A REPLY TO M. CALFHILLS BLASPHEMOUS ANSWER MADE AGAINST THE TREATISE OF THE CROSS; BY JOHN MARTIAL, bachelor of Law, and student in Divinity. read AND REGARD. If any man teach otherwise, and doth not incline to the wholesome words of our Lord jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness, he is proud, and one that knoweth nothing, but beating his brains about questonis, and strife of words. 1. Timoth. 6. Jesus Imprinted at Louvain by john Bogard at the Golden Bible with the kings majesties privilege. 1566. REgiae Maiestatis Privilegio permissum est joanni Martiali in LL. Baccalaureo & sacrae Theologiae Candidato, ut per aliquem Typographorum admissorum impunè ei liceat imprimi curare, & per omnes has suae ditionis regiones distrahere librum inscriptum, A reply to M. Calfhills blasphemous answer made against the treatise of the Cross, & omnibus aliis inhibitum ne eundem absque eiusdem joannis consensu imprimant vel alibi impressum distrahant, sub poena in privilegio contenta. Datum Bruxel. 12. Junii. Subsig. Prars. TO M. CALFHILL. Non contradicas verbo veritatis vllo modo & de mendacio ineruditionis tuae confundere, Ecclesiastici 4. Speak in no wise against the word of truth, but be ashamed of thine own ignorance. TO THE CHRISTIAN READER. Contradicunt linguae multae: diversae hereses, diversa schismata sonant: Multa linguae contradicunt veraci doctrinae 〈◊〉 cur ad tabernaculum Dei: Ecclesiam Catholicam tene, & protegeris●● tabernaculo a contradictione linguarum: August. in Psalm. 30. Many tongues do gain say: diverse heresies, diverse schisms do sound every where. Many tongues speak against the true doctrine. Run thou to the tabernacle of God. Keep the Catholic church, and thou shalt be defended in the tabernacle from contradiction of tongues. A REQVEST TO MASTER GRINDAL AND OTHER SUPERINTENDENTS OF THE NEW CHURCH OF ENGLAND. AMONGST other godly counsels of the wiseman this being one, Eccle. 19 that we should not believe all that is said, I thought it not convenient to believe the public fame that reported unto us, that you M. Grindal did peruse the answer made to the Treatise of the Cross, and allow all the doctrine contained in it, and privilege it to the print, jest for my light believing you might with the same wise man account me light of heart. Wherefore as every one that is desirous to learn the truth, when rumours are spread inquireth of the author as occasion serveth for further trial and better credit of the thing: Even so I longing to hear whither the doctrine uttered in the said book, be the doctrine of all your church of England, or the fancy only of one idle brain, make this request to you and the rest of your brethren, for further certificate, and surer knowledge of this. For albeit the wynking at the setting forth of it, the permitting it to be sold, the suffering the author to triumph of it at the Cross, and the not forewarning the people to be ware of it, and long silence to master Dormans' request, M. Dorma in the preface. have ministered vehement presumptions both of liking and allowing, yet have I not adjudged it reason, to charged the whole congregation with it, unless I have some further notice and certificate from you. As you therefore tender the honour of God, truth of the Gospel, and wealth of their souls, whom you pretend to bring to Christ: So let us be advertised whither you will justify all the doctrine uttered in that book, as the received and approved doctrine of all your new church of England or no. The request is reasonable: if you refuse it, we shall judge of your silence accordingly. Jest you should haft in this cause, and find some frivolous excuse, as distemperature at the full of the moan, business in ministering of oaths, care in sending promoters to the havens, aegernesse in searching after books, and trouble in seeking after non communicants, and zeal to appease the contentions amongst the brotherhood for the weighty matters lately in hand, and pretend that you have no leisure to take a new view of that old work, I have drawn out certain of his positions, and quoted the places in the margin, where you shall find them. And as I truly in effect repeat them: So do I most earnestly require and challenge you and all the rest of the superintendents (that must be ready to give an account of their doctrine to all that ask) to give notice and signification by some pamphlet in print, whither it be the received and approved doctrine of all the new church of England able to be justified by the plain and undoubted word of God, M. Calfhills positions. and by the true and godly fathers of the church, and general councils within six hundred years after Christ, or when the Gospel was most sincerely preached. Fol. 3. a That strange attire, difference of meat, refusal of marriage, rising at midnight, making of vows, shutting up in cloister, and most wilful beggary, be ordinances of the devil. Fol. 32. b That faith forceth sin upon us. Fol. 35. a That a naked faith is able to teach him that neither did nor ever could hear, without any further information that a God there is. Fol. 124. b That Latin service, vowing of chastity, communicating under one kind, are direct contrary to the word. Fol. 135. ● That God commanded Christ only, no church, no council, no man to be heard. That they made a good excuse that denying the body of Polycarpe to the Christians that sued for it, Fol. 147. b said it should not be delivered, jest they would forsake Christ, and begin to worship him. That God said of Behemoth and Leviathan, Fol. 27. a noon dare come near them, noon can resist them. That never God, nor good man devised a cross. Fol. 170. a That we having the material cross can not come to the knowledge of the crucified. Fol. 18. b That crossing bread such inconvenience that the external action had still in reverence, the inward faith hath been untaught. Fol. 26. a That wheresoever a sign of the cross was, Fol. 25. b we should not think that there was a zeal of true devotion, but as well, or rather an heathenish observance, and superstition of them that never thought upon Christ. That the sign of the cross was made a magical inchauntement and cause of conquest against the Christians. Ibidem. b. That the cross was never received upon good occasion. Fol. 26. a That the cross is not the sign peculiar to Christians. Fol. 51. b. That the cross is likened to the helmet of hell and conjurers mace. Fol. 29. b That the devil seemeth to tremble at the sign of the cross for no other purpose, Fol. 29. a. but that we should leave our confidence in Christ, and only repose it in a piece of wood. That the devil delighted in the sign of the cross. Fol. 117. a. That more witchcraft, and sorcery, Fol. 90. b was done by the sign of the cross, than with any thing in the world beside. That prayer for the dead is a thing of nought. Fol. 36. b That suffrages, intercessions to Saints, Fol. 94. a. and Masses are helps to hell. That it is a general precept, all men to judge, all men to try, Fol. 23. b what doctrine ethey receive. That Saints honoured with the honour of invocation, Fol. 26. a are devils. That no spirit can be worse, than he, that hath no faith. Fol. 36. a. Fol. 52. a That to dedicated a church in the honour of a saint, is a derogation to God's honour, and contrary to the use of the primitive church. Fol. 53. b That it is a point most strange and dissonant from all godly learning to say, that Mary mother of Christ did make a vow of chastity. Fol. 103. b That there be not seven graces of the holy Ghost, mentioned in the 11. of Esai: or that to gather a sevenfold grace out of that chapter, is to absurd. Ibidem b. That the Papists saying there be seven graces of the holy Ghost, be falsifiers of the scriptures. Fol. 106. a That the Mass is nothing else but the sacrifice of the devil. Fol. 113. b. That anointing mentioned by S. james was temporal, and only touched the present state. Fol. 107. a That to bless and give thanks is all one. Fol. 105. b That neither scripture nor any learned father commendeth any blessing, but of prayer unto us. Fol. 86. a That Helena for going to Jerusalem and seeking the cross, was superstitious. Fol. 132. a Fol. 101. b That S. Dionise and Fabian (both holy martyrs) were, the on suspected, the other infamous. Fol. 103. a That S. Cyprians saying, ungi necesse est eum qui baptisatus sit, etc. It is necessary for him that is baptized to be anointed, was proud and blasphemous. Fol. 36. a That it was blasphemy for S. Gregory to report how a jew was preserved from spirits by the sign of the cross. Fol. 68 a That the seventh general council, was a doltish and proud Synod, Fol. 160. b an insolent and doltish conspiracy: A Nice council, and the fathers a mad company, Ibidem a reverend asses, Synodical men, Fol. 17. a Nice masters, and their decrees idolatrous deeds and doctrines, and impudent vanities. Fol. 141. b That the council of Elibery or Granata in Spain was a general council. Fol. 145. b That we making our prayers to saints retain the memory of the dead, and call upon the dead. Fol. 3 a That the Papists have the decrees and decretals in as sovereign a price as the Bible. That the blood of Christ amongst the catholics (whom he calleth a rabble of Romish heretics) is a thing of a thousand jest accounted of. Fol. 94. a That ceremonies were used in dedication of churches, Fol. 95. a to bring in the devil. That within two hundred years after Christ the simplicity of God's ordinances was refused. Fol. 96. a That the fathers in observances and ceremonies scant agreeing with themselves, Fol 2. 3. a declined all from the simplicity of the Gospel. That sithence Silvester's time (which was in the year of our lord 309. Fol. 85. b ) such filth of idolatry and superstition flowed into the most parts of all Christendom, out of the synck of Rome, that he needed as many eyes as Argus, that should have espied any piece of sincerity until the miscreants, and heretics, to wit Luther and Crammer, began to restore the decayed state. Fol. 85. b That Rome is the synagogue of Satan, sink of idolatry, Fol. 121. b and no member of the church. Folly, 152. a That the Pope is the great Antichrist of Rome. Fol. 87. b That Popery is worse idolatry than the jews. Fol. 133. a. That if we light tapers in the day for the use and service of God, it is blasphemous. Fol. 142. b. That there is no lawful precedent of any miracle done by the sign of the cross. Fol. 151. a That every city, every monastery, Fol. 153. b every private parish church in Christendom, hath some piece of the holy cross. That king Solomon was abused by images. Fol. 165. a. That these words, jacob summitatem virgae joseph adoravit, Fol. 70. a jacob worshipped the top of josephs' rod, was coined of a father in the council of Nice, and not to be found in scripture. That this word, Crux, signifieth a cross pillar, a candelstick, Fol. 79. a a staffetorche, or a pole that carrieth the cresset. Fol. 139. b. That the ordering of ministers is a sacrament, Fol. 104. b. and yet no sacrament of the church. Fol. 99 a. That Imposition of hands (which he calleth a sign) should not remain. Fol. 111. b. That it is blasphemous and abominable to call penance the second table or board after shipwreck. Ibidem b. That it is an horrible law not only impious to God, but also injurious to man, that he that divorceth an adulterous person, may not mary another. Ibidem b. That it is an horrible law not only impious to God, but also injurious to man, that youngefolke wilfully contracting themselves without their parents consent, may mary well enough. Fol. 51. b. That it accordeth not with the doctrine of Christ, to say: Virtutum opes habere non possunt qui volverint divitias habere terrenas, they can not have the substance of virtues, that will have the substance of the earth. Fol. 120. a. Or that the thing (which was the holy Ghost) given by imposition of hands in the Apostles time, is now abolished. Fol. 99 a. Or that Chat Christ is not Legislator a lawmaker, and not catholic to call him so. These with diverse other which I omit to repeat, are his positions and paradoxes, these are his resolutions and sayings, as you may see in the places quoted in the margin. Now if you have privileged and allowed them as the received and approved doctrine of all the new church of England, for them and every one of them we require proof out of the plain and undoubted word of God, out of the true and godly fathers of the church, within six hundred years after Christ, and out of lawful councils, within the said term, or within these xiv. hundred years. And that the world may see your plain dealing in this behalf, Ley down the scriptures plainly without corruption, ley down the father's words truly without falsifying. Ley down the canons of the councils simply without all clipping, changing and inverting their words. Or if you have neither scriptures, nor fathers, nor councils for proof of them, condemn them as blasphemous, wicked, and ungodly, able to be maintained neither by scripture, council, nor any godly fathers of the church. If you suffer this doctrine to proceed and have increase, as it is sowed, we may say unto you, as the virtuous emperor Constantine said to the Arrians assembled at a Synod in Tyrus: Lib. 3. cap. 7. histor. Tripart. Vos autem qui sancta mysteria eius clementiae proferre videmini, non dicam custodire, vos inquam nihil agitis nisi quae ad contentionem noscuutur & odia pertinere, & ut absolute dicam, quae ad humani generis tendere videntur interitum. You who seem to bring forth, I will not say keep the mysteries of his mercy, you I say, do nothing but that which is known to pertain to contention and debate, and seem to tend, (that I may speak fully and wholly as it is) to the destruction of all man kind. Or if you fancy not Constantine's saying, I will say unto you as that valiant Emperor Charles the fift said of Luther in his edict set forth at Worms in this sort: Lutherus scribit nihil ferè aliud, nisi quod ad seditionem, schisma, bellum, caedes, rapinas, incendia, & ad defectionem universalem Christiana fidei tendit atque subseruit: Luther writeth almost nothing else, but that which tendeth and serveth to sedition, schism, battle, slaughter, robberies, burnings, and to the general revolt and defection of the Christiann faith. Or if that like you not, we will say of you as our noble king, Henry of famous memory spoke of the same friars faction. Nulla unquam factio fuit ita seditiosa, Pestilens, nepharia, Epist. ad duces Saxo. quae sic religionem omnem tollere, leges omnes ob●ilere, mores omnes bonos corrumpere, res publicas omnes evertere, machinata fit, ut nunc ista coniuratio Lutherana. There was never faction so seditious, so pestilent, so wicked, which so endeavoured to take away all religion, to oppress all Laws, to corrupt all good manners as this conspiracy of the Lutherans doth now. The counsels of Christ in his Ghospel, to be called ordinances of the devil, suffrages helps to hell, The law of God and his church forbidding him that divorceth an adulterous person to mary another whiles the party liveth, horrible and impious, the prayers of Christians a sacrifice of the devil, Christ no law maker, and his Ghospel no Law, what is to endeavour to bring a general revolt and defection from all Christian religion and faith, if this be not Grindall? Consider it, you were best. The matter is weighty, and the time perilous. And whereby a figure called praeoccupatio, you charged us that our books are seditious, if it may please you to examine them indifferently, it will easily be espied whither your divines books breath sedition, or ours. Let the learned judge: praised be God, There is no blast blown against the monstrous regiment of women. There is no libel set forth for order of succession: there is no word uttered against dew obedience to the sovereign. As for corrupt gains which is another soul fault that you charged us withal, we are thanks be to God so far from all just reproof in this behalf, that ever more we were content to give the copies of our books and gains whatsoever it were, to him that would bare the charges of the print, and convey them into the realm. And as yet, if it will please you either to sand us money to bore such necessary charges, or appoint some friend of yours that will faithfully print and truly set them forth to the sight of the world, you and your factor shall have all the gains, that may be made. At this present I have gathered together master Calfhils' lies, contradictions, false translations, falsifying the scriptures, corrupting the doctors, which will make a pretty volume, and because I could not conveniently set them forth together with this reply, I have reserved them to another tyme. Now if it will please you to try whither I will stand to the performance of my promise, sand your factor with your letter and he shall be heard with the conditions afore mentioned. S. Augustine declaring certain properties of the hearts in the forest, In Psa. 41 saith: They run very swift to the fountains and rivers, they kill serpents, and after the kill of them are very thirty, and when they will swim over into any other country, they lay their horns one upon another: and applying that to us, he saith: Sic nos Christiani debemus velociter currere ad fontes aquarum, & vitia, serpents iniquitatis nostrae interimere, ut amplius desideremus fontes veritatis: Debemus invicem onera portare & sic adimplere legem Christi. So we Christian men aught to run swiftely to the fountains of water, and kill sins, the serpents of our iniquity, that we may the more desire the fountains of truth, we aught to bear one another's burden, and so fulfil the law of Christ. Now if your zeal be such as you pretend to the Christian religion, and furtherance of truth give us leave to run to the fountains of water, to kill the serpents of iniquity, to impugn your heresies, to detect your ministers lies, keep not our books from them, that would come to the fountains of truth, but as you love the truth, so bear part of the burden with us, and fulfil the law of Christ. God sand you his grace, and spirit of truth. TO THE NEW CLERGY. Deponentes mendacium loquimini veritatem unusquisque cum proximo suo, quia sumus invicem membra, Ephes. 4. Leying away all lying speak the truth, every man to his neighbour, for as much as we are members one of another. THE PREFACE TO THE READER. Having read and regarded the answer to the treatise of the cross, and finding the scriptures falsified, the councils disauthorised, the fathers corrupted, the doctors misconstrued, the sacraments prophanelye reported, the church discredited, the virtuous slandered, S. Cyprian rejected as a Fol. 103 a blasphemous, b 101 b Fabianus an holy martyr refused as infamous, S. Dionyse Paul's scholar condemned as suspicious, c 132 a Helena a blessed saint neglected as superstitious. S. Gregory as fabulous, d 6. b Paulinus as zealous without knowledge, the fathers of the Nicene council called e 68 a Asses, Nice f 68 a masters, and g 70. a Synodical men, their assemble an h 182. a. insolent, doltish conspiracy, dissembling at Nice, their decrees impudent i Fol. 163. b i Fol. 17. a. vanities and idolatrous deeds and doctrines, the doctors unworthied of authority, as men that had k Fol. 120. b errors, men that thought l Fol. 29. b. better than they wrote, men that l Ibidem. borrowed of the common custom impropre phrases, such as seem to maintain an error, men that were not so well affectioned as they m Fol. 89. a ought, men that in terms n Fol. 175. b over shot themselves, men that declined all, from the o Fol. 23. a simplicity of the Gospel, To be short finding the cross, which in the holy scriptures and ancient fathers is called, a Apoca. 7. Signum Dei, Signum b Matth. 24 filij hominis, Signum c Cassio. in Psal. 4. coelestis Imperatoris, d Theod. ca 1. li 6. Trip. figura dominici trophaei, e Chrisost. in demonst. count gent. Argumentum multae benedictionis, f Aug. ca 3. de visit. in. venerabile monumentum, Salutare, g Cyril. li. 6. cont. julia. & Lactantius de passio. preciosum, venerabile lignum, h Ephrem de poenit. vivificum signum, i Cano. 73. Concil. Constan. in Trull. victoriae trophaeum, k Lactam. li 4 c. 27. de vera sapi. c. 26. coelestis nota, maximum sublime & immortale signum, l Aug ser. de cruce & lat. res honoris, mortis devictae m Cyril. high ros. epist. ad Const Impe. trophaeum, n Lactam. ca 27. lib. 4 de vera sapient. & Aug. c 20 de cathe. ru. Signum passionis, o Chris. ho. 55. 116. Mat. & justi. Tit. de Monac. Novel col 1 Signum salutis nostrae, p Chris ho 55. in 16. Mat. Signum communis libertatis, signum mansuetudinis & humilitatis domini, q Amb li. 6 c. 4. de Sacr. Signum virtutis, & r Paulinus epi. 11 ad Sever. pignus aeternae salutis, the sign of God, the sign of the son of man, the sign of the heavenly Emperor, the figure of our lords triumph, a token of much blessing, an honourable monument, an healthful, precious, and reverend wood, a lively sign, a triumphant banner of victory, an heavenly mark, a most great, high and immortal sign, a pearl of price, a sign of the conquest over death, a sign of Christ's passion, a sign of our salvation, a sign of the deliverance of all mankind, a sign of the meekness, and humility of Christ, a sign of virtue and pledge of eternal salvation, to be likened to a Fol. 44. b. gallows, to the helmet b 29. b. of hell, to the conjurers mace, and called a magical c 25. b. inchauntement, an heathenish d 117. a. observance, a stumbling e 176. b stock, a f 128 a. stone of offence, a g 25. b. cause of sickness, a h 106. a. dumb God, a i 94 a. dead devil, a k 3. a counterfeit of Serapis, and l 120 a. conquest against the Christians, and prayers of the church a sacrifice of the devil, suffrages helps to hell, our saviours counsels ordinances of the devil, Christ no lawmaker and his Gospel by consequent no law I thought it good to contemn it, as a famous libel, full of lies, M. dorman in his preface. slanders, and blasphemies, and let it lie obscure with the author, especially sing the superintendents, being demanded, whither they would justify the said book, and all the doctrine contained in it, have given no signification nor notice of their liking, jest if upon their general liking, it should be confuted, the ignominy should redound unto them, whereas now the whole shame lieth but in one prating Parrot, Prover. 26 more worthy to be contemned than answered. But when I considered that saying of Solomon, Answer a fool according to his foolishness that he may not seem wise unto himself, I thought it good to examine the foresaid answer, and discover the folly of it, that both the author sing his vanities laid before his eyes, might be ashamed of his arrogancy, and with the ꝓude peacock, looking upon his soul feet, cast down his bragging tail and abhor his serpentine voice, and also the simple reader poisoned with the venomous drugs, of his gay coloured, and sweet sugared words, might have a remedy to expel that infection, and preservative to beware of the like. Wherefore all his superfluities cast aside, and impertinents loted out, I will bring the chiefest and most principalst matters, that he treateth in his answer, to this examination. And that you may the better understand which are the words that M. Calfhill useth either of scripture, Doctor, Council, or his own, I have set them in a distincte letter, and noted the place in the Margin where you shall find them in his book, as they are in effect. And to begin with the preface, his long discourse there, M. Calf● intent in his preface. Fol 9 a tendeth chief to prove that there should be no images in churches. And for proof of that, he bringeth certain places of scripture, as the 20. Exodus, where it is said: Thou shalt have noon other Gods before me. Thou shalt make unto thyself no graven image, nor any similitude that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or in the waters under the earth. Thou shalt not adore them, nor worship them, And the 19 of Leviticus, where it is said. Nolite converti ad idola, turn not to Idols, nor make unto yower selves, Gods of metal, What is forbidden by this commandment. and such like. Which precepts of God do only inhibit the idols of the gentiles to be used among the jews who were so prove unto the idolatry, of the gentils that they worshipped caul●es, stocks, stones, cats, apes, brute beasts, and the sun, moon, and stars, for God. Wherefore God being a jealous God, a god that would have the glory of his name given to no creature on earth, did forbidden them, to make any graven idol, or likeness of any thing, because they should not adore it, Exod. 32. and worship it for God, as the children of Israel did, when they said of the golden Calf, Hi sunt dij tui Israel, These are thy Gods o Israel. If it had been his holy will, to have forbidden absolutely all kind of images, Exod 25. the images of Angels made and set in the mercy seat by the appointment of God. 3 Reg 7. Images of oxen and Lions in Salomon's temple. he would never have willed Moses to make the two Cherubins upon the mercy seat, in the Tabernacle. For he should have given a precept contrary to his first commandment. Neither would Solomon being in high favour with God at that time, have made, and engraved the images of oxen, lions, and Cherubins in the temple which he made, to the honour and glory of God. For in so doing he should have grievously transgressed that law. For the Cherubins that Moses made, were scuptile, a graven image, the images of a certain order of Angels: the oxen and Lions had Similitudinem, the likeness of a thing in earth. But let us not err. There is no alteration, no change, nor contradiction in God: he is always one. Wherefore when he did forbidden the Israelites, to make any graven image, he did forbid them to make it, because they should not take them to be Gods, nor adore them and worship them for Gods. When he willed Moses to make the tabernacle, he willed those Cherubins to be made, Paralip. 22 for a beauty and furniture of his house, which that precept did not inhibit: which Solomon understanding caused those oxen, The jews stamped Caesar's image in his coin. Lions, and Angels, to be engraved, and portraited in his temple. And sing he making that temple by the providence and commandment of God, willed those images to be made in his temple, it is evident that the foresaid commandment of God, did not inhibit all kind of images, to be made, not not in the temple. Besides this, the jews themselves, being very skilful in their law, and scrupulous in observing it, according to the letter, stamped the image of Caesar in their coins. And our Saviour Christ sing it, did never reprehend them for it, which he would have done, had it been against the law. But when he saw the Coin with the image of Caesar, he said no more, but give unto Caesar, Matt. 22. those things which are Caesars and to God those things that are Gods. Furthermore all Christian Emperors, princes, and gentle men would never have engraved, nor set in their ensigns, and Arms, Eagles, Lions, Lilies, Greyhounds, Dragons, Faukons, horses, goats, bulls, bears, Apes, and such like. For sculptile, is a graven thing. And if all graven things had been by that precept inhibited, they would never so generally have practised it, nor with out fear of God's indignation, hitherto have continued it. Over and above all this, Christ gave an image of his countenance to Veronica, and sent an other to Abgarus, Damasce. lib 4 cap. 17 de orthod. side. Euseb. lib. 7. cap. 14. histor. king of the Edissens. The Christians even from the beginning payncted both his images and the Apostles also, which were sculptile & similitudo, a graven image, and the likeness of a thing. Wherefore sing Moses at the commandment of God, made the two Cherubins in the tabernacle, sing Solomon engraved in his temple, oxen, lions, and Cherubins, sing the jews stamped the image of Caesar in their Coins, and were not reproved of Christ for them, sing Christian Emperors, princes, and gentle men set Eagles, Lions, Lilies, dragons, greyhounds, and such like in their arms, and were never controlled for it, Seeing the Christians, even from the Apostles time, have made the images of Christ and his Apostles, and thought to honour Christ and his Apostles by it, it must needs follow, that the precept of God, What images the L we doth forbidden. Non facies tibi sculptile, Thou shalt not make unto thyself any graven image, doth not absolutely forbidden all kind of images, but only such as were adored and worshipped, and that not simply neither, but such as were adored and worshipped for gods: such the law doth inhibit, such doth God forbidden. And all such do we Catholics detest, accurse, and abhor: and ever did. We know our images to be but the work of man: we do not worship, nor adore, nor honour the matter, whereof they are made. That which we adore and worship, is the thing represented by the image, which is either Christ himself, or some of his saints. And in honouring them as the friends of God, we honour God, as the prince that honoureth an others prince his Ambassador honoureth the prince in his Ambassador. Heretics calling the Christians images Idols, or deny Christ to be come, or discredit the prophets. Sopho. 2. All idols destroyed by Christ's coming . And if our new Masters will needs have the Christians images to be idols, than either they must deny Christ with the jews to be come, or contemn the prophetts with the Samaritans. For if Christ hath been incarnate & redeemed the world, then hath he according to the predictions of the prophetts destroyed all Idols, and delivered his church from them. For Sophonias said of Christ, He shall destroy all the gods of the earth. Zacharie sayeth, I will destroy the names of Idols out of the earth, and they shallbe remembered no more. By the name of Idols he understandethe here honour and worship done to Idols. Now if Christ according to this prophecy, by his cumning destroyed all Idols, and whorships done unto them, then will it follow, that the images of the Christians, are not Idols, nor the honour and reverence done unto them, an honour and reverence done unto Idols. Or if it be, that either Christ by his coming, did not destroy the idols of the Gentiles, or that the prophetts were not true, in their prophecies. And one of these two they must grant, spite of their beards, unless they wilbe worse than julian the apostata. For he being otherwise an enemy of Christ, and of all Christians sing the deameanour of the faithful beleavers, Lib. 6 cont. julia. was forced to confess that cessabant idola adorare, & colere as Cyrillus saith: They ceased to adore and worship idols. But because he despited their religion, and knew not the secret mysteries of it, he laid to their charged, (as these men do to ours) that they adored the wood of the Cross. But how fond it was done, Cyrill showeth at large, as the learned know, and he that is desirous to see and able to read and understand, may turn the book, and find. For the simple, it may suffice them to know, how that Christ, by his coming destroyed all wicked idols, and gross idolatry of the gentils, and taught us a true way to worship God in spirit and truth, and that, the catholic church, hath evermore observed that manner of worshipping of God, and ever taught that images, be devoid of all sense of themselves, and therefore worthy of no honour in respect of themselves, but in consideration that they represent unto us Christ, and his saints. Out of the new Testament he quoteth these places: Fol 9 a Acto. 7.48. But the highest dwelleth not in temples made of hands, heaven is my seat, and the earth is my foot stool, Acto. 15 28. It hath seemed good to the holy Ghost and us, to put no burden upon you besides these necessaries, that ye abstain from things offered up to false images, and blood and strangled meat, and fornication. Rom. 1 And they changed the glory of the uncorruptible God, into the likeness of an image of a corruptible man, and of birds, and four footed, and creeping beasts. I wrote unto you in an epistle that ye should not company with fornicators of this world, nor with the covetous, 1 Cor. 5.10. nor with the extortioners, nor with them that serve idols. For then must ye needs have go out of this world, but now I writ unto you that you company not together. If he that is called a brother, be a fornicator, or covetous, Idolis seruiens. 1 Cor. 10 1 Cor. 14 Idolorum cultura 2 Cor. 6 14. Consensus templo Dei cum idolis Galat. 5.20. 1. joan 21. Simula chris. Acto. 7.48. or a worshipper of idols or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner, with him that is such a one, see that ye do not eat. Flee from the woorshpping of idols. Draw not the yoke with infidels, and a little after that, what agreement hath a temple of God with idols? Be not drunk with wine in which is ryott, but be filled with the holy Ghost, speaking unto yower selves in hymns and Psalms and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to God in yower hearts, giving thanks always for all, to God the father in the name of our lord jesus Christ. Little children keep yower selves from false and feigned images. And all these places make not one jot against images. For albeit God dwelleth not so in temples made with hands, Acto. 15.28. but that his power also is every where without scripture, yet hath he been worshipped, adored and honoured in temples made with hands. And as in the old Testament he commanded the tabernacle to be made, and images of Cherubins in it, and Salomon's temple, where both the Cherubins, and images of oxen lions and such like were painted: So hath he in the time of grace, by secret inspirations, and visions, commanded churches to be builded, that the faithful might resort unto them, to honour praise, and serve him. And in those he hath willed the sign of our redemption, and cross of Christ and images of saints to be erected and set up. And if you ask me where this will, and commandment of God is to be seen, I answer, it is to be seen in the decrees of the catholic church which is one body with Christ, directed and taught by the holy Ghost. It is to be seen in the holy fathers, by whom God speaketh unto us, In Psal. 46 as S. Augustine declareth, saying: God hath spoken many ways, he hath spoken by Angels, by prophetis, by his own mouth, by his Apostles, by his faithful servants, he speaketh: by so mean a man as I am he speaketh, when I speak any thing that is true. Ipse sonat ubique tangendo, modificando, inspirando, he soundeth every where, by touching, governing, and inspiring the heart. Furthermore albeit God hath forbidden us to eat of things offered to idols, yet hath he not forbidden us to eat that which is offered upon the altar. 1. Cor. 9 But provided that he that serveth the altar, shall take part of the altar. Or if he had not, what reason hath this our protestants argument? We must not eat things offered to idols, ergo we must have no images? Consider it by a like. We must abstain from fornication, ergo we must not have the sounday kept holiday. As for the antecedent, it is a commandment of God as well as the abstaining from things offered to idols, and the consequent followeth as well as the first. Concerning the thing itself, as the church, notwithstanding God gave a special precept to keep holy the sabaoth day, adventured to turn it into the sunday, because they would have nothing common with the jews: So the same church, sing no precept of God forbidding the image of Christ and his Saints, to be had amongst Christian men, hath not only permitted, but also commanded the said images, to be had in churches, and oratories. And sing it is so, we are as much bound to obey the church in one, as in the other. To proceed, what argument will he make, against images, of the words of S. Paul, either to the Romans, Corinthians, or Galathians? If he say: Rome, 1. 1. Cor. 5. Galat. 6. M. Calves arguments. Some changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into the likeness of an image, of a corruptible man, ergo all men did: we must not company with idolaters, ergo we must have no images: we must flee from the worshipping of Idols: ergo we must worship no images, The temple of God hath no agreement with idols, ergo the church hath no agreement with images: we must not be drunk with wine, in which there is riot, ergo we must not have any images of saints, Keep yourselves, from counterfettes: ergo have no images, We will sand him to school to learn Logic again: For this is stark naught, as every young puine that hath read his first principles may see. But peradventure M. Calf. trusting to the English doctors translation, who where he found the word Idolum in Latin, 1. Cor. 5. idolis seruiens. False translation. translated it image, in English, as where the Latin and Greek both say: I wrote unto you that you should not company with him that is a worshipper of idols, he said: I wrote unto you, that you should not company with him that is a worshipper of images, And where the Apostle said: Fugite ab idolorum cultura, Flee from the worshipping of idols, and again: Quis consensus templo Dei cum idolis? What agreement hath the church of God with idols, he said, how agreeth the temple of God with images, M. Calf. I say, thought he might be bold to bring the said places against images: but that warrant is insufficient, and authority unworthy so famous a reader: and argueth that he passeth not how shamefully he corrupteth the scripture to deceive the simple people. Wherefore to make him understand his folly, The difference between an Idol and an image. I will declare for his further instruction, what difference there is between an idol, and an image. The word idol is derived of the Greek noun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 species, Cice. libr. 15. epist. Fa. Cassia. because it showeth and pretendeth a bore shape and void figure of a thing, whereas in deed there is no such thing at all. Whereupon that which the Greeks called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 idol, the Latins called, Spectrum, and it is taken for those pillars, counterfeicts and images, which were erected to represent that which is falsely believed to be a God. Lib. 7. quest. super judic. ca 41. Idolum. 1. Cor. 8. Sonnius' Demonst. lib. 2. ca 5. Wherefore S. August calleth, idolum falsi Dei simulachrum, an idol the forged image of a false and feigned God. In which there is no power, no virtue, nor any thing but mere vanity, as appeareth by S. Paul, where he sayeth: Idolum nihil est, the idol is nothing. That is to say: Nihil habet in se eius quod creditur numinis et veritatis. It hath nothing in it of the power and truth which it is believed to be. And in this sense, it is taken in the scriptures, that M. Calf. allegeth, and in all the fathers which writ against the gross superstition, and wicked impiety of the gentils for worshipping of idols. The Christians images can not be called idols . As for our images they can neither be called Simulachra, feigned counterfeits, nor idols. For first they are not erected to represent unto us any thing, as God, nor believed to have any virtue or power in them as God. Thirdly they represent, no false nor lying thing, but that which they represent unto us is true. As the image of Christ upon the cross in the form of man, representeth unto us, that he was a mortal man, and put to death for our redemption. The image of our lady representeth unto us the mother of Christ, in whom he was incarnate, and made man. And so likewise of other saints, whereupon an image either painted or engraved in wood, Vide Quintinun Heduum in Synod. Gang impressam Paris. 1560. Imago. Actio. 4. 2. Nicae. stone, or metal, is a true representation of a thing: or a figure, likeness, and shape of him that is portraited either in the picture, or in the engraved work. It is as Germanus an holy patriarch of Constantinople declareth, a description of the stoutness of holy men, who resisted sin unto death. It is a representation of holy virtue, and dispensation of grace, given unto them. It is an admonition and instruction to glorify God, whom they served in this life. And this hath nothing that resembleth the nature of the jews idols, or gentils counterfeits, as is declared before. We Christian men call not ower images Gods, we give them no divine honour, we think no power, nor heavenly thing to consist in them. We have no hope, nor affiance of help and secure from them, as the jews had of their golden Calf, and gentils of the Counterfeictes of jupiter, Mars, Apollo, Venus, and such like. Our trust is in God, and hope in the mightiness of his power, who made both heaven and earth. Psal. 95. Him we acknowledge to be our lord and God, and noon but him. Oens dii gentium, daemonia, all the Gods of the gentiles are devils. Wherefore to all that think other wise of the catholics and take their images to be Idols, we will cry Anathema, with the fathers of Nice. Act. 6. Nicae. 2. And to all that think we worship them as God, or give honour unto them, due only to god, we will say with the good father Epiphanius, O insanientem linguam. O mad and raging tongue, edged like a sharp sword full of poison. It is but a fable of the gentiles, and invention of the devil, and work of Satan. Not Christian man giveth Latriam, Acto. 6. Nicae. 2. divine honour and service to any creature on earth. Latria nostra est in spiritu & veritate. Our honour and service dew unto God, is in spirit, and truth. What adoration and worship is given to images Genes. 23. Genes. 33. Genes. 42.43. Exod. 18 2. Reg ca ulti . The adoration, worship and honour, that we give unto images is but aulia, that is a service, which one creature oweth unto an other, and is expressed by doing reverence and honour unto a man, or some other earthly thing, either by putting of the cap, bowing the knee, humbling the body, kissing the hand, or such like. In this sort Abraham adored the people of Heth, jacob adored his brother Esawe, josephs' brothers adored him, lying flat on the ground. Moses' adored jethro his father in law. Areuma jebu seus adored David with his face flat upon the ground, jacob adored the top of josephs' rod. And after like sort do we Christian men, reverence, honour, and worship one other. When we meet together we put of the cap, we bow the knee, we humble the body, we offer to kiss the hand. In like manner when we receive the kings letters, we put of our caps. When we come into the chamber of presence, and see the cloth of estate, we show a kind of reverence and honour unto it, not respecting the paꝑ and wax, nor silken cloth, or golden chair, but the prince that wrote it, and king that sat under that cloth of estate. Right so when we see the image of Christ, or any Saint, we put of our caps, Haeb. 11. we make courtesy, we bow, Why we bow to the cross and image of Christ we cap, we kneel, and show such external reverence, and honour, not because it is made of silver and gold, or curiously wrought, or set with pearl, or finely painted, but because it representeth unto me Christ and his passion, his saints and their patience, constancy and martyrdom. And if it be idolatry for me or any Christian man, to do this, them it is idolatry to reverence my prince's image, to vail my bonnet when I receive her letter, to show reverence when I come in sight of her cloth of estate. For both have one respect. The one to the first Sampler represented by the image, the other to the prince that occupieth that seat, and gave out that seal. And if heretics do not understand this to be the doctrine of the Catholic church, they show themselves very ignorant and unskilful in the councils. For the fathers have approved it. And of many to recite a few, Images made in remembrance of Saints. Stephanus B. Bostro writeth thus. God hath cast away and condemned the idolatry of the gentils, because they were counterfeictes of of devils, we make images in remembrance of Saints. Of whom you say? Forsooth of Abraham, Moses, Elias, Esay, Zacharie, and other prophets, Apostles, and holy Martyrs, who were persecuted for Christ's sake, that every man that beholdeth them in the image may remember them, and glorify God, who honoured them. For honour and worship is sitting for them, for their righteousness, that every one, who seethe them, may be drawn to an imitation, of their good works. But what honour of adoration is this? Images painted and worshipped. Lib. 5. Apolo pro Christian. cont judeos habet. act. 4 Nicae. 2. Ezech. 40 & 41. 3. Reg. 6. & 7. verily no other than such as we use, amongst ourselves, saluting one an other for honour and love. And a little after, reasonning the matter he concludeth and sayeth. By this it is very manifest, that the images of saints who are the servants of God, are payncted, worshipped and adored. Leontins bishop of Neapolis in Cypress, proving out of the old Testament, that God commanded images to be made, as the Cherubins, which were images of Angels, lions oxen, palm trees, men, and such like, sayeth unto the jew: If thou dost reprove me for images, reprove God himself, who commanded these to be made, in remembrance of those things which we have. And when the jew replied and said. The similitudes or images were not adored as God, The Christian awnswered. You say well, for with us the images, figures, and pictures of Saints are not worshipped as Gods. For if they worshipped Gods in the wood of the images, they would not burn the image, when the form, and print of it were go. For my part (saietn he) as two pieces of wood having the figure of the cross are joined together, I adore the figure for Christ's sake: The figure of the cross worshipped for Christ's sake, and not the wood nor metal when those pieces are separated, I cast them away and burn them. And as he that receiveth a commission or placket from the Emperor, by kissing the seal worshippeth not the wax, letters, or led, but giveth that honour and reverence to the Emperor: So we that are children of christian men, adoring the figure of the cross, do not not adore the nature of the wood, but we looking upon the seal, ring, figure, and Christ himself, salute and adore him by this figure, who was crucified upon it. Thus much Leontins, and much more in the same sense worthy of all men to be noted and read. Libr. 7. epist. 53. S. Gregory wrting to Secundinus who desired to have the images of Christ, S. Peter, and S. Paul, sent him, sayeth: I know, you desire not the image of our Saviour for that intent, that you will worship it as a God, but that by remembrance of it, you may be fervent in the love of God. And we do not fall down before it, as before God, but we adore him, whom by the image we remember either borne, either to have suffered, or sitting in his throne. Lib. 4 ca 12. de orthod fide . Damascene sayeth, we adore the figure of the precious and lively cross, albeit it be made of an other matter, not worshipping the matter (for God forbidden that). But the figure, as the sign of Christ. To be short, to declare the doctrine of the church in this point, Gratian, (whom you so much spite and malice) reciteth this Canon out of the syxt Synod. The Christians call not the reverend images Gods, De consec. dist. 3. cap. venerabiles. The sixth Synod. The 7 general council. Actio. 7. Images commanded to be set in churches. nor serve them as God, nor put hope of salvation in them, nor look for the judgement that is to come of them, but they worship and adore them, for the memory and reverence of the originals and first samplers, but they serve them not with divine honour, nor any other creature. The seventh genial council sayeth. We conclude that images be had and set up in churches etc. that by this beholding and sing of images, all that look upon them may come to the memory, remembrance, and desire of the first samplers, and give unto them a gentle salutation and courtiouse kind of adoration, not adoration dew unto God, according to our faith, but such as we give to the figure of the reverend and lively cross, and gospels of Christ etc. for the honour of the image redoundeth to the first sampler, and he that adoreth an image, adoreth the thing described in the image. Wherefore sing it is so? what honesty is in this man, that bringeth the places of scriptures and fathers, that speak against the idols which the seduced jews and gentils worshipped and adored as Gods, and took for God's, against the images of the Christians which we profess to be no Gods, nor of any divine and heavenvly power? Yea what Christian charity is in his heart that ceaseth not to upbraie us with gross idolatry that are redeemed with the death of Christ, and brought out of thraldom of the devil, and such abomination, as the gentils use, by his passion, and have learned to adore him in spirit and truth, and defy all idols, and accursed idolaters? The devil him self could say no more. But let it be their evangelical charity, what reason is there in this saying? Fol. 15. b Calf. An image can not be made of Christ except it be a lying image: for Christ is god and man. And since of the Godhead which is the most excellent part, no image can be made, it is falsely called the image of Christ: and they that do any honour unto it, are mere idolaters, making Christ thereby inferior to his father, cleaving only to his humanity, whereas we should so honour the son as they honour the father? joan. 5. Mart. Would any be sides a succourer of old errors, and revyuer of cankered heresies have made the like? This was one of the greatest reasons, that the image breakers made in their conventicle and conspiracy of Constantinople. And sing M. Calf. borroweth it of them, I might condemn him as an heretic with them. But that the world may see, what foolish fancies they have that impugn images, Actio 6 Nicae. 2. The heretics objections I will lay forth the answers that Epiphanius made for whole council of Nice to like objections, and then frame one to this. The heretics objected this in effect as M. Calf. doth, and said: Christ is God and man: Therefore if you make an image of Christ, it must be an image of God and man. And if that be true, then must either his deity be circumscribed, or his unity be confounded. Epiphanius answered. This word Christ doth signify the deity and humanity (that is) both the perfect natures of Christ. Epiphanius answer. According to that nature in which he was seen, Christian men have learned to paincte his image, and not according to that nature in which he was invisible: for that can not be described. For we have heard out of the Gospel, that no man ever saw God. joan 1. 1. joan. 4. Therefore when Christ is painted in his humane nature, as the truth of the thing showeth, Christian men profess and acknowledge that they shape the image that they see, to the first sampler according to the name, and not according to essence, or substance, The image of Christ painted as he was man. that is (to make it plainer) they profess to payncte Christ, as man only, and not as God and man. These light losells teach that there is no difference between the image, and the first sampler, that is between the bore image, and the thing represented by the image, et in diversis substantijs identitatem substantiae indicant and in diverse substances, show an idenditie of substance. Again he sayeth: Not man is so mad that saying the humane nature may be circumscribed goeth about by that, to circumscribe the nature which can by no means be circumscribed. Christ as he was man, was in jury, and Galilee. As he was God, he is in every place, and continueth, not able by any means to be circumscribed. If when he lay wrappeth in swadeling clotheses in the manger, his divinity was enwrapped by the nature of his humanity, then shall his divinity, that is uncircumscriptible, be circumscribed in a coloured image, but if his divinity was not enwrapped there, in the clotheses, nor can his divinity be circumscribed here in the image. I would they would acknowledge and call to rememaraunce that saying of holy S. Dionyse, in his Hierarcihe. Where he saith: S. Dyonise. Non est exacta similitudo causatis & causis, habent enim causata causarum contingentes imagines. Ipsae vero causae secundum proprij principij rationem exemptae sunt & supereminent. There is no exact or perfect likeness between things that are caused, and the causes themselves. For the things caused have the accident images or likeness of the causes. The causes themselves, are exempt and do overpass all, according to the nature of their own first beginning. And by this we may see, that Christ being God and man, may be payncted, as man, albeit he can not be payncted as God, because every image is made to the imitation of the name, and not according to the nature and substance of the represented. Another objection of theirs with which M. Calfhill also chargeth the catholics was this: To make an image of Christ in his humane nature, as he walked here in earth etc. is wicked and savouring of the heresy of Nestorius. Answer To this Epiphanius answered: The Christians knowing Christ to be God, paint him as he was made man, and besides reject and cast from them all idle fancies. And receiving plainly, and simply, all things that are delivered of the church, and beholding pictures or images, they conceive nothing in their mind, but that which is signified by them. For when they behold in the picture that the virgin hath brought forth a son, The meditations of true Christians when they see the image of Christ. and the angel and sheapeardes standing by, they think with themselves, that God is made man, and borne for our salvation. And that they acknowledge saying: He that is without flesh, is now incarnate and borne in flesh, he that is unable to be touched, is now touched and felt. And so they acknowledge and confess him to be one, perfect in his humanity and deity. As for Nestorius, Nestorius' heresy. he made two sons, unum verbum patris, alterum Filium virginis. One the word of the father, an other the son of the virgin. But true Christians confess Christ their lord, They do well that pay act the image of Christ. and God, to be but one son. And when they paint his image as he was incarnate and made man, they are knownen to do very well and godly. For God the son being made man, was conversant with us in flesh. The deity is not considered payncted: for no man ever saw God. For he can not be painted, seen, or comprised, but only his humanity. For we know Christ to be of two natures, and in two natures, that is of humane and divine, jointly without division. One of them is unable to be payncted, the other able to be payncted, is considered in one Christ. In what an image must be like the first sampler. The soul of a man not of any sought in his image And the image is not like the first sampler according to his substance, but only in respect of name and disposition of lineaments expressed by the parts of the body. For when a painter, painteth the image of a man, no man requireth or seeketh the soul in the image. And verily the difference of the soul of man, and the divine nature is severed. The divine nature is uncreated, and without all tyme. The soul of man is created, made in time, and framed by the divine nature. further: Not man that is wise, sing the image of man, ever thought that the man was severed from his soul by the paincter. For the image is not only deprived of the soul, but of the substance of the body, as flesh, musculles, sinews, bones, blood, phlegm, choler, and humours, the mixture whereof can not be seen in the image. For if it could be seen in the image, we would call it a man, and not an image. As for the denying or confounding of both natures, by painting Christ as man, he sayeth thus in effect. The talk which they have of denying and consounding the divine and human nature, hath no truth. For the image is one thing, and the proportion and original another. What is to be looked for in an image. Nor any man that wise is, will seek the properties of the original in the image. For true reason seeketh nothing else in an image, but a community of the name, whose image it is. It knoweth not the substance of the original. Thus much Epiphanius. Now to come to M. Calfhills' reason. We deny his principle, and require him to prove, according to his promiss, by scripture, council, and ancient father, that because Christ is both God and man, Fol. 1●. b an image can not be made of him, except it be a lying image. For Christ may be payncted in the form and shape of a man, as he walked here in earth, and died on the cross, albeit his godhead which is the most excellent part, can not be comprised in any image. Neither are they liars, that call any such picture the image of Christ, Fol 15. b They are not liere nor idolaters that call the image made to represent christ, the image of Christ. neither they mere idolaters that worship it. For it is not necessary in an image, that there be an exact similitude in all proportions. Nor it is required, that the image be like the original and first sampler, according to the substance, but only in respect of name and disposition of the parts of the body. Wherefore if Christ be payncted in the habit of man, either as he waulked here on earth, or as he died on the cross, or as be roose from the dead and ascended to heaven, it may welbe said this is the image of Christ, although the true form and proportion of his body be not known to us. As for his sentence adjudging them mere idolaters, that honour that image, it is but rash, foolish, and ignorant, and argueth that he knoweth not, who be idolaters. Who are idolaters. Lib. 10. ca 6. de Trin. Therefore for his further instruction, I will tell him. S. Augustine sayeth: Idololatrae dicuntur qui simulachris eam servitutem exhibent quae debetur Deo. They are called idolaters, who give that service to false images which is dew to God. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The service dew to God (called of the Grecians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) consisteth principally in three things, to wit, in acknowledging him to be lord of all lords, maker and creator of all things, and giver of all goodness to man. Next in loving him with all our hearts with all our souls, and with all our power. Then in offering unto him sacrifice of prayer, thanks giving, and the precious body, and blood of his son, jesus Christ. This honour and service was never given by Christian man to images. The honour and worship which the church alloweth to images, is no other, but a reverent putting of the cap, bowing, kneeling, kissing, or such like, which, sing it hath been done, and may be done to creatures, we are no more idolaters, for using the like to any image, than you are for kneeling to the prince, for putting of yower cap to the cloth of estate, for kissing the queens seal, or bowing to yower friend when you meet him. Fol 15. b Fol. 16. a A sclaunderaus cavil Christ not made inferior to his father by any Painting of images Where he sayeth: that we by making an image of Christ, make him inferior to his father, and cleave only to his humanity, it is but a mere sclanderouse cavil. For the making of an image, is the work of man's hand, and by such work Christ can not be made inferior to his father. When Christ walked here on earth, the disciples honoured him, and waited upon him, and served him as man, his mother attended upon him, the Maries and other holy women followed him as man. Mathaeus and Zachaeus received him into their houses as man: and because they did serve him, honour him, and follow him as man, did they therefore deny him to be God? and make him inferior to the father, or cleave only to his humanity? No sir: In like manner when we payncte him as man, engrave his image as man, or portraicte him upon the cross crucified as man, do we deny him to be God, or make him inferior, to the father or cleave only to his humanity? What extreme folly is in this follishe fantasy? A question to M. Calf . Let me ask M. Calf. this question. When you made and penned yower last sermon, did you writ the name of Christ in it or no? If you did, you did it in paper and ink, and because paper and ink can not contain the power of God, Whither he that writeth the name of jesus in ink paper maketh him inferior to his father. nor divinity of Christ, did you deny Christ to be God, or make him inferior to his father, and cleave only to his humanity? Answer M. Calf. And if you by writing his name in ink and paper, do not deny him to be God, nor make him inferior to his father, no cleave only to his humanity, no more do we by making his image in colours, or in any kind of metal. But as you by writing his name in ink, and paper, do by reading or pronouncing of it transmitte him by the ear into the mind, and there conceive him to be both God ad man: Even so we by payncting him as man, do by the eye transmitte him into the heart, and there adore and worship him as God, and man, of equal substance with the father, and never separate his divine and humane nature. But put case in painting Christ as man, we did make him inferior to the father? Are we therefore idolaters M. Calf? Did not Christ say, Pater maior me est? My father is greater than I am? Doth not the Catholic church sing in the crede made by Athanasius, joan. 14. Minor patre secundum humanitatem? In Symbolo Athanasij . Christ is lesser than the father according to his humanity? And if Christ be inferior to his father as he was man, is it not lawful for us to think so of him? And if it be lawful to think so of him, is it not lawful to paint him so, and set him forth in a picture as man and yet commit no idolatry? Answer directly sir. Unless you quit yourself the better, either you must recant with great shame, or deny the gospel of Christ, and doctrine of the church with impudent arrogancy. For they manifestly teach that Christ according to his humanity is inferior to his father. And that being true, it is no idolatry nor to think him nor make him in that sense inferior to his father. Thus for that objection, wherein if I have been somewhat long, pardon me (gentle reader). It is all to make the matter plain to thy capacity. If I had to do with M. Calf. alone in the schools, I would have denied his argument, and required his ministershippe to have made these consequents good. Christ is God, and man, ergo there can be no image made of him as man. There can be no image of the godhead, ergo there can be true image of Christ, as man, ergo they that honour it, are mere idolaters, making Christ thereby inferior to his father, and cleaving only to his humanity. And when he had justified them by scripture, council, or ancient father, or any good reason, I would have given him the victory, and so will I yet, unless I convince and impugn his reason with better. In the mean time we will believe the ordinances of the Catholic church, and boldly affirm that as man consisting of body and soul, An image of man may be painted although the soul can not be expressed. Fol. 16. a may be payncted, albeit the soul which is the chiefest part can by no art be expressed: Even so our Saviour Christ may be painted, engraved, and represented by an image in the form and shape of man, albeit the divinity which is the chiefest part be uncircumscriptible, indivisible, incomprehensible and unable by any means to be expressed. But the reason is nothing like, quoth M. Calf. For the soul may be severed from the body as daily by death we see by experience. Nor is it impiety to think upon, or behold the shape of a man without a soul, but the divinity of Christ can not be separated from his humanity. Neither is it lawful to imagine an humanity without a divinity jest we fall into the heresy of Nestorius. To reprove that he varieth far from all good reason, ask him first (good readers) whither our saviour Christ died not for us, as man, and whither he gave not up the ghost, and lay in the gave as man? The soul of Christ severed from his body at his death. and if he confess it, (as he must) if he be a Christian man, then ask him whither the soul of Christ was not severed at that time from the body, and if he acknowledge it, then ask him whither it be impiety for us to think that the soul of Christ was severed from his body? If he account it noon, then must he seek for a new reason to prove, that albeit man consisting of body and soul may painted, yet Christ consisting of his human and divine nature, can not be painted as man, for this will not serve. Again whereas we talk of painting, ask him why he changeth the state of question, M Calf fleeth from the question. and runneth to thinckinge, and where we speak of engraving, why doth he run to ymagining, and from the hand why doth he flee to the heart? ower controversy is not whither the mind may think, or the heart imagine the humanity of Christ, without the divinity, but whither the hand may paint him, as man, not withstanding it is not able to paint his divinity. And to this he sayeth nothing, worthy the hearing, nor can if he would. For look how lawful it is for him to have his wives image or counterfeicte of his friend, in his house: So lawful it is for us, to have the image of our saviour Christ in the shape of man, both in the church and house. Nor do we Christian men, Christian men never separate the divinity of Christ from his humanity. when we behold that image separate in heart and thought, the divinity, from the humanity, nor think of Christ as only man, but we believe him, we acknowledge him, we confess him to be God and man, equal with his father in substance, and everlasting in divine Majesty with him. This with heart we believe, and this with mouth we confess, and worship him in spirit, and truth, whom we know to be repnsented by that image. Nor was there ever Christian man, allowed of the church, that thought contrary. Wherefore M. Calf. may seek other, whom he may upbraid with the heresy Nestorius, for painting the image of Christ as man. For that slander can not light upon the Catholics. His other two reasons that follow are witless. Fol. 16 a M. Calves reasons . For who would say as he doth, Christ carried his flesh up unto heaven with him, no more to be known according to flesh, ergo we fleshly creatures do fall from his will, when we make a counterfeit of his mortal flesh, whereas his is glorified? Again unknown it is what was the form and countenance of Christ. Therefore as soon as an image of Christ is painted by and by a lie is made? I assure you no simple logisoner, The proꝑties of the original not to be sought in an image. The properties of the example not to besought in the image much less a solemn reader of Paul's ought to use such baggage for very shame. It is but paltry. For it is not necessary (as I said before out of Epiphanius) that the image be like the original, and first sampler in substance: nor any man that wise is, will seek the properties of the original, in the image. For true reason seekethe nothing in an image, but the community of the name, and disposition of lyneamentes expressed by the parts of the body. If it should have all the ꝓperties and qualities of the original, then should it be no image, but the thing itself. As if the picture which the payncter draweth, should have flesh, blood musculls, sinews, life and other properties, and qualities that rest in the original, we would no longer account it an image but a man. Wherefore we tell M. Calf. that in this case he is lurdely deceived, and that unless he prove by scriptures, counsels and fathers, that all the properties of Christ and his blessed flesh, must be expressed in his image, he shalbe a liar for saying, It is a lying image, and not the image of Christ. Now touching his authorities brought out of Epiphanius, Irenaeus, and S. Augustine, ye shall understand that he belieth Epiphanius and Irenaeus, and falsifieth S. Augustine. For neither did Epiphanius rend a painted cloth wherein was the picture of Christ or some saint, Fol. 141. b as shall appear hereafter, in the 5. Article: Neither did Irenaeus reprove the heretics called Gnostici, for that they carried about the image of Christ. Irenaeus writeth thus of those accursed heretics. Irenaeus lib. 1. c. 14. The Gnostics. They call themselves Gnostics, they have also certain payncted images, and certain made of other matter, saying that it was the shape and ꝓportion of Christ made of Pilate, at what time jesus was conversant here with men, and those images they crowned with garlands, and set them forth with the images of the Heathen Philosophers (that is to say with the image of Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle, and others) and did other solemnities about them as the gentils do. Thus much Irenaeus of that matter. And where is there in all this, any one word which reproveth the Gnostics, for that they carried about the image of Christ? Irenaeus doth but only declare the fact, and addeth no words of reproof, nor can it be gathered of his words or any circumstances that he reproved them for that. The cause why he reproved them, What Irenaeus reproved in those heretics. was because they placed the image of Christ with the image of Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle and other heathen Philosophers, and used such solemnities and observations about them as the gentils did. And this was the thing that Irenaeus reproved, and not the having and carrying about the image of Christ. S. August. falsified . Where he sayeth, that S. Augustine alloweth M. Varro, affirming that religion is most pure without images, and citeth for his credit in the margin, De civitate Dei lib. 4. cap. 3, You shall understand that in all that chapter S. Augustine doth no so much as mention M. Varro. That which he meaneth is in the 31. chapter of the said book. There he talketh of M. Varro, and commendeth him for a wise man, but these very words, that religion is most pure without images, Words attributed to S. Augustine not sound in him. are not to be found in the whole chapter: he sayeth: The Romans continued more than an hundred and seventy years, s●ne simulachro, without an idol, without a false and feigned images and if that had continued, he sayeth: Castius dij obseruamce. The Gods had been better honoured. Again he thought, castius observari sine simulachris religionem, that religion would have been more reverently and better observed without idols, or feigned images. That is to say, he thought that if they had had no idols, nor false images of God's, they would have thought better of God, and not have believed their idols, their stocks, and stones to have been Gods. But what is this to that which M. Calf. maketh S. Augustine father upon M. Varro, that religion is most pure without images? Can the having of images make religion worse, and the not having of them make it better? That were worthy the learning of so fine a fansier. Wise men think that religion, which (as S. Augustine sayeth) is cultus divinitati, Religion. Lib. 10. ca 1. de civit. Dei. vel deitati debitus, a worship dew unto the divinity, or godhead, continueth always one, and as the logisioners say, non suscipit magis & minus, is no more a worship this day, than it was yesterday, no more purer this day, than it was yesterday. And whither we have images, or no images, religion shalbe most pure always. All that M. Varro said, and S. Augustine reported in the foresaid place is, The effect of M varro his saying. that if the Romans had had no idols nor feigned images, men would have thought better of God, and have served him better, men would have kept religion better. Men that knew not God, nor could lift up their eyes to heaven, and conceive that there was a God, would have quickly learned that there had been a God, if they had had no earthly idols, which they might have honoured, and worshipped as God. But what is this to us, that know God, worship God, and are delivered from such ignorance, superstition, and idolatry by our saviour Christ through the great mercy of God? how dare you crack M. Calfhil that our religion is corrupted with them which we use not? The Christians when the jews would not give them the body of S. Polycarpe, thinking they would forsake Christ and worship him, said: Euseb. lib. 4. cap. 15. The miserable wretches know not, that we can not forsake Christ that suffered death for the salvation of the world, nor worship any other, because we know the true God that must be worshipped. So say we to these protestants that think we commit idolatry, forsake Christ, and corrupt his religion with images. And in deed they show themselves very wretches, that have so vile imaginations of any Christian man. There is noon unless he be mad, but can tell a difference between a dead and senseless thing, and that which hath both life and soul. Every child yea every beast knoweth, that it is not God, whom they see, as M. Calf. allegeth out of S. Augustine: In Psal. 36 & 113. which words although in part they be true, yet are they not all S. Augustine's words, nor these that follow, neither in such sort as they be alleged. Mark and you shall see. M. Calf. putteth them down thus. Every child, yea every beast knoweth that it is not God that they see. Fol. 15. a Wherefore then doth the holy Ghost so often warn us of that which all men know? he answereth thus. For when the images, are placed in temples in honourable sublimity, and begin once to be worshipped, forth with breadeth the most vile affection of error. S. Augustine talking there of the gentils idols, and declaring, that the God which they worshipped, was blind, deaf, dumb, immovable, unsensible, dead, and worse than the dead, sayeth: O my dearly beloved brethren, what is more manifest than this? what is more evident? what child being asked, is not able to answer, that it is certain that the images of the gentils have mouths, and will not speak, eyes and will not see, and the rest which the word of God hath adjoined? Why then doth the holy Ghost so earnestly provide to insinuate and inculcate those things, as it were to ignorants? as though they were not most open and well known to men, but because he signifieth by the shape and proportion of the membres, which we have been accustomed naturally to see in other, and see in ourselves. Albeit as they affirm in some sign made cunningly, and set up in an high place, when it beginneth to be adored and honoured of the multitude, it breadeth the most filthiest affection of error, that because he findeth not in the feigned image, a lively moving, he believeth that there is some divine power in it, yet for all that being deceived with the shape, and moved with the authority of wise masters, and obedient people, he thinketh the image, that is like a live body, is not without some lively inhabitor: upon this, such like affection of men inviteth wicked devils to possess the gentils idols, by whose manifest deceits resting there, diverse manifest errors are sowed and multiplied. Therefore in other places also the holy scripture doth watch diligently against these idols, nor let any man say, The scripture against idols. when these forged images are irrided, I worship not this visible thing that we see, but the power that lieth secret within. But those powers the scriptures condemn: Quoniam dij gentium, daemonia, because the Gods of the gentils are devils. And a little after he sayeth: They seem unto themselves to be of a more purer religion, which say, I worship not the image, nor the devil, but by the bodily shape, I see the sign of that thing which I must worship. What the Gentiles understood by their idols. So in good sooth they take and understand their images, that by one they say, the earth is signified, whereupon they are wont to call the temple of the earth, by an other they signify the sea, as by the image of Neptune, by another the fire, as by the image of Vulcan, by another the day star, as by the image of Venus, by another the sun, by another the moon, to whose images they give names, as they did to the image of the earth. By another they signify this star, and that star, this creature, and that creature, for we are not able to express all. Words not in S. Augustine . Thus far S. Augustine touching that which master Calf. allegeth. And in all this, where are those words. For when images are placed in temples, which he fathereth upon S. Augustine? They are not there, nor any one word against the images of the Christians. All his discourse in that place is against the false images of Neptune, Vulcan, juno, Venus, and the creatures which they did worship as gods, as the sun, the moon, the stars, the earth the sea, and such like. Which being so, what honesty is there in this minister to falsify S. Augustine, and turn that to the Christians, which he spoke of the Gentiles, and to allege that against their images which was spoken against idols? S. Augustine himself, best interpreter of his own words, giveth us to understand, in that place rehearsed, that the present Psalm which he handled, and other places of scripture spoke against those feigned and forged counterfeits of the gentils, and idols, which they worshipped. Yet notwithstanding he is so impudent, that he sayeth: Fol. 15. a An impudent lie. Thus all the doctors have thought the commandment to extend to us, and that ower images are forbidden by it. And of all the doctors, in this place, he hath recited, but three, and those three make nothing for him, as in part you see, and shall see further hereafter. But to oppose him a little better, The doctors allow images. tell us sir, were not Paulinus, Gregorius, Damascenus, Euthymius, Athanasius, Ambrose, Isidorus, Hieronymus, Gregorius Nissenus, and S. Basile, doctors of the church? And have you not read that Paulinus painted images in his church, that S. Gregory rebuked him that broke them, that Damascene made a book of them, that Athanasius accounted them amongst things appartayning to the church, and the adourning and setting forth of our faith, that Euthymius told the Emperor, that our saviour Christ ever sithence his incarnation have been worshipped in images? Have you not read, that S. Ambrose thought it lawful to worship an image, that Hierome had the cross in Bethlem, and licked it, and kissed it? Have you not read that Saint Gregory liked the image of Abraham sleying his son Isaac? that S. Basill counted it Apostolicum, a commandment or tradition of the Apostles to set up images in the churches? If you have, then can you not say, all the doctors have thought the commandment to extend to us, and that our images are forbidden by it. For all these doctors, and the whole Catholic church beside have always allowed images, and never thought this commandment to inhibit our images. If you have not read so far in the said fathers, but have trusted your english doctors, your Magdeburgenses, your M. Calvin, and such Apostatats, begin now to take them in hand. And if it be too cumbrous or longue to overrun them all, then read the discourse of the seventh general Council kept at Nice: or if that be loathsome and tedious, read the fourth and fift dialogue of M. Alane Cope lately set forth, and this reply of mine. There and here shall you see that it was never inhibited Christian men by any commandment of God, in the whole scriptures, to make images and worship them, in such sot as I declared before. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Fol. 15. a Nor think M. Calfhill, that you have any advantage by the jews, to whom the law was first given, and who of congruence should have the true sense and meaning of it, because they had no images publicly in their temples. M. Calves running to the jews and Turks helpeth him not . It furthereth yower cause nothing. They had the law, the ꝓphetts, and Christ himself amongs them: Yet did not all their skill in the law, and prophetts, and miracles of Christ, persuade them that he was the Messiah that was the expectation of the gentils, and redeemer of the world. They did not think that he was king of the jews, and saviour of Israel. They did not believe that a virgin should bring forth a son with out breach of her virginity. They did not understand the mysteries of our faith, their minds were so addicted to the bore and literal sense of the law. What consequution is this M. Calf. The jews and Turks have no images in their temple, ergo Christian men should have noon their churches Likewise the Turks until this day do not believe that the Messiah is come. they believe not that Christ hath died for the redemption of many: They have no faith in his passion, no trust in his resurrection, nor hope of his mercy. They have no sacrament, no baptism, no supper of our lord, nor gospel, nor Christ. And because they have noon, shall we have noon? what a sleight of Satan is this? To bring in more absurdititie, see how madly this minister reasoneth. The jews and turks have no images in their temples, ergo Christian men should have noon in their churches? If he might win so much of him, as to think, that a sufficient and good argument, then would he have other in store, as for example. The jews and Turks do not believe that the Messiah is come, ergo the Christians should not. The jews and Turks have no baptism, ergo the Christians should have noon. The jews and Turks have no Sacraments ergo the Christians should have noon. The jews keep not holy the sunday, ergo the Christians should not. The jews and Turks have no Gospel nor Christ, ergo the Christians should have nor Gospel nor Christ. By like reason as M. Calf. concludeth negatively, that we must have no images in our churches, because the Turks and jews had noon in their temples, he will negatyvely conclude all the other, and upon the granting of of the first infer the rest, and so bring his disciples a little and little to Atheism. Wherefore I much marvel that M. Calf. would use that reason of the jews, and allege that of the Turks. It convinceth him of inexcusable folly, and declareth that he, and his fellow protestants, in this point resemble the jews and Turks, as nigh as can be. For as the jews and Turks detested and abhorred images, Heretics resemble the jews and Turks. so do they. As the jews and turks counted images to be idols, so do they. As the jews and Turks called the christians idolaters, for having and worshipping of images, so do they. As the jews and Turks think it lawful to put away their wives in case of fornication, and mary another. So would M. Calf. and the protestants have it lawful for them. The jews and Turks mary according to Moses' law in the degrees of affinity. Melanch. in locis come 52. So M. Calf. and his fellows think it good that Christians should mary, for he findeth fault with the order of the church prohibiting marriage within the degrees of affinity. The jews and Turks have their Canon of scripture, Melanch. Ibidem. diverse from the Christians, and reject diverse parts of the old testament, so have M. Calf. and his fellows one diverse from the catholic church, and reject the Maccabees, Ecclesiast. and other parts. The jews and Turks do no penance, nor use any confession of their sins, no more doth M. Calf. nor his. The jews and Turks detest the cross as a sign of malediction. M. Calf. abhorreth it as a magical inchauntement, as a sorcerous mace, and as a sign of conquest against the Christians. And unless God of his goodness, stay the rage of heresy, they will agree in the other points. As David George began, Trinitaries. and the Trinitaries, Anabaptists, and such as circumcide themselves practice apace in Polonia. Wherefore sing the commandment of God in Exodus, and other places of scriptures make nothing against images amongst Christian men, sing the doctors teach that the precept of God doth not inhibit our images, but declare the contrary, sing the reason that M. Calf. borroweth of the jews and Turks, is but jewish and Turkish, and as meat to infringe all the mysteries of our faith and redemption, as to convince that there should be no images in churches, it is evident that all his babbling proveth nothing against the use of images. His other position that images do not teach, is a thing more boldly avouched, than wisely proved. To every good Christian, Lively 9 epist. 9, ad Sere. Actio. 4 Nicae. 2. Oratio. in laudes Theodo. martyr. Ser. de 40. mart. the authority of the church shallbe a sufficient warrant. And sing S. Gregory calleth them: Lay men's books which serve the ignorant in stead of writings, And Germanus taketh them to be a representation of the stoutness of saints, and an instruction to teach us to glorify God. And Gregorius Nissenus sayeth: Solet etiam pictura tacens in pariete loqui, maximeque prodesse. A still picture also in the wall is wounte to speak, and profit very much: and S. Basile termeth them a still poetry, and affirmeth, the profit of pictures and writing to be one, and sayeth: That drawing of things lively in a table hath stirred many to valiant courage, I trust with all indifferent men. S. Gregory, Germanus, Gregorius Nissenus, and S. Basill shall more prevail than the fancy of this protestant, who as he ran to the jews and Turks even now to prove that we should have no images in churches: So for proof of this, Fol. 11. b Amadys. he fleeth to one Amadies a gold smithe of London, lying in his bed, at the point of death, when commonly men's senses and wits fail them, to prove that images can not teach. And because he tormented with the agonies and pangs of death, having the cross presented unto him to put him in remembrance of his maker, asked what is the price of an ounce, This wise merchant shutteth up the matter, as though it could not put other in remembrance of Christ, and sayeth. Fol. 12. a Such is the fruit that the unlearned receive by images, yea though they be of the best sort. But that you may better understand the weakness of his reason, consider his argument: thus in effect, he sayeth, or must say if he will prove that images do not teach. M. Calves argument that images do not teach. Amadys' lying at the point of death, when men's wits and senses commonly fail them, was not put in remembrance of Christ by the cross presented unto him by his person, ergo men that are whole, and in no such extremity, can not be put in remembrance by it. And if this be not, in the judgement of some hot protestant, a doltish kind of reasoning, let him consider it by the like. Some that are almost dead in the lewd lusts of sin, take no commodity by the word of God preached by their person: Ergo no man doth. The scholar who hath neither wit nor capacity, taketh no profit by his masters lessons. Ergo noon of the rest can. The man that is desperately sick of a frenzy can have no help by physic, Ergo no other may. And if these be vain, and fond, so think of his. For as diverse take commodity by the word of God when it is preached, albeit every sinful man whose heart is obdurated, doth not, and diverse scholars receive, profit of their masters lessons, albeit the dullard can not, and many have help by physic although the prontike fool hath not: So albeit Amadies the gold smithe lying at the point of death was not put in remembrance of Christ, by the cross, yet diverse other are, and stirred to devotion, and contemplation of the merits of his passion. For if Gregorius Nissenus a famous doctor, Lib 22. ca 73 contra Faust. Manich. Actio. 4 Nicae 2. and learned bishop sing the image of Abraham and his son Isaac, tot locis pictum, payncted in so many places, as S. Augustine sayeth, wept when he saw it, and never passed by it, without tears, how much more will the whole discourse of our saviour Christ's life here incarnate upon earth being seen of us, move all that behold it, to tears, and other further commodity? Certes, now where charity is cold, and faith not fervent, although men seeing the cross and image of Christ crucified, do not weep, as Gregorius Nissenus did, when he saw the image of Abraham, offering his son, yet no doubt, every well disposed man hath some good motion and meditation of the mercy of our saviour Christ, by the sight of it. As for that which he objecteth, against Stephen Gardiner, Fol. 11. b Stephen Gardiner. that he was foully abused by an image, and found S. George on horseback in the kings broad seal, where the king himself was set on both sides, it is but a mere cavil. The wisdom, learning, gravity, and experience of that reverend father and honourable counsellor was not to seek, to know S. George on horse back in battle, from king Henry in peace. But of that hereafter, when I talk of his slanderous lies. In the mean time consider good readers upon what grounds this man buildeth his new doctrine, and as you find them weak, so imagine of all that is builded. Fol. 19 b To draw towards an end of this preface, where he sayeth: that if the Louanists had but a mangled piece of such a precedent for the Pope, as they have for every prince, found in the ancient records of London, remaining in the Guild hall, lord how would they triumph? they would desiphire, Fol. 20. a and by Rhetoric resolve every letter of it, I beseek you that have experience of his fine wit, examine the words, which he citeth out of an epistle of ●le●therius the Pope sent to ●ucius king of England. The words that he buildeth upon, are these. Fol. 19 b A sentence forte out of the Guild hall in London. You have both testaments in your realm. Take out of them by the grace of God and advise of your subjects, a law, and by that law through God's sufferance, rule your realm, but be you God's vicar in that kingdom. Here because Eleutherius Pope of Rome willed Lucius king of England (that sent unto him for laws to govern his people) to take laws out of the old and new Testament, and appointed him to be the vicar of God in that realm, M. Calf. thinketh his own desperate cause, to be greatly advantaged against the Pope. But I pray you, ask his wisdom, who is of greater authority, The man that appointeth the law, or he that receiveth the law? The commissioner, or he that giveth the commission? The Lieutenant, or the prince that appointeth the Lieutenant? The Viceroy, or the king that maketh the viceroy? If he acknowledge him that appointeth the law to be of greater authority, than the man that receiveth the law, and the prince that giveth a commission, to be of higher dignity, M. Calf. condennend by his own sentence brought out of Guild hall in London. than the commissioner that receiveth the commission, then must he needs condemn himself. For by the ancient records, remaining in Guild hall in London, it is evident that Eleutherius pope of Rome, appointed laws for Lucius king of England, and gave him authority, and commission to be Vicarium Dei, God's vicar, in that land. And look how hire in dignity he is, that appointeth the law, than he is that receiveth the law, he that giveth the commission, than he that receiveth the commission, so higher was Eleutherius then Lucius, and the pope then the prince. Which being so, Lord how hath M. Calf. deceived himself, with a piece of a sentence, brought out of the ancient records of London, remaining in the Guild hall? how hath he opened his own ignorance, and resolved a great piece of his folly? Is it not great pity for so learned a reader to be so grossly deceived in so plain a matter? Lord what oversight was this of those that had the oversight and view of his book before it come to print with out privilege? Must all syphre, and noon disiphre, nor by rhetoric resolve every lettre o●●his, and by logic prove, that it would make against him? Lord what a escape was that? Any of those whom it pleaseth his worship to call the famous writers of Lovayne, Fol. 19 b could have better advised his clarkship in this cause, if he had but once mentioned the matter unto them: yea the meanest of them all, (that as he sayeth be great clerk, Fol. 19 b bachelors of divinity, and students of the same, as soon as they taste the good liquor of Lovayne, could have signified that the sentence borrowed out of the Guild hall of London would make against him. And (be it spoken with out pride,) the meanest of them all could teach him, and all his more true divinity in one day, than he or his have taught the people in sundry points, these seven years. And albeit amongst them, we be no more known than contemned, yet shall our doings not lack estimation with the wise, nor intent lose his reward with the highest, when he and his shalbe unknown, and contemned with the lowest, if they amend not by tyme. We know it to be an old practice with heretics, Noon learned in the judgement of heretics but such as savour them. to contemn all that favour not their heresy, and think all unlearned that fancy not their faction. But he that was but yesterday a Cobbler, shalbe within few months, a profound minister, and great Rabbi, nor unknown nor contemned, if Apollo cast his curtain about him and the spirit inspire him to favour the procedings. Yea he shalbe such a docterlike man, that if the best of all the papists were matched wih him, Fol. 19 a The best of the papists not to be matched with the simplest protestant. Lib. 1. cap. 14. Trip. being but the simplest of their side, they should have great wrong. For which excessive pride well may we with Alexander bishop of Alexandria, having to do with arrogant heretics cry, O wicked arrogancy, O unmeasurable madness, O rage of vain logrie, O wisdom of Satan vehemently invading their wicked souls. But redress it we can not. Nor let them swell like hills in pride, nor be witless like Caulfes, nor be full of lies like lorrels, nor be ●●atting like paratts, nor prating like pies, nor clipping like cut purses, nor scolding like queans. It is a natural disease passing with the inheritance. Wherefore if we will do them good, the only remedy must be to pray unto almighty God to give them the spirit of humility and grace to know themselves. So may it come to pass, that they shall mislike singularity, and mistrust they own wisdom, and so by conference with the other, attain to the knowledge of the truth, which God of his goodness grant. If any wilful protestant, or hot heretic myslyke my writing, for that I dip my pen sometimes ing all, and use certain terms, inflamed (as it may seem) with choler, In the epistle. I desire them to consider charitably whose words these are. Wilful wanderer, young scholar, pelting peddler, Sinon, a Fol. 18. b Ape, servant to the devil, b Ib●. ●● b stuimmblg lad, c 40. b hasty hound, d Fol. 32. b Tapster, Tinker, ostler, lewd apothecary, Cook ruffian, e Fol 90 a puine, sir boy, f Fol. 91 b solemn sir, g 113. a bold, blind, bayard, h 36. a Spider, john i 119 b Taberer, a k 48. b fool that walketh in a net, l 10 9 a dolt, dawkin, and m 116. a clowter of a patch of truth upon a whole cloak of lies, with such like, which are applied to me in this answer to my treatise. Again I desire them to consider charitably whose words these are, wilfulness, ignorance, vain devices, In the epistle. dotages, drunken frenzy, fond, senseless, unsound proofs, stolen jests, idle tales, a Fol. 32. b unsavoury sops, professed b 127. a impudency, shameless deserving, c 135. b beastliness and vanity, d 160. b ignorant allegations, impudent untruths, applied to my writings. further if it be not tedious for them, I desire them to consider charitably whose words these are, a 78. a. b jezabel, Athalia, insolent, mad, savage, wild beast, applied to Irene, b in the epistle. Ruffian to Staphilus, disguised gest, sudden convert, Apostata, to M.D. Harding, dowghtye to M. Dorman, Rascal, to M. Rastell, dogs eloquence, peevish fancies, college of conspiracy, wilful, wittlesse, perverse confederates, out jaws, lewd c Fol. 52. b liars, image d Fol. 13 b mungers, e 94. a Romish heretics, f 19 b adversaries of truth, g 121. a enemies of God, reverend h 68 b asses, Nice i 69. a masters, popish k 19 a chaplins, blind l 94. a beasts, senseless hypocrites, sausy m 36 a mouths, Apish n 95. b imitators, o 105. b Greasy merchants, bloody p Ibidem. a conjurers, q 18. a Antichristians, and other such applied to the Catholics. And if they find them to be their own proper ministers words, issued from the plenifull sponge, and scolding spring of M. Calves. spirit, let him grant us the same liberty, which they account evangelical in their proper holy preacher, and give us, leave to use his own figure of Regestion, that is to return back upon him, either his own terms, or the like, and in imitation of his own Rhetoric, use his own figures and phrases of speech, or some equivalent with them worthily applied to his person, which he unworthily would lay upon me. It is reason that they allow that in another, which they commend in themselves. If any cold Catholic think this to hot, let him remember with what heat the ancient fathers have written against old heretics. And if he find these phrases that I use, or the like in their writings, let him bear with me, that in a more perilous time, have to do with more blasphemous heretics. As the physician by sharp medicines thinketh to cure long festered sores: So do we trust by this kind of writing to purge the venemouse infection, which this canker of heresy hath bred, and lodged in men's minds. S. Augustine declaring, how one may reprove an other of his fault, saith, dilige & dic quod voles. Nullo modo maledictum erit quod specie maledicti sonuerit, In exposis. cap 6 ad Galath. si memineris senserisque te in gladio verbi Dei liberatorem hominis esse velle, ab obsidione vitiorum. I oue and say what thou wilt. It shall be, by no means a taunt that soundeth after the manner of a taunt, if thou wilt be a deliverer of a man from the siege of vice, in the sword of God's word. And certes sing I love M. Calfhills' person, and hate his heresy, as every Christian man should, I have used that liberty which he him self took, hoping that as I minister him occasion to see his error, so he will gather understanding, and mislike it, wisdom and detest it, grace, and desire the mercy of God to pardon it. Qui attendit contemptores ut corrigat, Augustin. in Psal. 50 nes●●ntes ut doceat, confitentes ut ignoscat, who marketh the contemptuous that he may punish them, the ignorant, that he may teach them the bumble that confess their faults that he may pardonne them. But if God hath so given him over to his self will, that for shame of the world he will not change his perverse turkish faith, and with the Catholic church follow the right faith, but for eager zeal of contention will follow his blind guides, he may be well assured that fire shall come upon fire, Idem in Psal. 54. super ardorem dissensionis ardor consumptionis, the flame of consumption upon the heat of dissension, prepared for all rebellious heretics with Core, Dathan, and Abiron, by the just and merciful judge, whose name be blessed for ever. AMEN. FAULTES ESCAPED IN PRINTING. The faults. Fol. Pag. Lin. Corrections. Not Grindal ** A 35. not M. Grindall. Apostical 1 B 24. Apostolical The church the is 2 A 11. The church is Christ is te 2 a 12. Christ the Expound the scripture 9 a 10. expound not the scripture yourselves 9 b 16. ourselves yourselves 9 b 22. ourselves brood 10 b 20. bred intended 14 a 2. indented to governor 16 b 23. to govern may 19 a 32. many that make 20 a 32. that mark peicaunce 20 b 28 penance to commended 23 b 23 to commend us England 27 a 27 us in England O coming 27 b 31 O cunning Our 29 b 5 Or Resist 37 a 32 Resistite resistite it 37 a 33 Resistite No gross 41 b 6 No cross to leave 51 a 26 to learn The Greek Ψ 59 a 18 The Greek Υ him the faith 64 b 32 him in the faith maked 73 a 13 marked percepto 75 a 25 praecepto his 79 b 14 this inferiora 91 a in the margin interiora. that 208 b 25 to that not be denied 109 a 20 not to be denied to holy Ghost 109 a 34 to the holy Ghost hit mark 111 a 8 hit the mark appertaineth man 112 a 20 appertaineth to man to referred 113 b 36 to be referred anointing which chrism 129 a 14 anointing with chrism the remit 131 a 12 ye remit but fornication 133 a 28 but for fornication your 136 b 13 you An equality 139 a 24 And equality that is 141 a 5 that it is that is 141 a 6 that it is hears 142 b 30 hearers the would 144 b 27 he would Every wise seethe 144 b 33 Every wise man seethe No live 145 a 2 not live prophame 146 a 24 profane Church Christ 148 b 16 Church of Christ the 148 b 26 these our 152 a 12 your nor 154 b 32 our And 170 b 16 Or be 173 a 26 by to sign 190 a 19 the sign Dei iuvavime 200 b 18 Dei iwamine their air 208 b 7 the air the like may said 211 b 31 the like may be said. Whatsoever is escaped beside, I trust the gentle reader will by his own judgement amend it, and consider where, and by whom this was printed. Jesus A REPLY TO M. CALFHILS' BLASPHEMOUS ANSWER MADE AGAINST THE TREATISE OF THE CROSS. THE FIRST ARTICLE. Marvel not (good readers (that M. Calfhil laboureth busily in the beginning of this article to plant this position, that the ancient father's decrees, writings, and traditions are not to be credited. He doth naught else but that which his progenitors the cursed, and cankered heretics, have done in all ages. Basil. cap. 10. de spi. sancto. The Eunomians rejected the testimonies of the father, as things of nought: and with great clamours exacted proofs out of scripture. The Arrians would not admit the fathers, nor the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that expressed the consubstantiality of Christ with god his father, Lib. 2. ca 7 & lib. 4. c. 5. historiae Tripart. Lib. 1. cont. Maximun. Actioner. Concilj Chalced. Because it was not found in scripture. Maximus said to saint Augustine, The words that are not in scripture, are in no case received of us. The Eutychians cried, In qua scriptura jacent duae naturae? In what scripture lie the two natures. And so likewise other heretics, as M. Calfhil doth now. But as saint Basile urged the decrees and traditions of the Apostles, and the fathers against Eunomius: So did the fathers of Nice against the Arrians, Saint Augustine against Maximus, and the whole council of Chalcedon against Eutyches: not that the catholics lacked scripture, but because the heretics did pervert the true sense of scripture to the maintenance of their erroneous fancies, and blasphemous heresies: and forced the Catholics to stick to that meaning and sense of scripture, which the learned works of the fathers, traditions of the Apostles, and authority of the church, had taught them. They knew that if every heretic might have the interpretation which himself devised upon the words of scripture, admitted as good, there should be as many heresies as there were singular fantastical heads, able to device such fond interpretations. Libro de praescrip. And therefore they thought with Tertullian, (who was well acquainted with the shifts and sleights of heretics) that we should not appeal to scripture nor make our conflict and bickering in them, in which either there is no victory or doubtful, or not very certain. And this reason is given for it. This heresy admitteth not certain scriptures: or if it doth admit them, yet with additions, and detractions it turneth them up and down, to the maintenance of their own purpose. And if this heresy fortune to admit scriptures, she admitteth them not full and whole as they are: or if she admit them full and whole, yet by devising diverse expositions, she turneth them to a quite contrary sense. Therefore Tertullian would have old traditions and customs respected, and all doctrine that Christ revealed to his Apostles, not to be allowed otherwise than by the same churches, which the Apostles themselves did build by preaching unto them, as well by their lively voices, as by their epistles afterward. Further he affirmeth that all doctrine, The doctrine which agreeth not with the Apostolic churches is to be condemned of lying and falsity. which agreeth with these Apos●●cal churches Matricibus & originalibus fidei, The mothers and originals of faith, is to be reputed for truth, retaining without all doubt, that which the church took of the Apostles, the Apostles of Christ: and Christ of god. And that all other beside, what soever it be, is to be condemned of falsity, such as savoureth against the truth of the Churches of the Apostles, and of Christ, and of God. Wherefore sith the malice of heretics is such, that they admit not some part of scripture, as in our days, Luther would not admit the epistle of S. Paul to the Hebrews, the Apocalypse of S. john, and epistles of S. james and Jude, used additions, and divers interpretations to make them serve his purpose, as all heretics ever did before, and do at this present, the catholics after the example of their forefathers, think the only scripture to be not sufficient way to decide controversies in religion, but ever appealed to the expositions of the fathers, traditions of the Apostles, and authority of the church: who as it delivered the gospel of S. Matthew, and others for scripture, so hath it delivered a true sense, meaning, and understanding of scripture: which every man must follow, that will not be an author of heresy, as Eunomius, Arrius, Eutiches, Vigilantius, and diverse other were. For the same holy Ghost that spoke in them that wrote the ●●●●ture, speaketh in the church, that uttereth the true meaning 〈◊〉 scripture. S. Augustine saith, Christ is the bridegroom, In Psal. 30 the Church 〈◊〉 is his spouse, and why is Christ ●te bridegroom and the Church his spouse? Nisi quia duo in carne una? si duo in carne una, quare non in voce una? Loquatur ergo Christus, quia in Christo loquitur Ecclesia, & in Ecclesia loquitur Christus, & corpus in capite, et caput in corpore. But because they are two in one flesh? if they be two in one flesh, why not in one voice? Let Christ therefore speak because the Church speaketh in Christ, and Christ speaketh in the Church, and the body in the head, and the head in the body. For the head and the body is but one Christ. If then the true sense, and meaning of scripture be in the Church, and what soever the Church speaketh, Christ speaketh as the head of the church, we must repair to the church, and not to the scriptures, for the true understanding, and interpretation of scripture. In the old testament, when any controversy rose about the law, the people were not sent to Moses tables, not written letters of the Bible: but to the priests, and commanded to inquire of them, and they should show, judicij veritatem: Deut. 17. the truth of judgement: God said not, the ink and paper and letters of the Bible keep the knoweleadg of my william. But he said: Malac. 2. Labia sacerdotis custodiunt scientiam: The lips of the priest keep knowleadg. He said not, they should require and seek, the law out of the naked elements, But, exore eius, out of the priest his mouth, because he is the Angel of the lord God of hosts. Our saviour Christ sent not his disciples and hearers always to the scriptures: he sent some to the fig three, some to the flowers in the field, Matth. 24. Matth. 6. some to the fowls of the air, sometimes he used examples, sometimes similitudes, sometimes parables, Tit. 1. 1 Cor. 11. 2. Thess. 2. sometimes natural reason. His apostle S. Paul used both the sentence of Epimenides an heathen poet, and also custom and tradition, they said not always, scriptum est: It is written. Christ commanded us in no place of all the gospel, to go to the scriptures only. wherefore it is manifest that it was not his blessed will, that we should have scriptures only to be judges in controversies and matters of religion. If the heretic's object against us, joan. 5. that saying of his: Scrutamini scripturas: Search the scriptures, we tell them, that the same Christ, the same holy Ghost, and the same God the father, said: State, & tenete traditiones, 2. Thess. 2. Stand ye stout, and keep traditions. If they press us with that saying of God the father, Matt. 17. Ipsum audite, hear him: we will press them with that saying of God the son: Qui vos audit, Luc. 10. 1. joan. 4. Matt. 18. me audit: Qui novit Deum, audit nos: Si Ecclesiam non áudierit, sit tibi tanqûam Ethnicus & Publicanus. He that heareth you, heareth me, he that knoweth God, heareth us: He that heareth not the Church, let him be unto the as an Heathen and Publican. If they allege that saying of Christ: joan. 4. Illae sunt quae testimonium perhibent de me: It be the scriptures which give witness of me, we will return unto them the saying of God, Exod. 10. joel. 1. by his servant Moses, and Prophet joel, Our fathers shall tell us, our ancestors shall show us, and our elders shall bear witness unto us, of the miracles and mighty power of God: And so convince that we must not have controversies determined by scriptures only, but also by traditions, customs, and interpretations of the fathers, whom God hath placed, some Apostles, some Prophets, Ephe. 4. some Evangelists, Pastors and Doctors to the consummation of the holy ones, into the work of ministery, to the edifying of the body of Christ until we come all together into the unity of faith, and knowledge of the son of God. And sing traditions and customs generally observed through out all Christendom, and interpretations of the fathers agreed upon with one uniform consent, vary not from the plain and evident scripture, taken in the true sense that the holy Ghost wrote, and the catholic church receiveth, there is no inconvenience, but that they should prevail, where there is no express scripture, and the interpretations of the fathers agreeing in one uniform consent be admitted for the better searching out of the sense and meaning of scripture. There be many things in the scriptures of God, which may be drawn to that sense which every man presumeth and imagineth to himself, sayeth S. Clement. Libro 1. recog. wherefore we must seek the understanding of scripture of him who keepeth it according to the truth delivered of his forefathers. Which Christ hath laid up in the lap of his church, as in a rich treasure house, and taught that we should not seek it any where out of that church. And if any doubts of this, what doth he else but doubt whither God, (who doubtlese speaketh by the mouth of his church) be true. S. Basile and Gregory Nazianzene his brother for saking the study of Rhetoric, Philosophy, and other profane studies, Euseb. lib. 11. cap. 9 histo. and applying their pains to the study of the books of holy scriptures, Eorun intelligentiam non ex propria praesumptione, sed ex maiorum scriptis & authoritate sequebantur, etc. Folloed or rather sought the understanding of them, not of their own presumption, but out of the writings and authority of their forefathers, and especially those whom they knew to have taken the rule of understanding the scriptures, of the Apostolical succession, that is the see Apostolic. S. Hierome saith of himself, Prefat in Paralip. ad Rogat. that in the scripture he never trusted his own opinion, but was wounte to ask for the understanding of those things which he thought himself to know, how much more than did he in those things of which he doubted? writing to Paulinus, Epist. ad Paulinum. he told him, that in scripturis sacris sine praevio & monstrante non possit ingredi. In the holy scriptures he could not go without a guide, and one to show him the way. Epist 59 quaest. 5. S. Augustine taketh the general custom of the church to be a good way to expound the scripture, and therefore himself expounding those words of S. Paul, I desire obsecrations, prayers, supplications, and thanks giving to be had for all men, expoundeth them by the manner and custom of the church. If there had been any contention or reasoning about some mean and trifling question, Irenaeus thought, Lib 3 cont. haere. ca 4. that we aught to have recourse to the most ancient churches in which the Apostles lived and learn of them the plain and evident truth of the matter in controversy, and follow the tradition, Serm. de pass. & cruce dom. which they delivered to those to whom they committed their churches. Athanasius repeating a piece of scripture, saith, For the expounding of this, it shallbe good to have recourse to the holy fathers, and of them to take the meaning of these words. But to follow this council, and do as S. Clement, S. Basile, S. Gregory, S. Hierome, S. Augustine, Ireneus and Athanasius thought most best to do, M. Calfhil supposeth it, to be, To build upon an evil ground, Fol. 21. A. a loss of cost, and travail, and commending and setting to sale of a ruinous or infectious thing, in steed of a strong defence, and wholesome place to rest upon, and would have nothing but scripture, but how doth he prove it? Forsohe: S. Paul saith: Gal. 1. Si angelus è coelo, If an angel from heaven teach otherwise than the Apostles have preached unto us, let him be accursed. Look better to your text sir james, where find you there those words, Than the Apostles preached to us. will you be always like yower self, and use your own additions, detractions, and gloss upon the word of God? were not the disciples preachers of the gospel? Did not Christ give them authority and commission to preach his gospel? Why then do you not translate Euangelizavimus, the disciples preached, as well as the Apostles preached? Must not we receive and follow that which the disciples preached, as well as that which the Apostles preached? Had not the disciples authority from the same holy Ghost that the Apostles had? How say you M. Calf? If they had, they are to be credited on like. Paul said not: If an angel from heaven teach otherwise than the Apostles have preached to us, let him be accursed: But he said: If an angel from heaven preach otherwise than we have preached, let him be accursed: signifying that if any preached other doctrine beside, or contrary to that which the Apostles and disciples authorized by Christ had taught, he should be accursed. And therefore he saith further (which you suppress) If any preach unto you other doctrine, besides that which you have received, let him be accursed. He disannulleth not by this saying, the traditions of the church, and sayings of the fathers, that vary not from the gospel: Tract. 98. in joan. as you may see by S. Augustine, who saith: Si quis vobis evangelizaverit praeterquam quod accepistis, anathema sit. Non ait plusquam accepistis, sed praeterquam accepistis, etc. If any preach unto you otherwise than that which ye have received, let him be accursed. He saith not, if any may preach unto you more, than that which you have received, but if he preach unto you otherwise, than that which you have received, let him be accursed. For if he should say so, he should prejudice himself, Thessa. 3. who coveted to come to the Thessalonians to supply those things which wanted to their faith. But he that supplieth that which was less, addeth, and doth not take away that which was before. He that goeth beyond the rule of faith, cometh not in the way, but goeth out of the way. Thus much S. Augustine. And by this (sir) you may learn how that piece of scripture is to be understood. If S. Paul should be taken, as you mean, both the gospel of s. john, and his revelations should be condemned. For they were written after this epistle was sent to the Galathians. Wherefore deceive not yourself and your readers. S. Paul willeth the Galathians to flee such teachers, as should teach that which was contrary and repugnant to the doctrine of Christ, as they did, who at that time preached that circumcision, and the law of Moses was necessary to be observed. And if you would have dealt faithfully, and applied that place of the Apostle fitly, without all shift of falsyfying, you should have proved, that the traditions, and writings of the fathers generally received, and allowed of the catholic church in one uniform consent, had been repugnant to the scripture, and contrary to the gospel, and preaching of the Apostles, and then have said against them, Si angelus è caelo. If an angel from heaven teach otherwise than the Apostles have preached to us, let him be accursed. But that was to heavy for your head, and therefore as though you should not be espied, you ran it over slightly, even as you do the next of S. john, saying: 1. joan. 2. Fol. 21 A Vos quod audistis ab initio, in vobis ꝑmaneat. Let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. This plainly condemneth all your novelty. For if it be evident (as Tertullian saith) id verius quod prius, Lib 4 cont. Marcio. id prius quod ab initio, ab initio, quod ab Apostolis, pariter utique constabit id esse ab Apostolis traditum, quod apud Ecclesias Apostolorum fuerit sacrosanctum. That that is truer which was first, and that that was first which was from the beginning, and that that was from the beginning which come from the Apostles it shall be evident with all, that that was delivered of the Apostles, which was holy in their churches. And sing you do not observe that which is, sacrosanctum apud Apostolorum ecclesias, most holy in the Apostles churches, and especially in the church of Rome, where the chiefest Apostles S. Peter, and S. Paul had their churches, and suffered martyrdom, you do not abide in that which you heard from the beginning: and so neither continue in the father, nor in the son. You have forsaken the faith of your forefathers, and the faith in which you were baptized, and the faith of the visible, catholic and known church, for these xv. hundred years. Exijstis, discessistis: ye have go out, ye have departed away: And ye acknowledge it in your Apology. And that going out, and discession is a token of Antichrists coming, as S. Paul saith. 2. Thess. 2. 1. joan. 2. Yea it is a manifest argument that ye have not God. For as S. john saith: Omnis qui recedit, & non permanet in doctrina Christi, Deum non habet. Every one that goeth away and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. You have go away, and not tarried in the doctrine of Christ (for you have not tarried in the doctrine of the Catholic and Apostolic Church, which is one body with Christ) wherefore that saying of the Apostle may be verified upon you. As for the Catholics, they continue in the faith of their forefathers, in the faith in which they were baptized: in the faith of the Catholic, visible, and known church. They acknowledge no discession as you do. They abide in that which they heard ab initio, from the beginning, that is, in in that, which is sacrosanctum apud Apostolorum ecclesias, most holy in the Apostles churches. The high mysteries, and chief points of our religion and faith are all one with theirs in every respect touching the substance. As for you, how you altar, vary, change, and differ one from another, and flit from the Apostles, and that which you heard from the beginning, the world may see, and thereupon prove unuinciblie against you, that your doctrine is wicked, and nought. 2. joan. 1. That saying of S. john, If any man do not bring this doctrine with him, do not so much as salute him, nor receive him into your house, maketh against you. For if (as S, Augustine sayeth) He denieth Christ to be come in flesh, that breaketh the church: Then do ye heretics, Tract. in 1. Epist. joan. that break the ordinances, traditions, and customs of the church, and divide it, and tear it by schism, deny Christ to be come in flesh, and bring not with you the doctrine that S. john mentioneth, albeit your tongues clatter never so much of it. That saying of Christ: He that loveth God, heareth his voice, (for the which you sand us in the quotation of your margin to the 14. of S. john, where that is not to be found, but this: joan. 14. If any man love me, he will keep my sayings,) maketh nothing for your only scripture, against traditions and customs, and expositions of the fathers: but rather much for them. For sing the voice of the Catholic Church, and prelates whom the father hath ordained some Apostles, some Prophets, Ephes. 4. some Pastors and Doctors into the work of ministery, to the edifying of the body of Christ, until we meet all in the unity of faith, and knowledge of the son of God, is the voice of God, who said: Qui vos audit, me audit: Luc 10. He that heareth you, heareth me, it must needs follow, that whosoever heareth the voice of his catholic church, and prelates of the same, heareth the voice of God speaking unto us many ways besides the scripture. But quoth M. Calf. Matt. 15. Fol. 21. B. They in vain do worship Christ, that teach the doctrine and precepts of men. And verily, if he mean it, as Christ spoke it, they do so. But what? Do not they that teach the traditions of the Apostles, and general customs of the catholic church, and interpret the scripture after the mind and uniform consent of the fathers testified in their learned commentaries, worship Christ? Read the scriptures, search the word of God, confer the writings of the fathers, and you shall find that the traditions of the Apostles are the traditions of the holy Ghost, and the general customs of the Catholic church, the doctrine of Christ, who is the head of the church, and that the voice of the fathers agreeing in one uniform doctrine, is the voice of God, speaking by the fathers, whom he ordained Pastors, Doctors, and Bishops to rule, govern, and edify his Church. Furthermore you shall find, that, this saying of Christ, is meant of the Scribes and Pharisees, who rebuked the disciples, for eating with unwashed hands, and keeping certain curious, and frivolous traditions of their own, contemned the commandment of God. Whereupon Christ to rebuke their wicked arrogancy, Esa 29. said, Esai prophesied well of you, hypocrites, as it is written: This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me: And streitwayes addeth these words: They worship me without cause, Marc. 7. teaching the doctrine and precepts of men. And that you may see it more evidently, read further, where it is said: You forsaking the commandments of God, keep the traditions of men, the washing of pots, and cruses, and many such other like things ye do. And if sing this, you can not see M. Calf. that our saviour Christ spoke those words, of the fond and unprofitable traditions of the Scribes, and Pharisees, and not of the Catholic and Apostolic traditions of the church, and commandments of the fathers, by whom the church is governed and directed, your sight is very dim, and needeth either some clear spectacle, or some fine horn. Tract. 18. in evang. joan. S. Augustine was wont to say, That heresies and certain perverse opinions did not rise, but whiles the good scriptures are not well understood, and that which is not well understood, is rashly and boldly affirmed. And in this you may see a great piece of your own foul in to heresy. You understand not the scriptures, but frame unto yourself a sense contrary to that which the fathers teach and the church alloweth, and that you avouch, that you affirm, and of the scriptures not understood make a snare as the devil doth for the faithful. Ambros. lib. 4 comment. in Luc: And as you deal falsely in alleging the scriptures: so work you guilfully in alleging the fathers and doctors. S. Augustine (you say) framing a perfect preacher willeth him to confer the places of scripture together. Let it be so what conclude you of it? Forsooth, that he sends him not to the doctors distinctions, nor to the censure of the church, Fol. 21. B. Fol. 22. A. nor canons of the Popes, nor traditions of the fathers, but only to quiet and content himself with the word of God. Is not this a worthy and profunde reason? You might as well say: Christ commanded the jews to search the scriptures: ergo he did not sand them to his Apostles, and disciples, and traditions that they taught. Or this: M. Grindal commanded a young minister to study God's book: ergo he did not sand him to the university to learn Latin, Greek or Hebrew, nor any of the liberal sciences. Or if you will have a more familiar example, you might as well have said: The old cook of distaff lane sent his wife to the shambles, to buy a calves head and content herself with that, ergo he did not sand her to the Sermon at the Cross, lesson in Paul's, prophesying in Cornhill, nor gossip in yvy lane. There is as good reason and sequel in these as in yours. Did you not read S. Augustine's prologue before his first book, De doctr. Christ? And found you not there that he sayeth: The condition of man should be very abject and base, if God should seem not to be willing, to give and minister his word by men to men? Found you not that he said: How should it be true that is said, The temple of God is holy, which temple ye are, if God should not give answers out of this humane temple, but sound into our ears from heaven and by angels all that he would have delivered to men? Found you not that he said: Charity which bindeth men in the knot of unity together, should have no way, occasion or entry to utter and communicate the secret of minds, if men should learn nothing by men? Found you noth that both he reproveth their fond fancy, who thought they might have the understanding of scripture from heaven without any knowledge in tongues, and precepts and instructions from men? As you think we may have sufficiently by conference of one place with another, and also accounteth it a snare of the devil, and a most proud and perilous temptation, to refuse to go into the church, to read the book to hear a man reading and preaching, and to look to be taken up into heaven, and there to hear the mysteries of God's word, and understanding of it? Act. 9 Act. 10. Exod. 18. Found you not that he declareth how Paul was sent to a man, Cornelius to a man, and that Moses took counsel and the eunuch instruction of a man? And if you found all this, why make you the simple believe, that S. August. would not have us go to men to learn the true understanding of God's word? why say your that he sends us not to the doctors distinctions, nor censure of the church, nor canons of the Popes, nor traditions of the fathers? If your memory had been so slipper, that reading his second book De Doctrina Christiana, you forgot the contents of the first, yet you should not have forgotten that which he spoke in the eight chapter of the same book, immediately following that which yourself allege. There he saith, speaking of his preacher, or rather young student in divinity: Ecclesiarum catholicarum quàm plurium sequatur authoritatem, etc. Let him follow the authority of the most catholic churches, amongst which they are, which deserved to have the Apostles sees, and receive their epistles. Now sir if S. Augustine sand his scholar to the catholic churches where the Apostles had their sees (of which Rome was the chiefest) to know which was the Canonical scripture, is it credible that he did not sand him to the censure of the same church to know the true sense and understanding of the scripture? Not M. Calf. He that believeth this to be the gospel and scripture, because the church telleth him, it is so, believeth also that this is the true meaning and understanding of scripture, because the church telleth him it is so. Count epist. Manich. cap 5. And so did S. Augustine doubtless, who said, that he would not believe the gospel, unless the authority of the catholic church moved him so to do. Did you ever read his books against julian the Pelagian, where he allegeth the authority of Ireneus, Cyprianus, Reticius, Olympius, Hilarius, Ambrose, Innocentius and others? or his epistle to S. Hierome where he saith: Epist. 28. Nemo contra fundatissimum morem Ecclesiae sentiat? Let no man think against the most sure and ground custom of the church? Or his epistle to januarius where it is said: Epist. 118. Those things which we keep, not written, but delyured, which are observed through out the whole world, are given us to understand, that they are retained, as commended, and ordained either of the Apostles themselves, or of full general councils, whose authority is most wholesome in the church? Did you not read that he saith: If the catholic church through out the world useth any like thing, it is most insolent madness to dispute whither it should be done in such sort or no? If you did, what folly forced you to say, that S. Augustine sends us not to the doctors distinctions, nor censure of the church, nor canons of the popes, nor traditions of the fathers? Is it not evident that he himself used the authority and sayings of the fathers, and kept the traditions of the church, and thought it a madness to dispute against them? If you did not read so much in S. Augustine, was your wit so barren, and your skill so simple that you knew not this to be an evil argument, S. Augustine sends us not to the doctors distinctions, nor censure of the church, nor traditions of the fathers, in that place, ergo he sends us to them in no other place, nor no other father besides? Forgot you that it is no sound nor substantial reasoning upon the authority of any man negatively? If you did, to school like a sir james, to school, for shame, and learn your logic and divinity better, this will not serve yourne turn. Albeit S. Augustine did not command this, yet other holy men might, and be of no less credit, S. Augustine corrupted. than if S. Augustine had given it in express commandment. But (sir) where you say, that S. Augustine willed his scholar only to quiet and content himself with the word of God, where find you that in the 9 chap. & sequentibus, of his second book De Doctrina Christiana? Will you never leave your falsifying the doctors? we can find no such thing in the said book and chapters. Wherefore to save your credit, bring forth his words, Fol. 22. A as yet they can not appear. That in the primitive church before the new testament was written all things were examined according to the sermons and words of the Apostles, and that he that is of God heareth the Apostles, we grant, 1. joan. 4. what infer you upon it M. Calf? If you make this argument: All things were examined in the primitive church by the words and sermons of the Apostles, ergo nothing should be examined now, but by the words, and sermons of the Apostes, we will deny the consequent, and avouch the reason to be stark nought, and desire your worship to prove a necessity in it, and make evident declaration that all the words and sermons of the Apostles are written and come to our hands. S. Augustine is of this opinion, that we have many things of the tradition of the Apostles, Lib. 5. cap. 23. de Baptismo. Epist. 118. Ad Pamma. cont. erro. joan. Hier. Cont. Apostolicos. lib. 2. heres. 61. 1. Cor. 11. which are not written, and because the Catholic church doth keep them, he thinketh it, an insolent madness to dispute whither they should be observed. S. Hierome writeth that: Symbolum fidei & spei nostrae etc. Our creed and articles of our faith and hope, was delyured of the Apostles, and not written in ink and paper, but in the tables of men's hearts. Epiphanius saith: we most use tradition. For all can not be fotte out of holy scriptures. Therefore the blessed Apostles delyured certain things in writing, and certain things in tradition not written, as S. Paul saith: Sicut tradidi vobis: As I have delyured unto you, so I teach, and so I have delyured in the churches. By this you may learn that the Apostles left many things unwritten, which come from the holy Ghost, as well as the written scripture. You may learn that the xii. The Articles of our Creed not written in scripture . Articles of our creed were never written in the scripture: and sing they are necessary to be believed, although they be not written in scripture, you may see that some things necessary to salvation, are not written in scripture, and so prove unto yourself, that there is somewhat unwritten whereby controversies should be examined, besides the written scripture. further out of Epiphanius you may note two things, one is, that the Apostles left not all things in writing that they would have observed of the faithful. The other that all doubts and controversies, touching matters of faith, are not to be tried by scripture only, because all can not be fotte out of scripture, and by this you may learn to have the ancient fathers and unwritten traditions in better credit. But say you, So far as men accord with the holy scripture, and shape there writings after the pattern that Christ hath left, I will not only myself esteem them, but wish them to be had in most renown, and reverence. surely they are much beholding unto you, that without derogation to your person, can think them worthy of such renown, and reverence with so gentle a condition. I beseek you, is there any that reverence them otherwise? Is there any that esteem their writings when they writ any thing that is repugnant or contrary to the scripture? Is there any that follow their writings when they be not shaped after the pattern that Christ left? If there be, name him, and blame him. Not Catholic will be offended with you for it. Wheresoever any of the fathers vary from the received and approved doctrine of the Catholic chuche, in that he is nor followed, nor reverenced, nor absolutely trusted unto. we gather not out of their writings whatsoever was witness of their imperfection. That which we gather out of them, and allow to be followed, in matters of religion and faith, is the doctrine of the catholic Church, in which they were by the providence of God as apostles, evangelists doctors and pastors. If there be any imperfections in some, not agreeing withal the rest, we reject them, and utterly condemn them, and much marvel what moveth you and other heretics to condemn those things for imperfections in the fathers, which with one uniform consent both they have ever taught, and the Catholic church governed by the holy Ghost hath always allowed. Furthermore we marvel, that to prove that in no age any man was so perfect that a certain truth was to be builded on him, you bring only the example of Aaron and Peter, and in your induction, add not, & sic de singulis. If you would have it a general rule, you should have done so. But you knew that for Aaron in the old law, we could make instance of Abel, Abraham, Moses and Samuel, and for Peter in the new law, bring S. john Baptist, S. john the Evangelist, S. Paul, and other who never erred in faith, and therefore you did suppress it, and as though you had made a sure ground, march forward, and allege another place of S. Augustine to prove your purpose, Proem. lib. 3. de Trinit. Fol. 22. A your words are these. Trust me not saith S. Augustine, nor credit my writings, as though they were Canonical scripture, but what soever thou findest in the word, although thou didst not believe it before, yet ground thy faith on it now. And what so ever thou readest of my, unless thou knowest it certainly true, give no assent unto it. Epist. 48. And in another place, reproving such as will bring forth cavils out of men's writings thereby to confirm an error, he saith that a difference should be made between their assertions, and minds of men, were they either Hilary, Cyprian Agrippine, or other, and the canon of the scripture. But o merciful God what a miserable shift is this to impair the estimation of the Fathers? What a corruption to deceive the readers? S. Augustne in all that ꝓeme hath not those words, Trust me not. And sing he hath them not, what a vile falsifier are you to tell the simple people, S. August. corrupted that S. Augustine saith of himself in that place, Trust me not. That which he saith to to your purpose is this. Noli meis literis quasi scripturis Canonicis in servire. do not addict thyself to my writings as to the Canonical scriptures. But what is this against the writings of the ancient fathers? Did ever man esteem S. Augustine's words as highly as the scripture? Distin. 9 cap. Noli. or so addict himself unto them as though they were scripture? Not M. Calf. Gratian himself (whom your sect maliciously slander) hath put this saying of S. Augustine amongst the decrees, to prove that the sayings of the interpreters should yield to the scriptures. And certes there was never Catholic that thought otherwise. Now because we must not addict yourselves to the fathers as to the scriptures, will it follow that we must not credit the fathers at all? Not forsooth, no more than if one would say, I must give an high and peerless honour unto my sovereign Lady, and Princess, ergo I must give no honour to the lords of the Council, Epist. 48. justices of peace, ad shrives' of the sheer. As for the other place of S. Augustine it maketh against you and yours M. Calf. You are they that bring cavils and half mangled sentences out of the father's writings to confirm your errors. Your are they that press their authority to confirm your heresy. We use them but as witnesses to prove that this is the true meaning of scripture, and truth in matters of faith, and religion agreed upon in their days, and allowed by the catholic church And if they agreed with the scripture and determination of the church we admit them, if they vary, we refuse them in that, were they either, Hilary, Cyprian, Agrippine or Basile, whose authority I marvel much, how you dare so vilely abuse, and say: Fol. 22. b S. Basile setteth forth by a proper similitude with what judgement the fathers of the church aught to be read, and quote for your credit in the margin. Concio. ad Adolescen. S Basile abused . surely in all that sermon S. Basile speaketh no one word of the fathers of the church. All his discourse is to teach youngemen, how to behave themselves in the study of profane writers, as poets, historiographers, orators, philosophers, and such like. Wherefore unless, Hesiod, Homer, Virgil, Ovid, Horace, Eschines, Plautus, Terence, Livy, Saluste, Plutarch, Demosthenes, Cicero, Quintilian, Varro, Macrobius, Suetonius, Pythagoras, Aristotel, and Diogenes are accounted in your learned judgement fathers of the church, you can not say, that he speaketh of the fathers of the church. Of such he speaketh, and not of the fathers of the church. Those he thinketh expedient and necessary for young men to read in their tender years, to whet their wits, and increase their judgements, that afterward with more facility they might understand the mysteries of Christian religion. Which thing the very title of the book might have given you to understand, if there had been nothing else. But I perceive Momus will be Momus, heretics will be heretics, and falsify the fathers continually at their pleasure. Where you say that we are adversaries to you, Fol. 22. b and to the truth, and that all the fathers had their errors, and in ceremonies declined all, from the simplicity of the gospel, Fol 23. a and that you are only burdened with the name of fathers, and therefore desire leave to use a Regestion, and to have the liberty towards other that Hierome granteth to himself, We tell you that you take upon you four pretty persons, that is, a slanderer, a liar, a cursed Cham, and a poor suppliant. A slanderer, in that you say, we are adversaries to the truth. For we set not ourselves against the truth, but defend it, and maintain it against the assaults and villainy of heretkies. we continue and ●ide in that which we received ab initio. From the beginning, we tread after our holy father's steps. Communicamus cum Ecclesiis Apostolicis, Tertul. de prescrip. quòd nulla doctrina diversa, hoc est testimonium veritatis. We communicate with the Apostolic churches. That there is no diverse, nor contrary doctrine amongst us (touching principal points of religion and faith) it is a testimony of truth. This parologisme petitio Principij, taking that to be granted which remaineth to be proved is oft in your book: before you had slandered us as adversaries to truth, you should have proved it: that yourselves are such in deed you may see by these places of Tertullian. You communicate not with the Apostolic churches, and therefore hold not that which you heard from the beginning. You have diverse and contrary doctrine, in some of the chiefest points of your faith, and therefore have not testimonium veritatis, the testimony of truth: for there is: Et scripturarum & expositionum adulteratio, Tertul. de prescrip. ubi diversitas invenitur doctrinae: A corruption of the scripture, and expositions of them, where there is found a diversity of doctrine. Again in saying that the fathers declined all from the simplicity of the gospel, Fol. 23 you slander them. For if Christ according to his promise is with the church always to the end of the world, and if the holy Ghost teacher of all truth hath been precedent in it as God promised, then have they not suffered all the fathers to decline from the simplicity of the gospel, but hath preserved some to maintain his truth, jest hell gates should prevail against it. A liar you are for saying that ye are only burdened with the name of fathers: for besides their names you are burdened with their express words, and plain sentences. The places where you shall find them are laid before your eyes. further we burden you with the scriptures, and authority of the church, that authorizeth those scriptures, and giveth the true understanding and sense of the scriptures. We burden you with the traditions of the Apostles, and general counsels, and laws of emperors, besides the names of fathers. A cursed Cham you are, having a wicked mind to detect the imꝑfections and errors of the fathers to the world and for lack of imperfections, and errors objecting most undoubted truths to some, as shall apere hereafter. And albeit you pretend an holiness here not to follow Cham Noah's son, yet in your answer you do it so often, that you show in what forge you were framed. A poor supplicant you are in desiring leave to use a Regestion and the same liberty towards other which S. Hierome granted against himself. And because the request is reasonable, we grant it. Use you Regestion on God's name. Take the liberty that S. Hierome took, marry with this condition that you abuse it not, nor falsify S. Hierome. Go to what said S. Hierome? Forsooth, Certe ubicunque scripturas non interpreter, & libere meo sensu loquor, arguat me qui volet. Fol. 23. a Truly wheresoever I expound the scripture, but freely speak of mine own sense, let him reprove me that list. Why sir, have you so soon forgotten the condition that was joined to your licence? We told you that you should not falsify S. Hierome? How falleth it out that you so wickedly abuse him? Apol. cont. jovinia . Will it never be otherwise? S. Hierome in deed saith: Truly wheresoever I expound not the scriptures, but speak freely of mine own sense, let him reprove me that list? What followeth immediately without any distinction or point? Nothing M. Calf? Read it once again, and you shall see these words there, me durum quid dixisse contra nuptias: so that the whole sentence it this: Certe ubicunque scripturas non interpreter, & liberè de meo sensu loquor, 8. Hierom not truly alleged. arguat me cui libet, me durum quid dixisse contra nuptias. Truly wheresoever I do not interpret the scripture, but speak freely of my own sense, let him reprove me that list, that I spoke any hard or severe thing against marriage. In this place he talketh of an interpreter, and showeth what his duty is. And saith for himself that if he spoke any thing severely, or rigorously, against marriage, after his own opinion, and not as interpreting holy scripture, every man should reprove him. But if they could find no such thing in him, than he willed them rather to attribute it, to the authority of the writer, than to the fault of the interpreter. He gave not all men licence to reprove him: when he interpreteth the scripture, he willeth no man to reprove him. But when he speaketh any thing of his own fancy, any thing contrary to the scripture, any thing contrary to the received, and approved doctrine of the church, them he giveth licence, and liberty to all men to reprove him, and by good and sufficient reason to convince him. And if he did not grant it, we would take it, and reprove him, and all others. For we admit them, and receive them no otherwise, than as they agreed with the scriptures, and determinations of the catholic church: Apolog. count Iou●nia. Epist. 85. and so do all catholics. Nor is it the practice of this age to allege the fathers when occasion serveth. S. Augustine allegeth S. Cyprian, S. Hierome allegeth S. Ambrose, and Leo diverse father's sentences in his epistle to Leo the Emperor against the blasphemies of Nestorius and Eutiches: so that if our new master found fault with us, for alleging the fathers, and urging their authority, and pressing them with the traditions of their forefathers, we will desire them, to read S. Hierome, Ambrose, Augustine and Leo, and either with them to accuse us, or with them and others to licence us to do as we do. We assure yourselves upon the tender mercy of our saviour Christ, Mat. ult. that promised to be with his church always to the end of the world, Ephe. 4. and gave some Apostles, some Evangelists, some Prophets, some Pastors, some Doctors, to the edifying of his body, that we should not be little ones, wavering and carried away with every wind of doctrine, in the wickedness of men, in craftiness, to the circumvention of error, we I say, do assure yourselves, that God never suffered all the fathers to decline from the simplicity of the gospel, and to fall to such errors, as should be contrary to his faith and religion. But if any one did, he raised some other that controlled him for it: as when S. Cyprian erred, Cornelius bishop of Rome controlled him. S. Hierome, S. Augustine, and other that come after, found fault with him for it, as diverse did before with Tertullian, and Origen, in that they taught repugnant to the church. But what soever Tertullian, Origen or S. Cyprian say, if Cornelius or the bishop of Rome for the time did allow it, S. Hierome approve it, S. Ambrose confirm it, S. Augustine embrace it, Hilarius accept it, Prospero ratify it, S. Gregory receive it, Fulgentius admit it, S. Bede like it, and S. Bernard credit it, and others whom God appointed Doctors, and Pastors in his church, subscribe unto it, we may be well assured, that the saying of Tertullian, Origen, and S. Cyprian, is the determination of the holy catholic church, such as no man aught to gain say. Wherefore let us, (giving the first and highest place to the scripture) nothing imperish the estimation of the ancient fathers. Let us not wilfully abrogate the decrees of the doctors, where they agreed with the catholic church. Oratio dicta in present f●atr. Gregor. But with the blessed bishop Gregory Nazianzene, let us as long as we have a day to live, confess with a stout heart and free tongue: Sanctorum patrum depositum, that which our holy fathers which were nearer to Christ, left unto us. Let us keep, Primae fidei confessionem, the confession of our first faith. which was nourrished in us from our tender years: So shall we, no doubt, remain obedient and faithful children in Christ. As for the two judges of controversies, which master Calfhill appointeth, the word, and the spirit, Fol. 22. a let us (embracing the word and honouring the spirit) inquire of his wisdom, how the word and the spirit can be judges of controversies? A judge must be sensible, the word is senseless. A judge must speak. The word is dumb. A judge must hear, the word is deaf. the word no judge in controversies . A judge must examine things brought in controversy. The word, that is, the bore letter of the Bible (as heretics take it) written in ink and paper, considered as it lieth, nor read, nor pronunced of any man, is deaf, and not able to prove itself to be the word of God, and holy scripture of Christ. If one should require the best rabbi, and profoundest master among all the protestants, that exact proofs out of scripture only, for matters in controversy, to prove and justify out of scripture, that this word, (which they crack and brag of) is the word of God, he would never do it, so long as he liveth. all his refuge must be, to the catholic church, that hath adjudged, and declared this be the scripture, and word of God. Wherefore sing it hath those defects, it can not be judge of matters in controversy in the church, especially, sing all our contention, debate, and controversy is, of the sense and understanding of scripture, which they received of the catholics. And whereas the Catholics say: This is the true meaning of this place of scripture, and the heretics for their part deny it, and say: Nay: This is this the true meaning of this place of scripture, and so contend stoutly about it, how shall the scripture be judge, and decide this controversy? It hath no tongue to speak and give sentence. Shall we confer place to place, and so try out the truth? That is a way of greater contention: For when other places be alleged, the Catholics may say: This is the right sense of that scripture. And the heretics deny it, and so proceed infinitely in contention. Wherefore is it not possible that the scripture only, taken in any other sense than the Catholic church alloweth, should be judge, which is the true sense of scripture and so decide matters in controversy. But peradventure some cavilling heretic, will scanderously report of me, and say, I speak much to the derogation of holy scripture. If any such open his mouth, I will him to understand that I honour, reverence, and esteem the holy scripture, as well, or rather better than he. Heb. 4. I acknowledge with S. Paul, that it is lively, effectuous, and more piercing than any two edged sword. I confess that it is, as it were, Esa 23. a fire, and hammer wasting the rock, a lantern to guide our steps, sweet br●●d to feed our hungry souls, Psal. 118. joan. 6. joan. 4. Esa. 55. and pleasant water to quench our heats and lusts: to be short, I confess that it is, the sweet shore of rain and snow, that cometh from heaven, and moisteth the earth, and maketh it bring forth her fruit and do whatsoever God will have done, and prospero in all things, for which he sends it. But notwithstanding it hath all these virtues, and effects by the mighty power of God, yet in all the scripture can you not find that it hath this virtue, and power to be a judge, and decide controversies. Not more than the great book of statutes, and written laws, have to put on my Lord chief justices robes, and come to the kings bench, or common place, and give sentence. For saying as S. Hyerome saith: Contra Luciferia. The scriptures consist not in reading, but in understanding, and the Gospel is not in the letre which killeth, but in the spirit that quickeneth, not in the outward ryne, but in the inward pith, not in the leaves of paper, but in the root of reason, there must be some man that must inform us of the understanding, and instruct us in the sense of it, and pick out the pith, and rule us in the reason of it, as there must be a judge to inform men of the mind and understanding of the law, and decide their causes as reason and equity do require. Now as for the spirit, that it can not be a iugde, especially such a iugde, as we must have, reason tells you. The spirit no such judge as we must have in matters of religion . Our iugde must be visible, the spirit is invisible. Our iugde must be so in the light of the world, that every man may know where he dwelleth. The spirit is so secret, that no man can truly say, out of the Catholic church, here he dwelleth, here he abideth, here is his resting place. No man can say in this later age of the world, I am sure the holy Ghost dwelleth in me, I am sure the holy Ghost speaketh in me, unless he speaketh that which the Catholic church, hath taught him to speak. Which being so, the spirit can not be such a iugde of controversies, as we must have. Wherefore it remaineth that we search, who may be iugde in matters of controversy. For neither the word neither the spirit can be judges as M. Calf. saith, unless we will have a judge that is senseless, dumb, deaf, invisible, secret, unknown, and unable to be go unto. Or if either of them both might be iugdes, let our good minister tell us, how it come to pass that when a controversy arose for the observation of the law of Moses, Actuum 15.8. Paul and Barnabee, went, to the Apostles and priests in Hieru alem for decision of a matter in controversy. S. Paul and Barnaby Christ's Apostles went to Jerusalem about that question, ad Apostolos & Presbiteros, to the Apostles, and Priests? They had the spirit (that is the holy Ghost) given of Christ himself from heaven. They had the word, that was preached before of Christ. They had the traditions and precepts of the Apostles, and scripture whatsoever was then written, and yet they decided not that question neither by the word, neither by the spirit. But went up to Jerusalem to the Apostles and Priests: which they would not have done, if they had supposed the word or the spirit to be sufficient iugdes in controversies. Our saviour Christ redeeming the church with his death upon the cross, that he might make it glorious, and without wringle in his sight would not leave it in worse case, than the Synagogue of the jews was in the old law. And sing for them he provided a judge that could hear and speak, a judge that was visible, a judge that had a certain dwelling place, to which the people might resort for judgement, Cap. 17. as it appeareth in Deuteromie, where it is said, If thou perceive the judgement which is before thee to be hard, and doubtful, between blood and blood, cause, and cause, lepre, and leper, and seest the judges words within thy gates to vary, arise and go up to the place which the Lord thy God hath chosen, and come to the Priests of the sort of Levy, and to the judge that shalbe at that time, and thou shalt seek of them, who shall show unto thee, the truth of judgement, and thou shalt do whatsoever they say, who are presidents in the place, which God hath chosen, and teach thee according to his law, It can not be, but that he foreknowing that there should be heresies, schisms, and controversies in his church, provided of his tender mercy a like a judge to determine such controversies, and appointed a visible place whither men might resort to seek that determination. For he loveth us as tenderly as he loved them. As than he chose a place for the jews in the Synagogue, where controversies should be decided: So hath he chosen a place for the Christians in this new Jerusalem to end and determine all causes and controversies, and that place is his catholic church. Which is Locus sanctificationis, Esa. 60. Chrysost. hom. 36. in 1. Cor. Matth. 15. Psal. 18. Matth. 18. 1. Tim 3. Esa. 62. locus angelorum, locus archangelorum, regia Dei: The place of sanctification, the place of God, the city set upon the hill, the tabernacle placed in the sun, loved of God above all the tabernacles of jacob. To this God biddeth us go, saying: Dic Ecclesiae. Tell it to the church. This is the pillar and fure foundation of truth, & voluntas mea in ea, and my will in it, saith God: In this place shall we have controversies truly and faithfully decided. And no where beside. Again, as he appointed the jews: Sacerdotes Levitici generis, Priests of the order of Levi to be their judges: So for us he hath appointed Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and doctors to the edifying of his body. To them he hath said: Attendite vobis & universo gregi, Act 20. etc. Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, in which the holy Ghost hath placed you, bishops to rule the church of God. 1. Pet. 5. To them he hath said: Feed the flock of our lord, which is in you, taking the oversight of them willingly without compulsion. And if God hath appointed Apostles, Prophets, evangelists, Pastors and Doctors, to edify and build his church, and the holy Ghost hath given them authority, and commission to rule his sheep, than they must rule, they must govern, they must feed Christ's flock, and try what pasture is best for them. And if they must do it, and noon but they (for the commission of the holy Ghost stretcheth to noon, but to such as they are,) them is it not, A precept general all men to judge, all men to try, Fol. 23. a. what doctrine they receive, as you say M. Calf. For all are not Apostles, all are not Prophets, all are not Evangelists, 1. Cor. 12. all are not Pastors and Doctors. The holy Ghost placed not all to rule the church of God, but vos posuit episcopos, He placed you, that is to say, Apostles, God appointed one chief judge in the old law and another in the new law Matt. 16. Luc. 22. joan. 21. and such like, bishops to rule the church of God. And as in the old law, to avoid schism and division, he ordained one of the priests, to be chief judge for the time: So in the new law, he ordained one to be chief judge, head, and ruler, of all the rest. And that one was S. Peter, to whom Christ said: Thowe art Peter, and upon this rock, I will build my church. To thee will I give the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Thou being turned, confirm thy breethernes. Feed my lambs, feed my sheep. For by these words, Christ gave him a singular pre-eminence, and superiority over all the rest, and as the fathers say builded his church upon Peter. Whose sayings because M. Calfhill seemeth not to have read, I will briefly repeat them, for his further instruction, let him refel them if he can. Tertullian hath these words: De prescrip. Latuit aliquid Petrum adificandae ecclesiae petram dictum? Was any thing unknown to Peter called the rock of the church, that was to be builded? By this he may understand, that S. Peter was aedificandae Ecclesiae Petra dictus: called of Christ the rock of the church, that was to be builded. In another place he hath these words: Qualis es evertens atque commutans Domini intentionem, personaliter hoc Petro conferentem? Superte, De pudicitia. Orat. de consume. mundi. Libro 1. epist 3. inquit aedificabo ecclesiam meam? What art though turning upside-down, and altering the intention of our lord giving this personally to Peter? Upon the he said, I will build my church? The blessed martyr Hippolytus, saith: Princeps Petrus, fidei petra, etc.: docuit nos, Peter the chief of all, and rock of faith, hath taught us. S. Cyprian saith: Petrus super quem aedificata fuit à domino ecclesia, Libro 4. epist. 9 Ser. de habitu virg. dicit: Domine ad quem ibimus? Petrus loquitur, super quem aedificanda fuerat ecclesia. Petrus super quem dominus posuit & fundavit Ecclesiam, aurum sibi & argentum esse negat. Peter upon whom the church was builded of our lord, saith: Lord to whom shall we go? Peter upon whom the church was to be builded speaketh. Peter upon whom our lord founded, Lib. 1. commenta in Matth. vide Euse. lib 6 cap. 18. histor. Homi. 5. super exod. and builded his church, saith, he hath no gold. Origen hath these words: Petrus super quem domini fundatur Ecclesia, duas tantummodo epistolas scribit. Peter upon whom, the church of our lord is builded, writeth two epistles only. In another place he writeth thus: Magno illi ecclesiae fundamento, petraeque solidissimae super quam Christus fundavit ecclesiam, vide quid dicatur à domino: Modicae fidei quare dubitasti? See what is said of our lord to that great foundation, and most sure rock of the church, upon which Christ builded his church: Lib. 2 cont. Eunomium O thou of little faith, why didst though doubt? S Basile talking, of S. Peter saith: Propter fidei excellentiam, ecclesiae in seipsum aedificationem suscepit. For the excellence of his faith, In Anchor. he took the building of the church unto himself: Epiphanius hath these words: Ipse dominus constituit Petrum primum Apostolorum, petram firmam super quam ecclesia Dei aedificata est. Our lord himself made Peter chief of the Apostles the firm and sure rock, upon which the church of God was builded. S. Chrisostome saith: Homi. 55. in Matth. Christus Petrum universo terrarum orbi praeposuit: Christ made Peter chief ruler over all the world, and said unto him: Thowe art Peter, & super te aedificabo ecclesiam meam, and upon the I will build my church. in Psal. 103 S. Augustine saith: Manducat Petrus, quia Petrus petra, petra ecclesia. Peter eateth because, Peter is the rock, Serm. 26. de sanctis. and the rock is the church. In another place, he saith: You have heard Peter called, Petram rock oftentimes of our lord, as he himself saith: Lib. 2. de voca gent cap. 9 In cap 16. Matth. Serm de aniver. Pontif. assum. die. Thove art Peter and upon this rock, I will build my church. S. Ambrose calleth him: Firmissimam Petram, the most firm and sure rock, that took from Christ, the principal rock, communion both of virtue, and name. S. Hilary calleth him, Foelix Ecclesiae fundamentum, the happy foundation of the church: To be short: Leo speaking of S. Peter saith: Tu quoque petra es, thou art also a rock which art made strong by my virtue and strength. S. Hierome saith: Dominus domus Petrus Apostolus est: Peter the Apostle is master of the house, to whom God committed his house. In cap. Marc. 16. By which it is easy to be seen that S. Peter was chosen of Christ, to be judge and ruler in his church. If any man will argue out of S. Augustine as M. Nowell doth, that Christ is the rock: and therefore Peter is no rock. I will refer them to M. Dormans' disproufe of M. Nowells reproof, fol. 189. A, where S. Augustine's words are alleged to prove that he leaveth the matter indifferent to the reader and thinketh both opinions true, that Christ is the rock, and Peter the rock, so appointed by Christ. Now because Christ would have his church continue for ever, until his coming again, the same authority and pre-eminence which he gave to S. Peter, Lib. 2. de sacerdo. he giveth to S. Peter's successors as Chrisostome witnesseth: which being most undoubtedly true, it is evident, that neither the word, nor the spirit can be judges in controversies as M. Calf. fansieth, but men that read the word, men that preach the word, men that understand the word, and not all men neither, but Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, and Doctors, Chrisost. hom. 44. 23. Matth. whom the holy Ghost hath placed, Episcopos regere Ecclesiam Dei, Bishops to rule the church of God. They must be judges. For they be Claviculaij, quibus credi tum est verbum docendi, & interpretandi scripturas. The keybeares, to whom authority is given to teach the word, and expound the scriptures. They must decide controversies, but not in every place, but in the place which God hath chosen, that is in the Catholic church, where the spirit speaketh, ruleth, and governeth, and out of the which the spirit of God doth nor speak, nor rule, nor govern, but the spirit of errors, and heresy, the spirit of malice, and blasphemy. Wherefore if you will have M. Calf. the true place where controversies must be tried, and the true judges, that must judge them and determine them, come to the Catholic church, and to the Bishops whom the holy Ghost hath appointed to govern his church. And amongst them resort to the highest Bissop that is chosen for the tyme. Remember that S. Cyprian saith: Heresies have not risen, nor schisms sproung of any other occasion, than of that, that the Priest of God is not obeyed, Libro 1. epist. 3. nec unus in ecclesia ad tempus sacerdos, & ad tempus judex vice Christi cogitatur, and one Priest, for the time, and one judge for the time, is not thought upon in the church in the stead of Christ. Remember that God saith to you, Mat. 23. do all whatsoever they command you, as he said to the Israelites: Thou shalt do whatsoever they shall say unto thee, Deut. 17. who rule in the place whom God hath chosen. Remember that he saith to you: Obey your governors, and submit yourselves to them, as he said to the Israelites: Thou shalt follow their sentence and judgement, thou shalt not bow to the right hand, Hebr. 13. nor to the left hand. Remember that he saith to you: He that heareth not the church is an heathen, and a Publican, Matt. 18. as he said to them: He that obeyeth not the commandment of the judge for the time, shall die: And if you have any grace, obey the order that God hath appointed in his church, hearken to the voice of your Lord God, and forsake your private examination of doctrine in matters of controversies: Fol. 22. b and come to the public, Fol. 23. a which you memtion, (that is) the common consent of the church. That must be your ankorhold, that must be your refuge: The private examination is dangerous. Every one, as he is full of pride, and singularity, so will he have his own way, and his private fancy and sole opinion to rest upon, and fall into diverse absurdities, as you have done in this answer. And to come to the instances. Mark good readers. Whereas in the very beginning of the first Article of my treatise, I briefly declared that the word (cross) signified four things in scripture, to wit, tribulation, the passion of Christ, the Cross whereon he died, and the material and mystical sign of the Cross, and for the first referred the readers to the tenth of S. Matthew, ninth of S. Luke, the 8. of S. Mark, for the second to the first of S. Paul, to the Corinthians and first chapter, and sixth to the Galathians, for the third to the common story of the gospel, where mention is made how the jews forced Christ, and Simon of Cyrene to carry a cross to the mount of Calvary, for the fourth to the 49. of Isaiah, 4. of jeremy 9 of Ezechiel, 24. of S. Mathewe, and 7. of S. john in his Apocalypse, Fol. 24. b. Calf. in cometh this freash feloe like a lusty launce-knight, and telleth me that I have but few men, and in mustering them have numbered one soldier more than I have, and like a covetous captain intended for a dead pay. Mart. feign would he seem to have some skill in warly affairs, and although he never struck stroke in battle, nor heard the sound of trumpet in field, yet he talketh like a politic captain that had long served under some great Soliman's Bassa in war. But if trial be taken of his experience, and skill in this behalf, ye shall find him neither politic captain, nor faithful soldier. For no man that hath any mean knowledge, or practice in feats of war, will say unto his enemy, sir you have to few men to encounter, jest he sand for freash soldiers and more aid, and make himself more stronger. Again no man will signify to his enemy that for covetousness he retaineth fewer soldiers than he aught to do, or for his own gain indenteth for a dead pay, jest upon this warning he furnish himself better, and provide that he shall have no advantage against him. Again no faithful soldier will streeke out of his master's chequer book, any one that serveth stoutly against the enemy, or be aggrieved to have his master's ensign, and bannerborne in the field: yet such is the wisdom of this doughty knight, that he hath betrayed himself in both, declaring his ignorance in the one, and malice in the other Ignorance for that he telleth me, that am his adversary, that I have few men and number one soldier more than I have, and indent for a dead pay: malice for that he streaketh out of his master's book, one trusty and valiant soldier, recorded long sithence in the chequer roll. It is an old said saw, a little money is soon told, the lesser the number, the easier is the tale. A few soldiers are soon viewed, and the count quickly kept. Wherefore if (as you say) my soldiers were few, the tale could not be long, if the number were but small, the account could not be great. Where you say that I indent like a covetous captain, for a dead pay (that is) ask allowance for a soldier that is not a live, I must tell you, that you misreport me like an uncourteous companion. As for my honesty, that all my soldiers are a live, my chequer book shall bear record, and your infidelity in denying any such to be extant, shall both by the same and other sufficient witness be controlled. You say, neither the material nor mystical cross in that sense I take them, Calf. Fol 24 B. Mart. to that end, that I apply them, be once mentioned in scripture. Alas sir what have the Prophets, Isaiah, jeremy, and Ezechiel deserved, now after so many hundred years to be rejected out of the canon? Be not their prophecies scripture? Can not you and your companions be content to take away S. james epistle, the epistle to the Hebrews and S. judes epistle, but will you also put these (the principal and chiefest of all the prophets) in the same predicament? shall they now be compelled to seek a new harbour and be no longer in the canon of scripture? yeas say you, we admit them for canonical scripture, Calf. but they make nothing at all for your purpose. Mart. Cap. 49. Cap. 4. No sir? hath not Esai these words, Exaltabo ad populos signum meum: I will set out my sign on high to the people? doth not jeremy say, Levate signum in Zion? life up a sign in Zion? Cap. 9 Doth not Ezechiel say, or God by the mouth of Ezechiel: Pass through the midst of the city, in the midst of Jerusalem and sign Tau upon the men's foreheads, that mourn, and be sorry for all the abominations that are done in the midst of it? Calf. yeas? Mart. And doth not God by the sign that he will exalt to his people, and have lifted up in Zion, mean the sign of the cross? Calf. no Mart. yea sir. And why not my yea, as good as your nay? why may not the sense that I conceive of these places, stand as well as that which you imagine? Is it not as lawful for me to abound in my sense, as it is for you in yours? I see no cause to the contrary. I have to support me S. Hierome an ancient father, more expert in the scripture, and tongues wherein it was written than any of this age. His words because the people should not think that I spoke after my own fancy, I recited out of his learned commentaries upon the said prophets: you allege no authority but your imagination, and cite us a text out of the prophet Esai, which is not to be found in such sort, as you turn it, neither in the Greek, nor in the Hebrew text adnexed to S. Hieromes' commentaries, but in Robert Steuens, after the translation of the Tygurines, allowed by noon, but by such schismatics as they are. And withal you join a piece of your own fancy unto it, which although as far as it repugneth not to the rules of faith, it may stand, yet not withstanding, it letteth not, but that the other may be true. For be it, That God answering his church complaining of sterility, Fol. 38. A and barrenness, said, behold I will lift up my hand and set up my standard unto the people, and meant thereby, that not only the jews, but also the gentiles should be brought to Christ? Will it follow (as you say) That it was the preaching of the word that converted the gentiles from errors and superstition? And nothing (sir) but preaching? were there no miracles done? no strange signs wrought? no extraordinary virtues and power showed, besides the word? did not Christ himself say of some: Unless ye see signs and wonders, Cap. 4. Cap. 3. Cap. 6. you will not believe? Doth not S. john say: Many believed in his name sing his signs which he wrought? Doth not the same Evangelist say: A great multitude followed him because they saw the signs which he did upon those that were sick? did not the jews say unto our saviour, what sign dost thou then, that we may see, and believe, what woorkest thou? Ibidem . I think you being master reader have read these texts: And if you have read them, I trust you see, there was an other mean to convert the gentiles, besides the preaching of the word. Cap. 6. Again doth not Solomon sand us to the emmot, and Christ to the fig tree to learn? I trust your wisdom will not deny it. Mat. 24. Marc. 13. If then Christ willed us to learn of them, there be other means for a man to learn besides preaching. And if among those, it hath pleased the holy Ghost to make the sign of the cross to be one, Fol. 38. A then am not I a falsifier, of the word, but you a false liar before the lord, so to report of me. further where you bid me learn of you, that preaching is the hand of God, that he said he would life up to the gentiles, Ibidem. and that the standard which he set up to his people is preaching, whereby we are brought to truth, from blindness and ignorance, I tell you in plain terms, that I refuse such an ignorant master. And prefer S. Hierome before ten hundred such new upstarts and arrogant heretics. Esai. 11. He saith, This hand lifted up to the gentiles, is the same of which this self same Prophet speaketh: There shalbe a rote of less, which shall rise up, that he may be prince of all nations, in him nations shall hope. And he will not only lift up his hand, but also exalt, and set up his sign. Psal. 8. there is no doubt, but it is the sign of the Cross, that it may be fulfilled, which is written. The earth is full of his praise. Now sir which is the better schoolmaster, S. Hierome, or master Calfhil? S. Hierome that telleth me, that the hand, that is lifted up to the gentiles, is the rote of less, even Christ himself, that is preached, or M. Calf. that teacheth that it is preaching. S. Hierome that teacheth that, the standard that God will exalt and set up, is the sign or banner of the Cross, or master Calf. that saith it is the preaching of the word, S. Hierome that telleth us that God of his mercy will sand us two things, Christ aid his cross, or M. Calf. that by a feat of his Arithmetic will make of two but one, and Christ and his cross, but a bore preaching? surely (sire) whatsoever opinion of learning, the Alebastards, tankerdberers, porters, cobblers, and other your auditors have conceived of you, I will not acknowledge you for a master, more worthy of credit than S. Hierome, nor attribute that to preaching, thereby to exclude the cross as you do, which the prophet, by the judgement of that learned father, attributed to Christ, and his cross. Wherefore learn of S. Hierom M. Calf. to make one thing of the hand, that the Prophet mentioneth, and another thing of the standard: Christ of the hand, the Cross of the standard, Calf. Fol. 38. a for so he teacheth you: but say you. The Prophet Esai in the text before teacheth, that God's mouth is a sharp sword, and that preaching is a chosen shaft, had in the quiver of the almighty, and because you thought I would take scorn to learn of you, Mart. you willed me to learn of God. It is gently done of you (sire) you have preferred me to a good schoolmaster. I thank you for it. I will daily pray, that I may have grace to learn, and faith to believe all that he teacheth. But is it true that you say, that in the 49. chapter of Esay, God saith: his mouth is a sharpesword, and preaching is a chosen shaft. In what text shall we find it? In the septuagintes, and translation of S. Hierome, there is no such thing. The words that you harp upon, I suppose, are these. You Islands hearken unto me, and take heed ye people that are far of. The lord hath called me from my birth and hath remembered my name, even from my mother's womb. He hath made my mouth as it were, like a sharp sword, under the shadow of his hand he hath defended me, and hath put me as a chosen arrow. In his quiver he hath hid me. Thus far the prophet. But what is this to preaching? What word have you here to signify, that Esai should mean as you pretend? Is it sagitta electa? a chosen arrow? surely if it be so, S. Hiero. deceiveth us. For he saith: In 49. Esai. Christ verily of many arrows and many sons, is the only chosen arrow, and the only begotten son, which he hath hid in his quiver, that is to say, in an human body, that the fullness of divinity might corporally devil in him. By which words we may learn, that Christ is the chosen arrow that the prophet speaketh of, and not paching, his humanity the quiver, wherein he was hid in this world, and not the scripture. And if saint Hierome had said nothing, the circumstance of the place duly examined might have told you, that God spoke there, of the incarnation of Christ, and sending his son into the world to redeem man. But we must pardon your oversigth, and albeit you have falsified the scripture, in saying that to be there which is not there, and unjustly accused me for false alleging authorities which are in the places which I quoted, yet will I not deal cruelly with you here, nor note your errors, so despite fully to the world, as you would do mine if you had like occasion. But let me friendly ask you this one question. Did you ever read S. Hierome upon this chapter of Isaiah? If you did ever read him, then can you not be excused of great singularity and pride, who sing the words of the prophet to describe the coming of Christ, and reading the words of that ancient father, expounding Sagittam electam, to be Christ, and pharetram, his humane body, would not withstanding writ, and set forth in print to exclude the cross, that preaching is a chosen shaft, mentioned there, by the prophet, where he saith nothing less. If the chosen shaft be Christ as S. Hierome saith, them can it not be preaching, as you say. For Christ is one thing, and preaching is another. 1. Cor. 1. Christ is the thing that is preached (for as saint Paul saith: We preach Christ crucified, preaching the act of man that preacheth, directed by God, if he preach in the unity of his church. If you did never read these commentaries (as I believe you did not) then were you not well adui●ed when upon so slipper a ground, you would build, and prove that S. Hierome did not speak of the sign of the cross. For say you. Fol 38. b. Calf. S. Hierom meaneth there by the ensign of the cross, the setting forth of the praise of God, which is not by setting a cross upon the altar, but by preaching the crucified. Mart. Mart. You harp much upon preaching, which in deed is an excellent way to set foort the praise of God, and I trust it shalbe better used to his honour and glory hereafter. Luther. Act. 36. In comen. in epis. ad Rom Melanel in locis con. & annot. in joan. But as it is used amongst you, who make him the author of evil, saying that the traison àf judas was as well the work of God, as the conversion of Paul, false in performing his promise, saying that he gave a piece of bread, when he promised his flesh: unjust in saying that he exacteth the observance, and keeping of his commandments which you say, are unpossible: not careful of his church: saying it may err, whereas he promised the holy Ghost to it, to governed it, to comfort it, and teach it all truth, with many things mo, which I may not speak of, beside your blasphemies against his sacraments, slanders against his vicar on earth: malice against his members, and desire of vengeance uttered almost in every sermon, contradictions among yourselves in the high mysteries of the faith: thus I say as it is used amongst you, is nothing to set forth the praise of God. But what? Is there no other mean to set forth praise of God, but preaching? Must every one that will praise God, be a preacher? Then let the husbandman forsake his plough, and buy him a bible: Let the merchant leave of his traffic, and leppe up to the pulpit. Let women give over their business, and read lessons of divinity. May not all the minesterie joy in you, and think that they are sped of profound clerk who can reason fo deeply against the cross, and say: Fol. 38. b. The setting forth of the praise of God is by preaching the crucified. Ergo it is not by settig the cross upon the altar? May not we reason in like sort and say: The state of the common weal is preserved by ministering of justice: ergo it is not preserved by tilling of the ground? The City of London is enriched by merchants: ergo it is not enriched by resort of gentlemen, strangers and lawyers? Clothing is a relief for the poor: ergo the devotion and alms of the wealthy is no relief for the poor? The honour of the prince is set forth by worthy exploits in wars abroad: ergo it is not set forth by good government in peace at home, with a number as fond as these? yes M. Calf. therefore deceive not yourself. There be many ways to set forth the praise and glory of God besides preaching. Matth. 5. Christ speaketh of good works in S. Mathewe, and biddeth us let our light so shine before men that they may see our good works, 1. Corin. 6 and glorify our father which is in heaven. S. Paul biddeth us glorify and carry God in our bodies: by which we understand that the praise and glory of God is set forth by external acts, as virtuous life, charitable alms, devout prayer, visitation of the sick, entertaining of strangers, washing holy men's feet, chaste life, poverty of spirit, humility of mind, chastening of body, and such like which all men may do besides those that preach. Now then, sing there be more ways to set forth the praise of God than preaching, amongst which it hath pleased the ancient fathers to apoynte, and ordain the sign of cross to be one, as a mean to excite and stir up that heavy lump of earth, that aggreaveth the soul, and bring us to remember the passion of Christ, master Calf. doth no more overthrow the authority of S. Hierome, affirming that it is the sign of the cross, that God said he would exalt and set up to his people, them he that maketh the reasons before mentioned, or any like unto the same, doth overthrow the state of the common weal. For the reason is as good in the one as in the other. The next place of scripture that he ipugneth and saith maketh no more for the cross than for a candlestick, Fol. 38. b. is, levate signum in Zion, life ye up a sign in Zion. that is as S. Hierome saith: lift up the sign of the cross in the top of the church, and what shift useth this impugner here (think you) to shifted away this place of the prophet and interpretation of S. Hierome? Fol. 39 a. In good sooth, one as like an heretic as ever you saw. God saith he, spoke there by an Irony, that is to say, God mocked his people: Again, There was no cause why S. Hierome should run to an allegory: which how foolish it is, I had rather other men should conceive, than I declare: for his controlling of S. Hieromes' judgement, for going to an allegory, he giveth no reason why. Such is his insolency, and pride to control the fathers, and set them to school again. Here would I say some what of the difference that is between S. Hierome, and master Calfhil, saving I nothing doubt but every simple soul seethe, that an old ox is to be preferred and better esteemed than a young calf. But master Calfhil saith: Calf. Fol. 39 a. If S. Hieromes' allegory should take place, it maketh nothing for your purpose, because he talketh there of heretics, that make battle against the church, and we must not fight against them with a cross in our hands. Wherefore the sign that he would have set up in the top of the church, is no cross, but preaching of the word by the prelates. Mart. In deed if heretics had that grace and humility of spirit that they would gladly hearken to the prelates of Christ's Church, and gently embrace the truth when it is told them, this impugner had said somewhat. But if heretics are so obstinate and proud, that they contemn all other besides themselves, if they will admit no other sense, no other interpretation, no other meaning of the scripture, than that which they have conceived, if they contemn all the ancient fathers, and general counsels, as Arius contemned the fathers of Nice preaching unto him Jesus' Christ to be God, of equal substance with the father, Macedonius contemned the fathers of Constantinople, preaching unto him the holy Ghost to be God, and other heretics contemn other councils in effect as you do the general council kept at Nice against image breakers, and that of Florence, and this of Trent now in our days, preaching unto you that there is one supreme governor in Christ's church, and that there be seven sacraments ordained of God, for our comfort in this his militant church on earth, if S. Paul willed us not to contend with heretics, if the holy fathers not to dispute with them, because they have such singular conceits of their wisdom, that they will yield to noon, preach he Christ and the Gospel never so much, if it be any thing contrary to their fancy, if S. Hierome knew preaching to be no way to convince an heretic, (as undoubtedly he did) than all that master Calfhil hath said is not worth a blue point, and S. Hieromes' allegory, interpreting the sign that God would have lifted up in Zion, to be the sign of the cross to be set up in the top of the church, standeth in as good force as it did before. From these places he goeth to xxiiii. of S. Mathewe: Fol. 39 b. and to prove that the sign of the son of man that shall appear in the clouds at the later day, is not the cross, he bringeth in a place out of Chrisostome in his second exposition upon S. Mathewes Gospel. Where I beseek you note, how these heretics, for their advantage father this work upon Chrysostom: and when the catholic allegeth any thing out of the said work, they deny it utterly to be his, and for proof of their allegation bring the censure of Eras. set before the said work: which is no indifferent dealing. For if they will have it to be Chrisostomes' work, when they allege it for their purpose, there is no reason why they should deny it to be Chrysostom's, when we allege it for ours. If I were disposed to follow their vain in denying of authors, I could say, that were not Chrysostom's work, and bring his plain words for my purpose out of his commentaries upon S. Matthew which never man denied to be his, Homi. 77 where he sayeth upon those words of the Gospel: Tunc apparebit signum filij hominis in coelo: Matt 24 Then the sign of the son of man shall appear in the element. Hoc est ipsa crux. That is the very cross itself. For the cross shall be seen more brighter than the sun. For the sun shallbe darkened. The cross shall appear. But for what cause doth the sign appear, forsooth that the jews impudency may be abundantly overpressed, and convinced. He will come into judgement having his cross with him, for declaration of his own justice and righteousness: I could repeat his words in his homilies de Cruce & Latrone, where talking of the second coming of Christ, and enquiring whither, He shall come with the cross or not, he saith: Hear: Then when he shall come, the sun shall be darkened, than the stars shall fall, and the sign of the son of man shall be seen in the element. Thou hast seen the glory of the sign, that is of the cross. The light of the sun shall be made dark. The moan shall not have her beauty, nor grace, but that light shall glitter and shine. And like as the princely pomp goeth before an Emperor, and the soldiers, as they go before, carry his flags and ensigns upon their shoulders, so when our lord shall come from heaven, a company of angels and multitude of archangels shall carry that sign upon their shoulders, and denounce unto us, his royal and princely coming. But I will not use that heretical shift, and protestants refuge. I will rather examine the authority, and convince him by the same. Fol. 39 b. Chrysostom as you allege him (sir) saith: Some think that the cross shallbe showed in heaven, but it is truer that Christ himself shall appear having in his body the testimonies of his passion, Home 49. in Mar. 24 and so forth: These be Chrisostomes' words, let it be the truer opinion (as it is in deed) that Christ shall come at the later day having in his body the signs of his passion, what will you infer upon it? ergo is the other opinion false? ergo shall not the cross, the sign of the son man appear at all? If yower Logic serve you to make such reasons, than I beseech you tell me, how hold these arguments? It is truer that the city of London is wealthier than the city of Bristol, ergo the city of Bristol is not welthi. It is truer that M. jevel is wiser than M. Calf. ergo M. Calf. is not wise, or if you will have a more familiar example. It is truer that an old ox hath longer horns than a young Calf. of xii. months old, ergo a young Calf of twel months old hath no horns at all? And if yower mymistralitie found this but vain sophistry, so may you think that to be no verity which you would infer falsely, upon Chrysostom's authority. If you had remembered yower Logic rules, you might have concluded thus: This is truer than that, ergo this is true, and not false. As for the other, look all Aristotel, and your Ralph ploughman if ye list, you shall never be able to make that consequent good. Wherefore you had more need to seek yower old Logic rules than I for a fifth signification of the cross. Saint Hierome might have taught you that either the passion of Christ, either the sign of the cross, In 24. Matth. might be signified by those words of the evangelist: Tunc apparebit signum filij hominis: Then shall the sign of the son of man appear. For he sayeth: Signum hic aut crucis intelligamus, ut juxta Zachariam videant judaei, Cap. 22. quem compunxerunt, aut vexillum victoriae triumphantis. Here we may understand either the sign of the cross, that according to Zacharie the jews may see whom they have pricked, either the banner of the triumphant victory. But you would not vouchsafe to read him. His grave authority was to hard meat for your queasy stomach. It liketh nothing but woodcocks and capons. Origen in like manner expounding that place of S. Matthew saith: Then shall the sign of the son of man appear, that is to say, Homi. 30. in Mat. 24 the virtue which the son of man wrought upon the cross, and specially his sign shall glitter in the element, that men of all tribes which before did not believe Christianity, that was preached, but spoke evil of all, may at that time coming to knowledge of it, Per signum illud manifestatum, by that sign made manifest and open, lament for their ignorance and sin, because they did not receive the word of God. Here also you see (sir) that at that day both the virtue of the passion, and sign also shall appear. This notwithstanding if you cavil, and say that this sign is Christ himself having the sign of his passion, yet can you not exclude the cross, because that was one sign, and instrument upon which the other were made. Again here is mention made but of a sign in the singular number, Christ had many signs and wounds, and five more notable than all the rest, in his hands, in his feet, in his side. Then of likeliehoode if the Evangelist had meant only the signs of Christ's body wounded, he would have said: Apparebunt signa filij hominis, and not, signum, the signs of the son of man shall appear, and not the sign. Besides to make Christ, the son of God, that then shall come in majesty, and infinite glory, a sign of the son of man, and not the son of man himself, is to vile, and base a thought for a Christian, and meet for such signifiers as sacramentaries are. But that the sign of the cross also shall then appear, Cap. 3. read Hippolytus in his oration de consummatione mundi. Ephrem in his book of penance. read Ciril. Hieros' oration ad Constantium, read Damascen lib. 4. cap. 12. de fide, read S. Hilary upon the 24. of S. Mathewes Gospel, and Theophilact upon the same. Whose words to the intent the readers may see, that the Evangelist spoke of the sign of the cross, I will recite. In English they are these: Then shall the cross appear in the element shining above the sun, to convince the jews. For Christ shall come against the jews having his cross, as a great matter and testimony to justify him self. As if a man be strooken with a stone, he showeth the stone with which he was strooken: The sign he calleth the cross, as it were the triumphant banner, and princely standard. Thus M. Calf. you see by the judgement of these ancient fathers, that the sign of the son of man, is the sign of the cross, that shall appear at the terrible day of judgement, and that I need not seek, (as you fondly fancy) a fift signification of this word cross. For it may be a material cross, and the very same that Christ died on, if it please God. We are not sure of the contrary. Of what matter his Majesty will have it made, it is uncertain to us, but a cross he will have it to be, that is most certain. Dispute you as long as ye list of the one, we will believe the other. As for that, which you prate against the sign of Tau, mentioned in Ezechiel, and revelations of S. john, it is so childish, that I think, the very fool of the middle temple (made minister by M. Grindal) would never have preached it on a bench, at an ale bankett, much less have left it in writing to be seen. But because every merry man maketh much of his babble, and thinketh it a precious thing, I will unrip it, that you may see what baggage is within it, and be wiser hereafter. To prove that the sign of Tau with which the people of God were sealed in Jerusalem, did not signify nor express the cross you bring three reasons, that shall make me blush you say. But take heed M. Calf. that they cast not milk in your white wearish face, and make you ashamed. The first is this: Calf. Fol. 40. a. The spirit of life, and lively faith is not inspired as soon as a cross is figured, ergo the letter Tau of which Ezechiel spoke, and seal which S. john mentioneth, do not express the cross. The second not much unlike to the first. The sign of the cross is not sufficient to discern the good from the bad, the faithful from the infidels, ergo the letter Tau and seal that S. john mentioneth do not express the cross. The third is as bad, as the worst of the other. It is this. Noon were sealed with Tau but such as mourned for the abominations of Jerusalem, noon were signed but the servants of God, but all men indifferently have the sign of the cross, many more than be grieved with the sight of sin: Therefore the seal that in those places is spoken of is not the sign of the cross. Mart. You may see (good readers) that Logic was hard with him, and evil to be gotten, when he advised to make such consequentes. But of them hereafter. Now to his divinity, where he sayeth that the spirit of life, and lively faith is not inspired, as soon as a cross, is figured, understand ye, that God, who knoweth the secrets of men's hearts, and can not be deceived, commanded the sign Tau (expressing plainly the cross) to be printed in the foreheads of those that were godly, and lamented the abominations of Jerusalem. not purposing by that mark ex opere operato, to make men good, that before were bad, (as M. Calf. mistaketh the matter) or to inspire a lively faith by the nature of that mark into an infidel, without any godly inward motion of the person, but to the intent that those that were good, and godly in Jerusalem, before they received any such mark in their foreheads, might be known by that make to be good and godly, and thereby escape the plagues that should fall on the city. So that they were first good as the text is plain, and because they were good, Tau was figured in their foreheads, and not (as M. Calf. imagineth) to make them that were before bad to be good. Baptism by the very nature of the sacrament, is a full, perfect, and sufficient cause, whereby the infant is made from the child of wrath, the child of God, without having any proper faith of his own, or godly motion to have the sacrament. We never taught so of the sign of the cross, that it is able to make evil men good, without they have godly inward motions with faith, hope, and charity. Mary that it giveth men occasion to be good, by calling to remembrance our saviours bitter passion, I declared in the ninth article, where I told you, what commodity every Christian hath, or may have by the sign of the Cross. Matt. 9.16 Mar. 6. Luc. 8. Some men there were that were healed as soon as they touched fimbriam vestimenti eius, the hem of Christ his garment, and yet many touched his whole garment, that had no good thereby. Act. 18. S. Paul's Napkins did many men good in his absence, and yet there were many that took no good by them in his presence. Psal. 18. Coeli enarrant gloriam Dei. The heavens show forth the glory of God, yet how many philosophers were there that denied, some God himself, some his providence? Christ himself come to save that which was lost, Matth. 18. 1. Pet. 2. not with standing, he was called the stumbling stone, and rock of offence. Miracles were also done, both to the confirmation of the faithful, and conversion of the Gentiles, yet Christ upbrayed certain cities, Matth. 11. Luc. 10. and told them, that if miracles had been wrought in tire and Sidon, they would have done pertaunce. And why did not all these work the virtue for which they were ordained? The fault was not in them, but in the lack of godly motions in the persons that must necessarily concur, that the effect may, by ordinary course be brought to pass. They give great provocations to men of any good nature to come to a godly life, but they bring not the thing fully to pass without the consent and godly motions of the guns. What then? shall we say as M. Calf. sayeth: That these heavens are not of his creation, because diverse look not up and consider the power of God in their creation? Shall we deny that Christ had any coat, S. Paul any napkinnes, Christ's incarnation, the Apostles miracles, because they work not in all men alike? The scripture itself worketh not his effect straight in all men's hearts. Some believe, some do not. Shall the scripture therefore be no longer taken for God's holy word? as M. Calf. denieth the sign of Tau, to be the cross, because as soon as it is figured, it worketh not the spirit of life, and lively faith in all guns a like? God forbid. Many preach the word of God, and albeit the seed taketh no root, nor any spirit or lively faith be inspired as soon as it is spoken, yet is it the word of God. If it might have pleased the worship of this profound clearcke, to have looked upon the prophet, he might have seen, that Tau in that place, made not evil people in the nature of an efficient and sufficient perfect cause, to be good, but was signed in good folks foreheads, because they were good before. And notwithstanding there is no mention made in that place of the prophet that the sign of the Cross (figured by Tau) wrought any godliness at all in men's hearts, but was only commanded to be signed in their foreheads that were good before, yet for as much as it doth continually set before our eyes the memory of Christ, that died upon the cross, it worketh in all hearts a disposition of grace, and as the sky doth, make us consider God's glory, and all his works. And whereas God gave, when julianus was feared with spirits such force to the sign of the cross, that the evil spirits at the fight thereof departed in haste, and he might have had good occasion to forsake his Apostasy if any grace in the world might have taken place in him, it giveth us to understand that albeit the spirit of life and lively faith is not inspired, as soon as a cross is figured, yet is the cross of Christ, an heavenvly mark, and will work the effects of grace in us, if we be otherwise apt and meet vessels to receive it. Where he saith in his second reason, that the sign of the cross is not sufficient to discern the good from the bad, the faithful from the infidels, I will first examine the sufficiency of this mark Tau, and see how his reason hangeth. That Tau imprinted in the foreheads of the people in Jerusalem was sufficient to discern the good from the bad, I trust M. Calf. will not be so rash as to deny the scripture. God gave it for a sufficient sign at that time to the angel that should strike the city, to know the good from the bad: if it was not sufficient, than God that took it to be sufficient, was both deceived himself, and also deceived the angel. whereupon it followeth that the angel stroke with the plague as many good as bad. If M. Calves. discretion be such that he will drive us to confess, spite of our teeth, that as the sign of Tau, at that time in Jerusalem was a sufficient mark to discern the good from the bad, even so that same sign of Tau must be taken for a sufficient sign, to know the good from the bad, at all times, in all places, among all nations, whereas the scripture talketh but of the sufficiency of the sign, at that special time, in that special place, among that special people, I must be so bold as tell M. Calf. that he must have a bell rounge at his ears, to wake him out of his drowsy dream, that he may learn, that we use not to allow arguments, from particulars to generals, nor himself neither when he is fully awaked. If he do, ask him how this argument holdethe? M. Calfhill is appointed to read in Paul's, ergo he must read, at all times, in all places of the world: and with all, desire him to confer his own folly with this, and see whither it be not like. I will not press him yet with the doctors that take the sign Tau mentioned there to be the sign of the cross. Let it remain as it is, to be but the sign of Tau. Will he grant that as the sign of Tau was sufficient at that time, to discern the good and bad in Jerusalem, even so that it being marked in men's foreheads should be a sufficient sign to know the good? If not, I must know why. His answer can be no other (if he answer wisely) but that it was a sufficient sign then, at that time, place, and among that people, because God so appointed it, and that it is not a sufficient sign in all other places of the world to know the good, because it is appointed so no where by God. If he answer thus, as of force he must, then hath he answered fully for me, why the cross, (meant by Tau (is no sufficient sign to know the good, because God no where so appointed it. For the which I thank him, and signify with all, that it is a sufficient sign to know the bad in all places, in all ages, amongs all nations, if they do but contemn it. For they may well be called inimici crucis Christi, Philip. 3. enemies of the cross of Christ, and because they refuse that heavenly mark, shalbe in peril of death when the destroyer cometh. As for the dependence and sequel of his argument, it holdeth much after this sort. The working of miracles is not sufficient to discern the true Apostle from the false, the faithful from the faithless, ergo the working of miracles is not the virtue of the holy Ghost, that Christ spoke of in the Gospel. The last argument is so foolish that I marvel much that ever M. Calf. would suffer it to pass his pen. It hath neither rhyme nor reason, nor mode, nor figure, nor faith, nor truth. The argument runneth thus: The servants of God were sealed which Tau, but many more than be good have the sine of Tau, ergo the seal that is spoken of in this place, is not the sign of Tau. Doth not this conclusion follow as well out of yower premises, as that the sign of Tau is not the sign of the cross? look well upon it, and you shall find them all one. Or if that do not please you, take this. Such as are saved, M. Calf. by his own reason dri●en to soul absurdities. are saved by the death of Christ, but Christ died for many more then shallbe saved: ergo it is not Christ's death by which men be saved. So every way by yower own reason, you shall fall into soul absurdities, by the first to to deny the scripture, by the second the passion and death of Christ, and yet you are not ashamed of it. But you will I doubt not hereafter, when ye consider it better. Now because you marvel why I cite the seventh chapter of S. john's revelations, where it is said. Hurt not the land and sea, The seventh of the Apoc. examined nor the trees until we sign the servants of our lord God in their foreheads, I will take pains to examine it for yower further instruction. They are the words of the Angel, (that is to say) of our saviour Christ, to the devils, commanding them not to hurt, neither the land, sea, nor trees, until they had signed the servants of God in their foreheads. The land and sea signify sinners . By the land and sea, sinners are signified, which are vile in consideration of their sins committed, and inconstant and wavering, in respect of that which they have done, and will do. The land, because it is dry, signifieth the covetous, the sea, because it is moist and foameth, expresseth the riotous. By the trees, good men are meant, The trees good men. because they are fruitful by good works, and always ready to bring forth good fruit. The evil men that must not be hurt, are those that should convert and turn to Christ, and persevere to the end, albeit at that time, they were in darkness of infidelity and other wickedness. The hurt inhibited to be done, was both vehement temptations in spirit, The hurt inhibited to be done, to the evil. and to the good. and also external damage in body, which might have been done, by procuring death, or stirring up hatred and malice proceeding to murder. The good men were such as were converted already to Christ, and cleaved fast unto him by faith, love, and hope, and imitation of his cross. The hurt inhibited to be done to these, is the mightiness of spiritual temptations, and persecutions. The time Apoc. 7. The time appointed is the time until they be signed, as S. john sayeth: do not hurt until we sign, that is to say, both I myself, by framing within, the sign of faith with the affection of mercy, and power to follow the cross, and my ministers, by disposing outwardly by doctrine and sacraments, by which the soul is disposed to the impression of the sign of faith and grace, which is the sign of the cross, because it cometh from the cross, and showeth them to be servants of the cross. The place The place where the sign must be made is the forehead, which is the seat of shamefastness, and boldness, and constancy, and is taken both for the inward mind, and external part of the body. Two kinds of sealing. Wherefore the sealing also is internal and external. Internal when faith and love in the passion of Christ is imprinted in the heart, and desire to follow it, and boldness to confess it, and constancy to persevere in it, is engraffed in the nimmed. The external printing of this seal, is by the Sacraments, and especially by baptism, by which God doth work, and commandeth to be dispensed owtwardlye. In this sacrament the soul is not only sealed, but also the body, because the whole body by baptism is dedicated to God, for which consideration, the man is anointed in the shoulders, in the head and in the breast in baptism. And on the forehead by the bishop in confirmation, with Chrism, and sign of the cross. These two signs are required, because to make a man hold to confess the name of Christ, and constant to suffer adversity, the dispensation of the sacraments by the ministers outwardly, is not sufficient, unless God inwardly doth infuse grace, but when both concur and meet together, them is the sealing perfected. After which sealing by virtue of the sign, which is faith, and grace, and love of the cross in the soul, with imitation, and imprinting of the cross in the body, the faithful are more defended from the devil, than they were before. Thus you see sir how that sign which the evangelist mentioneth and sealing which he speaketh of, in his revelations is not only faith in Christ, and love of the passion, but also the outward sign of the cross, not only an impression of grace in the heart inwardly, but also a printing of the cross in the body owtwardlye. And this is not mine interpretation, or opinion. It is his, whom all good men reverence, 8. Thomas in Apocalip. whom all learned men wonder at, to whom if all the protestants in the world were compared and laid in a balance, for profound divinity they would appear lighter than a feather. Wherefore sing every one of these five places do signify and express the sign of the cross, and you in denying them so to do, deny both the scriptures themselves, the very propre word of God, whereof you vaunt yower self as pert as a pere munger, and also contemn the hoy fathers, Origen, Ephrem, Chrysostom, Hilary, Theophilactus, and Hierome, that be of that mind, what shall we think not of yower contemning the witnesses of men, but of yower denying the word of God, not of yower misreporting the sayings of the fathers, but of yower wreastinge of the 〈◊〉 scripture, not of yower cavilling against doctors, but of yower wrangling against the Prophets, Apostles, and Evangelists? Are you worthy to be taken for a cunning M. Carpenter, or a vile butcher, an expert free mason, or a dirty mortar maker? Myself will give no sentence, let wise men judge, to them I appeal, to them I call, to their censure I submit my cause. Now let us hear what you say against the fathers. Chrisostome liketh you not: His golden mouth you say: Fol. 14. a. Had leaden words, and for speaking honourably of the cross to the gentiles you chardg him with running to an extreme contrary. Chrysostom . But how unmeet a goldsmith you are to judge of Chrisostomes' golden mouth, your copper teeth and leaden tongue declare. As for running to an extreme contrary, we tell you, that albeit it be a true rule, that Contraria contrarijs curantur: Contraries are cured with their contraries, yet as the expert physician in tempering his mixtures, useth such discretion, that no extreme shall distemper the body: So although that virtuous father, and heavenly physician Chrisostome used (as you say (one contrary to cure an other (that is) highly commended the sign of the cross, Fol. 25. a. because the Gentiles reproved it: and thought that he could be no God that would suffer so vile a death upon the Cross, to make them embrace Christ and his cross, yet you must not suppose, that he so tempered his talk, that he gave them such words as should infect their souls: and for true religion (which he professed to teach them) gave them even at the beginning such lessons as might bring them to error and superstition, and by one evil, remedy an other. Let me reason with you after this sort. Either it was evil of itself to commende● the sign of the cross in such sort to the gentils, or it was not. If it were evil of itself, no circumstance can make it good. Rom. 3. Neither as S. Paul sayeth: We must do evil, that good may come. Which S. Chrisostome knew right well and would not adventure to fall into the hands God, in such a case, having other means to persuade, unless ye will enrolle him amongst those of whom the poet said: Stulti dum vitant vitia in contraria currunt. Fools whiles they avoid faults, foul in to the contrary. If it were not evil of itself, but for circumstances and considerations tolerable, then are you much to blame, for condemning so ancient and learned a father, as Chrysostom was, of folly in saying that he ran to an extreme contrary as far in one side, Fol. 25. a as the gentiles were on the other. If yower spirit had been evangelical, or any thing like unto theirs who preached Christ crucified, and his religion and faith unto us, you might have learned to have borne with that which you yourself grant to be in some respect tolerable. But he that looketh to find a sparkle of their meekness in you, is as much deceived, as he that looketh to find a drop of water in the flint stone. For if there had been either token of humility, sparkle of honesty, or sign of Christianity in you, that venomous tongue of yowers would never have said, that the sign of the cross, Fol. 25. b upon which it pleased Christ to work our redemption, is a magical enchantment, a conquest against Christians, an heathnishe observance, and superstition of them that never thought upon Christ: For they be words more meeter for a Lucian, a Celsus, a julian, an Apostata, and enemy of Christ, than for one that is redeemed with his death upon the cross. Matt. 24. And never read to have been used of any, but of heathens, turks, jews, or heretics in these our miserable days. The holy scriptures called it, the sign of the son of man, the fathers (as I proved it my treatise) call it, the sign of the a Cassiod. in Psal. 4. Emperor of heaven, a b Chriso. demonst. ad vers. gent token of much blessing, an c Paulinus epist. 11 ad Sever. pledge of eternal salvation, a triumphant d Damasc. lib. 4. cap. 12. de fide Chrisost. homi. 55. in Matth. banner of victory, a sign of e Ambro. li. 6. ca 4. de Sacra. virtue, an honourable f August. de visita. infir. ca 3. monument, a heavenly g Lact. de vera sapient lib. 4. cap. 27. mark, and immortal sign. And now in steppeth a julianiste, and contrary to the scriptures of God, contrary to the testimonies of the ancient fathers, in despite of all Christians revileth it, as ye heard before, and which is most abominable of all, in other places of his book, calleth it, an idol, a dumb God, dead devil, a schoolmaster of error, and impiety. And as though this were not blasphemous enough, he likeneth it, to the Gallows, to the helmet of hell, and conjurers mace. Like heart, like thoughts, like tongue, like words: he that once hath forsaken the unity of Christ's church, will never speak well of his ministers, cross, and sacraments. Examples we have to many in these our miserable days, and one to many by this peevish julianiste: who besides these blasphemies against the cross, hath not spared as in process shall appear, the saints in heaven, the Sacraments on earth, and ministers ordained of Christ to be dispensers of his mysteries, until his coming again: whom we had need to pity rather than to hate, sing so heinously he abuseth the gifts which he received of God, to bless, and not to curse: to our instruction, that we may beware of such: to his own condemnation, unless he repent. But be it M. Calf. that yower imagination (which is blasphemous for any Christian man to think) were true, touching the sign of the cross. Was it sitting for such a sincere professor of the Gospel, such an expert father in the scriptures, such a profound bachelor in divinity, as you pretend yower self to be, so to revile and rail at it? What scripture taught you that? Do you not read, that nothing is worse than the devil, and yet not with standing doth not? S. Jude ●he Apostle tell you, that when Michael the Archangel did contend with him about the body of Moses, he durst not, inferre judicium blasphemiae, infer the judgement of blasphemy? But said: Imperet tibi Deus. Let God command thee? Doth not the Wise man tell you, that: Dum maledicit impius diabolum, Eccle. 21. maledicit ipse animam suam? The ungodly curseth his own soul while he curseth the devil? And could neither the example of the Angel sparing to curse, and blaspheme the devil, being as fierce as a lion, and cruel as the dragon against us, teach you, as it teacheth other men, to beware of blaspheming? neither the care of yower own soul, stay you from railing at the Cross, which Procopius calleth a Niceph. lib 4 cap. 26. histo. Eccle. precious, justinian b De sanctiff. Epis. cap. cap. 32. coll. 9 honourable and holy, Constantine c Euseb. lib. 3. de vita Const. healthful, and S. Augustine a d Ser. de cruce & latro. thing of honour? Is the word of God forcible to pierce into men's hearts, when you preach, and can it not sink into yower own mind when you read it? If it be so, than may you think you have a stony heart, and crooked soul. But what proof have you for all that which you have said? In so weighty a matter as this is, some scripture, some father, some council, some example, some authority should have been alleged. Shall we believe you upon yower bore word, or trust you upon yower simple credit? Nay sir, not so, we will have better trial of yower honesty first. And albeit in some points peradventure you would be a Pythagoras, and credited upon your bore word, yet shall you not have silence for five years space, as he had of his scholars. But what if we did grant you, that some devilish and evil disposed person abused that holy sign, in practice of witch craft, aught it therefore of any to be called a Magical inchantement? a conjurers mace: or such like? If yower wisdom will serve you to think so, by like reason such as you are, may cavil against the holy name of God, scriptures of Christ, and Supper of our lord, and Pater noster that we use. For that women abused the name of God to sorcery, the devil scriptures to evil purpose, the Corinthians the supper of our lord, Homil. 21. Cap. 4. other, their Pater noster to witchcraft, S. Chrysostom declareth in an homely to the peolpe of Antioch. S. Matthew in his Gospel. S. Paul in his Epistle, 1. Cor. 11. and you yower self in this answer where you tell us of a witch, Fol. 2. b. that with her Pater noster made her pail go a milking. Wherefore if there be any grace in you, revoke this, for shame, and learn a new lesson, that a thing good of itself, should not be sclandered or taken away for the abuse of a few. further that the cross was no heathenish observance, The cross no heathenish observance Lib. 2. ad ux learn of julian the Apostata your Cousin, who exꝓbrated the Cristians, and not the gentiles with having and making of Crosses, which he would never have done, if the gentils had had any like custom. Or if you disdain to learn of him, learn of Tertullian who told his wife, that she should give alms with out trouble, go to the sacrifice with out scruple, do her business without suspicion, serve God boldly, rejoice merilye, and bless herself openly, if she married with a Christian after his death, but if she married with an heath she could not do it so freely, which Tertullian would never have said, if that practice of blessing, crossing, or signing had been practised among the heathens. Euseb. lib. 1. de vita Constan . Moreover that is was no conquest against the Christians learn of Constantine the great, who said: By this healthful sign a true token of virtue, I have delivered our city, from the yoke of the tyrant, and made it free, or if you will disdain for the nobility of yower person to learn of so mean an Emperor as Constantine was, learn of the highest, that is lord of lords, and king of kings, yea God himself, who showed that sign from heaven, and said to Constantine: In hoc signo vince: Overcome in this sign. Learn of Christ who the next night after appeared unto him, and willed him to make a sign like unto that which he had seen, and use it in wars. And consider with yower self that God shewing that sign from heaven, would never have caused the Angel to say: Overcome in this sign, Nor Christ appearing to him in a vision, would have willed him to make and use the like, if it should be a conquest against us. For he loveth us more tenderly, than that he will suffer that sign, upon which he conquered hell, death, and sin, to make us his coheirs, to be a conquest against us, and make us no inheritors. With all, learn that the laws punish such blasphemers, gladio, fuste, & cathena, with sword, club, and chain. And if you think yower self to stand in such security, in this world that you need not to fear them, yet fear the indignation of God, who will punish all iniquity and sin. And if he punished julian the Apostatats uncle called also julianus, in the secret parts, Socrates lib. 6. c. 10 Tripart. so that they rotten, and had worms engendering in them, and made his mouth that used to blaspheme God, to be the way and instrument of his natural egestion, and excrements, for casting on the ground the holy vessels and palles dedicated to God, and sitting upon them, and pissinge against the holy altar, and reviling at Christ as it pleased him, If all his veins opened, and blood issued out of his body for saing skornfullye, Behold in what vessels the son of Mary is served, Nicep. li. 14. cap. 36 If Nestorius tongue was eaten with worms, for blaspheming against Christ and the virgin Mary, think that some horrible plague hangeth over yower head, either in this world to repentance, to set you in state of salvation, if you have grace to acknowledge it, either to the greater heap of punishment into everlasting damnation, if you continue and die in it. Wherefore repent in time, and do penance for this abominable blasphemy. Act. 8 If perhaps this thought of thy heart may be remitted the. Yower fancy in saying that the cross was a ceremony amongst the priests of Serapis: I will differ as yet: Fol. 25. b In the mean season I will disscusse ij rules that you bring and proceed to the other authorities that you seem to oppugn, M. Calves. Rules. Calf. Fol 26. a. Mart. and confer yower answers. The first is this: Whatsoever is brought in under cloak of good intent, is not straight ways alloweable. To this I answer. Some things are brought in by the devotion of private men, in particular churches, and not authorized generally by the high bishop. What soever they are, they bind not generally, nor are straight ways to be allowed of all men. Concil. 2. Aurel. c. 9 As for example it was brought in, by the bishops of France upon good intent and devotion, that noon of the clergy should presume to devil with the lay people, without the licence of his bishop. Iten that noon should depart from Mass, Concil. 3. Aure. c. 22 Conc. To let. 4. c. 17 before the lords prayer had been ended, and blessing given of the bishop, if he were there. In Spain likewise the bishops brought in upon good intent and devotion, that the deacons should communicate before the altar, the other clerks in the quire, and the people without the quire. Besides they brought in, that every year, from the Ideses of December, they should have the Litanie, sung or said, three days together. And diverse countries have diverse like unto these But because they received them, they are not streitwayes allowable. In your churches, you have brought in the Paraphrasis of Erasmus, Caluins' institutions, to be read as homilies, you have made and injunction, that priests shall not mary unless the justices of peace take trial of their wives honesties before, and see whither they be meet women for such religious persons. These nor any such are allowable, as generally received, not amongst the Swinglians themselves. Some things are brought in by a common consent of all Christendom, expressed and concluded in general councils representing the universal body of Christ's militant church on earth. Whatsoever is ordained, whatsoever is determined, and brought in by them, with the consent and assent of the head bishop, Christ's vicar in earth, that straight ways is alloweable, that is to be followed of all the humble, and obedient children of God. Lucae 10. Whosoever gaynesayeth their decrees despiseth Christ, who said, he that despiseth you despiseth me. Whosoever heareth not them, must be unto us, as an Heathen and Publican. Some things have been brought in by tradition and custom, Matth. 18 and never altered in the Catholic church. As that in consecrating the body and blood of Christ, a Clemens li. 8. ca 17 Apost. Institution. just. Mar. Apol. 2. Cyprian. lib. 2. epi. 3 Ambrol. lib. 5. ca 1. de Sacra. water should be mingled with wine, that at the b Chriso. Ho. 69. ad popul. Antio. dreadful mysteries, commemoration should be had of the dead, that the c Basil. ca 27. de spirit. sanct. Tertul. de coromil. Fol. 26 a Chrism and only be consecrated, that we sign those that are Christened with the sign of the cross, that we pray towards the east, and bless ourselves. These are to be allowed because they were never altered. Some other have been brought in by tradition and custom, yet not generally received, as that infants after baptism should receive honey and milk, that children should receive the sacrament, and such like, which have either been altered by authority of such as Christ appointed to be ministers and governors to rule his church, or suffered to grow out of use by a secret dissent, and lack of use. These are not to be allowed, and followed. But the cross is noon of these. Yower second rule is this. Whatsoever hath been upon good occasion received once, must not necessarily be retained still. For proof of this, you bring a decree of pope Stephen, mangled at yower pleasure. Distin. 63. ca Quia But of that hereafter when I come to declare your falsity in abusing the fathers: your rule and authority we admit. What will you infer upon it? Because things once received upon good occasion may be altered, shall it be lawful for every jack straw, to altar and change, when and what pleaseth him? Learn you that by the authority that ye allege out of the decrees? To school sir james, to school, and spell it a little better. The words of the decrees be these. Si nonnulli ex praedecessoribus & maioribus nostris fecerunt aliqua. etc. If some of our predecessors, and elders have done any thing which at any time could be with out offence, and afterward be turned into error and superstition, let them with out any more delay, and with great authority be destroyed of them that come after. Here is authority given to aftercummers, to abrogate that which their predecessors made, if it grow to error and superstition: but who be these aftercummers sir james? Every peevish protestant? every lay man that cometh after? Will yower wit serve you to say so? as you must needs if you will infer any thing upon this for yower purpose? then by your judgement every man that cometh after, yea the very Tinkers, cobblers apothecaries, and peddlers (for you can not exempt them from the name of after cummers,) may altar and change what soever their predecessors have done. And should we not have a goodly common weal if it might be lawful for all men to altar things at their pleasure? But tell me sir james, what was that Stephanus that made the decree which you recited before? Was he not pope of Rome? Were not the predecessors and sorefathers that he speaketh of, the bishops that were before him in that see? If it be so, Calf. condemned by the decree which himself allegeth. as (if you deny it,) the decree shall control you, and reason convince you of folly, then must it needs follow, that the aftercummers, that he speaketh of, were the bishops that should ordinarily succeed him in that see. And not in general every one that should come after him. So that it is the bishop of Rome, M. Calf. that must abrogate and take away whatsoever abuse is crept into the church, it is he that must altar the decrees and Canons of his predecessors, if any be grown into error and superstition. Call to yower remembrance the rule of the law that sayeth, ff. de Reg. juris. Nihil tam naturale quàm eodem genere quodque dissoluere, quo est colligatum. There is nothing so natural as to dissolve every thing by the same sort and kind as it was knit together: and with all consider, that as with us England, when a law is established by a parliament in one kings days, and to be repealed after his death by his successors, it can not be done but by an other act of parliament, so in like case, when a decree is made by a bishop of Rome, it can not be altered but by an other bishope, that succeedeth him in the same see. Wherefore M. Calf. sing it hath been established by general councils and decrees of the bishop of Rome that the sign of the cross should be in churches, and these canons and decrees have never been abrogated by any of them, it followeth that it should be retained still, until the B. of Rome his successors, that Pope Stephen meaneth, abrogate it, as erroneous and superstitious. Where you say, that the making the sign of the cross hath bred such inconvenience that the inward faith hath been untaught, Calf. Fol. 26. a. and that the virtue hath been attributed to the sign, which only proceedeth from him which is signified, I must plainly tell you, Mart. that you maliciously slander the catholic church and affirm more than you shall ever be able to prove. For neither hath the faith been untaught these xv. hundred years in Christendom, nor almost these thousand years in England. Nor yet if there hath been any inconvenience or negligence in the prelates for not preaching, that hath not proceeded (as you disdainfully say) of Crossing. Fol. 26. a. You tell me that, I do put causam pro non causa, Where I wiss, You have little cause, but how well you have kept your ship from that rock and put, non causam pro causa let the world judge. See good people M. Calf. saith: Fol. 26. a. Christian men have used to bless and cross themselves, ergo the inward faith hath been untaught. In Tertullian's time the inward faith was untaught, and why M. Calf? Forsooth Crossing was so much used amongst Christians, that whensoever they went out, whensoever they come in, whensoever they sat down, or did any other thing, they made the sign of the cross in their foreheads. In 9 Ezechiel . In S. Hieromes' time, the inward faith was untaught. For crossing was so much used, that the figure of it was printed in men's forheds: Frequenti manus inscriptione, Ad Eusto. with often inscription of the hand. Yea S. Hierome himself commanded, that: ad omnem actum manus pingat crucem. At every action of ours the hand should make a cross: And so likewise in other ages. O fine logitioner and profound divine. An imitation of M. Calves Rhetoric. Fol. 28. a O cunning argument worthy that all the scholars may hiss out of the schools? Would a man have thought that a Bacchiler of Divinity and woorshipful reader in Paul's, could have made so woorshipful a reason? If crossing bred such inconvenience, that it hindered the teaching of inward faith, then was the fault in the people, not in the priests, in the laity, not in the clergy. For the greater number of such Christians, the more crossing, the more crossing, the greater let to preaching as you say: So sir, have you not bestirred yower sefe like a pretty clerk? You give us as good a reason for the hindering of of the inward faith, as the old sage father fool did the gentlemen in Kent for the stopping of Sandwiche haven, saying that the haven never prospered sithence yonder Tinderden Steeple was builded. May not yower superintendant M. Grindall much rejoice, that he hath so fine a piece nigh his palace, and give you leave to set forth a new book without the old privilege? But this is nothing to yonder Tynderden steeple. It is a great blot in yower eye: I dare say you would wish it a fish pool. Where you charged us that we attribute to the sign, Fol. 26. a Calf. Mart. the virtue which proceedeth from him, which it signified, I must tell you that you have ears and will not hear, eyes and will not see, a little wit and will not understand. For if your ears had not been deaf, eyes blind, and wit wilful, you might have heard, seen, and understood, that nothing is attributed, to the sign without special relation to the merits of Christ's passion, no effect mentioned to have been done by the cross, but in the virtue of Christ's death suffered full bitterlye upon the cross. Which clause I did purposely put in at the latter end of the first article, to take away occasion of cavilling from all such wranglers as you show yower self, to be. M. Calf. but a wragler . And surely if you did read that clause before, you can not escape the blemish of wilful malice, for charging me with that error, saying that I left out that sentence of Chrisostome, vellem scire a pagano etc. I would hear of the pagan how it cometh to pass that the sign of so cursed death is so to be desired, nisi magna crucifixi virtus, Fol. 26. b. if it be not the great power of him that was crucified, because I would prove the sign itself, without relation to the merits and virtue of Christ's pass●on, to be a token of much blessing. The contrary, to convince you, is there to be seen, Every one that hath eyes to see, and cunning to read, may perceive it. If you did not read that clause before you framed this answer, then ran you as far on the other side in to the note of ignorance and folly, for adventring to make answer before you understand what is the question, and meaning of him that doth propound it. For as the Wise man saith: Prover. 18 He that answereth before he heareth, showeth himself to be a fool and worthy of confusion. Calf. Fol. 40. b But you ask me, why I bring the example of julian the Apostata and say, that man using only the sign of the Cross, putteth away all the craft and subtlety of the devil, if I attribute nothing to the sign but by relation to the merits of Christ's passion? Mart. Here belike yower wit was a wool gathering, when you devised to move this question, or your capacity estranged with some fond fancy when you conceived it. For answer, I might refer you to the history, but seeing a thing once told can not sink into such a wittelesse head, I will tell it you once again. I brought that story, to express the great and mighty virtue of the cross, which being made by the wicked Tyrant, and Apostata, of itself, through the power and force, that Christ by his passion gave unto it, put the wicked spirits to flight. There was no virtue, no merit, nor faith in julian, yet he drove the devils away by the sign of the cross, Chrisost. de monst. contra gentil. and why by the sign of the cross? Nisi quia magna crucifixi virtus, but because the power of the crucified is great? And that triumphant banner of his victory terrible unto them, and the very printing of it in the forehead, such a terror, that they durst not abide, which argueth that it hath virtue specially of the merits of Christ's death. And if I had omitted the latter clause in my first article, yet the gentle, and charitable reader might have conceived so much of this history, if not of this, yet of the other sentence that I alleged out of Athanasius, where I signify that Athanasius, declaring how before the coming of Christ, devils miserably afflicted men, and how when Christ was come, they were discomfited and overthrown, said, Signo crucis tantum utens homo omnes horum fallacias pellit. Atha. de humanit. ver●i. Man using only the sign of the cross, putteth away all their subtlety and craft. For I declared there out of Athanasius (whose name M. Calf. suppresseth, lest the reader should reverence his authority) that the subtlety of the devil is driven away by the sign of the cross, after the death of Christ, which argueth, that there is a relation made to Christ's coming and death, upon the cross. And because it should most manifestly appear, I cited an other sentence out of Athanasius in the same place, where it is said: that if one use the sign of the cross, Christum solummodo nominans, naming only Christ, all the devils be put to flight. Which also might have given you to understand that nothing is attributed to the sign but by relation to the virtue and power of the crucified. Wherefore sing crossing hath bred no such inconvenience, that the inward faith hath been left untaught, seeing the virtue proper to the crucified, hath never been atttibuted to the sign, the sign may remain still, and Christ that is signified, may be simply preached not withstanding, as he hath ever been amongst the Catholics. Where you say, that these words of Chrisostom, Calf. Fol. 26. b hoc mortem sustulit, hoc inferni oereas portas confregit, This took away death, this broke the brazen gates of hell, convince, that Chrysostom meaneth not, that Christ, who hanged upon the Cross, made the cross and sign thereof to be of more virtue, because no material thing, no piece of wood nor sign did work that effect, nor conquer death and hell, Mart. We must desire you to make a Comment upon these words, and at the next edition with privilege, according to the queens majesties injunctions, expound to whom this word of the comparatyve degree (more) hath his relation & what you mean by it. Ad as (more) must infer a than, so when you tell us, what that (than) is, then shall you have an answer to yower than. In the mean season, the world may see that you mean deceithfullye that will not utter yower mind plainly. You take much pains, & bring certain places of scripture to prove that it was Christ, Calf. Fol 26. b Mart. and not the Cross that redeemed and saved us. I pray you what waltams calf did ever deny that, or think the contrary? And yet what wise man did ever say, that Christ did redeem us otherwise than by his death upon the Cross, o●r used that as an instrument other wise, than to work our salvation, or made that sign healthful and comfortable, otherwise than by the merit of his passion? If you have any mathematical imagination in yover idle brain, or melancholy fancy in yower wavering head, consult with some astronomers, that may resolve the one, and drink some Elleborum that may expel the other. For I think there was never man that had more need. Now to your answer against the authority of Martialis. First you will have him to be noon of the 72. Fol. 27. a Calf. disciples, one reason which you bring, is because Eusebius saith, the register of 72. disciples is found in no place, An other, that Hieronimus Gennadius, and Isidorus never made mention of him▪ which had been a great oversight, if his ancienty had been such as I pretend. Mart. M. Calves reasons against the authority of Martialis soluted . To the first I reply, that Eusebius in the place which you quote, that is, lib. 1. cap. 12. hath no such thing. And if he had, yet doth it make nothing for your purpose. For Eusebius in the proheme declareth that he gathered his history out of diverse men's works, which were confusely written, some in this country, so me in that, and thought that he should sufficiently please, and gratify his prosteritie, if he gathered together and registered in order, the successors of the chiefest Apostles of our saviour Christ in the most famous churches, if he did not show forth all. Whereby it is plain that albeit he compiled his story out of diverse Chronicles, yet he had not all the writings, all the monuments, all the Chronicles of all men, and all countries, and all things that were written and done in all ages, to his time, sithence Christ was incarnate. Many things might right well escape his hands, and pass his knowledge as well appeareth by his words rehearsed before. To the second I answer in like manner, that albeit S. Hierome, Gennadius, and Isidorus made books of Ecclesiastical writers, yet this might pass their knowledge, and yet no oversight committed. For it is not possible for every man to see every thing, nor to have information, or by mouth or by monument of all that was done before, search he never so narrowly. Many books and monuments of the fathers are brought to light now, that then were hidden, and many hidden now that then were known, as all that be expert in the ecclesiastical histories may right well see. Wherefore it is a childish part of you M. Calf. to deny so ancient an author and infer upon the authority of Eusebius and S. Hierome and others negatively, as (if you infer any thing against the foresaid author) you must of necessity infer this, Eusebius saith the register of the 72. disciples is found in non place, ergo Martialis was noon of the 72. disciples: and so consequently there were no such disciples. S. Hierome, Gennadius, and Isidorus writing the lives of ecclesiastical writers, make no mention of the foresaid author, ergo there was noon such. Certes if yower divinity should chance to fail, and you fortune to become a portpannier, or peddler, and cell Sophistry, the veriest idiot in the country that knoweth a B from a beetle, will not give two lepps of an old dog, for x. ounces of the best that you carry in all your panniers. Now to his words. Wheere that holy father sayeth, Calf. Fol. 27. a The cross of our lord is an invincible armour against Satan etc. it pleaseth his mastership to say that if this may be rightly understand according to the letter, we need not greatly stand in dread of Satan, he is easily vanquisshed, we need no further armour, than the cross. Let Christ alone. This Mars shall suffice. Mart. But Alas (sir) where is your wit become, where is your profound sight in divinity? Is all go? It should seem so by yower clerkly answers. For no man that hath wit and common sense, would reason as you do. To show your fondness plainly, Tell me I beseech you, Marc. 16. Is it not true according to the letter that Christ overcame the world and the devil, and that whosoever believeth and is baptised, shallbe saved? Is it not true according to the letter, that whosoever eateth the flesh of the son of man, joan 6. according to Christ's institution, shall have life everlasting? Is not all this true according to the letter? And this not withstanding have we not need to fear, and fight against the devil? Doth not S. Paul say unto us, Ephe. 6. Be strong in our lord, and in the mightiness of his power, put on the armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the assaults and privy weights of the devil? 1. Cap. 5. Doth not S. Peter bid us to be sober and watch because our adversary the devil goeth about like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour, and resist him being strong in faith? Luc. 21. Doth not our saviour himself command us to take heed to ourselves, and to be ware of surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this world? Doth he no● bid us watch and pray always, that we may be worthy to avoid the things that are to come, and stand before the son of man? I trust yower Mastership will not deny it. As then sir, by these places of scripture, not withstanding it be true according to the letter, that Christ hath conquered Satan, that baptism washeth away our sins, that the flesh of the son of man giveth us life, we have commandment to put on the armour of God, to be strong in faith, to be sober, to be ware of surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of the world, to watch and pray, and fight stoutelye against the devil, Nisi enim quis legitimè certaverit non coronabitur, 2. Tim. 2. for unless a man fight lustily, he shall not be crowned: Even so albeit according to the letter it be true, that as Martialis saith, The cross of our lord is an invincible armour against Satan etc. and by the mighty power of Christ and merits of his passion, a sword not suffering iniquity and ghostly assaults of perverse power to approach unto us, Yet have we need to fear the devil, and use against him all the means we can to avoid his assaults, and privy weights. For he is a mighty enemy, and of great power, and when we fight against him, Ephe. 6. job 7. we fight not against flesh and blood, nor against one only, but against powers. Besides our life is a warrfare upon earth, and as long as we are militantes, so long have we need to play the valiant soldiers, and exercise ourselves to fight, that when the enemy invadeth, we may put on the armour of God, spread our lords banner, against him, and encounter manfully. And if in fight we fortune to take a foil, or utterly be overcummed, the fault is in our dasterdnes, and not in our weapon. For as S. Paul saith. The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, 2. Cor. 10. But mighty in God, to the destruction and overthrowing of all munition and defence, made against them. further consider how the author calleth it, the cross of our lord, which words give us to understand, that we must be Christ's servants in holiness of life, and not bond slaves in vileness of sin, lively members of his mystical body, and not rotten bows severed from the unity of his church, Children serving him in spirit and truth, and not strangers following our own appetite, in sensuality and heresy: Otherwise neither this cross that is here mentioned, nor the passion of Christ itself, shall save us from the terrible thraldom of the devil, not that either the cross through the virtue of Christ his passion, either the death of our saviour itself is unable to save us, but because we through our iniquity and sin are not worthy of so great grace, and benefit. But quoth M. Calf. Behemoth and Leviathan (that is the devils against whom we must fight) are of an other manner of force, noon dare come near them, noon can resist them, Calf. Fol. 27. a the sword shall never touch them, the spear yieldeth to them. But believe him good people no further than you see him. Mart. The scripture falsified . For in the 40. chapter of job which he allegeth for his ꝓofe, there is no such thing in the text of S. Hierome's translation, but the contrary rather is there to be seen. For God sayeth, pone manum tuam super eum, lay thy hand upon him. To lay hand upon him, is as S. Gregory there sayeth, virtutis potestate superare, to over come him with power of virtue, not of thy own, but of God, who repressing his cruelty, suffereth him to rage's no more than is expedient, and turneth his fierceness into the commodity of the elect and chosen. And if M. Calf. urge his own saying to be true, Mat 12 Marc. 7 ask him whither our saviour Christ, when he commanded dumb and deaf devils to depart from the bodies which they possessed, and expelled whole legions, and made them go into the pigs, Matth. 8. when he spoilt the povers of the air, Matt. 8. Luc. 8. Coloss 2. and brought them forth in open show, ask him I say, whither he did not, or durst not come nigh the devil? Ask him again whither S. Paul come not nigh the devil when he expelled him out of a maiden at Philippis a city in Macedonia? Acto. 16. Ask him whither Christ's disciples come not nigh the devils, when they expelled them, and said: Luc. 10. O lord yea the devils are subject unto us in thy name? And if he deny it, tell him he denieth Christ, and his Gospel. Fol. 27. a Again where he saith: that no man can resist them, that is the devils. Ask him whither Christ gave not his Apostles virtue and power to cast out devils? Mar 3. Luc 9 Ask him whither Christ said not, that they that believe, in my name shall cast out devils? and if he tell you that Christ gave his Apostles, and faithful believers such authority, and power, then tell him again that the devil is not so terrible, Cap. 4. but that he may be resisted. For S. james saith: Resist the devil and he will flee away from you: Withal tell him I beseech you, that it is a great shame for him, and a soul slander for the Gospel, to bring in any such opinion, and falsify the word of God, to maintain such a new and wicked heresy. The next words that follow, as M. Calf. allegeth are these: Fol. 27. a They esteem iron as straw. and brass as rotten wood: But read as long as ye list, ye shall never find them in the 40. chapter of job, as it is quoted in the margin of his book, wherefore desire him to amend it, at the next impression. In deed such like words are readd in the 41. chapter of job. But not altogether as M. Calf. citeth them. S. Hierome's translation hath it thus: Reputabit enim quasi paleas ferrum, & quasi lignum putridum as. For he shall esteem iron as straw, and brass as rotten wood. And as S. Gregory interpreteth them, they are spoken of the devil that shall bear the sweay when Antichrist cometh: His force shallbe such, that he shall esteem iron as straw, that is, He shall consume with the fire of his wickedness, the power and strength of those that preach, unless the grace of God doth assist them. He shall repute brass as rotten wood, that is to say, he shall bring into dust the constancy of the patiented and long suffering, unless God doth defend them. The other sense, that M. Calf. like an evil glosser saith, that noon shall dare come near him, or that noon can resist him, Fol. 27. a is contrary to the saying of S. james, contrary to the Gospel, and Christ himself. Wherefore judge of him (good readers) accordingly, and think whither he be worthy to be a preacher amongst the people of God, who is so good a proctor for the devil. Myself will say nothing, but wish him grace to repent for his fondness, in tyme. Now to his answer against the place brought out of Damascene, Damasc. Fol. 27. b Calf. whom like a grave justicer he will not discredit but excuse, although he be not so sound in all points as was to be wished. But mark I pray you have wisely he doth it, Mart. these are his words: He lived in the time of Leo Isauricus, Calf. when the bloody bickering was for images: then Satan be stirred himself. Then was it no marvel if a man learned and godly other wise were carried away with the common error. Here is his excuse, Damascene was learned, but he yielded to error, and that not obscure or doubtful, but common, Mart. such as all men knew, he was godly, but he was carried away with the world, learning yielded to error, godliness to unstableness, which is not likely to be true. For the learned man, being a godly man (as Damascene was) will never yield to an error, if he know it to be an error, nor the godly man if his heart be fixed in the law of God, Ephes. 4. Rom. 8. willbe carried away with every wind, of new doctrine, that maketh against his glory. For what saith S. Paul, Shall separate us from the love of God? Shall tribulation persecution, or the sword do it? Not: Wherefore if Damascene yielded to a common error, he was not learned, and godly, if he was learned and godly he yielded not to a common error. Again if he was carried away with the swea of the world, he was not godly, and if he were godly, he was not carried away with the swea of the world. So that M. Calf. must grant his own excuse to be fond, and employ a kind of contradiction, or acknowledge that either Damascene was not learned and godly otherwise, or that he neither yielded nor was carried away with a common error. For both can not stand. Yet he pleaseth himself well with this conceit, and shifteth away his reason with as unreasonable talk, as ever man heard. For whereas that father said: that the cross is given us as a sign upon our foreheads, like as circumcision was to the Israelites, by this we Christian men differ, and are discerned from infidels, This is our shield, our weapon, our banner and victory against the devil, this is the mark that the destroyer touch us not, nay it can not be so (quoth M. Calf.) for Lactantius sayeth: The blood of a beast had not such power in it as to save men: Calf. Fol. 28. a therefore the sign of the cross is neither shield, nor weapon, nor victory of ours. Mart. This is as good reason as if some roister had said, my man's shadow can not keep a gnaw from my head, ergo my man's buckler or sword is no defence of mine. For that the blood of the lamb springled upon the posts of the children of Israel's doors, Lib. 4 cap. 26. de vera Sapient. was but a shadow, Lactantius in the place that M. Calf. allegeth, doth plainly show. But it liked not his learning to tell us so much, nor yet how he took the middle of a sentence, and left out the beginning, and ending, which is no unwonted thing with birds of that feather. Lactant. not truly alleged. Lactantius there, treateth of the mystery and power of our lords cross, and of the signification of those things which Christ did, or suffered, and how he was prefigured by the paschal lamb. And amongst the rest he declareth why he stretched out his hands, and saith. Christ therefore streacth out his hands in his passion and measured the world, that he might them declare that a mighty people should come under his wings, and receive in their foreheads, signum illud maximum & sublime, that most great and honourable sign, The figure of which, the jews do now represent, when they springle their door posts with the blood of the lamb. For when God was ready to plague the Egyptians, that he might preserve the children of Israel from that plague, Exod. 12. he commanded them to kill a lamb with out spot, and set a sign with the blood of that, upon their door posts, whereupon when all the first begotten of the Egyptians were destroyed in one night, Haebrei solo signo sanguinis tuti fuerunt, non quia cruor pecudis tantam in se vim gerebat ut hominibus saluti esset, sed imago fuerat rerum futurarum, etc. The Israelittis' only were safe, by the sign of the blood, not because the blood of a beast had such force, in it that it could be a safeguard to men, but it was a shadow of things, to come. For the white lamb with out spot was Christ, that is to say innocent, and just and holy, which being offered up in sacrifice of the same jews, is a safeguard and salvation to all which have written the sign of blood, that is the sign of the Cross upon which he shed his blood, in their foreheads. For the forehead is the highest door post of man, and the wood which was sprinkled with blood is a signification of the Cross. Thus much Lactantius, by which you see that the blood of the lamb springled upon the door posts in Egypt, was a shadow, and that it signified the cross of Christ, and not his passion only, but the cross, qua sanguinem fudit, upon which he shed his blood, the sign of which Cross, all men that come under the wings of Christ must receive in their foreheads. The blood of the lamb springled at that time upon the door posts was vaileable in a figure, to keep all that had it, from danger of the destroyer, not of itself, but because God did so ordain it, that it might appear how much the truth it, self should avail to defend the people of God, in the latter and extreme necessity of the world. This also Lactantius writeth in the foresaid place, and in the next chapter treateth of the power of the sign of the Cross, and declareth how terrible it is unto devils, which M. Calf. omitteth. But that men may see how he taketh a piece of an author and snatcheth all morsels to serve his hungry appetite, and letteth the rest go, and never doth respect the mind of the author, I will repeat you some of his words that follow in the very next chapter. Thus he saiethe. Lib. 4. ca 27. de vera sapien. Now it is sufficient to declare the power of this sign what it is albe to do. What a great terror this sign is unto the devils, he shall know, who seethe how when they are conjured by Christ, they flee out of the bodies which they possessed. Lactant. judgement of the cross. For as our saviour himself when he lived amongst men, did put all devils to flight with his word, and did quiet men's minds that were distracted, and set in rage by their wicked incursions: Even so at this present, those that follow him, drive out of men the same wicked spirittes, & nomine magistri sui, & signo passionis, both with the name of their master, and sign of the passion, of the which thing there is easy proof. For when the gentils offer sacrifice to their Gods, if any man stand by, that hath his forehead signed, they offer up no sacrifice. Again when certain of our servants stood by their masters, while they were sacrificing, by making of the Cross upon their foreheads, they put the devils to flight, so that they could not describe in the bowels of their beasts, what things were to come: Thus you see what Lactantius mind was of the cross, and that the sign is such a terror to wicked spirits, that they vanish away as soon as they see the figure of it. Wherefore not withstanding M. Calfhills half mangled sentence alleged out of Lactantius, it is true that Damascene writeth, that the cross is our shield, our weapon, our banner, and victory against the devil, and that his answer to Damascene, is not worth a rotten Damson, although he much rejoiceth in it, as may appear by the great triumph and exclamation which he maketh by and by upon it, because I said that the effects afore rehearsed were done by the death of Christ especially, and by the sign of the cross as an external mean, and used for proof of it, this similitude: As men not withstanding the merits of Christ's passion must receive the sacraments: So fighters against the violent assaults, of Satan, must use besides the faith in Christ's passion, the outward sign of the cross. In which similitude, I make my proportion and likeness between the passion of Christ redeeming and saving us, and the sacraments concurring as external means in the one side, and between the faith of a Christian man to fight against temptations, and the sign of the cross, concurring as an outward aid in the other side, that as the soul fighteth on her part, so the body which is but a lump of earth, and hath no faith may also fight with a bodily armour, and do his endeavour on his part, as the mind prayeth, the tongue speaketh, the heart believeth, the mouth confesseth, the soul laboureth in heaven, the hand worketh in earth. Now cometh M. Calf. inverting my words and manner of speech, and maketh me say thus: Fol. 28. a Calf. The sacraments must concur with faith, ergo the sign of the cross with Christ. Which is quite contrary to that I said, Mart. and not to be gathered of my words. For I am not ignorant, that infants although they have no actual faith, be saved by the sacrament of baptism, nor that Christ is unable to save us without the Cross: M. Calf. dealeth with us as Celsus did with the Christians. ●i 7 cont. Celsum. Fol. 1● b Wherefore this wrangler may well be compared to Celsus that Origen had to do with all, who would attribute those words to the Christians which they never spoke, as appeareth by his words where he sayeth, after this: Celsus shewing forth in many words those things which we never spoke, yet for all that he bringeth them forth as though we had spoken them. Which is a sorry shift, but consider his argument, this it is. Notwithstanding God his power that giveth increase I must eat my meat, ergo notwithstanding my labour, whereby I may sustain myself, I must covet my neighbour's goods: here be iiij. parts, as in my rehearsed before, Christ's power giving increase, meat nourishing, labour purchasing, covetousness desiring other men's goods: But the proportion is not like, especially between labour and covetousness, and faith and the cross: For labour is commanded, covetousness contrary to the precept, but faith and the cross are both commanded: faith by the express word of Christ, the cross by tradition, 2. Thess. 2. Cap. 17. de Spir. san. Ephes. 6. which S. Paul commandeth us to keep, and S. Basil doth in a sort equal with the scripture. Besides I am commanded by S. Paul to be strong in the mightiness of God's power? If then gods power be not tied to this, or that, but is infinite, and showed many and sundry ways (of the which the sign of the Cross through the merit of Christ's passion is one) as appeareth by the strange and great miracles, which it pleased his majesty to work by it, why may not every Christian man upon affiance of God's mercy and goodness, account himself strong against the devil, with this sign, as one of the instruments, whereby the mightiness of God's power is showed? Christ said to Constantine: Eusebius lib de vita Constan. Chrisost. demonst. ad versus gent. In hoc signo vince, overcome in this sign. The holy Ghost by the holy fathers and prelates of the church, tell us that this sign is a terror to wicked spirits, and bridle to contrary powers. The stories of antiquity and practice of this present time, declare the same. And why should we not believe them? Mary it is forbid quoth M. Calf. As covetousness and lusting after other men's goods is. Fol. 28. b. If it be so sir, show us that negative commandment, or some sentence, some clause of the express word of God, that doth prohibit men, to cross themselves, as we can show you, many places, in which the other is expressly forbidden. If you can not do it, (as I am sure you can not,) unless you have some text newly forged at Geneva or framed at Tygurie, which our forefathers never knew, then revoke yower rash sentence, in saying that it is forbidden in the express word of God. For it is no where to be seen. Withal be ashamed of yower blasphemy in setting the cross against covetousness, and lusting after other men's goods: and blush at yower lurde and calfish ignorance in making my words to be spoken by way of comparison, which are spooken by a similitude. Myself because you have not learned yet, what difference there is between a comparison and a similitude, would have taken pains to have expressed it unto you, but that I perceive, you have conceived such a majesty of yower own person, such trust in yower untruths that you will disdain to be taught of an old usher of Winchester. Therfere I remit you to your Doctor Radolphe. Lively 1. ca 24 Learn of him whither you have done well in calling that a comparison. If a man should say. As every scholar that is desirous to profit in study, must have besides the benefit of capacity, memory, and wit, a master to instruct him, and books to occupy himself with all: Even so every soldier that will gladly get the victory of his enemy, must have besides stoutness of heart, activity of body, and skill of war, harness to defend him, victuals to nourish him, and weapon to invade his enemy, would you make of it a comparison or a similitude? If according to yower rules of logic, and Rhetoric, you find it a similitude, rather than a com●● 〈…〉 ●ry out like a Calf. against yower self and use yower 〈◊〉 ●●●clamation. O blind ignorance that could not know a similitude from a comparison. Would a man-have thought that a M. of Art, M. Calves Rhetoric. Fol 28. a Fol. 18. b a bachelor of divinity, a reader of Paul's, could with heresy have forgotten logic, Rhetoric, and humanity? You, blame me as though: I compared things utterly unlike, of the which the one can not infer the other. But I tell you that it is some Melancholy fancy, or phrenetike passion in you, to think so. For the words of which you gather that, import no such thing. Where you tell me, Fol 28 b that sacraments have a promiss annexed unto them, I pray you be so good master unto us as find out by yower Genevian doctrine, where in all the scripture, there is any promiss made, to bread and wine. If you can show us noon, what shall we think of yower schismatical communion ministered by your disordered ministers, which is nothing else but bread and wine according to your doctrine? Sacrament it can be noon, because it hath no promiss annexed unto it. And if it be no sacrament, what impudency is there in you, to force men unto it under the name of a sacrament, and to publish to the world in yower Apology, that you have two sacraments in yower church, baptism and the eucharist? whereas every sacrament having a promise, and bread and wine (which is yower communion) having no promise, The communion no sacrament by M. Calves doctrine. it must needs follow by yower own rule, that it is no sacrament at all, and that you have but one only sacrament. Wherefore if you be rigorous to condemn the cross because it hath no promiss in express scripture, we will condemn yower communion of bread and wine, for the same default. As for the rock which you say you pass over like an unskilful mariner striking yower helm against it, that Sacraments are no cause of grace, I would likewise pass it over, Fol. 28. b but that it is too dangerous for all that pass, through this sea. For that Sacraments are no cause of grace, neither scripture, nor ancient father taught, neither Christian man believed. sacraments causes of grace . judge yower self. Is it not a greet grace to have remission of our sins? to be justified, and to have Christ with in us? be not all these great graces, and is not the sacrament of baptism cause of all this? Read the scriptures, doth not S. Peter say: Do penance, and let every one be baptized in remission of sins? Dotario not Christ say Whosoever believeth and is baptized shalbe saved? Doth not S. Paul tell us, that: All ye that are baptized in Christ, have put on Christ? Again is it not a great grace to have the holy Ghost? And read you not in the Acts of the Apostles, Act. 8. that they by imposition of hands gave the holy Ghost? Doth not S. Paul say unto Timothe For which cause I exhort thee that thou resuscitate and stir up the grace which is in thee by the imposition of my hands? 2. Tim. 1. Doth he not say to him in his other epistle. Despise not the grace which is in thee, which is given thee by prophecy with the imposition of hands of priesthood? And what other true construction can you make of this, but that the holy Ghost (which is no small grace) is given by imposition of hands, both in the Sacrament of Confirmation, and orders? Examine the words of the Acts, and S. Paul in his epistle. In the Acts it is said: The holy Ghost was given by the imposition of hands: In S. Paul, resuscitate and stir up the grace which is in thee, by the imposition of my hands: neglect not the grace which is in thee, Cap. 4. which is given thee by prophecy, by the imposition of hands? What plainer words can you have? See you not that one sayeth, that the holy Ghost, and the other that grace was given by imposition of hands? And yet will you say that Sacraments are no cause of grace? What colour or gloze have you to illude these words of the scriptures? Will you say (as you do by the fathers) that the Apostles and Evangelists, yea and our Saviour himself: Fol. 29. b meant better than they wrote, and borrowed impropre phrases of the common speech such as seemed to maintain an error, and overshot themselves in their terms? And where they said, by baptism, Christ is put on us, remission of sins is given us, and the holy Ghost and grace is given by imposition of hands, will you corrupt the text, and say: By baptism Christ is signified to be put on us, Remission of sins is signified to be given us? The holy Ghost and graces are signified to be bestowed upon us: And for a truth will you give us a figure? If this be lawful by yower new Gospel, what assurance shall we have of our Christianity? what hope, but that, when things shalbe ripe according to yower own appetite, 2. Cor. 4. Coll 1. you will not say with S. Paul: Christ is the image of God, nor with S. john: Verbum caro factum est: The word is made flesh: But Christ signifieth the image of God, the word is signified to be made flesh? You have begun prettily already, by interpreting those words of Christ: Hoc est corpus meum: Matt. 26. This doth signify my body. For this is my body, and certes great doubt jest you will proceed further. For in heresy there is no stay. Where you say, Calf. Fol. 28. That in the sacraments the only promises of God by Christ, both by word and sign are exhibited unto us, which promises if we apprehended by faith, then is the grace increased in us, and the gift of God by faith received, is by the sacrament sealed in us: I beseke you tell us, Martial. when the thing itself, (that is to say) remission of sins, and other graces are given us, if the only promises of Christ are exhibited in the sacraments? and let us understand in what time of our life we shall receive them? For it is a necessary matter for us, and worthy to be known. For if we apprehend the promises of God never so much by faith, and lack the thing by our own folly, there shall no grace effectually increase in us, to everlasting life, as Christ himself sayeth. Unless a man be borne again of water and the holy ghost, he can not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Again if grace doth not increase, joan. 3. nor the gift of God (which is specially remission of sins) be not sealed in us, before we apprehend the promises of God by faith, in what case will you put infants, that have no actuail faith? In what case will you put the ignorantes, that have neither wit, nor understanding to apprehend the promises of God? Shall they be exempted from the kingdom of heaven? Shall they be imbarred of the merits of Christ's passion? And where as all that are baptized in Christ, have put on Christ, and by baptism receive remission of sins, and so are made the children of God into everlasting life, will you take upon you to estrange them from the mercy of Christ, because, for lack of age, wit, and understanding, they can not by faith apprehend the promises of God by Christ? It is to unmerciful. Fol 28. b Calf . Yet so you do, for you say, that when we have apprehended the promises of God by faith, then is the grace increased in us, Mart. than the gift of God by faith received, is sealed by the sacrament in us? If it be then received and sealed in us, M. Calf, and not before, than you exclude all infants from eternal salvation in Christ. If it be signed and sealed before, then are you very ignorant in saying, that the only promises of God are exhibited unto us in the sacraments, and that they be no causes of grace: And while you profess to teach me true doctrine, by the way, you run like a wanton Calf out of the way, and fall into an old heresy of our new friends the wicked Anabaptists, lately scoured by yower doctor that died (as the fame goeth) of the lousy evil at Geneva: Calvin. for which fondness I will wish you, neither wring by the ears, nor winchester road, nor butcher's beetle, but a crystal glass to see yower errors and heresies, and grace to revoke them and amend. When you had done with this digression and wittily talked (as you conceive) of signs and seals, and promises, exhibited in the sacraments, you return to the cross, and tell us, that if there were such necessity in the cross to fight against Satan, Fol. 28 b Calf. Peter and Paul were fools: Peter for not saying, resistite crucis signo, resist with the sign of the cross, but fide solida, with a strong faith, when he gave advise to resist the adversary. Paul for forgetting that piece of defence, when he furnished a Christian man with his complete harness. Mart. Here you are to be noted of much ignorance and folly, both for not understanding that which you take upon you to confute: And also for judging so rashly and fond of the blessed Apostles. Touching the first that there is any absolute necessity, to use a cross in fight against the devil, I never taught in all my book, nor do I teach, that the ancient fathers commanded, but counseled men to use the sign of the cross, in their conflict against the devil. Read the fift Article and see whither you be not lurdely deceived, in thinking that the Catholics do make it a matter of necessity, as you would seem to make the simple and ignorant believe: and call to remembrance that law of justinian the Emperor, incivil est nisi tota lege perspecta, de aliqua part respondere It is an uncourteous point to answer unless all the whole law be well considered. Concerning the second. If it had been a matter of necessity, yet had there been no folly in S. Peter, nor oversight in S. Paul in omitting it. For both S. Peter writing two epistles, and S. Paul diverse, to the Romans, to the Galathians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, to the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, to Timothy, to Tite, and Philemon, omitted a more necessary matter than a cross. For in all those epistles, there is no commandment, nor counsel given to celebrated the supper of our lord in remembrance of his death, there is no mention made that the son is of equal substance with the father, nor of the proceeding of the holy Ghost, which are matters of importance, and necessary to salvation, not withstanding they were no fools as M. Calf. would make them, for omitting of it. They had the holy Ghost teacher of all truth to guide their hearts, and direct their pens. They knew what was expedient to be told at that time, and to those men. Our saviour being here on earth did not show his Apostles all that was behoveful for them to know, at that time, but said: I have many things to say unto you, but you can not bear them now, joan. 16. you shall know them hereafter. Now because our saviour Christ being present with his disciples, and opeaning the scriptures and secret mysteries unto them, did not tell them all at ones, will M. Calves. wit serve him to think, that, a folly in Christ? I doubt much: he is so fotted in folly, and infatuated with heresy, that to maintain his foolish fantasy, and to make some resemblance to the world, he passeth not to streatche a point. It is a small matter with him to corrupt and falsify the scriptures, he repeated but iij. words out of S. Peter's epistle, 1. Pet. 5. and one of the three is falsified. For whereas S. Peter teaching us to resist the devil, said (as the old translation hath) Resist sorts in fide, and as Erasmus translateth it: Resistite 〈◊〉 fide solidi: 1. Pet. 5. Do ye resist being strong in faith: Master Calfhill saith: Resistite fide solida: Resist with steadfast faith, M. Calf. altereth the words of S. Peter. turning the nominative case into the ablative, and altering the substantive to the adjective. Contrary to the common text of the Greek copy, and contrary to the common edition, and translation of Erasmus, who was ten hundred degrees better seen in greek than this prating parrot. S. Peter willed us to be strong in faith, and to join unto our faith sobriety, which containeth fasting, and to use watching, which includeth prayer (as appeareth by his words going immediately before,) for that he knew our adversary to be strong as a lion, and diverse of that sort, that they can not be cast out and conquered, Marc 9 Nisi in oratione et jeiunio, but in prayer and fasting: diverse may have a steadfast faith, yet not be strong in faith. For to be strong in faith is to believe unfeignedly, in the son of God, to love him above all things, and so to cleave unto him, that no adversity, no tribulation, nor fear of death may alienate our minds from him, which grace every man hath not, that hath a steadfast faith. 1. Cor. 13. For (as it appeareth by S. Paul,) some may have so steadfast a faith, that they may transfer mountains, distribute their goods unto the poor, and give their bodies to the fire to be burned, and yet have no charity, which is the most chiefest and necessary thing, that is required in him that wilbe strong in faith. Wherefore sing he sticketh not to altar the words of scripture and falsify them, to forge such a sense as liketh his foolish fantasy, there is no great doubt to be made, but that he will venture upon higher matters if time ripe things according to his imagination. The blessed Martyr Hippolytus in his oration made de consummatione mundi, saith that Antichrist shall give unto all them that will follow him, a character, or mark in the right hand, and forehead, that no man may print with his hand, that precious cross in his forehead: from which time forward he shalbe albe to sign no part of his body, In 13. Apocal. but shall cleave fast to the deceiver. In which sense S. Ambrose also writeth these words, It may be that as we have a character or mark of Christ, (that is the cross, with which we are signed: So Antichrist may have a peculiar character and Mark, with which they that believe in him shallbe marked. The mark and seal which he shall give in their right hands and foreheads is Calculus a Counter with these letters, Antichristes' Mark. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. and this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Id est nego, I deny, (as Hippolytus supposeth). And as the devil, by his ministers cried unto the blessed martyrs, Negato Deum tuum crucifixum, deny thy God crucified, so every one that hath this seal, and mark of Antichrist shall say. I deny the creator of heaven and earth, I deny my baptism, I deny the adoration and honour whih I was wont to give unto God, which words I repeat here for this purpose, that you (good readers) may consider, whither Satan by the doings of heretics and practices of protestants, in these latter days, and declination of the world, begin not to prepare a way for Antichrist. Do you not see how they stand upon the negative and cry all, Nego, I deny: Heretics resemble Antichrist by their Negatives. That is to say, I deny that there is any external sacrifice, in the church, I deny that Christ's body and blood is really and substantially in the sacrament? I deny that there be seven sacraments? I deny that there is any priesthood? I deny that there is any prayer for the dead? I deny that Saints are to be called upon? I deny that good works are meritorious? I deny that a man may say Mass unless he have some to communicate with him? I deny that there is any power in earth to remit sins? With a great many things more? Do you not see M. Calf. as though he had Antichristes' counter and mark in his hand, and forehead already, denying all that is mentioned before? and saying further? I deny that the sign of the cross is mentioned in scripture? I deny that Christian men should make it in their foreheads? I deny that they should have it in churches? I deny that it is able in a Christian man to resist temptations? I deny that the sincerity of God's word was preached these xiv. hundred years before Luther and Caluins' time? I deny that the ancient fathers ment as they wrote? I deny that they understood the word of God? I deny that the general councils had the holy ghost? with many things beside, as shall appear in process? And to what end is all this denied? See the subtility of the devil, he knoweth that if he should plainly say unto men, deny God: they would defy him. Again if the external sacrifice and sacraments should continue in their force, and priests be suffered to offer that holy sacrifice unto God the father, and the old religion be suffered to remain, he knoweth (I say) that God should be honoured, and acknowledged in the power of his majesty, and his own kingdom be diminished. Wherefore he goeth craftily to work, and like a subtle sophister keepeth privy his conclusion, that when he hath made men deny the external sacrifice, sacraments, and priesthood, and such like, he may urge them by their own grants to conclude, ergo there is no God. For if there be a God, he is to be honoured, as he himself sayeth, If I be your father where is my honour? Mala. 1. If he must be honoured, it must be chiefly with an external sacrifice, as Abel, Abraham, Melchisedech, and job and the children of Israel did, and as he himself by those words of the prophet Malachi: Malac. 1. A clean sacrifice shallbe offered to my name, said it should be from the East to the west. Which sacrifice can not be understood properly and principally of prayer, or of the the sacrifice of the heart, because no man can say: Prover. 20 My heart is clean, I am pure from sin. And if there be no sacrifice there can be no God. So upon one inconvenience granted, he inferreth many and triumpheth over men, when he hath seduced them. When he hath thus made them deny God the father, than he practiseth an other way to make them deny God the son, and that is, Tract. in 1. joa. Ser. 33 de verbis Apost. (as S. Augustine sayeth) by breaking of unity, by tearing the body of Christ, by schism, by renting and swelling against his spouse the church: An other is by taking away the external signs, that may print the memory of his death and passion, in our hearts, and continue the memory of it in our minds by often sing of it, and bringing men to contempt of that under pretence of Idolatry. Amongst which the sign of the cross is one, as the ancient father's record. Wherefore beware of him, yielded not to his suggestion, but knock his head against the rock, Which is Christ jesus, who by his death upon the cross, got the victory over him, and made that sign so terrible unto them, Quaest. 38. ad Antio. that whensoever they see it: they tremble and flee away, and are miserably tormented, as Athanasius writeth in his thirty. and eight question to Antiochus. In quoting of which place if the printers hand failed, mistaking one figure for an other, and set 9 for 8. it was not such a matter of importance, that required a reprehension with a marginal note. A gentle reader if he could not find in it one place, would have sought it in in an other, and have ascribed the error to the negligence of the printer, not to any oversight of the author. But you may see that M. Calf. had rather play small game than sit out. And whereas he can say nothing justly against the doctrine, he cavilleth chiledishlye against the miss quoting of the place. In which trip if I take him hereafter, and note how falsely he quoteth his places, bear with me gentle reader, and impute it to his folly who ministered occasion, and upbrayed me first with oversight in that, wherein he himself hath, full often failed, as shall appear in the chapter of his false quotations. In the mean season, hear his wise answers to the place of Athanasius, one is this: Fol 29 a Calf. We have no more the cross on which our salvation was wrought, than we have the ass on which Christ road, therefore the devils be not afraid of the sign of the cross: And is not this a far fett conclusion, fond devised, Mart. Arguments like M Calfhils' of Christ's Ass. and evil favoredly comparised? and good for nothing? Might he not as well have said, we have no more the tables that God gave to Moses, than we have the fire wherein he appeared: ergo they be not the laws of God that men be afraid to break. We have no more the copies of David psalms written with his own hand, than we have his slinge wherewith he killed Goliath, ergo the devils be not afraid of the words of the psalms. We have no more the melody that David made before Saul, than we have the harp that he played on, ergo melody is not good against melancholy. We have no more the epistles that S. Paul wrote with his hand to the Romans, than we have his horse that he road upon to Damascus: ergo the devils conjured with words of that epistle, be not driven away? The consequent is like, and followeth even as well as the first, (that is) stark staring nought. For as we have not the notes of David psalms song before Saul, nor the first copies or the originals of S. Paul's epistles sent to the Romans, but the like melody as good as that was against Melancholy passions, and ap●●terne of David's psalms, which being read, Homi. 20. in joshua. yea of them that do not understand them as Origen sayeth, make the devils afraid, and the copies of S. Paul's epistles, the words whereof have as much force now as they had then, being used of a Christian with faith and calling upon the name of christ: Even so albeit we have not the cross in all places, on which our salvation was wrought, yet have we the type, the figure and likeness of the same cross, which by the merits of Christ's passion, is as terrible at this present to all wicked spirits, as it was then. Euthymius Titul 19 part. 2. Panopliae Ea gratia quae semel in prototypo fuit efficax etc. The same grace which was ones effectuous in the first sampler proceeding also with like efficacy to very figures and signs of the cross. Nor Athanasius talketh of that special cross on which Christ died, but of a cross in general. Fol. 29 a Calf . The second reason is this: As the charmer doth not cast out Satan, but Satan of his own accord goeth out to deceive men, and that they may not go to Christ, persuadeth them to go to sorcerers: On like sort the devil may seem to tremble and quake, when he seethe a cross, but it is for no other purpose, but that we should leave our confidence in Christ, and repose it in a piece of wood. Mart. The devil is crafty I confess, and because men should not go to Christ, he will rather yield at the incantation of a charmer for a time, than loose the possession of his servants for ever. But that he trembleth and quaketh when he seethe the cross, to make men leave their confidence in Christ, and put it in a piece of wood, how know you that M. Calf? who made you of his privy counsel? and secretary of his secrets? Have you any such inspiration of the spirit? any such nightly vision? any such privy practices? or any such secret acquaintance with him, as yower forefather Luther had, that you can tell us so much of his intent and meaning? You make us mistrust it shrewdly, because you avouch it so earnestly, without scripture, council or ancient father. It had been expedient for you to have added some weight unto that yower assertion. As long as you simply assure it, as a position of yower own, without proof, no Wiseman will believe it. For you may well conceive that the devil useth no temptation, nor slight to deceive man, but such as he supposeth is most forcible to overthrow him. And whereas he knoweth every Christian man to repose his faith and trust in the merits of Christ's passion, he will not immediately attempt to bring him from that, to have affiance in some piece of wood. For so he should betray himself. For the error is so gross and sensible, that the simplest man that knoweth Christ crucified, and is learned to believe in God, would detest it, and defy all that should labour to induce him unto it. His devices are more subtle, his practices more politic, his weights more weighty. That was an error of the gentils too much disclosed, to deceive any Christian now in these latter days. If you have so vile and base an imagination of yower even Christian brethren, that they will forsake Christ, and repose their hope in a piece of wood, you may assure yower self, that it is more vile, than is sitting for one that professeth Christ. The jews mistrusting that the Christians would forsake Christ, and worship Policarpe then martyred, as you do jest we will renounce Christ, Euseb. lib. 4. cap. 15. Ecclesia. histo. The devil seemeth not to fear the cross, but feareth it in deed. Athanas. de verb. incar. Signo crucis etc. Lib. 3. cap. 2. ecclesia. histo. & lib. 6. cap. 1. Tripart. and repose our confidence in a piece of wood or metal figured, were counted ignorant, and most wretched men for that surmise: The Christians said then of themselves we can never forsake Christ who suffered death for the salvation of the whole world nor worship any other, because we know the true God and him who is to be worshipped. The like we may return to you. With all you may assure yourself, that it is too evident by the testimonies of the ancient fathers, that the devil doth not pretend and dissemble a feat at the sight of the cross, but feareth it in deed, and trembleth and quaketh at it, and can not abide it. To begin with Athanasius. Consider that saying of his alleged before. He said not, that the devils seem to tremble, but they tremble in deed, they seem not to flee away, but they flee away in deed, they seem not to be tormented, but are tormented in deed, yea they suffer persecution: Man using the sign of the cross, driveth them away in deed, and doth noth only seem to drive them away. Theodoretus saith: The devils when they saw the figure of our lords banner remembered the slaughter and foil, which they had taken, & mox evanuerunt, and by, and by they vanished away. Orat. pri. cont. julia. Gregory Nazianzene sayeth, that with the sight of the cross which julian made, daemones compescuntur, superantur, the devils were quailed, the devils were overcomed. He said not they seemed to be quailed, Titu. 19 part. 3. Panopl. they seemed to be overcomed. Euthymius saith by virtue of the cross companies of devils are expelled, he said not. They seemed to be expelled. Neither are you able M. Calf. to allege one ancient doctor, that maketh for that fond opinion of yowers, or if you can, let us have his words truly alleged, and you shall have an answer according. In the mean time this undoubted doctrine of the fathers, that the sign of the cross is a bit and bridle to the devil, and terror to all wicked spirits shall suffice us, and I trust, all true Christians beside. Fol. 29. a As for yower suspicious head suspecting the counsel given to the religious, that they should arm themselves and their houses with the sign of the cross, when the devil doth assault and attempt them, M. Calf. suspecteth S. Anthony his counsel as insufficient. as insufficient, we take far insufficient to be credited before S. Anthony that gave that counsel. He was a holy man given to contemplation, you seem to be an hypocrite given to dissimulation, he lived in wilderness with great abstinence, you live in the city with great delicateness, he was renommed through all the world, for sanctity, you infamous through out all England for blasphemy, he a friend to Christ, you an enemy to his church, he a worker of miracles, you because you can do noon, a thincker that they are illusions, he a virtuous eremite, you a wicked heretic. And certes unless Lucifer's proud spirit had pricked you forward, you would never so presumptuously have suspected that counsel as insufficient, Fol 29. a which S. Anthony an holy, virtuous, and godly father, altogether occupied in contemplation and prayer, with whom it pleased God to talk by visions, and revelations, and by whom it pleased him to work sundry miracles, vide Athana● de vita S. Antonij. and great cures, gave to the religious, and which Athanasius writeth and testifieth to be true. But o lord what will not heretics reject? whom will not they contemn beside themselves? There was never man yet so holy, never doctor so learned, never father so ancient, but they have set him at nought, where he wrote or spoke any thing against their new doctrine. Yea they have not spared the very scriptures, and epistles of the blessed Apostles, such is their zeal to promote their Gospel. As for this case that is now in hand, whom shall we credit? S. Anthony that gave counsel to the religions to arm themselves with the sign of the cross, when Satan did attempt them, or M. Calf. that forbiddeth it? S. Anthony that counseled it as good and godly, or M. Calf that sayeth, it is insufficient, and ungodly? S. Anthony that taketh the Cross upon which as an instrument Christ spoiled the powers of the air, to be the triumphant banner of victory or M. Calf. that seemeth to take the death to be the banner of his victory, and not the victory itself, not far unlike the heretics that thought Christ not to have died in deed but in a fantasy? I would refer it to yower judgement (good readers) but it is not hard to judge, nor uneasy to define, unless some wilbe so mad as to prefer a young devil before an old saint. Now to his answer against the place of Chrisostome. Where that holy father said. Homi. 55. in 16. Mat. Crucem non simpliciter digito in corpore, etc. Thou must not simply with thy finger make a Cross in thy body, but first of all thou must make it with great faith in thy mind, Chrysost. For if thou print it in thy face after this manner, noon of all the wicked spirits when they see the spear with which they received a deadly wound, will dare to encounter with thee, Fol 30. a Calf. This is neither material nor mystical cross, quoth M. Calf. for neither of them can be printed in the heart. Therefore it is the faith in Christ's passion, which the finger can not impress in the forehead, but grace can engraft in the mind of man. Mart. To convince his folly in this point, let us examine the place. Chrisostome telleth us here, that if we do two things, the devil will not dare to encounter with us. The first is to print the passion of Christ with great faith in our minds. The second to make the sign of the cross with the hand in our bodies, his words be plain for both. And as he maketh mention of body and soul, so doth he appoint ij instruments to imprint the passion of Christ in them, faith for the soul, and the figure of the cross for the body. If perchance M. Calf. being in some drowsy dream, Tell us M. Calf, what crosses. Chrysost. would have made with the finger? saw not this, nor yet will conceive it, ask him what Cross it was, that Chrisostome would have made in the body, with the finger, if it were not a mystical cross? If he say Chrysostom meaneth no ●rosse made with the finger, because it can, Not be printed in the heart, ask his worship what Chrisostome meaneth by those words, Crucem non simpliciter digito in corpore etc. Thou must not simply print a Cross in thy body, with thy finger, but first of all thou must print it with great faith in the mind? Is not digitus Latin for a finger, and corpus Latin for a body, Crux, Latin for a Cross, and Formare, Latin to frame, shape, form, and make? I trust his cunning serveth him to think so. And doth not he that telleth his servant two things, and saith, sirrah, do this first, mean that he should do the other afterward? In like sort doth not Chrisostome bidding us in this place print the passion of Christ first of all in our hearts, with faith, mean that afterward we should print the cross in our bodies with the hand? Look well to his words. It followeth: Si hoc modo faciei tuae impresseris. If thou print it after this manner in thy face? What manner, M. Calf? speak man, be not ashamed? tell truth and shame the devil. What manner was it? any other than that which he mentioned before? first by faith in the soul, afterward with the finger in the body? Not not: Yower gloss are too gross to gloze such an evident matter as this is. Fol. 30. a Yower reason in saying: it can be no mystical Cross, because it can not be printed in the heart, is not worth three lepps of an old dog. For albeit it can not be printed in the heart by man's finger or hand, yet may it be imprinted with preaching, meditation, and faith as Chrisostome sayeth. Where you say that the cross which Chrisostome there mentioneth is faith in Christ's passion, etc. You betray your own ignorance, and give us to understand that your capacity conceiveth, not what Chrisostome meaneth: his words be these Crucem magna profecto fide in ment prius formare oportet. You must first print the cross with great faith in yower mind, the cross that he speaketh of in this latter clause, is the passion itself, and affiance in the virtue and power of it. Which must be printed in our minds: faith is the gift of God by means where of the passion must be printed with in us. M. Calf. confoundeth the passion and faith in the passion And will yover pregnant wit serve you to confound the mean, with which men must print, and the thing that must be printed? Is there no difference between the conduct pipe, and the water? the wine and the tunnel, by which as means the water is conveyed into the city, and the wine to the vessel? Acknowledge, your folly for shame, and learn to take the doctors sayings in their true meaning. Learn that the passion of Christ is one thing, The pass on and faith in the passion not all one faith in the passion of Christ an other. The passion is the pains, torments, and death that Christ suffered for us, faith is a grace engraffed in us to believe it. The passion is the Ransom and price that was paid on the cross for our redemption, faith is the mean that maketh us partakers of the virtue and merit purchased by it. The passion is the acceptable sacrifice that Christ made for our justification, faith a gift of the holy Ghost, that by power of that maketh us a sweet sacrifice to God the father. When you have learned this and considered the words of Chrisostome, I trust you will neither affirm that the cross mentioned in that place is taken for faith in the passion, nor think that the collection which I made out of that father's words for printing the merits of Christ's passion first in the mind, and afterward in the body, is indirectly gathered, Fol. 30. b nor to be shifted away with this Sophistication: Frustra fit per plura quod fieri potest per pauciora. In vain it is done by more, which may be done by fewer. M. Calves. Sophistry A strange rule of new Sophistry practised most about the impugning of definitions and divisions, not to be admitted among divines, for by that same rule, you may illude all the mysteries of our religion. Our Salvation might have been wrought by the absolute power of God, ergo the incarnation, and passion of Christ was in vain, we might be taught the gospel from heaven with out ministers, ergo the appointing of preachers was in vain. The English communion might be in fewer words, ergo the saying of so many words is in vain. Some may be saved by faith, ergo it is vain to do good works, and so illude all the mysteries of our faith, and religion. But keep yower sophistical rules for the Sophisters, it is not to be admitted among divines. Christ said. Luc. 17. When ye have done all that ye can, say ye are unprofitable servants, but by yower judgement (M. Calf.) If we may be saved with doing as little as the these upon the Cross, it is in vain to do all that we can. For frustra fit per plura quod fieri potest, per pauciora. In vain it is done by more, which may be done by fewer. This is yower profound learning this is yower new divinity, The new doctrine. this is yower evangelical doctrine invented by Satan to destroy all that the forefathers builded, contented with as few prayers, and ceremonies, as little fasting and watching, as simple alms and devotion, as little modesty from lying, and railing, as mean care of sclaundering and blaspheming, as possible may be: Quia frustra fit per plura quod fieri potest per pauciora. Origen . Frome Chrisostome you go to Origen, and many matters you lay forth, to infringe his authority and diminish his credit. But how fond some of them are, it shall appear hereafter. Now let us see how wisely you shifted to avoid that place. Calf. Fol 31. a b. Origen (say you) ask a question how it is possible to avoid, that sin reign not in our bodies, Coll 3. answereth, and sayeth. It is possible to avoid it if we do as the Apostle sayeth. Mortify your members which are upon earth, and if we carry about always in our bodies the death of Christ. For it is certain that where the death of Christ is carried about, sin can not reign. Est enim tanta vis crucis. For the power of the cross is so great, whereby it is evident, that he speaketh of the death of Christ, and that is the cross that be commendeth. Mart. Very true it is (M. Calf.) that the way to provide that sin reign not in our bodies, is to mortify our members upon earth, and to carry the death of Christ always in our bodies: Never man denied it, but licentious heretics which plainly affirm that men can not mortify their members on earth, Free will proved by Origen. In epist. ad Rom. lib. 6. Fol. 30. a or live chaste, and utterly take away free will, which Origen plainly proveth by those words of the Apostle, the very next sentence before, but you could not see that, neither when you answered the place of Chrisostome how he taketh the cross to be the death of Christ, and not faith in the passion, as you fond imagined before. Neither could you see by what means he would have the death of Christ to be continued and carried in our bodies, and because other should not see it, you stayd in the midst of a sentence and uttered not Origen's words, as he spoke them. He said not, the power of the cross is so great, and made a full point there, (as you do) but he said: It is so great, that if it be set before a man's eyes, and kept faithfully in his mind, so that he look with steadfast eyes of the mind, upon the very death of Christ, no concupiscence, no sensuality, nor envy is able to overcome him. This (sir) said Origen: And you might have seen if yower shaking head suffered your gogling eyes to be steady, that as Chrisostome would have the cross to be printed in the body and soul, So Origen would have it set before the eyes of the body and soul: that by outward sight with the eye, the inward mind might conceive a full impression of the death, and passion of Christ. Consider his words. Origen would have the cross set before our eyes . In the first clause he would have it set before our eyes. In the second to be kept faithfully in the mind. And is there any way so convenient, either to set the death of Christ before our corporal eyes, as the sign of the cross, whereon Christ suffered? Let us have yower devise & if you devise a better, let us hear of it, and we will thank you for it: But all the politic wit in yower peevish head can not: neither is there any thing able to be leyd before the eyes, that can move vehementer affections to the mind, or make deeper impressions of Christ's death in a heart meek and gentle, than the cross which is seen by the corporal eye, as I have proved in the eight Article of my Treatise. Wherefore until yower better devise be devised, we will say that Origen willing the death of Christ to be set before our eyes, and kept faithfully in the mind, would have it set before the eyes with a crucifix, and kept in the mind with virtuous meditation and godly preaching. If you say that Origen by the eyes and mind which he speaketh of, meant but one thing, how will you excuse him from that soul figure Tautologia in so few words in one sentence? what shall become of yower own rule, frustra fit per plura quod fieri potest per pauciora? will you make him that in his time was counted the flower of the world, so ignorant in matters of divinity, that he knew not what he wrote? So unskillful in diting his style that he could not avoid Tautologiam, in two clauses separated, but with one comma? So rude in logic that he knew not your rule frustra fit per plura? Not I dare say you will not, if it were for nothing else but that he destroyeth Imagery, as you say. But of that in another place. In the mean while you see that all though the cross be the death of Christ that Origen speaketh of, yet is it the sign by which he willeth that death to be set before our eyes, because it can not be so conveniently and effectually done by any one visible thing besides. Yower extravagantes and impertinent digressions made against priests and nuns, I willingly omit, because they be slanderous. Fol 31 b Yower taunts and scoffs against me I wittingly contemn, because they be ridiculous. Mine intent is only to examine yower answers, and not to dally with you in trifles. The next authority then that you labour to infringe is that of Cassiodorus, Cassiodorus. a learned father and grave Senator, alleged out his commentaries upon the 4. Psalm, where he sayeth. Like as the Coin beareth the image of the Emperor: Even so are the signs of the faithful, etc. But you say never a wise word to it, but, what thought, Fol. 32. b M. Calf. answereth like a cook Ruffian. much like to a Cook Ruffian, who chidden ones for making his master unsavoury sops, said, in his fustian fumes, what thought, and for anger would speak never a good word beside, for his own excuse. In which point if his wisdom be weighed with yowers, it will counterpeise it a great deal. For he by silence did lessen his fault, for evil cokerie, you by multiplying of words disclose yower unskill in not knowing the marks of Christianity. The effect of yower answer is this: Fol. 32. b Fol. 33. a Calf. Though the signs of the heavenly Emperor be printed upon the faithful, as the image of the Emperor is in his coin, yet is a rood, or a crucifix, or wagging of a finger not able to show whose men we are, as the print in the money doth show whose the coin is. For wheresoever that image and superscription is stamped there is it certain, who hath right to the coin. But whosoever hath the sign or stamp of the cross, show not thereby whose servants they are. Marc. Here is much said, but naught proved. Belike you have purchased some protection, and privilege to say what ye list and prove what you please. If it be so, we will resemble you to the banckroutes in London, and for a Lad of Ludlowe take you for a Lacker of Ludgate. Their property is to require payment of others and to make noon themselves, and so do you here. Reason would that as you deny it constantly, so you should prove it substantially. For no Wiseman hath you in such admiration and credit that he will believe it, because you deny it. The cross hath evermore been an especial sign of Christianity, and wheresoever the faith was preached, the sign of the cross was had, and reverenced, as I prove in the 3. and first article of my of my treatise. Euseb. lib. 6 cap. 5. hist. eccle. In the beginning when any were converted to the faith they that were in authority gave them, signum dominicum, our lords sign, which was the cross, and by that they were known to be Christians. Damascene sayeth: By the cross the faithful are discerned from the infidels. Lib. 4. ca 12. de side. In Psal. 4. Cassiodorus (whom we have now in hand) sayeth, that the sign of the heavenly Emperor is printed upon the faithful, as the image of the earthly Emperor is printed in the coin, and to what other purpose, or reason is it, but as the Emperor his coin is discerned by his image, so the faithful Christians should be known by that sign (which is the cross) only peculiar, and proper to the Christians. Ells: Why do you in your communion book command it to be imprinted and made in children's foreheads in baptism? The gentils did ever detest it: the Christians always esteem it: The jews abhor it: The Christians honour it. The Turks defy it. The Christians desire it: Heretics blaspheme it maliciously: The Christians worship it reverently, heretics reject it with much villain: The Catholics set it up with great piety. They rail at it with much blasphemy. The Christians wheresoever Christ was preached, in testimony that they believed in the crucified, did set up his cross as a banner and recognizance honourably to be known for Christ's soldiers. For testimony whereof, if any will see proof of it, I refer him to the 3. and 5. article of my book. There notwithstanding all M. Calves. cavils he may be satisfied. And albeit we can not enter into other men's consciences, and judge the Pope, and Prelates to be the best Christians, for hanging Crosses about them, yet by that may we judge them to be Christians, and men that have affiance in the merits of his passion, because noon but Christians commonly use, that blessed sign. The gentils, jews, Turks and heretics (as I said before) hate it, and what they hate they do not willingly use. If then the using and not using of a thing maketh one man to be known, externally from an other, why may not the having and not having of a cross, discern a Christian outwardly from an infidel? In London a gentle man's servant is known from others by the badge on his sleeve. The Lawyer by his Coif, Some men known from other by their habit. the Citizene by his gown, the minister by his hat, and every man of experience that seethe them, can say, he is a gentleman's servant, he is a lawyer, he is a Londiner, and he is a minister. And shall not the cross of Christ be a sign sufficient, outwardly to discern this or that man to be a Christian? I refer it to the judgement of the wiser, out of which numbered, if M. Calf. will exempt himself by his profound knowledge, Fol. 33. a Knowing the most crossers (as he saith) not to be the best Christians, I can not be against his singular head, and self will, sine vivat ineptus, Let him live like a Wise man by him, self alone. In the latter day when all the secrets of darkness shallbe revealed men's thoughts discovered and doings rewarded, he shall find that the enemies of the cross, and no crossers shall have no part with Christ. But as all that had not the blood of the lamb sprinkled upon their door posts in Egipte, Exod. 12. nor the sign of Tau signed in their foreheads in Jerusalem, Ezech. 9 were killed by the destroyer: So at that dreadful day, they that have not the blood of jesus Christ sprinkled in their hearts, and the sign of the cross in their foreheads, shalbe in woeful case. For then the cross which they hated shall appear (saith Ephrem) and vex them and trouble them: Cap. 3. de penitent. Homi. 55. in 16 Mat. Then will Christ (saith S. Chrisostome) be ashamed of them, because they were ashamed of so great a treasure. But if a man should come to a point of law with M. Calf. and ask him, how he knoweth that the most crossers be not best Christians, and demand causes of his knowledge, quia scire est ꝑ causas cognoscere, to know is to know by causes, I think he would ask a very long term ad ꝓponendun omnia, and in the end let fall his suite, and from knowing leap to supposing. For be it that he knoweth some that use the sign of the cross, to be of evil conversation, and very lewd, for their vicious life, will it follow that he knoweth all to be such? Not, unless he were a young God, or near Cousin to David George that would be Christ. Let me reason with him a while. How say you M. Calf. be not the Dominicans, Obseruantes, Carthusians, and other religious men, and women, most crossers (as you term them)? Fol. 33. a Do they not renounce the world, forsake all that they have, and distribute their goods to the poor, and bind themselves from the pleasures of the world? Are they not content to far evil, to have hard lodging, and simple apparel? Do they not fast much, watch long, rise at midnight, and spend most part of the day in study and contemplation? Is it not so? How say you man? If you deny it, the world shall convince you of impudence. And will you say that these men be not the best Christians? Where is yower wit? Christ counseled him that would be perfect, to cell all that he had, and give it to the poor, Mat. 19 Mat. 26. Coloss. 3. Philip. 3. 2. Pet. 3. and follow him, he counseled men to watch, to fast, to pray, to abandon the pleasures of the world, to mortify their members upon earth, and to have their conversation in heaven, and come as nigh as they can to imitation of him, whereupon I may make this argument, all that follow these, and other counsels of Christ most nearest, be best Christians (for Christ said of Marie that would not encumber herself with worldly cares, but live in contemplation. Luc. 10. Marie hath chosen the best part, But these religious men and women to the outward show, (beionde which we may not judge) observe these and other, counsels of Christ, tending to perfection, The most crossers the best Christians. most nearest of all other and show nothing to the contrary. Ergo of all other they be the best Christians so far as man can judge, and so consequently the most crossers the best Christians. Where is now yower knowledge become M. Calf.? Hath it not confounded itself? Must it not come (as I said) from a knowing to a supposing, and that supposition in time be found vain, and unfitting for a christian? Try it and you shall find it, and know yower self better. Calf. Fol. 33. a Yower words that follow, That the sign of God, is belief in Christ, and grace to do thereafter, and the merits of his passion our succour, Mart. our refuge, and defence, we acknoweldg to be true in a sense, and so true, that whosoever denieth them denieth the mystery of our redemption. But what need (they) in that place? Was there ever Catholic that did gain say it? And because Cassiodorus, In Psal. 4. and other say, The Cross is our succour, our refuge and defence, think you that they exclude the death of Christ, and merits of his passion? Gregor. li. 5. cap 11. in job. One truth not be destroyed by another. The passion of Christ and sign of the cross our defence. and how . Not: but you would follow yower progenitors, whose property was to mingle good with evil, that they might creep into credit with their hearers, and by teaching one truth destroy an other. But that is not commendable. Faith is not so to be preeched, that good works be contemned, grace not so advanced, that free will be condemned, nor mercy so commended, that justice be not feared, liberty not so signified, that discipline be decayed. The omnipotency not so declared, that the Sacraments and other external means be rejected. Concerning the matter in hand, both the passion of Christ and sign of his cross, be our succour, our refuge, and defence. The passion as principal, the sign as a mean, the passion as a fountain giving virtue to all, the sign as a conduct derived from that spring. The passion as a Castle, strong enough of itself, the sign as an instrument taking force from thence. For (as Cassidorus sayeth, and I alleged in the end of the 6. article, In Psal. 1. ) spiritualis aqua signum crucis inundat, spiritual water doth flow into sign of the Cross, that is to say, heavenvly grace doth flow in to the sign of the cross, which is known to be the salvation, of faithful souls, and also the grace and virtue, which was once effectuous in the first pattern proceedeth (sayeth Euthimius) with like efficacy to the signs of the cross. Besides Damascene telleth us that, Libro 4. cap 12. de fide. ubi est signum Christi, ibi ipse erit. Where the sign of Christ is, there he wilbe himself, If the party be not unworthy to receive him. Thus you might have uttered both these truths, and not by uttringe one have condemned the other, saving it liked you better to intermeddle a few sweet sugared words, that the ignorant might drink of yower poisoned cup, than simply to utter the truth, that your falsetie might not be espeied. ut supra . But it is sayeth S. Gregory a property of heretics, so to do. And you have practised their properties so long, that now you can not leave them nor theirs. From one you flit to an other. And as Celsus, Lib 7. cont. Cells. (as I mentioned before, out of Origen) did attribute to the christians those words which they never spoke: M. Calf. attributeth that to us which we never spoke nor meant. so do you infer of my words that argument of which I never dreamt on, nor wise man could find, if he sought witht a lantern, wherein you seem, not to have had yower common senses at commandment, but either in captivity to heresy, or in thraldom to phrenesy, or in danger to both. For unless hatred to the truth, engendered by heresy, and foolish fantasies conceived by phrensye, had estranged yower wits, you would never have forged so foolish an argument, and falsely impute it to to an other. But such forgeries and foolish shifts they must have, that will defend heresies. To try your honesty, I desire no more of the gentle reader but to peruse the similitude, deduced from faith joined wirh charity, to faith assisted with the sign of the cross, by way of an answer to heretics objections, and note whither he can deduce and frame out of it this argument of yowers, Fol. 33. a b. The sign of the cross is as necessary to concur with our belief, as charity to be with faith: But faith without charity, is a devils faith, ergo belief without the sign of the cross is devilish? I am sure noon but such as are evil affected in causes of religion, and dance after such ministrells' pipes can pick out such a sense of my words. For here is no such to be found. Fol. 21 a of my treatise . Thus I say: As not every simple, bore, and naked faith, but such as worketh by charity, is the victory that conquereth the world, the mean that maketh our souls meet habitations for the holy Ghost, the way that leadeth us to heaven: Even so say we, that faith worketh to man the foresaid effects, expelleth devils, putteth out their fiery darts, and defendeth man from all their fury and assaults, Mary not every faith, but such as is steadfast, constant, and strong, joined with charity, builded upon hope, strengthened with prayer, augmented with fasting, and assisted by the sign of the cross. And I beseek you what word is there here that expresseth such an absolute necessity between the sign of the holy cross, and faith as is between faith and charity? Yea by what words may it be but probably gathered? Is it this word assisted? if it be so, let us see, by what reason they can make it good. To be assisted by one is to be helped by him, as in time of war, for a prince to be assisted by a garrison sent from his friend, is to be holpen by that garrison of his friend. Now as no Wiseman will say, that the friend that helpeth the prince is greater than the prince in his realm, whom he helpeth, or that the aid which he sendeth is of like necessity, as the power which he levied of his own subjects at home: Even so noon can say that the sign of the cross is either of as great power, or as necessary as faith. Albeit in resisting and expulsing of devils, it doth assist and help faith. That faith needeth the helps of fasting and prayer, and sign of the cross, 17. Matt. Lib. 4. ca 27. de vera sapientia. I proved the first, by our saviours words, where he told his disciples, that there is a kind of devils which is not cast out but in fasting and prayer: the second out of Lactantius, where he sayeth that as Christ by his words did expel wicked devils, so now the followers of Christ do cast wicked spirits out of men, both with the name of their master, and sign of the passion. And because he talketh so plainly of the name of Christ, and sign of the cross, M. Calfehills scoffing wit devised a new taunt for him, and said He tied two points together, the name of Christ, Fol. 33. b and sign of his passion, Wherein if I were disposed to imitate his Rhetoric, I could more justly say, that he compareth the name of Christ, and sign of his cross to two points, than he can avouch that I compared the cross with charity, and hope, fasting, and prayer. But I will not follow so lewd a precedent. My chiefest purpose is to discuss the pith of his answers to the authorities brought out of the fathers. Fol 33. b Calf . To Lactantius even now recited he sayeth. The name of Christ is spoken of in many places of scriptures, and all those places prove a true effect, but in all those places the sign of the Cross is not spoken of, wherefore the name of Christ alone would have done as much as the name and sign together. Nor we must impute the virtue to the sign, though contrary to the use, Mart. and example of Scripture it pleased some men to add it. To so foolish a reason, a brief answer shall suffice, and that is. Nego argumentum, I deny that argument. And when you justify it by good reason, I will disprove it with better, until that come, ye and then too we will better credit Lactantius than M. Calf. in this point, and more regard, the two points that he tieth together, the name of Christ, and sign of his cross, than all the pellfrey ware that he beareth in his peddlers pamnier. What? Nay soft quoth M. Minister, you do not well to liken him to a peddler, for he sustaineth a nobler parsonage, and is of late made a high counselor with God, Fol. 33. b so privy to his will and so well experienced in his power, that he can now assure us that twelve hundred years ago, the name of Christ alone would have done as much as the name and sign of his passion together. If it were so, for that respect he ought to be had in better reputation for his master's sake. In deed he talketh arrogantly of his person in the end of his book, and determinately like a counsellor with God in this place. But the more higher he is in opinion of himself, the more viler shall he be in the sight of God, and estimation of the wiser. It is an old rule in the law: Duo vincula sortius ligant. 2. Tim 2. Twoe chains bind faster. The name of Christ is holy, mighty and great, but if a man will have it stand him in stead, he must join an other link unto it, that is hatred of sin, How the calling upon the name of God helpeth us. for as S. Paul sayeth: Every man that calleth upon the name of God must go away from iniquity. And (as S. Augustine saith) he that calleth upon the name of our lord, must go from iniquity: if he will have the name of our lord profit him. The Apostles did many miracles in the name of Christ, yeat when a child possessed with a spiritte was brought unto them to be healed, they could not heal him by calling upon the name of Christ, Serm. 11. in evang. Matth. which they practised as may be gathered by a story of the Bible, because that kind of devils (as Christ said) is not cast out but with fasting and prayer. Mat 17. Mark 9 Luc. 9 Behold the name of Christ alone called upon of the Apostles (who had as strong faith as ever any had) could not cast out a devil, and bind him to depart out of a child. Christ besides the calling upon his name, told that two other links were necessary to bind that kind of devils, to wit, Matt 17. fasting and prayer. And shall we think that either there be no such devils raging like roaring lions now, or that we are able to cast them out by the name of Christ alone, whereas the Apostles could not? Not not: If we have that fantasy we do deceive ourselves. Faith being decayed in these latter days, and charity waxed cold, devotion slaked, and prayers not very fervent, and yet the power of the enemy being as mighty as ever it was, it is reason that we join all our force together, and call upon the name of Christ, trust in the merits of his passion, fast srome fleshly delights, iniquity and sin, pray without intermission, and use all the helps whatsoever they be, whereof the sign of the cross is one, taught undoubtelye of the holy Ghost, and practised of Christ's catholic church, universally througheout all the world, until this day, and all wilbe little enough. Wherefore M. Calf. being no counsellor with God (for as S. Paul sayeth: Not man is counsellor to him, Rom. 11. his ways be insearcheable) may be ashamed to define so absolutely without any reason, scripture, or doctor that the name of Christ alone would have done as much, as the sign and the name together. Where he saith, Calf. Fol. 33. b Mart. that we must not impute the virtue to the sign, we tell him plainly that we never did so, but referred all the virtue to the merits of Christ's passion, and noon to the sign, otherwise than to an instrument, by which the virtue is wrought, as remission of sins is by water in the sacrament of baptism. Where he sayeth, Calf. Fol. 33. b Mart. that contrary to the use and example of Scriptures, it pleased some men to add it, We desire him to show one express text in all the scripture, from the first of Genesis, to the last of the Apocalypsis, where it is inhibited, and where the use and example of scripture, is contrary unto it, No scripture forbiddeth and the sign of the cross. Calf. Mart. we would gladly learn it. If he can show noon (as I am sure he can not, let him be ashamed of his impudent assertion. You say it is not commanded in scripture, ergo it is not to be used. We deny that consequent, and and say it is not forbidden in scripture, ergo it may be used. If you admit not this, tell us by what scripture, you have been commanded to use this and that collect at yower communion? to set the table in the quire? to put a cope upon the ministers back? to have three at the least to receive at yower communion? or sing Gloria in excelsis, at the latter end? What scripture have you for all this? If you have noon at all, but use it because you think it not inhibited, be not offended with other for using that licence lawfully, that you take yower self, at your pleasure. Next to Lactantius I joined a sentence out of S. Augustine to prove, that the sign of the cross, S. August. De Symb. ad Cathe. lib. 2. ca 1. is a weapon and engine to fight against the devil. The sentence is this. We have received the remedy of faith against the poison of the old serpent, that if our adversary the devil will at any time lie in weight for us, the man that is redeemed, may know that he aught to meet with him with a steadfast faith, Crucis vexillo. or (as M. Calf. will have itt, with the Sacrament of faith and ensign of the cross. To shift away this sentence, a question is propounded, and answer framed as it pleaseth M. Calf. The question is this. Fol. 34. a. Calf. What meaneth s. Augustine by that Metaphor? What is that ensign of the cross? The banner that is carried about the church yard in procession? The answer: Not, but that which in the self same sentence before he called Canticum salutis, the song of Salvation. Mart. Fol. 25. b Fol. 29. b. A strange Metamorphosis (good readers) M. Calf. that before uttered many blasphemous words against the cross, can now say, it is: Canticum salutis, A song of Salvation. O that he would as gladly embrace the truth, when it is told him simply, as he can find starting holes to shift it away phantasticallye. For in deed this is a mere fantasy, and shift of descant, clean besides the plain song. S. Augustine, (upon whom he fathereth this his fantasy) instructing in that place, Cathecumenos, young Novices as it were in the faith, declareth part of the ceremony used about them, of the which this was one. They were brought from certain secret places, where they had been, into the face of the church, and there humbling themselves, with all humility, were examined, and prayed for. That the proud spirit might be expelled, Christ most highest of all, and yeat humble, was called upon for them. They were humble, and meek, they made their petitions, or ando, psallendo atque dicendo: Psal. 138. Proba me Deus & scito cor meum, praying, singing and saying: Try me (o God) and know my heart. God tried them, God examined them, God touched his servants hearts with his fear. God by his power drove the devil away from them, and delivered his family from the others possession and thrauldome. But to our purpose: with in few lines, after, it followeth: Our lords family therefore being purged, after that they had sung, the song of Salvation, they received the remedy of faith against the poison of the old serpent. But was this song of Salvation a banner of the cross (as M. Calf. fansieth) Not: S. Augustine sayeth him self. It was that verse of the Psalm: Psal 138. Proba me Deus meus & scito cor meum, Try me o God and know my heart. This song they sang after they come into the face of the church, and when they had sung this song, then did God try them, and examine them, and touch their hearts with his fear, and deliver them from the servitude of the devil. And when they were thus purged and tried, and entering now by faith into the mystical body of Christ, which is their health and salvation, and sung that verse of David, S. Augustine called it: Canticum salutis, the song of salvation. This is S. Augustine's mind. This might M. Calf. have seen in the same place, if it would have pleased him to have marked all that S. Augustine said. further he might have seen with in xiii. lines after the beginning, this saying of S. Augustine: Per sacrum crucis signum. You are not yet borne again by holy baptism, but you are conceived in the womb of yower holy mother the church, by the holy sign of the cross. By which he might have learned, that according to the use of the primitive church, of which Eusebius mentioneth, Lib. 6. c. 5 hist. eccle. Theodor. lib. 7. cap. 34. Tripar they that began to profess Christ had the sign of the cross given them, and by that sign were as it were brought to Christ. But he would not see it, it was not for his purpose. But we must pardon him. A rolling eye in a calves head, doth not narrowly mark all that lieth before him. That which was nothing to the matter in hand, nor any one jot against that, which I alleged for the sign of the cross, he espied to make a smother, and nothing else: For what thought S. Augustine, biddeth us use, The chaste fear of God, and faith of prayer, as two weapons against the two terrible engines, of the devil, pleasure and fear? Will M. Calfhills Logic make it follow, that he doth forbidden us to use the sign of the cross? This is too strange, and new trifling folly. S. Augustine in the very same place before, talked of the remedy of faith, and sign or banner of the cross, ut talibus armis indutus facile vincat Christianus, that the Christian being furnished with such armour might easily overcome, and because he repeateth not the same again in the other place, M. Calf. sayeth he doth not bid us make the sign of the cross in our foreheads. What trifling folly is this? How holdeth this argument? Fol. 34. a. S. Augustine (in that place) doth not bid us use the sign of the cross: ergo he biddeth us in no other place? S. Paul in ten of his epistles doth not bid us celebrated the supper of our lord, ergo he biddeth us no where? Christ in the 1. Chapter of S. Matth. doth not bid us pray, ergo he biddeth us no where. If you find them stark staring naught (as in deed they are) then fear not to give like sentence of M. Calfhills. For they differ not the breadth of a nail. For as S. Paul biddeth us celebrated the supper of our lord, 1. Cor. 11. in his epistle to the Corinthians, although he did not in the other, and Christ commanded us oftentimes to pray, notwithstanding he did it not in the first of S. Mathewe: Even so albeit S. Augustine did not bid us expressly in that sentence and clause, to make the sign of the cross in our foreheads, yet in the xxviij. line before, in the same chapter he told us that a Christian man must use against the devil, the remedy of faith and sign of the cross. And in diverse other places of his works, biddeth us use the same. Thus you see (gentle readers), M. Calfhills answers to be no thing but mere Cavilling and wrangling. You see the authorities brought for the use and virtue of the cross, stand in their force, and in the same sense for which they were brought, and never an argument, Fol. 34. a either to halt down right, or to run-, ne of uncertain feet, as the adversaries do. Wherefore let truth prevail, and heresy quail, let the ancient fathers have credit, and this new upstart his desert. As you find him limping in this little already examined, so shall you in all the rest. Read with indifferency, and see, there is nothing so absurd but he will maintain it after his feeble fashion, rather than grant that the sign of the Cross used of a Christian man, is through the merits of Christ's passion of virtue, or power against the devil. He telleth you that I prefer the bore sign of the cross before naked sole and only faith. But there he maketh a lie sir reverence. For I do not absolutely prefer the bore sign before naked, Fol. 34. b sole, and only faith: but declare an experiment, and fact, where the bore sign of the cross wrought that in Pagan, which a naked, sole, and only faith did never by any Christian, and the declaring of a fact, is not a preferring of one thing before another. I know that a naked faith, which in time may grow to a perfection is better than any external sign. But what needed all this babble about naked, sole and only faith? It nothing impugneth any thing that I said. But for M. Calfhils' pleasure let us hear the reasons by which he proveth, that a naked and devils faith is better than a Cross. The first is this, Fol 34. b Calf. that the devils faith doth teach somewhat. The second, that it taketh away the excuse of ignorance. The third, that it forceth a sin upon us. The fourth, that a naked faith is able with out further information to instruct him, that neither did, nor ever could hear at all. As for the first, Fol. 35. a Mart. M. Calves first reason. in good sooth as we must confess that as the naked and devils faith teacheth all that have it, some what, so may we not deny, but that the cross teacheth us somewhat. But the teaching of some what doth not always make a thing better. He that teacheth nothing, is some times better than he that teacheth some what, as the ignorant that holdeth his peace is better than the protestant that teacheth heresy. That which we teach, is that as a naked and devils faith availeth nothing, unless it be clothed with charity, so the bore figure of the cross, ordinarily profiteth nothing unless it concur with faith. But this is nothing to the purpose. We see in heretics, that have this naked and devils faith now a days, The fruits of the naked and devils faith. contempt of the Majesty of God, blasphemy against Christ, disobedience to his laws, dishonour to his governors on earth, rebellion against princes, spoiling of churches, sacrilege of religious, malice against Catholics, pride of heart, wantonness of body, covetousness of money, with a great many such of M. Calves somwhatts. But in those who having faith clothed with charity honour the cross, and are contented to have it in their churches, we see no such somwhats. To see your folly, reason but this with yourself M. Calf. That is better which worketh to man the less harm, but the Cross worketh less harm to man, than the devils faith, continuing still a devils faith (for it worketh noon at all), ergo the cross in this respect is better than the devils faith. Of the second reason, The second that it taketh away the excuse of ignorance, what can ye infer, but that it maketh men's sins that have it, more grievous, Luc. 12. and damnation more terrible. Doth not Christ say that the servant that knoweth his masters will, and hath not prepared himself, and done according to his masters will, shallbe beaten with many stripes, but he that doth not know it, and doth things worthy of punishment, shallbe beaten with few? And shall it now be better because it taketh away the excuse of ignorance? Me thinketh you might better have said: That is worse which maketh man's damnation greater, but a naked and devils faith, knowing God and not glorifying him as God, doth make our damnation greater than all the signs of the cross in the world, ergo a naked and devils faith in this point is worse than the cross. The third Concerning the third reason, where you say: that faith forceth a sin upon us, and allege Christ's words for it, you show yourself neither skilful in the scriptures, nor true Christian. For the place which you allege out of S. john proveth, Cap. 15. that the jews (of whom Christ spoke, had no excuse of their sins, because Christ had preached unto them, and they continued still in their incredulity, and would not believe in him, nor have any faith of his incarnation, death, or resurrection. If they would have had faith, M. Calves doctrine, that faith forceth sin upon us. they should have been delyured from sin, for they should have been justified by the death of Christ in lavacro regenerationis, in thee bath of regeneration and baptism. Furthermore no true Christian man would ever say, that faith forceth sin upon us. For faith is the gift of God, and the gifts of God force not sin upon us. As he himself is holy, so are all his gifts: and make us holy, If we use them to such effects as he gave them unto us. If a man should urge you that crack unto the people, that you teach nothing, but the sincere Gospel, where you find this position, faith forceth sin upon us, in all the Ghospel of jesus Christ, what could you say M. Calf? If you have any scripture, council, or father, let it appear, if you have noon, then are you little better than an Atheist, to say, that faith (which is the gift of God) forceth sin upon us: But if your position were true, we might make this reason against you. Whatsoever forceth sin upon us, is worse than that which forceth no sin upon us: but the naked and devils faith forceth sin upon us (as you say) ergo it is worse than that, which forceth no sin upon us. But the cross forceth no sin us, ergo it is worse than the cross. That the cross forceth no sin upon us, it is manifest, for it hath no life, no sense, nor power to use any force. Matth. 15. Marc 7. All that polluteth and defileth a man cometh from the heart. From thence, come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witnesses, and such like, these be they that defile man, and not crosses M. Calf. The fourth reason is so fond, The iiij. that I think your brain had some convulsion, and wit distraction, when you devised to utter it. For who but you, knowing that faith cometh by hearing, Rom. 10. and hearing by the word of God, would say, That a naked faith is able to teach him, that there is a God, that neither did, Fol 35. a not ever could hear at all? The man that did never hear, can have no faith, quia fides ex auditu, for faith cometh of hearing. If he hath no faith, I would feign have your devise, how faith can teach him. The instinct of nature, visible things of this world, as the moving of the heavens, the increase, of the earth, the face of man, and sight of others may instruct such a one, that there is a God. And the sight of the cross and crucifix can express unto his eye that one died upon the cross: but that faith (which is not in him) because he never had any sense of hearing, can do it, it were a pretty devise to le●ne. The Philosopher Aristotle taught, that, De sensu & sensibili. Auditus est via ad disciplinam. Hearing is the way to learning, lack hearing, and the sense of hearing, and lack learning and all that must be learned by hearing. But M. Calf. had forgotten that principle of philosophy, and no marvel for he beginneth prettily to forget Christianity. As for the absurdity, which he findeth in comparing the feigned and devils faith, which is a gift of God, Fol. 35. a he sayeth) and a quality of the mind, to the cross which is the work of man, will appear noon at all, if he remember how S. Paul compared the high priest who was in authority, Acto. 23. and had no doubt great gifts of God, and some kind of faith, such as M. Calfhills feigned devils faith is, to a painted wall, which was the work of man, full of double and dirt. And now to his cozen julian, and his judgement of that experiment. Mark it well. It is profound. Fol. 35. b M. Calves. Notes . First he noteth, that wicked, reprobate and godless persons can use the sign of the cross, as well as other, which if they can do, and notwithstanding have never a whit the more faith, it can not be (saith he) that the cross driveth out heresies, that it converteth obstinate sinners, that it maketh wicked men think upon God, or that it is comfortable in desperation. Mart. Is not this a proper note, and he a cunning noter? Is it not to be noted as well that lechers, usurers, heretics, covetous men, and other lewd persons can have the Bibles in their houses, resort unto sermons, hear the word of God, as well as other that are virtuously disposed, and not withstanding have never a whit the more care to amend their lives? yes verily, the more is the pity: And because all wicked men do not take occasion by reading of the Bible, and hearing of Sermons, to amend their lives, shall we say (as M. Calf. doth of the cross) that the word of God can not make lecherers chaste, usurers honest, covetous men liberal, heretics catholics, and naughty men good? Haebr. 4. God forbid. The word of God is lyvely and effectuous, and more piercing than any two edged sword? Esa. 55. It shall do all that God will have done, and prospero in those, for whom he sent it. When it falleth, it falleth like the sowers seed, some by the high ways side, some upon the stones, some amongst thorns, and some upon good ground. Some hear with one ear, and let it out at the other. Some receive it with joy, but suffer it not to root: and in tribulation be offended for it. Some hear it, but are so choked with riches and cares of the world, Matt. 13. that it doth not fructify. Some have humble gentle, and mild hearts, and they bring forth fruit in great plenty. In like sort, Some sing the cross, go by, and think not of it, but rather contemn it. Some see it gladly and think of it, but they are worldly, and can not enter into any meditation of Christ's death, by often sight of it. Some have holy meditations of Christ, and his passion, by occasion of it, and yeat do not fructify. Some that have remorse and care of eternal salvation, by sight of it fall into some heavenly contemplation of Christ's benefits, and passing love towards us, and fructify an hundred fold. Now because all that see it do not take like commodity by it, shall we generally say as M. Calf: sayeth, that it driveth heresies out of no man? It converteth no obstinate sinners? It maketh no wicked men to think of God, nor is comfortable to noon in desperation? or say as he noteth in the margin, Fol. 35. b that these are contradictions in Martial? It were no point of wisdom to build such an argument of so slender a reason. For that admitted, many other absurdities will follow, especially that which I declared before. Now that the sight of the cross, beheld with earnest meditation of Christ, humbling himself to death, to gather us together, and bring us into unity, expelleth heresy, not I only, but that holy father Ephrem, witnesseth in these words: De poenit. cap. 3. Crux est haeresium expulsatrix: the cross is an expeller of heresies, whose words M. Calf. that reproveth the virtue of the cross, should rather have answered wisely, then condemned foolishly. That some obstinate sinners are converted, or rather induced to convert by sight of it, not I only, but Athanasius teacheth. De humanit. ●erbi . And his authority should rather have been diligently weighed, than disdainfully rejected. That it is comfortable in desperation, diverse know that have been disquieted by the devil, and by God's grace, through the contemplation of this, have gotten the victory, and triumphed over him. For examples sake I could have named some, but that I thought the gentle reader would credit it, and did not mistrust that any heretic would scoff at it: But I perceive, under every stone there lieth a Scorpion. The 2. Note. Fol. 35 b. Calf. His second note is, that the devil was not sore hurt by the Cross, for notwithstanding he retained the possession of whole julian both in body and soul. Mart. If his note books at home, have no better notes than this, there were a foolish note book God wots. You forget yourself (sir). We speak not of harm done unto the devil, but of his fleeing away at the sign of the cross. Why urge you not that? The devil was not by conjuration called up, to hurt julian, but to help him. etc. For julian had to consult for an empire, and thereim the devils counsel was required. But when julian saw that terrible and oughly sight of so soul a find, he was in great fear, & woeful agony, and so upon the sudden, having no other refuge, he made the sign of the Cross in his forehead, as he commonly, used when he was a Christian. The devils were put to flight, and driven back again. Was this, after a sort, no harm to the devil as you term it? Imagine M. Calf. that M. Gryndall sendeth a Currier for you hastily to bestow some fat prebend upon you, and some one by the way draweth his sword upon you, and maketh you run away for fear: have you no harm by it? Yes verily: for the infamy that shall redound to such a dowtye knight for cowardness is harm sufficient, if there be no more. Calf. Fol. 35. b M. Calves. reason. Mart. But let us hear what reason you have, why the devil had no harm. The devil (you say) retained the possession of julian both body and soul, ergo he was not hurt by the Cross that he made. O that wit of yours how fine it is. When you went to M. Grindall you kept possession of your house, ergo when you ran away for fear, you had no harm. A pirate rob by another pirate keepeth the possession of his ship, ergo he hath no harm by the pirate. Is not this substantial gear? either get you better stuff, or hold your peace for shame. The third note which you gather, Fol 35. b The 3. note. is that the devil feigneth himself, to be afraid of that which with all his heart he would have men use. To this in part I answered before, and proved that the devil seemeth not to fear the cross, but feareth it in deed. To say somewhat beside I think it superfluous, unless M. Calf. will tell us by what secret conference he hath learned that the devil did at that time feign himself to be afraid of the cross that julian made, or would have men use the cross, and how we shall know when the devil is afaid. And what is the point which he would have doobled, If he had been afraid in deed, when julian and the conjuror were together? There was no cause why the devil should feign a fear to deceive them. They were both his own already. Et quod suum est, amplius suum fieri non potest, sayeth the law, that which is a man's own, can be no more his own, than it is. There was no cause why he should double a point. julian was his darling, the conjuror his friend, and noon use to double with their friends, for fear of breach of amity. There was no cause why the devil should play such open play, and run away, except it were for fear of the sign of the cross: he was called up by the conjuror to serve julian. julian was as glad to have him as the conjuror, and the devil would as gladly serve them. There was no occasion of fear otherwise ministered, and yeat to run away under pretence of fear? How can this stand? It is a great torment to the devil to be raised up by conjuration, and the oftener he is conjured, the oftener is his pain increased. Whereby it appeareth that being called up by the conjuror, he would not (as M. Calf. imagineth) play open play and make as though he were afraid, and run away, and suffer new torment by an other conjuration, only to make sport. Now let us have a rule of M. Calf. to know when the devil feareth in deed, and when he pretendeth to fear. He trembleth at the name of jesus, he quaketh also at the sign of the cross, he fleeth when he heareth his name, he runneth away when he seethe his sign. His trembling argueth fear, his running away cowardness: Now to know which is for fear, and which is under pretence of fear, were worth the learning of so cunning a man as M. Calf. pretendeth himself to be in the devils policies. If it be by no other than running away, he may say, that he pretendeth fear at the name of jesus, as well as he doth at the sight of the cross. For he runneth away at both. Where you note sir contradictions in me, Fol. 35. b because I said the sign of the cross must concur with faith, That which M. Calf. avoucheth to be contradiction, proved noon. and faith, with the sign of the cross, and declared two experiments, one of julian, and an other of a jew, in whom the sign of the cross wrought great effects, without faith, you seem to be so desirous of quarreling, that you would rather fight with a shadow, than sit still and not be counted a quarreler. You might see, that in the first, I had respect to the ordinary way that God appointed us to fight with all against the devil, and therefore said that the sign of the cross must concur with faith, and faith with the sign of the cross. And that they iontly concurring together have driven out of men not only one spirire, but whole legions of devils. In the second that I had respect to an extraordinary way, by the which it pleased god to declare the virtue of the cross, and what force it had, ex opere operato, by the work wrought, yea by an Apostata and infidel, who had neither faith, neither hope in Christ. And these two diverse respects considered, you might plainly have seen, that there was no contradiction at all. For in Contraries there must always be one respect. And if that respect vary in time, place, manner, or other circumstance, there can no contradiction be employed. If a physician should say unto you. Sir, this is the most common, and ordinary medicine, that our art prescribeth to cure one sick of a frenzy, and yet notwithstanding tell you that he knew a man fallen into as deep a phrensye, as you, cured with out that medicine, Or to use a more familer example, if a man say unto you, whosoever will go from London to Lambeth by water, must have a barge, whirr, or some such vessel, and yeat tell you how the last year, save one a man might go between London and Lambeth by water, with out any bridge, whirrie, boat, or Scullowe, will yower wisdom say that either the physician in his words, or the other man in his saying employeth a contradiction? I think not. And if you can find noon in these, look well, and you shall find noon in the other. And marvel first at your own ignorance, that understand not that which you take in hand, to confute, Secondly at your own folly, for wrangling and quarrelling, where you have no just cause. Thirdly at your own disobedience, who being a professor of divinity and reader in Paul's, and sometimes a lustily brave younker serving man like with a badge on your sleeve, an earnest favourer, and quick furderer of the superintendentes injunctions, would set forth a book, neither perused by the learned, neither privileged by the queen, M. Calves book printed without privilege. nor allowed by order, commanded by injunctions, which you being a faithful subject (as you say) should willingly have allowed, and not wittingly contemned. But I see heretics wilbe always contemners of authority and rule, bold, wilful in there own conceit, men that fear not to bring in sects, men that forsake the unity of Christ's, Catholic church, and break all good order. THAT THE CROSS OF CHRIST WAS PREFIGURED IN THE LAW OF NATURE FORESHOWN BY THE FIGURES OF Moses' Law, denonced by the Prophets, and showed from heaven in the time of grace. ARTICLE II Fol. 41. AS THE Philosopher whom M. Calf. mentioneth in the beginning of this article thought it not good to tell the fool that come unto him, Fol. 41. a and asked what was honesty, because he had nothing to do with it, so did I once think it not expedient, for me, to answer this contentious quarrelling of M. Calf. who professing the sincerity of the Gospel, Philip. 4. and commanded so to behave himself, that his modesty might be known to all men, doth so revile and rail in all his discourse, that whosoever fiftethe it, shall find no point of honesty or modesty, from the first leaf to the last: which in part he confesseth himself, In the preface to the reader saying that he is more asper in his writing, than modesty requireth: But the truth of the cause, so blasphemously reviled, desire to profit my dear country so miserably deceived, and care to reduce him that so blindly wandereth, have made me take in hand the disproving of this his answer, which is more worthy to be condemned than remembered. Briefly therefore to join issue with this quarreler that sayeth: Fol. 41. b Calf. The sign of the cross was neither prefigured in the law of nature, nor foreshowed, by the figures of Moses' law, nor denounced by the prophets, nor showed from heaven in the time of grace, but the passion of Christ, and manner of his death was only prefigured, Mart. What will he say to the fathers, and especially to S. Augustine, that speaking of the widow to whom Elias was sent, and of the sticks that she gathered sayeth: Non hic solo signi nomine, Count Faustum Manich li. 12. cap 34. sed etiam numero lignorum, signum crucis exprimitur. In this place the sign of the cross is expressed, not with the only name of wood, but also with the number of the pieces of wood? What will he say, to those express woods of his, Moses manus ad coelum extendit, iam tunc figuram crucis Christi ostendens? Moses lifted up his hands to heaven, De 5. Heraes ad quod vult Deum. ca 2. Fol. 175. b Fol. 29 b showing even at that time the figure of Christ's cross? Will he say: that they overshot themselves in their terms, and meant better than they wrote? If he do, Let me ask him this question. How say you (sir) was not the cross an instrument on which Christ should be put to death? Was it not one of the means, by which the manner of his passion was wrought? What say you? was it? or was it not? If it were, then by your own confession, M. Calf. by his own confession convinced a liar. saying that the passion of Christ and manner of his death were prefigured, You are convinced to be a liar. For if the manner of his passion, and means how he should come to his passion were prefigured, and the cross was one of those means, then must it necessarily follow, that the cross was prefigured: and that you have done me great injury in denying it. If the cross were no instrument of his death, then was not Christ crucified, and so by your opinion the world not yet redeemed. Your often confounding and taking the sign of the passion, for the passion of Christ itself, ministereth many occasion to suspect, least you be one of them, that intent to raise up the Manichees heresy, that Christ had but a fantastical body, and suffered here not in verity, but in fantasy: Take heed, vide Ambrosium serm. 55. de cruce & Augustinun ser. 19 de sanctis. you creep apace towards it. Again, whereas Damascene, and Cirillas, and diverse other do expressly tell us that the tree of life planted in the midst of paradise, did prefigure the sign of the Cross, dare you being but an upstart, of no experience, nor learning, in comparison, control them of ignorance in the scriptures, and mysapplying the figures of the old testament? or of seeking allegories more than needed? Were they men of such mean learning and cheverill consciences, that they would run from a revealed truth, Fol 42. a to their own fantasies, and devices: and overshoot themselves? Not not: their virtue and learning declare the contrary, too well known, to be imperished by such a pelting pellferer, who falsely persuaded, that he hath the best and finest ware, that is in all the world, setteth up a new shop, and like a mountebank praiseth his own confections, Lib. 4. ca 12 de fide. and reproveth other men's? As for example, where Damascene resembled the tree of life in paradise to the cross, this man (as though he had authority to sit in judgement over all,) saith. Fol 42. a Calf. As in one sense I condemn it not, so in an other sense I like it not: the words that are inferred savour not of scripture: Mart. why M. Calf liketh not Damasc. He wilbe above all, he will like, and mislike all, he will teach the fathers how to interpret scriptures: Is not this excessive pride? and Lucifer's own spirit? he likethe not Damascenes judgement, and why? The thief never liketh the judges sentence be it never so true, if it be against him. Besides whereas S. Ambrose said, Lib 1. de fide ad Gratia in prol. Lib. 8. ca 17. in evang joan. Lib. 4. ca 12. de fide. In 7. Exo. that the standard of Abraham when he fought for his brother Loth, Cirillus, that the wood laid upon Isaac when he should be sacrificed, Damascene that the blessing of josephs' two children by jacob, Origen that the rod of Aaron being all figures of the old law, prefigured the cross, yet this man saith, that it was not figured in any at all. Let the doctors dally in figures as they fancy, (saith he) let not us depart from the verity of the word. If they speak one thing, and mean an other let us take their meaning, Fol. 41. b Calf. Fol 43. Mart. and let their words go. As though such learned and virtuous fathers, would dally in figures after their fancy, and go from the verity of God's word, or speak one thing and mean an other, and so voluntarily err themselves, and be occasion of error to other. This imagination is too vile, and thought too slanderoous for a man to conceive of such noble lights of the world, and now by the grace of God saints in heaven. Fol. 23. a Ful. 96. a Fol. 85. b But yet such is M. Calfhills opinion of them, and not of them only, but of all the fathers that have lived these thirteen hundred years sithence Christ. A terrible matter, God commandeth us to ask our forefathers, and they shall tell us, and what shall they tell us? the truth. Deut. 32. For orherwise God would not send us unto them, but to learn the truth, and now M. Calf. biddeth us not go the fathers, they run from a revealed truth to their own devices, Fol. 43. a. they dally in figures as they fancy, M. Calves opinion of the fathers. they speak one thing and mean an other? Is not this to advance himself against God? Let the indifferent judge. If any say, the protestants and such as M. Calf. is, prefer the scriptures before the fathers, So do the Catholics too, and ever did, and yet never contemned their exposition upon the scriptures, where it is agreeable to the doctrine of Christ's catholic church, nor thought them to be so ignorant that they knew not the meaning of scripture, or so malicious that they would speak one thing, and mean an other to bring men into error, or so void of the grace of the holy Ghost, that making such learned commentaries, and expositions upon the scriptures, such godly sermons, and devote homilies to the people, such treatises of fasting, prayer, and alms deeds, and such like amounting to great volumes, they would vary from the true sense of God's word, and go from the sincerity of the Gospel. Nor Damascene savoureth the less of scripture because, he said: Seeing death come in by the tree, it was convenient that life and resurrection should be given again by a tree, If it may have a gentle interpretation, and be taken as he meant, that is for the mean, and instrument by which death come, and life and resurrection was given. For he was not so unskillful in the scriptures, but that he knew S. Paul said: By one man sin entered in, and by one man resurrection. 1. Cor. 15. Rom. 5. Nor so ignorant in the principles and grounds of the faith, but that he knew that our fall come by Adam, and our salvation by Christ, as the chief author and worker of it. Wherefore you do very great injury to so learned a father to charge him with ignorance and not savouring of scripture. And albeit you labour busily to discredit him, and Cassiodorus and Cyrillus, for saying that the tree planted in the midst of paradise prefigured the cross, Fol. 42. a and bring certain places of S. Augustine to prove that it is called the wisdom of God, and Christ him self, yet shall you have no advantage against them, nor improve their interpretations. The scripture is a great deep pole, it hath many dark senses, and secret mysteries, which may be diversly taken, and signify diverse things. As for example, the paradise that God planted for man, What paradise signifieth mystically. Lib. 13. ca 21. de civitace Dei. Sapientian. signifieth (sayeth S. Augustine in the place which you alleged before) the life of the blessed, the four floods, the four virtues, wisdom, fortitude, temperance, and justice, the trees signify all good learning, the fruits of the trees, the manners of the virtuous, the tree of life, wisdom, the mother of all goodness, the tree of knowledge of good and evil, the experiment that the commandment of God was transgressed. This is one sense. Besides this it hath an other signification. Paradise signifieth the church, the four floods, the four gospels, the trees holy men, their fruits, their works, the tree of life, Christ, Free will the tree of knowledge of good and evil, proprium voluntatis arbitrium, man's own free will. By which you may see that one thing in the scripture may have diverse mystical significations, and never a one confound the other. The tree of life signifieth Christ, and wisdom the mother of all goodness (as S. Augustine sayeth,) we grant. It signifieth also the cross of Christ, as Damascene, Lib. 13 de ciui●. Dei cap. 21. Cassiodorus, and Cyrillus say, no Wise man can deny. For both may stand, and one bring no confusion to the other, as S. Augustine proveth by diverse examples of the old testament. Wherefore (sir) in proving it to signify Christ, and wisdom, you prove nothing, but that we grant, and yet nothing improve that which we say, that it signifieth (as those fathers interpret it) the cross of Christ. Libro primo de moribus . But I perceive the drunkard will never lack wine, nor the quarreler matter of contention. True it is that Seneca writeth. Every man savoureth of that which he hath learned. You have learned in Luther and Calvin's school, to be contentious against the church, and impugn one truth with an other, and that you practise now, but how wisely the event shall try. The lifting up of Moses' hands (you say) signifieth prayer, ergo it signifieth not the cross, Calf. Fol. 43. a Mart. or else you say nothing against it. An argument like yower self. For if it were true, that the lifting up of Moses' hands did signify prayer, yet doth not yower reason hold in form of a good consequent. For it may signify an other thing beside prayer. That the lifting up of Moses' hands did signify prayer, you say, Fol. 43 a it is evident by consent of all men, and bring but one, both evil quoted and nothing for yower purpose. Consider yower words: Chrisostome sayeth libro primo de orando ad Deum, it is: Libro secundo de orando Deum, mend yower book Sirrah. Calf. How did Moses preserve the people of Israel in the wars? Did he not deliver unto his scholar his armour, and host, but he himself set his earnest prayer against the multitude of his enemies? Thereby teaching us that the prayer of the righteous is more available, than armour, or horse men? Thus much S. Chrisostome in deed. Mart. But where is there, in all this sentence, one clause, yea one word that sayeth: The lifting up of Moses' hands did signify prayer? Of the lifting up of Moses' hands . There is noon to be seen: All is spoken in the commendation and force of prayer: by which Moses conquered Amalech, yet not without the lifting up of his hands. For as the scripture sayeth: When Moses lifted up his hands, the Israelites overcome, Exod. 17. when he did let them fall Amalech had the victory: There are two actions, lifting up of the hands, and prayer. If prayer only had been necessary, he might have made it secretly, and continued it without pain, and never needed Aaron and Her to stand on both sides to bolster up his hands. For prayer may be made without lifting up of hands, and great weariness of the body. Now whereas Moses prayed with his heart, and lifted up his hands, M. Calf. can not well include them in one. For if he make them both one, and will have the lifting up of Moses hands to signify prayer only, then must he make one thing in one respect to be a figure of itself, which is impossible. For things themselves can not be figures of themselves. That he might have made his prayer without lifting up of his hands, and continued the same without pain, without Aaron and Her on both sides to bolster them up, no man doubteth. Tertullia. li. 1 adver. Marcio. & 2. Tertullian saith: Now verily why did Moses then only pray sitting, with his hands cast abroad, when jesus fought against Amalech, where as in such perplexity, he should rather have commended his prayer, by falling down upon his knees, with knocking his breast with his hands, and leying his face flat upon the ground, except it were because, where the name of jesus was mentioned, which should fight in time to come, against the devil, Habitus crucis erat necessarius. there the very form, and habit of the cross was necessary, by which jesus should carry away the victory. Here Tertullian declareth that if nothing had been to be signified in the lifting of Moses' hands, but prayer, it might better have been made with kneeling and knocking of the breast, and prostrating himself upon the ground, but because the holding up of his hands did prefigure the cross of Christ, who should fight against the devil, as he did then against Amalech, it was necessary for him to express the figure of the cross in such manner, as he did. Where is now yower consent of all sir? Can yower number come but to one, and that one speak never a word at all of the lifting up of hands in either of the places which you allege? Alas I pity yower case. There is great lack, and evil store, where one is all. You are such a weakling and in danger of such famine, that I think you will starve before you come to yower full groweth, and never prove a good ox to tread out the true corn in Christ's flower, unless you make better provision, but to the matter. Fol 44. a Folly 28 a De 5. Heraes quod vult. Deum cap. 2. What fond toy come into yower idle brain, when you said, the lifting up of Moses' hands did not signify the figure of the cross? Did you not see in my book, this saying of S. Augustine, Nobiscum est Moses ille etc. With us is that Moses, the great friend of God: who to the end he might overthrow his enemies, held up his hands to heaven, even then showing the figure of Christ's cross? Christ's cross prefigured by the lifting up of Moses' hands. Lib. 4. de Trinitate cap. 15. Calf . Did you not see in the next side of the same leaf, this saying out of the same father? Ille superbissimus spiritus etc. That proud spirit is discomfited and overthrown by the cross of our lord which was prefigured by the hands of Moses? And if you saw them, why did you dissemble them? Why did you not frame an answer to them? Make they nothing to the purpose? Construe them and see: Moses ille, that Moses, magnus amicus Dei, the great friend of God, est nobiscum, is with us, qui the which, ut, that, vinceret hostem praeliantem, he might overcome his enemies warring against him, manus ad coelum extendit: Lifted up his hands to heaven, iam tunc figuram crucis Christi ostendens, even then showing the figure of Christ's cross. Mart. Well done, how say you now sirrah? Is not figura crucis Latin, for the figure of the cross? and ostendere Latin to show, and manus Moysi, Moses' hands? See you not by this time, that the lifting up of Moses' hands did prefigure the cross of Christ? Well done, to the next. Ille superbissimus spiritus, that most proud spirit, Calf. negans transitum, denying passage ad terram promissionis to the land of promiss, superatur is overcomed, per crucem domini, by the cross of our lord, quae, the which, praefigurata est, Mart. was prefigured, manibus Moysi, with Moses' hands. How say you now, is not figura caucis Latin, for the figure of the cross, and ostendere Latin to show, and manus Moysi Moses' hands? What say you to this? Did not Moses' hands prefigure the cross, being lifted in such sort as they were? What will you have plainer? recant for shame, no shift will serve you. You can not say that S. Augustine taketh figuram crucis, the figure of the cross, to be the death of Christ, for an external figure of a thing can not be one with the thing itself, and S. Augustine sayeth not, Moses' hands did show the cross, but figuram crucis, the figure of the cross, which argueth that you can not make the figure of the cross, and the cross, which is the death of Christ, to be all one, unless you will make. S. Augustine fall into the Manichees heresy, and say that Christ's passion was figurative, and not true, and in deed, which is too soon for Satan's purpose to begin as yet. The harvest is not ripe, nor the harvest men framed to that jewer, albeit some be more readier than some. amongs whom take heed M. Calf. that he be not accounted one, that hath separated himself from the unity of Christ's church, and saith that the sincerity of God's ordinance was refused within two hundred years after Christ, Fol. 96 a Fol. 85 b and that sithence Syluester's time, in most parts of Christendom a man could not have espied any piece of sincerity, having as many eyes as Argus, and counterfeiting a new religion, profaneth the sacraments of the church, breaketh the old ordinances, and contemneth all the ancient fathers in comparison of himself, and thinketh that he and his only have the true meaning and sense of God's word, such as the holy Ghost never revealed before these latter days. For of such facts a vehement presumption is soon gathered. Lib. 20. ca 8. de civi. Dei. Fol. 43. b You find fault with me for interpreting those words of S. Augustine, Manibus in figuram crucis extensis, his hands held up a cross, and would have it word for word interpreted, Manihus his hands, extensis, stretched out, in figuram crucis in the form of a cross. That men may not think that you have no just cause to quarrel, I pass not a point to confess an oversight in the interpretation of those words: for if I did, you should have no advantadge by it. For whither Moses' hands were stretched out in the form of a cross, or held up a cross, it maketh against yower assertion, and proveth plainly that it prefigured the sign of the cross, as is proved by the places of S. Augustine recited before. Nor have we as you foolishly surmise by that allegation bewrayed our ignorance: for a man may hold up his hands a cross, Fol 43. b and never need to put one hand over an other, and frame as you say a S. Andrew's cross, Neither need we say that Moses to represent the cross which we have in the church, put one of his hands under his other elbow, which were a strange thing to be done, and meet for some tumbler. For if he had but held up his hands, the very holding up of them had prefigured, and represented the mystery and sign of the cross. For as S. Cyprian sayeth by lifting up the hands, S Cyprian de coena domini. Arnobius li. 8 adversus gentes. Fol. 43. b. the mystery of the Cross is represented, unto us. And Arnobius sayeth, Cum homo porrectis manibus orat, signum Crucis est. When a man prayeth having his hands stretched out it is a sign of the cross. But let me take yower own interpretation and see what argument may be builded of it, against you. You say, the stretching fooorth of hands in the figure of a cross, (for so you mean) is at the arms end, as Christ's was on the cross, but the stretching forth of Moses' hands, was in the figure of a cross, at the arms end, ergo it was like the stretching of Christ's hands on the cross, and so consequently did prefigure the cross, as by yower own interpretation it is plainly convinced. I would thank you for it, but it was against yower william. As for the greek Υ Pythagoras letter, Fol. 44 a which you say was the old figure of the cross, and have no better proof for it, than a glass window in a gallery at Lambeth, I will leave it to the painter, and glazier, until you can show more antiquity for that, than we can for this. And sing you make yower self so skilful an antiquary, and learned in old monuments, save yower poor credit, and small honesty, and bring forth but one precedent of scripture, and antiquity, contrary to the form of the cross which we use, and to instruct poor souls that would learn, recite but one place, or express text of scripture, Fol. 44 a which is (as you say) against the having of the sign of the cross, Non facies tibi sculptile, thou shalt make to the self no graven thing, Will not serve for it. Hitherto against yower fond awnswers, to the authorities of the fathers brought to prove that the sign of the cross was not foreshown by the figures of the law. Now let us hear whither you had just cause of laughter with indignation against my argument made, Fol 44 a upon the place of S. Augustine, and thence proceed to yower replies against the predictions of the prophetts. S. Augustine's words be these. That most proud spirit mediator to bring men to hell etc. is discomfited by the cross of our lord, Lib. 4. de Trinitate cap. 15. which was prefigured by the hands of Moses. To this mayor proposition of S. Augustine's, I added this minor, and conclusion. But by Moses' hands, the sign of the cross, was prefigured, ergo by the sign of the cross, devils are overcomed. Now sir is there, nor wit, nor common sense, (as you say) in this argument? Fol 44. a Or was S. Augustine, in yower judgement, so wittlesse and void of common sense, that he understood not what he said, when he made that mayor proposition? or is the minor, so far out of square, that it can not be joined with the mayor? Or is the conclusion so absurd that it can not follow of the premises? judge by yower own argument: you would have it thus. Fol 44. a devils are discomfited by that which Moses' hands prefigured: but Moses' hands prefigured the sign of the cross, ergo by the sign of the cross devils are discomfited. Is not this all one in effect? Have you not the same matter, and the same sense, that I had in mine? And have altered nothing, but added a term, and left out certain words, which I added to make it more plain, Which doth not infringe the substance and ground of the argument, but the form and fashion only? And will you laugh with indignation at an argument all one in effect with yower own, because it is not in mode and figure? Doth not yower Logic teach you, that the argument that lacketh mode and figure is not to be reproved as evil, nor the former of it, void of wit and common sense, if it be reducible to any mode and figure? Have you not heard of many such in Logic? And if you have forgot this, may we not laugh (not as you do with indignation (for that may welbe called a dogs laughter) but with good reason at yower malapertness in finding fault with that, which to no man that hath wit, or common sense, seemeth reprehensible? Weigh it well M. Calf. and for proof of the minor, which you think worthy to be denied, seek to that which I said even now of the lifting up of Moses' hands. Now to his cross answers against the sign of Tau, The sign of Tau. Fol 44 b he professeth himself to be a man of great learning, and to have deep sight in many sciences, and yeat when it cometh to trial, he is proved to utter nothing but idle fumes, and vain toys, to whom I am somewhat beholding. For where before, to instruct such young scholars as I am, he said nothing, now for my further learning, he will add somewhat, which in the end shallbe, for any good reason or wisdom, less than nothing. Hear it I beseech you, for yower instruction as well as for mine. Tau (sayeth he) which Ezechiel spoke of, Calf. did not figure our cross, for the prophets spoke Hebrewe, and the Hebrew character is a very pair of Gallows. Here, it is to be noted, Mart. that either M. Calf. hath not charitably accompanied his brethren, neither to Tyburn, nor to S. Thomas of Waters, and taken a true view, and proportion of the Gallows, either that he is not so good an Hebrew, as by pronouncing his words Noah and Elissha, after the sound of that tongue, as the parrot doth her 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he would make the poor prenteses of London believe. For albeit the Hebrew character somewhat resemblethe a pair of Gallows, yet hath it not the very figure of a Gallows. A difference there is, for one line is longer, and not so smothelye drawn neither above, nor beneath, as the Gallowe posts are. Werfore unless the Gallows that he saw last, was jointed, for some displeasure done to the brotherhood, in one post, and made shorter than an other like a jambus, I marvel that M. Calf. would so definitively say, that the Hebrew character is a very Gallows. He might have had a truer figure and proportion of a very gallows in an other Hebrew letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, if his sight had been good, but that he would needs play the gallows, and to bring men in hatred with the cross, term it a very gallows, as some preachers about Canterburye have done. But how fondly he faileth in this, and betrayeth his ignorance in the Hebrew character, you shall hear. The characters which the old Hebrews used when Moses, and the prophets wrote, were somewhat differing from those which we have now, and especially the last letter Tau, as it is evident by S. Hierome, In 9 Ezech. upon the ninght of Ezechiel, where he sayeth: Antiquis Hebraeorum literis quibus hody utuntur Samaritani extrema Tau litera crucis habet similitudinem, The Hebrew letter Tau hath the true form of our cross. quae in Christianorum frontibus pingitur, & frequenti manus inscriptione signatur. That is to say. In the old ancient letters of the Hebrews, which the Samaritans use at this present, the last letter Tau hath the likeness and form of the cross, which is painted in the forehead of the Christians, and signed with often impression of the hand. Thus much S. Hierome: who with painful travail, long study, and great charged, attained a great excellency in the Hebrew tongue: where note first, that in calling them the old letters of the Hebrews, he declareth, that they which were used in his time, were new and differing from the other. As if we would say, this was the old fashion, this was the old coin, this was the old law, it is to be understanded, that now we have a new fashion, a new coin, and a new law, differing from the other. Secondarilie in saying that the Samaritans use those characters at this present, he proveth not only a manifest difference, but declareth that in his days they were used, yea and seen, no doubt of himself. Whereupon he boldly pronounceth, that the Hebrew letter Tau had the very figure and form of the cross, which is painted in Christian men's foreheads, and signed with the often impression of the hand. Wherefore unless M. Calf. will say, that Christian men heretofore, had a gallows painted in their foreheads, and the figure of two posts with a beam overthwhart, signed with often impression of the hand in their foreheads, he can not bring to pass that the Hebrew letter Tau, which Ezechiel writing in Hebrewe used, and at the commandment of God signed in men's foreheads, is a very gallows, nor any man else, but such as with M. Calf will make a quarrel to the gallows, or gallye posts. Upon this place of S. Hierome, every simple soul may reason thus with our great Hebrew man, that sayeth, Fol. 45. a there is no likeness betwixt that Hebrew letter Tau that Ezechiel used, and our cross. The last letter which the old Hebrews had, and Samaritans use at this day, hath the likeness and form of the cross which is printed with the hand, in Christian men's foreheads, but Tau is the last letter, which the old Hebrews had, and Samaritans use at this day, ergo Tau hath the likeness and form of the cross that is printed in Christian men's foreheads. And that is the true sign of our cross, ergo the old Hebrew letter Tau hath the true sign of our cross. Which part of this argument will M. Calf. deny? the maior is S. Hieromes', Answer directly M. Calf. a man much better learned in the Hebrew tongue than he is. The minor can not be denied it is also S. Hierome's, the premises then being true, and the form of the argument good the conclusion must needs follow. Where is now the great learning of our profound clerk become, that will teach other that which he hath not himself? Is this the addition that he will give for our further learning: Fol. 44. b this and no other? Away with it for shame. It is meeter for Cobblers of queen hive, and drunckardes at S. Katherine's, and others that are well seen in ciathis ebriorum, than for those which profess then selves master readers in characteribus Hebraeorum. We are taught an other lesson for our further learning, and truer instruction of the blessed father S. Hierome, more sound and strong, than can be removed with the fantasy of so young an Hebrew. Young for his skill, and old for his malice. For unless he would have willingelye erred, and maliciously deceived, he could not choose but see this place that I have alleged. For it followeth in the very next word to the sentence that he himself recited out of S. Hierome, in the same chapter. Wherefore trust him as you find him. You have S. Hieromes' works, you I mean that be learned, confer the place, and see his subtility, & warn yower friends of it. Nor deaceave, nor be deceived any longer. You that have no sight in the latin● tongue, desire some to peruse the place, and when you have tried the truth cry Vae to him for deceiving you, and shame to yower selves that being wise men believe so foolish a calf. Homi. 14. If any will not believe this, for further instruction he may add the words of S. Chrisostome upon S. Mark, where he sayeth, The mystery of the cross, is showed in the number of three hundred. The letter Tau is a note of three hundred, whereupon it is said in Ezechiel. Cap. 9 And thou shalt writ Tau, in the foreheads of them, that mourn. And whosoever hath that written upon him shall not be killed. For whosoever hath the sign of the cross in his forehead he can not be strooken of the devil: And if that will not content him, take Tertullian more ancient well nigh by ij. hundred years, he sayeth: God did foretell that Christ should suffer persecution, and his Apostles in like sort and all faithful men signed, Illa scilicet nota de qua Ezechiel, etc. with that mark of which Ezechiel speaketh, The sign Tau. in Ezechiel signifieth our cross. our lord said unto me pass in the midst of the gate in the midst of Jerusalem, and give the signs of Tau in the foreheads of men. Tau is a letter of the Greeks, and our Tau is a sign of the cross, which he did portend or foreshow, that it should be in our foreheads in the true and Catholic Jerusalem. This considered, I trust you will better credit the authority of these fathers, declaring manifestly that the old letter Tau which Ezechiel mentioneth hath the likeness of the cross of Christ, printed in Christian men's foreheads, than the folly of M. Calf. that saith it is a very gallows, Fol. 44. b and biddeth, us go to the idol Serapis, If we will have any figure of old time for the cross, which we have in express signification and form showed of God himself, by his holy prophet Ezechiel. But if we had no precedent of antiquity for the sign of the cross, as M. Calfehill full calvishlye cavilleth, what shame were it to take a pattern there? May we not take salutem ex inimicis? Health of our enemies? and instruction out of the gentils writings? The old fathers think it lawful. If there were a jew in England M. Calf. that wrote the Hebrew characteres so fair and fine as no man in the world could counterfeit the like, I suppose you would think it no shame to yower worship, nor dishonour to yower person, to go unto him, and purchase a copy of his characters. But to instruct so long a reader at Paul's, so old a M. of art, and so cunning a Bachelor of Divinity as you are, I will declare for yower further learning, and better instruction, because I perceive you content yower self with English Doctors, and do but skim over the ecclesiastical histories, and ancient fathers, I, I say, being sometimes usher of Winchester will declare that this sign was not in the idol of Serapis, by any knowledge of the Egyptians, but by the secret disposition and eternal providence of God. Socrates an ancient historiographer, talking of the idol Serapis, amongs other things, sayeth thus. But I do not think that the priests of the Egyptians foreknew the coming of Christ, and made the sign of the cross. The cross set in Serapis by the providence of Coll 1. For if the mystery of the coming of our lord was hid (as the Apostle sayeth) and kept privy from the prince of naughtiness the devil, how much more was it kept privy from his servants the Egyptian priests? but the providence of God did make this before, that that might be done in questioning about those letters, which was showed in the Apostle S. Paul. Act 17. For he enriched with the holy Ghost, brought many of the Athenians to the faith, at what time, as he expounded those things which were written in the altar, as he in his own opinion thought best: except peradventure some man will say that God wrought, in the Egyptians priests, as he did in Balaam and Caiphas. For they also are said to have prophesied. Thus far Socrates: where note (good readers) that if we had to go to Serapis, M. Calf. by sending us to Serapis, for a pattern of the cross, sendeth us to the providence of God. for a pattern of our cross, as M. Calf. would have us, we should go to that which God himself foremade, to that which God by his providence ordained, to that which in those letters he would ha-prophecied, and so directly to God's ordinance, and have in Serapis that blessed sign, which according to the old tradition and interpretation of their holy letters, signified vitam futuram, the life to come. Now a word of his great marveling, and my wondering to shut up this chapter. Fol 45. a b Calf. I marvel quoth M. Calf. what joy come into yower idle head, when for a proof of the undoubted sign of the cross, you bring forth the words of the Psalm, O lord the light of thy countenance is sealed on us. Mart. And I wonder what brainsick passion pierced yower wit, when you devised to charged me with that which I never said, nor any indifferent man can gather of my words. To declare that you devise matter of marveling as a vice doth of laughter on a scaffold, when he hath nought to say, I will repeat my words of which you take occasion to marvel. In the thirty. leaf and second page, which according to yower promiss you quote not after yower appointed order, because belike the reader should not confer the place, Esa 49. and see yower false iuggingle, I say thus. Again by his said prophet, he sayeth: Behold I will lift up my hands to all nations, and set up my sign on high to all people. That sign sayeth: S. Hierome is undoubtedly the sign of the cross, which God also signified in the same prophet, Esa 66. and put (as S. Hierome there declareth) in our foreheads, that we may freely and frankly say: Psal. 4. Signatum est super nos, lumen vultus tui domine. O lord the light of thy countenance is signed and sealed upon us: Thes are my words repeated orderly as they lie in the book: Now sir in all this where find you that the words of the Psalm are brought for an undoubted proof of the sign of the cross? Is yower skill so small, that you can not conceive what is meant by so small a sentence set out in English? Is yower eye sight so dim that you can neither see the name of Isaiah and S. Hierome in the text, neither the 66. chapter quoted in the margin? But when I bring a sentence to one purpose, must you wrest it to an other, when I speak out of Isaiah, must you answer out of Ezechiel? when I cite S. Hierome in one place, must you take his words spoken in an other place? I am sorry for it, and wish you a guide to direct yower steps, and some Collirium to purge yower eyes, least if you continue in such blindness, you fall into the ditch, and draw to the increasing of yower own damnation diverse silly souls with you. Did you not see that first I brought the saying of the prophet Esai, in the 24. chapter, and S. Hierome's interpretation upon that place for the cross, and afterward for further evidence of the same noted the 66. chapter of the said prophet, and S. Hierome declaring that God did put that sign in our foreheads, that when we had received that sign in our foreheads, at baptism, and learned the faith of Christ, we might freely and franckely say, Signatum est super nos lumen vultus tui Domine? O lord the light of thy countynance is signed and sealed upon us? And if you did see it, why did you dissemble it? Is it not evident enough that the words of the psalm used in that place by S. Hierome declare the end why God would have that sign to be printed in men foreheads? and that the end was nothing else, but that when they had received that sign at baptism, and were now made children of inheritance and lightened with the light of faith and grace, they might rejoice in God, and sing that joyful song. O lord the light of thy countenance as signed and sealed upon us, we are sure of thy favour, and certain of thy grace, for we have thy signet, we have thy seal, we have that mark which thou wouldst to be set in the foreheads of all thy faithful? And if this be not plain enough what is plain? Certes when I wroteit, I took it to be plain enough for all that had wit to conceive, or eyes to see. How soever it be, yower shifting vain was very barren, when this was devised, and yower copy far spent, when this refuge was sought to put it in the readers ears, that we are so insensible, as to think, that either the wood in the rood loft, Fol. 45. b. or Crucifix on the altar is the light of God's sustenance, or that it can be printed in the fleashly foreheads with a finger. Such imaginations are to gross, and heathenish, unfit, either to be uttered in mouth, or conceived in heart of one Christian against an other. And certes M. Calf. if there were any such evangelical charity in you as Christ requireth, such a surmise should never have entered into yower heart, much less have been spoken with tongue and uttered in print to yower perpetual infamy. Take heed: Qui amat periculum, peribit in eo. Ecclesi. 3. M. Calves. brawl about the showing of the cross from heaven to Constantine . He that loveth danger shall perish in it. Yower brawl made about the shewing of the sign of the cross from heaven to Constantine, the great may welbe compared to an angry and choleric ruffians fight. For as he in his vehement passion, wearieth himself with vain blows, and openeth his body to the enemies sword: right so by yower trifling talk, you have opened yower gross ignorance, and given the adversary great advantage to trip you. first you confess it to be true that a cross in the fourth signification, such as I spoke of, was showed from heaven in the time of grace, wherein you are contrary to yower self, and injurious to me: for you said in the beginning of this article, that this sign was not showed from heaven in the time of grace, Fol. 41 b and that if either of those signs was prefigured in the law of nature, foreshown by the signs of Moses' law, etc. You did me wrong in reproving of me. Fol. 45 b Secondly you say I have good testimony for this, wherein you are a liar in saying that there is no lawful precedent of the sign of the cross, Fol. 151. a but call it an idle devise of man. Fol. 45. thirdly that God commanded him to make that sign, and carry it in his standard, wherein you are contrary to yower self, Fol. 44. a for you say a little before that it is against God's word, to have and occupy the sign of the cross. Fol. 46. b Fourthly you confess that Constantine set up his cross in the market place to the end it might there remain as a testimony of the power of God, wherein you are contrary to yower self, Fol. 26 a for in the first article you say that the cross was never received upon good occasion. Fol. 46 a Fiftelye you say, that whosoever did behold that sign of the cross, might by and by conceive, of whose religion this Emperor was, and in whose name he overcame his foes, wherein you are contrary to yower self, for in the first article you say that a rood, or crucifix are not able to show whose men we are: Fol. 33. a as the print in the money doth show whose the coin is. wheresoever that image and superscription is stamped, there is it certain, who hath right to the coin. But who so ever hath the figure or stamp of a cross upon them, show not thereby whose servants they are. Sixthlye that at the first gathering of the church together newelye come from the gentiles, Fol. 46. a the visible sign of the cross was thought very necessary. Wherein you are contrary to yower self, for the first gathering of the church together from the gentillls, was by Christ and his Apostles. And if at that time it was thought very necessary to have the visible sign of the cross, then was there either some precept or counsel given by Christ and his Apostles to have that sign, but you say, Christ left no precept of his cross, amongst us. Fol. 34. a b The Apostles never used the sign of the Cross, nor gave any counsel, or commandment for it. Seventhly you grant that by the cross, as an outward mean, men might be brought by a little and a little to think better of Christ and serve him. Fol. 7. a Fol. 11. a Which is both contrary to yower doctrine in our preface, where you call Images dumb doctors, which take out nothing else but lessons of lies, and bring no knowledge, but blind in ignorance: and also to all your discourse in the ninth Article, where you say, that no cross can tell you (that is a Christian man, as I think) for so you speak in yower own person, Fol 167. a Six contradictionum opeaning of one story. that Christ come once into the world, and so forth. And is not this a great foil for you. Six contradictions so manifest, so evident, so open, in so little room in the opening of one story, without shame, of the world and fear, to deceive the simple, besides lies and other smothering smokes? O M. Calf: where were the two functions of yower soul, sensus & memoria, sense and memory? be they both lost, and yet you take upon you to go about like a peddler, with a farthel of lies? Beware what you do, Fol. 36. a you said even now, Mendacem oportet esse memorem: A liar must have a good memory. The Philosopher Aristotle saith: Fumo & halitu carbonum, homines aggravantur & plerunque exanimantur: De sensu & sen●. Men are troubled with the smoke and breathing of coals, and often times styfled. And so may you with the smoke of untruths, smother of lies, breathing of falsehoods be quickly confounded. Besides these six contradictions you mingle with the history certain notable lies: for you say that the sign was not showed from heaven to confirm Constantine's faith, but to put him in assurance of the victory, Luc. 5. which is very false. For it was as well showed from heaven, first to bring him to the faith, and then confirm him in it, as it was to put him in assurance of victory. Lib 1. ca 4 Consider the story. It is written in the Tripartite history, that Constantine desirous to vanquish and overcome Maxentius, and deliver the Romans from his tyranny, thought what God he might have, to aid him in the war: For he knew, that the Gods which Diocletian did worship, were able to do nothing, and that his father contemning, the pagans religion, lived in much felicity: And whiles he was in this meditation, he saw in his sleep the sign of the cross, placed very bright in the element, and angels saying unto him, O Constantine in this overcome. By this it appeareth that Constantine was yet neither Christian nor earnest Pagan. The Pagans Gods he detested, as impotent, the Christians lord and God, he knew to be omnipotent, yet God the son crucified for them, he knew not. Now because he should know him, and believe in him, and have him for his aid and secure in the battle, this sign was showed him from heaven: this miracle was wrought. And was not this M. Calf. to instruct him and confirm him in the faith? The end of miracles. Lib. 2. ca 8. de civit. Dei. Capit. 62. quaest. ex novo testamen . To what end were all Christ's miracles, but to declare himself to be god, and to confirm men in faith and belief of the same? Read you not in S. Augustine, that before the world believed, miracles were necessary, ut crederet mundus, that the world might believe? Have you not seen this in sentence him? Signs and virtues were done of the Apostles for that end, that infidels might be alured to the faith? And shall this sign be showed from heaven not to instruct and confirm him the faith? What vanity is this? to shameless M. Calf. too shameless, leave it, or else you shalbe but a vain liar. The principal end was to instruct him and confirm him in the faith, the second to encourage him with hope of victory, which you might have learned by considering the circumstance of the history, and to what end signs are showed, and miracles wrought: But he that said: 3. Reg. 22. I will go forth and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophetts, would not suffer you so to do. And other lie you make in recounting the showing of the sign to Constantine a personal privilege. For a personal privilege passeth not the person, to whom it was given. It dieth with the person. Then if God would have had this to have been a personal privilege, it should never have passed his person, but have been showed only to Constantine, and seen of him only. It should have died with him, but many other did see it at that time, besides Constantine as the story mentioneth. Lib. 1. cap. 4. Tripar . And Christian princes ever sithence have graved it in their flags, portrayted it in their palaces, and made it in their foreheads, and continued it in their chapels, as experience teacheth. If you will have it a personal privilege, because Christ spoke only to Constantine, and commanded him to make that sign, by like reason you may say that Christ speaking at his last supper to his disciples only, and commanding them to do those things, that he did in remembrance, of him, gave them but a personnall privilege. For he was alone with them in the parlour, he spoke to noon but to them, he said to noon but to them do this in remembrance of me, and being personal it passed with their persons. So ever sithence by yower divinity, there was noon that had authority to celebrated the memory of Christ's passion, so well you have profited in Satan's school. A third lie you make in saying that Constantine was newly converted to the faith, before the apparition of the cross. Fol. 46. a. For as Socrates writeth, even before the appearing of the sign He thought what God he might have to help him in battle, which cogitation argueth that he was not converted, to the faith: for faith is not to seek in what God the faithful shall believe, Lib. 9 ca 9 histo. Eccle. nor of what God he shall have aid. And albeit Eusebius saith, that when he marched against Maxentius with his army, he was a favourer of Christian religion, (as some heathen Emperors were before) and a worshipper of the true God, as the jews are at this present, Yet not withstanding he had not received the sign of our lords passion, as the solemn manner is amongst us, to bring men first to Christ, and make them Christians, whereupon the sign of the cross was showed him in the Element, & ita coelitus invitatus ad fidem, and so from heaven invited and called to the faith, he seemeth to me no inferior them he was to whom it was said Saul, Saul, why dost thou persecute me? By which you see that he was called to the faith of Christ from heaven, Acto. 22. which was by the apparition of the sign of the cross, and not before, as you falsely affirm. further where you interpret the words in hoc signo vince. overthrow thy enemies in this sign, Fol 46. a Calf. Mart. that is to say in his name, whom this figure representeth, we require you to prove this yower gloze, either by some text of scripture, or authority of some ancient fathers. Yower bore assertion is to be counted lighter than a feather. Yower naked words nought else but puffs of wind: otherwise you for this presumption shallbe taken either for a false glosser, either a perverse corrupter and perverter of God's word. In all scripture I believe you shall not find, signum, taken for Nomen, (that is to say) this word sign, for the name of God. If you say the name of God, is glorious, and add further, that whatsoever we ask in his name, we shall obtain, whatsoever is to be asked of us, must be asked in his name, I grant it, and all Christian men confess, that there is no other name under heaven, by which we may be saved, but the name of Christ, with all we say that our saviour Christ who made his holy name so glorious, and promised us salvation, and all that we desire, in his name, doth also promise in this place, victory to Constantine, in the sign of the cross. He said not overcome in my name, Christ said not to Constantine, overcome in my name but in this sign. but in hoc signo vince. Overcome in this sign. He said not, overcome in his name, whom this sign representeth, but in this sign which the element showeth. And as he promised it, so he did perform it, in that sign he overcame, his enemies and got the victory. Not that the sign was of force, to fight, but that God gave such power to that sign where it was, that they overthrew their enemies. For proof whereof, read the story again M. Calf. Lib. 1. cap 4. Tripat. In Sozomemus you shall find these words. Christ appeared to Constantine as he was a sleep with the sign, which he saw in the element, and commanded that there should be a figure of that sign made, quae auxilio foret, which should be an aid unto him in the conflicts and skirmishes of his wars: Here I pray you (sir) who is antecedent to the relative, Quae, it is not, figuratio? then belike Christ would have the sign and figure to be an aid to the emperor in his wars, over and besiders figuratum, the figured? He would him to overcome in that sign over and beside, his name whom that sign represented. And sing Christ willed him overcome in that sign, and is able to give sufficient strength and power unto it, and because he promised it, would do it, shall we believe the gloze of yower idle head, and discredit the words of Christ's mouth and say, he bade him not overcome in the sign, but in his name, whom that sign representeth? Not: If Christ had meant as you imagine, it had been as easy for him, to have showed his holy name, from heaven, as it was to show the sign of the cross, and as easy to command the Emperor to writ the name of jesus, and use that, as an aid in war, as it was to command him to make the sign of the cross, and use that. But Christ did it not, not that he would not have Constantine to put his trust and affiance in his name, or to look for victory of any other God, but of him, but that he would bring him to the faith, and declare the mightiness of his power by the sign of the cross, upon which he was crucified, Constantine caused the sign of the cross to be painted. Euseb lib. 1 de vita Constant. Fol. 45 a Calf. Mart. which that it might be known to all the world, Constantine caused the sign of it, to be painted on a pillar at his right hand with this inscription. By this healthful sign, a true token of virtue, I have delivered our city from the yoke of the tyrant and made it free, which words you suppress. Again sir whereas you say, that whatsoever it hath pleased God for his glories sake at any time to do, must not be drawn for example to us, Will you infer upon it, that because all things are not to be drawn for an example, therefore nothing is to be drawn for an example unto us? As because we can not fast forty days, Matt. 4. and 40. nights, shall we not take example to fast one day and one night? Or because we can not feed five thousand with five barley lofes, and two fishes, shall we not take example to feed one or two poor Christians? joan. 6. Or because we can not be so meek, so patiented, so humble, and so ready to give our souls, for our flocks, as he was for the world, shall we not draw unto us the examples of his humility, and of his love towards us? and learn by him to be meek, patiented, humble, and ready to give up ourselves, for his sake? Or because we can not take example of his walking on the water, Matt 14. Luc. 8. to do the like, shall we not take example of his going to jairus house to visit the sick? Alas (good readers) what reason is there in this? Of whom shall we take example, if we take not example of God? who shallbe our pattern, if Christ be not? Whom shall we follow, if not him in all those things which are lawful and possible for us to follow? I trust yower divinity will not deny this M. Calf. and if you do not deny it, then doth yower universalll proposition what soever etc. make nothing against us. Fol. 45. b For if some things that Christ did may be done, although all that he did may not be done, and examples drawn of some things unto us, albeit there can not be of all, there is no inconvenience, How Constantine used the cross. nor let, but that we may be bold upon the commandment of Christ given to Constantine to make the sign of the cross and use it for an aid as he did, and draw example unto us of that virtuous Emperor to make it in our foreheads, to set it up in market places, to erect it at our gates, to bear it in our hands, and honour it as he did. first Christ commandeth nothing that is unlawful, and no other thing than the Christians were commanded of the holy Ghost by the blessed Apostles. Secondarily if his blessed will had been, that this precept should have extended no further than to Constantine, so many ancient, holy and learned fathers would never so highly have commended it, the general councils directed by the holy Ghost, would never have commanded it, the Christians in all ages, and all countries ever sithence, should not without controlment, and threat of God's displeasure, have continued it. Wherefore you may be ashamed to deceive the simple people with such pretenced reasons. And whereas you have said nothing to any effect, to vaunt so confidently, and say: What precedent is this to prejudice my cause? Fol. 46. a As though yower fond general proposition (but in deed particular if malice had not made you blind) forbidding us to take example of God in some things, because we may not take example of him in all, iiij. lies and six contradictions uttered in one story no precedent to prejudice M. Calves. cause. 1. Tim. 1. Cap. 28. Prover. 10 yower vain gloze in perverting and altering God's word, yower iiij. lies, and six contradictions in repeating of one story, were not a sufficient precedent to prejudice yower cause, and discredit you for ever. Yower own conscience would condemn you in this case, unless you repelling conscience, had made a shipwreck (as S. Paul saith) about faith, and said with those Minions, that which the prophet Esai mentioneth: We have put lying our hope, and with lying we are defended. But beware, it is a brickle bridge to go upon, and an evil staff to stay by. The Wiseman sayeth: He that leaneth to lies, feedeth the winds, and the very self same man followeth fleeing birds. Here would I have knit up the knot of Constantine, Contradictions. and passed to an other matter, but that I thought it good to put the reader in mind of certain other contradictions, and an absurd principle. The cross he saith, is necessary, and yet superfluous, tolerable and yet impious. Necessary to make gentils think better of Christ, but superfluous to put Christians in remembrance of Christ. Tolerable among them that come from infidelity, but impious amongst them, that profess Christianity, and that in respect of the abuse? as though the abuse could make a thing good of itself, wicked and impious. His absurd principle is this: talking of such extraordinary means in which he accounteth the cross, he sayeth: Fol. 46. b Calf. Whatsoever our need is through our own default, surely we aught not to have them, that is to say, these extraordinaries aids: God is not pleased with them. Where is this in scripture? Mart. What Prophet: What Apostle, What Evangelist, What council, What father ever taught this doctrine? What reason is there in it? If we stand in need of a thing, yea through our own default, aught we not to have it? What if a Ruffian quarrelling with his companion be wounded, and so stand in need of a surgeon, aught he not to have one? What if a man take a surfeit, and stand in need of a physicians counsel, aught he not to have it? What if yower self M. Calf. stood in need of a friend to put you in remembrance of yower duty, aught you not to have one? Yes verily, and God wilbe nothing displeased with it, and so likewise in this case. Charity that knitteth all men togheter in one body with Christ willeth us to do all that we can to edify one an other. Ephes 4. As appeareth by S. Paul, where he sayeth: Christ hath given some Apostles, some Prophets, some Evangelists, some Pastors, and Doctors to the consummation of the saints, into the work of ministration to the edifying of the body of Christ. Seeing than we be appointed ministers to edify the body of Christ (that is to say all Christians) we must omit nothing that may appartaine unto the edifying of them. Wherefore if they stand in need of such extraordinary means, as you M. Calf. mention, and may be edified by them, they aught to have them, and we to give them. For we are appointed ministers under Christ in aedificationem, 1. Cor. 14. to edifying, and all things must be done as S. Paul saith to edify. He himself understanding that the Corinthians could not receive the mysteries of Christ, 1. Cor. 3. but stood in need as yet of mild and sweet doctrine, saith: I gave you milk to drink, and not hard meat, for as yet you could not digeast it. Thereby teaching us to condescend to the infirmity of our brethren, and to do all that we can to edify them. Our nature then being dull and heavy, and needing many helps to provoke it to the contemplation of heavenvly things, and meditation of Christ's death and passion, we may use extraordinary means to stir us up the more, and bring to memory the merits of Christ's death. And sing amongst all other means, the sign of the cross doth most lively set Christ before our eyes, as preaching doth declare unto the ears, there is no reason, but we may have it, as God by the Apostles, Christ in Constantine, the holy Ghost by the prelates of his church, in 2. general councils have commanded us. another principle M. Calf. propoundeth unto us (good readers) fathred upon Chrisostome Homi. 44. in 23. Fol. 46. b Matt. in opere im perfecto. It is this. Calf. before the knowledge of God was in men it was reason that the power of God should be known by the holiness of men, but now it is madness. Mart. Here how faithfully he demeaneth himself, consider I beseech you: first Chrisostome in all that Homily hath no such sentence, but among other things he saith. good works necessary to salvation. An heretic double the child of Hel. The charged of interpreting scriptures committed to Priests To all men generally these two are necessary to salvation, true faith and good works. Again he sayeth, he that goeth over to heresies, is double the child of hell, first because he forsaketh the truth which he did hold. Secondarily because he is become an enemy of truth. Besides he saith. Priests are the key keepers to whom the charged of teaching the word of God, and interpreting the scriptures is given, with many notable things, which M. Calf. could not or would not see, and consider that, as he useth him for a witness in some points, so he should be pressed to admit his testimony in others, which would utterly condemn him and all his. But what meaneth M. Calf. by this trow you? Must not the power of God be known by the holiness of men? Will he be always like himself, and deny the scripture? Doth not Christ say: Matt. 5. Sic luceat lux vestra, let yower light so shine before men, that they may see yower good works, and glorify yower father which is in heaven? doth not the holy ghost say unto us by S. Paul, 1. Cor. 6. God glorificed by our good woortes. Glorify and carry God in yower bodies? And if we must glorify God by our good works, and carry him in our bodies by holiness of life, must not his power be known by our good works and holiness? If M. Calf. deny this, I would feign learn of him, what it is to glorify God, if it be not to make his omnipotency and mighty power known unto all the world? But he will say, Calf. his secretary wrote evil, and the compositour set worse, and the overseer or Corrector did oversee it worst of all. It is in the 24. Homily of the same work fathered upon Chrisostome. Matt. So is it also that the priests, Put a weighty loode upon them that come to penance. Priestez enjoined penance . By which words and others in the same place, it may be proved, that priests inioned men penance. What sayeth M. Calf. to that? Forsooth Erasmus affirmeth it undoubtedly to be noon of Chrisostomes' work. Ah sirrah, in one place and in one Homily Chrisostome spoke this, and he spoke not that? what indifferency is this (good readers)? were it reason that he should say, this is Chrysostom's saying, and yet say, that, that is not his saying, which he writeth in the same Homily? I dare say you think not so: yet such shifts must protestants use to defend their heresies. In deed I acknowledge that the author of that work hath such a saying, in that Homily, and meaneth, that it is but madness for men to seek for miracles, and not to believe the mighty work, and dreadful power of God, unless there be such holiness in men, that they work such miracles, and do such cures as S. Paul did by the Napkins, and Partletts, that were sent from his body. But what is this against the Cross? M. Calves. Similitude, Fol. 46. b thinketh M. Calf. that this similitude, As it is madness to have the power of God known by the holiness of men, So the sign of the Cross is not only superfluous, but also impious, will hold? It resembleth no more the nature of a similitude, than doth an ox of an elephant, saving that it hath the usual terms which every benchwhistler can use. For a similitude is a resembling of one thing to an other, What is required in a Similitude. which must in some point be like, to that unto which it is resembled. It must contain four things, two that must be likened, and 2. wherein they must be likened. Let this be one for an example. As they grievously offend, who with poison infect the common fountain, whence all men fet their water: So do they deserve very evil of the commonweal, who do corrupt the prince his mind with naughty counsel. Here the common fountain, and princes mind are 2. things likened. The infecting of the fountain with poison, and corrupting the princes mind with evil counsel are the things wherein they are likened. The resembling of one to the other is good. The foresaid similitude which M. Calf. seemeth to make of S. Chrysostom's words is a noun heteroclite, maimed in two of his principle parts. If he had said thus: As it is madness to have the power of God known by the holiness of men: So it is impious to have his glory set forth by the cross, I would have denied the second part of this similitude, and showed reason of diversity. But sing he urgeth not so much, I will use no more words than need, only this I say, sing M. Calf. granteth the sign of the cross to be not only tolerable, Fol 46. b but also necessary, as Constantine used it, He may also grant it to be not only tolerable, but also necessary as Christians now a days use it. For we use it no otherwise than Constantine did. The Christians use the cross no otherwise than Constantine did . He made the sign of the cross in his forehead, so do we: he caused it to be painted in a table: so do we. He set it up at his court gate, so do other Christian princes in their palaces. He wrought it into his banner, used it in the wars: So do we into our flags and ensigns. He set one of gold in the church upon S. Paul's tomb, we set some of stone, timber and metal in churches, upon the altars, in rood lofts, windows, and so forth. He did honour it calling it: A singular sign, and ensign a token of much virtue and power, we reverence it with like epithetons, and titles of honour. To be short, We do use it as Constantine did use it, and no otherwise than Constantine used it. If the adversaries reply, and say that Constantine did never cap, nor kneel, unto the cross, let them prove that negative, by scripture, council, or doctor: in this point I will stand with the best of them all, that no ancient writer, no famous historiographer, savouring of antiquity, ever wrote, that the virtuous Emperor Constantine did not Cap, nor kneel, nor do any other honour to the sign of the cross. Which negative when they prove, charing cross will say they lie, and this, till then. Now to an other, M. Calfehill, perceiving that the ancient histories make so often mention of the cross showed from heaven, that it can not be denied, but that it was a very true Cross, which was first made in julianus and the jews apparel, Lib. 5. ca 50 Tripat. with a shooer of rain, and afterward showed from heaven, when they would have builded the temple again, gladly forgetteth his vain assertion, that the sign of the cross was not prefigured in the law of nature, nor foreshown by the signs of Moses' law, nor denounced by the prophets, nor shown from heaven in the time of grace, and as though he had never affirmed any such thing, passeth it away in silence, and findeth fault with the application, Fol. 48. b and yet giveth no cause why: but resembleth me to a fool, that walketh in a net, and to children that think they can not be seen, when their heads be hid: which is as much to the purpose, as to prove a minister an honest man, some jester would begin to make a discourse, of one that hath a head like an ape, eyes like an owl, ears like a Calf. A mouth like a mastyfe, teeth like a Tiger, and tongue like a dragon, and say no more, as this Wiseman doth. That done, (finely as he imagined) fault is found with a conclusion where I made noon, but declared a cause, why God foreshowed the sign of the cross by so many figures in the law of nature, Why the cross was prefigured. Moses, and the prophets, which was that we should highly esteem the thing, which those figures signified, and believe that as those figures wrought temporal benefits to the Israelites. So the truth (that is the cross itself) shall work to us, believing in jesus Christ, and having that sign printed in our foreheads, the like benefits etc. When he heard this, as one set suddenly in a chafe, Calf. Fol. 48 b he demandeth who told me, that the truth of those figures was the cross itself? then how I prove that those figures wrought temporal benefits to the Israelittes? Mart. Gone 2. Temporal benefits wrought to Israelites by the figures which signified the cross. Gene. 48. Exod. 17. Ibidem . To cool that choleric heat, I answer, Damascenus, Cassiodorus, Cirillus, Ambrose, Origenes Augustinus, Tertullian and justinus martyr told me, that the truth of those figures, was the Cross on which Christ died, and not only Christ himself. That they wrought to the Israelites temporal benefits, I prove by the scripture. All that was lawful for Adam to eat in paradise, wrought him temporal benefit, before his fall. But the tree of life was lawful for Adam to eat: ergo the tree of life wrought him temporal benefit. The ark of No preserved him and his family from drowning. The blessing of jacob made josephs' children increase into great multitudes upon the earth, Moses' rod brought water out of the rock in the wilderners, the lifting up of Moses' hands got them the victory over Amalech: The wood cast into the river Marah made the water pleasant and sweet to drink, Exod. 15. which was before very unsavoury and bitter. All these were figures of the cross, and the benefits temporal wrought to the Israelites by the mighty power of God through them, as external means, ergo by the figures of the cross temporal benefits where wrought to the Israelites. Thus sayeth the scripture and holy word of God. Calf. Fol 48. b But quoth M. Calf. if they were causes of any good that come, they were causae stolidae, as Tully calleth them, foolish, mean, and instrumental causes, and not efficient. Mart. But where doth Tully tall them so M. Calf.? where doth he writ, of Adam and the tree of life planted in paradise? Where writeth he of Noah's ark, jacobs' blessing, Moses' rod, streking of the rock, lifting up of his hands, the wood cast into the river Marah, or any such? Tell us for shame, where doth he call them causas stolidas, foolish, mean and instrumental causes, and not efficient? If you be as cunning as ye brag in Tully, note the book, quote the place, assign the chapter? save your poor honesty. We will not cease to call upon you, until you tell us, where Tully calleth them, causas stolidas foolish, mean and instrumental causes, and not efficient. Whatsoever Tully saith of them: we are, sure, that our Logic taught us once, that omnes instrumentales causae sunt in genere efficientium. All instrumental causes are in the nature and kind of the efficient, and so were you as I suppose, before you learned that Tully called them, causas stolidas, The means by which God wrought benefits to his people called, foolish causes. foolish causes. Note here good readers, the fruit of heresy, one that pretendeth to be a Christian, out of Tully findeth occasion to control God's doings. Because he of his infinite mercy was the only efficient cause of all benefits to the Israelites, and used the other as means and instruments to work them by, M. Calf. learneth of Tully to call those means by which god wrought, Causas stolidas, foolish causes. Doth not Satan show himself in his likeness here? Draws he not well toward a thing called Atheism? See to what absurdity the devil will drive him by disputation, Horrible blasphemy. he hath done no more already by his minister, but proved God, (which is horrible blasphemy) a fool. Mark his reason. Whosoever worketh by foolish causes or means, is a fool, but God wrought those benefits to the Israelites by foolish causes, ergo you know what followeth. Which part deny you M. Calf? all worldly wisdom affirmeth the mayor to be true, The minor is yower own: the form good: the conclusion must needs follow. See you not to what absurdities you fall, and profit apace in yower M. school? who but you or one of yower profession would have fallen into such horrible blasphemy? How the new religion is maintained. Arrogancy of heretics . Can not yower doctrine be maintained with the scriptures denied, the councils disauthorised, the father's condemned, but must God be blasphemed? Must the means by which he wrought benefits to his people be called: Stolidae causae, foolish causes? O the arrogancy of heretics. From contempt of men, they fall to blaspheming of God, from inverting the sense of his word, they come to controlling of his wisdom: with them the means that he worketh his benefits, be causae stolidae, foolish causes. And because M. Calf. is sure of it, and proveth it out of Tully, and yet showeth not where we shall find it, men must believe it. But that warrant is not sufficient. Therefore be not deceived (good readers) it is a lamentable case, When a phrase of Tully must control the doings of God in divinity. A practice to be left to the heathenish pagans, and not to be imitated of true Christians: yet such is the wisdom of M. Calf. that to shift the matter that he taketh in hand, he sticketh not to use it, and call the means whereby God worketh, causas stolidas, foolish causes. Fol. 48. b Fol 49 a Calf . And where he sayeth that because I made no distinction of those words which might be diversly taken, and join the truth and cross together, my meaning is with covert speech to deceive the simple, and 'cause them to derive the glory from the truth, and tranffer it to a figure, to have in reverence the idle sign, Mart. and let the thing signified be forgotten, I would some good fellow would tell him in my behalf, that with one breath he uttereth himself to have an evil memory, and a slanderoous tongue. For in the beginning I made a division and distinction of that word that might be diversly taken, and signified in what sense I would have it understood. So that in other places, I needed not to use a vain repetition of one thing: which if M. Calf. remembered, why requireth he a new distinction? If he did not, let him go to school again, and learn the art memorative a little better: or mislike his wit for finding fault where noon can justly be found. That his tongue is slanderoous each man that hath eyes may see. For by the whole discourse of my treatise, M. Calves. tongue slanderoous. it may be seen that I require the sign of the Cross to be erected in churches, set up in high ways, had in private houses, The causes why I require the cross to be set up. Fol. 49. b and printed in in men's foreheads, to make them remember Christ, and by often sight of it, to be brought to the remembrance of his death, and memory of his passion, and so be stirred from vice to virtue, from the love of the world, to the love of God. Yet, as though he had crept into my bosom, and searched the secrets of my heart, (which God only knoweth) he reporteth, that my meaning is by covert speech to deceive the simple etc. and make them forget Christ, which surmise is far unfitting for one that professeth Christian charity and sincerity of the gospel, and very slanderoous. But like gospel, like fruits: where he biddeth me, Fol. 49. a Mark Tertullian's judgement of the figures of the old testament concerning the Cross, I have done it according to his advertisement and marked very well, M Calf. understadeth not Tertullian. Lib. 3 adverse. Marcio. that whereas he studieth to imitate Tully's phrases, he understandeth not Tertullian's sense. For in the very sentence which he allegeth, praedicatio is not taken for preaching, but for predication, (that is foresaying) as each man that considereth the circumstance of the place, and noteth Tertullian's style, may easily see: for my part because the discussing of it is more curious, than necessary, I omit it, and refer the judgement of it to the learned. And return to the examining of the default that he findeth with my application. I said the sign of the Cross was showed Constantine in in his great anxiety, to instruct us that in all anxiety of mind and pensiveness of heart, the Cross of Christ shalbe our comfort, Calf. Fol. 49. b Mart. and the sign a mean to overthrow our enemies. The first part M. Calf. granteth, the last he denieth, and asketh where I find it? As though the very story declaring that Christ commanded the sign to be made, and used as a help, did not convince, that, to all Christians trusting in the merits of Christ's passion, it should so be a mean to overcome their ghostly enemies, as it was to Constantine to overcome Maxentius, especially whereas the Angels showing the sign to Constantine said, In hoc vince: Overcome in this sign. But let us hear M. calves reason why this may not be inferred upon the story. He saith: Calf. Mart. God hath more means of comfort than one, he delivereth his that are in danger by diverse ways. You take much pains to prove that which no man denieth, we grant it. What will you build upon this position against me? will you say thus: Christ hath more means of comfort than one, and delivereth his out of danger by diverse ways, ergo he delivereth noon by the sign of the cross, ergo the cross is no means of comfort? If you make this argument as you can make noon other of this principle against mine assertion, I deny the consequent, and bid you resort to the young scholars, in the parvis school, and consult by what rule in Logic that argument holdeth. And upon consultation with some learned clerks in the faculty, I doubt not but you will say, deceptus perij miser: I was deceived poor man. On like sort when that which you infer upon the apearing of God in a priests attire to Alexander, and serving of Paulinus in the habit of a gardener shallbe examined, and proved to have no likeness in a manner to the apparition of Constantine, and that you can not infer of them that we must have the sign of a priest in his masking garments, (for that is your scoffing term) because God appeared to Alexander in a priests attire, Fol 49. b or that we must have a byshope a gardener, Fol. 51. a when prisoners must so be ransomed, because by Paulinus God delivered some after a strange manner, You will say, I marked not the story well. I remembered not, that God said to Constantine, ●n hoc vince, Overcome in this sign, and said nothing to Alexander. I forgot that Christ appeared unto Constantine the next night, and bid him make the sign of the cross, and use it for a comfort and aid in the wars, and never willed Alexander to make any priests apparel. It could not sink into my head that Christian men both before that time, and ever sithence used the sign of the cross, and had great help by it, which they could never have by a priests apparel. And so when suite of law shallbe commenced against you, Caput quoniam ignorantes, must be your proctor, and illude all the action, with such an exception. Diogenes marveled much at certain grammarians that diligently inquired and searched out the miseries of Ulysses, Diogenes. and were ignorant of their own. So may we justly wonder at this curiosity of M. Calf. who sought out two long histories of Alexander and Paulinus, nothing to the purpose, and forgot that which he had in hand of Constantine, of much importance, and fit for the purpose. For noon but such as lack wisdom, would have omitted to search such circumstances as make against him, and think to blear simple folks eyes with fancies of his own head, coloured with the truth of two histories. Truth may by some outward show be coloured for a time, but it can not be hid long. The Ass that had on the lion's skin and would have made his master afraid, was at length espied by his long ears, and made ridiculous. But peradventure, if M. Calf. were posed of his superintendant, why he dallieth and trifleth, and useth such vain shifts, that each man may aswell espy, as the good man espied his ass by his ears, I think he would answer as a fisherman sometimes controlled for trooblinge the river, The fisher Man's answer. and not suffering the neighbours to have clear water, answered: Nisi sic fluuius perturbetur, me oportebit esurientem mori. Unless the river be thus troubled, I must die for hunger. For certainly unless he should trouble the river in such sort, his eloquence were spent, and 'cause quite marred. The clear water would quickly purge the filthy mud that he stirreth. Mark and you shall see. Lib. 5. cap. 50. Tripar. Sozomenus sayeth, The sign of the cross made in julian and the jews apparel, did signify after the interpretation of some, that the doctrine of the Christians come from God, and that all men aught to be marked with the cross. M. Calf. troobleth the water here, and because men should not believe it, Calf. Fol. 51. b stirreth such a mud, as stincketh of folly a mile of. For he saith: The cross noted julian and the jews to be ꝑsecutors, Mart. ergo it is necessary for us to be noted as persecutors. Where first it is to be noted that he understandeth not the history. julian being a Christian changed his religion, julian a superintendant and named himself a superintendant of the Pagans', and coming into the temples of the pagans, did sacrifice, and counseled his subjects to do the same. Now to declare that he had done very evil in forsaking his religion, and sacrificing to idols, God showed him two strange and wonderful things. Circa occasum Pliadum , For when the vintinage was past, and all grapes gathered, the vines brought forth new grapes, and a shooer of rain falling from heaven made with every drop a sign of the cross in his soldiers apparel. Some said the grapes growing at such unseasonable time, signified that the Emperor should be undone, and his Empire of no long continuance. And the cross did forshewe that the doctrine of the Christians come from God, What the cross signified which was showed to julian. Lib. 5. Tripar. cap. 50. Tripart. and that all men aught to designed with the cross, which interpretation to be true, time tried shortly after sayeth Sozomenus. For he reigned but 3. years, and afterward, under jovinian, and other Christian Emperors the Christian faith and religion floorished. By which you may perceive, the cause of those miracles showed to julian, was to work penance in him, and to make him return unto Christ, and observe that faith and religion which by the sign of the cross was signified to be the true religion that come from heaven, and should go over the world: and not as M. Calf. fansieth to note him to be a persecutor. He was in deed a bloody Tyrant, julian not noted by the cross to be a persecutor. and a terrible persecutor as the story testifieth, but that by the cross he was noted to be such a one, all the divinity in M. calves brain will never prove it. But if it had noted him to be a persecutor: how doth this argument hold? The cross noted julian to be a persecutor, ergo it is necessary for us to be noted as persecutors? Holds it not then times loser, than his wavering head, when he jetteth up and down the streets? Let the Londyners judge, or judge yower self by a like: The bearing of a faggot before the cross in procession, noted the bearer to be an heretic, ergo it is necessary for all that bear faggotts to be noted as heretics. And if there be good reason in the last, think that I have done M. Calf. wrong in controlling the first. further where he sayeth: Fol. 51. b that noon were maked but such as had reneged their faith, If he restraineth his universal proposition, to julian and his company, and that time, when they were marked, we grant it to be true: If he meaneth it more generally, we utterly deny it, as vain, false, and most absurd. For the Christians in all ages were marked with the sign of the cross, as a token of their profession and faith, only peculiar and proper, to the Christians, as I declared before. Fol. 51. b thirdly where he wisheth that we may never have occasion to be marked as julian was. If his wish be, that we never have like occasion to renege our faith, it is godly: If it be, that we should not be marked as julian was with the cross, and when we have forsaken God, be called to penance, by that, or some like visible sign, by which it shall please him to show his mercy towards us, as he did to julian, if he had had grace to receive it, it is most impious and ungodly. For it is to wish and pray that he may not have occasion of grace ministered unto him, to know himself, and return to God. Fourthly in saying, Fol. 51. b The cross always portendeth goodness that the cross doth not always portend goodness, he showeth much ignorance. For he seemeth not to know that God being the only shower of it from heaven, and author of all such strange fights, and miracles worketh all things to good to those that love him. The cross then, being the mean by which it pleased God to signify unto julian, that Christ's religion, and faith come from haven, and that all men ought to be signed with the Cross, could not, but portend unto him great goodness, and have wrought it in deed, if he had not obdurated his own heart like as Pharaoh did. Fiftelye I much marvel why he sayeth, Fol. 51. b that the glittering sign of the Cross in the element, and Crossinge of the jews coats, was but a token of God's wrath and vengeance, and that albeit it was signum Crucis salutaris, the sign of the healthful cross, yet it was not healthful to them etc. The cross showed to julian was a token of the love of God if he could have so conceived it. Lib. 6. ca 43 Tripar. For albeit it signified that God was angry with their enterprise, yet it signified not that only, but also declared his especial love in making them understand that he was God, whom their forefathers crucified, that his death being acknowledged, and faith in his passion conceived they might turn unto him and be saved. And so of likelihood diverse were. For as the story mentioneth, many considering that which happened, and fearing the plagues and stroke of God, returned home to their houses, confessing him to be God whom their fore fathers had nailed upon the cross. Again that the cross otherwise healthful, was not healthful unto them, the fault was in their folly, that would not so demean themselves that they might have benefit by it, and not in the cross, which through the virtue of Christ's passion, is healthful to all that be not a stop, and occasion of the contrary. Thus you see (good readers) that both the examples brought for proof that the sign of the cross was showed from heaven in the time of grace, and also the authorities of the fathers alleged, to declare that it was foreshown by the figures of the law of nature, and Moses, and denounced by the prophetts, stand in their force, and are nothing impaired by M. Calves. battery, nor impugned by his babble. Wherefore his dealing in this case may be well compared to the devise of a politic practiser, knight of the order of Machevel, who understanding that the protestants were discomfited in their rebellion against the king in France, gave out letters to his friends, that the prince had won the field, to comfort them for a time. And sing M. Calf. sayeth: he could not see that the cross of Christ was prefigured in the figures of the old testament, in like manner as Faustus the Manichee cried, that he could not find any thing that apparteyned to the foreshowing of Christ himself, you may say as S. Augustine did of Faustus. Quid autem mirum, si oculos habet, ad legendum, Fol. 41. b Lib 12 ca 30. contra Faust. Manich. cor autem non habet ad intelligendum, qui positus ante ostium dominici secreti, non fide pietatis pulsat, sed elatione impietatis insultat. What marvel is it, if he hath eyes to read, and hath not a heart to understand, who placed before the door of our lords secret, Knocketh not with the faith of piety, but insulteth with elation and pride of impiety. THAT EVERY CHURCH, CHAPEL, AND ORATORY ERECTED TO THE HONOUR AND SERVICE OF GOD, SHOULD HAVE THE sign of the Cross. ARTICLE III HERDED you never (good readers) of the famous-rover Ropers' companion, who having often a jury empaneled upon him, did ever refuse the foreman of the quest, and found some frivolous exception against him, because his guilty conscience knew, that if his verdict might be heard, he should be convicted? The like part playeth M. Calf. in this Article: and because his conscience accuseth him of villainy, and blasphemous words against the cross of Christ, and by plain evidence seethe, that unless he find some foolish shift, to illude the authority of the ancient fathers and general councils, the world would condemn him, first he leyeth some vain exceptions against Abdias, the Apostles companion, that saw, Christ here in earth, and afterward with such slanderoous words revileth the doctors, and fathers of the second council of Nice, and the empress Irene in whose time it was kept, that a man would think some fury of hell, had inflamed his spirit. With his exceptions, against Abdias he filleth much paper, to make a show of some truth, but how vain they are, in part I will declare, the rest because they be but guesses of an idle brain, M. Calves. exceptions against Abdias. Fol. 53 b Calf. Mart. Cap. 1. I will leave to the judgement of the indifferent readers. One exception brought to prove Abdias work to be a legend of lies, is this: he reporteth that Mary the mother of Christ did make a vow of chastity. True it is he did so: we grant it. And is this a strange point in your divinity, and dissonant from all godly learning? Why it is the gospel. M. Calf. S. Luke saith: when the angel said unto our Lady: Ecce concipies & paries filium: Behold thoue shalt conceive and bring forth a son, She answered. How shall this be done, sing I know not man, which soothly she would not have said, Lib de sancta virg. cap 4. The doctors teach that our Lady made a vow chastity. unless she had vowed herself before, a virgin to God, saith: S. Augustine, but because the manner of the Israelites as yet refuseth this, she was dispoused to a just man, not such a one as should violently carry her away, but rather maintain and defend that, which she had vowed, against such as would offer her violence. How be it also, if she had said this only, how shall this be done, and had not added further, because I know no man, she would never have asked, how she being a woman, should bring forth a son, promised her, if she had married to have carnal company with her husband: She night have been commanded to remain a virgin, S. Augustine. in whom the son of God should take the shape of a servant, by miracle meet for it, but she that should be an example to all virgins, jest she alone should be taken to be a virgin, which had deserved to conceive a son without company of man, she dedicated virginity to God, whereas yet she knew not what she should conceive, that in an earthly and mortal body, there might be imitation of heavenly lif●, voto non p●●cepto, amore eligendi, Our Lady made a vow of virginity. non necessitate seruiendi, by vow and not by commandment, by love to choose, and not by necessity to serve. So Christ by his, being borne of the virgin Mary, which determined with herself to remain a virgin, before she knew who should be borne of her, had rather commend holy virginity then command it. Thus far S. Augustine, who proveth by the very words of the gospel that our Lady made a vow of chastity, and yet M. Calf teacheth, that it is a strange point, Fol. 53. b and dissonant from all godly learning. Have ye not a proper minister of him (good readers?) Beginneth he not prettily to practise after his master's ministry, that now even in the spiring of his Apostasy, dareth set out in print, to the view of the world, and sight of the posterity, that a doctrine builded, upon scripture and Gospel of jesus Christ, is strange and dissonant from all godly learning? What will he not venture here after, that beginneth so freashly? diverse ancient fathers besides S. Augustine, Ambrose. Lib ●. in Lucam. thought it no strange doctrine. S. Ambrose sayeth upon S. Luke, that in the virgin Mary, there was: Professio virginitatis, A profession of virginity: (that is to say) She professed herself to be a virgin. Again: Habes propositum, vides votum. Note this M. Calf. Ibidem Lib. 3. de Trinit. S. Hilary. Thou hast her purpose, thou seest her vow. S. Hilary sayeth: The Angle saluteth Mary, and promiseth, that she, being a virgin, should be mother of the son of God Illa virginitatis suae conscia, difficultate facti commovetur: She being witting of her own virginity, was moved with the difficulty of the fact, that is to say. She was troubled with thinking how it should come to pass. Now unless she had determined, with herself to keep her virginity, she would never have been troubled with any such thought. Nature taught her, that if she used the company of man, she might conceive. Wherefore in that she was troubled with the salutation of the Angel, and thinking how it might come to pass, that she should bring forth a son, it is evident, that she made a vow, to continue a perpetual virgin, and never to know man. S. Bede . S. Bede upon S. Luke sayeth: The virgin ask how this should come to pass, Reverently showed forth the purpose and intent of her mind, Home 4. de virg. that is, that she had determined to live a virgin's life. S. Bernard speaking of those words: Quomodo fiet istud, etc. How shall this be done, S. Bernard and so forth, sayeth: Our lady doubted not of the fact: She requireth the means, and order how it shallshall. For she asketh not whither this shalbe, but how it shallbe, as if she would say: Seeing my lord God, witness of my conscience, knoweth, that his hand maiden hath made a vow, not to have knowledge of any man, after what manner, after what order shall it please him to have it done? Mark M. Calf. If I must break my vow, that I may bring forth such a son, I will rejoice of my son, and be sorry for my vow. Thus much S. Bernard. Now (gentle readers) if it were a strange point and dissonant from all good learning, Fol. 53. b as M. Calf. sayeth: To affirm that Mary mother of Christ, made a vow of chastity, then hath the ancient fathers S. Augustine, S. Ambrose, S. Hilary, S. Bede and S. Bernard, being all virtuous and godly men, well seen in the scriptures of God, and expositions of the old interpreters, before them, taught a strange point and dissonant from all godly learning. Did S. Luke the Evangelist deceive them, and us in reporting the virgins answer to the angel in such sort as he did? It were blasphemous so to think. And if that were the virgins answer, then natural reason doth invincibly prove, that as these ancient fathers say, our Lady made a vow of chastity. Wherefore there is no cause why M. Calf. for any such saying should discredit the authority of Abdias. another exception against Abdias is, that a church, Fol. 32. a. was builded at Ephesus and dedicated to S. john in his life time, which may be proved false by a thousand testimonies, sayeth he, and yet of those thousand he bringeth not one, which signifieth that either he is a very pinching niggard, or else a passing Craker, or shameless liar. Wherefore to purge himself, let hyn show some of those thousand that say: There was no church builded to S. john at Ephesus in his life tyme. Fol. 52. a That it is derogation to the honour of God, and contrary to the use of the primitive church: He sayeth it only, but bringeth neither sentence out of scripture, nor testimony of any father to prove it: and good cause why. For he had noon to bring, that which he allegeth out of S. Augustine, maketh nothing against us. For the catholihe church ever taught, and teacheth at this present, Churches builded principally to the honour of God. that every church, chapel, and oratory is builded immediately and principally to God, and the service which therein is dew to God only, is given to no creature, be he Angel, or Archangel or any other blessed Saint in heaven. Marry, that churches, chapels and oratories at their dedication have been called by the name of S. Peter, S. Paul, S. john, and S. james, or such like, as it pleased the devotion of them that first erected them, we teach it not only to be lawful, but also honourable to the glory of God, and his saints. Lawful, first because no scripture nor council did ever inhibit it, No scripture nor council forbiddeth churches to be builded in honour of Saints. Vide epi. tomen Concil. De ecclesiast. dog. cap. 73. They are heretics and no Christians that think the bodies of of Saints and holy relics not to be honoured but condemn them as heretics that did impugn it, as Eustachius was condemned in the council of Gangre the year of our Lord 324. for contemning churches of martyrs and chapels called by the name of saints. secondarily, because the fathers have used, and the catholic church allowed it, and account him no Christian that denieth it. S. August. or whosoever was author of the book, De ecclesiasticis dogmatibus, sayeth: We believe that the bodies of saints and especially the relics of the blessed martyrs are most sincerely to be honoured, even as membres of Christ, and that Churches called by their names, are to be go unto, with most godly affection and faithful devotion, as holy places dedicated to the service of God. If any man contrary and gain say this sentence, he is thought to be no Christian, but as very an heretic as ever was Eunomius and Vigilantius. Where note briefly, that the holy fathers did not only build churches, and call them by the manes of saints, but also persuade themselves that they aught to go unto them with great devotion: and whosoever did think that no sound doctrine, was accounted no Christian man, but an heretic. Which being so, Alas in what predicament, shall we put M. Calf? By the determination of the council of Gangre, and sentence of S. Augustine, he must needs be an heretic. That it is honourable to the glory of God and his saints, I make this reason: what so ever God commanded to be done was honourable to him, To build churches in honour of Saints, is honourable to God. and all his saints: but God commanded churches, to be builded in the name of saints, ergo it was honourable to God, and his saints to build churches in their names. The mayor I think M. Calf. will not deny. The minor is proved by S. Ambrose in the life of Geruasius and Prothasius, where he telleth, that in the lent he had a vision, and because he would be assured of it, he made his humble praïer to God, that if it were an illusion of the devil, it might vanish away, if it were a true vision, it might appear more perfectly. That done he augmented his fast, the vision appeared as it did before. The third night, his body being now worn with fasting, and he not sleeping, but wondering at it, the vision appeared unto him again: that is, to say, two youngemen in white apparel, and a third person which was like the blessed Apostle S. Paul, whose countenance he knew by his picture, who amongst other thinghs told him, that the young men which he saw, were Geruasius and Prothasius, holy martyrs of Christ. Whose bodies thou shalt find in the place where thou standest and prayest: thou shalt find a cophine covered with earth, twelve foot under the ground, S. Ambrose commanded by God to build a church in the name of Geruasius and Prothasius. which cophine thou shalt take and lift up on high, and build a church in their name. Thus much S. Ambrose: the premises then being true, and the form good, the conclusion must needs follow. Here if M. Calf. will quarrel, and say, that it was S. Paul, that commanded the church to be builded in the name of Geruasius and Prothasius, and not God himself, we will him to under stand, that as S. Paul being made an elect vessel to preach the faith of Christ to the gentils, did nothing but that which God and the holy Ghost willed him to do: So being now a saint in heaven, he neither doth, nor can do any thing, but that which it pleaseth God to command him. Wherefore he may be ashamed of his most blasphemous assertion saying, that is a derogation to the honour of God. Where he sayeth: Calf. Fol. 52 b. It is contrary to the use of the primitive church, and that all men agree that until the reign of Constantine, there were no chapels nor oratories erected in honour of any saint, Mart. You may perceive (good readers) from what fountain, he fetteth his doctrine, and that he travaileth neither in the study of the ecclesiastical histories, nor ancient fathers, but in such halfpenny doctors, as have written these later years, as Luther, Bucer, Calvin, Beza, Bullinger, Bale, P●●idoru● uong. cap. 6. de invent 〈◊〉 Churches build 〈◊〉 hon●●● of Saints ●●fore Constantness time and the author of the homily against images, and Magdeburgenses, and such infamous friars and Apostatats. In Paris at this present in via jacobea they have an ancient church builded by S. Device and his companions in honour of S. Stephen, and because they had the service there for a time in Greek, they call it S. Estienne le Grec. Pius the tenth Pope after S. Peter, in the year of our lord 155. as Pantaleon noteth dedicated a church to S. Prudentia. Calixtus or as some writ Calistus the sixthene Pope after S. Peter in the year of our Lord 220. builded a church at Rome, beyond the river Tibris in honour of our blessed Lady. And all these with many more which I could reckon (were it not that I fear tediousness in so plain a matter) were builded in honour of saints, Polid. lib. 5. cap 6. de invent. rerum. & li. 8. cap. 1. long before Constantyne was borne. Where is now M. Calfhills credit become? What truth is in his words? What verity in that bold assertion, Where he sayeth, that it is contrary to the use of the primitive church, to build churches in the honour of saints? Is it not turned into a vain smothering smoke, and he taking upon him to instruct other, as puines, and young scholars, proved to have no sight in antiquities, nor skill in those authors, which favouring his affection wrote the story of antiquity, and mentioned this that I have last recited? judge you (good readers) for my part, I pity his ignorance, and wish him the spirit of humility, and understanding, that by the one he may know himself, and by the other learn, how by his new M. and Apostatical doctors he is lurdely deceived. Fol 51. b Calf . another exception against Abdias, is that he maketh S. john to say: virtutum opes habere non posse qui volverit divitias habere terrenas: That he can not have the riches of virtue, that will have the riches of the earth. Mart. But if this be a sufficient reason to impugn so ancient a writer, and M. Calfhills' wit, may be commended for it, than to purchase like commendation, some pretty protestant may start up hereafter, and deny the Gospel of S. Matthew, Matt. 19 and the Epistle of S. Paul to Timothe. For S. Matthew maketh Christ to say: It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than a rich man to enter into te kingdom of heaven. S. Paul saith: 1. Tim 6. Qui volunt fieri divites. etc. They that will be rich fall into tentation, and snare of the devil, and into many unprofitable and hurtful desires which drown me into perdition, and destruction. And are not these sentences, all one in effect, with that which Abdias attributeth to s. john? he saith they that will have riches of the earth can not have the riches of virtue: S. Paul saith, that they that will be rich fall into tentation and snare of the devil. What difference is there between these two sayings? Would not he have riches, that desireth to be rich? A wiseman would think yes, and if it be so, then hath Abdias varied nothing from the blessed Apostle S. Paul, The doctrine of Christ objected as a fault to Abdias. Fol. 51. b nor doctrine of Christ in the gospel: but M. Calfhils' capacity gaping after the riches of the world could not conceive that, nor take the saying of Abdias in that sense, in which the saying of Christ in Saint Mathewe, and S. Paul to Timothe is to be taken, but must make the simple people believe that it accordeth not with the doctrine of Christ. Wherefore to oppose M. reader in this point of doctrine, tell us sir, dot not Christ teach contempt of riches contempt of the world and all inordinate willing and desiring of earthly goods? 1. Tim. 6. Sayeth he not by his Apostle, that they fall into the snare of the devil, and many unprofitable desires, that will be rich? that is have an inordinate desire and unbridled will to be rich, an get the goods of the world? If Christ taught this, then was it Christ's doctrine. If it were his doctrine, then that which Abdias attributeth to S. john, varieth not from Christ's doctrine. For take the words which yourself allege, that he can not have the substance of virtues, that will have the substance of the earth, what is there here that accordeth not with Christ's doctrine? Have you not the same terms in one that are in the other? Volunt in S. Paul, and volverit in S. john? and signify they not both one thing? that is, an inordinate will, and desire to have the riches of the earth? And do not they that have this inordinate will and desire fall into the snare of the devil, and many unprofitable and hurtful desires, which drown men into death and perdition? And whiles they are in the snare of the devil and such unprofitable desires that bring perdition, can they have the substance of virtues? Speak M. Calf. This is the doctrine of Christ, this is the doctrine of the holy Ghost, in S. Paul. And this is the same that S. john preached, and Abdias reported. And certes like as you sir being sick of an ague can not have your health before the humour that is predominant, and matter of your sickness be all purged or consumed: Even so the man that hath this inordinate will and desire which the Apostles speak of, can not have the riches of virtues, before that lewd desire and inordinate will be purged and consumed with the fire of God's word, and love of Christ, and he made a new man in holiness and righteousness. Wherefore I much marvel that you dirst venture to say, that the foresaid sentence of Abdias attributed to S. john accordeth not with the doctrine of Christ. Myself will not condemn you of contrarying and gaynesaying the word of God, and doctrine of Christ in this case. Let your own indifferent brothers judge, how little you savour of any sight in divinity for saying that those words of Abdias accorded not with the doctrine of Christ. That the readers may understand how foully you have corrupted Abdias, and left out a word, and altered his meaning, I will examine the place. He told there how S. john talking against riches, spoke also of curing the sick of the palsy cleansing the lepers and casting out of devils, and afterward said: Sed has virtutum opes habere non possunt, qui volverint divitias habere terrenas. But they can not have these powers of virtues that will have the riches of the world: Where the Apostles meaning was that they could not have the grace and virtue of curing the sick, and working of miracles, who inordinately desired the riches of the earth, M. Calf. leaveth out craftily, the word (has) those, and putteth it indefinitely, as though the Apostle ment, that they could have no virtues at all, but this is plain covin, worse than liegier demayne. Some man would count him an ass, for leaving out the word (has) but I will not trouble his conscience. Let it be but a wilful escape, proper to heretics. The fourth exception is this: It is more than a miracle to me that Abdias should be such an ancient writer, Calf. Fol 51. b mart. because neither Irene, neither Eusebius, nor S. Hierome make mention of him. A great matter to be wondered at: a Wiseman would rather have wondered how it could be that three learned men, should be able to writ the whole histories of things done long before their time, and have true notice of all that was done in all countries, towns, cities and villages, and omit nothing, that was done. But M. Calfhills marvelous wit will never lack strange things to wonder at. It is to be thought, if M. Horn himself, as wise a man as he is, should tell him of Waltams Calf. that went nine mile to suck a bull, it should be more than a miracle unto him. The fift exception is that S. john allowed the fact of Drusiana, which withdrew herself from her husbands company. Calf. Fol. 51. q Mart. That is a false lie. For there is no mention in all that history (where Abdias talketh of Drusiana) that S. john allowed any such fact of hers. Calf. Fol 52. a The sixt that S. john turned trees into gold, and made broken jewels whole again. For they were fond miracles, and had no appearance of truth (quoth M. Calf. Mart. As though the Apostle provoked there unto to declare the mighty power of God, and standing in hope to win a soul to Christ (as he did in deed) should disdain to work such a miracle to so good and end. If you had looked to the story M. Calf. and considered the circumstances a little better, you would not have called them fond miracles, and miracles that have no appearance of truth. But we must bear with your boldness. If you continue, we may fortune to hear, that the turning of Moses' rod into a serpent, Exod. 7.4. Reg. 6. joan 2. the making of an hatchet swim upon the water, the going of Christ through the doors, the turning of water into wine, shallbe counted fond miracles. For take away first the authority of the church that alloweth the scripture, as heretics have done, and then the scripture itself, as in part they do, and there is no more reason why they should not stick to call these miracles, that I rehearse out of the scripture, fond miracles, and miracles that have no appearance of truth, than there is why they should say so of those that Abdias referreth to S. john. Thus you have heard some of the fond exceptions that M. Calf. bringeth against that ancient father, and by these you may judge of the rest. Dionysius Alexandrinus, an ancient, learned, and holy father, understanding that diverse condemned the Apocalypse of S. john, said: I verily dare not condemn, Euseb lib. 7. cap 23. histo. and reject the writing of this book, especially sing many of the brethren are of the same opinion with me, that it is S. john's: So modesty would have required, that M. Calf. should have said of Abdias, and because many think it, to be his work in deed, especially Lazius, and Sebastianus Munsterus a master of his, who were, at the finding of it, he should not so contemptuously have rejected it, and called the author, a liar, Fol. 51. b Fol. 53. b a landleaper, an author of strange doctrine, contrary to all godly learning: but you see what modesty is in protestants tongues, and reverence in their hearts to antiquities. Ever sithence friar Luther gave example to contemn the scriptures, and especially the Epistle of S. james, because it made against his position of only faith, his disciples have not sticked to contemn doctors, councils, yea and the scripture itself, where it maketh against them. His other exceptions against Abdias, I omit to avoid tediousness, now you shall hear what he saith against, the councils. M. Calves. answers to the councils. Didst 1. ca Nemo. The council of Orleans. Calf. Fol. 57 a Mart. I alleged out of Ivo and Gratian his canon made in a council kept at Orleans. Let no man build a church before the bishop of that diocese come and set up a cross, to which, M. Calf. talking much in vain, and so proving even as other principles of his religion be proved, that the Ring of the church door by the same reason is a piece of God's service, with many like follies to no purpose, answereth thus in effect: In that decree order is taken for things necessary before the church be builded. But we require what is necessary service in a church hallowed. If wise men will judge him to be a very ignorant advocate, who having his client's case given him in writing, and the copy always lying before his eyes, can neither conceive, the meaning of it, nor yet propound it in such order, as it is given him, what shall we think of M. Calf? Who taking upon him to be advocate for the protestants against the cross of Christ, neither understandeth the case which he hath to impugn, given him in print, and laid before his eyes in manifest terms, nor yet hath learned to tell it in such order, as it is given him? Donetur rude. In the beginning of this third article it is set forth with characters legible without spectacles, that every church chapel, and oratory, erected to the honour and service of God, should have the sign of the cross, yet this new advocate for the contrary part, having viewed the matter substantially (as he thinketh) and having nothing to say against the canon, but forced to say, that the practice of the church was so then, leppeth out into a buy matter, and saith: Fol. 57 a We do inquire what is necessary service in a church hallowed, and so for a a shift to deceive the simple calleth the reader, very rudely from the state of the matter, that is treated in the article. But that will not serve him. Every man that hath eyes, seethe that our reasoning is of the sign of the cross, and not of necessary service in the church. Necessary service in a church hallowed is matins, mass, and evensong, preaching and christening, and such like. Of this there was no word mentioned. The sign of the cross erected and set up there, is no necessary point of this vocal and ordinary service, no more than the covering of the book and defke that holdeth him is. Wherefore our fresh advocate may be thought not to have had his wits very sober when he imagined to colour an evil cause with such a buy train. So he say somewhat in appearance, for the time, he passeth not how little truth be found in his tale, when it cometh to examination. By his own confession a cross is necessary according to that decree before the church be builded, afterward, when it is builded, A cross necessary before the church be builded. Fol 57 a it is not necessary: what reason is there in this? If there were only (as M. Calfhil saith) a civil policy in it, and no point of religion, why did that council command a cross specially, before all other things, to be set up there, and that by no private man, but by a bishop? Let us here a substantial cause, of his pregnant wit. And he shallbe accounted to have more wisdom in that little calves head of his, than that whole council. Fol 57 a Calf . But to what purpose do we allege councils? M. Calf. sayeth if there were a most plain determination for the cross in this or any such like council, he is no more bound to the authority thereof, than we will be to the English Synods, held in king Edward's days, and in the queens majesties reign that now is. Here is a plain puritan, and notorious protestant. Mart. He showeth himself in his likeness. But (sir) how, and how far you and every man is bound to obey the decrees of the provincial councils, I will not dispute. It requireth longer time, yet this by the way, I will say that you are more bound to obey that, than we are either to obey the Synods kept in king Edward's days, either yours in these later years. For first the Synods in king Edwars time were by lawful authority, revoked, and abrogated, and therefore bind no man to obey them. These which you have held of late, The protestants Synods kept without true bishops. are of no authority, nor worthy to be called Synods, but conspiracies, conventicles, or assembles that had never a lawful and true bishop in them. The council at Orleans had thirty and three bishops, lawfully called, instituted and created. They kept themselves within the unity of the church, ye like Apostatats have forsaken it. Their decrees were to edify, yours are to pluck down. Look then how much more, we aught to obey true bishops, than false usurpers, Christians living in the unity of the church, than renegates that have for saken the church, men that desire to edify, than such as labour to destroy: So much more aught we to follow that council being but provincial, than your Synods being but schismatical. The next Canon alleged out of a council kept at Toures, The council of Toures. requiring, ut corpus Domini in altari, non in armario, sed sub crucis titulo componatur, That the body of our lord consecrated upon the altar, be not reposed and set in the revestry, but under the rood, M. Calf. thinketh to illude which his foolish cavils. Calf. Fol. 67. b Armarium, he saith, may be well taken for a library, for a closet, or almerie, but no more for a revestry than for a belfry. Mart. And why so sir, is not Armarium, properly a place, where any thing is laid, as books, coats, household stuff and such like? And doth not the revestry, resemble such a place more properly than a belfry. Fol. 57 b Yourself confess it to be the father's meaning, and if it were the meaning of the council, it was to much arrogancy in you to condemn it, as foolish, and excessive folly to reprove them, who take the meaning of the author, and stick not so precisely to the bore letter. S. Augustine reasoning against the Arrians contending earnestly the for word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 asked, Epist 174 It is folly to contend about the word. when we know the thing Quid est contentiosius quam quum de re constat, certare de nomine? What is more contentious the when there is plain evidence for the thing, to contend upon the name? In like manner we ask you what more evident sign can we have of a brawling brabbler, than such manifest contention about a word, when we know the thing that is meant by the word: your own friend the hath augmented Sir Thomas Eliot's Dictionary, could have told you that armarium, is a place where books are laid, or other stuff of household, and by that you might have guessed, that there is more affinity betwixt, Armarium, Armarium. and a revestirie, than between Armarium and a belfry. But if it be your manner in reading, to daily about the word when you have the true sense of the author, as you do here, certes I will not will every of your hearers to gather a rod for such a reader, but desire your tender hearted damsel that would not willingly have you hurt, with a rod, to get a peacocks tail, for fear of smart. When I was at Wynchester, I taught my scholars evermore true significations of their latin words, and when any come in construction, that had diverse significations, I expounded them, and when they translated, I taught them to keep the sense, and meaning of the author, although the propriety of the word strictely taken, would scarce abide it. And for so doying I suppose noon would think the usher worthy of rod, but such a wise man as you are. Titulus crucis . As for the fault you find with the interpreting of Titulus crucis, for a rood, it is so childish that it is to be laughed at, rather than answered, but take it whither you will for a rood, or for the title of the cross, it doth manifestly convince, that there was a cross in the church, which is the principal point that I took in I hand to prove in this Article. Where you marvel that I would not rather expound it for a pyx, than a rood, Fol. 57 b in good sooth I can not let so marvelous a monster to marvel at his own shadow if he please. Where you say, Calf. Ibidem. that you never heard afore this time that the sacrament was reverently kept under the Rood, that the altar refused, Mart. the rood should be reverenced. Surely it is no great marvel, for a man of so little experience of foren countries, and so small travail in reading the ancient fathers, and councils. But (sir) you take the matter amiss. The words of the Canon do not tell you that the sacrament was carried up to the rood fit, but said it was set, sub crucis titulo, under the rood, or title of the cross. Which might be in an other place, besides the rood fit. Again if it had been their meaning to have it set in the rood fit, yet would it not follow, that therefore the altar was refused, diverse countries have diverse places to keep the blessed Sacrament. or thought no worthy place to keep it. diverse countries have diverse places to keep the blessed sacrament: these lower parts of Germany have a place, besides the altar, builded of purpose very honourably to reserve it in, yet for all that they refuse not the altar, nor contemn it, as unworthy for it, but take the other to be a more safe, and commodious place: other hanged it reverently over the altar, other kept it in the revestry. The council of Chalcedon in Trullo . The next council which I alleged was the sixt general council kept at Constantinople in Trullo. But M. Calf. could not find any Canon in that council that made for the cross, and no marvel. For he followed not the counsel of our saviour saying: Quaerite & invenietis, Seek and ye shall find. In the sum of the councils gathered by the reverend father Carranza, the 73. Canon of the sixt general council is this. Seeing the lively cross doth show unto us that healthful thing (that is to say) the passion of Christ, it behoveth us to employ all our study, that we may give unto it, that honour which is meet and convenient. Wherefore we giving adoration unto it, with mind, tongue and sense, command that the figures of the cross, which are made of some in the ground, and paviment, be taken away, jest our triumphant sign of victory, be injuried by the treading of those that pass and go that ways. The judgement of the sixt general council of the cross . This if M. Calf. would have sought, he might have found, and noted, First, that the cross by the judgement of two hundred 27. fathers doth represent unto us the passion of Christ. secondly that they thought it their duty to give dew honour unto it. Thirdly that with mind tongue and sense, they gave adoration unto it, that they called it neither idol, nor sign of conquest against the Christians, but a triumphant sign of victory, for the Christians: Last of all because they would not have that holy sign to be trod upon, and defiled with men's feet, they commanded, that no sign of the cross should be made upon the ground, or paviment, and if any were made, they willed it to be taken up, and had away under pain of excommunication. In such honour and reverence they had it in those days. But if M. Calf. or any of his, reply, and say, that here is no mention made of any cross in the church, let him consider the words of the council well, first where they say: Quum crux vivifica illud salutare nobis ostendit: Seeing the lively cross showeth unto us that healthful thing, it is manifest that there was a lively cross to show them that healthful thing: secondarily, where they attribute adoration, unto it, with mind, tongue, and sense, this word sense, declareth that they had a sensible cross, to which, they might show their reverence with their external senses. Again the devotion of the people, being such that they would paint it, or engrave it upon the ground, and pavement, it is not to be thought, but that they had it in other places. And if in other places, why not principally in the church, Where they should have most occasion to remember Christ death and passion? and in remembrance of the great benefit purchased by the cross, honour and reverence that holy sign? Last of all, the prohibition forbidding it to be made in the ground and pavement, doth evidently convince, that it is lawful to be made in other places. For a prohibition restrictive, forbidding a thing to be done in this or that place, and no more, is a lawful permission for all other places, which are not namely included in that prohibition. For proof whereof, I refer me, to M. Calfhils' own advocate or lawyer, what so ever he be, so that he have a little more sight in the law, than the reader of Paul's hath in divinity. Now if it might have pleased him to have consulted with his learned counsel, he should right well have perceived that the gatherers of the councils into a sum (whom he calleth patchers of ragged relics) Fol. 57 b did not take the vj. council of Constantinople, for the seven. of Nice, nor that there was any slyght dealing in pressing the authority, and not alleging the words, the numbered of the canon was cited in the margin, the cause why it was brought, alleged, and either of these causes, is sufficient to excuse me from all sinistrous opinions of slight dealing. The seventh general coucel at Nice . The fourth council which I brought, was the seventh general council kept at Nice against image breakers: but against these M. Calf. opponeth three other councils, one at Constantinople under Constantine the fift, Fol. 58. b another at Eliberie in Spain now called Granata, the third at Frankford in Germany. The council of Constantinople under ●eo the fift no lawful council . The first all the world knoweth to be no lawful council, but a conventicle of heretics, condemned by the catholic church both in the council of Frankford, kept in the time of Charles the great in Germany, and also by the council Lateran in Rome, to which the forsaied virtuous Emperor sent twelve bishops out of France. Wherefore that assemble at Constantinople being unlawful, the callers of it heretics, the proceeding inordinate, without their true head, it must follow that their decrees were unlawful, their reasons schismatical, not founded upon scripture, but wrested to a wrong sense after their manner, and therefore not worthy the answering. As for the second, who but bold protestans dare affirm that about the same time when the council of Constantinople was kept in Greece, this council was kept at Eliberie or Granata in Spain? It is to be seen in the acts of the councils and sum gathered by a learned man of Spain, that it was kept in the time of Sylvester in the year of our lord 335. after the account of their own doctor Pantaleon, about the time of the first Nicene council. And I marvel that M. reader, of Paul's could not see it. Apoc. 22. But, he that is in filthiness, may grow in filthiness still, he that is in such gross ignorance, may be ignorant still. M. Calfhills author whom he followeth in this point, and of whom he borroweth the most of that which he infarced to no purpose into his book, against images, and made no mention of him, in very deed readeth it so, in the Homily against Images, fol. 37. and so one blind batfouler leading an other, they fall both into the mire of ignorance. Whereby you may see what ancient authors, M. reader studieth most. As for the council itself, it decreed that A bishop and priest might have his sister in his house, Canon 27 or daughter being a virgin, and professed to God: but no other woman. Why is not this kept? Why have they their nurseries? Why have they their houses deck with woman's kirtelis, Cassocks, and fardingalles that are no sisters nor spiritual daughtters, Cap 33. but carnal Concubines? It is decreed also, that Bishops, priests, Deacons and subdeacons, The protestats observe not the Canons of the council of Eliber. being placed in the ministry should abstain from their wives, and not beget children, It is decreed that all that did so should be thrust out of their Clergy. Wherefore keep ye not this Canon? why have your coloured and votary bishops, pretenced wives? Why have your friars, mounkes and lecherous priests their amorouses in their arms? Why fill they the country which bastards? Why keep they their benefices? Why deceive they the poor people by purchasing of lands and procuring of leases for their brats? It is convenient that those decrees should stand in force as well as this, which ye allege. The same fathers that made one, made the other, and at the same time in the same council, and with the same spirit. Wherefore they aught to be credited a like. And seeing you urge their authority, in one & refuse it in an other, I might use your own Rhetoric and tell you that I am no more bound to follow that council in one canon, than you aught to obey their determination in the other, Cap. 36. This canon of the Elibertine council speaketh not against all images. Pictures upon walls phibited only by this canon. but I will not deal so with you. The canon is good and maketh nothing against the catholic faith touching the use of images. This is the canon: Placuit picturas in Ecclesia esse non debere, ne quod colitur aut adoratur, in parietibus depingatur: We decree that pictures aught not to be in the church, jest that be painted on the walls which is worshipped and adored. Where note first that pictures only are prohibited by this decree, and not every picture neither, but such as were painted in walls. secondarily that this prohibition is but particular for pictures on walls, and being such, excludeth not other images, but rather permitteth them: for edicts prohibitorie, forbidding certain cases, permit all that is not specially forbidden, if it be, eiusdem generis & subiecti, of the same kind and the same matter. Thirdly that here is an evident proof that pictures were then worshipped. For this argument followeth necessarily upon those words. That was worshipped which was for bidden to be payncted in the walls: but pictures were forbidden to be payncted upon the walls, Answer M. Calf. ergo pictures were worshipped: the mayor is proved by the later clause of the canon: Ne quod colitur aut adoratur in parietibus depingatur. That that be not payncted in walls, which is worshipped and adored. For nothing can be payncted in the wall, but the image of some thing. If M. Calfhill say, that it is meant, that God which is adored and worshipped, should not be payncted in the waulles, he wilbe contrary to himself and doctrine of his own councils, and doctors. For he and they teach, that neither God, neither Christ can possibly be payncted. And if it be so, then that which the council said in that canon, is worshipped, and adored, is neither God nor Christ, but some thing that maybe payncted. Wherefore this impugner with his M. the author of the image homily, may streeke this council out of their books, and cry shame of their ignorance, for bringing that which proveth manifestly against them. Why the council of Eliberie, did forbidden pictures in walls Now why that council did forbidden pictures on walls, to help your understanding, lay down your peacocks tail, and disdain not to learn a Lawyer's point of an usher of Wynchester, and student in Lovayne. For the better understanding of a statute or Canon, diverse circumstances are to be considered. Amongst which for this which we have now in hand, Circumstances to ba considered you must note, the place where it was made, the persons that made it. The time when it was made, and the cause why it was made. They that made this decree were catholic bishops, and faithful dispensers of Christ's mysteries, such as knew to geave their people: Luc. 12. Their measure of wheat in tyme. The place where it was made, was Eliberye or Granata a city in Spain, which at that time, and long after had many infidels and Pagans, that despited Christ, and his religion: and because they were idolaters themselves, thought the Christians to commit idolatry by having of images. The time when it was made, was when they feared persecution, as appeareth by the 59 and 60. Canon of the same council. The cause why it was made, was because when the Christians by the tyranny of Pagans' and persecution of infidels should be forced to flee, and forsake their churches, they should be driven to leave their pictures in the walls to be mocked, scorned, and laughed at, by the infidels, to the great contempt of Christ and slander of the Christians. Thes circumstances considered no marvel, if such Catholic bishops desirous to win the idolatrous to the faith of Christ, and standing in fear daily of persecution, and knowing that if upon the sudden they should be forced to flee, the Pagans' would pill their churches, and make their pictures left in the walls, a mocking game, as they did crucify the image of Christ in Berythus, Athanas. de imag. Christ. Ephipha. epist ad 5. Synod. Const. to. 2. Concil. and stoned a cross in Tyrus, no marvel I say, if for such considerations such holy fathers made such a decree, and prohibited pictures on the walls in churches. At this present all catholic bishops upon like occasion would make the like. But what if those fathers had no such considerations, but did absolutely forbid pictures in the church? What would it advantage his cause? Dotario he not remember that it was a provincial Synod of xix. bishops, Fol. 88 a Marcel. Epist. 5. whose jurisdiction stretched no further than to their particular provinces? Doth he not remember that when the time is changed, that which was well done before, may be changed according to S. Augustine's rule which he himself allegeth, in another place? If he doth not, it must be told him, and further signified, that pictures and images were not only received into churches in diverse other countries, but also permitted and commanded by general councils, as by the council of Nice under Adrian the first, by the council of Rome under Gregory the second, and the council of Franckforde under Adrian in the time of Charlemaigne. And sing by these general councils the decree of that particular Synod was abrogated by the aftercummers, according to Pope Stephen's decree, and altered for the diversity of time, as S. Augustine permitteth, there is no reason why we should be pressed with the authority of that Canon which was ones abrogated, and forced to prefer one provincial Synod, before three general councils, and driven more to esteem the order of one province, than the authority of the universal church. Wherefore M. Calf. hath by no ways, any vantage by the Elibertine council. Now as for the council of Frankford held in the time of Charlemain, it condemned not (as you falsely report) the seventh council at Nice, but the false and forged Synod or Conventicle of heretics assembled at Constantinople, and all image breakers. The book which you say, Carolus magnus, made against images, Fol 58 a usque ad Fol. 78. a is a false forged tale, as you may see in the confutation of the Apology Fol. 328. and all the long process of dispute alleged out of that book, is not worthy so much credit, as the tale of Robynwhode on wakefyld on a green, and therefore needeth no answer. Fol. 78. ab Fol. 79 a The slanderous and spiteful words which you have used against Irene and the council of Nice, would never have been uttered, unless malice had hardened yower heart, and heresy blinded yower eyes. For who but you would declare, the bore fact of a prince to his reproof and not tell the circumstances? Who would say the king exercised extreme Tyramny against such and such persons, and not declare the causes why? No man that meaneth uprightly. For as the circumstances and causes why things are done may aggravate the indignity of the fact: So may they either somewhat extenuate it, or alltogeather excuse it. Fol. 78. b Calf . Twoe great and heinous facts (as you think) you lay to Irenes' charged: One that she burned Constantine the fift his bones, after he was dead. another that she Scratched out her sons Constantine's eyes, Mart. whiles he lived, and bereft him of his empire, and life. Constantine the fift a wicked emperor blasphemy . But (sir) why told you not the circumstances and causes, which moved her to dig up Constantine the fift his bones, and burn them? Why did you not tell that he was a wicked Emperor, and said unto his own Patriarch Anastasius, that Christ the son of God was not man, nor borne of the virgin Mary, otherwise than he was himself borne of his mother, called in like manner Marie? Why did you not tell that when he was plagued morbe elephantico, and miserably tormented, he said lying on his death bed, I am condemned to everlasting fire? Desperation . Why did you not tell that Irene understanding this, and exhorted by Theodorus then patriarch, digged up his body and burnt it, and cast the ashes in the sea? Why I say did you not tell all this? And (which is not to be omitted) why did you not tell that the said Constantine digged up saints bodies and cast them into the sea, Impiety. and compelled a gentlewoman of Bizance to dig up her husbands bones after he had been long buried, and cast them into the sea, where thieves, murderers, and sacrilegers were wont to be cast? Were not all these circumstances to be told? yes M. Calf. if you had dealt faithfully. But if those circumstances had been told, then should all Christian men have understood that the just judgement of God, fell upon that cruel tyrant, and Irene have been judged to have done nothing, but that which beseemed a virtuous Empress. But that was not for yower purpose, and therefore you suppressed all the said circumstances, and to exaggerate the matter more cruelly made two soul lies. For you say. Fol. 78. a Calf. This did the good daughter the defender of images, because her father when as yet he lived had broke them in pieces. Mart. For neither Irene was his daughter, otherwise than by marriage, and not properly to be called daughter, Why Irene burned Constantine's bones. neither was his body digged up and burnt, because he broke and burnt images, but because he denied the incarnation of Christ, and died in desperation, saying. Igni inextinguibili addictus sum. I am condemned to everlasting fire. The other fact which you lay to Irenes' charged is, that she bereaved the Emperor of his crown, and scratched out his eyes, and murdered him, which were cruel facts I confess: and as I deny it not, so will I not defend it. But sir, why did you not tell us, that when the said Emperor had the government in his own hand, he put his own mother in prison, and that in subiectos immaniter saevit. Constantine Irenes' son a wicked tyrant . He waxed cruel and raged most unmercifully against his subjects? Why did you not tell that he punished diverse men with strange kinds of torments, and governed his empire tiramnicallie? why told you not that he compelled his own wife called Marie, to go into religion and married his maid? Why told you not that he did put out his uncle Nicephorus eyes, and cut of Christophorus and Nicephorus tongues, because the soldiers would have created the said Nicephorus Emperor? Why told you not that he used like cruelty against many noble men, for which the whole city of Constantinople, and the whole army conspired to depose him, and make a new Emperor? Why I say did you not tell all this? was it not necessary to be told? Would any true meaning man declare a fact to an others infamy, and conceal the circumstances? Not, I suppose, in such weighty matters. But let it be yower oversight. Why did you not according to yower promiss prove by scripture, council, and ancient fathers that Irene was as you say a jezabel, Calf. Fol. 78. b an Athalia, a woman past all honesty, a woman that perverted lawful counsel, that she might go a whooringe with her idols still, a woman that become more savage than a wild beast. Mart. Praises given to Irene. Cuspinia . The histories give her sovereign praise, and great titles of honour. Some say she was: A most godly woman, more wise and politic in governing the state, than Leo and Constantin her father in law, notable as well for her beauty, as for her holiness and goodly qualities, a woman of singular wisdom, and integrity, worthy to be esteemed. Some said she was pijssima imperatrix, Eutropius lib. 22. a most godly Empress, and that she took the Empire with her son Constantine, gloriose, divinitus, honourably by the providence of God. As for her practices against her son, Cuspinianus sayeth, That she cast him in prison, and that afterward his eyes were pluck out, and where for anguish and sorrow he died, uti mulier optima publicum bonum privata charitati praeferret, that like a good woman she might prefer the profit of the common weal, before her private love. This considered, it had been reason that you should have brought some ancient father, some allowed historiographer, to have confirmed your saying, and improved these and such other as I have brought, before you had fallen into such a raging heat, of railing without all consideration of the circumstances, and causes that moved her to do as she did. But I perceive the french proverb is true. un asnè picque convenient que il trotté. An Ass pricked with the spur must needs trot. Besides when you spoke of yower Council of Constantinople assembled by Constantine the fift, Fol 58. a son to leo surnamed Isauricus, why did you not tell us that the said Leo that spoilt the churches, and broke down images, was moved to do it by two jews, Enchanters, sorcerers, Zonaras. To. 3. Annali What manner of man he was that first did pluck down images, and what counsellors he had for that purpose. Zona. To. 3. Annal. Zona. ut supra. Zona. 3. Annal. Cuspinia. and conjurers who promised I fitho prince of Arabia an Empire & long life, if he would cast the images of Christ and his blessed mother out of the churches, and fleeing out of Arabia into Isanria, promised the like to Leo, and asked nothing for their reward, nisi ut Nazareni er genitricis eius imagines tellerentur: but that the images of Christ, and his mother, might be taken away? Why did you not tell us that the said Leo promising these jewish enchanters to perform their request, began war against God, and with a terrible noise invaded the holy images? Why did you not tell that he deprived Germanus of his patriarkshippe, and ordained Anastasius, because he would not consent unto him for the plucking down of images? Why did you not tell us that he set a princely palace on fire, and burnt goodly books, and twelve notable learned men maintained there to the furtherance of learning, and furnishing the Emperor with grave and wise counsellors, and all that was in the house, because they would not assent unto him for the destroying of images? Why did you not tell us that he was an enemy of the Catholic faith, a sacrileger, a blood sucker, a lyonlyke beast, covetous, impious, opinative against the equality of Christ, the son of God, and true God with his father, an image breaker, and fighter against God? The histories report these things and other wickedness of him, as you may see in Eutropius, Zonaras, and Cuspinian. This would have been told, that the people might have understood what manner of man he was that first in surch raging sort pluck down images amongst Christians, Leo Isauricus counsellors that moved him to pluck down images. and what counsellors he had to exhort him unto it, to wit two jews and enchanters, and what grave fathers he had that did dehort him from it, but a great piece of your subtility and craft should have been desclosed by it. Therefore you thought it not good to meddle with it. Eutropius lib. 21. A description of Constantine under whom M. Calves. council was kept against images . Again why did you not tell us that Constantine the fift son to Leo, was a more wicked man than his father and a very forerunner of Antichrist? Why did you not tell us that he was called a persecutor, an unmerciful and most savage beast, always cruel, of wild and beastly manners, hurtful, fierce, rude, a forsaker of God and his saints, delighted even from his youth with magic, enchantments, sorcery, bloody sacrifices, calling up of devils, wantonness, riot, and all inventions that corrupt the soul? Why did you not tell us that he so wallowed in all kind of vice, that he was, non Christianus, non Paganus, non judaeus, sed collwio quadum impietatis etc. Not a Christian, not a pagan, not a jew, but a certain lump and heap of impiety, like the beasts of Africa, which are reported to be borne with diverse ouhgely shapes, by reason that the beasts of diverse kinds do couple together? Why did you not tell us that he betrayed many of his nobles, cut of some of their heads, picked out some of their eyes, punished diverse of his counsellors, murdered diverse religious men, burnt their houses, profaned their churches, ransacked their Revestries, took away their jewels, alienated their lands, and possessions, and for penance had three wives at ones? all this is written of him either in Eutropius, Zonaras, Sigiber te or Cuspinian, and more, as needful to be known as that which you heaped up against Irene. And I beseek you why was noon of all this told? Belike you feared that if so much should have been uttered, men should have learned that they that gave counsel to the plucking down of images, were runagate jews, conjurers, and practisers with devils: The emperors that plucked down images The emperors that followed their counsel, were Tyrants, persecutors, manquellers, sacrilegers, forerunners of Antichrist, enemies of Christ, and the vilest and most wickedest men that professing Christ, ever sat in that Empire, and so yower Constantinopolitan Council against images, should have been found to be nothing but a conspiracy, hatched of the devil and his ministers. But that was not evangelical simplicity, nor Christian charity. Truth should not be concealed, nor the ignorant deceived, with glorious words. Well may a minister face out a lie for a time, but certainly time will discover it, and reveal it to his utter shame. And as for you M. Calf. sing you like so well that Constantinopolitane conspiracy assembled by Constantine the fift, that you prefer it before the true and lawful council, assembled at Nice, take heed jest many think of you, as they did in those days of Constantine the fift. Is it not a soul oversight of you to worthy that Council of authority that was assembled by an enemy of Christ's faith, and religion? kept by heretical bishops, who dertermined what pleased them, and neither had the bishop of Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem, Lib. 4. ca 9 Tripart. Lib. 5. cap. 29 Tripar. nor Rome present at their conventicle? whereas the order of the primitive church was, and at this present is, that no council should be healed and reputed good and lawful, which the bishop of Rome did not confirm, and ratify? Is it not a gross ignorance to affirm that Eutropius saith there were 338. bishops at that assemble, whereas he sayeth. Lib. 22. The wicked Constantine gathered Iniquum concilium triginta octo episcoporum, a wicked Council of thirty and eight bishops against the holy and venerable images? For shame where was yower eye sight, when you looked in Eutropius, or did you not look in him at all, but speak by the advise of some learned brothers note book? who for the word (iniquum in Eutropius, wrote tercentum, Lib. 22. and made a strange Metamorphosis,) if you did so, (unless he hath better evidence than I can yet se) he deceived himself and you both. For Eutropius printed at Basile, by Frobenius, the year of our lord 1532. writeth thus. Constantinus impius contra sanctas & venerabiles imagines concilium iniquum triginta octo Episcoporum congregavit. That is, wicked Constantine gathered a wicked council of thirty and eight bishops against the holy and venerable images. And albeit Sigibertus reporteth, that there were three hundred and thirty, yet might you have better credited Eutropius, as more ancient and likelier to know the truth than he. And have imagined that the printer might sooner add a figure of 3. to 30. than an other print, iniquum, for tercentum, that is (wicked) for three hundred. But it was not for yower purpose. Wherefore sir, seeing you will not tell the people what they were that first gave council that images should be plucked down, nor signify what manner of men they were that wrought these troubles in Christ's Church, to declare it breiflye (albeit the wiser may see it by that which is declared already) yeat for the further understanding of the simpler, I will ley it down plainly, and truly, as every man that will read, Zonaras, Eutropius, Sigebertus, Suidas, and Cuspinian of these emperors lives may see. The counsellors of plucking down images . This first holy men that persuaded the Christians to throw down images, were two jews, both runagates, enchanters sorcerers, and conjurers and practisers with the devil. And an other runnagat called Bezer who had forsaken his Christianity, and become a jewe. These were the counsellors. The Emperors that followed these counsellors were Leo Isauricus, The emperors that followed their counsel. Leo Isauricus. Constantine the fift, Leo the 4. and Constantine the sixth. As for Leo Isauricus, he was as you heard before an enemy of the Catholic faith, a sacrileger, a blood sucker, a Lion like beast, covetous, impious, opinative against the godhead of Christ, an enemy of God: he deprived an holy patriarch and placed an heretic, he burned a goodly and princely palace, with the books, jewels, ornaments, and all the learned men that were within it. Constantine the fift . Constantine the fift, son to Leo, was many degrees worse than his father, even a very forerunner of Antichrist, as cruel a persecutor of the Christians, as Decius or any of the heathen Emperors was. He was of wild and beastly manners, a forsaker of God and his saints, so fierce and rude that he was called a most unmerciful and cruel beast, he delighted in wantonness and riot, he had great pleasure in sorcery, magic, and enchantments, in bloody sacrifices, and calling up of devils. He worshipped Venus, Suidas. offered human sacrifices unto her, and killed boys for to please her. He betrayed his nobles, cut of their heads, picked out some of their eyes, murdered diverse religious men, and spoiled them. He digged up saints bodies, and hurled them into the sea. To be short, he was as ye heard before, neither Christian, nor pagan, nor jew, but a certain lump and heap of impiety, like the beasts of Africa, that are of diverse oughely shapes. Under this sweet Emperor, Leo 4. M. Calfhills Council of Constantinople was kept against images, and God william. Leo, son to this Constantine, was as wicked a man as his father, and heir aswell of his impiety, as of his empire. Constantine the sixth his son, Constantine 6. walked as his father did, and was a very tirante murdered his nobles, put his own mother in prison, forced his own wife to enter into religion, picked out his uncle Nicephorus eyes, cut of Christophorus and Nicetas tongues, and did such horrible and villainous acts, that the whole city of Constantinople detested his cruelty, and sought means to depose him. These were the emperors that made the bloody bickering against images, these were they that defaced the churces, of the Christians, and broke, and burnt the images of Christ, and his saints. These our protestants follow, these they take for their precedent. Under one of these, yea under the vilest of them all, was the conspiracy of Constantinople kept by a few schismatical bishops contrary to all order and law. And this they reverence and prefer before the lawful council of Nice. Now whither they are to be followed, and their precedent imitated of any Christian man, I leave it to the indifferent readers. In all good Christian hearts, that can not be thought to tend any thing to the honour of God, which was devised by jews that were enchanters, sorcerers, and conjurers, and practisers with the devil, and put in practice by Tyrants, persecutors, enemies of God, and faith of Christ, as they were that broke and abolished images. As for the council of Nice, that it was a lawful general Council, summoned duly and kept orderly, and confirmed truly, as the ecclesiastical ordinance have decreed, No man denieth, but either he that is altogether blinded with heresy, or not travaled in reading the histories of the church. He that hath read no more but the talk of Paulus patriarch of Constantinople unto the Empress Irene, and her nobles, and marked the sad and grave oration that Tharasius that succeeded him, made before this council was kept, can not choose but say it was, Sancta & universalis synodus. An holy and general Synod. And so for all M. Calves. Serpentine tongue we will accept it, until his Mastershipp prove by the scriptures, counsels, and fathers that it was no general and lawful Council. That which he fathereth upon Carolus magnus, is as true as the book against images, to wit naught, else but a very slander. S. Ambro. Where, upon S. Ambrose words extolling the cross and making a comparison between a church and a ship, where it is said: As a church can not stand without a cross: Even so a ship is weak without a mast, I made this argument, That must needs be in the church, without which the church can not stand: But (as S. Ambrose saith) a church can not be without a cross: Therefore a cross must needs be in the church, M. Calfhil like a cunning carpenter, that knoweth a fine sleight to pluck down churches, thinketh in deed that no church can stand without a cross. Fol. 79. b Calf. For unless ye have (quoth he) the cross beams, and cross pillars with one piece of timber shut into an other, which is the very sign of the cross, I can not tell how the building can abide. Mart. Is not this a high point of skill in such a master workman? If one had been prentice x. years to john jumbler, this profound paradox, might right well become his bald head, when his night cap is of. But I beseke you sir, is Crux Latin for a cross beam, and cross pillar? Or was S. Ambrose (a most eloquent father in the judgement of all learned men) so ignorant and barbarous in your sight that the knew not what was Latin for a cross beam, or cross pillar? Or if he knew it, Crux never taken for a cross beam nor cross pillar. was his tongue so stuttring that he could not utter the concept of his mind? But must he needs take Crux, for a cross beam? Fie for shame? Confer your Calepine, Look on M. Copers dictionary, search the vocabulary that you learned at Ludlowe consult with the Cobbler at Queen hive, and upon mature deliberation, Let us hear their better advise. That S. Ambrose is not so to be understanded, all wise men see beside yourself. In the same place he saith: Arbor quaedam in navi, Serm. 55. S. Ambro. wrested. est crux in ecclesia. The cross in the church is as it were a certain tree in the ship. The tree in a ship (that is to say) the mast, is not a cross beam, nor cross pillar, ergo nor the cross in the church. Again where straight upon the similitude he inferred these words: For by and by the devil doth disquiet it, and the wind doth squatte it. But where the sign of the cross is set up, by and by both the iniquity of the devil is beaten back, and the tempest of wind appeased, it is manifest, that, signum Crucis, the sign of the cross, doth not signify nor cross beam, nor cross sail. For the devil is neither a fraied of a cross beam, nor wind allayed with hoisting up the cross sail. The cross beam hath no force to drive away the iniquity of the devil, S. Amb●o. meaning far wide from M. Calves. fancy. nor the cross sail power to allay the wind as the sign of the cross hath, of which S. Ambrose speaketh. Wherefore he must needs have a far other meaning than that which our minister deviseth of a cross sail or mast. And what other can it be, but that which he himself discourseth of in those sermons, the very sign of our cross, which through the merits of his passion hath such virtue that it driveth away the iniquity of the devil, from the church upon the land, and assuaged the tempest of the wind upon the seas. For the first you may take example of the church, preserved from fire, by the sign of the cross in Nola, for the second, Sir Ambro. Cave. sir Ambrose Cave on of the queens majesties honourable council, sometimes knight of the Rhodes can tell you that by Rhodes there is a little Island, and in that a road, for ships, where no anchor, nor cabel will hold the ship, unless the mariner make the sign of the cross over the place where he casteth his cable and pitcheth his anchor, this hath he reported to diverse men of worship, and as he loveht, the faith of a gentle man, and desireth to be reputed for a faithful knight, So I dare say he will not be a shamed to say again, that which he hath so often said before. Now sir where you say, Calf. Fol. 80. my ignorance, or unfaithfulness is to apparent for fathering these words, if a church lack a cross, by and by the devil doth disquiet it, and the wind squatte it, Upon S. Ambrose, Mart. I must tell you that your skill is very simple, if you can not pyck that sense almost word, for word out of S. Ambrose: and your rudeness to apparent, if you can not see that he talketh there of iiij. things, a church and a ship, the devil and the wind, the devil for disquieting the church, the wind for squatting the ship: Besides I must tell you that you are to be noted of unfaythefulnes in translating the sentence of S. Ambrose, alleged in this place, as shall appear when I come to treat of your false interpretations and translations. In the mean season what meaneth your wisdom, Calf. Fol. 80. b to say, that if my opinion be true, we need not fear the burning any more of Paul's, make a cross on the steeple and it shalbe fase? Mart. Because S. Ambrose, and I upon credit of his word said, that a church can not stand without a cross, will you with your logic, make us say, that it can not be burned, if it have a cross? no M. Calfhil. All the wit in your head, and sophistry that you learned, is not able to do it. We know when God upon just indignation will punish, nothing is worthy to stand in his sight. Wherefore no marvel if neither cross, neither policy of men could help that terrible fire sent from heaven, to declare the wrath of God, for polluting his church with your schismatical service and horrible blasphemy when by right order of the church the feast of corpus Christi, should have been celebrated. Calf. Fol 80. b A notable lie . Where you say that, twice within fifty years the like plague happened in the most Catholic time, I must crave pardon, and say, Sir reverence of your ministry, ye lie. For no chronicle sithence the church was first builded maketh mention that Paul's steeple was set a fire with lightning from heaven and burnt down to the battilments, and the whole body of the church with certain isles clean consumed, and the communion table burnt in the quire within the compass of three or four hours, on corpus Christi yeave, as of late it was. Wherefore you may be a shamed of this loud lie, Fol. 80. b to say that the like plague happened twice within the compass of l. years. Where as it is not to be found, that it happened so much as ones, thanked be God. In deed it was ones or twice set a fire, but quenched by the goodness of God straight, without any great harm, and ones haply by a morrow mass priest. Which I marvel why you did omit to report. But you had rather adventure your credit in facing a lie, than by reporting the truth, say any good a of priest. God requited it you in that day. Against Lactantius you say much to no effect. Fol 81. a If he can not confirm our doctrine so well as impugn others, as S. Hierome sayeth, why do you allege his words so thick? Seeing his works be accounted by Gelasius inter apocrypha, Ibidem. Heretics account Lactatius works inter apocrypha, and allege them for their purpose. such as may be read, an no doctrine grounded on, as you say, why do you and the author of the image homily, use his authority? There is not one author of whom you borrow more testimonies, but evil applied against images, than out of Lactantius, and is not this shame for you? The law saith: Nemo debet consequi beneficium ex eo quod nititur impugnare: Not man aught to obtain benefit of that which he endeavoureth to overthrow. Wherefore sing you overthrow the authority of the witness, which you bring, there is no reason why you should take any advantage or help by his words. But what is it that heretics will not do? what corner that they will not seek? what hole that they will not pry, to espy some apparent colour to overcast their evil favoured fantasies? Lactantius when he seemeth to make for them, is an ancient and approved father. When he maketh against them, then either his works be accounted apocrypha, not sound enough to build any doctrine upon, either utterly rejected as noon of his. Fol. 81. a Calf . As for example, his verses upon the passion M. Calf. verily supposeth to be noon of his making, and is induced to think so for these three causes. M. Calves. reasons why the verses of the passion be not Lactantius own. Mart. First S. Hierome making mention of all his writings maketh no mention of this. secondarily churches were scarcely builded in his time. Thirdly that it was a doctrine different from that which he himself taught, and was generally received in his days. But if any might be so bold to ask this cross crucifier how he proveth, that S. Hierome made mention of all Lactantius works, what could he say? How would he shifted his hands, and make it appear that Lactantius wrote so many books, and no more? and that S. Hierome saw all those books? It would gravel him. As every man believeth that S. Hierome desirous of learning read much, and saw much: So no wise man thinketh it possible, that he could read or see all that was written. Wherefore sing many things might escape his sight, and come to knowledge many hundred years after, this is no sufficient cause to say. S. Hierome maketh no mention of that book, ergo it was noon of Lactantius writing. Not more than if one would say, john Fox maketh no mention in his Martyrloge that Crammer was pardoned for treason, and burned for heresy, ergo it is not true that he was a traitor and an heretic. As for the second cause, that churches were scarcely builded in Lactantius days, it would have proved a stark lie, if he had not said, scarcely. For that the Christians had churches and places of prayer, yea in the Apostles time and ever afterward albe it not so gorgeously builded, nor freely frequented, as they have been sithence the time of Constantine the great, appeareth both by the scripture, The Christians had always churches. and ecclesiastical histories, as in part I have proved before. S. Paul rebuking the Corinthians for eating and drinking in the church, said: Have ye not houses to eat and drink in? Aut ecclesiam Dei contemnitis? Or do ye contemn the church of God? 1. Cor. 1. Cap. 14. In the said epistle he said it is shame for a woman to talk in the church, and talketh of the coming in of the idiot and simple into the church, which argueth that they had then a church, that is to say some place where they might pray, and to which men might resort. S. Hierome telleth that Cornelius house was made a church. In vita Paulae. Philo judaeus who lived in the time of the Apostles, speaking as Eusebius noteth, De ecclesiis, of the churches, which the Christian men had at that time, writeth thus. Euseb. lib. 2. cap. 17. histo. Est in singulis locis consecrata orationi domus. There is in every place, a house hallowed to prayer, which is called a monastery which in our tongue may signify a company of honest men, unto which place, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Religious men and women in the time of the Apostles. Hymns. Lib. 7 cap. 11. histo. Eccle. In inferiora altaris. Altars. Libro 8. cap. 25. Fol. 81 b M. Calf. convinced by this own words. some severing themselves from the world, lead a virtuous and chaste life, and bring nothing into that place that apartayneth to meat and drink, or other necessary service of the body, but only the books of Moses, and volumes of the prophets and hymns to serve God, and such other things. Eusebius declareth that when in the persecution of Valerian, at Caesaraea a city in Palestine, one Marinus should be put to death, the bishop took him by the hand, and lead him, Ad ecclesiam, to the church, and there, with many words confirming him to the faith brought him to the inner part of the altar and animated him to martyrdom. Again in the xxv. chapter of the said book there is special mention of a church made in a manner by miracle. For at the prayer of S. Dionise of Alexandria, a rock was removed, and place made to build a church. But what seek I further proof of this, sing, M. Calfhils own words confessing that Diocletian hurled down, and spoiled the temples of the Christians, prove it evidently: for if he spoilt their temples and hurled down their churches in his time, then before his time, temples and churches were builded, and Christian men served God in them. Besides where he saith, Calf. Fol. 85. b that the Christians had their Oratories plucked down, and therefore had no leisure nor liberty, to be at such idle cost, nor had time to make images of Christ, it maketh nothing to the purpose. Mart. For let it be undoubtidly true that the persecution under Diocletian was so terrible that the Christians, had neither liberty, nor leisure to make images, will M. Calf. infer upon it, ergo they could not look upon those which were made before? Ergo Lactantius, did not make those verses exhorting every man to worship the cross? Straggling arguments Not, I suppose, if he be in his wits. These arguments straggle far, and wide from all good reason, much like as if either an idle soldier would say: The enemy come so fast and fierce upon us, that we could not run to the armoury to fet new weapon, ergo we could not fight with the old: or a horse leeche and Mountibanck, would reason thus: when Galene wrote his book of physic, noon were sick, ergo the work De sanitate tuenda, is noon of his. For as the soldier might fight well with his old weapon, although he could not come to the Armoury for new, and Galene writ his book de sanitate tuenda, to instruct all that should be sick afterward, although noon were sick presently: So albeit the Christians were so persecuted that they had no leisure to make new images, yet were they not so straighted, but that they might behold the old. And although the churches were thrown down, and no cross nor Crucifix left in them, nor Christians then daring openly to worship them, yet might Lactantius make those verses to instruct other that should come after, aswell as those that lived presently with him. And certes sing it appeareth by S. Hierome, that he had a grace in poetry, and made other works, carminibus Hexametris, De viris illustr. in long verses, as these are, there is more cause why this conjecture should be true, than that guess of M. Calfhils' likely: especially sing it hath passed these many years under his name uncontrolled, yea of Erasmus, who was a professed enemy to most of the ancient father's works, if they had any evident and plain testimony to convince certain truths of the catholic faith against the heretic. But as Lactantius lived under Diocletian when Churches, were thrown down, so lived he long under Constantine, when churches were a building, De viris illustr. Lactatius lived under Constantine. and dedicated his books of divine institutions, unto that good Emperor, and as S. Hierome recordeth, taught his son Chrispus in France, where the Christians lacked not churches at that tyme. For Constantine, by and by as soon as the council of Nice was ended, and his solemn feast celebrated: Out of hand builded churches in all haste, Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 18. Tripa. and did it in every city, and at the city that of his name was called Constantinople. The first church he builded, was not at Jerusalem in the thirty. year of his reign, as it pleaseth M. Calfhill to lie for his vantage. But of that when I come to talk of his lies, this for the present I will advertise the readers that there is no reason why Lactantius verses written of the passion should be refused as noon of his, because he lived under Diocletian, when churches were thrown down. For (as I have proved) he lived in great favour with Constantine as it may appear (because he had his son to teach) when churches in all cities of the emperors dominions were builded. Wherefore this crossequareller may whissel for a new reason: for his second is nothing worth. Touching the third cause, Calf. Fol. 81. a that this doctrine to worship the cross, is different from that which Lactantius taught, and was generally received in his days, for a brief answer, Mart. we say it is very false. For he never taught that it was unlawful to bow the knee to the sign of the cross: nor contrary to the religion of Christ to worship it, in such sort and manner, as the Christians do. Read his works over and over, and you shall find no clause, that condemneth this religion of the Christians. Lactantius never reproved the worshipping of the cross . In deed he is very vehement, and that justly in his books De falsa religione, against the gentils, who worshipped stocks, and stones, the sun, and moan, the earth and sea, and dead men, and women, as jupiter and juno for Gods. Their superstition and idolatry, he convinceth many ways, and proveth that God is not to be sought for, in earthly things, but in heaven, as the whole chapter alleged doth manifestly declare, where it is said, Libro 2. cap. 19 who soever endeavoureth to consider the mystery of man and to keep the dignity of his nature, let him raise up himself from the earth, and when his mind is lifted up, let him lift up his eyes to heaven. Let him not seek God under his feet, nor pluck out of the place where he treadeth, that which he must adore, For what so ever is under man, must of necessity be inferior to man. But God is greater than man, and therefore is above, and not beneath, not to be sought, in this low and base region, but in the highest of all. Wherefore there is no doubt, but that there is no religion, where there is simulachrum. A false and feigned image. Simulachrum. Nam si religio ex divinis rebus est etc. For if religion consist of Godly things, and there is no godly nor divine thing, but in coelestibus: In heavenly things, then false and feigned images lack religion, Lactantius speaketh against the false and feigned images of the gentiles. because there can be no heavenly thing, in that which is made of the earth, which may appear evidently to a wise man by the name itself. Quicquid enim simulatur id falsum sit necesse est, etc. For what soever is counterfeited, that must needs be false, and that can never take the name of truth, which by deceit and imitation, counterfeiteth the truth, and so forth, By which it is manifest that he speaketh of the gross, and idolatrous gentiles, that could not lift up their hearts to heaven, and seek God there: but had earthly cogitations, and thought the sun and moon, the earth, sea, and the idols which they made, to be their God, and so worshipped them: which to make more plainer, in the neyt chapter of the same book he saith: Now than a great and hard portion of the work which I took in hand, is dispatched, unless I be deceived, and the heavenly majesty giving me grace, and power to speak, I have driven away the old cankered and festered errors. Wherefore unless M. Calfhils' evangelical spirit hath forced him to fancy, that the Christians worship the sun and moon, and dead stocks, and stones as God, and fett out of the earth, and place where their feet tread, the thing which they woorshipp for God, and be fallen from Christianity to the old cankered and festered errors of the idolatrous gentiles, he can neither say that the Christians err in worshipping the cross, nor that the doctrine of Lactantius in his treatise upon the passion, is different from that which he himself teacheth. In his other books he forbiddeth us to worship idols as the gentiles did. In this he counseleth us to worship the cross of Christ as the Christians do, which to have been evermore lawful in Christ's church shall evidently appear, When I come to talk of adoration in the tenth article. As for these words: Carent ergo religione simulachra, quia nihil potest esse coeleste in ea re quae fit ex terra, False and forged images lack religion, be cause there can be no heavenly thing in that which is made of earth, it is to be understand, that simulachrum signifieth not as M. Calf. translateth it ever image, but (as Lactantius himself declareth and the Etymology of the word giveth) a feigned or forged image, such as the gentiles images of jupiter, Mercury, and Apollo were. In such there is no religion, but much impiety. The images that Christian men use in their churches are nor feigned, nor forged, but true images of Christ, and his blessed saints, not honoured as Gods, as the Gentiles idols were, but used to represent unto us Christ and his saints. And so far forth we do reverence them and worship them, not for the lump of earth, mass of metal, or piece of timber whereof the are fashioned, but for their sakes who by them are represented. Directing our hearts to the first samplers, How Christian men worship the cross. and not fixing our minds upon the work of the artificer, as these two verses: Nam Deus est quod imago docet, sed non Deus ipsa: Hanc videas, sed ment colas quod cernis in ipsa, God it is that the Rood doth show, itself no God, but wood: See this with eye, but serve with mind that thereby is understood, used of the fathers of the Nicene council do manifestly declare, and Damascene witness, speaking of the worshipping of the cross. We adore also the figure of the lively and precious cross, albeit it be made of an other matter, no worshipping the matter, for God forbidden that, but the figure, as the sign of Christ. By which it is evident that in a thing made of earth, considered in his own naure there is no religion. But in consideration that it signifieth a holy thing, no Christian man can deny, but that there is such religion in it, that it deserveth honour and reverence of men for the thing signified. As for example man is made of earth: Consider him in his own nature, there is nothing in him, but a lump of clay, and mass of sin, not to be esteemed. Consider him as he is made to the image of God, endued with grace, and washed from sin in baptism by Christ, there is an heavenly thing in him worthy to be reverenced. If this sense please not M. Calfhils' honour, M. Calves reason against himself. let him reason thus with himself. There can be no heavenly thing in that which is made of earth, but I Sir james Calfhill am a thing made of earth, ergo there can be no heavenly thing in me, ergo I have nor modesty nor shame, nor honesty, nor truth, nor charity nor faith, no virtue, nor grace, nor any other heavenly gift that proceedeth from God, an so by labouring to prove that Lactantius spoke against the images of Christ and his saints, have ꝓued myself no true member of his church. As for the place of S. August. Crucis mysterio basilicae dedicantur. Serm. 19 de Sanctis. Calf. Fol. 82. b Churches are dedicated with the sign of the cross, M. Calf. saith, he speaketh of no thing else, but of the mystery of the cross, and not of the sign, as I ignorantly translate it, Mart. where at I marvel much. For ꝓtestants were wounte to be so delighted with signs, that rather than they would lack a sign, they would controlle Christ of impropre speech and where he said: This is my body, make him by their interpretation say: this is not my body, but the sign of my body. Here and in other places where mention is made of a sign, it must not be taken in that sense, that the authors mean, and words bear well enough, but for the thing itself, and that only and alone without the sign. Which can not be. For albeit the passion of Christ doth sanctify all things (which all Christian men do confess) yet is there no sanctification wrought by ordinary course to man and the creatures of God, How things are sanctified. but by prayer and other external means. As for example, It is the passion of Christ that taketh away our sins, but by the element of water and ministery of man in baptism. It is the passion of Christ that doth sanctify his creatures, 1. Tim. 4. but, per verbum Dei & orationem, By the word of God and prayer. It is the passion of Christ that halloweth and consecrateth churches, but by his minister the bishop, praying, In 1. Cor. 7. and making the sign of the cross, which is, as S. Ambrose saith: Quaedam sanctificatio, A certain sanctification. For proof where of, let us examine a little better, the place of S. Augustine. Serm. 19 de sanctis . He saith: Crucifixus noster à morte refurrexit & coelos ascendit, crucem nobis in memoriam suae passionis reliquit, crucem reliquit ad sanitatem. Hoc signum praesidium est amicis, etc. That is to say: Our saviour Christ crucified, rose from death, and ascended into heaven, he left us the cross in remembrance of his passion, the cross he left to health, this sign is a safeguard, to the friends, and a bar to the enemies: with the mystery of the cross, the font of Baptism is hallowed, with the sign of the same cross, they that are baptized receive by imposition of hands, the gifts of grace, cum eiusdem crucis charectere basilica dedicantur, with the sign, or figure of the same cross, churches are dedicated, altars consecrated, the sacraments of the altar with the putting in between of our lords words are made. By this self same sign priests and Deacons are promoted to holy orders. Thus far S. Augustine: where it is to be noted, that this ancient father, Christ left us the cross in remembrance of his passion. saying that Christ left us the cross in remembrance of his passion, meaneth that Christ left us a true sign and figure of his cross, otherwise we must condemn S. Augustine of barbarism, and impropre speech. For if you take, Crucem, in that place for the passion itself, then must you say, Christ left his passion in remembrance of his passion, which we re sluttish a figure to precede from so learned and eloquent a father. Neither can M. Calf. have any advantage to escape the force of this place by the next words following, Crucem reliquit ad sanitatem, he left the cross to health, that is to say to work health to men. For the very sign of the cross through the merits and virtue of Christ's passion, hath wrought health to many, as the histories declare, and S. Augustine himself wittnesseth in his books de civitate Dei, Libro 22. cap. 8. where he telleth how a gentle woman called Innocentia, was cured of a canker in her breast with the sign of the cross. Besides the words. Hoc signum praesidium est amicis, This sign is a safeguard to freneds and the rest that follow, declare manifestly, that he spoke before of the sign of the cross. To express the same he useth these terms, signum, mysterium, S. August. in this place speaketh of the sign of the cross. character, Sign, mystery, character, or figure. Whereas if he he had meant nothing but the passion, it had been sufficient to say: Cruce rudes cathechizantur, cruce fons regenerationis consecratur, cruce basilicae dedicantur, etc. The ignorant are thought with the passion, the font of baptism is hallowed with the passion, churches are dedicated with the passion. He would never have used so many words. But he knew both to be necessary. The passion as the principal from whence all sanctification and holiness cometh, the sign as an instrument by which is it derived unto us, and to the thing which is to be sanctified. Therefore supposing all Christian men to be verily persuaded of the first, he thought it expedient to commend the second, that is to say, the sign of the cross, by which the sanctification specified before is wrought. Besides, that the mystery of the cross is taken in this place for the sign of the cross, it may well appear by an other place of S. Augustin, De symb. add Cathec. lib 2 ca 1. Act. 1. where talking of those that were Catechumeni, young learners of their faith, he saith as I mentioned before, ye are not yet borne again by holy baptism, but ye are conceived in the womb of your holy mother the church, by the sign of the cross. For here it is evident, that young learners, called catechumeni, when they were taught the faith received a sign of the cross, and by that sign were adopted in to the numbered of Christians, as the manner was in the primitive church, and by that taught how Christ died, which thing S. Augustine meaneth here, by these words: Crucis mysterio rudes cathechizantur, the ignorant are taught with the mystery of the cross. If this like not our adversaries vain: Let him construe it, and see how it can serve his purpose. Calf. Rudes, The ignorant, cathechizantur, are taught mysterio, with the mystery, crucis, of the cross. Mart. Well, what ca●e is mysterio? Calf. The ablative case. Mart. why so? Calfhill. All verbs require an ablative case of the instrument, of the cause or of the manner of doing. Mart. Ah, well done Sir, I perceive you have not forgot all your grammar rules. By your rule then, mystery, in that place signifieth, either an instrument wherewith they were taught, or the cause why they were taught, or the manner how they were taught: if it be so, then can it in no wise signify the passion itself. Because the passion is neither the instrument, where with they were taught, neither the cause why they were taught, nor the manner how they were taught, but the very thing itself which they were taught, and so brought to faith in Christ, and hope of eternal salvation, by his death. M Calf. convinced by his grammar rules . Thus by his own construction, you may perceive (good readers) that he doth, but cavil and quarrel and deceive the ignorant with some show of words. Mysterium in that place of S. Augustine can not otherwise be taken in the judgement of any learned man, than for the sign of the cross: Neither am I to be accused of ignorance for translating it so, sing the author himself doth so take it, and reason convince, that it can not be otherwise. Marry I must confess an error in the printer, who in this place having mysterio in his copy, but dashed a little with a pen, and charactere written for it in the margin, set mysterio, for charactere, mystery for character, and so altered S. Augustine's words, as he hath done in an other place, for which, pardon would esely be obtained, if it might be known with what difficulty books are printed of duitche men that understand not our languadge. The words of S. Augustine are: cum eiusdem crucis charactere basilicae dedicantur, with the character or figure of the same cross Churches are dedicated. What is the character or figure of the cross? the passion of Christ as M. Calfhil imagineth? no: but one of the instruments with which churches are dedicated, in honour of Christ, to celebrated the memory of his passion, the very sign itself, of which he talketh much in that sermon. But to disprove this, M. Calfhil useth this fond reason. Fol. 82. b Calf. The sign of the cross is no ordinary mean wherbie God useth to confer health upon the sick, ergo he hath not ordained it to remain in the church for any remembrance of his death and passion. Profoundely by S. Mary, and like a clerk, Mart. if I were acquainted with ever a point maker in Waltam, I would request him to give this fine logisoner, some halfpenny points, to tie his lose arguments together. For unless they be better tied they will range so far, that they will shame that their M. for ever: Diogenes on a time meeting a minstrel that made as good melody as this minister, maketh argument, used this salutation unto him, Salue gall, God morrow cock, and when the minstrel asked, why he saluted him after that sort, marry (quoth. Diogenes Laertius. Quia canens omnes excitas. Because with your merry piping you stir up all. So if a man happily meet this our ministre early in the morning, he may put of his cap gently, and say, Salue gall, God morrow M. Cock, and if he ask a cause why, Diogenes answer may suffife, Quia omnes excitas, because you stir us up all to laughter with your gay sophistry. It is much like as if one should say. The bible is not and ordinary mean whereby God useth to confer healt upon the sick, M. Calves. reasoning ergo God hath not ordained it to be preached in the Church for a declaration of his holy will: and so proceeding a little further negatively, deny and refuse the scriptures with the Swenkfeldians. Wherefore good readers beware of this younker betime, let him not deceive you any longer with vain words: his reason hath no more truth nor sequel in it, than that, which as you see be is both impious and blasphemers, and yet you see, how he gloseth it. He telleth a fair tale that Christ, Calf. Fol 82. b left us his words to put us in mind of his passion, and the poor and comfortless Christians to feed our eyes upon: as for the Rood and crucifix, they may be compared to the gentiles idols. Mart. Touching the first, no man can deny, but that Christ hath left his words to excite us. But what of that? will M. Calfhill infer upon it, ergo he hath left nothing else beside his word, to put us in mind of his passion? All men can not read, all men can not come to the church. All men can not here a sermon, all men can not be in place where M. minister is at all times and all hours: and hath God ordained nothing to put them in mind of the passion of Christ? That were hard. If you say he hath ordained the poor and comfortless Christians to put us, that is as M. Calf. meaneth in his own person, and his brothers, Archedeacons', and Chancellors, deans and superintendents, Lords and Ladies and other that are rich, in remembrance of his death, what is ordained for the poor, and comfortless themselves, that seldom come to church, that hear sermons very rare, that scarce have a minister to preach unto them in a year? hath he provided nothing for them? Did Christ take such pain to redeem them, and now doth he forget to provide for them? Not M. Calf. God hath special care of all, and hath diverse ways and means besides his word, to put us in remembrance of the death of our Saviour Christ. Of which sing it hath pleased his divine majesty to ordain by general counsels (to which he promised the assistance of his grace) and appointed by the prelates of the church (to whom he committed the chardg and government of his flock) the sign of the cross and images to be one, what impiety is there in you to liken them to the gentiles idols, and judge Christian men to be idolaters? Intolerable I assure you. The blessed martyr justine sayeth: Quaest. 149 If to such impiety which opinion and imagination only breadeth talk and assertion be added, the impiety is made more greater. If it be both affirmed, and put out in writing, of necessity such ungodliness compriseth all malice and wickedness. Your digression and wild wandering talk, Fol. 83. a and places alleged out of S. Augustine, make nothing against our images. All is spoken against the idols of the gentils, which we detest. In his days Christian men had images, yea in the churches, as I have declared in the preface, and proved M. Calf. both to misconter, and also to falsify S. Augustine's words. Wherefore credit him accordingly, and never think that so ancient a father, and learned bishop as S. Augustine was, could be so fond affected, as he ymagineth against the use of the images of Christ and his saints amongst Christians in the church. To come to Paulinus, Fol. 84. a- Calf. Paulinus. our adversary granteth that a leaven hundred years a go, the sign of the cross was erected in some churches, but he saith, it sufficeth not to say, Mart. this was once so, but proved it must be, that it was well so. The prescription of a leaven hundred years, the use of Christian people, the authority of so ancient a father, as Paulinus was, will not serve to dispute against heretics: we must find manifest and evident proof, yea and that in the scripture, that they did well in having crosses in the churches, or else it shall not prevail, nor then neither: What hardness of heart and incredulity is this? S. Bernard was wont to say, that it was: Imperfecti cordis, De praecepto & dispensatione 〈◊〉. & infirmae voluntatis indicium statuta seniorum curiosius discutere, etc. A token of an unperfect heart, and weak will, to discuss somewhat curiously the ordinances of their elders, to stick at all that is enjoined, to require a reason of every thing and to suspect evil of every precept the cause whereof is not known, neither to obey willingly at any time, unless they hear, that which happily please them, or plain reason or undoubted authority, do evidently show, not to be otherwise lawful and expedient. And certes so may we say of M. Calf. requiring proof, that the ancient fathers did well in governing the church of Christ committed unto their charged. But sing it pleaseth him to have it proved that it was well done, I will reason thus with him. Paulinus that hearing (as S. Hierome saith) those words of our saviour, Epist. ad Pauli. de instit. Mona●hi. if thou wilt be perfect, cell all that thou hast, and follow me, turned words into works and following the naked cross climbed up the ladder of jacob, and reioised that he was poor, & puris manibus & candido pectore, & spiritu & operibus, with clean hands, sincere heart, both in spirit and all his works, Paulinus (as S. Ambrose saith) nulli secundus, second to noon, Paulinus that gave away all his goods, Libro 6. epist 36. ad Sabi. Quo impensius Deo seruiret: that he might serve God more earnestly, Paulinus Bishop of Nola▪ copiosissimè a Lib 1. cap 10. de civit▪ Dei. sanctus, abundantly holy (as S. Augustine saith) seaking God in simplicity of his heart, b Epist. 32. ad Pauli. sentiens de illo in bonitate, & afferens ei claritatem et honorem, thinking of God in goodness, and bringing unto him glory and honour, c Epist. 34 Lib. 3. dial. cap. 1. Whose breast is such an oracle of God, that we presumed to have answers given from thence to the most babbling questions, Paulinus (as S. Gregory saith) Vir domini, the man of god, that gave all that he had to poor and needy captives, This Paulinus, I say, so holy, so virtuous, and so learned a bishop, set up the sign of the cross in his church at Nola, and desired others by his letters to do the like, and no Catholic Bishop or general council did ever find fault with him, ergo it was well done. If he deny this argument I prove it after this sort? Whatsoever any holy and learned father, skilful in the scriptures of God, and right sense of the same did at any time, and was never controlled of any catholic and learned father for the doing of it, was well done, and must so be taken. But Paulinus an holy and learned bishop etc. did set up the sign of the cross in his church: and was never controlled of any learned and catholic for it: Ergo it was well done. De corona militis . If M. Calf. reply, and say, it was done without warrant of scripture or commandment from God, Let Tertullian answer, he saith: Dost not thou think it lawful for every faithful man to conceive and ordain, especially that which is agreeable with God, which is expedient for discipline and good order, which is profitable to salvation? sing our lord saith? Why do ye not judge of yourselves that which is good? etc. If that will not serve, Let S. August. answer, who in one place saith thus: Lib. 50. homi. 49 I fully and wholly warn you of this. I require you, I command you, the bishop commandeth you, Christ commandeth by me. In another place he saith: God hath spoke by Angels, by Prophets, by his own mouth, In Psal. 49 by his Apostles he himself speaketh by his faithful servants, by such a simple man as I am he speaketh, when I speak the truth, he maketh a sound every where, tangendo, modificando & inspirando. By touching directing, and inspiring their hearts. By which it is manifest that what soever is done, by the bishops and faithful dispensers of Christ's mysteries in the unity of the church to the honour of God, is done by God himself, who giveth his steward's commission here in earth, to plant, and sow the seed of his Gospel, and work all things they can, to the edifying of his body, Ephes 4. which is the church until we meet all in the unity of faith and knowledge of the son of God. So that M. Calf. needeth no longer doubt, but that it was well done to set up the sign of the cross in the church, sing it was done by so learned and holy a bishop, and faithful steward of Christ, as Paulinus was, who knowing his masters will in his scriptures, would never adventured to have set up that sign, if from the beginning of Genesis to the last letter of the Apocalypse, which he had oftentimes read, and profundely tried) he could have found any precept, or clause that did fobid it. Whereas he chargeth Paulinus, for commending a woman, Fol. 84. b. Calf. that separated herself from her own husband under pntemce of religion, and citeth in the margin the 3. epistle ad Aprium. I give him to understand, Mart. that he foully reporteth this holy father. In all his third Epistle, ad Aprium, there is no such thing to be found, but the contrary. Whereby it appeareth, Paulinus slandered. that M. Calfhil trusteth Melanchton, Luther's slave to much, and would not remove his eye from the book which he made (de ecclesia) of the church, to the original and epistle of Paulinus, where the very argument showeth, that he commendeth Apers wife, because she abstained from wedlock work, by the consent of her husband, according to S. Paul's counsel. In the epistle itself there be two notable places, that convince this to be an open slander. The first is this: Benedicti vos domino etc. You are blessed of God, who made both one, hiding two in himself, working miracles alone, who turneth not only souls, but affections, changing temporal things, into such as are everlasting. Behold, ye that were before one, man and wife, are not now man and wife, as ye were. You being the same, are not the same. As ye did not know Christ in flesh: So you do not know one an other according to the flesh. Haec mutatio dextrae excelsi. This change is of the right hand of the highest. The second place is this: Non illam a proposito tuo discors abiungit voluntas. Not disagreeing will, doth separate her from thy purpose. But (which is more marvel) one uniform faith doth divide her in work, that is joined in william. By which it is evident that Aper and his wife did very well agreed together, and separated themselves by mutual consent, from carnal company. Aper entering into holy orders, and made a bishop, his wife remaining in the state she was before, addressing her husband's woordly things, and not refusing his company, as M. Calf. falsely affirmeth without mutual consent under cloak of religion. Fol. 84. b Besides where he saith that Paulinus affirmeth that the book of the epistles which the Apostles wrote, laid unto diseases healed them, A lie fathred upon Paulinus. and allegeth for it, his verses, ad Cytherium, track him he that will and he shall take him in a lie, and well understand that he leaveth the goodly pleasant rivers, and fissheth in dirty puddells and stinking lakes. First Paulinus there, speaketh not in general of the books of the Apostles epistles, but of the book of S. Paul's epistles only. Then he saith not that they were laid unto diseases, but telleth how one Martinianus, with other Christians, being in danger of drowning, was preserved by that book, through the goodness of God, who as he he gave. S. Paul once, all their lives that were in the peril of death upon the sea, so he gave Martinianus and his company at that tyme. But as for any one fillable of leying it unto diseases, it is not there to be found. Wherefore what credit shall we give to this cross byter, who with a false slander and vain lie, laboureth to discredit so ancient a father? Any more than to a slanderer and liar? He that lysteth to be deceived may: he that leeketh to understand the truth will better try, ere he trust, if he be wise. If Paulinus had either commended Apre wives, for separating herself from her husband without mutual consent, or affirmed that the books of the apostles epistles laid to diseases healed them, yet should the word of God have never the less force, nor medicines be abhorred, nor men accounted fools for imitating of him, in setting up the sign of the cross. For where a Doctor swerveth from scripture, no man aught to follow him: where he speaketh not against the scripture, but tendeth to edifying, and hath the use of the church and consent of all Catholic Bishops for that doctrine, therein whosoever doth not follow him shallbe accounted but an arrogant fool, Confidens in stultitia sua, trusting in his own folly. Prover. 17 Now let us consider, what he saith against justinians' constitutions, and custom of the Church. First he saith, justinianus. Calf. Fol. 84 b Fol 8●. a Mart. that the order taken by justinians' constitutions, That no man build a church, before the Bishop hath consecrated the place with prayer, and set up the sign of the cross, is but politic, as he answered to the Synod kept at Orleans, and no matter of Religion. But let me ask him this question. If it were only a civil policy, why was it not done by a civil magistrate whom God hath ordained to rule in politic matters and civil affairs? If it were no matter of religion why is the bishop required to be there? Why is he willed to hold up his hands to heaven, to hallow the place with prayer? and to set up a cross, more than any other thing? Is it not the mark that signeth, Emperors and kings, princes, and dukes and all that willbe saved by christ, in the forehead? Is it not the mark and sign as justinian saith) nostrae salutis, of our salvation? Not Christian man believing that our redemption was wrought upon the cross, can think otherwise. The Bishop then being religious for his person, the lifting up of his hands praying, and consecrating, pertaining to religion, why should, the setting up of the cross required to be done, as well as the rest, and that with prayer and consecration, which pertain to religion, and by a bishop who is religious, why I say should it be politic only and no matter of religion? M. Calf. forgetteth his old logic rule, that saith similium idem est judicium, of things that are like we must have like judgement. If he do so, yet I trust he remembreth his grammar rule that teacheth him, that all that belong to one thing must be put in one case. The bishop that dedicateth the church is religious, the holding up of his hands, and consecraring with prayer pertain to religion. Therefore the sign of the cross, which is one of the three things, that justinian requireth in dedicating of a church, is a matter of religion, aswell as the rest, and not politic and civil, as our young M. pntendeth: but put case that it appertaineth to the external policy of the church? May there any unlawful thing be allowed, for the setting forth the policy of the church? No. But let that be pardoned. why sayeth he: that justinian lived in the time of great ignorance and barbarity, Fol. 85. a. and enacted a thing contrary to truth? If there were nothing else, the writing of the civil law, justinian lived not in time of ignorance. might plainly convince against him, that men of those days were neither ignorant, nor barbarous. It is so wittily conceived, and so eloquently penned, that if wisdom were to be sought, and eloquence lost, they might be found t●●re. In his time lived Priscianus, a notable grammarian. Procopius, a learned historiographer, Arator, a divine poet. Cassiodorus a notable divine, Benedictus, a virtuous and learned abbot. S. Medard, and Gildard both Bishops and Brothers by one father, and mother, Vide Pantaleon. Doctissimi, very excenllently learned, Silverius pietate & eruditione pollens, notable for Godliness and learning. In his time the fift general council was kept at Constantinople against iiij. famous heretics, Peter, Anthymus, Severus and Zoaras, to the which Epiphanius, bishop of Tyrus, and other learned Bishops under him sent their learned epistles, by which it is easy to be perceived that justinian lived not in the time of ignorance and barbarity. As for his laws whither he enacted any thing contrary to a truth, let such as have authority judge. They that are bound to live according to the prescript of laws, must not sit in judgement of the equity of the laws. It is an evil common weal, where every theafe may say, the laws of the lawful prince are enacted conrrary to a truth. Yet such is the audacity of heretics that whatsoever law liketh not their ligier and light brains, they will say it is enacted contrary to a truth. But how prove you M. Calfhill that this law of justinian is enacted contrary to a truth? Hath Christ who is truth itself, forbidden it? Hath the word of God (which is infallibly true) inhibited it? Have any Apostle or general council ruled by the holy Ghost condemned it? If it be so open your secrets, and communicate them with us. We read the scriptures and can find no such inhibition. We turn over the councils, and can note no such countermaunde. The daily practice of the church assisted, according to Christ's promise with the holy Ghost, showeth us the contrary. Pius the fourth of blessed memory, building a church in these later days, hallowed it himself, and according to the order of the Canons, and this law of justinian set up there: Venerabilem crucem, signum salutis nostrae. A reverend cross the sign of our salvation Which is a material cross, M. Calf. a cross in the fourth signification, of the which I promised to speak. Look to my division in the first Article, and if you find it so, then deceive not the simple with inverting my words. And sing you account, justinians' authority grave that calleth the cross, venerabilem, adorandam, & vere honorandam, reverend, worthy to be adored, and truly worshipped, and accounteth it, Signum salutis nostrae: The sign of our salvation, think your own head, but fantastical, and judgement very light, for accounting it impious, and blasphemous, and calling it an heathenish observance, a magical enchantment, and conquest against Christians. With all, consider that you gain nothing but shame to yourself: every boy in the schools can tell you, that, opponere non est solvere: An objection far from the matter, is no answer. The constitution that you bring of Valens and Theodosius, against the law of justinian, Fol 85. a Valens and Theodosius. is borrowed out of the image homily, and that which you attribute to Petrus Crinitus the homily author referreth to one Petrus Erinilus. In the which you are both grossly deceived, you for trusting Petrus Crinitus, as a received author, who lived but of late years, and was of no fame, nor profound learning, but skilled in points of humanity, like a pedant of Italy: He for fathering that upon an author whose name is a well known as the man in the moan. We may perceive what narrow shifts you seek, when for a proof of so ancient a law, you repair to him that lived in a manner, but yesterday. Sweet flowers be rare where nettles, are so made of. Good authors scant, where an humanitian, a schoolmaster, and a late writer is alleged, for a received author. Let me use your own Rhetoric. Not such constitution of Valens and Theodosius to beseene in any ancient author as M. Calf. allegeth . If Valens and Theodosius, made such a law what an oversight was it of Eusebius to suppress it? What an escape of Sozomenus and other historiographers, to forget it? What negligence in the fathers of Nice that could not espy it? what evil chance that it never come into the Code of justinian with other emperors constitutions? In good sooth he had need to have as many eyes as Argus and then thousand more, that should find that constitution, Which was never made. The constitution that you cite out of Peter Crinite, hath no appearance of truth. Valens and Thedosius never lived together. Lib. 1 Ti. 8 Valens and Theodosius the second never reigned together, much less made this constitution. The constitution which you mean was made by Theodosius and Valentinian and is registered in the Code of justinian in this sort: Seeing we have a diligent care to maintain the religion of God, in all points, we specially command that it be lawful for no man to engrave, or paint the sign of our Saviour Christ, either in the ground or in flint, or in marble stones laid upon the ground, but whatsoever cross is found (so painted or engraved (we command it to be taken away, and will him to be severely punished that shall attempt the contrary to our ordinances. Thus much Theodosius, and Valentinian. And what hath M. Calf. gained by this, but an opinion of folly, that had rather trust Peter Crinite, a late writer, than seek to the original, and try out the truth. Now then sing we have found the true constitution, not of Valens and Theodosius, but of Theodosius and Valentinian, let us see whither it maketh not much for the honour of the cross. First they call it: Signum salvatoris Christi, the sign of our saviour Christ. If it be his sign, them is it honourable. For all that is his, is holy, The cross the sign of our saviour. and worthy of all honour. Again if it be the sign of our saviour Christ, them is it nor magical enchantment, nor conjurers mace, nor helmet of hell, nor conquest against the Christians, as M. Calf. saith. For as there is no society between Christ and Belial, so is there no likeness between those things that appertain to Christ and Belial. Besides the good Emperors would not have it trod upon. Nor villainously abused, and therefore did forbidden it to be printed upon the ground, and in forbidding that, they taught they should maintain the religion of God. But M. Calf. and his companious think the throwing of it down and treading it under their feet, and villainous abusing of it, to be a maintenance of the religion of God, even as the infidels and jews thought they should do God very acceptable service, if the destroyed the faith, and religion of Christ. Wherein how far they are wide from the piety and zeal of those good Emperors, every indifferent man may see: And note withal, that the scalding spirit of scolding eloquence, M. Calf●. phrase. Fol. 85. b proper to protestants, come fiercely with some raging heat upon M. Calf. when he thought to shifted away the authority of the church by calling it, the synagogue of Satan. That slanderous term is often in their writings, but oftener in their mouths. Fol. 85. b But tell us O, ye evangelical brethren that will admit nothing but scripture, that brag unto the people that you preach nothing, but the word of the lord, and boldly say that you follow the ancient fathers of the primitive church, tell us, I say, Fol. 143. The commendation which the fathers give the church of Rome. where find you in all scripture, that the church of Rome is called the Synagogue of Satan? What ancient father doth so report of it? What doctor of the primitive church doth so term it? I told you in my conclusion that by Ignatius (who lived within an hundred and eleven years next after Christ) the Church of of Rome where Peter had his seat, was called, a church sanctified, and lightened with the will of God, precedent and chief in the nation of the Romans: worthy of God for faith, pre-eminence, blessedness, and peace: founded in the faith and love of Christ: I told you out of S. Cyprian, that it is called the principal church, from whence the priestly unity is sprounge: out of Irenaeus, that it is the church to which all Christian men must come for the mightier principality, and pre-eminence. I told you out of S. Amb. that it is the house of God: out of Leo, that is a scholar of truth, an holy nation a priestly and princely city, made by the holy seat of Peter the head of the world. I told you, out of Theodoritus, that is the greatest church, the most noblest church, and the church that hath the pnsidenceshipp over all nations: out of the oration of Martinianus the Emperor and Laws of justinian, that it is called, the Apostolical throne, the country of laws, the fountain of priesthood, Find us your terms that you give to the church of Rome, in the fathers M. Calf? Fol. 85. b and head of all churches. Why believe ye not them? If ye wilbe children of the ancient fathers, why vary you in principal points, from those things that the fathers have written? Why say you that ever sithence, Syluester's time which was in the year of our lord 318. such filth of idolatry and superstition hath flowed into the most parts of all Christendom out of the sink of Rome that he needed as many eyes as Argus, that should have espied any sincerity until the time that heretics, and miscreants began to reform the decayed state? Irenaeus calleth it Ecclesiam maximam, antiquissimam, omnibus cognitam, à gloriosissimis duobus Apostolis Petro & Paulo fundatam, Lib. 3. ca 3. a great church, a most ancient church, a church known to all, a church founded of the two glorious Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul. S. Cyprian saith: It is the only church to which infidelity could never have access. Epist. ad Damas . And sithence Syluestres time, S. Hierome said. The holy church of Rome, which hath always remained unspotted, shall continue always, God providing for it, and S. Peter helping, without the insultation of heretics, and persist steadfast and immovable always. Again in the same epistle he saith: The evil child being banished from the patrimony, the authority of the fathers remaineth uncorrupt, with you only. Ibi cespite terra faecundo dominici seminis veritatem centeno fructu refert. There the ground with her fertile soil, doth bring forth the truth of our lords seed with an hundred fold increase. S. Ambrose saith, Epist. ad Siricium Papa. Epist. 162. that the church of Rome doth observe the faith of the Apostles undefiled and without bleamish. S. Augustine saith, that in the church of Rome, semper Apostolica cathedra viguit principatus. The principality of the Apostolic chair hath always flourished. The same father reckoning up all the Bishops of Rome from S. Peter unto Anastasius, Epist. 165. who was the sixt Pope after Silvester, saith: Of all those, there was: Nullus Donatista, never a Donatist, not one traitor. Now if any of the six, that S. Augustine reckoneth after Silvester, had suffered idolatry, and superstition, to flow out of the Sink of Rome into the most parts of Christendom (as you say) they had been worse than Donatists, worse than traitors. But by S. Augustine's judgement there was no heresy, nor treason in that see, much less idolatry, and superstition. S. Bernard, said, In the church of Rome, fides non potest sentire defectum: Epist. 190. ad Innocent. Papa. faith can feel no defect. And with what face can you say that these twelve hundred years and more, there was no sincerity in the church of Rome, but idolatry and superstition? If it be so how was the promise of Christ made to S. Peter, Matt. 16. Matt. 28. that hell gates should not prevail against the church fulfilled? How hath Christ kept his covenant that said. Behold I am with you all days until the end of the world? How hath the holy ghost of who me it was said, Ille suggerei vobis omnia, & docebit omnem veritatem, joan. 14. joan. 16. he shall prompt unto you all things, and teach you all truth, discardged his office? How are S. Paul's words verified that said, the church is, columna & firmamentum veritatis, the pillar and foundation of truth? 1. Tim. 3. Let us have your judgement. For if the most parts of all Christendom were from the time of Silvester twelve hundred years in idolatry and superstition, without any piece of sincerity, hell gates prevailed against Christendom, Christ was not faithful in his promise, the hoylyghost not careful in his government, S. Paul not wise in his words. If you say, that Christ had his church remanyning in some countries not withstanding the most parts of all Christendom fell into idolatry and superstition, we tell you that this is plain against scripture. Christ's church is Catholic, and universal, dispersed through out the whole world. It remaineth not in corners and coasts as heresies do. God promised Abraham, Gene. 26. Psal. 2. that in his seed all nations should be blessed, he saith to Christ ask of me and I will give thee nations for thy inheritance, and the ends of the world, for thy possession. If the the whole world is Christ's possession, and the whole world is his inheritance, his church must needs be universal in the world, and not be shut up in this or that corner. The Donatists were in that heresy, that the church which was once universal, decayed and rested with few in Africa, In Psal. 101. as you be now. But S. Augustine said, they that say so, be not in that church. He accounteth their voice that say so, abominable and detestable, full of presumption and falsity, bolstered with no truth, lightened with no wisdom, tempered with no wit, but vain, rash headlong, and pernicious, as you may and see in the fortress of faith, set forth by M. Stapleton of late, Fol. 18. discussed at large. Again if Christ had a church in some corner all that time, you must tell us where it was. The church of Christ is visible, as a city set upon an hill, Matt. 5. Matt. 18. it can not be hid, men must resort unto it. Christ willing us to tell the church if occasion so served, meant that his church should be known. Wherefore if twelve hundred years and more, idolatry and superstition flowed so into the most parts of Christendom, Fol. 85. b that he needed as many eyes (as Argus that should have espied any piece of sincerity, I would you and your fellows would vouchsafe to use some honest conference, and upon an uniform accord signify unto us in writing, diverse opinions amongst protestāns for the time when the church began to decay. Fol. 85. b Fol. 96. a. why and when Christ lost his church, through out the world, and suddenly began to have it amongst protestāns. As yet you are not agreed when Christ's Church began to fail: you say here that sithence Silvester's time, idolatry and superstition flowed into most parts of Christendom: In an other place, you say that within .cc. years after Christ many idle ceremonies, crept into the church, and the simplicity of Christ's ordinance was refused. Luther said the church decayed after v. hundred years, the M. of the martyrologue after a M. years, M. juel, after six hundred. So that as yet there is a great variety between the gospelers, when the church begun to fail. Wherefore sing my request is reasonable, Epist 161. such as S. Augustine made to the Donatists, let us learn of your wisdoms when the church failed, where it hath been sithence, and how it come thither, what Bishops it had, and by what succession it continued. Tertullian required heretics to show the beginning of their churches, In prescr. and declare the order of their bishops, running so down lineally by succession, that the first bishop had one of the Apostles, or Apostolic men, Prove your succession M. Calf. show the beginning and continuance of your church. In Psal 18 The Catholic church always visible. Luc. 15. his author and predecessor: as the church of Smyrna had Polycarpe placed of S. john, and the church of Rome S. Clement ordained by S. Peter. The same must we require of you. For Christ had ever more a visible church in earth. For God, saith S. August. Hath placed his tabernacle in the sun, that is his holy church, he placed his Church is an open place, not in secret, not that it should lurk in a corner, not that it should be as it were secret, jest peradventure, it might be as it were secret, as the conventicles of heretics are. He hath placed his tabernacle in the sun: why dost thou o heretic flee into darkness? Art thou a Christian man? Here Christ. Art thou his servant? Here thy lord. Art thou his son? Here thy father. A mend, revive again, let us say of thee, he was dead and is revived again, he was lost, and is found again▪ Now if you M. Calf. can show no such church set upon a mountain, or placed in the sun, as I am sure you can not, think this spoken to you, and be not ashamed to learn of S. Augustine, where he saith against the Manichees, There be many things which keep me justly in the bosom of the catholic church. The consent of all people and nations do keep me: Cont epist. Manich. cap. 4. the authority begun with miracles, Nourrished with hope, increased with charity, and established with antiquity, doth keep me. The Catholic church ever prevailed against heresy. The succession of Bishops from the seat of the Apostle S. Peter, to whom Christ committed the feading of his sheep after his resurrection, until this Bishop that presently possesseth the place, doth keep me. Finally the name of the Catholic Church, doth keep me, which hath only so prevailed against heresies, that whereas all heretics would be called Catholics yet for all that, when a stranger asketh where, or whither, he shall go to the Catholic Church, noon dareth show any Church or house. By which you may see that the Church of Rome, hath ever prevailed against heresies, The succession of bishops in the church of Rome. azure bond to stay men in the Catholic church. and that the succession of Bishops in that Seat is a sure bond to stay men in the Catholic church, and such, as stayed S. Augustine himself at that present, who was long after Syluester's time; and a man that knew the scriptures to well, to be deceived either with idolatry, or superstition. Wherefore both you and your fellow protestants must either deny, that Christ had any church these twelve hundred years, or recant your villainous terms, and slanderoous words, in saying that the church of Rome, is the Synagogue of Satan and sink of idolatry and superstition. For as I proved out of the fathers, it is the only church, that hath condemned all superstition, and idolatry. It is the church that hath ever prevailed against heresy and shall never be over thowen, Not, not by hell gates, and all the power of the devil: or else deny yourselves to be children, of the church and followers of the ancient fathers. For either they were deceived, or ye be liars. Besides, that the church, of Rome is the Catholic church or at the lest wise, the root and mother of the Catholic church it appeareth by Cyprian, S. Ambr. S. Hierome, Libro 4. Epist 2. Libro 4. epist 8. He that will be a Catholic must communicate with the church of Rome. In Orat. fu. de obit. fra. Ad Dama●●. Aument. 'tis 4. and justinian. By S. Cyprian who saith, to be with Cornelius (who was bishop of Rome) was to communicate with the Catholic church: to allow and firmly hold the community of Cornelius, was to hold and firmly keep, the unity and Charity of the Catholic Church. S. Ambr. saith, to be one of the Catholic Bishops is to agreed with the church of Rome. S. Hierome, telleth, that every one that gathereth not with the bishop of Rome scattreth. justinian saith, the Church of Rome is matter omnium sanctarum Ecclesiarum: The mother of all holy churches. Wherefore if any church is to be followed, this is to be followed, if any is to be obeyed, this is to be obeyed. If the tradition or custom of any church is to be kept, the tradition and custom of the church of Rome is to be kept. Because it never admitteh any custom that is contrary either to reason, or truth, but condemneth then, that despise the truth and follow customs, as the eight distinction in the decres, doth plainly declare, and with all concludeth that when truth beareth with custom, Custom. Cap frustra dist. 8 nothing should be more firmly holden than custom. Therefore if M. Calf. would have gained any thing by disannulling their custom, he should have proved first, that it is against either reason, or truth: and than have alleged the Canons against us, for presuming to build upon custom. But that passeth his capacity: De bapt. count Donatist lib. 2. cap. 8. his London learning could not stretch so far. S. Augustine talking of the custom that the church had to receive them by imposition of hands who had been baptized of heretics, believed that, that custom come of the tradition of the Apostles. As many things are not found in their writings, neither in the councils of their aftercummers, yet for all that, because they are kept through the universal church, they are believed to have been delyured and commanded of noon, but of the Apostles. Here I beseek you mark, S. Augustine's reason: he proveth that certain things not written in scripture, nor determined in counsels, were believed to have been delyured, and commended of the Apostles, Things generally used believed to come from the Apostles. De corona mil tis. because they were used generally in the Church, which reason Tertullian also used long before. For speaking of an old observance he saith, if no scripture hath determined this, certes custom hath strenghtned it, which undoubtidly proceeded out of tradition. For how can a thing, be used, unless it were left first by tradition? So that it is to be understood, that if there were neither scripture, nor council, that made, for the use, and having of the sign of the cross, yet sing it hath been generally used in all Christendom, Custom. this twelve hundred years ever sithence pope Silvester's rhyme, by M. Calfhils' own confession, this general and ancient custom, were a sufficient argument to prove that it was delyured, an commended unto the church by the Apostles, neither against reason, In contradictorio jud. cio. nor scripture. But thanks be to God besides tradition, we have councils of the bishops and laws of the Emperors whose authority is more weightier than can be blown away with the bellowing blast, of such a quarreling Calf. As for his slandering the virtuous lady Helena with superstition, I will talk in the eight Article. Fol. 86. a As for his synistrous surmises that the Christian Emperor Constantine would have some piece of Gentility observed in building of churches, Fol. 86. b I count as vain. His tongue is no slander. As for the reputing the decrees of Silvester, Donation of Constantine, apparation of Peter and Paul to be tales and impudent lies, I do not marvel. Fol. 86 b Heretics will deny the moste undoubtedst truth, that is, yea the plain words of scripture itself, if it make against them. as Luther denied the epistle of S. Paul to the Hebrews, S. james epistle and S. judes, and the Apocalypse of S. john. As for his comparing jonas Bishop of Orleans, a great learned man, that lived eight hundred years sithence, and more, unto a nettle, Fol. 87. a it is not rare, with protestants. No man is learned, no man worthy of credit, if he favour not heresy. Wherefore gentle readers sigh M. Calfhills' conjectures against Abdias be but vain, sith his disproving of the authorities brought out of S, Ambrose, Lactantius, Paulinus, and S. Augustine and general councils is convinced, to be but mere quarrelling, sith it is declared, that the catholic church can not be shut up in corners, but must be dispersed, through out the woorld, contrary to his, and all the protestants prating, Sigh all truth is proved to have issued out of the church of Rome, as the undoubted fountain of all true Christianity, Sigh it is convinced by undoubted testimonies, that the church of Rome is teacher of all truth, and enemy to all infidelity, superstitition and idolatry, Sigh the custom, to have the sign of the cross in churches, chapels, and oratories, come first by tradition from the Apostles, and afterward was confirmed by general councils, and laws of Emperors, to have been used always where true Christianity hath had his force, as you love Christ crucified on the cross, be not ashamed to have the sign of his cross in your churches, chapels and oratories, and all other places what so ever they be deputed to God's honour and service. THAT THE SIGN OF THE CROSS WAS USED IN ALL SACRAMENTS. etc. THE FOURTH ARTICLE. ALbeit you have M. Calfhil battered like Soliman's bloody Bassa, against the material cross of Christ, and used all violence that you can, to raze it up, and lay it flat upon the ground, yet may you see, that no shot of yours have pierced, but rebounded back again, and put the gunner in danger. And as that triumphant sign of victory standeth, displayed upon the walls, for all your force: So keep I both watch and ward and flee not from the walls into any other castle, than I took myself unto before. From thence you shall never be able to drive me with all the fire you can make. I have heard of some that carrying fire to mischive others, have been burned to ashes themselves. Wherefore by my counsel you shall do well to take heed, how you meddle to much with fire. A little sparkle may kindle to a great flame. And one in a castle is not fired out but with long siege and some perilous attempt. But let us mark what flames of fire you make. You acknowledge, Fol 87. Fol 88 ● Calf. that the Christians used crossing to testify their faith in despite of their master's enemies: And that upon zeal and devotion, the fathers admitted the sign of the cross into God's service, as a laudable ceremony, and whished all men to use it. But you seeing some superstitions men to abuse it, and of a ceremony make a necessity, and noting that the people bend not their hearts, The Christians sclandered. to the consideration of the heavenly mystery, but defixe their eyes, and repose their affiance in the earthly sign, were forced to refuse it. Mart. Here to omit your false slandering the fathers for superstition and abuse of the sign of the cross, and unjust condemning Christian people of forsaking God, and putting their affiance in a sign, because you say you were forced to refuse the sign, Let me ask you first, who forced you to refuse it, but your own wilfulness? secondarily what are you? From what coasts come you? Who made your ministers in Christ's church? Who called you when you stood idle in the market, Matt. 20. and sent you into God's vynearde? What lawful bishop gave you authority to preach and minister the sacraments? Let us have your evidence and see, or else we will say unto you with Tertullian, De praesct. putting in certain names of our new heretics, Tertullian's question applied to our ministers. Answer sires. for his old, what do ye in my ground, being no work men of mine? By what right do ye cut down my woods M. Horn? By what authority do you transuert and turn away my fountains M. juel? By what commission do ye remove my bounds M. Grindal? And all ye other ministers why sow ye and feed ye here, at your pleasure? It is my possession, I have possessed it long, I possessed it before you. I have sure evidence and originals even from the lords whose inheritance it was. I am the heir of the Apostles. As they ordained in their testament, as they committed it to my charged, as they adjured me, so I keep it. As for you, they have disherited you always as foreigners and enemies. If you can not show your vocation to be lawful, according to Christ's institution, and ordinance of his church, then will it follow that you are no true ministers, and dispensers of his mysteries, nor prelates, that have charge to rule God's people, and therefore have no authority to do what ye please, and refuse what ye list. For he that can not make a law, can not refuse a law that is made. The use of the sign of the cross then, being a tradition derived from the Apostles, and generally received in Christ's catholic church, and things received by tradition having as S. Hierome saith: authoritatem scriptaelegis, Authority of a written law, Aduersus Luciferia. you can not justly violate and break this law, unless you will set yourselves wilfully against Christ, and the holy Ghost. For as S. Cyprian sayeth: Serm. de Ablut. p●dum. That is no less ratified which the Apostles delivered by the inspiration of the holy Ghost, than that which Christ himself delivered. The authority which you bring out of S. Augustine and S. Gregory to prove that things once received, Fol 88 a may for circumstances of persons, time or place, or other considerations be changed, I admit with all my heart: The protestāns have no authority to make any ecclesiastical. laws. and confess that things once received, may for circumstances be changed, in such sort, and such things as they mean. But by whom must they be altered and changed M. Calf.? of every private man? Not: but of those that have authority to make a law: and that authority lack you and your congregation, who having no bishops, can make no Ecclesiastical laws, nor abrogate the old? if you will press us with your Synods, we will prove unto you, that if you had as may apostatical bishops, as you have ministers and priests, it would avail no more than a goose feather in the Thames, Seeing the ecclesiastical rule commandeth that no counsels should be kept contrary, or besides the mind of the bishop of Rome, and julius the first writing for Athanasius to the bishops of the east saith unto them, your rule nor hath, nor can have, any force, Lib. 4. ca 9 Tripart. No council to be kept without the consent of the Bishop of Rome. because that council was not kept of Catholic Bishops, nor had a legate from the church of Rome, whereas the canons command that councils aught not to be kept without his authority. Wherefore you condemn yourself and all your sect of much arogancy, who being but private men, not called to the offices which you presumptuously usurp, by any lawful means, nor hired of any true gardener, that hath the custody of Christ's vynearde, do take upon you to refuse the laws that your forefathers made and Christian people have hitherto observed. Where you talk of compulsion and say, Fol. 88 ● that you were forced to refuse that laudable ceremony, It is well known that there was never violence used against any protestant to make him renie the Catholic faith, or sign of the cross, and that you were not otherwise forced, than voluntate, by your own wilfulness. But if great violence had been used to force you unto it, you should rather have suffered, all torments than have broken the unity of the church, knowing, that it is more glorious to suffer martyrdom, Dionys. Alex. epi. ad Novat. Euseb. lib. 6. cap. 34. Cap. 27. de Spir. san. The rejecting of traditions a destroynig of Religion. that the church be not divided, than that idols should not with sacrifice be honoured. S. Basile talking of Ecclesiastical institutions written, and of certain traditions and customs that are used amongst Christian men, and not written, numbered the sign of the cross for one, and saith that there is like affection of piety dew unto both, and supposeth that if we cast away such customs, religion shall have great detriment and loss, and the preaching of faith be brought to a naked name. Which being undoubtedly true, every man, that is desirous to have the Gospel of Christ reverenced, true religion maintained, and faith sincerely preached, should defend such traditions and customs as the Apostles, and ancient fathers, did recommend unto the church, for maintenance of Christ's religion, and not be forced by a little wilfulness to refuse them at their pleasure, as M. Calfhil say they are. Traditions must be observed. 2. Cap. 2. S. Paul commanded the Thessalonians to stand, and keep the traditions which they had learned either by his epistle or by his sermons and talk. And in them warneth us to do the like. Wherbie we may perceive that he would have us to be constant in observing of traditions, and whatsoever pretence or colour Satan transfiguring himself into the angel of light useth, to pluck us from them, under the shadow of superstition and other gross abuses, we must not flee from that which we received. For he crieth: State, tenete: Stand stout, keep fast, let no violence force you, to refuse that which is delyured unto you. Wherefore I exhort you M. Calfhil, to refuse your foolish fancy, and keep traditions and customs, according to the counsel of S. Paul. And if wilfulness here tofore forced you to refuse them, let reason induce you now to embrace them, Policarpe Epist. ad Ephesios. Origen. In exposis. 1. ad Titum. Homi. 29. In Matt. that as that blessed martyr Polycarpe said: We forsaking the vanities of many, and false doctrines, may return to that word which was delyured us from the beginning. Origen accounted him an heretic that professeth to believe Christ and believeth otherwise of the truth of the Christian faith, than the tradition of the church hath defined: and counseled us not go away: From the first Ecclesiastical tradition, nor believe otherwise then the church of God, by succession hath delivered unto us. Which counsel if you could follow, you would not be such a sworn enemy to traditions, nor esteem the ecclesiastical histories, written by such authors as all the world regard and reverence, to be but tales: but to maintain heresy, traditions must be rejected as trifles, visions as illusions, fathers as fablers, histories, as lies. Which is lamentable, that so soul a bird should unplume so many, to feather her filthy neaste. If the history of Probianus be but a tale, M. Calf. and Sozomenus author of it, no better than a thief, as you make him, why hath it passed the judgement, of so many, under the name of an ecclesiastical history, which is a testimony of things done in the church, & witness of the truth? Sozomenus likened to a thief. Fol. 89 a Cassiodorus the Senator in the pface before the Tripartite history, saith: that the ecclesiastical history, written, mirabiliter as it were by miracle) by the three greek authors, Theodoretus, Sozomenus and Socrates, is ꝓued and tried to be very necessary for all Christians: and therefore, he biddeth every man read them boldly. For whosoever so doth, shall have great knowledge and commodity by it. Theodoret he reckoneth for a reverend bishop, Sozomenus and Socrates for most eloquent, wise, and no doubt grave and learned men. Wherefore either he must report an untruth, or you make a lie M. Calf. For if the history written as it were by miracle, be very necessary, for all Christians, then certain it is that it consisted not of idle fables, and fabulous tales. For to what purpose should tales be very necessary for all Christians. If it consisted not of tales, then can you with no more right condemn this story of Probianus, for a tale, than any other thing that the said author writeth. If Sozomenus be a light of the church and a most eloquent man, then have you slanderously, let your tongue slip, in resembling him to a thief, Calf. Fol 89 a that leaping over a pale leaveth a piece of his cloak behind him, and so passeth that we may track him by the foot. Mart. But let us consider what a fine blood hound ye are to track a thief by the foot. Sozomenus saith, that the divine power appeared to Probianus, because he would not worship the cross, Lib. 2. ca 19 Trip. and showed him the sign of the cross, which was upon the altar of the church, where he was, and made it plainly apere, that ever sithence Christ was crucified, all things which were done for the commodity of man, were done by no means without the virtue of the holy cross; Fol 89 b Calf. nor of holy angels nor of good men. You say, either the collector of this was a liar, or I an evil applier. For quoth you, Angels can not make any material cross, such as is set up in Churches, nor mystical, such as men use to print in their foreheads. For they have no bodies to bear it, nor hands to make it. Mart. Gene. 32. Worshipfully sir: If your senses serve you no better, your nose will sooner be hired to be some poor man's sow, than required to serve some gentle man's foster for a blood hound to track a thief Did not the angel wressell with jacob, and breeke a synowe in his thigh? Did not the angels that come to Sodoma lodge with Loth, and eat and drink in his house? Gene. 19 Did not the angel Raphael, that went with Tobias to Rages a city of Medes, walk, eat, speak, and receive money for Tobye? Look the fifth, sixth, seventh, eight and ninth chapter of Tobias: Did not the Angel take up Abacuc by the hear, and carry him from jury to Babylon? Look to the fourthtene of Daniel. Did not the angel Gabriel when he was sent to our Lady in to Galilee in Nazareth, go into her? Did he not salute her, with that sweet salutation, ave Maria, that the church useth in remembrance of Christ's incarnation and honour of the blessed virgin? Did he not, talk with her, and when his message was done departed he not again? Look the first of S. Luke. Did not the angel come down from heaven and roll away the stone of Christ's sepulchre and sit upon him, and speak to Mary Magdalene and the other Maries and willed than not to fear? Look to the 28. of Mathewe, and to be short look through out all the scripture, and you shall find that where it pleaseth God to do any thing for the commodity of man, by the ministery of his blessed angels, he suffered them to take the shape of our bodies, hands legs, tongue, and all, and to do such corporal functions as appertaineth to any part or member of the body. Where for unless some evil angel bewitched the senses of your body and powers of your soul, I can not see what should force you to disgrace the truth of this story, because angels have no bodies, to bear the cross, nor hands to make it? Of ten hundred shifts, this was the worst: every one that knoweth God to be omnipotent, can easily conceive, how the angles may have bodies and hands to work the will and pleasure of our lord in earth, or to make a cross without hand or body. Now sir for my discharge that I am no fond applier (as it pleaseth your worship to term me) let the indifferent reader that understandeth the story, and is able to weigh the circumstances of it, judge. Probianus of a Pagan was made a Christian, that is to say he believed in Christ, and hoped to be saved by his death upon the cross, Lib. 2. cap. 19 Tripar. but he would not worship the cause of all our salvation (that is to say) the most holy cross: What is this cross, which he would not worship? The passion of Christ, as you say? Not: For he was a Christian, and being a Christian, he did honour, reverence, adore, and love the passion of Christ, and had the hope of his salvation reposed in it. And whosoever doth otherwise can not be a Christian. Wherefore, the cross that he would not worship must be an other thing, than the passion itself. And what can it be but the very sign of the cross which all young converses, were wont to have delyured unto them, when they began to be Christians, and God showed him by his divine power in an holy vision from heaven, standing in the church, upon the altar, A cross standing upon the altar is not the passion M. Calf. a place of great honour and reverence, for the dreadful mysteries that there be offered. Nor have you any advantage, against me, because S. Cyprian. S. Augustine and Chrysostom treating of the passion do use the term Cross, when they mean the crucified. The same fathers very oftentimes in their works use the same term cross, when they mean the sign of the cross, as the learned know right well, and you are driven to confess the like in this Article of Tertullian, Prudentius, and S. Hierome. Fol. 88 b But notwithstanding all the fathers: used the sign of the cross in ministration of Sacraments, Fol. 89. b and sometime otherwise, as M. Calfhil granteth, yet it contenteth him not, but with a vehement spirit, and hot interrogation he maketh these demands. Fol. 89. b Fol. 90. a Calf. Shall we be restrained to that whereof there is no precept in scripture, nor they themselves yield lawful cause? Think you that they did attribute, so great virtue to the wagging of a finger, that the holy Ghost could be called down, and the devil driven away by it? Think you that they would have neglected, churches, refused sacraments, doubted of their health, if the priest had not broken the air first, and with his holy hand, made an owerthwart sign? To answer mildly because his patience is some what broken, Mart. and charity chafed, I tell you (sir) that if you wilbe a Christian man, and so reputed you must be restrained, to what whereof there is no precept in express written scripture. As for example. There is no precept in express written scripture that commandeth you to believe that in the blessed Trinity there be three persons and one God. We must be restrained to that whereof there is no commandment in express scripture. Yet you must be restrained unto it. There is no precept in express written scripture that the son of God, is of equal fubstance with his father, that the blessed virgin Mary was the mother of God, that she continued always in virginity, without the carnal company of man, that the Saboth day refused, the sounday should be kept holy, that the sacrament fhould be received fasting, that infants should be baptized, that bishops should not practise jurisdiction in other men's Diocese; that the baptism of heretics should be available. That there is a distinction of the books of scripture, some to be canonical, some Hagiographal, some Apocryphal. For those and many more you have no precept in express scripture written in the compass of the Bible, yet you must be restrained unto them, maugre your beard, as now you are to square caps, and priests gowndes although there be no precept of them in scripture. Touching your second demand, it is most evident that as soon as prayer is duly made, and the name of God called upon, and sign of the cross drawn wit the hand, the holy Ghost according to the promise of Christ cometh down, and sanctifieth the gifts offered, and things brought to be consecrated, uhatsoever Sacrament, or Sacramental it is, and that the devil is driven away. As for the third, I verily believe that noon of the old fathers at that time did neglect the churches, refuse the sacraments, doubt of their health, if the priest did omit the sign of the cross in any sacrament or ceremony: and the same opinion have all true christians and catholics in our age. Fol. 52. a Myself told you in this article of my treatise, that the cross was used in celebration of Christ's sacraments for two causes. The first is to put us in remembrance of our redemption by the cross. The second to declare that all sacraments have their virtue and effect of the merits of his passion? and said further, that albeit the ancient fathers taught, If the sign of the cross be omitted the sacraments lack not their virtue. and catholic church commanded, that the sign of the cross should be used in all sacraments, yet it is not their meaning, that any sacrament lacketh his operation, effect, and virtue, if or for necessity, or by oversight, or by ignorance, the said sign be omitted: But when of self will and purpose the order of the church is contemptuously broken, and the intention of the ministre evil, and faith worse, as theirs is, who be Zwinglians, calvinists and such like, there is no doubt, but that they offend the goodness of God, and in omitting the sign of the cross, transgress the ordinance of the holy Ghost, and tradition of the Apostles and ancient fathers. This sir to take away matter of cavillation, I told you: there might you have seen it, if you would have taken pains to have sought it, and because you might and would not, learn more good ye peevish puine julianiste, than so fond to think, M. Calf. understandeth that which he taketh i● hand to reprove. and falsely report, of another. Learn to understand the author which you take in hand to reprove, before you set forth your reprouf, jest whiles you improve that which is not to be reproved, you prove yourself as wise as William Wittlesse of Waltam. But because you require me to examine the words of my author, for my part sing I am in your judgement, but a puine, a young scholar, Fol 90. ● one that hath not learned his leasson well, I will join a third person to be an umpire in this cause between you and me, and because you shall not suspect him as partial, or refuse him as to favourable to papistry, let it be one that careth as little for papistry, as for honesty: D. Cox or M. Grindal, if you will: One, I pass not which. M. Grindal because he is your Diocesan, if you please. Well go to then. Martial. Serm. de passio . S. Cyprian saith: Whatsoever the hands be which dip those that come to baptism, whatsoever the breast is, out of which the holy words do proceed, the authority of operation giveth effect to all sacraments, in the sign of the cross. Here S. Cyprian teacheth that men have authority by commission from God, to make, and minister his sacraments, and that in the figure, and sign of the cross, Fol. 90. a all sacraments have their effect. Calfhil: Yea sirrah, say you so? show the commandment, for the sign of the cross, if ye will have Cyprian to mean of it. Mart: I proved even now, that if you will be a Christian man, and willbe reputed for one, you must be restrained that whereof there is no precept in scripture written in the volume of the Bible. If you will have it proved out of scripture written by the holy Ghost in the hearts of men, and not in leaves, of paper, and sheeps skin, look in Tertullian and S. B●●ile, and other ancient fathers, that say it was a tradition and practice of the catholic Church. Calf. What talk you to me of traditions, customs and scriptures, written in men's hearts? if it be not in God's book, away with it. Grindal . Grindal. O pacify yourself sir james, for the lords sake. It must not be so. The Apostle S. Paul and his scholar Timothe exhorted men to keep those things, Act. 16. that were decreed of the Apostles, and elders that were in Jerusalem. The said Apostle willed the Thessalonians to stand stoutly and keep the traditions, ● Thess. 2. which they learned either by his epistle or by word of mouth: and in very deed if we reject traditions and customs, Cap. 27 de Spir. san. we shall bring (as S. Basile saith) the preaching of faith to a naked name, and never be able to maintain our own religion. For we have many things by custom and tradition, of which we can show no precept. Calfhill. Calf. Why if it please your superintendentship what shall we do? If we admit the traditions of the Apostles, and ancient fathers, Grind. our religion will never be maintained. Grindal. If we condemn them, all the world will cry out upon us. Athanas. epist ad Afros de Ariminensi council. For who will not hate them (saith Athanasius) that refuse the constitutions, of the fathers, and prefer those things that were made of l●te contentiously, and with great violence at Ariminum? Very few or noon. Therefore sober yourself, sir james: and go wisely to work. Every thing hath a time: Mar not all upon a little headynes and hasty courage. It can not be denied, but that men have authority of operation from God (that is to say) commission and authority, as ministers, to work and make his sacraments. Men have authority of operation. Matt. 28. joan. 20. The words of Christ are plain: As my father sent me: So do I sand you: Therefore going forth, teach all nations, baptizing them, in the name of the father, and of the son and of the holy Ghost: Receive ye the holy Ghost, whose sins ye remit, are remitted them, do this in my remembrance. Here you see commission, and authority is given to baptism, to releese sin, to celebrated the supper of the lord, and if according to this commission one be baptized in water, in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the holy Ghost, this Sacrament hath his effect. And if he be not so baptized, by ordinary course it hath no effect. Wherefore it is not be denied, but that the authority of operation, that is to say, a man having authority to work and make his sacraments as gods ministers, giveth after a fort effect to the sacrament. For before the man doth his duty commanded by God, in that behalf, there is nothing done, when he hath spoken the words of Christ, Ego te baptiso, I baptize thee and so forth, then is the soul washed from his filth, then is remission of sin, given, and then hath the sacrament his full effect, and not before. Calf. Nay if please your superintendentshippe. De baptis. Christi. Fol. 90. b Remission of sins given by Sacraments. Moore Sacraments than two . Cyprian saith, Christ come to baptism, not wanting a washing in whom there was no sin, but to the end that a continual authority might be given to the Sacrament, and not accepting of persons commend so great a work. For remission of sins, be it either given by baptism, or by other sacraments, properly appertaineth to holy ghost, and the privilege of this effect remaineth unto him alone. As for the solemnity of words, and calling upon the name of God, and signs attributed to the apostolical institutions through the ministery of the priests, they make a visible sacrament, but the thing itself, the holighoste doth frame, and make, and to the visible consecrations, the author of all goodness, doth visibly put his hand. Here you see that the effect is given to the holieghost, and only to the holighoste, which you attribute either to the priest or to the sign of the cross. Grind. You talk as though you did not understand the scripture. Not Christian man doubteth, but that the holy ghost is author of all grace, and giveth effect to all sacraments: but the holy ghost hath put all things under a law, he worketh every thing by a mean. And in scripture, the effect that is wrought by God, is attributed, in a sort to the man that worketh, Things done by God, attributed to men. Acto. 28. although the holy ghost be the principal and chief worker of all. For example when Publius father was cured, of his ague and bloody flix, the scripture saith that, S. Paul sanavit eum, healed him. Here the effect of healing; proper to God only is attributed to S. Paul, because S. Paul was the mean by which God vouchesafed to confer health upon him. In the second chapter of the Acts it is said, many wonders and signs were done by the Apostles in Jerusalem: Exod. 10. because God did it, by them, as instruments, and means. In like manner because the Bishops and priests being dispensers of Christ's mysteries, do either dip the child in the font, that must be baptized, or pour water upon him, and celebrated the Supper of the lord, and pronounce these holy words, and consecrated according to the institution of Christ, whereby remission of sins and life everlasting is given, this effect which God only giveth, is according to scripture, said to be given by the bishops and priests, in these sacraments, as means, and these men as ministers, to give remission of sin and life everlasting by. So you may see that, S. Cyprian, The meaning of S. Cyprians place. saying that the holy ghost giveth effect to all sacraments, meaneth that the holy ghost is author of all grace and giveth effect to all sacraments, immediately by his absolute power, and mediately by the ministry of man, whose service it hath pleased his divine majesty to use, as means to work, these effects to his people. Calf. what my lord, S. Cyprian saith remission of sins, Grind. Matt. 10. properly appertaineth to the holy ghost and is dew to him only: So Christ saith, It is not you that speak, but the spirit of your father that speaketh in you. Did not the Apostles, therefore speak? I perceive you understand not what you say, nor your own author neither. I told you that remission of sins appertaineth properly and only to the holy ghost, immediate, immediately. For he is the fountain from which all grace floweth, he the author from whom all virtue is derived. But as every fountain disperseth his water by diverse ways to the use of man: So doth the holyghoste disperse his grace by diverse means. And because he doth it by external means in sacraments, those external means are said to give effect unto his sacraments. That remission of sins is given by baptism, and other sacraments, as external means, S. Cyprian testifieth plainly, in the words that you alleged. For he saith: Remission of sins, De baptis. Christ. whither it be given by baptism or other Sacraments, properly appertaineth to the holy Ghost. Here you may see that he acknowledgeth remission of sins, to be given by baptism, and other sacraments, Remission of sin is given by other sacraments besides baptism. There is a visible consecration. Officialibus. There is a sanctifica done of duty. Calf. yet properly by the holy Ghost, and by them, as means. Besides he talketh there of visible consecrations and of sanctifications done of duty, and saith that the author of all goodness doth put his hand invisibly to those visible consecrations, and the holy Ghost infuse the fullness of grace to those sanctifications, and perfect the thing of the Sacrament. Whereby you may understand, that there is a visible ministry, and external operation, by which the holy Ghost giveth the fullness of his grace. Take away one, the other ceaseth: use the visible consecration, and the invisible grace is granted, through the omnipotency of his word that ordaineth it. Calf. Well may I grant as your superintendentshippe have proved, that after a sort the authority of operation, giveth effect, to all Sacraments: but I can not be persuaded, that S. Cyprian speaketh here of a cross, as Martial fansieth. Martial: Mnrt. Not sir? you are very hard lase and loathe to believe. May it please you before you superintendant here, to consider the place of S. Cyprian: and for better understanding of it, call to remembrance, a few words that went before? Talking there of the blood of Christ, he saith: It is of such authority and power, that it doth not only fence the door posts of Israel, The virtue of the cross. but even the very, and only sign of that sacrament, doth drive away devils, and the virtue of the hoy name, and mark of the blood, is terrible to all wicked spirits, wheresoever it is seen. In brief, whatsoever the ministers of the sacraments be, whatsoever the hands are that dip those that come to baptism, whatsoever the breast is, out of which the holy words proceed, the authority of operation, giveth effect to all sacraments in the figure of the cross, and the name which is above all names, being called upon by the dispensers of the sacraments doth all. Here I pray you (sir) what is the sign of the sacrament that driveth away devils? What is the mark of the blood that is terrible to wicked spirits? Calf. Calf. Mary the passion itself. Mart: We know that the passion of Christ is terrible to the devil, Mart. Calf. and all wicked spirits, but is that S. Cyprians meaning only? Calf. What should he mean else? Mart. I will tell you: He speaketh there of the passion of Christ, Mart. and to prove that it is of great virtue and power, able to drive away devils, he useth these reasons. The sign of the sacrament (that is the sign of the passion, for so is Sacramentum taken some times in S. Paul) driveth away devils. Again the virtue of his name and mark of his blood is terrible to wicked spirits, ergo much more the blood itself. Here the grater is proved, by the less, the passion by the sign. As then the thing that is proved, must be diverse from that, by which it is proved: so in this place the sign of the Sacrament, (that is the sign of the passion) and mark of the blood must be diverse from that which was proved: otherwise S. Cyprian said nothing, but proved one thing by itself, which is absurd. For a more familiar example, if one would say, my lord Mayours mace borne in the street maketh malefactors afraid, ergo much more my lords own person, would you not think M. Calfhil that my lord mayor were one thing and his mace an other? Calf. yea I would. Mart. so may you in this case. For it is all one. Calf. Nay, yet had I rather be crossbitten than confess that. Martial. Diogenes' words to the boy that cast stones at the galloes. on a time Diogenes sing a beardless bachelor casting stones at a galloe tree, said unto him, Go to sirrah, In good faith, one day you will hit the mark: So in good sooth to you sir, that had rather cast stones at the cross, and be cross bitten than confess the truth, we may say, Take heed, sir, one day you will hit mark. The third reason that S. Cyprian maketh, for proof of this (as you may see by the continuing of his talk, by the adverb of order, and particle, Illative, denique, which signifieth that something followeth, appertaining to that which went before) is this, Authority of operation in the sign of the cross giveth effect to all Sacraments The authority of operation in the sign of the cross giveth effect to all sacraments, ergo much more the passion of Christ itself. Here the virtue of the passion, is proved to be great by the figure of the cross. For be the dispensers of Christ's Sacraments never so wicked, yet if they call upon the name of God, and make the sign of the cross, and work according to the authority of operation that is given them, and do as their commission chargeth them, the sacraments have their full effect. Calf. Why sir, Fol 90. b Fol. 91. a refer you the authority of operation to the priest, that maketh the cross with his thumb. Have ye forgot that you learned out of S. Ambrose, Aliud est elementum, aliud est consecratio, aliud opus, aliud operatio. The element is one thing and consecration an other, the work is one thing, and operation an other, The work is done by the priest, the operation by God. So S. Ambrose saith also, that the consecration is. Non sanat aqua nisi spiritus descenderit et aquam illam consecraverit. The water healeth not unless the holy Ghost come down and consecrated the water. Fol 90. b. Fol. 91. a Mart. I am glad that at length I know who it is that made the proper dialogue in your book between. C. and M. Before I stood in doubt of it: because. C. you know, standeth for Calf. Cuckold, or Cuckoo, as well as for Calfhill, and M. for Martin, Mathewe or Mortimer, aswell as for Martial: and I persuaded myself that M. Calf. would propound no such questions as C. did, and was sure that Martial, would frame no such answers as your naked M. imagyneth. But sing time trieth truth, and falsehood showeth itself, I will deal with you accordingly. Now to your question. I have not forgotten sir that which I learned out of S. Ambrose. I remember it right well. He hath those words: but not in that sense which you take them, and that you may the better understand it, and the readers see how you have perverted it, let us consider the place, and gather. S. Ambrose meaning of his words that go before, S. Ambro. perverted and come after. Before, he spoke of Naaman the Syrian that was cured of his leper by washing in the water of jordane: De sacra. lib. 1. ca 5. and ask the question what that should signify, he said: vidisti aquam. Sed non aqua omnis sanat, sed aqua sanat quae habet gratiam Christi. Aliud est elementum, aliud consecratio, aliud opus, aliud operatio. Thou hast seen the water, but all water doth not heal, but that water healeth, which hath the grace of Christ. The element, is one thing, the consecration an other: the work one thing, the operation an other. afterward declaring how Christ come to S. john to be baptized, and showing a cause why Christ went down into the water, and then the holy Ghost come, he telleth that the form and manner of our baptism, hath this observation, that first the font must be hallowed (how like you that M. Calf?) then he that is to be baptized, must go down into the water. For as soon as the priest cometh in, he maketh an exorcism (how like you that?) secondarily he maketh an invocation upon the creature of water (what say you to that) and afterward he maketh prayer, that the font may be hallowed, and the presence of the everlasting Trinity be there present. This laid together you may see that in baptism, of which S. Ambrose spoke in that place, there is water, there is exorcism, there is invocation over the water, there is prayer to hallow the font, and one to be washed in the font. So that S. Ambrose by the element meaneth water, by consecration, the invocation of the name of God, and blessed Trinity upon the creature of water, to hallow the font, and there to be present: by the work he meaneth remission of sin given by the goodness of God to him that was baptized, by operation he meaneth the exorcism, prayer, ablution, and act of the priest, washing him that was baptized. and this is the very meaning of S. Ambrose. The work that is wrought, to wit the remission of sins, is not as you foolish by imagine, done by the priest, Fol. 91. a The work in baptism done by God and not by the priest. but by God, to whom only and immediately appertaineth remission of sins. It is the operation, that (is to say) the exorcism, the act of ablution and washing, that is done by the priest, and not the work. For if you say that the work is done by the priest, and the operation by God, then do you prefer the priest before God. For in all the course of nature and grace, where besides the operation there is a work: Digni●s est opus operatione, the work is worthier than the operation, as the end is worthier than the means, by which we come to the end. And if the work be worthier than the operation then is the worker of the saed work worthier than the operation by which it was wrought: and so by your frontike fancy, the priest more worthier them God. See you not into what blasphemy your gross ignorance bringeth you? Recant for shame, and give to God that which is God's, and to man that which appertaineth man. Let the work in baptism, which is remission of sins, be given to God, whose properly it is: let the operation, which is the saying of prayers, making of exorcism, hallowing the water, dipping the child, and whole act of ablution, be the priests whose ministry God useth in that work. Likewise in S. Cyprian the authority of operation is not after your fancy, Ibidem. the power of the holy Ghost. For authority of operation is a commission, licence, or grace, given to man to work. The holy Ghost is the author that giveth this authority, commission, licence, and grace. Authority of operation, remaineth in the party that hath lawfully received it, be he never so vicious, the holy Ghost dwelleth in noon by special grace; that enormously sinneth. Wherefore you did very evil when you taught yower young scholar, Fol. 9●. that authority of operation is the power of the holy Ghost. Not because it is untrue that the holy Ghost doth sanctify, consecrated, and work every thing invisibly, but because by this invisible sanctification, consecration and working of the holy Ghost, you labour to exclude the visible sanctification, consecration, and working of the priest, and so by one truth destroy another (that is) that the priest doth sanctify, consecrated, and work. For as S. Ambrose saith: Thowe wenst in, thou sawest the water, Lib. 1. de Sacram. cap. 5. if sawest the priest, if sawest the Levites: Jest some should happily say, is this all? Yea verily it is all, it is truly all, where all the whole innocency, all the whole piety, all the whole grace, and all the whole sanctification is. Thowe hast seen all that thou couldst see with the eyes of the body, or sight of man. Thowe hast not seen those things, which are done and not seen. Those things that are not seen, are much more greater. Because those things that are seen are temporal, those things that are not seen, are eternal. By which you see that the priest sanctifieth, 2. Cor. 4. the priest consecrateth, the priest worketh, and that that which the priest worketh, is all innocency, all piety, all grace and all sanctification. Likewise in saying that the sacraments have their effect in the figure of the cross, Fol. 91. a that is as you say in Christ himself, you walk deceithfully, not because it is untrue thal all sacraments have their effect in Christ, and only by Christ, and merits of his passion, but because you exclude the use of the sign, from the celebration of Christ's sacraments, which the holy Ghost taught, and the catholic church received by tradition from the Apostles, as many ancient father's witness, and is now generalie observed through all Christendom, where the corruption of heresy, hath not entered, and shall prevail and be used, maugre all heresies and heretics, in despite of the devil. Grind. In deed (sir james) we can not deny, but that the old fathers used the sign of the cross in all sacraments. justinus Martyr, Apolog. 2 talking of the cross, biddeth us view in our minds, and consider with reason, all things that are in the world, and see, whither sine hac figura administrentur, they may be done without this sign. The very words of S. Cyprian, which you alleged even now out of his sermon, De baptismo, declare no less. Calf. I marvel, that your superintendentship should think so. Grind. do you so sir james? Construe the words, that you alleged. Calf. Verborum solennitas, The solemnity of the words, Fol. 90. b & sacri invocatio nominis, and the calling upon the name of God, &, and, signa, the signs, attributa, attributed, institutio nibus Apostolicis, to the Apostolical institutions, sacerdotum ministerijs, through the ministry of the priests, celebrant, do make, visible sacramentum, the visible sacrament. Grind. In very deed you have translated it so, and set it out in your book. But how well yourself shall see. I pray you what case, is Institutionibus in your construction? Calf. The dative case. Grind. Then signs were attributed to the apostolical institutions. Calf. yea my lord. Grind. what were thoose signs and what were those apostolical institutions sir james? Calf. You oppose me hard, my lord: The signs are the visible elements, the Apostolical institutions, are sacraments as I think. Grind. Ah sirrah, you have deserved not only to be had to S. Anthony's school and laid over the form, but to be brought to the consistory and deprived of your lesson, Archdeaconry, and all that, you have. You a preacher, and guide of the people, that can not tell of whose institution, the sacraments are? I had thought that Christ had instituted the sacraments? yourself speaking against the sacrament of holy orders, Fol. 104. a said that neither angels nor men make a sacrament, and are you driven now to contrary our own saying, and tell us that the institutions of the Apostles (who were men) be sacraments? By the faith of my body, I am ashamed of you. Look better upon it, and construe it once again. Calf. Verborun solennitas, the solemnity of words, & sacri nominis invocatio, and the calling upon the name of God, & signa and the signs attributa, attributed, institutionibus apostolicis, Signs attributed to the sacraments by the institution of the Apostles. by the apostolical institutions, sacerdotum ministeriis, through the ministery of the priest, visible, sacramentum celebrant make a visible sacrament. Grindal. This is an other matter, by like then, besides the solemnity, of words, and calling upon the name of Christ, there were certain signs required, by the institutions of the Apostles, to be used by the ministery of priests, to the making of a Sacrament? Calf. It seemeth so: Grin. What were those signs? the visible elements, as you said before? Calf. what will you have them be be (my lord)? Grind. Not visible elements (sir james): As the Apostles did not institute the sacraments: So did they not institute the visible elements, which are matters of Sacraments. But the signs which they instituted, were certain rites, and ceremonies, for the dew celebration of the sacraments. And what were those rites and ceremonies that they ordained and instituted, I beseke you? Were they not such as the church hath ever sithence used? And of all those what one hath more mention in their writings, than the sign of the cross? I assure you noon. Wherefore this contentious brawl of yours, is not commendable. It giveth the Catholics more advantage, against us, and maketh them more curious to seek out antiquities, and the more antiquity they find, the more shall our novelty decay. The Wiseman commandeth us, not to strive of that thing, which doth not molest us, and not to meddle with many things. I wish you had followed his counsel: Eccle. 11. by your impertinent speeches, you do nothing, but show the weakness of our cause. To what purpose I pray you, is that foolish Dialogue that you make about the words of S. Cyprian? Is it not not all one to say, the authority of operation, giveth effect to all Sacraments in the figure of the cross, and the authority of operation in the figure of the cross giveth effect to all facraments? There is no difference in it at al. search well and you shall find it so. There are no points to distinct the parts of the sentence, as you imagine. I have consulted diverse prints, and from the word operationis they continue it to the last, which is, effectum, without any point at all: and as far, as I can see by S. Cyprians drift in that place, those words should rather be governed of the verb, than of any other word that goeth before the verb. For he proveth, that the virtue of the passion is great, by the sign and figure of the cross, and power that it hath, which could be to no purpose, if he would have these words in figura crucis, in the figure of the cross, to referred to the operation of authority that went before, and not to the verb largitur effectum, that followeth after. Again where you find fault, with your adversary, for staying there, and not alleging the other words, that follow, it argueth that you do but quarrel. For it is presupposed that every Christian man believeth, that in the celebration of the sacraments, the name of God is specially to be called upon, and that his holy name (as S. Cyprian saith) doth all things: To talk therefore of the invocation, and calling upon the name of God, which all men, do confess, it was not to his purpose, but of the sign of the cross, Which you and such like deny. And sing he took those words, that made specially for his principal purpose, and omitted the other as loathe to be tedious in speaking of that which no man denieth, no wise man, would mislike his doing therein, nor allow, your superfluous pains, M. Calf. taketh much pains to prove that which no man denieth. in proving out of S. Cyprian, that which the church ever taught, and all Christian men hold at this present, that all things do stand and be brought to perfection, by the majesty of God, and truth of faith, and that sacraments are not imperfect if they lack a cross, as the author told you in the 52. leaf of his book. Which being so, Eccle. 8. you should have abstained from contention as the Wise man saith, and never have contended in words, as S. Paul teacheth, knowing that: It is honour to a man, 2. Tim 2. Prover. 20 who separateth himself, from contention. The Catholics will report of us, that we pass not what we say, be it never so absurd, and from the purpose, so we say somewhat for the present. They will say, as father Gregory said, Lib. 8. ●● 2. M●●●l. that heretics by their inquisitions seek not to attain the truth, but to be victorers, that is to have the last word: And whiles they desire to show themselves outwardly wise, inwardly they are tied by foolly with the chains of pride. Wherbie it cometh to pass, that they seek matter of contention, and can not speak peaceably of God, which is our peace: and of a matter of peace, become inventors of contention and strife. Wherefore deal more circunspectly, be not so contentious. If I had been of counsel with you before, or if you had according to the queens majesties injunctions repaired to me for privilege to the printing of your book, it should not thus have passed. It had been a thousand times better for us, if it had been suffered to pass away in silence, but now set a fair face upon it, and let it go. Here good readers, you see the force of truth how it prevaileth, and how the enemy of truth is confuted by him, that otherwise persecuteth the truth. At the instant, when I took him to be arbiter, I suppose he had in his meditation, that verse of David: Psal. 118. Num. 22. Et ne auferas de ore meo verbum veritatis usquequaquè. O take not the word of truth utterly from my mouth, and as Balam hired to course, could not choose, but bless: So M. Grindal professing otherwise to maintain lies, could not choose but in this case defend the truth. God be thanked for it. But to let M. Grind. take his ease, and return to M. Calf. another while, you shall understand good readers that he is forced to confess, Fol 89. a The fathers used the sign of the cross in ministration of sacraments that the ancient fathers used the sign of the cross in ministration of the Sacraments▪, and that a ceremony wanted, if the making of a cross wanted. Which being true, where is their great crack, that they have restored the communion to the use of the primitive church? where is their vaunt that they follow the ancient fathers? Al is turned into a vain brag. By their own confession, in those days in celebrating the supper of our lord, the sign of the cross was used, and in other sacraments, now it is rejected with the sacraments. They observed it for a godly ceremony, now it is contemned for gross idolatry. How stands this together? As right as the ministers badge in horn church yard. Calf. Fol. ●. b Mar● . But M. Calf. saith, that our sacraments lacking the sign of the cross and that usual ceremony, be perfect not withstanding. Wherein he is much to be commended for a jolly wise sire, The sign of the cross but a ceremony, yet not wilfully to be omitted. that affirmeth that, which no man denieth, and although the thing be told him ten times, yet will not unbutten his precious ears, to let in so little a blast of wholesome wind. One's again therefore I tell you M. Calf. that we confess, that the sign of the cross is but a ceremony, yet such a ceremony, that whosoever doth wilfully omit it, and contemptuously reject it as superstitious, transgresseth the ordinance of the holy Ghost, tradition of the Apostles, custom of the church, and decrees of the fathers. further we say, with S. Augustine that if the sign of the cross lack in the Sacraments, Noon of them is done rightly, that is, according to the solemn, rite and ceremony: And so, you M. minister might have conceived, that I M. lawyer did so take it, both by my words that went before, and by this alleged here out of S. Augustine. And albeit the English word (rightly) being written so, for rightly, Fol. 52. a did minister you occasion to think the contrary, yet might the latin word, rite: have given you to understand, that it was meant of the solemnity and not of the substance. But if your will had followed your wit in this, yourself should have lacked words, your book stuff, the printer work, and prentices matter of error, which had been a great oversight. Concerning your robbing the Sacraments, of their effect, Fol 92. a August in joa. T●ac. 40 & de Catacls. cap. 5. and attributing the same to faith only, and for proof of it alleging a place out of S. Augustine, wherein you followed your Sarum Solymam, who is answered by doctor Harding in his reiondre lately set forth, I say nothing but refer you to that. There shall you see it confuted to your shame. Your cavils against the vision of Probianus and fancy that angels can make no crosses, because they have no hands, I answered before: Fol. 93. b likewise your brawl about S. Augustine's place for mystery, and trifling against these words operationis Authoritas, out of S. Cyprian, I have already confuted, Ibidem. only you say Chrisostome maketh nothing for me, and bring no cause why. As long as your do so: my yea, shalbe as good as your nay. But how lurdely you deceive, and are deceived, the learned that have S. Chrisostom's works may see by conference of his places. For the unlearned, Ho. 55. in 16. Matth. The cross a banner and ensign of victory. it may suffice that S. Chrysostom saith, When we are Christened, when we are nourished with the holy meat, when we are placed to be consecrated in holy orders, that banner and ensign of victory always assisteth us. I pray you good sir, what was the ensign of victory, that Chrisostome speaketh of, but the sign of the cross? The passion, was the conquest, and victory itself, as S. Paul testifieth, and not the ensign of victory. The sign and the thing signed, be two things, in wise men's judgement. If some drowsy dream, have made you dote, and think the contrary, awake betime, and stretch your limbs or else we will say, God night M. Calf. Fol. 94 a Your idle digression and blasphemous words uttered in your raging heat, against the ceremonies used in the dedication of churches, I wittingly omit as loathe to spend two leaves as you have done, in confuting not your reason, but your railing. For reason you do not soberly, but rail impudently, as your evangelical manner is. Wherefore sing you rail, where you should reason, I think it not reason to enter any long discourse of it, and reason against railing. The church that useth those ceremonies is of sufficient authority to convince the using of them to be lawful, and such a pillar and foundation of truth, that rail against it as long as ye list, you shall but utter your malice and spend your breath in vain and hurt it no more, than the bloystring wind, that beateth against the rock. I remember when I was a scholar, I learned a tale of an elvish angry beast, called a weasel, that coming to a smiths shop and finding a file, did lick it, and gnaw it, until her tongue was razed, M. Calves. tongue like the weasel, that gnawed the Smiths file. and the blood dropping out of her mouth: Yet she made herself merry so long, with licking and gnawing the file, thinking to get away somewhat of the iron, that she had her tongue licked of. So may you, M. Calf. lick, which your venomous tongue, gnaw with your Tiger's teeth, the cetemonies of the church, and delight yourself in it: You shall hinder it no more, than the elvish weasel did hurt the iron file: and perchance by licking, lick out your own tongue, before you disgrace the church, and ceremonies therein used. From railing, you run to your sorry refuge of denying. Being pressed with th'authority of S. Dionise. S. Paul's scholar, and bishop of Athens, you have no shift to elude it, but to deny the he heavenvly and Ecclesiastical Hierarchy to be S. Dionises work, and call it a bastard book, unjustly fathered upon him, which is a shift next the worse, and most agreeable, to your negative divinity, M. Calves. reasons against S. Dionise works answered. and ablative doctrine. But as your impudence passeth honesty, in denying, so doth your folly show itself planly in uttering the reasons, that induced you to deny it. For who but such a minister, as you, would say, Eusebius and S. Hierome made no mention of S. Dionyse heavenly and ecclesiastical hierarchy, ergo, he wrote no such work? I told you before that it was possible that many things might escape Eusebius knowledge, and S. Hieromes' also, concerning the history of things done, before in diverse ages, diverse countries, and diverse emperors days: and so I tell you again. And for to instruct such and old bachelor and young reader of English divinity, I tell you here, that Origenes, Sophronius Archbishop of Jerusalem, Gregorius Nazianzenus, Ignatius, Testimonies cited of S. Dionise by the ancient fathers. the third Archbishop of Antioch, after S. Peter, do cite places out of his epistles, and hierarchies, as you may see in the epistle before his works set forth in Greek by Morelius, the king's printer in Paris, the year of our Lord 1562. Your other reason why that book should not be S. Dionyse is this: He speaketh of God fathers in his book, but the use of God fathers was not invented forty years after, Calf. Fol 95. b ergo that was not his work. The Minor you prove by Hyginus, that lived an hundred and fourthy years after Christ, Mart. The antiquity of god fathers. and instituted, that at every Christening there should be at the least on God father and one God mother: where the gentle reader may see, that that ceremony used, in the church, is not a late devise, nor new inventon, but fourteen hundred years old. But be it that Higinus Pope of Rome did first institute in the west church, that God fathers and God mothers, should be present at baptism? what will you infer upon it M. Calf? Will you say this, Pope Higinus was the first that instituted godfathers and godmothers in the west church, ergo S. Dionyse bishop of Athens did not speak of it nor think of it, xl. years before in Athens amongst the Grecians? How holds this argument? Why speak you not? Or tell us the sooner, or we will say that as yet, it hangs as far wide, as Athens is from Rome. Consider it by a like. The queens majesty was the first that ordained by act of Parliament, that every man should eat fish in her realm upon wenesday, ergo the kings and bishops of Italy, France and Spain, yea and England too never thought nor spoke of the wenesdayes fast before. Is not this paltry? leave it, leave it, for shame. Higinus borne in Athens. Higinus, being a Graecian, borne in Athens, where S. Dionyse was bishop, might know the orders and ceremonies which he had received of his master S. Paul, and planted in his church at Athens, and knowing them might by his authority, being now bishop of Rome command the same order, and ceremony to be used in the Latin church, not as first inventor or institutor, but as a new reviuer and recommender of old ordinances and ancient ceremonies, like as holy Augustine, our Apostle, having commission from S. Gregory, to chose out of all churches, Didst 12. ca Novit. those things which were godly, religious, and honest, and delyured them to our forefathers to be observed, was not to be counted the first inventor, institutor, and ordain of new ceremonies, but a recommender of old, such as were used in other churches before. Which being undoubtedly true, your reason serveth no more to infringe the authority of S. Dionyse heavenly and ecclesiastical hierarchy, than the paring of a nail to battre the bishops palace of Canterbury. Neither can you have any evasion to escape and refuse the sign of the cross, because the ancient fathers repelled the traditions of their elders, Fol 96. a Calf. and after established other of their own, nor think that because their example proveth no use Apostolic, or necessity to have been in them, that their precedent authorizeth you to disannul the other. Mart. For they were lawful bishops, duly called to that holy ministery. Wherefore as true shepherds of God's flock, and faithful dispensers of Christ's mysteries, they might by their authority altar and change, such traditions, as according to the variety of time, and disposition of men, they understood to be burdenous, and unprofitable for the people. As in very deed the church of Rome (mother and head of all churches) hath altered diverse. But as for you who are but murderers and thieves, false prophets, that run before you were sent, deceithfull woorkmen that were never hired, presumptuous usurpers that were never lawfully called, adulterous ymps that can prove their inheritance by no succession, that is three score years old, you I say have no more authority to altar and change any ordinance, Our heretics have no authority to change the decrees of the ancient fathers. statute, decree, tradition, or ceremony of the church used of the ancient fathers, than the fool of the middle temple hath to change the principles, and grounds of the common law. Wherefore you may wipe that conceit and fancy out of your head, and think it undoubtedly true, as I said before, that he that hath no authority to make a law, hath no authority to abrogate a law: and before you may presume to altar and change, by any precedent of theirs, who for these fifteen hundred three score and five years can show their succession from whence they come, prove your petrigrewe by lineal descent, from that race, or else you shall prevail nothing. Where you tell me, Fol. 96. b Calf. that you have as good authority for honey, milk, and wine to be restored in baptism, and communion to be given to children, as I have for the cross, You deceive yourself and the simple reader. For, giving of honey, Mart. milk, and wine in baptism, went out of use by discontinuance, The tradition of the Apostles touching the sign of the cross, never altered. Fol 96. b▪ Calf. and giving the communion to infants was lawfully abrogated, and put out of use by the church of Rome, which you your selves are forced to follow. The tradition for the use of the cross was never discontinued, never abrogated by that church, nor ever taken away by any ordinary and lawful authority: and therefore standeth in his full force still. Which sing you knew right well, what vain toy come into your head to argue deceitfully in this sort? If the sign of the cross hath been used in baptism, and therefore is now to be had in reverence, than honey, milk, and wine, shallbe restored, in baptism, and every infant receive the communion? For they were ones used? If you would have dealt simply, and plainly, Mart. as one desirous to further truth, you should have told them (according to your own knowledge) that honey, milk, and wine were discontinued, and communion used once to be given to children in baptism lawfully abrogated by the church of Rome, but the use of the cross never. And than have made your argument: but full wittily like a wise minister you knew that if you should first have opened those particulars, and afterward have made that reason, every reasonable man would have called for a bottle of hay to present, such an unreasonable reader. And therefore you wrought more craftily. But as Solomon saith: The deceithfull man shall find no gain, Prover. 12 his foot is taken in the snare which himself laid. He shall fall down in his own destruction, and the simple shall possess his goods. Prover. 28 When you had done with this subtle deceit of yours, and by some secret inspiration understood, that it would be espied, you thought it good to face out the matter, and far like a bedlam, and rail so boisterously, that no man should withstand the bitter blast that malice blue from your blessed mouth: and therefore you have disgorged your stomach of a soul deal of filth: which I dare not repeat, for fear of offending good Christian ears. Wherefore to omit the villainous terms, and blasphemous words which your virulent mouth, and serpentine tongue uttered against the ceremonies used in baptism, sacrament of confirmation, chrism, holy orders, and priests, for eight leaves together in your book, because they are to horrible to be repeated, and more meeter to be written of a Celsus, Porphirie, or Lucian, that despited the faith of Christ, and mysteries of the Christians, than of a bachelor of divinity, that should reverence them, and more worthy be heard of heathens, Turks and painimes, than of such as reverence the name of Christ, and profess their faith in baptism, where these ceremonies, and mysteries were used, let us come to the principal point and talk soberly. The cause why you and yours storm against those holy ceremonies, and mysteries, is because they be not mentioned in the written scripture. Is it not? If it be so, tell me I beseek you, doth not the scripture say, joan. 20 that jesus did many things that were not written. Doth not the Evangelist writ, joan 21. All things that Christ did are not written. joan. 16. that if all things which jesus did, were written particularly, the whole world were not able to receive the books that should be written? Did not Christ himself tell his disciples, I have many things to say unto you, but you can not bear them now? But when the spirit of truth shall come, he shall teach you all truth? For he shall not speak of himself, but whatsoever he shall hear, he shall speak, and declare unto you, and tell you those things that are to come? Is not this scripture M. Calf? And learn you not by this, that the Evangelists did not put in written scripture, all that Christ did? Learn you not that Christ would not tell his disciples many things, because at that time they could not understand them? Learn you not that the holy Ghost should teach them all truth, and show what was to come after? Learn you not (I say) all this? If you have learned it, why require you authority of written scripture for all that Christ did? See you not by S. john, that all that Christ did was not written? See you not that Christ left many things to be told of the holy Ghost? Answer M. Calf. and that according to Christ's blessed will the holy Ghost did tell his disciples afterward those things, which he had to tell them before, but left untold, because of their infirmity? And I beseek your mastership where are those things written that Christ had to tell his disciples, and left to the holy Ghost to be told? Where are they I say, why speak you not? In what Evangelist? In what Apostle shall we find them? They were Christ's words: they were necessary to our salvation: otherwise Christ would not have spoken so carefully of them, nor have put his disciples in mind of them, nor have left them to be told by the holy Ghost? Let us have your advise. Where shall we seek them? In the Evangelists? they treat only of the doings of Christ before his passion and ascension. In the acts of the Apostles? Note us the chapter. In S. Paul's epistles? Assign us the place. In the works of S. Peter, james or Jude, Note the sentence. In the epistles and revelations of S. john? repeat us the words, and remember well that you find, Multa, many things, Such as noon of the Evangelists specified, neither covertly, nor expressly. And when ye have found them, prove unto us by express scripture, that they are those, multa, that Christ had to tell his disciples, and yet would not tell them, but lef them to the holy Ghost to be told. further where S. Paul saith to the Corinthians: All other things will I dispose when I come, 1. Cor. 11. The order that s. Paul prescribed the Corintians not found in scripture. 2. Cap. 2. Let us understand of your wisdom in what written scripture we shall find those dispositions and orders of S. Paul. They are not to be neglected. Again he willed the Thessalonians to stand stoutly and keep the traditions which they had learned, whither it were by epistle or by word of mouth. If your learning have found what traditions, he commended unto them in his sermons, and talk, show in what written scripture they are to be seen: help at a pynch, make a book of the orders and dispositions, that he left to the Corinthians, and traditions which he willed the Thessalonians to keep: bring out your written scriptures, and purchase yourself immortal fame, by showing that which never man yet could find in the scripture. If you can find no place in scripture, where they are written, No absurdity to build a doctrine upon traditions. and yet most certain it is that certain orders and traditions S. Paul left to be observed, them think it no absurd thing to believe more than is contained in scripture, nor inconvenient to build a doctrine upon the traditions of the Apostles unwritten. But you will say, how shall I know that these are the traditions of the Apostles? For answer, ask yourself how, a man shall know that the Gospel of S. Mathewe, Mark Luke, The church that approveth the written scripture, approveth unwritten traditions. and john, Acts of the Apostles, epistles of S. Paul and others, be canonical scripture? And if you find the authority of the church to be a sufficient reason to prove them to be scripture, and perceive by drift of reason, that you must take them to be scripture, because the church hath allowed and approved them for scripture: So think the authority of the church to be sufficient to prove those to be traditions of the Apostles: and because the catholic church hath received them, and used them from time to time until this present day, think that every Christian man that wilbe a member of the church, must also receive them, and use them as the church commandeth. For as S. Basile (talking of ecclesiastical ordinances written in scripture, and others not written, but delivered by tradition of the Apostles, in mystery) saith: Both have like force to piety, Cap. 27. de Spiritu sancto. Traditions. and no man doth gain say them, that hath any mean experience in the laws of the church. But you have gain said them M. Calf. ergo your skill in the laws of the church is very simple. And that it may clearly appear to all the brethren that boast you so bravely, yourself give plain evidence. M. Calf. ignorant in the scripture . First in saying that we delight in odd numbers as all enchanters have done of old: next in denying the sevenfold grace of the holy Ghost: For if you understood the scriptures, and knew what mysteries the holy Ghost had hid, and ancient fathers observed in numbers, and knew, that we delight in them no otherwise, than the church taught by the learned Doctors, you would not have found fault with odd numbers, nor likened us to enchanters. But you spoke according to your knowledge. Fol. 103 a b Aug lib 2. quest. evang cap. 6 The mystery of Three. Et in Psal. 49. five. August in Psal. 147. Seven. In Psal. 78 In Psal. 118. Prover 24 In the number of three, the blessed Trinity, is signified, and the spiritual part of man, because we are commanded to love God, with all our heart, and with all our soul, and with all our mind. In the number of five, the continence of our five sense is understood: because, by them, as by five gates, things entre into the soul. And whosoever doth not suffer corruption to enter, by the five gates unto his soul, is reckoned amongst the five virgins, who signify all faithful souls, that shall enter into the kingdom of God. By the numbered of seven, Plenitudo significari solet, fullness is wounte to be signified saith S. Augustine, be it either in reward, or in punishment. In another place he saith: Numerus iste solet esse universitatis indicium. This numbered is wont to be a token of universality, as when Solomon said: The just man shall fall seven times in a day, and rise again, he meaneth, that the just man humbled all manner of ways never perisheth. For this phrase: Septies cadet, he shall fall seventimes, is put for all kind of tribulation by which he is abased in the sight of man. Again he saith: Libr. 4. quaest sup Nu. cap. 33 Eleazar was commanded to springle blood seven times toward the face of the tabernacle of witness, because that numbered of seven, pertaineth to spiritual cleansing. The seven churches, seven candlesticks, the seven stars, seven seals, that S. john speaketh of in his revelation, the seven barley lofes that our saviour multiplied in the gospel, the seven washings of Naaman the Sirian, in the river of jordane, Seven pillars builded, by Solomon, be not without high and secret mysteries, Vide Cypria. Ser. de spiri. sancto. not such as enchanters and conjurers use (as M. Calfhil pretendeth) but such as it pleaseth the holy Ghost to use, to express deep and profound secrets, to whom the scripture commendeth, and the church knoweth this numbered of seven to be dedicated. August. li. 5. cap 5 de genes ad liter . The like might be said of fifteen, xxi. and diverse other odd Numbres, in which, if we delight, we delight not as conjurers, and enchanters, as this quarreler saith, but as true Christians, that have learned, Aug lib. 1 cap 15●▪ quaest super Gene. numbers to be very holy and full of mysteries in scriptures, which if our sir james divinity could have foreseen, although he denieth the seven sacraments, yet he would never have denied the sevenfold grace of the holy Ghost, nor upbraid the papists with corrupting, and falsifying the word of God, and set them so scornfully to school, Fol 10●. b M. Calf. setteth the Catholics to school, to tell seven as Tom fool told his geese. in their old age, to learn to tell seven, as Tom fool told his geese. But his clerckly skill could not direct his sharp sight so far, nor make his rolling eyes see the wood for trees. To tell the seven graces of the holy Ghost mentioned of Esay was no long labour. It might have been done without an auditor, or Tom fool, that told his mother's geese, but sing this good calculer in telling of seven, misseth one, let us reckon together and make a score, jest for fear of forgetting, so great a numbered, Cap 11. Seven gifts of the holy ghost in Esai. we be forced to begin again. The prophet Esay saith: There shall come forth a rod out of the rote of less, and a flower shall spring up out of his rote, and the spirit of our lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom, there is one. Keep store M. Calf. understanding, there is two, counsel, there is three: strength, there is four: knowledge, there is five: Godliness, there is sixth: the fear of our lord, there is seven: how say you sir? Have you the just numbered? If you have not let us call for some of the queens auditors, and tellers out of the exchecker, or if they be to much encumbered with odd reckominges, and old accounts, let us find some other to reckon for us. S. Clement, S. Clement Epist. ad jul. & julia To. 1. council S. Cyprian, Origen, S. Chrysostom, S. Ambrose, S. Hierome and S. Augustine, and see how they reckon. S. Clement saith: All men must haste without delay, to be borne, again, and signed of the bishop, that is, receive the sevenfold grace of the holy Ghost, he keepeth just tale. S. Cyprian sayeth: By the benefit of this ointment, both wisdom, and understanding is given us from God, Serm. de unct. Christi. S. Cypria. counsel, and strength slideth into us from heaven, knowledge, godliness, and fear, by heavenly inspirations are poured upon us: there is another telleth seven. Origen in his third homily of seven women, upon Esay the prophet, considered diligently, Origen. what women those seven were, and what was the ignomine which they sustained, and found, that those seven women, were but one. For they were the spirit of God, and this one is seven. For the spirit of God, is the spirit of wisdom, and understanding, the spirit of counsel, and strength, the spirit of knowledge and godliness, the spirit of the fear of our lord: This wisdom sustaineth ignomine of many false wisdoms, rising up against it. This true understanding sustaineth obloquy, of many great understandings. This great counsel is slandered of many evil counsels: This strength is misreported of another, which being no strength nor virtue, yet accounteth herself a virtue. This knowledge abideth injury, of a false pretenced knowledge, which taketh away her name. This godliness is upbraied of that which vaunteth herself to be godliness, and is in deed impiety, and instruction of the ungodly. This fear suffereth villainy of that which is thought to be fear. Here is another that keepeth just reckoning and telleth seven. Chrysost. saith, Chrisost. Homil de sanct & ado●ando spiritu. as S. Paul called the holy ghost, the spirit of life, the spirit of charity, the spirit of virtue, the spirit of temperance, the spirit of promise, the spirit of faith, the spirit of meekness, the spirit of adoption of of sons: So the blessed prophet Esai saith, A root shall come forth out of the root of jesse, and a flower spring out of it, and the spirit of God shall rest upon him. Here is the name of the nature of the spirit himself: afterward folloe the gifts, the spirit of wisdom, and understanding, the spirit of counsel, and strength, the spirit of knowledge, Lib. 3. cap. 2 de sacra. S. Ambro. Mark M. Calf. The holy Ghost is given at the invocation of the priest. the spirit of Godliness the spirit of the fear of our lord. This auditor keepeth just account with the rest, and findeth seven. Come to S. Ambrose, he saith, The spiritual seal followeth, which you heard read this day, because after baptism it remaineth that there be a perfection made, when at the invocation of the priest, the holy ghost is infused. The spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel, and strength, the spirit of knowledge and godliness, the spirit of the fear of God, seven as it were graces of the holy Ghost. Here is an other, that misseth noon of the numbered. Cap. 11. S. Hiero. S. Hierome upon Esai, keepeth the same tale and saith, It is to be noted that spirit of God, wisdom, and understanding, counsel, and strength, knowledge and godliness, and fear of our lord (that is to say, the seventh number, which are called in Zacharie seven eyes, in one stone, doth rise out of the root of less, and so consequently, out of the stock of David. Cap. 3. S. August. Lib. 11. ca cap. 31. Libro 12. cap. 15. In Psal. 49 Here is an other goeth jump with the rest. S. Augustine in his work, de civitate Dei, in his book against Faustus the Manichee, in his tteatise upon the psalm, and diverse other places of his works keepeth the same reckoning, with all other christians, and maketh special mention of the sevenfold grace of the holy ghost. But what? In comparison of our Sir james, and respect of the profound knowledge which his mastership hath gotten in divinity, they were evil auditors, not learned to reckon seven, Fol. 103. b they were falsifiers of scripture, nor expert in their texts, but very Tom fools, scarce able to tell, their mother's geese. O pride intolerable? what ear can hear, what heart can abide this Lucifer's spirit? Such ancient fathers, such learned doctors such wise bishops, such virtuous prelates to be sclandred as falsifiers of scripture, to be reputed as unskilful idiots, not able to tell seven, to be esteemed as ignorants, that must learn to tell seven, An objection. as tom fool told his mother's geese? What spiteful malice and raging fury, is this? Satan author of all lies, to establish his kingdom hath scarce a viler practice. But M. Calf. will say he followeth the truth of the Hebrew, and therefore finding no more, but six graces of the holy Ghost mentioned in that text, durst boldly, Fol. 103. b presume to term us falsifiers, and say there were but six, Fol. 103. b The answer. and return the seventh (which is godliness) to us, as our own. For answer we say. S. Hierome, ten thousand times better learned in the Hebrew tongue, than this prating parrot, and all the protestants, labouring for his life to translate the old testament so faithfully according to the truth of the Hebrew text, as was possible, reckoneth up seven gifts of the holy Ghost, and piety for one, which was to cumbrous for heretics company, and therefore no marvel, if they cast him out of the text, and turn him over to Catholics. Now if he translating the Bible according to the truth of the Hebrew, because the jews should not insult against the christians, and say it was not so in the Hebrew, and have the like starting holes to flee unto, when they were priest with scriptures, as some smattering Hebrew protestants have now, did shuffle in one word more in to the scripture than the true text had, he should have given the jews just occasion to cavil, and himself have had great grudge of conscience for adding to the scriptures, contrary to God's ordinance, The septuagintes, reckon 7. graces of the holy Ghost. Oratio. ●a●aenet. ad gentes. In what estimation the fathers had the septuagints. Lib. 3. cap. 25. Ireneus. Origen. Epist. ad Africa, vide Euseb. li●. 6 cap. 23. histo. Ciril Hieros. Cathechesi. 4 Chrisost. homi 5 in 1 Matth. S. Hiero. De doctri, Christ li. 2. cap. 15. S. August. which had been too gross an oversight, for so wise, learned, and godly aman, as S. Hierom was. Again the septuagintes whom Ptolomeus king of Egypt had to Jerusalem, to translate the scripture into Greek, being as justinus Martyr recordeth, men of excellent wisdom, well learned in the Greek, and Hebrew tongue, translating this place of Esai, reckon up these seven graces of the holy Ghost, and piety for one, which M. Calf. would have cast out. And that the world may understand, how maliciously he sclandreth the Catholics with falsifying the scriptures, because they follow S Hieromes' translation, and the septuagints also in this, I will declare in what estimation the septuagints, that translated the old testament, were with our forefathers. Irenaeus saith: The scriptures were interpreted of the seventy elders per aspirationem Dei, by the inspiration of God, and declareth in the end of the chapter, that the self same spirit, that did foretell in the Prophets, what and after what sort the coming of Christ should be, did interpret very well in the elders, those things which were well prophesied. Origen saith: that only is to be counted true in scripture, which the septuagints did translate. Cyrillus Archbishop of Jerusalem saith: The interpretation of holy scripture was made of the holy Ghost. Chrisostom writeth thus: To make credit of a true translation, the septuagints are of right, worthier than all other. S. Hierome in his prologue upon the Paralippomenon, saith: The septuagints full with the holy Ghost, did translate those things which were true. S. Augustine hath those words: The authority of the seventy interpreters excelleth, touching the old testament. In all churches, of great learning and skill, they are said to have translated with such present assistance of the holy Ghost, that those seventy men had but one mouth. Hilarius, In Psal. 2. S. Hilary in psal. 118 S. Luke. S. Paul. Orige. in epist. ad Rom lib. 10. cap. 15. counted their authority, Perfectan & religiosam: perfect and religious. To be short, S. Luke, an holy Evangelist, both in his Gospel, and Acts of the Apostles citeth testimonies out of the old testament, according to the translation of the seventy interpreters, and not out of the Hebrews. S. Paul an Hebrew borne and well seen in the law, keepeth the translation of the 70. almost in all points. Which being so it followeth that neither they were deceived in translating this place of Esai, nor we falsifiers in following those learned men, that interpreted the old testament by the inspiration of God, and assistance of the holy Ghost. If this quarreler will yet say, they had no sight in Hebrewe, he shall prove himself a stark liar and a very Tom fool. For they were (as I proved before out of justinus Martyr) very well learned in Greek, and Hebrew. If he say, their translation was corrupted, I will not contend: but it was corrupted most (as the said justinus reporteth) by the jews, whose special purpose was to improve the mystery of Christ's incarnation, and not the sevenfold grace of the holy Ghost. If he say that S. Hierome found fault with them, we will him to understand, that Ireneus, Origenes, Cyrillus, Augustinus, Hilarius, do highly commend them, as men full of the holy Ghost. Yea S. Hierome himself, (as is afore said) who having the misliking of the septuagintes laid to his chardg, as a fault by Ruffinus, Apolog. 2. cont Ruff. said for his purgation, non damno, non reprehendo Septuaginta, I reprove not, I condemn not the Septuagints: But I do boldly prefer the Apostles before them all. Which places must have a reconciliation, before he be proved to be enemy to the translation of the Septuagints. M. Calves. reason why there should not be seven graces of the holy Ghost. Fol. 103. b Calf. In the mean while hear M. Calf. his fine reason, why there should not be seven graces of the holy Ghost. He saith, Other places attribute of diverse effects, diverse other titles to the holy ghost, nor the faithful are only partakers of those which Esay speaketh of, but also of others, as chastity, sobriety, truth holiness, which in like manner do flow from the same spring. To thrust the power of God's spirit, into such a corner, that it shall have but seven holes to start to, is to strait a compass, and can not contain him. By this he showeth himself as wittles as the Tom fool that he spoke of even now, Mart. that could not tell his mother's geese. For if wit had served, or Arithmetic feyed, he might have seen, that the lesser numbered is always included in the greater. As the merchant that hath ten pound and a purse, the famer that hath ten horse and a cart, the parson that hath ten kine and a calf, hath seven. And so understanding, that there be more gifts of the holy ghost than seven, he should never have denied that there be seven. If he fancied, that by the sevenfold grace, we say therebe no more gifts of the holy Ghost but seven, he showeth his head to be but a sphere of fancies, and void of all learning. For if he had spent but a small time in divinity, he might well understand, that the fathers, by saying there be seven graces of the holy Ghost, exclude not all beside seven. S. Ambrose saith: There be seven graces of the holy Ghost, and all graces pertain to the holy ghost: but these are as it were the chiefest, these are as it were the principalst. Lib. 3 cap. 2. de sacra. Cardinales principales. For what is so principal, as piety? What is so principal as the knowledge of God? What is so principal as the strength of God? What is so principal as the counsel of God? What is so principal as the fear of God? and so of the rest. If then these be the principalst, and chiefest graces of the holy Ghost? and all other are contained in them, he that saith there be seven graces, meaneth not, that there be no more than seven, but meaneth that in those seven all other are comprised, as Chrisostome or the author of imperfect work joined with him testifieth, saying. As of God's part, albeit there be many spirits of power yet for all that, they are counted seven, Cap. 11. Prover 9 be cause out of those seven all spirits of virtue and power do proceed, the which spirits, Esai doth reckon up, and Solomon express in these words, wisdom hath builded her a a house and put seven pillars under it: So of the devils part, although there be many spirits of sin, yet they are said to be seven, Homil. 30 in 12. Mat. because out of those principal vices, all other vice and sin doth flow. If M. Calfhills wisdom will say for excuse that he did not see so far in these fathers, yet the note of ignorance shall stick on his cloak, as long as this his dounghil of blasphemies, and lies shall remain unburnt. For out of Tully's offices, which he read being but a boy, he learned that liberality, affability, modesty, patience, and constancy, are counted virtues, and yet Cicero him self, with other philosophers say, there be but iiij. virtues, Wisdom, justice, fortitude, and Temperance. Which might have given him to understand, that they, in saying there be four virtues, minded not to exclude all other virtues besides those four, but esteemed those iiii. as the chiefest and principalst virtues, out of which, as out of fountains, all other should issue, and spring. And by that he might have learned to judge of the seven graces of holy Ghost. But his head was so infatuated, that he passed not what he said, so he said somewhat at the request of this brethren to deface the Catholics. To proceed, he travaileth much to infringe the reasons that I brought, to prove that the sign of the cross was used in consecrating the body and blood of Christ, in the sacrify of the Mass: and by the way like a venomous serpent spetteth out his poison, and blasphemously calleth that dreadful sacrifice, nothing else but the sacrifice of the devil. Fol. 106. a Blasphemy . Which is a phrase, more metre, for a limb of the devil and tormenter in hell, than for a professor of Christ, and preacher of the gospel. For if the true substance of Christ's body an blood were not there, Prayer and calling upon the name of God is no thing with M. Calf. but a sacrifice of the devil. after consecration, by the omnipotency of his words pronounced by the priest, yet there is an oblation, and sacrifice of thanks giving and prayer made for all states of men, yea with many of the same collects, which of force, they themselves have been compelled to borrow of the church of Rome, which maliciously they do malign. There is the epistle and gospel. There is the very true word of God. The name of jesus is called upon: the prayer of our lord said, Gloria in excelsis, pronounced. The Crede repeated. The name of God, with thrice repeating, Sanctus, holy, holy, holy, lord God of sabooth. And is this, nothing, but a sacrifice of the devil? O horrible blasphemy? what days are these? with heretics evil, is good, and good is evil. The devil is God, and god is the devil: if holy Polycarp was wounte to say, when he heard any thing sounding the dishonour of God: Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 20. histo. O merciful God to what time hast thou reserved me, that I hear these things? How much more justly may we, that hear not only the body and blood of Christ, but also the prayers of Christians, that have put on Christ in baptism, and that trust to be saved by the merits of his passion to be reckoned nothing else but a sacrifice of the devil? O merciful God to what time hast to reserved us? If the beast with seven heads, and ten horns, Apoc. 13. that opened his mouth into blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and those which dwell in heaven, were come into the woorld, what could he say more, to the dishonour of God, and shame of the Christians? To God, who being a ieloous God, a God that giveth the glory of his name to noon other, A God, that said to his Prophet, that men should offer in every place from east, to west, a pure and clean sacrifice to his name, would suffer so many priests, and bishops, to sacrifice so many hundred years, in so many countries, in so many free cities, so many towns, and so many villages, to such and oughely dragon, and monstrous beast, as the devil is? To man, that being redeemed with the precious blood of Christ, and made a member of his mystical body, would forsake so merciful a lord, and loving father, and honour his deadly enemy, that waiteth for his destruction, and like a roaring lion seeketh to devour him, what I say, could he say more to the dishonour of God? I assure you nothing. For it convinceth God to be untrue of his promise, that said in thy seed all nations shallbe blessed: and Christ uncareful of his church, which he so dearly ransomed, and promised to assist with the presence of the holy Ghost until his coming again: which is the greatest derogation to the glory of God that can be. Wherefore sir unless you will say that Christ, saying behold I am with you all days to the end of the world, Matt. ult. failed in his promise, and sent not the holy Ghost to teach them all truth, (as he said he would) or unless you will say, that the holy Ghost for this xv. hundred years, was idle in the church, and suffered Christ's people that were incorporate into his mystical body by baptism, to err and offer their sacrifices of prayer, and thanks giving, at the celebration of the heavenly mysteries done in remembrance of Christ's death, unto the devil, you can not say that the mass is nothing else but the sacrifice of the devil. Wherefore you may be ashamed, that so blasphemous a word passed your mouh. For if you should be narrowly examined whom you have upbraied, whom you have blasphemed, against whom you have exalted your voice, and lifted up your eyes on high, it would appear to be: 4. Reg. 19 Contra sanctum Israel? against the holy one of Israel. As touching the principal point, you say nothing to the purpose. For whereas I proved out of Albertus Magnus a learned man that lived iii. hundred years a go, and was B. of Ratisbone, that Christ in his last supper taking bred in his hands, Signo quodam manus benedixit, did bless it with a certain sign of his hands, and for proof, that this word, benedicere, may be taken to bless with the hand, brought certain places of scripture, as that jacob with his hands blessed josephes' children, Genes. 48 Marc. 10 Luc. 14 Fol. 106 a Christ laid his hands upon children, and blessed than, Christ lifted up his hands and blessed his Apostles, and that considered, asked a reason of the protestāns, why we might not say that Christ instituting the sacrament of his body, and blood and taking bread into his hands, and blessing it, lifted up his hand and with a certain sign of the cross blessed it, specially, sing the ancient fathers do so often insinuate the same, and the holy Ghost, directing the church in all her doings, hath ever allowed this manner of consecration in that mystery, and sacrifice, to all this you answer not one word, but prove that which no man denieth, that benedicere, is to say well, to speak well, and give thanks, which is no more to my demand and question, than if one would say, to him that asketh why may not M. Calfhil, be a ministre and ministrel also, honey is good meat for my lords bears, and nuts fine service for jack a napes. Blessing given with the hand. Serm. de venerat. crucis . By conferring places of scripture, we learn, that blessing is given with the hand. By S. Chrisostome we learn that the sign of the cross (which can not be made but by the hand) is present every where, whither the mystical meat is to be received, or any thing else to be done. By S. Augustine, that with this sign of the cross which is expressed, with a light moving of the hand, and calling upon the name of God, the body of our lord, and all other things that are sanctified, are consecrated. By the same father we learn, that men make a cross in celebration of Christ's sacraments. Tract. 118. in joan. Tit. 20. Panopl. These Authorities not answered by M. Calf. This question not soluted . By Euthimius that a cross with the hand doth sanctify all things, to which it is put, as the water of baptism, the oil and ointment, the faces of the faithful, the mystical bread, and holy blood. And all this I did put in my book, and desired our new ministers to tell us, how all this could be done, unless it be, as the church useth, by lifting up the hand, and making the sign of the cross? but I have no answer. M. Calf. that hath taken upon him to answer, in the behalf of all the protestāns, answereth no word, neither to this question, nor to these places of S. Chrisost. Aug. and Euthymius: whereby you may perceive that he answereth not directly to that which is propounded, but useth slyghtes to shift matters, that the ignorant may continue still in error. But because he braggeth so much of scripture, and thinketh no catholic to have so much skill in them, as himself, and and his masters, let us examine the places which he bringeth, and see, whither benedicere, signifieth nothing else, but to speak well, and give thanks. S. Mathewe saith: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which words, you tell me, If I understand Greek, be these, jesus taking the bread, Matt. 26. and giving thanks, broke it. But I tell you, if you interpret them so, you understand neither Greek, nor the Evangelist. For to oppose you in your small rules, be not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Fol. 106. a participles of the second and first Aoristes? And to what hath the first, and second Aorist respect in your Lexicon and grammar? to the present, or to the perfect tense? If to the perfect tense, then can not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, signify taking, nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, signify giving thanks, in the present tense. But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must respect the time past, and signify, after he had taken, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, when he had given thanks. And so, if you would needs refuse the old translation, and follow the Greek precisely, you should have said: Acceptum jesus panem fregit quum benedixisset, jesus broke the bread taken into his hands, after that he had blessed it. Or else this: Acceptum jesus panem & benedictum fregit, jesus broke the bread taken into his hands, and blessed it. Which kind of translation, by the participle of the preterperfect tense, they that be more skilful in Greek than you or I, Sir james, take to be most aptest to express the nature of the participles of the active Aoristes. But that sense could not like your melancholy humour, because it proveth that the bread was blessed of Christ, and convinceth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth more than speaking well, and giving thanks: which you like not. In the words of S. Mark you commit the like error. For you interpret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taking in the present tense, which signifieth, after that he had taken, in the preterperfect tense. But to the purpose. S. Mark saith, Accepit jesus panem & benedicens fregit. jesus took bread, and giving thanks broke it, after your translation. Tell us sir to whom did Christ give thanks in this place, to God the father? that appeareth not by scripture. For it is evident by the evangelist S. Mark, that jesus took bread, blessed bread, and broke bread, as the Greek Aorist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 governing in that place an accusative, doth plainly show. And whither it be gratiarum actio, aut benedictio, giving of thanks, or blessing, it must aswell be applied to the bread, as taking, and breaking. For Christ blessed that which he took, and that which he took he broke, which is easy to he seen in S. Mathewe, who joineth those words, taking bread, and blessing with a conjunction copulative, which showeth, that there is a likeness, between that which went before, and that which come after. But to end this controversy, and put all out of doubt, S. Paul hath an evident place in his epistle to the Corinthians, where he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉? The cup of blessing which we do bless, 1. Cor. 10. is it not a communication of the blood of Christ? and the bread which we break is it not a participation of the body of our lord? Because, we being many, are one bread, and one body, all that be partakers of one bread and one cup? Here S. Paul referreth blessing to the cup, and giveth us to understand that albeit the Evangelists do not clearly express it, yet they meant that the blessing should be also referred to the bread. Both the bread and the cup are of like holiness, blessed in the last supper and not thanked of Christ, as our young master minister by the Etymology of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would made such as himself believe. But to talk with him plainly, how say you sir, Fol. 107. a doth it evidently appear by the word of God, to all reasonable creatures that it is all one to bless, and to give thanks, as you teach in your book? If it be so, construe the words of S. Paul, and make a reasonable man believe it. He saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉? Construe it I beseek you in Greek, as it lieth. Calf. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the cup, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of blessing, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for the which we give thanks, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is it not, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the communication, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of the blood of Christ? Mart. Yea young man, will you ever more falsify the scripture? where find you that particle (for) which you shuffle in, to help your purpose? There is no such word in the text. Construe, it again, and remember, that, o, in Greek is the accusative case, governed of the verb, and answereth to the question whom or what, Go to be not afraid. Calf. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the cup, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of blessing, o, the which, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, we bless, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is it not, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the communication, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of the blood of Christ? Mart. Well said, I am glad that at length you can see the truth. By S. Paul then, it is plain, that we bless the cup of benediction: and so plain that you can not say, we give thanks the cup of benediction, or we speak well the cup of benediction. For that is an unprope phrase of speech, nor yet, that we give thanks to the cup of benediction. For thanks are due to God only, nor yet that we speak well the cup of benediction, nor give thanks only for the cup of benediction. For the words do not import so much, nor employ that sense, The bred and wine blessed. but infer a plain blessing of the bread and wine. Whereby, if you be one of the reasonable creatures that yourself mentioned even now, you may see by the word of God, that to bless, and give thanks, is not all one. The very places of scripture which you allege, prove against you. For when five lofes and two fishes mentioned in S. Mathewe, Mark and Luke, Matt. 14. were blessed, it is unproper, to say, that Christ said, well bread, well fishes, Marc. 6. Luc. 9 or gave thanks to the bread, and thanks to the fishes, or for the fishes, but as S. Matthew saith: He blessed and broke, what M. Calf? the bread forsooth? S. Luke saith: Benedixit illis, He blessed them. Marc. 8. Likewise S. Mark: Habebant paucos pisciculos & ipsos benedixit, They had a few fishes and he blessed them. Here blessing is not thanks giving, nor speaking well, but a sanctifying of those creatures, a giving a virtue and power unto them to multiply, and increase, to set forth the glory of God in feeding so many persons. Likewise when Christ lifted up his hands, and blessed his disciples, you can not say, that Christ said, well disciples, nor that he gave thanks to his disciples. But benedixit eis, he blessed them, Perchance pouring into them a strength, which should ward them, Theophilact. in 24. Lucae. until the coming of the holy Ghost. Perchance instructing us, that when we go far from home, we should commend the people under us, to the blessing of God saith Theophilact. Thus you see that blessing and thanks giving is not all one. And albeit it followeth in S. Luke, that the Apostles come into Jerusalem, benedicentes Dominum, praising God, yet shall blessing, and thanksgiving, be diverse, as long as there is man to bless, or thing to be blessed. And because you seem to be ignorant, what blessing is, and can not espy a difference between, blessing, thanks giving, and speaking well, I will upon hope that you will bless more oftener, thank more frendlyer, and speak more honestlyer, note what is blessing, thanksgiving, and speaking well. Benedictio est sancticationis traditio, Didst 28. cap presbiterum. Genes. 2. What is blessing. blessing in that sense that we talk of now, is a giving of sanctification, as when God blessed the seventh day, he gave a sanctification to the seventh day, and made it holy, and would have men, to cease from labour, and beasts from work, that his holy name might be honoured that day. Likewise when he blessed No and Abraham, and other patriarchs, he gave them a sanctification, Genes. 9 1. Reg 9 and made them holy in his sight. Samuel, blessed the sacrifice and made it holy and meet to be offered unto God: In the new testament, the virgin mary was, benedicta in mulieribus, blessed amongst women, that is sanctified above all other women, made an holy and sweet tabernacle to receive the eternal son of God. Christ in his last supper blessed bread, that is gave it a sanctification, and by the omnipotency of his word, made it his own flesh, saying. This is my body, which shallbe given for you in remission of sins, and so likewise, of the cup, this is my blood of the new testament which shalbe shed for many in remission of sins. And that you may not think this to be my private opinion, diverse ancient fathers speak notably of this sanctification and consecration of the outward elements and visible creatures of bread and wine, especially justinus, Martyr, S. Cyprian, S. Ambrose, Eusebius Emisenus, Apolog. 2. de coena domini. De ijs qui mister. cap. 9 Homil. 5. de Pasch. Epist 59 quest. 5. Thanks giving. De gratia & gratitu. quest. 106 and S. Aug. as all that are desirous to seek may find in the places quoted in the margin, which for fear of tediousness I omit. As for thanksgiving it is defined, thus. Gratiarum actio est quaedam gratiae recompensatio, that is to say, thanks giving, is a certain recompense, of grace, and benefit bestowed upon us. As when the poor beggar giveth the rich man thanks, for his alms, his thanks is a certain recompense for his alms. In like manner when we give our heart, our soul and mind, to God, when we have compassion of the poor, when we fast, and pray, when we renew the memory of his passion, when we set forth the glory of his name, and give him high commendations, and sovereign praises for the benfites of our creation, for the abundance of all things, appertaining to our sustenance, for the kinds of things, for the variety of time, yea for persecution, adversity, and trouble, and so forth, just. Mar. Apol. 2. then give we thanks to God, then do we so far forth as we may recompense, his goodness towards us, and after the benefit is bestowed, give thanks, and when the good turn is done, make recompense, and in consideration of his merciful promise make him debtor unto us. For as master Calf. allegeth out of Chrisostome: Qui benedixerit debitorem illum facit maioris benedictionis: He that blesseth, and giveth thanks to God, Fol. 116. a Homil. 29 in 9 Gene. maketh him debtor of a greater blessing. Which blessing is no thanks giving M. Calf. For God giveth us no thanks, we must give thanks to him. And for our poor thanks, ꝑceding of a pure heart, he giveth us an infinite treasure, that is the fruition of himself in glory. By this we see that to give thanks to God, is to recompense his goodness, and benefits towards us, so far forth as we may, by rendering our hearts, souls, and minds, unto him, and giving him high commendations, and sovereign praises for our creation, as is before said: but that Christ in such sort only, gave thanks to God the father, at the institution of his supper, the words of the Gospel do not import, for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in S. Mathewe, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in S. Luke, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in S. Paul have relation to the bread and wine, What did Christ bless in the supper M. Calf? Answer. and answer to the question whom or what, as if you would ask what was it, that Christ took, what was it that Christ blessed, your answer must be, he took bread, and he blessed bread, and not he thanked bread, or said well bread, or gave only thanks for the bread. Thanks in such only sort, as you protestāns mean, were given after supper, when they sang their hymn, and went up into the mount Olivet. And that you may not cavil, in saying that thanks were given after supper in such only sort, as you mean, I put you to understand, that we deny not, that Christ lifting up his eyes to heaven gave thanks to God the father before, to instruct us, that before and after the celebration of the mysteries, we should praise God, and give him thanks, for his tender mercy towards us: but we say, that Christ besides giving of thanks, blessed the bread, and gave it a sanctification, and made it holy, even his own body and blood, and both by his example taught, and with his word commanded us to do the like whensoever we would celebrated the memory of his passion, that is, to take bread, and bless it, and pronounce those holy words, by which through the omnipotency of his power, the visible creatures are sanctified, and hallowed and turned into the substance of his body and blood. He meant not only, that when we come, to the mysteries of the lords supper, we shhould bless only, that is as M. Calfhils' interpretation expoundeth it, Fol. 106. a Be thankful for them. For which exposition of his, because he allegeth. S. Chrisostome, and willeth me, to set him against my Albert, I will examine the place of that ancient father. And to the end you may the better understand his words, I will note a place, In 1. Cor. cap 10 homil 24. Homi. 60. Christ doth sanctify the creatures of bred and wine and change them. where he proveth that the creatures of bred and wine were consecrated by Christ in the supper. In his Homily to the people of Antioch, talking of the sacrament he saith, The works set forth, are not wrought by the virtue of man: he that then made them in that supper, maketh them also now. we keep the place of ministers. It is christ himself that doth sanctify them and change them. Here he declareth, that Christ in the supper did more than give thanks, he sanctified the creatures, and changed them. And so must we that are his ministers do. If you ask into what he changed those visible creatures, S. Chrisostom shall tell you out of the same Homily upon the epistle to the Corinthians, Home 24. in 1 Cor. cap. 10. The creatures of bred and wine changed into the body of Christ. Mark M. Calf the body of Christ is seen upon the aultor whence M. Calf. hath picked his half sentence. There he saith, Christ gave us his flesh, that we might be filled with it, by which he alured us into a marvelous great love of him. That flesh was Christ's body. That body the wise men adored in the manger, But you do not see that in the manger, but in the altar, not a woman holding in her armies, but a priest present, and the holy Ghost plentifully diffused upon the sacrifice there proposed: neither dost thou see that simple body, but thou seest also his power, and knowest all the order and doing of it. further he saith. If thou desirest blood, do not springle the altar of idols with slaughter of brute beasts, but springle my altar with my blood. Quod est in calice id est quod a latere fluxit, & illius sumus participes. That which is in the Chalice, is that which flowed out of his side, and of that we are, partakers. By which every man that hath not his senses corrupted with fancies, may see, that the true body, and blood of Christ, are in the sacrament, and that it is the true substance of his flesh into which the creatures of bread and wine are changed. This considered let us see the place, that M. Calf. alleged. And that Chrysostom's meaning may more clearly appear, I will repeat the words that go before, and come after. straight upon those words of S. Paul, he saith: What sayest thou O blessed Apostle Paul, when thou wilt as●onnie the hearers, and make mention of of the dreadful mysteries? Dost thou call that cup fearful and full of dread, the cup of blessing? I do so in deed. For it is no small thing that is spoken. Siquidem quum benedictionem dico, Eucharistiam dico, & quum Eucharistiam dico, omnem benignitatis Dei thesaurum aperio. For when I speak of blessing, I speak of thanks giving, (as M. Calf. translateth it) and when I speak of thanks giving, I open all the treasure of the goodness of God, and rehearse those great gifts of his. For with the cup we add the unspeakable benefits of God, and whatsoever we have obtained. So we come unto him, we communicate with him, thanking him that he hath delyured man kind, from error, that when we had no hope, and were wicked persons, he admitted us brothers, and companions unto himself. With these and such other rendringes of thanks we come unto him. Hitherto M. Calf. and as though he had found a great proof for his gay fancy, he saith: Fol. 106. b Here you see, what Chrisostom took blessing to be. It followeth a little after in Chrisostome: The cup of blessing which we do bless, is it not a communication of the blood of Christ? By these words specially, What S. Paul calleth the cup of blessing. he made himself to be credited, and also to be dreaded. The sense and meaning of those words is this, that which is in the chalice, is that, which flowed from his side, and of that we are partakers. He called it the cup of blessing, because when we have that cup before us, with admiration and certain honour of that unspeakable gift, we praise him, giving him thanks that he shed his blood, that we might not remain in error, but have made us partakers of it. Thus Chrisostome there: Now gentle M. Calf. what meaneth Chrisostome by blessing? thanksgiving as you say? If it be so? Then thanks giving is all the treasure of the goodness of God, thanks giving is that which flowed out of the side of Christ, thanks giving is the table of our Lord, thanks giving, is animae nostrae vis, The blessing that Chrisost. mentioneth in the Place alleged by M. Calf nerui mentis, fiduciae vinculum, fundamentum, spes, salus, lux, vita nostra. The strength of the soul, the sinews of the mind, the bond of faith, the foundation, our hope, our health, our light and our life. For benedictio, and eucharistia, that S. Paul mentioned, have all these properties applied unto them in the very self same place of Chrisostome. Read the whole chapter and see: and after view of the place, let us understand whither thanks giving (which is an action of ours) never of itself acceptable, in the sight of God, for our unworthiness, can be compared to any of them. If after mature deliberation, you find it not only great impiety and ungodliness, but also cursed blasphemy and abomination to conceive any such thing) think them no unreasonahle men, that make a difference between blessing, and thanks giving, and mislike your rashness for alleging, that out of Chrisostome which you understand not. The thanks giving or eucharist, which he mentioned, is the body and blood of Christ, called of S. Paul the cup of blessing, What is Thanks giving mentioned of Chrisost. because, when we have that cup before us, we praise God with admiration, and honour, giving thanks that he shed his blood, for us, and suffered us not to remain in error. With that cup we remember the unspeakable benefits of God, we come unto him, we communicate with him, and praise him, for redeeming us out of thrauldom. By this you see that first we must have the cup of blessing before us, and then give thanks, not that we may not give thanks without the cup, but because our thanks giving with that cup of blessing is a more acceptable sacrifice in the sight of God. Wherefore it behoveth us to seek, how we may come by this cup of blessing. A mean must be had: if it may be gotten by only thanks giving, or by being thankful, than every man may make this cup of blessing. For every man can give thanks, at the mysteries of our lords supper, and be thankful for them: but if noon can make that cup, but such as be specially called, to whom it was said: Make this in my remembrance, it will follow that some special thing is required, more than thanks giving, as taking, blessing, and consecrating, with those words, which Christ spoke, when he instituted this sacrament, and said: Take, eat, this is my body: Drink ye all of this, This is my blood of the new testament, which shalbe shed for many in remission of sins, which appertaineth not to all. As for speaking well, Speaking well. it is either a giving of gentle words in familiar talk, or a reporting well of our even Christians, or a copious and eloquent setting forth of an oration by voice and gesture, or a teaching in right order. And noon of all these was principally meant of our saviour Christ in his last supper. To conclude therefore, sing I have disproved, M. Calfhils' assertion, that by the nature of the word, the judgement of the Evangelists, and testimony of S. Paul, to bless and give thanks is not all one thing, and declared that Christ in his last supper, did not only give thanks, but bless the bread and wine, and gave them a sanctification, and made them holy, that is, turned them in to the substance of his body and blood, and proved that blessing which Chrisostome speaketh of, ●. Cap. 10. in the x. chapter of S. Paul to the Corinthians is not our bore thanks giving, but the very blood of Christ itself, and further noted, that in celebration of Christ's sacraments, there must be a consecration, and sanctification of the visible creatures, by pronouncing the words of Christ, and calling upon his holy name, and making the sign of the cross, which manner of consecration the church learned of Christ, and hath continued ever sithence, which custom and use of the church, S. Augustine thought a good way to understand the scripture, we may boldly say with that learned father Albertus Magnus, that Christ blessing the bread, Signo quodam manus benedixit, Epist. 59 quest. 5. ad Paul Blessed it with a certain sign of the hand, and then pronounced these words, this is my body etc. and this interpretation of his, and assertion of mine, all the wit of M. Calfhils' head, and learning in his English Doctors, will never be able to prove to be frivolous. His jarring still, like a blind harper upon one string, that it is not material, Calf. Fol. 107. a what rite or ceremony was received after, and that it is not sufficient to say, it was once so, but it must be proved that it was well, so, Mart. I have answered before. And say further here with S. August. that as we must do all that, which the authority of scripture commandeth: So likewise, if the catholic church through out all the world doth use any of these rites, and ceremonies, we must also use them and do as the church doth. Epist. 118. ad janua. Epist ad Pomp. For to reason whither this should be done in such sort, or no, it is a point of most insolent madness. The place of S. Cyprian, which he himself alloweth, unde est traditio etc. Whence is this tradition, doth it descend from the writings and commandments of his Apostles, maketh nothing against us. For this rite and ceremony of making the sign of the cross, come from the tradition of the Apostles, and so consequently from, their commandment, as it is proved before. If you bid us show scripture for it, we bid you show us in what scripture all Christ's doings, All the Apostles preached, but all their precepts are not written, yet to be followed. and all the Apostles commandments were written. All preached, all gave commandments, to the Christians, where they preached, and yet have we not writings of all. And because all their commandments were not written, shall we think that the commandments which they gave to their people, and they to their aftercummers successively, by tradition unto this present, are to be contemned? No. S. Paul commandeth the contrary, and biddeth us keep traditions, that we learned by his epistle and word of mouth S. Cyprian himself urgeth earnestly the tradition of Christ, for mingling water with wine: Libro 2. epist. 3. Serm. de unctio. like wise the anointing w●h Chrism to be instituted, and yet neither this nor that tradition▪ is written, neither in the Evangelists, nor in the Acts of the Apostles, nor in any of their epistles. Whereby you may understand, that he ask for tradition, asked aswell for such as were unwritten, and sealed in the hearts of men, by the commandment of the Apostles, as for those which were written i● the Evangelists, epistles, or Acts, of the Apostles. Wherefore, Fol. 107. b in saying that S. Cyprian would not be bound to admit any thing which was not written in the Evangelists, Acts, Epistles, or other writings of the Apostles, S. Cypria. slandered. Heretics denying traditions deny the scripture. August▪ epist. 118. you slander that holy father, and deceive the readers, with abusing his authority, and wresting his words. And whiles you will not be bound to the observance of traditions without proof of scripture, deny the authority of scripture, which commandeth traditions to be kept, although they were delyured without scripture. You break the ordinances of the Apostles, and determinations of general councils, from whom all traditions generally used in the catholic church are commended unto us. So little pass you either for scripture, councils, or fathers, when they make against you. But to proceed: where I proved that the sign of the cross is used in matrimony, penance, and extreme unction, because they are sacraments of the church, which are made (as S. Augustine saith) with the sign of the cross, M. Calf. having little to say, findeth fault where noon is, and saith: Calf. Fol. 107. b I am abused in my own conceit, for esteeming the sign of the cross, to be a thing of such necessity, as that the sacraments can not be made without it. Mart. This for lack of better stuff he infarced, ones or twice in his book before, but the oftener he repeateth it, the more is his shame. For all that have eyes to see, and ears to hear, and wit to judge, may well perceive that this is, a very cavillation. In all my treatise I maintain no such position, but mistrusting, jest some malicious momes should mistake my meaning, I put in a clause in the 52. leaf of my book, to declare that no sacrament lacked his operation, effect, and virtue, if by negligence, or forgetfulness the sign of the cross were omitted. And this quarreler could not chose, but see it before he come to this place, if he were not blind or drunk with an hasty zeal to answer that, which come after, before he understood what went before, which is a soul shame. Where such practices are used, there is small hope of upright dealing. That done he saith, that I leave out the calling upon the name of God, Fol. 107. b as though Christian men taught that any sacrament could be made with a bore sign, without the calling upon the name of God, and pronouncing the words of Christ. The lawyer saith, all that is spoken in the preface or beginning, is presupposed to be repeated in that which followeth. Wherefore, albeit in every place, I put not in all the doctors words, nor talk particularly of the calling upon the name of God, yet sing that was: Primum in intentione, first in intention, as I professed in my preface, and so well known of all men, that he is an heathen that doubteth of it, a charitable reader, and good Christian, would ever think that to be principally understood: but we may learn be this, what good opinion this our good adversary conceiveth of us. When he preacheth, and for one halfhower speaketh against the Pope, for another against the Cardinals, for another, against the enormities of the clergy, for another, againft the students of Lovayne, would he think any of his brother's wife, if he said, to his reproach. M. preacher spoke never a word of faith in all his sermon, nor of the name of God? Not: His charity (I fear me) would be chafed with it. And yet he dealeth so with me: and because I did not expressly talk of the calling upon the name of God, he saith, I leave it out: and when he had left such a sinistrous suspicion of that in his brethrers ears, he armed himself and went in haste to prove that matrimony, penance, and extreme unction be no sacraments, and whereas S. Ambrose, Augustine, and Leo call matrimony, a sacrament, that maketh no matter, quoth M. Calf. For Ambrose calleth the words, Fol. 108. a Calf. and works of Christ a sacrament. Augustine hath nothing more familiar in him than, Sacramenta scripturarum, the sacraments of scriptures. Wisely by S. Mary, and like a clerk. Mart. I ever thought before this, that you had learned, that sacraments in their proper and true signification, (as the church taketh them) be signs of an holy thing, that is of an invisible grace, What signs Sacraments are. given of God in the visible elements, and not naked signs only, but signs that are effectuous, signs, that contain grace, and be the cause of grace, and bring to pass that which they signify. Signs that put us in remembrance of that which is past, present and to come, as baptism putteth us in remembrance of the passion of Christ that is past, of present grace, that is remission of sins, given in that sacrament and the glory to come, to which we have entry by baptism, this I say, I though, you had learned, and could have judged that in this sense, S. Ambrose, S. Augustine, and Leo take matrimony to be a sacrament, and not as the works of Christ, and parables of scripture, be counted sacraments: but I perceive you are worse, and worse: everyday more ignorant, than other. Every sacrament is a sign of an holy thing: but every sign of an holy thing, is not a sacrament. You forget your rules of reciprocation. Albeit, Aristotle said, every horned beast lacketh teeth in the upper jaw, yet you know right well, that whosoever lacketh teeth in the upper jaw is not an horned beast. And so may you think of signs and sacraments. But that is not the matter that you stick so much upon. You think if it be a sacrament it must be a sign, ordained of God for us, Calf Fol 108. a to confirm our faith, and seal the promise of grace within us. This is a strange definition of a sacrament. I beseek you in what scripture, Mart. doctor, or council, shall we find it? If in noon, then give us leave, not to believe it. By this definition, we are like to have never a sacrament left. For baptism was not principally ordained to confirm our faith, but to wash away our sins, as S. Peter said: Let every one of you be baptized into remission of sins. Acto 2. For such as were of age, it was necessary, that they should (be confirmed in their faith, and believe in Christ before they were baptized, as it is written: He that believeth and is baptized shalbe saved. As for infants the faith of the church sufficeth for them, Marc. 16. to baptism, to purge them from original sin. The sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, was instituted to be a meat and food of the soul, in this warfare of ours, and before we can be partakers of it, we must not only be confirmed in faith, but also have such discretion and judgement, which cometh not, but after certain years, that we may be able, as S. Paul saith, 1. Cor. 11. to try ourselves, and examine our consciences, whither we be worthy to be partakers of that holy meat, before we presume to come to that dreadful table of our lord. And more sacraments than these the protestants do not acknoweledg. So whiles M. Calf. proveth Matrimony to be no sacrament, by his new devised definition coined of Calvin in Geneva, M. Calf. of two sacraments, by his new definition leaveth never a one. Fol. 108. b Calf. and of seven cutteth of five, of two he hath left his fellows newer a one, which is an evil kind of Aritmeticke. Such diminutions make poor treasures. Another reason why Matrimony should be no sacrament, is this. We have for baptism, who so ever believeth and is baptized shalbe saved: for the supper, Take, eat, this is my body, drink ye all of this, this is my blood, which is shed for many, for the remission of sins. But we have not for matrimony take a wife, and thou shalt be saved. Take a wife and thy sins be forgiven thee, ergo matrimony is no Sacrament. A proper reason, and meet for such a reader. Mart. To answer briefly, I deny that argument: for it is not necessary that every sacrament have a promise of remission of sins, albeit some have. If it may be showed that it is a sign of invisible, grace, Every sacrament hath not a promise of remission of sins annexed. joan, 20. in such sort as I said before, it is sufficient to convince, that it is a sament. But what if Matrimony had such a promise annexed unto it, would this old bachelor and young minister, acknowledge it to be a Sacrament? Not Not: Penance hath an express promise of remission of sins, by Christ himself, saying. Receive ye the holy Ghost, whose sins ●e remit are remitted them. Likewise extreme Unction hath a promise of remissian of sins, by the holy Ghost in the blessed apostle S. james, saying, Cap. 5. Penance and extreme unction have a promise of remission of sins, yet M. Calf denieth them to be Satraments. Is any man sick amongst you, let him bring in the priests of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil, in the name of God: and the prayer of faith shall heal the sick, and God shall ease him, and if he be in sins, they shallbe forgiven him: yet amongst protestants they can be no sacraments. Their definition must stretch as far, and be coarcted, as short, as pleaseth their fancy: Yea rather, than they would confess these sacraments to be comprised in that definition, which themselves make, they will sand that to Geneva, and seek an other in Gehenna. But let us go forward. A third reason they have learned of Calvin their brutish Bassa upon the words of S. Paul: who writing in Greek called it a mystery and not a sacrament. but as I answered in my treatise before, So I answer now again, that baptism and the sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ, are called by diverse ancient fathers, mysteries, and yet notwithstanding they be sacraments. For every sacrament is a mystery, and this word Sacrament and mystery do not so far differ, but that, that which is a mystery, may also be a sacrament. Mary every mystery, is not a sacrament in the proper signification: So that if matrimony must be no sacrament, because it is a mystery, than baptism and the sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ be no sacraments: for they are mysteries, and so we shall have (as I said) never a sacrament left shortly. Such is the drift of the devil. To this answer, this quarreler made no reply in the world, but thought it best to scoff it out, Fol. 109. a and like a minstrel make men laugh, with a merry mariadg solennised by the vicar of S. Fools, between Mauking and Daukin etc. M. Calves. scoff of Maukin and Daukin answered. But if Sir james, Calfhil, wilbe such a calf still, as to follow Calvin, than Calfhil, and Calvin, A Calf with a carrin, may dance before Satin and like a dolt, and a dawkin, meet with Luther and his katrin, and simul & semel by the vicar of saint Folly, be married to a fury, without sacrament or mystery. The fourth reason why matrimony should be no sacrament is, Fol 109 a Calf. saith he, because it conferreth no grace. For he that is married, is not, in that respect more the child of God, than if he were unmarried, he that is married hath no peculiar promises, that for his marriage sake, his sins are remitted him: and yet these are requisite in a sacrament. For answer, I say, where I declared in my book, Mart. that in matrimony there is an invisible grace (that is to say) a gift of God, by which, they (that are married) are made more stronger to suffer adversity, more wiser to instruct their children, and better able to resist all corruption, and unclenlynes, you should (sir) first have disproved these to be graces, and gifts of God, and than, have said, that in matrimony, there is no invisible grace, given to the man and wife: but that was to hard meat for your sucking teeth. Homi 20. in Genes . S. Chrysostom, counted it a great mystery, and unspeakable wisdom, for a man to forsake his father that begot him, his mother that with pain brought him into the world, Invisible grace given in the sacrament of matrimony. and cleave fast to a woman, which perchance he never saw before: and dare you say it is no grace? Again every honest man so tenderly loveth his wife, as his own flesh, and joyfully contenteth himself with her company, all days of his life, and departed his body to noon other. Is this no grace? Besides in all adversity, he continueth with her, in all sickness he cherisheth her, and from all injuries defendeth her, and so likewise the woman for her part to the man. Is not this a special gift of God? If it be given in matrimony (as noon have that specially, but those that are united together in matrimony) why is there no grace conferred in matrimony? Furthermore, saint Paul saith in this place, Heb. 13. that matrimony is honourable in all things, and the bed undefiled. In an other place: The womam shallbe saved by bringing forth of children, 1. Tim. 2. if they continue in faith. Now if matrimony hath not a grace of God annexed, how can the woman have her salvation? Take away matrimony, the act is unclean, use it in matrimony, as God hath ordained, it hath his reward, and why? because God hath given it his special grace. To be short, when God joined our first parents together, the scripture saith, benedixit illus Deus, ac dixit, Genes. 1. Crescite & multiplicamini. God blessed them, and said, increase and multiply. What was that? thanks giving, praising or saying well, according to your etymology, M. Calf.? Not: but God's blessing, was a sanctyfying of them, and giving of a spiritual grace: which ceased not in them, but flowed into all, to whom this precept of his increase and multiply may extend. In S. Mathewe it is said, whom God hath joined let no man separate. Cap. 19 By which we may perrcave that the man and wife, that come together in the fear of our lord, are joined by God. And such is his mercy, whom he joineth, he replenisheth with his grace: wherbie it is evident that matrimony hath an invisible grace of God annexed unto it. But M. Calf saith, he that is married is no more the child of God in that respect than if he were unmarried. It is true: what then? Is Matrimony therefore no sacrament? or hath it no grace annexed unto it? It followeth not. For like as if the queens Majesty should give to the lord mayor of London, an hundred pounds by the year, her liberality should be always counted a singular favour, and special grace albeit in that respect, he be no more the queens subject than he was before: So is matrimony an holy sacrament, although the married is not in respect of his marriage more the child of God than if he were unmarried. For as the prince extendeth not her liberality to the lord Maior, to make him more her subject than he was before, but to encoradge and able him, to do her grace better service, in that vocation: So God ordained not this sacrament of matrimony, to make the married man more the child of God, than, when he mas unmarried, but to able him by his grace to live in that state honestly, and serve to the increase and generation of children to the honour of God, so long as he would have men to live upon the earth. Calf . Again to prove that matrimony is no sacrament M. Calf. saith, he that is married hath no peculiar promise, that for his mariadg sake his sins are remitted, and yet these things are required in a sacrament: Maat. where note good readears that he paseth not what he sayeth, so he blind men's eyes with some gay coloured words. For what if those things be required in a sacrament? ergo be they required in all sacraments? It is no good argument. For albeit baptism hath a promise of remission of sins annexed unto it, yet it is not necessary that every sacrament have that promise. It is sufficient that according to their diverse effects, Where hath the supper of our lord a promise of remission of sins M. Calf.? joan. 6. they have diverse graces of the holy Ghost, always following. If every sacrament hath a promise of remission of sins annexed, and that can not be a sacrament, which hath not the promise of remission of sins annexed, what shall we say of the supper of our lord? Where will the protestants prove in all scripture that a promise of remission of sins is annexed to this sacrament? If they tell us out of S. john: If a man eateth of this bread, he shall live for ever, we will say unto them out of S. Paul: He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh his own judgement not discerning the body of our Lord. So that remission of sins is not promised to a man, because he is made partaker of this sacrament: his sins must be remitted before, and he himself in favour with God, before he presume to come, to this Sacrament, otherwise he shall not only not have remission of sins, but he shall have a terrible judgement also, and greater heap of damnation. And if there be a remission of sins, them is it a sacrament propitiatory, M. Calf. proveth the supper of our lord no sacrament. contrary to your own doctrine. If it be not, then have you found a sacrament that hath no promiss, of remission of sins annexed unto it, and so consequently make it no sacrament. For if that be no sacrament which hath no remission of sin promised unto it, as baptism hath, certes, this can be no sacrament: and so of two sacraments by this reason the protestants will leave themselves but one, and not that neither, if their definition of a sacrament may stand, as I said before. Thus they foul from error to error, from absurdity to absurdity, whiles they forsake the true determination of Christ's catholic church. As for the five absurdities which M. Calf. hath noted in popish doctrine, touching matrimony, I differre to speak of them here, only this I say, he hath as absurdely demeaned himself in treating of them as the ass did in his lions skin. In the last of them he sclaundreth the church, and controlleth that which never honest man thought worthy of reprehension, and mayntayneth a notable error, by which the whole state of common weals shallbe disordered, that is, that a man may put away his wife for fornication and the woman refuse her husband, Fol. 111. a Aposition of M. Calf● contrary to scripture. Matt. 19 Vide Augu. de adulter. coniug. ad Pollent. 1. Cor. 7. upon like cause, and yet mary an other: which is expressly against the Gospel of Christ, and preaching of the holy Ghost. For Christ saith: Whosoever forsaketh his wife, except it be for fornication, and marrieth another, he committeth adultery: and he that marrieth the woman that is so forsaken committed adultery. The holy ghost teacheth by S. Paul, that neither the man must forsake his wife, nor the wife go away from her husband. If she fortune to go away from her husband (which is never permitted, but in case of fornication) S. Paul willeth her: Manere innuptam aut reconciliari viro. To continue unmarried or else to be reconciled to her husband: which being true, how can he that devorceth an adulterous person, He that putteth away an adulterous person can not mary another while she liveth. Acto. 10. mary another? S. Paul saith if the woman forsake her husband (which she can not do but fornication) she is commanded by god, either to remain unmarried, either to be reconciled to her husband, and if the woman being guiltless, and innocent, is bound by the law of God not to mary, if she forsake her husband for fornication, shall not the man be bound in like sort to continue unmarried, if he put away his wife for like occasion? Is God, Acceptor personarum? An acceptour of persons? Shall the weaker and frailer vessel be bound to continue unmarried, and shall the man whom reason and wisdom should more rule, be set at liberty? Not M. Calf: There is no reason in it. The law that bindeth one, bindeth the other. But we may see how lewdly you wrist the scriptures, to maintain the sensual lusts of some fleashlie brothers, but let us go forward. That you will have penance, to be no sacrament, that you follow Calvin and count it blasphemous and abominable to have it called the second table after shipwreck, Fol. 111. a and so consequently the author of that doctrine, a blasphemous and an abominable man, In cap. 3. Esai. & epist. ad Demetri. who was no worse, than S. Hierome, what shall I say? When S. Hierome translated the epistle of Epiphanius against images (as you think) and gave no signification that he misliked it, than S. Hierome was a Cardinal, and a saint Canonised, now he calleth penance the second table after shipwreck, M. Calf. accounteth S. Hiero. a blasphemous and an abominable man. he is a blasphemous and abominable man. Alas sir how hath S. Hierome offended you, that you should prefer Caluins' judgement, and your own before his? If penance be not the only way and mean to raise us up again, when we fall, after baptism, tell us how we shall rise? We sin daily, and therefore we must have some mean to wipe away our sins, and re-enter into favour with God daily? Fol. 118. a Are we bound to call our baptism to remembrance, whensoever we sin, that by the promise exhibited in baptism, the sinful soul may be refreshed and penance out of it gathered, as you say, thereby to exterminate the sacrament of penance? Where is this in scripture? If it be necessary to salvation, some Apostle or Evangelist must needs have specified it after your doctrine? Some thing necessary to salvation not found in scripture, by the protestants doctrine . Christ that so tenderly loved us, the holy Ghost that so wisely inspired the Apostles, to instruct us, would not omit so necessary a point of doctrine. If it be no where to be found in scripture, and yet in the protestants fancies necessary to salvation, then by their own position, there is some thing necessary to salvation, and yet not to be found in scripture, but alas: Aspis a vipera mutuatur venenum. Calfhil hath sucked, this drags out of Caluins' drugs, as far wide from all scripture, and reason, as east from west, and North from South. God by the Prophet cried unto the sinful people: joel. 2. Turn unto me in weeping and wailing. Christ himself cried: Do penance the kingdom of God is at hand. Matt 4. S. john Baptist in like sort preached, Matt. 3. and willed us to do the works and fruits of penance, and not to say we have Abraham for our father. Likewise the Apostles cried: Poenitemini, repent. Acto. 3. Cap ● . S. john the Evangelist in his Apocalypse, willed the angel of Ephesus to remember whence he fell and to do penance, and work the works that he did first. And what is it to do penance? to call our baptism to remembrance, as M. Calvin and Calfhil say, minding thereby to exterminate the sacrament of penance? A proper definition nor found in scripture, council, nor ancient father, these fourteen hundred years, but wicked and heretical, and therefore worthy to be contemned, with the authors of it. Other things, you bring against this sacrament. As that absolution should be the sacrament, Calf. Fo. 112▪ a. b and not penance, that confession is to no purpose, that contrition of heart, sufficeth to remission of sin, that the church should teach that every thief, murderer, and adulterer hath clear remission of his sins although he never repent, that it requireth a visible element, but so far unlike a divine, Mart. and one that pretendeth skill in the fathers, that wisemen, think it more metre to laugh at you, than answer you. To talk of all those requireth a large treatise, which I omit because it is not incident to my purpose. They that are desirous to see it largely handled, may read Hosius confession, and other late writers. That which you speak of extreme Unction, Fol. 113. a as that oil can not enter into the soul, How fond is it? You might aswell require it to be proved that water entereth into the soul in baptism. For as remission of sins is given in baptism, as soon as the water hath washed the body, and the minister pronounced Christ's words: So is remission of such sins as Christ would have remitted by virtue of this sacrament given, as soon as the body is anointed. Again that priests anoint every sick body, Calf. Fol. 113. a. and noon are the better, that bishops (who are priests) have not commission to cast ont devils, to cure diseases, to cleanse lepers and to raise the dead. That priests mock the holy Ghost, and make the body the gresier for the grave, that we come not by our wills to the sick until the last gasp, that we admit but one alone, or noon but priests when the sacrament is ministered, Mart. what vain lies be these? All that are of any experience can control you of untruth in all these, and diverse others as shall appear hereafter? Fol. 114 b Galf. Mart. Where you conclude, that extreme unction is no sacrament, because it is not a ceremony instituted of God, and delivered us, nor hath a promise of grace that concerneth us, Let me ask you this question. Protestant's denying extreme unction to be instituted of God, deny the holy Ghost to be God. Cap. 5. Is the holy Ghost God, or is he not? If he be God, then was this sacrament and ceremony of extreme Unction instituted of God. For the holy Ghost infused plentifully upon the Apostles, and speaking nothing, but that which he heard of Christ, did ordain by the blessed Apostle. S. james, that sick men should be anointed by the priest, and have prayer made over them. Examine the words: S. james saith, Is any man sick amongst you? Let him bring in the priests of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil: Is not here a plain institution and ordinance of the holy Ghost? Is not inducat, let him bring in, the imperative mode, which biddeth and commandeth? and doth not (orent) let them pray, signify also a commandment? What reason have you to the contrary? Show it if you can. As for the promise of grace, A promise of grace. doth it not follow streitwayes? And if he be in sins, they shalbe for given him? Is not remissioa of sins a grace with you M. Calf? Be not these the words of the holy ghost in the Apostle S. james? If you acknowledge them to be the words of the holy ghost, and confess the holy ghost to be God and allow remission of sins, to be an invisible grace of God, then must you grant, that extreme unction is a sacrament instituted of God, and hath a promise of grace annexed unto it? Calf . Touching your fancy that S. james would have it to be temporal, Mart. and not pass the present state, we tell you, that the express commandment of God, may not be illuded with such fond surmises. We have it put indefinitely, as a precept to continued for ever, without all lymitation of tyme. If you will have it but temporal, show us the commadement? Show us as good evidence out of scripture against it, as we show you for it. Or if you have no scripture in store, show us some general council: some ancient father: some decree of the See Apostolic. If you can show noon, (as I am assure you can not) why crack you so impudently, that you have reason, Calf. and scripture for you, Fol. 114. b with the learned and sound determination of more fathers of the church, Mart. than were at the council of Florence and Synod of Trent? you have not alleged so much as one council, nor one father: nor have any to allege, but friar Luther that married Mouncke, and Calvin that lousy Lorrell, of Geneva, and such Apostatats as have followed them and kept their conspiracies against the church and spoiled it, as appeareth in a little oration, made against the insurrections and outrages of heretics and lately translated in to English. Wherefore what shall puaile? scripture, or no scripture? God's word, or men's wills? True councils, or false conspiracies? holy fathers, or rennegate friars? Catholic bishops, or violent usurpers? fond talk or sad proof? If all the dirty terms which friar Luther used were laid in a heap, and all the filthy words that bawdy Bale disgorged, were brought together, and all the villainous phrases, slanders, Taunts, that Melanchton, Illiricus, and Montanus, and all the rabble of such raging rufflers had often in their mouths, were conveyed with a glister pipe into your railing breast M. Calf., you should never be able to disgrace that honourable council, which was kept of late in Trent. It was summoned by the head of Christ's church in earth. The council of Trent . It was kept by true and lawful bishops. It was assisted by the Emperor, and mightiest kings in Christendom. It was honoured with the Legates, and Ambassadors of all catholic princes. The fathers there assembled out of Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, Pole, etc. Flanders, Brabant, Henalt and Artois, were learned bishops, well nigh to the numbered of 2. hundred, besides many Doctors of Divinity, and law, diverse of the society of jesus, generals of all religions, men profoundly learned in the deep points of Divinity, and not be witched, Fol. 115. a with the sorcery of Cyrce, nor called, to a trough of draff, (as it pleaseth such a well nurtered gentleman to term it) but required to come together to debate these controversies of religion for the stay of Christian people, and suppression of heresy, and being there assembled, they examined the grounds that all heretics build on, and tried them to the utter moste. And because all protestants should have access thither, and dispute freely, and propound what they could, for maintenance of their new religion, Safe conduct offered the protestāns they gently required them to be present, they offered safe conduct to come, and go, to tarry, return when they would? yet not one of all your sect durst appear, and show his face, not, not your great idol of Geneva, and that as the world may well judge conscientia imbecillitatis, for conscience of their own imbecility and weakness. When they could not procure any protestants thither to defend their positions, they assigned some, who after the manner of all schools, should dispute for both parts, and after long and mature deliberation, they concluded by the assistance of the holy Ghost, whose presence and grace Christ promised to all such companies, assembled in his holy name, the decrees which you see. Matt. 18. Amongst which this is one, that there be seven Sacraments in Christ's church, as Baptism, Confirmation, the Supper of our Lord, Sessio 7. Can. 1. holy Orders, Matrimony, Penance, and extreme Unction. Withal they accursed all that defend and maintain the contrary. Which curse will light upon you, make as light of it as you can. For God's words must be true, spoken to Peter: Matt. 16. Quic quid ligaveris super terram, erit ligatum & in coelis. Whatsoever thou bindest in earth, shallbe bound in heaven. They have tied you in the terrible band of excommunication upon earth, doubt you never a deal, but ye are tied. They are the body of Christendom, the Pope is the head: They both make one church, and besides this church, there is no other church: Mat. 18. if you hear not this church, Christ saith: You are an Heathen and Publican, and so consequently an heretic. Wherefore in contemning the church, and despising the orders of general councils, if there were nothing else, you show yourselves to be heretics. In all ages and all countries hetetikes ever more, and noon but heretics, have refused to yield to the general councils, quorun saluberrima in Ecclesiis est authoritas. Whose authority is very wholesome in the church, saith S. Augustine. August. epist. 118. The Arrians refused the council of Nice. The Macedonians the council of Constantinople. The Eutichians the council of Chalcedon. Noon but heretics refuse general councils The place of Hilarius lib. 8. de Trinit. applied to heretics . Image breakers, the seventh of Nice, and you the counsels of Florence, and Trent. Wherefore the saying of Hilarius, against Auxentius, may welbe applied unto you. For as he kept conventicles against Hilarius, so do you against the church. As he called him heretic, so do you the catholics. As he purchassed him the displeasure of noble men, so do you labour asmuch as you can, to bring us in hatred, with the prince. As he despised the council of Nice: So do you not only contemn the council of Florence and Trent, but that of Nice also, and all other general councils that were ever kept in such points as they make against your errors. You have revived diverse heresies that they condemned. Therefore, as he said: Diabolus est quia Arrianus est, he is a devil because he is an Arrian: So we may say he is a devil, because he is a Calvinian. For as they contemned the church, and rebelled against God: even so do you. That saying of Hilarius, many there are which feigning a faith, are not subject to faith, and rather do apoynte themselves a faith, than receive a faith: puffed up with the sense of much vanity, whiles they savour those things, as they list, and will not savour those things that be true: whereas this is the truth of wisdom, some times to savour those things, which thoue wouldst not: but the talk of folly followeth this will wisdom. For necessary it is, foolishly to be uttered, that foolishly is understood, That I say, may worthily be returned upon you, and all protestants. Heretics feign a faith unto themselves . For you are they that feign unto yourselves, a faith never heard of before Luther, and his disciples began to spread it abroad, for his bellies sake: because he and his conventual brothers could not be preachers of a pardon. You are they that wilbe subject to no faith, not not to your own, made at Augusta, by the arch heretics and chief apostatats of your religion. One faith must be preached at Wittenberg: an other at Zuriche an other at Lipsia, and other at Basile, another at Geneva: so many Apostatats, so many Christ's, so many cities, so many faiths, so many congregations, so many gospel. You are they that appoint yourselves a faith, and receive not that which your fathers received of their elders, and taught you. You are they that are puffed up with the sense of human vanity. You will believe no counsels, nor ancient fathers. No man knoweth the scripture, no man hath the interpretation of the word of God, no man hath the right sense and meaning of the gospel, and holy writ, but you. The fathers were men and did err, as men, you are Saints and Angels: you can not err, you can not tread a wry. The spirit doth so inspire, that all that you say is as true as steel and light of the gospel. This is your opinion of yourselves. As for the fathers, these thirteen hundred years, you say they erred, they refused, the simplicity of gods word: Fol. 96. a Christ had no church until a few renegade friars, and lecherous mounckes come and restored it again. And whiles your hearts are infatuated with this arogancy, and pride, you savour what please yourselves, and mislike what ye list, you will not understand, those things that be true, which is the occasion that your talk is so foolish, your doctrine so diverse, and your preaching so dissolute, and your writings so slanderoous, your books so blasphemous. As for the Catholics they have neither feigned nor made themselves a faith, they continue in that which they received of their forefathers, and can prove to come from Christ, by succession, and lineal descent, even from S. Peter and Paul, to Pius the fifth that sitteth now by the merciful providence of God in the Apostolic see of Rome. They be neither disobedient to faith, nor to their lawful bishops. They vary not in the principal points of their religion and faith. In all churches, Cities, patriarchs, and bishops, there is one uniform consent, through out the world, wheresoever Christ's, catholic church hath dispersed her light. Wherefore, if you will rightly apply Hilarius his words, and to good purpose, as he did, apply them to heretics, whose talk and pestiferous doctrine, should range and rage against the sound of God's word: 2. Tim. 2. And creep like a canker, to the rote of the soul. Apply them as he did to such as you are yourselves: Homines ment perversi, & professione fallaces, & spe inanes, & sermone viperei. Men corrupt in mind, deceythfull in profession, vain in hope, and adders in talk, men which force us, of necessity to gain say your positions, because under colour of religion, you teach the simple people (falsas doctrinas, & morbidas intelligentias, & corruptas voluptates. Lib. 8 de Trinit. in princip. ● False doctrine lewd understanding and corrupt fancies. For of such, he speaketh in the place whence you had those words. THAT THE APOSTLES AND FATHERS OF THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH BLESSED THEMSELVES, etc. THE FIFTH ARTICLE. IF it were granted to be true that the Apostles and fathers of the primitive church did bless themselves with the sign of the cross, and counseled all Christian men to do the same, and that in those days a cross was set up in every place convenient for it, Fol. 115. b M. Calf. supposeth that it would not hurt his cause: yet because we shall understand that he, who sometimes come in silks, veluetes, and great bravery to Paul's cross, when he was but a green minister of this new divinity, lacketh now no humility, he abaseth himself to point-makers craft, Fol. 116. a M. Calves. humility and taketh in hand the trying of three taglesse points, as he saith. Which is a bold enterprise of so young a prentice, never brought up in the faculty. His cunning will appear by his workmanship. The first point that he counteth taglesse is this. That the fathers of the primitive church blessed themselves with the sign of the cross, for the term of blessing (saith he) is evil applied to the signing in the forehead. Fol. 116. a Calf. For benedicere, to bless, is to speak well, and to live well. And that is the nature of the word: in that sense it hath been taken of old. Mart. Here is one evil point to begin with all. Craft increaseth daily I see well. If to humility in abasing himself to pointmakers craft, he had joined simplicity in stretching out his leather, this point would have been strong enough and lacked never a tag. For benedicere, as I have ꝓued before is streatched further, Article 4. Benedicere. 3. Reg 21. job 2. and applied to other significations in the scripture, and doctors, than to those three which master Calf. mentioneth. It was laid to Naboth's charged that benedixit Deum & Regem. Satan, said to God when he would further plague job, Cast thy hand upon him, touch his face, and his flesh, and then thou shalt see, that, in faciem tuam benedicat tibi. What is benedicere here, to speak well, live well, profess well, as master Calf. saith? Not, it is quite contrary: to ban, to blaspheme, and to curse God. It is written in Genesis, that God benedixit diei septimo. David sayeth: Genes. 2. Psal. 84. Benedixisti domine terram tuam. How shall this be Englished? In which of the significations that master Calf. devised? Shall we say thus: God said well to the seventh day? Or thus, God professed well to the seventh day? or thus, God lived well to the seventh day? or, God gave thanks for the seventh day? And so in the other, Shall we say, God spoke well the earth? or God professed well the earth? or God lived well the the earth? or God gave thanks for the earth? or what shall we say? Our new pointmaker saith, that benedicere, is to speak well, profess well, and live well, and streatcheth his leather no further, for fear of breaking in te midst? shall we take his points? no, they be taglesse, and made of rotten calves skin. We must stretch it out a little further, and find another signification for benedicere. Christ taking little children in his arms, Marc. 10. Luc. 24. and leying his hands upon them, benedicebat eos. Ascending up to heaven, in the sight of his Apostles, lifting up his hand benedixit eis. What is benedicebat here? Shall we translate it and say, Christ spoke well the children, or Christ professed well the children, or Christ lived well the children, or Christ gave thanks for the children? and so likewise in the other? Not: these are impropre speeches, and phrases not agreeable to the letter, nor savouring of any good sense in that place. Wherefore benedicere, must be streatched on inch further to another signification, besides master Calfhils, speaking well, living well, and professing well. And that is, Christ did bless the children, Christ did bless his Apostles, yea, Christ did bless with his hands. Theophil. in 24. Luc. elevatis manibus, with hands lifted up) that is to say) Christ lifted up his hands and blessed his Apostles: Perchance pouring (saith Theophylact.) into them grace and strength that might guard them, until the holy Ghost come, perchance also instructing us, that when we go far from home, we commend those that are under our government, to the heavenly benediction. By which it is evident, that benedicere hath another signification in the scripture, besides to speak well, profess well, and live well, and that is to bless with the hand as Christ did. Wherefore he doth injury to the estimation of his own learning to say, that this is a new found signification: Fol. 116. a and wrong to think that we borrow this phrase and manner of speech, either of old mother Malkin, or of a foolish custom. For benedicere, in this signification, is as old as jacob, who with his hands a cross blessed josephs' children, and as Autentick, as the Gospel of S. Mark and Luke, who said that Christ laid his hands upon children and blessed them, and lifting up his hand blessed his Apostles. But if it had been a common custom to use that phrase, and we had borrowed that manner of speech of custom, it is no point of wisdom in M. Calf. to account, that custom foolish; and hold them fools that follow it. As wise as a man he is, said. we must speak as the common sort do, and think as the wise. And that custom is to be followed, a better poet than he is divine telleth us, saying: Multa renascentur quae iam cecidere, cadentque, Quae nunc sunt in honore vocabula, si volet usus: Quem penes arbitrium vis est & norma loquendi. Many words that withered be shall flourish as the spring. And such as stand in high degree, vade as each feigned thing. If Lady Custom doth once take the exchange in to her hand. For custom hath a mould to make words currant in each land. Wherefore sing in this treatise I laboured to profit the multitude, which is miserably deceived by these new ministers, it was most necessary, for me to use the terms which common use had made most familiar in their ears, and most lively represented the thing itself unto them. And albeit the old fathers do not commonly use to say, To bless with the cross. and sign himself with the cross is all one. benedicebant se signo crucis, they blessed themselves with the sign, but signabant se signo crucis, they marked themselves with the sign of the cross, yet do not I, very ill, (as M. Calf. saith) in applying it, to the Apostles time and primitive church. For in effect they are all one, and as I may say, Synonimons: For he that after the use of a Christian man, marketh himself with the sign of the cross, Lib. 2. histor. Apostolic. Lib. 3. blesseth himself, and he that blesseth himself, marketh himself with the sign of the cross. Wherefore seeing Abdias reporteth that S. Paul crucis signo se muniens, arming himself with the sign of the cross, held out his neck to the hangemam, and that S. Andrew, singulis manus imponens & consignans cruce, Lib. 5. leying his hands upon every one, and signing them with the cross, suffered them to depart, and that S. john, Armavit se signo crucis, Armed himself with the sign of the cross, no wise man can take it otherwise, than that they blessed themselves, with the sign of the cross, nor think contrary but that this crossebiter is very quarrelling, who knowing the thing to be one, will yet contentiouslie jar about the word. But like doctor, like Doctrine. He is always denying the authority of the fathers, when he hath no cavil in store to shifted it away: but sing he saith no more here against Abdias, than he did before, do ye credit him no more than ye did before. Semel malus semper praesumitur malus, he that is ones evil, is pnsumed to be always evil (saith the law,) unless the contrary be proved, Denying authorities M. Calves best refuge. Fol. 116. b and that will not M. Calf. do. For lying ad denying must be his best defence, and Ajax shield in this skirmish. Even in the last sentence, Abdias was denied, as a very liar and forger of fables, now that which is brought out of S. Clement, is refused as an authority that hath no credible author to support it. Ibidem . So bring what ye can, either the author shallbe refused, or his work denied. As for S. Clement that he is an author sufficient to support himself, and writer of the Apostles constitutions, the preface set before his work, doth sufficiently prove to any reasonable man, neither all the wit that M. Calf. hath, is able to convince it of forgery: That he will not fully believe S. Clement, Ibidem. because he succeeded not immediately, after S. Peter, according to his appointment, but suffered Linus and Cletus to occupy the room before him, and scoffeth at his modesty in that behalf, I marvel not. A lesser cause than that, will make him believe, as a great many protestants did, and let not to put in print, that S. Peter was never at Rome. But what matter is it if he do not believe, nor fully, nor in part? It hindereth this cause no more than the in credulity of Caiphas, and lack of faith in Pilate, did hinder the verity of Christ's incarnation in earth, an equality with his father in heaven. The Evangelists themselves if we take the bore letter do not agreed exactly in the hour, that Christ suffered death. Yet being well understood they agree both in the time, and the manner of it. So albeit all the fathers that have written, do not agree of the manner and order of bishops, that succeeded S. Peter, yet the truth is confessed by all, and not withstanding, S. Clement did of humility and modesty yield the prerogative, to Linus and Cletus, whiles they lived, yet do they acknowledge that S. Clement was ordained by S. Peter to be his successor. As he that listeth to see the truth of this, may read, Damasus of the bishops lives and Baptist Platina that wrote of late. Where M. Calf saith that, the fact of S. Anthony, S. Martin, Fol. 116. b and Donatus of Euoria Epiri, blessing themselves with the sign of the cross, being men of great holiness and virtue, and so high in favour with God, that in their life time, they did many miracles, Fol. 117 a and the example of Paula a most godly woman be not precedents to enforce imitation, it were to be wished that some good physician, would feel his pulse, and try his humour, that we might know of whom he would have pnsidents to be taken, Heb. 6. Examples of virtue to be taken of holymen. if not of holy men. S. Paul writing to the Hebrews, whysseth them not be slothful followers of them, that shall inherit the promises. By which it is evident that the holy Ghost, would have the examples of holy men to be followed, as directories to virtue, and as precedents to force an imitation in godliness of life. As for blessing with the cross I did not teach, that the examples of those holy fathers did force an imitation, but only showed that thy did so, and that it is lawful for us by their examples, being holy men, and in great favour with God, to bless ourselves, and use the sign of the cross, in temptations and other dangers, as those holy fathers did, and that the contempt thereof is abominable: Fol. 116. b And albeit it pleaseth m. Calf. to term these histories, but tales, and condemn S. Hierome, Sulpitius Severus and Sozomenus, as reporters of idle tales, and not writers of true histories, yet I doubt not but the indifferent of his own sect, will blame his impudency, for so judging of such learned and renommed writers. Calf. Mart. Where he saith: The devil delighted in the cross, and feigned himself to be a fraied of it, that the Eremite might run to that sorry succour, and men put more affiance in it, it is to childish for little coknells that run up and down the streets, The devil feigneth not fear at the sight of the cross but feareth in deed. with tumbrells and rattles. That the devil pretendeth not fear, but is a frayed in deed at the sight of the cross, I haved declared before, but further to add somewhat, when julian the Apostata had by virtue of that sign, driven the devils away, the conjuror understanding it blamed him for it. And whereas julian for excuse signified that he was in great fear, and wondered at the virtue of the cross, the sorcerer said unto him: do not think Sir, that they feared as you say, but they disdained this sign rather, and so departed: The gentiles as Lactantius telleth, perceiving that the Christians, imposito frontibus signo, putting the sign of the cross to their foreheads, drove their Gods away from their sacrifice, said, that their Gods fled away, non metu, sed odio: not for fear, Lactam. lib. 4. cap. 17. de vera sapient. but for hatred. Master Calf. agreeing with them in one point, saith: That the devil fleeth not away at the sight of the cross for fear, but whereas the conjuror said that the devil fled away for disdain, and the gentiles said that he fled away for hatred, he knowing more of his counsel then either the conjuror or gentiles, saith, that he fleeth away, as it were for love or delight that he had in the cross, thereby to allure men to use it: M. Calf. showeth himself more privy to the devils counsel, than the conjuror or the gentiles. which is a strange case and much like to the comical poetes fancy, where he saith: Credo quia misera prae amore hunc exclusit foras. I suppose, poor woman she shut him out of doors for love. If one that loveth music well, and delighteth to hear men sing, and play upon musical instruments should come in place, where there is a sweet noise, and suddenly run away, when the best melody is made, would any wise man think that he ran away for love that he beareth to music, or delight that he hath in musical instruments? Not I suppose. Every thing liketh to be where it loveth, and never fleeth that in which it delighteth. For it is natural. Wherefore if the devil loved the sign of the cross, and delighted to have it made, as M. Calf. saith, Fol. 117. a he would be still where it is, and not always flee away, when it is made, albeit he might sometimes pretend a flight, to do it, for a further mischieffe, but be he jew, be he Turk, be he a julian, or be he a judas that maketh the cross, unless God giveth him up to the devil as a pray, the devil fleeth away still, whensoever he seethe it, much less he maketh it (as this quarreler blasphemously reporteth, a cause of further sickness, Fol. 117. a a stone of offence, a stumbling block to fall at. S. Anthony, of whom we talk, knowing the subtiltes and crafts of the devil, and withstanding them all, Fol. 117. a and so withstanding them that he upbraied, the wicked spirits with their weakness against him, Athan. in vita S. Anthonij. said boldly (as Athanasius reporteth) unto them all: If ye are able to do any thing, if our lord hath given you power against me, behold here I am, devour me, being granted unto you. If ye can not, why do ye labour in vain? For the sign of the cross, and faith in our lord is an inexpugnamble wall for us. In the same place, in the very next sentence it is written, that the devils treathning many things against S. Anthony, did gnash their teeth because their temptations had no effect, but were made vain illusions. Where it is to be noted that the devil tempted not S. Anthony to make the sign of the cross in his forehead. For if he had done so, then had his temptations taken effect: but Athanasius saith, it was a great torment to the devil that: Not effect followed their temptation. If M. Calf. will not believe this saying of so learned a father, Let him believe the devil himself, confessing the same. It so come to pass that certain wicked spirits were raised up, and commanded by a conjuror, called Theodas, to tempt a young prince to the lusts of the flesh, but they prevailed not. When the conjuror Theodas understood that, he said unto them. O ye weak and wretched caitiffs, Damasce. in histor. Barlaan & josaphat. how are ye overcomed of one boy? The wicked spirits forced by the power of God, made answer, against their will and said: we were neither able to abide, nor behold the power of Christ, and banner of his passion, which they call the cross. Illo enim signo redivimus eneruati, etc. For we returned weakened with that sign, and all the princes of the air, and rulers of darkness fleeing away are burnt with it. Before the young man was perfitly signed with that sign, we coming furiously upon him did disquet him. But as soon as he had called Christ to his help, and armed himself with the sign of the cross, he persecuted us with anger, and made unto himself a most sure defence. Here is a plain testimony of the devils, that they fear the sign of the cross, and are weakened with it, and forced to flee away at the sight of it. And this they confess not of themselves, thinking as M. Calf. doth to deceive us: but they confessed, divina virtute compulsi: compelled by the power of God, they confessed it, inviti against their wills, and that which they confessed was the truth. Wherefore it hath no appearance that the devil delighteth in the sign of the cross, or feigneth himself to be afraid of it, but he is afraid in deed, and trembleth, and quaketh at it, and fleeth away for very fear. But you see what a patron the devil hath. Martialis writeth that the cross is a buckler beating back the darts of the enemy. S. Augustine that it is, Epist ad bird gall. Ser. 19 de sanctis. Libro 4. cap. 12. Demonst. cont. Gent. a let or stay against the enemies. Damascene that is, a sign that the destroyer touch us not. S. Chrisostome, that is, a destruction of the devil, a bridle of wicked spirits, and bit for contrary powers. A sign of much blessing, and a wall of all kind of security, and yet M. Calf. is not ashamed boldly to assure, without authority, and reason that the devil delighteth in the cross, and maketh it a cause of Sickness, a stone, of offence, Fol. 117. a and stumbling block to fall at. Diogenes was wounte to say unto him, that talked busily of heavenly matters: Quando de coelo venisti? Ah Sirrah when come you from heaven. In like sort we may ask of our adversary, that talketh so certainly of the devils practisses, Quando de inferis redijsti, when come you from hell sirrah? For noon but such as have been of privy counsel in Satan's court, can tell these secrets. The learned fathers never knew any such practice of his: yet had they as many conflicts with him, and as much experience of his subtleties, as any in this later age. And that might M. Calf. well understand, if he would have read the life of S. Anthony written by Athanasius, and other ancient fathers. But he will not: and therefore what shall we say of him, but as S. Augustine said of the like, Evil men are enemies to themselves, by not understanding how they may live well: not because they can not, In Psal. 35 but because they will not. For it is one thing, when every man endeavoureth to understand somewhat, and through infirmity of the flesh can not, and an other thing when the heart of man dealeth somewhat frowardly, against himself: in so much that he can not understand, that which he might understand, if he had a good will, not because it is hard, but because will is wilful and against it. Where he saith, that not withstanding, Fol 117. a Calf. if in the doings of elder age there were no such offence, yet considering how things in time have grown to abuse and superstition, such as have been tolerably received, must now of right, and conscience be condemned, We tell him that if things, good of their own nature must be taken away and condemned, because of the abuse, we shall have nothing left to our comfort in earth. Iron is abused to murder, fire to burning other men's houses, The thinkge that is good, must not be taken away for the abuse. water to unlawful drowning, the name of jesus to sorcery, the Pater noster to witchcraft, and making pails go amilking as he told us before) and nothing so holy but the wickedness of man doth profane, and abuse. Shall the things therefore, be taken away? Not M. Calf. The abuse aught to be amended, and the thing suffered to remain. Or if it be expedient to have the thing itself taken away, let it be done in such order as it aught to be done, and of such persons as the decree of Stephen (which you yourself mention) require, who are as I proved before the bishops of Rome, to whom God hath given the charged and government of his church on earth. But where you say, that the cross hath been abused, and show no evident proof of it, we tell you that you most impudently belie, and slander the church of God, and therein show, that your conscience (is cauteriata, feared with a hot iron, and hath no sense at all. Nevertheless, if any should abuse it, the abuse should be taken away by lawful authority, and yet the sign suffered to remain. Fol. 117. b The place of Epiphanius answered . As for the place, cited out of the epistle which you say: Epiphanius wrote to the patriarch of Jerusalem, and S. Hierome translated, what if we should deny that Epiphanius wrote that epistle? What if we should say it is not be found in his Greek copies, and for a probable conjecture, and vehement presumption tell you that all the bishops in Grece, that were image breakers never alleged any such epistle of Epiphanius, which had been a great, oversight, if either the epistle had been his, or the place so manifestly oppugned the use of images, as you pretend? Yea further, what if we should deny that S. Hierome did translate the epistle, and say as you do for disproufe of other authors, that the style savoureth nothing of S. Hierome's eloquence? How would you be able to prove it, or justify this work, in which ye triumph as though you had gotten the victory? You have no antiquity for it. You have no other testimony in all his works, to prove that he misliked the use of images. In all his books against heresies, he accounteth the having of images to be no heresy. And where you say on the contrary side, Fol. 78. a that he discoursinge upon the sects of heresies accounteth them for noon that condemned images, there is good cause why. For in his days there were no heretics, that condemned images. Image breakers were not then out of their shell. But if they had, he being a learned man, and skilful in the scripture, both understanding that no text through out the Bible doth inhibit the having of images, and also knowing that from the Apostles time, Christian men had the images of Christ and his saints, and the Catholic bishops never inhibited the use of them, he I say would undoubtdly have reported them, as condemned for wicked and accursed heretics, that condemned the use of images, if any such had been either in, or before his tyme. In the seventh council of Nice every man that can read and understand may see that not only images were in churches in Epiphanius time, Actio. 6. Nice. 2. A church a builded in Epiphanius name and decked with images. but also that his disciples builded a church to God in his name, and adorned the same with images and pictures: which they would not have done, if either their master had taught them that it had been heresy, or the fathers, and bishops of that age had judged it derogatory to Christ's religion. Which being so, it is evident that Epiphanius did neither mislike the having of images, nor writ any thing that improved that doctrine. But let this epistle which you brag so much of be Epiphanius own writing, let the translation be S. Hierome's? What maketh it for you? Will you say Epiphanius, cut a veil: habens imaginem quasi Christi vel sancti cuiusdam, having the image as it were of Christ, or of some saint, ergo he was an enemy to the image of Christ, and his saints (as you note in your margin?) I think your wisdom wilbe better advised: Fol. 117. b or if you must of necessity say so, or else conclude nothing of that notable place of Epiphanius against images, tell us, how holdeth this argument, My Lord chamberlyn coming into the chamber of presence, and finding one sitting in the princes seat, under the cloth of estate, quasi reginam, as it were the Queen, thrusteth him out, and putteth him in prison, for his traitorous presumption, ergo my Lord chamberlyn is an enemy to the true Queen that should sit there in deed? Let us have your answer speadelie. And if you think this argument nought, So think of your own. For they be both like. The veil rend of Epiphanius had not the image nor of Christ nor any Saint . The image that was in the veil rend by Epiphanius was not a true image of Christ, nor of any saint. It was, quasi imago Christi vel sancti alicuius, as it were the image of Christ or some saint. Perchance the image of jupiter, or Hercules, or some man that lived in those days, as it pleased the painter. Epiphanius, remembered not whose image it was, but sure he was that it was not the image of Christ, or any saint, but, quasi Christi vel alicuius sancti, as it were the image of Christ, or some saint. Wherefore in renting and tearing that false image, he did the duty, of a learned, wise, and grave bishop, as the lord chamberlyn did the part of a true, faithful, and trusty subject. He was no more enemy to the true image of Christ and his saints, than the other was to his sovereign lady, and natural princess. For as he thrust the traitor out of the royal seat, that pnsumed to fit there, Quasi regina, as it were the Queen: So did Epiphanius rend the veil that had, imaginem quasi Christi, the image as it were of Christ: and not the image of Christ in deed. As he bore faithful heart to his true sovereign lady: So did Epiphanius to the true images of Christ and his Saints, as I declared before, which the word Quasi, as though, if nothing else might have made your wisdom conceive. 2 Cor. 6. S. Augustine to make his hears understand these words of S. Paul, In Psal. 48 Quasi tristes, semper ante gaudentes, as it were ever sad but always merry, saith: Our sorrow hath always, Quasi, an as it were, our joy hath not a, Quasi, an as it were, because it is in sure hope. Why hath our sorrow a, Quasi, an as it were? Because it passeth away as sleep: Your charity knoweth, he that telleth a dream, addeth, Quasi an as it were. Quasi dicebam, quasi loquebar, quasi prandebam, quasi equitaban quasi disputabam, Totum quasi, qui cum evigilaverit, non invenit quod videbat. Quasi the saurun inveneram dicit mendicus, si quasi non esset, mendicus non esset, sed quia quasi erat, mendicus est, I said as it were. I spoke as it were, I dined as it were, I rid as it were, I disputed as it were. All is as it were, because when he awaketh, he findeth not that which he saw: the beggar saith, I found, a treasure as it were. If as it were, were not, he were no beggar. But because there is, an as it were, he is a beggar. So to make you to understand this place of Epiphanius, we tell you, Si quasi non esset, Christi imago fuisset, sed quia quasi erat Christi imago non fuit, if there had not been, an as it were, it had been the image of Christ, but because there was an as it were, it was no image of Christ, and being no image of Christ, nor saint, Epiphanius did well in renting, and tearing it, and nothing against the true images of Christ and his saints. the contrary whereof is not to be seen in all his work. Concerning S. Hierome's translation, sing the whole epistle understood according to Epiphanius mind, containeth no doctrine contrary to the Catholic faith, no marvel if he translated it out of Greek into Latin. He had such an earnest zeal, and desire to profit the church of God, that he spared no pains, neither to translate out of Hebrewe, nor Greek. But if there had been any unsound doctrine in that epistle, his translating doth not argue a liking. Many a good man may translate a work at his friends request, out of one language into another that containeth not all together sound doctrine, and yet be far and wide from allowing that doctrine. S. Hierome himself, and Ruffinus translated diverse works of Origen's, yet do they not allow those errors, which are objected against him. Wherefore, sing there is nothing in Epiphanius that maketh against the images of Christ, and his saints, sing S. Hierome interpreting that epistle never found fault with that place, sing the image breakers assembled in Constantinople, never espied that place, or if they did espy it, thought it not worthy to be objected against the having of images, sing the three hundred and fifthye Catholic bishops assembled at Nice for discussing the controversy moved against images, affirmed plainly that there is nothing in Epiphanius, writings that gain saith the laudable manner of the church for the use of images, your triumph is lost. Paula. Fol. 118. b The fact of Paula can not be set against, the fact of Epiphanius (as you would have it). There is no contrarity in them. She did nothing but that which beseemed a virtuous matron. He no more than was sitting for an holy bishop. Ephiphanius . She made the sign of the cross in her forehead: So did he, and confessed that with the sign of the cross, Lib. 1 cont. Hebr. 2. and holy water, inchauntements, and devils are driven away. She prostrated herself before the image of the cross, he never cut the veil that had the image of Christ, or any Saint upon it. She being learned and taught of S. Hierome, did according to reason worship the cross, as S. Hierome himself did, Apol. 3. as you may see in his epistle to Marcellina, and in his Apology against Ruffinus. He never condemned it, nor knew any religion, or scripture to be contrary unto it. Therefore I will still urge the fact of Paula, until you prove out of Epiphanius by better evidence than you have showed yet, that he would have no cross, Fol. 119. a no crucifix, nor image in the church: And this is my judgement of your place brought out of Epiphanius. Calf . Where you tell me that I reckon a sort that used of devotion to make the sign of the cross in their foreheads, but make no mention of them that used it not, in zeal as good as they, Mart. and in numbered more, I believe verily that there was never Christian man, of pure zeal, and sincere mind, that ever refused to bless himself with the sign of the cross. Read all the ancient fathers that ever wrote sithence Christ's incarnation, keep your Calendar as warily as you can, make as perfect a register as possible may be, and if you find any of them, say that this man, A Calendar to be made of Christian men that refused to cross themselves and this man was a perfect Christian, as fervent in zeal, and as good as Epiphanius, S. Anthony, S. Hiero. and S. Augustine and did refuse to bless himself, or sign himself with the cross, or make the sign of the cross in his forehead. Put him in your Calendar, and when you have found out a numbered, bring them to light, show them forth, as I have done: name the authors that mention them, note the books, and chapters where we shall find them, and we shall say, ye have kept your promise. But before you have found many such, boast not of a number nor crack of antiquity, jest if you find noon, (as I am sure you shall not till you come to frontike Fox his lying Calendar) ye be found a jack bragger, and vain boaster. Your position, non vivendum exemplis, sed legibus: men must not live by examples, but by laws, which you say taketh place in religion if any thing doth, is not all together true. Fol. 119. a And if I should require you to find it in scripture, you would be long in seeking, and in the end return the writ and say, 1. Tim. 4. The examples of holy men to be followed. Cap. 2. Cap. 5. non comparet. S. Paul writing to Timothe, said unto him: Be an example of the faithful, in word, and conversation, in charity, in faith, in chastity. Likewise to Tite: In all things show thyself an example of good works. S. james biddeth us take the prophets for an example of suffering adversity, and patience. To be short, S. Peter saith: Christ hath suffered for us, leaving you an example that you follow his steps. And I pray you M. Calf. to what end did the holy Ghost require Timothe and Tite to be an example of good works to the faithful, if he would not have the faithful to take example of them and frame their life according? To what end hath Christ left us an example, but that we should follow his steps, and frame our lives as nigh as we can to his? If only laws must be followed, and not examples, why said S. Paul: Lex justo non est posita, 1. Tim. 1. sed iniustis? The law is not made for the just man, but for the unjust and disobedient? How shall he live? must he not take example of Christ, and his Apostles, and other holy men that trod in the path of holiness before him, and come by imitation as nigh unto them as he may? If it be so, then is your assertion vain, foolish, and frivolous. For we must live in some cases, as well by examples as by laws. For where there is no express law there examples must prevail. The lawyers (of whom you borrow this rule, altered at your pleasure) say: Non exemplis judicandum, sed legibus: Men must not judge by examples, but by laws, yet where the case is not determined, nor decided by the law, they allow customs and examples. Examples and custom to be followed l. de quibus ff. de l. The custom of the city of Rome a refuge where laws fail For proof whereof, we have this law. De quibus causis scriptis legibus non utimur, id custodiri oportet quod moribus & consuetudine inductum est, etc. As for the causes, in which we have no written laws to use) that must be observed, which was brought in by custom and manner: And if in any thing that fortune to lack, then that must be kept which is next, and like unto it, If that appear not, than the law which the city of Rome used, must be observed. An ancient custom is not unworthily observed for a law: And this is the law, which is said to be received by the custom, and manner of those, that use them. Here is order taken that when there cometh a strange case for which there is no law written, it must be decided by custom and manner, and for defect of custom, the judge must proceed by likelihoods, and if they fail, he must stand to the laws and customs of the city of Rome. By which you may learn that for many cases there is no law written, and that when there is no law written, men must judge according to custom. And if justice can not be ministered, nor judgement given in worldly matters, for certain cases, but by the customs, examples and precedents of other that went before, surely in spiritual matters, where there is no express law in scripture, the church of God can not be maintained, unless we follow the customs, and precedents of other, and live as our holy fathers did before us. Luther your first father was so far wide from this fond opinion of yours, that he said, a prince might better rule by the instinct of nature, In cap. Babylo. epist ad Pragens. than by orders and laws. And in diverse places of his works, it appeareth that the would have the liberty of the gospel, to put away all princes laws. In which although he meaneth as wickedly, as you do fond, yet you being but an imp of his branch pretending unity in doctrine, should not have revolted from that your Apostata, and upon no ground of scripture, Fol. 119. a doctor, or reason have concluded that in religion we must not live by examples, but by laws. For every wise seethe, that where there is no law, the custom, manner, precedents and examples of others must stand for laws. But to what purpose would master Calf. think you (good readers) have this his position take place? Forsooth, that when he had concluded that we must no live by examples, but by laws, he might make simple souls believe, that they aught not follow the examples of their holy forefathers, in blessing themselves, but to have the name of the law in their mouths and do nothing less than that the law biddeth them to do. And to bring that to pass see how he wrangleth. Calf. The fathers taught other things more often, and more earnestly, than the use of the cross. As Tertullian taught that it was a wickedness to fast on the Sunday, or to pray on our knees. Besides, in his time oblations were made at birth days. milk and honey was given to the children at christenninge. In S. Augustine's time, infants received the communion, Because we do not observe all these ceremonies that are out of use, M. M. Calf. will not keep that which is in use. Mart. 1. Cor. 11. By M. Calves reason S. Peter and S. Paul must not be credited. and diverse such ceremonies were commanded, which are now abrogated, and because we do not observe all those ceremonies, that these and other fathers specify, they will not follow this that they speak of the cross: which hath no reason. For if the disuse of some ceremonies used of old time for good purposes, doth derogate authority in all other from the fathers, that make mention of any ceremonies, S. Paul must not be credited in apoynting order for the supper of our lord, for he maketh mention of a ceremony then used, that men should not pray with their heads covered, nor women with their heads uncovered, which is now go out of use. For men pray with night caps, on their heads, and women come open faced to church, and maids in their hear, in some places, especially when they be married. S. Peter, yea and all the Apostles must be disauthorised. For they made a law that none should eat bluddings, or styfled meat: for it is now go out of use, no man account themselves bound to the observance of it, thought the Apostles all together assembled did make that law. But be not deceived, although the foresaid ceremonies that S. Paul spoke of, be go out of use, and the decree of Peter and the Apostles be broken, yet standeth their authority full and perfect in the dispensation of Christ's mysteries, and every man is bound to follow it, and so likewise in the fathers. For the church hath authority to abrogate ceremonies and laws, for orders and discipline, as the diversity of time, place, and men require. And although one or two be altered, the rest must not be contemned, because the church hath not so decreed, which prerogative if heretics had, Heretics have no authority to altar ceremonies. their alteration and changing of ceremonies, had some colourable show of piety, but sing they have no church, no lawful bishops, no duly called ministers, they aught not to altar the least rite, and ceremony in Christ's church. But if they would be as they pretend followers of Christ, they should keep the unity of his church, and not seek occasion to condemn all that is used, because some things are disused that in old time were used. Were it reason in a common state of a city, for private men to altar this and that statute, of the whole corporation at their pleasure? Or were it reasonable for some one citizen to say, he will not keep this statute, because they keep not another statute, that was made an hundred years before, and now abrogated? or go out of use? Not, as wise men think: And if it be not permissible, in a city, much less is it to be suffered in the church and whole body of Christendom. Furthermore, whereas, M. Calf. refuseth, to believe, Tertullian, Ephrem, Fol. 119. b Fol. 120. a Fol. 120. b Chrisostome, S. Hierome, Augustine, Cyrillus, and Prudentius, and other fathers, because they had their errors and imperfections, and like a wicked Cham discovererh that which he knoweth, against them, and for lack of errors objecteth undoubted truths against some of them (as shall appear hereafter) and yet would be seen to reverence them, it is to be thought that he is so busied with his Genevian doctors, that he hath not so much as viewed the treatise of Vincentius Lirinensis, against heresies. For if he had, he might easily have seen, how and in what sort, we are bound to follow the doctors: but because the book is so chardgable that he can not buy it, and so long that he hath no leisure to read it, I will for his further instruction declare his judgement, which all the church followeth presently in this case. He instructing a young scholar to avoid heresies, moveth certain questions, and answereth them. One is this. What if some new infection sekeeths to corrupt, not one little part only, Vincentius Linnensis counsel against heresy. but the whole church? The catholic (saith he) must provide that he stick to antiquity, which can not altogether be seduced with any deceithfull novelitie. another question is this: What if in antiquity itself, the errors of two or three men, or else of a city or province be found? Then he must procure that he prefer, the decrees of the universal church, which were generally received of old tyme. The third question is this: What if some such question rise, that we can find no antiquity, How the ancient fathers must be credited. nor decree of the universal church for it? Then he shall employ all diligence that he may, to consult and ask the judgement of the forefathers, and compare them together, those especially, who although they lived in diverse ages, and places, yet continuing in the unity and faith of the catholic church, were good masters and teachers, and whatsoever he knoweth, that not one or two, but all together with one consent did hold, writ, and teach, openly, commonly, and continually, let him understand, that he must without all doubting, or staggering, believe that: And for more clearer evidence of the same, I will add another sentence of his. In the same work, he hath these words. When the rottenness of any evil error beginneth to break out, and steal the words of the holy law, and expound them craftily, and deceithfully to the maintenance of it, forth with (saith he) the expositions of the forefathers are to be gathered together, for understanding of those scriptures, by which, that what soever it is, that shall spring up, The expositions of the fathers to be gathered for the understanding of scripture. being new, and therefore prophame, may both be discovered without circumstance, and also condemned without all retractation and delay: but the expositions of those fathers only are to be conferred, who living holily, teaching wisely, and continuing stoutly in the faith, and unity of the Catholic church, deserved either to die faithfully in Christ, or to be martyred happily for Christ. Whom not withstanding we must credit with this condition, that what soever either all, or the most part have affirmed, with one assent, plainly, commonly, and continually, as it were by an agreeing council of their masters, by receiving, keeping, and delivering, With what condition we must credit the fathers. the same we receive and follow, as most undoubted, certain, and true. And whatsoever, any man be he never so holy, be he bishop, confessor, or Martyr, Private opinions must be rejected. shall presume to maintain otherwise, than all the rest do think, contrary to all other, that must be divided from the authority of the common, public, and general sentence, and be adnumbred amongst proper, secret, and private opinions. Thus much Vincentius a zealous father, more than a thousand years a go. By which we understand that the doctrine which the holy fathers, or the most part of them taught generally with one consent, is to be embraced, and followed. And that if any of them had any private opinion, contrary to the truth, which was generally received, that is no cause why they should not be received in other things, where they agreed with the test. Seeing then in the matter of the cross, nor Tertullian, nor any other Catholic author varieth from the rest of the fathers, nor teacheth any other thing than his elders delyured, and our forefathers taught ever sithence, plainly, commonly, and continually with one consent and umformitie, there is no cause why either he, or any other doctor should be refused, because they had other private opinions. Protestant's discredit the fathers . And certes where you refuse to follow their judgement, in such matters as they all agreed upon with one accord, and are received generally of the church, ye discredit them, as men that knew not the scripture, and true interpretation of the same, ye like a judge sitting magnifically in your throne of arrogancy disauthorise them, as ignorants that knew not light from darkness, verity from heresy, true religion from vain superstition: you justify yourselves, and prefer your own judgements before theirs. You establish your traditions, and destroy theirs. You make men believe that they transgressed the commandment of God, to bring in a custom, and devise of their own. For the which you shall never lack the shameful note of pride and singularity. For Vincentius (of whom I spoke even now) proving that no man aught to contemn the holy and catholic consent of the blessed fathers by the place of S. Paul, 1. Cor. 12. Ephes. 4. where he saith: God placed certain in his church, first Apostles, them Prophets, and then doctors, preachers, and pastors to the edifying of the church until his coming again, saith: Whosoever despiseth these, placed and appointed of God, in the church, as the times and place required, agreeing and consenting together upon one thing in Christ, he despiseth not man, but God, He that despiseth the fathers appointed by God, despiseth God. who is no author of dissension, but of peace, (that is to say) he is not God of him, which shrinketh away from the unity of consent, but of such as abide constant in the peace of unity and consent. Wherefore sing you are faulty, in refusing the authority of the ancient fathers, in such points as they with one uniform consent agreed upon, no marvel if ye be reputed heretics and schismatics: Such as despise not men, but God, not the church, but Christ, whatsoever reason you and your farthel of fancies, your patch of old errors, your pack of heresy, and lump of lies, The Apology of the new church of England. for a fair name called the Apology of the church of England, campntend for your schism and separation. For one of the greatest reasons and causes which it pretendeth for your going from the church, is the wicked life of the governors and rulers. And whosoever forsaketh the church for any such considerations, violateth the commandment of Christ, who telling his disciples, that Scribes and Pharisees sat upon the chair of Moses, said: Matt. 23. Whatsoever they shall say unto you, keep all, and do all, but do not as they do. Were he not an evil soldier that being commanded upon pain of his prince's displeasure to serve under a captain, would forsake the camp because his captain liveth viciously? Were he not an evil mariner that being in the midst of the sea would leap out of the ship, because the pilot or master is nought? were he not an evil citizen that being required to continued in the city on peril of his life, would run out because the maiot and other officers live not as they should? You as verily, and so are they that forsake the church. For God being king of all kings hath, placed diverse captains in his church (which is acies ordinata, Cant. 6. a battle set in good array) and a general over al. As long as we live in this warfare he hath required us to obey these captains. His church is as a ship upon the sea, We must never forsake the church. a city builded upon a mountain, he hath willed us to continue in that ship as long as we are on the sea, and remain in the city as long as we wilbe citizens. And if any be so wilful, that he will run from the camp, leap out of the ship, and for sake the city, besides that, he breaketh his master's commandment, he falleth into the hands of his enemies, and putteth himself in undoubted danger of drowning. For as S. Hierome saith: If a man be not in the Ark of Noë, Epist ad Damas. While the flood rageth, he shallbe drowned. Which if the master of the Apology had considered, his reason might have told him that the church is not to be forsaken, for the evil life of the rulers. The holy Martyr S. Cyprian having to do with certain that broke the unity of the church for the same cause that you do, said unto them: Libr. 3. epist. 3. Albeit there be cockle seen to be in the church, yet for all that, our faith and charity aught not to be let, that because we see cockle in the church, we should depart from the church. We must only labour that we may be good corn, that when the corn shall begin to be leyd in our lords barn, we may have reward for our labour and pains. By these words S. Cyprian keepeth us in the house of God, by these words he may bring us peaceably to the catholic peace and unity, saith S. Augustine, Lib 2. cont. Cresco. cap 30. that you being offended with other men's faults, be they true or be they false, might not object such great mischiefs against the church, fructifying and increasing in all the world with the scripture, that ye might not blame the wheat for the cockle, that ye might not for sake the corn for the chaff, that ye might not remain without the great house for the soul and filthy vessels. For so to do, it is, as the said, S. Cyprian testifieth, What it is to forsake the church. superba obstinatio, & sacrilega presumptio. A proud obstinacy and a wicked presumption: from which S. Augustine exhorteth us, saying, when either by negligence of rulers either by some inexcusable necessity, either by privy obreptions we find evil men in the church, whom by ecclesiastical discipline we can not correct, and punish, then let not that wicked and dangerous presumption, De fide & oper. ca 5. by which we think that we should be separated from them, that we be not infected with their iniquities, Aug. ad Cresco. grain. lib. 3. cap. 3. come into our hearts. If thou desirest good corn, mourn in the travel of the field, rejoice in hope of the barn, suffer the evil, in the communion of Christ's sacraments, jest by breaking the net before you come to the banks side, you be that which you would not suffer. Thus both by reason, and authority of S. Cyprian, and S. Augustine you see, that no Christian man should forsake the church for the wickedness of the governors. If this content you not, learn of your own dear darling and master john Calvin. In the 4. book and fift chapter of his institutions, he saith. Horrible are those descriptions wherein Esay, Hieremie, joel, Calvin. Abacuc, and the other Prophets do lament the sickness of the church of Jerusalem. In the common people, in the magistrate, in the priests, all things were so corrupt, that Esay doubted not to match Jerusalem with Sodom and Gomorrha: religion was partly despised, partly defiled. In their manners are commonly reported thefts extortions, breaches of faith, murders and like mischiefs, yet therefore the prophets did neither erect to themselves new churches, nor build new altars on which they might have several sacrifices, but whatsoever manner of men they were, yet because they considered that God had left his word with them, and ordained ceremonies, whereby he was there worshipped, in the midst of the assembly of the wicked, they held up pure hands unto him. Truly if they had thought that they did gather any infection thereby, they would rather have died an hundred times, then have suffered themselves to be drawn there unto. Therefore nothing withheld them from departing, but desire to the keeping of unity, but if the prophets thought it against conscience to estrange themselves from the church, for many and great wicked doings, not of one nor two men, but in manner of the whole people, than we take to much upon us, if we dare by and by depart from the communion of the church, where not all men's manners do satisfy either our judgement, yea or the Christian profession. No offence greater than schism. Libr. 2. epist. 1. Lib. 1. cont. Donat. cap. 13. Tract. 6. in epist. joan ca 4 In Psal. 54 Here your own doctor, your own patriarch, and idol of Geneva condemneth your presumption for separating yourselves from the church, for that cause which your Apology most vehemently urgeth. He had learned out of S. Cyprian that there is no greater, offence, than to break the unity of the church, and espied in S. Augustine, that immanissimum est separationis scelus. The fault of separation is most heinous, and that he hath no charity that breaketh unity, and that he which forsaketh the unity of all nations and remaineth in a part, Polluit testamentum Christi, difileth the testament of Christ, yet he had not the grace to follow it. Wherefore his damnation is the greater. But you say, Calf. Fol. 121. a we are the enemies of God, and his church, and therefore you separate yourselves from us, and join with the church of Christ. Mart. These are sweet words but full of poison, if all men that live evil, be God's enemies, them are we and you also gods enemies: for neither of us lack infirmities, and sins. But if they be God's enemies that know his will, and wilfully break it, Who be God's enemies properly. Matt. 13. Psal. 65. Psal. 73. Matt. 16. joan. 21. Matt. 18. Heretics sow upon the corn that the Apostles sowed. that come after that his seed is sowed, and sow cockle over it, that in the multitude of his power lie unto him, that have maligned and done evil in his sanctuary, and blasphemed his holy name, then are you the enemies of God. For you know that he gave the keys of heaven to S. Peter, and made him chief of the Apostles, and ruler of his church in earth, yet you wilfully deny it. You know that every Christian man is commanded to hear the church, yet you contemn it. You know that the seed which was first sown, was the true seed of our lord, yet have ye sowed cockle over it, and taught that these thirteen hundred years men, yea that chief pillars of the church varied from the sincerity of the gospel. Lib. 4 cont. Marcio . You know with Tertullian, that that is truest which is first, that is first which was from the beginning, that was from the beginning which was delyured of the Apostles, and that was delyured of the Apostles, which was holy and well observed in their churches, Heretics refuse that which was holy in the Apostles churches. yet the most part of things that were holy and observed in their churches you refuse to follow. you know that Christ in his last supper said, This is my body, This is my blood, yet ye lie unto him, and to his, in the multitude of his power, & say it is not his body, it is not his blood, but a sign of his body, and a sign of his blood only. You know that he went by his divine power through the doors fast shut into his disciples, joan. 20. Heretics lie unto God. yet in the multitude of his power, ye lie unto him, and to his, and say, he went not in through the doors fast shut, but by a chincke, by a wicket, or some such thing. you know that his sanctuary is an holy house and a place of prayer, yet have ye plucket many a hundred down to the ground, Heretics profane and spoil churches. turned diverse into stables and slaughter houses, destroyed the altars, broken the baptisteries, and made it a place of desolation. You know that God tempteth no man, to evil, yet ye writ that he is author of evil: and affirm that the treason of judas, and cruelty of Manlius was the work of God, Heretics blaspheme God. aswell as the conversion of S. Paul, which is horrible blasphemy, and yet one of the lest, with which ye blaspheme his holy name. If you were God's friends, and so holy as ye pretend, ye would never have done such villain to his church as ye do. But to let, all those pass, and come to your separation and schism, I will say unto you with S. Augustine, In Psal. 40 Si ad membra Christi pertines introeas ad caput etc. If thou appertain to the membres of Christ go into thy head: bear with the cockle, if thou be wheat: bear with the chaff, if thou be good corn. Bear with evil fishes within the net, if thou be a good fish. Why didst thou flee away before the time of wynnoing? Why hast thou plucked up good corn before the harvest? why hast thou broken the net, before thou camest to the banks side? Christ saith, ye shalbe my friends if ye do those things which I command you. The end of his commandment is charity: if then you wilbe Christ's friends, joan. 15. you must have charity, if you have charity, you must have unity, if you have unity you must have one God, one faith, one baptism, and one church, and one chief head of that church, and that one head must be S. Peter's successor, even whom you so maliciously impugn the bishop of Rome. For Christ (saith S. Chrysostom) shed his blood, that he might gather unto him those sheep, Quarum curam tum Petro tum successoribus Petri committebat. Lib 2. de sacerd. The charge of Christ's church committed to S. Peter and his successors. Lib. 2. de consid. ad Euge. The charge of whom he committed both to S. Peter and to S. Peter's successors. And other successors of S. Peter, that do continue, you can show noon, but the bishops of Rome, as both the succession from Peter to Pius the fifth, doth plainly convince, and S. Bernard writing to Eugenius doth manifestly show. For he saith: Go to, let us search out more diligently as yet, who thou art, what person thou bearest for the time in the church of God: who art thou? Sacerdos magnus, summus Pontifex, Tu princeps episcoporum, tu haeres Apostolorun, etc. A great priest: The bishop of Rome Peter's sucessour. an high bishop, thou art thou art the chief of Bishops: thou art the heir of the Apostles: If heir of the Apostles, ergo successor of the Apostles, if successor of the Apostles, ergo endued with all the rights, titles, and prerogatives that his predecessors had. As Peter then was, so must his successor be, aedificandae ecclesiae a Tertull. de prescri. petra: magnum fundamentum Ecclesiae, b Origen. ho. 5 super Exod. solidissima perta: Apostolorum princeps: c Chriso. ho 29. in epist. ad Rom. Antesignamus, coripheus, d Idem ho. 1. in epist. ad Rom. vertex, caput e August. quest. 75. ex novo testam. eorum, caput f Marcellus epist. 1. & Chrys. ho. 55. in Mat. totius ecclesiae, fidei g Hippol. Oratio. de consume. mundi. petra, firmamentum h Ambro. in. 5. Luc. De quest. novi & ve ter. testa. quest. 110. Show us your church M. Calf. and prove your succession. August in Psal. 15. ecclesiae. The rock of the church that was to be builded: a great foundation of the church: a most sound and strong rock: the prince of the Apostles: the chief captain, the head and top of all: the head of all the whole church, the rock of faith, and ground pillar of the church. Wherefore if ye wilbe Christ's friends (as ye pretend) have charity: keep unity, love his church: obey his officer, and vicar on earth, whom he hath made ruler of his church. As for that church, which you call the church Christ, with which you flatter yourselves, and say ye join unto, is no church, but a synagogue of Satan, often overthrown, and manytimes invisible, by your own confession, a conventicle of Apostatats, and conspiracy of libertines. For S. Augu. calleth the church that disturbeth, the order begun in S. Peter, and continued by order of Bishops succeeding one after another to the present time, which was the order of the bishops of Rome, Cathedram pestilentiae, the chair of pestilence. If your church be (as you make the simple believe) a catholic and universal church, dispersed through out the world, show us where it is now: and where it hath been the fifteen hundred years: prove your succession: name your bishops. The church of Christ hath always been visible, as a city placed upon an hill: It hath always had (as he ordained) Apostles, Evangelists, Doctors, and Pastors: In sole posuit tabernaculum suum, hoc est sanctam ecclesiam suam, etc. He hath placed his tabernacle in the sun, that is his holy church: he hath put it in an open place to be seen, and not in covert, and secret corners, not that it should lie privy, not that it should be covered, that happily it might not be covered, as the conspiracies and conventicles of heretics are. That we may know your church show us the tabernacle, where it was placed as in the sun: Show us the open place where it was planted as in the light of the world, and if ye can not (as most certain it is you can not) then brag no more that your church is catholic and universal. The church of Rome founded of Christ by his blessed Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul, which we presently follow, The church of Rome always visible, and sincere in faith. and are able to give the name of every bishop that succeeded in that see eversithens, hath continued in the light and face of the world, always visible, always seen, always resorted unto, always uncorrupt both in doctrine of faith and doctrine touching manners, always undefiled, always firm and stable in the faith, always counted the head of the universal church, always mother of faith, and rock, that hell gates could never break. Wherefore sir you needed not require us to make it a catholic church, Fol. 121. b and a follower, and furtherer of true religion. It was proved before, and now for your further instruction, I will repeat somewhat of it again. To be with Cornelius (who was bishop of Rome) idem est quod cum Ecclesia Catholica communicare, Cip. lib. 4. epist. 2. is the very self same thing that it is to communicate with the Catholic church. To allow and firmly hold the communion of Cornelius, est catholicae Ecclesiae unitatem, pariter & charitatem probare, & firmiter tenere, is to allow and firmly hold both the unity and charity of the Catholic church. Libr. 4. epist. 8. To be one of the Catholic bishops, est cum Ecclesia Romana convenire, is to agreed with the church of Rome. S. Cyprian saith, The church of Rome hath been, Ambros. de obitu fratris. Libr. 1. epist. 3. Lib 3 ca 3 epist. ad Damas. and is the only Church to which infidelity and unfaithfulness could never have access. Irenaeus saith, in the church of Rome that tradition which come from the Apostles was always kept. S. Hierome saith, Amongst the Romen only, the authority of the fathers remaineth uncorrupt. Ibi cespite terra soecundo dominici seminis veritatem centeno fructu resert, there the ground with her fertile soil, bringeth forth the truth of our lords seed with an hundred fold increase. The church of Rome the Catholic church. By this you might have seen that the church of Rome is the Catholic church, or at the lest the mother, rote, spring, and head of the Catholic church, never defiled with heresy, idolatry, superstition or any error in matters of faith. But peradventure you read not so far. Wherefore in God's name see it now, and if you wilbe a member of the Catholic church, be with the chief bishop of the Catholic church. you may learn by S. Cyprian that the bishop is in the church, and the church in the bishop: Lib. 4. epist. 9 and that if any man be not with the bishop, he is not in the church: and that they flatter themselves in vain, who having not unity and peace with the priests of God, creep up, and believe that they secretly communicate with some, whereas the church, which is one, and catholic, is not cut, nor divided. You may learn by S. Augustine that they who go from the whole to a part, from the body to a wound, from life, to a division, shall pass hence into the pit of corruption: and that they that die in frowardness, In Psal. 54 and schism, shallbe humbled of God in damnation, because they were advanced up in dissension? To be short, you may learn that he crieth woe to them that hate the unity of the church and make themselves parts in men, wherefore as ye tender your own health, Tract. 12. in joan. read and regard. And if ye shall find no unity nor perfect truth out of the church of Rome, then return again from whence ye departed, into the unity of the church of Rome. Where yove object against me, that speaking of custom, I make a lie and falsify Tertullian, Fol. 123. a you must pardon me, if I tell your mastership, sir reverence according to your custom you make a lie. These are my words. Custom increaser, confirmer, and observer of faith, taught us this use of the Cross. His words out of which I gathered this position, in latin are these. De coro. militis. Harum & aliarum eiusmodi disciplinarum si legem expostules scripturarum, nulla legis traditio tibi praetendetur. Autrix consuetudo, confirmatrix & fidei obseruatrix. If thou require a law of scriptures for these and other observances, no tradition of law shallbe pretended unto the. Custom author, confirmer, and observer of faith shallbe pretended unto the. These words find I in Tertullian printed of Frobenius at Basile in the year of our lord 1521. in the month of july. The very same words find I in Tertullian printed of Frobenius at Basile in the year of our lord 1528. in March. And the very same may you find in Tertullian, if it please your worship to look upon any of the said prints. Wherefore sing I followed my printed book viewed by learned men before it come to the prime, and received of learned men in the same sense, in which it is alleged, after it come from the print, especially out of Basile where your religion reigneth, I am not to be counted a falsifier of the author, for alleging him as I find him in print, but you an infamous slanderer, for so reporting of me before you had consulted diverse prints, and impressions, and seen upon what ground I builded. But we may see that you are glad to take every light occasion to discredit us, and shift away the matter which ye take in hand to impugn. But it is a soul shift to make a lie, and slander your neighbour. Let your newest Basile print, and the last of Paris, read that saying of Terrullian in this sort: Harun & aliarum disciplinarum si legem expostules scripturarum, nullam invenies, traditio tibi praetendetur autrix, consuetudo confirmatrix, et fides obseruatrix: that is, For certain ceremonies tradition and custom suffice for scriptures. if thou demand a law of scriptures for those and other observances, tradition shall be pretended unto the as author, custom confirmer, and faith observer of them, it maketh quite against your positions, who will have nothing but scripture. You see that tradition may be author of a ceremony in Christ's church. For so have your new printed book, autrix, and not auctrix, author and not increaser. How be it if we had not to do with wranglers, both might signify one. You see that to the curious that ask for scriptures, Good Christians observe traditions. tradition and custom are pretended, and that the faith of true Christians observeth that, which tradition delyured and custom confirmed. You take much pains to prove that which no man denieth, Fol. 123 b Fol. 123. a that traditions not written should be reasonable, and agreeable to scripture, as though the Apostles and fathers after them, delyured any thing by tradition that was unreasonable, and contrary to scriptures: or the catholic church would maintain any thing, contrary to reason and scripture. Again you would have the use of the cross proved to be a reasonable tradition, Calf. Fol. 123. b agreeable to God, furthering to discipline, and profitable to salvation, and then ye would yield unto it, Mart. but if there had been such modesty, and honesty in you, as is required in an obedient child, you would never have doubted, but that the Apostles having the holy Ghost, did all things agreeable to God, furthering to discipline, and profitable to salvation, and consonant to reason, albeit they gave not presently a reason why and wherefore they did it. Hom. cont. Sabel. Tradition In 2 ad ad Thess. Hom. 4 Whensoever any tradition might be alleged, S. Basile said: Te pacatum reddat traditio. Let tradition make the quiet. S. Chrysostom saith: Tradition est, nihil quaeras amplius. It is a tradition, seek for no more. Wherefore sing Tertullian and S. Basile tell you that it is a tradition to use the sign of the cross, and bless ourselves with it, that might have made you quiet, and taught you to believe that it was of God. Leo an holy father was wounte to say, that it was not to be doubted but that every thing which was retained of the church into custom of devotion, come of the Apostles tradition, or doctrine of the holy Ghost. Serm. 2 de jeiunio. pentecost. The general customs of the Catholic church come from the Apostles and doctrine of the holy ghost. Lib. 2. cap. 7 de bapt. cont Donatist . Likewise because many ceremonies were used through out the universal church, and not sound in scripture, nor council, S. Augustine thought that they were delivered and commanded of no other, but of the Apostles, and if they being holy and learned fathers, thought the universal custom of the church a good cause, and sufficient reason, to ꝓpue that the ceremony used, was delyured of the Apostles, what wisdom is there in your singular head to require other proof for the tradition of the cross, than the general observation and common custom of the catholic church? Are you wiser or better seen in the scripture, or more zealous to set forth the honour of God than they were? Not not M. Calf. There was, more wisdom learning, and devotion in the meanest of them, than in all the protestants heads that ever were, or shallshall. Wherefore sing you know it to be a tradition, brawl no more contentiously against it. Say with S. Basile, Me pacatum reddet traditio. Tradition shall make me quiet. Say with Chrysostom: Traditio est nihil quaeran amplius. It is a tradition, I will seek no further. Say with Leo and S. Augustine, it is received into custom of devotion, and general use through out the catholic church, therefore it cometh from the tradition of the Apostles, and doctrine of the holy Ghost: so shall yourself be most at peace and quiet. The further ye venture, the more ye fall in danger. The distinction, which you make of three kinds of traditions, that some are necessary to be retained of all Christians as necessarily inferred of the scripture, Fol. 124. a & b. Three kinds of traditions mentioned by M. Calf. As that a woman in the congregation should not be bore headed, that in the congregation she should keep silence, that the poor should labour with their own hands and get their living, other direct contrary to the word, As Latin service, worshipping of images, vowing of chastity, and communicating under one kind, Other indifferent, neither utterly repugnant to the word of God, neither necessarily inferred of it, so savoureth of ignorance that it is like to disgrace the estimation of our learning amongst the hottest puritanes in all London. For first to put you in remembrance of the great vanity made in the title of your book, that the vanities of men should disproved by the undoubted word of God, and the dreams and dotages of others controlled by the godly fathers of the church, and conspiracies overthrowed by lawful councils, M. Calves distinction of traditions not to be found in the fathers nor school men. I beseek tell us in what scripture, father, or council you find this distinction? We admit all for scripture, that you reject out of the Canon. Besides S. Augustine, Ambrose, Hierome, Gregory, and other ancient fathers, we will receive S. Thomas, Gaietan, Alexander de Alice, Martin de Magistris, Bonaventure, and all other school men with their gloss in this case, we will not refuse the simplest provincial council that was assembled by any lawful bishops these thirteen hundred years. Go to therefore bring us one text of scripture, one father, one council, and canon, where this distinction is made. Why speak you not? Are your scriptures so tied to the paper, that they can not be loosed? Are your fathers so to the less that they can not speak? Are your councils so conceived that no canon can appear? What a strange ease is this? Find some for shame, let not all the world see that great crack of scriptures, fathers, and councils to be turned into a dream dotage, and fancy of your own. If they do, you are shamed for ever. For either men will esteem you, but for an arrogant fool, for making such a great brag, or a very idiot for so foolishly exemplyfying your distinction. For what ignorant, but you would, say that these are traditions necessarily inferred of the scripture, and so proved out of the scripture by S. Paul, that a woman should not be bore headed in the church? that in the congregation she should keep silence? That is necessarily inferred of scripture which being not in express scripture is by drift of argument, and necessary sequel of reason, Inferred of scripture. 1. Cor. 11. inferred of some place of scripture. As for the tradition that women should cover their heads in the church, it is taught in express words, and commanded in S. Paul, and not inferred of any scripture. There is one lie: and if that place of S. Paul were not, there were no scripture in all the Bible to prove it. Fol. 124. b Again where you say, that S. Paul did not obtrude this of his authority, but by the scripture prove it, there is another lie. For S. Paul bringeth no text, nor sentence of scripture to prove it necessary that women should be covered, in the church: but as he was an apostle endued with the holy Ghost: So he gave that precept. further who but such a blind batfouler, would say, that Latin service, worshipping of images, vowing of chastity, and receiving under one kind were direct contrary to the word of God? Whereas there is no express precept of any one tongue in scripture, nor any commandment against images, vowing of chastity, or receiving under one kind. Last of all, who but such a wise man would say: that in traditions of such things as are indifferent, Fol. 124. b we must follow the order of the church with a limitation, and not absolutely? Every wise man knoweth that we should not prescribe order to the church, but the church prescribe order unto us: we obey the church, and not the church obey us. Yourself say within few, Fol 124. b lines, that the church must still retain her right, to be judge and determiner of such traditions, either to bear with them, or abolish them, as may best serve for edification. If that be true, how will you excuse yourself of contradiction? If the church hath a right to be judge and determiner of traditions, than the church must see whither they be profitable, the church must see whither they be to edification, the church must see whither they be tolerable, and not we, I mean such private men as you and I are. If the church command them, we must obey, yea absolutely: and not with a limitation, unless for not obeying the church, we wilbe alienated absolutely without all lymitation from Christ, The church must be obeyed absolutely without limitation. Matt. 18. and made of Christians heathens and publicans. Christ, willeth him that heareth not the church to be counted an heathen and Publican. But sir in which of the three kinds of traditions, will you place those that S. Basile mentioneth, to wit, the signing and blessing of Christian men with the sign of the cross, praing toward the east, the words of invocation whiles the Sacrament is showed, hallowing the water of baptism, the oil of inunction, and the man that is baptized? be they necessarily inferred upon scripture or direct contrary to the word of God? Or indifferent, neither repugnant to the word, nor necessarily inferred of the word? Seeing our controversy was of the tradition of the cross specially, which both Tertullian, and S. Basile mention, reason would you should have placed them in one of your three ranks, that we might by your good advise have known, whither it be a tradition or necessarily inferred upon scripture, or direct contrary to the scripture, or indifferent, nor repugnant to scripture, nor necessarily inferred of scripture. But you thought it not good for your purpose, jest if happily you had adumbred it amongst such traditions as are indifferent, Fol. 125. a The fathers account the cross to be a tradition and yet M. Calf. will have it to be noon. your own rule would have forced you to retain it, because the church hath taken order for it, and universally received it, through out all christendom. Wherefore to advoice that, you say, that in this numbered we can not iustlely comprise the cross: which is a strange case. Tertullian, S. Basile, Leo S. Augustine, ancient and learned fathers, and all the whole church of Christ take these and such like traditions to be at the lest, things indifferent, and yet your wisdom can not see, it. Whence cometh this? Of humility, or arrogancy? of modesty, or singularity? flatter yourself as well as you can, S. Augustine) as I told you before) counteth it not omly arrogancy, and singularity, but insolentissimam insaniam, most proud madness. Epist. 118. Where you say, that although of some fathers it hath been accounted such, Fol 125. a Calf. yet we must remember that they did not always build gold and silver, but sometimes hay and stubble upon Christ (which words being meant of manners you wrist falsely to doctrine) and that every thing which is pretended to be the father's writings, Mart. is not by and by theirs, I answer that albeit some fathers in searching reasons to convince Heretics arguments had some private opinions, yet there is no reason why their authority should be refused when they agreed with all other fathers and bishops of Christ's church. Likewise albeit some false books, and bastard babes have been fathered upon some fathers, by bastards, Apostatats and heetickes, yet is it not convenient that therefore we should condemn the true books and works of the fathers, Or refuse to follow the custom of catholic church. Therefore we say unto you as S. Basile having to do with such a wicked heretic as you are, and almost in a like case, S. Basile. Lib. 1 cont. Euno. Reverence dew to the ancient fathers. said once. What sayest thou man? Shall we not give more to antiquity? Shall we not reverence the multitude of Christian men, aswell those that live presently, as those that lived ever sithence the Gospel was preached? Shall we have no regard of their dignity who florisshed in all spiritual grace, for whom thou hast lately devised this envious way of impiety? But shutting the eyes of our hearts, and abandoning the memory of every holy man, shall we yield our minds now quiet, and void of fancies to thy sophistry and cavillation? surely thy power is great, if those things shall be at thy commandment which the devil himself with his manifold craft, could never attain: For we being persuaded of thee, shall prefer your wicked imaginations and thoughts before the tradition of faith, which in all ages past, hath prevailed under most holy men, which were no safety. Wherefore utter all the vemine that you can against the fathers, of blessed memory: turn up their ashes: disclose their infirmities: show their errors, spend all the eloquence that you have against them, you shall never hurt them, nor drive any Christian man from reverencing that, which the church hath allowed in them: Tradition shall make us quiet. We will say with S. Basile. Dominus it a docuit, Apostoli praedicaverunt, Hom. cont. Sabell. patres obseruaverunt, confirmaverunt martyres, sufficiat dicere, sic edoctus sum. Our Lord hath so taught: the Apostles have so preached: the fathers have so observed: the martyrs have confirmed. As for you and yours we leave with the Arians, who would not vouchsafe to compare any of the old fathers to themselves, Lib. 1. cap. 14 Tripar. The pride of heretics. nor to be equalled to the schoolmasters of whom they were instructed, nor think any man comparable to themselves in measure of wisdom, but imagined that they only were wise, they only had those things revealed unto them, which were known of no man under the sun beside. We lean you to Nestorius, Lib. 12 ca 4 Tripar. who having a little eloquence, disdained to read the books of the old interpreters, and thought himself better than all. It shall suffice us to say, we have been so taught. Your long discourse made to prove, Calf. Fol. 125. b that whatsoever hath been delivered, and otherwise esteemed Apostolic, is not to be observed, that for diversity of ceremonies men are not to be contemned, and that traditions varied often, Mart. to the end that you might not be contemned, for refusal of the like, I have answered before: and say further, that there is nothing more reasonable, than to have every thing dissolved by the same means that it was tied: every law to be abrogated by the same means that it was first ordained. Seeing then traditions were delivered unto the church by the Apostles, and bishops, who had the dispensation of Christ's mysteries, it is reason that if there be cause why they should be abrogated and refused, Prove your church to be Apostilike and Catholic and your vocation lawful M. Calf. they should be abrogated by the Apostles successors, and bishops, that have the dispensation of Christ's mysteries, and governance of his church committed unto them. As for you, prove your church to be Apostolic, and Catholic, your vocation to be lawful, that ye are rightly according to Christ's ordinance called to the dispensation of his mysteries, that you have true bishops in your church, before you challenge unto you, the alteration, of any ordinance, tradition, or ceremony in Christ's church. Hitherto I have spoken of the two points which you like an evil point maker have knocked long to make taglesse, and break a sunder: But thanks be to God the leather was so good and your hammer so unhamsom that they be both whole yet. Now let us see how you tug at the third point: videlicet, that a cross was set up in every place etc. To Martialis one of the 72. disciples that said: Crucem domini in ment, in ore & in signo tenete: Keep the cross of our lord in your mind, in your mouth, and in a sign, Martialis wort denied and words wrested. Fol. 127 a Calf. Mart. you say nothing, to any purpose: but as the property of all heretics is, deny his work, and wrest his words, and say: We may have the cross in a sign according to Christ's words in his last supper, do this as oft as ye do it in remembrance of me, though we have not the sign of the cross. Here it is to be noted, how wittily this wiseman dissenteth from the rest of his brethren. For whereas they say, that in the supper we have the body of Christ in a sign, he to have a singular fancy from all the rest, will not rest upon that, but saith, we may have the cross at the supper, in a sign, to wit the passion of Christ in bread and wine, which is but a new devised to ye, to shift away an old truth. Certain it is that by the celebration of Christ's supper, we are put in remembrance of Christ's passion. But because it was done then, but privily in some secret place, it is to be thought that the author requiring us to have the cross of Christ in our minds, in your mouths and in a sign, meant that, sing our mature is so dull and heavy, that we could not always think and speak of Christ, unless we had some external mean to excite our memory, nor be ever at the supper to celebrated the remembrance of his passion, we should have the sign of the cross before our eyes in our churches, houses, parlours, chambers, high ways, and else where, that whethersoever we turned nor face, the cross might be seen, and put us in remembrance of Christ. Certain it is that Martialis was no signifier with Swinglius, nor meant that the supper of our lord is a naked sign. His words in the same epistle testify the contrary: for he saith, That which the jews through envy sacrificed, thinking to abolish his name out of the earth, An altar hallowed. An argument for the presence of Christ in the Sacrament. we for our health's sake, set forth in the hallowed altar. upon which words we may buld this argument. That is upon the hallowed altar which the jews crucified, but the jews crucified Christ's true body, and not a naked sign of his body. Ergo his true body and no naked sign of his body is set upon the altar: which being true, it can not be, that he willing the Burdegalensians to have the cross in a sign, meant that they should have a sign of our lords body at our lords supper, but the sign of the cross in our churches, chambers, and high ways. To the place of Athanasius that said: Crucis certe figuram ex duobus lignis componentes adoramus, we certes making the figure of the cross of two pieces of wood, do adore and worship it, you answer nothing, but as you did before sclanderouslie report of me, Quest. 38. ad Antio. that I falsified Tertullian: So with like impudency, and less honesty you say here, that I falsyfie Athanasius. Athanasius not falsified . But what truth is in your words let the readers judge. I allege the words simply and plainly as I find them in the author. Athanasius printed at Lions in Melchior and Gaspar Trechsels shop, the year of our lord 1522, hath one and fourth ye questions to Antiochus, and in the answer to the 38. question hath these words. Crucis certe figuram ex duobus lignis componentes adoramus, we certes making the figure of the cross of two pieces of wood, do adore and worship it. The same Athanasius printed at Argentine, (a town of our own gospel) in March the year of our lord 1522. by Knoblouch hath all the same questions to Antiochus, and the very same words in the answer to the 38. question. Like wise the same Author printed at Colony the year of our lord 1548. in the print house, of Melchior Monesiany, readeth as before, as every man that will take pains to look in them, may see, and are less to be suspect, of corruption than your late Basile print. Which being undoubtedly true, judge (good raders) whither I alleging Athanasius words as I found them, in three diverse printed books, have deserved to be accused for a falsifier, or he condemned for a slanderer, I for a liar, or he for a false accuser. But to return those three lies unto him self again, you shall understand that where he saith: that I suppressed a piece of Athanasius, Fol. 127. b. saying of the spear, reed and sponge, that thy are holy as the cross, whereas the author said, they are as holy as the cross, that is a lie of his. For I suppressed it not, my written copy is yet able to show the contrary. In deed the printer hath omitted it, by oversight, but his negligence is not to be abused to my hindrance. In so small a matter a gentle reader would have borne with such a escape, sing it was printed in a strange country, but sing he grateth so nigh, to spy a fault, you shall pardon me, if hereafter I drive him to the printer for excuse of oversights. The word Adore. in Athanasius text . Where he saith: the word adore is not in the text, there is a false lie. For all the three prints which I alleged before have this word: Adoramus we do adore, and are better to be credited than his newest impression. Again in saying that there be not xxxix. questions, that is another lie. For if he tell them, as tom fool told his geese, 41 questions of Athanas. to Antio. he shall find fourthy and one in the books of the said prints, which if it might have pleased his mastership to have viewed with other circumstances before he pronounced so rash a sentence, and condemned me of falsifying those authors, this infamy had not rebounden back upon him. But let us consider the words, which he allegeth out of his newest print. Quest 16 ad Antio. Calf. Fol. 127 b They are these: Quare credentes omnes ad crucis imaginem cruces facimus, Lanceae verò sanctae, aut arundinis, aut spongiae, figuras nullas conficimus, quum tamen haec tam sint sancta, quàm ipsa crux. Responsio: Figuram quidem crucis ex duobus lignis compingentes conficimus, ut si quis infidelium etc. Why do all beleavers make crosses after the image of the cross, but make no figures nor likeness of the spear, the reed, or the sponge, whereas not withstanding, they are as holy as the cross itself? The answer, we make in deed the figure of the cross by putting of two pieces of wood together, that if any of the infidels reprove that in us, that we worship wood, we may by separating those two pieces of wood, and taking away the sign of a cross, account them as unprofitable wood, and persuade the infidel, that we worship not wood, but crucis typum, the thing represented by the cross, quoth M. Calf. which in the spear, sponge and reed, we neither can do nor show. Mart. But what hath he adunataged his cause by this? Or what hath he hindered mine? Is it not plain, that all Christian men made crosses to the likeness of the cross of Christ? What will he make of those words omnes credentes? Al Christian men made crosses. all beleavers? and conficimus figuram crucis ex duobus lignis? We make the figure of the cross, of two pieces of wood? If he construe them, must he not say: All we Christian men make a figure of the cross of two pieces of wood? yeas I trow, and that the youngest puine in Paul's school having learned, but Esop's fables of bayard and the Ass, the eagle, and the beetle can tell him. If it be so, then have we found, that in Alexandria in Athanasius time all Christian men made crosses, like the cross of Christ, and that Athanasius himself archbishop of Alexandria was one of those Christian men spite of M. Calfhils' bald ministers beard. But (he saith) there is not any word or half word for worshipping. Calf. Fol. 127. b Mart. Veneror veneraris etc. is not latin to worship with M. Calf. Athanasius corrupted No sir? Is not veneror veneraris etc. Latin in your Dictionary to worship? And have you not that word twice in the same sentence? non veneremur lignum, sed veneremur crucis typum? That we worship not the wood, but we worship the figure of the cross? O merciful God what frontitck frenzy inveigled your wits that you durst make so open a lie? and interpreting the authors words corrupt his sense? Is typus crucis, the thing represented by the cross? or the figure of the cross? Examine the place better, call your wit to court, assemble your learned counsel, and make a conference, of the brotherhood. Or if it be to chardgable, for you to be at such a cost, consult master Copers Dictionary and see whither, typus be not Latin for a type, figure, shadow, an example, a form, a likeness, and Crux Latin for a cross? and when you have put them both together, ask some learned man, whither typus crucis, be not a figure, a form an example and likeness of the cross, and not the thing figured by the cross. In the mean while we wilbe so bold as to score up the three lies, Three lies one for that you said: there was no word no half word in that sentence for worshipping. Another because you say: Typus cruris signifieth the thing represented by the cross. making no difference between the figure of the cross, and Christ himself. The third that you say the spear sponge and reed should be aswell worshipped as the cross. For the very words and meaning of the author is against it. He saith: we make crosses, that if the infidels would say to our chardg that we worship wood we might break those pieces of wood, and persuade the infidel, that we worship not the wood, but Typum crucis, the sign, form, figure, and likeness of the cross, but we can neither do the like, nor show the like in the spear, The spear and the sponge not to be worshipped as the cross. An imitation of M. Calves Rhetoric. Fol. 128. a. sponge, and reed, and therefore we worship it not as we do the cross, which is Athanasius true meaning, or else the question propounded, remaineth as yet unsoluted: which were absurd to think. Wherefore to use his own Rhetoric: Ah see (good readers) with what a sot, we have to do with all, that condemneth him of falsifying authors, who allegeth their words as he findeth them in their books of diverse prints, more ancient than his, and more likely to be true than his of the newest print? See with what a Calf. we are encumbered that understandeth not his own book, that falsely translateth the words of his author, and maketh lies as he list? And because men should not think that the crosses which Athanasius and other Christians made in his time were set up in private and public places, asketh, Fol. 128. a. whither any wise man when he hath a new garment proclaimeth it in the market, or hang the counterfect of his friend upon a pole to beseene? And willeth us as we judge of one so to imagine of the other? Which hath nor wit, nor reason in it. For as every wise man that maketh him a new cote maketh it to were on his back, and not to proclaim in the market: So they that make crosses, and images of saints, and counterfectes of their friends, make them because they should be seen. To have them seen is not to lay them up in a coal house, but to set them in some open place, where they may be seen. And albeit, M. Calfhil, thinketh it a soul inconvenience, for a man to hung the counterfect of his friend upon a pole to be seen, yet he can not deny, but that every man that hath the counterfect of his friend, or hangeth it upon a nail against some wall, or setteth it in some window, where he himself and others may see it, and remember his friend. For that is the only end, why he maketh the counterfect of his friend. To your brabble about Serapis, I answered before: that may suffice. For the sinistrous suspicion and lewd surmise which of the fact of Tyrannus an heathen and idolatrous priest, you labour to rear, and leave in men's heads of all Catholic priests, of the new law of Christ, and his gospel, God that knoweth the secrets of all hearts, judge you for it, and reward that malicious mind of yours, who for the lewdness of a few, slander the whole order: But where find you, that any priest blamed lawful mariadg, as you say? Fol. 129. a. Where find you that they count it a life dissolute? Where find you that they take it a satisfying of lusts of the flesh? The places that you alleged before in the fourth article when you spoke of matrimony out of Innocentius, and Syricius, speak only of priests and deacons, that vowed chastity, and made a solemn promise to God, 110. a b Distin. 82. cap. propo suisti. Distin. 82. cap. qu●a. The mariadg of priests condemned. that they would live a sole and single life: and for them to mary and break their vows, for them to take women, and undo their promise made to God, not only Innocentius, and Siricius and all other Catholic bishops and priests, but all godly lay men that are learned in the scripture, or otherwise zealous in the setting forth of God's honour, count it, all together unlawful, a life dissolute, and satisfying of carnal lusts, and that worthily. For both the word of God, decrees of Emperors, and statutes of princes do condemn it for such. In our realm of England you have a law against the unlawful mariadg of priests, standing still in his full force to all effects at this present, which condemneth all your married mounkes, friars, and Apostatats of disobedience to God, and their prince for their unlawful marriadgs. If you have no better proof than these decrees of Innocentius, we may score up three lies more. For first we blame not lawful marriadg, but the marriadg of priests, which is altogether unlawful. secondarily we think it a life dissolute in noon, Three lies. but in priests and such as have vowed chastity. Thirdly we account it a satisfying of the flesh in noon but in priests as before, and sing we esteem it only unlawful in them, what honesty is there in you to say indefinitely, Fol. 129. a that we blame lawful marriadg? What charity to affirm that all we soole lived priests practise, all for the most part adultery? and use viler shifts, than Saturnus, the idolatrous priest? how prove you it? how justify you it? what evidence have you for it? if you have noon in store, found some I advise you, the time may come when you shall be driven to show your proofs. Fol. 129. a You appeal to my conscience whither I know it to be so or not, and I answer before God, in my conscience I do not know it to be so, nor ever did. Whatsoever enormity or fault was severely punished in Wynchester at my aboode there (as many were both by me, and their discrete, sober, and virtuous school master at that time, I protest before God, I know no other that taught them any evil, than he that teacheth men all wickedness and evil, that is Satan the author and deviser of all iniquity and evil. For my own behaviour there, I will say nothing for avoiding of vanity. Let the world judge, and the scholars and their friends, for whose sakes, I took that tedious pains of enducation witness, and say of me as they know. Fol 129. a Where you threaten bluddely that you will unripp the lives of our popish doctors, and of ourselves, I beseek you say what you can. When all your venomous blasts are blown, when all the poison of your serpentine tongue is spit out, when all the rancored malice, and festered hate of your evangelical stomach is disgorged, you shall hurt our cause no more, than other heretics did the Catholic faith, by like railing and sclaundring the fathers in those days. And sing our saviour and M. Christ was called a Samaritane, a man that had a devil, joan. 8. Matt. 11. Act. 26. Act. 17. just. Mar. in Apol 2. a friend of Publicans, a wine bibber, and S. Paul a madbrayne, a word sour, a preacher of devils, The Apostles drunkards, the Christians that followed them, eaters of men's flesh, wicked adulterers, and cursed Atheists, and in other ages other slanders have been raised upon the catholics, as S. a Greg. Nazian. in Monod. Basile was slandered to have had a woman in his chamber, b Libr. 2. ca 24. Tripart. Eustachius that he had a son by an harlot, c Euseb. lib. 10. ca 18. hist. Athanasius that he ravished a woman, cut of d Ibidem. Arsenius arm, used sorcery, stirred a e Lib. 4. ca 17. Tri. sedition in Alexandria, deceived poor men of f Lively 4 c 19 Tripart. corn sent from the Emperors, and burnt the holy books, and so likewise diverse other, certainly it shall nothing grieve us to hear the heap of slanders and venomous words that you shall falsely lay to your charge, and have learned of Martin Luther and friar Bale. That comfortable saying of our saviour Christ: Beati eritis quum maledixerint vobis, mentientes propter me: You shall be happy, when they shall speak evil of you, lying for my sake, shall be our preservative against all our poison. Begin when ye will: g Lively 4. ca 24. Trip. he that shall feel him self guilty in conscience, shall have occasion thereby to lament his sins, and do the worthy fruits of penance, and if he take it patiently, have merit by your mischief. As for myself, when you have said all that you can, I trust if all the world turn into protestants, and they all refuse me, yet he that shall judge them and all the world, will receive me, who as Chrysostom saith, speaketh these comfortable words of the sinner. Licet omnes homines, Matt. 5. Ho. 21. ad pop. Anti. licet daemones cum diabolo constituti ipsum accusent de turpissimis & occultis criminibus, non reijcio, non abhominor, sed ab accusatoribus ipsum liberans, & ab iniquitate absoluens, sic ad certamina duco. Albeit all men in the world, albeit all the spirits with the devil in hell, accuse him of most filthy and privy faults, I do not reject him, I do not abhor him, but delivering him from his accusers, and absolving him from iniquity, I bring him in such sort to fight. When the woman accused of the jews to our saviour Christ for adultery was rigorously exacted to punishment after the laws of Moses, Christ said unto them, let him that is without sin amongst you, cast the first stone at her. joan 8. So say I to you M. Calf. if you think yourself faultless, prepare your sling, let flee your stones, our pavice is ready, and shield prepared, to receive your strokes. In Psal. 36 A comfortable saying against the railing of heretics . Against that famous libel of yours come, I will desire all Catholics to arm themselves with patience. I will say unto them, as S. Augustine said to his people: Let them speak against us what they william. Let us love them against their wil For we know dearly beloved brethren, we know their tongues. Wherefore let us not be angry with them, have patience as well as we have. For they see that they have no advantadge in the cause, and they turn their tongues against us, and begin to speak evil of us: many things which they know, many things which they do not know. Those things that they know, are our offences past. For we have been, as the Apostle saith, foolish, and incredulous, and unwilling to all good works, we have been doting, and madding in perverse error, we deny it not, and in asmuch as we deny not our infirmity past, so much do we praise God that hath pardoned it: and if they reprove us, do you contemn it. In Psal. 36 To M. Calf . And to you sir with the same holy father I say: Quid ergo haeretice dimittis causam & is ad hominem? Quid enim ego sum? Quid sum? nunquid ecclesia catholica ego sum? etc. Why dost thou o heretic forsake the cause, and go to the man? For what am I? Am I the Catholic church? Am I the heritage of Christ, dispersed through out the world? It sufficeth me that I am in it. Thou dost reprove my offences past: what great thing dost thou? I am more severe in my own offences then thou art. That which thou reprovest, I have condemned. O, would to God thou wouldst follow, that thy error might also at length be past. Withal, to the reader I say out of the same father, If we be good men, we be wheat in the church: To the reader. If we be evil men we be chaff in the church, yet for all that, we go not from the floor. Thou that fleest away with the wind of temptation, what art thou? wheat? If thou were wheat, the wind should not drive the from the floor. Wherefore by the place where thou art, agnize and acknowledge what thou art. What we are he knoweth to whom we make our moan. Matt. 23. Of evil men it is said, scribes & pharisees have sat upon the chair of Moses. Do what they say, but do not what they do: by which you see, that in the chair of Moses, for which the chair of Christ succeeded, evil men sit, and yet for all that by saying well hurt not their hearers. Wherefore dost thou then forsake the chair for evil men? O man Redi ad pacem, redi ad concordiam quae te non offendit, etc. Return to unity, In Psal. 36 return to peace and concord, which hath not offended the. If I say well, and do well, follow me. If I do not as I say, thou hast the counsel of our saviour Christ, do as I say, but do not as I do. And for all this, go not away from the Catholic chair, from the unity of the church. Embrace the truth, who so ever speak it. This I thought good to admonish the gentle reader out of S. Augustine, not because my conscience is witting of any of those horrible and heinous crimes which that wicked Neronist by his lewd surmise would make men suspect, but that thoue mayest understand that no Christian man aught to discredit the truth, nor forsake the church, for the lewdness of the rulers and gourenours. Now you shall see what a bone he giveth me to pick out of Chrisostome. Whereas he speaketh of houses, marketts, Fol. 129. b Fol. 130. a Calf. wildernesses, high ways, seas, ships, Garments, Parlours, walls windows, armour, and such other things, where the cross should be, only he saith not (quoth M. Calf.) that he cross was in the church. Reckoning up so many, would he have forgotten the chief, if any such order had been received then? It is not credible. This is M. Calfhils' bore bone, Matt. bore I say, because it hath no honesty nor truth in it. For Chrysostom speaketh in the very same place of the cross in the church, these are his words: In demonst cont. Genti. All men sign themselves often times with the cross, by printing of it in the noblest part of our body. For it is figured and made daily in our foreheads. So it shineth in the holy table. So it shineth in the consecrating and ordering of priests. So it shineth again with the body of Christ in the mystical suppers. This Chrysostom there, within three lines, before the other words recited, by M. Calf. The cross in the church mentioned by S Chrisostome . And if the cross were in the holy table was it not in the church? Where was the holy table, but in the church? In Chrysostom's time, Churches were not dentie. Every city had them honourably adorned for the use of God's service. Is it credible then that where he saith, The cross was in the holy table, in the body of Christ, in the mystical suppers, that he said, it was not, in the church? What reasonable man would think so? Noon, but M. Calf. He that saith this or that is, in the holy table, saith that it is in the church. For noon or very few holy tables, were without the church at that time: but you see good people, what a strong pillar you have to lean unto, and what a wise minister to be your reader, that must face out so evident, so manifest and plain a truth with such a shameful lie. Ser. 130. de Temp. de cruce & latro. Fol. 130 a If his lessons, and sermons be no truer than his assertions in this book, you may hearken long, and hear many a lie before you shall hear any truth. Wherefore unless your ears, itch with hearing lying vanities, spend no more time in hearing such vain liars. His drift is nought else, but either with gay coloured words to blind you, or with destroying one truth with an other to deceive you. Where S. Augustine saice: Before the cross was a name of condemnation, now it is made a matter of honour, before it stood in damnation of a curse, now it it is set up in occasion of salvation, M. Calf. saith: That S. Augustine speaketh not here of a mystical or material cross, but of the passion of Christ. Wherein with a lewd breath he maketh a loud lie, and yet in some thing telleth a true a tale. For that S. Augustine speaketh there of the passion, it is true. That he speaketh not of the material cross, it is most false. And that it may, the better appear, judge yourselves. In this very place S. Augustine making a difference between the cross of the old law, and the cross of the new law, and comparing them together saith, The cross in the old law and the cross in the new law Before (that is to say in the old law, before the passion of Christ) the cross was a name of condemnation, but now (it) what is that (it) M. Calf? The Cross which was before the name of condemnation, is made a thing of honour. Before (it) that is to say the cross which was before a name of condemnation, stood in damnation of a curse, to wit as a cursed sign of damnation, now it, what is that (it) M. Calf.? forsooth the cross that was before, the name of condemnation, is set up in occasion of salvation. If then the cross which in the old law was a name of condemnation, and set as a cursed sign of damnation, was a material cross, certes the cross in the new law, made a thing of honour, and erected in sign of salvation, must as S. Augustine there meaneth, be a material cross: and not only the passion. For otherwise his comparison can not stand. And this my guess is more agreeable to S. Augustine's mind, than all the assurance, that M. Calf. hath to the contrary. Wherefore my collection, made of S. Augustine's words, that as then the material cross was a name of ignominy, so now the material cross is a thing of honour, is not vain, as M. Calf. saith, Fol. 130. a. but his fancy very fond, who because the scripture do not account the wood of which the gallows was made accursed, thinketh that in this place of S. Augustine, there is no material cross mentioned. Whereby ye have some trial of your ministers wit, but such wit, such wisdom, such knowledge, such assurance. To another place of S. Augustine following immediately in my book, where express mention is made also of an external sign of the cross, he saith not as much as one word. By like his lips were tied. Lively 3. de vita Constan . Likewise to the place of Eusebius who declared that Constantine the great, made the sign of the cross in his forehead, and painted it in a table and set it up on high at his court gate, he saith nought in effect, Fol. 130. b. but that he did repose no holiness in it, nor ever brought it into any of the churches, which he builded, and for proof of it bringeth not so much as one word out of scripture, council or ancient father as full gloriously he bragged in the first front of his book. Wherefore sigh his sight in the Greek is so slender, that he knoweth not how to translate the Aorists truly, sith his ignorance understandeth not the father's writings, sing he refuseth ceremonies, customs and traditions, which the Apostles delivered and commanded, and the Catholic church hitherto never abrogated, nor he nor his are to be thought other then false Apostles, contemners of their ordinances, despisers of their traditions, discrediters of the ancient fathers, and disauthorisers of their learned works, for all their glorious words and shameless cracks. THAT DIVERS HOLY MEN, AND WOMEN GOT THEM LITTLE PIECES OF THE HOLY CROSS, and enclosed them in gold, etc. THE SIXT ARTICLE. AGAINST this Article M. Calf. bringeth nothing worthy of answer. In the beginning he allegeth a mangled place of Tertullian, Fol. 131. a De velandis virg. to prove that Christ called not himself custom, but truth: against which no person, no space of time, no maistershipe of men, no privilege of countries can prescribe: Which sing every Christian man granteth, that idle allegation might well have been spared. In the next page he proveth that the fathers of the old and new Testament, are not to be drawn always for example, and for that he allegeth a place of S. Lib. 2. cont. epist. Gaudentij ca 23 Augustine, which in deed in the sense that the author meaneth is both godly and true. For disputing there against the Donatists murdering themselves, because they would be Martyrs, and defending their wilfulness by scripture, and the example of Razias that killed himself, because he would not come into the hands of his enemies, that would murder him, he sayeth more largely, and otherwise than our M. minister hath recited. Non itaque debemus quicquid etiam Dei testimonio laudatos homines fecisse legerimus, consentiendo approbare, sed considerando discernere, adhibentes judicium non sane nostrae authoritatis, sed scripturarum divinarum atque sanctarum etc. We must not therefore allow by consent whatsoever we read in scripture that men commended by God himself have done, but we must discern with discretion, not taking the judgement of our authority, but of divine and holy scripture, which doth not permit us neither to imitate, nor to commend, the facts of those men, who in the scriptures have good testimony, if any thing were done otherwise than well of them, or not convenient for this time: as you must not follow, nor commend Razias that killed himself, 2. Mac. 14. David that committed murder, and adultery, nor Solomon that departed his body to so many Concubines, nor Peter that denied his M. and ventured to waulke upon the water, alhoughe each of these men have their special commendation in scripture. And why must we not follow those holy men? Because in those things they did naught, and contrary to scripture. And this is the meaning of S. Augustine's rule, full wide God wot from M. No man to be forbidden to follow the virtuous examples of the ancient fathers. Calfhills' purpose. For if they, or any other man did any thing agreeable to scripture, convenient for the time, or profitable to edifying, no man is forbidden to follow them. Yea it is against all reason that any man should be inhibited to imitate them. Wherefore unless this our adversary and enemy of Christ's Cross, had first proved that Helena, Paulinus, Gregorius, who got little pieces of the cross, and set them in gold or silver, had done evil and against the express scripture, he should never have alleged that place of S. Augustine. For as every wise man knoweth that he aught not to follow the facts and misdo of the old and ancient men in evil: So no man is so ignorant, How fa● forth examples may be followed but understandeth that it is lawful for him to follow their examples in all works of verity, so far forth as the time will serve, and their ability bear. But he had forgot that, and thought it enough to say: They had a zeal, but not according to knowledge, and call Helena superstitious, and S. Fol 132 a He●ena superstitious. S Gregory fabulous. Gregory and Nicephorus fabulous, until some good sage father Bizias had told him, that S. Hierome reproved the having, and enclosing of pieces of the cross, and willed him to seek for it in his commentaries upon S. Mathewe. Then as though he had gotten a great pray, Half a sentence out of S. Hierom mangled & wrested. Matth. 23. in he layeth half sentence of S. Hierome, and triumpheth as though he had won the field. But that you may see how he mangleth the Doctor and wresteth him for his purpose, I will repeat S. Hierome's words that go before. Expounding these words of the Gospel, Dilatant enim philacteria sua etc. For they set abroad their phylacteries, or brood guards of their coats, and so forth, he saith. Woe be unto us miserable men to whom the faults of the Pharisees are come. When God had given the commandments of the law by Moses, at the last he said, Thou shalt tie them in thy hand, and they shallbe immovable frrome thy eyes, and this is his meaning, let my commandments be in thy hands, that they may be fulfilled in deed. Let them be before thy eyes, that thou mayst muse on them day and night. The Pharisees not well construing this, wrote the x. commandments in parchment, foolding them, and tying them in their foreheads, The pharisees under stood not God's commandment. and making as it were a garland for their heads, that always they might be moved before their eyes, which the Indians, Persians', Babylonians, do at this present: and he that hath this, is cownted religious amongst the people, and so forth, much in that sense. At lenghte to come near to our purpose, he sayeth: Those frontlettes, or fillets in which the precepts of the law were written they called phylacteries, because whosoever had them, had them, as it were for a safeguard, or defence of themselves. Where the Pharisees understood not that the commandments were to be carried in the heart, and not in the body. For otherwise studies and chests have books, and have not the knowledge of God. This do superstitious women at this day with us in little gospels, and pieces of the Cross, which have the zeal of God, but not according to knowledge, straining a knatt, and swallowing a camel. The superstitious of the pharisees and women that S. Hieron mentioned in a manner alone . Thus much S. Hierome complaining of the iniquity of the time, and hypocrisy of men that do in manner as the Pharisees did, get the word of God, bear it in their hands, and lay it in their windows, but did not lodge it in their hearts. further as the Pharisees having the skirts and hems of their coats leid with scripture, thought themselves defended sufficiently with the bore characters, although they had noon in their hearts: So in S. Hierome's time some superstitious women got light gospels, and pieces of the cross, and as the Pharisees did (for so saith the text) Hoc faciunt, they do this, that is to say, hanged it about their necks, and thought themselves well armed with them, although they had not the inward faith in their minds, as the Pharisees had not the commandments in their hearts. For which only S. Hierom calleth them superstitious, and women that have a zeal, but not according to knowledge. He compareth not the pieces of the cross to the Pharisees phylacteries. He thought it no fond thing to be enclosed, carried about, or worshipped of any: for he himself saith: S. Hierom worshipped the cross. Apolog. 3. cont. K●ff Incunabula●. When will that day come that it shallbe lawful for us to go into the den of our saviour, to weep in the sepulchre of our lord with the sister, to weep with the mother, and afterward to kiss or lick the wood of the cross? Again in another place he saith: By and by I returned in all haste to my Bethlehem, I adored the manger, and the swaddling clotheses of my saviour. By which it is manifest that S. Hierome thought it no fond thing, nor to have, nor to keep, nor to worship, nor to adore the sign of the cross. But he misliked such superstitious women, In Maatt. 23. ho. 43. as had little gospels and pieces of the cross, as the Pharisees had the commandments in their phylacteries, that is without faith in their minds, and good works in their hearts. And so doth Chrisostome in the place alleged. For he saith: How can the gospels hanged about one's neck save him, whereas being heard of some they profit them nothing? Again, where is the virtue of the Gospel? In the figures of the letters or in the understanding of the sense? If it be in the sign of the letters, then well dost thou hang them about thy neck. If in the understanding, then would it profit more, reposed in they heart than hanged about thy neck. By this it is evident that in his time, What priests Chrisostome rebuked. some priests were as full of hipocrise as the Pharisees, and would hang the Gospel about their necks, and not have it in their hearts, and have a piece of Christ's coat and hear thinking to be holpen more by that, than by the worthy receiving, of Christ's body. Those Chrysostom blamed, those he called foolish priests: of them he saith: O impietatem, O what impiety is this. He did not absolutely condemn the hanging of gospels, pieces of Christ's cote, and hear about them, but he condemned their folly and hiprocrisie in thinking more virtue to be in it than in true faith and the body of Christ itself. When two things are to be done, Christ said: Mat. 23. Luc. 11. Haec oportet facere, illa non omittere. These things you must do, and not omit those. On like if either those women that S. Hierome spoke of or these priests that S. Chrysostom mentioneth, would needs have kept little gospels, pieces of the cross, Why S. Hierom and Chrisostome rebuked those that enclosed pieces of the cross etc. Fol. 132. b and relics of our lords cote, and hear, they should not have omitted the other which was the most chiefest and principalst, that is, true faith and virtuous life: But because they did so, and put to much affiance in those outward things. S. Hierome and Chrysostom did reprove them, not because it was evil of itself, but with such a circumstances as they used, most wicked, and intolerable. Thus have I laid down all affection as you requested me, and spoke out my conscience of these places of S. Hierome and Chrysostom, and showed that they make nothing against me, nor condemn any error of mine. For I maintain noon, but avouch most undoubted truths, which I have received of the Catholic church. S. Hierome a learned man, hath nothing contrary to Helena, Fol. 133. a a silly woman, S. Hierome a received doctor hath nothing in this place against Nicephorus a suspected writer, Ibidem. Ibidem. as you say. S. Hierome a Cardinal hath nothing contrary to Paulinus a bishop. S. Hierome a saint canonized, hath nothing contrary to Gregory, a saint also canonized. Chrisostome also hath nothing against the having of such pieces of the cross, as may well appear by his work against the gentils, where he declareth that the Christians in his days were very desirous to have pieces of the cross, and for a great treasure enclosed them in gold or silver. Fol. 133 a Calf. Mart. But quoth M. Calf. it is not to be thought that Chrisostome spoke that is a praise of the parties, but a practice of tyme. Full wisely, God wot, and like a profound clerk, well seen in Chrysostom. In all his discourse there, he doth so highly commend the virtue of the cross, so ofren repeat it, and with such words inculcate the same, that no wise man can see, but that he speaketh all that is spoken in commendation of the cross, as a praise of the parties that used it, and commended the fact to be lawful, and not only a practice of the time as he fansieth. Chrisostome commendeth the having of crosses enclosing of them in gold. The cross every where . For example, when he said, This accursed, this abominable, this sign of extreme punishemennt (that is the cross) is made more briter than prince's crowns and coronets, spoke he that as a practice of the time, or a praise of the thing? speak M. Calf. when he said, every man seeketh the cross, we see it with princes, with subjects, with men and women, we may see the cross every where, in houses, market places, high ways etc. All men so gredylie, take unto them this wonderful gift? Spoken he that for a practice of the time only or praise of the parties? Answer Master Calf. when he said, Not Christian man ashamed of the cross. This is a marvelous grace, no man is confounded, no man is ashamed, thinking that it was a token of a cursed death, but all men are more adorned with it, than with princes crowns or ouches set with precious stone, or chains of Gold, and it is not only not shunned, but it is desired, it is loved, all men are hoofull for it. Spoken the that as a practice of the time, only, or as a praise of the parties? when he said to the gentle, If thou thinkest this to be nothing, but remaynest impudent as yet, and settest they self against the truth, and art blind in the clear light, learn by an other argument, what manner of thing this is and of what virtue. Tell me from whence cometh so great zeal, and care of it, that it is so desired of all men, and worthier to be desired than all things? All Christian men desire the cross . Why do all the world so earnestly desire to have that wood in which the holy body of our lord was set, in so much that whosoever have a little piece of it, enclose it in gold, as well men as women: and make it meet for their necks, by that rightly honested, and honoured, defended, and guarded, although sometimes it was the wood of condemnation? spoke he that as a practice of the time only, and not as a praise of the parties, and for the laufulnes of the fact? Say down all affection and to condemn your own error, speak out your conscience, doth he not labour to prove unto the pagan the virtue of the cross, because all men did honour it, all men desired it, all men were glad of it, yea all the world laboured earnestly, to have it, and when they had any piece of it enclosed in Gold, and kept it as a treasure, and though themselves honoured, and defended with it? And if their fact had been wicked, and the having of it a shame to the Christians, would so eloquent a preacher, and writer as Chrisostome was, have used no other reason, but such as afterward (if yower sayings were true) might turn him to perpetual shame? If only some private men had used that of zeal (as you fancy,) would so holy a father have made so impudent a lie? and said, No man is ashamed of it, No man is confounded with it, No man blusheth at it? But all men desire it, all men love it, all men are glad of it, all the world did earnestly labour to have it? No sir, Not: you take the mark amiss. The virtue of Chrysostom, and so impudent a lie can not stand together. Wherefore unless you have some other shift, you may put up yower Pipes. This is too gross to say. All the Christians in those days were will worshippers. All the Christians desired willingly and wittingly that which turned to their shame. All the world was deceived, and wandered in errors, vanities, and idle toys. For it is plain that S. Chrysostom doth not talk of the fact of a few private men, but of all the world, if Totus Orbis in yower Calepine be all the world. Other thing there is noon in all the Article, worthy of answer, but a few lies, of which you shall hear more hereafter. THAT A CROSS WAS BORN AT THE SINGING OR SAYING OF THE LITANIE: etc. THE 7. ARTICLE. HERE upon light occasion M. Calf. maketh an extravagant discourse of litanies and processions, and like a true man maketh three notable lies one after another: One that processions come first from gentilytie. Fol. 138. b Another that never Christian men used processions before the montanists and Arrians, as he read. The third that Papists degenerate from all good order. That processions come from Gentility to the Christians, Ibidem. Fol. 139. a it is utterly false. They come to us from the traditions of the Apostles, and doctrine of the holy Ghost, ergo not from Gentility. The antecedent I prove after this sort. Processions a tradition of the Apostles, and doctrine of the holy ghost . Whatsoever is retained of the church into custom of devotion, cometh of the tradition of the Apostles and doctrine of the holy ghost, but processions have been retained in the church into custom of devotion, ergo they come from the tradition of the Apostles, and doctrine of the holy ghost. The Maior is Leo his position in his second sermon of the fast of Pentecost, and S. August. doctrine in his hundred and eighteen epistle: the minor is, manifest by the ancient, and continued practice of the church uncontrolled to this present: all that come from gentility must not be condemned. which being true, the conclusion must of necessity follow, that it come not from gentility, but from the first professors of Christianity. but be it that procession come, from Gentility: Will M. Calves wit, serve him to condemn it for that? Because the liberal sciences come from the gentils, and the learned Philosophers who did not worship God, shall we condemn the liberal sciences? Because diverse policies and laws come to us from the gentils, shall we condemn those policies and laws? That were peevish policy and lawless liberty. And yet so do our new masters, and especially this crossebiter. For he saith, images come from gentility, crosses from gentilie, processions from gentilie, ergo images crosses, and processions must be condemned: but how fond it is consider by that I said before. The Manichees upbraied the catholics of old, that they retained many customs and manners of the gentils, as this our good new master minister doth us at this present, but as S. Augustine answered those wicked heretics, so do we this peevish protestant not knowing, what he saith. Seeing (saith S. Augustine) the just man liveth of faith, Lib 20 ca 23 contra Faust. Ma. Rom 1. 1. Tim. 1. 1. Cor. 13. Diversity of faith hope, and charity, maketh a diversity of manners and the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, good conscience, and unfeigned faith, and those three, faith, hope, and charity remain, to confirm the life of the faithful, how can it be, that he should have like manners and customs with any man that hath not these three faith, hope, and charity like with him? For he that believeth otherwise, hopeth otherwise, and loveth otherwise, must needs live otherwise. And if the use of certain things be like between us and the gentils, as of meat, drink, houses, garments, washings, marrying and having of wives, for them that will follow that kind of life, begetting of children, bringing them up, and purchasing of lands for them, yet for all that, he useth these things far otherwise, that referreth the use of them, to another end, and he otherwise who for them giveth thanks to God, of whom he believeth no sinistrous nor evil thing. For as you in your error, whereas ye eat the same bread that other men do eat, and live with the same fruit and water, and are clothed with linen and woollen as other men are, and yet for all that, in these things esteem not your life equal, not for eating and drinking any other thing, nor for having any other apparel, but by thinking and believing otherwise and referring these things to another end: So we both in those things, and other which we take in like, do not live in like with the gentils, referring the same things to one like end, but to the end of the commandment of God, to charity issuing out of a pure heart, good conscience, and unfeigned faith: from which some men wandering, have been turned into vain babbling. In which you bear the bell, not sing nor considering, that in doing and having of like things, it is sufficient only to make the life to be different, if the faith be diverse. Thus much S. Augustine. So that if we had received images, crosses, and processions of gentility, yet because we use them otherwise than the gentils did, we refer them to another end than they did, neither are we to be blamed, nor the things themselves condemned no more than liberal sciences because they come from the heathen Philosophers, nor yet policies, and laws, because they come from the gentils. That the Christened never used processions before the montanists, and Arians, Tertul. li. 2 ad uxor. Euseb lib. 6 cap. 8. Ecclesias. histor. Ceremonies of the Christians in Tertullian's tyme. neither doth it appear by Tertullian nor Eusebius in these places noted by M. Calfhill in the margin. Tertullian writing to his wife telleth her, (being a Christian woman) that if she marry after his death with a gentle, she should not observe the orders and ceremonies of the Christians, as their stations, fastings, visitation of the sick, meetings in the night, watching in the church at Ester, resorting to our lords banquet, visiting the prisoners, washing holy men's feet, kissing of the bretherene, and making the sign of the cross: but as for any ceremony or odre of procession or other that the montanists and their prophetesses used, he speaketh not so much as one word. Eusebius in the 7. chapter of the sixt book talketh of one Narcissus, bishop sometime of Jerusalem, who at the solemn feast of easter, Water turned in to Oil by miracle to serve for light in the church. whereas they lacked oil for their lights commanded water to be filled and brought unto him, and when the water was brought, oravit & benedixit aquam, he prayed and blessed the water, and when he had so done the water turned into oil, and gave a more clearer light, than ever it did before: this was done in the reign of Severus, a hundred years before Arius began his heresy. Wherefore unless, he had better prouf for this negative, we will enrroll him amongst the negative doctors of whom the common rule, Plus potest asinus negare etc. may be truly verified. Concerning the third lie that papists degenerate from all good order in procession, (for so he meaneth there) you shall see how fond it is. Cap 33. The council of Mentes, kept viii. hundred and thirteen years after Christ, made this decree. Our will is that the greater Litanie be observed of all Christians three days: Sicut legendo reperimus, as by reading we find (which words, M. Calf. leaveth out) and our holy fathers ordained, not riding nor having precious garments on them, but bore footed, in sack cloth, and ashes, unless infirmity do let. This Canon speaketh of the procession, which the fathers used in the rogation week before ascension day, In cap. 7. 1. ad Cor. Procession in S. Ambrose time. Cap. 29. Fol. 138. a between easter and whitsuntide: of which S. Ambrose who lived in the year of our lord 380. maketh mention calling them Dies processionis, the days of procession, and the first council kept at Orleans, in the year of our lord 515. calling them Rogationes, Rogations, and yet M. Calfhil saith we read not of processions, before Agapetus days, in the year of our lord 533. Whereby you may see what a diligent student, and great reader he is. In those processions riding, precious apparel, as well of men as women, Ecclesiastical, as secular, were forbidden. And the Canon was ever observed nisi infirmitas impedierit, unless infirmity did let: we ride not in procession: we put not on our best apparel: we were no copes. Wherefore albeit in other ꝓcessions at home in Cathedral churches on high days, for more solemnity and honour of the feast, the church useth copes, yet do we not degenerate from all good order, we do not contrary to that Canon. For that Canon inhibited riding and precious apparel in the rogation week, and not copes in other solemn and high feasts. Women slandered . And if some women have for vain glory, and ambition contended to have the higher place in procession, yet every woman and every wife have not strived for it, nor showed themselves so immodest and past all womanly shame, that they were ready to scratch one an other by the face, Fol. 139. a as M. Calf. saith, for going next the cross. This lie might have been spared, It maketh nothing to the solemnity of a procession. Although you sclandered men, yet so fine a chamber knight and carpet gentleman, should not have slandered every woman, and every wife, and made them little better than mad furies, that for a trifle wilbe ready to flee in their neighbour's face: and scracthe out their eyes. But you may see in what follies he falleth, while he seeketh to quarrel against the truth. And that not in one place or two, but generally in all his book. Where Sozomenus declared that the Catholics passed the Arrians in numbered of men, and solemnity of procession, and to ꝓove that, said, Argentea crucis signa una cum cereis accensis praecedebant eos, Before the Catholics went two silver crosses, with tapers or torches burning, this wise merchant devised an other folly: as where I translated, Argentea crucis signa, two silver crosses, he saith: Calf. Fol. 140. a Mart. Crucis signa, may be as well many silver signs of the cross as one. Is not this an high point of new divinity? well sir, whither you will have it silver signs of a cross, or silver crosses, must it not signify more than one, I beseek you? Is it not the plural numbered? And doth not the plural numbered signify many? And if it signifieth many, doth it not signifieth two at the lest? Answer M. Calf. If that be true them in translating Argentea crucis signa, two silver crosses, Fol. 141. a I did not (as you say) make a lie. For in many two are comprised, and the geater number ever containeth the less: but let that ignorance be pardoned. Why trifle you still? As though this were not folly enough, to ridiculous for a cocknel with bean in a bladder, you foul into a worse than all the rest. Fol. 139. b Fol. 240. a For you say: Argentea crucis signa, be not silver crosses, nor silver signs of a cross, but certain cross pieces of silver, a staff torch, or pole to carry a cresset. And for proof of that, Ecclesia. hist. lib 6. cap. 8. allege these words out of Socrates, excogitaverat argenteas cruces quibus erant impositae cereae faces accensae, and translated them thus: He had devised certain cross pieces of silver, where upon were put burning tapers of wax. Is not here a fine piece of skill? Surely if M. Cooper in augmenting. Sir. Tho. Eliot. Significations of this word Crux devised by M. Calf. Fol. 7. b his dictionary had called you to counsel, he should have learned many significations for this word Crux. which he hath wittingly omitted, as a gallows, a magical enchantment, a sorcerous mace, a conquest against Christians, an helmet of hell, a cross beam, a cross pillar, a candle stick, a torch staff, a pole that carrieth the cresset, a cross piece. O what a fruitful vain and fertile soil, is this for so little a calves head? who would have thought that such a doctorlike ministre could have fallen into such doltish folly? To omit all the rest, is Crux (sir) Latin, for a candlestick, a torch pole, or cross piece? You promised that the vanities, dreams, dotages, Show us your scriptures, counsels and fathers M. Calf. and compiracies of men, should be disproved and controlled by undoubted scriptures, holy fathers, and lawful councils. We must desire your mastership to show us one sentence out of scripture, one evidence out of some holy father, one place out of some lawful council, where Crux, is taken to be a candlestick, a torch pole or a cross piece, or else your glorious title will convince you to be but an egregious fool. If your play school play, you must not make your instance in the present, but let us grant you that liberty, do Argenteae cruces, signify cross pieces of silver? Which is the word that signifieth cross? Which is the word that signifieth piece, which is the word that signifieth silver? Argentea signifieth of silver, and Cux signifieth cross: where is piece, M. Calfhil? How patch you that on? Either do it finely, or your folly will so appear, that all your finesse with the best stitch that all the minister tailors have in England, will not excuse your grossness. Crux Latin for a cross piece, a candlestick, and torch pole? O the faith of God and man? What a fine deviser is this? all the grammarians, makers of Calepynes, observers of phrases, and noters of proprieties in words could never find out these significations, their wits were to gross, their capacities to dull their judgements to blind. Crux a cross piece a candle stick a torch pole? Doth any wise man think that M. Calf. meaneth as he writeth? If he do, I would gladly understand what authority and reason he hath for it. M. Calfhils is stark nought. For if those crosses were candlesticks, or cross pieces, for candles, because candles were set on them, then in like manner must the gentleman's hand be a miewe for his hawk, his servants back a desk to writ, and the ladies bed be a kennel for her hound, because the hawk is set upon the gentleman's hand, the paper is laid sometimes upon the servants back, and the little hound cast upon the ladies bed. The crosses that Chrysostom devised, were (as Sozomenus and Socrates report) made of silver, which argueth that they were not candelsticks, or cross pieces, for candles. Silver was not so plentiful in those days, that men would make cross beams, cross pieces, torch staves' and candelsticks of it. Again if those crosses had been made only to bear candles, and give light in the night season, what needed Chrysostom to devise about the matter? Was it so hard a matter in such a great city as Constantinople was, to have links, torches, and cressets, to give light? But must crosses be turned into Candlesticks? Was there no man to devise that? No wiseman believeth it M. Calf. Wherefore in so much as Chrysost. devised these crosses of silver, and made supplication to the empress to bear the charged, it is not so be presupposed that making his supplication, to the empress, he said, as he must, A supplication to the Empress. (if your saying be true) if it please your most excellent Majesty, the Catholics lack Candlesticks to bear their Candles in the night time, when they should go against the Arians, and sing the hymns that I have made for them. Therefore if it please your most excellent Majesty, I have devised a way to make them candlesticks, that is to say, I have devised that they shall have ij. cross pieces of silver, Fol. 140. b and set candles upon them, that the lights glimmering there upon, might make a beautiful and goodly show. Wherefore my humble, suit and request to your most excellent majesty is, that it may please you to bestow so much silver upon me, as may serve for the making of these candlesticks, and cross pieces. Were not this a worthy request for so wise a bishop as Chrysostom was? were it not a meet supplication to be made to such a famous empress as Eudoxia was? If that be not presupposed to be true, than it is not to be thought that Cruces Argenteae, & argentea crucis signa, are cross pieces of silver, or silver signs of a cross piece, or candelsticks of silver, or a torch pole. The words bear it not, the sense give it not, the authors mean it not. To childish is that fancy, & to gross for a bachelor of divinity. Study your Calepine better, and read M. Cooper's dictionary with more judgement for shame, that men may not cry, fie of your ignrance, for taking cruces argenteas, to be latin for cross pieces of silver. The Magdeburgenses your own doctors, protestants of the newest Religion, never espied this shift. But confess plainly that Chrisostome used crosses of silver, and burning tapers, ut res abiret in superstitionem, The Magdeburgenses against M. Calf. Centu. 5. cap. 6 pag. 650. Candles were set upon the crosses, ergo the crosses were candle sticks, it is no good argument M. Calf. that the thing might go into superstition: which was not like to proceed of bearing cross pieces for candlesticks. If you ask me why candles were set upon them, if they were Crosses, It may be answered, that Candles were set upon them to give light. And yet for all that they are never a whit the more to be reputed for cross pieces or Candelsticks. The butcher when he killeth a Calf, sometimes putteth his knife in his mouth, The scholar as he writeth sometimes putteth his pen in his ear, yeat neither is the butcher's mouth a sheet for his knife, nor the scholars ear a case for his pen. So is it in the crosses that had Candles stickte, or set upon them. Sozomenus said Argentea crucis signa una cum cereis accensis praecedebant eos. Silver signs of a cross or two silver crosses went before them together with burning tapers. Which words sing I alleged out of Sozomenus, it had been reason that you should have answered them, and not opposed an other place out of Socrates, who although he sayeth, tapers were set upon the Crosses, yeat he varieth not in the chiefest point from the other: that said they went together with the Crosses. For both confess that they were crosses, and crosses of silver, not Candlesticks or Cross pieces of silver. But you thought in this night of darkness to have some advantage by the glimmering light, of Socrates words, and make a goodly and beautiful show: but thanks be to God, it is turned into a soul driseling mist, and upleasant savour of a stinking Candlestick. Fol 141. b Now how justly he chargeth me, with four lies, consider I beseek, thee (good reader). I said they carried two silver crosses. Ibidem . That is a lie, (quoth M. Calf.) For there is no number mentioned. Doth he not grate hard to make this a lie? Sozomenus sayeth, Argentea Crucis signa precedebant eos. Silver signs of a Cross or silver crosses went before them. Socrates saith, excogitabat argenteas cruces, He devised silver crosses. Both signa & cruces, signs and crosses, are the plural numbered, which ever signifieth more than one, and when it compriseth lest, it compriseth two, yet because I said, there were two where no certain number is mentioned, he accounteth it for a lie, whereas being in the plural numbered, it must signify two at the lest: and sing he sayeth that I make a lie where noon is made, Lies returned upon M. Calf. let him go which way he will, we may return it to him again and say that he is a liar. Then that they should be carried in procession. That is a lie, quoth M. Calf. For it was only in processu, Ibidem. in their marching forward. Is not this far sought and foolishly brought, to convince one of a lie? It was carried in processu, ergo not in procession? what Tom fool, that had wit to tell his mother's geese, would make such a reason? Is not processus, Processus and processio. and processio all one? Doth not he that marcheth forward go forward? and he that goeth forward, march forward? An high matter in a low house. After that the Catholics were marched forward, and go forth, did they not go still the most part of the night, until they met with the Arrians? And all while they went, had they not the Crosses with them? Read the story: and when you find the contrary, then say it is a lie. In the mean season sing they were carried in processu, all the while they were going in procession, it is no lie for me to say, that they were carried in procession, but it is a lie for him that said, they were not carried in procession, because it was in processu, in the marching forward. The third lie (as he reckoneth) is because I say the crosses were carried in the churches, for it was in the streets, Ibidem. quoth M. Calfhil. As though he that said, The Cross was carried at a general procession in Paul's church, made a lie, because it was carried in the church yard, when procession was used. The cross was first carried in the church, and afterward in the streets, and then brought into the church again. And as the clergy of Paul's then began their procession in the church, and went into the street, so it is most likely, that the catholics in S. Chrysostom's time, repaired all together to the church, and there made their prayer first to God, and sang their hymns, and from thence went with their crosses into the streets, singing the same. There is no mention that they repaired together to the bishops palace, nor any one Catholics house, and yeat together they come, and sing it is so, what other meeter place could there be for it than the church? Noon as wise men think. The case them standing so, and my assertion being probable, agreeing to reason, I am not to be condemned of a lie, but he that imputeth it to me, must have it revolted to himself, and so is it where it should be. The fourth lie is, That they were carried as ours are in the day time. And this is a lie in deed, and a Notable lie, but noon of mine: it is his own: therefore I beseech you let him have it. In all my book I have no such word. Try it, and you shall find it. So while he hath laboured to control an other of iiij. lies, he is found to be a vain liar himself, in every one of the said four, besides other hundreds as shall appear hereafter. To the four mentioned before, he addeth two more in the Margin with great letters, because every man shall see them. The one is, Fol. 141. a that the matter alleged out of Sozomenus history maketh nothing for me. The second that I gather this conclusion out of Sozomenus, that we must carry a candlestick in stead of a Cross, in procession, which I refer to the indifferent reader to judge, whither they be two Notable lies or no. Fol. 142. a M. Calves. reasons against tapers in the church. Fol 141. b. The first. Cap. 34. Myself having to talk of other matters more necessary, will not stand trifling about it. M. Calf. noteth in the Margin that there must be no tapers upon the lords table, because a decree of a Council called Elibertinum, general (as he sayeth, but provincial in deed), forbiddeth us to light candles in the church yard in the day time. The words of that provincial council are these. Cereos per diem placuit in caemiterio non incendi, It hath pleased us, that tapers be not lighted in the day time, in the church yard, here is no mention of the church, nor lords table. Wherefore it is to be seen, that he meaneth not plainly. For reason willeth that he that citeth a law, cite it truly as it is, and not leave out the chief part of it. This Canon inhibited not tapers to be lighted in the church, nor upon the lords table, but in caemiterio, in the church yard. This word (church yard) M. Calf. suppresseth, The canon of the Elibert: council falsely alleged. and maketh the council say indefinitely, that we should not light candles in the day time, quite contrary to the meaning and words of the council. another reason why there should be no tapers upon the lords table, The second he bringeth out of Lactantius, and beginneth with half a sentence. For where describing the superstition and vanity of the gentils, he said, Mactant igitur opimas & pingues hostias Deo quasi esurienti, profundunt vina tanquam sitienti, Lib. 6 cap. 2. de ve●o Cultu. accendunt lumina tanquam in tenebris agenti, etc. They kill the best and fat sacrifices to God, as though he were hungry, they pour forth wine as though he were a thirst, they light up candles as though he dwelled in darkness, the last words of this sentence M. Calf. snatcheth, and letteth the other alone, which expound the meaning of the author. For Lactantius perceiving the gross and most absurd error of the gentils who attributed to their Gods no heavenly, but an human sense, and thought that they needed meat, drink, clotheses, and light, as well as we did, reproved this fond opinion, and fancy of theirs, and sing God is author of all light, thought it madness in them to offer up candles and tapers to him pro munere, for a present, or gift, The gentiles fancy of their gods as though he lived in darkness, and needed light. Now because Lactantius accounted it a madness to light candles and tapers to God in such wicked sort, as the superstitious gentils did, our ministers mad brain serveth him to think it a madness in us to set tapers upon the table of our lord, Isido li. 2. cap. 1. de Ecclesias. officijs. who know God to be the author and giver of all light, and light not our candles to God, as though he needed them, or as though he dwelled in darkness, but ad signum latriae demonstrandum, etc. To declare a sign of the high service and worship that we own to God, Why the Christians light candles in the church. joan. 1. Fol. 141. b The fathers that make mention of lights in the church. that under the shadow of that corporal light, that light may be represented, of whom it was said, he was the true light, that lightnethe every man that cometh into this world. In which sense neither scripture, nor Council, nor ancient father inhibit the lighting of tapers. And for imagining the Catholics to think so of God, and light their candles in such manner as the gentils did, and have no precedent for burning of tapers, but from the sacrifices of Saturnus, it is an extreme madness. But let it be proper for heretics. Let them be better seen in the sacrifices of gentility, than ceremonies of Christianity. Let us Christians retain lights in the Church, of which we have so evident record, and witness, out of a Libro 6. cap. 7. Eccles. hist. Eusebius, b 6. epist. ad orthodox. Athanasius, c Orat. 4. in pasch. Gregory Nazianzene, S. d Contra Vigilant. In epitap. paulae, Hierome, e Ser. 7. de sanctis. Augustine, f 3. Natal. S. Foelicis. Pauline and g Libr. 2 cap. 1. de Ecclesia. officijs. jeremy cap. 6. Fol. 142. b Isidore. Let us keep that which the holy Ghost hath continued in the church these many hundred years and confirmed by miracle. Let us make no innovation to the great injury of the dead: but let us tarry in those things which were determined of our forefathers, and never abrogated by the church. So shall we follow the counsel of the prophet, that commanded us to ask of the old paths, which is the good way, and walk in the same. Where M. Calf. findeth fault that I said, our heretics now a days, will have no cross at the singing of their lords prayer, because neither their lord nor they can abide the sight of the cross, and thinketh that because they have no other lords prayer than that which is written in the vi. of Mathewe, and xi. of Luke, I might as well have said at the lords prayer, as at their lords prayer, I wish with all my heart, that they had neither given me occasion so to writ, neither other men 'cause so to think: but sing they have separated themselves from the church, and whosoever is separated from the church, Cyprian. tract. de simple. praelato. and joined to the adulterous and bastard church, is separated from the promises of the church, and sing non pertinet ad praemia Christi, qui relinquit Ecclesiam Christi, alienus est, prophanus est, hostis est, he pertaineth not to the rewards of Christ, who forsaketh the church of Christ, but is an alien, He is no Christian that forsaketh the church. a profane man, and an enemy, I could not but writ as I did and call it their lords prayer. For if Christ were their lord in deed, and for firmly fixed in their hearts, as he is often in their mouths, they would not forsake his church. For as S. Augustine sayeth: Totus Christus caput & corpus, caput ille salvator corporis qui ascendit in coelum, corpus autem Ecclesia quae laborat in terra. In Psal. 30 Conc. 1. The head and the body is whole Christ. He the saver of the body, who ascended into heaven, is the head. The church that travaileth in the earth, is the body, and a little after that you may know (sayeth he) quia unus dicitur Christus caput & corpus suum: That the head and his body is called one Christ, he said when he spoke of mariade, They shalbe two in one flesh. Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. And a little afterward. Fit ergo tanquam ex duobus una quaedam persona, ex capite, & corpore ex sponso et sponsa etc. There is made therefore as it were one person of two, of the head and the body, of the bridegroom and the spouse. For the prophet Isaiah commendeth the marvelous and excellent unity of this person. For Christ speaking also in him, said in way of prophecy. He hath tied a Mitre upon me, as it were a bridegroom, and adorned me as it were a spouse, with precious attire, he called himself the bridegroom, and her the spouse, why did he call himself the bridegroom, and her the spouse, but because they are two in one flesh. If they be two in one flesh, why not in one voice. Let Christ therefore speak, because the church speaketh in Christ, and Christ in the church, the body in the head, and the head in the body. And whosoever separateth himself from the body, separateth himself from the head. Which sing heretics have done, although they brag lustily, and talk busily of Christ, Lib. 4. episto. 3. Reasons out of S. Cyprian that our heretics are not in the church. yeat are they not in deed true Christians but traitors and Apostatats. For as S. Cyprian saith. Christianus non est qui in Ecclesia non est. He is no Christian man, that is not in the church, but an alien, a profane man, and an enemy. But peradventure some will say, It is not sufficient to tell us that the our heretics have forsaken the church of Christ, it must be proved. And but reason in good faith: hearken therefore, and see how I prove it out of S. Cyprian. He saith. Quo modo autem potest ei cum aliquo convenire cui cum corpore ipsius ecclesiae, De simple. Praelato. & cum universa fraternitate non convenit? that is to say, how can he agreed with any man that agreeth not with the whole body of his church, and with the universal brotherhood? upon those words I reason thus: he that agreeth not with the whole body of Christ's church, and the universal brotherhood, is not in the church: but these heretics do not agree with the whole body of Christ's church, nor with the universal brotherhood. For they agree not with Italy France, Spain, portugal, Polonia, Bavarie, Burgundy, Brabant and Flanders being in the church of Christ, nor with the bishops, priests, and catholics in these countries, and otherwise despersed, Ergo they are not in his church. another reason out of the same father is this. Qui adversus sacerdotes Christi facit, & see a cleri eius, vel plebis societate secernit non est cum Christo: he that doth against the priests of Christ, and separate himself from the society of his clergy, and people, is not with Christ. But these our heretics have done against the priests of Christ, and separated themselves from the society of his clergy and people: Ergo they are not with Christ, and so consequently not in the church. That they have done against Christ's priests I prove by this reason out of S. Heretics practice against the priests of Christ. Cyprian: Quisquis contemptis episcopis, & Dei sacerdotibus derelictis constituere audet aliud altare, precem illicitis vocibus facere, dominicae hostiae veritatem per falsa sacrificia prophanare, contra sacerdotes Christi facit: that is, whosoever contemneth the bishops, and forsaking the priests of God pnsumeth to set up another altar, to make an other prayer in an unlawful tongue, to ꝓphane the truth of our lords sacrifice, with false sacrifices, doth against the priests of God: but our heretics have pnsumed in despite of all the bishops, and priests of God, to set up a new altar, yea rather to destroy all aultres, and set up a new skittish and whyrring table, never sure settled in one place, but removable, from Corner to corner, from chancel to Bellfrey: They have presumed to make an other kind of prayer in an unlawful tongue, they have presumed to profane the truth of our lords sacrifice, offered in the Mass as he commanded, and the Catholic church hath ever taught, for the quick and the dead, The english communion. by their single communion, which is nothing, but a bore thanks giving, and naked sign with a piece of bread, and reading certain places of scripture as it were an history: Therefore they have done against the priests of God, and so be not in the church, but traitors to the church, spurners against the ordinance of God, enemies of the altars, rebels against the sacrifice of Christ, disobedient servants, and wicked children. If you deny the minor proposition, and say that you have not contemned the bishops, and forsaken the priests of God etc. yower own doings shall condemn you. The bishop of Rome contemned . For first you have contemned, and forsaken the bishop of Rome Peter's successor and Christ's vicar on earth, the ruler of the house of God, the heir of the Apostles, the head of the universal church, called to that vocation by God. You have forsaken yower own lawful bishops, and pastors, Religion changed without consent of the bishops. you have altered the state of religion without their consent, you have brought in a new kind of service, never heard of in the catholic church before yower days, and now too rare, for the whole state of Christendom, if it had pleased God not to suffer that horrible plague to light upon us. The case then standing so, that you have forsaken the church of Christ, for exijstis, discessistis. You have go out, ye have departed away, it must needs follow that ye are not Christians nor obedient servants that have Christ for their lord, nor natural children, that have God for their father. For if ye had Christ for yower lord, ye would have his spouse for yower mistress. If you had God for yower father, ye would have the church for yower mother. For Christ and his spouse, is but one body, God and his church one foundation, and pillar of verity. If they will object that they acknowledge one God the father, one God the son, one God the holy ghost, as well as we do, we anwser them with S. Cyprian, That Core, Dathan, Libr. 1. epist. 6 ad Mag. and Abiron acknowledged one God with Moses and Aron, and living in the same law and religion that they did, worshipped God, which is to be adored and worshipped, yet for all that, because they passed their ministery and vocation, and challenged unto themselves licence to sacrifice, Against Aaron the high priest, they were strooken from heaven, and swallowed into the earth a live, and so may they. S. Augustine hath many notable sayings in this sense able to make any man that looketh for favour with God astonnied and a fraied. In one place he saith: If a man be separated from the catholic church, Epist 15. The wrath of God hangeth over all schismatykes. He that breaketh the church denieth Christ. Tract. ● in epist joan. cap. 4. In Psal. 10. He violateth the temple of God that breaketh unity. although he think himself to live commendably, for this only fault, that he is separated from Christianity, he hath not life, but the wrath of God hangeth over him. In another place he saith: He denieth Christ to become in flesh, that breaketh the church, which he assembled. In another place he saith: He breaketh the temple of God that breaketh unity, for he holdeth not the head by which the body and head is joined and compacted together. God is in his holy church which consisteth of many members, doing every one his duty in their vocation, which he breaketh, Whosoever is separated from the catholic society. A terrible case. and worthy to be considered of all that have fallen into schism, that they may see in what miserable state they stand. As for us, we are not to be counted Apostatats, we have not forsaken our faith, we keep that which we received from the beginning. Non exivimus, non discessimus, mansimus apud eos qui fuerunt ex nobis. We have not go out: we have not flitted away: we have remained with them, who were of us: we have not broken the unity of his church, but as the church hath ever taught, so we hold: we refuse not the lords prayer, but your schismatical service, your single communion, and Genevian lords prayer commonly called doctor Coxes, Pater noster with such additions, as are neither to be found in the vi. of Mathewe, nor xi. of S. Luke, this we detest, this is not of God. This is not of Christ. This is not of the holy Ghost, but of your fancies, your dottages, and your dreams. Now as concerning your other imagination, that Luther should be no heretic, Calf. because Ephrem said: the cross is an expeller of heresy. For that he is always pictured full devoutly kneeling before the cross, Fol 143. a. and no Papist had the sign of the cross in more reverence than he, Mart. you must restrain your position, or fall into a lie. For he hath not always been portrayted kneeling full devoutly before a cross. Myself have seen his picture without any cross, before him: and many mo beside, that travail into Germany. Luther and his nun payncted together . In some places ye may see in steed of a cross his sweet heart dame Katerin bore a nun of Nemeck and amorous of Wittenberg, pictured with him: but if it were so, for you to gather of the painter's fancy an argument of no heresy in Luther, was a marvelous policy, much like the devise of the knight of the order. For your wit, if you were joined in commission with him, we should have a pack full of policies able to be compared with Machevell. But if a man should oppose you, how would your mastership prove that no catholic had the sign of the cross in more reverence than Luther? Surely very hardly: if you can, save your small honesty, from an impudent lie: and in your next reply make some demonstration of it. In the mean time it shall run with the rest: for as friar Luther was an enemy to all good religion, and ceremonies of the church, so was he also to images and the sign of the cross, Luther an enemy to the cross and images. and where he blamed Carolostadius archdeacon of Wittenberg for plucking down of images in his absence, it was not for that he misliked, the doying of it, but because he was not the principal author of it. That saying of holy Ephrem: Crux est haeresium expulsatrix, The cross is an expeller of heresy, is true in his sense. For it bringeth to all that can abide the sight of it, and have holy meditations of Christ's passion, such thoughts of humility, and obedience, that singularity can have no place, nor pride prevail. If the devil tempt any with rebellion, against the church, by sight of that it cometh or at the jest it may come the sooner to his mind: How Christ was obedient to his father even to death, Good thoughts may come to our minds by 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 cross. 〈◊〉 2. 1. Cor. 2. yea death of the cross. If he tempt him with vain glory, and would make him conceive such opinion of himself, that he passeth all other in knowledge, and learning, by sight of the cross, the humility of Christ so cometh so to his mind, that he resisteth the temptation, and saith: I think myself to know nothing, but jesus Christ and him crucified: and in very deed if Luther had locked upon the cross in such sort, heresy that cometh of singularit e and pride could never have prevailed against him and his. For it would have taught him humility and obedience, mothers of all virtue: but that the devil could not a bide. And therefore made him run out of his cloister and disobey the general of his order, contemn the Pope's Legate, set nought by the Emperor, and rail most wickedly against the bishop and see of Rome, and to fall to great disorder as the sequel hath tried. Touching justinians' constitution for crosses to be borne at the singing or saying of the litanie, M. Calfhil thinketh himself not bound to follow his order in religion, Fol. 143. a but in civil cases, and some matters of correction: ut quod pederastis virilia confestim exsecari voluit, he doth gladly admitteth, and we do not refuse. Other constitutions he hath also in civil cases and matters of correction, justinians' laws of correction. as that every man that contracteth any unlawful marriadg contrary to the law of nature, should lose all his goods and dignities, and he sent into banishment, and be bodily punished, if he were a poor gnaw: what say your married monukes to that? That the blasphemous man should be put to death, how do you sanfie that? That the houses where heretics keep their conventicles should be confiscated and appropriated to the church, how like you that M. Calf? and the heretics themselves abide the punishment of the law, what say you that? Consti. 109. Item that heretics should bear no office in the common weal. Admit ye that? And that we should not be ignorant who be heretics, he saith: All they be heretics that be not members of the holy catholic, and Apostolic church of God, in which all holy bishops and patriarchs of the world, Who be heretics and the bishops under them preach the Apostolic faith and tradition. But these constitutions are to sharp, and therefore M, Calfhi did wisey in admitting justinians' laws but in some civil cases and matters of correction. For he knew, if all were admitted he and his should be condemned. If like liberty might be permitted every where, and each man refuse the laws of the Emperors, and princes, and be judged by noon, but such as it pleaseth him to admit, and understand at his own pleasure, murders, rovers, church robers, lechers, heretics and pirates had purchased themselves great privilege, and the virtuous and godly great damage and hindrance. Wherefore it must not be so. Every man may not admit, and refuse what him listeth: laws once established must have their force, unless by like authority they be abrogated, or otherwise grown out of use. And albeit the laws of justinian, bind not us in England in all points because they were never generally received, in our realm being an Island and kingdom of itself, yet do they declare the use and manner of all Christendom in his time, and condemn all heretics of vanity, in condemning the whole world, and bragging that they follow the primitive church, and craking of antiquity: whereas in this point, all the world may see that they serve from the use of the primitive church and all antiquity. Now to come to holy Augustine our Apostle, M. Calf. Augustin. our Apostle. because he will not acknowledge that we English men received our faith and religion from Rome, and S. Gregory Bishop of that see, by Augustine and his companions, Fol. 143. a. b. Calf. telleth us that ever sithence the time of Eleutherius of Rome and Lucius of England, Christianity hath been received, and never failed amongst us: and that Ethelbert king of kent was meetly well instructed in the faith by a good wife, that come out of France and a faithful hisshop that attended upon her. How so ever it be if it come from Eleutherius in king Lucius days, it come from Rome. For Eleutherius was pope of Rome. Mart. If it come be Ethelbert's wife, and the faithful bishop that was sent with her out of France, it come from Rome. M Calf. forced to confess that we received our faith from Rome For France received the faith from Rome, and the French kings daughter and bishop that attended upon her, coming out of France had no other faith, nor laboured to plant any other faith than they received from Rome. So which way so ever he turneth, the truth forceth him to say that we received our faith from Rome. But albeit the Britons received the faith in king Lucius days, and Ethelbert heard of the Christian religion by his wife, that come out of France, yet is there no old history that mentioneth that those parts of England which king Ethelbert and other possessed in that time, generally received and professed the faith of Christ, before Augustine come from Rome. S. Bede testifieth that when he and his companions come to the king in the isle of Tenede, King Ethelbert's words to S Augustine our Apostle. Lib. 1. ca 25. histo. Angl. Cap. 26. Fol. 143. b he said unto them, Yove give us fair words and promises: but yet for that they are strange, and unknown unto me, I can not rashly assent unto them, forsaking that ancient religion which this long time both I and my people have observed. By which it appeareth that nor the king, nor his people were instructed in the faith of Christ before Augustine come and preached. In the next chapter Bede saith: They began to express the very Apostolic order of living of the primitive church, serving God in continual praying, watching, and preaching the word of life, to as many as they could. And if they did follow the order of the primitive church, and preach the word of life, they did not plant superstition in place of idolatry, as M. Calf. saith: For the word of life is not superstition, M. Calf. nor the order of the primitive church a way to induce men unto it, and the word of life they did preach and observe the order of the primitive church, as Bede saith, more worthy of credit than ten hundred Galfrides'. Ibidem . That holy Augustine should labour of an ambitious proud heart to pervert true religion, it is a malicious slander. For he was a man of an humble, and meek spirit, far from all haftines and pride. His doings witness, and stories testify, that his coming was to plant true religion, and not to pervert any. All that you have to object against him is that he required subjection of the mounkes of Bangor, Augustine's requests, to the mounkes of Bangor thought unlawful by M. Calf. that he would have enjoined them to be come servitors in preaching of the Gospel, to their mortal enemies the Saxons, and that he would have them keep Ester as the church of Rome did, and use their ceremonies in ministration of baptism. Now whither he that requireth these things of others, mindeth to pervert true religion, it is easy to be judged. If those seven bishops, with their archbishop and mounkes of Bangor had been faithful, and learned prelates (as you say) they would have considered, as reason and learning taught them, that the church of Rome was the rote and mother of all churches, sithence the Apostles time: and that the bishop of that see, is head and chief governor universally over all churches, and that Augustine being appointed and sent, as a Legate from that see, required their obedience to that head and chief bishop, and not unto himself, as you may see in S. Bede: Libr. 1. cap 27. and that considered, knowing that humility is a godly virtue, and obedience a sweet sacrifice, it had been their duty rather meekly to have yielded, than stubbornly to have resisted. S. Augustine in this behalf, did but his duty, as a faithful ambassador, would do for his prince in like case. And they in repining showed very little love to unity and charity, and jest of all to perfect Christianity, when they refused to be servitors in preaching the Gospel to their mortal enemies the Saxons. For Alas what true Christian man, knowing that Christ hath commanded us, to love our enemies, and that he himself loved us so tenderly, when we were his enemies, that he gave himself to death upon the cross for us, will refuse the preaching of his gospel to a whole nation, because they are his enemies? 1. Cor. 1●. Charity is patiented: gentle, it envieth not: it doth nothing wickedly: it is not puffed up, it is not ambitious, it seeketh not her own commodity: it is not provoked: it thinketh not evil: it reioiseth not over iniquity: It is glad with the truth, and suffereth all things. and certes if there had been any sparkle of Christian charity in those men, Little piety or Charity in the mounke of Bangor that M. Calf. praiseth so much. jacob. 5. they would never have refused to preach the Gospel, to the whole nation under pretence of enmity, knowing that he that maketh a sinner turn away from the error of his way, shall save his soul from death, and covereth a multitude of sins. Wherefore in refusing this condition (if there were nothing else) they showed themselves nor faithful, nor learned prelates, nor scarce good Christians. And if you had devised an argument to make an invective against them, you could have invented no better than this. As for the keeping of Ester, and baptizing after the manner of the church of Rome, if they were but trifles (as you say) then were they very triflers that would resist the authority of that church, from which they received their faith, in trifles. If they were matters of great importance, Euseb lib. 5 cap 23. histo. Nicepho. lib. 4 c 22 then were they not lovers of unity nor desirous to follow orders received by general and ꝓuincial counsels, under Victor at Rome, under Narcissus at Jerusalem under Irenaeus in France, under Palmas in Pontus, under Bachilus at Corinth, and other bishops in other countries: but declared themselves willinger to follow the schismatics of the East, than Rome, Africa, Italy, Egipte, Spain, France, Lybia, Cilicia, and all other Catholic churches of the west. Which savoured little of the spirit of God. Fol 143. b Calf . That Ethelbert should stir up Ethelfrede, and the Saxon kings against the Britons, and mounkes of Bangor, partly in Austin's quarrel, and partly of an old grudge of his own, It hath no colour of truth, Mart. yea it is a most slanderoous lie. For Ethelbert being converted from idolatry, and Christened, did seek, Beda lib 1 cap. 32. Ecclesiast. hist Ang. and maintain the honour of God, as appeareth by the Epistle of S. Gregory sent unto him. And would he seeking and maintaining the honour of God, either bore malice and rancour in his heart, or stir idolaters against the religious that had professed Christ? It is not credible. S. Bede reporteth that they were plagued by the secret working of God's judgement, because they refused and despised the wholesome counsel of perpetual life, Lib 2 ca 2 hist. Ang. offered unto them, which is more likelier, than Galfrides' tale. And if it might have stood with the reverence of your worship and honour of your person to have believed a received author, before an unlearned friar, and remembered what is spoken in commendation of Augustine, by S. Gregory himself you would never have judged him to be ambitious, nor have imputed the murder of those mounkes, to his ambition, who died long before that murder was committed. But authority prevaileth little with you, I perceive. He that speaketh worst of the Catholics, is credited before the best, that writeth the true histories. It should not be so. The ancienter and worthier each writer is, So aught his credit to be be preferred amongst the wise. Where you note in the margin, that we differ from Augustine the mounke in ceremonies, because, Fol 144. b Calf. he brought but a bore cross, and we have not only a cross, but also a crucifix graved thereon, he carried a picture painted in a table, we have the same carved and embossed, Mart. I marvel that you are not ashamed, to infarce such childish toys in your writings. What if their cross had no image of Christ graved on it? What if they coming a thousand miles and more brought but a little table with the image of Christ painted in it? Will it follow that they misliked crosses having the image of Christ engraved? or allowed not images carved and embossed? your lodgick faileth, if you think that a good consequent. If a man should say, you, and your felloe protestants differre from the Apostles, and being demanded why, Answered: The Apostles forsook all that they had, you keep all that you have, The protestats vary from the Apostles. they went bore foot and in sheeps skins, you go some in buskins, some in great breeches, some in woosteades, some in chamletts, some in silks, some in unshorn velvet, they had no benefices, nor prebends, you have both benefices, and prebends, some four, some five and so forth: They went from city to city a foot, if you go from city to city, most commonly you ride: when they went to any town to preach, they received no money for sermons, you unless you may have money, in some places will make no sermons, yea ye do obtrude yourselves to have the preferment of funeral sermons and such like. They required no benevolence of their clergy, you, or at the least, some of you have required benevolences of the clergy, they fasted often, you very seldom, they prayed devoutly, you very coldly, they lodged hardly, you very delicately, they lived continently, you very licentiously, if I say a man should make such an answer, to the said question, would you not reckon him but a Calf. You as I dare say: And so do we you for the other. It is manifest that the church in those days, had images, engraved, carved, and embossed, and as we received the faith from the church of Rome: So in time, we received images also with the church of Rome. And although he brought noon that were carved nor embossed, Augustine never misliked carved and embossed images. yet doth it not argue that he condemned those that were carved and embossed. In all his preachings, in all the story that Bede mentioneth, there is no word that employeth any discontentation or misliking with carved and embossed images. Wherefore you may scrape out that note, and note in your margin that you and yours differ, from the Apostles aswell in manners as in tyme. For this is more meater for that place. Fol. 144. Calf . Where you say, that if Augustine's fact coming to them that never heard of Christ and bringing a cross, and image of Christ, to feed them, that lending him their ears, he might instruct their hearts, might he excused by the state and condition of the country, yet can not we in our cross carrying have the like pretence, and therefore aught not to use the like example, Mart. I marvel that you forgot to prove it by scripture, council or ancient father, according to the large promise of your glorious title in the beginning of your book. Your bore assertion deserveth no credit. If I should desire you to make good this argument. S. Augustine coming to an idolatrous nation that never heard of Christ, had a good pretence to use the cross and image of Christ, but the papists in their cross carrying have not the like pretence, ergo they aught not to use the like example, it should be a long time before you would justify it. If one should say we have not occasion, to use like diligence in preaching as he used, for the conversion of infidels to the faith, Ergo, we aught no use the like example of diligence in preaching, for the preserving of Christian men in the faith, you would think it no sound reason. The like sentence may you give of your own. How S. Augustine used the cross and how we use it . For they are like. S. Augustine used it as a mean to bring infidels to the faith, we to keep Christians in the faith, he ta win men's hearts by sight of it, we to continue these that are won in perpetual memory of it: he to bring men from idolatry, we to keep them out of idolatry. He to make them fix their minds on Christ that never heard of Christ: we to make them that have fixed their hearts in Christ, never to remove their thoughts from Christ. Wherefore albeit we have not (thanks be to God) like pretence to use the cross, as S. Augustine did, yet is there no inconvenience, nor let, but that we may follow his example, and use it, as he did. The lack of like pretence may not infer a necessity to refuse old received fashions and customs. another position of yours, is that the popish litanie, Calf. Fol. 145. a virgin Mary pray for us is idolatrous, but where be your scriptures councils and fathers to prove it? Mart. Forgot you your promise so soon? That was a soul oversight. Hereafter or promise' less, or perform more. If you can say no more for it, than Luther Calvin, and the Magdeburgenses have done, you may go lay up your harp with blind Browne. All the wisdom in your head will never prove it to be against scripture, council, or ancient father. Your applying that saying of Tertullian Vos religiosi, Fol. 145. a Calf. etc. you devout persons seek for salvation where it is not to be found, ye ask it of them that can not give it, omitting him in whose hands it is, nor content with this, ye beaten down those Christians which know to ask health, which also be able to obtain it, Mart. because they know how to ask it etc. to the Christians, which he spoke by an irony to the Gentiles, How we seek aid of Saints. is very slanderoous and false. For we seek for salvation no where, but of God, where it is to be found. We ask it of noon, but of him that is able to give it: we omit not him in whose hands it is. We say not Mary have mercy upon us: Peter deliver us, Paul hear us, but lord have mercy upon us, deliver us o Christ, The holy fathers prayed to Saints. Ser. de lau dibus Mart. here us o most merciful father. When we say Mary pray for us, Peter pray for us, Paul pray for us, we seek not aid of Mary, Peter, and Paul, but of God, by mean of their prayers, and in so doing we have the examples of the holy fathers to support us. Holy Ephrem prayed in this sort to the holy martyrs: De laudibus Paul. O ye most blessed men, o ye most glorious martyrs of God, help me miserable man with your prayer. S. Hierome prayed thus to Paula when she was dead: Far well o Paula, and with they prayers, help the old age of him that loved the. S. Augustine prayed to all saints in this manner: Orate omnia agmina sanctorum & universi coetus beatorum, Lib. medita. cap. 24. etc. O all ye companies of saints and universal fellowship of the blessed pray that we assisted with your prayers and merits may deserve to come to the haven of salvation, with a whole ship, and sound merchandise. Prudentius prayed to S. Laurence in this wise: Lib. de coro. Mart. O thou honourable and worthy servant of Christ, here a rude poet confessing the offences of his heart. Besides this, we have the pillar and foundation of truth, the catholic church (I mean) to support us. She hath taught us to pray in this wise, The catholic church teacheth us to pray to Saints. Marry mother of God pray for us, Peter pray for us, Paul pray for us, O all ye blessed companies of saints pray for us. By which we learn that it is no derogation, to the honour of God so to pray. They were, all holy and learned men well seen in the scriptures and true interpretation of them, they were in life and conversation godly and virtuous, not letting the fear of God depart from their eyes: if it had been against scripture, by their great learning they would have espied it, and if they had once espied it, for fear of God's displeasure, they would never have used it, nor the Catholic church these many hundred years continued it. If I witted ye were ignorant, that saints living in immortal glory in heaven pray for us, besides those places recited, I would recite for your sake certain out of S. a Lib. 1. epist. 1. de habi. virg. Cyprian, b Serm. de 40. Mart. Basile, c Ho. 41 in Genes. In Psal. 50 homil. 2. In Matth. home 27. Chrysostom, d Lib 22. de civit. Dei cap. 9 & 10. Tract. 84. in joan. Lib. 4. ca 28. divin. institut. Calf. Mart. Augustine, and diverse others, but if you be as, you would seem, expert or conversant in the ancient fathers, you find this mentioned so often, that you need not an Eubulus, to put you in mind of it. Where you say that Papists are superstitious, because Lactantius, writing against the gentils, called them superstitious, who kept the memory of the dead, and worshipped their father's images, as their household Gods, and honoured the dead in steed of God's, we tell you, that we Papists keeping the memory of the blessed virgin Mary, Peter and Paul, and calling upon them and praying to them and other saints, do not retain the memory of the dead nor call upon the dead, nor pray unto the dead. Mary is a live, Peter is a live, Paul is a live, and all the holy saints be a live. Matt. 22. Luc. 20. Remember you not that God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and jacob? He is not the God of the dead but of the live, for all live unto him? Yy you do, why say you that we ratayning the blessed memory of Saints, retain the memory of the dead? Is not the blessed virgin Mary in heaven? Is not Peter in heaven? It not Paul in heaven? Are not all the saints and blessed martyrs in heaven? And be they that are in heaven with God, dead with you M. Calf? Blasphemy . What horrible blaspheme is this? Where is your sight in scripture, non est Deus mortuorum, sed vivorum, he is not God of the dead, but of the living? Can you being a reader daily occupied in scripture forget so manifest a place, and remember to slander your neighbour, with no less crime than superstition? Alas what oversight was that? While you laboured to prove us superstitious, with the gentils, you have showed yourself more slanderous, and foolish than many of the wicked heathens: in so much that we may in manner say with the Prophet Ezechiele: Cap. 18. because he hath slandered, and done injury to his brother, and wrought wickedness in the midst of the people, behold he is dead in his own iniquity. You are taken in the trap that you laid for another. Fol. 146. a The other note in the next Margin, That the material cross is no ensign of Christ, hath simple proof. The sentence alleged out of Carolus magnus book against images is noon of his: or if it be, show us some council or ancient father, or allowed writer that fathered that book upon that worthy Emperor. If you can not, deceive not yourself, and the world with a false fable. Let it be Eliphili the man in the moans book, made by Calvin or Illyricus or some such peevish protestant, and printed the first time so suspiciously without any printer mentioned, either in the beginning or in the end, and without mention of the place where it was first found, that every man of mean experience may well see, it was noon of his. But to proceed, Acto. 4. Nica●. 2. M. Calfhil understanding that the place alleged out of the seventh general council, proved plainly, that procession with the cross was used in Caesarea a notable city of Palestine, had no shift to put it away, but was driven to run to a common place, Calf. and say that a superstitious instrument was meetest to serve such a superstitious effect: but that the cross should be a superstitious instrument, Mart. or the translating of relics a like effect he proveth not, according to his promise, neither by scripture council, nor ancient father, but saith, that Moses' body was buried in a valley by an angel no man knoweth where: Calf. Fol. 146. b Fol. 147. a and that if the translating of dead bodies had made either for the glory of God, or commodity of man, the relics of such a one as Moses was, should not have been hidden. Mart. And that he proveth not neither, nor is able if he would. For what if Moses was the greatest of all prophets, The not translating of Moses' bones, no cause, why the translating of other saints bodies should not be permitted. Exod. 33. Rom. 9 faithful in all God● house, to whom God spoke mouth to mouth? was it necessary therefore that his body, should be shrined or his bones carried in procession, or Chapel erected for him? Or because it pleased not God to have his bones translated, was not the translating of other holy martyrs bones, for the glory of God and commodity of man? what reason is this? did not God say, Miserebor cui voluero, & clemens ero in quem mihi placuerit? I will have mercy upon whom I list, and be gentle to whom it pleaseth me? declaring that if it be his blessed will to have this or that done, it shallbe done, and if it be not his will, it shall not be done? He loved jacob and hated Esau, was there therefore iniquity with God? Not: God forbidden: In like manner it was not God's pleasure that Moses' body should be revealed and translated, as S. Peter's and S. Paul's and other apostles and martyrs were. Is the translating of Saints bodies therefore, Rom 9 nor for the honour of God, nor commodity of man? What reason is there in this? hath not the potmaker as S. Paul saith, power to make one vessel, to honour and an other for reꝓche? May he not transfer Peter's bones, and let Moses alone? May he not make Paul's body to be honoured, and josephs' obscured? S. Stephens shrined, and Samuel's interred? I think you will not deny it. And if he being lord of all may do it, as it pleaseth his wisdom best, then is the letting of one obscure and unknown no cause why the translating of an other should be either against the glory of God or the commodity of man. Vigilantius a famous heretic was in like error, Our heretics agreed with Vigilantiꝰ. that relics of saints, and translating their bodies, was not sitting for the glory of God, and therefore he accounted such as worshipped their relics, or translated them, superstitious and wicked. But S Hierome said unto him. Hier. cont. Vigilant. If they are wicked and ungodly who worship the relics of Martyrs, then is Constantine the Emperor wicked and ungodly, who translated the holy relics of S. Andrew, S. Luke and Timothe to Constantinople, at which the devils rore, and the inhabiters of Vigilantius do confess that they feel their presence? The devils cry at the presence of Saints relics. And now also is Arcadius who translated the bones of Samuel a long time after out of jury, into Thracia, to be counted a wicked and ungodly man. All bishops are not only not to be counted wicked and ungodly, but very fools, who have carried in a silken cloth, and golden case, a vile thing, and dissolved Ashes. The people of all the churches that met the holy relics, and received them with such great joy, as though they saw the prophet present and alive, were very fools: which is very absurd to say or think. Eusebius reporteth that the Christians gathered up Policarpes burnt bones, and laid them up, preciosissimis gemmis chariora, Lib 4 cap. 15. histo. & omni auro probabiliora per ignem facta, more dearer than the most precious pearls that were, and made by the fire more pure than all gold. And if it had been neither for the glory of God, nor for the commodity of man, would the Christians among the midst of the gentiles either have begged Policarpe his body, either have gathered up his bones: or have thought them more precious than the most precious pearls that were? It is not credible. Calf. And where M. Calf. thinketh that they made a right good excuse, that denying the body of Polycarpe, said it should not be delivered, Ne Christo relicto hunc. colere inciperent, lest Christ forsaken, they should begin to serve him, Mart. You may understand good people that he hath such malice against the church, and such despite against the reverend ceremonies of the Christians, The Policy of the devil commended by M. Calf. and relics of saints, that he had rather commend the policy of the devil, and practise of the jews, then think reverendly with Christ's catholic church of saints, and their relics. For the excuse why Polycarpus body should not be delivered to the Christians to be buried, was devised by the devil, and made by the wicked jews, enemies to Christ, and all Christian religion: and yet his wisdom thinketh they made a right good excuse: as though there were any goodness in the devil, or hope that he and his should mean well to the Christians. The excuse which M. Calf. thinketh right good devised by the devil and uttered by the jews . That you may think this no feigned matter, and try more spedilie what spirit ruleth in him, I will tell you what Eusebius sayeth of this matter, in the fourth book, and xv. chapter of his ecclesiastical history. When Polycarpus was thrust through with a sword, he saith: Ille aemulus totius boni, & adversarius justorum, postquam vidit, etc. That enuier of all goodness and enemy of all just men, after he saw that he was crowned both for the glory of martyrdom, and virtues of his notable life, and had got the rewards of immortality by death, he began to do as much as he could, Polycarpe crowned for good works. that no man should give the Christians his relics to burial, if they desired them. Whereupon Nicetas Herod's father, and brother to Dalcas, were earnestly provoked to go unto the judge, and desire him that he would not give the body to be buried, lest peradventure (quoth he) the Christians forsaking him that is crucified, Nicetas Herodes father. begin to woorshipe this man. These are Eusebius words. Here you see plainly, that the grave counselor, and politic practiser, who laboured that Polycarps body should no be buried, was Satan, the enemy of all goodness and good men. You see that the promoter of the cause, that went to the judge and required that it might not be buried, was a wicked jew, yea herod's father. And yeat M. Calf. yower reader and preacher, thinketh this a right good excuse. Are not you happy that hear him preach with authority, that thinketh that right good that was devised by the devil, enemy of all goodness, and practised by a jew that maligneth Christ and all Christians? May ye not rejoice that you have such a guide to direct yower souls? What shalbe evil with him, if the devils counsel be good? What shalbe unholy if the jews requests against the Christians be holy? What shalbe refused if their advise be admitted? horrible is it to think. Beware therefore good people in time, try the spirits that preach, 1. joan. 4. whither they be of God or no. And if you find that there is no communication between light, and darkness, God and Baal, Christ and the devil, you may see that there is little grace of the holy ghost, Little grace in him that thinketh the devils counsel against the Christians right good. The devil can not abide the relics of Saints. Hom. 5. ad pop. Antioch. ho. 5 de beato job. De S. Babila. or sparkle of God's spirit in him, that likethe the devils counsel, and thinketh that right good for the Christians, which the sworn and deadly enemies of Christ gave in despite of the Christians. But all this is because he will not allow the having of Saints relics. And no marvel. For the devil himself can not abide them, as S. Hierome specified before, and S. Chrisostome plainly affirmeth, saying. I would be in those places where the chains remain, and see the fetters, which the devils fear, and tremble at, and Angels reverence. If I were disbourdened of Ecclesiastical cares, and had a strong body, I would not refuse to take a pilgrimage, that I might see the chains and prison where S. Paul was bound. In an other place he saith. Such is the power of Saints, that the devils can not abide the Shadows and clotheses of them that are alive, and as for them that are dead, they fear their tombs. Whosoever is desirous to see more of Saints relics, let him read Chrisostomes' oration upon the Martyr Babilas, his commentaries upon S. Paul's epistles at the beginning: a Epist. 85 S. Ambrose, b de civit. Dei lib. 22 cap. 8. Serm. 256. de temp. Augustine, c Hom. de S Bladina Eusebius Emissenus, d Serm de S Barlaan Mart. & in Conc. Ma mertis mart. Basill, and all the ancient fathers of the church. There shall he find such evident proofs and auctoririties for the holy relics of Saints, that unless he wilbe blind, and wander after such as think the counsel of the devil, that ca not abide the tombs of the Apostles, and relics of Saints, to be right good, as M. Calf. doth, he can not choose but acknowledge that they are of great virtue and power, by the goodness of God and merits of jesus Christ whose cross they carried, and whose faith they ꝓfessed. Wherefore sing M. Calves. devise, saying that the cross signifieth a candlestick, a cresset, a torch pole, and torch staff, is ꝓued to be foolish and fantastical, sing the laws of justinian dedeclare the use of all Christendom in his time, and although they bind not every man, as emperors laws, yet they show what the order of Christ's church was at that time, which sithence by custom is grown into a law, Seeing the fact of S. Augustine coming in with a cross, and featching in the relics of Anastasius with a cross in like manner, declare that Christian men in those days used the cross in procession, it remaineth that my proofs for having a cross at the singing and saying of litanies be sufficient, and convince, that sing it was the use of the primitive church, continued until our time without any lawful interruption, and never abrogated by any general council, or decree of the head bishop of Christ's catholic church, we Christian men desirous to live in obedience, and follow the steps of the forefathers of the primitive church, aught to continue the same order in singing or saying our litanie, and pray for all estates of men, and especially for the chief governor of his church, ut dominus conseruet eum, vivificet eum, & beatum faciat eum in terra, Psal 40. & non tradat eum in animam inimicorum eius. That our lord may preserve him, give him long life, and make him happy in the earth, and not deliver him to the power and will of his enemies. THAT MANY STRANGE AND WONDERFUL MIRACLES WERE WROUGHT BY THE sign of the Cross. THE EIGHT ARTICLE. THAT M. Calf. thinketh, Fol. 148. b miracles wrought in these latter days to have been wrought ofter by the power of the devil, than by the spirit of God, it is no new thing to be wondered at (good readers) it hath been an old surmise of heathens and heretics. The jews objected to our Saviour Christ that in Beelzebub prince of the devils he did cast out devils. Matt. 12. The Pagans said that he wrought his miracles by magic and inchauntements. Augu. ser. 11. de verbis domini in Mat. Idem li. 21 cap 8. de civit. Dei. In Praefa. Insti. ad Francis. Gall. Reg. Fol. 149. a Calf . The heathens attributed those strange things that were done by the merits of saints, to sorcery. Calvin a wicked Apostata crieth that the miracles of saints are frivolous, ridiculous, vain and false lies, done by Satan that transfigureth himself into the angel of light. In like manner doth M. Calf. here: and further openly protest, that unless I will admit that witches and wisserds must be consulted, that Berecinthia, Esculapius, Hercules, and Proserpina, devils, or wicked spirits in hell must have sacrifice, because by the devil they have done miracles, he will not grant the sign of the cross to be admitted for any miracle, that hath been wrought by it. Mart. M. Calf. like to Pharaoh . For which I may well compare him to Pharaoh who would not believe the true miracles wrought of God by his servants, Moses and Aaron, because he understood that his sorcerers and wisserders of Egipte were able to do the like by incantations and enchantments. The miracles that were done by the cross (as I have alleged) were not done of late years, Miracles done by the sign of the cross, done by the power of God. nor by enchantments, nor by sorcery, nor by the power of the devil. They were done by the power of God, more than a thousand years ago: for brevities sake, consider but two of them with me. When Helena had found the cross, it was laid upon a gentlewoman in Jerusalem that had been long sick. As soon as it touched her, she recovered, and was made hole. Macarius' bishop of Jerusalem, an holy and virtuous man, to discern which was our lords cross, willed all three to be brought unto him, Ruff lib. 1 ca 7. & 8. and said: God shall reveal it unto us. In his prayer he said: Tu domine ostende. Show thou O lord which was the cross, that served to the glory of Christ, that is, on which christ died. She at the touch of our lords cross being revived, began to magnify the power of God. This was a great miracle wrought by the the power of God, at the touch of his cross. The enemies can not deny it. Paulinus in 10. Natali. Foelicis . further at Nola, when the religious house was set on fire, Christ preserved it miraculously, and therefore Paulinus required his people to give thanks to Christ, and praises to almighty God. The mean whereby Christ wrought that miracle, was a splinter of his cross, healed in the fire by the bishop. He said himself: Nec mea vox aut dextra illum, sed vis crucis ignem terruit. Neither my voice, neither my hand, but the power of the cross made the fire cease: By which it is evident that the said miracle was wrought of Christ by a piece of his cross. Besides, the woman that Epiphanius speaketh of, Lib. 1. heres 30. Lib. 22. ca 8. de civit. Dei. was aided by the sign of the cross, and faith. Innocentia that S. Augustine mentioneth, received health by the sign of the cross, and both these miracles were wrought of God by the means of his cross. Epiphanius sayeth plainly: The woman received health, by the sign of the cross and faith. S. Augustine sayeth that Innocentia was admonished in her sleep, to make the sign of the cross upon her breast, and that she was not warned so to do of any evil angel, Innocentia commanded of God to make the sign of the cross. but of God himself, it is easy to be gathered by S. Augustine. She was, foemi na religiosissima, a most godly woman. She turned herself to god with prayer in her extreme necessity, and whiles she prayed, she was heard, and commanded to make the sign of the cross, but by whom I pray you? By the devil, or some evil angel? Not: S. Augustine sayeth: She turned herself to God, she prayed to God, and comforted she was, but by whom M. Calf? By the devil? That were strange, that God should forsake the godly, and the devil help. Christ not hear when we call, as he promised, and the devil be ready to hear, and do good, before we call. This case then standing so, M. Calf. can no more refuse the cross than Christ's doctrine because wounders have been done by conjurers. joan. 14. that these miracles were wrought through the almighty power of God by the cross, should any man refuse the cross, because he findeth in profane histories and other authors false wonders, illusions, and signs wrought by the devil and his angels? by Sorcerers and witches? There is no reason in it, unless we will forsake our faith, and believe noon of Christ's doctrine confirmed with miracles, because we read that the Sorcerers of Egipte, Simon Magus, and other enchanters have wrought great wonders by help of the devil. Christ himself did many miracles whiles he lived on earth: and told his disciples that he that believed in him should do those works, that Christ did. And according to this promiss of Christ, not only the Apostles have wrought more miracles than be expressed in the scripture or acts of the Apostles, but diverse holy men have done strange things, as are reported unto us in old histories, and ancient monuments of the fathers. Now if we in this latter age, shall not believe those miracles that were done of old time, because the like to outward show may be done by the devil, either we must be driven to say that sithence the Apostles time, Absurdities. there were no good men in earth that had faith in Christ or if they had faith, that Christ did not keep his promise, and give them power to work miracles: or if Christ gave them power to work miracles, that the old histories and ancient father's report unto us the deeds of devils and sorcerers, for miracles of Saints and holy men. For certain it is that miracles were done at the first planting of Christ's faith in all nations, and the name of God glorified by wonderful strange things, and some notice made of holy men in writing for the benefit of the posterity. If they must now be but tales, idle fables, and illusions of the devil, and wicked works of sorcerers (as M. Calf. lewdly surmiseth) Alas in what in what case are we? whom shall we believe? The ancient fathers that said, they were true miracles, or new frontick protestants that say they are false illusions? The fathers that said the were done by the power of God? or protetestantes that say they were done by the power of the devil? The fathers that say they were done by holy men? or frontike and Bedlam ministers that think they were done by wicked sorcerers? If we will follow God we must believe our elders, for he sayeth: Deut. 32. God willeth us believe our elders. Ask thy father, and he shall show thee, ask thy elders and they shall tell thee. And when God biddeth me ask my father doth he not bid me believe my father? when he biddeth me ask my elders? doth he not bid me believe my elders? yes verily. Wherefore sing Ruffinus, Epiphanius, Paulinus, and Saint Augustine tell us expressly, that these miracles of the cross were done by God, and Sulpitius Severus, Eusebius, Sozomenus, Orosius, and Eutropius report the like of other, if we will follow the commandment of God, and believe our forefathers, and throughly persuade ourselves that Christ according to his promiss gave those that did believe, power to work miracles, we must (I say) think that these miracles which they have reported unto us were true miracles wrough by God, and not false illusions showed by Satan, especially sing the church who hath authority to discern true miracles from false, hath allowed these records for true, and condemned noon of the said miracles as false. Neither hath M. Calf. any scripture, council, or ancient father that teacheth him to discredit true miracles wrought by God, because some false wonders and illusions are wrought by the devil, or not to admit the sign of the cross, by which God hath done miracles because Sorcerers, wisserders and witches by some enchantments have done strange things. 2. Thess. 2. Fol. 150 a That which he allegeth out of S. Paul that the wicked man shallbe revealed, whose coming is by the working of Satan, with all power and signs, and lying wonders, is to be referred to Antichrist, in the latter end of the world, before whose coming (saith S. Paul) there shalbe discessio, a going away, a separation from Christ, and the unity of his church and See of Rome. The miracles that Epiphanius, Paulinus, Ruffian, and S. Augustine speak of, were done in the primitive church within four hundred years after Christ. The other place of scripture brought out of S. Math. Cap. 7. Fol. 150. a that many shall say in the latter day, Lord, lord, have we not prophesied in thy name, have we not done many miracles, Ho 25. in 7. Matt. Faith only doth not justify. etc. proveth as S. Chrysostom sayeth that, Fides absque operum sanctitate nihil valet, etc. Faith without holiness of works availeth nothing, and that not only faith, but neither the working of miracles itself shall profit him, if he do them without possessions of virtues, and that neither faith, neither miracles shall help if good life assist not. It declareth also that evil men do miracles by the gift of God, which they received to the edifing of Christians and furthering the Gospel: and as Sacraments lack not their virtue and effect, because they are ministered by evil men, so miracles done to the honour of God lack not authority, although they be done by the wicked. The words of S. Augustine, Si Angeli etc. Lib 10 de civit Dei cap. 16. If angels require sacrifice to be done unto them, and work signs with all, and contrary wise some other testify that sacrifice must only be made to God, and yet do no miracles, we must believe these and not them, those I say make nothing against me, for they speak of such as would derogate honour from God, we talk of miracles done to the honour of God, and commanded by God himself. M. Calf. should first have proved that miracles wrought by the sign of the cross, and catholics of old, were as great derogation to God's honour and glory, as the request of an angel, desiring sacrifice to be done unto him, before he had objected this saying of S. Augustine, or the other spoken against the Manichees, Fol. 150. b a cursed kind of heretics, who if they had been able to have done miracles, would have done them to the destroying of Christ's faith, and his Gospel, and not to further any truth, or glorify God. For it runneth against such, and not against us. Fol 190 b Where he sayeth: that wicked spirits lurk in shrines, in roods, in crosses, and images, tell him to his face (good readers) that if he had any sight in the old fathers he would never utter so fond and blasphemous a lie. Ho 7. de Nativit. Machab. Chrysostom telleth us, that devils and wicked spirits which are in deed the captains and masters of thieves, where they see the hodies of glorious martyrs shrined, run away by and by, Lib. uno cont gentle. and flee for fear from that place. Again he writeth that when the body of Babilas was brought to Daphnis where Pithius Apollo, gave oracles, out of a great idol, He made the devil dumb, and impotent, not able to do any thing in the world: and at length, The devils fear the relics of Saints. Hom. 55. in Matt. Quest. 38 ad Anthioch. Daemonem ipsum exegit, drove away the devil himself. For such is the power of saints, that the devils cannot abide so much as the shadows, and garments of those that are a live, and fear the shrines of those that are dead. Besides for the cross he saith that the devil fleeth away whensoever he see it: and so doth Athanasius and diverse other fathers, as I have declared before, which if M. Calf. had foreseen, he would never have been so impudent as to have made so vain an assertion and blasphemous a lie. But we must bear with him: his great zeal infatuateth his little wit. In deed S. Cyprian talking of the vanity of idols writeth: Tract. de vanitate idolorum That devils were in pillars and images of their false gods, and that being there, they gave oracles, and enwrapped truths in falsities, disquieted men in their sleep, distorted their members, took away their health, and such like. Nor Shryns nor roads, nor crosses mentioned in S. Cyprian . As for shrines, roods, or crosses, or working miracles, S. Cyprian speaketh not so much as one word, but to your confusion that think, our miracles to be wrought by the power of the devil, he saith of those wicked spirits that lurked in idols: These wicked spirits adjured by the living God, yield by and by to us, and go away and depart out of the possessed bodies. You may see them yield secretly, at our voice and prayer, to be burned with fire, to cry out, to lament, to vanish away, as the faith of the patient helpeth, or grace of the man that cureth, doth aspire. In like manner Athanasius declareth, Lib. 2. de Incar. that before Christ come, the devils did much molest and trouble men with diverse fantasies and sights, and took up for a dwelling place, fountains, rivers, stocks, and stones, and by vain slyghtes deceived the simple, ●iuels driven away by the sign of the cross. but when Christ was once come, their pomp perished: for man using only the sign of the cross, driveth away all their subtility. And for more evident proof of the virtue of the cross, he saith: Let him come hither that seeketh to learn experience of these things, to wit, of the devils pomp, of deceith of enchantment, and wonders of sorcery, The virtue of the cross. utatur signo ut illi dicunt ridiculae crucis: Let him use the sign of the foolish cross (as they say) naming only Christ, he shall see the devils to be put to flight by it, soothesaying to cease, magic and poisoning destroyed. If the devils fear the cross and be put to flight, and driven away with the cross, Our miracles not to be ascribed to Satan and witches. then do they not lurk in crosses: if magic, inchauntements and sorcery be destroyed by the cross, and good men calling upon Christ, and his holy name, then are not their miracles, to be ascribed, to the working of Satan, witches, and wissers. Athanasius to prove that miracles were not done by a dead man, as the gentils cavilled, used this reason: Virtues wrought by the sign of the cross. If by the sign of the cross all magical art is driven away, all poisoning is taken away, all idols forsaken, all sensual pleasure stayed, and all men made look up from earth to heaven, Who can say that Christ doing such things, is but a dead man? In like manner may I say, if the devils and wicked spirits tremble and quake at the shrines of martyrs, if they complain of their presence, flee away at the sight of the cross, and vanish away when it is in presence, who can think that they lurk in shrines, crosses, or images? Who can think that miracles wrought by the sign of the cross were wrought by the devil? Noon but such as have forsaken the church and must seek vile shifts to colour heresy, and further the work of the devil. As for this position of his, Fol 150 a Calf. That it is not a sufficient proof to make a thing good, to say that miracles were wrought by it, Mart. I would feign learn what he meaneth by this word (make:) if he taketh it to make, as the apothecary maketh his confection, and goldsmith a ring I will not contend: True miracles done by a thing, declare the thing to be good. Matt. 9 Luc. 6. Mar 8. Act 19 Euse. li. 7. cap 14 histor lib. 6. cap 41. Tripart. but if by that word (make) he meaneth to declare consider with me a while gentle reader, how little truth it hath. Christ wrought miracles by his divine power in earth: were not those miracles a sufficient ꝓufe to make us believe, that his power was of God? The hem of Christ's coat cured a woman of a bloody flix. Was it not a sufficient proof to make us believe, that the hem of Christ's cote was holy? S. Paul's Napkins healed diseases, was not that healing a sufficient ꝓufe to make us think that those napkins, had a virtue by touching his body? the herb that growed at the foot of our saviours image in Caesarea Philippi, did many strange cures, in so much that it was called medicamentum omnium passionum & aegritudinum, a medicine of all passions and sores: was it not a sufficient proof to declare that herb to be good? In like manner God wrought diverse miracles, by the coats, napkins, August. lib. 22. Cap 8. de civit. Dei. Fol. 150 a Calf. M Calves miracles. ashes of martyrs, and sign of his cross, Is not this a sufficient proof to decare that the coats, napkins, and ashes of Martyrs and sign of the cross be good? Not quoth M. Calf. God doth abhor adultery, yet by the act of it, he suffereth a miracle to be done etc. God is offended with theft, yet doth he suffer stolen bread to feed us, which is only the power of his secret and miraculous working, Now if you gather, that the use of the cross is commendable, because of miracles done, by the same reason the adulterer and thief may defend and maintain their unlawful doings, because as great or greater miracles are wrought by them. Mart. Is not this a worthy Paradox for so profound a divine? But in what, scripture council or father doth he read that a miracle is wrought by adultery and stolen bread? Is the begetting of a child either in lawful matrimony (which God ordaineth) either in adultery (which he abhorreth) or the feeding of a man with stolen bread any more miraculous than all other ordinary and common works of nature are? Be they not both done by the common course of nature such as in all ages, in all countries have been done from the beginning, and may continue to the world's end? Yes verily: and yet no miracles, otherwise than the generation of all other creatures, and the feading of birds in the air, and beasts in the field. When I spoke of miracles, I spoke of such as were far passing the capacity of man, and common course of nature. I spoke of such as were wrought by the mighty power of God contrary to all nature, as the examples may particularly declare. And M. Calf. to make silly souls believe that a thing is not commendable because of Miracles done by it, varieth grossly in his answer. Fol. 150. a How M. Calf. varieth in his answer . For where every wise man should frame his answer, to the question, and reason, Secundum subiectan materiam, according to the matter that is treated, he fleeth from that: and where mention was made of miracles done above the common course of nature, he telleth us of such as were done by the common course of nature. And where mention was made of miracles done through the mighty power of God, to his honour and glory by the cross, he telleth us of miracles done by adultery and theft to his great dishonour, which is extra oleas, far wide from the purpose God knoweth. Miracles done through the omnipotency of God for the advancement of his glory, are a sufficient proof, to declare that the thing by which (as a mean) those miracles were done is commendable, as I proved before. Miracles done by heretics not able to commend a thing . Wounders and signs done by adulterers, and thieves, by sorcerers, and enchanters, by heretics and Apostatats, to the dishonour of God, and subversion of his faith, seem they never so great, are not able to make the thing commendable, whereby they work their miracles. Neither can the adulterer and thief defend their unlawful doings, because great miracles by wrought by them, as we can defend the cross because miracles were wrought by it, unless they or some new divine for them, can prove, that adultery and theft is as good as the cross of Christ, Three reasons of M. Calves why miracles ●ake not for the cross. or that the adulterers and thieves were commanded to commit adultery and theft, as we can show that men and women were commanded to use the cross, and wrought in deed true miracles by it. Which sing you deny, and bring three reasons why miracles make not for the cross, I will first examine your reasons, and then consider your answers to the authorities, that prove miracles to have been wrought by the sign of cross. Before you bring your three reasons you ask this question, why the dirt of the street (sing Christ wrought a miracle by it) should not as well be honoured as the cross of the altar? A question of M. Calves. Fol. 151. a To which a brief answer may serve: It is a dirty question, meet for a dirty divine. The answer . The cross was an instrument by which all the world was saved, the dirt a mean by which one only man was healed. The Cross a lively representation of Christ's death. The dirt but a memory of one man's health. The cross effectuous ever sithence. The dirt never effectuous but then. The cross commanded of God to be made and used, by divers revelations from heaven. The dirt never mentioned to any such purpose, nor of God, angel, nor man. The like may be said to that which you talk of Moses' bush, Fol. 158. a. b. Aaron's rood, the wood of Marach, the brazen Serpent, the water out of the rock, Gedeons' fleece, Samson's jaw bone, Elias Cloak, Naaman's washing, the hem of Christ's garment, the shadow of S. Peter, Napkins of S. Paul, and such like. Fol. 151. a The first reason. Calf . The first of yower reasons is made by this interrogation, why should not such external means as Christ and his Apostles used, and the scripture mentioneth, be had in admiration, rather than the idle devise of man, of the which there is no lawful precedent, If any external means whereby strange wonders have come to pass, Mart. be to be had in admiration? For answer we say, that it is most reasonable that all such external means as Christ and his Apostles used, and the scripture mentioneth be had in admiration so far forth as is beautiful for us, rather than the idle devise of man whereof there is no lawful precedent. And with all we tell you that the cross is no idle devise of man, The cross no idle devise of man. but a doctrine of the holy Ghost, and tradition of the Apostles. For which we have lawful precedents and sufficient record. This to yower interrogation set out for a reason may suffice▪ until you confirm by scriptures councils, and fathers, that the cross is an idle devise of man, whereof there is no lawful precedent. The second reason is this: Fol. 151. a The 2. reason. Calf. If miracles were done by the sign of the cross, yet were they not done only by the sign of the cross, and therefore the cross only should not according (to my treatise) without the rest be magnified. In deed M. Calf. Christ worketh all miracles: Mart. Christ healed the sick woman at Jerusalem: Christ preserved the fair damsel from rape in Syciria: Christ preserved the religious house from burning in Nola: Christ healed Innocentia of her canker in Carthage: but quibus medijs, by what means? by faith, prayer, and sign of the Cross: and as I find the stories in the authors so do I report them in my treatise, and not say they were done as you falsely imagine, by the cross only, without Christ and faith in his passion, nor conclude that the Cross without the rest should be magnified, as you heathenishly imagine, and make silly souls believe. The third reason is this. Fol. 151. a The 3. reason. Calf. If it were true that such miracles were done by the sign of the cross, yet this can be no reason why the cross should now be had in estimation, unless you will have all means and instruments of wonders heretofore wrought, as the hem of Christ's garment, the spittle and the clay, the shadow of Peter, and Napkins of S. Paul to be likewise honoured and esteemed of us? Mart. If you had proved by scripture, council, or father, that we can not worship the cross and honour it, unless we honour and worship the hem of Christ's, garment, spittle, and clay, Shadow of S. Peter, and Napkins of S. Paul, this last reason of yowers, should have had some colour of reason, but sing you assure it only without any reason, I will count it, but a vain assertion. A captain may be rewarded although every soldier be not rewarded . I beseek you may not a captain that hath gotten a great victory be rewarded of his prince unless all the petty captains and soldiers be rewarded also? May not the Maior of London be privileged to wear a collar of gold, unless every citizen be licenced to wear the like? May not some hot puritanes of the new clergy be dispensed with for wearing of a long gown, square cap, and satin tippet, unless all be dispensed with all? I think you will gladly subscribe to these: and if the foresaid be lawful, why may not the cross of Christ be honoured, The cross may be worshipped although other instruments of Christ's death be not worshipped. worshipped, and esteemed, unless all other means and instruments heretofore wrought, be esteemed of us? Show yower reason to the contrary in yower next reply. In the mean time understand that we honour, worship, and esteem the cross, as the chief and principal instrument of our redemption, because of all other it doth most lively set before our eyes, the death and passion of Christ. The hem of Christ's garment, spittle, and clay, if we had them, we would honour, worship, and esteem them, for his sake whose precious body they touched. And as a true lovier will highly esteem a ring, napkin, or other jewel sent from his lovier, be it never so small: So would we for the love that we bear to Christ, for his infinite mercy towards us, both highly esteem the very dirt that he touched, if we might happily come by it, and for his sake reverence S. Peter's shadow, S. Paul's parletts, and S. Stephen's bones, and all other saints relics, because they were God's friends, and most specially his cross. Now to your answers against the authorities that prove miracles to have been wrought by the sign of the cross. And first for the virtue of the Lady Helena, what mean you to diminish her credit, and impair her good name as much as in you lieth, Fol. 151. b by calling her a concubine to Constance? have you not read, that it is: Impium morderee mortuos? A wicked and ungodly part to bite the dead? The Poet Horace could have told you, Lib. 1. ser. satire 4. that absentem, qui rodit amicum hic niger est, hunc tu Roman caveto, he is a man without all honesty, that gnaweth and biteth at his friend that is absent, o thou that art a Roman and true gentle man, beware of this man: he doth not only bite at his friends that are absent, but at God's friends living with glory, in heaven. Fol 101. b Fol. 103. a Saints slandered . Fabian an holy martyr he calleth infamous, S. Cyprian, proud and blasphemous. Helena superstitious, and concubine to Constance. If this thing were true, is not this a part of cursed Cham? If a man should bring a fact of S. Peter, S. Paul, Mary Magdalene, king David, or Solomon to confirm a truth, were it the duty of a Christian man to say (by your leave) S. Peter was a traitor? S. Paul a persecutor? Mary Magdalene a harlot? Davida man killer, & adulterer? Solomon a fornicator? & keeper of concubines? No. God that suffered them to fall, raised them up again, and made them glorious in his sight. And whom hath glorified we must not discredit, in such things as they did after penance done for their sins, when they were in favour with God, when they were washed, when they were sanctified, 1. Cor 6. The virtue of Lady Helena when they were justified in the name of our lord jesus Christ, and spiritie of our Lord God. As for lady Helena, the histories and ancient fathers say, that she was a woman a Ambro. de olitu Theod. Sanctae memoriae b Ruff. in lib. 1 cap. 7. histo. incomparabilis fide, & religione animi, & magnificentia singulari, religiosa foemina, c Paulinus epist 11. ad Severum. fidelis mulier, regina venerabilis, spiritum sanctum per affectum pium meruit, foemina virtutibus omnibus d Suidas. ornatissima, of holy memory, peerless for faith and devotion of mind, and singular magnificence and liberality, a holy matron, a faithful woman that deserved to have the holy Ghost, through her good affection, a woman plentifully adorned with all kind of virtue, not superstitious (as it pleaseth master Calf. to say, nor gadding) as he spitefully saith, to Jerusalem on pilgrimage of a singular fantasy, but going of great devotion inspired of God. S. Ambrose saith: Insudit ei spiritus ut lignum quereret, De obitu Theod. The holy ghost moved Helena to go to Jerusalem. Epist 11. ad Sever. certam indaginem spiritus sanctus inspirat, lignum infuso sibi spiritu revelavit. The holy ghost did put into her heart to seek the wood, The holy ghost doth inspire that diligent search unto her, by the holy ghost, with which she was inspired, she found out the wood. Paulinus writeth, that she obtained of her son to purge the places, and build a church where our Saviour Christ had trodd, divino inspirita consilio, inspired by the counsel of God, and when she was at Jerusalem, and by diligent inquisition advertised of the place, she set men a digging, urgente sine dubio conceptae revelations instinctu, Ibidem. the instinct of the conceived revelation undoubtedly driving her thereunto. Ruffinus sayeth that, she admonished by revelation from God, went to Jerusalem, Lib. 1. cap. 7 histo. and found three crosses when she come to the place, revealed unto he by some heavenly token or vision. Macarius in his prayer declareth that in these latter days, God inspired the heart of his hand maiden to seek that blessed wood of the cross. Now judge good readers, whither the lady Helena Constantine's mother called a woman of blessed memory, peerless for faith, devotion, and liberality, a woman both holy and faithful, adorned plentifully with all kind of virtues, and endued with the holy ghost, is to be esteemed otherwise than virtuous? judge whither she whose heart God inspired, whom the holy ghost admonished and warned by visions from heaven to go to Jerusalem, and seek the cross of Christ, is to be counted superstitious, driven by woemanishe curiosity, or foolish zeal, as M. Calf. saith? judge whither this yower new minister hath dealt either charitably towards the dead, that to blemish her good name and impair her credit, calleth her a concubine? or faithfully to you that are alive, who calleth her superstitious, whom the blessed and holy fathers S. Ambrose, Paulinus, Ruffinus, Macarius, and Suidas testify to have been inspired with the holy ghost, and commanded of God to seek the cross as she did? An honest man having such plain and evident testimonies out of so many, so ancient, and so holy fathets, for the honesty of that virtuous lady, besides the judgement of the church, that she is a blessed Saint in heaven, would never so impudently have assured himself, that she was superstitious, nor confidently have avouched it to his readers with out sufficient proof. But you may see what rotten stakes you stick unto. He promised that the vanities of men should be disproved in this answer, by the undoubted word of God, true and godly fathers, ad lawful councils, but where is the word of God? where are the godly fathers? where is the lawful council that say, M Calves. impudency. Helena was superstitious? See you not how he deceiveth you, and for scriptures, councils, and fathers, obtrudeth his own impudent, vain and arrogant assertions? See you not that contrary to the evident testimonies of so many ancient and holy fathers, he justifieth himself, to maintain his heresy? If you believe not me, ye that have eyes, see, and read: ye that have ears, hearken and learn. The places are quoted: the books easy to be had. And as you find his assertion true, in this case, so believe him in others. For my part seeing his heart is so malitiouse, his mouth so venomous, his pen so slanderous, that he spareth not the blessed saints in heaven, I little esteem the boisterous blasts of his spiteful breath, whatsoever words of reproach, either he hath, or shall breath out against me, or any Catholic hereafter. Furthermore where to deface Helena, he telleth you out of S. Ambrose, that she was a woman brought up in as hostrie, Fol. 151. b If it might have pleased him to have dealt faithfully, he might also have reported the words that follow in S. Ambrose He sayeth, De obitu Theodotij S. Ambrose's commendation of Helena. She was a good hostrie woman that sought so diligently the manger where our saviour was borne. A good hostrie woman that knew right well the master of the hostrie, that cured his wounds, that was wounded of thieves. A good hostrie woman that passed not to be reputed dirt to win Christ, and therefore Christ advanced her from an hostrie to an Empire. But if all this should have been reported with the rest, it should have convinced him a shameful liar, and proved Helena to have been virtuous, and not superstitious, and an honourable lady, albeit she lived some times in a poor hostrie. As for his chardgying me with belying Eusebius, because it was noted in the margin of my book Eusebius libro 10. cap. 7. & 8. Ecclesiasticae historiae, and Eusebius hath not the story, but Ruffinus in his first book and seventh Chapter, In deed I must confess an oversight in the printer for setting Eusebius for Ruffinus: But is this a shameful lie with you M. Calf? and worthy so bitter a note in the margin? If you will adjudge it so, let it be so: and be not angry if you be served with the same measure again. I shall have place to discourse of yower lies in time, and then let the indifferent reader judge between us who is the most shameful liar. Yower long wendlesse about the variety of the time in the history, Fol. 153 a. b Fol. 152. a for the invention of the cross maketh a man almost breathless to read it, and spend much labour to little profit. For what if authors vary in the circumstance of time, and yet agree in the principal? Are they by and by to be discredited as reporters of untruths? or disauthorised as full of repugnancy and contradiction as your marginal note signifieth? Fol. 153. a Marc. 15. That were enough to condemn the Gospel of Christ. S. Mark sayeth: The jews crucified Christ hora tertia, at the third hour. S. john sayeth: Cap. 19 It was the preparing day of Easter, about the sixth hour, and Pilate said to the jews, behold yower king: They cried away with him, away with him, Crucify him. Pilate said, unto them, shall I crucify yower king? The high priests answered, we have no king, but Cesar: Then he delivered him to them to be crucified. And they took jesus and led him away, and he bore his cross, etc. By which it appeareth that it was about the sixth hour that Christ was condemned of pilate, and delivered to the jews to be crucified. Authors not to be discredited for a little apparent diversity in tyme. Cap. 17. And shall we now because of this variety in time, say there is a repugnancy and contradiction in the Gospel? Shall we refuse S. Mark and follow S. john? or refuse S. john and follow S. Mark? or suspect them both, because they agreed not in the hour of Christ's passion? Not M. Calf. To vary apparently in time and agreed upon the thing among divines, is no sufficient cause to disprove the truth. S. Mathewe writing of the transfiguration of Christ in the mount sayeth: and after six days jesus took Peter, james and john his brother, and led them into a high hill and was transfigured before them. S. Luke sayeth: It changed almost eight days after, etc. Here in these words seemeth also an apparent variety in time, but an accord and agreement in the thing: and shall we for a little apparent diversity of time, which may be gathered by the bore words) disauthorise the Gospel? God forbidden. It were jewish folly. So albeit some say that the cross was found when Eusebius governed the church of Rome, other some in Syluester's popedom, yet do they all agreed in the consequent, that is was found by Helena, by the inspiration of the holy Ghost, and revelation from heaven. And this being agreed upon by all writers that discourse of antiquities, and affairs of the church, what foolish curiosity, or curious folly is it to beaten about the bush, and hunt after hours, days, years, & for a little diversity of time condenne a true story. But peradventure M. Calf. understanding by some advocate of his, that testes singulares non faciunt plenam probationem, Cap. cum dilectus ex de elect. Panor c. bonae memoriae, ex. de elect. and that they are, singulares that agreed not in time, because they that depose of diverse times, depose of diverse facts, and for a full proof two must depose of one fact, thought he should improve the truth of the history, if he could show that the authors that witness it, did not agreed in tyme. But if he or his lawyer had any such fancy, they were both deceived. For in historiographers there is another consideration, than in witness. The case of an historiagrapher and witness far diverse Bart. & dd. in l 1. ver. Celsus ait ff. si certum Petat . For the law giveth credit to an history thought one only wrote it, such credit I mean as the author commonly in all countries deserveth, else no history were lawful, except two men at one time wrote it, yea and nothing, but that they saw both together at ones. If another come and writ, that it was not done, he that is of better credit is believed, but if he writ that it was done, as the first writer did, but differeth in time, it is to be believed the more, that it was done. For both agreed in that: but now there is a greater doubt in deed of the time, then if the last had held his peace. Therefore we must believe him that is of greater authority, touching the tyme. Item him that bringeth best reason. When authors vary in time wi●h is best to be credited . Item him that lived nearer the time when the thing was done. Item where public registers or other writers prove one time rather than another, with such other circumstances: which I would teach M. Calf. for his learning, if he would be my scholar in law, as long as he hath been Caluines in heresy. But if no such circumstances could be found, yet must not we conclude, that the thing was not done, but rather confess the contrary: and stand still in doubt of the time, never discrediting the authors for erring in time, but rather excusing them as the law doth, especially in reporting things of antiquity, the knowledge of the precise time whereof, can not be easily gotten: Quia labilis est hominum memoria circa tempus. Man's memory faileth often in the ●ust tyme. Because the memory of man is slipper about the tyme. In some cases the law is content, contrary to common rules, in witnesses to have testimony de auditu alieno, of the hear say, of other men: As if he say, I know he bought that house for an hundred years ago, because I heard my grandfather say so, this witness proveth. And if that be true, how much more shall we bear with an historiographer in forgetting, or misreporting the time, when there is no doubt of the thing done? As for example, it is manifest that Wiat with a great company of the evangelical brethren rebelled against their sovereign lady and Queen: it is certain that he come to Ludgate, and when he could not have it opened, departed thence, and was apprehended and after a time beheaded, like a traitor. Now if one would writ the history of this rebellion, and say he come to Ludgate the 4. of May, and another writing the same, say he come the xii. of March, should this variety of time prove a contradiction in the the thing, and argue that Wiat stirred no rebellion at all? Or should men an hundred years hereafter say that both those writers were to be discredited? To school sir james to school: you had need begin yower A.B. C. again, if your secret store, be not better furnished, than that which yover freash peddlers pack showeth at the top: But perhaps you will say, the apparent contradiction in the Evangelists is reconciled by S. Augustine, and others, but this it not. It is true. I grant: but if I had yower spirit, and would say: The doctors were but men, they had their errors, they varied from the simplicity of the Gospel, and urge the bore text, and words of the Gospel, and believe nothing that is alleged, because it is not in the written scripture, what had yower mastership to say? How should the places be reconciled? Let us have yower judgement, and hereafter as occasion serveth, I will sand you mine, for the reconciliation of such authors, as vary about the time of finding the Cross. Fol. 152. b Furthermore your brabble about that saying of Ruffinus: Titulus non satis evidenter dominici prodebat signa patibuli: The title did not show evidently the sign of our lords gibbot, And this of S. Ambrose: Titulo crux patuit salutaris, By the title, the healthful cross was known, is to no purpose. When you have all said a simple Logician will prove unto you, that in those two sayings there is no contradiction. And where I say in my treatise, Fol. 99 b that neither by the title that Pilate set up in Hebrew, Greek, or Latin, neither by any other means they could discern which was the cross that bore our saviour, I mean they could not discern it by any ordinary means, satis evidenter, evidently enough, as Ruffinus sayeth: And this comment for fear of yower gross cavillation I make, that in your next reply you may not have such idle extravagants and vain digressions. Yower lewd and shameful lie that no ship or hulk of greatest burden is able to carry the pieces of the holy cross, Fol 153. b A Shameful lie. if they were gathered together, I remit to the master of the game to stand your friend for the whetstone. The talk of the nails wherewith all Christ was crucified, Calvin. I omit as impertinent. The disproving of Calvin I refer to learned in France, where his adulteries, his sacrileges, his murder, laid to his charge by servetus, his treasons, his extortions, and tyranny, and lousy evil are better known. Calf . Where you say of the miracle done at Nola by the cross, and reported by Paulinus, that miracles were not made to establish a worshipping or having of a cross, but to confirm a faith in the crucified, and teach us not to do the like, but to believe the like, Mart. The one we grant: the other we deny: we grant that they were done to confirm a faith in the crucified, we deny that they were not done to establish a worshipping and having of the cross, and desire you to prove it according to yower promiss, by scriptures, councils, and holy fathers. Fol 155. a Miracles that teach us to believe the like, teach us sometimes to do the like, if we may. In that you say, they teach us not to do the like, but to believe the like, I pray you tell me, Doth not he that teacheth one to believe that alms covereth sins, teach him also, to give alms? Doth not he that teacheth one to believe, that by worthy receiving the Sacrament he receiveth life everlasting, teach him also to receive the Sacrament? Doth not he that teacheth one to believe that by baptism he shall have remission of sin, teach him also that he must be baptized? In like manner, if miracles done by the cross teach us to believe the like, that is that the like may be done by the cross, through the mighty power of Christ, do they not teach us, when like occasion serve to do the like if we may? And if it pleaseth God to have his glory showed by like miracles unto us, as he did at that time to Paulinus in Nola, by his cross, is it not reason that we should conceive a strong faith and assured hope in Christ's mercy, and venture to do the like? And if we may venture to do the like, Paulinus kept and reverenced the cross. why may we not have such a piece of the cross as he had to do the like? Let us have yower advise: he was an holy man, and learned bishop: he keapte it: he reverenced it: he worshipped it, and made a singular jewel and precious treasure of it. If you tell us that there is more fear of idolatry now, than there was then, yover own words shall convince you of untruth. For you say we have the Gospel amongst us more commonly than they had, and the truth more sincerely preached than it was in those days. And where that is, there is less fear of idolatry. Fol. 155. a Where you say that I have heaped up many tales, as that a woman, was preserved from rape and withcraste by the cross etc. I would marvel why you are not ashamed to call true histories tales, True histories counted tales. and judge Epiphanius, Palladius, S. August. Sozome ne, Sulpitius, & Osorius to be tellers of tales, rather than reporters of true histories, saving that, I perceive, you are past shame, and most shamefully contemn the fathers, where they make against you. But with the indifferent I trust the foresaid authors shall have their worthy credit and you yower just desert. As for your affirmation that those miracles prove not my cause, because (as you say) It is no good reason, Fol. 155. a to say, The sign of the cross hath done this or that miracle, ergo the sign of the cross must be set up and honoured, we reject as frivolous, nakedly assevered and nothing proved. When according to promise' you bring scriptures, councils and holy fathers to disprove it, then shall you have an other answer. In the mean time we tell you that it is a sufficient testimony to convince against all he retikes, that it should not be hackte, hewed and contemptuously abused. And that you may not run at riot and hunt after owls in the mid day, What M. Calf hath to prove in his next book. we tell you that the thing which you must prove in your reply, is that miracles wrought of holy men, by the sign of the cross, at the commandment of God, as some of those were, to the comfort of his people, and glory of his holiee name, is not a sufficient reason to prove that the sign of the cross should be had, keapt, set up, and honoured. In the examining of it, you shall discover your own folly, and see that albeit miracles done by heretics, Sorcerers, Nigromancers and devils, are to be rejected with the doctrines, and positions, which they would confirm with feigned miracles, yet miracles wrought by good men, to confirm the doctrine and faith of the Christians, are not to be contemned, nor the doctrine and faith refused, which God confirmed with those miracles. That considered, you shall further see that it was some phrontike fury or devilish spirit that made you say, that you would not only have to sign of the cross, Fol. 157. b A strange fancy meet for a new brother. but the sign of the devil, if miracles may commend a thing. Was not the faith of Christ commended by miracles, and so commended that unless he had done those miracles, the gentils would not have believed? And will you because miracles did commended the faith of Christ, have not only the faith of Christ, but the faith of the devil? what a strange fancy is this in yower evangelical mind? joan. 10 & 14. Christ willed the jews to believe his works, if they would not believe his words: and will you not believe them because miracles did commend them? I never heard of Christian man that in like case said, Fol 157. b we may have as well the sign of the devil, or any sign of idols, as the sign of the cross. And certes unless the devil had possessed your heart, this blasphemy would never have been uttered. You tell us how in the reign of Tarquin the proud, Fol. 157. b the image of madness hanged before men's doors delivered the household from all dangers: It is very like that madness itself, hath taken her flight from all those doors, and lighted upon such a pale faced minister as you are, and driveth you to esteem the sign of an idol and devil, as well as the sign of the cross: for remedy whereof the worst that I wish you, is some holy, and learned exorcist from Italy, An exorcist for M. Calf. or Spain, that is able with prayer, and other means that the church useth, to expel that spirit of madness that possesseth your heart. To the place of Epiphanius, that said: A gentle woman blessed herself in the name of Christ, because she was a Christian, and was preserved, you say, that the sign of the cross was no cause of her preservation, Fol. 155. b but witness of her faith that did preserve her. But how vain it is that you say: Let the reader judge of Epiphanius own words. Lib 1 To. 2. heres. 30 He saith: Per signaculum Christi & fidem mulier auxilium percepit, etc. By the sign of Christ and faith, the woman received help: neither did the force of the enchantment avail, where the name of Christ, and sign of the cross was. What do these words, the woman received help by the sign of Christ and faith signify? Do they not signify that by them, the woman was preserved? A woman helped by the cross . Construe it M. Calf. and tell me what is percipere auxilium per signaculum Christi? to receive help by the sign of Christ (which is the cross as appeareth by the words that follow) if it be not to be preserved by the sign of the cross? And if she received help by the cross, was not the cross one cause of her preservation, one I say, because the passion and goodness of Christ was the principal, and faith and the cross the mean by which she was preserved? If the cross were no such cause, why doth the author join: Signaculum Christi & fidem? The sign of Christ and faith together with a conjunction copulative? Is that in vain? His skill is very simple that thinketh so. Nor do I say, that the sign alone did preserve, the woman (as M. Calfhil imagineth) but join the cross and faith together, as Epiphanius doth, and say, by the sign of the cross of Christ, and faith, the woman received help. But let us see how M. Calf. proveth that the sign of the cross was but a witness, of her faith that did preserve her. Epiphanius (saith he) testifieth this, for he saith: Signavit se in nomen Christi, Calf. ut quae Christiana esset, she signed herself into the profession and name, of Christ, as who was a Christian woman. Mart. But is not this good readers a new devised translation? to say, M. Calf. a fine translator. Signavit se in nomen Christi. She signed herself in to the profession and name of Christ, as who was a Christian woman? The gentle woman was a Christian woman long before she come into the bath, as our sir james confesseth here: and did not there begin to sign herself into the profession and name of Christ: but because she was a Christian woman (as Epiphanius saith) before, and knew that the Christians used the sign of the cross, against all temptations, therefore she signed herself in the name of Christ, and not as M. Calf. foolishly translateth it, into the profession and name of Christ. For that signing was past. She had professed the faith and name of Christ in baptism, there she was signed into the profession, and name of Christ. Here she did but sign herself in the name of Christ, and in that showed herself a Christian woman, and made not a new profession. Where you say, Calf. Fol. 155. b The end why God used this miracle was to show the virtue of belief in Christ, and to convert an heathen man, that could not see the secret faith, that so prevailed aghasted enchantment, and therefore stood in need of an outward sign, Mart. I marvel much why you labour buselie to deceive yower readers, and destroy one truth by an other, and separate, that which Epiphanius knitteth together with a copulative? He sayeth, The force of enchantment prevailed not, where the name of Christ and sign of the Cross was, This copulative (and) declareth that faith in this case prevailed not without the sign of the cross, but that by the sign of the cross, The sign of the cross concurred with faith. and faith together the miracle was wrought. And albeit faith be able to resist the force of incantation without the cross, yet it pleased not God so to dispose it at that time, but made the sign of the cross concur with faith, both to deliver the gentlewoman from violence, and also to convert the gentle to the faith. For Epiphanius sayeth in deed, hoc tertium instructionis ad fidem opus josepho contigit. This third work of instruction happened to joseph to bring him to the faith: which few words how falsely M. Calf. hath translated, shall appear when I come to treat of his false translations. In the mean time we desire to learn of his wisdom, why God wrought that miracle by the sign of the cross rather than by any other external mean? And whereas God notwithstanding preaching used the sign of the cross to convert an infidel, I would gladly understand, why we that are Christians may not use, notwithstanding preaching, the sign of the cross, to keape those in memory and meditation of Christ's passion, josephus used the sign of the cross. Ibidem. who are converted already? This josephus of whom we talk being made afterward a perfect Christian man, used the sign of the Cross, and reverenced it. For as Epiphanius reporteth, the jews by incantations went about to hinder his buildings: and so wrought by their sorcery, that his wood would not burn to make lime, and brick. Of which when he was advertised, he went to the place, and commanded water to be brought thither, Water blessed with the sign of the cross. and when it was brought: Magna voce crucis signaculum proprio suo digito vasi imposuit, etc. with a great voice he made the sign of the cross upon the vessel with his own finger, and when he had called upon the name of jesus, he said: In the name of jesus of Nazareth whom my fathers have crucified, and all theirs, who stand here about, let there be virtue in this water to the destruction of all enchantments and sorcery, Virtue in water blessed with the sign of the cross against inchauntements. which these men have made, and strength of power to make the fire burn, to perfect the house of God. And so he took the water, into his hand, and sprinkled every keel with part of the water, and the enchantments were dissolved, and the fire made burn. Which done the very heathens acknowledged, that he was only God, that helped the Christians. Constantinus after he was converted, notwithstanding he had much preaching, used the cross, and so have all good Christians that were converted to the faith, and so ought we, unless we will degenerate from them. Fol. 155. b Calf . Where you say, that the outward fact by which the inward purity is notified needed not now to be the sign of the cross, since we live not among Turks and Saracens, but all men without it, know of whom we hold, in whom we do believe, I would feign learn how a Portugal, Mart. or one of the new converted Islands of India coming by chance in to England, of which he never heard before, How may one of the new Indians know that we hold of Christ M. Calf? and sing nor altars, nor images, nor rood in the church, nor cross in the street, nor high ways, and noon to bless themselves with the cross in the forehead, feign would I learn (I say) how this man should know of whom we hold, and in whom we believe? Will you have him hearken to yower preachers? He can not understand them. Will you have him inquire of merchants or some learned men? What if neither the merchant nor the learned man understand his language, neither he have any sight in the learned tongues? What shall he do then? But depart as ignorant as he come, and think that he hath been rather in a coast of jury than in a land that professeth Christianity. And albeit we devil not (blessed be God) amongst Turks or Saracens, but amongst Christians, yeat because strangers of all countries have access into our realm, and happily some may come out of Grece, Constantinople, jury and India to our coasts, we should both to make us think oftener of the passion, and also to signify our faith unto the heathens, have the sign of the cross in churches, chapels, and high ways, and by the outward sign make them understand of whom we hold, and in whom we believe, sing by preaching we can not. Thus your answer to Epiphanius is confuted, and by this you may learn, never to build yower own fancy, upon an holy father's authority, and wrest it to a sense which neither the plain words of the text, neither the circumstance of the place can infer. I think a man should have much to do with you, if you could show any such evident places out the fathers, that there were no miracles done by the cross, and that we aught in no case to have the cross. In all the rest that followeth I see nothing worth the answering, but certain slanders, and lies, of which I will speak hereafter. Now to the ninth Article. WHAT COMMODITY EVERY CHRISTEN MAN HATH, OR MAY HAVE BY THE SIGN of the Cross. THE ninth ARTICLE. IN THE beginning of this Article this our cross quarreler sir james, fareth as a man sick of a pestilent fever. For as he through the abundance of the choleric humour, doth loath the savour and taste of wholesome meats: So this man through the corruption of heresy not only loatheth, but also refuseth the authorities of the seventh general Council, and condemneth their doings, Augustin. epist. 118. quorun saluberrima est authoritas, whose authority is most wholesome: and that he might seem to do it, with authority, he taketh example of S. Ambrose, who said of the council healed at Ariminum, Fol. 163. b Illud ego concilium exhorreo, that council I do utterly abhor. But how evil he imitateth S. Ambrose, The council of Ariminum a private and wicked council. judge (good readers) The council keapte at Ariminum was a private council, unlawfully assembled by heretics, without the authority of the bishop of Rome contrary to the great general council of Nice, and never confirmed. It made Christ the soon of God a creature, which the gentils and jews did easily acknowledge. Saint Ambrose a catholic bishop, acknowledging obedience and subjection to the Pope's holiness, and a follower of the decrees of the Nicene council, understanding that, said like a stout prelate: Illud ego concilium exhorreo, that council I do utterly abhor. The 2. council of Nice a general and lawful council . The council keapt at Nice against image breakers, was a general council kept by Catholics, lawfully called and duly confirmed. It appeased the great schism, that image breakers had raised against the church many years. It decreed nothing against Christ and his holy scriptures, as the other did. Wherefore if M. Calf. would have imitated S. Ambrose, he should first have proved that to have been a private Synod keapt of heretics, unlawfully assembled and never duly confirmed. He should have showed that the fathers there decreed things contrary to scripture, and derogatory to Christ. Otherwise there is no more likeness in the case, nor reason why he should say with saint Ambrose: Illud ego concilium exhorreo, I utterly abhor that council, than there is cause why the thief condemned at the kings bench for felony, should say to the 〈◊〉, my lords, as that worthy gentleman my master, tal●● 〈◊〉 of the tumults and sedition in Norfolk, said, I utterly abhor that tree of reformation: So do I utterly abhor this place of judgement, and with all my heart refuse this authority, and condemn the verdict of these twelve men, and sentence of this judge. For as captains Keetes tree of reformation was a conventicle of rebels, so was the council of Ariminum, a conspiracy of heretics. As that was against their lawful Prince: So was this against the true church. As that was against the commandment of Christ: So was this to the dishonour of God. Wherefore M. Calf. could not take example of S. Ambrose's fact in abhorring the council of Ariminum, to refuse and condemn the second council of Nice, unless with the Ariminians he wilbe an Arrian, and forsake the council of Nice. Or with the thief forsake the lawful justices, because the good gentleman his master abhorred the practice of rebels. But let us hear what he sayeth against them. Where Germanus a learned father, and worthy bishop of Constantinople said, The images of holy men are a lively description of their stoutness, Actio. 4. Nice. 2. a representation of their virtues, a dispensation of grace given them, etc. It was (quoth M Calf. Fol. 1642 Calf. ) a vain allegation of Germanus: for I beseech you (sayeth he) what stoutness and virtue is described, what holiness and grace is dispensed by them? when the saints were alive, their virtues could not be discerned, with eye, they rested in their mind, their proper subject. And shall they now beseene in their dead images, which have neither mind neither sense, to hold them? This is as just as Germans lips: Mart. It was not for nought that Tertulian did forbidden disputation with heretics, bring what you can, either they will falsely wrist it, or shamefully deny it. For proof whereof we need not seek far: In this very thing we have experience of both in our sir james. He denieth not only the saying of a learned bishop, but also the authority of a general council. Fol. 163. b Fol. 164. a The decrees of the one he calleth impudent vanities, and the saying of the other a vain allegation. Which how sitting it is for so young a divine, and simple minister, you that are men of wisdom judge. His wresting Germanus words is so shameless, that unless with heresy he had put on impudence, his pale face would blush to hear it. That you may better understand his forgery, consider that holy bishops words, he said: The images of holy men are a lively description of their stoutness, Germanus words wrested. and a representation of holy virtue, and despensation of grace, given unto them. Now cometh our sir james, and asketh what holiness and grace is dispensed by them? As though the author meaned that images of saints were a dispensation of holiness, and grace, which is absurd and contrary to his mind. For he meaneth as the very words do import, that images of saints do describe unto us the stoutness of holy men, What images represent unto us. and represent the holy virtue and grace that God dispensed unto them. As for example, the image of S. Peter martyred upon the cross, the image of S. Paul beheaded with the sword, the image of S. Stephen stoned, Bartholomewe fleied. S. Laurence broiled and diverse such, do represent unto us, that hold of Christ, their stoutness in contemning death, their patience in suffringe torments, and grace that they had to persevere constant in the faith and love of Christ until the end. Here is no mention that grace is dispensed by images: M. Calf. falsely translateth Germanus words. nor Germanus saith (as M. Calf. falsely translateth) that an image is a dispensation of holiness, but sanctae virtutis et dispensationis figuratio, a figuring or repnsentation of holy virtue, and dispensation (that is) of grace given unto the saints. The word dispensation which Germanus used in the genitive case, Calf. turneth into the nominative case, which is forsooth no falsity nor unhonest dealing amongst heretics. And whereas the author said: An image is a representation of dispensation. This false quarreler sayeth: an image is a dispensation of holiness. And as though he had dealt honestly, asketh this peevish question, what holiness is dispensed by them? and showeth himself as wise as Waltams calf. His reason that followeth, savoureth of the same pasture. For he saith: the virtues of Saints could not be discerned with eye, Calf. They rested in the mind their proper subject, ergo they could not be seen in their dead images, which have no sense to hold them: Here the antecedent is stark false? Mart. For albeit the mind is the proper subject of virtue, yet doth it not so closely keep itself there, but that some times it showeth forth her fruits. Faith the chiefest virtue in a Christian man is showed by good works. The Apostle S. james said, Faith showed by Good works Cap. 2. ostendam tibi ex operibus fidem meam, I will show the my faith by good works. S. Peter commandeth us to labour to make our vocation known by our good works. And this would neither S. james have said, nor S. Peter have commanded, 2. Petr. 1. if our faith and virtue might not be known by the outward works. But sing it is so, that faith and all other virtues may be showed forth by good works, although they rest in the mind as their proper subject, it standeth with reason that they may be set forth to the eye, by images. As the obedience of Abraham, and readiness to offer his son Isaac at God's commandment, may be and is set forth by pictures: likewise the constancy of the Apostles, and patience of Martyrs, and charity of all, may in like sort be set forth. If M. Calf. deny this, let us ask him how it cometh to pass, that albeit the faith and other virtues rest in the mind as their proper subject, yet they may be set forth by ink and paper, as the faith and holiness of the Apostles, is set forth in the acts, If the virtue of saints may be set forth in ink and paper, why not in pictures? answer M. Calf. Ser. de 40. Mart. Noble faicts set forth by pictures. and ancient histories? If he find, that by ink and paper they may be set forth to the carnal eye, to be read, and by reading conveyed in to the mind, Let him give a good reason out of scripture, council, and ancient father, why a picture can not set a thing forth to our eyes, and by outward sight convey it unto the mind. S. Basile commending the fourthy Martyrs, told his people, that he would endeavour to set forth their noble acts to them all, quemadmodum in pictura, as it were in a picture. For both writers of histories and also payncters do set forth very lively noble feats of arms: the one by eloquence, the other by garnishing and setting it forth by tables: both stirring many to imitate the like valiantness, and courage. For whatsoever the utterance of the history proveth by induction, the same doth a still picture set forth by imitation. But what if in way of reasoning, we granted M. Calf. his antecedent, that the virtues of Saints could not be discerned with eye, for that they rested in the mind, their proper subject? How doth this consequent follow, Ergo they could not be seen in their dead images, which have neither mind, nor sense, to hold them? As just as Germans lips. May not all London laugh at it, and think they have a peevish minister for a learned reader? A proper reason for a new minister . Consider his reason I beseech you. In effect he saith thus. Dead images of Saints have no mind, nor sense, to hold their virtues, ergo their virtues can not be seen of men that have wits, and sense to behold them. Is not this true dealing, and a token of profound learning? Might not one by a like argument prove that we can not see the power of Christ, and virtue of the Apostles, M Calves reason condemneth the scripture as well as images. in scripture? how say you to this argument? The ink and paper wherein the scripture is written have no mind nor sense, to hold the power of Christ, and virtue of the Apostles, Ergo the power of Christ, and of the Apostles can not be seen in the scripture? If M. Calfhils be good this is good. For they are both like. And if you will say with him that the virtues of Saints can not be seen in images, because images have no mind nor sense to hold them, you must say in like sort that we can not see the power of Christ and virtue of the Apostles in scripture, because the paper and ink, have no mind nor sense, to hold them. And by like reason as he condemneth images, condemn the scripture. But be not deceived. As by reading the scripture written in ink and paper, the heart conceiveth the power of Christ, and virtue of his Apostles: So by sing images of Saints made of insensible things, the mind conceiveth the virtue of Saints. And as the ear by hearing, giveth understanding to the soul: So the eye by sing doth give light to the mind. Whereby it cometh to pass that although images have nor mind, nor sense to hold the virtues of Saints, yeat we that have minds, wit, reason, and sense, may behold the virtues of Saints in images, and glorify God for them. But to proceed. When I see an image gorgeously decked, with spear, sword, Fol. 164. a or book in the hand, an other with a box or babe in her arms, Fol. 164. a what reason can tell me whither Mars or S. Georg, Venus, or the virgin mother of Christ be erected, quoth M. Calf? Mart. Forsooth if you be a Christian man, and live amongst Christians, and have any reason in your head, it may tell you that ever sithence Christ conquered the devil, the Christians have forsaken all idols, of Mars, Venus, Apollo, and such like: Idols destroyed by the Christians. and utterly destroyed them, as the prophets did foretell, and suffered noon to remain amongst them. It might further tell you that the Christians neither have nor can abide to have any other image to be honoured in the church than the image of Christ and his saints. Which being true, and noon so simple amongst the Christians, but is well assured of that, little reason might serve to make you to think that, when you see an image with a sword, or child in the arms, it is nor Mars nor Venus, nor Mercury, nor Momus, unless by heresy you have been made so very a Mome, that you know not amongst whom you devil nor of whom you hold. Fol. 146. b It is a great argument of yours that images teach pride, avarice, Fol. 165. b wantonness and nothing else. And for proof of it you bring the example of Cherea in Terence, and Venus Gnidia in Lucian, two worthy Doctors to confirm such a truth. Scriptures, councils and fathers failed, when these were thought worthy to be alleged. But I pray you sir what if some wanton maidens learn of the image of Mary Magdalene, the lusts of vanity, Fol. 164. b what if the covetous man sing an image fair gilded, wish it in his purse? what if the careless and desperate man think with himself, Fol. 174▪ b what shame is it for me to hung, sing our God was so served? Ibidem. What con consecution is this M. Calf. Some may have evil thoughts by sight of images, Ergo images must not be suffered. Gene. 19 Gene. 30. Osee 1. Mat 25. Luc. 19 Matt. 18. What if all this were true, what will you infer upon it? Shall images therefore be condemned and thought unlawful? Then by your wisdom we shall shortly condemn the scripture: Wanton maidens hearing the chapter read where it is declared how Loathes two daughters made their father drunk, and went to bed unto him, may learn some lewd lusts of vanity, evil women hearing how Rachel gave jacob her husband leave to beget children of his maiden Balam, may have wicked imaginations: Men hearing how the patriarchs had diverse wives, may think that lawful for them. Some hearing those words that God spoke to his Prophet Osee: Go thy way, take a harlot to thy wife, and beget children of fornication, may think wickedly of committing fornication. Some hearing that Christ said to the servant: Thou shouldest have put my money to the bank that I returning might have received it with usury, will imagine that it is lawful to give money to usury. Some hearing that he said: If I thy eye offend thee, pick him out, if thy hand or foot be offence unto thee, cut them of, and cast them from thee, may take occasion, as some have done, to mangle themselves and cut of their members. And so all wicked men may take occasion of some other places of scripture to be nought and like the spider turn all into poison, as our sir james doth. Shall the scripture therefore be contemned, and thought unlawful? Shall all men be forbidden to read it, because some take occasion of hurt by it? Not: there is no reason, why the lewdness of a few should prejudice a multitude, and the iniquity of some lewdly disposed, imbar the commodity of many well affectioned. As therefore the scripture is not to be rejected because wicked men by certain histories, and texts misunderstode may take occasion of evil: So are not images to be condemned because wanton maids and covetous persons conceive light affections at the sight of them. Many have holy meditations and great commodities by them, and more good men and women by sight of Mary Magdalene payncted mornefully, Mary Magdalene not want only painted. and not wanton (as you say) take occasion to repent for their sins, and lament their wantonness past, than to fall into the lusts of vanity. Moore by seeing the gilded images, think of the joys of heaven, and bliss that they have there, than of having it in their purse. Moore seeing Christ hanging on the Cross, thank him, for his passing love towards us, than think hanging no shame, because their lord and master was hanged: and they for the lewdness of a few that are nought, are not to be bereaved of a commodity that doth turn them to good. The examples of Ezechias, josias, and Solomon, Fol. 164. b Fol. 165. a The fact of Ezechias destroying the serpent maketh not against our images. 4. Reg. 18. are brought to no purpose against images amongst Christians. The cause why Ezechias destroyed the brazen Serpent, is declared in the text: Siquidem, usque ad illud tempus filij Israel adolebant ei incensum. For until that day the children of Israel did offer incese to it. And in deed, the people of Israel being very prove to idolatry, did oftentimes offend the goodness of God with their wickedness and abomination, which the virtuous prince Ezechias understanding did destroy the brazen Serpent. Amongst us that are Christians, there is no such mistrust of idolatry. No man knoweth the secrets of an others heart, nor is able to say, this man or that man committeth idolatry, or burneth incense to idols, as the Israelites did. Wherefore the fact of Ezechias is unfytly alleged, against images. The law saith: cessant ratione legis cessat & ipsa lex. The reason of the law ceasing, the law itself ceaseth. Seeing them there is no idolatry, committed, as there was in his time, sing the people direct their hearts, and offer their prayers to God, and whensoever they set their eyes on the image, they have their mnydes in heaven with God, the destroying that Ezechias used, should also cease, and no image now be thrown down, unless there were like apparent cause of idolatry, as there was in Ezechias and josias reign. For whose fact also this answer for avoiding tediousness shall suffice. Fol. 165. 3. Reg. 11. Solomon not abused by images but by women . As for Solomon, he was not, (as M. Calf. saith, contrary to the word of God) abused by images. The text saith, Auerterunt mulieres cor eius, depravatum est cor eius per mulieres, ut sequeretur deos alienos, women turned away his heart: by women his heart was corrupted, that he followed strange Gods, as you for having and pleasing of your women, are brought to heresy. To these women he was inveigled, Ardentissimo amore, with most hot and fervent love. That he was abused by images, or by suffering his wanton paramours, to bring their idols into his court, the scripture maketh no mention. The lively images of his paramours the wanton continaunces of his concubines and niceness of his ladies, were the Idols that corrupted him, and not the images which he knew, to be but stocks and stones. And albeit he was permitted to like his own lusts, and follow strange Gods, which were but stocks and stones, yet will it not follow that he was perverted, and abused by those stones. The scripture must be true, depravatum est cor eius ꝑ mulieres, his heart was depraved by women to follow strange Gods, and not by any affection to false images, to follow idols. If you think this true, then tell, your minister that he hath made a soul and shamefully lie. If you think him an honest man, not withstanding this shameful lying, and contrarying the scriptures, all wise men may think, 2. Tim. 4. that the time is come of which, S. Paul spoke to Timothe: There shalbe a time, when they shall not abide wholesome doctrine, but having ytching ears, shall heap unto themselves masters after their own desire, and turn away their hearing from truth, and turn to fables. Fol. 168. a Calf . Where he allegeth this place out of S. Chrisostome, Animo desperato, nihil peius, etc. nothing is worse than a desperate mind. Although he see signs, Although miracles be wrought, yet he standeth still in the same self will frowardness, Mart. to prove that obstinate sinners have small or no comfort by the cross, ye shall understand good readers, that S. Chrysostom speaketh, there of the jews that crucified Christ, Hom. 54. in 8. joan. and of such hard hearted and obdurated men, as Pharaoh was. Amongst them Christ wrought a great number of miracles. In his passion he laid them flat upon the ground, and took away their sight, and yet they (that is to say the jews) did not believe. Now because the jews were obstinate in their wickedness, and would not believe, although they saw signs and miracles, is there any honesty in this master minister to refer that to the Christians that was spoken of the wicked jews? and to say they who have received the faith of Christ, being now estranged by abundance of impiety and sin, can not by signs and miracles, and sight of the cross be turned to Christ again, because the jews, that crucified Christ, and Pharaoh that of malice and hardness of heart, Learn M. Calf. to make a difference when an author speaketh of a jew and when he speaketh of a Christian. opposed himself against God, could not be converted by miracles and signs? The case is far different between a jew and a Christian, a Pharaoh and a faithful. The one knoweth that by Christ he may have salvation, the other supposed it a vain illusion. The Christian understandeth that Christ, will receive him to mercy if he turn unto him. The jew can not conceive that there is any such Christ to have mercy upon him. Therefore no marvel if small comfort arise to the like that S. Crysost. spoke of, that is the jews and Pharaonites, when the cross, is brought unto them. For they never believed in Christ crucified. But being brought to a Christian (of whom we talk and not of jews, and Pharaonites M. Calf. Comfort to Christians by sight of the cross. ) there may rise great comfort unto him. For by the sight of it, he may come into remembrance of the passion of Christ, and consider, that as he died for sinners, so he will save sinners, if they turn unto him, and repent, and fall into such holy meditations as I declared in my treatise. Neither doth this authority, and example brought out of S. Chrysostom condemn me, as M. Calfhil supposeth, Fol 116. a but showeth him, to be gross, and ignorant, that can not see, when an author speaketh of a jew, and a Christian, of an infidel, Fol. 168 a and faithful: and declare that his lying spirit passeth not what he writeth, so he may colour his craft for a tyme. Or if this be not evidence enough, mark what a shameful lie followeth straight upon the back of this? A shameful lie. Fol. 168. a Calf. (Athanasius sayeth he:) In the place by you alleged how the wonted affections be taken out of harlotts hearts, murderers keep their weapon no longer, fearful men conceive courage, barbarous men lay away all immanity, doth not ascribe the effects to the cross, but wholly and solely to the faith of Christ? Mart. Now whither this be a most impudent and shameful lie, judge yourselves. Athanasius words be these: Who hath so taken out of men's hearts their wounte affections, that harlotts would live chaste, murderers keep their weapons no longer? Fearful men conceive courage? who hath persuaded barbarous people, and other nations, to lay away all immanity in their own country, The virtue of the cross. and muse only upon quietness and peace? nisi Christi fides & signaculum crucis? But the faith of Christ and sign of the cross? And is it not plain that he saith here, The faith of Christ and sign of the cross took the wonted affections out of men's hearts? The faith of Christ and sign of the cross made harlotts live chaste? the faith of Christ, and sign of the cross made murderers, cast away their weapon, and the fearful conceive courage, and the barbarous ley away their immanity? And in saying that the faith of Christ and sign of the cross made all this, doth he not ascribe all these effects to the faith of Christ and sign of the cross? And if it be so, then doth he not ascribe those effects, Wholly and solely to the faith of Christ, but to the faith of Christ and sign of the cross together, not that faith is unable, to do it, without the cross, but because we might understand that God would have the sign of the cross, concur with faith, and work the said effects by faith and the sign of the cross, to confound the gentils that imagined Christ, to be but a dead man, and wrought us no benefit by his cross. M. Calf. his fancy, saying that Athanasius joined the sign of the cross to faith, that the one might be testified by the other, hath no sure ground to stay upon. He hath according to his promise, alleged nor scripture, nor council, nor father to prove his guess. It is manifest to all that will read the whole discourse, which Athanasius maketh there, that he talketh much of the virtue and power of the sign of the cross, Athanasius speaketh much of the virtue of the sign of the cross. as that it driveth away devils and destroyeth enchantments and sorcery, as I have specified before, and for declaration that it hath further power and strength to the benefit of Christians, he ascribeth the aforesaid effects to faith and the sign of the cross together: for so signify his words: Fides Christi & signaculum crucis. The faith of Christ and sign of the cross. And albeit it be granted to be true that M. Calfhil saith, that the manner of that time, was for the christians by this kind of sign to show their profession, being conversant amongst, infidels, yet doth it not prove that the aforesaid effects be ascribed wholly and solely to faith. For by that sign, they might both testify, their faith, and with faith in the merits of Christ's passion, and that sign of the cross, have the effects afore said wrought, as Athanasius plainly declared, when he said, who taught all these things, nisi Christi fides & signaculum crucis? But the faith of Christ and sign of the cross? Which being true, I can not see with what face M. Calf. could, say that Athanasius in that place ascribed those effects wholly and solely to the faith of Christ making faith and the cross vary as it were, and not able to concur on with the other, unless he had determined to out face the truth wholly and solely with lies. As he hath faced this: So hath he made an other, The Parisiens approve not Erasmus Censure etc. Fol. 172. b that the Parisians, that is the faculty of divines commonly, called the doctors of Sorbon in Paris, approved the judgement and censure of Erasmus, denying the book, de visitatione infirmorum to be S. Augustine's work. For there is no word, nor syllable there that maketh mention that the said censure set before the work was approved by the Parisiens, except M. Calfhils' wisdom will say, it was printed at Paris, ergo it was allowed by the Parisiens. Nor content with this, to show more feats of his art, he feigneth of S. Cyrill that he having to do with julian the Apostata (who entwited the Christians for having, and setting up of crosses before their doors) did excuse the order of the Christians in his time, and cover their fault, Fol. 172. b Fol. 173. a which is an impudent lie For Cyrillus acknowlegeth no fault in the order of the Christians of his time, Cyrillus acknowlegeth no fault in the Christians for making of crosses, and therefore excuseth it not Libr. 6. cont. julia. for making and setting up of crosses, and therefore neither excused them, nor covered any fault of theirs. He was so far from all such imaginations, and thinking it a fault to have, or make the sign of the cross upon, either their doors, or for heads, that whereas julian said that they were wretches that made crosses, he said: Absque labore demonstrabimus eiusmodi sermones à malis cogitationibus profectos, extremam sapere imperitiam, we will prove without any great travail, that these words coming of wicked thoughts, savour of extreme ignorance. And so reckoning the benefits of Christ's passion he sayeth: Haec omnia recordari nos facit salutare lignum. The healthful wood doth make us remember all these things. further he sayeth: We make the cross of the precious wood in remembrance of all goodness and virtue. Now if Cyrillus a learned bishop judged the talk of julian the Apostata agreeing with our heretics, for upbraiding the catholics with having and making the sign of the cross, to precede of wicked thoughts, & savour of extreme ignorance, it is not to be pnsupposed that he thought it a fault in the Christians to have them neither judged it a wicked thought in an other to reꝓue the having of them. But would rather have taken it as an advertisement, to warn the christians to forsake it, jest they should be an offence and slander to the Gospel. But in all his works there is no sentence to declare that he exhorted the Christians to leave the making and setting up of crosses before their doors. But the contrary appeareth very evidently in this place. For he sayeth with great indignation to that wicked Apostata. Lib. 6. cont. julia. The cross bringeth us in remembrance of all goodness. Wilt thou, that we cast away the wood that bringeth us in remembrance of all goodness, and set forth thy toys to women and children? Not, we will not. Herepon I make this reason. Where there is no fault, there needeth no excuse: There was no fault (in Cirillus judgement) to make the sign of the cross. Therefore it needed not to be excused, as a fault. If any wrangling heretic deny the second proposition, let him consider Cyrillus words alleged before: and if he hath common sense, he can not choose but prove it sufficiently out of that place: To avoid tesdiousnes I leave it to the indifferent reader's deduction, Notes of M. Calves. considered. and by the way consider certain notes that M. Calf. hath gathered out of an other place, of Cyrill in the same book against julian. As for example. Where Cyrillus said that Numa king of the Romans builded certain temples in the which nullum erat simulachrum, there was no false or forged image, The first Note. Fol. 173. because he learned of Pythagoras that God lacketh form and shape, he maketh this note in the margin, Cyrillus alloweth no images in churches, and maketh this argument. There can be no likeness of God made, therefore not of Christ unless we deny him to be God? Corcerning the first, consider how wisely it is inferred upon that holy father's words. Cyril telleth us that Numa a good king (as julian said) had no forged and feigned images, in his temples, ergo Ciril alloweth no true images of Saints in churches. Is not this beggarly logic, A like argument to M. Calves. and pelting divinity? Consider it by a like. The prophets and Apostles tell us, that the gentiles had no true manner of worshipping the true God in their temples, Ergo the prophets allowed not the true worshipping of God in Christian churches. That Cyrill did not disallow images in the church, it appeareth first by his earnest reply against julian that upbraided the Christians with having the sign of the cross, and thought it an extreme ignorance, to think it unlawful to have the cross. Next by his not reproving neither the fathers that were before his time, neither those that lived in his time, for suffering images in churches. S. Basile before his time allowed images in the church, as appeareth in his sermon upon Barlaam the martyr. There he crieth to the painters in this sort. Go to now, S. Basile alloweth images in churches. o ye notable paincters of noble faictes, set forth with yower art the mutilate image of this captain, making him noble with the colours of yower industry, whom I have somewhat obscurely described and crowned. I will depart as overcomed with the image which you make of the conflicts and victories of the martyr. I will rejoice that by yower dexterity and fineness I am conquered with such victory. And in the same book, in the end he sayeth: Pingatur in tabula una, et certaminum agonotheta Christus: Let Christ the helper of those conflicts and victories be painted also in a table with him, to whom be glory world without end, Amen. Thus much S. Basile, and would he have required them to paincte the image of the martyr, and our saviour Christ, if it had been unlawful to have the images of martyrs and Christ in the church? Would he have desired it in his sermone before the face of all the people, in the open audience, and show himself to rejoice in it, if it had been against God's commandment? Not: His knowledge in the scriptures was greater, and zeal to the honour of God more feruenter, than that either he could be ignorant in such a matter, or would be wilful to commit such an offence. Athanasius alloweth images in churches . Likewise Athanasius allowed images before Cyrillus time, as appeareth in the story, which he declareth of the image of Christ crucified at Berithus. There he sayeth: The faithful Christians and disciples of Christ were warned of the holy Ghost to depart from Jerusalem, and to go to the kingdom of Agrippa, two years before Titus and Vespasianus destroyed the city: Qui egressi ab urbe, omnia quae ad cultum nostrae religionis vel fidei pertinere videbantur secum auferentes, in has regiones transtulerunt. Quo tempore etiam icona cum caeteris rebus ecclesiasticis deportata usque body in Syria permansit. Who departing from the city, taking away with them all things that seemed to apertayne unto our religion or faith, transported them into these countries. At what time also this image being carried away with other things of the church, hath continued unto this present day, in Syria. Here it is to be seen evidently that in those days, even at the beginning, images were adnumbred amongst those things that appartayned ad cultum nostrae religionis, to the furnishing and setting forth of our religion, & cum caeteris rebus ecclesiasticis, with other things of the church. a Oratio. in laudes Theodor Mart. Gregorius Nissenus, b In mira. S. Stepha. Euodius, c In Felice Paulinus. d De consensu. Euangel. lib. 1 cap 10. Libr 22. cont Faust. Manich. cap 73. S. Augustine, e In Cassian. Prudentius, or in Cyrill●● time, or very little before his time, speak in like manner of images amongst Christian men. And if Cyrill had disallowed images in churches, either he would have reproved the fathers that before his days, or those that lived in his days, and had images in their churches, but no such thing appeareth in all his works. Wherefore M. Calf. can not justly say that Cyrill alloweth no images in the church. The other argument that we can make no image of Christ unless we will deny him to be God, The 2. Note. because God lacketh form and shape, is as vain as the first, and so simple that M. Calf. is driven to featche a proof for it, out of an heathen philosopher in stead of scripture, council, and ancient father. Christ our Saviour, God and man, taking upon him the nature and shape of man lived here on earth and died on the cross like a man. And sing it pleased his infinite Majesty to appear unto us in the form and shape of man, I would gladly see M. Calfhils' scriptures, councils, doctors, and fathers that prove we can not paincte the image of Christ as man, unless we will deny him to be God? We esteem not his own assertion, neither the doctrine of Ely Phisi, nor fancy of the Magdeburges so highly that it shall be worthied of authority for scripture, council, or doctor. How fond this fancy is, I have sufficiently declared in the preface. another note is, that if the cross was used in Cyril's time, The. 3. Note. yet there was no picture upon it. And that is but his guess. If it were denied, he would hardly prove it. Last of all, Fol. 173. b The 4. Note. that he condemneth the foolish superstition of Christians in giving worse names unto their churches, than he did to the Temples of his idols. For he called them all the Temples of faith giving thereby the glory to God. whereas we call them S. john's church, S. Mary's church, and such other like. This note is so fine that all men may note him for a very Calf. that noted it. Nor Numa nor his writings can condenne us for building of churches. Numa Pompilius was the next king to Romulus who lived many hundred years before Christ, and never dreamt of Christ nor the Christians, and therefore could not condemn them of superstition. If he say his monuments and writings condemn us, albeit himself did not, I answer, the writings of noon can condemn us in matters of religion, but theirs whom we are bound to follow, as the scriptures, councils, fathers, and prelates of the church. We take not our religion of Numa, nor learn of him, and the gentils the manner of building or dedicating churches. Christ is our Master, under him the bishops and prelates of his church are our spiritual fathers and guides: Of them we must learn our faith, of them we must take instruction how to honour God and serve him. They have builded churches and called them by the name, of S. Peter, Paul, john, and Marie, Stephen and such like, and yet were never condemned of any for superstitious, but of heretics. Athanasius writeth that after the great miracle was wrought by the image which the jews crucified, the Metropolitan of Syria being requested by those that were converted and baptized, converted their Synagogue into a church, and consecrated it in the honour of the saviour of the world. afterward being required to convert other synagogues and hallow them in honore quorundam beatorum Martirun, Lib. de passion. imag. in the honour of certain blessed Martyrs, Dei iwavime fretus cuncta explevit devotus, having confidence in the help of God, he fulfilled all that they required of him like a good devout man. Here the good Metropolitan that dedicated churches in the honour of Martyrs, is not called superstitious, but devout, not alured with foolish zeal, but inspired with an holy spirit. And if it were of any accounted (as M. Calf. imagineth) a foolish superstition of the Christians, to build churches in honour of saints, and call them their names, why doth he not lash out his scriptures, bring in the councils, and ꝓue it by the holy fathers? thinketh he that it is a sufficient discharge of his glorious promise, to bring, in so weighty a matter, against the Christians the only authority of an heathen, infidel, and one that never knew christ, such as Numa and Pythagoras were? Not, we have to many examples to the contrary, of elder age. And to many presidents of holy men sithence, and authorities of councils and fathers to maintain it. And if M. Calf. were as well conversant in S. Ambrose, S. Augustine, Hierome, Gregory, and other ancient fathers, and writers of Ecclesiastical histories, as he is in his Esopes fables and in his new pelting doctors, he would be ashamed that ever he let such a fond sentence, escape his mouth. For in S. Ambrose he shall find a church called by the name of Geruasius, Libr. 10. epist. 85. Lib. 22. de civit. Dei cap. 8. Ibidem. cap. 10. Cont Vigilant. add Ripa. Lib. 3. dialog. ca 26. and Protasius, and another of S. Fausta, an other of S. Felix, and Nabor. In S. August. a memory of S. Stephen, and altars in honour of Martyrs. In S. Hierome, basilicas Apostolorum Prophetarum, & Martirum, churches of the Apostles, Prophets and Martyrs. In Gregory a church called by the name of S. Paul, and so in all other writers and historiagraphers almost as thick as hail. And certes such holy fathers, such learned doctors, such famous writers, such true historiographers could have discerned true religion from vain superstition. And if they had thought it only a will worship or service unacceptable to God, they would never so willingly, so gladly, and so devoutly have dedicated those churches, and called them by the name of Saints. Thus much of his notes: where it is to be noted that he had rather follow Numa Pompiliꝰ, that reigned over the Romans, them the holy ghost that governed the holy fathers: heathens and philosophers, than Christians, and true Catholic doctors. As for his negative arguments, Paul sayeth, not, Quaecunque picta sunt, Fol. 166. a. sed quecunque scripta sunt, what so ever things are payncted, but what things soever are written, are written for our instruction, Paul saith not that by images or gasinge stocks, but through patience and comfort of the scriptures, we may have hope, Paul saith not all pictures, but all scripture inspired of God is profitable to teach, to reprove, to instruct, that the man of God may be perfect, ergo images and pictures be not profitable to teach, ergo Images and pictures be to no use, I leave, with a great many more, to the logisioners and determiners in the schools. The meanest and symplest of them all knoweth, that nothing can be truly concluded of negatives. Certain lies and slanders are contained in this Article, and as yet not touched. You shall hear of them in their place. Now to the tenth Article. THE ADORATION AND WORSHIP OF THE CROSS ALLOWED BY THE AVNcient fathers. THE TENTH ARTICLE. IF YOU craked less master Calf. in the overthrowing foundations that are to strong for your weakness, and did lay forth before the face of the world weightier proofs, men would think their labour better bestowed in reading your writings. But you are so full of cracks, and no deeds, that you do men great wrong to trouble them, with so many words without substance of matter. Parturiunt montes: The hills travail, as though they lay in child bed, but after long expectation of a fair baby, out cometh a soul and foolish mouse from the hills side, that giveth all that see it occasion of laughter. Calf. Fol. 175. a. b. You say: it had hen reason that I should have proved an adoration of the cross by some testimony of scripture, which in God's matters only and sufficiently do take order. Mart. Protestant's prove not all their doctrine out of scripture . As though God had so tied himself to the written letter of the scripture, that nothing can be taken for truth, but that which is had in written scripture. It is no where found in written scripture that baptism ministered by an heretic after the manner of the catholic church should be allowable: yet the church alloweth it. Philip Melanchton an old friend and master of yours having to prove the baptism of infants against the Anabaptists, Article 10 was compelled to allege the custom of the universal church, because he had no express scripture for it. Friar Luther your great idol denied S. Paul's epistle to the Hebrews, and S. james and S. judes epistles to be scripture. If a man should require you to prove by scripture that those epistles are no scripture, I think you would be as void of all scripture to confute your masters assertion, as you would have the world think that we are for the adoration of the cross. In your late Synod you made a distinction of the books of scripture. Some ye call Agiographall, some Apocryphal, some Canonical: but are you or they able to prove this distinction by any express testimony of scripture? Tumble and toss the Bible, search your wits, ask counsel of the superintendents, and let us have your resolution. You may study as many years as Waltams Calf went miles, and prove yourself as wise as he, before you find it there. You say: Fol. 175. b I saw the scripture direct against me. But how could I see that, sing the catholic church by whose only tradition and authority we have received the scripture is evidently and plainly with me. Touching the ignorant painter that drew a cock evil favoredly, and commanded his boy, Ibidem. The paincters Cock to keep the quick cocks away to cover his fault, it could never come in better tyme. For you are the ignorant painters that have drawn an evil favoured cock, that is, a new plat of religion, Promotors sent to the havens to keep out the catholic books. depending of heresy and lies. And because certain of our books do lively set forth the truth, and unplume the filthy feathers of your evil favoured cock, you have sent abroad your spies, our promotors, your searchers and your ministers, that noon of the lively cocks should be brought into the realm to crow against your evil favoured painted cock. Where to shifted away the authority of the fathers that speak for the adoration of the cross, you say, Fol. 175. b they have overshot themselves in terms, I beseek your mastership tell us, were those ancient fathers, Athanasius, Chrysostomus, Lactantius, Augustinus, Paulinus, Damascenus, and the fathers of the sixth general council in Constantinople, so ignorant that they could not tell how to use their terms? Were they so unwary of their words, that in a matter of great weight, wherein if they should overshoot themselves in terms they might train the people to idolatry, they would speak they knew not what, and give other occasion by following their guess to rove far from all godliness? The fathers to wise to overshoot themselves in their terms . Not M. Calf. Their wisdom was greater, and learning more sounder, than so fondly to overshoot themselves in terms. But how do you prove this wicked slander that you lay to their charged? By God's evident and plain commandment? Take heed, you promise' no more than you are able to perform. Calf. Fol. 175. b Before you bring forth God's evident, and plain commandment, you say: If I had ꝓceded according to the rule of skill, I should have showed what adoration and worship is, and then have applied it to the cross. Mart. Every term is not to be defined , As though a man were bound by the fantastical rule of your unskilful skill, to define every term that falleth in talk: and nothing were presupposed to be known among Christian men. You have talked in your book of God, but in all your talk where have you defined what God is? You have talked of the devil, but where have you defined what the devil is? If you should presuppose nothing in talk as known, but would be so precise in your unskilful skill, that nothing should escape undefyned, when would you make an end of any matter which you take in hand to debate? Never whiles you live: But sing the rule of your unskilful skill doth so lead you to define every thing before you can proceed, and to presuppose that the word of adoration and worship were not known among good Christian men, before you made your deduction out of the Hebrew and Greek, and describe it, by bowing down, prostrating yourself, or by bowing he knee, and putting of the cap, which you say, can in no sense be given to an image or to a sensebesse thing, At this time as I am well contented with the former part touching your explication of adoration and worship: Even so do I much marvel that you being so often in the court do not forbidden men to put of their caps to the queens majesties cloth of estate, which is both a senseless thing, and a dead creature? Can you that are of so hot a spirit of reformation, hold your peace, and see such idolatry committed (if your own rule be true? By M. Calves rule no man may put of his cap to the Cloth of estate etc. ) If you were ever served with a privy seal, or stood by when other were served, I think either you did put of your cap, or see other that did. If it be idolatry, why have you done it yourself? Why have you not preached against it? Can you find fault with them that put of their caps to the cross, and find noon with them that put of their caps, when they receive the queens majesties letters, which are as senseless as the cross? I pray you good sir be as favourable master to the cross on which our saviour Christ died for us all, as you are to the cloth of estate or the privy seal, or the queens majesties letters, which are never able to be the instruments whereby any such benefit may be wrought unto us. In the rehearsal of God's evident and plain commandment out of Exodus, Cap. 20. I marvel much that you did not rehearse the former part which doth utterly forbid (as some of you were wont to preach) the having of any graven work or similitude, which is in heaven above or in earth beneath, or in the water under the earth? Why spoke you not against painting, imbrodering, and silk works? peradventure the queens Majesties arrises, noble men's arms, and gentle men's recognisances, of dragons, eagles, owls, horses, fawkons, dogs, Apes and such like stayed your pen. Or perchance your wives amorours' image, persuaded you to allow the having of such images, and search a gentle interpretations of God's plain and evident commandment. If the case stand so, God's commandment in Exod. toucheth not our images. then let us desire your clarkship with as good reason to search out some gentle understanding in the second part of the said commandment, at the old ancient father's request, who saw right well that all the places that you allege, against us, touched not the images allowed by the Catholic church, but are all referred against, the idols of the gentiles. Which being so, reason would, that you should have proved that the places of scripture which you alleag, had utterly forbidden the images of Christ and his saints: Then had they been to some purpose. But because that passed your capacity, you did as wisely in omitting it, as you did foolishly in alleging scriptures to the to the purposes they served not. The images against which the prophets cry Esa. 46. Esa. 2. Num. 22. Osee. 10. Amos. 5. Cap. 7. The idols of the gentils against whom the prophets do so earnestly writ, are no where found in all scripture to be the images of Christ, and his saints: But the images of Bel and Nabo, and the images of Molewarpes, and reremise, and the images of Baal, the images of Moloch, and Remphan, whereof S. Stephen speaketh in the acts. These and such other are the idols, and images against which the prophets speak: And do not you think M. Calf. that S Ambrose, Augustine, Hierome, Epiphanius, Chrysostomus, Damascenus, Cassiodorus, Euthymius, and other fathers did understand what the prophets meant by the idols against which they cry, as well as you, or rather better than you? Your arrogancy is great, yet I think you will not imagine yourself able to match with these men. If you do, we can but lament the arrogancy, and fond opinion conceived of our own wit, little learning, and less discretion. S. Ambro. De obitu Theodos . S. Ambrose doth witness, that Helena lifted up the cross in the head of kings, that the cross of Christ should be adored in kings. How like you this saying of S. Ambrose? Because he said, the cross should be adored, will you say, he overshots himself in his terms? S. Augustine. if you do, what will you say to S. Augustine upon whose authority evil understood you ground many of your heresies? He taking of the cross how honourably it was placed in the foreheads of Christian men, hath those words. There was nothing at that time more intolerable in the flesh, there is nothing now more glorious in the forehead: what keepeth he for his faithful servant that gave such honour to his punishment? Finally it is not now used amongst the Romans in punishing the condemned. For where the cross of our lord was honoured men thought that the guilty person should have been honoured, Tract. 36. in joan. In Psal. 36 if he were put to death upon the cross. How like you this? S. Augustine teacheth that Christ made his cross honourable and that the Romans honoured it, and forbore the punishing of malefactors upon the cross because the people for the honour which they did bear unto the cross, were likely for the cross his sake to honour thieves and murderers, if they were put to death upon the cross. If you spare him, as I trust you will reverence his age, learning, and plentiful graces of God in him, I trust you wilbe as good M. to S. Hier. who was somewhat elder, and very well learned in terms, Latin, Greek and Hebrew, S. Hierom and not say to his chardg that he overshot himself in terms. He writeth of the grave and sad matron Paula in this sort. She went about to every place with so great and fervent desire, that she would not departed from the first places, In epitaphio Paulae. Pilgrimage. A cross. Adoration before the cross. save that she made haste to go to the rest, and she lying prostrate before the cross, (awake M. Calf.) as though she had seen Christ hanging upon the cross, she did adore. She having entered into the sepulchre did kiss the stone of resurrection, and the very place where our saviours body did lie, she licked, and kissed with her faithful mouth. Hitherto S. Hierome. Here you hear of Paula his pilgrimage, from one holy place to another, you hear there was a cross, and how she lay ꝓstrate before the cross, and made adoration as though she had seen Christ hanging there before her face. What will M. Calf. object against these three ancient fathers? Will he call them idolaters? That were to gross. Will he say they overshot themselves in terms, as he said of Chrisostome, Athanase, S. Basile and the rest? That were to arrogant? What shalbe his refuge then, if one say unto him, he may worship and honour the cross as these and other holy men did? Forsooth he will say, avoid Satan. By which you may note how finely he can apply scripture. Christ spoke those words to the devil. Scripture finely applied . And can any wise man think that the cross which S. Hierome, S. Ambrose, S. Augustine, and other fathers, whom I mentioned before, would have to be honoured should be so odious to a Christian man, that it should be as great horror to fall down before it, as it is to fall down before the devil? Not surely, except it be our sir james, who is not ashamed to say, that the holy fathers did overshoot themselves in terms, and yet is so blind himself that he knoweth not how to use his terms. For writing in ꝓse, Fol. 176. b he talketh of a wooden tree, as though there were such difference of matter in trees, that unless he had put in that epitheton, we should have imagined that he had spoken of some horned graft and or leaden tree. But you may see his wit. Now let us mark how wisely he wringeth the scripture that our Saviour alleged against the devil to be understood of the cross: he sayeth: It is written, Thou shalt worship thy lord thy God, Matt. 4. Calf. Fol. 176. a and him only shalt though serve. Now worship and service so jointly do concur together, that the one can not be without the other. If only we must serve God, him only we must worship. It is true sir, what conclude you of this? That we may not worship the cross? Mart. By M. Calves rule we must not honour nor serve our parents. Eccle. 3. What mean you to imagine such sophistical arguments as these are? I must honour noon but God, whom I must serve, ergo by your wise rule, I must neither honour my father, mother, nor serve them. And yet the scripture biddeth me do both, and maketh the honour of my father and mother agreed with the honour of God without any repugnancy. He that feareth God, doth honour his parents, and serve them that begat him, as Lords. Now M. Calf. as the only service that men own to God doth not repugn against the service that good children own to their parents, and as the honour dew to God doth not impugn the honour dew unto our parents, but both may stand: Even so the honour that is dew unto God, is nothing contrary to the honour that is done unto the cross. If M. Calves wisdom had proved that there is as great contrariety between Christ and his cross, as there is between God and the devil, than he might have concluded his purpose, somewhat likely out of that place of scripture alleged against the devil. But S. Ambrose, S. Hierome, and S. Augustine have laid such a beetel in his way, that he shall have a knock in the head like a Calf. if he attempt it. If a man would deny that principle of his, that service and worship do so concur together that one can not be without the other, and require him to prove it by scripture, council, or doctor, Article. 9 I think he would be found for all his lusty hot bedlam spirit, as devoid of all authority and reason, as an Ass is to seek of a good amble. Might not a man lay to his chardg out of his own declaration of adoration and worship, I may worship him, whom I do not serve. that I may bow my knee or put of my cap to diverse men, whom I purpose never to serve? And because worship consisteth, in part, of bowing the knee or putting of the cap, prove that service and worship do not so concur together, but that one may be without the other? The common course of our life declareth it. We must serve God only, I grant: that is we must serve no other God but him, nor any other before him, or abowe him or contrary to him. But he hath not proved, God only to be served, and how. that the cross hath been taken of any for God, nor that the adoration and worship of it, is a thing contrary to the service of God: nor shalbe able as long, as S. Ambrose, Hierome, Augustine, and other holy fathers say the contrary. This argument being rotten before it come out of the shell, he fleeth to another as childishly as though he had forgot the rules of his unskilful skill. Thus he saith. In the epistle to the Hebrews S. Paul proveth Christ more excellent than the angels, because they worship Christ. Heb. 1. Fol. 176. a An addition not in S. Paul Which I grant: but than he addeth upon his own head, but they are not worshipped again. For it is not in S. Paul's epistle that the angels are not worshipped again. And there he playeth a cast of ligier demayne to blear the ignorants eyes. If he meaneth, that angels worship Christ, and that Christ doth not worship them again, as in some sense it is true, even so it maketh nothing to his purpose to subvert the adoration of the cross. For what kind of reasoning call ye this? The angels worship Christ, but Christ doth not worship them again, A fine reason. acknowledging them to be his equals or superiors: Ergo we may not worship an angel? where was this sophistry learned? at Waltam belike. And as though he had made sure work, forth he goeth, if angels have not this adoration, what adoration M. Calf? Mean you that Christ doth not adore them? If it be so, then as it is very true: So is it far from the purpose. If you mean that we must not exhibit this adoration which is only proper to God to any angel, Angels not forbidden in S. Paul to be worshipped, as Christian men do worship them. that is true, but as far wide from this purpose, as the other. If you mean that S. Paul saith: We aught to give no kind of adoration to angels, that is false, and no where found in that epistle of S. Paul. Which you must make good, or else you can not not proceed with this argument against the adoration of the cross, by taking away the adoration of angels, which is not mentioned in S. Paul to the He brews. Wherefore you may put that argument in your purse. It will not follow: If angels have not this adoration, shall a vile stock, Fol. 176. a or a cold cankered, corrupt piece of metal have it? Therefore what talk you of a vile stock, or a cold, cankered corrupt piece of metal? Our reasoning is of the adoration of the cross, and not of a vile stock, nor corrupt metal, be it cankered or cold. Damascene maketh a plain difference, between the matter, be it metal or wood, and the sign of the cross. Why are you so ignorant to take the one for the other? Lib. 4. ca 12. de fide . Why make you such a fond argument: We may not adore the metal nor wood, ergo we may not adore the sign of the cross? which is in the metal or wood? The sign of the cross worshipped, and not the matter whereof it is made . Know your folly by Damascene: We adore, saith he, the figure of the precious and the life working cross, though it be made of another matter, not worshipping the matter for God forbidden that, but the figure as the sign of Christ. Hitherto Damascene: by whom you may learn to make a difference between the wood and the sign, the metal and the figure, and leave to range like a lavish hound that knoweth not his game. The catholics, when the figure is blurred out, or the image broken, pass as little for the wood and the cold cankered corrupt metal, as the most spritish puritan and peevish protestant that liveth. Act. 10. The fact of S. Peter. lifting up Cornelius The fact of S. Peter lifting up Cornelius that fell at his feet and worshipped him, saying: Rise up, for I myself am a man, maketh nothing against me. For both S. Peter might do that of humility toward Cornelius who was placed in good authority, giving him to understand, Article 10 that as he saw him that was his master sent of God, little pass for any such glory of the world, even so he should in the whole trade os his life use humility, and not esteem the honour and glory that might be given him. August de praedest. sanct. lib. ● cap 7. 1. Cor. 4. further he might do it to instruct Cornelius, who was but yet very young in the faith, and had but a little glimpse of it, that he should yield no other kind of honour to him, than was dew to the minister of God, and faithful dispenser of God his mysteries, not taking the ministers to be the principal workers and givers of grace, but as the deliverers of those holy mysteries, which he received at God's hand. For although S. Peter spoke those words, for the better instruction of Cornelius (who had already done his adoration both inwardly in heart, and outwardly in bodily gesture by falling down at his feet, no doubt without all idolatry by the special aid of God, who would not suffer him at his first coming to Christianity to commit idolatry, whose prayers and alms deeds he had so well allowed before), yet did he never reprove him for doing that act of adoration, as M. Calf falsely sayeth, nor ever refused to have the honour, as a thing unlawful, that was dew by the very saying of our saviour Christ unto him as an Apostle. Matt. 10. For Christ said, he that receiveth you, receiveth me, and he that despiseth you despiseth me. God is honoured, God is despised, God is loved, God is persecuted in his servants. Pri. Reg. 20. 3. Reg 1. David suffered Abigail, and Nathan the prophet to adore him. further to make the matter more plain, that M. Calf. may see his blindness. We have examples in the old testament, that Abigail adored David lying prostrate at his feet, entreating for her husband's pardon. Nathan the prophet lying groveling on the ground adored king David also. And if this kind of adoration had been idolatry, neither would so good a king as David was, praised of God himself, have suffered Abigail to have fallen flat to the ground, neither the Prophet Nathan to have adored him. Seeing then this adoration that Cornelius did, was no idolatry, there is no cause why S. Peter might not have suffered it to be done unto him as David fuffred it to be done unto him by Abigail and Nathan the prophet. Apoc. 19 & 22. The places of the Apocalypse, make not against the adoration of the cross . Touching the places of the Apocalypse, where the angel refused to be worshipped, when the Evangelist fell down at his feet, if we should follow the notable declaration of worship and adoration which he made in the beginning of this Article, the Evangelist had done his adoration, before the Angel did forbidden him. For he saith: Cecidi, I fell down, I prostrated myself, before his feet. By which it appeareth that the adoration was actually done, if by M. Calves declaration, it consisteth only in the prostration of the body, bowing of the knee, or putting of the cap. And if the adoration was actually done, go, and past, how could the angel forbidden it? It followeth in the text ut adorarem, that I might adore, ergo notwithstanding the prostration of the body, and falling down at the angels feet, the adoration was not done, and so consequently it appeareth that adoration standeth not only in the bowing or prostrating the body, What worship the angel did forbidden the Evangelist. but may be separated, as this text importeth. The angel forbade the Evangelist to give him worship, not that worship which was dew unto him as to an angel, but he would noon of that absolute worship and adoration which is dew to God only. Therefore he told the Evangelist, who might have been deceived in taking him to be God himself, and so might have given the adoration dew to God, to the angel, that he was but a servant of God, as the Evangelist was. But what of all this? Because angels refused to be adored and worshipped as God, shall we refuse to give that honour and worship that may be given to an angel, or any other creature, as the image that represenreth unto me Christ, and the cross that leyeth before mine eyes the merits of his passion? By what reason can M. Calf. make this good? surely I know not. If he bringeth it to the schools, he shall sooner have the noise of a goose, than praise of a scholar for it. We may licence him like a lord in his own dungehill, to call the image of Christ, a soul block, Fol. 176. a b. Blasphemy. a vile stock, a cold, cankered, corrupt piece of metal, a post forbidden to be made, accursed to be used, a dumb God, and a dead devil, and use such fine eloquence, as he hath learned of Martin Luther and friar Bale: and of a lusty courage, Article 9 and vain singularity to prefer himself, before S. Ambrose, S. Augustine, S. Hierome, S. Gregory, and other fathers of the church, The images of angels, oxen, Lions and such like in Salomon's temple, and the tabercle by the appointment of God. What adoration is given to images. who commend images and the worship of them unto us. But until he answer to the Cherubins that God commanded Moses to make to cover the propitiatory, to the brazen serpent, to the Lions, oxen and other images in Salomon's temple, which are as far against the commandment, as the crucisix, the cross, and the image of Christ, I will never acknowledge that the scriptures are against me. Nay as long as he, and his, do neither answer the places which we bring out of scriptures, and fathers, nor prove that the whole catholic church hath erred in admitting images into the church, and worshipping them, Dulia, with a mean and reverent kind of adoration and honour, such as hath been given to creatures, and we commonly give one to another, I will boldly say, and stoutly affirm that the scriptures are with me: and prove it as need shall require. but to proceed. He findeth fault with the seven authorities, which I alleged out of the fathers and councils for the adoration of the cross, and in effect saith nothing more than he said before. Wherefore you shall expect no other answer than I made before: If it may please you to look back to that which went before, you shall see every one of his cavils to the said places detected. Where he saith that I brought but seven authorities in all, Fol. 176. b I must tell his worship that I brought not those seven authorities only, because I had no more to bring, The seventeen authorities brought by M. Calf examined. but because I was loathe to cumber the readers with more authorities than was necessary. If the avoiding of tediousness hinder me not, He may before I make and end, hear more authorities perhaps, than will stand with his honesty. He braggeth hard of seventeen for seven, that my blind ignorance, or wilful obstinacy may the more appear, as he saith. And S. Clement is the first which he allegeth. S Clement speaketh no word against the cross and images of Saints . But where doth S. Clement speak against the image of Christ, and the cross, M. Calf. or any other image used in the church? If you bring me not that in express terms out of S. Clement, or so frame your argument out of his authority that men may as well see that he spoke against the cross, as he did against the idols of gentility, you shall bring nothing against me and the Catholics. We condemn and abhor as well as you, all the idols of gentility, which the paynims took to be very Gods, giving that adoration of supreme dominion unto them, which is due only to God himself, as appeareth a little before, in the same place of S. Clement which you allege. For they against whom S. Peter speaketh, confessed by way of talk, that there was one God lord of all: but thy would needs have diverse other gods also, that should have equal honour with him, and rule the world under him, as the Emperor hath diverse, Officers, Lieutenants, Consuls, Tribunes and such like. Against whom S. Peter reasoneth by their own example, of the Emperor and his officers. You (say quoth he) that God is compared to the Emperor, and that all the other Gods may be compared to his judges, and other officers: keep than the example of Cesar the Emperor, Lib. 5. recog. S. Peter's talk to the gentiles. which yourselves have set forth, and know ye, that as it is not lawful to geave Caesar's name to any of his judges, officers, and lieutenants, otherwise as well he that taketh it upon him, as they that do give it, shallbe put to death: Even so touching this matter, your duty is to understand, that if any do give the name of God, to any other besides him, and the other do also take it upon him, they shall have one condemnation and death much worse than Caesar's officers. For he that playeth the traitor against Caesar, suffereth but temporal death: but be that committeth treason against the one only true God, shall suffer pains eternal. And well worthy because he hath shamefully against alright abused the singular name of God that can be verified but in one: although this word God, The word God abused tendeth to the injury of God himself. be not the name of God, but a word which is given men for the while as it were, for his name, which not withstanding as I said, where it is spitefully used, tendeth to very injury of his very true name. Hitherto S. Clement of S. Peter's talk. Now M. Calf. you may open your eyes, and see that here is no word against the cross, against the image of Christ and holy sanctes, but only against the idols of gentility, which the Paynims adored and honoured as very Gods, and said that such were rulers of the world under God. Their idols had in themselves nor any divine power nor represented any thing that had any such divine power, or excellency above the common creatures, yea they were worse than the basest creatures of all, because the devils gave their oracles out of them to deceive the people. They worshipped, Apis the ox, the goat, the serpent, Ibis the soul of Egypt, oynions, The idols of the gentiles against which S. Clement spoke. privies, fyestes, farts, the ague: and of every one of these they made a God, and gave them no less honour than they should have given to God himself. Against the honour that is given to these you may bring in S. Clement's authority: but against the honour that is given to the cross of Christ, at the which the devils do tremble, against the image of Christ set up, in part, to condemn the Manichees heresy that denied Christ his incarnation and humanity, against the picture of our blessed lady his mother and other saints, against the image of Christ's own face that he gave to Veronica, and sent to king Abgarus, there is not so much as one word in S. Clement: but this is there, that this word God is not the very propre name of God. For there is no one word, nor all the words of honour in all the world able to express the very propre name of God, but he saith: It is given men for the while for his name: And if it be spitefully abused, it tendeth to the injury of his true name. If then by S. Clement, this word (God) be not the proper name of God, but a name delyured for the time to the dull capacity of men that are not able to understand his very true name, and yet the abusing of this word (God) which is but a sensible word to the ear, as the image is a sensible work to the eye, tendeth to the injury of God his true and proper name, why did not M. Calf. and his company perceive that the abusing of the cross of Christ, The abusing of the cross tendeth to the despite of Christ. in the image where his body rend and torn for our redemption is represented unto us, tendeth as well to the despite of Christ, as the abusing the word (God) tendeth to the injury of God his true and proper name? May there be spite done in words that we hear, and can there be noon done in things subjects to the eye? I think M. Calf. is not so far past all grace, but when he precheth he putteth of his cap, and the people make courtesy, when he nameth the sweet name of jesus Christ, and yet the name of jesus that is named at sermons, or written in books is not jesus himself, As our ears call upon us to bow our knees at the name of jesus So do the eyes at the sight of the crucifix. Galat. 3. but his name, and a word that vanisheth into the air as soon as it is spoken. And if we may do honour to the name of jesus, which is but a sound rebownding in their air, and not jesus himself, by bowing the knee, and putting of the cap, why should we not honour the image of Christ, and sign of his cross, by which his bitter passion is represented unto our eyes. S. Paul writing to the Galathians, saith, that Christ was painted before their eyes. For so doth Erasmus translate the Greek word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ante depictus, painted before, as the word doth bear and signify. If then our ears do call upon us to bow our knees, and adore the name of jesus, when it is pronounced, because S. Paul said that every knee should bow in that name, Philip. 2. Why should not our eyes call upon us to bow down our knees, and adore the crucifix and image of Christ, who as S. Paul saith is painted and crucified before our eyes. Out of this place of S. Paul, let it be taken howsoever M. Calf. will, either he must say that the crucifix was verily painted before the Galathians eyes representing the passion and murdering of Christ as lively, as it was in a manner done maliciously by the jews, or else S. Paul must mean that they carried the image of the cross, and how Christ his body was rend and torn in their minds always. And if it were lawful for them to have the image of Christ's bitter passion suffered upon the cross, always in their minds as painted before their eyes, why is it not as lawful to have that image painted in a fair table to be represented unto our bodily eyes, as it is to carry the image of Christ's cross in our minds? Speak M. Calf? Answer if you can? Will you allow the having of the image of Christ's cross within our soul, where if it be an evil thing, it will do more harm? and will you inhabit the having of the self same image to be represented to our bodily eyes? Where if it be evil, it may do you less harm? The common order of nature planted for the understanding of things by God his special providence in man, Learning cometh by the senses. hath so his beginning of the senses, especially of the sight and of the hearing, that no ma should ever understand, or conceive aught in the inward part of his soul, but the first occasion thereof riseth (as Aristotel and other learned philosophers say) of the very senses. Their intent that take away sensible things, that move devotion . And they that go about to take away the sensible things that move men to devotion by the eyes and the ears, do naught else, but reprove the common order, that God hath planted in man's creation to come to learning, and do the best they can to make all christian men believe, they have souls without bodies, and seem to pass little upon the article of resurrection. Your last injunctions take order that all the people should kneel at the receiving of the communion after your schismatical order: and yet according to your doctrine, Kneeling at the communion. there is no transubstantiation, of the bread and wine into the body and blood of our saviour Christ. To whom do ye kneel? to the bread and wine? that were idolatry, by your declaration of adoration and worship out of Hebrew and Greek. Doth the bread and wine which you see, put you in mind to kneel to jesus Christ? Christian men may kneel before the cross as well as before bred and wine at the english communion . If that be your answer, why may not Christian people kneel before the cross, and thereby be admonished to tender their adoration and worship to jesus Christ, as you are by bread and wine? Search the crooked corners of your wit M. Calf. and when you have put of your brazen face let us have a true answer. And sing S. Clement talketh there of the idols of the gentils, give us a good cause why you do liken the images that represent the triumphs of Christ and his Saints unto such idols. We read in the scripture that holy men, judges, and magistrates, were called Dij Gods, by participation and resembling God his authority in the execution of their office. But that the idols of the gentiles or they that were represented by them, were ever called by that honourable name, to their praise as the other are, it is no where to be seen. But Dij gentium daemonia, the Gods of the gentils are devils. Wherfere to conclude concerning this place S. Clement, we do abhor both the Egyptians and their dumb beasts which they made their Gods, settling their adoration in them. We defy their ox, their goat, their serpent, their Ibis, their cat, their dog, and all their idols: and all those that worship the things that never lived, Christian men have not to do with the images that S. Clement talketh of. making the perfect end and full resting place of their adoration in them: And if you be ignorant, we tell you that we have nothing to do with those idols that S. Clement mentioneth, we do not worship them, we do not adore them, we do not reverence them. further we tell you, that it is to childish a practice, and foolish toy, to bring that against our images, and worshipping of them which was spoken of the gentils idols, which they worshipped as Gods. Where you bring another place of S. Clement declaring that the devil sayeth by the mouth of other. We to the worship of the invisible God worship the visible images. Calf. And this is most certainly false, for if ye will truly worship God his image, ye should being beneficial to man, worship the true image of man in him, I tell you as I told you before, that S. Clement speaketh thereof the gentils idols, Mart. such as the church never used. Who did ever set up a drawght, a jakes, a fart, a fyeste, Images of idolatry mentioned by S. Clement. a cat, a dog, a serpent, an ox or a Calf. to be worshipped? Such are the images of idolatry against whom S. Clement's place serveth, and not the images of Christ and his saints. Therefore you did well to bid the reader mark, that S. Clement's place proveth, that it proceedeth of the suggestion of the devil, that men for God's honour will worship, such images: And in mine opinion you shall do wisely to call upon all those that set their delight upon belly cheer, and make that their God, as some of the Egyptians did, of whom S. Clement speaketh, and have unleaded many a church and peeled many a poor man, to maintain that, and have made fine galleries, trim privies, and brave jakes for such purposes as the Egyptians did, and tell them that S. Clement speaketh against them, for serving so soul a god, or thinking that by honouring such fair images of such sluttish offices, they honour the invisible God. Among other things which you keep in England yet not reform, one is to take, an oath upon a book. Article 10 Wherein you are very liberal, before you are desired. Swearing a kind of adoration Now you know that to swear is a plain act of adoration, whither it be given by simple contestation, or by execration for the delivering of some creature to the malediction of God, if the thing be found otherwise than is contained in the oath. Here I must ask you, why you do exhibit to God this high and excellent kind of service and adoration, by a material book, which the printer printed, or the scrivener wrote in paper or parchment? If you may exhibit the high act of adoration by an oath upon a book, which is a dumb, visible, and senseless thing, why may not we as well exhibit to Christ the high act of adoration, and thanks giving for his benefits given us by his death on the cross, by casting our eyes upon his image, where the dullest man that is, Adoration may be given to God by sight of an images, as well as by taking an oath upon a book. if he be a Christian man may lively see in the twincle of an eye what torments our saviour Christ suffered for us? Have you any better reason to save him from idolatry that taketh an oath upon a dumb visible, and senseless book, than we can render for him that kneeleth before the crucifix? No. Look what shift you can make for the book, the same will we make for the crucifix: look what defects you lay to the crucifix, the same we will say to your book. S. Clement as hard as in your opinion he maketh against images, Lib. 5. recog. granteth in plain terms that we may worship the image of God in man: and if we may worship the true image of God in man, The image of God worshipped in man. than I trust you will grant that the true image of God is in man, and that we may worship that image by some external act of the body, and that the external act with which we shall worship that image is no idolatry. And if you grant this, what reason is there why you should not grant, that we sing the image of Christ, and his saints, and thereby calling, to remembrance that they were men, and in the shape of men upon the earth, endued with the lively image of God, may not with some external act worship them, and commit no idolatry in worshipping God, and his lively image in them? Let us have a reason at your next reply. In the mean time the gentle reader may both understand, that this place of S. Clement maketh nothing against the images of Christ and his cross, and also perceive that your cavillations against the cross are but vain and foolish, and by this sufficiently descried. The rest of the old fathers which you allege, speak nothing in express words nor against the cross, nor against the images of holy saints. Nor there is any thing whereby it may be substantially gathered, that they boor any such hatred to the cross, as you do bear the world in hand. The images that they speak against are the idols used of the gentiles, as the place of Clement of Alexandria doth declare, The images against which the sathers speak. and not the cross and crucifix. They were the images of Diana, of Isis, Pluto, Mercurius, Bacchus, Serapis, Castor, Pollux, Hercules, Osiris, , jupiter, juno, Cupid, Venus, Saturnus, Neptune, Ceres, Proserpina, and such like idols. Of these the fathers speak. Master Calf. for his life can not find one place against the cross and image of Christ, do the best he can. Therefore the words of Clement ask whither they be not monstrous men that worship stones, Clemens Alexandrinus. must be understood of those idols, and those gentils that worshipped them as Gods, as appeareth by the words that follow. And though you master Calf. blinded with pride, and heresy, can not see what the cross is better than a stone, yet as long as Damascene and other fathers of the church do put so plain a difference (as I told you before) betwixt the sign and the metal, the figure and the matter, I trust every good Christian man, will see it to be much better than a stone, in respect of him whose sign and figure it beareth. As for the stones that Clement speaketh of, what they are I have told you already, and whosoever worship such, they are monstrous in deed. Words shuffled in, that be not in the author. Fol. 177. b But as for our images, you shall never prove to be such, as long as you live: and sing Clement speaketh not of them what honesty is there in you to shuffle in these words crosses and crucifixes, among his, where as he hath no such word? What honesty is there in you, that repeating those words that follow corrupted the author and left out some of his words, and where he said: Adorant autem hij qui deos faciunt, non deos & daemones, They who make goods do not worship God's and devils etc., Why left you out these words, qui deos faciunt? they that make God's? why used you such vile corruption? Thought you that the book should not be conferred, and the place considered? If you did, we pity your folly and as Clement had compassion upon the gentils that were so mad as to honour senseless things, with divine honour dew to God: So have we compassion of your blindness, ignorance, and malice, that imagine the Christians to give divine honour to senseless things, and worship idols as gentils did. As for the places of Irenaeus, Ireneus Tertullian. and Tertullian, they have nothing to your purpose but that which is contained in the commandment Exod. 20. they are answered in the preface. The place of S. Cyprian would have expounded itself, S. Cyprian. if you had not as a false heretic corrupted the place, and left out his words. For whereas speaking against the gentiles that worshipped their idols as Gods, he said, Quid te ad falsos deos humilias et inclinas? why dost thou humble and bow they self to false Gods? you because the simple should not see that S. Cyprian spoke of those that worshipped idols, and false images as Gods, leave them out, and infer your own fancy, that to bow, to kneel, Fol. 178 b Calf. to show any sign of reverence to an earthly counterfeit▪ is contrary to nature and against the dignity of our creation, and a wicked worship. And if that be simply true, Mart. them by your doctrine it is contrary to nature, and against the dignity of our creation, and a wicked worship, By M. Calves doctrine it is contrary to nature to show any reverence to the cloth of estate etc. Fol. 179. a to put of our caps to the cloth of estate: for there is an earthly counterfeit of a lion, a dragon, a greyhound, and flower de Luice. Then it is contrary to nature, and against the dignity of our creation, and a wicked worship to show any sign of reverence when we receive the princes letters or broad seal. For there is an earthly counterfeit of an horse, and a harnessed man, of a prince of a sceptre of a sword. And if you think it true, preach it at the court. Your illation upon Origen's words, That whatsoever our minds are, our bodies must not bow to any cross or creature, is as foolish as the other. For who but you would say, we may not worship the idol of jupiter, juno, Venus: Ergo we may not worship the image of Christ. We may not bow our knees, nor put of our caps, to the images of Mercury, Ceres, Proserpina, and such like, Ergo we may not bow our knees nor put of our caps to the cross of Christ? May not a man put of his cap to his friend, Origen speaketh against the gentiles idols. humble his body to his better, give reverence to the cloth of estate, bow the knee to the prince, and kneel at your cummunion, whatsoever his mind be? This is a strange position, worthy to be preached at the court. Or if that place be terrible for so malapert a minister, you may go to the ale bench, and tell them that king David did stark nought when he suffered Abigail to lie prostrate before him. And if your evangelical spirit will serve you, tell them, the prophet Nathan was an idolater because he bowed his body to David: tell them that jacob that bowed his body to Esau committed idolatry, tell them that they that kneel down and ask their father's blessing, humble their bodies to the prince, and kneel at the communion do nought. For what soever our minds are, our bodies must not bow to any cross or creature. As for the worshipping that Origen mentioneth there, we condemn and ever did. And unless you were maliciously set, you would never allege it. Do you not see that he speaketh there of the gentiles idols, and worshipping and adoring them? And sing we never had to do, nor ever allowed them, or any worship done unto them, why do you bring his authority in that point against us? If you lack better stuff hold your peace for shame. Origen speaketh there no more against the cross of Christ, than he doth against a Calves. head in a man's body or an ox tail in an asses face. Arnobius The like may said of Arnobius, and all that you bring out of him. For as the title of his book giveth, he speaketh all together against the gentils, with whom we have no communion: unless you will compare Christians to gentils and our images, Fol. 82. a Lib. 8. cont. gentes. to their idols: which you can not. Before, in the 3. article, you brought this place out of Arnobius, Cruces nec colinus nec optamus, we neither worship crosses nor wish for them: but if I should deny them to be Arnobius words, and require proof of them, and authority that Arnobius made eight books against the gentils, you would never justify it: But I will not contend about it. I allow the words, and tell you as Arnobius saith, that we neither worship, nor wish for crosses, in such sort as the Gentiles did. We make no Gods of them: we acknowledge no divine power in them: we honour them not as God's, like as the gentils did their idols: and therefore in that sense that Arnobius spoke those words, we say also that we neither worship nor wish for crosses. Where you say that you will deal no further with Arnobius, and affirm, Calf. that all his eight books contain nothing else but confutation of our image heresy, and cross shame, In mine opinion, as you do wisely to deal no further with him, Mart. because he maketh nothing for your purpose: So you lie shamefully, when you say that his eight books contain nothing else, but the confutation of our image heresy and cross shame. For first we have no image heresy, nor cross shame. The doctrine of the cross no heresy The doctrine of images that we teach is catholic, and good, founded upon the Prophets and Apostles and jesus Christ, the corner stone, who is one body with his spouse the church. And whatsoever he speaketh by her mouth, The cross no shame to Christians. he speaketh in his own person. The cross is no shame of ours, but of gentils, heretics and heathens. It is our honour, glory, and triumph. And we desire to live no longer than we may say with S. Paul: God forbidden that I glory in any thing, but in the cross of our lord jesus Christ. As for Lactantius, Lactantius. what opinion he had of the cross of Christ I declared before. This place that you allege here, speaketh of the gentils that feared them, whose counterfectes they had in stocks and stones, and could not life up their eyes to heaven, and consider the creator of heaven and earth, and lord of all. Therefore he quarreled with them, because they would look to stocks, stones, and waulles, and not life up their eyes to hea●●●. And if you knew any such amongst the Christian, the●● might you have justly alleged this place of Lactantius against them, but if you did not, then are you, but an heathenish quarreler against the Christians, and one that could not follow Lactantius counsel, and lift up your eyes to heaven, and consider how you are fallen, from humility to pride, from truth to heresy, from honesty to impudency, from heaven to hell, from God to the devil. From God by forsaking the unity of his catholic church, to the devil by furthering his policies, and impugning the religion of Christ, and his church. In which this saying of Lactantius: Flecte genu, lignumque crucis venerabile adora, Bow down thy knee and woorshipp the reverend wood of the cross, shall be admitted when all your heresies shall have their overthrow, and be condemned with their authors: and that adoration and worship which we give to the sign of the cross shall stand, when all the worship of the gentiles idols that Lactantius speaketh of shallbe confounded, and the idols of heresy men's imaginations, and fancies shall be destroyed. It was neither absurd nor impious for Lactantius to counsel the Christians to bow to the cross . Wherefore to end with Lactantius, it is neither absurd nor impious (as you say M. Calf.) to condemn the gentils for turning their eyes to stocks and stones, and charging the Christians to bow the knee to the reverend wood of the cross. For the gentils rested, their thoughts in their idols and could not lift their eyes no higher. The Christians lifted up their hearts to God, and would not rest there as the Gentiles did, but by that were stirred more often to fix their minds in heaven. The gentils feared their idols as though they had some divine power: The Christians knew the images to be void of sense, which difference between the gentils, and Christians, sing Lactantius being a profound learned man knew right well, there is no reason, but that he might right well condemn the gentils for turning their eyes to earthly creatures, and charge the Christians to bow their knees to the sign of the cross, and yet be neither absurd nor impious. Athanasius Concerning Athanasius, what his opinion was for the worshipping of the cross, I have also in part declared before. For this present place, Fol. 180. a where M. Calf. saith that, in his sermon contra Idola, against idols, he hath nothing more frequent than that such honour to creatures is accursed, I believe it and allow it right well: and confess with Athanasius, that all honour done to creatures, as Gods, in such sort as the gentils did honour to their idols is accursed, abhorred, and detested. But that we Christian men do, or ever did any such honour to creatures, noon but gentils, Turks, and jews, and such as favour their religion, and follow accursed, abhorred, and detested heresies, will ever say: but because we should not think that those sermons of Athanasius, concern the gentils idols, Calf. Fol 180. a and touch not our images, master Calf. will come near and go to the nature of the word general adoration. And as one not fully awaked out of his drowsy dream, Mart. he layeth forth a place of Athanasius against the Arrians, Serm. 3. not understanding that the said father both in other places and also in the same place giveth him a soul fall. One creature may adore another after a sort . For taking the word Adoration in his nature general, he confesseth that one creature may adore another, when he saith that such as are of servile condition do adore their lords and masters: but Athanasius drift against the Arrians is, to prove that the Angels do not only adore our saviour Christ, for the greater glory they see him in, for then it would follow that all other inferior creatures would bow down themselves in that kind of adoration to their superiors, which they do not, but that the Angels do their adoration to Christ, as unto God who knoweth no superior nor equal. And in this kind of adoration, Solius est numinis adorari. Adoration dew to God . It appertaineth to the only Godhead to be adored. Noon must be acknowledged to have supreme dominion but he, noon honoured as lord and God but he. But what maketh this against the cross? Is this a wise argument trow you? Christian men may not make the perfect end, and full resting place of their adoration in the visible cross, ergo they may in no case put of their caps, nor bow their bodies to the cross? or this? God only must be adored as Lord, and supreme governor of all: Ergo I must not adore my prince, by kneeling unto her grace, by bowing my body or putting of my cap to her cloth of estate? If they be nought, you may easily see that you have gained nothing by alleging Athanasius against the superstition of the gentils or heresy of the Arrians to impugn the cross. If Athanasius had taken the cross to be so vile a thing as he took the idols of the Gentiles, he would never have reported so honourably of the image of Christ, that Nicomedus made, and jews crucified in Berithus as he did. As for his words in his questions to Antiochus I tell you again, you shall find them there in his sort: Serm. de imagine. Quest. 39 Epiphanius Crucis figuram ex duobus lignis componentes adoramus, we making a figure of the cross of two pieces of wood, do adore it, as I declared before. The words of Epiphanius which you rehearse after a miserable kind of mangling neither declaring upon what occasion he spoke them, nor to what end he wrote them, might be answered in few: to wit, That he condemneth those in that place that forsook the living God, and worshipped his creatures as God, and speaketh no word against the Christians, who acknowledge him, fear him, and serve no creature as God, but him, nor worship the image of Christ or sign of his cross with any such honour as is dew only to him. But that your ignorance and malice may apere, I will declare the circumstances that you have omitted, Heretics despisers of our Lady. Lib. 3. To. 2. cont. Antidocomari. her. 78. and show what Epiphanius meant in that place. There were certain heretics called Antidicomarianites, that bore such malice to the blessed virgin Mary, that to diminish the honour and glory that God gave her, said: She had carnal copulation with joseph after Christ was borne: at the which heresy Epiphanius marveleth considering therein, how busy men are to seek out things not necessary, showing therein their great folly in leaving out things necessary, falling for lack of faith to blasphemy, and to deface as he saith the saints honour: which heresy being no less malicious against the blessed virgin than yours is, who were wont contemptuously to compare her to a saffron bag, Epiphanius refuteth by diverse other women, who were never called to that honour that the blessed virgin was, and yet because they had ones promised to keep their chastity for God's sake, they never broke their promise, as diverse Apostatats, mounkes, friars, and priests do in these days. Virginity vowed and kept. Lib. 3. To. 2. count Collyria. heres. 79. For if they that promised chastity, kept it unto their dying day, how much more aught we to believe that our blessed Lady, sayeth he, who was called to greater honour, and kept in her heart all the words that ever Christ spoke, kept herself a virgin all days of her life? Another heresy there was which by undiscreet zeal, and unbridled affection toward the virgin, gave that honour unto her which was neither meet nor convenient. For certain women took upon them at a solemn time of the year to set forth a square chair or chariot, covered with linen clothe spread abroad, and there to set forth breed, and make a sacrifice of it, in nomen Mariae, in the name or honour of Mary, and so afterward all that were present took part of it. Epiphanius for confutation of this heresy, wherein women took upon them to do sacrifice useth a long process declaring that it was never allowed that women should do sacrifice nor in the old testament, nor in the new, How can they then be heads of the church? nor do any ordinary act in the church of God. For if there had been (saith he) any commandment, that a woman should make sacrifice to God, or execute any ordinary or regular act, or office in the church, it should have been more reason that Marie mother of Christ, should have done sacrifice to God. But it pleased God to give her no such authority, not not so much as to baptism. For then would he have chosen rather to have been baptized of her than of S. john. These women then in taking upon them authority to sacrifice, did quite contrary to the law of God, as Epiphanius saith, wherein he choketh both Luther's heresy, Luther's heresy condemned. and yours that say: Every woman and girl are priests, and have as good authority to do sacrifice as the priest. Another point, wherein those woomen offended was in that they offered up sacrifice to the virgin Marie without all consideration, purposing to make her a God as Epiphanius saith in his epistle to the Arabians, doing sacrifice unto her in bread as unto God, which is wicked and abominable, because many were deceived, not (saith he) because the holy saints are cause that these women are thus deceived, but because their thoughts never quieted themselves, But would be overthrown by wickdnes. For whither the holy virgin be dead and buried her sleeping is in honour, her death in chastity, and her crown in virginity. Or whither she were taken up, as it is written, The sword shall pass through her soul, her glory is among the Martyrs, and her holy body by whom light sprang unto the world in praise, or whither she tarried. For nothing is unpossible to God, who doth all things that please him: her end is known to no man. It is not convenient to worship saints more than is meet. But we aught to honour their lord. Let the error therefore of the deceived, and of the deceivers make once an end. For Marie is neither God, nor hath her body from heaven, but by conception wrought by man and woman, according to promise' disposed as Isaac. And no man may offer sacrifice to her name, for thereby he destroyeth his own soul. No sacrifice to be done to the virgin Mary . And on the other side no man may rail at her, dishonouring and defacing the holy virgin, God forbidden that, for she never knew carnal copulation neither after, nor before the birth of our saviour .Hitherto Epiphanius. By these places of this old father, men may know if they list, that neither he in all respects condemned images, nor the honour given to saints: But in that only respect that women did sacrifice that had no authority at all, and that they did offer up sacrifice to the virgin as to God, which kind of adoration by sacrifice, Epiphanius content that our Lady be honoured. is dew to noon but to God only. Touching the worship to be done to the virgin, he is well contented that she be honoured like a Martyr, and her holy body to be honoured with praises. Now to come to the very point, as he wllleth all men to refrain railing at the virgin: Even so he willeth all men to refrain the doing of sacrifice unto her appartayning only to God, and forbiddeth the images that were set up for that sacrifice, or to her, as though she were God. Whereupon in the same place that M. Calf allegeth against images, he saith In very deed the body of Marie was holy, yet for all that it was no God. In very deed the virgin was a virgin and honoured, but not given us to be adored, The adoration that Epiphanius meaneth. but she adoring him which was borne of her flesh touching flesh. And in this kind of adoration by sacrifice Epiphanius might right well proceed with proof that neither Elias nor, john, nor the virgin, nor the angels are to be adored, nor any other mortal creature or seen with eye, or conceived in heart, or expressed by images, if it be advanced to be in degree as high as God. For it were as bad as the fornication of an harlot, that offereth herself equally to be abused of many, if any would be so mad as to erect any image of a mortal creature, that the thing thereby represented, should be adored with sacrifice as God. This is the right meaning of Epiphanius, nothing against the image of Christ or any saint, as they are used amongst us, and allowed in the catholic church, as may appear by diverse sentences of his, and this among the rest. Sat in honore Maria, Let Mary be in honour, that is, let Mary be honoured. Let the father, and the son and the holy Ghost be adored, No man may (after this sort) adore Mary. This mystery is dew only to God, nor the angels do take such a glorification. Now (sir) if you had marked these and other places of Epiphanius, and compared them together, you might soon have seen that it made nothing for your purpose, to allege this place. For here you may see that a woman can offer up no sacrifice to God, and yet I think you can not find in all the scripture but that a woman may offer spiritual and inward sacrifices. Some external sacrifice . Therefore it must follow that there is some external sacrifice in the church, which women may not offer, for lack of authority, which overthroweth your heresy that deny the sacrifice of Christ's body and blood to be offered in the Mass. No woman can be head or governor of the church . And where he saith that no woman may execute any ordinary office in the church, there is another of your articles overthrown, that No woman can be head or supreme governor of the church, be cause she can not speak in the church, nor execute any regular or ordinary office in the church. But this liked you nothing, and therefore no marvel if you did not so soon espy it. At the second council of Nice, certain heretics alleged Epiphanius against images. But as the council did answer then, that the book was noon of his, but some Manichees, that abhorred images (as you do) Even so doth one Epiphanius in the same council clear this elder Epiphanius to be noon of them that abhorred images. Touching the later place of Epiphanius which you allege: Non dominabitur nobis antiquus error, etc. The old error shall not prevail over us, to leave the lyvig, and worship those things which are made of him, for they have worshipped the creature besides the creator, and become fools, Wherein he alludeth to the place of S. Paul's epistle to the Romans, Cap. 1. the younger Epiphanius answereth you plainly, that it is to be understood to be written against the idols of the Gentiles. For as much as the Apostle speaketh there, of the images of fleeing things, of four footed beasts, of serpents, and creeping worms, and not a word against the image of Christ, and his saints as the Christians use. Which being so, what wisdom was it for you to cite him, who besides that he proveth an external sacrifice, and that no woman can be head of the church, speaketh also for the cross and maketh against you? Epiphanius against M. Calf. De vitis propheta . For Hieremie the prophet (saith he) prophecing of the second coming of Christ, sayeth in this manner. Et hoc adventus indicium ipsius erit, quando gentes universae ligno supplicabunt. And this shalbe a token of his cumming, when all nations shall make their supplications to wood. Here of force you must confess that either all nations do well, to kneel before the the cross, and making their prayers there to God, or else grant that the cross of wood, whereunto all nations shall make their supplications, can be no good token of Christ his coming. Or if the prophet by the wood should mean the matter itself, then were it an error of gentility, from which Christ by coming into the world delyured all nations. Wherefore the wood which the prophet speaketh of, must needs be the sign of the cross, before which all nations that worship Christ, make their supplications to God. S. Ambro. Where S. Ambrose saith of Helena, that: Regem adoravit, non lignum, She adored the king and not the wood, because it is an error of the gentils, and a vanity of the wicked, It is to be understood that she adored not the wood as the gentiles did: but she did bow her body, and prostrate herself devoutly before the cross, and worship that which was represented unto the eyes of her heart by the cross, that is the king that redeemed us upon the cross. S. Ambrose meaneth not that it was unlawful either to humble the body, or to bow the knee, or to put of the cap, or show such reverence as the Christians do unto the cross. He saith in the same oration, that Helena (as I said before) lifted up the cross in the head of kings, ut crux Christi in regibus adoretur, that the cross of Christ might be adored in kings. He saith: Ferro pedum eius reges inclinantur. Reges adorant, Crux remedium immortalitatis, Sacramentum salutis. & ●otiniani divinitatem eius negant? kings are bowed to the iron of his feet. kings do adore it, and do the Fontinians deny his divinity? He saith: Ecce clauus in honore est. Behold the nail is in honour. He sayeth: Helena hastened to touch, remedium immortalitatis: The remedy of immortality: she feared to tread upon sacramentum salutis, the sign of our salvation. By which it is evidently seen, that S. Ambrose alloweth a kind of adoration, honour, and reverence to the cross, and nails of Christ, albeit he declareth that Helena did not worship the wood of the cross, as the error of the gentiles, and impiety of the wicked had forced diverse to adore their most accursed idols. Yea as it appeareth in the acts of the Nicene council, he with other fathers of the church, hath a plain testimony for the adoration of the cross. For he saith: Nunquid quum diviuitatem & carnem adoramus, Christum dividimus? Actio. 2. Nicae. 2. The cross adored and Christ therefore not divided. S Hierome. The images that he spoke against. Num quando in eo & divinam imaginem & crucem adoramus, ipsum partimur? Absit. When we adore the divinity and flesh of Christ, do we divide Christ? When we adore in him both his divine image, and cross, do we separate him? God forbidden: So that as you see, M. Calf. hath no advantage by S. Ambrose: for he maketh clean against him. The next doctor that M. Calf. bringeth for his purpose against us, is S Hierome upon the third of Daniel, where how he deceiveth the readers note I beseek you. S. Hierome talketh there of Nabuchodonosars' Gods, and the golden image that he would have to be adored, and saith: That the worshippers of God should not adore that image. further he saith, that the judges and princes of the world, which adore the pillars and images of Emperors, may understand, that they do that which the three children refusing to do, pleased God. Then he inferreth these words that master Calf. allegeth: Notanda est proprietas, etc. The propriety of the words is to be noted, that Gods are worshipped, and an image adored, whereof neither is convenient to the servants of God. By which words S. Hierome declareth that it is inconvenient for the servants of God to worship false Gods, with the gentiles and jews, and the golden image of Nabuchodonasar, with the judges and princes of the earth. As for the cross and image of Christ or any saint, No word in S. Hierome against worshipping of the cross. S. Hierome speaketh not so much as one word, neither in that chapter, nor in the 6. and tenth of jeremy, to which M. Calf. referreth us, to see plainly, that no worship nor adoration should be given to so vile a thing as the cross is. How vile a thing so ever the cross seemeth to you, it forceth not. That S. Hierome would have adoration and reverence given unto it, Adoration of the cross allowed by S. Hierom and to such earthly things, that put us in remembrance of Christ, and his saints, he declareth upon the 98. Psalm, where he saith: There be diverse opinions about this foot stool, but the prophet taketh it here for our lords body in which the majesty of the Godhead standeth, as upon a foot stole. Which that it should be adored, the Apostles declared at his ascension up to heaven, when they returned adoring unto Jerusalem. These also are to be referred to our lords cross, Acto. 1. and to his holy soul. Here S. Hierome taketh the foot stool which the Prophet David willed us to worship to be our lords body, his cross, and his soul, and willeth them to be adored and worshipped. In another place he saith: I returned by and by as fast as I could to my Bethlehem, Apol. 3. cont. Ruff. adoravi praesepe & incunabula salvatoris. I adored the manger, and swathlinge clotheses of our saviour. And if he did adore (as he saith) the manger and poor clotheses that Christ was wrapped in, is it likely that he found fault with them that worshipped the cross on which he was crucified? Not in wise men's judgements I suppose. But M. Calf. hath purchassed a placket to make them say what he listeth, and to turn that to the Christians, which they spoke against the heathens, paynims, jews and their idols. Where S. Augustine speaketh against idolaters and the idols of jupiter, S. Augustine. juno, Venus, Ceres, Bacchus, and not one word against the cross or any image of Saints, he abuseth that holy father's authority, and maketh the simple believe that he speaketh against the cross of Christ, and adoration of it, which is very fond and vain. But what S. Augustine thought touching the respective re adoration of the cross, I have declared before. Where M. Calf. saith, Fol. 186. b Chrysostom. joan. 11. that Chrysostom in any work of his dissenteh not from the rest, tell him that as Cayphas saying, It is expedient that one die for the people, said true, and truer than he was aware: So in this case, he sayeth true, and truer than himself witted, but not in the sense that he imagineth. For Chrysostom in very deed in all his works dissenteth from noon of the fathers in this point. But as they all condemned the gentils idols, and wicked worship done unto them: So doth he. As they spoke nothing against the adoration of the cross in such sense as the Christians adore it: So doth he say, not one word. But both telleth us, how Christian men did bless themselves, and worship the cross, and also giveth testimony by his writings that he exhorted his people to worship the cross. For the first, talking of a foolish custom that some had to dawke their children's heads with dirt thinking thereby to preserve them from witchcraft, he said, Hom. 12. in 1 ad Corinth. Chrisostome alloweth the adoration of the cross. It is to be lamented that this ignominy, prevaileth amongst them, quicrucem adorant: who adore the cross, and communicate the secrets mysteries. Therefore he will led them to leave it, and to teach their children to bless themselves with the cross. And if the children were not of age able to do it, he willed the parents to do it for them, For the second, that he exhorted all his people to worship the cross, it appeareth by his sermon made de veneratione crucis of the worshipping of the cross. There he saith, Because this day, is appointed to the worshipping of the precious cross, come hither, Let us with fear and desire embrace it. By these plain words out of his commentaries upon. S. Paul to the Corinthians, and out his sermon translated truly after the Greek copy, and not after friar Perions fancy (as M. Calf. supposeth) it is evident that his people did adore, and worship the cross, and he himself allowed and commended that adoration and worship which they did unto the cross. This saying of his. Adorare creaturae, adorari non creaturae, sed domini est. To adore belongeth to a creature: to be adored belongeth to no creature, but to him that is lord of the creature, is true in the sense that Chriso. there meaneth: for expounding those words of the gospel, joan. 4. vos adoratis ꝙ nescitis, etc. You worship that which you know not, but we worship that which we know, he talketh there how both the manner and place which the jews and gentiles had to worship God, should be altered, and changed, and god worshipped in spirit and truth. And in that sort no creature must be worshipped but worship, no creature be adored, but adore his creator and lord, Cyrillus. Lib. 2. ca 1 both as Chrisosto. here, and Cyril in his books of treasure and all other Christian men acknowledge. But that absolute and perfect kind of adoration with which God must be adored, and worshipped only, will not let but that creatures may be adored as creatures, otherwise how will M. Calf. justify this argument, I must adore and worship God only, Ergo I must not humble my body, put of my cap, bow my knee nor show any reverence or to my prince, or to her letters, or to her cloth of estate? If he think that an unlawful argument then must he confess that neither Chrisostome, nor Cyrill, make any thing for his purpose. For the adoration which they speak of, is the high and absolute adoration dew only to God, and not that which one creature may give unto another. And this answer may suffice for the places which he bringeth out of S. Gregory. S Gregory . For the adoration which he forbiddeth to be done to images, is the absolute adoration dew unto God, and no other as you may see by that which I have declared in the preface, and by his whole epistle to Secundinus. Libr. 7. epist. 53. For there it is declared, that he kneeled and prostrated himself before the image of Christ not as before the divinity itself, but as before an image that represented Christ, God and man whom he adored. Alfonsus. Fol 181. a Now to Alfonsus de Castro: He reporteth (saith M. Calf.) that one Claudius, bishop of Taurino forbade all in his jurisdiction the adoration and worship of our lords cross. True it is he doth so. But is there all that Alfonsus saith M. Calf? Doth he not tell you that the said Claudius was an heretic? and declare that the prohibiting of adoration to our lords cross was an heresy? Yes verily, and why did you omit that sir? Can you so subtly see the one, and be blind in the other? Can you allege a workman of our occupation (as you term him) and could you not see the juggler of your own occupation? That was not well spied of you. Your case is miserable when you must allege accursed heretics to defend your evangelical doctrine. Your Claudius was a wicked heretic, he endeavoured to raise not only the heresy against the worshipping of images, but also, the heresy of Vigilantius, and Eustatius. If you discredit it, see what jonas bishop of Orleans hath written against him. Myself will say no more, but that it is an evil cause that hath no better pillars to mayntaye it, than cankered heretics, amongst whom Alphonsus discoursing of heresies reckoneth M. Calfhils Claudius: and condemneth his inhibiting the people to worship the cross of Christ, to be a wicked heresy, and so showeth his opinion concerning the adoration of the cross, that if M. Calf. had diligently viewed it, he would never have numbered him amongst such doctors as prohibit the worshipping of the cross. For there he doth plainly approve it, and in another work of his most evidently declare, that it is the devil that maketh men destroy the cross of Christ, Lib 1. cap. 16. de justa punitione hereticor. and images of saints. For talking of certain duties that the devil requireth of some lewd persons that commit themselves unto him, he saith: He that is ready to profess this art, when he is brought before the devil, must deny his baptism, A precept of the devils to destroy images. and forsake all the principles of Christ's faith: He must contemn all the sacraments of the church. He must throw down the cross, and image of the blessed virgin, and all holy saints, and tredde them under his feet, and beware that he call not upon the name of God nor make the sign of the cross, because he can not abide it, but fleeth away at the sight of it. But either M. reader had not read so far, or else he was not disposed to utter Alfonsus' opinion truly, jest the people should understand that it is a counsel and precept of the devil to destroy the images of saints, and prohibit men to make the sign of the cross: but there is little sincerity in such dealing. As for the book which you ascribe to Carolus Magnus, it is but a fond fable, as I declared before. Your opprobrious words calling the second Nicene council a doltish conspiracy dissembling at Nice, Fol. 182 a declare that you are but an arrogant, doltish, and dissembling, fool. For you venture to condemn that which all the catholic church hath allowed to be a sound, learned, holy, and general council. These seventeen authorities thus recited, he draweth to a conclusion, and before he entereth to it, he saith in his own person: Calf. Thus have I slightly past over not all that I could recite, but as many as I though expedient for clear disproufe of your ungodly purpose, Mart. and where he thought to have a triumph, as though the field were won, he hath lost the victory, and confessed so much against himself as would in any court in England condemn him of extreme folly. For he saith: He hath slightly passed over these authors, M. Calves slight dealing. and so in deed he hath both slightly, and craftily: nor weighing their words perfitly, nor considering the circumstances narrowly, nor comparing what they said in other places wisely, not putting a difference between the image of Christ and idols of Gentility. To slightly God woott, for the weight of the matter and instruction of the reader. But such sleight dealing is not unwounte to such slight heretics, that use all the sleights they can to deceive the simple people: and certes unless M. Calf. had been wilful in contempt of antiquity, singular in his own fancy, puffed with vain glory, impudent in forging of lies, and careless in deceiving the reader, he would never so slightly have passed over so many fathers, and reported never a one of their sayings in the true and proper sense that they meant. But let it be his sleight. Why findeth he fault with me for acknowledging the adoration and worship which the fathers gave unto the cross to be an inferior kind of reverence, such as may be given to creatures? May not every man be best interpreter of his own meaning? Thought he that when the fathers spoke of the adoration and worship of the cross, they did not understand what adoration and worship was dew unto God as creator and lord of all? and what was dew to the cross as a creature and sign of health unto us all? Thought he because the perfect, & absolute adoration and worship, by which we serve god only acknowledging him to be supreme lord, and governor of all, only worthy to be adored in spirit and truth, that there is no adoration, no worship, no inferior reverence dew unto creatures, as to our prince, to our parents, to our elders, to the cross of Christ? If he do, he is foully deceived. For that we may given a kind of adoration, worship reverence, and honour to creatures by humbling the body, bowing the knee, putting of the cap, kissing and such like, I have declared both here and in the preface. If M. Calf. knew this, what frenzy forced him, to account them babblers, who made their distinction, between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉? that is service dew to God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. and service dew to man? They are both gathered out of scripture, and used of no worse doctor than S. Augustine, expressing by the one, adoration, worship, service, and honour dew only to God, Libr. 15. cont. Faust. Manich. cap. 10. & lib. 10. Cap 1. de civit. Dei. Calf. Fol. 183. b Mart. and by the other, adoration, worship, service, and honour dew unto man or any other creatures. Thought he with a fond and doltish tale of? woe horses put in one stable, to eat at one rack, and reach to one manger, not served yet a like, because they have a bar betwixt them, to scoff out the matter, and irride the holy fathers that used that distinction? That was not Christian like, nor ministerlike. No bedlam in his fury could have spoken more unreverently. For the one part of his tale of two horses set at one manger, he applieth, to the adoration of God, and the other to the adoration of the cross, which application is blasphemous. But you see how M. Calf. improving the cross, and adoration of it, is driven to run to jews, to Turks, to conjurers, to idols of gentils, to heretics, to horses, to stables, to mangers, and racks, for defence of his heresy, and yet all will not serve: The distinction of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, standeth sound and good, and the maintainers of it as wise and learned fathers, and not vain and doltish babblers as this our sir james imagineth. And if he had been so wise as he maketh himself, he might have seen it in our common life. We bow our bodies to our prince, we kneel unto her grace, we put of our caps to her cloth of estate, and at the receipt of her broad seal, and this bowing, kneeling, putting of the cap, is a kind of adoration (as himself proveth) out of Greek and Hebrew, but this adoration is not done unto the prince as to God, kneeling to the prince is no idolatry, M. Calf, and yet a kind of adoration. and yet it is a kind of adoration. Wherefore as it must be different from that which is dew unto God: So it must have a different term to be known by: and sing no Latin word doth so well express it, as the Greek, our forefathers have called it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and therein in the judgement of all learned men did right well, and were never controlled of any until our young master sir james that will turn all upsi down ventured to call them babblers. But that will not serve his turn, nor save his honesty. If M. Calf. should tell a simple man, that hath but a mean wit, that this is the image of Christ, he would know by and by that the honour which he useth in kneeling before the image, may not have his full rest, and principal end in the image, but in our saviour Christ, represented by the image, and not worship the material image in the church, but Christ, his merciful lord and saviour in heaven. Wherefore to conclude sing the seventeen authorities that M. Calf. allegeth, speak either against the idols of gentils, and wicked worship done unto them as Gods, or of the perfect and absolute adoration which may be given to no other, but unto God only, and utter not one word against the images of the Christians, and the inferior adoration, Words used of the fathers to declare that they worshipped the sign of the cross. reverence, and worship that may be given to them as to the creatures of God, there is no cause why any Christian man should believe his seventeen witness, that speak nothing for him, before the seven that in evident, plain, and express words, justify this cause that I have in hand, or think that S. Basile, Athanasius, Chrysostomus, Lactantius, Paulinus, Augustinus, Damascenus, and the fathers of the sixt general council of Constantinople in Trullo, using these words, honorare, adorare, venerari, veneratione dignum arbitrari, honorem habere, adorationem tribuere: To honour, to adore, to worship, to think worthy of worship, to give honour, to attribute adoration, to declare a kind of adoration, honour and worship dew unto the cross, were liars and idolaters, men that overshot themselves in terms, or meant better than they wrote. Because the right woorshipful M. Calf. mounted into the hill of pride, and set in the seat of singularity, with out all honesty, reason, or shame, hath condemned them for such. Where he noteth these words in the Margin of his book, Fol. 183. b A strange proof that no man may fear idolatry in a papist, know ye good readers, that unless that strange wit of his, had been estranged with strange fancies, and idle toys, he would never have thought the reason that I made for it to be a strange proof. To the end you may understand it, and his strange capacity conceive it, I will bring it into a fillogistical argument. It is this. No man aught to judge evil of another. etc. No man aught by the Law of God to judge evil by any curious surmises or suspicious fancies of any Christian man that is baptized, and believeth in one God for doing of any act that is commonly praised and allowred of many as well done, unless the contrary be proved. But to kneel down in the church before a cross, to put of our caps, and bow the body, is an act that is commonly praised, and allowed of many, videlicet of the whole Catholic church, as well done: Ergo no man aught to judge evil by any curious surmise, or suspicious fancy, of a Christian man kneeling before a cross, and think that he committeth idolatry. The Maior dependeth of the law of God. Nolite judicare. judge not, Matth 7. and you shall not be judged. The Minor is evident by the practice of the Catholic church, and proved by authorities brought before out of the old fathers, Greeks and Latins. The argument is good: ergo the conclusion, that you may not judge men idolaters by curious surmises, or suspicious fancies until the contrary be most evidently proved, must needs be true. And if we may not judge evil of them, then may we not think evil of them. And if we may not think evil of them, then may we not fear when we see them kneeling before a cross, and prostrate before the crucifix that they commit idolatry. For if we be Christians, and know them to be Christians then must we think of them like Christians, and not suspect and fear the worst, like Antichristians. Charitas non cogitat malum: 1. Cor. 13. Charity thinketh not evil. Where you labour M. Calf. to prove by force of my argument that all protestants be good Christians, I wish with all my heart that you would prove it true in deed, Fol. 184. a by some fruits of penance worthy of Christians. But as long as you continue in your Apostasy, like obstinate heretics out of the unity of the church, you will never be able to prove yourselves good Christians. Tertullian maketh this argument: Hereticus est, ergo non est Christianus. De prescr. Tract. de simple. prae lat. & li. 4. epist 2. Contra Auxent . He is an heretic, ergo he is no Christian. Saint Cyprian maketh the like: Est segregatus ab Ecclesia: He is separated from the church. Ergo prophanus est, alienus est, hostis est, therefore he is profane man, he is an alien, he is an enemy. S. Hilary maketh this argument: Arrianus est, ergo diabolus est. He is an Arrian, ergo he is a devil. The scripture maketh this argument: Non audit Ecclesiam, ergo est Ethnicus & Publicanus. He heareth not the church, Ergo he is a Heathen and a Publican. Wherefore for all the fair cracks of your Christianity, the truth will try, that you be no true Christians and by consequent have not learned effectually that commandment to have no other God but him, nor to believe in any other God but in him, nor to serve any other God but him. secondarily where you say, that we are to blame in deeming amiss of protestants, Fol. 184. a We judge not evil of heretics for doing any act allowed by the church in such sort as they should. understand I beseek you, that we judge not evil, nor deem amiss of you, upon any curious surmises or suspicious fancies, for any act that the catholic church hath allowed, as it hath allowed the adoration and worship of the cross. If we did, we did very evil: but your tongues utter such blasphemies, your hands, writ such heresies, your selves practice such villainies, and show such affinity in your doings with the old cankered, corrupt, and wormeaten heretics, that all Christian realms not infected with your corruption, may account you for such. And sing we have evidence of your facts, we do not amiss in judging of you, as we do. Thirdly where you say, that all Christians (by force of my reason) can not sin, Let us understand of your worship, how this argument holdeth, Christian men that have but one God, believe but in one God, and serve, but one God, continuing Christian men can not commit idolatry, ergo they can not otherwise sin. And if you find that the gross and wicked idolatry of the gentils that worshipped stocks and stones, which we talk of, was taken away by Christ, and so taken away that every Christian man knoweth it, and abhorreth it, Idolatry taken away by Christ. most of all other faults, you may well think that albeit sin may otherwise, by frailty reign in us for a time, yet idolatry can not enter into our hearts, especially that gross idolatry of the gentiles to worship stocks and stones. I told you before that the Christians said to the jews, thinking that they would forsake Christ, and worship Polycarpe, as you do that we will forsake God and worship stocks and stones: The answer of the Christians to the jews. Euseb. lib. 4. cap. 15. histo. The wretched men know not, that we can never forsake Christ who suffered death for the salvation of the whole world, nor worship any other. And the same I tell you now again, and give you the same cause that they did, the jews: Quoniam verum Deum & qui solus colendus sit noverimus, Because we know the true, God and him who is only to be worshipped, and love and worship the martyrs, as the disciples of our lord, etc. Wherefore notwithstanding after Christendom and faith received, many be murderers, thieves, adulterers, and such enormous sinners, Yet no true Christian that hath received the faith, can fall to the gross idolatry of the gentils, and forsake the true and living God, and for him worship a stock and stone. So that it bideth still for all M. Calves blind reason, that there can be no fear or mistrust of idolatry in Christian men adoring and worshipping the cross. And that they do most wickedly in affirming us to be idolaters. For they judge of our hearts, they judge of our minds, they judge of our inward thoughts, which no man can do, but God only, that knoweth the secrets of all hearres. Where you say that God is not contented if a man inwardly Fol. 184. b Calf. with heart acknowledge him, but also severely doth exact, that by our outward profession we testify to the world, that his disciples we are: for upon noon other condition but this, he doth admitteus into the society and fellowship of his kingdom, Mart. I marvel that you did not remember your position and doctrine of only faith. For if only faith justifieth, and good works help nothing to our justification and salvation, them doth not god severely exact that we testify by outward profession, that we are his disciples. For that we can not do but by good works. M. Calf. condemneth his own doctrine of only faith And if God admitteus into the fellowship and society of his kingdom upon no other condition, but this, that is, except we testify to the world by our outward profession, (that is by our good works) that we are his disciples (for to profess Christ is a good work) then unless we do good works we shall not come into heaven, have we never so much faith, able to transfer mountains, and force us to give our bodies to the fire to be burnt. Wherefore my counsel is that sing God admitteth us into the fellowship and society of his, kingdom upon noon other condition but this, that we testify our faith by outward profession which can not be but by good works, that you leave your preaching of only faith, and fall to good works. For upon noon other condition God will admit you into the society of his kingdom. Where you say that there is no true faith before God, but the same engendereth a true confession before men, I can not see to what purpose you bring it against me in this matter. A man might cast a beetle in your way out of S. john's gospel, where it is said, Cap. 12. A faith and yet no confession before men. Many of the chief rulers believed in him. Here is a true faith: but for the pharisees they did not confess him that they might not be cast out of their Synagogue. Here is no confession. So you have a true faith, unless you will say the scripture is false, and yet it engendered no confession before men. But, put case it be true, what maketh it against me? Do not we confess our faith before men that we profess inwardly to God? Let our works try. Fol. 185. a Concerning the two kinds of idolatry which you mention, as I deny them not: So am I glad to hear that you do confess once in your life that there are two kinds of honour dew unto God, One spiritual resting in the heart: Two kinds of idolatry. Two kinds of honour dew unto God. Another corporal consisting in outward gesture. Certes if there be a corporal honour dew unto God, we may think that God not withstanding he is a spirit, is delighted when we honour him by the corporal service and gesture of our body: and that our kneeling, knocking, holding up the hands, yea before an image, do nothing abase our estate, nor show us to be any others servants than jesus Christ that redeemed us, and hath brought our holy fathers to his kingdom in heaven, that kneeled, and held up the hands, yea before images in his church in earth. But Calf. saith that because we kneel we knock, and hold up the hands before an image, we defile our bodies with sacrilege, Calf. Fol. 185. a. we attaint them with idolatry, we have them subject to the devils service. Here are bloody words. But where are the scriptures, Mart. counsels, and fathers to prove this? yea where is any reason to make this his argument good? we kneel we knock, we hold, up our hands before an image: ergo we defile our bodies with sacrilegd and attaint them with idolatry, and make them subject to the devils service? If kneeling, knocking, and holding up the hands yea before an image, be a sufficient cause, to prove men idolaters, how will he excuse himself, and his brethren that kneel before the prince, kneel before bred and wine at the communion table, and peradventure upon remorse of conscience knock their breasts with the publican? how will he excuse them that in Cathedral and parish churches, Protestant's kneel before images, and creatures. hold up their hands, and turn up the eye, yea before the images in the glass windows, when they here the name of jesus, or pray with the minister? How will he excuse the prentices, and dentye dames, that at Paul's cross, hold up their hands, and turn up their face to the element, and when the preacher talking against the papists, saith, the Lord confound them, answer Amen? They kneel before creatures, they hold up their hands before images, they lift up their eyes to wards the sun and element: and if M. Calves. sophistry be true, they delfie their bodies with sacrilege, they attaint them with idolatry, they have them subject to the devils service. The excuse that M. Calf. maketh for his brethren serveth for the Catholics . If he excuse his brethren from gross idolatry, because their intent is good, and minds are in heaven, although their bodies bow in earth, the same excuse shall serve for us. Four our intent is good: our minds are in heaven with God: our knees bow to him: our hands are lifted up to him, our breasts are knock to testify a compunction of our heart, for offending him, and to stir us to more devotion, and sorrow for our sins. We set not our adoration in the image: but in the represented by the image. We adore not the image, as it is an earthly thing, but we adore it, for that it representeth unto us Christ or his saints. further, where M. Calf. saith, that God his eternal will, requireth, and reason convinceth that we with bodily service should glorify and honour him, and affirmeth corporal honour to consist in outward gesture, Fol. 185. a either he must acknowledge, that God is glorified and honoured by kneeling, knocking holding up the hands, yea if it be before images (for wheresoever any kneel, knock, or hold up the hands, he must do it before some visible creature, for the which he may be as well suspected of idolatry, as for kneeling, knocking or holding up the hands, before an image), Or else he must declare in what other outward gesture the corporal honour, wherewith we must glorify God, doth consist. For some there must needs be, and few besides these he will find that shall like him. Fol 185. a Outward things condemned by protestants . Outward ceremonies he calleth masking and external pomp. Comely apparel is counted the rags of Rome, and God thought to be so delighted in brood hats, turkey gowndes, round caps, long beards, polled heads, barrelled breaches, pinked buskins, and courtlike ruffs, that it is an high offence to forsake them, and obey the prince and Metropolitan that have commanded them to be no more used of the ministry. Fasting from meats to punish the body is little esteemed: chastity is thought unpossible: and the vowing of it an ordinance of the devil: the setting up of images before our bodily eyes, to stir the mind to remember Christ, is an heathenish observance, praying is lip labour, rising at midnight, voluntary, beggary, going in vile, and base apparel, visiting holy places, going on pelgrimage, be ordinances of the devil: becking, bowing, nodding, and such like, tend to the observance of some part of the law, as he sayeth, and so by their ordering of the matter, we shall have little outward gesture left for the bodily honour of God. To disprove our kneeling and bowing before the cross: M. Fol. 185. b Calf. sayeth, God to express the peculiar note of his faithful servants, saith of them, that they bowed not the knee to Baal. But what is this to the cross? Have I not showed a plain difference between, the cross and images of the Christians and Baal, and other such idols of the gentils? Do not the doctors of the church allow the one, and cry out upon the other? If he could cite any such sentence out of any catholic writer, that alloweth the kneeling before Baal, as I have for kneeling before the cross, he might match the cross and Baal together, but he can not, nor all his, be their malice never so great. He saith: it is the peculiar note of God's servants, not to bow their knee to Baal. If he meaneth the idol that the scripture calleth Baal, how many thieves, murderers whoormoungers', extorsioners, A mad peculiar note to know a Christian. usurers, conjurers, sorcerers, heretics, harlots, church robbers, poisoners, and Apostatats are there among you that never kneeled to that idol Baal? And yet if your rule be true, that not to bow the knee to Baal, be the peculiar note, that God expresseth to be the mark of his faithful seavamts, all those that I mentioned before, by your peculiar note must be taken for God's faithful servants. For they never bowed their knees to Baal. And than have you done them wrong to punish them: But deceive not yourself, and the simple M. Calf. It is one thing to be a note of God's servants, and another to be the peculiar note of God's faithful servants. The peculiar note of God's faithful consisteth not altogether in negatives, as this doth. It hath some affirmatives, but your negative religion must stand upon negatives, and deny you to have any peculiar note of God's faithful servants. M. Calves rule to discern an idolater . By our capping, knocking, kneeling, and other outward gesture, and adoration, he maketh a sure rule to discern a mere idolater. Will he then never give us leave to put of our caps, to knock, to bow, to kneel? Or is it possible for us in any open or secret place to show any kind of adoration by like gesture, though there be no cross, nor image before us? If it be possible where there is no image, why should it not be possible where there is an image? If the curious heretics will suspect evil, they may say, that men kneeling in their naked churches, at the communion table, kneel, bow, and cap, to the bread and wine, to the walls, to the glaze windows, to the forms, to the tables, to the sun, to the moon, and practise M. Calves rule, to discern and try them mere idolaters. Did M. Calf. never put of his cap, kneel down upon the ground, and ask his father's blessing? If he did, shall we by his own rule discern him and try him a mere idolater? I would feign learn his answer. Esa. 45. Again, every man putteth of his cap, when he taketh an oath upon a book. And the taking of an oath rightly, upon a book is an high adoration of God, as appeareth by his own words set before, in the place of Esai, which he himself allegeth: Vivo ego, mihi flectetur omne genu, & omnis lingua iurabit mihi. I live saith the Lord. Every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall swear to me. And if swearing be taken by the prophet Esai, to be as high an adoration of God, as kneeling is, why doth he and his brethren suffer the people rather to swear upon a book with their caps in their hands, which is a corporal thing, subject to many casualties of corruption, than to kneel before the cross in doing of their adoration to God? Let him answer if he can. Fol. 185. b A lie. But I will have neither good nor bad adjudged by gesture, quoth M. Calf. Either let him tell me where I say so, or I will say, though it be to the derogation of his honourable person, that he lieth, I never said it, nor was of any other mind, nor in writing nor in saying, but that he that would kneel and do his adoration to the idol of Baal, jupiter, Venus, juno, or any such rather than to our saviour Christ, before his cross, might by that external act and outward gesture be discerned to be an idolater. The doing of our adoration to Christ before the cross, is not of that nature, and therefore the thing being lawful, you do but show your suspicious head, and malicious nature to judge any that doth it, a mere idolater. My saying was that there could be no fear or mistrust of idolatry in Christian men worshipping and adoring the cross. And when I spoke of Christian men, I meant such, as love God, No fear of idolatry in true Christian men. serve God and worship him in spirit and truth, as other Christian men do. And these you can not discern to be idolaters by their kneeling, knocking, capping, bowing, or any such outward gesture. Id potes quod iure potes, you can do that which you may do by the law. And that which you may not do by the law, you can not do. Wherefore sing God's law doth forbid you to judge of other, as long as they do that which is lawful, and do as other Christian men do, and have done before them, you can not judge them to be idolaters by any outward gesture and act of theirs. Twoe excuses you make for us of very goodwill no doubt: one, Calf. Fol. 185. b A lie. Fol. 186 a Mart. that we know the image or Cross to be but a piece of metal. etc. Another that we affirm that an image or a cross is nothing. But where is the licence, where is the proxy that authorized you to make those excuses for us? show your mandatum or if you can not, show us how it can stand that the cross can be a piece of metal, and yet be nothing? Is a piece of metal nothing? Can men buy and sell nothing? Metal is bought and sold, and if the cross metal were nothing, how were the poor goldsmiths deceived that bought many a silver cross? Did they buy nothing? and give great sums of money for nothing? Look out those bedlens I beseek you, that say, a cross is nothing: Not bedlam saith, A cross is nothing. we never told you that a cross is nothing nor ever wil You would gladly make us say of the cross, as S. Pauld said in his own person, and not in the person of the Corinth. (as you say) of an idol, Scimus quia idolum nihil est, we know that an idol is nothing. Because as Origen saith, Orig. ho. 8. in 20. Genes. it representeth nothing that ever was or shalbe in nature, as a horse head joined to a Man's arms, and a snakes tail in one body or such like. But no man without horrible blasphemy can say so of the cross M. Calf. It representeth the passion of Christ that was some what, truly done here in earth. It representeth Christ that had a true, and natural body, unless you wilbe come a Manichee, and say there was never no such in nature as Christ was: and therefore you can not wrist S. Paul's place to prove your purpose, nor match it with the sacrifices that were done to idols, Not Christian so simple but knoweth what is meant by the cross. as you would gladly. But it passeth your skill, nor all the wit in your head is able to prove that any Christian man is so simple that he will deem any great virtue to be in the bore sign considered as, a piece of wood or metal not withstanding he seethe wise men give adoration unto it. God be thanked the people are sufficiently instructed to know a difference between an image and the represented by the image, between the cross, and the crucified. Yea I believe there be noon that have mean natural wits, that will think as you imagine, or have such a fiction that if the body called the heart unto account, A fiction of M. Calves. Fol. 186. a the heart should be condemned of misgovernement in the chancery. For the heart calleth the body to account, and sitteth in judgement of his doings, as the worthier and excellenter part in man, and condemneth the body of disobedience. As for the body it hath no jurisdiction, nor superiority over the heart, and therefore can not call the heart to an account. If you have such affiance in the cause that you think the heart should be condemned by the body of misgovernement in the chancery, I beseke you ꝓpounde these questions to the learned of that court: Questions to be propounded by M. Calf in the chancery. whither the body goverth the heart, or the heart governeth the body. Iten, whither the body calleth the heart to an account, or the heart calleth the body to an account. Iten whither, the body condemneth the heart, or the heart condemneth the body. And when you have their resolutions, try further whither the evidence of a Christian man's fact, kneeling, knocking, holding up his hands in the church, or else where, yea before the cross, or any other image, make as you say, a sufficient probation of idolatry, and is to good a witness of a misdemeaning mind. Again for your further instruction, learn how this argument holdeth. Christian men kneel, knock, and hold up their hands in churches before the cross of Christ, and image of his saints: ergo they are idolaters, and have misdemeaning minds. If by learning, and conscience it be examined in the chancery and found to be full of ignorance and folly, then may you think yourself to be an ignorant fool for talking so absurdely and judging so rashly. In king Ezechias matter if I had been advocate to impugn his deed, for breaking the brazen serpent, Of Ezechias fact breaking the brazen serpent. I would never have tried the case of injustice against him. I would never have disallowed his doing. For Ezechias was able to make just proof of a crime. He was able to convince them of idolatry both by their deeds, and also by their own words. The scripture saith: 4. Reg. 18. The people burnt incense unto the brazen serpent until that present tyme. Which God had forbidden, they made themselves images, woods, groves, an did sacrifice after the manner of the gentils, feceruntque verba pessima irritantes dominum, 4. Reg. 17 and they spoke most wicked words, provoking God: and that not privily, but verbis non tectis, in plain and evident words. They were so prove to idolatry, that they worshipped the idols of the paynims, and kept it not privy in heart, but said openly: Sequamur deos alienos, Let us follow strange Gods: Hij sunt Dij tui Israel. Thes are thy gods o Israel: And by this you may understand that Ezechias had manifest proof of their idolatry, both by word and deed, and sing he saw so much evidence of their wickedness, and had besides this, the secret instruction of God, that he should not fear to break that brazen serpent, there needeth no lawyer to defend his fact: It defendeth itself sufficiently. Mary as for you (sir) what like evidence have you of any fact or idolatrous deed in any christian? No evidence of any idolatrous fact in true Christians . Who did ever burn incense to an image, as unto God? Who ever said: Sequamur deos alienos? Let us follow strange Gods? Who ever said to any cross, crucifix, or image, Ecce dij tui Israel? Behold thy Gods o Israel? Speak, if accuser of thy brethren, if condemner of the Christians, if judger of other men's servants. Speak for shame. What Christian ever believed so? Either make an instance, or we will condemn the for this rash judgement, and misdeming of Christians, and say that thou dost, use the fact of Ezechias to no purpose against us. Daniel's companions . Touching Daniel's companions, if they had feed you, or me, or any advocate beside, whatsoever you or any other could say for them, they should have been accused of idolatry, If they had bowed their knee, to the image, which the king commanded them to worship. For it was a mere wicked idol, taken and reputed for God, and worshipped for God. To such no man boweth the knee, but with suspicion of idolatry. But that the cross or crucifix is, or hath been taken, for such, and as unlawful to be worshipped, as that was, you should first have proved, and then triumphed: but because you knew your weakness in that behalf, you use a common sophistication called, Petitio principij, and like a foolish sophister you presuppose, that to be proved, which you were never able to prove, nor shalbe as long as scriptures, councils, fathers, reason, and common sense shalbe of any authority with men. To proceed, I said. When you see men praying, in my poor judgement it is a good consequent to say: They be Christian men. Therefore they serve God in spirit and truth: Calf. Fol. 186. b This is a poor judgement, quoth M. Calf. that because god is worshipped in spirit and in truth therefore men falling before a piece of wood, knocking the breast, and holding up the hands, may not in any wise be thought idolaters. Mart. But how poor his judgement and honesty also is, judge, I beseek you. I talked of men that were baptized in Christ, and believed in God, and served him in spirit and truth, and said, whensoever they pray, wheresoever they kneel, whatsoever gestures they use, they give all honour and praise to god. Now cometh M. Calf. and speaketh indefinitely of men, which may be referred to Heathens, Pagans', Turks, infidels, and such like as well as to Christians, and because men, that is to say some men, as Turks, jews, Heathens, Pagans', infidels, may be judged to be idolaters by kneeling, knocking, or holding up their hands to any of their idols, he concludeth against us, that Christian men may for like gesture before the cross of Christ and his image, be adjudged for such. But that is a vile furmise and most wicked suspicion contrary to the commandment of God, saying, judge not, and ye shall not be judged. Wherefore because M. A vile furmise and wicked suspicion. Calf. taketh vantage of that which I spoke in way of humility, I will now therefore stoutly say unto him, sir, when you see men, that is to say, men that are baptized, men that believe in god, praying, yea before any image, and holding up their hands and knocking their bereasts, it is a good consequent to say: A good Consequent They be Christian men, ergo they serve God in spirit and truth: and we may not judge the contrary. For we can not enter into their hearts, and minds where God is served. We can not condenne them for their outward gestures by which they give their corporal honour to God. Try this in the court of Chancery, where conscience is examined, where you think the body will condenne the heart of misgovernment. And if it be not found a good argument, return it to me, and I will justify it. In the mean time we tell you, that wicked surmises and vain suspicions are contrary to the gospel. further we never sought by roods and images to plant any opinion of holiness and divinity to rest in dead things. But as we have known God, so have we glorified him, so have we been thankful unto him, and not become vain in our imaginations, we have not had our hearts full of darkness, concerning the knowledge of the only true, and almighty God. The adoration of the cross standeth with the glory of God. We have not given the glory of his name to other. The worship and adoration which we exact to be given to the cross, standeth with the glory of his name, as well as your kneeling at the communion table, your putting of your cap to the cloth of estate, your vailing the bonnet to the princes letters, your bowing your bodies to the queens majesty, your kissing of the book when you take an oath, and such reverences that may be done to creatures stand with the glory of God. Wherefore in charging us with idolatry, or any dishonour to God in this behalf, you show more malice than reason, and declare that your tongue is more slanderous, than your heart is wise. Calf. Fol 187. a Drawing towards an end, you say: Thus have I answered your ten Articles using more words in disprouf of them, than the cause requireth, or any man of indifferency, would look for at my hands. Mart. But how well you have answered, let the indifferent that read this examination of your answer judge sincerely. In deed I acknowledge that you have used more words in disproufe of them, than the cause requireth or any man of indifferency would look for at your hands. For the cause being a most certane and undoubted truth, such as hath continued in all ages amongst Christian men, ever sithence the Apostles time, all faithful men that love the cross of Christ should embrace the sign of their salvation, and neither revile it nor blasphemously abuse it, nor utter any words to the disproufe of it. No man of indifferency looked for at your hands, that you should liken the cross of Christ, to a gallows, to the helmet of hell, and to the conjurers Mace, No man of indifferency looked, No man of indifferency looked for such stuff of M. Calf. that you should call it, a Magical enchantment, am heathenish observance, a superstition of gentils, or conquest against Christians, No man of indifferency looked that you should say: it was a dumb God, a dead devil, a schoolmaster of error, and impiety, and God in the Roodelofte. No man of indifferency looked that you should so falsely wrist and corrupt the scriptures, so untruely allege, and mangle the fathers, so fond reject and contemn the ancient doctors, so maliciously report of holy saints, bishops, Emperors, and empresses, and so conremptuosly condemn and abhor the general councils, and prefer an assemble of most wicked and accursed heretics before them. No man of indifferency looked for so many extravagant and idle discourses, so many impudent blasphemous, and slanderous lies, so many false allegations, so many evil translations, and so many foolish contradictions, as you have uttered in this your answer as shall particularly hereafter appear. And because you will continue like yourself, even in the very end you make an impudent lie to help your credit. For you say, An impudent lie. Calf. Fol 187. a that you have turned over leaf by lease, and perused each line and word that had any reason in it, annexing a sufficient and the same abundant confutation of it. Which is most false. Mart. As for the sufficiency of your confutation, Let the readers judge. As for the turning over of leaf by leaf, and perusing each word that had any reason in it, Well nigh thirthy places unanswered. it shall appear that you have omitted well nigh thirty places alleged out of Clement, Tertullian, S. Cyprian, Cornelius, Melchiades, Origen, Chrisostome, Cyrill, Socrates, Theodoretus, Sozomenus, S. Ambrose, S. August. S. Hierome, Eusebius, Leo and Euthymius, who were learned men and like to have reason in their sayings, and annexed no confutation unto them at all, much less any that was sufficient and abundant. My conclusion in deed you deal not withal, I blame you not. It is to hard meat your for weak teeth. If it be but an heap of lies and slanders (as you say) it had been more for your honesty to answer them, My conclusion not touched. than with silence to pass them over. But you saw more weight and pith in it, than you and all yours are able to improve with like authority or reason. And therefore you thought it best to answer with silence. But that silence we take for confession. For whosoever keepeth silence when he should speak, the matter whereto he should answer tending to his prejudice or hurt, seemeth to consent. Thus have I examined the chief points and effect of your answer, to the treatise of the cross, and so discovered your corruptions, errors, and falsities, that each man may see the weakness of your cause, and perceive manifestly that the cause which I took in hand standeth too fast to be battered with your feeble assaults. Wherefore I desire the gentle reader to do no more but read and regard, and judge indifferently, and beware of these deceithfull workmen, and lying lips. And whereas M. Calf. hath determined if his sleight dealing and shameless lies should be detected by me, and set in print to the view of the world, to contemn such a lewd adversary, Fol. 187. b and give place to other that with more freedom of speech, and derogation to their persons might answer accordingly, my request is, that some friend of his tell him politicly, that, sing he sustaineth such and honourable parsonage, it shall be great derogation to his person to give over this quarrel to another that hath neither such impudency to deny the aun●●nt fathers, nor such immodesty to abhor general councils, nor such unhonesty to falsify and wrest the scriptures, nor such sleights to abuse the doctors, nor such inventions to shift away truths, nor such gloss to colour lies, nor such slanderous words to rail against bishops, princes, and saints, nor such villainous terms to inveigh against Christ's church and his sacraments. For if it be not workmanly done, it shallbe great derogation to his person. But sing he hath determined to contemn me as a lewd adversary, and for fear jest it should be a derogation to his person, saith he will not answer that which I shall put in print, I require him to avouch that which he himself hath setfoorth in print, and prove those his parodoxes, positions and assertions, by the plain and undoubted word of God, by the true and godly fathers of the church, and by lawful councils, provincial or general, which I have gathered out of his book, and set in the beginning of this book, or else being convinced with the force of truth, acknowledge them to be impious and blasphemous, contrary to the plain and undoubted word of God, contrary to the true and holy fathers of the church, contrary to the determination of provincial and general councils, and confess his oversights, errors, and heresies, and in humility of heart and meekness of spirit, embrace the truth, and return to the unity of Christ's catholic church, and do the worthy fruits of penance for his wicked abominations, and horrible blasphemies, which God grant, Amen. TO M. CALFILL. Non meliora meis, sed quae pro tempore nosti, Impius impertis: exegi, hijs utere mecum.