THE FIRST READING.

I HAVE chosen this parte of the holie scripture, wherein to trauail with you at this time bicause thorough goddes great wrath against sinne, and the most despiteful malice of Satan against the truth, the olde hainous heresie of the vn¦godlie Arrians, is renued in our coūtree, and as it were raised vp againe from hel. These cankerd old Arrians, that you maie undrestāde their heresie, spake blas¦phemously of the godhead of our Lorde Iesus. For the first autor of it Arrius vt∣tered erroniously, & vngodly in the sco∣les of Alexandria, in Aegypte, that there was a time, whā goddes sonne was not. By which wordes he ment, that he was not of the same beinge, and substāce that the father is of, nor of the fame aeternitie and so not the natural sonne of God, and verie God in dede, but an excellent crea¦ture of God, whereby God made al thin¦ges, Page  [unnumbered] as by ā instrumēt, as he him selfe o∣pened in farther declaration of his mīde.

For he graūted that the Lorde Iesus was the first, and cheifest creature, & the beginninge of al other creatures, and ga∣ue him also the name of God. Howbeit he thought not that he had his Godhed by nature, but by borowinge.

For trial of this matter the most no∣ble and godlie Emperor Constātine the great, called a general concile at Nice, of thre hundred, and eightene bishoppes, of whom manie for singular lerninge and e∣loquence, manie for great holines of life, were compted worthie of euerlastinge remēbrance. In this famous cōcile it was cōcluded out of the holie scriptures, that goddes sonne is of the same aeternitee, of the same substance, essence, & beinge, that God the father is, goddes natural sonne, and coaequal with the father, as it appeareth in the Crede, communely cal∣led the Nicene Crede. Whereunto the hole assemble agreed, and subscribed, sauinge these fiue, Eusebius bishoppe of Nicomedia, Theognis bishoppe of Ni¦ce, Maris bishoppe of Calchedon, The∣ognis Page  [unnumbered] bishoppe of Marmarike, and Se∣cundus bishoppe of Ptolemais. Which fiue bishoppes for their vngodlines, by the emperors commaundement, were banished out of their coūtrees. But sone after their exile, Eusebius, and Theog∣nis repented that thei had don so vn∣aduisedly, and sent a boke of repentan∣ce to the godlie bishoppes, wherin they vsed these wordes. We haue agreed to the faith, and after we had made inqui∣sition of the meaninge of this worde cō¦substantial, we were throughly quie∣ted. And in dede we claue not to the hae¦resie, yea we subscribed to the faith, but we subscribed not to the excom∣munication. Not that we reproue the faith, but we beleued not that he, that is to saie, Arrius, was such one, as he was accused to be. But if the holie councile be so persuaded, we re∣pugne not, but consente to your decre∣es, and confirme our consente with this our present writinge, not that we can not beare our banishment, but to auoide the suspition of haeresie.

Out of these wordes Socrates the storie writer gesseth, that these two subscribed to the faith agreed vpon in the concile of Nice, but wolde not alowe the depositiō of Arrius.

This matter beinge thus wisely and godly estably shed, begāne to be trobled againe, by this occasion. Constatine the emperor had a sister called Constantia, in to whose fauor a certaine preist crep∣te so far, that she cōpted him as one of hir awne. This preist, whose name the storie writer vttereth not, as worthie perpetual obliuiō, by thaduise of Euse∣bius declared to Constantia, that the cō¦cile had don Arrius wronge, and that he thought not as the rumor went. The la∣die durst not tel the Emperor that his af∣firmation, and yet she beleued hir preist. It happened sone after that she fel sicke, and the Emperor hir brother cam to vi∣site hir, at which time she singularly com¦mended hir preist vnto him. Who imme¦diately vpon hir cōmendation receaued him in to his fauor, and familiaritie. The preist hauinge gotten boldnes, and liber¦tee of talke, renued vnto him, Arrius his matter, affirminge that he agreed Page  [unnumbered] with the concile. The emperor aūswe∣red that if Arrius wold consent to the cō¦cile, he wolde receaue him to fauor, and sende him againe to Alexandria, to be restored to his former place. And there vpō he sent Lettres to Arrius to repare spedely vnto him. Whan Arrius was cō∣me, and presented before the Emperor, he demaūded of him, whether he consen¦ted to the faith of the Nicene concile.

Arrius aunswered that he did consente there vnto. The Emperor bad hī put his faith in writīge, he did so, & this was the cōfessiō of hī & of Euzoius that was htā there with hī. We beleue in one god, the father almightie, and in the Lorde Iesus Christ his sonne begotten of him befo∣re al worldes god the worde, by whō al thinges were made, both thinges in hea∣uen, and thinges in erth. The Empe∣ror forthwith wrote to Athanasius bis∣shop off Alexandria to receaue Arrius, and to restore him to his roome. And bicause Athanasius refused so to do, he was deposed. Than beganne Arrius to sow againe his enuenimed seedes.

The Emperor enformed of his nawhg∣tie behauior, sent for him againe vnto Page  [unnumbered] Cōstantinople, and asked him once mo¦re, whether he cōsented to the determi¦nation of the Nicene concile. He aun∣swered yea, with out anie staggeringe the Emperor meruailinge at the matter, required of him, to confirme his confes∣sion with an othe. And he toke his othe incontinētly, vsinge therein fond craft, and subtiltie. For he had writ∣ten his awne doctrine in a paper, and ca∣ried the same vndre his arme hole, and so sware that his sentence was, as he had there written, meaninge the paper vn∣dre his arme hole. Here vpon rhe Em∣peror commended him to the bishoppe of Constantinople, to be receaued to the communion of catholike Christian mē. Alexander the bishoppe knowinge the malitious wilines of Arrius, staied at the matter. Eusebius a stoute man, cea∣sed not to threatē the good bishoppe, that if he wold not willingly admitte Ar¦rius to the communion, he shuld be com¦pelled thereunto by force.

The bishoppe perceauinge that he was not able to resiste the violence of Euse∣bius hauinge the Emperor also on his side, fel to praier, and continued there∣in Page  [unnumbered] al night liynge prostrate before the lordes table. In the morninge Eusebius accompanied with a bande of men, went to Arrius his lodginge, and wil∣led him to folow him to the temple.

Euerie mannes minde was occupied with expectation of the ende, knowin∣ge the fiercenes of Eusebius, and the cō∣stantie, and godlines of Alexander. Ar∣rius by the waye as he was goinge to church in the middest of that route, for mannes necessitie desired to goe a side to a priuie, where his guttes barst out, and he died an horrible vile, stinckinge, and shameful death. And so the good bishoppe was by miracle deliuered from great feare, and burthen of conscience, and proud Eusebius disapointed of his purpose.

Howbeit afterwarde by the meanes of that nawghtie preist, and Constan∣tius Constantine the Emperors sonne, whose fauor the preist got by deliue∣ring to him the testamēt that the ēperor left in his hādes, the haeresie of vile Arri∣us was so reuiued, & maīteined, that it cold not be quēched, but with great tra∣uail of lerned mē, & blode of manie Mar¦tyrs. Page  [unnumbered] For heretikes if thei once preuaile, ar most cruel persequutors, as in old time the tru Christians felt, in the furious rage of the haeretical Arrianes, and we now fe¦le vndre the most bloodie haeretical Ido¦latres. Neuertheles the goodnes of God was such, that for the confusion, and ov¦throwīge of this most horrible haeresie, he raised vp most excellent wittes, and mē of most singular lerninge, and ver∣tue, so that in processe of time, after great trauail, after terrible tormentes, & most cruel kindes of death, which the godlie suffred, this haeresie was vtterly ouer∣throwen, and beaten doune to hel.

But now as good mē reporte, sondrie phrantike spirites labour to blow life in to it, and to cal it againe in to the worl∣de, out of Satās darcke dongeon. And if al be tru that I haue hearde, thei haue pat¦ched two, or three peeces of their awne to that ilfauored bodie, and haue made it a fowler mōster than it was before.

But howsoeuer thei haue handled their monstruous babie, it shalbe good for vs, to know the truth of this matter, and to haue readie a perfecte rule, to iudge all maner of doctrines. Whan we haue a Page  [unnumbered] true rule out of goddes worde, it shalbe easie to auoide al false inuentions. For what so agreeth not to that rule is to be refused, and cast awaie. Therefore we ought first to labor to know what hte scripture teacheth, and to cleaue there to, whatsoeuer, ether lerned wittes can sub¦tilly deuise, or phrantike braines fanati∣cally, and rauingely dreame out, & pow¦re forth at auenture, in their traūces. If we bringe al thinges to this touchstone, we shal neuer be deceaued by anie new broched doctrine. But bicause the matter of al other is most high, & most excedin∣ge our capacitee, we ought wit al h feare, reuerence, sobrenes, and modestie to ap¦proch vnto it, & in no wise to entre in to a place, of such maiestie, brightnes, & glo¦rie with foule fete, and to touch so holie thinges, with vncleane handes. Comme therefore my brethern with al humilite, and reuerent behauior to the gospell of, S. Iohan. For it is euidently true that none of the diuine writers haue handled this our present matter, so largely, so plaī¦ly, & so strongely against al cauillations. And therefore I haue purposely takē in hande, to treate some parte of his most Page  [unnumbered] diuine worcke amōg you that, we maye al certaīly know what we ought to thin∣ke of the lorde Iesus in this behalfe, and that we maie be surely armed agaīst the hissinges of the venimous serpētes clouē toūge. For in dede it is a communs opi∣niō amōge the olde ecclesiastical writers, that. S. Iohā wrote this treatise purpose∣ly against such haeretikes, as in his time denied the diuinitie of Christ, namely Carpocrates, Cerinthus, and the Hebio∣nites, verie poore mē in vndrestanding according to their name, which taught that the Lord Iesus was a man only, & not God. Certainly the purpose, and cheife marke of the hole worcke is, to teach that Iesus our Lorde was not a mā only, but also God, and so the true Mes¦sias, and verie Saueor of the worlde.

The gospel after, S. Iohan) Euangeliō signifieth good tidinges. And in the ho¦lie writers it signifieth a publike, solē∣ne, and opē preachinge of Christ, who by his death hath purged our sinnes, and beinge rissen from the deed, raigneth in the hertes of his chosen, and renueth thē vnto godlines thorough his spirite mor∣tifiynge from time to time their fleshlie Page  [unnumbered] lustes, and abolishinge more and more the remnaūtes of their natural corrupti∣on. And this in dede is verie good tidin¦ges. For here by we ar deliuered from the feare of death and damnation, and from the bondage of sinne, & Satā, brei∣fely hereby we ar remoued frō darcknes to light, from despeare, to good hope from death to life, from hel to heauen. Now bicause the office of proclaminge, and publishinge this most ioiful tidīges, was committed to the ministers of the new testamēt, the name of Euāgelistes is most proprely attributed to them, & specially to those that discribe the natiui¦tee, cōuersation, death, & resurrection of the lorde Iesus, wherein this blisful∣nes resteth, that we so much aduance.

Some writers affirme that as manie pro¦misses of felicitie, and saluation as there∣be, so manie gospels there be, and that therefore the prophetes ar also euange∣listes, whan they speake of the redemp∣tion, that goddes annointed shuld accō∣plish. I thincke it not good to striue a¦boute wordes, and I denie not that the hebrue word, Bassar, which signifieth to euangelize, & to preach good tidinges Page  [unnumbered] is applied in some place to mē of the old time. Howbeit I beleue rather, that Euāgelion is an opē publishinge of sal∣uatiō al readie perfirmed, & accōplished, than of the same promised. And there∣fore they speake more distinctly, & pro¦prely that giue the name of Euāgelistes to thapostles, & writers of the historie of the lorde Iesus, & finally to the minis∣ters of the new testamēt. And to giue place rather to this iudgemēt, the wor∣des of our saueor in the 16. of Luke mo∣ue me, where he saieth that the law, and the prophetes were vnto Iohā the Bap∣tiste, & that from that time the kingdō of god was euāgelized. The kingdō of god was in dede taught before, and the gospel preached in some wise, but it was not so opēly, so largely, so plainly, so far & wide published, and proclaimed.

But herein as I said I wil contēd with no man, nor binde the worde to this pro∣pre significatiō only. For I am not ig∣norāt what a wrāglinge wit maie ga∣ther out of the fourth cha. to the Hebr. After S. Iohan). The historie of the gos∣pel sheweth that the Lorde Iesus out of Page  [unnumbered] the nombre of his disciples chose twel∣ue principal, whom he called Apostles, bicause they shuld be sent as his special Embassadors in to al the world to pub∣lish, and preach the glad tidinges of free saluation. And amonge these twelue there were three yet more special, & sin¦gular furnished with most excellēt gif∣tes, and therefore admitted to certaine thinges, where thother were excluded.

Of these three Iohan was one, of whō it is writtē singularly and specially, that he was the lordes biloued. To whom also the Lorde gaue this mer∣uailous name, that he was called the son of thondre. And surely who so weigheth this present worcke, shal thin¦ke that he rather thondreth from hea∣uen, than speaketh mannes wordes.

Numenius an heathen Philosopher, whan he had red the beginninge of this gospel, barst out in to these wordes:

I praie God, I die, if this barbarous fellow haue not comprehended in few wordes, al that our Plato prosequu∣teth in so manie worckes.

He called him barbarous bicause he was an hebreu, and in his writinge leaueth traces of his mothers toūge, & foloweth not curiously the finenes, & proprietes of the greke maner of speakinge, but he graūted vnto him asmuch knowlege, as the most famous Philosopher, & fa∣ther of al lerned wittes Plato had, and more shortenes in writīge, which is mo∣re cōmendable in a writer of graue mat∣ters. Writers of histories shew manie wō¦derful thinges of this Iohā, as that he was put in to boilinge oile, & cā out againe vnhurte &c. But it shalbe sufficiēt for vs to know, and cōsidre that he was one of the most excellent, singular, & special a∣postles, & therefore a mete witnes of the Lorde Iesus.

In the beginninge) Kinge Dauid in∣spired from aboue teacheth in the third psal. that to saue pertaineth to Iehoua. The prophete Esaie moued by the same spirite in the .45. cha. hath these wordes: Israel is saued ī Iehoua, whith a perpetu¦al saluatiō In which cha. also God spea∣kinge of himselfe, saith thus: A iust God and one that saueth there is none be∣side me. And in the prophete Hosea, he Page  [unnumbered] beareth in the same, saiynge, thou shalt know no god besides me, & there is no saueor besides me. And in Hieremie he pronoūceth hī accursed, that shal trust in mā, & make fleeshe his arme, which wor¦des cōstraine vs to seke saluatiō no whe∣re saue in God. But we al seke saluation at the handes of the lorde Iesus, we al ac∣knowlege him to be the saueor of the world. We must thā of necessitee know him to be god, onles we wil forge, and mainteine a faith not agreynge to god¦des worde. And that vndoutedly god∣des Messias, whō the father aeternally ap¦pointed to be the saueor of the world, is God, the holie scripture beareth witnes most plainly, that we shuld be certaine that we swarue not from god, whā we se¦ke saluatiō in him. For the kinglie pro∣phete Dauid in the .45. psal. where with a notable songe he celebrateth the prai∣ses of Messias, saieth thus: Thy throne o God is for euer. In which wordes he giueth him not only the name of God, but also confesseth his throne to be euer lastinge. Now nomānes throne is esta∣blished for euer sauinge goddes only.

Esaie in the .9. cha. calleth him el gibbor Page  [unnumbered] a stronge god, and in the same cha. he teacheth that there is no measure, nor en∣de of his kingdom. The prophete Hi∣eremie to take awaie al cauillations, tea∣cheth expresly that he is Iehouah, which name is neuer giuē nor can be giuē, saue to the true God only, the autor and foū¦raine of al beinge. For these be his wordes: Beholde the daies comme sai∣eth Iehoua, and I wil raise vp to Da∣uid a iust blosom, and a kinge shal raig∣ne, & do wisely, & shal exequute iudge∣mēt, and righteousnes in the erth. In his daies Iehuda shalbe saued, and Israel shal dwel safely & this is his name which thei shal cal him, Iehoua our righteousnes. And this confirmeth the prophete Ho∣sea, where god speaketh thus: But I will haue pitie on the house of Iuda, and wil saue thē in Iehoua their God.

In the new testamēt this matter is taught most clearely. For these be. S. Paules wordes in the .9, to the Ro. who∣se be the fathers, and of whom is Christ after the flesch, who is ouer al god bles∣sed for euer. And in the .2. to the Philip Let the same minde be in you, which was also in Christ Iesu, who beinge in Page  [unnumbered] the forme of god thought it not robbe∣rie to be equal with god, and yet emp∣tied him selfe, takinge the forme of a ser¦uant &c. Thus S Paule teacheth that he is not god by vsurpation, but by na∣ture, and that he was, and euer is, & shal∣be in the forme and state of god, & ve∣rie god, as whan he saieth that he toke the forme of a seruant, he meaneth that he entred in to the state of a seruant, and became a verie seruant. Some wran∣glīge spirites wrest this place verie bold¦ly, & vngodly. For thei saie that S. Pau∣le reacheth no more, but that the lorde Iesus was humble, and contente with his state, and aspired not farther, ne went aboute to climme vp vniustly to an aequalitee with god. But if that we∣re the meaninge, whan. S. Paule saieth, that beinge in the forme of God, he thought not to make himselfe equal to god by robberie, he shuld signifie that beinge in that state that he was in, he might haue so dō, & haue preuailed. Or els what great matter had it bē, that he abstained frō that, which ōce to haue gō aboute, or to haue thought vpon, had ben more than mere madnes.

Wherefore it is euidēt that this theire deuise, is the verie rauinge of sicke brai∣nes, beside that they shamelesly wringe these wordes out of their natural sense, he thought it no robberie to be aequal with God, & make them signifie, whe∣ther thei wil or no, he mēt no robberie, or he wēt aboute no robberie thinkin∣ge to make him selfe aequal to god, in such a sense, as thei neuer knew before, nether wil abide, ōles they be haled clea¦ne out of iointe. S. Paules meaninge is this, that the lorde Iesus beīge verie god yet couered his glorious maiestie with the shape & state of a seruāt, & hūbled him selfe vnto the death of the crosse, to do vs good, which exēple he setteth be∣fore vs, to folow, & not to be ashamed to abase our selues to the welth of o∣ther. For we cā neuer cast doūne our sel∣ues so much, as he did, if we cōsidre his glorie & diuine estate, & what a thīge it is, for him, that is verie god, to becō∣me not only a mā, but also a seruāt, and not that only but more ouer to be ap∣pointed to a most vile, & shameful de∣ath. Now the higher he was, the more liuelier his exēple is to moue vs, & to Page  [unnumbered] make vs ashamed of our disdainfulnes. And therefore, S. Paule speaketh of his godhead, which he had & hath natural∣ly, that we maie know, that his hūblin∣ge camme not by force, but of his awne good wil. Where I haue turned this worde (alla) which signifieth but, in to these wordes, & yet, I haue marcked that. S. Paule so vseth the word (alla) in manie places. One shal suffice, for this time, in the .6. to the Cor. he speaketh thus. For though you haue innumera∣ble leaders in christ, alla, but not manie fathers, that is to saie, yet not manie fa¦thers. To returne to our purpose. S. Paule in the .14. to the Ro. applieth this sentēce of Esaie: Euerie knee shal bow vnto me &c. to the lorde Iesus, with the¦se wordes: we must al be presēted befo¦re the iudgemēt seate of Christ. For it is writtē as truly as I liue saieth the lorde, euerie knee shal bow vnto me &c. But it is euidēt that those wordes ar spoken of Iehoua, in the prophete, & so must the lorde Iesus be Iehoua. For thes be the wordes of that prophetie in the 45. cha. Am not I Iehoua, & there is no god be∣sides me, a iust God, & one that saueth Page  [unnumbered] there is none besides me. Loke vnto me, and be saued al ye endes of the erth; for I am god, and there is no more, I ha∣ue sworne by my selfe, the word is gon out of my mouth in righteousnes, that euerie knee shal bow doune vnto me &c. Againe. S. Paule in the ninth to the Ro. teacheth that the lord Iesus is the stomblinge blocke, and the stone where at the lues shulde fal, which thinge the prophete Esaie speaketh of Iehouah.

For thus he writeth: you shal sanctifie Iehoua the lorde of hostes. And he shal∣be a sanctuarie, and a stone to stomble at, & a rocke to sal at, to bothe the hou∣ses of Israel a snare, and a trappe to the in dweller of Ierusalem. And manie shal stomble in them, or amonge thē, shall sal, and be brused, & snared, and takē.

Now cōpare Esaie, and Paule together, and you shal see, that the lorde Iesus is Iehoua, as S. Paule colde vndrestande the scriptures, who was sure that he had goddes spirite.

The Angel also in. S. Luke saieth, that Iohan Baptiste shuld turne manie of the childrē of Israel to the lorde their god, and that he shulde goe before him in the spirite, & power of Elias. But the lord Page  [unnumbered] Iesus him selfe teacheth, that Iohans of∣fice was to goe before his face, alleginge the texte of the prophete Malaki, after this sorte in the .11. of Matheu: beholde I sende myne Angel before thy face, which shal prepare thy waie before the. So must the lorde Iesus be the Lorde god of the Israelites.

But this matter is no where taught with greater clearnes, light, & grace, thā in this gospel of S. Io. For in the first parte of his first cha. speakīge of the true Messias, namely of the lord Iesus our vn∣doubted saueor, that our faith might safely rest in him, and that we might know it to be cōsonant to the truth of goddes word, & that we make not flesh our arme whā we putte our trust in hī, he saieth, that he was euer goddes worde vtue, & wisedō, & that he was with god & that he was verie god, & that al thin¦ges were made bi hī &c. here indede our wittes ar dafeld, & amased, here arise ma¦nie thoughtes. For here two be spokē of god I saie, & goddes worde, & the wor∣de is said to be god, & to be with god. It semeth thā to mānes hastie reasō, that there be two goddes. But the truth is, that there is but one god.

Wherefore some haue bē so boide, or ra∣ther so mad, as to denie the godhead of the lorde Iesus, & to bringe him in to the ordre of creatures, & to faine him a made God, lest there shuld be two natu∣ral goddes. For they cā abide no more of god, thā they cā cōprehēde with their litle wittes.

But we must cōsidre that god is best knowē, yea only knowē to him selfe, & we must thinke him to be such, as he hī selfe hath opened vnto vs, that he is, & not such as we cā imagine him, or cōpre∣hēde him. Now he hath taught vs that there is one god, the father, the sonne, & the holie gost. That the father is god, the sonne is god, the holie gost is god, & yet not three goddes, but one god. Three distinctions, three proprietes, & as the good fathers speake, three perso∣nes to be in the godhead, he him selfe hath taught vs, by his special instrumē∣tes sent by him in to the world, to teach the assured truth. And it foloweth not in dede herevpon, that there be three goddes. For these three haue one sub∣stāce, (if it be lawful to vse that terme in this matter,) one essence, one beinge. Page  [unnumbered] I graūte it shuld folow, that there we∣re three goddes, if they were three son∣drie diuided substances. But now the substāce and essence is one, and they dif∣fer not therein, they differ only in pro∣prietes, and persons. This is the pro∣prietee of the father, that he is the foū∣taine & head springe of al, & begetteth his sonne. This is the propriete of the sonne, that he shineth from the father, issueth and springeth out of him, and is begottē of him. This is the proprie∣tee of the holie gost, that he procedeth from the father, and the sonne. If anie mā wil aske how this trinitee, can bein ā vnitee, & ā vnitee in a trinitee, the same declareth, that he wil not be satisfied, vn¦til he haue ētred in to the secretes of god and know al that is in god, and be as wi¦se as god, and comprehēd that, that is infinite, and vnmeasurable within the smal compasse of his franticke head, and so in dede shew him selfe to raue, and to be more mete, to be placed in bedleem, than in the companie of Christiane mē. Whan god hath once clarely and certaī∣ly saied it, it is our parte to thincke it to be, as he hath saide it to be. For Page  [unnumbered] surely it maie be, & it is, whan he hath plaīly saide it, though our reason cā nev reach it. And that god hath said this with cleare wordes, it shal most euidētly appeare out of. S. Ioannes doctrine, whā it shalbe weighed. For I doubte not but that we al acknowlege, that what so. S. Io. saieth, god saieth. And whā we know that god hath certaīly said it, we wil be∣leue it, though it seme neuer so much re¦pugnant to reason. For we refuse not al that is repugnāt to reason, but whā the same is repugnant to goddes worde.

And to saie the truth this matter is not so much repugnāt to reason, as it is abo∣ue the reach of reason.

In the beginninge was the word

The word was in the beginninge. By the worde the euangeliste meaneth, the secōde person in the holie trinitee, name¦ly our lorde Iesus Christ touchinge his diuine nature, as it appeareth afterwar∣de, whā he saieth, & the word became flesh. Here we must cōsidre why goddes sonne is called a worde. Aunciāt wri∣ters cōsidre a worde two waies. For thei teach that there is an outwarde worde, & ā inwarde worde. The outward word Page  [unnumbered] is that soūdeth, & passeth awaie. The in¦warde worde is the cōceipte of the her∣te, which remaineth stil in the herte, whā the soūd is past. So thei saie that god hath an outwarde worde, which is sounded, pronounced & writtē in bo∣kes, & that he hath an inwarde worde, which remaineth with in him selfe whe∣re of the outwarde worde is an image, effecte, & frute. This inwarde wor∣de euer remaininge in him is called his sonne, as the cōceipte of the herte maie be called the engēdred frute of the her∣te, and the hertes childe.

Thei thincke also that he is called the worde of god, bicause that as a worde is the image of mannes minde, & repre∣senteth it vnto vs, so the Lorde Iesus is goddes image, and most liuely repre∣senteth vnto vs his power, his god∣hed, and his wisedom.

For what so euer is in the father shineth in the sonne. Some other thincke that the worde here is taken for a thinge, af∣ter the hebrue maner of speakinge.

For the hebrues vse (DABAR) which signifieth a word for a thinge.

Whan Esaie the prophete asked kinge Ezechias, what the Embassadors of Ba∣bilon had seē in his house, he aunswe∣red thus: They saw al that was in myn house, lo haiah dabar, there was not a worde, that is to saie anie one thinge, that I shewed not vnto them in my treasures. The prophete replieth: Be∣holde the daies comme, that what so e∣uer is in thy house shalbe takē awaye, & what so euer thy fathers haue laied vp in stoare vnto this daie, shalbe caried to Babilon lo ijvather dabar, there shal not a worde remaine saieth the lorde, that is to saie, there shal not one thinge be left behinde. The angel also in. S. Luke whan the Virgine Marie mer∣uailed how she shuld conceaue a childe without mannes helpe, said vnto hir, no worde shalbe impossible vnto god, that is, no thinge shalbe impossible for him to do. So than after this understandin∣ge S. Iohānes meaninge is, that in the beginninge there was a diuine, & hea∣uēlie thinge with god.

The greke vocable, logos, which S. Iohan. vseth, hath sondrie significatiōs, and amonge other beside cōmunicatiō, Page  [unnumbered] and talke, it signifieth reason, and wisdō which singificacion agreeth ryght wel. For Salomon calleth that thing wisdōe that was with God beefore the founda∣cion of the world was laied, and that was Amō before him, that is to saie, as the Hebreues expoune the worde, a di∣rector. For by that wisdome God made all thinges, and doeth all thinges, as it is there expressed, by me kinges raigne, & Princes enacte righteousnes &c.

Surely in my minde S. Iohn hath res∣pect to the first cha. of Genesis, and ope∣neth the same vnto vs. For Moses saith not simply, that God made all thynges of noughte, but that he spake, and made thinges, that is to saie, that he made all thinges by his worde. By the worde than I vnderstande Goddes vertue, and power, wherby he hath opened, and as it were set abrode himselfe in makynge all thinges, & in preseruing & maintai∣ning thē in their state, & finally in repai¦ring, restoring, and renuing them being decaied thorough sinne. For as a worde vttereth, and bringeth forth that, that is in the hearte, so by this woorde, this po∣wer, Page  [unnumbered] & vertue of god, is vttered brought forth, and sette abrode, that laie hydden in god before. So that I thinke that he is called goddes worde, both bicause he is gods wysdome, and gods image, represē¦tyng all that is in the father, and also be∣cause he is the secrete vertue, and power of God, wherby god vttereth, shewethe oute, and sendeth foorth that is in hym, namely hys might, and wisedome in ma¦king all thinges, his goodnes in preser∣uing them, and his mercy indeclaring to mortal men his wil, and pleasure, and in recouering and sauing them being lost. only let vs beware, that we take not this vocable (word, grosly for a word soun¦ded, pronounced, or writtē, but for an es∣sencial person subsisting, and abiding in God, and than whether we vnderstande the worde to be gods image, and bright¦nes, gods vertue and power, or goddes wisdome, we shall not doe amysse. For the holy scripture giueth al these things to the seconde person in the most sacred trinite. In the beginning) that is before the world was made for so we learne in Salomon. Iehoua possessed me in the be∣ginning Page  [unnumbered] of his waye, before his workes Meaz. from than, that is to saye eternall¦ly. And than he goeth forth, meolam, frō euer I was stablyshed, from the head, be∣fore the beginninges of the earth. Bee in the homoth in not depes, that is whā the depts were not, I was conceaued, be ein maienoth, in not foūtaines, that is whā the fountaines were not yet laden wyth twaters. Before the foūdaciō of moun∣taines was layed, before the hilles I was conceaued. Yet he had not made the erth and the outward partes of it, & the head that is the beginning of the dust of the world. Whan he prepared the heauens, I was there. &c. hitherto we haue reher∣sed the holy gostes wordes out of Salo. prouerbes. And I thynke more sondrye wordes can not bee deuised to expresse that gods wisdome, euen the Lorde Ie∣sus, touching his diuine nature, was with God before any creature had his beyng. And in dede sith the Lord Iesus, in that he is gods sonne is gods wisdō, thei blas¦pheme God, that imagine anye tyme whan he was not: For so they imagine a tyme whan GOD was wythoute wyse¦dome. We haue another place of the Page  [unnumbered] scripture, that teacheth vs thus to vnder¦stande, in the beginning. For in the .17. cha. of this gospell, the Lorde hymselfe saieth: glorifie me father at thi self, with the glory, which I had before the world was with thee. he that had glorie before the worlde was made, was, and had a be∣inge beefore the worlde was made. For that, that is nothing, cannot haue glory while it is nothing. WAS) It is euidente that S. Iohns intente is in this chap. to shewe what goddes sonne is touchinge his substance, essence and being. And if he had been a creature, here had been a place of necessite, to shewe that he was made. But he saith not that he was made yea he saieth that he was alreadye, and had his beeing before any creature was made. And so he is exempted out of the nomber of creatures.

And these two woordes in the begin∣ning, and was, confounde two heretikes, Cerinthus, and Arius. Whan Cerinthus shall swinishly grunte that the Lorde Ie¦sus was a pure mā, and had his begīning of Ioseph, and Mary, we maye stopp hys mouth with this worde in the begyn∣ning. Page  [unnumbered] For he that was in the beginninge was not to be begone in the tyme of Io∣seph, and Mary. Whan Arrius shal blas∣phemously iangle, and peuishlye bable, that he is a creature, we shall putte hys rude talke to silence, wyth thys woorde, was. For he that was alreadye in the be∣ginning, before any thing was made, & had his beeing beefore the creation of thinges, was neuer made. And this voca¦ble (the worde) bindeth both these here¦tikes together in a bondle and throweth them down to hell. For eyther to saye that Goddes worde was not eternallye, or that Goddes worde is a creature, is to say that God was some tyme withoute his wisdome, and power, or to saye that God had no wisedome, vntyll he hadde made it. For it is manifeste out of Salo∣mon, that Goddes worde is his wisdome For there it is taughte, that all thynges were made by hys wisedome, and here we are taughte, that all thynges were made by his worde. So his wisedome, & his worde muste be all one. And than cā¦not his worde be a creature. For GOD was neuer, nor neuer shalbe without his Page  [unnumbered] wisdome. But the Arrians make an argu¦ment wherby they thynk to ouerthrow all. That say they, that begetteth is bee∣fore that, that is begottē, but the father begetteth, ergo he is before the sonne, that is begotten. To thys first I answere that they, which will shewe thynges vn¦create, by thinges create, shal sometimes shewe themselues very fooles. Secondly I answere that the argumente is not al∣wayes true, in thinges create. For lyght springeth out of the sunne, and therfore we mai say, that the sūne begetteth light and heate issueth out of fier, and yet the sunne is not before his lighte, nor fyer before heate. But assone as the sunne is lyght is also, and assone as fier is, heate is The sunne goeth before hys lyghte, fier before heate in order, nor in tyme. And so we may say, that the father is before hys sonne, god is before his wysedome in order, not in tyme. In order, beecause wisdome springeth from the father, not in time, because the father is neuer with∣out his wisedome. But yet thei blasphe∣mously demaūde, whether the father be gatt the sonne, whan he was, or whā he was not, thinking whatsoeuer shall bee Page  [unnumbered] answered, to shewe an absurdyte. Wher indede the demaund is most absurd, and peuishe. For we wyll demaunde of them agayne, whether fier begette heate bee∣fore heate is in it, or after. If they saye be∣fore, than they graunte that fier is some tyme without heate, which is impossible For it is no fier that hath no heate. If thei say after, than we will saye as they saye, that the begettyng of heate is superflu∣ous, syth heate was there before. Againe we myght aske them, whether god whā he was became god, or became god bee∣fore he was. But we delight not in such vaine questions, wherewyth idle wittes sporte their follies. But briefely to them we say, that it is no absurdite to affirme that the father begetteth his sonne alrea¦dy being, bicause the sonne is euer in him & springeth euer frō him, no more than it is an absurdite to say, that mās mynde begetteth reasō, bicause reason is in it & sprīgeth frō it. And yet mās mīd is no soner, thā reasō is. But these great clerks cā imagine none other begettīg, but mās grosse begettīg of childrē. And so absur¦dites folow not our doctrīe, but their dre¦mīgs. For our doctrīe of gods sōne, & of Page  [unnumbered] begetting, is farre from the grosse ima∣ginacion of mans, or beastes fleshlye be∣getting. There is nothyng in oure doc∣tryne but heauenly, and spirituall. And these menne are altogether drowned in fleshe, and speake nothing but fleshe, & fleshly thinges.

I wyll rehearse another argumente of theirs, that the simple, and vnlearned be not perchance combred, and amased with their sophistications. Otherwise I think all their reasons rather to be buryed in perpetual silence and darkenes, and to be in dede so many blasphemies, as they bee reasons. For they aske whether God be∣gattē his sonne withoute consideracyon or consideringe and willinge. If neyther considering, nor wylling, than saye they he suffred somewhat, that he would not If considering, and willing, than his con¦sideracion, and will wente before his ge¦neracion.

But as before we may discouer their extreme folly with another demaunde. For we may aske whether God be good and mercifull of hys owne wil, or agaīst his will. For if he be good, and mercifull Page  [unnumbered] of his own will, and wil goeth before all thinges, that are chosen by wil, thā there was a time or space, whan God was not yet good, and mercifull, but consulted, & toke deliberatiō aboute those thynges. Item we may demaunde of them, whe∣ther the father be God of his will, or a∣gainst his will. If of his will, than after these mens high wittes, his wil went be¦fore his essence, and beeing. If agaynste his will, who constrayned him▪ who seeth not nowe the outragious madnes, and extrēe fransie of these wilde spirits For in dede in naturall thynges no will goeth beefore, whiche will hath place only in those thinges that bee withoute the substaunce of him, that taketh deli∣beraciō. But here we wil make an end of this lecture. Let these words of the Euan¦gelist my brethren which we now haue treated sinke depelye into your heartes, which weighe downe so greate heresies and teache vs so excellent, and so diuine thinges, as the angels can not attaine vn¦to. Let vs consider how great goodnesse of God this is, that he hath vouchsafed to open vnto vs the moste reuerende tem∣ple Page  [unnumbered] of his diuine maiestie, and lette vs prayse hys holy name therfore, and bee thankefull.