Two Popish Heretics Confuted, Rejoinder · To the reader
To the Reader.
OF all the treatises sent ouer within these twentie yeares from the Papists, there is none in which appeareth lesse learning and modesty, nor greater arrogance and impudencie, then in this one Booke of Martiall. Who, as he tearmeth him selfe a Bacheler of Lawe, so more like a wrangling petty fogger in the Lawe, then a sober Student in Diuinitie, doth in a manner nothing else, but cauil, quarel, and scolde. Which as it were an easie matter to wype away with a sharpe answere, for him that would bestowe his time therein: so I thinke it for my parte neither needefull nor profitable. The memory of that godly learned man Maister Doctor Calfhill whome he abuseth, is written in the Booke of the righteous, and shall not be afraide of any slaunderers reporte. Omitting therefore all friuolous quarels, I will onelyonly endeuour to answere that whiche hath in it any shewe of reason or argument to defende the idolatry of the Papistes.
In which matter also, as many thinges are the same which are already satisfied in my confutation of Doctor Sanders Booke of Images: so I will referre the reader to those Chapters of that treatise, where he shal finde y• which I hope shal suffice, for the ouerthrowe of Idolatry. This reply, as the first treatise, is diuided into ten articles, all which in order I will set downe, with such titles, as he giueth vntounto them. But first I must say a fewe wordes concerning his request made to the Bishop of London, and the rest of the superintendentes of the newe Church, as it pleaseth him to call them, and his preface to the reader. His request is, that the Bishops should certifie him by some pamphlete in printe, whether 61. articles which he hath gathered out of Maister Calfhils booke, be the receyued and approoued doctrine of the newe Churche of England, able to be iustified by the worde of God, and the Fathers, and Councels within sixe hundreth yeares after Christ? How wise a man he is, in making this request, I leaue to reasonable men to iudge.
And touching the articles themselues, I aunswere, that some of them be such, as the Church of England doth holde and openly professe, as that Latine seruice, Monkish vowes, the communion in one kinde, &c. are contrary to Gods worde, the other be particular affirmatiōs of Maister Calfhil, which in such sense as he vttered them, may be iustified for true, and yet perteyne not to the whole Church to mainteine and defende, as whether Helaena were superstitious in seeking ye crosse at Ierusalem, whether Dionyse and Fabian were the one suspected, the other infamed, &c. beside that a great number of them be so rent from the whole sentences whereof they were partes, that they reteyne not the meaning of the author, but serue to shewe the impudencie of the cauiller. As that the counsels of Christe in his Gospel, be ordinances of the Deuill, the prayers of Christians a sacrifice of the deuill, the councell of Elibeus was a generall councell, &c. Wherfore I will leaue this fond request, with all the rayling that followeth there vppon, and come to the preface, to the Reader. First he findeth himselfe greatly greeued, that not only ancient fathers are by M. Calfhil discredited, but also the holy crosse is likened to a gallowes, &c. which moued him to follow Salomons counsell, & to answer a foole according to his folly. After this he taketh vponupon him to cōfute M. Calfhils preface, in which he proueth, yt no images should be in churches to any vse of religion, because God forbiddeth them, Exo. 20. & Leuit. 19 in ye first table of religion. His reply standeth only vponupon those common foolishe distinctions of Idols & Images, of Latria & Doulia, which are handled more at large & with greater shewe of learning by D Sander in his booke of Images. Cap. 5. 6. 7. 8. whither I refer ye reader for answer. Likewise, yt discourse which he maketh, to proue yt an image of Christ is not a lying image, is answered in ye same booke, Cap. 7. The authoritie of Epiphanius, he deferreth to aunswer, vntounto ye 5. article. To Irenaeus he answereth, yt he only reporteth, yt the Gnostike heretikes had ye image of Iesus, but reproueth not yt fact. But he reproued them only because they placed the image of Christ wt the images of Plato, Pithagoras, &c. vsed them as ye Gentyles do. This were in deed a pretie exception for a brabling lawyer to take: but a student in diuinitie should vnderstand that Irenaeus in yt book & Chapter li. 1. Ca. 24. declareth no fact of ye heretiks yt was good, but his declaration is a reproof. And so it is throughout that whole booke conteining 35. Chapters.
But he chargeth M. Calfhill for falsifying Augustine, in sayng, that he alloweth M. Varro affirming that religion is moste pure without images, first quarreling at the quotation, which by errour of the Printer is de ciuitate Dei, lib. 4. Cap. 3. where it should be Cap. 31. a meete quarrell for such a lawyer: secondly shewing that the Latine is Castius obseruari sine simulachris religionem, that religion woulde hauehave beene more purely kept without Idols or fayned Images: as though there be anye Images but fayned, and the worde Imago, euen in their owne Latine translation of the Bible, is indifferently taken for Idolum and simulachrum, and that in many places, Deut. 4. ver. 16. 4. Reg. 11. ver. 18, Sapient Cap. 13. & 14. Esai. 40. ver. 18. & 44. ver. 13. Ezec. 7. vers. 20 where imagines & simulachra are both placed together Ezech. 16. Ca. 17. Amos. 5. ver. 23. wher he sayeth, Imaginem idolorum, the image of your Idols: and many other places declare, that this counterfait distinction was not obserued, no not of the Latine interpreter. As for his other logicall quiddity, wherin he pleaseth him selfe not a little, that religio non suscipit magis & minus, sheweth that eyther his lawe is better then his Logike, or else both are not worth a strawe.
Further he chargeth M. Calfehill for adding words which are not founde in Augustine, where images are placed in temples, in honourable sublimitie, &c. These wordes are founde in the Ep. 49 ad Deogratias: Cum hiis locantur sedibus, honorabili sublimitate, vt a praecantibus atque immolantibꝰ attendantur, when they are placed in these seates, in honourable sublimitie, that they are looked vponupon by them that praye and offer, &c. But Martiall looked onelyonly to the quotation, Ps. 36. &113. Yet doeth not M. Calfhill rehearse the wordes, but the iudgement of Augustine, from which he doth nothing varie, except Martiall will cauill at the wordes, images in temples, where Augustine sayeth: Idola hiis sedibus, Idoles in these seates, speaking of temples, in which images were placed. But he speaketh (saith Martiall) in the Psalmes, against the images of the heathen, and not of the Christians. Then reade what he writeth De moribus ecclesiae Catholicae, lib. 1. Cap. 34. & de consensu Euangelist. lib. 1. Cap. 10. where you shall finde his iudgement of such images, as were made of Christians, to be all one with those of the Gentiles. The iudgement of other doctours, whome he nameth, you shall finde aunswered in the 14. or 13. Chapter of Master Sanders booke of Images. That the Iewes had no images in their temple, he sayth, it is a Iewish and Turkish reason, to proue that we should hauehave none. Much like ye priest that would not beleeue in Christe, if he knewe that he were a Iewe. So wise he is, to compare the superstition of the wicked Turkes, with the obseruation of the lawe by the godly Iewes. Nay, hee is yet more eloquent, and sheweth that the Protestantes are like the Turkes, in condemning of images, in allowing marriage after deuorce, &c. as though we might not acknowledge one God, lest we should be like the Turkes and Iewes, nor honour vertue, nor dispraise vice, because they do so, nor obey magistrates, nor eat and drinke, because the Turkes and Iewes doe so. O deepe learning of a lawyer diuine.
That Images do not teach, he sayeth it is a position more boldly aduouched, then wisely proued, & then quoteth Gregorie, Ep. 9. lib. 9. &c. but he is deceiued, if he thinke we holde, that images teach not: for we affirme with the Prophet Abacuc, that they teache lyes, Cap. 2. ver. 18. & vanitie, Ier. 10. ver. 8.
As for the story of Amadis the Goldsmith, and the Epistle of Eleutherius fetched out of the guild hall in London, as M. Calfhill maketh no great accompt of them, so I passe them ouer, although Martiall would hauehave men thinke, they be the strongest arguments the Protestants hauehave, against the superstition of the crosse and the vsurped tyrannie of the Pope.
Finally, the excuse he maketh of his railing, by M. Calfhils example, how honest it is, I referre to wise men to consider. If M. Calfhill had passed the bondes of modestie, it were small praise in Martiall to follow him, yea, to passe him. But if M. Calfhill (as indifferent men… …ay thinke) hath not greatly exceeded in termes of …eate against Martials person, whatsoeuer he hath spoken against his heresies, the continuall scorning, both of M. Calfhils name and his person, vsed so often in eueryevery leafe of his reply, in the iudgement of all reasonable persons, will cause Martiall to be taken for a lawlesse wrangler, rather then a sober and Christian lawyer.