The vvhole workes of W. Tyndall, Iohn Frith, and Doct. Barnes, three worthy martyrs, and principall teachers of this Churche of England collected and compiled in one tome togither, beyng before scattered, [and] now in print here exhibited to the Church. To the prayse of God, and profite of all good Christian readers.

That by Gods worde it is lawfull for Priestes that hath not the gift of cha∣stitie, to marry Wiues.

* 1.1I Haue séene and heard in diuerse countryes, where I haue béene, intolerable persecutiō agaynst Priestes, that were compelled by weakenes of na∣ture to mary wyues, for that intent that they might after Gods law, and mans law vse an honest cōuersation in this world. For the which thyng, I say, they haue béene sore persecuted, some cast out of their countrey, some drowned, some burned, and some be∣headed: Finally, all the cruelnes that could bée excogitated against them, men thought it to litle.

Wherfore I, that recken my selfe a debtour, and a seruaunt vnto all mē in all thynges, wherein I may profite them, and specially in thynges that ap¦perteine to instructiō of their consci∣ence, hath taken vpō me, in this cause to shew my litle and small learnyng: charitably desiryng thē that bée some thing yet against this thyng, that they will let them selues bée taught, and in¦structed by Gods word, and not to set themselues obstinately agaynste the verity of Gods blessed word. For our Lord can easely beare and suffer, an vnwilled ignoraunce, but a peruerse malice and a froward resistyng of his veritie, can hée not suffer, but there∣unto is hée a mortall, and an extreme enemy.

Wherefore let men consider, that if this article doth stand with Gods word, & ••ith Christes holy doctrine, that if then they resiste, and set them¦selues agaynst it, how that they doe resiste God, the which no man is able to performe. Certaine men there bée, * 1.2 that of a very peruerse, froward, and obstinate mynde, doth set them selues agaynst this article & other moe. And will in no wise admit either reason, or learnyng, but still remaine in theyr old errour, that they haue conceiued in their braynes, whiche is neither grounded in Gods holy word, nor yet in the holy conuersation, or lyuyng of blessed and vertuous mē. Ʋnto these men will I write nothyng, bycause I will not trouble them, and bycause I would bée loth to bée torne with dogs téeth, or elles to cast pearles béefore swyne.

An other sorte of mē there bée, that * 1.3 doth not admit this article, by the rea∣son that they bée ignoraunt in Scrip∣tures, and know not the very groūde therof, but alonely are led by an old custome, that they haue béen brought vp in. Yet neuerthelesse they are not obstinate enemyes vnto the veritie, but would gladly geue place to lear∣nyng,

and reason. And all that they doe, is to search with a sober méeke∣nes, what y^e truth is. The which thing they are glad to embrace, as soone as it is layde to them. Ʋnto these men is my writyng, and my labour spent: whom I doe charitably beséeche, that they will fauourably, and indiffe∣rently iudge this my writyng. This doe I bynde my selfe, to prooue this thing (by Gods grace) out of Christs holy worde, by the sayinges of holy Doctours, by the authoritie of authē∣ticall stories, by the examples, & pra∣ctise of holy and vertuous men. And if I doe not this, I will bée contented not to bée beléeued, which thyng, if I can performe, I thinke all reasonable men will géeue credence to mée.

Finally, and la••t of all I will shew those reasons, and authorities, wher∣by that the Pope hath bounde hys Priestes to kéepe (as hée calleth it) pure chastitie. And in conclusion, af∣ter my poore learnyng, I will assoyle all those Scriptures and reasons, and prooue that in this thyng they cā haue no place. Ʋnto the performyng of the whiche, Iesus of his infinite mercy graunt me of his holy spirite. Amen.

FIrst cōmeth blessed Saint Paule, whom the Church of God hath al∣wayes had in reuerence, and hée ap∣proueth this doctrine of mine, saying: Let euery man for auoyding of forni∣cation * 1.4 haue his wife, and euery wo∣man haue her husband. Marke how blessed S. Paule cōmaundeth, where as any daunger of fornication is, that euery man in auyoding of vicious ly∣uyng, should take a wife. Here is no man excepted, for the text is for euery man, and specially for them, that can not lyue sole. Ʋnto thē it is a streight commaundement to marry: there is none other remedy ordeined of God to auoyde fornication, but mariage. Yea, and if there were ten other re∣medies more then mariage, yet must mariage bée as lawfull as they to bée vsed, yea and a great deale more, sée∣yng, that it is specially appoynted of God, for a remedy in this case. For as for all other remedyes (as fastyng, watchyng, labouryng, chastising of a * 1.5 mans body) though they bée lawfull, laudable and good, yet bée they not ap∣propriately, and onely appoynted of God, to bée remedies agaynst forni∣cation: as blessed S. Paule doth here appoynt mariage for to bée.

Wherefore if it bée lawfull for Priestes for to fast, and watch, to a∣uoyde fornication, it must néedes bée more lawful for thē to marry wiues, if they bée in daunger of fornication. For mariage in this case, is not alone¦ly commaunded of God, but it is ap∣pointed of God for an especiall, and singular medecine for this disease. Marke also the occasion that S. Paul had to write this text to the Corinthi∣ans. There were certeine men amōg them, that reckened it an holines, and a perfectiō (as certeine mē doth now, for Priestes) that Christen mē should lyue sole without wiues, as the text declareth. It is good for a man, not to touch a woman. Now doth blessed S. Paule aunswere to this holy hypocri∣sie on this maner: To auoyde forni∣cation, sayth hée, notwithstandyng your holynesse, let euery man mary a wyfe.

Now, if blessed Saynt Paule had thought it vnlawfull to marry for a∣ny Christen man, then would not hée haue sayde: Let euery man marry. Marke also, that it is not agaynst the perfection of any Christen man for to marry, but hée is rather boūde to mar∣ry, if hée haue not the gifte of cha∣stitie.

Farthermore, note that S. Paule neither biddeth them, that thought it holynes to bée vnmaryed, to fast, or to labour, or to weare héere. But al∣onely to marry, as who shoulde say, God hath ordayned and approoued a lawful and a laudable remedy against your sicknes. My doctrine is, that you shall heare your God, and vse to your comforte, those creatures & remedies with thankes géeuing, that God hath appointed, and therewith bée you cō∣tent, and recken not your selues wy∣ser then God, in helpyng and curyng your diseases. For nothing can bée vnlawfull that God doth allowe, and

prooue. And for vsing of Gods crea∣tures and his ordinaunces, in tyme, and place requisite, can no man bée blamed béefore God. But for refu∣sing of Gods remedies, whē they bée necessary, let no man thinke, that hée shall auoyde Gods daunger.

As for an example: Hée that wyll not eate and drinke when hée is hun∣gry and thirsty, but excogitateth some other remedie of his owne brayne, so long that hée bringeth himselfe in vtter destruction: let no man doubte, but in this case before God hée is a murtherer, and an homicide. I thinke there is no learning to the contrary. Wherefore I woulde that mē should well remember themselues in thys case, & thinke not that they cā inuent a thyng more pleasaunt vnto God, then hée can doe hym selfe. His plea∣sure is best knowen vnto himselfe. For this cause, I iudge it lawfull for euery Priest that hath not the gift of chastitie, to vse the remedy that God hath ordayned, and also sanctified. Blessed S. Paule saith, that mariage is honorable, and the bedde of them is vndefiled: but fornicatours, and aduoulterers God shal iudge. Marke that S. Paule caulleth it honorable, and a cleane thyng. What presump∣tion * 1.6 is therefore in vs, that recken it a dishonour, and vncleannesse for priestes to vse maryage? God sayth, hée shall iudge whorekéepers and ad∣uoulterers: but not them that bée ma∣ryed. Wherefore yet agayne, after y^e doctrine of S. Paule, I exhorte all Priestes that can not liue chaste, to receiue Gods remedie with thankes. This is S. Paules doctrine, where * 1.7 hée sayth, I woulde that all men were as I my selfe am. But euery mā hath his proper gift of God, one after this maner, an other after that. I say vn∣to the vnmaryed men and wydowes, it is good for them, if they abide as I doe. But and if they can not abstaine, let them mary. For it is better to ma∣ry * 1.8 then to burne. I can not deuise a clearer text for my purpose then thys is. Saint Paule woulde that euery man had the gifte of chastitie. But in as much as all men hath not one gift, therefore sayth S. Paule, must euery man vse himselfe after his gifts. And hée that hath not the gifte of chastitie, S. Paule wyll plainely, that hée shall mary. Hée sayth not, that hée shal cha∣stice himselfe wyth labour and wyth payne, to remedye that weakenes, though I woulde bée contente for my parte gladly, that men shoulde prooue all maner of lawfull remedies, to helpe them to lyue sole. But then, if they can not so continue, I wyll in no wise that they shall refuse mary∣age, as a thyng vnlawfull and filthy: but rather vse it, and prooue it at the least wise, as they haue done other re∣medies, that they haue inuented, sée∣ing that God hath iustituted this, as a thyng that hée iudgeth for a lawfull and principall remedy. But note, that S. Paule sayth, it is better to mary, then to burne. S. Paules meanynge is, that if man hath not the gifte to ex∣tincte the burnyng, and ardent desire of nature, that then hée must mary, ra¦ther then bée subiecte vnto such con∣cupiscence. S. Paule sayth not, rather mary then to kéepe whores. But hys will is, that wée shoulde bée so farre from all whoredome, that wée should not suffer our selues so much as to burne. The whiche precéedeth all whoredome, and is lesse in very déede then whoredome. And yet S. Paule wylling vs to auoyde this lesse thing, commaundeth vs to mary: how much more to auoyde open whoredome, & abhominable and detestable vnclean∣nes, that is now vsed shamelesse in the worlde?

I doe not reprooue that Priestes * 1.9 doth lyue sole, I had rather thereto exhorte them. But this I detestate, that men had rather suffer, and allow priestes to liue in whoredome, and in all abhominable fornication, then for to vse that lawfull remedy that God hath both ordayned and sanctified. Wée haue no mention in any storye, that euer any Priest was burned for kéepyng of whores, but for mariage, we haue séene, and doe sée dayly, how cruelly and violently men doth perse∣cute them, as though Gods blessed or∣dinaunce were rather to bée extincted

and abhorred, then that thyng, y^e both God, & nature reprooueth. Where is there one man in England, that hath so great loue, and reuerence to the ho¦ly state of Matrimony, that hée should kéepe a maryed Priest in hys house? But Priestes that lyue vnlawfully a∣gaynst Gods law, and mans law, and agaynst all honesty, and morall ver∣tue, bée in euery mans houses & com∣pany, and rulers, and coūsellers, and controllers. Alas for pitie, what shall I say to the affectiōs of mens hartes, that thus can winke (I will not say a∣low) at such abhominable thynges. Yea, and the selfe same men shall bée most extreme, and cruell vnto a poore simple Priest, that of a good hart to∣wardes Gods ordinaunce, maryeth a lawfull wife. This Priest, I say, shall neither haue meate, nor drinke of thē, nor yet no office of charitye. But the other sort shalbée exalted, and set vp in all honour and kept in reuerence and estimatiō. And why? Bycause as they say they bée good and cleane felowes, and loueth a péece of flesh well. These blasphemous woordes haue I heard diuerse tymes and many. And men sit and laugh at them, & haue a great reioysing in them. So sore is Gods holy ordinaunce, & a morall vertue, & goodnes extincted in mens hartes.

O Lord God, and thy mercy were not, how were this world able to cō∣tinewe, that thus abhominably, and shamefully iudgeth of thy halowed, & sanctified workes? But oh Lord haue thou mercy, and pitie on vs, for the swéete bloud of thy sonne Christ Ie∣sus. Loke not on our synnes, oh lord God, for who is able to abyde in thy syght. But Lord of thine infinite mer¦cy, send downe thy spirit into y^e harts of thy people, that they may bée taught better to iudge of thy heauenly, and Godly institutions. Amen.

To our purpose. Other articles that I haue written of, bée something harde, and obscure, sauing all onely to these men, that bée learned. But as for this article, mée thinke it is so playne, that I meruayle how any mā should doubt in it. For doubtles it née∣deth no learned iudge, but onely a Ci∣uell, and a morall good man, that is * 1.10 indued with reason and equitie. For surely mine aduersaries doth not ear∣nestly defend pure, and cleane chasti∣tie, for they know how few priestes there bée, that kéepeth their chastitie. Yea & they know how sore they haue punyshed those men, that hath broken theyr chastitie. So that they doe not defend chastitie, but rather fylthines, and abhominable lyuing. In y^e which the most part of the spiritualtie doth liue. Of this I will bée reported to the * 1.11 recordes of the kinges courts, and al∣so to their owne recordes. in y^e which (if they should bée serched) should bée found an innumerable sort detected of vncleanes. These matters bée open, notwithstanding I am right sory to rehearse it, but I am compelled, seing there is such intollerable violēce vsed agaynst those poore mē that marry, be cause they would not all onely lyue vertuously béefore God, but also mo∣rally before the world.

Now let men all onely vse reason * 1.12 in this case, and make comparison be∣twéene these two manner of lyuings, and consyder which of them doth bée∣come a polytike order, and a common wealth best. Whether is it after rea∣son better for mée to defile shameful∣ly, other mens wyues, other mens daughters, and other mennes may∣dens, that no mans seruaunt shoulde bée in safegarde for mée? or els that I should marry a wyfe of myne own, as other noble kinges, and Dukes, and other good men of the world hath done, and doth dayly, and so to con∣tinew my lyfe with myne other neigh¦bours, after this māner of good neigh¦bourhod? Let men heare without ma∣lyce iudge indifferētly. Blessed Saint Paule procéedeth farther with this matter, and proueth clearely, that no man ought, or can bée bound to vergi∣nitie, farther then y^e gift of God doth strengthē hym. Thus hée sayth, as cō∣cerning virgins, I haue no precept of the Lord, but all onely I geue you my councell, for I thinke it good by y^e rea∣son of this present necessitie, that a man should lyue so. As hée would say Ʋnto verginitie I can not ••inde yo••,

farther then your gift is, nor I doe not recken it a thing necessary to wyn heauen by. For heauen is neyther the price of virginity, nor yet of mariage. But all onely I reken verginitie, a * 1.13 good, and an expedient thing to liue quietly by in this world. For in mari∣age is many thinges y^e doth distracte, and disturbeth a mans mynde. That this is S. Paules meanyng, it is wel proued by y^e texte that followeth. If a * 1.14 virgin doth marry, she doth not sinne vut shée shall haue much tēptation in the flesh. That is to say, many occasi∣ons of disquietnes. But I (sayth S. Paule) would gladly spare you from such occasions, for I would haue you without sorowe. And shée that is vn∣maried, hath no care, but how to serue God. But shée that is maryed, hath much care, and sorowe, how shée shall dispatch all worldly busines.

So that S. Paule doth clearely de∣clare his meaning, how that virginity is no nearer way to heauen, then ma∣riage is: sauyng that all onely an vn∣maried person hath not so many occa∣syons to bée disquieted, as a maryed hath. Wherefore you shall marke of this text, Fyrst that S. Paule hath no commaundement to binde men to chastitie.

How commeth it now therefore, y^• the Pope compelleth all those men y^• * 1.15 will ••ée Priestes, fyrst to forsweare mariage, and to vow chastitie? There is no learning, that is able to proue, how that the pope cā make more pre∣ceptes of God, then blessed S. Paule could doe. Furthermore, what aucto∣ritie hath the Pope to bynde vs to a∣ny thyng, that God, and his holy A∣postles hath left frée? All learned men that euer wrote, doth graunt, y^e there bee two manner of thinges in this world. Some bée called, Res necessa∣riae. * 1.16 Thinges that bée necessary, and must bée done, béecause that God hath commaunded them. And these things no man is able to make iudifferent, but they must néedes bée necessarily done. Other thinges there bée, which lerned mē cauleth, Res mediae. thinges * 1.17 that bée indifferent: and these may bée done, and may bée left, without sinne. Now is the nature of these, contrary to the other, for they can not, nor may not bee chaūged into thinges necessa∣ry. For that is agaynst their nature, as S. Paule declareth to the Romans * 1.18 and in other diuers places.

Now is this of trueth, that virgini¦tie is a thyng of him selfe by Gods or∣dinaunce indifferēt, and may bée vsed and left without sinne. Wherefore it * 1.19 standeth with no learnyng, that mās law should chaūge the nature of this thyng, and make it vnto any man a thyng necessarie, whereas after gods commaundement, it is a thyng but in different. For that were as much, as both to chaunge Gods ordinaunce, & also y^e nature of the thing. The which stādeth with no learnyng. For as the Pope, and all the world can not make of Gods commaundement a coūsell: no more can they of Gods counsell make a precept. Wherfore I cōclude out of blessed S. Paule, that no man * 1.20 ought to vow chastitie, farther then God hath geu••n hym the gift. For if chastitie were a thyng that could bée obtayned, and kept through vowyng, then were it not the gift of God, but the gift of vowyng, the whiche is a∣gaynst our maister Christ, and also a∣gaynst * 1.21 blessed S. Paule.

Farthermore, let euery man now thinke in him selfe, séeyng that blessed * 1.22 S. Paule had no commaundement o∣uer chastitie, nor yet would geue any commaundement, whether that it bée the surest way, and the lawfullest to folow the Popes commaundement, or els to folow blessed S. Paules doc∣trine? the which knew the perfection of virginitie, and also what dyd bée∣come Priestes for to doe, as well as the Pope doth.

Moreouer, if men will iudge those Priestes, that will marry, whiche fo∣loweth S. Paules counsell, & doctrine greuously for to sinne, and for to bée heretickes: Why should they not ra∣ther iudge those men more greuously for to sinne, & to bée ten tymes worse then heretickes, that foloweth the popes commaundement in not mary∣ing? Is no•• S. Paules doctrine as lawful to bée keept, and as farre from

sinne, as the Popes cōmaundements bée? Or is not S. Paule of as great auctoritie in the Churche of God as the Pope is? I thinke yes. Note also, that S. Paule would not bynde the * 1.23 Corinthians to virginity, bycause hée would not tangle them in a snare, but alonely hée exhorteth them to virgini∣tie, as vnto an honest & comely thyng, that they might y^t more quietly serue God. Ʋpō this same text, sayth Atha∣nasius, that the Apostle would com∣pell * 1.24 no mā to kéepe virginitie agaynst his will, nor hée would not make vir∣ginitie a thyng of necessitie.

Wherefore it must néedes folow. First, that the Pope byndyng men to virginitie, doth lay a snare for them, & both nothyng els (except they haue the gift of chastitie) but bryng men in daunger of damnation.

Secōdarily, hée maketh a thyng of necessitie, that y^e holy ghost in blessed s. Paul durst not, nor would not doe.

Thyrdly, that thyng that S. Paule reckened onely to conduce, and helpe to quietnes in this present lyfe, that same thyng maketh the Pope a Saui∣our, and a helper to heauē, the which is a great blasphemy to Christes holy bloud, and also a peruerse vsing of Gods blessed creatures.

Now let euery Christen mā iudge, if this bée charitably done of the pope, yea, whether hée hath authoritie this to doe or not? Let no man, I beseche hym iudge in this matter after parcia litie, but euen as hée will aunswere béefore God.

After this blessed S. Paule goeth farther, as cōcernyng them that haue a purpose, & a promise between, God * 1.25 and them, to kéepe their charitie: hys woordes bée these: Hée that purpo∣seth surely in hys hart, hauyng no néede, but hath power ouer his owne wil, & hath so decréed in his hart, y^t hée will kéepe hys virginitie doth well. Here note first, that S. Paule compel¦leth no man to vow, but hée letteth e∣uery man stand to his owne will.

Farthermore, blessed S. Paul wil∣leth what soeuer hée bée, that decréeth in his hart to kéepe virginity, that bée must first consider, whether it lyeth in his power to kéepe his decrée or not. If it bée in his power, then sayth S. * 1.26 Paule doth hée better to kéepe his vir¦ginitie, thē to marry. But if it lye not in his power to bée chast doth body & soule, then willeth S. Paule that hée marry. Note here, that S. Paul, not∣withstandyng mans decrée, and pur∣pose which hée made to kéepe virgini∣ty, willeth that hée doe marry, if hée cā not kéepe his decrée & purpose. How cōtrary is this to the popes doctrine, whiche rather suffereth his Priestes to liue in all vnclennes, by y^t reason of their foolish promise made vnto hym, then hée would suffer them to marry wyues after S. Paules holy doctrine. Yea the Pope is not ashamed, more cruelly to punishe a poore woman for marying, then hée doth, if shée were a whore. For a Nunne if shée marry * 1.27 (sayth hée) shall neuer bée admitted to receyue the blessed Sacrament of Christ. But if shée bée an whore, then (sayth hée) may shée after penaunce, bée admitted to the Sacramēt. What is abhorryng of Mariage, if this bée none? For to compare it, yea and to make it worse thē whoredome? what if shée haue vowed chastitie? hath shée not also vowed to flye fornication? Now is shée bounde vnto virginitie, but by mans law. But for to auoyde fornicatiō, and whoredome, is Gods commaundement Wherfore sée how hygh that the Pope will set hym selfe aboue God and his holy ordinaunce. * 1.28

Furthermore S. Paule sayth, that the will of God is, that we should ab∣stayne from fornicatiō, and that eue∣ry one of vs should know to kéepe his vessell in sanctifiing, and honour. Marke S. Paules saying: First, that it is the will of God, that we should abhorre fornication. Who will now resiste the will of God? & not regarde the thyng that God will haue done? I trust no Christen man. Furthermore the will of God is, y^t euery man should kéepe his vessell in honour. Now if Priestes bée men, and haue not the gift of chastetie, then are they bounde to regard this commaundement. For hée sayth, euery man.

Marke also, that blessed S. Paule

calleth the vessell of maryed men ho∣norable and sanctified. Wherfore thē shuld it bée vnlawful for a priest to vse a sanctified, & an holy vessell? To pos∣sesse other mens vessels in vnclennes is agaynst God, and man. But it is lawfull for any man here by this text, to possesse a vessell of hys owne, the which God hath sanctified and hono∣red. How can man now for any occa∣sion curse that thyng, that God hath sanctified, or make it vncleane, that God hath purified.

S. Paule hauing y^t spirite of God did prophecie, that there should come * 1.29 men in the latter dayes, which should forbid men to marry, and these men should speake lyes in holy hipocrisie. Nowe marke the texte. Men shall forbyd maryage, and that in the lat∣ter dayes. The trueth is, that no mā hath forbidden any certayne state of men to marry, but the Pope onely. Wherefore this texte must néedes touch his kingdome, séeing that hée is also in the latter dayes. There were certayne heretickes called Taciani, which did condemne fully and who∣ly all maner of maryage. And though * 1.30 Saynt Paule speaketh against them, yet in very déede the Popes doctrine is not excepted, séeing it is contayned in these latter dayes. For though there were twenty heresies more thē Taciani, yet must the texte bée appli∣ed agaynst them all, that doth cōdēne or els despise mariage, in the whole or in the parte. For the text is against them all that doth forbid maryage, and specially in the latter dayes.

But hée that doth forbid his priests to marry, doth forbid for so much ma∣riage: * 1.31 therefore the texte maketh a∣gaynst the Pope. Note also, that these men that shall forbid mariage, shall haue an holy colour of hypocrisie. Now hath the Pope forbidden hys Priestes to marry, vnder the colour of holynes, béecause (as hée sayth) that his Priestes must bée pure, and cleane: As who shoulde say, that ma∣ryage were vncleane and vnpure for priestes to vse. What can bée holy hy∣pocrisie, if this bée not hypocrisie? Here is the holy and pure institution of God condemned, as a thyng vn∣cleane for his holy Priestes to vse. Moreouer, the Taciani did not for∣bid mariage vnder the colour of holy∣nes: but they said it was fully, & who∣ly an vnlawfull thynge. The which doctrine had no maner of colour. But the Pope sayth, that mariage is good and laudable in it selfe, but his priests bée to pure, and to holy for to vse that simple thyng. For it is not a thynge (sayth hée) that doth become y^t state of perfecte mē, but it belōgeth to weake & vnperfect men. Now iudge good rea∣der, which of these heresies, eyther Taciani, or Papacy doth pretende y^t greatest colour of holynes? And yet I am sure y^t the holy Ghost in S. Paul, did speake both against the greatest, & also smallest hypocrisie. For hée al∣loweth no maner of fayned holynes.

There were other certayne here∣tikes called Marciani. These did re∣ceiue no man to bée a Christen man, excepte hée woulde refuse mariage. Marke what diuersitie is betwéene these heretickes and the Popes lear∣ning. The Pope receiueth no priests except they forsweare maryage. The * 1.32 Marcianites, they receiue no man to bée a Christen man, excepte hée for∣sweare maryage. So that there is no diuersitie betwéete the heretikes and the Pope, but that these heretikes doth excepte a greater number then y^t Pope doth, and speaketh more gene∣rally: but the thynge is all one. For the Marcianites iudgeth mariage vn∣cleane for their sorte, and so doth the Pope for his sorte. Farthermore, Marcian sayth, that among Christen men may bée no temporal maryages, but all coniunctions must bée turned vnto a spirituall mariage. And the * 1.33 selfe same thing saith the Pope of his Priestes. Wherefore séeing that they doe graunt how that blessed S. Paul, * 1.34 and also holy fathers hath condem∣ned this heresie of Marcian, it m••st néedes also folow, that the opinion of the Pope is lykewyse condemned. But yet paraduenture here will bée * 1.35 sayde, as Doctour Eckius, and other mē writing of this matter sayth, how that the Pope doth not condemne maryage, but hée causeth men alone∣ly

to kéepe their vowe. I aunswere, that thys is but a small euasion. For * 1.36 first the Pope cōpelleth them, if they wyll bée priestes, to vowe, and to for∣sweare maryage. For if there were no statute made béefore of the Pope, that all priestes should forsweare ma∣ryage, then shoulde there no vowes bée made of priestes against mariage, but the thing shoulde bée frée. So that the vowe commeth out of the Popes decrée & prohibition, and not the de∣crée out of the vowe. Therfore y^e pro∣bation goeth béefore the vowe. Wher¦fore this euasion can haue no place.

Take an exāple. The Emperour maketh a statute, that no man shalbée admitted into his seruice excepte that hée first sweare to bée an enemy vnto the kyngs grace of England. Is not now the Emperour first an enemye * 1.37 vnto the kynges person, and then also a forbydder of loue and fauour, to∣wardes the kinges grace of Englād? I thynke hys grace wyll take this acte none otherwise. For though hée doth not, nor can not make all men the kynges enemies, yet hee maketh all that appertayne to hym, to bée the kinges enemies. So lykewise the Pope, though hée doe not forbid all men maryage, yet hée forbyddeth as many as will bée Priestes. Yea, and hée will admitte no man to bée priest, excepte hée first forsweare maryage. So that y^e vow is first made, ere that that pristhoode is géeuen.

Now if hée were not an enemy in very déede vnto maryage, what shoulde mooue hym to compell hys priestes to forsweare maryage? why doth hée not as well bynde all hys Priestes to maryage, as hée doth to chastitie? Yea, why doth hée not at y^t least kéepe hymselfe indifferent, and neither make decree against mariage, nor agaynst chastitie? But the very trueth is, that all the protectours of vncleannes & filthy liuing, doth know very well, that this solution is of no strength or valure. For in very déede their hartes doth recken matrimony vncleane and vnpure: and though they woulde now make a glose, yet their owne lawes, y^t which bée sprong out of their hartes, doth shewe how much they holde of holy & vnpolluted * 1.38 matrimony. The pope doth cal clarks y^t bée maried, impios, y^t is, wicked, cur∣sed, vncleane, filthy, and all y^t nought is. Also in an other place, hée cauleth the matrimony of lay men, a fleshly, and carnall thyng, and the chastitie of * 1.39 his spiritualtie, hée cauleth spirituall maryage. What saith Marcian more then this is? Is not this abhominable doctrine? thus shameles to speake of holy and sanctified matrimony? and to call it fleshly and carnall? And yet hée is not thus content, but hée cauleth y^t maryage of priestes sinne, and defen∣ders of the same, sectatores libidinum, * 1.40 the folowers of filthy lustes, precepto∣res viciorum, the teachers of vice, lax∣antes frena luxuriae, géeuing libertie to lechery. Tell mée, if any man woulde speake and reprooue y^t whores of the stewes, what other wordes co••ld hée vse agaynst them more shameful then these? And yet they wil not bée noted to condemne matrimony. What mis∣chiefe can not the deuill cloke, if men woulde beléeue hym.

But farthermore, let vs sée, how holy, and blessed that hée reckeneth matrimony for to bée, by the reason of honours, and rewardes, that hée geueth vnto priests that marry. First * 1.41 saith hée, if a Priest doth marry of ig∣noraunce, by the reason that hée knew not the statute of the pope, forbidding priestes to marry, that then this priest * 1.42 fyrste shall forsake his wife, and then shall so continue with out any farther promotion, as long as hée lyueth. And if there bee any Priest, that will defēd his mariage, by the example of the Priestes in the ould lawe, hym doth the Pope priuate of all maner of Ec∣clesiasticall honour for euer. Moreo∣uer * 1.43 hée sayth, that if any spirituall mā doth after this decrée marry, then his sinne shall neuer bée forgeuen hym, nor they may neuer afterward handle the blessed sacramēt, because that ma∣riage is a fylthy, and a foule concupi∣scence sayth hée.

Now iudge indifferently Christē rea∣der, if this bée not dispising of holy ma∣trimony, thus shamefully to speake of it, and so cruelly to handle them, that

holyly doth liue in it, hauing nothing for hym, but a lousy decrée of Pope Siricius. So that men may perceaue clearely, how that hée byndeth not his priestes, by the reason of their vowe, as his protectours doth say, but by y^t reason of the statute, that Siricius had made afore the priestes had vowed a∣ny chastetie.

S. Paule, when hée should order such byshoppes, as should bée in the * 1.44 Church of God irrepresēsible, among all other thinges hée would that hée should bée a man of one wife, hauing * 1.45 children well brought vp. Here Saint Paule aloweth hym one wife.

How commeth it then, that men say, that a Priest shall haue no wyfe? How agreeth this one, with none? Men must at the least wayes graunt, that S. Paule dyd not recken mari∣age vnpure, & vncleane for a byshop, for if hée had, hée would not haue graū¦ted hym one wife. Yea moreouer hée speaketh of his children well brought vp, in the which hée admitteth, and a∣loweth, the coniunction, and copula∣tion * 1.46 béetwéene them two, for to bée godly, and vertuous. Hée hath other eyes to looke on the blessed, and holy coniunction, which is betwéene man, and wyfe, then the Pope hath. For the Pope rekeneth it fylthy, and not seme¦ly, that a Priest should with his holy handes touch a womans body, & with the same handes to conscecrate y^t ho∣ly sacrament. Oh Lord God, what cā not the deuill bring to passe? what ab∣hominable holynes of hypocrisye is this? to recken a Priest vnpure, and vncleane, béecause hée hath vsed hym selfe in Gods holy ordinaunce? Is not this as much to say? God thou art an inuenter, and ordayner of that thing that maketh men vnpure, & vncleane? thou art the auctour of this vncleane¦nes? For haddest thou not instituted it, so had men not vsed it? * 1.47

Alas how fayne would I chide. I could here say some thing, If I would but I may not. Neuertheles it grée∣ueth mée, for I can not tell where to vse euell wordes, if I shall not vse thē against such abhominable, and execra∣ble heresye as this is. But yet I pray you one worde. Why bée not your hāds defiled for handeling of whores sleshe? Is whores slesh so cleane? that Priestes may handle it? and the fleshe of an honest, and a good woman so vn∣cleane, * 1.48 that Priest must bée burned for handeling of it? Fye on the, deuill. Thinkest thou that men hath neyther reuerēce in their ••artes toward God, nor yet reasō to iudge of these things? What can bée shameles, if this thing shall bée thus alowed amongest Chris∣ten men? Here bée all honest women and that in honestie, abhorred & des∣pised, and whores in comparison of them, bée sanctified, and blessed. But oh thou Lord God, I doe yet beléeue that thou wilt once bée reuenged of this d••shonour, & shamefulnes. More∣ouer, why doth not oppression, and violence, and thefte, defyle Priestes handes, as well as mariage? What hath pure matrymonye offended, that it alonely should defyle priests hands, and all other maner of vices, and vn∣cleanenes, doth nothing contaminate them. But alas for pitye, how blind∣ly doe we iudge of this holy ordināce, and institution of God, that thus doe blaspheme it?

What will men say to blessed S. * 1.49 Paule, where hée sayth, Haue we not power to lead about a syster to wife, as well as the bretheren of the Lord, and as Cephas? I will not dispute, whether that Paule had a wife or not But this I am sure, that this text doth clearely proue, and that after y^t mind of great doctours how that Peter, & other Apostles had wiues. Where∣fore then should it bée vnlawfull for our priestes to marry? Bée our priests holier thē S. Peter & other Apostles? Or is mariage now more vnlawfull, then it was then? But peraduenture * 1.50 here will bée sayd, that the Apostles had wiues beefore y^t Christ dyd chuse thē, but afterward they forsooke their wyues, and folowed Christ.

To this I aunswere, that it is not inough so to say. For séeing that they haue graunted, how the apostles had wiues, whē they were cauled, it stan∣deth with reasō, that these men should proue by an open scripture, that the

Apostles after theyr caulyng, dyd for∣sake theyr wyues. Yea, I wyll goe farther wyth them, and say playnely, that is an abhominable lye, & a great blasphemy agaynst God, and his ho∣ly Apostles, to say that they had forsa∣ken theyr wyues. For our M. Christ taught them not to forsake their * 1.51 wyues, but in any wyse to kéepe thē, sauing alonely for fornication. Now * 1.52 is the election vnto Apostleship, ney∣ther fornication, nor yet like vnto for∣nication. Wherefore I say boldely, that it is a false lye agaynst the holy Apostles, to say that they forsooke their wyues. Also this same place of S. Paule doth prooue it a false lye. For S. Paule speaketh, how S. Pe∣ter after hys Apostleshyp, and also o∣ther disciples of Christ, caryed theyr wyues about wyth them, when they went a preaching. Wherefore it is but a lye, to say, that they had forsa∣ken them.

Now Christen reader, here haue I perfourmed I trust, one part of my promise, that is to say, I haue proued this article of myne by Gods holy worde so playnely, that no man (I trust) can or will deny, but that these Scriptures bée sufficient to moue me and al other mē to bée of this doctrine that I am of. The second part of my promise was to proue this also by ho∣ly doctours. Ʋnto the which, I will now prepare my selfe.

But afore all thinges, I louingly, and charitably, desyre the reader to set apart all parcialitie and malice, and to iudge indifferently of my doc∣trine, as hée will aunswere at y^• dread full day of doome, and not to refuse that thyng that is truth, for hatred, or displeasure of my person. For surely myne intent is neyther to hurte, or harme, nor yet displease (as much as lyeth in mée) any person. And though I haue in tymes past, somwhat vehe∣mently written agaynst those thinges that I thought errours: yet would I require hartely euery man to weye euery thyng indifferently by hymself, and consider how I haue taken vpon mée, not to enuey agaynst any persō, but alonely to fight agaynst that de∣uillishe doctrine, which is dishonour to Christ and hys blessed bloude, and perillous and dampnable vnto all Christen mens soules.

Secondarily, I haue béene wrong∣fully, and vncharitably handeled, as God and all good men doth knowe, the which I will bée bounde to prooue whensoeuer it shall please God and the kyng to assigne indifferent iudges to heare mée, and myne aduersaries. Now, let no mā require in mée, that hée can not finde in hymselfe, that is to say, that I can so patiently, and so easely beare and suffer these intolle∣rable wronges, as I ought for to doe, yea and paraduenture as I gladly woulde doe. Wherefore I confesse, that many wordes hath béene sharpe∣ly written by mée, the which I would gladly had béene more charitablyer written, but then God had not geeuē mée so great patience. Wherefore I trust now by Gods grace, somethyng more temperately to speake, desiring euery good man of hys charitie, to helpe mée wyth his deuoute prayer. Amen.

To our purpose. Fyrst commeth blessed S. Ciprian, of whom was as∣ked a question, what should bée done * 1.53 wyth those religious personnes, that could not kéepe theyr chastitie as they had vowed. These bée hys wordes. Thou doest aske what wée doe iudge of vyrgins, the which after they haue decréed to lyue chastly, are afterward founde in one bedde wyth a man. Of the which thou sayst that one of them was a Deacon. Wée doe wyth great sorow sée y^• great ruine of many per∣sons, which cōmeth by y^• reasō of such vnlawfull and perillous companying togither. Wherefore if they haue de∣dicate them selues vnto Christ, out of fayth to lyue purely, and chastly, then let them so remayne wyth out any fa∣ble, and strongly, and stedfastly to abyde the rewarde of virginitie. But * 1.54 and if they wyll not abyde, or els can not abyde, then is it better to marry, then for to fall into the fier of concu∣piscence, and let them géeue vnto the brethren and sisterne none occasion of sclaunder. &c. I doe for my parte

require no more then blessed Cypri∣an doth here teach, that is to say, if Priestes can lyue sole, I beséeche our Lord to rewarde them for it, & géeue them grace to continue. But if they can not, I woulde haue no snare layd for theyr soules, nor yet haue them compelled to a thyng that they can not kéepe. But I woulde the thyng shoulde bée indifferent for them that can lyue chaste, so to remayne. And they that haue not the gifte, nor can not so lyue, for to vse that lawfull re∣medy that God hath ordained. What hath men to doe, or what moueth thē * 1.55 to compell Priestes not to marry, as long as God is contēted with priests wedlocke? Let no man thynke that such a compulsion is acceptable to God. And if men wyll not bée contē∣ted with this doctrine, that is so good, so reasonable, and so honest, what cā I say to it? I must bée content, I can doe no more, but say my learnyng, and let God alone wyth hys punish∣ment.

Also blessed S. Augustine writing of thys same matter, sayth these * 1.56 wordes: Certayne men doe affirme those men to bée aduoulterers, that doth marry after they haue vowed ••hastitie: but I doe affirme, that those men doe greuously sinne, the which doth separate them. &c.

Note first that S. Angustine wry∣teth of them that had vowed chastitie. And yet notwithstanding hée woulde that those men shoulde continue in their maryage togither. The which thyng hée would neuer haue suffered if it had béene vnlawfull and heres••e, as men woulde make it now a dayes.

Secondarily obserue that there were in his dayes (as ••ée now many in ours) that thought it a greuous * 1.57 sinne, for a man to marry after hys vowe. And yet this opinion S. Augu∣stine doth condemne.

Now let men admit this doctrine of S. Augustine, and I wil require no more. And if they will condemne me, then let them also condemne S. Augu∣stine, for I haue learned it of hym. Al∣so blessed S. Ambrose, writeth of vir∣ginitie in this maner: Chastitie of bo∣dy ought to bée desired of vs. The which thyng I doe geue for a coūsell, and doe not commaūde it imperious∣ly. For virginitie is a thyng alonely, * 1.58 that ought to bée counsayled, but not to bée commaunded, it is rather a thyng of voluntary will, then of a pre∣cept. &c. Note how S. Ambrose tea∣cheth, how that virginitie ought not to bée required, as vnder a precept. Wherfore it must néedes folow, that the Popes doctrine is vnlawfull, whē hée commaundeth, that no man shall bée a Priest, except hée vow chastitie. For ••ere the Pope compelleth men vnder a colour, for to vow chastitie. As for an example.

It chaunceth me to méete by the way a théef, the which sayth vnto me. Thou shalt not goe ouer y^• bridge, ex∣cept thou wilt deliuer me thy purse. Now is it of trueth, that I may choose whether I will goe ouer the bridge or not, but yet this man doth violence, for cōpellyng mee either to goe backe agayne, or els to lose my purse, if that I will goe ouer. And I doubt not, but * 1.59 the kynges lawe will both condemne hym for doyng violence, and also take him for a théefe. So likewise the pope doth wrong, when hée sayth, I shall not bée a priest, except that I first vow chastitie. I say, that this condition is vnlawfull, and it is wrongfully done, to bynde me to any thyng vnder any condition, that God hath left frée to me. Moreouer, our M. Christ did not require that condition of hys priests. Wherfore it must néedes folow, that it is not a thyng, that of necessitie be∣longeth to Priesthode.

Also S. Hierome approoueth this * 1.60 doctrine of mine, saying: Let bishops, and priestes read this thyng (hée spea∣keth agaynst mispendyng of goodes, that is offered to helpe poore men with) the which doth teach their chil∣dren prophane letters, and maketh them to read commedies, and to sing baudy songes of iesters, and these chil¦dren they finde of the charges of the church. &c. Obserue this y^• S. Hierom speaketh here of Byshops, and priests children, the whiche they could not haue, if they were vnmaryed. For it

is not to bée supposed, that S. Hie∣••ome speaketh of bastardes, or of whores children, for then hée would haue vsed other wordes. So that good reader, it is cleare, after the doctrine of holy Doctours, that it is lawful for Priestes to haue wiues, and specially if they can not lyue sole.

But now will we goe farther, and sée what holy councels hath ordeined in this cause. The trueth is that y^• de∣uill hath of long tyme harped on this stryng, to sorbyd Priestes Matrimo∣ny. Not for any deuotion, that hée had to virginitie, for hée knew well men could not kéepe it, farther then theyr gifts were: but alonely that hée might lay a snare for mens soules, and also bryng the holy institution, and ordi∣naunce of God into a contempt, and a despising. But God hath alwayes of hys infinite mercy, styrred vp some good man to resiste hym. We doe read in authenticall storyes, that in the coū¦cell of Nicene, certeine men went a∣bout to haue pri••ated Priestes from their wyues. But almighty God dyd l••t them. The woordes of the storyes bée these. The Councell of Nicene, * 1.61 willyng to reforme the lyfe of men, dyd set certayne lawes, the which we call Canones: among the whiche, cer∣tayne * 1.62 men would haue had a lawe to hée brought in, that Byshops, priests, Deacons, and Subdeacons, should not lye with their wyues, which they had maryed, before theyr consecratiō. But Paphnutius a confessour, dyd withstand them and sayd, that theyr mariage was honorable, and it was pure chastitie for thē to lye with theyr wyues. So that the Coūcell was per∣suaded, not to make any such law, af∣firmyng it for to bée a greuous occa∣sion both vnto them, & also vnto their wyues of fornication. And this thyng dyd Paphnutius, though that hée hym selfe was vnmaryed. The Councell dyd alowe this sentence. So that no∣thyng was decréed, as cōcernyng this thyng: but euery man was left vnto hys freewill, and not bounde of any necessitie. &c.

Here is to bée noted, that this holy Coūcell dyd not recken it an vnpure▪ or a filthye thyng, for a Byshop, or a * 1.63 Priest, to cōpany with his wyfe. But they doe graūt, that it is a pure, and a cleane chastitie for a Priest to compa∣ny with his wife. The which is cleare¦ly agaynst y^• Pope. For hée sayth, that it is fleshly, and carnall, and that their handes bée defiled, and they made vn∣worthy thereby, to handle the blessed Sacramentes. But here will bee sayd that these mē had wyues before theyr consecration, the whiche thyng they will also graunt, that a maryed man may bée chosen a Byshop, & also kéepe his wife afterward. But hée may not marry after hys cōsecration, that had no wyfe before.

To this I aunswere, that it is no lawfull solution, thus to say. For if it bée lawfull for a mā to kéepe his wyfe after his Priesthode? why shall it not bée as lawfull for hym to take a wyfe after hys cōsecration? What thyng is there in hys matrimony, that is made after hys consecration, that was not in his matrimony before hys conse∣cration? Or for what cause dyd hée take a wyfe before hys consecration? If hée dyd it to auoyde fornication, then is hée now much more bound to take a wyfe then before: for it becom∣meth hym a great deale worse to lyue in fornication, after hys consecratiō, then hée dyd before. But these mē that maketh this lighte solution, doe not hādle this matter truely before God. For it is not their meanyng, that ma∣ryed men should either bée Byshops, or Priestes. For let them shew me in * 1.64 all their chronicles, that euer any ma∣ryed man was chosen to bée a byshop▪ since they had made lawes, that Priestes should haue no wyues, and then I wil beléeue them: But alonely they séeke an e••asion, how to defende the matter by. For I dare say, if any man should goe aboute to chuse a ma∣ried man to bée a byshop, or els a per∣son, they would thinke hée were mad. In so much that some of them hath sayd, that mariage was so vnlawfull * 1.65 for Piestes, that they haue fayned, y^• ••olye Apostles for to forsake their wiues, after their election. How stā∣deth these two togeathers? that ma∣ryed

men may bée bishops, I feare me * 1.66 the byshoprickes will soone bée gotten out of their handes, and most parte also of all benefices. Wherefore I woulde counsell them rather to graunt that Priestes myght haue wiues, then for maried men to bée made byshops.

Furthermore marke, that the ho∣ly counsell made no lawe, whether y^• Priest should marry after their conse∣••ration or not. Wherefore it must néedes bée taken away of them as frée and an indifferēt thing, for a priest to marry after his cōsecratiō or not. For if they had reckened it vnlawfull for hym to marry, then would they haue forbidden it. For the counsell was ga∣thered for to reforme those thinges y^• were a•…•…sse, as the text saith clearely. Moreouer, if it had chaunced then a priest to haue maried after his conse∣cration, hee had not offended, for there was no lawe at that day, that did for∣byd hym. Therefore, it is now no ne∣cessary artycle.

If men will not bée content with these auctorities: yet somewhat to sa∣tisfye them, I will bringe them an o∣ther lawe, which the Papistes calleth Canon Apostolorum, the wordes bée * 1.67 these. If any man doth teach, that a Priest by y^• reason of his order ought to forsake his wyfe, cursed bée hée. &c. Marke of this lawe, that for colour of holines, no mā ought to forsake their wyues. Wherefore it must néedes fo∣lowe, that for priests to marry wiues after their consecration is not against their holynes. Note also, that the text sayth: how Priests had wiues of their owne, and went not a borowing, as they doe now. We reade in the coun∣sell * 1.68 of Gangrens, how they made this decrée. If any man doth iudge or con∣demne a Priest that is maried, that hée may not, by the reason of his ma∣riage doe sacrifyce, but will ab∣stayne from his masse by the rea∣son thereof, cursed bée hée. &c. Fyrst you shall know the occasion wherfore this counsell was gathered.

There was a certayne heretyke cal¦led Eustachius, the which dyd among * 1.69 all other heresyes teach, that no mari∣••d man could be saued. Also be taught that Priests, which dyd marry, ought for to bée despised, and in no wise for to handle the blessed sacramentes.

Against this heretick, is this decrée made. Now let euery mā iudge what diuersitie is betwéene this heretyke, and the Popes doctrine. This here∣tyke sayth, that mariage is vnpure, & vncleane, and that a maryed Priest may not touch the sacramentes. The selfe and the same doctrine sayth the Pope in diuers places: and especially in a chapter, y^• beginneth w^t Nullum. * 1.70 Where hée sayth, that no byshop shall pre ume to consecrate any Deacon, except hée will fyrst vow chastitie. For no man ought to bée admitted (sayth hée) to serue at the aulter, except his chastitie bée fyrst knowen.

Also in an other chapter hée sayth, * 1.71 They that eyther kéepe whores, or els marry wiues, shalbe priuated of their benefices. For they are vnworthy for to bée in the temple of God, & to touch the holy vessels of the Church, that doth vse them selues in such vncleane∣nes, sayth hée. What is condemning * 1.72 of matrymony, if this bée not? Hée cō∣pareth whordome, and matrymony to bée like cleane, the which did neuer none heretyke. The Pope goeth fur∣ther, * 1.73 and sayth: No man may bée ey∣ther Priest, or Deacon, that is mary∣ed, except they will promise to forsake their wiues. &c. These lawes make against them that say, how that mary∣ed men may bée Priestes. The same * 1.74 thyng doth the Pope also confyrme in dyuers other places of his lawe, hauing none other cause why, but on∣ly because (as hée sayth) Priestes must bée pure, and cleane. This same cause had also Eustachius. For he reckened as the Pope doth, how maryage, was vnpure, and vncleane, and dyd there∣fore forbyd Priests to marry. Yea in our dayes, I dare say, that no man forbiddeth Priests to marry, but on∣ly they that reckē mariage vncleane. But let ••s goe farther, and sée what holy counsels haue decréed, as conser∣ning Priestes matrimony.

We doe reade in a counsell, that is called the syxt Sinod, these words: * 1.75

Considering y^t it is decréed amongest the lawes made by thē of Rome, that no deacon, nor Priest, shall company with their wiues. Therefore we not withstanding that decrée, folowing y^t rules of the Apostles, and the consti∣tutions of holy men, wyll, that from thys day forth, maryage shal bée law∣full, in no wyse dissoluyng the matri∣mony betwéene them & their wiues, nor depriuing thē of their familiarity in time conuenient. Whosoeuer ther¦fore shall bee founde able of the order * 1.76 of Deacon, Subdeacon, or of Priest∣hoode, wée wyll that no such men bée prohibited to ascende the dignities a∣foresayd, for the cohabitation of their wyues: Nor that they bée constrained at the receite of theyr orders, to pro∣fesse chastitie, or to abstayne from the company of their lawfull wyues.

It foloweth, if any man presume ther¦fore agaynst the Canons of the Apo∣stles to depriue Priestes, or Deacons from the copulation and felowship of theyr lawfull wyues, let such a man bée deposed. Semblably, both priests and Deacons, which putteth away their wyues vnder the colour of ho∣lynes, let them bée excommunicated. But if they continue in the same, let them bée deposed.

Note how thys counsell doth con∣demne by name the Popes decrée, which hath commaunded spirituall men to forsake their wyues. And in thys is also to bée obserued, that the euasion of the Papistes, when they say, that marryed mē may be priests, is a false lye. For the Pope and they dyd neuer admit that, as this counsell witnesseth, but alonely that they are driuen to a narrow exigent, by y^t vio∣lence of our argumentes, & they haue none other euasion to delude the peo∣ple by. Wherefore they bée compel∣led to helpe themselues with such a lye. For here is it playnely in thys Counsell declared, how the Pope, & they haue prohibited those Priestes y^t were marryed, to cōpany with their wyues, and would not admit them to mynister, béefore they had forsaken their wiues.

Farthermore, note how that thys counsell doth alleadge for them, the * 1.77 rules of the holy Apostles, and the cō∣stitutions of blessed men. What Chri¦sten man wyll nowe set hym selfe a∣gaynst thys holy counsell, the which hath so good auctoritie for it? After∣warde it is to bée marked, how that this counsell doth commaunde, that no man shall vowe chastitie, whē hée shall bée consecrated, the which thing is clearely agaynst the Pope, that cō∣pelleth all hys priestes to vowe chasti∣tie, béefore they bée sacred.

Now let euery Christen mā iudge whether it bée better, or surer to fol∣low the Pope hauing none auctoritie for hym, and béeyng also but one mā: then to follow thys holy Counsel, ha∣uyng for it the auctoritie of the holy Apostles, and of other blessed men.

Finally, marke how that this bles∣sed counsell doth depose all those that doth priuate Priestes from the com∣panye of a lawfull wyfe. Out of the which doth follow, that the Pope, & all hys adherentes bée ipso iur•• depo∣sed. And if they re•…•… their er∣rour, they bée excōmunicated. Wher∣fore I conclude out of this counsell, that Priestes may lawfully haue wiues. Wée haue also euen there these wordes. It is open that neither * 1.78 Deacons, nor subdeacons, ought to bée forbidden from maryage. &c. If thys bée not playne? I can not tell * 1.79 what is playne. Wherfore Gracia∣nus concludeth, that whether hée bée Priest, Deacon, subdeacon, hée may lawfully vse matrimony. If men will not bée content wyth these sayinges, I can not tell what will satisfie them. Reasonable men ought not to fight both agaynst God and man. But yet let vs goe farther, and sée what the Popes lawe sayth more.

Innocent the thirde writeth in his * 1.80 decretalles, on thys maner: Those Priestes, that after the maner of the countrey, hath not forsaken the con∣iunctiō of maryage, if they doe breake their wedlocke, ought greuously to bée punished, séeyng that they may vse lawfully matrimony. Marke how that this was the maner of certayne countryes, that Priestes might ma∣ry.

Therefore it must néedes follow, that Priestes matrimony is not for∣bidden by Gods lawe. And if it bée not forbidden ••p Gods lawe? what charitie is in the Pope to compell mē so violently vnto the thyng, y^t which God hath not bounde thē to. Is it not a cruell thyng for the Pope to burne a man as an hereticke, because that hée kéepeth not his commanndement and lyueth not in open whoredome? Why doth hée not commaunde hym as well neyther to hunger, nor yet to thyrst? And if hée eyther hunger, or thyrst, why doth hée not forbid hym to eate and to drinke? It is as much in our power to vowe chastitie, and to kéepe it, if wée haue not the gift of God, as it is to vowe that wée wyll neyther hunger nor thyrst: for they are both inclinations of nature, im∣planted of God. For as Cicero sayth, and also the Emperour in hys lawe: * 1.81 wée are naturally inclined vnto the coniunction that is in matrimony, for cause of propagation. And it is as much in our handes, neyther to hun∣ger nor to thyrst, as it is to chaunge this naturall inclination. And as wée * 1.82 when wée are hungry and thirsty, cā not abstayne from eatyng and drink∣ing: no more can wée kéepe our cha∣stitie (notwythstanding our vowe) if God haue not geuen vs the gyft. Mē may here please somthyng thēselues, and stand in theyr owne conseyte, & say how they can inuent many reme∣dies to kéepe their chastitie by.

But I dare say, they woulde not for all the clothes that belongeth to their backes, that the purenes, and cleannes of their hartes were writtē in great letters, & set vp on y^t church dore. Wherfore I woulde desire mē to bée contented, and to set aside all hipocrisie, and speake the trueth, as it is written in theyr hartes: for God wyll not bée deceaued, nor yet moc∣ked. And doubtles, if I coulde not shewe infinite examples, how that Priestes neyther doe, nor yet cā kéepe theyr chastitie, mē myght well blame mée for mouyng thys article. But now séeyng that theyr lyuyng doth te∣stifie my doctrine, and that to y^t great offence and sclaunder of Christes ho∣ly Church, and also to the great re∣buke and shame of many a good mans childe: yea finally to the dampnation of many a deare soule: Mée thynke men ought to bée contēt and to thāke mée for takyng of so great labours, for deliueraunce of theyr soules, and also for mayntenaūce of honesty, and and good morall vertue, according to Gods lawe, and mans lawe.

But let vs procéede farther to * 1.83 prooue thys matter. The maister of the sentēces, wryteth on thys maner: Our weakenes is prone to fall into filthynes, but it is helped wyth honest maryage. And the thyng that is vnto whole men an offēce, is vnto sicke mē a remedy. Marke how the M. of the Sentences sayth, that wée are ready to fall into filthynes? And how that maryage is an honest remedy? How can men then after theyr owne lear∣ning condemne mariage, as no ho∣nest thyng? séeyng that theyr owne Clarkes cauleth it honest? Moreouer the mayster of the Sentēces will, that both perfect and vnperfect may vse this honest thyng: for to the first it is an offēce, & to the other it is a necessa∣ry remedy. Iesus how woulde men cry agaynst vs poore men, if they had halfe so much against vs, as wée haue agaynst them. But our Lorde sende them hys grace, and molisie theyr hartes. Amen.

We haue also in the Popes law a * 1.84 title, De filijs Presbyterorum, in the which there bée many chapters writ∣ten to the Byshops of Englande, as concernyng Priestes children. Wher¦fore it is to hée supposed, that Priests had then wyues. And if they had thē, why may they not now? By what authoritie are our Priests now more compelled then they were? Haue our Priestes nowe more articles of theyr fayth then they had? But yet here wil bée sayd, that the Popes law speaketh of bastardes, and not of lawfull chil∣dren. Mée thynketh that this same is not charitably aunswered, for here they doe accuse of fornication many an honest Priest, agaynst whom they haue alonely but a light supposition.

For they that made this aunswere, knew not those men, nor yet theyr ly∣uyng. And the text speaketh but of Priestes children, & not of bastardes.

Farthermore by this solution is * 1.85 many an honest man defamed, for to ••ée a basta••d, the whiche is an euill name, and me thinke vncharitably layd by these men vnto their charges. Wherefore note, that these men doth sore defame priesthode, & that agaynst the order of charitie, that had rather graunt all these Priestes, that the law speaketh of (which is no small nōber) for to bée breakers of theyr vow, and to bée open whoremaisters, yea, and also theyr children to bée bastardes, ra¦ther then they would graūt that those Priestes had lawfull wyues. The which were neither agaynst honesty, nor yet the order of priesthode. Wher¦fore if I shoulde thus haue defamed Priestes, & theyr children, men would ••ore haue beene greued with me: yea I am afrayde, that some men will bée displeased with me, alonely bycause I doe write agaynst those priestes, whō I know of surety to bée naught, if ha∣uyng of children can testifie it.

But what will they say to y^t popes law in the same place, whose wordes bée these. Thou doest aske of vs (saith * 1.86 the Pope, to the Byshop of Cassell) whether that these men, that hath Priestes to theyr fathers, may bée pro¦moted to holy orders or not, if they hée of good, and honest de•…•…our, & well learned. To this we aunswere (sayth the Pope) that if they bée gottē of lawfull marriage, & there bée none other Canonicall impediment, then may they lawfully bée promoted vnto holy orders, and may enioy that same benefice, which their fathers had be∣fore. &c.

This no mā cā not deny, but y^t law speaketh of Priestes children, y^t were gotten in lawfull matrimony. Wher∣fore it must néedes follow, y^t Priestes were then maryed: yea, and the lawe calleth theyr marriage lawfull, which must also bée noted: so y^t men may sée that this doctrine of myne is no new thyng, but it is elder then theyr law.

Also in that same title, the Pope sayth, we haue vnderstanded, that N. borne, and gotten in Priesthode of a * 1.87 lawfull wife, hath alwayes had an af∣fection to serue God in the office of a spirituall man. &c. Here note, that the Pope speaketh of Priestes children: yea, and of them that were gotten in lawfull marriage, and not in fornica∣tion. Wherfore the Pope supposeth, that Priestes may haue a lawfull ma∣trimony. And therfore mee thinketh, that when men finde in the law, men∣tion made of Priestes children, they should rather suppose them to bée got∣ten in matrimony, then in fornicatiō, both for the honesty of the father, mo∣ther, and also of the childe: specially séeyng y^t Priestes had wyues in those dayes. And it stādeth also more with honesty of Priesthode, to graunt that they had wyues, rather then whores.

Now let vs sée what the Empe∣rours * 1.88 lawe sayth to Priestes wyues. We will (sayth hée) that all maner of spirituall men shal haue this preroga∣tiue, that theyr wyues, and their chil∣dren, and their seruauntes, that is for to say, both male, and female, shall bée frée from an homage, whiche is called Perāgariam. Here is to bée noted, that the Emperour doth not alonely ad∣mit Priestes matrimony, but also hée honoreth it with a priuilege, & a pre∣rogatiue, the whiche hée would not haue done, if hée had iudged their ma¦trimony vnlawfull. Wherefore men may sée, if they will, how indifferent our forefathers hath béene vnto this holy state of matrimony. And it wold not become vs euill, if we learned of them better to iudge of these thyngs, that God our maker hath both insti∣tuted and sanctified.

Now good reader haue I prooued this article by Gods holy word, by the sayinges of Doctours, by the autho∣ritie of Councels, & by some certaine lawes, both Emperiall, and Popish. Wherfore now wil I goe farther vn∣to the hystories, and prooue this thing by examples, and practise of holy mē.

First, we haue she example of bles∣sed S. Peter, the which had doubtles a wyfe, as it may bée prooued by Ma∣thew, which sayth: Quod socrus Petri * 1.89

tenebatur magnis febribus. Peters wy∣ues mother had a gret agew. Now, if Peter had a wife, as this text is clere, what thyng should forbyd our priests mariage? I thinke they are not boūde * 1.90 to more chastitie, then Peter was? Nor it will not helpe to say, that hée forsoke his wife after his calling. For the Scripture here speaketh of Pe∣ters wyues mother. Why doe they not as well take hys wyues mothers name awaye, as they take away hys wife? But I haue aunswered to this reason largely inough before.

Also Philippe the Euangelist, had thrée daughters, the whiche hée could * 1.91 not haue bad, if that hée had had no * 1.92 wyfe: for I thinke there is no good mā that will reckē them to bée bastardes, and whores children. Neither it can helpe, to saye, that these children were borne before hys electiō, for this is but a simple saying, and no proba∣tiō. And it is not inough to say, séeyng that men will haue it for so necessary an article: but men must also prooue it by open Scriptures. For els I may saye by as good authoritie, that these daughters were borne after hys elec∣tion, as other mē say, how they were borne before hys election. And I haue better supposition for me out of the texte, then they haue: for they are not called Philips daughters alonely, but Philippe the Euangelist daughters. Wherfore they may by a good reason say, they were not Philippes daugh∣ters, as they may say, that their father was none Euangelist.

We doe read in Tripertita Historia these wordes: All Priestes in the ori∣entall * 1.93 Church doth abstayne with a frée will, & of no necessitie frō wyues. For many of them, in tyme whē they bée byshops, haue had of their lawful wiues chlidrē. Note how this history declareth clearely, that priestes in the orientall Church were not compelled to vowe chastitie. Secondarily y^t his∣tory cauleth priestes wiues lawfull wiues. And also how the byshops had childrē, after their consecration. Now doth all learned men know, that the orientall Church receiueth their ma∣ners nerer of the Apostles then we.

Wherefore it is to bée presupposed that these men tooke their custome of marryage, of the holy Apostels. And at the least wise, it must followe, that if their priestes may haue wiues law∣fully, that then our priestes may haue also. For God hath layde none other burthen on our Priestes neckes, thē hée had on theirs.

Moreouer we doe reade in Ecclesi∣astica * 1.94 Historia, that Penitus byshop of a citie called Gnoseos, would haue made a decrée, y^t priestes should haue * 1.95 vowed chastitie. But Dionisius By∣shop of Chorinth, wrote agaynst hym and required hym, that hée would not lay no necessitie of compulsed chastity in other mens neckes. Penitus folo∣wed his counsell. Here you may sée, y^t the deuell hath béene of long tyme a∣boute to bring in this snare for priests but God hath resisted hym.

We haue also in the same historye, * 1.96 agaynst those men, that did despise mariage, a goodly saying which is this what will they reproue the Apostles? Peter, and Philip had wiues, and did also geue their daughters to mariage. In so much as S. Peter did crye vnto * 1.97 his wyfe, when shée should bée led vn∣to her passion, and called her by her name, and sayde vnto her: Oh deare wyfe, remember our Lord. Heare is it cleare, that Péeter had a wife. And heare is also against them that sayth, how y^t Peter forsoke his wife, which is here proued a false lye.

Moreouer, Spiridon the byshop of * 1.98 Cipres, hauing the gift of prophecye, had also a daughter, whose name was called Irenem, which after her faith∣full seruice dyed a vergin. Heare is it cleare, y^t this holy man had a daugh∣ter, which hée could not haue, if hée had had no wife. Farthermore we do * 1.99 reade, that Policrates, byshop of E∣phesum, doth shew, that seuen of his parentes lynially were bishops in order before hym, and hée hym selfe was the eyght. Now coulde not this bée, that his fathers from the seuenth * 1.100 degrée could haue béene byshops, if bi∣shops had had no wiues, for the text is cleare of his fathers, and not of his kynsmen. Mée thinke this is a cleare

example, & sufficient to proue as great a matter as this is if men would bée content, and satisfied with reason.

¶ Ex damaso Papa, ad Hieronimum, ex Platina, & Nauclero.

BVt let vs goe farther, and sée, how many Popes haue béene priestes children, that this matter may bée o∣pened by them, and that Popes them selues may be witnes of this doctrine

Fyrst is there Siluerius, pope, the which had a byshop to his father cal∣led * 1.101 Ormisda. This Siluerius lyued a∣bout the yeare of our Lord. 524.

Pope Felix, the third of that name * 1.102 was y^t sonne of Felix, priest of Rome. This man lyued about the yeare of our Lord. 474.

Pope Deus dedit, was the sonne * 1.103 of Stephane the subdeacon, which ly∣ued about the yeare of our Lord. 623.

Pope Theodorus, was the sonne * 1.104 of Theodore byshop of Hierusalem. This man lyued about the yeare of our Lord. 634.

Hadrian, y^t secōd was the sonne of * 1.105 Thalare, the byshop. This man lyued about the yeare of our Lord. 873.

Pope Iohn, the xv. of that name, was y^t sonne of priest Leo, This man * 1.106 lyued aboute the yeare of our Lorde. 984.

Pope Agapitus, the fyrst of that name, had a priest to his father called * 1.107 Gordianus, hée lyued about the year of our Lord. 534.

Pope Siluerius, had a father called * 1.108 Siluerius. a byshop of Rome, This man liued about the yeare of our lord 544.

Pope Boniface, the fyrst of y^t name * 1.109 was sonne to Iucundus priest.

Pope Osius, was y^t sonne of Ste∣phan the subdeacon. * 1.110

Pope Gelasius, the fyrst, had a by∣shop to his father called Valenus anno * 1.111 Domini. 484.

Iohn the. x. pope of y^t name, was sonne to pope Surgius, about the yere * 1.112 of our Lord. 924.

All these, & a great many more (as the Popes lawe testifieth) were the * 1.113 children of subdeacons, deacons, and Priestes, and haue borne rule in the Church of Rome. Wherefore I mer∣uayle very fore, that men doe recken it so new learning, that priests should haue wiues, séeing, that it standeth with Gods holy word, with the say∣ing of the olde doctours, with the de∣termination of counsels, with y^t Em∣perours lawe, and also with y^t Popes olde decrées.

Moreouer, Christes holy Apostels, and many other holy men, since their dayes, haue liued in the holy estate of matrymony. Finally, there hath been many holy men, and also holy women borne in the wedlocke of Priestes.

By what reasō now can, or wil mē damne all these thynges, that bée of so great auctoritie? If men wyll heare neyther God nor mā, nor yet no good reason, what néede men then so much to speake of learning? séeing that they wyll heare nothyng, but that they al∣onely iudge good? Truely this is a great high minde of mē, thus wrong∣fully to condemne other men for he∣retikes, hauyng so good learnyng for them: and yet they themselues are grounded onely of their owne sensu∣all mynde, hauyng no learnyng, nor reason for them. But I wyll put this matter to Gods iudgement. And let not men doubt (if they béeléeue there is a God) but that God wyll bée a reuenger of such wrongfull violence, as men doe vse in thys case, both a∣gaynst hym and agaynst all his bles∣sed company of Saintes. But yet for to doe men pleasure, and that they myght bée perswaded if it were possi∣ble, I will declare vnto them, how y^t wée doe finde old monuments, testifi∣yng clearely, that priests were in pea∣ceable possessiō of matrimony, & their childrē gottē in that same matrimony were admitted to spiritual benefices.

In the tyme of Pope Alexander y^t thirde, there was a controuersie for the patronage of a benefice betwéene the pryor of Plimptō in Deuenshyre, and one Iohn de Ʋalletorda. Now were there deputed iudges, Rychard Archbyshop of Caunterbury, & Ro∣ger Byshop of Wynchester, béefore whome the pryor of Plympton proo∣ued his patronage, by the reason that

hée was in possession, and had géeuen it vnto diuers persons. Fyrst (hée sayth) there was a Priest of Plymptō called Alpheghe, which had by y^t gyft of the pryor of Plympton, the bene∣fice of Sutton, which is now called Plymmouth. This Alpheghe had a sonne cauled Sadda, which had also the benefice after hys father. And af∣ter Sadda, was there an other priest cauled Alnodus, which had the bene∣fice likewyse. This Alnodus had a sonne called Robert Dunprust, which after the discease of his father Alnode had also the same benefice. And after thys Robert Dunpru••t, William Ba¦con hys sonne, enioyed the benefice lykewyse. Here men may see, that it is neyther so new learnyng, nor yet so long agoe since priestes had lawful wyues.

Moreouer, I reade in our owne Chronicles, that in the tyme of kyng * 1.114 Henry the iij. which raygned y^t yeare of our Lord 1101. priestes myght lawfully marry wiues, in so much y^t Anseline than Archbyshop of Caun∣terbury in a Seane that hée helde at London, did make a decrée, y^t priestes should forsake their wiues, the which was both agaynst Gods lawe, and mans. For the texte of our Mayster Christ is cleare. Quos deus coniunxit, Homo non seperet. Marke these two wordes, Deus, and Homo. And howe much the one passeth the other.

Farthermore, the Pope hymselfe hath not greatly regarded Priestes chastitie, if hée myght get any money for dispensations, in the which thyng hée coulde not haue dispēsed, if it had béene of Gods lawe. And if it bée but but mans lawe, what charitie is in the Pope to compell men so sore to kéepe it, séeyng that it is so great daū∣ger vnto priestes, and that so many soules béene lost thorough it? Yea, what tyranny is in hym, thus cruelly to kill men for breakyng alonely of hys commaundement, the which is not in their power to kéepe? To our purpose, the Pope hath often tymes dispensed both wyth Priestes, and religious men for their vowe, & hath géeuen them licence to marry.

It is not vnknowen to many men * 1.115 that there was an Abbot of Reading, whom men for his perfecte lyuinge, called Abbot Sancte. This man bée∣yng in daunger of a certayne disease, * 1.116 by the reason hée had no wyfe, sente vnto the pope, desiring hym to dis∣pense wyth hym for hys vowe, and y^t pope dispensed wyth hym, and gaue hym licence to marry a wyfe, but vn∣der a condition that it shoulde bée se∣cretly done, and not In facie ecclesie. By this men may sée, that the Pope himself holdeth not so much of priests chastitie: for then hée woulde not re∣garde more money, then it. And if the pope may dispence wyth thys Abbot for auoyding of a disease corporall: how much more ought hée now to dis¦pense with priestes: séeing there bée so many soules in daunger? Yea, and also the order of priesthoode is sore de∣famed and sclaundered, by the reasō that priestes hath no wyues.

Moreouer, wée doe reade, that * 1.117 pope Celestine the third, did dispense with a Nunne, whose name was cau∣led Constatia, Kyng Rogers daugh∣ter of Cecyll, and gaue her licence to * 1.118 marry with Henry y^t Emperour, the sixt of that name. This was about y^t yeare of our Lorde. 1186. So that mē may perceaue how the pope doth not greatly regarde the vowe of hys spiritualtie, if any thing may bée got∣ten, to pay for a dispensation. And it wil not helpe to say, that the pope did dispense with this woman for a com∣mon wealth. For the stories maketh mention that the pope dispēsed with him vnder a cōdition, that hée should paye hym a yearely pencion for the kyngdome of Cecyll, and should reco∣uer it of his owne charges, out of the handes of Tancredus, which was then in possession of it. And béecause that hée myght haue the better title to the kyngdome, hée gaue hym the one∣ly daughter of Cecill. So that y^t pope did it not for a common wealth, but for his owne lucre. But now graunt that it were for▪ a common wealth, therefore, first it was not Gods com∣maundemēt, that priestes should liue sole. For gods word géeueth no place

to no common wealth. And if y^• pope did then dispence for a cōmō wealth? why doth hée not now dispence for a∣uoyding of fornication, in so many innumerable priestes? Doth not mē recken it for a common wealth to ex∣pell fornication, & all occasions there∣vnto? But now there is no commō wealth to bée regarded, béecause there is no shyning golde offered. But at y^t * 1.119 least wayes mée thinketh that priestes which marry, bée very farre from he∣resie: for it is neyther agaynst Gods lawe, nor yet agaynst the common wealth.

Here were many examples to bée brought in, how the pope hath dispen¦sed both with Monkes, Friers, and Nunnes, the which I will passe ouer, and will she we as neare as I can out out of Chronicles, how lōg▪ it is, that the pope hath gone about to bryng in the vow of chastitie. Doctour Eckius doth say, that Calixtus primus dyd firste make the statute, that priestes should vow chastitie, b••t that is false. For all Chronicles beareth witnesse, that priestes had wyues in the Coun∣cell, of Nicene, the which was almost an hundreth yeares after Calixtus dayes. Wherfore it can not bée suppo¦sed, that y^t statute was made béefore the Councell of Nicene. But authen∣ticall hystories doth make mention, that Nicholas the first, whiche was * 1.120 Byshop of Rome, the yeare of our Lord 860. did goe about this thyng: but hée could not bryng it to passe by the reason of an holy man S. Hulde∣ricke, Episcopus Augustensis, the which wrote a very sharpe Epistle a∣gaynst hym, reproouyng hym sore, by∣cause hée would compell priestes to vow chastitie. Hys woords bée these. Thou hast not swarued a litle from discretion, y^t where as thou oughtest to haue counsayled priestes to chasti∣tie, thou hast with a Lordly violence compelled them to it. Is not this af∣ter the iudgement of all wise men, a * 1.121 great violence, whē that thou agaynst the institution of the Gospell, and a∣gaynst y^e decrée of the holy ghost, wilt compell men to obserue thy priuate decrée? &c. Hée reciteth also agaynst y^e Byshop of Rome all those same scrip∣tures, that I haue brought herein my booke of this matter, and al••o certain of the counsels, to that purpose, that I haue brought them. So that men ought not to thinke, that I am the first, that thus hath vnderstande the Scriptures, nor yet the first, that hath spoken agaynst priestes vowes.

Note also how this holy mā sayth, that priests ought to bée admonyshed, & counselled to chastitie, but not com∣pelled. For that (sayth hée) is a great * 1.122 violence, and agaynst Christes holy Gospell, and y^t blessed spirite of God. These bée as vehement wordes as I haue spokē. For out of these woordes men may gather, that it is not farre from heresie to compell priestes to vow chastitie. This holy man procée∣deth farther with y^t Bishop of Rome, and telleth a fact of S. Gregory, the which went about to compell priestes to vow chastitie.

Vpon a day S. Gregory sent vnto hys pondes for fish, and in the nettes * 1.123 that they fished withall, were brought vp aboue sixe thousand young chil∣drens heades, the which thyng, when S. Gregory saw, stroke hym sore to the hart, & hée was very heauy of that sight, and perceyued anone, that hys decrée, that hée made for priester cha∣stitie, was the occasion of this great murther: In that that priestes could not lyue sole, nor yet they durst not a∣uow theyr children, for feare of the decrée. And so for sauegarde of theyr honesty, they fell into a fearefull, and abhominable sinne, to kyll theyr own children. And for this cause S. Gre∣gory (sayth this holy Byshop) dyd re∣uoke hys decrée agayn, and did greatt¦ly * 1.124 alow the saying of the Apostle: I∣is better to marry then to burne. Ad∣dyng vnto it of hys owne: It is bet∣ter to marry then to geue occasion to murther.

Here note good reader, what a ter∣rible, and a fearefully example this is? Is not this a piteous case, that so many thousandes innocētes bée thus slayne? When shall the chastitie kee∣pyng of all the priestes in the worlde bée an occasion of so great goodnes, as

the law of chastitie hath béene hereof mischief? Alas is there no pyty in •…•…ēs hartes? that are nothyng moued, whē they read such horrible factes in holy mens writyngs? Or doe men thinke, that there is no mischief now in our dayes done, by the reason that priests are compelled to chastitie? If men thinke that there come any mischiefe by the reason of it, how can men rec∣ken to auoyde Gods vengeaūce, that will so stifly and strongly mayntayne the same?

I haue béene informed of credible persons, the whiche if néede were, I could yet bryng foorth, that in a place of Religion within this fewe yeares, there was a religious man, that dyd * 1.125 get a woman with child, the whiche woman was brought a bed in the bro¦thers chamber of a fayre sonne. This child was Christened in the same chā∣ber, and as soone as it was christened, hée brake the necke of it, and buryed it in the night, in the Churcheyarde. * 1.126 This is the trueth, I cā prooue it. Is not this a terrible thyng? dooth not na¦ture abhorre this? And yet men had rather here this abhominablenes, thē for to release a litle of theyr own will. But oh Lorde God, howe streightly shalt thou punish this?

It is not yet out of y^t minde of mā, sinnes y^t an honest man lost his daugh¦ter, by the reason that a priest defiled * 1.127 her, the which (bycause hée would not bée dishonested) kylled the mayde pri∣uely, and afterwarde cast her into a well. If men will not bée moued at this? and such lyke other factes? I can not tell what will moue them?

I could recite a great many of ab∣hominable, and detestable factes, if I were not more ashamed to tell them, then priestes hath béene to doe them. Neither will I recite how shamefully that mens daughters, mens wyues, mens seruauntes hath béene, and are dayly cast awaye, by the▪ reason that priestes are so hoate of courage, and can not kéepe theyr chastitie. Would it not abhorre a Christen mā, to heare tell of the innumerable baudes, that are made by y^t reason y^t priests cā not lyue chaste? What a petious case is it to sée so many young men cast away? th•…•… whiche doth sée dayly their mai∣sters vncleane liuyng? Here were ma¦ny * 1.128 thynges to bée recited, but honesty compelleth me to passe thē ouer. But I thinke there is no good man, but hée will thinke as much in hym selfe, as I either would say, or can say.

I could tell, if If I would, the occa∣sion why y^t those Cardinals of Rome, which kéepeth whores, bée noted of the common people to bée of the best sort of Cardinals? But I will passe it ouer. Neuertheles it gréeueth mée a lyttell, that I may not somewhat opē my hart. But this I promyse them, if * 1.129 any of these proiectours of this fylthy chastitie doth take in hand to defende it agaynst mée, I will not bée asha∣med to write••, that they haue not béene ashamed to doe. Nor I will not kéepe secrete how certayne byshops of England, and also of other countries doth let whores to ferme vnto priests. And all béecause they will not suffer them to marry. Yet heare will I tell you one prety tale.

There is a byshop lyuyng at this same day in Germanye, which had * 1.130 néede of a great some of money (I could tell his name if I would) this byshop called vnto hym a gentilman, a great frend of his, which smelled a littell of the new learning, so called. * 1.131 Ʋnto this mā hée made his complaint how that hee must néedes make shifte shortly for a great somme of money, desyring hym both to helpe hym, and also of his counsell. This man sayde vnto hym, if hée would folow his coū∣sell, hée would shortly helpe him. The * 1.132 byshop was very glad, and graūted to folowe his counsell. Then sayde the gentylman.

My Lord, your Lordship shall geue a strayte commaundement, that all your Priestes within your diocese, shall put away their whores within this two monethes, vnder the payne of heresye at the least. After this, your Lordship shall send. ij. of your coūsel∣lers, that bée knowen to bée greately in your fauour, to handle with the priestes, in their owne names, for to

take vp thys matter, betwéene your Lordeship and them. But vnder this condition, that the priests shall graūt vnto them a certayne some of money and they shall promise the priestes, y^t they will bring it to passe, that your Lordship (notwithstāding your strait commaundement) shall bée contented to suffer them to liue, as they haue done in tymes past, and after the olde custome of the Church. The byshop * 1.133 was contented with this counsell, & incontinent gaue out y^t commaunde∣ment, and afterward sent out two of his best frendes, priuelye to treate with the Priestes in their names, but not in his. For hée woulde not bée knowen of it, because hée had vowed chastitie.

But what thinke you, that these two mē did gather in this one byshop∣pricke, within y^t space of ij. moneths? Ʋerely ••xx. M. guyldens, the which money the byshop receiued very de∣uoutly, and thought it not against the vowe of chastitie. What shall men say to these mens conscience? that will not sticke to burne a poore priest, that maryeth a wife? but yet, they will receyue. xx. M. guyldens to mayntayne open whoredome. O lord God thou knowest this, & yet doubt∣les thou sufferest it. And all béecause they should haue space, and respite to amende, vnto which, God geue them grace. Amen.

But agayne to our purpose: men may perceaue that this holy byshop Hulderyke was agaynst the pope, & dyd also alowe my doctrine, and de∣clare that S. Gregorie did repēt him * 1.134 of y^t statute y^t hée had made for priests •…•…astitie. Wherefore I conclude here yet agayne, that Gods holy worde, olde doctours, holy counselles, the Emperours lawe, olde decrées of the Church, the practice of the holy Apos∣tels, the lyuing of holy men, Gods lawe, and mans lawe, nature & rea∣son, doth alowe this article of myne. Wherefore I trust no good nor rea∣sonable man, will withstand mée, in this case.

There runneth a greate voyce of * 1.135 mée, that I haue maried a wife, and for that cause men doth recken that I will something proue my witte, and also stretch my learning, to mayntain that priestes myght haue wyues. But * 1.136 the very trueth is béefore God, & mā that I haue no wife, ••or neuer went about to marry: I thanke God of his grace. And of this I haue as noble princes as bée in Germany, to beare mée witnesse, and also many other worshipfull, and honest men, y^t doth knowe mée, and my conuersation. I haue also the ryght worshipfull man Doctour Lée, which was the kinges Embassadour with vs, and all his ser∣uauntes to testifye for mée, which bée honest men, and sufficient in a grea∣ter cause then this is.

Finally, here is also the byshop of our citie, with whom I doe dwell, & am most conuersant with. Heare is also the Embassadours of Lubycke, which doth also know mée, and my conuersation. And I doubt not, but all they will testifye for mée, as farre as any lawe shall require. Yea I dare boldly say, y^t myne aduersaries haue not so good testemony, that they kéepe theyr vowe of chastitie, as I haue, that I am not maryed. But all is done to bringe mée in defamation. Let God prouide. Neuertheles, what if I had a wyfe? is y so great a crime? What can men make of it? Hath not many noble Princes, and good men wyues? Will mē make more articles of saluation for mée, then for princes * 1.137 or for other Christen men? what haue I deserued thus to bée taken? Men will haue to doe with mée, but I pro∣mise them, they shall get no good by it, if I may come to my aunswere, I wil bée able alwayes to defend a wyfe (if I weare disposed to marry) agaynst all those that kéepe whores. Let them begin when they will. Notwithstan∣dyng, I doe not abstayne from a wife béecause that is euell, and vncleane to marry: but I haue other lawfull considerations. Let no man doubt, but this is of trueth, if I had a wyfe, I would not haue medled with this article, because that men myght haue suspected mée, that then I would haue defended this article, for the mainte∣naunce

of my facte. But now on the other syde, that men should not think how I despised mariage, or thought it vnlawfull for a Priest to marry, in as much as I my selfe doe not marry. Therfore haue I takē this labour on mée, to wryte my meaning, & so much the more boldely, béecause that men haue no cause to suspect mée, that I speake to defende myne owne cause, but all onely to set out the veretye, so God helpe mée. Amen.

But now will I goe to the Popes lawe, and sée what tyme that thys thyng begunne to take strength. It had beene often times attempted, but it was alwayes repelled by one good man or other, tyll after the dayes of Saint Gregory.

Pope Siricius made a statute, that priestes should haue no wyues, but it tooke none effect. * 1.138

After hym came Pelagius the se∣conde, and hée commaunded, that those priestes that had maryed wiues should abstayne from their wyues.

Next after hym came S. Gregory, and hée thought that statute of Pela∣gius to sore, that men should abstaine from their wyues, which had neither vowed chastitie, nor yet had vsed thē∣selues to continencie. And therefore hée decréed, that the Byshops should consecrate no Subdeacon, except hée woulde first vowe chastitie. Thys is openly in the popes lawe. Here bée∣gan the thyng somthyng to springe, * 1.139 and to take effecte, but yet it was not fully establyshed. For afterwarde S. Gregory hymselfe repented hym, as S. Hulderike beareth witnesse, by y^t reason of the great murther thath hée sawe come thereof. Wherefore it re∣mayned so styll a great whyle, vnto the commyng of Leo the ix: and hée sayth, that priestes may kéepe theyr * 1.140 wyues, but they may not company wyth them, for the Apostles (sayth hée) dyd forsake the company of their wyues: alonely they prouided them meate and clothe.

After hym commeth Innocentius the second, the which (not regarding * 1.141 Gods ordinaunce) ioyneth priestes that maryeth, and priestes that kée∣peth whores, all vnder one damna∣tion.

But all these yet coulde not bryng thys matter to passe as they woulde. For in many places (for all this) all priestes had wyues: tyll the tyme of Gregory the seuēth, which was cau∣led * 1.142 Hildebrande, a man of euill ly∣uyng, as the chronicles testifieth, and also a great nygromancer, and very familyar with the deuill. And as chro¦nicles sayth, a man that had poysoned 4. or 5. popes before, that hée myght come the sooner to it. Thys man (I say) in the yeare of our Lord. 1074. * 1.143 began to attempte thys matter very sharpely in Germany, where priests were then quietly suffered to haue wyues. Thys man sent his commaū¦dement vnto Otto byshop of Constā∣tinople, commaundyng to forbydde priestes that had not yet maryed, for to marry. And those y^t had maried, to bée separated from their wyues. But byshop Otto perceiuyng thys thyng * 1.144 for to bée deuillishe, woulde not exer∣cise hys commaundement. Wherfore Pope Gregory cursed him, and assoi∣led all men from his obedience, and cited hym vnto Rome, where hée had gathered a counsell, in the which hée had made a decrée, that no Prieste shoulde afterwarde marry. And they that had maryed béefore, shoulde for∣sake their wyues. Moreouer, it was there decréed, that no man should re∣ceaue holy orders afterwarde, except hée first sweare to lyue sole.

These decrées were prouulgated ouer all Italy. But the priestes, and Byshops of Fraunce resisted this de∣crée, * 1.145 and sayde, that this counsel was contrary to Gods worde, and tooke from Priestes, that God and nature had graunted them. And therefore y^t Pope (sayde they) was an hereticke, and an auctour ofdamnable doctrine, and that this decree came not of God, but of the deuil, and alleaged for them the saying of our mayster Christ. No•• omnes * 1.146 capiunt verbum hoc. And also S. Paule, De virginitate prec••ptum non * 1.147 habeo. They saide also, that the pope woulde compell them to lyke lyke An∣gels, and how hée dyd opē a wyndow

vnto fornicatiō & vncleannes. Wher∣fore they made hym aunswere, that they had rather to forsake their bene∣fices, then their wyues. And if hée woulde despise maryed priestes, then shoulde hée goe & prouide him Angels to serue his cures. But the pope was * 1.148 nothing moued at all with their scrip∣tures or reasons: but still wrote to y^t byshops straite letters, cōmaundyng them, and threatning them vnder the payne of cursing, and priuating them of their byshopprickes, y^t they should bring this thing to passe. So that at y^t last, the most parte of the Byshoppes consented to him for feare, and labou∣red all y^t they coulde to perswade the priestes to forsake their wiues, and to vowe chastitie. But it was long ere the priests were perswaded: yea some of them woulde neuer agrée thereun∣to as long as they liued.

This Pope wrote also to the Arch∣byshop of Mentz, cōmaunding him as primate of all Germany, to compell maried priests to forsake their wiues, and to cause all other to vowe chasti∣tie. This byshop called a conuocatiō, in the which hée declared the Popes pleasure. But y^t priestes resisted mer∣uaylous earnestly, alleaging for them Scriptures, reasons, and counsels. So farre they procéeded togither, that there had lyke to haue béene a greate * 1.149 tumulte. Then the byshop beynge a wyse man, consideryng how stiffe, & earnest the priestes •…•…ere, desired thē to take halfe a yeares deliberation, ex∣horting them to agrée vnto that thing wyth a good will, vnto the which, hée must els compell them, by the Popes auctoritie. After the halfe yeare was come out, the byshops called a conuo∣cation at the Ʋniuersitie of Erforde, and there required an aunswere of the priestes, but they were stiffer thē before, and sayde, how they had ra∣ther dye then forsake their wyues cō∣trary to Gods law. On the other side * 1.150 the archbishop was earnest in setting forth the popes commaundement.

Then the priestes required to take their counsel, and so when they were departed out of the conuocation they agreed (séeyng that neither scriptures, reasons, counsels, nor yet intercessiō could ••helpe as they sayd) that they would go in agayne, and kyll the By∣shop, that all other Byshops after hym should bée well aduised, ere they set foorth that thyng any more. But the Byshop had some frendes amōgst them, the which reuelated this thyng vnto hym, and hée streight wayes sent certaine of his frendes vnto y^t priests, requiryng them to come in agayne peaceably, and hée would promise thē so to entreate the pope, that hée should bée contēt to let it passe, and that they should kéepe their cures still as they had done before. Notwithstandyng the Archbyshop could not chaūge the popes mynde in any wise. For the yeare after the pope sent downe hys Legate Curiensen Episcopum, and ioy∣ned the Byshop of Mentz with hym, commaundyng them to gather a con∣uocation in Mentz, and there to pro∣pounde his decrée agayne. But yet y^t priestes would in no wise agrée vnto them, but layde all Scriptures, and reasōs for them, that they could. And when all these thynges would not helpe, then they fell to entreatie, and intercession. But the popes Legates * 1.151 were so stiffe, that there was no re∣medy, but tyranny, and violence to bée vsed.

But as soone as the priestes sawe that, they gathered them togither, & made a tumulte, that the popes Le∣gates scaped very hardely with their lyues out of the conuocation house, & so was the conuocation broken. And the Archbyshop of Mentz would ne∣uer medle more in it, but committed the matter to the popes discretion. So that the pope was fayne to tary a con¦uenient tyme, till hée had gotten cer∣taine Byshops, and certaine priestes of his partie. The determinate tyme doth not y^t stories declare, but alonely we sée that nowe hée is preuayled in mischief.

Wherfore I will now procéede af∣ter my promise, and recite their Scrip¦tures and reasōs, wherby they prooue Celibatum Sacerdotū. Their first scrip∣ture is. Bée ye holy, for I am holy, * 1.152 sayth the Lord. Ʋpon this Scripture

disputeth y^t pope on this maner. The priestes of the old law did not compa∣ny with their wyues, in the tyme of their ministration. Wherefore the priestes of the new law, whiche doth * 1.153 alwayes minister, must much more alwayes kéepe their chastitie. First, the pope doth alleage this Scripture * 1.154 wrong. For it is not Moyses mynde, where this text is spoken, to compell men from their wiues, or not to mar∣ry (the which thyng the pope hath ta∣ken vpō hym to prooue.) For Moyses speaketh there to the whole houshold of Israell.

Now was not the house of Israell cōpelled by the text, either to forsake their wyues, or els to vowe chastitie. Wherfore this text can not make for the popes purpose. Farthermore, the text sayth no more, but that we should bée cleane, and holy. Now is not ma∣trimony, either vncleane, or vnholy: for it is a thyng instituted, and sancti∣fied of God. And the purest creatures * 1.155 that euer God made dyd vse it, & was not therby defiled. Ergo, this text ma∣keth not for the popes purpose. And where as the pope saith, that y^t priests of the newe law shall bée cleane, we * 1.156 graūt the same, and desire God with all our hartes, that they may bée so. And béecause that we would, that it should bée so: therfore doe we exhorte them to vse Gods holy ordinaunce, that they may bée holy. For all crea∣tures of * 1.157 God bée good. And vnto them that bée cleane, nothyng is vncleane. Now is matrimony gods ordinaūce▪ Wherefore it must néedes bée cleane of it selfe, and may bée lawfully vsed with thankes.

Farthermore, what argument is this of the popes? The priestes of the old law, did abstayne frō their wiues, * 1.158 the tyme of their ministration, Ergo, our priestes must alwayes abstayne? How foloweth this, alwayes, out of the old priestes, sometyme? But me * 1.159 thinketh the pope should rather take an occasiō of this place, to bynde hys priestes to mariage, if they can not lyue sole. For the priestes of the law, by Gods cōmaundement had wiues: Ergo, God would not recken mariage vncleane, and vnpure. And if it were cleane for them, it must much more bée cleaner vnto our priestes. For all thynges bée cleaner vnto vs, then to them. Wherfore me thinketh y^t pope should rather dispute on this maner. The priestes of y^t old law had wyues, and were not thereby defiled, Ergo, my priestes must much rather haue wyues, for they shall bée lesse defiled.

Moreouer, it foloweth not. The priestes of the old law abstained from their wyues, in the tyme of their mi∣nistration, Ergo, our priestes must ab∣stayne alwayes, bycause they bée al∣wayes in ministration. For many thinges were vncleane to the priestes of the old law, that bée not vncleane vnto our priestes. Also vnto them it was a commaundement so to doe, or els it had béene lawfull for them to ta∣ry by their wyues. But our priestes hath no commaundement. Ergo, they are not bounde to abstayne. Finally, this text of Scripture dyd not bynde the Apostles, nor all the holy fathers after the Apostles till Innocentes tyme to abstayne from theyr wyues. Ergo, it byndeth not our priestes now. For gods word was in as full strēgth before Innocentes dayes, as after.

The second Scripture is this. Ab∣stayne * 1.160 for a tyme that ye may the bet∣ter geue attendaunce to prayer. On this texte disputeth the pope on this maner. Paule commaundeth (sayth hée) laye men to abstayne for a tyme. Ergo, much more are priestes bounde to abstayne alwayes. The whiche must alwayes pray, and bée in a con∣tinuall sacrifiyng. This argument is also false, and not concluded after Saint Paules mynde. For S. Paule woulde not by this text forbydde ma∣riage, by the reason of prayer. For howe could hée saye then, Abstayne for a tyme? Ʋnmaryed men must ab∣stayne alwayes, and not for a tyme onely. Nor it is no commaundement vnto lay men (as the pope sayth) to abstayne. For S. Paule will, y^t they shall not abstayne, except that they be both agréed. Yea and also in a case, y^t is, where their abstayning should bée an occasyon of more prayer. But if

their abstayning may bée the occasyon of vncleanenes: Or els, if the one party will abstayne, and the other can not: Then will blessed S. Paule that neyther of them shall defraude the o∣ther. For they are more bounde in thys case to vse them felues in the of∣fyce of matrimonye, then pro illo loco, & tempore to pray. For y^t text is clere Ʋxori vir debitum reddat. Let men marke my saying well. For though we bée bound to pray by the Gospell, yet I thynke that the cercumstance of tyme, and place, is of mans lawe, & reddere debitum, is in this case of the Gospell. Wherefore the other must geue place. Take my wordes charita∣bly, and after learning. But yet graūt it a commaundement. How can it fo∣lowe there out, that priestes shall ne∣uer marry? because that lay men are bound (as the pope sayth) to abstaine for a tyme? Why doth not the pope * 1.161 rather bynde his priestes in tyme, and place requisite to matrimony, for a∣uoyding of fornication, as S. Paule doth? All the world knoweth, y^t priests doth not alwayes pray. Wherefore then doth not the pope graunt them that same lybertie, y^t S. Paule doth. For he w••ll (lest y^t deuyll should tēpt them by incontenency) y^t they should returne againe after their prayer to y^t office of matrimony.

O Lorde God, how would men crye out agaynst mée, if I should thus * 1.162 teare, and wringe scriptures? But this popet may doe what hée lysta: nd all that hée doth, men doe recken to bée articles of our fayth There is not a stronger place in all scripture for matrimony, then this is. In so much that all learned men, that euer spake of this matter, hath brought this same chapter of S. Paule for them, & yet y^t deuill in the Pope can turne this top∣se turuy. And that y^t maketh agaynst him, must néedes make for hym, or els hée will wring him tyll hée breake his necke. What learning can prooue this, that priests may not marry? bée∣cause they are boūde to pray? & to doe sacrifyce? Doth mariage defyle their prayers, or can it cōtaminate their sa∣crifyces? then the holy patriarches, & Prophetes, haue no cleane sacrifyces. Yea Christes Apostles had vncleane sacrifices. But here is a wonderfull iuglynge of the deuyll. For sometime * 1.163 matrymony shall bée an holy, and a blessed sacramēt, and shal géeue grace: and an other while it shall bée against God, and all his sacrifices, and a de∣fyler of Gods mynisters, & of all their prayers.

Wherefore I conclude, that this texte of S. Paule, Abstaine for a time that you may the more diligētly pray, maketh nothing for the Pope. For if wée should bée boūde (as y^t pope saith) not to marry, by the reason that we * 1.164 ought to pray, then might no lay man marry a wife. For laye men are as much bounde by the Gospell to pray∣er, as priestes bee. There is no tyme, that the Gospell cōmaundeth a priest to pray in, nor yet no prayer, that is commaunded to priestes by y^t gospell, but lay men are bonnd to the same. Wherefore if the pope will conclude that priestes shall haue no wiues, be∣cause they are bound to pray. By the same reason will I prooue, y^t no christē man may haue a wife. Nor it will not help to say, that priestes are more bound to pray, then lay men, & there∣fore they haue no wyues. For whe∣ther that they be bounde lesse or more that maketh no matter to y^t argumēt. For both the parties are bounde to prayer. Therefore, after the popes doctrine, neyther of them both may marry. But whether the one be more bounde then the other, it maketh no matter to mée, for they are both bounde: therfore they must both ab∣stayne. I woulde desyre all Papistes, to let this reason of myne stande still vnassoyled.

An other reason their is of Pope * 1.165 Leo the. ix. that bringefh this text of S. Paule: Haue not we power to leade aboute with vs a wyfe, as the brother of our Lord, and Cephas? Out of this texte disputeth the pope thus. S. Paule sayth not, we haue power amplectendi mulierē, to embrace a woman. But circunducendi, that is * 1.166 to leade her with vs, that shée may bée sustayned (as the Pope sayth) of her

husband? But there may bée no com∣pany of maryage betwéene them. E∣uery Christē man may sée what a sklē∣der argument this is of the pope. S. Paule sayth not, amplectēdi sed cercū∣ducendi. Ergo, non licet sacerdotious ha∣bere vxores? This can no man denye, but S. Paules mening is there, how that priests may lawfully haue wiues as the example of Peter doth there prooue. Wherefore I thinke no man so madde to iudge, that the Apostels dyd myrry wyues, alonely to lead thē about with them (as the Pope sayth) and to put other men to costes and & charges? For this office they might haue had of all other women, and ne∣ded not to marry, for leading about of women with them. Wherefore it must néedes follow, séeing S. Paules meaning is, that priestes may lawful∣ly haue wiues that they may also law∣fully vse the office of matrimony. For his owne doctrine is, that the man hath no power ouer his owne body, * 1.167 but his wife. Wherefore it must fol∣lowe, that the pope maketh an euell supposition, when hée supposeth, that the Apostles hadde wiues, and did onely but cary them about, to geue them meate, and drinke, and not to company with them.

Also marke of this argument, how the pope graunteth, that the apostles had wyues? Wherefore he must now prooue, that the Apostles, forsooke the company of their wiues, as hée sayth. But I am content to take this argu∣ment at the popes hand.

This the pope graunteth, that the Apostles ledde their wyues aboute wyth them. Wherfore it must néedes follow (euē after the Pope) that our priestes may also leade wiues aboute with them. If ye graunt me this, I am content, I will not binde priestes amplectendi vxores, I will put it to his wiues discretion, and his, as they two cā agrée: so am I cōtent, alonely to let them haue the libertie that the Pope graunteth the holy Apostles to haue had. And I doubt not but there wyll * 1.168 folow tokens, not onely of circumdu∣cendi but of amplectendi.

Truely I haue great maruayle, y^t men bée not ashamed, thus to trifle * 1.169 with holy Scripture, yea, and that in matters that bée so waighty, & wher∣by they sée dayly so great offence and sclaunder to spring in the holy church of God.

An other Scripture the pope hath * 1.170 which is this: They that are in the fleshe can not please God. On thys text disputeth the Pope thus: They that are defiled, are in the fleshe: But priestes that marry wyues, are defiled: therefore, they bée in y^t fleshe, and can not please God.

If men had eyther feare of God in thier hartes, or els reuerēce to Gods holy institutions, and ordinaunces, they would not thus speake nor iudge of pure & cleane matrimony. I trust * 1.171 there is no Christē man, but bee will graūt mée that matrimony is of gods ordayning and settinge? Wherefore it must néedes bée pure a••d cleane. For our God is no God of vncleane∣nes, or of filthines, let the pope iudge hym as hée wyll. Nowe to the Popes argument. The Pope sayth in hys minor, how Priestes that marry, bée vncleane. I denye that, and say sted∣fastly, that the pope blasphemeth both God and his holy giftes. And whē hée can prooue his minor true, then will I graunt it vnlawfull for Priestes to marry.

But I wyll take the Popes argu∣ment, * 1.172 and prooue that no man shall haue wiues, and so shall the worlde soone bée at an ende. The popes maior is this: They that bée in the flesh can not please God. But maryed mē (as the Pope thinketh) lyue after y^e flesh, therefore no maryed man can bée sa∣ued. Let the pope of Rome, and all hys adherentes aunswere to my ar∣gument, and I will soone aunswere to theirs. For this I am sure of, that y^e scriptures which he bringeth, maketh not agaynst matrimony, nor yet more against priests then agaynst lay men. Wherfore let hym conclude what hée can out of them against priestes, and I will conclude the same agaynst laye men. These bée all the Scriptures that I can finde in the Popes law a∣gainst this matter. Wherefore, now

will I goe to their reasons.

Their principall reason is this. Ma∣ryed * 1.173 men may bée chosē to bee priests, but after their priesthoode (say they) may they not marry.

These mē must first consider what doctrine they defend, y^t is to say, how they intēde to defēd y^e popes doctrine, and y^t doctrine, which they call the do∣ctrine of the church: for there is none other doctrine agaynst vs but that.

Nowe doth this doctrine clearely deterne agaynst them, and say how * 1.174 no mā that hath a wife, may bée chosē to bée Priest or a Deacō, neither they cā bring mée one exāple, that euer the Pope did graunt, that a maryed man myght bée a priest excepte hée got mo∣ney for dispensing. So that the Pope by his dispensation hath alwayes te∣stified that it was against his law for * 1.175 a maryed man to bée a Priest. Wher∣fore these mē (if they will defende the lawes of the Church) must bée bound to prooue that maryed men may after the lawes of the Church (as they call them) bée chosen, or elles their aun∣swere is naught. For it is no reason that they should faine this solution of their owne braynes, and say, that it may bée so. But they must prooue me, that their church doth graūt it lawful so to bée. Moreouer, where bée now all their Scriptures, whereby they prooue that Priestes may not marry for defilyng of them? Is not the com∣pany that a Priest kéepeth with hys * 1.176 wife after his consecration (which they graunt) as pure, and as cleane, as it was béefore his consecration? Hath his consecration made y^t thyng vncleane, y^t was before pure? Wher∣fore if hée may kéepe his wyfe (after these men) which hée maryed before his consecration, why may not an o∣ther Priest lykewise marry a wife af∣ter his Priesthoode. What doth thys man, as concerning the office of ma∣trimony, that the other mā doth not?

Farthermore, they were wont to say, that Priestes might not kéepe their wiues, in so much that they fai∣ned how y^t Apostles did forsake their wiues. How stādeth thys wyth their solution, that maryed men myght bée bishops? But mée thinke they doe but trifle with this matter, and séeke no more but a light euasion, to helpe them for a tyme.

Moreouer, both the practise and the lawes of their church declareth clear∣ly, that their meaning is not to chuse a maried man to bée a byshop. For their custome is that a man may bée a Subdeacon at 16. yeares olde. Now is there no man customably maryed so younge. And when hée shall be sub∣deacon, * 1.177 hée must forsweare mariage, as the Popes lawe commaundeth. Therefore, it must néedes folow, that no maryed man can bée a Priest. For hée hath forsworne maryage many yeares before. Moreouer, all Doc∣tours doe graunt, that after the fall of Adam, matrimony was a remedye a∣gainst fornication, and S. Paule ap∣prooueth the same. Vnusquis{que} suam ha∣beat vxorē propter fornicationē. What if this man, after his consecration is in more ieopardie of fornication then hée was béefore? What remedy will men finde nowe for this infirmitie? His consecration taketh not away his naturall appetite, nor it maketh Gods remedy vnlawfull. And eyther hée must lyue in fornication, or elles marry a wife. Let men iudge, which of them becommeth a priest best after his consecration.

Farthermore no man can denye, but the hystories make mention, how diuerse priests haue béene maryed af∣ter their consecration, at the dispensa∣tion of the pope. Wherfore it must fo¦low, that it is not agaynst Gods law, for a Priest to marry after his conse∣cration. For then the pope might not dispense with him. Men must graunt, that many Priestes haue had wyues. Now stādeth it with good reason, and learnyng, that they prooue, y^t all these men dyd marry before their priest∣hode onely, and not after, séeyng they wil haue it so necessary, and so perfect a solutiō. And if they cā not prooue it, * 1.178 why doe they affirme it so styfly? what moueth thē so to say? yea, and so bold∣ly? But yet I will bée content, let the matter bée indifferently handled, and let as many maryed men bée chosen to bée Byshops, as bée vnmaryed, sée∣yng

they graunt it lawfull: And then am I sure, y^t we shall auoyde a great heape of fornications, that béen now vsed. Yea I feare me, that our chaste men shall soone bée quyt of all, and the maryed men shall haue all.

An other reason they haue, & that is this. Priestes may extinct the bren∣nyng * 1.179 heate that is in thē, by fastyng, labouryng, watchyng, praying, & by other good workes doyng. And if they doe thus, no doubt, but God wil geue them the gift of chastitie, for hée is li∣berall in geuing, and mercyful in hea∣ring of their prayers, Ergo, they néede not to marry.

First I desire to know of those mē, if they will say of their cōscience, that the thyrd part of Priestes in Englād doe kéepe their chastitie? I thinke they will rather sweare nay, thē yea. Now * 1.180 come to their argument, and sée how shamefully they doe reprooue priests. I durst not speake so much agaynste them, as these men doe. For first they say, that if priestes did pray, or fast, or did like good workes, thē God would, yea hée must of his liberalitie, & mer∣cy geue them the gift of chastitie. Se∣condly, they graunt that y^t thyrd deale of priestes kéepe not their vow. Now is this as much to say, thinketh me. Firste, that Priestes bée naught in déede. Secondarely, that they neither will, not yet desire to bée better. For if they did desire it of God, hée would geue it them, saye they. In hym is no fault, Ergo, the fault is in the priestes, that neither bée good in déede, nor yet will praye, or desire to bée good. I would not gladly haue such patrons in my cause.

Moreouer I graunt that Priestes * 1.181 shall fast, and pray to kéepe their bo∣dyes lowe. But now to them. Why shal not priests also marry to auoyde fornication, as well as fast, and pray? séeyng that God hath ordeined matri∣mony, for a peculiar, and singular, re∣medy agaynst fornication? I doe not condemne true fastyng, and praying. Why doe they then condemne mary∣ing? séeyng that God which ordeyned fastyng, and praying, hath also ordey∣ned marying? Yea, and me thinke, if any one thing should bée first prooued, then should mariage bée first prooued, séeyng that it is deputed of God, for a proper, and spedy remedy agaynst for¦nication? Notwithstanding I will bée content, first to exhorte all Priestes, both to praying, and fastyng, & if they can so kéepe their chastitie, I will thanke God with them. But if they can not, then will I in no wise, that they shall bée cōpelled either by law, or by vow to chastitie. For that is a∣gaynst Gods word, and the doctrine of his holy Apostles.

But yet let me touch their grounde nearer. I would desire thē to tell me, and to prooue vnto me by learnyng, that God is bounde, in as much as * 1.182 hée is liberall, and mercyful to graunt vnto them y^t gift of chastitie, for theyr praying, and fasting. It is not inough for them thus to saye, séeyng that ma∣ny good men hath both prayed, and fa∣sted, and yet had not the gift of chasti∣tie: But they must bryng me an open Scripture, wherin that this promise is made vnto their fastyng, and wat∣chyng, or elles they must graunt that they bée bounde to vse Gods reme∣dies, which hée hath ordeined, and in∣stituted, to the helpyng of our infir∣mitie. If I were hungry, and thursty, and would goe, and praye to God to slake my hunger, and thurst, & would not vse those meanes, and remedies, that God hath ordeined, thinke you that God were bound of his liberali∣tie to graunt me my request? Nay for s••••th. But it were rather to bée iud∣ged, that I were a tempter of God, & a despiser of his holy ordinaunce, and would not bée content with those re∣medies, that God hath appointed.

The deuill commeth with like tēp∣tatiō * 1.183 to our M. Christ, and requireth him to the honour of God to doe a mi¦racle, to leape down from the highest of the temple, if hée would bée taken for the sonne of God, & as for harme hée could haue none. For the Scrip∣ture * 1.184 testifieth (saith hée) that God had commaunded his aūgels to beare thée vp in their armes. Wherefore (sayth the deuill) it shall bée a great honour to God, and also a great declaration

to thy power, if thou descende frō the height of the temple, otherwise then any other man can doe. And if thou goest downe by the steyers, God shal * 1.185 no more bée glorified in thy fact, then in other mens, nor thou shalt not bée taken for the man, that thou art, and wouldest bée.

Moreouer, thou néedest not doubt, but God will helpe thée. For the scrip∣ture speaketh of thée, whiche can not bée false. Notwithstandyng all this, our M. Christ calleth it temptyng of God, when men will séeke vnto hym for other remedyes, then hée hath ap∣poynted. And therfore our M. Christ doth clearely declare, that the same Scripture, which the deuill bryngeth for him, maketh not for his purpose. For though that God doth promise to helpe Christ, & all his, yet will hée bée glorified in his creatures, & will that we shal vse them with thankes, to the entent, & purpose, y^t hée hath ordeined them for: And then, if there bée any thing lacking vnto our health, & salua¦tion, hée will, that we shal both pray, & trust in hym. With what boldenes cā I desyre of God to helpe mée? and am not concent to receiue his creatures, that hée hath instituted to helpe mée? Whereby shall God helpe mée, If I dispise his ordinaūces, and creatures that hée hath alreadye ordeyned to my helping? Is it reason, that God at my instaunce, shal make a new ordinaūce * 1.186 and new remedies for my diseases? Why am I not content (if I will bée helped at Gods hand) with those re∣medyes, that bée all ready instituted? It was but a small thynge, and a vyle thyng in a maner, for Christ to descēd by the steyers from the heyghte of the temple, séeyng that the deuill required hym, by Gods honour, & also by his owne, to shew some speciall power.

If I weare diseased, and sycke, and would not vse the counsell of Phisici∣ons, nor of other medecines, y^t God hath instituted, but wil fast, and pray, and watch, and doe almes déedes, thynke you that men would recken mée wise? And if I did thus dye, were not I a despiser of God, and of his good ordinaunces? God hath apoyn∣ted Phisicions, and geuen vertue to hearbes, and other creatures, to help my disease. Whèrefore I am bounde with méekenes, and with thankes to receyue them, and to pray to God, y^t hée will fortifye, and strengthē the na∣tures of these creatures, and that they may haue vertue, and effecacy in me. This is a Christen man bound to do: * 1.187 For if this reason of these men shall haue strength, thē will we vse no mā∣ner of creatures, or remedies y^t God hath ordeined, but agaynst hunger, and thirst, heate, and could, agues, and pestilences, pouertie, and neces∣sitie, swoordes and gonnes, agaynst all maner of diseases, against all manner of misfortunes, will we vse nothing, but all onely pray, or fast, or els geue almes, as we shall thinke best. So that we will teach God what thing is best to the helpyng of all imperfecti∣ons. I thanke you good Maysters for your good doctrine, I praye God re∣warde you.

Fynally I haue great meruayle, why that prayer, and fastynge shall all onely get Priestes to the gift of chastitie? and not all other men? And * 1.188 if other mē may haue the gift of chas∣titie through their prayer? why bée not all men moued to lyue chaste? sée∣ing y^t chastitie in very déede is a high∣er state then matrimony is. Why bée priestes more bounde to pray for the gift of chastetie, then other Christen men bée?

Nowe marke this doctrine. If a lymme of the deuyl would come now and preach vniuersally to all men the ercellencye of chastitie, and to shew what a greate quiet lyuing it is, and what a plesaūt state it is before God, And contrarywise, of mariage would * 1.189 say, that it weare a sorowfull state, full of troubles, full of cares, full of heanines, and (as the Pope sayth) a fleshely, and a carnall state, and that séemeth to haue in it self any vnclene¦nes: and by these reasōs, and perswa∣syons, with many moe that hée might bring, would exhort all manner of mē in England to lyue sole, and vnma∣ried, And would also teach them to pray, and to fast for the gift of chastity

and not to doute, but that God of his liberalitie would géeue it thē. I would fayne know of learned men▪ if this man were gods frend and the kings? How much hée is gods, I will not dis∣pute. But I am sure there could not bée a greater traytour to the kinges grace thē hée is. For if hée might bring to passe that hée intendeth by his doc∣trine. Fyrst he should destroy y^t kyngs succession. Secondarily, hée should within this seuen yeres, make y^t king a Lorde of a fewe subiectes, or none, and fynally of none indéede. And all this would they doe by fasting, and praying.

But what thing so euer they tell vs of their fasting, and praying, I am * 1.190 sure that they fall to getting of childrē as sone as other men doe, and all is with fasting and praying. Alas what thing can not the deuill misuse.

But let no mā take mée, as though I condemned fasting, and praying. For surely I would that they should bée vsed, and that diligently. But I would, haue them vsed in tyme, and place convenient, and for the intent, and purpose, that God hath ordayned them. But yet I would not, that other remedies, and gyftes of God should bée thought vnlawfull, & also bée des∣pised for them.

Now most gracious Prince, here haue I shewed vnto your grace, fyrst myne obedience, willyng that euery man should both so learne, and so doe. Secōdarylye, I haue shewed my lear∣ning in certaine articles, for y^t which there is a variēce in the world at this day, protesting vnto your grace, that I haue sayde nothing, but I trust bée true, and agreeable with Gods holy worde, and with the learning of the Doctours▪ Notwithstanding, if there bée any man within your realme, that can prooue by good learning the cōtra∣ry (so that your grace shall alowe it to agrée with Gods word, and to bée suf∣fycient béefore Gods dreadfull iudg∣ment) I shall bée content to submyt my selfe to your graces determinati∣on, and to doe that thing that béecō∣meth a Christen man, & a true sub∣iecte to doe. Thus our Lord Iesu Christ, y^e purchasour of all grace and goodnes, euer preserue your grace in al vertue and honour,

Amen.

Notes

• * 1.1

  The cause that moued hym to write of this thing.
• * 1.2

  Two sorts of men.
• * 1.3

  Math. 7.
• * 1.4

  1. Cor. 7.
• * 1.5

  Priestes are more bounde to mary for a∣uoyding vi∣cious liuing thē to other chastising of theyr bo∣dy, seyng that is Gods ordi∣naunce ther unto appoin¦ted.
• * 1.6

  Hebr. 13.
• * 1.7

  1. Cor. 7.
• * 1.8

  It is not sufficient before God to auoyde S. Paule with a light and a vayne solution.
• * 1.9

  Whoredom is lawful in no case, but mariage is lawfull in diuerse cases, ergo mariage must rather bee alowed then whore¦dome.
• * 1.10

  I write not agaynst those Priestes that cā, and doe lyue chast, but I rather exhorte thē so to conti∣nue.
• * 1.11

  Let those men at the lest marrye wyues se∣yng they doe not, nor can not lyue chast.
• * 1.12

  No man doubteth, but a greate many doth thus lyue, the whiche bee greate persecutors of maryed Priestes, I would desire them not to proue my pacience to sore. For I know theyr names, and some of theyr chil∣dren. 1. Thess 4.
• * 1.13

  Maryed men shall testifie that Ʋirginitie is a quyet lyfe.
• * 1.14

  Mariage hath a greater crosse, then virginitie.
• * 1.15

  D•…•…. xxxi. ca•…•…nte tri∣e•…•….
• * 1.16

  Res necess.
• * 1.17

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 me∣••••••.
• * 1.18

  Roma. 14.
• * 1.19

  Virginitie is a state in differens.
• * 1.20

  Chastitie is Gods gift.
• * 1.21

  Math. 19. 1. Cor. 7.
• * 1.22

  Whether it bee better to folow s. Paule, or the Pope.
• * 1.23

  1. Cor. 7.
• * 1.24

  Athana∣sius. 1. Cor. 7.
• * 1.25

  〈…〉〈…〉 virgi∣••itatem 〈…〉〈…〉.
• * 1.26

  Blessed S. Paule dis∣penseth with vn∣lawfull vowes.
• * 1.27

  x••v•• q. c. de filia, in verbo de fi∣lia.
• * 1.28

  Thess. 4.
• * 1.29

  1. Tim. 4.
• * 1.30

  Taciani.
• * 1.31

  The Pope forbyddeth mariage.
• * 1.32

  The Mar∣cianites & the Pope, all one.
• * 1.33

  Dist. xxxi. ca. l••x.
• * 1.34

  1. Tim. 4.
• * 1.35

  Obiectio.
• * 1.36

  The Pope compelleth mē to vow, and for so much hee forbiddeth maryage.
• * 1.37

  A good ex∣ample a∣gaynst the Popes prac¦tises.
• * 1.38

  Dist. 32. c Erubescant.
• * 1.39

  D. 31. c. lex.
• * 1.40

  Dist. 82. c. Plurimos.
• * 1.41

  Dist. 82. c. quia ali∣quanti.
• * 1.42

  The popes lawes a∣gaynst ma∣ryage of Priestes.
• * 1.43

  New deui∣sed sinne a∣gaynst the holy ghost, helpe God.
• * 1.44

  1. Tim. 3.
• * 1.45

  Tit. 1.
• * 1.46

  Children bee not got¦ten with lookyng on women one¦ly.
• * 1.47

  The Pope alloweth his priestes to keepe whores, but cannot abyde that they should haue an ho∣nest wife.
• * 1.48

  Burne all Priestes that bee knowen for open whore masters, & benesices will bee thē better chepe And I will recken you then earnest¦ly to defend chastitie.
• * 1.49

  1. Cor. 9.
• * 1.50

  A great blasphemy agaynste Christ and his holy A∣postles.
• * 1.51

  Math. 19.
• * 1.52

  The Apo∣stles for∣sooke not their wiues as men dreame.
• * 1.53

  Ciprian ••∣pist. 11.
• * 1.54

  S. Ciprian did more re¦garde ho∣nest liuing, then the re∣ligious vowe.
• * 1.55

  The mary∣age of Priestes is allowed of God, and therefore not to bee condemned of men.
• * 1.56

  Aug. de b••∣no coniuga∣l•• ad Iulia∣num.
• * 1.57

  S. Aug. dispenseth wyth vowes where daū∣ger is of fornication.
• * 1.58

  Ambr••. 32. quest. cap. 1. Integritas.
• * 1.59

  Vowes that haue vnlawfull conditions are not to bee obser∣ued.
• * 1.60

  Hi••. d. 37. cap. Legan••.
• * 1.61

  The holy Councell.
• * 1.62

  Ex triper∣tita histo∣ria▪ Dist. xxxi. ca. Nicena.
• * 1.63

  The Coun¦cell of Ni∣cen•• dyd not thinke it an vn∣meete thing for a By∣shop to haue a wife.
• * 1.64

  The Pop•• will not suffer that maryed mē shal••e cho∣sen By∣shops.
• * 1.65

  Di••t. xx••i. ca. O•…•…in••.
• * 1.66

  If maryed men may be Byshops, then second brethren shall no lon∣ger bee beg∣gers.
• * 1.67

  Canon A∣post.
• * 1.68

  Consilium Gangrens. Canon. 4.
• * 1.69

  Eustachius, Hereticus.
• * 1.70

  Dist. 2••.
• * 1.71

  Dist. 28. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. De••erni∣mus.
• * 1.72

  Sauyng the Pope, & Eusta∣chius.
• * 1.73

  Dist. 28. Dist▪ 28. c. Assumi, & pr••teria.
• * 1.74

  Dist. 31. ca. sac••rdotib•••• ••piscopi. Tenere cos. Si laicus.
• * 1.75

  6. Sinodus.
• * 1.76

  This Coū¦cell doth ful¦ly establish and cōfirme the mariage of Priests.
• * 1.77

  The popes doctrine is condemned by a Coun∣cell.
• * 1.78

  Dist. xxviij c. Diaconi.
• * 1.79

  Dist. xxviij. ca. de Sira∣cus.
• * 1.80

  De vita & honest. clo∣ricorum.
• * 1.81

  Cicero. lib. i. officiorū. Iu∣stinianus lib. i. cap. Ius natura∣le.
• * 1.82

  It is im∣planted in nature to marry, if Gods gift doe not chaūge our nature.
• * 1.83

  Magister Sē¦tentiaru••. lib. ij. Dist. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.84

  Ext. de 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Pres cap ad presentiam. Ʋen••ēs. Pro∣posuit. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 transmissa.
• * 1.85

  〈…〉〈…〉 not〈…〉〈…〉de∣〈◊〉〈◊〉 holy 〈◊〉〈◊〉 as they doe that graunt thē〈…〉〈…〉bastardes.
• * 1.86

  Extra. lib. i de fi•…•…s pres∣byterum. c. Ad 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.87

  Ibidem. cap. Litteras.
• * 1.88

  Imperator Constan. le∣ge. Omnis ••a Ad pe∣rangariam. Codice de Epis. & ele.
• * 1.89

  Math. 8.
• * 1.90

  S. Peter had a wife.
• * 1.91

  Actes. 11.
• * 1.92

  Philip the Euangelist was mar∣ryed.
• * 1.93

  Ex triperti∣ta historia. lib. 9. cap. xxxviij.
• * 1.94

  Li. iiij. ca. xxiij.
• * 1.95

  Penitus. Dionisius.
• * 1.96

  Li▪ iij. ca. xxx.
• * 1.97

  A playne place to prooue that Peter had a wife.
• * 1.98

  Ibi. li. x. c••. v.
• * 1.99

  Eccle. hist. li. v. cap. xxiiij.
• * 1.100

  Policrates. Ephes. Epis.
• * 1.101

  Siluerius Papa.
• * 1.102

  Felix. iij.
• * 1.103

  Deus dedit.
• * 1.104

  Theodorus. i
• * 1.105

  Hadrianus. ij.
• * 1.106

  Iohānes. xv.
• * 1.107

  Agapitus. i.
• * 1.108

  Siluerius.
• * 1.109

  Bonifacius. i.
• * 1.110

  Osius.
• * 1.111

  Gelasius. i.
• * 1.112

  Iohannes. x.
• * 1.113

  Dist. •…•…i▪ ca. Osius.
• * 1.114

  Croni▪ Fa∣••i.
• * 1.115

  Abbot Sā••¦te of Rea∣dyng.
• * 1.116

  Priestes hath ma∣ryed after their priest∣hode.
• * 1.117

  N•…•… generatio∣ne. xl.
• * 1.118

  Cransius. Canutus was seuen yeares a Monke ¶ Iuniacen∣sis, and yet the Pope dispenseth with hym to marry a wife.
• * 1.119

  Mariage of Priestes is neither agaynst Gods lawe nor mans lawe.
• * 1.120

  Nicholaus. 1
• * 1.121

  Compelled chastitie is against the institution of the Gos∣pell.
• * 1.122

  To compel Priestes to vowe cha∣stitie that hath not y^t gifte, is halfe bro∣ther vnto heresie.
• * 1.123

  A lamenta∣ble and hor¦rible sight.
• * 1.124

  O Lord God that our By∣shoppes woulde nowe bee so charitable.
• * 1.125

  A frute of chastitie.
• * 1.126

  A horrible tale.
• * 1.127

  An other trabbe of y^t same tree.
• * 1.128

  I will not speake of the litle pre¦ty ••oyes that folow Priestes in long dou∣blets▪ and short hosen.
• * 1.129

  The chasti∣tie of the court of Rome, frō the whiche God defend vs all.
• * 1.130

  M. spare me a little, to speake but, one word more.
• * 1.131

  An hystory sprong out of the cha∣stitie of Priests.
• * 1.132

  This man intended to declare to this holy fa¦ther, what honestye was mayn∣tayned by Priestes chastitie.
• * 1.133

  A prety practise to finde out a naughty concious Byshop.
• * 1.134

  Dist. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. ca. Ante trie∣nium.
• * 1.135

  The world will lye.
• * 1.136

  I haue mer¦uayle why men are a∣shamed to come & lay this thing to my charge, now that I am here?
• * 1.137

  D. Barnes lyued sole & vnmaryed.
• * 1.138

  Dist. 82. ca. Plurimos.
• * 1.139

  Dist. 31. ca. Ante trie∣••ium.
• * 1.140

  Dist. 31. ca. Omnino.
• * 1.141

  Dist. 28. ca. Docerni∣〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.142

  Nauclerus. Alber••••s. Hirsucid••••∣sis.
• * 1.143

  Here began∣neth priests cha•…•… get the o•…•… hand. For this was a captaine for the no••ce.
• * 1.144

  Pe•…•…am 〈◊〉〈◊〉 gem. Quos deus cō••ūx•…•… homo nō se∣peret. Et ne∣mo dimittat vxorē, excep¦ta fornicati¦onis caus••.
• * 1.145

  Who cā re∣quire a bet∣ter aūswere then these Byshops make? their wordes be•• Gods wor∣des.
• * 1.146

  Math. 9.
• * 1.147

  1. Cor. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.148

  This hath alwayes beene the Popes maner of teachyng, other doc∣trine had hee neuer.
• * 1.149

  A tumulte for priestes wyues.
• * 1.150

  The deuill sleepeth not nor geueth not gladly place to Christ.
• * 1.151

  What shall men doe a∣gaynst vio∣lence, and tyranny.
• * 1.152

  Dist. xxxii•…•… cap. Tenere.
• * 1.153

  Solutions to their reasons.
• * 1.154

  The popes arguments for y^t main∣tenaunce of their con∣strained chastitie.
• * 1.155

  Adam. Eua.
• * 1.156

  The Leui∣tirall clean∣nes lyeth to much in the Popes head.
• * 1.157

  1. Tim. 4.
• * 1.158

  Alwayes. Somtime.
• * 1.159

  Why hath ••ot our Priestes sometyme wyues, as the olde Priestes had.
• * 1.160

  Dist. 31. c••▪ Nam sicut. Abstinete ad tempus, vt vacet is orationi.
• * 1.161

  The popes doctine is repugnaunt to the doc∣trine of S. Paule.
• * 1.162

  The Pope is a tearer ••nd wrester of Scrip∣tures.
• * 1.163

  The Pope maketh a hotchpot of mariage.
• * 1.164

  Lay men are bounde to prayer, as well as Priestes.
• * 1.165

  Dist. xxxi. ca. Omnino. 1. Cor. 9. Nunquid nō habemus po¦testatē mu∣liere•…•… sor••∣re•…•… circun∣ducēdi. &c.
• * 1.166

  1. Cor. 9.
• * 1.167

  1. Cor. 7.
• * 1.168

  How many factes could I recite here, of amplectēdi?
• * 1.169

  if children that bee got¦ten might beare wit∣nes.
• * 1.170

  Dist. lxxxi•…•… c. Proposu••∣sti. Qui in carne sunt Deo placer•• non possunt.
• * 1.171

  The Pope accompteth whoredom to bee more cleane then holy matri∣mony.
• * 1.172

  The Pope blasphe∣meth God.
• * 1.173

  Men that haue wiues may bee Priestes, but after their priest∣hode they may not marry.
• * 1.174

  Dist. x•• viij. c. Nullum. &c. Assumi &. ca. Pre∣terea. &. c. Pr••usquam.
• * 1.175

  Remember the tyranny of Gregory the vij. which com∣pelled priestes to forsake their wiues
• * 1.176

  Mariage is all one, be¦fore priest∣hode, and after.
• * 1.177

  Dist. xxvi•…•… cap. Null•…•….
• * 1.178

  The Pope mainteineth his constrei¦ned chastity agaynst the institution of Christ.
• * 1.179

  Priestes may get cha¦stitie, by praying, & fastyng.
• * 1.180

  A Notary of London sayd to me openly, that hee had written a thousand dispensati∣ons for Priestes children in his dayes. How many then haue all Nota∣ries writtē.
• * 1.181

  Priestes shall fast, and pray. But what if all that will not helpe.
• * 1.182

  God is bound to as much as he hath pro∣mised.
• * 1.183

  Math. 4.
• * 1.184

  Psal. 90.
• * 1.185

  The deuill tempteth God.
• * 1.186

  God chaun¦geth not his order for our plea∣sure.
• * 1.187

  God hath ordeined e∣uery thyng to a pur∣pose, and thereunto must they bee vsed.
• * 1.188

  Priestes haue a priui¦lege beefore other men.
• * 1.189

  The flesh would glad¦ly haue a quyet ly∣uyng, & plea¦saunt.
• * 1.190

  Had the world con∣tinued, they would haue made vs poore men beleeue, that they had gotten children w^t fastyng, & praying.