A Confutation of a Popish and Slanderous Libel, Treatise · Papist opinion 6
The Papiste.
The fifte consideration is, that wheras I am not perswaded that the forme of praiers set forth in the saide boke, is lawful and catholike, my comyng to heare it shoulde bee an acte, not onelyonly contrarie to mine owne conscience and also to my damnable sinne, but also my comyng therto, should be to the weake and ignorant, an occasion of ruine, and deadly sinne, which is called scandalum infirmorum, and I am bound by the words of our sauiour Christ, to auoide that, saiyng wo be to that man, by whom any suche offence or slaunder shall vprise and come. For of my comyng thether, either they muste iudge that I am a dissembler in doyng against my cōscience, or els they must iudge that I am in cōscience perswaded thereunto. And therby gather by mine example a likyng of that thing to be good and holy, which in my very conscience I do vtterly condemne, and that this slaunder shall not be so taken, as scandalum acceptum, but so geuen as scandalum datum of my parte. And wher as it hath been often tymes obiected vntounto me, how that it is but a very small matter to sticke or staie at, for to come to the Church, and heare the saied seruice, beyng set at libertie, secretly, and priuily to praie with my self whatsoeuer I shall thinke mete, for he aunswere, I doe reade in the Scriptures howe Eleazarus the Preest is in the same commended, because he would not dissemble the eatyng of swynes fleshe, wheras he might hauehave escaped the paynes of death therby. Tertulliane writeth a booke in the praise of a Souldiar, and entituleth his boke de corona militis, because that Souldiar refused in natali die Seueri imperatoris, to weare but a Garlande of flowers vpōn his heade, because he should therin then hauehave followed the maner of the gentiles, and heathen people. And rather or he would do so small a mattet, as to weare but a Garland of flowers, he did suffer inprisonment, and therfore is commended of so greate a clerke, as Tertullian was. Theodoritus in hys second booke of the historie Ecclesiastike, in Cap. 24. doth note Leontius Bishoppe of Antioche of greate dissimulation, for as much as he, beyng present in the quire at Antioche, and in the hearing of christian men, there to sing Gloria patri & filio, &c. and the Arians Gloria patri in filio, &c. Contrariwise he did there openly take nether partie, but priuily at the ende of eueryevery psalme did sing Gloria pari in saecula saeculorum. Amen. And so he mumbled it vp to hym selfe, vt ab instantibus vix audiri posset, whose example therfore beyng so manifest, and so well admonished therof, I purpose not to followe God willyng. VVhen to dissemble with a mā I hold it no honestly, to dissemble with my Prince, it is the iuste deserte of perpetuall discredite, and infamie, but to dissemble with God, it is most impietie, from the whiche detestable sinne, I am vtterly resolued by the word god, spoken by the mouth of Helias saiyng: Vsquequo claudicatis in duas partes? How long will you halte or limpe on both sides? And S. Ihon in his reuelation saieth: Because thou arte neither whot nor colde, therfore I shall beginne now to vomit and cast thee out of my mouth. The premisses well waighed, it cannot be iustly saied that I sticke at a trifling or small matter, but a matter of greate importance, and conscience moueth me therunto, and forceth me that I shoulde not vnaduisedly without greate cause seperate my self, from the vnity of the Churche, neither to condēne the vniuersal church, vnheard hauing no iust or weightie cause why I should so doe. For I hauehave alwaies, and doe thus waigh the matter with my selfe, that the poinctes and matters of religion, which this boke of seruice, hath condemned or taken awaie, ether thei were thought matters of smal importāce and did no harme, but being rightly vnderstanded might hauehave doen good, or els thei were to be taken, for matters of impietie and intollerable to be borne withal. In case thei were of the firste sorte, whiche thei hauehave condemned and abolished. Then in my iudgement they should hauehave been tolerated and borne withall, for charities sake, and for the continuance, and encrease of vnitie betwixte vsus and the vniuersall Church of christendom. On the other side, in case thei had been taken for matters intollerable, and could in no wise hauehave been borne with all for their impietie, as it hath been pretended, then yet in my cōscience, we ought to hauehave been better aduised then by our priuate condemnation of theim, to hauehave shewed our selfe to condemne thereby, al the whole vniuersall church of impietie vnheard, which thinges the vniuersall church hath vsed from the Apostles time, and doe to this daie. As touching matters of right faieth, and godly maners, the churche of Christe beyng the spouse of Christ, was neuer destitute of the holy ghost, neither could nor woulde in all this tyme hauehave borne or dissembled any impietie like as. S. Augustine writeth hereof. The Church of God beyng placed and put among muche chaffe, and many Cockles, and wedes, the same church doth suffer, and beare with many thinges, yet that notwithstandyng, touchyng the thinges whiche are against faithe, and against good life, the Churche doth neither approue theim, nor yet lette theim escape vnspoken against.