A Retentive to Stay Good Christians, Title page · Motive 48

A Retentive to Stay Good Christians · Title page · Motive 48

p. 130The 48. motiue.

How to make playne demonstration that the heretikes hauehave no euidence & that we hauehave all. VVho be wresters of the Scriptures. Bristow.The inconstancy of the Protestants: The vnderstanding of the Scriptures is in the church.

This wise demonstration is a playne declaration, that Fulke.he which made it, knoweth not what a demonstration meaneth, but such as it is, let vsus see what is in it.

First he would hauehave it proponed by a Catholike, to his frend that is in heretike, to be considered, seing al these motiues beginning with holy Scripture, approued traditions &c. be for them & agai st vsus, what is the cause that we cry so shamelesly & deceitfully the Gospel, the word of the Lorde, the touchstone of Gods booke? And least we shoulde say, that he beginneth with a false supposed & shameful begging of the principle, he will proue that all these euidences are for them, and so must the heretike that you wil deale withall be made in the beginning to cōfesse, Yea Sir, but howe will you driue him to this confession? Forsooth sayth Bristow, they all confesse it many wayes indirectly. First in that they vse not the same euidences them selues, in their declarations. Secondly in that they admit no euidence but only Scripture. To the first I answere they vse as much of this euidence, as is good & agreable to the holy Scripture. To the second I say, that if only Scripture be on our side it is more then all the rest against the Scripture, and againe if only Scripture be on ourside, then al the motiues be not on their side, for Scripture is one of them, the 8. in the motiues the first in the demaundes. But the Papist must make his frend say as much directly or els say expressely to eueryevery one of them whether he will be tried by them. As a frende to the presones, though p. 131an enemie to the errours of such Papistes as are curarable. I hauehave sayd expressely and particularly to euerie one of them, sheweing whether it be a true and proper note of the church, and if it be, that it belongeth to vsus and not to them. Although Bristow say, that this way we know full well that they shall hauehave the victorie flying therefore euermore to our weake & false castle of only Scripture. That the scripture onelyonly is our castle, we do gladly admitte, but that the same is a most strong true & impugnable castle, none but a blasphemous heretike will deny. But you must (saith Bristow) still labour to get them (& if you can) with their consent, out of the castle into the plaine fieldes aforesayde, to make them graunt expressely that there in your handes they can not stande. Nay Bristow you must beate vsus from our castell if you can, for we will neuer consent to goe out of it for defense, except it be to offer you the aduauntage, not in the playne fieldes as you cal it, but among your pettie piles and small holdes. And so we hauehave done often. So did that reuerende father the Bishoppe of Salisburie, in that noble challenge wherein you were shamefullie foyled in your owne grounde and many of your fortes beaten about your eares. But you doe not well to teach your schollers to seeke a gentle aduersarie to fight withall, which must first of all be willing to laye downe his sworde and shielde and then you are good enough for him with your manlie motiues with which when you hauehave treandled him about like a tenis ball, you sende him backe agayne to his castell of onelyonly Scripture, to see whether they will beare him out in his opinions. For example, is not this Scripture manifest inough on your side and agaynst vsus? This is my body. This is my blood? Mat. 26. Verily euen as plaine as this. They did all eate the same spirituall meate. They all dronke of the rocke that followed thē & y^e rocke was Christ. 1. Cor. 10. They are both one maner of speaking, and both of one matter. Therefore they hauehave both one meaning. The second exāple is. By works a man is iustified & not by faith only Iac. 2. And this is also Scripture, p. 132knowing that a man is not iustified by the workes of the Lawe, but by faith of Iesus Christ G…lat. 2. And agayne by grace you are saued through faith (and that not of your selues it is the gift of God) not of workes least any man shoulde boast. The later being in maner of speaking contrarie to the former text doe playnly shewe, that these two Apostles, speake not both of one kinde of faith or iustification. But that Iames speaketh of a dead faith as his wordes are playne Vers. 17. and of iustification before men. Paule of a liuing faith and of iustification in the sight of God. The third example is out of Iames 5. Where I must first note, that Bristow in translation doth manifestly corrupt & falsefie the Scripture. The Latine is, Infirmatur quis in vobis? If any amongest you be daungerously sicke let him send for the Priests of the church and they to pray ouer him anealing him with oyle in the name of our Lord &c. First Bristow addeth this word daungerously of his owne heade, which is neither in the Greeke nor vulgare Latine text, to draw the text of Iames violently, to their popish greasing which they vse only when a man is desperatly sicke, and past hope of recouerie in thei… iudgement. Whereas Iames speaketh generally, of any kinde of sickenes, wherewith any of the faithfull were molested. Secondly Bristowe leaueth out the wordes following, which are these and the prayer of faith shall saue the sicke person and the Lord shall restore him or raise him vp, the Latine is alle…iabit shall ease him, which wordes declare, that the Apostle speaketh not of a perpe…uall Sacrament of the church, but of a ceremonie vsed by them that had a speciall gift of healing the sicke in the primitiue Churche whiche ceremonie must needes cease, with the gift except it be among apes, that practise outward gesture and actions, without effect. The other two examples out of the 2. of Machabees the one of praying for the deade, the other of Ieremie praying for the people, are no partes of the castell of Canonicall Scripture, and therefore with other errours in the same bookes I omit them. The p. 133last exāple is out of Genesis 48. The saying of Iacob the Patriarke of Iosephs two childrē. God who hath fed me from my youth euen to this day: The Angell who hath deliuered me out of all aduersities, blesse these children which is (sayth Bristow) as if one would say, God and our Ladie blesse them. Nay rather God by Iesus Christ blesse them, for what other Angell but Christ the Angell of the great councell was the deliuerer of Iacob, which when he wrestled with him in a vision and mystery Gen. 32. he doubted not to call God. Euen the same Angell which led the children of Israel through the wildernes, whō S. Paul 1. Cor. 10. calleth Christ, who was not an Angel by nature but by office, & in that as the Mediator he was sent to deliuer the people before he came in the flesh. But if we should vnderstand, the Angell of whom Iacob speaketh, for sōe priuate Angel, appointed of God to protect him, yet is it not as if one would say now God & our Lady blesse thē. For that God vseth the ministery of Angels to defend & prosper his seruaunts, but not the ministery of Saincts in heauē, for any such purpose that we can learne by the holy Scriptures. Iacob might therfore pray y^t God would send his Angell to protect those children, euen as he had done for him. As for that vaine brag that all Scripture from the beginning of Genesis to the end of the Apocalipse is for thē & against vsus, is nothing els but a false alarme, as though he woulde on all sides assalt our castel of only Scriptures, wheras he purposeth nothing lesse. But this can not be borne, that he sayeth some places of Scripture be so playne against vsus, that we can not aunswere them but by plucking the pen of the holy Ghost out of his hand that wrote thē meaning that we deny the auctority of such books as be not Canonicall the Machabees especially. But this he sayth can not be. For either they are proued mu…ncibly to be of the holy Ghostes indighting, or no Scripture at all is proued to be suche as you may remember the common saying of S. Augustine. Ego Euangelio non crederem &c. I shoulde not beleue the Gospell it selfe vnlesse the Catholike Churches auctoritie p. 134did compell. What shall I say to this impudent blasphemer that alloweth none other tryall of holy Scripture but the authoritie of the Church, because Augustine supposing that hee were an Heathen, Againe (sayth he would not beleeue the Gospell except the authoritie of the Church, with other thinges did moue him: his woorde is Commoueret whiche Bristowe not so ignorauntly as impudently translateth did comp…l mec. But the Catholike Church (saith Bristow) hath receiued these bookes of equall authoritie with the rest. Indeede the Synagogue of Antichrist in the Tridentine councell hath so decreede. But the Catholike Church of Christ did neuer receiue them, as I hauehave shewed out of Hicronime. praef in Prouerb and others whereto I may adde the iudgement of Origine out of Eusebhist: lib. 6. cap. 18. tran. Russ. with the councell o Laodicea. Can. 59.

Marke the plainenesse of this demonstration, when the question & cōtrouersie is, whether they or we be the chuch. All scriptur is for them & against vsus because the church that is, they hauehave thus & thus decrede, No meruail therfore if Bristow appeale to the iudgmēt of indifferent mē, that al our prating of y^e scriptures is nothing else but as S. Peter saith of S. Paules Epistles) our wresting and writhing of them by our owne vnlearnednes & vnstablenes, from the Catholike Churches vnitie and vniuersalitie to the scisme and peece of Luther, & from thēce to Caluine &c For the Church is the setled and vnmoueable rock, against which ther is no scripture no trueth but all for it.

This is good a demonstratiō, as if a man should say to a vessel tossed in the brode sea with wind & waues, that in the hauen there is great rest & securitie, but not shew what course they should keepe to come thither. We by the only true lodestone Pharos, and heauenly Cynosura of the holy scriptures (we praise his holy name therfore) hauehave founde the moste happy hauen of the holy Catholick Church of Christ, & by his helpe hauehave caste out the Anchor of Faith so surely fixed not in the sand, p. 135but in the Hauen it selfe, that all the Cables of popishe motiues, or blasts of Diuelish doctrines shal not be able to stirre our ship from thence: which course God graūt them to keepe, who labouring in the sea of doubtfulnes, ride not wilfully among the rocks of Romish pride, nor be obstinately set on the sands of mens traditions, but seeke trueth in humilitie to Gods glory & their safetie.

Besids these motiues there are two demands which I cannot aptely reduce to any of the Motiues, namely the seconde which he termeth the building of the Church, and the laste which hee calleth Apostasie. In the former demaund he asketh vsus whether we hauehave not read this argument vsed by Chrisostome againste the Painims and Iewes, that Christe is God, because his Church hauing but a small beginning, & many stronge enemyes, to withstand the building thereof, yet could or can neuer be suppressed, but contrariwise of a litle spark hath set all the world on fire &c. I answere, we hauehave read this argument, and allowe of it. Then sayth Bristowe, How hath it beene these many hundreth yeeres quite suppressed, yea and in Chrisostomes time no Church at all I answere that since it was first set vp, it was neuer for one houre quite suppressed, although by Antichriste these many hundred yeeres it hath beene greatly oppressed. And in Chrysostomes time the Church did openly florishe, although infected with some errors, yet holding strongly the only tradition Iesus Christ, which church was a member of the same vniuersall Church, whereof our Church at this day is a parte, with which Church in Chrysostoms time, the popish church in that it dissēteth from vsus, hath nothing cōmon except one or two errors, hauing the whole substance of doctrine contrary vntounto it: wherefore that argument stāding, the popish church is nothing vnderpropped thereby: which though it had a small beginning, as the sect of Mahomet, yet grew it by sufferance of God, without great withstanding of strong enemies, yea God sending the effecacy of error, that it might preuaile and yet hath not increased ouer all …he p. 136world, but is for the most part contained in one parte of Europa deminishing where it is punished as in Germany, Sauoy, Denmarke, Swetia and Englande, growing onelyonly where it is either mayntained by tyranny or tollerated by lenitie.

And now to the laste demaund of Apostasie, wherwith he chargeth vsus. Firste for chaunging the Priesthoode, wherevpon must insue a chaunge of the law. so this I aunswere, we hauehave chaunged no priesthoode, instituted by God, but retaine that eldership and ministery ordayned by our Sauiour Christe. Contrarywise the Pope hath changed Sacerdotium (which Bristowe confesseth to be no other thing then presbiteratum) which is the ministration of the Gospel yet commonly called both of him and vsus Priesthood, that Sacrificing priesthood I say w^c the Apostle He. 7. affirm…th to be euerlasting and proper to the person of our Sauiour Christe, hath the Pope translated vntounto his shaueli gs, and sette them vp to offer that Sacrifice which Christ only could offer, and by once offering found eternall redemption: yea the Priesthood of Melchisedech which the Lord by an othe confirmed only to our sauiour Christ. Psal. 100. Hee hath made common to all his Massemongers, Therfore the Pope hath manifestly made an Apostacy from the lawe of Christ.

The second argument by which Bristow would charge vsus with Apostasie is, for receiuing not one or two, but so many olde heresies, besides as he is bolde to say a thousand more of their owne inuention. This beeing affirmed without all shew of proofe. It shall suffice to deny and turne ouer vntounto him and his fellowes.

The third argument is for taking from Christian men, so many arguments of Christes diuinitie, as the inuincible continuaunce and authoritie of his Church. The honor and vertue of crosses and reliques miracles, exorcismes, vnitie, Sacrifice &c. I aunswere so many of these as are good and sufficient argumentes, wee holde still, the vnsufficient arguments doe rather disfornish then arme the Christians p. 137faith, which we hauehave so strongly fortified with arguments out of the holy scriptures that all the power of darkenesse cannot preuaile against it,

The fourth argument is, for leauing nothing vndenyed, not Fathers, not Councels, not Traditions, not Scriptures, nor (the onelyonly witnesse of all canonicall Scriptures) the Churches institution, and departing from the Fathers of all ages since Christes time, agreeing with no Christian time, nor none with them. For denying of canonicall Scriptures, it is an impudent slaunder, as for Fathers, Councelles, Traditions, Churches authoritie, we affirme or deny, as they agree or dissagree with the trueth of the holye scriptures, the onelyonly certaine witnesse of the will of God reuealed vntounto men, which we thinke more reasonable then the Papistes doe, whiche denie, fathers, Councels, Traditions, yea the authoritie of the holy Scriptures, and submit all vntounto the i…dgement of their Church, now when then the controuersie is, whether they be the Church of God, or of the Deuill: whereas the Scriptures are of bothe partes confessed to be the worde of God in generall termes, although in comparison of the authoritie of their Church, Piggius calleth the holy Scripture a nose of Wax, and a dumbe iudge. Eccius tearmeth the written gospel a black Gospel and an inkish diuinitie. Hosius sayth, that this commaundement of Christe, Drinke ye all of this, beeing vnderstoode doth appertaine vntounto laye men, contrary to their Churches determination, is the expresse worde of the Deuill. And for departing from the faith of the Fathers &c. I aunswere it is false, there is but one true Faith of all true Christians, in al times from which wee will neuer departe, although wee hauehave departed from some erroneous opinions of some fathers, which because they are contrary to the woorde of God, by hearing whereof Faith commeth, they deserue not the name of Faith.

Finally, whereas hee sayth, the authoritie of the Church is the onelyonly witnesse of all canonicall Scriptures, p. 138it is vntrue. For although he should meane not the popish Sinagogue, butthe true catholike church of Christ, yet is it not the onelyonly witnesse of the Scriptures. For euen the Iewish Synagogue, is witnesse of the olde testament, and many sectes of heresies of all the scripture, beside that the spirit of God is the chiefe and principall witnes of all, which speaketh so euidently in allthe canonical scripture, that if all mē on earth should refuse to giuegive credite vntounto them, yet his maiestie alone is sufficient to get credite vntounto them, especially with all those whome he teacheth inwardly in heart, as he speaketh sensibly to their eares.

The last argument is, That in place of all Religion and goodnes which they hauehave remoued, deuising a new Gospel of their foresaid onelyonly vaine fayth, which teacheth all sinnes & all heresies to presume of saluation. What can bee more impudent or false then this slaunder, seeing God and the worlde knoweth, that wee teach none other Faith but the fayth of the Gospell, which worketh by louelove, and promiseth remission of sinnes and saluation to none, but such as earnestly repent, and are willing to remoue all heresie, and to imbrace all true Christian Religion and goodnesse.

God be praysed.

p. 139A DISCOVERY OF THE DAVNGEROVS ROCKE OF THE POPISH CHVRCH, lately commended by Nicholas Sanders D. in diuinitie, at which the Catholike Church of Christ hath bene in perill of shipwracke these many hundreth yeares, By W. Fulke D. in diuinitie.

THE eternal rocke of the vniuersal Church, Christ was the rocke, an other foundation no Saunder.man is able to put. 1. Cor. 3. & 10.

The temporall rocke of the Militant Church: Thou art Peter & vponupon this rocke I will build my Church. Mat. 16.

SPaule speaketh manifestly 1. Cor. 3. of building of the Church Militant, and Christ Fulke.Mat. 16. speaketh of an eternall rocke, against the which the gates of hell shall not preuayle. Therefore your distinction of eternall and temporall, vniuersall and militant, which is the foundation of all your rotten rocke is an impudent and blasphemous falshood.

Of the continuance of your temporall rocke, it is in vaine to contende when your rocke is nothing els but an heape of sande and dunge whereon your popishe Church is builded.

To the right worshipfull M. Doctor Parker bearing the Saunder. p. 140name of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and to all other Protestants in the Realme of England, Nicolas Sander wisheth perfect faith and charitie in our Lorde, declaring in this preface, that the Catholikes (whome they call Papistes) doe passe the Protestants, in all maner of signes or markes of Christes true Church.

Concerning the omission of titles accustomed to be giuen to the Archbishop of Canterbury, for which you excuse your selfe, I thinke M. D. Parker while he liued, did not much esteeme them giuen to him by any man, and least of all looked to receyue them at suche mens handes as you are: but touching the religion & church, whereof he was a minister, I will aunswer you in his behalfe and of all other ministers and members thereof, that no excuse will serue you, vponupon so slender reasons as you bringe, to condemne the same of schisme and heresie, nor to defend that Synagogue of Satan, wherof you professe your selfe to be a Champion, to be the vndefiled Church and spouse of Christ. For thinke you M. Sanders, that we wil more mislike the Church of Christ persecuted by the hypocriticall crueltie of Antichrist for the space of 5. or. 6. hundreth yeares before our age, then we do the same, persecuted by the furious rage of Heathenish tyrantes, for 300. yeares after the first planting of the same amonge the Gentills. And thinke you if we are now to learne, that all that glory and bright shining of Christes Church promised by the Prophets, is spirituall and not carnall, heauenly and not earthly, eternal & not transitory? Or that we know not your synagogue to be the very contrary kingdome and sea of Antichrist, euen by that outward glory, and glistering pompe of open shewe, that you boast of, according to the prophecy of Christ in the reuelation? Apoc. 13. & 17. And as for the citie built vponupon an hill, whereof you hauehave neuer doone babling, by the playne context of the Gospel, is not the whole Church, but eueryevery true pastor and minister thereof, who are also the light of the worlde, the p. 141salt of the earth, and a candle set on a candlesticke, to giuegive light, not hiden vnderunder a bushell to be vnprofitable. Mat. 5. And Christ hath alwayes bene with his Church, although the Church of Rome be departed from him, and he both liueth & raigneth for euer, ouer the house of Iacob, though he be persecuted in his mēbers by the whore of Babylon, and his name is great amonge the Gentilles, from the Sunne rising to the going downe thereof, notwithstanding that all nations hauehave dronke of the cuppe of her fornications. The prophecyes of Gods spirit doe not one of them ouerthrow the other, but the one sheweth how the other is to be vnderstanded. And whereas you say our Church hath bene vnderunder a bushell before these fiftie yeares, because no historie maketh mention of any congregation professing our faith in any townes or places of diuers cōtryes at once, I aunswer this is as true as all your doctrine beside. For all auncient histories that write of the state of the primitiue Church, make mention of the same faith which we professe. And although towarde the reuelation of Antichrist, the puritie of the faith beganne to be polluted, yet the substance thereof continued, vntill by Antichrist, that great defection & apostasie was made, wherof the Apostle prophecyeth 2. Thess. 2. 3. And yet euen in the tyme of that a postasie, many histories make mention, of the continuance of our faith and Church in diuers contryes in Europe, namely England, Fraunce, Italy, or although vnderunder cruell persecution and tyranny, beside great nations of the East, which neuer submitted them selues to the Church of Rome, and yet retayned the substance of Christian faith and profession, though not without particular errors and superstition. Wherefore although they that were blind, or farre of from the Church of Christ, could not see her glory, although she had bene set vponupon neuer so high an hill, no more then a citie built vponupon the Alpes, can be seene in England, yet they that had spirituall eyes, and by Gods gr…ce drewe neare vntounto his Church, did in the most obscure p. 142tymes, (as the worlde esteemeth them,) see the cleare bewtie of her light, and the glorye of the Lordes hill, lifted vp aboue all the hills in the world. Esa. 2.

The heathen tyrants, thought by their cruell persecution, that they had vtterly rooted out the name and nation of Christians from the face of the earth. Nero gloried that he had purged the world of the superstition of Christ, as appeareth in an olde inscription, in a picture of stone. Neroni …l. Caes. Aug. Pontif. Max. ob prouin. latromb. & hijs qui nouam generi hum. superstitionem inculcar. purgatam. To Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus the greatest Prelate, for that he hath purged the prouince of theeues, and them that brought in a newe superstition to mankind. Likewise another like piller there is of Diocletian and Maximian, in these wordes. Diocletian. Iouius Maximi. Herculeus Caes. Augu. Amplificato per Orientem & Occident. nup. Rom. & nomme Christianorum deleto quiremp. euertebant. Diocletianus Iouius and Maximianus Herculeus Caesaris Augusti, hauing amplified the Empire of Rome, both in the East and West, and vtterly destroyed the name of Christians, which did ouerthrow the common wealth, Another like there is of Diocletian alone. Diocletian. Caes. Aug. Galerio in Oriente adoptat. superstitione Christi vbi que deleta & cultu Deorum propagato. Diocletianus Caesar Augustus, hauing adopted Galerius in the East, and in all places vtterly destroyed the superstition of Christ, and set forth the worship of the Gods. By these inscriptions and glorious titles you see, that the heathenish tyrants, perswaded them selues, that they had vtterly defaced the religion of Christ, & destroyed his Church out of the worlde. what maruell then, if Antichrist and his adherents, which to the cruelty of the former tyrants hauehave added most detestable hypocrisy, hauehave thought that they had so wholy subuerted the true religion of Christ and his true Church, that the name ether of Church or religion, might not seeme to hauehave remayned in the world, but that of the Romish Antichrist. But as Nero the Pontif. Maximus of Rome, p. 143with Diocletiane and the reste were deceyued in their time, so their successors in place, office, and wickednes, the Popes of Rome are likewise disapoynted of their cruell purpose.

But M. Sander glorieth that in all markes and signes of the true Church, the popish Church doth excel ours. But first of all, that which is the onelyonly true marke and triall of the Church, namely the word of God, he denyeth to be a sufficient marke of the true Church, yet had he before confessed the Church to be the piller and stay of truth. 1. Tim. 3. but the rule of truth (if we beleue our Sauiour Christ) is the word of God Iohn. 17. 17. therefore the word of God is the onelyonly true tryall and marke of the Church.

But let vsus consider his reasons, by which he woulde perswade vsus that y^e word of God is not the chiefe marke whereby the true Church of God may be knowen. First he sayth the marke whereby an other thing is knowne, ought it selfe to be most exactly knowne, wheras we are not agreed what Gods word is. Note this reason of his, by which he taketh away all authoritie and vse from the worde of God, not onelyonly thereby to discerne the true Church, but also to teache vsus any other thinge that is needefull for vsus to know. But why I pray you are we not agreed what is Gods word? Forsooth because some cal onelyonly the written letter and the meaning thereof Gods word, other thinke many thinges are Gods word which are not expressely written, but deliuered by tradition from the Apostles, and by the holy Ghost, which hath written his lawes in our hartes: of this later sort be the Papists, but they are easily confuted. For this principle must needes stand vnmoueable, that Gods spirite is neuer contrary to him selfe. Therefore seeing the spirite of God hath pronounced of the Scriptures, that they are able to make the man of God perfect prepared to all good workes. 2. Tim. 3. 16. it is certayne that God hath reuealed nothing by tradition, for our instructiō, which is not conteyned in his worde written, much lesse any p. 144thing that is contrary to his doctrine deliuered in the holy Scriptures.

His second reason is, that we are not agreed vponupon the written word of God, because the Protestants doe not admitte so many bookes of the olde testament as the Catholikes doe. I aunswer, the Protestants doe admit as many as the Catholike Church euer did or doth at this day. His third reasō is, that the meaning of those bookes which we are agreed vponupon, is altogether in question betwene vsus, therfore that can be no marke of the church, which it self is not knowne. I answer, although heretikes which are ouerthrowen in their owne conscience, will acknowledge no meaning to be true but their owne, yet are there many principles in the Scriptures so playne, as they are graunted by both partes, or els can not without shame be denyed of our aduersaries, out of which playne certeyne and immutable principles, all matters in controuersie may be proued and the same church also discerned, which is the verie cause, why the Papistes dare not abide the triall by the Scriptues, but flye to traditions, euen as their forefathers the auncient Valentinian heretikes, of whome Irenaeus writeth lib. 3. cap. 2. Cum ex Scripturis arguuntur, in accusationem conuertuntur ipsarū Scripturam, quasi non rectè habeant, neque fuit ex auctoritate, quia variè sunt dictae, & quia non possit ab his inueniriveritas, qui nesciant traditionem, non enim per literas traditam sed per viuam vocem. When they are conuinced out of the Scriptures, then fall they to accusing of the Scriptures them selues as though they were not right: nor of sufficient authoritie, because they are spoken doubtfully, and that the trueth cannot be found of them which knowe not the tradition, for that was not deliuered by letters, but by word of mouth. Thus much Ireneus of the olde Heretikes, and what his iudgement was of the meaning of the Scripture which M. Sand. maketh so ambiguous, he declareth lib. 2. cap. 35. Vniuersae scripturae & Propheticae & Euangelicae in aperto, & sine ambiguitat, & similiter ab omnibus audiri possunt &c. The p. 145whole Scriptures both of the Prophets, and of the Gospells, are open and without ambiguitie, & may be heard of all mē alike. This speaketh Irenaeus not of eueryevery text of Scripture, but of the whole doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles, which is so playne and easie to be founde in the Scriptures, that no man can misse thereof, that seeketh not of purpose to be deceyued, as he sayth cap. 67. of the same booke.

But M. Sander is content for disputation sake to admit 1.Gods word for a marke of the true Church, and will proue that it is first with the Papistes.

For if by Gods word we meane the written letter of the Bible, they are before vsus, because we hauehave none assured copies thereof, which we receyued not of them, for since that day in which S. Peter and S. Paule deliuered Gods word to the Romaines, the Church of Rome hath alwayes kept it without leesing or corrupting.

I aunswer we meane not by Gods worde the written letter onelyonly, but receyuing and obeying the true and playne sense thereof to be the marke of the Church. Againe I deny, that we had any assured copies of the olde and new testament of the popish Church, but the one of the Iewes in Hebrue, the other of the Greeke Church in Greeke. And whereas he talketh of a certayne daye in which S. Peter and S. Paule deliuered the Scripture to the Romains, it sauoreth altogether of a popish fable, finally how the Romish Church in these last dayes hath kept the Scripture from corruption, although I coulde shew by an hundreth examples, yet this one shall suffice for all, the very first promise of the Gospell, that is in the Scripture. Gen. 3. that the seede of the woman shoulde breake the serpents heade, the popish Church hath ether willfully corrupted, or negligently suffered to be depraued, thus, ipsa conteret caput iuum, she shall breake thyne heade, referring that to the woman which God speaketh expressely to the seede of the woman.

The second marke is, that the Papistes acknowledge more of the Bible then we doe, by the bookes of Toby, p. 1462.Iudeth, Wisedom, Ecclesiasticus and of the Machabees. I aunswer in that you adde vntounto the word of God, it is a certayne argument, that you are not the true Church of Christ, for the true Church of Christ hath euer accompted those bookes for apocryphall, witnesse hereof Hieronym praef. in prouerb. Sicut ergo Iudith & Tobiae & Machabaeorum libros legit quidem Ecclesia, sed eos inter Canonicas Scripturas non recipit: sic & haec duo volumina legat ad aedificationem plebis, non ad auctoritatē Ecclesiasticorū dogmatum confirmandam. Therefore as the Church doth in deede reade the bookes of Iudith, Tobias, and of the Machabees, but she receyueth them not among the canonicall Scriptures: so she may reade these two bookes (meaning the booke of Wisedom and Ecclesiasticus) for the edifying of the people, but not to confirme the authoritie of Ecclesiasticall opinions. Nether is Augustine de doct. Christ. lib. 2. cap. 8. (whō M. Sander quoteth) of any other iudgement, but prescribeth rules how the canonicall Scriptures are to be knowne. And cont. Gaudent. epist. lib. 2. cap. 23. he confesse…h plainely that the booke of Machabees is not accompted of the Iewes as the law, the Prophets and the Psalmes, which our Sauiour Christ admitteth as his witnesses: yet it is receyued of the Church, if it be read or heard soberly. Whereby it is manifest, that the Church in his tyme receyued it not absolutely, as part of the Canonicall Scripture, but vnderunder condition of a sober reader or hearer. As for the decree ascribed to Gelasius, it hath no sufficient credit of antiquitie, and much lesse the late councels of Florence and Trent, which he quoteth. Beside that the same decree of Gelasius admitting but one booke of Esdras, excludeth the Canonicall booke of Nehemias, and receyueth but one booke of the Machabees which will doe the Papistes but small pleasure.

The third marke, the popish Church receyueth not 3.only the hebrue text of the old testament, & the greeke of the new, but also the greeke translation of the septuaginta, and the common Latine translation, to be of full p. 147authoritie, whereas we giuegive small credit to those translations, except they agree with the first Hebrue and Greeke copies. Therefore the Papists hauehave Gods word in more authenticke tongues and copies then we hauehave. I aunswer, The Tridentine councell alloweth none for authenticall, but the common Latine translation, that is the worst of all: but in that the popish Church admitteth differing translations from the originall truth of the Hebrue and Greeke text, to be of full authoritie with the truth, it appeareth plainely that she is not the Church of Christ: which ether willfully confoundeth error with truth, or els lacketh the spirite of discretion to know the one from the other. And for more authentike copies it is impudently sayd, that the Papistes doe receiue, for we receiue not onelyonly all these which he nameth, but also the most aunciēt Chaldee Paraphrastes, & the Syrian text of the new testament, yea the Arabicall text of the whole Bible, beside, all vulgare translations of English, French, Dutch, Italian, Spanish, which the Papistes can not abide. All those, I saye, we receyue as authenticall copies for Christian men to vse: but so that the tryall of all translations be made, by the originall truthe of the Heb…ue and Greeke texts: in which tongue, the olde and newe Testament were first written.

Fourthly, the Papistes doe translate and expounde 4.Gods worde in all maner of tongues, better then we, because they hauehave not onelyonly internall vocation, but also externall vocation and commission from the Apostles, by lyneall succession of Bishops and Preestes: whereas we hauehave no commission, but …rom the common wealth which hath none authoritie to make Preestes &c: and yet how shall they preache if they be not sent? Rom. 10. I aunswer concerning translations of the word of God into all tongues I neuer saw any, nether is there any translation to be shewed of any Papist, into any vulgare tongue.

And as for the externall calling of the Papistes, I say p. 148it is not from any lawfull succession of the Apostles and auncient Church, whose faith and doctrine they do not follow in their interpretations, for if lyneall succession of Priestes and Bishops coulde make interpretations good, the doctrine of Arius, Nestorius, Macedonius, and many other heretikes, whose externall calling was according to the lyneall and ordinary succession of Bishops and Priestes, might be auctorised for Catholike. Yea the Papistes might not refuse whatsoeuer Luther, Bucer, Cranmer, and other hauehave taught, which had the same lyneall succession that M. Sander doth nowe bragge of. And as for our externall calling, he sayth falsly it is of the common weale &c, whereas it is of the Church, and therefore ordinarye and lawfull, and the saying of S. Paule whom he citeth Rom. the tenth is of the inward calling and sending by God, whereof our doctrine agreeable with the Scripture and our whole intent to set forth the glory of God is a sufficient profe, the one to satisfie men, the other to aunswer our owne conscience.

Fiftly he sayth it is no perfection at all on our side, 5.that we reade Gods word to the people in our Church seruice in the vulgare tongue, for thereby we lacke the vse of the better tongues, as of the Greeke and Latine. O maister of impudencie, what vse is there of the Greeke and Latine tongues, to be read to the people that vnderstande them not? And why are those the better tongues? he sayth they were sanctified on Christes crosse for all holy vses, and especially to serue God in the tyme of sacrifice. But howe were they sanctified I pray you? For sooth, because Pilate wrote the title in Hebrue, Greeke, and Latine, that it might be vnderstoode of all nations for what cryme he was condemned. And is Pilate nowe become a sanctifier of tongues for Gods seruice? is the malicious scorne of an heathen tyrant, a sanctification of these tongues? O brasen foreheads of shameles Papistes. But heare more yet of this impudent stuffe.

p. 149This sanctification was the cause, that the Apostles in the East and West deliuered these tongues alone as holy, learned and honorable, not regarding the infinite multitude of prophane and barbarous tongues, whereof it came, that the East Church was called the Greeke Church, & the West the Latine Church. But the Scripture, Acts the second, doth teach vsus, that the holy Ghost hath sanctified all tongues of all nations to the praysing of God, and that the Apostles deliuered the magnifical prayses of God, in all languages. Act. 2. 11. And although the Greeke and Latine tongues, were most vsed, & most commonly vnderstoode in the Romane Empire, yet the Church of Christ was enlarged farther then euer the Romane Empire extended in Persia, Armenia, AEthiopia, India &c. where there was no knowledge, ether of the Greke or Latine tongues. And euen in the Romain Empire those nations, to whome the Latine & Greeke tongues were not vulgare, vsed their Church seruice in other tongues. Hieronym. in epitaphio Paulae ad Eustochium telleth, that at the solemne funeralls of Paule: eueryevery nation that was present, did singe their Psalmes in order in their owne language. Hebraeo, Graeco, Latino, Syroque sermone Psalmi in ordine personabant. In the Hebrue, Greeke, Latine and Syrian speache, the Psalmes were songe in order. But seeing Maister Sander alloweth none other sanctification of the tongues, but Pilates title on the crosse, how is the Hebrue tongue which was one of the three, and the most principall, as the first tongue of the worlde, and for the excellencye therof called the holy tongue, how is that I say, shut out from Church seruice, why was there not an Hebrue seruice established by the Apostles as well as the Greeke and Latine? But yet he bringeth another argument to proue that it is lawfull to reade seruice to the people in a tongue w^c they vnderstād not, by the exāple of Christ, who in time of his sacrifice, did recite the beginning of the 21 Psalme, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me, in y^e Hebrue tongue, which he knew the people did not p. 150vnderstand, and did not interprete the same in the vulgar tounge. Good Lord into what foollishnes doth satan carry their minds, that wilfully striue against the truth? For what reason is this? Christ in his priuate praier, that concerned his owne person, spake with a toūg that was not commonly vnderstood, therefore the ordinary publike seruice ought to be in a straūge toung. Christ compassed about with his enemyes, & none within the hearing of him but the virgine Mary, & Iohn the Euangelist … loued him or regarded him spake Hebrue, therefore the Prieste in the church, must speake Latine or Greeke. But when M. Sand. hath played with this argument as long as he can, his antecedent is vtterly false, for Christe resited not that texte of the Psalme in the Hebrue, but in the Syrian toung, which was the vulgar tounge vnderstood and spoken of all the people, as is manifestly proued by the word Sabac…tani reported by both the Euangelists. Mat. 27. Mark. 15. Which is of the Syrian tounge, whereas the Hebrue texte is Hazabtani, as I report me to all that can but read two tounges Hebrue and Syrian. And whereas the malicious Helhoūds said he called for Elias, it was not because they vnderstood him not, but because they most dispightfully mocked his most vehement praier, taking occasion of the like sound of the name of God & of Elias, as scornefull deriders vse to doe.

Sixtly, lest the Protestants should passe the Papistes in any one iote, they hauehave the vse of the vulgar tongues in Dalmatia, Assyria, & AEthiopia, which acknowledge the supremacie of the Byshop of Rome. This is a loude lye, for neither the church of Dalmatians, Moscouites, Armenians, Assirians, AEthiopiās, nor any other of those East nations, that retaine the name of Christe, did euer acknowledge the Popes supremacie. I knowe they hauehave fayned Fables of Letters sent from Preto Ioannes and such like, which are meere forgeryes vppon the submission of some one poore wanderer, that hath come out of those countryes. But M. Sand. will shewe the p. 151cause, why all Nations are not suffered likewise to vse their vulgar tounges in their seruice. First he sayeth vulgar tounges cause barbarousnesse, for the Preachers of those Countryes vnderstande not the Latine and Greeke tounges by this meanes. What an absurde reason this is, experience doth shewe. For when or where was greater ignorance in the Cleargie, then there, and at such time as the Latine seruice was vsed? How many in all England vnderstoode or coulde read the Greeke toung within these sixtie or eightie yeeres? I speake nothing of the Hebrue tounge. Contrarywise what age was euer more full of lyberall knowledge in all Sciences, and learned tounges, then this is euen in England, France, & Germany, where seruice is vsed in the vulgar toūge? The…fore the vse of thevulgar toūge in Church Seruice is not the cause of barbarousnesse.

The seconde reason is, that necessitie inforceth the Apostolike See to tollerate these Nations in their vulgar tounges, because they knowe none other, but Protestants by schisme are fallen from Latine to Englishe, that is from better to worse, and therefore not to be tollerated. But indeede the necessitie is, because they will not receiue your Latine tounge, and our schisme is from Antichriste to be ioyned with Christe, from whose doctrine the Church of Rome by horrible schisme is departed, for what the doctrine of Christe is concerning Publique Prayers in a tounge that is not vnderstoode, his Apostle Saincte Paule hath abundauntly taught vsus, the 1. Corinthes the 14. Chapter. Finally we defende that our naturall Engli…he tounge, is better to edi…ie Englishe men, then your balde Latine toūge that you vse in your popish seruice is for any vse of any man learned or vnlearned.

Seuenthly the Papistes doe not onelyonly consider the written letter, but also the plain meaning of eueryevery proposition and as the words doe sound, so doe they vnderstand them. And heerof he bringeth many exāples. To this I answere, that if they vnderstande all propositions, p. 152aswel figuratiue as plain & proper speaches as the words doe sound, they make monstrous interpretations, as if they vnderstande this proposition the rock was Christe as the words sound, they make a new transubstantiation of the stone into Christ, or this: This cuppe is the newe Testament, if theire interpretation be none other then the sound of the word doth giuegive, they make the newe Testament to be nothing but a drinking vessel. But to discusse his examples, the first is this text. Matth. 26.

This is my body, why saith he is this which Christe poynteth to, denied to be his body. I answere, it is affirmed to be 1his body in that sence that he spake and otherwise then he ment, it is denyed to be his body.

Againe Iames saith Cap. 2. A man is iustified of workes & not of faith onelyonly. VVhy then are workes denyde to iustifie, or 2onelyonly faith taught to iustifie. I aunswere woorkes are not denyed to iustifie before men, and onelyonly faith is taught to iustifie before God. Rom. 3.

The doers of the lawe shalbe iustified. Rom. 2. VVhy then 3teach you the lawe not to be able to be doone. Because the Apostle saith, that of the workes of the law none shalbe iustified before God. Rom. 3. 20. for if the workes of the lawe could be done, by any man perfectly as the law requireth, he shold be iustified by thē as the text affirmeth

By the obedience of one, that is Christe, many shall bee 4made righteous. Rom. 5. VVhy then are wee denyed to bee really righteous, and sayde to bee righteous by imputation onelyonly? Because the obedience of Christe is not really our obedience, but by imputatiō of God through faith.

The louelove of God is spread in our heartes by the holy ghost, which is geuen vsus. Rom. 5. This is more then a bare imputing 5of righteousnesse to vsus, yea Sir, but this is not our iustification, but an effect thereof, for he saide immediatly before that beeing iustified by faith wee hauehave peace with God.

VVhose sinnes ye forgiue they shalbe forgiuē them. Ioh. 20 6VVhy then are Bishops and Priests denyed to forgiue sinnes. We graunt that true Byshops and elders hauehave authoritie p. 153to forgiue sinnes in Gods name, but not absolutely.

He that is great among you, let him be made as the yonger. 7Luke 22. VVhy then deny you that one was greater among the Apostles, and is stil among the Bishops their successors. One was not greater among the Apostles in authoritie, for their greatnes was to be the greatest seruaunt & to take the most paines, & to be most humble. Mat. 18

Thou art Peter or a rock, and vponupon this Rock I wil builde 8my Church Mat. 16, VVhy is the militant Church denyed to be built vponS. Peter and his suceessors in that chayre and office.? The Church is affirmed to be built vponupon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, and so vponupon Peter as one of thē, in which office he hath no successors.

Keepe the traditions which yee hauehave learned, either by word or by an Epistle. 1. Thessa. 2. VVhy then are traditions 9so dispised that the name cannot be suffred in the English Bible. It may and is suffred in that sense, which the holye Ghost vseth it, but not to bring in prayer for the deade or any thing contrary to the scripture, vnderunder the name of traditions Apostolike. For the Apostle speaketh only of the doctrine which he deliuered to them, either by preaching or by Epistle, which is none other, then is cōtayned in the holy Seriptures. For of other traditions pretended to be of the Apostles, he biddeth them take heede in the same Chapter. vers. 2.

He that ioyneth his Virgine in mariage doth well and hee 10that doth not ioyne her doth better. VVhy make you mariage as good as virginitie? For such as hauehave the gift of continence we graunt virginitie is better in such respectes as the Apostle teacheth,

Vow eye and render your vowes vntounto God. Psal. 75. If 11thou wilt be perfect go and sel all thinges which thou haste & giuegive them to the poore & follow me. Mat. 19. There are Eunuches which hauehave gelded them selues for the kingdome of Heauen. Obey your Rulers, and be subiect vntounto them? VVhy thē are the vowes of pouertie, of chastitie and obedience, counted vnlawful, or men cōstrained not to performe thē. The first text perteineth to the old Testamēt, The second is a singular p. 154tryall to that one place. The third we graunt in them to whome it is giuen, the fourth we neuer made question about it, but al these are euil fauouredly patched togither, to proue the vowe of Monkery lawfull, which is superstitious for want of Gods commaundement, blasphemous for the opinion of merite, impossible for the frailtie of many mens nature. As for compulsion there is none vsed, for no man is compelled to be rich, vnchaste or disobedient.

Doe ye the worthy fruites of penaunce, Luc. 3. VVhy thē 12is satisfaction and penaunce desptsed with you? This text is, Doe ye the fruits worthy of repentance. We honour the fruites worthy of true repentance, and exhorte all men to bring them forth, but popish satisfaction hath nothing like to them. For we beleeue that God doth freely forgiue the penitent for Christes sake.

The husband & wife beeing two in one flesh, is a greate 13. sacrament or mistery in Christ, & in the church. Ephe. 5. VVhy is then the mariage of faithful persons denied to be a sacrament. If you vnderstand a sacrament generally, for eueryevery mystery, we may graunt you it is a sacrament, but if you vnderstand a sacrament specially for an outwarde signe of Gods fauour & grace or a seale of our iustification it is none. For if it were it should be necessary for all men to receiue it, againe it hath the institutiō of God before the fall of man, therefore can be no sacrament of y^e new Testament to testifie our restitution. Your cōmon translation turneth the Greeke word foreign which is a holy secret, oftentime Sacramentum, yet I know you woulde be ashamed to confesse so many sacramentes of the popish church, as there be misteries which hee calleth sacramēts as Ephe. 3. the preaching of the gospell to the Gentiles he calleth Sacramentum. 1. Tim. 3. So he calleth the incarnation of Christ sacramentum pietatis. And are you not ashamed to delude ignorant men, with the ambiguous name of a Sacrament.

VVork your saluatiō with feare & trembling Phi. 2. VVhy then are you so presumptuous, as euen by faith to assure your 14. p. 155selues of you saluation? because it followeth immediatly that it is God which worketh in vsus both to will and to performe according to his good wil, for it is no presumtion to assure our selues that the promises of God are true. And he may welfeare, which is assured to be saued, for faith doth not exclude but plant in vsus the feare of God, though not a seruile feare. As for y^e deepe secretes of Gods predestination, we take not vponupon vsus to knowe them, otherwise then they be reuealed by his worde. Finally, where you aske whether faith be not an ordinary gift in the Church, I answere you w^t the Apostle, that all men which are in the outward face of the Church, and participate the Sacraments, hauehave not fayth. 2. Thess. 3. 2.

The 8. marke of the Church if not onelyonly the playne 8. vnderstanding of any one sentence, but also the circumstance of the place, and the conference of Gods worde be necessary, the Papists hauehave vsed it in eueryevery question. For proofe herof M. Sanders referreth vsus to his treatise of the supper of the Lord lib. 4. and to his booke of Images cap. 2. & 11. & in this booke to the ca. 2. & 4. I answer you make a light shew, for a fashion, but you nether cō sider the circumstances rightly, nor make any true collation of one place with another, as is proued by the answers of these bookes: Therefore your Academical conclusion is false, hereticall & blasphemous, that the onelyonly word of God, being neuer so well handled, is no sufficient marke to shew the truth. When Christ sayth, Sanctifie them in thy truth, Thy word is the truth. Ioan. 17. 17.

The 9. M. Sander sayth: the heads of the Church, the 9. councels, the Bishops and the auncient fathers must be Iudges whether we do well apply the Scriptures or no? as whether S. Peter be the rock which M. Iewel denieth, & he proueth by 16 doctors afterward cap. 4. of w^c proofe we shall consider God willing in due place. But whereas M. Sander quoteth Aug. cont. Iulian. lib. 2. for his rule of Iudges: I say, he hath no such rule in that booke, onelyonly Augustine doth cōuince the argumēts of the Pelagians of nouelty, by the iudgemēt of Iren. Cyprianus, Rheuanus, p. 156Ambrosius &c. and other, which liued before their time, and therefore were no partial iudges, so do we conuince the Popish heresies, and their argumentes of noueltie, not only by the manifest worde of God, but also by the testimonie of the most auncient fathers, although we may not admit all that they did write to be true, euen as the same Augustine being pressed with the auctoritie of Ambrose, Chrysostome, and Cyprian by the Donatists & Pelagians, prouoketh from them onelyonly to the Scriptures. de nat. & gra…cap. 61. de vnit. eccl. cap. 16. cont. Crescon. lib. 2. cap. 31. de gratia Christ. cap. 43. That the allegation of the fathers suffiseth not of it selfe, we agree with Maister Sander, but that there is any other triall of the truth thē Scripture, we wil neuer graunt, seeing God hath therein deliuered his whole doctrine, whatsoeuer is necessarie for vsus to beleue that we may be saued. Ioh. 20. 31.

But the Papistes for the tenth marke ioyne tradition and practise of Gods church, which can neuer deceaue amā. VVe 10. thinke sayth Chrysostom the tradition of the church to be worthie of beleefe. Is it a tradition? aske no further. But howe shall we proue it to be a tradition of the church. The Valentinians (as I shewed before out of Irenaeus) denyed the Scriptures to be sufficient, without knowledge of the tradition. Therfore to discerne the tradition of … church from the tradition of the heretikes, we hauehave none other triall but by the Scriptures. Therefore Chrysostom saith in 2. Cor. Ho. 3. that S. Paule did write the same thinges which he told them before in preaching. As for the vniuersall practise either of the Popes supremacy, or of the sacrifice of the masse which he braggeth of, shall neuer be proued, but the contrarie.

The eleuenth marke is the auctority of generall coū cells confirming the truth, & condemning heretikes, & 11. such he maketh the late councell of Trent to be. But we deny that Conciliabulum, of a few Popish hypocrits, to be a generall councell, in which no man should hauehave a definitiue voyce, but they that were accused of heresie and whereof, he that is most of all charged with heresie, that p. 157is the Pope, is made the supreme iudge, wherefore the Papists hauehave no lawfull generall councell on their side, although generall councells as he confesseth, are no sufficient triall of the true church, both because they may be hindered many wayes, and also because they may erre, as did the conncells of Arimine, and Ephesus.

In respect of these considerations, he maketh the twelfth marke to be the supremacy of the Pope, whichis 12. wholly theirs for triall whereof, this booke following was written. But for proofe that Christ hath appoynted such a iudge, ouer all, he citeth Ioan. 21. that Christ cō maunded Peter to feede his sheepe, as though that perteyned not to euerie one of the Apostles, as much as to Peter. Also Lu. 22. that Christ hauing praied that Peters faith might not fayle, commaunded him when he was conuerted from his fall, to confirme his brethren, which perteineth only to the person of Peter, and can not with any cable ropes be drawē to the Bishop of Rome, or any successor of Peter, for it concerneth his singular, full, comfort & duty, in respect of his fall & Gods mercy, except that according to analogy, it may be applied to any man, that is so raised after his fall, and so that precept confirme thy brethren, geueth no speciall commaundemēt to the Pope, but to eueryevery. man whom God hath mercifully conuerted as he did Peter.

With the twelfth marke M. Sander would hauehave ended, but that the Protestantes, affirme the lawfull preaching 13. of Gods word, and the lawfull administration of the Sacramentes to be a marke whereby they wilbe tried. But seeing lawfull preaching & ministring must be tried by Gods worde, M. Sander first asketh what we call Gods word? & secondly he asketh if he hauehave not proued it to be more with thē thē with vsus, whatsoeuer it be? It is like this Popishe academicall Atheist, hath proued Gods word to be on his side, … wil not hauehave it certeinly known what Gods word is. After this he will proue the Papists to be most lawfull preachers, because they are likest to the Apostles, in conuerting many nations, within these p. 158900. yeres, whē he sayth no man aliue could once heare vsus peepe. As though controuersie of nations would argue a true church. By which reasons not only the Protestants may nowe proue them selues to be most like the Apostles in conuerting so many nations of Europe, but also the Arians, and most of all, the Mahumetists, might proue them selues the true church. It is not therfore cō uersion of nations, but conuersion of thē to the true doctrine of the Apostles, which maketh vsus like the Apopostles: & the Papistes, Arians, & Mahometists most vnlike vntounto them. And where he saith, that no soūd of ours was heard in 900. yeares space by any man aliue: to see how impudētly he lyeth, read Flaccius Illyricus in catalogo testium veritatis, & you shal see in all ages, what monumēts are extant of some few, whom God reserued from that generall Apostasie of Antichrist. Read also the acts & monumentes set forth by M. Foxe, & you shall see the same most plentif…lly. He wil proue their administration of the Sacraments to be more lawful then ours, because they hauehave fiue more then we. But I answer because they hauehave fiue more then the worde of God alloweth, or the primitiue church acknowledgeth: & in the administration of the other they hauehave either altogether peruerted the institution, as in the Lordes supper: or shamefully corrupted it with superstition, as in baptisme: they are not the church of Christ, but the church of Antichrist.

When we alledge the persecution of the Romish Antichrist, to be the cause that our church, hath not florished 13in outward peace, & to be a marke also of the truth of our congregation, what maisters (sayth D. Sanders) Antichrists persecution shall dure but three yeres, & an halfe, and is the Pope Antichrist, who hath dured these 900. yeres? But good M. Doctor determiner, how proue you that Antichrists persecution shall dure but three & an halfe, of such yeares as the Pope hath dured 900. you quote Dan. 7. Apoc. 13. you might by as good reason say it shal dure but three dayes & an halfe Apoc. 11. 9. will you take vponupon you so precisely to determine of the mysticall p. 159nūber which is somtime called 3. yeares & an halfe, somtime 42. moneths, somtime 1260. daies, somtime 3. daies & an halfe, somtime a time & times & halfe a time, al which make halfe a Prophetical weeke, & signifie a time determined of God, but not plainly reuealed to many.

Secōdly you aske, how it could be the true church, against w^c Antichrist so lōg preuailed, that no man could tel whether any such were in y^e earth: whē hel gates shal not preuaile against y^e true church? I answere, if you can not put a difference betwene impugning & preuailing: you wil hauehave much to do to defend your Romish church to be the true church, against the Turkes thē selues, who hauehave possessed a great part of … groūd, w^c you say perteined once to your church. But herin appeareth the mark of the true church, against w^c the gates of hell hauehave not preuailed, that although Satā was let loose, the whore of Babylon dronken with the blood of her mēbers, her two witnesses slaine, she her selfe driuen into the wildernes, her seede persecuted wheresoeuer they were dispersed, yet she is restored in the sight of the world, her witnesses raised frō death to life, the deuill is vanquished, y^e purple whore of Babylon is fallen, & Antechrist shall at length be throwne into the lake with the deuil and his Angels. This is the Lordes worke & it is maruelous in our eyes.

If either persecution, or not failing in persecutiō, be a marke of the church, it is more in the Papists thē in the 15. Protestāts, for persecutiō he will proue that they be persecuted by vsus, as the mother by y^e child, which departeth from her obedience, as Agar & Ismael frō Sara. But I answer, we are departed frō Agar, vnderunder whom we were in bondage to Sara by whom we are made children of the heauēly Ierusalem: & euen as Agar departed frō Sara, so did the synagoge of Rome frō the Catholike church of Christ. For not failing in persecutiō, experiēce teacheth in all countries, w^c hauehave receaued the Gospell, how small punishmēty greatest nūber of Papists wil abide, for their Popish profession: whereas so many thousands Go…s Saincts being most cruelly murdred by y^e popish church, p. 160the church of Christ is not diminished but encreased thereby, euen as Cyprian saith the blood of the martyrs is the seede of church.

If antiquitie be a marke, it is proued to be on the Papists side by this reason. The church is all one, the later part of the church for 900. yeares last past is on the Papistes side therefore the former parte also. But this reason standing vponupon a shamefull begging of that which is questioned, is soone turned vponupon your ownē necke. The church is in all but one, but the beginning of the church maketh not for you, therefore that which you say is the later part of the church, being contrary to that former, is no part of the church, so that by this reason, you shal neither hauehave antiquitie or any parte of the church.

But if you appeale to particular examples (sayth M. Sander) I say the Christians in the primitiue church, did 2. communicate vnderunder one kinde at Emaus, and at Ierusalem. And I say M. Sander, if he would burst him self with study, shall neuer proue it. He quoteth Aug. de consen. Euang. lib. 3. cap. 25. whose opinion was that Christ gaue the sacramēt at Emaus, but of communion in one kind, 3. he neuer once dreamed.

He sayth the Christians did set vp images in the honor of Christ, quoting Eus. lib. 7. cap. 14. whereas Eusebius speaketh of heathen men, that of heathenish custome did set vp images and not of Christians.

Dionysius although he be auncient, yet he wrote not 4: in the tyme of Eusebius, Hieronymus or Gennadius, & so was knowne for no writer in y^e Church for 500. yeares after Christ, Wherefore I wil not stand about his errors and ceremonyes, which yet for the moste parte are as vnlike the popish ceremonyes, as they are to ours.

Although wee hauehave no certaintie of the writinges of Ignatius which are extant, yet is there nothing in them that fauoreth the Papists religion. Hee nameth a a sacrifice which could not be offered without the Byshop, that cannot be the Masse, whiche eueryevery hed geprieste may say, ad Symrn. He would hauehave the Emperor obey p. 161the Byshop (sayth M. Sand.) ad Phil. But this proueth the Epistle to bee counterfaite, for there was no Christian Emperour when Ignatius liued. (Although in deuine matters the Christian Emperour ought to obey the Bishop, or rather Gods word which y^e Bishop preacheth.) Also he speaketh of Virgins that had consecrated them selues to God: & who speaketh against them, which hauing the gifte of continency doe keepe virginity? In the same Epistle: He affirmeth both Peter and Paule to hauehave bene maried, and will not condemne the mariage of church ministers.

He commendeth the lent fast ad Antioch. Choose M. Sander, whether your decretals lye of Thelesphorus that inuented the lent fast, or that this is a counterfait Epistle of Ignatius. In the Epistle ad Phil. Where he commendeth the 40. daies fast, the Wednesday & the Friday fast he saith farther. Quicun que dominicum aut sabbathum non ieiunauerit praet…r vnum sabbathum pas…ae ipse est Christi interfector: Whosoeuer shall not fast the Lordes day or sabbat beside one sabbat of Easter he is a murtherer of Christ. If this be true antiquity: why doth the church of Rome omit fast on Sunday: if it be counterfait? why is not M. Sander ashamed to alleage it?

Iustinus witnesseth that water was mingled with the wine. 5. Yea but it was to alay the strength of the wine, not that it was necessary for the Sacrament, though afterward it grew to a superstitious obseruation. He saith further, the Deacons caried the consecrated mysieries to them that were absent which Caluine reputeth for an abuse. If they caried the bread & the wine as the Sacrament, it was an abuse not to be warranted by Gods word. But seeing the Deacons office was to minister to the poore: I thinke rather they caried it as the almes of the church, to suche as were needy.

What Pius decreed we finde in no writer of credit. As 6. for the Popes law it is no good euidēce, hauing a busnel of drosse & counterfait dregs to one graine of good and true antiquitie. In deede Eusebius restisieth, that Victor p. 162Bishop of Rome did excommunicate the Bishops of Asia, about the celebration of Easter, but he testifieth also, that Victor was sharply rebuked by diuerse other godly Bishops, namely by Irenaeus of Lyons and Polycrates of Ephesus for so doing. Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 25.

Tertullian sayth all doctrine is false & lying that agreeth not with some Apostolike church. And such is the doctrine, that the church of Rome holdeth, which agreeth with no Apostolike church, no not with the ancient Apostolike church of Rome. But our doctrine agreeth with all the Apostolike churches that euer were, planted in the earth and continued in the doctrine of the Apostles.

Tertullian a Montanist, speaketh in deede of oblatiōs for the deade, but they were none other, then suche as 7. they offred for the birth daies, & that was thākesgeuing. He speaketh of praier for the deade, which he receaued of Montanus the heretike. The stations he speaketh of were no gaddings, but standings. The visitation of Ierusalem is denyed to no man that will take the paynes to go thither, nether was it euer like to Popish pilgrimage, which is to runne a whoring after Idolls.

We confesse with S. Cyprian, that the breade in the Sacrament is chaunged, not in shape but in nature, to be 8. the flesh of Christ vnderstanding nature for propertie, and the flesh of Christ to be receaued spiritually.

In publike offences we woulde hauehave confession to be made publikely, before the Elders of the church, as Cyprian would them that fell in persecution, but of Popish auricular confession, he neuer spake one word. We acknowledge the forgiuenes of sinnes by the ministers, to be ratified by God, not binding Gods iudgemēt to it but it to Gods iudgement. We graūt that tēporal punishmēt for satisfaction of the church ought to be appointed vntounto publike offenders, which may be released vponupon their harty repētance, & is no more like to Popish pardōs, thē the stewes & market of Rome is like the church of God.

The rest which he huddleth vp together, I wil answer 9. as briefly. S. Iames his chaire was esteemed, but as a monument p. 163of antiquity & no holynes put in it. Euseb. lib. 7. cap. 15. The solēne dedicating of churches was no more like Popish hallowing of churches, then Christian preaching & praying is like to con…uration. Euseb. lib. 9 …a. 10. The straight life of heremites was as like the Popish heremites that dwelt at eueryevery good townes end, where the other dwelled in the wildernes, as the city & the desolat wildernes are alike Ruff. li. 11. c. 4. Driuing of deuils by holy water, was no ordinary ceremony, but a miracle once wrought by the Bishop of Apamea, who whē the temple of Iupiter could not be burned with fire, that was set vntounto it, after he had prayed, caused water signed with the crosse to be sprinckled on the altar, which being done, the deuills being driuen away, the temple was set on fire & burned: Theodor. lib. 5. c. 29. The auctority of vnwritten traditions is so defended by Basil, de sp. sanct. 27. that he affirme…h whatsoeuer is not of the holy Scriptures, is sinne. Mor. diff. 80.

Praier to Saincts, as the dregges of that time, I leaue to be sucked vp of the Papistes. Repentance but no Popish sacrament of penance, is cōmended by S. Ambrose. The name of the masse is not in Ambrose Ep. 33. for missā facere signifieth to let go, or let passe, not to say masse, y^e name of sacrifice signifieth a sacrifice of thākesgiuing.

The Canon of the Popish masse is not in Ambrose, but the forme of celebration of the communion in his time de Sacr. li. 4. ca. 5. & 6. Chrysostom reciteth the text of S. Iames onelyonly to proue that God forgiueth sinnes at the praiers of the Elders, not speaking of the ceremony of extreame vnction, vsed by the Papists & de Sacer. li. 3.

Hyeronym ad Vilant. alloweth not the superstitious vse of burning candells in the day time. That he will not allow Bishops to beget children, it sheweth his errors, cō demned by the Nicene councell, by the perswasion of Paphnutius: Socr. li. 1. cap. 11. Hieronyme speaketh not of a certeine number of prayers, to confirme the vse of your beades, but of a certeine nūber of the verses of the holy Scripture to be learned as a talke to the Lord. ad Furtan.

p. 164That he which hath had two wiues coulde not be a Priest in Hieronymus time y^t was a litle of that chaffe, w^c afterward ouerwhelmed y^e good corne in the church of Rome. Hierom affirmeth that he, as helper, vntounto the writing of Damasus Bishop of the city of Rome, did answere the synodicall consultation that came from the East & the West. What is this to any purpose of the Papistes? Not only the Bishop of Rome was consulted, nor he alwaies, except the matter concerned the whole church, when no member should be lefte vnconsulted, and not made priuye.

Finally that Augustine sayeth, that the fier by which some shalbe saued after this life, is more greeuous then any paine of this life. Psal. 37, he sayth the contrary de fide ad Laurent. cap 68 where he denieth that text of scripture to be vnderstode of punishment after this life: and saveth the whole matter of purgatory may be enquired of, as a matter vncertaine. The like De octo Dulcity quest. 91. & cont. Pelag. Hypog. lib. 5. he knoweth heauē & hell, and vtterlye d…nyeth the third place to be found in the scriptures. By which it appeareth, that this error of purgatory was but very young in Augustines time. And now you see what antiquity he can boast of, for when he hath wrested & wrong all that he can, scarce two or thre errors hauehave any shadow of antiquity, & those not in the greatest matters, wheras the whole substance of the doctrine of fayth in God, iustification by Christ, the true worship of God, the vertue of Christes death, the infirmity of man, the right vse of the sacramentes the auctority of the holy scriptures, & a nūber more of such principall heades of Christian learning, in which we differ from them, he is as silent as a stone.

The 17. marke, is the name of Catholikes, which 17. M. Iewel confesseth to hauehave bene of late geuen to the Papistes, which among other thinges, stayed S. August. in the right fayth, as he confesseth Cont. epist. Manich. lib. 4. But seing the name of Catholikes was falsly geuen to you, which arè nowe ryghtlye called by the name of p. 165your archeheretike the pope, papistes, the onelyonly name of Catholikes, which was geuen to you by your selues, to shadowe your heresies, cannot proue you to be Christians, or your church to be Catholike, especially seeing you lacke the truth which Augustine in the same place, confesseth to be more worth then either successiō, antiquity, the name of Catholike, or any other thing else.

The eyghteenth marke is the succession of Priestes, and Bishops, euen from the seate of Peter vntounto Pius the fifth in whose time this booke of M. Sander was written, which marke is approued by Augustine, by Irenaeus, by Tertullian, by Optatus & by Hieronym, as he sayth, being one of the most euident of all other, but therein he belyeth all these fathers whom he citeth, who neuer alleaged the bare successiō of place & persons, but ioyned with the cōtinuance of doctrine, receaued from the Apostles, against new & late sprong vp heresies. Augustine shall speake for the rest, who after he hath alleaged vntounto the Donatistes, the successions of Bishops from Peter in the vnity of the Catholike church, among which was neuer a Donatist, the iudgement of the Bishop of Rome in absoluing of Cecilianus, and many such like reasons, whereunto he thinketh the Donatistes shoulde yeelde, yet in the ende, he addeth these words. Quamquàm nos non tam de istis documentis presumamus, quam de Scripturis sanctis. Although we doe not so much presume of this documents as of the holy Scriptures.

These eighteene markes M. Sander will hauehave to be more richly seene in them, then in the Protestantes, but what markes they are, and how they are to be found in their church, I hauehave briefely shewed. But nowe he commeth to a general challenge to proue that we hauehave nothing which they lacke, and we lacke many thinges which they hauehave. First they hauehave a iustifying faith as well as we, but not iustifying alone, but with charity, which is the life of faith. But charitye is a fruict of a liuinge and vnfayned fayth, not the life thereof. 1. Tim. 1. 5. the effect not the cause, and we holde with Saynct Paule p. 166that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe. Rom. 3. for charitie is no instrument to apprehend the merciemercy of God, but faith onelyonly, therefore faith onelyonly doth iustifie. We are iustified gratis, steely by his grace. Rom. 3. 24. therfore nothing can come in accompt of iustification before God, but onelyonly faith. which seeing y^e Papistes hauehave not, they hauehave not a iustifying faith.

We hauehave two Sacraments, and they hauehave seuen, but seeing they hauehave fiue more then Christ instituted, and hauehave peruerted the one, and polluted the other, they hauehave but one Sacrament at the most, and that horribly prophaned, I meane baptisme. VVe hauehave an inward priesthood (he sayth) to offer vp Christ in our hartes, and they offer him both in hartes and handes. But our spirituall priesthood is not to offer vp Christ, but spirituall sacrifices acceptable by Christ 1. Pet. 2. 5. Heb. 13. 15. and they are horrible blasphemers, that take vponupon them to offer vp Christ, whome none could offer but him selfe by his eternall spirite. Heb. 9. 14.

He sayth, that the Papistes beleeue as well as we, that Christ by one sacrifice payed our raunsom for euer, when they shewe it to the eye in the eblation of their Masse, then the which nothing can be more contrary to the onelyonly sacrifice of Christ once offred and neuer to be repeated, because he founde eternall redemption thereby. Heb. 10. 14. 9. 12. & 25. &c.

He addeth that they beleue Christ to be the head of the Church, and shewe it by a reall figure of one heade, in earth, meaning the Pope, whome now he maketh a figuratiue heade, as though Christ were not present with his Churche, or that his Churche were a monster with two heades.

As laye men receyue the communion in both kindes with vsus, so they d…e with them in Austria by the Popes dispensation, as though Christes commaundement and institution were not sufficient without the Popes dispensation. Wherein also he affirmeth a monstrous absurditie, that the Sacrament was not instituted in two p. 167kindes, to be so receyued, but by an vnbloody sacrifice, to shewe the nature of his bloody sacrifice in which his soule and blood was separated from his body and flesh, and yet he sayth the body and flesh of Christ, is not well conteyned in the cuppe, as his blood in the paten, with the body and forme of breade, and no separation of the one from the other, and no more contayned or distributed by both, then by one alone. Which saying is to be receyued with whoopes and hisses, of all men that hauehave their fiue witts.

They hauehave mariage (he sayth) in greater price then we, because they teach it to be a sacrament, but we find it not instituted by Christ to be a sacrament of the new testament, therfore we receyue it as an holy ordinance, contayning also a great mystery, but yet no sacrament. But if it be an holy sacrament, why doe you thinke it vnmeete for ministers of the Church? and why doth your Pope Syricius, or rather some counterfeating Canonist in his name, call holy matrimony a liuing in the flesh, such as can not please God. But although mariage be honorable in all men (you saye) it is not so in them that hauehave gelded them selues for the kingdome of heauen, who hauehave no more possibilitie to marye, then a gelded man to …eget children. You were best then to tel the Apostle that his saying was too generall, for he shoulde hauehave excepted them that so gelded themselues. But S. Paule sayth, notwithstanding your impossibilitie, if a virgine doe marye, she doth not sinne. 1. Cor. 8. 28. You will reply he speaketh of them that hauehave not vowed, & how proue you that Christ speaketh of them that hauehave vowed, longer then God would giuegive them grace to liue chast, which he affirmeth to be a peculiar gift, & not in the power of eueryevery man. Mat. 19. 12. But what if your popish geldings, by neying at eueryevery mans wife, and by tombling in all beddes, where they are not kept out by force, proue them selues to be stone horses, are they still in the number of those, that hauing gelded them selues for the kingdom of heauen, may not possibly marye, p. 168and yet nether we will nor can possibly liue chast? But omitting these thinges, which they hauehave as well as we, now he commeth to those thinges, which we lacke, and yet many of them are very necessary: as insufflations, that is blowing vponupon exorcismes, that is coniuring: holy oyle in baptisme, chrisme in Bishopping, externall priesthood, sacrifice, altars, censing, lights, and so forth a large rablement of popish errors and superstitious ceremonies. And that we saye falsly, in saying these are naught, he proueth by S. Paules saying to the Galathians, praeterquam quod accepistis, beside that you hauehave receyued. for once (sayth he) we hauehave receyued those thinges of our auncestors, as if S. Paule had not spoken of the Gospell, but of beggerly ceremonies, which because they are an other Gospell, and way of saluation, brought in by the Pope, then S. Paule deliuered to the Galathians: we hold the Pope & thē iustly accursed. But we iustifie them (sayth he) by the word of God not written I am sure, but by your counterfeit word of traditions, & as you say by bookes of auncient fathers, and yet not by bookes of the most auncient fathers: in whome is litle or nothing at all of suche drosse and chaffe, amonge a great deale of good corne.

But seeing we made no new religion in those and such like thinges (sayth he) but keepe the olde: humilitie, obedience, and vnitie is our fault, if we hauehave any O fautles hypocrites, if the older truth had neuer bene reuealed vntounto you, against your olde heresies, your faults had bene the lesse. but nowe your darkenes being conuinced of the light, your pride, rebellion, and schisme from Christ and his Church, is and appeareth most haynous and manifest.

Now seeing M. Sander dare not encounter with vsus in this very poynt of our contention, he sayneth an Idoll of an aduersary, to shew his manhood vponupon, before his friendes, that they may prayse him for a worthy champion. He imagineth that we reply, that Luther and Caluine did so change popish religion, as Christ and his Apostles did chaūge the Iewish religion, and then he layeth p. 169on lode, that Luther and Caluines authoritie is not like to Christes, whereas we make no such comparison: but affirme, that these godly preachers were sent of God, so to reueale and discouer the idolatry & corruptions, mayntayned in the Church, as Elias, Elizeus, Oseas and the other Prophets, were sent to restore and reforme the true worship of God, corrupted and decayed amonge the Israelites, reprouing and reforming all thinges according to the infallible rule of Gods worde. And whereas he trifleth of the continuance of the sacrifice of Christ, according to the order of Melchisedech, I say it is horrible blasphemy, to make any successors vntounto Christ in … priesthood, which the holy Ghost sayth, he hath foreign, such as passeth not from him by succession to others, because he liueth for euer. And whereas he quoteth Irenaeus lib. 4. cap. 32. and Augustin. in Psal. 33. de ciui. Dei lib. 17. cap. 20. cont. adu. leg. lib. 1. cap. 18. reade the places who will, and he shall finde, that these fathers speake not at all, of any propiciatory sacrifice of Christes very body and bloode in the sacrament, but of the sacrifice of thankes giuing, which the Church throughout all the world doth offer to God, in the celebration of the holy mysteries, for their redemption by the death of Christ. But it is sufficient for blinde and obstinate Papists, to see the bookes margent paynted with quotations of doctors, by them which peraduenture neuer turned the bookes them selues, but borowed their quotations of other men.

But M. Sander sayth, whereas we pretend that Luther and Caluine doe all things according to Gods worde, they are the more to be abhorred, not only because the one is contrary to the other, but also because they pretende to hauehave their doings figured and prophecyed in the Gospel, whereas there is but one Christ, which hath bene borne & dyed but once, therefore these men hauehave no power to abrogate the Masse, or to take away the key of auncient religion. To their dissention, I aunswer it is not in many poyntes, but in one & that not of the greatest p. 170weight as for their pretence of theyr doinges, to be figured or prophetied in the Gospell, it is a dreame of M. Sanders drousie head, for they make none such, but they shew the abuses of the Romish church, by the doctrine of Gods word, & by the same they shew the way to reforme them and this, to the glory of Christ, who dyed but once, they abrogate the Masse, by which it should follow, if it were of any force, that he should dye often, for without death & sheding of bloud, there is no sacrifice for remission of sinnes. Heb. 9. 22. & 26.

If we deny the Masse to be that, they say it is, he aunswereth: that as he doeth not reade, that the Iewish priestes did erre concerning the substance of their publike sacrifice. So is it lesse possible, that the vniuersall church of Christ should erre in that publike act, wherin Christ is sacrificed. Here is a wise argument, hauing neither head nor foote, nor any ioynt to hange togeather. For whatsoeuer M. Sander readeth, we reade that Vrias the high Priest, made an heathenish altar in the Temple, at the commaundement of the king Achas, & offered sacrifice theron, 2. Reg. 16. VVe reade also in Iosephus, that Caiaphas & diuers other of y^e high Priestes were Saduces, which could not but erre in the substāce of their publike sacrifice, when they beleued not the resurrection. Seeing the end of theyr sacrifices was, to signifie y^e eternall red…ption by Christ. Now to the second parte of the argument, I say the vniuersall church dyd not erre, though the schismaticall synagogue of Rome departed frō Christs institutiō. But M. Sāder chafeth vsus away, with this double negatiue, no no maisters, Antechrists you may be, christ you cānot be. Gods curse light on him, that would hauehave any other Christ thē Iesus the sonne of God & Mary, which sitteth at the right hand of his father in heauē. But it is your Antechrist of Rome, that vsurpeth not only the office, but also receiueth the name of Christ & God, of his Antechristiā Canonists, w^c I know you will not deny, though your face be of brasse, because … boks may be shewed to any māy list to se thē.

p. 171After his large excursion, he returneth to D. Parker whome he would aduise to reuolt to the popish church, but he (God be thanked) hauing ended his dayes in the catholike church of Christ on earth, is now receued into the fellowship of the tryumphant church in heauen. I passe ouer how maliciously he …ayleth against the blessed martyr Tho. Cranmer, for defence of whose learning and godlines, I refer the reader to his story faithfully set forth by M. Fox. All other Archbishops of Canterbury he saith from Augustine sent thither by Gregory were of their popish profession. Of a great number it is as he sayth, but not of all. For the opinion of the carnall presence of Christ in the sacrament, was not receiued in the Church of England, for two or three hū dereth yeeres after Augustines arriual, as that Homely which that reuerend father Matthew late Archbishop of Canterbury, caused to be translated and imprinted, doth manifestly declare.

And whereas hee s…orneth at the persecuted congregation of Wickleue, Husse, and the poore men of Lyons, boasting of the externall pompe and visar of glory that was in the Romish Church, I hauehave sufficiently aunsweared before, that bothe the apostacy of the church of Antichrist & the persecution of the church of Christ was so described & proficied before, that neither the one nor the other should trouble any mans conscience, w^t the straungens thereof, so long as the trueth of the little flock & the falshod of the reuolted multitude, are manifestly tryed by the authoritie of the scriptures.

The conclusion of all his Preface is, that which was the cause of this treatise that there neuer lacked a chief Byshop in Saincte Peeters chaire, whose supremacy beeing graunted all other controuersies bee superfluous. Yea verely all Scriptures, Doctors, and Councelles be needlesse, where there is such a person alwaies at hand, who cannot erre in any thing that he commandeth men to beleeue or doe. And contrariswise if ther be any necessary vse of scriptures, doctors, coūcels, p. 172Learning, Tounges &c. there is no such chiefe Byshop on Earth. But what saye you M. Sander, did there neuer lack a Pope to sit in Peters Chayre? Was that See neuer voyde many dayes, many monethes, and many yeeres togither? And when there was two Popes or three Popes at once and that oftentimes, who sat in Peters Chaire? You will say one of them: but which you cannot tell. Whose voyce shoulde the people obey as Christes vicar? The one cursed, the other absolued: the one commannded, the other forbadde. Is not all your bragging of Peters chaire, and vnitie, thereby proued to be nothing else but a meere mockerie?

The Lorde Iesus confounde Antichrist with the breath of his mouth, and with his glorious appearance, and defend his Church in trueth and holinesse, for euer and euer. Amen.