The institution of Christian religion, vvrytten in Latine by maister Ihon Caluin, and translated into Englysh according to the authors last edition. Seen and allowed according to the order appointed in the Quenes maiesties iniunctions

The .ii. Chapter. A comparison of the false Chirche with the true Chirche.

OF howe greate value the ministery of the worde and Sacramentes ought to be with vs, and howe farre the reuerence of it ought to procede, that it be vnto vs a perpetuall token wherby to discerne the Chirche, it hath been already declared. That is to say, wherso∣euer that ministery abideth whole and vncorrupted, there the faultes or diseases of maners are no impe∣diment, but that it may beare the name of a Chirche. Thē, that the very ministery it selfe is by small errors not so corrupted, but that it may be estemed lawfull. Moreouer, we haue shewed that the errors that ought so to be pardoned, are those wherby y^e pryncipal doc∣trine of religion is not hurt, wherby those chefe poyntes of religion that ought to be agreably holden among the faythful are not destroyed, and in the Sacramentes, those y^t do not abolish nor empaire the lawful in∣stitution of him y^t ordeined thē. But so sone as lying is broken into the chefe tower of religion, so sone as the summe of necessarye doctryne is peruerted, and y^e vse of the Sacramentes falleth: truely the destruction of y^e Chirch foloweth: like as a mans lyfe is at an ende, when his throte is thrust through or his hart deadly wounded. And thys is clearely pro∣ued by the wordes of Paul,* 1.1 when he teacheth that the fundation of the Chirch is layed vpon the doctrine of the Apostles & Prophetes, Christ himselfe being the hed corner stone. If the fundation of the Chirche be the doctrine of the Prophetes and Apostles, by which the faythfull are commaunded to repose their saluation in only Christ: then take awaye that doctrine, and how shal the bilding stande any longer? Therfore the Chirche muste nedes fall downe, where that summe of religion falleth which is only able to vpholde it. Againe▪ if the true Chirche be the pil∣ler and slay of the trueth it is certaine,* 1.2 that there is no Chirche, where lyeng and falshode haue vsurped the dominion.

[ 2] Sith it is in such case vnder the Papistrie, we may vnderstand how much of the Chirche is there remayning. In stede of the ministery of y^e worde, there reigneth a peruerse gouernement & made of lyes mingled together, which partly quencheth and partly choketh the pure light. In to the place of y^e Lordes Supper is entred a most filthy Sacrilege: the forme of worshipping God is deformed with a manifolde & intolerable heape of superstitions: the doctryne, without which Christianitie can not stande, is altogether buried and dryuen out: the publike assemblies are the scholes of idolatry and vngodlinesse. Therfore there is no peryl lost in departing frō a dānable partakyng of so many mischeues, we be plucked frō the Chirche of Christ. The cōmunion of y^e Chirch was not ordeined to thys ende, y^t it should be a bonde wherby we should be entā∣gled with idolatrye, vngodlynesse, ignorance of God, & other kindes of euils: but rather wherby we should be fast holden in the feare of God & obedience of truth. They do in dede gloriously set out their Chirch vnto vs, y^t there should seme to be no other Chirch in y^e world: & afterwarde, as though the victory were gotten, they decree y^t all ••e Schismatykes that dare withdrawe themselues from the obedience of that Chirche

that they painte out: and that all be heretikes that dare ones mutter against the doctrine therof. But by what proues do they confirme that they haue the true Chirche? They alledge out of the auncient Chroni∣cles, what in olde tyme was in Italy, in Fraunce, in Spayne. They say that they fetche their beginnyng from those holy menne that with sounde doctrine founded and raised vp Chirches, and stablished the same doctrine and edifieng of the Chirche with their bloud. And that so the Chirche hath ben among them so consecrate bothe with spiritual gyftes, and with the bloud of martyrs, and preserued with continuall succession of bishops, that it myght not fall away. They rehearse how muche Ireneus, Tertullian, Origen, Augustine, and other estemed this succession. But howe triflyng these thynges be, and howe they be but very mockeries▪ I will make them very easily to vnderstande that will be content a little to wey them with me. Truely I woulde also ex∣hort them selues earnestly to take hede herevnto, if I did trust that I might any thyng preuaile with them by teachyng. But forasmuche as they, leauyng all regarde of truthe, doo bende themselues to this one∣ly purpose, by all the waies that they can, to defende their owne cause, I wyll onely speake a fewe thynges whereby good men and those that loue the truthe, may wynde them selues out of their suttle cauil∣lations. Fyrste I aske of theim, why they doo not alledge Aphrike, and Egypte, and all Asia? Euen because in all those countreyes this holye Succession of Byshoppes hath ceassed, by meane whereof they boast that they haue preserued Chirches. They come therefore to this poynt to saye, that they therefore haue a true Chirche, because sins it fyrst began to be, it hath not ben destitute of bishoppes: for in perpe∣tuall course they haue succeded one an other. But what if I caste Greece in their waie? Therefore I aske agayne of them, why they say that the Chirche is loste among the Grecians, among whom that suc∣cession of Byshops was neuer interrupted, whiche in theyr opinion is the onely keeper and preseruer of the Chirche. They make the Gre∣cians Schismatikes. but by what right? because in departing from the Apostolike sea, they haue lost their priuilege: what? Do not they much more deserue to loose it that departe from Christ himselfe? It foloweth therfore, that the pretence of succession is but vaine, vnlesse the poste∣ritie doo kepe faste and abide in the truthe of Christe, which they haue receaued of their fathers from hande to hande.

Therefore the Romanistes at this day doo alledge nothyng els but [ 3] that, whiche it appeareth that the Iewes in olde tyme alledged when they were by the Prophetes of the Lorde reproued of blyndnesse, vn∣godlynesse and idolatrie. For they gloriously boasted of the temple. Ce∣remonies and priesthodes, by whiche thynges, by great reason as they thinke, they measured the Chirche. So in steede of the Chirche, they shewe certayne outwarde visours, that oftentymes are farre from the Chirche, and without whiche the Chirche maye very well stande. Therefore we nede to confute theym with no other argumente, then that wherewith Hieremie fought agaynst the foolyshe presumptuous∣nesse of the Iewes:* 1.3 that is, that they shoulde not boaste in lying woor∣des, saying, The temple of the Lorde, the temple of the Lord, it is the temple of the Lord. Forasmuch as the Lord doth no where acknowlege

any thing for his, but where his worde is heard and reuerently obse••∣ued. So when the glory of God did sit betwene the Cherubins in the Sanctuarie,* 1.4 and he had promised them that that should be hys stedfast seate: yet when the Priestes ones corrupted the worshipping of hym w^t peruerse superstitions, he remoued els where, and left the place wyth∣out any holinesse. If the same temple which semed to be holily appoin∣ted to the perpetuall dwelling of God, mighte be forsaken of God and become vnholy: there is no cause why these men should faine to vs that God is so bounde to persons or places, and so fast tyed to outwarde ob∣seruations, that he must nedes abide with them that haue onely the tit∣tle and shewe of the Churche. And this is it about which Paul conten∣deth in the Epistle to the Romaines, from the .ix. Chapter to the .xii. For this did sore trouble weake consciēces, that the Iewes when they semed to be the people of God, did not onely refuse the doctryne of the Gospel, but also persecute it. Therfore after that he hath sette oute the doctrine, he remoueth this dout, and denyeth that those Iewes beeyng enemies of the trueth are the Churche, howsoeuer they wāted nothing that otherwise myght be required to the outward forme of the Church. And therfore he denieth it, bicause they embraced not Christ. But som∣what more expresly in the Epistle to the Galathians▪* 1.5 wherin cōparing Ismael with Isaac, he sayeth that many holde place in the Churche, to whom the inheritaunce belongeth not, because they are not begottē of the free mother. From whence also he descendeth to the comparison of two Hierusalems. Because as the law was geuen in the mount Sina, but the Gospel came out of Hierusalem.* 1.6 So many being seruilely born and brought vp, do wythout douting boast themselues to be the childrē of God and of the Churche, yea they proudely despyse the natural chyl∣dren of God, when themselues be but bastardes. On the other syde al∣so, when we heare that it was ones pronounced from heauen. Caste out the bonde woman and her sonne, lette vs, standyng vppon thys inuiolable decree, boldely despyse their vnsauerie boastinges. For if they be proude by reason of outwarde professyon, Ismael was also cir∣cumcised: if they contende by antiquitie, he was the fyrst begotten, and yet we see that he is put away.* 1.7 If the cause be demaunded, Paul assig∣neth it, for that none are accompted chyldren, but they that are begottē of the pure and lawfull sede of doctryne. According to thys reason God denyeth that he is bounde to wycked Pryestes by thys that he couen∣anted with their Father Leui that he should be his Angel or interpre∣ter: yea he turneth agaynst themselues their false bostyng, wherewyth they were wonte to rise vp against the Prophetes, that the dignitie of Priesthode was to be had in singular estimation. Thys he wyllyngly admitteth, and wyth the same condition he debateth wyth thē, because he is ready to keepe hys couenaunt, but when they doe not mutually performe their parte to hym, they deserue to be reiected. Loe what suc∣cession auayleth, vnlesse therewithal be also ioyned an inuitation and euenly continuing course: euen to thys effect that the successors, so sone as they be proued to haue swarued from theyr originall, be depryued of all honor. Unlesse parhappes because Caiphas succeded many Godlye byshops (yea there was euen from Aaron to hym a continuall vnbrokē course of succession) therefore that same mischeuous assemblie was

worthy the name of the Churche. But this were not tolerable euen in earthly dominions, that the tyranny of Caligula, Nero, Heliogabalus and suche other, should be called a true state of Common weale, for that they succeded the Brutes, Scipions, and Camilles. But specially in the gouernement of the Churche there is nothyng more fonde, than lea∣uyng the Doctrine to sette the succession in the Persons only, but ney∣ther did the holy doctours whom they falsely thruste in vnto vs, meane any thyng lesse, then to praie that precisely as it were by ryght of inhe∣ritance Churches be there where byshops are successiuely placed one af∣ter an other. But where as it was then out of controuersie, that from the very begynnyng to that age nothyng was chaunged in Doctrine, they alledged that whiche myght suffise to make an ende of all newe er∣rours, that is, that by those was that doctrine oppugned, which had ben euen from the Apostles constantly and with one agreing consent retei∣ned. There is therfore no cause, why they shold any longer go forward to deceiue by pretending a false colour vnder the name of the Churche, which we do reuerently esteme as becometh vs: but when they come to the definition of it, not only water (as the common sayeng is) cleaueth vnto them, but they stick fast in their own myre because they put a stin∣kyng harlo•• in place of the holy spouse of Christe. That this puttyng in of a changelyng should not deceiue vs, beside other admonitions, let vs remēbre this also of Augustin.* 1.8 For speaking of the Church, he saith. It is it that is sometime darkned, and couered with multitude of offen∣ces as with a cloude: sometime caulmnesse of time appeareth quiete and free: sometime is hidden and troubled with waue of tribulations and temptations. He bringeth forth examples, that oftētimes the strongest pillers either valiantly suffred banishment for the faith, or were hidden in the whole worlde.

In like maner the Romanistes do vexe vs, and make afraide the ig∣noraunt [ 4] wyth the name of the Church, whereas they be the deadly ene∣mies of Christe, Therfore althoug they pretende the temple, the priest∣hode and the other suche outward shewes, this vayne glistring wher∣wyth the eyes of the simple bee daseled oughte nothyng to moue vs to graunt that ther is a Church where the Word of God doth not appere. For this is the perpetual marke wherewith God hath marked thē that be his.* 1.9 He that is of the truth (saith he) heareth my voyce. Agayne, I am that good shepeherd, and I knowe my shepe, and am knowen of them. My shepe heare my voyce, and I know them and they follow me. And a little before he had sayd, that the shepe follow their shepherde, because they know his voyce: but they follow not a straunger, but runne away from him, because they know not the voyce of straungers. Why are we therfore wilfully madde in iudgyng the Churche, wheras Christ hath marked it with an vndoutefull signe, which wheresoeuer it is seene can not deceiue, but that it certainly sheweth the Churche to bee there: but where it is not there remayneth nothing that can geue a true signifi∣cation of the Church?* 1.10 For Paule rehearseth that the church was buil∣ded, not vpon the iudgementes of men, not vpon priesthodes, but vpon the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophetes. But rather Hierusalem is to be seuerally knowen from Babylon, and the Church of Christ from the conspiracie of Satan, by that difference wherewyth Chryste hath

made them differēt one from the other. He that is of God (saith he) hea∣reth the Words of God.* 1.11 Ye therfore heare not, because ye ar not of God. In a summe, forasmuche as the Chirche is the kingdom of Christ, and he reigneth not but by his word: can it be now doutfull to any man, but that those be the wordes of lyeng, by whiche Christes kyngdom is fay∣ned to be without his scepter, that is to say without his holy worde?

[ 5] But now where as they accuse vs of Schisme and heresie, because we bothe preach a contrary doctrine to them, and obey not their lawes, and haue our assemblies to Praiers, to Baptisme, to the ministration of the Supper, and other holy doinges, seuerally from them: it is in dede a very sore accusation, but suche as needeth not a long or laboursome de∣fence. They are called heretikes and schismatikes, which makyng a di∣uision, doo breake in sunder the communion of the Chirche. And this cōmunion is holden together with true bondes, that is to say, the agre∣ment of true Doctrine,* 1.12 and brotherly charitie. Whervppon Augustine putteth this difference betwene heretikes and schismatikes, that here∣tikes in dede do with false doctrines corrupt the purenesse of Faith, but the Schismatikes somtime euē where there is like Faith, do breake the bond of felowship. But this is also to be noted, that this conioinyng of charitie so hangeth vpon the vnitie of Faith, that Faith ought to be the beginnyng therof, the ende, and finally the onely rule. Let vs therfore remembre that so oft as the vnitie of the Chirch is commended vnto vs this is required, that while our myndes agree in Christ, our willes also may be ioyned together with mutual well willing in Christ. Therefore Paule,* 1.13 when he exhorteth vs to that wel willing, taketh for his founda∣tion that there is one God, one Faith, and one Baptisme. Yea where so euer he teacheth vs to be of one mynde, & of one wil, he by & by addeth in Christ, or according to Christ: meanyng that it is a factious cōpanie of the wicked, and not agreement of the faithfull, whiche is wythout the woorde of the Lorde.

[ 6] Cyprian also folowyng Paule deriueth the whole fountaine of the agreement of the Chirch, from the onely bishoprike of Christ. He after∣ward addeth the Chirch is but one,* 1.14 which spredeth abrode more largely into a multitude with encrease of frutefulnesse: like as there bee many sunne beames, but one light: and many braūches of a tree, but one body grounded vpon a fast roote: And when many streames doo flowe from one fountayne, althoughe the nomber seme to be scattered abrode by largenesse of ouerflowing plētie, yet the vnitie abideth in the original. Take away a beame of the sunne from the body, the vnitie can suffer no diuision. Breake a braūche from the tree, the broken braunche can not spring. Cutte of the streame from the spring hed, beyng cut of it dryeth vp. So also the Chirch being ouerspred with y^e light of the Lord, is ex∣tended ouer the whole worlde: yet there is but one light that is spred e∣uery where. Nothing could be said more fitly to expresse that vndiuida∣ble knitting togither, which all the mēbers of Christ haue one with an other. We see how he continually calleth vs backe to the veray hedde. Wherupon he pronounceth that heresies and schismes doo arise herof, that men do not returne to the originall of truth, nor do seke the hedde, nor kepe the doctrin of the heuenly maister. Now let them go & cry that we be heretikes that haue departed from their Chirch: sithe there hathe

ben no cause of our estrangyng from theim but this one, that they can in no wise abide the pure professyng of the truthe: but I tell not howe they haue driuen vs out with cursynges and cruell execrations. Whiche very selfe doyng doeth abundantly enough acquite vs, vnlesse they will also condemne the Apostles for Schismatikes, with whom we haue all one cause.* 1.15 Christ (I say) dyd forsay to his Apostles, that the tyme shuld com when they shuld be cast out of the Synagoges for his names sake. And those Synagoges of which he speaketh, wer then accompted law∣full Chirches. Sithe therfore it is euident that we be caste out, and we be ready to shewe that the same is doone for the names sake of Christ▪ truely the cause ought fyrst to be enquired of, before that any thyng be determined vpon vs, either one way or other. Howbeit, if they will, I am content to discharge of this poynt. For it is enough for me▪ that it behoued that we shuld depart frō them, y^t we might com to Christ

But it shall appeare yet more certainly, in what estimation we ought to haue all the Chirches whom the tyranny of that Rom•• she id••ll hath possessed, if it be compared with the olde Chirche of the Isra••••ies, as it is described in the Prophetes. There was then a true Chirch among the Iewes and Israelites, when they continued in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the co∣uenant, for they obteyned those thynges by the benefite of God, wher∣vpon the Chirch consisteth. They had the truthe of doctrine in the lawe the ministerie therof was among the Priestes and the Prophets: with the signe of circumcision they entred into religion: by other Sacramē∣tes they were exercised to the confirmation of Faith. It is no dout that those titles wherwith the Lorde hath honoured his Chirche, fittly per∣teyned to their felowship. After that, forsakyng the lawe of the Lorde, they went out of kinde to idolatrie and superstition, they partly lost that prerogatiue. For who dare take a waye the name of the Chirche from them, with whom God hath left the preachyng of his worde and obser∣uation of his mysteries? Agayne, who dare call that the Chirche with∣out any exception, where the word of the Lord is openly and freely tro∣den vnder foote? where the ministerie therof, the chief sinew, yea the ve∣ry soule of the Chirch is destroied?

What then? will some man saye: was there therfore no parcell of •• [ 8] Chirch remaining among the Iewes after that they fel away to idola∣trie? The answer is easy. Fyrst I say y^t in the very fallyng away there were certayn degrees. For we will not say that there was all one falle of Iuda and Israell, at suche tyme as they both first swarued from the pure worshyppyng of God. When Iaro beam fyrst made calues, against the opē prohibition of God, and did dedicate an vnlawful place for wor∣shipping, he did vtterly corrupt religiō. The Iewes did first defile them selues with wicked & superstitious maners, before that they wrongfully changed the order in the outward forme of religion. For although vn∣der Rechabeam they had alredy gotten them many peruerse Ceremo∣nies: yet because there taried at Hierusalem bothe the Doctrine of the Lawe, and the Priesthode, and the Ceremonious vsages in suche sorte as God hadde ordeyned theim, the Godly hadde there a tolera∣ble state of Chirche. Among the Israelites vnto the reigne of Achab, there was no amendement of thynges, and from thense foorthe they fell from worse to worse. They that succeded afterwarde, to the very

destruction of the kyngdome, partly were like vnto hym, and partlye (when they minded to be somwhat better than he) they folowed the ex∣ample of Iarobeam: but they all euery one were wycked and ydola∣ters. In Iewrye there were nowe and then diuerse changes, whyle somme kynges peruerted the worshippyng of God wyth false and for∣ged superstitions, some other restored religion that was decaied: vntill the very priestes them selues defiled the temple of God with prophane and abhominable vsages.

[ 9] Now let the Papistes if they can, how much soeuer they extenuate their owne faultes, denye that among them the state of religion is as corrupt and defiled as it was in the kyngdome of Israell vnder Iaro∣beam. But they haue a grosser ydolatrye: and in doctrine they are not one droppe purer: vnlesse peraduenture euen in it also the be more vn∣pure. God, yea all men that are endued but wyth a meane iudgement, shalbe witnesses with me, and the thing it self also declareth, how here∣in I tell nothyng more then trueth. Now when they wyll dryue vs to the cōmunion of their Chirch, they require two thyngs of vs: first, that we shuld cōmunicate wyth al their praiers, sacramentes, and Ceremo∣nies: then that whatsoeuer honor, power & iurisdictiō Christ geueth to hys Chirch, we shuld geue the same to their Chirch. As to y^e first point, I graunt that all the Prophets that were at Hierusalem, whē thinges were there very much corrupted, dyd neither seuerally sacrifice, nor had assemblies to pray seuerall from other men. For they had a commaun∣dement of God, whereby they were cōmaunded to come together into Salomons temple:* 1.16 they knew that the Leuiticall priestes, howsoeuer they were vnworthy of that honour, yet because they were ordeined by the Lord, ministers of the holy Ceremonies, and wer not as then depo∣sed, dyd yet still rightfully possesse that place. But (whyche is the chiefe poynte of thys question) they were compelled so no superstitious wor∣shippyng, yea they toke in hande to doo nothyng but that whiche was ordeined by God. But among these men, I meane the Papistes, what like thing is there? For we can scarcely haue any meting together with them, wherin we shall not defile our selues with open ydolatrie. Truly the principal bond of their cōmunion is in the masse, which we abhorre as the greatest sacrilege. And whether we do this rightfully or wrong∣fully, shalbe sene in an other place. At this present it is enough to shew that in this behalf we are in other case than the Prophetes were, whi∣che although they were present at the Ceremonies of the wicked, were not compelled to beholde or vse anye Ceremonies but suche as were institute by GOD. And, if they wyll needes haue an example altogether like, let vs take it oute of the kyngdome of Israell. After the ordinance of Iarobeam Circumcision remayned, the sacrifices were offred,* 1.17 the law was accompted holy, the same GOD was cal∣led vppon whome they had receyued of their Fathers: but for the for∣ged and forbidden formes of worshippyng, God disalowed and con∣demned all that was there done. Shewe me one Prophet, or anye one godlye man that ones worshypped or sacrificed in Bethell. For they knewe that they coulde not doo it, but that they shoulde defyle them selues wyth somme sacrilege. We haue then thus muche, that the communion of the Chirch oughte not so farre to bee of force wyth

the godly, that if it shuld degenerate to prophane and filthi vsages, thei should foorth with of necessitie folow it.

But aboute the other poynte we contende yet more earnestly. For [ 10] if the Chirche bee so consydered to bee suche, whoes iudgemente wee ought to reuerence, whoes authoritie to regarde, whoes monitions to obey, with whoes chastisementes to bee moued, whoes communion in all thynges we oughte religiously to obserue: then we can not graunte them a Chirche But that we must of necessitie be bounde to subiection and obedience vnto it. Yet we will willingly graunt them that whyche the Prophetes graunted to the Iewes and Israelites of theyr tyme: when thynges were there in as good, yea or in better state. But we see how eche where they crie out, that their assemblies are vnholy, to whi∣che it is no more lawfull to consente than it is to denye God. And tru∣lye if those were Chirches, it foloweth therfore that in Israell Helias, Mi••heas and such other: in Iurye, Esaye, Ieremye, Osee and other of that sorte, whome the Prophetes, priestes and people of that tyme ha∣ted & detested worse than any vncircumcised men,* 1.18 were straūgers from the Chirch of God. If those were Chirches, then the Chirche was not the piller of truth, but the stay of lyeng: not the tabernacle of the liuing God, but the receptacle of idoles. Therfore it was nedefull for them to depart from the cōsent of those assembiles, which was nothyng els but a wycked conspiracie agaynst God. In like maner if any man acknow∣ledge the assemblies at these dayes beyng defiled wyth idolatrie, super∣stition and wicked doctrine, to be such in whoes ful communion a Chri∣stian man oughte to continue euen to the consente of doctrine, he shall greatlye erre. For if they bee Chirches then they haue the power of the keyes. But the keyes are vnseperablye knytte wyth the worde, whyche is from thense quite dryuen awaye. Agayne, if they bee Chirches, then the promise of Christe is of force amonge theim, vvhatsoeuer ye bynde.* 1.19 &c. But they contrarywyse do banyshe from their communion al suche as doo professe them selues not faynedly the seruantes of Christ. Therfore either the promise of Christ is vaine, or at least in this respect they ar not Chirches. Finally in stede of the ministerie of the word thei haue scholes of vngodlynesse▪ and a sink of all kindes of errors. Ther∣fore either in this respecte they are not Chirches, or there shal remaine no token whereby the lawfull assemblies of the faithfull maye be seue∣rally knowen from the meetynges of Turkes.

But as in the old tyme there yet remained among the Iewes certain [ 11] peculiar prerogatiues of the Chirch, so at this day also we take not frō the Papistes suche steppes as it pleased the Lord to haue remaynyng among them after the dissipation of the Chirche. The Lord hadde ones made his couenant with the Iewes. That same rather being vphol∣den by the stedfastnesse of it selfe dydde continue wyth s••ryuing against their vngodlynesse, than was preserued by them. Therfore (such was the assurednesse and constancie of Goddes goodnesse) there remained the couenant of the Lorde, neither coulde hys faythfulnesse bee blot∣ted out by theyr vnfaithfulnesse: neither coulde Circumcision be so pro∣phaned wyth their vncleane handes, but that it styll was the signe and sacramente of that couenante. Wherevppon the chylderne that

were borne of them, the Lorde called hys owne, whiche vnlesse it were by speciall blessyng, belonged nothyng to hym. So when he hath lefte hys couenaunt in Fraunce, Italye, Germanye, Spayne, Englande: sins those prouinces haue bene oppressed wyth the tyrannye of Anti∣christ, yet that hys couenaunte myghte remayne inuiolable, firste he there preserued Baptisme, the testimonie of his couenant, whiche be∣yng consecrate by his owne mouth reteineth her owne force notwyth∣standyng the vngodlinesse of man: then, with his Prouidence he hath wrought that there should remayne other remnantes, least the Chirch should be vtterly destroied. And as oftentymes byldinges are so pulled downe, that the foundations and ruines remaine: so he hath not suffred his Chirch either to be ouerthrowen by Antichrist from the very foun∣dation, or to be layd euen with the grounde (howsoeuer to punishe the vnthankfulnesse of men that had despised his worde, he suffreth horri∣ble shaking and dissipation to chaunce) but euen after the very wasting he willed that the bylding half pulled downe should yet remayne.

Wheras therfore we will not simply graunt to the Papistes the ti∣tle of the Church, we do not therfore deny that there be Chirches amōg them: but onelye we contende of the true and lawefull orderyng of the Chirch: which is required in the commmunion both of the sacraments which are the signes of profession, but also specially of doctrine. Daniel and Paule foretolde that Antichrist should sitte in the temple of God.* 1.20 With vs we accompt the bishop of Rome the captaine and stādard bea∣rer of that wicked and abhominable kingdome. Whereas hys seate is placed in the temple of God, thereby is meant that his kingdome shal∣be such as can not abolish the name of Christ nor of his Chirch. Hereby therfore appeareth, that we do not deny but that euen vnder his tyran∣nie remain Chirches: but such as he hath prophaned with vngodlinesse full of sacrilege, such as he hath afflicted with outeragious dominion, suche as he hath corrupted and in maner killed with euill and damna∣ble doctrines, as with poisoned drinkes: such wherin Christ lyeth halfe buried, the Gospel ouerwhelmed, godlinesse banished, the worshipping of God in a maner abolished: such finally wherin al things are so trou∣bled, that therin rather appereth the face of Babylon then of the holye citie of god. In a summe, I say that they be Chirches, in respect that the Lord there maruelously preserueth the remnauntes of his people how soeuer they were dispersed and scattered abroade, in respecte that there remayne some tokens of the Chirch, specially these tokens, the effectu∣alnesse wherof neither the craft of the Deuil, nor the maliciousnesse of man can destroy. But on the other side because these marks are blotted out, which in this discourse we ought principally to haue respecte vnto, I saye that euery one of their assemblies and the whole body wanteth the lawfull forme of a Chirch.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Ep. ii.xx.
• * 1.2

  i. Tim. iii xv.
• * 1.3

  Hier. vii.iiii.
• * 1.4

  Eze. x.iiii
• * 1.5

  Gal. iiii.xxii.
• * 1.6

  Gen. xxi.x.
• * 1.7

  Ro. ix.vi.
• * 1.8

  Ad Vina cen epist. xlvii.
• * 1.9

  Ioh. xviii xxxvii. Iohn. x.xiiii.
• * 1.10

  Ephes. ii.xx.
• * 1.11

  Ioh. viii.xlvii.
• * 1.12

  Lib que sti. euāg. secund. Math.
• * 1.13

  Eph. iiii.v. Philip. ii.ii. et. v.
• * 1.14

  De sim∣p•• praesa.
• * 1.15

  Ioh. ••vi.ii▪
• * 1.16

  Exo. xxix ix.
• * 1.17

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. x••i.••xxi.
• * 1.18

  i. Tim. ••ii xv••
• * 1.19

  Ma••. xvi.xix & xviii xviii. Iohn. xx.xxiii.
• * 1.20

  Dani. ix.xxvii. ii. Thess. ••••.iiii.