The supremacie of Christian princes ouer all persons throughout theor dominions, in all causes so wel ecclesiastical as temporall, both against the Counterblast of Thomas Stapleton, replying on the reuerend father in Christe, Robert Bishop of VVinchester: and also against Nicolas Sanders his uisible monarchie of the Romaine Church, touching this controuersie of the princes supremacie. Ansvvered by Iohn Bridges.

❧M. Feckenhams title of his Booke.

THe declaration of such scruples and stayes of con∣science* 1.1 touching the Othe of supremacie, as M. Iohn Feckenham by writyng did deliuer vnto the L. Bishop of VVinchester, with his resolution made thereunto.

This title the Bishop noteth to conteine an vntrue re∣porte and ambiguous guile. You pretend (saith the B.)* 1.2 and would haue your frendes to thinke, that the first foure chiefe pointes set forth in your booke, were deuised by you, put in writing, and so deli∣uered vnto me, as the matter and ground. Wher∣vpon the conference to be had betwixt me & you should stande, and that I made therevnto none other but such resolutions, as it pleased you vn∣truly to reporte. In the first parte you conuaye an vntruth vnder a colourable and ambigious mea∣ning, in these wordes, as M. Iohn Feckenham by writing did deliuer vnto the Lord B of VVinchester. In the other parte you make vntrue report with out any colour at all.

Thus saith the B. to M. Feckenham, for the false title of his Booke. To this M. Stapl▪ counterblast consisteth on foure points, the first is, that It is a by matter, which whether* 1.3 it be true or false, doth nothing either preiudicate or touche the principall question.

To the which I answere, it is in déede but the very title, but I feare me, it is somwhat preiudiciall to the parties ho∣nestie,

& also to his whole treatise, to be entituled with a ma∣nifest lie. Howbeit M St. doth wisely for himselfe to set the matter so light, that it should not force whether this title be true or false so long as it doth not touche the principall que∣stion, for by this rule M. Stapl. counterblast, being almost litle els, than by matters nor touching the principall questiō, when soeuer (as it will fall out very often) he shalbe sounde to make a lie, the matter may quickly be salued, with this his first rule, it is a by matter which whether it be true or false, doth nothing either preiudicate or touche the principall question. And so this one answere may serue to defend not onely M. Feck but the best parte of M. Stapl. counterblast. But if he had any great regard of his owne, or M. Feck. ho∣nestie, or would winne credite to his booke & cause, he would haue more regarde, then, euen of the thing that is first of all chalenged, for a manifest falshood, to protest that he recketh not whether it be true or false. It is a signe either of a very rechlesse defender that careth not for truth: or of a very false client and cause that must be defended with falshood. & that, euen in the very title & front of the treatise. But alas, what should M. St. els do, in so euident a case, & yet I may say to you, he setteth a good face on the matter, leauing out nothing that may séeme not only to make y^e matter lesse haighnous, but also to proue that M. Feck. vsed simple dealing herein.

And so secondly entring into the excuse of M. Feck. VVhat incōuenience (saith he) is it I pray you, though M. Feck wrote* 1.4 in the towre, that which he deliuered to M. Horne at walthā▪ what inconuenience foloweth I pray you, if he minded first to deliuer the same to his examiners in the Tower, or els where as occasion should serue? is this sufficient to disproue him, to condemne him, to slaunder him of surmised vntruth? it is ra∣ther to be thought of such as are not malicious, to be playne dealing▪ not to dissemble with you, but euen as he had penned the writing before, so without any alteratiō to deliuer it▪ who neuerthelesse afterwarde hauing occasion to exhibite and pre∣sent

the same writing to others, did simply without guile or deceipt signifie it to be deliuered vnto you at walthā▪ and was it not so? denie it if you cā. Euery childe by this may see, how fonde and foolish your cauill is. But euery childe M. St. (you thought) should not see the couneyance of your Sophi∣strie, in fetching the matter thus about the bush to clere M. Feck. of the falshood of his title. And yet many childrē know that captiō wel inough à pluribus interrogat•…•…s, by asking ma∣ny things togither confusedly, to make vs graūt vnawares what ye please to conclude. We graunt ye, that M. Feck. wrote that in the Tower, that he deliuered to the B•…•…at walthā, he did so, and might do so without any inconuenience. We graunt ye also, he minded first to deliuer the same to his exa∣miners, in the tower or els where, as occasiō should serue, this might he also haue done conueniently. You aske againe, if this be sufficiēt to disproue him, to condemne him, to slaūder him of surmised vntruth? We graunt ye also it is not M. St. nor y^e B. or any other goeth about so to do, here in you do but slaunder y^e B. with surmised vntruth. Ye procéede, that it was plaine dealing, and not to dissemble with the B. euen as he had penned the writing before, so without any alteration to deliuer it. We graunt it might be so also M. Stapl. if he meant good sothe, but what is all this to the matter, where∣with the B. chargeth him? It followeth, VVho neuertheles afterwarde, hauing occasion to exhibite and present the same in writing to others, did simply without guile or disceit, signi∣fie it to be deliuered to you at Waltham.

Yea forsooth M. St. now ye come to the purpose, where∣with the B. chargeth him, for the falshood of his title Proue now that this treatise, thus made by M. Feck. in the tower, di∣rected to the cōmissioners, & after that, without any alteration deliuered to the B. at waltham: had the same title which this his treatise set out, hath, & then you cléere M. Feck. But this you can not do, and therefore you speake in •…•…ious speaches, saying, VVho neuerthelesse afterwardes hauing occasion to

exhibite and present this same writing, to others did simplie without guile or deceit, signifie it to be deliuered vnto you at waltham. The writing ye say, is the same writing, howe chance then it hath not the same title? why say you, neuer∣thelesse? meane you not thereby he altered either somthing therein, or at least the title thereof? why dare ye not speake it in plaine english? But say he did signifie it to be deliuered to the B•…•…at waltham? If he had let the treatise kéepe his true title, and then haue made such signification, then might ye haue said he did it simplie without guile or disceit, then might ye haue concluded plaine dealing. But since M. Feckenham first en•…•…ituled his booke, an Answere &c. to the Queenes Highnes commissioners &c. and after scrapeth out that title, & in place thereof entituleth it, Scruples &c. to the Lorde B. of VVinchester: if ye had concluded that M. Feck vsed plaine dubling, this had bene a plaine conclusion. And the more ye trauaile to excuse his dubling, ye shew your owne guile and disceit, with your captious argumēt & ambiguous speaches, and to couer his falsehood bewraye your owne vntruth. Which M. Stap. wisely fearing, letteth go the furder excu∣sing of M. Feckenham and retorning to his former rule.

Be it false or be it true what is al this (saith he) to the mat∣ter* 1.5 and thing now in hande? it is (as your selfe confesse) but a circumstance. And here thirdly after his defence of M. Feck▪ he falleth to accuse the B. for not obseruing of due circumstances. But I reserue the answere, to some instance hereof, & also his marginal note that M. Horne keepeth not his owne rule. But sith this hath neither coūterblastical, nor marginal, nor any 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of proofe at al: till it shal•…•…e proued, let it go as woordes of course among his common places.

M St. hauing thus labored to excuse the title of M. Feck, booke, and that now it is so clere of all faulte, that he might procéede to his next diuision without furder daliā•…•…e, as one that all this while, was not well aduised, nor remembred his matter, nor him selfe, but wrote this excuse of M. Feck.

halfe a sléepe, sodenly calleth to minde one greate poynte, wherin the title of M. Feckenhams treatise may be counted faultie. And here fourthly, he entreth into a great and so∣lemne counterblast, almost full true sides of his booke, the summe whereof is very muche forsoothe appertayning to the question, and therefore in no case mus•…•…e so lightely be forgotten.

But novv (sayth he) that I remember and aduise my selfe* 1.6 a little better, I suppose I can not altogither excuse M. Feck. for this title, but muste rase out thereof foure vvords, and in steade of L. B. of VVinchester, set in M. Robert Horne.

This is a sore fault in deed M. Stap. and M. Feckenham worthy great blame for it, and you worthy much commen∣dation, for calling to your remembraunce so seene, a matter that so muche toucheth the state of the question betweene them, whether the B. of Winchester were well called L. Byshop, or M. Horne, yea or no, a very highe poynte, and worthy so clerkly a declamation, as ye haue made there•…•…. But since, as ye confesse, he is so in the estimation of many, and so called after the vsuall sorte, let vs sée after what vsu∣all or vnusual sort, you esteeme and gather to the contrarie, agaynst M. Feck. and the B. herein. But first, remembring also in time, that this is not the way to defende M. Feck. to finde faulte with him, and that he hath already founde a faulte in this title of his treatise, and can not eate agayne his worde: though he defende him not, yet will he not be ouer harde an aduersarie to him, but mitigate at the least the cause of his defaulte, saying: M. Feckenham dissembling* 1.7 and winking at the common errour. &c. of his great mode∣stie and ciuilitie, willing the lesse to exasperate you & others, though he well knewe ye vvere no right B. yet after the vsual forte, calleth and termeth you L. B. of VV. But I muste be so bolde by your leaue, as playnly and bluntly to go to worke with you, as I haue done before with M. Grindall, and M. Iuell, your pewfellowes, and to remoue frō you this glorious

glittering pecocks tayle, and to call a fig a fig, and a horne a horne, and to say that most truely, ye are no L. B. of VVin∣chester, or else where, but onely M. Robert Horne.

And is there no remedie M. Stap. but you muste be so bolde and blunt, as to chaunge M. Feck. title onely, for say∣ing L. B. of. VVinchester? But since ye must néedes, who can let you, ye do but after your blunt kinde, ye are a plaine mā, brought vp at home, & who so bold as blind bayard. Yet is your b•…•…unt boldnesse herein y^t more to be borne withall, that while ye would shew your bolde spite agaynst the B. your aduersarie, ye excuse M. F. your clyēt with very blunt termes also: whō ye entituled before with smooth flattring clawes, The right Reuerent father my L. Abbot of VVestm. Now he is distembling M. Feck. and winking M. Feck. at the common error. But the B. and M. Feck. must néedes beare with you at this time, bicause ye must néedes be so bolde as to go plainly and bluntly to worke. But howsoeuer they must beare with you for your blunt spéeches, must we also beare with you, that would make dissembling at errours, to procéede of great modestie, and vertue to be the mother of vice? except dissēbling be also a vertue in you, as it is much vsed amongst a number of dissembling Papists at this day with vs, & was wont to be proper to friers & monks aboue al other, to dissemble, & that with most fayned modestie and humilitie to. But al was but hypocrisie, & an hypocrites end it hath come vnto. Therefore howsoeuer we muste beare with your bluntnesse, as ye cal a fig a fig, & a horne a horne, so I pray you call dissembling dissembling & falshod falshod, ye can neuer call it modestie, great or little, howe boldely, bluntly and immodestly so euer ye out face the matter. And thus once againe, while ye would excuse M. Feck. title, to conteine no ralshod ye not only accuse it, but also accuse M. Feck. to be a false dissembler, and a winkapipes, so pro∣perly ye defende him. But still ye must be borne withall, for bicause ye go bluntly to worke.

And were it not that for this phyne bluntnesse, ye muste be borne withal, some blunt playne fellow woulde perad∣uenture call for some reason. Let vs heare therefore howe bluntly you proceede to proue, that ye haue so bluntly spokē.

For (say you) albert the Prince may make a Lorde at hir* 1.8 gratious pleasure, whom she liketh, yet can she not make you L. B. of VVinchester, considering you are not L. but in respect of some baronages and temporalties belonging and annexed to the See of VV. But you vsurping the See, as ye are no B. so for the consideration aforesayde ye are no L. nor Prelate of the Garter. For ye can be no Prelate of the Garter, beeing no Prelate at all, that beeing a prerogatiue appropriate to the Prelate and B. of VVinchester.

Soft M. St. if ye be so playne & blunt a man as ye pretr̄d,* 1.9 ne sutor vltra crep•…•…da, hew not t•…•… hye, least chips fall in your eye: blunder not so rudely with princes. must the Q. Maie∣stie beare with you to, bicause you must needs go bluntly to worke? ye presume to determine what the Q. highnes may do. She can make him •…•…. but she can not make him L. B. of VV. And why so M. St? considering he is not Lorde, but in respecte of some baronage and temporalties belonging and annexed to the See of VVinchester. Erg•…•…, then ye graunt him to be Lorde B. by your owne words, to whom the Q. highnesse (as you graunt she may, in respect of the tempo∣ralties and baronies belonging therto) hath graunted and gi∣uen him them. Wherby she hath made him Lord, except ye wil denie, that hir highnesse authoritie, which euen al your popish bishops, did receiue before at hir graces progenitors hands, neither the baronies and temporalties onely (whe•…•…by they were named Lords, but their inuestiture also, wherby they were Byshops,) at the Princes handes.

But see stil how bluntly ye go to worke against your self, & for hast to remoue this title of Lord from the B. of W. ye ouerturn y^e glory of your own prelats. For if this your rule be true, y^t he is not called Lord, but in respect of some baro∣nies

& temporalties belonging and annexed to the See how many Cardinals, Bishops, Suffraganes, Abbots, & Priors, euen in Italie (that haue neither baronies nor muche tem∣poralties) should léese their title of Lorde & honour? thinke you all these will be pleased with this your rule?

We must beare with you there is no remedie, and well may M. Feck. of friendship, & the B. of pitie beare with you also, & the Quéenes maiestie of hir gracious clemencie bea∣reth with your saucie bluntnesse. But assure your selfe, and ye were as blunt & playne as euer were your Marcolphus, those Italian prelates, if ye stayne their honour, will neuer beare with you one iot. And I rede you beware this blunt∣nesse for they can do much with your holy father the Pope, except ye be so blunt ye care not for him neither. But deale with them as ye may, ye are blunt inoughe in your owne conceite, for the finest of them all. Let vs sée what reasons moueth you to be so blunt with the B.

He is not L. Byshop of VVin. nor Prelate of the Garter.* 1.10 Why so? bicause he is no B. or Prelate at all. How proue ye that? he is an vsurper, he is an intruder, he is called therto by no lawfull vocation nor canonicall consecration &c. he is no true B. &c. his vocation is direct contrarie to the canons and constitutions of the Churche, and to the vniuersall custome and maner heretofore, vsed and practised not onely in Eng∣lande, but also in all other Catholike countreys and Chur∣ches, deliuered to vs from hande to hande, from age to age, euen from the first gra•…•…fing and planting of the fayth, espe∣cially in Englande.

Here are many blunt & playne words in déede M. St. and many great crakes, but here is no proofe of any: do not think ye muste still be thus borne withall: your to muche presu∣ming of eche mans pacience, to beare with your rudenesse, will hazarde your credite to farre, excepte ye alledge some reason of your sayings. Let vs heare therefore what proues ye bring.

For the which I referre me (say you) to all autentike and* 1.11 auncient▪ recordes, as well of Englande as of other Nations concerning the ordinary succession of Bishops, namely in the foresayde Sea of VVinchester, for there was not, no not one, in that Sea, that did not acknowledge the supremacie of the Sea of Rome, and that was not confirmed by the same, vntil the late time of M. Poynet, who otherwise also was an vsur∣per, the true B. then liuing, and by no lawfull or ecclesiasticall order remoued or depriued. Ye are therefore the first B. of this sewt and race, and so consequently no B. at al. As not able to shew to whom ye did ordinarily succede, and any good or customable either vocation or cōsecration. VVhich point be∣ing necessarily required in a B. and in your Apostles Luther, and Caluin & other lacking, (as I haue otherwhere sufficiētly proued, though you by depesilence thinke it more wisdome, vtterly to des•…•…emble, than once to answere) they being ther∣with pressed, were so messhed and bewrapped therein, that they coulde not in this worlde witte what to say thereto, an∣swearing this and that, they wiste neare what, nor at what poynt to holde them, yea Beza was fayne at the last as∣semblie at Poysie, with silence to confesse the inuincible truth.

Setting aside these vaine crakes, & manifest lying slaun∣ders which I referre to your common places M. St. I will answeare onely to your inuincible argument. Which stan∣deth vpon your common bragge of succession.

Your argument is this, ye succeede no Bishop of VVin∣chester:* 1.12 Ergo, ye are no Bishop of VVincester. I answere: First, if he meane succession of the person in the roome, your antecedent is euident false. He succeded the persons of Popishe Bishops in the same roome. And the consequent followeth not. For then, the first Bishop of that Sea, was no B. bicause he succeded none, but was the first ther•…•…f. And if the first was none, then the second was none, and so there was neuer any at all. If ye meane sucession of the doctrine,

and the Apostles rules: then neyther Bishoppe Gardiner whom ye call the true B. nor any popishe Bishops, haue succession, but digression and defection from them. And our Bishoppes haue the true succession, that is to say followe the doctrine and orders of the Apostles, prescribed in the worde of god, for a Bishops office. But howe do ye proue your an∣tecedent?

Of all the Bishops not onely in Englande, but in other na∣tions, namely, in the Sea of VVinchester. From hand to hand, from age to age, euen from the first grafting and planting of the fayth in Englande, not one of them all, no not one, that did not acknowledge the supremacie of the sea of Rome, and that was not confirmed by the same.

But you do not acknowledge the supremacie of the Sea of Rome, nor are confirmed by the same.

Ergo, ye are the first Bishop of this sewt and race, and so consequently no bishop at all, as not able to shew to whome ye did ordinarily succeede, or any good and customable ey∣ther vocation or consecration.

This argument (M. Stapleton) is of a newe sewt and race, it succedeth neither good nor customable moode or figure, and therfore can make no good successe. Howbeit l•…•…t vs sée the partes of it. The minor we graunt, as euident on the Bishops part. For the maior we must put you to your proufe. We affirme it to conteyne many euident falshoodes. For proufe hereof, you say, for the which I referre me to all autentike and auncient recordes as well of Englande, as of other nations. Ye say well herein master Stapleton, and we take your offer.

And fi•…•…st let vs sée for other Nations. Did Iames euen the first Bishop of Hierusalem, acknowledge the suprema∣cie of the Sea of Rome? Was he confirmed by the same Sea? when as yet the same Sea was not to be acknowledged or be confirmed by? If (as you say) the B. can be no prelate of the Ga•…•…ter, being no prelate at all: how could that Sea be

acknowledged, that was not at all? Moreouer do ye thinke that Timothie Bishoppe of Ephesus, or Titus of Cr•…•…ta, and all other Bishoppes of Asia or Grece, that Sainte Paule made, acknowledged the supremacie of the Sea of Rome, or were confirmed by the same, when Sainte* 1.13 Paule that ordeyned them sayeth, he receyued his authori∣tie of no man? And when he came to Rome, he neyther came to haue his Bishops confirmed of the Sea of Rome, nor he founde anye Sea there, nor sought Peter for the saide purpose else where, nor thought himselfe any whitte inferiour to him: much lesse thought he of any suche supre∣macie, eyther of his Sea or him.

Nowe, if the first and originall of all those Bishop∣rikes Eastwarde, neyther acknovvledged anye suprema∣cie of that Sea, nor were confirmed by the same: What plea can you make of theyr succession? If they swarued from theyr predecessours and first founders, your selfe confesse it is no good succession, but a newe sewte and race. And if it be good and lawfull succession, that the Bishops of the East Churches succeded by, then, neyther acknow∣ledged they anye supremacie of the Sea of Rome, nor were confirmed by the same, euen which not onelye the true autentyke and auncient recordes doe testifie, howe they agréed, although in sayth, yet nothing lyke in dis∣ciplines, rytes and orders, to whiche the Romaine Sea doth sweare all those Bishoppes, that are confyrmed by it, and acknowledge obedience therevnto: But also euen to this daye (thoughe one or two Bishoppes, nowe and then of late time, for verye necessitie and hope of reliefe) haue runne to the Sea of Rome, yet by theyr ordinarie and customable succession, euen from the Apostles times, so long as they continued Christian, neuer acknowledged they the supremacie of the Sea of Rome, nor were confir∣med by the same.

The like recordes for the Churches southward, remaine,

not only of their beginnings from the other Apostles, & not from the Sea of Rome, but also of their continuance, howe they woulde not admitte anye supremacie of the same Sea, ouer them, and what contention they had thereabout. As for their confirmations, that they had them not from the sea of Rome, but euen from the Emperour, yea the Bishop of Rome himselfe, and other, from their princes: the practise when we come thereto shall shewe.

And as east warde and southwarde, so may we like wise reason of the Church westward, where S. Paule (after he had bene two yeare at Rome) by the space of tenne yeares trauelled in Italie, Spaine, and Fraunce, as witnesse Eu∣sebius, Epiphanius, Ierome, Euthalius Diaconus, Nice∣phorus, Beda, Platina, yea Frier Perionius, that wrote the other daye de vit•…•…s Apostolorum: that in Langue do•…•… he made a Bishoppe at Narbona, who trauelled after with him in Spaine. And if in all that space (as it is most likely) he made other Bishops, shall we suppose they were not full Bishops, till they had their Bulles from the Sea of Rome? And if the first B. did not so, your reason of suc∣cession fayleth.

So that your maior is false concerning other Nations. Now let vs briefly sée howe it likewise fayles for England. And as you say.

Namely in the foresayde Sea of VVinchester, that from the first grafting and planting of the fayth in England, there was not, no not one in that Sea, that did not acknowledge the supremacie of the Sea of Rome, and was not confirmed by the same, vntill the late time of master Poynet: who o∣therwise also was but an vsurper, the true Bishop then liuing, & by no lawful or ecclesiasticall order remoued or depriued.

The lawfull order and sufficient causes of B. Gardeners depriuation is extant, and sette out in the booke of Monu∣mentes. Howe true a Bishop (as ye call him) he was, if the acknowledging of obedience to the Sea of Rome, bée

an argument of a true Bishop, his booke de vera obedientia, of true obedience, doth declare, and almost all the time of his bishopriche, he neuer acknowledged the supremacie, to apperteine to the Sea of Rome, but to the prince, as the Bi∣shop now doth, there néede no recordes for the matter. And as for olde recordes, since the first grafting and planting of the faythe in Englande, whiche is farre longer, than ey∣ther from your Apostle, monke Augustine, or from Biri∣nus Bishop of Winchester: the recordes do testifie, howe the Christians, whome your Augustine and his mates founde in thys Realme, neyther kept the ceremonyes and rytes of the Romaine Churche, nor admitted the Legan∣tine authoritie, of your sayde Apostle, which argueth that theyr Bishoppes acknowledged not (as you saye) the su∣premacie of the Sea of Rome, nor were confirmed by the same, euen from Lucius till almost King Arthures tyme. when the Heathen Sarons so preuayled, in the west parts, that euen in Winchester, in King Arthures reigne, Cer∣dicius erected a Temple of Heathen Idolles falsely called yet to this daye the Temple of Dagon, as the olde re∣cordes doe mention. And therefore your maior is false for Englande also.

Now M. St. séeing the falsenesse of this argument of suc∣cession to be such, that he dare not abide the triall of his re∣cordes, he flyeth from it, and graunteth at the length, the B. vocation to be good and sownd. Yet hath he a stronger rea∣son to disable him, which is this:

No heretike ought to be admitted to a Byshops roome,* 1.14 or if he be, he forthwith ought to be remoued. But for that yee are yoked, or as ye pretende maryed, ye are no doubt an Heretike, Ergo were your vocation good and sounde, yet haue you disabled your selfe to occupie that roome, and eyther ought not to be admitted, or forthwith ought ye to be remoued.

I aunswere the maior i•…•… true, and if it were as truely

executed, none should better féele it, than the popish prelates, who confesse them selues not only for other Seas, but euen for their hed and mother sea of Rome, that diuers here•…•…ikes haue bene B. thereof. Who being so admitted, I demaunde with Piers Plowmā of you M. St. by this your maior, who shall hang the Bell about the rattons necke? who shall re∣moue an heretike Bishop of Rome? I thinke it will belong or euer he remoue him selfe.

The minor of this argument is of the diuels sophis•…•…rie, so S. Paule calleth it doctrinam daemoniorum, and sayth, let a* 1.15 B. be the husbande of one wife, and so was Saint Peter (who ye say was your first Bishoppe of Rome.) And yet neither was Saint Peter therefore an here•…•…ike, nor saint Paule woulde haue B. to be here•…•…ikes. But herein your owne Canons answere and confute you.

And yet here to proue vs heretikes, for defence of mari∣age, he saith he will referre vs to the olde Canons of the fa∣thers. What fathers meane you, the Apostles, Master Sta∣pleton, that sayd mariage was honourable among all men?* 1.16 Meane ye the Canons that beare those fathers titles, and say, Episcopu•…•… aut Presbiter vxorem propriam nequaquam sub* 1.17 obtentu religionis abijciat, si vero reiecerit excommunicetur, sed si perseuerauerit deijciatur? Let not a Bishop or a Priest putte awaye his owne wyfe vnder the pretence of Religion, and if he put hir away, let him be excomunicate, and if hee continue (in his fault) let him be put out of his office.

If you meane these fathers, your selues heare their ver∣dict agaynst you. Dr meane ye the fathers of Nicene coun∣cell, that agréed to the reuerent father Paphnutius? but, for some of the fathers, ye name whom ye meane, specially S. Augustine and Epiphanius, whom ye call poore Catho∣likes, in déede master Stapleton they are very poore hel∣pes, that ye can wring from them, to maintaine Poperie withall: but thinking we will reiect them, M. St. will wrap vs euen in our owne confessions.

Your owne famous Apologi•…•… (sayth he) sayth that Epipha∣nius* 1.18 numbreth. 80. heresies, of the which it is one, for a man after the order of Priesthood to mary. But I trust you wil not be agaynst your owne Apologie. Ergo ye are heretikes by your owne confession that marie after Priesthood.

The cōsequence of this argumēt goeth hard M. St. to rea∣son from y^e Apollogies reciting of Epiphanius, to the Apol∣logies allowing of all thinges that either he hath, or they recite out of him. But letting go your logike, I aunswere to the maior. The Apologie sayth truely that Epiphanius numbreth 80. heresies, and the Apologie vs•…•…th this tearme Heresies, in the same sense that Epiphanius did, as appeareth plainly by the example, of heresies that are therein rehear∣sed. Epiphanius entituling his booke contra. 80 hereses, mea∣neth not 80. perticular and seuerall false opinions, for so he should haue doub•…•…ed at the least that number, but he mea∣neth by 80. heresies, so many head or chief •…•…ectaries or sects, whereof euery one maintayneth many seuerall perticular opinions hereticall, this is the plaine meaning of Epipha∣nius, as appeareth most manifestly through out his booke, which argueth that M. St. séeking this poore shift, full lyke a poore Catholike and poore clearke also, neuer read Epi∣phanius himselfe, but hearing tell that Epiphanius wrote a∣gaynst 80 heresies 〈◊〉〈◊〉 at 80▪ perticular opinions here∣ticall. Of the which heresies taken after Epiphanius his v∣sage, sect or sectarie, either for a perticular opinion hereti∣call, he reckeneth this for none, (that I can finde) for a man after the order of priesthood to marie. If he had reckened this for any, be sure M. Stap. would hane reckened vp hys wordes and quoted the place.

Master Sta•…•…leton now imagining with himselfe that he hath quite foyled vs, and that we must runne from the fa∣thers, yea and ea•…•…e our owne wordes, cryeth out, what then haue you to iustifie your cause?

But againe to help vs in this distresse, he conceyueth that

there is yet one poore and s•…•…elye helpe behinde, and that is to flie vnder the defence (as he contumeliouslye tear∣meth it) of our brickle Bulvvarke of actes of Parlia∣ment.

And here for raging after many impertinent things he cō∣cludeth thus. Such and such articles are commaunded to be set forth by the authoritie of Parliament. Ergo our fayth hangeth onely on the authoritie of Parliament.

Item, such and such articles of religion are not namely expressed in the actes of Parliament, Ergo they are heretical, and vnlawfull. The follie of these arguments néede none other answere but to shew them. But all this while where were your eyes fixed, that they once looked not to the que∣stion in controuersie doe ye obserue your owne rule, so well M. Stapleton? howbeit, sith ye doe it of bluntnesse, agaynst these wordes of M. Feckenhams title, the Lord Bishop of VVinchester, Ye must be borne withall.

The seconde Diuision. Fol. 1. b

THe B. to proue this chalenge of M. Fecken∣hams title to conteyne manifest guile and fals∣hoode, sheweth the whole processe, fyrst of Master Feckenhams treatise composed in the Tower, and directed to the Queenes high∣nesse Commissioners: and afterwardes howe he scrapeth out those phrases, and pretendeth as thoughe the treatise had beene composed at Waltham, and directed to the Bishop. Secondly, for his pretence of scruples as deliuered to the B. by writing, to be resolued in them, and of the B. resolutions there vnto, the B. sheweth the whole dealing of the cōferēce betwene thē. First that by

mouthe, not by wryting, they reasoned on these poynts, and that M. Feckenham seemed resol∣ued in them, and vpon what occasion afterwarde he fell to wrangling agayne from them, & what a doe the Byshop had, to haue master Fecken∣ham write some positions or assertions in for me of propositions, to the ende they mighte cer∣tenly goe forwarde, whiche the Byshop coulde not bring him vnto, tyll at the lengthe, at his owne requeste the Byshop putte in wryting the woordes of the othe, with the sense or in∣terpretation added therevnto, that master Fec∣kenham considering therevppon, mighte deuise the fourme of his propositions, wherevppon they mighte afterwarde debate. Whereby ap∣peareth bothe howe vntrue it is, that he had deliuered vnto the Byshoppe any suche scruples of his in wryting, for then the Byshop needed not haue soughte any propositions of hys as∣sertions: and also how•…•… vntrue that is, that the interpretation of the othe, whiche the Byshop wrote at his requeste, before he euer sawe any writing of master Feckenham, was to answere hys scruples and stayes deliuered to the Bishop in writing.

To these the Byshoppes chalenges of master Fecken∣hams* 1.19 false tytle, master St•…•…pletons answere is thréefolde. First (sayth he) here is no matter effectuall, but that maye seeme already by our former ansvvere sufficiently dischar∣ged. Howe this matter is before of you discharged, is yet freshe in the Readers memorie. I thinke he will not giue

ye your quietus est, so lightly, except ye bring better proues, and agrée better to your owne tale. For here, where ye say, ye haue ansvvered suffyciently before, to all that is effectu∣all, this argueth that he was charged with somewhat that was effectuall, else haue ye answered to no effectual thing. And yet your answere before was, that y^e matter wherwith the B. charged M. F. for his false title, was but a bie matter, which, whether it were true or false doth nothing preiudicate or touch the principal question: and so the whole charge is a matter nothing effectuall. But let go this to your contra∣dictions, and let the reader iudge howe sufficiently ye haue discharged M. Feck. or not rather charged him, with as muche, or more than the B. did.

The secōd part of M. St. answere, is a gathering togither of such matters, as he noteth in the B. for vntruthes, which I referre to his common place theron.

Thirdly, where the B. speaking of the occasion of M. Fe.* 1.20 wrangling in his conference with the B: mentioned hys shrinking from his confederates in the conference at W. in the. 1. yere of the Q. maiestie: Herevpon, though he cōfesseth, saying, I might now passe forth to the residue of M. Hornes* 1.21 booke, yet must he not in any wise let slip this occasion of digression, for otherwise, he should want matter to s•…•…uffe vp his connterblast. And so at large entreth to proue, that they were vneuenly delt withall, for proofe wherof, he alledgeth diuers reasons. First, they were disaduantaged to be put* 1.22 to the profe of that, wherof they were in possessiō. I answer, they were in possession of possessions in •…•…éede, not of the truth, vnlesse they had it in their possession of imprisonmēt.

Secondly, they gaue ouer the disputatiō, not bicause they had not, or did not shevve suffycient euidence, but bicause they were very muche strayted for shortnesse of tyme: and so belike coulde not finde it out.

Thirdly, it was a fruitlesse and superfluous enterprise, to* 1.23 dispute of those three matters only, whether the seruice may

be in the mother tong. VVhether any one realme may alter and change the rites and ceremonies in the Church, & make new. VVhether the masse▪ be a sacrifice propiciatorie, seeing that the. 1. and. 2. question, be no questions of fayth And the 3. dependeth vpon the questiōs of transubstantiation, & the reall presence, vvhich ought first to haue bene discussed and then this as accessorie therevnto.

What a nūber of starting holes the papists had to auoide the disputation? they were farre better armed to find excu∣ses to giue it ouer, than prouided to go throughstitche ther∣with. But had they had such euidence ready as ye pretende M. St. what néede they finde fault with the time? although they had as much time, as their aduerfaries had, to prepare them selues. And if they were strayghted for shortnesse of time, to dispute onely of three matters, and those as ye say not the weightiest neither: why complayne ye of their que∣stions to haue bene but three onely, in so many and weigh∣tie matters, as nowe stande in controuersie?

Could they dispatch so many great matters, in so straight a time, and would they whine to be straited, for only three lesse matters? Ha M. St. this is to broade before. But ye wrythe the excuse an other way, not so muche for the number, as the lightnesse of the matters, to be dependant and accessory to other questions, a•…•…d to be no matters of fayth. How light so euer ye woulde séeme to make them now, ye haue made thē as waightie an other time before. But let thē be as light as ye would haue them, & lesse to, did ye not agrée on them, yea did you not your selues deuise them, vnwitting to the other parties? Did ye not prepare for them? & might ye not the easelier haue answered vnto them? these are but chil∣dishe excuses, let vs heare what more ye haue.

Fourthly, it was made before lay men as Iudges. Yea* 1.24 there M. St. ye hitte the nayle on the head. Ye woulde be disputers and Iudges too your selues.

His example of the Anabaptists disputation at Monster,

which he likeneth to this at VVestminster, I passe ouer to his raylings and slaunderous common places.

Fifthly, they should haue bene suffred to haue replied to* 1.25 their aduersaries, which they could not be suffred to do. If ye had put in disorderly, ye had said true. But would they haue kept the order by them selues deuised and agreed vpon, they might haue replied at the full: the doing was not in hucker mucker, inowe heard it that can tell. And your owne other excuses do plainly argue, not that ye coulde not be suffred, but that ye could not for the time, or would not for the mat∣ter, and néeded not pleading possession, and thought not good, for bicause of the Iudges, with such other excuses, that as your selfe confesse, moued you to giue ouer the disputa∣tion. Which howe it agréeth with this fifth excuse, that ye could not be suffred to replie: is easie to discerne, and to take a lyer tardie in his owne tale.

Sixtly & last say you, surely amōg al other, concerning the* 1.26 supremacie of the Prince in causes eccle. &c. there shoulde haue ben much more mature deliberation. Deliberation is good in al things, M. St. but wilfull prolonging & foding on the time, is neither good nor godly, chiefly in Gods matters, wherein we are bidden, hodie si vocem 〈◊〉〈◊〉 andieritis, nolite ob∣durare* 1.27 corda vestra. But when would your deliberation be ripe M. St? it appeareth by these your excuses, y^t your selfe would be rotten, or euer it would be ripe. Ye would go to it with ripe deliberation, that is to say, as a beare goeth to the stake: ye would aduise your self long or euer ye would wil∣lingly come to try your doctrine & religion by disputation, if ye could otherwise chose. Howbeit by your owne tale, these matters néede no such long protracting the time, béeing so few, & so light, as here in your excuses you pretend they be.

Yea but surely (say you) among al other things cōcerning* 1.28 the supremacy of the Prince in causes ecclesiastical. &c there would haue ben much more mature deliberation. Why M. St. here was neither al causes, nor the cause of supremacie

debated. But onely (as your selfe say) three accessarie mat∣ters, and matters nothing touching faith. And therefore ye ouershoote your selfe once againe, to put in this excuse. But what is your small drift of all these excuses? forsooth this: The Popes legate should haue bene president at the dispu∣tation of these matters, and then it had bene a formall dispu∣tatiō. Then the Catholikes had ben indifferently delt with∣all. Then would ye haue refused no controuersie. Then would ye not haue complained of the straightnes of time. Nor desired furder delaye. Nor refused either to haue an∣swered or replied, if the Popes legate had bene president at it. But who seeth not that this is no indifferencie? but what argument bring ye to proue that the Popes legate should be president thereof?

Especially considering (say you) that aboue ten hundreth* 1.29 yeares past, in disputations of matters of faith, whereto the Catholikes were prouoked in Aphrica, the saide Catholikes required, that at the saide disputations should be present the Legates of the sea of Rome, as the chiefe and principall sea of Christendome. Ye forget M. St. that in Aphrica likewise, the Catholikes refused the B. of Rome his anthoritie, and detected his falshoode in forging of Canons therefore. Wel, let that now go as forgotten. And let vs sée your argument, which in effect is this:

Aboue ten hundreth yeres past, when the sea of Rome flo∣rished in more perfect religion and faith, the Catholickes of Aphrica, in their disputations of faith, required that at the sayd disputations, should be present the Legates of the sea of Rome, as the chiefe & principall sea of Christendome. Ergo:

We now, in all our disputations of causes Ecclestastical, especially concerning the supremacie, should acknowledge the Pope by his Legates, to be president thereof.

This argument followeth not M. Stapl. reasoning, from that tune to this, from their requiring to our submission, from Aphrike to England, from presence to presidence, from cer∣taine

questions to all questions, from matters of saithe to these in hande, which your selfe say are nons. From the chiefe and principall sea then, to the vniuersall supremacie that the Pope claymeth now, in all which pointes there is no sequele, and therefore your argument is starke naught, nor all your vayne excuses, will hide their frowarde disobe∣dience, or strengthen the weaknesse of their naughtie cause in the saide disputation.

But let vs now (saith M. St.) returne to M. Horne, for these matters were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, M. Stapleton looked quite besides his marke.

The third Diuision.

THe third Diuision sheweth the cause and oc∣casion,* 1.30 why M. Feck. deliuered this his trea∣tise to the Bishop, not as he pretendeth to be re∣solued at the Bishops handes, for he had sayd be∣fore that the matter it selfe was grounded here (pointyng to his brest) that shall neuer go out. But, beyng charged of the B. herefore, that he had neither conscience nor constancie, M. Fecken∣ham shewed and deliuered this his treatise to the B. to shew what he had suffred for the same, and how it was grounded and setled in him long be∣fore. Which argueth first his falshood in preten∣ding to haue offred the booke before to the B. as scruples by him to be resolued in: And also his fur∣der falshood, in setting forth of his owne bald re∣solutions to his scruples, vnder the B. name.

To the former parte M. Stapleton replieth it is an vn∣likely* 1.31 tale, and referreth it to his score of vntruthes. Where it is answered vnto. The later parte for the resolutions, he

leaueth it to a place more apropriate, where the matter shal∣be* 1.32 more conueniently and more fully discused. And this is all that he saith for the cléering of M. Feckenhams false title.

The fourth Diuision.

MAster Feckenham in the beginning of his trea∣tise,* 1.33 propounding one chiefe purpose and en∣tente (as he saithe) of this Othe, to be for a more saue∣garde to be had of the Queenes royall person, and her highnesse most quiet and prosperous raigne: Offreth to sweare thus muche, that her Highnesse is the onely supreme gouernour of this Realme, and of all other her Highnesse dominions and Countries, according as the expresse woordes are in the beginning of the sayde Othe. And offreth yet furder to sweare: That her Highnesse hath vnder God the souerainetie and rule, ouer all manner of persons, borne within these her Highnes realmes, of what estate either Ecclesiasti∣call or Temporall soeuer they be.

To this the B. of Winchester answereth, that this beyng one chiefe entent of the Othe, as is graunted: whosoeuer denieth the chiefe parte of the Othe, what soeuer in wordes he pretende, in his deedes denieth withall the chiefe entent ther∣of. But M. Feckenham doth thus, Ergo: How soeuer by woordes he would seeme to tender her Maiesties safetie, his deedes declare his mea∣nyng to be cleane contrarie.

The Minor that M. Feck. denieth the princi∣pall

parte of the Othe, he proueth thus:

The principallest parte of the Othe, is the Q. Highnes supremacie in causes Ecclesiasticall so well as Temporall, but about this M. Feck. da∣lieth with dominions and persons, & denieth the causes, which is the matter it selfe, wherein the gouernance doth consist: Ergo, He denieth the chiefest parte of the Othe.

The Maior, that the gouernance in Ecclesiasti∣call causes is the chiefest thing that the Othe doth purporte, is euident.

The Minor, as it appereth by this nice dali∣ance of M. Feck. so the B. furder proueth it, by this his treatise, by his deepe sighes & grones, desiring a change, and ascribing to the Pope this principall parte of the Othe.

M. St. to counterblast these the B. arguments, bloweth* 1.34 apace with bothe his chéekes. With the one breathing out dispitefully all riffe raff•…•…, that he coulde gleane togither, to deface, as he thought, the protestantes with disobedience. With the other he laboreth to qualifie the disobedience of the Papists, namely of M. Feckenham.

But before these two partes, wherein the most of his re∣plie consisteth, he prefixeth yet one page, declaring first that this parcell of the Othe, is no parte of the Princes royall power, and wherefore the Papists refuse the same.

First saith he, There haue bene many kings in this realme* 1.35 before our time, that haue raigned vertuously, quietly, pros∣perously, most honorably, and most victoriously, which ne∣uer dreamed of this kinde of supremacie, and yet men of such knowledge, that they could soone espie, wherein their autho∣ritie was empayred, and were of such courage and stoutnesse, that they would not suffer at the Popes handes, or at any

other, any thing done derogatorie to their Royall power. This argument standeth vpon the opiniō of Princes here∣tofore, and is framed thus.

What soeuer the noble and prosperous Kinges to fore, tooke to be so, or tooke not to be so, the same was and is so, or was not and is not so.

But many noble and prosperous Kings heretofore, tooke this kinde of supremacie to be no parte of their royall power: Ergo, It was not, nor is any parte thereof.

The Maior, which God wote is very fonde and weake, he would furnishe and strengthen with their wisedome and stoutnesse, if it had b•…•…ne iniuriou•…•… to their authoritie, they were so wise they could soone espie it, & were so stoute they would not suffer it. But who seeth not, that they could not very soone espie it, in that palpable darknesse of poperie: and that worldly politike wisedome, is no good proofe of soone espying the spirituall wisdome of God and his worde, and of their dutie in setting forth thereof? This knowledge was not so clerely espied then, as thanks be to God now it is, being pulled frō vnder the bushell, wherewith it was co∣uered,* 1.36 and the Angel of darknesse, being stripped out of that shape of the Angell of light, that when he was cladde with∣all, be bleared many wise Princes eyes. And though many of them were coragious & stoute, yea & espied to, what belon∣ged vnto them, & attempted also to get it, yet who seeth not, that the Popes tirannie ouermatched them? And yet suche Princes were there many, wise, stoute, and vertuouse, that dreamed not as you say, but well saw this their authoritie, and tooke it on them, and withstood the Popes vsurpation. Which improueth your Maior, that ye would séeme to ca∣ry away so cléere. And withall ouerturneth your argument, by the like: Some Princes thought it was no parte of their royall power: Ergo, it was not. Some Princes thought it was parte of their royall power: Ergo, it was. Neyther of these argumentes (ye sée) doth holde, for still the matter is

where it was, who thought so, or who thought not so, and yet bothe of them politike, stout, and prosperous Princes.

But whereto doth M. St. thus colourably, so highly extoll the vertuous, quiet, prosperouse, most honorable, and most vi∣ctorious estate, of those noble, wise, stoute, and coragious princes, that (he saith) neuer heretofore dreamed of this kinde of supremacie? can he dreame out this so drylie, against his most gratious soueraigne, the Q. Maiestie now, that not on∣ly of right claymeth, but most godly directeth this suprema∣cie, to blemish her highnesse with her noble auncesters, and thinketh he this his byiouse nippe, could not easily be espi∣ed? Yes M. Stapleton, it is easie to sée your good harte, and what opinion ye haue of her highnesse.

But albeit comparisons be odious, chiefly of the liuing with the dead, De quibus nil nisi bonum, whom we ought to speake reuerently vpon: yet notwithstanding, thus muche may I say, without derogating from them, or •…•…lattrie of her, (for he flattreth not that saith that which eche true man fin∣deth true) her highnesse in no point that you recken, is infe∣riour to any her royall progenitors, & in many farre greater pointes, that ye recken not, doth farre surmount them all. Which I speake not to boast of, but that God, whose giftes they are, make her thankful for them, & vs thankful for her. And therefore, go the matter by wisedome, fortitude, quiet∣nes, vertue, honorable, prosperous and victorious raigne, her Maiestie that claymeth this title, her Brother, and Father before her also, haue as good plea for them, as any other princes of England can haue, that neuer claymed the same. And therefore leaue this crake M. St. of vpbrayding to her highnesse, the good giftes of her predecessours, for thankes be to God (that hath giuē hir all the same or more) hir grace hath had hitherto a most quiet, prosperous and victoriouse raigne, and yet hath claymed and enioyed this supreme go∣uernment withall, yea, the one hath strengthned the other: And God for his mercy cōtinue & prosper hir maiestie long

therein. And in déede this is that ye whine at, that God stil so prospereth the successe of his Gospell by her: 〈◊〉〈◊〉 so God hath promised, Q •…•…cun{que} honori ficauerit me▪ glorificabo eum, &* 1.37 thus he glorified Salomon, when he sought the wisedome & truth of God, before the riches & might of worldly Princes, & so hath God blessed her Highnesse aboue many Christian princes, for that she directeth all her gouernment, to the set∣ting forth of his glory. Peccator videbit & irascetur, all you* 1.38 Popish enimies beholding and gnashing your téeth thereat. But who would thinke M. Stapl. were one, or the Papists any, they haue of him so swéete and fine a proctor, with so fayre wordes to couer so foule disobedience.

And albeit (saith he) the Catholikes wishe to the Q. Maie∣stie,* 1.39 as quiet, as prosperous, as lōg▪ & as honorable an Empire, to the glory of God, as euer had Prince in the world, & are as wel affected to her highnes, as euer were good subiectes to their noble Princes aforesaide: Ye recken not vp so many times as as as, as as as as, as he were a very asse, that would beleue you for all your goodly wishes and painted affections, such faire wordes may make fooles faine, and beleue that all is golde that glistreth. But what in harte you wishe, and in déede you attempt, her grace hath tried throughly, & all men well perceyue. But God sendeth a curst cow short hornes: & God sende her Maiestie long safetie, frō the fained teares of such wel wishing Crocodiles. And thē with y^e grace of God, she shall do wel inough, maugre all hollow harted Papists. But go to now, tell on M. Stap. if ye wish her highnes thus wel as ye wold séeme, why refuse ye your duetiful obediēce?

Albeit (say you) the catholikes wishe thus, yet can they not* 1.40 finde in their harts to take the Othe, not for any sinister affe∣ctiō &c. but onely for conscience sake, groūded vpon the Ca∣nons and lawes of the holy church, and the continuall practise of all christian and Catholike realmes, finally vpon holy Scri∣pture; namely that saying of S. Peter, O portet obedire Deo ma∣gis* 1.41 quàm hominibus, God must be obeyed more than men.

Is not here a fayre cloke to couer the Papists disobediēce to their Prince withall? all whose open stubbornesie, and priuie practises against their Prince & countrie, are not for∣sooth of any sinister affection, but euen for conscience sake.* 1.42 But what manner a conscience is this that ye do it for M. Stapl.? is it not such an other conscience, as Sir Thomas More telleth the Wolfe had? to whom when the Foxe his ghostly father enioyned him penance for his rauening, that he should neuer after, deuoure any thing that he thought in his conscience was aboue the value of sixe pence, the peni∣tent Wolfe afterward, seing a fat cow with her calfe feeding in a medow, being hungrie and gréedie of his pray, yet durst he not breake his ghostly fathers rule, till he had examined in his conscience the price of them: On my conscience ({quod} the Wolfe) this cowe is but worth a groate, and then of conscience can her Calie be hardly worth halfe as muche. Now if you M. Stapl. and your fellowes haue this woluish conscience, to deuoure the shéepe of Christ, the cow and calfe and all, to burne the people of God, to persecute his truth, to betray your countrie to strangers, to disobey your naturall Prince, and so can set your conscience, that all is done for conscience: then, as, many haue to little consciences, so you haue a great deale to much. And such large consciences God defend vs frō. But to shew that your conscience is no better, I pray ye whereon is it grounded? Grounded vpon the Ca∣nons & lawes of the holy Church, and the cōtinual practise of all Christian and catholike realmes. Do ye ground your con∣sciences vpon the Canons & lawes of the church, that is, vpō the practise of man? this is but a sandie groūd, (M. St.) for a christian cōscience (in a matter of religiō, that ye say, is the waightiest of all points in controuersie, & the fountaine of al o∣ther) to be builded & founded vpon. And yet the one of these groundes, is a manifest lying crake, of the continuall pra∣ctise of all Christen realmes, which ye haue not yet proued, crake of it, and grounde your conscience on it, when ye haue

proued it, for before, ye do but set your conscience on the tenterhookes, to presume of that ye haue not proued. The other is euen the wolues conscience vp and downe, that grounded his conscience of his owne gréedie desire, so you grounde your conscience on the canons and lawes of the ho∣ly Church. And what is the holy Church with you, on your conscience? Forsooth on our conscience holy Church, is our selues, that be the Bishops, Monkes, Friers, and priestes. We (say you) are the holy Churche, and our owne lavves and canons, are the lawes and canons of holy Church, and all that is giuen to vs, is giuen to holy Churche. And so ye grounde your consciences after your owne lawes and Can∣nons, as the wolfe did after his. Are not these good woluishe consciences? But haue ye no better grounde of your con∣science than these two? yes, say you, finally we ground our consciences vpon holy Scripture, namely that saying of S. Peter, oporte•…•… obedire deo magis quam hominibus, God must be* 1.43 obeyed more than men.

In déede M. St. if ye can make this a grounde, it is a much surer grounde than the other twayne, the sacred worde of God, and the obedience that ye owe to God. Howbeit sithe euery pretence of obedience to God, and euery wresting of Gods worde, is no good grounde of conscience: neither the worde of God, nor the obedience to God, taketh away the obedience that is due to the Prince: Howe do ye frame your argument, from S. Peters saying? God muste be o∣beyed more than man. Ergo, the Q. Maiestie can not be obeyed for supreme gouernour vnder God, in all ecclesia∣sticall causes within hir dominions. This argument is so fonde, it might serue any traytor, or any other to disobey his Prince, vnder pretence of conscience: and therefore can not cleare you from the sighes and grones, that ye make for your foresayde change, where with the Bishop rightly cha∣lengeth M. Feckenham.

These arguments nowe pretending conscience, béeing

not sufficient to discharge the Papistes of disobedience, M. St. addeth to them two more, the one, by obiecting the like to vs: that we sighe and grone for the change of other prin∣ces, nor affected in religion as we be. And so he thinketh to put away this reason from them selues, that the B. maketh agaynst them: The Papistes do not obey but im∣pugne the Q. Maiesties authoritie, Ergo, they wishe and looke with diepe sighes and groanes, for a change therof. The other argument that M. St. maketh agaynst this, he frameth thus: diuers papists haue lost their goods, and are ready to lese their life, Ergo, they wishe not for this change. This argument as it serueth no more their cause, than any other heretikes: so it followeth not, but rather the contrarie, that the more they léese, the more they wishe the change. And to shew this, as one that had forgotten himselfe, whyle he craketh what witte, body, and lyfe, he would employ for his prince and countrey, ad∣ding withall this exception, if the case so require: he bur∣steth out into a diepe sighe and groane for a change, saying: And for my parte I pray God hartily the tryall once woulde* 1.44 come.

What case is this ye speake off so doubtfully master. St. if it be not a change? that leauing your argumente, ye fall thus deuoutly to your beades, & pray so hartily, promising to employ your pregnant witte, your proper body, yea ven∣ture your life and all, that once it might come, if it be not a change? if ye meane well, why be you not at home, and in your natiue countrey employ your witte & body, like a good subiect as ye ought to do, but subtract your bodie, and bende your witte, your body, and all your endeuour, by all mali∣cious practises, agaynst hir Malesties authoritie herein▪ abusing dayly, not onely by suche your inuectiue Pamph∣lets dispearsed abroade in hucker mucker, hir Maiesties subiectes here quiet at home, to make them mislike hir Highnesse regiment: but also to slaunder hir abroade to

other Nations, besides your continuall whisperers, whom ye sende aboute, instilling into the peoples heades, a hope or feare of a chaunge to come: bearing the people in hand, euen from hir Maiesties first raigne, that the nexte Ea∣ster, the nexte Midsomer, the nexte Michelmas, the nexte Christmas, the nexte quarter, the nexte halfe yeare, the nexte yeare, we shall haue a chaunge. And thus from yere to yeare ye fode them on, with vayne hope, nourishing pri∣uie rebellion in their hearts, or at least, to make the people to faynt and murmure, as the searchers of the lande of pro∣mise,* 1.45 did to the children of Israell. But God be blessed, that hitherto hath defeated all your blinde prophesies. He will* 1.46 confounde the hypocrites hope, and establishe his truthe for euer.

Nowe to put away this cryme from the Papists, and to* 1.47 charge vs therewith, he alledgeth first, the practise of the Paynims and Ievves, and Heretikes. The effecte of hys argument is this:

Diuers Heretykes vsed greate cruelties and seditions, for that they misliked the contrarie religion to theirs: Ergo; the Papistes misliking the Quéenes maiesties au∣thoritie, and wishing a chaunge thereof, make not in so dooing, a preparation to sedition, but we that acknow∣ledge the same, do make it.

I answere, 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉 est. A false Papiste is a perillous beast. And if hotte burnyng, cruell hande∣ling, trayterous poysoning, pitifull murdering, horrible tragedies, tragicall enormities, priuie and great conspiracies, (all which he obiecteth to vs in the sustian fumes of his boy∣strous Rhetorike) be arguments of Paynims Iewes, or He∣retikes: then •…•…one better than the Papistes haue deserued those titles.

And here, as he thinketh, béeing gotten into a plentyfull* 1.48 •…•…ayne, he runneth into Germanie, Denmarke, Swethlande, Englande, Fraunce, and Scotlande, frō these to the low coun∣treys

of Brabant, Hollande, Flaunders, and Lukelande, from thence to Monster, then to the Duke of Saxonie, and the Lantgraue of Hesse, agayne to Denmarke and Swethlande, and for his witnesse, he bringeth in one as good as him selfe, Frederike Staphilus. From thence sodenly to Charing crosse and to Towre hill, then haue ouer the water agayne to Fraunce, Piemont, Geneua, Gascoigne, Rhone, Orleance, Lions, skipping in and out, and it were a Iacke of Bedlam, raking euery corner to picke quarels, and deuise lyes by the Protestants. And what proofe of all this alledgeth he? for∣sooth, I referre you M. Horne, to an oration made of this mat∣ter* 1.49 expressely, and pronounced here in Louayne, and transla∣ted eloquently, and printed in our Englishe tongue. Naye, then it must néedes be true M. St. who dare gainesay it, if suche a man of credence as you, will referre all these dis∣courses vnto that oration, yea and that it was pronounced among you in Louayne, where, God wot, neuer lye is pro∣nounced, yea, and besides all this, it is translated eloquently in our Englishe tongue, and printed too: these are sore argu∣ments I promise you, as euer I heard so wise a man make, to proue the truth of all th•…•…se accusations, that ye lay to the protestants charge. But M. Stap. and ye would follow my councell, ye should let all these by quarels go, and referre your selfe to your matter.

But ye wil first make an other vagarie, and sée the coun∣treys* 1.50 once agayne, so may ye write vs ouer lies •…•…owe by authoritie, as ye do full handsomly, for after ye haue bene at Scotlande, and are returned to your lovve countreys of Flaunders, we haue fiue leaues togither entituled the rebel∣lion of Flaunders, with a swarme of reprocheful staunders, to deface the Gospell with sedition, hurli•…•… b•…•…rlies, and dis∣obedience: when all the world séeth, the authors of al those tumults, to be the Papists them selues.

At length remembring him selfe that all these lyes, are no good purgation for the Papists, for the ful proofe of their

obedience. Now for the purgation of the Catholikes (sayth* 1.51 he) agaynst whom this man so falsly and malitiously blo∣weth his horne, it may seeme a good and conuenient proofe of their quietnesse and obedience, that all this eyght yeres & more, there hath not bene in this realme, no not one that I can heare of, that hath bene conuicted of any disloyaltie, for worde or deede, concerning the Princes ciuil regiment: which they all wishe were as large and ample, as euer was our noble countrymans the great Constantines.

You blow your pipe like a subtile flatterer, howsoeuer he bloweth his horne, M. St. The ioly ciuill regiment, that ye wishe hir highnesse, is in the ende no better, as your selfe af∣terwarde shew, when ye come to the definition therof, than ye can aforde to the very Turke, and therfore hir Maiestie is much beholding to you, and hath very loyall subiectes of you. Yea you are (as ye commende your selfe, if we may beléeue you on your owne reporte) suche obedient subiects, that all this eyght yere and more there hath not bene, no not one conuicted of any disloyaltie, for word or deede, that you can heare of. Ye do wisely, M. Stap. to mitigate the mat∣ter by your owne hearing: ye coulde heare all things that sounded agaynst the Protestants, wherein you were as quicke of telling as of hearing. But for any thing, that should sounde agaynst the Papists, although it rang in the eares of all men, ye haue on your haruest eares. But and if ye coulde haue heard on that side the eare, that sheweth out the Papistes practises, ye shoulde haue hearde of ma∣ny their conspiracies, and other their wicked attempts, by∣sides their muttrings that they dare not vtter, which if they durst, no doubte ye shoulde heare thereof. Did ye ne∣uer heare of one that wrote, Quod non est tutum scribere* 1.52 contra eos qui possun•…•… prescribere? Well, it was written and printed at Louayne also, no doubt of an obediente subiecte, but he Englished it not, for feare all Englishemen shoulde haue séene his Diuels Paternoster, and haue espied hys

trayterous heart, that no will wanted in him, to directe his penne, so farre as he durst, against his most gratious soue∣raigne: and shall we thinke, if he could with safetie attēpt further agaynst his prince, that he woulde spare his vtter∣moste? Well, ye knowe him, I dare say, at least ye haue heard of him, for he taketh him selfe a nere friend of yours, and spake it, besides many mo trecherous wordes agaynst his Prince, euen within this your limitation of eight yeres, and lesse: but I will not bewray him, although your par∣tiall dealing be not to be borne withall. To diffame the Protestants, ye haue runne at randon, and raked togither, all that ye could deuise, from Paynims, lewes, and heretikes, and all other, true or false, for this. 1000▪ yeres, and chiefly for this. 40. or. 50. yeres, in euery countrey, all that ye could heare of, or inuent any thing to slaunder the Gospel by. On the contrarie, for your owne partie, ye could rem•…•…ber your selfe, but of eight yeres onely in Englande. Where euen in your sayd eight yeres, had ye but opened your other eare, to vnderstande but those Frenche and Flemmishe matters, that were done harde by you, you might haue heard of such fetches, practises, murthers, conspiracies, and other suche horrible enterprises of the Papists: that your eares would haue glowed on your head, to haue heard but a quarter of them reported truely.

But letting go these eight yeres, may it please ye to rem•…•…∣ber, if not of olde times, the continuall broyles, seditions, conspiracies, and rebellions, that your Pope & Popelings, haue exercised christian princes and their realmes withall: as in Germanie, Henry the. 4. Henry the. 5. Lewes the. 4. Frederike the. 2. In Fraunce, king Childeprik, Philip le Beaw, Philip de Ualois. In Apulia and Cicill, Con∣radus, Manfrede. &c. In Naples, Charles, Alphonsus. &c. In Italie, the factiōs of the Guelphes, & Gibellines, the Al∣bi & Nigri. In Rome, the hurlie burlies with the Consull & people for their auncient libertie. In England, the troubles

of king Iohn, and king Henry the. 8. If not all these & many moe: yet I pray you remember the late rebellions of the North, of Lincolne shire, of Deuonshire, & the attempts of* 1.53 cardinall Poole, in the time of king Henry the eyghte, of Kettes rebellion, of the Westerne mens vprores in king Gowardes time. All moued by the Papists, good paternes of Popishe obedience and loyaltie to their Princes I war∣rant you.

But al this M. S. could neuer heare of, nor any other thing else that soūded against thē. And here, as though they were so cleare and innocent from all disobedience, returning a∣gayne to his former pretēce of conscience and religion, as though he were the proctor of the Papists:

VVe poore Catholikes (sayth he) most humbly vpon our* 1.54 knees, desyre hir highnesse, that we may vvith moste lovvly submission, craue and require to be borne vvithall.

And were ye downe on your marybones in déede, M. St. when ye wrote this? but why shuld we not thinke so? since that (to haue hir highnesse the better behold you, how hum∣bly ye knéele) ye are run to Louayne, belike that she might sée you knéeling ouer y^e seas, bicause she could not sée you so néere as here at home. What a mockerie is this, most stub∣bornely to disobey hir gouernement, to forsake hir Maie∣sties dominions, and your natiue coūtrey, and liue in other Princes territories, as subiect to them, not to your natural Soueraigne, to sollicite, not onely by priuie whisperers, hir Highnesse subiects to a misliking of hir gouernement, but by open writing to deface, to slaunder, and inueighe agaynst the same: and all the while moste humbly knee∣ling, vvith most lovvly submissiō, desiring, crauing, & requi∣ring. If this be your most humilitie, and most lovvly sub∣mission if this be your maner of desiring, crauing, requi∣ring, how intollerable and tyrannicall, was your violent and proude authoritie? when Emperours were fayne to go barefoote, knéele vnto, and kisse the feete of your Pope, and

with muche adoo and great labour, obtayne thus muche fa∣uour at his holynesse, to lye prostrate and be troden vnder his féete, when al Princes and people créeped, crouched, and stoode in dreade, of almoste euery pelting Priest. The N. highnesse requireth only of you & your complices. M. St. to come home, and doe your duetie, as good subiectes ought to do. Shewe that lowly submission, that is necessarie, and then craue that is requisite, and so may ye easily finde hir highnesse mercifull and gratious to you. But what is it, that after this mocking sort ye pretende to craue so ear∣nestly?

To be borne withall, if we can not vpon the sodayne, and* 1.55 without sure and substantiall grounds, abandon that faythe that vve vvere baptised in. Sée what a wicked slaunder to couer your disobediēce, ye charge your most gratious prince withall: as though she went about to make you renie that fayth ye vvere baptised in. And this ye doe euen where ye pretende to kneele on your knees, vvith moste humble and lowely submission. Sée what cankred hearts ye beare, for all your counterfayte crouching. If ye knowe, M. Stap. the fayth ye were baptised in, at least, if ye were rightely baptised, and be a true Christian man, it is not in the name, fayth, or obedience of the Pope, but in the name, fayth, and obedience of the father, the sonne, and the holy ghost, and this fayth, the Q. maiestie goeth so little about, to haue you abandon, that hir Graces supreme gouernemēt is chiefly directed to this end, to haue ye without any super∣stition, error, idolatrie, or any other pollution therof, kéepe & maintein it inuiolate, as in baptisme ye promised to do, and therfore this is not subiect like, though ye be on your knees neuer so muche, to accuse hir highnesse, as to cause ye to abandon the fayth ye were baptised in. She requireth ye to kéepe it, not abandon it, neither on the soden, nor at leisure. And if this were all the cause of your refusall of obedience, as hir Grace neuer denied you it, ye doe but slaunder hir:

so néeded ye not haue runne away, nor shew yet such disobe∣dience to hir authoritie, since she euer graunted and mayn∣teined the thing ye séeme to craue.

Howbeit your counterfeite humilitie detecteth it selfe, to be very stubborne disobedience. And that while ye pretende to craue one thing, ye entende another thing. And that is, ye would be borne with, still to refuse her graces supreme au∣thoritie ouer you in Ecclesiasticall causes, this is the thing in deede ye meane: and ye would the rather be borne with∣all, bicause it is a matter that commeth vpon the sodaine, & therefore ye can not vpon the sodaine graunt it. In déede M. St. ye pretende reason. Weightie matters require not to be done on a sodeyne passion, but with deliberation▪ But is this so sodeyne a matter yet vnto you? did ye neuer heare of this questiō before? haue ye not had leasure to deliberate there∣on? but who seeth not, that and ye had neuer so much lea∣sure, this matter would still come vpon the sodeyne to you? and of reason ye must haue time to take aduisement vpō it, which you will take all at your leasure, and so for feare ye should become an obedient subiect vpon the sodeyne, ye craue to remayne still vpon deliberation an obstinate enemie. But M. St. pretēding this refusall to be for the abandoning of the faith that we were Christened in, procéedeth:

And as we are assured all our auncetours, and her Maiesties* 1.56 owne most noble progenitours, yea her owne most noble fa∣ther King Henrie the eight, yea that faith, which he in a clerk∣ly booke hath most pithily defended, and thereby atchieued to him and his, and transported as by hereditarie succession, the worthie title and stile yet remayning in her Highnesse, of the Defendour of the Faith.

As ye slaunder most wickedly the Quéenes Maiestie, to cause ye to abandon the faith of your baptisme▪ so ye slaun∣der not only al our auncestors but that most famouse Prince her highnesse Father K. Henrie the 8. as christened in the faith of the Popes obedience: & hereof ye say, ye are assured,

when it is most assured & most euident false. For although our fathers, & the Q. Maiesties father also, yea many of vs our selues, & the Q. Maiestie also her selfe, were borne and baptised, when all the errours of poperie, or many of them did chiefly abounde: yet can no more any one of these, be said now, to be baptised in those errours, that they helde which baptised them, (if they kept the right & formall words of ba∣ptisme, I baptise thée in the name of y^e Father, of the sonne, & of the holy Ghost:) thā in the old time any of their childrē, or they themselues, could be saide to be baptised in such er∣rours, as they helde that were Nouatians, Donatists, Roga∣tists, Pelagians, or any other Heretikes, that notwithstāding kept the right element & formal words of baptisme. Neither can any Papist say now to any, that dissuadeth him from his popish errours, that he goeth about to will him, to abandon the faith wherein he was baptized: any more thā a Pelagian, or any such Heretike, being moued to forsake his heresie, could pretēd he were moued to forsake the faith, he was ba∣ptised in, bicause they that baptised him, yea & his auncesters before him, were Pelagians, &c. Ye should therefore M. St. make your distinction, betwene the faith of your baptisme, and the faith that your popish Church putteth in diuers er∣ronious pointes of doctrine.

As for the faith that K. Henrie the 8▪ the Q. Maiesties most* 1.57 noble Father, set out in the Booke that ye mencion, & therby labour to stayne the Q. Maiestie, as setting out a contrarie faith to her father: as you for your parte M. St. shew your extreme malice, nothing subiectlike, to blemish her highnesse with the famous renown of her father, which notwithstan∣ding ye cā not do: so for the King her father, I answere you, howbeit his booke were clerkly, yet clerklines is one thing, & truth is an other. & what maruel if he thē wrote, in defence of your doctrines, whē your popish prelates hid y^e very truth frō him, & bore him in hand, that your falshoodes were truth? till it pleased God, not to suffer so noble a Prince, to be any

longer deluded by such false prelates, but first in this que∣stion, & after in other, according to the measure of his merci∣ful riches, reueled the truth vnto him: how chance, ye speake not of his faith then, & what clerkly & sincere doctrine he set out thē, against your Pope? And as for the Q. Maiestie here∣in, (which is the proper questiō now in hād) followeth most zealously the steppes of her highnesse father, not wherein he was abused, as many other princes were, by false teachers, but in that he forsooke those errours, he abolished those false teachers, & their captaines vsurped authoritie, in y^t he obeyed the truth reueled to him, before all his own clerkly bookes, before all worldly glory & securitie, & aduentured himselfe & his kingdome, against all his enemies, in setting forth the truth, & gouerning his subiects after y^e word of God. Which though it were not so plentifully set forth then, nor all wée∣des so thoroughly rooted vp, by reason of some false Gardi∣ners, whom he trusted ouer much (howbeit at lēgth thanks be to God he espied them also, & had procéeded furder if God had lent him furder life) yet is he rather to be commended for that he did, than to be euil spoken or euell thought of, for that he could not throughly bring to passe in his time, but left his most vertuouse Sonne King Edwarde, to bring to more perfection. And herein hath the Quéenes highnes fol∣lowed, as ye say, both her Fathers and Brothers faith also.

But ye wring al to that faith, wherein he was before be∣guiled, as though she should follow him in that he was de∣ceiued, & not wherein he founde out & forsoke the deceyuers, that you with your painted wordes might likewise deceyue her Highnes now, as they dece•…•…ued her Maiest father then. But sée how God turned their deceyt agaynst them selues. That where your Pope, to flatter K. Henrie withall, ascri∣bed* 1.58 to him this title (as it were the prophecie of another Cai∣phas) Defender of the faith, the King espying the falshood of y^e Pope, became the very defender of the true faith in déede, abolishing the Pope the very impugner & peruer•…•…er therof,

and so (as you say truer than ye wist, M. Stap.) atchieued to him and his, and transported as by hereditarie succession, the worthy title and stile yet remaining in her Highnesse, of the defendour of the faith. Neither as you faintly say, this title onely remayneth in her Highnes, but the thing that the title doth entende, her highnesse is in very déede, not in a •…•…aked name, the defender thereof: And hath defended her subiects, not from foreyne power of straungers onely, brought in by the Papistes, and from all bodily iniurie and oppression of Popish firebrandes, or any other tirannie: but defendeth e∣uen our faith from all errours, heresies, superstitions, and Idolatries. And this it is for a Prince to be a defender of* 1.59 the faith in déede: which argueth a plaine supremacie. Now after M. Stapl. hath thus flattred, and on his knees humbled him selfe, to obtayne a placard of their disobedience: vp he starteth once againe, and geueth another fling at vs, to re∣uerse this crime of disobedience on vs, thinking so to excuse this disobedience of the Papistes thereby.

And first he setteth on those, whome he calleth round cap* 1.60 Ministers, howbeit if he remembred, that within this hun∣dreth yeres and vpward, the popish priestes themselues did weare round cappes, he would not be so hastie to giue that nick name. He asketh who are those that haue preached with a chaine of golde about their neckes, in steade of a tip∣pet?* 1.61 Assoyle your question your selfe M. Stapl. I know no such protestant. What slaunderous reporte you haue heard of any singuler person I know not, no such order is alowed. Although it be common among your popish Cardinals, Bi∣shops, Abbottes, Deanes, Canons, and other beyonde the Seas, so to ruffle as ye speake, not onely with a chayne of golde, but with hatte and feather, cappe and agglets, rapier and cloke, hawke and houndes, ruffians & fooles wayting on them, and oftentimes in complete harneys on a great cour∣ser, or on a palfrey with a courtisane behinde them, thus go the chiefest of your fleshly spiritualtie: belike they learned

it of that royster Pope Iohn. 13. howbeit no Pope doeth a∣mende this disorder. Upbrayd not therefore such petit and perticular things to vs, which is so great and so common a fault with you.

But Master Stapleton will go more certainely to worke, and charge the Protestantes ex scripto wyth their owne writings.

VVho are those I pray you (sayth he) that write, sint sanè* 1.62 & ipsi Magictratu•…•… membra, & paries, & ciues ecclesi•…•…dei, imo vt ex toto corde sint, omnes precari decet. Flagrent quo{que} ipsi zelo pietatis, sed non sint capita Ecclesi•…•…, quia ipsis non compe∣tit iste 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Let the Magistrates also be members, and partes, and citizens, of the Church of God, yea and that they maye bee so it behoueth vs all wyth all our heart to praye. Let them bee feruent in the godly zeale of Religion, but they may not be heades of the Churche, in no case, for thys supremacie doth not appertaine to them. These are no Pa∣pists I trow M. Horne, but your owne dere brethren of Mag∣deburge, in their new storie ecclesiasticall, by the which they would haue all the worlde directed. Yea in that storie wherof one percell, Illiricus and his fellowes haue dedicated to the Queenes maiestie, that beare the worlde in hande they are the true and zelous schollers of Luther.

Thus triumpheth M. Stapleton against the wryters of the storie of Magdeburge. The effect of his argument is this. These wryters do say that Princes may not be hea∣des of the Church, Erg•…•… no prince ouer all Ecclesiasticall persons & causes in his owne dominions, may be supreme gouernour. Howe euill this argument followeth is easie to perceyue, and the better, in beh•…•…lding howe impudently master Stapleton wresteth these wryters. But he forceth* 1.63 not thereof, bicause they be his aduersaries. For that which they write, not simplie agaynst the supremacie of princes in Ecclesiasticall causes, but agaynst suche supre∣macie of princes, as the Pope vsurped: that wresteth he as

spoken agaynst such supreme gouernment, as the Quéenes maiestie claymeth and vseth.

The writers hereof, hauing set forth two •…•…nsamples of that age, the one of a godly princes gouernmet, by Constan∣tinus Pogonotus: the other of a wicked tyrant, by •…•…eracli∣us: to declare what kinde of supremacie they disalow. Th•…•…y she we that this is the scope of the matter, iste est scopu•…•…res, {quod} magistratibu•…•… politicis, non sit licitum cudere forma•…•… religionū,* 1.64 in perniciem veritatis, ita vel cōcilietur verita•…•…, & mēda•…•…ium, vel vtra{que} simul sopiant, id quod tandem •…•…um habet exitum, vt re∣gnent errores, veritas crucifigatur, & sepeliatur. This is the •…•…cope of the matter, that it is not lawfull for politike magi∣strates to coyne formes of religion, to the destruction of the truth, so that thereby truth and falsehoode should be reconci∣led togither, or both of them togither quayled: VVhich at the length commeth to this ende, that errors raigne, the truth is crucified & buried. And so followeth the sentence that M. St. citeth, let the magistrates also be mebers. &c. but let them not be heades of the Church. Whereby appeareth plainly what maner of heades they meane.

And this they do not once nor twise, setting forth the do∣ings of the wicked •…•…yrant Heraclius for ensample, that was* 1.65 altogither led by affection, and not indifferent to heare •…•…i∣ther party, nor called in counsell lerned and faithfull men, nor called any synode to trie the matter, nor serched y^e truth diligently, but being puffed vppe with pride, and deuising o•…•…ely with a flattring Monke (that after set vp the false fayth of Mahomet) determineth in a corner of a moste weightie controuersie, and afterwardes will haue the mat∣ter neuer called into question. This Emperour they call Architectum religionis, and demaund what man well in his wittes, woulde alowe such attempts, processe and execu∣tions? concluding it is not lawfull form as religionum con∣flare. &c. To make newe formes of religions, and obtrude them to the Church without all kind of godly, honest, modest

and comely gainsaying & refuting therof. All this and much more, say they, of that kinde of supreme gouernement in Princes that they mislyke, and is in déede to be vtterly mis∣lyked of all Christians. But as this is a plaine description of your Popes supremacie, that playeth in all these poynts Heraclius part, so it nothing toucheth that supremacie that the Quéenes maiestie claymeth. It is but your wicked malice to slaunder hir, with such tyrannicall vsurpation of Heraclius as they condemne.

Whie doe ye not rather take theyr other comparison,* 1.66 from Constantinus Pogonotus, to al other godly Princes, and referre that to hir regiment? With what care, and singuler diligence, trauaile, and godlinesse, when the Chur∣ches were horibly deformed, and torne, by the sect of the Monothelites, He summoned the sixt generall Councell, he ouerwhelmed not the debating of the controuersie of do∣ctrine by might or preiudice. He willed the Ministers of the Churche, and preachers of the worde of God, to searche out which opinion was, and which was not agreable to holye writte. He regarded not the ensamples of hys auncesters, who by publike Edictes had approued the doctrine of the Monothelites, which was harde for him to abolishe. Ney∣ther did the authoritie of the Patriarches and Bishoppes, in Constantinople and all ouer the East (that stifly helde that opinion) any thing moue him. Nor he suffred himselfe to be made afrayde, although he heard that the pryde of the By∣shop of Rome was incredible, as one that wickedly chalen∣ged a dignitie and authoritie aboue other Bishops and tea∣chers. But sent his letters to him, exhorting him to come or sende some other in his place. Neyther gaue he him any prerogatiue, nor craueth licence of hym to call the Coun∣cell, but of hys owne duetie, he defineth him selfe for the appoynting of the Councell. He louingly biddeth the Ro∣maine and other Bishoppes, not to bee absent at so neces∣sarie matters, and concerning the Churches publike weale.

The Emperour himselfe is present at the Synode, not as a dumbe or deafe person (like a cifer in Algorisme) or recey∣uing the decrees without iudging of them, or placing the B. of Romes Legates in the chiefest place, and receyuing them without all contradiction (as oracles from them, as it were from Apollos triuet) but modestly, reuerently, and godly, as much as became his calling, he gouerned the Sy∣node, propounding to them the state or scope of the cause, and enquiring on a rowe, gathered their sentences togither, least ought should be done rashly or confusedly. He com∣maunded not the one partie, but the contrarie partie also, plainly and without subtilties to declare their opinions, and what groundes they had of their sentences, out of the holye scriptures, and what autenticall witnesse of the approued fa∣thers. And so forth, they declare, howe indifferently he dealt with either partie, knowing, that he must not condemne any before he knewe the full matter. And when it was euidently found out, that the Monothelites could not defend their opi∣nion, by the clere testimonies of the scripture, nor any sen∣tences of the doctours allowed, yea when it was founde out, they hacked of purpose certaine of the Doctours sayings, and in place of them cited certeyne sayings falsly fathered in the Doctors names, thē the Emperor subscribed to the iudgemēt of al those that thought aright, and earnestly and stoutly exe∣cuted the condemnation made in the name of them all.

Here these wryters commend this Emperor, & the more for that he had about him, no doubt say they, such parasites, as woulde tickle in his eare, that these thinges were vnsitting fo•…•… his maiestie to intermeddle him selfe, with the brawles of the Churches pelting Doctours. It were a blemish to him, to condemne his ancesters, & to cal into doubt or retract things already decreed. This were not the safest way. Let the bishops alone with the matter, for euen they are able to make lawes agaynst the Emperors estate, and abase it. The Emperour by his authoritie may do no more than commaund silence, sende

into exile, or punish with other violence, those that make cla∣mors, or disobey the councels decree. But the Emperor not re∣garding these fancies, thought it honorable to him to be pre∣sent, in the midst of the teachers of gods worde, assisting not a little the triall and iudgement of the cōtrouersie. This en∣sample these wryters thus set out, for a princes gouernmēt, dealing, & ouersight in the chiefest ecclesiastical causes. And thus before they determined in generall, that God or deined not Princes to spoile their subiects, and make themselues •…•…at. Neither onely to attende to outward discipline, and that men may liue in honest tranquilitie, for (say they) seing that ma∣gistrates are in the scriptures called Gods, this ought to bee their first and chiefest care, that their subiects serue God after such a sorte, that his kingdome in their dominions may bee knowne, encreased, and conserued, that is to were, sincere do∣ctrine. &c. may be deliuered, remaine, & passe frō thē to their posteritie. To this end tendeth all politike administration, all defence of peace and neighborhod, & that laborsome care of getting the liuing & gathering goodes: that these spirituall & euerlasting goodes both of the body & of the mind, should be gotten. Thus do they stretch out, further than doth M. St. the bounds of a princes gouernment to al ecclesiastical can∣ses. And all that they write on the other part, is against such a popish supremacie, as establisheth & maketh a new religiō quicquid imperita•…•…erit re•…•…. And yet sée howe spitefully and falsly M. St. wresteth it, as writtē against the Q. maiestie. When as he confesseth himselfe, they cōmend hir, & euen by the ensample of Constantine, they allow that supreme go∣uernment that she doth take vpon hir. Now M. St. after his maner presupposing, we will reiect these writers, as though they spake against the supreme gouernmēt of the Quéene:

In case ye thinke (sayth he) theyr testimonie not to haue* 1.67 weight ynough, then herken to your & their Apostle Luther,* 1.68 who writeth that it is not the office of kings & princes, to cō∣firm no not the true doctrine, but to be subiect and serue the

same. The effect of this argument is this, princes must not take on them, so to confirme the true doctrine, that they be not subiect therevnto, nor serue, but rule the same: Ergo Princes may not set forth the true doctrine, nor be supreme gouernors in their dominions, ouer all ecclesiastical persons and causes. This argument is like to his fellowe aboue.* 1.69 And as ye wrested the former writers, so wrest ye Luthers saying also, whose sētence as it is nothing against the godly gouernment of our most noble soueraigne, subiect to y^e prin∣cipall authoritie of Gods word, & that it might be of chiefest authoritie, subduing thereto the authoritie of all other wri∣ters, & remouing those superstitions, that exalted them sel∣ues in authoritie equall, or aboue Gods worde: so this sentence is eftsones, as the other, agaynst such vsurpation, as is euident that your Pope taketh vpon him.

But M. Stapleton dreaming that he hath so sore pressed* 1.70 vs, and this is so harde and straunge a case, that now Luther can take no place amongst vs: he obiecteth another vnto* 1.71 vs, one Andreas Modrenius. And yet his saying also, ma∣keth (God wote) ful little for the Papists herein. Who saith there ought to be some one to be taken for the chiefe and su∣preme head in the whole Church in all causes ecclesiasticall. What conclude ye M. St. herevpon? Ergo it must be your Pope? or no christian prince? And here as though all these were not yet sufficient testimonies, ye bring in Caluin. But since ye doe it but to fill vp your booke, with that common allegation of your side, which being also not omitted of M. Feckēham, is to be referred, to be propounded and answe∣red vnto in his proper place: I therefore remit you thither. Onely to that ye say, he so spitefully handled King Hen∣rie* 1.72 the eyght, as hee neuer handled the Pope more spite∣fully, I aunswere: this is but your spitefull lie, to deface the Protestantes. Else why doe ye not proue the same? And as for your Pope it is euident also, he neuer handled him spitefully, but onely reproued his vyces and errours

by the worde of God. But howe spitefullie your Pope and popishe Prelates, so farre as they coulde, handeled him, and howe spitefully they handle all Protestantes, that they maye once sette their spitefull spirituall fingers vppon, all the worlde doeth sée. And yet the silie Protestantes muste beare all the blame, it is not ynoughe for them to beare the iniuryes. This lesson ye learned of the Diuell of Dowgate, to bite and whine also, or rather ye doe as E∣sops Woolfe did, chalenge the poore Lambe for troubling his water, and to misuse him spitefully, but thys mercifull Woolfe, deuoured this spitefull Lambe.

He vrgeth vs farther in great outcryes, with a sentence of one Anthonie Gilbie, our own Countriman. The summe* 1.73 of his argument is this. Anthonie Gilbie an Englishe man, speaketh verie vnreuerently, and vnreligiously, of King Henrie the eight: Ergo the Protestantes now in England, whatsoeuer they pretende and dissemble in wordes, in heart mislike the Quéenes maiesties gouernment.

How doth this follow M. St? and yet ye wrest Anthonie Gilbies sentence also. He speaketh not of this supremacie neyther, but in plaine wordes, of such a supremacie in Eng∣land, as y^e Pope chalengeth all ouer Christendome. Though therefore he be greatly to be blamed, for his vnreuerent speach, and for his vnaduised mistaking of hys Princes lawfull authoritie: yet is he not to be belyed, as though he spoke of all kinde of supremacie in all princes simplie. It is a shame (as they say M. St.) euen to belie the Diuell. But sée how the matter falleth out. Ye haue brought Anthonie Gilbyes sentence, agaynst vs and the Quéenes maiesties authoritie. Haue ye not wel holpē your self, if this sentence also make flat agaynst your pope? For if (as he sayth, & ther∣in truely) Christ ought onely to be the head of the church, & the placing of any other displaceth him: then is not the pope the head also, but the placing of him displaceth Christ. But the Pope chalengeth to be the heade of the Churche also,

which our prince doth not: Ergo not our prince, but your Pope displaceth Christ. And thus thinking to beate vs, ye still make a rodde for your owne Popes tale.

And here sodenly calling to mind, how far he hath straied in forraging out these sentences, he returneth a little to the Bishop, setting on him for calling the Pope the Papists god* 1.74 in earth, the archeheretike of Rome and that M. Fec. would haue him reigne in the Queenes place. Besturring himselfe with a heape of arguments, to defende his Pope. Besides his scoffes, raylings, and other rhetoricall floures quoted in his common places. But first for his Pope sayth he, VVe* 1.75 make no God of the Pope, and sometimes perhaps no good man neyther. In déede M. Stap. ye should haue more than both your handes full, to make your Pope sometimes a good man▪ ye néede not put perhaps to the matter. It would pose him selfe, and all the Diuels in hell, and that oftentymes, to worke such a miracle on him, as, that man of sinne, that childe of perdition, and aduersarie of God, to become a good man. But yet I say beware, howe ye speake such buggishe words of him, as not to be a good man. Whose wil is law, whose law is all power, in heauen, in earth, in hell. Nowe can this be an ill man. Beware least this come to his eares* 1.76 M. Stap. and withall, that ye make him not a God in earth. Are not you of theyr religion, that beléeue and confesse this principle, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 deus noster Papa: Our Lorde God the Pope? Yea and as some say, he is Plus{que} deu•…•…. If ye be: be∣ware his thunderbolt. If ye be not: whie defende ye him, and his errors, against the truth of God? whie forsake you your most vertuous Prince, to follow a straunger, and that an yll man? but you answere:

And yet we reuerence him, for his office, and authoritie,* 1.77 that Christ so amply and honourably gaue him, for preserua∣tion of vnitie and quietnesse in his Church.

That ye reuerence him in déede, and that is more, adore* 1.78 him to, is manifest. But the patent of that his office and

authoritie, that ye crake Christe so amplie and so honorably gaue your Pope, ye shewe none, nor where, nor how, nor when he gaue it: Only ye tell vs of the endes, wherefore he gaue it. For the preseruation of vnitie and quietnes in his* 1.79 Church. But if these were the endes M. St. he hath forfeited his patent long ago. That not onely disagreeth from the ex∣presse wordes and commaūdement of Christ, but swerueth, one Pope from another. And how chance he setteth his own scholemē, & his Canonists at no better vnitie? his Thomists and his Scotistes, his sects of Religions, at no better quiet∣nes, than a t•…•…ade & a snake togither? how chance he agreeth no better with his Bishops, & his own colledge of cardinals? How chance he falleth out so often with Emperours and kings, & setteth Princes & their subiectes by the eares togi∣ther? why fighteth he so fast with both his swordes, like king Arthures dubble sworded knight? why had he rather at this day, that al christendome were in a broyle, & so much bl•…•…ud were cruelly shedde, than he would relent one inche of his honour, one penie of his filthie gaine, one i•…•…te of his errors, Idolatries, & false dectrines, that euē are cōfessed of his own secte, & giue place to the worde of God? is this his preseruing of vnitie and quietnes, in the Church of Christ? or had he any such patent giuen him, hath he not lost and lost it againe? and will ye still reuerence and adore him, for it?

Secondly, where the Bishop calleth your Pope, the arch∣heretike* 1.80 of Rome. Your wisedome (say you) with like truth also appeareth, in that ye call the Pope the Archeheretike of Rome, naming no man, and so your wordes so liberally & wā∣tonly cast out, do as well comprehende S. Peter, S. Clement, and other holy Martyrs, and Bishops there, as any other.

The summe of this argum•…•…t is this, The Pope now aliue, or to come, (for the B. speaketh of one, that they would haue raigne in the Queenes place) is called an archeheretike: Ergo, S. Peter, S. Clement, and other holy Martyres, are called arch∣heretickes. His answere to this is thus,

I promise you a well blowen blast and handsomly handled,

I answere ye againe M. Stapl. I promise ye this is a well* 1.81 made argument, and handsomly answered.

Ye bragge much for your Pope of S. Peter, and S. Clement, and other holy martyres. Your Pope doth well M. Stapl to bragge of them, for that is all the neerenesse that he cōmeth to them. S. Peter and those Martyrs were as like your Pope, and he as like them, as Caiphas was like to Christ. If they saw his deings and his craking of them, they would neuer crake againe of him, but call him archeheretike to. But he may crake of these holy martyrs, as y^e Earle of Warwick craked in king Edward y^e fourths daies, that it was a iolier* 1.82 thing to make Kings, than to be him self a King: and so may your Pope bragge, that it is a iolier matter to make mar∣tyrs, than to be a martyr him selfe. He can make saintes he saith, & I beléeue it, & the poore saintes féele it dayly, whose* 1.83 stoles he dippeth in their bloud. So like is he to s. Peter, S. Clement & other holy Martyrs, that where he is none him selfe as were they, yet in that defect, he will re•…•…ōpence God, with store of martyrs of his owne making. And for this re∣semblaunce, if the Pope be now touched, S Peter by & by is touched, and he that speaketh generally of the Popes now a dayes, if he name not one certaine Pope, casteth out his wordes wantonly, at S. Peter, S. Clement and other holy Mar∣tyrs of the old time. But and ye had not bene wantonly dis∣posed M. St. your self, you might wel haue perceyued whom the B. meant, nothing the old Bishops of Rome (of whome whether S. Peter were euer any or no, is an other question, and ye are well stripped out of that Lions skinne.) But he spake plainely, of such Bishops as now vsurping the sea of Rome, ye would haue to raigne in the Queenes place. But let not the matter go so M. Stapleton.

VVith like finenesse (say you) ye call him archehereticke* 1.84 that is supreme iudge of all heretickes and heresies to.

I answere with the like finenesse ye take that for graun∣ted,

that is chiefly denied. By this fine Sophisticall figure Petitio principij, your finenesse M. St. will hurt you, euery boy in the scooles would hisse out such fine reasoning.

Ye call him archeheretike, (say you) that hath already* 1.85 iudged you and your Patriarches, for archeheretikes. I wiste as well might the fellon at the barre in VVestminster hall, to saue his life if it might be, call the iudge, the strongest theese of all. And doubtlesse had he a Prince on his side, his plea were as good as yours is. Let go the Prince M. Stapleton, that is to much trecherie, and more than felonie, though ye liken vs to the fellon, to resemble the Quéenes most excel∣lent Maiestie to an abbettour of theeues and fellons: & then I will answere your I wiste, with an other I wiste. I wiste as well the strongest theefe of all, might crie stoppe theefe, by any true man, to saue the pursuite from him selfe, and his crie were as good as the Popes crie, that we, not he, are the archheretikes: and doubtlesse, hauing such confederates on his side as you, to helpe to crie so with him, the theeues crie might séeme more true, than the true mans. Especially if as you would haue the matter go, that the theefe should be made iudge in his owne case to, when would this theefe condemne him selfe trowe you? do ye not perceyue M. Sta∣pleton, that your comparison fayleth of the indge in VVest∣minster hall against a fellon? when saw ye there a iudge sit, and giue sentence in his owne cause, him selfe beyng on the one side the principall partie? what Iustice or lawe call you that? you should therefore let VVestminster hall alone, and say, at Rot•…•… in Rome, or in the Popes cōsistorie, and where he will si•…•…te as Iudge on him selfe and vs. There in déede, he hath Iudged vs to be the archeheretikes, but euen this vn∣iust doyng, sheweth him selfe to be the very archeheretike. Otherwise if his cause were good, he durst come downe from the bench, and pleade with his aduersaries, the truth or falshood thereof: Which till he do, he plaieth the parte of an archetyrant also.

Now (say you) where ye say we would haue the Pope, to* 1.86 raigne here in the Queenes place, proceedeth from your like truth and wisedome. For albeit the Popes authoritie was euer chiefe for matters Ecclesiasticall, yet was there neuer any so much a noddie, to say and beleue the Pope raigned here, the Pope and the King, being euer two distinct persons, farre dif∣ferent the one from the other, in seuerall functions and admi∣nistrations, and yet well concurrant and coincident togither, without any imminution of the one or the others authoritie.

I answere, with the like truth and wisdome, as ye reaso∣ned before, so ye frame also this reason. Ye say (say you) we would haue the Pope to raigne in her place: Ergo, ye say we would haue the Pope to be King. Hereupon ye make your distinction of raigning, and hauing supreme authoritie, and so ye conclude there was neuer any so much a noddie, to say and beleeue the Pope raigned here.

First your argument is faultie, for, putting the case, ye* 1.87 will not for shame say, that ye would haue him King here, yet if he tooke from her a principall parte of her royall power, did he not then raigne in her place, though he clay∣med not to be King? and since ye vaunt of wisedome, what a wise distinction is this, of raygning and hauing supreme authoritie, to bleare the simples eyes with woordes? for so farre forth, as he claymeth the supreme authoritie, which he doth in all supreme matters, as are Ecclesiasticall, and that ouer her, so well as any other: so farre foorth he claymeth, to raygne ouer her. Nowe this being a parte of her royall power, deth he not clayme to raigne euen ouer the princi∣pall parte, and so is King thereof?

But say you who was euer so much a noddie as to say he raygned here? Sir this noddie is euen your Pope, that ma∣keth this clayme, & you your selfe for him. Do you not here say, (although you greatly lie therin) that he was euer chiefe for matters Ecclesiasticall, and do not all your complices say, that he raigneth for spirituall matters, both here & all ouer

Christendome? Yea, I wil go further, for the temporalties to. I pray you (sauing the reuerence of your noddie) who raygned heere, when for certayne dayes the Popes legate, kept the crowne of Englande from king Iohn, and gaue it him agayne, making the king become vassall & feodatarie to the Pope, and to holde the crowne and realme of him in fee farme, and pay. 700. marks a yere for England, and. 300. for Irelande? And hath not the Pope chalenged other king∣domes also: yea doth he not clayme to be the chiefe Lorde and Prince of all kingdomes? and to set vp, and depose, what king or prince he pleased? And he that beléeued not this, was not counted a noddie, but an heretike. And yet sayth M. St. was there euer any so much a noddie, to say and beleeue the Pope raigned here? but all Papistes muste be noddies with him, yea his owne Pope in steade of a triple crowne, muste weare a cockes combe, and him selfe for companie will beare the bell.

But here he leapeth backe agayne to M. Gilbie, not for the matter of supremacie, but for his misliking of certayne orders of religion in king Edwards dayes, and here vpon plea∣deth,* 1.88 that the Papistes are nowe more to be borne withal, if they can not beare the seruice, and the title set foorth.

I answere, first (M. St.) another mans faults excuse not yours. Neither Anthonie Gilbies and yours are alike. For were his greater, or any of those Protestants, that ye vp∣brayde vnto vs afterwards, yet are they lesse, in that they obstinately maynteyned not the same, nor persisted therin, nor attempted any conspiracies, nor would haue a foraigne supreme, nor suche an other as your Pope, the father of er∣rors, and so on their submission or repentaunce, their fault is pardoned or made lesse. But you obstinately maynteine a playne refusall of obedience, would haue a foraigne vsur∣per be your supreme, and not onely subdue the realme and our bodies to his tyrannie, but our soules to his errors: nei∣ther do ye repente therof, but perseuer in it, and by wicked

Libels, priuie conspiracies, and all other meanes that ye can, deface Gods worde, your natural prince, & natiue coun∣trey: your fault therfore, is much greater thā his, or theirs. And therfore your wilful obstinacie is not to be borne with∣al, especially since after so long and gentle tollerance of the Quéenes moste gracious lenitie towards you, ye encrease your malice, and harden your hearts with Pharao, abusing hir highnesse lenitie.

Now, where the Bishop sayd, these dealings were a pre∣paration to rebellion agaynst the Queenes person, M. Stap.* 1.89 sayth, that it nothing toucheth hir person, nor hir crowne. And that without the ecclesiasticall authoritie, the crovvne hath continued and flourished moste honorably many hun∣dreth yeres▪ and shall by Gods grace continue full well, and full long agayne, when it shall please God.

Why M. Stap. what meane ye by this? dothe not the crovvne flourishe and continue, euen nowe also, God be praysed for it? why say you then, it hath flourished, and shal agayne, when it shall please God, as though it dyd not now. And the state of the Crovvne were nowe no estate, or a ve∣ry ill estate, in the reigne of the Quéenes maiestie. If this be not a preparation to rebellion, to make the Sub∣iectes mislike the estate of the Crovvne, is it not then, euen a rebellious Proclamation it selfe? but let vs sée your ar∣gument, that ye make hereon, to excuse your selues.

Diuers Princes haue continued and flourished hono∣rably of long time without the ecclesiasticall authoritie.

Ergo, it is nowe no preparation to rebellion, agaynst the Quéenes person, to refuse hir authoritie ouer all causes ec∣clesiasticall, and to defende that it apperteyneth not to hir* 1.90 person or Crowne.

I answere. First the worde ecclesiasticall authoritie, is very subtilly and doubtfully spokē, as though hir highnesse went about to play the minister. If ye meane so, the antece∣dent is then true. The ecclesiasticall authoritie nothing

toucheth hir person or crowne▪ without the whiche it hath most honorably continued and flourished many hundreth yeres, and shall by Gods grace continue, ful wel, and ful long agayne, when it shal please God. But then is this your most spitefull slaunder, to say, that the Quéene now taketh vpon hir eccl. authoritie, and that it is now vnited to hir person or crowne, which is most euident false. And therefore the crowne flourisheth, (for any suche matter) so well as euer it did. And God graunt it neuer to flourish worsse, than it doth vnder hir Maiestie now. But the antecedent béeing so farre foorth true, as is declared, then the consequent follo∣weth not, that it is now no preparation to rebelliō to refuse hir authoritie ouer all eccl. causes, and to defende that it per∣teyneth not to hir person or crowne.

But if in the antecedent by ecclesi. authoritie ye meane authoritie ouer ecclesiasticall matters, then the antecedent is false, and so to be proued, by the issue of the practise in this Realme: Neither is it any good argument.

Bicause many tooke it not on them: Ergo, none may?

Bicause they did not vse it: Ergo, they ought not?

Bicause they had worldly prosperitie without it: Ergo, it was not necessarie to them?

Bicause the denial was no preparation to rebellion then: Ergo, it is none nowe?

None of these causes are sufficient, M. St. and therefore your subtile and false reason fayleth.

Now when ye sée nothing will fadge this way, eyther to defende you, or to accuse vs, ye will set vpon vs for other matters, that we are those that make this prepara∣tion to rebellion.

Let this title and eccl. iurisdiction goe (say you) which all* 1.91 good princes haue euer forgone, as nothing to them apper∣teyning: let vs come to the very temporall authoritie, and let vs consider who make any preparation of rebellion, the Ca∣tholikes, or the Protestants.

In letting that go, M. Stap. that appertayneth to this title and ecclesiasticall iurisdiction, ye let go your matter, and after your maner, make so many impertinent discour∣ses, contrarie to that ye called vpon before, neuer to swerue from the question in hande, and nowe your selfe swerue of purpose from it. Howebeit, shall we let you go so rounde a∣way, with suche a heape of notorious lyes, that all good Princes haue euer forgone this title and ecclesiasticall iuris∣diction, as nothing to them appertayning? that not some or many, but all good Princes, haue forgone, and euer forgone, both this title, and also ecclesiasticall iurisdiction, and so euer forgone it, as nothing pertayning to them? If ye coulde haue shewed this, ye should haue well spent your time, and kept ye nearer your matter, ye néeded not haue fisked about so many by quarels. But this could ye not proue, and ther∣fore it was necessarie, ye should runne to them, picking quarels at vs, not marking your owne wicked defacing of your Prince, whome otherwhiles so fauningly ye flatter. For whereto else tendeth this saying, all good princes haue euer forgone this tytle and ecclesiasticall iurisdiction, as no∣thing perteyning to them, but to inferre, that all those prin∣ces that take on them, or will at any time not forgoe thys title & eccl. iurisdiction, as apperteyning to them, are ill and wicked Princes? What else can be made of your saying? And so not onely ye playnly reuile the Lordes anoynted, the Quéenes most excellent maiestie, but also hir highnesse brother and father, whom so muche ye praysed before. For neither of them did forgo it, no not Quéene Mary hir selfe, that dyd forgoe it, did euer forgoe it, & so ye rayle at hir also. Besides many other godly princes, of this & other realmes, for the eccl. iurisdiction, as ye call it, whiche some of them did neuer, some of them did not euer forgoe. And therfore ye both reuile them, and belye thē, but chiefly the Quéenes highnesse, and is not this neither a preparation to re∣bellion?

But M. Stap. muste néedes be let goe, whether he list to range: and therefore let him goe. First, he asketh, vvho vvere they that set foorth deuises of their ovvne, for the suc∣cession* 1.92 of the crovvne, vvithout the Princes knovvledge? Surely (sayth he) no Catholikes, but the very Protestantes them selues. Ye doill, M. Stap. to make a generall con∣clusion, of the Protestantes simply, from the priuate doo∣inges of some. Should a man say that the pedigrée, that M. Christoferson set from Iohn of Gaunt, for king Philips title to the Crowne of Englande, prouing him to be, euen nearer than Quéene Mary hir selfe, was the dooing of all the Papistes? No, the Papistes mystiked and corrected it. Howebeit, when it was best corrected, it tended to a farre worsse ende, (which ende was all their dooings and fetche, to bring this Realme to perpetuall slauery and bondage of Aliens) than dyd these mens facte, in deuising for the suc∣cession: which though it were not lawfull to be done, vvith∣out the Princes knovvledge, as ye say: yet was their entent farre otherwise than to make a preparation to rebellion, yea rather to stoppe all gappes (as they thought) the bet∣ter from Popishe rebellion, althoughe they medled further than became them to do. But what excuseth this the Pa∣pistes disobedience? thinke ye these faultes of the Prote∣stantes be couerings large inoughe to hyde the Papistes wickednesse? but to stretche them further, he discourseth on the writinges of master Knox, and master Goodman. For we shall haue all layde in our dishe, noughte shall be* 1.93 lefte behinde concealed, that any Protestants vnaduisedly euer dyd or spake. And it is good to sée our owne fa•…•…ts and follies, this profite of foes Plutarche teacheth vs, to be one of the greatest commodities, for that that our friendes would not tell vs, our enimies will not layne, but sp•…•…e out all that they knowe, to our shame, good and badde, false and true togither. And therfore we had néede beware, that pro∣fesse the word of God, how circumspectly we lead our liues, least we giue occasion to the aduersarie, and his ministers,

to slaunder the Gospell, and that the vncircumcised Phili∣stians rayle not of the God of Israell, by reason of our de∣faults, as héere this enimie dothe. Howbeit his argument is all insufficient, either to proue any disobedience in vs, or to excuse the Papistes disobedience: the argument is this.

M. Knox, and M. Goodman wrote agaynst the raygne of* 1.94 women: Ergo, the Protestantes acknowledge not the Quéenes supremacie in all causes ecclesiasticall.

Such slender arguments he gleaneth togither agaynst vs, séeking bye matters. But what should he do? else should he haue nought to furnishe his counterblast withall.

At last, giuing ouer the pursuite of the Protestantes, he returneth to the defence of his clyent, that this can be layde of all men least to M. Feck. And héere lyke a wel enstructed proctor, he reckneth what good déedes he did in Q. Maries dayes, and appealeth to certayne Right honorables, as the Lorde Earle of Leicester, the lorde Earle of Bedforde, the lorde Earle of VVarwike, Sir VVilliam Cecill secretarie. Yea the Queenes maiestie hir selfe, to defende and purge him. The good déedes that he reckneth vp are these two. First, that sir Iohn Cheekes life, landes and goodes, by his trauayle and humble suite were saued. The other: His hope is, that the Queenes highnesse, his soueraigne good Lady, will thus muche reporte of hym, how in the beginning of hir high∣nesse trouble, hir highnesse then beeing imprisoned in the Court at VVestm. and before hir committie to the Towre, his good hap was to preache a sermon before Queene Mary, and hir honorable councell in the Courte, where he moued hir highnesse and them also to mercy, and to haue considera∣tion of the Queenes highnesse that now is, then in trouble, and newly entred in prison. VVhat displeasure he susteined therfore, I do heere (saith M. St.) omit to expresse, but this I certenly know that he hath reported, and hath most humbly thanked almightie God, and hir highnesse, that hir highnesse had the same in remēbrance, at the first & last talke that euer

he had with hir in hir palace at VVestin. before hir highnes coronation. I trust these are suffycient personages for M. Feck, purgation and discharge, against your false 〈◊〉〈◊〉. And so he concludeth with a prayer, that M. Feck. may be made partaker of the like dooinges, as he then shewed to other men.

That downe, M. St. God hath graunted him long time, & M. Fec. hath felt it: nor (if he be not too vnthākful) can deny it: yea, your selfe graunt that he confesseth the Q. highnesse to be his soueraigne good lady, & reported, that hir highnesse forgot not the same, & I warrant you, forslacked not y^e large recompence of his sermon, not only if he would haue reuo∣ked his errars & super•…•…titions, but also, euen as he wilfully refused hir highnes fauourable inclinatiō towards him, & I haue herd him oftē times my selfe, publikely & priuately ac∣knowledge, what the Q. maiestie most liberally gaue him, at the reducing of the Minster to the former estate. But what doth this Pharisaicall repetition of his former good déedes then, excuse his obstinate disobedience now? or proue that his booke set foorth agaynst the Queenes maiesties au∣thoritie, & dispersed among hir subiects, is notnowe a very preparation to rebellion? if he did any thing then, to deserue fauour now, let him now so behaue him selfe, that he may finde it, the Quéenes maiestie is most mercyful and benefi∣ciall. What hindreth him then, but his owne rebellions obstinacie? and yet he hathe founde since (what little fa∣uour so euer he got for other then) tenfolde muche more doubled to him agayne. Little fauoure (God knoweth, and hir Highnesse felte) founde she in that hir trouble, and streight imprisonment, after M. Feck. sermon. But ye will not expresse, what displeasure M. Fec. susteined for mouing Quéene Mary and hir Councell to mercy, and to haue but consideration of the Queenes highnesse that now is. What?* 1.95 gotte he so great displeasure for thus much, M. St? was it so sore a matter, to moue them to mercy and consideration

of their doinges? I had thought they had done all thinges with mercy and great consideration. But why will ye not expresse it? forsooth, ye should then expresse, what excéeding crueltie, (whiche can hardly be expressed) what inconsi∣derate doings, the Papistes vsed then, neither coulde they be moued from them. And neuer so little a motion (for M. Feckenham went not ouer farre I warrant you) coulde not be made of mercy and consideration, without great dis∣pleasure taken. Ye haue well described the state of your Popes raigne (M. Stap.) so vnmercyfull an estate and in∣considerate, that for description thereof ye doe best, as dyd Timantes, when he paynted the mourners at the sacrifice of Iphigenia, setting out one wéeping, another with this, a∣nother with that heauie visage, when he could not deuise a more dol•…•…rous coūtenance, he paynted Agamemnon hiding his face with a kerchiefe: so you, whē ye can not sufficiently set foorth those dolefull tymes, ye do wisely, in that ye omit to expresse them, and therein ye expresse them most of all.

And woulde ye haue lyke mercy and consideration she∣shed nowe to the Papistes, as the Papistes shewed then to the Protestantes? Alas, master Stap. if but halfe a quar∣ter of suche extremitie were shewed nowe, as was shewed then, it woulde goe harder with master Feckenham, and other his complices, than it dothe. No, no, M. Stap. their* 1.96 chambers, their walkes, their libertie, their ease, their fare, is nothing like your dōgeōs, your stockes, your colehouses, your famine, your racks, your gaggs, your whipping there, & rostmeate at a stake, that ye gaue the protestants. I war∣rant ye M Fe. lookes not like a ghost, nor like a poore schol∣ler of Cambridge or Oxford, & perchaunce fares better than some studēts of diuinitie in Louayne. It is easy to discern•…•… M. St. what spirite either religion is of, the protestants and the papists, euen by this your own note of vnmercifulnesse and mercy: and now (saith M. St.) let vs proceede on to the residue of your booke.

The fifth Diuision.

THe Bishop of Winchester, after he hath shewed (on M. Feckenhams wordes) the entent of the Othe, and the entent of M. Feckenh. booke to be contrarie: and therefore, what soeuer he offreth in wordes, he denieth the same in déedes: and in the beginning for ensample, dalieth with y^e Oth about dominions & persons, thinking ther∣by, he escapeth the principall ende of the Othe: in this diui∣sion sheweth first, how doublie he dealeth, in pretending as though the Bishop had forced him to sweare: but there was no such Othe offred or required betwéene them: •…•…rgo, A man might well mar•…•…aile, that he shamed not to pretende such a lie.

Secondly the Bishop sheweth, how M. Feckenham is taken in his owne dalia•…•…ce. The Bishops reason is this. In that ye graunt to her Highnesse the onely su∣preme rule ouer the Laye and Ecclesiasticall per∣sons, you haue all ready proued withall the cau∣ses also, euenby a supreme gouernors definition.

A supreme gouernour or ruler, is one who hath* 1.97 to ouerse•…•…, guide, care, prouide, order, and directe the thinges vnder his gouernment & rule, to that ende and in those actions, which are appointed, & properly belong, to the subiect or thing gouerned: But the Queenes Highnesse is, by your own cō∣fession, the only supreme gouernour ouer al man∣ner persons Ecclesiasticall, &c. Ergo, Hir highnes hath to ouersee, guide, care, prouide, order and di∣rect, to that ende, and in those actions, which are appointed, & do properly belong to persons Ec∣clesiasticall.

And thus concludeth, that M. Feckenham graūting thus

much for fashion sake in generall speache, is but a dissem∣bler, and in déede denieth the obedience of the person also: or els he péeuishly standeth on the distinction of the cause, which in full effect he hath graunted alreadie.

To the first parte M. Stapleton answereth. Here is first a worshipfull reason, and cause to meruaile at M. Feckenham.* 1.98 that he should by writing presently offer him selfe to receyue an Othe, bicause he neuer made mention of any suche othe before, neither any suche was at any time of him required, surely this is as great a cause to wonder, as to see a goose go barefoote.

Ye plainly falsifie the Bishops woordes M. Stapl▪ he said not, that M. Feckenham neuer made mencion of any suche othe before, but he saide, that he neuer made any mo∣tion of such an offer to him. So that this declareth both a double dealing of him, & also a wresting of you. But this in eyther of you, muste not be wondered at, as a rare dealing, that in lying and wresting ye be shamelesse, bi∣cause it is as common to you, as to sée a goose go barefoote, and as rare, as to heare a barefoote Foxe, preach to shod géese in Louaine.

Secondly to the Bishops argument he saithe:

But now will he play the worthy Logitian, and M. Fecken∣ham* 1.99 will he, nill he, shalbe driuen by fine force of a Logicall definition, to graunt the Queene to be supreme head in all causes Ecclesiasticall, for that he graunteth hir to be supreme head of all persons both Ecclesiastical and Temporal. Bicause (saith he) the supreme gouernour or ruler is he, that ordereth and directeth all actiōs, belonging and appointed to the sub∣iectes, and thereby enferreth that the Queenes Maiestie is su∣preme and onely gouernour, euē in those actions that belong to Ecclesiasticall persons, which are causes Ecclesiasticall. But as good skill as this man hath in Logike (which is correspon∣dent to his diuinitie) he hath brought vs forth a faultie and a vitiouse definition. For a supreme gouernour is he, that hath

the chiefe gouernment of the thing gouerned, not in those a∣ctions that may any way, properly belong to the subiect or thing gouerned, (as M. Horne saithe) but in those actions that belong to the ende, whereunto the gouernour tendeth. VVhich may well be, although he haue not the chiefe go∣uernment in all the actions of the thing gouerned, but in such actions as properly appertaine to him, as a subiect to that go∣uernour.

Although M. Stapl. arguments hitherto haue shewed some tast of his owne great skill in Logike, and what a wor∣thie student of Diuinitie he is him selfe (the want of which two he vpbraydeth to the Bishop after his prowde & scorne∣full manner) yet in this his coūterblast to the Bishops only reason of a supreme gouernours definition, he wil further shew what a passing subtile Logitian, & déepe Deuine he is. But alas the mans ill lucke, for while he clerkly laboreth & striues to bring M. Feck•…•…ham out of the briers, he not only wrappeth him the faster in them: but so snarleth & entan∣gleth him selfe withall, that as one all amased, he speaketh he wottes not what. And goyng about the Bushe wonder∣fully to worke, when he hath all done, he hath not onely left the matter where it was, against M. Feckenham, but hath made it more playne against him selfe also. First, he re∣prehendeth the Bishops definition of a gouernour as faul∣tie, but his guiltie conscience was so striken, that he durst not, or he well wist not, how to report the definition as it laie, but saith that the Bishop defined, A supreme gouer∣nour, to be one, that ordreth and directeth all actions, belon∣ging and appoynted to the subiecte: Which the B. said not, but M. St. who hath altered, hacked, and cut halfe away of the Bishops definition, which within eight lines after (though nipping and wresting the woordes, yet some what more truly than before) he expresseth, saying: in those acti∣ons that may any way properly belong to the subiecte or thing gouerned. Wherein he séemeth vnskilfully, or as one

astonnied, to make no difference betwixt the subiect which is the person, and the obiect, which is the matter and action, or not to vnderstande that properly the gouernour, is not said to order and direct the obiect, but the subiect, in or about the obiect. In which point as the Bishops definition is di∣stinct and cleere: so M. Stap. finding fault therewith, but not able to saie here lieth the faulte, nor to amende it, and yet going about to amende it: either in conclusion, maketh one, nothing differing in matter, or farre worsse so much as it differeth from it.

A supreme gouernour (saith M. Stapl.) is he, that hath the* 1.100 chiefe gouernment of the thing gouerned, not in those actiōs that may in any wise belong to the subiect, or thing gouerned (as M. Horne saith) but in those actions, that belong to the ende whereunto the gouernour tendeth.

This is your perfect definition M. St. which either is Idē per Idem, a gouernour is he that gouerneth in those actions, wherein he is a gouernour: and so your fautles definition is very faultie it selfe: or els it is in effect and matter all one, with the Bishops definition, that ye reprehende, though ye would in wordes séeme to make some difference: & so againe it is the more vitious, the more obscure it is.

But this may well be (say you, to confirme your definitiō)* 1.101 although he haue not the chiefe gouernment in al the actions of the thing gouerned, but in such actions as properly apper∣taine to him as a subiect to that gouernour.

M. St. we stande not now in question what may well be, but what is of necessarie consequence. But ye séeke out cor∣ners and darke speaches to wrappe the truth in such obscu∣ritie, after the Popishe manner, that your readers might ra∣ther meruayle at ye than vnderstand ye. Which if they did, they should sée your folly and contradictions, and that your selfe scarce vnderstād your owne wordes (if they were your owne) for if ye vnderstoode your selfe, when ye say, he hath chiefe gouernment, in such actions as properly pertayne to

him, as a subiect to that gouernour: then would ye also sée, how it followeth that being a subiect to him (as M. Fec∣kenham hath confessed) as well in that he is an Ecclesiasti∣call person, as Temporall: he is also a subiect to him in such actions, as are so well Ecclesiasticall as Temporall. The ar∣gument is euident. He that is subiect to the Princes su∣preme gouernment, is vnder him in all such actions as ap∣pertaine to him, as a subiect to that gouernour. But euery manner person so well Ecclesiasticall as Temporal, borne in the Princes dominiōs, is subiect to the Princes supreme gouernment: Ergo, The Prince hath the supreme gouern∣ment ouer euery manner person borne in his dominions, in all such actions as are Ecclesiasticall so well as Temporal.

And thus his owne darke speaches being brought to light, make flatte agaynst him selfe.

But to make the Reader vnderstande his meaning bet∣ter, and to vnwrappe him selfe out of this obscuritie, in the which he hath rather hindred than bettered his cause: he set∣teth out the same with sundrie ensamples, of a Master and his Seruaunt, a Father and his Sonne, a Mayor and a Ci∣tizen, the Prince and his subiect, a Schoolemaster and his scholers, the Shipmaster and the Mariners.

For in one man (saith he) many rulers may and do dayly* 1.102 concurre, which in some sense may euery one be called his su∣preme gouernour. As if he be a seruant, the Maister: and if he be a sonne, in that respect the father, and if his father and Ma∣ster dwell in a citie, the Mayor also, is the fathers & maisters, & so his chiefe gouernour to, for things concerning the chiefe gouernment of the citie, and of all these the Prince, chiefe and supreme gouernour, as they be subiects. Otherwise the Prince doth not intermeddle with the fathers office, in duetifulnesse dewe to him by his sonne: nor the Master for that gouernmēt he hath vpō his seruant, no more than with the scholemaster, for the gouernment of his schollers, and their actions, or the maister of the ship, for the actions & doings of the mariners,

otherwise than any of these offende the positiue lawes of the realme, and so hath the Prince to do with him as his subiect, or when he shal haue neede to vse them for the cōmon welth, wherein as subiects and members of the said common welth, they must to him obey. Much like is it with the spiritual men, which be also members of the said common welth, and there∣fore in that respect, subiect to the Prince and his lawes: and so is it true, that the Prince is supreme gouernour of all persons as well spirituall as temporall. But that therefore he should al∣so be supreme gouernour in al their actions, will no more fol∣low than of the actions of thē before rehersed, yea much lesse.

M. St. thinketh he hath now clered the coast, & that by all these ensamples, the matter goeth cléere with him. Shew∣yng first how euery one of these rulers, master, father, mayor, and Prince, may in some sense be called supreme gouernours. But yet, either he doth not or wil not sée withal, how in the sense now in controuersie, all these ensamples are also flat against him. For as the father, in all causes that haue re∣spect from the father as father, to the sonne as sonne▪ is the sonnes supreme gouernour, as he saith: and as the master in all causes that haue respect from the master as master, to the seruant as seruant, is likewise the seruants supreme go∣uernour: and as the mayor in all causes that haue respect frō the mayor in that he is mayor, to y^e citizen in that he is a ci∣tizen, is also the citizens supreme gouernour: so the supreme gouernour of ecclesiasticall persons, in all causes that haue respect from him, in that he is a supreme gouernour, to eccle∣siasticall persons in that they be ecclesiasticall persons, is in all those causes their supreme gouernour: but the causes in respecte whereof they be called ecclesiasticall persons, beyng no other than ecclesiasticall causes, it followeth that he is not onely supreme gouernour of the persons, but also in the cau∣ses belonging to the persons, as the father or master is not onely supreme gouernour of the sonnes or seruaunts per∣sons, but also in those causes in respect whereof he is the

sonne or seruant.

Yea, but saith M. St. though the Prince be supreme go∣uernour to these and all other persons in the realme, yet as he entermedleth not with father, schoolemaster, shipmaster, &c. in their seuerall actions of their offices or vocations: so though the Prince be supreme gouernour of all persons ec∣clesiasticall, yet is he not supreme gouernour in all their a∣ctions of their offices or vocations.

Ye conclude not a like M. Stapl. but subtilly and falsely ye alter the state of the conclusion: if ye made your argu∣ment aright, ye should make it thus: as the Prince inter∣medleth not in the seuerall actions of his temporall subiects offices or vocations, so he intermedleth not in the seuerall actions of his Ecclesiasticall subiectes offices or vocations. This is the right illation of the s•…•…militude, and thus it ma∣keth nothing against vs. Which you espying, in the place of intermedling, thrust in, gouerning, concluding •…•…alsely, bicause he is no intermedler in the one, that therefore he is no gouernour of the other. But the •…•…urder ye wade in this similitude, the more ye labour against the streame. For as, although the Prince intermedle not with the Fathers, the Masters, the Schoolemasters, the Pilotes seuerall actions, in their offices or vocations: yet he ought to ouersée, that e∣uery one of these, and all other his subiects, do their owne proper actions, belonging to their vocations, and offices du∣tifully: yea not onely to make lawes for them all, as sub∣iectes, but also for their seuerall estates and degrées besides, not for him selfe to exercise, but for them to worke in their vocations: so the Prince beyng likewise gouernour of Ec∣clesiasticall persons, so well as of any other aforesaide, al∣though he intermedle not with the seuerall actions of their vocations, yet ought he to ouersée them, that euery Eccle∣siasticall estate do their proper actions dutifully, and also to make Lawes and Orders, not for him selfe, but for them in their degrées and vocations to exercise and

obserue the same. And thus your similitude euery way ma∣keth quite against you M. Stapl. how be it you will proue it better ye say.

For the better vnderstanding whereof it is to be knowne,* 1.103 that before the comming of Christe, Kings were there many, but Christian Kings none. Many cōmon wealths were there, but no Christian common welth, nor yet godly cōmon welth, properly to speake, sauing among the Iewes, but cluill and politike. The ende and finall respect of the which ciuill com∣mon wealth, was and is vnder the regiment of some one or moe persons, to whome the multitude committed them selfe to be ordered and ruled by, to preserue themselues, from all inwarde and outwarde iniuries, oppressions and enemies, and furder, to prouide not onely for their safetie and quietnes, but for their wealth and abundance, and prosperous maintenance also. To this ende tendeth and reacheth, and no furder, the ciuill gouernment: And to the preseruation, tuition, and fur∣derance of this ende, chiefly serueth the Prince, as the princi∣pall and most honorable person of the whole estate, whiche thing is common as well to the Heathenishe, as to the Chri∣stian gouernment.

Is this all that ye will aforde christian Princes M. Stap.* 1.104 what a heathenish doctrine is this, to make Christen prin∣ces and Heathen princes gouernment all one? What if Christen princes (as they haue right good cause) beginne to startle at this, that ye make their estate no better before God than is the great Turkes? And what if one should an∣swere, that ye not onely sclaundered reprochfully, all the estates of Christendome nowe liuing, or that shalbe, or haue bene since Christes comming: but also wickedly de∣face all the godly Kings and rulers before Christes com∣ming, Melchisedeck, Dauid, Salomon, &c. beléeuing in Christ to come, as Christen Princes now beare the title of Christ already come. And yet dare you saie, that be∣fore the comming of Christ, Kinges were there many, but

Christian kinges none. Do•…•… ye dallie on the tytle and name of Christian, or meane ye the tytle and effecte of christianitie? if ye meane so (as ye must néedes meane, if ye meane any thing materiall to the purpose) ye are very in∣iurious, not onely to those Kings, but to their subiects, yea, to their common weale also. And yet ye say further, their common wealth was but ciuill and politike, and vvente no further, than outwarde peace, tranquillitie, welthe, and pro∣sperous maynteinance, which is the onely ende of their go∣uernement, and that it reacheth not any iote further.

What if one should bidde you looke further in the scripture,* 1.105 and so ye should finde it stretche somewhat further, than to be common with the great Turkes gouernement? What if a man should presse you with your owne wordes after∣warde, that yet catche it more than one inche further, for assisting of the Churche vvith the temporall svvorde, which the great Turke, the great Chan, the Persian Sophie, doth not, but drawe their swordes agaynst it? What if a man should referre this among your contradictions? What if he should ioyne another withall, that where yet ye confesse, the Iewes common vvealth was godly before Christes comming, and other common wealthes were not godly and yet the ciuill gouernement of Christian princes, reacheth no further, than the ciuill gouernement of heathen princes, and one finall ende is common to bothe, and so eyther the Heathens common vveales were godly also, or else the Iewes were vngodly too? yea, what if the heathens cōmon vveale, and heathen Princes fell out to be in better estate of the twayne, if only quietnesse, vvealth, abundance, and pro∣speritie, were the onely and finall ende of bothe? if ye were well vrged in all these thinges, thinke ye, M. Stap. these your principles would be able to defende you? yea lastly, if one woulde denie these your Heathen and Turkishe maximies, bring ye any thing to proue them, than your owne bare saying, that it is to be knovvne? But no true

Christian knovveth it, M Stap. nor will euer acknowledge this, which with suche bolde impudencie, ye grounde vp∣pon, that christian Princes gouernement reacheth no fur∣ther, than ciuill and outvvarde safetie, vvealth, abundaunce, and prosperitie, and is common asvvell to heathen, as to Christian princes. Neuerthelesse, M. Stap. taking it for a rolled case, and out of question, rolleth vp the matter as graunted. And as he hath thus determined the boundes of Christian Princes gouernement, so (as it were by com∣mission from his holy father) he descrybeth the Popes kingdome.

But ouer and besides (sayth he) yea, and aboue this, is* 1.106 there an other gouernment instituted and ordeyned by Christ, in a spirituall and a mysticall body, of such as he gra∣ciously calleth to be of his kingdome▪ which is the kingdome of the faythfull, and so consequently of heauen, wherevnto christian fayth dothe conduct vs. In whiche spirituall body, commonly called Christes catholike Church, there are other heades and rulers than ciuill Princes, as Vicars, Parsons, By∣shops, Archbyshops, Patriarkes, and ouer them al the Pope. VVhose gouernement chiefly serueth, for the furtherance and encrease of this spirituall kingdome, as the ciuill Prin∣ces doe for the temporall.

That there is another mysticall body, the kingdome of the faythful directed by an other spiritual gouernement, this is a true principle, M. Stap. and truer than you wéene or would haue it. But as you are deceiued, and would deceiue others, with the title of that spirituall Churche, so on thys principle, you gather a moste false assumption. That the heads of this spiritual or mystical body, the church of Christ, are vicars, parsons, byshops, archbyshops, patriarkes, and ouer them all the Pope. In which assumption, ye take for true & graūted, sundry manyfest errors, flatly of vs denied, chiefly foure. The first about the spirituall and mysticall body of Christ. Wherin ye shew great vnskill, not knowing what

is ment by the spiritual & mystical body. For in that respect, as there are no ciuil princes, emperours, kings, or quéenes,* 1.107 so there ar no Bishops neither, no not Greke nor Scythian, Gentile nor Iew, neither male nor female, but all the elect that haue bene, are, or shall be, either in heauen aboue, or here dispersed in any parte of the earth, without any respect of person, are al members, and Christ the only head. And so M. St. your selfe also call it, the kingdome of the faythfull, so that if any bishop be vnfaithful, he is so far from beeing a head in this misticall corporation, that he is no member or any part therof. And your selfe confessed before, that now & thē your Pope was no good mā neither, & therfore vnfaith∣ful, hauing not the true, liuely, & effectual faith in Christ, as they only haue y^t be mēbers of this body, wherby he is quite excluded frō it. Your first error therfore is, in not discerning betwéene the inuisible and visible estate of the Church.

Secondly, taking it (as after, contrarie to your former sayings, ye seeme to expounde it) to be the visible estate of the church, saying, cōmōly called Christes catholike church: then erre ye, in that ye say, vicars, parsons, bishops, archby∣shops, and popes, be rulers and heades of it. For excepting parsons (taking them for pastors) & Bishops, the scripture knoweth none of th•…•…se rulers. The other titles haue come in since, with deanes, arch•…•…eacōs, abbots, priors, cardinals, patriarches. &c. although I speake not against the names of thē, no not of the name of Pope neither, which béeing well vsed, I reuerīce & admit, but against the Popish hierarchie, & proud abuse of them. And therfore thirdly, where ye say, the Pope is ouer them all, that he is so ouer all those de∣grées in your Churche, I graunte ye, but that he is so ouer those, or any other degrées, in the true visible Churche of Christ, it is but your facing maner, to take that for confessed that is chiefly denyed. Fourthly, that ye affirme the Pope, and his Prelates gouernemente chiefly to serue for the furtheraunce and encrease of the Spirituall kyng∣dome

of Chryst: where it is euident to the contrarie, what hauocke and decrease, so muche as they can, these Rulers make of the members of Christes Churche, to maynteine infidelitie, and exautorate the worde and kingdome of Christ thereby.

M. Stap. now presupposing, that the christian Princes gouernement is only outward and for the body, and cōmon with the heathen and stretcheth no further: and that on the other parte, the Pope ouer al, and his fleshly chaplens vnder him, are the heades and mēbers of the spiritual and mysticall body of Christ: nowe he will proue (and God before) that this gouernement of the pope, & his chaplaines, is far aboue the kings gouernement, and that kings he subiect therto.

Now (sayth he) as the soule of man incomparably passeth* 1.108 the body, so doth this kingdome the other, and the rulers of these the rulers of the other. And as the body is subiecte to the soule, so is the ciuill kingdome to the spirituall. His rea∣son is thus:

The soule or spirite incomparably passeth the body:

The kings gouernement is onely for the body, and the Priests gouernement onely is for the soule and spirite:

Ergo, the Priestes gouernement incomparably passeth the Kinges.

As this argument is noughte, so the conclusion béeing rightly vnderstoode, dothe noughte infirme the Princes su∣preme gouernement ouer all ecclesi. causes. For thoughe the maior be true, the minor is moste false, that the kinges gouernement is onely for the body. Yea though the spiri∣tuall gouernement be onely the Priestes, yet the gouerne∣ment ouer spirituall matters, and matters apperteyning to the soule, may still for all that, and dothe belong, euen ouer the Priests to the Prince. Neither dothe M. St. proue the cōtrarie, or alledge ought for his minor, than as we haue heard, the foresaide principles, of limiting the Princes go∣uernement, to be all one with the Turkes. But you might

haue done well M. Stap. to haue e•…•…sed your paynes euen here, and haue troubled your selfe no further to proue your matter, if these your vaine presupposals, be such true and vndoubted principles. But as though we had alredy graun∣ted them, M. St. still goeth on.* 1.109

To the which kingdome (sayth he) as well Princes as o∣ther, are engrafted by baptisme, and become subiects to the same by spirituall generation, as we become subiectes to our princes, by course and order of natiuitie, which is a terrestrial generation.

The argument is thus. As the childe that is borne by a terrestriall generation, in the earthly Princes kingdome, is subiect to the earthly Prince: so, euen the Prince being borne againe by spirituall generation, is become subiect to the spirituall kingdome.

But the rulers of the spirituall kingdom are the pope. &c.

Ergo the Prince is become subiect to them.

Thus fondly still ye reason on your principle, in so much that we can say nothing agaynst you. But nowe, while ye thinke ye may say what ye will, sodenly see how ye haue o∣uerturned these your mightie principles, with a trippe of your owne contrarie sayings, euen in the same place.

Furthermore (say you) as euery man is naturally bounde,* 1.110 to defende, mainteyne, encrease, adorne▪ and amplifie, his na∣turall countrey, so is euery man bounde, and much more, to employ himselfe, to his possibilitie, towarde the mition and defence, furtheranee and amplification, of this spiritual king∣dome, and most of all the princes themselues. As such which haue receyued of God, more large helpe and facultie, toward the same, by reason of their great authoritie, and temporall sworde, to ioyne the same as case requireth, with the spirituall sworde.

Thinke ye this to be true indéede M. St. may we trust you on your wordes? then is religion an ende of the Prin∣ces gouernment, which a little before ye not onely most vn∣truly

denyed, but buylded as ye thought iolye arguments therevpon. All whiche come nowe downe of themselues with an heaue and hee, your selfe pulling awaye the soun∣dation, wherevppon they were buylt. And nowe ye make an other platforme, contrarie to the former, which is, that Princes moste of all are bounde (as those that haue receyued of God more large helpe, and facultie towarde the same) to employ them selues to their possibilities, to these endes, to defende, mainteyne, encrease, adorne, and amplifie, not onely the ciuill peace and prosperitie, but much more the spirituall kingdome. And ioyne the temporall sworde with the spiri∣tuall sworde, as the case requireth.

Upon this, as a better platforme than the other, I build this argument euen according to your owne definition of a supreme gouernour, and master Feckenhams offer.

A supreme gouernour is he (say you) that hath the chiefe gouernment of the thing gouerned, in those actions that be∣long to the ende, wherevnto the gouernor tendeth:

But the actions of Ecclesiasticall persons (ouer whome the Prince is supreme gouernour, as master Feckenham hath graunted) doe belong properly to the ende, wherevnto the Prince tendeth: to wete, not onelye to mainteyne the common peace and tranquilitie, but also to sée that Gods re∣ligion and seruice be purely and syncerely had and kept a∣mongst the subiects: Ergo

In these actions the prince is supreme gouernour, and so by consequence in all causes and actions ecclesiasticall.

To proue the minor: first, that all the trauayle of all godly Preachers in the worlde, is to this ende, is playne and manifest. That this is also the chiefe ende of the Prin∣ces gouernement, both your selfe master Stapleten at length haue confessed, centrarie to your former heathen limitation, and also the verye heathen and prophane wry∣ters themselues: so well as Christian, haue acknowled∣ged. Wherein master Stapleton both sheweth his great

follie, in reasoning that heathen Princes did not regarde religion, Ergo they ought not especially to haue regarded it: and also bewrayed his ignorance in the antecedent of this his vaine reason: for the heathen though they erred in mistaking religion, yet they knewe and taught that it was an especiall care, and ende of the Princes gouernment. I speake not howe Plato in his bookes de rep. & legib. rec∣koneth* 1.111 the care of Religion, to be a chiefe ende of theyr au∣thoritie: And yet will I note two sentences out of Aristotle, whome to denie your Sorbonistes make more than petit heresie. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) sayth he) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉* 1.112 in the other Cityes the sacry∣fices are left onely to the Kinges. And agayne, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. For the Capitaine was •…•…oth King and Iudge and Lorde of the deuine matters.

And to proue this by the storyes of heathen Princes. Numa Pompilius hath his chiefest commendation not so muche for making ciuill lawes and pollicies to the Ro∣maynes, as for his lawes about theyr religion, theyr Prie∣stes, theyr Nunnes, theyr Sacrifices. The Magistrates of Athens, did sitte in iudgement and condemned Socra∣tes when Anitus and Melitus accused him for false religi∣on. The Romaine Princes them selues woulde labour principally for the office of the chiefe Bishoppe, whiche terme Pontifex. Maxim•…•… the Bishoppe of Rome nowe chalengeth. Tiberius promoted to the Senate of Rome, (as to those that had the care and gouernement of theyr re∣ligion) that Christ might be accounted among theyr Gods.

Yea, in the Scripture is declared that Nabucha•…•…nezar* 1.113 the King of Babylon, an Heathen Prince, and vt∣terly destitute of the truthe, before God gaue him some spar•…•…kes thereof, yet made hée a lawe of worshipping hys owne Image. And King Darius of Persia made a* 1.114 decrée that none shoulde worship God in certayne dayes.

In all which matters although these heathen Princes crred from the truth: yet they thought, that religion (which they mistooke for truth) to be a principall part belonging to their gouernment.

Although therefore master Stapleton ye doe great iniu∣rie to Christian Princes to make their state common with the Paganes: yet do you more iniurie herein to them, than* 1.115 the heathen did to their heathen princes. Was it lawfull for them in their heathen gouernment to haue so especiall a care aboute their heathen and false religion, and is it not lawfull for godly Christian Princes, to haue the like or more aboute Chrystes true Religion? Is the ende of their gouernment common to both alyke, as ye say, and yet the Heathens stretched further than doeth the Christian Princes?

Iohannes de Parisus affirmeth, that this is a false sup∣position* 1.116 of yours Master Stapleton. Quod potest as rega∣l•…•…. &c. That the kingly power is corporall and not spiri∣tuall. That the Kingly power hath the cure of the bodie and and not of the soules. Sithe it was ordeyned to the common profite of the Citizens, not euery profite, but that profite which is to liue according to vertue. Herevpon sayth the Philosopher in the Ethikes, that the intention of the law∣maker, is to make men good, and to enduce them to ver∣tue. And also in the Politykes he sayth, that as the soule is better than the bodie, so a lawmaker is better than a Physi∣tion, bicause the lawmaker hath care for the soules, and a Physition for the bodie.

Nowe as the Philosophers ascribed this ende (in the Heathens false religion, in vertues of lyfe, and care of the soule) to the gouernement of Heathen Princes: Doth not Saint Paule shewe as muche and more trowe you, for the ende of Christian Princes gouernement in these thinges? Ut 〈◊〉〈◊〉 & tranquillam vitam degamus in omni pietate & honestate. That we may leade (sayth he)* 1.117

a quiet and peaceable life in al godlinesse and honestie. Was this no further master Stapleton than safetie, quietnesse, worldly wealth, aboundance and prosperous maintenance? Did the great Constantine stretche the ende of his gouern∣ment no further when he sayde, 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 debere ante* 1.118 omnta scopum esse •…•…udicaus, &c. I iudged that this oughte before all other thinges to be my scope, that among the most holye multitudes of the Catholike Churche, one fayth and syncere charitie and godlinesse agreeing togither towardes almightie God, might be conserued?

Did the whole assemblye of Byshoppes, in the first* 1.119 generall Councell at Constantinople, limitte no further the endes of Theodosius gouernment, when they confessed that God instituit imperiu•…•… Theodos•…•… ad communempacem ecclesiarum, & sanae fid•…•… confirmationem? God did or∣day ne the gouernement of Theodosius for the common peace of the Churches, and the confirmation of the sounde fayth? Did Saint Augustine beléeue that Princes go∣uernement* 1.120 reached no further, when he sayde, Reges in ter∣ris seruiunt Christo faciendo lege•…•… pro Christo? Kinges in the earth doe serue Christe in making lawes for Christe? Did Iustinian suppose, hys authoritie tended no further, when he wrote, Legum Authoritas & diuinas & humanas res bene disposuit? The authoritie of the lawes hath well disposed both the deuine and humaine matters? Did the m•…•…ste Christian King of Spaine Richaredus, thinke that the ende of hys gouernement stretched no further, when he sayde openly in the thirde Councell at Tolet, be∣fore* 1.121 all the Bishoppes there assembled, Quanto subdito∣rum gloria Regali extolli•…•…r, tanto prouidi esse debemus in his quae ad Deum sunt, &c? Howe muche more we bee exalted in royall glorie ouer our subie•…•…es, so muche more ought wee to bee carefull, in those matters that appertayne to God, eyther to augment our owne hope, or else to looke

to the profite of the people committed to vs of GOD. And as ye see me in verie deede inslamed wyth the feruen∣cie of fayth, God hath styrred mee vp to this ende, that the obstinacie of infidelitie beeing expelled, and the furie of discorde remooued, I shoulde reuoke the people to the knoweledge of faythe, and to the •…•…eloweshippe of the Catholyke Churche, who serued errour vnder the name of Religion.

Lo master Stapleton, here ye sée farre other endes, of the ciuile gouernment of Christian Princes, than (as you most falsely and iniuriouslye alleage to preserue them from all outwarde iniuryes, oppressions and enemyes, and fur∣ther to preserue them for theyr safetie and quietnesse, for theyr wealth, abundaunce, and prosperous maintenaunce, and that it tendeth and reacheth no further. And that thys is common as well to the heathenishe as the Christian go∣uernement. Fye for shame master Stapleton that euer suche heathenishe woordes shoulde procéede out of your ca∣tholyke lips.

But ye are halfe ashamed I sée, and woulde mollifie the matter so muche as ye can with a proper qualification: that those thinges which these godly Princes did, although they did them: yet therein were they no more but Ad∣uocates: and so saye you, All good Princes doe and haue* 1.122 done, ayding and assisting the Churche decrees made for the repression of vice and errors, & for the maintenance of vertue & true religion: Not as supreme gouernors themselues in all* 1.123 causes spirituall and temporall: but as faythfull Aduocates in ayding and assisting the spirituall power, that it may the sooner, and more effectually take place.

As ye bring this shifting distinction of Aduocate to late, M. Stap. hauing before quite debarred the Princes Ciuill gouernement, of goyng anye iote further than ye there did bounde it, to meddle no further wyth ayding and assisting the spirituall power, than a Saracene doeth ayde and as∣sist

it: gyuing Princes no more leaue to be Aduocates thereof than ye make the Turke or Souldan, saying this theyr so limitted gouernement is common as well to both Heathen as Christian: euen so this your office of Aduocate∣shippe came to late into the Churche by manye yeares, to debarre anye of these forenamed Princes, in theyr owne supreme gouernement aboute 〈◊〉〈◊〉 mat∣ters, to make it sownde, as though they onely had béene the ayders, assisters, or Aduocates vnto others, and not them selues the doers. Whereas on the contrarie, they were the verye doers, thoughe not of those actions that appert•…•…yned to the Ministers offices, yet of the gouer∣ning and directing bothe the Ministers and their actions, yea and the principall ouerséers and supreme rulers of them, as euen their déedes and wordes before rehearsed plainly declare.

As for thys shyft of Aduocation, was long sithence, af∣ter theyr tymes deuysed. Whiche office of Aduocate∣shippe, séemeth to bée de•…•…yued, from this fonde errour of the Papistes, that the seculer power is immediately and primarelye (as they terme it) in the Pope, but he hath not also immediatelye the exercise or execution of it, but gyueth that to the Prince, and so the Prince becom∣meth the Popes Aduocate, or rather his executioner.

And thus was first (say they) Carolus Magnus Pope Adrians Aduocate, executing the Byshoppe of Romes will, agaynste Desiderius King of Lumbardie. Where∣vpon Charles was made Emperour by the Pope, not∣withstanding Michaell the Emperour was then lyuing at Constantinople. Propter hoc dicunt (sayeth Dantes* 1.124 Aligherius) quòd omnes qui fuerunt Romanorum imperatores, post ipsum & ipse, Aduocat•…•… Ecclesiae sunt, & debent ab Ecclesia aduocari. For thys thyng, all that were Em∣perours of Rome after hym, and hee hym selfe, are Aduocates of the Churche, and oughte of the Churche to

be called vpon.

Lupolous de Babenberge also telleth, that Pope Za∣charie* 1.125 declarauit. &c. declared or pronounced, that Childe∣ricus Pepins master, shoulde be deposed, and Pepine be made the King of Fraunce, whome when Pope Steuen the seconde annoynted, with his sonnes Carolus and Ca∣rolomanus, French Kings: Ipsos specialiter elegit (sayth Lu∣poldus) ad sedem Apostolicam defendendam. Ex hac electio∣ne puto{que} reges & imperatores Romanorum, sint vs{que} in hodi∣ernum diem ecclesia Romanae aduocati, de qua Aduocatia lo∣quuntur iura canonica. He chose them especially to defende the Apostolicall Sea. Of this election I thinke it com∣meth, that Kinges and Emperours of the Romaynes are euen to this daye the Aduocates of the Romayne Churche, of whiche Aduocacie, speake the Canonicall lawes.

Thus you sée the originall of your deuised Aduocate∣ship, commeth nothing neare the examples of the sayde godly Princes, béeing themselues supreme gouernours in Ecclesiasticall matters before your Aduocateshippe was first hatched. No reason therefore the Punie shoulde de∣barre the Seniour. And yet it is but a sielie shift of your Canonistes descant, rather detecting the vnlawfull en∣croching of the Pope, than defeating anye parte of the Princes authoritie, in this hys supreme gouerne∣ment.

As for those Princes Carolus Magnus, his sonnes and other Emperours since theyr tymes, were nothing suche Aduocates as your Pope and you woulde nowe pretende, that is to say, to be your onelye executioners: But as these stories testifie, euen these Aduocates also, were the chiefe directours and supreme gouernours, of all those things they did. Yea the Pope hym selfe so well as anye other Byshoppe in theyr territoryes was subiecte to them. They ayded and assisted the Byshoppe of Rome I graunt, when he humblie

aduocated, then he called vppon them for ayde and assys∣tance, agaynst the wrongers of him. But the Pope by com∣maundement called them not, and they obeyed his calling, and so became his aduocates, which is cleane contrarie to an aduocates office. And therefore once agayne your argu∣ment is nought. They were aiders and aduocates, Ergo, not supreme gouernours.

But M. St. will further proue, by his former ensamples, why this supreme gouernement can not appertayne to the Prince.

For this supreme gouernement (sayth he) can he not haue,* 1.126 vnlesse he were him selfe a spirituall man, no more than can a man be master of a shippe, that neuer was a mariner: A maior, that neuer was a citizen. Hys principal gouernement resting in ciuill matters, and in that respecte as I haue sayde, he is supreme gouernour of all persons in his Realme, but not of all their actions, but in suche sense as I haue specified, and least of all the actions of spirituall men, especially of those which are most appropriate to them, which can not be vnlesse he were him selfe a spirituall man.

You frame your similitude very vnproportionably, M.* 1.127 Stap▪ from the master of a shippe, or the maior of a citie, to a Prince or supreme gouernour. Either of these béeing par∣ticuler offices vnder a supreme gouernour, that maketh lawes, euen both for maiors in cities, and masters of shippes also▪ And albeit no argumēt builded on similitudes, is firme to proue or improue any controuersie, though rightly ap∣plied, they may lightē the matter, to him that assenteth, but not enforce it to him that denieth (notwithstanding your similitudes, as they proue nothing, so they nothing lighten, but more obscure the matter) yet if these your similitudes were admitted, frō maior and pilot, to supreme gouernour, what true conclusion can ye inferre vpon them? when both the ensamples that ye make your similitude from, and the matter that ye apply them too, are false. For a man may be

master of a shippe, though he neuer was a maryner in the shippe: and also •…•…e made the Maior of the towne, where∣in he was neuer citizen before. As many a noble or gentle∣man, is made the captayne of a forte, of a towne, or an ar∣mie, that neuer was prest before a souldier, and yet a good captayne to, hauing the knowledge howe to gouerne soul∣diers, though he him selfe were none.

Yea, to draw néerer than mariners, Maiors & captaines, reade ye not, that S. Ambrose was neuer so much as any of the clergie, and that more is, no not baptized, & yet he was a better byshop, than the best bishop of the Romish making now, or than the byshop of Rome him selfe? yea your holy Pope Felix. 5. was he before he was Pope any other than (as ye call it) a méere lay man, neither Cardinall, Byshop, Priest, nor had so much (that we reade of) as your benet & collet? and therfore your examples are not true of Maior & Pilot, that they must haue bene citizen & mariner before. And yet, where herevpon, ye would néedes haue christian Princes to be spirituall men, if they should be supreme go∣uernours of spiritual matters: it is graunted you, and so they be. And if you thinke godly christian Princes not to be spi∣ritual, but vtterly voyde of spiritualnesse: then is this in you a lying and carnall spitefulnesse. All godly Princes, y•…•…a all godly persons are spiritual, and that muche better than any shaued or oyled massing Priest. But if ye meane, after the common distinction, those that haue any spirituall office in the ministerie of the worde and sacraments, as deacons, el∣ders, byshop•…•…: &c. then your similitude, as is before declared, fayleth. Such Offices are not necessarie to haue gone before in a Supreme gouernour ouer them, although the know∣ledge is necessarie how to gouerne them.

Besides this, the proportion of your similitude fayleth, in that to proue a supreme gouernour should withall be a spi•…•…i∣tuall man, yo•…•… alledge ensamples of suche gouernours, as be not, but haue bene, suche or suche persons before: and so from the master, which hath bene a maryner, and nowe i•…•…

•…•… master, you conclude, the prince béeing a gouernour in spi∣ritual matters, should withal be a spiritual person. Neither doth the proportion hold, in the necessarie relation of the si∣militude, from a Ma•…•…or to his citizen, from a master of a ship to a mariner seruing in the ship (which hath relation frō the gouernours, to the parties in their offices gouerned) to any like relation betwéene a supreme gouernour, ouer eccl. causes & persons, to a spirituall person▪ but from a spirituall gouernour, to a spirituall subiect, this were the right relati∣on. Now the Prince néedeth neither to haue bene a spiritual subiect, nor yet a spirituall person, in your common sense of spiritualtie: neither so claymeth he to be a spirituall gouer∣nour. And therefore, neither the ensamples of your simili∣tude, nor the proportion holdeth.

But sée how still your owne tale ouerturneth your selfe. For if his principall gouernement resteth in ciuil matters (as immediatly ye say) & that, in that respect he is supreme go∣uernour, of al persons in his realme, but not of their actions: why is he not of their actions also, syth they be ciuil or tem∣poral matters in which respect he is their supreme gouernor? is it not bicause, though he be their supreme gouernor, yet he professeth not all their seueral offices, sciēces, handy crafts, mysteries, or vocations, and so is not a dealer in their acti∣ons? which hindreth nothing his principal gouernemēt ouer them al, that he is, nor euer was, a prentise of any of their sciences, nor practiseth the actions of their callings, being all ciuill matters. And yet say you truely, he hath the prin∣cipall gouernement in ciuill matters. But why then also, notwithstanding the prince dealeth not with the actions of spirituall men, may he not haue a principall gouernement in spirituall matters, thoughe him selfe haue not the spi∣rituall function, or office of a spirituall man? Doe ye not •…•…ée, by your owne wordes, that to haue a principall go∣uernement, or to be a supreme gouernor ou•…•…r all persons and matters▪ is one thing: and to do all the particuler actions, of those persons or matters, is another thing, not requisite in

the supreme gouernour? and why then wilfully confounde ye them so often, as though we made the Prince the doer of the actions, bicause we acknowledge the Prince the gouer∣nour of the matters. And why sayde ye before in your last similies, that he coulde not be a principall gouernour of any ciuill matters excepte he had bene a doer of the actions, and as it were, a prentise to the occupation before? concluding the like for a gouernour of spiritual persons and causes, that he must be a spirituall man, and do the spirituall actions. But if now, béeing better aduised, ye perceiue that a man may be a gouernour in ciuil matters and yet be not the doer of the ciuill actions, I then conclude likewise for spirituall matters, that the Prince may be a supreme gouernour in spirituall causes, and yet the same not the doer of the spiri∣tuall actions.

The two vntruthes therfore M. Stap. that ye gather of the Byshop, saying: VVherefore we haue heere two vn∣truthes, the one, in an vntrue definition, the other in saying the Prince is supreme gouernour in all causes spirituall, are no vntruthes. The Byshops definition is clearer and truer than yours. Neither haue ye, or hitherto coulde ye, improue his conclusion, with all your ensamples, or your simili∣tudes, Yea, euery similitude that ye haue made, béeing throughly weyed, hath proued the Byshops conclusion, and confuted and contraried your selfe.

But beside al this, we haue, sayth M. St. a playne contra∣diction* 1.128 of M. Horne, directly ouerthrowing his owne asser∣tion heere. The Bishoply rule and gouernement* 1.129 of Gods Church (sayth M. Horne) cōsisteth in three poyntes: to feede the Church with Gods word, to minister Christes Sacraments, and to bynde and lose. to gouerne the Churche (sayth he) after this sorte, belongeth to the onely office of By∣shops and Church ministers, and not to Kinges,

Queenes, and Princes. The like he hath afterwarde. Now then, these being, by his owne confession, the actions that properly belong to Ecclesiasticall persons, and the Prin∣ce by his sayd confession, hauing nothing to do therewith: how is it then true, that the Prince is the onely supreme head and gouernour in causes Ecclesiasticall. Yea in those, that do properly belong to persons Ecclesiasticall? or by what colour may it be defended, that this saying, is not plaine contradi∣ctorie and repugnant, to this later saying, which we haue al∣leaged, and whereof we shall speake more largely, when we come to the saide place?

There is no doubt M. St. but ye will recken it vp there at large, and here also, and in many other places, ye still sing Decies repetita placebunt, for so your booke will growe to a welfauoured volume. The outcrie is here, for a contradi∣ction. But ye should first cléere your selfe, of your own foule contradictions before committed, and then obiect contradi∣ction to the Bishop. But let vs sée what a sore contradiction it is: Princes can not do certaine Ecclesiasticall actions. Prin∣ces are supreme gouernours in Ecclesiasticall causes. Here M. St. ye labour to shew where the Bishop saith so, but ye should labour to proue them cōtradiction•…•…, but that ye take for manifest, being manifest false. Neither néede there any colour to defende these sayings from contradiction, for it was euen the last thing that your selfe defended, in putting a difference betwene a principal gouernment of matters and that gouernment that is exercised in doyng the actions of those matters. And thus easily your self reconcile this great contradiction, and a•…•…were your owne argument, that ye make of the Bishop sayings, reasoning thus: He confesseth, that those actions do not belong to the persons of Princes, Ergo, he confesseth, that Princes are not supreme gouernours to direct and ouersee them. This argument your owne di∣stinction answereth. And therefore where ye lappe vp the matter, saying, Thus ye see M. Horne walketh like a bare* 1.130

footed man vpon thornes, not knowing where to treade, ye should remember your selfe M. Stap. that you haue walked all this while like your barefooted goose that ye spoke of before, not knowing what last ye creaked.

The sixth Diuision.

MAster Feckenham offreth to sweare to obserue and* 1.131 performe that obedience to the Queenes hignesse now, that he did before vnto Queene Mary.

The Bishop sheweth how therein he was forsworne, & as he had helped to spoyle Q. Mary, of a principall parte of hir royall power, so would he with no lesse di∣sloyaltie spoile the Queenes Maiestie now.

M. Stapl. taking after his fashion, Non concedenda pro* 1.132 concessis, saith the othe is vnlawfull: likeneth it to wicked King Herodes othe, denieth this gouernment to be any part at all of the Queenes royall power, and auoucheth that if the Bishop can once by any meanes, proue this gouernment to be a principall parte or any parte at all of the Queenes royall power, he dare vndertake that not only M. Fek. but many mo, that now refuse, shall most gladly take the saide othe, he were surely no good subiect that would wish hir highnes any wrōg.

To wishe wrong to any body, is naught in déede M. St. & worse to do it, but worst of al to wish and do it against your liege and soneraigne. What wrong ye wishe and do by all trecherous practises, vnto the Q. Maiestie, is apparant, and therefore your owne iudgement be on your owne head. Ye liken hir highnesse to wicked King Herode, euen here pre∣sent, & yet ye say ye wishe hir no wrong. But what reasons should moue ye M. St. to thinke this open wrōg no wrong?

Neyther can (say you) the maintenance of the Catholike* 1.133 faith, wherof she beareth a title of a defender, be counted any iniurie to hir highnesse, neither is it to be thought but if there had bene any wrong or iniurie herein done to the Crowne,

some Christian Prince or other in the worlde haue ere this, once in this 1000. yeres & more espied it, and reformed it to.

This later argument of former Princes, is answered a•…•…* 1.134 large alreadie. The other argument, standeth on M. Stap. former presupposall, that the Popes supreinacie is the Ca∣tholike faith. His reason is this.

The maintenance of the Catholike faith, is no iniurie to the Queenes Highnesse.

But our refusall of the othe is the maintenance of the Ca∣tholike faith:

Ergo, our refusall of the othe is no iniurie to the Q. Highnes.

Here where M. St. should proue the Minor being mani∣fest false, he letteth that go, presupposing it is most true, and confirmeth the Maior which none denieth.

She beareth a Title of defender of the Catholike faith:

Ergo, The maintenance of the Catholike faith is no iniurie to •…•…ir highnesse.

Of this Title we spake also before, onely now I note his* 1.135 argument that here couertly he séemeth to make thereon.

The Qu. highnesse Title calleth hir defender of the faith:

Ergo, If she should also haue the Title of supreme gouer∣nour in all causes Ecclesiasticall, then were the former Title iniurie to hir highnesse.

But the former Title of defender of the faith can not be counted any iniurie to hir highnesse.

Ergo, She can not haue the other Title also.

This bald reason standeth vpon a presupposal in M. St. head, that this is a principall article of the Faith. The Pope is onely head of the Catholike church: But graunt not M. St. this his faithlesse principle, and he wil proue but a sielie Defender of this. His simple reason.

The seuenth Diuision.

MAster Feck. pretending that he was by the Bishop re∣quired* 1.136 & prouoked to sweare, refuseth that parte of the

Othe that toucheth the Quéenes supremacie in the causes Ecclesiasticall, vnlesse the Bishop shew him the meanes how he may sweare without periurie.

The Bishops answere stands on two points: the one, to* 1.137 detect his false dealing to pretende that the Bishop required the othe. The other, that this his refusall of the later parte of the Othe, is but his nice daliance in woords, hauing graun∣ted alreadie the matter in effect. The B. reasoneth thus:

Euery Ecclesiasticall person is called Ecclesi∣asticall onely in respect of ecclesiastical functions, things and causes belonging to ecclesiasticall per∣sons.

But ye haue graunted that the Queenes high∣nesse is supreme gouernour ouer al persons in hir realmes so well ecclesiasticall as temporall:

Ergo: ye haue graunted that she is the supreme gouernour ouer them in those their ecclesiasticall functions, things and causes also.

M. Stapletons counterblast is thréefold: the first against* 1.138 the Bishops argument. The seconde as he calleth it, is an heape of vntruthes wherewith M. Feckenham is falsly char∣ged. The thirde his shamefull sclaunders, that the plague, was sent of God to punish the doings of the Parliament: that bicause the Bishop required the Othe of D. Bonner, he ther∣fore sought his bloud. That our Bishops were no Churche Bishops, nor parliament Bishops neither. But these too fri∣uolous partes I omitte, it sufficeth to haue quoted the slann∣ders in their common place. As for the vntruthes, are an∣swered in their proper bedroll. I will answere onely now, that which is materiall, and that counterblasteth the argu∣ment.

Yet once againe (saith M. St.) M. Horne taketh in hande* 1.139 M. Feckenhams graunt, which may well be graunted, and by▪

his great cunning and skilfulnesse will thereof inferre as be∣fore, that may not be graunted. But now he spitteth in his hande, and taketh faster holde as he thinketh, and seing the lightnesse of his former reason, woulde nowe giue greater weight to it with a new fetche, but yet as light and as weake as the other, and employing manifest contradiction as be∣fore, and to be answered as before. For albeit, a man is not called an Ecclesiasticall person but in respect of some church cause and function, which we freely graunt to M. Horne, yet* 1.140 is he neuer a whit the nearer of his purpose, vnlesse he can proue that there were also no other respect, why he should be vnder the Prince, but for causes Ecclesiasticall. For as we haue saide, he is a subiect also as other Laye men are, and a member beside of the ciuill common wealth, in consideration whereof the Prince hath to do with him, and not properly as he is a spirituall man, though both respects be concurrant in one person, and he be named of the worthier.

As the Bishops argument is plaine and formall against M. Feckenham, so here M. Stapleton stepping out to helpe him, as it were clapping him on the backe, recomforts him, saying, his graunt of the Minor, That the Queenes highnesse is s•…•…preme gouernour of all persons in hir realmes so well Ecclesiasticall as temporall, may be well graunted. And he will also freely graunte to the Bishop the Maior, A man is not called an Ecclesiasti∣call person but in respect of some church cause, and function, which is all one with the Bishops affirmatiue: Euery ec∣clesiasticall person is called Ecclesiasticall onely in respect of Ecclesiasticall functions thinges or causes belonging to Ecclesiasticall persons: what now can rightly follow hereof, but the Bishops flatte con∣clusion, that the Queenes highnesse is supreme gouernour of them, in those their functions, things and causes also?

Nay saith M. St. I will graunt him al this freely, and yet is he neuer a whitte the neerer of his purpose, vnlesse he can proue that there were also no other respect, why he should be vnder his Prince, but for causes ecclesiasticall: for he is a sub∣iect also as other lay men are.

Ha M. St. I sée you would faine slippe the coller, deui∣sing a new diuersitie of respects betwéene ecclesiasticall per∣son and subiect, when the question is, and M. Feckenham hath confessed, that he is a subiect euery way, whether he be lay subiect or ecclesiasticall subiect▪ Otherwise, whē M. Fec∣kenham saide, ouer all persons either ecclesiasticall or temporall of what estate so euer they be: if he had ment as you say ouer ecclesiasticall persons in déede, but not in that respect that they be ecclesiasticall but temporall and lay persons, then had he plainly dalied in coloured speach & foo∣lish meaning, as thus: ouer al persons ecclesiasticall and tem∣porall, that is to say ouer all persons temporall and temporall▪ if he meant ecclesiasticall persons, not in that respect they be so called, but in that respect they be temporall and lay as o∣ther subiectes be. But this is your owne wilie deuice which in effect is nothing but wilie beguild him selfe. M. Fecken∣ham ment plaine & therefore twice togither saith, either ec∣clesiasticall (on the one partie) or temporall persons (on the other partie) and to make the matter plainer, of what estate (saith he, that is to say of what condition kinde or degrée of subiects) soeuer they be. And did not your selfe say before and freely graunt it, that an ecclesiasticall person hath not his name of ecclesiastical person for any other respect but for ec∣clesiasticall causes and functions? why say you now contra∣ry to your self, he is named here ecclesiasticall person▪ not in any respect of any ecclesiastical causes or functions, but in re∣spect he is a lay and temporal subiect? how hangs this togi∣ther M. Stapletē? will ye denie so soone that so late ye freely graunted? then I perceyue (as ye here say the Bishop doth) I must be fayne also to spitte on my handes and take faster

holde on yours and M. Feckenhams graunt.

M. Feckenham hath graunted and you also, thus much: that the Queenes Highnesse is supreme gouer∣nour ouer all persons borne within hir realmes, either ecclesiasticall or temporall, of what estate soeuer they be. That is to say, they are all subiect to hir, all persons gouerned, or vnder hir supreme gouernment, but the vsuall worde is subiect. Subiect here is the Generall worde or Genus, comprehending two members deuiding thē selues vnder it, that is, ecclesiasticall person and temporall person. Either of these is comprehended a like in the gene∣rall woorde subiect, for it is neither nearer the one nor the other, nor may be more properly spoken of the one than of the other. The temporall person is as much subiect and no more, than the ecclesiasticall person, the ecclesiasticall as much and no more than the temporall, nor these two can be confounded togither, nor the one taken for the other, Mem∣bra diuidentia non confunduntur, but as the one is temporall in respect onely of the temporall functions, so the other (as ye say well therein) is ecclesiasticall, only in respect of fun∣ctions ecclesiasticall, & bothe are comprehended vnder their generall worde subiect: & thus doth M. Feckenham plain∣ly set them foorth as it were in a table. Now commeth our student M. St. & seing all this so manifest plaine, that him selfe is euē forced to graunt it: he hath studied out this shift, first to iumble them altogither iugglerlike, & then deuides or rather breakes them, making ecclesiasticall and subiect to be Membra diuidentia, the one to ouerthwart y^e other, which they do not, but the one cōprehendes the other. And maketh this worde person, to be general to them both, which here is al one with subiect. And thus when he hath plaied Cole vn∣der y^e candlestick, chopping & chaūging the words, now saith he, ye shall sée the Bishop is neuer the nearer of his purpose,* 1.141 vnlesse he cā proue that there were also no other respect, why

he should be vnder the Prince, but for causes Ecclesiasticall, for as we haue said he is a subiect also. As who should say in that respect he is a subiect, he is not Ecclesiasticall, in that respect he is ecclesiasticall, he is no subiect bicause he suppo∣seth these two are contrary respects, ecclesiastical & subiect. But this he doth by presupposall, that ye will graunt him al that he saith, or els he would neuer so freely haue graunted the Bishop, that which after made against him selfe. For who seeth not that ecclesiasticall and subiect may well agrée togither, which M. Feck. saw well inough, whē he graunted as well the ecclesiasticall person as the temporall to be the princes subiect? And againe, who seeth not that this is but a fonde shifte of M. Stapl. to say that the Bishop is neuer the nerer of his purpose, onlesse he can proue there were also no other respect, why he would be vnder the prince but for cau∣ses ecclesiasticall. For, graūting him againe, there are other respects wherefore he is also vnder his prince. What is M. St. the nerer of his purpose? doth it follow bicause he is sub∣iect also in other respects, that therefore he is not subiect in this respect? he should haue proued this, but this he lettes alone, and thinks all is safe if he be subiect in other respects. But what other respects so euer there be, him selfe hauing freely graunted▪ that this name of person ecclesiasti∣call hath no other respect, but to the causes ecclesiasticall: and being gouerned or subiect, as M. Feckenham hath graun∣ted, in respecte of eyther parte of this diuision, temporall or ecclesiasticall: if fellowes that in all respectes what soeuer, of causes or persons ecclesiasticall or temporall, the Prince is supreme gouernour. Nor all M. Stapl. crooked shiftes, and crabbed respects, to hinder the sequele of this argumēt, are any more to be respected, than •…•…ere trifles, and toyes to delude the Readers withall.

But M. St. will not giue ouer the matter thus, but will bring his darke respects, to the aspect and light of all mens eyes, by a familiar though somwhat an homely sim•…•…

As if master Robert Horne were a lay man and a paynter,* 1.142 (sayth he) the Queene properly hath not to do with him as a paynter (vnlesse it were for some lavve or order concer∣ning paynters) but as Robert Horne hir highnesse subiect, and borne vnder hir obeysance. Sée how enuye hath blyn∣ded this man, that whereas for very spite he likeneth the reuerent and godly learned father in Christ, to a paynter, this his paynted similitude maketh also flat agaynst him. For, as he confesseth, the Prince hath to doe vvith a payn∣ter, not onely in that he is simply hir highnesse subiecte, borne vnder hir obeysance, but also in respect he is suche a subiecte, in whiche regarde (he saythe) she maketh lavves and orders also concerning paynters, thoughe she entermed∣dle not with the Paynters pencell, in drawing lynes, and laying colours, and other their perticuler actions: euen so hath hir highnesse to do with all ecclesiasticall persons, not onely in that they be simply, subiectes borne vnder hir obeysance, but also euen in that they be suche manner of ecclesiasticall subiects, in which respect she may also make lawes and orders concerning ecclesiastical persons, though she entermeddle not with preaching, ministring the sacra∣mentes, and other their particuler actions. Thus as God would haue it, doth your owne similitude (M. Stap.) which of pure enuye ye bring foorth to deface the byshop withall: so liuely in euery poynt make agaynst you, as any simili∣tude can do. At length ye discende from your similitude, to your playne purpose, saying.

So shoulde the Queene haue also to doe with you, yea in* 1.143 case ye were the true Byshop of VVinchester, but not pro∣perly as Byshop, or for your byshoply function, for the whiche ye are immediatly vnder your Archbyshop and the Pope, but considering you as a subiecte othervvyse, or as Byshop either, touching your temporalties, and no further. For the which the true Byshops also to their Prince do their homage.

With muche adoe (for it sticketh in your throte lyke a boane) ye admitte at length this case, that the Bishop were the true Byshop of VVinchester, but without any stay at the matter ye could compare him to a paynter) but now beeing a Bishop, he is (as you say) vnder his Archbishop and the Pope, and vnder the Queene onely for his temporalties. Here is no argument, M. Stapleton, but your bare asser∣tions, as though the matter were cleare and all out of que∣stion. I ye had still reasoned from the similitude of the paynter and paynted it out in his true meaning, ye had con∣cluded another maner of tale, that as the Prince mighte meddle euen with lawes and orders for paynters, so she hath to do with Byshops, not onely concerning their temporal∣ties, but euen cōcerning that they be Byshops. And so agayn your similitude excludeth your Pope. And where ye say, in that he is byshop, he is immediatly vnder his Archbyshop and the Pope, what if his Archbishop be not vnder the Pope neither, is he not then also béeing immediatly vnder him, exempted likewise from your Pope? and thus ye stam∣mer euen in your owne false principles.

Now when ye haue thus without any reasoning deter∣mined the Byshop to be vnder the Pope, and that he dothe homage to the Quéene onely for his temporalties and no farther, ye conclude the matter, saying:

But what should I further reason with this man, vvhiche* 1.144 (as I haue sayde) hathe remoued the Prince from all su∣perioritie, concerning the meere Byshoply or Priestly fun∣ction, and so with a notable contradiction hathe full vvorshipfully concluded agaynst hym selfe, and eased hys aduersarie of any other proofe, and eased master Fecken∣ham also, for taking any othe, that the Queene is supreme head in all causes temporall and spirituall.

This notable contradiction is so sore a matter, that you muste néedes haue a fling at it once agayne, the contradi∣ction is this:

The Prince hath not the iurisdiction of the meere Priestly or Byshoply functions:

The Prince hath the superioritie ouer the priest∣ly or Byshoply functions:

Is not héere a notable contradiction, and worthy to make thys finall conclusion thereon? The Prince hathe not the iurisdiction of the meere Priestly or Byshoply functions:

Ergo, He is remoued from all superioritie ouer the same functions?

Full vvorshipfully concluded, to vse your owne termes master Stapleton. What should ye reason further with this man? but in steade of reasoning, fall to making prin∣ciples, or sit downe and ease you with master Feckenham without any further proofe. But, mighte it please you to starte vp agayne, and looke better aboute ye: ye shoulde sée, that betwéene euen that superioritie (which worde not∣withstanding the Byshop sayde not, but power or iuris∣diction) of the meere byshoply or priestly function, that is to saye, his office, and the proper actions of his office, prea∣ching, binding and losing, the ministring of the Sacra∣mentes: and betwéene the superioritie, that is, the ouer∣sight and supreme gouernement, in caring for, directing, and prouiding, that all those functions and actions be dueti∣fully done on their partes, to whome they properly belong: there is a great difference, as all your similitudes hitherto haue proued and concluded agaynst you. And that betwéene the dooing of the one, and the not dooing of the other, is no contradiction or opposition at all. And therefore ye be not so eased yet, but that ye muste take a little more paynes, or else where ye had thought to haue wonne the spurres, ye may happe to lose the saddle.

The eight Diuision.

MAster Feckenham standeth on foure poyntes, where∣by* 1.145 he thinketh he should periure himselfe, if he should sweare to this laste parte of the othe, in eccl. causes. The first point is, that he muste testifie it on a booke othe. But to testifie any thing on a booke othe, and not to knovve the same, is periurie. Then for him selfe he pleadeth ignoraunce, that he neither knovveth it, nor knovves any meanes hovv to come to the knovvledge of it. Whervpon he ioyneth an issue with the Byshoppe, which issue is this: If the Byshop make proofe to him, that any Emperour or Empresse, King or Queene, may clay me or take vpon them any suche gouernement in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes, then he will yéelde and receiue the othe. The meanes whereby he will haue this issue proued, are these foure. Either by suche order of gouernement, as our sauiour Christ hath lefte be∣hinde him in his Gospell and nevve Testament: Ei∣ther by the vvritinges of suche learned doctors bothe olde and nevve, vvhich haue from age to age vvitnes∣sed the order of eeclesiasticall gouernement in Chri∣stes Church: Either by the generall councels, vvher∣in the right order of ecclesiasticall gouernement in Christes Churche hath bene moste faythfully decla∣red, and shevved from time to time: Or else by the continuall practise of the like ecclesiasticall gouerne∣ment, in some one Church or parte of all Christen∣dome.* 1.146

By these foure meanes, this issue aforesaide (as the state of the controuersie betwéene bothe parties) must be tryed. That, by any of these foure meanes, proofe be made

to him, That anie Emperour or Empresse, King or Queene, may claime or take vpō them, anie such go∣uernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes.

This requireth master Feckenham to be prored. The satisfaction whereof to be proued by the Bishop is this:

That by some of these foure meanes, proufe may be made to him, that some Emperour, Em∣presse, King, or Queene, may clayme or take vp∣pon them, some such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes. If the B. shall be founde to haue proued thus much to M. Feck. he hath fully satisfyed his re∣quest, and M. Feckenham according to his promise, ought to sweare with humble thankes, notwithstanding master Sapletons quarelling Counterblast.

The Bishop reducing M. Feckenhams first poynt, to a* 1.147 forme of argument, repeateth it:

No man may restifie any thing by a booke oth, whereof he is ignorant and knoweth nothing, without committing manifest periurie:

But you neyther knowe that the Queenes highnesse is the onely supreme gouernour of this Realme, as well in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall things or causes, as temporall: neither yet know ye anye waye or meane, whereby to haue anye knowledge thereof.

Ergo ye cannot testifie the same on a boke oth, without manifest periurie.

To this the B. replieth, that although he might flatly de∣nie the minor, that M. Feck. is not without all knowledge, and vtterly ignorant of y^e matter, nor destitute of al meanes to attaine therto: yet he sayth he wil answere by distinc∣tion of ignorance, to shew how M. Feck. is ignorāt, how he is not. He alleageth a thréefold deuision of ignorance out

of Thomas of Aquine the chiefe of the Popish scholemen▪* 1.148 Ignorance of simplicitie, Ignorāce of wilfulnes, and ignorance of malice. Prouing that he is not igno∣rant of the first sort, hauing in king Henries and king Ed∣wards reignes, continually knowne, acknowledged & con∣fessed it, and therfore his ignorance is either of wilfulnesse, or of malice, or of both of them.

M. St. Counterblast standeth chiefly on thrée matters, first his answere to Thom. distinction, with an obiecting againe to the B. the opinion of Tho. in this cōtrouersie. Se∣condly a quarrelling & chalenging of the B. for vntruthes. Thirdly, an excuse of master Feckenham for setting forth this supremacie. With a quarell ioyned thereto that the B. citing a sentence out of the booke of wisdome, called it a sen∣tence of the holy ghost, concluding thereon a discorde of our doctrine. But or euer he enter into his first part, he noteth this for a generall warning before.

Now are maister Feckenham, and master Horne come to* 1.149 couple and ioyne togither in the principall matter.

If this forewarning be true M. St. that this their cou∣pling and ioyning togither on this issue (to wete, whether any princes haue takē any such gouernmēt on them) be nowe by your confession the principall matter contro∣uersed, betweene the partyes standing in variaunce, whiche (as ye sayde before) is conuenient and necessarie to haue be∣fore* 1.150 (our) eyes, and then deligently to see howe the proufes are of eche partie applied, for the confirming of their as∣sertions: Then all those sixe principles, whiche ye sette vp before your Counterblast as markes to fixe the eye of the Reader vppon, were but false markes and not the prin∣cipall matter, wherein the parties coupled them selues togi∣ther to proue or improue the same. Then were almost all that hitherto M. Stap. hath sayde (as the Reader marking this well shall sée) and the most of that which he hath to say in this great Counterblast, nothing else but a running

about the Bushe, and wresting of euerye thing, from the principall matter in which they ioyned, to some other mat∣ters wherein they coupled not. Whiche is plaine to be∣guile and abuse, not rightly to direct the eye of the Reader, as the Reader fixing his eye on thys issue, shall soone espie your falsehoode.

This issue then, being the principall matter (as ye say) and the Bishop coupling and ioyning herein togither with* 1.151 master Feckenham (as ye also say) and the Bishop hauing proued that which he endeuoured himselfe to proue (which ye likewise haue confessed) what remayneth by your owne tale telling, but that the Bishop hath fully proued the prin∣cipall matter in question? Neither will you (as you say) nor any other Catholikes greatly contend with him for that he hath proued: and he hath proued that that he laboured in: he laboured in that he coupled: he coupled in this issue: thys issue is the principall matter betwéene them: whie then do ye so fiersely contende? but that ye woulde shewe your selfe a vaine sophisticall and brabling quarrellour, that haue no great cause to contende, nor anye cause at all, and yet will so greatly contende, onely of wylfull malice, con∣fessing your selfe the thing to be proued, that is the princi∣pall matter.

Master Stap. hauing giuen this forewarning, commeth to his first part, which he deuideth thréefold.

First he iesteth out the matter with scoffes, which I referre to his common place thereon. Secondly, he denieth master Feckenham to haue any ignorance in this poynt ex∣cept it were inuincible ignorance, by no study or diligence a∣ble* 1.152 to be put away, and therfore pardonable. Since ye admit the distinction M. Stap. ye bring out of time your other in∣uincible ignorance. How pardonable it is, is another que∣stion. But sée how ignorantly, while ye would defende M. Fec. you ouerthwart him, he pleadeth ignorance for his de∣fence, and you say he is not ignorant and woulde put the B.

to proue that he should be ignorant of wilfulnesse and ma∣lice, which the B. hath done alreadie, and so ye debarre M. Feckēham of his refuge, and make him to haue knowledge of this poynt. Which not only he himself denieth, but which your selfe afterwards denie also, yea that he could not haue knowledge of this poynt. But you thinke to escape cleare, with helping the matter by a newe pertition of ignorance, adding a fourth part of inuincible ignorance.

Surely (say you) if there were any ignorance in this point it were such as S. Tho. and other call inuincible ignorance. Except (M. St.) ye confound this fourth ignorance with one of the thrée before named, ye quite exclude M. Fec. from the whole distinction of Thomas, and yet ye say the distinction may be true, & ye will not stick with him for that distinction. So that eyther ye sticke at that ye will not sticke, and make that false that ye graunt true, or else ye proue master Feck. not to be ignorant, contrarie to his defence, and all the rest of your owne défence of him, as we shall sée your wordes afterwarde. In the meane time let vs sée howe pretily ye shift off the matter, onely bicause the Bishop names Tho. of Aquine a schole Papist, for the diuision of Ignoraunce, thinking ye haue gotten a wonderfull aduauntage thereby, for the Popes supremacie.

But nowe (sayth M. Stap.) the verye authour brought* 1.153 forth by master Horne, so fullie and effectually dischargeth M. Feck. of all three, and chargeth M. Horne, with the worst of them three, that is wilfulnesse and malice, as he shal winne small worship by alleaging of S. Thomas. For S. Tho. sayeth plainely, that we are obliged and bounde vpon paine of euer∣lasting damnation to beleeue that the Pope is the onely su∣preme heade of the whole Church.

Nowe fearing (as not without good cause) that the B. would in this matter reiect the authoritie of this Thomas, whom our Thomas calleth a late latine writer, and to much affectionate to the Pope: as it were by preuention, He can

not well reiect his authoritie (sayeth he) vsing it him selfe.* 1.154 And why so Sir I pray you? must euery one that citeth him in any one poynt, receyue and admit his authoritie to in eue∣rie poynt? Is it lawfull for the Sorbonistes, the Schole∣men, and the whole rabble of the Papistes, yea for Tho∣mas Stapleton him selfe, to accept Thomas of Aquines authoritie in some poyntes, and to reiect his authoritie in other some poyntes: and is it not lawfull for the Bishop or anye other to vse the same libertie? The Sorbonistes af∣firme of this Thomas, Illa doctrina non potest esse in omnibus* 1.155 sic approbata, &c. That doctrine can not in all thinges be so approued, that conteyneth many thinges erronious in fayth: but as they say the foresayde doctrine of Saint Thomas, not onelye in the matter of the absolute necessitie of a crea∣ture, &c. but also in manye other thinges conteyneth ma∣nye matters erronious in fayth. And againe, Non opor∣tet* 1.156 credere. &c. VVee muste not beleeue that the doc∣trine it selfe is in no parte thereof erronious or hereticall, wherein are conteyned manye contrarieties and repugnan∣cies, yea euen in the matter perteyning to the sayth▪ but manye suche contrarieties and repugnancies are contey∣ned in the doctrine of Saynt Thomas: Agayne. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 dicunt* 1.157 aliqui. &c. And some saye for thys, that manye maye de∣nye the glosses of the decrees and Decre•…•…, when the glosse doeth openlye denye the texte, and lykewyse some saye of the ordinarye glosses of the Byble, that notwith∣standing seeme to bee of greater authoritie (when they are alleaged for authoritie) than is the Doctryne of Saint Thomas.

The sixte example maye bee giuen of certayne Doc∣tours whiche are not canonized Saintes, as the venerable Anselme Byshoppe of Cant. Hughe of Saint Victor, and certayne other, whose sayinges or wrytinges are in cer∣tayne poyntes founde erronious, and yet theyr doctrine seemeth to bee no lesse authenticall, than the doctrine of

Saint Thomas, sithe they are of the skilfull in their scola∣sticall actes alleaged for authoritie, nor are wonted to bee denyed, but their sayinges reuerently to be glosed and ex∣pounded, whiche notwythstanding the Schoolemen are not woont to doe on the sayinges of Saint Thomas, and there∣fore it seemeth presumptuous so to extoll hys Doctrine ouer them and other Doctours, that wee maye not be∣leeue and affirme that hee erred in fayth, euen as other also haue erred.

And after this as likewise before, reckoning vp diuerse errours, these spéeches are common: Ista locutio est de vir∣tute sermonis falsa & multum impropria. &c. This speech in the force of the wordes is false and verie improper. Ista doctrina multos errores continet. &c. This Doctrine con∣teyneth manie errours. Uidetur multipliciter erroneum. &c. It seemeth diuerse wayes erroneous. Deficit in multis. &c. If fayles in many poyntes. Non est verum. &c. It is not true. Et breuiter haec & alia multa erronea falsa & impropriè dicta, vidētur multis in praedicta doctrina contineri quae, tamen ex taedi•…•… pertransimus. And briefly these and many other erronious, false, & improper sayings, seeme to many to be conteyned in the foresaide doctrine, the which notwithstanding we ouer∣passe for tediousnesse. And from hence they discend to ma∣nifest errours in diuinitie. And in conclusion write thus of him. They say also that in verie many places of his doctrine he erred by reason of this, that he applied to much the prin∣ciples of philosophie or rather certaine wordes of Philoso∣phers to the conclusions of Diuinitie.

Thus say the great Censors of the Popish doctrine a∣gaynst Thomas of Aquine, so well they agrée togither in v∣nitie of doctrine, obiecting discorde vnto vs. Yea the whole swarme of Papists, not excepting our Thom. St. here him selfe (vnlesse he be returned to the truth since he wrote his booke) reiecteth and condemneth Thom▪ of Aquines iudge∣ment and authoritie, in one of the most necessarie matters

of Christian religion, namely the doctrine of iustification. For expounding this sentence of S. Paule: Arbitramur he∣m•…•…nē* 1.158 iustificari absque operibus legis: Arbitramur enim nos, &c. For we being taught of Christ, thinke (sayth Thomas) accor∣ding to the truth of the Apostle, that euerie man, whether he be Iewe or Gentile is iustified by faith. Actes. 15. By fayth purifying their hearts, & that without the workes of the law, and that not onely without the ceremoniall works, which did not giue grace: but also without the works of the moral com∣mandements, according to that saying to Titus. 3. Not of the works of the righteousnes that we haue wrought. The reason is presumed, that we are saued for our merits, the which he ex∣cludeth when he sayth, not of the works of the righteousnesse which we haue done: But the true reason is the onely mercy of God. There is not therefore in them the hope of iustifica∣tion, sed in sola fide, but in fayth alone. VVorkes are not the* 1.159 cause that any bodie is iust before God, but they are rather executions and the manifestings of righteousnesse.* 1.160

Where Tho. of Aquine thus according to Gods worde speaketh the truth, as in this poynt here of iustification: the Bishop and all other faythfull, receyue his iudgement and admit the same, with better reason than the Papists reiect it. But where as, in many other poyntes he swarueth from the truth: though the Papists saint him neuer so much, yet there all true saintes, with good reason refuse him. As in this that master Stapleton citeth out of him, who confes∣seth him selfe that Thomas being a late latine writer, wrote partiallye in this poynte, bycause hée was to muche af∣fectioned to the Pope, and shall we beléeue such an affectio∣nate* 1.161 wryter in hys partiall affection? Or shall we beléeue master Stapleton no lesse affectioned than Thomas, tel∣ling vs that Thomas sayeth plainly, that we are obliged and* 1.162 bounde vpon paine of euerlasting damnation, to beleeue that the Pope is the only supreme head of the whole Church. And yet when he hath all done, Thom. plainly sayth not so, it is

but our Thomas his plaine lye. And though Thomas him selfe in that he sayde, made also a plaine lye, as 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 affectioned to the Pope, yet shoulde you haue 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 wordes more truely master Stapleton, if ye 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 pressed the Bishop with his authoritie. But for 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 Thomas his partialitie woulde soone be 〈◊〉〈◊〉, •…•…o 〈◊〉〈◊〉 more weight thereto, ye say:

Saint Thomas proueth his assertion by Cyrill and M•…•…xi∣mus, two notable and auncient wryters among the G•…•…∣ans. VVherefore it followeth that neyther master Fecken∣ham,* 1.163 nor master Horne, nor any other Christian man, can knowe the contrarie, beeing such an euident and daungerous falsehood as importeth eternall damnation.

Sée howe one Thomas here (were it but for name∣sake) woulde still helpe another Thomas, he careth not by what meanes, hooke or crooke, both belying Thomas and these notable fathers also. Where sayd Thomas your wor∣des aboue alleaged? Where had he them out of Cyrill and Maximus? where haue Cyrill and Maximus that assertion? Shew it and then you cleare your selfe. In deede Thomas* 1.164 being a late & affectioned writer herein, alleageth proufes out of both Cyrill & Max. but they proue no such assertion. Cyrill hath no such wordes in his booke of Thesaurus, and that epistle of Maximus is not extant for ought that I can learne, and yet Thomas doth but wrest both their sayings to proue his title, that it is of necessitie of saluatiō to be vn∣der the B. of Rome. The sentence that he fathereth out of Cyril to proue his saying, and yet notwithstanding proueth it not, is this: Ita{que} fratres, &c. Therefore brethren, if wee followe Christ, let vs as his sheepe, heare his voyce, abyding in the Churche of Peter, and let vs not be puft vp with the winde of pryde, least peraduenture the winding serpent cast vs out for contētion, as long since it cast Eue out of paradise. Can you, or Thomas, or any other, cōclude your assertion, or anything for your Pope on this saying? ye wil vrge these

wordes the Church of Peter Thinke ye he ment the church to be S. Peters patrimonie, as ye terme it? or the Church of S. Peters dominion? if ye so thinke, S. Peter hym self gaynsayth it, saying that he is him self but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 consenior, a fellowe Elder, or Priest, and witnesse of Christes passions, and not the Lord, but Christ the Lorde of his Church, and him selfe with other not to be rulers and princes among the clergy, but they be only pastors & formes of the flocke, Christ alone being the Prince of the Pastors. So that if you meane hereby S. Peter to be the owner and Lorde of the Church (as your Pope at this day taketh on him to be) this sentence maketh nothing for him, but quite agaynst him. For neither doth the Pope followe the humilitie of Christ, nor heare his voyce, as Cirill willeth, neither followeth he Peter, of whome he craketh, but is puft vp with the winde of pride. Whiche Cirill forbiddeth, and therfore is cast out with the winding serpent.

But what Cirill meaneth by y^e church of Peter, euen the other sentence following may declare of Maximus: Coad∣unatam & fundatam super Petram confessionis Petri dicimus vniuersalem ecclesia•…•…, sicundum definitionem saluatoris, in qua necessario salutis animarum nostrarū est remanere, & ei obedire, suam seruantes fidem & confessionem. VVe call that the vniuer∣sall Church, according to the definition of our Sauiour, the which is vnited togither, and founded vpon the Rocke of Pe∣ters confession, in the which it is necessarie to remayne, for the saluation of our soules, and to obey it, keeping the fayth and confession thereof. This sentence well expoundeth the other. The Church of S. Peter, that is to say, the Church vnited and founded vpon the rocke of Peters confession, not of Peters rule and patrimonie, but of his confession, which Rocke is onely Christe the corner stone, on whome onely the Churche is founded, and in whome as liuely stories of the buylding we are vnited. To this Churche in déede muste we be obedient, and remayne in it, kéeping

the fayth and confession thereof. But what doth this proue for the obedience to the Pope & his Church? dothe it not ra∣ther detect his church, not to be the vniuersal Church, wher∣of Maximus speaketh, that Christ hath defined (howsoeuer the Papistes crake of the vniuersall church) syth it is not vnited togither on the rocke, but on the sands of mens tra∣ditions, and founded as you say, vpon Peter, & not as Christ sayd, vpon the Rocke▪ Since it kéepeth not this faith & con∣fession, nor remaineth in it, nor obeyeth it, it is not Christes true vniuersall Church, neither ought we to remayne in it, or obey it. But as the Angell calleth vs, exite de illa populus* 1.165 mens. &c. Come out of hir my people, and be not partakers of hir offences, least ye taste also of hir plagues. And thus by Maximus saying (howsoeuer Thomas as an affectionate late writer doth wrest the same to the obedience of y^e Pope and his Churche) when we examine Christes true defini∣tion, and Peters confession, we finde that we are obliged and bounde, to renounce the Pope and his Churche, and that vpon payne of euerlasting damnation. But nowe M. Stapl. let vs also sée your owne proper argumentes oute of Thomas.

Thomas sayth, the Pope is the only supreme head of the whole Church (wherin he quite excludeth Christ:)

Ergo, we are obliged and bound to beleeue the same vpon payne of euerlasting damnation.

Thomas sayth, we are obliged and bounde to beléeue the Popes supremacie vpon payne of damnation: Ergo, the B. is to be charged with malicious and wilfull ignoraunce.

Thomas sayth, we are obliged and bounde to beleeue the Popes supremacie, vpon payne of damnation: Ergo, M. Feckenham is fully and effectually discharged of malicious and wilfull ignorance.

Thomas his distinction of ignoraunce is alledged of the Byshop: Ergo, the Byshop is bounde to allowe his autho∣ritie simply in all matters, or in this of the Byshop of

Romes supremacie.

Thomas cyteth Cirill and Maximus to proue his assertion: Ergo▪ the matter is so playne that the Byshop nor any other can know the contrarie.

These writers say so (or rather as is shewed are wrested to say that they say not:) Ergo, it is suche an euidente and dangerous falshood, as importeth eternall damnation.

These are the wise and worshipfull conclusions (to re∣peate your owne termes) that ye gather on the authoritie of Thomas, bicause the byshop cited him in the sayde diui∣sion of ignoraunce: wherefore ye say, he shall vvinne small vvorship by alleaging of S. Thomas. Howbeit you to win much worship and great honor by alleaging him, haue ad∣uentured to lay all your honestie to pledge.

M. Stapletons seconde parte about vntruthes is answe∣red sufficiently in his bedroll.

In the third part be confesseth that, wherwith the byshop chargeth M. Feck. that in king Henries dayes he set foorth this supremacie in his open sermons. But withall to excuse him, he saith, it was not vpon knowledge but vpon very ig∣norance* 1.166 and lacke of true knowledge, and due consideration of the matter▪ What ignorance cal ye this M. St? if it be not malicious, it is of simplicitie, yea and wilfull carelesnesse withal▪ & yet before ye sayde he was discharged of all three, and héere contrarying your own selfe, ye charge him again with two of them at the least, besides that ye there sayde: Surely if there were any ignorance in this poynt, it vvere in∣uincible* 1.167 ignorance, by no studie or diligence able to be put away, and therfore pardonable. But is this suche ignorance, when héere ye confesse that he studied not for it, but did it without due cōsideratiō of the matter? & therfore it was not pardonable euē by your own saying. Thus, while ye would excuse him of ignorānce, do not only accuse him of ignorance, but also declare such great ignorāce in your self, y^t it séemeth ye neither well wot, nor muche care what ye say, so that ye

may contende. Neither shame you in this poynt, whyle ye would mitigate M. Feckēhams fault, to accuse with him of ignoraunce, no fewer than all, yea the beste learned of the realme then, to whom it was not so well knowne (ye saye)* 1.168 as it is nowe to euery man, beeing but of meane learning. To the proofe whereof, ye cite sir Thomas More, that tyll his latter time, did neuer of many yeres beléeue the Popes supremacie to be prouided by God, and therefore M. Feck. with many other good and well learned men otherwise, was* 1.169 caried away among them, with the violence of this common storme and tempest, for lacke of mature and deepe conside∣ration. Where as nowe all Papistee, suche as haue trauel∣led* 1.170 in these latter controuersies do beleeue, that the Popes primacie was immediatly instituted of God, and that it is Iure diuino, by Gods lawe, and not the Princes supreme go∣uernment, which is now knowne clerely to stand agaynst it.

Héere is no argument all this whyle for it, but onely defacing of their predecessors learning and knowledge, to aduaunce their owne, which notwithstanding it be nothing comparable in all wyse mens iudgements, yet is it worthy to beholde the grosse presumptuous impudencie of these Louanistes, that as though they came from the newe In∣dies, that say, other men are blinde or haue but one eye, and they onely haue two: so these wryters pretende they haue suche knowledge nowe, yea, the meane learned among them, as the very best learned before them, had not the lyke, who were not resolued herein, nor sawe so muche as they* 1.171 now do, in the Popes authoritie. For they haue espied now at the lēgth with their Linxes eyes, that the Pope his pri∣marie is de lure diuino of the law of God, which thing euen Sir Thomas More did not sée, who a great whyle was so blinde herein, that he thought it but the Churches institu∣tion: at length, full dimly God wot, he thought that he saw, it was prouided of God. But nowe euery meane lear∣ned Louanist, hath espied through a milstone (to vse M.

Stapletons owne phrase) and cleerely seeth and knoweth, it is ex lure diuino, instituted by God immediatly. Who would haue thought they had bene then so blinde, vnlesse M. Stapl. had told vs they were so? or that our Louanistes had bene waxen so cunning, to haue found out of late, that they could neuer sée before? no doubt they had turned ouer and ouer, both the Old and the New Testament many a time, and I warrant ye, all to haue found out this imme∣diate institution of God, and yet was it neuer their happe (vnfortunate blinde buzzardes that they were) to light on the place of this Institution. But now the Bible and Te∣stament hath bene so turned and tossed once againe at Lo∣uaine, and that with such cléere eye sights, that it is plainly founde out, yea and so cléere, that euery man of meane lear∣ning knoweth it, that the Pope is supreme head ouer all the whole Church, instituted by God immediatly, to be obeyed vnder the paine of eternall condemnation. O happie man for the Pope (whose estimation and welth began so fast to decay) that yet at the last hath founde out this institution. I warrant ye like to weare a Cardinals hatte M. Stap if you haue had so good lucke, to finde this out. But I pray you (since it is so plaine a place, that all your side now cléerely séeth it) shew where aboutes in the Bible or Testament it is. I haue of purpose turned them ouer ere now also, yet could I neuer haue the hap to sée this. But I hope your sight be better than mine, I pray you tell vs where it is, do but quote the place, is it not peraduenture on the backe side of your booke? for in your booke it is to be doubted ye shal finde no more, than could those learned men before you, finde out. That it was ordayned but Iure humano, by the law of man. And where ye crake so much, that ye haue now founde it in∣stituted lure diuino, by the law of God, I am afrayd it will in the ende be found out, to haue ben forged 〈◊〉〈◊〉 & frau∣de Diabol•…•…ca, by the iniurie and craft of Sathan.

That it is not Iure diuino, by Gods lawe, your selfe allea∣ging

no place or proofe besides your onely vaunt, fearing ye should be put to the proofe of your crake, ye starte from it againe by admitting that if ye could not (as ye cā not) proue so much as ye haue made boast of, though the Popes prima∣cie* 1.172 (say you) were not ordeyned of God, yet could it not be reiected by any one realme. And although the Popes pri∣macie were not grounded directly vppon Goddes worde, but ordeyned of the Churche, yet could it not be abrogated by the priuate consent of any one or fewe realmes, no more than the Citie of London can iustly abrogate an acte of Parlia∣ment.

The sequcle of this argument M. Stapleton is nought by thrée wayes. First by presupposing an impossible absur∣ditie that the true Churche of Christ should ordeyne any o∣ther necessary doctrine to saluation, than God hath ordey∣ned or is grounded on his woorde. The spouse of Christ hea∣reth hir husbande, my sheepe (saith Christ) heare my voice,* 1.173 and not the voice of a straunger.

Secōdly if this absurditie were admitted, that the church of Christ should or could (as it cā not) ordeine other things, yet should not we be bounde to follow it, no though an An∣gell came from Heauen, to teach vs any thing that is not* 1.174 onely contrarie, but euen praeter besides the woorde of God. And thus the Fathers of the Church thē selues haue taught vs, to reiect it as easily as to receyue it, what soeuer hath not* 1.175 his authoritie out of the Scriptures. And what so-euer wee finde not in the Scriptures, we may vse them euen as we list our selues. Why may we not say as S. Augustine saide, Quia Canonicum non •…•…st, non me astringit. Bicause it is not the Canonicall Scripture it bindeth me not to beleue or re∣ceyue it? but of this matter furder as ye giue furder oc∣casion.

Thirdly your argument of proportion from a Parlia∣ment to London fayleth, standing on your olde and vayue presupposals, that we haue graunted or must graunt you,

that your Popish Church is the true Churche. That Chri∣stian realmes haue the same respect to your Popish church, that a Citie in any Realme hath to the whole estate of the same Realme, and againe that your Popes violent Coun∣cels, are as frée, lawfull, and generall, and enact onely as Godly decrées and constitutions, to the directing of the true Churche, as the Parliaments of a realme be frée, lawfull and generall, and enact godly lawes and constitutions, for their policies and estates. All these things beyng nothing proportionable, we must graunt you to be true and fitte, or else this your argument, and your former crake, neyther barell better herring, may go togither a Gods name.

The rest of your counter blast to this diuision, as it is no∣thing materiall, so it is eyther altogither wordes of course, or else a petit quarell that ye lappe vp all the matter with∣all, bicause the Bishop called this sentence, a sentence of the Holy Ghost, In male•…•…lam animam non 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sa∣pientia:* 1.176 VVisedome shall not enter into a frowarde soule: which bicause it is mere impertiuent and friuolous, I haue reiected it to your common places. Discorde on our doctrine can ye gather none thereon, but you would faine sowe dis∣corde where none is, and yet ye boast of vnitie. But if ye remembered, (setting all other discordes aside) how well as is afore sayd, your Sorbonists, and your Louanists, and you Thomas Stapleton agrée euen with your owne swéete S. Thomas of Aquine, and how your tale agreeth with it selfe, how it excuseth and accuseth M. Feckenham, ye should then sée who they be, that as ye say, in place of vniforme tu∣ning* 1.177 ruffle vs vp a blacke Sanctus, who they be that chaung∣ing their shapes like Proteus, haue so often altred their re∣ligion, and whether they touch M. Feckenham and you, or any of your chiefe Masters yea or no.

The ninth Diuision.

THe Bishop hauing by Thomas his distinction of igno∣rance answered M. Feckenhams argument: descen∣deth to cope with M. Feckenham in his issue, and to proue the same by all the sayd meanes that he requireth. And first to the issue, whiche was: That any Emperour or Em∣presse, King or Queene, may claime or take vpō them any suche gouernment in spirituall or Ecclesiasticall causes: The Bishop answereth that they ought to take such gouernment, Ergo: they may lawfully do it. For his antecedēt that they ought, he referreth to the foure meanes of the issue, that M. Feckenham would haue it tri∣ed by.

M. Stapl. picking by quarels, of other pretended answers,* 1.178 made by the Bishop before, & falsely surmising that he then denied, or mollified the woordes of the othe, and that now he answereth, without any molli•…•…iyng or restiaint, that the Queene ought to take vpon hir such kinde of regiment: these answeres he calleth so •…•…arring, variable, diuerse, and so con∣trary the one to the other, that if the one be true, the other must be false, and so concludes they be false and deceiueable both of them.

But M. St. this is a false and a deceiuable point of your owne deuising, from the which I perceyue by the tenour of your whole counterblast, ye will neuer iarre nor varie one iote, except God sende you hereafter better grace and iudge∣ment, than thus still to ground your self and your writings, on manifest lies and forgeries, and then presuppose them in your nod•…•…le, for manifest principles and truthes. Thus do ye all your booke ouer, & so ye play here. First ye ground your selfe on a forged answere, that the Bishop should be∣fore haue made: imagining it must néedes be true, bicause you say ye certainly vnderstande, that M. Feckenham hath so

reported to some of his friendes, that the Bishop made then another resolute answere. This is all that ye all age for proofe of it, ye haue it but by heare say, at the hande of some partiall tale bearer, some tolde you, that M. Feckenham told some, that the Bishop tolde him, that this was his re∣solute answere, and you beleue it for a certentie, and write it solemnly in your booke, to deface the Bishop as it were with doubble and contrary answering, your selfe in the meane season answering nothing to the argument, nor to y^e Bishops present and printed answere. And therfore I neede returne no other answere to you, than, that one tolde me, that another told him, that he told you, that ye were to light of credence, to beleue euery flimme flamme tale, and to rash of Iudgement, to clap downe such tales in your booke, of whiche ye had no better proufe, than that all the worlde should see, claw me claw thee, two false marchants néede no broker they say.

The tenth Diuision.

THe Bishop entring into his proufes of the issue, that Princes ought to take vpō them such gouern∣ment in Ecclesiasticall causes, as the Queenes Maiestie doth chalenge and take vppon hit, among other properties belonging to the Princely office, to beginne with all, auoucheth out of Deut. the 17. and the 13. with some expositoures vpon the same, that the Prince is commaunded to haue by him the booke of the lawe, to reade in it diligently, to this ende that he himselfe may learne the feare of God, and cause his subiects to become Israelites by his princely authoritie, redressing the peruersnesse of such a•…•… swerue from the ordinances and ceremonies appointed of God. The which beyng true, the conclusion consequently followeth thereuppon.

M. St. answere to this argument, resteth on foure faults* 1.179 that he findeth with the Antecedent, which he calleth vn∣truthes, & so reckoneth them vp also in his score, but bicause they are the principall materiall pointes whereon his an∣swere dependes, I thought it more fitte to note them here.

But first after his scoffing, & craking maner he saith to y^e* 1.180 Bishop: Go on I saie in Gods name, M. Horne, and prosecute your plea stoutly: God sende you good speede. And so he doth, euē such as ye, & the honestie of your cause deserue. &c.

But all these his fromps and vaunts I ouerpasse and re∣ferre them to his common places, and will onely answere to that which he chargeth the Bishop withall, which is no lesse than infidelitie and vnskilfulnesse. And to beginne with the later, bicause he saith it is the least matter and note•…•…h it for the former vntruth.

Your vnskilfulnesse (saith he) whiche is the least matter,* 1.181 standeth in that ye say the King is commaunded to haue by him the booke of the lawe, your texte sayth not so •…•…ir, but Describet sibi Denteronomium legis huius in volumine: he shall* 1.182 write out this second law in a booke; as Edmund Beck, a man of your sect truly hath translated.

This is the least matter, saith M. Stapl. and yet this is so great a matter, that as a notable reproche, he fasteneth it also in the margine as it were with a tenne penny nayle (to vse his own phrase) M. Hornes vnskilfulnesse▪ But if M. St. did not play the vnskilfull hypocrite him selfe, but had pulled the beame of vnskilfulnesse out of his owne eye, he should then haue cleerely séene, that the Bishop vsed good skill in citing his text faithfully, and he in thus repr•…•…hēding the Bishop hath shewed so litle skill, and so much infidelitie, that though he him selfe be paste shame, yet M. Feckenham, and all his fréendes may well •…•…e ashamed of him.

Ye say (saith M. Stapleton) the King is commaunded, to haue by him the booke of the lawe, your text saith not so sir. Forsooth sir the text saith so by your leaue, the text hath

bothe, and therefore it is not the Bishop but you that lie, both vnskilfully and also vnfaithfully therein. Put on your spectacles, reade your text againe, and I dare say, except your lippes hang in your lighte, ye shall within sixe woordes following, finde these woordes, Et habebit secum, and he shall haue it with or by him, or as Munsterus translateth it, Erit{que} illud pen•…•…s e•…•…m, and it shalbe about him, or ap∣pertayning vnto him. So that here appeareth plainly your skilfull fidelitie, (if it be not done rather of peruersitie and malice, to vse your owne woordes) in deniyng the Scri∣pture to say that, which in plaine woordes it saithe, and in calling that an vntruth in translation, which euidently is a very true translation. This vntruth therefore must be cutte of from your talie, and nicked vpon your score.

The second fault founde with the Bishop in his antece∣bent, is an vntruth (as M. Stapleton hath scored it vp) in leauing out a parte of the sentence materiall. Wherein he* 1.183 noteth the Bishop of infidelitie. Your infidelitie (saith he) appeareth in the curtalling of your texte, and leauing out the woordes that immediatly go before those that ye alleage. What were these woordes that the Bishop did alleage? That he haue by him the Booke of the lawe. Say ye me so M. Stapleton? then, if the Bishop haue left out the wordes of Moses, that immediatly go before those that he alleaged, euen by your owne confession these wordes alleaged, do come immediatly after those that ye say the Bishop left out. D•…•…ye not sée what a manifest lier your owne testi∣monie proueth you. Within sixe lines folowing, ye affirme that the text hath not these wordes, and here ye say they fol∣low immediately. You are full of gathering contradictions, what call ye this, it followeth in the text immediatly, and, it is not in the text at all. Where is your Logike that ye boaste of? are not these contradictories? so that vnlesse ye cā •…•…ake two contradictions true, ye haue made your selfe in the one an open lier. Alacke M. Stapleton where was

your remembrance? Mendacem memorem esse oportet a lier should haue a good memorie least he faulter. Well will you say, here ye tooke me tardie. But how say ye to this, the Bi∣shop hath leaft out a parte of the sentence materiall, he hath* 1.184 curtalled his▪ text. The later worde he hath (bicause they make directly against him) quite least out. Hath he so M. St.? ve∣rily that were a foule faulte, and infidelitie in deede. But what againe if he haue not done so, if he haue left out no parte of the sentence which he cited, & what if those wordes which M. Stapleton would adde out of another sentence, would not make any thing against the Bishop, were he not then cléered of this faulte, and might it not redounde to the faultfinder? And by your leaue M. Stapl. though I will not herein charge ye with infidelitie, vnlesse ye wist it, but im∣pute it rather to want of knowledge, yet at the least, it is one of your vnskilfull lies, for the sentence, Et habebit se∣•…•…um, &c. and he shall haue it by him, and shall reade it all the daies of his life, that he may learne to feare the Lorde, his God, and keepe his woordes and ceremonies, whiche are commaunded in the Lawe, is an whole and perfect sentence, and as the Hebrues call it a Pasuk. which, if not so much as perusing the Hebrue or Chaldee text, yet if, meaning a truth, ye would haue looked vpon the translation of Sanstes Pagninu or Munsterus, ye should haue séene it to be a full period and sentence of it selfe. So that the Bishop is suffici∣ently discharged of all vnfaithfulnesse, nor hath curtalled any sentence that he alleaged, nor left out any later, for∣mer, or middle parte, materiall, or not materiall thereof. But now M. Stapleton, looke you to it, least you be founde herein a passing vnfaithfull lyer, not onely on the Bishop, but on the holy Scripture also.

Ye say he hath curtalled his text. What was his text? he shall haue by him the booke of the lawe. What woordes follow immediatly after? and he shall reade it all the dayes of his lyfe, to the ende that he may learne to feare the Lorde

his God, and keepe all his wordes and ceremonies that are commaunded in the lawe. All this the Byshop cited and ex∣pounded also: hath he then curtalled his text, M. Stap. that so throughly and so largely hath set out the same? Tushe, saye you, he lefte oute the wordes that immediatly go be∣fore those that he alledged. Why, M. Stay. call ye that cur∣talling? curtalling is to cut off those wordes that come be∣hinde. To cut off those wordes that immediatly go before, was rather to behead his text, than to curtall it. And do ye not sée withall how contrarie ye speake to your selfe, they be the latter wordes and they be the words that immediatly go before? If they be the wordes that go before, they be not the latter wordes, if they be the latter, they be not those that went before, vnlesse they come twise bothe before and after, and so the head and the tayle of the sentence is al one, and the byshop cutteth off both head and tayle away, accor∣ding to your popishe vsage of the Scripture. But then where ye say, he leaueth out a material parte of the sentence, ye should haue sayde he tooke away, all that is materiall, and not one materiall parte thereof. But the byshop citeth the full sentence. And those words which ye say come after, and that the byshop leaueth them out, bicause (ye say) they make directly agaynst him, they come not after at all, but playnly are set before. And I muche maruell with what impudent face ye durst chalenge the byshop for curtalling his texte, when he telleth all the wordes that followe, both of the sentence he cited, and of that whiche commeth after also: and yet your selfe so flatly belye the Scripture, for malice to the byshop, in saying, suche wordes that the by∣shop lefte out do followe which neither followe at all: and your selfe before confessed, they went immediatly before.

Sée, see, howe enuie hath blinded this mans sighte. Lesse maruell it is that ye sawe not the period, for although those wordes whiche ye cite, as lefte oute, taking a copie of the Priest, and the Leuiticall tribe, •…•…e wordes going before the

bishops sentence, and he shall haue by him. &c. yet is there a ful period betweene them, which you saw not, or would not sée, so that those former words are no materiall part of the sentence following cited by the byshop, but a material part of the sentēce going before, which the byshop cited not. But M. St. citeth & falsly threapeth that the bishop did cite it, and in citing it, lefte out a materiall parte thereof, charging the byshop in these wordes, after suche order as your owne text* 1.185 appoynteth▪ saying: VVhen he is set vpon the seate of hys kingdome, he shal write him out this second law in a booke, taking a copie of the Priestes of the Leuiticall tribe. VVhich latter wordes ye haue, bicause they make directly agaynst you, quite lefte out. Why, M. Stap. he left out bothe the lat∣ter, middle, first wordes, and all of this sentence, he mentio∣ned it not at all, ye doe but threapen kindnesse on him, to fasten withall vpon him your chalenge of infidelitie. One∣ly he alleaged the nexte sentence, and that expounding it so fully, that he leaueth oute neither former, latter, or any materiall poynte at all thereof.. And thus muche doth your selfe also witnesse agaynst your selfe, saying, that he lefte o•…•…t vvordes that immediatly goe before the vvordes vvhich he alleadged. And what were those? he shall haue by him. &c. This then was the texte that he alleaged by your owne confession. And therfore when ye vrge him with the former texte that he alleaged not, to proue infidelitie in him: ye contrarie your selfe, ye cleare him, ye shewe your owne excéeding vnfaythfull dealing, bothe to the scripture, and to him also.

But wherefore should the Byshop haue left out (as ye charge him) any materiall parte of his texte? bycause (say you) it maketh directly agaynst him. In déede that were a shrewde cause, and would iolily cloke M. St. infidelitie, and cause men to suspect infidelitie in the bishop, if he had con∣cealed any thing in his text, that directly made against him. Which infidelitie who vseth, and who approueth it, for the

poynt of a wise man, to conceale that, that maketh agaynst him, shal after wel appeare. But now, although it be plain∣ly proued, that the byshop in his text left out no part therof: Yet for further tryall of this also, let vs take not onely the latter wordes of the next period going before, which words he complayneth are lefte out, but euery worde also of the same sentence, concluding two or thrée periodes vnder one, bicause we would haue nothing left out, and ioyne them to the sentence following cited by the byshop, and then behold what maner of conclusion either directly, or indirectly they make agaynst him. Wherin shall appeare, that M. St. hath so besotted himselfe in diuinitie, that he had quite forget the logike that so ofte he crakes vpon. These textes are these: VVhen he is set on the seate of his kingdome, he shall write* 1.186 for him selfe out of this seconde law in a booke, taking a co∣py of the Priests of the Leuiticall tribe. And he shall haue it with him, and he shall reade of it all the dayes of his life that he may learne to feare the Lorde his God, and keepe all the wordes and ceremonies that are written in the lawe. Upon these words, M. St. frameth his argument.

The king shal write out this second law in a booke, taking a copy of the Priestes of the Leuiticall tribe:

Ergo, a king ought not to take vpon him suche gouerne∣ment in ecclesiasticall causes, as the Quéenes maiestie doth chalenge and take vpon hir. For this is the conclusion that directly maketh agaynst the bishop: but as herein his logike is altogither vnskilfull, so is his diuinitie yet more vnfaith∣full. For, hauing chalenged the bishop for leauing out these words, taking a copie of the priests of the Leuiticall trybe, as directly against him: and thē immediately foloweth (sayth he) how he shall busily reade the sayde booke, and so foorth. In which words he maketh another toto manifest lie, falsi∣fying the text yet once againe. For these words, Et habebit sec•…•…, he shal haue with him, which word he leaueth quite out, go betwéene, & therfore followe not (as he sayth) immedi∣atly.

But sée héere (whether it be of malice to the byshop, or to the Scripture) that all this while in quarelling with this little poore text, & habebit secum, he shall haue with him, he findeth fault with translating, he accuseth the byshop of infidelitie and vnskilfulnesse, he complaineth of leauing out wordes going immediatly before, of curtalling the texte, and leauing out latter wordes, of leauing out a material part, of words following immediatly: he citeth and reciteth these and those wordes in Latin and Englishe, he scanneth and descanteth on translations, and all this while those onely three wordes, & habebit secum, which the byshop alleaged, wrinching and wresting, he euer glaunceth by them, he will not once name them, but leaueth them quite out, which was the materiall thing that the byshop alleaged. And yet all the while he whineth of leauing oute, and leaueth oute him selfe that he should chiefly answere. What shall we thinke is the cause that he dothe thus? surely there is some force in those wordes, that he sawe were more directly a∣gainst him, or else he would neuer do so for very shame. But I remember a tale that he hath patched vp into his coun∣terblast, of the Simoniacall Priest, that béeing commaun∣ded to say In nomine patris, & filij, & spiritus sanct•…•…, could re∣hearse all well inough, till he came to spiritus sancti: as for that, he could not pronounce it in any maner of wise. But sée your chance M. Stap. that ye there fabled, howe here your selfe haue playde the like part. The byshop vrgeth you with thrée wordes, & habebit secum▪ ye will not onely an∣swere nothing thereto, but ye will not in any wise, whyle ye repeate the sentences, so muche as name those wordes, and yet ye goe rounde about them. On the other side, those wordes that the bishop cited not, as no parte of his sentence alleaged, Lorde what a doe ye make of curtalling, of lea∣uing out, of infidelitie, vnskilfulnesse, peruersitie, malice, and I can not tell what. Onely bicause ye thinke those wordes séeme to make for your massing Priests authoritie, bicause

they name Priests: and yet God wot they make nothing for you, nor agaynst the byshop directly or indirectly.

But you thinke this sentence maketh thus much for your priestes, that if the Prince hereon will clayme by the one sentence, to haue the knowledge of the lawe and worde of God: ye wil enforce of the other, that he shall haue no more therof, nor no otherwise, than it pleaseth you to licence him. And so farre ye dare aduenture to say: VVell let the king* 1.187 reade in Gods name, not only that booke, but all the whole Byble beside, it is a worthy and cōmendable studie for him. But let him beware that this sweete honie be not turned into poyson to him, and least vnder this pleasant bayte of Gods worde, he be sodenly choked with the topicall and pestife∣rous translation, wherewith ye haue rather peruerted than translated the Byble printed at Geneua, and in many other places, with your false dangerous damnable gloses, wherwith you haue corrupted and watred the same, and made it as it were of pleasaunt wine, moste sowre vineger. The onely remedie and helpe to eschue and auoyde this daunger, is to take this booke, and other holy writings faythfully transla∣ted at the Priestes handes, as they from tyme to tyme haue receyued them.

Howe fitly ye apply your metaphors in making one thing in the same respect to be sweete hony, & yet sowre vinegar, let others descāt, How properly ye rap your friers & monks on the balde, in vpbrayding gloses wherwith the worde of God hath bene watered and corrupted, let euen the Pa∣pistes be iudge them selues, whether it toucheth you or vs more néere. How notably ye haue confuted the translation of the Geneua Byble, shall be declared, when ye shall set downe some one or other false worde or sentence translated in it. Howe well you like that kinges should read the By∣ble, as a worthy and commendable studie for them, appea∣•…•…h, in that ye can away with no translation, nor yet your •…•…e wyll set out any for them. But howe well so∣euer

you like it, or at least dissemble for to lyke it, the moste of your complyces lyke it neuer a deale: Full sore agaynst whose willes it was translated in the mother tong of any prince or people. But if it were so worthy and com∣mendable a studie for Princes, why were not Christian Princes permitted to studie in it? why kepte ye them in ignoraunce? why limit ye them within the studie of •…•…ill affayres, of martiall policies, of hunting and hauking pa∣stimes: But as for the worde of God not one word, no not to moue any talke thereof, sayth Cardinall Hosius. And thinke ye they might then make the same their studie? but how soeuer ye ordered Princes as other people then: now that ye sée there is no remedie, Princes will be no longer deluded, but make it their studie in déede: with a false heart God knoweth, ye say, well let the king reade in Gods name, not onely that booke, but all the whole Byble beside. It is a worthy and commendable studie for him.

If ye be thus liberall (master Stapl.) to Princes from your heart nowe, why did ye quarell with the byshop so muche before, for saying, he should haue by him the booke of the lawe, should he reade and studie the same, and yet not haue it by him? But I perceiue ye are halfe wéerie of your owne wrangling, and therfore in the end, ye not onely graunt that he shall haue it by him, but also shall make the same his studie. Now here if your fellowes aske ye, what ye meane to be thus liberall to princes, in permit∣ting them to studie in the worde of God, in suche tonges as* 1.188 they vnderstand, which thing many of your felowes would stifly gaynsay: be content my masters may you say, it is not now time to striue to muche with princes, since they will néedes haue thus muche, let them haue it a Gods name, yea let vs séeme to giue it them franke and frée, but euer pre∣supposed they muste haue it of our giuing, and then go•…•…d inough, they were as good and perchaunce better without it▪ For here, after ye haue seriously warned princes to beware

of our false gloses and translations: The onely remedie and helpe (say you) to eschue and auoyde this danger, is to take this booke and other holy writings faythfully translated, at the Priests hands, as they frō time to time haue receiued thē.

Some simple man, that heard ye, M. Stapleton, thus demurely preache of translations and glosinges, woulde perhappes thinke ye coulde not glose and translate so false∣ly & so impudently as ye do, euen here, where ye reprehende the same in others. Dothe your texte that ye beate so much vpon, mention these words, receiuing of it translated at the Priests hands, as they from time to time haue receiued it? or is there any suche meaning? First, there is no mention of any translating at all, but the text sayth, accipiens exemplar* 1.189 à sacerdotibus Leuitic•…•… tribus: taking a copie of the priestes of the Leuiticall tribe: Or as other haue it, describet sibi ex∣emplar huius legis, in librocoram sacerdotibus Lenitici generis. He shall write out for him selfe a copie of this law in a booke before the Priestes of the Leuiticall tribe. He speaketh not héere of any translation, for why, the lawe was wryt∣ten in their owne mother tongue. Nowe bicause to other Princes it is giuen translated, can ye inferre hereon, the Priests onely should haue the translating of it? or béeing translated, it should be receiued onely at the Priests handes, as they from time to time haue receiued it? wherby it should follow, that had the translation passed any continuāce from time to time, it should be forced on vs for a faythful transla∣tiō, were it neuer so false: which is apparāt in the old tran∣slation that hath long time frō time to time continued falsly vnder S. Hieroms name, as both appeareth by S. Hieroms works, & also S. Hierom cōfuteth this fond reason. Neither was he moued with y^e outcries of those in his time, yea euen of S. Austine, y^t cried on him as you do now on the learned trāslators in our time. Neither might y^e word of god hereby be trāslated into any other tōg, thā it hath ben trāslated into of long cōtinuance frō time to time, & thus should princes be

debarred of the word of God, in which ye would haue them studie except you popish priests would translate it, & per ad∣uenture, to kéepe them from it, ye would say you should not deliuer any other translation, than hath bene vsed from time to time. And yet to what prescription of time, ye wold driue vs off, it is vncerteyne.

This is false therfore, and ful of absurdities, that ye prat∣tle of receyuing it translated at the Priestes handes, as they from time to time haue receiued it. No (M. St. to borrowe your own termes) your text sayth not so sir, nor meaneth so. But only that the prince should receiue it of the Leuiticall priests, as they had faythfully kept the word of God, from the first original setting out therof. So noteth Uatablus the great learned Hebritian. Curabit sibi describ•…•… exemplar legis* 1.190 huius. vulgo transumptū. Ung double de ceste loy▪ ad exemplum libri sacerdotū Leuitarū. Quasi dicat ad exēplū castigatiss•…•…ū, ad exemplum eorū qui sunt periti in ea lege, quales sunt Leuitae. He shall prouide for him selfe, that of this lawe there be dra∣wen out a coppie, commonly called a transumpt. One couple of this law. According to the examples of the priests beeing Leuites (as who should say) after the best corrected copy, af∣ter their copie that are skilfull in the lawe, suche ones as the Leuites are. But to receiue it after such a simple sorte, as in processe of time the Rabines and the Priests too, from time to time had watred it with their false gloses: & as since that time, the popish Rabines of the schole friers, monkes, and priestes, from time to time with their false dangerous dam∣nable gloses, haue corrupted and watred the same, and made it as it were, of pleasant wine moste sowre vineger: ye had néede to ryse betimes, M. Stap. or euer ye shall proue this vntimely consequence, by the text that you vrge so sore, or yet by any other. Your argument is this:

The king in the olde lawe, should receiue the coppie of the booke of the lawe, at the handes of the Priestes of the Leuiticall tribe:

Ergo▪ If Princes now will haue the Bible, they must re∣ceyue it of such, and after such manner, as the popish priests will from time to time deliuer it to them.

Now, not seing y^e extreme folie of your sequele, ye runne on headlong as though all were yours, and say: if this order* 1.191 had of late yeares bene kept, and that Princes and other had taken the Bible as it is and euer hath bene of the Priestes of the Catholike churche (orderly and lawfully succeeding one the other as the Leuites did) read, taught, and expounded, as well in Greke and Hebrue as in Latine, these errours and he∣resies should neuer haue taken so deepe a roote as they haue now caught.

Here is bibble babble inough but no argument, and all runnes vppon his wonted presupposals, that our doctrine is heresies and errours, that they be the Priestes of the Catho∣like churche. That they orderly and lawfully succeede one the other, as did the•…•…e Leuites. That they haue euer redde taught and expounded the Scripture, in Greeke, Hebrewe, and Latine. That their translation is onely true and faithful. And that this their order from time to time, hath euer bene, till of late. Let all these thinges be graunted to M. Stapl. for vndoubted principles, and then let him alone. But if a man denied all these things (beyng euery one so apparant false) & proued that our doctrine were not those dangerous gloses, errours, or heresies, but the expresse infallible worde of God: if he denied that their Church were the Catholike Churche, otherwise than in that sense that the scholler of* 1.192 Oxford, by a certeine woman whom other praysed, did me∣rily say, she was a Catholike woman, meaning a common queane, so the Popishe church in like sense is a Catholike church, that is to say, a common strumpet prostitute to all Idolatrie, and not the chaste espouse of Iesu Christe: if he denied not onely such orderly succession in your Pope, his Bishops, and Priests now, as was of the Leuites then, they beyng expresly ordeyned of God, you beyng not ordeined

of God at all: but also proue that suche succession as it is, (whiche in dede may better be called degeneration) is alto∣gether vnorderly and vnlawful: If hée denyed that they did alwayes reade, teache and expound the scripture in Hebrue, Greke and Latine, when euen among the moste of theyr greate Schoole doctours, in that blynde tyme, they had v∣neth any meane skill in Latin, muche lesse, or nene at all in gréeke or Hebrue: As for the moste of their morrow Masse Priestes lyke blynde guydes, were so farre from reading, teaching, and expounding the Scriptures to the people, out of any other tongues, that euen in their mother toung they scarse knewe one worde thereof themselues: If he denyed that they woulde haue the Scripture redde, taughte and ex∣pounded at all, but on the contrarie woulde haue no tran∣slation, other than their common latin translation, which howe corrupte it is, is manyfeste: as Besides the Prote∣stantes, Caietanus, Erasmus, Pagninus, Catharinus, and others of themselues are enforced to confesse it: If he denied that the Popishe handling of Gods woorde, hathe bene the order that hath euer bene, but is quite contrary to the origi∣nall Institution, to the aunciente order, and is of muche later tymes, as corruption from tyme to tyme hathe taken deeper roote. If a man thus denyed all these his Prin∣ciples, til tyme be that M. Stapleton shall proue them bet∣ter, than onely by dreamyng that wée graunte them for true, whyche are called into greate question, and denyed of vs for manyfest false: Then is all the fatte in the fire, and thys Mast. Stapletons solemne processe aunswered and confuted.

Neuerthelesse, M. Stapleton styll procéedyng on, as thoughe all these thynges were out of question: Neyther* 1.193 is this place onely mente (sayeth he) that the King shoulde take the bare letter, but rather the exposition vvithall, of the sayde Priestes. For vvhat vvere the king the better, or any man else for the bare letter, if hee hadde not also as ordi∣narie

a vvaye for his direction in his vnderstandyng, as hee had prouided him for to receyue a true and an incor∣rupted copie? VVhereof wee may see the practise in all ages in the catholike Churche, whereof this place is the very sha∣dow and figure. And herewithal he setteth vp in his margin this note: bothe the bookes of the Scripture, and the exposi∣tion muste be taken at the priestes handes.

The argumente is this: The king in the olde lawe must receiue not only the bare letter of the priestes handes, but the exposition withall:

Ergo, Christian Princes muste receyue that sense of the Scripture, that the Popishe priestes doe please to expounde vnto them.

As there is none I truste so simple, that séeth not the fondnesse of this argumente, so agayne eche man may per∣ceyue, that the more M. Stapleton trauayleth on these wor∣des (whiche he sayth be vnfaithfully lefte out,) hée shall not onely shewe the more his owne vnfaithfulnesse: but detecte also the vnfaithfull dealing of all his Romishe priestes and Churche. For where as this place sayeth, that the Le∣uiticall Priestes shall delyuer to the Kyng a perfecte and true Coppie of the Lawe of God, whyche hée shall vvrite oute and haue it by him. And that the Priestes shoulde not delyuer onely the bare letter, but withall the exposi∣tion therof, not expounded after their fantasies, as dyd the Scribes and Phariseis, in one place by the bare letter, whi∣che Christ confuteth Math. 5. 6. 7. In an other place, by their owne inuentions and traditions, but one place truly expoū∣ded by an other, and so deliuer it faithfully to their Prince: And that this order then was the verye shadowe and figure of the true Churche novv: But then is it most euident that the Popishe Churche is not the true Churche, nor was fi∣gured hereby at all.

For first the popishe Prestes deliuered not a coppie of the

lawe of God, to wete, of the Old and New testament vp in∣to their Kings, Queenes and Princes handes, to write it out and haue it alwaies by them to studie vppon: but rather do the contrary as did the Pharisies, keping the key of know∣ledge away from them of purpose, telling them it appertai∣neth not to their estates: but that they may go play them, or employ them selues in other foreigne matters, onely the worde of God they must in no case meddle withall, which belongeth alonely to the Priests. Nor they will be bounde to deliuer vp to their Princes any coppie thereof at all. But thus much yet they will do for their Princes, to giue them a péece here and there, and that either must be the bare letter as M. Stapleton calleth it, or els such expositions, as it shall please them to leauen the dough withall. And is this now the perfect bodie of that shadow, the veritie of that figure set forth in Moses order? or not rather the full accomplishing of the Scribes and Pharisies doings? whom they haue so followed in not giuing vp a coppie to their Princes, in wre∣sting, defacing and taking away Gods worde, that theirs may better be said to be a very shadow and figure of the Po∣pish priests dealings herein. And that we rather expresse the veritie of that figure and shadow of Moses order, rendring vp to our Princes a full, perfect, and sincere coppie of Gods lawe, that they may write it out, set it forth, haue it by them and meditate therein day and night (as King Dauid coun∣sayleth)* 1.194 to learne thereby to be wise and feare the Lord their God: and by them all their subiects. And thus his impor∣tune vrging of this place hath so properly helpt his matter forwarde, that where he saith, the Bishop left it quite out as making directry against him, what soeuer the Bishop did, it had bene better for M. Stapl. to haue left it quite out, also: or not to haue triumphed so much on that, which at the better view thereof, so directly maketh against all his popishe Priestes.

But for all this, M. Stapleton will proue, that the popish

priestes must not onely haue the handling of Gods worde: but also that they can not be deceyued, nor erre in the sense thereof. And this will he proue euen by the Pro∣testants them selues.

For (sayth he) as the Protestants them selues are forced* 1.195 by plaine wordes to confesse, that they knowe not the true worde or booke of God, but by the Churche: whiche from time to time deliuered these bookes, euen so by all reason and learning they shoulde also confesse that the Churche can no more be deceyued, in deliuering the sense of the sayde worde, than in deliuering the worde it selfe. VVhich seeing they will not confesse, (for then we were forthwith at a point and ende with all their errours and heresies) they must nedes continue in the same.

The argument is this. The Protestants confesse that they know not the worde of God but by the Churche (of Christ) that kéepeth, witnesseth and agnizeth the same from time to time.

Ergo the Protestants must néedes confesse, that the Church (he meaneth the Popishe priestes) in deliuering of the worde can not be deceyued in the sense thereof.

In stéede of aunswere hereto, master Stapleton him selfe maketh a preoccupation, for perceyuing the falsenesse and follie thereof woulde soone be reiected: VVhich seeing (sayth he) they will not confesse (for then we were at a point with all their errours and heresies) they must needes conti∣nue in the same.

Do we not confesse, master Stapleton that ye woulde haue vs confesse? why then haue ye reasoned all this while thus fondly, taking that for confessed which your selfe now are forced by plain wordes to confesse, that we confesse not, but vtterly denie, that you be the Catholike Church, that you haue deliuered these bookes from time to time, (which you haue rather hid away) that you can not erre in the sense •…•…f the scripture, and such like wrong principles. Which in

déede if we shoulde falsely confesse with you, then all the matter were at a poynt and ende, as ye saye. But since we denie it, and reiect your fonde reasoning, à petitione princi∣pij, it is tyme that ye séeke out other arguments more sub∣stantiall, or else as your cause is at a poynte, or not worth a poynt: so in conclusion ye stande on this poynt, to slaun∣der vs, as following euery man his owne heade, and that* 1.196 we shal neuer haue done, and errours will neuer cease more and more to encrease and multiplie, vnlesse we take forth (say you) the lesson I haue shewed you. And what lesson is that? Forsooth that we must graunt and confesse to be most true, all these your false principles. And then we shall be your white sonnes, and good scholers I dare say, if once we would conne that lesson. Ye would giue vs a fat remedie, and leaue to play the fooles & truands all day long, if we would learne that lesson of yours. But such scholemasters as y•…•… are, such schollers ye desire to haue, and suche lessons ye take them forth. Caecus autem si caeco ducatum prestet, ambo in foueam ca∣dunt.* 1.197 If the blinde leade the blinde, both of them fall into the ditch. Thus ye deceyued the princes and people in tymes past. But God be praysed both Princes and people haue now taken forth that lesson, out of Gods holy word, that ye could not, or neuer would teach, read or expound vnto them.

Nowe when ye haue redde this lesson vnto vs, with so false a glosse and commentarie vpon the text, (as ye com∣plaine) left out: ye determine that the best remedie were the* 1.198 exact obseruation of this place that ye haue (say you) so wily∣ly and sleightly slipt ouer. This is but a poynt of your ap∣parant impudencie master Stapleton, to set a be•…•…de face on the matter, for God knoweth ye would nothing lesse, than that the diligent reader shoulde exactly obserue this place. Whiche if he did, this place alone, (were there no more) woulde sufficiently shewe howe ye haue haled and racked it, and all the lawe of God besides. That this place there∣fore (if the exact obseruation thereof be the best remedie

to your cause, as ye say) might remedie your cause the bet∣ter, I haue somewhat the more exactly obserued it, and if your cause haue founde any remedie thereby, muche good doe it you, ye shall haue more of it. So that I trust yée shall not néede to complaine of ouerslipping any thing ma∣teriall. Which least ye should doe, the Chapter shall be yet more exactly obserued than perchaunce ye would haue it to be. And to begin with that ye quarrell at next, as wilily and sleightly slipt ouer.

But most of all (say you) another sentence in the verie said* 1.199 Chapter. And euen the next to this ye alleage that the king as soone as he is chosen shall bestowe his studie vppon the reading of the Deuteronomie. VVhere Moses sayth that in doubtfull causes, the people shoulde haue their recourse to the sayde Priestes, and to the iudge for the time being mea∣ning the highe Priest, of whome they shoulde learne the truth: and are commaunded to doe accordingly, euen vnder paine of death.

All this ye say the Bishop wilily and sleightly slipt ouer, and yet in the verie sayde Chapter it was euen the next to that he alleaged. Alacke master Stapleton that euer yée should for shame haue thus ouerslipt your selfe. Were ye not halfe a sléepe, when ye made this slippe? For I will not recharge you so harde wyth wylinesse and sleight, but with palpable grosnesse, and marueylous negligent igno∣raunce, in a student of diuinitie, to beate so much vppon a text as you doe here, charging your aduersarie wyth wy∣linesse, sleight, vnfaythfulnesse, vnskilfulnesse, leauing out, curtalling, and ouerslipping, and your selfe shewe so little skil, or regarde, in citing your text, that eyther ye know not, or ye care not what commeth before, what commeth after, what commeth next, what commeth not next, nor nere it. Ye saye that the sentence of the Priestes and the Iudges iudgements on doubtfull cases, commeth euen the next, to that the Bishop alleaged in the verie sayde Chapter.

Turne your booke to the Chapter once againe M. Stap. reade the wordes that come next, yea all the wordes that follow in that Chapter. Nor his heart shall be lifted vp in pride aboue his brethren, neyther shall he turne to the right* 1.200 hande or to the left, that both he and his childe may raigne long time ouer Israell. Doth not this follow next and is not this the last sentence of the sayde Chapter? Then if it be in that verie Chapter, it commeth not as you say next vn∣to it, but must néedes go before, and so doth it. Neyther yet the next before, for there commeth betwene them fiue or six periods at the least. And as they are two diuerse places, so are they two sundrie matters. Ye charge therefore the Bishop amisse, with wilie and sleight ouerslipping, where nothing is ouerslipped, though the former sentence be not alleaged. And ye falsely ioyne them togither saying. The King shall bestow his studie vpon the reading of the Deute∣ronomie, where Moyses sayth that in doubtfull causes. &c. When as Moses there, sayth not so. Ye falsely say it com∣meth next to it, which it doth not, but goeth before, in ano∣ther matter, and diuerse sentences betwene. What a foule ouerslippe was this of you, that could prie so narrowly to séeke a slippe ouer a slipper in anothers footing, where was not so muche as any tripping awrie, and your selfe vna∣wares haue slipt into a foule lie ouer the sloppes and all.

But if we let slippe this, as but a grosse ouerslippe, yet maye we not so let slip M. Stapletons slipperie and false exposition, for all he sayeth, that their priestes can not ex∣pounde the scripture amisse. For where the text sayth, the people sholde haue their recourse to the priestes, and to the iudge for the time beeing: meaning (sayth M. Stapleton) the high priest: In déede so doth his popishe glosse interline it, and yet euen Lyra that woulde shift of the matter, as much as he might, for his Pope, with his morall or rather marre all gloses hereon: both noteth in his margin that these be twaine, summ•…•… sacerdos, & iudex, the high Priest

and the Iudge. And sayth, in his casibus, &c. In these and the* 1.201 like cases, they must runne vnto the higher Iudges, that is to say▪ to the high Priest, and to the chiefe Iudge of Israell. And althoughe sometime it chaunced, that one person had both these offices as appeareth by Hely, who was both chiefe* 1.202 Iudge, and chiefe Priest, yet for the most part, as they are distinct offices, so were they commonly in distinct and se∣uerall* 1.203 persons.

And to proue this further by the penaltie, which as you say was vnder the paine of death, the which iudgement ap∣perteyned to the Iudge, but ordinarily it was not lawfull for the high priestes, to iudge any man to death, as euen the wicked priestes, to cloke their murther, when Pilate sayde vnto them, Accipite eum vos. &c. Take you him and iudge* 1.204 him according to your law, coulde replie (like to the papisti∣call Priestes, that post of the bodyes death to the temporall power) Nobis non licet quem{que} interficere, It is not lawfull for vs to kill any man: but the Iudge that this place speaketh of, should ordinarily condemne to death the refuser, Ex in∣dicis decreto moriatur homo ille, Let that man die by the iud∣ges decree. Ergo he meaneth not that this ordinarie Iudge shoulde be the high priest.

Besides this the very text is plaine, in making this distinc∣tion, to the Priestes, and to the Iudge, not to the Iudge mea∣ning the Priest. Againe, The commandement of the high Priest, and the decree of the Iudge. Which fully importeth that he meaneth not the one by the other, but expresseth two diuerse persons, and two seuerall offices distinctly. Wherfore master Stapleton apparantly wresteth the text, thus flatly to say, that he meaneth the high Priest by the name of Iudge, to proue that his Pope hath no péere, but all iudgement remayneth in him alone, in euery difficult matter of religion.

And here againe appeareth another of his false and pur∣posed ouerslippes. Moses (sayth he) doth say that in doubt∣full

causes the people should haue their recourse to the priests. Whie doe ye here master Stapleton forget your former marginall censure, of leauing out anie materiall partes of the sentence? telling vs of doubtful causes, but not telling vs what those doubtfull causes were, and speake as doubtfully as though they were matters of doctrine, religion, and ec∣clesiasticall ordinaunces, (which are the matters in questi∣on betwéene the partyes) when this place speaketh onely, of decyding a difficult or doubtfull matter, betweene bloud and bloud, plea and plea, plague and plague, in matters of stryfe: But none of these specifications, what maner of doutfull causes hée ment, woulde you expresse, for feare it woulde then bée to soone espyed, that this sentence made nothing at all for the supreme iudgement of your Pope. And yet after these two sleightes, the one of remoouing the ciuill Prince or iudge from this iudgement with the Priestes, and ascribing all to the Priestes alone, to make it serue your purpose the better: The other by slipping o∣uer all these doubtfull causes, in the sentence expressed, as thoughe it were simplie spoken wythout anye specifica∣tion, to make it serue for the Priestes absolute iudge∣mente in all ecclesiasticall ordinaunces: When ye haue wyth thys dubble sleyght and wylinesse thus wrested the Text, then come yée in ruffling lyke a lustye Rutter∣kin, and swappe mée downe hereon this iolie marginall note.

An other sentence in the sayde Chapter by master Horne* 1.205 alleaged that ouerthroweth all his boast. God saue al master Stapleton, here is no small boast I trowe. We had nowe néede to beware betymes, for feare the Bishoppe be here quite ouerthrowne, since that master Stapleton maketh so prowde a chalenge. Let vs therefore take héede to hys argument on thys place. VVhiche place (sayeth he) well weighed and considered, serueth to declare that I haue sayde, that the King and others, shoulde receyue not one∣lye* 1.206

the letter, whiche as Saint Paule sayeth doeth kyll, but the true and syncere meaning withall, wherein standeth the lyfe of the letter, as the lyfe of man wythin hys bodie, yea the eternall lyfe (whereof by following lewde lying expositions of holye w•…•…itte, wee are spoyled) at the Priestes handes.

Is this the conclusion of all this great crake M. St. that the B. should be quite ouerthrowne by this sentence? what one word is here, not only of this sentence, but euen of your owne well weighed and considered conclusion theron, which hath come nere vnto, much lesse ouerthrowne the Bishops assertion? Which if ye would haue ouerthrowne, ye should haue concluded agaynst it, and thus haue reasoned.

Moses sayde to the people of Israell, if any hard or doubt∣full* 1.207 thing in iudgement rise vp with thee, betwixt bloud and bloud, plea and plea, plague and plague, in matters of strife within the Citie. &c. Go to the Priestes and vnto the Iudge that shall be in those dayes. &c. Ergo a Christian king ought not to chalenge or take vpon him any such supreme gouern∣ment in ecclesiasticall matters as doth y^e Queenes maiestie. This conclusion in déede, quite ouerthroweth the Bishops assertion. But who séeth not that this sentence is to farre fetched to inferre any such conclusion? And therfore master Stapleton thoughe this was his butt•…•… on whiche his ey•…•… shoulde haue béene fixed, and brought his proues to haue improued this: yet durst he not once touche or come nighe it for very shame, for if he had, he sawe that euery boye in the scholes would haue hissed out his argument. And there∣fore wilyly weighing and considering howe he might make it séeme to serue to some purpose, that he had craked on so much. This place (sayth he) well weighed and considered ser∣ueth to declare that I haue sayd, that Kings and others should receyue not onely the bare letter, but the true and sincere meaning withall. &c. at the priestes handes.

And is this all that this place serueth to, M. Stapleton? for

I dare say you haue well weighed and considered the matter, that from so great a boast, are so sodenly fallen in∣to so déepe a consideration, of the bare letter killing, and the true quickening sense therof. Wheras that text if ye would but meanely weigh and consider it once againe, neyther talketh of any killing letter, or liuing sense at all: but of cer∣taine doubtfull cases of strife, nor can serue to confirme those sayings of Christ and Saint Paule, without manifest wresting of it. But to what purpose doe ye so well weigh and consider that, whiche is nothing in question, and that which is in question, & denyed, and you should proue: with∣out any weighing or considering ye take it for confessed? Who doubteth of this that Princes should not onely receyue the bare letter, but the true sense and meaning withall at the priestes handes? This Princes in déede should do, which if they had alwayes done, they shoulde not haue receyued so many of their lewde lying expositions, as they haue done here to fore, at the priestes hands, who herein deceyued prin∣ces, and gaue them not the true meaning and sense togither with the copie of Gods worde: but debarred Princes of copie thereof, of letter, sense, and all: féeding them wyth the vayne fables, and lewde lying expositions, of theyr owne deuisings.

Wherefore Lyra noteth here vppon the Hebrue glosse,* 1.208 Hic dicit glossa Hebraica. &c. Here sayth the Hebrue glosse, if the priest shall say vnto thee that thy right hande, is thy left hande, or thy left hande, is thy right hande, this saying must be vpholden, which thing is manifest false. For the sentence of no maner of man, of what authoritie so euer he be, is to be vpholden, if it conteyne a manifest falsehoode or errour. And this appeareth by this, which is set before in the text. They shall iudge vnto thee the truth of Iudgement: and afterward is set vnder: And they shall teach thee according to his lawe: whereby it appeareth that if the Priestes speake that which is false, or swarue from the law of God, they are not to be heard.

Thus sayth Lyra in (confuting the Hebrue glosars) of their hye Priests, that sayde they could not erre, and therefore what soeuer they taught must be beléeued. And do not your Papistes say the same of the Pope, and your selfe holde the same of your Priestes expositions, that theirs alwayes muste be taken for the true sense? else wherto bring ye out this conclusion? In doubtfull cases of bloud, and ciuill acti∣ons of strife, the highe Priest, and the chiefe Iudge muste determine a finall sentence:

Ergo, Princes muste receiue, not the letter of the scrip∣ture, but suche sense as the Popish priestes and the Pope, shall determine for the true sense in all controuersies of religion.

For this is the ful drift of your reason, though ye dare not for shame speake so playne. But this argument, the more it is wayed, wayeth lyke a fether in the winde: and there∣fore ye turne the conclusion into generall words and say: Ergo, Princes and others muste receiue at the Priestes hands not onely the bare letter that killeth, but the true and sincere meaning therof withall.

Which cōclusion is not in controuersie, but on both parts graunted they oughtso to do, the Priests to deliuer to their Princes and others, the worde of God, and the true sense therof: and the Prince and others oughte so to receiue of them the same word of God, and the true sense thereof, and not the priests owne deuises and expositions.

But since that none haue euer done more cōtrarie to this rule, sythe it was first giuen by Moyses, then haue the Po∣pishe priestes: had not Christian princes great néede to be∣ware of Popishe Priests gloses, and follow the councell of Lyra in reiecting them, & as other good Princes haue done, to displace those false glosing priestes, and place faythfull disyensers of Gods mysteries in their roomes, and ouersée that their people be not deceiued in receiuing at the priests handes, quid pro quo? And for this cause the priest shoulde

deliuer to his prince a perfect copy of the law, which M. St. wickedly termeth the bare letter that killeth, and thereto wresteth S. Paule, & wresteth this sentence of the iudiciall law, among the Iewes for their time, in the foresaide ciuill controuersies: to be a simple rule for all christian common weales, in all ecclesiastical causes, excluding quite al iudge∣ment from the prince, & including it in his Pope & Priests alone, iumbling the Prince and the people togither vnder the priests absolute determination. Where this place ioy∣neth togither as colleages, the prince with the priest, or ra∣ther ascribeth the skil in suche doubtes to be defined by the learned and faythfull priest, and the full authoritie to giue iudgement, and to ratifie the Priestes sentence, in con∣demning the refusers to death, and in approuing the recey∣uers, to consist, not in the high Priest, but in the Iudge or Prince. And thus this place, that he would so fayne wrest euery way agaynst Christian Princes, and for his Pope and popelings, béeing well wayed and considered according to his owne request: maketh nothing for his matter, nor for his shauelings, but cleane agaynst them. And béeing better wayed and considered, maketh nothing against the Bishops cause, nor against christian Princes supreme gouernment, in ouerséeing & correcting such false priests: but very muche for their duetie and chiefe authoritie therin.

M. St. hauing thus shamefully counterblasted the By∣shops allegatiō, to set a good face on an euilfauorde matter: biddes the byshop go on, and crieth out that he hath go•…•…ten the victorie, & that the bishop is at his first encoūtring ouer∣blowne* 1.209 and discomfited euen with his owne blast. And that it is not likely hereafter, that he shall bring any thing to re∣solue his aduersarie. But as God would haue it, all these wordes are no blowes, nor arguments, but vayne triūphes before he haue gotten the victorie: of the which he recko∣neth him selfe so sure, that he graunteth the Byshops other allegation. Deut. 13.

For as for the next place (sayth he) it enforceth no supre∣macie,* 1.210 we freely graunt you, that princes may sharply punish teachers of false and superstitious religion and Idolatrie (bee∣ing therof by the Priests instructed) whiche is the matter of your texte.

This parenthesis, M. St. (beeing therof by the priests in∣structed) is the levvde lying glose of your owne forge. The text hath no such matter of the priests instruction but what thinke you, doth enstruction more enforce an authoritie in the priest, than powre to punish & correct doth enforce an au∣thoritie in the prince? or doth this follow, that bicause the prince by the priests enstruction doth punish false teachers: Ergo he punisheth thē by the priests authoritie? but as you fréely graunt that the prince may punish noughtie, false, and idolatrous priests, so that the priests instructiō is any mat∣ter of the byshops text, or that his instruction should more enforce authoritie ouer the prince, than the princes punish∣ment doth ouer false teachers: is both euident false, & this we as flatly deny, as you do fréely graunt the other.

Howbeit, presupposing that we would also graūt him this, that all things must still be done by the priests instruction: But then (sayth master Stap.) take heede to your selfe ma∣ster* 1.211 Horne) and as though he him selfe were this instruc∣tour, for I say to you (sayth he) that ye and your fellowes teache false and superstitious religion, many and detestable heresies, and so withall playne idolatrie.

In déede sir, so ye say, & that full stoutly, braying out with I say to you, but thanks be to God, ye do but say it to vs, ye do not proue it to vs, but and it were put to a double post, might it not proue a worde of course? and then take heede to your selfe master Stapl. for we not onely say to you, but by the worde of God proue it to you, that you and your felowes teach false and superstitious religion, many and dete∣stable heresies, & so withal plaine idolatrie. &c. and so haue ye giuen sentence agaynst your selfe, & haue told the magistrate

his office to punishe you as false teachers, that care not how ye falsifie & wrest the scriptures to deface your aduersarie, the vnskilfulnesse and vnfaythfulnesse wherwith ye falsly charge him, euer double or treble, redounding vppon your selfe. The residue of your proces on these two chalenges of vnskilfulnesse & vnfaythfulnesse, I referre to your common places of rayling, scoffes, and slaunders, and will answere to the thirde great faulte that ye finde in this diuision.

Nowe that ye bring out of Glossa ordinaria, (say you) that* 1.212 the Prince is commanded by his princely authoritie to cause his subiectes to become Israelites, it may perhaps be in some ordinarie glose of Geneua his notes, Bales, or some such like, but as for the olde ordinary Latin glose, I am right sure (M. Horne) it hath no suche thing.

Are ye right sure therof, M. Stap? and hath it no suche thing in déede? will ye venter your poore honestie thereon? I dare say ye would haue vs thinke, that ye haue looked on the ordinarie glose, whether any suche thing were there or no, else would ye neuer for shame so boldly affirme it. But what speake I of shame in so shamelesse a face, that boldly dare auouche he is right sure there is no suche thing, when if he had looked in y^e ordinary glose, except he would of pur∣pose looke from it, he could scantly misse it, euen at the first viewe. The wordes of the glose vpon super Israel, are these: Benedictio est regnare super Israel. 1. regnando facere Israel. s. deum videntes. It is a blessing to raigne ouer Israell, that is to saye, by raigning (which the Byshop Englished, by his Princely authoritie) to make or cause to become Israelites, that is to wete, folkes seeing God. The Bishop Englished the sentence playnly, by his Princely authoritie to cause his subiectes to become Israelites. And what is here that is not onely in summe of sentence, but in the very emphasis or force of the bare wordes, all one with the glose? and yet this moste impudent, what should I call him, vnskilfull or vnfaythfull lyer, or both, chalengeth the

Bishop of vntruth, and sayth he is right sure there is no such thing. In what thing wil this man stick, to outface the sim∣ple & vnlearned, that dare thus deale with such a lerned fa∣ther? and cōmit it to print to be examined of any lerned rea∣der, and crake of such assurance, as though he had poared o∣uer al the booke for it, & euen at the first chop, he is found an open lyer. But I doubt whether euer he looked on the booke at all, but trusted some retchelesse superuisor. For if he had looked but ouer the head of the verie texte, Ut longo tempore* 1.213 regnet, That he might long time reigne, hée shoulde haue founde noted on this worde Regnet, corporaliter & spiritua∣liter, That hee shoulde reigne or exercise his Princely autho∣ritie a long tyme, Bodily and spiritually, not onely to haue a regiment in lay, temporall and ciuile matters, as M. St. affirmeth, but euen in spirituall matters also. And had he but looked a little higher on these wordes, Leget{que} illud om∣nibus diebus vitae su•…•…. He should read it all the days of his life, He should haue found, Vsus reddit magistrum, the vse (of rea∣ding the worde of God) makes the king a maister (in Gods worde) that is to say, a setter forth or teacher thereof as it were. Upon whiche the ordinarie Glose sayth, Nota quan•…•… assid•…•…itate legere debent Sacerdotes, c•…•… assidue legant reges. Le∣ctio ipsa est lux & vit•…•…: vnde verba qua ego loquor spiritus & vita sunt. Note with howe muche continuaunce the Priestes ought to reade the worde of God, when Kings should reade it continually: The reading is it selfe the lyghte and the life, whereuppon sayth Christe, the words which I speake are spi∣rite and life. Here M. Stapleton, the lyfe lyes not (as you sayde right nowe) in the Priests exposition, but in the word it selfe, and the continuall reading thereof: wherein not onely the Priest, but the Prince, is a kynde of Maister: But are ye not right sure, none of this is there neyther? ye were best to say so, for I perceyue ye haue an excellente grace to face downe a matter, bée it neuer so playne and open.

Let vs nowe come to the fourthe and laste fault, that he

gathereth against the Bishop in this diuision whiche is also an vntruth (as he saith in his margin) the place of the Deute∣ronomie flady belied and adding this vnto the other before, he saith, This therfore may wel stand for an other vntruth, as also that which immediatly you alleage out of Deu. 13. for in* 1.214 al that chapter or in any other of that booke, there is no such worde to be founde as you talke of.

Uerily I beléeue our student M. St. had for studied him∣self in a lasie slumber, and wrote this nodding half a sléepe, for ful awake for pure shame, he would neuer haue suffred such lewd lyes to scape his pen, & come in dropping thus one in an others necke, as though he were at a poynte, he cared not what he sayd, neither against the playne truth, nor a∣gainst himselfe, much lesse against the bishop: Euery worde that the B. rehearseth in the last end of this diuision, is f•…•…ūd plainly exprest in the . xiij. and▪ 17. of Deut. which chapters y^e Bishop quoted: The wordes of punishing teachers of fal•…•…e and superstitious religion and idolatrie, in the former side of* 1.215 the leaf, he graūteth himself to be in Deut. the. 13. Notwith∣standing he forgetteth straight wayes what he sayd, & affir∣meth on y^e other side of the leaf, that there is no such word to be found. But as he trippeth on the truth in the first side, so on the other side of the same leaf, he flatly falleth into a flat lye, & in both he tumbleth into a foule contradiction. More∣ouer in both sides he graunteth, that by the. 13. of the Deut. The prince by his authoritie may punish teachers of fal•…•…e re∣ligion, superstition and idolatrie. And may he do it withoute examining, whether the doctrine wherewith the teacher is charged be true or false, and being false whether he taught it or no? Suche may be the order in the Popes consistorie, but in Gods Courtes it is farre otherwise. For God com∣maundeth Deut. 17. (as the Bishop auouched) the Prince, when any is denounced vnto him, to haue taught any false religion, that he make diligent examination, Quia no•…•… est* 1.216 procedendum ad sententiam (sayth Lyra vpon these wordes)

fine diligēti examinatione praeuia, bicause he must not procede to giue sentence without diligent examination had before. And this beeing found by the Princes diligent examination that he hath taughte false religion: he shall be put to deathe. The Bishoppes woordes comprehende all this. The laste wordes also of the Bishops diuision, to wete, Et auf•…•…res ma∣lum de medio tui, And thou shalt take away euil from among thee: Are they not plainly set foorth in both those chapters? So that a man might wonder that knewe not well Master Stapletons impudencie (seeing that all the poyntes that the Bishoppe speaketh of in the later parte of this Diui∣sion, in the places of the Deuter▪ aboue mencioned, are so manifestly expressed) with what face M. Stapleton can so boldly affirme, that in al the▪ 13. chapter, or any other of that boke, ther is no such word to be found as the bishop talketh of. And thus with more than a full messe of notorious vn∣truthes* 1.217 (to returne your owne conclusion M. Stapl. moste worthyly vpon your selfe, ye haue furnished the firste ser∣uice, brought yet to the table, concerning the principal mat∣ter: howbeit perhappes though this be verie course, yet you haue fine dishes and dayntie cates comming after. Lette vs then proceede. And as he sayth in the entrance of this diui∣sion, Go on I say in Gods name (M. St.) and prosecute your* 1.218 plea stoutely, God send ye good speede, and so he doth euen such as you and the honestie of your cause deserue, and at the first entrie of your plea, causeth you and your clerkly and ho∣nest dealing, forthwith to your high commendation so to ap∣peare, that euen the firste authoritie that ye handle of all the holy Scripture, playnly discouereth you and causeth you to be espied, and openeth as well your fidelitie, as the weakenes of youre whole cause, the which euen with youre owne firste Counter blast is quite ouerblowen. So fitly (M. St. al these your owne words do serue against your selfe.

Diuision. 11.

IN this diuision the Byshop bringeth for his purpose two* 1.219 things, first he alleageth generally that the beste and moste godly princes that euer gouerned Gods people, did perceiue and rightly vnderstand, that to be Gods will, that they haue an especiall re∣garde and care, for the ordering and setting foorth of Gods true Religion, and therefore vsed great diligence, with feruent zeale, to performe and accomplishe the same.

Secondly, for proofe héereof, he entreth into his ensam∣ples of the olde Testament, beginning with Moyses, that he was not the chiefe Priest or Byshop, but the supreme gouernour or Prince, and as chiefe gouernoure had the ordering of religion, whiche he dutifully executed with great zeale and care.

To the former parte and generall assertion of the Bi∣shop,* 1.220 M. Stapleton only answereth by a marginall note, saying:

Regarde, and chiefe rule, care and supreme gouerne∣ment,* 1.221 are two diuers things▪ Nowe forsoothe a solemne stu∣died answere of a student in diuinitie, he is a silly wise man that vnderstoode not thus muche before without this mar∣ginal note. Too simple were he in déed that séeth they be not al one, as he hath simply set them out. But he that complai∣ned so late of curtalling and leauing out a materiall parte of the sentence, whiche dooing he calleth vnfaithfulnesse, sée howe vnfaithfully he hoffeth and curtalleth the Bishoppes sentence. The Bishop spake not of simple care and re∣regarde, but of an especiall care and regarde for the ordering & setting foorth of Gods true religion. With which assertion M. Stap. findeth no fault, neither •…•…y

any worde goeth about to improue it, and so sheweth him∣selfe to agrée therewith, and by silence to confesse the truth thereof. Now therefore let vs resolue the Bishops asserti∣on, and then consider thereon. The Bishops assertion hath these thrée partes. First that godly Princes ought to order and set forth Gods true religion. Secondly, that they ought to doe this with an especiall regards and care. Thirdely, they perceyue and rightly vn∣derstande, that it is Gods will they shoulde so doe. Now since that this by master Stapletons déepe silence, is agréed vpon betwixt the Bishop and him: I make hereon this argument. To order and set forth Gods true religion with especiall regarde and care is the Princes duetie.

But the only sort of gouernment that the Quéenes Ma∣iestie doth chalenge and take vpon hi•…•… in ecclesiasticall cau∣ses, is to order and set forth Gods true Religion with an es∣peciall regarde and care. Ergo

Prin•…•… ought to take vpon them such gouernment, as the Quéenes Maiestie doth claime and take vpon hir in ec∣clesiasticall causes.

And thus is the Bishops antecedent directly proued, and so consequently the principall matter of M. Feck. issue.

Nowe as the former part being the generall assertion to all the ensamples following, is no whitte impeached by any aunswere of master Stap. to it, but by silence (whiche with him is an argument of confession) graunted: so like a very Counterblaster in déed, he blus•…•…reth and puffeth at the seconde part, as though he would all to blast it.

Moses (sayth the Bishop) was supreme gouer∣nour ouer Gods people, and was not chief priest or Bishop, for that was Aaron.

Here master Stapleton denyeth not Moses to be the supreme gouernour, but that he was not chiefe priest or Bi∣shop he vtterly gainsayeth it. It is an vntruth (sayth he in his

score) for Moses was the chiefe priest as shall be prooued.* 1.222 Here is a flat promise of proufe, but I feare me it wil neuer be perfourmed, neyther doth master Stapleton here go a∣bout the perfourmance of it. And therefore the Bishops de∣nial of Moses to be the chiefe Priest, must stand for a truth, till by prouing Moses to be the chiefe Priest, he haue pro∣ued it to be an vntruth. And in the meane time, his pro∣mise must stande but for a crake, as also his prowde en∣tra•…•…nte into his Chapter. That the Scripture by the Bi∣shop alleaged reacheth nothing home, but rather infrin∣geth* 1.223 and plainely marreth the Bishoppes purpose, and ful∣lye standeth on our syde, sayeth this student, so greatly hath arrogancie sotted him. He fareth as did the Souldiour, who when his aduersarie had manye tymes in wrastling hurled him downe in the sighte of euerie stander by, yet woulde hée neuer confesse that hée had anye fall, yea, most arrogantlye▪ he styll affyrmed that hée had •…•…ast the other. And euen so playeth this student (for this of wrast∣ling is one of his common similitudes) he contendeth to wrastle with the Bishoppe, whiche is in verys déede as hée sayeth in this Chapter, Impar congressus Ach•…•…lls Troilus. An vneuen matche betweene Troylus and Achilles. What a number of •…•…oule falles hée hath had, yea, howe hée hath béene ouerturned in hys •…•…wne trippes, is apparaunt to euery Readers eyes, and goe no further but euen to hys last Chapter. And yet sée howe hée craketh, that all the Byshoppes allegations, marre hys owne cause, and fully stande on hys syde. Where contraryewyse they haue drie beaten him backe, bellie, side and all.

And as hée thus fondely maketh vaunt of his former* 1.224 victorie: •…•…o I doubt nothing (sayth he) it will fare with his ex∣amples. Well sayd of a student, like an other Gawin, he doubteth nothing. But sée a sodaine qualme of hys incon∣stancie, for euen streyght wayes, after he hath cryed out, all comes to shor•…•…: he sayth, but here am I shrewedly •…•…n∣combred,

and in a great doubt what to doe. Whie master* 1.225 Stapleton, are ye now so soone in a great doubt, and right nowe as doeth bolde Bayarde doubted nothing, and haue before alreadie without any stammering thereat, clapped downe your marginall note for a full resolute aunswere, that Moyses was the chiefe Priest, and nowe doubt ye what to answere?

But master Stapleton hath so many weapons that he is shrewdly encombred with them, as it were another armed Golias, and yet one smal poebble stone, will soone ease him of this encombrance. He telles vs he hath so many aun∣sweres, that he doubteth with which he should beginne, for I could (sayth he) make a short but a true aunswere that these ensamples are fully aunswered alreadie by master D. Harding and master Dorman. In déede master Stapleton this were a short aunswers, but I sée your selfe feare (as ye sayde be∣fore) it woulde come to short, and not reache home to the matter. Yet, say you, if ye shoulde referre the Reader thi∣ther,* 1.226 to his and your great ease, it should be to the sparing, not only of penne, ynke, and paper, but of the time also, which of all thinges is most precious. It séemeth master Staple∣ton ye are a man of déepe casting, these are good considera∣tions of penne, ynke, paper and tyme. But whie followe ye not your owne councell, whiche if ye had obserued, and left out so many impertinent vagaries, and other your tri∣fling common places, ye had saued more paper, penne, ynke, and tyme, by thrée halues than ye haue done. And here as séeming full resolued to follow this aduise, ye clappe downe another marginall note. All master Hornes examples out of the olde Testament aunswered alreadie, by master Doctour Harding, and master Dorman. Here, sayth he, is a shorte but a true aunswere. To this shorte aunswere, I aunswere againe.

All M. Doctor Hardings and M. Dormans answeres, confuted alreadie by the B of Sarum, and M. Nowell.

Here is another as short an answere as yours M. Stap. and a great deale truer, whiche I remitte to the indifferent viewers of both their answeres.

Nowe might we both rest, and breath vs, from further answering of these ensamples, and spare penue, ynke paper, and time also, that he séemeth to accompt most precious. But another thing was more precious vnto him, and that was master Feckenhams hyre, and his friendes largesse, for so much Paper penne ynke and time spent about his booke, and the gaine of the printed copies, which the bigger volume it came vnto (for he woulde not séeme a thréehalfepennie stu∣dent) the fatter exhibition it should yéelde, and he séeme the greater clerke, yea to go beyonde his masters. And there∣fore there is no remedie, he will spare neyther penne ynke paper time. nor paynes also, but that his Counterblast shall be blowne vp to so large and full a volume, that it may en∣counter euen the best of theirs.

To whose answeres if he shoulde referre himselfe, and saye no more thereto: Then I feare me (sayth he) woulde* 1.227 steppe forth if not master Horne (a good simple plaine man in his dealings) yet some other ioly fine freshe pregnant wit∣tie fellowe, yea and bring me to the streightes which way so euer I did treade.

You are loath I perceiue master Stapleton to be brought into the streight way to treade aright therein, for then your wrie treading woulde soone be espied. But ye séeke crookes and shifting answeres for the nonce. And lyke the vayne talkatiue Arrian Philosopher, ye dispise the right reue∣rende and learned father, calling him in contempt a good simple plaine man in hys dealings. Whose wisedome, iudge∣ment, learning and estimation, not onelye all godly lear∣ned that knowe him both on this side and beyonde the seas, acknowledge wyth reuerence: but euen the chiefe syre•…•… on your syde, and your good masters master Stapleton doe confesse, thoughe they groyne thereat, and be of contrarie

opinion vnto him, and agrée therein with you, yet are they ashamed of this your light demeanour. And which of them séeth not that yet it is muche better, to be a good simple plaine man in his dealings, then to be a vaineglorious, wic∣ked, craftie, dissembling man, in his dealings, as you haue shewed your selfe throughout all your Counterblast to be? And if he be a good simple playne dealing man, are not you agayne (that durst counterblast his dealinges) a naughtie, false, and dubble dealing man? If he be a good simple plaine man in hys dealinges, than he hath dealt well sim∣plie and plainely wyth master Feckenham, who ought to receyue the othe by his promise, if he ment also good truth▪ simple and playne fayth in his dealinges. And then what ment you master Stapleton, thus to bende your studie, to spende your paper, penne, ynke, paynes and tyme, agaynst a good simple and plaine dealer? Though ye haue Balaams marke▪ man, and tread the way of Balaam. (Qui mercedem* 1.228 iniquitat is am•…•…it, That loued the rewarde of iniquitie.) Be∣yng hyred for lu•…•…re to wryte agaynst him: did ye thinke that d•…•…bling false•…•… woulde preuayle agaynst honest, playne and simple dealing? Or that the truth is to be dis∣pised bycause it is playne and simple? And that your false craft woulde not be espy•…•…, except some iolie, fine, freshe,* 1.229 pregnaunt, wittie fellowe, woulde steppe forth and bring yee to the streightes? Ye are muche deceyued master Staple∣ton, in your owne concepte, and thinke your selfe a iolyer fellows than any man else takes you, that ye must néedes bée matched •…•…th some suche •…•…ie pregnaunt wittie fel∣lowe, or else ye can not be dryu•…•…n to the streightes. But were your memorie as good as 〈◊〉〈◊〉 take your witte to be, ye would•…•… not forgette, that euen that Balaams Asse, whereon your Balaams mynde do•…•…th ryde, hath brought your selfe to the streyght•…•… manie tymes before thys. And as Saint Peter sayeth of hym, Correptionem vero ha∣buit* 1.230 s•…•… vesani•…•…. &c. Hee was rebuked for hys iniquitie,

for the dumme Asse speaking with mans voyce forbad the foolishnesse of the Prophete: so your owne tongue hath di∣uerse times so confounded you, that there is lesse néede than ye wene of some suche iolye fellow. I wisse a good simple plaine dealing man, will bring ye to the streightes soone y∣nough, howe wittie, pregnant, fresh, fine, and ioly, so euer ye estéeme your selfe. Nowe say you:

If I should (as I sayde) sende the Reader to them, then* 1.231 shoulde I heare a foole, a dolt, an Asse, that can say nothing of his owne. As though ye had not alreadie sent the Reader to them, when ye say it is a true and a short answere, and set it forth with a solemne note in the margine, as it were a marke for the nonce set vp, for the Reader to resort vnto them. Doth your conscience giue ye therefore, that ye de∣serue suche homely termes as you conceyue ye shoulde heare, if ye did so? Whie did ye not then auoyde the doing so, that ye might there by a•…•…oyde those termes? But ye maye well heare in déede, (if not suche termes as your guiltie conscience fancieth you deserue) yet this, that yee can say nothing of your owne, but theyr aunsweres in ef∣fect, turquesed in your flaunting liuery wordes.

Then shoulde the cause be slaundered also (saye you)* 1.232 as so poore and weake, that it coulde beare no large and ample Treatise, and that their aunsweres were suche as I was ashamed of them, and therefore wylilye and wiselye forbeared them, wyth manye suche other triumphant try∣fling toyes.

Would ye in good sadnesse master Stapleton auoyde all triumphant tryfling toyes? Whie then stande ye try∣fling in these excuses? If master Harding and master Dor∣man haue aunswered these ensamples alreadie, lease you a∣ny estimation (vpon the whiche ye stande so muche) béeing yet but a yong student in diuinitie to them, to referre the matter to their aunsweres? If they haue answered ho•…•…▪ your surplus•…•…age is but tryfling toyes. If it be any other,

then their aunsweres reached not home. And so your an∣swere makes your selfe a lyer, that say they haue aunswe∣red the Bishoppe alreadie. Againe, is your cause slaunde∣red as poore and weake, if it haue aunswered alreadie by suche famous Rabines? Or is it the richer and stronger for the addition of your néedelesse toyes? Lastly, doth the honestie of your cause lie, in bearing a large and ample Treatise? Nowe truelye then it is a false cause, that dare not abide shorte plaine and simple dealing, but must bée flourished 〈◊〉〈◊〉 embossed out with a large and ample▪ Trea∣tise. •…•…. And herein you haue done in déede your parte, ney∣ther wyll I speake it to flatter you (thoughe I woulde not* 1.233 haue you waxe to prowde thereof) your aunsweres are farre beyonde all your fellowes, or maisters, or anye of your syde, for rayling, scoffing, lying, slaundering, quar∣relling digressions, and other your common places, ye may •…•…eare the pricke and prise. Yea the best of them all here∣in, are but benchewhi•…•…lers to you, that of so poore and weake, of so false and naughtie a cause, coulde make it beare so large and ample a Treatise. But when all is done, a good playne simple manne in hys dea∣ling, woulde tell yée in plaine Englishe, that all these flourishe•…•… are nothing else, but tryumphaunt trys•…•…ing toyes.

Againe, (say you) if I shoulde repeate or inculcate their* 1.234 aunsweres, then woulde master Nowell or some other rushe in vpon mee, with his ruffling rhetorike that he vseth against master Dorman, and master Doctor Harding, with a precise account and calculation what eyther master Dorman o•…•… ma∣ster doctor Harding borowed of Hosius, or either of them two of the other, and what I haue no we borowed of them both, or of eyther of them.

It were maruayle, had master Stapleton any shame, that he would for shame mention those broade borowings.

Howbeit that this is but a craftie preoccupation, borowing likewise from them, the most of his stuffe, and would not be vpbrayded therefore, nor called to account: a good simple plaine dealing man may soone espie this preuention.

Nowe that he hath cast all his doubts that encumbred him, like a circumspect man, bicause he woulde haue hys aunswere large and ample: and hath made his preoccupa∣tion, vnder the name of borowing, to steale hereafter what he will from his fellowes, knowing he might be bolde with them, who had by like borowing 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the s•…•…ne from o∣thers: leauing the short aunswere that he chose before, hée chooseth two for more suretie, that if the one fayle him, the other may helpe at a pi•…•…che.

But on the one syde (sayeth he) least anye of the good* 1.235 brethren, shoulde surmile vppon my silence any suche dis∣trust▪ I will compendiously as the matter shall require ab∣bridge their aunsweres, and that master Horne shall thinke that our stuffe is not all spent▪ I shall on the other syde for a surplussage, adioyne some other things to our opponent accomodate. An Almonde for Parate, so finely our student begins to speake, that a good plaine simple man can scarce vnderstande his 〈◊〉〈◊〉 termes.

But this is the effect of it, we shall now haue new stuffe of some olde store, (good stuffe and God will) for all their stuffe as he crakes, is not yet spent, but I perceyue it goeth harde with them in their store house, and that this stuffe is some of the last cast, God sende it be not such stale stuffe, when it comes to the view, as Cardinall Campeius moiles did bring into Englande, and vttered in Cheape side. But such as it is we must take it in good worth, it is the best he hath to answere the Bishops ensample withall.

The first ensample is of Moses, in whome the By∣shop* 1.236 noteth thrée things. First that he was the supreme gouernour of Gods people. Secondly, that hée ordred and set forth Gods true Religion, wyth

great regarde and care, prescribing aswell to Aaron and the Leuites, as to the people. Thirdly, that he was not the chiefe priest, & therfore could not do them in suche res∣pect, but as he was supreme gouernour.

The first and the seconde propositions that Moses was the supreme gouernour, and that he did order and direct all things, M. St. graunteth. The thirde parte he denieth, and affirmeth that Moses was the chiefe priest, and in that respecte dyd all these foresayde thinges. This assertion he sayth he will proue, bothe by his masters olde, and by his owne surplusage of newe stuffe also. His argument of both these stuffes is this.

I say with M. D. Harding, and S. Augustine, that Moses* 1.237 was a Priest aswell as a Prince, I say the same with M. Dor∣man▪ with Philo Iudeus, with S. Hierome, and with S. Hie∣roms master, Gregorie Nazianzene:

Ergo, Moses was the chiefe Priest.

By the like reason, if M. St. be a priest, he might proue him selfe to be the Pope of Rome. He is a Romish priest: Ergo, he is the chiefe Romish priest, which is the pope. The one reason is as good as the other. But here he will cry out, and say I do him wrong to change his conclusion, for he in∣ferreth no such words, but these:

And so consequently Moses ensample serueth not your* 1.238 turne, but quite ouerturneth your assertion.

True it is in déed, this is your cōclusion, M. St. but what was the bishops assertion, which this ye say, quite ouertur∣nes was not this his assertion, that Moses was not the chiefe priest, and did not you denie this assertion, & affirme it to be an vntruth, saying, for Moses was the chiefe priest, as shal be proued? did ye not héere make promise to proue it? did ye not say, that to answere this example, ye had other freshe stuffe, not yet spent? must not then this stuffe be directed to this ende & conclusion, to fulfill your promise, & ouerturne the bishops assertion, which was, that Moses was not

the chiefe priest, but Aaron? and you should proue as ye haue freshly promised, that Moses was the chiefe Priest. And therfore if this be not your conclusion, ye subtilly & fal∣sly swerue frō the cōclusion that ye ought to haue cōcluded: ye performe not your promise to proue Moses the chiefe priest: nor your conclusion, as ye crake, ouerturnes the by∣shops assertion: which was that Moyses was not the chief priest, but Aaron. And therfore either this is your argument, Moses was a Priest, Ergo, he was chiefe Priest, or else ye conclude not agaynst the bishops assertion.

If ye say ye conclude this, al the world séeth what a fonde conclusion it is. And if ye haue a poleshorne priests crowne of your owne (as I doubt not but ye haue a faire one) ye may aswell conclude to your self the Popes triple crowne. And if ye cōclude it not, ye conclude not agaynst the bishop, nor fulfill your promise, for all your proues stande on this profe, that Moses was a priest. Nowe the question was not whether Moses was a priest, or no, which is another que∣stion in controuersie. But the question is, whether he or Aaron were the chiefe priest.

Yet will ye peraduenture say, though I haue herein (as ye haue proued) swarued from the directe conclusion in hande, that Moses was not the chiefe priest, nor kepte my promise, yea and made a scape in saying, that I ouerturned the bishops assertion, when I did not, or if I went about it, yet mine argument proued but a fonde reason, from priest to chiefe priest: yet in the ende I haue proued Moses a priest, and so consequently it serueth not your turne (vnlesse* 1.239 ye will king Henry the eight, and his sonne king Edwarde, yea & our gratious Queene to be a priest to) but rather quite ouerturneth your assertion: and think you M. Horne, that the Queenes authoritie doth iumpe agree with the authoritie of Moses in causes ecclesiasticall? then may she preache to the people as Moses did: then may she offer sacrifices as Moses did: then may she consecrate priests, as Moses did consecrate

Aaron and others: then may it be sayde of the imposition of handes, as was sayde of Moyses, Iosua the sonne of Nun was* 1.240 full of the spirite of wisdome, for Moses had put his hande vpon him. It must needes therefore followe that Moses was a priest, and that a high priest, whiche ye heere full peeuish∣ly denie.

Where ye aske, M. Stap. of the Byshop. And thinke ye M. Horne, that the Queenes authoritie do the iumpe agree with th'authoritie of Moses? might not the byshop demaund agayne the like of you, and thinke you▪ M. Stap. that euen your Popes authoritie, (admitting it were not the vsurped tyrannie which it is) dothe iumpe agree with the authoritie of Moyses? yea admitting also that question, that he was a Priest, and so consequently agayne it serueth not your turne, nor master D. Hardings, nor master Dor∣mans neither. I am sure, as ye confesse he was a priest, so ye will admit a difference betwéene your Pope and him, and euen so (since ye reason thus precisely of differences in the persons) ye ought also to haue made a difference betwéene Moyses his diuerse offices, and to haue giuen either office his proper actions, and so to haue applied them, and not to haue confounded them, admitting that he, one person, were both a Prince, and a Priest also, which hangs in controuersie for all your cited authors. But you reason confusedly à secundum quid ad simpliciter.

Moyses (by an especiall priuiledge) was a Prieste as well as a Prince, and thereby did preache, offer sa∣crifice, consecrate Aaron, lay imposition of handes, and did other offices of Priests, and many extraordinary things besides:

Ergo, Moses in that he was a Prince, not a Priest, in that he exercised ordinary gouernment ouer priests and all ecclesiastical persons and causes, as other Princes did after him▪ is not to be broughte for example for our christian princes to follow.

This is the plaine & full effect of your tale. And what an ilfauorde argument is this I pray you? but to hide this se∣quele after your fashion, ye would inserre another yet more darke conclusion, saying:

It must needes therfore follow, that Moses was a priest, & that a high priest, which ye heere full peenishly denie.

Doth this conclusion, M. Stap. if it were admitted, im∣proue the Byshops assertion? and yet this your conclusion standing on thrée partes, as it is not to the purpose, so is euery parte starke false, and like the maker thereof. For Moses by his prerogatiue, hauing especiall cōmaundement of God therto, might well do all those things, and yet it fol∣loweth not of any necessitie, that, as you say, he must néedes therfore haue bene a priest. Or if he had bene a priest, he must néedes therefore be a high priest: or if he had bene a high priest, that he must néedes be the highest priest. Nei∣ther did the byshop denie peeuishly, that he denied (as you full peeuishly, rashely, and like your selfe do iudge,) nor yet denied, or graunted, or spoke vpon, one way or other, whether Moses were priest, or a high priest, yea or no. But denied, and that truely, that Moses was not the highest or chiefe Priest. Which words ye durst not alleage, nor yet generally terme him the high priest, but ye say, a priest, and that a high priest, your selfe séeming euen by your spéeche, to graunt that the high priest or highest priest he was not. Nor ye can not cauill about your owne phrase, vnlesse ye will say it is all one, a Lorde, and the Lorde, a high priest, and the high priest, & so say ye ment the chiefe priest, when ye sayd, a high priest: for all the worlde séeth a great diffe∣rence betwéene these termes, and that your self did subtilly sée, to make the reader beléeue ye had performed your pro∣mise in prouing him to be the chiefe priest. And yet ye bring no profe, but onely say, a priest, and that a high priest, •…•…go, the highest priest So that if the reader more narro•…•…ly viewing your grosse sleight, shoulde chalenge ye, that you

haue not proued him the highest priest simply, no (will ye say to saue your honestie) I onely sayde, a priest, and a high Priest, and no more. But why do ye then belie the byshop, saying he denied that, that he medled not with, and proue not your matter in hande, nor kéepe touch with your reader in perfourming your promise, that Moses was the chiefe Priest? Haue ye learned so wel this subtill shift, that Om∣ne promissum est aut debitum aut dubium, Euery promise is eyther due or doubtfull? But howsoeuer ye will discharge your promise, this your doutfull conclusion neither dischar∣geth your falshood, nor impugneth the Bishoppes assertion, muche lesse ouerturnes it, that he was not the chiefe priest, but the chiefe Prince or gouernoure, and thereby did order and direct Gods true religion, bothe to all the Priestes and people, as the Bishop affirmed.

Nowe seeing he can by no meanes, neyther olde stuffe, nor newe stuffe, bring it about as he wold haue it, nor proue him to be the highest Priest, he will leaue his promise, and lyke to the Fore that would eate no Grapes, when he could not come by them, with all the leapes he coulde make, so M. Sta. will nowe, euen renounce his solemne marginall crake, that he promised to proue Moyses the chiefe prieste, and leaping at it, but euer leaping shorte, that he was a Priest, and a little higher, that he was a highe Priest, but he can not leape so high, to obtaine his purpose, that he was the highest Priest, he will now let him goe for béeing any Priest at all, and since he can not get the grape he wil none of it, but will hunt after an other praie.

I say now further with master Dorman (sayth he) that put* 1.241 the case Moses were no priest, yet this exāple frameth not so smoothly and closely to your purpose as ye weene, for Moses was a prophet, and that such a prophetas the like was not a∣gaine. Giue me now M. Horne Princes, prophetes, giue mee P•…•…nces and lawmakers by especiall order and appointement ordeined of God, to whose wordes God certainly wold haue

giuen as great authoritie, as he would and commaunded to be giuen to Moses, and then perchaunce I will saye that ye saye somewhat well to the purpose. Againe Moyses was suche a speciall Prophete, and so singularly chosen of God to bee hearde and obeyed in all thinges, that he is in the holy Scrip∣ture euidently compared to Christe himselfe: compared, I saye, in the office of teachyng and instructing. Moyses in the Deuteronom, foretelling the Iewes of a Messias to come,* 1.242 sayeth: The Lorde thy God will rayse thee vp a Prophete from among thyne owne nation, and of thy brethren, suche an one as my selfe, him thou shalt heare. And this so spo∣ken of Moyses in the olde Lawe, is in the nevve Testament auouched and repeated, firste by S. Peter the chiefe apostle, and nexte by Saint Stephan the firste martyr, and applyed to Chryste. If then Christe must be so heard and obeyed of vs,* 1.243 as was Moyses of the Ievves, no doubte as Christe is a king, a Prince, a Prophete, a Prieste, and a Bishoppe to vs: so vvas Moyses to them a Prince, a Prophete, a Priest, and a Bishoppe. As Christe is of vs to bee hearde and obeyed as well in all matters Ecclesiasticall as temporall (for no tem∣porall lawe can haue force agaynste the lawe of Christe a∣mong Christian men) so vvas Moyses to be hearde and o∣beyed of the Ievves in matters and causes as vvell tempo∣rall as spirituall. For vvhy? the Scripture is playne. Tan∣quam meipsum audietis, You shall heare that Prophete euen* 1.244 as my selfe. Shevve vs Master Horne any prince in the nevve Testamente so conditioned and endevved, and then make your argumente on Gods name. Verely any prince that novve is (namely in Ecclesiasticall gouernement) com∣pared vvyth Moyses, is as the Poete sayth: Impar congressus Achilli Troilus.

Yea forsoothe novve yee saye somethyng further, Mai∣ster Stapleton, as ye boaste: howbe•…•…it nothyng further in substaunce than youre fellowes before, but in flourish of Copia verborum, yee saye novve further in déede, And I

maye saye to you, it was high tyme to saye something fur∣ther•…•…: for hytherto all that ye haue sayde is nothyng.

Well saye you, nowe Put the case Moyses were no Prieste: I conclude then he was not hyghe Prieste, and so putting this case, yée put youre selfe in an yll case, that before ye made a false lying crake, and nowe with shame are fayne to giue it ouer. But if ye put the case (as ye say) like Master Dorman, then dare ye not abide, by this case neither lyke Wylliam Sommer, for so playde Master Dorman in putting this case, and so I feare in the ende ye must be fayne to do. Nay say you it frameth not so smoo∣thely and closely to youre purpose as ye vvene. Well Master Stapleton, it hath hitherto so framed, that ye are fayne to gyue ouer youre tackelyng, and forsake the per∣fourmaunce of youre promyse, and to séeke oute other shiftes of descante so that, althoughe ye woulde beare vs in hande, it frameth not so smoothelie, and closelie for the Bishoppe, as hée thinkes, yet you graunt thereby, that it frameth to his purpose. But as for your purpose, for all youre olde or newe stuffe, it neyther frameth wyde nor close, smoothe nor roughe, but bringes it out of frame. For what an argument call ye this?

Though Moyses was no prieste, yet Moyses was a pro∣phete so well as a Prince.

Ergo, Princes in that respect Moyses was a Prince, may not followe his princely steppes.

Was not Saule also for the while a Prophet: Num &* 1.245 Saul inter prophetas? Was not Debora a Prophetesse, and yet a Princesse too or Iudge ouer Israel? Was not Dauid a Prophete, and is commonly called Regius propheta, the Kingly Prophete? Neuerthelesse all Christian Princes maye and oughte to folowe his princely supreme gouer∣nement. And yet you cry, Giue me now M. Horne princes, prophetes, giue me princes and lawemakers by especiall or∣der and appoyntmente ordeined of GOD. Doe ye not

sée howe fondly ye reason, and howe ye confute your selfe▪* 1.246 Yée reason as thoughe there were no difference to be putte betwéene those especiall giftes and appointmentes: and the ordinarie gifte of their Princely authoritie, bycause one Prince had bothe, and that after an extraordinarie and es∣peciall sorte, but if those commaundementes, lawes, and giftes of prophecies, were suche specialties, (as you saye) or∣deined of God, then do your self seuer them from the prince ly authoritie. And why do ye then demaund suche preroga∣tiues in euery Prince, whiche they had not in resp•…•…▪ they were Princes, but in other especiall respects? But by this your fonde rule, if bycause they had suche especiall priuile∣ges, commaundementes, or giftes, therfore they are not to be broughte in for an example of the authoritie: then you must not alleage them, for the Priestes or bishops authori∣tie in Ecclesiast. causes neyther, except your Priests & Bi∣shops haue the lyke prerogatiues, and that God wold haue as great authoritie giuen to them, as he would and comman∣ded to be giuen to Moyses.

And thus your argument maketh directly againste your selfe. Yea, you may hereby exclude al Princes from al ciuil gouernement too, whiche if we proued they might haue, bi∣cause Moyses ordered and directed all the Iudiciall lawes of Gods people: may ye not replie on this fashion, and say, Giue me Princes and lawmakers by special order & appoint∣ment ordeined of God? For you knowe wée can giue you none in these lawes neyther, that are equall to Moyses. May not therfore Moyses ensample herein, be alleaged for the Princes authoritie in makyng ciuill lawes, bicause the Prince maketh them not, with suche speciall order and ap∣pointment ordeined of God as Moses did? Yes M. Stap. Moyses authoritie may well be alleaged for al Princes au∣thoritie, although they haue not the like gifts that Moyses, Iosue, or Dauid had. Yea those singular ornamentes of God in them, ioyned to their princely authoritie, make so 〈◊〉〈◊〉

an argument to feare Princes from doing the like things, bicause they haue not the like excellent giftes: that they be rather encouragementes, to set such singular Princes go∣uernement (as patternes to folow) euermore before their eyes, and the better those Princes were, the better theyr ensamples be.

Where as you reason contrarywise, such a Prince was more excellēt than princes be now, Ergo, our Princes now may not take example of him: but ye shoulde conclude, that they oughte to take example of him the rather. And euen for these causes, such Princes are examples to all other, bi∣cause they so excell all other. So men set their children in writing, to the best and most cunning penman, at the least to haue them come the nearer to him, so muche as they can though they cānot fully attain to his perfectiō, & not to say, tushe he writes too fine for them, and therfore they must not take ensamples of him. Yea, if a learned Schoolemaister were also an excellent diuine, myght not the same man be reckoned for a schoolemaister, yea rather for a paterne and ensample for other schoolemaisters to follow, bicause of his singular gift to traine the children vp in the feare & know∣ledge of God, so well as in the rudimentes of Grammer?

And will ye then debarre Moyses from being an exam∣ple to other Princes, bicause he was not only a Prince, but a Prophete also, bicause he had more excellente giftes and prerogatiues than other Princes haue?

But here, thynking thereby the more to abase and dashe Christian Princes oute of countenaunce, from taking ex∣ample of this excellente Prince Moyses, ye mounte so highe into the prayse of him, that lyke to the Fryer which in the prayse of saincte Frauncis, extolling him aboue all the Sainctes, aboue Seraphin and Cherubyn, yea aboue Christe, coulde fynde no place in Heauen to sette him in: so where in the prayse of Moyses, ye shoulde referre him vnto Christe, ye ouershoote your selfe, and referre Christe

vnto him, making Christe to be terminum à quo, and Mo∣ses terminum ad quem▪ Moyses sayeth (saye you) The Lorde thy God will rayse thee vp a prophete, from among thyne owne nation, and of thy brethren, suche a one as my selfe, him shalte thou heare.

Ergo, Ch•…•…ist is so to be hearde of vs, as Moyses was of the •…•…wes. Hereuppon preposterously ye inuerte the rea∣son backewarde, not from Moyses to Christe (of whome Moyses knowledged hym selfe but a fygure) but from Christe agayne to Moyses, as though Christe also were a fygure of him, saying: As Christe is a kyng a Prophet, a Prieste, and a Bishoppe to vs, so was Moyses to them a Prince▪ a Prophete, a Priest and a Bishop. As Christe is of vs to be hearde and obeyed •…•…s vvell in all matters Ecclesia∣sticall as temporall, so was Moyses to be hearde and obeyed of the Iewes, in matters and causes, as well temporall as spirituall.

What a manifest writhing of Scripture is this? Who playeth Cacus parte here, that drewe Hercules •…•…en by the tayles backwarde, and so stole them into his theeuish•…•… denne? Doe not you so hale this testimonie of Scripture backwarde, lyke the witche that sayde hir Pater noster backewarde, to make hir payle goe forewarde, saying, As Christe is King, Prophete, Prieste, and Bishop, so was Moyses: As Christe is to be hearde and obeyed, so was Moyses. Where by the testimonie alleaged, ye shold* 1.247 rather haue reasoned forwarde, thus: As Moyses was Prince, Prophet, priest & bishop to thē, so should Christ be to vs: As Moyses was hearde and obeyed of them, so shoulde Christe be of vs. This had bene the right and or∣derly reason, but you sawe, that then youre wresting the Text woulde soone be espyed: And that in swaruing from the hearing and obeying of the olde lawe of Moyses, and the Gospell of Christe, to all proportions of these pe•…•…ons offices, would be but an homely sequele to serue your •…•…ur∣pose,

and rather abase Christe, than serue any thyng for Moyses, to make him a Priest and a Bishop. And where you make Chryste a fygure of Moyses, to make Moyses also a Priest and a Bishoppe, bycause Chryste is so: the texte maketh a similitude from Moyses to Chryst, onely in eyther béeing a Prophete, and that the one Prophete and the other shoulde be heard and obeyed: But you turne it topsie turuie, and making Christes person represente Moyses person, conclude thereon not onely Prophete but Priest and Bishop also, which the texte citeth not, nor any other mentioneth in the scripture, that Moyses was priest and Bishop. Nor the Priesthood of Christe was prefigu∣red by Moyses priesthoode, (for that is a question whether Moyses were Priest at all or no,) but the Scripture ex∣pressely for Christes priesthoode, testifyeth, that Aarons Priesthoode in some respectes, but chiefly Melchis•…•…decks, were the onely fygures thereof, and not any Priesthood of Moyses, and therefore your selfe durste not flatly con∣clude before that hee was the chiefe Prieste, but a highe Priest: But dare ye saye the lyke of Christe, he was a hyghe Priest, but not the chiefe or hyghest Priest of all?

But when ye sawe a glimse, that this inuersed argu∣ment could not proue Moyses to be a lyke Priest to Christ nor bishoppe at al, nor that his béeing a Prophete, tooke a∣waye the ensample of his Princely authoritie: as ye did the residue, so ye subtilly inuerte and folde vp the con∣clusion. For, where it shoulde haue falne out thus: As Christe is of vs to hee hearde and obeyed, as vvell in all matters Ecclesiasticall as temporall: so vvas Moyses to bee hearde and obeyed of the Iewes, in all matters and causes as well spirituall as temporall, whiche were the playn conclusion: yée come indreaming and saye, in mat∣ters and causes as vvell temporall as spirituall, as thoughe the •…•…uestion were moued of temporall, not of spirituall matters▪ neither dare ye say all, as ye did in y^e former part.

But if ye replie that ye ment all, and so the proportion of your argument runneth, and that I do ye wrong to charge ye, with so lighte a matter, since the indefinite, is taken for the vniuersall: maye not I replie agayne, that ye doe the Bishop muche more treble wrong? that so often call and make suche outcryes for thys syllable, all, when soeuer he concludes, In matters so wel ecclesiastical as tem∣porall, Lo say you, he leaueth out, in all matters Ecclesiast. and temporall. Whiche althoughe it were no parte of his issue with M. Feckenham, and yet he settes it downe ofte∣ner than ye woulde haue it, though he be not in euery par∣ticular proofe bounde thereto: yet sée howe thys hitteth your selfe, that if ye leaue out this word (All) ye can make no good conclusion from Christe to Moyses at all.

Nowe when you haue thus Master Stapleton, prefer∣red Moyses before Christe, ye crie out vnto the Bishoppe, Shewe vs Master Horne any Prince in the newe Testamente so conditioned and endued, and then make youre argument on Gods name.

Haue you made your argument on Gods name M. Sta∣pleton? or not rather in his name that exalteth himselfe a∣boue all that is called God, when ye haue made the may∣ster serue as a fygure to the seruaunte, to serue youre purpose? But lette Moyses haue hys due estymation vnder Christe, and hys especiall prefiguryng of Chryste also, and all prerogatiues of dooyng any thyng for the tyme then, by Gods especiall appoyntmente, that Prin∣ces nowe can not doe: Yet on Gods name, maye anye man argue as the Bishoppe dyd, that Moyses care and re∣garde (béeyng the Prince of the Israelites) in settyng foorthe and ryghtely orderyng Gods true religion then: maye, and is, and oughte to be a paterne to all Christian Princes, to care and regarde in setting foorth and rightely ordering Gods true religion nowe.

And what though in this cōparison (although in déed i•…•… be

no comparison, as you call it, but an example) any christian Prince that now is, compared with Moyses, be Impar con∣gressus Achilli Troilus, as vneuen a match as Troilus to con∣tende with Achilles, may not therefore a christian Prince followe Moses examples? Why bring ye that Poets sen∣tence, M. St? what Prince goeth about to cōpare & contend with Moyses, and not rather submit them selues to his ex∣ample heerein? Ye slaunder christian Princes, ye deface Christes glory, ye belye Moyses, ye skippe from Priest to Prophet, from Prophet to Priest agayne, to delude the bi∣shops ensample, and yet all this will not frame, neither smoothly nor roughly to your purpose. Whiche when ye perceiue, leauing all these shifts of descant, to infringe the authoritie of this first example, that vrgeth you so sore, that ye can not tell what to say vnto it, but are driuen to the harde wall, and that all store, olde stuffe, and new stuffe is cleane spent: then as a desperate man ye quite denie all examples, either of Moyses, or of any that hereafter shall be alleaged, and •…•…ée for sanctuarie once agayne, to the place of the Deuteronomie, mentioned in the former diuision, of the doubts arising betweene bloud and bloud, plea and plea,* 1.248 leprie and leprie, to be determined by the priestes & Iudge. And héere clayming sanctuarie, and remouing al examples:

And the lawier sayth (say you) legibus non exemplis iudi∣catur,* 1.249 VVe muste iudge according to the precise rule of the lawe, and not by examples: extraordinary doings enforce no ordinary prescription or rule. The ordinary rule of priests iudgements without whyes and whats, and suche other try∣fling importune instances, as ye are wont to make agaynst it, by the lawe of Moyses, and by your owne chapter before alleaged in doubtfull cases, muste absolutely vpon payne of death be obeyed. By this rule of the lawe you must measure all the examples following, of kinges and princes vnder this la•…•…e. Ye muste square your examples to the rule, and not the rule to the examples, vnlesse ye will make of the lawe of

God Lesbiam regulam, and bothe vnskilfully and vnorderly worke therwith. And hereon as a ruled case ye set downe your marginall iudgement. Men must iudge by lawe, and not by examples.

If ye will not, M. St. be iudged by examples, wherefore do ye take vpon you to defende M. Feckenham, and im∣pugne the byshop? For one of the foure meanes whereby he desireth to haue his issue proued, and will be iudged by, is practise: which altogither ye wot, standeth of examples, and therfore the byshop proueth it by examples. And if you will now flée from the authoritie of examples, ye should at the beginning haue striken off, one of those foure meanes to haue the issue proued by, and not first to admit them, and •…•…id the byshop go on, and say ye will yeelde also if, he proue ought by any of those foure meanes, and when he hath so proued the same, by suche examples as first with al shiftes ye labour to answere, and when ye can not answere to any purpose, will ye now at length come in crying, with an humaine lawiers shift, against the examples of Gods eter∣nall worde, & say, legibus, non exemplis, iudicatur, men muste iudge by law, and not by examples? is this your indifferent dealing, M. St? But of what opiniō I pray you, be you, that* 1.250 dare reiect the ensamples conteined in the holy scripture? & make a difference betwéene them and rules? do ye lyken them to other worldly examples? are they not also rules, if they be examples of godly men, for vs to folow: if they be examples of wicked men, for vs to flée? Doth not S. Paule so teache vs, after he had cited many examples of the olde Testament, saying: H•…•…c autem omma in figura illis contige∣bant.* 1.251 &c. All these things hapned to them for ensamples, and are written to admonishe vs, vpon whome the endes of the worlde are come. Thus maketh he rules of these examples to be ware the like. And your selfe that héere refuse them, if this or any other ensamples should neuer so little sée me •…•…o serue your turne, or may with any countenance of proba∣bilitie

be wrested to it: there by and by ye will be iudged by ensamples, and maruellous eloquently dilate them, omit∣ting nothing that might eache forwarde your cause, yea though in steade of an example of the scripture, it be but a tale of your golden lying legende. This is afterward in all your Popish historiographers, your common fashion, as the Reader shall perceyue. And héere ye will not in any wise the matter to be iudged by examples of the Scrip∣ture. For then it were to euident by many and manyfest examples, the iudgement would goe agaynst you. The examples of Gods worde woulde soone ouerthrow you, and therfore you playnly refuse nowe at the length to be iud∣ged by them.

But to bleare the simples eyes, ye alleage that extraor∣dinarie doings enforce no ordinary prescription or rule.* 1.252

As who say the byshop alleaged suche doings of Mases as were extraordinary, and not rather suche his doings, as other godly princes did besides him the like, it is your selfe, M. St. that recken vp his prophecies, his making speciall lawes appoynted of God, and other his extraordinary gifts & doings: and not the bishop. And therfore this is but one of your ordinary shiftes, vnder the pretence of extraordinarie doings, to denie flatly in the end al exāples brought against you, and say, men must not iudge by examples. But wherby wil ye be iudged then? by the rule, say you, of the chapter going before, that the Priests & the iudges iudgement, in* 1.253 doubtful cases, without whies and whats, must absolutely be obeyed vpon payne of death. By this rule of the lawe, you muste measure all the examples following, of Kinges and Princes vnder this lawe.

If this be your rule, M. Stap. this is ruled ouer alreadie. Which besides that it hath shewed many of your impudent falshods, in belying and wresting the place, so it be wrayeth also your extreme folly, ignorance, maliciousnesse, and ar∣rogancie, besides the weakenesse, yea and desperation of

your whole cause, to flée from examples, and depende on* 1.254 this sentence. First, this rule was but the Iudiciall lawe of the Iewes, and so it toucheth not vs. Secondly, the cases mentioned in this rule, were not matters of religion, but ciuill cases of strife betwéene neighbour and neighbour, and therfore the rule of that lawe was no absolute rule in all cases to them, or is any rule at all in any case to vs, and is bothe to them and vs, manyfestly wrested of you, to all cases of religion: and therefore in this controuersie, of all spirituall or ecclesiasticall matters, is alleaged out of place and season. Thirdly, the doing herein appertayned not to the Priests alone, but the sitting and determination of the truthe of the doubt to them, and the ratifying decrée to the Iudge or Prince. Fourthly, it was not absolutely done, without whies and whats, as you pretende, but that, euen by your owne popishe doctours mindes, men might not onely haue asked why and what, but vtterly haue refused it, had it bene, not according to the lawe. But to beare men in hande, as the Papistes would, that the Crowe is white, and we muste not say the contrarie, bicause (as the Pharisies saide, we haue a lawe, and by that lawe he ought to dye) so* 1.255 sayth M. Stap. we haue a rule, and by this rule ye muste obey the Priestes sentence in all doubtes whatsoeuer he sayth without any whies and whats therto. And whatsoeuer examples ye haue to alleage, they must all be measured and squared by our rule, otherwise ye worke vnskilfully and vn∣orderly, making of the lawe of God Lesbiam regulam, a rule to bowe euery way that ye would haue it.

But who are those that make of the lawe of God Lesbiam regulam, to runne on foure whéeles to euery tropologicall, anagogicall, mysticall, and morall sense, that ye liste to ap∣plie it: who it is that by this rule, would make the mani∣fest words of Moses Lesbiam regulam, applying them backe∣warde and forwarde as he liste, and wresteth Christ to Moyses, and would rule Christ vnder Moyses ruler: who

it is that would bring all examples to one rule, and so make his owne rule Lesbiam regulam also: who they be that call the scripture not onely Lesbiam regulam, but besides giue it other foule and shamefull tearmes: I trust master Staple∣ton you are not ignorant. But euer ye were best to obiect that to vs, wherein ye are culpable most your selfe, for thus it becommeth an impudent man in a desperate cause to do. And so yelustily knit vp the matter, that This one answere might well serue for all the kings doings now follo∣wing, sauing that I will (say you) particulerly descende to e∣uery one, and so for euery one say somewhat.

What somewhat ye will say to other ensamples, we shall then sée somewhat as ye descende vnto them, and som∣what may we sée alreadie by this, whereby ye count ye haue answered all to come. The somewhat and summe of this great answere is this: A canceled rule, perteyning nothing to Christian men to follow, nor being euer of any spirituall matters, but indiciall and ciuill cases, for the time being, wherein the Prince had as much to doe, or more than the Priests, is a fitte rule and absolute, in all ecclesiasticall and religion cases, to rule ouer all Christian Kings, Quéenes, and Princes, vppon paine of death to be ruled by popishe priestes: but an expresse ensample of a most godly Prince, to set forth, order and direct Gods true religion, with great regarde and care, is no fitte ensample for Christian Prin∣ces to follow. And the reason is, bicause, that Prince had, besides that he was a Prince, some especiall prerogatiues, and other excellent giftes of God. Here is the full effect of your whole answere, which how effectuall it is to infringe the Bishops assertion, let all the worlde be indge. And yet ye so triumphe hereon, that as it were some instie freshe Champion, hauing beaten all downe before him, ye crie out for another aduersarie.

Here I wish (say you) to encounter with master Nowell.* 1.256 Ye are all heart to the hard héeles I sée M. St. and were

it not herein that ye resemble the wise captayne, that in the beginning you mentioned out of Luke. 14: I woulde haue sayde this chalenge had procéeded of a noble and hawte •…•…o∣rage, but bicause it wanteth that naturall wisdo•…•…e and foresight, so rashly to runne vpon one aduersarie, & hauing more than bothe your handfuls with him, yet more fond∣ly to chalenge another on your toppe, your ca•…•…se beein•…•… so badde, and your selfe so weake and vnskilfull a souldiour withall: all wise men will iudge it in you neither pollicie nor manhoode, but that in your foole hardie presumption ye play but the desperate Dicke, if not a Thom of L•…•…d∣lem.

The. 12. Diuision.

NExt to Moses the Bishop adioyneth the ensample of* 1.257 Iosue, prouing by diuers testimonies and doings of Iosue, that the supreme gouernement in all ecclesias•…•…i also well as temporall causes, was committed to him, •…•…ot to Eleazar the high priest, who onely had the ministration of things belonging to the priestly office.

M. Stap. in al the residue of the examples, •…•…auing before* 1.258 promised to be as briefe as he may: yet to amplifie his an∣swere, least it should be too briefe, or his counterb•…•…ast too small, in the beginning, and so throughout his answers, picketh bye quarels at the Apologie, at master Nowell, at the Conuocation, and other thinges not to the present purpose, but for any materiall or directe answere to any of Iosues doinges, he vseth nothing but méere shiftes, or very childishe arguments.

First to Iosue his example generally. M. D. Harding* 1.259 (sayth he) sheweth that allegation to importe no chiefe rule in spirituall matters as in deede it doth not. As though the whole matter (M Stap.) muste be determined by •…•…hat so euer your M. D. Harding hath sayde, and you with it is

learned proofe, in deede it dothe not haue confirmed your masters saying. Now as though this were, betwéene his allegation and your cōfirmation, a sufficient and ful proo•…•…e, ye set downe theron your marginall note, as a cleare case, Iosue no supreme gouernour in all ecclesiasticall causes.

What kinde of arguing call ye this, M. Stapl? but sée howe soone at the first ye confounde your selfe, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that Iosue had the gouernement in eccleuasticall matters. For where ye picke by quarels, already answered, agaynst the Apologie and master Nowell, about this phrase to goe* 1.260 foorth and come in, and will not haue it vnderstoode onely of going and comming to and fro the warres, as M. Nowell hath fully proued it dothe, as also Ruvi 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Aben •…•…zra, do expounde it, and Lyra expresseth the mea∣ning of the phrase, do a quod no•…•… si•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ad labores sed pri∣•…•…us,* 1.261 so that he be not the last but the first to labour.

But say yau, Immediatly before it is generally vvritten,* 1.262 prohoc si quid agendum crit, Eleazar sacerdos consulet domi∣num. For him (meaning Iosue) Eleazar 〈◊〉〈◊〉 aske counsell of God when any thing is to be done. In which words we see euident•…•…y, that Iosue whatsoeuer he did touching the gouer∣ning of the people in ecclesiasticall matters, he did nothing of him selfe, but was in all suche matters instructed of Elea∣zarus the high Priest.

Doe ye not see withal euidently, master Stapleton, that admitting this to be vnderstood so generally as you pretēd, howe your selfe doe piaynly graunte, that the gouerne∣ment in ecclesiasticall matters appertayned to Iosue, in saying: VVhat soeuer he did touching the gouerning of the people in ecclesiasticall matters: and what now will ye make Iosue? a Priest? no say you, but in all such thinges* 1.263 he was instructed of Eleazarus the highe Priest. VVhose parte therfore it was alwayes to aske counsell of God, when Iosu•…•… had anything to doe. Why, what then M. Stap. the question is not asked heere of asking counsell, who asked it

of God, or whether Iosue asked it of Eleazar, but by whose gouernment it was done. We graunt the Princes shoulde aske counsell in all ecclesiasticall matters of their godlye learned clergie, and they shoulde aske it of God, that is to say, of his holy worde, wherein he hath reuealed his will. But what letteth this asking counsell, the ordering, doing,* 1.264 setting forth, and gouerning of those ecclesiasticall matters, to be in the Prince? What hindreth this, that the Prince ought to aske counsell also in euery weightie ciuill affayre, the chiefe gouernment thereof to be in the Prince? Though he follow in all points, the aduice of his counsellers, yet haue not they the chiefe authoritie? This exception therefore of asking counsell, taketh not away your graunt, that Iosue had the doing of those things that touched the gouerning of the people in ecclesiasticall matters. And so is this a fit en∣sample, euen by your owne flatconfession. And with all ye haue graunted the full issue, that godly Princes haue and may take vpon them such gouernment in ec∣clesiasticall causes, as the Q. maiestie now doth.

Here if ye would flée touch, and say ye graunt Iosue had the gouernement in causes ecclesiasticall, but not the su∣preme gouernment: although this be but a shifting toy, so long as he did not those things by any others gouernance, (and yet is it much more than your fellowes, or your selfe otherwhiles will confesse, that he was any gouernour at all in ecclesiasticall matters: so contrarie ye are to your fello∣wes and your selfe) yet what can ye shew, why, as ye graūt Iosue to be gouernour: so he should not be supreme gouer∣nour also, but be subiect to another? If ye stand on this ar∣gument: Iosue must in all things aske counsell of the Priest: Ergo, Iosue in all things is subiect to the Priestes iudgement: By this argument you will make the kinges counsell to be the kings supreme gouernours to. But they for all theyr good counsell giuen to the king, be he neuer so much b•…•…und to take it, are but his subiectes still therein, and he their so∣ueraigne

Lord, for by him when al their coūsell is done, the thing must be set forth, & established through his authoritie. As therfore you haue graūted, Iosue had y^e gouerning of the people in ecclesiastical matters: so this exceptiō doth nothing embarre his supreme gouernment therein, but rather esta∣blish it, that in all his doings were they neuer so generall, the priest was but the counsellour, first learning of God, and then instructing his Prince: but the gouerning and setting forth thereof belonged vnto Iosue. And to reason on the contrarie, from asking or giuing counsel and instruc∣tion, to a chiefe authoritie: or from following good counsell, to obedience and subiection: is but an homely argument, and fitte for suche a counsellour as your selfe are M. Stap.* 1.265

But when ye sée this weakenesse of your argument, by and by you start backe againe from all that you haue sayd. And as before ye forsooke the ensamples from Moyses, and referred them to your foresayde wrested rule, so woulde ye nowe also deale with Iosue, that if the Priestes counselling would not inferre his authoritie, yet his iudgement should as ye thought enforce it. Your argument is this.

The Priest and the Iudge must discusse all doubtes of* 1.266 bloud, strife, cleane, and vncleane.

Ergo all the testimonies of the holy scripture brought* 1.267 forth by master Nowell, and before him by master Horne, can not induce supremacie in causes ecclesiasticall, but the execution of the high Priestes or lawes commaundement.

This friuolous argument, grounded on this impertinent and weake ankerholde, which master Stapleton maketh his generall rule and succour, whensoeuer he is driuen to a plunge, then backe againe to this, as a foxe to his earth: is so fully aunswered and confuted, that it were but super∣fluous to stande any longer about it.

And here (sayth master Stapleton) I will not quarrell* 1.268 with master Nowell. &c.

Under pretence that he will not, he beginnes to picke

by quarrelles with him. A pretie figure he will not, but he doth. The quarels are, a couple of mi•…•…quotings of figures for 33. 34. for 23. 24. For vsing such examples as the Bishop of Winchester doth. For detecting M. Dormans s•…•…ealth, the noting wherof, he calleth childish and boyish rheto•…•…ike, for feare in deede that his owne childishe and boyish rheto∣rike (stealing so many sentences, arguments, and in maner whole leaues, from Doctor Harding and master Dorman, as master Dorman stale from Hosius & ma•…•…ler Harding) shoulde be also detected as master Dormans is, and there∣fore he flourisheth it out with his common places, but the stuffe is the olde st•…•…ffe still, though newe furbished for ru∣sting to seeme the fresher to the shewe.

After he hath done with M. Nowell he returneth to Io∣sue, and least he should seeme to haue answered no particu∣ler point, he choseth out one of Iosue his doings in the place of all the rest alleged, not so much to make any answere at all to the obiection thereof, as thereby to picke yet another by quarrell, and so to shake of the matter, as though he had made a clerkly answere thereto. The Bishop shewed how at the appoyntment of Iosue, the priestes 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the arke of Couenant, and placed the same: & so goeth on through many perticuler actions, that decla•…•…e Iosues supreme gouernment & ordring of ecclesi matters. To this when M. St should directly answere, whether this declare an authoritie of the Prince, euer the priestes in ec∣clesiasticall matters yea or no, in s•…•…eed of answere he sayth.

But for the doyng of Io•…•…ue, I will further note, that then* 1.269 the Priestes tooke vp the arke of couenant, and went before the people. But I pray you master Horne, how was this ob∣serued of la•…•…e yeares, when the lay men durst aduenture to take the guiding of the arke, and go before the Priestes, and not suffer the priests to go before them? And durst alter the state of Christian religion, agaynst the will and minde of •…•…he B. & the whole clergie then at their conuocation as•…•…embled?

And I pray you againe master Stapleton. What doth this answere the Bishops proposition? •…•…t shew•…•…th your shifting, it detecteth your malice, that wit•…•…ingly slaunder your most grac•…•…ous pri•…•…ce, & natiue countrey. Hir Maiestie hath onely done therein, euen after the example of this moste Godly pri•…•…ce Iosue. In cōmaunding the arke, that is is to say gods holye worde, in the syncere setting forth of it, by the godly ministers thereof, to be caried before hir, & hir subiects. And when your popish pr•…•…lates & priests (which in deed are ney∣ther pre•…•…ates nor prieus) refused •…•…o to cary it, otherwise thā after your o•…•…n devises to cart it, •…•…ot after Gods 〈◊〉〈◊〉, or rather would not cary it about at al, but bury it vn∣der a bushel, •…•… in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 therof cary about ma•…•…mets & toyes, to m•…•…ke 〈◊〉〈◊〉 peopl•…•… commit most barbarous idolatrie: hir high •…•…sse as 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉, hath abolished iuch caryage: and as did Salo 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 out of office your 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉, aud 〈◊〉〈◊〉 clergie, and placed other 〈◊〉〈◊〉, & painful 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in their •…•…ooues, to cary this erke as goo hath appointed it, before hir highnes & all hir people.

Now when ye haue thus 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the prince, the clergie, the whole realme, and yet answered not one worde to the obiection: VVell (say you) •…•…et t•…•…ts pal•…•…e for this present, I say* 1.270 no 〈◊〉〈◊〉 for Iosue his doing, sauing that otherwise they are not to be drawne into an ordinarie rule for that the spirite of God was certainly in him, and for that hee had part of Moses glorie, and the people commaunded to heare him, and those things that he did (wherof M. Nowell & M. Horne would in∣ferre a soueraigntie in causes spiritual) he did them by the ex∣presse commaundement of God. And from such princes to all princes indifferently, to gather the like preheminence in all poynts were no sure and found gathering and collection.

Your argument is this: those Princes in whom the spirit of God certainly is, and haue part of Moses glorie, and whom th•…•…▪ people are cōmaunded to heare, and whose doings are by Gods expresse cōmandement, are not ensamples for all godly

Princes to follow in their gouernments.

But such another was Iosue:

Ergo it were no sound gathering & collection, to set Iosue for ensample, for other Princes to follow. For that which ye inferre (of like preheminence in al points to Iosue) both ma∣keth your argument vicious, hauing more in the conclusion than is in any of the propositions: neyther doth the Bishop or any other contende for like prehemmence in all point, as Iosue had, but inferre of his ensample a like charge of their dueties, & a like care and regard of gouerning Gods people, to be required of thē, being princes & rulers as Iosue was. But where lerned you this wicked & false principle, wheron ye ground your argumnet? that the doings of any, are not to be set for examples for other Princes to follow, that had cer∣tainly the spirite of God in them, or that had a part of Moses glorie, or the people were commaunded to heare them, or bi∣cause they did their doings by the expresse commaundement of God, are they not a great deale the more to be set for en∣samples to follow? Would ye haue them follow such as certainly had the spirite of errour in them, suche lying Pa∣pistes as your selues? Woulde ye haue them follow your expresse commaundements, and then they were to be follo∣wed, but not if they followed the commaundements of God? Are those Princes not to be followed whome God com∣maundeth the people to heare: And are they to be followed whom you commaund the people to heare? If they be god∣ly Princes, God commaundeth all people both to heare them, and obey them, chiefly where they haue for warrant the expresse commaundement of God. So that by your wic∣ked principle no good nor godly princes ought to be drawne into example, for any other Princes to follow, but naughtie and wicked Princes, such as had so little any part or sparke of Moses glorie, that they had not the spirit of God in them, or at the least it is vncertaine whose spirite they had, such as the people were not commaunded to heare them, suche as

had not Gods expresse commaundement for their doinges, these are fitte examples with you for Princes to followe. Thus do ye shew how ye haue heretofore, & yet still would abuse Princes, making them so drunken with that cuppe of abhominations of the whore of Babilon, that they might take ensample of no good nor godly Prince.

But let vs sée howe substantially ye proue your maior. You reason by admitting the contrary thereto, ab absurdo, from a foule inconuenience that we should fall into, by ta∣king such Princes for example: or else fall into a •…•…oule con∣tradiction agaynst our selues.

Else if ye will haue your examples (say you) to proue and* 1.271 confirme, then as Iosue circumcided, so let the Prince baptise, and as Iosue sacrificed vpon an altare, so let the Prince in Cope & Surplesse celebrate your holy cōmunion: But these two things as peculier offices of Bishops and Priests. M No∣well excludeth flatly all Princes from, yea and sayth they ought to be vntouched of Prince or other person. Ergo, thus agayne, either ye iumble and iarre one from another, or else your argument (to bring Iosue for example to proue and confirme) falleth downe righte, choose whiche of bothe ye will.

Héere is, as M. Stap. thinketh, a marueilous Dilemma, and yet the absurditie therof moste easily anoyded, and the contradiction as playnly turned vpon him selfe. To the maior I answere, that as the one did these things, so dothe the other, and therfore the one is a fit example of the other. As Iosue then did circumcise, so the Prince nowe bapti∣seth. As Iosue did then sacrifice on an altare, so the Prince doth now celebrate, not ours (as he scornefully termes it) but the Lordes holy communion. Neither of them, by exe∣cuting them selues the fact, but by commaunding, appoyn∣ting, and ouerséeing the facte to be rightly executed by the ministers, to whom the doing apperteineth.

And that this was Iosue his doing, and not otherwise:

Lyra vpon these wordes, Et primum quidem benedixit popu∣lo,* 1.272 doth witnesse, And first of all he blessed the people, &c. Non est intelligendū quòd Iosue proprie loquendo benedixit po∣pulum, quòd hoc pertinet ad sacerdotum officium, sed imprecatus est bona populo, tanquàm princeps populi, post immolationē, prae∣dictā quam similiter fecit non per se, sed per sacerdotes. VVee must not vnderstand (these words he blessed the people) that* 1.273 Iosue in speaking him selfe did blesse them, for this apper∣teyned to the Priestes office. But Iosue as the Prince of the people wished well vnto them, after the offring afore sayde, whiche likewyse he did not by himselfe, but by the Priestes. And againe, Posthac legit omnia verba, &c. Then afterwarde he reade all the wordes of the lawe, the blessinges and cur∣sings according to all that is written in the booke of the law, there was not a worde that Moses had commaunded, whiche Iosue read not, before all the congregation of Israell, as well before the women and the children, as the straunger. &c. Non per se sed per sacerdotes vt praedictum est, coram omni multitudi∣nem Israel. &c. Not by him selfe, but by the priestes, as is be∣fore sayde, afore all the multitude of Israell.

And euen as he thus read and blessed by his commaun∣dement,* 1.274 and their ministerie: so saith Lyra, fecit immolatio∣nem similiter, he did offer sacrifice in like sort, not by him selfe, but by commaunding the minister to do it. And do ye thinke that he circumcised all the whole people of Israell with his owne handes, because the wordes are, circuncidit filios Israel? Do ye thinke bicause the bare wordes are, Igi∣tur* 1.275 Iosue de nocte consurgens mouit castra, that he remooued* 1.276 all their tents with his owne handes? and of the stones in Iordan, alios quoque duodcim lapides posuit in medio Iordanis alueo, that he set them in the riuer with his owne fingers Do ye thinke of the Citie and the King of Hai, succendit vr∣bem* 1.277 & fecit eam tumulum sempiternum, regem quo{que} eius suspen∣dit in patibulo, he burnt the Citie, and hee made it an heape* 1.278 for euer, and the King thereof he hanged on a gallowes, and

of the other Kinges Iosue smote them, and slewe them, and hanged them on fiue trees: all these thinges and a number of such other, as well seruile as other deedes, as well tem∣porall as ecclesiasticall, thinke you, bycause still all run∣neth vnder his name and his doing, that he did them hym selfe? Or rather gather thereon, that syth he did not these things himselfe, and yet so well in ecclesiasticall as other matters, all beareth the name alone of him, it importeth his supreme gouerment and direction of them. So little is there any absurditie, in the comparison of these doings, but your owne absurde mistaking and reasoning so absurdly on them, not distinguishing betwene the doing of these things and the maner of doing them.

To the minor likewise I answere, there is no contradic∣tion, iumbling, or iarring, betwene the Bishop and master Nowell therein. For of the same minde that the one is, is the other also, as the Bishop hath declared many times in his answere, euer obseruing this destinction betwéene the doing of the fact, and the ouersight in appoynting the fact to be done. But this, of a peuish selfe will, ye will not vnder∣stande. And so here bicause the wordes are simplie spoken that Iosue did such things, ye vnderstande it that personal∣ly he executed the doing of them. But what now if you doe contrarie your owne selfe, and talking after of this same partie, confesse that the doing of these and such like things▪ must be vnderstoode by this sayde maner of anothers mini∣sterie? May ye not then most worthely here your owne wordes returned on your selfe, that your argument falleth downe right (if euer it stoode vpright) your selfe, in playne spéeche hurling it downe? and that eyther here or there yée speake agaynst your owne conscience, your owne sayings iumbling and iarring one from another, and so ye encurre eyther the absurditie or the contradiction, choose which of both you will.

The. 13. Diuision.

The next ensample of the Byshop is of Dauid, how God* 1.279 appoynted him king, not onely for the people to liue in ci∣ul•…•… peace and hones•…•…ie, but chiefly that by Dauids gouern∣ment, care and zeale therein, they mighte be fos•…•… red vp in Gods true religion, decayed among them by the negligent reigne of king Saule. This the Eyshop proued by king Dauids Actes, in ordering, disposing, reforming the priests and Leuites in their offices and functions ecclesiasticall, in appoynting howe the Arke shoulde be borne. For sacri∣fising, and blessing, for ordeining Psalmes, singers, instru∣ments, officers, and all other things, for the setting foorthe of the diuine seruice, and Gods true religion. Whiche ar∣gueth that he was their supreme gouernour in all ecclesia∣sticall causes.

Master Stap. first for a briefe summarie answere to* 1.280 these doings of Dauid, clappeth downe this marginal note:

Dauid in all these matters determined no doctrine, nor altered any religion agaynst the Priestes willes of his owne supreme authoritie.

This note is bothe malicious and slaunderous, as though we ascribed to the Quéenes Maiestie, or she tooke vpon hir such authoritie, and that of hir owne sway and wil, against all hir Clergies minde and counsell, to determine and al∣ter what religion pleaseth or displeaseth hir. This is the Popes clayme and tyrannie, and not oure Princes, or any other godly Princes dooing. And yet this note is part∣ly false, for king Dauid agaynst the will of hys idle Priestes, caused the misordering of the Arke to be refor∣med. And did many other thinges about Religion, to the which the Priests obeyed. And determined doctrine also, euen by master Stapl. owne confession in this Chapter. The first argument that master Stapl. maketh is this:

Bothe M. Dorman, and M. D. Harding affyrme that the* 1.281

proceedings of king Dauid are nothing preiudiciall to the ecclesiasticall authoritie in redressing of disorders before committed, or doing suche thinges as are heere rehearsed:

Ergo, They inferre no supreme gouernment ouer cau∣ses ecclesiasticall.

This argument standeth altogither vpon the authoritie of his good masters. M. Dorman, and M. D. Harding, from whome he boroweth his stuffe. For, the moste of his owne surplusage, is but his common places of descant on them. And as they be so great in his bookes, so he reasoneth as Pythagoras schollers had wont to reason of their master, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, he sayde so: Ergo, it is so: and thus argueth M. Stap. Bothe M. Dorman, and M. D. Harding affirme it: Ergo, it is true. But what do they affirme?

That the proceedings of king Dauid in redressing disor∣ders before committed, or doing suche things as heere are rehearsed, are nothing preiudiciall to the ecclesiasticall au∣thoritie.

Why M. Stap. who sayth against them, or you herein? king Dauids procéedings in deede, were nothing preiudi∣cial to the ecclesiasticall authoritie of persons ecclesiasticall, they executed all their functions still belonging to their au∣thoritie. And bicause his procéedings in redressing suche disorders, and all other things that he did, declare moste plainly his supreme gouernement, in setting foorthe and directing Gods true religion, and yet were no preiudice to the Priests ecclesiasticall authoritie: it followeth ther vpon* 1.282 that the supreme gouernment, in setting foorth Gods true religion, in correcting, & repressing ecclesiastical disorders, in reducing and directing good orders, and al other doings here rehearsed, that ye confesse king Dauid did, are no parte of the Priestes ecclesiasticall authoritie, for then in doing them, he should haue done things preiudicial therevnto, and therfore they are no parts therof, but of king Dauids royal authoritie. And this while fondly ye woulde as it were,

ouerpresse vs, with suche great mens authoritie as is M. Dorman, & M. D. Harding: or euer ye be aware ye make them flatly giue verdite agaynst you, & with vs. A Gods name bring their authoritie so agaynst vs as oft as ye wil, neither M. Dorman nor M. D. Harding will giue ye great thanks therfore. But for all this ye will bring vs more of D. Hardings stuffe.

As master D. Harding (say you) noteth, king Dauids* 1.283 proceedings in redressing disorders before committed or do∣ing suche things as are heere rehearsed, do no more employ a supremacie in him, then the reformation of religion made by Queene Mary.

But that, ye wot well, employeth in hir no suche supre∣macie.

Ergo, No more do those procéedings in him.

This argument stādeth wholly vpō his M. D. Hardings authoritie alone, bicause he hath noted that the one dyd no more than the other, & that their doings were alike héerein: But the doings of the one inferre no supremacie, Ergo, the others neither. But if we might be so bolde as to denie this your maior, or rather your maxima or principle that ye build vpon of D. Hardings comparison, in making king Dauids doings to be none other, but such as were Quéene Maries: Where were then your argument, M. St? ye talked righte now of Impar congressus Achilli Troilus, the match betwene* 1.284 Troilus & Achilles was vneuē, but here is a gret deale more inferiour match betwéene K. Dauid & Q. Mary. Yea their doings were so little alike, that they were cleane contrarie. For, although she were a princesse of famous memorie, yet herein your popish Prelates made hir so beléeue them, that she durst not redresse disorders in the Clergie at al, but suf∣fred the Pope and his prelates to reduce their false religi∣on. Nor she retayned the estate that belonged to hir of su∣preme gouernment, but vtterly renounced it. And therfore that reformation, or rather deformation, was not made at

all by hir, nor in hir name, but by the Pope and his Pope∣lings, she only permitting it▪ But if ye meane as ye speake, that it was made by hi•…•… in d•…•…de, & as your Massers words are, Queene Mary did it, by the meanes of the Priest so that she was the doer, and they were but the m•…•…anes, she was the maker, and they but hir instruments: then your similitude goeth agaynst you, and proueth a supremacie in hir, as was in Dauid. But ye speake colorably to make in suche a 〈◊〉〈◊〉, some proportion in speeche of a si∣militude. For in very déede, what soeuer ye say, the matter went so, that your popishe byshops and priestes were the doers of all. And she good Lady, was but your instrument and meane, whereby ye killed Christ in his members as did the high priestes kill Christ in his body, vnder Pontius Pilate. I speake not to compare hir, béeing hir selfe a noble* 1.285 Christian Prince, to him, béeing a heathen tyrant: but to shewe how you abused hi•…•… authoritie, as the Iewes did his.

But as for king Dauid, as he did those things, in redres∣sing disorders, and all other noted by the Bishop (whiche your selfe can not denie) so he was the principall in the dooing of them, and he reformed euen the Priestes them selues. And thoughe in some thinges he vsed the Priestes as meanes, yet what dothe this infringe his supreme authoritie, and not rather proue it? And thus your other argument from D. Hardinges authoritie, by D. Har∣dinges owne confession, that they were but the meanes, and king Dauid, and Quéene Mary the doers of suche ecclesiasticall matters, once agayne maketh quite agaynst you, and your master D. Harding also, and establi∣sheth the Princes supreme gouernement ouer the priests and all. I areade ye beware, since ye stande so muche vpon your masters woordes héerein, that if ye alleage hys authoritie any more, ye bryng hym foorthe to bet∣ter, purpose, or else whyle yee thynke by clawyng hym thus, to wynne hys good fauour, yee gette hys

heauy displeasure, and that he answere ye flatly, non hercule veniam tertio, he will not come at your cal. Howbeit ye will once agayne in hope of better lucke bring him foorth, and alleage his authoritie better than ye haue done hitherto.

Besides that (say you) it is to be considered, as M. D. Har∣ding* 1.286 toucheth, that he passed other Princes herein, bicause he had the gifte of prophecie. So that neither those thinges that the Apologie sheweth of Dauid, or those that ye and master Nowell adde therevnto for the fortification of the sayde superioritie, can by any meanes induce it.

This friuolous argument, he was a Prophet also aswell as a Prince, Ergo, his superioritie in that he was a Prince, can not be alleaged for other Princes to followe: ye vsed before, as your owne freshe stuffe, to shifte off Moses en∣sample: but as it nothing helped your cause then, no more dothe it nowe. Onely it detecteth héere, your vayne crake there, of vnspent stuffe, where in déede it was olde rotten stuffe, spent before by D. Harding on king Dauid, as héere your selfe cōfesse: yet there ye brought it as a notable fresh surplusage, beyonde all that had bene sayde. But as you thus of D. Hardings olde scroppes héere, would haue made vs there newe fresh stuffe of your owne, wherby the allea∣ging of him agayne this third time openeth your shame: so yet once agayne ye make your M. D. Harding, and your selfe for companie, confounde your owne tales, and speake contrarie to your selues.

Right now ye sayde, and alleaged your masters autho∣ritie for it, that king Dauids doings were no more than Queene Maries doings, to employ a supremacie. Nowe ye say agayne, and like wise alleage your master for it, that king Dauid passed other princes heerein, bicause he had the gifte of prophecie. If he passed other princes héerein, then he passed Quéene Mary, whome many other Princes haue also héerein passed: and so his doings were more than were Quéene Maries doings héerein. For who knowe not that

she was no Prophete? and thus the oftner ye alleage your master, ye take your master tardie in one lie or another and make him still contrarie both himselfe and his cause al∣so. Againe, it King Dauid were a Prophete, as I graunt he was: a Prophete, ye wote, might and did determine doctrine, but your selfe sayde before, Dauid in all his doings determined no doctrine, and thus ye lie on your owne head, and make your master witnesse thereto. Well, leaue at the length to cite your masters authorities for shame master Stapleton, since ye can bring them out no handsomer, or howe well so euer ye haue brought them out to your ad∣uantage, since they be no better proues than that: He af∣firmeth, he noteth, he toucheth: as though all were gospell that master Doctor Harding affirmeth, noteth or toucheth. Are ye so fond to thinke any man would yéelde so soone vn∣to them, vnlesse he were as wise as your selfe?

But since none of all these reasons will serue, we shall now haue other stuffe of your owne, though not very fresh, but such stale refuse, as your masters haue refused, but to you all is fishe that commes to nette, ye do wisely to let go nothing, that maye any waye be wrested to helpe so yll a cause. And first ye reason from the authoritie of the scrip∣ture. In déede this is a better way than to reason from D. Hardings authoritie.

The Scripture (say you) in the sayde place by you and* 1.287 master Nowell alleaged, sayth that Dauid did worke iuxta omnia quae scripta sunt in lege domin•…•…, according to all things written in the lawe of God.

What conclusion can ye inferre hereon agaynst the Bi∣shops allegation of Dauid?

Ergo he had not an especiall care and regard in ordring and setting forth Gods true religion? if ye make the quite con∣trarie conclusion:

He did worke according to all things written in the lawe of God:

Ergo, as the B. sayth he had an especiall care and regard in ordring & directing Gods true religion: then should ye make a most true conclusion, where otherwise rightly applied it can no ways serue your turn. Thus bring ye out that, which once again ouerturnes your cause, and proues K. Dauids su∣preme gouernmēt. And euen so the Q. Maiestie by this en∣sample of K. Dauid, is taught to do the like, as praysed be to god for hir therfore, she foloweth wel herein the steps of K. Dauid: doing, iuxta omnia quae scripta sūt in lege domini, accor∣ding to all things written in gods law. And where the papists in al their errors, & this amōg other of y^e supremacie, do prae∣ter & cōtra omnia quae scripta sunt in lege domini, besides & a∣gainst all things writtē in gods law: As Dauid redressed eccl. disorders crept in before his time, so y^e Q. highnes now hath redressed such disorders, as she foūd before hir time crept in. Thus the more ye reason, y^e more stil ye make against your selfe. Ye had néed adde some better stuffe thā this, or els if ye thus hold on, your friends wold wish M. Fec. had hired ye to hold your peace, when he first moued you to plead for him.

Master. Stap. séeing it now more than high time to adde* 1.288 some notable thing to better his cause: VVherevnto I adde (sayth he) a notable saying of the scripture in the sayd booke by you alleaged concerning Dauids doings by you brought foorth touching the Priestes and Leuits. Vt ingrediantur do∣mum* 1.289 dei iuxta ritum suum sub manu Aaron patris corum sicut pr•…•…ceperat dominus deus Israel. King Dauids appoyntment was, that the Leuits, and Priestes should enter into the house of God, there to serue vnder the gouernment: of whome, I pray you? not of King Dauid, but vnder the spirituall go∣uernment of their spirituall father Aaron and his successours. The gouernour of them was Eleazarus.

Upon this notable sentence for your purpose, as ye thinke, you gather thrée notes. And bicause ye would go or∣derly, ye begin first with the last note.

VVhere we haue to note first (say you) that Dauid ap∣poynted* 1.290

hereto the Leuits nothing of himself: But sicut prae∣ceperat dominus deus Israel: as the Lorde God of Israel had before appoynted.

VVe haue here againe to note first in you M. Stap. no plaine dealing, that begin with the last part of the sentence first. And wherefore I pray you? but that, that which is spoken here of this matter in especiall, ye woulde make it séeme to serue for all Dauids doings in generall. VVe haue to note againe, your hacking and wresting of this sentence, which sheweth a playne destination betweene theyr turnes of comming in, and their ordinarie ministerie in theyr turnes, in attending on the highe Priest. The text is thus: •…•…ae vices eorum secundum ministeria sua vt ingrediantur* 1.291 domum domini, & iuxta ritum suum sub manu Aaron pa∣tris eorum, sicut praeceperat dominus deus Israel. These are theyr courses after their ministeries to enter into the house of the Lorde, and according to theyr manner be vnder the hande of Aaron their father, as the Lorde God of Israel hath commaunded. Which last wordes ye beginne withall, and ioyne them to the first parte, as thoughe the Lordes commaundement had béene of Dauids appoyntment where it was onely of the obedience of all the Tribe of Leuie, to be vnder Aaron and his successors in the ministerie, which in deede was Gods statte commaundement. But the ap∣poynting of the courses to those mencioned in that place, was Dauids commaundement, euen as your selfe doe say it was King Dauids appoyntment. And the Chapter before of the lyke argument playnlye sayeth. Iuxta pracepta* 1.292 quoquè Dauid 〈◊〉〈◊〉. &c. And according to the last com∣maundements of Dauid, the Leuites were numbered from twentie yeare and vpwarde, to wayte vnder the hande of the sonnes of Aaron in the seruice of the house of the Lorde.

But admit that these wordes Sicut praeceperat, &c. as god had commaunded, be to be ment as you pretend of a speciall

cōmaundement to Dauid, so to dispose those courses: & as ye* 1.293 expound it, he did nothing without gods cōmaundement. Is this again I pray you? any argumēt to improue his supreme authority next vnder god, bicause he did al things sicut praece∣perat dominus, as the lord had cōmaundéd? then by this same rule yourpriest should not haue the supremacie neither, for I am sure he had no further priuiledge, to do against, or be∣yond Gods cōmaundement, no more than Dauid had. It is your Pope that thus stretcheth his claime to do beyonde all Gods forvoade, and contrarie to Gods commaundement, but little or nothing sicut praeceperat dominus deu•…•… Israel, as the Lord God of Israel hath cōmaunded. As for the Quéenes Maiestie hath not done, or doth any thing, more than Da∣uid did, which is, sicut praeceperat. &c. as God hath commaun∣ded hir to do. And syth Gods commaundement vnto Dauid stretcheth to the placing & appointing both aboue & vnder, in their orders of sacrifices, euē of all the leuiticall pries•…•…es: it strengthneth hir cause the more that she hath not onely the bare example of King Dauid, but also the warrant of Gods commaundement for the supreme gouernement of all hir clergie to place them in their seuerall functions.

Secondly, (ye say ye haue to note) that king Dauid did* 1.294 make appoyntment vnto them, of no straunge or new order to be taken in religion, but that they should serue God in the temple, iuxta ritum suum: after their owne vsage, custome or maner before time vsed.

Secondly, we note to you againe M. St. that you inter∣prete his sayings ambiguously, and applie it maliciously. Ambiguously, bicause thoughe Dauid neyther made any straunge or newe order to be taken in Religion, nor yet in their vsage custom or maner of their ceremonies commaun∣ded of god, and so vsed before his time, but saw euery thing dutifully obserued both sicut praeceperat dominus, & iuxta ri∣tum suum: as the Lord had cōmanded, & after their owne or∣der: yet in their courses and in other circumstances, diuers

of his orders were new and strange vnto them, and of his owne appoyntment. And diuers ceremonies that were iuxta ritum suum, according to their own order, hauing been neglected by the priests, and become straunge vnto them: those he redressed iuxta ritum suum, according to their own order, and sicut praeceperat dominus, as the Lorde had com∣maunded.

But what serueth this howe soeuer ye expounde it, to in∣fringe* 1.295 any supreme gouernement in king Dauid? bicause the Prince is bounde not to alter the Priestes rites and ceremonies béeing appoynted of God, Ergo, he is not su∣preme gouernour in séeing them kéept accordingly? might ye not rather argue contrarywise. The prince is bound not to alter religion, nor those orders that God hath ordeyned, bringing in straunge and new: Ergo, he is bound to ouersée, care, and prouide, that those orders be onely kept and none other brought in. And if princes had alwayes looked to this their duetie more narrowly than they haue done, then had not your Pope and popishe Prelates broughte in so many vayne traditions, false doctrines, and superstitious ceremo∣nies as they haue, neither iuxta ordinem suum, according to their owne order, nor sicut praceperat dominus, as the Lord commaunded.

On the other part this your application is a malicious* 1.296 slaunder to the Q. highnesse. For she hath not made or ap∣pointed to be receiued, any strange or new order in religion, but reuoked the olde & primatiue order of religion ordeined of Christ, and hath appoynted the ministers of God to do their dueties, secundum ritum suum, according to their owne order, & sicut praeceperat dominus, as our sauiour Christ by him selfe, and his Apostles hath prescribed to them. It is your Pope and Papall Church that offreth strange fire to God, that hath appoynted & erected those strange and newe orders in religion, and therfore hir maiestie hath worthily abolished all those false priests with their strange and new

orders, and all their false worship of God, and in that hir highnesse thus doth, she sheweth hir selfe to follow Dauids e•…•…sample, like a godly supreme gouernour.

Thirdly and lastly (say you) king Dauids appoyntment* 1.297 was that they should serue in the house of God, sub manu Aaron patris corum, as vnder the spirituall gouernement of their father Aaron, and his successors the high Priests.

Héere agayne to the shew of some aduauntage, ye tran∣slate sub manu, which is vnder the hande, importing, atten∣dant at hande in their ministerie to the high Priest: vnder the spirituall gouernement, as thoughe they were exemp∣ted from the kings gouernement, and so you make your conclusion, saying:

The which words of the Scripture do so well and clearely* 1.298 expresse, that king Dauid did not take vpon him any spiri∣tuall gouernment in the house of God. &c.

This conclusion is captious, and yet not to the purpose. There is a difference betwéene spirituall gouernment, and gouernment ouer spirituall & •…•…cclesiasticall matters. This ye should conclude, not that: if ye will confute the bishop. And this gouernment ouer spirituall matters tooke Dauid on him, the other, that is, the spirituall gouernment he left entier vnto the Priests, without any preiudice to their ec∣clesiasticall authoritie, as ye graunted before. And as Da∣uid therin did, so doth the Quéenes Maiestie nowe.

But what maketh this agaynst king Dauids supreme gouernment, that the inferior priests & Leuites in their mi∣nisteries & offices were by the kings appoyntment, vnder the hande or spirituall gouernment of their spirituall father* 1.299 Aaron, and his successors the high priests, as you translate the text? Is it not also the Q. Maiesties appoyntment, that the inferiour Ministers should serue in their functions, vn∣der the spiritual gouernment of their bishops? and bicause it is hir appoyntment, it is an argumēt not of hir subiectiō, but of hir authoritie héerein ouer them, as also is this of

Dauid. And therfore the exāple was very well applied, & al your three notes on your notable sentēce, that you haue ad∣ded to your master, not onely nothing seruing your turne (for all ye haue so notably inuerted the text, so wrested the sense, so expoūded the words, that your friends might very much muse and maruell at your falshoode) but also in the whole & euery part, all your thrée notes, haue made cleane agaynst you. And yet ye knit vp your conclusion on them, That ye can not but very much muse and maruell why he should alleage king Dauid for any example or proofe in this matter. So desperate a face ye can set on the matter, though all be quite agaynst you.

Now, as M. Stap. dalied with Moses before, if he coulde not proue him a priest, yet at the least to proue him a pro∣phet: so héere (after a florishe in one of his common pla∣ces, slaunderously comparing our clergie with Qza) seeing that he can fasten no good argument against princes by the priests, he will once agayne assay it by the Prophets. And where the bishop alleaged that Dauid made Psalmes, ordei∣ned priests, Leuites, singers, and porters, &c. he denieth not, but that Dauid did al these things, but, sayth he, Think you* 1.300 he did al this and the rest of his owne authoritie, bicause he was king of the people? so you woulde haue your reader to beleeue, but the holy ghost telleth vs playnely, that Dauid dyd all this, bicause God had so commaunded by the handes of his Prophetes.

What argument call ye this, M. Stap? the king ordei∣ned and set foorth ecclesiasticall lawes, bicause God had so commaunded by the hands of his Prophets.

Ergo, The king is not supreme gouernour to sée those thinges obserued, but the Prophetes are the supreme go∣uernours of them:

Héere ye stande on two things, on Gods commaunde∣ment, and the Prophetes message. As for your reason on Gods commaundement, is answered already, it 〈◊〉〈◊〉

not that godly Princes authoritie that submitteth him selfe to God, as Dauid did, and the Quéenes Maiestie doth: but it is to be brought agaynst the ambitious proud vsurpation of your Pope, that maketh him selfe as it were a God in earth, and will controll Gods flat commaundement.

Agayne, that ye vrge so much the ministerie of the Pro∣phets, to abase the kings authoritie, and thereon make your conclusion, saying:

Thus you see, that by the declaratiō of the prophets Gods* 1.301 ministers then, as priests are now, the king did al those eccle∣siasticall matters, and not by his princely authoritie.

This answere is but a méere shifte, and yet nothing for your priestes supremacie. But suche is your enuie to prin∣ces, that ye care not to whome ye ascribe this supreme go∣uernment, so that princes haue it not. When ye can not* 1.302 proue that it appertayned to the priests, ye alleage the pro∣phets. Ye are not so ignorant, I dare say, but that ye know the prophets were no priests, and many of them (as ye terme vs lay men) and some also of occupation. Yea but say you, they were Gods ministers then, as priestes are nowe. Ye should proue they were priestes then, for, were they but Gods ministers herein to declare the same to the prince, doth this proue any supreme authoritie héerein ouer their prince? Nay but (say you) they were suche good ministers as priestes are nowe.

In déede were they suche as your priestes crake now to be, then the matter were out of question. For your priests* 1.303 now say they, be not onely aboue kings, princes, and all other men, but aboue angels, yea that they can make their maker also which Angels can not do, as D. Bonner vaun∣ted in his conuocation of priests. The Prophets coulde do none of these things, nor so exalted them selues. They were then Gods ministers and faythfull preachers of his worde, they were not sacrificers. And if your priests nowe are like prophets then, they must not be sacrificers, but preachers

of Gods worde, and so shal they be like the Prophets. Your priests, & chiefly your Pope can not erre in iudgement ye say, do ye father this warrant on the Prophetes, or on the Priests? haue ye not alleaged the priests for it? and nowe when ye sée the priests will not serue your turne, ye say ye be like the prophets. But ye should make a distinction like what prophets ye be▪ are ye not like to lying prophets? are ye not like the Prophet that God sayd he would tempt his* 1.304 people withall, that shoulde say, come let vs goe worship straunge Gods? are ye not like the false flattring prophets that deceiued king Achaz, like Baals prophets mayntei∣ned* 1.305 of Iesabell? But Christ hiddeth vs take héede to suche false prophetes as you be, that come in sheepes clothing, and are rauening wolues within.

But let vs consider further this your shift by Prophets. Ye say, Dauid did all those ecclesiasticall matters, but not by his princely authoritie, but by the declaration of the pro∣phets, Gods ministers then as Priests are now: and therfore the next authoritie vnder God was theirs, not his, bicause he was no prophet. But what nowe if Dauid were a pro∣phet also, and is so cōmonly termed, and your selfe the leafe before sayd, he had the gift of prophesie, and alleaged your master D. Harding for it? will not this proue then by your own•…•… shifte, that either he béeing Gods prophet, had therby so well as others this authoritie, contrarie to the which ye say he had it not, but the prophets had it: or else the hauing of the gift of prophesie, is no argument of any supreme au∣thoritie, as ye would so sayne inferre. As in déede it is not neither in priest nor prophet: which ye shoulde soone haue perceiued, had ye but read the next chapter to that, out of* 1.306 whiche you tooke (as ye fancied) your notable sentence for the Priestes gouernement. For there are foure chapters going togither, the. 23. of the Leuites, howe Dauid put or∣der amongst them. The. 24. of his appoyntment among the* 1.307 priestes and sonnes of Aaron. The. 25. of his ordering of* 1.308

the Prophetes and singers.* 1.309

The Chapter beginneth thus: And Dauid and the cap∣taynes of the host appoynted out to do seruice, the sonnes of Asaph, of Heman and Iduthim, which should prophecie with Harpes, Psalteries, and Cymbals. And the multitude of the men were to do seruice in their offices. The sonnes of Asaph &c. to wayte on, or to be at the hand of Asaph, who prophe∣cied by the king. And againe, These were the sonnes of He∣man the Kings Seer of visions in the wordes of God to lift vp the horne that is the power, meaning of Dauid. And a∣gaine, A saph, Iduthim, and Heman were at the Kings hande, that is to say, at the kings commaundement to execut•…•… hys appoyntment. The. 26. Chapter is of Dauids ordring the* 1.310 Porters diuisions, ending on this wise: VVhom king Da∣uid made rulers ouer the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the halfe of the tribe of Manasses, for euery matter perteyning to God, and for the kings businesse, that is to say, both in spiri∣tuall and temporall things. And also a little aboue, In all the businesse of the Lorde, and for the seruice of the King.

Howbeit, I speake not this so much to proue King Da∣uids supremacie ouer the Porters, in all and euery ecclesi∣asticall matter, so well as temporall, but chiefly to followe your shift of the Prophetes. For here we sée howe expresly the Prophets also, were appoynted their orders by the king, and euen the principall fathers of them attendant vnto him, as their children were to them. And thoughe theyr children were vnder theyr gouernmentes as were the in∣feriour Priestes vnder the higher Priestes, yet as Asaph,* 1.311 Heman, and Iduthim, were vnder the gouernment of the King also, who ordered, directed, appoynted and cōmaunded them, so was Aaron and his successors the high priests vn∣der the appointment and order of the King, for all that their sonnes and inferior priests were vnderneath their gouern∣ment. For the one gouernment doth not exclude the other, as master Stapleton himselfe confesseth, that in one man

many rulers may and do dayly concurre which in some sense may euery one be called his supreme gouernour.

And thus was first God by the ministerie of his priestes and prophetes, the absolute supreme gouernour vnto Da∣uid. So was Dauid next vnder God, by his ouersight, or∣dering, and commaunding those ecclesiasticall actions to be rightly done, the supreme gouernour, not onely to the Le∣uits and Porters: but to the chiefe Priestes, to the chiefe Prophets and all. And so were the chiefe priestes and prin∣cipall Prophets in their functions and ministeries of theyr offices, the supreme gouernors ouer their inferior priests & prophets: and yet was not their gouernment embarring the kings, nor the kings any whit preiudicial to theirs. For the priestes and the prophets did the action: but the cōmaunde∣ments, the appointing & ordring, was the kings next to god, who cōmaunded them to him, & •…•…e to the priests & prophets.

And this order should M. St. haue séene had he but read the next sentence before the text that he vrgeth. Secundum dispositionē Dauid regis & Gad vidētu regis. &c. According to the commaundement or disposition of Dauid the king, & of Gad the kings Seer of visions, and Nathan the prophet. &c. Thus the prince, euen in those thing•…•… that god cōmaundeth by the hand of the prophets, is chéef for his authoritie vnder God. Next to whom are adioy•…•…ed the Prophets, or learned preachers, or ministers of Gods worde, as by whose mouth or hande God commaundeth it to be done, and haue mosts skill thereof. And yet that both priest & prophet do their offi∣ces faithfully, apperteyneth to the kings cōmaūdement: ap∣péereth further throughout this chap. as also in Ezechias en∣sample* 1.312 frō whence be takes this sētence as we shall sée whē we come therto. Onely thus much to detect the shifts y^t M. St. maketh, stil leaping from priest to prophet, frō prophet again to priest, as it were a squirrel skipping frō one trée to another, to saue hir frō y^e birdbolt, but all wil not be, nothing wil any thing serue his turne, but euery thing maketh quite against him: which whē he séeth (as it were to set an Oliuer

agaynst a Rowlande, he alleageth agaynst king Dauids eusample, the ensample of Carolus Magnus.

Againe (saith he) the like might you haue alleaged of Ca∣rolus* 1.313 Magnus, that he corrected most diligently the order of reading and singing in the church, that he brought first into Frau•…•…ce ca•…•…tum Gregorianū, the order of singing lefte by S. Gregorie at Rome, and appoynted singers therfore, & when they did not well, placed other in their rowmes. And many such other like matters of the church, wherin that godly Em∣perour much busied him selfe, and yet exercised no supreme gouernment ouer the clergie, but was of all other Princes, most far frō it: as it may easily appeare to him that wil read in the decrees dist. 19. in memoriam, where he protesteth obe∣dience to the Sea of Rome, yea though an importable charge should be layde vpon him by that holy Sea.

Ye haue picked out an vnlike & vneuen match, M. St. to* 1.314 compare herein the doings of king Dauid with K. Charle∣maines. Where is become your Impar congressus Achilli Troilus, the vnequall matche betwene Troilus and Achilles? Howe corrupte the tyme of king Charlemayne was, and what practises and fetches your Pope vsed, to get the crowne of Fraunce to Pepin his father, from the right and lawful prince therof, and the Empire of Rome to Charle∣mayne, frō the Emperour of Constantinople, to whō it dyd belong: euery hiltoriographer can tel, & may fitter be decla∣red in his proper place, than here to leape ouer the stile, ere ye come at it by many an hundreth miles: & yet for hast ye breake your shinnes euen agaynst those things y^t as trifles ye recken vp vnto vs. As, the correcting most diligently the order of reading and singing in the Church, the placing and displacing singers, if he did these things as a godly Empe∣ror, as ye say, then he tooke it, that as Emperor he had a go∣uernment in them. But ye say as a godly Emperor he much busied him selfe. If he found him self busines like a busie bo∣dy, wherin he had no authoritie thus so place & displace, to institute, order, and correct, how was he a godly Emperour

therin, or not rather as ye sayd before, played Oza his part? But ye say he was therein a godly Emperour, therefore he did nothing of any bu•…•…iositie, but of his owne authoritie and supreme gouernment therein. Well yet say you it was but in singing and ouer singers. Was it no further M. Staple∣ton: howe then do you say, the like you might haue allea∣ged of Carolus Magnus, to King Dauids doings? Did King Dauid meddle onely with singing and singers? Did he not meddle with Priestes and Prophetes also? But to salue the matter ye say, and many other suche like matters of the Church. Whie tell ye not man what those many other mat∣ters were? haue ye no lust to declare them, for feare they would marre your market? Well, let them alone till we come to the proper examination of them. Howbeit whatso∣euer they shall fall out to be, here remember ye liken them to King Dauids doings. But King Dauid commaunded and appoynted singers, Priests, Prophetes, all the clergie, high, and lowe, of what degrée so euer: Ergo, King Charle∣maines authoritie stretched further than to singing men, euen to all Priestes, Prophetes and all the clergie besides. And thus eyther your similitude is not like, or else the one and the other maketh cleane against you.

But if these doings of Charlemaine be not like, yet hath master Stapleton another proufe in store.

Also in the decrees. 11. Q. 1. which Iuo also alleageth, where* 1.315 he renueth out of the Code of Theodosius a lawe binding all his subiects of all Nations, Prouinces and Countreys, of what so euer qualitie or condition they were, and in all maner cau∣ses, if the defendant require an ecclesiastiall iudgement, it be not lawfull from the Bishops sentence to appeale any higher.

This lawe is here brought forth master Stapleton very* 1.316 vntimely and impertinently, nothing to proue or unproue the ensample or doings of King Dauid, vnlesse ye woulde proue it on this wi•…•…e. •…•…uo alleageth a lawe of Theodosius, binding all his subiects of all Nations, Prouinces and Coun∣treys,

of whatsoeuer qualitie and condition they were, and in all maner causes, if the defendant require an ecclesiasticall iudgement, it be not lawful from the Bishops sentence to ap∣peale any higher: Ergo king Dauid made the like lawe to this, or this was like to king Dauids lawes. Howe thys hangeth togither like your Germaines lippes that before y•…•… spake of, let others iudge.

King Dauids lawes were not for priests to be such Iud∣ges, but for priests to be subiect to these orders, & that they should obserue and obey them, porter, singer, Leuit, Priest, or Prophet, high or low, of what qualitie or condition soeuer they were. These lawes of king Dauid were (as ye say) by Gods commaundement, by the mouth of his Prophets, and therefore coulde not be yll. The law you cite of Iu•…•… from* 1.317 Theodosius, though at that time it were good, & vpon some godly consideration, yet it is not ius diuinum, the law of god, it is but mans law, & the princes law, & sheweth a chief au∣thoritie in him to giue such liberties to the clergie, which as they may be very wel vsed, especially when princes do looke well to them, that they vse their gifts, offices and priuileges dutifully: so haue they since by your pope and prelates bene very ill vsed, euen to the treading down of the doners of thē, Theodosius, Iuo, or any other. And as the Iuy taking al his* 1.318 strēgth & growth from the Oke, so cōpasseth & ouergroweth it, and that by his gréene & pleasant embracings of it, till the Iuy haue quite destroied the whole bole of the Oke: so haue your clergie by such franchesies & liberties of princes, at the first by compassing them with counterfeit holines & subtile deuises, so growne vp & aboue them in riches, strength and possessions, that at the length ye haue destroied & brought to nothing, all their supreme estate ouer you. For whereto bring ye out this priuiledge of the Emperor Theodosius, that none might appeale to any higher sentence than the B. but as ye haue brought it now in the end, to cal corā vobis, as your vnderling, euē the prince himself, from whō ye cōfesse

this your priuilege came? And thus ye alleage king Iuo his lawes as it were an Iuy bush to behold how your popish prelates do play y^e Iuies part. But it is hie time with other sharper lawes that princes pull vp such Iuies by the rootes. Now as ye haue thus shifted off y^e answere to king Dauids doings, redressings, ordrings, lawes, and chiefe gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes, so to knit vp the knot, euen like a fawning Iuy about princes your selfe:

And surely (say you) no Prince more recognized their o∣bedience* 1.319 to the spirituall magistrate in spirituall causes, than such as were most readie and carefull to ayde, further, and to their power direct, all spirituall matters. This therefore pro∣ueth well that godly princes do further and set foorth godly religion, by meanes seemely to their vocations.

Why master Stap. who desireth or attributeth more to Princes than to set forth Gods religion by meanes seme∣ly to theyr vocation? If this ensample of Dauid, as you say, proue thus much: then to gouerne, direct, commaunde, and appoynt the Priests, yea your hiest Priestes, as Dauid did, is no vnseemely meanes to their vocation, nor vnsitting euen for your Popes vocation, to obey the Princes appoyntment and commaundement. And if to direct all spirituall matters may be done of Princes, & yet the obedience to the spirituall Pastor in spirituall matters, still recognized: then doth not the Quéenes Maiestie any preiudice to them, recognizing to them a dutifull obedience in the ministration of spiritu∣all matters: for all that she fetteth forth Gods true religion and directeth all spirituall matters, as ye graunt she maye. Which is as much as the Bishop or any of vs desire, or hir Maiestie taketh on hir.

But (say you) here is no maner of inckling, that Princes* 1.320 do or did euer beare the supreme gouernment in all ecclesi∣astical matters, to decide and determine, to alter and chaunge, to set vp and plucke downe, what religion liked them by their princely authoritie, and mere soueraigntie.

Haue ye gone about to impugne this all this while M.* 1.321 Stapleton, then I see well it was not for nothing that al∣wayes ye aunswered so wide. Ye needed not haue sought so many shifting corners. The Bishop proponed one thing, and you aunswered another. Doth the Bishop maintaine or euer sayde that Princes might decide, determine, alter, chaunge, set vp, & pluck downe, what religion liked them, by their Princely authoritie, and mere soueraigntie? Quote me the lease, name me the place, where once the Bishoppe so said. Or doth the Q. Maiestie take any such thing vpon hir. These be but your wicked, I had almost sayde trayt•…•…rous slaunders, to desace hir highnesse to hir simple subiectes. And no doubt so ye report to other Countreys of hir Ma∣iestie, as ye write here most opprobiously agaynst hir. It is your Pope agaynst whom ye should make this conclusion, for he taketh on him to decide and determine, to alter and chaunge, to set vp and pluck downe what religion liketh him. The Quéenes Maiestie, God be highly praysed for hir, as a most godly supreme gouernour feloweth king Dauids en∣sample, and neyther your wicked conclusion toucheth hir, nor these your shifting counterblasts come nere the matter in hande.

The. 14. Diuision.

AFter King Dauid, the Bishop alleageth the wise King* 1.322 Salomon his sonne, citing a briefe summe of his actes that inferre his supreme authoritie.

For answere to this, Master Stapleton chooseth out one* 1.323 act of Salomon, as a full aunswere to all the rest besydes, and sayth:

The weight of this obiection resteth in the deposition of* 1.324 Abiathar the high Priest.

The weight of this aunswere resteth first vpon a mani∣fest vntruth. The Bishop alleaged besides Abiathars depo∣sition,

the placing of Sadocke, the placing of the arke in the temple of Salomon, the dedication of the temple, the of∣fring sacrifices, blessing the people, directing the Priestes, Leuites and other Church officers after his fathers orders, and the Priestes obedience in euery thing to the kinges commaundement: none of these obiections resting on Abia∣thers deposition. Onely the néerest that commeth to it, is the placing of Sadocke in Abiathars roome. And yet sayth M. Stap. the weight of this obiection resteth in the depo∣sition of Abiathar the high priest. And so thinketh if he fully aunswere this, he hath satisfied all the rest. Nowe since M. Stapleton will néedes haue it so, and hath prepared himself onely to aunswere the deposition of the high Priest, as the* 1.325 highest and principallest matter, be it so, let vs go forwarde with him, and sée his aunswere thereto. Although hereaf∣ter he must remember, that if the placing and displacing of prelates, be a matter of such importance (as in déede it is to this present purpose) that the answering of it includeth di∣uerse other weightie poyntes also: then the inuestiture of Bishops is not so impertinent a matter, as nowe and then he will sée me to make it being vrged therewith. He must remember also, that making all other obiections to rest on this as chiefe, if he answere not this, then both all the other be vnaunswered: and this being a chiefe matter doth quite ouerthrow all his counterblast besides, and brings his pope to his olde obedience, yea in case also of lyke deposition to Abiathars. Wherefore, it standes him now in hande, to an∣swere well and surely vnto this obiection.

To go therefore (like a profounde clerke déepely séene in the doctours) the more authentically to worke, he first pres∣seth vs with the authorities of his good masters:

This thing (sayth he) Master Dorman, and Master doctor* 1.326 Harding say employeth no more superioritie, than if a man should say Queene Mary deposed Master Cranmer.

But Queene Marie was not the chiefe, but an accessorie

instrument for the furtherance of the execution.

Ergo, Salomon in deposing Abiathar was not the chiefe, but an accessorie instrument for the furtherance of the execu∣cution.

Ye are much in Master D. Hardings debte already ma∣ster* 1.327 Sapleton, for much good stuffe that ye haue borrowed of him, especially this example of Quéene Mary and Bishop Cranmer, which I perceiue ye like full well, & therefore ye will borrowe it once againe: and bicause master Dorman borrowes it out of him also, ye will borrowe it of both: ne∣uerthelesse so, that they haue the praise thereof that vsed it before you. And therefore to gratifie your masters againe (mulus mulum scabit, for one mule as the latine prouerbe saith rubbes another mule) you euer referre vs to their high authoritie, saying:

I say with master D. Harding: I say with master Dormā: D.* 1.328 Har. sheweth: master Dor. and master D. Harding affirme: M. D. Harding noteth. M. D. Harding toucheth: and here, ma∣ster Dor. and master D. Harding say it imployeth no more.

Thus ye thinke to saue your credite with them, to ob∣iecte their credence and authoritie to vs. But in thus doing, either ye shewe a great arrogancie in them, or an extreame flatry in your selfe, with no lesse folly, to frame your argu∣ment on their bare sayings, and obiect it to vs for good au∣thoritie, they being parties aduersary, besides, God wotte, their litle estimation euen among your selues. Although herein taking witnesse thus one of another, what is it else than to aske your owne fellowes if you say true or no? Let go therefore your masters authoritie, and if ye will néedes alleage them, alleage their reasons if they haue any, and tel vs not they say i•…•… imployes no more, but proue you, or al∣leage their proues, that it employes no more.

Ye vrge the doings of Quéene Marie how litle they im∣ployed, but ye take pro concesso and not to be denyed to your Master, that their doings were alike▪ wheras they were

most vnlike, and quite contrary. Quéene Mary ye say was* 1.329 but the accessorie instrumente therein to the high prieste which is ye say the Pope: but Salomon deposing the high priest, that as ye likewise say was the figure of your Pope, how could he be an accessorie instrumente to the high priest, when he sat vppon him, gaue indgemente against him, and deposed him? was the high priest the principall doer of it against him selfe, and Salomon but his accessorie instru∣ment? indede your high priests beare princes so in hande, that no body can sit in iudgement on them, or depose them, but they must do it them selues, or else it can not be done. Abiathar neuer learned that knacke, but was iudged and deposed of his prince. for all he was the highest priest. nor the prince was his instrument thereof, for then had he not bene deposed at all, he would not haue made an instru∣ment to Salomon to depose him selfe. But Salomon did it against the will of Abiathar being a traytor to him: nor he did it as the other priestes accessorie instrumente, for a•…•… the other priests were inferiour to their high priest: and the inferiour (your lawe saith, and good reason to) can not de∣pose the superiour, Ergo, he was accessarie instrument to no liuing creature herein, but did it by his owne royall autho∣ritie, and therfore by this royall authoritie he was supreme gouernour ouer the priests, yea, the highest priest and all.

Nowe contrariwise, Quéene Mary did not depose the highest priest, which you say is your pope of Rome, and not the Archbishop of Caunterbury, excepte ye will translate your primacie frō Rome to Canterburie. She wrongfully deposed the archbishop of Cant. or rather as ye say, was but an accessorie instrument to the furtherance of the execution. For so in very déede ye vsed hir, while your Romish Pope his legats and prelats were the doers thereof: she sate not on hym in iudgemente, nor gaue sentence agaynste hym, as did Salomon againste Abiathar, and had she done so, as ye woulde not haue allowed hir dooing, so

would ye not allowe him to be the highest priest.

And if ye will néedes haue it, that their doings were a∣like, then as King Salomon deposed by his princely autho∣ritie the chiefe Bishop, so, after your account that the By∣shop of Rome is the chiefe Bishop, she should haue deposed the Bishop of Rome, which she did not, but set him vp in hir realme euen aboue hir selfe, where he was before put downe: so that these doings being in euery point contrary, how are King Salomons doings with the high priest Abia∣thar, like to the doings of Quéene marie to Bishop Cran∣mer? and therefore this is but a shifting aunswere of your Masters olde stuffe: and you are but their accessorie instru∣ment, to burnish it a freshe: which ye doso yll fauouredly, that your master or you can take little honestie by it.

Ye alleaged this comparison of Q. Mary out of your Master once before, that Quéene Mary redressed religion, but by the meanes of the Priests. What is the meane wher∣by one doth any thing, but the accessorie instrument where∣by he doth it? And what is the accessorie instrument but the meane? But the Priestes ye say are the meane, for the Prince to doe it by. Ergo the Priestes were but the acces∣sorie instrumentes to the Quéene. Which if it were any a∣basing of the Princes superioritie, whie is it not an abasing of your Priestes? And as ye make these shiftes thus in the ende fall out against your cause: so can ye not agrée in your owne tales to your selfe. In the ensample of Dauid the Quéene was the represser, and the Priests were the means or instrument: in this cause of Salomon, where your Pope by his figure (as you say) the high priest, is so nere touched with an example of depriuation: There contrary to that ye tolde vs before, the highe Priest him selfe must be the re∣presser, and the Prince but the meane or instrument.

And thus it séemeth ye care not what ye say, for you, or agaynst you, so ye maye shift of the matter in one place, though in another ye speake quite contrary. And thinking

to beare your selfe out with your masters authoritie, yée make your master partaker of your shame, besides the shame that they haue for their shamefull shiftes receyued alreadie at the Bishop of Sar. and master Nowels hands.

But here thinking to be euen with master Nowell for confuting this vnlike similitude, vsed also as newe freshe stuffe by master Dorman.

But Lord (sayth he) howe master Nowell here besturreth* 1.330 him selfe?

Nowe when the Reader should looke howe here master Stapleton would besturre him selfe, to bring ought against master Nowell: he dare alleage nothing, it was but a copie of his countenance.

He fumeth and he fretteth with master Dorman (sayth he)* 1.331 who shall coole him well ynough I doubt not. In the meane while, I will aske master Horne and master Nowell to, one question.

Yea forsooth master Stapleton, I like your witte nowe better than before, demaunde what you will, but chalenge not the combat so fast as ye did ere while, cumber not your selfe with more aduersaryes than ye néede, ye shall finde more ease in the ende. Go to therefore and propounde your question.

Master Horne sayth (say you) a little before that Iosue sa∣crificed* 1.332 burnt sacrifices, and burnt offrings, that king Da∣uid sacrificed burnt and peace offrings, that Salomon offred sacrifices. VVere trow ye Iosue, Dauid, and Salomon priests?* 1.333 If so, then how bring you their ensamples to proue any thing for Kings and Queenes that are no Priestes? If not, then this phrase is verefied in that they caused the Priestes (to whome the matter pertayned) to offer sacrifices. And so whereas M. Horne sayth of Iosue, that he sacrificed burnt sacrifices which is agreeable to the latine obtulit holocausta, master Nowell sayth he commaunded sacrifice to be offred.

Thus farre your question to the Bishop, and your di∣lemma

thereon. To the question I aunswere, that neither Iosue, Dauid, nor Salomon were priestes, if not, say you, then by your owne words and master Nowels, this phrase is verefied, that they caused the priests to offer sacrifices. I graunt ye master Stapleton, and it was graunted to you many tymes before by the Bishop: what inferre ye here∣vppon?

And why then I pray you M. Nowell (say you, turning* 1.334 your speche to him) may not this phrase also be taken after the said sorte that Salomon deposed Abiathar in procuring him by some ordinarie way to be deposed for his treason? as master Cranmer might haue bin, though he were deposed and burnt for his heresie.

Here is a matter farre fette or euer the inconuenience breake out. In the ende thanks be to God, this is the worst conclusion: and why may not this phrase also (of deposing) be taken after the said sorte of sacrificing? I aunswere, that to reason from may to must, either must or may be but a mu∣stie reason. I had thoughte this déepe question, and this lustie dilemma vppon it, woulde haue concluded with a necessitie, this phrase of deposition muste be so resolued as the other of sacrifice: and commeth it now in like a poore hedgecréeper, with a perchaunce that it maye bée so re∣solued? parturiunt montes nascitur ridiculus mus: the moun∣taynes trauaile, out there péepes a mouse. But nowe since ye conclude no furder, but that it may be so, what if one would doubte of your may bird, and like a good sim∣ple plaine dealing man, wold bluntly say to your may, Per∣awnter yea sir: perawnter nay sir, and bid ye reason more substantially than to stand on a peraduenture that it may be so.

But since ye will nedes know why the one phrase may not be vnderstoode like the other, I will not only shew you why they may not, but also why they must not. The phrases* 1.335 on the one parte of Iosues, Dauids and Salomons sacrifi∣ces,

mighte not be done personally by them, bycause they were no priests, but it must haue bin done by the priests, bicause it was the priests especiall office appointed of God But in this other case of deposition. Salomon not only might either commaund or execute personally, or by his de∣putie: but of dutie ought to haue deposed that naughtie high priest, bicause on the one parte it was no especiall or any part at all of the priestes office appointed by God to depose their high prest, nor the inferiors cold depose their primate: on the other parte, only the king could do it, did it, and ought to do it, bicause it appertay•…•…ed to his royall estate, and was appointed by God thereto. And thus ye sée the phrases are not alike, neither may nor must be resolued the one by the other, as ye say in your cōclusion, Salomō deposed Abiathar in procuring him by some ordinarie waye to be deposed for his treason. What some ordinarie way should this be, that ye tell vs thus generally, he mighte procure? If it were for the lower to depose the higher, it was no ordinarie way. If it were by the other priests, it was by the lower. If it were by some Prophete, it was extraordinarie, and yet ye pull downe the Prophetes and all vnder the priests, especially vnder the high priest. If it were by the princes procurement, ye say the prince is also inferior, durst any inferior at an o∣ther inferiors commaundement, or procuring, attempte to depose their superiour, yea their supreme? your Pope wold giue ye little thankes, and he hard ye harpe on that string master Stapleton. By what ordinarie way then shuld it be done, who shoulde haue done it, who shoulde haue procu∣red it? Can ye deuise any excepte the ordinary power that God gaue the Prince, had byn the procurer doer and all thereof?

Nowe that ye haue put foorthe youre question, made youre dilemma, lapte vp youre conclusion, and nothing still serueth your turne, but more againste you: shall I be so •…•…old as to demand of you agayne, euen your owne questiō,

and adde another dilemma of your owne wordes thereto?* 1.336 VVere trow ye Iosue, Dauid, and Salomon priests? If so, then howe say ye here, this phrase (they sacrificed) is verefied in that they caused the priests to whom the matter perteyned to offer sacrifices? And why vse ye all the shiftes ye can to a∣base their doinges? If no: Whie sayde ye then thrée* 1.337 leaues before of Iosue, If yee will haue your examples to proue & confirme, then as Iosue circumcided, so let the prince baptise, and as Iosue sacrificed vpon an aultar, so let the prince in cope and surplesse celebrate your holy communion? Did Iosue circumcise and sacrifice personally him selfe, and was no priest? I speake this onely to shewe your shifting off of your aduersar•…•…e on the one part, and your contradiction to your selfe on the other, euen in your owne question.

Although herein if ye say they were no priestes (which this your later exposition, contrary to the first inferreth) ye say the truer, and therefore doe well to recant your for∣mer saying. But sée howe ye contrary your selfe once a∣gayne, ye liken the phrase of deposition and sacrificing to∣gither. Salomon deposed Abiathar in procuring by some or∣dinarie way to haue him deposed: And Iosue, Dauid, and Salomon did sacrifice, in that they caused the Priestes to of∣fer sacrifice. Here the Prince when he will haue sacrifice done, causeth the priest to minister and execute the sacrifice, and so the Prince doth it by the Priestes handes. Who is here the instrument for the furtherance of the execution? the priest. For the Prince can not, except ye will make him a Priest. Who is the causer (as ye call him) and such a causer, as hath the name of the doer, though he do it not, but haue an accessorie instrument for him? the Prince. Doe ye not sée what an ouerthrow ye giue your selfe? and withall speake cleane contraryes not a dosen lynes asunder? The Prince is not the chiefe, but an accessorie instrument to the furtherance of the execution: the Prince is the causer and doer, but he doth it by an others execution. Is not this plain

contradiction? and yet to helpe the matter, ye let another on the necke of it. As Iosue and Dauid did sacrifice, so did Salo∣mon depose Abiathar. Salomon was the minister and execu∣ter:* 1.338 Iosue and Dauid were not the ministers and executers: If these things be a like, this is another manyfest contra∣diction. If they be not a like, why bring ye them one for proufe of another? Why affirme ye them to be alike, when the doyng of the one by your owne report, is contrary to the other? Eyther ye lie in saying they be alike, or ye speake huddle and ouerthwart your selfe. And yet while ye would séeme nicely to stande descanting on the phrases, (be it vn∣wares or wittingly) ye graunt the full point of the matter, that in the sacrifices, and the deposition, whosoeuer were the executor, the Prince was the procurer, the causer, and the commaunder therof, which is ynough to argue his su∣preme authoritie therein.

Your conclusion is, he was deposed by the Princes pro∣curement,* 1.339 for his treason. And who was this y^t thus was delt withall? for sooth the highest priest. Why, the highest priest is (ye say) the figure of your Pope, was the figure of your Pope then a traytor? I trust ye will tell a good tale for your Pope anon. Nay will ye say, the Pope can not be a tray∣tour, nor be deposed, bicause he is the highest Priest. And what say ye to Abiathar the successour of Aaron, was not he the highest Priest also? If he were not, name an higher. And yet sée, his seate saued him not from being a traytor, nor his highnesse from being vnder the prince that deposed him. And had he not béene vnder his Prince, he could not haue bene a traytour to him.

A traytour is he that reuolting from his dutifull obedi∣ence* 1.340 to his Prince, rebelleth or conspireth agaynst him.

But ye say Abiathar was a traytour:

Ergo, he ought a duetifull obedience to his Prince, from the which he swarued.

Now if that hiest Priesthood (which as ye say was a fi∣gure

of the Popes highest Priesthoode) was neuerthelesse obedient to the Princes royall authoritie, and the highest priest might be a traytour, in swaruing from his obedience: then the Bishop of Rome hauing nowe likewyse the high∣est Priesthoode (as ye pretende) ought neuerthelesse to bee the Emperour of Romes obedientiarie: and if he swarue from his obedience: as was Abiathar, he is a traytour and ought to be deposed as Abiathar was. But howe well he* 1.341 hath set the paterne of Ab•…•…athars tr•…•…ason before his eyes, and farre passed it, in conspiring & rebelling against the Em∣peror of Rome, and in the end hath exempted himselfe from all obedience of the emperiall estate, denying that he can be a traytor therto, but contrary, that the emperor oweth obe∣dience vnto him: it is so manifest that your selues can not deny it. Only therfore it now remayneth that all other prin∣ces in their signiories, as the Quéenes Maiestie hath done in hirs, take ensample of wise king Salomons supreme go∣uernement, in deposing this traterous Abiathar.

And thus thinking to deface the memorie of the blissed martyr Bishoppe Cranmer, that neuer conspired agaynst his prince, that neuer claymed supremacie ouer his prince, that neuer tooke hym selfe to be the highest Priest, that in hys lyfe lyued lyke a moste godly father, and in his death behaued himselfe as mylde as a Lambe: ye haue no whitte Master Stapleton blemished hys renowne, yea your disprayse redoundeth to hys greater prayse. Neyther doth your masters nor your similitude of him to Abiathar, agree in any poynt, onely with your Pope it agréeth, and that as you sée in euerye poynte so iumpe: that, as hée claymeth Abiathars chiefest place, as hée hath practysed more than Abiathars treason, so Chris•…•…yan Princes followyng King Salomons steppes, shoulde giue hym also Abia∣thars rewarde. And were that or thys Abiathar neuer so muche the highest Priest, Christian Princes haue the same authoritie nowe to depose lowest and highest al∣so,

that Salomon had before: except Maister Staple∣ton haue yet some further shifte to delude thys fact of Sa∣lomon.

But nowe master Horne, (saith he) that Salomon was but* 1.342 a minister and an executer herein, the verie wordes immedi∣ately following (the which bicause they serue plainely against your purpose, you craftily dissembled) do testifie.

And here he fastneth a triumphant note in the margine.

Master Horne ouerthrowne concerning the deposition of Abiathar, by the very next line of his owne text guilefully by him omitted.

Here is of a sodaine a sore a doe in déede. Salomon shall be proued but a minister and an executer herein, by the plaine wordes of the scripture. The Bishop shall be proued a craf∣tie dissembler, and a guilefull omitter of those wordes. And by those wordes he shalbe quite ouerthrowne. May the mat∣ter go by M. Stap. wordes, these wordes giue a very boiste∣rous Counterblast. But since he will proue it by the scrip∣ture, let vs heare not his, but the scriptures wordes, and his conclusion thereon. The wordes are these:

And so Salomon put away Abiathar from being Priest* 1.343 vnto the Lorde, to fulfill the wordes of the Lorde, which hee spake ouer the house of Hely in Silo.

Ergo Salomon was but the minister and executor of Gods* 1.344 sentence published before by Samuell the Leuite.

What doth this infringe the Bishops purpose, or ouer∣throw* 1.345 his assertion master Stap? can ye conclude hereon he, was not the supreme gouernour next vnder God in doing of the fact, because he was the minister and executor of gods sentence? By this rule the Prince were not supreme go∣uernour vnder God, in any poynt of ciuill iustice neither: for he is therein also a minister and executor of Gods sen∣tence, that by his Prophe•…•…es commaundeth the Prince to minister and execute iustice. And by this rule, howe coulde 〈◊〉〈◊〉 prooue this superioritie to bée i•…•… youre Pope eyther? would

ye make him haue such a claime, that he should not be Gods minister and executer of Gods sentences? or would ye not rather reason contrary?

He is in all spirituall causes the minister and executer of Gods sentences published by his Prophets.

Ergo he is the supreme gouernour vnder God in all spi∣rituall causes.

If ye had any sentence of God to proue this antecedent, I warrant ye then ye would reason on this wise. Yea, you do reason on this wise, though ye haue no sentence of God at all therefore. As for vs, we haue (as by your owne testi∣monie) the worde of God to warrant, that the Prince in de∣posing the hiest Priest, and figure of your Pope as ye say, hath so good warrant of authoritie therefore: that euen hee was Gods minister therein, and executer of Gods sentence. which plainly argueth his supreme authoritie next and im∣mediately vnder God. To be a minister and executer on that fashion next and immediately vnder God, is no argu∣ment to abase the princes authoritie. If ye had proued he had béene the priestes vnderling minister, and executour herein, this had béene somewhat to your purpose. But this ye could not proue, and ye sayd the contrary before, that the priest was the princes minister and executour, and that he deposed Abiathar not by himselfe, but as he sacrificed, by causing another to minister and execute for him.

Nowe when ye say the Prince is Gods minister and ex∣ecuter, the priest is the princes minister and executer, doe not your self I pray you acknowledge in the ministerie and the execution the priest to be vnder the prince? and that the prince is not onely Gods minister and executer, but as ye say further the causer, commaunder, and procurer also ther∣of to the priestes?

Is this the ouerthrowing of the Bishop as your margin maketh boast: or is it not rather the ouerthrowing of your selfe? can ye speake any thing more plaine for the Bishop,

and agaynst your cause than this? and yet ye crie eut that the Bishop omitted and dissembled •…•…his guilefully & craftily, verily M. Stap▪ there was no cause ye see why he should so do, the craft and guile is but your owne, the Bishop as he did in all the other doings, onely touched them per trans•…•…n∣nam, not describing any one of the circumstances, but in a worde or two shewed the fact, and so passed ouer to other factes of Salomon. But whatsoeuer the Bishop tolde or left vntolde, it had béene better for you, as ye haue vsed guylefully and craftily many other poyntes, to haue omit∣ted and dissembled this, if ye haue no better shift than this, that not onely maketh nothing agaynst the Bishoppes as∣sertion in Salomons supreme gouernment, but still more and more, euen by the mouth of God by his Prophets doth confirme the same.

Nowe that none of all 〈◊〉〈◊〉 shifts will hitherto s•…•…rue a∣gainst this one ensample of Salomon, yet hath M. St on•…•… shift more behinde, and that a trimme shift to.

Besides (sayth he) that the deposing of Abiathar doeth* 1.346 not employ that Salomon was the chiefe ruler in all causes ecclesiasticall, whiche is the Butte that ye must shoote at, and then must ye prouide another bowe, for this will not shoote home.

This is one of your olde s•…•…ale shiftes M. Stap. I sée you are nowe euen at the last cast, to let the arrowe alone, and quarrell about the bow, and the butte, but and ye would (as ye gaue good counsell to others) haue followed it your selfe, in firing still your eye on the issue betwéene the parties in controuersie: neyther would yemake so many vagaryes as ye do, nor here haue quarelled at the Bishop•…•… short shooting. The wordes of the issue whiche is the butte that M. Feck. requireth the Bishop to shoote vnto (if ye be remembred) are these: to make proofe vnto me that any Emperour* 1.347 or Empresse, King or Queene, may claime or take vp∣pon them any such gouernment in spirituall or eccle∣siasticall

causes (meaning as doth the Quéene) if the Bishop proue this: then he hittes the Butte. His artillerie the Bow and Arrowes that he must shoote withall at thys Butte, are appoynted by him likewise: the Scriptures, the doctors, the Counsels, and the practise: the testimonies, alle∣gations, decrées, and examples therein conteyned.

The Bishop hitherto hath with many arrowes out of the Scripture hit the Butte so full: that as yet ye coulde not make this quarrell, but sought other peltyng shiftes.

Nowe, séeing that none of all those paltrie brablings will serue, ye say hée shootes not home, and must chaunge his Bowe. His Bowe here is the Scripture, his Arrowes here are the ensamples of Salomon, of which the Bishop shotte a good many seuerall Arrowes and factes, and eue∣ry one hitte the Butte. He alleaged not onely the facte of Abiathars deposition, but also of Sadockes placing, of consecrating the Temple, of sacrificing, of placing the Arke therein, of blessing the people, of directing the Priests, Leuites, and other Churche officers, and of their obedi∣ence to all his commaundements. Of all these allegations, you your selfe master Stapleton, choose one to answere vn∣to, whiche is the deposition of the highe Priest, and say all the obiection dependes thereon. And so guylefully omitting the residue, stande onely a measuring thys shotte, and in the ende after muche warbling crie out, shorte, shorte, ye muste prouide another Bowe, for thys wyll not shoote home. The deposing of Abiathar doeth not employe that Salomon was the chiefe Ruler in all ecclesiasticall causes.

First, what if it doth not, M. Stapleton? one fact of Sa∣lomon* 1.348 employes not all ecclesiasticall causes. Go to, doth it employ some ecclesiasticall causes to be in the chiefe rule of the Prince? If ye graunt me this, ye graunt the issue, and this is the ende ye graunt. But ye say it employes not all ecclesiasticall causes▪ and therefore is short▪ Did the Bishop

againe shoote no more but that one? how chaunce ye medled not in measuring of the other? Did ye foresee, that as this had hitte one cause, another woulde hitte another, and so at the least euery one one cause, yea perchaunce euery one 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and so a number of your causes might be hitte, and perchaunce all causes, by some one shot, not yet measured, and therefore guylefully and crastily dis•…•…embling and omi•…•…∣ting them, you let all the rest alone. Yet should ye not then for shame haue thus cryed out agaynst this one first shotte, since if it were shorte though short shooting léese the game, yet one shorte shotte leaseth it not. And if one bee shorte, manye other maye come home, and wynne the game for all this, especially matching with one that shooteth so faire and Gentlemanlyke as you doe Maister Stapleton, that it were better to stande at the marke many tymes, than from it.

But séeing ye deale so vneuenly with the Bishops other shottes, (for all your bellowing short, shorte, it hittes not the Butte, it commes not home) ye giue all standers by, suspition of fal•…•…e ayme in this shotte, and therefore let vs measure it once againe. The deposing of Abiathar (saye you) doth not employ that Salomon was chiefe ruler in all ecclesiasticall causes. I pray you who was then chiefe ru∣ler in all ecclesiasticall causes? Abiather say you. And wherefore he? bicause he was the highest Priest or By∣shoppe, therefore the chiefe rule of them was in him. Doth it not then followe, if he depose him, in whome is all the rule, that all this rule is yet restrayned vnder hys higher rule, that deposeth him? For the more man•…•…fest ensample of our time: If I aske in whom the chiefe rule of all ecclesi∣astical causes is now, in the Pope, say you: wherfore? say I: b•…•…cause, say you, he is the hiest Priest or Bishop, and there∣fore he hath the •…•…yest rule of all ecclesiasticall causes Well say I, if the Emperou•…•… nowe woulde go aboute to cite the Pope, to iudge him, and tell him he is the childe of death,

for not acknowledging his olde obedience to him, and so deposing hym bydde him departe and meddle no more with* 1.349 that Byshoprike: the Emperour can not doe this (say you) for then the Pope in all ecclesiasticall causes shoulde be the Emperours inferiour, if the Emperour might depose 〈◊〉〈◊〉, bicause when he is deposed by the Emperour from all his chiefe rule, all his chiefe rule is translated from him, and so were hée vnder the Emperour, and all his chiefe rule at the Emperours disposition to giue to another. But thys saye you were suche a fowle inconuenience as the lyke can not bée. And therefore the Emperour can not depose the Pope, but the Pope the Emperour. This is your com∣mon reasoning. Wherein doe ye not sée, howe the graun∣ting of the deposition of the chiefe Priest, inferreth a hyer rule and authoritie in the deposer ouer the deposed, in eue∣rie prerogatiue that the partie deposed had before he was deposed?

But then (will ye say) the Prince that deposed the high∣est Priest, may not he doe all those matters that the priest might haue done, if hée bée the chiefe ruler of them? It is* 1.350 one thing master Stapleton, to be the chiefe ruler in and ouer all those ecclesiasticall causes, that the partie depo∣sed myghte haue done, and to bée the chiefe doer or exe∣cutioner of them. For example, the Prince maketh an Ad∣mirall or chiefe ruler ouer hys Seas, a President or De∣putie ouer hys Marches, a chiefe Iustice or Chauncel∣lour ouer hys lawes. &c. These Officers agayne, the king deposeth: the deposition of them is an argument, that in all those thinges the King is the chiefe ruler. And although the King can not doe anye of those thinges that belong to their Offices, yet is that no impayring of hys chiefe rule ouer them and all thinges in theyr offices: And therefore hée transferreth the doing, to them that better can or wyll doe those offices. And so likewyse in the chiefe office of priesthood (admitting there were such an one now in all ec∣clesiasticall

causes) though the prince can not do all those ec∣clesiasticall actiōs nor any one of them: yet grant the prince that he may depose that chiefe priest, to whome the doing of them appertaineth: ye graunt with all that he is the chiefe ruler of all those ecclesiasticall things, so farre forth as the rule of ouersight, gouernance and directing stretcheth vnto, which is aboue the ministeriall executing. Nowe (as youre selfe haue confessed) the prince is the causer, and the prieste the executor, and doer, which likewise his name importeth, and therefore is called minister: whiche name though the prince haue also, yet he hath it (as your selfe haue likewise confessed) in a higher respecte, bicause he is Gods especiall minister, to ouersée, directe, dispose, and depose all other mi∣nisters.

And thus graunting the ensample euen but of this one facte of Salomon for our princes to followe, to depose in their realmes any one whatsoeuer highest or lowest priest, it not only hitteth home the butte, yea and the pricke to, set vp by master Feckēham: but this one facte of Salomon, and the like of christian princes now, employeth a chiefe rule of ouer sight and direction (though not of executing in al eccle∣siasticall causes) besides whatsoeuer appertayneth to the parties office that may be so deposed, as Abiathar was by Salomon.

The vntruth that ye note in the end of this ensample, is orderly aunswered in your beadrolle.

The. 15. Diuision.

TThe Bishop in this diuision alleadging the example of* 1.351 king Iosaphat, chiefly of two visitatiōs set forth by him, 2. Paral. 17. and. 19. how he reformed religion through out all his dominions, appointed preachers and setters foorth of Gods lawe, and Iudges in all causes aswell ecclesiasticall

as temporal: cōcludeth his supreme gouernment herevpon.

To this Master Stap. counterblas•…•…eth: As M. Doctour* 1.352 Harding and M. Dorman haue written so say I that yee are they which frequent priuate hilles, aulters and darke groues that the scripture speaketh of. VVherein you haue set vp your Idols that is your abhominable heresies.

In that ye say, master Stapleton, As they say, so say I, ye shewe howe well ye haue learned your lessons thus one of another, to say what soeuer your master sayd before you, and take your bare so saying for proufe good inough. But as ye fondly flatter your selues with your owne say∣ings, so more fondly ye obtrude them as principles to your aduersaries, that will by and by bid ye either proue them, or else will they still estéeme them as they are, for mere lying sayings of a knot of thrée false confederates, the master & his two schollers to outface & delude the manifest truth withal. And if these your masters sayings and yours hap to become wordes of course, then beware you on whose side they are lykest to light, that haue mainteyned so open Idolatrie, and diuerse false worships of God that he did neuer institute.

After this master Stapleton drawing néerer to the matter, admit•…•…eth this example of King Iosaphat: VVee also confesse (sayeth he) that there is nothing written in the* 1.353 holye Scripture of Iosaphat, touching his care and diligence about the directing of ecclesiasticall matters, but that godly Princes may at this day do the same, doing it in such sort as Iosaphat did.

Holde ye here master Stapleton, and we aske no more of you. Ye haue here frankly confessed two things. First the care and diligence, that Iosaphat had aboute the di∣recting ecclesiasticall matters. Which care and diligence was the Bishoppes first proposition, nowe twise alreadie graunted by you, what followed thereon ye haue heard be∣fore alreadie. Secondly, that godly Princes may at this day doe the same, doyng it in such sort as Iosaphat did. Here∣vpon

I conclude this argument:

As Iosaphat did in directing ecclesiasticall matters, so doth the Queenes maiestie nowe:

But all godly Princes ought so to do, as Iosaphat did in directing ecclesiasticall matters:

Ergo, the Quéenes Maiestie doth now, as all godly Prin∣ces ought to do.

To proue that she doth as did king Iosaphat: your selfe confesse, that he reformed religion and was carefull and di∣ligent about directing ecclesiasticall matters.

But the Queenes Maiesties clayme is none other here∣in but this, to reforme religion and to be carefull and dili∣gent about directing ecclesiasticall matters:

Ergo, King Iosaphats doings and hirs are not vnlike.

But this importeth in hir a supreme gouernment.

Ergo, King Iosaphats example hitteth home the Butte, and is a fitte patterne to hir and all godly Princes of su∣preme gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes.

Here séeing that for fashions sake, where ye durst not denie the manifest truth, ye haue graunted so much that in déede ye haue graunted all: ye would now restraine your graunt, and say it was conditionall, that though all Prin∣ces may reforme religion, and with care and diligence di∣rect all ecclesiasticall matters, yet they must do it in suche sort as Iosaphat did: and therefore leauing your simple and generall termes of reformation and direction by god∣lye Princes, yée will haue them perticulerly leueled by that sort that Iosaphat did them. Whiche as we gladly, graunt you in all thinges that Iosaphat did well and god∣ly,* 1.354 as were the moste of his doings, and in al that which the Bishoppe rehearseth: yet in some thinges Princes muste not doe in that sort, but go beyonde him. For, althoughe for the moste part he did those thinges, Quae plac•…•…ta erant domino, That were acceptable to the Lorde: 〈◊〉〈◊〉 en* 1.355 excelsa non abstulit, Notwithstanding he tooke not away the

high places: wherein godly princes muste do after a more zealous sort than Iosaphat did.

As for all those things that the Bishop citeth, sée that ye stand to your graunt made vnto vs, that Iosaphat refor∣med religion, and vsed care and diligence about the directing of ecclesiasticall matters, and then that godly princes may at this day do all the same: And feare ye not but we will also graunt to you, and not starte therefrom, that they may re∣forme religion and directe ecclesiasticall matters in such sort as Iosaphat did. And so, excepte ye be disposed to quarell, or will falsefie the sorte and manner of Iosaphats or the Que∣nes Highnesse doings, I trust we shall anon agree herein.

They may do it (say you) in such sort as Iosaphat did, that* 1.356 is, to reforme religion by the priests. First this is very sub∣tilly spoken master Stapleton (by the priests) if ye meane by the aduise or godly counsell of the prestes, true it is, so might king Iosaphat well haue done. If ye meane by the authoritie and commaundemente of the priestes, then is it false, nor you can euer proue that Iosaphat did it by theyr commaundement and authoritie, but they contrarywise by his. Nowe in suche sort as Iosaphat did, hath the Quéenes Maiestie done, and this proueth bothe their supremacies* 1.357 herein.

Not to enact (say you) a new religion, which the priestes of force shall sweare vnto.

Indéede this did not Iosaphat, no more hath the Quéenes Maiestie done, it is but your surmised sclander.

Item to suffer the priests to iudge in controuersies of reli∣gion,* 1.358 not to make the decision of suche things a parliamente matter.

This latter parte of your sentence, is agayne but youre manifest sclander, to suffer the priestes to iudge in contro∣uersies of religion after the rule of Gods word, and not af∣ter their owne pleasures, in suche sorte Iosaphat not onely suffred, but ordeyned them, commanded and ouersaw them

so to do: and so doth the Quéenes maiestie. And this suffe∣rance, commaundement and ouersight, argueth their chiefe authorities.

Item not to prescribe a newe forme & order in ecclesiasti∣call* 1.359 causes, but to see that according to the lawes of the church before made, the religion be set forthe, as Iosaphat procu•…•…ed the obseruation of the old religion appointed in the lawe of Moyses.

And euen thus and none otherwise hath the Quéenes Ma∣iestie procured the obseruation of the old religion of Iesus Christ whome Moyses prefigured, and the orders of the apostles, and most auncient fathers after them, to be resto∣red: remouing, as Iosaphat did, all other newe formes and orders of ecclesiasticall abuses. And this restoring and pro∣curing of the aunciente religion and ceremonies, the sup∣pressing and abolishing of new: is againe in both these prin∣ces a good argument of their supreme gouernement.

Briefly (say you) that he do all this as an aduocate, defender* 1.360 and son of the Churche, with the authoritie and aduice of the cleargie, so Iosaphat furdered religion, not otherwise.

Your word aduocate how it came vp, is declared alrea∣dy, but neither aduocate, defender, sonne or daughter herein, are any thing contrary to supreme gouernour. But where ye adde al these words, aduocate, defender, and sonne, to the prince: and to the cleargy authoritie & aduice: this sheweth your subtile deuise, to deceyue princes with youre paynted termes. But princes begin to waxe wise and learned, as Dauid exhorted them, and perceaue howe ye haue foaded* 1.361 them with these names and stiles, that were but nomen sine re, a bare name without any matter: for, the authoritie and ad∣uice ye reserued to your selues. The princes to whome ye gaue these gay titles, had neither authoritie, nor might giue their aduice, according as Hosius woulde not haue them so much as to talke of matters of religion, much lesse to re∣forme religion, to directe ecclesiasticall matters with care

and diligence as before ye graunted. And nowe to eate a∣gaine your worde, ye woulde haue them be carefull and diligent without aduice, reforme and direct without autho∣ritie, of their owne, except onely the clergies aduice and au∣thoritie. Thinke ye Iosaphat did so, not otherwise as ye say•…•… ye may well tell vs so but the Scripture telleth vs other∣wise: howe he gaue aduice to the Clergie, and by his au∣thoritie directed them, though I denie not he might vse their aduice, and admitte their authoritie to, yet the supreme au∣thoritie apperteyned vnto him.

Not (say you) as a supreme absolute gouernour, contrary* 1.362 to the vniforme consent of the whole clergie in full conuoca∣tion, yea and of all the Bishops at once.

This worde absolute, is but your absolute and malicious slaunder M. Stap. Such absolute supreme gouernment did your Pope vsurpe, as sayth Franciscus de Ripa, that the Popes power is absolute and that he may do what he will. As Baldus in the proheme of the decrées alleageth, that his power is absolute from all bondes, and from all rule of restraint. And that we must beléeue him absolutely as Marcus Mantua and Pope Boniface himselfe affirmeth.* 1.363

Thus doth not the Quéenes maiestie, no more did king Iosaphat, and therefore I inferre the conclusion that the Queenes Maiestie doth all these things, in such sort as lo∣saphat did them, excepting these quarelous slaunders which are your owne, put them vp in your purse agayne master Stapleton, and then shall ye finde the sort and manner of the doings, of the one Prince and the other alike: and so I conclude with your owne conclusion. Thus the example of Iosaphat fitteth well Christian Princes. he vsing the same su∣preme gouernment then, that the Quéenes Maiestie now doth: nor ye can alleage any thing to the contrary but cer∣taine manifest slaunders. Whervpon it followeth that the Q. taketh none other authoritie vpō hir than Iosaphat did, and all godly Christian Princes ought to doe the like, the

one ensample fitting the other euen as your selfe confesse.

Now that M. St. by this most cleare confession & graunt, hath yelded so farre in this example that he hath contraried not only M. Dor y^t denied it to be a fit example, frō Kings in the old law to kings in the new: but contrary also to him∣self that denied before any example at al to be fit, telling vs that legibu•…•… non exemplis iud•…•… atur, Men must iudge by lawes* 1.364 and not by examples. And here he sayth that this example fits well christian princes, & thereon hath concluded already the full matter in question: neither •…•…e can find any thing in the Q. maiestyes doings swaruing from Iosaphats, but cer∣tain of his owne mere slaūders: he startleth, and besturreth himself with euery tristing quarrell, picking fault at trāsla∣tions, at the print of the letter, & such like things to occupie the readers head withall, least he should perceiue & marke, how the weight & pith of the matter is alredy graunted and concluded, by his owne mouth & confession. And here he cha∣lengeth y^e B. with wretched & shameful bandling of the holy scriptures. This is a sore fault indéed if it were true, but how proueth he this?

First promising verye sadly in his preface (sayth he) to* 1.365 cause his authors sentences for the part to be printed in latine letters, here coursing ouer three seuerall chapters of the 2. of Paralip. he setteth not downe any one part or worde of the whole text in any latine or distinct letter, but handleth the scriptures as pleaseth himselfe, translating, mangling and be∣lying them beyond all shame. For the translation we shall sée afterward M St. what you chalenge therin, in the mean season, we may well sée how hard it goeth with you in y^t ye are faine to séeke such brabling matters as this, which is but a petit quarel, and that false also. The Bishop euen as your selfe confesse, did but course ouer, that is, did but touche the summe & effect of those matters, & not set out word by word the text, as he hath not chaūged the letter hitherto in y^e like doing, & ye find no fault there with. Neither did the B. bind

him selfe in translating, to euery worde, but so to set out their minds & sētēces, which word minds, ye haue left out, & also for these words (for the most part) ye haue put in, for the part. Thus do ye order the Bishops sentence in setting it foorth in a distincte letter, as though he had so said, which in déede is the part of wretched and shamefull hand∣ling and belying beyond all shame, especially to vpbrayde it to another, to shewe the more impudēcie of your selfe ther∣in. As for the Bishop only shewing the effect of the matter, and not the words, nor going about there to translate at al, it was lawfull for him to vse his common print, his promise still obserued when he translated any thing. You youre selfe vse this commonly in translating, not onely to kéepe your ordinarie forme of letter, but therby, to hādle the scrip ture as it pleaseth you. But now in this the Bishops sum∣marie draught out of all those three aforesayde chapters, let vs sée what it is that ye chalenge him for so sore.

He telleth vs (say you) of the kings visitours, of a progresse* 1.366 made in his owne person, through out all his countrey, and of Iustices of the peace, whereas the texts alleaged haue no such words at all.

It is easie to sée howe enuy or proud follie blindeth thys mā, that reprehendeth the Bishop as missetelling the effect of a sentence, and him selfe in distincte letter, going about to set out the Bishops words, as he did before, cannot or will not repeate the same aright, were these the bishops words, kings visitors & Iustices of the peace▪ the bishops words wer these, He sēt forth through his kingdom visitors, & again, he appointed in euery towne through out his kingdome as it were Iustices of the peace. Why, will ye say, thys is al one. it is so in effecte master Stapl. and so they were the kings visitours. But yet should you here tell the bare wordes that the Bishoppe allea∣ged, and if you may be blamelesse in saying you tell the effect & summe of the sentence, may not then the same say∣ing

bishop also? and a gret deale more, bicause (as ye say) he did but course ouer three chapters briefly, and therefore coulde not easily expresse the bare texts. But you might easily (no∣ting but two or thrée little sentences) haue set them downe playne. I speake this the rather for that that followeth. Ye say y^e bishop telleth of Iustices of the peace. The bishop on∣ly said, as it were iustices of the peace, as who should say, suche officers then, as a man might liken to our petit iudges, or iustices of the peace now. But thus ye euer loue to wrest the Byshops words, that ye may make the feater entrance into one of your common places, saying:

Verily suche a tale he telleth vs, that his ridiculous dealing* 1.367 herein were it not in Gods cause (where the indignitie of his demeanour is to be detested) were worthily to be laughed at.

Are the stories of the Scripture become tales to this Lo∣uanist?* 1.368 are the visitations and progresse of this godly king, that right nowe was with him a fitte ensample for chri∣stian princes, become now ridiculous dealing, and worthily to be laughed at, or indignities to be detested? suche were in déede the Popishe visitations. As for that the byshop ci∣teth is manyfest in the scripture. The king sent out his* 1.369 Princes and preachers, as the summe of the chapter in your olde translation sayth, mittit praedicatores per vniuersam Iudeam, he sendeth ont preachers throughout all Iewry: Whervpon Lyra noteth, hic ostenditur qualiter populum su∣um* 1.370 instruxit, scilicet per sacerdotes & Leuitas quos ad hoc misit & cum eis aliquot de principibus suis, vt populum inducerent ad obedientiam & punirent rebelles si quos inuenirent. Heere is declared how he instructed his people, to wite, by the Priests and Leuites, whom he sent to this purpose, and with thē cer∣taine of his Princes to moue the people to obedience, and to punish the rebellious, if they should finde any. Is it ridicu∣lous or detestable dealing herein, to name these parties visitours sent from the king? were they not sent to him to visite y^e people & reforme thē in religion? Againe the bishop

said, he made a progresse in his owne person, throughout al* 1.371 his coūtrey. What fault find ye herewith, that he called it a progresse? call you it an egresse, or by what ye can finde a more vsuall or •…•…itter name, where the prince him selfe doth trauell. The text is, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 egressus est ad populū, and again he went foorth vnto the people. Stande ye on that he said it was in his owne person? In déede Lyra saith, per sacerdotes* 1.372 & Leuit as sicu•…•… ante ficara•…•…, He went foorth by the Priests & Leuites, as he had done before. But the text séemeth cōtrary, that he traueled him selfe. Wheron Uatablus noteth, vt* 1.373 ambularet per populū fortasse quē offenderat •…•…alo exēpl•…•…, vel per populū cut prae•…•…rat, quasi dicat pe•…•…agrauit regionē sibi subditam. That he might trauel by the people whō perhaps he had of∣fended by his euill exāple (for personally he went out with them to Achabs warres) or by the people whō he ruled, as though he should say, he trauelled all ouer the realme that was subiect to him.

Are ye offended that he sayth throughout al his countrey. The text is playne De Bersabe vs{que} ad montē Ephraim, from Beersabee, euen to the mount Ephraim. Id est (sayth Lyra)* 1.374 à principio regni sui vs{que} ad finem, that is, from the beginning of his kingdome, euen to the end therof. Of which progresse in the note before, sayth Lyra, Hie consequenter ponitur ipsius Iosaphat emēdatio in se & populo, & primo in cultu diuino. Here consequently is set foorth the amendment of Iosaphat in him selfe, and in the people, and first in the worship of God. In none of these words hitherto there is any indignitie, no∣thing to be detested or any ridiculous tale to be laughed at, but euery word is agreable to the most graue, holy and in∣fallible worde of God.

If there were therfore any such leuitie & detestablenesse in y^e bishops termes, it is only in this, that he likened those parties to iustices of the peace. But this name I am sure is neither to be detested nor laughed at, except you be some od* 1.375 wicked Lucian or Timon •…•…all godly christians can allowe

this name with reuerence. Is the ridiculcusnesse & detesta∣blenesse, in saying the one might resemble the other? reade the text. Constituit{que} Iudices terrae in cunctis ciuitatibus Iuda munitis per singula loca, and he appointed Iudges of the land in all the walled cities of Iuda through all places. Now could a man expresse this by a liuelyer example, than to say those petit iudges were, as it were Iustices of the peace, if you can shewe a more apter estate to expresse them by, do it on Gods name. I dare say for the Byshop, he will giue you good leaue, & though ye somewhat missed the quishion, make no such haynous matter therat.

Lyra sayth, Hic secundo describitur ipsius Iosaphat & po∣puli* 1.376 melioratio in regimine populi, primo in communibus causis, secundo in arduis, in quibus erat recursus in Hierusalem. Circa primum dicitur, constituit{que} Iudices, vt non oporteat populum discurrere à loca ad locum, ad habendum in causis communibus. Heere secondly is described the bettering of Iosaphat him selfe, and his people, in the gouernance of the people, first in common causes, secondly in difficulte causes, wherein the recourse was vnto Hierusalem. Concerning the firste it is sayde, and he appoynted Iudges to be had in the com∣mon matters that the people shoulde not runne vp and downe from place to place. And is not this exposition of Lyra so agreable to the Byshops, that it conteyneth euen the same? what cause then had ye héere, Master Stapl. to make this haynous exclamation? Were not this youre dealing rather ridiculous, and to be laughed at, sauyng that the indignitie of your enuious demeanour is more to be detested?

But nowe in the matter, of all this what is héere, that directly inferreth not Iosaphats supreme gouernement, not onely ouer the nobles and the people, but ouer the Priests, Leuites, preachers, & al the clergy, in directing and setting foorth the word & worship of God, & that not only in cōmō matters, but euē for those matters also of the priests

sentēce at Ierusalem, for the which hitherto ye haue made so muche ado? but all this, M. Stap. though he saw it plaine inough, yet he thought best not to meddle therwith. But ra∣ther (least the reader shoulde marke it also) to finde him play about the printing of words and phrases, and here at to hallow and make suche outcries, as though all the matter lay therein. Yea he bursteth out into such a vehemencie of his spirite, that not contente with his former haynous quarels, he layeth yet greater to the Byshops charge, saying:

But from fonde counterfayting he proceedeth to flat ly∣ing,* 1.377 for where he sayth that Iosaphat commanded and pre∣scribed vnto the chiefe Priests what fourme and order they should obserue in the ecclesiasticall causes and controuersies of religion. &c. This is a lewde and a horrible lye, flatly be∣lying Gods holy worde, the which in one that goeth for a Byshop, what can be done more abhominable?

In déede, M. Stapl. it were an abhominable thing to be∣lye Gods holy worde, were it in any man, chiefly in a By∣shop: but this abhomination, besides many worsse, not only lewdly, flatly, & horribly to belie, but to deface & blaspheme, yea to take away and burne Gods holy worde, are the right properties of your Popish Bishops, not of ours.

But what hath the Bishop nowe héere saide that belyeth and accordeth not with the holy scripture? for, the wordes which you your selfe set foorth, do they not playnly compre∣hende a fourme and order which they should obserue in ec∣clesiasticall matters and controuersies of religion? Sic agetis* 1.378 &c. Thus shall ye do in the feare of the Lorde, faythfully and with a perfect heart. And as your selfe expound it. They should do their duetie faythfully and perfectly, as they had done before in the dayes of Asa and Abias. Lo, do not your* 1.379 owne selfe héere confesse a maner and fourme of order, which be prescribed them to do those things by? Agayne are not these your owne words, howe Iosaphat appoynted

the Leuites and priestes to these ecclesiasticall functions, it shal appeare in the next Chapter by the example of Ezechi∣as? Where ye say, howe he did it: had that how, no maner or fourme of order in it? Yes, but ye say, that maner of fourme shall appeare in the example of Ezechias. A Gods name so let it doe in the meane season, ye graunt he did it after the fourme of order that Ezechias dyd it. And there ye say that Ezechias did it as Dauid did it. But ye wotte well the Scripture sheweth at large the fourmes and orders of Dauids appoyntments: if therefore Ezechias did it like to Dauid, and Iosaphat like to Ezechias, then is the bishops saying proued true, by all these your confessions, that he commaunded and prescribed vnto the chiefe priests what fourme and order they should obserue in ecclesiasticall cau∣ses and controuersies of religion. Is not this then your own abhomination and contradiction, •…•…atly to say, here is no fourme or order prescribed? and that the Bishop belieth* 1.380 Gods holy woorde which in one that goeth for a student of Diuinitie, to sclaunder one that goeth for a Bishop, what can be done more malapertly?

But as ye thus sawfely misuse your better, so full fondly and malitionsly, do y•…•… gather that thereon, then the which the Bishop minded nothing lesse, nor can instly be gathe∣red thereupon. Y•…•… say the Bishop writeth thus to make folke weene that religion proceded then by way of commis∣sion* 1.381 from the Prince onely.

This is your owne spitefull sclander M. Stapl. not one∣ly on the Bishop but on the Quéenes Maiestie, your argu∣ment is this.

He prescribed them a fourme and order to obserue in cō∣trouersies of Religion.

Ergo, He attempted to make Religion proceede by way of commission from the Prince onely.

This is a false and ma•…•…itions collection M. Stapl. from the fourme and order of athing, to the thing it selfe. It is

your holy father the Pope to whom ye may obiect this con∣clusion, he ma•…•…eth religion to depende on him and to pro∣ceede from him onely▪ by his Commissions and Legacies •…•… latere. We-acknowledge all true religion to procéede onely from God the father, through Iesus Christ his sonne, by the* 1.382 ins•…•…ctiō of the holy ghost in the mouth of the Patriarches, Prophets, and Apostles. And from the Prince to procéede, onely such godly orders, and formes of directing, and setting foorth that true religion, as he by the notable examples of these godly Kinges, shall finde out paterns most expedient for him and his people, to gouerne and order them of what •…•…state soeuer they be, in that true religion, and all other ec∣clesiastical causes belonging thereto. So did Iosaphat then, so doth the Quéenes Maiestie now. Frō whose authoritie, next •…•…nder▪ God, the order & direction procéeded, though the religiō procéeded not from them, but altogither from God.

Nay (say you) king▪ Iosaphats dealings were rather with* 1.383 〈◊〉〈◊〉 perso•…•… th•…•…n with matters ecclesiasticall.

This was M. Feckēhams former shifte, and many pro∣per ensamples and similitudes you also vsed thereon, to dally about the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the ecclesiasticall person, but not in ecclesiastical matters. But those were but séely shifts, and euer turned against your selfe in the ende. And there∣fore ye dar•…•… not abide by this shifte, but within a litle while after, yea euen in this Chapter, ye recant and denie the obedience of the persons and all. And what hath bene your* 1.384 practise, any other than cleane to ridde your selues out of al obedience from the Princes authoritie? ye knowe your Pope hath bene vnder the Emperour ere now, but vnder what Princes obedience euen for his person will ye con∣fesse your Pope at this day to be? And do not all the packe of the popishe Priestes, as his chickens cl•…•…cke vnder his winges, and exempt euen their persons also from the du∣tifull obedience they owe to their naturall soueraignes, in so much that where the Popes primacie is admitted,

Princes can not by any of their lawe•…•…▪ fasten any con∣digne punishement, vppon any ecclesiasticall persons▪ what mischiefe soeuer they committe? and all bicause the ecclesiasticall persons were priuileged and exempted from their Princes authoritie. Wherein your generation dealt surely for themselues, that hauing graunted them an inche got an elle. For, seing, that if they should graunt againe the obedience of the person, the cause and all would at last returne to his old master the Prince, as it did before, but you thinke your selfe sure inough, if ye graunt that Iosa∣phat dealed with ecclesiasticall persons, but not with their matters. As ye shifted of the matter before, that the Prince dealeth with a Bishop for his homage, baronie and temporal∣ties,* 1.385 but not otherwise.

Thinke ye M. Stapl. and tell me on your fidelitie, did Iosaphat meddle with the high Priestes, and all other of the Clergie so well as his temporaltie, onely in respecte of their persons, or in respecte of their reuenues and li∣nings vnder him, or chiefly in any of these respectes did he thus commaunde them and deale with them: or not ra∣ther and most of all in respect of refourming abuses in re∣ligion, and setting in order all ecclesiasticall causes? he ap∣pointed not onely the persons but the places where the persons shoulde execute their offices, and what matters these and those persons shoulde entreate vppon, and how they shoulde do them, as your selfe haue confessed the manner.

And least we should thinke he •…•…ubbered ouer the mat∣ter, as ye say, many good and godly princes among the* 1.386 Christians also haue charged their Bishops and clergie to see diligently vnto their flockes and charges.

Ye say true M. Stapleton, many godly Princes haue thus done to your further confutation in this issue. But you meane they haue onely giuen them a generall exhorta∣tion, and yet neuerthelesse lefte the matter wholly in their

Clergies hands, not medling themselues therewith: Least* 1.387 ye should thinke that Iosaphat did it thus sclenderly, & not that his chiefe charge of ouersight lay thereon, not onely of them all generally, but particulerly in euery kinde of mat∣ter: the holy ghost hath penned out, how precisely he went to worke, & that rather hauing his care about the matters, then the persons. For this was his principal marke & care, not so much that the person might sit in authoritie, as that the matter might wisely and truly be iudged and discer∣ned, and therfore saith the text. In Hierusalem quoque con∣stituit* 1.388 Iosaphat Leuitas, & sacerdotes, & principes familiarū ex Israel, vt iudicium & causam domini Iudicarent habitatoribus eius, &c. Praecepitque eis, &c. And Iosaphat appointed in Ie∣rusalem Leuites and Priests and families of Israell, that they might giue iudgement and iudge the cause of the Lorde to the inhabitants thereof, &c. And he cōmaunded them saying: Thus shall ye do in the feare of the Lord faithfully, and with a perfecte harte, and in euery cause that shall come vnto you of your brethren that dwell in their Cities, betweene bloud and bloud, betweene lawe and precepte, statutes and iudge∣ments, ye shall iudge them and admonish them. &c. Wher∣vpon saith Lyra: Hic ordinatur regime•••• populi in arduis cau∣sis,* 1.389 &c. Here is ordeyned the gouernment of the people in difficult causes, which could not well be cutte of, without re∣course had to Ierusalem, according to that which is cōmaun∣ded, Deuter. 17. Where it is saide, if thou shalt perceyue the* 1.390 iudgement before thee to be difficult and doubtfull, arise and get thee vp to the place which the Lord shall choose. &c. And therefore Iosaphat appointed iudges there, to determine such difficult matters. Wherefore it followeth, euery cause which commeth vnto you, &c. VVheresoeuer the question is: if it be of the lawe, so farre forth as pertaineth to the ten commāde∣ments of the tables. If it be of the commaundement, so farre forth as pertaineth to the other moral points: if it be of the precepts of the ten commandements, as it were certaine con∣clusions

piked out: if it be of the ceremonies, so farre forth as pertayneth to ceremoniall matters: of iustifications, that is to say of iudiciall matters whereby iustice is to be conserued among men.

Thus is there no parte ecclesiasticall or temporall, exem∣pted from the ouersight, care, directiō & appointment of the king. No not the iudgement that ye haue so often alleaged and craked vppon out of the Deut. 17. vnder the which (as a generall rule for all examples to be ruled by) ye would subdue the Prince vpon paine of death, to obey the absolute determination of the Priest. Euen this same office and all other, with all causes to them belonging, (so farre as stretcheth to the ouersight and supreme gouernment) do be∣long, to the Prince, to appoint and ordeyne fitte parties, to displace and remoue vnfitte parties, & to sée al these offices, so well as any other temporall, obserued kept and executed dutifully. Which is not so much for the persons, as for the persons offices. And therefore Iosaphat not only appointed them by his authoritie or regiment as Lyra saith, their of∣fices: but also he told thē how they should do their offices.

Nay say you, to each your matter yet with an other shift, He doth it not with threates of his highe displeasure, or by* 1.391 force of his owne iniunctions, but onely saith: so then doing you shall not sinne or offende. The which very manner of speache, christian Emperours and Kinges haue eft•…•…ones vsed in the like case, as we shall hereafter in the thirde booke by examples declare.

Euen in the examples that ye shall there declare M. St.* 1.392 ye shall finde both threates of high displeasures and the in∣i•…•…nctions also of many godly princes. And therefore seing that ye cōpare their doings alike, why say you these doings of Iehosophat haue no threates nor iniunctions? what call ye this, did he not threate them trowe you, when he saide, Ne veniat tra super vos & super fratres vestros, Least wrath come vppon you and vppon your bretheren. Whiche

woordes ye ouerhipped. He denoūced vnto them the wrath of God, which declared his great zeale and care of Gods matters as the Bishop saide. And thinke you that the high displeasure of God, conteyned not this godly Princes high displeasure also? do ye suppose that they drad not the Prin∣ces high displeasure in the breache of their dueties, bicause he threateth them with Gods moste high displeasure? Or thinke ye it was not so forcible as any iniūctiō of his vnto them, in that (as your selfe say) he charged them, and (as the text saithe) Praecepit eis, he commaunded them? which is most plaine and euident to signifie, that he enioygned them by his supreme gouernment ouer them?

And to shew that besides his charge, his commaunde∣ment, his threate of Gods most high displeasure, they should incurre his high displeasure also, if they or any other dis∣obeyed: Lyra saithe on his former visitation, Hic often∣ditur* 1.393 qualiter &c. Here is declared after what sorte he in∣structed his people, to wite, by the Priestes and Leuites, whom he sent to this purpose, and with them certaine of his Princes, to bring the people to obedience, and to punish the rebelles, if they should finde any. And of this visitation al∣so saith Lyra: He appointed Zabadias to be ouer those wor∣kes that belong to the Kinges office, that if any rebelles were found they should by him be chastized with due punishmēt. Doth not this import the Kinges highe displeasure, in the breach of these his appointments, charge & cōmaundment, when he adioyned those that should punish the disobedient?

Now whereas the Bishop briefly noted all this, how King Iosaphat appointed the Priestes to decide and iudge controuersies: you snatch thereat, and clappe downe there∣on a marginall note. Yea the Priestes iudged, not the king, say you, ouerskipping that the King appointed them there∣to, which argueth his supreme gouernment. And yet the King iudged also by his deputie, not the Priest alone. And so saith plaine the texte: In Hierusalem quoque constituit &c.

And Iosaphat appointed also Leuites and Priestes, and the* 1.394 Princes of the families of Israel: Here M. St. he appointed as well the lay Princes, as the Priests. And wherto? vt Iu∣dicium & causam domini iudicarent, that they should iudge the iudgement and cause of the Lorde. Sée how plaine this is against you: but what is there not, that ye will spare to* 1.395 wrest, to make it sée me to serue your turne? For euē of the last sentence, ye thinke in the ende ye haue gotten so nota∣ble a proufe for your matter: that greatly ye vrge it and wonderfully triumph therevppon.

Thus saith (say you) King Iosaphat. Amarias the priest and* 1.396 your Bishop, shall haue the gouernment of such things as ap∣pertaine to God. And Zabadias shalbe ouer such workes as appertaine to the kinges office. Lo (say you) the kings office and diuine matters are of distinct functions.

Lo say I, how sone ye would cōclude a lie. Your text saith not, the kings office and diuine matters are of distinct functi∣ons. Nor maketh any opposition or distinction betwene the kings office and diuine matters, as though it appertained not to the kings office, to haue any thing to do with diuine* 1.397 matters. Contrary to the which, your own cōfession euen in this kings doings, witnesseth against you, that he reformed religion, and had a care and diligence about the directing ec∣clesiasticall matters. And trow you he did this beyond the boūdes of his office? How can then his example, as ye say, fitte well christian princes, if it be not a parcell belonging to their office? the text is plaine that the king appointeth as wel the Bishop Amarias his gouernmēt, as Zabadias his gouernmēt: to the one, to haue the gouernmēt of such things as appertaine to God: to the other, to be ouer such workes as appertaine to the king. Here in these two, (such things) on the one partie, and (such workes) on the other partie, is the distinction made: and not betwene the kings office, and di∣uine matters, as you falsely conclude. And yet I pray you what argument can ye gather herevppon?

The kings office & diuine matters are of distinct functiōs:

Ergo the King hath no supreme gouernment ouer all ec∣clesiasticall causes.

By the like reason he hath no supreme gouernment ouer temporall causes neither. For, the kinge•…•… office & his tem∣porall subiects matters, are not they also distinct functione?

Ergo, the king hath no supreme gouernmēt ouer his tem∣porall subiects matters. Againe ye reason thus:

Thus saith the king, the priest shall gouerne in those things that belong to God.

Ergo, to ouersee the Priests, & gouerne them rightly, ap∣pertayneth not to the kinges gouernment.

Where in deede you should rather reason the quite con∣trarie.

Thus saith the king, the priest and the Bishop shal haue the gouernment of such things as appertaine to God.

Ergo, the Prince that thus appointeth him thereto, hath an other supreme gouernment of appointing and ouerseing euen the priests gouernment.

Doth not the King appoint the one to his office, so well as he appointed the other, & are not both gouerned in their offices vnder him?

Yet say you, ouer gods matters is the priest, not as the kings commissioner, but as the priests were after the example of Moses. The Bishop refuseth not the example of Moses, but alleaged euen the same, and your selfe then refused that example: saying, he had such prerogatiues, that he of all o∣ther could not be alleaged for exāple, bicause of his especial priuilege. And now contrary to your former sayings, you say, the priests were not as the Kings cōmissioners, but were alwaies after the example of Moses. But go to, be it so, how doth this helpe your matter, or not rather quite confute it?

In Moses time Aaron, and after him Eleazar were the chiefe priestes ouer gods matters, vnder whome were the other Priestes and Leuites.

But all of them, yea Aaron and Eleazar, so wel as the rest, were vnder the supreme gouernement, in ecclesiasticall causes so well as temporall, of their Prince and ruler Moses.

Ergo, If Moses be an example how the priestes should alwayes gouerne vnder Gods matters, then muste their go∣uernment be alwayes vnder the princes supreme gouern∣ment, to ouersée, order and direct them as Moses did.

And where ye say, the Priest here, was not the Princes* 1.398 commissioner in these matters, the very text is most playn to the contrarie. I stande not on the worde, least I should minister to you occasion of wrangling with me, as ye do with the byshop: but goe to the matter. What call ye him that the Prince sendeth foorth in a commission, committing a charge vnto him, call ye him not a commissioner? and his commissioner that so sendeth him in commission? did not Iosaphat so sende about his priestes and Leuites on this commission, that they shoulde teache and set foorth euery where the worde of God? Tertio ann•…•… regni sui misit, &c.* 1.399 in the thirde yere of his raigne, he sent out certayne of hys princes, Benail, and Obdias, and Zacharias, and Nathaniel, and Micheas, that they should teache in the cities of Iuda: and with them the Leuites, Semeiah, Nethamah, Zebediah, and Asahel, and Semiramoth, and Ionathas, and Adonias, and Thobias, and Tob Adoniah Leuites: and with them Elizama and Ioram Priests. And they taught the people in Iuda, hauing with them the booke of the lawe of the Lord: and they went about throughout all the cities of Iuda, and taught the people.

Were they not héere sent in this commission thus to do, frō the king? Their doctrine was not the kings, but Gods commission, the Lords booke: but this their maner of tra∣ueling in setting it foorth, was the kings commission. And they, so wel the Priests and Leuites, as the Princes, were bothe of them the kings commissioners. In lyke case, the

Quéenes maiesty sendeth out hir godly learned commissio∣ners, & sendeth by them the worde of God, Gods booke and truthe to be set foorth. The truth thus set foorth, hath not his authoritie from hir cōmission, nor the preachers to preach, only by hir outward commission? but they haue another in∣ward cōmission from God, and are Gods commissioners by the calling & ministerie of their office. Howbeit, in this out∣ward maner of visitation & setting it foorth, in this sorte of traueling about hir highnesse townes and cities, reforming abuses, & directing all eccl. causes: they are therin euen as∣well the Quéenes cōmissioners, as those priests & Leuites in al their reformatiō of religion, were cōmissioners from king Iosaphat. And thus euery thing in the ende is moste euident agaynst you. But yet ye blunder still on in your owne conceite, and thinke ye haue héere gotten a wonder∣full strong argument.

And marke well M. Horne, this poynt (say you) Zabadias* 1.400 is set ouer suche workes as belong to the kinges office. But suche workes are no maner thing perteyning to the seruice of God (for ouer them Amarias the Priest is President) Ergo, the kinges office consisteth not about thinges pertey∣ning to God, but is a distinct function concerning the com∣mon weale. Ergo, if the king intermeddle in Gods matters, especially if he take vpon him the supreme gouernement thereof, euen ouer the priests thē selues, to whom the charge is committed, he passeth the boūdes of his office: he breaketh the order appoynted by God, and is become an open ene∣mie to Gods holy ordinance.

Your crakes and reuilings that ye powder your argu∣ment with, I remitte to their proper common places, to the argument I aunswere. If it be marked well, as ye would haue it, saying, Marke well this poynte M. Horne: First, the marker shall finde it neither in any moode nor fi∣gure. Secondly, the marker shall finde an Equiuocation in these words, workes, kinges office, pertayning to Gods

seruice. Which words béeing diuerfly vnderstoode in either proposition: Thirdly, make a paralogisme of foure termes. Fourthly, in these words ye make a Fallation a secundum quid ad simpliciter. Lyra liuiteth the•…•…e words, super ea ope∣raerit* 1.401 quae ad regis officium pertinent. He shall be ouer those workes that perteyne to the kings office: onely to the ay∣ding and strengthening the Priests and the Leuites, by the temporall sworde, to punishe the disobediente. But is there no other works of the Kings office besides this? Ua∣tablus* 1.402 vnder standeth it, that as the priest medled with the weightie causes at Ierusalem: so also the Leuites shoulde be ouer the lesser causes, Causae Ciutū cognoscebontur à Le∣uitis, causaeautē Regtae à Zabaudi•…•…. The causes or controuer∣sies perteyning to the citizens, should be herd of the Leuites, and the causes and controuersies perteyning to the King, should be herd of Zabaudias. Neither of these vnderstande these words so generally, of al the doings belonging in any wise to the office of a king. In lyke case, for the priestes gouernment, in suche thinges as belong to God, Id est (sayth Uatablus) quod pertinet ad rem diuinam: To wite, so farre as perteyneth to the diuine seruice, or the dyuine administration. And you wrest it to be vnderstoode sim∣ply for all ecclesiasticall matters, and all causes of reli∣gion. Besides that Fifthly, ye reason styll after youre wonted fashion, from the distinction of the thynges and vvorkes of eithers perticuler functions, to the ta∣king away of the Princes supreme gouernement ouer those distincte workes and functions. Howe dothe this argument followe?

The king appoyntes one ouer Gods workes, and ano∣ther distinct from him ouer his owne workes:

Ergo, the king hath not a supreme gouernement ouer them both, to ouersée thē to do those works. Your conclusi∣ons therfore last of all are faultie, neither directly follo∣wing vpon your premisses, and comprehending much more

then they inferre. This part of your conclusion, that the kings office is a distinct function from the Priests, neither impugneth the byshops assertion, nor the princes supreme gouernement. Conclude this M. Stap. agaynst them that confounde their offices. The other parte of your conclusi∣on, that the kinges office medleth onely with the common weale, by which ye meane, onely the ciuill policie, and hath nothing to do with any matters perteyning to God: or euer ye shall directly proue it, on this, or any other place in the whole scripture, it will finde ye somewhat more to do than ye suppose it will. As for the kinges intermedling with Gods matters: your selfe before haue graunted a king* 1.403 may intermedle and be no breaker, nor enimie to Gods order. And that euen this king Iosaphat vsed a care and di∣ligence about the directing of ecclesiasticall matters, that he reformed religion, and that godly christian Princes may at this day do the lyke. This your selfe haue already graun∣ted. And is all this no intermedling? dothe it not rather proue he intermedled, & that as supreme gouernour there∣of, yea euen ouer the Priestes them selues, to whome that charge (of doing those matters) is committed? and yet he neither breaketh the order appoynted by God, nor is be∣come an enimie to Gods holy ordinance.

Ye say, it was Gods ordinance and appoyntment, what followeth? it was not therefore the Princes ordinance and appoyntment also? as though these were contrary, and coulde not stande togither the one vnder the other, the or∣dinance of God, and the ordinance of the king. Put case the Priest had ordeined it, might it not haue béene Gods ordinance too? but the priest ordeined it not, but the prince: Ergo, the Prince immediatly ordeyning it vnder God, she∣weth that he hath an immediate power vnder him, euen aboue the Priests. Of whome are these words so precisely* 1.404 spoken, he appoynted, he commaunded, he sayde it shall be so, thus shall ye do, &c? was it the Prince, or was it the

Priest? Did Amarias commaunde Iehosaphat, or Iehosa∣phat commaunde Amarias, and all the other Priestes and Leuites? who is the supreme gouernour of the twaine, the commaunder and appointer, or he that is commaunded and appoynted? Untill therefore that ye can proue, that the high Priest Amarias, commaunded and appoynted vnto King Iosaphat these things, and that the king did not commaund, nor appoynt these things to the Priest and Bishop: euerie man that hath any vnderstanding, will easily perceyue and iudge, that the Prince was the Priestes supreme gouer∣nour next vnder God, both ouer his person, and ouer the thing also wherein he appoynted and commaunded him.

But, sée your constant dealing in this matter▪ before, you made the gouernance of the thing to be more than the go∣uernance of the person. And here as though it were a grea∣ter matter to gouerne the person, you say:

If he take vpon him the supreme gouernment thereof e∣uen ouer the Priests themselues, to whom the charge is com∣mitted: Againe, before you sayde, that Iosaphats dealings were rather with persons than with matters ecclesiasticall: But now ye exempt the persons to, saying: If he take vpon him the supreme gouernment euen ouer the Priests them∣selues, &c. he passeth the boundes of his office. And thus, al∣though for a while ye would shift off the matter by séeming to graunt somwhat, to bleare the reader withall: yet in the ende contrary to your former graunt, ye ea•…•…e your worde, and debarre the Prince of all, both for matter and persons to. But (thankes be to God) this insample of Iosaphat is so plaine, that all these fetches and shiftes that ye are dry∣uen vnto, can so little any way improue his supreme go∣uernment: that euery thing which ye bring agaynst it, ma∣keth more and more for it. Such is the force of the truth, and so doth falsehoode in his owne trippe still ouerturne it selfe.

The. 16. Diuision.

THe Bishop alleaging the example of king Ezechias, fi•…•…st* 1.405 sheweth what great commendation, for his godly go∣uernment in reforming religion, the scripture attributeth vnto him. Secondly, how he called togither the clergie, tel∣leth them their faults, declareth to them the wrath of God, exhorteth & commaundeth them to do their dueties in clen∣sing themselues, in making their sacrifices, and appointeth their offices, & prouideth them conuenient portions to liue by, and that in all things the clergie and the people obeyed the Kings commaundement, which argueth his supreme gouernment ouer all ecclesiasticall persons and causes.

To this master Stapleton aunswereth, first on the olde warrant of his good masters wordes, by reiecting all this as insufficient.

Here is nothing brought in by you (sayth he) or before* 1.406 by the Apologie (as M. Dorman and M. D. Harding do well aunswere) that forceth the surmised soueraigntie in King E∣zechias, but that his power and authoritie was readie and ser∣uiceable (as it ought to be in all prynces) for the execution of things spirituall before determined, & not by him as supreme head newly established.

How well or yll master Stap. your masters haue aun∣swered this obiection, and are aunswered againe, is appa∣rant and easie to be iudged by viewing both their answeres. Howbeit, vnto their wel doings, for feare they should not fal out so well as ye pretend: you haue done well also to better their answeres, with the surplusage of your new stuffe.

And if it were graunted you M. Stap. that those things which Ezechias did, had not bene, by him as supreme heade, newly established, would it folow therevpon, that they were not by him, as supreme head or gouernour, newly reformed neyther: hauing bene some of them of olde established be∣fore,

& by the priests negligence, hauing long time bene cor∣rupted? But what letteth why they may not also be sayde, to haue bene by him newly established, being quite decayed before? And so sayth Lyra of the ioy at the great passeouer that long time had ceassed, Propter quod, quado Ezechias eam* 1.407 renouaeuit, fuit maior exultatio, quòd noua placent & delectant. For the which cause, whē Ezechias renued it, there was grea∣ter reioising, for bicause new things do please and delight. So that to them it was a newe establishing. But was the bra∣sen serpent pulled downe and destroyed euer before, as o∣ther Images and hill aulters had béene? was the feast of the passeouer euer chaunged before? was that order of col∣lations* 1.408 euer ordeyned before? was this the Leuites doings of the Priests partes, euer done before? So that at the least some of these doings were by him newly established and ne∣uer done before: but as the necessitie of the time was then, so were they commaunded to be done by him and well al∣lowed of God.

Yet, say you, they were not newly established by him as supreme hed, but his power & authorit•…•…e was ready & seruice∣able for the execution of things spiritual before determined.

But if these things were not before determined, I pray you master Stapleton, whose executioner was he then? nei∣ther the priests nor the prophets had before determined that he should do, or commaund to be done these things, therfore he was neyther the Priestes nor the Prophets executioner in them. If ye say, God had determined that they should so be done: ye say true, and we denie not, but that the Princes* 1.409 power and authoritie did execute Gods determination, yea it was readie and seruiceable, as ye say, thereto. And so it ought to be in all princes. But what conclude you herevp∣pon? Bicause the princes power and authoritie is ready and seruiceable to execute Gods determinate purpose, yea or his open commaundement either, and that by the mouth of any Priest or Prophete: Ergo, he is not supreme gouernour

vnder God therein? In déede ye might well conclude he is not an absolute supreme gouernour ouer God, whose deter∣mination he doth execute so seruiceably, but this ye might conclude agaynst your Pope, that exalteth him selfe aboue all that is called God, and despiseth to execute seruiceably Gods open determination, and maketh all Princes to bee seruiceable executioners of his own determinations. Thus doth not the Quéenes Maiestie nor any Godly Prince, but obeyeth and executeth Gods determination, with all hir power and authoritie most readie and seruiceable therevn∣to, and yet is neyther hir supreme power nor authoritie vnder God, any whitte empayred thereby. And if this be an argument to abase the Princes supreme power and au∣thoritie, how shall it not also abase the Priests? ought they to doe any other things then execute Gods determinations? ought not their power & authoritie be ready and seruiceable herevnto? Ergo▪ they can be no supreme gouernors neyther.

But ye will say the Prince is yet inferiour to them, by∣cause they executed Gods commaundement immediately,* 1.410 and the Prince theirs. What now, if it fall out quite con∣trary, that Ezechias executed seruiceably Gods commaun∣dement, & they againe executed (although their seruice was not ouer readie, such was their corruption, yet tandem, at the length, they executed) the Princes commaundement, doth it not then followe that they were therein inferiour to the Prince? But, that he commaunded and appointed them, and that they executed in these spirituall things his commaun∣dement and appoyntment, the scripture is most apparant. He brought in the Priestes and gathered them togither in a∣trium* 1.411 sacerdotum, sayth Lyra, into the porche of the priests. The Priests called not him and his nobilitie togither. And therefore sayth Lyra, vnder him was made Primo, expiatio legalis. &c. First, the clensing of the lawes sacrifice. Secondly, the celebration of the benefite of the passeouer. Thirdly, the repayring of the Priestly ministerie. He, as a commaunder,

sayde vnto the Priestes séeing them s•…•…owly de•…•…ed, Au∣dite* 1.412 me Leuitae & sanctificamint. &c. Heare me O you Leuites, and be ye sanctified, clense the house of the God of your fa∣thers, and take away all vnciennesse from the sanctuarie. Which are not wordes of entreatie, but flatte commaunde∣ments, as Lyra sayth: Ezechias cupiens renouare foed•…•… cum* 1.413 domino, primo pracepit. &c. Ezechias desirous to renew the co∣uenant with the Lorde. First did commaund the Leuites to be sanctified. Secondly, by them being sanctified, the temple to be clensed. Thirdly, by those which were clensed, sacrifice to be made for the offence of the people. Fourthly, by sacrifi∣cing, God to be praysed. Fiftly, by clensing, the holy burnt∣offrings to be offred vp.

Thus were all these thinges done by his commaunde∣ment, by his constitution, and at his pleasure. Nunc igitur placet mihi vt 〈◊〉〈◊〉 foedus cum domino, It is now therefore my pleasure (sayth he) that we enter into a couenant with the Lorde. And in this doing, euen in the place where he put∣teth them in minde of their high office, he calleth them not his fathers (which worde hereafter ye stande much vpon) but calleth them, being the Priestes & Leuites, his sonnes: Filij me•…•… (sayth he) nolite negligere. O my sonnes be not neg∣ligent, being him selfe in yeares but a childe in respect of them, of the age of xx. yeares: sauing that in respect of hys royall power and estate, he considered he was the father of all Gods people, so well the clergie as the laitie: and so the clergie tooke him, and obeyed him. Et ingressi sunt iuxta man∣datum regis & imperi•…•… domini, And they entred in accor∣ding to the Kings commaundement, and the commaunde∣ment of the Lorde. Iuxta mandatum regis (sayth Lyra) ad purgandum templum domini, To clense the temple of the* 1.414 Lorde, according to the Kings commaundement. And Lyra praysing all these doings sayth, Et sic Ezechias in d•…•… coro∣nationis. &c. And so Ezechias in the day of his coronation, o∣pened the doores of the temple of the Lorde, and euen there

gathering the Priestes and the Leuites togither, he enioyned* 1.415 vnto them the sayde purging. (Lo here is againe the kings owne iniunction, whereat ye quarreled in the former Chap∣ter.) And on the morrow after, they began it: and in this ap∣peareth the great prayse of Ezechias, that euen foorthwyth from the first day of his coronation, he commaunded the re∣nuing* 1.416 of the diuine worship that was destroied by his father. Lyra shewing further of the pollution of the temple, telleth out of the Hebrue glosse, that there were many Images of Idolatrie, fastened in the walles of the Temple, with such* 1.417 strong and great nailes that they were hardly pulled away. A liuely patterne of your popish Temples Master Staple∣ton,* 1.418 decked vp euen so, with Images in the walles: and withall it confuteth your fonde distinction of Image and I∣doll, since as well ye may haue Idolatrie of Images as of Idolles. If ye thinke to escape by distinguishing of the I∣mages of holy Saintes, and the Images of the wicked hea∣then, that they onely be Idolles, not the other, I pray you what was the brasen serpent, was it the Image of any pro∣phane thing? or not rather a representer of Christ, and yet* 1.419 it became an Idoll, and this godly King, not the Priestes destroyed it, and called it in contempt, a péece of brasse, as a man might call your Images or Idolles (whether ye will) a stocke or stone.

Thus did this notable Prince, which I tell by the way, not onely to shewe his supreme authoritie in the doing: but besides, to aunswere your ordinarie cauillation in defence of your manifest Idolatrie. The Temple being clensed from these Images, the Priestes offered, first for the King, Pro Regno, for the Kingdome, that is, sayth Lyra, pro Rege & Principibus, for the King and the Princes: and after for themselues & the people. The King •…•…ad them offer on y^e aul∣tar of the Lord: and they obeyed, & offred (sayth Lyra) pro peccatis Regis, & Principum, & Sacerdotum, & Leuitarum, & communis populi. For the sinnes of the King, & of the Princes,

and of the Priestes, and of the Leuites, and of the common people. Thus in their degrée reckoning euery sort. Hée appoynted also the singers. Againe, he commaunded the Priestes to offer the burnt offrings, and he and his Prin∣ces commaunded them to sing Psalmes. When they had sung and worshipped the Lorde: he tolde the Leuites they were sanctified, and commaunded them to doe their ecclesi∣asticall functions: saying, Accedite & offer•…•…e victimas & lau∣des in domo domini, Come neare and offer burnt offrings and prayses in the house of the Lorde. Thus are all these ecclesi∣astical matters hitherto noted, done of the Priests and Le∣uits by the direction & commaunding of Ezechias. Nor this your common shift can any thing auaile you to abase Eze∣chias doings, bicause he appoynted diuerse of those things* 1.420 According as Dauid had disposed: he appoynted also diuers other thinges, which Dauid neuer had disposed, and yet he had the lyke authoritie and commendation in appoynting both. Which argueth his supreme authoritie in appoynting ecclesiastical matters, whosoeuer had appointed thē before. And what was Dauit? was he not a king also? So that this paltrie shift still maketh agaynst you, that although godly Princes succeding, establish, renue, appoint, & commaunde such matters as their predecessors haue done before: yet haue they no lesse authoritie therein, than had euen the first ap∣poynters of all. And also the Quéenes maiestie taketh none other authoritie now on hir, in appointing & commaunding, than Dauid, Ezechias, & other auncient godly Princes did: than Constantinus, and other hir predecessors, haue done* 1.421 before. And hir authoritie, in renuing such orders as long haue bene decayed or abolished▪ is n•…•… lesse than was theirs, in the first ordering and commaunding of them.

But ye say king Dauid did not order those things by him selfe, but it was Gods commaundement. As though any said (except it •…•…eyour Pope) that this supreme authoritie is not subiect to Gods commaundement, and vnder hys absolute

authoritie, or as though this subiection vnder God, abaseth the Princes authoritie, and not rather confirmeth it to be immediate next vnder him.

But ye adde further, God did it, by the handes of his Pro∣phetes. If to do a thing by the hands of another, do alwayes signifie a supreme authoritie in the partie by whose handes* 1.422 it is done, then were y^e Princes Pursiuant or letter bearer, aboue the Lieutenant, Iudge, or Deputie, to whom the let∣ter is sent. But the bearer although the Prince sende it by his hande or ministerie, is not onely vnder the sender, but also vnder the partie to whome it is sent, and he, not the •…•…earer, is next and immediate vnder the Prince, in the performing of his letter, and signifieth againe to the Prince by the bearers hande, his dutifull obedience in fulfilling the content thereof. Either parties here, ye sée, vse the bearers hande or ministerie: doth it follow therevpon, he is superior to either of them, or not rather vnder both? What good argu∣ment can ye frame herevpon?

God commaunded Dauid by the handes of his Prophets:

Ergo, the Prophetes were aboue Dauid in ordering and directing Gods will and commaundement?

And againe, where ye say, Iosue, Dauid and other Prin∣ces sacrificed by the handes of the Priestes.

Ergo, the Priestes and Leuits were aboue Iosue, Da∣uid, and those other Princes?

Your argument therfore, God cōmaunded by the handes of his prophete, that the king should make such orders:

Ergo, the Prophete is the Kings supreme gouernour: is a very slender argument.

But if ye had reasoned thus,

The partie that commaundeth is supreme gouernour to him by whose handes he doth it:

The Prince commaundeth these ecclesiasticall matters to be done by the handes of the Priestes and Leuites:

Ergo, the Prince therein is the supreme gouernour to

the Priests and Leuites.

This had bene the fitter and truer argument of the twayne. But this had quite ouerturned your shifte.

Neuerthelesse M. Stapl. ye haue shifte vpon shifte, and more waies I perceiue to the wood thā one. For, séeing that this argument, God commaunded by the hands of the cler∣gie, that the Prince should make ecclesiastical orders, could not inferre he did it by their authoritie, but rather it argu∣eth the Princes authoritie ouer the clergie: ye fall then in quarelling, that the Byshop sayth, the king did it by the counsell of the Prophets.

As though (say you) Dauid had first done it by the aduise* 1.423 or counsell onely of the Prophets, & by his owne authoritie.

Dothe the doing and disposing then of any thing. M. St. by the counsell & aduise of other, inferre his own authoritie, in the disposing, that is the asker of counsell? Thus ye say héere, and remember ye say it. For hereafter ye make this a common reason: He did it by their counsell, Ergo, he did it not by his owns authoritie.

But be it Master Stapleton, he dyd it not of his owne deuise and simple commaundemente or authoritie, but by Gods commaundement and authoritie ouer him. Dothe it followe therfore he did it not by his owne autho∣ritie, since all his authoritie was of God? but what impro∣ueth* 1.424 this his authoritie ouer the priests or prophets? can ye shew he did it by their authoritie? be it their counsel, or be it their declaration, their authoritie it was not, but Gods: and vnder God, the kinges authoritie, in disposing suche orders. And therfore your caui•…•… agaynst the word counsel, sheweth you wanted counsell to haue disposed your answere better.

For euen in this present example, do ye not sée how king Ezechias did order diuers eccl. matters by the counsell of his princes, clergie, & people, and yet the whole dooing was by his owne authoritie? Inito{que} consil•…•…o Regis & principum* 1.425 & vniuersi coetus Ierusalem, decreuer•…•…nt •…•…t f•…•…cerent phase mēse

secundo. And a councell beeing helde of the king and his princes, and al the assemblie of Ierusalē, they decreed to kepe the Passouer the. 2. moneth Wheron sayth Lyra, Circa 〈◊〉〈◊〉* 1.426 celebrationē Ezech•…•…s de consilio sacerdotum diem instituit. Se∣cundo ad hoc populum inuitauit, ter•…•…o sole•…•…niter celebrau•…•…. About this celebration, Ezechias by the coūsel of the priests instituted the day: Secondly he bad the people therevnto: Thirdly he celebrated it solemnly▪ So that the whole doing in this councel was by his owne authoritie in a matter ne∣uer vsed before, for the present necessitie to change the day of the Passeouer. Moses, Dauid, or any other Prince, had neuer by the commaundement of God, or by the handes of his Prophetes ordeyned it before.

And therefore withall where ye say: In all thinges that Ezechias or Iosaphat before dyd, they dyd but as Dauid had* 1.427 done before.

I answere, that whatsoeuer they dyd, you héere do none other, than your masters and you haue done before. Ye care not what rechlesse lies ye boldly auouch, to bolster vp your false cause, and furnishe your volumes withall. Were all these thinges hitherto recited, done before by Dauid? had he taken downe and destroyed the Brasen serpent? had* 1.428 he caused the Leuites to play the Priestes partes? had he altered the Passouer day? had he appoynted before to the Cleargie those portions of liuel•…•…de that are mentioned? Besides diuers others things that argue his authoritie. For after his summons to come to the Passeouer, whereto the Iewes obeyed, Ut facerent, secundum pr•…•…ceptum Regis &* 1.429 principum, verbum Domini: To doe the worde of the Lorde after the commaundement of the king, and of the Princes: bicause there were not Priestes clensed inowe, the Le∣uites did that, whiche by the lawe belonged onely to the Priestes offices. But by whose authoritie did they it, had God commaunded it by the handes of his Prophetes? had Moses, Dauid, or any other so disposed it before? or dyd

they it héere of their owne brayne? No, sayth Lyra, it was done de mandato Regi•…•…, by the kinges commaundement.* 1.430 They also that were vncleane did eate of the Passeouer, which according to the law, ought to haue bene eaten only of the cleane. But they were, sayth he, dispensed with for the necessitie. And how? the king him selfe, that was the commaunder and doer of these things, contrary to the law for necessitie sake, made a prayer for them to the Lord, and he heard him, and was pleased therwith. Thus did God ac∣cept these dealings of the king in ecclesiastical matters, and allow his authoritie in commaunding & disposing them.

And as he was the chiefe orderer and directer of all these things, so it followeth in the. 31. chapter, how•…•… he directed all other things about the Priestes. And therefore sayth* 1.431 Lyra theron: Cum{que} haec fuissent •…•…ite celebrata, &c. Hic conse∣quenter sub Ezechia discribitur reparatio sacerdotalis mini∣sterij, &c. VVhen these thinges were orderly celebrated. &c. Here consequently is described vnder Ezechias, the repay∣ring of the priestly ministerie, about which is first described the destroying of Idolatrie, where the text sayth: And they brake the Images, &c. And this by good reason, bicause that first the impediments of the Priestly ministerie ought to be remoued, &c. Secōdly, the repairing of the priestly ministery is described, &c. where Ezechias, first, restored the priests and Leuites in their offices. Secondly, he prouided thē of victuals. Thirdly, he ordeined in these things procurators for thē. &c. And thus all the doing, not onely ouer the temporaltie, but ouer al the clergie, so far as apperteineth to y^e chief gouern∣mēt vnder God, in ordring, appoynting, cōmanding, direc∣ting, & prouiding, belonged to K. Ezechias. And in the ende* 1.432 hereof, the scripture giueth him this cōmendation, fecit ergo Ezechias vniuersa, &c Ezechias therfore did all the thinges that we haue spoken of, through all Iuda, and he wrought that which was good, and right, & true before the Lorde his god in al the works that he begā, for the seruice of the house

of God bothe in the lawe, and in the commaundementes he* 1.433 sought his God, and did the same with all his heart, and it succeeded prosperously.

In like case, God be praysed (maugre your mightie Ze∣nacheribs head & triple crowne, with al your blasphemous raylings, that play the parte of Rabsaces, to robbe the peo∣ples harts from the Lorde their God, & frō their duetyfull obedience to their princes supreme authoritie) the Lorde hath prospered & blessed the Q. Maiestie, in following this godly Princes steps, in reforming, or newly establishing Gods true religion decayed, as this good king Ezechias did. And therfore as are all the residue of these your séely shifts in this example, so is your conclusion no whit agaynst hir highnes doings, and but slaunderous lies on hir Maiestie, and craking lyes on your selues, saying:

This is farre from enacting a new religion, by force of su∣preme* 1.434 authoritie, contrary to the cōmandement of God, de∣clared by the bishops & priests, the onely ministers of God now in spiritual matters, as Prophets were then in the like.

And this ye clappe vp for ful conclusion, to all the doings of king Ezechias. To which conclusion before I answere, I* 1.435 haue to detect one pretie shift of yours, muche practised in your volume. Whē ye should haue answered to the doings of king Dauid, ye then sent vs hither to the doings of king Ezechias: now when ye come to the answere of king Eze∣chias, ye sende vs backe agayne to the doings of king Da∣uid. Likewise, when ye should fully answere the doings of king Iosaphat, ye tell vs: How Iosaphat appoynted the Le∣uites* 1.436 and priests to these eccl. functions it shall appeare in the next chapter by the example of Ezechias. When we come to the example of Ezechias, to finde it set out héere, as ye promised, ye sende vs backe agayne to Iosaphat, and to Dauid, saying: In all that Ezechias, or before Iosaphat* 1.437 did, they did but as Dauid had done before. That is, they ex∣ecuted Gods commaundement declared by the prophetes.

And thus ye shifte and poste vs of, from one place to ano∣ther, making vs beleue here, that ye answered fully there: making vs beleeue there, ye answere fully here, and when both places be conferred, ye haue answered no more in the one than ye haue in the other, and that is in effect▪ to resolue the arguments, nought at all in both. And if ye make an accompt of this place to be a resolute answere, why sende ye vs backe againe to Dauid and Iosaphat? & yet how can those answere this, or this answere those examples? Since many things ye se here were done by Ezechias, that were not the executing of any commaundement of God by any of his Prophetes before: But of his owne authoritie Ezechias dispensed for them, and was allowed of God therein, when he had commaunded them to be done.

Now for your conclusion of the Quéenes Maiestie is mere sclaunderouse and like to your premisses. Hir high∣nesse doth not by force of hi•…•… supreme authoritie enact a new religion contrary to Gods commaundement, but by the force of Gods woorde in these ensamples, giuing hir a supreme authoritie: she enacteth the most old religion to be renewed and restored, and reiecteth all other as new, crept since into the Church, not proceeding ab Antiquo dierum, from the an∣cient* 1.438 of dayes, but ab antiquo serpente, from the ancient ser∣pent, such as chiefly is the doctrine of papistrie. And there∣fore your conclusion is not to the matter in hande, other∣wise than against your Pope. For he by the force of Su∣preme gouernment, or rather supreme vsurpatiō, enacteth a new religion contrary to Gods cōmandement, declared by Christ & his Apostles, & therfore by the Apostle is accursed. Si quis predicauerit euangelium praterquam quod accepistis a∣nathema* 1.439 sit. If any shall preach any other gospel than that ye haue receiued: let him be accursed. As for that ye say, the cō∣maundement of God declared by the Bishops and Priests: is but a craking lie. For they hidde Gods cōmandement (if ye meane your popish Bishops and priests) and declared their

owne commaundement, in steade thereof, as did the Phari∣seys make frustrate Gods commandement for their owne traditions sake. And so farre are they from being the mini∣sters of God now in spirituall matters: that, as they dispise to administer Gods worde & Sacraments, so they disdayns & scorne at, euen the name of Ministers, as euen your selfe do* 1.440 M. St. other where, how soeuer here it came vppon you, to pretende to bestow a reuerent speach thereon. But the Apo∣stles thought not scorne of the name, but willed men so to estéeme them, as the ministers of God and the dispensers of* 1.441 his mysteries, but as your papall Bishops and Priestes be nothing like Gods ministers, so least of all are they like the Prophets that were then, except ye meane the prophets of Baal, that maintayned idolatrie and pleasant leasings,* 1.442 to maintayne them selues at Achabs table, and fill their paunches with the chéere of Beel and the Dragon. The* 1.443 Lords prophets they be not like neither in preaching, pro∣pheciyng or ought els. And yet saith M. Stapl. they be the* 1.444 onely ministers of God now in spirituall matters, as prophets were then in the like.

Why M. Stapl. were the prophets then onely gods mi∣nisters* 1.445 in spirituall matters? if ye say, no: how doth your tale hang togither? why say ye, they are onely Gods ministers now, as Prophets were then in the like? since the Prophetes were not onely Gods ministers then, as ye pretende for your Bishops and Priestes to be onely now. If they were not onely then, no more be yours only now, admitting they were in the like. If ye say, yea: they were onely then Gods ministers, as the Bishops and Priests be now: what were the Bishops, Priestes and Leuites then, that were no pro∣phetes, were not they Gods ministers in spirituall matters also? if yea, then were not the Prophets in the like to your Bishops and Priestes, that are (as ye say) only gods mini∣sters now. Make your tale for shame hang better togither, and withall tell what you meane by this dubble shuffling.

Ye tolde vs before that your Bishops and Priestes now,* 1.446 are like the Bishops and Priestes then: and that not the Prophets, but the Priestes, had that prerogatiue which ye haue so often craked vpon, your generall rule of iudgemēt, whereby ye vrged then, a supremacie, not in the Prophets, but in the Bishops & Priests. And now seing that ye cā not proue it in these examples, where the Bishops & Priests o∣bey the Princes ordinance as his inferiours: ye shift of the matter to the Prophetes, & say now your priests & prelates succéede & are like the Prophetes & let go the former claime of priests. But these are but your shifts, for if the Prophets had this supreme gouernment, then the priests had it not. If it appertained to the hie priestes chayre, so long as the priesthoode of Moses continued, then it belonged not to the Prophetes, and thus ye contrary your selfe. But in very déede neither of thē both had it, but the Prince vnder God. They were both Gods ministers in their diuerse functiōs, and yet subiecte to their Princes as for the popish Bishops and priestes, are like to neither of both.

The. 17. Diuision.

THe Bishop with the like example of Iosias concludeth* 1.447 his collection of the Princes in the Old Testament, and herevppon maketh in effect this reason:

All these doinges of these kinges are commended as acceptable seruice and right in the sight of God:

But the clayming & taking vppon them the supreme gouernment ouer the ecclesiasticall persons of all degrees, the ruling, gouerning and directing them in all their functions, & in al manner causes belonging to religion, were the doings of all these kinges:

Ergo, For Princes to clayme and take vppon them the like supreme gouernment, is their right and acceptable seruice in the sight of God.

The counterblast of master Stapleton to this diuision* 1.448 is thrée folde. First to the example of Iosias. Secondly to the argument. Thirdly by setting vp newe issues and markes, to improue all that the Bishop hath hitherto exemplified, as vnsufficient to proue the issue.

To the first part sayth Master Stapleton.

King Iosias traueled full godly in suppressing Idolatrie by* 1.449 his kingly authoritie. VVhat then? so doe good catholike Princes also, to plucke downe the Idolles that yee and your brethren haue of late set vp, and yet none of them take them selues for supreme heades in all causes spirituall.

This is all that he aunswereth to the example of Iosias. First where the Bishop sayd: Iosias had the like care (to the foresayde Princes) for religion, and vsed in the same sorte his Princely authoritie in refor∣ming all abuses in al maner causes ecclesiastical. To this aunswereth master Stapleton.

He traueled full godly in suppressing Idolatrie by his king∣ly authoritie.

As though this were a full aunswere denying or graun∣ting the Bishops assertion, or as thoughe besides the sup∣pressing of Idolatrie, he did nothing else. Where as the scri∣pture is plaine, how hee also redde the lawe before all his subiects, how he made the couenant with God that all hys subiectes shoulde walke after the Lorde, and obserue all hys* 1.450 commaundements, testimonies and ceremonies. Howe hée sware them all to kéepe this couenant. Howe he commaun∣ded them to kéepe suche a solemne passeouer, as was neuer kept by any of all the kings before him. How the Priestes appoynted not themselues, but he appoynted them in their offices. Howe they exhorted not him, but howe he exhorted* 1.451 them, to prepare themselues (sayth Lyra) dutifully to cele∣brate with deuotion the solemnitie of the passeouer. Howe he commaunded the arke to be set vp in the Sanctuarie, and to beare it no more on their shoulders. Howe he commaun∣ded

thē to minister to the Lord and to his people Israel. How he commaunded thē to prepare them selues according to the houses of their aūcesters in their orders a•…•… Dauid had appoin∣ted them. How he cōmaunded them to minister in the san∣ctuary by their families and Leuiticall courses. How he com∣maunded them to be sanctified, and then to offer the passe∣ouer. How he commaūded them also to prepare or sanctifie the residue of their brethren. And when al things were pre∣pared, how the Priestes kept their stations and the Leuites were in their orders according as the king had commaunded them. And so (saith the text,) after it hath reckened vp the manner of the Priests, Leuites, singers and porters mini∣steries) all the seruice or worship was orderly accomplished in that day to keepe the passeouer and offer their burnt of∣frings vppon the aultare of the Lorde according to the com∣maundement of Iosias the King.

All these things (M. Stapl.) were done by his authoritie and commaundement:

But all these thinges are matters and causes ecclesia∣sticall:

Ergo, his authoritie and commaundement stretched fur∣der than in suppressing Idolatrie, yea •…•…uen ouer the chiefest matters ecclesiasticall.

But all this had M. Stap. quite forgotten, and therefore we must beare with him, though he answere the Bishop only with this:

Iosias traueled full godly in suppressing Idolatrie by his kingly authoritie.

Wherein we sée also how doubtfully he speaketh, for when he perceyued it could not be denied, but that which he did, he did by his kingly authoritie, yet would he not say* 1.452 that he suppressed Idolatrie by his kingly authoritie, but he traueled full godly in suppressing Idolatrie by his kingly authoritie. as though his kingly authoritie stretched no fur∣der, than to trauell in the execution of seruing the priestly

authoritie. But the Scripture is most euident, that his kingly authoritie and godly trauell, was not in executing the Priestes commaundement, but the priestly authoritie traueled in the seruice and executing of the Princes com∣mandement. For, as he destroyed all their Idols and places of Idolatry, and abolished or depriued (as Uatablus ex∣poundeth it) the false priestes of their priestly dignitie: so he commaunded by this his kingly authoritie, all the true priestes, both the high priest Helchias, and vnder him the inferiour priestes and porters, to trauell likewise in brin∣ging out to him all the Idolatrous vessels, and he summo∣ned or gathered togither all the Priestes. And all that there is done, is named to be done by him, that is to say eyther by him selfe, or by his appoyntment and com∣maundement, through his kingly authoritie, both in abo∣lishing the false worship, and in establishing and direc∣ting the true worship of God, not onely in generall, but also in perticuler, yea in the chiefest spirituall matters, ouer all the Clergie and the high Priest, so well as all his other subiectes: and all this was done of him by his kingly authoritie.

But what then saith M. Stapleton, to all this: as it were with a phillip to ouerturne al the matter, with his Masters what then. Forsooth M. St. then, it was not his godly tra∣uell in a seruiceable execution of the priestes commaunde∣ments: but his godly trauell in commaunding them, & their godly trauel in a seruiceable execution of the kinges com∣maundements. And then, it was not onely in suppressing Idolatrie as you limite it, but in refourming, establishing, directing & appointing the whole true worship of God be∣sides. And then was this his kingly authoritie, by the which he did all these things, though many of them were Moses, Dauids, yea the Prophetes former ordinances, and Gods commaundement long before: yet were they done here by the kinges owne authoritie, which in the last example of

Ezechias concerning Dauid ye would not admitte, bicause it was Gods appoyntment by the hande of his Prophetes. Such as were many of these things like wise, and yet now ye graunt, they were done also euen by Iosias his kingly authoritie. And then, I pray you, what so great a diffe∣rence finde ye betwéene these twaine, the King doth it by his kingly authoritie, that here ye confesse: and the King doth it by his owne authoritie, that there ye denied? is not the kinges kingly authoritie, the Kinges owne authoritie? and yet is all his authoritie from God. It followeth then, to your what then, by your owne confession, and the mani∣fest Scripture, that this his owne kingly authoritie of Io∣sias, was next vnder God the chiefe and supreme ouer all the Priestes, Leuites, Singers, Porters, or any other, so well as the people, in all abolishing of false religion, and in all commaunding and directing the true worship and re∣ligion of God, which are the principall causes ecclesiasti∣call. And what then say you to this M. Stapleton? doth it not cléerely proue the Bishops assertion against M. Fec∣kenhā, for al your counterblasting it with your bigge what then? Thinke ye it proues he did no more then, than you will suffer Princes to do now, abusing them with the title of good catholike Princes, and bereauing them of their good catholike and princely authoritie, that by the examples of these good catholike princes they ought to take vpon them, and your Pope vsurpes it from them?

And yet you say (to abase the doings of Iosias) so do good catholike Princes also, to plucke downe the Idolles that* 1.453 ye and your brethren haue of late set vp, and yet none of them tooke them selues for supreme heades in all causes spi∣rituall.

The question is not nowe Master Stapleton, what those your good catholike Princes (as ye call them) take them selues to be: whome you haue spoyled, and make

beléeue, what it pleaseth you to tell them, that their king∣ly authoritie reacheth no furder but to be seruiceable tra∣uelers and executioners of your commaundements. But the question is here, what these Princes (mencioned in the holy Scriptures) tooke them selues to be, which appereth by* 1.454 their appointinges and cōmaundinges of their Clergie in their functions, that they tooke them selues for their Cler∣gies supreme gouernours in these matters. And so ought al good catholike princes by their examples to estéeme of them selues, and of their high calling and charge in eccle∣siasticall causes, and trauayle by their godly supreme go∣uernment to discharge the same. Where ye say there∣fore, so do good catholike princes, meaning those that sub∣mitte themselues, with all the gouernment of religion, and all ecclesiasticall matters, to your Pope and his prelates, not medling them selues therewith, as did Iosias and these other godly Kinges, whome we sée to haue medled with the gouernment and direction thereof: it is appa∣rant false, and their doinges herein are no more alike, than blacke is like to white: than to commaunde, directe and appoint others, is like, to be of the same parties, in the same matters, commaunded, directed and appointed them∣selues: than gouerning is like seruing: than one contra∣rie is like to another. And yet you say (for ye care not what ye saie) as did king Iosias, so do your good catholike princes now.

But what is that they do? plucke down the Idols (say you) that you and your brethern haue set vp.

Whether we & our bretheren, or you and your bretheren haue set vp Idols, let it fal out betwene vs as it shall, here∣after we shall come to the reckening: onely stande you to this M. Stapleton, that the plucking downe of Idols belon∣geth to Princes, by their kingly authoritie, and that so they ought to account of them selues & their authoritie: which if

they had done, and diligently executed this their kingly au∣thoritie, your shifte of Images and Idols had not auayled you, for euen to your moste famous Images, shrines, and pilgrimages, hath foule idolatrie bene committed, as the chiefe of your brethren them selues are fayne to confesse, and crye out vpon, and yet durst your princes neuer pull them downe, nor you would euer haue suffred th•…•… so to do,* 1.455 (for your lucre lay muche therein) but caused the Princes to mainteine and enriche suche Images as you dayly did set vp. As for the Idols that we should haue set vp, who séeth not we haue so little set vp any, that we reiecte for Idols those which ye call your Images, and professe that neither they, nor any other thing besides God, nor God in them, or by them, is to be worshipped: but God alone, and that in spirite and truthe, and so receiue his playne & simple worde and sacraments.

But if, as ye sayde before, those Princes pull downe our* 1.456 heresies, and those are the Idols that we set vp: except this presupposall should be graunted you, that those be heresies which we mainteine, your argument néede not be plucked downe with idols, for it would fall downrighte of it selfe: what a kinde of reasoning call ye this, to take that for graunted, and out of all doubt true, that is chiefly denyed, and is most starke false? But what soeuer our doctrine is, do those your Princes plucke it downe by their kingly authoritie, or by your false suggestions and commaunde∣ments? or suffer you their kingly authoritie to pul downe, set vp, or meddle any thing at all with one iote of doctrine, true or false, more or lesse, otherwise than you by your priestly authoritie, will commaund, appoynt & direct them?

What babble ye then of their kingly authoritie, in pul∣ling downe such idols of ours (as ye say) where both there* 1.457 is neither any Idols at all, and you giue them, be there or be there not, no authoritie, kingly nor vnkingly at all, but onely make them your seruitours, I mighte say for your

vnworthie vsage of them, your Butchers & slaughtermen, at your commaundement to kill and make hauocke in the congregation of Christ, destroying his liuely Images and members, for the maintenance of your dead Images & most grosse Idolatrie. And yet ye obiect Idolatrie to vs, which is, not to espie a mote, but to quarrell at a mote, in your bro∣thers eie, where none is: and not to see the great beame, or rather a number of beames, postes, stones, stockes & infinit Idols in your owne eyes, and in the sight of all the worlde. Can your Princes see to plucke out so small a mote in our eyes, yea, so small to your eyes, that ye are fame to call it inuisible or spirituall Idolatrie (and yet falsely charge vs therin also) & can not sée to pull out of their owne eies, those open & manifest Idolatries that the Popish Church hath set vp? would ye haue vs thinke those princes to be thus blind? Surely if some of thē be, yet many of them haue séene and do sée such inckling, that ye had néede to beware betymes what kingly authoritie ye geue them in plucking downe of Idols. For shortly they will not onely pull downe all your Idols, but pul you downe also for wicked Idolaters, asking Iosias pulled down & suppressed al Idolatrie by his kingly authority. And so by his example many good catholike prin∣ces indéede, as ye say, (thanks be to God) haue done, do, and God willing shal dayly more & more suppresse & pul downe the Idols, that you and your brethren M. St. haue of long time set vp. And in steede thereof by their kingly authoritie, set vp the true worde and worship of God.

And thus, as did Iosias, hath the Quéenes maiesties most noble Father & Brother of famous memories done, & hi•…•… Highnesse after them (whō God continue & prosper) doth. And as Iosias not onely pulled downe the Idols, but also* 1.458 the houses and opē maintenance of filthie fornication, in the false Idolatrous priests, in their geided chaplaines, as Lyra sayth, & as he telleth how the Hebrues called them •…•…diculas M•…•…nachorum, the celles of Monkes, how he destroyed their

Sodomitical priests, and their cōc•…•…tines, that weaued their* 1.459 hangings for their groues: So do & ought to do good catho∣like princes. And so hath the Q Maiestie both suppressed the popish Idols, & abolished a•…•… maintenance & dispensations of whores, concubines, & other such vowed Stalions & Sodo∣mites, pulled down the Monkish cels, with their Nunnish weauers, & hath (as did Iosias) established the only worship of the liuing God. y^e only veritie of gods most blessed word, the holy ordināce of honorable & chast matrimony. And this hath she done by Gods cōmandemēt, by the hand of his pro∣phets & vnder God by hir royall or kingly authoritie (for so may I cal it, for al your petit quarels) and therfore since she can & ought to do these things (as did Iosias) by hir kingly authoritie: it followeth, hir kingly authoritie is a supreme authoritie, ouer all hir subiects, bishops, and priests, or any other, so wel Clarke as Lay, in suppressing al false religiō, & plucking it downe, in setting vp & establishing Gods true religion, and al things ecclesiasticall belonging there vnto.

Now sayth M. St. to the bishops argumēt, collecting his* 1.460 conclusions on the manyfest doings of all these Princes:

And ye haue hitherto brought nothing effectual to proue that the kings of Israel did so, wherfore your cōclusion, that they did rule, gouerne, and direct the eccl. persons in all their functions, & in al maner causes of religion, is an open & no∣torious lie: and the contrary is by vs auouched, & sufficiently proued by the authoritie of the olde Testament, whereupon ye haue hitherto rested and setled your selfe.

Whether this bare saying, on M. Stap. priestly authori∣tie, without any further profe or improfe, be any thing effectuall, to proue that the kinges of Israell dyd not so: and whether the Byshops conclusion, of these t•…•…r open and notorious doings, or M. Stap. deniall, be an open and notorious lye: let the indifferent reader & marker of these kings doings, hardly be the •…•…pere. But M. St. as though he had decided the matter already to the readers hand: The

contrary (saith he) is by vs auouched and sufficiently proued by the authoritie of the olde Testament. That it is auou∣ched, M. St. and that full stoutly auouched the reader may soone perceiue. But that this your auouching is sufficiently proued by the authoritie of the olde Testament, woulde re∣quire a more sufficient proofe and authoritie, than your so saying (M. Stap.) in the iudgment of any sufficient exami∣ner and conferrer, what you on the one parte out of the olde Testament, hitherto haue alleaged for your priestes supreme gouernment, and what the byshop hath alleaged for the Princes supreme guuernement: bothe allegations and proues in their places are euident. Commit them to the reader, suspende your hastie and partiall iudgement, least your sufficient proues be estéemed more vnsufficient.

The thirde parte of M. Stap. answere is prefixed with a marginall note, saying:

It is heere declared, that master Horne commeth nothing nye the principall question.

This declaration hath thrée partes. First, an exhortation to regarde the principall scope and issue of the matter. Se∣condly, a setting vp of eight or nyne new markes, as the issue and principall matter in question. Thirdly, a num∣ber of outcries and exclamations, that the byshop shooteth wide, and commeth not néere the marke.

The first (as ye say M. Sta.) is a good admonition. Neces∣sarie* 1.461 it is that the Byshop haue before his eye the very state of the question, which must be especially euer regarded of such as mynde not too loosely, and altogither vnfruitfully imploy their owne labour, and loose bothe their owne, and the readers labour.

This is good counsell, and ye often put the Byshop in minde of it, but I pray you dothe it not comprehende your selfe? or haue ye a Bull from the Pope to call vpon other, and dispence with your selfe? it may well be ye haue some especiall placard, for ye vse it throughout all your counter∣blast,

to make your continuall outrodes and vagaries quite from the matter. No Flie is busier in buzzing on entrye dish, than your Counterblast is blowing on euery flim •…•…am tale. If ye thinke ye maye be borne withall for the enlar∣ging of your volume, yet ye make your Readers loosely and altogither vnfruitfully to employ their labours carying them at roauers (as ye say) and at randon to, (•…•…s ye had woont* 1.462 to do the people after all Hallowes) from the very state of the question in controuersie. For shame therefore vp∣brayde not this to the Bishop, of straying from the marke, excepte you kéepe your selfe better to the marke, or else shewe your Dispensation that yée may styll babble all be∣sides the question, of what impertinent tryfles yée please to descante vppon, and will not suffer your aduersary once to wincke awrye, nor to alleage anye thing, thoughe it neuer so muche appertayne to the purpose, if it doe not directly conclude the very state of the question. This dea∣ling master Stapleton is very vneuen. If ye will deale vp∣rightly, call vpon the Bishop hardly, so oft as ye will: but then stande you for shame to your tackling to, least an o∣ther come and call as fast on you, to marke and regarde bet∣ter the matter ye meddle withall.

But perhappes ye will say, admitte that I ranne a∣stray from the matter my selfe, yet, doth my faulte ex∣cuse the Byshoppes? In déede it doth not Master Staple∣ton, if hée bée faultie therein, but it lesseneth hys, and it maketh yours the greater, and the more to your shame, except yée be a verye impudent man, for your fault here∣in is manifest, and therefore deciphered oute vnto you, in one of your common places? If ye be belied, there purge your selfe, whiche t•…•…ll ye doe, the more ye call vppon the Bishop, to kéepe him to his marke: he that shall marke your dealing, shall wish you had either lesse impudencie, or more remembrance of your selfe.

Neuerthelesse, since ye so sharply chalenge the Bishop,

that all his examples draw nothing neare the mark, but runne at randon, and shoote all at Rouers: I pray you sir call to your remembraunce what was the marke and issue in question betwene them? was it not this, that if the Bishop by any of the foure abouesayde meanes coulde make proofe* 1.463 to master Feckenham that any Emperor, or Empresle, King or Queene, may clay me or take vpon them any such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes, that then he would yéelde? Was not this the state of their question? accorded they not on this issue? and ought not the Bishop to direct all his examples to proue this? And if he proue this, whether he shotte at Buttes or Rouers, hath he not hytte the marke? and what woulde ye haue more?

Nowe that he hath done this, is plainely proued by e∣uery of these examples, and that not onely as the wordes of the issue inforce, that they tooke vpon them some suche gouernement in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes, which being prooued is ynough to discharge the Bishop of straying from his matter: but also, that they daymed and tooke vppon them suche supreme gouernement in all spiri∣tuall or ecclesiasticall causes. And you haue counter∣blasted nothing to the contrary, that were able to remoue these prooues from this marke and issue, sauing your fa∣cing and bracing of the matter, and a number of blynde pelting and foreworne shiftes, except ye haue any better behinde to come. For all these shiftes hitherto notwith∣standing, the Bishoppes examples are both directly di∣rected to the issue, and directly and fully prooue the same. And whers ye find•…•… faulte with straggling from it, ye touch not him, but wring your selfe by the nose. For ensample whereof, I remitte the Reader to your common place thereon, or to spare his paynes, and go no further, than e∣uen here to marke the markes that your selfe set vp, and conferre them with the issue betwéene the Bishoppe and

master Feckenham, and the Reader shall soone discerne* 1.464 howe farre of purpose ye stray from it, yea from those false markes also that your selfe set vp before And yet ye crie the Bishop strayes from the marke, and will the Reader to fixe his eye thereon.

But herein ye play as the common people say the Lap∣wing or Pewet doeth, who when they seeke hir Neast, draweth them still further and further from it, wyth hir noyse and flittering about them, crying as the simple people imagine, here is it, here is it, when it is nothing neare it. And euen as they conceyue of the Pewet, so do you with vs, with great noyse and earnestnesse, bidding vs regarde and set before our eyes the very state of the question, and* 1.465 busily pretende to tell vs wherein lyeth all the chiefe que∣stion, when vnder the cloake and credite of this your ear∣nestnesse, ye carie the reader quite away from the question and issue in controuersie, to runne vp and downe after such newe and so many questions, that the Reader dared as a man in a maze, shoulde neyther perceyue the true question in déede, nor finde out the weakenesse and falsehoode of your cause, nor well knowe where himselfe is become.

But, that he maye winde himselfe the better oute of this your Laberinthe, let him (as is sayde before) directe his eye euer on the issue betweene the parties, and then shall hée still see whereaboutes hée is, and howe farre or neare, not onely the Bishop is, but you also are, to or from the matter.

The issue, as is before sayde, is this, That any Empe∣ror* 1.466 or Empresle, King or Queene, claymed or tooke vpon them any such gouernment.

By this issue in all his examples, hath the Byshoppe directed him selfe, that Moses, Iosue, Dauid, Salomon, Iosaphat, Ezechias, and Iosias, did take vpon them suche gouernment.

But all these were Kings and Princes of Gods people,

commended of God for their godly gouernance:

Therfore Emperours and Empresses Kings & Quenes, may and ought to take such gouernment vpon them.

This being alwayes the Bishops conclusion, wherein strayed he from the issue? But nowe come you ruffling in with Nine newe issues for aduauntage, not one of them all béeing the verie issue and state of the question in con∣trouersie, and yet you crie the Bishop draweth nothing nigh the marke.

True in déede master Stapleton, he draweth nothing* 1.467 neare the markes that you haue set vp, for the nigher hee shoulde drawe to them, he shoulde drawe the further from the question betwéene master Feckenham and him, as you doe of purpose in all these your markes, to deceyue, and begu•…•…le the simple Reader, that thinkes ye meane good truth, when ye •…•…rte so often on the question, and runne so farre from the same.

For ensample, was this I pray you good master Staple∣ton, (to vse your owne ph•…•…ase) the issue and question be∣twéene them, whether these Kings acknowledged, or not acknowledged the highe Priest? •…•…t is true, and the By∣shoppe demeth not, that they did agnise the highe Priest,* 1.468 euerie one of them. But followeth it thereon, that they agnised him to bee their supreme heade or gouernour? This woulde require to bée prooued with some better Logycke. As for these examples, argue all the contrary, that though the Prin•…•…s agnised alway one to be the chiefe Priest, and also agnised all other inferiour Priestes, Leuites, Por∣ters, Singers, in theyr offices: yet all those, highe and lowe, whatsoeuer, acknowledged agayne the supreme go∣uernement of commaunding, appoynting, ordring, direc∣ting, and ouerseeing them, to doe all their duties dutifully: to appertayne not to themselues, but to theyr soueraigne Princes. And the Princes (as theyr seuerall examples witnesse) tooke it vppon them, in commaunding, appoyn∣ting,

placing, and displacing, all and euery one, yea the high∣est Priest himselfe.

And therefore where ye say to the Bishop:

I pray you good M. Horne bring forth that king, that did* 1.469 not agnise one supreme heade and chiefe iudge in all causes ecclesiasticall among the Iewes, I meane the highe Priest, wherein lyeth all our chiefe question. Yee haue not yet done it, nor neuer shall doe it. And ye coulde shewe anie, it were not worth the shewing. For ye shoulde not shewe it in anie good King, as beeing an open breache of Gods lawe giuen to him by Moses, as this your doings are an open breache of Christ and his Churches lawe, and giuen to vs in the newe Testament.

These be but your crakes and outfacings master Staple∣ton. The Bishop hath done it euidently that ye require, and the scripture is manifest in all these Kings ensamples. Nor they were any wicked Kings, nor breakers of Gods law gi∣uen by Moses, or any other. But euen Moses and all the rest, were mainteiners of Gods law giuen to them, and ther∣fore are worth the shewing.

Your conclusion that our doings are an open breache of Christ and his Churches lawe, giuen to vs in the new Testa∣ment, I maye well ouerpasse without aunswere, dismis∣sing it to your common place of slaunders, not onely of vs, but of Christ and his Churche, and his newe Testament also: till ye shewe in what place of the newe Testiment, Christ and his Church (whom ye ioyne togither in this law making) did make and giue vs this law, that either our god∣ly Christian Princes should not haue this supreme gouern∣ment ouer their dominions, or that your Pope should haue it ouer all the vniuersall Churche. And when ye haue pro∣ued this, proue also this your first new marke, to be the ve∣rie state and issue here in question betwene the Bishop and master Feckenham, or else agnise with shame your selfe, that ye runne at randon, & loosely and altogither vnfruitfully,

haue employed yours and your Readers labour, for all (so lyke a Faulconer) ye crie marke, marke, neuer so muche.

Your first false marke béeing thus reared vppe, yée sette vppe a seconde, muche lesse lyke the issue betwéene them, but much more lyke the malicious slaunders among you, saying:

Againe, what president haue ye shewed of any good King* 1.470 among the Iewes, that with his laitie, altered and abandoned the vsuall Religion a thousande yeares and vpwarde custo∣mably from age to age receyued and embraced: and that the high Priest, and the whole clergie gainsaying all such altera∣tions? If ye haue not shewed this, ye haue strayed farre from the marke.

Whether this be the marke or no, or whether maister Stapleton of purpose straggle from it, the conference of the issue wyth this, will soone declare, there is no néede to fette the highe Priestes iudgement as in a doubtfull mat∣ter. Euery childe maye sée not onely howe farre they differ, but also what an heape of slaunders on a plumpe, he burdeneth like an vngracious subiect, his most gracious so∣ueraigne withall. As for the Quéenes Maiesties most god∣ly* 1.471 doings, are very well confirmed by these examples. And in proufe thereof, the Bishop euer kept him closely to hys marke, that the supreme gouernment which hir Maiestie taketh on hir, is none other, but such as they before did take on them. Hir highnesse hath abandoned olde inueterate er∣rors, crept in besides, and contrary to the worde of God: she saw the ensample in these godly Kings before hir, whose do∣ings therein she followed. Hir highnesse hath by the aduice and instruction of hir godly learned Clergie, reformed reli∣gion according to Gods word, although the Popish clergie were negligent and gainesayde the same: she sawe the en∣sample in these kings before hir, how by their godly learned prophets aduice, and instructions, according to Gods word,

they reformed religion, although the Priests & Leuits were negligent or withstood the same. And this hitteth home the marke, Any such gouernment, syth both their supreme gouernments be so like. And therfore in that you charge hir maiestie otherwise, is nothing •…•…eare the marke, but is your owne reprochfull and very trayterou•…•… slaunder.

The ioly number of a thousande yeares and vpwarde, of* 1.472 your vsuall religion, is but your common vaunte, and what if I sayde your outfacing lie also, to deceyue the simple with a countenance of antiquitie, the noueltie and late hatching whereof, is dayly the more ye striue, the more discouered, to be nothing so auncient as ye pretende, of a thousande yeares and vpwarde. Of which number the most part (the originals béeing well boulted out) may come backe againe halfe a thousande yeares and more downwarde with shame ynoughe.

But I sée master Stapleton, ye haue hoysted vp your Religion so hie, that it staggreth againe, and higher for fal∣ling downeright ye can not get it. It hath béene ye say the vsuall Religion a thousande yeares and vpwarde, that is a fayre tyme master Stapleton, God saue it. But what meane ye by this indefinite terme vpwarde? Meane you it hath continued a thousande yeares and a little more? Alacke Master Stapleton I am sorie for it, and for your paynes taking till your armes ake to lyft it vp so highe, and yet it commes too too short to be any true Religion. For* 1.473 if it be the true Religion of Iesus Christe, whie say yee not boldely man, it is the vsuall Religion of fifteene hun∣dreth yeares and vpwarde? But eyther your armes are too shorte, or your heart fayles you, to lifte it vpwarde so highe, for then the worde of GOD woulde soone controll you, and beate it downe agayne. And therefore you are contente with a lower sayle, to crake that your Reli∣gion is yet a thousande yeares olde and vpwarde. But as that is a false crake, so is it also, a vayne crake

and serues not the turne, yea admitting it were so old as ye boast, 1000▪ yeares and vpward, yet ought it of all godly Princes to be remooued and pulled downe againe, except it be the Religion of fiftene hundreth yeares and vpwarde. E•…•…amsi Angelus docuerit aliud Euangelium quàm quod ac∣cepistis* 1.474 ana•…•…hema sit. Althoughe an Aungell from heauen should teache any other doctrine than you haue receyued, let him be accursed. The Religion that the Quéenes Ma∣iestie hath set forth (thankes be to God therefore) is the re∣ligion of 1500. yeares and vpward, and therfore good reason that yours giue place to his senior, y^e popish & later base born religion of your Romish church, to th•…•… first & most auncient true religion, of that Alpha & Omega Iesus Christ himself.

Master Stap. hauing now set vp these two false markes, like to one being out of his way, that after he is once ouer his shooes in the myre, careth not howe he ben•…•…yre him∣selfe, but running deeper through thicke and thinne, cryeth this is the way, to haue other to followe him: so rusheth on master Stapleton still further from the issue, and yet taketh euerye thing in his way, to bée hys marke and di∣rectorie. Setting vp the perticuler factes of those Princes, that chalenge and take vppon them this supreme gouerne∣ment: that the selfe same factes must be founde in the en∣samples of the olde testament, or else hée sayth, the Bishop strayeth from the marke.

VVhat euidence haue ye brought forth (sayth he) to shew* 1.475 that in the olde lawe, anye King exacted of the Clergie In verbo Sacerdoti•…•…, that they shoulde make none Ecclesiasticall lawe without his consent, as King Henrie did of the clergie of Englande.* 1.476

Is this the marke master Stap. betwene the Bishop and master Feckenham, to proue in their supreme gouerments euerye selfe same perticuler fact, yea the circumstances about or concerning the fact to be all one, in them that clayme this gouernment nowe, and those that claymed it

then: since bothe the states, the times, yea all the ceremo∣nies of religion of the Iewes then, and ours nowe, are no∣thing like? and trow ye then the princes perticuler doings, must be like, and euen the same, and euidence must be gi∣uen out of the one for euery fact of the other, or else their su∣preme authorities be not alike? The issue betweene them, is not so straight laced, but requireth onely any such go∣uernment,* 1.477 some such gouernment, yea & he it, al suche gouernment to, I meane not all suche actions in the go∣uernment, but the supreme directing, gouernance, authori∣tie, or powre, are proued both alike in either princes estate, so well ouer eccl. persons in all their functions then, or now, as ouer the temporall in theirs. For by this rule, wheras that most famous prince king Henry the eight, did sweare also to his obedience, all his temporall, subiects in ciuill causes, as other Princes likewise haue done and do: it would be harde to alle•…•…ge an euidence thereof out of the old Testament, and yet their supreme gouernments ther∣in, were not therefore vnlike.

As for the ministring of the othe, is but a circumstance to confirme the matter, and not the matter itselfe. And if* 1.478 king Henry were (by the obstinate and craftie malice of his popishe clergi•…•… then,) constrayned for his more assu∣rance, to take an othe or promise of them on the honestie of their priesthoode (which God w•…•…t, was but a small holde, as it went then in the moste of them) and that no king of those ancient yeres, mentioned in the olde testament, bée∣ing not moued by the wickednesse or mistrust of his clergy, tooke the like othe or promise of their priestes honestie, or fayth of their priesthood•…•… then: what is this to or from the matter, why their supreme authorities shoulde not be alike in bothe? Do not you also say for your side, that the highe Priest had suche supreme gouernment then, as your Pope •…•…othe chalenge now ou•…•…r all eccl. causes? •…•…nd dothe •…•…ot your Pope nowe exacte of all his clergie, in verbo •…•…acer∣dotij,

by the worde of their priesthoode, that they shall make* 1.479 no eccl. law without his consent? May we not then returne your owne words on your selfe? VVhat euidence can you bring foorth, to shew that in the olde lawe any highe Priest exacted this of the clergie vnder him? And if ye can not (as ye can not) dothe not then this your wyle reason and newe marke, ouerturne the false clayme that your Pope clay∣meth, of such supreme gouernment now, as the high Priest had then?

But his clayme is false, & his gouernment nothing like.* 1.480 For the high priest then, tooke not vpon him to make eccl. lawes, as doth now your Pope: but only obserued such eccl. lawes, as God had made to his hande, till time of the Pha∣risies corruption, who not content with Gods lawes, had deuised besides, many fond lawes of their own inuentions, when there wanted amōg them this kingly authoritie. To the which, so long as it continued, the high priest & al other obeyed, receyuing and obseruing such eccl. constitutions, as their godly princes made vnto them. So did Aaron first re∣ceiue the eccl. cōstitutions of Moses. So after him did al•…•…re residue admit the eccl. constitutions of Dauid, & the rest of the foresaid princes: their priests made none of thē selues without the Princes consent. But the princes ord•…•…ined di∣uers eccl. orders, partly with the aduise and consent, partly without, yea agaynst the wil & cōsent of their clergy now & then: and yet those godly princes exacted of them, euen as* 1.481 they were true priests (as the stories of Iosaphat and Eze∣chias mention, how they charged their priests, euen in that they were the Lords priests, which is all one with that you alleage in verbo sacerdotij) that they should do suche things as they appoynted them to do. And is not this good and au∣thenticall euidence for king Henries doings? but that the priests appoynted any suche ordinance without their prin∣ces consents, will be harde for you to bring the like, or any •…•…uidence at all for your Popes exacting.

And if, as ye conclude herevpon, this exacting to make no* 1.482 eccl. law without his consent, be to make the ciuil magistrate the supreme iudge for the final determinatiō of causes eccle∣siasticall: then your Pope hauing no such euidence for him, by this your marke, is no supreme iudge for suche finall de∣termination: but it •…•…latly proueth agaynst you, that the Princes should be the supreme iudges therein. And if the exacting of consent, importe suche supreme authoritie as héere ye confesse: then, whereas not onely these ancient kings, but also the ancient christian Emperors, in the con∣firming of your Pope, exacted, that none shoulde be a law∣full Pope, to whome they gaue not their consent: it ar∣gueth that those Emperours were the supreme Iudges, for the finall determination of the Popes ecclesiasticall elec∣tion. Which afterwarde, when ye come to the handling therof, ye renie: affirming that although his consent was necessarie to be required, yet it argued no suche supreme iudgement in the matter.

And thus you care not, may ye for the time shuffle out an answere, howe falsly or how contrary ye counterblast your false. The nexte marke is yet further wyde from the issue, and more fonde than any of the other, for abandoning his Pope, and generall Councels.

VVhat can ye bring foorthe (sayth he) out of the olde* 1.483 Testament to aide and relieue your doings, who haue aban∣doned, not onely the Pope but generall Councels also, and that by playne acte of Parliament.

And what can you bring foorth, M. Sta. (to returne your wise demaunde on your selfe) for your pope & his councels, out of the olde Testament? can ye finde your pope and his cardinals in councel there assembled? Uerily, then might ye haue béen much bolder than ye were right now, in your sa∣cond marke, to limit your crake within a thousande yeres and vpwarde. But thereby might ye soone haue marred the popes clayme frō Peter: & so, that ye wan in y^e hundrethes,

léese agayne in the shire, and put your winning in your eye well inough, and yet sée neuer the worsse.

But ye will replie, that ye can bring proofe out of the olde Testament, how they acknowledged their highe Priest. But what is this to the purpose, except ye proue their high priest, to haue had the same authoritie that your Pope doth clayme? For otherwise, so say we, our godly Princes do ac∣knowledge* 1.484 their godly byshops, nor do abandon, but reue∣rence them. Neuerthelesse, if those their byshops be wic∣ked, they may remoue, depriue, or as ye cal it, abandon thē, or otherwise punish them accordingly. Thus did king Sa∣lomon depriue or abandon Abiathar the high Priest. And so if ye lyken your Pope to the Iewes highe Priest, then hath the byshop brought foorth profe out of the olde Testa∣ment, to confirme our Princes abandoning of your Pope: but muche more (if we consider these godly kings exam∣ples) the foresayde idolatrous priestes, suche as in déede al the Popishe priestes bée. And also in reiecting suche coun∣cels* 1.485 as the Prophet, agaynst the naughtie priestes in hys time, speaketh of, Inite consilium, dissipabitur: Enter into counsell, and it shall be defeated. But ye will say they are not like to your coūcels. Yet were they alike, then is proofe* 1.486 brought foorth euen by the olde Testament, agaynst your councels. And wherin are they not alike, béeing both aduer∣sus Dominum, & Christum eius, agaynst the Lorde, and a∣gaynst* 1.487 his annoynted? Sauing that herein they are not like in déede: those olde councels of the wicked priests, yea the councels of Caiphas, Annas, the high Priests, the Scribes, and Phariseis, that assembled so often agaynst Christ and his Apostles, were not halfe so craftie, malicious, and vio∣lent, as your Popes generall councels are. Where, sauing the bare title of generalitie, is nothing but partialitie, vio∣lence,* 1.488 and bondage, and are nothing lesse than generall, as shall be further noted, where ye giue occasion further to speake thereon.

Now to that ye say the Quéene hath abandoned general councels and that by acte of Parliament, it is but your gene∣rall lie. And your selfe very fondly without furder councell in your next wordes confute your owne tale. For, going a∣bout to alleage such motines, as cause you to say that the Quéene hath abandoned generall coūcels, and that by plaine acte of parliament: I say this (say you) partely for a certaine* 1.489 clawse of the acte of parliament, that for the determination of any thing to be adiudged to be heresie, resteth onely in the authoritie of the canonicall Scriptures, and in the first foure generall councels, & other councels generall, wherin a∣ny thing is declared heresie by expresse wordes of Scripture.

Is this the clause that moueth you M. Stapl. to say the acte of parliament abandoneth generall councels? this clause* 1.490 doth quite the contrarie, most plainly admitting & acknow∣leging the authoritie, not onely of the first fowre generall councels, but also of all such other, as grounde them selues on the authoritie of the canonicall Scriptures. Now what a reason call ye this:

The acte of Parliament admitteth the determinations of the fower generall councels, and other councels generall:

Ergo, generall councels be abandoned by acte of parlia∣ment? it admitteth them. Ergo, it abandoneth them? Had not your braines admitted somewhat ouermuch, which a∣bandoned all counsell and reason 〈◊〉〈◊〉, when ye framed this reason M. Stapleton? for by the like reason your selfe do a∣bandon your Pope and generall councels also, bicause ye do admitte them. Do ye not see therefore how fondly ye rea∣son, and how falsly ye say, that the acte of parliament aban∣doneth generall councels, when it admitteth and receiueth generall councels, and reiecteth so litle any one true gene∣rall councell, that it admitteth also the determination of a∣nything to be adiudged heresie by any generall councell, that the said councel can so proue to be heresie, by the worde of God?

If the acte of Parliament attributeth thus muche to all generall councels, doth it abandon them? and will you re∣quire it shoulde acknowledge them further, than euen the godly generall councels themselues, in determinations of Heresies would be admitted? They alwayes layde before them, as their leuell and ruler the holy Scriptures. And thinke ye they layde them forth for a cipher in Algorisme,* 1.491 as the Pope vseth them in his counsels? Or rather as Con∣stantine the great in the Nicene counsell sayde: In disputa∣tionibus rerum diuinarum a•…•… fidei, in quibus tamē habent sanctis∣simi* 1.492 spiritus doctrinam praescriptam, Euangelici enim & Apo∣stolics libri, nec non & antiquissimorū prophetarum oracula pla∣nè instruunt nos quid de voluntate dei sentiendum nobis sit. Nothing is more vnworthie than. &c. in disputations of di∣uine matters, and matters of fayth, wherein they haue yet pre∣scribed to them the doctrine of the holy ghost, for the Euan∣gelistes and Apostles Bookes, and also the Oracles of the most auncient Prophetes doe plainely instruct vs, what wee ought to thinke concerning the will of God. Athanasius one of the same counsell, sayth: Quae in Synodo Ni•…•…na à* 1.493 patribus secundum diuinas Scripturas exposi•…•… sit fides suffui∣ens est, ad omnem omnis impietatis destructionem, & ad con∣firmationem piae in Christo fidei. That fayth is sufficient to all destruction of all wickednesse, and to the confirmation of a Godly fayth in Christ, whiche fayth was expounded of the fathers in the Nicene councell according to the diuine Scrip∣tures. And of this generall counsels authoritie, sayth saint Augustine, Nec ego Nicenum, nec tu debes Ariminense tan{que}* 1.494 praeiudicaturus proferre concilium, ne{que} ego huius authoritate, ne{que} tu illius detineberis, scripturarum authoritatibus. &c. Neither ought I to alleage the Nicene counsell as giuing any forestal∣led iudgment, nor thou oughtest to alleage the coūsel at Ari∣minū, neither should I be deteyned by the authoritie of this, nor thou of that, let the matter be tried by the authorities of the scriptures, &c. And in this point S. Aug. is so earnest, that

he woulde admitte no doctrine not proued by the Scri∣ptures, but calleth it plaine fabling. Ecce singere extra Euan∣gelium* 1.495 est fabulari, For behold it is but fabling to faine ought besides the Gospell.

Neither herein doth S. Augustine thinke he iniured any councel, Ne{que} enim (saith he) quorūl•…•…bet disputatione•…•…, &c. Nei∣ther* 1.496 ought we so to counte the disputations of any men what soeuer, how catholike or laudable soeuer thei be, as we ought to counte the Canonicall scriptures, in so much that I might not (their honour which is due to those men, saued) improue or refuse any thing in their writinges▪ &c. And writing to Paulina of the credite to be giuen to the Scripture: Alijs* 1.497 vero testibus, &c. As for any other witnesses (saith he) or te∣stimonies, whereby thou arte moued to beleue ought to be: it is lawfull for thee to beleeue it or not to beleeue it. And so saith S. Herome, Quod scripturae sacr•…•… authoritatem non ha∣bet, eadem facilitate contemnitur qua recipitur: That that hath not authoritie of the holy Scripture, is as easily dispised as re∣ceyued. So saith Chrysostome, Nullis omnino credendum* 1.498 nisi dicant vel faciant quae conuenientia sunt. scripturis sanctis. Thou must beleue none, without they say or do those things, that are agreeable to the Scriptures. And againe: Si quid absque scriptura dicitur, &c. If any thing be spoken without the Scripture, the knowledge of the hearers halteth, nowe graunting, now staggering, now and then detesting the talke as vayne, now and then as probable receyuing it. But wher∣as the scripture is, there the testimonie of Gods voice com∣meth forth, both confirming the talke of the speaker, and confirming the minde of the hearer.

So S. Cyprian, Legat hic vnum verbum, &c. Let him* 1.499 reade the onely woorde, and on this commaundement let the christian religion meditate, and out of this scripture he shall finde the rules of all doctrine, to flowe, and to spring from hence, and hither to returne what soeuer the Churches disci∣pline doth conteyne.

So saith Cyrill, Necessarium nobis est diuinas sequi liter as,* 1.500 & in nullo ab earum prascripto discodere. It is necess•…•…rie for vs to follow the diuine writinges and to swerue in nothing from their prescript rule. And 〈◊〉〈◊〉 these Fathers, so all the Doctours be plaine, not to allow, much lesse to determine any doctrine, not onely contrarie but also besides the worde of God.

Nor the Auncient doctours onely, but also diuerse of the popish writers affirme, that neither the Churche, the Bi∣shops, the Pope, nor any prouincial or generall coūcel, hath powre to determine any doctrine to be true or false, other∣wise than onely by the authoritie of the Scriptures, to de∣clare them so to be. So saith Thomas of Aquine, In doctrina* 1.501 Christs & Apostolorum, &c. In the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles, all truth of faith is sufficiently layde forth. How∣beit, to beat downe the errours of heretikes and of peruerse men, certaine opinions of faith ought many times to be de∣clared. And of the same minde also is your great captaine Frier Alphonsus de Castro, who attributing farre more to the popish Church and the Pope, than he ought to do, yet in this point after long disputation and argumentes on the matter, he concludeth: Nullo ergo modo, &c. It can by no* 1.502 meanes therefore be, that the church may make any new ar∣ticle of faith, but that, the which before was the true faith and yet was hidde from vs, the churche by hir censure maketh, that it may be knowne vnto vs. Whereuppon appeareth, that my Lord Abbate did miserably erre, who expounding the chapter that beginneth C•…•…m Christus, which is had in the booke of the Decretall epistles in the title de Hereticis, saith that the Pope can make a newe article of the faithe. But he must be borne withall, being ignorant, nor well weighing of what thing he spake, this onely I see must be laide in his dish, that he Iudged beyond the slipper: for it is not the office of Canonistes to Iudge of heresie or of faith, but the office of Diuines to whom Gods lawe is committed. The Canonistes

partes are to descant of the Popes lawe. Looke they to it therefore, least while they couet to sit on both stooles, the taile come to grounde, as is the Prouerbe. Thus sharpely concludeth Alphonsus against my Lord Abbate, and all po∣pish Canonistes that would intermedle with writing in Diuinitie (I knowe not whether you Master Stapleton, were any such or n•…•…, but many of your site are euen such as he speaketh of) that woulde studie bothe the Popes lawes, and Gods lawes togither, and so lay them both* 1.503 in the duste. For, 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 Christi & Behal? VVhat felowship is there betwene Christ and Belial? Thus writeth he, that neither the Pope, nor his 〈◊〉〈◊〉, nor the Church, can determine faith or here•…•…ie without the worde of God.

And so saith Ferus, Cum cont•…•…leris falsa•…•… doctrin•…•…m &c.* 1.504 When you shall conferre the false doctrine, ye shall finde out the errour. For the onely holy Scripture is the rule of the truthe, from the which whatsoeuer differeth, or doth contra∣rie, it is darnell and errour, in what countenaunce soeuer out∣warde it come forthe. For he that is not with me, is against me saith Christe. Herevppon the Apostles and Disciples in the primitiue Churche, did dayly search the Scriptures whe∣ther they were so or no. For oft time it commeth to passe, that that is iudged errour, which is not errour, and contrarie wise. Here therefore the Scripture iudgeth. So Christe was Iudged a transgressour of the lawe, but if ye conferre him with the Scripture, you shall see he agreeth best therewith. On the contrary, the traditions of the Phariseys seemed good, which not withstāding Christ conferring with the Scripture, plainly sheweth they are contrarie to the Scripture. And therefore Dauid in all that octonarie desireth nothing els, but to be directed by the worde of God.

And the same Ferus in the eleuenth chap. of Matthew.* 1.505 Baculus arund•…•…neus est quicquid extra verbum des traditur, &c. VVhat soeuer is giuen without the worde of God is a rodde of a reede. For it is al onely the worde of God, which

we may safely leane vppon, in so much that from hence thou mayst see what frowarde deceyuers they be, that for the worde of God would onely set foorth vnto vs their dreames, that is a rodde of a reede, Hereuppon the true Apostles glo∣ried most of all on this, that they deliuered nothing but the* 1.506 woord of God, so saith Peter: Not following vnlearned •…•…∣bles, we make knowne to you the powre and presence of our Lord Iesus Christe, so Paule doth glory that he receyued not the Gospell of men, but by the reuelation of Iesus Christe. Whereon he inferreth, if therefore any preache any other thing, let him be accursed. As though he shoulde say▪ we haue preached the woorde of God, whereto ye may safely leane▪ accursed therefore be he, that for the certayne worde of God, bringeth a rodde of a reede, that is to say, mannes feigninges.

Thus hitherto agrée euen these Papists with the aun∣cient Fathers, that nothing may be decided to be true or false, neither by Church, Councell, Pope, or any Man, nor any Angell, with out the authoritie of Gods worde, so to iudge and confirme the same.

But (say you) by this rule it will be harde to conuince ma∣ny* 1.507 frowarde and obstinate Heretikes to be Heretikes, yea of such as by the foresaid fower first and many other Coun∣cels generall, are condemned for Heretikes.

As Dauid saide of the wicked, I•…•…llic trepidauerunt timore* 1.508 vbi non erat timor, They trembled there for feare, where no feare was: And as Esay saith, Possedit timor hypocritas.* 1.509 Feare hath taken holde on the hypocrites: So are you M. Stapl afrayde of your owne shadowes. For, except those frowarde and obstinate he•…•…etikes be your selues, that feare the iudgement of that cutting two edged sworde, to beate downe your traditions: no godly Christian neede to feare, or flee from the determination of the Scripture, or thinke it insufficient to detect and d•…•…termine all Here•…•…ies.

Yet (say you) it wilbe harde to conuince there with many

froward & obstinate heretikes▪ As who shuld say, it would be* 1.510 easi•…•…r to cōuince them, being so froward and obstinate with out the Scripture, and not rather a great deale harder. Is it likelier that their frowarde obstinacie, will yelde to the authoritie of mans worde, that will not yelde to the autho∣ritie of Gods woorde? but be it harde or •…•…ofte, what is that to the matter, if it will conuince their Heresies, be the Here∣tikes neuer so obstinate? This is inough to the purpose, that there is no here•…•…ie defended neuer so frowardly, of any obstinate heretike but the worde is able to conuince it to be an here•…•…ie. Yea as Chrysostome saith, Nullo modo agnosci∣tur* 1.511 &c. •…•…o them that are willing, to know which is the true church of Christ (from heretikes Churches) it is knowne by no meanes. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 modo per scripturas: but all onely by the scriptures. And where ye make exceptiō of such as were condemned for heretikes by the first f•…•…wre generall Coun∣cels: it is most euident, that as in all those Councels, the worde of God (as their line and squyre) was layde foorth amongst them: so they conuinced all tho•…•…e heretikes by the same.

Your common obiection hereto is of the worde 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which ye say in the expresse scriptures can not be found, but what saith S. Augustine to this: Quidest enim 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nisi* 1.512 〈◊〉〈◊〉 e•…•…usdem{que} substantiae•…•… quid est inquam 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nisi ego & pater vnum sumus? sed nunc nec ego Nicenum &c. VVhat is this worde 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 but of one & the same substance, what is I say 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 but I and my father are one? but now neither ought I to alleage the Councell of Nice, neither oughtest thou to alleage (as to giue fore iudgement) the councel of A∣•…•…iminum, neyther should I be withhelde by the authoritie of this, nor thou of that, but by the authoritie of the Scri∣ptures, &c. Thus doth S. Augustine both replie to you, that euen those Heretikes were confuted onely by the ex∣presse Scripture: and also that for the Iudgement of Here∣sies, the authoritie of the Scripture is to be preferred,

not onely before the prouinciall Councell at Ariminum, but euen before the first generall councell at Nice. Ney∣ther did S. Augustine declare their doctrine to be an here∣sie, bicause it was so determined by the generall councell, but bicause it was determined by the authoritie of the Scri∣ptures. And following this rule we are sure we can not erre. For this is (as Dauid saith) Lucerna 〈◊〉〈◊〉 me•…•…s ver∣bum* 1.513 tuum domine & lumen semitis me is, Thy worde O Lord is a candle to my feete and a light to my pathes. On the con∣trary* 1.514 with out this light not onely the priuate fathers, but euen the councels, yea the generall councels, where they determined ought not grounded on the Scriptures, so litle could espie the heresies of others, that they erred foule them selues.

I omitte the councell of Carthage wherein S. Cyprian* 1.515 was, how it erred in determining heretikes to be rebapti∣zed. The councell of Laodicea (whiche though otherwise* 1.516 was a godly councell) yet erred it farre, in disallowing and enioyning penaunce, for those that maried the second time. And so forth diuerse other prouincial coūcels. And to speake only of generall councels, euen the first Nicene councell,* 1.517 how greatly was it like to haue erred in forbidding priests mariages, and the matter was alreadie passed by all the Bishops voices, had not one father Paphnutius bene, that made them retract their errour. Which they did, not for any* 1.518 authoritie in him, being but one Bishop against so many Bishops, but moued by the authoritie of Gods worde that be alleaged, and from which they swarued. And as they ha•…•… like to haue erred herein, so erred they in déede, in condem∣ning those souldiours, who hauing once professed the faith of Christ, are prest for souldiours afterwardes. Which is contrary to the rule of S. Iohn the baptist, that allowed the* 1.519 life of souldiours as a lawfull calling. Neither doth Christ in the Centuri•…•…, nor S. Paule in Cornelius, in Publius, or any other captaines or souldiours, with whom he had to do,

and by whose industrie he was often saued from daunger, and whome he likewise helped, did euer condemne the vo∣cation of a souldiour vnder his Prince, as a calling not a∣greable to christianitie. Likewise the coūcel of Calcedō, did* 1.520 wel in condemning Eutiches, but in forbidding mariage to Monkes, they erred from the expresse worde of God, that sayth: Mariage is honorable among all men, and that euery* 1.521 man might take a wyfe to auoyde fornication, and suche wickednesse not to be named, as monks since that restraint haue fallen into.

And to bring euen a Monkes, or an Abbots testimonie of your owne side, Panormitane sayth: Concilium errare* 1.522 potest, sicut alias errauit super ca•…•…sa matrimon•…•… contrahendi in∣ter raptam & raptorem, quando dictum Hi•…•…ronimi fuit postea toti concilio praelatum: A councell may erre, as otherwise it erred concerning a cause of matrimonie betweene the par∣tie rauished, & the ra•…•…sher, when as the saying of Hierome was afterwarde preferred before an whole councell. And if ye referre this to a Prouinciall councell, the generall rule taken from S. Augustine will conuince you, that not onely Prouinciall councels are corrected by generall, but also •…•…psa plaenaria saepe pr•…•…ora posteri•…•…ribus emendantur: oftentimes* 1.523 euen the former generall councels are amended of the lat∣ter councels.

But how soeuer this rule was true in S. Augustines dayes, since that time the latter generall councels haue ben worsse than the former, and so from worsse to worsse, are not onely become starke nought, but nothing general at al. And therefore it is not onely lawfull to abandon them, but we are bounde so to do: as our Sauiour Christ warneth* 1.524 vs: Cauete vobis ab hominibus quontam tradent vos in conci∣habulis suis: Take heede to your selues of men, bicause they will betray you in their councels.

Suche councels did S. Paule abandon, when Fes•…•…us of∣fred* 1.525 him to go vp to Ierusalem, and there to be tryed in the

assemblie of the highe Priestes. So Athanasius abandoned* 1.526 the councels at Lyre, Smirna, and Ephesus▪ So Maxi∣mus abandoned the Councell at Antioche. So Pauiinus abandoned the Councel at Milayne. So Chrisostome aban∣doned the Councell at Constantinople. And so we abando∣ned the Popes violent councels at Rome and Trident, that we might say with Dauid, Non consed•…•… i•…•… consilio 〈◊〉〈◊〉,* 1.527 cum 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 non intro•…•…bo, odi ecclesi•…•…m malig•…•…atium, & cum impijs non •…•…edebo: I haue not sitten in the counsell of vanitie, I will not enter in with wicked doers, I haue hated the Churche of the malignant, and I will not sitte with the wicked. These Councels we haue abandoned, M. Stay. but no generall Councels, wherein all things are tryed to be truthe or heresies, by the touche of the worde of God, and not by the Popes, the councels or any creatures d•…•…cree besides. Omnis homo mendax, euery man is a lyer, and the* 1.528 worde of God is onely the truthe of doctrine.* 1.529

And therefore in all Councels we must crie with the Prophet, Adl•…•…gem, & ad testimonium Let them r•…•…nne to the* 1.530 lawe (of God) to the testimonie (of his worde) quod si •…•…on d•…•…xerint i•…•…xta verbum hoc, non er•…•…t eis •…•…x 〈◊〉〈◊〉. If the Councell declare any thing to be heresie, not according to the worde of God: the morning light, the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of righte∣ousnesse shall not shine on them, but they shall erre in the shadowe of death. But sayth Ambrose, 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉 vs* 1.531 e•…•…rare non possis, followe the •…•…pture, that thou mayest not erre. And if the Councell do not follow them, we are made free from following, yea, licen•…•…ed to abandon and accurse those Councels by your owne Canons. S•…•… quis proh•…•…t vo∣b•…•…* 1.532 quod a Domino 〈◊〉〈◊〉 est, & rurs•…•…s imper•…•…t fieri quod Dominus prohibet, exe•…•…rabilis sit ab omnibus qui dil•…•…nt De∣um: If any body forbid you that that is commanded of the Lorde, and agayne, commaunde that thing to be done, that the Lorde hath forbidden, l•…•…t him be accursed of all that loue the Lorde.

And your Abbote Panormitane willeth vs so to estéeme of* 1.533 your Councels without the scripture, that plus credendum* 1.534 vel simpli•…•… l•…•…co 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 q•…•… toti simul con∣•…•…: we muste more beleeue, euen a simple lay man allea∣ging the scripture, than all the whole Councell togither. And your famous doctor Iohn Gerso•…•… Chauncelour of the vniuersitie of Paris, sayth, Prima verit•…•…s 〈◊〉〈◊〉 stat, &c. this* 1.535 truthe standeth first, to weete, that any simple man beeing not authorized, may be so excellently learned in holy writ, that we muste more beleeue his assertion in a case of doc∣trine, than the Popes declaration: bicause it is euident, that we must more beleeue the Gospell, than the Pope. Neither sayth he thus for the Pope alone, but euen for your Coun∣cels, yea for generall Councels, in sacris. &c. VVe must more beleeue an excellent learned man in the scriptures and alleaging the catholike authoritie, than we muste beleeue euen a generall Councell. Thus by your owne doctors, yea by the Pope him selfe, that sayth, no proofe oughte to* 1.536 be admitted agaynst the Scripture, we may and muste a∣bandon your Councels, wherein many things besides, and many thinges expressely agaynst the Scripture, are deter∣mined for truthe, and the expresse truthe of the scripture is condemned for heresie.

And therefore where ye say, we renounce them onely for this cause, bicause they grounde not them selues on the authoritie of the Scriptures: ye shewe a good cause to cleare vs of all heresies and errors, and shewe sufficient cause withall, why we admitte not your Councels nowe: your obstinate frowarde heresies to be suche, that ye can not a•…•…ouche for them, nor defende them, by the ho∣ly Scriptures. The authoritie whereof, if those your Councels doe ad•…•…itte, as did the olde generall Councels, then the clause in the Act of Parliamēt doth no more aban∣don your Councels, than it reiecteth those foure firste, or

any other, that grounde their proues thereon. But ye haue some better reason belike, why ye set vp this fourth mark•…•… of abandoning the Pope and his councels, to be exemplified in the olde Testament.

Partly, and most of all (say you) I say it for an other clause* 1.537 in the Acte of Parliament, enacting that no foreigne prince spirituall or temporall, shall haue any authoritie or superio∣ritie in this realme, in any spirituall cause.

Either your fingers itche (master Stapl.) at this clause wherwith ye be pidling so often, before ye come to the pro∣per place where this is handled more at large. Or else ye do vse the figure of anticipation so mutch, and so imperti∣nently, to puffe vp your counterblast withall. But were it the chiefest cause why ye set vp this marke, bicause we re∣iecte all foraigne authoritie: then hath the Bishop hit this* 1.538 marke also at the full, euen in all these examples. Excepte you can on the other side proue, that these godly Princes admitted in their dominions, the authoritie of any foraigne Prelate ouer them. Of which, till you shal be able to bring profe, the commaunding and directing of their owne prie∣stes (as is sayde before) yea euen of the highest Priest of all: is argument sufficient to inferre, that they admitted not any other straunge Priest ouer them (all straunge Priests then béeing heathen Idolaters) and therefore this clause of foraigne prelates, is also by the Bishop, out of the olde Testament fully proued.

But say you, The Popes authoritie ecclesiasticall is no* 1.539 more foraigne to this Realme, than the Catholike faythe is foraygne.

You say so, M. Stapl. I will beare ye witnesse, but ye* 1.540 shoulde proue it, and not say so onely. Neuerthelesse, be it not foraigne, then is he not excluded by that clause, nor ye néede so storme thereat, that it should be the cause moste of all, why ye haue sayde all this, and nowe ye lyke it vvell inough, saying:

And yet mighte the Pope reforme vs well inough for any* 1.541 thing before rehearsed.

Why rehearsed ye this clause then, and found most fault therwith, since those words hinder nothing his clayme?

Sauing that (say you) he is by expresse words of the sta∣tute* 1.542 otherwise excluded.

How chaunce your quarell then, M. Stap. is not at that exclusion? But wilily ye sawe well inough, that he is ex∣empted, euen in that he is a foraigne powre. And had his name not bene exempted, yet the clause that before t•…•…kled ye so muche (though now ye would make so light thereat) did fully exclude your Pope, bicause he is a foraygne power. Or elsefull fondly ye quarell moste at that, wherat ye had no cause.

Yes, say you, there is a cause why I mislike this clause* 1.543 agaynst foraigne authoritie. For then I pray you if any ge∣nerall Councel be made to reforme our misbeleefe, if we wil not receiue it, who shall force vs? And so ye see we be at li∣bertie to receiue or not receiue any generall Councell. And yet might the Pope reforme vs well inoughe for any thing before rehearsed.

Now surely M. St. and for any thing heere rehearsed by you, the matter is well holpe vp, and full clerkly haue ye answered your owne obiection▪ For first, where ye say: If any generall Councell be made to reforme our misbeleefe: Your obiection hangeth altogither on your accustomed pre∣supposall, threaping this kindnesse on vs, that hauing re•…•…e∣cted your Pope, we must néedes be in misbelefe: and so rea∣son forward, à petitione princ•…•… that we muste be reformed therin. Where otherwise, denying first this your presuppo∣sall, & vrging the contrary, that the misbeléefe were on your party, in admitting the popes claime, & al other his errors: then must ye begin a little higher to proue vs in misbeléefe, or else ye cā go no further, the fat is in y^e fire, & al your trim deuised incōuenience agaynst this clause of the act, is dasht.

But bicause it were great pitie, that so good an heades inuention, in forecasting so great a peril, should not be herd throughout, let vs winke at your misbeleefe, in déeming misbeleefe in vs, and suffer you to tel on your tale, misbele∣uing now with you that we are in misbeleefe, what follo∣weth? VVe must be reformed, say you. And good reason, say I. But tell on.

If any general Coūcel be made to reforme our misbeleefe, if we will not receiue it, who shal force vs? And so ye see we be at libertie, to receiue or not receiue any general Councell.

Your argument, M. St. after your wōted maner, stādeth al on ifs: If we be in misbeléefe, we must be reformed: if a general Coūcel be made to reforme vs, we ought to receiue it: if we wil not receiue it, who shal force vs? if we wil not be forced, we be at libertie: if we be at libertie, we may re∣iect it: if we reiect it, we continue in misbeléefe: if we con∣tinue in misbeleefe, we shall be condemned. One if, as is a∣foresayd, for an Oliuer to his Rouland, set against his first if, •…•…f we be not in misbeleefe, had turned off al the other ifs. But hauing admitted, we were in misbeléefe: is there none other remedie, M. St. but néedes a generall Councel must be called for vs? are we so obstinate, or is there none other meanes? yes, thankes be to God, where we haue bene in déede in misbeléefe, we haue bene reformed by our godly Princes, and that without a generall Councell.

Which I speake not to the disprayse or dispising of ge∣nerall Councels (although when they were better kepte than they be nowe, seldome they haue had good sequele, as the auncient fathers complayne on them) but I speake a∣gaynst* 1.544 the Popishe Councels, nothing lesse than generall nowe, and nothing lesse than reforming any errours, but violently so maynteining them, that true generall Coun∣cels* 1.545 (suche as in the olde tyme reformed errours) can not nowe be summoned. And the Pope feareth, hindreth, and stoppeth by all his practises nothing more, than a

very frée and generall Councell, suche as the foure first generall Councels were. Of which sorte admitting there wer any called now, admitting also we were in arror, since that Councell would by the onely worde of God (for so did the auncient generall Councels) conuince our errour, we mighte well be reformed thereby, euen by these clauses that ye alleage. For suche a Councell, where our Prelates* 1.546 them selues▪ aswell as any other of Christendome, mighte fréely debate the matter, were no forayne power to vs, or to any other Realme in Christendome: since euery Chri∣stian Realme shoulde haue his frée powre and libertie therein alike, to proue or improue by the worde of God. And the clause of the statute abandoneth not, but admit∣teth and receiueth all such Councels either past or to come, that shall with suche fréedome, by Gods worde, conuince vs of any heresie or error that we misbeléeue vpon. To say therefore, that by these clauses of the Acte, we set our selues at libertie, to reiect simply all generall Councels, it is but the libertie of your slaunderous tong, disposed to be∣stowe a liberall lye vpon vs. No, M. Stap. we exempte not our selues from the authoritie and determination of any suche general Councels▪ But as we are ready to admit them with all Christian reuerence: so we hartily pray to God, once to sende suche an one, as by the infallible worde of God, might frankly and truely determine, whether our Princes & we, or your Pope and you, mainteine these here∣sies, errors, and misbeléefe, that ye say we do.

The drift of your argument is this: there must be one to force vs: wherby ye meane your Pope. Wherein ye rightly conclude in déede for his parte, that he is a forcer, that is (to speake playne English) a violent Tyrant, per∣force to extorte of men, to yéelde to his partiall Councels. But euen for this cause also we worthily reiecte hym and his force, with his enforced conuenticles, as no gene∣rall or frée Councels, nor orderly called, wherwith he hath

by the fourme of olde Councels no more to doe, than other Bishops haue.

But now where ye say, yet might the Pope reforme vs well inough, for any thing before rehearsed. Whether the Pope mighte reforme vs or no or howe he might do it, by any his owne authoritie ouer vs, or otherwise, is not yet M. Stapl. séene. But what the Pope hath done, is many∣fest: How he hath not reformed, but deformed, not only vs heretofore, and other places, but euen his owne Court, and him selfe also. Let him first reforme him selfe, his Cardi∣nals, his whores, his Stewes, his simonie, his ambition, his pride, his tyrannie, with other his innumerable abho∣minations, in life and doctrine (who by his clayme from Christ and Peter, should be an ensample and paterne of all godly reformation) and thē let him moue the question, how we may be reformed. This were a more formall waye for him, and for you also, M. Stap. (sithe you will néedes bée writing) to write to him hereof, ment ye to haue your coun∣trey reformed in déede, & not deformed by him. And whē he hath reformed himself in al these things thē write you ouer to your countreymen vnreformed, that the Pope might re∣forme vs well inough: for otherwise we can not but thinke he woulde reforme vs ill inough, that can not, or will not once reforme him selfe. But I think I set ye to long a day, to write ouer to vs of his reformation. Ye might tary M. Sta. til the Kalends of Gréece, or euer ye sée the Kalotes of Rome reformed by him, or any vice or error besides.

Well, say you, and yet he might reforme vs wel inough, for any thing before rehearsed.

D•…•… ye not sée M. Stap. how fondly ye haue answered al your fo•…•…de warbling? for if he might still reforme vs, for all those clauses rehearsed: why rehearsed ye them, since they were not agaynst him? why haue ye made suche a doe agaynst them? that by them we abandon him & his coun∣cels since he and they bée in statu quo, in the state we were

before for all them? Why do ye frame your argument on your iff•…•…s, of the inconuenience of our libertie thereon, if for all that we be no more at libertie frō him, than we were before? how were they ouershot that put those wordes in the acte that were to so small a purpose? or els how hath M. St. ouer shotte him selfe that hath traueled thus earnestly to reason against those clauses as most of all against the Pope, and when all is rehe•…•…sed in them, are neither to or fro against him?

The fifte false marke that ye set vp is this.* 1.547

Now what can ye showe that mere lay men should enioy ecclesiasticall liuings as vsually they do among you.

This is partly one of the vsuall lies and sclaunders a∣mong you, to terme our Clergie mere lay bicause we be not of your Romish stampe, oyled, clipt, nor shaued. But what is this to the question or issue of the state of supreme go∣uernment,* 1.548 if any such mere lay men haue crept into any ec∣clesiasticall liuings? I pray you were not suche bothe men and boyes vnder your Pope also that enioyed ecclesiasticall liuings, and that with dispensation, and were no ecclesiasti∣call persons, otherwise than as ye call them studentes or clerks, and yet many of them no great clearks neither, but great ruffians not a few, yea some hauing abbeys, cardinal∣ships, and bishopricks to the ricks as ye termed it before, they had, & yet they were not ouer spirituall pastours. But ye will say, they were not meere lay men▪ for at the least they had receyued, if not Benet & Collet, yet Primam tonsu∣•…•…um. As though the giuing them a notche in the head with a paire of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, made them the more spiritual or ecclesiasti∣call. But doth not Florobellus confesse, that the Pope com∣mittit 〈◊〉〈◊〉 etiam mero laico, commit•…•…eth spirituall things vnto meere lay men?

But what manner of spirituall persons the Pope besto∣wed his ecclesiasticall liuings vppon, Bernard writing euen to the Pope him selfe, doth partly declare. Ex toto or∣be

Romam confluunt ambitiosi, &c. Out of all the worlde there* 1.549 flocke vnto Rome ambitious men, couetous, Simoniakes, Church robbers, keepers of cōcubines, committers of incest, and monsters like men, and that by the Apostolicall authori∣tie to obteine or retayne ecclesiasticall promotions.

Thus wrote Barnarde of the holy spirituall company of those in his time that receiued and enioyed ecclesiasticall liuinges, euen of the Popes holy handes, foure hundreth yeres agoe. And trow ye then, they haue not bene bestowed farre worsse since that time? He sayde of them in his time: Ipsa quo{que} ecclesiastica dignitatis officia▪ &c. The ecclesiasticall* 1.550 offices also of dignitie are gone into a filthy lucre, and into an occupation of darkenesse, neither is there sought in them any health of soules, but riot of riches, for this they are clip∣ped, for this they haunt Churches, they celebrate Masses, they sing Psalmes, for Bishoprickes, Archdeaconries, Abbeys and other dignities they striue at this day impudently, to waste the reuenues of the Churches, in vses of superfluitie and vani∣tie. It remayneth that the mā of sinne be reueled, the childe of perditiō, not onely the day Diuel, but also the nooneday Di∣uell, who is not onely transformed into an Angell of light, but is extolled aboue al that is called God, &c. Thus writeth he of your Pope, for bestowing his liuings so well.

But alacke Bernardus non vidit omnia, Bernard neuer sawe the horrible abuses that haue bene since, such liuings bestowed on Catami•…•…es to the maintenāce of Sodomitrie. But to let such buggishe abuses passe, except ye giue furder occasion: & to speake of that that Kawline cōplaineth vpon, taking occasion of the tempter, taking vp Christ and set∣ting him on the pinnacle of the Temple: In qua ostendit, &c. Wherein (saith he) he shewed that pride should destroy* 1.551 the Church of God, and the desire of honour, euen as now we see many, to flie vppon the pinnacle of the Churche, without the winges of science and life, and therefore the Diuell caried them. And a litle after he faithe: Then the

learned did slie, now the ignorant and children flie, like to chickens that will immediatly haue a combe so soone as they are out of the shell, these are noble men that wil be mytred and made Bishops being children and vnlearned. For the Di∣uell doth many things that God would not do. It is tolde, how that a certayne Germane hauing a very vgglie visage, would haue obtayned of the Pope a certaine benefice beyng* 1.552 vacant, but fearing he should not haue accesse to the Pope, neither would he reueale it to any body els, least he should be defeated of the benefice: came vnto the gates of the Popes palaice, and strongly rapping thereat, when the porter cha∣•…•…ing with him, demaunded who it was that beate on the gates so mightely: the vggly Priest answered, I am the Diuell, go tell the Pope that I will speake with him, or else I will en∣ter perforce. The porter trembling and astonnied, ranne and declared all to the Pope. The Pope all trembling, open (quod he) the dore, or els he will enter, all we can not shutte him out. VVhen he was let in, he came to the Popes pre∣sence, that trembled for feare: and fell downe at his feete, saying, most holy Father I am not the Diuell, but bicause to gette my benefice, I should not haue entered in the name of God, I camme vnto you in the name of the Diuell, the Pope hearing this, quickly gaue him what soeuer he deman∣ded. VVhereby it appeareth that many are caried vppon the pinnacle of the Temple, more in the Diuels name than in the name of God. Thus saith 〈◊〉〈◊〉 a famouse Monke and Preacher of your side, for the good enioying of ecclesiasticall liuings vsually among you. This is a spi∣ritualtie in the Diuels name, yet much better wereit, to* 1.553 be in the name of God a mee•…•…e lay man: according as your owne Canons confesse: that oftentimes lay men are better than Bishops, yea your Bishops are no better than Dogs, Rauens, Wolues and Asses.

But you wil replie that these were abuses, true in déede, so they were. Howbeit they were neuer better vsed,

but euer worsse and worsse. Come now to those that were counted no a•…•…uses among you, but allowed: what say you by* 1.554 your •…•…ay brethren, among your holy ones of religion? Yea all the Monks that were in the old time, were counted •…•…ay▪ What say ye by the Templers, and after them the Knights of the Roades, and Prussia? but to let go them, and other 〈◊〉〈◊〉 brethren. If it were demaunded, whether your Priests, By∣shops, Caroinals, yea your Pope him self, with al his eccle∣siasticall* 1.555 liuings, were any thing else than meere laye, and cleane without all spiritualnesse, concerning Gods spirite, I thinke it would come to a Qu•…•… potest, and be a question disputable, whether his Holinesse, for al his triple crowne, and other ecclesiastical liuings & titles, were any Byshop, or any member of Christs Church or no, euen by your ec∣clesiastical Canons, of which one beginneth: Nō omne•…•… epis∣copi sunt episcopi, al Byshops are not Bishops. &c. 2. Q 7. Like∣wise Bernard the Canonist saith Spiritualis gladius ex leui* 1.556 causa non tantum per alios. &c. the spirituall Sworde, mouing and nourishing warres of a light cause, not only by other but also by it selfe, contrary to right, is become a souldiers Sword. Erasmus saith, the Popes them selues are rather the succes∣sors* 1.557 of such as Iulius Caesar, of Alexander, Xerxes, Croesus, and of mightie theeues, than the Apostles successors. And that there are none so pernicious enemies to the Churche as the* 1.558 wicked Popes, that suffer in silence Christe to growe out of knowledge, and tie him to gainefull lawes, and deflowre him with wrested interpretations, and murder him with their pe∣stilent life.

Call ye these spirituall byshops, or rather as Christ said, théeues and robbers, painted sepulchers, rauening wolues, or as he called Iudas the Deuill him selfe? For why, beeing thus degenerate from the office of a Bishop, should they haue the name of bishops? as their owne law saith. Si repri∣ueris nec nomē habere mereris, It thou want the thing▪ thou de∣seruest not the name. And as Christe him selfe doth say, If

the salte haue lost his saltnesse what shalbe seasoned therwith,* 1.559 it is thenceforth good for nothing but to be cast out & to be troden downe of men: These are the spirituall Pastors of the popish Church, yeathe Popes them selues being worsse than lay men, and yet will be Lordes of all ecclesiasticall li∣uings, & lay mens liuings too. But I will reserue this mat∣ter till ye be disposed to commune furder thereon, for they touch néerer the ouerthrows of your Popes claime, & more decipher the hauiour of his Clergie, than they come néere the issue of the Princes gouernment.

The sixte marke that ye set vp is this: VVhat good in∣duction* 1.560 can ye bring from the doings of the Kinges of the old lawe, to iustifie that Princes now may make Bishops by letters Patents, and that for such and so long time as should please them, as either for terme of yeres, monethes, weekes or dayes.

What an impudent and too too shamefull a sclaunderer you may be marked to be, appeareth by this marke M. St. If Bishops haue their letters patents from the Prince, for their Bishoprike, had they them not also frō Princes, euen in the most popishe time? but that they are made for suche termes as ye write, you wilfully belie your Soueraigne. The Prince in deede at all times, if they do not their dutie (and so shalbe thought vnworthie) may orderly remoue, inhibite, or punish them. And of this the Bishop hath al∣leaged good proofe in the old Testament. And yet if there were no proofe of it there, what matter can ye make thereon, that your Popes did not practise? who licenced, deposed, restrayned, limited, and that for such and so long time, as should please them. As Florobellus saithe of the* 1.561 Pope, Item facere potest Praelatum ad tempus, He can also make a Prelate for a time. And can ye finde such bulles of leade from the doings of the high Priest of the olde lawe? If ye can not, this marke ouerturnes your Popes supre∣macie, more than it commeth any thing nere the Quéenes.

The Seuenth marke. VVhat good motiue can ye ga∣ther* 1.562 by their regiment, that they did visit Bishops and Prie∣stes, and by their lawes restrayned them to excercise any iu∣risdiction ouer their flockes, to visit their slockes, to reforme them, to order or correct them without their especiall au∣thoritie and commission thereunto, yea to restrayne them by an inhibition from preaching, which yee confes•…•…e to be the peculiar function of the Clergie, exempted from all su∣perioritie of the Prince.

This marke hath two partes. For the former (so farre as ye say true) the Bishop hath gathered good motiues by their regiment, that they did visite Bishops and Priestes,* 1.563 and by their lawes restrained them, to exercise any iurisdi∣ction ouer their flockes, to visit their flockes, to refourme to order and correct them, without their especiall commission therevnto, for what else was their ordeyning and allow∣ing them, their commaunding, ordering, appointing and di∣recting them? Except ye meane hereby (for ye sp•…•…ake it ve∣ry subtlely) that the Bishops could do none of those func∣tions, that belonged to their office, after they were ap∣pointed therto by the Prince, but that for euery thing they must haue a speciall commission: and than it is a captiouse sclaunder, the Prince doth not so. But what belongeth to the Prince herein, and what to the Bishop, in either of their Iurisdictions: is to be considered in the fourth booke. Sauing that still ye will augmēt your counterblast, by the way of preuention.

Your other parte of this marke, is a manifest sclaunder. The Prince restrayneth no Bishop nor preacher with any simple inhibition from his office of preaching, but Secun∣dum* 1.564 quid, inhibiting your popish seducers, from preaching their traditions and erroneous doctrines, such false Pro∣phetes as Christ biddeth vs beware of. If ye would preach the onely truthe, ye might haue good leaue to preache it. Now, to stoppe the mouthes of false Idolatrouse Priestes,

the Bishop in these examples hath brought good proofe hereof: no preaching is simplie forbidden, but Papistes, sectaries, and other of noughtie or suspected life or doctrine, and therefore where in the margine ye bidd•…•… your reader Note, here is nothing for him to note, but your notorie•…•…se lie, and your notable argument that ye make thereon:

Preaching is the peculiar function of the Clergie exem∣pted from the Prince:

Ergo, The Prince hath not authoritie to restrayne a noughtie preacher, nor to inhibite him from preaching false doctrine. Proue your argument a little better M. Staple∣ton, and then bidde vs note it, els is there litle to note in it, but much to note in you.

For your Eight marke say you: VVhat? thinke ye* 1.565 that ye can persuade vs also that Bishops and Priestes pay∣ed their first fruites and tenthes to their Princes, yea and that both in one yeare, as they did for a while in Kinge Henries dayes? Verely Ioseph would not suffer the very heathen Priests (which onely had the bare names of Priests) to paie either tythes or fines to Pharao their Prince, yea rather he founde them in time of famine vppon the common store.

This marke Master Stapleten, of paying first fruites* 1.566 and tenthes to the Prince, is bothe wide from the Bi∣shops marke, and mere frinolouse. For supposing they payde none, yet this supreme gouernement still remayned entiere and whole to the Prince: nor the paying it to the Prince, maketh him supreme gouernour any whitte the more. It was an order taken, ye know, in the time of your Popes superstition, and that not long since neither, vnder pretence of helping the Church in hir warres against the Saracens, but in very déede to enriche the Popes coafers, although he claymed it, not by any title of Supremacie, but as the keper of the Churches hutche. And since by con∣tinuance grew to an ordinarie custome, as a fée vnto him.

And afterwarde (his vsurpation here being remoued) this* 1.567 was also thought good, to be better and more profitably be∣stowed on our owne naturall liege, and true supreme go∣uernour within our owne realme, than on a foreyne vsur∣per, to mainteyne his whores and pompe, and to empoue∣rish the realme, and beat vs with our owne goods. And had it bene otherwise disposed, or remitted, the Prince not withstanding had bene full supreme gouernour. But is it so haynouse a matter now for a Prince to receyue tenths or first fruites? did not I pray you, euen by your Popes dispē∣sations and bulles, Princes receyue them diuerse times be∣fore? and if they may receyue them with his bulles, why may they not receyue them (being giuen by order of the owners) euen without his bulles also?

Now, sith ye can make no good argument on the ordina∣rie paying of tenthes or first fruites, to proue your Popes, nor to improue the Princes supremacie, thinke ye it a good reason to argue, from an extraordinarie facte on some occa∣sion or consideration, to subuerte an ordinarie authoritie? You say they paide both in one yere to King Henrie. Were ye not disposed to wrangle and misconster euery facte odi∣ously, ye woulde not vrge your reason thus M. Staple∣ton. For admitte ought were amisse therein by ouersight or euer the inconuenience were espied and amended, as after ye graunt it was; which was euē the next yéere following: what is this to the impayring of his supreme authoritie? if their receyuing of the tenthes and first fruites be allow∣able as euen your Popes haue allowed the same. What cāye make of the double receipt? sauing that he receiued more than he should that yeare of dutie haue receyued, if ye make the worst of it. And yet thereby it followeth, that he might haue receyued them, as he afterwarde did, and as the Prince now receyueth them. But haue ye neuer redde of the Popes dubbling, trebling, quadrupling, and extreme ex∣cessiue encreasing of payments vpō payments, not one yere

but euery yere, with continuall and vnsatiable polling of the clergie in times past? But this coulde ye not remember. Your remembraunce serues ye like the hornes of a snayle, ye can stretche it out, and pull it in as it pleaseth you. But the Chronicles that ye pretende to haue read, and quote so fast, cry out of the Popes vnsatiable dropsie, and infinite practises to get golde and siluer. And where findes he suche priestly supremacie in all the olde Testament?

The argument wherewith you confirme your marke a∣gaynst the Princes receiuing therof, is yet more fonde and faultie.

Ioseph would not suffer the heathen Priests to pay either* 1.568 tithes or fines.

Ergo, The Christian Clergie muste not suffer them∣selues to paye tenthes or firste fruites to their Christian Princes.

This argument is more Heathenish than christianlike (M. Stapl.) or student like either, but good inoughe for the popish Clergie to grounde them selues vppon. Thinke ye the doings of Ioseph in dealing with those heathen Idola∣ters, to be a fit rule to le•…•…el Christian Princes duties, to∣wardes their Priests and people? or do ye thinke that Io∣seph did giue this immunitie to the Priestes, more than to the people, to mainteyne those Priestes the better, bicause they were Priests, hauing onely the bare name of Priests (as ye say well therein) and so being false Priestes, and setters out of Idolatrie, that they should haue more immunities, liberties and wealth than others had? you will make Io∣seph belike a very holy Patriarke.

But perchance ye haue espied a greater affinitie betwene* 1.569 those Egiptian Priests, and your romish Priestes than e∣uery body was aware of. And therefore ye reason substan∣tially from their prerogatiues vnto yours. Is it bicause ye fetche your shauen crownes from them, or at least that they had shorne heads as you haue? as witnesseth Alexan∣der

ab Alexādro, Apud Aegiptios qui sacra ministrāt sacerdotes* 1.570 capite rasi sunt. The priests among the Egiptians that minister the holy sacrifices are shauen on the head. Or is it bicause the most of your masking trinkets came from thence? or is it bicause of your Egiptiacall darkenesse and ignorance that ye kept all people in? or is it bicause all your religion lay in mysticall figures, and as they dispising ordinary let∣ters, had their Hierogliphicall mysteries and signes, wher∣by they set foorth their meaninges: so you dispising Gods worde, and all good letters, your whole religion consi∣steth in mysteries, signes and gestures? or is it bicause the Egiptian priests Idolatrie, and the Popishe priests Idola∣trie, is the grossest of all others, and the most bestiall? or is it bicause, as Rauistus Textor telleth, of the likenesse be∣twéen your religious Heremites, Anachor•…•…, & Friers: and their priestes called Sarabaytae? of whom he sayth, Habita∣bant* 1.571 in foraminibus petrarum, induti porcor•…•…m & boum pel∣libus, cincti funsbus, discalciati, & sanguine cruentati, cauerni•…•… demum exeuntes pa•…•…pertatem & abstmentiam predicabant, & barbam spectante populo sibi per•…•…ellebant, nummis{que} tali astu & comme•…•…to adeptis, remeabant in suas speluncas, & in summa lae∣titia furtim dapibus epulabantur. They dwelled in the holes of rockes (like your ankers and recluses) clad with hogges skins and oxe hides (like your heremites) girte with cordes and barefoote (like your friers) besprent with bloud (lyke your Spanish whippers) comming abrode out of their dens they preached pouertie, and abstinence (like your limitors) they pulled away their beards in the sight of the people (like your popish shauelings) and by this craft and deuise getting money, they returned to their dens and in great mirthe they priuily made good cheere. So like, the one almost in euery iote, is to the other. Or is it bicause your Ladies chaplaines & maiden priests, were so like the single priests of Isis? Or is it bicause your Nunnes were so like their women priests? or is it for that your priests haue claymed such au∣thoritie

aboue their princes, to take frō them their estates, and realmes, yea and their liues at their pleasures, as dyd the Ethiopian priests at Mer•…•…e: of whome sayth Diodo∣rus* 1.572 Siculus, Adeò superstitione impleuerunt hominū animos, vt nōnunquam misso nuncio, necem reg•…•… Aethiops•…•… demandarēt, nullo detracta•…•…te, a•…•…t mandatū i•…•…ssionemue abnegan•…•…e. Super∣stition did so muche fill the mindes of men, that the priests sending a messenger, would oftentimes commaund the king of Ethiopia to be killed, and nobody forslacked his cōmaun∣dement, nor refused his bidding Euen a right popish supre∣macie, M. St. And thus they handled at their commaunde∣ment christian Princes, and the superstitions people were so bewitched, that none durst fores•…•…acke or refuse (euen a∣gaynst their naturall Princes) to satisfie the tyrannie and commaundement of the Pope.

A great many causes more mighte be suspected, why ye pretende so muche for your immunities, the priuileges of the heathē priests, they are so like vnto your popish priest∣hoode, but I spare the reader. Neuerthelesse, what cause so∣euer moueth you to write so fauorably for the Egiptian Priests, none of these causes, or any other maintenance of Idolaters moued Ioseph: nor that any other suche lyke priesthoode to come, shoulde take hereat any suche prero∣gatiue, of béeing exempt from all fines to their princes. The reason that moued Ioseph is apparant in the text. He tooke the fift part of the peoples fruites, bicause before, they helde thē not of their king: but the priests liuing was altogither of the kings gift & finding. And therfore they payed no por∣tion to the king, but the king allowed thē al the portiō they had. But this, y^t al that they had to liue vpō was of y^e kings gift, you quite forgat (which argueth their subiectiō to him) & ye reasō vpō their priuiledge. Where ye sh•…•…ld note with∣al, that al those & other their priuiledges & liuings, came frō & depēded on the king. And thē sée how fit a marke therby ye cā set vp, against the Princes gouernmēt ouer priests.

Your Ninth and last marke is yet more fond and confu∣sed* 1.573 than all the rest besides, wherin ye demaund of the Bi∣shop, saying:

Are ye able (suppose ye) to name any one king that wrote* 1.574 him selfe supreme head of the Iewishe Churche, and that in all causes aswell spiritual as temporall, and that caused an othe to the priestes and people (the nobilitie onely exemp∣ted) to be tendred, that they in conscience did so beleeue, and that in a woman prince to, yea and that vnder payne of pre∣munire and playne treason too?

Me thinkes ye play huddle now in the latter end, M. St. sixe or seuen markes togither in one: For the title of su∣preme head, for receyuing the othe, for the persons recey∣uing it, the persons exempted, the maner of receyuing it, the Princes person, and the penaltie of the refusall. All these matters on a plumpe for haste, come in one liuerie, with the cognisance of your Ninth marke: how neere the issue betwéene the Bishop and M. Feckenham, I remit to the view of others. To all these demaundes, bicause ye are in hast, and therfore thrust them out on an heape togither, that the one might be a cloake to the other, I will briefly answere them as they lye. To your first demaunde, for the Title, thinke ye this a good argument:

No king of the Iewes wrote this title of supreme head* 1.575 or gouernour:

Ergo, No king of the Iewes was so?

By the same argument, no king of Englande before king Henrie wrote him selfe, Defender of the faythe, nei∣ther any king of the Iewes wrote that tytle: Ergo, None of them were defenders of the faythe.

And by the same argument, your holy Father myghte léese a ioly Uicarige, that he claymeth from Christ and Peter, for neither of them wrote suche titles as he doth: nor the highe Priest in the olde Testament wrote any suche stile as he dothe.

Ergo, he claymeth his supremacie from them in vaine. But this is a vaine argument, if you can proue, not the title, so muche an the matter, the thing and effecte of the title to come from them to him: no man will stande with you in the stile, but graunt your Pope his clayme. This can you not do, and therfore your Pope•…•…tytle is but vaine. But this, for the Princes supreme gouernment, the Bishop hath named the Princes in the olde Testament, and fully proued it: that in matter, thing and effect, they tooke vppon them this supreme gouernance, that the Quéenes Maiestie iustly claymeth now. And this béeing proued, as before: till ye can improue this, what babble ye of the title? and yet since ye can bring no sufficient proofe of your Popes title neither, why maketh this argument more agaynst the Prince, than it doth agaynst the Pope?

Your second quarell is at the othe, but the content ther∣of* 1.576 (as is proued) béeing true, why ought they not to sweare therto: yea thoughe there were in the olde Testament no such ensample of an othe ministred by the Prince to hys subiects? And yet we read how Iosias swore al his subiects to the Lord. But ye wil say, this othe is not for the Prince to sweare them to Gods religion, but to his estate. If his estate be dutiful by gods religiō, is he not therby also sworn thervnto? And why then, may not the Prince for his more assurance, make an especiall othe thereof, so well as a gene∣rall? But was it lawfull for your Pope to sweare them to his vndue supremacie, and is it not lawfull for the prince in a matter so due vnto him? If you stil vrge, a playne ma∣nyfest ensample to be shewed you, where in expresse wor∣des suche an othe was then required: I pray you (and you will not deale partially M. Stap▪) shewe you another ex∣ample, where the highe Priest of the Iewes, required such an othe of the Clergie, as your Pope dyd minister to those vnder him.

To that ye stande on the tendring the othe to the Prie∣stes* 1.577

and the people, and to aggrauate the matter, as par∣tiall, say, the Nobilitie be exempted: partely is fonde, and partely false. For, the Nobilitie, or any other, in certayne offices are not exempted. But see the proude orgulous harte of this Priest, howe he picketh quarels agaynst the Noibilitie, bicause heerein they haue any prerogatiue ouer his priestly order.

But he maketh a matter in that the othe is, that they in* 1.578 conscience did so beleeue, as thoughe they coulde sweare therto, and can not beleeue it in their consciences. Belike master Stapleton your popishe Priestes make good othe•…•…, and haue good consciences and beléefes, that can sweare to a thing, and haue no conscience: or can haue conscience, and not beléeue it so to be as ye sweare. It is to be feared that some of your order haue so done. Whether you haue done so or no, I will not say, for I knowe not your dealing, nor am ouer curious to search out your olde reckonings. But I thinke some of your good masters are not all in cleane life thereof.

Your outcrie at a womans Prince to haue thys Tytle,* 1.579 yea and that (say you) in a woman Prince to: sheweth your impudent spite agaynst your most gracious soueraigne, and withall, your impudent follie. A woman Prince to? say you. If a Prince, Master Stap. and why not a woman Prince to? Will ye graunt hir to be a Prince, and take from hir the duty, that these ensamples shew, doth belong vnto a prince? Therefore, eyther ye muste denie that a woman may be a prince, or else graunt this authoritie, yea to a woman prince to. And doth not the Scripture commende, yea a woman Prince to, to suppresse Idolaters and tyraunts, to gouerne and iudge Gods people? And why may not now a woman Prince to, deliuer vs (as the Quéenes Maiestie hath done) from the yoke of a greater tyrant, and all his Idolaters to? and punish to suche obstinate and trayterous resisters of hir godly power, as you and your sect are to? yea and that

vnder paine of premunire and plaine •…•…reason to?

These are the Nine markes which master Stapleton setteth newe vp. Of which howe wise soone be, howe slaun∣derous other some, and howe wide all be from the •…•…ue in question: I remitte to the indifferent Readers iudgement. For mine owne part, as I sawe the shamelesse dealing of this student, studying with all his endeuour •…•…oelude the Bishops ensamples, and to deceyue the Reader with these tryfles: so was I halfe ashamed to haue answered them a∣ny thing, being altogither vnworthie of any aunswere, knowing that to the wise, folly detectes it selfe. But least any one shoulde be deceyue•…•… by this false ayme giuer, I haue somewhat more largely shewed his dealing in these markes, than otherwise I would. And yet as the impuden∣cie of this man may further moue occasion, hereafter hée may perhappes heare more than he or his fellowes would that all the worlde shoulde sée. Onely nowe it sufficeth to haue shewed the insufficiencie of his argumentes, and to haue cleared from his cauillations, these ensamples of the Bishops, recorded in the old testament. Wherof the Bishop* 1.580 mencioned not one, that proued not Master Feckenhams demaunde and issue: Any such supreme gouernment, as hath the Queenes maiestie. And therfore M. Staple∣tons conclusion, is like the residue of his Nine markes, if it be not rather most fonde of all. And sauing his rhetoricke, rayling, scoffes, and his vaine triumphing before the victo∣rie, is nothing else but wordes of course.

O Master Horne (sayth he) your manifolde vntruthes are* 1.581 deciphered and vnbuckeled, ye are espied, ye are espied, I say, well ynough, that ye come not by a thousande yardes and more nigh the marke. Your Bow is to weake, your armes to feeble, to shoote with any your commendation at this mark: yea if ye were as good an Archer, as were that famous Ro∣bin Hoode, or little Iohn. VVell, shift your Bowe, or at the least wise your String. Let the olde Testament go, and pro∣ceede

to your other proofes, wherein wee will nowe see if you can shoote any streighter. For hitherto ye haue shotte all awrie, and as a man maye say, lyke a blynde man. See nowe to your selfe from hencefoorth that yee open your eyes, and that yee haue a good eye, and a good ayme to the marke we haue set before you. If not, bee you assured wee will make no curtesie eftsoones to put you in remembrance. For hitherto yee haue nothing prooued that Princes ought, whiche ye promised to proue, or that they may take vppon them suche gouernement, as I haue layde before you, and suche as ye must in euery part iustifie, if eyther ye will M. Feckenham shall take the othe, or that ye entende to proue your selfe a true man of your worde.

This were a hard matter for you to proue your selfe to be Master Stapleton, a true man of your worde, hauing nowe béene taken tardie in your wordes with so many o∣pen lies. And euen here with no lesse impudencie, ye would haue the Bishop in euery part to iustifie, not such issue as he ioyned in with master Feckenham, but such as you in euery part do falsifie. Did the Bishop promise to master Fecken∣ham, to proue that Princes ought or maye take vppon them such gouernment as you haue layde before him? Or did ma∣ster Feckenham request any suche proufe? or not rather, Any such gouernment as the Queenes maiestie doth clay me and take vpon hir. This is the right marke that they haue set before them, and not these markes that (say you) we haue set before you. You assure vs that ye will make* 1.582 no curtesie. But ye néede not assure vs hereof master Sta∣pleton, we will beleue you without assurance, that ye know little curtesie, and can make lesse, nor ye will make any if ye coulde. Little curtesie (except butcherly curtesie) haue we felt of your stiffenecked and frowarde generation, and lesse we looke for, and none we craue at your vncurteous & vnmercifull hands, although more mercie and curtesie be shewed to you. Yet though ye assure vs of no curtesie, yée

might and should assure vs of truth and honestie: of which if we can haue no assuraunce of you, be ye assured againe, master Stapleton ye shall get as little credite, as we shall get little curtesie.

But to winne you better credite: in your vaine trium∣phant* 1.583 conclusion, ye knit vp al your Nine marks with Ro∣bin Whood and little Iohn, lacking but one of your Po∣pes Courtisanes, and some Louaine Franciscan, to haue played Frier Lucke, and mayde Marian, and so to haue made vp the full messe. Might not a man say for (O M. Horne) O Master Stap. these toyes are full vnsitting and nought to the purpose to or fro. And for al ye cry he shootes awrie lyke a blinde man, thoughe a blinde man can not sée to shoote, yet could a béetle blindman both heare, and thinke small wisdome, in suche great boast, and well perceyue, that the onely turning of O master Stapleton, for O ma∣ster Horne, would hitte you so little a wrie, euen with your owne wordes, that there néedes no further aunswere.

The. 18. Diuision.

NOwe where the Bishop alleaged out of the olde testa∣ment* 1.584 all these foresayde ensamples: and master Feck. vnder the pretence of Christes gospell, restrayning himselfe to the new Testament, goeth about thereby, to clude and shake of all the Bishops ensamples of the olde Testament: The Bishop proueth this to be the very shift and practise of the Donatistes, denying that Princes ought to entermeddle in ecclesiasticall matters, as now y^e Papists denie the same. Who when they were vrged by the learned fathers Saint Augustine and other, with suche like ensamples as the Bi∣shop hath alleaged out of the olde testament, they reiected them, and would haue all examples restrayned to the newe

testament, as here doth master Feckenham, which the Bi∣shop sheweth to haue bene (as Saint Augustine calleth it) An odious and wicked guile of the Donatistes: and thereon concludeth, that eyther he must shunne suche heriticall shiftes, or else, that following the very error, de∣fence, shift and paterne of the Donatists, he bewrayeth him selfe therein to be a couert Donatist.

The effect of master Stapletons Counterblast to this,* 1.585 is deuided into sixe partes. The first, is an inuectiue against the order of the Bishops writing. The second, is a clearing of master Feckenham to be no heretike. The thirde, is a re∣turning of his charge of heresies to vs. The fourth, an e∣numeration and conference of diuerse heresies with oure doctrine. The fift, a reuersing to vs of the crime wherwith master Feckenham is charged to follow the Donatists, in diuerse pointes resembling vs to them, and them to vs. The sixt and last, a remouing of those motiues, whereby the Bi∣shop charged M. Feckenham to play the Donatists part.

In the first part, or euer he enter into the matter, he ma∣keth as it were a Preface agaynst the Bishops dealing, which is twofolde: the former, for procéeding in his mat∣ters out of order.

Hither good Reader (sayth Master Stapleton) Master* 1.586 Horne althoughe vntruely, yet hath hee somewhat order∣ly proceeded. But in that which followeth vntill we come to the. 20. leafe, beside most impudent and shamefull lyes, wherewith he woulde deface master Feckenham, he prosecu∣teth his matter so confusedly and vnorderly, leaping in and out I cannot tell howe, nor whether: that I verily thinke that his wittes were not his owne, being perchaunce encombred with some his domesticall affayres at home, that he could not gather thē togither, or that he the lesse passed, what an hodge potch he made of his doings, thinking which is like, that his fellowes Protestantes woulde take all thinges in good gree, knowing that poore master Feckenham was shutre vp close

ynough from all aunswering. And thinking that no Catho∣like else would take vpon him to answere to his lewd booke.

To that ye beginne with, master Stapleton, to chalenge the Bishop for vntruth, yea, most impudent and shamelesse lies: till ye name them, and so proue them, the best answere thereto, is to giue it a wispe, and place it in your common places of scoldes blacke rhetorike, and so let it alone. As for the Bishops vnorderly proceding, (howbeit ye confesse that hitherto he hath somewhat orderlike proceded) in that which foloweth, ye say he prosecuteth his matters so confusedly. &c. that you thinke his wittes were not his owne.

Were not your wittes ouermuch your owne, M. Stap. you woulde neuer wittingly haue let your witte cast forth such vnwittie and vnorderly speaches to your better. But I will say somewhat yet more gentlier of you: that I verily* 1.587 think herein your w•…•…ts were altogither your owne, and ther∣fore ye are the more to be borne withall. Otherwise, if your wittes had taken the aduice of some other of your confede∣rates wittes, they woulde perchaunce haue counselled you more wittily, not to accuse any of such fowle confusion, dis∣order, leaping in and out, and making an hodge potch: and not tell at al wherein he confoundeth or disordreth his mat∣ter. And they woulde peraduenture withall haue aduised you, to marke this rule your selfe, and to beware that you alleage euery thing in his proper place, not to wrappe vp in a clutter so many things vnder one, nor to make one thing to séeme so many. Not to preuent your matter so oft before it come, nor to repeate it so often being •…•…ast, all to encrease your volume. Many other things about your cōmon places they would perhaps haue tolde you, if ye had taken some of their wits to counsel and not to much haue trusted on your owne, they would at the least haue charged you, not to cha∣lenge another for wit, (your self therin being nothing com∣parable in al wise mens iudgements, euen of your own side that know both him and you) least while ye stande so much

on witte, ye shewe your selfe not so wise as wittie, not yet so wittie as your selfe wéene ye bée, or your friendes and I for my part woulde wishe ye were, so that ye employed it better than ye do.

The coniectures that ye gather of his disorder, that he was encombred with some his domesticall affayres at home, that he thought his fellowes protestants would take all things in good gree. That M. Feckenham was shut vp close ynough from answering. That he thought no Catholike else woulde take vpon him to answere his lewde booke: All these are no∣thing else but the lewde imaginations which that wittie pate of yours hath maliciously conceyued M. Stay.

The thirde quarrell is: That the Bishoppe procée∣deth* 1.588 not nowe to the newe Testament. I had thought, Master Horne (say you) that from the olde Testament, yee woulde haue gone to the newe Testament: and would haue laboured to haue established your matters thereby: belike the worlde goeth verie harde with you in that behalfe, that yee doe not so: sauing that here and there yee iumble in a testimonye or two, I can not tell howe, but howe vn∣handesomelye and from the purpose, yea agaynste youre owne selfe, that I wo•…•…e well, and ye shall anon heare of it also.

Yea, well sayde Master Stapleton, and tell him so to, let him heare of it throughly, both here and there to, for so you shall the better encrease your Counterblast. But will ye tell it him anon in verie déede? Then I pray you, where, and howe, master Stapleton, will you tell it him? Where? euen here and there, where he iumbleth in a testi∣monie or two, I can not tell howe. Can ye not tell how ma∣ster Stapleton he alleageth them? then I thinke ye will an∣swere them ye can not tell how, full vnhandsomly and from the purpose, can ye tell what? Well, I had thought master Stapleton, your wits being your owne, they had bene more circumspect than I perceiue they be. And that your memory

could haue made one lye, to haue hanged better to another. For howe hanges thys togither: ye will answere him, where here and there he iumbleth in a testimonie or two, out of the newe Testament: and that ye say: I had thought master Horne, from the old Testament, ye would haue gone to the newe Testament, and would haue laboured to haue established your matters therby, belike the worlde goeth ve∣ry harde with you in that behalfe, that ye do not so? When* 1.589 your selfe euen in the next words confesse, that he dothe so out of the new Testament also. Heere and there (say you) he iumbleth in a testimony or two. Wherfore doth he this, but to labour to establish his matters therby?

Tushe say you, he dothe it but heere and there a testimo∣nie or two. Had it bene but one testimonie, M. Stap. it had bene inough to proue you a lyer: nor the truthe, nor force of the truth, consisteth in numbers of testimonies, one true testimonie were inough, had he no more. But ye confesse, he had a testimonie or two, yea and that here and there a te∣stimonie or two, and I thinke, when ye cast your account, there will be founde more than thrée or foure, & so agayne proue your selfe a lyer.

But say you, he doth b•…•…t iumble them in. Howsoeuer he iumble them in, M. St. beware you they tūble not out your cause, for the iumbling in of thē, hath proued you already to haue mūbled vp a lye, & a contr•…•…tion to your owne tals.

But ye say, he did it, ye can not tell howe. I thinke the same M. St. And therfore as I sayde before, ye coulde not tel how ye answered, nor how ye contraried your selfe. For howsoeuer he did it, he did therin go from the old testament to the new testament, which you both denie & graunt, ye can neither tell how, nor where, nor what. And therfore to con∣clude with your owne words, belike the world goeth very hard with you in that behalfe. For shame, M. Sta. vpbraide not their wits vnto others, & so much ouerth•…•…te your own.

The seconde part is the clearing of M. Feckenham to be

no heretike, consisting on two parcels, the one altogither on rayling and scornes.

In the meane while (say you) it is worthe the labour, well* 1.590 to consider the excellent pregnant witte, and great skill of this man, who hath in the former treatise of master Fecken∣ham, espied out (which surely the wisest and beste learned of all the vvorlde, I trowe, besides master Horne, vvould ne∣uer haue espied, suche a speciall grace the man hathe giuen him of his master the Diuell, of meere malice, ioyned vvith like follie) that M. Feckenham is an heretike and a Donatist.

Whosoeuer be the Donatist, euery reader may sée, how M. St. sheweth him selfe a playne scoffing Lucianist, vaun∣ting his wit, and despising all others, like a perte Pharisée, in the meane season, answering nothing to the matter. And therfore let this go to his proper common place.

The other parcell is to cléere M. Fe. by occasion of that the bishop saide, he bewrayed his secrete heresies. M. St. catcheth holde of this worde secret.

But yet (sayth he) M. Feck. is somewhat beholding to him,* 1.591 that he sayth M. Fe. hath bewrayed his secret heresies: wherin he sayth for the most part truely, for if there be any heresie at all in this matter, surmised vpon him, as certenly there is none, it is so secret and priuie, that Argus him selfe with al his eyes shall neuer espie it, no nor M. Horne him selfe, let hym prye neuer so narrowly.

Were it euen so secret as ye deuise master Stapl. yet* 1.592 béeing secret, then it is: contrary to that ye affirme (as cer∣tenly there is none) whereas certenly there is one, and muste néedes be, if it be secrete. Yea and be it a greate deale more secrete than ye wéene, thoughe Argus wyth all his eyes coulde not espie it, yet there is an espier, euen he that saw the Pharisies thoughts, and sercheth the reines,* 1.593 and from whom no secrets are hid: he that séeth al your se∣cret practises & conspiracies, euen he séeth all your secrete heresies. Tush say you with the wicked, the Lord séeth not.

But, he that made the eye, shall he not sé•…•…? Yes, M. Sta. he* 1.594 séeth them, and hath so detected them, that there néed no Ar∣gus eyes. The bishop séeth them, and sets them out, that all the world may sée & stare vpon them: Yea thanks be giuen to the opener of all secrets, this Donatisticall dealing in re∣iecting the princes authoritie in eccl. matters, and M. Feck. refusal of the examples of the olde testament: if there were no body else to reueale the same, not onely M. Feck him selfe hath opēly bewrayed, but M. Dorman also, and other your complices. Although therfore ye thinke ye be not espi∣ed, bicause ye daunce in a net, and play boopéepe, séest me, séest me not: yet this your dealing bothe bewrayes it selfe, and is dayly more and more made apparant by others, to the view of all mens eyes.

The thirde part of this answere is a retorting of this crime of heresies vnto vs.

VVherfore on the other side (saith he) M. Horne and his* 1.595 fellowes, and his masters Luthers and Caluines heresies, are no secret nor simple heresies, but so manifolde and so open, that they haue no way or shift to saue their good name and honestie, blotted and blemished for euer (without repētāce) for the obstinate maintenance of the same. VVherof many were many hundreth yeres since condemned, partly by the holy fathers, partly by generall Councels.

Nothing of this béeing hitherto proued, but barely auou∣ched, it may stande (M. Stap.) for words of course, till ye bring some profe therof.

As for that ye adde in distinct letters, howe the Byshop sayth: The Donatistes are the Catholikes ancestors: ye de∣praue the bishops words to aggrauate the matter: he spake the quite contrarie, that the Donatistes were rather y^e Ca∣tholikes enimies, who rising agaynst them, yet clothed thē selues with the name of catholikes, as do you like vnto thē, neither of ye both, papists nor Donatistes, being catholike, otherwise thā as I told ye before, of your catholike hostesse

at Oxeforde: a catholike woman, that is to say, a common queane. The bishop saide, that herein M. Feck. was a Do∣natist, and so he proueth him, till you shall improue it. In which chalenge he strayeth not from the butt, of the princes supreme gouernment. And hauing occasion therin, to note his like subtile dealing, to elude all the examples of the olde Testamēt, he chargeth him therwith, & goeth no further, as you do, shooting so wide frō the marke without any eye or aime therto, which right now in your ruffe ye called vpō so hastily, and now so soone your selfe haue so farre forgotten, that where ye should couch you only to this matter, wherin M. Feck. not impertinently is burdened, and you are hired to cleare him: ye let go the clearing of him, & snatch occasion thereat, to charge vs agayn with a nūber of other heresies.

Good sir (say you) may it please you fauorably to heare,* 1.596 you and your masters honorable pedegree, and of their worthy feates and prowesse. You haue heard of them before perhaps, and that by me. But suche thinges as may edifie the Catholike, and can neuer be answered by the Heretike, Decies repet•…•…ta placebunt.

How should your booke, M. St. arise to so faire a volume, but by such vaine extrauagant tenfolde repetitions. But ye say, ye will repeate them so often, bicause they may edifie the catholike, and can neuer be answered by the heretike. Whosoeuer be the catholike, it is to be feared some of them will detecte your selfe, to be the heretike that ye meane we be. To that ye say, we can not answere them, thoughe we haue heard of them before, and that by me, say you: this is but your fonde vaunting of your selfe, and of your paltrie workes, M. Stap. All which is besides the matter here in question, and therfore deserueth not the answering. Howbeit, for the most parte, as it is obiected often and full péeuishly, by other likewise of your side: so is it answered agayn on our part, & as yet remaynes vnanswered vnto of you. Neuerthelesse, bicause either the importunitie of your

extréeme craking, might séeme to enforce a furder answere: or else your gentle mockery, and buxome entreatie, might not seeme worthie to be reiected, saying so curteously, good sir may it please you fauourably to heare you and your mai∣sters honorable pedegree. Go to therefore M. St. though it be altogither impertinent, let vs heare a Gods name what ye haue to charge vs with, and we will sée, how we can answere thereto: and shall we say as you saide before? sée ye lie not, for it ye do, be ye assured we will make no curte∣sie* 1.597 eftsoones to put ye in remembrance. Though ye spake those wordes to him, of straying from the marke, and here your selfe stray so farre therefrom.

To come therefore to the fourth parte, which is a rere∣charge to vs, of a number of auncient heresies.

How say you then (saith M. Stapl.) to the great heretike* 1.598 Aerius the Arian, that said there was no difference betweene Priest and Bishop, betweene him that fasted and that did not fast, and that the sacrifice for the dead was fruitlesse? Howe say you to Iouinian that denied virginitie to haue any excel∣lencie aboue Matrimonie or any speciall rewarde at Gods handes? to the Arians that denied the miracles done at Saints tombes to be true Miracles, and that the Martyres can not cast out the Diuels, and relieue them that be possessed? To the Bogomiles that said the Diuels sate at the Saints tombes and did wonders there, to illude and deceyue the people, to cause the people to worship them? To Berengarius con∣demned* 1.599 in diuerse Councels, first for denying of the Real presence in the Sacrament of the Altare, and then for denying the Transubstantiation? To the Paulicians, that said these* 1.600 woordes of Christ, take, eate, this is my bodie, are not to be vnderstanded of his bodie, or the bread and wine vsed at the celebration of our Lordes maundie, but of the holy Scrip∣tures▪* 1.601 which the priestes should take at Christes hande, and deliuer and distribute to the people? To Claudius and Vigi∣lantius, that denied the inuocation of Saintes, and enueighed

against the blessed reliques, and the vse of lightes and other* 1.602 ceremonies of the Church? To the Massilians and other he∣retikes, saying that concupiscence as a sinne remaineth in vs after holy baptisine? And bicause ye shall not say, I suppresse, conceale, or obscure, the chiefe and most notable persons of your auncestrie: how say ye to the Emperours Philippicus, Leo, Constantinus, condemned with their adherentes by the seuenth general Councel at Nice, that villayned by defacing, breaking and burning, the images of all the holy hallowes of Christ, and Christes to? to whome for your more honour and glorie I adioyne the Emperour Iulianus the Apostata. VVho, as ye do in your bookes and pulpits, cried out vppon the Christians. O ye wretched men, that worship the wood of the Crosse, setting vp the signe of it vppon your foreheads and dores: you therefore that are of the wisest sorte, are worthy to be hated, and the residue to be pitied, that treading after your steppes come to such a kinde of wretchednesse? To the Pela∣gians* 1.603 affirming that children not Baptised shalbe saued? and yet are your Maisters in this point worse than the Pelagians, aswell for that some of them haue saide, that some infantes though vnbaptized shalbe damned, and some other though* 1.604 vnbaptized shalbe saued. And some of them especially Cal∣uine and other Sacramentaries say, that they shall come with∣out Baptisme to the kingdome of heauen: which the Pela∣gians durst not say, but that they should haue the life euerla∣sting, putting a difference, but peeuishlie, betwixt these two. And if ye thinke the race of your worthie generation is not fetched high inough, we wil mount higher, and as high as may be, euen to Simon Magus him selfe. Of whome Marcion* 1.605 and Manicheus, and after long and honorable succession your Patriarches, Luther and Caluine, haue learned their goodly doctrine against free will. Yea to touche the very fundation and wellspring of this your new Gospell, which al∣together is groūded vpon Iustification without good works, in that also ye draw very nigh to the said Simon Magus.

In all this, here is nothing els, but the heaping vp, of an impertinent, s•…•…launderous, and maliciouse rable, partely of Heretikes, partely of no Heretikes, some of them falsely belied, most of them falsely applied, eyther they defending no such things, or some of these us Heresies, nor any of their Heresies mainteyned of vs.

First for the Arianisme of Aerius with whom M. Sta∣pleton* 1.606 beginneth, would God the Papistes had not as much, defaced the glory of Christ, as did the Ariaus, but he findeth no faulte with them therefore. He vpbraydeth to vs, thrée other pointes.

First that Aerius said, there was no difference betweene Priest and Bishop, and ye a•…•…e (M. Stapleton) how say we to him?

What soeuer we say to him, we haue first to say to you,* 1.607 that sauing the reuerence of your Priesthood, there is no dif∣ference betweene you and a lier, to obiect Aerius herein to vs: Whereas (ye know well inough) our Church doth ac∣knowledge in the ministerie, a difference of Deacon and Elder, from a Bishop, although not according to your Po∣pish orders. For as neyther Epiphanius, nor yet Augu∣gustine (quoted by you) speaketh there of any sacrificing Priest, so he neuer knewe any such Pontificall prelates as your Popishe Churche bréedeth. And yet of those that were euen then in Epiphanius time, and of their difference from the Elders or Priestes, if ye know not how it came: Hierome that liued in the same age will tell you, or if ye haue not redde him, your owne Canons will tell ye what he saithe. I dem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus & ante∣quam* 1.608 Diabols studia, &c. An Elder or Priest therefore is the same that a Bishop, and before that the studies of the Diuell were made in Religion, and that the people saide I holde of Paule, I of Apollo, I of Cephas, the Churches were gouerned by the common Counsell of the Elders, but after that euery one did accompt those to be his, and not to be Christes, whome he had Baptized, in all the worlde,

it was decreed, that one of the Elders being chosen, should be placed aboue the rest: to whom all the care or charge of the Church should belong, and the seede of scismes be taken a∣way. And a litle after. Sicut ergo Presbyteri, as therefore the Elders know that they by the custome of the church, are sub∣iect to him, that is set ouer them: so let the Bishops know, that they, more by custome, than by the truth of the Lordes dispē∣sation, are greater than the Elders. This was the iudgement of the auncient Fathers, & yet were they no Arians, nor Aerians therefore. Yea Peter Lombarde the maister of the sentences, citing also Isidorus to witnesse, saith: Apud* 1.609 vetere•…•… idem Episcopi & Presbyter•…•… fuerunt. Among the aun∣cient Fathers, Bishops and Elders were all one. And againe alleaging the Apostle S. Paule, he saith, Qualis autem▪ &c.* 1.610 But what manner an Elder ought to be chosen, the Apostle writing to Timothie declareth, where by the name of Bishop he signifieth an Elder. And anon after: Cum{que} omnes, and when all of them (he meaneth his false seuē orders) are spi∣rituall and holy, yet the Canons account only two orders to be excelling holie, that is to say, Deaconship and Eldership. Bicause the primitiue Churche is redde to haue these alone, and we haue the Apostles commaundement of these alone, for the Apostles in euery Citie ordeined Bishops and Elders. Neyther the Master only writeth thus, but almost all your schoolemen, yea though they be them selues of the contrarie opinion, yet they write this was the auncient opinion. And so Durandus, though he make a difference betwéene the power of Iurisdiction, & the power of order, yet he sheweth* 1.611 that both the Scripture, & S. Hierome maketh no differēce, but only the custome & institution of the Church. The Apo∣stle (saith he) writing to the Philippenses cap. 1. saith: With the Bishops and the Deacons, by them vnderstanding the El∣ders, sith in one citie as in Philippos, many Bishops ought not to be. Agayne Act. 2. he saith, Looke to your selues and to all the flocke in which the holy ghost hath placed you to be Bi∣shops. And he spoke vnto them of the onely citie of Ephesus.

But this appeareth more expresly to Titus the. 1. Where he saith for this cause I haue left thee at Crete, that thou shoul∣dest correct those things that want, & ordeine Elders through out the cities, euē as I haue apointed to thee, if any be blame∣lesse the husbād of one wife. And streight he setteth vnder it, a B. must be blamelesse. And whō before he named an Elder, he calleth now a Bishop. And in the. 4. of the. 1. to Timothie, Dispise not (saith he) the grace of God which is giuen to thee through the imposition of the handes of an Elder, that is to say of a Bishop. S. Paule called him selfe an Elder, when he was the Bishop that ordeined him.

Thus far & more at large Durādus, concluding at lēgth, Sic ergo. Thus therfore saith S. Hierome, that a Bishop and an Elder. Olim fuerūt nomin•…•… synonym•…•…, &c. were in the old time diuerse names betokening one thing indifferētly, and also of one administration▪ bicause the Churches were ruled by the commune Counsell of the Priestes. But for the remedie of a scisme, least each one drawing the Churche after him, should breake hir: it was ordeyned that one should be aboue the rest, et qu•…•…ad nomē, &c. And so far forth as stretcheth to the name, that he onely should be called Bishop, and that so farre as stretcheth to the administration of some Sacraments and Sa∣cramentals, they should be reserued to him by the custome & cōstitutiō of the Church. And this would Hierome expresly, 93. Dist. cap. legimu•…•… in Esa. & super epistolam ad Tit. & recita∣tur Dist. 93. cap. Olim presbyter•…•… &c. Consuetudo aut institutio Ecclesiae potest dare Iurisdicti•…•…nem sed non potestatem ordi∣nis aut consecrationis, quare. &c. He therefore that coun∣teth this erroneouse or perilous, let him impute this to Hie∣rome, out of whose saying in the fore alleaged chapter, Legi∣mus in Esa. the foresaide authorities are takē. VVhere also he putteth an exāple, That it is of a Bishop in respect of priests, as of an Archdeacon in respect of Deacons: vnlesse the Dea∣cons choose one among them selues whom they call Arch∣deacon &c. In the end Durādus recōciling Hierome saith: and the authorities alleaged by Hierome withstande it not,

bicause according the name and the truth of the thing, euery Bishop is an Elder: and on the other parte, so farre as stretch∣eth to the name, euery Elder hauing cure, may be called a Bi∣shop, as superattendent on other, although the consecratiō of a Bishop, or of the chiefe Priest, be larger than of a simple Priest or Elder: but peraduenture in the p•…•…imitiue Churche they made not such force in the difference of names as they do now. And therfore they called a Bishop euery one that had a cure. Thus writeth Durandus of the aun∣cient Fathers opinions. And will ye compt him or them Aerians too?

And this also doth your institution in Co•…•…aine Councell confesse, N on est tamen putandum. VVe must not for all this* 1.612 thinke, that he ordeined Bishops another order from Priests, for in the Primitiue church Bishops and Priests were all one. The which the Epistles of Peter and Paule the Apostles, S. Hierome al•…•…o and almost all the aūcient ecclesiastical writers do witnesse. And chiefly that place of the first Epistle of S. Peter the •…•…ist chapter, is euident to declare this. For when Peter had said, The Elders that are amōg you, I also an Elder with you beseech, which am also a witnesse of the passions of Christ, and pa•…•…taker of the glory to come that shalbe reuea∣led: He ioyned vnder it, Feede or guide the slocke of Christ that is among you, and ouersee it, not by compulsion, but wil∣lingly, according to God. VVherein it is spokē more expresly in the Greeke, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is to say, Superattendent, from whence also the name of Bishop is drawne. VVherefore Priesthood is esteemed the highest order in the Churche. In the meane time, no bodie is ignorant, that this order is di∣stinguished againe, by a certayne order of offices and digni∣ties. Thus do your Schoolemen and Diuines witnesse: First, that in the Substance, Order, or Character as they terme it, there is no difference betweene a Priest and a Bishop. Secondly, that the difference is but of Accidents and circumstances, as degrées of dignitie, Iurisdiction, Ho∣nour, &c. Thirdly, that in the Primitiue Church, this dif∣ference

was not knowne, but they were méerely all one and the same. Fourthly, that this difference was taken vp by custome, consent, and ordinance of the Uniuersall Church when it once began to be dispersed in al the world. Fiftly, that it was done for the auayding of factions and sectes that grewe in the time of the ministers equalitie e∣uen anon after the Primitiue Churche, and some of them in the Apostles time.

But quite contrary to this Iudgement of your Diuines, are all your Canonistes, your Diuines make seuen orders. Et in hoc saith Angelus de clauisio, concordant cōmuniter theo∣logs.* 1.613 On this the diuines agree commonly, but the Canonists holde, that there are nine orders according to nine Hierar∣chies, that is to wite, the first notch or psalmist, and the order of a Bishop, and that the first notch is an order, the text is in C. cum contingit & ibi do. Anto. & canonist•…•… de 〈◊〉〈◊〉. & qua∣li. or. similiter quod Episcopatus est ordo & quod imprimatur Caracter indi•…•…io meo facit inconuincibiliter, tex. in C. 1. de ordi∣natis ab Episcopo &c. & sic secundum Canonist as erunt nouem* 1.614 ordines. And so according to the canonistes there shalbe nine orders. Great ado your Scoolemen and Canonistes make about this, in so much that Aerius heresie will draw verie néere to one of you, light on which side it shall. But your selfe may holde on both sides M. Stapleton, being both a Bachelour in the one, and a student in the other. As for vs, ye do falsly burden vs. Our doing is apparant therein, acknowleging all due obedience and reuerence to our Bi∣shops. But as for your Popishe Clergie, there is in déede litle differēce in this point or none, which barrell is better herring, B. or Priest, both starke nought, or rather neither of them eyther true Priest or B. by S. Paules description.

Secondly, you obiect that Aerius said there was no diffe∣rence* 1.615 betwene him that fasted and him that did not fast: wherein also as in the other, your conscience (haue ye any) knoweth, that ye wittingly slaunder vs, and babling of fast, do lie as faste as a dogge doth trotte. For we allowe Bbb. ij.

and commende fasting as godly, & exhorte all men thereto as néedefull. Onely we inueigh agaynst the superstitions of the Popish fastes, that binde fasting to necessarie and su∣perstitious lawes, to difference of dayes and meates, wher∣in the kingdome of God consisteth not, that ascribe a merite to their fast, and make it a matter of conscience and religi∣on. Such errours we disalowe, and if this be heresie, the Apostles, and the chiefest of all the auncient fathers, were heretikes also, who made concerning conscience, no diffe∣rence of meates, or of dayes for their mmates, in their fa∣sting. Montanus the heretike, sayth Apollonius, was the first qui docuit nup•…•…ias solus & qui •…•…orum leges primus im∣posuit.* 1.616 That taught the dissolution of mariages, and first of all appoynted lawes of fasting. For before it was frée to fast as they woulde. As Ireneus (blaming Pope Uictor for his pertinacie, in being the authour of such a schisme, for diuer∣sitie of vsing the feast of Easter) doth witnesse Non solum.* 1.617 &c. Not onely (sayth he) the controuersie is mooued of Ea∣ster day, but also of the very forme of fastinges. For certaine do thinke that fast shoulde be kept but onely one day, other two dayes, other more. Yea many fast fortie dayes, but so that they recken the day accompting the howers of the day & the night togither. The which varietie of keping their fast, began not first now, nor in our times, but long before vs, of them (as I deeme) who not retayning simplie, that which was deliuered from the beginning, haue afterwarde fallen into another cu∣stome, either by negligence or by folly.

Socrates writing further of this diuersitic not onely of fasting times, but of the meates also, saith on this wise. Sed* 1.618 etiā ciborū. &c. but of the meates also they haue not the like abstinence, for some altogither abstain from liuing creatures. Other of liuing creatures eat only fishes▪ some with fishes do eat foules also, saying that these (after Moses) haue their sub∣stance of the water. Other are knowne to absteyne from in∣wards and egges. Some will eate onely drie bread, some not so much as that, some fasting vntill nine a clocke, are refreshed

without any difference of meates. And innumerable cu∣stomes are fonde among diuers men. And bicause there is no auncient recorde found therin, I thinke the Apostles left this to the mind of euery man, that euery man might do that that is good neither by feare, nor by necessitie.

In which testimonies are to be noted: first the frée libertie* 1.619 for euery Churche to fast as they thought good, without any feare of conscience, or any necessitie enforcing them therto. Secōdly, that this libertie, was both in the time of fasting, and in the meate, without any difference of fishe or fleshe. Thirdly, that this was the order of the Apostles, and the primitiue church. Fourthly, that they which began to alter this custome, and to binde them selues to dayes or meates, swarued from the beginning by negligence or folly. This was the former estate for fasting. But after Montanus the heretike began first to prescribe lawes to fasting, many su∣perstitions ensued: Some began to haue scruple in eating flesh, as Bishop Spiridions weary ghest, before whome when he set a piece of porke on a fasting day, his ghest refu∣sed* 1.620 to eate therof, Christianum se profitente, bicause he was a Christiā. To whō, quoth Spiridion, propterea magis refutare non debes: Euen bicause thou art a Christian, thou oughtest the more not to refuse it. For all things are cleane to them that be cleane, as the vvorde of God hath taught. But for al this, after Montanus lawes, superstition began to grow so faste, that euen Hierome, a great cōmender of fasting, was fayne to exhort them to moderation, yea, to crie out theron: Tantum tibi. &c. Appoynt vnto thy selfe such a measure of* 1.621 thy fasting, as thou canst beare. Let thy fastings be pure, chast, simple moderate, & not superstitious. VVhat auayleth not to tast of oile, and to seeke for dayntie meates, and harde to come by, puddings, pepper nuttes, the fruites of palmes, meale, hony, craknels, all the trimming of the gardens is tos∣sed, that we should not feede on common bread. And thus, while we seeke delicates, we are drawne quite from the king∣dome

of God. Yea, besides this, I heare say of some, that cō∣trarie to the rule and nature of men, wil drinke no water, nor eate bread, but delicates, suppings, and chopped pot herbes, and the iuice of Beetes, nor will not suppe it in a cuppe, but in a shell. Phie for shame, Blushe we not at these toyes? do not these superstitions irke vs? If Hierome cried out thus in his dayes of such superstitions fastings, and yet be no here∣tike, are we heretikes that crie out of the popishe superstiti∣ons, a thousande partes more toyishe than in Hieromes time, and a thousande times more delicate knacks founde out to fast forsooth withall? But as the saying is, shewe me not the meate, but shew me the man. Looke vpon your chief fasters, your popish chaplaynes, your religious monkes and* 1.622 Abbots, what gorbelly paunches, what fat chéekes, what riche noses and highe faces, your stalfed fasters had? they shewed well what porrige they loued, in so muche that Aerius made not so little difference betwéene a Priest and a Bishop, as euery man made lesse difference betwéene a Monke and a burstenbelly churle. Euen Chawcer that de∣scribeth a Monke, doth giue him this prayse,

He looked not like a forepyned ghost,* 1.623 A fat swanne he loued best of any rost.

Suche were those that euen by profession pretēded to be chiefest fasters, when they had filled them selues till they swet agayne, with all daintie viandes, then they cried hold belly hold, O quantū patimur pro amore Christi, what paines we suffer for Christes sake. And yet bicause they eate no fleshe, no not an egge on a fasting day, excepte it were in Aduent, the inwards, tripes, and trullibubbes, for that was no fleshe, we muste vnderstande: O they were holy catholike fasters. And bicause we reiect these foolish toyes, and superstitious fastes of these bellygod Epicures, they crie out vpon vs, we are Heretikes, we are Aerians, we make no difference betweene him that fasteth, and that fasteth not.

But as héerein ye slaunder vs, so ye béelie Aerius also, and that euen by the iudgement of your great champion Alfonsus de Castro, who alleaging S. Augustine to wit∣nesse, sayth: Non dicit. &c. He sayth not that he quite con∣temned* 1.624 fasting, but he ascribeth this vnto him, onely that he shoulde say, certayne appoynted fastings are not to bee obserued but eche one should fast when he woulde, least he should seeme to be vnder the lawe. Aerius therfore speaketh not agaynst fasting, but onely agaynst the lawes of fasting, by no maner meanes admitting, that the Churche can binde vs to fast, bicause, although fasting be healthfull and pro∣fitable to the soule, yet vvill he not that any should be con∣strayned.

Thus sayth Alfonsus of Aerius opinion for fasting,* 1.625 and not as you say, master Stapleton, that he made no dyfference betvveene him that fasted, and that fasted not. Whereas Aerius made a great difference, and Alfonsus cleareth him of that you accuse him. But howsoeuer Al∣fonsus in the other poynt (wherin you let him go frée) accu∣seth Aerius by S. Augustines testimonie: if he altogither contemned all maner of fasting ordeyned by the Churche, then are we cleared from béeing charged with him, for we refuse onely the superstitious necessitis of the Popishe* 1.626 Churches lawes. As for the true Churche of Christe, if vpon any occasion, some lawes of fasting should be made by hir, toll vs where we haue sayd, we would contemne them. Yea, it is apparant we yéelde obediently to those lawes of fasting ordeyned by the Quéenes Maiestie, and hir realme, the Churche of Englande: whiche be not superstitious fastes, nor binding the minde of the faster with any ne∣cessitie of conscience, but made for the necessitie and policie of the Realme, and state of our countrey. And if the whole Church of Christ, ordeine like lawes for fasting, we shewe hereby how little we would with Aerius despise the same: but we with the word of God, and with the true Church of

Christ in the Apostles times, in the Primatiue age, and in the auncient fathers dayes: reiect all suche superstitions in fastes, as the Popishe lawes and customes •…•…o burden the Churche withall.

And thus dothe euen S. Augustine (that noteth Aerius) writing to Casulanus agaynst one Urbicus in Rome, who would haue it obserued for a lawe, and made a foolish booke theron, that men should fast on Saterday and other dayes, saying that Peter did so, (whom he calleth) as the papistes* 1.627 do, the head of the Apostles, the porter of heauen, and the foundation of the Church) when he conuicted Simon Ma∣gus. S Augustine improueth this tale, by Peters concorde with all his fellow Disciples, that vsed no suche faste. And after long prouing and improuing, he concludeth thus: Si autem quontam huic quantum potus, &c. But (bicause I thinke* 1.628 I haue answered this as sufficiently as I could) if ye aske my sentence hereon: I reuoluing it in my minde, do see that in the Euangelicall and Apostolicall writings, and in the whole instrument that is called the new Testament, fasting is cō∣maunded. But on what dayes we shoulde not fast, and on what dayes we should fast, I finde it not defined by the com∣maundement of the Lorde, or of the Apostles. And by this, I deeme that fasting agreeth fitter, not in deede to obtayne righteousnesse, which fayth obteineth, wherein is the beautie inwarde of the kings daughter. &c. Howbeit in this fast or dinner on the Saterday, nothing seemeth to me heerein to be kepte more safely and quietly, than that he which eateth, dis∣pise not him that eateth not, nor he which eateth not, dis∣pise not him which eateth. For neither if we eate, we shall* 1.629 abounde, neither shall we want if we do not eate. That is to say, while we keepe companie with those among whome we liue (and with whome we liue to God) without offence ta∣king in these things: For as for that the Apostle saythe is true, it is ill for the man that eateth through offence, so is it ill for the man, that by offence doth fast. &c.

Thus farre saint Augustine agaynst the precise appoin∣ting of fast on the Saterday, in whose time it was frée for euery Church to vse hir owne custome. Yea, as he conclu∣deth with aunswere of Ambrose hereon: VVhen I am at Millaine I fast not on the Saterday, when I am at Rome, I fast on the Saterday. And to what Church ye come keepe the or∣der thereof if ye will neither giue, nor take offence.

Thus we sée, first how the fastes of the Church of Rome,* 1.630 were no such lawe to all other Churches, to receyue from hir their order or dayes of fasting, or else they had bene Ae∣rians: for then had both S. Augustine & Ambrose to, béene Aerians by master Stapletons rule, and by the Popes ob∣trusion of his Churches fastes, to all other Churches nowe. But the Church of Millayne euen vnder his nose, besydes those of Affrick, were at that time of contrarie orders.

Secondly, as it was of Saterdayes fast, so was it also* 1.631 for Fridayes fast, or any other daies or day, as appeareth by Saint Augustines generall rule, in appealing to the Scrip∣ture, and there finding no day at all appoynted. As he sayth afterward againe, Sed quoniam nō in•…•…enimus &c. But bicause we finde not (as I haue rehearsed aboue) in the Euangelicall and Apostolicall writings, which properly perteyne to the reuealing of the newe Testament, that on any certaine dayes it is euidently commaunded we should keepe fastes. &c.

Thirdly, that what dayes soeuer they did kéepe fast, they* 1.632 did it not as any meritorious act, to obteyne righteousnesse thereby. For this was the difference that the Papists put, betwene him that fasted and that fasted not, which is a thou∣sand partes worse heresie than was that of Aerius.

I aske none other witnesse herein, than euen one of your owne side, Frier Ferus, who inueying agaynst the Pha∣riseys for ascribing righteousnesse to their sacrifices and ce∣remonies:* 1.633 But wee (sayth he) do all things preposterously, placing righteousnesse in these things, which of themselues are neither good nor bad: neglecting those things wherein

true righteousnesse consisteth. But one errour draweth on another. For from hence followeth, first, that we make to our* 1.634 selues a greater conscience of the transgression of the Chur∣ches or Monkishe decrees, than of the transgression of the diuine precepts. Secondly, hereon it commeth, that we easily iudge other that obserue not the same, as here did the disci∣ples of Iohn. VVhen Paule notwithstanding teacheth: let no man iudge you in meate or in drinke, or by reason of a feast* 1.635 day. &c. Item, he that eateth not, let him not iudge him that eateth. &c. To conclude, it is farre an other thing to doe the worke, than to put a trust in the worke. It is good to fast and to keepe the Churches decrees, but to put a trust in them, is* 1.636 not only not good, but wicked. For this cause therfore Christ required not fasting, & other bodily obseruations, he exacted not of those that are his, or prescribed ought at all of these* 1.637 things, not that he iudged such things of thēselues to be euill or vnlawfull, but that they should not •…•…all thither againe, that is to were, to a trust of workes, from whiche he woulde haue them most farre. The which surely had chaūced, if he had ex∣acted any such thing of those that are his, as nowe we per∣ceyne is committed in the Churches constitutions. For euen as sone as euer these cōstitutions began to be giuen, men be∣gan also therwith to trust in them. And so by little & little we* 1.638 haue degenerate from true godlinesse, into a kinde of Pha∣risaical righteousnesse, or rather into a shew of righteousnesse, the which is more cleare than that it can be denyed. And afterwarde complayning further of the Popishe fastes and other abuses, he sayth: His similes sunt pleri{que} nostrum. &c.* 1.639 The most of our men are like vnto these (he meaneth the Phareseys) that iudge they keepe the lawes then, when they follow externally the letter of the law, when they do nothing lesse, as appeareth by them that are ydle on the feast dayes, and giue themselues to ryot, neglecting those thinges that are perteyning to the Sabaoth. Of those also that thinke* 1.640 they fast, when they eate but once a day, but so daintilye,

and they so glutte themselues, that they feele no hunger all day long. On the contrarie, they iudge not him to fast, but to transgresse the commaundement, that compelled by po∣uertie, necessitie, or labour, doth eate but sparingly often ty∣mes a day. And a little after: These thinges doe flatly fight with the doctrine of Christ. For first it impugneth the fayth, secondly charitie, which two Christ did chiefly touch. For this cause therefore he doeth so often blame them. But if we marke our selues, we shall see our selues to be euen the most culpable in the same thinges. For commonly our righteous∣nesse* 1.641 is set most in outwarde thinges. I damne not outwarde thinges, for who hauing his right wittes woulde or coulde so do? But I say they suffice not to saluation. And as I sayd a litle before, of the precept of keeping the Sabaoth, two things are commaunded. First, the bodies rest, secondly and principally, the rest of the old man from his workes: so say I now, euery precept requireth two thinges, that is to wete, the outwarde worke, & the heart, & that principally, which Christ declared inough. Math. 5. But wee neglecting that which is principally exacted, do stick onely in the externall things. The same may I say of the ecclesiastical cōstitutions, they giue not holinesse but shewe it & further it, as for ensample, true religion con∣sisteth not in this, that thou shouldst weare, this or that habit, but in this, that if thou be dead to the world, thou liue to god: & to this point, outward things do also not a litle further thee: so the true worship of god is, if that in spirite and truth thou worship the father. But hereto the externall worship doth stirre thee vp. The same also is to be said of fasting, cōfession, prayer. &c. which chiefly cōsist in the hart. But we neglecting* 1.642 these things which are most necessarie, do please our selues a∣bout the outwarde things onely. Thus sayth Ferus of your Popishe fast, conteyning farre worse errors than Aerius not putting of difference, but belike he shalbe an Aerian to.

The third thing M. St. obiecteth to vs out of Aerius, is* 1.643 that he sayd the sacrifice for the dead was fruitlesse.

If you were not also dead and fruitlesse, for any trouth* 1.644 in you Master Stapleton, ye would neuer make such a ly∣ing sacrifice of your Priestes lippes for shame. As though Aerius were counted an Heretike, for denying the propi∣ciatorie sacrifice (as ye call it) of the Masse, which ye say is auaylable and meritorious, not onely for the liuing, but al∣so for the deade, to deliuer them from the fayned paynes of purgatorie. Whereas if he had affirmed at that time any such thing, he should himself haue bene counted a straunge and new monstrous Heretike. For as then, nor long after, neither your pardons and indulgences, nor your trentals and Diriges, neyther your satissactions nor your oblations, neither your Masse of Requiem, nor your soule Priestes to sing or say it, were extant or deuised.

Errours in déede there were about the dead, both then and long before, and suche as after gaue occasion to these your gainfull deuises. And if Aerius had denyed such er∣rours, or such errours had then bene practised, he had béene no Heretike for denying them, but rather such Heretikes as had mainteyned them. Which the godly fathers did not, but acknowledged and knew of no other place, eyther of ioy or torment after this lyfe but onely of heauen and hell. A thirde place (sayth Saint Augustine, that writeth of thys* 1.645 Aerius) Penitus ignoramus, VVe are vtterly ignorant of, nor we can finde any such in the scriptures. And yet must Saint Augustine néedes haue knowne and acknowledged such a thirde place of deliueraunce of the deade, if he had ment of prayer and oblation for theyr deliuerance as you do meane. But he flatly denieth the knowing of any such place: it fol∣loweth* 1.646 then, that wryting thus of Aerius, either he was in the same Heresie, denying any place for the dead to be hol∣pen out of, (and wherto then should such praier serue, or ob∣lation for deliuering them out of a place of torment, since there were no such place of torment) & so he confirmed Aeri∣us his saying: or else he must runne yet into a greater error

and absurditie, that the deade being in one of these two places heauen or hell, they were there holpen by such pray∣ers and oblations.

But for those that are in hell, the scripture is flatte, their* 1.647 worme shall neuer die, their fire is vnquenchable and euer∣lasting, the riche Glutton coulde not get from thence, nor* 1.648 finde any neuer so little ease from his torments. Ab inferno nulla est redemptio. From hell there is no redemption. And this knewe saint Augustine well ynough, that sayth: Duae* 1.649 quippe habitationes, vna in igne aeterno, altera in regno aeterno. There are two dwellings the one in fire eternall, the other in the Kingdome eternall. And againe: Scitote vos. &c. Knowe* 1.650 ye, that when the soule is parted frō the bodie, streightwayes either it is for his good deedes placed in paradise, or else cer∣tainly for his sinnes, cast headlong into hell fire, choose nowe that you like, either to reioyce euerlastingly with the Saints, o•…•… without ende to be tormented with the wicked.

This was the foule and great errour of Origene, Saint* 1.651 Augustine was not infected therewith, nor any godly father of his time, muche lesse Epiphanius, that was an earnest condemner of Origene. Although the Papists be not cleare of this errour, that say they haue deliuered, and can deliuer soules euen out of hell, as they tell howe Pope Oregorie* 1.652 deliuered Traian an infidell Prince: and howe his mother (condemned and tormented in hell fire for hir whoordome) was deliuered from thence by him through a trentall of Masses.

Nowe as for the soules that on the other side be in hea∣uen,* 1.653 the other place: I thinke Saint Augustine was neuer so farre ouershotte, to say or thinke that such prayers coulde ease or deliuer them from paynes, that were in the ioyes of heauen. What then remayneth to thinke of saint August. noting Aerius of Heresie herein.* 1.654

We shall the better perceyue this, if we marke the er∣rours that many of the Grecians and Egiptians, had at that

time about the dead, yea euen those sayth Epiphanius, Qui* 1.655 primas sib•…•… ferre videntur. &c. That among certaine exercisers of godlinesse in Egipt, seemed to beare the chiefest sway, and also of those in Thebaida and other Regions, that denied the resurrection of the bodie, Et Graeci quidam. &c. And certaine Grecians there were that vtterly denied the resurrection. On the other part there were some that graūted it, but with ve∣ry fond and straunge opinions, that partly they had receiued of the heathen Philosophers, partly they had deuised of thē selues. For this hath bene alwayes one of the deuils chiefe practises, to abuse and deceyue the liuing by the dead.

And from hence, as S. Ambrose and S. August. affirme,* 1.656 by worshipping the pictures of the deade, sprang all Idola∣trie, and therefore the Deuill stryued so muche for the bo∣die of Moses, as diuerse learned fathers note thereon. And of all errours, the most auncient are those that haue sprong about the deade. As with the Saduces among the Iewes before Christes comming, by other among the Corinthi∣ans in S. Paules time baptising ouer the deade, and these aboue sayd Heresies in the east Church. As likewise in the west, by thrusting the communion bread into the mouthes of the dead, by conceyuing opinions of their estate such as they had learned out of Plato and Uirgill, of their paynes* 1.657 and torments, of their ease & deliuerance whom they loued and wished well vnto, of whom sayth Saint August. Hu∣mana quadam beneuolentia mihi falli videntur, and as euen Epiphanius sayth, Quum vero tales à via vera discesserint, &* 1.658 veritatem dei ad fabulas conuerterint: VVhen such men swar∣ued from the true way, and conuerted the truth of God into fables, Such as Origens conceytes and allegoryes were, such as the morals of Oregorie are full of, suche as the He∣retikes fathered of the Apostles names, Saint Peters Gospell, Saint Thomas Gospell, Nichodemus Gospell. &c. Then no marueyle, if not onely the Heretikes had ill opi∣nions of thedeade, but also some of the godly and learned

fathers in this behalfe, were eyther somewhat deceyued,* 1.659 ouercuriously searching and affirming, that they knewe not, or caryed to muche away with the sway of the peoples abuses.

Yea and by his leaue, though he were an excellent and* 1.660 godly wryter, yet in this poynte Epiphanius somewhat ouershotte himselfe. Althoughe I speake it not to accuse him, nor to excuse Aerius, for no doubt as Aerius was* 1.661 an open Artian, that denyed the diuinitie of oure Saui∣our Christe: so conertly he shotte herein agaynst the re∣surrection with the foresayde Heretykes, as appeareth by Epiphanius his confutation of him. Who not onely con∣futeth him, but also sheweth why at that time they vsed suche an order for the deade, whiche in the latter ende of the Booke, shewing the diuerse rytes of the Christians in his Countrey then, he expoundeth what it was: In his* 1.662 autem qui vita defuncti sunt, ex nomine memorias faciunt, ora∣tiones ad deum perficientes ac cultus diuinos & mysteriorum dispensationes. But as concerning those which are deade, they make memorials by name, while they make their prayers to God and diuine worship and dispensing of the mysteries. That is, in their publike prayers of the diuine seruice, and receyuing the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, they made a thankefull memoriall of suche as were departed in the* 1.663 fayth of Christ, giuing God prayse and thankes for them, to confirme the fayth of the lyuing in the hope of the deades resurrection.

Now, that they ment not by these doings, any such de∣liuerance out of paynes of Purgatorie, or any such other thing as the Papistes dreame of, and woulde deceyue the people withall: Epiphanius himselfe doeth plainely declare, not to muche regarding what the Heretyke did pretende, as what hée mente to destroy the hope* 1.664 of the Resurrection, and béeing an Artian to abase the prefection of Christe: Postea verò (sayeth hée) de co quòd

proferantur nomina defunctorum. &c. But afterwarde, concer∣ning that the names of those that are departed this life, a•…•…e brought foorth, what can be more profitable than this, what more commodious than this, and what more worthie admi∣ration? that these that are present, beleue that they which are departed do liue, and are not none, but they are, and are li∣uing with the Lorde. Whereby it appeareth that those prayers, were principally to confirme the hope of the im∣mortalitie of the soule, and the bodies resurrection: and ra∣ther confute the Heresie of Pope Iohn. 22. than confirme any Popish Masse or Dirige for the deade.

Notwithstanding, for that that followeth, Epiphanius is not altogither excusable, though to be borne withall, more than you beare with him for rending the picture of Christ,* 1.665 and not suffering so much as an Image on painted cloth, no not of Christ himselfe, to stande in the Church, although it serued but for the vse of a vayle. What would he haue done trow you, if he had come into one of your Churches, all to be dashed with Images, not onely painted on cloathes, but carued in wood and stone? no doubt he would haue broken them all to fitters, and haue cryed out on your open Idola∣trie. And so, had he seene what horrible errours and super∣stitions, your Church mainteyneth about the dead, and that his wordes should after haue giuen occasion, to pretende in his name a defence of suche superstition: vndoubtedly hee woulde haue tolde you to your faces, that you wrested his wordes, and abused him, and were farre worse your selues than euer Aerius was: and woulde (as did Saint August.) haue reuoked such wordes, as whereby ye shoulde haue pic∣ked any such occasion. But he foresawe not this, as he saw the other. But rather (as ye say afterwarde of Nicephorus) was caried away in the sway of the common errour, and so* 1.666 defended that which ye nowe pretende to boulster your er∣rours by.

As for any authoritie for this vsage, such as it was, Epi∣phanius

alleageth none at al, out of the word of God: yea,* 1.667 and that was more fonde in the doing, he sayth, they prayed for the Patriarkes, Prophetes, Apostles, and Euangelistes. Wherin ye will graunt, I am sure, M. St. both your selfe and your Church doth swarue from him. And your owne Popes Decrée sayth, Iniuriam facit martyri, qui orat pro* 1.668 martyre he doth iniurie to a martyr, that prayeth for a mar∣tyr. The reason, he is in blisse already. But wherefore (saith he) made they this prayer for the sainctes already in heauen? for soothe to separate Christ from the order of men, by the honor they gaue him, that he excelled all creatures, were they neuer so holy. Which though it be most true, and withall confuteth your adoration of Saincts departed, yet their reason héerein was very fonde, that therefore they should pray for them that were already in perfect blisse and glory. And as fond was it to pray for those that died in their* 1.669 sinnes, agaynst whom the scripture is playne and plat: and hereto accordeth the best of the learned fathers, as I haue declared before of S. Aug. whō ye quote with Epiphanius. If therfore Epiphanius ment more than thankes giuing to God, for his mercies to the saincts, in sauing them, & pray∣sing God for his iustice to the wicked in condemning them, and withall to confirme in the liuing the hope of the resur∣rection of the dead: then is Epiphanius not onely contrary to the Scripture, and S. Aug. but also to him selfe, and to the best of all the fathers besides, whose traditions is the onely argument that Epiphanius pretendeth.

Ciprian (who also admitteth the memorials & oblations* 1.670 of thanks giuing for the faythfull martyrs departed) yet in this poynt of doctrine to pray for any departed, as to helpe them by their prayers, or that they be in case to néede & find suche helpe, he vtterly denieth. Quando istin•…•… excessum fue∣rit, &c. when we are departed out of this life, there is now no place for repentaunce, no desire of satisfaction, lyfe is ei∣ther loste heere, or gotten heere by the vvorship of God,

and the fruite of fayth, eternall saluation is prouided for: neither is any body hindred, either by his sinnes or his yeres, that therby he might the lesse come to the obteyning of sal∣uation. To him that is abiding in this worlde repentance is neuer to late. &c.

Athanasius likewise, Animae à nobis profectae vbi & quo∣modo* 1.671 sint. &c. VVhere the soules departed from vs, are, and how they be, is a straunge and horrible question, and hid frō men: for God hath not suffred any to returne from thence, which should declare it. Notwithstanding out of the scrip∣ture we learne, that the soules of sinners be in hell, and the soules of the iust be in Paradise. (Without any mention at all of Purgatorie.)

The iudgement of S. Hierome is very playne, and in∣serted among your Popishe decrées; In praesenti siculo. &c.* 1.672 VVhyle we are in this present worlde, either by prayers or by counsels, vve may one be helped of another: but when we shall come before the iudgement seate of Christ, nei∣ther Iob, nor Daniell, nor Noe can doe ought for any body, but euery one shall beare his owne burden. And agayne,* 1.673 he that while he liueth in this body, shall not haue obtay∣ned the forgiuenesse of sinnes, and so shal depart out of hys life, perisheth vnto God, and endeth his beeing, although to him selfe he be in paynes.

He that hathe n•…•…t washed away his sinnes (sayth Chriso∣stome)* 1.674 in this present lyfe, shall not afterwarde finde any consolation. For in hell, saythe he, who shall prayse thee? and vvorthily sayde, for this is the time of cares and con∣flictes, and wrastlinges, as for that is the tyme of crow∣ninges, of retributions, and rewardinges. And agayne,* 1.675 If thou arte made any mans enimie, bee reconciled before thou come to iudgement. Dispatche all thinges heere, that without griefe thou mayest beholde the iudgement seate. VVhyle we are heere, we haue notable hopes, but so sone as euer we shall be departed from hence, it lyeth not in

vs afterwarde to repente, nor to washe away the faultes vve haue committed. Yea, he sayth more. After the ende of* 1.676 this life, there are no occasions of good workes, as wrastlers haue then no occasion of getting the garlande when the wrestlings are finished. And as Theophilacte saythe: after* 1.677 thys ly•…•…e there is no tyme, eyther of repenting, or of vvishing.

All which sayings, if they be true, it followeth there is no place of purging and helping them, that are already dead in their sinnes: since the s•…•…ules so departed can not repent, but there is no forgiuenesse without repentance: since at occasi∣ons of their deliuery are past, yea, they be past wishing any goodnesse to them selues, that is to say, they vtterly dispayre of al mercy, knowing, that wishing booteth not, muche lesse the wishing of others for them: as Theophilact a little be∣fore sayde of the foolishe Uirgins: The vertues of my neigh∣boure* 1.678 will hardly suffice for his owne defence, so farre off is it from helping me. Thus are all these Doctors contrarie to Epiphanius héerein, if Epiphanius were to be expeunded as you woulde haue him. And will ye make all these Ae∣rians too?

But to all these your vsage is, to clap downe as many or* 1.679 more Doctors of the contrary opinion, yea to bring euen these that I haue r•…•…cited, to witnesse the quite contrary. In which doing, thinking to discredite vs, ye not onely lese cre∣dit•…•… your selfe, by wresting them, but also ye diminishe their credite (haue they any with you) that make them speake contrary to them selues. True it is, that euery one of these fathers, as they had theyr faultes and errours, so they bare muche also, in these matters of dead men, with the common sway, althoughe S. Augustine and Chriso∣stome, more than the rest, do often times chide the people, for vsing about the dead, suche fonde abuses, as at that tyme they did. Chrisostome telleth howe they woulde strippe their armes, make them bloudie, teare their heare,

scratche their faces, and weare blacke apparell, and hire mourners. All whiche he greatly blameth: and althoughe* 1.680 they pretended custome for them, saying: Consuetudinem quero, &c. consuetudinem requiro, &c. I seeke to keepe the old custome, I require custome. Yet doth not Chrisostome al∣low their sayings, but calleth it, pessimam consuetudinem, a most wicked custome, ineptias, toyes, suche as he was asha∣med of, hypocrisie and such as long ago ought to haue bene driuen cleane away.

Thus earnestly writeth Chrisostome against the abuses about the dead. And also for that opinion, that euen then in his dayes was a common and constant opinion among* 1.681 the people, euen as it is yet among al papists, that the soules of diuers do walke after their death, and mone them selues to vs aliue, to be holpen by our prayers. Which, how false an opinion it is, appeareth by Chrisostome.

Shall I be persuaded (sayth he) bicause thou hast heard the* 1.682 diuels often times crie, I am the soule of suche an one? but this saying comes also of the diuels fraude and disceite, for it is not the soule of the departed, which sayth these things, but the diuell that feygneth these things to deceiue the hea∣rers. &c. These things are to be counted but olde wiues, or rather dotardes tales, and toyes for children: for the soule beeing separate from the body, can not wander in these regi∣ons. As for the soules of the iuste, they are in the handes of God. The soules likewise of the Infantes, for they haue not* 1.683 sinned. But the soules of sinners are caried away euen staight after their departure, the which is made playne by Lazarus and Diues. &c. And by many places of the scripture it may be proued, that the soules of iust men after their death, do not wander heere For bothe Steuen sayde, Receiue my spi∣rite, and Paule desired to be loosed and to be with Christe. And also in another place the Lorde sayth, this day shal they take thysoule from thee. The soule therfore when it is once gone from the body, can not wander heere amongest vs.

And the Scripture saith also of the Pattiarche, he was put to* 1.684 his father and died in a good age. But that also neither the soules of the sinners can abide here, thou maist harken what the riche man saith, and marke what he craueth and can not get it, if the soules of men might be cōuersant here, he would haue come him selfe as he desired, and haue warned his kins∣men of Hell torments. Out of which place it appeareth also plainly, that the soules after their departure from the bodie, are carried away to a certaine place, from whence at their will they can not get, but do there abide, expecting that terrible day of iudgement.

These wordes of Chrysostome well weighed, inferre* 1.685 fower things: First, that there be no moe estates of the dead than twoo, the iust and the wicked, and so there are none to be purged after-death. Secondly, that there be be but two places also, Heauen and Hell, & so the purging place called purgatory is excluded. Thirdly, that the soules once departed from their bodies, come forthwith to one of these two places, and there tary continually till the day of dome, without wandring here on the earth: and so purga∣torie is againe excluded. Fourthly, that all appearings of any, that say they are the s•…•…ules of such and such, &c. are the Diuels fraudes, old wines fables, fooles tales, & childrens toyes, and so againe, not onely the opinion of purgatorie is improued, but also al the Popish reuelatiōs thereof, proued to haue bene the Diuels illusiōs. But of this, more hereaf∣ter. I note it now only to shew, that this errour (though no∣thing like to that it hath since) was so cropē into the Church then, that Chrysostome was faine thus sharply to cōfute it.

S. Augustine also rebuketh other errours cropen in by* 1.686 custome about the dead. Nou•…•… •…•…ultos esse, &c. I know (saith he) that there are many worshippers of sepulchers, and of pi∣ctures. I know there are many which most riottously drinke ouer the dead, and making banquets to the corses, burie them selues vppon the buried, and these their gluttonnies and

dronkennesse, they accoumpt for Religion. These and such like wicked customes and errours about the dead, gréeued S. Augustine, wherefore he deuised with the godly Bishop. Aurelius, how he might remoue them. Though therefore Epiphanius allowed the praying for the dead and other ce∣remonies there aboutes, that euen the popish Church doth not vse, and pretende custome for him neuer so muche: yet none of these fathers are of his iudgement herein. Nor his argument, from custome beyond the worde of God, bindeth vs: but that rather we may follow S. Augustins rule, Ma∣gis veritatem quàm consuetudinem sequi debemus. VVe ought* 1.687 rather to follow the truth than the custome. Yea, although al these Doctours had bene contrarie hereto, the Scripture being so plaine therein.

Epiphanius argument therefore, is very meane to force any Heresie of denying this erroneouse custome. And yet is not Aerius excused, bicause he withall couertly (as ap∣peareth by Epiphanius proues) denied the Resurrection, els, had their bene no furder meaning in those wordes, than that Prayer or Sacrifice was fruitlesse for the dead, it had bene so litle any Heresie, that Epiphanius was rather in an errour thereof, by yelding to corrupted custome, as I haue proued by the Fathers to whose tradition he appea∣leth: and by S. Augustine, that also noteth this thing in Ae∣rius. Howbeit I speake it not, to deface the worthie com∣mendation of Epiphanius, but I do as you do, when ye talke with him for Images. Although I might note in him furder, not only his too bitter cōtention with Chrysostome, but also that he is not all sounde for doctrine, no not in eue∣ry point of the Trinitie: not that I lay it to him as any He∣resie, but as an errour: no marueyle then though he were deceyued herein, and you also M. Stapleton that ground on him, to slaunder vs with Aerius heresie, which was against the resurrection, and that the dead Sunt nulli, are none, and are resolued to nothing. I haue bene the longer in an∣swering

you to Aerius, bicause ye vrge it so much, and tri∣umphe in so vaine and false a matter.

Your next obiection is about virginitie.

How say you to louinian that denied virginitie to haue* 1.688 any excellencie aboue Matrimonie or any speciall rewarde at Gods handes?

Or euer I say any thing to Iouinian, I answere to you M. Stapleton. If you should receyue such rewarde at Gods handes, as your slaunderouse and lying toung deserueth, I thinke your virginitie (presupposing that ye were so good a virgin Priest as ye pretende, although I will not sweare for you) would at that great daie of rewarde stande ye in litle stéede. Your selfe know well inough, that although we attribute to the honorable state of Mariage, that reue∣rence and libertie among all men, that Christ and his A∣postle S. Paule biddeth: yet, do we not deface or dispise, but esteeme honorable also, the excellent gift of continen∣cie. Yea & confesse with the Apostle that in him that hath the gift thereof, it is, in those respects that the Apostle men∣tioneth, more excellent than Matrimonie. Bicause such are more frée to tranaile, in the preaching and ministerie of* 1.689 Gods worde, with lesse trouble, care and charge, chiefly in time of persecution. But not for any excellencie of virgi∣nitie it selfe, as an holier vertue, deseruing heauen, which you call a speciall reward at Gods hands, meaning thereby a merite or deserte of a greater glory in heauen than Ma∣trimonie.

This fonde presumption of merites we disalowe, and would haue ye say with Gregorie your Pope: Let them* 1.690 know that virginitie so excelleth mariage, that the vnmaried extoll not thēselues aboue those that be maried. You & your popish Priests do not thus, but in that ye be vnmaried ye preferre your selues aboue the maried, craking of excellēc•…•…e and special reward aboue others, as did y^e boasting Pharisée.* 1.691 And God wote are so far frō that virginitie which ye crake

of, that not onely ye burne within with most filthie lustes* 1.692 of your pampred bodies and vnmortified fleshe, and so by reason of the scruple of your vowe, haue your consciences marked with an whote Iron, and yet virginitie, as your selues (to your owne greater condemnation without your greater repentance) testifie, is quite loste, being polluted in the assent of the minde. But what speake I of the minde? which I would commit to God, to iudge vppon, sauing that all the world crieth out of your fornications, adulteries, in∣cestes, sodomitrie, the crie whereof is ascended vnto hea∣uen. Your owne bookes swarme in exclaiming it, and al∣most euery Cronicler noteth it. But what néede notes of Chronicles, when your licences and dispensations for your Priestes concubines, your open mainteyning of courte∣zanes, stewes and harlotrie, are so apparāt, that ye can not denie it? Would God yet ye could blushe, and be at the least ashamed of it. But why wishe I shame, in so shamelesse maiden Priestes, if ye can be maydens, that neither haue maidenhed nor shamefastnesse in you? are ye not those Lo∣custes that S. Iohn saith, should come out of the bottomlesse pitte, hauing on their heads as it were crownes like vnto* 1.693 golde, and their faces were as it had bene the faces of men, and they had heare as the heares of women, that is to say, a shew and countenance of maydenly virginitie, hauing not∣withstanding tayles like Scorpions.

Surely Eneas Siluius your Pope called Pius. 2. did not* 1.694 for nought so commonly vse this sentence: that where the Fathers, not without great consideration at the first, forbad Priests to marry, and to keepe them selues single: they should now not without a greater cause, suffer them to marrie. In the which wordes, he not onely noteth the popish Priestes abominations, but also that this forbidding of marriage is not of any commaundement of Christ, but merely of mens prohibition: but such prohibition, as were much better re∣uoked, euen by the best learned Popes opinion (as the wri∣ters

of his life do note) that euer satte in that s•…•…ate.

Of the same iudgement was Erasmus, who seing the* 1.695 abhominable life of the popish Priests, abosing the simple vnder the n•…•…e of virginitie▪ Mu•…•… 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉▪ &c. Ma∣ny causes (faith he) •…•…o persuade a change of the lawe of single life in ecclesiasticall persons. And when your Sorbonistes of Paris stamped hereat and wrote against him, boasting as you de of the excellencie of virginitie shining in holines: Erasmus answered them: Qui tract•…•…nt, &c. They that lay those that medle with the diuine mysteries and the admini∣stration of the heauenly worde, chastitie doth most become them, they say true and godly, and I allow their iudgement very well: but they do consider, what the thing it selfe requi∣reth: I consider▪ what the imbe•…•…ilitie of men requireth. Many discommodities (I graunt) might follow, if wiues were per∣mitted vnto Priestes, but such discommodities as either the Church, or the carefulnesse of Princes, might easilie with cer∣taine constitutions remedie. But now in so corrupt manners of men, their most silthie single life hath farre more greuous discommodities. Would to God so many as are priests would turne their minde to cleannesse.

Thus saide Erasmus of your birginly Priesthood not onely with wh•…•…, but euen with S. Paule, we say: it is* 1.696 better marry than to li•…•…e in such wicked burnings and vi∣ciouse liuing. Yea although the partie had neuer so much vowed virginitie before, yet if he could not keepe his vowe but burne in lust, it were farre better for him to marry, and his mariage (as S. Angustine saith) is perfect matrimonie.* 1.697 And not whoredome as you & your Papistes slaunderously do terine it▪ But no meruaile if ye slaūder our Matrimonie, that not onely liue your selues in such wicked demeanour, & he such stalions as the Prophete cried out of, that neighed after their neighbours wines, rather than with the honest care of Matrimonie, ye would haue any of your own: since, as ye defiled others •…•…eddes, so ye accoumpt and write of all

matrimonie as a polluted state. For so saith Durandus, and so ye say all: Matrimonium tollis puritatem, & ma∣culat* 1.698 corpus, Matrimony taketh away cleannesse, and de•…•…i∣leth the bodie. Whereas the Scripture calleth it, Cubile impollutum, An vndefiled bedde, and an honorable estate. And yet for simple fornication it is a common question moued among you, whether it be a mortall sinne or no. So fauourable ye are to wickednesse, and so harde to Ma∣trimonie. To liue in Matrimonie, is with Papistes to* 1.699 liue after the •…•…eash. Which what is it els with S. Paule but to liue in sinne, to offende God, to deserue death? S•…•… secundam carnem vixerit•…•… moriemini, If ye liue after the flesh ye shall die. Qui in carne sunt Deo placere non pof∣sunt. They that are in the flesh can not please God. And therefore they reason that Priests may not liue in Matri∣monie. But to sorsweare Matrimonie, to liue a single life, how soeuer he liue it, Si non caste 〈◊〉〈◊〉 cau•…•…e, If not chastely yet closely. This with Papistes is virginitie, this is an excellent life, this at Gods handes deserues a speciall rewarde.

This hypocrisie, of fained virginitie, this defacing and* 1.700 destling of honorable matrimonie, bicause we crie out vpon, we are 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Bicause we reprehends your forced sin∣gle life, that compelleth Priestes not to marrie, whether they will or no, o•…•… whether they haue or no, the gifte of vir∣ginitie, which is not of them selues, but a gift, and that of God, and that a rare gifte, as Christ saith, and as experience* 1.701 hath proued, a most rare gifte among your votaries: we are therefore Iouinians. Bicause we preferre marriage be∣fore such vncleane virginitie, as the honorable, necessarie and vndefiled meanes to auoide fornication: Bicause we say virginitie (I meane not Popish virginitie, but true virginitie) is in it selfe no such vertue, as you make it, of especiall rewarde, but in respect of auoiding some hinde∣rances: as also Matrimonie, in respects of auoyding grea∣ter

cuils, therefore we are Iouinians, and make them both alike.

But what say we herein, that euen your Schoolemen* 1.702 say not▪ Durandus aforesatde, vppon this selfe same que∣stion whether virginitie be to be preferred before matri∣monie. Aliquod est 〈◊〉〈◊〉, &c. Something is good in it selfe, something accidentally or inrespect of another thing, that is, bicause it remoueth an euill or inconuenient thing. After the firste sorte, meate is good to the bodie. After the seconde for•…•…e, medicine is good. VVee must say therefore that virginitie is not good after the first sorte, but after the* 1.703 seconde: which appeareth three wayes. First, thus: to ab∣staine from that that is conuenient in it selfe and good, can not of it selfe be good. But by virginitie we abstaine from Matrimonie, which of it selfe is good: therefore virginitie of it selfe is not good. I•…•… which woordes (omitting his con∣tradiction to his owne tale) he maketh in it selfe Matri∣monie to be better than Uirginitie. But what stande I on Durandus, when all your Priestes (incurring therein worse contradiction) make Matrimonie a Sacrament, but Uirginitie they make none? If therefore we be louinians, be not you louinians to? y•…•… rather, per syncopen, be ye not louinians as good virgin maydens as euer Iupiter was?

But to supplie that wantes in you, ye presse vs with* 1.704 S. Hieroms authoritie. To whome though •…•… might fully answere ye, with the learned censure•…•… of Eramus on that S. Hieromes 〈◊〉〈◊〉 against 〈◊〉〈◊〉, yet for your fur∣der satisfiyng your de•…•… •…•… will referre ye to 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 excellent learned father, and euen fellow student with S. Hierome, & one also that had written against 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Whereby ye may sée how farre S. Hierome ouershotte him selfe 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉, &. H•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉, (saith* 1.705 Ruffinus to Hisrom speaking of Iouinian) did first set vpō this worke, and peraduenture being compelled. And no mer∣uaile

if he wauered at the first yet should not occasion there at be snatched, of derogating from the Christians, but rather the profite of amendement be sought for. If you had writen* 1.706 those things vnto him, should ye not haue giuen both greater grace and edifiyng, either vnto him▪ hauing his beginnings in the feare of God, or els vnto others being readers thereof: than now the same your inuectiues do giue more griefe and confusion to all that feare? which both in you do shew a most foule lust of back byting and in me a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of answering. For, as I haue said, in your bookes wrttten against 〈◊〉〈◊〉, you be founde now to affirme the selfe •…•…ame things, with which ye reproued him▪ Howbeit now ye are fallen so farre, that ye affirme, the filthes of mariage ca not be washed away, no not with the blond of martyrdome. &c. And after this againe saith Ruffinus on S. Hierome, besides this we haue 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 shewed; that it is this mans fashion to derogate 〈◊〉〈◊〉 all good men and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 this point he taketh 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 to be som∣what, if he may repre•…•…ende a•…•… wi•…•…e men and those that haue any name in •…•…earning▪ I haue shewed also how vnworth•…•…ly he hath rayled on the Ministers and Priestes of Christ. No he hath not spared the Mokes, no nor the virgins whom he hath praised, nor the continent▪ yea 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 infamed with his fou•…•…e •…•…ibels the estate and degree of 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉. &c.

And so Russinus telleth, how vnworthily he defaced S. Ambrose & 〈◊〉〈◊〉, whome before he placed among the Prophets & •…•…postles, and afterward placeth them among those that teach stra•…•…ge things, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 neither did nor new writers, Martyr nor other. All this I 〈◊〉〈◊〉 M. St. ou•…•… of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, not to detect the Fathers 〈◊〉〈◊〉, but only to shew how weake your argument is, in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vs, and that with 〈◊〉〈◊〉, for this article of •…•…ourman (for, his other matters •…•… sette 〈◊〉〈◊〉) 〈◊〉〈◊〉 S. Hierome calleth 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉, & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 him vp therefore, declaring rather his owne impoten∣cie (though otherwise; being a very godly Saim, and a no∣table learned Father) than herein confuteth his aduersarie.

Your thirde demaund, is to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 what we say to the A* 1.707 rians, that denied the miracles done at the saincts tombes to be true miracles, and that the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 cannot cast out the di∣uils, and relieue them that be possessed. And to the Bogomi∣les, that saide the diuels sate at the saincts tombe•…•…, and dyd wonders there, to illude and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the people, to cause the people to worship them.

We denie not, M. Sta. with the Arians or 〈◊〉〈◊〉, the power of Christ 〈◊〉〈◊〉 his wondrous workes, at the 〈◊〉〈◊〉* 1.708 of the 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 the•…•…: bicause we denie the feigned 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of your 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉▪ and images now, Betwéene which 〈◊〉〈◊〉 & their 〈◊〉〈◊〉 then, was as much difference 〈◊〉〈◊〉 it betweene 〈◊〉〈◊〉 miracles and false illusions, betweene the sincere worship of God, & open Idolatrie. So that this, as the other, is your false slaunder also. And if ye make al 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉〈◊〉, who, though they did 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 at that time 〈◊〉〈◊〉 wrought 〈◊〉〈◊〉 his 〈◊〉〈◊〉, to confirme the fayth among the 〈◊〉〈◊〉, yet would they not make any ordinary prescript 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of mira∣cles, nor by miracles measure true or false doctrine, nor as∣scribe any holinesse to the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 or places, nor such mira∣cles to be of the martyrs doings, nor to be done for their de∣se•…•…uings, nor the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 or the martyres them selues, to •…•…e honored with spirituall worship: Then will •…•…s make S. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Cyril, and other godly fathers to be Arians and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 also.

〈1 line〉〈1 line〉,(sayth S.* 1.709 Aug.) Let not the worship of dead men, be religion to vs. For if they haue liued well▪ they are not so to be accompted, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 they would seeke such 〈◊〉〈◊〉 but they woulde haue 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 who 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vs▪ they reioyce that we are made) 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉〈◊〉. They are* 1.710 therfore to be honored for imitation, they are not to be wor∣shipped for religion. 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉, you 〈◊〉〈◊〉 worship them for religion, dedicate temple•…•… to them, offer 〈◊〉〈◊〉,

knéele, pray vnto them, and make these great poyntes of* 1.711 religion. The angell of God in no case woulde suffer any suche kinde of worship to be done vnto him, but for•…•…ad S. Iohn to do it. Peter would not suffer Cornelius, nor Paule and Barna•…•…as the Lyaconi•…•…s this to worship thē. Which if they refused beeing alme, thinke ye they desire you to worship them béeing dead? in deede so do your popish saincts.

Francis the author of the begging Friers, as your legend* 1.712 telleth, releysed on a 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and laug•…•…ed greatly, and beeing demaunded the cause of his laugh•…•…er, he answered, it was, bicause •…•…e should after his death be worshipped for a sainct. And in many your other saincts, ye tel •…•…s, how they appea∣red to suche or suche a Priest, F•…•…ier, Monke, or 〈◊〉〈◊〉: commaunding this or that ceremonie, church, prayer, feast, or holyday, to be made in their honor. This did not the true saincts and good angels of God require, nor the Churche of God yéelde vnto them: as sayth S. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉* 1.713 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 do we builde Churches to them, for they would not so be ho∣nored of vs. But as Cyrill sayth, Sanctos martyr•…•…s 〈◊〉〈◊〉* 1.714 〈◊〉〈◊〉. VVe neither call the holy martyrs, Gods, no•…•… yet vse we to worship them. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 rather we prayse them with high•…•… honours, that they haue stoutly foughte 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the sin∣ceritie of the •…•…aythe, in so muched at they 〈◊〉〈◊〉 their owne life, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of death 〈◊〉〈◊〉, they preuayled in great daungers, and were of suche strengthe, that they woulde rayse vp, as it were, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of their life. And therefore it is not vnworthy, yea rather it is also nec•…•…ssarie, to honour them with perpetual pray∣ses, which are glorious by so noble dee•…•…es.

As for other kinde than this, of prays•…•…ng them for their vertues, Cyril 〈◊〉〈◊〉 none to the Christians, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sayth▪* 1.715 To worshippe dead 〈◊〉〈◊〉 otherwise▪ is the propertie of hea∣then 〈◊〉〈◊〉.

Nowe where ye measure 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and saincts by mira∣cles, S. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sayth, 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉

fieri Christianum, non 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sanctum. &c. It is possible* 1.716 that a Christian by signes and vvonders may be made fa∣mous, but he can not be made a Saincte by them, if he vse intemperat and rough 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ (Such an one as your Chro∣nicles write that Augustine the Italian was, which came hither from 〈◊〉〈◊〉, nothing like this S. Augustine of Af∣frike: suche an other proude and sharpe sainct, as was you•…•… S. Thomas 〈◊〉〈◊〉, of wh•…•…se shrine and miracles your legendes babble muche.) Temperatis 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ &c. say the S. Augustine, but by temperate and softe demeanour▪ we beleeue that a man may well be made bothe a saincte, and perfecte, and a man of God, yea 〈◊〉〈◊〉 without the efficacie of miracles. And so sayth Cyrill on S. Iohn the Baptist,* 1.717 in that he wrought no myracles: 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in aliquo de∣rogat sanctitate 〈◊〉〈◊〉. &c. Neither doth this in any pointe de∣rogate* 1.718 from his holynesse▪ than 〈◊〉〈◊〉 there 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not a greater, as our Sauiour dothe 〈◊〉〈◊〉. For to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 my∣racles addeth no holynesse or 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to a man, si•…•…he it serueth aswell for the ill and reprobate, as the Lorde wit nesseth: haue not we (sayd the Hypocrites) O Lorde, caste* 1.719 out diuels in thy name? And therefore sayth Chrisostome* 1.720 to suche as in his 〈◊〉〈◊〉 required myracles, and asked why they had not myracles, so well 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the olde time, Si fide∣lis e•…•…. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. If 〈◊〉〈◊〉 arte faythfull, as thou oughtest to be, if thou louest Chryst▪ as he oughte to be loued, thou needest no myracles, for myracles are giuen to those that are vnbe∣leeuers. It is a 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉. M. Stap. that your Churche is an vnbelée•…•…ing Churche, since it so vaunteth of myracles, and that of such myracles, as either are plaine* 1.721 illusions of wicked spirit•…•…s, working, strongly in the chil∣dren of vnbelee•…•…e, to de•…•…ayne them still in errour: or else are nothing but ma•…•…yfest forge•…•…ies, and iugglings, suche in very déede as the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 the christians then withall.

But that your 〈◊〉〈◊〉 are not s•…•…aundered there with

now, I report me to those your Images that could sweate,* 1.722 roll their eyes▪ moue their handes, turne rounde aboute, sense the Church, walke vp and downe the aultare, speake, wéepe, laugh, frowne, and do) many other pretie miraculous knackes. Of which 〈◊〉〈◊〉, all the worlde now seeth the marueytous legerdemaine, the best of your s•…•…rt, are either forced with shame, to confesse the abuses, or else to •…•…est out the matter with scoffes, as sir Thomas Moo•…•…in in his booke of pilgrimages and myracles doth. But none durst crake of them so impudently as doe you, comparing your false my∣racles, to the auncient true miracles, calling vs Arians and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 a•…•… though we denyed those, when we onely de∣nie yours, at the which if not the Deuill himselfe, yet his ministers sate, if not at saintestombes, yet at your Zoola∣trous shrines, to illude, yea to robbe and spoyle the simple people, to derke your gorgious shrines and Images, but chiefly to enriche your •…•…es.

But as Christ come sayth, Martyres non gaudent. &c.* 1.723 The Martyres reioyce not when they are honoured with that money▪ for which the poore doe weepe. VVhat vertue of iu∣stice is that to rewarde the deade and spoyle the liuing? &c. what maner of men then be they, that spoyle men, and make buyldings of 〈◊〉〈◊〉? What woulde Chrysostome haue sayde, had he séene with what rapine•…•… your Popishe shrines were decked nothing like the reuerēt tombes of those holy Martyrs, which yet they worshipped not, nor the Martyrs in thē, what true myracles 〈◊〉〈◊〉 were wrought at them▪ •…•…nd therefore Chrysostome wa•…•…th, Ne a•…•…endas cin•…•…res* 1.724 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 of the •…•…es bodies, nor the imbe•…•… of the fl•…•… reliques, and all their bones, which in time 〈◊〉〈◊〉 cōsumed, but open the eyes of thy sayth, and see the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 with 〈◊〉〈◊〉 power.

And in such sort sayth saint Augustine▪ Honoramus sanè* 1.725 memorias martyrum tan{que} sanctorum ho•…•… Des. VVe ho∣nour in d•…•…ede the memorie of the martyrs▪ as the holy men

of God: Not (as he sayth afterwarde) as the heathen doe,* 1.726 that to their Gods buy•…•…de Churches, and erect aultars, or∣deyne Priestes, and make sacrifices. Nos autem. &c. But wee (sayth he) doe not buy•…•…de Churches to our Martyrs, as though they were Gods, but make memories of them, as deade men whose soules do liue with God, neyther doe we erect altars there, whereon we might sacrifice to Martyrs, but we offer Sa∣crifice to the one God, both of the Martyrs, and of vs. At the which Sacrifice the men of god which in the acknowledging of him, haue ouercome the worlde, are in their place and order named, but not of the Priest that sacrificeth, although he sacrifice in the memorie of them, bicause he is Gods Priest, not theirs. But the sacrifice is the bodie of Christ, which is not offered to them, bicause they are this same bodie. Which saying of Saint Augustine, as it con∣foundeth your grosse opinion of this spirituall sacrifice that next ye lay to our charge: (for he sayth the sacrifice is that bodie of Christ, the which they them selues be also, that is, the mysticall bodie, and not his naturall bodie) so it sheweth what a difference betweene those olde tombes of true Mar∣tyrs, and your Saints shrines there is.

You builded and dedicated Churches to them, so did not* 1.727 they. Your schooemen say they haue numina, and therefore ought to be worshipped, so did not they. You erected altars to them, so did not they. You sacrificed to thē, so did not they. You ordeyned Priestes vnto them, and besides Priestes, you instituted Monkes, Nunnes, Friers and Chanons to them, so did not they. You worshipped them with diuine ho∣nour, so did not they: and yet ye call vs by the name of those Heretikes, that reiected theyr Martyrs miracles and me∣mories, bicause we reiect your illusions and Idolatries.

Now as you thus meruelously slaunder vs, so are yée* 1.728 eyther deceyued your selfe, or would deceyue others vnder Saint Ambrose name, where as the booke ye cite (whiche also Alfonsus standeth much vpon) is none of Ambrose his workes, but some fayned forgers in his name, as Erasmus

very well doth proue.

If ye will know the very minde of S. Amb. turne to his commentarie on the first to the Rom. where he saith: quanta agritudo, &c. VVhat a great griefe, what a great folly is it, for those to call themselues wise men, to their owne damnation, among whom the deade can do more than the liuing, and the deade are of better power than those that are aliue, These are Ambrose his owne wordes making flatly agaynst you. But whosoeuer those Sermons be that ye quote, they touch not vs, as is declared. We yelde to the olde Martyrs, so much as these fathers require. We only denie to yours, that you require, and woulde extort, to enriche your selues, and delude the people, neyther sparing to belie vs, nor the fathers, and face vs out with false cardes in their names.

But letting go your forgeries of the fathers, what say ye once againe to Frier Ferus herein? Uulgus hominum. &c. The common people (sayth hée) esteemeth Saintes by myracles and counteth him the greater, that hath done more myracles, but they erre manifestly that so iudge: myracles are in deede (to vse Saint Paules wordes) the operation of great workes, the gift of the holy ghost. But hereon they are not onely esteemed Saints, else the blessed virgin & Iohn Baptist were of all saints the least, that are read to haue wrought no myracle. VVe may not therefore esteeme Saintes hereupon.* 1.729 Moreouer, oftentimes myracles are giuen to the euill, for many shall say in that day, Lorde, Lorde, haue wee not cast out Deuilles in thy name, and I shall say to them, I haue not knowne you, &c. And thus will Christe say of your my∣racles, master Stapleton, and therefore let him be a Bo∣gomile with you also.

Concerning Berengarius, bicause your slaunder both of him* 1.730 and vs, in the controuersie of the sacrament, is confuted by the learned trauayles of those, that fully haue answered all your cauillations therin: I wil now passe it ouer, as vn wor∣thie further answere. Only I bid you looke to it your selues,

that charge him with heresie: least y^t re•…•…nfation that your* 1.731 Pope cōpelled him to make, sauer not (as euen your glosse theron doth warne) of a greater heresie than you lay to him.

Where ye aske vs what we say to the Paulicians, that* 1.732 sayde, these wordes of Christe, Take ea•…•…e this is my body, are not to be vnderstanded of his bodie, or the bread & wine vsed at the celebration of our Lords maundie, but of the holy scriptures, which the Priest should take at Christes handes, and deliuer and distribute to the people.

I answere, let the truth of this obiection to vs, be a mea∣sure, on Gods name, to all the rest: and as men finde you true or false herein, so estéeme you in the other. For my part, I scarce can tell what wordes I should vse vnto you, vnlesse ye will giue me leaue to vse your owne, that except ye had a face harder than any horne, M. St. yea harder than any yron staple, except the deuill at your backe prompted lyes vnto you (for these be your owne termes) you woulde neuer for very shame charge vs herewith. Your selfe knowe (saue that ye are hyred as Balaam was, to speake cursed slaunders contrary to your conscience) that we hold no such opinion: but affirme euen the •…•…at contrary. That those words of Christ, take eate this is my bodie, are to be vnderstanded both of his bodie, and of the bread and wine also. Both which you say the Paulicians denie, and we confesse and beleue both. Only,* 1.733 the question on the former part betwene you and vs, is of the maner of the bodies presence, which we with y^e fathers, say is sacramitall & spiritual: & you say, with y^e Capernaits, is natural & carnal. As for y^e other part, of the bread & wine, you come a great deale nearer the Paulicians than we. The Paulicians (say you) did say, these wordes of Christ, take, eat, this is* 1.734 my body, are not to be vnderstāded of bread & wine, And you say also these words are not to be vnderstanded of bread and wine, for there is no bread & wine there to vnderstand thē vpō. Thus herein you & the Pauliciās agrée togither. But we say y^e con∣trary to you both, they are vnderstanded both of bread and wine.

And so Christ plainly speaketh, calling further the wine,* 1.735 (to be vnderstoode the better, contrary to you and the Pau∣licians) the fruite of the Grape, and the bread which we breake,* 1.736 sayth Saint Paule, not the fleshe which we do •…•…asticare, as you say, champe and chawe it, gnashing the bones, and the bloud running about the teeth, as ye caused Berengarius to confesse. This is a grosser Heresie than that of the Pau∣licians, and yet are you nearer the Paulicians to than we.* 1.737

But what should make you obiect this heresie to vs? there is no cause, that I can see, except ye enuie at this, that at the ministration of the Sacrament, the holy scriptures are read, that the people may vnderstande the true institution of it, and celebrate the Lordes death till he come. And that in your sacrament of the altar (as ye call it) there is no holye scriptures read, that the people may vnderstande, but onely* 1.738 the wordes are mumbled vp to your selues, that the people neither heare nor know them. And if you say yet, be ye not like the Paulicians herein: it may well be, for ye be rather like Magicians, murmuring vp a charme, than like Pauli∣cians, or any bodie else I know.

Where next ye demaunde what we say to Claudius and* 1.739 Vigilantius, that denyed the inuocation of Saints, the blessed Re∣liques, and the vse of lightes, and other ceremonies in the Church.

First, to Claudius I aunswere, that I can say no more* 1.740 than Alphonsus doth. For he reckoneth vp one Claudius, and nameth another Iuo Carnotensis, cited out of Thomas Walden, which Iuo he confesseth he had not séene. You father it on an other called Ionas, whome also I confesse, I haue not séene, nor am greatly curious to searche him out. For, if he denied those thinges, or any of them, no other∣wise than we do, it will be hard for you to proue him there∣fore an Heretike. As for Uigilantius opinions on these things, are manifest in Saint Hieroms inuectiues, and con∣teyne no Heresie that I can perceyue. He misliked greatly and spoke against diuerse abuses, betweene whom and saint

Hierome thereaboutes, fell out foule language. Insomuch that diuerse misliked Saint Hi•…•…romes lacke of modestie. But letting him chide with his aduersarie, let vs go to the matter. And first for inuocation.

The scripture acknowledgeth no kind of inuocation but* 1.741 only of God: Laudabilem inuocabo dominum. &c. I will make (sayth Dauid) inuocation on the Lorde that is to be pray•…•…ed, and I shall be safe from mine enimies, In tribulatione mea in∣u•…•…cabo dominum, & ad deum meum cla•…•…abo. &c. In my trouble I will make inuocation vpon the Lord, and I will crie vnto my God. Inuocabit is me & •…•…iuetis, saith god, Call vpon me and ye shall liue, The Lorde is riche to all that call vpon him, sayth S. Paule. VVho so euer calleth on the name of the Lord shall be saued. Thus sayth the scripture all ouer, for the inuocation of God. As for any other inuocation, the Scripture ad∣mitteth* 1.742 none, no not of the holy Patriarkes. Tu enim pater noster, & Abrah•…•…m 〈◊〉〈◊〉 nos. &c. For thou art our father* 1.743 (sayth the Prophete Esay) as for Abraham knewe not vs, and Israell is ignorant of vs, thou God art our father and redeemer. No doubt Abraham was, and is a•…•… good a Saint, and much bet∣ter, than many in your Popes Calender (of whome some are doubted to be Deuil•…•… in hell, that are inuocated for Saints in heauen) yea Abraham is called Pater omnium cr•…•…∣dentium, The father of all the faythfull, and yet in this poynt of inuocation, Abraham is no father at all, Tu deus pater no∣ster,* 1.744 onely God is our father, Abraham is not inuocated, yea, he is by name excepted, and that as ignorant of vs▪ If Abra∣ham then the father of the Saints, haue no priuelege, yea léese his priuelege of fatherhoode in this behalfe of inuocati∣on: what shall we thinke of all the children of Abraham, the* 1.745 Saints of God that haue succéeded him, that they are to be inuocated? or not rather conclude thereon, if inuocation be not to be made to Abraham, then inuocation is to be made to no Saint, but all and onely vnto God. And the reason is this: God is a iealous God of his glorie, and will not com∣municate

any part thereof with any other. But the greatest glory that we can giue to God, is in our trouble to inuocate him. Call vpon me in the day of trouble, and I wil heare thee,* 1.746 and thou shalt glorifie me, sayth God.

The schoolemen confesse that inuocation est virtus latriae,* 1.747 is the vertue of diuine honour. Inuocation is therefore to bée made to none but God. And if you knew or weighed M. St. howe great a thing Inuocation were, ye woulde neuer for* 1.748 feare of God, or shame of your selfe, ascribe it to anye crea∣ture. I nuocas deum (sayth S. Aug.) quando in te vocas deum. Hoc est enim inuocare, illum in t•…•… vocare, quodam modo eum in* 1.749 domum cordis tui inuitare. Thou inuocatest god, or callest vp∣on God, when thou callest God vpon thee, for this it is to in∣uocate, to call him into thee, as it were to inuite him into the* 1.750 house of thy heart: but none ought to dwell in our hearts be∣sides God, none can search the heart & reynes but only god, our hearts ought to be onely Gods seat, for we are the tem∣ple of none but of God: inuocation therfore (being the sacri∣fice of the heart, Sacrificium deo spiritus tribulatus & cor con∣tritum.* 1.751 &c. A troubled spirit is a sacrifice to God, neither will he dispise a bruised heart) ought to be ascribed to none but to god, y^t saith, Praebe fili mi cor tuū mihi, my son yeld me thy heart.* 1.752

Moreouer as Chrisostome sayth, cum oramus deo colloqui∣mur,* 1.753 VVhen we pray, we speake to God. And so S. Aug. Ora∣tio tua locutio est ad d•…•…ū, Thy prayer is a speaking with God.* 1.754 Isidorus likewise, cum oramus, ipsi cum deo l•…•…quimur. VVhen we pray, we our selues do speake with god. And Cassiodorus. Cum deo loquitur, &c. Prayer speaketh to God, talketh with the iudge. &c. To conclude, al the doctors, yea the schoolemen thēselues, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 praier to be directed only to god. oratio (saith* 1.755 Hugo) est piae mētis & humilis ad deū conuersio, fide. spe, & cha∣ritate subnixa. Praier is the conuersion of a godly & humble mind to god, grounded on faith, hope and charitie. And in the name of* 1.756 thē all, Summa Angelica sayth, accipitur proprie oratio. &c. Praier taken properly is the ascending of our minde to god. &c. and

so taken, it is diuersly defined. Vt patet per Ho. in summa ti. de poenis. & lo. An. in cle. vnica de rel•…•…▪ & ve. san. VVhervpon after Aug. in lib. de verbis domini: Praier is a certaine petition: And in an other place, prayer is a godly affection of the mind directed to god. &c. Or according to Damasus, li. 23. prayer is the mounting vp of the mind to god. &c. Or according to Raymunde, Praier is an hea∣ping vp of words, tending to God, to obteyne somwhat. &c. By all which sayings, appeareth the definition of praier, that except it be made to God, it is no true praier. But inuocation is praier. Ergo, inuocation must be made to God, which except it be, it is no true praier. Inuocatiō therfore vnto saints, an∣gels, or any creature besides God, is neither true nor godly.

To the confirmation whereof, Christ teaching his disci∣ples* 1.757 to pray directeth them onely to God, saying. Our father which art in heauen. &c. which prayer ought to be the greūd and paterne of all prayer, to pray to him whome we may call our father whiche art in heauen, whiche terme is com∣petent to none but God. As Christe sayde, ye haue but one father. The aungels call themselues our fellowe ser∣uants, not our father. The Saintes may be called our bre∣thren, not our father. The blessed Uirgin, our sister, not our father, Yea though ye should call hir our mother (wher∣in ye should derogate from the Church of Christ) or our La∣die (as without any warrant of y^• scripture ye do salute hir, and with diuerse other names inuocate hir) yet syth by no meanes ye can call hir our father, you ought not therefore to inuocate or pray vnto hir, or to any angell, saint or crea∣ture, but only pray to god, that only is our heauenly father.* 1.758

Saint Augustine and all the doctor•…•… agrée, that the foun∣taine of inuocation is faith, according to the scripture, Quo∣modo inuocabun•…•… in quem non crediderunt? Howe can they make inuocation to any vpon whom they haue not beleued? By which rule, if ye admitte inuocation to saints, we must then beleue on saints: but we must beleue on none but god, we must there•…•…ore inuocate none but God.

Neyther here can ye slippe the coller with your stely dis∣tinction,* 1.759 of calling for helpe, and calling for intercession, al∣leaging that ye pray to Saints, as but to intercessors, me∣diators, or spokesmen for you, saying only to them, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 pro nobis, pray for vs, in•…•…ercede pro nobu, go betweene vs and God: But to God ye say, Miserere nostrs, •…•…a nobis, 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 pro∣tege nos, liber a nos. Haue mercie vpon vs, giue vnto vs, helpe vs, defende vs, deliuer vs, &c: For howsoeuer ye make your prai∣ers, ye graunt ye inuocate, which by the nature of prayer, by the forme prescribed of Christ, by the beliefe to be affied on him to whome soeuer ye pray, sheweth still your pray∣ers to be Idolatrous.

In deede this shift is a stale shift, but as S. Ambrose cal∣leth it, it is a wretched shift. Solent misera vti excusation•…•… &c. They are woont (sayth he) to vse a wretched excuse: saying, that* 1.760 euen as we come to a King by his noble men, so through righteous men we may haue accesse to God. Go to, is there any so madde, and so forgetfull of his health, that he will ascribe the honour of the King vnto the noble man? when if any man shall bee founde to haue so much as medled herein, they haue worthily bene condem∣ned* 1.761 for traytours. And yet these men thinke not them guiltie, which giue to a creature the honour of Gods name, and forsaking the Lorde, worship their fellowe seruants: as though the matter were the more, bicause they serued God. For we come to the king through his tribunes and noble men, for this cause, euen bicause the King is a man, and he knoweth not to whom he ought to com∣mit the rule of the common weale. But to come vnto God, from whome nothing is hid, (for he knoweth the merites of all men) we haue no neede to fee any intreater to speake for vs, but wee haue neede of a deuout minde. For wheresoeuer any such intreater shall haue spoken for vs, God will giue no aunswere at all. What can be playner spoken than this master Stapleton, against the inuocation of Saintes, admitting them no further, than e∣uen as intercessours? Wherein he not only confuteth your distinction as a wretched shift of helps, and intercession, ta∣keth

away your common similitude, and sheweth that in∣tercession of any man, be he neuer so iust, not onely dothe vs no good at all, but also hindreth the matter, offen∣deth and abaseth God, and maketh all those playne tray∣tors to God, that vse it. But to be euen with him, M. St. for calling you traytors, call you him agayne heretike, call him a Vigilant an for it.

But then must ye make Chrisostome a Uigilantian with him, that is euen as earnest agaynst this shifte of interces∣sion* 1.762 as he For writing vpon the womā of Canaan, calling vpon Christ for hir daughters health, he •…•…arth: 〈◊〉〈◊〉 me•…•…. &c. Haue mercy vpon me: Beholde the phisosophical minde of the woman, saying, haue mercy vpon me. I haue not (sayth she)* 1.763 a conscience of good workes, nor a trust to godly lyfe, to mercy I flee, to the calme hauen of those that sinne, to mercy I flee, where iudgement ceasseth, where vnspeakable saluation is. Tell me, O thou woman: how art thou so bolde, sithe thou arte a sinner and wicked, to come vnto God? I know, sayth she, what I will do. Be∣hold the womans wisdome, she requireth not Iames, she besecheth not Iohn, she goeth not to Peter, nor regardeth the company of the Apostles. She sought not a mediator, but in place of all them, she tooke repentance to be hir companion, which repentance filled the roome of an Aduocate, and so she went vnto the chiefe foun∣tayne. For this cause (sayth she) he came downe from heauen, for this cause he was incarnate, and made man, and I dare speake vnto him. Aboue in the heauens, the Cherubins dread him, the Seraphins feare him, and heere beneath, euen a common woman sayth vnto him, haue mercy vpon me. A very bare saying, but conteyning euen the mightinesse of saluation, haue mercy vpon me. For thys (sayth she) thou camest, for this cause thou took est fleshe, for thys cause thou wast made euen that which I am. O wonderfull matter, aboue is trembling, beneath is confidence, haue mercy vpon me. I haue no neede of a mediatour, haue mercy vpon me. VVhat hast thou neede of? mercie I seeke, sayth she, &c. haue mercie vpon me. If my daughter were dead, she shoulde not suffer such things,

for then vvould I haue deliuered hir bodie into the bosome of the earth, and in processe of time, I should haue forgot∣ten these euilles, and my griefe vvoulde haue paused▪ &c. Marke the philosophie of the woman, behold hir noble cou∣rage, she went not to soothsayers, shee called not wise men, she sought not charms to tie about hir, she fetched not those •…•…orceresse women, that vse to prouoke Diuels, and augment the •…•…ore vvith theyr enchauntmentes. Shee lette go all suche falsehoodes of the Diuell: shee contemned all purgings, and shee came vnto the healthefull porte of oure soules. &c. The iudge commeth to thee, flee thou to God, the Iudge doth call for thee, doe thou inuocate God, whiche is on thy syde. Is he farre from thee, that thou shouldest goe to any place for him? God is not included in place, but he is always euen present at hand: & euen he that is not shut vp in place, is holden yet by faith. For if thou wilt enquire a man, and de∣maund what he doth, thou shalt heare, he sleepeth, or he is not at leysure▪ or in deede euen his seruant vvill disdayne to answere thee. But vnto God there is no nede of any of these things. But wheresoeuer thou shalt be, or wheresoeuer thou shalt inuocate him, he hereth thee: ther nedes no porter, ther needes no mediatour, there needes no seruant: but say thou, Haue mercie vpon me, and by and by God will be present, yea whyle thou yet speakest he sayeth, here I am. &c. Let vs followe then this woman of Canan•…•…e.

And like wise on the same storie in an other place, Ma∣uult* 1.764 〈◊〉〈◊〉 nostram. &c. God had leauer haue our own prayer which are guiltie, than the prayer of other for vs. And again, Non est opu•…•… pa•…•…ronis apud dei•…•…. &c. There is no neede of pa∣trons* 1.765 before God, nor nede of gadding vp and down to flat∣ter other. But although thou art alone, and haste no patrone, and prayest by thy selfe, yet shalt thou certainly obtain thy request: for God doth not so easily graunt, when other pray for vs, as when our selues do pray, yea though we be repleni∣shed* 1.766 with many euils. And to conclude he saith, Haecigitur

scientes. &c. Knowing therfore these thinges, let vs euermore flee to God, who is both willing and able to deliuer vs of oure grieues. But as for men, if at any tyme we shoulde entreate them, it beho∣ueth first to meete with the porters, to moue their parasites and iesters, and oftentymes to goe along way about: but in God there is no suche matter, he is intreated without mediator, without mo∣ney, without cost he graunteth our prayers.

Now although we sée by the Scripture, and by these fa∣thers, being yet therfore no Heretikes) that we néede not, nor oughte to seeke so muche as any intercessoures (by* 1.767 whiche terme ye woulde shifte off all the matter, saying ye make them no helpers, but intercessors only:) yet herein your shifte is not so miserable, as your lie is manifest. You inuocated Saintes as healpers, yea and Sauioures also. Your Primers can witnesse againste you, youre Antipho∣naes, your Grayles, your Massebookes, Hyu•…•…als, Legen∣des, Portasses. &c.

Haue ye forgotten this hymne to the blessed virgine Ma∣rie?* 1.768 Virgo singularis inter omnes mitis, nos culpa solutos 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sac et castos, vitā pr•…•…fta purā, iter para tutū, vt videntes Iesum, semper collaetemur. O thou virgin singular among also meke: make vs loose from sinne, make vs meeke and chast: giue vs a pure lyfe and make our iourney safe: that beholding Iesus, we may alwayes ioy. Do ye not pray in your primer to S. Iohn and the vir∣gin* 1.769 Mary. Te etiam inuoco. &c. I inuocate thee also with Marie the mother of the same our sauiour, that thou wouldest vouchsaf∣to giue me thy helpe with hir, O you two precious stones, O hea∣uenly Marye, O Iohn, O you two lightes from God, shining be∣fore God, with your rayes, driue away the cloudes of my sinnes? Doe ye not there pray to S. Christofer? O thou martyr Chri∣stofer with the godlie honor of our Sauiour, make thou vs in mind to deserue the loue of God, Christ hath promised, that what thou askest thou haste obtained, giue vnto the sory people those things, that at thy death thou askedst, giue thou comfort to vs, and take a∣way the grief of our mynde, make thou the accompt of the iudge

to be milde to all men? Pray ye not to S. George on horse∣backe: O George the noble martyr, prayse and glory becom∣meth thee, &c. we beseeche thee with the bottome of our hart, that our sinnes being washed away, we may be ioyned with al the faith∣full citizens of heauen? Pray ye not to the. 11000. virgins: O you eleuen thousande maidens, Lilies of glorious virginitie, and Roses of martyrdome, defende you me in my life, giuing to me your helpe, and in my death shew your selues vnto me, in bringing euerlasting comforte? Do ye not pray to the virgin Mary: Exaudi me, salua me, custodi me, Heare me, saue me, keepe me? Do not ye pray to the Apostles, O blessed Apostles of God, loose me from my sinnes, defende me from the paynes of hell, and deliuer me from the power of darknesse, and bring me to the euer∣lasting kingdome Do ye not pray to all the virgins, I beseech you all holy virgins helpe me, that I may haue of hart good will, of body health, humilitie, chastitie, and after the course of this lyfe, the felowshippe of euerlasting blisse.

Do ye not pray to all the hée saincts and she saincts, euen where ye mention their intercession: O all you hee and shee sainctes of God, I beseeche you, and make supplication to you, suc∣cour me, haue mercy vpon me mercifully, and pray for me instant∣ly, that by your intercession, a pure conscience, a compuncti∣on of harte, and a laudable consummation of euerlasting lyfe, may be giuen me of God, that throughe your merites I may come to the countrey of euerlasting blisse? Dyd ye neuer say this prayer in your Primer: O moste noble, moste ex∣cellent, and euer glorious Virgin, &c. O Lady my Queene, and Lady of all creatures, whiche forsakest none, dyspysest none, nor leauest anye desolate, that wyth a good and pure hearte, humbly and deuoutly runneth to thee: despise me not for my moste greeuous sinnes, forsake me not for myne innu∣merable iniquities, nor for the hardnesse and vnclennesse of my* 1.770 harte caste me not away, from the face of thy grace and loue, but for thy moste greate mercie, and moste sweete pitie heare mee, putting firme confidence in thy mercy, and succour mee

most holy and most glorious virgin Marie in all my tribula∣tions, griefes and necessities, and also giue me councell and helpe in all my woorkes, and deliuer mee from all mine eni∣mies, visible and inuisible, giue me vertue & strength agaynst the temptations and deuises of the worlde, the fleshe, and the deuill. &c. And in my last dayes be vnto me my helper, and comforter, and deliuer my soule, and the soule of my Fa∣ther* 1.771 and of my mother, of my brothers and my sisters, of my parentes, my friendes, and my ben•…•…factours, and of all faith∣full both liuing and dead, from the mist of eternall death, he helping thee whom thou hast borne, Iesus Christ thy sonne.

Prayed ye not to S. Erasmus, Receyue me S. Erasmus, into thy holy fayth and grace, and conserue me from all euill by these eight dayes, and giue vnto me, that I may passe them ouer with a right fayth, and with all prosperitie vnto the ende of my life, and that ought of mine enimies will, preuaile not agaynst me, to thee, to thy prayse and honour, to me, to my consolation and grace, to thee S. Erasmus I doe commende* 1.772 my body and my soule, & all that are ioyned vnto •…•…in con∣fession, and prayer, or consanguinitie, and all my doi•…•… that I may liue with all prosperitie, peace and ioy now and for euer.

Ye haue in the Primer, a notable prayer to the blessed virgin, Aue domina sancta Maria &c. Haile Lady S. Marie, mother of God, Queene of heauen, port of Paradise, Ladie of the world, eternall light, Empresse of hell. &c. Ouer the head of this prayer, is set in red letters: Quicun{que} orationē sequē∣tem* 1.773 deuotè dixerit, promeretur quadraginta millia annorum in∣dulgentiarum, & per tot dies videbit beatam virginem ante diē exitus sui, per quot annos continuauerit: VVhosoeuer sayth this prayer following deuoutly, shall haue fortie thousand yeares of pardon, and for so many dayes as he hath continued yeres, he shall see the blessed virgin before the day of his departure. Likewise ouer the head of the prayer to the virgin Marie, called Aue rosa sine spi•…•…is. &c. Haile rose without thornes. &c. is printed in red letters in English: This prayer shewed our

Ladie to a deuoute person, saying, that this golden prayer is* 1.774 the most swetest and acceptablest to me. And in hir appea∣ring she had this salutation and prayer written with let∣ters of gold in hir brest.

How say ye to these prayers & inuacatiōs M. St. is here nothing but Ora pro nobis? do they make saints only inter∣cessours as ye now would beare the simple in hande, the prayers to them were nothing els but to desire them to be our intercessours? is this the comming betwene vs & God, & not rather the placing them in Gods seat? what left they out that they fully ascribed not vnto them▪ could they do any greater blasphemie to God and defacing to his Saints than this? but perhaps ye wil say, this was done in the time of too grosse ignorance and idolatrie. Now things are more opened, & the people pray not after so grosse a māner. Who were they M. St. that taught them thus to pray, was it we or you? whose plackardes & pardons of sinnes are pre∣fixed to entise & tickle the people to say these prayers, ours or yours? Ha M. St. for shame yet at the length blushe at the reading of them. All godly will tremble with horrour, to heare and sée how they blasphemed God vnwittingly, being deceiued by such blinde leaders of the blinde, the thick rymine of whose ignorance is not yet taken away frō the eies of a great many. I promise you M. St. this Primer (since I tooke in hande to answere you) I sounde deuoutly occupied in the Church, of a priuy friend of yours, & I dare say, had you séene it in his hands, ye would not haue taken it from him, but haue commended his Idolatrie. And shall we thinke that in your late time of Quéene Maries raigne your selfe vsed any better Primer?

Haue ye not in your English & Latine primer, printed* 1.775 An. Dom. 1557. by the assignes of Iohn Waylande, (all o∣ther primers forbidden to be printed) in your Mattins to the virgin Marie: Thou art the dore of the heauenly king. And the gate of life replenishing. Since a virgin life doth

bring, ye redeemed people reioyse and sing? And againe, O gloriouse mother &c. we besech thee of thy pitie, to haue vs in remembrance, and to make meanes for vs vnto Christ, that we being supported by thy help, may deserue to obtaine the kingdome of heauen. Here•…•…e pretende hir to be but a meane maker, & yet ye ascribe supporting and helpe of sal∣uation to hir, and to your selues most arrogantly deserte of heauen. Do ye not pray to S. Michael. O Archangel Mi∣chael come for to succour the people of God, and I shall giue thee prayse in the presence of Angels: Versicle: In thy holy temple I shall to thee pray: Answere: And thy blessed name confesse alway: and yet who knoweth not, that Dauid ascri∣beth those wordes onely to God?

Do ye not say in the prime: Wee do praise thee, and do pray thee, mother of God most mercifull: that thou entend, vs to defend, from death that is most sorowfull. In the third howre. The dolorouse passion of Gods swete mother, bring* 1.776 vs to the blisse of almightie God the father. What doctrine call ye this M. St. that omitting the passion of Christ we be saued by the passion of the virgin Marie? In the 6. howre. O virgin Mary most gracious, O mother of mercie incompa∣rable, from our enimie defend thou vs, and in the houre of death be fauorable. And in the ninth houre, euen in a pray∣er to Christ: That he would giue all those that remem∣ber hir compassion, prosperouse life and euerlasting glorie, for hir sake, which wordes, for hir sake, in the middle of the* 1.777 prayer are (as the principall wordes thereof) onely set out in redde letters, and all the rest in blacke. In the euensong: Hayle starre of the sea most radiant, O mother of God most glorious, a pure virgine alway perseuerant, O gate of hea∣uen most gorgious, thou wast saluted with great humilitie, when Gabriell sayd Aue Maria, establish vs in peace and trā∣quillitie, and change the name of sinfull Eua. Lose the priso∣ners from captiuitie, vnto the blinde giue sight againe, de∣liuer vs from our malignitie, to the ende we may some grace

attaine. Shew thy selfe to be a mother, so that he accept our petition, which for our sake before all other, was content to be thy Sonne. O blessed Ladie, O singuler virgin, in perfect meekenesse all other exceeding, deliuer vs from bondage of sinne, and make vs meeke and chast in liuing, make vs euer pure life to ensue, guide vs euer vppon our iourney, that we beholding the face of Iesu, may ioy with him in heauen al∣way. Item, Holie mother succour the miserable, comforte the weake sprited, giue courage to the desperate. In the com∣plene, O Mother of God we do glorifie thee, for thou ar•…•…e she that bore Christ, preserue all that glorifie thee. Item, O thou meeke mother haue mercie therefore, on wretches for whome thou haddest this paine, seing thy Sonne that vine cluster pressed sore. And from the pestilence of death eter∣nall, keepe vs, by voyding the feende infernall, and ioyne vs with them that renowned shal be, with eternall life seing the deitie. Item, Haile queene of mercie, our life, our sweetnes,* 1.778 our hope, all hayle vnto thee do we crie, which are banished children of Eua, vnto thee do we sigh, weeping and wayling in this vale of lamentation, come of therefore our patronesse, cast vppon vs those pitifull e•…•…es of thine, and after this our ba∣nishment, shewe vnto vs the blessed fruite of thy wombe Ie∣sus. Item, In the heauenly habitation, where the fruite of* 1.779 thy wombe euerlasting we may behold through thy deser∣uing in ioy without limitation. And in the prayers follow∣ing: Reioyce spouse of God most deere, for as the light of the day •…•…o cleere, commeth from the Sunne most radiant, euen so doest thou cause questionlesse, the worlde to florish in quiet∣nesse through thy grace abundant.

These were the prayers that you said your selues, and taught the people to pray, in the dayes of your late tyranny M. St. and what point of inuocation is here omitted, that ye can deuise to giue to God, that ye haue not yelded to the Saintes, correcting so little the old Primer that is a great deale worse, if worse can be? And dare that impudent face

of yours (to returne your 〈◊〉〈◊〉 termes on your selfe) still beare vs in hand ye made them but only intercessours, and all is but Ora pro nobis? I haue onely hitherto master St. set ye t•…•… learn•…•… your Primer, or rather to vnlearne it.

Ye haue a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 for the nonce of this matter, called the* 1.780 prayers and salutations of the blessed virgin: before which are 〈◊〉〈◊〉 these verse•…•…. Vnaqua{que} die, deuota mente Mariae, hac decant•…•…tur, & vita 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sequ•…•…tur. Euery day let this pray∣er be song vnto S. Marie, and you shall be saued. The first prayer is this: Exa•…•…ds. &c. O blessed queene of Heauen hear vs, & receiue our praises that singing we offer to thee, in tend to our prayer, & succor vs celebrating thy praise, reach thy hand of cōsolatiō to vs that inuocate thee, and vouchsafe* 1.781 to be present here with them that desire thee▪ &c. we cōsider the greatnesse of thy godlinesse, and to thee with sure confi∣dence do we flee, to thee we crie lifting vp our hāds from the depth of iniquitie, heare thou our prayer, and deliuer thou vs from the snares of sinnes, make thou vs beeing clensed from* 1.782 all oure sinnes, in thy praises to bee founde woorthy, purifie thou our hearts, wherin we may worthily heape vp the re∣membrāce of thee: water thou our hearts with the dew of thy sweetnesse, that the drink of bitternes which 〈◊〉〈◊〉 soup in may vanish away. Let our minds defiled with the gall of sinnes, be moistned with the streame of thy goodnes. &c. Let thy loue root in vs, and expel frō vs, the custome of vices and offen∣ces. Let it lightē our soules, and pull away the heauie multi∣tude of euils, let it mollifie our hardned harts, & let it vouch∣safe in them to make for it a worthie habitation: that thou O Ladie of heauen mayst possesse the cloysters of oure breast, and with thy holie *goddeshed* maist encōpasse them, giue* 1.783 vnto our mindes continually to thinke on those things that are pleasing to thee, & to our lips to speak those things that please thee, so that our senses and our tong in doing thee ser∣uice, may please thee: that the fleshe and spirite remaine al∣vvays vnder thy protection, to thee holie Mother of God be

prayse and glory and thankesgeuing, let the congregation of •…•…aintes glory in thee. Amen.

What a blasphemous prayer is this M. St. and yet the second and thirde passeth it. Venice &c. Come you that de∣sire the heauenly glory, and let vs praise the Empresse of hea∣uen. Let vs magnifie the most blessed Marie virgin, and giue glory vnto hir. Let vs embrace her steppes in humilitie, and poure out our humble prayers vnto hir. Let vs lift vp to hir the eies of our minde, and put firme hope in hir, for she is the* 1.784 saluation and medicine, the swete renowne and healthfull re∣fuge to them that put their trust in hir, she is the mother of mercie and godlines•…•…e, the mercifull and most godly comfor∣ter of the miserable, for she defendeth all those that serue hir, from all aduersities, and enricheth them with the crowne of glory. &c. In the third prayer: Thou our most mercifull mo∣ther, clense vs from our dayly sinnes, &c. thou a•…•…te our true* 1.785 hope and consolation, thou arte the sweete refection of our minde, thou art our saluation and medicine, heare vs thy ser∣uāts that trust in thee. What sacrifice shal we offer to thee O Ladie? with what praises can we worship thee? what thanks can we, can our basenesse, giue thee? or what honour can we do to thee, with what deuocion shal we serue thee? which by thy only chastitie hast found the entrāce of helth, &c. despi•…•…e* 1.786 not vs that put our trust in thee. VVee trust in thee, and thee our aide we inuocate, &c. In the 4. prayer. Thou with Christ possessest the imperiall honor, &c. Cast thy godly eies on vs, and search the inwarde partes of our harts, &c. In the* 1.787 fifth prayer. VVithout thee euery soule is as an vnfruitfull tree worthy to be rooted vp, and to be cast into the wasting fire. Our soule lusteth after thee thou noble mother of God when wilt thou visit it? come lady and sometimes visite thy seruants least our vertue •…•…aint, &c. Our soule is wi•…•…hered and made baren bicause we haue not deserued to haue thy grace. Come O mother come, and moysten it, that it may somtimes bring forth fruit, that it may be fruitful being bedewed with

thy grace and bring forth pleasant fruite to thee. In the. 6. prayer: VVhom God and thou the inuincible mother of God wilt vouch∣safe* 1.788 to help, they shall endure. O Ladie heare the sighes of thy ser∣uants, and hasten to help them that trust in thee. In the 7. prayer.* 1.789 Looke downe from thy high trone of heauen, where thou raignest with thy sōne, &c. Of al wretches he is most wretch, that neglecteth to get thy grace, &c. he is iust indeede and worthy the felowship of the iust, that deserueth in his seruice to please thee, he shall not be confounded in the last iudgement, when he shall see his Lady the iudges mother, and shall see thee with him iudging him. He shall* 1.790 cast his eyes on thee, and he shall not trēble, for thou wilt not forget him, &c. In all our grieues let vs runne to the loue of thee, &c. In the 8. prayer. Haile prayse of the continent, vertue and strength of the maried, mother of the fatherlesse, succour of widdowes, haile firme and vnmoueable hope of all the faithful, hayle myrth and ioy of Christians, &c. behold we cōmend body and soule to thee, yea all* 1.791 the gouernance of our whole life, we cōmende into thy holy hāds, we offer our selues to serue thee, dispise not our oblations, &c. In the. 10. prayer. Be present with vs O lady, as we trust in thee, that art the remedie of all euill, &c. that thou being our guide we may come streight to heauen.

Now M. St. is all this neither, nothing els but Ora pro nobis? well, I could yet bring more, & more horrible stuffe thā this. Yea it were infinite & to tedious, to rake out those most blasph•…•…mous prayers, that all your other bookes haue. Your self could neuer abide the reading for shame, nor the godly susteyne y^• hearing for horrour, to see God so blasphe∣med, & spoiled of al his honor, of y^t which he is a ielouse God & wil cōmunicate no part therof to other. Only (to swéeten your lips withal) ye shal heare a few stories out of your le∣gende,* 1.792 & other your holy bookes, what ye ascribe to saints.

And first to begin euen at the intercession that ye say the Saints make for vs, chiefly the virgine Marie, whom ye make farre more mercifull than Christ. To proue this, ye* 1.793 tell vs: That a certaine wicked sinner going about his sinne,

by the way (as his manner was to salute hir Image with an* 1.794 Aue) beholding the Image of the virgin, and hir sonne in hir armes, he saw that the bloud distilled from the childe, as it did from his woundes on the Crosse. VVhich when he saw, being astonied thereat he said: O ladie who hath done this?* 1.795 to whome the virgin answered. Thou and such sinners do Crucifie my Sonne againe. And she would haue wiped and stanched the bloud, but she could not. To whom ({quod} the sin∣ner) O mother of mercie make intercession for me. She an∣swered to him, You sinners call mee the mother of mercie, & ye make me the mother of miserie and sorow. And he said, not so most godly ladie▪ but remember that thou art the ad∣uocate* 1.796 of sinners, and make intercession for me. And the mo∣ther said: O most godly sonne, for the loue of me be merciful to this sinner. And hir sonne said to hir: No mother, nor thou oughtest to be grieued in that I heare thee not. For I prayed once my father, if it were possible to saue mākind some other way, and take from me the cup of my passion, and he would not heare me. And she sayd, O my son, remember that I che∣rished thee with motherly loue, and fed thee with my papps, forgiue then this sinner. O mother ({quod} the sonne) I will shew that by good right I am not bound to heare thee. VVe plead not right ({quod} the mother) but flie to mercie, and therefore for thy mercies sake, be mercifull to this sinner. To whom hir sonne said, I prayde my father twice, that if it were possible the cup should parte from me, and he heard me not. To whom his mother answered: O my sonne, remember my tra∣uailes and paines, that I haue susteyned with thee, and giue me this sinner. O Mother quoth the Sonne be not vexed,* 1.797 bicause I will not heare thee, but remember that I prayed thrice, and was not hearde. VVith that the mother set downe hir Sonne, and would haue fallen downe to his feete. VVhich hir Sonne seing, saide vnto hir: what is that ye will doe Mother? I will (quoth she) lie before thy feete with this sinner so long, till thou graunt him pardon. God for∣bid

this mother (quoth the sonne) for it is ordayned in the diuine* 1.798 lawe, that the sonne ought to honour his mother, and iustice con∣cludeth, that the lawgiuer fulfill himself the law. Then sith I am thy sonne, and thou my mother, I will honour thee in this sinner, and for thy sake forgiue him al his sinnes, and in tokē of peace betwene him and me, let him come and kysse my wounds, and so the sinner healed all the wounds of Chryst with his kisse.

How say you M. Stapleton, was not this propre stuffe to be printed, euen for information to Preachers to instruct the people, with almost so manie blasphemies as there bee lines, besides the ridiculousnesse of the whole tale? But I tell it for your conceytes of hir intercession, making hir a great deale more mercifull than Chryst.* 1.799

The like tale within a Sermon or two after, or rather a more fonde tale he telleth of an vnthrift that hauing wasted his goods, gaue himselfe to the diuell for riches. Of whome the diuell* 1.800 required, that he should renie the highest, and so he did. To whom the diuell aunswered that his worke was yet vnperfecte, excepte he renounced the mother of the highest: for it is she that doth vs most harme. For looke whome the sonne by iustice destroyeth, the mo∣ther by mercie and pardon doth saue. VVhiche the yong man hea∣ring, he was sore adrad and troubled aboue measure, and answered he woulde neuer doe it. To whome the Coniurer sayde: you haue denied the Creator, stick not man to denie the Creature: no (quoth he) that will I neuer doe, I had rather alway begge my breade. And so the matter was dasht. The yong man retourning, came by a cha∣pell, where was the picture of the blessed Virgin, holding hir childe in hir armes: and he began to inuocate hir with all his heart, and by* 1.801 the merites of hir, repented earnestly, calling instantly vpon the Virgin Marie, for he durst not call vppon the highest, whom he had denied. VVith that, he hearde the mother speake to hir sonne in hir armes, saying: my most sweete Sonne be mercifull to this man. To whom hir Sonne would not speake one worde, but wri∣thed his face from hir. And when againe she besought hir Sonne for him, he turned his backe to his mother, and said he hath renied

me, what shall I doe to him? when she saw this, she set downe* 1.802 the childe on the altare, and fell at his feet, saying: I beseech thee sonne, that for me thou wilt forgiue him: and streight the infant lift vp his mother, and sayde: O mother, I coulde neuer denie thee any thing, beholde for thy sake, I forgiue him all. Thus ye made the mother farre more mercyfull and louing than Christe, and that forgiuenesse of sinnes is in hir name, and for hir sake. And made the people by these tales beléeue, that it was a more heynous offence to denye the blessed Uirgin, than it was to renounce oure Sauioure Christe.

The same authour telleth yet a more fonde and wicked* 1.803 tale. How S. Dominike on a night saw Christe standing in the ayre, shaking in his hand three speares against the world, and his mother ranne hastily againste him, and demaunded him what he would doe, and he sayd to hir: All the worlde is full of vices, of pride, of luxurie, and of auarice, and ther∣fore I will destroye them with these three speares, then the blessed virgin fell downe at his feete▪ and sayd: Deare sonne, haue pitie. and tarrie thy iustice by thy mercie. And Iesus Christ sayd to hir: Seest thou not howe many vvrongs and iniuries they haue done to mee? And she answered, Son at∣temper* 1.804 thy wrathe, and tarie a little, I haue a true seruaunt, and a noble fighter against the vices, he shal runne ouer all, and vanquishe the worlde, and subdue them vnder thy seig∣norie, and I shall giue him an other seruaunt into his helpe, that shall fighte as hee dothe. And oure Lorde her sonne sayde, I am appeased, and receyue thy prayer. But I woulde* 1.805 see vvhome thou wilte sende in so greate offence. And so the tale telleth, howe she fette and presented vnto him Saincte Dominicke and S. Frauncis, and howe Christe praysed them. And thus once the worlde was saued by hir, and hir two champions.

On the other syde of the leafe, as a confirmation to this,* 1.806 is declared howe an other tyme, a deuout Ladies chaplein,

called sir William, dyd see Christe sitte in his throne, and on his right hand an angell standing with a trumpet, whom Christe with a cleere voyce, in the hearyng of all the armie of heauen, bad blowe. And when he had blovven, the blast was so mightie, that all the worlde shooke, as it had bene a leafe on a tree, to whome Christe sayde the seconde tyme,* 1.807 Blovve, and he blevve as before. But the Virgin Mary mo∣ther of mercie, knovvyng that yf he blevve agayne, all the vvorlde vvere ended, (the other Sainctes being all husht) shee starte vp, and fell at hir Sonnes feete, and besoughte him vvith muche adoe to deferre his sentence, and spare the worlde. To vvhome Christe aunsvvered, Mother, all the vvorlde is sette on wickednesse, and doe so prouoke me vvith their sinnes, that neither I ought to suspende my sen∣tence,* 1.808 nor spare man. Sith not only the laitie, but the clergie also, yea the Monkes haue vtterly corrupted theyr vvayes, and offende me from day to daye. And then sayde his mo∣ther, My deare son spare them, though not for those wicked ones, yet at the least for my frends sakes: and so Christ vvas pleased once againe. An other tyme the matter wente so harde, that the Uirgin Maries image fell a sweating so fast* 1.809 in the Church, that all the people maruelled. And the cause was this, The sonne of Marie had euen stretched oute his arme, to strike the vvorld, and if his mother had not run the quicklier, and stayed his arme, the vvorlde had bene de∣stroyed ere novve.

This is the intercession that youre Church ascribeth to hir M. Stapleton, makyng hir a greate deale more prone to mercie, than Christ the fountain of mercie, and mercie it selfe, by these youre wicked and blasphemous fables. But what said I▪ I should haue said by these your holy histories and deuoute sermons. But sée withall what true doctrine ye teache, that the sainctes do pray for the deferring of the kingdome of God, where Christe teacheth vs to pray, that he would vouchsafe to hasten his kingdom, saying, Let thy

kingdome come: And willeth the godlie to lift vp their heads when they shall heare of the signes thereof: and sayth, that* 1.810 vnlesse God should shorten those dayes, no fleshe should be saued: and he will cut them off, for the electes sake. And the Martirs slaine for the worde of God, doe long still for his cōming, and crie: How long O Lord, which art holie and true,* 1.811 wilt thou not iudge the worlde, and reuenge oure bloud, of those that dwell in the earth. And there were giuen to them white gar∣mentes, and they were bidde rest a whyle, till the number of theyr felow seruants and brethren were fulfilled, that should be slayne likewise. And the spirite and the spouse sayth come, and he that heareth, let him say, Come. &c. And Christe sayeth, Yea I come quickly. Amen. Yea Lorde Iesu come quickly, (sayth S. Iohn.) And your Church saith (As an harlot that is afrayde of the husbands comming) come not. And ye tell vs that the bles∣sed Uirgin hath nowe thrée tymes stayed backe his arme, and wil not lette him come.

You haue hitherto ascribed verie muche, and much more than ought to be ascribed to a creature, but do ye go no fur∣ther? ye pretende that the death of Christ is auaylable: but no further than the blessed virgin doth obtain it at his hād by hir mercie. What a tale is that ye tel vs, euen where as ye mention the bloud of Christe? howe a certains nough∣tie religious man, vsing notwithstāding to say an hundreth Aue Maries euery day, the deuils brought him béeing dead in his sinnes before Christ to be iudged. Christ pronounced* 1.812 him to be eternally condemned. With that came the bles∣sed virgin and offred the papers, wherein the Aue Maries wer written, desiring Christ to go to iudgemēt once again. The deuils seeing that, brought all the bookes of his sinnes,* 1.813 and when the balance was peysed, his sinnes did ouerwey the Auies, which séeing, the virgin besought Christ, saying: Thou art my sonne, the bloud that thou hast, thou hast of me, I pray thee giue me one droppe thereof. To whome (quoth Christ) O mother I am not able to denie it thee, then Marie

put in the ballance the droppe of bloud togither with hir me∣rits,* 1.814 and then that part weyed downe to the grounde: so that the deuils went crying away. Our Ladie is too mercifull to Christians, we euer fayle where she medleth with vs. O Ladie it is not good contending with thee. What a derogation is this to Chist?

And where ye graunt most to the bloud of Christ, where ye would salue the matter with intercession, euen there ye say, not that he will vouchsafe to graunt hir petition, but that he is not able to gainesay it, yea that it is not lawfull for him to denie it, For (sayth Cardinall Uigerius) Dixit* 1.815 Salomon. &c. Salomon sayd to his mother, aske mother what you will, for it is not lawfull for me, to turne away my face from hir that bare me. VVhat shall wee thinke other than this, the Lorde Iesus Christ to say to his mother, who is farre wiser and iuster than Salomon? And his reason is this, Sa∣lomons mother had midwiues, nources, bearers of the child and instructours: but Marie was all this hir selfe, and so Christ is more bounde to his mother, than Salomon to Bethsabée. And therefore if we will worship Christ, wée* 1.816 must first go to his mother. For as sayth Iacobus de Vo∣ragine: as Eue was in the middest betweene the serpent and the man, so Marie making our reconciliation, is in the midst betwene God and man.

What a dubble blasphemie is this? First that our re∣conciliation* 1.817 is made by any other than Christ, of whom the Apostle sayth: If when we were yet enimies, we were recon∣ciled to God, by the death of his sonne: much more, seeing we are reconciled, we shall be preserued by his life, nor yet onely so, but also glorying in God, through our Lorde Iesus Christ, by whome we haue nowe obteyned reconciliation. Secondly, that we haue any other mediatour than Christ, wher as the apostle sayth: Unus deui. &c. There is one God* 1.818 and one mediatour of God and man, the man Christe Iesus, neyther will your shift serue you to cloake youre blasphe∣mie,

that ye make hir a mediatour of intercession: for lo here, he maketh hir a mediatour, of making the attonement and reconciliation betwene mankinde and God, which as it is our very redemption, so is it the proper office of Christ alone. •…•…pse est pax nostra. &c. He is ou•…•… peace, whiche hath* 1.819 made one of both, & hath broken downe the wall that was a stop betweene vs, and also hath done away through his flesh the cause of hatred, that is to say, the lawe of commaunde∣ments, conteyned in the lawe written, for to make of twaine one new man in himselfe, so making peace: and to reconcile both vnto God, in one bodie through his Crosse, and slue ha∣tred thereby. For through him we both haue an open way, in one spirite vnto the father. Wherevpon sayth S. August.* 1.820 Nes per mediatorem Christum reconciliamur deo. VVe are re∣conciled to God by Christ being the mediator.

What blasphemie then is this in you, to spoyle Christ hereof, and giue it to the virgine Marie, and make hir as much the instrument and meane of our reconciliation, as Eue was the instrument and meane of our perdition. But in this entrance of our perdition, though both Adam & Eue were culpable, and both (being one flesh) are comprehended vnder the name of one, and that of Adam the husband, as the Apostle sayth, Death reigned from Adam to Moses, euē ouer* 1.821 them also that sinned not with like trāsgression as did Adam, which is the similitude of him that is to come: Yet afterward S. Paule noting the meane, by whome properly the sinne* 1.822 entred first, affirmeth that Adam was not deceyued, but the woman was deceyued, and was in transgression. If then ye make the like proportion of our reconciliation frō Adam to Christ, from Eue to y^e virgin: then as Eue properly was the very originall and cause of the transgression, though Adam (being the assenter) bare the name therof: then properly the virgin is the very original, & cause of our reconciliation, and Christ is but an assenter, & so beares but the name thereof. What a wicked doctrine is this M. S.▪ and is this now no∣thing

els but ora pro nobis? Might not Christ rather say ora pro nobis to hir, syth ye giue hir all, & him a bare name only?

Now to the confirming of this blasphemous doctrine, commeth in another of hir Chaplayues, crying, O foemina* 1.823 super omma. &c. O woman that art aboue all things, and bles∣sed of all things, the fore elect and most worthie vessell, fra∣med of the first artificer, the treasorie of the diuine giftes, god hath chosen & forechosen thee, that God and man might dwell nine Monethes in thy tabernacle. I dare boldly say, that euen for the Virgin conceyued in Gods minde, many thou∣sande yeares before shee was borne, mankinde was preser∣ued in his beeing. For it is euident that for their first trans∣gression, Adam and Eue deserued not onely death, but euen the vtter rooting them out to nothing. And the diuine ven∣geance which knoweth not the accepting of persons, as it left not vnpunished the aungels offence, so woulde it not haue left vnpunished mankindes offence: but our first parents were preserued, that they were not consumed to nothing, for the chiefest reuerence that he had to the virgin, for he loued hir aboue all creatures that should be created, and not vnited vnto God. The reason is, that this Mayden was in the loy∣nes of Adam, as concerning the sede. And the power of bring∣ing forth the mayden, was imprinted in the first father, tyll shee were in deede brought foorth. But of hir Iesus ought to be borne, who was in Adam onely, after his bodily sub∣stance, to be brought forth of the virgin, and of none other: God therefore did spare oure first parentes, nor consumed them to nothing, bicause that so shee had not beene borne, and by consequence Iesus neyther, nor God had put on flesh. Therefore by this noble creature, God did saue our first pa∣rentes from the transgression: and Noe from the floud: and Abraham from the slaughter of the Kinges: Isaac from Is∣maell: Iacob from Esau: the Iewish people from Aegypt, from Pharaos hande, from the redde Sea, from the force of dyuerse Kinges and Tyrauntes, from Nabuchodonozor,

and from the captiuitie of Babilon: Dauid from the Lion, from Goliah and from Saule. And to conclude, all the fauou∣rings, and deliuerances made in the olde testament, I doubt* 1.824 not but God did them, for the loue of this mayden, and for the worship of hir, whom God had from without beginning foreordeyned to be set aboue all his workes.

O outragious blasphemie where is Christ? How agréeth this with S. Paules doctrine, that Christ is the image of the* 1.825 inuisible god, the first begotten of all creatures, for by him were all things created, things that are in heauen, & things that are in earth, things visible, & things inuisible, whether they be Maiestie or Lordship, either rule or power, al things are created by him and in him, & be is before all things, and in him all things haue their being, and he is the head of the bodie, that is to wit, of the congregation, he is the begin∣ning and first begotten, that in all thinges he might haue the preheminence, for it pleased the father that in him all fulnesse should dwell, and by him to reconcile all things to him selfe, and to set at peace by him, through the bloud of his Crosse, both things in heauen, and things in earth. Here is no mencion at all of hir, but all of him (master Stapleton) for whome all things were made. But euen these proper∣ties of Christ, this blasphemous doctour applieth to hir, and sayth: your Church doth so. For a little before he sayth: Sed hoc loco. &c. But in this place is to be asked whether the blessed virgin were brought forth before all creatures? For of hir sayth the Church that saying. Eccle. 24. Ab initio & ante secula creata sum. From the beginning and before the worlde was I made, and againe in the Epistle of this solem∣nitie, the Virgine is brought in saying that sentence. Prou. 8. The Lord hath possessed me from the beginning of his wayes before he made any thing, euen from the beginning, from e∣uerlasting I was ordeyned, and from of olde before the earth was made, as yet the depthes were not, and I was alreadie begotten, as yet the fountaynes flowed not with water, nor as

yet the mountaynes in their great compasse were setled, be∣fore all the hilles was I begotten. VVhich wordes doe seeme so to sounde, that she was brought forth, before the bringing forth of any other thing. Who is he that knoweth not that these wordes are spoken of the eternall sonne of God be∣gotten before all ages, and is euen one wyth that S. Iohn* 1.826 sayth, In the beginning was the worde? and yet bicause it is spoken in the feminine gender, vnder the name of the eter∣nall wisedome of God, he most ignoran•…•…ly and Idolatrously transferreth it to the virgin Marie. Neyther he alone, but he sayth your Church doth so, so that all your whole Church* 1.827 is a blasphentous Church. And thus ye ascribe the promise of the blessed seede, to the blessed virgine saying, not it, but shee shall tread downe the serpents heade So where Da∣uid* 1.828 sayth, Non est qui se abscondat à •…•…alore 〈◊〉〈◊〉, None can hide him from his heate: ye say none can hide him from hir heate. Likewise where the wisedome of God sayth: In the welbe∣loued Citie gaue he me rest, & in Hierusalem was my power. Iaco∣bus de Udragine, applieth it to hir, saying, Primo pater. &c. First, the father hath made hir mightie to helpe. Eccle. 24. in Hie∣rusalem was my power: for she is made so mightie, that she can help* 1.829 vs in life, in death, and after death. &c. Againe where Christe sayth, I am exalted like a Palme tree aboute the bankes, and as a rose Palme in Hierico, as a fayre Oliue tree in a pleasant fielde, that ascribeth he to hir, saying: Sunt enim quidam. &c. There are some Saints, who when they are prayed vnto, follow the informa∣tion of their conscience, and therefore often tymes they will not pray to God for vs, bicause they haue a conscience, that they are not worthie to be heard. Other Saintes there are, that when they are prayed vnto, they follow the streightnesse of Gods righteous∣nesse. And therefore if they be desired, and knowe that this is not fitte for Gods iustice, they dare not aske: but the blessed Virgin, neither looketh to conscience, nor to iustice, but to mercie. As who should say, let them keepe their consciences to themselues that lust, and let them that will, loke to Gods iustice: I will alwayes hold me to

mercie, and for this so excellent Modestie shee sayth of hir selfe. Eccle. 24. I am as a fayre Oliue in the fieldes. Yea you say shée hath such excéeding and excelling mercie, that not onely it passeth all the Saints, but that, illud quod dicitur. Eccl. 18. de* 1.830 Domino, potest dici etiā de Domina &c. That the which is spo∣ken Eccle. 18. of the Lorde, may be spoken of the Ladie. The mercie of a man is towarde his neighbour, but the mercie of the Lorde is ouer all flesh. Thus ye robbe God of his glory to adourne hir, attributing all to hir. And say that the fa∣ther hath written in hir his power, where Christ sayth con∣trarie,* 1.831 all povver is giuen me of my father in heauen and earth. &c. that the sonne hath vvritten in hir his vvisedome: that the holy ghost hath vvritten in hir his goodnesse and mercie. Againe, the father hath made hir his Treasorer,* 1.832 vvhereby shee hath conquered the Deuill, and povvreth in∣to cur mindes diuine knovvledge. The sonne hath made hir his Chamberlayne. The holy ghost hath made hir his Celle∣rer. The vvhole Trinitie hath made hir Almosiner of hea∣uen. Shee is Chauncellour to the holy ghost, shee is Porter* 1.833 of Paradise. Ipsa nan{que} est ostium. &c. For shee is the doore, by the vvhich vve enter into Paradise, vvhich by Eue vvas shutte, and by hir is opened. Ipsa enim est quae nos suis meritis in atrium principis introducit. For it is shee that by hir merits bringeth vs into the porch of the Prince. VVhervpō. Ioh. 18 it is sayde. A Damsell, that was the doore keeper (the bles∣sed* 1.834 virgine calleth hirselfe an handemayde or Damsell) let in Peter into the Princes porche, Ipsa nan{que} virgo. For euen the virgin is the vvindovv vvherby God beholdeth vs vvith the eie of mercie. Uirgo autem Maria. The Virgin Marie is the* 1.835 throne of mercy, grace and glorie: she is the Sunne to the iust, the Moone to the Saints, the faithful vvitnesse to sinners, the aduocate of mankinde, the drop that softneth all hardnesse.* 1.836 There vvere three things that once vvere hard: God, that receyued none to mercie: Death that svvalovved vp all to hell: the Deuill that enraged vvith enmitie. But the Vir∣gin

Marie so mollified God, that he receiued all men to mer∣cie. She so trodde death vnder foote, that novve he can not take avvay the Saints. Shee ouercame the Deuill that he can novve▪ deceyue none, but him that lust to be deceyued: that novv shee may say I forsake you not, but as a drop I abyde vvith you, bicause my odour abydeth vvith you, vvhere∣vvith I haue mollifyed God, I haue troden dovvne death, I haue ouercome the Deuill.

This is one droppe of hir grace, master Stap. but what can ye ascribe more to al the droppes of the bloud of Christ. To conclude ye make hir all in all, Shee •…•…lenseth vs from* 1.837 our sinnes▪ shee lightneth vs from ignorance, she strength∣neth vs from our infirmities. Et per ipsam virg. &c. and by the blessed virgin Marie. Quilibet tan{que} per portam in coelum as∣cendit. Euery man euen as by a gate, ascendeth to heauen.

By these immoderate prayses, or rather outragious blasphemies, Master Stapleton, ye stirred the people (quite neglecting Christ) to inuocate the Uirgine Marie. And ye exemplifie it by fables to confirme the people therein. Ye* 1.838 tell vs how an Abbot and his holy Couent sayling in a tem∣pest: one called on Saint Nicholas, an other on Saint An∣drewe, and euerie one vppon his peculier Patrone (but none called vpō God) the Abbot chod them all, and bad them call on the mother of mercie. Which when they did forth∣with the Seas were calme. Ye tell vs of many other, that being vexed with spirites, haue sought manye remedies, nowe holy water, nowe one thing, nowe another, yea they haue called vpon Christ, vpon the Trinitie, and haue had so little helpe, that they haue rather bene much worse: onely, when they were taught to lift vp their handes, and crie, Saint Marie helpe me: then forthwith the spirite hath fled away all afrayde, as he had beene smitten with a stone, and sayde the cursed deuill enter into his mouth, that hath taught thee that: and so being vanquished, neuer came againe.* 1.839

Ye tell vs a noble Storie of a Spanish woman called

Lucie, to whome for saluting the virgin Marie, the virgin, at the deliuerance of hir childe, came and was the midwife, and at the Christning the Godmother and Christ the God∣father, and the childe was named after the Godmother, and called Marianus. And how at hir Churching, Christ himselfe sang Masse, and how at the offertorie, Lucie was preferred to go and offer and kisse the Priestes hande before the vir∣gine Marie, and what honour the Uirgin gaue hir aboue hir selfe, saying, This is your day of Churching now, I was churched long ago. And all for saying the Aue Marie.

Ye tell vs of a Strumpet, that all hir life did no good* 1.840 work, saue that she would say an Aue Marie, and heare a Masse on Saterday (which ye call our Ladies day, as Sunday is cal∣led the Lordes day) and on hir death bed this harlot sayde, O Ladie Queene and mother, though I did neuer any good, yet I trust to thy mercie, and to thee I commende my spirite. And when the fiends would haue taken hir soule, the mother of mercie tooke hir soule from them, saying, do ye not knowe that shee saluted me dayly, and euery Saterday heard a Masse, and at hir death commen∣ded hir soule to me? And when they alleaged hir sinnes, I tell you (quoth shée) that soule was neuer damned that serued mee, and commended it selfe to me, and so she draue them away and caryed the soule with hir.

Ye tell vs of a knight that neuer did other good, but at* 1.841 morning and Euening say an Aue Marie, and by the grace of the Virgin he was saued. And hereon ye conclude a rule, Quod orandum sit, &c. That at the poynt of death we must pray, mother of grace, mother of mercie, defende thou vs from the enimie, and keepe vs in the hower of death. And then we are safe. Yea as Anselme sayth. Impossibile est vt pereat. It is impossible hee should perish, syth by the vertue of the Aue Marie, the worlde was renued. And that Redempturus deus genus humanu•…•… vniuer∣sum* 1.842 precium contulit in Mariam: sine ea nihil possumu•…•…, sine ea miseri sumus, sine ea factum est nihil. God going about to re∣deeme mankinde, conferred al the price therof vpon Mary. VVith∣out

hir we cā do nothing, without hir we are wretches, with∣out hir nothing was made.

To conclude, ye make hir to be all in all. And as Alber∣tus Magnus in his booke of hir prayses, saith: Est autem o∣pus,* 1.843 &c. The booke of the beginning of the Lordes incar∣nation, describing the mysterie of our redemption, to the prayse, honour and glorie of the most glorious, and alonly, truly, honorable aboue euery Creature, the virgin mother of God. By the most speciall confidence of whole helpe, we take this worke in hande. And in the mercie of hir, euen as in the most firme anchore of our hope, we looke for the ende of the perfourmance, and the rewarde of the labour. VVho is the moouer of the wil, the cause of the worke, and the behol∣der of the intention. Thus blasphemously ascribeth Alber∣tus, all these things to hir, euen in the Preface of his booke. But what excéeding more blasphemies he filleth his vo∣lume withall, were infinite to recite. Looke your selfe M. St. if with shame ye can sustaine to reade them.

Neither is all this, the errours of priuate men, but the* 1.844 dooing of all your whole Church. For, euen in the solemni∣ties of your Masse, haue ye not in the Sequences of our La∣dies Masses (as ye cal them) Aue terrarum domina, &c. Haile ladie of the earth, holy queene of heauē, let the heauens and all the company of saincts bring forth melodie to thee, the lāds, the floudes, the woods, and groaues resound, &c. By thee mother, we craue that the childrens sinnes be abolished, and we be all brought to the euerlasting ioyes of Paradise.

Againe, Seda nobis bella, Appease thou warres, hayle, starre of the seas, thou mother giue to vs the true peace, giue vs help, changing the name of Eue. Driue away our euils, draw∣ing vs without bitternesse, forgiue vs our crimes, aske al good things, let the Sonne and the Father be giuen by thee O mo∣ther,* 1.845 &c. that which Eue hath taken away, thou only, O mo∣ther, giuest. Through thee, the people recouer their former lost strength, thou art the gate of the high King, by the which

gate we enter into the court. &c. And againe: The ladie of the world &c. is the cause of our saluation, the gate of life.* 1.846 Againe: Pray euery man to hir in euery houre, and call thou vppon hir defence. Sing, sing, Aue Maria, with the force of thy harte▪ with thy voice, with thy vow, &c.

And in the third reason that ye giue, why ye dedicate the Saterday to hir, as the Sonday to the Lord: ye say in redde letters, Tertia ratio est, &c. The third reason is, bicause the Saterday is the gate and entrāce to the Sonday, but the Son∣day is the day of rest, and betokeneth eternall life. VVhere∣vpon when we be in the grace of our Ladie, we are as it were* 1.847 in the gate of Paradise. Therefore, bicause euen she is to vs the gate to the kingdome of heauen, which is figured by the Sonday, we keepe for the solemnitie of hir, the Seuenth day, which goeth before the Sonday. Thus doth your whole Church (yea and that in your holy Masse booke) ascribe to hir euen as much as any of the other.

What say ye now to all this M. Stap. haue ye any shifte of descant to runne vnto, any distinction behinde to alleage, any figge leafe to couer your shame, that all this kinde of inuocation may be thought no Idolatrie to a creature, nor blasphemie to God? well, if all this will not serue, giue me I pray you occasion hereafter, to shew yet furder many mo & farre worse abhominations than all these. But I thinke you be ashamed alreadie, and will confesse, that there are at the least some abuses. But what soeuer you will graunt, I dare say some of your side (that would neuer haue belee∣ued such wickednesse to haue bene wrought, such doctrine to haue bene taught and printed) will hereafter haue more regarde of their owne soules health, than to beléeue such false Prophets as you. For, how will ye spare to deceyue them, that spared not to blasphenie God?

If ye say it was not generall, I haue shewed you in ma∣ny of your owne confessions, yea euen in the Masse booke,

that it was the publike seruice of your Churche. If ye say* 1.848 it was reformed in the later times: I haue shewed ye, euen your last Primers and Masse bookes, set foorth and authorized in Queene Maries reigne, to conteyne as Ido∣latrouse and blasphemouse prayers as did the other. If ye say it was but Intercession and meditation: I haue shewed ye, that it was not onely helpe, mercie, grace and euerla∣sting lyfe, but euen as muche that ye ascribed to the mo∣ther of Christ, as for your liues ye can deuise to giue to Christ, yea and that many times ye giue much more to hir than to him. If ye say now, that one breakes no square, all this is but to one, and that to the Mother of God: Al∣though this were to vile an excuse, for any Christian eares to heare, and the question is, whether any besides God is to be inuocated: yet not withstanding, it is euen as false, as all your other excuses. For ye haue not so stin∣ted, ye haue not onely inuocated other besides, and that not onely as intercessours, with Orate pronobis: but ascri∣bed helpe to them also. Yea there is not almost one Saint mencioned in the whole Legende, to whome ye attri∣bute not some or other proper vertue, wherein ye inuo∣cate him or hir, not onely to be an Intercessour and Ad∣uocate, but to be an helper, patrone, defender, deliuerer, and the giuer of it.

Yea as it is declared in the life of S. Peter, euen as the Heathen did make menne their Goddes, you make like∣wise the Saintes your Gods. Do ye not tell vs, how in the time of S. Cornelius the Pope: Greekes stale away the* 1.849 bodies of the Apostles Peter and Paule, but the Diuels that were in the Idols, were constrayned by the diuine vertue of God. And cried, and sayde, ye men of Rome succour hastely your Gods, which be stolen frō you. This ye say, they cried being constrained therto by the diuine powre. And thus as ye make them Gods to go before you, & helpe you in euery

thing, so ye inuocate them, and giue them godheads.

If now Vigilantius were liuing, & should crie out of your blasphemouse inuocation, should he be an heretike therfore? yea surely should he with you M. Stapl. and all that speake against you. But I pray you, let S. Augustine be his com∣panion in this heresie. Non ad creaturam (saith he) debemu•…•…* 1.850 tendere, sed ad ipsum creatorem, de quo si aliud quàm opor∣tet, ac sese res habeat, nobis persuadetur, perniciosissimo errore decipimur. VVee ought not to go to a creature, but euen to the verie creator, of whome, if we persuade our selues any other thing, than the truth is, we are deceyued with a most perniciouse errour. This is his iudgement of all these your wicked fables. As for the assertion that we holde against you, that we haue to God no other aduocate to call vppon, but our Sauiour Iesus Christ, would he haue called vs Heretikes, or Scismatikes, thinke you, or Uigilantians therefore? no saith he, Iesum Christum iustum ipsum &c.* 1.851 Wee haue euen Iesus Christ him selfe the aduocate to the Father, he is the propitiation of our sinnes, he that hath helde this hath made no heresie, he that hath helde this hath made* 1.852 no Scisme. So that we are here cleared of heresie, and the Scisme and Heresie lighteth on your selfe Master Sta∣pleton.

As for your fonde distinction, S. Augustine reiecteth, of intercession betwéene God and vs, as false, and no true Religion. Religat nos religio (saithe he) vni omnipotenti* 1.853 ▪Deo, quia inter•…•…mentem nostram, &c. Religion is that, that bindeth vs to the onely almightie God. Bicause, betweene our minde, with the which we vnderstande the Father, and the truth, that is the light by the which we vnderstande him, there is no creature put betweene. And as S. August. thus confuteth your distinction of intercession, so would he haue* 1.854 your foolishe dotage on Saintes corrected, in thinking you did them honour in seruing them, when they reioyce if we serue onely God, and are offended, that ye should

ascribe suche honour and seruice as ye did vnto them. Non libenter 〈◊〉〈◊〉, They take it not (sayth he) in good* 1.855 parte, yea they know it is not lawfull to giue it to a∣ny but to God, Cui vni fas esse nouerunt, To whom onely they knovve it is lavvful. And therfore those Saints that ye write, appeared to such and suche Heremites, Monkes, or Nu•…•…nes, and woulde thus and thus be honored, fasted for, prayed vnto, serued and called vpon, were but either the de∣uils illusions in their names, or your owne inuentions: and he would haue coun•…•…elled you in this maner: Nō ergo crea∣turae pu•…•…ius •…•… creator•…•… serutamus, •…•…e euan•…•…scamus in cogitationi∣bus nostris, Let vs not rather serue a creature than the Creator, lest we vanish away in our own imaginations, as in these fables you haue giuen to a creature, more than to the Creator.

Neyther the excellencie of the creature can excuse you,* 1.856 that bicause she is so excellēt a creature, ye may make sup∣plications to hir, although ye might so do to none besides: No sayth S. Aug. Uni deo, & semper, & in omnibus, nulli au∣tem quantum ut•…•… excellenti creaturae supplicandum. VVee muste make supplication to God only, and that alwayes, and in all things, but to no creature neuer so muche excellent. Thus will S. August. make all you Papists heretikes.

But since ye would before haue proued vs heretikes by Epiphanius: let vs sée if nowe ye will stande to Epipha∣nius iudgement, in the inuocation euen of the virgin Ma∣rie. For euen then began this erroure, by the seducing of false and ignorant priestes, and the superstitious people, to take roote, so that in déede ye may vaunt of antiquitie of this* 1.857 errour, but other than a wicked errour, be it neuer so olde, neyther you can make it now, nor Epiphanius tooke it then other wise. He calleth it follie, superstition, blasphemie, fu∣rie, madnesse, the worship that certain women gaue hir in his tyme: and yet was it not the hundreth part so much, as* 1.858 the Papists in our tyme haue giuen to hir.

Reuera sanctum: &c. In deede (sayth he) the bodie of Marie

was holye, but God it was not. The Virgin was a Virgin in deede and honorable, but she was not giuen to vs to be wor∣shipped, but hir selfe worshipped him that was borne of hir, who came to hir from heauen out of his fathers bosome. And for this cause dothe the Gospell arme vs, telling that whiche the Lorde spake, woman, what haue I to do with thee, mine houre is not yet come, least any should thinke, the holy virgin to be more excellent, he calleth hir woman, as it were, prophecying suche thinges, as by reason of sectes shoulde come to passe on the earth. Least that any bodye maruelling too muche at the holy Virgin, slippe in∣to this heresie, and these dotages. For, all the handling of thys heresie, is but a mockerie, and as a man maye saye, an olde wyues tale. For what Scripture hathe euer declared, whiche of the Prophetes commaunded man to be worshipped? muche lesse a woman, shee is in deede an excellent vessell, but a wo∣man: and nothing chaunged from hir nature. Shee is honora∣ble in honoure, bothe in vnderstanding and sense, euen as are the bodies of the Sainctes. And if to hir glorifying I should haue sayde somewhat more, euen as Helias a virgin from his mother, and so still remayning, was translated, and sawe not deathe: euen as Iohn that leaned on the Lordes breast, whome Iesus loued: euen as sainct Thecla. Yea Marie is yet more honorable, for the dispensation of the mysterie: wherewith shee was made woorthie: But neither Helias is to be worshipped, althoughe he be yet alyue: neither is Iohn to be worshipped, althoughe by his prayers he obtayned his wonderfull sleepe, or rather hee obtayned grace of God: Nor yet Thecla, ney∣ther any Saynct is worshipped. For the auncient errour shall not master vs, that leauing the lyuing God, wee shoulde wor∣shippe those thinges that are made of hym. For they worship∣ped and honoured the Creature more than the Creator, and became fooles. If he wyll not haue Angels to be adored, howe muche more will he not haue hir, whiche was engendred of Anne, which was giuen to Anne of Ioachim, which by their prayers, and all their diligence, according to the promise to hir father and mo∣ther

was giuen, yet was she not engendred beyonde the na∣ture of men, but as all are of the seede of a man, and the wombe of a woman. &c. For it is vnpossible for any to bee engendred on earth, beyonde the nature of man. Only it was sitting for him: nature gaue place to him alone: he, as the work master, and hauing powre of the matter, fourmed him self of the Virgin, as it were of the earth. VVho beeing God the word, discended frō heauen▪ and put on flesh of the Vir∣gin Mary, but not that the Virgin shoulde be worshipped, not that he would make hir a God, nor that we should offer in the name of hir, &c. he suffred hir not to giue baptisme, nor to blesse the disciples, he bad hir not rule in the earthe, but onely that she shoulde haue hir sanctification, and bee made worthy of his kingdome. From whēce then commeth agayne to vs the round Dragon, that wrappeth him self on a heape? fro whēce are these Councels renewed for any cause? Let Mary be had in honor: let be worshipped the father, the sonne, and the holy ghost let no man worship Mary. I say not a woman, no not a man. This mysterie is due to God, the Angels receiue not suche glorifying. Let the thinges euill written, he rased cleane oute of the hearte of those that are deceyued, let the luste of the tree be taken out of their eyes, let it tourne to the Lorde that framed it, let Eue vvith Adam feare God, that shee maye vvorshippe him onely, least shee be ledde by the Serpentes voyce. But let hir abyde stedfast in Gods commaundement, eate not of the tree. Let no body eate of the errour that is for sainct Mary. For thoughe the tree bee fayre, yet it is not to be ea∣ten: althoughe Mary bee moste fayre, and holy, and hono∣rable, yet is she not to be adored. But these Arabicke women worshipping Mary, do renue again the mixture to Fortune, and prepare a table to the Diuell, not to God, as it is written, they are fedde with the meat of wickednesse. And agayne, And their women do boult flowre, and their children gather stickes to make cakes kneaded with oyle to the Q. of heauē.

Let suche women be put to silence by Hieremie, and let them not trouble the worlde, let them not saye, wee honour the queene of heauen. &c. Thus sayth Epiphanius, and muche more, nei∣ther for hir only, though chiefly for hir, but in generall for all the Saintes. Non conuenit colere sanctos. &c. It is not mete to woorshippe the Sainctes beyonde comelynesse, but it is meete to honour the Lorde of them, let the errour therfore ceasse of those that be seduced.

Nowe if ye say vnto me, all this is spoken againste the* 1.859 worship of offring to hir, and sacrifising to hir, not for inuo∣cation of hir: first this shift is false M. Sta. for Inuocation in déede is the chiefest worship that we can giue, not of the lips so much as of the heart, farre aboue any outwarde sa∣crifice of the bodie, and therefore to be muche more giuen to God alone, as S. Aug. reasoneth. Sicut orantes. &c. Euen* 1.860 as, when wee praye and prayse, wee directe signifying vowes vnto God, when we offer the verie thinges in our heart, the whiche we signifie: so sacrifycing, we know that no visible sacrifice ought to be offred to any other than to him, to whom we our selues ought to be an inuisible sacrifice. As therfore no bodily sacrifice may be directed to any but to God, so knew Epiphanius, that all spirituall sacrifice is onely due to God. And therefore he so little ascribeth it to hir, or any other, that bothe in the be∣ginning of his treaiise, and in the ende, he maketh his inuo∣cations onely to God. Saying in the beginning: Nunc autem clarè. &c. But let vs now clearely speake of the heresie it selfe, and inuocating God, as we will adioyne confutation agaynst it. &c. And in the ende thereof: Ad vnam illam. &c. Let vs proceede to that onely heresie, which is yet vntouched, inuoca∣ting God that he would helpe vs. &c. Thus ye sée to whome he ascribeth inuocation, not to hir of whom he writeth, or to any other saincte, but alonely to God. This shifte fayleth therefore, in saying he writeth onely agaynst offring and sacrificing to hir.

But setting all this aside, haue not you, I beséeche you,

offred and sacrificed to hir? I pray you turne back agayne* 1.861 to those your prayers, whiche I haue cited, that playnely confesse the facts, and glorie therein. Neither coulde they tell, by what meanes they shoulde worshippe hir inoughe. But if it yrke ye to turne to that, whiche was so yrkesome to reade before: I will sh•…•…we you, yet once more, so playne a testimonie, that all the shiftes of Proteus can not turne it away.

Iacobus de Uoragine sayth: Secundo est regina coeli. &c.* 1.862 Secondly, she is the Queene of heauen. Ierem. 44. Let vs sacri∣fice to the queene of heauen, and let vs powre out drinke offrings to hir, and let vs make cakes, as we and our fathers haue done, and* 1.863 were filled with bread, and it was well with vs, and we sawe no e∣uill: but since that time that we haue ceassed to sacrifice to hir, we wante all things, we are consumed with famine and sworde. But as it is sayde in the ecclesiasticall stories, there was a threefolde di∣stinction of the thinges that were offred to God, for either they were an offering of beastes, and that was called sacrifice: or it was of a dry thing, as of flowre, bread, or suche like, and that was cal∣led oblation: or else it was of moyst things, that is to wit, of wine, or oyle, and that was called drinke offeringes. But this threefolde distinction is touched heere. First, the sacrifice, when it is sayde, let vs sacrifice: the drinke offering, when it is sayde, let vs poure out drinke offeringes: the oblation, when it followeth, let vs make cakes. But to the queene of heauen we ought to sacrifice oure bodies, by the mortifying of vices: to poure out our moyst hartes, by the compassion of teares: and to exhibite cakes, that is, quiet consciences, by our inwarde purification.

What greater sacrifice can be giuen than this, M. Stap. euen to God? can we do any more to him, than as the Apo∣stle* 1.864 exhorteth vs. Obsecro vos. &c. I beseeche you brethren by the mercies of God, that ye giue vp your bodies a liuing sacrifice: holy and acceptable to God, which is your reasonable worshippe of him? And haue not you vnreasonably héere giuen all this worshippe to hir? This passeth, M. Stapl. the saying

of a Masse, and yet ye haue diuers Masses of hir also, euen as well as ye had of the Trinitie, or of the Holy Ghost, wherof ye haue heard some of the Sequences. But to sée this testimonie, (I omit here how iumpe ye play those Ido∣laters partes, measuring religion by the belly, and tell vs what trouble and scarcitie hathe bene since massing was lefte, and what a plentifull worlde it was, when the Masse was vp) I note it chiefly, to shewe, both how wickedly and howe fondely ye alleage their sacrificing for the proofe of yours, which is bothe condemned flatly of God by the Pro∣phet Hieremie, for he alleageth it not, that we should fol∣lowe it, or confirme ought vpon it, but abhorre it: and al∣so Epiphanius crieth out vpon it, and vpon them that made an argument therfrom, to defende their doings, and calleth them wicked, and yet do you (as did they) fette argu∣mentes from thence, to confirme your worshippe of hir, and both of you, making hir Quéene of heauē. But besides this worship of sacrifice, as Epiphanius sayth also, she is not Queene of heauen, so he sayth, God would not haue hir rule in the earth neither. And you quite contrary, call hir ruler, lady, Quéene, & Empresse therof. And so it followeth euen in y^e next words of the author cited, Tertiò, est Domina* 1.865 mundi. &c. Thirdly, she is the Queene of the world, and therefore all other mediators set aside, it shal be lawfull to appeale to hir, as to the Lady and Empresse, if any man be greeued of the diuell, or of a tyrant, or of the flesh, or of the iustice of God.

And thus ye are flat agaynst Epiphanius, his saying bée∣ing as directly agaynst you, as agaynst those in his time. Which proueth you (all your shifts notwithstanding) to be starke heretikes your selues in inuocation, that obiect here∣sie in inuocation to vs. Yea, whether you be more blasphe∣mous heretikes, than euer they were, or no, let the reader iudge. But frō what iudgement will not you appeale, that will appeale, euen frō the iust iudgement of God him selfe, to the virgin Mary? I can not read, that th•…•…se heretikes in

Epiphanius time, durst euer attribute halfe so muche vnto hir. Clere your selues, M. S. of these heretical & blasphemo{us} inuocatiōs, & thē proue vs heretikes for denying the same.* 1.866

Nowe if your inuocation were grosse, much more were your abuses in Reliques, lights, and ceremonies. In which the chiefest part of your religion did consist, as ye made the simple people beléeue. First, to your blessed reliques I an∣swer, that christiā religiō, nor y^e worship of god, nor our be∣léefe, nor our saluatiō, nor remissiō of our sins, nor any such vertue lieth in clou•…•…es, in sticks, in bones or stones. Which if it did, as your Legēds tel how miraculously they wroght outward, & how vertuously inward, to those y^t honored thē with crouching, knéeling, kissing▪ or bearing thē about, and hurt thē that cōtēned thē, then would they do much harme now to those y^t set not by thē. We sée yet many of your bles∣sed reliques extāt, & they neither do vs good nor harm. They can neither blesse nor curse, nor they worke any miracles now. If ye say we want faith, al consisted in the beléeuer, ye make a plain witcherie of thē, & blasphemie to God. But ye* 1.867 shew how ye abused those that beléeued you, making them beléeue the Moone was made of a gréene chéese, as they say: but were those blessed relikes so good as the chéese paring? Were they not such as euen Erasmus said: Yea, dothe this* 1.868 also pertayne to fayth, to kisse a rotten peece of leather, and filthy linnen rags, &c. Especially since it may be, that the shoe which they force vs to kisse, may not be S. Thomases, but some butchers, or some bawdes shoe. Or (as Chaucers pardoner bewrayed them, euen at that time that they were in greatest price) the olde rotten bones of some Iewes sh•…•…pe.

Frequenter audiuiè doctis, saythe Erasmus, I haue often times herd say, of learned men, that went to Hierusalem, and pro∣bable it is, that the certayntie at this day is not knowne, where Hierusalem in the olde tyme dyd stande. For euen I see it doubted of the learned, whether Rome should haue bene there, or no, where it is nowe shewed to bee. Sainct Hierome that ly∣ued

in that countrey, reckoning vp certayne things, which at this day are shewed there to straungers, sayth it is reported, and they say so. VVhat shall we thinke nowe, after so many incursions, so many mutations of humaine matters, that in a thousand yeres and more are wont to chaunce, of which sort, Veronica, the piller of Salomon, the chaire of Peter, and his sepulchre, which are shewed at Rome, are sayde to be?

Shal we now beléeue your Legēd, better than Erasmus: but that also is so vncertayne, that ye can not tell whether ye haue many of the saincts right bodies, or no: & so by your own false doctrine, ye can not tell whether ye commit Ido∣latrie, or no. One of your Churches sayth: We haue such a saincts body scalp, arme, leg, or hucklebone. That is not so, saith an other church, we haue it. Nay, sayth the thirde, nei∣ther of ye both haue it, but we. Héere the one partie or the other say not true, & yet al work miracles after their mira∣culous maner. But will ye know the truth, they were false harlots al, & deceiued y^e séely soules, that now (God be pray∣sed) vnderstād the knacks of S. Wenefrids néedle, the re∣newing of the bloud of Nayles, the filth of S. Frācis brée∣ches, &c. These were your blessed Reliques. They were so blessed, that as your great champion, frier Alfonsus sayth, where he defendeth them: your blessed coūcell of Laterane vnder your blessep Pope Innocent the thirde, was fayne to make this prouiso for them, that is put in your decrées. Cum ex eo. &c. Seeing that the Christian religion is defaced, and* 1.869 may be defaced in time to come, vpon this, that certayne do set out to sale the Saints Reliques, and euery where shew them foorth: we haue ordeined by this present decree, that frō hence foorth the olde Reliques shal in no case be shewed without a cause (that is to say, without a péece of money to sée them) nor shall be set foorth to sale, and that suche as shall be found out of newe, no man presume to worshippe them, till they shall be allowed by the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome that is to say, till they haue payed their fées to him, for before, they be so litle blessed, that they be not

worshipfull) and as for Prelates, they shall not suffer those* 1.870 that come, for to worship at their Churches, to be deceyued by sundry feigned forgeries and false teachings, as for lucre sake it is accustomed to be done in most places.

This decréed your Pope and your Councell M. Stapl. against your blessed reliques. Were not here your Pope and his whole Councell heretikes also? you were best to say so. For this saying proueth your Prelates, Priests, & Pardoners, to haue bene false teachers, and deceyuers of the people for Lucre: and the people hauing bene deceyued by them, to haue committed Idolatrie: and the Reliques, that we were borne in hand were blessed things, as ye call them, to haue bene faigned forgeries and false teachings: & not in one place, or in some places, but in most places, that is, all ouer your Churche: and that not once or twise, by a scape: but of custome, which how long time it prescribeth, search you. This was the generall state of your vniuersall Church (for vniuersall comprehendeth the most parte) con∣cerning your blessed reliques, euen by the Popes owne de∣finitiue sentence, and all his councell, which, oft times you boast, can not erre.

But though the Pope cōfesse thus much, as •…•…e could not for shame denie so manifest a matter: yet he knew what he did wel inough, when he made this statute. For what losses so euer other poore Priests and Pardoners should féele, he made sure for him selfe to get thereby, not so much by retay∣ning the old reliques in estimation, that then, as stale and common, began to decaie: as to relieue the Churches hutch (whereof he saith he is the coaferer) by authorising newe blessed reliques. But though he gayned much by this deuice, yet much water goeth by the mill, that the miller knoweth not of. And many miriades of blessed reliques more & more encreased, and neuer fette the Popes blessing from Rome, for their warrant, so blessedly they multiplied, but had this Popes decrie bene plainly ment, or truly kept: bothe old

and new, and all your blessed reliques, had bene banished from all blessednesse and worship, long agoe: as nothing but lies and forgeries, inuented to enrich your selues, with the spoyle of the peoples Idolatrie.

I graunt, ye haue some antiquitie to pretende for Reli∣ques,* 1.871 not onely of S. Hieromes time, but somewhat before also: that with greate reuerence conserued the bodies of the glorious Martyrs. But trowe you, they worshipped, knéeled, crept, and offred to them? and yet some might, yea some did ouershoote themselues herein euen then. But did the learned Fathers allow it? Doth not euen S. Hie∣rom (of whome Alphonsus saithe, Qui duriu•…•… & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 pugnare solet, that was wonte to fight more harde and bitter∣ly) say to Uigilantius, Quis enim O insanum caput aliquan∣do* 1.872 martyres adorauit: For who, O thou frantike head, hath at any time worshipped the Martyres? He telleth how they translated them honorably, as noble martyres, but they worshipped them not. And where other began to attribute an opinion of vertue to their vestiments, Chrysestome (if the worke be his) greatly blameth them. Alij autem qui san∣ctiores,* 1.873 &c. Other there be (saith he) that would shew them selues to men, to be more holy: and tie and hang about them a parte of their hem or heares. O wickednesse, they would shew a greater holinesse in their garmēts, than in the body of Christ. He which is not healed feeding on his bodie, would be saued by the holinesse of his garment. In so much that he trusteth in the vestiment of man, which despayreth in Gods mercie. Yea? what did Paule? did not he giue his napkins, that the sicke might be helped? yes, before those men had the knowlege of God: and the reason was, that by those mens health, the power of God, might be knowne. But now it were madnesse. For, after we haue knowne the power of God, whereto is it necessarie that we should know the power of man? No (saith he) as I shewed before: Neattenda•…•… ci∣nerem,* 1.874 &c. Regarde not the asshes of the saincts bodies, nor

the Imbers of the Reliques of the flesh, and all their boanes that in time are consumed.

Yea your owne feigned Epistle in the name of Clement* 1.875 saith, Nothing is more wicked and vnthankefull, than to re∣ceyue a benefite of God, and to giue thankes to stockes and stones. S. Augustine telleth of Hypocrites in his dayes,* 1.876 that caried about with them Reliques for sale. Alij mem∣bra & ossa martyrum, &c. Other fell the members and bones of Martyrs, if yet they be Martyrs: other extoll their hems and gardes, &c. Thus there is some antiquitie to be pre∣tended for Reliques, and that they were worshipped also, but not of the godly and learned Fathers: but of wicked and supersticious hypocrites. Against whome, they cried out, but what would they haue saide, had they séene the playne Idolatrie to your forged Reliques. Of the which euen the defenders of them haue cried out, and cōfessed their abhominations. For, besides your Pope, your Councell of* 1.877 Coleyn euen in defending them, saith: Hi•…•… tamen, &c. Not∣withstanding here (which we can not denie) the gouernours of the Churche did after a meruailous fashion sleepe out the matter. And anon after: Sed nostro saculo, &c. But in our age (and that through the slouth of the parishe Priestes, we can not denie it but that we erred. And againe, Expositae sunt passim, &c. Reliques are euery where set forth for gaine, and those vncertayne Reliques, and perhaps herevppon oc∣casion was giuen, not to a fewe being yet but •…•…elie Christi∣ans, of putting confidence rather in Sainctes bones, than in* 1.878 the liuing God, which ought not to haue bene done. And thus do your own Pope, Councels and writers condemne your selues, for the horrible abuses of these your blessed Reliques, and therefore we may worthely reiect them.

To your Lightes I answere, true it is the Churche in* 1.879 the time of S. Hierome, & lōg before, vsed Lights. But as he witnesseth himself, they vsed thē for their necessitie in their Morning and Euening prayers: which first sprang of this,

that the Churche in time of persecution, assembled as they might closely in caues, in cellars, and other priuy places, comming togither very early in the morning, and very late in the euening, yea in the dead of the night, to inuocate God, to heare his worde, and participate the Lords supper, so that lights were necessarie for them. After the time of persecution, kéeping still those howres of prayer, they like∣wise serued for their vse, till by litle & litle, as other things, they also began euē about S. Hieromes time, to be abused.* 1.880 And not long after about Gregories time, to be kept light euen in the broade day, and to be set in goldē candlestickes, which the former fathers counted and called heathen cu∣stomes. For the Heathen vsed lampes burning day & night,* 1.881 and tapers before their Idols on their aulters, besides their torche lights euen as the Papists vsed.

But you wil say, not they onely vsed lights, but God al∣so* 1.882 ordeyned lightes to be vsed in the Temple. Indéede if ye could proue vs to be bounde to the ceremonies of the olde lawe, or that Christ had renewed them, and not rather ab∣rogated them, nor ordayned any other like them in their places: then should ye say something to the matter. But what néede ye labour to reduce the lawe, since ye are not* 1.883 ashamed to confesse it came from the Heathen vsage. Po∣lygrane confesseth and braggeth of it, that all your candles on Candlemasse day came from the wicked and old super∣stition of the Ethnikes. Tradunt enim hystoriographi, &c. For the historiographers tell, that the heathen Romaines had a custome, that alwaies at the fift yeare in the moneth of Fe∣bruary, they kept the feast of going about the clensing, with torches and lightes in the honour of Februa the mother of Mars, whom they tooke for the God of battayle. And also in the same moneth, the Romaine women with the like worship of candels, kept the memorie of Proserpina: whome (being rauished of Pluto the God of hell) they feigne that hir mo∣ther Ceres sought hir euē to mount Aetna. VVhich supersti∣tion

was first of the Grecians, bicause of a most grieuous pestilence in the yeare of health. 551. turned into the fore∣sayde worship of solemnitie. But afterwarde of Sergius By∣shop of Rome (who first chaunged his name, for the defor∣mitie thereof, being called Os Porci, Swines face, or Hogges snout) it was turned into a common religion, as also the feast of all the Gods, was dedicate to all Saints. VVhich was about the yeare of the Lorde. 694▪ that the Christian people should make memorials, not so much of Februa, and Proserpine, as of Christ and Marie.

Iacobus de Uoragine agréeth somwhat herewith, though herein he agrée little to himself, and least of all to the truth, besides his impudent Idolatrie to the Uirgine Marie, quite forgetting Christ, and ascribing all the honour of your can∣dels vnto hir. First he sayth it came vp herevppon. Quod* 1.884 Simeon lumen Christum vocauit, ideo consuetudo inoleuit in Ec∣clesia, vt hodie lumina deferamus. Bicause Simeon called Christ a light, therefore grewe the custome of the Church, that on this day we carie lightes. For euen as this day Marie, Ioseph, Simeon and Anna did after the order of Procession, carie a light in the Church: so do we after the order of Procession, carie Candles light vnto the Church.

As this is a most euident and grosse lie, for neyther then, nor long after, they knewe what Procession m•…•…nt: nor ca∣ried any light in the Temple, which had bene quite beyond Gods commaundement: nor any such doing is in the scrip∣ture, but onely that this blinde authour followed to much the pictures in the Primer, or the Masse booke, that painte out the midwife, or Ioseph holding a Taper: so it neyther agréeth with the other common opinion, nor yet with him∣selfe. For euen immediately after. But we must note (saith* 1.885 he) that there is a triple reason of this obseruance aud cu∣stome, the one a literall, the other a spirituall, & the thirde a morall. The literall reason i•…•… this, for bicause the Romaynes in the olde time did celebrate three feastes with lightes, the

First in the honour of Proserpina, the Seconde in the honour of Februa, the Third in the honor of all the Court of hell▪ &c. to appease them and induce them to mercie, that they would more mildely punishe the soules of their friendes departed. But bicause it is a hard matter to forsake things accustomed, the Romaynes after they receyued the sayth of Christ, did yet also kepe these feasts of lightes in Februarie. Pope Gre∣gorie* 1.886 therefore did chaunge this feast into the honour of the mother of light. That in hir honour we should beare lightes, that bare vnto vs the true light. Nor that now it shoulde bee made to Februa the mother of the God of battell: but to the honour of the mother of the GOD of peace. That it should not nowe be to the honour of the court of Deuils, but to the honour of the Queene of all Angels, and worthily was this translation made. The Romaynes did therefore honour Proserpina, that so she might obtaine grace of hir husbande. They honored Februa to obtain victorie of hir sonne. They honored the Deuils that punished the soules, to encline them to mercie. But these three things we receyue of the mother of God, that is to wit, grace, mercie, and victorie. And there∣fore the Church singeth, Marie mother of grace, mother of mercie. For shee gyueth grace to the lyuing, and there∣fore is called the mother of grace. And to the deade ob∣teyneth mercie, and therefore it followeth, mother of mer∣cie. And to the vniuersall Church shee obteyneth victorie of their enimyes, and therefore it followeth, defende thou vs from the enimie. &c.

Thus sayeth Iacobus de Uoragine of the originall of your feast of lightes. That it was but a chaungeling of the Infidels, hatched of your Pope, on this grounde, that it was harde to forsake an olde Heathen custome. But thin∣king to chaunge these lightes to the better, haue yée not blasphemed God, euen by his Saints, as yll or worse, than they did by theyr Idols.

Your Legende disagréeth from thys latter deuise of

Proserpina. &c. And sayeth, This feast is called Candle∣masse,* 1.887 and is made in remembraunce of the offering that oure Ladie offered in the Temple as sayde is. And eue∣ryeche beareth this day a Candle of VVaxe, vvhiche re∣presenteth oure Lorde Iesu Christ. This is yet somewhat better than the other. And yet in effecte no better, for as this mysterie was not vnderstoode, so was it not regarded. All the honour was to hir. And therefore your Legend tel∣leth vs a full worthie storie, that euen in hir honour of hir lights, Christ himselfe sang Masse to his mother.

VVee reade an ensample (sayth your Legende) of a no∣ble Ladie, vvhiche had a great deuotion in the blessed Vir∣gin* 1.888 Marie, and shee had a Chappell in the vvhiche, shee did do say Masse of our Ladie dayly by hir Chaplaine. It happe∣ned that the day of the Purification of our Ladie, hir Chap∣laine vvas out, so that the Ladie might that daye haue no Masse, and she durst not go to another Church, bicause shee had giuen hir mantell to a poore man for the loue of our La∣die. She vvas much sorovvfull bicause shee might not heare Masse. And for to make hir deuotiō, she went into the Chap∣pell, and tofore the aultar she kneeled dovvne for to make hir prayers to our Ladie, and anon shee fel a slepe. In vvhich, shee had a vision, and hir seemed that she vvas in a Church, and savve come into the Churche a great companie of Vir∣gins, tofore vvhom shee favve come a right noble Virgin crowned right preciously, and when they were all set eche in order, came a companie of yong men, which sat dovvne eche after other in order like the other: after entred one that bare a burthen of Candles, and departed them to them aboue first, and so to ech of them by order he gaue one, and at last came this man to this Ladie aforesayd, and gaue to hir also a Can∣dle of vvax. The vvich Ladie savv also come a Priest, a Dea∣con and a Subdeacon, all reuested going to the aultar, as for to say Masse. And hir seemed that S. Laurence, and S. Vin∣cent vvere Deacon and Subdeacon & Iesu Christ the Priest,

and two angels bearing tofore them Candles: and two yong* 1.889 angels began the introit o•…•… the Masse: and all the cōpanie of the virgins soong the Masse. And when the Masse was soong vnto the offring, hir semed that thick virgin so crowned, went tofore, and after, all the other followed, and offered to the Priest (kneeling much deuoutly) their Candles. And when the Priest taried for this Ladie, that shee shoulde also haue commen to the offring: the glorious Queene of Virgins sent to hir, to say that she was not curteous to make the Priest so long to •…•…arie for hir. And the Ladie answered, that the Priest should proceede in his Masse forth, for she would keepe hir Candle and not offer it. And the glorious Virgine sent yet once to hir. And shee sayde she would not offer hir Candle. The thirde time, the Queene sayde to the Messenger, go and pray hir that shee come and offer hir Candle, or else take it from hir by force. The Messenger came to this Ladie, and bi∣cause in no wise shee woulde not come and offer vp hir Can∣dle, he set hande on the Candle that the Ladie helde, & drew fast. And so long he drewe and haled, that the Candle brake in two peeces, and the one halfe abode still in the hand of the* 1.890 Ladie aforesayde, which anon awooke and came to hir selfe, and found the peece of the Candle in hir hande, whereof she much marueyled, and thanked our Lorde and the glorious Virgin Marie deuoutly, which had suffered hir that day not to be without Masse. And all the dayes of hir life after, shee kept that peece of that Candle muche preciously like an holy re∣lique. And all they that were touched therwith, were guari∣shed and healed of their maladies and sicknesse.

Thus worde for worde, sayth your golden Legende, in the honour of your Candles. And is not here a golden▪ péece of worke, for a waxen péece of Candle? Here is, loe, one of your blessed Reliques that before ye spake of, but it was gotten with hard hold, hale and pull, not all they coulde get it out of hir fingers, neither the Aungel coulde pull it away, nor our Ladie was obeyed any whitte, yea Christ the poore

Masse Priest was caused to tarie, and coulde not go foorth with his Masse. If this then be true, as it must needes be, being written in so holy a golden Legende, (where fors•…•…th is no lie) neyther was it a dreame, for the Candles end was in hir hande, to make mencion of hir holde fast: Is not this a foyle to Christ, to his mother, and all the Saints in hea∣uen, that a Candles ende was thus wroong from them all? Well howsoeuer that was, will ye say, this sheweth a fur∣ther originall of Candles: euen Christ, his Aungels, and Saints in heauen, do vse them at their Masses. I thinke well master Stapleton, at their Masses. But if they haue no Masses in heauen, and if they haue no Candles in hea∣uen, then leauing these childish and impudent lyes for very shame, of Candles originall: ye were best to stande to the former deuising of them, from the heathen custome, and re∣turne to your Popes chaunge at Rome.

Now after these Romishe Pagan customes aforesayde,* 1.891 were taken vp in Christendome, they began in Spain, and after in other Countreys, to fall after a coniuring maner to hallow Pascall light•…•… with exorcismes. But vppon what simple reasons, Alphonsus declareth in the defence thereof.* 1.892 Concerning the halowing of lights▪ I will onely birng (saith he) the decree of the fourth Toletane Coūcell. Ca. 18. At certaine Churches a Candle and a Taper, are not hallowed at their Vigils, and they en∣quire of vs why we hallow them? VVe hallow them solemnly that we may receyue the glorious mysterie (that came at the time of this auowed night) by the blessing of the hallowed Candle. And bicause this obseruation is commended in many Countreyes, and King∣domes of Spaine, it is fit that for the vnitie of peace, it should also be kept in the French Churches. Neither shall any escape vnpunished, but be vnder the fathers rules, that contemneth this.

Thus we sée the originall and créeping vp of your lights to depende on men. Wherevppon, though Alphonsus crie out most bitterly, calling vs coniurers and enchaun•…•…ers of the people from the truth of the fayth, bicause we set not by

them, but call such superstitious maner of halowing lights, to be the verie coniuring in déede, as euen their names of exorcismes doth import: yet is he faine to confesse, that Talis ceres benedictionem omi•…•…ere, nō sit contra fidem: The o∣mitting* 1.893 the hallowing of suche a Taper is not agaynst the fayth. And if it be not agaynst the fayth to omitte them, then are not we Heretikes for omitting them, especially in so iust considerations, of so great supersition and hor∣rible abuses, as of late time more and more they haue growne vnto, being at their best, but constitutions of men, and growne at the length to a very plaine coniuring, that* 1.894 an holy Candle coulde driue away lightning, and tempests, yea the Deuill and all it coulde: that such mysteryes, suche vertue, such confidence, suche seruice of God, such forgiue∣nesse* 1.895 of sinnes, consisted in burning a Candle, in setting vp a Lampe, in offering a Taper, in mainteyning a light be∣fore an Image, or bearing it in Procession.

Do ye not say in your hallowing of them at Masse? Bene∣dic* 1.896 Domine Iesu Christe hanc creaturam. &c. Blesse Lord Ie∣su Christ this creature of wax Candle, at our supplication, and powre into it an heauenly blessing, by the vertue of the ho∣ly Crosse, that thou which hast giuen it to mans vse to repell darkenesse, it may receyue by the signe of thy holy Crosse, suche strength and blessing, that in whatsoeuer places being lighted it bee put, the Deuill may depart thence, and trem∣ble and flie awaye pale, with all his ministers, oute of those houses, nor presume to disquiet them any more. Againe in the next prayer. Ut has Candela•…•…. &c. That these Candles prepared to the vse of men, and to the health of their bodies & their soules, either on land or water, by the inuocatiō of thy holy name, & by intercession of S. Mary alway virgin whose feasts are this day deuoutly celebrated &c. And in the thirde praier, that thou vouchsafe to blesse, hallow and kindle them▪ with the light of the heauenly blessing: that we by offering them to our God, may deserue to be kindled with the holy

fyre of thy most swete brightnesse, and to be presented in the holy temple of thy glorie.

All these vertues and many more ye ascribe to your Can∣dles. Neither do ye (as here ye pretend) offer them vp onely to God, but to the Saints also, chiefly to the Uirgin Marie,* 1.897 which as it was so common, that it cannot be denied: so to cōfirme the same, your Legend telleth vs a tale of one, that neuer did good déed in his life, but that he offred a Taper to* 1.898 the virgin Mary. And whē he died he was of Christ cōdem∣ned, & the deuils had alreadie gottē his soule. Then came the virgin Mary, & put the Taper in his hande, & had him shift with the deuils so well as he could, the soule hauing gotten the Taper, stood therwith at his defence, & euer whē the de∣uils came nere him, he •…•…oyned one in the face, & hit another here, another there, & so lustily he laid about him, y^t he droue with the Taper all y^e deuils away. So notable a force ye as∣cribed to a Candle offred to the blessed virgin, and made the simple people beleue what ye would, by these outward Cā∣dles, in the darke night & mist of error: hauing put out, and* 1.899 hidden vnder a bushel, the true holy Candle, the light of our féete, & lanterne to our steps, the blessed worde of God, that* 1.900 shoulde haue shewed Christ vnto vs, the verye light of the world, that came to giue light to those that sit in darknesse & in the shadow of death. Which spirituall light of Christ, and the glorious beames of his Gospell, the dimme eies of your soule cannot abide to looke vpō. Qui male agit odit lucē. &c.* 1.901 He that doth yll (saith Christ, our true light) hateth the light, & cōmeth not to the light, least his works shuld be reproued.

Syth therfore, euen as the Owle flieth the light, you slie the word of god: all these other lights are but mere & vnfruit∣full workes of darknesse, lulling the people a sleepe with these your dreaming fables. Yet these fables were let forth in the mother tong, y^t euery man might vnderstād them, but in no case, the true cādle might shine vnto them. In stéed whereof ye set vp a Candle before the deuil. For the godly christians

are not taught by Christ, his Apostles, nor the learned aun∣cient fathers, to set vp any suche Candles before Christ, which Lactantius calleth plaine madnesse. Candles in the* 1.902 Church so well as in other places we allowe and vse, as did Saint Hierome. And therfore, where ye obiect Uigilantius to vs, we returne euen Hieromes wordes to you. Cereos* 1.903 autem in clara a luce. &c. But we light not waxe Candles at broade day light, as thou slaunderest vs in vaine: but with this comfort, to mitigate the nightes darkenesse, to keepe vs awake at the light, least we should sleepe in darkenesse, beeing blinde with thee. And thus Saint Hierome maketh euen you master Stapleton, and your Church, that haue them in the cleare day light, and that to such blind and Idolatrous endes: both Uigilantians and Dormantians to.

Nowe to Ceremonies: I answere, that such as be decent,* 1.904 laudable, and to edifying, and may set forth Gods glorie, we refuse them not. We reiect (I graunt) and that in good con∣siderations, the rable of such heathen and Iewish ceremo∣nies, that you laded the spouse of Christ withall. We are frée from the yoke of the lawe, much lesse néede we tye vs to the bondage of Paganisme. And frō one of these, the most of your ceremonies were deriued. Saint Augustine com∣playned in his time (and he liued euen in the time of Uigi∣lantius)* 1.905 That they oppressed the Church, which God had set free, with such slauish burdens, that the state of the Iewes was more tol∣lerable, who though they knewe not the time of their libertie; yet were they but vnder the burthens of the lawe, aud not vnder the presumptions of men. Thus speaketh Saint Augustine of Ceremonies, euen where he mitigateth the matter, and bea∣reth with them so much as he coulde. But what woulde he haue thought and sayde, had he séene such an infinite num∣ber, as haue crept in since his tune, obtruded with such se∣ueritie vrged with such necessitie, estéemed with such opini∣on of holinesse, as nothing more: yea preferred before the knowledge and expresse commaundements of God, beeing

nothing but the traditions and inuentions of men?

If ye obiect Uigilantius to vs as an Heretike, for impro∣uing such ceremonies, and the abuses of them: why call ye not Christ M. St. a starke Heretike also? for he obiected e∣uen the same matter to the Scribes, Pharisies & High Priects, that they worshipped God with the traditions of men, and therefore saith, •…•…n vanum •…•…olunt me. They woor∣ship* 1.906 me in vaine: he charged them that they ouer burdened y^e people with such loade of Ceremonies, whereas his yoke* 1.907 was light and easie, and reproued them, that for those their ceremonies, they neglected and transgressed the commande∣ments* 1.908 of God. I warrant ye, they said, as you say by vs, that he was a ranke Heretike, and accursed, and excommu∣nicated* 1.909 him, and all that helde with him. And do you speake any better (of his Ministers I meane not) but euen of his worde it selfe, in respect of your ceremonies than did they? I omitte as now to tell how ye haue defaced his worde, how many things ye preferre aboue it, onely I will note this, how sawcely in the defence of your ceremonies and your other errours, contrary to the Scripture, ye exalte your selues aboue Gods worde.

Pigghius (who might for his writing be called Hog∣ghius* 1.910 wel inough) one of your chiefest porkelings, in his de∣fence of the inuocatiō of Saincts, against the worde of God: He groyneth out this saying: Ego certè maiore ratione, &c. Truly I will with greater reason denie thee, the authoritie of all the Scriptures than that thou shalt call me into doubte, the beliefe and authoritie of the catholike Church, since that vn∣to me the Scriptures haue no authoritie, but all onely of the Churche. What a wicked and swynish saying is this, of a proude Popish borepigge, against the euerlasting worde of God, that it hath no authoritie at all from God the author of it, but all from man, all from the Churche of Rome, for that is the Catholike Church that he meaneth, the Pope, his College of Cardinals, and his assemblies of Priests, for

this they call the oecumenicall and representatiue Church.* 1.911 All the authoritie that the worde of God hath, it hath it from them alone. Which if it were true, then indéede, as he saithe, by better reason he may denie all the Scriptures, than so much as call into doubt the beléefe and authoritie of the popish Bishops and Priests. Why may they not then adde too, and take from, and make what and as many Cere∣monies as they please, and good reason to?

But since it is no reason that the worde of God should be thus trod vnder the foote of man: that Gods worde should giue place to mans worde: that Gods worde should haue all his authoritie of the worde of Priests, and none at all of God: that the Wiues worde should controll, checke mate,* 1.912 and ch•…•…ks vp hir husbandes worde: that the wife may speake and appointe as much as she thinkes good, and the husbande which hath but a few wordes to say, can not be heard: that the wiues worde should beare the streake, and giue authoritie to the husbandes worde, according to the common saying, As the good man saith so say we, but as the goodwife saith so it must be: if this be no good reason, nor a∣ny reason, but cleane against all reason: then may we re∣plie to Pigghius and you M. St. that with better reason▪ all your Churches authoritie and beleefe, ought net onely to be called in doubte▪ whether it agrée to Gods worde or no, but also ought to depend wholy and onely on the authoritie of Gods worde. And rather than the authoritie of the worde of God should be called into doubte, much lesse denied, as wickedly he presumeth to speake, it were much better reason* 1.913 that he were cast into the sea, as Christ saith, and in sléede of a milstone, that all his ceremonies were hanged aboute his necke, & all such blasphemous swine, as this Pigghius, were caried hedlōg into the sea with him Yea saith Christ, Heauen and earth shall passe, but my worde shall not passe.* 1.914

If your Catholike Church M. St. were the true wife and spouse of the Sonne of God, she would with all lowlinesse,

humilitie & reuerence, here regarde & obey Christ hir hus∣bandes worde. And be content to be commaunded by it, not to countermaunde it, not to thinke it were not of force, vn∣lesse she gaue authoritie thereunto, not to adde or diminishe to or from it, not to commaunde one thing when he com∣maundes another, not to compell the children and houshold of the faith to obserue hir worde more than hir husbandes, not to haue twentie commaundements for hir husbandes tenne, not to vse other fashions and customes than hir hus∣band bids hir, yea such as he forbids hir, not to haue all the wordes and hir husbande not one worde, yea to shut vp his mouthe and not to heare his worde: these are impudent whores and bolde strumpets fashions, a godly Christian matrone, a vertuouse and faithfull spouse, would neuer do thus. But since your Church doth thus, call hir catholike so fast as ye lust, she is nothing else but a common catholike queane, and not the humble and faithfull spouse of Christ. And your selues that defende hir, haue good reason indéede* 1.915 to defende your Mother: but such Mother such children, that to holde with their mother dispise their Father, and make hir worde to giue authoritie to his, and say that with better reason they may denie the authoritie of their Fa∣thers worde, than so much as make a doubte of the beleefe and authoritie of their mother. Yea that is a good ladde I warrant him and a well taught childe, that will helpe the Mother to beate the Father, is he not worthie his Mo∣thers blessing for his labour? but suche bastarde rebelles shalbe sure of the Fathers curse. For indéede they are not his Children: Ues ex patre vestro Diabolo estis. You* 1.916 are of your Father the Diuell. Qui ex Deo est verba Dei audit, propterea vos non auditis quia ex Deo non estis. He that is of God heareth the worde of God, therefore you heare it not, bicause yeare not of God. The true children of God aboue all, other thinges, yea more than Father, mother, wife, children, fréendes, yea than their owne life, loue God,

and the hearing of his woorde. Otherwise they were not* 1.917 worthie of God. Thus do all the shéepe of Christ, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 meae v•…•…cem meam audiunt. My sheepe heare my voice: As the Fa∣ther hath bidden them, Hunc audite, &c. This is my welbe∣loued* 1.918 Sonne, in whom I am delighted, heare him, that is to say, Leuell all your faith and life by the onely authoritie of his worde: Who onely knoweth the Fathers will, and* 1.919 in whom all the treasures of his fathers glorie are couched: Who is the wisedome of God, the truth, the way, the life, and the worde it selfe. The Sonne which is in the fathers bo∣some, he hath declared it. Heare him. Auditus autem per ver∣bum Dei, But hearing commeth (not by the Mothers autho∣ritie) but by the worde of God.

Thus did the godly children vnto God, whome we call Fathers vnto vs, both before, & in Uigilantius time. Nul∣lum imitemur, &c. Let vs follow none, (saith Origen) and if* 1.920 we will follow any, Iesus Christ is set forth vnto vs to follow, the Actes of the Apostles are described, and we acknowledge the doyngs of the Prophets out of the holy volumes, that is the firme example, that is the •…•…ounde purpose, which who so desireth to follow, goeth safe. Thus also saith Cyprian, both for Gods worde, & for your Mothers ceremonies: The* 1.921 Heretike saith let nothing be deuised of newe, besides that which is by tradition deliuered. From whence came this tra∣dition? came it from the authoritie of the Lorde, and of his Gospell, or came it from the commandements of the Apo∣stles, and their Epistles? for indeede that those things which are written ought to be done, God witnesseth, and setteth forth to Iesus of Nauee, saying, let not the booke of this law departe out of thy mouth, but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou obserue all things that are written. Like∣wise the Lorde sending his Apostles, commandeth that the nations be baptized, and taught to obserue all those things that he commaunded. If therefore it be commaunded in the Gospell, or in the Apostles Epistles, or be contayned in the

Acts. &c. Then let also this holy tradition be kepte.

And anone after he sayth: Quae ista obstinatio. VVhat an obstinacie is this, or what a presumption, to preferre an humane tradition before Gods ordinance. Nor to consider, that God taketh indignation and wrath, so often as an humaine tradition looseth, & goeth beyonde the commaundements of God, as he cryeth by his Prophet Esay, and sayth, this people honoreth me with their lippes, but their hart is separate frō me: they worship me in vayne, whyle they teache the cōmaundements and doctrines of men. The Lorde also in the Gospell, blaming likewise, and reprouing, putteth foorth and sayth, ye haue reiected Gods commaundement, to establishe your tradition. Of whiche commaundement S. Paule beeing mindefull, dothe likewise warne and instructe, •…•…aying: if anye teache otherwise, and contenteth not him selfe with the wordes of our Lorde Iesus Christ, and his doctrine▪ he is pufte vp with bloc∣kishnesse, hauing skill of nothing. From suche an one we ought for to departe. &c.

And in the same Epistle he sayth further: But if so be, O moste deare brother, the feare of God be before vs, if the tenor of fayth preuayle, if we keepe Christes cōmaundements, if we mayn∣teyne the holynesse of his espouse incorrupte and inuiolate: if these wordes of the Lorde sticke faste in oure vnderstanding,* 1.922 and in oure hartes whiche he sayde: thinke ye that when the sonne of man shall come, he shall finde fayth in the earthe? Bicause then, we bee the faythfull souldiours of God, bicause we wage vnder him, with faythe and sincere religion, let vs with a faythfull manhoode keepe hys campe committed to vs of God. Nor the custome that crepte in among some, oughte to hinder vs, that the truthe mighte the lesse preuayle and van∣quishe. For custome without truthe, is the antiquitie of errour. VVherfore, forsaking errour, let vs followe the truthe. Knowing that the truthe saythe, as it is written in Esdras: The truth flori∣sheth* 1.923 and preuayleth for euer. &c. If we returne to the head and originall of Gods tradition, mans errour ceaseth. And beholde the reason of the heauenly sacraments, what obscuritie soeuer lurked

vnder the miste and cloude of darknesse, it is opened with the light of the truthe. If a conduite of water, whiche before dyd slowe plentyfully and largely, do sodaynely fayle: do we not go to the* 1.924 spring, there to knowe the reason why it fayleth? whether by the encreasing of the vaynes it be dryed in the head: or else flowing from thence whole and full, it stoppe in the middle course. And if it come to passe, by reason the pype is broke: or if it soke vp the water, whereby the streame can not still keepe on his course con∣tinually: the pype beeing repayred and amended, the water is fette agayne as plentyfully, and as holesomely, as it springeth from the fountayne. VVhich thing now also the Priestes of God ought to doe, keeping the commaundements of God. That if so bee the truth stagger, and wauer in any poynt, let vs then returne backe to the Lords, and his Gospels original, and the Apostles tradition. And from whence bothe the order and originall arose, from thence let the reason of our doing arise.

Marke this generall rule of S. Cyprian, M. Sta. and I pray you set all your ceremonies vnto it, and ye shall tell me another tale, and say with Hilarie, they are well ta∣ken away. Omnem plantationem, &c. Euery plant which is not* 1.925 of my fathers setting, is to be pulled vp, that is to say, the tradition of man is to be rooted out, by the loue whereof, they transgressed the commaundementes of the Lawe. And therefore are they blynde leaders of the blynde, promising the waye of eternall lyfe, which them selues can not see, and so beeing blinde them selues, and guides of the blynde, they tumble into the ditche to∣gither. Suche Pharisies are you, M. St. with your blynde ceremonies, and suche Chrisostome (if the worke be hys) calleth you and all other, that s•…•…ande so muche on ceremo∣nies. Per obseruationes. &c. They enlarge their owne sayinges* 1.926 by the obseruations of dayes, as thoughe it were euen the Phari∣seis broade gardes, and in their preaching they shewe them continually to the people, as thoughe they were the full kee∣ping of the Lawe, and the getting of their saluation. Suche were they of whome Christe sayde, they worship me in vayne,

teaching the doctrines and commaundementes of men. The large hemmes of their garmentes, he calleth the magnificall extolling of their commandements. For when they prayse those trif•…•…ing and superstitious obseruations of their owne righteousnesse, as though they were excellent, and very much pleasing God: then do they set out the hemmes of their garments.

If y•…•… saye, it is to be doubted, whether this be Chriso∣stomes owne opinion of ceremonies, or no, in likenyng them to the Pharifeis hemmes: ye shall heare euen his owne opinion. Unde patet multa. &c. It appeareth heere∣vpon,* 1.927 that many thinges were of newe broughte in by the prie∣stes, and althoughe Moyses wyth a greate terrour hadde threat∣ned them, that they shoulde neither adde too, nor take awaye anything, ye shall not, saythe hee, adde any thyng to the worde that I speake to you thys daye, nor take therefrom: yet for all thys had they brought in very many new thinges, suche as were those, not to eate meate with vnwashed handes, to rince their cuppes and brasen vessell, and to washe themselues. And whereas they oughte in processe of tyme to haue contemned suche obseruations, they tyed them selues to more and greater. VVhich thing came to so gret wickednesse, that their precepts were more kept, than were the commaundements of God. In so muche that now they seemed worthily to be reprehēded, that did neglect their obseruations. In which doings, they committed a double fault, for bothe the bringing in it selfe of the newe thinges, was no small crime: and in that they sharpely punished the contemner of their obseruations, hauing no regarde of the commaundementes of God, they became thrall to greeuous offences. So right in eue∣ry poynt thefe doings of the Phariseis, hit on the thumbes, and liuely portray out your popish Priestes doings. M. St. that oppressed the church of Christ with the like, and m•…•… superstitious ceremonies than euer the Phariseis did.

Nowe where they pretended, as you do, that they recei∣ued* 1.928 these ceremonies of their auncestors: Although (sayth Chrisostome) he make no mention of their Elders, yet in

accusing these, he so dasheth downe those, that he sheweth euen that to be a double fault, first in that they obeyed not God, then that they did them for bicause of men, as though he shoulde say, I tell you euen this destroyeth you, bicause in euery thing ye will obey your elders: whiche is one of your greatest reasons (M. St.) for your ceremonies

Here if ye say for all this proportion betwéene your do∣ings and theirs, yet are not we so straightly bounde from* 1.929 the fathers traditions as they, bicause the Iewes other∣wise had ynowe commaunded them, and verie fewe in the newe Testament are left to vs Christians: Chriso stome telleth you, that Christes Disciples ought to keepe the doc∣trine of God, not of men. For otherwise, Christ blaming the Pharisers for kéeping the doctrine of men, if he had suffered his Disciples to kéepe any doctrine of men, they* 1.930 woulde haue replyed that wherein he reprehended them, hée himselfe was culpable. If nowe the Disciples bée bounde to this rule, are not your Priestes also? Yea are not all Christians bound thereto, not to worship God with doctrines of men?

As for the doctrine of Christ, to be euen as full, yea and* 1.931 much fuller than was theirs, for all it hath not your cere∣monies. Chrisostome sayth: Omnia enim Euangelium con∣tinet. &c. For the Gospell conteyneth all things both present and to come, the honor of God, godlinesse, faith, yea al things are shutte vp togither in the worde of Preaching. &c. For e∣uen as the cryer proclaymeth to all that be at the assemblie, euen so (sayeth hée) doe wee publikely preache. After this sorte, that we adde nothing, but preach onely those things, whiche wee haue hearde, for that is the vertue of the cryer, to prosecute all things truely that he is trusted with, not to put to, nor alter, nor take away anie thing. Whiche is so haynous a faulte, that from hence as Saint Ambrose sayeth, the Deuill gat the first holde, when our first mo∣ther Eue did but a little alter in telling the wordes of

God to the serpent. Whervpon, we learne (sayth he) that* 1.932 we ought to ioyne nothing to the commaundement no not to make vs the more warie. For if thou puttest too, or dra∣west away any thing, it appeareth to be a kinde of trans∣gression of the commaundement. And that the pure and simple forme of the commaundement is to be kepte: vve muste followe the fashion of witnesse bearing. Commonly* 1.933 a witnesse, while he putteth too some thing of his owne de uising, to the manner of the deedes doing: he stayneth with a peece of a lie, the whole credite of the witnesse. For heere at the first shewe what offence hath it, that the woman ad∣ded, Nor ye shall touche any whitte of it? for God had not sayde, ye shall not touche, but ye shall not eate. But for all that, heereon came the beginning of the fall. For the wordes that shee added, eyther shee added them as superfluous, or adding them of hir owne, shee thought that the comman∣dement of God was but halfe perfecte, (as you speake of Gods worde, and the infancie of Christes Churche, in the primitiue state therof, while it was yet without your addi∣tions.) The treatise therfore of this present lecture teacheth vs, that we ought not to withdraw any thing from the com∣maundements of God, nor adde thereto. For if Iohn gaue iudgement on this writing, If any, sayth he, shal adde to these things, God shall adde to him the plagues that are written in this booke, and if any man shall minishe of the wordes of this booke of this prophesie, God shall take away his parte out of the booke of life: howe muche more muste no man withdrawe from Gods commaundements.

This sayth S. Ambrose to all your vnwritten verities, and loades of ceremonies, all beyonde, and many agaynst the worde and commaundement of God. Therefore I may safely, for al doctrine, say with S. Aug. (if it be his sentēce)* 1.934 VVhatsoeuer ye heere alleaged out of the scriptures, let that sauour well vnto you, whatsoeuer is besides the scripture, flye it, least ye wander in a cloude. L•…•…t vs not make (saythe

he) religion of oure owne fantasies, for what truth soeuer it be,* 1.935 it is better than all that we can deuise after our will, who soeuer be the deuyser, howe wyse, howe holye, howe greate soeuer he were. We muste despise him, as S. Augustine saythe on this versicle. Effusus est contemptus super principes. &c. VVhye were they contemned? bicause they declared an other* 1.936 thing: who are contemned? those that are accursed. For whosoeuer shall declare any other thing than that ye haue receyued, let him be accursed. &c. Are they Princes? are they learned? are they great? are they precious stones? VVhat wilte thou call them more? are they Angels? and yet if it were an Angel from heauen, that should declare ought vnto you besides that ye haue receyued, let hym be accursed. And are your Priests or Pope more priuileged héerein than are the heauenly Angels? if he be a Prince, as he pretendeth by his crownes: if he be learned, as he sayth his brest is the closet of all learning (thoughe indéede ma∣ny Popes haue béene as simple Clerkes, as euen the sim∣plest minister in all Englande, whose lacke of learning so often ye rayle vpō:) if he were neuer so great, as he calleth him selfe, Pontificem maximum, the greatest Byshop: were he a precious stone him selfe, as in his Pontificalib•…•…s he is all to be dashte with precious stones. Yea, were he an angell that came from heauen, as he is but a man that came from earth: yet for all this, if your Pope make ceremonies, and establish them for necessary doctrine of religion, besides the word of God: then is euen he, & all you that so maynteyne them, before God accursed, and so to be counted as accur∣sed, howe faste soeuer wyth Booke, Bell, and Candle, he curse other, that forsake him and his accursed ceremonies. And haue not we then good cause to refuse them, séeme they ueuer so plausible?

But as S. Augustine sayth of mans doctrine: The saying of man seemeth to haue reason for it (as the Papistes alleage* 1.937 many goodly reasons for them) tyll it be layde to the diuine knowledge: but when the lye (that is, mans doctrine, omnis

hom•…•… mendax: euery man is alyer) shall approche to the truthe, it is deuoured, and perisheth euen as towe layde to the fyre. And all the opinions of falshoode, which now are called Idols, bycause they be feigned and forged, shall be vtterly wasted away. And this is their verye destruction, that as Gamaliell sayde* 1.938 they be not of God Demaunde of them this question, for their doctrines: An ex Deo sint, an ex hominibus, whether* 1.939 they be of God, or of men. and ye shall pose them, as Chryst posed the Phariseis. For euen as Ise melteth at the rayes of the cleare sunne, so these ceremonies waste away, and léese their estimation, whersoeuer the word of God begin∣neth to take place: and are maynteyned, onely where the worde of God is kepte in hucker mucker, and the peo∣ple in ignoraunce, beléeuing these ceremonies to be of as muche, yea of muche more force, than the worde of God. And therfore as Eckius, Piggi•…•…s, C•…•…ingius, Peres•…•…us, Ca∣nus, Fisher, Petru•…•… a S•…•…, Cocleu•…•…, Catharinus, Hosius, Alphonsus, &c. before you: so all you stande nowe with vs stifely at this baye, that they are euen as necessarie to sal∣uation as the word of God. And if ye let goe this tackling, all come downe on anheape.

Whiche Alfonsus fore•…•…éeing, or euer he woulde make his booke, as he termes it, agaynst heresies. Iaciendum est* 1.940 solidissimum fundamentum. &c. VVe muste laye (saythe he) a moste sounde foundation, wherewith we muste hereafter moste often defende our selues agaynst heretikes, as with a moste sure bulwarck, that the traditions and difinitions of the vniuersal church in those thinges that pertayne to faythe, althoughe the euident scripture fayle for the proofe of them, are of no lesse authoritie than the holy Scripture it selfe. And agayne, Mihi horum per tot seecula. &c. The authoritie of these most approued men by so* 1.941 many ages, should suffice to me, although I had by no former rea∣son conuicted it. Let vs therfore say, that the Churche muste be o∣beyed in all things, that are to be beleeued, or to be done, although the authoritie of scripture want.

Thus do you estéeme and stoutly stande to the defence of your ceremonies, quite contrarie to all the foresaide aūcient fathers, that giue, as we do, all especiall prerogatiue to the only scriptures. You were best therfore, to call them here∣tikes* 1.942 & Uigilantiās with vs, for so your Sorbonists played with Erasmus. Though he allowed many of your popishe ceremonies, and durst not speake open mouthed agaynst any of them, for it had beene to hotte for him, since he dyd but touche them ful softly, and yet they cried out vpon him, a Uigilantian, an Aerian, an heretike, as héere you doe. A sore •…•…adde ye knowe, is soone broken: and they are tender ware, and dayntie to be delte withall, the least worde in the worlde agaynst them, will make a maruel∣lous heretike.

Erasmus had but sayde: Quo magis haeremus. &c. Howe* 1.943 muche more we cleaue to bodily ceremonies, so muche the more wee encline to Iudaisme. And dyd but wyshe on thys wyse: Opto omnes esse tales. &c. I wishe that all men were suche, that they mighte not muche neede bodily ceremonies, or not giue so much vnto them. And that Christ said: Discipulis nihil istarum rerū prascribo. I prescribe to my Disciples, nought of these things: eate this meate, abstayne from that, now rest, now labour, be clad thus, touch not this, handle not that: if I were their master, they shoulde not once learne to trust in these bodily thinges, least they shoulde remayne weake alwayes. He sayde but thus, and lesse he coulde not well say, and say any thing: but Lorde what sturre the Sorbonistes made at the matter, and howe they all to be heretiked hym, Aerian, Aetian, Io∣uinian, Uigilantian. &c. So that he was fayne for feare so muche as he mighte, to sette a good collour on these* 1.944 your ceremonies, and when he had salued the matter as well as he coulde: what sayde he then in this retracta∣tion for them? Iudaismun appello •…•…on Iudaicam impieta∣tem:* 1.945 I call them Iudaisme not Iudaicall impietie. And yet for al his excuses and commendations he was fayne to say:

Quanquam si Ecclesia tribuitur, &c. Although, if that be at∣tributed* 1.946 to the Church, what so euer is prescribed of the Bi∣shops, or is done in the churches: there are many cōstitutions of Bishops, of the which, not with out cause, all men make a publike complainte. There are many ceremonies in certaine Churches, the which ye may call either to no purpose, or els foolish, or else superstitious, for commonly either some idle Deane, or els some other meane man like him, hath deuised them. Oft times some old wife (giuing monie therefore) ob∣teyneth that this or that be done, now & than certaine creepe in, or if not so, they breake in, euen by the violence of the cō∣mon peoples custome. He should therefore not speake wic∣kedly, that should say, the libertie of the Christian people is burdened with such constitutions and ceremonies, especially when among them there are not a fewe, that do no good at all to godlinesse, but either to lucre or ambition.

Thus was Erasmus (euen where he defendeth your ce∣remonies)* 1.947 constrained to confesse. Yea where he speaketh euen the best of them. In his obseruandis, &c. In obseruing these (saith he) although they were ordayned to godlinesse, the minde of many Christians is Iewishe, either while they rest there, neglecting those things that are of the spirit, or els, while with a preposterous Iudgement they attribute more to those outwarde things, then to true godlinesse, which is set∣tled in the affections. But euen as the hardnesse of the Iewes was to be kept in, with so many prescriptions, as it were with boundes: so charitie waxing colde in Christians, caused that the Bishops prescribed many things, not vnlike the Iewishe prescriptions, although to be kept with an vnlike minde. For they are as it were certaine wagons, wherein the infancie of* 1.948 little children is brought vnto the spirite. As he sheweth after an example, Exemplicausa, &c. For ensample, the peo∣ple is bid to bow their knees, or their heads to God. By this ceremonie, the people is warned to submit their soule to God: this helpe, he that is perfect, neede not, who submitteth

his minde to God in what state soeuer his bodie be.

And although that such as this the bodies comely ge∣sture* 1.949 of knéeling (which is not a ceremonie inuēted of your Bishops, but taught vs in Gods word, by Christ and his* 1.950 Apostles manner of prayer) we not onely vse, but also di∣uerse of your Churches, Ceremonies be not refused of vs, but kept: yet are they vsed farre otherwise than your pre∣lates vrged them, or your people kept them, reposing in them as Erasmus saith: Proram & puppim Sanctimoniae, The whole stay of Religion. Tali hominū genere quoniam, &c. Bicause (saith he) I saw the worlde full of such kinde of men I now and then call them backe to the studies of true godli∣nesse,* 1.951 from the admiration of ceremonies. But to admonish to trust to ceremonies, I neither thought it necessary nor safe. Of the worde of trusting let other looke to it, vnto me, to whom this worde to trust soundeth to leane principally vnto, it soundeth hardly to trust to the workes of men, and to trust to Ceremonies. Neither finde I these voices either in the di∣uine writings, or in the writings of godly men. Thus hardly was Erasmus driuē to his defence about your Ceremonies, by the Facultie of the Diuines of Paris, that vrged the ne∣cessitie, vertue, and confidence in them.

In the ende of all which conflictes, as he saith to them, so* 1.952 say I to you M. Stap. Quid autem his tot, &c. Of all these so many propositions, what is done that shoareth vp Christian Religion? that the people should beleeue, a Monkes cowle was auailable to heale diseases? that passing ouer Christe, we should with petitions sollicite the Saincts? That very many should runne to Hierusalem, leauing their wiues and childrē, and thinke that a meruaylous kinde of godlinesse is therein? that we should thinke all the constitutions of men to binde vs on paine of hell fire? That we should put the chiefest parte of Religion in the choyse of meates? that in the Churches no decking should seeme to much, but euē excesse also should pertaine to the honour of God? that to what Ceremonies ye

lust, very much should be attributed? that boyes and wen∣ches for triflings causes, so sone as euer they repent them of their estate, dispising their parents, should runne to Mōkes or Nonnes? that no man but a Diuine should talke of Christ or of the holy Scriptures? that in Sainctes we should put very much confidence? that we should know euill men not to be indeede in the Churche, but to be of the Churche? that we should beleue the Church to be marueylously trimmed, with an exceeding and wonderfull strange varietie of seruices and vestiments? that lawyers should be comly appareled? that we* 1.953 should kisse the shoe soles, and the shoes of saincts? that no∣thing at all of the Popes institutions should be released, al∣though great profite should moue it? that they that are dying should lay-out obites? that mans mortuaries may be made, & that in them we should repose very much trust, & other mat∣ters of this sorte? But Christian godlinesse is placed herein, that we should loue God with al our hart, and our neighbour as our selues. That in Christ we should put the summe of our hope: that we should frame our manners & our life, after the doctrine and exāple of him, & after the rule of the Scriptures. Frō the which whosoeuer calleth vs away, by any manner of means, they do rather leade vs into the daūger of Paganisme.

Thus much Erasmus (so far as he durst, & so truly, that you nor all the world can denie thē) escried the wickednesse of your popish Ceremonies: which bicause we refuse on these so good cōsideratiōs, ye cal vs Heretikes. But whether we in not admitting them, or you in vrging & maintayning them, be rather Heretikes, let the Reader discerne & Iudge.

You aske vs next, what we say to the Messalians and o∣ther* 1.954 Heretikes, saying concupiscence as a sinne remayneth in vs after holy Baptisme.

To your other namelesse Heretikes, when ye name the childe, we shall tell you what we say vnto them.

To the Messalians, saying sinne remaines in vs after* 1.955 holy Baptisme: I answere, that euen your selfe do shewe

by your continuall lust of lying, that concupiscence after ho∣ly Baptisme, is yet a fowle sinne in you. Otherwise ye would not still so lust to lie both on vs, the Fathers, and the Heretikes also. Ye cite S. Augustine to declare the Messa∣lians errour, and so he truly doth, telling how they say, that* 1.956 in Baptisme our sinnes are taken away, as a ra•…•…er taketh heare away, leauing the stoompes vntaken away. If ye obiect this vnto vs, your selfe beareth witnesse against you, that ye s•…•…ander vs. For we fréely coufesse, that by Baptisme, the* 1.957 forgiuenesse of all our sinnes, stoomps & all, past or to come, is sealed vp vnto vs. So that they are all washt away, but as S. Augustine saith of Originall sinne him selfe. Non vt* 1.958 non sit, sed vt non imputetur. Not that it is not, but that is nor imputed. So that hereby you will make S. Augustine him selfe a Messalian, that writeth against the Messalians.

And I may say to you, your iolie porkling Pigghius, ma∣keth* 1.959 of S. Augustine litle better accompte. Deinde hoc mihi videtur e•…•…identer falsum, &c. Furthermore (saith he) this see∣meth to me euidently false, in that he saith, carnall concupis∣cence, the which is in our flesh, sighting against the lawe of our minde, to be properly and truly sinne in those which are not Baptized. The which should be forgiuen in Baptisme, that it should be sinne no more: and yet not withstanding should remaine, the gilt of it being taken away. For the which cause he is so offended with. S. Augustine, that very groynishly he saith, Ut autem haec ipsa vis concupiscibilis, &c.* 1.960 But that this very force of concupiscence should properly be sinne, a faulte, iniquitie, odious of it selfe to God and execra∣ble, and placing in his wrath, indignation or displeasure: it seemeth to me to be spoken most absurdely▪ nor no lesse ab∣surdly, that the selfe same should remaine, and not be also ab∣hominable to God, if at any time it were so.* 1.961

Thus hoggishly someth Pigghius against S. Augustine, for making Concupiscence and Original sinne, to be verily sinne, euen before Baptisme: & misconstruing S. Augustine

in saying it is not sinne after baptisme. Where S. August. expoundeth himself, that it is not sinne then, in that respect that it is not imputed, but forgiuen: where before it was sinne in it selfe and in imputation also, being not yet forgi∣uen. Nowe where he sayth this is most absurde, to say that it was sinne before, and it still remayneth after baptisme, the same that it was before baptisme, and that it is not ab∣hominable, & sinne after baptisme, if it were so before, put∣ting the case it were so before: It followeth then, that ey∣ther* 1.962 you confesse master Stap. with Saint August. that it is still in it selfe sinne after baptisme, though not sinne by imputation: or else that ye say with Pi•…•…hius that it is neyther sinne in it selfe, nor by imputation, neyther after, nor before.

If ye say with Saint Augustine: you incurre that, which Pigghius calleth the most absurditie, and yet incurre you a greater, making Saint Augustine a Messalian to, that pur∣posely wrote agaynst them, yea and your selfe a Messalian with vs also, agréeing with vs therein, and yet therein wryting agaynst vs.

If ye say with Pigghius, thinking to escape absurditie in being agaynst Saint Augustine, (which notwithstanding is absurditie inough, to be agaynst him whom ye pretende to follow) you incurre manifest falshood in being against the truth: yea and more absurditie to, then any yet rehearsed. For, whether is it more absurde, to impute sinne to him* 1.963 that hath none: or to forgiue him his sinne, that yet in déede hath sinne, and of mercie not to impute it to him, as though he had not that he hath, which is no absurditie at all▪ For al∣though where sinne is, it may be not imputed, yea as Dauid sayth this is blessednesse: Beatu•…•… vir, cu•…•… dominus non impu∣tauit peccatum. Blessed is the man whose sinnes the Lorde hath not imputed to him. Yet can there not be imputation of sinne, where there is in déed no sinne at all: as Pigghius most absurdly sayth.

Groyne you nowe with Pigghius, that it is neyther sinne after nor before, and we will take Saint Augustines great absurditie on vs, to defende that it is in it selfe verie sinne and damnable sinne before baptisme, and remayneth still in his nature verie sinne, but not damnable, bicause it is not imputed after baptisme. And now let vs see, whether you with Pigghius, or we with S. Aug. shall come nearer to the Messalians Heresie.

Your Capitaine Pigghius saith, that originall sinne is in* 1.964 deede no sinne at all in infants before nor after baptisme.

But baptisme taketh away frō them, only original sinne. Ergo, Baptisme taketh no sinne from them.

Againe you▪say, the childe that is not baptised shall be condemned:

But his sinnes, which are the cause of his condemnation, are not taken away by baptisme, for how can it take away that that is not?

Ergo, ye make the infant to be neuer the better for bap∣tisme.

Nowe what was the saying of the olde Heretike Adel∣phius* 1.965 vnto the godly Bishop Flauianus? Os venenum {quod} ce∣lauit euomuit, at{que} dixit nullam quidem vtilitatem ex sancto baptismate baptisatis accedere. His mouth cast out all the ve∣nome which it hid, and sayde, there commeth no profite at all by holy baptisme, to those that are baptised. And hath Pig∣ghius parbreaked vp agayne this olde poyson of the Messalians, and you haue lapped vp this Pigges most fil∣thie vomite?

But woulde to God this went no further, and that ye* 1.966 were not herein worse poysoned than euer the Messalians were, and that it were not directly agaynst God himselfe, and quite disanulling the death and blo•…•…dshed of Iesus* 1.967 Christe. For, whereas the infant (sayth Pigghius) hath no sinne in him, and yet God cendemneth him if he be not baptized: then doth GOD condemne him that i•…•… a•…•… in∣nocent

from sinne, God condemneth where no offence nor transgression is. Nowe doth this agrée with the iustice of God, to condemne an infant for no sinne, or for a bare name of sin, or for another mans sin, it selfe being nothing culpa∣ble thereof: for, all this Pigghius sayth. But God is •…•…ust and righteous in all his doinges: then is the infant borne in very sinne, and hath but the rewarde of sinne if he bée* 1.968 condemned. The rewarde of sinne is death. And by sinne, and verie sinne, not a name of sinne, came death into the* 1.969 worlde, and so hath ouerrunne all men, for as muche as all haue sinned.

Againe ye say, that the death of Christ taketh away only the originall sinne of Infants baptized, as for other sinnes after baptisme, our selues must make satisfaction for them. But originall sinne sayth Pigghius, is in déede no sinne, for* 1.970 all it is called sinne, as my writing is called my hande, bi∣cause my hande wrote it, but it is not in deede my hande: The death of Christ therefore taketh away the onely bare name of a thing. And so our satisfactions do not onely more* 1.971 than the death of Christ, but in very déede our satisfactions do all, and the death of Christ doth nothing. And thus as ye ascribe to the vertue of his death a bare name, so make ye him a redemer in bare name, and make an Idoll of the bare name of Iesus, and take away the purport and effect there∣of: giuing him baptisme, that ye call Primam gratiam to take away a bare name of sinne, but not to take away that which ye call sinne in déede.

This is the doctrine master Stapleton of your doctours, and if ye agrée with them, of yours. Who are now the Mes∣salians? who deface baptisme? who blaspheme God? who disanull and make of none effect the death of Christ, and all the benefite of washing vs from our sinnes, so fully in bap∣tisme represented and exhibited vnto vs, Pigghius or S. Augustine, you or we? For shame M. Stap. leaue your ly∣ing: nay rather, for shame learne to knowe, shoulde I say

the righteousnesse of God, and the benefit he hath wrought* 1.972 by Christe? But howe shoulde ye knowe this, when yée knowe not your selues? ye féele not your owne corruption, ye acknowledge not your sinnes, but make them no sinnes, ye vnderstande not yet your principles and rudimentes of Christianitie, and perceyue not what Baptisme is, which ye receyue•…•… being infantes, and nowe taking on you to be writers, Doctours, and teachers of other: ye had more néed go to a yong scholler againe, and learne your Cathechisme better, to know what ye were deliuered from, and what re∣mayneth in you. Is it any maruayle though ye haue such a number of other errours, that haue as it were thus sucked error from your infancies? he can neuer be good reader that can not spell, nor good Gramarian that neuer learned hys rules, but often breake Priscians head, and so do you breake Christes, so much as lyeth in you.

If your vnskill be not of malice, learne to knowe your* 1.973 selues, that before baptisme ye were children of wrath, old Adam, a lumpe and Masse of verie sinne in déede, that that is borne of the flesh is flesh. And that all euen the thoughts and affections of the fleshe, are very enemities agaynst God.* 1.974 And that this leauen of sinne, hath sowred the whole dough. That we are not sicke, but Mortui in delictis: Starke dead in wickednesse and sinnes, & that all are thus, The Scripture* 1.975 (sayth S. Paule) hath shut vp all vnder sinne. There is not one hath done good no not one. All are borne and begot∣ten of vncleane seede. Yea Dauid himself confesseth his mo∣ther cōceiued him in sin. Where he accuseth not his mother for an harlot, or himself of bastardie, or y^e act of matrimonie to be sinful. But that euen the masse & substance of himselfe conceyued, was corrupt with sin, bicause they were sinners of whose seede he came. For such as is the tree, such fruite it bringeth forth, we cannot (saith Christ) haue grapes of thor∣nes, nor figges of briers. By one man sin entred into the world,* 1.976 & by sin death, & so death passed through all, bicause al haue sinned.

Thus plainly as ye may sée that originall sinne and con∣cupiscence* 1.977 is very sinne before baptisme: so learne of the A∣postle to know what s•…•…ill remaineth in you after baptisme. For ye are not better than he that sayde, I know that in me, that is, in my flesh there dwelleth no good thing: he knewe no pure naturall qualities remayning in his flesh as your schoolemen say they know in theirs. And thinke ye he miti∣gated the matter, or was ashamed to confesse that it was e∣uen sinne in him after Baptisme? Nay, he not onely calleth it peccatum, sinne, But inhabitans peccatum, sinne inhabiting,* 1.978 corpus peccatū, the body of sinne, legē peccati, the law of sinne, legem rebellantē, a rebelling law. (and is rebelliō no sin with you?) fighting agaynst the spirit of God in him, yea leading him captiue, insomuch that, thereby he sayth he was solde vnder sin? yea it is the very body of death, vpon which he stil cried out, Miserum me quis •…•…e liber abit a corpore mortis huiu•…•…. Vvretch that I am who shal deliuer me from the body of this death. Dare you M. St. (bicause Pigghius and other popish flatterers tell ye it is no sinne) so exalt your selfe aboue the holy Apostle S. Paule, to thinke it is no sinne at all in you, that he confessed to be so great and grieuous a sinne in him?

Now, and there were no other place in the scripture to proue it sinne, but euen this, were not this plaine ynough,* 1.979 that the Apostle sayth, Nesctebā concupiscentiam esse peccati•…•…, nisi lex dixisset non concupisces. I had not knowne cōcupiscence to be sinne, but that the law said thou shalt not lust. Wherin he nameth it not onely sinne, (for that ye count no sufficient argument, but say it is so named, for that it commes of sinne and disposeth and inclines to sinne, & therefore is called im∣properly by the name of sin) but the Apostle addeth a strong reason to proue it sinne in very déed, bicause by the flat com∣maundement of God it is forbidden, therefore it is a trans∣g•…•…ession of Gods commaundement and displeasing God, for otherwise, God would not by his law forbid it. Which ex∣presse law against concupiscence, when S. Paule regarded

better, than it appeareth you dothe then cōfessed it to be sin, which before he knew not by ignorance of y^e law. Although your ignorance be of wilfull malice that will neither know Gods law, nor your owne transgression of it, nor all these e∣uident confessions of the Apostle, & obiect S. Aug. against the Messalians to vs, and yet are you both agreeing with the Messalians, and flat agaynst S. August your selues.

For what could Saint August. write more plaine than this, Sicut coecitas cordis, &c. Euē as the blindnesse of t•…•…e hart* 1.980 is both sinne, wherewith we beleue not in God, and the pu∣nishment of sinne, wherwith a prowde hea•…•…t is punished with worthie correction, & the cause of sinne, when ought is com∣mitted by the errour of a blinde heart: so concupiscence of the flesh, against the which the good spirite doth lust, is both sin, bicause there is in it a disobedience, against the rule of the mind, and the punishment of sinne, bicause it is giuen for the deseruings of the disobeyer, and the cause of sinne, by the de∣fection of the consenter, or the contagion of him that is borne. In which wordes as he plainely speaketh both of the state of the birth before baptisme, and of the consent, de∣fection, and deseruings after baptisme: so he maketh concu∣piscence not to be sinne it selfe onely, but also the punish∣ment and the cause of sinne.

Neither is S. August. alone herein for. S. Hierom doth* 1.981 not onely call it sinne, but least ye shoulde dally about the name, he sayth: Habitans in sua carne peccatum, hoc est vitia corporis & desideria voluptatis. &c. But if my outwarde man do that he would not, and worke that whiche he hateth: hee sheweth the commaundement to bee good, and that he wor∣keth not that which is euill, but sinne inhabiting in his flesh, that is the vices of the bodie, and desires of pleasure, the whiche for the posteritie and ofspring, is euen grafted in mennes bodyes. Thus maketh he concupiscence not sinne inhabiting onely, but euen verye vice it selfe engrafted in vs, speaking not onely on himselfe, but euen on Saint

Paule also. And are you better •…•…ord•…•… all these? What pro∣céedeth* 1.982 this vpon, but plaine arrogancie, ioyned with obsti∣nacy, to conceale your shame and flatter your selues, in your sinfull burning lusts? which rather than ye would with hu∣militie acknowledge and confesse, ye spare not so to exalt your selues, that ye deface the glorie of God: so to vaunte your p•…•…ra naturalia, your frée will and merits, that ye quite take away euen the death of Iesus Christ, and to establishe* 1.983 your owne righteousnesse, ye disdaine to be subiect to the righteousnesse of God: and making vs beleue we had no sin at all while we were infants newly regenerate, to deceyue* 1.984 our selues, and to haue no more truth in vs than is in you.

Go now Master Stapleton and boast that we be Messa∣lians, or rather clere your selues of their Heresies, besides that, ye be not onely Messalians, but Missalians, or Massali∣ans, which is a great deale worser Heresie.

Your next obiection is of Images.

And bicause (say you) ye shall not say I suppresse, conceale,* 1.985 or obscure the chiefe and most notable persons of your aun∣cestrie: how say ye to the Emperors, Philippicus, Leo, Cōstan∣tinus, cōdemned with their adherents by the 7. generall Coū∣cell at Nice, that villained by defacing breaking and burning, the Images of all the holy Hallowes of Christ & Christs too.

If your guiltie conscience M. Stap. do misgiue you, that ye haue hitherto charged vs falsly, and haue suppressed, con∣cealed and obscured our true auncestours, and in stead ther∣of haue obiected Heretikes: it were some token of grace and repentance in you, that ye say yet now at the length, ye will not suppresse, conceale, or obscure the chiefe and notable per∣sons of our auncestrie. Where ye aske vs what we say to these thrée Emperors, Philippicus, Leo & Constantinus that ye say villained Images: whatsoeuer we say to them Master Stapelton, some good fellowe perhaps will say this to you, that if they bée suche most notable persons, ye might haue spared such villainous language, except it be naturall to you

to vse villaynes Rhetoricke on chiefe Princes and most no∣table personages.

But I will not meddle with your well nurtured termes, onely I desire you, as ye pretend, not •…•…o suppresie, conceale, nor obscure indeede, the chiefe and most notable persons of our auncestrie, whereby ye meane the auncient Emperors. If ye will not in very déed, how chaunce ye name but these thrée for taking away of Images? why suppresse ye y^e names of the Emperors Ualens & Theodosius, that made a plaine* 1.986 decrée agaynst all maner of Imag•…•…rie, of all the holy Hal∣lowes of Christ, as ye call them, & Christes to? and yet your seuenth generall Councell condemned thē not, yea your selfe (as after shal appéere) do highly cōmend them. What ment ye to suppresse the name of Carolus Magnus, commended* 1.987 likewise highly euen by your selfe? and yet he abolished all Images also? Why name ye Philippicus, Leo & Constan∣tinus onely? and tell not of all the other Emperors before these, & after these, euen til the time of Theodorus Lascaris that yelded to your Pope herein at Lions Councell, & ther∣fore the Gréekes depriued and expelled him for his labour.

Syth then so many chief and most notable persons of the auncient Emperors (of which your self graunt some to be as godly as notable, & being before that Coūcell were not con∣demned by it, being as ye say, our aūcestors herein) are alto∣gither quite suppressed concealed & obscured: is not this very partiall and vnfaithfull dealing in reiecting our honourable pedegree, M. St? But I see you will neuer leaue your lying.

Nowe where ye say these thrée Emperors were condem∣ned* 1.988 by the seuenth generall Councell at Nice. True in déede they were so, euen as you condemned all Godly Prin∣ces at your last Trident Councell, that abolishe your I∣dolatrie. What maner a Councell it was, and what ma∣ner of reasons they haue in it, for the setting vp of Images, I thinke your selfe was halfe ashamed to shewe, but muche more afrayed to note, by who•…•…e authoritie thys

Councell was called and ordred, which had béene pertey∣ning to the issue betwéene the Bishop & Master Feck. But we shall see more thereof when we come thereto.

Ye are very straight laced For defacing and burning the* 1.989 Images of all Hallowes, of Christ, and of Christes Images, and this ye call villanie, But ye make no boanes to deface and burne as villaynes and herelikes the very all Hallowes in déede of Christ, his true and liuely Images and members, this is no villanie with you at all. But euen your owne boo∣kes, yea your owne Pope (if Clement were a Pope, and if the worke were his) condemneth you. For what doe you herein otherwise th•…•… did the Heathen▪ If whom he writeth thus: That Serpent also is woont to alleage such woordes as* 1.990 this, we worship visible Images to the honour of the inuisible God, but this is most certainely false: for if in deede yee will worship the Image of God, yee shoulde in doing of good deedes vnto man, worship the verie Image of God, for in e∣uery man is the Image of God. His similitude is in no other things but there, where is a benigne and pure minde. If ye* 1.991 will therefore honour truely the Image of God, wee open to you that whiche is the truth, that yee doe well to man whiche is the Image of God, giue honour and reuerence to him, giue meate to the hungrie, and to the thirstie drinke, to the naked cloathing, succour to the sicke, harborough to the straunger, minister to him that is in prison such things as hee needeth. And this is that which in deede shall be counted gi∣uen to God. These things do so much redounde to the honor of Gods Image, that he which doth them not, is thought to do villanie to Gods Image. VVhatkin worship then of God is this, to gad vp and downe after stonie and wodden shapes,* 1.992 & to worship thē as though they were godheads, being vaine figures and without life, and dispise man in whome is the very Image of God. But knowe ye for certaintie, that he that committeth murther, or whoredome, yea whatsoeuer he doth to hurte or iniurie men, in all these thinges is the Image of

God violated, &c. vnderstande ye therefore that this is the* 1.993 Diuels suggestion lurking in you, which persuadeth you ye may seeme godly while ye worship vnsensible thinges, and not to seeme vngodly, while ye hurt both sensible and reaso∣nable creatures.

Thus saith your Pope not onely to the Heathen then, but also to you, vsing the same Heathen fashions now, stan∣ding so much on the defacing burning and villaning Gods Images as ye call them of woode & stone: And your selues burne, de•…•…ace and villaine, the very Images of God, either not knowing the true Images of God, but taking dead pi∣ctures for his Image, or wittingly reiecte your Popes ad∣uertisement, and do contrary to your consciences. But as ye thus deface Gods very Image, so deface ye God him selfe. Ye stande much vppon his pretended Image, and yet ye re∣garde not him, his worde nor his commaundement. Ye ho∣nour ye say his Image, and dishonour him selfe.

I omit the foresaid dishonoringes of him in your inuo∣cation, in iustifiyng your wicked concupiscence from beyng sinne, &c. ye dishonour him euen in the Images that ye made of him, to honour him by. Was not this a dishonour* 1.994 of God, to picture him out like a Creature, like a sinner, like a corruptible man, like an old greybearded Father, yea like a monster with three faces in one head, as the •…•…ea∣then pictured Ianus with two faces, or Gerion with thrée bodies, or Cerberus with three heads? what was disho∣nour to God if this were not? to set out any picturs of God, yea after the portrature of man, whose bodie though it is, Formae praestamissim•…•…, Of a most comely shape, is yet so vn∣sitting for God, that S. Augustine calleth it Sacrilege. Yea* 1.995 God sende it •…•…all not out, that ye mainteyne a foule Heresie of the Trinitie therein. But how cunningly soeuer ye shall cleere your: selfe thereof, a great dishonoring of God it was.

A lie can not be an honour to him that is truth and a spirite, and will be worshipped in spirite and truth, not in a

bodely Figure, and that a false figure too? if the picture of* 1.996 God be not a lye, when sawe ye God at any time? if ye neuer sawe him, ye go by blinde ghess•…•…. Yea, if he him selfe, euen for this purpose, when he would most shew him selfe, would yet shewe no bodily figure, least any should Wor∣ship him by any bodily Fiigure: will you presume to make after your fanta•…•…ies, a bod•…•…ly forme or rather deformitie of him? how can this be but a lie, a dishonour, an Idolatrie, and presu•…•…npteouse rebellion against Gods purpose and ex∣presse commaundement? Euen as Iob saith: Currit im∣puis* 1.997 contra Deum extent•…•… collo, The wicked runneth against God euen with a stretched out necke.

Thus as you deface God, pretending his honour: so de∣face* 1.998 ye those Saincts that ye call al •…•…hallowes, euen vnder the pretence of honoring them, and their Images For if it be not honour to God, to honour him by a picture: thinke you it is than an honour to his Saincts, to be honored by pictures? and if his Saincts themselues refused honour, will they haue their pictures honored?

Your shifte that ye make of unlearned and lay mennes* 1.999 bookes, neither will any thing auaile you, nor your selues vse it otherwyse than for a shifte. For ye vsed them not as remembrancers, but ye honored them as helpers. Now, if a learned man may not knéele, créepe, crouche, offer, and praye to his booke, thoughe the booke were of the Saintes lyues neuer so muche, yea thoughe it were Gods booke, (Moyses honoured not the verie Tables writen with the finger of God) by what priuiledge then may the Lay and vnlearned person, honoure, knéele, offer and praye vnto their bookes: yea admitting the case, that Images were the Idiotes bookes, as ye call them. But God wote they are verie Idiots, that haue no other, but suche bookes. And more Idiots, that thus honoure their bookes. And you most Idiotes of all (I am afrayde) that make suche Idiotes reasons.

The Idolatry that ye made the people to commit was to* 1.1000 manifest. The practises ye vsed were to broade. The tales that your Legendes tell of the workes of Images, are tootoo shamefull M. Stapleton.

Ye tell vs, howe the picture of the Uirgin Marie was* 1.1001 Bawde to Beatrice a Nonne the space of the xv. yere, while she played the common strumpet. Ye tell vs that at Spire, (Ubi adoratur Imago Sancta dei genetricis quae ad sanctū Ber∣nardum* 1.1002 tribus vicibus locuta est, &c. Where the Image of the holy mother of God is adored, which spake three times to S. Bernarde,) A boy gaue hir childe a piece of bread criyng Pu Pu, and the Image of Christ embraced the boye, and saide Pu pu pe, noli flere, post tridu•…•…m mecum papabis. Whine not, and three daies hence, thou shalt eat pappe with me. Another time, how the Image of Christ came down out his mothers* 1.1003 armes & playde with an abbots childe. Another time when the arme of his Image of stone was broken, how bloud* 1.1004 gushed out, and the stone Image of his Mother seing the bloud, rent hir garmentes and ornamentes of stone about hir, rente the Iuels about hir necke, and made naked hir brest vnto the pappes, for the reproch and iniurie that was done to hir babie. Another time,* 1.1005 when Auinion was besieged, they got hir Image vpon the gate, putting their confidence in hir, and when one standing behind hir was shot at, Imago genu erexit, &c. The Image lift vp hir knee, and receyued the stroke of the arrow, &c. and it stic∣keth yet in hir thigh.

Ye tell vs how on a time, Quidam pictor Diabolum cum* 1.1006 cornibus, &c. A certaine painter painted the diuel with hornes and other members, so vgglie as he could, but the Image of the Virgin Marie he painted so faire as he could, whereat the Diuell being angrie, brake the scaffold while he was pain∣ting hir Image. Mox Imago pussimae virginis, pictori manuū porrexit, & eum ne caderet firmiter retinuit, sic{que} eum à daemone custodiuit. VVith that the Image of the most godly Virgin caught the painter by the hande, and helde him fast from falling, and so it

saued him from the Diuell. Ye tell vs of a Churche set on fyre by lightning, but when it came néere to the Image: Quasi expauescens, omnino intactam reliquit. &c. The fyre as afrayde of it, lefte it vntouched: yea a bunche of Pecocks fe∣thers, leaning to the Image of wood, escaped vnburnt also. And this miracle (sayth he) was done to shewe, quòd sibi seru•…•…entes, ab igne aeterno liberare faciliter possit: That she can easily deliuer from hell fyre those that serue hir Howebeit,* 1.1007 at Wilsdean hir picture escaped not the fyre so scotte free, but that the one halfe was burned, euen with the negligēce of the candles that were set about hir. But to salue thys blemishe, the remnaunt of the blocke wrought as greate miracles, as any of the other. For when the Priest had sent to London the residue of the Image that was saued from the fire, to be peeced out by the Caruer: after he coulde not make the olde and the newe to frame well togither, he cast the olde picture behinde the stall, and made another lyke it. The Priest, when he came to sée the picture, where is my wife, quothe he: to whome the Paynter shewed the picture that he had newe made lyke the other. No, quothe the Priest, thou lyest, this is an other, this is not my wife. That it is, quoth the Paynter. No, no husbande, quoth the olde Image, that is not I: I am héere hidden and caste be∣hinde the stall. This was a famous miracle, and his wife deserued to be caried home agayne with solemne processiō.

It were infinite to tell the tales of your Roodes that spake, that nodded, that sweatte, that bledde, that embraced and kissed those that came to them: with a number of such like forgeries, to make the people beléeue, not onely the Saincts, but euen the very pictures of them had a force and influence of grace and helpe in them. And so the Roode of grace, our Lady of grace, our Lady of pitie. &c. had their names. I omitte your other Saincts pictures, yea some of those whome ye worshipped, that God knowes were sée∣ly Sainctes, and your selues doubte whether euer they

were honest men and women, or no. Yea of those that* 1.1008 were neither men nor women, I meane not Angels, whom ye honored in pictures of winged and fethered men, but of S. Sunday, of S. Sauiour, of S. Crosses, &c. Nei∣ther* 1.1009 God, nor Angell, nor man, nor woman, of whome ye might say, as the Priest sayde, when he byd his beades on Sunday: Good friends, ye shall haue this wéeke the feast of S. Epiphanie, but whether it be hee Sainct or shée sainct. I can not tell. Of these Saincts you had pictures, you had Churches, ye had Pilgrimages, ye had offringes, and yet were there no suche persons at all, but as the heathen had the pictures of Iustice & other vertues, worshipping them also, as Lactantius vpbraydeth to them: Quid nobis ina•…•…em Iustitiam depingi•…•…, VVhy paynte ye out vnto vs bare Iustice?* 1.1010 can ye excuse this also of manyfest Idolatrie? Thinke you that your seconde Nicen councell woulde not lykewyse haue condemned you euen for very shame, as tootoo grosse Idolaters?

What sayth Alfonsus your owne champion, writing of purpose in the defence of Images, in handling the fact of king Ezechias, for destroying the Brasen Serpent? •…•…f the* 1.1011 Christian people (sayth he) were nowe as prone to Idola∣trie, as the people of Israell were then, nor coulde be called otherwise from theyr errour: Then, if Images were broken in peeces, I would beleeue, that they ought wo thily to be broken. This is the iudgement of Alfonsus vpon all your Alhallowes Images, and Christes too. But heereto adioy∣ning this false assumption: But the Christian people are* 1.1012 not nowe so prone to Idolatrie as were the Iewes, he conclu∣deth: there is no suche vrgent cause why Images oughte to be broken, as there was then. But if he had acknow∣ledged the manyfest truth, and had looked no further, than in his owne countrey, of S. Iames picture of Compostella, that (as they say) can moue and stirre his head by frow∣ning, or looking cheerefully, and other proper knackes: and

had he séene the great Idolatrie committed therto, and how the people flocked trō al parts thither: he should then haue seene as great, if not a great deale greater idolatrie, among those that professe the name of christianitie, than euer was to the Brasen Serpent among the Iewes, and that (as he would excuse the Popishe idolatrie) it was not one or two deceyued by a certayne simplicitie, but that it was more than an hundreth, yea than an hūdreth thousand, that were so deceyued by a certayne fraude of your priestes, that no preaching or teaching coulde serue to remoue their Idola∣trie, so long as ye let the Images stande. Which not onely ye did, but teached and preached suche fables, as more en∣creased your gaynes, and the simple peoples Idolatrie. And therfore, euen by Alphōsus reason, your Alhallowes Images are worthy to be defaced & broken in fitters by Christian Princes, as by Ezechias the Brasen Serpent was.

Nowe to the further improofe of Alphonsus his false as∣sumption, that Christians are not so prone to Idolatrie as the Iewes: I wil not presse ye with Erasmus testimonies, nor yet with Sir Thomas More, but euen as I did before with your owne councell of Colleyns complaynts, of the wickednesse vsed about your Images. Verum cum multus* 1.1013 etiam abusus. But, sithe muche abuse hath also by little and little crept in, about the worshippe of Images, that the Images also of those thinges haue beene brought into the Churche, whiche haue no testiminie of the Scripture, or of approued authors: That ma∣ny carued Images beyonde measure, with great sumptuousnesse and coste, were sette vp so faste in Churches, as thoughe heerein* 1.1014 a great parte of godlinesse consisted, the poore people of Christ be∣ing in the meane while neglected, which are the liuely Images of Christe. Furthermore, that we beholde the Images so paynted, and expressed, that they seemed to bee forged, not after the fourme of Christian honestie, but after the enticementes of the vanitie of the worlde. To conclude, that the rude people was suffred to worshippe the Images, with a certayne truste reposed

in them, the which is not altogither free frō Idolatry, so that they can not be excused of Idolatry, that haue chosen to them selues any Image to be worshipped, and that either for the fairenesse therof, or the foulnesse, or the newnesse, or the oldnesse, beleeuing that Image to haue some vertue, yea or some godhead or diuinitie more than the rest. VVhich error is to be playnly damned. Thus do your owne mouthes cō∣demne your selues, & that not of trifling points, nor of any extraordinary chance, but of open and ordinary Idolatrie.

I omitte suche casualties of Idolatrie, as are obiected in* 1.1015 Biga salutis, if the people should worship the diuell for God in any forme, in any reuelation, or in the consecrate hoste, which ye made the people worship (since the diuel can trās∣forme him selfe to any such shape, yea of an angell of light) whether y^e peoples worship be Idolatrie or no. I wil rather detecte your more grosse idolatrie, althoughe that, of your honoring the cake were grosse inough. Neither can it be but manyfest idolatrie, sithe there is no proportion betwéene the body of Christ, and suche a likenesse, whereas in euery Image a right and true portrature is to be required. But into that Idolatrie I will not nowe enter: onely I will come to your next obiection of the crosse. To the whiche ye* 1.1016 committed most open idolatrie, not only worshipping with cappe & knée, with crouching, knéeling, knocking, blessing, kissing gréeting, and praying vnto, but ascribing the merite of saluation to suche your worship of the crosse.

Ye tell vs how a théefe, that continuing an arrant théefe* 1.1017 all the dayes of his life. Orauit vnum Pater noster, ante cru∣cifixum, & sic saluatus est. He saide one Pater noster before the crucifix, and so he was saued. And therefore saith Discipu∣lus: Christo valdè placet cum quis orat pr•…•…tereundo Cruci∣fixum in publica strata, vnum Pater noster, & vnum Aue Maria. VVhen one passing by in the open streete, saythe one Pater noster, and one Aue Mary, Christe is highely pleased.

But not content with this Idolatrie, ye make humble prayers vnto it, as though it had life and soule, as though it were God it selfe. O Crux 〈◊〉〈◊〉 cunctis astris. &c. O* 1.1018 Crosse more cleare than all the starres, famous to the worlde, very louing vnto men, whiche onely wast worthy to beare the price of the worlde, saue this present company, gathered togither this day in thy prayses. Thus prayed you to the crosse in your olde primer. Haue you neuer sayd this prayer to the crosse? O Crux benedicta. &c. O blessed Crosse, bicause the Sauiour of the worlde did hang on thee, and the king of Angels triūphed on thee, I adore thee, I prayse thee, I blesse thee, with all my senses, be thou our consolation in our trouble. &c. Agayne, Oro te sancta Crux. &c. I pray thee holy crosse, by the omnipotent God, that thou wilt deliuer, and pull me, out of all my necessities and greeues, and de∣fende me from the wrath of God, and from the vengeaunce of all my enemies, and from sodayne death, and from all shame, pe∣rill, and blasphemie, and from all sinnes, wherewith mans frayltie may sinne agaynst God. I beseeche thee holy crosse, by the loue of Iesus Christe our Lorde, who hath exalted thee maruellously, aboue all thinges earthly, that thou wilte protecte and defende me from the Diuell, and from all daungers and euils of minde and body. Agayne, Salue gloriosa splendidissima Crux. Aue in∣uincibilis & insuperabilis dilectissima Crux. Salue preciosissima vere & digne in aeternum beatissima Crux. Aue sanctissima & sine fine digne venerāda praeclarissima Crux. Salue preciocis∣si•…•…a & vere deuote adoranda sacratissima crux. Lo, master Stap. what gallant Rhethorike is h•…•…re to the Crosse.* 1.1019

And as with these idolatrous prayers ye worshipped the picture of the Crosse, so with the like or worse, ye wor∣shipped the picture of the face of Christe, which yet by the auncient describers thereof, was nothing like his face. Neither can ye say, ye prayed not to it, but vnto Christe, whom the face in the cloath represented: for euen vnto the paynted face it selfe ye prayed, in this Rime dogrell: Salue sancta facies nostri Redemptoris, in qua nitet species diuini splen∣doris,

impressa panniculo niuei candoris, dataque Ueronicae sig∣num ob amoris, salue decus saculi speculum sanctorum, quòd vi∣dere cupiunt spiritus Coelorum, nos ab omni macula purga vitio∣rum, at{que} nos consortio iung•…•… beatorum. Salue nostra gloria in hac vita dura, labili & fragili cito transitura, nos perduc ad pa∣triam O foelix figura, ad videndum faciem quae est Christi pu∣ra▪ &c. Ye can not say héere, ye spake this to Christe him selfe, or to the very face of Christe, but your prayer is euen to the very figure or paterne of the face in the linnen cloth, and ye desire that paynted face, to exalt vs to the very face it selfe.

The lyke Idolatrous prayer and adoration ye make to* 1.1020 the fiue woūds, Salue vulnus dextrae manus, &c. God speede, wounde of the right hande, &c I adore thee, I honour thee, I require thee, I beseeche thee, that I a wretche nowe dy∣ing. &c. may neuer fayle. Hayle thou right hande wounde of Christe, thou whiche waste pearced with a moste harde nayle. &c. VVe adore thee, O wounde, to thee we encline our head, as to a moste sweete fountayne, by thee let it be giuen, that we may ouercome our enimies, and reioyce in the laste day. God speede wounde of the righte foote, &c. God speede wounde of the lefte foote. O sweete syde wound. &c. Aue, salue, g•…•…ude, vale. Hayle, God speede thee, reioyce, farewell. What foolishe prayers, and beastly Ido∣latrie was this, master Stapletō, and yet were these pray∣ers counted suche notable stuffe, that they are enfraunchi∣sed with great priuiledges and pardons. Set in golden let∣ters for more estimation and credite.

Ye haue a goodly rubrike that sayth: Fuit quaedam foemina solitaria & reclusa, &c. There was a certayne woman that was solitarie, and a recluse, which desiring to know the num∣ber of the woundes of Chryst, prayed God to reueale it to hir. At the length, beeing heard, God sayde vnto hir▪ The* 1.1021 woundes of my body were so many, as if thou wouldest honor thē with worship, thou must say euery day through∣out

the yeare, xv. Pater nosters, &. xv. Aue Maries, and so thou shalt salute worshipfully euery one of my woundes. And he* 1.1022 that shall say this prayer one yeare, shall deliuer. xv. soules of his kinne out of Purgatorie, and. xv. lyuing shall be con∣firmed iust and in goodstate, and he himselfe shall obtaine grace and knowledge of perfection. &c. And he shall see my most holy bodie. xv. dayes before his death, &c. And I with my welbeloued mother Marie, will come to him before his death. &c. Another Rubricke. To all that say this prayer, be∣tweene the Eleuation, and the third Agnus dei, are giuen by Pope Boniface two thousande yeares of pardon, at the in∣treatie of Philip the French king.

An infinite number of lesser pardons prefixed to your* 1.1023 prayers I omitte, howe Pope Iohn. 22. giues a hundreth dayes of Pardon, to him that sayth, Salue plaga lateris. &c. And howe Pope Leo added fortie more. Howe Pope Iohn the. 23 gaue to another, a yeare and fortie dayes, and. 22. Car∣dinals added euery one fortie dayes more a piece, and howe by Bull they were confirmed. These were but paltrie pardons in respect of those in your Primer, wherein among other is this more frankly giuen. VVhosoeuer being in the* 1.1024 state of grace, shall say these seuen prayers following deuout∣ly, with seuen Pater nosters, and seuen Aue Maries, before the Image of pitie: Hee shall deserue seuen and fiftie thousand yeares of pardon. The which were graunted of three Popes, that is to we•…•…e of Saint Gregorie, fourtene thousand yeares: Secondly of Pope Nicholas the fift, fourtene thousand yeres, in the yere of the Lorde. 1459: Thirdly of Pope Sixtus the fourth, who composed the fourth and the fift little prayers of these Suffrages following, 1400. yeres, and hath dubled these pardons, in the yeare of our Lorde. 1478.

Whether was this more wicked Idolatrie, or foolish lies* 1.1025 M. Stap? what say you here euen to your owne Popes, doth not your Primar make them very Heretikes teaching a doctrine of so manie thousande yeares pardon after

the day of Dome? Howe muche differeth this from the fowle errour of Origen? Or did they thinke the worlde should continue so long, or euer the day of Dome shall come, which Christe and his Apostles then sayde, was so néere at hande, and your Popes since that tyme haue stret∣ched it out so many thousande yeres to come? or to what torment shoulde the soule goe, when his pardon shoulde be expired? For, be the day neuer so long, at the lengthe (ye saye) commeth Euensong. Shoulde the soule at the ende of those seuen and fiftie thousand yeares of pardon, go from heauen to hell? For Purgatorie lasteth, ye saye, but tyll Domes day. Or vsed your Primer, Numero fin•…•…to pro infi∣n•…•…o, a determinate number for an vndeterminate number▪ But whye then dyd your Popes one after an other, en∣crease the number, and so straightly limitte it? and yet by your leaue your Primer missed one thousande years in the accompte. For promising seuen and fiftie thousande, it reckoneth vp but stre and fiftie thousande. And thoughe one in a thousande breake no square, as they saye: yet a thousande yeares is somewhat, master Stapleton, it is little more, ye wotte, than one thousande and a halfe, since Chryst was borne. But goe to man, since your Popes are so liberall to pardon for so many thousandes, ye shall not say, we will sticke to pardon them for one thousande backe agayne. I woulde counte this but one of your Arith∣meticall scapes (as ye obiecte to the Byshoppe) but that your Primer is full, if not of suche misreckoninges, yet of suche lauishe summes. I mentioned one before of fourtie thousande yeares. Pope Iohn the twelf the (say the one of your Rubrikes) hathe graunted to all that saye this prayer* 1.1026 for the dead: Auete omnes 〈◊〉〈◊〉 fideles. &c: passing throu∣ghe the Churche yarde, so many yeares of Pardon, as bodies be buried therein since is was a Churchyarde. By whiche rule in Paules Churchyarde, a man might easily get a ne∣m•…•…scu▪ of yeares of pardon.

Phie M. St. this is too grosse and shamefull deceyuing of the people. Whether it he your Popes faulte (as they can not be excused, sith it is decréed, sealed & confirmed by them, and their full Chapters of Cardinals, which ye say in such authenticall doings can not erre) or whose faultes so euer they were, in your Primers and prayer bookes, they are so∣lemnly set out in redde letters, to egge the people to pray vnto your Images.

But ye will say I swarue frō my purpose, some of these prayers were not vnto Images. Well, what was this M. Stapl. Subsequens scriptum, est scriptum Rom•…•…, &c. This wri∣ting that followeth was written at Rome, in the Chappell of S. Marie at Hierusalem in the Temple. VVhilom S. Gregorie the Pope did celebrate Masse in the citie of Rome, and when he came to the consecration, the Lorde appeared to him in this Figure that is here painted. VVherevpon he being mo∣ued of compassion, graunted to all that did beholde such a pi∣cture, and with making curtesie, and deuoutly saying fiue Pa∣ter Nosters, and fiue Aue Maries: fouretene thousand yeares of pardon. And besides this xij. Popes his successours haue graunted euery one of them fiue hundred yeeres of pardon, the summe of the whole pardon is twenty thousand yeeres.* 1.1027 And this is registred in Rome.

And as ye gaue these liberall pardons for the beholding of the picture of Christ, so for looking on the Crosse, yea the Nayles, whippes, roddes, ropes, and other instraments, where with he was put to death, and for the saluting & wor∣shipping of them ye offer no smal pardons also, of the which in one booke I haue two Rubrikes. The one to this noble prayer, Crucem coronam sp•…•…neam, cla•…•…os{que} diram{que} lanceam, de∣uote veneremur: Acetum fel 〈◊〉〈◊〉, virgam{que} spum spōgiam, i•…•…giter veneremur: Uele•…•… laternam nobilens, pellicanum & cal•…•…∣cem, Arundines pungente•…•… tunicam inconsu•…•…ilem, sortes columnā stabilem, & f•…•…nes vigentes, flagella fustes innumerabiles, enses la∣tronum horribles, denarios ter denos, manus c•…•…dentes dissimiles,

cultellos duros & forcipes, vr•…•…eos •…•…menos serpentes, scalam & malleum, sepulchrum lumen candelabrum, corde recolamus. To sturre vs vp to say this foolishe and wicked prayer to wor∣ship all these things, is prefixed this Rubrike. Quicun{que} hac arm•…•…, &c. Who soeuer shall beholde these armes of our Lord Iesus Christ, and say deuoutly this prayer: sixe thousand yeeres of pardon are graunted him of S. Peter the Apostle, and of thirtie Popes after him, if he be with out deadly sinne and in charitie. The second Rubrike in the same booke on these verses: Lance•…•… Crux claus, tua pertuls corde 〈◊〉〈◊〉, &c: is this: Quicunque arma Domini, &c. VVho soeuer shall looke deuoutly vpon the weapons of our Lord Iesus Christ, and shall deuoutly say this prayer, he shall haue of his sinnes beyng truly confessed and repenting of them, sixe thousand, seuen hundred, and fiue yeeres of pardons of S. Peter the A∣postle graunted him, and graunted of. 30. Popes after him. How agreeth this with the former M. Stapleton, or did* 1.1028 S. Peter giue this pardon twis•…•…, and augment the summe bicause of the excellencie of those verses?

But these are trifles to the thirde that followeth. Crux, coronae, spinae, flagellis, clauis, lanciae, marcellae, spongae, laqueae, co∣lumpilae, vesti purpuriae, a•…•…undinae, honorem impendamus. This is good Latine I warrant ye, and as good as the mat∣ter euery whit: and so good, that, saith the Rubrike ouer it, VVho soeuer say this Orison here following, shall haue* 1.1029 great grace of almighty God, and sixe thousand thousande and threescore and ten yeeres of very pardon. This was lustely multiplied. Sitte downe Master Stapleton, sith ye pretende to be so perfect an Arithmetrician, and cast your accountes, and ye shall sée a fayre muster of pardons to comforte your sprites with all. Feare not (man) the Diuell so long as these last, and many thousandes more there are besides, but these are easily gotten, euen for worshipping the Iewes Ropes, Halters, Hammers, R•…•…iues, Swordes, their Fistes, yea their spettle and all. But if ye be ashamed

and thinke scorne to worship these thinges, as in déede ye may well be ashamed of them: yet I haue suche holy Re∣liques for you to worship, that ye can hardely finde any higher. But I tell ye you must take vp your hand and blisse you at the sight of them, and so they worke meruailes as your holy bookes recorde. And that not for the Images of all Hallowes, but of Christes Image, or rather of him selfe, that ye should know euen the iuste length of him, as they pretende.

Among the good prayers aforesaide, is this Rubrike:* 1.1030 Qui cupit cognoscere longitudinem, &c. He that desireth to know the length of Christ being God, let him take this* 1.1031 line here drawne forth, twoo and thirtie times measured, which line was brought out of the Citie of Constantinople, in a certaine Grosse of Golde. VVhiche line who soeuer in the day doth deuoutly looke vppon, and say the Antiphona with a Collect, and shall signe him thrise with the signe of the holy Crosse, he shall not that daye die any suddayne death, nor be vexed with Diuell, nor with any tempest, nor any euill nor any Creature shall hurte him. And this line was brought by an Angell to King Charles the great. This is a fayre grace M. Stapl. for looking vppon and worshipping a line of the length of Christ.

But I haue another length and Rubrike, that hath more Iolie promises to stirre vs vp to worship it. Which sayeth: This Crosse fiftene times measured, is the length of our Lorde Iesu Christe, and that day ye looke thereon, blesse ye therewith. There shall no wicked spirite haue power to hurt you: nor thunder, ne lightning, sleeping ne waking shall not hurt you: nor winde nor blasting, on lande nor on wa∣ter shall not hurt you: nor in battayle ye shall not be ouer∣come with your enimies, bodely, ne ghostly: nor die no shamefull death, nor suddayne death, nor of the pestilence, nor in water be drowned, nor in fire be brente: and if yee be in deadly sinne, ye shall not die therein: and you

shall increase in worldly goodes: nor ye shall not die of* 1.1032 woundes, nor of stroake, nor without confession: nor ye shal not be combred with no fiendes: and if a woman haue this Crosse, and lay it on hir wōbe when she traueleth with childe, she shall soone be deliuered, and the childe shall haue Chri∣stendome, and the mother purification of holy Church. S. Ci∣riake, and S. Iulite desired this gifte of almightie God, and he graunted them, as it is registred in Rome, at S. Iohn Latera∣nence. Here are many moe fayre graces if all were true. But some of them your Papistes them selues haue •…•…ounde starke lies. And some of them, as that he shall not be com∣bred with no fiende, &c. I thinke may well be true, as you will graunt I dare say, resoluing them by your Equipol∣lences, on which ye stande so much in your fourth booke.

As for the assurance of the truth of these lengthes, that, I remit to you M. St. to reconcile them togither: how the one came frō Constantinople, the other frō Rome: how the one was graūted of God to S. Ciriake, and S. Iulite: the other brought by an Angell to king Charles the great, and yet as appeareth by the prayer, it came first to S. Ciriake, and S. Iulite too. With other such circumstances as arise in the conference of them. Onely I note the lengths them selues, and I pray you M. St. (if ye haue as good skill in Geome∣trie, as in Arithmetike) to measure these two lengths, the one. xxxij. the other. xv. times as they require, and see how properly they will agree. I thinke ye shall finde them dif∣fering, little lacking the length of both Crosses ioyned to∣gither. So that the one (light on which it shall) must needes be a very lie, and haue no vertue in it at all, but those that worship it be Idolaters, worshipping a false thing. If ye replie an inche breakes no square: although it breake no square, yet it breakes lēgth M. St. neither ought ye to misse* 1.1033 one inche in this matter, wherein ye pretende is such ver∣tues, and so exactly take vpon ye to describe euen the iumpe length, and say it came from God, and his Angell brought

it, knew not the Angell the iumpe length, or would he not giue it truly, and would haue it so precisely worshipped? surely then he was no good Angell. But the difference is more thā an inch M. St. or. 6. or. 7. inches either. And would ye haue Christ cut shorter by the head, to make your lēgths euen? were it not better that a great many such liers as you hop•…•… •…•…edlesse before? which of these two shall we be∣léeue M. Stapleton? or is it not best, by your counsell, to let them both goe in the •…•…irrops name, and all their for∣ged vertues with them, than for gréedinesse of their gaye promises, endanger to lose bodie and soule by worshipping a lie, and committing foule Idolatrie? Well let them goe for me, if ye he agreed thereto, M. Stap•…•….

But yet ye haue one excuse as ye thinke to mitigate the* 1.1034 matter, that how soeuer they missed in the Figure, eyther of the Crosse, or the Crucifixe, of the which some was long, some was shorte: this hindred not the peoples deuoute meditation thereon. Although M. Stapleton this nothing excuse the former manifest lie, where ye misse of the lēgth, that so iustly ye pretende to set out, and yet ascribe the vertue to the iust length, saying, Per virtutem gloriosa lon∣gitud•…•…nis tuae. By the vertue of thy glorious length: yet to come to your meditations, that ye teach vs do come to vs, by the beholding the Crucifixe: If these were as fonde, as the other worship Idolatrouse, what shall we then iudge of the residue?

Three things (saith Discipulus) we must consider, firste,* 1.1035 that Christ hanges downe his necke on his shoulder, to kisse you (and herevppon your Capochini Friers hang their heads a wrie, bicause the Crucifixe is so set forth). Se∣condly, the Crucifixe hath both his handes stretched abroad, to embrace you. Thirdly, his feete are both fastned to the Crosse, to betoken that he will not starte from you. Suche toyes ye imagine the Crucifixe to represent vnto vs, and thereout gather your mysticall significations, that a man

might looke thereon till his eyes stare, and neuer thinke on kissing, colling, or any such things. Thus did ye mocke and deceyue the simple people, and made them besides Ido∣laters very Idiotes indeede with these your Idiotes bookes. But the Booke of God that setteth out to the eyes of our faith, the death and benefites of Iesus Christe, ye quite lefte out, and would not suffer that Crucifixe to be looked vppon. Wherein they should haue séene and learned to know most fully Christ Crucified, without any daunger of Idolatrie at all.

Now if ye say all this hitherto inferreth not yet Idola∣try,* 1.1036 so lōg as ye giue not to the Crosse, the very worship that is due to God, but reserue that still to him alone, which ye call Latriam, and giue to the Crosse Duliam, and Hy∣perduliam, although this shifte be fully by others alreadie confuted: yet admitting the same, it so litle shifteth your ma∣nifest Idolatrie, that it proueth ye liers on your own heads, and Idolaters euen by your owne distinction. Sith, not* 1.1037 onely ye gaue Latriam the Crosse, but also defende that it may be giuen thereto. Chiefly Thomas of Aquine your great schoolemaster, yea M. Doctour Saunders himself one of your chiefest Louaine writers, in his especiall treatise of the defence of Images, cā scarce tell what to defende herein. For firste he saythe, we defende it for the more probable,* 1.1038 that the same degree of hononr is not due to the Image of Christe, of our Ladie or of other Sainctes, whiche is due to Christ, our Ladie, and to other Saincts them selues. But there is a certayne proper honour, due to a good remembraunce or monument. Thus saith D. Sanders there. But in the ende & conclusiō of his whole booke, one while he defendeth Tho∣mas, and graunteth the figure of the thing, to haue the same honour done to it, that is done to the thing it selfe: and saith the worship that is done to Christ, is done to his purple coate also. Then fleeth he touche againe from that, saying* 1.1039 that the Church neuer taught, nor doth teach, that the Image

of Christ, must be adoured with the honour due to God. Then againe he alloweth Thomas his naturall reason. But after that flying as fast from Thomas, If Thomas (saith he) haue bene deceyued in this question, it is an errour in Philosophie and not in Diuinitie. And why? bicause he al∣leageth Aristotle. I pray you M. Stapleton if you may be so bolde, pull him by the •…•…léeue, and desire him to be ware how he speaketh against Aristotle and his Metaphysikes. What? is Aristotles Metaphysikes no good Diuinitie with him? if the Sorbonistes heare this, it is to be feared they will condemne him for an Heretike, as they serued Ramus.

Now when M. Saunders hath thus startle•…•… too and fro, in docke out netle (for belike he was ne•…•…led with this que∣stion) notwithstanding (saith he) I put it for an vndoubted truthe, that all Images be honored in the Churche, with an inferiour honour to that which is due to the first samplars, and principall paterns. And yet by and by quite contrarie* 1.1040 to this, he saithe: For whether, in any case, the honour of the Image may be the same with the honour of his truth or no, I neyther will, nor can, nor am perfectly able throughly to discusse. And yet before he determined it Doctour like, and saide, I put it for an vndoubted truth that Images haue inferiour honour. But in conclusion, when he shoulde de∣fende the Papistes from the perill of Idolatrie, and ful∣ly determine how farre Images may be honoured with∣out Idolatrie, he concludes they must be honored with such honour, as is giuen without furder curious discussing,* 1.1041 whether any more may be giuen them or no. And telleth vs that howe muche is dewe to the Image, we neede not care. When all this while, this was the chiefest thing in this pointe cared for, and that he him selfe so muche hath laboured in, and one while denies, another while grauntes: one while determines, another while saithe he will not, can not, nor is able to determine: thus standing in

doubt, and yet putting vs out of doubte: and all this adoe is onely for this question, how much or how little honour should be giuen to Images, least we committe Idolatrie to them, by giuing the worship of Latria after his owne distinction: and after all this adoe, to lap vp the doubte with saying, VVee neede not care how much is dewe, and we must honour Images with such honour as is giuen, with out furder curiouse discussing, whether any more may be gi∣uen or no: what is this but to open a gap to all Idolatrie? But if M. D. Saūd. may thus ridde his handes of this mat∣ter,* 1.1042 by bidding the people not care how much worship they giue to Images, whereto then should we care for this your shift of these three kindes of worships, sith it is not to be ca∣red how much worship be giuen them? Thus ordered you the simple people then, bidding them honour, worship, cappe, knéele, offer, pray vnto, trust vppon, and care not* 1.1043 how much they gaue to the Image. And this carelesse Ido∣latrie M. Stapleton would you and your complices bring vs againe vnto.

Neyther are these things (as M. Sanders pretendes to mitigate the matter) Quiddities & subtilties imagined of Thomas, & a few Schoolemen only: but all your Schoole∣men for the most part, handle and tosse this question to and fro, hauing occasion by the excéeding great▪ Idolatrie com∣mitted in the meane while by the people. Yea not onely the Schoolemen helde their opinions: but the Friers as fast preached the like worship, and cited the famous Scoole∣men for them.

Discipulus citeth Thomas. 3. parte Quest. 25. Artic. 6.* 1.1044 Crux Christi potest adorari adoratione Latriae, &c. The Crosse of Christe may be worshipped with the worship of Latria (which ye call Diuine worship) bicause the Crosse besprent with the bloude of Christ, is the very Image of the Crucifix spredde thereon: and the Image of it also, is euery wood that is formed after the fashion of a Crosse.

And thus he not onely proueth, that the Crosse whiche* 1.1045 Christ dyed on, but euery other Crosse, yea euery péere of wood formed lyke a Crosse, is to be worshipped, and that with diuine honour. Although other make a great diffe∣rence of worship betwéene the Crosse that Chryst died on, and other Crosses.

Cardinal Uigeriu•…•… maketh this a principal argumēt, to haue touched the ble•…•…d of Christ. And wrote theron, béeing desired of y^e College of Cardinals & Bishops, at what time* 1.1046 as the great Turke for a token of friendship had sent to the Pope (as he telleth) the speare head that wounded Christ, kéeping still the coate of Christ with him in Turkey: Herevpon arose a question among al the Prelats, whether the Coate or the Speare head were more precious, and worthy greater honor. Uigerius reasoneth muche of Chri∣stes shirte, hauing touched his sweate and his 〈◊〉〈◊〉: of the Nayles that perced his handes: and the other instruments, postes, cordes, roddes; &c. and woulde haue them worship∣ped more, as they touched him more néere, or more princi∣pall partes of Christ. By which rule he mighte make the stones holy Reliques, that he trode vpon, and why not, since your foresayde prayers confesse, that euen the handes of the Iewes that s•…•…ote him, and the spettle that they spit on his face are holy Reliques, and to be worshipped with diuine honour also, bicause they touched Christe: if thys kinde of reasoning were good diuinitie.

Alanus de Rupe sayth, Imago Christi. &c. The Image of* 1.1047 Christ is not to be worshipped with the worship of Latria: The Image of the virgin Mary, with the worship of Hyper∣dulia: the Images of other with the worship of Dulia. At∣tributing that worship to the Image of euery thing in his* 1.1048 degrée, that you attribute to the thing it self. And the reason is, as he sayth: Cum stabu coram Imaginibu•…•…. &c. VVhen thou standest before the most holy Images of Christ and the virgin Mary, thou oughtest to thinke that there is the bles∣sed

Trinitie, and Christ, with Mary, whiche see thee vnder the eyes of the Image, and heare thee vnder the Images eares, and loue thee vnder the Images hearte, and speake with thee vnder the mouth of the Images, not according to the artificiall essence of the Image, but according to the imagi∣natiue therof, or the diuinitie of the Trinitie, most blessed and present. And that there is suche a powre in this sighte, hearing, vnderstanding, loue, and so of the other, as the most blessed Mary hath reuealed: that if infinite worldes with all their power shoulde see▪ thee, heare, loue, vnderstande, and conserue thee: they should not do so much vnto thee, as is done vnto thee by the representing of such an Image, &c. Therfore, before such Images, as beeing ordeyned by the di∣uine ordinaunce of the Church, and of the holy fathers, and the especiall ordinance of Angels, represent high things be∣yonde other creatures: thou oughtest to behaue thy selfe with all reuerence, and feare, and al fayth, and loue, euen as if the diuine things represented, were there present.

Neither do ye make them bare representations, but that euen in the Images, the things them selues represented, are. Yea sayth Alanus: Tota Trinit as beata, per essentiā, prae∣sentiam, & potentiam est in •…•…a aequaliter, quantum est ex parte deitatis, & nō ex parte operis, &c. The whole blessed Trinitie is in the Image by essence, by presence, and by power, equal∣ly, so farre foorth as in respect of the deitie, not in respect of the worke. And by such a maner that is, in respect of the dei∣tie, with the Ideaes or formes imagined, the virgin Mary is in such an Image, according to hir whole life, hir nature, hir grace and hir glory, most really, most truely, and most prin∣cipally, by reason of hir Idea, or imagined forme and diuine* 1.1049 part, which is infinitely greater (after Albertus & Aug.) thā is hir creature it selfe. Therfore the most mercyful Mary shal alway be present, most really in such an Image, not by bodily presence, but by diuine presence, according to Dionisius and Boëce. And this is the maner of worshipping the Images of

saincts, and of worshipping by signification the Image of the Lord Iesus Christ, which is now whole, euen the selfe same thing in his Image. Therfore in these Images, thou oughtest to beleue, that the Lady Mary doth there see thee heare thee, loue thee, and prouoke thee to all goodnesse.

Thus say your subtil Scholemen with their ideities; es∣sencies, realities, diuinalities, quiddities, qualities, and such other Sim suttle title tumtatle•…•…ies: the effect wherof is this, that the Images must haue the same honor, that the things should haue which they represent & be Images of. Wherby not speaking of the manifest idolatrie cōmitted to saincts & their images: but only of the image of Christ, to whō ye say the same honor is due, that is due to Christ him self: But to Christ him self this honor is due, not only alexternall wor∣ship* 1.1050 of the body; but inuocatiō, faith, trust, hope, ascribing al our help & saluatiō, thāks giuing. &c. al which ye cōprehend vnder Latria, as due to be rēdred to Christ: the image ther∣fore, besides y^e bodily worship, must be inuocated, beléeued, trusted & hoped in: al our help, saluatiō, & thāksgiuing, must be ascribed to y^e image of Christ, so wel as to himselfe. How can ye excuse this, M. Stap. from 〈◊〉〈◊〉 shamefull idolatrie, euen by your owne distinction. Was it now any maruel,* 1.1051 if the people (that knew not these scholepoynts, & were not acquaynted with these distin•…•…tiōs, but wēt plainly to work, doing al the worship they could deuife, & more would they haue done, coulde they haue deuised more:) gaue Duliam, Hyperduliam, Latriam. & all that ye can els inuent to Ima∣ges: since your Scholemen, euen by the distinctions that they would couer and shift off the matter withal, confesse as grosse idolatrie ought to be done, as the people did cōmit to images? neither did your preachers blame thē, but cite the scholemē, & incite the people, setting thē more a gogge. Yea your selues from Louayne sende vs ouer a licence, not to care how much honour is due vnto them, nor curiously to discusse, whether any more may be giuen them than is giuen: when so muche, bothe of the learned & vnlearned was giuē, as more

though ye would, ye can not deuise to giue, for ye gaue no more but all.

Nowe where we crie out vpon this, as apparant Idola∣trie: you crie out agayne vpon vs for heretikes, and liken vs to Iulianus the Apostata, writing agaynst the Christi∣ans, for the Crosse of Chryst. But lyke renegate Apo∣stataes your selues, it is not we, but you that renie, forsake and deface, the vertue, effecte, and merites of his deathe, that dyed vpon the Crosse. Who offred him selfe a full, propiciatorie, euerlasting, and perfecte sacrifice of redemp∣tion, and attonement, once for all our sinnes before or af∣ter Baptisme. And you in his place, offer the Crosse, and other his Images, to be thus worshipped of the ignorant people. Affirming that, Hoc modo (vt Dominus Iesus reue∣•…•…auit* 1.1052 cuidam deuoto) poterit venire in breui ad amorem & ti∣morem perfectum coelestium By this meanes (as the Lord Ie∣sus reuealed to a certayne deuoute man) he might in shorte tyme, come to a perfecte loue, and feare of heauenly things. But in the meane time, the people sticking in visible and earthly thinges, fell without all feare or loue of Gods truthe, euen to a perfection of Idolatrie. Beléeuing too muche in such faygned reuelations, and reiecting the word of God, wherein Christ hath, not to a certayne deuoute man, but to all the worlde, reuealed the expresse will of his heauenly father, in playne words, forbidding the wor∣shippe of all Images, yea of all creatures, as heathen and wicked Idolatrie.* 1.1053

But ye still crye, that your Images are not Idols, as the heathens Images were, and therefore your wor∣shippe of them is not Idolatrie, as was theirs. I omitte the examining of thys sequele, M. Stapl. And will onely as nowe denye the antecedent. The which thoughe other more at large haue improued, and I haue somewhat tou∣ched it before, yet bicause at the very instant of the writing hereof, there came to my hands a paper, by a certen friend

of youres (whome I spare to name) wherein was contey∣ned (as he affirmed) suche reasons as were vnanswera∣ble, to proue that your Images are nothing like the Hea∣then Idols. Although, perusing the same by Doctor Saun∣ders foresayde booke of Images, it séemeth to be drawen from his collections, of the differences betwéene Idols and Images, and so by some other already may be full answe∣red:* 1.1054 yet I thought it not amisse, euen héere to set it downe, and sée, by this whiche already is spoken, howe easily or hardly it is to be answered vnto.

The differences betweene the Idols of the Gentiles, and our Images, sayth this Papistes paper.

First, some kinde of Idols, had no truthe at all in nature,* 1.1055 but were feigned monsters: all our Images haue that essen∣tiall truthe extant in the world, which they represent.

I answere: first, for some of their Idols ye say truth. Se∣condly, for all your Images ye make a loude lye. As for en∣sample, the Image of S. Sunday pictured like a man, with all kinde of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 about him, as though he had bene Iohn of all craftes. Wheras, for the béeing of any suche man, there was no suche essentiall truth at all extant in the worlde that it represented. And yet for your Images this is a generall rule, that you must most firmly beléeue, Quod qualem ima∣ginem* 1.1056 vides ad extra oculo corporali, •…•…lem Christus habet simi∣litudinem aed infra, secundum esse diuinale & Ideale. That, what maner of Image thou seest outwarde with thy corporal eye, Christ hath the same similitude inwarde, according to his diuine beeing, and conceyued forme. And the like he sayth of the Uirgin: •…•…deò habeatur Imago Mariae virginis pulchra, quoniam turpis Imago (teste Maximo) non est vera I∣mago* 1.1057 Mariae, sed falsa. Cum ipsa Maria sit totius pulchritudi∣nis, decoris, amoris, regina, & domina. Let a fayre Image be had of the virgin Mary, bicause a foule Image (as Maximus wit∣nesseth) is not the true Image of Mary, but a false Image, sith Mary is the Queene and Lady of fayrenesse, comlynesse

and loue. And M. Saunders concluding this poynt, saythe: For looke what proportion is betweene thing and thing, the same proportion is betweene signe and signe of those things. By which rule of leueling the Image according to y^e essen∣tial truth extant in the worlde of the partie represented by the Image: as many other Saincts, yea Christes, and the blessed Uirgins maye be proued Idols, being pictured a∣misse, and swaruing from their truth represented: so by no meanes can ye defende your consecrate cake, your three fa∣ced picture of God the father, your winged and feathered Aungels, your pictures of Saint Sauiour, and Saint Sun∣day, from being manifest Idols. And therefore betweene these some Images of yours, and those some Idols of theirs, there is no difference in this first point.

Secondly, all their Idols were without truth concerning* 1.1058 fayth and religion: All our Images conteyne such a truth as belongeth to Christes fayth and religion.

I answere: No Images belong to the truth of Christes fayth & religion. As for religion, all the religion that Christ ordeyned, was without Images. Images in diuerse places are forbidden to be worshipped, Custodi•…•…e vos à simulac•…•…ris.* 1.1059 Kepe your selues from Images. And they are in no place bid∣den to be worshipped. As for fayth, Fides ex auditu, auditus autē per verbum dei. Faith cōmeth by hearing, hearing by the worde of God. But the worship of Images is without the word of god, yea (as is alreadie shewed by your schoolemen) it is but of the Churches ordināce: but no faith can be with out Gods worde: the worship then of Images is without the truth of Christs faith & religion: & so likewise in this 2. point they differ not from the worship of the heathen Idols.

Thirdly, sacrifice was done to their Idols, not so to oure* 1.1060 Images, but onely to God.

I answere: first, in that ye made such sacrifice to God, as God neuer ordeyned, and made more dayly renuing of sa∣crifices to him, not contented with the only sacrifice that he

made once for all: therein ye committed plaine Idolatrie, and your massing sacrifice was the Idoll. Secondly, where ye say, ye made sacrifice onely to God: I haue proued al∣readie, in plaine confession of your selues, that ye made sa∣crifice to the blessed virgin also. Thirdly, that ye say, they made sacrifice to their Idols, so do not you: If sacrifice bée the worship of Latria, then so doe you, by your owne tales. but what matter maketh this, whē ye sacrificed to them, of whome the Images were the pictures: and what differed that from the Heathens doing, that sacrificed to Iupiter, before the Image of Iupiter, or honored him by sacrifice in his Image? whiche thinges you did also, and therefore without any difference héerein, bothe theirs and your Ima∣ges are Idols.

Fourthly, their Images belonged many times to very wic∣ked* 1.1061 men: our Images which we worship, belong alwayes to blessed Saincts.

Not alwayes, M. St. to blessed Saincts, except ye iumble God & his Saincts togither. Yea some of those that ye wor∣ship for blessed Saincts, are doubted of your selues to be dā∣ned spirites: belike they were little better than wicked mē. But, how blessed saincts some of thē were whō ye worship∣ped, read euē your own writer, sir Thomas Mores works of Images & pilgrimages, & ye shall sée little difference be∣twéene theirs & yours, except yours were the worsse, euen in that simulata sanctitas est duplex iniquita, Their counter∣feit sainctship made them double hypocrites.

Fourthly, some of the Gentils professed thēselues to adore* 1.1062 the vnsensible wood and stone: we do not professe or teache any such thing, but rather the contrarie.

I answere, if some of the Gentiles did teach this among them: many, & those that are counted your chiefest schole∣men, do euen the same, both professing & teaching to adore the very vnsensible wood of the crosse, & that with the same honor that ye adore Christe him selfe: and all bicause he

dyed thereon, and bicause it was besprent with his bloud. Neither do you it for the forme sake, as nowe and then ye would shift of the matter (which neuerthelesse, God wot, is but a poore shift, to saue you from Idolatrie, for why should ye worship a figure, more than a substance?) but euen the very wodden peeces, as ye beare vs in hand, of the crosse, ye worship, & many other vnsensible substances, nailes, ropes, pillers, thornes. &c. As for your grosse worshipping of vn∣sensible wood, stone, mettal, and payntings: none is so vn∣sensible, that he knoweth it not. And therfore in this poynt there is no difference: if there be, it is, that your worship was the more vnsensible of the twayne.

Sixthly▪ other of the Gentiles thoughte a certayne sub∣staunce* 1.1063 of God to lye priuie in the Idol: we make our Ima∣ges onely remembraunces of holy things, and not to con∣tayne any Godhead.

I answere: First, that ye make them only remembran∣ces of holy things, is a manyfest vntruthe. For besides the remēbrances, ye adde worshippings to them: but to remēber only a thing, is not withal to worship a thing. Secōdly, you lye, in that ye ascribed many helpes to Images, many mi∣racles to be done by them, and that life, bloud, motion, speaking, vertue, pitie, grace, and power was in them, as is alreadie playnely shewed by the ensamples of Dis∣cipulus, by the stories of your Legendes, and by the doc∣trine of your Scholewriters. All which is farre more, than onely a remembraunce of holy things. If ye say ye ascribe this, not to the materiall stockes or stones, or to the forme and Image, but to the power and grace of God in them: sith the power and grace of God, is a certayne substance of God: what differeth this also from that ye say of the Gen∣tiles, they thought a certayne substaunce of God to lye priuie therein, and do not you think euen the same? yea, and that the very essentiall Idea of God, and his very Diui∣nitie* 1.1064 and Godhead, lyethand is, wholly, really, principally,

and infinitely, and that not so much by his power, but by his grace, and his glory also in Images, as I haue shewed ye out of Alanus, citing the Schoolemen for it: and which of the Gentiles went so farre? in this pointe therefore ye a∣grée with the Heathens Idolles, or rather ye go beyonde them.

Seuenthly, the wisest of the Gentils, adored by the Image* 1.1065 of Iuno or of Vulcanus, vnreasonable creatures, as the earth or the fire, and by them certayne Gods who gouerned those Creatures: we adore, by our Images, no vnreasonable crea∣ture, but onely blessed soules, and one God their maker.

I answere: first, by this your confession, that ye adore blessed soules by Images, and as ye saide before in the fourth point, our •…•…ages which we worship▪ belong alwayes to blesled Saincts, since both ye worship them, and by them worship Sainct•…•…: ye proue your seine•…•… liers, in saying in your fifte point, we make them onely remembrances of ho∣ly things. And so your points being not truely knitte togi∣ther, but tagged with lies, to trausse vp your Images, to make them not séeme Idols? ye worship not onely God and blessed soules, but euen the Diuell, for he is the Father* 1.1066 of lies.

Secondly, to that ye say, we adore by our Images no vn∣reasonable creature: ye are confuted by your adoration of the Crosse, as is before alleaged, vnlesse ye can proue the Crosse to be a reasonable creature. Which except ye can do, this also is a manifest vutruth, a•…•…appeareth by this ar∣gument:

The crosse y^e Christ died on is an vnreasonable creature:

But by other Crosses, ye worshipped the Crosse that Christ died on, as Images of it:

Ergo, By your Images ye worshipped an vnreasonable creature. Which is contrary to that ye say, by our Images we worship no vnreasonable creature.

Thirdly, where ye say ye worship only blessed soules and

one God their maker: if ye meane by soules, the more prin∣cipall and the immortall parte of man, as ye séeme to meane, and is commonly taken: then is this an other lie, for ye worship the bodies also of diuerse, yea and sundrie partes of their bodies, armes, sculles, legges, &c. whiche are no soules. Or how soeuer, for parte or whole, ye take it: ye escape not a lie, bicause, besides your pretended worship of God, and confessed worship of the blessed soules: ye worship Angels also which are neither soules nor God.

Fourthly, to the doing of the Gentiles in this pointe of worshipping certaine Gods, who gouerned those creatures fire or earth▪ whereby they worshipped them: euen the selfe same thing do you, not only in your reliques, which are vn∣reasonable Creatures, but for other vnreasonable creatures also that serue to our vse, as fire, earth, seas, prisen, fetters, corne, barrennesse, fruitfulnesse, agues, pestilence, botches, &c. ye gaue to the Saincts a gouernance of thē. Yea, for cat∣tle, pigges, horses, shéepe, ye ascribed to the Saincts a prote∣ction of thē, as your Legende is ful of such patrones for sun∣drie things. If ye say, ye called thē not Gods: I haue proued that also, euen by your Legende. If ye say, ye gaue not them the principal gouernmēt of these things, nor that which they had, they had it not of them selues, but of God, that gaue thē such a grace & gouernance: what say you herein, that euē the Heathēs do not say? that al that the particuler gouernāces of their petit Gods, cōmeth à •…•…oue summo, frō the great Iupiter, or à Primo motore, from the first moouer, and so likewise herein, your Images are not different frō y^e Heathēs Idols.

Eightly, The Diuel ruled their Idols, the same Diuels feare* 1.1067 our Images which are set vp in a right Faith.

I answere: first, this in one sense is truly saide, he feareth those your Images which are set vp in a right faith: but none of your Images, are set vp in a right faith: he feareth there∣fore none of your Images. A right faith is grounded (as is* 1.1068 sayd) on Gods worde: 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Gods worde▪ biddes not Images

to be set vp to be worshipped: therefore your Images that are set vp to be worshipped, are not set vp in a right Faith.

Secondly, that the Diuell feareth your Images: if ye* 1.1069 meane he feareth your Images should be taken away, ye say true. If ye meane they make him afrayde to see them, or to come nigh them: ye say vntrue, for both he came nigh them, and was in them, and ruled them. But he feared them as he did Holywater, and as he did feare the great bell in the steple when he satte vppon it. But these are but childishe bugges to feare the simple people with all. The birdes be∣rayed them, wormes eate them, the spiders made cobw•…•…bs in them, and is the Deuill afrayde of them? the Diuell he is as soone M. Stapl. No, no, he delighteth in Idolatrie. Ex∣cuse this Idolatrie, that I haue shewed was committed to them, and then tell vs he feareth them. Which, except ye cā do, euen as he ruled the Heathē Idols: so that he ruled yours, his very practises declared. He feareth not deceipt, iuggling knackes, craftie cōueighāces, forgeries, & feigned miracles: but rather is the ruler of them. But many of your Images, yea the most famous Images, that could sweat, frowne, smile, nod, moue, goe, speake, &c. were wrought by such craf∣tie legerdemaines: as the vices and deuices of them, haue since bene openly séene, at the pulling downe of thē. Which argueth that the Diuell feared them not, but ruled them, as he did the Heathens Idols.

Ninthly, The Diuels mainteyned their Idols, the same co∣uet* 1.1070 to throw downe our Images.

I answere: this is in effect, all one with the other. For Quem •…•…etuuni oderunt, quē oderunt perisse expetunt. VVhom they feare, they hate: whome they hate, they wishe to perish. But (as is shewed) he feared them not, but delighted in thē. Ergo, he hated them not, nor coneted to throw them downe, but mainteyneth them, with all his might and mayne, with all his crafte and illusions, and maketh such sturre against the worde of God, and the setters forth thereof, for them:

that neither the Priests of Baal made the like against the Prophets, nor Alexander the Coppersmith against Paule,* 1.1071 and other Heathen Idolaters against the Christian mar∣tyrs: as your Pope, and you his Priests do, against the Ga∣spel and the Protestants, to mainteyne the worship of your Images. And to say the truth ye haue greater losse, by the decay of the worship of them, than euer the Coppersmith (which had gaines for making the Images of Diana) had losse by S. Paule for speaking against them. Infinite was the gaines that came toombling in by your Images. And all this fat is in the fire, by throwing them downe: If then Images mainteyned such filthie lucre, their maintenance must néedes be of the Diuell. And God by his worde is the very ouerthrowe of them, as he was before of the Hea∣then Idols.

Tenthly, to be shorte, their Idols were dedicated by In∣fidels,* 1.1072 to an Heathenish purpose: our Images be dedicated to a verteouse intent. Therefore our Images being so farre dif∣ferent from the heathenish Idols, are iniuriously called Idols.

I answere: First, this common argument of good or verteouse intent, is not sufficient for to make a difference herein. Especially, the Heathen euen in worshipping their Idols, hauing likewise as good an intent and verteouse, (as téemed vnto them) as your good & verteouse intent séemeth vnto you. They thought they did well, and so do you: & this verteouse intent, as it serueth you both, so it serueth all Ido∣laters. But you ought to make a distinctiō of good in déede, & good in apparance, els ye are more vnskilfull than the Hea∣then,* 1.1073 that made a difference betwéene, Reuera bonum, & that quod videtur bonum, That that is good in deede, and that that seemeth good. This distinction herein, ought you to haue made: & not stande on the intent, which was in thē, as good as yours, as they thought: for they purposed not to do ill, but good, though they did ill and not good. And why? bicause they did not order their purpose, by Gods purpose, yea by Gods

commaundement, not onely in the worship of Images, which he statly forbiddeth, but euen in the worship of God himselfe. We must not doe that which séemeth good in our owne eyes: but that which God hath commaunded, wée* 1.1074 shoulde do, and in no poynt swarue therefrom. If we doe swarue, the heathens good intent will no more beare vs out, than it did the heathen, no more than it did Saule, or* 1.1075 Uza, no more than it shal do those that Christ saith, shall kil the Prophetes of God, and thinke they do God good seruice. All these are a like in good intent and vertuons purpose, but not in good matter nor vertuous cause. Wherein, you fay∣ling togither with them, your intent maketh so little diffe∣rence of your Images, frō their Idols, that it maketh them more alike. And therefore the conclusion, for any of these tenne poynts alleaged, may well be inferred: your Images are not iniuriously called Idols.

Thus much, to answere one of your muttring Libels, that ye scatter among the simple people, whining that we slaunder you with the terme of Idols for Images. By this little, let them iudge whether we slaunder you or no for I∣dolaters: and whether they be Idols or no: and howe faint and faigned shiftes ye make to finde out difference betwene their Images and yours. Wherein also ye would bleare the simple, for who denieth, but that there is a difference of the one from the other? but not such as may make eyther the one or the other no Idoll. If they were no such Idols, they were as yll, if not worse, but were they not so yll, yet yée proue not them no Idols for all this. Well, you haue spo∣ken of the difference, and nowe might I, if I had not béene ouerlong already, requite your tenne differences, more than with twice tenne likenesses of your Images and theirs, to proue them Idols both.

But you will say, all this is an outroad, neither properly your matter. Be it so for once, if you will, although in déede it be not, but is directly to your quarrell of Images. Yet to

draw nearer to your charge of Iulianus the Apostata for the Crosse. If ye affirme that in Iulianus time the Christians worshipped the Crosse: then, as he slaundered those Chri∣stians, so doe you slaunder them. Helene, that ye say founde out the Crosse, worshipped it not. Epiphanius that saw the picture of Christ in a place proue to be worshipped, rent it in péeces. Cyrillus that aunswereth this slaunder of Iuli∣anus, obiecting to them that they worshipped the Crosse, doth he graunt that they worshipped it? He sayth no suche thing, he onely mencioneth, how they had it as a memoriall of Christs death, and to moue them to thinke of mortifying themselues. And where had they it, in their Churches? had they Roodlofts to set it in? set they it on an aultar? had it any sensing to it? créeping, knéeling, capping, crouching, praying, offering to it? if there had bene any such matters, we should by some of your side, haue heard of it ere nowe.

No M. St. there was no such Idolatrie then, as your Ro∣mish Church hath nowe, farre passing the Idolatrie euen of the Emperor Iulianus. He was an open enimie to Christ, & for his sake, to his Crosse, & to all that was his, but you are priuie enimies and hypocrites, that vnder the pretence of* 1.1076 friendship and honour, as it were with Herodes pretensed worship, & Iudas kisse, salute Christ & his Crosse, & rob him of the price that he paid vpon the Crosse, spoyle him of his glorie, & bereue him of his people. Thus do you that pretend such worship of the Crosse. Which Iudas trecherie and ma∣nifest Idolatrie, onely bicause we escrie: you crie out vpon vs, that we be like Iulianus the Apostata, your selues being worse than he. We remoue these abuses from the wodden Crosse, that Christ himself might be glorified, and we with S. Paule might truly say, Absit mihi gloriari, nisi in cruce do∣mini* 1.1077 nostr•…•… Iesu Christi, God forbid I should glorie, but in the Crosse of our Lord Iesus Christ: that is, in the merits & victo∣rie of his death & passion, & not in y^e wood that he was cruci∣fied vpō. Which notwithstanding we hate not, but we speak

against the confidence that you put therin, the worship that ye make therto, & the lies and fables that ye forge thereon.

Erasmus saith, the Crosse is so growne among you, & hath so many peeces, that if al were put togither, a whole ship would not beare it, & yet when Christ suffred it was but one mans bur∣then.* 1.1078 So iolily haue you multiplied it since, by your lying Arithmetike. Now, all those péeces, by your doctrines, must haue diuine honour: yea to all your Images, we must not care, how much honor we giue, & yet all this notwithstan∣ding, there is no Idolatrie cōmitted, & we y^t speak against it, are heretiks & apostataes, & you forsoth are good & holy catholiks

Ye aske vs next, what we say to the Pelagians, affirming* 1.1079 that children not baptised shall be saued.

I aunswere, if you had any regarde of your saluation M. St. ye would not still thus wittingly staine your conscience with slaunderous and notorious vntruthes. We denie not baptisme to infants, either as the Pelagians did, nor at* 1.1080 all. Nor we make it to no purpose as did they, that helde the infants were not borne in sinne: and that original sinne was properly no sin. These are the Papists assertions not ours. And hereon did Pelagius reiect baptisme. But we say* 1.1081 with Dauid the infant is conceyued in sinne, and borne in iniquitie. And that this originall sinne, is both his owne sinne, and verie sinne. And that he must be regenerate, or else he cannot be saued, and that this regeneration is especi∣ally wrought from about by the spirit of God, which Christ adioyneth to the water. And that the water is the outward signe ordeyned of Christ, as necessarie to seale vp vnto our faithes, Gods spirituall adoption & regeneration. Onely, we denie such absolute necessitie of this outward signe, that god which ordeyned it to be the ordinarie signe, is necessarily ti∣ed* 1.1082 therevnto, as you Papists affirme. And there vpon pre∣sumptuously determine, that no christian infants can be sa∣ued, except they haue the outwarde signe also, and so ye bury them out of the ordinarie buriall of Christians as damned.

This hard and hastie iudgement we reiect and confute, euen with your owne schole Doctours: that make thrée* 1.1083 kindes of baptisme, Fluminis, flaminis, & sanguinis, Of water, which is ordinarie: of the spirite, as where the ordinarie baptisme by water fayleth: and of bloud, that is to wete, by Martyrdome.

Moreouer baptisme succéedeth circumcision, but the faith∣full Iewes, did not iudge their children condemned, that died before the day appoynted for circumcision, but rested in such cases on Gods promise to Abraham. Vt sim deus tuus & seminis tui post te, That I might be thy God, and the God* 1.1084 of thy seede after thee. And if he be likewise now our God, that are the spirituall séede of Abraham and true Israelites, is he not also the God of our séede so well as of theirs? whie shall we then measure his grace or mercy (which is both or∣dinarie, and extraordinarie, and aboue all his workes) by his ordinarie signe? Chiefely when Christ the authour of Baptisme, and into whome by baptisme we bée not onely initiate, but incorporate, testifying that hee whiche be∣leeueth* 1.1085 and is baptised shall be saued: reuersed not his sen∣tence so hardly as you do: He that is not baptised shall bée damned: but, he that beleueth not shall be damned. So that the apprehension of saluation, is ascribed of Christ to fayth. Which fayth, the outwarde sign•…•… of baptisme sealeth vp vnto vs. As Saint Paule reasoneth of Abraham, in the fourth to the Romaynes. Beatus vir cui non imput•…•…it. &c.* 1.1086 Blessed is the man to whome the Lorde imputeth no sinne. Came this blessednesse then, vpō the circumcised, or vpon the* 1.1087 vncircumcised? VVe say verily, how that fayth was reckoned to Abraham for righteousnesse. Howe was it reckoned in the time of circumcision, or in the time before he was circumci∣sed? not in the time of circumcision, but in the time he was yet vncircumcised. And he receyued the signe of circumci∣sion, as a seale of righteousnesse, whiche is by fayth, whiche fayth he had yet being vncircumcised, that he should be the

father of all them that beleeue, thoughe they bee not cir∣cumcised.

And as Saint Paule reasoned thus, and Saint Stephen* 1.1088 likewise maketh the same reason agaynst the Iewes, that tyed saluation to the Sacrament of circumcision: so do wée vse the selfe same reason agaynst you, holding the errour of the necessitie of the outwarde signe of baptisme, that the Iewes held of the signe of circumcision, saying that all were* 1.1089 damned that were vncircumcised, as you say, all are dam∣ned that are not baptised in water. Thus are you become very Iewes and Phariseys, that vpbrayd to vs that we be Pelagians.

But you say. Your Maisters are in this poynt worse than the Pelagians, as well for that some of them haue sayde, that* 1.1090 some infants though vnbaptised shall bee damned, and some other though vnbaptised shall be saued.

What meane ye to recken thus by sommes, M. Stap? Were those some worse than the Pelagians, that sayde, some though vnbaptised shall be damned? how much thē are you worse than they, who say all that be vnbaptised shall be* 1.1091 damned? And if you may say all such shall be damned, may not we say some such shall be damned? as though all inclu∣deth not some, and so your selues are worse than the Pela∣gians were. And I trow, it is yet somewhat surer, or at the least lesse daunger, to say some vnbaptised shall be damned, than to affirme it on all. And do ye thinke, this is so hey∣nous a matter to affirme it on some? I pray you, howe say ye by the Turkes, Iewes, and Heathens infants vnbap∣tised, may we not say it of some of them, if we let ours passe? Now, if this be so sore a saying, belike you holde opinion, that none of their infants though vnbaptised shall bee dam∣ned: and if ye do so, whie sounde ye fault with vs before, for saying some vnbaptised shall be saued? If we may neyther say some vnbaptised shall be saued, nor yet some vnbaptised shall be damned, what will ye haue vs say Master Stap?

But looke howe your owne sayings hang togither. All vn∣baptised shall bee damned, and yet all vnbaptised shall bee saued. For what doe ye else say in condemning vs, for saying, some not baptised shal be damned▪ the contradictorie whereof must néedes be this, all not baptised shall be saued. And so by your cōtradiction to vs, ye speake flat contraries to your selfe immediatly togither.

As for that you reprehende some of vs, for saying, some vnbaptised shall be damned, and some vnbaptised shall be sa∣ued: neither is there betwéene these sayings any repugnan∣cie, both may be true well ynoughe: neither is there any∣flashood in either saying. For, as it is true to say, some vncir cumcised were damned: so is it true to say, some vnbaptised shall be damned. And as some vncircumcised in the fleshe, were saued: so some vnbaptised in water, shall be saued. For, circumcision then was that to thē, that baptisme is now to vs. Thus, as these some, that say either of these sayings or both, of some vnbaptised, said nothing but the euident truth: so your warbling thereat sheweth not onely your falshood, but your enuy to be so spiteful, y^t whatsoeuer we say, ye will controll it be it true or false, onely bicause we say it. Yea al∣though* 1.1092 your self say the same, & much more to y^e same effect. But howsoeuer ye contrary your self & cannot tell what ye say: yet so that ye say somwhat against vs, be it true or false, good or bad, wise or fond, all is wisely, well, and truly sayde. Thus hath pride sotted your affectiō on your selues, & enuie blinded your iudgement on vs. But you leaue vs not thus.

And some of them (say you) especially Caluine and other* 1.1093 sacramentaries say, that they shall come without baptisme to the Kingdome of heauen, which the Pelagians durst not say, but that they should haue the life euerlasting, putting a diffe∣rence, but peeuishly, betwixt these two.

In déede it was a very peeuish putting of a difference be∣twixt* 1.1094 comming to the kingdome of heauen, and to euerla∣sting life, but I pray you M. Stap, do not your selfe, and that

euen here ful peeuishly, put this self same peeuish difference: ye say, that some of vs say, that infants vnbaptised shall bee saued. And some of them (say you, as though it were another maner of matter and farre more heynous) specially Caluine and other Sacramentaries say, that they shall come without baptisme to the kingdom of heauē. What difference is there betwene these sayings, they shall bee saued, and they shall come to the kingdom of heauē? Is not this as peeuish a dif∣ference, as betwene the cōming to the kingdome of heauen, & the hauing euerlasting life? what differeth either of these frō being saued▪ If ye say, ye make the difference betwene those that be vnbaptised, & those that be without baptisme, this is as peeuishe as the other, if not more peeuishe of the twaine. Now, if there be no difference betwene these sayings, some though vnbaptised shalbe saued, & that they shal come with∣out baptisme to the kingdom of heauen: is not this thē most peeuishly put of you, to say some of them say thus, & some of them, especially Caluine and other Sacramentaries (for so ye please to terme vs) say thus? and yet all these sommes, spe∣ciall sommes, and other sommes, agrée in one some, with∣out any some or other speciall or not speciall difference at all, sauing in bare wordes. Doe yée not herein shew•…•… your selues as peuishe as the Pelagians? For what did Caluine especially, or the other, in saying they should come to the Kingdome of heauen, more than the other before did say, that they should be saued? But that ye would shew a difference that ye haue of speciall spite to Caluine, more than to any other.

Are ye able to proue this difference, that some shall be sa∣ued, & not come to the kingdome of heauen▪ or that any shal come to the kingdom of heauen, & not be saued? I haue ne∣uer read this difference before M. St. And therefore it soun∣deth like a very peeuishe difference in mine eares. I haue heard and read of your peeuish differences, betwene Lymbus* 1.1095 patrum, and heauen, but what is that to this difference? for if

they shall be saued, they shall come to the kingdome of hea∣uen.* 1.1096 Yea, you tell vs that those that be in your Purgatorie, which besides the continuance ye say, differeth little or no∣thing from hell, yet say you, they shall all be saued that are there, that is to say, they shall come from thence to the kingdome of heauen. I haue heard likewise on the other part, howe ye say there is a difference betwéene being damned, and being in hell: but God wote a peeuishe diffe∣rence also, feigned of Plato and Uirgill, and that ye shall finde master Stap. if euer ye come togither. But God saue the childe as they say, the worst I wishe you master Stap. is that ye neuer féele that difference. But that God in time giue you grace, to repent these your peeuish and fonde stri∣uings agaynst his truth, and malicious slaunderings of his ministers. And so master Stapleton, ye shall finde no dif∣ference betwixt the being saued, and the comming to the kingdome of heauen.

Nowe where ye say, ye will mount higher, to fetche the* 1.1097 race of our generation, euen to Simon Magus, to Marcion and Manicheus of whom Luther and Caluine haue learned theyr doctrine agaynst free will.

Ye did well master Stapleton, to mount higher betimes, for if ye had gone but one ynch lower, when ye obiected Pe∣laganisme to vs for Baptisme, ye had plunged into Pe∣lagianisme your selfe, euen in your free will, as we shall sée when we come thereto. But no maruaile if your malice maketh you willing and free to slaunder vs, with the opi∣nions of Simon Magus, Marcion, and Manes in fréewill: ye were soddenly mounted vp so high, like a Buzzarde, that your eyes could not discerne the great difference betwene* 1.1098 those Heretikes false fables, and the true doctrine of Luther and Caluine thereon. They ascribed all things to a fatall enforcing necessitie procéeding from diuers good and bad Gods as they sayde. And looke you to it in the honouring of your Saints as I haue shewed, that you make not more

Gods that they did, besides your other errours. And what is this Heresie of theirs, like the godly doctrine taught by Luther & Caluin, out of the worde of God, against your frée wil, making your selues as it were Gods with Simō Ma∣gus, to mount vp to heauē at your own free will & pleasure?

But had ye mounted a litle higher, thē should ye in déede* 1.1099 haue found out, of whom Luther and Caluine learned their doctrine against free will: euē of the holy Apostle S. Paule, that confessed he had no such freewill, to do good or ill at his choyse, no not being regenerate. In respect whereof, he had indéede a wil to do good, according to the inward man: but by reason of the outwardman, this will was hindred, & so not free but vnperfect, as he saith of him selfe, S•…•… enim quod* 1.1100 lex, &c. For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold vnder sinne, bicause I wot not what I do. For what I would do, that I do not, but what I hate, that I do. If I do now that which I would not, I graunt to the law that it is good. So then now, it is not I that do it, but sinne that dwelleth in me. For I know that in me, that is to say, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing. To will is present with me, but I finde no meanes to performe that which is good. For I do not that good thing, which I would: but that euil do I, which I would not. Finally, if I do that which I would not, then it is not I that do it, but sinne that dwelleth in me, doth it. I finde then by the lawe, that when I would do good, euill is present with me. I delight in the lawe of God concerning the inwarde man: but I finde another lawe in my mēbers, rebelling against the lawe of my minde, and subduing me vnto the law of sinne, which is in my members. O wretched man that I am, who shall deliuer me frō this bodie of death? I thanke God, through Iesus Christ our Lorde. So then, I may selfe in my minde serue the lawe of God, and in my flesh the lawe of sinne.

Lo M. St. this is all the will that S. Paule felt & confes∣sed to be in him selfe, while he liued, euen in respecte of the inward man. But God wot, this is farre from free will. If

then the will of the Saincts of God be thus hindred by the* 1.1101 flesh, that it can not freely will nor worke: what shall we thinke of the will of the fleshly man? forsoth saithe S. Paule, Animalis homo non percipit •…•…a quae sunt spiritus Dei, The fleshly man vnderstandeth not those things, that are of the spirite of God, for they are follie to him, neither can he perceyue them, bicause they are examined spiritually. But what will hath man in that, whereof he hath no percey∣uing? Yea, is he not rather altogither vnwilling, to that, which séemeth follie to him? and for this cause, the flesh stri∣ueth* 1.1102 and rebelleth against the spirite. He hath therefore no will to any goodnesse at all. Where are then those Pura na∣turalia, the pure naturall qualities of inclination, conuersion, and wil in man of himselfe, to moue God with all, that you and your Schoolemen crake so much vppon?

The question here, is this, whereas our first parentes* 1.1103 before their fall, had in them selues free will to haue sinned, or to haue not sinned, and misusing them selues & their free will to sinne, lost them selues and their free will to haue not sinned also: whether, after this corruption of mans nature, it hath yet free will will to good, or not to sinne, as it had be∣fore it fell. To this question, if ye had (as I said) mounted* 1.1104 so high as the Apostle: he would haue answered you, that we were dead in sinne. Cum mortui essetis in delictis & pecca∣tis: When ye were dead in offences and sinnes: but a dead thing hath no will at all: When therefore we were dead to sinne, we had no will at all to goodnesse. He would haue an∣swered you that we are not able of our selues, to think any* 1.1105 good thought at all: but if we haue a will to any good thing, we must néedes thinke some thought thereon: we are not therefore of our selues sufficient to haue a will to any good thing. And if we haue any good will, this cōmeth not of our selues, but of God: not of old Adam, but of new Adam: it is not a naturall vertue of man, but a supernaturall gifte of god. Deus est enim qui operatur•…•…n vobis & velle & perficere pro* 1.1106

bona voluntate. It is God that worketh in you both to will & to performe it, according to his good will. If then it be Gods gift, Quid gloriaris quasi non acceperis? why boastest thou (O proud Papist) as though thou receiuedest it not of God, but thou hadst it of thine owne, to moue God as thou saist, Ex congruo ex parte liber•…•… arbit•…•…ij, of congruitie, to deserue* 1.1107 heauen for thy workes in consideration of thy free will.

If ye had mounted thus high M. Stapl. you may sée how S. Paule woulde haue pulled downe, this surmounting pride of yours. But, had ye s•…•…oonke by him neuer so frée, and mounted vp to Christ, he would haue tolde you in playne speach, that ye were but thornes, briers, & ill trées of your* 1.1108 selues, on which no grapes, nor 〈◊〉〈◊〉, nor any good fruite can be gathered. That ye were but flesh, and that nothing but fleshe could come of fleshe, and that flesh and bloud re∣uealeth not Christ. He would for your frée will, say vnto you, as he said to the craking Phariseis▪ Uox ex patre Dia∣bolo estis, & desideria patris vestr•…•… vultis facere. You are of your father the Diuel, and your will is to do the lusts of your father. This is all the free will that he ascribeth to man of him selfe. And if he haue any better will, it is not but of him that saith, Sine me nihil potestis facere, without me ye can* 1.1109 do nothing. We can not do, nor will, ought that good is without him. Yea we are (before he giue vs a will thereto) so vnwilling, that we are euen drawne thereto, Nemo ve∣nit* 1.1110 ad me nisi pater meus traxerit e•…•…m: No man cōmeth to me (saith Christ) vnlesse my father draw him. Omnia traham ad* 1.1111 meips•…•…, I will draw all things to me. We came not thē of our own free will if we were drawne to him. Ensample of this draught, euē in S. Paule himself. I graūt, our vnwillingnes* 1.1112 is changed to an obedient willingnesse, & to a frée will also. We are frée, in respect of deliuerie frō y^e chaines of darknes & bondage of sinne: S•…•… v•…•…s filiu•…•… liber auerit vere liberi er•…•…is: If* 1.1113 the sonne make you•…•… free then are ye free in deede: but this is the fréedome of y^e spirit, & the spirit helpeth our infirmities,* 1.1114

which infirmities yet hinder the fréedome of this will, e∣uen in the Saincts of God, as I noted in Sainct Paules complaint before. Yea euen Christ our Sauiour who tooke our infirmities without sinne, in his agonie to his Father sayde, Non sicut ego vol•…•… sed sicut t•…•… vis, Not as I will, but as* 1.1115 thou wilt, subduing his owne will for our ensample, to his fathers will, and will you wilfull Papistes crake of your free will?

But if ye let passe Christ also, as ye vse to do, and fetch∣ing a furder race of all mankinds, mounting so highe as Adam the first man of all: you should there haue founde in* 1.1116 déede this your frée will. But there ye should haue séene it lost againe, and in his loines, all our free willes with all, and him selfe and vs also. Sauing that a second Adam hath founde vs, quickened vs, and made vs free againe, of his free mercie, not of our freewill workes. So that what we haue now either in will or worke, to do any thing accepta∣ble to his most blessed will and pleasure: the same in déede is in vs, bicause his spirite is in vs, but not of vs, but of him, bringing forth in vs, Uelle & perficere, Both to will and* 1.1117 to worke, as fruites of his holy spirite within vs. And if this agrée with the pestiferous Fables and lies of Simon Magus, Marcion, and Manes: then ye haue mounted faire and well. If not, had ye mounted farre higher than they write Simon Magus did, yea than euer Lucifer did, yet as Simon Magus fell downe and brake his necke, as Lucifer was throwen downe to hell fire: so must you M. Stapleton with shame come downe againe, for feare ye be hurled downe with them.

Now, if as ye rashly mounted vp, ye will orderly come downe, through out all ages, as it were by steppes, ye may descende by this doctrine, euen to your owne time againe. But I pray you M. Stapleton in your comming downe, let* 1.1118 Pelagius be your host. What, mā, drinke with him at least, one free draught of his erroneous doctrine. He is a free

companion, and will let ye drinke at will, freely, and he hath pleasannt licour well swéetned with pure naturall drugges, and brewed with strong spices of your owne ha∣bilitie, perfection, and merites, delectable to the palace of mans selfeloue. But swéete soppes must haue sowre sawce, they say▪ This pleasaunt errour, is but a sugred poyson, and as ill on the other parte, as S•…•…nō Magus fatall necessitie was, if not a great deale worse.

But ye will come neere vs, and touche (ye say) the ve∣ry* 1.1119 foundation and well spring of this your newe Gospell, which altogither is grounded vpon Iustification without good workes. In that also ye drawe very nighe to the sayde Simon Magus.

Do we drawe nighe him, M. St? God sende grace you* 1.1120 draw not with him, and that many of your works, yea euen of your good works, and suche as ye ascribe iustification vn∣to, be not suche as Simon Magus and his disciples workes were. We grounde not vpon iustification without good* 1.1121 workes, you grounde vpon lyes without good consciences, that thus do slaunder vs. Iustification in déede may well be without your good workes, yea, it can not be with them. The good workes that God commaundeth, iustification bringeth foorth, and therfore it can not be without them, bi∣cause they be the necessarie fruites of Iustification, we se∣uer not them therfore from Iustification, but discerne them from the Acte of God in iustifying. Not to make our selues our owne iustifiers, in whole, or in parte. We discerne thē from the causes of our iustification, and ascribe the causes to the loue, fauor, and mercies of God the father, for Christ his sonnes sake, by the sanctification of his holy spirite. We discerne our workes from the merite and deserte of iustifi∣cation, muche more from the merite of our saluation, and say, it is onely wrought by his merites, and giuen to vs gratis, freely. All haue sinned (sayth S. Paule) and wante* 1.1122 the glory of God, but they are iustified freely by his grace

through the redemption which is in Iesu Christ, whom God hath appoynted to be the reconciliatiō, through fayth by his bloud comming betweene. Which worde freely, is contrary to merite, and excludeth it, as S. Paule reasoneth. S•…•… ex gra∣tia* 1.1123 iam non ex operibus, alioquin gratia non est gratia. If it come of grace, then commeth it not of workes, otherwyse grace is not grace. That is to say, it is not frée fauour, but bound fauour, as deserued or bought As Barnard said, Nō* 1.1124 est quo gratia intre•…•…, vbi iam meritū occupauit. VVhere merite hath taken vp the rowme, there is no place for grace to enter

And so S. Aug Haec est electio gratia. &c. This is the electiō of grace, bicause all good merites of man are preuented. For* 1.1125 if it were giuen by any good merites: then were it not giuen free, but rendred as ought. And by this meanes, it is not by a true name called grace, where reward is. As the same Apo∣stle sayth, it is not imputed according to grace, but accor∣ding to duetie, but if that it be true grace, that is to saye, freely giuen, it findeth nought in man, to whom it may be worthily owing. Infinite are the places that may be cited out of the fathers, and many are by others at large collected in this behalfe: yea, I haue shewed you Thomas his iudge∣ment alredy therin, who is the prince of al your scholemē. For merite of works therfore in iustification, we are of S. Paules minde. Arbitramur hominem iustificari fide abs{que} ope∣ribus* 1.1126 legis: we suppose that man is iustified by fayth with∣out the works of the law. Thus, in the poynt of iustification, workes are excluded, as he sayde immediately before: VVhere is then thy boasting? it is excluded. By what lawe, of workes? no, but by the lawe of fayth. Althoughe our* 1.1127 workes are not at all excluded, in respect of the fruites of those that are already iustified. For they are ipsius factura. &c. His workemanshippe, created in Iesu Christ in good workes, which God hath prepared that we shoulde walke in them. But* 1.1128 before this workemanshippe of Iustification, we were but very enimies. And therefore, as sainct Augustine saith:

Quae merita bona tūc habere poter amus, quando Deum non di∣ligebamus?* 1.1129 VVhat good merites could we then haue, when as yet we loued not God?

VVithout fayth it is impossible to please God. And, what soeuer is not of fayth, is sinne.

Nowe, this fayth, (which lykewise is not of vs, but is the gifte of God) we discerne from workes: bicause it hath relation to the onely mercies of God, promised in Christ vnto vs. Which promises, fayth catching holde vpon, is the only meanes and instrumēt that God hath giuen vs, to re∣ceiue the frée offer of his grace, and to applie to vs forgiue∣nesse of our sinnes. And so stedfastly beléening the same, we are iustified, by God onely, as the efficient and actiue worker: by Christ onely, as the formall cause, in whome our righteousnesse consisteth: and by faythe onely, as the instrument giuen of God vnto vs, wherby we receiue the same. And this sayth S Paule, exemplifying it by Abra∣ham. Quid enim dicit scriptura? For what sayth the scrip∣ture? Abraham beleeued God, and it vvas imputed to* 1.1130 hym for righteousnesse. But to him that worketh, re∣warde is not imputed according to grace, but according to duetie. But vnto him that worketh not, but beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vvycked, his faythe is imputed to righteousnesse, according to the purpose of the grace of God. And this is that we say, fayth onely iustifieth, that* 1.1131 is, fayth is the onely eye that séeth, the onely hande that catcheth holde vpon, the onely meanes whereby we re∣ceiue, the onely instrument wherewith we applye to our selues the mercies of God, pardoning our sinnes, by not imputation: The fauour and grace of God, offered in Christe vnto vs, by imputation, of his righteousnesse, wor∣kes and merites, and not of ours: but the father accepting his as ours, bicause we are incorporated into him, & depend by faith on him, in whom the father is onely well pleased, and this is our Iustification. Which is so sealed vp in vs,

by the spirite of God, sanctifying vs to do all true good wor∣kes, that by the shining of them, God is glorified, the fleshe subdued, the spirite quickned, our consciences appeased, our fayth assured, our liues bettred, our fruites yéelded, our du∣ties discharged, our neighbours helped, the godly reioyced, the weake confirmed, the mouthes of the enimies stopped, Gods commaundement obeyed & practised, and the workes of the diuell, manyfest euill, or hypocriticall, detected, aban∣doned, and destroyed. Not that these thinges be perfectly done, but that we striue to perfection by them: not that we are cleane dead to sinne, as the Monkes boasted, but that we dye dayly, as S▪ Paule sayth, and still mortifie the olde* 1.1132 man. Not that we fulfill al the law of God, or supererogate more, as the Papistes vaunt, but that fighting continually with Sathan, with the worlde, with fleshe and bloud, all our workes are vnperfect. Muche lesse, that by our good workes, we satisfie for our ill workes. But that when we haue all done, we are vnprofitable seruaunts, for any satis∣faction.* 1.1133 For howe can any vnperfect goodnesse (which not∣withstanding is not ours, and so we can not boast thereon, Si accepisti, quid gloriaris, if thou hast receyued it, why boa∣stest* 1.1134 thou?) make satisfaction for perfect wickednesse. Least of all, that for any worke we can do, or for any trouble we can suffer, that we should merite y^e fruitiō of God, the most perfect thing of all. Non sunt condignae passiones huius tēporis* 1.1135 ad futurā gl•…•…riā quae reuelabitur in nobis. The afflictiōs of this life are not answerable to the glory to come, that shall be re∣uealed in vs. But that all the goodnesse of our good works, & all the rewarde of them, is of him, that fréely for Christes sake, accepteth them: and for his sake will crowne them, bicause we be Christes, and Christ is his, and he is all in al in vs. This is our doctrine of good works, M. Sta. descer∣ning our owne workes from the fruites of the spirite of God, working in those, whome he hath iustified, holynesse and righteousnesse, all the dayes of their life, till tyme h•…•…

glorifie them.

And thus in déede set we foorth the doctrine of iustificatiō* 1.1136 without all workes, be they neuer so good, yea without our selues too, in whom this iustification is wrought. Cōfessing God to be all in all, and our selues the workmanship of his hāds. And this was the groūd, the foūdation, and welspring, not of our new Gospell, as ye terme it, but of the new Te∣stament, and ancient Gospell of Iesus Christ. Upon which foundation we béeing grounded: farewell al your merites, your supererogatorie more thā merites, your masses, your* 1.1137 traditions, your ceremonies, reliques, Images, myracles, inuocations, vowes, purgatorie, & al this bagge & baggage, & what soeuer your other not written verities, or rather false forgeries, which (béeing not subiect to Gods righteous∣nes) ye haue soght before mē, to iustifie yourselues withal.

Thus much, M. St. to the heresies ye charge vs with, for* 1.1138 This shall suffice (ye say) at this present, to make open to all the worlde, that they are no secret nor petit heresies, that ye and your fellowes mainteyne.

What we mainteine, M. St. is in déede not secret & hyd,* 1.1139 (as your mysteries & secret conspiracies are) but as Christ saide of his doctrine, is dayly taught openly in the temple, is proclaymed on the house toppe, the corner stone is not caste aside in a hole of our builders, but is made the head stone of the buylding. The candle is not hidde vnder a bu∣shell. The people maye sée it, and sée by it (as thankes be to God they do more and more full sore agaynst your willes) neither al the puffes of your counterblast can blow the light of this holy candle out. But ye crie, all is heresie, heresie. In déede suche as was layde to S. Paules charge, is this heresie of ours. It is soone sayde, to call it heresie, as ye haue done al this while, but it would cumber you to proue it heresie, as yet ye haue not done.

Ye haue héere layde many things vnto vs, where either we defende not any suche thing at all, nor any suche like

thing. And your selues for the moste parte defende them, or the like, or else a contrarie as ill or worsse. As for such doc∣trine as we in déede defende, except your slaunderous ray∣ling, ye haue brought not one worde agaynst it, to proue any one heresie or errour, aperte or priuie. Neuerthelesse, bicause of your instant crying, and importune craking, I haue answered a great deale further, than either the prin∣cipal issue about y^e princes supremacie, or the volume could well suffer, or than I minded or néeded to haue done. For, to say truth, ye haue not, nor ye can, obiect any thing, that your masters haue not obiected before, and is not answe∣red already by others, chiefly by that Reuerende father in Christ, the Byshop of Sarisburie, whome you so often snatche and snurre at, and not you alone, but al the packe of you, as at him whome God hath raysed vp, as a singuler Iuell and instrument to open & confute all your falshoods.

Yet since your impudencie is so extreme, still to crie out vpon vs, as though nothing were done or spekē in the mat∣ter, saying: Come foorth once, and cleare your selfe of this* 1.1140 onely obiection, if you can, beeing so often pressed therwith. If you maynteine olde condemned heresies, what are ye lesse than heretikes them selues? if you maynteyne them not, or if they be not heresies that you maynteyne, cleare your selfe if you be able. I assure you master Horne, you and all your fellowes will neuer bee able to auoyde this one onely ob∣iection. &c.

Since ye thus still crie and call vpon vs, as though non•…•…* 1.1141 had answered to these obiectiōs, I haue therfore thus much at your earnest entreatie, digressed thus farre from the principall question, to satisfie, if playne truthe (for Rhe∣thorike I leaue to you and other) may satisfie your impor∣tunitie: and fedde withal your vayne humor, that where ye haue made and translated many braue bookes, to the which your margine oftentimes sendeth vs, to put vs in remem∣braunce what a ioly writer you be, and thinke you muste

néedes be answered, or else al is marred, and then ye might say with the Soluters dawe, oleum & operam perdidi, I haue loste all my cost and labour, if no man should regarde my workes: ye still crie out therefore to be answered, and bidde vs come foorth and we dare, as though it were Go∣lias: and yet any one poore séelie stone of our Dauids bagge, will make you, M. Stap. so tottle vp your héeles, that we may safely cutte off your head, the Pope, euen with your owne weapon, for all these your cries and crakes.

But like a lustie champion, as though ye had made a suf∣ficient conquest, ye say ye wil forbeare at this time to speake* 1.1142 of the residue of our noble progenitours.

Coragiously sayde, M. St. when ye haue done the worste ye can, and spit out all your poyson, then tell vs ye wil for∣beare vs. Wel then, at the length, thāks be to God, ye haue done with our ancestors, as ye cal thē: & haue ben answered as ye haue heard. Now let others in gods name iudge of vs both, as they shal find y^e falshood or veritie of these matters.

May it nowe please you (M. Sta.) to giue me leaue a* 1.1143 while to runne at randō the same race that you haue done, and to vse your owne words: Good sir may it please you, fauorably to heare your and your masters honorable pede∣gree, and of their worthy feates and prowesse.

First, what say you to the Phariseis, that seuered them selues from all the people in their strange apparell, in their fastings, prayers, and other poynts of hypocrisie, described out by Christ, in so much that they preferred them selues a∣boue* 1.1144 al men, & so were counted, as in whō religion did only or most consist: so like in euery poynt to your Monkes and Friers, deuided frō other men by their rules & profession, and estéemed & called onely or chiefly religious men?

VVhat say ye agayne to the Phariseis, that kept the key of* 1.1145 knowledge among them selues, and would neither them selues enter in, nor suffer other to enter, but rather be blind guides and leaders of the blinde: so like to your Prelates

and you pretending to be the pastors of the people, and kée∣pers of the worde of God, but so to kéepe it, that not only ye kept the people from it, but for the most part your Priests were ignoraunt of it, and blinder guides of the blinde then euer the Phariseis were.

VVhat say ye agayne to the Phariseis, that brought tradi∣tions into the Church, besides the worde of God, and trans∣gressed the worde of God for their traditions sake? Wher∣in,* 1.1146 for one tradition of the Phariseis so brought in: the Pa∣pistes haue brought in a score at the least, and if I shoulde say, an hundreth, I spake within my bounds.

VVhat say ye to the same Phariseis, that defended a mā* 1.1147 might do all that the law commaundeth, and obteine iusti∣fication, and heauen therby? But héere the Papistes go be∣yonde them, that say, we not onely may do all, but more than all that euer God commaunded, workes of counsel, of voluntarie, & of supererogatiō, like to the Foxe, with more* 1.1148 than a thousand wiles, in cōparison of the poore catte: but the Phariseis herein were nothing stored like the Papists.

What say ye to the Saduces, that sayde: we haue powre &* 1.1149 frée will to do good or badde?

What say ye to the Esseni, that liued in woods and soli∣tary places, and eate onely rootes and herbes, counting all righteousnesse to consist in streight rules of life: although herein, you be but counterfeits to them, and I do them in∣iuiurie in this comparison to you, whose Friers, Monkes, Heremites, and Anachores, were nothing comparable but méere Pharisaicall hypocrites.

What say ye euen to Simon Magus your selfe, with* 1.1150 whom you charge vs? that first began to mingle the Iewish and heathen ceremonies with Christianitie.

What say ye agayne to Simon Magus, that would haue made sales of the giftes of the holy ghost, as the Pope ma∣keth sale of his Indulgences & graces? What say ye agayn to Simon Magus, that came to Rome, and there was

honored as God? as the Pope not like Gods vi•…•…ar, as he pretende•…•…, but like God him self, is there honored, and clai∣meth here in earth to haue the power of God, according as Simon Magus named him selfe the power of God.

What say ye once againe to Simon Magus and all his of∣spring* 1.1151 that mainteyned filthie fornication, as the Pope doth stewes, courteianes and Concubines? What say ye to the* 1.1152 Heretikes called Sethiani? Of whome saith S. Augustine, Multa de principatibu•…•… & potestatibus van•…•…ssima 〈◊〉〈◊〉. They faigne many moste vaine thinges of principalities and powers: according as do your fabling bookes, of the celesti∣all Hierarchies, in the name of Di•…•…nisius and other like.

What say ye to the Carpocratians? that to mainteine* 1.1153 their wicked liues & false opinions, did say that Iesus taught those things to his Disciples and Apostles aparte from his written worde, and deliuered them by tradition to be kept: as the Pope and all the Papistes say for defence of traditi∣ons and vnwritten verities (as they call them) besides the written worde of Christ.

What say ye to the Cainites that made inuocation vnto* 1.1154 Angels? but the Papistes made inu•…•…cation not only to An∣gels, but to dead men and women also, yea and to thinges vnsensible.

What say ye to the Theodotians? that would take from* 1.1155 and put to the worde of God, and that they had authoritie to correct th•…•…se things that were not well, and saide they were therein wiser than the holy Ghost: as do the Papists adde to the worde of God their traditions, and suppresse and •…•…i∣minish* 1.1156 the authoritie of Gods worde, saying, their Church is of greater authoritie by them, and they haue furder knowledge of Gods spirite than is cont•…•…ined in the written worde of God.

What say ye to the Basilidians, that to their Disciples* 1.1157 commaunded •…•…ue yéeres silence: as your Monkes, Friers, Heremites, Ana•…•…hores, &c. enioyned to their nouices silence

at certaine times, and did all by beckes and noddes, and if a worde were spoken, all their perfection were marde.

What say ye moreouer to the Basilidians? that painted* 1.1158 and carued the Image of Christ and worshipped it. As I haue shewed the Papists did, what kinde of worship socuer ye would excuse the matter withall.

What say ye to the Cerdoniaus? that reiected the ensam∣ples of the old Testament: as you M. St. and M. Dorman in this controuersie of supremacie do.

What say you to Montanus? that first appointed lawes of fasting, which before were frée, as is shewed already in the Article thereon. That said the holy Ghost taught him more, and better, & greater things than Christ taught in the Gospell: as your Papistes say for their vnwritten verities and workes of supererogation. Ascribing a greater perfec∣tion to such voluntarie workes, than to the workes expres∣sed and commaunded in the worde of God.

What say ye againe to the Montanistes? that abrogated* 1.1159 the authoritie of Gods w•…•…rde: as I haue shewed ye in Pig∣ghius and Alphonsus that the Papistes do.

What say ye againe to the Montanistes? that boasted much of mysteries, but nothing so many nor so mystie, as the Papists were. That said to accuse and condemne them∣selues to be sinners, was to sclaunder them selues, as the Papists that can not abide the Letanie, for saying so often,* 1.1160 Lorde haue mercy vppon vs miserable sinners, and for saying Amen to the curses recited against the wicked. Besides that I haue shewed alreadie, how they iustifie them selues with puritie of nature, with fréewill, with preparatiue workes, meritorious, more than m•…•…ritorious, & workes of perfectiō,

What say ye to the same Montanistes? that vnder the* 1.1161 pretence of offerings craftely gathered and extorted of the people great summes of monie. But not the hundreth parte that the popish Priests offrings brought in.* 1.1162

What say ye againe to the Montanistes? with whom the

Prophicie•…•… of Priscilla and •…•…aximilla were in greater ho∣nour, than the holy Gospels of Iesus Christe: as likewise the blinde Prophecies of the Papistes, to the which they giue more credite, than to the true Prophets, that haue set forth Gods worde.* 1.1163

What say ye once againe to Montanus? that taught the dissoluing & contemning of Matrim•…•…nie for religiō sake: in all which thing•…•… how nere your Papists follow Montanus steppes, is very apparant to the easie conferrer.

What say ye to the Tessarescedecatitae? which vsed and* 1.1164 alleaged forged bookes in the Apostles names, called Apo∣crypha: as the Papistes make Canonicall the bookes so called, besides that they alleage and set out their S. Tho∣mas gospell. Nichodemus gospell. The actes of S. Peter. The fables of Lazarn•…•…, the birth, life, death, and assump∣tion* 1.1165 of the blessed virgin, and many such other counterfaite bookes, to establishe their Masse, Purgatorie, Reliques, Traditions, and other such errours by them.

What say you to the Seueriani of Seuerus? that saide a* 1.1166 wench called Ph•…•…lumene was enspired with the holy ghost to foretel things to come, to whom declaring his dreames & burnings of his minde, she would warne him secretly as it were of things to come, and that she should sée phantasies come vnto hir in the likenesse of a childe, which childe ap∣pering would now and then say he were Christ, now and then S. Paule, & that the spirite told hir such things as she told the people, & that she wrought such miracles, of which this was the chiefe: that she woulde put a great loafe into a glasse hauing a narrow mouth, and with the tippe of hir fingars take it out againe vnbroakē, & that she eate nothing els but that, as sent hir from God. Compare these things with the Popish practises in their visions, trances, and mi∣racles of their she •…•…incts. S. Bridgits Reuelations, the trances of the holy mayde in Kente, the P•…•…ell of Fraunce, the she saint that Sir Thomas More telleth of in

his booke of Pilgrimages, and sée how much they differ.

What say you to the Taciani? that would admitte none* 1.1167 into their rules and orders, were they men or women, that renounced not Mariage: as none may be admitted to the Popish orders or rules of their religions, that haue not vowed not to marie.* 1.1168

What say you to the Alogiani, that as is saide before stood vppon vnwritten verities, and reiected the written worde of God?

What say ye to the Angelici, that bowed them selues downe in the worship of Angels?

What say ye to the Apostolici which most arrogantly called them selues by this name (as do your Popes call thē selues Apostolicall) and they receiue not into their commu∣nion, those that vse wiues (as your Papistes will admitte no married Priests to consecrate at their Masse) nor they receiued any that professe any proprietie of their goods (as your Monkes and Friers do p•…•…tende) of whome saith S. Augustine, Quales habet Ecclesia & Monachos & Clericos plurimos: Such as the Church hath many Mōkes & Clerkes, No meruayle then if your Monkes and Priests do so now, for the Heresie of your Apostolical (as ye cal it, but in déede apostaticall Church herein) is of faire antiquitie.* 1.1169

What say you to the Manichaei, with whom ere while ye falsely charged vs? They forbid (as S. Augustine saithe) mariage, so much as in them lieth. They saide, that by cha∣stitie, Prayers and Psalmes, they purged their liues & sent them to heauen. They craked of false Abstinēcie and Con∣tinencie to deceyue the simple. They boasted that they for∣sooke all things for God, and did arrogate to them selues all the blessings mencioned in the Gospell. They added and tooke from the Scriptures so much as they pleased, preten∣ding they had bene or might be corrupted, and preferred the bookes called Apocrypha. They said the promise of Iesus Christ, concerning the holy ghost the comforter, was fulfil∣led

in their Archmanichée: as the Papists besides all the o∣ther aforesayde, say the same promise of the holy ghost, is fulfilled in their Arch prelate the Pope. And as Manicheus called himselfe the Apostle of Iesu Christ, so your Pope in* 1.1170 his Bulles prefixeth the authoritie Apostolicall of Peter and Paule. Moreouer they reiected flesh, egges and milke, which the Papists d•…•… on certaine dayes, they reiected also the proprietie of goodes, as due the begging Friers.

What say ye to the Hierachitae, that likewise as these would receyue none into their societie but vnmaried men* 1.1171 and women? Such were also your Aerians, whome falsly you obiect to vs, being more like to them your selues, admit∣ting none but suche as were continent, as renounced the worlde, and would possesse nothing of their owne.

What say ye to the Psalliani and Euchitae? that were all giuen to mumbling vp of prayers, and sayde that Monkes ought not to labour to get their liuing, and therefore they professed themselues to be Monkes, bicause they woulde do no worke but pray. Whom Erasmus in his defence against the Sorbonists, being appeached onely for saying, Christu•…•… in orando damnat multiloqu•…•…um. Christ doth condemne much* 1.1172 babling in prayer) likeneth the Papists vnto: Deni{que} Psal∣liani siue Euchitae. &c. To conclude, the Psalliani or Euchitae haue augmented the beadroll of Heretikes, who lyuing in idlenesse, dispatched vp an heape of psalmes, with a maruey∣lous rolling of the tongue.* 1.1173

What say ye to the Pattalorinchitae? which did so giue themselues to silence, that at suche times as they thought they must holde their peace, they would lay their fingers on their nose and lippes, least they should speak•…•… a worde: as I noted before of the Basilidians, both whome herein your religious men resembled.

What say ye to the Aquarij, which mingled water with wine in the Sacrament, as all the Papist & do?

What say you to the barefoote Heretikes, that walked

vp and downe barefoote, and woulde weare no shooes, like the barefoote Friers.* 1.1174

What say you to the Priscillianists? that had this rule among them, Iura periura secretum prodere nol•…•…. Sweare and forsweare, bewray not the secrete: not onely like the dissem∣bling Papistes practise among vs, that will sweare and for∣sweare themselues to the Prince with false hollow heartes in truth▪ and yet in falshood trustie to their confederates, nor will bewray their secrete conspiracies: but also like the rule of your Pope, and all his perfect faythfull ones, Nulla •…•…ides tenenda Haereticis. No fayth must be kept to Heretikes, as ye call vs. But syth ye protest to be so vnfaythfull, you might call them fooles to, that would beléeue, either any o∣pen or dissembling Papist.

What say ye againe to the Priscillianists? that say men* 1.1175 are tyed to the destinie of the starres, and that our bodie is composed, according to the twelue Signes of heauen, pla∣cing (as those doe that are called the Mathematikes) a Ram to rule the heade, a Bull in the necke, Twinnes in the shoul∣ders, a Crabbe in the breast: and so running throughe the other Signes by name, they discende vnto the soales of the feete, which they allotte to Fishes, which of the Astrolo∣gians is called the last signe. Vppon these and such other fa∣bulous, vayne, and sacrilegious thinges, which were to long to prosecute is this Heresie compounded. Thus sayth Saint Augustine. Nowe if this be so heynous an Heresie, as Saint Augustine maketh it, all your Popishe Churche are* 1.1176 infected with it. And I woulde wishe all good Christians to beware, howe farre they beléeue the blinde Prophecies of many Almanackes, that fill the Papistes braynes with hopes and murmurings, and feare the sielie people wyth doubtfull expectations. All which by Saint Augustines iudgement is but Heresies, But God graunt say I, it tende to nothing else.* 1.1177

What say y•…•… to the Acephali? that sayde women may be

shée Deacons (such as were your Nonnes.)* 1.1178

What say ye againe to the Priscillianistes? that those whome they coulde perswade to their sect, they parted the man from his wife, agaynst the wiues will: and parted the wife from the husbande, agaynst the husbandes will. And that although they refused not the canonicall scripture, yet they ioyned there with the Bookes called Apocrypha, coun∣ting them likewise of authoritie: and in the canonicall scrip∣tures whatsoeuer ouerturneth their errour, they turne it into allegoricall senses.

What say ye to the Messaliani, with whom ye burthen vs? but howe neare your selues drawe to them, appeareth in that they spent their life in Monkishe ydle praying, slée∣ping and eating: not so like the foresayde Euchitae, as lyke the Papists. They craked that they sawe reuelations, and fled from all handie craftes and labour, and buylded them∣selues Celles and Oratories, and Euening and Morning with many lights and Caudles burning gathered togither, and deceyued themselues with long praiers, & told straunge fables of purging of soules. Epiphanius confuting them, imputeth all this to a fonde and naughtie zeale, wherewith they were so blinded, that they durst attempt such thinges contrarie to the holy Scripture. This Heresie so encreased in euerie place, that the fathers had much a doo to •…•…oote them oute, yea diuerse Monasteries were faine to bée burned vp, that were infected herewith. And yet all the Popishe Abbeys, had euen the selfe same lubberly deuotion, and all the other errours, superstitions, and fables, if not an infi∣nite number of worse, and therefore no maruayle if God haue rooted vp, and do most iustly destroy the dennes of such auncient and so pernicious Heretikes.* 1.1179

In this point notwithstanding the Papists are contrary to the Messalians: who sayde, there are manie Gods, and yet doe worship but one GOD almightie. But the Pa∣pistes will say, there is but one GOD almightie, and

yet giue such worship, as is onely due to him, to many m•…•… besides. Of which contraries, it is hard to iudge, which barrell is better herring.

What say ye to the Aëtians? that sayd, for a man to lie* 1.1180 with a woman without matrimonie, was no more a sinne, than to picke his eare, so that he were of their religion: and doth your Pope make much more of the matter? so that ye be a Catholike, and pay a fee for a whore, whiche is yet somewhat more than to picke his eare, for by such filthie gaynes the Pope did picke their purses.

What say you to the Theophroniani? that trauayled* 1.1181 chiefly in Aristotles Categories, & interpretation of wordes and propositions, in subtile and absurde disputations, in cu∣rious scanning of names and wordes in the scripture: like for all the worlde to your Thomists, Scotists, D•…•…camists, Sorbonists, and all the sects of schoolemen, making of Ari∣stotles* 1.1182 Philosophie, good diuinitie: being altogither occupi∣ed in curious and subtile quiddities.

What say ye to the Aërians your selues, with whome ye charged vs so fast? that as the other abouesayd Heretikes, admitted none to their communion, but such as were con∣tinent, without wiues, and forsooke the worlde, and had no proprietie of their goodes: as all your Cloysterers pre∣tended.

What say ye to the Colliridiani? or Ladies Chaplaynes* 1.1183 (as ye terme your Priestes) that worshipped and offred sa∣crifice vnto hir: as the Papists doing the same or more, is shewed sufficiently.

What say ye to the Anthropomorphitae, that helde, that God had forme and partes like a man? if ye say you beleus not so, whie then doe you (contrarie to your beliefe) picture out God in such a fashion? and so by your owne rules, the figure not béeing like the truth, it implieth an Idoll as is confessed. Yea, are ye not like herein to those Heretikes, that S. Augustine noteth to make triformem deum, a three∣formed

God? whereby if those Monkes were by ignorance deceyued, how much more were many thousands deceyued by such pictures, taking God in déede to be euen such an one, as he was portrayed out in the Image,

Ye haue called vs Pelagians, and worse then Pelagians.* 1.1184 But do ye not say we are worse bicause you like them well ynough, but for the name sake onely? Else, what say you to the Pelagians errours?

The Pelagians helde for originall sinne, that it can not* 1.1185 be sinne, that is in infants, for bicause infants want will: but sinne cannot be where will doth want: Ergo, it is no sinne. And is not this the Papists saying Uoluntas est sedes pecc•…•…: VVill is the feate of sinne: but infants haue not will, nor li∣berum voluntatis arbitrium: The •…•…ree arbitrement of will: infants therefore haue no sinne. For it cannot haue the na∣ture of sinne that wanteth these.

The Pelagians sayd•…•…, that sinne can not infect, corrupt, chaunge, nor be in the nature and substance of man. And is not this the very selfe same saying of Pigghius?

As for frée will, did not the Pelagians say, that if there re∣maine by nature no free will in man▪ then all exhortation, preaching, and the law of God is commaunded in vaine? And that the taking away of freewill, taketh away the studie and care of Godly life? And doth not Pigghius say euen the* 1.1186 same, that we are not, nor can bee bounde to any lawe of God, to keepe the commaundements, where we haue not fa∣cultie, freewill, and might, to satisfie and fulfill those things that are commaunded: and that this doctrine of grace, de∣stroyeth all good woorkes, as taking awaye free election and will?

Did not the Pelagians say that the law of God is easie to* 1.1187 be fulfilled, and all the commaundements of God are possible to be kept? And do not all Papistes defende the selfe same doctrine, yea and say they can do more?

As for grace, the Pelagians graunted a first grace of God

in our creation, euen before any merits, likewise, a seconde* 1.1188 grace of preaching, whereby God sendeth his worde vnto vs, and either of these come without any merit or occasion in vs. But the third grace of God, to heare his worde, beleeue, and follow it, is preuented by our owne preparatiues, & dispositi∣ons, of seeking, asking, and knocking, and not to resist grace when it commeth, is in our selues, & in our owne nature from the creatiō of vs: and doth not Alphōsus say y^e same, although many Papists be farre worse, & say that the first grace & all, commeth Propter praeuisa opera, For works that God foresaw?

Of predestination, the Pelagians say, that the number of* 1.1189 the elect, may be encreased or diminished, and that God hath no determinate number. That God hath predestinate them, that he foresaw should deserue it, by their workes. That the predestinate can be, or can not be saued: and leese or keepe at their voluntarie, the graces of God giuen vnto them. And that the doctrine of predestination is not profitable to bee preached. And what poynt is there of all these, that the Pa∣pists do not openly defende.

The Pelagians sayde of iustification, that althe Prophets, Apostles and Saincts of the old and new Testament were sa∣ued for their vertuous life.

The Pelagians sayde of sayth, if thou beleuest thou shalt be saued, the one of these twaine is commaunded, the other is offred. That which is commaunded is in mans power, that which is offred is in the power of God.

The Pelagian concerning good workes and euill, sayth* 1.1190 thus. I haue sayd, that a man can be without sinne, if he will, not as some men slaunder me, without the grace of God, the whiche so muche as to thinke is very sacrilege, but simplie, that hee can if hee will, so that wee vnderstande it with the grace of God. And this I affirme, he that can one day ab∣staine from sinne, he can abstaine also another day. And hee that can abstaine two dayes, can abstaine three dayes. And he that can three, can thirtie, and so by order can abstaine

three hundreth, and three thousande when he will. All this sayde Pelagius, and do not the Papistes likewise say, that it lyeth in theyr frée will to abstayne or not abstayne, ioy∣ning with their will the grace of GOD to helpe them? And althoughe you confesse (as ye cannot choose) that euerie man is a sinner: yet for mortall or deadely sinne, you* 1.1191 say: that euerie man can liue cleane without doing any dead∣ly sinne all his life long, and that to holde the contrary is an errour and an Heresie.

Where likewise ye falsely obiect vnto vs, the saying of the Messalians, for that we say concupiscence is sinne after baptisme: The affirming that concupiscence is no sinne, is the very saying of the Pelagian, that reasoned thus as Pig∣ghius doth, concupiscence is naturall, Ergo, it is no sinne. In* 1.1192 all these poynts, besides many other, what say you (M. St.) to the Pelagians? But I trust you will say no hurt vnto thē, that are your elde friends and alies. I omit the Donatists; and their bandes, till your selfe come vnto them.

What say you to the Eutichians? that said the humanitie* 1.1193 of Christ glorified, by reason of the personall union had also the properties of the diuinity, to be in infinit places at once, to haue no lineament, part, quantitie, forme, or circumscrip∣tion. Which heresie i•…•… no simple nor smal heresie, Theodo∣retus calleth the defēder of it: Eranistes or Polymorphus as though it were made of sundry coloured patches, like a beg∣gars cloake, an Heresie botched vp of all Heresies togither. And what say ye to your doctrine of transsubstantiation, if it be euen this Heretikes doctrine, & his principall argument to mainteyne the Entichians heresie withall: and the cōtra∣ry (by taking away of trāsubstantiation) be the true Catho∣likes doctrine, to defend the veritie of Christs bodie agaynst the Eutichians heresie▪ & in proufe hereof, what say ye to y^e heretik Cranistes his argumēt, reasoning thus? Euē as ther∣fore* 1.1194 the signes of the bodie & the bloud, are other things in deed (that is to wit the norishmēt of the sedes, bread & wine)

before the Priests inuocation: but after the inuocation, they* 1.1195 are chaunged and are made other things, (that is to w•…•…te, the bodie and bloud of Christ it selfe:) euen so the bodie of the Lord after the assumption, is chaūged into a diuine substance. Thus sayth this beggerly patched Heretike to defende this heresie. But what replieth the true catholike to him again?* 1.1196 Thou art taken (sayth he) with the nettes that thou hast knit thy selfe, for, as for the mysticall signes, they go not from their nature, after the sanctification, for they remaine in the same substance, figure, and forme, and can be seene and felt, euen as they could before the sanctification. This was then the Catholikes doctrine agaynst all transubstantiation, as the very argument and piller for the Heretike, to main∣teyne all his diuerse coloured patches of Heresies withall.

VVhat say you nowe master Stapleton, to all this crewe of Heretikes? Is not here a fayre pedegree of you and your Masters honourable progenitors? And yet there are many mo behinde, that (as ye call for them hereafter) will come forth also, and shewe their faces: In the meane season, to borrow your owne wordes, till I pay you againe, If you,* 1.1197 Master Stapleton, mainteyne olde condemned Heresies, what are ye lesse than Heretikes your selues? And what is the doctrine of Poperie, but a misshapen lumpe of sowre dough, leauened and hotchpotched vp togither, of a number of olde condemned Heresies? a good and catholike doctrine I warrant you, Master Stapleton.

Nowe (say you comming to your fift part) as I haue pro∣ued* 1.1198 you and your companions open and notable Heretikes, so shall I straight way purge M. Feck. to be no Donatist.

I thinke the same Master Stap. As ye haue proued the one, so you will purge the other: but ye haue not hitherto proued the one, nor any one iote of it, nor haue alleaged a∣ny thing but slaunders, and your bare sayings, after your •…•…acing maner without any proues at all. Neuerthelesse, let vs sée, how ye will purge the other.

But now M. Ho•…•…e (say you) beware your selfe, least this* 1.1199 iniuste accusation against M. Feckenham and the Catholikes, whom ye cōpare to the Donatistes causelesse, most iustly and truly redownde vppon you and your fellowes heddes.

Is this (M. Stapleton) his purgation to charge another?* 1.1200 yet if your vaine so serueth you, that ye will néedes charge vs, it had bene your dutie, first to haue cléered him, and then to haue charged vs. But go to, we must follow still your peruerse order, especially •…•…ith ye giu•…•… v•…•… so faire a warning piece, saying:

Beware I say, for I suppose, I will laye more pregnant mat∣ter* 1.1201 in this behalfe, to your and their charge, than ye haue or possibly can do, to M. Feckenham or any other Catholike, whereof I dare make any indifferent reader Iudge.

True indéede (M. Stapl.) without supposall, ye h•…•…ue an head as it were a counting house, full of pregnant matter, such as these your vi•…•… and crakes, with other your com∣mon places of sclaunderouse rayling•…•…are: wherein ye ex∣cell all your com•…•…, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 wherein for my parte I will not contende with you, but onely sette it 〈◊〉〈◊〉, that (as ye say) euery indifferent reader, whom you dare make your Iudge, may beholde, Iudge, and co•…•…d, your pregnancie there∣in. And if ye haue any pregnant matter t•…•… charge vs, as ye vaunt, it shall suffi•…•… me aft•…•…r my h•…•…y manner, (not contending who hath more pregnant matter, wherein ye graunt ye may be charged by vs, in some pregnant matter,) to discharge our selues of the charge if we can, and againe if we can also, to returne the charge on your neckes, or els let it stande for me indifferent, to whome the readers indif∣ferent iudgement shall awarde it, whether you haue more pregnant matter to charge vs, or we haue more and more true matters to recharge you, and discharge our selues, in this heresie of the Donatistes.

They were all (ye say) called first Donatistes, but as they* 1.1202 first•…•… fell from the Church Catholike, so fell they afterwarde

from their own Church and maister, into an horrible diuision of the Maximianists, Circumcellions, Rogatists, Circenses & others. A liuely paterne of the sectes sprong from your Apo∣stle Luther, as in their pedegree in the Apologie of Staphi∣lus,* 1.1203 euery man may see.

Euery man may see M. St. that he is a good cocks•…•…re wit∣nesse of your side, and therefore it is pregnantly done of you to sende vs to him, but sauing your reuerence M. Staple∣ton I haue heard say ere this, that two false harlots neede no broker.

Your argument is vicious diuerse waies, but chiefly it standeth of your common fallacion, A non causa vt causa: & so doth the most of this your pregnant matter. For els, by the like argument, yè might make another liuely paterne, from Christes own wordes: Necesse est vt Scandala veniant,* 1.1204 It is necessarie that offences come. And Christ him selfe (as Simeon saide of him) is, Positus multis in ruina•…•…, Placed to* 1.1205 many to their ruine. And so he calleth him selfe a stombling stone: and his ghospell (as saith S. Paule) is to the Iewes* 1.1206 an offence, and follie to the Gentiles. What a number of Heresies sprang vp, euen in the Apostles time, through false Apostles? of whom saith S. Ihon, They went out from* 1.1207 vs, but of vs they were not. Doth not S. Augustine (descri∣bing the Church of Christ) confesse, H•…•…reses 〈◊〉〈◊〉 de illa ex∣i•…•…runt tanquam sarmenta inutilia de vitè precisa, ipsa autem manet in radice sua. All Heresies went out of the Church as vnprofitable boughs cut of from the vine, but it selfe remay∣neth still in the roote thereof. Ye should discerne betwene the sower of the wheate, and the sower of the darnell, M.* 1.1208 St. and then your argument were aunswered.

Although it be also a sclanderous lie, to Father those sectes on the gospell, or from Luther, that are rather de∣riued* 1.1209 from Popish errours, with which they more agrée, as sprong out of suche superstitions and ignorance, as you had noseled them withall. But if ye will fetch, in this point,

an argument from the 〈◊〉〈◊〉: how forgatte you the* 1.1210 plentifull sectes of your false Friers? all sprange first from Francis and Dominike, but what swarmes full, not of the Friers onely, who as Cha•…•…er telleth came driuinge like bées out of Sathanas tayle, but of the diuerse sectes of* 1.1211 them, that haue sproug•…•… out since, the one no more like the other then an Apple is like an Oyster, and all agreing* 1.1212 togither like catt•…•… in a •…•…tter. Ye might haue tolde vs of Peter Lombarde, of Thomas, of Scotus, &c. And of the sectes sprong out of their loynes, deuided so bitterly among them selues, with great 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and •…•…artakinges, and that in no small pointe•…•… of 〈◊〉〈◊〉: & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ye might haue made a fitter comparis•…•…n to the 〈◊〉〈◊〉.

Suche pregnant 〈◊〉〈◊〉 a•…•… your first charge is, such is your second charge.

The Donatistes (say you) would sometime crake & bragge* 1.1213 of their multitude, and bring it as an argument that the truth was on their side, as doth your Apologie▪ which being restrai∣ned by the Emperours lawes, and dayly diminishing▪ thē they cried, the truth resteth with the few elected and chosen per∣sons, then cried they, O little flocke feare not, as ye did, when ye were as yet but in corners, rotten barnes, and luskie lanes.

If these be good arguments (M. Stapl▪) to pr•…•…ue a Do∣natist,* 1.1214 to crake and bragge of multitude, & to bring it as an ar∣gument that the truth is on their side: then are all Papistes Donatistes and we 〈◊〉〈◊〉 For it is your crake, & almost your onely vaūt, of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of greatest multitudes of people: asking vs in cōtempt where our Church was, when for the* 1.1215 most parte (ye saide) all is •…•…urs, as the Diuell saide when he looked in at the C•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉, as telleth the olde by worde. And if nowe it hath 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Go•…•…, by the preach∣ing of his •…•…lessed▪ word•…•… (〈◊〉〈◊〉 he pro•…•…ed) after t•…•… ge∣nerall defection, so to detect the man of sinne, and to chaine vp Sathā, that he should not so much dectine the world, but that we may 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and e•…•…race the glad and true tidinges

of our saluation: we do not crake nor bragge thereof. Re∣ioyse* 1.1216 in the Lord we may, praysing God, that he hath re∣uealed these things to the simple: and to lifte vp our heads Christ biddeth vs, when the haruest waxeth ripe and great, praying him to sende more workemen into his haruest, to reape the sheane•…•… with ioy, the seede whereof we sowed be∣fore in teares. This we may do, & be I trust no Donatists. As for craking of multitudes, it is proper to your Churche M. St. we make no argument to or fro thereon.

And if on the other parte, in the time of persecution, whē iniquitie had the vpper hand, we comforted our selues with* 1.1217 this consolation of Christ, Feare not O little flocke, and the truth resteth with the fe•…•…e ele•…•…ed and chosen persons: If ye scoffe at these wordes, and he•…•…vpon inferre vs to be Dona∣tistes, bicause they saide the same: by this argument, ye wil •…•…oue the author of them Iesus Christ him self to be a Do∣natist to. The wordes are godly & true who soeuer vse thē. Only, ye should haue proued, that we applied them falsely as the Donatistes did, or elsye proue nothing. Ye say we cri•…•…d thus when we were as yet but in corners, rotten barnes, & lusky lanes. Were you neuer in corners, rotten barnes, & luskie lanes M. Stapl? I will not say for what purposes, but God forgiue ye and I do, but I thinke ye werenot there for Religion. And though it seemeth by these your lusty crakes, where ye are n•…•…n at Louaine, that ye would be thought no hedge•…•…réeper▪ nor •…•…uedropper (as s•…•… of your broode, are peaking here in lus•…•…y lanes, and lurking in corners, and yet they court thē selues no more Donatistes than you): Not∣withstāding it appeareth, for all your crakes & bragges, ye haue not that stout courage f•…•…r your ra•…•…se, but that ye like Louaine better than M. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 •…•…ging, and had rather blow your 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉, like 〈◊〉〈◊〉 l•…•…ytorer in a lusky lane, or hide your head 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the corner of an old •…•…otten barne, rather than warme your selfe with a •…•…aggot a•…•… a •…•…ake in Smith∣fielde, suche as was the crueltie of your Popish tyrannie

to those that constantly abode the terrible brunt therof.

And although other giuing place to your furie, either of* 1.1218 their owne infirmitie, or that God preserued them to a bet∣ter oportunitie, did then flée or hide them selues: what dyd they héerein, that Chryst gaue them not licence, example, and commaundement so to do? Ye might aswell obiect this, to those Saincts of God, of whome S. Paule telleth, that they wente about in the wildernesse, of whome the worlde* 1.1219 was vnworthy. Why say ye not, Elias lurked in lusky lanes, when he sted the face of Iesabell? Why say ye not, that A∣thanasius crepte into corners, when he hidde him selfe seuē yeres in a Cesterne, an harder harborough than a rotten barne? For shame M. Stap. learne to make a difference* 1.1220 betwéene the perfecution, and the cause of it: or else this were an easie argument to make all Donatistes, yea your selues also. And would to God all corners, rotten barnes, and luskie lanes, were wel ransacked, some luskes (I think) would appeare in their likenesse, whom ye would be loth should be founde out, M. Stapleton.* 1.1221

Thirdly ye say, The donatistes, when they could not iu∣stifie* 1.1222 their owne doctrine, nor disproue the Catholikes doc∣trine, leauing the doctrine, fell to rayling, agaynst the vitious life of the Catholikes. In this poynt, who be Donatistes, I re∣ferre me to Luthers and Caluines bookes, especially to M. Iewell, and to your owne Apologie.

Ye n•…•…ede not, M. Stap. referre your selfe so farre, referre* 1.1223 your selfe to your selfe a Gods name, yea, go no further than this your Counterblast. I warrant ye, you blow such a blast héerein, that ye maye well encounter master D. Harding, master D. Sa•…•…ders, M. Dorman, M. Marshall, or any other of your writers, thoughe they haue all godly giftes in this poynt, yet this your Rhel horicall grace of ray∣ling, goeth so farre beyonde them all, that they are scarse worthy to cary the wispe after you, M. Stap. Onely at this I maruell, that like the wiseman, when he tolde how ma∣ny

were in the companie, he neuer reckoned him selfe, that you hauing so pregnant a vayne héerein, do still forget your selfe. But belike it is for this cause, that as ye surmount all your companie: so ye goe beyonde the Donatistes also, who (as ye saye) rayled onely agaynst the vitious lyues. But you, where ye finde no vitious life to rayle agaynst the Protestantes, fall to slaundering and reuiling, euen their godly and vertuous liues.

Fourthly ye say, The Donatistes refused the opē knowne* 1.1224 catholike Churche, and sayde, the Church remayned onely in those that were of their side, in certaine corners of Afrike. And sing not you the like song, preferring your Geneua & VVittenberge, before the whole Churche beside?

The Donatistes (as you say M. St.) tied the Churche to Affrike, and wrested the scripture for it, forsaking the open knowne catholike Church in déede. But you shoulde haue proued your popish Church to be that open knowne catho∣like* 1.1225 Church now, which they refused then. If ye saye, you proue that, bicause they refused the church of Rome then, & your church is the church of Rome now: if ye vnderstād the church for the cōgregation of the faythful, ye vtter a double vntruth. For they-refused not only the cōgregation then at Rome, but of al the world besides: and agayne your church or congregation of Rome now, is nothing the same, or lyke the same, in religion, that it was then. If ye meane by the* 1.1226 church of Rome, the Citie of Rome, and the Popes chayre there: then ye proue your selues to be Donatistes, that tye the churche of Christ (dispersed euery where) to the seate of Rome, as they did vnto Aphrike. And if ye meane by the open knowne catholike Churche, the multitude of people acknowledging your Popes s•…•…ate at Rome: then agayne are ye Donatists by your second poynt, in craking of mul∣titude, depending on Rome a corner in Italie: as ye saye, the Donatistes craked of their multitude, depēding on their corners in Affrike.

As for vs, we depende neither vpon Geneua, nor VVit∣tenberge,* 1.1227 nor tye the Church of Christ vnto them, nor pre∣ferre them, either before the whole catholike church, or any parte thereof: nor referre men vnto them, for the triall of the Church, or to any other place else: but allow them, and all and singuler other places, where the worde of God is sincerely set foo•…•…th: where Idolatrie, errours, & superstition are abolished. We 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to the mountaynes, as Chrysostome* 1.1228 expoundeth it, Qu•…•… sunt Christiani conferant se ad scriptura•…•…, They that are Christiās, let them get them to the scriptures. And why not to Rome, Ierusalem, and suche other moun∣taynes, but onely to the scriptures? Bicause, saith he, since that heresie hath possessed the Churches there cā be no triall of true christianitie, nor refuge of Christians, that would trie out the truthe of fayth, but the deuine scriptures. Before, it coulde haue bene knowne diuers wayes, whiche was the Church, which was Gentilitie. But nowe there is none other wayes to know, which is in deede the very church of Christ, but all onely by the Scriptures. If they therefore set foorthe the Scriptures, we acknowledge them to be of the Church of Christ. Let Rome doe this, and we will as gladly ac∣knowledge Rome to be of the Churche of Chryst, as either* 1.1229 Wittenberge or Gen•…•…ua▪ Yea as S Hierome sayth, which is also put in the Popes owne decrées, Eug•…•…bium, Con∣stantinople, Rhegium, Alexandrie, Thebes, Guarmatia, or any other place, if it professe the truthe with Geneua and Wittenberge. For on this consideration (sayth S. Augu∣stine,* 1.1230 the Churche is holy and catholike, (not bicause it de∣pendeth on Rome, or any other place, nor of any multitude obedient to Rome, bothe whiche are Donatisticall) but, quia recte credit in Deū, bicause it beleeueth rightly on God. This is our song, M. Stap. of Geneua, VVittenberge, Af∣frica, yea, and of Rome too. And if you can sing any better note, I giue you good leaue for me, onely I would wish you (howsoeuer ye sing) to leaue your flat lying tune in saying

Fifthly say you: The Donatistes corrupted the fathers* 1.1231 bookes wonderfully, and were so impudent in alleaging them, that in their publique conference at Carthage, they pressed muche vpon Optatus wordes, and layde him foorth as an author making for thē, who yet wrote expresly against them, and in all his writinges condemned them. Is not this, I pray you, the vsuall practise of your Apostles, Luther and Caluine of M. Iewell and your owne too in this booke? as I trust we haue, and shal make it most euident. And heere let M, Dawes beare you companie too, in the craftie and false handling of his own deare brothers Sleidans story, where he leaueth out Alexander Farnesius Oration to the Emperour, wherin he sheweth the Protestants dissentions.

If this be an argument to proue a Donatist, belike your Popes, Boniface and Innocent, learned it of them, so im∣pudently, in the publique conference, and Councel at Car∣thage,* 1.1232 to alleage, lay foorthe, and presse muche vpon the Nicene Councell, as making for their superioritie: though all the true Copies therof condemned them, as impudent corrupters of the fathers Decrées. What fathers bookes, and Councels haue these Popes successors spared since to false∣fie, chalenging authoritie ouer all fathers and Councels, to do with thē as they please? And as the Popes own sonnes, this is not onely the vsuall, but the chiefe, and almoste the onely practise of all Popish writers, in the alleaging of the fathers, euen as the diuel alleaged the Psalmes to Christ. Neither do you onely corrupte the fathers bookes, but fa∣ther on them whole bookes of your owne deuisings, falsified in the fathers names: as Erasmus exactly obseruing, hath founde out many suche euident corruptions. As for vs (thankes be to God) ye name not one father corrupted by Luther, Caluine, the Bishop of Sarum, or of Wint. nor of any other as yet. Onely ye finde faulte with M. Dawes, for omitting an Oration in Sleydan, no auncient father, but a late Hystoriographer. I knowe not his consideration in

good sooth M. St. if I did, I would answere you. But he is a liues man, and can answere you him selfe.

Your argument is very fond, to inferre a Donatist here∣vpon, yea, be it that we were culpable in this behalfe, as it is but your flaunderous lye: and yet, be it further, that it were any argument to proue a Donatist, not onely the parties whome ye name, haue proued your good masters Donatistes, but your selfe would proue your selfe to be as great a Donatist as the best.

Sixthly ye say: The Donatistes to get some credit to their* 1.1233 doctrine, pretēded many false visions and miracles, and they thought that God spake to Donatus from heauen, and doth not M. Foxe in his dunghill of stinking martyrs pretily fol∣lowe them therein, trowe you?

So clenly, M. St. your thethorike procéedeth from those swéete lippes of yours. Ye chalēge M. Foxe with vnsauery termes, ye proue or improue nothing agaynst him. Onely ye scoffe at Luthers visions: and tell vs a tale of a man in Hungarie (I can not tell where nor whome) feigning him selfe to be dead, and pretending to be raysed agayne to life, to confirme the doctrine of the Gospell, but in conclusion was found to be dead in déede.

Hath not (say you) the like practise ben attempted of late* 1.1234 in Hungarie, to authorise the new Gospel, by pretending to restore life to an holy brother, feigning him selfe to be dead, and by the greate prouidence of God, founde to be deade in deede?

What witnesse of this, M. St? Forsooth aske your fellow if ye lie. I warrant ye he wil say, all is true, and who shall proue him a lyer, that the partie would so haue faigned him selfe to be dead, or would by such toyes, go about to cōfirme the Gospell of Chryst? whome whispered he in the care, while he was on liue, that he ment any such matter? Wel, the partie is dead, ye say: then say I, it is easie for a false varlet (thereby to deface the Gospell) to deuise a lie by a

dead body, or so suborite or bribe another to witnesse a lye. For the partie (ye say) is dead, •…•…us Le•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉 morde•…•… a dead Lion (they say) bytes not. But if he be dead, (presupposing there were any such thing in déede) God sende grace there were no false packing to murther him amōg you, & then to say so by him: I haue heard of such Popish shifts ere now.

But howe soeuer the matter were, yea graunt it had bene so, that some noughtie fellowe had attempted suche a wickednesse, is the same to be obiected to the Protestantes, or the Gospell of Christe to be defaced therby? or not ra∣ther the more to be confirmed therby, that God abhorreth suche false meanes to set out his truth, and destroyeth suche dissemblers, as he did Ananias and Saphira: and wil haue* 1.1235 his truth simply and playnely set foorth, as (thankes be to God therfore) it is in many places, and with good successe and encrease he blesseth it.

No, no, M. St. and that ye know full wel, we vse no such false visions, or feigned miracles, to further Gods truth: no, we seeke no visions or miracles at all, but séeke the truth it* 1.1236 selfe. It is the practise of your Church, to cōmēde your false doctrine vnto the simple, by pretending many false visions and miracles. What haue ye else for purgatorie, but a num∣ber of reuelations, that were shewed forsooth to such or such a Monke or Frier? what else for deuising all the sectes of Friers and Nonnes, but such and such a reuelation? What haue ye for your Ladies Psalter, for hir Rosarie, for hir feast dayes, for the inuocation of Saincts, for the most of al your trūperie in the Masse & Diriges, for Reliques, shrines and pilgrimages, for worshipping this or that sainct depar∣ted, but your feigned reuelations, your false visions and mi∣racles▪ Looke your Legends who shall, your paltry Friers postils, your Louanian scholemen, looke who shall on Ma∣rulus reuelatiōs, on Tundalus visions, on S. Bridgets re∣uelations, on the miracles of the blessed Uirgin set out in Latine and Englishe. &c. He shall finde for this poynt such

stuffe, that both his eares will glowe to reade it. And these practises are not deuised by vs agaynst you in the name of a dead man: but they are set out in print, and published by your selues in good sad earnest, to deceiue the simple with∣all. If therefore this be an argument to proue Donatistes by, then as it cleareth vs, that seeke no suche meanes, so it proueth you to be Donatistes, that in thus many poyntes of your religion stande so muche thereon.

Seuenthly say you, Did not the Donatistes preferre and* 1.1237 more esteeme one National erronious Councel in Aphrica, than the great and generall Councell at Nice: keepe not ye also this trade, preferring your forged conuocation libell, before the generall Councell of Trident. And this is set out with a Marginall note: They preferre a Nationall Coun∣cell, before the Generall.

As for forged Libels is but your forged lye, master Sta.* 1.1238 if we preferre a Nationall Councell, before your Generall: no maruell, the legge of a larke is to be preferred before the body of a Kyte. If ye crake of Generalitie, for the mul∣titude: once agayne you make your selfe a craking Dona∣tiste, althoughe in déede, there were no suche Generall assemblies, at your Trident Councell, as ye bragge vpon. If •…•…e meane, for the frée libertie and order of it: it was not onely Nationall of Italians in Italy, as the Donatistes was of Aphricans in Aphrica, but also more partiall, vio∣lent, and nothing but tongtyed bondage and compulsion, farre worse than was the Donatistes.

Eightly say you, The Donatistes sayde, that all the world* 1.1239 was in an Apostacie before the comming of their Apostle Donatus: and is not Luther the same man to you, that Do∣natus was to them?

We estéeme Luther as a notable organ of God, to detect* 1.1240 your falshoods and open his truth: although we graunte he were not without his infirmities: but what dothe that ex∣cuse your apostacie, or argue him to be a Donatist? Yea,

though he had sayd such words now as then Donatus falsly sayde. M•…•…ght not an vniuersall apostacie haue bene since, or be nowe, bicause there was none suche then? and yet Luther charged not al the world, but al your popish Church with this Apostacie. And what dothe he therein, that is not manifest? what said he, that the Apostle S. Paule foresayde not, there should come a defection before y^e cōming of christ?* 1.1241 what said he, that euē at your last Trident councel (that ye craked on last) the Frenche Legate did not openly say to your Prelates faces? Verily we must euen of necessitie cō∣fesse* 1.1242 this (quoth he) whether it hath bene perchaūce by mans infirmitie, or by some negligēce of the Prelats of the church, or else by their preposterous godlinesse, if I should name no greeuouser thing, that there hath crept into the Church ve∣ry many things, worthy to be abolished, abrogated or re∣strayned. Yea, what saide he, that euen your Pope hath not confessed? VVe know (saith Pope Adrian to the Princes* 1.1243 of Germanie, in his Cpistle, wherin he chiefly inueigheth agaynst Luther) that euen in this holy seate, many abhominable things there haue bene already now certayne yeres, abuses in spi∣rituall matters, excesses in cōmaundements, to conclude, all things haue bene changed into peruersitie: not it is maruell, if the sicknes haue descended frō the head into the members, from the chief by∣shops into the inferiour Prelates: all we, that is to say, the eccl▪ Pre∣lates, haue erred euery one in his owne wayes, nor there hath bene any this long while the which dyd good, no not one. This gene∣ral apostacie (loe) your owne Pope confesseth, both for him selfe, for his predecessors, for al other Prelates and Priests vnder him, and for al the Church besides. And weye these words wel, M. St. for they serue agaynst you in many mat∣ters touched before, chiefly whether the Pope & al his Pre∣lates, yea al the visible state of the Church may erre, or no.

But ye were best make this Pope a Donatist too To the author of the harboroughe ye are answered by other, as I heare say. And it is but your péeuishe quarell.

Ninthly, say you, The Donatists being charged and pres∣sed* 1.1244 to shew the beginning and continuance of their doctrine, and the ordinarie succession of their Bishops, were so encom∣bred, that they coulde neuer make any conuenient aunswere. And are not you I pray you with your fellowes Protestant Bishops fast in the same myre? If not, aunswere then to my third demaunde in the fortresse annexed to Sainct Bede.

This is Satis proimperio, More than inough, for your authoritie, Master Stapleton, to commaunde our Bishops to aunswere your vaine demaundes, and pelting bookes, or else they must be Donatists. But euen so played the Do∣natists with the godly Bishops then, as you play now with ours. Your humour is all on vaine glorie, to set oute and vaunt your owne workes. But it is a signe ye lacke good neighbours at Louaine. For, one of them, not your selfe, should haue commended to vs your Demaundes, Fortresses, and Translations. But your selfe must be faine I sée, to put vs in minde of them, for your brethren séeke theyr owne glorie likewise in their writings. And why then shoulde not you séeke yours as well as they? But for my part, as I haue not youre noble Fortresse, so I thinke your De∣maunde be not worthie the séeking for, much lesse the aun∣swering. I pray you pardon me, if I thinke amisse: for I measure it by many other Demaunds of this your Coun∣terblast.

As for the beginning of our doctrine, is alreadie shewed,* 1.1245 euen he that is the beginning & the ending, the Alpha and Omega, he began our doctrine, and hath euer continued and preserued it. We say with Chrysostome (as is before sayd) Ad montes, Let vs flee to the mountaines, that is to the scrip∣ture:* 1.1246 we say with Saint Cyprian, Ad fontein, Let vs go to the fountaine, that is to the Scripture: we say with the Prophetes, Ad legem & testimentum, To the lawe and testi∣monie, that is, to the Scripture: we say with him that is the beginning himselfe, venite ad 〈◊〉〈◊〉, come vnto me and we

admit onely that, Quod suit ab initio, reiecting that doctrine of which we may say, Non suit sic ab initio, It was not so at the beginning, this ye say the Donatistes being charged and pressed could not do: but we shewe you here the very be∣ginning of all our doctrine.

Now if a man should demaunde of you, to shew the be∣ginning* 1.1247 of all your doctrines, & aske you, as Christ teacheth vs to demaunde of you, the originals, is it of God, or is it of men: then are you for a great many of them, bemyred fast with the Donatistes, and can not tell how they came vp, sa∣uing that they crept in by custome, and many retayned of the old superstitions of the Pagans, little or nothing tur∣quesed: but none of them al came vp otherwise than by mē, none were set foorth of God in his holy word. And so againe ye are Donatists, or worse than they, and the worse, in that (as the French Kings Embassadour aforesaide, tolde your* 1.1248 Trident Fathers) ye hold fast with tooth & nayle all things that ye haue receiued of long custome. But the old fathers tell you, from whom ye father your customes: We must not follow the customes of man, but the truth of God. Yea your* 1.1249 old Popes them selues, Felix, Gregory, Nicholas, & Leo, can tell you, that all customes should giue place to the Scri∣ptures, for Christe said not he was custome, but the way, the truth and the life. That we should not goe one Iote from the Apostles institutions. That such ill customes are no lesse to be auoided than a pestilent infection, which except it be taken out the soner, the wicked will take holde of it, as dutie of priuileges. And that such transgressions and presumptions being not forthwith suppressed, will be reuerenced for lawes and celebrated like priuileges for euer. Here is the com∣ming vp and beginning of the most of your doctrines, and therefore what hable ye of your Bishops, since your Bi∣shops them selues say thus of your long customes begin∣ning and continuance of them?

As for the ordinary succession that ye crake of, ye haue

neyther succession of Bishops nor Bishops at all, according* 1.1250 to the beginning and the Apostles orders. Which as it is now twice alreadie proued, so is it easie to see, by confe∣rence of the Apostles rules and principles of a Bishop, with* 1.1251 your Popishe Bishops orders quite contrarie thereunto. Where therefore ye crake and bragge so often of succession (although it be nothing in the person succéeding, except it be in the doctrine succeeding also) yet euen for the person ye neither can alleage any ordinarie succession but degenerate* 1.1252 succession, nor ye haue any certaintie of that beginning thereof, that ye pretende, no not of the Bishop of Romes beginning and succession from Peter, whiche not onely examined by the infallible Scripture, will so encomber you, that ye can neuer make any conuenient answere there∣vnto, but be fast in the same myre that ye say the Dona∣tistes were.

Tenthly ye say, The Donatistes finding fault with Con∣stantine,* 1.1253 Theodosius, and other Catholike princes, ranne for succour to Iulianus the renegate, and highly commen∣ded him: and doth not M. Iewell I pray you, take for his president against the Popes primacie Constantius the Ar∣rian, against Images Philippicus, Leo, Constantinus and such like detestable Heretikes by generall Councels con∣demned? do not your selfe play the like parte in the Empe∣rour Emanuel as ye call him, and in other as we shall hereaf∣ter declare?

By this rule should Hosius, Staphilus, M. Harding, M. Dorman, and your selfe also be Donatistes: that take argumentes from your aduersaries, yea from Heathen men. So might ye make S. Paule a Donatiste also. Ye had néede therefore make your comparison more aduised∣ly. And thus might ye haue fitte it very well: The Dona∣tistes finding faulte with Constantine, Theodosius, and other Catholike Princes, ranne for succour to Iulianus the renegate and highly commended him: And doth not M. Stapleton,

M. Harding, and other popish Priestes, finding fault with their most Christian and naturall soueraigne Ladie, •…•…unne ouer to Louaine, and to Rome, to a foraigne Apostaticall vsurper and highly commende him? this had bene a fitter and truer proportiō M. St. of the twaine. And what do you herein, that your graunde Captaine the Pope him selfe did* 1.1254 not? Pope Boniface ran to the cruell and detestable tyrant Phocas, that most trayterously had murdred his naturall Emperour: and first obtay•…•…d of him this title of Primacie, that neuer any godly or lawfull Prince did graunt before this traytour Phocas, one vsurper to another vsurper, a good beginning of so good a claime. Againe, did not Pope Gregorie the third stirre vp all Italie to rebell against the Emperour? and he and after him Pope Zacharie ran frō their naturall Prince, to the Princes of Fraunce, Germa∣nie, and Italie, highly commending them, that mainteyned them selues against their soueraigne Lord and Emperour, and after that bereued him of the Empire of Rome also? did not Pope Stephan teach the nobles of Fraunce to for∣sake their liege King, and to run to Pepin an vsuper, whom you highly commende as one of your chiefest Patrones? Did not Pope Leo the fourth run from the true and law∣full Emperour, to his Tygerlike & vnnaturall mother Irene the vsurper, whom he highly commended for maintayning Images? and do not you M. St. euen here for the same on∣ly cause, runne vnto, and highly commende hir & hir Coun∣cell, crying out of the lawfull Emperours, calling them de∣testable and condemned Heretikes, bicause they abolished the worship of Images? but I reserue the examining of these Donatisticall doings, and the trayterouse practises of your later Popes, to your seuerall counterblastes thereon. In the meane season by this it appereth who be more Do∣natistes, we, that alleage an example (by writing) of those Emperours, were they as ill or worse than ye call them: or your Popes, that runne in déede frō their naturall Princes,

to detestable murderers, and trayterous vsurpers. Thu•…•… had ye fitte•…•… your cōparison, ye should liuely haue shewed, who had bene the very Donatists: the Protestants or the Papists.

Eleuenthly ye say. Nowe who are I pray you Donatists,* 1.1255 for the defacing and ouerthrowing of aultars, for villayning the Chrisme, and the holy sacrament of the aultar? whiche they cast vnto dogges: whiche straight wayes by the ordi∣nance of God, fell vpon them, and being therein Gods mini∣sters, made them feele the smart of their impietie. It were a tragicall narr•…•…tion, to open the great and incredible crueltie that the Donatists vsed towarde the Catholikes, especially their horrible rauishment of religious Nunnes. And yet were they nothing so outragious, as your Hugenotes haue bene of late in Fraunce and the beggerly Guets in Flaunders, namely about Tourney.

First here master Stapleton, ye shewe your selfe a Do∣natist, after your first note, in corrupting the fathers wor∣des, as though those holy Uirgins, were suche Nunnes as your popish Church mainteyned. Againe ye corrupt Opta∣tus* 1.1256 wordes, in telling vs of the sacrament of the aultar, as though there ha•…•…ged in his time such a God in a Pire ouer the aultare: or as though there were then any such altare: to make the people conceyue by your tale telling a great antiquitie, in your later vpstarted •…•…olatrie and supersti∣tion. And this ye do in seuerall letters, as though they were the proper wordes of Optat•…•…, wherein ye shew your selfe a Donatist Secondly, it is not alike to compare the rooting vp of Idolatrie, and abolishing of naughtie superstitious customes (which euen your Popes, as I haue shewed be∣fore,* 1.1257 allow not) to the naughtie doing of the Donatists, for the outrages of souldiou•…•…, if any such were. And put case there were any such (as 〈◊〉〈◊〉 doubt, to slaunder the Gospell ye aggrauate many lies, & will make a mountaine of a mole∣hill) yet me thin•…•… ye shoul•…•… remember that if crueltie be a

rule of a Donatist, your selues that shewe farre passing crueltie and horrible outrages to the poore Hugenotes and beggerly Guets, as ye terme them, (hauing made them beggers, and made as many beggerly Papists to) suche is the papists loue to their owne side, but chiefly their immor∣tall hatred to the Protestants, murthering them by hea∣pes,* 1.1258 burning, sacking, tormenting, yea euen the Carcases of the deade, and sowing salt on the grounde for spite, with infinite other vnnaturall and vnspeakable cruelties besides your secrete practises. Me thinks this might haue béene re∣membred also. But hem quoth sir Harry, harpe no more on that string, for then were you Papists double and treble Donatists. Although ye were worse than Donatists here∣in also, that so much peruerted, altred, abused, & prophaned hypocritically, all those things that ye mention. And abused with so much filthie abhomination euen those your religious Nunnes, that many of your side were ashamed & complay∣ned thereon, and therefore God hath iustly rooted them out▪

Twelfthly say you. The Donatists sayd of the Catholikes:* 1.1259 Ill•…•… portant multor•…•…m imperatorum saer•…•…. Nos sola portamus Euangelia. They bring vs many of the Emperours letters, we bring them the only Gospels. And is not this the voyce of all Protestants whatsoeuer? onely Scripture, onely the Gos∣pell, onely the worde of God? and for the first part, what is more common in the mouthes of the Germaine Lutherans, of the French Caluinists, and now of the Flemish Guets, than this complaint, that we presse them with the Emperors diets, with the Kings proclamations, and with the Princes placards? to the which they obey as much as the Donatists, when they haue power to resist.* 1.1260

Remitting your rayling Rhetorike (Master Stapleton) to your common places: your argument is very fonde and faultie. First, if this be a simple and generall proufe of Do∣natists, to say we bring the onely Gospels, you will make Christ a Donatist to, for he brought the onely Gospels. And

his Disciples and Apostles Donatist•…•…, for they brought the* 1.1261 onely Gospels, and sayde they knewe nothing but Iesus Christ crucified, they deliuered no other thing than that they had receyued, and accursed him that should bring any thing besides this onely Gospell. Ye will make the fathers Cyprian, Chrysostome, Ambrose, Hierome, Augustine, &c. become Donatists: that will vs in all trialles of any point of doctrine, to bring the onely Scripture, the onely Gos∣pels, the onely worde of God?

Againe, for the other part, if this were a proufe of a Ca∣tholike, to bring, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 imperatorum sacra, the letters of many Emperours, and to complaine hereon, the token of a Donatist: then was Athanasius & diuerse other godly Bi∣shops Donatists also, & the Arrians Catholikes. And your selfe with M. Feck. alleage the complaints of Athanasius, belike to proue him a Donatist. This therfore (M. St.) thus simply set forth maketh but a simple argument. Ye should either proue, that we do bring the onely Gospell, and com∣plaine of your Princes diets, Proclamations, & placards, after the maner that the Donatists did, or else ye proue nothing but your selfe a malicious slaunderer. We bring the onely Gospels to you, as Christ his Disciples and the holy fathers brought them to vs, and yet bring we not the Gospell so a∣lone, that we bring not also the fathers writing thereon, we also bring both Princes diets, Proclamations and placards, so farre forth as they mainteyne, set forth and agrée with the* 1.1262 doctrine of the onely Gospels. Otherwise, can ye wyte A∣thanasius, if he complayned when he were pressed wyth them? Can ye wyte the poore Protestants in Germanie, Fraunce, & Flaunders, if they so much as complaine that ye presse them wrongfully, euen as your selfe in plaine wor∣des confesse th•…•…t ye presse them in déede, with the Empe∣rors diets, with the kings Proclamations, and with the Princes placardes? Neuerthelesse, if ye pressed them lawfully, and as Constantinus pressed the Donatists, I warrant ye no

Protestant would once complaine thereon. But ye presse & oppresse them, with nothing but mere violence to main∣taine your errours, besides and against the worde of God.* 1.1263 And to this purpose, your selues play the right partes of the Donatists, for as the Donatists peruerted and wrested the scriptures, to shake the authority of princes frō themselues, which otherwise they admitted so farre as pleased them: so do the popishe priests peruert and wrest the scriptures, to reiect the Emperors and other Christian princes authoritie ouer them, and vpbraid vs saying, Ill•…•… por•…•…ant multorū impe∣ratorum sacra, They bring many of the Emperors letters, that is, we presse them with the authoritie of princes, when we require that ye giue as much and no more authoritie vnto Princes, than the onely worde of God doth warrant them. But you will giue them no more, nor yet their sacra, their diets, proclamations, or placarts, than shall serue your turne. And thus your selues are most Donatists in this poynt.

Your last comparison, is of the Donatists murdring of* 1.1264 others and of themselues, and yet canonizing of suche for Sainctes and Martyrs. This comparison ye stretched out with large outroades, nothing agaynst the Bishop, nor to the matter, and in déede nothing but extréeme rayling and scoffing agaynst master Foxes booke, to whome I remitt•…•… the quarels that you lay vnto him, who is able at the full to aunswere them. As for me I will aunswere, onely to the comparison for murthering and canonizing, wherein the Papists excell all other. If ye had master Stapleton allea∣ged the Monke that poysoned himselfe, to poyson his prince: the Pope that to poyson his welthie Cardinals dronke him selfe of the wrong Bottell: had ye tolde that men said of the death of the two late Cardinalles in Englande: or howe good a medicine for the heade ache your Popishe Priestes haue made of the Sacrament of the aultare as ye term•…•… it: and what Princes they haue poysoned therewith: If ye had tolde of your Italian perfumes and Spanishe

figges for the pippe: ye might well master •…•…tapleton, haue confirmed your comparisons from the Donatists mur∣ders. But what néede such prini•…•… tokens in so open a mat∣ter? Your hate charitie, to heape burning coales on your ad∣uersaries hea•…•…s too many haue felt, and all the world doth knowe. For murther, the Donatists be nothing compa∣rable, nor yet Baraba•…•… the Iew, nor nere a théefe in New∣gate, to the bl•…•…dthirstie Papists.

Ye say Saint Augustine sayth of the Donatists viueb ant vt latrones, mor•…•…ebātur vt circumc•…•…liones, honorabantur vt mar∣tyres. They liued like robbers, they died lyke Circumce∣lions (meaning they fiue themselues) they were honoured as martyrs.

True in déede master Stapleton, and ye put me in re∣membrance of another saying, that went in thrée parts to, I trowe it was of an honest man of your religion, of whom* 1.1265 it was sayd, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vt vulpes, regnabat vt Leo, moriebatur vt canis: He entred like a Foxe, he reigned like a Lion, he died like a dogge. And yet ye count him one of Gods holy vicars. And I pray ye call to minde another common saying, that went also on three partes, euen of your Popish canon•…•…zed Saincts, that some were worshipped a•…•… Saincts in heauen, that liued full wickedly here in earth, and are now tormen∣ted with Diuels in hell: this did men say master Stap. an•…•… they were Papists that sayde so to.

Ye t•…•…ll vs of the Montanists that worshipped one Alex∣ander* 1.1266 for a worshipfull martyr, though he suffred for no mat∣ter of religion, but for mischieuous murther.

What is this to the Donatists master Stapleton? or that which ye tell vs of the Manichees worshipping the day* 1.1267 of their master Manes death. The worship of dead men good or bad, or the kéeping of solemne dayes as in the honour of them, is proper to you popish 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not to vs. We kepe a memoriall I graunt, but of these onely whome we are most infallibly assured that they be the blessed Sainctes

of GOD. Howbeit, we worship not them, nor the day for them, nor them by the day: wée worshippe one∣ly* 1.1268 GOD in spirite and truth, as Christ hath taught vs. But you that so worshippe deade men, will yée worship none for Martyrs, but those that dyed for matters of Re∣ligion? Whie worshipped ye then, and that with such high worship to, your solemne Saint Thomas Becket, that* 1.1269 dyed for no matter of Religion at all? But eyther for his obstinacie agaynste his liege Lorde, and agaynst all the Barons Spirituall and Temporall of the Realme: or if ye colour it neuer so fayre, yet was it but in main∣teyning his honour, and the priuileges of the Clergie, and that contrarie to the auncient custome of the Realme: except yée will graunt that the Popishe Religion doeth consiste herein. Whiche if ye bée ashamed to confesse, vpbrayde not then for shame false Martyrs vnto vs, nor yet the Canonising of wicked Sainctes. We vse no such* 1.1270 Canonization at all. It redoundeth on your selfe, on your Legende, on your Popes, and on your Pope holy Saincts. Whome, by this rule, you make both Donatists, Monta∣nists, Manicheans, or what soeuer Heretikes ye can ob∣iect besides.

As for all these Comparisons hitherto, betwéene the Protestantes, and the Donatists, wherein ye thinke ye haue be stowed great cunning, there is not 〈◊〉〈◊〉 poy•…•… that is not violently wrested, to make it séeme to touch vs: and not one poynt, that (being returned on your selues) doeth not rightly and fully hitte you home againe. And therefore, I for my part am content, as you concluding say you be.

To ende this talke with the whole conference, leauing* 1.1271 it to the indifferent Reader to consider, whether the (Po∣pishe) Catholikes, or the Protestants, drawe nearer to the Donatists.

To come newe at length to the sixt and last parte of

this Chapter, which consistes in rem•…•…ing such motiues, as the Bishop alleageth, to burthe•…•… Master Feckenham with the practise of the Donatists. First master Stapleton deuideth these motiues in twaine.

Let vs then (sayth master Stapleton) proceede foorth, and consider vpon what good motiues ye charge master Fec∣kenham to be a Donatist, whiche are to say truth, none o∣ther but falsehoode and follie. But, as ye surmise, the one* 1.1272 is bicause hee craftily and by a subtile shifte, refuseth the prooues of the olde Testament, as the Donatists did. The other, bicause hee with the sayde Donatists should auouch, that secu•…•…er Prince•…•… haue not to meddle in matters of Reli∣gion, or causes ecclesiasticall: nor to punishe any man for such causes.

These two motiues (ye say Master Stapleton) are to say the truth none other but falsehoode and follie. In déede they are the wors•…•…, by comming through so false a marchantes handes as yours. For shame either tell the wordes as they •…•…e, at least the true and full effect of them: or neuer sette them out in a distinct letter, sy•…•… you so often, but euer falsly, vpbrayde the Bishop hereof. Else all the follie and false∣hoode will proue to be in your selfe, and not in the Bi∣shops motiues.

The Bishop sp•…•…ke not of Princes medling or punishing for Ecclesiasticall 〈◊〉〈◊〉, as though the Donatists simpli•…•… denied that, an•…•… y•…•… graunted Princes yet so much, as to meddle or punishe for your Ecclesiasticall causes, that is to say to be your executioners therin, as though the Emperors & other Christian Princes 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 more vpon them at that time. But the Bishop tolde how the godly fathers craued aide & assistance of the magistrats and rulers, to reforme them, to reduce them to the v•…•…itie of the church, & to represse their heresies, with their au thoritie & godly lawes made for that purpose, to

whome it belonged of duetie, and whose especi∣all seruice of Christ is, to see, care, and prouide,* 1.1273 that their subiects be gouerned, defended, and mainteyned, in the true and syncere religion of Christ, without all errours, superstitions and heresies. This is that the Bishop wrote, and to proue this he alleageth Saint Augustine. Thus did Christian Princes gouerne in Ecclesiasticall causes then. This did the Donatists then denie vnto them, and this do now the Pa∣pists denie: and ye come sneaking in and tell vs, the Bi∣shoppes motiue was this, In charging Master Fecken∣ham to followe the Donatists: by cause hee with the Do∣natistes, shoulde auouche, that seculer Princes haue not to meddle in matters of Religion or causes Ecclesiasticall, nor to punishe anie man for suche causes. As though the con∣trouersie had b•…•…ne for anie kinde of medling, or puni∣shing: whiche you, s•…•…ming to graunt to Princes, to bée your seruaunts and droyles in suche ecclesiasticall cau∣ses, and so farre as you assigne them, might therefore séeme not to play the Donatists, when ye play their partes so liuely as can bée, and so subtilly, that the Donatistes were but Babes vnto you: in séeming to giue them some* 1.1274 medling or punishing in Ecclesiasticall causes. but if they meddle with or punishe you, or anie other, otherwise than ye commaunde and restrayne them, you so little then suffer them to meddle in Ecclesiasticall matters, that with solemne curses ye debarre them from medling in a∣nie temporall and ciuill matters too, so farre ye passe the Donatists. For shame master Stapleton, tell your tale plainely, that we may sée whether M. Feckenham played the Donatistes part or no: or else your doubling wyll de∣clare your selfe to be a Donatist also for companie. But let vs sée how ye aunswere these motiues euen as your selfe propounde them.

The one is (say you) bicause he craftily and by a subtile shifte, refuseth the proues of the old Testament, as the Dona∣tistes did. Your Stale Iestes M. Stapleton of a fine blast* 1.1275 of a horne▪ of a •…•…oule slawe, of a blinde betell blunte shifte, I ouer passe them.

When M. Feckenham (ye say) offereth to yelde, if ye can* 1.1276 proue this regiment, either by the order that Christ left be∣hinde him in the new Testament, either by the Doctours, ei∣ther by Councels, or els by the continuall practise of any one Churche, thinke you M. Horne, that this is not a large and an ample offer?

The largenesse of this offer is not here in questiō M. St. the offer is large and ample inough▪ & taken of the Bishop at his handes, and proued vnto him at his owne demaunde. It remaineth then that he stande to his promise, and yelde to the truth, or else he sheweth that he minded to offer more, than he purposed to perfourme. Onely now it is exami∣ned, why here he specifieth the new Testament, and quite leaueth out the old Testament▪ This doing, in this pointe, saith the B. smelleth of a Donatist.

Nay say you, There is not so much as any cōiecture, to ga∣ther* 1.1277 this vppon, yea the old Testament is not by this offer excluded but verely included. For if the new Testament, which rehearseth many things out of the old, haue any thing out of the old Testament, that make for this regiment: if any Doctour old or new, if any Councell haue any thing out of the old Testament that serue for this regiment, then is Master Feckenham concluded, yea by his owne graunt. For so the Doctour or Councell hath it, he is satisfied according to his demaunde. VVhereby it followeth, he doth not re∣fuse, but rather allowe and affirme the proufes of the old Te∣stament.* 1.1278

It might in déede follow M. Sta. but it doth not alwayes followe▪ A man may refuse manifest proufes of the old Te∣stament and yet graunt such things besides, that he may be

concluded yea by his owne graunt▪ And so is M. Fecken∣ham here concluded as graunting the newe Testament, the Councels, and Fathers. For since al these alleage he proufes of the old Testament: he is forced by conclusiō of necessarie consequence, to graunt also to the old Testament. Except he be as peeuish as the Donatistes, that granted thus much also and yet refused the manifest proufes and examples of the old Testament. Although their own péeuishnesse conuinced thē, but still they stoode on the bare wordes as you do, and refu∣sed inclusiue proufes followed they neuer so necessarily. And so did your selfe before require the Bare title of this supre∣macie* 1.1279 to be shewed in the exāples of the old Testament, el•…•… you reiect the exāples, agrée they neuer so much in matter. But now contrary, ye say, M. Feckenham doth allow and af∣firme the proufes of the old Testament, bicause they may be included in those pointes that he alleageth, but he would be loath they should be included, as thankes be to God they be: and so, Uolens, uolens, beyonde his expectation, is enfor∣ced with them.

But what is this to excuse him more thā the Donatists, if he had not of set purpose slonke from the manifest proufe & examples of the old Testament? for otherwise, he might as soone haue expresly named the old Testament, as he ex∣presly named the new. And so should he haue gone directly & simply to worke, & not indirectly with a Circumqua{que}, haue referred the old Testament to such inclusions, as you here would shake off the matter withall: chiefly since the old Te∣stament, hauing no included but expresse proufes, is so ex∣presly vrged of vs. And yet if he would haue included the old Testament, (as you say) vnder the name of the new Te∣stament, why specifieth he the one so plaine, & not the other at all? if he did it for breuitie, he might most briefly haue saide, the Scriptures: which worde had comprehended & in∣cluded both, & so had he shewed, that he allowed the proufes of the old Testament also. Ha M. Stapl. Ueritas non querit

angulos: The truth seekes no inclusiue corners, goe plainly man to worke for very shame. For yet, for all your inclusi∣ons here to colour the matter: in other places where this is not layde vnto your charge, both your selfe and M. Dor∣man, quite excludeth the examples of the old Testament from the new, as not fit paterns for Princes to followe. Doing herein (what pretences so euer you here include) euen as M. Feckenham dothe, and the Donatistes did be∣fore. And that Master Feckenham did no other, but euen of purpose conceale the old Testamentes examples, as foreseing that they made against him: I will aske no bet∣ter witnesse than your owne selfe Master Stapleton that by all these couerte inclusions go aboute to excuse him. But when ye can not make any good excuse: in conclu∣sion, yea in your next wordes, ye bewray all the matter, ye could hold it no lenger for your life, blabbe it wist and out it must.

And surely (say you) wise men vse not greatly to shew that* 1.1280 maketh against them, but most for them.

Holde your hande from the booke M. St. ye neuer saide truer worde in all your life. Ye hitte the pricke there in déede, and tell the very cause why he concealed the name of the old Testament and shewed it not in his large and ample offer. Bicause (say you) wise men surely, vse not greatly to shew that maketh against them, but most for them: but M. Feckenham surely is a wise man: Ergo, he sheweth not in his offer the name of the old Testament bicause the proufes thereof make against him, but onely put the name of the new Testament, bicause he thought that made moste for him. True, Master Stapl. thus do the children of this* 1.1281 world (beyng wiser in their generations than the childrē of light) not shewe▪ as ye say, but conceale the truthe of God, bicause they sée, it maketh agaynst them. But herein M. St. for all your iolie witte and wisedome, that ye vaunte vp∣pon so often, your wisdome ouershot it selfe. Surely ye did

not like one of these wise men, but rather like one of the wise men of Gotham, God turning your wisedome into folly, that confesse those examples and proufes to make a∣gainst M. Feckenham, or at least wise that he so feared, and therefore he sheweth not the name of the old Testament, but concealeth it. And thus, while your drift is to proue that he shifteth not off those proufes and examples, you con∣fesse that he of very purpose, (not minding, as ye saide be∣fore, to include them, but to exclude them) leaueth them out and sheweth them not, but shifteth them of, and that of a shamefull purpose, only bicause they make against him. Where if he had any sparke of truth and conscience, he would not hide that in Gods worde that maketh against him. But perceyuing that those prouses make against him, would withall perceiue him self to be in a manifest errour, and neuer let worldly wisedome so ouercome him, that he should be ashamed openly to confesse, that he striueth a∣gainst the truth. And you M. Stapleton had ye any grace, confessing the truth to be against him, (except ye be a ve∣ry Manichee, that set the old Testament against the newe,)* 1.1282 would perceyue, that if the old were against him, then the newe were also against him: and would euen here, hurle away the penne, that should defende such a shifter off, and hider of the truthe, against your conscience. So farre would ye be from this impudencie to write that he affir∣meth and comprehendeth that, which of wisedome as ye call, it he purposely concealeth: and that he alloweth that, which he hides as making against him. Whiche is no point of wisedome M. Stapleton but rather of starke follie, and méere contradiction to it selfe, and to all your former ex∣cuses. And thus speaking of wise men, to shewe your selfe in the number: ye speake against him, whome ye are hyred and labour to defende: ye speake against your selfe, yea against your cause and all. So doth God make them shew their owne shame, that wittingly will be hyred with

Balaam to resist his open truth. Confusi sunt sapientes. &c.* 1.1283 The wise men are confounded (sayth the Lord) they shal be astonied and taken for lo, they haue cast out the word of the Lorde, what wisdome can be among them. And so hath God here infatuate M. St. that whē he hath bewrayed the very cause why M. Feck. shewed not in his offer, the name of the old Testamēt, so wel as of the new, to be, bicause he thought it made agaynst him, & therefore did like a wise man, to leaue it out: he concludeth most fo•…•…dly, euen the quite contrarie.

VVherfore (sayth he) it is incredible that M. Feck should* 1.1284 once imagine any suche sifting or shifting, as ye dreame of, hauing wonne his purpose agaynst you, euen by the very olde Testament, as we haue declared.

By your owne declaration, M. Stap. (all your inclusiue shifts for him not withstanding) ye haue declared the quite contrarie: That he wisely (as he thought) left it out as a∣gaynst him, which (when ye haue sayde all that ye can to salue the matter) is in very déede nothing else but sifting and shifting, and that full shamefull too.

Now where ye vrge your conclusion further, saying:

And therefore it is spoken but in your dreame, when ye* 1.1285 say, ye haue therby with maruellous force shaken M. Feck. holde, which surely is so forcible, as will not beate downe a very paper wall. And maruell were it, if ye should so batter his holde, when that these your great Cannōs come not nigh his holde by one thousande miles.

Haue ye measured the myles, that ye recken them so iumpe, M. Stap? else it is possible ye might be deceyued. For if the proues of the olde Testament be agaynst master Feckenhams cause (as you haue confessed) there is no doubt but they would shake and beate it downe al to fitters, if they were bent and shot agaynst his holde were it neuer so strong: which in déede is nothing else but the very paper walles ye speake of, as your M. D. Harding, while he was a Protestant, called Purgatorie. And therfore M. Feck▪ more

worldly wise than you his defender: like an olde beaten souldiour, knowing they were against him, or at least so fea∣ring, & mistrusting withal his paper walled holde durst not abide the battrie of those great Cānons, the proofes and ex∣amples of the olde testament, and therefore, as ye confessed before, would not shew that which made agaynst him, but purposely left it out, wherin how wisely soeuer he did, your selfe, I thinke, spake and wrote all these follies & contradic∣tions in your dreames, which, had ye béene well awake, ye would neuer (I déeme) haue confessed for very shame.

Agayne (say you) this accusation is incredible. For master Feck. is so farre from this suspition, that he him selfe brin∣geth* 1.1286 in agaynst you▪ many and good testimonies of the olde law (as fol. 109 and. 123.) by the force whereof onely he may be thought to haue shaken and ouerthrowen to your rotten weake holde, vnderpropped with your Sampsons postes, as mightie as Bulrushes.

If the proofes and examples of the olde Testament séeme to you as mightie as bulrushes, howe mightie then did M. Feckenham thinke your cause? much weaker belike than withered grasse, that perceyuing these bulrushes were a∣gaynst it, durst not abyde the brunte and pushe of them, but like a wise man, that is to say, like a subtill Donatist, paste them ouer in silence. But as therein (laboring to shewe master Feckenham to be a wise man) ye shewed your selfe not to be all the wisest: so haerein (going aboute to cleare him of refusing the olde Testament, and so to be no Denatist) ye not onely your selfe with him refuse these proofes, like the Donatistes, but worsse than the Do∣natistes, call the proofes of the olde Testament in con∣tempt, as mightie as Bulrushes. So did Golias accompte the mighte and slingstones of Dauid, to giue as small a* 1.1287 stroke as a fillip, or as your bulrushes, master Stapleton, but yet the little stone of Dauid rushed him top side turny. So did Holofernes captaynes esteeme the Bethulians, say∣ing,* 1.1288

these mise are come out of their holes and dare prouoke vs to fight with them. But suche a God is God, that by the* 1.1289 weake things of the worlde he confoundes the mightie, and euen with his bulrushes ouerturueth all your bulwarkes.

Ye thinke, M. St. it is incredible that M Feck coulde be a Donatist, bicause he bringeth in many & good testmonies of the olde law, as fol. 109. and. 123 by the force wherof onely he may be thought to haue shaken, and ouerthrowne too, our rotten weake holde. &c.

He may (as ye say) be thought so, M. St. of some of your side. But the question might be demaunded, what he hath done, and not what he may be thought to haue done. Ye say his testimonies be many and good. But how many, ye durst not tel for shame, nor y^e goodnesse of thē to proue the Popes supremacie, but wisely also let them alone, & say he may be thought by them to proue the Popes title, whereas they make nothing for it, nor against the Princes gouernment any thing at al. But what is all this to y^e purpose, to cleare M. Feck of a Donatist? if it be incredible that he is a Do∣natist, which refuseth all these proofes out of the old Testa∣ment, bicause he admitteth other proofes, suche as he thinks make for his purpose: then is it incredible to beléeue, that* 1.1290 the Donatistes them selues were Donatistes, which is not onely incredible, but impossible. Did not the Donatistes for their Churche in the corners of Afrike cite the Canticles & other places in the olde Testament, & they sayde they were many and good also, notwithstanding they refused these proofes & examples of princes gouernment. And yet no mā thought it incredible nor impossible, that they should still be Donatistes. So, is it nothing incredible nor impossible, but that, for all your testimonies frō Aarons priesthood & cere∣monies, which ye alleage out of the olde testamēt, that bind vs not: and yet refusing the manifest proofes & examples of Princes, that binde vs: ye may, for all this, be Donatistes still. Yea héerein also ye play the Donatistes partes.

But I perceyue (say you) by your good Logike, your law* 1.1291 and like diuinitie, silence maketh a deniall, and bicause M. Feckenham maketh no mention in this place of the matter to be proued by the olde Testament, therefore he subtilly refu∣seth the prooues thereof.

What néede many wordes master Stapleton, your selfe haue confessed that this making no mētion of the matter to be proued by the olde Testaments ensamples: was a wise mans part, bicause they were against him. Which, what it is in Logike, let Logitians descant. What it is in lawe, (which is your profession) to play suche wise mens partes: I com∣mit to the Lawyers. But in diuinitie (Master Stapleton) of which ye say ye are now a student, if you studie till your braynes ake, ye shall finde this wisedome, that concealeth the truth, which maketh agaynst it, to be nothing lesse than a subtill refusall, which is the fayrest name ye can couer the Donatists errour withall.

But ye should rather (say you) me thinke, induce the con∣trarie, and that he consenteth to you for the olde Testament: Quia qui tacet consentire videtur: (as the olde saying is) for hee that holdeth his peace, seemeth to consent: and so yee might haue better forced vppon him that all was yours, pre∣supposing that you had prooued the matter by the olde Testament.

Do ye leaue your Logike, Lawe, and Diuinitie, so soone,* 1.1292 and fall to prouerbes master Stapleton, and olde sayings? In déede it is an olde saying, that he that holdeth his peace, seemeth to consent: But yet this (seemeth) proueth not that he doth consent. A man may refuse some things, and bicause he refuseth them, will not aunswere them. A man may (seeing a thing against him) of purpose hide it in silence, and* 1.1293 so, thinking to slippe the coller, he subtilly refuseth it. A man may play coll vnder Candlestick, séest me, séest me not: and who is so blind as he that seeth & will not sée? A man may lay his hande on his mouth, mumbudget, whust, not a word

for a thousand pound, least he open a gappe, and rippe vp a matter against him selfe. And what doth he héere, graunt it or refuse it? doth he not of set purpose subtilly refuse it, and thinks him selfe no smal foole, yea, perhaps a great wise mā, in so refusing it? and God wot, a full simple man is he that perceiueth not this to be a playn refusal. If leauing Logike, law and diuinity, ye runne for succour to old sayings: These are no new sayings, M. St. I thinke ye haue heard also of another homely olde saying: VVhen the rayne raynes and the goose winkes, little wottes the gosling what the goose thinkes. And a full séely gos•…•…ing would ye make your selfe, M. St. if, séeing how M. Feck. as subtil as a goo•…•…e winkes at these matters, & will not of purpose sée them, when he is so pressed & vrged with these exāples & proues, that as it were they raine vpon him: ye thinke not that this is a refusall of them, but perhaps ye wil say, ye be wiser than the gos•…•…ing, and that ye perceiued as muche as did the winking goose, when ye sayd, he seemeth to consent that holdeth his peace, for ye tell not what he seemeth to consent vnto. He seemeth in deede to consent vnto this, that they be against him as ye say, and for this cause like your wise man, he purposely re∣fuseth them, in burying them in silence, so muche as lyeth in him, euen as the Donatistes did.

Now that neither logike, lawe, diuinitie, olde sayings, nor yet the wise mans shifte, will serue to cleare master Feck. from béeing a Donatist: master Stap. will once more (for an olde grudge) haue a •…•…ing at vs, and to see if he can fa∣sten any thing on vs, be sayth:

But you will needes driue your reason another way. Let* 1.1294 vs see then, what we Catholikes can saye to you for your Apologie by the like drifte. You and your Colleges seeing themselues •…•…arged with many heresies, to wipe away that blot, if it be possible, and for your better purgation, take vpon you, to shew your whole, full and entire beleefe. And thervpon you recite the articles of the common Creede. But

now good sir, I aske you a question, what if by chaunce you had omitted any one of them, would ye gladly be measured by this rule▪ ye measure M. Feck. by? would ye be content, that the catholikes should lay to your charge, that ye subtilly refuse that article, that ye haue foreslowne to rehearse? If ye would not, then must I say to you with Christ: Quod •…•…ibi non vis fieri, alteri non facias. Do you not to another, that ye would not haue done to your selfe. If ye say that ye are con∣tent to stande to the very same law, as if ye be a reasonable and a constant man you must needes say: Lo then good sir, you haue concluded your selfe, and al your cōpanions plaine heretikes, for the refusall of the articles, Conceyued of the holy Ghost, which ye omit in the rehearsall of your Creede, which article, I am assured, ye finde not there. Then further, seeing the Archeheretike Eutiches, and before him Apollinarius in the reciting of the cōmon creede ranne in a maner the same race, you following them at the heeles▪ as fast as may be, pre∣termitting also these words: Incarnatus est de spiritu sancto, here might we euen by your own rule and example, crie out vpon you all as Apollinarians and Eutichians, and that with more colourable matter, than you haue, either to make M. Feck. a Donatist, or that your Apologie hath to make the worthy and learned Cardinall Hosius, a Swenkfeldian: wher∣in your rhethorike is altogither as good, as is this yours heere agaynst master Feckenham.

To let rhethorike go, M. St. with your law & logike, I wil only come to your questiō, & then to your illatiō ye inferre theron Your demaund standeth on this presupposall.

VVhat if we, by chaunce, haue omitted any article of the common creede? would we be charged, that we subtilly re∣fused that article?

This similitude, M. St. is nothing alike, frō any article, ei∣ther* 1.1295 by chance (as ye say) omitted, or not required, or not in question at al, or not pertinēt to the purpose & issue in hād, but graunted & agréed vpon of bothe parties, without any cōtrouersie: to a thing not by chance, but of purpose omitted,

as your selfe haue confessed, M. Feck. did omit the proofes of the old testament, bicause he was a wise, otherwise called a subtill man: he béeing so much vrged of his aduersarie ther∣with: the matter chiefly in questiō & properly belonging to the purpose & issue in hand: yea, & him self making a chalege to be tried by the scriptures, fathers, councels & practise: & to strike off before hand (as it were a debarre) the one halfe of y^e same scripture, or rather y^e part therof, that setteth it out most plainly: & to do al this, only bicause it maketh against him: what can this be thought else but subtill refusing and shifting off, as did the Donatistes? and to liken the other chance vnto this, which (all the world may sée, euē by your owne confession) is most vnlike, what is this but another shamefull kinde of shifting off also?

Thus you sée, that ye can rightly lay no such thing to our* 1.1296 charge, although, as ye say, by chaunce, some article of the common Creede had bene by vs forslowne. We refuse not the rule of Christ, in this or any other behalf: neither do we so to you, as you haue done to vs: but require you rather to do so to vs, as we haue done to you. But then, ye say, we conclude our selues and al our companions plaine heretikes. And how so, M. St? for that (say you) in the apologie in the reciting of the cōmō creede ye omit these words, incarnatus est de spiritu sancto, conceyued of the holy ghost.

First & formast, M. St. this assertion of yours, is a wilful lye, & not a scape forslowne or ouershot by chance: if ye haue séene the Apologie your selfe, as I dare say, ye haue done, & narrowly pried for the matter, & think ye haue espied more than your master could espie, or thought worthy to be no∣ted. For where as ye tell vs, both in your text, and in your margine for fayling, that the Apology reciteth the common creede: this is most euident false. And your M. D. Harding him selfe, I dare say, if he he a liues man, will say ye erre fowly therin, who findeth a péeuish fault with Thapologie, euen for this, that it reciteth not the common creede.

But can ye say your common creede, M. St? For it may* 1.1297 be (to conster it to the best) that this your errour is rather of ignorance. I thinke ye say your common Creede in La∣tin oftner than in Englishe, for in Englishe ye re•…•…ke not howe fewe can say it, and yet ye hitte it truer in Englishe, than in Latin. But you that reprehende the byshop and o∣ther for Grammer, in englishing of wordes so exactly, I pray you, by what newe founde figure of Grammer, do ye* 1.1298 englishe, Incarnatus est de spiritu sancto, He was conceyued by the holy Ghost? In good sooth, M. Stap. ye were héere somewhat cōceyued amisse your selfe. And this was a grea∣ter ouershotte than any of your common petit quarels, be∣sides this foyle most of all, that ye can not perfectly say the common Creede, nor write it rightly in your booke, that al∣most eche plow boy can say without the booke. Ye tell vs Thapologie reciting the common Créede, omitteth Incar∣natus est de spiritu sancto, whereas those wordes are not in the common Creede. The wordes of the common Creede are these, Qui conceptus est de spiritu sancto, with whiche agréeth Damasus Creede, and not Qui incarnatus est de spi∣ritu sancto. Thus haue all the bookes that I haue séene, and yet I haue looked a good many, to see if any write it as you do, whereby I mighte the rather holde you excused. The wordes that you recite are the words of the Nicene creede, which ye haue put in your Masse. But belike ye sing Masse oftner than ye say the cōmon Créede, & so tooke that which ye commonly vsed, to be the common creede,

Well, say you, howsoeuer it be, ye haue héere omitted both incarnatus and conceptus too▪ And therfore by your own rule and example, heere might we crie out vpon you all, as Apollinarians and Eutichians.

In déede M. Sta▪ no man can let ye to crie out and crow out, that we be, what soeuer it please you to crie out vpon vs. But howe well and truely ye may crie it out, that is another matter. For, by the same rule and example, you

might crie out also vppon Ireneus, that omitteth this arti∣cle in his Créede. Ye might crie out of Tertullian, that* 1.1299 likewise omitteth it. Ye might crie out vppon S. Ambrose, and S. Augustine, that are said to haue compiled the himne Te 'Deum. Ye might crie out vppon Athanasius Creede Quicun{que} vult: And vppon diuerse other, that omitte this Article of the conception of Christ by the holy ghost. And yet are they neither Apollinarians nor Eutichians. But looke you to it whether any of their Heresies touch your or no, euen in maintenance of their hereticall doctrine.

You stretch the rule to farre and to generally (M. Stap.) euery forflowne omission by chaunce, as your selfe say, where no speciall occasion is giuen, is not a subtile refusall: Nor so M. Feckenham is charged, your selfe haue shewed he did it wittingly, yea wisely as you say, and he thought to omitte that that he is chiefly charged withall, bicause it made against him. If the fathers, and the Apologie did thus in their omission: then hardly lay it to their charges, and therein ye shall do but well. For otherwise, as you would retorte this on vs: see how sone, and how sore it might be retorned on you, yea and that in the selfe same place where of very purpose ye say the common creede, and say to the* 1.1300 Bishop in your fo•…•…rth booke about the number of the arti∣cles, that ye will bring him to his Catechisme, which vnlesse ye thought your selfe a cumming student in Diuinitie, and specially well traueled in your ab•…•…e, ye woulde not else take vpon you to teache a Bishop. In déede your Bishops were verie blinde, but thankes be to God our Bishops are no such blinde guides, that they should néede to learne their Catechisme of you. But let vs sée how do ye teache him when ye come euen to the common creede, & how ye num∣ber the Articles, (although concerning your quarell at the number of the articles) I wil answere (God willing in his proper place.

The first article then is (say you) I beleue in God. The

second, I beleue in God the father. The. 3. I beleue that he is* 1.1301 omnipotent. The. 4. That he is the creator of heauen and earth. The. 5. I beleue in Iesus Christ. And here proceding to* 1.1302 other Articles, ye leaue quite out these wordes, his onely sonne our Lorde. Why do ye thus M. Stapleton? do ye not beléeue that Iesus Christ is the sonne of God, and that he is the onely sonne of God, and that he is our Lorde? Looke well to this geare M. St. here is first, after the manner of your accounting, thrée articles omitted, and one of them such a speciall point, as we charge you with, that ye take away his Lordship, & now ye take away his sonneship too. Will ye say this was ouerhipped by chaunce or forslowne? well be it-so, although, euen in saying the common Creede, suche a forslowne scape might deserue a yerking in a yong scholler, but more shamefull it is in a Diuine, yea in such a Diuine as will take vpon him to teach a Bishop. But why not? would not the sow take vppon hir, to teach Minerua? but let vs sée your furder teaching.

The sixte, I beleeue that he was conceyued of the holy* 1.1303 ghost. The seuenth, that he was borne of the virgine Ma∣ry. The eight, that he suffered vnder Pontius Pila•…•…us.

Here once againe, ye omitte these wordes, crucified, dead, and buried: conteyning also (after your reckening) thrée other articles, and ye leaue them cleane out. Whe∣ther it be, that ye cannot say the Créede perfectly, which were a foule blotte: or which is worse, that ye purposely leaue them out, like the wise men, that vse not greatly to shewe that, that maketh against them. For, the popishe doctrine is so flatte diuerse wayes, against the death of Christ: that it quite taketh away the vertue and effect ther∣of. And therefore the Papistes séeke to be saued, by so many meanes besides. But whether ye leaue it out for this, or any other priuier cause or open: I remitte it to your owne purgation, and to other mens coniectures. You pro∣céede and say.

And the ninth, that he descended into hell. The tenth, that* 1.1304 he arose from death. The eleuenth, that he ascended into hea∣uen. And the twelfth, that he shall come to iudge the quicke and the deade.

Thus againe haue ye left out an other Article, that hee sitteth at the right hand of God the father almightie. Which is also materiall, in the controuersie betwene vs of your transubstantiation, whiche errour as it cleane confuteth, so it argueth you to be the very Eutichians, your selues, as is alreadie proued out of Theodoretus. More things are to be noted about this your dealing in in the common Crede, on∣ly nowe I note, but these your shamefull omissions, and that not once, nor twice, but thrice: and that in principall matters in controuersie, and all in reciting euen the com∣mon Creede, which almost euery childe with vs of any dis∣cretion (thankes be to God) can say without booke, and you master Stapleton, a shorne priest, a Bacheler of law, a stu∣dent in diuinitie, a writer of Louaine, a translator of bookes, a doctours proctour, a defender of a quondam Abbot, & one that not onely will teache and controll all other, but crake that ye will bring a Bishop to his Cathechisme, and teache him his Créede, and cannot say the common Creede aright your selfe, but make so many scapes: surely, and ye were a boy againe in Winchester schole, ye were well worthie so many lashes, as ye haue left out wordes, and as well layde on, as the wordes are weightie and materiall. Ye may escape the lashes nowe ye be adultus, but and ye were a doltus to, ye can not escape the shame. On the other part, if ye say ye left these articles out of purpose, and not of such truandly ignorance, euen where of purpose ye went a∣boute to leaue out no article, and yet left oute so manye: howe was not then your witting purpose, euen a wilfull refusall of those articles? Whereby, howe many herelies ye bewrappe your selfe withall, well nigh euery man may perceyue and iudge.

And thus with too narrow sitting of small matters in o∣ther men, for the defence of M. Feckenham: ye haue not onely not hurte thē, nor helped him any thing, but brought your selfe into the same and greater briers than he was in, and can not ridde your handes of them, either without ble∣mishe of many Heresies, for wilfull omitting such weighty matters, and that so nere points in controuersie, forseing that those articles were against your errours: or els (not to presse ye so sore, yet at the least to impute all to ignorance or retchelesse foreslouth) it is a foule fault in so great a stu∣dent, and the greater foyle, the more ye take vppon you to controll the Apologie of so many excellent learned and fa∣mous men, and will teache the Bishop his Catechisme and your selfe can not your Créede. If M. Feckenham heare of this his defenders foyle, he will perchaunce of pitie or cha∣ritie pray for you, and haue you in his Pater noster, that God would make ye a better scholler, or a wiser man: but, and he would followe mine aduice, ye shoulde neuer come into his Créede, since ye can not say your owne.

Now M. Stapl. crie out and yell vppon vs, that we be Heretikes, so loude as ye can, if for very shame ye can open your mouth at all. Ye say ye cā do it to vs, & that with more colourable matter than (we) haue, either to make M. Fecken∣ham a Donatiste or that (our) Apologie hath to make that worthie and learned cardinall Hosius a Swenkfeldian.

I thinke so euen in déede M. St. that ye may crie out vp∣pon vs with more colourable matter. For other matter than colourable, to crie out vppon vs for Heretikes, haue ye none.* 1.1305 But since it is but your painted colours, and not any matter at all in déede, the more ye crie out, the more ye shew your shame. Cardinall Hosius, whome ye so much commende, the matter wherwith he is charged to be a Swenkfeldian, or worse than a Swēkfeldian, is no colourable matter, but apparant, & confessed by him selfe. And if ye make M. Fec∣kenhams case to be such as his, ye haue well helpen him vp

M. St. then is this no colourable matter, that he is charged with, to be herein a Donatiste: but a very plaine and true matter. And then is his case worse than it was before▪ when he of set purpose (thinking to play a wisemans parte) left out the old Testaments proufes, and therein shewed him selfe a Donatiste: doth also with Hosius deface and blas∣pheme both old and newe Testament, and therein shewe him selfe a Swenkfeldian also. And thus the furder ye wade to saue M. Feckenham your client from the spotte of one Heresie, ye not onely helpe him nothing therein, but go nere to drawe him into an other. It is best therefore M. Stapleton both for him and for your self, let him craule out him selfe so well as he can: for ye do hetherto but hin∣der him, and bemyre your selfe. Which when at length be∣like ye beginne to perceyue:

Neither (say you) do we greatly passe how the Donatistes* 1.1306 in this point demeaned them selues, and whether they open∣ly or priuily shunned proufes brought and deduced out of the old Testament.

Ye should haue told vs thus much before M. St. and not al this while to haue laboured so earnestly in and out with all these shiftes, onely for obiecting this practise of the Do∣natists to M. Feckenhā, & to remoue the Bishops motiues, which now ye sée ye can not do: you say, ye greatly passe not how the Donatists in this point demeaned them selues. And I am euen of the same opinion also that ye greatly passe not of it. But if ye tooke the Donatistes to be Heretikes in déede, and had not a certaine affinitie with them: ye would not thus after all your sturre, relent to the accusation, & say, ye passe not how the Donatistes in this point demeaned them selues, since you be charged with their demeanour in this point. Which, what is it els, than to say, ye paste not in this pointe, whether ye be Donatistes or no. If ye had a good zeale to the truth, or your conscience were cléere of this crime: ye would rather haue saide with Hierome, Errare

possum, Hereticus esse nolo. Erre I may, but I will not be an Heretike. As therefore ye confessed right now, that all your defence hitherto hath bene but colourable matter: so now ye care not in this pointe, whether ye be culpable or no. Yea you go about to defende and cléere the Donatistes, and to post off this accusation to the Manichées. For what meane ye els to say?

In deede the Manichees denied the Authoritie of the* 1.1307 bookes of the old law and Testament, which I reade not of the Donatistes. Yea in the very same booke and chapter by you alleaged, Petilian him selfe, taketh his proufe against the Catholikes out of the old Testament, which you know could serue him in litle steede, if he him selfe did reiect such kinde of Euidences. This nowe shall suffice for this branche, to purge M. Feckenham that he is no Donatist, or Heretike o∣therwise.

How well all this suffiseth to M. Feckenh. purgation, either of the Donatistes heresie, or rather of blemishing him with other Heresies, and how good a compurgatour you haue bene, or rather a partaker of his Heresies: we must both referre to the Reader (M. Stapleton) as iudge in his cōscience, to cast or aquitte M. Feckenhā herein. Ye thinke by cleering the Donatistes of this obiection, ye haue clée∣red withall M. Feckenham. But while ye go aboute to cléere them, ye accuse S. Augustine that is their accuser, who saith, they did refuse the proufes of the old Testament. And you say ye haue not redde it, had ye redde S. Augustine or so much as the wordes taken out of him that the Bishop citeth, and you take vppon you to answere vnto for Master Feckenhams defence, how could ye not haue redde it? but ye would slippe off the matter vnder the colour of the Ma∣nicheans refusall, bicause the Donatistes did not refuse it as they did, therefore they did not refuse it at all, whereas* 1.1308 the Manichées did simplie and vtterly refuse the old Te∣stament, which the Donatistes did not, but refused it like

such wise men as the Papistes, when they thinke it maketh against them▪ and admit & vrge it when they thinke it ma∣keth for them, thus did they, and thus do you: and therfore for this handling of the old Testament ye be like the Do∣natistes. But for your handling of the newe Testament ye be like the Manichées, of whome S. Augustine saith, Ipsi•…•…s{que} nou•…•… Testaments, &c. And they so reade the senten∣ces* 1.1309 of the new Testament, as though they had bene falsified, that what they lust they take from thence, and what they like not they reiect, and as though they contained not all the truth, they preferred many bookes that were Apocrypha: And saide that in their Archemanichee the promise of the Lorde Iesus Christ was fulfilled, wherevppon in his letters he called him selfe the Apostle of Iesus Christe, bicause Ie∣sus Christe promised to sende him, and sente in him Iesus Christe. Whiche how nere it toucheth your Popes prac∣tise, looke you to it, and cléere him of it M. Stapleton, els ye will not onely proue Donatistes I am afrayde, but al∣so Manicheans.

Thus muche then for the former motiue that the B. had to charge M. Feckenham with the Donatistes. And if this suffise (as you say) for this branche to purge M. Fecken∣ham, content is pleased, and so am I, let it suffise in Gods blessed name, I commit it to the readers iudgement. Now to the other motiue.

Concerning the other (say you) besides your falshood,* 1.1310 your great follie doth also shew it selfe too, aswell as in the other, to imagine him to be a Donatiste. And to thinke or say as you say they did, that Ciuill Magistrates haue not to do with Religion, nor may not punishe the transgres∣sours of the same. Master Feckenham saith no such thing, and I suppose he thinketh no such thing. And furder I dare be bold to say that there is not so much as a light coniecture to be grounded thereof, by any of M. Feckenhams words, vn∣lesse M. Horne become suddenly so subtile, that he thinketh

no difference to say, the Prince should not punishe an ho∣nest true man in steede of a theefe, and to say he should not punishe a theefe: or to say there is no difference betwixt all thinges and nothing. For though M. Feckenham and all o∣ther Catholikes do denie, the ciuill Princes supreme go∣uernment in all causes Ecclesiasticall, yet doth not M. Fec∣kenham nor any Catholike denie but that ciuill Princes may deale in some matters Ecclesiasticall, as Aduocates and De∣fenders of the Churche, namely in punishing of Heretikes, by sharpe lawes. Vnto the whiche lawes, Heretikes are by the Church first giuen vp, and deliuered, by open excommu∣nication and condemnation.

Here first as ye did in the other motiue, so againe ye charge the Bishop with falshood and folly, but take héede M. Stapleton the falshood and follie light not on your owne pate, as it did in the other. Whether it be follie in you or crafte, let other déeme: certainely falshood it is, that when ye come to the setting downe of the Bishops wordes in a distincte letter, ye dare not for both eares on your head, set downe the full wordes of the Bishop, nor of S. Augustine, nor yet of the Donatistes, whereby it might haue bene knowne, what the Donatistes attributed or de∣nied to Princes, and how néere, or how farre, ye had come vnto, or diffred from them. Thus durst ye not do, and thus should ye haue done, which argueth your owne false∣hood. But ye turne the catte into the panne, and say, that the Donatistes saide, Ciuill magistrates haue not to do with re∣ligion, nor may not punishe the transgressours of the same, but (say you) M. Feckēham saith no such thing and you sup∣pose he thinketh no such thing, and furder ye dare be bolde to say there is not so much as a light coniecture to be groun∣ded thereof by any of M. Feckenhams wordes, and hereon you conclude him to be no Donatiste.

Now since ye will be thus bolde for M. Feckenham as to enter into his thought, ye should not haue bene afrayde

with the Byshop, to haue set downe his playne written wordes, or so muche as the full content therof. Did ye feare they would bite ye? in déede they woulde haue shewed you to haue bene a Donatist, & they would haue shewed howe ye haue altered the Donatistes refusall, and S. Augustines complaynt on them, to make it séeme you were none.

Ye saye M. Feckenham and you graunt, Princes may deale with matters ecclesiasticall.

Why? M. Stapl. so di•…•… the Donatistes too. Haue not* 1.1311 your selfe confessed, that they ranne for succour to Iulianus the Apostata, and highly commended him? And ye knowe in Cecilians controuersie, that they refused not the Empe∣rours dealing, till he delte still agaynst them, and therfore, as you say, you do not, no more did they simply denie, that princes might deale in matters of religion. Ye should ther∣fore haue adioyned the wordes that the Byshop reciteth out of S. Augustine, howe, and after what manner they de∣nied their dealing in matters of religion, and punishment of heretikes. Whether they denyed it as you d•…•…, that they should not dealing as supreme gouernours, as punishers by their owne authoritie, yea or no, for this you denie. Now that Princes had and t•…•…ke vpon them, and oughte to haue this kinde of dealing, the Bishop proued out of S. Aug•…•…∣stine,* 1.1312 that magistrates and rulers •…•…ught to reforme thē, to reduce them to the vnitie of the Church, and to represse their heresies with their authoritie and godly lawes made for that purpose, to whō it belonged of duetie, and whose speciall seruice to Christ, is to see, care and prouide, that their subiectes be gouerned and maynteined in the true and sincere religion of Christ, without all errors, superstitions and heresies.

This was the maner of the Princes dealing then with religion, and this you now denie to Princes, to deale on this

wise▪ And on this fashion saide the Donatistes. The secu∣ler* 1.1313 Princes haue not to deale in matters of reli∣gion or causes eccl. That God committeth not the teaching of his people to kings, but to Pro∣phets. Christ sent not souldiors, but fishers, to bring in, and further his religion. Pretending the ordering and disposing of all eccl. causes to be in the Cler∣gie, and by the Clergie they ment them selues. As you do likewise when ye say, heretikes▪ are by the Churche giuen vp, and deliuered. By the Churche, that is, say you, onely by* 1.1314 vs that are the Priests. Heretikes ye say are first giuen vp by the Churche, vnto the ciuill Princes sharpe lawes: do ye not héere make your selues onely the Churche? Yea do ye not make these two distincte members, the Church that gi∣ueth them vp, and the Prince, to whose sharpe lawes the partie condemned is giuen vp, and so excl•…•…de the Prince from the Church, as no member at all therof? And héerein ye agrée, or rather are worsse than they. So that still the similitude holdeth, betwéene M. Feckenham and the Do∣natists, bothe of them refusing the olde Testament for the proofe of Princes supreme gouernement. Yea although the Donatists had gone further than the Papistes do, where in déede the Papists go further than did the Donatistes, what soeuer liberalitie ye pretende to giue Princes to deale in religion, wherin ye dare be bolde, ye say. But yet for all that M. St. be not ouer bolde, in allowing Princes a dealing in religion, for feare your friendes (that allow not Princes so muche as to talke of religion) count your boldnesse, to pro∣céede of Bayards blindnesse.

Although your self espying by & by your ouer hardie and* 1.1315 hastie boldnesse, step backe agayn, and so qualifie this your bolde graunt of Princes dealing in some eccl. matters, that in conclusion, ye say as the Donatistes saide, or rather giue Princes lesse than they did, either making them the enri∣chers of your coafers, whiche ye terme by the name of

aduocates or defenders of the Church, or else the executio∣ners of your crueltie, and to deale not one io•…•…e further. Which béeing no ecclesiasticall matters at all (excepte to defende or put a man to death be an eccl. matter) your bold graunt, that they should deale in some eccl. matters, is so cunningly resolued, that whē all cōmes to al, they shal deale in none at all, but onely be the defenders or executioners of them that are the onely dealers ther with. Thus do ye play in words mockholiday with Christian princes.

Do ye think (M. St.) that Christian princes did nothing else, nor had any other authoritie but this, in punishing the Donatistes in S. Augustines time? the wordes of S. Au∣gustine are agaynst you, the story of Cecilians cause dothe confute you, yea, euen the •…•…ning & refusall of the Dona∣tistes sheweth the plain•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉. And thinke you if prin∣ces had at that time no f•…•…her authoritie to punishe the Donatistes, than ye limit princes now, that the Donatists* 1.1316 would haue refused and cried out vpon the Emperors au∣thoritie therein, if they had béene but the onely execu∣tours of the fathers iudgementes? Naye, they woulde then haue cryed, that the fathers, as principall, had had nought to doe therein, and that the Princes were mis∣ruled by the fathers, and that the fathers had made the Princes their executioners: Thus no doubte would they, and néedes muste they haue cried, if they woulde haue cried out at all; presupposing Princes had then no more to doe in matters of religion▪ than the fathers woulde permitte, appoynt, and allowe them, as you order Princes nowe. But the Donatistes cryed not out so, nor in déede they could, but they cried out chiefly agaynst the authoritie of the Princes: it arg•…•…th then the Prince•…•… had the chiefe authoritie, to s•…•…t foorth the true religion, and to suppress•…•… theirs, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 all other heresies, and not the fathers and By∣shops▪ Nowe what difference is t•…•…ere betweene your crie and the D•…•…ies?

VVhy? say you, is there no difference betweene al things, and nothing.

Yes, M. Stap. there is something betwixte them. For* 1.1317 who sayth the Prince hath, or maye haue the doing of all thing? obiecte it to them that say so. We say, the Prince hath vnder God the supreme gouernement ouer all things ecclesiasticall. That is to say, to ouersée and direct, that all thinges be duetifully done by them, to whom they belong. Nowe in this behalfe, you giue the Prince not so muche as any something, but bare nothing, vnder a name of some∣thing. Whether then it be something, or it be nothing, ye still are lyke the Donatistes about this matter in eue∣ry thing.

Is there no difference (say you) to say the Prince shoulde* 1.1318 not punishe an honest true man 〈◊〉〈◊〉 stead of a thiefe, and to say, he should not punishe a 〈◊〉〈◊〉?

Yes for soothe, M. Stap. there is a great difference. But dothe this example also make any thing agaynst the Prin∣ces supreme authoritie, in dealing in ecclesiastical matters? Go too then, let this stande for an example. As the Prince, though the right of his authoritie stretche not so farre, that he should punishe an honest true man, in steede of a thiefe, yet, to punishe a thiefe, he hath authoritie: so although the right of the christian Princes authoritie stretch not so far, that he should punish a true and faythful Christian in stéede* 1.1319 of a false thée•…•…ishe Christian: (A thiefe in this behalfe is he that followeth not the doctrine of Christ, of whom he saith, Omnes qui venerunt ant•…•… me fures sunt, & latrones▪ All that came before me were theeues and robbers, bicause they rob God of his glory) yet to punishe the very thiefe he hath au∣thoritie. Nowe, M. Stapl. by what authoritie dothe the* 1.1320 Prince punishe the thiefe, dothe he not punishe him by his owne supreme authoritie next to God? you will saye, he punisheth him by his lawes. But who maketh the lawe forcible, doth not (next vnder God) the Princes supreme

authoritie? Yea, what though the Prince him selfe sat not on him, nor pronounced the sentence, nor executed the pu∣nishement of the thiefe, yet is not all this done, by theirs, to whome these offices appertayne, but by the Princes su∣preme authoritie. The Prince is not the Iudges executio∣ner, but the Iudge and the officer are the Princes. If then your similitude holde, euen there where it shoulde princi∣pally holde, and in the matter in controuersie betwéene vs, then that authoritie, that the Prince hath to punishe spiri∣tuall theeues, Idolaters, heretikes, false Prophetes. &c. is next vnder God, his owne supreme authoritie. And though he him selfe pronounce not the sentence on the heretike, nor execute the punishment of him, yet is it done by his supreme authoritie: Nor the Prince is the Clergies exe∣cutioner, but the Clergie therin and the officers, are rather the Princes executioners. Thus ye sée howe your owne similitude directly and playuely applied, maketh cleane agaynst you.

Now for the testimo•…•…ies that the byshop citeth out of S.* 1.1321 Aug. to open and confu•…•…e the practises of the Donatistes, which should hau•…•… shewe•…•… how like your doing had bene to theirs: as though ye heard not on that •…•…ide, or as though ye would counterfeit the wise man your selfe, that vseth not greatly to shew that that maketh agaynst him, ye quite omit them, saying:

As for S. Augustines testimonies they nothing touche M.* 1.1322 Feck. and therfore we will say nothing to them, but keepe our accustomable tale with you.

Ye do wel to call your answere a tale, for ye haue hither∣to tolde a faire tale, and a well told tale, and therfore I pray ye, M. Stap. tell on your tale, till ye haue redde vs out this worthy chapter. And sée that the residue of your tale be ac∣customable (as y•…•… say) to this ye haue hitherto tolde vs.

The. 19. Diuision.

THe Bishop (for that M. Feck. with the Donatists) refu∣seth* 1.1323 the proues of the olde Testament •…•…or Princes su∣preme gouernment) ioyneth with Saint Aug. agaynst the Donatists and the Papists, alleaging out of S. Augus•…•…. ma∣ny* 1.1324 sentences: first, to proue this to be the verie dutie and speciall seruice of Princes vnto God, to haue an especiall care, diligence and ouersight, to see Gods lawes and true Religion set forth and kept, and to punish and remoue all things to the contrary. Secondly, to confute this refusall of the Donatists and Papists, besides the foresayde pro∣ues and examples, hée alleageth o•…•…te of Saint Augu∣stine* 1.1325 the examples of the King of Niniue, of Darius, of Nabuchodonozor and others: prouing thereby, that the Histories and testimonies cited out of the olde Testa∣ment, are partly figures, and partly Prophecies of the power, dutie and seruice, that Kings shoulde owe and per∣forme in like sort, to the further•…•…uce of Christes religion, in the time of the newe Testament.

Master Stapletons aunswere to these testimonies is* 1.1326 thréefolde. First he laboureth to restraine all the testimo∣nies of Saint Augustine, onely to punishing of Heretikes. Secondly he laboreth to proue that these testimonies make agaynst vs. Thirdly he goeth about once againe, by the Bishops illation on these testimonies, to clere master Fec∣•…•…enham of the crime that the Bishop charged him with, for refusing the examples of the olde testament. The first part he parteth againe in thrée. First he gathereth a contract and summe of all these testimonies, to the which he yeldeth. Secondly, he sheweth that this was his olde and former o∣pinion. Thirdly, he limitteth all the matter only to punish∣ment. And first of all he sayth:

•…•…o, now haue we mo testimonies out of Saint August. to* 1.1327

proue that, for the which he hath alleaged many things out of S. Aug. already, and the which no man denieth. For what else proueth all this out of S. Aug. bothe nowe and before alleaged, but that christian Princes ought to make lawes and constitutions (euen as M. Horne him selfe expoundeth it. fol. 12. b) for the furtherance of Christes religion?

Are ye afrayde M. Stap. to be oppressed with the number* 1.1328 of testimonies? What man, and your cause be good, the mo the merier they say: but bicause your cause is noughte, the fewer belike with you the better fare: althoughe by your leaue ye make a pretie lye in the beginning, to say that he alleageth these testimonies of S. Augustine, to proue that, for the whiche he hathe alleaged many thinges out of S. Augustine already. For, the abouesayde allegations* 1.1329 were directed to detecte the Donatistes, in refusing the Princes authoritie, and the examples of the olde Testa∣ment, and to sée howe like to theirs, your dealings to Prin∣ces, and your refusall of the same examples were. But these testimonies present, are to confirme the Princes au∣thoritie, and the examples of the olde Testament, for Prin∣ces, agaynst both Donatistes and Papistes deniall of their authoritie, and refusall of thexamples. But let this passe, sithe whatsoeuer those or these be, ye say no man denieth them.

For what else (say you) proueth all this out of S. Aug. bothe nowe and before alleaged, but that Princes oughte to make lawes and constitutions for the furtherance of Christes religion? this thing no Catholike de•…•…ieth.

Meane ye playne dealing and speake ye in good sadnesse* 1.1330 M St? dothe no Catholike denie, nor no man denie, that Princes may make lawes for the furtheraunce of Christes religion How chaunce then you runne from the obedience of your own naturall & most gratious soueraigne, that ma∣keth so godly lawes and constitutions for the furtherance of Christes religion? & denie that she hath authoritie to make

any lawes and cōstitutions in that behalfe, but that she must onely be obedient to your Popes and his Priests lawes and* 1.1331 constitutions? And for this matter, ye compile the moste of your works. And now ye say, no mā nor catholike denieth it. By this rule you be no catholikes, that ye crake so much of. Nay ye be no men neither, for it is moste euident that ye chiefly denie this thing. And your selfe in your Pre∣face, make it to be the moste principall controuersie of all other, and most to be denied.

If ye be a true Catholike, and a true man, deale playnly, For no doubt, ye meane that there is a padde in the s•…•…rawe. Ye haue a knacke in your budget, whereby ye thinke ye may well graunt this, whiche for shame in open wordes ye dare not denie but graunte. And yet ye thinke we shall haue no more holde by your graunte, than he that holdeth a wette Ele by the tayle. For in the ende, ye come in with suche a qualification: as all the worlde may perceiue a flatte deniall thereof. And yet at the firste blushe, no man woulde thinke, but that the matter betwéene vs and you were full concluded.

We say, all the authoritie that the Quéene hath is one∣ly to this ende in effecte, that she oughte thereby to make* 1.1332 lawes and constitutions for the furtherance of Christes reli∣gion. This (say you) no man denieth, but that they oughte to make lawes and cōstitutions, for the furtherance of Chri∣stes religion. Héere you agrée with vs, to a simple & playne dealing mans iudgement. Ye are become a Protestant, I hope. But what will your good masters at Louaine, and your friendes with vs say to you, when they shall heare of this graunt? they wil affirme with one voyce that they vt∣terly denie it, and aske ye, howe ye haue defended master Feckenhams quarell.

Tushe will you say to them, holde your peace sirs, all is* 1.1333 wel inough, there was no remedie but I must néedes grasit to S. Augustines words, they were so manyfest, and so

pressed, that there was no helpe but to graunt it, yea and to beare downe the matter that no bodie denied it. But I haue* 1.1334 such a distinction for it, that they shalbe neuer the néere, for all my graunt. Did ye neuer réede (may ye say to them) the practise of Arrius? that whē he was so vrged, that he could not denie it: he yelded to the true beleuers, and wrote al∣so, as I haue done, deposing that he beléeued as he had written: but when his cōplices herefore expos•…•…ulated with him, he declared to them, that for all the shewe of his grant in wordes, in déede he had graunted nothing. He saide, he beleeued as he had written, and looke here quoth he (pul∣ling a paper out of his bosome contayning his Heresie) this is the writing to the which I referred my wordes. And so may you say to your friendes M. Stap. true in déede I haue graunted, that both I & you denie not this, that the Quéene* 1.1335 ought to make lawes and constitutions for the furtherance of Christes Religion. And if ye marke it, all this matter lies in this worde furtherance. Furtheraunce I graunted. But I warrant ye, I raunced no f•…•…rder. I told not as yet how farre nor how much, nor how litle, this furtherance stretcheth. Do ye not know that euery thing, that ye•…•… any whitte, be it neuer so little, is yet a furtherance? and euery thing yekes quoth the wrenne when she pist in the sea, as the old Prouerbe faith: and euen as much furtherance in this mat∣ter (as you shall sée me bring it aboute) haue I graunted Princes, and ye know as good neuer a whit as neuer the better. They shalbe neuer the better for this my graunt, no more than when I made them like the Heathen Prin∣ces. Onely now, being pressed, it standeth me vppon, to alter my wordes, and giue them a Title of furderance for a clawe, but so cunningly handled, that they can go no furder than we allow them. And so may ye turne this furtherance to their hindrance, as you shall perceyue anon will you say. In the meane season, ye enter solemnly into your seconde parcell, to confirme this your straunge graunt, that might

otherwise séeme newes to your fréendes and to vs, saying:

And for my parte M. Horne, that you may not thinke I* 1.1336 haue now bene first so aduised vppon sight of your booke, I haue forced that argument with many examples of godly Emperours and Princes in my Dedicatorie Epistle to the Queenes Maiestie, before the translated historie of the ve∣nerable Bede.

It seemeth ye want good neighbours M. St. at Louaine,* 1.1337 that thus are driuen to set out your worthie volumes. But belike they take you, if ye haue saide as much there as ye haue done here, to be a false dissembler, pretending in clo∣ked wordes a furderance, and in déede minding none but rather an empayring of their estate: and so perhappes ye may go beyonde them all. And thinking •…•…eatly to defeate vs, suppose that your fréendes will like well of this dali∣ance, and that we poore soules can not see how trimme ye daunce naked in a nette. Yes M. Stapleton thankes be to God our eyes be not so dimme, but we may sée this disobe∣dience, yea all the worlde may see it. And i•…•… no man could espie it except it were declared, your selfe will open your falshood, ye can not kéepe your owne councell, but by and by bewray al your former graunt of making lawes and con∣stitutions and all the Princes furtherance therein, in con∣clusion to come to nothing, or as good as nothing, or rather worse, if worse may be, than nothing.

Briefly (say you) all •…•…. Augustines wordes force nothing* 1.1338 els but that Christian Princes may make lawes to punishe Heretikes, and ought to fortifie the Decrees of the Priestes with the execution of the secular power, when obstinate Heretikes will not otherwise obey. Lo Masters mine, may ye say, to your fellowes M. Stapleton, now ye neede not feare that I graunted ouer much to Princes, when I de∣nied not but that they might and ought to make lawes and constitutions for the furtherance of Christes religion, and

yet is nothing lost from our Popes religiō by this graunt, yea thus it serueth our turne very well say you. In deede M. Stapleton if ye can bring all your iolie mightie graunt to this: if ye can thus quickly •…•…hwite a post to a pudding∣pricke: I will say also with you, ye haue turned it so well, that ye haue made it serue your turne very well. And that so well, that God wote, of all these lawes▪ constitutions, and furtherance here is nothing left at al, the qualifying of your graunt hath taken it cleane away.

For, if I should replie, that though ye haue taken away the making of lawes and constitutions, for the setting forth of Christes religion, yet haue ye left to Princes, lawes for punishing Heretikes, if they see any Bishops or Priestes that be teachers of false doctrine, they may call them be∣fore them, they may examine them, and if they finde them suche, they may by their lawes depose them, or otherwise punishe them: Fye, no no, will you replie, ye are quite deceyued man, Gods for•…•…ode, that I shoulde haue graun∣ted Princes to make lawes, for punishing Heretikes on that fashion, then as good haue graunted all vnto them. Nay (will you say) ye should haue marked what follow∣ed, and how cunningly and warily I limited their making of lawes. I saide they ought to fortefie the decrees of the* 1.1339 Priestes. Which argueth that the Priestes, not the Prin∣ces, must make in very déede all the lawes of punishment. And (w•…•…te ye well) if they make them, they be no babes, they can tell on which side their bread is buttred, they will so make them, that they will kéepe them selues harmelesse, be ye sure.

But softe M. Stapleton, saide ye not the Prince muste make lawes▪ yes, but the Priestes must decree them, say you, & then a Go•…•…s name let the Prince make them, when the Priestes haue decreed them. In 〈◊〉〈◊〉 there ye went be∣yonde me an ace, M. Stapleton.

But go to, yet the Princes (ye say) ought to fortifie the

decree that is to say, they must establish and giue force by their royall authoritie, vnto that the Priestes haus decreed to be conuenient, and otherwise it is not of force. Nay, in any case (will you say) beware that, I meane not so, but thus I declare my meaning furder, they shall fortifie the Priestes decree, with the execution of the seculer power, that* 1.1340 is to say, by their riches, armies, swordes, and might, they shall put to death, or fight against, such as we Priests (that be the Churche, shall decree and appoint them, being seculer. Why M. Stapl. what is all this? this is nothing (in plain•…•… Englishe) but to make Princes your very butchers, tor∣mentours, and slaughtermen.

Nay (say you) they shall not do thus much neither, when they will, but if ye marke, I saide in the ende for fayling, when obstinate Heretikes will not otherwise obey, then wil we assigne Princes to hamper them. Nowe forsoth gra∣mercie horse, that ye can not, or will not do your selues, that ye thrust to Princes to be your drudges therein, are they not well holpen vp by this your liberall offer? they are much beholding to you for so large a charter. The texte of your graunt gaue much, but your glosse takes all away a∣gaine. But Maledicta glassa▪ (say I) qu•…•… corrumpit textum:* 1.1341 all be shrewd be that glosse, that corruptes the text, so long as ye limite your text with such a glose, ye may giue your graunt to what Princes ye shall, a faire catche they shall haue thereof. They ought (saith your graunt) to deale in Ecclesiasticall matters, and make lawes and constitutions for the furtherance of Christes religion. That is to wete (saith your glosse) to let the Priestes make all decrees, and they with their swordes, villes, bowes, and gunnes, to lay on, and strike, onely when the Priests bid them, and those one∣ly whome the Priestes appoint to be slaine. Now forsoth and forsoth M. St. this is a proper dealing of Princes in Ec∣clesiasticall causes, and a goodly kinde of making lawes and constitutions for the furtherance of Christes religion. Well

whatsoeuer it be, this is all they are like to haue of you, and yet will ye kéepe touche with them in your graunt to.

But thinke ye M. St. was this all that princes ought to do? and nothing else but to punish heretikes on this fashion? nothing else, say you, for that was in deede the very occasion why S. Aug. wrote all this. A •…•…a M. St. then I perceyue S.* 1.1342 Aug▪ wrote something more, than ye would perticulerly an∣swere vnto. Well say you, what soeuer he wrote, this was the very occasion whie he wrote it, to make lawes for puni∣shing Heretikes, and nothing else. How M. St? to make the Emperor that then was, none other dealer in their punish∣ment, than your Pope maketh the Emperour now? or than your Prelates made Q. Marie of late your executioner, and the Nobilitie your droyles, whome soeuer ye determine to prick, by your excōmunication & condemnation? what fooles were the Donatists then, to crie out vpon the Emperour?

This were like the furie of the angrie Dogge, that being bitte with a stone, wreaketh his anger vpon the stone, and not on him that hurled it. What fellon is offended with the executioner, or layeth his death to the beheaders charge, when the Prince commaundeth to behead him: but to the Prince? But in this case you are the Princes, that are the Priests, and the Prince is but, as it were the stone in your bande, is but the executioner of your sentence. Why should the Donatists then haue blamed the Prince, except the Prince then had beene, not the Priestes instrument, but euen the principall in making lawes of punishment for them? And so did Saint August. acknowledge the Prince. He decréed not lawes, for the Emperour to put in executi∣on, but desired the Emperour to reforms them, by suche sharpe lawes as séemed best to himselfe.

And although this were the verie occasion (as ye say) why* 1.1343 Saint Augustine wrote all this, Yea, though it were the one∣ly occasion to, of writing all that he wrote: what is that to this purpose? For whatsoeuer the occasion were, the oc∣casion

is not vrged, but the wordes that he wrote. A particuler occasion maye haue generall prooues. The oc∣casion of Saint Augustines wryting (ye saye) was the punishing of the Donatists. And yet woulde Saint Au∣gustine so haue written, thoughe they had béene other Heretikes. And it serueth agaynst all Heretykes. Whie? bycause hys prooues are generall, whatsoeuer were the occasion.

And yet his occasion was not onely aboute the puni∣shing of the Donatists, for the Donatists denyed more than hys authoritie in punishing them, they denyed hys authoritie to •…•…ette foorth the true Religion, and to ouersee that it bee in all estates duely preserued. This sayde they, was committed to Fishers, not to Souldiours, to Prophets, not to Kinges, as you nowe saye the lyke, it was com∣mitted to the Apostles and Priestes, not to Kings. This was another verie occasion also, and many other besydes might be, whie Saint Augustine wrote all this. But what is this (All this) that ye speake vppon? I pray ye tell vs at* 1.1344 least the summe of all this that saint Augustine wrote. And then shall we sée, if it be all none other, but lawes, of punish∣ment for Heretikes, that he layde and ment, or no. And whe∣ther you haue hitherto truly sayde and ment or no, all your falsehoode will then appeare.

Let vs here therefore resume some of those Testimonies of Saint Augustine. God dothe inspire (sayth he) into Kinges, that they shoulde procure, the commaundement of the Lorde to be performed or kept in their Kingdoms. Is this onely master Stapleton for punishing of Heretikes? Againe, In that hee is also a King, hee serueth in making lawes of conuenient force, for to commaunde iust things, and to forbidde the contrarie. Is this onely ment of lawes to punishe Heretikes? Againe, The Ensample of the King of Niniue that it apperteyned to the Kinges charge, that the Niniuites shoulde pacifie Gods wrath. Was

thys onely mente of making lawes, for punishing He∣retikes? What Heretikes were in Niniue? Heathen I∣dolaters there were store, but of Heretikes we read none. And who made the decree of their fasting and repentance? not the Prophete: he onely denounced the wrath and iu∣stice of God: nor highe Priest of Aarons order was there any among them, that the Scripture mencioneth. Idola∣trous Priestes no doubt they had more than ynowe, but the lawe of that Ecclesiasticall discipline, was not set out by them, but by the King.

Generally to conclude, Saint Augustine sayth: that* 1.1345 the auncient actes of the godly Kinges, mencioned in the Propheticall Bookes, were figures of the lyke factes to bee done by the godlye Princes, in the tyme of the newe Testament. Were nowe these theyr doynges and aun∣cient actes, nothing else but lawes and constitutions, for punishing Here•…•…ykes, and false teachers? Were all the constitutions and doyngs of Moyses, Iosue, Dauid, Sa∣lomon, Iosaphat, Ezechias, Iosias, and others, nothing else Master Stapleton, but this? O good GOD, that euer any that shoulde professe the studie of diuinitie, shoulde be founde so false and shamelesse, not onely thus to dallie with Princes, but also to delude the fathers and the Scrip∣tures, and all to enfringe and takeaway the Princes in∣terest and authoritie.

Nowe that ye haue thus in your first part brought the* 1.1346 matter about, giuing a graunt in wordes, and expounding the wordes, haue taken away the graunt againe: ye enter into your seconde part, to set a fresh on vs, as ye did in your former Chapter, & would make these testimonies of S. Aug. to serue against vs, which ye go about two maner of ways. First, hauing nowe abridged the princes authoritie to no∣thing else, but to make lawes to punish Heretikes, ye crie out vpon vs that we be the heretikes, and that they must punish vs▪ Secondly, ye woulde proue that we be the Heretikes,

to be punished, for denying euen this title to Princes of punishing Heretikes. And for the first part ye say:

But nowe that master Horne may not vtterly leese all his* 1.1347 labour herein, let vs see howe these matters do truely and trimly serue agaynst his deare brethren and master Foxes holy Martyrs.

Here is all made sure on euery side, euery way preuen∣ted,* 1.1348 least the poore •…•…elie Protestants shoulde escape your violence, by any starting hole. First, you your selues our enemies, will onely haue the making of the decrées and lawes, what shall be true religion, what shall be false. Se∣condly, the Prince shall haue nothing to doe in examining the matter betwéene vs, who haue in déede the true religi∣on, who haue the false: but they must beléeue before hand, that that which you shall say against vs, is al and only true, and all that we replie is starke false. Thirdly, the Prince must not condemne vs, but you our enemies and accusers, must sit vppon vs and condemne vs. Fourthly, the Prince must, as you bid him, put vs to death, and for more assu∣raunce to catche vs, ye giue him this libertie, that he may make any lawe to attache vs, to emprison vs, to heade, hang, or burne vs. Prouided alway, that this lawe be no∣thing else but for punishment, and that of those that you ap∣point, and will crie ou•…•… vpon for heretikes, and to deale no further. Here is all things made sure against the poore pro∣testantes. Who séeth not, that euen as shéepe appointed to the slaughter, they must néedes die, if you but please to bid the prince to kill them, they must néedes be heretikes, if once you call them so And now that ye haue brought your matters to this passe, let vs sée how ye cry out against vs.* 1.1349

VVe say with S. Aug. (say you) that princes may punish wicked deprauers of religion. And we further saye that you are those.

O maister St. that ye woulde stande to your word & say as S. Aug▪ did. But it may be, ye will say it with S. August.

but will ye also meane it with S. Augustine, for there is litle trust to your saying without your meaning. Ensample right now, of your last graunt, wherein you spared not to belie S. Aug. if ye meane with S. Aug. plainly, that Princes may punish wicked deprauers of religion, as did the Empe∣rour* 1.1350 in S. Augustines time: there is then yet good hope of equitie, & that you shall not be your owne Iudges, and our condemners to. But the Prince shall appoint delegates vp∣rightly betwéene vs both, yea the matter maye come to be hearde and discussed before the prince himselfe, and to bée iudged of him, who are in the right, who are in the wrong: for thus did the Emperour in S. Augustines time, and S. Augustine lyked well of it, but of all things you cannot a∣bide this, and yet ye boast for fashion sa•…•…, that ye saye with S. August. Princes may punishe w•…•…, deprauers of religion. But ye adde withall at the harde héeles thereof, And we further saye that you are those. Whereby ye signi∣fie howe farre ye will allowe their punishing. And that the prince and all must be ruled by your bare saying, for ye al∣leage no reason or argument to preue it, but onely auouch it, saying:

And wee further saye that you are those. As though your bare so saying, were full proofe of the matter, and rea∣son good inough, to cause the prince to punish vs.

But if the Prince take that ye haue graunted hym, to punishe the wicked deprauers of religion, as Saint Au∣gustine sayeth he ought, and the Emperour then did: then so fast as you shall saye that wee are those, we will also, not saye onelye, but prooue, that you are those. And a righ∣teous Prince will punishe as he séeth prooues, and not as he heareth onely sayings. Nowe therfore if ye will say with S. Augustine thus, tell on your tale hardilye, and we feare not your malice.

VVe say with Saint Augustine (say you) that Christian* 1.1351 Princes maye make a decree, ye à of death, as did Nabucho∣donozor

against the blasphemers of God, and carefully pro∣uide that God and his Sacraments be not lightly contemned.

This is well sayde of you master Stapleton, and euen the same with tongue and heart say we, and haue proued it alreadie with many ensamples. But you say it from the teeth outwarde, howe chaunce else that ye sayde not thus much before? Yea howe chaunce ye sayde that Saint Au∣gustine* 1.1352 ment no more but of their lawes for punishing He∣retikes? Here are lawes for blasphemers also. And though euery Heretike be a blasphemer, yet is not euery blasphe∣mer an Heretike. And ye knowe Nabuchodonozors lawe was not of Heretikes, but of Heathen blasphemers. And yet besides the l•…•…. of their punishing, howe chaunce ye forgot also this part of their authoritie, carefully to prouide* 1.1353 that God and ic•…•… Sacraments be not lightly contemned? Is all this carefull prouiding, nothing else but punishing He∣retykes? yes master Stapleton it importeth muche more, and euen as muche as we ascribe to Princes, and as the Quéenes Maiestie taketh on hir. And nowe that yee haue once againe graunted thus muche to Princes: spare not a Gods name to charge vs with the worst ye can, onelye stande you to your tackling, as we wyll stande to ours.

VVe say (say you) you are as great blasphemers as euer the* 1.1354 Church of Christ had.

How proue ye that M. Stap. say we? why say you, we* 1.1355 say so, and that is proufe good ynough for vs. In déede it is proufe good ynough for you, yea the best proufe that ye haue. For bad ye any better I knowe ye woulde not spare to lay it in our dishe. But remember master Stapleton, that yee haue giuen the Prince that authoritie of punishing blas∣phemers, that Saint Augustine gaue to the Emperour in his time. That is to wete, not to punish he wottes not what, but by his authoritie eyther to appoynt Delegates, or him∣selfe to sit and here the tryall, and iudge who are the blas∣phemers,

and who are not. So that nowe your saying we be, will not serue yuo in stéed, vnlesse ye proue your saying. Else might we put it to a double post, and say passe to you, you are greater blasphemers, yea the greatest blasphemers, that euer the Churche of Christ had. And to proue it not onely on you, but euen of your head also, your holy father the Pope: whose blessed lippes can they blaspheme trow you? I praye ye remember who sayde, he woulde eate Porke & despetto de d•…•…o, euen in dispite of GOD. But let this blasphemous Porkeling go, and say you on master Stapleton.

VVe say (say you) you be they that haue contemned* 1.1356 Christes sacraments, making of seuen two, and vsing those two after such a sort, that the olde prouerbe may (the more is the pittie) in a maner take place, as good neuer a whitte as neuer the better.

Here is still nothing but we say, to aunswere therefore we say, with we say: we say agayne, that you are those So∣phisters that by the arte of multiplication, whereof ye* 1.1357 spake in your Preface, haue learned muche more com∣ning than had the scholler of Oxeforde that woulde make thrée egges of two, you will make seuen of two, and com∣ming out with your fiue egges (as the Preuerbe also sayth) euery one of them are rotten: making of two Sacraments seuen. But fiue of them are of your owne hatching, Cocks, egges without yolkes, no sacraments at all. And two of them, the one, baptisme fowly prophaned, the other hur∣led quite away, and an Idoll (euen by your owne defini∣tion of an Idoll) put in place. This lay we to your charge, proue vs lyers and ye can. And to that ye say we contemne Christs Sacraments, we briefly say againe ye say vntruth, except ye can proue we do so.

VVe say further (say you) that not onely the generall* 1.1358 Councell of Trent, but that the whole Churche hath con∣demned your opinions, by generall and nationall Councels

many hundreth yeares since.

VVe say further also, that as your Councell of Trent, so did the Priests, the Lawyers, Scribes, and Pharises, assemble togither & held a councell against Christ in his absence, and* 1.1359 Caiphas gaue iudgement on him, that one man (meaning Christ) should die for the people. And so hath your Trident Councell in their absence condemned Christ in his mem∣bers. The residue of your saying is but your lying vaunt of the whole Church, where in deede ye meane but the po∣pish Church▪ ye crake of many hundred yeares, but ye tel not howe many they be, nor what is condemned, nor by whō, nor where, nor when, nor what Councell generall nor pro∣uinciall,* 1.1360 but carie away the matter in generalities. But we say to you againe in generall speach, that not onely Gene∣rall and Nationall Councels haue condemned many of your doctrines many hundreth yeares since: but euen Christ him selfe and his Apostles, yea some of your owne Popes, yea* 1.1361 some of your owne selues, habentes cauterizatam conscien∣tiam, hauing their consciences marked with a hote iron haue condemned them. And all this, partly hath bene alredy suf∣ficiently, and partly shall be further prooued in particulars, as we descende thereto. And if we go no further than the present matter and issue in hande, concerning the Princes authoritie: yea, euen with your owne mouth, or euer we haue done, ye shall yet more than once againe condemne this your owne saying, that the Princes gouernement in ecclesiasticall matters stretcheth no further, than to make lawes and constitutions to punishe heretikes.

Nowe, when ye haue thus with bare sayings, charged vs to be heretikes, ye woulde charme the Prince also in putting him in remembrance, that his dutie stretcheth not now, to stande in examining all this that ye lay to vs, nor to iudge therevpon, whether it be true or false, but on the credit of your bare honesties and words, to make forthwith some sharpe lawes of attaching, hanging, sacking, drow∣ning,

or burning vs, for condemned Heretikes, bicause you haue so called 〈◊〉〈◊〉 To this purpose therefore say you:

And that Christian Emperours, christian Princes, as well* 1.1362 in other countries as in Englande, especially the noble and worthie king Henry the fifte, haue made sharpe lawes, yea of death against Heresies. VVe do not nor neuer did disalowe these their doyngs, as repugnant either to the olde or newe Testament. VVhy then call you for this respect the Catho∣likes, popishe Donatistes?

The Bishop s•…•… called them M. St. not with Bare say∣ings* 1.1363 as you haue here called vs, deprauers, blasphemers, and condemned Heretikes. But the •…•…. hath so proued his say∣ings, that, as ye haue hearde, all your improuinges were to no purpose, but to bring M. Feckenham more in the mire, and to proue him a greater Donatiste and your selfe also in his defence.

Ye say ye do not, nor neuer did disalowe, as repugnant to the old or new Testament, Christian Emperours and Princes doings, nor king Henry the fifte his sharpe lawes, yea of death against herefies.

If ye do not so disalowe them as repugnant, then be they conformable. But how chance then your selfe excusing M. Feckenham, saide he omitted them bicause they made a∣gainst him? if they make against him, they are repugnant to him. And if you disalowe them not as repugnant, then are you repugnant to him, and to your owne excuse for him.* 1.1364 Yea, what repugnancie your wordes present do implie, or what doubtfull vnderstanding ye meane, in saying, we do not, nor neuer did, I leaue to your owne expounding, whether ye meane ye did neuer, or euer, or sometimes disalowe them: and in adding, as repugnant, whether ye meane ye disalow them in other senses or 〈◊〉〈◊〉. But inter∣prete your owne sayinges as ye lust, if ye say to conster them to the beste, ye disalowe them not as repugnant, that is, ye allow them as agréeable in those doings of Princes

in the olde Testament▪ then, as King salomon dis∣placed Abiathar the high Priest, so may the Emperour dis∣place the Pope, and other Princes their Bishops, when they be vnworthie of their roumes and offices.

But, besides the punishing of false teachers and Here∣tikes by their lawes, that ye allowe in the Princes of the old Testament, for Princes vnder the newe Testament to do the like, did they nothing els? made they no other lawes and constitutions ecclesiasticall? or do ye allow them onely for their lawes in punishments, and disalow them for all other* 1.1365 lawes and constitutions that they made? Well, what soeuer you allow or disallow, God allowed them and liked well of them. And therefore to all Christian Princes, they ought to be paternes to do the like, not on•…•…ly in zeale of punishment of heretikes, & abolishing Herefi•…•…, superstitiōs, Idolatries, and all errours: but also in setting forth the true and sincere religion of Christes gospell, and ouerséeing that the Pre∣lates and Pastours, the Nobilitie, the Magistrates, the peo∣ple and all subiects what soeuer, do euery one their dutie, in receyuing and aduauncing the same. But this ye vtterly disalowe in Princes, if they go one inche furder, than lawes of punishment of those, whom ye giue vp to them to punish, and the defence of your persons and goodes, making Prin∣ces either your waighting garde, or els your slaughtermen: and there is al, say you, that in these matters Princes haue to deale. And for this respect, we not onely call you, but proue you popish Donatistes.

Nowe that by crying out vppon vs, you thinke ye haue fully cléered your selfe, ye enter into your other point, to burden vs with this crime of the Donatistes, euen to denie that little which you graunt vnto Princes. Which surely were a cunning poin•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉 do, to proue that we denie with* 1.1366 the Donatistes, that which we affirme against the Dona∣tistes and you too. First, we affirme that it appertayneth to the Princes supreme authoritie next vnder God, by the

aduise of their godly and learned estates, to make lawes* 1.1367 and constitutions, to punish Heretikes, •…•…ismatikes, erro∣nious teachers, and to abolishe all their false doctrines. And also to make lawes and constitutions for the setting forth of all true doctrine, and to appointe godly learned set∣ters out thereof. This say we before hande: if now you can make vs beléeue we holde the cōtrary to this, that were worth the séeing.

But will ye know M. Horne (say you) who be in this point* 1.1368 in very deede the doltish diuelish Donatistes? hearken on well, and ye shall heare.

On to M. Stapleton hitherto we heare nothing but your blacke Rhetorike not worthe the hearing, which remitting to your common place thereon, tell on your tale and we will hearken.* 1.1369

The Donatistes as S. Augustine reporteth saide it was free to beleeue or not to beleeue, and that faithe should not be forced. VVas not this I pray you the common song among the Lutherans in Germanie and Englande at their begin∣ning? was not this your Apostles Luthers opinion, that no man should be compelled to the faith? and as there are many dissentions, diuisions, Scismes, betwixte you the Sa∣cramentaries, and the Lutherans: so are you deuided also in this point. For your Master Caluine writeth that a mā may lawfully and by Gods lawe be put to death for heresie, as he practised him selfe also, burning Se•…•…etus the Arian at Geneua.

Sée how your selfe beyng blinded with pure enuie M.* 1.1370 Stapleton, while ye studie with all bitternesse of termes to deface vs to the simple, to all wise mē ye cléere acquite vs of the crime ye obiect against vs. Ye say we are Sacramen∣taries and that Caluine is our Maister. Ye say furder, that our Maister Caluine writeth, that a man may lawfully and by Gods lawe be put to death for Heresie.

I aske ye here, if this were the opinion of the Dona∣tistes? if they then saide the contrarie to vs, and we to them, then haue your selfe discharged vs of this crime, that euen contrarie to your conscience and wittingly, ye sclaunder vs with. Which is so euident a matter, that euery man here∣after may iustly take you for a common lying sclaunde∣rer. Do not your selfe also complaine in many places e∣uen of this counterblast, that we would haue the Prince execute more seueritie towardes you, and that we séeke your bloud, and such other thinges? wherein, although in that matter ye sclaunder vs, yet euen your sclaundering purgeth vs in this matter. And do ye not say here present, we are deuided in this pointe? and so againe ye cléere vs of this crime.

But (say you) all Luthers schollers in Germanie are not* 1.1371 so forewarde.

I know not all Luthers schollers, for my parte, M. Stapleton▪ and I ghesse you know them not all, neither. But suppose, (as ye say) all be not so forwarde: yet if they be forwarde, they are againe discharged of this your lying crime.

Yet say you, this was Luthers opinion, and their common song in the beginning.

If slaundering were not your common song M. Sta∣pleton ye would neuer sing thus purposely out of tune. It is well knowne the reuerence and obedience that Luther teacheth subiects to yeld to their Princes euen to the death. But wilfully ye peruert and wrest his wordes: he spake* 1.1372 not of fayth simply, among professed Christians: but of some doubtes of faith. He saide, they should not be onely forced without outwarde violence, but rather with persua∣sion and argumentes if it might be: if not, then the Magi∣strate might lawfully punishe the obstinate, for his er∣rour or Heresie. So he declared of Muncer and other Here∣tikes

(séeing their peruersenesse) that the Magistrate might lawfully punish him and his adherents, yea that he ought so to do, and thereto he vehemently excited them. This was Luthers opinion, and what fault finde you therewith. In déede agaynst those that are Infidels, Turkes, Iewes, Heathen, or any any other not professed Christians, he sayd Christians ought not (béeing not prouoked by them) to set on their realmes, and prouoke them, onely of purpose, by force of armes, to make them become Christians. And in this behalfe, he spake muche agaynst the foule abuses of* 1.1373 the Pope, in his Croyses and practises aboute the Tur∣kish warres. But what is this to this purpose in hande? yea what is all this, either of Luther or Caluine (if there were suche diuision in this poynte betweene them, as you, like a makebate, would set, where none is) to the matter in question.

The question is, whether the Prince may punishe here∣tikes,* 1.1374 and that by death. Which bothe Luther and Caluine graunt ye may. But the Donatistes denied this, bicause (they beeing apparant heretikes) perceiued it made against them, you shoulde likewise haue proued, that Luther and Caluine, and that we were heretikes, or else it toucheth vs not at all. For, would ye haue the Prince put to death the faythful Christian? Luther & Caluine might wel (ye know) and ought to speake agaynst that. They sawe the violent practises of you Papistes, in murthering and deuouring the poore shéepe of Christ, and can ye wite them if they cō∣playned therof?

Ye shoulde haue first proued vs to be the heretikes. But* 1.1375 you will say, that I haue done already. Ye haue done so in deede, M. St. after the Popish maner, that is to say, ye haue called vs heretikes, and starke heretikes, and condemned he∣retikes ofte inoughe, and if that will do it. And ye haue tolde euen right now, that ye say, we be heretikes, & al to nought, with we say, and we say, on the head of it. These sayings we

haue hearde, as ye bad vs harken, but we haue hearde ne∣uer* 1.1376 a proofe. Nowe what muste the Prince héere do? 〈◊〉〈◊〉 he not examine and searche out bothe our proofes: and pu∣nish, not the faythfull be léeuer, but whome he findeth to be the heretike? And thus, if ye wil néedes haue death the pu∣nishment, in Gods name euen death be it. But then M. St. I thinke ye will not be halfe so hastie: no, ye had rather (I dare say) kéepe ye still at Louayne.

Héere entreth M. St. agayne into an inuectiue agaynst* 1.1377 M. Foxes booke. For that booke, and the bishop of Saris∣buries, are his chiefest eyesores, so that I blame him the lesse, that he startleth so often at them: as all his compani∣ons* 1.1378 and masters do besides. For, the one for their practi∣ses, and the other for their errours, haue almost marde all their estimation with their friends. But his by matters I will not answere, only to the question now in argument.

Yea (sayth he) some of your holy martyres auouche, that* 1.1379 the King can make no lawe to punishe any maner of crime by death, and that al suche lawes are contrarie to the Gospel. This was the opinion of sir Thomas Hitton priest.

Where finde ye this master Stapleton? this is (you* 1.1380 will saye) an article layde vnto him that he defended. Yea, but are you sure, master Stapleton, that he in déede de∣fended this, as it is héere set out: and that it is not rather altogither deuised for malice, or peruerted & misconstrued, as many other haue béene? the false witnesses wrested the sayings of Christ, that he should denie tribute to Cesar, that* 1.1381 he went about to destroy the temple, &c. Yea, the title let on his crosse (if the Priestes might haue had their will) should not haue béene writtē as it was. The like wresting of his sayings vsed the Iewes with S. Steuen. And in the primitiue Churche, were many articles obiected to the poore Martyres, of refusing obedience to magistrates, of licencious lyfe, of vnnaturall commixtures, of mur∣dring and eating children. And euen suche malicious mis∣construed

articles, the Papistes deuise on the Protestants:* 1.1382 that in the meane while are gagged, nor suffred once to speake and declare their innocencie. But blessed are you (sayth Christ) when men reuile you, and speake all euill on you for my name sake.

But you say, this is no slaunder, it is of master Foxes owne setting foorth.

I graunt, M. St. he is the chronicler, & setteth downe that he findeth. Doth that argue that he acknowlegeth for true, euery such article as he setteth downe? nay, he maketh of∣ten exception to the contrarie, that many of suche articles are falsly obiected, which neuerthelesse he setteth downe.

Yea, but there is moe thinges layde vnto him than this.

By whome, M. Stap? Forsoothe euen by sir Thomas More. A trustie witnesse on your owne side. But go to, be it, he sayde euen so. Yet is this iniustly done of you master Stapleton, to charge all Protestantes with his opinion in* 1.1383 this poynt, when they manyfestly mainteine the contra∣rye. We deale not so, with you, we burden not your whole Churche (where ye openly defende the contrarie) with the seuerall iudgement of euery writer: much lesse of euery obscure author, and suche an one, as of whome we haue nothing but heresay: and that such heresay, as his ad∣uersaries loue to reporte, and wrest, to make it odious to the hearer: this is not vpright dealing.

But yet for al this, ye can not héere vpon fasten that whi∣che so fayne ye would, that therfore he is a Donatist. The Donatistes denied to Princes the punishment of heretikes, and would haue beleefe free, This man denieth neither of* 1.1384 these. First, his quarel was not of faith alone, but as ye tell it, for any maner of crime to be punished by death, and yet it followes no more hereon, that he woulde haue faith free, to beléeue what eche man woulde: then he woulde haue it▪ frée for any manner of cryme, to doe what eche man woulde. Secondly, thoughe he denie

the punishment by death, yet he denieth not, but there•…•…▪ graunteth, that Princes might make lawes of other kind; of punishement, which if he graunt them, your selfe cleare him of béeing a Donatist.

But leauing him ye tell vs of greater businesse concer∣ning* 1.1385 sir Iohn Oldecastle, whō ye rattle vp with a susurra∣uit, calling him traytor and detestable Donatist.

And nowe (say you) all the weight resteth to proue this substantially to you, and to master Foxe. And to stoppe all your froward quarellings, and accustomable elusions against our proofes. VVell, I will bring you (as I thinke) a substan∣tiall and ineuitable proofe, that is master Foxe him selfe, and no worsse man.

Héere is a lustie crake M. Stap. to bumbaste the matter withall, out of doubt we shall héere haue some great foyle. But let vs sée what all this haynous matter is. Forsoothe M. Foxe setteth downe the articles, that the Papistes haue composed to be sir Iohn Oldecastles articles, the tenth article whereof is this.

That manslaughter, either by warre, or by any pretended* 1.1386 lawe of iustice, or for any temporall cause or spirituall reue∣lation, is expressely contrary to the new Testament, which is the lawe of grace and mercie.

Why, M. Stap. is this your substantiall and ineuitable proofe, that is, master Foxe him selfe, and no worsse man? this is none of master Foxes saying nor opinion, he dothe but write▪ playne and plat what soeuer articles it pleased his enimies your auncestors to deuise, in the name of Sir Iohn Oldecastles articles.* 1.1387

Lo thus he writeth (say you) of this worthy Champion, and that euen in his owne huge martyrologe, who doubteth but to the great exalting and amplification of this noble worke and of his noble holy martyr.

The worthy prayse of this noble worke in déede, and of this noble and holy martyr, are no whit blemished by these

your sco•…•… & raylings, M. St. but what kinde of argument* 1.1388 call ye this? he reciteth this article among the rest, and therfore out of doubt he alloweth it, and sets it out to hys great exalting and amplification. By this argument your selfe allowe the article too, for ye haue héere also recited it.* 1.1389 But what would ye haue sayde if he had subtracted it? and the one of the twayne he must haue done, either haue left it out, or set it out as he founde it.

But howe chaunce you lefte out that, whiche in many places of his worke M. Foxe noteth, of the Papists corrup∣ting of those martyrs articles: & yet (which is in déede to his great exalting and amplification) he setteth them downe, euen as he founde them. For, the thing, to any indifferent reader, will easily shewe it selfe.

But yet goe to once agayne. Were this article his or not* 1.1390 his, it proues not him a Donatist. First, the Donatistes allowed manslaughter, thoughe vnlawfully done, as your selfe haue proued before of the Circumcelions. But héere ye graunte that he vtterly disalloweth all manslaughter, and so ye cleare him héerein of béeing a Donatist. Agayne the Donatistes vtterly reiected (as your selfe say) all the Princes authoritie, and all punishement in false religion. Contrarywise Sir Iohn Oldecastle allowed their autho∣ritie, yea ouer the Pope and his Prelates, to punishe them for their false religion. And thoughe he disallowed man∣slaughter, yet can ye not gather, that he allowed no punish∣ment for false religion. Onlesse (as ye shewed in the dayes of your late crueltie) there be no punishement with you but manslaughter. Whereby we maye more iustely gather that he acknowledged their authoritie, in willing Princes to punishe, thoughe not by deathe: than you can any way gather héereon, that he vtterly denied all kinde of punishement.

And if ye would deface his martyrdome for this, or coūt* 1.1391 it Donatisticall, of the same minde was euen sir Thomas

More him selfe your owne mery martyr (whome ye cited to witnesse a fewe lynes before) as appeareth in his Vto∣pia, although more couertly, yet he quite disaloweth man∣slaughter, and deuiseth other punishments in stead thereof. Is he therefore a Donatiste? And I pray you, what was all the auncient order in banishing heretikes, was it death? or were they Donatistes then, bicause they allowed not punishment by death? So was S. Augustine a Donatiste also, whome ye cite agaynst the Donatistes. For it was long or euer he came to this opinion, that the Donatistes might be slayne, and vpon what considerations, I wil shew you out of that learned clarke Erasmus, who for this mat∣ter also, had great conflict with your Sorbonistes.

I denie (saythe he) that euer I readde that Byshoppes* 1.1392 sholude haue stirred vp Kinges to kyll Heretikes. For, this is not to warne Princes in generall, but to appoynte oute vnto them a kynde of punishement. But I speake in my reprehension, not of these tymes, but of Sainct Augustine, and the Byshoppes of his age. For, nowe certayne Abbotes* 1.1393 and Byshoppes thinke it a moste acceptable sacrifice to God, if they may kyll a great many with their owne sworde, and their owne hande. And to confesse the truthe, in that they tell howe Sainct Augustine was first of that opinion, that he denied the Emperoures power to be called vpon, but when he sawe the heresie succeeded, he changed his mynde: euen so is it as true that I wrote. But then had they to do* 1.1394 with Donatistes, that were more than heretikes, who moste pernitiously raysed vp a schisme of the whole Churche, and had Circumcelions, bothe a madde and fierce kinde of men, whiche murthered with swordes, maymed with Sythes, and* 1.1395 with Lyme mingled with Vinegar put oute the eyes of the true beleeuers. And what coulde the Emperour do, but chastise suche, that deserued any punishement whatsoeuer, although they had helde no hereticall errour besides? and yet notwithanding euen agaynst these, the punishement of death was so little defired, that euen S. Augustine did with∣stande

the Shiriffe, when he sent out a sharper edict, fearing that he should kill any. And so broughte to passe, that a* 1.1396 more milde edicte was set foorth. For as then, all the Empe∣rours punishment consisted in a forfeit of money, in taking away their goods frō the Donatistes churches, & giuing thē to the churches of the true beleuers. And if the bishops could* 1.1397 not be corrected by any remedie, they were banished, but of killing there was no mention at al. And therfore against Pe∣lagius, there was neuer any motion of crauing the Emperors aide, bicause he did not on this sort trouble the trāquilitie of the cōmon weale, yea and that is more (by the entreatie of the Bishop) they which had payed their forfeiture, had their mo∣ney giuen thē agayne: and their bishops reteyned their dig∣nitie still in their Churches, if they would change their opi∣niōs So great was the lenitie of those daies towards heretikes, and that such heretikes to. There are many kindes of puni∣shing, besides the punishment of death. Very farre in deede are they from this lenitie, which now a dayes for euery word* 1.1398 that either is strange to them, or not vnderstoode, they crie foorthwith, to the fyre, to the fyre. Heere therefore betweene these deuines and me thereis no dissention but this, that they considering what a great plague of religion it is, that the* 1.1399 church should be deuided into such factiōs, seeme more en∣clined to slaughter. On the other side I am more slow, consi∣dering wherto the parable of the Lord, wherto the most ho∣ly mens interpretations, wherto the lenitie and mildnesse of the ancient Bishops, and of the Emperours, against heretikes calleth vs: then also thinking on this, howe nowe and then mens affections mingle them selues in this businesse, and how often suche remedies fall out otherwise: last of all that sometymes the truthe is doubtfull, and nowe and then it hapneth that he is in errour himselfe, that layeth the heresie to an others charge many times neither partie vnderstādeth other, and they agree in matter whyle they iarre in wordes. neither dothe S. Hierome speake rashely in the dialogue a∣gaynst

the Luciferians (vnder the person of the true belee∣uer)* 1.1400 after this maner: no body (saythe he) can take vpon him Christes victorie, no body can iudge of men before the daye of iudgement: if the Churche be nowe clensed, whye reserue we the clensing to the Lorde? there is a waye that to men seemeth righte, but the endes of it leade euen to the bottome of hell. In this errour of iudgement, what certayne sentence can there be? &c. VVhat Hierome ment by these wordes, is cleare to the learned. Truely they haue hitherto so moued me, that I am of opinion, that we oughte not to come to the laste remedie, before all meanes be tryed. Least perchaunce (either through a corrupt iudgement) the inno∣cent, or at the least he that might be recouered, do perish: or else euen that which is right be condemned for euer.

Thus muche and a great deale more writeth Erasmus on this matter. But by this, first we sée Erasmus iudge∣ment, and yet is he not counted a Donatiste. Secondly, he so describeth the Donatistes, that these two witnesses of Iesu Christe (which moste paciently tooke their death, nor inuaded any others lyfe) be fully cleared of this cri•…•… Thirdly, he so setteth the Donatistes out, that beyonde all the former comparisons, the Papistes of all other rome* 1.1401 néerest them, in cruell bloudsucking, in prouoking, and setting vpon other that prouoks them not, in farre more cruell tormentes than of swordes, sythes, lime, and vinegar, yea, they haue lefte no vnnaturall cruelties, nor mischie∣uous trecheries vndeuised and vnpractised. Fourthly, he sheweth (agaynst this popishe tyrannie) euen where they will not suffer the examination of the truthe, howe contra∣rie it is to the fathers and auncient Byshops, whome they crake to succéede. Fifthly, where you M. Stap. falsely cite S. Augustine agaynst vs, Erasmus truely •…•…iteth him a∣gaynst you, shewing what clemencie the Emperours vsed euen to manyfest heretikes, and what crueltie you practise agaynst the true beléeuers.

In times past (saith Erasmus) the Ecclesiasticall mildnesse* 1.1402 did mitigate the seueritie of Princes. And now the crueltie of certaine Monkes, except it were mitigated by the mildnesse of Princes, would burst out into more than the Scithians vn∣mercifull rage.

Thus we séethese two that ye •…•…ayte at, are not alone, they shall haue good companie, if they be Donatistes, for dis∣allowing manslaughter. But now, what if these twoo reie∣cted it not at all, but onely shewed the exact difference be∣twéene the old lawe, or man•…•… politike lawes, and the Go∣spell.* 1.1403 Will you denie that the Gospell (that is to say the glad tidings of reconciliation, forgiuenesse, and saluation wrought by Iesus Christ) is the lawe of grace and full of mercie? I thinke M. St. ye will not denie this, for shame.* 1.1404 Then should ye consider, that the Gospell (in it selfe) killeth not, but laboureth to sa•…•…e, it sendeth killing to the lawe: the exercise, threates, and external punishment whereof, is not altogither taken away by the Gospell, but is forcible to the transgressours. Nor the Gospell taketh away ciuill or po∣lytike lawes from Princes, nor the sworde to execute them on the euil doers. And yet is there a manifest distinction be∣ti•…•…éene the one and the other, and so are euen your Sorbo∣nists driuen to yéeld to Erasmus: Quamuis Euangelium, &c. Although the Gospell do not expresly and plainly shew, that Heretikes should be burned: yet the lawes ciuill (which are conformed to the law naturall) which the Gospell doth not abrogate, do decree that they should be put to death and burned. So that neither be such lawes comprehended in the Gospell, nor otherwise allowed than indirectly, that is to say, for the importunitie of the wicked. And in this sense their wordes are not amisse.

But what sense soeuer ye make of their wordes, ye can not proue them Donatists. And yet if thus much also were graunted you, doth this either charge vs that we be Dona∣tists, not allowing them therein, if they had any such opi∣nion▪

or doth it cléere you? Nay, it once againe proueth you* 1.1405 more Donatists. For in very déede the Denatistes refu∣sed not simplie, that the Prince should punish heretikes, no nor by death neither, if he would haue held with them, and at their bare instigations haue punished the true beleuers by death: they would haue then allowed it, & set him more on, yea, haue layed to their owne hands, and haue thought they had done God good seruice too, so that he would haue maintayned them. And do not you euen so? what els ma∣keth ye crie vpon y^e Princes beyond the seas, with all kinde of torments to destroy the Protestants? If Princes would aduise them selues or euer they beléeued you so lightly, and would not destroy their subiects, till they had sit in iudgm•…•…t & heard & discussed both parties causes throughly: ye would not be halfe so hastie. Ye would then crie to the contrarie, that you must only be iudges, they must onely beleue you, & strike onely them whom you shall bidde them strike. Con∣trarywise, where the Princes (espying your falshood) for∣sake your errours, and sette out euen very milde lawes a∣gainst you: then ye change your coppie, and crie out, euery thing is extreme crueltie, ye are too too sore handled and op∣pressed, then ye extoll beyonde the moone, lenitie and suffe∣rance, and winche like a gald horse at the least thing that toucheth you. And thus euery way do you still shew your selues, to be the very Donatistes. Now that ye haue, as you conceyue with your selfe, giuen vs so great a foyle: ye enter into your thirde parte saying.

VVe may now proceede to the remnant of your booke, sa∣uing* 1.1406 that this in no wise must be ouerhipped, that euen by your owne wordes here ye purge M. Feckenham, from this crime ye laide vnto him euen now, for refusing the proufe•…•… taken out of the old Testament.

Now for God (M. St.) since hitherto ye haue cléered him so sclenderly, that ye haue more bewrapped him, and your selfe also in this crime, let nothing in any case be forgotten,

or ouerhipped, that any wayes may helpe the matter for∣warde for hitherto it rather hath gone backward, but now there is good hope, M. Feckenham shall take a good purga∣tion, euen of the Bishops owne making, that you M. Stap. will minister to him which wil so worke vpon him, & make him haue so good a stoole, that he shalbe clerely purged of this crime of Donatistes. •…•…o to then M. Stapl, and let vs sée how apothecarylike you can minister the same.

For if as ye say (say you) the order & gouernment* 1.1407 that Christ left behind in the Gospell & new Te∣stament, is the order, rule & gouernment in eccle∣siastical causes, practised by the Kings of the old Testament, then will it follow that M. Feckenham yel∣ding to the gouernment of the new, doth not exclude but •…•…a∣ther comprehende the gouernment of the old Testament al∣so, both being especially, as ye say, all one.

Is this the purgation M. St. that ye will minister to M. Feckenham, would to God ye could make him receyue an•…•… brooke this sentence, & if you would take it also, I warrent ye it would so purge you of your old leuen & sowre dough, that ye should no more be Donatists nor Papistes neither if ye receyue and well digest this little sentence. The order and gouernment that Christ left behinde in the new Testa∣ment is the order rule and gouernment in Ecclesiasticall cau∣ses practised by the kinges of the old Testament: For then* 1.1408 giue ye Princes that, that ye haue all this while denied thē. But do ye thinke M. Feckenham will wittingly and wil∣lingly receiue this sentence, & that which in déede followeth necessarily thereon? The sentence is true, but M. Feck. for all that may be a lier and you another. For I warrant you M. Feck. granteth this no •…•…urder, than (as the Donatists) he may temper it to make it seeme to serue his turne.

Why? say you, if he grant the on•…•…, he doth not exclude but rather comprehende the other.

Nay M. St. M. Feck cōprehēdes it not, but shoonnes it, as

agaynst him by your owne confession. But the olde, being comprehended by the newe, Master Feckenham is contra∣rie wise, by force of argument, graunting the newe enfor∣ced by the olde. Not that he comprehendeth it, but is com∣prehended of it, and driuen to yeelde thereto of his aduersa∣rie, by conclusion of reasoning, the one including the other. But rather than he will do this voluntarily, he will rather exclude them both, the olde and the newe testament also, and as he hath done, burne them both togither.

The. 20. Diuision.

THe Bishop in this diuision, first, gathereth his full con∣clusion* 1.1409 of all these testimonies into this argument:

What gouernment, order, and dutifulnesse so euer belonging to any, God hath prefigured and promised before hande, by his Prophetes in the holy scriptures of the olde Testament, to be per∣formed by Christ, & those of his Kingdom: that is the gouernment, order and dutifulnesse, set forth and required in the Gospell or new testament.

But that faythfull Emperours, Kinges, and Rulers, ought of dutie, as belonging to their office, to claime and take vpon them the gouern∣ment, authoritie, power, care, and seruice of God the Lorde in matters of Religion, or causes Ec∣clesiasticall, was an order and dutifulnesse for them, prefigured and forepromised of God by his Prophetes, in the Scriptures of the olde Testament, as Saint Augustine hath sufficient∣ly witnessed: Ergo:

Christian Emperors, Kings, and Rulers, owe

of dutie as belonging to their office, to clayme and take vpon them the gouernment, authoritie, power, care, and seruice of God their Lorde, in matters of Religion or spirituall & ecclesiasticall causes: is the gouernment, order and dutifulnesse setforth and required in the Gospell or new Te∣stament.

The Bishop hauing thusfully concluded these Testimo∣nies, he yet confirmeth them further with more authori∣ties of the Prophete Esay, with Lyra his exposition there∣vpon, and the example of Constantine for proufe of the same.

At this master Stapleton, first carpeth by certaine mar∣ginall* 1.1410 notes, or euer he blowe vp the Chapter of his Coun∣terblast thereto. The minor of the Bishops conclusion for the Princes gouernment, authoritie, power, care, &c. he graū∣teth, but not such supreme gouernment (sayth he) as the othe prescribeth. He graunteth also Saint Augustine to witnesse this the Princes gouernment, but no such large and supreme gouernment as we attribute now to them. Againe, he graun∣teth this supreme gouernment is in causes ecclesiasticall▪ but not in all causes ecclesiasticall. And so graunting that the Bishop concludeth well in some such thing, you conclude not (sayth he) in all things and causes, and therefore you con∣clude nothing agaynst vs. Lastly, he graunteth all the Bi∣shops testimonies concerning Constantine, but he denieth that it maketh any thing for vs.

Nowe after these marginall notes prefixed, he entreth* 1.1411 into his Chapter: pretending to open the weakenesse of the Bishops conclusion, and of other his proues oute of holie Scripture. And first, his aunswere to this diuision he de∣uideth in thrée partes: First, he graunteth all that the Bi∣shop hath sayde, but denieth that it is sufficient. Secondly, he quarrelleth about this, that the Bishop calleth the Em∣perour

Constantine, a Bishop, as Eusebius nameth him. Thirdly, he chalengeth him for calling Idoll Image. Now to the first parte, to sée whether all these grauntes make sufficiently for vs, and conclude against him yea or no.

Now ye may conclude (sayth master Stapleton) that there* 1.1412 is some regiment that Princes may take vpon them in causes Ecclesiasticall.

Thankes be giuen to God (master Stapleton) that yet now at the length, contrary to all your felowes, & to all your owne wranglings hitherto, the force of the truth hath en∣forced you to yelde thus much to the B. ye graunt Now that Princes haue some regiment in ecclesiasticall causes, which hitherto (except the making a law of burning or punishing be an eccl. cause) ye haue altogither denied vnto Princes.

But what is this some regiment that ye graunt thē now? for neither we graunt them al regiment but some regiment also, that is to say a supreme regiment. And you also denie not in your marginall note, that they may take vpon thē in* 1.1413 ecclesiastical matters supreme gouernmēt, authority, power, & care, but not (say you) such supreme gouernment as the othe prescribeth, so that here, we both agrée of supreme gouern∣ment, but the kinde of supreme gouernment is denied. And to specifie your meaning herein, how large a kind ye graunt or denie, ye adde he should haue concluded in all things and causes, else he concludeth not agaynst you, signifying that you deny to them a supreme gouernment in all things & cau∣ses ecclesiastical: but ye graunt them a supreme gouernment, authoritie, power, and care in things and causes ecclesiasticall.

First M. Stap. this is but a iangling and shifting quarell* 1.1414 in wordes, about things and causes ecclesiasticall, and all things and causes ecclesiasticall. For not onely the Bishop when he speaketh so indefinitely vnderstandeth all, but also it is an ordinarie speach, & allowed in Logike in all things that be naturall or necessarie, where the indefinite is counted as much as the vniuersall. As to say, a man is a

reasonable creature, or man is mortall, is as much as pre∣cisely to say, all men and euery man is reasonable and mor∣tall. And the saying in the next diuision, he came to fulfill the lawe, and the Prophetes, is all one with this, he came to fulfill all the lawe, and all the Prophetes. And likewise this, giue vnto God, that belongeth to God, and to Caesar, that belongeth to Caesar, is as much to say as this, giue vnto God all that belongeth to God, &c. and euen your selfe doe commonly speake thus indefinitely, ecclesiasticall matters, when ye meane all ecclesiasticall matters, though now when ye be thus •…•…iuen to graunt the effect of the matter, yet would ye find some shift of descant to frustrate all the mat∣ter, and say.

If ye meane of such regiment as ye pretēd (where ye know* 1.1415 well ynough none other is ment) ye make your reckoning without your host, as a man may say, and conclude before ye haue brought any proufe that they ought or may take vpon them such gouernment.

Whether this some regiment be such regimēt, or such go∣uernment (for thus M. St. ye loue in termes to dally) though the Bishop hath proued it sufficiently, and you haue graun∣ted it, standing onely like a daintie Nicie besetter, on this quaint poynt, in things, not in all things: yea whether this Nice restraint, defeate the full proufe of the question in con∣trouersie betwene master Feckenham and the Bishop, shal appeare (M. St.) by calling them •…•…ath coram, to recken bet∣ter with their host, that is, (as you haue like a thriftie tap∣ster called vpon so oft before, though still ye brought in false reckonings) to set before them, and mark the issue, that they* 1.1416 condiscended vpon, that is to we•…•…e, Any such gouernmēt in ecclesiastical causes. Lo here the demaund of the hoste himselfe, be requireth but, any such gouernmēt, and that without putting in, all, in the reckoning. Where therfore ye graūt y^e B. hath proued it in some eccl. causes, which satisfieth the demaund of any ecclesiast. causes euen according to your

owne wrangling ye confesse the Bishop hath concluded the very issue that was concluded vpon.

Thus master St. euen by your owne reckoning, the B reckoned with his host, at the full, and hath payed and satis∣fied that he promised, and M. Feckenham required.

But nowe looke you, what reckoning you will make to your friendes, that haue here brought your selfe so farre in the lashe, that taking vpon you to impugne the Princes go∣uernment in ecclesiasticall causes, ye haue graunted and yelded to it. How will your credite holde with your friends? yea how will your reckoning hold with it self? here ye haue graūted some regimēt, yea supreme gouernment, though not such supreme gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes. In the last Chap. ye would graunt thē nothing but punishment of those whom you had condemned, which is no ecclesiastical matter at all, to hang or burne a man. And yet ye gaue them no re∣giment, much lesse supreme regiment, therein neyther. For you would haue al the appointing whō he shal punish, & the prince hath nothing else to do, but to execute him whom you deliuer vp vnto him, which agréeth nothing with this y^t now ye haue graūted, least of all with y^t ye further graūt, saying:

For though I graunt you all your examples ye haue allea∣ged,* 1.1417 and that the doings of the olde Testament were figures of the new, and the saying of Esay that kings should be nou∣rishing fathers to the Church, and all things else that ye here alleage: yet all will not reach home, no not Constantine the great his example.

How agréeth this graunt (master Stap.) with all that ye haue done all this while? Why haue ye denied the Bishops ensamples heretofore of Moyses, Iosue, Dauid &c. and made such a long and earnest a do in the matter to be graū∣ted at length? Did ye stand in it then, to dilate your booke? or do ye graunt it now, to bragge of your skill? or did ye resist the truth then, contrary to your conscience, & repent ye now? or be ye forced to graūt with some colour, that ye cannot for

shame in plaine speach denie? howsoeuer it be, many odde reckonings will fall out in your account against your selfe, although you neuer •…•…ecken with your host for the matter.

Ye graunt the saying of Esay also, that Kings shoulde be* 1.1418 nourishing fathers to the Church, and all things else that the* 1.1419 Bishop here alleageth, yet will not all reach home, no not Constantine the great his example.

VVill not all this reach home Master Stap. to proue the issue, that euen your selfe do confesse the Bishop hath alrea∣die proued? For that is the home that it ought t•…•… reach vn∣to, by master Feckenhams demaund. But go to, measure it with a true yerde master Stap. and ye shall see it fayre and easily, without any stretching at al, reach euen as full home* 1.1420 as you besides can require, euen for the supreme gouern∣ment of all maner ecclesiasticall causes, looke what ye recken most vppon, and that is euen the féeding with the worde, vnder which the Sacraments also are comprehended, not that he is the Minister of the worde and Sacraments (as* 1.1421 you captiously gybe and cauill) for that belongeth not to su∣preme gouernment. But that he is so the supreme gouer∣nour in ouerséeing the consecration and deliuerie of the true foode, wherewith the people of God ought to be fedde: that euen he ouerséeth the féeder himselfe.

And for this cause, the King is called of the Prophete,* 1.1422 the nourishing father, and Quéenes are named Nourses, that although the ministerie of féeding pertaine to the mi∣nisters, yet the prouision for the foode, the ouersight that the children of God be duely fedde, with the right milke, with the true bread and water of lyfe, belongeth to the Princes. And therefore haue they the name of nourses, not to nou∣rishe them in ciuill matters and corporall f•…•…de onely: but as in ciuil, so in •…•…acte verbi, in the milke of the worde of God also. Is this only the cherishing of the good childe, by giuing landes, reuenewes, maintenaunce, and lyuing to the Churche? Is this onely the displing of the frowarde child•…•…,

or as ye call it the punishing of the heretike. No M. Stapleton Lyra his exposition and yours doe not agrée. He sayth they are nourses, what to doe? to feede, whom? the faithfull ones, wherewith? with the milke of the worde, whose worde? euen the worde and sacraments of God. Wherof sith the ministery and execution belongeth not vnto them, but to the mini∣sters: it followeth necessarily thervpon, that the prouision, direction, appointment, care, and ouersight, which is the su∣preme gouernement, belongeth to them. And this is that which Lyr•…•… confesseth & the B. vrgeth of Constantine, that he was such another nourse, as did kepe, defend, maintaine, vp∣holde, and feede the pore faithfull ones of Christ, yea caried them in his bosome, as it were, and procured them to be fedde, did set forth proclamations not only against false religion, but also to set forth, to exhort, and allure, vnto the Christian faith, caused not on∣ly the Idolatrous religion to bee suppressed, but caused also on the other parte the true knowledge and religion of Christ to bee brought in and planted among his people, and did not only make lawes for punishing heretikes and Idolaters, but also reformed all manner abuses about Gods seruice.

Thus sayth the Bishop out of Eusebius, did Constan∣tine* 1.1423 play the nourses part. Nowe what saye you to all this M. Stapleton?

All this of Constantine (say you) is graunted and maketh no∣thing for you.

Whether it maketh for vs or no, we will not contende. But it maketh for the matter, and being graunted, it maketh vp the matter. For and ye will graunt thus much from your heart inwarde, which ye nowe graunt from the téeth out∣warde, by compulsion of the manifest truth: ye might come home well ynough with a wannion, and bestow your wit and trauell better, than thus to graunt vnto, and yet with pieuishnesse to wythstande the manifest truth of the matter.

The Quéenes Maiesties othe requireth no more of you

to giue to hir, than here ye graunt to giue to Constantine, to* 1.1424 set foorth Christes religion, to make lawes and constitutions, not only of punishment, but of reformation of all maner abuses about Gods seruice, to prouide that the Church be fed with Gods worde, and in all pointes aboue sayde shewe her selfe a very nource of the Church, committed to hir gouernement, as the childe is to the nourse. What one thing ecclesiasticall is not here comprehended? or can ye shewe cause, why she ought not to haue the same authoritie in hir dominions, as well as Constantine (to whome ye graunt it) had in his? if ye saye she doth not this, but the contrarie: this is but your wicked slaunder M. Stapleton. But graunt hir hir interest, and then trie that. Hir right is one thing, and whether she dis∣chargeth well the same or no, is another thing. Graunt hir hir right, as you doe to Constantine, and then spare not to improue, what ye can proue amisse.

Nowe, hauing graunted thus much, which in dede con∣cludeth* 1.1425 vp all the matter, least he shoulde vtterly be discr•…•…∣dited of all his friendes, he goeth about so much as he can, in wrangling of wordes, to defeate once againe all his former graunt, according to his practise in the Chapter before. For, where the Bishop by the example of Constantyne, proueth the Prince to be herein not only a nourse to the peo∣ple, but also to bee appoynted vnto them of God, as it were the common or vniuersall Byshop, as Eusebius testifieth of Con∣stantine, and Constantine to other Byshops calleth him∣selfe a Byshop, signifying his carefull ouersight ouer all his people, in setting forth Gods true religion: Maister Sta∣pleton first snappeth at thys worde Byshoppe, secondlye hée challengeth the Byshoppe for curtalling Eusebius sen∣tence.

And when Eusebius (sayeth he) calleth hym as it were a common or vniuersall Byshoppe: I suppose yee meane not, that hee was a Byshop in deede. For your selfe confesse, that

Princes & Bishops offices are farre distincted and disseuered, & that the one ought not to break into the office of the other.

The Bishops meaning is euident master Stap. and so* 1.1426 are his words. But your meaning is to brabble, & to tickle in the Readers heade a suspition, that he confounded these offices. Is there no difference betwéene these sayings, he was as it were a Bishop, and he was a Bishop in dede? Yes M. St. and ye were not a very wrangler in dede, ye might per∣ceyue by these wordes (as it were) he plainly ment, (and as it were) spake it, that he was no B. in deede. And what though he were no Bishop in dede, in the function and office of a Bi∣shops ministerie? no more was he also a nourse in deede, nor the people were suckling babes in deede, nor the worde of God is milke in deede: yet, as these things be not falsly* 1.1427 spoken, but being borowed speaches, in their senses import not onely a true, but a more excellent vnderstanding than the bare wordes vsually betoken: so the Emperour being named to be as it were a common or vniuersall Bishop, and yet in deede, being no Bishop, it argueth that he had this name, bicause of his common and vniuersall gouernment ouersight and care ouer all Bishops and causes Ecclesiasti∣call. This shift therefore, to slinke away from the mani∣fest meaning of the wordes, by threaping on the Bishop this kindnesse, that he shoulde meane to proue him a very Bishop in dede, is a very meane shift, though it haue in dede a shrewde meaning Master Stapleton.

And if you did so meane (say you) Eusebius himself would* 1.1428 soone confounde you, if you reherse Constantines whole sen∣tence that he spake to the Bishops.

What a good year meane ye M. St. ye vrge this meaning further than néedes, that the B. should meane to make the Emperor a Bishop in y^e Bishoply ministerie, & therfore cur∣talled as ye call it Eusebius sentences. If Eusebius sentence (set it downe as whole as ye list) confound them y^t meane to confound these offices: it will neuer soone or late confound

the B. the popish Bishops it may rather confounde, for they confounde their offices, turning Bishops not as it were into lay men but into lay men in deede. What the Bishops wordes do meane is most playne to a man of meane witte, that list not to Iangle about nothing, neither the wordes importe any such meaning, nor this is any thing in que∣stion, the ministeriall office, but the supreme gouernment, which are two farre different things. But since that to no purpose, ye chalenge the B. for curtalling Eusebius words: let vs behold how you do set them downe.

For thus (say you) he saith to the Bishops, Vos quidem* 1.1429 eorum quae intus sunt in Ecclesia agenda, ego vero eorum qua extra sunt Episcopus à Deo sum constitutu•…•…. You are Bishops (saith he) of those thinges that are to be done within the Church, I am Bishop of outwarde thinges: which answere of his may satisfie any reasonable man, for all that ye bring in here of Constantine, or all that ye shall afterwarde bring in, which declareth him no supreme Iudge or chiefe determi∣ner of causes Ecclesiasticall, but rather the contrarie, and that he was the ouerseer in ciuill matters. And the most that may be enferred hereof is, that he had the procuration and execu∣tion of Churche matters, which I am assured all Catholikes will graunt.

Ye would faine I sée M. Stapl. reuoke your graunt and it could be cleanly conueyde, or so to limite it, that it might not appéere ye haue granted that, that all your fellowes de∣nie. But this reuocation is to late. Neuerthelesse fuli pre∣tely ye compasse the matter, to defeate all these most plaine not wordes but doings of Constantine, by shoouing at this name B. shop in the Emperour, which in any case ye cā not abide. And therefore, as who though B. went aboute to* 1.1430 confounde the offices of a Bishop and of a Prince, and there∣to had concealed Eusebius words: ye solemnly take on y•…•…n to set them out both in Latine and in English.

But tell me by that false faith of yours M. Stapleton,

why ye haue not translated the wordes aright in English, that ye haue set downe in Latine? did ye sée in déede they made nothing for you, but rather much against you? is the English of intus in Ecclesia, within the Church? And the En∣glish of eorum quae extra, Outward ciuill things or matters? or, Ego vero, &c. Episcopus à 'Deo sum constitut•…•…. I am a Bishop? what is manifest corruption of plaine wordes, and euident sense, if this be not? this is past cutting of the tayle M. St. or slitting his nose, and paring his eares, to dresse it like a perfect curtall, but euen to cutte both buttockes and heade away, and make it a carrion karkasse, this translating is trans I ordanem in déede.

But the wordes of Constantine & the sense are plaine:* 1.1431 You (saith he speaking to the spirituall pastours) are Bishops of those thinges that in the Churche are to be done within or inwardly. But I am appointed of God a Bishop of those things that are forthout, or outwardly. As who should say your Bishoply office in Gods Churche, is in the ministeris of those things that worke inwardly, that perce the heart, enter into the soule, cleaue the thoughtes in sunder, and properly belong to the inwarde man: the liuely worde of God. My Bishoply office in Gods Churche, is distingui∣shed from this, and is in things without, that is, in the out∣warde setting forth, and publique direction of Gods worde, to be duly taught by you. Thus both their offices were in Gods Church, the matter and groundworke of both their Bishoprikes, was Gods true religion. But the doing of the one was pertayning to the inwarde man, the doing of the o∣ther to the outwarde man.

And this is the very distinctiō that Constantine maketh which (being not falsely translated, as you do, and so misun∣derstoode) may satisfie as ye say any reasonable man. But* 1.1432 your vnderstanding is very vnreasonable, to vnderstand by inward things, things ecclesiasticall, and by outward things, only ciuill things, in déede they be out, and quite out of the

consideration of the Churche. But wherefore then called he him selfe a Bishop also with them, yea an vniuersall Bi∣shop, as Eusebius termeth him, but to declare that his ouersighte was in the same matter that was theirs? the matter was Gods truth and Religion in bothe, the manner was outwarde or inwarde, as eithers Bishoprike required.* 1.1433 Otherwise, if he had meant onely of ciuill matters as you expounde, he had bene no more a Bishop thereby, than the very Soldane or great Turke, or any other Heathen Prince, that ouersee their ciuill matters very circumspect∣ly. And so as ye did in your fourth Chapter, ye make Con∣stantine (for all these notable things in him, that your selfe before haue graunted) no better than an infidell Prince in this behalfe. For by outward ye say, is meant ciuill matters.* 1.1434 But the ciuill gouernement (ye say also) reacheth no furder than the peoples quietnesse, wealth, abundance and prospe∣rouse maintenance, & that these thinges are common as well to the heathen as to the Christian gouernment. Thinke ye M. Stapleton these Fathers meant no furder gouernment, nor in other matters than these, when they called Constan∣tine an vniuersall Bishop? and that Constantine measured his office no furder, when he called him selfe by the name of a Bishop▪ for shame M. Stapleton deface not to Christian a Prince, after so Turkish a manner, nor thereto so mani∣festly falsifie your authour, nor abuse your reader with such a shamelesse impudence.

Well say you, And the moste that may be inferred thereof is, that he had the procuration and execution of Churche matters, which I am assured all Catholikes will graunt.

May we be assured M. Stapleton on your worde, that all your popish Catholikes will graunt euen thus much? For I verily feare they will graunt it no furder than it pleaseth them. And where ye are so readie to assure vs of others graunts, what assurance haue we had alreadie of all your

owne liberall graunts. when ye were disposed to wrangle, as now againe ye do? for how agreeth this euen with your former graunt, that Princes might make lawes and consti∣tutions for the furtherance of Christes religion, that Prin∣ces might take some regiment vppon them in Ecclesiasticall causes. yea, might do as much as all these ensamples speci∣fie:* 1.1435 and that now ye make, the most to be but the procura∣tion and execution of Church matters? Although, what ye meane by these wordes ye tell not, would ye haue them onely the Churches (that is, as you meane by the Churche, onely the Priests) proctours and executioners? now truly* 1.1436 ye limite them a full faire office. But thinke ye the name of B. and vniuersall B. did importe nothing els? was that the most that may be inferred thereof? and yet that is more than onely to be their executioner, (as ye said before) to be, as ye adde here to it, their proctour also. Yea, it is much more than not to meddle in Church matters at all.

But as ye falsly expounded Eusebius before, so here ye controlle and falsefie your owne saying, affirming that the most which may be enferred hereof is, that he had the procu∣ration and execution of Church matters.

If this be either the most or ought at all, then your for∣mer exposition of ciuill ouersight, was at the least a false corruption of you. But and ye marke it well, ye shall finde (and neuer goe to the moste for the matter) that this title and other the doings of this noble Christian Emperour, comprehended much more th•…•…n either to be a Priestes pro∣ctour, or executioner in Churche matters, yea to betoken in very déede a chiefe and supreme gouernour.

Your thirde parte of this diuision is altogither an imper∣tinent quarell of Images chalenging the Bishop of an vn∣truth and therefore (besides that is saide alreadie sufficient∣ly, on the same argument) is answered in his proper place.

The. 21. Diuision.

THe Bishop hauing thus fully proued that the ensam∣ples and prophecies of the old Testament, were figures* 1.1437 to be perfourmed in the new: entreth into the confirmatiō therof by the newe Testament.

And first, in this diuision proueth by two allegations of* 1.1438 our Sauiour Christ, that this authoritie of Princes in the olde Testament, is confirmed by Christ to christian Prin∣ces in the newe.

But the Princes authoritie in the olde Testament, stretcheth not onely to ciuill matters, but also to the ouer∣sight, mayntenance, setting foorth, and furtherance of reli∣gion, and matters ecclesiasticall.

Ergo, Christ hath confirmed in the newe Testament, that christian Princes power stretcheth not onely to ciuill matters, but also to the ouersighte, mayntenance, setting foorth, and furtherāce of religion, and matters ecclesiastical.

The minor is proued already, by these foresayde exam∣ples of the olde Testament.

The maior the Bishop proueth by two testimonies of Ie∣sus Christ. The first generally in Matt. 5. that he came to accomplishe the lawe and the Prophetes. The seconde out of Math. 22. where he commaunded all men to giue that vnto Cesar, that belonged to Cesar, and bounded the Prin∣ces authoritie by the worde of God.

To the minor master Stap. sayth not one worde, neither in his marginall notes, nor Counterblast. Belike, that he relenteth to it, according to his owne rule: Qui tacet con∣s•…•…re* 1.1439 videtu•…•…, he that holdes his peace seemeth to consent.

The maior likewise he graunteth, in saying:

Master Horne goeth yet needlesly forward to proue that* 1.1440 Christ did not destroy the rule of Princes in Church causes, figured in the olde lawe.

Whervpon, till M. St. shall denie one of these two pro∣positions, the conclusion foloweth of necessarie consequence against him. Onely, M. St. thinketh it inough for him to euerturne all the argument, if he denie the proues of the maior graunting to the other proofe, and ther vpon bendeth all his answere against this sentence, Giue vnto Cesar that belongeth vnto Cesar. But this no whit hindreth the argu∣ment, so long as he graunteth the other proofe, yea thoughe he denied that also, so long as he graunteth the maior it selfe, to the confirmation whereof, bothe these allegati∣ons were broughte foorth. But let vs sée howe properly he handleth them.

And nowe at the length (sayth M. St.) catcheth he one* 1.1441 testimonie out of the newe Testament to proue his saying: which is, giue vnto Cesar, that belongeth vnto him. VVhich place nothing at all serueth his turne, but rather destroyeth, I will not say any figure of the olde Testament, but master Hornes foolishe figuratiue diuinitie.

I feare me, master Stapleton, that you which vpbrayde others for foolishe figuratiue diuinitie, will euen in this diuision shewe, not the wysest diuinitie in Louayne: I had almoste sayde also, your owne more than foolishe diui∣nitie, without any figure at all. But firste, let vs sée your false diuinitie. The Byshop héere togither citeth two testi∣monies* 1.1442 out of the newe Testament, and you come in, say∣ing. Now at the length catcheth he one testimonie out of the newe Testament to proue his saying. But to winke at this false diuinitie, with what wise diuinitie do ye improue this one testimonie?

For it is so farre off (say you) that of this place master* 1.1443 Horne maye make any grounde for the ecclesiasticall au∣thoritie of Princes, that it dothe not as much as inferre that we ought to pay so muche as tribute to our Princes, but on∣ly that we may pay it.

Surely M. Stap. this is a trim diuinitie, and as trim lo∣gike

as diuinitie. Christ commaundeth vs, saying, giue that* 1.1444 vnto Cesar, that belongeth vnto Cesar: Ergo, we may, but we ought not to giue it him. Where haue ye founde this new logike and diuinitie M. Stap? Is it Louayne stuffe? a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 would haue thought this reason better of the twayne, that if we ought not then, of righte we neither mighte nor shoulde giue vnto euery body, that belongeth to them, and so denie to the Prince that belongeth to him. But this we may not, nor should do, but to giue him and all men their duetie, therfore we ought to do it. But stil sée how ye wrap your words in contradiction.

Ye graunt that this sentence, Giue vnto Cesar that be∣longeth* 1.1445 vnto Cesar, doth not destroy any figure of the olde Testament, if it do not destroy it, then it confirmeth it, and* 1.1446 ratifieth to the Prince, that belonged to the Prince, and that the Prince had in the olde Testament: but the Prince had then authoritie in ecclesiasticall matters, as ye confes∣sed in the two laste diuisions: Ergo, by this sentence the same authoritie is nowe confirmed. How then say ye héere, it maketh no grounde for the authoritie of Princes in eccle∣siasticall matters? since their authoritie was a figure, and this sentence ye say doth not destroy it, but nowe you haue made this sentence destroy the figure quite. For that due∣tie* 1.1447 that belonged to Princes before, stoode not on a may bawe, it lay not in the subiectes choyse to choose, whe∣ther they woulde yéelde the Prince that belonged to him, or no, as thoughe they mighte if they woulde, they néede not if they list, but they must and ought of necessarie duety and obediēce haue yéelded to the Prince whatsoeuer to him belonged, in the time of that figure of the olde Testament. And this sentence, say you, hath not destroyed the figure, Ergo, This sentence now bindeth and confirmeth it, with as great duetie and necessitie, and not lesse.

But say you, this sentence dothe not so much as inferre that we oughte to paye so muche as tribute to our Princes:

Ergo, This sentence hath destroyed the figure, & set vs at li∣bertie, in that the figure bounde vs. And thus not onely ye speake quite contrarie to your selfe, and to all reason: but besides with your good diuinitie, haue taken away al huma∣nitie.* 1.1448 For what pollicie can consist in any sure estate, if their subiectes be not bounde of duetis, but at their plea∣sures may, or may not, yéelde their dueties to their soue∣raigne Lordes?

The Pope in déede dispenseth at his pleasure with sub∣iectes othes and homages, to denie that duetie to their na∣turall Princes, that be longeth to them. But this is a case reserued to him selfe, except ye can shew your legacie à la∣tere. And yet this your licenciousnesse to subiectes is more than his dispensation. But what good motiue hath moued you héere vnto? howe do ye confirme it, that this sentence importeth not their duetie, but their voluntarie in rendring the Prince his owne?

For the question (say you) was framed of the captious* 1.1449 Iewes, not whether they ought, but whether they might pay any tribute to Cesar.

Héere, M. Stap. ye shewe your selfe yet more captious than those Iewes. Is this any necessarie cause of sequence,* 1.1450 the Iewes propounded their question, not whether they ought, but whether they might pay tribute to their Prince, or no: Ergo, Christ answering flatly, and generally, com∣maunding them to pay all duetie to their Prince, that ap∣pertayneth to him, muste be vnderstoode, not that they ought, but that they might pay it? Which argument though followe nothing at all, let vs yet go onwarde with M. St. and so sée how he proues it.

Cesar was then an externall and an infidell Prince: Ergo, the question of the captious Iewes for paying him tribute,* 1.1451 was not whether they ought, but whether they might paye tribute, or no.

Ye had néede make this argument more perfect, M. St.

but to graunt ye, they propounded it as captiously as you can frame it, will you as captiously theron conclude, that we must vnder stand the answere of Christ, to cōteine no more than theyr captious question propounded? You should proue that Christes sentence inferreth no more, than that they might pay tribute: and you like a captious sophister, runne to the captious Iewes, that their sentence inferred no more. But kin will créepe I sée where it can not go. But whether ye reason frō their question, or Christes answere, are these sufficient & reasonable reasons M. St? Bicause their prince was an externall or an infidell prince, were they not therfore his lawfull subiects? Was not the Emperour of Rome the Prince of many other Countreyes besides? all which in the naturall situation of the prouinces were externall to him,* 1.1452 might they therfore haue reasoned that their obedience and tributes were not of duetie to be payde? No Master Stap. they considered that though their countrey were externall, yet bicause they were vnder his gouernment, their policies and his were but one Monarchie, and therefore he was not to be counted an externall prince vnto them, no more than other princes, that haue in their possession diuerse Coun∣tries, and Realmes vnder their signiorie.

But yet say you, there remayneth a greater matter, he* 1.1453 was an Infidell: Ergo, they might, but they ought not to haue payed him tribute. But I pray you master Staple∣ton, what was Nabuchodonozor any other (when he sub∣dued Zedechias and the Iewes) than an Infidell Prince? And yet was it not lawfull for Zedechias to denie him his Tribute. Mardocheus, Tobie, Daniell, Esdras, and other godly fathers, had no skill of this Diuinitie, that they might, but not that they ought haue payed theyr duties to Cyrus, Ahasuerus, Darius, and other Princes, bicause* 1.1454 they were Infidels. Ioseph and Marie traueyled with all obedience to pay theyr taxe to Augus•…•…us Cesar, as of dutie: although they knew well ynough that he was an Infidell.

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

But to returne to master Sta. he proueth his consequence ab absurdo.

For if (sayth he) M. Horne will say these words importe a* 1.1455 precise necessitie, he shall haue muche ado to excuse the Ita∣lians, Frenchmen, Spaniardes, and our nation whiche many hundreth yeres since, haue payed no tribute vnto Cesar.

The argument is thus made perfecte.

If these words giue vnto Cesar that belongeth to Cesar, be to be vnderstoode that he ought to haue it, thē the Italiās Frenchmen, Spaniards & Englishmen, all which nations haue payde tribute to Cesar, ought still to pay it.

But these natiōs haue payde no tribute to Cesar, many hundreth yeres, nor ought now to pay any to him:

Ergo, The words of Christ importe no necessitie nor are to be vnderstoode that they ought, but that they might.

For the minor I will not examine, how many, or howe few hundreth yeres it is, since the Italians payde tribute to the Empire. And by what meanes, & whose practises they haue lefte off paying it: may be better shewed hereafter. Onely for our nation, we haue good cardes to shewe, howe the Romanes them selues haue remitted their tribute, and all their Empire ouer vs.

The maior of this argumēt foloweth not, the folly wher∣of* 1.1456 consisteth, in the wilfull misconstruing this word Cesar. Wherby Christ meaneth not onely the Emperour or state Imperiall but he simply meaneth the Prince, whosoeuer he were. As like wise sayth S. Paule generally (thoughe at the same time the Christians, to whome he wrote, were vnder an externall and Infidell Prince) Cui tributum, tri∣butum. &c. Pay tribute to him, to whome tribute is due. And so Christ, thoughe he answere them with their owne worde, yet thereon he teacheth a generall doctrine, not to them alone, but to all Subiectes, towardes all Princes, whome he comprehendeth by the name of Cesar, whome they had named to him. And not onely all mens duetie

to their Prince, but all mens duetie to God, and not the Iewes duetie to God alone. And therefore, although he confuted their particuler caption, yet his answere was ge∣nerall* 1.1457 to them, and all other, both then and for euer. And so he spake generally▪ not, giue this penie, nor giue tribute onely, but giue that (what soeuer it be) vnto Cesar that be∣longeth vnto Cesar, and that vnto God that belongeth vnto God whatsoeuer it be: reasoning on this. Euery man not only may haue, but ought to haue that that is belonging to him. Which includeth withal y^e perticuler that your selues testifie, this belongeth vnto Cesar, ye ought therfore of good right giue it him, as his owne, and not ye may giue it him. This is the euident reason and doctrine of our Sauioure Christ, that euery one ought to haue his owne.

From the which, howe farre this doctrine of M. Stap. swarueth, besides the danger of it, that we may lawfully (if we please) giue euery one his owne, but we be not bounde of precise necessitie, nor oughte so to doe: let euery body iudge, as he shall sée occasion, what inconuenience mighte quickly bréede béereon. But master Stap. thinking that he hath sufficiently proued the former parte of Christes sen∣tence to importe no more than he beareth vs in hande: on the other parte he endeuoreth to set on the Byshop, cha∣lenging him to haue lefte out that parte therof, that is con∣cerning our duetie to God.

But I pray you M. Horne (sayth he) why haue ye de∣falked* 1.1458 and curtalled Chrystes answere: why haue yee not set foorth his whole and entire sentence: Giue to Cesar that belongeth to Cesar, and to God that belongeth to God? which later clause, I am assured, doth muche more take away a supreme regiment in all causes ecclesiasticall, than necessa∣rily by force of any wordes binde vs to pay, yea any tribute to our Prince.

This quarell, M. St. is an euident vntruthe, for the By∣shop* 1.1459 hath not left out the other part of the sentēce, but men∣tioned

it in the next words immediatly following. Admo∣nishing notwithstanding al princes and people, that Cesars authoritie is not infinite, or without limits, (for such authoritie belongeth only to the king of al kings) but bounded and circumscribed within the boundes assigned in Gods worde. Which words of the bishop, not only make playn relation vnto, but also comprehende the sentence folowing, & quae dei deo, and giuing vnto God that perteineth to God. And this limitation youre selfe anon afterwarde confesse, that the Byshop specifieth, though héere ye denie it according to the maner of your quarelling disposition. But whereto M. Stap. moue ye this quarell?

This latter clause I am assured (say you) dothe muche* 1.1460 more take away a supreme regiment in causes ecclesiasticall, than necessarily, by force of any words binde vs to pay, yea any tribute to our Prince.

Are ye so well assured héereof, M. Stap? but by your leaue, for all ye be so well assured, if this sentence muste be vnderstoode of may, and not of ought, then perchance it may neither take away that supremacie that belongeth to the Prince, nor that supremacie may hinder our duetie to God. Yea what if this same may, or might, and ought not, may become an argument for all popish traytors agaynst their Princes, teaching subiectes that they may giue them their dueties, but they ought not? For I am assured on the other side, that the Priestes and Byshops to their Princes, yea* 1.1461 the Byshop of Rome him selfe to the Emperoures, as you vnderstande Cesar, haue yéeded their seruice, obediēce, yea and their tributes also ere this, howe soeuer since they haue wrong them selues from that olde obedience that they ought to Cesar.

And if to subtracte this, ye may thus dally on the former clause, why may not all Papistes for the later clause of the sentence to vpholde their honour of Images, their inuo∣cation

of Saincts, their owne traditions, and vnwritten ve∣rities, against Gods expresse worde and commandement, alleage for them that they may giue to God that, that be∣longeth to God, but not that they ought, as bounde thereto* 1.1462 necessarily by force of any wordes? For this I am sure of also, that these wordes of Christ do make no more mencion of dutie toward the one parte of the sentence, than to the o∣ther, the one comprehendeth not may, and the other ought: but though the dutie to God be greater, and more excellent than the dutie towarde the Prince, yea and boundeth it (as the Bishop saide) yet dutie belongeth vnto hothe, and both ought to haue it. And we be not here licenced, but flatly cō∣maunded to giue that that is dutie to eyther partie. The wordes are manifest 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Reddite, Render you that* 1.1463 vnto Caesar that is Caesars, and that that is Gods to God. So that if reddite Caesari quae sunt Caesaris, be no more but this, ye may giue vnto Cesar those things that are Cesar, then may reddite Deo qu•…•… sunt Dei, be also by as good Latine, ye may giue to God those things that are Gods. What figuratiue di∣uinitie,* 1.1464 yea what figuratiue Grammer call ye this? wherof ye crake so much, and finde such fault in others, and can not sée in your selfe, how your Diuinitie either marres your Grammer, or your Grāmer your Diuinitie. And yet both must go for excellent good, for why you are assured of the matter that the imperatine mode is in the one clause no more than the potentiall, commanding to do, is no more but to say ye may do: though in the other clause, it retaineth still his force. Besides this good Diuinitie, that we be not neces∣sarily, by force of any wordes bounde to pay, yea any tribute to our Princes, and so may denie them both that, and all du∣ties else, as do the Papists when they be disposed to refuse their lawfull obedience to their soueraignes, as you & your Louanistes do. This is a holy diuinitie. Did euer any of the ancient Diuines, giue this libertie to subiects against their Princes, or thus expounde these wordes, and not ra∣ther

al with one, cōsent, yea your popish writers hereō also,* 1.1465 so many as I haue read, gather here vpō a necessary dutie of al subiects obediēce, tributes, honor & al other preheminēces belōging to Princes? & chie•…•…y on this sentēce, write of pur∣pose vpon this cōmon place, of subiects dutiful obedience to their magistrates: & you make so light a matter of it, y^t ye say it bindeth vs not so much, as to pay any tribute at al vnto thē.

But that all the world may sée how falsely ye wrest the wordes of Christ, ye shal sée some of the fathers iudgments on these words, giue vnto Cesar that that is Cesars: that they inferre not that they may giue, but that they ought to giue them. Tertullian an ancient Father saith: Alius est denarius* 1.1466 quē C•…•…sari debeo, &c. It is an other penie that I owe to Cesar, that pertaineth to him, wherof it was thē moued, that is to say, a tributarie penie due to be paide of tributarie, & not of free mē. I pray ye M. St. what is y^t English of Debeo & of debitus? Origen likewise an aūciēt Father saith: In tēpore ergo Chri∣sti,* 1.1467 &c. In the time therefore of Christ, when they were com∣manded to giue tribute to the Romaines, there was a thought & coūsel amōg the Iewes, Utrū deberent, whether they ought that were Gods people & his portion, to giue Princes tribute, or rather take armes for their libertie, except they were suf∣fred to liue as they lusted. And the story telleth that one Iudas a Galilean, of whom Luke mencioneth in the Actes of the A∣postles,* 1.1468 drawing away the multitude of the Iewes, taught, Nō oportere, they ought not to giue tribute to Cesar, & call Cesar Lord. But he that was at that time the tetrarch hastned to per∣swade the people, & that they should regard the present state, & not wilfully take armes against the stronger. But be cōtent to giue tribute. And truly the worde of this present gospel, not in deede manifestly, yet it shewes these things. But he that di∣ligently cōsidereth the sense of the present wordes, shal finde this, yea euē in this place. For the Phariseis had not had occa∣sion (being willing to take Christ in his speach, sending their disciples with the Herodiās) to aske him whether it were law∣full

to giue Cesar tribute or no, if it had bene manifest amōgst them, that they ought not to giue it, & that there had bene an agreement of all their willes, that they should not giue it. &c.

Thus we sée that the question they moued to Christ, was whether they ought to pay tribute or no. And y^t this was a great questiō betwixt thē. And y^t Iudas Oalileus a mouer of conspiracie, & a rebellious traytour, & M. St. an English re∣negate, & a like mouer of seditiō: are of one opiniō, y^• tribute ought not to be payde. But Christ was of a cōtrarie opiniō. & all true subiects ought to follow Christes opiniō, that tri∣bute ought to be be paide. And so doth Origen expoūd Chri∣stes* 1.1469 wordes. When they shewed Christ a penie, and Christ asked whose inscriptiō it was, and they said it was Cesars. He answered that they ought to render vnto Cesar the things that are Cesars, and that they ought not to defraude him of those things that are his owne, vnder the occasiō of godlines. And likewise the same Origen saith, Some thinke it simply* 1.1470 spokē of our Sauiour, render to Cesar that is Cesars, that is to say, Tributū reddite quod debetis, render the tribute that ye owe, Quis enim•…•…ostrū de tributis reddendis Caesari cōtradicit? for who gainesaith it that tributes ought to be payd to Cesar?

Forsoth that doth M. Stapl. saying they might but they ought not. Hilary likewise an auncient Father saith: Igi∣tur* 1.1471 an violaret, &c. Therefore they trie him, whether on the condition of the question propounded, he would violate the worldly power. An videlicet reddi tributum Caesari oportet, whether tribute ought to be rendred to Cesar, &c. And when they sayd it was Cesars, he said, Caesari reddenda esse, &c. The things that are Cesars, ought to be rendred to Cesar. And a∣gaine, whē he decreeth that the things that are Cesars ought to be rendred to him: Likewise Basilius Magnus, VVhen they had said Cesars, he replied, render, &c. wherein we be manifestly taught, that those are bounde to the tribute of Cesar: with whom the monie of Cesar is founde, &c. Like∣wise* 1.1472 Chrysostome: That the things that are Cesars ought to

to be rendred to him: Likewise S. Ambrose, Et tu si vis.* 1.1473 &c. And thou if thou wilt not be bounde or thrall to Caesar, haue thou not those things that are of the world, but if thou hast the riches of the world thou art bound to Caesar. If thou wilt owe nothing to the earthly King, forsake all things and follow Christe. And before, decerne ye well what thinges ought to be rendred to Caesar.

Likewise S. Augustine: Sed quia Manichaei, &c. But bi∣cause* 1.1474 the Manichei vse openly to blaspheme Iohn, let them heare euen the Lord Iesus Christ, Hoc stipendium iubente•…•… reddi Caesari, Commaunding (not, permitting) this stipende to be rendred to Caesar. And on these woordes of S. Paule to the Romaines, Omnis anima, Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers. Si quis ergo: If therfore any body thinke, that bicause he is a Christian, he ought not to render taxe or tribute, or that honour ought not to be giuen due to those powers that care for these things: he falleth in a great er∣rour. But that meane ought to be kept which God him selfe prescribeth, that we should giue vnto Caesar the things that are Caesars, and to God the things that are of God.

Likewise Theophilactus: Arbitrati se, &c. Thinking* 1.1475 they should smooth him with prayses, they flatter him, that being milked, he should say, Non deberi Caesari tributum, Tribute ought not to be payde to Caesar, and therevpon they might take him as a seditious man and mouing the people a∣gainst Caesar, and therefore they bring the Herodians with them that were the kings men, to apprehende him, as a stur∣rer of new things. Thou regardest not, say they, the person of any man, that speakest nothing to get the fauour of Herode and Pilate. Tell vs therefore, Debemus & hominibus. Ought we to be both tributarie to men, and to giue them taxe, as wel as to giue taxe to God, or shall we giue to God onely, or els to Caesar also? this they spake (as I sayde) that he should say that tribute ought not to be giuen to Caesar, &c. Thus we sée againe their question whether they ought, or no. But

Iesus by this coyne that was figured in the Image of Cesar▪ Persuadet illis debere Caesari, Perswadeth thē that those things are owing to Cesar, that are his, (that is) those that haue his I∣mage. Both in corporal and in outward things we must obey the king, but in inwarde things and spirituall, onely God.

Thus al these ancient Fathers are flat against ye M. St.* 1.1476 and expound this saying, not that they might, but that they ought, and that we ought to obey our Princes. And thus do your owne popish writers although partiall to your Pope yet herein reproue you. Reddit &c. quia reddere debitum est bonū & iustum. Render, &c. bicause to render that that is due, is good and iust. And all the popish Postilles, that I haue séene, Poligra•…•…, Ferus, Hofmeister, R•…•…yard. &c. affirme on these wordes, that tribute ought to begiuen to Cesar, and obedience ought to be giuen to Princes. And none of them that I can yet finde, founde out this fine conceyte, that they may, but not that they ought to do it.

Now on their side, ye stretch so far the other words, giue that vnto God that belongeth to God, that as though they were cleane contrary to the former, ye say: they take away a supreme regimēt, but sée how while ye would séeme so knuc∣kle déepe in Diuinitie, ye quite take away your Popes cha∣lenge & all. For if it take away a supreme regiment, how doth your Pope chalenge a supremacie? in déede ye spake truer than ye wist, for such a supremacie as he claimeth, is onely due to Christ, God & Man: & to no simple Creature, Prince, Prelate, or any other. Wherfore he ought not to vsurpe it, but giue it vnto the owner. The supremacie that is due to godly Princes, is neither such as the Pope claimeth, nor is derogatorie, in any Iote, from the dutie that is to be yéelded to God. But is the ministerie appointed by God, to gouerne and direct according to Gods worde, the boundes of Gods Church that God hath limited to his rule and ouersight.

And therefore that which you alleage out of Hosius of Spaine, & S. Ambrose that vsed euen these wordes, Et quae

Dei Deo, against the Arian Emperour Constantius, and Ualentinian the yonger, are quite besides the purpose. Th•…•… Queenes maiestie taketh not on hir, nor claymeth any such absolute supremacie and dealings as they twayne vsurped, It is but your common sclaunder. But sith ye onely touche it saying, whose wordes we shall haue an occasion hereafter to reherse, I will therfore with you referre the examining thereof to that your occasiō of rehersal, only here I note this your folly & contradictiō in citing these fathers allegations.

If this sentence be onely to be restrayned to the Iewes* 1.1477 bare demaund: if it meddle only with Tiberius Cesar then Emperour, and stretch no furder: If it determine nothing but money: If it inferre no necessitie or dutie but only giue licence: how then did these Fathers alleage & vrge this sen∣tence against these Princes? and how do you alleage them against the Bishop? do ye not sée how ye speake against your selfe? but I forbeare you till ye come to your appointed place. Although furder here I might admonish you, since ye reherse here no wordes of those authours, but referr•…•… yourselfe to another fitter occasion: not to stande dalying in so often preuentions and rehersalls, and all to no pur∣pose, but onely to encrease your volume. Much lesse, to tri∣umphe therevppon, till ye haue sette downe some proufe, either of them, or of other to confute the Bishop: for els ye do but triumphe before the victorie, and such commonly in the ende do l•…•…se the victorie. For hitherto ye haue alleaged nothing against the Bishops allegation, and yet say you:

This ill happe hath M. Horne euen with his first authoritie* 1.1478 of the newe Testament extraordinarily and impertinently I can not tel how chopped in, to cause the leaues and his booke and his lies to make the more muster and shewe.

This was an happie happe for you M. Sta. (to ruffle in your Rhetorike) that it happed the B. to haue so ill an hap by alleaging this sentence, for hereby ye haue shewed first your truth & honestie. That where the Bishop citeth two

plaine sentences out of the new Testament together, to cō∣firme his assertiō, you say he alleageth here but one. Where the Bishop citeth this of Cesar the later of the twaine, you quite omitting the other, say: this is his first authoritie of the new Testament. Good happe haue you M. St. to haue chop∣ped in two lies so round togither, to make the more muster of lies in your booke, but happie man happy dole they say. With the like happinesse haue ye founde out this grammar rule, that Reddite is ye may giue. But chiefly this happie new Diuinitie to refuse your Princes lawfull authoritie, that necessarily by force of any wordes, ye be not bounde to pay so much as any tribute to your Prince. All these happes was it your hap, first to finde out. And therefore all your side haue good cause M. St. to count ye an happie man.

But M. St. not content withall these happes, stormeth yet against the Bishop for adioyning these wordes:

Admonishing not withstanding all Princes & people, that Cesars authoritie is not infinite or without limites (for such authoritie belongeth only to the King of all Kinges) but bounded and circumscribed within the boundes assigned in Gods worde.

This M. St. calleth, a foolish and a friuolous admonition* 1.1479 without any cause or ground, & grounded on M. Hornes fan∣tasticall imagination, and not vpon Christ, as he surmiseth.

Is this M. Stapl. a foolish and a friuolous admonition? a groundlesse fantasticall Imagination, to say that the Princes authoritie is not infinite, but circūscribed within the boundes assigned in Gods worde? what would ye haue had y^e Bishop to say? that it had bene infinite without any boundes, & such as onely belongeth to God? but how would ye then haue triumphed at the matter? and in déede ye had had good cause.* 1.1480 Where now ye haue none, but that ye be disposed to quarel at euery thing, be it neuer so well spoken. Neyther was

it without cause or grounde, syth the wordes that immedi∣ately are ioyned so togither, make an expresse limitation, that the former part of the sentence, is bounded with the la∣ter parte: that the Prince ought to haue such due belon∣ging to him, as hindreth not y^e yéelding of that due that be∣longeth to God. And therfore the Bishops admonition was not onely godly and true, but grounded on Christes wordes, yea and comprehendeth them also, and was no lesse necessa∣rie for the Bishop to haue vsed, both for that it maketh a dis∣tinction, of that supremacie that your Pope chalengeth, in∣truding and incroching on those things that are only due to God, and not suffring his authoritie to be limitted by Gods worde, and woulde rule Gods worde, and go beyonde the boundes thereof: And also for that, to the ignorant & simple of your side, ye slaūder the B. and other setters forth of gods word, yea the Quéenes maiestie her self to take on hir, and we to yelde to hir, such an absolute and indefinite authoritie, as taketh from god, from his word, from his ministers, that authoritie that belongeth vnto them. Which syth it is your vsuall lying and malicious slaunder, to sturre offence to the simple, to bring the Prince and Preachers in obloquie, and the authoritie in suspition and hatred, it was not a friuolous & fantasticall imagination, as your fantasticall braine imagi∣neth, but a most necessarie cause for y^e B. to haue giuen that admonition, to shew what authority we allow in y^e prince, & the Prince taketh on hir, agréeable to that, that Christ cō∣maūds to render. Nay (say you) it is not groūded vpō christ.

VVho willeth that to be giuen to Caesar that is Caesars and* 1.1481 to God that is Gods: but determineth & expresseth nothing that is to be giuen to Caesar, but onely payment of money. And yet if we consider, as I haue sayde, what was the question demaunded, it doth not determine that neither, thoughe the thing it selfe be most true.

Doth this M. St. determine nothing but money, yea not so much as that neither? whie, what doth it determine then?

nothing (say you) if we consider, as I haue sayde, what was the question demaunded. In déede M. Stap. if we conside∣red as you haue sayde, it would be a very meane determina∣tion of any thing. And yet if you would better haue consi∣dered, euen that you haue sayde, ye shoulde haue found this your saying, to haue bene sayde without your considering cappe. For then ye tolde vs, that thoughe it forced not that we ought to pay tribute, yet it forced that we might pay it, which inforceth yet somewhat more than bare nothing.* 1.1482 And euen héere present ye say, that Christ determineth & expresseth nothing that is to be giuen to Cesar, but onely paymēt of money. And by & by ye say, it doth not determine that neither. And so ye tell vs it dothe determine nothing, and yet it determines something, and that something it doth determine, and yet it dothe not determine it. If we consider it, as you haue sayde it, howe would ye haue vs consider it, master Stap. when your selfe so inconsiderately haue saide suche contradictions?

Besides this, as repugnant as the rest, before ye sayd, his wordes imported onely that they might, which is not to will a thing to be done, but to permit or licence that a thing may be done, or may not be done. And héere ye playnly say, he willeth that to be giuen to Cesar that is Cesars, and to God that is Gods. But Christes willing a thing to be done, is his commaundement that it be done: and not a licence that may or may not be done. It lieth not in our will, that we may if we liste, giue God that that is Gods, but we must and ought so to doe, bicause it is Gods will. And so likewise for the Princes duetie, he hath willed that he shoulde haue that belongeth to him, yea your selfe say, it is moste true, and therein ye say truely: and it is most iust and reason by all lawes (except your Popishe lawes) that euery man haue that is his, and then muche more the Prince to haue that that is his: no body ought to take away anothers right and due, muche lesse his Princes: then if it be most true,

most reasonable and iust, and Christes will, was not this most true, iust, and reasonable will of Christ, a sufficient determination, that the Prince shoulde haue all that belon∣ged to him, but that he might haue it, if it pleased his sub∣iectes to giue it him? Nay, it was not so muche, say you, no not for so much as his owne money, yea he determined no∣thing at all. What a straunge answere of Christ had this béene to the Iewes demaunde, or rather a daliance to haue determined nothing at all? but this is your moste false and fantasticall imagination, M. St. For vpon their particuler demaunde Christ giueth a determinate and generall doc∣trine, that all Princes shoulde haue, not onely money or tribute, (as they moued their question) but all things else that belong vnto thē, as likewise God, to haue althings be∣longing to God, and yet their demaūde mentioned not God at all. But Christes answere determined that, and more than they demaunded. And therfore he answered then not agayne, that it was lawfull to giue tribute to Cesar, but gaue them flat commaundement, for all things not only be∣longing to Cesar, but to Good also, bicause they pretended to be exempted from the Emperours subiection and taxes, béeing Gods peculier people, as the Popish prelats claym•…•… to be exempted from the gouernement and tribute of their Princes, bicause they be (as they pretende) the spiritualtie.

The residue of M. St. answere is nothing but wordes of course, and slaunderous bye quarels.

First that this admonition of the bishop serueth him, and* 1.1483 his brethren for many and necessarie purposes to rule and master their Princes by at their pleasure. That as often as their doings lyke them not they may freely disobey, and say it is not Gods worde, wherof the interpretation they referre to them selues.* 1.1484

Héerein M. St. you measure vs by your selues, none sée∣keth another in the ouen, they say, that hath not hidde him selfe in the Ouen before. This that ye clatter agaynst vs,

is the common practise of the Pope and his Prelates, so they vse Princes, and so they vse the worde of God. So long as the Gréeke Emperours enriched the Popes, and* 1.1485 suffred them to set vp Idolatrie, your Popes lyked well of them, but when they beganne to pull downe Images, then your Popes rebelled agaynst them, add stirred vp Pepia and Charles the great to inuade the Empire. So long as the Frenche Emperours endowed and de∣fended the Popes seigniories, they were the Popes chiefe and white sonnes. But so soone as they beganne to chalenge their righte in Italie, then your Popes fea∣ring the Frenche power, berefte agayne the Frenche Em∣peroures of it, and gaue it to the Germane Princes. But euen in Germanie, as any Princes woulde clayme their righte and interest of his estate, to be Emperoure in déede of Rome, as he is called in name, then the Popes did excommunicate him, and stirred his people to rebel∣lion agaynst him. And thus likewyse in Englande: so long as king Iohn withstoode the Pope, and his By∣shops practises, he was excommunicated, and his king∣dome giuen to the Frenche kings sonne, and the Dolphin willed to in•…•…ade Englande. But when king Iohn had made him selfe the Popes vassalle, and to holde the king∣dome in Capite of the Pope, he was absolued, and the Dol∣phin forbidden and accursed. So long as king Henry the eight wrote agaynst Luther, he had a golden Rose sent him, and was entituled, Defendour of the faythe. But when he in déede began to defende the fayth▪ and abolish the corrupter of the fayth and his corrupte Idolatrie, then he was excommunicate with booke, bel & candle: and al Prin∣ces that the Pope might moue, were set against him. And this practise he vsed with other christian Princes, calling one his eldest sonne, another the most Christian king, ano∣ther the Catholike king▪ &c. With suche clawes to master and rule Princes by, at his pleasure. But as often as any

Princes doings like him not, then to cause their subiectes to disobey them, and renounce their othes of allegeance.

And wherto else serueth all this your present wrangling and wresting of this text, Reddite Caesars quae sunt Caesaris: but to this purpose, that béeing not necessarily bounde by force of any wordes to pay, yea any tribute to our Prince, and that it standeth onely on a case of licence or possibility, we may if we please, it is lawfull if we do it, but we ough•…•… not, we be not bounde, it is not a precise necessitie of sub∣iectes. What is a gappe to all disobedience and rebellion, if this be not? and yet he obiecteth this to vs. No M. Stap. it is your owne, we acknowledge it to be a commaunde ment, due, and necessarie, that the Prince haue all thinges that belongeth to him, and what belongeth, in this contro∣uersie, is proued out of the olde Testament, which Christ héere confirmeth, and limiteth it by the duetie giuen also to God, putting no meane of Pope nor Prelate betwéene God and the Prince, as you do. And this limitation ye can not denie to be good and godly, for all your scoffing at it, to limitte the Princes authoritie by Gods worde. Which we do, not to disobey our Prince, but rather to giue to our Prince hir owne, knowing which is hirs, & which is Gods, least we should with you intermingle these dueties that Christ hath seuered, as your Pope vsurpeth bothe Cesars and Gods also, bicause he will not haue his power measu∣red by Gods worde, but will rule the worde of God, and referreth the interpretation thereof to him selfe. It is manyfest in him that he doth so. To lay it to vs, is but a manyfest slaunder. And this is a greater matter of all on your side, than the refusall of a cappe or a surplesse (wher∣at ye quarell) in some Protestantes on the other side, which dothe nothing abase, but rather (in comparison) shew the more your stubborne disobedience in all poyntes to your Princes authoritie, besides your abusing of Gods worde, wherof ye say we make a very welshmans hose. Or

but yet do you, M. St. and a great deale worsse too, but ye were best to crie, stoppe the théefe by another, for feare ye be espied to be the théefe your selfe.

But I pray you how do ye proue that we or the Byshop* 1.1486 so vse Gods worde?

For (say you) we playnely say that this kinde of supre∣macie is directly agaynst Gods holy worde.

Is this an argument M. St. that we abuse the worde of God, bicause you playnly say, this supremacie is direct∣ly agaynst Gods worde? In déede I heare ye say it, and saye it playnely, and as playne as ye can saye it, and that very often too, and make it a sufficient cause, saying: For we playnly say: But ye shoulde once at the least proue it as playnly withall, and not so often tell vs that ye playnely say so, and then we shoulde playnely sée, and say also with you, that ye vsed playne dealing, as well as playne sayings.

The. 21. Diuision.

IN this diuision the Byshop procéedeth further with other* 1.1487 testimonies out of the Apostles, with the fathers exposi∣tions therevpon. First, where Sainct Peter. •…•…. Ep. cap. 2. and Sainct Paule. Rom. 13. do not licence but commaunde obedience vnto Princes. Chrisostome stretcheth this obe∣dience to euery kinde of Ecclesiasticall person, so well as lay person. And maketh the obiecte or matter wherein the Princes gouernement is exercised, to be for the furthering and aduauncing of all vertuous actions, the correcting and repressing of all vices: and that not onely in all matters of the seconde Table, betwéene man and man: but of all matters in the first table, betwéene God & man, so well as of the other. To the confirmation wherof he citeth agayne S. Paule. 2. Timoth. 2. stretching the duetie of Princes, not onely to honestie of life, but also to godlinesse. Wherby

Sainct Augustine meaneth, the chiefe or proper worship, seruice, and religion of God. Shewing at large by Sainct Augustine, (who reasoning on the thirtéenth to the Rom. confuteth the Donatistes héerein) that Princes haue au∣thoritie for the furtherance and setting foorth of true reli∣gion, and suppressing of all heresies, schismes, and other ecclesiasticall abuses: so well as the furtheraunce and set∣ting foorth of ciuill iustice, and the punishement of morall vices.

To this M. Stapletons answere is parted into foure.* 1.1488 First, gathering a contraction of the Byshops allegations, he graunteth vnto them, and proueth that he and the Pro∣testantes agrée héerevpon.

Secondly, he pincheth and restrayneth his graunt, and endeuoreth to proue contradiction in the Protestantes.

Thirdly, he entreth into the answere of certayne wordes and testimonies by the Byshop alleaged.

Fourthly, he replieth on the bishop with other allegati∣ons out of Chrysostome, and theron frameth an argument on them, for his Priestes superioritie. The residue of his answere to S. Augustine he passeth ouer in wordes of course. In the first sayth M. Stapleton:

Heere is nothing, M. Horne. that importeth your surmi∣sed* 1.1489 supremacie. The effect of your processe is, Princes haue authoritie to mainteine, praise, and further the vertues of the first table, and to suppresse the cōtrarie, wherein onely con∣sisteth the true religion and spiritual seruice that is due from man to God And that he hath authoritie herein not only in the vertues or vices bidden or forbidden in the second table of Gods cōmaundementes, wherein are conteyned the du∣ties that one mā oweth to another. This is graūted M. Horn both of the Catholikes, and of the soberer sort of the Prote∣stantes (for Carolostadius, Pelargus, Struthius, with the whole rable of th' Anabaptistes denie it) that Princes haue authoritie both to further the obseruation, and to punishe

the breache of Gods cōmaundements, as well in the first ta∣ble, as in the seconde, that is, as well in suche actions as con∣cerne our duetie to God himselfe, as in the duetie of one man to another.

This were meetely well sayde M. St. that héere agayne thus liberally ye graūt, if it made any gret matter what ye* 1.1490 graunted or denied. The bishop & you should soone agrée sa∣uing for your instabilitie, that after you haue made your large graunts, ye still reuoke thē againe with some pelting distinction or qualification of them. Your graunt is this.

Princes haue authoritie both to maynteine, praise & fur∣ther the obseruation, and to suppresse and punish the breach of Gods cōmandements, aswel in the first table, as in the se∣conde that is, aswell in suche actions as concerne our duty to God himselfe (wherin onely consisteth the true religion and spirituall seruice) as in the duetie of one man to another.

But thus wel haue Princes authoritie to mainteine & fur∣ther, or to suppresse and punish in actions of the duety of one man to another conteyned in the second table: that no suche actions be exempted from their authoritie, but they ought to prayse, maynteine, and further al such actiōs as are bidden, and suppresse and punish al such actions as are for∣bidden, and that to do with moste great care, diligence, and ouersight, yea & supreme authoritie also vnder God therin:

Ergo, They may do so, by like righte, in all the actions of* 1.1491 the first table, concerning the true religion and spirituall seruice of God. Or else this (aswell) that ye put in twyce togither for more confirmation, commeth an ace behinde, and is belike as muche to say, as not as well, the quite con∣trarie to aswell.

Thus if ye stande to your owne words that the Princes authoritie is aswell in the one as in the other: they suffici∣ently importe all that we demaunde, and are as muche as this, The Prince is supreme gouernour, not onely in all tem∣porall▪ but also in all ecclesiasticall causes.

And therefore where ye say that they be Anabaptistes that denie it, ye conclude all the Papistes to be Anabap∣tistes, for they denie it. And your selfe are in the table also, that haue pu•…•…te oute this your Counterblast, chiefly to ouerturne it. Although, when ye be pressed, ye oftentimes graunte that whiche ouerturnes your selfe. Neither dothe your distinction helpe▪ ye, to the which ye runne for succour euen to your enimies.

But all this is (say you) as not onely the Catholike wry∣ters,* 1.1492 but Melancthon him selfe, and Caluine doe expound: Quod ad externam disciplinam attinet: As muche as ap∣pertayneth to externall discipline. And the Magistrate is the keeper and defender of bothe Tables, saythe Melanc∣thon, but agayne he addeth. Quod ad externos mores atti∣net: As muche as belongeth to externall maners, behauiour and demeanour.

Ye promise héere agayne to agrée with Caluine and Me∣lancthon in all this, whiche ye haue graunted, that the Prince hathe authoritie as well in the firste Table, as in the seconde, this onely excepted as they excepte. Quod ad externam disciplinam & externos mores attinet. So long as appertayneth to outwarde discipline and outwarde maners.

But al Ecclesiastical causes and orders for setting foorth religion, are either outwarde disciplines or outwarde rites, maners, behauiours, or demeanoures, (for as for inwarde actions or thoughtes the Prince meddleth not withall, but God alone: the minister onely pronounceth Gods threats or promises for them▪)

Ergo, Euen by this your own distinction ye confesse once agayne the Princes supremacie in all eccl. causes.

Neither dothe your reason folowing helpe ye any thing at all.

For (say you) in the first Table are cōteined many offences* 1.1493 and breaches, of the which the prince cā not iudge, & much

lesse are by him punishable: As are all such crimes which pro∣perly* 1.1494 belong to the court of conscience, to we•…•…e, misbelefe in God, mistrust in his mercie, contempt of his cōmandements, presumption of our selues, incredulitie and such like. VVhich all are offences against the first table, that is, against the loue that we owe to God. Contrarywise, true beleefe, confidence* 1.1495 in God, the feare of God, and such like, are the vertues of the first table, and of these Melancthon truly saith, Haec sunt ope∣ra prime tabulae, These are the vertues of the first table.

All this M. St. that ye speake, is beside the question, con∣cerning* 1.1496 such crimes or vertues of the first table properly be∣longing to the courte of Conscience. What néede ye stande so long descanting on the first table? as though in the secōd table many such vices were not lurking in the hart•…•… of mā, for which the Prince also can make no lawe. For, he can not compel his subiects to beare no hate nor wrath in their hartes: nor to lust or desire in their harts vnlawfully their neighboures wife and goodes: nor to loue another as them selues. All which are of the second table, properly also be∣longing to the court of conscience. You might as well haue added these of the second, as the other of the first table, but then had your falshood bene espied, going aboute by this meanes to reuoke all your graunt for the first table, that be∣cause the Prince cannot punish such inwarde and peculiar breaches: therefore he can not iudge vpon the doctrine and open causes, and so ye simply conclude:

The punishing, correcting, or iudging of these, appertaine* 1.1497 nothing to the auctoritie of the Prince, or to any his lawes, but onely are iudged, corrected and punished, by the speciall sworde, of excommunicatiō, of binding of sinnes, and enbar∣ring the vse of holy Sacramentes, by the order and auctoritie of the Priest onely and spirituall Magistrate.

Ye might M. St. as well conclude this of the second ta∣ble also, and quite debar the Prince of all dealing in either table, bicause the inwarde action of either table, the Prince

can not punish, & so defeate all your graunt which before ye confessed, that the furthering or punishing for both the tables as well of the first as of the second belongeth to the Princes aucthoritie, Quod ad externam disciplinam & mores atti∣net: So far as belongeth to outwarde discipline and manners. And now ye say the quite contrary, he can not punishe nor Iudge the offences of the first table, if ye meane▪ the open offences thereof he can do it by your own limitacion, Quod ad externam disciplinam & mores attinet. And so you make a fallacion, à secundum quid ad simpliciter except ye meane (as your reason pretendeth) properly as yet belonging to the courte of conscience betwene God & him. Then, whether it be in the first, or in the second table: the Prince in déede can not iudge or punish the secrete offence, no nor properly the minister but so God alone. The minister doth but pronoūce Gods sentence: and the Magistrate punisheth it, be it in the first or secōd table, come it once to y^e breach of external •…•…tes & discipline, as your selfe do limite their aucthoritie, & there in haue promised to agrée with Caluin and Melancthon.

But as in this your first parte ye haue graunted so much as suffiseth all the matter, besides the referring your selfe to Caluins and Melancthons iudgement: so in your second parte, ye wrest and wrangle about your graunt, and labour to proue contradiction in thē, though in déede you can finde none, and yet (would ye looke on your selfe) ye should finde an heape of fowle & manifest contradictions, besides those foresaide euen in this present chapter.

Againe (say you) whereas, the chiefe vertue of the first ta∣ble* 1.1498 is to beleeue in God, to know him, and to haue the true faith of him and in him, in Externall regiment (as to pu∣nish open blasphemie, to make lawes against Heretikes, to honour and maintayne the true seruice of God) Princes e∣specially Christians, ought to furder aide, and mayntaine the same: but to iudge of it, and to determine, which is the true faith in God, how and after what manner he ought to be ser∣ued,

what doctrine ought to be published in that behalfe, the Prince hath no aucthoritie or power at all.

Sée how ye first pinche and wrest your former graunt* 1.1499 M. Stapl. and inconclusion take it quite away. Before ye saide, Christian Princes had the regiment in externall mat∣ters, now ye come in with externall regiment. Right now, the Prince had authoritie to further and punish, ouer the one table as well as the other: and now, he cannot determine so much as which table is which. Right now, he had autho∣ritie, Quoad externos mores as much as belongeth to exter∣nall manners: now, he must not iudge how or after what manner God ought to be serued. Right now, he had Exter∣nam disciplinam, the outward discipline: now, to know what doctrine or discipline ought to be published, he hath no au∣thoritie or power at all. This géere hangeth trimly togi∣ther, and haue we not gotten a faire graunt? we thought as the Papistes had wont to say, we had God in the Ambry, but, the Diuell I see was in the Horologe.

Now after he hath renoked his graunt he beginneth to* 1.1500 quarrell with the Protestants, with whome before he said, he and all his felowship would agrée, and first he begin∣neth to proue contradiction in Melancthon. His argument is thus.

Melancthon saith, that Princes ought to looke vnto true* 1.1501 doctrine, to correct the Churches when the Bishops falle of their dutie, yea and to consider the doctrine it selfe.

Againe, the same Melancthon saith, they must make no newe doctrines in the Churche, neither institute any wor∣ships.

Ergo, Melancthon either recanteth as better aduised, or writeth playne contraries to him selfe.

How hath malice blinded you M St? can ye sée no lesser difference than contrarie, betwéene looking to the olde and coynyng newe, betwéene considering and instituting worships? Surely, then can ye neuer consider, nor well

looke vnto (not the truth) but euen your owne follie, that dreame of recanting and contradictions in other, hauing your selfe scarse written a line before, wherein so plainly ye contraried your owne wordes, in recanting your former graunt.

Thus, as in vaine ye séeke for cōtradiction in Melācthōs wordes, so as fondly do ye conclude thereon your purpose.

Melācthon would not haue Princes make new doctrines and worships of God, nor haue the functions of both Magi∣strates spirituall and temporall to be confounded:

Ergo, he taketh away all auctoritie from Princes in iud∣ging and determining of doctrine.

But what dealing call ye this M. St? that in translating* 1.1502 Melancthons sentences, ye both falsely wrest them, & add•…•… of your own vnto them. Where Melancthon saith, Nec in∣stituant cultus, Neither let them institute (or appoynt of new) any worshipping of God, you translate it neither appoint a∣ny worshipping of God. As though they might not appoint that true worship of God, that God hath appointed him selfe to be worshipped by. Where Melancthon speaketh only of appointing other new deuised worships, such as the Popish worships are. Likewise speaking of the functions, ye clappe in of your owne these wordes (of bothe Magi∣strates) calling the ministers magistrates, whiche wordes Melancthon hath not. And thus ye loue al•…•…e to tell your fale falsly. And as you thus deale with Melancthon, so frō him ye runne to M. Nowell, and say:

Yea, M. Nowell him selfe with a great stomacke biddeth* 1.1503 vs shew where they denie that godly and learned Priestes might iudge according to the sinceritie of doctrine. As though whē the Prince and his successours are made supreme gouernours without any limitacion, it fall not often out, that the Bishop be he neuer so learned or godly, shall not once be admitted to iudge of true doctrine except the doctrine please the Prince.

Ye will neuer leaue your falsehood M. Stap. w•…•… sayth that Princes made supreme gouernours without any limita∣tion? Who saith the Bishop be he neuer so godly or learned, shall not once be admitted to iudge of true doctrine, except the doctrine please the Prince? I•…•… there any that saith so, or doth so, except your Pop•…•…e He in déed chalengeth a supreme gouernaunce without limits, in as large and •…•…ple 〈◊〉〈◊〉 as belongeth vnto Christ. He will suffer no doctrine but that which pleaseth him, and he will be the onely chiefe* 1.1504 Iudge thereof. This is not the gouernance that we ascribe to Princes, but such as is limitted by Gods worde, such as stretcheth not further tha•…•… the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of their dominions, suche as suffreth godly and learned Priestes according to Gods worde, to iudge of the synceritie of doctrine, for this you confesse that master Nowell sayth, and therefore ye confesse your selfe to be a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 lyer, and to speake contrari•…•…, when ye bring in th•…•… the Protestants, to acknowledge a limitation, and •…•…t 〈◊〉〈◊〉 say, we make a gouernement without any lymitation. Neither is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 any contradiction in master Nowels saying to be anie more gathered, than of Melancthon•…•… wordes: Princes are supreme gouernours, Ergo, Prelates may not iudge of true doctrine. Which is as wi•…•…e a sequele as the other agaynst Melancthon. Ye might wel conclude it against your Pope, that chalengeth such as absolute 〈◊〉〈◊〉, that all the iudgement of doctrine shoulde 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to him to iudge according as he please bot•…•… quite besides, and quite contra∣rie to Gods worde.* 1.1505

As though (say you) there had not bene a statute made de∣claring and enacting the Queenes maiestie, yea & hir high∣nesse successours (without exception or limitation of godly and vng•…•…dly, and yet I trowe no Bishops) to be the supreme gouernour in all things and causes as well spirituall as tem∣porall. As though M. St. this were a good argument.

The statute declareth hir highnesse supreme gouernment▪

without limiting it vnder the Bishops gouernment.

Ergo, the Bishops can not iudge of true doctrine, and the Princes gouernment is without all limitation.

As though their were no difference betwéene supreme gouernment, and euery other gouernment, or betwéene gouernment and iudgement. And as though the statute ex∣〈…〉〈…〉 not it selfe, what kinde of supreme gouernment is y••••lded in all things and causes Ecclesiasticall, nothing de∣barring the Bishops and ministers of their iudgement and ministerie, but rather ouerséeing them to giue their iudge∣ment and administration rightly.

As though you master Horne (say you) had not written,* 1.1506 that in both tables the Prince hath authoritie to erect▪ and correct, to farther and restraine, to allow and punish, the ver∣tue and vices thereto apperteyning.

As though your selfe M. Stapl. had not written also, and graunted the same euen right now, and that not for your selfe onely, but for all your followes besides, to agree with Melancthon and Caluin therein.

Or as though (say you) the gouernour in all causes, is not* 1.1507 also a iudge in all causes▪

Or as though M. St. his gouernment or iudgment were any preiudice to the gouernment or iudgement that belong∣eth to the Pastours office.

Or as though (say you) it were not commonly so taken and* 1.1508 vnderstanded of a thousand in England, which haue taken the othe to their great domna•…•…ion, but if they repent.

Or as though not rather on the contrarie, it were not your so wilfull and malitious mistaking of it, with a peuish obstinacie to withstande the manifest truth, that refuse the othe of your dutifull obedience, to your great damnation in deede, but if yee repent betymes. And thus still aun∣swering your As though, with another as though: ye can finde no contradiction nor absurditie neyther in Melan∣cthon, Caluin, Master Nowell, nor the Bishops sayings

herein. As though▪ your selfe i•…•… the meane time were clere aboorde, and not in euery one of your quarels, either m•…•…st fonde and absurde, or quite contrarie to your owne sayings and graunts made so late before.

The conclusion of this your second part, is this.

You therefore master Horne▪ which talke so confusely and generally of the Princes authoritie in both tables, do yet say nothing nor proue nothing this generall and absolute au∣thoritie in all things and causes, as lustily without exception the othe expresseth, and therefore ye bring indeed nothing to proue your principall purpose, to the which all your proues shoulde be directed.

For generall and confuse talke of the princes authoritie,* 1.1509 you belie the Bishop master Stap. he made so plaine and flatte a limitation that you coulde not abide it▪ it is your Pope that chalengeth such a general and absolute authoritie, and your selfe that talke of the Princes authoritie confuse∣ly, to deface Princes, as confounding and intermedling▪ in the office and authoritie p•…•…rteyning to the clergie, whiche the othe requireth not, further than such supreme autho∣ritie, as ouerse•…•…th, careth, prouideth for, directeth, and gouerneth all matter persons Ecclesiasticall and temporal, so well in matters of the first table, as in the seconde, that is to say, so well in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall matters, as temporall. Quod ad externam disciplinam, Quod externo•…•… mores attinet. So farre as perteynes to externall discipline, and belongs to externall behauiour. And this is not onely the issue in question, but also (as is proued) comprehēdeth the othe and principall purpose, whervpon ye call so fast, to haue all the proues directed therto, as the Bishop here hath done, and your selfe hath graunted the same.

Your third part is a quarelling at the sentence of s. Paule cited by the B. Tim. 2. that kings and rulers are or∣deyned of God for these two purposes, that their people mighte liue a peaceable lyfe, throughe

their gouernment, both in godlinesse, and in ho∣nestie, comprehending in these two wordes, whatsoeuer is commaunded in the first or second table. Here as ye sée hath the Bishop cited once againe another sentence oute of the new testament: how fitly to the matter, & how effectuall to the purpose, we shall sée anon. Onely now I note it to shew your former vntruth M. St. saying the Bishop onely cited a sentence or two out of the new testament besides your fro∣warde blindnesse the more to be noted herein. For as there ye could not, or would not sée this sentence, as other that you omit likewise: so here ye note particulerly nothing so much as this onely sentence, yea you will not let escape the ad∣uantage (as you conceyued) of one word, & yet the word, and al, when al is done, maketh cleane against you. For where, in citing this sentence, the B. (by the way of a parenthesis)* 1.1510 alleged S. Augustines interpretation for the worde godli∣nesse, to import the true and chief or proper worship of God: M. Stap. obiecteth falsehood and vntrue reporte, or at least mistaking of S. Augustine. And concludeth thereon a gene∣rall 〈◊〉〈◊〉, so aptly and truely ye alleage your doctours.

Alacke master Stap. that ye shoulde be driuen to these thiftes, that finding no iust matter wherein to improue the Bishop, ye runne to such trifling quarels as this: As though* 1.1511 the Bishop had some great foyle by Saint Augustines wordes, or they had bene so darke and mysticall, that they coulde not lightly haue béene vnderstood. Saint Augustines* 1.1512 wordes are these: Sed loquemar de hominis sapientia, &c. But we wil speake of the wisedome of man, howbeit of true wise∣dome, that is according to God the true chiefe worship of him, which in one word is in Greke called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 VVhich name our men (as we haue alreadie declared) willing also to interprete it in one woorde, called it godlinesse. VVhen godlinesse among the Greekes is more vsually called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, bycause it can not perfitely be interpre∣ted in one woorde, is interpreted better in two woordes,

so that it is rather called Gods worship. Thus farre S. Augu∣stine: and what is here that swerueth from the B. saying? That S. Augustine interpreteth godlynesse the true worship of God. Which as it is true in both wor∣des (for what signifieth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 but ageed, iust, lawfull, and godly worshippe) so S. Augustine vnderstode it in both wordes, although the one in vsuall speach want a proper Latine name, as hath the other. And likewise in our Eng∣lishe tongue, while we would expresse Gods worship, which is two wordes after the Latine, and woulde terme it in one worde, we call it Godlynesse, as S. Augustine telleth howe the Latines called it Pietas. True it is that S. Paule vseth the worde 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which the Bishop denieth not. Neyther haue ye anye more fault to finde with his, than with S. Augustines, or any others trāslation calling it god∣lynesse. If ye be so angry that the Bishop shoulde say it mea∣neth Gods seruice, why be ye not angry with your selfe? Do ye not sée how like a blynde hobbe about the house (as ye me∣rily terme it) ye r•…•…p your selfe vpon the sc•…•…nce? for did not your selfe both in the beginning of this Chap. tell vs, that in the first table consisted the true religion and spiritual seruice that is due from man to God? And also euen in this your further finding fault, ye confesse, that by their peaceable gouernement we might with more quiet attende to Gods seruice: and that this was S. Paules only meaning, and no further: which were it so, yet thereby then •…•…ement, not onely godlinesse of lyfe, but also Gods seruice as your self interpret it, & yet ye blame the Bishop for saying S. Augustine s•…•… interpretes it. But the Bishop not only proued this to be S. Augustines minde by this sentence alone, but by m•…•… sentences afterward, all which it pleased you to let alone, and go sneaking by them, and come peaking in with this. Howbeit, euen in this to sa∣tisfie* 1.1513 ye further, ye shal sée that this is not only S. Augusti∣nes exposition, by this worde Godlynesse, to vnderstande Gods seruice and true religion: but the exposition of other fa∣thers

also.

Chrysostome vnderstandeth this woorde Godlynesse so* 1.1514 largely, that it comprehendeth al tru•…•…h offaith, doctrine, re∣ligion & integ•…•…itie of life also. Omne inquit dogma. &c. Euery opinion (saith he) is made perfect not onely with godlynesse, but also with integritie of life. I or godlinesse is also to be sought for in that part. For, what auayleth it, if keping the godlynesse of faith, thou art wicked in workes. Likewise S. Ambrose, Vt in pac•…•….* 1.1515 &c. That in peace, in tranquilitie of minde, and quietly we myght serue God the Lorde. &c. That therefore these things might bee kept, quietnesse is necessary, that acceptable obedience might bee rendred vnto God. So Hai•…•…o, Pietas •…•…st •…•…ulius & religio o•…•…∣nipotentis* 1.1516 des. &c. Godlynesse is the worship and religion of al∣mightie God. So thē glosse interlined. Cum omni pietate & castitate, with all godlynesse and chastitie, id est, •…•…ultu, & reli∣gione,* 1.1517 & integritate fides, that is to say, the worship, and religion, and integritie of fayth. And Lyra himselfe, In omni pietate, id est, cultu dei debite, In all godlynesse, that is to say, in the dut•…•…full worship of God. So likewyse Hygh the Car•…•…inall, In omni pietate, in cultu & religione diuina▪ In all godlynesse, that is, in the worship and diuine religion. Et 〈◊〉〈◊〉. integritate fides, hac duo sunt necessaria, vt fides interior seruetur incorr•…•…pta, & cul∣tiu exterior diuin•…•… in omnibus teneatur. And in chastitie, that is, in the integritie of faith, these two are necessarie, that the inwarde •…•…ayth shoulde be kept incorrupted▪ and that the outwarde worship should be holden in all diuine things. This sufficeth to cléere the Bishop of wresting the signification of the worde Godly∣nesse, affirming it to meane the true, chiefe, or pro∣per worship of God, contrarie to your péeuishe wre∣sting, although therein ye contrarie your owne selfe, con∣fessing also that it meaneth Gods seruice, and yet ye quar∣rell thereat in the Bishop, saying: As though Princes hauing charge therof, should also haue authoritie to appoint such worship.

If ye meane by appointing such absolute authoritie as your* 1.1518 Pope vsurpeth: that the appointment, of what he please to

appoynt for a worship and seruice of God, belongeth to him: it is but your ordinarie sur•…•…ised slaunder, and is the proper doing of your Pope. If ye meane a charge to appoint or com∣maund, that the only true religion which God hath appoin∣ted, be set forth, and by the ministers of God obserued: It is playne, y^e S. Paule and al these fathers ment no lesse.

Nay say you, S. Paule speaketh here of no such, or of any au∣thoritie* 1.1519 at all in Princes, but only that by their peaceable gouermēt, we might with the more quiet attende to Gods seruice.

What, M. St? speaketh S. Paule there of no authoritie at all in Princes? saith he not in most plaine wordes: for kings and all men that be in authoritie? Haue those that be in authoritie, no authoritie at all? What a saying is this, and yet sée how your selfe confute your selfe. Going about to embarre their au∣thority, ye say, he mē•…•…ioned their peaceable gouernmēt▪ He did so in déede M. St. But what gouernment, or what peaceable estate of gouernment had they, if they had no authoritie at all. It sée meth that while ye 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to saye somewhat against their authoritie,)) ye neyt•…•…, o•…•… regarde nor can tell what ye say of them, nor of the Apostles •…•…eyther, to maintayne your false quarrell.

Now, as ye further procéede, so still ye bring your selfe* 1.1520 more in the briers.

But will yee knowe (say you) M. Ho•…•…ne, why thapostles both Saint Peter and Saint Paule so earnestly taught at that time obe∣dience to Princes?

Ha, go to then M. St. belike they tau•…•…ht obedience to Prin∣ces, more earnestly than your Popishe Prelates haue taught or pract sed since that time, or than your selfe haue her•…•… taught vs, not ouer earnestly, but God wote full s•…•…enderly, or rather by all shifts and fetches of your wits, haue sought to deface and impu•…•…nt their authoritie. But how agréeth this with S. Paule earnest teaching. Yea▪ howe woulde ye make Saint Paule agrée to himselfe? To say that he speaketh there of no authoritie at all in Princes, and yet that here he

taught obedience to Princes so earnestlye. What obedience taught he, if he taught not their authoritie at all? What earnest∣nesse vsed he then therein? but let vs sée (as ye would haue vs) what was the cause of the Apostles earnestnesse.

This was the cause. In the beginning of the Church some Chri∣stians* 1.1521 were of this opinion, that, for that they were Christian men, they were exempted from the lawes of the Infidell Princes, and were not bounde to pay them any tribute, or otherwise to o∣bey them. To represse and reforme this wrong iudgemēt of theirs, the Apostles Peter and Paule by you named, diligently employed themselues. And was this a wrong opinion and iudgement M. Stapleton, and with such earnestnesse and diligence employed of the Apostles Peter and Paule to be repressed and reformed, that Christians, for that they were Christian men, were exempted from the lawes of the Infidell Princes, and were not bound to pay them any tribute, or otherwise to obey them? What a right opinion and iudgement then was this of him, that affirmed not only the same of Infidell Princes, but of Christian Princes to? that we be not bounde by force of anye wordes of Christes sentence (which as •…•…latly commaundeth vs, as any of these the Apo∣stles sentences doe) to obey or paye so much as tribute to our Christian Princes? Doe ye not knowe who this was that helde this wrong opinion M. Stapleton? Well, who soe∣uer it was, I thinke be must with shame saye that of him selfe which he spake of another, that eyther hee recanteth as better aduised, or else writeth playne contrary to himselfe.* 1.1522

But nowe sayth M. St. for the Apostles sentences.

VVhose sayings can not implye your pretensed gouernment,* 1.1523 vnlesse ye will say that Nero the wicked and heathenishe Empe∣rour, was in his time the supreme head of all the Church of Christ, throughout the Empire, as well in causes spirituall as temporall.

As before (M. Stapleton) you captiously restrained Chri∣stes generall commaundement of obedience to Princes, only to the Emperour: so doe ye here againe, besides, that ye sticke also in the person, abusing his office, and let the dutie

of his office go. Whereas S. Paule writeth generally, not only for those then present, but for all kinges or any other in authoritie both then and from thenceforth for euer. And* 1.1524 so doe all the Expositours gather a generall rule, for all Christians towards their christian Princes, although Ne∣ro and other princes then, were wicked and Heathenishe infi∣dels. Yet in the duetie of their estate, to the which God had called them, they ought neither to haue bene wic∣ked nor Heathenish Infidels, but godly and faithf•…•…ll defenders and setters forth of Christ his true religiō. To reason ther∣fore from such persons abuses, therevpon to denie from all princes the dutie of their lawfull authoritie: is as naughtie an argument, as Nero himselfe was naughtie. And Chry∣sostome flatly confuteth this cauill of the Princes person, Ne{que} enin de quouis. &c. For neyther I speake now (sayth he) of* 1.1525 any one of the Princes, but of the matter itselfe. And againe, Propterea non dicit, non enim princeps est. &c. VVherefore hee sayth not, there is no Prince but of God, but he disputeth of the matter it selfe, saying there is no power but of God. The powers that are, they are from God▪ As when any wise man sayth, that the woman is knit of God vnto the man: he sayth no other thing, thā that God hath ordeyned mariage, not that euery man, how so euer he dwelleth togither with a woman, is ioyned vnto him of God, for, we see many dwelling togither in euill, not according to the lawes of mariage, which yet notwithstanding we impute not vnto God. This cauillation therefore (how naughtie soeuer the Prince were) restraineth not the Apostles meaning which tendeth to the office and not to the person, least of all to those present persons then liuing. For were they neuer so wicked, other were good, that knew the dutie of their estate & gouernment, exercising it both in the direction of vertues & punishment of vices, as well of the first as of the seconde table, & this your self haue confessed to be the dutie of Prin∣ces, and why had it not bene Neroes duetie to? And I praye you what lacketh this of all ecclesiasticall causes, the vertues

and vices of the first and seconde table? But ye thinke to escape with this your common exception, saying:

And yet in temporall and ciuill matters I graunt we ought to be* 1.1526 subiect not only to Christians, but euen to infidels also being our Princes, without anye exception of Apostle, Euangelist, Prophete, Priest, or Monke, as ye alleage out of Chrysostome.

And doe you thinke thus in déede M. St. as ye saye? and shall we haue any better holde of you in your graunt once a∣gain, be it euen but for temporall & ciuil matters? And yet this fayleth much of that ye graunted before, of the first as well as of y^e second table. Be Princes y^e Clergies superiors now? Before ye sayds that Princes should take to much vpon them to thinke themselues ecclesiasticall persons superiors, speaking simply of superiours without your distinction of ciuill and* 1.1527 temporall or spirituall and ecclesiasticall matters. But sée M. St. what ye haue graūted here. It is not vnknown to you that the Pope in no case can abide, no not for ciuill and tem∣porall matters, to be subiect to any Christian Prince or Em∣perour, but contendeth euen therein also to be the farre su∣periour: and weareth thrée crownes where the Emperour weareth but one: and that one he hath set on & turned off with his foote, and made him kisse his foote, and troad vp∣on him with his foote, and as his page to holde his stirrop to his foote: and claimes to giue or take awaye his estate. And you say here (for all estates of the clergie,) VVe ought to be subiect not onely to Christians, but euen to Infidels also be∣ing our Princes, without any exception of Apostle, Euangelist, Pro∣phete, Priest, or Monke. What? and is your Pope none of these Maister Stapleton? an Apostle he is not without a pseudo: nor he calles himselfe an Apostle, but Apostolicall. Much lesse he is an Euangelist, and least a Prophete, except a lying Prophete. Sometimes in déede he hath bene a Monke, but is there any Pope not a priest? If he be a Priest, then ought he by your owne confession, to be subiect to the Em∣perour, and in refusing this subiection, what can ye make of

him, but, as your selfe to your Prince: so he to his Prince, a very rebell and vsurper against his prince.

If ye say the Emperour is not his prince: why is he then named the Emperor of Rome, is not y^e name of an Emperor,* 1.1528 y^e name of y^e chiefest Principalitie? And then if he be Emperor or king of the Romaines, howe ought not the Pope (being a Romaine, or dwelling at Rome within this Princes kingdome or Empyre) be subiect to this king or Emperour at the least (as ye say) in temporall and ciuill matters? Doe ye thinke to es∣cape, in saying, VVe ought to be subiect to our Princes without exception, but he ought not? I had thought ye had spoken of all Christiana, and had simply m•…•…nt as Chrysostome did (to whome ye referre your selfe) who speaketh in generall of euery man 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉 fuer•…•…, or whosoeuer thou art, which wordes ye dissemble and omit. So that if your Pope be of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 calling, and he be no more a Priest than Pope Ioane, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 he a soule, be he a bodye: he ought by your owne graunt to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 subiect to the Emperour of Rome in these matters, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Emperour to be subiect vnto him. Whiche 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Pope shall vnderstande, •…•…owe for his 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and for all his ciuill and temporall matters, you woulde bring him to hys olde obedience 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Emperour, as he hath bene: I thinke he will 〈◊〉〈◊〉 s•…•…all thanke Maister Stapleton for your labour.

But all this subiection (saye you) is but graun∣ted in temporall and ciuill matters. Doth Saint Paule (Mai∣ster Stapleton) alleage this distinction, or Chrysostome, to whō ye reforro your selfe? no M. St. they make no such re∣straint, but stretch this obedience, as to al ecclesiastical per∣sons, so principally to all ec•…•…l▪ matters, & to the setting forth Gods religon▪ And so Pauledoth call the Prince Gods mi∣nister▪ And Chrysostome sayth, Neque enim ista subiectio pi•…•…∣tatem subuertit, for neyther this subiectiō ouerturneth godynesse.

And vpon these words, He is the minister of God, a reuenger to him that doth euil: He saith, Againe, least thou shouldst start back,* 1.1529 hearing of punishment, correction, and the sword: he mentioneth againe that the Prince fulfilleth the lawe of God, for what though the Prince himselfe know it not? yet God hath so formed and or∣deined it. If therfore either he punish or aduance, he is the minister of God, maintaining vertue, abolishing wickednesse, euen bicause God would haue it so. By what reason repugnest thou in striuing against him, that bringeth such good things, and goeth before thee, and prepareth a way for thy affaires? for many there are, which at the first exercised vertue for respect of the magistrate, but at the length they cleaued thervnto euen for the feare of God. For things* 1.1530 to come do not so moue the grosser sort, as present things. He ther∣fore that prepareth the minds of many both with feare and honor, that they may be made fitter for the worde of doctrine, is worthily called the minister of God. In which words he plainly sheweth that the Princes ministery, wherby he is called Gods mini∣ster, consisteth in making vs fit & apt receiuers of the word•…•… of doctrine, which the minister teacheth, & the Prince by pu∣nishing or rewarding goeth before, & prepareth a waye, and bringeth to vs, making vs apt to receyue, either for feare 〈◊〉〈◊〉 loue this benefit by his minist•…•…rie. In which work as y^e A∣postles & Preachers, for the vtterāce of y^e word of doctrine, are called the workers togither with God: so the Prince in pre∣paring this way to the worde, & making vs apt to it, is like∣wise said of Chrysostom, that he worketh togither with the will of God. Wherin as we must not rep•…•…gne against y^e prince, so this obedience that we owe vnto him, is not only in tem∣porall and ciuill matters: but in making vs apt for the worde of doctrine, in which all eccl. matters are comprehended.

Now after M. St. hath thus stoode quarrelling in vain w^t the B. allegations, he fourthly entreth into a reply vpon the B. w^t other allegations collected out of y^e same father Chry∣sost. & therō frameth an argument against y^e Princes supe∣riority. In y^e forhed wherof he prefixeth this marginal note, y^e Priesthode is aboue a kingdom, which note as it is true in y^e

sense that Chrysost. vnderstandeth it: so maketh it nothing that he is abou•…•… him in y^e supreme gouernment & directiō of all eccl. causes, which is y^e present questiō, & y^e thing that M. 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ calleth so ostē at other times vpō. But now saith M. St.

As contrariwise the Prince himselfe is for ecclesiasticall & spirituall causes, subiect to his spiritual ruler. VVhich Chry∣sostome himselfe, of all men doth best declare. Alij sunt ter∣mini. &c. The boundes of a Kingdome, and of Priesthoode (sayth Chrysostome) are not all one: this Kingdome passeth the other: this King is not knowne by visible things, neither hath his estimation, for precious stones he glistreth withall, or for his gay golden glistring apparel. The other King hath the ordring of those worldly things: the authoritie of Priesthood commeth from heauen. VVhatsoeuer thou shalt binde vpon* 1.1531 earth, shall be bounde in heaue•…•…. To the King those things that are here in the worlde are committed, but to me ce∣lestiall things are committed: VVhen I say, to mee, I vnder∣stande to a Priest. Andanon after he sayth. Regi corpora. &c. The bodies are cōmitted to the King, the soules to the priest. The King pardoneth the faultes of the bodie, the Priest par∣doneth the faultes of the soule. The King forceth, the Priest exhorteth, the one by necessitie, the other by giuing councel: the one hath visible armour, the other spirituall. He warreth agaynst the barbarous, I warre agaynst the deuill. This prin∣cipalitie is the greater, and therefore the King doth put his heade vnder the Priestes handes. And euery where in the olde scripture Priestes did annoynt the Kings. Among all o∣ther bookes of the said Chrysostome, his booke de sacerdotio, is freighted with a number of like and more notable senten∣ces, for the Priestes superioritie aboue the Prince.

For the other sentences in Chrysostome, I can not di∣rectly aunswere them master Stapleton, till ye set them downe. I thinke they will all come in the ende, to the effect* 1.1532 of this sentence here, so often by all yourside alleaged. Ye cite Chrysostome, as though it were at the full. Where

in déede ye cut off both the heade the middle, and taile of his sentence, whereby (considering the occasion and purpose of his wordes) we might sée that they shoulde not be wrested from his meaning. Chrysostome vpon these wordes of the Prophet Esay, Factum est anno quo mortu•…•…s est Ozias rex. It came to passe in the yere that king Ozias died: after a Pre∣face made of Priestes mariage, taking occasion of the Pro∣phet Esays wife: telleth of Ozias presumption, Uerum hic Ozias, &c. but this Ozias, when he was a crowned King, bi∣cause he was iust, waxed hawtie in minde, and conceyuing a greater courage than was for his estate, entred into the tem∣ple. And what sayth Esay? He entred into the holy of holies, and sayde I will offer incense. He being a King, vsurpeth the principalitie of the priesthood. I will (sayth he) offer incense bicause I am iust. But abide within thy bounds. And so Chry∣sostome procéedeth in the sentence cited by you, Alij sunt ter∣mini: The boundes of a kingdome, & of a priesthood are not al one. &c. Which sentence ye truly cite, til ye come to these wordes: VVhen I say, to me, I vnderstand a priest. And there ye strike of m•…•… words of Chrysostam, than ye cited. Which belike ye do for two purposes. Partly, for that ye could not abide to heare of any vices or discommendation in priests, & therfore ye cull out only that, which soundeth to their praise & dignitie. Partly, for that this would haue made the purpose of Chrysost, playner, reprouing them that dis•…•…erne not, be∣twene the office, & the persō. At which fault your self so late did stūble in princes, not discerning between Neroes vices, & a princes office. As in Chrysostoms time, same despised the office of a priest, bicause of the faults of diuerse priests. The wordes of Chrysostome (folowing those you cite) are these: Therefore when thou seest an vnworthie priest, slaunder not the priesthod. For thou oughtest not to cōdemne the things, but him that euill vseth a good thing. Syth Iudas also was a traytor, howbeit, for this the order Apostolical is not accused, but the mind of him. Neither is it the fault of the priesthood,

but of the euill mind. And thou therfore blame not the priest∣hod, but the priest, that vseth euill a good thing. For if one dis∣pute with thee, and say, seest thou yonder Christian•…•… answere thou: but I speak not to thee of the persons, but of the things, or else, how many phisitions haue bene made slaughtermen, & haue giuen poisons for remedies? And yet I dispise not the arte, but him that euill vseth the arte. How many shipmē haue guided euill their ships? yet is not the arte of sayling euill, but the mind of them. If the Christian man be wicked, accuse not thou the profession & the priesthood, but him that euill vseth a good thing. These are Chrysostomes wordes, which you omit, and then followeth as you recite, Reg•…•… corpora &c. The bodies are cōmitted to the king and so forth, as ye say, til ye come to the knitting vp of the sentence with Ozias, which again you omit. Verū rex. &c. But that king going beyond his bounds, and passing the measure of the kingdom, attēpted to adde somwhat more, and entred into the temple, willing with authoritie to offer incense. VVhat therfore sayth the priest? It is not lawfull for thee Ozias, to offer incense. Behold libertie: behold a mind that knoweth not bōdage: behold a tong tou∣ching the heauens: behold liberty that cannot be restrained: behold the body of a mā, & the mind of an angel: behold one that goeth on the groūd, & is cōuersant in heauē. Thou sawest a king, thou sawest not a diademe. Tel not me it is a kingdom, where is the transgression of lawes. It is not lawful for thee (O king) to offer incēse. It is not lawful for thee to come into the holy of holies. Thou passest thy boūds: thou sekest things not graūted to thee, & therfore shalt leese the things thou hast re∣ceiued. It is not lawful for thee to offer incēse: but this is giuen vnto the priests. This is not thine, but this is mine: haue I vsur∣ped on me thy purple? vsurpe not thou my priesthod. It is not lawful for thee to offer incēs•…•… but only for the sons of Aarō.

By this, it plainly appeareth wherevpon Chrysost. spea∣keth, to wete, of the seuerall functions of the spirituall pa∣stor and the prince and that it is not lawfull for the prince

to intrude himself into the office of the diuine minister. He may not more take vpō him to administer the diuine sacra∣ments of christ his church now, although he be the prince (to the which not with standing you admitted womē) thā might Ozias sacrifice then. For as then God had appoynted who should sacrifice, so hath he apointed who should now mini∣ster his sacramēts. Now if ye had shewed that the supreme gouernment ouer ecclesiasticall causes, the ouersight and direction of the setting forth of Gods true religion, the abo∣lishing of false religion, and the deposing of Idolatrous Priestes, that obs•…•…inately mainteyne errours, agaynst the expresse worde of God, be the like doing to this fact of Ozi∣as: if ye had proued that the Prince hath euer done or doth,* 1.1533 or claymeth to do the like fact to this of Ozias, in ministring the sacrament: then had you alleaged this sentence to some purpose, else maketh it nothing to the purpose, but maketh agaynst your popish mid wiues, they rather play the part of Ozias: It maketh not agaynst y^e Q. Maiestie, but most of all against your Pope himselfe, that thinketh he playth the high priests part, and is so farre therfrom, that none is more like than he to this vsurper, entring into the holyest place, and vsurping the priesthood, the sacrifice, the power and the honour that belongeth onely to Iesus Christe himselfe.

As for the office of the true minister of God (which ney∣ther* 1.1534 your Pope nor you his sha•…•…elings ar•…•…) is in déede as Chrysostom sayth both a distinct function from the princes, and hath other boundes, and also we graunt surmounteth farre the boundes of the Princes office, in respect of his spi∣rituall ministerie, of administring the sacraments, of prea∣ching the glad tydings of saluation, of denouncing to the ob∣stinate sinners, the threates of Gods wrath and vengeance: to the penitent, the most comfortable promises of Gods mercie & fauour: whose sentence being rightly applyed in earth, God hath promised to ratifie the same in heauen. And for this cause doth Chrysost▪ so highly extoll this priesthood,

referring all his prayses to the dignitie of his ministerie, in respect whereof, the Princes ministeris is but outwarde and earthly, medling nothing with the administration of this high function, but onely with the supreme charge, ouer∣sight, and gouernment, to sée that the Priest do not abuse this so excellent and spiritual ministerie, but exercise right∣ly the same according to Gods worde. Who, so doing, the Prince so well as any other Christian, obeyeth his prea∣ching & ministerie, & submitteth his head (as Chrysos•…•…ome saith) vnder the ministers handes, as to Gods messenger, steward, and dispenser of his heauenly mysteries.

But if the Priest be not such an one as Chrysostome de∣scribeth:* 1.1535 if he do not denounce Gods promises, & threa•…•…es, nor his worde at all, but as Christ saith of the naughtie ser∣uant, striketh his fellow seruants, and subtrac•…•…eth their spi∣rituall foode of Gods worde from them, & would poyson thē with such erroniouse foode as he would giue them, besides and contrarie to the worde of God: if he will not be centent with his owne boundes, but will vsurpe also the dignitie that is not due vnto him, but belongeth to the Prince: shall the Prince suffer this at his handes, him selfe to be spoyled of his authoritie and royall estate, and his sub∣iectes pilled of their goods, yea both he and al his subiects, by such a false vsurper & tirant Priest, to be robbed and spoiled of their soules foode & saluation? Here hath the Prince au∣thoritie to suppresse such wicked Balamites, such counter∣faites, such Antichrists what soeuer they be, and to place in their places true and godly ministers, such as Chrysostome here speakes of. Frō which kinde of ministerie your Pope M. St who is your great high Priest, & all the inferiour ra∣ble of Priests that depende on him, are so farre different: that Chrysostoms sentēce not only maketh nothing for you, but is cleane against you. For first, take your owne words, that you cite out of Chrysostome, lay them to your Pope & Prelates, and sée how they agrée togither. This king (saith

Chrys•…•…stome of the minister or Priest) is not knowne by vi∣sible* 1.1536 things, neither hath his estimatiō for preciouse stones he glistereth with all, or for his gay golden ghstering apparell. Contrarywise your Pope and his prelates (to get the more estimation thereby of the people) are not onely knowen by visible things, but set out them selues, and all their ceremo∣nies to the vttermost, in gay golden glistering apparell, with most gorgeous ouches of siluer, of golde, of pearles, and precious stones. Againe, this Prieste saith to the King, I haue not vsurped thy purple: contrarywise, the Pope hath vsurped Emperours purple, the Emperours Dia∣deme, the Emperours throne, the Emperours Empire and all. Againe, ye tell vs out of Chrysostome, that the bo∣dies are committed to the King, the soules to the Priest: the King pardoneth the faultes of the bodie, the Priest pardo∣neth the faultes of the soule: the King forceth, the Priest ex∣horteth: the one by necessitie, the other by giuing counsell: the one hath visible armour, the other spirituall: he warreth against the barbarous, I warre against the Diuell: Contra∣rywise the Pope warreth against Christ, and with the Di∣uell, as his generall vicar and Licuetenant, and taketh not onely vppon him the Emperours parte, by warring a∣gainst the barbarous Turkes and Saracens, but also the Diuels parte by warring against the Saincts & truth of God, and that with more horrible treasons, murders, and villa∣nies, than euer was practised among the barbarous. And entermedleth with faultes of the bodie as whoredome and fornication, not onely bodily to punish them: but also beast∣ly for filthie lucre to maintaine them, and condemneth in Gods ministers godly and honorable wedlocke: which be∣sides the other is a manifest argument, that he is a Priest of no such kinde as Chrysostome here cōmendeth. For had you M. St. looked better euen in the same Homelie, but the leafe before: ye should haue seene what a notable commen∣dation* 1.1537 he maketh of the mariage of Priestes vppon the

prophetes wordes, Vidi dominum, &c. I saw the Lorde sit∣ting* 1.1538 in an high I hrone, &c. Quis hac loquitur, &c. VVho (saith he) spake these thinges? Esay that beholdet of the celestiall Scraphins, which had to deale with mariage, and yet extinguished not grace. You haue harkened to the Pro∣phet, and you haue heard the Prophet this day. Go thou out and lasuph thy sonne, neyther must we ouerpasse these thinges. Go thou out and thy sonne. Yea? had the Pro∣phet a sonne? if he had a sonne, he had a wife also, that thou mayst vnderstande that mariages are not euill, but whoore∣dome is euill. But so often as we talke with any of the vul∣gare people saying, why liuest thou not well? wherefore ex∣pressest thou not perfect manners? how can I (say they) except I should go from my wife, except I should bid my children farewell, except I should bidde my businesse adieu? VVher∣fore canst thou not? doth matrimonie hinder thee? a wife is giuen thee for an helper, not to lay a snare for thee. Had not the Prophet a wife? neither did wedlocke hinder the grace of the spirite, and yet he kepte companie togither with his wife, and was a Prophet neuerthelesse. Had not Moses a wife? and yet he brake the rocke, he changed the ayre, he talked with God, he stayde the diuine wrathe. Had not A∣braham a wife? and yet he was made a father of Nations, and of the Churche: for he got his sonne Isaac, and he was to him a matter of notable affayres. Did he not offer his Sonne, the fruit of his mariage? was he not a father, and with∣all a louer of God? might not he see him selfe a sacrificer to be made of his owne bowels? a sacrificer I say and a father withall: nature to be ouercome, godlinesse to ouercome: his bowels to be troden downe, & his godly deedes to surmount: the father to be cast downe, and the louer of God to be crow∣ned: hast thou not seene the whole mā, both a louer of his son and of God? was matrimonie here an hindrāce? but what saist thou to the mother of the Machabees? Was she not a wife? added she not seuen sonnes to the felowship of the saincts? did

she not see them crowned with martyrdom▪ did she not stand by as a looker vppon, and not •…•…aint in hir minde? stoode she not by exhorting euery one of them, and being the mother of the martyrs, suffred h•…•… selfe seuen martirdoms? for while they were tormented she receyued the stroke. Neither yet without affections beheld she •…•…he things that were done. She was the mother, and the violence done to nature, declared hir proper vertue. But she was not ouercome, &c. But what say we to Peter, the maine piller of the Church, that vehemēt lo∣uer of Christ: he that in speach was vnlearned, & conquerour of Rhethoritiās: he that was vnskilfull, & stopped the philo∣sophers mouthes: he that dissolued the Greeke wisdome, no otherwise thā the webbe of spiders: he that trauailed through the world, & cast the net into the sea and fished the world? but what saith the Gospell? Iesus entred vnto Peters wiues mo∣ther, being sicke of a feuer. VVhere a wiues mother is, there is a wife, and there is wedlocke. But what say we to Philip, had he not foure daughters? but where soure daughters were, there was both a wife and matrimonie. But what then doth Christ? he was indeede borne of a virgin, but he came to a mariage, and brought his gift with him. They haue (saith she) no wine, and he turned water into wine, with virginitie hono∣ring mariage: commending with his gift the thing that was done, that thou shouldest not abhorre mariage▪ but shouldest hate whooredome. For at my perill I behoofe the saluation, al∣though thou shalt wed a wife. Looke to thy selfe, a woman if shee be good, is an helper to thee &c.

All this & more saith Chrysostome, in the cōmendation of the ministers mariage, euen in the same Homelie cited by you M. St. which estate of mariage to be ioyned in, sith the Pope & his Priests can not abide, and alleage such impedi∣ments as here Chrysostome confuteth: it is an euident ar∣gument (by the way) that they 〈◊〉〈◊〉 nothing lesse than such Priests as Chrysostome ascribeth this spirituall kingdome of the ministerie of Gods worde and Sacraments vnto.

and where Chrysostome (as your selfe haue cited him) saith that the Princeforceth the Priest exhorteth: the one by ne∣cessitie, the other by giuing counsell: the one hath visible armour, the other spirituall: Contrarywise, your Pope not only exhorteth, but extorteth and forceth too not only by counsell, but by necessine & extreme violence. Not only pre∣tending spirituall armour, such as he calleth his curses with booke, bell, and candle: but also with visible armour, muiro∣ned about (where he rideth, or on mens backes is caried) with a gard of Swar•…•…trutters & Switchers, with gunnes, Harquebushes, partesans, glayues, and weapons, as if it were Iudas with his armed bande to take our Sauiour Christ. And he claymeth thriurisoiction of •…•…oth the swords, wresting thert•…•… the wordes of the Disciple: E•…•…ce 〈◊〉〈◊〉 gladi•…•… hic: Beholde heere are two swordes: to the temporall and visible armour, so well as to the spiritual: Wherevpon Eo∣nifacius the eight, did not onely hang seuen keyes at his girdle, in token of his spirituall power: but girte him selfe also with a sworde, in token of his temporall power. These Prelates the refore are not such kinde of Priests as Chry∣sostome speaketh of. Neither not•…•… I this, as a fault•…•… in this or that person, but as errours defended and maynteined by them, for the aduauncement of their naughtie Priest∣hoode. What maketh then this sentence of the excellencie of the Priestes ministerie, for the ministerie of the Popes Priesthoode, that is all the quit•…•… contrarie? Suche false Priestes therefore the Prince hath authoritie to remoue them, and to place such•…•… Priests as Chrysostome speaketh of, and so to bowe his head vnder their hands, that is, to o•…•…ey their ministerie, which is no derogation to the matter in hande of the Princes supreme gouernement. Thus muche M. Stap. to your sentence alleaged out of Chrysostome, vpon the which you and all your side do harpe so often, and yet (beeing well considered) it not onely makes nothing for you, but muche agaynst you. Nowe to your argument

that ye gather héere vpon, saying:

Nowe then M. Horne, I frame you suche an argument.* 1.1539 The Priest is the Princes superiour in some causes ecclesia∣sticall: Ergo, The Prince is not the Priestes superiour in all causes ecclesiasticall. The antecedent is clearely proued out* 1.1540 of the words of Chrysostome before alleaged. Thus. The Priest is superiour to the Prince in remission of sinnes by Chrysostome▪ but remission of sinnes is a cause ecclesiastical or spirituall: Ergo, The Priest is the Princes superiour in some causes ecclesiasticall or spirituall.

To this argument béeing thus framed (vpon the which* 1.1541 M. Stap greatly triumpheth,) I answere, it hath thrée fal∣lations in it for fayling. The first, in this worde superiour, béeing vnderstoode two ways, either in respect of the mini∣sterie or function, or in respect of the publique ouersight, ordering and direction. In the former sense the maior is true. The Priest is superiour to the Prince, in respect of his ministerie or function. But this worde superiour, béeing thus vnderstoode in the conclusion, for superioritie onely in the ministerie or function, concludeth nothing agaynst the Princes superioritie, which is only the publike ouersight, ordering and direction, that this superiour ministerie and function be not abused.

Now if the word superiour be not thus vnderstoode, but simply to be the superiour: or in the later sense, that is to say, the Priest is superiour in the publike ouersight, orde∣ring and direction, that the office be duely administred by the minister: then is this maior false, for the Priest is not thus the Princes superiour.

The second fallation is in the words remission of sinnes. If he meane thereby the ouersighte to sée suche remission be duely made by the Priest: then is the maior also false. The Priest is not the Princes superiour therin. If he means by remission of sinnes, the action of remitting them, or the function of the office, in pronouncing them remitted: then

is the maior true, but the minor false: For so remission of sins is not a cause ecclesiasticall, but an action or function eccle∣siasticall. Wheron ariseth the third fallation of these words ecclesiasticall cause Which the statute and the title mentio∣ning, that the Prince hath supremacie in all ecclesiasticall causes, he wilfully wresteth, as though all actions and fun∣ctions eccl. were yéelded to the Princes supremacie. Where neither the Prince requireth, nor the statute & title yéeldeth any such supremacie in the actions, but onely a supremacie in the causes, not to do them, but to sée them rightly done. And thus by resolutiō of these words, it appeareth how the Priest in one sense, as Chrysostome sayth, is superiour to the Prince, not only in this one thing of remission of sinnes: But in al other actions of his dutie, and the Prince is farre inferiour to him: and yet the Prince in the other sense of the general direction, and publike ouersight, is in this and all other causes eccl. superiour to the Priest, and the Priest farre inferiour vnto him. And so the superioritie of the Priest hindreth nothing the supremacie of the Prince.

Master St. (hauing now as he thinketh by this mightie* 1.1542 argument wonne the fielde, and quite confounded the By∣shop) setteth out as a tropha•…•…m or monument of his historie this marginall note.

Euidently proued by S. Chrysostome, the Prince not to be the supreme gouernour in causes ecclesiasticall.

And crieth out for ioy:

Which being most true, what thing cā you cōclude of al ye haue* 1.1543 or shal say to win your purpose, or that ye heere presently say?

And thus on the triumph of this argument, M. St. reie∣cteth all that the B. hath said as insufficiēt, & would returne vpon him the sentence of S. Augustine against the Dona∣tists, that the Byshop cited agaynst M. Feck. Wherein he bringeth nothing a freshe, that is not before declared and answered vnto, besides vayne words of course, worthy no other answere, than to be returned vpon thē selues, to whō they properly appertayne: who in deede denie both Chryst

the head, and Christ the body, that is, his catholike Church. And that as the Donatistes secte was condemned by Con∣stantine, Honorius, and other Emperours, the highe kings of Christendome. So haue they withall condemned you ma∣ster Stapl. that followe the Donatistes, and so may and ought all christian Princes, & the Emperour nowe (whose highe kingdomes, besides a bare name in any matter of Christianitie, ye make nothing) to pull downe suche vsur∣pers of their highe kingdomes, and set vp true and godly ministers in their places: to whome they might and ought to submitte their heades, vnder their spirituall ministerie. To the whiche sorte (as is shewed playnely out of Chriso∣stome) your Popishe Priesthoode is cleane contrarie. And therefore to returne your wordes vpon your selfe: Ye are* 1.1544 they that cutte in sunder the vnitie and peace of Christes Churche, and rebell agaynst the promises of his Gospell. Which Gospell ye can not abyde should come to light, and therefore the highe kinges of Christendome should remoue and condemne you. Whiche is a better argumente than yours, M. Stap. and is sufficient to inferre the supremacie of these highe Kings and Princes.

The. 23. Diuision.

THe Bishop in his diuision prosecuting still the wordes* 1.1545 of S. Paule Rom. 13. proueth further out of Chryso∣stome and Eusebius, that as the Prince is Gods minister: so this ministerie consisteth not onely in ciuill and tempo∣rall, but also in the well ordering of the Church matters, and their diligent rule and care therein. The effecte of his argument is this.

The Prince (as Chrysostome sayth) prepareth the mindes of many to be made more appliable to the doctrine of the worde, and is the great lighte

and true preacher and setter foorth of true god∣lynesse, as Eusebius sayth:

Ergo, His ministerie consisteth as well in ecclesiasticall as ciuill causes.

The antecedent Eusebius proueth by the example of Constantine, that his ministerie stretched to the setting foorth of godlynesse to al countreyes, and that he preached God, and not onely ciuil lawes by his Imperiall decrees and Proclamations. And this he confirmeth by Constantines own confession, that he taughte by his ministerie the religion and lawe of God: that therby he caused the en∣crease of the true fayth. And by the same put a∣way and euerthrewe all the euils that pressed the worlde.

But the world in Constantines time was pressed with diuers schismes, errours, heresies, false religions, and ma∣ny ecclesiasticall abuses and superstitions, besides the hea∣then Idolatrie:

Ergo, His ministerie stretched not onely ouer temporall causes, but also ecclesiasticall. Yea he counteth this his best ministerie: Ergo. It belongeth to the Prince as well, if not more than the other. And so the Bishops argument follo∣weth héerevpon, that the Apostles sentence (the Prince is Gods minister) argueth the Princes charge and gouerne∣ment, in all maner causes ecclesiasticall, so well as tem∣porall.

These proues of the Byshop béeing so euident, M. Stap.* 1.1546 answereth they are all insufficient, saying:

I see ye not (master Horne) come as yet neere the mat∣ter.

I answere, who is so blinde as he that seeth and will not see? Were ye not of the number of those, of whome

Chryst sayth, I came to iudgemēt into this worlde, that those that see not, shoulde see, and those that see shoulde be made blind: Ye might then both clearely see, that he both cōmeth* 1.1547 neere the matter, and satisfieth it at large. Excepte ye be as blinde of the matter also, as ye pretende to be of these the Byshops proufes. But if ye woulde haue followed your owne counsell, euer to haue set before your eyes the state of the question in issue betwéene them: ye shoulde well by this time haue seene, that the Byshop digressed nothing frō it. And that your selfe of self will or malice, will not looke a∣right theron, but cleane awrie, stil starting aside and swar∣uing frō the marke for the nonce, to picke occasions wher∣on to wrangle. For, wherfore I pray you do ye not see, that the Bishop commeth not neere the matter?

I see not (say you) that Constantine changed religion, plucked downe Altares, deposed Byshops, &c. But that he was diligent in defending the olde and former faythe of the Christians.

Whatsoeuer you see or see not in Constantine, master Stapl. all the world may see false dealing in you: and how lyke an vnnaturall subiecte, to your naturall Prince ye be. As thoughe ye sawe that the Quéenes highnesse had chan∣ged religion, excepte ye meane false religion, and that ye might haue seene in Constantine also. He changed the hea∣then religion of the Paynims, and abolished it, with all* 1.1548 their Altares, Byshops, Priestes and temples, and set foorth the true religion of Iesus Christe. He chaunged likewise and abolished suche superstitions, Idolatries, schismes, er∣rours and heresies, as troubled the Churche of Christe in his time. Which you might easily haue seene in Constan∣tines owne wordes by the Byshop cited, That he put away and ouerthre we all the euils that pressed the worlde.

If you say, ye can not yet see that he ment all spirituall and ecclesiasticall euils, so well as temporall: put on a

payre of spectacles, master Stapl that are not dymmed with affection, and then shall ye see, that of suche kinde as the good thinges were, whiche he set foorth, of suche kinde were the contrarie euils, that he put away and ouerthrew: but the good things that he set foorthe, were true godly∣nesse, decrees of God, the religion of the moste holy law, the most blessed fayth. &c. All whiche are matters moste spirituall and ecclesiasticall: Ergo all the euils that he abolished, were so well spirituall and eccle∣siasticall as ciuill and temporall matters.

If ye say, yet ye see nothing but that he was diligent in defending the olde and former fayth of the Christians. True in deede, neither can ye see any other thing in the Quéenes Maiestie, nor any authoritie is giuen héereby to Princes, than as Constantine was, to bee diligente in defending the olde and former fayth of the Christians, foun∣ded by Christ and taught by his Apostles. And if any other since that time, haue brought in any things besides that old and former fayth, to remoue the same, and reduce vs to the olde and former fayth of the Christians. For as Tertullian* 1.1549 sayth: That is of the Lorde, and that is truthe, that was before deliuered, but that which afterward was thrust in, is bothe strange and false. And so sayth Constantine, I bothe called agayne mankind (taught by my ministerie) to the re∣ligion of the most holy lawe, and also caused the moste bles∣sed fayth should encrease & grow vnder a better gouernor.

Nowe séeing that many poynts of the Popish fayth and* 1.1550 doctrine haue cropen in since that time, and manie of later yeres, besides and contrarie to the olde and former fayth of the Cheistians, taught by Christ, and left vs written by the finger of the holy ghost, sealed and confirmed by so many myracles, to endure to the worlds end, and neuer to be al∣tered, added vnto, or taken from: all suche nouelties be∣sides or contrarie to the olde and former fayth, hathe the Q. highnes (god be thāked therfore) remoued, as Cōstātine

did, and all Princes ought to do: and hath called vs agayne to the religion of the most holy lawe, as a most diligent de∣fender of the olde and former fayth, from the Popishe cor∣ruptions in faith that haue sprong vp since. And as Constā∣tine* 1.1551 deposed such Bishops as obstinately mainteined those later errours, and not the olde and former fayth (except on their repentance & submission they were by him restored) so hath our most gracious souer aigne, deposed such Popish Bishops and Pastors, as obstinately defended and maintei∣ned their later errours. Wherin she hath shewed hir selfe, a moste diligent defender and recouerer, of the oldest and for∣most fayth of the Christians.

Thus as hir doings swarue not héerein from Constan∣tines▪ (as you pretende) so hath she no lesse right and autho∣ritie in hir dominion, than Constantine had in his, and all Princes ought to haue in theirs: béeing all (as S. Paule sayth) Gods ministers in this behalfe. To the which sentēce of S. Paule, with Chrysostomes and Eusebius iudgement theron, full coldely, ye say:

If S. Paule call the ciuill Magistrate a minister, bicause* 1.1552 through feare he constrayneth the wicked to embrace the godly doctrine, as by your saying S. Chrysostome construeth it, we are well content therwith.

Now well ye be content therwith, as your obstinate re∣fusal of this the Princes ministerie, the stormes & counter∣blastes ye rayse agayn̄st it, do declare: so also, that ye be not halfe pleased with Chrysostomes construction theron (how well soeuer ye would seeme to be contented) appeareth in this your pinching & wringing of Chrysostomes sentence by y^e Bishop cited. For neither the Bishop cited him as you* 1.1553 say he doth, neither you cite Chrysostome fully nor rightly, whiche argueth ye are not very well contented therwith, Chrysostome sheweth not, that y^e prince is called y^e minister of God, onely bicause through feare he constrayneth the wicked to embrace the godly doctrine, but also he speaketh

of honoring cōmending, or aduancing, whereby he prepareth mens mindes to be the more apte to receyue the worde of doctrine. Which phrase of Chrysostome, the worde of do∣ctrine,* 1.1554 ye could not also abide, least ye should haue ouertur∣ned thereby, all those points of doctrine, that are not contai∣ned in the worde of God, whiche neuerthelesse ye terme godly doctrine, though God in his worde hath not allowed the same, but are the traditions and commaundements of men. And thus making what doctrine it liketh you godly or vngodly, and reseruing to your selues the authoritie thereof, ye say, ye are well content that the ciuill magistrate be a minister, bicause through feare he cōstrayneth, that is to say, ye make him serue your turne, to hang, to draw, to burne, to racke, to banish, to emprison, and to force men to embrace what doctrine you appoint and tell him, is godly doctrine. This ye be well content withall. This ye call his best ministerie. And that this is his setting forth of Christes true religion, & that this is his preaching the same with his imperiall decrees and proclamations. But if once he take vppon him carefully to examine by the worde of God, whe∣ther those doctrines and that religion that ye pretende to be godly, and the old and former faith, be so or no: and finding them cleane contrary, he remoue them, & by force cōstraine his subiects to embrace the doctrine of Gods worde, and so prepare them to receyue the truth, by punishing the wicked and obstinate seducers, by placing in their roumes, and ho∣noring the godly setters forth of the worde of doctrine: then in no case ye are well content therewith, but raile at, and sclaunder the doings of such a Prince, and deuise al the tre∣cheries that ye can to his destruction.

Neuerthelesse would ye well consider what here once a∣gaine M. St. you haue graūted, That the best ministerie and* 1.1555 seruice of the great Constantine rested in the setting foorth of Gods true religion: Then if the setting forth thereof, be the Princes best ministery and seruice: may he not Iudge

of his best ministery and seruice? yea how shall he set forth that, whereof he shall not iudge? Of other partes of his ministerie he may iudge, and may he not Iudge of his beste ministerie? are the setting forth of ciuill lawes, properly a part of his office, bicause they be a good parte of his ministe∣rie, & is the setting forth of true religion, being the best parte (as ye are content to call it) no parte at al thereof? or not ra∣ther if it be his best ministerie, it is the best part of his office also. And seing the setting forth of true religiō is not proper∣ly a ciuill matter, but distinct therefrom: then doth the beste parte of the Princes office consist in the ministerie of an ec∣clesiasticall matter, and that of such an one, as containes the ouersight of all other matters ecclesiasticall. For as in true religion they are or ought to be all cōteyned, so in the setting forth of thē is cōtained their ouersight & direction. For how can he well set forth any thing, that he ouer•…•…eeth not, nor di∣recteth? which ouersight and direction being the supreme gouernment that the Quéenes Maiestie only claymeth and we ascribe vnto hir: how haue ye not graunted withall (M. St.) that this supremacie ouer all causes Ecclesiasticall, a∣boue all other things belongeth to hir Maiestie? But, for all this that he him selfe hath graunted, or the Bishop hath in∣ferred, saith M. Stapleton:

Neither this that ye here alleage out of place, nor al the re∣sidue* 1.1556 which ye reherse of this Cōstantine (with whose doings ye furnish hereafter sixe full leaues) can importe this superio∣ritie, as we shall there more at large specifie.

This is alleaged out of place ye say M. St. for Constan∣tine. But who seeth not, that this is but a pelting quarrel? the Bishop on good consideration & order declareth, both by Chrysostoms exposition, & Constantines example, how this sentence of S. Paule, that the Prince is Gods minister, stretcheth not only to his ministerie, in ciuil, but also in cau∣ses Ecclesiastical. But this is alleaged out of place▪ say you. It is no meruaile M. Stap. if it séeme out of place with you,

for all is alleaged out of place, that hauing any place displa∣ceth your assertion. And thus pretending it is alleaged out of place: ye passe it ouer, & post vs off•…•…il an other time, when ye wil declare it more at large, ad Calendas Graecas, when ye shall haue more leasure. But sir, had ye any leasure at this time, ye might better haue satisfied your Reader, to haue fully answered here, to that is here obiected, and not thus to dallie off the matter till another time. But there is no re∣medie, the reader must haue paciēce, and waite your furder leasure. Neuerthelesse, when ye shall (M. St. vouchsafe to méete againe, to common furder of Constantines doings, I* 1.1557 pray ye do not, as hitherto ye haue done in other answears, telling the reader ye will specifie it more at large in such a place hereafter, & when ye come to the answering of that place, ye tell him againe, that ye specified that more at large before, and so sende your Reader from hence thither, and from thence againe hither, to trotte vp and down, & he satis∣fied in neither place. Howbeit, this is a good readie answere for you, for by this shift, one answere serueth both places. Neuerthelesse what néede any more large specifying either hers or there? For ye tell vs roundly to make a shorte tale of the matter that all is to shorte.

Neither this, say you▪ that is here alleaged, neither al the re∣sidue, which ye reherse of Constantine, (with whose doings ye furnish hereafter six ful leaues) cā import this superioritie.

This is in déede a round answere and a shorte, and if it* 1.1558 were withall as true▪ ye néede not M. Stapleton promise to specifi•…•… it more at large hereafter, but belike ye thought this answere was to short, and therefore ye do well to re∣ferre the Bishop furder. As for the Bishops present alle∣gation out of Constantine, fully importeth this superiori∣tie, that the ministerie of the Prince hath to set forth Ec∣clesiasticall causes so well as Temporall, or rather much more, in so muche as it is the Princes best ministerie, to set forth by his decrees the true religion, the lawe of God,

and the most holy faith, and to remoue and punish all euils, that trouble the worlde, such as chiefly are errours, Here∣sies, Schismes, superstitiōs, abuses, false or wicked pastors, &c. all which is euident by Constantines owne auouching. And I pray you M. St. marke all these things a little more aduisedly, & tell me then what wanteth of the issue in que∣stion betwene these parties, that the Prince hath supreme gouernment, so well in Ecclesiasticall causes, as in Tempo∣rall. And whether these be facings without proufe or halfe proufe in the world, as ye say: or rather these be not your to to impudent facings and bracings, without any proufe* 1.1559 or half proufe or any iote of proufe in the world, but say on∣ly it importeth it not, & neither tel▪ how nor why: and say it is here alleaged out of place: and ye will specifie it there more a•…•… large: and so shift it off here vnanswered: and there say here ye haue answered to it: and neither here nor there meddle furder withit. Doth (this trow) you importe a full & sufficient answere?

The. 24. Diuision.

WHereas the Bishop on S. Paules sentence declared before, out of Eusebius, commending Constantine, that the Princes best ministerie consisteth in setting forth all true Religion, and abolishing all false doctrine and er∣rours: in this Diuision he confirmeth the same with the iudgement of another later Ecclesiasticall historier, Nice∣phorus, whom the Papists set out for Catholike: Compa∣ring* 1.1560 in these things, these two Emperours, the one with the other, Paleologus with Constantine, commending this Emperour of Gréece aboue al other things, for this his rule and dealing in reforming religion, as did Constantine. For which cause, as Constantine called it his best ministerie, so Nicephorus calleth it, a vertue among all other belonging to an Emperour, and most seemely for his imperiall dignitie.

which what it is, and wherein this ministerie doth chiefly consist, the Bishop gathereth togither diuerse sentences, out of the Preface of Nicephorus to the Emperour, in his commendation, for his zeale, his defence, his chiefe authori∣tie, his gouernaunce, his restoring, his clensing, his establi∣shing, his setting forth of true religion, and pulling downe the contrarie: whereby Nicephorus (protesting that he speaketh nothing for fanor, or statterie) declareth his iudge∣ment to agrée with Eusebius on Saint Paules sentence, that the Princes supreme gouernment in these things, is his best ministerie, and most properly belonging to hys charge and office.

To this allegation of Nicephorus Master Stapleton de∣uideth his Counterblast into two windes. The former blast procéedeth altogither out of his stinking breath of ray∣ling Rhetorike, to deface not onely the Bishop his aduer∣sarie, the Bishop of Sarum, and the Homelies set forth a∣gaynst Idolatrie, chalenging them for lyes and forgeries: but also to deface the authoritie of Nicephorus and the Em∣perour, whome he affyrmeth to be wicked and wretched Heretikes. In the other blast, admitting the authoritie of Nicephorus, he bloweth as fast to ouercome the force of the Bishops allegations, as insufficient to proue hys purpose.

In his first part, to get the more credite for plaine and true dealing with his Reader, and to blemish the Bishop with suspition of cloked dissembling, he promiseth, saying:

But first, we will dissipate and discusse the mist that master Horne hath cast before thine eyes, where indéede none was, for the Bishop most clearely set downe the wordes of Ni∣cephorus.* 1.1561 Master Stapleton himselfe of purpose rayseth a miste, whereby not onely he dimmeth the Readers eyes, but also wandreth in his owne mist vp and downe, slun•…•…∣bling at many impertinent matters, and al besides the pur∣pose. For whereto else serueth all that he discourseth about

the Gre•…•…ians Heresie of the holy Ghostes procéeding, or the Councell of Lions, of Michaell Pale•…•…logus that a∣gréed with the Latins therein, of the •…•…recians reuolt, of the malicious spite of the Gréeke Bishoppes, of the de∣nying Michaell his buriall, what néede all these decla∣rations? Which if the Bishop had set forth, as he had no∣thing thereby opened the matter, so had he giuen occasion to Master Stapleton of iust reproouing him for straying of purpose from the marke, and dal•…•…ying in vayne cir∣cumstaunces. And nowe that he hath not stoode in anye suche long 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and fodings off of the matter, master Stapleton sayeth he casteth mistes. And thus which way soeuer the Bishop take▪ Master Stapleton woulde finde an occasion to picke a quarrell. And pretending to dissipate and discus•…•…e a myste, in the fayre and cleare Sunne shyne, hée rayseth suche a smoke, that blunde∣ring foorth he wotteth not well whether, he st•…•…uibleth hee can not tell on whome, and falleth into a bitter in∣nectiue at the authour of the Homelie▪ agaynst Idolatrie, onely vpon this occasion, that he chaunced on the name of Michaell Paleologus.

Wherein he playeth, as I heard once of a •…•…opishe Priest in Cambrige that in his Sermon naming Abra∣ham in his discourse, to dissipate and discusse all mystes, as he pretended, but most likely to stretche out his mat∣ter, beganne to tell what manner a man Abraham was, and hauing named his sonne, beganne to tell of Isaac, and so of Iacob, and on a rowe of all the twelue Patri∣arkes, and of Egypte, of the lande of promiss, of the wildernesse, and waded so farre that he had quyte loste himselfe in the Wildernesse, and his theame be beganne withall. After whiche sorte fareth Master Stapleton, bi∣cause the Bishoppe mentioned Michaell Paleologus, here∣vppon he entreth into an exclamation agaynste the Au∣thour of the Apologie. All whiche though it be a plaine

digression from the Bishoppes aunswere, and the issue in question, beeing aboute Images and Idolatrie: yet such is his importunitie, we muste followe master Stapleton, not whether the cause requireth, but whether hys ydle brayne pleaseth to runne at randon. Otherwise, the prin∣cipall parte of this Counterblast beeing reiected to hys common place of other impertinēt bibblebables: he would crie oute that hée were not aunswered in suche a weigh∣tie matter. And yet when all is done, as it is nothing to the present purpose, so is it to no effect in any other mat∣ter at all.

For, all his quarrell consisteth in these two poyntes.* 1.1562 The one, that the Homelie wrongfully named Theodo∣rus Lascaris, for Michaell Paleologus. The other, for a decree of Ualence and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 agaynst Images. For the former, what Authours the Authour of that Ho∣milie followed, I knowe not, howe be it he nameth not Theodorus Lascaris, as you say, master Stapleton, but one∣ly Theodorus, neyther this missing of the Emperours name (to him that woulde haue regarded the matter con∣teyned in the Homelie) mighte bee thought worthie so great an outcrye, excepte it were to you master Sta∣pleton, that still vse to stumble at a sirawe and leape o∣uer a blocke, lyke to the Phareseys, that Excolantes cu∣licem Camelum glutiebant, VVere stiffled with a g•…•…atte, and* 1.1563 yet swallowed a Camell. Neyther was this so great an ouersight, sythe Theodorus and Michaell were both of one tyme. The one expelled the other, and both still retey∣ned the name of Emperour. For as Uolaterane sayeth, Michaeligitur Paleologus. &c. Michaell Paleologus there∣fore* 1.1564 at the same tyme inuaded the Empyre, whiche two moste noble houses of Constantinople, that is to saye, the house of the Lascarie, and the house of the Paleo∣logie, the one decayed, the other lyfte vppe hir heade. Theodorus Lascaris being thus expelled from the Citie of* 1.1565

Constantinople, yet raigned he still at Adrianople as the Emperour of Gréece. And it is not vnlikely, the occasion of his exile to haue bene about Images, so well as other matters. Syth the Gréeke and Latine Church haue stry∣ued* 1.1566 aboute the controuersie of Images nothing more, and none so hotte. For which matter chiefely, the Pope rebel∣led from his alleageance, and raysed all the diuision of the Empire in the Church of Christ, that hath bene the chiefe decay and ruine thereof, which onely sprang of the question of Images. And yet sayth master Stapleton, giuing vs no other warrantiss thereof, than this his bare worde for Images:

VVhich had customably continued in the Greeke Church* 1.1567 many hundreth yeares before, and so reuerently afterwardes continued, euen till Constantinople was taken by the great Turke, and yet this good Antiquarie and Chronographer, will needes haue the Gr•…•…cians aboue seuen hundreth yeares togyther, to haue beene Iconomachees, that is, Image breakers.

Are ye not ashamed, master Stapleton, to speake suche vntruthes euen where your selfe chalenge other of lyes? For, the authour of the Homelies noteth not here, nor herevpon, the dealing against Images all that space, nor na∣meth any Iconomachees nor medleth any thing there with those. 700. yeares that customably continued till Constan∣tinople was taken by the Turke. But onely of those yeares that customably continued from the primitiue Church, till the time of the Empresse Irene.

The wordes of the Homelie are these. These things* 1.1568 were done in the Church about the yeare of our Lorde 760. Note here I pray you in this processe of the storie, that in the Churches of Asia and Grece, there were no Images publike∣ly, by the space of. 700. yeares, and there is no doubt but the primitiue Churche next the Apostles tymes was most pure.

Now where the words and meaning of the Homilie are most plaine, and so true withal, that ye could not gainsay it, nor your Maister D. Harding coulde improue any point of B. Iewels chalenge, about the same article: ye wittingly wrest the wordes of the Homilie to the. 700. yeares prece∣ding the taking of Constantinople by the great Turke, chalen∣ging the Homilie to alleage the Gretians to haue bene Ico∣nomaches all that while, thinking to fasten as ye call it a no∣torious lie on the Homilie. But the Homilies truth is mani∣fest, and the lye lighteth on your selfe, besides your rashnes to affirme without the booke on your owne fingers, that for many hundreth yeres before, Images customably continued in the Greke Church? and so reuerently afterwardes continued euen till Constantinople was taken by the great Turke. For the which, though it would go harde with you to put you to your profe, and to let it hang in suspence of a lye till ye haus confirmed it: yet letting it passe, I onely demaunde, that if your Ima∣ges haue such great force as your Legendes pretende, howe chaunce they kept the Citie and their worshippers no bet∣ter from the Turkes? can they do no morethan the dumbe I∣dols that the Prophet speaketh of? Habent gladium & secu∣rim* 1.1569 in manu se autem de bello & latro•…•…ibus non liberant, they haue a sword and an axe in their hand, but they deliuer not them∣selues from warre and from theues. Or rather (if it be as ye say) were the Grecians not deliuered ouer to those enimies, as for their other vices, so chiefly for that their Idolatrie, as the children of Israell for the like were ledde captiue into Babylon?

The other thing that Maister Stapleton noteth in the Homelie is this.

Many other shamefull lies are there (saith he) to disgrace, de∣face,* 1.1570 and destroy the Images of Christ & his Saintes, especially one, wheras he sayth that the Emperor Valence and Theodosius made a proclamation, that no man shoulde paint or carue the crosse of Christ. And thervpon gaily and iolily triūpheth vpon the catholiks.

VVheras the Proclamation neither is, nor was, to restrayne all vse of the crosse, but that it should not be painted or carued vpon the groūd. VVhich these good Emperours, not Valens (for he was the valiant captaine and defend•…•…r of the Arians) but Valentinianus and Theodosius, did of great godly reucrēce that they had to the crosse, enact. And yet as grosse, as soul, & as loud a lying fetch as this is, M. Iewell walketh euen in the verye same steppes, putting Valens for Valentinian: and alleaging this edict, as general against al Ima∣ges of the crosse.

You take vpon you lustily M. Stapl. to chalenge in your brode language both the Homilie, & the B. of Sarum▪ But it is your maner, there is no shift, ye must be borne withall, chiefly in this your extrauagant by quarrel. Otherwise if ye had cōsidered more indifferently y^e homilies & the B. allega∣tiō, no doubt you would haue tempered your pen with more sobrietie, ye chalenge either of them for two lies in this alle∣gation, the one, for putting the name of Valens for Valentini∣an, the other for citing that simply that was conditionall. which though it were as ye pretend, yet neither of these the* 1.1571 B. or the Homilies author, are to be charged w^t any lie her∣in: who haue both faithfully set downe their author Petrus Crinitus, (except ye will dally also about the Printers es∣cape, that for Crinitus put Erinilus, placing E. for C. and l. for t.) and quoted the place, and cited his wordes. Which to your better contentation, least ye shoulde saye any thing is not fullye satisfied, I will set downe the whole ad ver∣bum.

Sed libitum est verba ex libris Augustalibus referre. &c.* 1.1572 But it pleaseth mee to declare the woordes out of the Imperiall bookes, whereby the whole maye bee knowen, for bicause both Valens and Theodosius Emperours, did wryte on this wyse vn∣to their Gouernour the Pretour, Sith that we haue a diligent care in all thinges, concerning the religion of the high Godheade, wee will suffer no bodye to carue, or ingraue, or paint, the signe of our

Sauiour Christ eyther in colours, stone, or other matter, but what∣soeuer signe is founde, wee commaunde it to bee taken awaye, punishing them with most grieuous punishment, whosoeuer shall attempt the contrary to our decrees and commaundement. In the which saying, if perhappes any man require an authour, let hym reade the Decrees and Edictes of the Emperors, which of the most learned men Tribunianus, Bassilides, Theophilus, Diosco∣rus, and other, are collected by Satira in the reigne of this most no∣ble Emperour Iustinian.

Thus ye sée Crinitus worde•…•… (whome onely and truly they alledge) howe simply he citeth it, and also in Ua∣lens name. If ye be so heinously offended at the matter, go and picke your quarrell against Crinitus, from whome they haue it, chalenge him, not them therefore. I war∣rant you Crinitus being a Papist, had it bene otherwise, woulde not haue set it downe so simplye agaynst you: and being so famous a Lawyer among you, referring the Reader to the Edict it selfe, woulde not sette it downe o∣therwise than he had simply reade it, howsoeuer your la∣ter false▪ Iuggling (as is more likelye of the twayne) hath thrust in suche condicionalles, of the grounde, to make it séeme done of more Idolatrie, and not to take awaye all occasion of Idolatrie.

But howsoeuer it were, both the Bishoppe and the Ho∣milie bring their warrantise with them, to cleare them* 1.1573 of making any lyes therein, and euer the lyes doe light vp∣pon your selfe. As for that ye snatch occasion hereon, to digresse further into one of your inuectiue common places, against the Booke of Homilies, and commends vnto vs your Homilies of Bede and others: neyther is this a proper time and place of the triall of ours nowe, neyther it appeareth yee can finde anye point of false doctrine in them. Which no doubt you woulde not haue spared to haue noted, that woulde quarrell at suche

petit matters as ye doe: neither doe I vtterlyd discem∣mende the Homilies of the venerable Bede, although o∣therwise* 1.1574 he smatc•…•…th of many corruptions of his cor•…•…upted time. But whatsoeuer his or others were, that ye boast of so haue bene redde in the Church by you, what I praye you was the Church the better by the reading of that, whereof they had no vnderstanding, what was reade? as they haue in the Homilies now set forth vnto them.

But it is more than hie tune M. Stapleton, that for shame at the length ye remember your selfe, your matter, your ad∣uersarie, and your Reader. And not thus to run at randon, and wander for the nonce in mistes, hauing promised to dissiptae and discusse the myst that M. Horne hath cast before the Readers eyes. Here is hitherto no myst at all of the Bishop. At least wise ye haue myst it, and not discussed it, or medled any thing at all with the Bishops sayings to or fro. Go to there∣fore M. St. haue the B. reised any mist, let vs see howe your counterblast will blow away and dissipate the same.

Yes say you, M. Horne calleth ignorantly Emanuell, him whō* 1.1575 he should call Andronicus. And here, to shew your cunning, ye enter into those Emperors pedegrées.* 1.1576

Why M. St. is this so sore a myst to haue mist the Em∣perors name? were all these circūquaques for this matter, to haue foyled the B. for mistaking a name by ignoraunce? which were it so as ye would haue it, what preiudice is here done to the matter? for what soeuer this Emperors name was, whom Nicephorus doth commende, it greatly for•…•…th not, but the matter forceth. The author setteth forth in this Emperor, such vertues, that as Langus noteth, ought to be* 1.1577 in euery good Christian Emperor. What mist was therfore in the matter cast before the readers eyes, if by ignorāce he had misnamed y^• man? Neither could you (if enuy against the B. and pride of your selfe pricked you not) vpbraide this mista∣king of the name to the Bishop, for vnclerkly or vnfaythfull handling as ye do: except ye will do the like to the most, and

most famous Hystoriographers, that haue written there∣vpon. For the same authour Uolaterane (whom ye quote)* 1.1578 being a Papist, and imputing all their decay to their often for saking of the Pope, sayth of the Hystoriers of these Em∣perors, that almost all the writers do err•…•… in the most part of things, & take Caloiohannes for Andronicus the yonger, and so confounde all things, reckoning vp. 16. or. 17. famous Gréeke wryters, that do all disagrée among themselues in the Treatise of the Emperours. No marueyle then if the Bishop might mistake the name of one, without any hys rebuke of vnclerklinesse and ignorance, least of all, of ani•…•… vnfaythfulnesse, or casting of mistes for the matter to the eies of any indifferent Reader, except to the eyes bleared wyth malice, of suche a counterblasting Momus, as is master Stapleton.

Neuerthelesse to his further satisfying and contentation (if any thing may content him) he might well haue séene the Bishop discharged, and to haue followed good reason and authoritie, in alleaging this Emperour by the name of Emanuell Paleologus, and not Andronicus Paleologus, had master Stapleton, eyther beene so cunning as he maketh himselfe, or would haue delt iustly, to haue accused them* 1.1579 of mistes, vnclerklinesse, ignorance, vnfaythfulnesse, (being famous wryters of his owne side) that haue so named him, and so set it cut in print, and that not by a scape, but of pur∣pose, in setting out of the storie, and are allowed and autho∣rised. Whose iudgement the Bishop following, the blame (if any blame be) lighteth on them, and not on him. For as the Bishop nameth him Emamuell, so also doth the vo∣lume of Nicephorus printed at Basill by Io. Oporinus, and Heruagius, Anno domini 1555 Mense Martio, which print is set forth (least you should reiect it) Cum priu•…•…legio Rom. vegù Ferdinandi & Fra•…•…crum regis Hemi•…•…. 2. perused like∣wise and approued by the Doctors of the faculties of Sor∣bon and of Louaine, translated and set forth by Io. Langus,

and commended as a worthie worke to the Emperour Ferdenande by his honourable, learned, faythfull and be∣loued Counceller and Hystoriographer▪ Wolfangus Lazi∣us, if all this will be able to content you.

Io. Langus, in his Preface Dedicatorie to Ferdi∣nandus hath these wordes. Uirtutes vero Maiestatis •…•…uae, &c. I purpose not here to rehearse otherwyse of your Ma∣iestyes vertues, both for that I haue to small habilitie for so great a woorke, and better it were not to speake at all of a matter of weight, than not to bee able to pro∣secute it, as the worthinesse of it requireth. And also for that Nicephorus in hys Preface, when hee consecrateth the trauayle of thys Hystorie to Emanuell Paleologus the Emperoure of Constantinople, (for so beeing moo∣ued by coniectures I take him to bee) he liuely expresseth as it were in a Glasse, the moste of those selfe same vertues.

Besides this, where Nicephorus in the beginning of his Preface Dedicatorie, doth call the Emperour to whome he dedicateth his woorke, Pricipem omnium Christianissimum at{que} humanissimum, A moste Christian and moste curteous Prince: Herevppon Iohn Langus maketh his first mar∣ginall note, Uidetur is esse Emanuel Paleologus: This Prince seemeth to bee Emanuell Paleologus. And after that in the same Preface, he addeth another note thereof, Emanuels nato praedones Turcae Constantinopoli eiecti sunt: VVhen Emanuell was borne the Turkishe spoylers were driuen out of Constantinople. And againe, Imperatoris Emanuelis in∣fanti•…•…: The infancie of Emanuell the Emperour. Lyke∣wise another. Successor eius in Imperio Constantinopolitan•…•… Emanuel filius: His successour in the Empire of Constanti∣nople was Emanuell his sonne. Another. Diuini numinis er∣ga Emanuelem gratia & fauor: The grace and fauour of the diuine Godheade towardes Emanuell. Another. Trib•…•…untur Emanueli praecipue Imperatoriae virtutes: The chiefe vertues

of an Emperour are ascribed to Emanuell. Another. Pa∣latiū Imp•…•…riale ib idem ab Emanuele constructum. The Empe∣rours Palayce was buylt by Emanuell. Another. Eam vide∣licet Constantinopolim per Emanuelem Christiani retinuerunt: The Christians helde it (that is to say Constantinople) by Emanuell. And yet another. Dedicatur Ecclesiastica hysto∣ria Imperatori Emanueli, & veluti corona capiti cius imponi∣tur. The Ecclesiasticall hystorie is dedicated to the Empe∣rour Emanuell, and is set on his head as it were a crowne.

Nowe master Stapleton might not all these notes vpon the Preface made by Langus a learned Papist, moue the Bishoppe to name the Emperour, Emanuell Paleologus, and cleare the Bishoppe of vnfaythfull dealing and ray∣sing of mystes? And if he were deceyued, he was de∣ceyued, for that he gaue to muche credite to suche fa∣mous Papistes, as Lazius and Langus, the Doctours of the faculties of Sorbone and of Louayne, that take vppon them Censoriam potestatem, To haue the authoritie of Censors, in allowing and approouing the moste of all youre Bookes. If therefore ye blame the Bishoppe for this, (except ye will shewe your selfe ouer partiall) ye must needes condemne all these for the same.

Nowe master Stapleton hauing (as he thinketh) a∣bout this name, gotten a great triumphe, pretending to driue awaye the myste, and cleare the coastes, doing no∣thing him selfe but trampling in the duste, and raysing vaine smokes aboute bare names, letting the matter alone vnaunswered, the more to dimme the Readers eyes: telleth vs howe this Andronicus the elder, sonne to Michaell, after hys fathers death, summoned a Coun∣cell of the Gretians, wherein hee and they anulled and* 1.1580 reuoked that hys Father had done at the Councell at Lions, namelye concerning the proceeding of the holy Ghoste, and for the whiche Nicephorus Maister Hor∣nes Authour, beeing also carryed awaye wyth the

common errour, as with an huge raging tempest, dothe so highly aduaunce this Andronicus. And so withall ye see vp∣pon howe good a man, and vpon howe good a cause, master Horne hath buylded his newe supremacie to plucke downe the Popes olde supremacie. For the infringing whereof, the wicked working of wretched Heretikes is with him, here and else where, as we shall in place conuenient shew, a good∣ly and a godly President, as it is also with maister lewell for to mainteyne the verye same quarrell, as I haue at large in my returne agaynst hys fourth article declared.

What yée haue there declared at large or at briefe, (Master Stapleton) is not our matter, nor I haue it to sée, and I recke not to looke, for I déeme it by this: If I iudge amisse, GOD forgiue me. Onely herein all the* 1.1581 worlde maye sée, what a iollie bragger ye bée. Ye are euer telling vs of youre For•…•…resle, youre Translations, your Replies, your turnes and returnes, besydes thys your Counterblast, nothing muste bée forgotten of all your clerkly Pamphletes. If yée wante good neigh∣bours, ye will not spare to commende them to vs your selfe. As for mée, I will for this once, returne your re∣turne emptie to your selfe, and aunswere onelye your presente quarrels. The effecte whereof is to deface the Bishops allegation, as grounded vppon the doyngs of an Heretike, and auouched oute of the sayings of an erroni∣ous authour.

And to this purpose, first ye threape vpon the Rea∣der: the Prince to haue beene Andromens the elder, and not Emanuell. And yet for all ye woulde make it so cleare a case: ye sée the Doctours doubt (as they say) and all your owne Doctours, and that the chiefe in iudgement. Se∣condly, ye woulde make the facte and doings that are commended by Nicephorus in this Emperour, to be about the anulling and reuoking of that Michaell had done at the Councell of Lions, namely concerning the procéeding

of the holy ghost, wheras all your Doctors abouesaid, name it chiefly to be for expelling of the Turkes, and preseruing of the Christians in Constantinople, besides his other ver∣tues. For the which cause not onely Nicephorus so highlye commendeth him, but also Lazius, Langus, and all your fore∣sayde Sorbonistes and Louanians. And yet you (to make the Emparor and the matter odious) say, that it was the de∣nying of the proceeding of the holy ghost, for y^e which Niceph. doth so highly aduaunce this Andronicus. Wherein as ye slaunder them both, so, thirdly, doe ye great wrong to Ni∣cephorus, to slaunder him with so great an hereste, and saye that he was caried away with the common error, as with an huge raging tempest. But I doubt it will rather séene M. Staple∣ton, your selfe were caried awaye with so huge a raging tem∣pest, eyther of the heate of some cholericke passion, or some melancholicke enuie, so cankered against the Bi∣shop and the truth of his cause, that it maketh you freat and* 1.1582 rage euen against Nicephorus also. For and ye were not caried away in the huge raging tempest of such a sustian fume, a man might then be the bolder to pull you by the slée•…•…e, and gently demaunde if ye finde any thing in this Nicephorus, wherefore ye shoulde so sore chalenge him of this heresie, or wherefore he shoulde so highly commende this Emperour for this heresie: I thinke ye woulde be better aduised, and mollifie this sharpe chalenge of heresie in Nicephorus.

Many superstitions and fabulous tales there be found, of manye thinges in Nicephorus, I graunt, but for my owne part, I finde not that any euer noted him of heresie in this point. And I thinke my opinion therein to be more true than yours, for proofe whereof, I will be reported by such witnesses, as I thinke you will not except against, euen by your Colledge of Di•…•…es in Louaine. Who affirme in their censure vpon this authour, that, P•…•…a solum & religiosa com •…•…endat &c. Nicephorus cōmendeth only godly and religious things, Nicepho•…•… historia ecclesia•…•… •…•…yois mand•…•… &c. not only the ecclesiastical historie of faith and religion may be printed,

but with much and publike profite of the Church. This coulde not haue bene true, but an euident, false lie if that the au∣thor as you saye, had so highly aduaunced the Emperour for restoring and maintaining of that heresie. Moreouer in the verie title of the boke priuileged by the Emperour Ferdi∣nand, he is entituled with this Epithete, scriptor verè catho∣licus▪ a writer Catholike indeede: and so likewise by that name of a Catholike writer he is highly commēded to the Emperor Ferdinande, both by Lazius a catholike, and Langus a catholike, (as you accept the name of catholike) who trāslated him out of Greke into Latine, at the said Emperors commaunde∣mēt. Who also in plain speach to the Emperor, affirmeth, Volumen Nicephori de vera syncera{que} pietate conscriptum esse, the volume of Nicephorus is writtē euē of true & sincere godlines.

But what néede we cite all these against you? when that herein ye cōtroll your self in your fourth boke of this coun∣terblast, for although ye there saye he is no Papist, nor a* 1.1583 Latine, but a Grecian, & infected also w^t their schisme, yet not∣withstāding ye graūt he is in al other things catholike, thus ye mollifie y^e matter with y^e name of scisme, & dally with Ni∣cephor there, which is yet somewhat gentler than to make him an heretike, & an high aduancer of heresies, as here ye do. And there yée promised to stande to his arbitrement about you Popes praises, why then so storme ye at him here, for his iudgement in the Princes praises?

But still I sée we must beare with you, & so must al your doctors, especially sith ye be here caried awaye in so huge a raging tempest of your furie against the allegations of Nice∣phorus here cited by y^e B. And good cause ye had to kick and winch thereat, for they rub ye a litle on the gall, and there∣fore you not onely slaunder Nicephorus being the au∣thor, but fourthly also, and wherevpon you chiefly stande,* 1.1584 most 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ye reuile the Emperour, calling his doinges, wicked working, and his person a wretched heretike, whom, notwithstanding this your railing, not onely Nice∣phorus commendeth for a most godly Prince, but also Lā∣gus

in his owne preface, and his other notes to the Preface of Nicephorus, giuing him as great a praise: saying he was an Emperour flourishing in all vertues and many ornamentes. A∣gaine, An Emperour begotten by the verye prouidence of God.* 1.1585 Againe, Godlynesse and religion was from the beginning of his Empire his greatest care. And that to him were giuen, the chiefest vertues of an Emperour▪ Againe, In this Emperour be∣ing absolute almost in all vertues and ornamentes, is por∣trayed apaterne of a most excellent Prince. Yea, y^t he was ano∣ther Noe, another Moses. Againe, This was the Emperours chiefe prayse that he attayned all the whole vertues of the best auncient Princes. And that the Emperours godlynesse and religion is com∣mended chiefly among his other vertues. Thus doth your catho∣like Lāgus in his notes vpō Nicephor preface set him out, cōtrary to that you say was a wicked worker and wretched heretike. But wherto in y^e end do you so reuile this emperor? forsoth euen to this end, by him not only to deface y^e B. alle∣gation, but also to dashe dawne the Princes supreme go∣uernment, as though it consisted altogither or chiefly here∣vpon. For so you make your conclusion of this part, saying: And, thus withall ye see vpon how good amā & vpon how good a cause, M. Horne buildeth his new supremacie to plucke downe the Popes old supremacie.* 1.1586

As for the newnesse of this supremacie, and likewise the oldnesse of your Popes supremacie, is nowe (M. Stapleton) no cōuenient place to discusse: it hath partly ben touched be∣fore, & shal God willing be examined more herafter. In the mean seasō, good leaue haue ye to crake of old & vpbraid new, at your pleasure, so long as you bring no new but old & rottē proues therof, though here ye alledge neither new nor old at* 1.1587 al, you wil neuer I perceiue leaue your old fashiōs, ye threap on y^e B. y^t he buildeth this supremacy on this emperor. No M. St. the B. buildeth on no such groūds, but on y^e word of God. It is you y^t build the Popes supremacie on mēs donatiōs, & the most of your Popish doctrines & traditiōs of mēs inuētiōs.

The grounde of the Bishops argument, as ye haue hearde, was out of Gods worde, that the Prince is Gods minister: only he shewed it out of S. Augustine and Chrysostome, and exemplified it by the example of Constantine, wherein this ministerie doth chiefly consist. With whome sith Ni∣cephorus doth so agrée in the description of a Princes chiefe ministerie: were Nicephorus otherwise an heretike, or were he not, in this he sheweth himselfe none: and were it Andronicus or Emanuell: and were he an hereticke in that point, or were he sounde: the Bishop medleth not withall, nor groundeth or buildeth vpon him. Onely he setteth forth Nicephor{us} iudgemēt, either what this Prince was, or what he ought to be. And proueth y^e the things which he commē∣deth him for, (whether he deserued such commendation or no, let other examine) are the principall pointes of a Prin∣ces chiefe ministerie. And what hath the B. done here, that your Catholike Langus doth not? commending this Em∣peror to Ferdinandus, & likening Ferdinandus vnto him, saying of him, that either he was, Sicut •…•…um. &c. Such another as our historier depainteth him out in his ornaments, in the moste* 1.1588 part of all vertue to bee worshipped, most like your Maiestie: or else in the person of him, declaring that he ought to be such an one as he described (which is the maner of some Philosophers, and al∣so of Historiographers, composing orations and bookes of great Princes) he hath confirmed so many and so great ornamentes of your Maiestie, foreseeing as it were euen then in his minde, that his worke hereafter being turned into Latine, shoulde at length be published vnder that Princes name, whom he in Greke had most truly adorned with his prayse. If it were lawful thus for your Langus to apply these Emperors prayses to the Emperor Ferdinand, may not the Bishop apply them in general, as a paterne of all good Princes duties? and therfore, where ye scoffe at this, calling it in scorne a goodly and godly president: setting your mo•…•…kes aside, I maye well aunswere with Langus, whatsoeuer the Emperours iudgement, or the

Emperours life were, or the author also of these commen∣dations: these vertues so highly cōmended, are both a good∣ly and godly president, for all Princes to set before them.

Thus much therefore to the former winde of your coun∣terblast.* 1.1589 Now to the later, which after all these long dis∣courses, draweth somewhat néerer to the matter, in admit∣ting the authour Nicephorus his testimonies, and the Em∣perours doings, and answering to the Bishops allegations thereon. The effect whereof, is to improue all that is al∣leaged, as insufficient to inferre this supremacie. And it is quartred into foure partes. Firste, pr•…•…supposing this Prince to be Andronicus, & all 〈◊〉〈◊〉 doing about to be the re∣uoking of Mich•…•…els yelding to the Pope at the Councell at Lions: he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to proue, that, not 〈◊〉〈◊〉, but the Priestes (though wicked) had the chiefe •…•…uperioritie. Secondly, he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 against the gathering and sor∣ting of the Bishops 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Thirdly, he entreth into the inualiditie of the allegacions. And fourthly here vpon, he maketh his triumph and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 thanks for the victorie.

In the first parcell sayeth M. Stapleton.

But now M. Horne what if these hereticall doyngs do no∣thing* 1.1590 releeue your cause, nor necessarily induce the chiefe superioritie in all causes, and perchaunce in no cause Eccle∣siasticall, concerning the finall discussing and determina∣tion of the same? verily without any perchaunce, it is most plainly and certainely true, it doth not. For euen in this Schismaticall councell, and hereticall fynagog, the Bishops played the chiefe parte, and they gaue the finall though a wrong and a wicked iudgement VVho also shewed their su∣perioritie, though vngodly vppon this mans Father, in that they would not suffer him to be enterred Princelike: them selues much more worthy to haue bene cast after their de∣cease, to the Dogges and Rauens, vppon •…•… durtie doong∣hill.

What those Priests were worthie, we haue your wor∣thie

iudgement M. Stapleton, whereby we perceiue your Priests can erre, although they be Massemongers, and by your former sayings, Reuerent worshippers of Images too. But all will not helpe, they are adiudged to be cast on a d•…•…rtje doonghill, to be deuoured of Dogges and Raues, bi∣cause they would not suffer▪ Michael Paleologus their Em∣perour (who notwithstanding intruded him selfe by vio∣lence) to be enterred Prince like.

I pray you M. Stap. be an vpright iudge. What then are those Priests much more worthy that would not suffer their liuing Princes to vse their princely authoritie? what are those Popes more worthie▪ that haue not onely not suffred their predecessours, to be en•…•…orted Pope like, but haue pul∣led them out of the ground againe, and hacked and mangled them? What are those prelates worthie that haue caused the Priestes and the people to renounce their obedience to their sworne Princes? I thinke ye will not say these should be▪ call out on durtie doonghils: and yet their faulte is as much as the other: & it is to be feared least they shalbe cast out into vtter darkenesse▪

But ye do a little to much charge the Gréeke Priestes,* 1.1591 with the whole burden of this crime. It was not onely they as Uolaterane saith, but it was the whole nation, as Baptist Egnatius writeth, as is also noted in Laugus his margine, Ex qua tuntam •…•…nuidiam▪ &c. VVherevppon he gotte so great enuie of the Greeke notion, that neither they performed the obsequies of the dead, & also denied him the place of his Sepulchre. But you applie it onely vnto the Priestes, that their superioritie might the more appeare. For which purpose you direct all your tale, to sette foorth their superioritie, euen in such as ye call wicked and here∣ticall doings: whereas the Princes claime is not for any such superioritie in wicked doings, but onely in Godly and Christian causes.

Ye driue all the matter to 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 of the holy Ghosts proceeding, and to Andronicus cealing therein, a∣gainst the dealing of his Father. In 〈◊〉〈◊〉 thus do the last editions of Nicephorus, Printed at Paris, 1562. and 1566. (whether truely or no, is doubtfull to say) referre al to Andronicus, and euer in the place of Ema•…•…el, put An∣dronicus: and for dri•…•…ing away of the Turkes, put in the anulling of the doings at Lions Councell. Which sen∣tence soeuer be the truer, either the former which the Bi∣shop followed, or the later which you follow: yet cā you not go so round away with the matter, but that euen Michael* 1.1592 which yéelded to the Pope, mangre all his Priestes, and made them perforce while he liued to acknowledge the Pope, shewed therein a superioritie •…•…uer them, which I thinke ye will not call a tiran•…•…y, 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 gaue it ouer to the Pope. And his sonne in doing the contrarie (euen in the Councell ye mention) sheweth also a supreme dealing therein. And that supreme dealing that you most stiffly de∣nie to Princes, to w•…•…te, the calling of Councels, the Pa∣triarch did it not, but the Prince, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 as your selfe ha•…•… confessed before, that he after his Fathers death, su•…•…mo∣ned a Councell of the Grecians. And so sayeth Langus in the Margine of the Preface. Imperatori•…•… istius ductu, &c. By the guydance of this Emperour in the Councell, the Easterne Bishops contrarie to the Westerne, decreed, that the holy Ghost proceeded onely from the Father. But not long after by his Nephewe Iohn Paleologus being Empe∣rour, in the Synode at Florence holden in the yeere of the Lorde, 1439. the Grecians accorded to the determina∣tion of the Latines, in so much that they professed the ho∣ly* 1.1593 Ghost to proceede from the Father and the Sonne, when they were perswaded, that the Latines beleeued God the Father to be the onely cause of the Sonne, and of the ho∣ly Ghost, and that they accursed the being of twoo begin∣nings, or two causes in the consubstantiall Trinitie.

Which sent•…•…nce, as it sheweth the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to be called by the 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ so it sheweth the cause of the Gréekes di∣•…•…ision 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉〈◊〉, in this 〈◊〉〈◊〉, aboute which, here and in your 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉, •…•…e make so much a do, to haue bene rather of misunderstanding the one of the other, than any such 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ as ye here •…•…o often charge them, •…•…aunder Ni•…•…phorus, re•…•…ite this Prince, and afterwardes 〈◊〉〈◊〉 •…•…o vs also. And withall it sheweth, that this con∣trou•…•…rsie was not so much tho matter betweene them, as was the re•…•…enting vnto the Popes obedience, which the Greeke Church could neuer abide, and to say the sooth, they of all other had chiefe cause▪ for the Pope was the chiefe ruine 〈◊〉〈◊〉 their Empir•…•….

But to returne to my purpose. In this Councell, the Prince hath this point of supremac•…•…e, that he sum•…•…oned and guided it▪ which M▪ Stapleton espying, dareth not ful∣ly affirme▪ that thi•…•… doing maketh •…•…atly againste the Princes supremacie, but he cometh f•…•…intly in, with, what, 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉 do 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 you 〈◊〉〈◊〉. And what if 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 shalt we 〈◊〉〈◊〉 haue larkes▪ what 〈◊〉〈◊〉, •…•…id▪ phie on Deuill with his shifting if 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 thou be* 1.1594 the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of God.

And what if it do not necessarily enduce the chiefe supe∣•…•…* 1.1595 in all causes?

And what if it did not necessarily, if it did it, what is here the necessitie to or fro the matter? and what if it did some necessarili•…•… though not all? Yet ye see here is somwhat gotten to helpe the matter for warde. Ye graunt this doing argueth a supremacie in some Ecclesia•…•…call causes al∣though not necessarilie. But st•…•…pping backe againe, ye▪ say:

And 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in no 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Ecc•…•…siasticall concerning the* 1.1596 〈◊〉〈◊〉 discussing and determin•…•…cion of the same.

Well, and what if this also were graunted you, that con∣cerning the finall discussing and determination, he had

supremacie in no cause ecclesiasticall, yet might it followe that in all other poynts (except the finall discussing and de∣termination) he had the supremacie.

Verily (say you, waxing somewhat bolder) without any* 1.1597 perchance it is most playnly and certaynly true, it dothe not.

And howe proue you this M. Stap.

For (say you) euen in this sch•…•…maticall councell and here∣ticall* 1.1598 synagoge the Byshops played the chiefe part▪ and they gaue the finall, thoughé a wrong and wicked iudgement.

And verily then (without any perchaunce) either your selfe do make a foule lye, or else bothe in calling the Coun∣cell, and giuing the finall sentence also, the Prince had the superioritie. For, whatsoeuer ye deni•…•… héere, not. 16 lynes before, ye gra•…•…nted, that he •…•…othe summoned the Councell, and also that he and they anulled and reuoked that hys fa∣ther had done at the Councell at Lions. Lo heere, in the annulling and reuoking, which was the finall discussing and determination▪ ye bothe ioyne hi•…•… with them, and place him before them. And thu•…•… vnawares, whyle ye speake agaynst the truthe, ye wotte not what, or care not howe ye wrappe your selfe in contradictions, and make your selfe a lyer.

Your seconde parcell is onely agaynst the order of the sentences collected by the Byshop, asking him what honor he hath got for al his cra•…•…tie cooping or cunning▪ and smoth* 1.1599 •…•…oyning, combining, and incorporating a number of Nice∣phorus sentences togither For all these wordes you vse to outscoffe the mat•…•…er, and quarell at the placing of them vn∣orderly. But all this whyle ye answere not one worde to any one worde in them, and yet set you downe your mar∣ginall note with a solemne out•…•…rie.

O what a craftie Cooper and smothe Ioyner is master Horne.

But sée how handsomely it falleth out, and how orderly, euen where ye talke of order▪ For where ye 〈◊〉〈◊〉 haue

set downe this your marginall exclamation, at the com∣ming to his second parte, saying: what honor haue ye go: for all your craftie cooping, &c. Ye set it downe for haste in the matter before answered, concerning the schismaticall Councel, and the bishops dealing therin, doing as the story telleth of Doctor Shawe in his sermon of the prayse of king Richarde the thirde, that or euer the king was come to the sermon, had already sayde his parte, that he should haue sayde at his comming, and so with shame inough, out of place, and out of time, repeated the same. But you may say, thankes be to God, inke and paper can not blushe, and although I thinke you can do as little your self, yet a Gods name, let it passe, be it but the Printers misplacing of the note, although it fell out ill fauor•…•…dly, to light euen there, where ye reprehende the Byshop for ill ioyning togither of his sentēces, and your booke ioyneth your marginal notes, all besides your matter.

Now hauing thus stoode trifling in reprehending the order of the bishops collection of Nicephorus sentences, bi∣cause he setteth them downe togither, béeing not so set to∣gither, but here & there dispersed, in the great & long Pre∣face of Nicephorus: where the Reader now at the length should looke that M. Stap. should come to answere some poynt materiall of all the bishops allegations: as though he had fully answered them all (hauing sayde not so much as Buffe vnto any one sentence alleaged) he repeateth his former vaunt full lustily, saying:

What honor haue you, I say, wonne by this or by the whole* 1.1600 thing it self? little or nothing, furthering your cause, and yet other∣wise playne schismaticall, and hereticall. For the which your hand∣some and holy dealing, the author of the foresaide Homilie, and you, yea M. Iewell too, are worthy exceeding thanks.

Is not héere a proper answere, thus to iest out the matter with scoffes, crakes & raylings? Surely, M. St. what honor soeuer the bishop hath wonne by this, or not wonne (as he

looketh for none at your hāds, & your thāks ye may reserue for your friends) you win much shame to your selfe & your cause, thus shamefully to •…•…umble vp the matter, all onely with out facing it. Ye say the B. hath patched vp a number of Nicephorus sentences togither. Why do ye not •…•…ip a sun∣der those patches' If he hath vsed craftie cooping cunning, smoothe ioyning, combining, and incorporating, it were your part to vnhoope thē, to dissolue thē, to answere them. Tush say you, what néede that? they are al little or nothing furthering your cause. Now, M. Sta? I thinke then they might be the easelier answered, & not so to skip ouer them like whip Sir Iohn at his morrow Masie. But til you an∣swere something to thē, an vpright iudge will déeme them much to further our cause. Although it is somewhat that ye graūt, y^t yet a litle they further our cause: •…•… I think by that y^e reader hath wayed thē better, he shal sée they so hinder your cause, that ye thought it the best way to let them all alone.

And that the Reader may the better beholde bothe your dealing, and the Byshops allegations, & so iudge how much or howe little they further the matter, and whether they might haue bene thought worthy the answering: as the Byshoppe hathe gathered them, so will I set them downe. Who hath glorified God more, and shewed more* 1.1601 feruent zeale (sayth Nicephorus to the Empe∣rour towardes him in pure religion, without fayning, than thou hast done? Who hath with suche feruent zeale sought after the most sincere fayth muche indaungered, or clensed agayne the holy table? When thou sawest our true religion brought into perill with newe deuises, brought in by counterfeite and naughtie doctrines, thou diddest defende it moste paynefully and wisely, thou diddest shewe thy selfe, to be the mightie, supreme, and very holy anchor and staye in so

horrible wauering and errour, in matters be∣ginning to faynte, and to perishe as it were with shipwracke. Thou arte the guyde of the profes∣sion of our fayth. Thou haste restored the Ca∣tholike and vniuersall Church (beeing troubled with new matters or opinions) to the olde state. Thou hast banished from the Church all vnlaw∣full and impure doctrine. Thou hast clensed a∣gayne with the worde of truthe, the Temple, from choppers and chaungers of the diuine doc∣trine, and from hereticall deprauers thereof. Thou haste bene set on fyre with a godly zeale for the diuine Table. Thou haste established the doctrine. Thou haste made constitutions for the same. Thou haste entrenched the true religion with mightie defences. That which was pulled downe, thou haste made vp agayne, and haste made the same whole and sounde agayne, with a conuenient knitting togither of all the partes and members. (To be shorte, thou haste, saythe Nicephorus to the Emperour) established true religion and godlynesse with spirituall butres∣ses, namely the doctrine and rules of the aun∣cient fathers.

These are the Bishops allegations out of Nicephorus, for this Princes dealing in ecclesiastical matters. Wherin are comprehended (as eche man may sée) all the chiefe ec∣clesiasticall* 1.1602 causes. The true religion, the sincere fayth, the diuine doctrine, godlynesse, making constitutions, the fa∣thers rules, the catholike & vniuersal church. Neither ascri∣beth he to the Prince herein, a power Legātine frō Priest, Byshop, Patriarke, or Pope: muche lesse to be their onely

executioner: but vnder God he giueth him a supreme go∣uernement, in calling him, not onely the defender, but the mightie, supreme, and very holy anchor and stay, the guyde, the restorer, the clenser, the establisher, the entrencher and maker vp of all these things. On the contrarie: the puller downe, and banisher of newe deuises, counterfeit, naughtie, vnlawfull, and impure doctrines, of horrible errors, and here∣tical deprauers. And this, his chief dealing herein, to be most seemely for him, and chiefly belonging to his princely of∣fice. Dothe all this M. Stap. little or nothing further our cause? if it doe not, then it lyttle or nothing hindreth yours. Why graunte ye not then vnto it? if ye graunte but thus muche, we wil vrge you little or nothing further: for what is not héere conteined, that is either conteined in the issue betwéene the Bishop and M. Feck: or in the othe of the O. Maiesties supremacie, that ye refuse to take?

But as light as y•…•… would séeme to make of this, it pin∣cheth you, and ye dare not graūt, nor answere any sentence therof. Onely ye giue a snatche at a worde, and bayte at the bishops marginal note vpō these former allegatiōs. Wher∣in* 1.1603 ye play like Alciates dogge, at whom when one hurled a stone, he let go him frō whom the stone came, & wreaked his anger on the stone. So set you vpon the marginall note, that in déede hitteth you a good souse, but the allegations from whēce the marginal note doth come, ye let alone, and fal to tugging of the note. Only (as I saide) ye snatche at a word, as though all the weight of the marginall note were setched only from thence, and not from all these sentences,

But (say you) M. Home will not so leese his long allega∣tion* 1.1604 out of Nicephorus. He hath placed a note in the mar∣gine, sufficient (•…•… trow) to conclude his principall purpose. And that is this. The Princes supremacie in repayring re∣ligion decayed. This is indeede a ioly marginall note. But where findeth M Horne the same in his text? for soothe of this, that Nicephorus calleth the Emperour, the mightie, su∣preme,

and very holy anchor, and stay in so horrible wauering, &c. of the worde supreme anchor, he concludeth a supremacie. But O more than childishe follie. Coulde that craftie Cooper of thys allegation, informe you no better, master Horne? was he no better seene in Grammer, or in the profession of a schole ma∣ster, than thus foully and fondely to misse the true interpretation of the Latine worde? for what other is suprema anchora in good Englishe, than the laste anchor, the laste refuge, the ex∣treme holde, and staye to rest vpon? As suprema verba, doe signifie the laste wordes of a man in hys laste wyll: as sum∣ma dies, the laste daye, supremum iudicium, the laste iudge∣ment: with a number of lyke Phrases. So suprema anchora is the laste anchor, signifying the laste holde and staye, as in the perill of tempeste the laste refuge is to caste anchor. In suche a sense Nicephorus calleth this Emperour the laste, the mightie, and the holy anchor or stay in so horrible wauering and errour. Signifying that nowe by him they were stayed from the storme of schisme, as from a storme in the sea, by casting the anchor, the shippe is stayed. But by the metaphore of an anchor, to con∣clude a supremacie: is as wyse, as by the Metaphore of a Cowe to conclude a Saddle. For as well dothe a saddle fitte a Cowe, as the qualitie of an anchor resemble a supremacie. But by suche beggerly shiftes a barren cause muste be vpholded. First all is saide by the way of amplification to extoll the Emperour: as in the same sentence he calleth him the sixt element, reaching aboue Ari∣stotels fifte body, ouer the foure elementes with suche lyke: Then all is but a Metaphore: which were it true, proueth not nor concludeth, but expresseth and lightneth a truth. Thirdly, the Me∣taphore is ill translated, and last of all, worsse applied.

A sirra, M. St. héere is a whot sturre and highe wordes. A man would thinke all is nowe answered to the full, and yet when all cōmes to all, héere is nothing of all this a do, agaynst any one sentence of the Byshops allegations. But the poore marginall note, and one poore séelie worde, of all these long allegations, shall abye for this geare. First ye

say M. Stapl. that M. Horne will not so leese his long allegation out of Nicephorus. What ye meane by leesing, I know not. But it appeareth, he may le•…•…e or finde them all, for any thing ye wil answere to them. Ye slinke for the nonce to the marginall note, which is this:

The Princes supremacie in repayring reli∣gion decayed.

This is in deede (say you) a ioly marginal note, but where findeth M. Horne the same in his texte? forsoothe of this, that Nicephorus calleth the Emperour the mightie, supreme and very holy anchor and stay, in so horrible wauering of the worde supreme anchor, he concludeth a supremacie.

Is there nothing, M. Stap. in all these allegations, that ye coulde sée, wherfore the Bishop set downe his marginal note, of the Princes supremacie in repayring religion decay∣ed, but onely this sentence? yea onely that worde? do not all the other sentences importe as muche as this? that he is the guyde of the profession of our fayth: the restorer of the catholike and vniuersall Church: the banisher from the Church of all vnlawful and impure doctrine: the clenser of the temple with the worde of truth, frō choppers and chan∣gers of the diuine doctrine, and from hereticall deprauers thereof. That he is the entrencher of true religion, with mightie defences: That he is the establisher of the doc∣trine, and maker of constitutions for the same: that he is the maker vp agayne, the maker whole and sounde agayne of al that was pulled downe. Might not all this to an indifferent reader, be thought sufficient, to answere the marginal note, and comprehende in all poyntes as muche as the note? yea though ye quite set aside the sentence and word wher∣at ye wrangle? And yet with M. Stap. this one sentence must beare the weight of all that the bishop alleaged, the mightie, supreme, and very holy anchor and stay in so hor∣rible wauering.

But go to, let it do so, presuppose that the bishop alleaged

no more but this one sentence: or that all the other little or nothing further the cause. Yet dothe this onely sentence fully comprehende as muche as this marginall note conte•…•…∣neth. (Yea set also aside the word supreme, that master St. quarell is at) that in so horrible wauering and errour, in matters beginning to faynte, and to perishe as it were with shipwracke, the Prince is the mightie and very holy anker, or stay, Sacris simul & prophanis, both in holy and prophane matters. Doth not this mightie stay, onely or chiefly vnder God, of the Prince, for al kinde of persons, agaynst errors, playnely argue a soueraigne helping power, or supremacie in repayring of religion beeing decayed? But M. Stapl. letting goe all this, girdeth onely at this worde supreme, bicause the byshop translated suprema anchora not the laste anchor, but supreme anchor. Héere first he falleth out with a Cooper, I can not tell whome for missinforming the by∣shop. As though the interpretatiō of supremus were so high a poynte, that the byshop muste be taught of some▪ Gram∣marian or scholemaster, the English therof. And bicause it is* 1.1605 not englished in good Englishe, full scholemaster like, he ta∣keth vpon him to expounde the same.

For, what other is (sayth he) suprema anchora, in good English, than the laste anchor, the laste refuge, the extreme holde and stay to rest vpon.

Be it euen as you would haue it, M. Stap. And thankes be to God, that when you haue nothing to say agaynst the bishops allegation: this is your last anchor, your last refuge and extreme stay to rest vpon, to finde faulte with the by∣shops englishe, for not good english. Though héere neither you can proue any false englishing (which is common with you) and when you haue all done, supremus is bothe laste, and chiefe, and which way soeuer ye conster it, supremus is supreme, take it howe you list. Although in the very pro∣per der•…•…uation of the worde, supremus comming of supra, signifieth the chiefe or hyest. And that it is called laste, is

but accessorie and improperly spoken (for properly, vlti∣mus is last, or extre•…•…) by reason that the last things, as ad∣ded, & for the most part vppermost, and the last doings are commonly the chiefest. But what neede contention here de laua caprina, of a matter of nothing? It were more fitte ye had reserued this your earnest answere, to some earnest matter. But as they say, In refrigidissima feru•…•…, in f•…•…entis∣sima friges. In the coldest matters you be boyling ho•…•…te, and in the hottest matters you be key colde. To auoyde therfore contention, as ye ought not to controll the Bishops English, being not false: so am I for my parte, content to admit your English, and I thinke so will the Bishop to•…•…. For (setting a∣side your quareling) it co•…•…th not hi•…•…, but all in the ende commeth to one effect.

You say it signifieth the last anchor, the last refuge, the ex∣treme holde, and stay to rest vpon.

Uery well sayde M. St. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is not that the chiefe, which we must flée vnto, holde, stay, and rest vpon, when all other helpes do fayl•…•…? And so ye graunt the Prince vnder God to be the chiefest refuge and stay, both to the lay and Cler∣gie, in all w•…•…rings of doctrine, and err•…•… of Religion▪ Is not this now asmuch, as the Bishops note contained, the Princes supremacie in restoring Religion decayed?

You exemplifi•…•… the matter thus.

As suprema verba, do signifie the last wordes of a man in his last will: as 〈◊〉〈◊〉 dies, the last day: supremum iudicium▪ the last iudgement▪ with a number of the like phrases▪

True in déede M. St. but ye should withall remember, •…•…uen in these examples, that the last will is the chiefest will,* 1.1606 and al the other former willes giue place to the last will. And the last day is the chiefest day, and by a speciall prerogatiue called Dies Do•…•…ni, the day of the Lorde, and Dies magnus▪ the great day. And the last iudgement, is the chiefest iudge∣ment, when all iudges shall be iudged: and therefore God the father hath onely giuen it to Christ, bica•…•…se he is simply

the chiefest of all. And here in earth also he is the chiefest iudge, that is last appealed vnto. Thus M. St. your owne phrases, fitte the Bishop well.

And as it doth in these, so in this present phrase, Suprema anchora, say you, Is the last anchor, signifying the last hold & stay, as in the perill of tēpest, the last refuge is to cast anchor.

And is not this then also the chiefest refuge and stay?

In such a sense (say you) Nicephorus calleth his Emperour the last, the mightie & the holy anchor, or stay so in horrible wauering and errour, signifying that now by him they were stayed, from the storine of schisme, as from a storme in the sea, by casting the anchor, the shippe is stayed.

This is in dée•…•… M. St. the meaning of Nicephorus. And* 1.1607 do ye not sée what chiefe dealing it giueth aboue all other only to the Prince, in the storme of a schisme or errour, or o∣ther ecclesiasticall matter, wauering? is not the anchor in a storme the chiefest and most principall stay? doth any thing stay the ship more or better than an anchor? or is there any other ordinarie stay therof? Then, by your own expositiō, y^e Prince is made here, the chiefe, the principal, & the only stay in such cases, which fully cōcludeth all the matter, notwith∣stāding al your scoffes, & therfore where ye cōclude, saying.

But by the metaphore of an anchor to conclude a supre∣macie,* 1.1608 is as wise, as by the metaphore of a Cow, to conclude a Saddle. For aswell doth a saddle fit a Cow, as the qualitie of an anchor resemble supremacie. But by such beggerly shiftes a barren cause must be vpholded.

Ye haue sadled the Cow M. St. hādsomly, & ye are the fit∣test mā that I sée, to ride vpō hir, for this cōclusion sheweth you as wise a mā, according to y^e old saying, as euer spurred a Cow for admitting y^e metaphore of an anchor, no further than your selfe haue sayed, that as by it the ship is stayed frō stormes in the seas, so by the Prince, all the people are stayed frō Schisme & wauering errours, in religion: if the anchor be the chiefest stay next to Gods help in y^e one, is not the Prince the chiefest stay next to Gods helpe in the other? although

therfore, ye •…•…elie the B. to say he concluded only therevpon (for before ye sayde he concluded on the worde. Suprema. which he did not neither, but on all the whole allegacions altogither) yet holdeth this conclusion, euen by your owne sayings better I •…•…row, than you will holde on your sadled Cowes backe as fit a rider as ye be, except ye sit the faster, that the Cow cast not a calfe as bigge as M. St.

As for the B. shifts what they are, & what beggerly shifts they are, euery reader will soone iudge, y^t seeth how you shift off the matter. Ye answere nothing to any sentēce of the B. allegatiōs: ye runne at randon to other •…•…lim flamtales: ye finde fault at other •…•…thours about other matters: ye picke quarrels about bare names: ye snatch at the marginal note, & let go the matter: ye def•…•…āt about the only word supremus, more like •…•… beggerly Pedantie, than a grammarlike schole∣master: & all but to raise mistes & coūterblasts, pretending to dissipate & discusse mistes, & al but to cary the reader frō the flat & round answering of the 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 yet are al these no beggerly shifts of yours. In déede M. St. these are no cōmon* 1.1609 beggers shifts, these are 〈◊〉〈◊〉 shifts than al men vse, or thā e∣uery mā cā see, they are belike borowed of y^e beggerly friers of Louaine, but from whēce soeuer ye haue them, the cause is both beggerly & barraine, that in stéede of good plaine an∣swering, seketh such shifte of shiftes, but hold your peace 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the begger, it is a bad sacke that can abide no clouting.

Now hauing thus shifted of the B. allegations. with these shiftes: you gather them vp in a briefe recapitulacion, to ex∣cuse the matter. First, all is sayd by the way of amplification* 1.1610 to extoll, the Emperour (as in the same sentence he calleth him the sixt Element, reaching aboue Aristotels fifte bodie, ouer the foure Elements with such like.)

As though this amplifying of his estate, were any argu∣ment for you to depresse the same. And sith (as him self pro∣testeth) he meant no flatterie, this amplification, meaneth yet a truth of his excellēcie, and supreme estate. Otherwise, he could not well haue so called him, although he sayeth not

altogither as you say, neither: for he micio•…•…eth not Aristo∣tle at all, nor any his fift body, nor speaketh of the foure Elements, but he saith, Et vt ille ab vtra{que}, &c. And that he receyuing from both of them (speaking of godlinesse and s•…•…∣licitie) that which was proper to them both, might make per∣fect, to all men a newe, and in very deede a maruelous cōmo∣ditie and helpe, to wo•…•…e, a certaine stable firmament, and (as I might call it) a sixt and an eternall Element, in diuine matters beginning to slyde & perishing by shipwracke, offering thee the great, supreme, and in deede the holy Anchor, of so hor∣rible a wauering, and errour, both in holy and in prophane matters. That in thee they might represent a sownde stabili∣tie, to others also that are with thee.

This being the amplification of Nicephorus which is in déede a great amplification: it sheweth that he meant to cō∣mende him very highly for his supreme dealing in religion, & not as M. St. would haue it, any thing to abase the same, which is quite contrarie to the authours meaning.

But then (saieth M. Stap.) all is but a metaphore, which* 1.1611 were it true, proueth not nor concludeth, but exprefleth and lighteneth a truth: Thirdly, the metaphore is ill translated, and last of all, worse applied.

For the trāslation (M. St.) it is answered before, thanks be to God ye can not proue it false. And yet (not to cōtend) yours is admitted, and maketh against you too, •…•…uē by your owne tale. But what hindreth this, that this worde an∣chor is but a metaphore? doth a metaphore being a true me∣taphore, proue nothing, but lighten a truth? doth not a true* 1.1612 thing proue a truth, be it metaphore or what soeuer it be, be it true? as for a metaphore, doth it not proue the thing that it is resembled vnto? Christ is called bread, a vine, a stone, a Lion, a way, a dore, a sheperde: do not these metaphors proue and conclude in him, the reasons and proportions wherefore he is so called? do we not by these metaphors cō∣clude, that he is our norisher, our life, our stabilitie, our

strength, our guide and defence, our onely meanes and en∣trance into heauen? The Emperour is called here the chief Anchor. Yet al is but a Metaphore say you. What thē? we go not about to proue him an Anchor. But euen as your selfe expounde it we proue him by the metaphore of an Anchor, to be a stay: and so being the chiefe Anchor, it proueth and concludeth that he is the chiefe stay. And this is ynough, that that it proueth thus much. As for the An∣chor take it to your selfe, and get an Asse to your Cowe, to carie it.

Neuertheles, if this were also remitted to you, that being a metaphore, it prooueth not, nor concludeth, but expresseth and lightneth a truth. What 〈◊〉〈◊〉 this the matter? So the truth therby be expressed and lightned, although the Bi∣shop thereby, concluded not his matter, but onely lightned and expressed the truth thereof. Were not this ynoughe at least to stoppe your brabling and rayling agaynst him? Ex∣cept* 1.1613 ye be of I•…•…mbres and Membres disposition, that of purpose will resist the truth, and not expresse but suppresse, not lighten but obscure the same, as the Phariseys did, and you Papistes after them haue done, and labour still to do. But ye cannot oppresse the truth for euer, yeaeuen your striuing agaynst it, shall the more (agaynst your willes) expresse and lighten the truth.

Your small conclusion is verie short. Last of all (say you) it is worse applied, but so long as ye shewe, neither howe, where, nor whie: a man might aunswere you, a shorte horse is soone curryed. And when you applie your minde to aunswere more substantially, I will take paynes to re∣plie, and cu•…•…rie your answere more smoothly. As for the rest of your Counterblast, it is but the blowing vp of the victorie before ye haue it. It aunswereth nothing to the matter, but is a crake of your triumph, that ye wene ye haue got∣ten, much good do it you, master Stapleton.

Nowe whereas (say you) in the beginning of your matter,* 1.1614

the substance of your proues hereafter standing in stories, yt haue demeaned your selfe so clerkly & skilfully here, the rea∣der may hereof haue a taste: and by the way of preuention and anticipation, haue also a certaine preiudiciall vnderstan∣ding, what he shall looke for at your handes in the residue. VVherefore God be thanked, that at the beginning hath so deciphered you, whereby we may so much the more, yea the boldlier without any feare of all your antiquitie herfater to be shewed, cheerefully proceede on.

Thou séest here a iolie triumph (gentle Reader) and I doubt not, but thou séest what a great gaine he hath wonne. Do but call for his cardes, I warrant you, he will be asha∣med to shew them. But alas good man, giue him leaue, he must crake of somthing to comfort himselfe withall, and set a fayre viser, on an yll fauoured visage to outface the mat∣ter, when nothing else will helpe it. But God be thanked, indéede, that hath thus deciphered his noughtie reckonings, and sophisticall summes, filled vp with bare Ciphers in Algorisme, that furnished a place in steade of an aun∣swere, and were in déede no aunswere, nor anie iust ac∣compt, but as they say, he that reckens without his hoste, must recken twice.

But a Gods name (as master Stapleton cryeth) let vs cheerefully proceede on. We are almost at an ende of this first booke of his.

The. 25. Diuision.

AS the Bishop hitherto on the wordes of Saint Pauls Rom. 13. calling the Prince Gods minister, hath by the fathers Chrysostome and S. Augustine, and by these Ec∣clesiastical historiographers Eusebius & Nicephorus, about these two Emperours, shewed sufficiently how farre this ministerie stretcheth, and wherein it chiefly consisteth: so concluding this for the other testimonie of S. Paule allea∣ged,* 1.1615

he sheweth the endes and boundes of the Princes go∣uernment, not onely to stretch to the conseruation of ciuill peace & outwarde tranquillity, but also to the maintenance and preseruing of Gods true religion. To the confirmation of this sentence of the Apostle, he citeth Chrysost. cōcluding hereon, that these two parts and notes of a princes gouern∣mēt, are so knit togither, that y^e one cannot be without the o∣ther, & therfore both are necessary to be required in a prince. And that thus, the auncient Christian Princes did consider of their duties, he citeth out of Cyrill, the testimonies of the Emperours, Theodosius and Ualentinian.

Master Stapletons aunswere to this chiefly standeth in* 1.1616 thrée poyntes. First, he querelleth with the Bishop, for calling these Emperors, Christian Emperours. Secondly, he yeldeth to the Bishope allegation of Saint Paule and Chrysostome, as rather for him, than against him, & thereto trauayleth in bringing forth ensamples. Thirdely, to the testimonies of Ualentinian and Theodosius, he replyeth with other testimonies of the sayde Emperours.

All the first part is friuolous and to no effect, nor aun∣swering the argument of the Bishops conclusion, which is this.

All Christian princes notable and godly doings, that are necessarily belonging to their office, are paterns for other Princes to beholde and do their dutie to their subiects by.

But these and such like Princes, are by the ecclesiastical writers commended for their notable doings in the main∣tenance and furtherance of Christian religion, as doings necessarily perteyning to their office:

Ergo, they are paterns, examples, and glasses for other Christian Princes to beholde, and to learne thereby to do their dutie to their subiects, in the maintenance and furthe∣rance of Christian Religion.

To this master Stap. sayth neuer a worde, but falleth a rayling on the Bishop for calling this Emperour, Christian

Emperour. And first, in his sume he sweareth by God, that he he will not feare the Bishops conclusion, syth the ante∣cedent was so naught.

And shall we nowe M. Horne (sayth he) your antecedent* 1.1617 matter beeing so naught greatly feare the consequent, and conclusion ye will hereof inferre? Nay pardie.

Well sworne master Stapleton, ye can not sweare by a greater. But if one of your companie would do so much for me, as to remember you but with a good phillip, that your foreheade smarted withall, ye woulde not thus lightly take the name of God in vaine, but it was done (in this your be∣ginning ex abrupto, and shall we, &c.) to shewe your bolde manhoode. Shall we feare (say you) the Bishops conclusion his antecedent being so naught? nay perdie. No, in no wyse, M. Stapl. feare it not: but stande to it euen as you did to the other, that is to say, take your héeles and runne quite away from it. And be it naught, or be it good, aunswere not a worde thereto. But onely wrangle aboute some bye worde or other, finding play with the Reader aboute o∣ther matters, and th•…•…n euen as you aunswered the ante∣cedent: so shall ye shewe your selfe constant in aunswering the conclusion.

For what else is all your first part (where, if ye feare not the Bishops consequent, ye should denie it, and shew some reason thereof, or distinguish the same, or else ye graunt it) but a bare shifting off to other matters? as this, bicause the Bishop called the Emperour (on Nicephorus his commen∣mendation) a Christian Emperour, an example, a spectacle, a glasse for other, as one that refourmed Religion to the purenesse thereof: This (say you) in suche a personage as* 1.1618 yee counterfey•…•…, can not bee but a deadlye and a mortall sinne.

Herevppon ye snatche occasion to fling at master Foxes bóoke of Martyrs once againe, about M. Doctor VVesalian, of whome ye say ye spake before.

Here againe ye come to your former Qu (like the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Pharisey) despising the Bishop as one that is farre from the knowledge of Bishop White and Bishop Gardiner, these are Reuerend fathers with you, as for the bishop nowe,* 1.1619 is a verye poore sielie Clerke, and howe mete to occupie such a roume, ye leaue it to others discrete and vpright iudgement.

There is no doubt M. Stapleton, but that ye meane some* 1.1620 discrete and vpright iudges, to iudge this matter of both their learnings, ye shewe your selfe so vpright betwéene them. But what shall those discrete men iudge of, your vpright∣nesse and discretion in aunswering? For what is anye of these things to the purpose? although (setting aside this your im∣pudent outfacing) what? man, it was well knowen what mightie great Clerkes the better of these twaine, Bishop Gardiner and Bishop VVhite were, either for law or for ver∣sifying, either for a Sophister, or a schoolemaister. And yet in these pointes were they neither in primis, secundis, nor in •…•…ertijs. As for any déepe knowledge of Diuinitie, or of eccle∣siastical stories, which had bene fitter for a Bishop I trow, Iwis, it was not so great but that a meaner man than the Bishop that now is, might hasarde a comparison with thē. But comparisons they say are odious. I speake it not to the dispraise of their learning, woulde God, such as it was, they had emploiedit better to the glory of God the giuer, and the edifying of his Church, in setting forth his Gospell, as they ought to haue done. For this is y^e chiefest thing in a bishop, although the other are also necessarie, and, as ye say, among other, this the knowledge of ecclesiastical stories, which ye vpbraide to the bishop, as a verie poore sielie clarke in them. But thus much your impudencie driueth me to saye, that neither of your two Reuerend Fathers, haue taken a quarter of the studious trauel in this point, that the B. that now is hath done, and hath shewed more fruite thereof, than euer they did, Scripture as they saye, maketh mention of all thrée, let your discrete and vpright men, or any other searche

and iudge who lyst.

But wherfore in conclusion is all this adoe? forsooth the Bishop (on Nicephorus wordes) commendeth him, for a Christian Emperour, and sayth he, was a spectacle and glasse for others, and as one that reformed religion to the purenesse there∣of, this can not be a venial but a deadly and mortall sinne, saith M. Stapleton.

Whosoeuer be the discrete iudge, you are no mercifull iudge M. Stapl. there is no pardon with you but present death I see well, I woulde at least ye were an vpright iudge, to iudge vprightly of the matter. Ye haue condemned the B. for saying an Ecclesiasticall writer commendeth him for a Christi∣an Emperour, but what will you say to the same writer, if he will call him the most Christian Emperour? is not this warrāt inough for the B? he calleth him an exāple, a glasse, or a specta∣cle for others. What if not onely Nicephorus say the same, & a great deale more, but Langus your catholike Clerke say euen the same also, and commend him like wise for a paterne and mirror to the Emperour Ferdinande?

But Lorde what a stirre is here, for that the B. spake* 1.1621 of reforming religion to the purenesse thereof? Here is the Bi∣shop and Maister Foxe chalenged both of them for heretikes, more than any of their felowes. Here is Maister Stapleton disposed to haue his tongue roll, as though it had not walked and run at large before.

And then (sayth he) that I may a little roll in your rayling Rhe∣toricke, wherein ye vniustly rore out against M. Feckenham, may I not for much better cause and grounde say to you, than you did to him, to make him a Donatist, M. Horne? Let your friends now weigh with aduisement, what was the erroneous opinion of the Grecians against the holy ghost, and let them compare your o∣pinion and guilefull defences thereof to theirs, and they must needes clap you on the backe, and say to you Patrisas (if there be any vpright iudgement in them) deeming you so like your great

graundsiers the Grecians, as though they had spyt you out of their mouth.

Howe iustly or vniustly, the Bishop proued Master Feck. of set purpose to followe the steps of the Donatistes, is al∣readie declared at large, and also howe teatly you haue ex∣cused him, and brought him and your selfe further into the selfe same briers: But howe vnf•…•…tlye and vniustly here, ye woulde returne the Bishops words vpon himselfe, chalen∣ging him to denie (as the Grecians did) the procéeding of the holy ghost from the father and the sonne: is not only mani∣fest to the contrary•…•…, to all that knowe, and often heare, in publike place, the profession of his faith, to argue you to be a wilfull malicious lier, Abhominatio est domino labia men∣dacia,* 1.1622 lying lips are abhominable to the Lorde: but also the Bi∣shops wordsminister no occasion, to gather any such sur∣mise vpon. Which sheweth you to be a captious wrangling sophister, for the Bishop doth not flatly say, he was such an one as reformed religion to the purenesse therof, which you make him here to say, but he sayd, Nicephorus in his Preface before his ecclesiasticall storie doth com∣pare Emanuel Paleologus the Emperour to Constantine, for that he did so nearely imitate his duetifulnesse in ruling, procuring and refor∣ming religion to the purenesse thereof, in whiche wordes the Bishoppe sayeth, that Nicephorus commen∣deth him for this. And this haue I proued at large that Nicephorus doth so, which is the Bishoppes full dis∣charge.

How be it this you wil not sée, but make it the bishoppes flatte assertion. Which yet notwithstanding were it so, no man, except hée were sette on gogge of pure ma∣lyce, woulde wrest this sentence of the Bishoppe, to a∣nye other matter, than to the present controuersie,

of the Princes dutie and dealing in ecclesiasticall mat∣ters, and not to euery other opinion or vice, which was ei∣ther in the Emperor, or in Nicephorus, or else in al y^e Gre∣tians. And woulde ye but limit your selfe to the boundes of the question as the bishop doth: ye coulde not haue made this false extravagant chalenge. And ye shoulde haue séene that not onely the bishop had discharged himself: but that, so farre forth as this controuersie stretcheth, both the Em∣perour, Nicephorus, and also all the Gretians (whatsoeuer they were in other pointes) in this controuersie of the Princes supreme gouernement, it appeareth, they were of a sounde and true opinion, although you call it schis∣maticall and hereticall, whatsoeuer be against the Primacie of your Pope, but till you prooue it so to be, no wyse man will be moued with your bare so calling it.

If you nowe denie that Nicephorus was of this opini∣on,* 1.1623 besides the Bishops allegations that haue prooued it sufficiently: The same Preface of Nicephorus is full of o∣ther proues. First, Nicephorus dedicateth his ecclesiasticall hystorie to this Emperour, not onely to haue his publike protection: but also to haue the Emperors censure and iud∣gemēt, whether it were sounde doctrine, agréeable to Gods worde, and méete to be set out among Christian people, or no. Inprimis vero si quid minus. &c. But chiefly (sayeth he) if* 1.1624 anything shoulde not haue bene declared of mee in this woorke: that your myldenesse woulde pardon mee, and by the sharpe∣nesse of your iudgement, you woulde clense my historie, eyther by adding to, or taking therefrom. For whatsoeuer your iudge∣ment shall more exactlye correct: that shall bee accounted both to mee and to all other, thankefull and sure. Forbicause* 1.1625 that, of all other which haue bene, vnto thee it hath chiefly hap∣pened, by the readynesse and quickenesse of nature, through the gift of God, to perceyue and finde out suche thynges. And bycause thon knowest, both to reason and dispute wyth a

iust moderation, and also hast skill to expound diuine mat∣ters with feare. And bicause thou canst excellently conceiue in thy minde, and with an eloquent mouth declare that which thou thinkest good. And moreouer canst in a maner giue such iudgement thereon, that one thing may bee throughly knowne from the other. Neyther is there any founde so ma∣lapert or rash, that after thy correction and iudgement, will abyde to set his hande vnto thy writing▪ &c. And the like sen∣tence he hath towardes the ende of the Preface.

Thus besides his authoritie, such an excellent iudgement in determining and deciding diuine and ecclesiasticall mat∣ters, Nicephorus ascribeth to this Prince and commendeth him for: euen as you woulde do to the Pope, or any of your most reuerend holy fathers. All which you cleane denie to Princes, to haue any medling, knowledge, iudgement, or determination in them: but rather commende Princes for ignorance, and woulde haue them onely meddle with iud∣ging mere•…•…cuill matters. But Nicephorus, euen where the Bishop left in citing his allegations (which were suffi∣cient to any man, except to such a brabler as you) sayth to the Emperour.

Moreouer thou hast (with a feruent order) made more sin∣cere and purer than golde, the priestly vnction, which soun∣ded of a certaine corruption. And also both by setting out a law, and thy letters: thou hast taught a continencie of ma∣ners, and contempt of money, by meanes whereof, the priest∣ly ministery of the common weale is become holy, the which in former tymes by little and little, through a corruption of discipline and maners, was defiled and depraued. (And here noteth Langus in the Margin: Reformati•…•… Ecclesiae, The re∣formation* 1.1626 of the Church.) And thou conceyuing alwayes some more notable matter hast adorned the forme, and state, and Image of the Church, most beautifully polishing it vnto the primitiue example.

These things doth Nicephorus, ouer the Priestes, the

Bishops, and the whole Church, acknowledge in this Em∣perour, for their reformation as he saith, so nere as •…•…e could to the primatiue Church. Which notwithstanding, as it was not true, in this errour: so was it not (I graunt also) in diuerse other corruptions, agréeing some of them with the dregges of Poperie. Yet for all this, he that sayth Nicepho∣rus sayth so, neither lieth on him, nor therevpon fauou•…•…eth their errours. And he that sayth so in this poynt of the prin∣ces supreme dealing, and deliuering of the Grecians from that Thraldom to the Pope, into the which Michaell per∣force had brought them: shall not onely say true in saying Nicephorus sayth so: but also that therein, Nicephorus or any other, so saying, sayth therein most true, he reformed religion to the purenesse thereof.

But nowe that master Stapleton will haue the Bishop clapped on the back, for an Heretike against the holy ghost, for shewing onely Nicephorus wordes, who shall clappe on the backe, Lazius, Langus, and all the doctours of Pa∣ris and Louaine, for setting out, allowing and approuing this authour to be verie Catholike in all poynts, not making any exception of Heresie at all? If there be any vpright iudgement in your selfe master St. let vs see you roll in your rayling rhetorike, and rore agaynst them. Go clap them on the backe and say patrisas, and ye dare. Ye might so be clapped your selfe by the héeles, or haue a fagot clapped on your shoulders if ye did, to teach you to kéepe your clatte∣ring clapper better in your heade.

Your second part is somwhat better directed to the alle∣gation of the Bishop out of S. Paule with Chrysostomes and Cyrils iudgement therevpon. Which you say is neede∣lesse, and farre from the matter, &c. That prosperitie of the* 1.1627 common welth and true religion springeth from good regi∣ment or Magistrates, which we denie not (say you) and that the decay of religion destroyeth or deadly weakeneth the o∣ther which is also true.

I•…•… ye graunt these to be true, master Stapleton, bowe chaunce in your marginall notes, and store of vntruthes, ye quarell so sore thereat. There ye say, there is no such words in Saint Paule and say:

This would be noted how ye racke S. Paule, he nameth not* 1.1628 religion at all, he doth not attribute religion to the rule and gouernment of the ciuill Magistrate, but peace and tran•…•…l∣litie onely in godlynesse.

Thus ye chalenge the Bishop there for falsehoode •…•…nd* 1.1629 racking. How truly shall appeare in the aunswere to your bederoll of vntruthes. Only now I note yo•…•… vnconstant dealing. For here ye denie it not, but say it is •…•…rue, all that the Bishop hath sayd thereon, and graunt the •…•…e as not preiudiciall to your cause. But marke M. Stap. what here ye graunt, and confesse to be true.

That prosperitie of the common welth, and true religion,* 1.1630 springeth from the good regiment of Magistrates.

If this be so as ye say: then the Princes regiment and di∣rection in both these next vnder God (is simplie the princi∣pall:) is the fountaine of them both. And as the ouersight, direction and chiefe authoritie of setting forth the one, so the ouersight, direction, and the chief authoritie, of setting forth y^e other, floweth from the Prince, if either of those do spring from him. For howe can that spring from him, whiche* 1.1631 ye neyther make to bée deriued by anie meanes from him, nor he to haue any direction or gouernement off, nor anie taste, rellishe, care, or •…•…edling therewith, as nothing belonging to him. Is this to be a spring or fountaine of it? Which syth ye graunte vnto the Prince (whether witting∣ly, or vnaduisedly, I knowe not: nor by what cautele ye •…•…de to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 off the matter) it is 〈◊〉〈◊〉, simplie to esta∣•…•… the Bishops 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 your cause, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 your craftes, with your owne plai•…•…e words, that here ye say, it is true, and ye will not denie it, the prosperitie of the common weale, and true religion, springeth from the

good regiment of Magistrates. Whervpon it foloweth, that not only true religion belongeth to their regiment, out their regiment being a spring thereof, hath a superioritie, and i•…•… the heade as it were, in direction and setting forth true Re∣ligion among their subiects, as the spring hath a superiori∣tie, and is the heade, in casting forth pure water into the brokes or riuers.

Thus ye sée (master Stapleton) that the Bishops allega∣tion is so necessarie and near•…•… to the matter, that both it concludeth the question in hande: and your selfe in the end, are •…•…ayne, or of force driuen, to yelde thereto in this poynt. And vpon this, dependeth the other poynt, which ye graunt also to be true.

That the decay of Religion destroyeth, or deadly weake∣neth the other.

Wherein ye say we•…•…l Master Stapleton, if ye graunt it to the purpose wherefore it is alleaged, that these two* 1.1632 thinges, prosperitie and religion, are necessarily •…•…o be com∣bined in a Prince, whose regiment ye haue gra•…•…ed to be a spring, from whence both of these doe come. For so, not onely Saint Paule and Chrysostome expounding him, & Cyrill also meaneth: but euen Nicephorus, the authour last mentioned, in the sayde Prince doth commende: that* 1.1633 felicitie, and the true worship of GOD were so knit•…•…e in him, that godlynesse by hir force had drawne felicitie to hi•…•…, or rather GOD had ioyned and tempered them togither, to the ende, that by the helpe of bothe these, hee might become both in deede a marueylous helpe and succour, and also a steadie stay, and firmament, as it were, to diuine o•…•… Ecclesiasticall matters beginning to fall away. And to this purpose are these two so ioyned togither, in the Prince, that (as the Bishop sayeth, and you doe not gainesay th•…•… same) The wante of the one, (especially of religion) destroyth or deadly weakeneth the other.

Sith now therfore the B. and you agrée that these point•…•…

are true, (and howe nere eyther of these doe comprehende the matter in controuersie, is apparant) wherefore doe you in néedelesse examples, and farre from the matter, spende the time to prooue that which neither the Bishop nor you •…•…enye?

As the vtter ruine (say you) of the Empyre of Greece procee∣ding* 1.1634 from the manifolde heresies, especially that whereof we haue discoursed, doth to well and to plainly testifie. And therefore I wold wishe you and maister Foxe, with others, but you two aboue all o∣thers, with good aduisement to note, that as the wicked Iewes that crucified Christ about the holy time of Easter, were at the verye same time or thereabout, besieged of the Romaines, and shortlye after brought to such desolation, and to such miserable wretched state, as in a maner is incredible, sauing that beside the foreseeing and foresaying therof by Christ, there is extant at this day a true & faithful report▪ euē so your dearlings the Greciās, whose error, but not alone, but accompanied with some other, that you at this day stoutly defend, yet especially rested in this heresie against the holy ghost, that ye terme with an vnclean & an impure mouth, pure re∣ligion, were in their chiefe citie of Constantinople, in the time of Constantinus sonne to Iohn, nephew to Andronicus your Ema∣nuels* 1.1635 father, euen about VVhitfontide (at which time the Ca∣tholike Church in true and syncere fayth, concerning the holye ghost, keepeth a solemne festiuall day of the holy ghost, sodenlye by the wicked Turkes besieged, and shortly after the Citie and the whole Greeke Empire came into the Turkes handes and pos∣session. VVherein God seemeth as before to the Iewes, so af∣terwardes to the Grecians, as it were with pointing and noti∣fying it with his finger, to shew and to notifie vnto all the worlde the cause of the finall destruction aswell of the one as of the other people.

What is all this to the purpose M. Stapleton? what maketh this against the Bishoppes matter, or to further yours, except to lengthen your tale? although it séemeth that your tale is false, neyther you agrée with your selfe

therein, it is false, bicause at that time the great Turke, besieged and wonne the Empire of Gréece, the Grecians had forsaken this heresie, yea, and that more is, acknow∣ledged the Popes supremacie (wherein the question lyeth whether in so doing they fell into another or no) for after their agréement at Lions councell by Michaell Paleolo∣gus, and their reuolt agayne vnder Andronicus the el∣der: Iohn the sonne of Emanuell nephewe to Andronicus the yonger, whom before ye mentioned, came to the coun∣cell at Florence, that was called in spits of Basill councell, and agréed with Pope Eugenius, whome Basill Councell had deposed, and so continued in agréement with the Pope, till in Constantinus reigne, brother to this Iohn, the* 1.1636 Turke besieged and ouercame them. And so your tale is false, that say, they rested in this opinion till their captiui∣tie. Whereas, a good while before, they had quite forsaken it: after they fully vnderstoode the Latines opinion theron, which before they did not. Secondly, ye agrée not with your owne tale, for both in your Preface, and hereafter in many places, ye ascribe the captiuitie of them, chiefly to their not acknowledging of the Pope: and so doth Uolaterane, which is as false as the other. For at that time they were fully agréed with him. And here (as one that had forgotten his former tale) you ascribe the chiefe cause of their captiui∣tie, to the heresie against the holy ghost, and so make your proportion betwéene the Iewes bondage at Easter, and theirs at Whitsontide, at what time is celebrated the so∣lemne feast of the holy ghost. And thereon, ye take vppon you (as though ye were of Gods secrete counsayle) to tell vs howe God poynted out the matter wyth hys fin∣ger.

But where to is all this so farre fetched about? how is it brought into the purpose? For M. St. will haue nothing here that is nedelesse and farre from the matter, forsooth this must be presupposed, that the Grecians are the B▪ dearlings▪

and that the Bishop is of the same opinion, bicause he alle∣ged Nicephorus, as is before said. And her vpon he maketh his marginall note, a good aduert sement for M. Horne, to con∣sider the cause of the destruction of Constantinople. Where, by* 1.1637 this rule, he may saye it is a good note for Langus, for La∣zius, for the Sorbonistes of Paris, for his owne Doctors, and good maisters at Louaine (where he professeth himselfe a student in Diuinitie) to beware the same, for they haue commended Nicephorus to all the worlde, and they allowe his doctrine for pure religion in all pointes, not excepting this, and therforeal the Papists be belike the Grecians dear∣lings, and denie the proceeding of the holye ghost from the father and the sonne, & so is it a fitter admonition for the Popish ca∣tholikes, than for the B. or any other Protestant, whose faith in this point, and all other concerning the holy ghost, the Papistes can not blemish. And yet by your leaue M. St. the Papistes be not very sounde in all pointes concerning the holy ghost, as I shall shewe you further when you re∣quire the same, and therefore they had more néede of the twayne, to beware of this ensample.

But since M. Stapl. will so faine haue this cause conside∣red, of the Grecians captiuitie, I graunt him, this their er∣rour might worthily be noted, a sufficient cause, or any o∣ter errour, or naughtinesse of life, might well deserue the heauy hande of God, and the scourge of such a tyrant as the Turke. But, whatsoeuer they or we (to whome God be mercifull) at Gods handes doe deserue: not entering in∣to Gods iudgement, but speaking of men, the most likely and chiefest cause of this Empires decay, is euen the verye* 1.1638 Pope him selfe, his ambitious treacherie, first spoyled and diuided the Empire into twaine, and made all the West part forsake their sworne obedience. And hath also so spoy∣led this part of the Empyre in the west, that besides the bare title of the Empire of Rome, the Emperour God wote, hath little or nothing, the Pope in effect hath all. And

where the Emperor of Rome had wont to be Lorde to the Bishop of Rome, and to other Bishops besides: The Bi∣shop of Rome is nowe Lorde to the Emperour of Rome, and to all other Princes besides, and to attaine to his triple diademe ouer all Princes, he hath neuer ceased to stirre and moue such garboyles, as all Christendome hath lost, onely the Pope hath woon therby, and the barbarous nati∣ons haue ouerrunne all Europe, Asia, and Affricke. No maruayle then if at the length, Christian Princes powers being diuided and weakened with continuall warre, and chiefly set on or maintained by y^e Pope, especially against y^e* 1.1639 Grecians: the Turks at the last haue ouercome y^e Empire, being destitute of forrein ayde, and of themselues, giuen to wanton effeminatenesse. Although thus much I may iustly note, they euer well ynough defended and maintained them selues, till they acknowledged obedience to the Pope, who was the first cause of their ruine. Which done, they neuer throue after, but were in short time besieged & clean•…•… ouercome. When they had once giuen their soules captiue to the tirannie of the Pope, their bodies not long after be∣came thrall to the slauerie of the Turke. Which séemeth rather to be Gods iust plague vnto them, wherein (to vse your owne wordes) as it were, with pointing and notifying with his finger, he sheweth to all the worlde, to beware of these two aduersaries, the spirituall enimie the Pope, and the bo∣dilie enimie the Turke.

Thus M. Stapleton, your néedlesse admonition toucheth your selfe and your Pope, nearer than ye were a wist. Ne∣uerthelesse, not so content, making as though you had (as in déede ye haue) ouershotte your selfe, you pretende to drawe nearer home.

But what speake I of Greece (say you) wee neede not to run* 1.1640 to so farre yeares or countries, the case toucheth vs much nearer: the Realme of Boheme, and of late yeares of Fraunce and Scot∣lande, the noble Countrie of Germanie, with some other that I

neede not name, be too too liuely and pregnant examples, of this your true, but needelesse and impertinent admonition.

How needelesse or impertinent the Bishops admonition was, is séene already euen by your owne graunt thereto. But how needelesse in déede, & impertinent altogither, are these your vaine admonitions, which ye cal, a returne: euery body may sée. And how fitly they returne with a recumbē∣tibus vpon your owne side: and how you controll your self for running to farre: and yet ye runne at randon furder a∣bout the Countries, to Boheme, Fraūce, Scotland, Germanie, and other namelesse countries, to make them examples of your marginall note, Heresies the destruction of common weales. But thanks be to God, none of their cōmon weales are destroyed, it is but your maliciouse slaunder on them. And if they haue bene troubled or weakened, the Papistes practises haue euer bene the chiefe originals thereof, what soeuer ye pretende, (to deface the Gospell) by calling all do∣ctrine Heresie, be it neuer so pure and holy, if it be not by your popish Church allowed: calling all countries and cō∣mon weales destroyed, how soeuer they florish in prospe∣ritie, peace and godlinesse: if they refuse the Egiptian bon∣dage of your spirituall Pharao the Pope.

But why mention you not all that parte of Hungarie,* 1.1641 that acknowledging obedience to your Pope, neuerthe∣lesse were ouercome and conquered of the Turkes? why forget ye your mightie bulwarke and holy knights of the Rhodes? I wisse they were the Popes champions, and yet his blessing could not saue them frō the Turkish bondage. You say there is some other place that ye néede not name, what meane ye thereby? Rome it selfe? that so many times hath bene sacked, destroyed and lefte waste, and at this day the olde Citie, for the most parte, not inhabited, ex∣cept of owles and vermine in the ruines thereof, and the new Citie deftled (besides Idolatrie and superstition) with most notorious filthy fornication and stewes of courtizans,

your Pope him selfe beyng the vicar of bawdes in main∣tayning his estate by such filthy lucre. And this is counted among you, the most holy common weale, yea such a mir∣rour to all other: that those Cities whiche conforme them selues to this common weale of Rome, can neyther erre, nor be in daunger of destruction. But euen so sayde Sodom and Gomor, till their destruction came sodaynly vpon them.

M. Stapl. hauing thus puffed vp his counterblast with* 1.1642 these discourses in both his foresaide parts, descendeth now to the thirde.

And now might I here breake of (sayeth he) from this, and go further forth, sauing that I cannot suffer you to bleare the readers eyes, as though the Emperours Theodosius, or Valen∣tinianus sayings or doings should serue any thing for your pretensed primacie.

In déede, M. Stapleton it is more than highe time, that you had broken off long or this, except you would or could haue answered▪ better to the purpose, and not to haue dri∣uen your counterblast furder forth, with such heapes of di∣gressions, needelesse to the matter, but not needelesse to your purpose, to bleare the readers eyes, when otherwise▪ you* 1.1643 néeded a materiall answers. But here (such is your zeale) ye can not suffer the Bishop to bleare the readers eyes. This zeale M. Stapleton were cōmendable in you, if you ment good soothe, or the Bishop had bleared the readers eyes, and not simply and plainly set downe the truth, that euen the bleared eyes (if they were not cleane blinded with ouer∣much affection) might well beholde it. But it is rather to be feared, that as ye played before, pretending to dissipate and discusse mistes (where in déede none was) ye raysed mistes and caste cloudes, least the reader should haue espi∣ed the matter as it was: so here, though the readers eyes were cleere, ye would bleare and dimme them, and if he

were bleare eyed any whit before, ye would soone mende the matter and make him starke blinde. For euen as ye there did, so eftsones do you here.

The Bishops alleaging of these Emperours, stayeth you frō breaking off, and from going further foorth▪ ye can not suffer the Bishop to bleare the readers eyes. And yet to any thing that the Bishop out of these Emperours allea∣geth (what soeuer the matter meane) ye answere not one worde. Except this be an answere (as they say) to sette the Hares head against the Goose iublettes, to set one alle∣gation against another. If the Bishop hath bleared the rea∣ders* 1.1644 eyes, he cited as long an allegation as yours, shewe then where he bleared them. If he cited any thing false, name the place. But false or true, say something to it, or to some piece of it, and not thus slinke away without a∣ny answere at all, to the whole, or any parte thereof. What shall the reader iudge (if he can see any thing) but that the Bishop goeth plainely to worke, and it is you that would bleare his eyes, and put them out, if ye could, to kéepe the reader still in ignorance and wilfull blinde∣nesse. If the Bishops allegation be such as deserueth no answere: at the least ye might haue sayde so.

Howbeit, that you should not so bleare the readers eyes, and that the reader should sée both the Bishops plaine dea∣ling, and the playne truth of the matter, and how fully it proueth the Bishops purpose, and the Princes dutie, care, charge, and supreme gouernment ouer matters Ecclesi∣asticall: I will set downe not onely so much as the Bishop alleaged, but the whole Epistle. Firste, hauing shewed, that the suretie of the common weale dependeth vppon Gods religion, and what a great kindred and societie is betwixt these twayne, true Religion, and Iustice: •…•…ith ther∣fore we (sayeth the Emperour) are constituted of God to* 1.1645 be the Kinges, and are the knitting togither or ioynture

of godlinesse and prosperitie in the subiects, we keepe the societie of these twayne, neuer to be sundred: and so farre forth as by our foresight we procure peace vnto our sub∣iectes, we minister vnto the augmenting of the common weale, but, as we might say, being seruaunts to our subiects in all things, that they may liue godly, and be of a religiouse conuersation as it becommeth godly ones. VVe garnish the* 1.1646 common weale with honor, hauing care (as it is conuenient) of them both, (that is peace and true religion) for it cannot be, that diligently prouiding for the one, we should not care in like sorte, also for the other. But we trauaile earnestly in this thing aboue the rest, that the Ecclesiasticall state may re∣mayne sure, both in such sort, as is seemely for Gods honor, and fitte for our times, that it may continue in tranquillitie by common consent without variance, that it may be quiet through agreement in Ecclesiasticall matters, that the godly religion may be preserued vnreproueable, and that the life of such as are chosen into the Clergie, and the great Priesthode, may be cleere from all faulte.

Thus doth the Emperour protest of the guidance, care & charge that he thought belonged to his hie office, not onely in prouiding, ordering, & directing publike peace and iustice but also as much, or rather much more, & most of all, godli∣nesse, true religiō, Ecclesiastical matters, and Ecclesiastical persons, to liue blamelesse in their spirituall vocations, so well as the laytie to liue in peace and iustice. And that in al these points the Prince is the knitting togither & iointur•…•… of the one, so well as of the other. Which flatly argueth, that the direction and preseruing of both causes & persons, next vnder God, doth appertaine to his gouernment, being both knit alike to his authoritie.

What false dealing? what blearing of eyes hath the Bi∣shop here vsed? hauing faithfully set downe the Emperours owne wordes, which as they fully shew Theodosius his minde: so they fully proue the present question, & conclude

the Princes supreme authoritie, so well in Ecclesiasticall matters, as in temporall. To all this master Stap. thought best to answere not one worde, but to let it goe, telling vs, that the Emperours sayings or doings, serue nothing for our* 1.1647 pretensed primacie: and that this is wandring in an ob scure generalitie. This may well be called a Counterblast, M. Stap. If this be sufficient answere to the bishops alle∣gation, let others iudge. Ye complayne it is obscure, it may perchaunce so appeare to your eyes, bleared with affection, or rather blinded with wilfulnesse. So is the Gospell ob∣scure to those that would not sée, and the sauour of death to* 1.1648 those that perish. Cleare light is noysome to dimme sights. Euery body saue you, and suche as are bleared by you, may easily sée a farre off the playnnesse of these proues.

Nowe where ye say, he wandreth in an obscure genera∣litie, wherof can not be enforced any certayne particularitie* 1.1649 of the principall question:

Otherwhiles, M. St. ye cōplayne of particularities, & re∣quire the B. to proue generalities, or else ye crie, it commeth* 1.1650 shorte. Héere the Bishop hauing proued this generalitie, by your owne confession, nowe you quarell at generalities. I perceiue nothing will content a froward brabbler, but any other that liste not to quarell, will soone perceiue that this generalitie that ye complayne of, bothe comprehendeth the particulars, & also satisfieth that, that ye call so often for, to proue a supreme gouernemēt ouer all ecclesiastical matters in general, which fully answereth euen to the othe likewise.

Neuerthelesse, sith you would slip away by wandring* 1.1651 about particulars: This Epistle of the Emperour sheweth his supreme direction and gouernment euen in particulars, and that principall particulars also. This Epistle béeing di∣rected from the foresaide Emperours to Cyrillus, a chiefe ecclesiasticall Prelate, and Patriarche of Alexandria, after the Emperours (as is before sayde) haue declared, this their generall care and gouernment▪ so well ouer eccle∣siasticall

matters as temporall: But when (say they to Cy∣ril)* 1.1652 we vnderstoode, both by our loue to God, and our mynd louing hys truthe, that these thinges mighte bee obteyned in those that are godly, wee haue nowe often thought it very necessarie, by reason of those thinges that haue hap∣pened luckyly, to haue a Synode moste deare vnto God, of those moste holy Bishoppes whiche bee euery where, &c. And so shewing the cause of their delaye, and the necessitie of the Ecclesiasticall matters: they commaunde Cyrill, with other Bishoppes, not to fayle, bu•…•… be rea∣die at Ephesus, at Whytsontide nexte following.

For (saye they) the Copies of the same Synode are al∣ready sente out from oure Maiesties to the bishoppes be∣loued in GOD, throughout all the Metropolitane Cities, that thys beeing doone, bothe the trouble, whiche hathe happened on these controuersies be dislolued, according to the ecclesiasticall rules, and those thinges corrected that are vnseemely committed. And that godlynesse maye be, towardes God, and profitable establishement to publique matters. Neither let any thyng be seuerally innouate, in any matter of any person, before the holy Synode, and the common sentence of it to come. And we are fully persua∣ded, that euery one of the Priestes moste deare to God, both forbicause of the ecclesiasticall and publique matters, bee∣ing throughly moued by this our sanction or Edict: will spe∣dyly make haste towardes this councell, with diligent ende∣uour, and to their habilities consulte vpon these matters, be∣ing so necessarie, and apperteining to the good pleasure of God. As for vs, we hauing muche care of these things, wil suffer no man lightly to be wanting, neither shall he haue any excuse before God, or before vs if any out of hande do not diligently appeare at the foresayde tyme, in the place determined &c.

Thus euen in thys Epistle, in particularities also, doth Theodosius shewe his supreme authoritie. But you

will say, these are not principall particulars, the princi∣pall particulars are to dispute vpon the questions, to re∣solue the doubtes, to debate the matter, and to indge and determine which parte is the truthe thereof. These partes (say you) are the principall, these partes belong not to the* 1.1653 Prince, but to the Priestes. That these thinges, master Sta belong to those, that for their function haue the know∣ledge and profession of them, no man denieth, no more than that lawyers shoulde haue the lyke debating, trying, and determining the truthe, of any doubte in the lawe. But this, nothing hindreth the Princes supreme authori∣tie and gouernement in his lawes, no more dothe it in the debating, trying, and determining doubtes in any ecclesia∣sticall matters (in the discussing wherof, the Prince is ig∣noraunt) debarre his supreme authoritie and gouernment, in all suche cases debated or defined. These doings therfore though they be the principall in respect of the examining of suche doubtes, yet in respects of the ordering, di∣recting, disposing, setting them out, and maynteyning them; the Princes dooinges are farre more principall particulars. As when a doubte in the lawe aryseth, to call all the Lawyers togither, highe and lowe what e∣state soeuer they bee off, to appoynte them the place and tyme of meeting, where, and when, to directe and order their assemblie, and what they haue iudged to be the lawe therein, to ratifie and allowe it, to sette it foorthe, and maynteyne it, this dooing theweth the Prince to be the supreme gouernour in all Laive mat∣ters: thoughe he neyther debate nor determine the truthe thereof. Sithe therefore Theodosius dyd thus muche, as this that is héere shewed, and as that, héereaf∣ter (to whiche ye referre your selfe) shall further declare: this is inoughe to argue hys supreme gouernement in all Ecclesiasticall matters, euen by these parti∣culars.

If all this proue no supremacie, why graunt ye not thus muche to Princes nowe, that ye sée these Emperours had then? howe chaunce your Pope wyll neither suffer the Emperours nowe to summon a Councell, to cite and call the Bishops togither, to assigne them a place whereto they shal resort and kéepe their Councell, to appoynte the time to méete and begin their Councell in? Howe chaunce your Pope will not suffer Princes in their seuerall domi∣nions to haue the like synodes, but will do all, either gene∣rall or Prouinciall, by him selfe, or by his Legates▪ For∣soothe when he dothe it, then it is a principall matter, it ar∣gueth his supremacie, and therefore none can do it but he. But nowe, when examples are founde and alleaged, that Christian Princes had wonte to doe it: Ergo, They were supreme then belike therein. Nay, then it argueth no su∣premacie, then it is no principal matter, nor any eccl. matter* 1.1654 at al. Thus you play mockhalliday with vs, and boe péepe, as though we were children, it is, and is not. When the Pope dothe it, then it argueth a supremacie, when the Prince dothe it, then it argueth none. And why so? for sooth, then the case is altered. Thus do you dally out the mat∣ter, and when any substantiall proufe is brought agaynst you, either ye giue it suche a mocke as this, or leape cleane ouer it, as though ye sawe it not, or in stéede of answere to that that is propounded, propounde your selfe an other allegation, which is, clau•…•…m clauo pellere, to driue out one nayle by another. For to the allegation out of the Empe∣rours Theodosius and Ualentinianus Epistle, ye answere nothing, but set a péece of another letter of Ualentinian to Theodosius in the téethe of it.

VVe, sayth Valentinian to the Emperour Theodosius,* 1.1655 (say you) ought to defende the fayth which we receyued of our auncestors, with all competent deuotion, and in this our tyme preserue vnblemished the worthy reuerence due to the blessed Apostle sainct Peter, so that the moste blessed

Bishop of the Citie of Rome, to whome antiquitie hath gi∣uen the principalitie of Priesthoode aboue all other, may (O moste blessed father and honorable Emperour) haue place and libertie, to giue iudgement in suche matters as concerne fayth and Priestes. And for this cause the bishop of Cōstan∣tinople hathe according to solemne order of Councels by his Libel, appealed vnto him. And this is writtē (M. Horne) to Theodosius him selfe, by a cōmon letter of Valentinian. And the Empresses Placidia & Eudoxia, which Placidia wri∣teth also a particular letter to hir said sonne Theodosius, and altogither in the same sense.

Héere ye clap vp a marginall note,

The Popes supremacie Proued by the Emperour Valen∣tinian, alleaged by M. Horne.

And héere agayne full triumphantly ye crie out.

Herkē good M. Horne, & giue good aduertisemēt: I walk* 1.1656 not and wander as ye do here, alleaging this Emperour, in an obscure generalitie, wherof cannot be enforced any particu∣laritie of the principall question. I go to worke with you playnly, truely, and particularly. I shewe you by your owne Emperour, & by playne words the Popes supremacie, & the practise withall of appeales frō Constantinople to Rome.

Héere is a ioly face of this matter, M. St. But yet héere is not one worde to answere the bishops allegation, but to cō∣mend your owne, that ye set against it: and so thinke ye an∣swere it, bicause it is of the same Emperour Ualentinian, whom the bishop alleaged. But such answere as it is, sithe ye can make no other, we muste take it, or none at your handes. Neuerthelesse, since ye so crake, that ye walke not and wander not in obscure generalities, but go playnly and particulerly to worke: if ye ment as ye say, how chaunce ye open not any of the necessary particuler circumstances of the matter, whervpon the Emperour wrote, whiche might haue made this matter plaine, & would haue shewed what, and wherin they cōmended the B. of Rome, and what au∣thoritie

belonged to the Emperour. Yea if you had but set downe a little more largely, the selfe same Epistles that ye cite: the matter had beene a great deale more cleare. Ye say also, ye go truely to worke, and yet you falsly translate, euen those very words that ye cyte, and so cutte them off, ere ye come to the periode: that, that which shoulde haue shewed the matter, to haue béene about a particular contro∣uersie of the fayth then ris•…•…n, might séeme to be generally spoken of all controuersies. And therfore ye leaue out these wordes: For the controuersie of the faith that is sprong vp: And where the wordes of your allegation are, Locum ha∣beat* 1.1657 ac facultat•…•…m, de fide & sacerdotibus iudicare, that he may haue place, and leaue or facultie, to iudge of the fayth, and of the Priests: you captiously and falsly translate it, that he may haue place and libertie to giue iudgement in suche matters as concerne fayth and Priestes. This subtile translation in generall ye vse, to make it appeare, that the Bishop of Rome hath a generall authoritie, to be the chiefe Iudge to decide all doubtes in matters of fayth, and to be the chiefe Iudge of all Priestes, where your texte inferreth no suche thing.

Likewise where the Emperour sayth, of the Bishop of the Citie of Rome: to whome antiquitie hath yeelded the principalitie of Priesthoode aboue all others: ye conclude that by playne wordes is shewed the Popes supremacie, and so sette vp your Marginall note, The Popes supre∣macie proued by the Emperour Valentinian. Where in your letter are no suche playne wordes of supremacie, nor any proufe thereof at all. Do you thinke that the Emperour acknowledged that supremacie, which your Pope nowe chalengeth and vsurpeth, not onely ouer all Priestes but ouer all Kinges and Emperours also? No master Stapleton, it is euident, by the dealing of these Emperours, and that euen in this matter, that the Pope, •…•…ad no suche supremacie, but the Emperour dyd those

thinges then, that your Pope dothe clayme nowe: as fur∣ther shall appeare, in the proper treatise therof. Your Pope nowe woulde be lothe to be suche an humble L•…•…, and fall downe to the Egles féete, as the Pope dyd then to the Emperour, whiche nowe ye make the Emperour doe to the Popes féete. For why, ye may •…•…ay, •…•…empora mutantur, & nos mutamur in illis, the tymes are changed, and we are changed in them.

All the playne wordes and proues ye crake of, for this supremacie are these, that the Emperour sayth, antiquitie gaue hym the principalitie of Priesthoode. But there* 1.1658 is a greate difference betwéene the principalitie of Priesthoode, and supreme head or chiefe gouernour of Priesthoode, or that all Priesthoode is deriued out of the Popes Priesthoode, as diuers of your wryters affirme, that Christe made Peter onely a Priest, and all the other Apostles had their Priesthoode from him, and so* 1.1659 all other from the Bishop of Rome, whome they call hys Successoure. But as they erre in the office of Priesthoode (wherof God willing we shall speake hereaf∣ter) so whatsoeuer the office of their Priesthood was, their saying is manyfest •…•…alse. For if Peter were a man as he* 1.1660 confessed hym selfe to be S. Paule sayth, he had not hys authoritie of men, but immediatly of God, and Peter gaue him nothing, neither yet Iames nor Iohn.

And here, if I might spurre you a question, bicause ma∣ster Heskins setteth oute his Parliament, so solemnelie before his boke in pictures for the nonce, making s. Iames the first that sayde Masse, wherin he followeth the cōmon opinion of the Papistes: I demaunde (if Peter was made* 1.1661 the first priest, & al other frō him) how s. Iames could say y^e first masse that was said? was Peter made Priest without singing or saying his first masse, or any masse at al? then be∣like Peter was no masse 〈◊〉〈◊〉 priest, & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 pope hath not h•…•… principalitie of priesthood frō Peter, nor any priesthod

at all from him, for Peters was no massing Priesthoode, suche as the Popes is, and pretendeth to be the principall of that order.

But at your leysure answere this, onely nowe I note, that there is a great difference betwéene the principalitie of Priesthoode, and the supremacie of all the Churche of Christe, which is your conclusion, and that that your Pope chalengeth. But the Emperours words héere do nothing proue it. And yet suche principalitie or excellencie of Priest∣hoode, as it was, it neither came from God, nor from Peter, for any thing that either is playnely alleaged, or proued héere, but rather the playne wordes are to the con∣trarie, that this principalitie was yéelded and giuen to the Bishop of the Citie of Rome, by men, for so sayth the Em∣perour, antiquit as contulit, antiquitie gaue it. Béeing part∣ly moued with the opinion that Peter was bishop there, and partly for that Rome was the auncient and moste fa∣mous Citie of the Empire, as appeareth in the nexte Epi∣stle of Placidia, by you mentioned, who calleth it, Ciuitatem antiquam, the auncient Citie, and the Citie that is the Lady of all the Emperours Cities. And therefore it became them to conserue the reuerence therof. For which considerations, that antiquitie gaue to it the principalitie, and to the bishop therof. Which principalitie of priesthoode, or bishoph•…•…, was not aboue, but vnder the principalitie of the Empe∣rours estate, as appeareth euen by these Epistles cited by you. For first in the Epistle whereout ye take your alle∣gation, Ualentinianus telleth, howe when he came to Rome, I was (sayth he) bothe of the Romane Bishop, and also of other that were with him, gathered togither out of diuers prouinces, entreated to write to your mildnesse (saith Ualentinian to Theodosius, of the fayth, which beeing the preseruer of all faythfull soules, is sayd to be troubled, which fayth, beeing deliuered vs frō our Elders, we ought to defend with al cōpetēt deuotiō, & in our times to cōserue vnblemi∣shed

the dignitie of the reuerence proper to the blessed A∣postle Peter, so that the most blessed B. of the citie of Rome, to whom antiquitie hath giuen a principalitie of Priesthood aboue all others, may (O most blessed Lorde, Father, and ho∣norable Emperour) haue place and facultie to iudge of the faith of the Priests, and for this cause according to the solem∣nitie of Councels the Bishop of Constantinople hath appea∣led to him by his Libels, for the contention that is sprong vp of the faith, to him therefore (requesting and adiuring me by our common sauing health) I denied not to graūt thus much, as to moue my petition to your mildenesse, that the foresaid Priest (meaning the Bishop of Rome) all the other Priestes being also gathered togither through all the worlde, within Italy (all other former iudgement set aside) may with dili∣gent triall, searching all the matter that is in controuersie, from the beginning, giue such sentence thereon, as the faith and the reason of the true diuinitie shall require. For in our times, the frowardnesse of multitudes ought not to preuayle against religion, since hitherto the faith hath bene conserued stedfast. And to the more perfect instruction of your wor∣thinesse, we haue also directed the gestes whereby your god∣linesse may know the desires and outcries of them all.

Thus farre the Epistle. Which if ye had withall sette* 1.1662 downe, it wold haue dashed your Marginall note and con∣clusion of the Popes supremacie. It would haue shewed that this principalitie of priesthoode, was so vnder the Princes principalitie, that the Pope was faine to labour to Uale•…•…tinian, and the Empresses also, to write to Theodo∣sius, that he might haue place & leaue to iudge the matter. And that the place of iudging it, might be in Italie, and the Bishop of Rome might giue sentence, not as he him selfe should please, but conditionally as the truth should require, and that thus he would admit the Bishop of Constantino∣ples appeale to take place, and so he sendeth all the gestes of the matter for the Emperour to peruse and know them,

and to graunt their petitions and desires. In all whiche things though there were a principalitie of the Priestes and Bishops and chiefly of the Bishop of the chiefe emperiall Ci∣tie, olde Rome, so farre as appertayneth to the debating, discussing, and iudging the doubtes in controuersie: yet so farre as appertayneth to the licencing thereto, the com∣maunding, directing, ordering, setting out, and maintay∣ning euen of the same Synodicall iudgements, of the Bi∣shop of Rome or any other: the supreme principalitie be∣longed to the Emperours. And this appeareth yet furder by the other Epistles, that ye mention.

In the next Epistle of the Empresse Placidia, to Theo∣dosius the Emperour hir Sonne, for the Bishops of Rome and of Constantinople: after she hath shewed with what teares the Bishop of Rome moued hir to write, she shew∣eth how all thinges were done vnorderly at Ephesus, a∣gainst Flauianus Bishop of Constantinople, bicause (sayeth she) he sent a libell to the Apostolicall seate, and to* 1.1663 all the Bishops of these parties, by those which were in the Councell, directed from the moste Reuerende Bishop of* 1.1664 Rome. VVho are accustomed (O moste holy Lorde my Sonne and Reuerent Emperour) to be put according to the Decrees of Nicene Councell: and for this cause, let your mildenesse (withstanding so great troubles) commaunde the truth of the Religion of the Catholike faith, to be kepte vndefiled. And so ascribing a principall prerogatiue to the Bishop of Rome, she desireth the Emperor, that the iudge∣ment of the matter may be sent ouer to him. Which shew∣eth that the Bishop of Romes principalitie was vnderneath the Emperours.

Likewise in the next Epistle of Eudoxia to Theodosius,* 1.1665 after she hath praysed the Emperour, saying: It is knowne vnto all men, that your mildenesse hath a care and earnest heedefulnesse of Christians, and of the Catholike faith, in so much that you would commaunde nothing at all to be done

to the iniurie of it.

And after she hath shewed how the Bishop of Rome be∣sought hir in the foresaide matter, to derect hir letters to the Emperour: saluting you (sayth she) I desire right, that your tranquilitie would vouchsafe to haue care to the letters, and those things that are ill done ye would commaunde them to be amended, vntill that all things that also already are deter∣mined, be altogither reuoked, the cause of the faith and Christian religion that is moued, in a Councell gathered to∣gither in the partes of Italy, may be fetched out. For it is written that all this contention raysed, commeth from hence that the Bishop Flauianus might be remoued from the Eccle∣siasticall dealings.

Thus do these Empresses write for Flauianus Bishop of Constantinople, and for the Bishop of Rome. Wherein though they ascribe the dealings to the Councell and to the Bishop of Rome, yet the licence and authoritie to do any thing, or to stay any thing, they al ascribe to the Emperour. And as they ascribe this, in these Epistles vnto him (which argueth his supreme gouernement in all these matters) so the Emperour in the answeres to these Epistles, that are immediatly set downe to those by you cited, acknowledgeth and claymes his supreme authoritie therein.

In the answere to the first, from whence ye bring your* 1.1666 allegation for the Popes primacie, he saith: The Emperour Theodosius to my Lord Valentinian Emperour. In the be∣ginning of your letters, it is signified by your Maiestie both that your mildenesse came to Rome, and that a petition was offered vp to you, by Leo the most reuerende Patriarche. As concerning your safe returne to the Citie of Rome (O my Lorde, my moste holy Sonne, and honorable Emperour,) we render thankes accordingly to the diuine Maiestie, but as concerning those things which the foresaide most reuerende man hath spoken, it is already declared vnto him more plainly and fully (as we suppose) and he knoweth that we swarue

in no parte from the Religion of our fathers, and the tradi∣tion of our auncetours. We will, no other thing, than the fa∣thers sacraments deliuered as by succession to keepe them inuiolably. For this cause therefore, hauing knowledge that certaine persons with hurtfull noueltie trouble the most holy Churches, we haue decreed a Synod to be holden at Ephesus. VVhereas, in the presence of the most reuerend Bishops, with much libertie, and with sounde truth, both the vnworthie were remoued from their Priesthood, and those that were iudged to be worthy were receyued. VVe therefore know nothing committed of them, contrary to the rules of faith, or iustice. Therefore all the contention was examined of the holy Councell, & Flauianus which was founde giltie of hurt∣full newfanglednesse, hath receiued his dew, and he being re∣moued, all peace and concorde remaineth in the Churches, and nothing but truth doth florish.

Thus the dealing and determining of the controuersie,* 1.1667 remayning Synodically to the Priests and Bishops, the decreing of the Councell, the assigning of the time and place thereto, the giuing them in charge to boulte out the truth, the receyuing intelligence from them of their iudge∣ments, the allowing and ratifying their determination, belonged to Theodosius. And in respect of this his supreme doing, though at other times he extoll the Bishop of Rome: yet here he onely calleth him, but, most reuerende Patri∣arche, and most reuerend man, as he calleth other Bishops. The answere to the second Epistle hath the like. Theodo∣sius to my Ladie Placidia the honorable Empresse: our high∣nesse vnderstandeth by the letters of your mildenesse, what the most reuerende patriarch Leo hath desired of your high∣nesse. To these your letters we declare, that concerning those things whiche are spoken of the most reuerende Bishop, we haue written often times alreadie more fully and more at large, by which writing it is without doubt manifest, that we haue defined or decreed or vnderstoode nothing besides the

fayth of the fathers, or the diuine opinions, or the definiti∣ons of the most reuerende Bishops, which were gathered to∣gither in the Citie of Nice, vnder Constantine of godly me∣morie: or of late were gathered togither at Ephesus by our precept. But this onely we commaunded to be ordeyned, that all persons, which by noisome hurtfulnesse troubled the holy Churches, should worthily be remoued. &c.

Thus doth the Emperour commaunde the Councell to be holden. He giueth a generall charge to the Bishops to ordeyne that that they ordeyned, to wete, the expulsion or deposition of perturbers of the Church whatsoeuer they were, and in what matter ecclesiasticall soeuer they were. And when the Bishops had according to the Emperours commaundement ordeynes this decrée, and in their syno∣dicall discussing of the matter, found out Flauianus (though therein they did him wrong) to be culpable hereof: then the* 1.1668 Emperor peruseth, ratifieth and confirmeth the same their synodicall iudgement, and sayth, he defined and decreed it himselfe, bicause he approued and confirmed their definiti∣on and decrée. Which is a manifest argument of Thodosius supreme authoritie, ouer all the Bishops debatings and de∣terminings of their ecclesiasticall constitutions.

To the same effect is the other Epistle to Eudoxia. Wher∣in he telleth the Empresse flatly, that since these things were alreadie decreed, it was not possible to determine of the mat∣ter* 1.1669 any more. In which deniall of suffring the matter to be tryed any further, he sheweth also his supreme authoritie of debarring and frustrating any appeales to Rome, that you make so great accompt vpon. The Emperour will not onely not suffer it to take place, and to infringe the Coun∣cels and his owne doing: but sayth it is impossible to pro∣céede on the matter alreadie determined. And thus he re∣iecteth Flauianus appeale from the Ephe•…•…ine Councell to the Bishop of Rome. Which Councell notwithstanding should also haue bene held by the Emperours leaue and ap∣poyntment.

But he would not allow it, although Pope Lee laboured to him, and to Ualentinian Emperors, to Eudoria and Placidia Empresses neuer so much therefore.

Lo M. St. here are the generalities and the particularities also. Wherein ye may sée what belongeth to eyther partie. Hearken good M. Stap. and giue good aduertisement therto, since ye will not vtter it your selfe, and yet woulde haue vs listen to you. You say ye wander not in obscure generalities, but ye go to worke plainly, truly, and particularly. And yet of all this ye speake not one word. Ye would neither answer•…•… the Bishops allegation, but set another agaynst it, which is no plaine nor true kinde of aunswering: neither yet for that you alleage, ye alleage it either plainely or truely or particularly, as ye pretende. But cull out a piece of that, that séemeth to set forth your cause, by extolling the Bishop of Rome, and when the matter is plainly, truly, and particu∣larly sifted out, it neither proueth any supremacie for him: and in all poynts, sheweth the Princes supremacie against you. But ye are the more to be borne withall, for I thinke ye read not the whole particulars, but either as your com∣mō places led you, or the title prefixed tickled you, that saith In qua quo{que} Romani Pontifici•…•… authoritas com•…•…ndatur, VVherein also the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome is com∣mended. And so gréedily ye snatched at that sentence, and let go all the residue. But, call ye this plainly, truly, and parti∣cularly going to worke, master Stapleton?

The. 26. Diuision.

THe Bishop hauing hitherto as master Feck required in his issue, proued by the Scriptures both by the olde te∣stament and the newe, and by some such Doctours as haue written thereon, and also (which was more than M. Feck. requested) by the ecclesiasticall writers, & Nicephorus, and by some of those Emperors whom they commend for most

godly, proued the like gouernment in Church causes as the Queenes Maiestie taketh vpon hir of dutie to belong to ci∣uill magistrates: he concludeth ther vpō, by these two parts of the request so satisfied, that they may and ought to take the same vpon them. Which done, he promiseth to enter in∣to the other twaine, to proue the same by the continuall practise of like gouernment in some one part of Christen∣dome, and by the generall Councels.

To this answereth M St. Hitherto ye haue not brought* 1.1670 any one thing to the substātial proufe of your purpose, worth a good straw, neither Scripture, nor Doctor nor Emperour.

This is a short aunswere indéede, as if Iacke Strawe had made it, and not a student of diuinitie. All is not worthe a strawe with you. Such was the iudgement of Esops dung∣hill Cocke when he found the precious stone. Haue ye done nothing master Stapleton but scraped strawes? though you estéeme better of your owne doings, wherevpon (as it were an other Chaunticlere) ye cr•…•…we and crake so often: yet set not so little by the doings of other men, and th•…•…se that are farre your betters. But what are the Bishops proues the lesse worth, for this your strawish iudgement. Your bolt M. St. is soone shotte, but a raylers tongue is they say no slaun∣der. Let others iudge, that haue more iudgement, what the Bishops proues amount vnto. And let them iudge euen by this your Counterblast, that ye haue blowne out agaynst these proues, to ouerturne them. Which, had they bene as light as a strawe, ye might haue easily done, and neuer haue puffed vp such a stormie Counterblast. But let them iudge what your Counterblast hath done, and whether ye haue blown away so much as one straw bredth from the matter, one proufe of al the Bishops proufes. But least I should al∣so be like to you, I remit y^e iudgement of the whole to other: yea, in Gods name, to any of your owne side, that with any indifferencie will examine both. Ye quarell further, at the least to blemish the Bishop with suspition of heresie, saying:

Among your foure Emperors by you named, ye haue iug∣led* 1.1671 in one that was a starke Heretike, but as subtilly as yee thought ye had handled the matter, ye haue not so crastily conueyde your galles, but that you are espied.

Ye haue told vs of this often inough (master Stapleton) if that would helpe you, though ye tolde it not so Iuglerlike as now, although with as much bitternesse of gall, as euer y^•* 1.1672 Iugler or sorcerer Simō Magus had. With Heretike, starke Heretike, wretched Heretike, &c. But ye neuer tell how the Bishop cited him. For, were he Heretike or were he not, (as it is a question, by Saint Augustines definition of an Heretike) yet in that point that the Bishop cited him, ye can proue him no Heretike. But whatsoeuer he were, the B. is clearely discharged, to your owne shame and to all your doc∣tors of Louaine, where ye learne your good diuinitie. And this is al that ye haue to say to the Bishops proues hitherto. Now, to that he promiseth to enter into the residue, there is yet one thing, y^t (after all your raylings) ye cōmend him for.

Yet for one thing (say you) are ye here to be commended,* 1.1673 that now you woulde seeme to frame vs a certaine fixed state of the matter to be debated vpō, and to the which you would seeme to direct your proufes, that ye will bring. And therein you deale with vs better than hitherto ye haue done, seeming to seke by dark generalities, as it were corners, to lusk & lurk in. Neither yet here walk ye so plainly and truly as you would seeme, but in great darknesse, with a sconce of dimme light, that the readers should not haue the clere view & sight of the right way ye should walk in, whō with this your darke sconce ye lead far awry. For thus you frame vs the state of the questiō

These are but wordes M. Stap. to spend time and fil pa∣per. Ye know best your owne practises. Ye tell vs before hand the Bishop will do so. Tell vs so when ye come to it. It séemeth he mindeth it not, euen by your owne confession, prefixing a state of y^e matter to be debated vpō, & to direct his proues vnto. This is not the way of one that would lu•…•…ke or

lurke with darke sconces in corners, nor the B hitherto hath gone thus to work, it is one of your ordinarie slaunders, his proues are euident, name one that is not directed to the issue set betwene him & M. Feck. & that fully proueth it not, but that sconce of your own hath left no corner vnsought, to •…•…usk and lurke in, and to lead the Reader about the bush, as besides this, your common place of impertinent matters, will (for the most part) declare.

The. 27. Diuision.

THe B. hauing proued his issue by the two forsaid parts, the scriptures, & the Doctors, being entred into the other twaine, the Councels & the practise: since the issue requireth the proofe, of Any such gouernement as the Q maiestie now taketh vpon hir: the B. first expresseth hir Maiesties gouernment, & theron, according to the issue, maketh his ge∣nerall state, to leuell his proues vnto, y^e B. words are these:

The gouernement that the Q. Maiestie most* 1.1674 iustly taketh vpon hir in ecclesiasticall causes, is the guiding, caring, prouiding, ordering, and ay∣ding the ecclesiasticall state, within hir domini∣ons, to the furtherance, maintenance, and setting foorth of true religion, vnitie, and quietnesse of Christes Church, ouerseeing, visiting, refour∣ming, restrayning, amending, and correcting all maner persons, with all maner errors, superstiti∣ons, heresies, schismes, abuses, offences, con∣temptes and enormities, in or about Christes re∣ligion whatsoeuer. This same authoritie, rule, and gouernement was practised in the catholyke Church by the most Christian kings and Empe∣rours, approued, confirmed, & commended by the best Councels both generall and Nationall.

The effect of M. Stapletons aunswere to this, is all against the state of the question, that the Bishop here setteth downe,* 1.1675 and is diuided chiefly into thrée pointes. In the first he cha∣lengeth the bishop to alter the state of the question in hande, and setteth himselfe downe another state, to the which he woulde haue the Bishop direct his prooues. Secondly, he trauayleth to show, that the Bishop concealed two clauses of the statute, that should chiefly haue expressed the state and what inconuenience may insue thereby. Thirdly, he allea∣geth the excuses of the Papists, for refusing the othe.

In his first part, being deducted into these two members, to quarell at the Bishops state, and to set vp his own: for the former, thus sayth M. Stapleton.

Here is a state framed of you M. Horne, but fane square* 1.1676 from the question in hande. For the question is not nowe be∣twene M. Feckenham and you, whether the Prince may visit, re∣forme and correct all maner of persons, for all maner of here∣sies and schismes, and offences in Christian religion, which per∣chance in some sense might somwhat be borne withall, if ye meane by this visitation, the outward execution of the Church lawes and decrees, confirmed by the ciuill magistrate, roborated with hise∣dicts, and executed with his sword. For in such sort many Empe∣rors & Princes, haue fortified & strēgthned the decrees of Bishops made in Councels both general & National, as we shall in the pro∣cesse see. And this in christian Princes is not denied but cōmended.

What the state of the question in hande is, the reader hath often hearde. How be it, such is your importunitie, that ye* 1.1677 will neuer leaue your olde warbling. But for the full satis∣fying of the Reader berein, let him once againe resort to the issue that M. Feck requireth of the bishop to direct all hys foure meanes vnto, wherin he would be satisfied. And that is conteyned in these flat wordes.

VVhen your L. shall be able by any of these foure* 1.1678 meanes, to make proofe vnto me, that any Emperour or Empresse, King or Queene, may claime or take v∣pon

them any such gouernment in spirituall or eccle∣siasticall causes: I shall herein yeelde. &c.

This then is the state of the question betwéen thē: whether any Prince may take vpon him any such gouernment in spi∣rituall or ecclesiasticall causes, as the Queenes Maiestie doth. Now wheresoeuer the B. proueth anything by the foure fore said meanes, that any Prince hath taken vpon him any such go∣uernement, as doth the Queenes Maiestie in causes ecclesiasti∣call: there the bishop kéepeth himselfe to the state of the que∣stion in hande, and satisfieth M. Fecknams issue. What the bishop hath done in the two foresaide meanes, is euident by that that is past, let others iudge thereon. Here, the B. en∣tring into the other two meanes, prefixeth this issue againe before him to leuell his proues by. The issue is now, that by any of these two meanes remayning, he shall proue that anye Prince may claime or take vpon him any such gouernment as the Queenes Maiestie in Ecclesiasticall matters doth. And where the B. by any of these two meanes, shall proue that any Princes haue taken •…•…pon them, any such gouernment in ecclesiasticall matters, as the Q. Maiestie doth: there y^e B. digresseth nothing from his question, & also satisfieth M. Feck▪ demaunde. This then being the state of the question betwéene them, the proofe of any such gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes: the B. first set∣teth here down the particulars that plainly declare, what go∣uernment this is that the Q. Maiestie taketh on hir, wher∣to he must direct his proues. So that now y^t question in hande is this. What is that gouernment, & in what particulars consi∣steth it, that the Q. maiestie taketh on hir? Which when here the B. doth specifie, & in the last Chapter M. Stapl. himselfe commended the bishop for his orderly going to worke there∣in, and now crieth out, here is a state framed farre square from the question in had: whether it be so or no, & whether it be not plain dealing of the B. and plain warbling of M. St. let any man be indifferent iudge betwéene them.

But M. Stapl. sayth: the question is not nowe betweene M.

Feck. and you whether the Prince may visite, reforme and correct all maner of persons for all maner of schismes, heresies and offen∣ces in Christian religion.

True in déede M. St. the question is not nowe whether the Prince may doe these things that you rehearse or no, but the question that is nowe in hand, being deducted out of y^e words of the issue, (any such gouernment) demaundeth first, what kinde of gouernment that is, that the Q. maiestie doth claime and take vpon hir? to the which question the B. aunswereth: the gouernment that hir highnesse taketh on hir is such and such. &c. And so the state of the question is knowne, what kinde of gouernment the B. must proue. And looke where he proueth any such gouernment, there M. Feckenhams request is aun∣swered. And if he can not prooue any such, then M. Fecken∣ham may complaine that he is not satisfied. And, as he is bounde to performe his promise of thankfull yéelding: so haue you no cause to warble at this the B. diligent enume∣ration of those particularities of the principal question, least, both ye should wander in an obscure generalitie, & also cōtrarie your late vaunt, that ye go to worke plainly, truly, and particularly.

But sée your falshoode, how chaunce ye set not downe the Bishops wordes as he spake them, but abridge them, & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of thrée parts of them and more, crying: Here is a state fra∣med farre square from the question in hande? Here is a false sub∣tiltie of you M. St. farre square from any truth, in hand, or out of hande. The Bishops wordes are these.

The gouernment that the Q. Maiestie moste iustly taketh vpon hir in eccles. causes, is the gui∣ding, caring, prouiding, ordering, directing, and ayding the ecclesiasticall state within hir domini∣ons, to the furtherance, maintenance, and setting forth of true religion, vnitie, and quietnesse of Christes Church: ouerseeing, visiting, refour∣ming, restrayning, amending and correcting all

maner persons, with all maner errours, superstitions, heresies, schismes abuses, offences, contemptes, and enormities, in or about Christes religion whatsoeuer.

In place of all these wordes, euery one béeing materiall to shewe the particular things, wherein hir gouernment con∣sisteth, that she claymeth: you onely for all these, set downe these wordes, The Prince may visite, reforme, and correcte, all maner of persons, for all maner of heresies, schisines, and offences, in Christian religion. As though the Bishops par∣ticular words, specifying the poynts of hir gouernmēt, con∣teined no more but this. Neuerthelesse, had the bishop spe∣cified no more, but these words that ye thus contracte: yet had he not swarued from the issue betweene them, (Any suche gouernment:) nor from the direct•…•… answering to the question, declaring any suche gouernment, chiefly the chiefe poynts therof, that the Quéenes maiestie claymeth, and you refuse to yéelde vnto hir. For euen these particu∣larities that you set out, ye will not graunte without an ex∣ception, and that is, in effecte, vtterly to denie them, al∣thoughe in daliaunce of spéeche saying in some sense) ye would onely séeme to mollifie them. For what else meane these your words?

VVhich perchaunce in some sense, might somewhat be* 1.1679 borne withall, if ye meane by this visitation and reformation the outwarde execution of the Churche lawes and decrees, confirmed by the ciuill magistrate, roborated with his edicts, and executed with his sworde: for in suche sorte many Em∣perours and Princes haue fortified and strengthened, the de∣crees of Byshops made in Councels bothe generall and na∣tionall, as we shall in the processe see. And this in Christian* 1.1680 Princes is not denied but commended.

Christian Princes haue héere gotten afaire catche by this your graunt and commendation, to become your seruants, your souldiours, & your slaughtermen, only executing with their swords, that you with your authoritie decrée and ap∣point

vnto them. Now forsooth a fayre supreme authoriti•…•….

But let vs sée how this doth hang togither. Ye graunt thē to visite, reforme, and correct all maner of persons, for al ma∣ner of heresies, schismes, and offences in Christian religion.

This is inough, M. St. for your part, to graūt the Prince thus much. Nay soft ye (say you) I graunt this but with a perchaunce. What? doth so waightie a matter hang by so rotten a thread? Nay, I graunt not this perchaūce neither, say you, but in some condition. This goeth hard with Prin∣ces (M. St. to stand at this smal reuersion. But go to, let vs see, how many Princes visite, reforme, and correct, all maner persons, heresies, schismes and offences? What is the condi∣tion ye wil make? Forsooth the condition is this: looke what maner lawes and decrees the Priests will make, the Prince shall only confirme them by outwarde execution of them. Looke what maner persons the priests do say are heretikes, •…•…chismatikes, and offenders, the Prince shall execute them with the sworde and kill them. Looke what maner religion, doctrine and doings, the Priests and Bishops shall in their Councels both generall and nationall, decr•…•… to be heresie, schisme, and offence: the Prince shal roborate, fortifie, and strēgthen them. And this is the only sense (sayth M. St. that I meane, that they should visite, reforme, and correct all ma∣ner persons, heresies, schismes, and offences in Christian re∣ligion. Why? M. Stapl. this sense, and this graunte, are quite contrarie the one to the other. The Prince shall vi∣site, reforme and correct all maner of persons, heresies, schis∣mes, and offences: that is to say, he shall not visite, reforme, nor correct, any maner of person, for any maner of all these things, but the Priest shall do it, and he shall onely be the Priestes slaue and executioner. Well, sayth M. Stap. be it as be may, construe it as ye will, this is the onely some sense that we may graunt it in, and in none other sense. And this in Christian Princes is not denied, but commen∣ded. Is not héere a proper graunt to Princes? and is not

master Stap. to be commended for this some sense of chri∣stian Princes gouernment? But who is so senselesse, that he seeth not in this sense, that the Prince hath no gouerne∣ment at all, but is made a very slaue to the Popish priests authoritie. And in this some sense, coulde master Stapl. finde in his heart to acknowledge a gouernement to the Queenes maiestie, and yet not without a perchaunce nei∣ther. But without perchaunce master Stap. your sense sheweth, what good harte ye beare hir Maiestie, and all o∣ther christian Princes.

Now that M. Stap. hath thus chalenged the state which the bishop framed, and yet graunteth with a perchaunce thereto in some sense, which sense is as you haue heard: he taketh vpon him to set downe the true state of the question in hande: and prefixeth these words in his margine:

The state of the question: and so procéedeth, saying:

But the question is here nowe, whether the Prince or lay* 1.1681 magistrate, may of him selfe, and of his own princely autho∣ritie, without any higher eccl. power in the Church, within or without the Realme, visite, reforme, and correct, and haue all maner of gouernment and authoritie in all things, & causes eccl. or no. As whether the Prince may by his own supreme authoritie, depose and set vp Bishops and priests, make in∣iunctions of doctrine, prescribe order of Gods seruice, enact matters of religiō, approue and disproue articles of the faith, take order for administration of Sacraments, commaund or put to silence Preachers, determine doctrine, excōmunicate and absolue with such like, which al are causes eccl. and al ap∣perteyning not to the inferiour ministerie (which you graūt to Priests and Bishops only) but to the supreme iurisdiction and gouernment, which you do annexe to the Prince only. This I say, is the state of the question, now present. For the present question betweene you and M. Feck. is grounded vpon the othe comprised in the statute: which statute em∣plieth and concludeth all these particulars,

I had thought (séeing your earnestnesse, M. St. when ye* 1.1682 came to mētioning the statute) that we should haue herd all these things (that ye haue thus as it were on your fingers endes particularly named) expressed in the statute. But whē al cōmeth to al, ye knit vp the matter with this: which sta∣tute implyeth & concludeth al these particulars. But I sée, you employ your selfe (like your self) stil to false cōclusions. And such as your cōclusions are, such are your proues. You pretende here (after ye haue controlled the B.) to set down the true state of the questiō. But as ye played in the begin∣ning, so ye holde out rubbers euen to the ending. Ye are stil the same man, that cried out of short & wide shoting, hauing set vp new markes of your owne making, by this doing, both to defeate the bishops profes, & also to deceiue y^e reader.

Ye would fayne driue all to the othe, and make the othe the present question. And why so? bicause (say you) the pre∣sent question is grounded on the othe.

True in déede, bothe the present question, and all other* 1.1683 questions about this controuersie, and the issue also agréed vpon betwéene these parties: is grounded (as ye say) vpon the oth. And bicause y^e present question is grounded theron, it is a good argument against you, that the oth is not thē the present questiō, bicause the present questiō is groūded ther∣on, & a question is not grounded on it selfe. Ye shoulde haue marked, that though y^e originall be of the othe, yet both the issue, & the present questiō in hād, being by degrées deducted from thence, make nowe an other state. To the which, & to this issue, if the bishop satisfie, ye can not iustly chalēge him any further. As for that state of the question that you set downe, and the particulars thereof, that ye say are implyed and concluded in the statute, & that all those things are ap∣perteining not to the inferiour, but to the supreme iurisdi∣ction and gouernment, that ye say we annexe to the Prince only: al these are your most manifest vntruthes & slanders, nor ye can finde them either specified, emplyed, concluded,

comprised, or any wayes to be ment in the othe, or in the sta∣tute,* 1.1684 or in any parte therof. Neither the othe or the statute giue, al maner of gouernment and authoritie in all things and causes ecclesiasticall to the Prince: but ascribe to the Prince the supreme gouernment and authoritie in al things and cau∣ses ecclesiasticall. True it is, that supreme gouernement is* 1.1685 aboue & ouer them, but yet the one is not the other, supreme gouernment is not all maner of gouernment. Neither bothe the othe, or the statute, either in wordes, or effect of wordes, ascribe to this the Princes supreme gouernment, the making of Priests, and Bishops, the making iniunctions of doctrine, the determining of doctrin, the approuing or disprouing ar∣ticles of the faith, excommunicating and absoluing, the prea∣ching of the worde, and the administration of Sacramentes. Where fynde ye any of these things so muche as to be ga∣thered out of the othe or statute? Why say you, they all ap∣pertaine not to the inferiour ministerie (whiche ye graunt to Priests and Bishops only) but to the supreme iurisdiction and gouernement, which you doe annexe to the Prince only.

In déede, these thinges you make to appertayne to youre Pope, to whome ye giue such supreme iurisdiction and go∣uernement, as annexeth all this to his papal authoritie. But ye doe wickedly herein, and iniurie to our sauiour Christe, to whom only such supreme iurisdiction and gouernment be∣longeth, and vnder whome, the inferiour ministers maye do these things, not as they please, but as he hathe prescribed them. The Iurisdiction and authoritie appertaineth onely to ministers, bishops, or priestes, as ye call them. To whome herein we doe not (as ye sclaunder vs) graunt only an In∣feriour ministerie, but euen an higher ministerie, than wée* 1.1686 giue to Princes. In their spirituall ministration they are higher ministers: but in gouerning them, ouerséeing them, directing, punishing, maynteyning, placing, or displacing them, as they shall do their dueties well or yll: the Prince therein is higher than they, and his gouernement vnder

God is supreme and chiefe in all suche causes, as belongeth to the Ecclesiasticall persons, or any other in his territo∣ries. This is that the statute ascribeth, and the othe requi∣reth farre from youre malicious and sclaunderous slate of the question that you haue here deuised. Whiche (as ye say the truthe therein) the Bishop proueth not, for it is no part for him to proue. But that, this is the •…•…slue, he fully pre∣ueth. Yea and proueth the full contentes of the Othe al∣so, to the whyche ye woulde so fayne driue the question nowe in hande.

After ye haue thus sette vp a false and wrong state, and quarelled at the verie state of the question in hande, playnly and truely set downe by the Bishop: ye enter into your se∣cond part, wherin prefixing an other marginal note, Master Hornes dissembling falsehood: ye chalenge the B. to omit* 1.1687 two clauses of the statute, the one at the beginning therof, the other at the ende. The former is this.

That no foraine person shall haue any maner of authoritie* 1.1688 in any spirituall cause within this realme. By whiche wordes is flatly excluded (saye you) all the authoritie of the whole bodie of the Catholike Churche without the realme, as in a place more conuenient towardes the ende of the laste booke, it shall by Gods grace be euidently proued.

If that be a place more conuenient, why doe ye antici∣pate it here not so conueniently? where it appertayneth not to the question in hand. The Bishop now medleth not with that parcell that excludeth all foraine authoritie, but onely with that parte that expresseth what manner of authoritie it is, that the Quéenes Maiestie taketh vpon hir. And this the Bishop playnely and faithefully dothe, not here inter∣medlyng with other pointes of the statute. But where that conuenient occasion is, there ye shall sée the Bishop touch that, that here ye call for. And there a Gods name answere hym if ye can. But your fingers itched, ye coulde not holde youre hande, but néedes ye muste euen nowe haue a fling

thereat for a farewell. Althoughe therein ye proprely o∣uertourne youre selfe, and yet to make somewhat of the matter, yée playe all the false playe yée can. For where* 1.1689 the Statute mencioneth onely anye forraine persone to haue no authoritie, you conclude, that it excludeth all the authoritie of the whole bodye of the Catholike Churche withoute the Realme. Where as there the Statute men∣cioneth not the catholike Churche at all.

And besides, who séeth not a great difference betwéene these twayne, any persons authoritie, and the whole bodies authoritie? And who séeth not withall, that if England be a parcell and membre of the whole bodie of the Catholike Churche of Christe, and all the membres make one vnited bodie: then neither is the whole bodie foraine to the mem∣bers thereof, nor the particular membres foraine to the whole bodie? Nor in déede any parte of this mysticall bo∣die is excluded. But in that respect that one countreyman is foraine to an other, suche foraine authoritie of any foraine person, is thereby excluded. But in regarde of the bodye of the Catholike churche, (if ye meane Christes holie Ca∣tholike Churche) there is neyther Iew nor Gréeke, Scy∣thian,* 1.1690 nor Barbarian, nor any forayne Countreyman: we are no straungers and forainers, but Citizens of the Sain∣tes and of the householde of God, and all compacte in Christe, nor any is excluded oute of this Churche (if he be in, and of this Churche) bycause he is not forayne. And where ye saye, the whole bodie of the Churche with∣out the Realme, youre wordes implie a contradiction to themselues. For if the realme be a parcell of the bodie of the churche, whiche perchaunce you will denye: or if the realme be a parcell of the bodie of the Churche, whyche you wyll not denie: then that which is without the realme, is not the whole bodie, as ye call it.

But lettyng this goe, what is that authoritie, be it of

the most part, or be it (as you sa•…•…) of the whole bodie of the* 1.1691 Churche without the realme, that ye would haue the realme allowe? If it be the verie Catholike church of Christe, then is it also the wyfe and spouse of Christ, and hath no autho∣ritie to make any faith doctrine, or religion, besides that hir husband hath appointed: neyther England, Fraunce, Ger∣manie, Italy, Spayne, or any other parte, or all the whole bodie of this spouse, hath authoritie to doe it. And looke what parte doth not this, or presumeth to doe otherwise, becom∣meth foraine, and as foraine is cut off, euen as a rotten and putrified member seuered from the bodie. Euery braunche* 1.1692 (sayth Christ,) that beareth not fruite in me, my father will cut it away. But if this authoritie be for such ecclesiastical di∣scipline, as Christ hath giuen therof no expresse cōmaunde∣ment: then euery seuerall part may receyue or not receyue the same, and yet is not estranged or made forrain from the whole corps of Christendome, yea though the most parte of the churche besides, authorised and vsed the same. But eue∣ry particular Churche hath in it selfe authoritie to establish orderly, suche disciplines as shall be thought best and fittest for their estate: and yet is there no diuision or schisme from the whole, thereby. But sith ye referre your selfe to a more conuenient place, where ye say it shall by Gods grace be eui∣dently proued, it is not much conuenient to stand any more hereon, sith it is here but accessorie, and ye confesse your self that ye doe not, but ye will hereafter, by Gods grace proue it euidently. But I doubt me of two things, the one of your euident prouing therof, the other, that ye will doe the same by the grace of God, the dooing wherof, is agaynst the grace of God.

The other clause (saye you) you omitte, at the ende of the* 1.1693 statute, whiche is this: That all maner superiorities that haue or may lawfully be exercised, for the visitation of persons ec∣clesiasticall, and correcting all maner of errours, heresies and offences, shall be for euer vnited to the crowne of the realme

of England: wherin is employed, that if (which God forbid) a Turke or any heretike whatsoeuer, shoulde come to the Crowne of Englande, by vertue of this statute, and of the othe, all maner superioritie in visiting and correcting ecclesi∣asticall persons in all maner matters, shoulde be vnited vnto him. Yea and euery subiecte should sweare that in his consci∣ence he beleeueth so.* 1.1694

Is this a part also M. Sta. of the question in hand, for the omission of a part wherof ye haue so sharply reuiled the Bi∣shop for a false dissembler? Is there no difference betwéene the kind of gouernment it self, or the particulars therof, & the perpetual vniting of that gouernment▪ and the same particu∣lars to the crowne, or any other suche clauses for the prefer∣•…•…ing of it? If the Bishop concealed any parte of that go∣uernmēt that the Quenes maiestie taketh on hir: then might ye haue sée ned to haue had some cause, to haue thus quarel∣led at y^e B. but then ye shuld haue set down what clauses of any point of gouernmēt in ecclesiast matters, y^t the Quéene claimeth y^e Bish. omitted. But this neither ye do, nor ye can do, but run about the bushe, picking quarels, that he let not downe other clauses also, that be no parcel of the question in hande. The question is not nowe aboute the vniting to the crowne the supremacie that hir highnesse claimeth, but what that supremacie is, and what are the pointes, wherin it con∣sisteth that are to be vnited. The thing it selfe is one thing, & the vniting of the thing is an other thing. The B. hath 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to set down the thing it self for his leuel, for so y^e question of the issue, demaūdeth to proue any such gouernment as the Queene taketh on hir, If now the B. tell what kinde of gouernmēt it is, & •…•…o enter into his proues, to leuel thē ther∣to: doth not the B. deale playnly and truly? and do you any other thā kéepe your wonted wrnggling, which way soeuer the B had go•…•… to worke? For if, when he vniteth himselfe only to his matter, he cānot satisfie your brabbling quarels, but euen there, (suche is your impudencie) ye chyde by∣cause

he straggleth not from his question: If he had vnited any thing else vnto it, and spokē of this vniting also, as now ye would haue him do: then woulde ye as faste haue cryed out on the other side, that he shot wyde, and set vp new sta∣tes of the question in hande. And thus woulde nothing stop your mouth, ye loue of lyfe to wrangle.

But all these quarels are but your starting holes pre∣tending to fynde fault with the Bishop, where indéed your* 1.1695 quarell is at an other matter, to caste (for a farewell at the ende of this your booke) a boane for the reader to gnawe vpon, to breede a suspition in his head of a greate inconue∣nience, and so to bring him in a misliking of the state. At least to leaue him striken in the head with a doubtfull scru∣ple of the s•…•…qurle therof: As who should say cracke me this nutt•…•…, and there an end, answere me to this inconuenience that may followe hereon.

If a Turke (say you) or any heretike whatsoeuer, shoulde come to the Crown of England; by vertue of this statute, and of the Othe, all manner superioritie in visiting and corre∣cting Ecclesiasticall persons in all maner matters, shoulde be vnited to him.

You haue a mischeuous meaning M. St. al the world may sée, but that ye dare not vtter it without an if. But (thanks be to God) they be no Turks, nor any heretikes whatsoeuer, that ye shoot at, and refuse to obey. God graunte all be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 whome ye wish in place: as for your Pope, whom ye would giue this supremacie vnto, as he is no whit better than any heretike whatsoeuer, so is he a more perillous enimie than the Turke. A worsse than he, can not be feared, excepte y•…•… will put your case of the Diuell himselfe. And shall we leaue y^e certayntie of a present good state, for doubt of an ill to come? or for feare of a worse, runne to the worste of all? Thankes be to God the Quéenes Maiestie, whome God of his mercifull fauour hath placed to reigne ouer vs, and to enioye this supremacie, is neyther Turke, nor heretike,

but a moste excellent and blessed christian Quéene, a moste syncere defender of the true faith of Christe, & a most godlye nourse and mother of Gods people. God for his mercyes sake, vouchesafe to blesse and long continue hir ouer vs, maugre all your spites.

But go to, will ye say, I stande not •…•…n the state present. It is good for hereafter to forecast the wors•…•…e▪ What if this should happen (as God forbid) that a Turke or an heretike should come to the crowne of England?

Since there is no remedie with you M. Stapleton, but* 1.1696 we must néedes answer this your wicked presupposall: for myne owne parte, I will answere you thus. First, there is a great difference betwene a Turke and an heretike, of both whome confusedly ye put your case▪ A Turke is an open e∣nimie to Christes religion, professing Mahomet that sedu∣cers lawe. An heretike pretendeth to be a christian, but a∣gréeth not with the truth of Christes doctrine, so that there might be a more lykelyhod of the one than of the other. For this realme being Christian, and withall (God 〈◊〉〈◊〉 thanked therefore) so farre from any danger of the Turke (betwene whome and vs, bothe by lande and water lie many Nati∣ons) that yet of the twayne, the heretikes, of whiche there be many and subtile •…•…ortes, and all pretending to be mem∣bres of the Catholike Churche of Christ, were more li•…•…∣ly to obtaine that whiche you presuppose. Nowe if a Turke (a•…•… God forbad) shoulde come to the crowne: most lykely he coulde not get it, but by tyramicall vsurpation, as he doth other Countreys and then your question is aunswered for him, that of right neither this authoritie, nor any other vni∣ted to the Crowne it selfe, is due vnto him. Neyther wil he, if he be a Turke in religion (althoughe •…•…e woulde take the Crowne, neyther coulor be, if he woulde, take withall* 1.1697 this Christian kynde of Supremacie vpon hym, whiche is the subuersion of his false and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Religion. No, M. Stapl. he would not take, any su•…•…e kynde of Regiment,

as you your selfe allow to Christian Princes, and vnite vn∣to their crownes.

As for an heretike, might easilyer crepe in, to the obtay∣ning the crowne of England, (which also God forbid) for no throne, chaire, or citie, place, or people, haue any warrant a∣gainst this presupposall▪ The holie temple of Hierusalem became a denne of théeues, and their priests moste wicked murderers of Iesu Christ. And in the seate. of Dauid sat many idolaters, yea farre mo bad than good. Besides, that no natiō is exempted frō this threat, Propter peccata populi reg∣nare* 1.1698 facit hypocritam, For the sinnes of the people, God ma∣keth the hypocrite to reigne▪ So that nothing is impossible. Our sinnes are such as may deserue, or Gods trial may be suche, as he may proue vs with affliction vnder a Turke, or heretike, or any other tyrant or vsurper. But what is all this to the purpose? Shal not lawfull and godlie Christian Princes, (as Gods blessed name be praysed therefore, he hath so blessed Englande presently, with suche a moste happie Princesse, for all his moste gracious and rare gifts shyning in hir, that we maye iustly saye, Non tal•…•…er fec•…•…* 1.1699 omni nationi, he hath doone the lyke in our dayes to no chri∣stian nation: I speak it not to flatter hir, or to blemish any other estate, but to glorifie God for hir, to confirme vs i•…•… our allegiance, and to confounde your disobedience to hi•…•…* 1.1700 highnesse) shal not, I say, such Godly princes vnite & ma•…•… sure to them and their heires, all such lawfull authoritie, as belongeth vnto their estate, bicause it may be abused by o∣ther Princes hereafter?

If ye saye, it is not their lawfull authoritie, nor belon∣geth vnto them of ryghte: That woulde beproued fyrst, Maister Stapleton: for otherwyse, thys youre presuppo∣sall, toucheth as well their authoritie ouer temporall mat∣ters, as ouer spirituall. If the one may be vnited bycause it is ryghte, why maye not the other béeyng ryghte als•…•…, be lykewyse vnited, withoute thys vayne castyng be∣yonde

the M•…•…Wue, to let goe a certentie of present righte, for feare of an vncertayne daunger of some inconuenience to come? And yet if any suche chaūce should come, ye should* 1.1701 alwaies consider a difference, betwéene a Princes authori∣tie, and a Princes tyrannie: betwéene his duetie, and hys doing, whether he be Turke, Iewe, Heretike, Heathen, or whatsoeuer he be, or whatsoeuer he do, he oughte to be a faithfull Christian Prince, and he ought to do nothing, but that a christian Prince may lawfully do. Neither do any godly lawes giue the Prince that nowe is, or euer shall be, any other authoritie than lawfull authoritie. And as for this clause of the statute, euen your selfe do confesse that it giueth none other superioritie, to be vnited to the crowne of the Prince, whatsoeuer the Prince be, or shall be, or may be, but to do that that is lawfull, and that that he oughte to do. For the words which ye cite are these.

That all maner superiorities that haue or may lawfully be exercised for the visitation of persons ecclesiasticall. And correcting all maner of errours, heresies, and offences, shall be foreuer vnited to the Crowne of the Realme of Eng∣lande.

These wordes ye sée vnite no other authoritie, but suche as may lawfully be exercised, and so lawfully it vniteth to the Crowne, the correction of errours, heresies, and offences, not the maintenaunce of errours, heresies, and offences.

Nowe, if ye thinke the Turke would thus do, ye thinke* 1.1702 better of him than I can conceiue, and make me to thinke worsse of you than I thought. If ye thinke the Turke (as is moste likely) would not do these things that the statute yéeldeth to the Prince, that is to say, he would vsurpe that superioritie that may not be lawfully▪ exercised, he woulde mainteine errours, heresies, and offences, he would set out the Alcaron and worship of Mahomet, and suppresse and beate downe the Testament and worship of Iesu Christ: th•…•… the statute toucheth him not, nor he the statute, no•…•… any

othe is héere required, and your inconuenient presupposall is put foorth in vayne. For the statute yéeldeth not all cor∣rection simply: but correction of errours, heresies, and off en∣ces, & that he exercise it lawfully, which the Turke will not do, nor can do, béeing an opē enimie to Christes true religiō.

And therfore where ye say on this clause of the statute: wherin is implied, that if a Turke, or any heretike whatsoe∣uer should come to the Crowne of Englande, by vertue of this statute, and of the othe, all maner superioritie in visiting and correcting eccl. persons in all maner matters shoulde be vnited vnto him.

This is your excéeding falshod to the truthe, and too much iniurie to the statute, and playne trechery to the crowne, to say that the statute implieth this doing of the Turke, or this swearing and beleeuing so in him. For the statute implieth nothing, but that belongeth to a very christian Prince. The statute implyeth no suche absolute superioritie of cor∣recting ecclesiastical persons in al maner matters. This is (to borrowe a worde of your owne rhethorike) too too Tur∣kishly and spitefully put in of you, to make it appeare •…•… great inconuenience. Where the wordes that ye cite of the statute, speake of correcting all maner of errours, heresies, and offences. And is there no differēce trow you, betwéene the correcting of all maner of errours, heresies, and offences, & the correcting al maner matters? The one no mā wil denie to be godly, to punish the euil. The other is so large in deede, that if a Turk, or an heretike, had the doing therof, he might punish vertues in stéede of vices, & truth in place of falshood, and say that he punished some maner matters, except truth and vertue be no matter with you, as it appeareth by this your presuppesall, and your false implying on the statute,* 1.1703 that ye make it no great matter, either what become of Gods true religion, or of the Crowne of Englande. It sée∣meth ye care not greatle, whether a Turke or any heretike whatsoeuer had the Crowne of Englande, or the Crowne of

any other Realme, so that your Pope might kéepe his tri∣ple Crowne, and you the dignitie of your shauen Crowne. Which to mainteine in honor, what daunger heretofore ye haue brought the Realme in, other can tell, and Englande hath felt the popish practises, to bring this Realme in bon∣dage, & the crowne therof to strangers. And on condition, that this clause of superioritie were annexed, not to the Prince, but to the pope: M. St. could like it wel, and would spende to haue it so, the best peny in his pouch. Although a more perilous enimie to Christ and Christes church, than* 1.1704 is the pope, is neither Turke, or any other heretike, or arch∣heretike whatsoeuer: that would not care if the mo•…•…t royal crowne of Englande and most christian Realme, were on a fishpoole, bicause it hath reiected his superioritie: and to shew his good will thert•…•…, he hath abandoned it with his great curse, to any that will come, Christian, Heathen, Turke, Iewe, heretike, or whatsoeuer he be, that will either destroy it, or reduce it to his captiuitie, farre more dangerous to the soule, than is the Grecians bodily slauery to the Turke. But all this M. Stap. will vtterly denie, that there were any suche bo•…•…dage, if that this clause were vnited to the Popes triple Crowne.

Go to M. St. were this also graunted you: will not your* 1.1705 owne deuised inconuenience as well come to passe, the pope hauing it for eu•…•…r vnited vnto him, as if the Prince had it? What if there were an heretike Pope? what if there were a Pope, not only by his natiue countrey a Turke, but also one that practiseth priuie conspiracies & leagues, yea •…•…reasons with the Turke against christian Princes, & in all mischiefe of life, yea and errours of fayth also, were worsse than the Turke, and that the Turkes erroneous Alkaron, speaketh yet more reuerently of Iesus Christ, than doth the pope, that pretendes to be his vicar? What if there were a Iew pope, or one that would cause Christians to receiue Iudais•…•…e, yea to cru•…•…e Christ agayne? What if there

were a heathen Pope, or one that caused as grosse Idola∣trie to be vsed, as dyd the Paynims, and beléeued as much of heauen or hell, of God or the diuell, of the bodies resur∣rection or of the soules immortalitie, as the Epicures or the Saduces dyd. What if there were a whoremaster Pope, yea a whore Pope, a Sodomiticall Pope, a Iudas Pope, a Neronian Pope, an Antichrist Pope, and suche a Pope, as hath done more for the diuels kingdome, than euē the deuill him selfe could haue done? If this clause were for euer vnited vnto the Pope: how should we do then master St? I pray you helpe vs héere at a pinche out of the briers. If ye shall denie there can come any suche Popes: shewe why there may not come suche hereafter, as well as there hath gone suche heretofore. If ye denie there hath bene any such Popes heretofore, and put me to my profes: wel, then I must proue it, and God willing so will I, when ye shall bid me. But if beforehand, ye thinke I shal be able to do it, and you wil preuent me with a shift of descant, that though they were such ill Popes, yet, in respect they were popes, they were none of al these things, but in respect they were mē (for so ye afterward excuse y^• matter, to which distinctiō there you shall be answered God willing) yet here admit∣ting also this distinction: why may not I replie, that what soeuer the person shall be that shall haue hereafter the* 1.1706 crowne of this realme, the statute and the lawe respecteth not the man that shall haue it, but the estate and authoritie that •…•…e shall haue, and entendeth not that he is a man, but that he is a king: and so medling not with his vices and af∣fections, setteth out his duetie and office, what he oughte to do, what maner of man he ought to be, & in this respect he hath this authoritie. And so euery way your wicked and malicious presupposall is answered, simply, but truely I trust, howsoeuer other woulde answere it better, or (as i•…•… better deserueth) giue it no answere at all.

Nowe hauing cast foorth your presupposition, as a sna∣ring

bayte, to bréede a scruple of some marueylous inconue∣nience: and after your false maner of concluding, hauing inferred that of the statute, that it implyeth not: ye begin to buskle vp your feathers and crow, saying:

This kinde of regiment therefore, so large and ample, I am* 1.1707 right well assured ye haue not proued, nor neuer shall be able to proue in the auncient Church, while ye liue.

In déede for that kinde of regiment master Stapleton, that you inferre, and would as a ma•…•…e set vp: it is a Papal, or Turkish regiment: and that the Bishop shall neuer be able to proue it, I bolde well with you, nor be goeth about to proue it, but to improue it. But that kinde of regiment that he here setteth downe of the Quéenes Maiestie, that will he proue, and hath alreadie proued it, for al this your Thra∣sonicall crake, which I commit to muster in your common place thereon. And let this his fellowe go with it for companie.

VVhen I say (say you) this kinde of regiment, I walke not* 1.1708 in confuse and generall wordes as ye doe, but I restrayne my selfe, to the foresayde perticulers nowe rehersed, and to that platforme, that I haue alreadie drawne to your hande, and vnto the which master Feckenham must pray you to referre and applie your euidences, otherwise, as he hath, so may he, or any man else (the chiefe poynts of all, being as yet on your side improued) still refuse the othe. For the which doings, nei∣ther you nor any man else, can iustly be grieued with him.

You maye saye, like a lustie Gentleman, what ye please master Stapleton. I say this kinde of regiment, and that kinde of regiment, and tell vs of your walkes, of your restrayntes, of your platformes that ye haue drawne, but these are but néedelesse vauntes. Tell vs of that regiment that is in question, walke there a Gods name, restraine your selfe to that, be contente with the platforme that is alrea∣die drawne to your handes: otherwise master Feckenham, and all other, will sée that ye doe but brabble. And as ye

would drawe the Bishop to driue his proues thither, whe∣ther he is not bounde to referre them: so ye doe not onely deceyue the Reader, but offer wrong also euen to master Feckenham, whome ye take in hande to defende, and here ye make him such a childe, that he knewe not how to frame his issue, nor wherein he would be resolued But M. Fec∣kenham (if ye defende him thus) may bi•…•… you meddle with your Fortresses, and let him alone with his cause. And if the Bishop haue not in these two meanes, satisfied the demaund of his issue, then tell master Feckenham, that he may still refuse the othe. But if the Bishop haue proued by any of these two poynts, the Scriptures, or the Doctours, master Feckenhams issue that he desired to be proued, that is, any such gouernment as the Queenes Maiestietaketh on hir in ecclesiasticall causes: then can not maister Fecken. iustly refuse the othe, but must vvith heartie thanks yelde therevnto, as he hath promised by wryting to the Bishop, or else he shall be holden as an vniust man, and as obsti∣nate a wrangling Papist, as you shewe your selfe to be. Which wilfull refusall, though it be a griefe to all the godly affected, that beholde your frowarde blindnesse, yet shall it be the lesse griefe vnto them, when they sée that neyther truth nor honestie will reclaime you.

Here, after the vaunts of your selfe, and the excusing of master Feckenham, ye enter into your thirde part, of excu∣sing all the Papists, calling it in your margine: A reaso∣nable* 1.1709 defence of the Catholikes for refusing the othe. This reasonable defence hath two partes, the one, the excuse of the Papists: the other, the accusing of the Bishop. For the former sayth master Stapleton.

As neither with vs (master Horne) ought you, or any man* 1.1710 else, be grieued for declaring the truth in this poynt, as if we were discontented subiects or repining against the obedience we owe to our gracious Prince and countrey.

No man is grieued with you, master Stapleton (as ye

pretende) for declaring the truth in this poynt, or any other,* 1.1711 but onely for your not declaring the truth, but concealing the truth, and outfacing the matter with false counte∣nances of the truth in this poynt and in so manie other. Where in yée shew your selfe not onely discontented sub∣iectes, but in heart verie rebellions, nor repining onely with discontented stomackes, but with open sayings, wri∣tings, and other seditions attemptes agaynst the obedi∣ence ye owe to our gracious Prince and Countrey. Ye call hir gracious, but God defende hir gracious person from your vngracious practises, and from all such Iudas kisses of hollow hearted flattring Papistes. For, howe vngra∣clously ye minde hir highnesse and your Countrey: all that heare your sugred wordesnowe, speaking as though that butter would not melt in your mealy mouth, and read your common place withall, collected of your most shamefull and notorious slaunders, that ye rayse vpon so gracious a prince and your natiue Countrey: would meruayle how that dub∣ble tongue of yours coulde speake such contraries. But ye are a Merchant for the nonce, ye studie Louaine diuinitie, that is to say, to beare fire in one hand, & water in another, to laugh in ones face, and strike him with a dagger to the heart, as Ioab did with Abner and Amasa. But let vs sée how trimly ye cloke this geare. I dare say neuer a Frier in Louaine can play the sinoother hypocrite.

For besides (say you) that we ought absolutely to obey God* 1.1712 more than man and preferre the truth (which our sauiour him selfe protesteth to be, encouraging all the faythfull to pro∣fesse the truth, and giuing them to wit, that in defending that, they defende Christ himselfe) before all other worldly re∣spectes whatsoeuer.

What a godly pretence of zeale is here to God? were* 1.1713 it not for pure loue they heare to God, master Stapleton promiseth for them, as theyr spokes man, they would obey their Prince. Nowe surely this séemeth to procéede of an

holy zeale. But what is that they meane here by this ab∣solute obedience to God? God may be absolutely obeyed, and the Prince also next to God conditionally be obeyed, as the chiefe setter foorth of Gods absolute obedience. God* 1.1714 in his holie worde neuer spake any thing against obedience to the Prince, whereby any Hypocrite might pretende a scruple of disobeying God, if next vnder God, he obeyed his Prince, but God in his worde commaundeth vs so to obey him. What meane they then to alleage God for theyr disobedience? Forsooth here is a mystery, ye must vnder∣stande by God, the Pope, for so he is called, Dominus deus noster Papa, Our Lorde God the Pope▪ and their obedience* 1.1715 to the Prince herein, is flatte agaynst this Gods obedience. And bicause master Stapleton and his fellowes, are priests of this Gods making, they must therefore disobey theyr Prince. And this is the very matter. So Thomas Bec∣ked* 1.1716 died for Gods cause, and what was that? forsooth the franchisies of the Popes Church. For all, that is for the Pope, and Popery, and the Popish priests honours, is only for God, for Christ, and for the truth, when it is for the De∣uill as soone, as indéede it is for him the Authour of all such hypocriticall disobedience, and for their owne filthie lucre. But God is a good God, he must beare the name of all▪ The Papistes being thus (by theyr Attourney master Sta∣pleton) excused of theyr Disobedience: least this shoulde not be thought sufficient. There is yet behinde one other proper waye of excusing themselues, and that is to fall in accusing the Bishop, that therby the papists may be thought the more excusable.

Beside all this I say (sayth master Stapleton) whosoeuer will but indifferently consider the matter, shall see that M. Horne himselfe in specifying here at large the Queenes Maiesties go∣uernment by the statute intended, doth no lesse in effect abridge the same by dissembing silence, than the Catholikes doe by open and plaine contradiction.

Ye charge the B. here with abridging the Queenes Maie∣sties gouernement by dissembling silence. This is your former quarrell, M. Stap. yet could ye hitherto proue nothing omit∣ted, concerning the verie gouernment it selfe, and therefore ye wrangled about other clauses of debarring the gouernement* 1.1717 from any foreine person, and of vniting the gouernment to the crowne of Englande, which bicause the B. set not downe as parcels of the gouernment, which ech man séeth are none, ye chalenge him of dissembling silence, and do as one that either hath nothing else to saye, or that this is some such notable triumph, that ye thought good to end your first booke there∣with, as it were a gyrde to the Bishop, and a pricke fa∣stened in the Readers minde to cause him mislyke of the Bishops dealing, and suspect the whole cause thereby. This indéede were somewhat oratorlyke, if it were not so appa∣rant an vntruth, that euery body might behold the falshood therof, the malice of you, and the impertinencie of the quar∣rell. But as you thereby are able (crie it out as fast and as lowde as ye will) to proue nothing in word or déede against the Bishop, and therefore run to byous quarrels of silence and abridging in effect: so your selfe while ye would excuse your selfe, as not discontented nor repining subiectes accuse your selfe without any dissembling at all. And are not asha∣med to confesse, that ye withstande hir Maiesties gouernment by open and plaine contradiction. Though therefore your ac∣cusation of the Bishop be to any indifferent man to consider the matter, no excuse of your disobedience: yet any that shall indifferently consider the matter, yea, though he were som what partiall on your side, sith so openly and plainely ye dare open your contradiction thereto, will holde you altogither vnex∣cusable, and iudge you on your owne mouth.

But let vs sée why ye are thus importune with the Bi∣shop to accuse him so often, nowe in the ende of this booke, whether ye haue any newe matter to lay to his charge, that ye haue not yet vttred, & how truly ye accuse him.

For (say you) whereas the statute and the othe (to the which all* 1.1718 must sweare) expresseth a supreme gouernment in all things and causes without exception: M. Horne taking vpon him to specifie the particulars of this generall decree, and amplifying that little which he giueth to the Queenes Maiestie, with copie of wordes full statutelike, he leaueth yet out, and by that leauing out, taketh* 1.1719 from the meaning of the statute the principall cause ecclesiasticall▪ And what is that you aske, forsooth, iudgement, determining, and approuing of doctrine, which is true and good, and which is other∣wise. For what is more necessarie in the Church, than that the su∣preme gouernour thereof shoulde haue power in all doubtes and controuersies to decide the truth, and to make an ende of questio∣ning? this in the statute, by M. Hornes silence is not comprised. And yet who doubteth that of all things and causes ecclesiasticall, this is absolutely the chiefest.

Why M. St. are ye nowe of a contrarie opinion to that (if ye be remembred) that ye were before? for then ye rea∣soned, that omission and silence was no deniall, but concluded* 1.1720 the contrarie, Qui t•…•…cet consentire videtur, for he that holdeth his peace, seemeth to consent. Howbeit, I crie you mercie, the* 1.1721 case is altered. For there ye defend your client, & here ye op∣pugne your aduersarie. And belike ye haue some priuiledge from Rome, euer to turne the matter so, as may best serue your turne. But and it were not for this your priuiledge, surely I woulde further aske ye howe chaunce so soone ye haue forgotten your late vaunt, and euen in this leafe wher∣in ye crake, that ye walke not in generall wordes, but restrayne your selfe to particulars: & now stande quarrelling about the generall words of the statute, and mocke the B. for particulars: if ye shal•…•… laye forth your priuiledge to doe this, when ye thinke ye may get some aduauntage thereby: yet I thinke your priuiledge stretcheth not, both to wrest the state of the question in hande, and of the issue, to the statute: and to wrest and bel•…•…e the statute as ye please, and thereof to gather what false conclusion ye lyst. For first, ye do the Bishop wrong,

•…•…th Maister Feckenham hath set vp his issue to be prooued,* 1.1722 Anye suche gouernement in Ecclesiasticall causes, to driue the bishop from thence, to the wordes of the statute that expresse it, in all ecclesiasticall causes. Herein ye offer the bishop wrong. For by this issue betwéene them, though the Bishop in euery Prince continually alleage not ensamples in euery Ecclesiasticall cause, but nowe and then in all, nowe and then in some (for your Popes daily encroched on Prin∣ces, and at length got the m•…•…st of all,) yet hath the Bishop proued and satisfied the vertue of this issue, Any such go∣uernment in ecclesiasticall causes.

Howbeit, ye do him further wrong, to chalenge him here for leauing out any poynt of gouernment, in any Ecclesiasticall cause, that euen the statute giueth hir maiestie, that is to say, A supreme gouernement in all things and causes. Doth not the bi∣shop set downe this M. St? hath he not specified euen the same wordes oftentimes already? and doth not his parti∣cular specifications cōteine as much here also? N•…•… say you, he leaueth out the principall cause ecclesiasticall and most necessa∣rie, meete and conuenient for a supreme gouernor Ecclesiasticall. Soft M. St. stay here, or euer we demaund what this cause should be. I demaunde only now why ye say supreme gouer∣nour Ecclesiasticall? is this your honestie in handling the sta∣tute?* 1.1723 doth y^e Quéene take vpon hir to be a supreme gouernor Ecclesiasticall? or doth y^e statute giue this title to hir maiestie, A supreme gouernor Ecclesiasticall? the statute saith A supreme gouernor in all Ecclesiastical causes▪ And is there no diffe∣rēce betwene an ecclesiastical gouernor, & a gouernor in ec∣cles.* 1.1724 causes? but you vse this your false & captious speach, to make y^t people beleue the slāder y^t ye raise on hir Maiesty, as though she toke vpon hir to bean ecclesiasticall person, to be a B. and a minister of the worde & sacraments, and by hir chiefe gouernmēt ouer bishops, chalenged to be a chief or head bishop of Bishops, like vnto your Pope. And so hauing raised vp this slaūder on the Quenes maiestie & the statute,

ye chalenge the Bishop for omitting a principall ecclesiastical cause.

But what is that, you aske, forsooth iudgement (say you) de∣termining, and approuing of doctrine, which is true and good, and which is otherwise.

Here againe M. Stapl. ye speake as captiously, for, if by* 1.1725 this iudgement ye meane an authoritie aboue the doctrine of Gods worde (as all your side maintaineth) & that the word of God receyueth his authoritie of the Churches iudgement▪ (which Church ye call the Priestes) and is authenticall, bi∣cause they haue ratified it so to be, otherwise it were not true nor good: then in déede as the Bishop hath set downe no such iudgement, determining, or approuing of doctrine, ney∣ther so coulde he haue done, for the Quéenes Maiestie •…•…∣keth no such supreme gouernement vpon hir, nor such su∣preme gouernement is due to any other than to God alone, who hath by Iesus Christ his sonne already fully determi∣ned in his holy worde, what doctrine is good and true▪ And what doctrine soeuer is besides that, is neyther true nor good, whosoeuer take vpon him to iudge, determine, and ap∣proue* 1.1726 the same, be it eyther your Pope, or your Church ne∣uer so much, yea, were it an angell from heauen •…•…e must 〈◊〉〈◊〉 helde accursed. But if ye meane by iudging, determining, and approuing of doctrine, such authority as only acknowledgeth, giueth testimonie, admitteth, alloweth, setteth forth, and strengthneth the doctrine of Christes onely worde, not a•…•… ruler ouer it, but as seruant vnto it, and the reiecting or a∣bolishing of all other doctrine, against or besides that word•…•… then hath the bishop not left out this ecclesiasticall cause in the statute, though not iudging in that maner, that the ecclesia∣sticall gouernour, Bishop or Minister doth, in his sermons, or debating thereon, but for so much, as belongeth to a su∣preme gouernour. And so sayth the bishop. The gouern∣ment that the Queenes Maiestie most iustly ta∣keth on hir in ecclesiasticall causes, is the gui∣ding,

caring, prouiding, ordering, directing, and ayding the eccl. state, within hir dominions, to the furtherance, maintenance, and setting foorth of true religion, buitie and quietnesse of Christes Church, visiting, reforming, restrayning, amen∣ding, and correcting, all maner persons, with all maner errours, superstitions, heresies, schis•…•…es, abuses, offences, contempts, and enormities, in or about Christes religion, whatsoeuer.

Marke these words a little better M. Stap. and I trust you shall sée it was you, that ouershot your selfe, and lefte out good attention, béeing caried away in a cocke brayne •…•…ume, with too hastie a preiudice. And that the bishop left out héere no part of such iudgement, determination, and appro∣uing of doctrine, which is true and good, & which is other∣wise, as belongeth to suche a supreme gouernour, as groun∣deth himselfe on Gods iudgement▪ determining, and appro∣bation. What do ye thinke? is true religion no good doc∣trine with you? If it be, the bishop hath not omitted it. Can he care and prouide for it, direct and set it foorth, without iudgement? without the determining of it to be good and true? without the approbation of it? On the other side, are errours and heresies no false nor naughtie doctrine with you? if they be, then the bishop named them, and thinke ye the visiting, reforming, restrayning, amending, and cor∣recting, can be without a iudgement and determination a∣gaynst them? Then sithe he in playne spéeche ascribeth all this to the Prince, which fully answereth all this that ye call for, (if as I sayd, ye vnderstande this iudgement, deter∣mining, and approuing a right) ye shewe what a very con∣tinuall wrangler ye be, where no cause at all is giuen. But incontinent ye declare what ye meane by this iudgement of doctrine.

For what say you is more necessarie in the Churche, than

that the supreme gouernour therof, shoulde haue power in all doubtes and controuersies to decide the truthe: and to make an ende of questioning. This in the statute by master Hornes silence is not comprised.

True in déede, M. Stapl. this kinde of iudgement is not* 1.1727 mentioned by the Bishop▪ but it is moste falsly mentioned by you. For where ye say, this in the statute moste malici∣ously ye slaunder the statute, for this in the statute is neither named, comprised, or can be gathered thereon. Neither the Quéenes Maiestie claymeth or taketh on hir this kinde of iudgement. It is due onely to Gods worde, and your Pope and popishe Churche violently snatcheth it from Gods worde, chalenging it to them selues euen aboue Gods worde it selfe, although they agrée not héerein togi∣ther. For the popishe Churche will be aboue the Pope in thys poynt of iudgement, maugre his bearde, and yet they graunt the Pope to be their supreme gouernour ecclesia∣sticall. Though they will not relent to him this supreme* 1.1728 iudgement, but giue it to the Churches iudgement. And therefore they be of a contrarie iudgement to you, that say, this poynt is moste necessarie, meete, and conuenient for a supreme gouernour ecclesiastical. By which poynt you wil make your Pope either no supreme gouernour eccl. ouer you, or spoyle him of a most necessarie, meete and couenient poynt of the supreme gouernment that ye giue him, but these are your iarres, agrée as ye wil (like cats in a glitter) about thē. This popish churches or papall iudgement the Q. Maiestie taketh not vpon hir, nor the statute ascribeth it vnto hir, and therefore the B. had nought to do therewith.

Yet haue we one thing more, which after a couple of your slaūders that I answere not, but referre to your common place thereon, ye charge the Bishop once more for this o∣mission.

Agayne (say you) preaching the worde, administration of* 1.1729 the sacraments, bynding and loosing▪ are they not things and

causes eccl? How then are they heere omitted by you master Horne? or how make you the supreme gouernment in all causes to rest vpon the Queenes Maiestie, if these causes haue no place there?

What should a man vse many words with suche a brab∣ler? who though he haue nought to say, yet will neuer l•…•…e saying, of that which is nought to purpose. Ye have beene often inough, and fully inoughe, answered to this master St. if the Quéenes Maiestie taketh not these thinges vpon hir, then the B. omitteth not any thing, that hir highnesse taketh on hir, in omitting these things. Neither doth the▪ sra∣tute yéelde vnto hir the doing of them. It is but your slaun∣derous obtruding of y^e statute. It giueth a supreme gouern∣mēt in al these things to the Q. Maiestie. And so these cau∣ses haue place there, so farre as is néedful to a supreme go∣uernour But from a supreme gouernour, which consisteth in caring for, ordering, directing prouiding, guyding, mayn∣teining, & setting foorth: to the executing doing, preaching and administring of those things: is as farre from any good conclusion, as you & your matter are farre from truthe and honestie. Neuerthelesse, such is your great cōfidence in this your Counterblast, as though ye had so puft vp the falshood therof, that no man could espie it: ye lustely blowe vp the last blast of this your first booke, saying:

VVhich is nowe better I appeale to all good consciences,* 1.1730 playnly to maynteine the truthe, than dissemblingly to vp∣hold a falsshod? playnly to refuse the othe, so generally con∣ceiued: than generally to sweare to it, beeing not generally meaned▪ But nowe let vs see, how M. Horne wyll direct his proufes to the scope appoynted.

Why may not you appeale to all good consciences, M. Stap. as well as that mayden Priest of yours, that mighte bidde his maydenhead Goodmorrowe, and haue as good a conscience for your owne parte, as he for his parte had a maydenhead. And to shew your good conscience for a fare∣well

while ye shake handes, at the very parting ye lash▪ out a couple of slaunderous vntruthes togither. Ye haue not many words to speake, and therfore ye huddle them vp. You say the othe is conceiued so generally, that it giueth to the Prince your foresayde absolute power of determining all doubts and controuersies of preaching the worde, admi∣nistration of the sacraments, bynding and loosing. This lie to lappe vp all in the ende, was worthe a whetstone M. Stapl. and his fellowe that iutteth with him chéeke by chéeke, is as good as he: That the othe generally conceyued is not generally meaned. But set aside your malitious mea∣ning to wrest the othe: and the othe is playne and all one, bothe in wordes and meaning. But howe soeuer the othe were not so generally conceiued, your meaning is playnely to refuse the othe. And therefore héere in the ende for a remembraunce to all the rest, you must néedes strike vp the stroke with ala lia, and desperatly with∣out al dissembling for the, matter vpholde a falshoode with falshoodes, euen to the laste breathe.

Et fiunt nouissima illius hominis peiora prio∣ris.* 1.1731 And the latter ende of that man is worsse than the beginning.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Fol. 6. a. b. Feckenham.
• * 1.2

  Winchester Fol. Diuisiō. 1.
• * 1.3

  St. fol. 6. b.
• * 1.4

  St. fol. 7. a.
• * 1.5

  St. fol. 7. a.
• * 1.6

  Stap. 7. a.
• * 1.7

  Stap. 7. b.
• * 1.8

  Stap. 7. b.
• * 1.9

  The title of L. Bishop.
• * 1.10

  Sta. fol. 7. b.
• * 1.11

  Stap. S. •…•….
• * 1.12

  The papistes argument of B. succession.
• * 1.13

  Galat. 2.
• * 1.14

  Stap. fol. 8. •…•…
• * 1.15

  1. Tim. 4. 1. Tim. 3.
• * 1.16

  Hebr. 13.
• * 1.17

  Canon. 6.
• * 1.18

  Stap. fol. 8. b
• * 1.19

  Stap. 10. b.
• * 1.20

  The disputa∣tion at West. An. 1. Eliz.
• * 1.21

  Stap. 12. a.
• * 1.22

  Stap. 12. a.
• * 1.23

  Stap. 12. a. b
• * 1.24

  Stap. 12. b.
• * 1.25

  Stap. 13. a.
• * 1.26

  Stap. 13. a.
• * 1.27

  Psal. 95.
• * 1.28

  Stap. 13. a.
• * 1.29

  Stap. fol. 13. a.
• * 1.30

  Fol. 13. a.
• * 1.31

  Stap. fol. 13. b.
• * 1.32

  Stap. fol. 13. b.
• * 1.33

  Fol. 14. a.
• * 1.34

  Cap. 3. fol. 14. b.
• * 1.35

  Stap. fol. 14. b
• * 1.36

  Matth. 5. 2. Cor. 11.
• * 1.37

  1. Reg. 2. •…•…. Reg. 3.
• * 1.38

  Psalm. 112.
• * 1.39

  Stapl. 14. b.
• * 1.40

  Stapl. 14. b.
• * 1.41

  Act. 5.
• * 1.42

  A Papists cō∣•…•…cience.
• * 1.43

  Act. 5.
• * 1.44

  Stap. 15. a.
• * 1.45

  Num. 13.
• * 1.46

  Iob. 8.
• * 1.47

  Stap. 15. •…•….
• * 1.48

  Stap. 15 16.
• * 1.49

  Stap. 16. •…•….
• * 1.50

  Fol. 16. 17. 18 19. 20. 21.
• * 1.51

  Stap. 21. •…•….
• * 1.52

  Stap. 21. •…•….
• * 1.53

  Put to these the late trea∣sons and re∣bellions of the Papists in •…•…ng land, their hor∣rible murders and cruelties in Fraunce and Flaunders.
• * 1.54

  Stap. 21. •…•….
• * 1.55

  Stap. 21. a. We abandon not the fayth we were bap∣tised in bicause we abandon the Pope.
• * 1.56

  Stapl. 21. a. b.
• * 1.57

  The booke of K. Henrie the eyght.
• * 1.58

  The title of Defender of the Faith.
• * 1.59

  The title, de∣fender of the Faith, inferreth supremacie.
• * 1.60

  The Papistes obiection of apparell.
• * 1.61

  St. fol. 21. b.
• * 1.62

  Stap. 22. •…•…. Magdeb. p•…•…ef. cent. 7.
• * 1.63

  The Magde. burgen•…•…es wrested.
• * 1.64

  Histo. Magde. pref. cent. 7.
• * 1.65

  The tyrannie of Heraclius.
• * 1.66

  The godly su∣preme gouern∣ment of Con∣stanti•…•…us Po∣gonotus.
• * 1.67

  St. Fol. 22. a
• * 1.68

  Contra a•…•…tic. Louani. tom. 2
• * 1.69

  Luther wre∣sted.
• * 1.70

  Stap. fol. 22. a
• * 1.71

  Andr Modre. de Eccl. li. 1. ca. 10.
• * 1.72

  St. fol. 22. b.
• * 1.73

  Stap. 23. a. b.
• * 1.74

  Stap. 24. a.
• * 1.75

  The Popes goodnesse. Stap. fol. 24.
• * 1.76

  The Pope cal∣led God. Extrau. Ioh. 22 cum inter in glosia. Cardinalis Zirabella.
• * 1.77

  Stap. 24. 2
• * 1.78

  The Popes patent.
• * 1.79

  The Vnitie that the Pope maketh.
• * 1.80

  Stapl. 24. •…•….
• * 1.81

  Stapl. 24. a.
• * 1.82

  Hallus in vita Edvv. 4.
• * 1.83

  Apoc. 7. How the Pope can in deede make sainctes and martyrs.
• * 1.84

  Stap. 24. a.
• * 1.85

  Stapl. 24. a.
• * 1.86

  Stapl. 24. a.
• * 1.87

  The Popes reigne in En∣glande.
• * 1.88

  Stap. 24. b.
• * 1.89

  Stap. 24. b.
• * 1.90

  Ecclesiasticall authoritie, and authoritie o∣uer eccl. mat∣ters are not all one.
• * 1.91

  Stap. 24. b.
• * 1.92

  St. 24. b. 25. a
• * 1.93

  The commo∣ditie that we haue of Pa∣pists.
• * 1.94

  Stap. 25. a. b. 26. a. b.
• * 1.95

  How farre the Papists are frō mercy and cō∣sideration.
• * 1.96

  A difference betweene a Pap•…•…st and a Protestant.
• * 1.97

  A supreme gouernour.
• * 1.98

  Stapl. 2•…•…. b.
• * 1.99

  Stapl. 28. b.
• * 1.100

  Stapl. 23. b.
• * 1.101

  Stapl. 28. b.
• * 1.102

  Stapl. 28. b. & 29. a.
• * 1.103

  Fol. 29. a. b.
• * 1.104

  The Papists make the go∣uernment of christian prin∣ces, no better than the Turkes go∣uernment.
• * 1.105

  Deut. 13. 17. Rom. 13. 1. Tim. 3.
• * 1.106

  Stap. 29. b.
• * 1.107

  Gal. 3.
• * 1.108

  Stap. 29. b.
• * 1.109

  Stap. 22. b.
• * 1.110

  Stap. 29. b.
• * 1.111

  Heathen prin∣ces care and gouernment tended to re∣ligion.
• * 1.112

  Aristot. Polye. 3. ca. 10. Cap. 11.
• * 1.113

  Daniel. 1.
• * 1.114

  Daniel. 6.
• * 1.115

  The Papistes more iniurious to Christ an Princes than to Heathen.
• * 1.116

  Iohannes de Parisi•…•…s de po∣•…•…estate reg. & p•…•…. ca. 18.
• * 1.117

  1. Tim. 1.
• * 1.118

  •…•…useb. lib. •…•…. de vit. Const.
• * 1.119

  Concil Con∣stantin. 1.
• * 1.120

  Aug. epist. 48.
• * 1.121

  Concil. Tola. 3
• * 1.122

  Stap. 30. a.
• * 1.123

  The papistes shift that prin∣ces are the cler∣gies aduocates.
• * 1.124

  Dantes Ale∣gherius. li. 3.
• * 1.125

  Lupold. de Babenb. ca. 15.
• * 1.126

  Stap 30. a.
• * 1.127

  Though the Prince be not an eccl. person, yet hath he su∣premacie in eccl. causes.
• * 1.128

  Stap. 30. b.
• * 1.129

  Winchester. fol. 96. 97.
• * 1.130

  Stapl. 30. b.
• * 1.131

  Fol. 30. b.
• * 1.132

  Stap. fol. 30. b.
• * 1.133

  Sta. fol. 30. b.
• * 1.134

  Supra Diuis. 4. fol. 65.
• * 1.135

  Supra fol. 80.
• * 1.136

  Fol. 31. •…•….
• * 1.137

  Winchester, Fol. 31. b. 32. a
• * 1.138

  Cap. 5. fol. 32. a. b.
• * 1.139

  Stapl. 32.
• * 1.140

  Fol 32. b.
• * 1.141

  Stapl. 32. b.
• * 1.142

  Stap. 32. b.
• * 1.143

  Stap. 32. b.
• * 1.144

  Stap. 32. b.
• * 1.145

  Fol. 34. •…•….
• * 1.146

  The issue and state of the question be∣tvveene the B. and M. Feck.
• * 1.147

  Fol. 34. b.
• * 1.148

  Three kindes of ignorance▪
• * 1.149

  Stap. 35. •…•….
• * 1.150

  Supr▪ •…•…o. 3. a. b
• * 1.151

  Supra. fol. 4.
• * 1.152

  Stap. 36. a.
• * 1.153

  Stap. 36. a.
• * 1.154

  Stap. 36. a
• * 1.155

  In erroribus Parisi•…•… con∣demna•…•…s.
• * 1.156

  Ibidem.
• * 1.157

  Ibidem.
• * 1.158

  Tho. Aquin. super Tit. ca. 3
• * 1.159

  Sola fide.
• * 1.160

  Executiones & manifesta∣tiones.
• * 1.161

  Stap. 36. a
• * 1.162

  Fol. 36. a.
• * 1.163

  Stap. 36. a.
• * 1.164

  Contra errores Grecorum.
• * 1.165

  Apoc. 18.
• * 1.166

  Stap. 37. b.
• * 1.167

  Stap. 35. b.
• * 1.168

  Stap 37. b.
• * 1.169

  Stap. 38. a.
• * 1.170

  Stap. 38. b.
• * 1.171

  The Louanists bost they haue now foūd out the Popes title to be lure di∣uino.
• * 1.172

  Stapl. 38. b.
• * 1.173

  Iohn. 10.
• * 1.174

  Gal. 1.
• * 1.175

  Hieronimus super Mat. Ambrosius li. 1 de officijs. Aug. contra Faustum li. 23
• * 1.176

  Sap. 1.
• * 1.177

  Stapl. 39. •…•….
• * 1.178

  Stapl. Cap. 7. fo. 39. b. 40. a
• * 1.179

  Stapl. ca. 8.
• * 1.180

  Stapl. 40. b.
• * 1.181

  Stap. 40. b.
• * 1.182

  Deut. 17.
• * 1.183

  Stapl. 40. b.
• * 1.184

  Stapl. 40. b.
• * 1.185

  Stap. 41. •…•….
• * 1.186

  Deut. 17.
• * 1.187

  Stap. 40. b.
• * 1.188

  How subtilly the Papistes graunt princes to studie in Gods word.
• * 1.189

  Deut. 17.
• * 1.190

  Vatablus in Deut. 17.
• * 1.191

  Stapl. 41. a.
• * 1.192

  In what sense the popishe Church may be graunted Catholicke.
• * 1.193

  Stapl. 41. a.
• * 1.194

  Psalm. 1. 2.
• * 1.195

  Stap. 41. •…•…
• * 1.196

  Stapl. 41. b.
• * 1.197

  Math. 13.
• * 1.198

  Stap. 41 b.
• * 1.199

  Stap. 41. b.
• * 1.200

  Deut. 17.
• * 1.201

  Lyra in Deut. 17.
• * 1.202

  1. Reg. 4.
• * 1.203

  The highe priest and the chiefe iudge mentioned Deut. 17. were two distinct persons.
• * 1.204

  Iohn 18.
• * 1.205

  Stap. 41. b
• * 1.206

  Stapl. 41. b.
• * 1.207

  Deut. 17.
• * 1.208

  Lyra in Deut. •…•…7.
• * 1.209

  Stap. 42. a.
• * 1.210

  Fol. 42. a.
• * 1.211

  Stap. 42. a.
• * 1.212

  Stap. 42. b.
• * 1.213

  Deut. 17.
• * 1.214

  St. fol. 42. b
• * 1.215

  Fol. 42. a
• * 1.216

  Lyra in Deute. 17.
• * 1.217

  Sta. 42. b
• * 1.218

  Supra. 40. b
• * 1.219

  •…•…ol. 42. b
• * 1.220

  Chap. 9.
• * 1.221

  Fol. 43. b
• * 1.222

  Stap. 42. b & 43. a
• * 1.223

  Stap. 43. a.
• * 1.224

  Stap. 43. a.
• * 1.225

  Stap. 43. a.
• * 1.226

  Stapl. 43. •…•…
• * 1.227

  Stap. 43. a.
• * 1.228

  2. Pet. •…•….
• * 1.229

  Stap. 43. a.
• * 1.230

  2. Pet. •…•….
• * 1.231

  Stap. 43. a.
• * 1.232

  Stap. 43. a. b
• * 1.233

  Wherein ma∣ster Stapleton excelleth al the Lou•…•…in write•…•…▪
• * 1.234

  Stap. 43. •…•….
• * 1.235

  Stap. 43. b.
• * 1.236

  The example of Moses and the Papistes shift•…•… about it.
• * 1.237

  Stap. 43. b.
• * 1.238

  Stap. 43. b.
• * 1.239

  Stap. 43. b.
• * 1.240

  Deut. 34.
• * 1.241

  Sta. 44. a
• * 1.242

  Deuter. 18.
• * 1.243

  Act. 3. &. 7.
• * 1.244

  Act. 7.
• * 1.245

  1. Reg. 19. Iudic. 4.
• * 1.246

  A difference in excellēt Prin∣c•…•… betweene their extraor∣d•…•… giftes and ordinarie authoritie.
• * 1.247

  Moyses a fi∣gure of Christ▪ not Christe a figure of Mo∣ses
• * 1.248

  Deut. 17.
• * 1.249

  Sta. 44. b.
• * 1.250

  How the Pa∣pistes order the examples of the Scripture.
• * 1.251

  1. Cor. 10.
• * 1.252

  Stap. 44. b.
• * 1.253

  Stap. 44. b.
• * 1.254

  The rule Deu. 17. that the Papists would haue all the question ruled by, and how farre it stret∣ched.
• * 1.255

  Ioh. 19.
• * 1.256

  Stap. 45. •…•….
• * 1.257

  45. •…•…. The example of Iosue his supreme go∣uernment.
• * 1.258

  Cap. 10. Fol. 46. b.
• * 1.259

  Stap. 46. b.
• * 1.260

  Num. 27.
• * 1.261

  Lyra in Num. 27.
• * 1.262

  Stap. 46. b.
• * 1.263

  Stap. 46. b.
• * 1.264

  The Princes asking councel of the clergie embarres not his authoritie ouer them.
• * 1.265

  Stap 45. b.
• * 1.266

  Deut. 17.
• * 1.267

  Sta. 45. b.
• * 1.268

  Stap. 46. a.
• * 1.269

  Stap. 46. •…•….
• * 1.270

  Stap. 46. •…•….
• * 1.271

  Stap. 46. b.
• * 1.272

  Lyra.
• * 1.273

  Losue. 8.
• * 1.274

  Iosue. 5.
• * 1.275

  Iosue. 3.
• * 1.276

  Iosue. 4.
• * 1.277

  Cap. 8.
• * 1.278

  Cap. 10.
• * 1.279

  The example of King Da∣uids supreme gouernment in eccl. causes.
• * 1.280

  Cap. 11. Fol. 47. a.
• * 1.281

  Stap. 47. a.
• * 1.282

  The Princes supreme go∣uernment in ecel matters not preiudi∣cial to the ec∣cle. authoritie.
• * 1.283

  Stap. 47. a.
• * 1.284

  An vneuen cōparison be∣tweene the do∣ings of king Dauid, and Q. Mary.
• * 1.285

  Howe the Po∣pish priestes abused queene Mary.
• * 1.286

  Stap. 47. a. The Papistes shift agaynst the example of king Dauids supremacie, bicause he was a Prophet.
• * 1.287

  Stap. 47. •…•….
• * 1.288

  Stap. 47. a.
• * 1.289

  1. Par. 24.
• * 1.290

  Stap. 47. a.
• * 1.291

  1. Par. 24.
• * 1.292

  1. Par. 23.
• * 1.293

  It abaseth not the princes su∣preme gouern∣ment, to do all things accor∣to Gods com∣maundement.
• * 1.294

  Stap. 47. b.
• * 1.295

  The keeping of the rites & orders appoyn ted, is not a∣gaynst, but cō∣firmeth the princes supre∣macie.
• * 1.296

  The Queene appoynteth no new or st•…•…āge order in reli∣gion.
• * 1.297

  Stap. 47. b.
• * 1.298

  Stap. 47. b
• * 1.299

  It deba•…•…reth not the prin∣ces suprema∣cie, that the in∣feriour mini∣sters be vnder their bishops.
• * 1.300

  Stap. 48. a.
• * 1.301

  Stap. 48.
• * 1.302

  The papistes shiftes from Priestes to Peophets, and from Prophets to Priests, for the Popes pri∣macie.
• * 1.303

  How highely Pop•…•…sh priests esteeme of thē solues.
• * 1.304

  Deut. 13.
• * 1.305

  3. Reg. 22. 3. Reg. 18. Math. 7.
• * 1.306

  1. Pap. 25.
• * 1.307

  1. Par. 23.
• * 1.308

  1. Par. 24.
• * 1.309

  1. Par. 25.
• * 1.310

  1. Par. 26.
• * 1.311

  Both the chiefe prophets and cheife priestes vnder the ap∣poyntment of the king.
• * 1.312

  2. Par. 29.
• * 1.313

  Stap. 48. a.
• * 1.314

  Carolus Mag∣nus, an vnlike match to Da∣uid.
• * 1.315

  Stap. 48▪
• * 1.316

  The lawe of King •…•…uo.
• * 1.317

  Priuileges of Princes, to the clergie well or yll vsed.
• * 1.318

  The Pope and his prelates like the Iuy.
• * 1.319

  Stap. 48. b.
• * 1.320

  Stap. 49. a.
• * 1.321

  The Queenes Ma estie by the Papists shame∣fully 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.322

  Win. Pag. 9. a.
• * 1.323

  Cap. 12.
• * 1.324

  Stap. 48. b. The example of the supreme gouernment of K. Salomon.
• * 1.325

  Salomons de∣deposing the high priest.
• * 1.326

  Stap. 48. b
• * 1.327

  Salomons ex∣ample depo∣sing Ab•…•…athar applied by the papists to Queene M•…•…∣rie deposing the archbi∣shop Cran.
• * 1.328

  Fol. 44. b 45 b. 47. a. 48. b
• * 1.329

  The difference betwene Q. Maries and king Salomōs doings.
• * 1.330

  Stap. 49. •…•….
• * 1.331

  Stap. 49. •…•….
• * 1.332

  Stap. 49. a.
• * 1.333

  Master Stap. question and dilemma.
• * 1.334

  Stap. 49. a.
• * 1.335

  The difference of the phrase for the princes sacrificing and the princes de posing Abia∣that.
• * 1.336

  The question and the dilem∣ma returned on the papists.
• * 1.337

  Sup. fol. 217. a
• * 1.338

  Stap. 4 9. •…•….
• * 1.339

  The highest priest a traytor
• * 1.340

  A traytor.
• * 1.341

  The Bishop of Rome a tray∣tor to the •…•…m∣peror of Rome
• * 1.342

  Stap. 4 9. a.
• * 1.343

  3. Reg. 2.
• * 1.344

  Stap. 4 9 a.
• * 1.345

  The ministerie and executing of Gods sen∣tence debarreth not the princes supremacie.
• * 1.346

  Stap. 49. •…•….
• * 1.347

  The issue 〈◊〉〈◊〉 question.
• * 1.348

  Master Stap. graunteth the P•…•…ince to be chiefe ruler in some ecclesi∣asticall causes.
• * 1.349

  What the au∣tho•…•…tie of de∣p•…•…sing the Pope implieth.
• * 1.350

  A difference betweene the chiefe▪ ruler of ecclesiasticall causes and the chiefe doer of them.
• * 1.351

  The example of king Iosa∣phats supreme gouernment.
• * 1.352

  Cap 13. Sta. 50. a.
• * 1.353

  Sta. 50. a.
• * 1.354

  Wherein chri∣stian Princes must go be∣yond•…•… k•…•…ng 〈◊〉〈◊〉 hat.
• * 1.355

  2. Par. 20.
• * 1.356

  S•…•…a. 50 a. Iosaphat direc ted eccl•…•…siasti∣cal matters not by the com∣mandement but by the ad∣uise of the prests.
• * 1.357

  Sta. 50. a.
• * 1.358

  Sta 50. a.
• * 1.359

  Sta. 50. a.
• * 1.360

  Sta. 50. a.
• * 1.361

  Psalm 2.
• * 1.362

  Sta. 50 a.
• * 1.363

  In cle. si Rom. N 22. de pre∣bendis.
• * 1.364

  Supra. 205. a.
• * 1.365

  Stap. 50. a. b.
• * 1.366

  Sta. 50. b.
• * 1.367

  Stap. 50. b.
• * 1.368

  How contemp tuously the pa∣pistes esteeme of the exam∣ples of the scrip¦tures.
• * 1.369

  2. Par. 17. Preachers sent of the prince
• * 1.370

  Lyra in 2. pa∣tal. 17.
• * 1.371

  The princes progresse a∣bout reli∣gion.
• * 1.372

  Lyra in 2. paral. 19.
• * 1.373

  Vatablus.
• * 1.374

  Lyra.
• * 1.375

  Iustices of the peace.
• * 1.376

  Lyra.
• * 1.377

  Stap. 50. b.
• * 1.378

  S•…•…apl 51. •…•….
• * 1.379

  The princes forme and or∣der in procee∣ding.
• * 1.380

  Stapl. 51. •…•….
• * 1.381

  Stap. 51. •…•….
• * 1.382

  Religion only proceedeth frō God, the prea∣ching procee∣deth from the ministers, the direction and ordering from the Prince.
• * 1.383

  Stapl. 50. b.
• * 1.384

  The Papistes denie not only the Princes go uernment of ecclesiasticall matters, but also of ecclesi∣astical persons.
• * 1.385

  Supra pa 47. •…•…
• * 1.386

  Stapl. 5•…•… •…•….
• * 1.387

  King Iosaphat did not deale sclenderly in ecclesiasticall matters but as his chiefest charge.
• * 1.388

  2. Paral. 19.
• * 1.389

  Lyra in 2. Pa∣ral. 19.
• * 1.390

  Nothing ec∣clesiasticall or temporal, exē∣pted from the chief ouersight of the Prince no not of the cases, Deut. 17. that the Papists chiefly boast vppon.
• * 1.391

  Stap. 51. •…•….
• * 1.392

  The iniūctiō•…•… of princes for the obseruatiō of ecclesiastical matters and threates of dis∣pleasure for the breache of them.
• * 1.393

  Lyra in 2. Pa∣•…•…al. 19.
• * 1.394

  The king iudged ecclesi∣asticall causes, in that his de∣bi••••e iudged them.
• * 1.395

  2. Paral. 19.
• * 1.396

  Stap 51. b.
• * 1.397

  Diuine mat∣ters not exclu∣ded from the kings office.
• * 1.398

  The priest the princes com∣missioner.
• * 1.399

  2. Paral. 17.
• * 1.400

  Stap. 51. a.
• * 1.401

  Lyra in 2. Paral. 19.
• * 1.402

  Vatablus.
• * 1.403

  Sta. 50. a.
• * 1.404

  The prince commandeth the Priest.
• * 1.405

  Fol. 52. a. The example of king •…•…ze∣chias supreme gouernment in ecclesiastical causes. 4. Reg. 18. 2. Pat. 29.
• * 1.406

  Stapletoa Caput. 14. Fol. 52. b.
• * 1.407

  Lyra.
• * 1.408

  Ecclesiasticall matters by K. Izechias new∣ly established.
• * 1.409

  To be readie and seruiceable to fulfill Gods determination, debarreth not the Princes su∣preme go∣uernment.
• * 1.410

  Ezechias exe∣cuted Gods commaunde∣ment, and the clergie the cō∣maundement of Ezechias
• * 1.411

  Lyra in 2. Par. 29.
• * 1.412

  2. Par. 29.
• * 1.413

  Lyra in 2. Par. 29.
• * 1.414

  Lyra.
• * 1.415

  Iniunxi•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.416

  Praecepit reno∣uationem di∣uini cultus.
• * 1.417

  Imagines Ido∣lolatriae mul∣tas.
• * 1.418

  The popishe fond destincti∣on of •…•…mage and Idoll.
• * 1.419

  4. Reg. 18.
• * 1.420

  The Princes predecessors disposing, de∣barreth not his supreme gouernment.
• * 1.421

  The subiecti∣on to Gods commaunde∣ment, embar∣reth not the Princes su∣preme go∣uernment.
• * 1.422

  The doing it by the handes of the prophets or any other, embarreth not the Princes su∣preme go∣uernment.
• * 1.423

  Stap 53. •…•….
• * 1.424

  The asking counsell of o∣thers, debarieth not the Princes supreme au∣thoritie in the doing.
• * 1.425

  2. pa•…•…al. 30.
• * 1.426

  Lyra in. 2. Par 30.
• * 1.427

  S•…•…ap 53. •…•….
• * 1.428

  Ezechias did many things neuer so done before.
• * 1.429

  •…•…. Pa•…•…. 30.
• * 1.430

  Lyra in. 2. Paral. 30.
• * 1.431

  Lyra in. •…•…. Paral. 3•…•….
• * 1.432

  2. paral. 31.
• * 1.433

  The commen∣dation and ap∣plication of K. Ezechias.
• * 1.434

  Stap 59. a.
• * 1.435

  A proper shif∣ting answere, muche vsed by M. St in these examples.
• * 1.436

  Supra. 50. b.
• * 1.437

  Stap. 53. a.
• * 1.438

  Daniel. 7. Apoc. 12.
• * 1.439

  Gal. 1.
• * 1.440

  The name of ministers.
• * 1.441

  1. Cor. 4.
• * 1.442

  3. Reg. 18.
• * 1.443

  Daniel. 14.
• * 1.444

  Stapl. 53. a.
• * 1.445

  The popish priestes now not like the true prophetes
• * 1.446

  The Papistes shifte from Priests to Pro∣phetes.
• * 1.447

  Fol 53. a. The example of King Iosias his supreme gouernmēt in ecclesiasticall causes.
• * 1.448

  Sta. Caput. 15.
• * 1.449

  Stapl. 53. a. b.
• * 1.450

  4. Reg. 23. 2. Par. 34. & 35.
• * 1.451

  Lyr•…•….
• * 1.452

  Iosias trauaile by his kingly authoritie.
• * 1.453

  Stap. 53. a. b.
• * 1.454

  The trauailes of good ca∣tholike prin∣ces.
• * 1.455

  Whether we or the Papists let vp Idols.
• * 1.456

  Sta. 50 a.
• * 1.457

  How the po∣pish prela•…•…s vsed christian Princes.
• * 1.458

  Howe the Q. Highnes follo with the en∣sample of Io∣sias.
• * 1.459

  4. Reg. 23. Monkes and Nunnes celles pulled downe.
• * 1.460

  Sta. 53 b.
• * 1.461

  Stap. 53. b.
• * 1.462

  Master Stap. stragleth from the marke, and calleth on the Bishop to kepe him to the marke.
• * 1.463

  The issue in question be∣tvvene the Bi∣shop and ma∣ster Fecknam. Sup. •…•…ol. 136. a
• * 1.464

  M. Stap. settes vp. ix▪ nevve markes both differing from M. Feck. and the B•…•…shops issue, and also from his ovvne former marks, and yet cryes o•…•…t on the B. for straying from the question.
• * 1.465

  The Papistes play like the Lapvving.
• * 1.466

  The issue.
• * 1.467

  Stapl. 53. b. M. Stapletons first fal•…•… marke.
• * 1.468

  The kings ag∣nising the high Priest in the old testament, inferreth not that they ag∣nised him their •…•…npreme go∣uernour.
• * 1.469

  St. fol. 53. b.
• * 1.470

  St. fol. 53. b. M. St. second false marke.
• * 1.471

  The confer∣ring of the Q Maiesties do∣ing, with these auncient and godly kings.
• * 1.472

  The Papistes vaunt of 1000 yeares anti∣quitie.
• * 1.473

  The Papistes dare not stretch their crake of antiquitie to Christe, or to 1500. yeare•…•… and vpvvarde.
• * 1.474

  Galat. 1.
• * 1.475

  Stap. 54. a. M. Stap. thirde false marke.
• * 1.476

  In the proofe of the supreme gouernment, the proofe of euery particu∣ler fact is not necessarie.
• * 1.477

  The issue be∣tweene the B. and M. Feck.
• * 1.478

  The taking an othe.
• * 1.479

  The othe to the Pope.
• * 1.480

  The high priest in the olde law did not as the pope doth novv.
• * 1.481

  The king•…•… in the olde lawe charged their clergy on their priesthood for eccl. matters.
• * 1.482

  Sta. 54 •…•….
• * 1.483

  Stap. 54. •…•…. M. St. fourth false marke.
• * 1.484

  The Prince a∣bandoneth not godly bishops, though he abā don the Pope.
• * 1.485

  The abando∣ning of the Popes coun∣cels.
• * 1.486

  Esay. 8.
• * 1.487

  Psal. 2.
• * 1.488

  Howe general the Popes coū cels are.
• * 1.489

  Stapl. 54. a.
• * 1.490

  The acte of parliamēt ad∣mitteth the g•…•…rall coūn∣cels.
• * 1.491

  The worde of god, the rule of all true general Councels.
• * 1.492

  Tripartit. hist. lib. 2. cap. 5. Theodoret.
• * 1.493

  Athanasius in epistola ad E∣pictetum Co∣rynthi episco∣pum.
• * 1.494

  Contra maxi∣minum Aria∣nū li. 3. ca. 13.
• * 1.495

  In psalm. 92.
• * 1.496

  Epistola. 3. ad Fortunatianū.
• * 1.497

  Epistola. 112. ad Paulinā de videndo Deo.
• * 1.498

  In mat. ca. 24. Homil. 49.
• * 1.499

  In Sermone de baptismo Christi.
• * 1.500

  Ad reginas de recta fide.
• * 1.501

  Thom. Aqui∣nas in secunda secundae Que∣stione 1. Arti•…•…. 10.
• * 1.502

  Alphons. de Castro, aduer∣sus heres. li. 1. cap. 8.
• * 1.503

  2. Cor. 6.
• * 1.504

  Ferus in Mat∣th. 13.
• * 1.505

  Ferus in Mat∣th. 11.
• * 1.506

  •…•…. Pet. •…•….
• * 1.507

  Stapl. 54. a.
• * 1.508

  Psalm. 25.
• * 1.509

  Esayas. 33.
• * 1.510

  Heretikes are to be cōuinced by the Scrip∣ture.
• * 1.511

  Chryso. in o∣pere imperf. hom. 49.
• * 1.512

  Contra maxi∣mum 〈◊〉〈◊〉. lib. 13. ca. 14.
• * 1.513

  Psal. 118.
• * 1.514

  The errours of councels when they swerued from the Scripture.
• * 1.515

  Carthagi∣nense. 1.
• * 1.516

  Concil. Lao∣dice•…•…um.
• * 1.517

  Concil. Nice∣nu•…•…. 1.
• * 1.518

  Zozom lib. 3. cap. 11.
• * 1.519

  A souldiours life alow•…•…ble among Chri∣stians.
• * 1.520

  Concil. Calc•…•…∣don.
• * 1.521

  Hebr. 13. 1. Cor. 7.
• * 1.522

  Panormitanu•…•… de electione cap. signifi∣casti.
• * 1.523

  Aug. contr. Do natist. li. 3. cap. 4.
• * 1.524

  Math. 10.
• * 1.525

  Act. 25.
• * 1.526

  Examples of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 nough•…•…e coū∣c•…•…ls.
• * 1.527

  Psal. 25.
• * 1.528

  Psal 115.
• * 1.529

  Rom. 3.
• * 1.530

  Esay. 8.
• * 1.531

  Ambrosius.
• * 1.532

  De•…•…r. Gratiani Can S•…•… •…•…s q•…•… p•…•…aest. 11 q •…•…
• * 1.533

  Pano•…•….
• * 1.534

  A lay m•…•…n al∣leaging 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 before a gene∣•…•…all councel.
• * 1.535

  Iohn Gerson.
• * 1.536

  Innocentius 3. C. Cum vene. de except.
• * 1.537

  Sta. 54 a.
• * 1.538

  The godly kings in the old testament admitted no foraigne Pre∣lates autho∣ritie.
• * 1.539

  Sta. 54. a.
• * 1.540

  The Popes power fo∣raygne.
• * 1.541

  Sta. 54 a.
• * 1.542

  Stap. 54 a.
• * 1.543

  Stap. 54 a.
• * 1.544

  Greg. Nazian.
• * 1.545

  The Popes Councels not generall.
• * 1.546

  True generall Councels, are not foraigne power to this or any Chri∣stian realme, nor excluded by the Act of Parliament.
• * 1.547

  St. 54. b. Master Stap. fifte false mark
• * 1.548

  More lay men among the Pa pists than a∣mong vs en∣ioy ecclesiasti∣call liuings.
• * 1.549

  Ad Eugenium 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.550

  In sermon•…•… 6. ad Psalm. 91.
• * 1.551

  Raulinus in quadragesi∣mali. Sermo∣ne. 22.
• * 1.552

  The tale of him that gotte a benefice of the Pope in the Diuels name.
• * 1.553

  8. Q. 1. C. Ve•…•…cor. 2. Q. 7. C. Secuti. 2. Q. 7. Au∣gust. 2. Q. 7. No•…•… omnis.
• * 1.554

  Mōks in times past were but •…•…ay.
• * 1.555

  The popishe priests and Bi∣shops were •…•…ay.
• * 1.556

  Bernardus Glossator in ca. St clericus.
• * 1.557

  Erasm. Ch•…•…ad.
• * 1.558

  Encom. moriae.
• * 1.559

  Math. 5.
• * 1.560

  Stapl. 54. b. The sixt false marke of M. Stapl.
• * 1.561

  Florobellus de principal▪ rom. eccl. ex bald. 6. q. 1. c. pasto∣ralis.
• * 1.562

  Stapl. 54. b. M. Staplet. 7. false marke.
• * 1.563

  A Bishops iu∣risdiction.
• * 1.564

  Preaching not simplie for∣bidden to preachers.
• * 1.565

  Staplet. 8. fal•…•…e marke. Stapl 54 b.
• * 1.566

  Tenthes and First fruites to the Prince.
• * 1.567

  Tenths & First fruites far bet∣ter bestowed on the Prince than on the Pope.
• * 1.568

  The Papists ar gumēt of •…•…o∣sephes immu∣nitie to the E∣giptian priest•…•…. Gen. 47.
• * 1.569

  The affinitie betweene the Popish priests, and the Egip∣tian priests.
• * 1.570

  G•…•…ialium Dierum. li. 2. cap 8.
• * 1.571

  In Epithetis textorn.
• * 1.572

  Diodorus Si∣culus de rebus antiquis. li. 4. cap. 1.
• * 1.573

  M. S•…•…a. Ninth false marke.
• * 1.574

  St•…•…p. 54. b.
• * 1.575

  The title of supreme head.
• * 1.576

  The oth of the Supremaci•…•….
• * 1.577

  Tendring the othe.
• * 1.578

  Charging the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 with the othe.
• * 1.579

  A woman Prince.
• * 1.580

  Master Feck. demaund satis∣fied in euery one of the foresayde ex∣amples.
• * 1.581

  St. fol. 55. a.
• * 1.582

  The Papistes curtesie.
• * 1.583

  Robin Hood & Litle Iohn.
• * 1.584

  Fol. 55. a. b.
• * 1.585

  Stapleton. The. 16. chap.
• * 1.586

  Stap. 56. a.
• * 1.587

  Master Stap. obiection of witte.
• * 1.588

  Stap. 56. a.
• * 1.589

  M. St. quarels at the Bishops testimonies out of the new testament.
• * 1.590

  Sta. 56. b.
• * 1.591

  Stap. 56. b.
• * 1.592

  M. Feck. secret heresies.
• * 1.593

  Math. 9. Ierem. 17.
• * 1.594

  Psal. 93.
• * 1.595

  Stap. 56. b.
• * 1.596

  Sta. 56. b.
• * 1.597

  Supra. 55 a.
• * 1.598

  The Heresies that the papists falsly charge vs withall. August & E∣piph. de haeres. Hier. contra Iouiniam. Ambr. Li. 10. Epi. 18. Ambros. serm. 91.
• * 1.599

  Euth in Pa∣nopl. tit. 33.
• * 1.600

  Euth. Zigab. in Paul. tit. 21.
• * 1.601

  Hieron. cōtra Vig. Ionas Episco∣pus Au•…•…elian contra Claud.
• * 1.602

  Futh in Pa∣nopl. Tit. 22. August. lib. 1. cont. 2. Epist. Pela. ad Bon if. cap. 13. Cyril. lib. 6. cōt. Iulian.
• * 1.603

  August. cōt. 2. Epist P•…•…l. ca. 4
• * 1.604

  Caluine in his Institutions ca. 18. In fine Argentorati impress. Anno. 1545.
• * 1.605

  Epiph. & Phi∣last. de Haeres▪ Clemens li. 3. recog. Irenaeus Li. 1. cap. 20.
• * 1.606

  The Papistes deface the glo∣rie of Christ as ill as Arius or Aerius.
• * 1.607

  Difference be∣twene Priest and Bishop.
• * 1.608

  Hieronimus ad Titum. Dist. 93. can. Olim idem:
• * 1.609

  Lib. 4. Dist. 24. 1.
• * 1.610

  1. Tim. 3.
• * 1.611

  Durandus de sancto Porti•…•…∣no in lib. 4. Sent. Dist. 24. Q. 6.
• * 1.612

  Institu•…•…o do∣ct. Christi de •…•…acr. or dinis fol. 196.
• * 1.613

  Summa ange∣lica L. ordo.
• * 1.614

  The Papistes controuersie about their holy orders.
• * 1.615

  Difference be∣tvvene fasting & not fasting.
• * 1.616

  Fuseb eccl. hist. li. 5. ca. 18
• * 1.617

  Eccl. histor. lib. 5. cap. 24.
• * 1.618

  Tripartit. hist. lib. 9. cap. 38.
• * 1.619

  Fonre thinges to be noted in the fastings of the auncient Church.
• * 1.620

  Trip. Hist. li. 1 ca. 10.
• * 1.621

  Hieron. ad Nepotianum.
• * 1.622

  The Popishe chief fastest.
• * 1.623

  Chavvcer in the Monkes Prologue.
• * 1.624

  Lib. 7 de 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 2. h•…•…r.
• * 1.625

  M. St. belieth Aerius.
• * 1.626

  The Church of Englande allovveth fa∣sting.
• * 1.627

  Saterday fast.
• * 1.628

  Aug. Epi. 83.
• * 1.629

  Rom. 14.
• * 1.630

  The Churche of Rome ap∣poynted not lawes for fa∣sting to other Churches
• * 1.631

  Fridayes and Saterdayes fasts no more than other dayes by the scripture.
• * 1.632

  No difference of merite in fasting or not fasting.
• * 1.633

  Ferus in Math. Cap. 9.
• * 1.634

  The Papistes confesse they make greater conscience on mans decrees thā g•…•…ds word
• * 1.635

  Iudging of the faster, or not faster.
• * 1.636

  The work, and the trust in the worke.
• * 1.637

  Why Christ prescribed not orders in these things.
• * 1.638

  The Papistes confesse them selues to bee Phariseys.
• * 1.639

  Ferus in ca. 12. Math.
• * 1.640

  Misiudging in fasting.
• * 1.641

  The Popishe righteousnesse worse than the Phariseys. Outwarde things. Two things commaunded in keeping the Sabaoth. Two things in euery precept the heart & the outward work Ecclesiasticall constitutions. Apparell.
• * 1.642

  The Papists abuse in all these things.
• * 1.643

  Sacrifice for the deade.
• * 1.644

  Aerius againe belyed.
• * 1.645

  Hypognost. lib. 5.
• * 1.646

  Saint August. knevv not of any purging place for the deade.
• * 1.647

  Marke. 9.
• * 1.648

  Luke. 16.
• * 1.649

  De verbis Apo∣stoli Serm. 18.
• * 1.650

  De vanitate s•…•…culi.
• * 1.651

  Origens error of the damned.
• * 1.652

  The Pope de∣liuereth out of hell.
• * 1.653

  The soules in heauen neede no prayer for deliuerie.
• * 1.654

  The Grecians and Egyptians errours about the deade.
• * 1.655

  Epiph. in lib. Anachoratus.
• * 1.656

  Ambro. in Rom. 1. August. de ciu. dei. Iud. Epist. August. de mi∣rabilibus sacrae script. lib. 1. Cap vlt. 1. Cor. 15.
• * 1.657

  August. Enchi. ad Laurent.
• * 1.658

  Theophil. in •…•…or.
• * 1.659

  The godly fa∣thers errors a∣bout the dead.
• * 1.660

  Epiphanius defectes.
• * 1.661

  The drift of Aerius.
• * 1.662

  The auncient fathers memo∣ries for the dead were but than∣kes giuing and prayses.
• * 1.663

  Whie they praysed God for the dead.
• * 1.664

  Epiph cont. Haer. lib. 3. to 1. Haer. 75.
• * 1.665

  In Epist▪ ad 10. Hierosol. epist.
• * 1.666

  Stapl. 77. b.
• * 1.667

  Prayers need∣lesse for the saincts in hea∣uen.
• * 1.668

  Ca. Cum Mar∣thae decele. Missae.
• * 1.669

  Prayer •…•…∣lesse for them that dyed in their sinnes.
• * 1.670

  Ad Demetria∣num Tom. 1.
• * 1.671

  Lib. de varijs quest. Q 19.
• * 1.672

  13. Quest. 2. c•…•…. in praesent.
• * 1.673

  In Esai. ca. 65.
• * 1.674

  Chry. ad Heb. ca. 2. hom. 4.
• * 1.675

  De Lazaro cō∣cione. 2.
• * 1.676

  Mat. 11. hom. 37.
• * 1.677

  Theophil. in Mat. ca. 25.
• * 1.678

  Ibidem▪
• * 1.679

  The Papistes vsage of the allegation of the doctors.
• * 1.680

  Chriso. in cpi. ad Heb. cap. 2. hom. 4. Naughtie cu stome.
• * 1.681

  The soules of the dead walk not.
• * 1.682

  In Mat. cap. 8. Hom. 29.
• * 1.683

  Sap 3. He meaneth the Infantes of the faythfull beeing rege∣nerate. Luke. 16. Act. 7. Phil. 1. Luke. 12.
• * 1.684

  Gen. 25.
• * 1.685

  Foure notes of Chrysostome for the state of soules depar∣ted.
• * 1.686

  De moribus Eccl. lib. 1. ca. 34. Abuses about the dead in S. Augustines time.
• * 1.687

  De Baptis. par∣uulo•…•…um.
• * 1.688

  Stap. 57. a. Virginitie and Matrimonie.
• * 1.689

  Wherein vir∣ginitie is to be preferred be∣fore mariage, and wherein it is not.
• * 1.690

  Gregorius Pa∣pa in pastorali parte. 3. ca. 29.
• * 1.691

  Luc. 18.
• * 1.692

  How farre the popish votari•…•…s are from true virginitie. 1. Tim. 4.
• * 1.693

  Apoe. 9. A figure of the popish vo∣taries.
• * 1.694

  The iudgemēt of Pope Pius 2. for priestes mariage.
• * 1.695

  Erasmus opi∣nion of prests mariage. Declarationes Erasmi ad cē∣suras •…•…uteuae▪ Tit. 20.
• * 1.696

  1. Cor. 7.
• * 1.697

  De bono con∣•…•…. Mariage after the vowe of single life is lawfull. •…•…erem. 5.
• * 1.698

  Durandus in li: 4. Dist. 37. Q 1. Heb. 13.
• * 1.699

  In decretis Si∣ritij Pp. dec. 7 Rom 8.
• * 1.700

  The causes why M. Stapl. calleth the protestants lo∣uinians.
• * 1.701

  Matth. 19.
• * 1.702

  Durandus o∣pinion of vir∣ginitie and Matrimonie. Durandus in magist. sent. li. 4. Dist. 39. Q. 4.
• * 1.703

  Virginitie not good it selfe but in respect.
• * 1.704

  The papist•…•… obiectiō of S. Hierome for virginiue.
• * 1.705

  Ruffinus in Hieron.
• * 1.706

  S. Hieroms foule ouer∣shooting him selfe in de•…•…en∣ding virginitie against 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.707

  Sta. 57 a. The Papistes ob•…•…ection that we be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ for deoying •…•…∣cles at San•…•…cts tombes.
• * 1.708

  Difference be∣twene the an∣cient mi•…•…acles, and the Popish illusions.
• * 1.709

  De vera rel. cap. v•…•…t.
• * 1.710

  How sainct•…•…s are to be ho∣no•…•…ed, howe not.
• * 1.711

  Howe the Pa∣pistes honored saincts. Apoc. 21. Act. 14.
• * 1.712

  Legendum san cto•…•…um in vita Francise•…•….
• * 1.713

  Augu. de vera relig▪ ca. vlt.
• * 1.714

  Cyrill. contra •…•…ulian. li. 6.
• * 1.715

  Cyril contra lulian. li. 6.
• * 1.716

  Aug. de eccl. dog. cap. 84. &. 85. Sainctes not to be mesured by myracles. S Thomas of Cantorbury, & S. Aug. of •…•…ng lande no sain∣ctes by S. Aug. of Afrikes rule.
• * 1.717

  Cyril. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Ioh. lib. 7. cap. 13.
• * 1.718

  The best sain∣ctes wroughte least miracles.
• * 1.719

  Mat. 7.
• * 1.720

  Chrysost. in Iohn. cap. 2. Hom 21. No neede of miracles to the faythfull and them that loue God.
• * 1.721

  The popishe Churche an vnbeleeuing Church.
• * 1.722

  Miraculous •…•…mages.
• * 1.723

  The spoyle of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to honor the dead.
• * 1.724

  De 7. Mach. Hom. 7.
• * 1.725

  De Ciuit. Dei. lib. 8. ca. vit.
• * 1.726

  Lib. 22. ca. 10.
• * 1.727

  How the fa∣thers vsed the memories of the martyrs. How the Pa∣pists vse them.
• * 1.728

  Sermons falsly fathered on •…•…. Ambrose.
• * 1.729

  Math. 9.
• * 1.730

  The cont•…•…o∣uersie of the Lordes supper.
• * 1.731

  De consecr. distinct. 2. Ego Berengarius in glos•…•… 2.
• * 1.732

  The Pauli∣cians.
• * 1.733

  The question betweene the Papists and vs, in the maner of the presence of Christs body.
• * 1.734

  The Papistes obiecting the Paulicians to vs, are proued to be Paulici∣ans the selues.
• * 1.735

  Luke. 22.
• * 1.736

  1. Cor. 10. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 He∣•…•…olt. in propt. exempl.
• * 1.737

  The Papists e•…•…uie that vve rede the scrip∣tures at the sa∣crament of the Lordes supper.
• * 1.738

  Hovve the Pa∣pists celebrate the sacrament.
• * 1.739

  Claudius and Vigilan•…•…ius.
• * 1.740

  Alphō de castr. contra Haer.
• * 1.741

  Inuocation of Saints. 2 Reg 22. Psal. 17▪ Inuocation only due to God by the sc•…•…ipture. Hierem. 29. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 2. & Rom. 10.
• * 1.742

  Esay. 63.
• * 1.743

  If Abraham be not to be in∣uocated, no saint is to be inuocated. Rom. 4.
• * 1.744

  Esay 63.
• * 1.745

  Arguments whi•…•… inuoca∣tion is onely due to God. Exod. 20. Esay. 42. 48.
• * 1.746

  Psal. 49.
• * 1.747

  Summa Ange∣lica de inuoca∣tione.
• * 1.748

  What it is to inuocate.
• * 1.749

  Aug. in. psa. 30 part. 3.
• * 1.750

  2. Cor. 6. Psal. 7. Ierem. 17. 1. Cor. 3. 2. Cor. 6.
• * 1.751

  Psal. 51.
• * 1.752

  Prouerb. 23.
• * 1.753

  What praier is.
• * 1.754

  Sup. Psal. 85. Super Psal. Miser•…•…re mei.
• * 1.755

  Hugo de sanct. Victore.
• * 1.756

  Angelus de Clauisio, •…•…it. de orat.
• * 1.757

  Christ direc∣teth prayer only to God. Math. 6. Luke. 11. None can be prayed vnto, but vvhom vve may cal father. Math. 23. Apoc. 19.
• * 1.758

  In verb. domi∣ni secundum Luc. •…•…erm. 36. Rom. 10. Inuocation can not be vvithout fayth, and •…•…her∣fore not to be made to saints.
• * 1.759

  The Papistes distinction of helpe and in∣•…•…ercession.
• * 1.760

  Amb. in. R•…•…. 5.
• * 1.761

  The Popish si∣militude for imercession plainly confu∣•…•…ed by S. Amb.
• * 1.762

  Chry▪ de mu▪ Can. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 16.
• * 1.763

  The Popishe shift of inter∣cession to sain ctes most no∣tably confu•…•…ed by Chrylost.
• * 1.764

  Homil. 53.
• * 1.765

  De profectu euang. hom. 6.
• * 1.766

  De poe•…•…iten. Homil 4.
• * 1.767

  The Papists a∣scribed more than interces∣sion to saintes, making them helpers and Sauiours.
• * 1.768

  What the Pa∣pistes ascribed to Saintes in their hymnall.
• * 1.769

  What they as∣cribed to sain∣tes in theyr Primers.
• * 1.770

  Firme confi∣dence put in the blessed vir gin Mary.
• * 1.771

  The blessed virgin made the principall, and Christ but an helper vnto hir.
• * 1.772

  Soule and bo∣dy cōmended to S. Erasmus.
• * 1.773

  A Pardon of 40000. yeres for saying a prayer to the blessed virgin.
• * 1.774

  The Papists say the blessed virgin delights to be prayed vnto.
• * 1.775

  The abhomi∣nable prayers in the Primers printed in the Reigne of Q. Marie.
• * 1.776

  Saluatiō ascri∣bed to the pas∣sion not of Christ, but of the blessed virgin.
• * 1.777

  Saluation giuē for the blessed virgins sake.
• * 1.778

  The blessed virgin to be our life, our hope.
• * 1.779

  Saluatiō gottē by the blessed virgins deser∣uing. The blessed virgin the cause that the world flo•…•…ish∣eth in quietnes.
• * 1.780

  Saluation for saying a praier to the blessed Virgin.
• * 1.781

  The presence of the blessed virgin.
• * 1.782

  Purification of the heart as∣cribed to hir.
• * 1.783

  Tuo sacro •…•…u mine. Goddesshed ascribed to the blessed virgin.
• * 1.784

  Et firmā spem ponamus in •…•…am. The bl. virgin saluatiō to thē that put their trust in hir.
• * 1.785

  Tu vera spes & consol. no∣stra. Quale tibi sa∣crificium im∣molabio•…•…us.
• * 1.786

  Sola castitate. Confidentes in the speramus.
• * 1.787

  How agreeth this vvith: Ego Deus scrutans corda, &c. •…•…erem. 17. Psalm. 7. Rom. 8. Horrible blas∣phemi•…•….
• * 1.788

  Deus & tu.
• * 1.789

  Sperātes in •…•…e. Regnas cum filio tuo.
• * 1.790

  Cum ipso iu∣dicātem eum.
• * 1.791

  Ecce corpus & animam tibi cōmendamus.
• * 1.792

  The popish stories of pray ing to the bles∣sed virgin.
• * 1.793

  Discipulu•…•… serm. 162.
• * 1.794

  Quicke Ima∣ges.
• * 1.795

  This vvas don vvhen stockes spoke then, as stones speake novv.
• * 1.796

  Hovv agreeth this vvith S. Iohns do∣ctrine, Si quis peccauerit ad∣uocatum ha∣bemus Iesum Christum? Christ belike beareth a grudge to his father that he vvas not heard at the first.
• * 1.797

  The blessed virgin vexed.
• * 1.798

  Christ still bound to the lavv. Honora pat & mat. Hovv agreeth this vvith. Pro∣pter me. prop∣ter no•…•…e 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ An excellent surgeon to heale Christ, and that vvith a kil•…•….
• * 1.799

  As did Pope Siluester. 2.
• * 1.800

  The mother of Christ to do more against the Diuel than Christ. The mercie & pardon of the mother aboue Christs iustice. A greater mat∣ter to forsake the blessed virgin than to forsake Christ.
• * 1.801

  Not on Christ. This vvas done vvhen Images could speake. A sullen boy, it vvas not he that sayd, Ve∣nite ad me &c.
• * 1.802

  In quacunque hora. &c Con∣uer•…•…mini ad me &c.
• * 1.803

  In Prompt. di∣•…•…. de 〈◊〉〈◊〉. B. Maria: tit. Ma ria virg. sustē∣tauit mūdum: & in Legenda in vita S. Domi nici, Anglice.
• * 1.804

  The daye of doom dese•…•…ed for the blessed virgins sake.
• * 1.805

  Christes igno∣rance.
• * 1.806

  Discip. ibidem exempl. 9.
• * 1.807

  Who hearde this might •…•… blast besides sir William?
• * 1.808

  The vtter cor∣ruption of the clergie & mon kerie by Chri∣stes ovvne▪ mouth.
• * 1.809

  Ibid em. So contemp∣tuously they terme Christe. Christes a•…•… me stayed by his mother. The Papistes teach that sain tes praye for pro•…•…ōging the day of doome, and Christ tea∣cheth vs to prai for the haste∣ning of it. Matth. 6.
• * 1.810

  Luke. 24. Marke. 13. Apocal. 6.
• * 1.811

  Apoca. 22.
• * 1.812

  Discip. de mi∣raculis beatae Mariae.
• * 1.813

  Christes iud∣gement reuo∣ked. Alan▪ de rupe in psalterio beatae virginis.
• * 1.814

  More ascribed to the blessed virgin than to Christ.
• * 1.815

  Vigerius Sao∣nensis Cardi∣ralis decacord: 4. can. 12. Christ bounde to denie no pe∣tition to hys mother.
• * 1.816

  Iacob. de Vo∣rag. serm. 1. in die pascae.
• * 1.817

  The blessed virgin made the reconciler, and mediator betweene God and man. Rom. 5.
• * 1.818

  1. Tim. 1.
• * 1.819

  Eph. 2.
• * 1.820

  Enchirid. ad Laur. ca. 32.
• * 1.821

  Rom. 5.
• * 1.822

  2. Tim. 2
• * 1.823

  Robertus de Licio sermon. de sanctis ser. 24. de cōcept. beatae Mariae ca. 1.
• * 1.824

  Nisi pro Amo∣re huius puellae & reuerentia.
• * 1.825

  Col. 1.
• * 1.826

  Iohn. 1.
• * 1.827

  Blasphemie in all the whole popish church.
• * 1.828

  Gen. •…•…. in Prolog. eiusdem ad serm concep. Iacobus de Vorag. serm. quarag. 50.
• * 1.829

  Ibidem.
• * 1.830

  Ibidem.
• * 1.831

  Ibidem.
• * 1.832

  Idē in quad•…•…. •…•… 8. & in assū. serm. 8.
• * 1.833

  S. Peter is tur∣ned out of of∣fice belike. But Christ said ego sum ostiū.
• * 1.834

  A proper reasō & wel applied.
• * 1.835

  In assump. serm. 7.
• * 1.836

  God vnmerci∣full. Christ cleane forgotten.
• * 1.837

  Serm. 5.
• * 1.838

  The Papists blasphemous examples of inuocating the bles. Virgin Discip. exemp. 40. In Legēda fest. assumpt.
• * 1.839

  Iohannes de monte in suo Mariali.
• * 1.840

  Discipulus.
• * 1.841

  Disc. exem. 57.
• * 1.842

  Alanus de rupe
• * 1.843

  Albertus Ma∣gnus episcopus de •…•…anlingen. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.844

  The papist•…•…s shut that these were but pri∣uate mens er∣rours. Missale in of∣ficio Beatae Mariae.
• * 1.845

  The Father & the Soone gi∣uen by the blessed virgi•…•….
• * 1.846

  Salutis causa vitae porta.
• * 1.847

  Cum in gra∣•…•…ia sumus Do∣minae nostrae.
• * 1.848

  All the Papists shiftes about inuocation confuted.
• * 1.849

  Legenda in vi∣ta S. Petri.
• * 1.850

  De 〈◊〉〈◊〉. arb. lib. 3.
• * 1.851

  In epist. Ioh. Tract. 1.
• * 1.852

  S. Aug against the papists shift of intercessiō.
• * 1.853

  De vera Rel. Cap. 55.
• * 1.854

  S. August. iud∣geth the Saints dishonored by inuocating them.
• * 1.855

  The Popishe saincts that de∣sired to be wor shipped, we•…•…e but either illu∣sions of diuels, or Papistes forgeries.
• * 1.856

  The P•…•…pistes exception of the blessed Virgin from other crea∣tures. Deciuit. dei. Li. 10. ca. 19.
• * 1.857

  The antiquitie of the error of inuocating saincts.
• * 1.858

  Contr. haer. l. 3 cont. collyrid. Mar. & Anti∣dicomarit.
• * 1.859

  The Papistes shift that they offer not sa∣crifice to saincts.
• * 1.860

  De ciuit. Dei. li. 10. ca. 10.
• * 1.861

  The Papistes offred sacrifice to saincts.
• * 1.862

  De assumpt. Mar. serm 5.
• * 1.863

  The Papists confirme their inuocation by the Iewes I do∣latrie.
• * 1.864

  Rom. 12.
• * 1.865

  Iacobus de Vor. serm. 5. Assump.
• * 1.866

  Reliques.
• * 1.867

  Beleefe in Re∣liques.
• * 1.868

  Declar. 61. fol. 384. The doutful∣nesse of Re∣liques whose they were. Declar. 3. ex collo. fol. 334 Hierusalem & Rome douted whether they stand there where they stoode in the olde time.
• * 1.869

  Alphons ad∣uers. haer li. 13 The Popes re∣ligion consists in Reliques. If it wer good the shewing of it woulde not deface it.
• * 1.870

  The Popes owne confes∣sion that in most places the people were abused with reliques.
• * 1.871

  Antiquitie for Reliques.
• * 1.872

  Hieron. contra Vigila•…•…t.
• * 1.873

  In Mat. 23. hom. 43.
• * 1.874

  De. 7. Math. hom. 7.
• * 1.875

  Clemens ad lac.
• * 1.876

  Augustinus de ope•…•…e Monac.
• * 1.877

  Concil. Colō in explic. De∣calogi.
• * 1.878

  More confi∣dence in Re∣liques than in God.
• * 1.879

  Lightes. The first occa∣sion of lights in the prima∣tiue Church.
• * 1.880

  The abuse of lightes.
• * 1.881

  The heathens vse of lightes.
• * 1.882

  The Papistes obiection of lights taken from the olde Testament.
• * 1.883

  From whence the popish lights did spring. Polygr. postil. Pars. 3 in die purifi.
• * 1.884

  In die purifi. serm.
• * 1.885

  The Papists triple reason for lightes.
• * 1.886

  This is quite contrarie to Poligrans for∣mer saying. Pater luminū is forgotten.
• * 1.887

  Legenda An∣glice in die Purif.
• * 1.888

  A noble •…•…ale of a Masse that Christ •…•…ong on Candlemas day.
• * 1.889

  Yong Angels.
• * 1.890

  Harde holde betweene a Ladie and an Angell for a Candle.
• * 1.891

  Hallowing of lightes.
• * 1.892

  Contr. haerese•…•… li. 6. de exor∣cis. Conc. Tol. 4. ca. 8.
• * 1.893

  Not against the faith to o∣m•…•… holy can∣dles.
• * 1.894

  Coniuring by candles.
• * 1.895

  Vertues in lightes.
• * 1.896

  Missale & Pro ces•…•…onale in die Purif.
• * 1.897

  Serm. discipul.
• * 1.898

  A tale of a da•…•… ned soule that beat the diuels with a candle.
• * 1.899

  Psal. 118.
• * 1.900

  Ioh. 1. Luc. 1.
• * 1.901

  Ioh. 3. The Papistes flie the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 light •…•…nd set vp external lightes. •…•…phe. 5.
• * 1.902

  •…•…ib. 6. ca. 2.
• * 1.903

  Hierom ad∣versus Vigil.
• * 1.904

  Ceremonies.
• * 1.905

  The Churche ouerburdened with Ceremo∣nies in S. Aug. time. August. epist. 119.
• * 1.906

  Marc. 7.
• * 1.907

  Matth. 11.
• * 1.908

  Matth. 15.
• * 1.909

  Ioh. 9.
• * 1.910

  How the Pa∣pistes exalt thō selues aboue Gods word. Pigghius de inuocat. san∣ctorū contro∣uers. 13.
• * 1.911

  What the Pa∣pistes meane by the name of the Church.
• * 1.912

  What manner of huswife the popish Church •…•…s.
• * 1.913

  Matth. 11.
• * 1.914

  Matth. 24.
• * 1.915

  The children of the mother Church of Rome.
• * 1.916

  Ioh. 8.
• * 1.917

  Matth. 10. Ioh. 10.
• * 1.918

  Matth. 3.
• * 1.919

  Matth. 11. Coll. 2. 1. Cor. 1. Iob. 14. Ioh. 1. Rom. 10.
• * 1.920

  In Ezech. ho∣mil. 7.
• * 1.921

  Ad Pompei•…•… contra Stepha∣num.
• * 1.922

  Luc. 18.
• * 1.923

  3. Esdr. 3.
• * 1.924

  A notable si∣militude of Cyprian.
• * 1.925

  Hilarius in Matth. can. 14
• * 1.926

  Chrisostomus in Matth. cap. 23.
• * 1.927

  In Matth. 15. homil. 32.
• * 1.928

  Pretence of Auncesters & forefathers.
• * 1.929

  The Papistes shift that their traditions are not like the Pharisies tra∣ditions. Ibidem.
• * 1.930

  Doctrines of men.
• * 1.931

  The sufficien∣cie of the Gos∣pell. In epist. ad tit. hom. 1. The simili∣tude of a crier and a preacher.
• * 1.932

  Li. de paradiso ca. 12.
• * 1.933

  The similitude of a witnesse bearer.
• * 1.934

  Se•…•…m. 6.
• * 1.935

  De vera rel. ca. vlt.
• * 1.936

  In Psal. 160.
• * 1.937

  In Esa ca. 2.
• * 1.938

  Act 5.
• * 1.939

  Luc. 20.
• * 1.940

  Iib. 1. •…•…a. 5. Humaine tra∣ditions the chiefest Bul∣wark and foū∣dations of the Popish doc∣trine.
• * 1.941

  Ibidem.
• * 1.942

  How the Sor∣bonists dealte with Eras•…•…. for speaking against popish ceremonies.
• * 1.943

  Declarat. ad Cesuras Facul∣tatis. tit. 11. propos. 58.
• * 1.944

  Frasmus ex∣cuse.
• * 1.945

  Ibidem.
• * 1.946

  Ibidem.
• * 1.947

  Ibidem.
• * 1.948

  Ceremonies likened to Wagons.
• * 1.949

  Kneeling.
• * 1.950

  Howe we vse wel, euen some of the Popishe Ceremonies, but nothing like to their v∣sing of them.
• * 1.951

  Trust in Ce∣remonies.
• * 1.952

  Decl. 70. ex collo. 1. Erasmus pro∣positions of the Popishe Ceremonies.
• * 1.953

  He meaneth Canonistes.
• * 1.954

  Concupiscence sinne after Baptisme.
• * 1.955

  The Messaliās
• * 1.956

  Li. 1. contr. 2. epist Pelag. ad Bonif.
• * 1.957

  Our confessiō.
• * 1.958

  How original sinne is taken away.
• * 1.959

  Pigghius de peccato orig. Contiouers. 1.
• * 1.960

  Ibidem.
• * 1.961

  Pigghius of∣fended with S. Aug. for say ing coacupis∣cence is finne.
• * 1.962

  The inconue∣niences that master St. in∣curreth.
• * 1.963

  More absur∣ditie to say God imputes 〈◊〉〈◊〉 where is none, than to say wher sinne is God im∣putes none.
• * 1.964

  The obiection of the Messa∣lians heresie to vs, returned on the Papists.
• * 1.965

  Histo. Tripart. lib. 7. ca. 11.
• * 1.966

  The Papistes worse than the Messalians.
• * 1.967

  The Papistes say▪ God con∣•…•…th where 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉
• * 1.968

  Rom. 6.
• * 1.969

  Rom. 5.
• * 1.970

  The Papistes make original sinne to be •…•…o sinne.
• * 1.971

  Our owne sa∣tisfactions doe more than the death of Christ by the Papists doctrine.
• * 1.972

  The grosse ig∣norance of the learned Papists in the •…•…udi∣ments of chri∣stianitie
• * 1.973

  What we are before bap∣tisme. Ioh. 3.
• * 1.974

  Rom. 8. 1. Cor. 5.
• * 1.975

  Col. 2. Gal. 3. Rom. 3. Iob. 14. Psal. 51.
• * 1.976

  Matth. 7. Luc. 6. Rom. 5.
• * 1.977

  What concu∣piscence is in vs after bap∣tisme. Rom. 7.
• * 1.978

  Rom. 7.
• * 1.979

  Rom. 7. The Apostle not onely cal∣leth concupis∣cence sinne, but proues it to be sin in deede.
• * 1.980

  Contra Iulia∣num. lib. 5.
• * 1.981

  Ieromes opi∣nion of con∣cupiscence.
• * 1.982

  The arrogan∣cie of the Pa∣pistes.
• * 1.983

  Rom. 10.
• * 1.984

  1. Iohn. 1.
• * 1.985

  Images. Stapl. 57. •…•…
• * 1.986

  Images defa∣ced by diuers godly Princes.
• * 1.987

  In Concil. Frankf.
• * 1.988

  The second Nicene Coun∣cell.
• * 1.989

  The Papists defaced the liuely Images of Christ, and honored dead Images.
• * 1.990

  Clem. li. 5. ad Iacob.
• * 1.991

  The true wor∣ship of Gods Image.
• * 1.992

  The false vvor ship of Gods Image.
• * 1.993

  Worship of •…•…ages the di∣uels sugge∣stion.
• * 1.994

  Howe the Pa∣pists dishono∣red God in pi∣cturing him.
• * 1.995

  De fide & fi•…•…∣bolo cap. 7. •…•… The picturing of god maketh the Papistes Anthropomor phites.
• * 1.996

  The picture of God must ne∣des be a lying and dishono∣rable picture. Deut. 4.
• * 1.997

  Iob 15.
• * 1.998

  The pictures of Saint•…•…s not to be honored.
• * 1.999

  The Papistes shifte of laye mens bookes.
• * 1.1000

  The Popishe tales of images
• * 1.1001

  Discipul{us}. Ex∣emplo. 27.
• * 1.1002

  Exempl. 17.
• * 1.1003

  Exempl. 81.
• * 1.1004

  Ex Vincentio in sper. hist. li. 8. ca. 110.
• * 1.1005

  Exempl. 82.
• * 1.1006

  Exempl. 83.
• * 1.1007

  The Picture of our Ladie of Wilsdeane with the burnt tayle.
• * 1.1008

  Pictures of Angels.
• * 1.1009

  S. Sondayes Picture.
• * 1.1010

  Li. 5. de Iust. cap. 8.
• * 1.1011

  Alfons. contra He•…•…es. li. 8.
• * 1.1012

  Christian Prin ces haue no lesse cause to breake the po∣pishe Images than Ezechias had to breake the brasen Ser∣pent.
• * 1.1013

  Concil. Colo. in decal.
• * 1.1014

  See howe the Papistes con∣fesie their own Idolatrie.
• * 1.1015

  Biga Salutis. dominic•…•…. 1. quadrag. serm. 29. The worship of the Deuil in an other thin∣ges likenesse. The reason why the wor∣ship of the cō∣secrate cake is flat Idolatrie.
• * 1.1016

  The worship of the Crosse.
• * 1.1017

  Exempl. dise.
• * 1.1018

  Prayers in the Primar to the Cros•…•…e.
• * 1.1019

  The worship to the Picture of Christes face
• * 1.1020

  Praier and ad∣oration to the fiue woundes.
• * 1.1021

  The number of al the woū∣des of Christ.
• * 1.1022

  Pardon for saying this prayer.
• * 1.1023

  Petit pardons.
• * 1.1024

  A liberall pardon.
• * 1.1025

  The pardon of these Popes proue them plain heretiks.
• * 1.1026

  So many yeres of pardon, as bodies haue ben buried in any Church∣yarde.
• * 1.1027

  A Praier made to the Crovvn, the Nayles, the Speare, the Vi∣negar and Gal, the Reede, the Spittle, the dise the Coate, the Cocke the Pil∣ler, the Wh•…•…ps, the Svvord, the Fistes, the Buf∣f•…•…ts, the Ladder the Maller. &c about the Pas∣sion of Christ.
• * 1.1028

  The Papistes iarre in their pardons.
• * 1.1029

  A lustio par∣don.
• * 1.1030

  To know the lengthe of Christe.
• * 1.1031

  [illustration]
• * 1.1032

  [illustration]
• * 1.1033

  The one of th•…•…se two Crosses must needes be false
• * 1.1034

  The Papistes shift that all this hyndreth not the medi∣tation of the mynde.
• * 1.1035

  Ser. de temp. 35. The Papistes deuout medi∣tations in be∣holding the Crucifix.
• * 1.1036

  The Papistes shift in distin∣ction of wor∣ship. Latria. Dulia. Hyperdulia.
• * 1.1037

  The Papistes gaue their chiefest kynde of worship to the Crosse.
• * 1.1038

  D. Saunders in his booke of the defence of Images.
• * 1.1039

  D. Saunders inconstancie.
• * 1.1040

  D. Saunders contrarietie to himselfe.
• * 1.1041

  D. Saunders giueth the peo∣ple leaue not to care howe muche honour they giue to Images.
• * 1.1042

  D. Saund. him self ouerthro∣weth his own distinction of three kynds of worshipping.
• * 1.1043

  To what care∣lesse Idolatrie the Louanistes would reduce vs. The Papistes shift, that these are but the sub tilties of a few Scholemen.
• * 1.1044

  Discipulu•…•… sermone. 35.
• * 1.1045

  Not onely the Crosse Christe dyed on, but euery other crosse, and e∣uery stick ma∣de like a crosse is to be hono∣red.
• * 1.1046

  The Turkes token to the Pope. Vigerius de instrumentis. A solemn que∣stion among the prelates at Rome aboute Christes coate, and the spear∣hed that woū∣ded him.
• * 1.1047

  In pract oran∣di Psalterium Virginis.
• * 1.1048

  What the Pa∣pistes saye we shoulde con∣ce•…•…ue when we stande 〈◊〉〈◊〉 fore Images.
• * 1.1049

  He meaneth Augustinus de Ancona, the Scholeman.
• * 1.1050

  The image of Christ to haue as muche ho∣nour as hym∣selfe.
• * 1.1051

  The Schoole∣men mayntei∣ned as muche idolatrie as the people com∣mitted.
• * 1.1052

  Alanus de •…•…upe.
• * 1.1053

  The Papistes shift that their Images are no thing like the heathen Idols.
• * 1.1054

  A popish libel of the differē∣ces betwene their Images and Heathen idols.
• * 1.1055

  The first lisse∣rence▪ of pro∣portion to the natural truth.
• * 1.1056

  Alanus de •…•…upe.
• * 1.1057

  Ibidem.
• * 1.1058

  The seconde difference, of Images and idols, of faith and religion.
• * 1.1059

  1. Iohn 5. Rom. 10.
• * 1.1060

  The. 3. diffe∣rence, of sacri∣fice.
• * 1.1061

  The. 4. diffe∣rence, of wic∣ked men and Saintes.
• * 1.1062

  The. 5. diffe∣rence, of the worship of vnsensible creatures.
• * 1.1063

  The. 6. diffe∣rence of the substance of God.
• * 1.1064

  Alanus de rupe.
• * 1.1065

  The. 7. diffe∣rence, of the gouernance of vnreasonable creatures.
• * 1.1066

  Iohn. 8.
• * 1.1067

  The. 8. diffe∣rence, of the feare of diuels.
• * 1.1068

  Rom. 10.
• * 1.1069

  Howe the Di∣uell is afrayde of Images.
• * 1.1070

  The. 9. Diffe∣rence of the Diuels hate of Images.
• * 1.1071

  Act 19.
• * 1.1072

  The. 10. diffe∣rence, of a ver∣ruous & good intent.
• * 1.1073

  Two kyndes of good.
• * 1.1074

  Deut. 12.
• * 1.1075

  1. Reg. 15. 2. Reg. 16. Iohn. 16.
• * 1.1076

  The compari∣son betwene Iulianus and the Papistes.
• * 1.1077

  Gala. 6.
• * 1.1078

  Howe ioylylie the Crosse is growne amōg the Papistes.
• * 1.1079

  Stapl. 57. b Pelagians.
• * 1.1080

  Infantes bap∣tisme.
• * 1.1081

  Psalm. 51. Our confes∣sion.
• * 1.1082

  The Papistes presumption in iudging no infantes sa∣ued that be not baptised.
• * 1.1083

  Three kyndes of Baptisme.
• * 1.1084

  Gen. 17.
• * 1.1085

  Marc. 16.
• * 1.1086

  Rom. 4.
• * 1.1087

  Baptisme not the cause of saluation.
• * 1.1088

  Act. 7.
• * 1.1089

  The Papistes in the opinion of Sacramentes verie Iewes and Pharisies.
• * 1.1090

  Stapl. 57. b
• * 1.1091

  The Papistes worse than the Pelagians.
• * 1.1092

  The Papistes care not what they saye a∣gaynst vs, so they say som∣what.
• * 1.1093

  Stapl. 57. b
• * 1.1094

  Peeuishe dif∣ferences.
• * 1.1095

  Lymbus pa∣tium.
• * 1.1096

  Purgatorie.
• * 1.1097

  Stapl. 57. b Simon Ma∣gus. Marcion. Manicheus.
• * 1.1098

  The heresie of Marcion and Manes, for fa∣tall necessitie and mo Gods 〈◊〉〈◊〉 one.
• * 1.1099

  Luther and Caluines doc∣trine agaynst freevvill.
• * 1.1100

  Rom. 7. What little freedome of vvill S. Paule had.
• * 1.1101

  The infirmi∣tie of vvill in the regenerate man. 1. Cor. 2. The vvill of the vnregene∣rate man.
• * 1.1102

  Gal. 5.
• * 1.1103

  The very que∣stion of Free∣vvill.
• * 1.1104

  S. Paules rea∣sons agaynste Freevvill. Eph. 2.
• * 1.1105

  1. Cor. 3.
• * 1.1106

  Philip. 2.
• * 1.1107

  Antoninus parte. 4 tit. 9. cap. 7. §. 1.
• * 1.1108

  Luc. 6. The reasons of Christ a∣gainst freevvil. Iohn. 3. Math. 16. Iohn. 8.
• * 1.1109

  Iohn. 15.
• * 1.1110

  Iohn. 6.
• * 1.1111

  Iohn. 12.
• * 1.1112

  Act. 9.
• * 1.1113

  Iohn. 8.
• * 1.1114

  Rom. 8.
• * 1.1115

  Math 26.
• * 1.1116

  Alams will.
• * 1.1117

  Phil. 2.
• * 1.1118

  The affinitie of the Papists with Pelagius.
• * 1.1119

  Stapl. 57. b
• * 1.1120

  Iustification.
• * 1.1121

  Good workes.
• * 1.1122

  Rom. 3.
• * 1.1123

  Rom. 11.
• * 1.1124

  Super cantic. Serm. 17.
• * 1.1125

  Lib. de Patien∣tia. cap. 2.
• * 1.1126

  Rom. 3.
• * 1.1127

  Howe workes are excluded, and how not.
• * 1.1128

  Ephes. 2.
• * 1.1129

  Contra Pelag. & Coelest. de gratia Christi. cap. 26. Faith. Rom. 11. Rom. 14. Phil. 1.
• * 1.1130

  Rom. 4.
• * 1.1131

  Howe faithe only iustifieth.
• * 1.1132

  1. Cor. 15.
• * 1.1133

  Luc. 17.
• * 1.1134

  1. Cor. 4.
• * 1.1135

  Rom. 8.
• * 1.1136

  The grounde of this oure doctrine of Iu∣stification.
• * 1.1137

  Iustification is the ouer∣throw of all Poperie. Rom. 10.
• * 1.1138

  Stapl. 57. b
• * 1.1139

  Iohn. 18. Luc. 22. Luc. 12. Matth. 21. Math. 5. The worde of God is the ho∣lie candle that can not be put out. Act 24.
• * 1.1140

  Stapl. 57. b 58. a
• * 1.1141

  The cause why I haue thus largely aun∣swered these obiections of the Papistes.
• * 1.1142

  Fol. 57. b.
• * 1.1143

  Supra 56. b The aunciente heresies and errours that the Papistes maynteyne. The Pharisies Matth. 23.
• * 1.1144

  Luc. 14. & 18. Sectes of reli∣gion.
• * 1.1145

  Math. 23. Keeping the key of know∣ledge.
• * 1.1146

  Traditions. Math. 15.
• * 1.1147

  Fulfilling of the lavve.
• * 1.1148

  Aesopi fab.
• * 1.1149

  Saduceis. Ioseph. li. An∣tiq. 13. cap. 8. Eseni.
• * 1.1150

  Simon Mag{us}. The•…•…doretus li. 1. hae•…•…t. fab. Act 8. The Pope ra∣ther the suc∣ces•…•…our of Si∣mon Magus, than of Simon •…•…eter. Act 8.
• * 1.1151

  Fornication.
• * 1.1152

  Sethi•…•…ni. August▪ de Haeresib. Orders of Angels.
• * 1.1153

  Carpocratians Theodoretus & I•…•…naeus. Traditions.
• * 1.1154

  Caynites. Th•…•…odoret. I•…•…uocation of angels.
• * 1.1155

  Theodotians. Theodoret.
• * 1.1156

  Authoritie of Gods worde.
• * 1.1157

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. Theodoret. Silence.
• * 1.1158

  Theodoretus. The image of Christe. Cerdonia•…•…s, for reiecting ensamples of the old Testa∣ment. Montanistes▪ for superstiti∣ous lavves of fasting. Vnwritten ve∣riti•…•…s.
• * 1.1159

  Nicephor. Theodoret. The authori∣tie of Gods worde abro∣gated. Mysteries.
• * 1.1160

  Confession of our selues to be sinfull.
• * 1.1161

  Offerings.
• * 1.1162

  Blynde pro∣phec•…•…es.
• * 1.1163

  Contempt and dissolution of matrimoni•…•… for religion.
• * 1.1164

  The Tessare∣scedecatitae. Apocrypha.
• * 1.1165

  Bookes for∣ged in the fa∣thers names.
• * 1.1166

  Augustious. Seuerians. Inspirations, dreames, re•…•…e∣lations, visions, traunces, mi∣racle•…•….
• * 1.1167

  The Ticiani. August. Renunciation of mariage.
• * 1.1168

  The Alogiani. August. Vnvvritten verities. The Ange∣lici. Worship of Angels. August. Apostolici. Apostolike ti∣tle. Refusall of mariage. Communitie of goodes. August.
• * 1.1169

  The Manichei Forsaking ma∣riage. Aug. con Faus. Manich. Abstinence. Continence. The forsaking of al things. Addition and diminution to the Scripture. The pretence of the Scrip∣ture.
• * 1.1170

  Authoritie A∣postolicall. Fleshe and white meate. Proprietie of goodes.
• * 1.1171

  The Hiera∣chitae. Single life. The Aerians, August. de Haere. The Psalliani & Euchi•…•…ae, Mumbling vp of prayers. Idle Monkes.
• * 1.1172

  Frasmus de Precatione vo∣cali tit. 19. pro posi. 1.
• * 1.1173

  Aug. de haere. The Pattalo∣rinc•…•…ae. Silence. The Aquarij. August. ibidē, Wa•…•…er with the wyne in the sacrament. August. ibidē. Barefoote he∣reukes.
• * 1.1174

  The Priscilli∣anistes. Dissembling and keeping no faith nor promise.
• * 1.1175

  August. ibid. Destinie of starres and pla nettes.
• * 1.1176

  A Caueat a∣gainst popishe Almanacks.
• * 1.1177

  Sigeber•…•…ns, The Acephali
• * 1.1178

  Women Dea∣cons. August. Sep•…•…on of 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 for 〈◊〉〈◊〉. The bookes called Apo∣crypha autho∣rised. Allegories. Theodoretus. The Messa∣lians. Praying, slee∣ping, and ea∣ting. Reuelations, Fleeing of hā∣dycra•…•…s. Celles. •…•…ightes. Purgatorie. August. Epiphanius. The abbeyes of idle Mon∣kes in the olde tyme burned.
• * 1.1179

  Wherein the Papistes differ from the Mes∣salians. Epiphanius.
• * 1.1180

  The Aetians. Epiphanius, Simple forni∣cation.
• * 1.1181

  The Theo∣phroniani.
• * 1.1182

  The schoole∣mens subtill quiddities. The Aerians. Continencie.
• * 1.1183

  The Colliri∣diani. Sacrificers and offerers to the blessed Virgin Marie. The Anthro∣pomorphitae. The picture & forme of god. Aug con. haer. A three for∣med God.
• * 1.1184

  The Pelagiā•…•…
• * 1.1185

  Aug. li 1. •…•…on. •…•…ul cap. 5. Original sinne Arbitrement and wyll. Pighius de o∣rig. peccato. Aug. de pec∣catorum meri∣tis cap. 19. Pighius ibidē. Free will. Hilarius Arela ad Aug. Prosper de in∣gratis.
• * 1.1186

  Pighi. ibidem
• * 1.1187

  Hier. in epist. ad Ctesiphont. Fulfilling gods lawe.
• * 1.1188

  Prosper▪ in E∣pist. ad Augu. de reliquijs Pelag. haere∣seos. Three sortes of Grace.
• * 1.1189

  Predestinatiō. Prosper ad August. Ibidem. Hilar. A relat. in epistola ad August. Aug. lib 2. de bono perseue∣rantiae cap. 14. Iustification. Augu. cont. 2. epist. Pel. li. 1. cap. 21. Li. 4. ca. 2. Faith.
• * 1.1190

  Hieron. in di∣alog aduers. Pelag. Good workes.
• * 1.1191

  Discip. serm. 162. Deadly sinne.
• * 1.1192

  Pigghi. de peccato orig.
• * 1.1193

  The Eutychi∣ans. The co•…•…foun∣ding the pro∣pernes of chri stes humanitie with his diui∣nitie. Transubstan∣tiation, the ve∣rie doctrine of the Eutychians and an heresie patched vp of many heresies.
• * 1.1194

  Theodoretus dial. 2. Incon∣fusus.
• * 1.1195

  The heretikes argument of Transubstan∣tiatiō to proue his heresie.
• * 1.1196

  The replie of the true catho∣like againste Transubst•…•…∣tiatiō to proue the humanitie of Christ to be vncōfounded.
• * 1.1197

  Stapl. 18. a
• * 1.1198

  Stapl. fol. 58. a
• * 1.1199

  Stap. fol. 58. a.
• * 1.1200

  Master Staple∣tons charge to vs that we b•…•… Donatists.
• * 1.1201

  Sta. fol. 58. a.
• * 1.1202

  Sta. fol. 58. a.
• * 1.1203

  M. Stapl. ta∣keth witnes of his fellowe.
• * 1.1204

  Matth. 18.
• * 1.1205

  Luc. 2.
• * 1.1206

  Matth. •…•…1. 1. Cor. 1.
• * 1.1207

  1. Iohn. 2. De symbolo ad 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.1208

  Math. 13.
• * 1.1209

  From whence these sects did spring.
• * 1.1210

  Secte•…•… of reli∣gions among the Papistes.
• * 1.1211

  Chaucers opi∣nion of Friers.
• * 1.1212

  The sectes of Scholemen.
• * 1.1213

  Stapl. 58. b
• * 1.1214

  The Donatists va•…•…t of mul∣titude.
• * 1.1215

  The Papistes Donatists in craking of multitude.
• * 1.1216

  The ioy of Christians in the gospells prosperitie. Matth. 11. Luke. 10. Matth. 9. Psalme. 126.
• * 1.1217

  The consola∣tion of Chri∣stians in the persecution of the Gospell.
• * 1.1218

  Fleing in per∣secution.
• * 1.1219

  Heb. 11. 3. Reg 19.
• * 1.1220

  Distinctiō be∣twen persecu∣tion it selfe & the cause of it.
• * 1.1221

  Stapl. 58. b
• * 1.1222

  The Donatists leauing the doctrine fel to rayling.
• * 1.1223

  What a nota∣ble grace of railing M. Stapl. hath a∣boue all the Popishe wri∣ters.
• * 1.1224

  Stapl. 58. b The Donatists refused the known chur∣che.
• * 1.1225

  Difference be∣twenee the Churche of Rome then, & the churche of Rome now.
• * 1.1226

  The Papistes Donatists that tye the church to a place.
• * 1.1227

  We depende not on Gene∣ua and Wir∣tenberge, as the Papistes depēd on Rome.
• * 1.1228

  Chrysosto in Math. 24. ho∣mil. 49.
• * 1.1229

  Dist. 23. Ca. Legimus.
• * 1.1230

  Why the chur∣che is holy and catholike.
• * 1.1231

  Stapl. 58. b
• * 1.1232

  The Popes Donatisticall impudencie.
• * 1.1233

  6. Stapl. 59. •…•… The Donati∣stes pretended many false vi∣sions. A tale deuised of a deade man to slaunder the Gospel withal.
• * 1.1234

  Stapl. 59. a. In li. Teut. ad Senat. Germa.
• * 1.1235

  Act. 5.
• * 1.1236

  False visions is one of the che∣fest practises and foundati∣on of the Po∣pishe churche, not of the pro∣testantes.
• * 1.1237

  7. Stapl. 59. a
• * 1.1238

  Nationall and general coun∣cels.
• * 1.1239

  8. Stap 59. a.
• * 1.1240

  A generall de∣fection.
• * 1.1241

  2. Thess. 2.
• * 1.1242

  Sessione. 4.
• * 1.1243

  Orthwinus Gratius in Fa∣sciculo rerum sciendarum.
• * 1.1244

  9. Stapl. 59. •…•… The begin∣ning, continu∣ance and suc∣cession.
• * 1.1245

  The begin∣ning of our doctrine.
• * 1.1246

  Chrysost. in Matth. Cyprian. ad Pomp. Fsai. 8. Math. 11.
• * 1.1247

  Matth. 21. The begyn∣ning of the popish doctri∣nes besides the Scripture.
• * 1.1248

  Sessione. 4.
• * 1.1249

  Cyprian. ad Pomp contr. ad cp•…•…. Steph. Dist. 2. Can. Si consuetudinē. Distin. 11. Hoc vestr.
• * 1.1250

  Ordinarie suc∣cession of Bi∣shops.
• * 1.1251

  Succession of the person, and succession of the doctrine.
• * 1.1252

  The Papistes can not suffi∣cientlye proue so muche as the succession of the person.
• * 1.1253

  10. Stapl. 59. b Fleeing for succoure to euill Princes.
• * 1.1254

  The Pope run ning to a trai∣tor gat of him his suprema∣cie.
• * 1.1255

  St•…•…pl. 59. b 11. The Donatists crueltie to the Catholikes.
• * 1.1256

  Optatus vvre∣sted.
• * 1.1257

  The Papists in horrible cru∣eltie•…•… farre passe the Do∣natistes.
• * 1.1258

  Put to this the horrible mur∣der in Fraunce since this was vvritten.
• * 1.1259

  Stapl. 59 b. 12. Vaun•…•… of scri∣ptures, and cō∣play•…•…t of the Prince•…•… Char∣•…•….
• * 1.1260

  The allegati∣on of the only Scripture for doctrine, no sufficien•…•…e ar∣gument of a Donatist.
• * 1.1261

  1. Cor. 2. 1. Cor. 11. Gal. 1.
• * 1.1262

  Hovv vvebring the only Go∣spell.
• * 1.1263

  Hovve the Pa∣pistes herein playe the Do∣natistes partes.
• * 1.1264

  13. Mu•…•…hering & canonizing of saintes.
• * 1.1265

  Bonif 8.
• * 1.1266

  Stapl. 60. a
• * 1.1267

  The Papistes and Donatistes vvorship of the dead. What memo∣riall of Saintes vve kep•…•….
• * 1.1268

  Iohn. 4.
• * 1.1269

  Thomas Bec∣kets death no martyrdome.
• * 1.1270

  Canonization of Saincts.
• * 1.1271

  Stapl. 61. b.
• * 1.1272

  Stapl 61. b. The motiues that moued the Bishop to cha∣lenge M. Feck∣for folovving the Donatistes practise.
• * 1.1273

  The Princes especiall ser∣uice of Christ.
• * 1.1274

  Howe the Pa∣pistes play the Donatists par∣tes.
• * 1.1275

  Stapl. 61. b
• * 1.1276

  Stapl. 62. a
• * 1.1277

  Sta. fol. 61. b
• * 1.1278

  How M Feck. expresly deni∣eth, and yet in∣clusi•…•… gra•…•… teth the exam∣ples of the old Testament.
• * 1.1279

  Supra pag. 344.
• * 1.1280

  Stap. 62. a M. Stapl. here bewrayeth the very cause why M. Feck. for∣sooke the ex∣amples of the olde Testamēt, bicause they made against him.
• * 1.1281

  Luke. 16.
• * 1.1282

  M. Stapl. de∣fendeth Mast. Feck. agaynste his own know ledge and cō∣science.
• * 1.1283

  Hieremie. •…•….
• * 1.1284

  Stap. 62. a
• * 1.1285

  Stapl.. 62. a.
• * 1.1286

  Stapl. 62. b
• * 1.1287

  1. Reg. 17.
• * 1.1288

  Iudith. 14.
• * 1.1289

  1. Cor. 1.
• * 1.1290

  How the Do∣natists and the Papists alledge the olde Te∣stament alike.
• * 1.1291

  Stapl 62. b
• * 1.1292

  Silence argu∣eth not always assent.
• * 1.1293

  Olde sayings.
• * 1.1294

  Stapl. 62. b 63. a
• * 1.1295

  M. Sta. vnlyke similitude to disburthen M. Fecknham.
• * 1.1296

  Howe falsely M. Sta. chalen∣geth vs for he∣retikes, for lea∣uing oute an article of the common crede in the Apolo∣gie.
• * 1.1297

  How cunning M. Stap. him∣selfe •…•…s in the cōmon creede.
• * 1.1298

  M. Stap. notes the Bishop and other for grā∣mar, and •…•…o what a Gram∣marian he she∣wes himselfe to be.
• * 1.1299

  Contr. Valent. lib. 1. cap. 2. & lib. 3. cap. 4. De praescript. haereticorum.
• * 1.1300

  Fol. 423. li. •…•… Diuis. 159. cap. 4. M. Stap. taketh on him to tea∣che the bishop his Catechisme
• * 1.1301

  Stap. fol. 423.
• * 1.1302

  M Sta. in say∣ing the Com∣mon crede lea∣ueth out these words. And in Iesus Christe our Lorde.
• * 1.1303

  Stapl. 423. a M. Sta. leaueth out againe, in saying the cō∣mon Creede, these wordes, crucified, dead, and buryed.
• * 1.1304

  Stapl.. 423. a A•…•… other arti∣cle left oute by M. Sta. in say∣ing the com∣mon creede, That he sitteth at the right hād of God the fa∣ther almighty.
• * 1.1305

  Whether Car∣dinall Hosi' be iustly chalen∣ged to main∣tain the Swēk feldians heresi•…•… or no.
• * 1.1306

  Stap. 63. 2.
• * 1.1307

  Stap. 63. •…•…
• * 1.1308

  The D•…•…natists did not simply refuse the old•…•…▪ testamente, as the Manichees did, but sub•…•…∣ly as the Pa∣pistes do.
• * 1.1309

  Aug. de haere•…•…. Ad quod vult.
• * 1.1310

  Stapl. 63. a. b The seconde motiue that moued the Bi∣shop to cha∣lenge M Feck. to followe the Donatiste•…•….
• * 1.1311

  Supra pag.
• * 1.1312

  Diuis. 18. pag. 11.
• * 1.1313

  How the Do∣natists and Pa∣pistes denie the Princes gouer∣nement in Ec∣clesiasticall cau ses, and ref•…•…rie it onely to the clergie.
• * 1.1314

  What the Pa∣pistes meane by the Church
• * 1.1315

  M. Sta. re•…•…o∣keth his graūt.
• * 1.1316

  The Donatists exclaming on the Princes for Ecclesiasticall causes, argueth that the supre∣me gouerne∣mente of them was in the Princes.
• * 1.1317

  Stap. 63. b
• * 1.1318

  Stapl. 63. b M. Stapl. ex∣ample of the Princis puni∣shing an ho∣nest man for a theefe.
• * 1.1319

  A theefe in christen reli∣gion. Iohn. 10.
• * 1.1320

  M. Sta. simili tude returned vpon himself.
• * 1.1321

  M. Stapl. let∣teth go the te∣stimonies of S Aug. allea∣ged by the Bi∣shop.
• * 1.1322

  Stapl. 63. b
• * 1.1323

  Winton. pag. 12. b.
• * 1.1324

  The speciall 〈◊〉〈◊〉 o•…•… chri∣stian princis.
• * 1.1325

  Further exam∣ples of the old Testament al∣ledged by S. Aug. for prin∣ces dealing in ecclesiasticall matters.
• * 1.1326

  Stapletons or∣der to this di uision.
• * 1.1327

  Stap. 65. a
• * 1.1328

  Number of te∣stimonies.
• * 1.1329

  Whereto the former testi∣monies of S. Aug. were al∣leaged. Wherto serue the authorities present.
• * 1.1330

  Here M. Stapl. confesseth, that Princes ought to make l•…•…wes for the •…•…∣rance of Chri∣stes religion.
• * 1.1331

  The Papistes denying the Queene to make lawes, and say no ca∣tholike deny∣eth it, denye them selues to be catholikes. The Papistes subtill mea∣ning in theyr plaine spea∣ches. The holde of a Papists worde, and the holde of a weat Eele by the tayle.
• * 1.1332

  Howe trimly the Papists and we do here a∣gree in words.
• * 1.1333

  See a subtill▪ Papist.
• * 1.1334

  At a dead life, well fare a pa∣pists shift. M. Stapl. re∣nueth an olde knacke of Ar∣rius.
• * 1.1335

  Howe finely M. Stapl. can turne his tale.
• * 1.1336

  Stapl. 65. a. &. 65. b
• * 1.1337

  Belyke M. Sta. wantes good neighbours.
• * 1.1338

  Stapl. 65. b Here M. Stapl. bewrayeth all the •…•…etche of his former graunte.
• * 1.1339

  Howe cra•…•…tyly M. Stap. limi∣ted the Princes making of lawes.
• * 1.1340

  All M. Staple∣tons ioly graūt to Princes, is nowe come to nothing, but to make them the clergies slaughtermen and droyles.
• * 1.1341

  M. Stapletons fay•…•…e texte, and foule glose.
• * 1.1342

  Stapl. 65. b.
• * 1.1343

  How S Augu∣stine acknow∣ledged the Prince.
• * 1.1344

  M. Stap. telleth of all this that August. wrote, but what this (all this) is, he duist not vtter. August. contr. Gaudent. epist. 2 li. 2. c•…•…. 26. Epist. 50. The testimo∣nies of S. Aug. to proue the princes dealing in ecclesiastical causes to reach further than making lawes for punishing heret•…•…kes.
• * 1.1345

  Epist. 48.
• * 1.1346

  M. Stapl. wold returne S. Au∣gustines words vppon vs.
• * 1.1347

  Stapl 65 b.
• * 1.1348

  How sure the Papistes make all pointes a∣gainste the Protestantes.
• * 1.1349

  Stap. 65. b
• * 1.1350

  Howe Princes punished de∣prauers of re∣ligion in saint August. tyme.
• * 1.1351

  Stapl. 65 b.
• * 1.1352

  The Princes lawes for blas∣phemers.
• * 1.1353

  The Princes carefull proui∣ding.
• * 1.1354

  Stap. 65. b
• * 1.1355

  M. Stapletons strong proues.
• * 1.1356

  Stapl. 65. b. Contempte of Sacraments.
• * 1.1357

  Popish Sophi∣st•…•…e can make 7. of. 2.
• * 1.1358

  Stapl 65 b. Councels.
• * 1.1359

  Matth. 26. Ioho. 11.
• * 1.1360

  The Papistes maynteyn cō∣demned do∣ctrines.
• * 1.1361

  1. Tim. 4.
• * 1.1362

  Stap. 65. b
• * 1.1363

  Howe the Bi∣shop called the Papists Dona∣tistes.
• * 1.1364

  Howe darke and subtilly M. Stapl. spea∣keth.
• * 1.1365

  How farre the examples of the olde Te∣stament stret∣che to directe christian prin∣ces.
• * 1.1366

  M. Stapl. will proue that we denie that whi che we affirm.
• * 1.1367

  What it is that we affirme of the Princes authoritie.
• * 1.1368

  Stapl. 66. •…•…
• * 1.1369

  Stap. 65. a Who bee the true Donatist•…•… for saying Princes maye not punishe in causes of God•…•… religion.
• * 1.1370

  M. Stapl. him∣self cleereth vs of that he fals∣ly burdeneth vs.
• * 1.1371

  Stapl. 66. a
• * 1.1372

  Howe Luther sayd, Faith can not be forced.
• * 1.1373

  Croyses and Turkishe warres.
• * 1.1374

  The question whether Prin∣ces maye pu∣nishe heretikes by death.
• * 1.1375

  How the Pa∣pistes proue vs to be heretikes
• * 1.1376

  The Princes dutie where a∣ny are chalen∣ged to be he∣retikes.
• * 1.1377

  An inuectiue gainst M. Fox.
• * 1.1378

  M. Foxes boke and B. Iewels, great eyesores to the Papists.
• * 1.1379

  Stap. 66. a. Sir Thomas Hitton priest.
• * 1.1380

  False slaunders and malicious misseconstru∣ctions of the faithfull.
• * 1.1381

  Luc. 23. Matth. 26. Iohn. 19. Act. 6.
• * 1.1382

  Hewe the Pa∣pistes deale with the Pro∣testantes and their articles. Math. 5.
• * 1.1383

  The vneuen dealing of the Papistes.
• * 1.1384

  Sir Thomas Hitton priest no Donatist.
• * 1.1385

  Sir Iohn Old∣castell.
• * 1.1386

  Stap. 66. b. •…•…
• * 1.1387

  Stap. 66. b.
• * 1.1388

  M. Stapletons weake argu∣ment.
• * 1.1389

  Maister Foxes synceritie in the Papistes falshoodes.
• * 1.1390

  Sir Iohn Old∣castle proued no Donatist.
• * 1.1391

  Sir Thomas More himselfe mislyked the punishment of manslaughter in many offen ce•…•…. The aunciente punishment of of heretikes.
• * 1.1392

  Declar. Erasmi tit. de puni∣endis her. 76. 77.
• * 1.1393

  The myld spi∣rit of popishe Bishoppes and Abbots.
• * 1.1394

  S. August. opi∣nion of the pu nishement of heretikes.
• * 1.1395

  The Circum∣celions.
• * 1.1396

  Punishement by the purse.
• * 1.1397

  Banishment.
• * 1.1398

  The popishe crueltie.
• * 1.1399

  The difference herein betwen Erasmus and the Popishe Bishops.
• * 1.1400

  S. Hieroms opiniō herein and the resons mouing him thereto.
• * 1.1401

  The Papistes in crueltie come neerest the Donatistes.
• * 1.1402

  Eras. decla. tit. de pun. h•…•….
• * 1.1403

  The mercie of the Gospell.
• * 1.1404

  Though the Gospell taketh not awaye po∣litike lawes or punishmentes, yet is there a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 be∣tweene them and the Go∣spell. The Sorboni∣stes cōfession. In declar. bras. tit. de pun. haer.
• * 1.1405

  Howe the Pa∣pistes yet nee∣rer resemble the Donatistes.
• * 1.1406

  Stap. 66. b. &. 67. a
• * 1.1407

  Stap. 67. a
• * 1.1408

  How M. Feck. yeldes not to the examples of the olde te∣stament, and yet yelding to the new Testa ment, is com∣prehended by it, though he comprehended it not.
• * 1.1409

  Pag. 14. a.
• * 1.1410

  M. Stapleton cap. 7. fol. 68. a
• * 1.1411

  M. Stapl. order in this diuision
• * 1.1412

  Stapl. 68. a. M. Sta. now at the length is driuen to gra•…•…t Princes some regiment in Ecclesiasticall causes.
• * 1.1413

  M. Stapleton graunteth also to Princes su∣preme gouer∣nement in all ecclesiasticall causes.
• * 1.1414

  In natural and ordinarie pro∣positions, the indefinite be∣tokens the vni∣uersall.
• * 1.1415

  Stap. 68. •…•…▪
• * 1.1416

  M. Stap▪ con∣fesseth that the Bishop hath proued the full issue in questi∣on betweene M. Fecknham and him.
• * 1.1417

  Stap. 68. a M. S•…•…apl. grant of all that the Bishop hathe hitherto allea∣ged.
• * 1.1418

  Esai. 49.
• * 1.1419

  Whether the Bishops exam∣ples and alle∣gations beeing granted of M. Stapl. reache home or no.
• * 1.1420

  The prince su∣preme gouer∣nour of all and euery ecclesia∣sticall cause.
• * 1.1421

  What this su∣preme gouer∣nement is?
• * 1.1422

  Why kings & Queenes are called Nouri∣shers and Nur∣ses of Gods Churche.
• * 1.1423

  St•…•…p. 67. •…•…
• * 1.1424

  M. St•…•…p. gran∣tes to Cōstan∣tine this su∣preme gouer∣ment, and de∣nieth it to the Queenes Ma∣iestie.
• * 1.1425

  M. Stap. goeth now about by wrangling to defeate all his former graunt.
• * 1.1426

  The princebe∣ing called Me∣taphorically, as it were a Bish. maketh no breach into the offico of a Bi∣shop.
• * 1.1427

  What these vvordes Bishop and nourse be∣tokē, although in deede the Prince be ney∣ther nourse nor Bishop.
• * 1.1428

  Stap. 68. a.
• * 1.1429

  Stapl. 68 b
• * 1.1430

  M. Stapl. false translation of Constantine•…•… wordes.
• * 1.1431

  The sentence of Constantine and the true meaning ther∣of. Euseb. de vita Const. li. 4.
• * 1.1432

  Hovv M. Stap. vnderstandeth invvard things and outvvarde things, & hovv vve vnderstand them in Con∣stantines sen∣tence.
• * 1.1433

  The matter & maner of ey∣ther Bishoprik
• * 1.1434

  Stapl. 29. b. As M. Stapletō vnderstandes this sentence, the Turke is as good a bishop as a Christian▪ Prince.
• * 1.1435

  Procuration & execution of Churche mat∣ters.
• * 1.1436

  The Papistes vvould haue Princes to bee b•…•…t the Priests proctours and executioners▪ at the moste.
• * 1.1437

  Fol. 69. a.
• * 1.1438

  The Bishops allegatiōs ou•…•… of the nevve Testament.
• * 1.1439

  62. b.
• * 1.1440

  Stap. 69. a •…•…. Sta. graun∣teth the Bish. argument.
• * 1.1441

  Stap. 69. a
• * 1.1442

  M. Stapletons diuinitie.
• * 1.1443

  Stap. 69. •…•….
• * 1.1444

  M. Stapleto•…•… vp braydyng the Bishops di∣uinitie, see what good di∣uinitie he hym selfe maketh. M. Stapl. Lo∣gike.
• * 1.1445

  Matth. 22.
• * 1.1446

  The nevv Te∣stament con∣firmeth the fi∣gure of the old Testament.
• * 1.1447

  That subiectes may paye tri∣bute▪ but they ought not.
• * 1.1448

  All humanitie i•…•… destroied by by M. Staple∣tons good di∣uinitie.
• * 1.1449

  Stap. 69. a The captious questions of the Iewes.
• * 1.1450

  The flatte and generall aun∣swer of christ.
• * 1.1451

  M. Stapl. dea le•…•…h as capti∣ously as the Iewes.
• * 1.1452

  An externall Prince.
• * 1.1453

  An infidell Prince.
• * 1.1454

  Luc. 2.
• * 1.1455

  Stap. 69. a. b
• * 1.1456

  By the name of Cesar, Christe comprehēdeth all princes.
• * 1.1457

  Christes aun∣swere a gene∣ral commaun∣dement.
• * 1.1458

  Stapl. 69. b.
• * 1.1459

  M. Sea. many∣fest vntru•…•…
• * 1.1460

  Stap. 69. B
• * 1.1461

  By M. Staple∣tons exposition of Christes, Sentence not all obedi∣enc•…•… to Prin∣ces 〈◊〉〈◊〉 se•…•…e at libertie, but all obedience to God.
• * 1.1462

  The one parte of the sentence bindeth asmu∣che as the o∣ther.
• * 1.1463

  Matth. 22.
• * 1.1464

  M. Stapletons Grammer.
• * 1.1465

  The iudgemēt of the writers of this sentence cleane contra∣rie to maister Stapleton.
• * 1.1466

  Lib. de fug. in persecution.
• * 1.1467

  In Matth. 22. tract. 21.
• * 1.1468

  The same saith M. Stapl.
• * 1.1469

  Orig. ibid.
• * 1.1470

  In. 20. Luc. homil. 38.
• * 1.1471

  In Mat. c•…•…. 23. In regula Mo∣nachorum.
• * 1.1472

  In Matth. 22. homil. 71.
• * 1.1473

  In Luc. lib. 9. cap. 20.
• * 1.1474

  Contr. Faustū Manichaeu•…•… lib. 22. ca. 74.
• * 1.1475

  In. 22. Math.
• * 1.1476

  Lyra in Matth. 22.
• * 1.1477

  M. Stapletons contradictions.
• * 1.1478

  Stapl. 69. b.
• * 1.1479

  Stap. 70. •…•….
• * 1.1480

  This admoni∣tion godly and necessarie.
• * 1.1481

  Stap. fol. 70.
• * 1.1482

  What a proper determination M. Sta. maketh of Christes sentence.
• * 1.1483

  Stapl. 70. a
• * 1.1484

  M. Stapleton measureth our doings by his owne.
• * 1.1485

  The practise of the Popes with christian prin∣ces.
• * 1.1486

  Sta pag. 70. •…•…
• * 1.1487

  The Bishoppes further testi∣monies of the newe Testa∣ment, with the fathers iudge∣mentes theron.
• * 1.1488

  The order of M. Stapletons ansvvere.
• * 1.1489

  Stap. pag. 71. b
• * 1.1490

  M. Stapletons maner at firste to graunte, aoō after by some wrangling di∣stinction to reuoke his graunt.
• * 1.1491

  M. Sta. graun∣teth the Prince hath the ouer∣sight as well of the first as the second table.
• * 1.1492

  Stapl. pag. 72.
• * 1.1493

  Stap. pag. 72.
• * 1.1494

  M. Stapletons shifte of the court of con∣science.
• * 1.1495

  Melancth. v▪ supra.
• * 1.1496

  The Prince dealeth neither with the fyrst nor secōd table, in respect of the court of con∣science, but of the outwarde facte.
• * 1.1497

  Stap. pag. 7•…•….
• * 1.1498

  Stapl. 7•…•…. b.
• * 1.1499

  M. Stapl. after his pinching taketh cleane away his own graunt.
• * 1.1500

  M. Stapleton woulde proue contradiction to Melancthō.
• * 1.1501

  Stap. fol. 72. b
• * 1.1502

  M. Stapl. sub∣tile and false translating.
• * 1.1503

  Stap. fol. 73. a. M. Stapletons cauill agayoste Mast. Nowell.
• * 1.1504

  Christian Prin ces clayme not supreme go∣•…•…ement with∣out limitation, but the Pope clamyeth it.
• * 1.1505

  Stapl. 73. •…•… The acte of parliament.
• * 1.1506

  Sta. pag. 73. •…•…
• * 1.1507

  Stap. pag. 73. a
• * 1.1508

  Stap. pag. 73. a
• * 1.1509

  What maner of authoritie the othe of the su∣premacie re∣quireth.
• * 1.1510

  M. Stapletons quarell at the Bishops inter∣pretation of this word god¦lynesse.
• * 1.1511

  lib. 1. de trin. cap. 14.
• * 1.1512

  S. Augustines exposition.
• * 1.1513

  The exposition of other fa∣thers.
• * 1.1514

  Chrysost. in 1. Tim. 2. bo∣mil. 7
• * 1.1515

  Amb•…•…osius in 1. Tim. 2.
• * 1.1516

  H•…•…ymo in. 1. Tim 2.
• * 1.1517

  Glossa inter∣lineata. •…•…ytanus. Hugo Card.
• * 1.1518

  Stapl. 73. b.
• * 1.1519

  Stap. fol. 73. b
• * 1.1520

  Stap. fol. 73. b.
• * 1.1521

  Sta. 73. b. The cause why the Apostles taughte obedi∣ence so ear∣nestly.
• * 1.1522

  Stap. fol. 72. b
• * 1.1523

  Stapl. fol. 73 b
• * 1.1524

  A distinction betweene the the Princes person or vices and his estate or office.
• * 1.1525

  Chrysost. in Rom.
• * 1.1526

  Stapl. 73. b.
• * 1.1527

  The Pope clai∣meth superio∣ritie in ciuile and temporall matters.
• * 1.1528

  The Pope oughte to bee the Emperours subiect by M. Staplet. owne graunt.
• * 1.1529

  Chrysosto. in Rom. 13. ho∣mil. 23.
• * 1.1530

  Why the Prince is called gods minister.
• * 1.1531

  Stap. fol. 73. b. Chrysost. ho∣mil. 4. de eo {quod} scripsit Esa.
• * 1.1532

  Howe M. Sta▪ citeth Chryso∣stome.
• * 1.1533

  The facte of Czias wh•…•…me the Papists al∣leage, maketh agaynst them∣selues, not a∣gainst vs.
• * 1.1534

  Wherein the Pastor, being the minist•…•…r of God, surmoū∣teth the Prince being also the minist•…•…s of God.
• * 1.1535

  Wherin againe the Princes ministerie sur∣mounte•…•…h the pastours mini∣sterie.
• * 1.1536

  The sentence that the Papi∣stes cite out of Chrysostome for their prie∣stes, maketh cleane against them.
• * 1.1537

  Priestes mari∣age.
• * 1.1538

  Chrysosto. d•…•… verbis Esa. ho∣mil. •…•….
• * 1.1539

  Stap. fol. 74. a
• * 1.1540

  M. Stapletons argument.
• * 1.1541

  The answere to the argu∣ment.
• * 1.1542

  Stapl. 75. a.
• * 1.1543

  Stap. pag. 75. a
• * 1.1544

  Stap. 74. b.
• * 1.1545

  Fol. 75. a.
• * 1.1546

  Stapl. cap. 19. fol. 75. b
• * 1.1547

  Iohn. 9.
• * 1.1548

  Constantine chaunged re∣ligion.
• * 1.1549

  Tertull.
• * 1.1550

  The Queenes highnesse hath not altered, but restored the olde and for∣mer faith.
• * 1.1551

  What Bishops the Queenes Maiestie hathe deposed.
• * 1.1552

  Stap. foll. 7•…•…, b
• * 1.1553

  Why the prince is called the minister of God.
• * 1.1554

  The worde of doctrine.
• * 1.1555

  Stapl. 75. b The Princes best ministeris and seruice.
• * 1.1556

  Stap. fol. 75. b
• * 1.1557

  M. Stapletons shifting an∣svvere.
• * 1.1558

  Stap. 75. b.
• * 1.1559

  Stap. 75. b.
• * 1.1560

  Nicephorus iudgement of the Princes su∣premacie.
• * 1.1561

  Stap. fol 76. b M. Stapletons Miste.
• * 1.1562

  M. Stapletons in•…•…ect •…•…e a∣ga•…•…nst the ho∣milie of ima∣ges.
• * 1.1563

  Matth. 23.
• * 1.1564

  Anthropol, lib. 23.
• * 1.1565

  Lascaris.
• * 1.1566

  The contenti∣on betweene the greeke and Latine churche for images.
• * 1.1567

  Stap. 76. b.
• * 1.1568

  In the homilie against idola∣trie.
• * 1.1569

  Baruch. 6.
• * 1.1570

  Stapl. 77. b.
• * 1.1571

  The Bishop of Sarum and the author of the homilie dis∣charged of M. Stapl. chalenge
• * 1.1572

  Petrus Crinit. l b. 9 cap. 9. de honest. di•…•…c.
• * 1.1573

  Te Papistes offended at our Homelies.
• * 1.1574

  Bedes Home∣lies.
• * 1.1575

  Sta. 79. a. &. b
• * 1.1576

  Mistaking the name of an Emperour.
• * 1.1577

  Langus in pr•…•…fa. Niceph.
• * 1.1578

  Anthropolog. lib. 23.
• * 1.1579

  The Papiste•…•… themselues call this Emperour as the Bishop did.
• * 1.1580

  Stapl. 77. a.
• * 1.1581

  What a brag∣ger M. Stapl. is
• * 1.1582

  Nicephorus selaundered▪
• * 1.1583

  lib. 4. cap. 8. fol. 468. b
• * 1.1584

  How M. Stap. reuileth the Emperour.
• * 1.1585

  Praefat, Langi in Eccl. histor. Niceph.
• * 1.1586

  Stap. 77. b.
• * 1.1587

  Whereon wee buyld the Prin ces supremacie and whereon the Papistes buyld the Po∣pes supro∣macie.
• * 1.1588

  Langi Epist. ad Ferdin.
• * 1.1589

  M Stapleto•…•…s order.
• * 1.1590

  Stapl. 77. b
• * 1.1591

  M. Sta. burde∣neth the Greke priests to farre.
• * 1.1592

  The supreme∣cie of the Greeke Empe∣rours.
• * 1.1593

  The Grecians opinion in the holie Ghostes proceeding.
• * 1.1594

  Math. 7.
• * 1.1595

  Stapl. 77. b.
• * 1.1596

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 77. b
• * 1.1597

  Stapl. 77. b.
• * 1.1598

  Stapl. 77. b.
• * 1.1599

  Stapl. 77. b▪
• * 1.1600

  Stapl. 78•…•….
• * 1.1601

  Pag. 17. b.
• * 1.1602

  The Bishops proues that M. Stapl. passeth so slightly o∣uer proue the full matter.
• * 1.1603

  M. Stapleton letteth go the principall mat ter, and quarels at the margin.
• * 1.1604

  Stapl. 77. a.
• * 1.1605

  The engli∣shing of the worde supre∣mus.
• * 1.1606

  The last taken for the chiefest
• * 1.1607

  The propor∣tion betweene the stay of an anchor, and the staye of a Prince.
• * 1.1608

  Sadli•…•…g •…•… Cowe.
• * 1.1609

  Beggerly shifts.
• * 1.1610

  Stapl. 78. b Nicephorus his amplifica∣tion.
• * 1.1611

  Stap. fol. 78. b
• * 1.1612

  The force of a metaphore.
• * 1.1613

  2. Tim. •…•….
• * 1.1614

  Stapl. 78. b.
• * 1.1615

  1. Tim. 8.
• * 1.1616

  M Stapletons order to this diuision.
• * 1.1617

  Stapl. 79 b
• * 1.1618

  Stapl. 80. a.
• * 1.1619

  Stapl. 80. a
• * 1.1620

  Comparison of learning betweene bi∣shop Gardine•…•… bishop White, and Bishop Horne.
• * 1.1621

  Sta. 80. a.
• * 1.1622

  Prouer. 12.
• * 1.1623

  Wherfore Ni∣cephorus de∣dicated his ec∣clesiastical hi∣storie to the Emperour.
• * 1.1624

  Prefa. Niceph.
• * 1.1625

  The princes exact iudge∣ment and cen∣sure in ecclesi∣astical matters.
• * 1.1626

  The Princes reformation of the priestes, and of the Churche.
• * 1.1627

  Stapl. 80. b
• * 1.1628

  79. •…•….
• * 1.1629

  M. Stapl. in∣constancie and contradiction.
• * 1.1630

  Stapl. 80. b
• * 1.1631

  M Stap. graū∣teth the good regiment of magistrates to be the spring of true religiō.
• * 1.1632

  Prosperitie & religion ioy∣ned in a Prince
• * 1.1633

  Pr•…•…fa. Niceph.
• * 1.1634

  Stap. 80. b.
• * 1.1635

  Stapl. 85. •…•….
• * 1.1636

  The Grecians fell into the Turkes capti∣uitie after this submission to the Pope.
• * 1.1637

  The Papistes haue as muche cause or more, to beware by the Grecians captiuitie than the Protestāts.
• * 1.1638

  The Pope the chiefe cause of the Greke em∣perours decay. The Pope also the chief cause of the Weast Emperours decay.
• * 1.1639

  The Greeke church neuer became captiue to the Turke, till they be∣came thrall to the Pope.
• * 1.1640

  Stap. 81. a
• * 1.1641

  The countreys that obeyed the Pope, be∣come thrall to the Turks cap tiuitie.
• * 1.1642

  Stapl. 81. •…•…
• * 1.1643

  Blearing the readers eyes.
• * 1.1644

  How M. Stapl. answeres the Bishops alle∣gation.
• * 1.1645

  Cyril. epi. 17. •…•…om▪ 4.
• * 1.1646

  Wherein the Emperoures chief care con∣sisted.
• * 1.1647

  Obscuritie.
• * 1.1648

  2. Cor. 2.
• * 1.1649

  Stapl. 8 •…•…▪ b
• * 1.1650

  Generalities.
• * 1.1651

  Particulari∣ties.
• * 1.1652

  Cyril. epi. 17. tom. 4.
• * 1.1653

  The discussing and debating Ecclesiasticall matters, argu∣eth not the su∣preme gouer∣nement of thē.
• * 1.1654

  How the Pa∣pistes elude the examples of christian prin∣ces.
• * 1.1655

  Stapl. 81. b
• * 1.1656

  Stapl. 81. b.
• * 1.1657

  M. Stapl. false and subtile translation.
• * 1.1658

  Principalitie of priest •…•…ode.
• * 1.1659

  Priesthoode sprong not frō Peter.
• * 1.1660

  Gal. 2.
• * 1.1661

  The Papistes saye S. Iames sayd the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Masse. Peter no mas∣sing priest.
• * 1.1662

  What manner of principalitie of priesthoode Valentinian ment.
• * 1.1663

  Concil. tom. 1.
• * 1.1664

  The Epistle of Placidia to Theodosius.
• * 1.1665

  The Epistle of Eudoxia to Theodosius.
• * 1.1666

  Theodosius E∣pistle to Va∣lentinian.
• * 1.1667

  Wherein the Emperour had the gouerne∣ment of the councell.
• * 1.1668

  The Emperor decreeth the decree of the Councell.
• * 1.1669

  No appeale af∣ter the Empe∣rours decree.
• * 1.1670

  Stapl. 82. •…•….
• * 1.1671

  Stapl. 82. •…•…
• * 1.1672

  Act. •…•….
• * 1.1673

  Stapl. 82. •…•….
• * 1.1674

  Pag. 19. b.
• * 1.1675

  M St. order to this diuision.
• * 1.1676

  Stapl. 82. b. cap. 20.
• * 1.1677

  The state of the question.
• * 1.1678

  Supra pag. 136.
• * 1.1679

  Stap. 82. b.
• * 1.1680

  The supreme authoritie the Papistes graūt to Princes, and in what sense they graunt it.
• * 1.1681

  Stap. 82. b.
• * 1.1682

  What state of the question M. St. setteth downe.
• * 1.1683

  The oth of the supremacie.
• * 1.1684

  The othe and the statute sla•…•… de•…•…ed by the Papistes.
• * 1.1685

  Supreme go∣uernmēt is not all maner of gouernement.
• * 1.1686

  How the mi∣nisters are hi∣gher or inferi∣our.
• * 1.1687

  Stapl. 83. a.
• * 1.1688

  Stapl. 83. a.
• * 1.1689

  The statute e•…•… cluding any forain persons authoritie ex∣cludeth net the authoritie of the whole churche.
• * 1.1690

  Gala. 3. Coloss. 3. Ephe. 2.
• * 1.1691

  What authori∣tie it is that the true catholike church hath.
• * 1.1692

  Iohn. 15.
• * 1.1693

  Stap. 8•…•…. a
• * 1.1694

  M. Stapl. qua∣rell for vni∣ting the supre∣macie to the crovvne.
• * 1.1695

  M. Stapl. at the ende of his booke woulde leaue a scruple in the readers head of misse∣lyking the state.
• * 1.1696

  The answere to M. Stapl. in∣conne•…•…ence of a Turke or an heretike to haue this su∣premacie. Difference be∣twene a Turke and an here∣tike.
• * 1.1697

  What a Turke would doe, if he had the crovvne.
• * 1.1698

  Iob. 34.
• * 1.1699

  Psalm. 147.
• * 1.1700

  The Princes certain and pre sente righte oughte not to be forsakē for feare of vncer∣tain incon∣ueniences that may be doub∣ted to come.
• * 1.1701

  Difference be∣twene a Prin∣ces authoritie, and a Princes tyrannie.
• * 1.1702

  The Statute cleared from M. Stap. in∣conueniēce.
• * 1.1703

  Howe muche the Papistes regarde the crow•…•…e of 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.1704

  How well the Pope wisheth to England.
• * 1.1705

  Whether M. St. inconueni∣ence wold not fall oute, if the clause of supre macie were v∣nited to the Pope.
• * 1.1706

  What the lawe respecteth in the statute.
• * 1.1707

  Stapl. 83. a. b.
• * 1.1708

  Stapl. 83. b
• * 1.1709

  Stapl. •…•…3. b.
• * 1.1710

  Stapl. 83. b.
• * 1.1711

  The excuses of the Papists.
• * 1.1712

  Stapl. 83. b
• * 1.1713

  The Papistes pretence of zeale to God to disobey their Prince.
• * 1.1714

  The absolute obedience to God hindreth not the condi∣tionall obedi∣ence to the Prince.
• * 1.1715

  What the Pa∣pists meane here by God.
• * 1.1716

  Hovv Thomas Becket died for Gods cause.
• * 1.1717

  Sta. 83. b. The accusati∣on of vs.
• * 1.1718

  Stapl. 83. b
• * 1.1719

  The B. char∣ged for omit∣ting the Prin∣cipall ecclesia∣sticall cause.
• * 1.1720

  Cap. 63. b
• * 1.1721

  M. Stapletons contradiction.
• * 1.1722

  M. Stap. wold driue the B from his issue.
• * 1.1723

  The Prince and the statute sl•…•…undered.
• * 1.1724

  Difference be∣twene ecclesi∣asticall gouer∣nour, and go∣uernour in ec∣clesiasticall causes.
• * 1.1725

  How iudge∣ment in eccle∣siasticall causes is ascribed to the Prince, how not.
• * 1.1726

  Gal. 1.
• * 1.1727

  The statute slaundred.
• * 1.1728

  The Popishe churche clay∣meth superio∣ritie in iudge∣ging of doc∣trine aboue the Pope.
• * 1.1729

  Stap. 48. a.
• * 1.1730

  Stap. 48. b.
• * 1.1731

  Math. 12.