A detection of sundrie foule errours, lies, sclaunders, corruptions, and other false dealinges, touching doctrine, and other matters vttered and practized by M.Iewel, in a booke lately by him set foorth entituled, a defence of the apologie. &c. By Thomas Harding doctor of diuinitie.

M. Iewels Vntruthes, and flatte Lies concer∣ning the Marriage of Priestes, and Votaries.

[ 1] He steineth the authoritie of S. Hierome, S. Chryso∣stome,* 1.1 S. Gregorie Nazianzen, and diuers other learned and ancient Fathers, as disgracing lawful Matrimonie, and the Marriage of Widowes, and Widowers.

[ 2] He saith, S. Hierome in Catalogo witnessed, that Ter∣tullian was a married Priest.* 1.2 The place wil shew this vn∣truth. Albeit I denie not, but that he was married, before he was Priest: and so were diuers others, as Spiridion, S. Gregorie Nazianzenes Father, Gregorius Nyssenus, and certaine others.

[ 3] He saith, S. Hilarie Bishoppe of Poitiers was married, and that he prooueth by an Apocryphal epistle to one A∣bra his daughter. These toies are vaine, and more fabu∣lous, then Esops fables.

[ 4] So he maketh Prosper the bishop of Rhegium, a mar∣ried man, vpon a felender coniecture, how soeuer it be,

it can not be prooued, that he was married after that he was Bishop. that is ynough for vs.

He saith, that Polycrates had seuen of his Fathers [ 5] Bishops before him. The meaning of the testimonie alleged for that purpose is, that seuen of his howse, and kinred, had benne Bishoppes in his Churche before him. For so signifieth the Greeke worde 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,* 1.3 as is before noted.

That which he allegeth vnder the name of Pope Da∣masus, [ 6] is intitled in the Decrees, Palea, as muche to say, Chaffe, by which name in the Decrees of Gratian, that is signified, which is by some other mā added vnto Gra∣tian. and wel may this be so named, bicause it is a thing forged, and litle worthe. And how could Damasus write of so many Popes, whiche liued after his death certaine hundred yeres?

He saith, alleging for his authour Fabian the late mer∣chant [ 7] of London,* 1.4 that Marriages of Priestes in England were free a thousand yeres together, and yet it is euidēt, that the English Clergie was gouerned according to the order which our Apostle S. Augustin leaft, who by S. Gregories rule, might not allow married Priestes.

He saith, the Priestes of England were neuer Vota∣ries, [ 8] for proufe, he saith boldely, it is knowen, and confessed, which stout asseueration maketh weake proufe. And were it so, then surely if any had maried, although he had sinned thereby, yet the mariage should haue continued, whiche is knowen to haue alwaies benne vsed other∣wise.

He calleth the Vow of Chastitie, an euil promisse,* 1.5 and [ 9] an vnhonest Vow, whiche worde was neuer yet spo∣ken

by any good or honest man. For our Ladie vowed her chastitie vnto God,* 1.6 as it is euident by the interpreta∣tion of many holy Fathers vpon S. Lukes Gospel.

[ 10] He denieth primam fidem, the first faith in S. Paule to be meant of the Vow of Chastitie,* 1.7 whiche is directly a∣gainst the aunciēt fathers doctrine. For although it were expounded of baptisme also, yet none but Heretikes, euer denied it to apperteine to Vowes.

[ 11] He beareth the world in hande, as though we violent∣ly forced yong Maidens to receiue Vowes.* 1.8 It cōmeth of their owne choise, and of Gods grace, and not of any constraint of ours.

[ 12] He turneth, Offerre, to Minister the oblation, or holy com∣munion,* 1.9 whereas it is to make the oblation, before that it be ministred.

[ 13] He taketh halfe the sense of S. Paule awaye, concer∣ning those, whom he exhorteth to absteine from the vse of wedlocke for a certaine time of praier, as I prooued before.

[ 14] He saith, Paphnutius alone, was proctour for the truth a∣gainst the whole Councel of Nice,* 1.10 intending thereby to bring his reader in beleefe, that one is better, then three hundred and seuenteen. For 318. Bishoppes were at that Councel. Thus he seeketh to discredite Councelles.

[ 15] He burdeneth vs, as seming to say, that the cōpanie of man and wife is filthinesse, which we say not, but teach Marriage to be a Sacramēt, but yet, as, not betwen father and daughter, so neither betwene Frier and Nonne.

[ 16] He saith, I haue falsified S. Chrysostoms woordes. But it is not so.* 1.11 For S. Chrysostom saith, that neither he, that had two wiues at once, nor he, who had ben againe

married after his first wiues death, may be made Priest by S. Paules rule, he speaketh of the seconde Marriage after the first wiues death, saying. Qui defuncta vxori beneuolentiam non seruat, he that rendreth not good wil to his wife being dead, how can he be a good gouernour ouer the Church? So that by S Chrysostomes interpreta∣tion, S. Paule literally forbiddeth him to be made Priest, who hath had mo Wiues then one, whether it were at once, or one after an other.

He corrupteth the text of S. Chrysostom, putting for [ 17] the Greeke word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, this Latine,* 1.12 quae discessit (à se) her that is gone frō him, in stede of this worde defun∣ctae, which is, dead. His coniecture taken of the Greeke worde, is void, and nothing worth. For 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, dece∣do, doth signifie also to depart this life. And it is plainer, that S. Chrysostom expressely cōfesseth this sense, which we defend, saying, Quidam hoc ita intelligunt, vt ad episco∣patū is assumatur, qui vnius fuerit vxoris vir. Some men do vnderstand this mater, that he be taken to Bishophoode, who hath ben the husband of one wife. And that this last sense not being reproued of S. Chrysostome, is the most literal sense, it may appeare by these wordes of S. Paule. Let her be chosen a widowe, quae fuerit vnius viri vxor,* 1.13 which hath ben the wife of one husband. Wherefore as by the wife of one husband, she is meant, which hath not ben twise married: so by the husbād of one wife, he like∣wise is vnderstanded, that hath not ben twise married.

Cassiodorus (saith M. Iewel) writeth, that Eupsy∣chius, [ 18] who suffered Martyrdome being newe married,* 1.14 was a Bishoppe. What a shameful corruption is this, to adde the woorde, Bishoppe, vnto the text, whereas it is

euident by Sozomenus the authour of the Storie, and by Nicephorus, that Eupsychius was a laie gentleman of Ce∣sarea in Cappadocia, as is before declared. What vile for∣gerie is this M. Iewel, to turne a Gentleman, or a Noble man, into a Bishop, only that a Bishop might seeme to haue married? So litle can your Marriages of Bishoppes, and Priestes be mainteined without Lies.

[ 19] He leaueth out the better halfe of the Glose, reciting that parte,* 1.15 which the Glose alloweth not, leauing that, which it alloweth.

[ 20] He saith, that a good and diligent Bishop serueth ra∣ther the better, bicause of marriage. But how vntruly he saith it, it is before sufficiently declared. Certainly (I may say) were it true, then Christ, who was the best Bishoppe that euer was, and omitted nothing, whereby he might haue ben most perfite) would haue ben married.

[ 21] He saith, S. Paule gaue rules to the Clergie, that Bi∣shops,* 1.16 and Deacons should be the husbādes of one wife: the sense is not wel geuen. It is to be vnderstanded, that none other husbandes should be Bishops, or Deacōs, but such, as had ben, or were, the husbandes of one wife.

[ 22] He saith further, immediatly after the former rule of one wife, in the same tenour and course of speache S. Paule sheweth, that some shal forbid to marrie. This is false. It doth not follow immediatly. For there goeth betwen a cōmendation of the Church (which S. Paule nameth the piller of truth) and likewise of the Incarnation of Christ. After which wordes S. Paule saith.* 1.17 The spirit saith plaine∣ly, that in the last daies some shal depart from the faith. From whiche faith? Verely from that faith of the incar∣nation, and that, whereof the Churche is the piller.

Marke the worde discedent à fide,* 1.18 they shal depart from the faith. He that departeth from the faith, once had the faith. We neuer had your faith M. Iewel, neither in any other point, nor in this concerning the marriage of Priestes. But we had, and haue the faith, that the lawful Marriage of Christian persons is a Sacrament, and that faith had you once, when you were baptized, and incor∣porate in our Church. You are gon from that faith, and not we. S. Paul then teacheth, that some shal forbid Mar∣riages, as the Manichees, Encratites, and Marcionistes did, of whom the Apostle prophecied, as S. Chrysostom, and diuers other Fathers doo expounde. But (saith M. Iewel.) He that condemneth Marriage in a few,* 1.19 must likewise be called a condemner of Marriage. Why sir, doo you allow [ 23] Mariage betwen the Father and the Daughter, or be∣twen the Brother and the Sister? If not, then you con∣demne Marriage in a fewe. It is to be knowen, that Marriage is then forbidden, when it is taught, that a man hauing no impedimēt in his owne person, or when there is no impediment in the person, whom he would take, is yet forbidden to marrie: as if Marriage of it selfe were il, or, as if it were an il thing in it selfe, a man to marrie.

There is impediment, as of blould, as betwen brother and sister, so of Solemne Vow, and of Religion, as betwen a Priest and a Nonne, or any other woman. And as S. Paul doth allow the impediment of bloude, counting him a great sinner, who had his fathers wife:* 1.20 so doth he allow the impediment of a vow, when he saith, that the yong widowes (if they should be receiued into the number of those chast persons, whom the Churche vsed to feede) were like to haue damnation, bicause they would desire

to marie, and so would in harte at the least breake their former faith, or promise of perpetual Chastitie. But (saith he) let yonge widowes marrie,* 1.21 and bring forth children. As who should saie: If they were receiued into the solemne number of Widowes, then they should make promise not to marrie: and that promise perhaps they would breake, if not openly, yet in hart.

Thus it is no Deuils doctrine to teache, that a per∣son hauing once vowed, can not marrie: bicause he him selfe geueth the impediment, and not the lawe of the Churche. For that lawe was in S. Paules time, as I now haue shewed after S. Chrysostoms minde. Oecu∣menius saith, Pactae sunt quòd Christo adiungerentur, reij∣ciunt autem ipsum ad humanas reuolutae nuptias. (Item pòst) verùm quia hoc faciunt, nubant, seipsas Christo non despondeant. They couenaunted that they would be ioi∣ned vnto Christe, but they shake him of, and turne them selues to humaine Marriages. But bicause they doo so, let them marrie on Goddes name, let them not (by Vow) betroth them selues to Christe. Marke Rea∣der, S. Paule would not haue them marrie after their profession of Chastitie (that might not be in any wise) and therefore he wil haue them not to be professed, and so to marie.* 1.22 Pope Innocentius is belied. he condem∣neth [ 24] not Marriage, but Incest, and vnlauful Marriage, and preferreth in Priestes, and Deacons, holy conti∣nencie, [ 25] before the satisfying of Carnal luste. Likewise Pope Siricius is fowly belyed. If thou deale not chastly, [ 26] yet deale charily,* 1.23 what is meant thereby, and how rea∣sonably it is said,* 1.24 I shal hereafter declare in due place. Where I shal cleare the Canonistes of the sclaunder you

vtter against them of teaching the people, that Simple fornication is no sinne, whiche they neuer taught.

We saie not that men in Marriage can not please God: [ 27] but that such men can not please God, who hauing pro∣mised by taking holy Orders, that they wil liue chaste, do breake their promise. It is better to marrie in a case, then [ 28] to liue single: to some man I graunt, it is the auoyding of a greater euil, but not of it selfe better. For the Apostle saith, he that ioyneth his virgin in Marriage, doth wel,* 1.25 but he that ioyneth her not, doth better.

Whom God hath ioyned, let no man sunder. But God ne∣neuer [ 29] ioyned a Priest in Christes Church to a wife after his Priesthood, bicause the mans owne facte, and vow,* 1.26 is against his Marriage. Againe he is alreadie married to Christe, who liueth for euer, and so whiles his firste spouse liueth, he maie marrie no more. that is S. Basils reason. Although simple fornication be not now pou∣nished [ 30] with deposing the Priest, yet it is not leafte vn∣pounished.

Last of al you repeate manie abuses of the Clergie, which as in some part maie seme to arise and come of sin∣gle life, so I doubt not, but if Priestes were commonly married, the case would be muche worse. Certainely seeing Christe said, there are Eunuches,* 1.27 who gelde them selues for the kingdom of heauen, the Churche hath done right wel, to reserue the highest order for them, who do most force vnto them selues, for heauens sake. And seing S. Paule would haue al men chaste without Mar∣riage, as him selfe was: muche more it is to be thought,* 1.28 he would haue his owne Successours in the publike mi∣nisterie to be suche.

Againe if among married men, he be meetest to be cho∣sen Priest, who hath had but one wife, he yet were more meete, who had none at al. If before Priesthod one wife be the most, afterward one is to much. If perfection, and an Angels life be in most perfite chastitie, that same is most meetest for Priestes, who are the Angels of God. If married persons ought to be apart for a time, to haue the more leisour to praye, and to communicate: he that must stil attend the publike prayer, and must bothe offer, and minister the Communion, had nede stil to absteine from wedlocke: specially seing the Priestes of the lawe during the time of their ministerie, did not companie with their wiues.

Eusebius, and Epiphanius, accompt those counselles, and praises of single life, which are in holy Scripture, to apperteine to Priestes, as to the most excellent degree, and not vnto the Laie men: as who are permitted to vse a lower state of perfection. If no man that liueth in war∣fare to God, doo wrappe him selfe in secular busines, and yet S. Paul saith,* 1.29 that the maried person doth thinke vpon the thinges of the world, and is distracted thereby: how conueniently hath the West Churche ordeined, that he should only be made a Priest, who by Gods grace is con∣tent to professe and leade a single life? Or how can that Bishop, or Priest wholy attend hospitalitie and almose dedes, and the profit of his flocke, and the setting vp of common schooles, of vniuersities, of hospitals, and almose houses for the poore, and such other like dedes of mercie, and of publike profit: who hath his wife and children to prouide for? Had we now had in al England the furni∣ture of Colleges, and Scholes (whiche God be praysed

we haue, and should yet haue had more, had not the blaste of your Euangelical spirite ouerthrowen them) if the Clergie had alwaies ben married? Nay the mar∣ried Bishops, that now liue so merily, and kepe such con∣tinual dalliance and cheere vpon other mennes paines and trauailes, were nourished in the Vniuersities, special∣ly by their almose, and foundations, who were single, and chaste Bishops, and Priestes. Thus though nothing be perfite in this life, yet the single life, of the two, is more conuenient for the Cler∣gie, both by Gods Worde, and by the experience of Ci∣uil policie.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Pag. 165.
• * 1.2

  Pag. 166.
• * 1.3

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

  Pag. 167.
• * 1.5

  Pag. 168. 169.
• * 1.6

  Luc. 1.
• * 1.7

  Pag. 170. 1. Tim. 5.
• * 1.8

  Pag. 171.
• * 1.9

  Pag. 172.
• * 1.10

  Pag. 173.
• * 1.11

  Pag. 174
• * 1.12

  Pag. 175. Chrysost. in epist. ad Titum Hom. 2.
• * 1.13

  1. Tim. 5.
• * 1.14

  Pag. 176.
• * 1.15

  Pag. 175.
• * 1.16

  Pag. 182.
• * 1.17

  ••. Tim. 4.
• * 1.18

  Discedent à fide.
• * 1.19

  Pag. 182.
• * 1.20

  1. Cor. 5.
• * 1.21

  1. Tim. 5.
• * 1.22

  Pag. 182.
• * 1.23

  Pag. 183.
• * 1.24

  Infra. li. 5. cap. 15.
• * 1.25

  1. Cor. 7.
• * 1.26

  Pag. 185.
• * 1.27

  Math. 19.
• * 1.28

  1. Cor. 7.
• * 1.29

  1. Cor. 7.