THE RESCVING OF THE romish FOX OTHER WISE called the examination of the hunter devised by steven gardener.  
THE second COURSE OF THE HUNTER AT the romish fox & his advocate, & sworn patron steven gardener doctor & defender of the popis canonlaw and his ungodly ceremonies.  
REED IN THE LAST LEfe the xii articles of Bishop Steuens new popish credo.   


The bannisshed fox of rome speaketh.   

My son steven gardener with weeping tears  
Hath cut away the tops of mine ears  
But the rest of my body abideth hole still  
Withalle my ceremonies even at my will  
I trust mine ears shall grow again  
When all the gospelers are once slain.  
Which steven my son both sterct and stove  
Doth now right earnestly go about  
If he can bring this matter to pass  
Be schal be Cardnal as fisher was    

TO THE MOST VICTORIOUS AND TRIUMPHANT Prince, King Henry the eight, King of england, France, & Ireland, Supreme Governor in earth, of thes his realms next under God, Vuillyam Wraghton, Vuisseth prosperity of both body & soul.  
IT is not unknown unto your Princely Majesty that of late iasked you leave to hunt a certain romish fox/ with in the bounds of your dominiones/ which had been hid more than seven years/ among the bishops of England/ after that your higness had commanded them to drive him clearly out of all places where as ye/ have any power ot or domination. And now am i crediblely informed/ that ye have seen the course that i had at this foresaid fox your fo/ with many of your nobles & learned men/ which i suppose will not denys but that i have found out the fox/ with my hounds/ in the self places where as i reckoned before my hunting to find him/ that is in the church a 'mong the bishops & priests whom ye commanded straightly to drive him away/ But as sound as my hounds had found out the fox and held him at a bay/ that he kould neither go back nor forth/ ready to be taken if any man/ would have laid hands upon him/ a certain sworn advocate of this best/ a doctor of the popis doctrine/ drove mi hounds from the best/ and rescued him and saved his life bearing me in hand that the beast was no fox/ but on of your read dear/ even as i prophesied before that the foxy generation would call their father the fox when soever that he should come in any jeopardy of taking. This foresaid proctor of the best calleth him/ not alone your red dear/ but also good order/ good politic laws/ where with good hath enclosed all your subjects under your authority alone/ the pale of the English church/ with divers such other goodly names. Howbeit at length/ he grantethe himself/ that the best which i hunt is the romish fox in deed/ but that it was neither your mind neither any wise man's mind/ to drive out the hole fox/ but that it was thought sufficient if his ears were only cut of hard by the roots all the rest of his body and especially his gorgeous and fair tale/ remaining untouched/ And where as i dispraised the best with divers other/ he as it becometh an advocate/ praiseth him highly/ saying that though in one thing he hath done amiss/ that is where as he preferred himself above the lion which is king of all beasts/ yet that in all other things he is good good good and commendable/ & that if he were driven away with all his ordinances/ that all semelynes/ all religious & devout behavore & all godliness should bedryven a weigh also/ what is this elliss but to make agod of the fox? This foresaid patron of the fox was one of them whom i accused in my former course/ for a coverer and a manteyner of the romish fox & his whelps/ But now (by what means it is come to pass i can not tell) he is comed from a defendant and a person accused to be an accuser/ an examiner & a judge/ over the matter which is in controversy between him & me. I lay unto his charge that he is the mantener of the fox/ which i prove both with scripture & natural reason/ & he being accused himself/ examineth my witnesses/ and refuseth them all together at his pleasure/ & calleth me heretic & iudgely pronuncieth that i am an heretic/ but with out any witness or reason at all. I beseech your learned highness to consydre whether this matter be in differently handled or no/ that on man openly accused of a great offence/ shallbe both defendant examiner judge & accuser all ate one time. Is it any marvel if the thief escape hanging which is suffered to be his own examiner & judge (If that lucifer the great devil might have such liberti/ to do what he list to accuse whon he would/ & then to be both his own witness & judge/ woe should come to all goodmen & he should never be condemned his self which were great pity. Where fore i beseech your highness/ as this matter that is between us/ is no small matter/ to appoint sum indifferent learned men/ sum of the Clergy/ & other sum of the laite/ to examine freely with out jeopardy of their lives/ this matter which is between use/ and not to suffer my adversary both to be my accuser and examiner/ and his judge and mine both together all at one time. This ones brought to pass and licence once granted again to hunt the ravening fox/ which i doubt not but that ye will grant me for the love that ye have to the liberty of your loving subjects/ i trust that we shall not need here after to hunt the fox any more/ his aiders & manteyners and he shall be so manifestly and openly known/ who and where they be. This that i go about shall not only minish the murder of the cruel fox/ and purchase spiritual liberti unto many agood man/ but also shall turn to the great honour and good name of all the hole realm/ which in many countries is sore sflandered for to be au upholder of the best that we pretended to banniss he away/ They that sit ot home and have not been in far countries/ cannot tell what report goeth abroad in other lands of our nation/ But they which are and have been in strange lands/ are comppelled sometimes to hear it that they would not hear very gladly/ of our country for holding of such doctrine and ordinances as all the world knoweth to be of the bishop of rooms making cand contrary to the holy word of God. Who grant you health of both body and soul/ victory over your enemies and grace to do in this our matter of religion as shall be most to thee/ glori of God and the profit of the common wealth/  
Amen.   

THE RESCVER OF THE romish FOX AND his whelps, against the hunter & his hounds.  
THe examination of a proud praesumptuous hunter/ who under a crafty praetence of hunting the romish fox/ breakethe the pale of the enclosed park/ and with his rasheand knavish hounds entendethe to destroy the dear of the same.  The Hunter 
All Good and indifferent men which have seen my hunting can bear me record that the intent and purpose of it was to find out the romish fox/ and to prove that he was still abiding in England/ and that ye master gardinere with your companiones did manteyn and hold him still in the realm/ contrari to the kings commandament/ which appointed you to drive him clearly out of all places of his dominion. And you also your self in this your examination grant that it is the bishop of romis doctrine that i writ against but that it is not there for to be cast away/ because he hath tawght & ordained it. There fore i hunt the fox in deed and not pretend to hunt him as ye say. But how chanceth this/ that you/ whom with your other fellows i have in my hunting accused of idolatri/ of heresy and mantenance of the fox/ the king's enemi/ that in the stead of an answerer/ ye are now becumed my examiner/ and judge/ and your own judge also? It is far against all reason that ye which have long been my open enemi/ and are my adversary in this cause shall be now allowed to be an examiner and a judge of me and mi accusation/ whether i accuse you sufficiently orno/ seeing that hatred blindeth all examiners and judges. It is as far wide from all right that ye shall be allowed to be an examiner and a judge upon the accusation made against yourself/ seeing that as Plato sayeth/ no man canbe an equal & indifferent judge of himself/ for everyman is blind in that thing which he loveth/ Therefore it were more seeming that ye should leave of your examination/ and answer to your accusation/ Ye resemble much in manners your holy father pope july the second/ which after that he was deed and deposed from his popedom/ (as it is written of him (commanded saint peter so imperiously to let him in at heaven gates/ as he had wont to command his servants when he was alive/ everdreming of his old state as thoge he hadbene a lordly pope still/ so ye master gerdiner/ the common examiner of all them that are accused for breaking the traditiones ordained by your popish father's/ whether the transgression be done in your diocese or your brother bonors (which would be better but for you) when it is at the last ones cummede to your course to he accused of heresy and idolatri your oun self/ ye dream still that ye are an examiner/ as ye had wont to be/ as julius dreamed still that he was pope/ If this be not so it is likely that of a set purpose ye will not seem to be accused of heresy and idolatri and of the mantenance of the fox/ lest any other beside me should arise here after and accuse you of the foresaid crimes as i do/ and then the accusationes of ij should be allowed/ or at the lest should betaken for a common report/ and than it should be hard for you/ with all the haly water that ye made thes seven years/ to purge pour self from the fame of a popish heretic/ as ye can not even at this hour with all the learning and law that ye have clear yourself from the thing itself which maketh a popish heretic/ Therefore for fear ye should be accused here after of papistri heresi and Idolatri and that my accusation should neither be taken for a witness nor an increase of the common fame that ye be a popish heretic/ ye make yourself an examinet/ dissembling that ye are accused/ of the crimes above rehearsed/ Where as ye call me a proud presumptuous hunter/ he that knew both you and me and ower livings & saw your mule/ your jolly styropis your gentle men going before you in their velvet coats/ your daily apparel and mine your casting of your nose in the wind like as a stork doth in her nest/ would say (or else i am deceived) that i had good occasion to say/ hypocrite or disguised player pull first surthe the beam of thy own eye & then take own the mote of mine. Wherefore am i proud? my hounds have no velvet collars/ my nets are not of silk/ I can not guess why that i should be called proud except it be for hunting of the proud fox your father which maketh emperors and kings kiss his fet/ and you which have so many proud velvet coats going be fore you every day. What mean ye by your saying that i break the pale of the enclosed park? What mean ye by the pale/ and what is this park? So far as i can spy/ ye mean by the park/ the church of england/ and by the pale/ the unprofitable & letworde ceremonies which were once thirst in to the church by the Bishop of rome Telme for what intent have you and your fathers made this pale of yours/ for the church of England/ to hold in/ or to hold out something that should not come in? If ye have made your traditional/ and ceremonial/ pale to keep the dear within it that they may not go forth to get themselves sum good meat abroad/ when as ye either gyne them none but contagious meat/ or lok up their good meat from them (as ye did of late when ye took the word of God from/ them and commanded them in pain of death to eat your stolen breed that is to keep your traditiones) ye do the thing yourself which ye lay falsely un to my charge/ that is ye kill sum of the kings dear with poisoned meat and other sum with hunger. If your pompons pale be made to hold out/ ye have welobteyned your purpose/ for which your ceremonies and man's inventions/ which ye grant that the pope hath made/ ye hold out the word of god which should only be the meat of all the dear of this park/ and the true preachers of the same/ for haly water must be conjured/ and cast about/ then it must be expounded what it me anethe/ legends/ sequences secrets colates aunt litanies and dirges for the deed must either be said or sung/ the cross must be crepto an kissed ashes and haly breed must be taken/ palms and candles must be borne/ thes ceremonies must have their time to be done and expounded in which time/ the word of god might be red and expounded/ but if either of both must be left undone the word of god must be left of/ for the ceremonies are reckoned to be God's service as the word of god is not reckoned/ How many preachings are on Christian mes day nay it is to dear a day or to high a feast to preach on it/ & the holy ceremonies may not be left of for the preaching. I heard once an indifferently well learned divine say on a Christian messday/ a short sermon wolddo well to day/ as a long sermon were not allowable/ for hyndering of the ceremonies which ye call god does service/ If a preacher cum from oxford or cambridge/ freely to preach the word of god to the people/ & require to be heard/ the pressed useth to gyne this answer to the preacher/ if he smell any thing of the new learning/ we must this day read the six articles other wise called gardiner's gospel/ and so the preacher goeth away/ Therefore your traditional pale holdeth out in deed. If that ye say that your pale hold the out here tikes/ the contrari is true/ for loykyn of an werp that arch heretic/ the spoilers/ & the davidianes with all other such sects with all their followers keep all the ceremonies that are kept in england and more to/ and allow them as decent rites/ and yet for all that this pale of your ceremonies cannot hold out/ damnable and detestable heresies and heretices out of those parks where of they are the pales/ This pale of youris after my judgement is not the pale of our english church/ or at lest should not be/ but it is the pale of the poe pis pin fold/ where in/ ye and your fellows set all them against their wills/ which have against your minds/ tasted of the corn of God's unmingled word/ your pale may be called the pale of the popis gardin/ where of bishop steven ye are gardener/ and there in ye compel all men to work & to eat of your popish weeds in pain of death/ The pale of all the red dear of christis hired/ is the word of god/ which will hold all that argood/ with in their bounds/ if they will not keep them with in their bounds the chief keeper weareth not a wodknyfe in vain/ To break this pale were plain felony/ but to break your popish pale and to set it all in a fire in my mind were a deed of charity no less than the deed of Ezechias/ which broke the brazen serpent/ for he that should break/ your pale/ should deliver many a poor prisoner piteously pined with in your popish pynfold. And where ye say that i intent to destroy the dear of the park that is the kings subjects/ it is not true for i intent only to hunt out the fox and to find out his fautors and manteyners/ If ye feel yourself in jeopardy of your life by my hunting/ then are you either the fox or on of his manteyners/ for their are no other in jeopardy by my hunting.  The rescuer 
Sith it hath pleased allmyghty God/ author of unite to raduce this realm to perfect accord and agreement in the truth/ and by good politic laws/ hath under the only authority of the king's maiesti enclosed/ and as is were imparted/ the dear-beloved subjects for their safeguard/ with in the forche and streynghe of the same/ how much is it to be lamented/ to see arrogance in the eyes of the said subjects/ as with breach and violation of the said laws/ to make a tumult and a clamour/ under pretence of hunting the fox that is all ready driven out/ thereby to move and trouble the hearts of the good people/ and to corrupt such other as be easy for their simplicity to be seduced.  The hunter 
To thank allmyghty god for all his benefits which he hath sent us/ and to knowledge that they came from him/ when we have the benesittes/ it is i grant well done/ and thankfully/ but if thersites the foulest of xv thousand and more/ should thank God for his beauteous and well favoured face/ should he not trifle? Even so do ye to thank God for it that ye have not/ that is for accord and agreement in the truth/ when as the third part of the realm dissentethe from the other ij parts in the cause of religion/ There are x thousand and more honest men in england which in their consciences descent from you/ & hate with all their hearts your false doctrine/ which ye so earnestly with word and writing do defend/ There are bishops in inglond & many honourable men of the temperalti which descent from you and all them that uphold the popish doctrine that ye defend/ There is not a citi nor a great town in all england where in are not many that dissent from you in doctrine & would openly speak against you if they durst/ your servants of late would have the pope heed os te church/ the bishop of cantorberies servants will have the king supreme heed in his oun realm/ is not here/ good agreement? The most part/ of all the learned men both of oxford and cambridge which have been brougth up in the bosum of the holy scripture/ would be delivered gladly of the unberable burden of servile ceremonies/ where with they are both hindered, from their study and the lay-men are hindered from hearing of the word of god/ The more than most part of unlearned mattenmumbling sacrifieers which can do nothing elliss but/ play in ceremonies and/ cast hallywater with all them have takem any degree in the canon law/ save a very few (truly i know non) would have the popis cere moties to continue still and yet ye say that their is so good agreement in the truth/ The cock and the fox are enemies on against an other/ the fox lo vethe not the cock/ be like because he with his crowing/ bewrayethe the fox when he would on the night cum to worry hens/ Then when all the cokkes are deed/ or else put to silence/ the fox reckoneth that he hath good peace that he may worry hens & chikkinges and do what so ever he list/ noman speaking on word against him Go ye ij footed foxes after that ye haüe killed iij well crowing cokkes at a cast for crowing only a 'gainst your doctrine/ and have pulled all the feathers of ij cokkes of kind/ and have put them to silence/ & have brought the matter so to pass that neither cock nor hem nor chikking for fear of their lives dare speak one word against your devilish doctrine/ and that no man may examine your doctrine whether it be argeing with the word of god or no/ ye reckon that their is good agreement and peace of opiniones/ in the realm/ There is i grant great accord and agreement among you traditionerres/ and that none of you dissenteth from an other/ in popistri/ but how can ye agree together in the truth which persecute the truth and forbidden it to be red/ lest by reading of it men might spy out your naughty living & devilish doctrine? The scripture is as it were the light of the day the preachres are as cokkes & wait chemen/ thieves & murderers hate both/ therefore have ye forbidden the scripture/ to be red openly in the chir che/ & put preachres to silence or kill them that be wray your ungodliness/ What agreement is this in the truth? Where ye say that god hath inclo sed thekyngis dear-beloved subjects only under the authority of his majesty/ by good politic laws/ what mean ye by thes laws? mean ye god does politic laws or man's politic laws? By thes politic laws ye cannot understand the law of moses/ neither the law of the gospel/ for ye mean of such laws as ye accuse me here after to be a transgressor and a breaker of/ in the hunting of the fox/ in thes words/ with violatione of the said laws/ to make a tumult under the pre tense of hunting the fox/ but in my hunting of the fox i wrote only against those ceremonies & traditiones which ye cannot deni but the bishop of rome hath made/ therefore ye mean by your politic laws of whose transgression ye accuse me/ neither the laws of the new testament nor the old/ but the ceremonies and traditiones/ which the bishop of rome hath ordained. If that i had written in my hunting against the laws of moses/ or the gospel/ ye might have found out sum excuse for yourself/ but now seeing that i wrote only against the popis ceremonies/ i gather of you this/ that ye say that god hath enclosed & as it were inparked/ the king's dear beloved subjects/ under the authority of the king's maiesti alone/ by the ceremonies & traditions which ye grant that the pope hath ordained/ for other politic laws can ye not mean of in this place/ I believe that all the subjects of all kings and emperourers are enclosed under their autoxite alone/ by the everlasting word of good/ and not by any corruptible politic law of man/ for as man is corruptible so is all that he maketh/ then if the kings subjects be enclosed under his authority by man's politic laws/ when thes laws is broken (as he that maked a law may break the same again) the kings subjects are no longer under his auto rite/ whereby ye give men occasion to gather of you that yemeane that the king is supreme guerner of all his suciectes & all his/ are under his authority alone/ by the popis cerenonies & traditiones/ Is not this a sure ground that ye build the kings supremeci upon? Hath not the king authority enoghe of the scripture for to manteyn hyssupremeci with all but that he must be fain to fet sum of the popis ceremonies to help the scripture which were not able to do it alone? What a crasty for is this to say that ceremonies enclose the kings subjects under his authority alone/ for that intent that the king's highness seeing that his suprenicie were fortified with ceremonies/ suld be the readier to fortify them again/ Mark also Turrian other subtlety of the fox/ where as in my former hunting i made such arguments against the popis ceremonies & traditi ones as he could not solute/ now because he seeing that he cannot defend the pope under the name of ceremonies & traditions/ now calleth him good politic laws where with the kings subjects are enclosed under his authority alone/ & after this marvelous transformation/ he maketh the popis ceremonies the kings politic laws/ Marck also how that he would maketh pope the kings friend why lsis he makeththe popis ceremonies manteyners of the king's supremeci/ for when as the pop & his doctrine are all on/ if the popis ceremonies manteyn the king's supremeci/ the pope doth the same/ Is not the king's highness much bound to master gardener for purchessing him such a friend? Now sir tell me/ if ye can/ which of thes politic laws that i have written against have enclosed the kings subjects under his authority? If that there be no politic laws which i have written against that encloseth the king's subjects under his authority alone (as iam sure ye can show none that i wrote against) then must ye be taken as ye have been many a day/ for an impudent & an unshamefaced liar Because ye say that i break good politic laws/ & therwithe make a tumult and a clamour/ let me know i pray you which good politic laws i have broken and i shall knowledge my offence & take the punishment worthy for such an offence/ I wrote against a sort of popish ceremonies/ & ungodly tradiciones/ but that i remember i never in all my book wrote against one politic law/ A politic law is an ordinance devised by wise men for the profit of a city or a country/ or a common wealth/ such ordinances did not i ones touch in my book/ let them be judges which have red the book/ And that this manis lying may be more manifest i will shorthy per use and go thorough all the traditiones which i have either made mention of or spoken against in my book/ What politic law is it to command all the people of a realm/ to kneel before a piece of molten or casten silver to creep to it/ and to kiss it/ and to sing Crucem tuam adoramus Domine, lord we worship thy cross? What polyci is it to go so earnestly about to drive the devil out of acorn or ij of salt which noman eateth/ and to conjure the devil out of the haly water fat where noman saylethe and to suffer him to be still/ in the great heaps of salt where with men's meat/ is seasoned/ and to let him tarry still unconjured in the great rivers/ and broad se/ and in the alefattes? It were a more politic law to send thes coniviurers to the salt pans and to the broad se where into we are sure that the devil ran once with the swine of the gergesenes/ then to make such a business a bout a little water and salt/ which must both be cast way all together and never cometh in any man's belly. What policy is it to desire of god to give a new vertu unto salt to hele burning agues/ and to water to hele cold dropsies and other cold diseases? What politic law is it to orden that churches shallbe consecrated for the sacraments and for God's word & then a non after to make a place of them to read politic laws in and all devilish doctrine that antichrist can devise? What polici is it to receive the sacrament of Christis body and blood which was ordained to be revived in the remnmbrance of Christ's passion/ to take it for sick horse/ and in the remembrance of dedemen? What politic ordinance is it to sing dirge either to bring damned souls out of hell or elliss to raise men from death tolyfe again? This is a praty polyci to deserve remission of sins by the mixtur of both the parts of the Sacrament together/ What politic law is this that the psalms which were ordained for the maker and creator shall be song in the honour of the creatures? What politic laws are thes that amam may not as well prays god in lent in he brew as in latin/ & that all the year thorough messes matines diriges evensongs shall be song in a tongue that noman understandeth saving they that are learned? What polytike laves are thes that the lay menshal have but the half of Christis supper/ and that the priests shall have the hole Sacrament/ and that the water of the font shall be hallowed/ as thoge the element took away original sin/ and to hold styngking water half a year and more/ and to put in the coldest day of all winter a young tender infant in it/ over both heed and ears/ where by many children are lost and many cache such/ diseases as they can not claw of as long as they live again) Is it not a praty politic law that thoghe a pressed have the french pox or the canker that he must spit in the child's mouth/ What politic law is it to ordain that a man may eat so mich fish at one meal as would serve for ij and to call that fasting and to forbid to eat an ounce of flesh & to suffer men to eat iiij pounds of the daintiest fishes that can be found/ and to suffer the most nourishing fruits an strongest wines that can be gotten to be received? What good politic law is it to command men to believe that no pressed neither any other man/ can make an unadvised vow after xxj. years of their age? What politic law is it to lok up marriages from priests all their life time/ and from all lay-men also for the hole half year? save six weeks/ and to set the stews open all the hole year no day that i her tell of except? If any man think that this is not true red it that is written of this matter in your common manual in thes words/ Traditio uxorum, & nuptiarum solennitas certis temporibus fieri prohibentur, videlicet ah Aduentu Domini usque ad octavas Epiphaniae. six weeks and six days are between/ Et a Septuagesima usque ad octavas paschae, x. weeks / Et a Dominica ante Ascensionem Domini usque ad Octavas Pentecostes, iiij weeks. Now put to thes the fridays embring days and Apostellis evens/ and ye shall find that the hole half year is lokked up from marriage save vj. weeks. What politic laws is it to command the pressed tosing saint Maries merits bring us unto the heavenly kingdom/ and to desire god that Petronilla and diverse other saints should do the same? What polytik laws are thes to orden that myndeles pipes shall play that Christian men should sing/ and say/ with their hearts? to make altars for sacrifices when all sacrifices are all ready sufficiently offered up that are necessari for our salvation/ and god requireth of use no other sacrifices but the sacrice of our own bodies and of our prayers? What politic laws is the popis canon law which maketh Antichrist under heed of the hole Catholic church which is Christis spouse/ above all emperovers and kings and all other lawful politic governors? Now have i rehearsed all the matters of religion/ which i either wrote against in my hunting or reersed to be of the popis making/ which of all the ceremonies & traditiones that i have reckoned here hath enclosed the kings subjects under his authority/ alone? Which of all thes that i have written against are either good civil or politic laws? Not one/ where fore your lordship lieth once again where re yesay that i make a tumult with the violation of good & politic laws. If they be politic laws/ what do they in the church? for their is no place for them but for the word of god alone/ ne their were the church bare if all your politic laws were in the popis bellies from whence they came/ for where Christis church is richly replenished with Goddis word/ there can no man justly complain that the church is naked and bare as ye canonists mean it should be if your fathers traditiones were casten all out of the church with your father/ And if ye would say that your politic laws manteyn & fortify God's word beside that i have proved a great sort of them clearly contrari unto God's word/ and the rest hindrance unto the preaching of it/ i say that the word of god/ which came in to the world/ all politic brains as yours are/ labouring all that they cold/ to hold it out/ both with laws and divers kinds of deaths needeth no politic laws to manteyn it/ for as all things that live are norisshede with the same where of they be made/ as the wise man sayeth/ so the laws which are of god and cum from him/ are only nourished/ & man teyned by allmyghty god/ and receive no nourishment/ neither substance of any manis ordinance/ Then do princes manteyn gods word as Micheas heath in them when they see that it is diligently and sincerely preached/ which thing when they do/ it hath no need/ master gardener/ of your fathers traditiones and yowris/ to manteyn it & to further it. Where as ye say that i make a tumult & a clamore and seduce the people/ this slander suffer i common with the prophets with Christ and his apostles & all other good men which ever at any time assayed to destroy/ & drive away/ old and long rooted idolatri/ or any other devilish doctrine. Even so do ye now unto me as the masters of a certain maid which had in her an evil spirit/ did unto Paul/ This made which had this spirit in her/ brought no small advantage unto her masters by prophesying/ and when Paul came by with his companiones/ she followed them and cried and said thes men are the servants of the highest god/ which show you the way of health/ an thus did she many days/ but Paul not abiding that/ turned him and said unto the spiret i command the by the name of jesus Christ to go out of her/ and in the self hour he went out/ but her masters seeing that the hope of their advantage was gone/ took Paul and Silas an brought them to the court or lawhouse to the rulers/ and they delivered them up to the officers saying thes men trouble our citi/ and yet are they jews and teach ordinances that we which are Romans ought not to receive and keep/ and then was the appostelles' bet and scourged/ The bishop of romis canon law with his devilish ceremonies entered into the church of england and brought no small advantage unto the pope the master of this doctrine and to his children/ of the same law and traditiones/ all ye that have in England the bishop of romis mark in your crowns receyne much profit and advantage/ and though i know that your father the pope in his ceremonies and canon law alloweth with his voice Christis doctrine/ yet seeing that i know that he doth that for that intent that/ he may tarry still in the church & be undryven out to flatter preachers with all/ and to purchase credence unte his 〈…〉 doctrine/ i thynck that for all his naming 〈◊〉 jesus and flattering of the apostles/ that his hole heap of Traditiones is to be castenn out/ And as the romans appeached paul and his companiones of a tumult and of trubling their city/ because they saw that their vantage was lost when the spirit was cast out/ so ye fautors of the romish doctrine fearing that your pom●●s state should be minished if the popis traditio●es/ should be driven out with the pope/ ye accuse me of a tumult and a clamore/ because i would have the bishop of romis doctrine which is a falls spirit of propheci/ entered in to the church/ cast clearly all together out of the church/ And whether i have been accused by you and yours/ to the rulers and have been ponisshed openly or no/ my tormentoures which are yet a live/ can testi fi/ and if i were at this hour with in your reach/ i should not escape so lightly as paul and silas did/ If ye say unto me as Ahab said unto Ely the prophet/ art thou he that troblethe all England? i answer you as Eli answered Ahab/ I trouble not england butthow and thy father's house/ betause ye have left the commandements of god and thou goest after baal/ This is no new thing then that false prophets & maeteyners of idolatri/ do call them that labour to drive idolatri away/ troblers' and seducers of the common wealth/ Now is it time to come unto that point where yesay that the fox is driven out all ready/ If he be driven out all ready ye grant that he was once amnoge you/ Then if ye durst answer me directly to my question i would axe you whether the fox which ye have driven out all ready was the bishop of romis body or his do-doctrine/ if ye say that he was the bishop of romis doctrine/ ye make a lie against yourself for ye say that his doctrine is good and worthy to beholden and that only so much of his doctrine is to be rejected as was worthily to manteyn his authority to be reject/ and all his doctrine was not to manteyn his authority/ then was not all his doctrine after your mind worthy to be reject/ & that which ye reckon good that hold ye still/ Then i will reason with you thus/ the popis doctrine and the pope are all one/ but ye hold all the popis doctrine still saving the supremeci/ and ij or iij trifles more ere go ye hold still the hole pope saving his supremaci and ij or iij trifles that ye have taken from him. If that a duke commanded his hunt to kill a certain fox in a wood which had killed many of his fighting cokkes/ and other pullen/ if the hunt should only cut of the fox's ears/ and clip of his nails and so let him go/ were this fox killed/ had this hunt kept his masters command meant? no. And why? for his master's mind was that he should fill no more cokkes. Then who will say that ye have killed or driven away the romish fox/ which have only pared of his supremite/ & hold all the rest of the fox still/ and call them heretics which only barked at such ordinances as ye grant yourself are of the foxes making? ye grant yourself that the popis doctrine contrari to the scripture is the pope/ and such have i proved in my former book that ye hold still/ then is it not true that ye say that the fox is driven away all ready/ The fox/ say ye/ is all ready driven out/ and so sayeth the fox himself. But x. thousand enemies of the fox/ sayeth that he is not driven out and i which was thrice bitten in England with the fox sense that time/ that ye said he was driven out/ say/ that he is not driven out/ whether shall more credence master gardener begive unto me & to x. thousand more or to your father the fox and to you in whose house of late a young fox or ij was found as ye camot yourself deni? The properti of a fox is to be wily and crafty/ & when he is in ieperdi of death/ to fain himself deed all ready/ that so he may escape/ as it chanced once in the north country/ A certain four footed fox/ leapt in at a window in to a house in the country whose walls was deeper with in then with out/ and when he was once in/ he worried all the wives hens and cokkes of the house/ the good wife in the morning betime spying her hens and chikkinges all worried/ looked a bout her and spied the fox & all to knokked him on the pate with a knoke/ till he gaped and lay down as deed/ the wife trailed him out to the mydding/ for deed where to came all the neybores and children of the street to wonder at the fox/ but after that the old folck was gone/ none standing about him but children/ the fox took him to his feet and ran away to the would/ and killed hens afteras he did before. So the ij footed fox your father for a pretence can say that he is driven out of england all ready/ for fear that men should go more cruestly a bout to drive him out in deed/ when as he lurketh still in your house and such other canonists houses/ where as he gitteth commonly a litter or ij of young fox whelps every year/ Therefore where as ye say that he is all ready driven out/ ye do that/ but to save him/ as a covetous and thievish old wife said to a warryner for the saving of her cat This cat was a coney worryer and did much harm in the warren/ the warrener catched the cat at last/ and hanged her up with polecattes & other murderers of conies/ as the cat was in hanging her masters which had eaten many a good rabbit of the cats catching/ and fayn would have eaten more/ said to the warrener/ sir this cat i warrant you is well enough hanged/ i pray you give me her that i may make me a stomingere of her skin/ the cat leapt still and the wife ever said she is deed inoghe/ when the cat stirred no more the wife knowing that a cat was a best that not shortlly die/ axed the cat ones again/ and bare the warrener in hand that she was thoroughly deed/ Was it not like but that this wife hoped that she should have hyrcat alive again if the warrener had done no more to the cat after that she had axed her? even so ye say that the fox is all ready driven away/ that noman should go any more about to drive him out in deed/ for ye know that if the romish fox be no more killed in england than he is killed yet/ that he may well arise up again and do as he had wont to do in England in times passed/ saying ye say that he is driven out all ready at what time was he driven out/ or he was not driven out at all/ as far as i can gather in your book ye mean that then was he driven out or else never/ when he was first no more suffered to be called supreme heed of the church in England/ But after that time i will prove you/ that he was in England/ theridamas fore is he not driven out at all/ There was certain young foxes found in england certain in in your house/ and certain in other bishops houses/ whom/ we call papists/ of which sum ran away/ and sum was taken and would not deny their father till they dyede/ In that hole where as young foxes are found whelped and brought up must there nedis a fox be or lately have been/ but in your house and in other of your fellows houses sense the popis supremeci was taken from him/ was found certain young foxes whelped and brought up/ it followeth therefore that sense the time that the pope's supremecie was taken from him that the pope was in England and got children in your fellows houses/ If ye answer that the fox's whelps were gotten in england before that time/ how happeneth that ye have such a ●ely nose to smell out an heretic if he be a great way from you/ and yet cannot smell out a papist which is in company with you more than seveu years? ye stop be like the one side of your nose/ because ye will smell none/ or because the savour of a papist is so natural and pleasant unto you that it grieveth you not/ and therefore complain not to any man of that smell/ as men only use to complain of such smells as pleas them not/ How happeneth it that if thes whelps were gotten so long a go that they were all found in those bishops houses which are▪ manteyners of ceremonies and man's traditiones and not in the bishops houses which set no store by your father's ceremonies and are called fovorers of the new learning? It is easy to know the cause for as birds of on kind and colour flok and fly always together/ so the papists will ever be together/ that on may ever help another/ not only with numbered as sterlynges do when they are afeard of the hawk/ but also to consult & take counsel together how their sect might be best promoted maintained & set forward/ I doubt not but their are sum noble men in england which will reason thus with you one day/ in this bisshopis house which is a manteyner of man's traditiones/ was found one nest of papists & in that bisshopis house which is a manteyner of man's rraditiones was found an other nest of papists and so with the third bisthop & sic de sin gulis, and so with all the teste of them that are man teyners of ceremonies/ ergo all the bishops how says of england which are manteyners with gardener of man's traditiones are nests of papists and their swarms of ceremonies/ are the fox holes and covers where in the young fox's breed and the old hide them in tyla better time come If that ye answer master gardener/ that ye bewrayed your seruanres as sound as ye knew that they were papists/ i reckon that for that cause ye bewrayed them that a beaver biteth of his stones as sum write/ or else for the same cause that on tom story steelgate bewrayed his sons at the sessioves in neuwcastel/ Tom story was a strong thief and had iiij tall fellows to his sons which was as well learned in thevery as he was/ tome heard tell that he was complained/ of & therefore hasted out of the town/ but as he was going forth he met suddenly with the sheriff & therefore he fearing that he should be taken himself said unto the sheriff master sheriff/ if ye would fain take thieves lay hands on sum of my sons for by my sawl they are false thieves & i cannot do with all/ the hang man's will not be ruled by me/ Even so ye which teach your servants all the tym that they are with you so diligently ceremonies and man's traditiones which are the very sedes of popistris and make then with your example hate all them that hate papistry/ when ye are complaynid of & accused of papistri yourselves then for the safeguard of yourselves offer up your servants/ and when ye are blamed for holding such in your houses and that ye have not taught them better/ ye say ye cannot do with all/ But i marvel though men wink and oversee your doings if god ponish you not on day for bringing up your servants so ungodly and popishely/ as he ponisshed ely the pressed for the slack looking to the amendment of his sonis manners/ I reckon verily that if that excellent young man german gardener had been brought up in the bishop of cantorberries house as he was in youris/ that he should never have been a papist/ and comen to that death that he came to/ There fore let all men take heed how they put their childer to scool to you/ lest they learn of you the lesson in your house that german did/ & make the same end that he made/ you say that the for is all ready driven out & i say that he is in england still/ let us nuw see how well ye can prove that he is driven out all ready/ his devilish doctrine remaining still and by you and yours so manfully maintained.  The rescner 
But thus strangely the devil setteth forth his malice/ and hunteth sometime roaring like alien to devour the good/ sometime slightly like the fox/ whom he pretendeth to chase away/ And seeing it hath pleased the king's maiesti/ this hunter may be examined/ & for want of the presence of theman/ to consider the chief points & matters of the book/ i trust so in differently to handle the examination/ as what so ever name the man hath he may appear to you/ of such sort as his book well examined/ doth plainly declare/ the man calleth himself wraghton/ & pretending in the beginning of his book to write such matter as he would have cum to the kings majesties knowledge/ he can not be content to attributto that style to his maiesti where with the hole realm hath truly agreed his hygnes should be honoured/ to be supreme heed of the church of england & ireland/ This can have no pretence of ignorance and simplicity/ but it is a plain declaration of pride and arroganci. In his preface to the king's maiesti/ he confesseth his ignorance of hunting whereby he believeth to have the more learning which of what sort it is shall after apere.  The hunter 
Where as ye call me proud & arrogant/ because i call not the king our master the supreme heed of the church of england and irlande which i ought to have done because the hole realm hath given it unto him/ ye declare yourself more to be a blood seeking & aflattering canonist them a learned divine/ for a learned divine would have reproved my fact if it had been unlawful/ by & by with a text or ij of the scripture &/ not have cited the multitude for authority/ as old wives do for lak of scripture/ when they would manteyn any old superstition which hath been long used of many/ If the king be therefore lawfully heed of the church of England & ire land/ because the hole realm hath agreed there to/ then when all the hole realm consented that the pope should be called the heed of the church of England he was lawfully called the heed of the church of England/ If it be a good argument to say the hole realm do the it ergo it must nediss be true. A little before ye have builded the king's supremeci upon the popis traditiones/ & here ye build it upon a multitude of men/ have ye no better foundation for it/ than so●itrow it will once break out that ye hold in so closely/ But to the purpose again/ when as supreme governor in earth under god/ betokeneth as much as supreme heed doth/ and is as honourable a term for the maiesti of a king as the other is/ what need ye make so much business a bout a word when as i have given the king in the title that i gave him so much honour as is lawful to give unto any earthly man by the word of god/ Where as i named him supreme governor under god/ i excluded both emperor & pope & all other that might seem to have any hy authority/ or might derogate any thing from the king's supremite. And be cause supreme governor seemed unto me a more honourable title and more becomly for a king then to be called heed of the church as antichrist calleth himself/ and certain wanton persons where as i have been therefore call the kings highness pope of england becaws ye give him the title that the pope hade/ i changed that term in to a better/ and have taken the occasion of mocking of our prince a way/ But lest ye or any other/ should think that i should deny that the king is supreme heed of the church of england and irelonde/ i hold as well as ye do that he is supreme heed of the church of england and ireland/ if ye under stand by this word church an outward gathering together of men and women/ in a polytike order/ But if ye take this word church in the signification that it is taken in the xuj. of Matthew/ and to the ephesians the first and fift/ and to the Colossians the first chapter/ i deny that the king or any earthly man/ may be called heed of the church save only Christ for the church that is spoken of in the xuj. of Matthew of that nature that the gates of hell can not prevale against it then he that must be the heed of that church/ must be such on as the gates of hell cannot prevale/ for the body and the heed must be of one nature/ but we are sure of no more such but of Christ alone/ therefore/ are we only sure that Christ is the heed of that church/ The king our master hath such authority given him of god as all other kings have and have had and neither more nor less but neither the Emperor nor king Herod in Christ's time was ghostly or mystical head of the church but only politic heads of the church therefore/ our master is only politic heed of the church of England and not mystical and ghostly heed of it/ a evil prince and a vicious liver hath as much authority given him of god as a good and a virtuous/ and all a like/ but every vicious king is a member of the devil/ and no member of the devil can be heed of Christ's mystical body which is the church/ then can no prince be a mystical or spiritual head of the church which is Chrystis mystical body/ But lest we should reason without a sure ground/ hear what the scripture sayeth of the heed of the church/ Paul unto the ephesians in the first chapter writetht thus of Christ god hath subdued all things under his feet and hath given him to be an head above all things/ to his church which is his body/ So far Paul/ then is the church Christis body/ was king Herod the virgin Maries mystical heed/ and spiritual heed of the apostles and of the rest of Christis church? or was the Emperor the spiritual heed of Christ's church in those days? if ye say nay/ no more is any man in earth now heed of Christis mystical body which is the church Paul also to the ephesians in the v. chapter sayeth/ the husband is heed over his wife as Christ is heed of the church but a good husband will have no more heads of his wife/ but himself alone/ so no more will Christ have any more heads of his mystical body and his spouse the church but himself neither is it needful to have any spiritual/ under heed of this his mystical body for lak of his presence for he hath promised us that he will be with us unto the end of the world/ And as concerning spiritual matters Christ gave unto peter as much authority as he gave unto any king or Emperor that either is or was or shall be/ when he gave him the keys of the kingdom of heaven but he made not peter neither any other of the apostles neither Chief heed of the church/ neither under heed of it/ therefore are neither Emperors nor kings pope's nor bishops neither under nor over spiritual heads of the church which is Christ's mystical body/ To conclude i hold that the king our master is the suprem politic heed under god both of all the spiritualti/ and also of the temperalty of England and ireland and that there is neither spiritual nor politic heed in earth above him/ neither bishop king nor emperor/ If this be not enough that i give unto the king's highness tell me what more is to be given by the scripture and i shall be glad to give him it.  The rescuer 
The man pretendeth to hunt the romish fox/ and assigneth ij places specially one under the aultare/ & another under the chalice where by he declareth where at he shooteth Albeit he would gladly dissemble it/ yet he cannot utterly hide it he is angry with the aultare/ & with the chalice/ and fareth as miners do that intend to throw down there neyborres house pretending to find an othar/ ye may sown see wherefore he seeketh that findeth fault in the altar and chalice but let us hear the man speak/ & examine his reasons whether there be any reason in them. Thus he beginneth his hunting ye lordly bishops etc.  The hunter 
Where ye say that i hunt the fox under the chalice/ and thereby mean that i hunt against the Sacrament/ your lordship lieth as ye had wont to do/ for i say not that the fox is under the chalice/ but i say that i trust that if the king find the fox under the chalice/ that he will no more suffer him to have sauctuarjs there/ than Solomon suffered ioab to have any sanctuarij of the aultare/ When i say though steven gardener had brought up of his costs/ all the lords children of england/ yet i trust for all that/ if he can be proved a papist/ that the king will punish him as he hath deserved/ doth it now follow that i have said that ye have brought up all the lords children in england? at your costs? i reckon nay/ So it followeth not that i hunt the fox under the chalice because i desire the king to let him have no refuge there. Howbeit if the fox schuld creep either in to/ or under the chalice as he crept in to the canon of the mess/ from whence the king fet him out/ & i should hunt him out of the chalice or from in under the chalice it followeth not that i were angry with the chalice or intended any hurt to the Sacrament therefore/ ye do not say the truth where ye say that i hunt the fox under the chalice and your meaning is as false where ye privily mean that intent to write against the Sacrament/ I sought the fox among you bishops & priests/ & was he not of late found in your secretari whereas he hath been so long secretly hid? ye dissemble that i sought him among you/ and yet the title of my book testifieth that i meant that he was among you/ i sought the fox also in the church and a bout the altar where as i thought that he was/ and there i am sure he is and hath taken sanctuari and will their so long abide till Solomon take him by violence away from the altar and punish him according to his deservings.  The rescuer 
He asketh whether the king's maiesti banished the pope's name his purseand his doctrine.  The hunter 
This bishop is no more ashamed to lie then a best is ashamede to go barefot/ for i said thes words only that follow/ ho ye lordly bishops & ye clean fingered gentlemen of the clergy/ is not the fox of rome otherwise called papa among you? What was the pope that the king commanded you to drive out of England? When as thes were my words/ are ye not ashamede to say that i axe the king's maiesti whether he hath bannysshed the popis purse/ name/ and doctrine? Are ye lordelly bishops and the clean fingered gentle men of the clergy the king's maiesti? it appeareth plainly that ye mean so/ or else ye would not judge that to besayde unto the king's maiesti/ what soever is said unto you and to the rest of the clergy/ let men that have leisure here of gather more of your meaning. Moreover i axed not whether the king's maiesti banished/ neither whether ye proud prelate's banished the popis name/ purse and doctrine/ (for i knew well that the popis doctrine was still unbannisshed among you) but i axed of you foxes whelps/ what was the pope that the king commanded you to bannysh away/ and where as i say/ command to banish/ ye make banish alone/ as to command to banish/ & to banish followed by & by from the master to the servant/ If that your banish had been all one with the kings command to banish/ & the on had followed conse quently of/ the other/ we had had no need at this time to babble so much of that bestis bamisshement.  The rescuer 
And by this distribution the man making himself an swear to each member & part deviseth himself matter there upon to triumph/ But if an other should answer him/ he would say that the king's maiesti banished not the bishop of rome/ either for his name alone/ for his purse alone or for his doctrine alone/ but for all together.  The hunter 
Here ye answer nothing to the purpose for the question was not whether the king had banished the pope for his name purse or doctrine/ but it was whether the pope which the king commanded you to drive out of England/ was the popis name or his doctrine or his purse/ and ye make no answer to that question/ but to the great dishonour of the king and of the hole realm answer/ that the king hath banished the pope for his purse/ Is not this a sweet hearing to hear on of the kings counsel to say that the king hath banished the pope for his purse? And then ye say that he hath banished the pope not for his purse alone but for his purse name and doctrine all together.  The rescuer 
And not for all together so as all together were nought but for all together so far as he misusethe them. And as touching his name so far as it should signify a superiority/ above all princes and challenge a dominion in this realm/ so far is the name of pope bannisshed/ But else the god man pope of trumpyngton may in england live quietly/ for the name was never abhorred but as it brought a wrong persuasione of the bishop of rome/ by that name/ where as else the bishop of rome/ men call him still with out danger/ And as concerning his purse as it was worthily expelled/ so was it not because any money might be taken of the spiritualti by their just superioures/ but because it might not be justly taken of him that was neither superior/ neither yet did any thing for it.  The hunter 
See as the fox runnethe out and in as it were in a sophistri maze/ sum time backward and sum time forward/ that my hounds should not find him/ How beit i gather this of his saying that the popis purse and his doctrine abide still in England only so much of them taken away as the pope hath abused and that the rest of the popis doctrine and his purse which gardener & his fellows can occupy well/ may lawfully tarry still in England/  The rescuer 
And as concerning such doctrine as was under him taught it was never under stand of any good man that all that which was taught either by the bishop of rome/ or under his authority/ was his own doctrine/ & to be cast away/ but only that which was worthily to manteyn his authority to be reject with him.  The hunter 
The fox though he be very wily in keeping of his own consel/ yet hath he once uttered his meaning/ and holdeth that only those doctrines of the bishop of rome ought to be put away where with he manteyneth his supremecie/ for he sayeth only/ which word excepteth all other/ and thereby hemeaneth that all other doctrines teach they never so much idolatri/ superflition and devilishness/ aught to continue in england still. Is not this to cut of the fox's ears and to let him worrishe pe'still at his liberti? yis i think so.  The rescuer 
And it which was good to be retained and kept/ not because it was his/ but because it is good/ Shall not we confess Christ the son of god because the devil said the same?  The hunter 
To answer shorthy to all this superfluous babbling of this bishop in my hunting i did not say that all thes doctrines that were taught under the bishop of rome were nought/ but this was my argument. The popis doctrine/ is the pope/ and ye hold still the popis doctrine ergo ye hold still the pope. If that the pope or any of his taught the word of god/ that was not his doctrine/ but the doctrine of god/ which is eiher contained in the new Testament or in the old/ and against such doctrine have i not spoken/ neither would i such to be castaway/ thoghis he and his had taught it/ but such doctrine would i only to be driven a way with the pope as the pope hath ordained only and not christ/ and is either plain manifest contrary to the written word of god or else vayn/ idle superfluous and hindrance to the preaching of God's undouted word/ Now babble on as long as ye lest.  The rescuer 
Finally the bishop of rome was expelled neither fox his name only his purse only/ ne his doctrine only but for all together/ so far as each of them exceeded from the truth which is only minded/ all naughty doctrine is expelled with the bishop of rome/ and not because it was his but because it was nought/ It were pity that evil men should have such a stroke in things of the world/ and moche less of god/ that what good thing one meddled with/ should be called by and by nought/ King richarde the third/ au usurper in this realm/ brak the trust committed unto him/ by his brother/ concerning the preservation of his children/ And yet caused an act of the parliament after to be made in his time/ that feoffs of trust should do according to their trust/ The author we justly hate/ & yet we make much of the law which is good & reasonable/ Wherefore the foundation of this man's reasoning to reprove or reject any ordinance because our enemy either made it or used it/ is very slender and foolish. God can be the auctor but of goodness/ Amongst men that is nought is nought who soever hath used it/ and that/ that is good is good who soever hath abused it. And therefore there cannot be a more fond manner of proving then to say this is nought/ and why so? for such a man meddled with it/ such aman used it such a man commanded it/ to be observed.  The hunter 
Because ye cannot conconfut my arguments/ which i have made against the pope & his traditiones/ that ye might seem to your friends to say something ye fain an argument yourself as though it were mine and reason stoutly with histories & examples against it but all in vain/ & to no purpose/ your argument which ye have made in my name is this/ the pope hath made the ceremonies of the church/ ergo they are to be cast a way with him/ which argument thoghe it be not mine yet for as much/ as it is fathered on me/ a little added to it/ i will make it mine and prove that if followeth well enough. Never the less that all men may see how unshamfaced a liar ye be i will rehearse the argument that i made to prove that the pope was still in england/ The popis doctrine is the pope/ but ye hold still the pope's ' doctrine whiles ye hold still the ceremonies that he made/ ergo ye hold still the pope/ and when as i come to the trial of the popis ceremonies i do not as ye falsely lyk one of the unsham faced whore of babylones sons/ report of me/ only say the traditiones are to been cast away because the pope made them/ but i prove both by testimonies of scripture and by natural reason that they are nought have i brought no other argument against/ conjuring of haly water and salt/ creeping to the cross/ against the forbidding of prestis marriages/ against/ the robri of Christis cope against the stews/ against the service/ in latin/ against the priests receyning of the Gacrament to win there by to other men remission of sins/ but that the pope made them? I report me unto all them that have red my book whether i have brought scripture and reason or no/ i have brought such reasons as me think ye can not yet wipe away with all the sophistri logic & law that ye have/ & as for the other ceremonies that i reasoned not against/ i did not say that they were therefore nought because the pope made them as ye lie/ but i would they which were very trifles in compary son of those traditiones that i wrote against/ should be esteemed by the other which seemed much more gorgions than they were/ not confutyng them because both my book should have been to long and also they needed no confutation when their ibetters as they appeared/ were proved to be nought/ Now what will the story of king Richard help you? seeing your foundation is false. But i pray you what an argument is this/ king richard being an evil man/ made a good politic law/ ergo the pope though he be an evil man may make a good doctrine that god never made/ which is godly & necessari for Christis church/ Aristotel and Plato were infideles and made good politic laws for the common wealth ergo they could also make good and godly and necessari doctrines for Christis church/ Your argument followeth not where ye argue an evil man may make good politic laws for the body/ ergo he may also make good and wholesome doctrine for the soul/ This manner of reasoning from the less to the more affirmatively/ is allowed in no logic nor learning that ever i have seen/ But lest ye should make your excuse and say/ that your argument is from like to kyke/ and as it were thus made/ king richarde an evil man made a good politic law ergo the pope may make a good politic law/ i will prove that ye take not thes ceremonies and traditiones for polytik laws/ which are profitable for the governance of a coman wealth but for laws for the soul/ Ecclesiastical laws/ and for both promoters of God's honour and for God's service also/ ye and more over i can prove that ye take thes ceremonies for the commandements of god and make the breakers of them the breakers of God's commandements/ which if i do/ then proceedeth your argument thus an evil man may make/ good politic laws/ ergo he can also make good laws for man's soul and so wholesome doctrines for the church of Christ that if they were taken away all semelynes/ & godliness should be taken away with them as ye say here after expressedly of taking away of the popis cererionies/ In your Catechism lately set out in the king's name writing upon the fourth commandment ye say thus of the popis ceremonies against the which i have written/ partly in my hunting of the fox.) Likewise do they all break this commandment/ which do not observe but despise such laudable ceremonies of the church as set forth God's honour/ & appertain unto good order to be used in the church/ And there concerning such ceremonies of the church as have been instituted by our fore father's/ and be allowed by the princes or kings of the dominiones as hallowing of the font/ of the chalice/ of the corporace of the altar/ & other like exorcisms and benedictiones/ sprinkling of holy water/ giving of holy breed/ bearing of candles/ & palms creeping to the cross/ and other like laudable customs rites & ceremonies/ are not to be despised/ but to be observed.) Then can ye not say that ye mean by the popis traditiones polytske laws/ for god gave no commandment of politic laws in the ten commandments/ but left that in the liberti of Princes to make as many or as few as they think necessari for their subjects/ but ye weave thes ceremonies under the commandment of god/ & to your great shame ye make them commandments of god/ for if the transgression of ceremonies be the breaking of God's commandment/ then must the keeping of them be the keeping of God's commandment/ & they must also be God's commandments. If that a man come not to the church to krepe to the cross/ to bear candles to hear mes in atong that he under standeth not/ say not ye unto him why will thou not come to God's service? Is God's service a politic law? then it is plain that although ve once said so/ ye mean not by the pope's traditiones polytike laws. Now let usse whether this argument followeth or no. The pope only being/ a man & that an evil/ man brought in to Christrs church & commanded to be kept/ thes ceremonies & traditiones which are not found in any place of God's word ergo they ought to be cast out of the church again/ That the pope is amanye will grant me/ but that he is only a man your canon law will deny/ for it sayeth that the pope may do that amam may not do that is to serperate whom god had coupled together/ that the pope is an evil man & a false Prophet i doubt whether ye will grant me this/ both with heart and mouth or no i must therefore prove it as well as i can/ He is the kings enemy & an usurper of authority unto himself that god gave him never/ ergo he is an evil man/ but i will if i can bring a reason or two something stronger to prove that he is Antichrist and a false Prophet & theridamas for that he is an evil man/ He is Antichrist which teacheth false and contrary doctrine unto Christis doctrine/ & taketh it upon him which belongeth only unto christ/ the pope doth so for he teacheth that Peter was heed of the hole catholic church over all kings and Emperors and above all the rest of the apostles and that he is above all Emperors and kings and that they are bound to obey him and not he them/ and that he being but a bishop hath both the sword/ of the word/ and of temporal correction/ with many such other false doctrines which because they are well known i need not greatly to rehearse/ That he is a false Prophet i prove it thus by the authority of the Prophet Ezechiel which painteth your father and you so plainly as though he had seen you both together/ In the thyrtent chatpter he sayeth thus/ Son of man Propheci against the Prophets of Israel/ which prophecy/ and say unto them that prophesi out of their oun heart hear the word of the lord/ Thus sayeth the lord god/ woe be unto the foolish Prophets which go after their own spret when as they have seen nothing/ Thy Prophets (o Israel) are made like foxes in the wilderness ye have not gone up to the burstynges/ neither have ye made an hedge for the house of Israel to stand in battale in the day of the lord. They have seen vanity/ and a falls propheci saying/ the lord hath said/ when as the lord hath nor sent them/ & they trust that their word shall once be allowed/ Have ye not seen a vain vision/ and spoken a lying prophecy? And ye have said/ the lord hath said when as i have not said it/ There fore sayeth the lord god/ for as much as ye have spoken vanity/ and have seen a lie/ therefore sayeth the lord be hold here am i against you/ and my hand shall be against the Prophets which see vanites and prophecy lies/ they shall not be in the secret privity of my people/ and they shall not be written in the number of the house of Israel/ neither shall they come unto the land of Israel. And ye shall know that i am the lord/ Now because they have deceived my people saying peace when there is no peace/ and he buildeth a wall/ and they plaster it over with an unprofitable crust/ Say unto them that make an unprofitable plastering of it that it shall fall/ and their shall be a shower flowing in/ and ye shall fall with the stones of the hale/ and the wind of the tempest shall burst you/ And behold when the wall falleth/ shall it not be said unto you/ where is the cover that ye laid over/ I shall pull down the wall which ye have covered with an unprofitable crust/ and i will dash it down to the ground/ and the foundation of it shall be openly known and uncovered/ and it shall fall/ and ye shall be killed in the mids of it/ and ye shall be taught to know that i am the lord/ And in the end of the chapter he sayeth thus/ Because ye have made sad the righteous man's heart with a lie/ when as i did not make him sorry/ and streyngthen the hands of the wicked that he return not from his evil way/ that he may be kept quik. There fore ye shall see no more vanity/ and ye shall guess no more/ but i will deliver my people out of your hand. Thus far Ezechiel/ of whose words i gather that they are false Prophets which speak unto the people those words and doctrines which they have not received of god and yet make the people believe that their doctrine and words be of god and wound good men's consciences where no sin is committed/ and comfort evil men when as yet the wrath of god is over them/ but thes properties agree both to your father of rome & you/ ergo ye are both false Prophets/ ye and your father say that a pressed may not marry by the law of god/ that noman may be a preacher of God's word except hebe first benet/ collat/ subbecon ano decon or a sacrificing pressed/ that it is deadly sin to eat flesh in lent and on the days that ye have for bidden to eat flesh on/ except a man by apardon or a licence for money/ with you also is sin/ and yet can ye not prove that god hath forbidden that ye forbidden/ ye have neither scripture nor word of god for you but thes lies have ye spoken out of your own hearts and wound and strike the consciences of good men with deadly fear for leaving of such things as god our law maker never commanded/ ye say it is good to take Christis cup from the lay-men/ to conjure haly water/ to bear wilowes/ and wax candles/ to creep to the cross/ to hallow churches vestments and chalices/ to hear Mess Matines and evensong in a strange tongue that the hearers understand not/ to hallow the font and the pascal and little candles/ and fire/ to desire saints merits to bring us to heaven/ that one man may deserve remission of sins by the receiving of the sacrament for an other/ thes doctrines do ye teach and say/ that all thes are good works/ and god is pleased with thes works when they are done and offended when they are left of and undone/ and thus do ye both comfort tevel men with your trifles/ and wonde good men with deadly fear where none should be/ & ye speak thes words and doctrines out of your oun hearts/ and ye can not prove that god bade you teach thes doctrines that ye teach/ there for both the pope and you which be the pergetter of the pope's wall are false Prophets/ Be that is a true Prophet is sent of god/ he is sent of god that speaketh the word of god/ and hath the word of god to show for him/ then seeing that your father the wall maker of the popish church/ and you the pergetter of the same/ have not the word of god to show for your doctrines/ & yet say they are good and necessary for the church/ are both false Prophets than shall it not be a good argument to say/ this is the doctrine taught of a false Prophet which he never received of god/ ergo it must be cast away? Because now in this time we have much to do with man's traditiones/ and cererimonies/ which god neither commanded/ nor ordained/ and ye say that they are to be held in the church/ and i contend that they are to be driven out of the church let us see whether i can bring better reasons for the banishment of man's doctrines or ye for the mantenance of them/ Every doctrine that the heavenly father hath not ordained/ must be pulled up by the roots and cast a way/ but the ceremonies and traditiones that ye defend/ did the henenly father never orden/ there fore the ceremonies and traditiones that ye defend/ must be pulled up by the roots and cast away. If he did orden them tell us what book and chapter they are written in/ I have once proved that they are of the popis making prove you now and ye can/ that they are of God's making/ and till that time that ye have proved that/ they must be pulled up by the roots and cast away. Every strange doctrine is to be shoned of Christian men and to be cast out of the church/ but every doctrine is strange which is not contained in the holy scripture/ ergo all doctrines that are not contained in the scripture are to be shoned of Christian men/ and to be cast out of the church/ But none of thes traditiones are contained in the holy scripture/ there fore they are to be shoned of all Christian men and to be casten out of the church/ according unto the learning/ of saint Paul which sayeth/ hebrews the xiii. let us not be carried about with divers and strange doctrines. All those precepts are to be banished out of the church/ where to we are forbidden to give heed/ but unto the precepts of men which refuse the truth are we forbidden to give heed/ therefore/ all precepts of men which refuse the truth are to be bannisshede out of the church/ But the pope and his papists are falls pro phetes and refuse the truth/ ergo all their precepts ceremonies & doctrines are to be banished out of the church. But the ceremonies and traditiones that ye defend are the popis commandmentes/ therefore even because they are his/ being a false Prophet and not God's commandements/ are to be cast out of the church according to the learning of saint Paul unto titus in the first chapter which sayeth/ rebuke them sharply that they may be sound in the faith not gyving heed unto jewish fables and commandements of men which refuse the truth. If that we be forbidden in the scripture to keep the commandement both of our fathers by nature/ and also by governance if they command any thing concerning religion that god hath not commanded/ moche more are we forbidden to keep the commandmentes of them that belong nothing unto us/ if they command it concerning religion that god hath not commanded/ But we are forbidden to keep our father's commandements concerning religion if they command us any thing that god hath not commanded/ Ezechiel the xx. chapter in thes words. In the commandements of your fathers walk ye not and keep ye not their judgements/ walk in my precepts and keep my judgements/ ergo much more are we forbidden to keep the commandements of them that belong nothing to us when they command us to keep that god hath not commanded/ But the pope hath nothing to do with us/ there for we are forbidden to keep his commandements/ when he commandethe us that god hath not commanded be fore/ but the ceremonies that ye defend are the commandements of the pope/ therefore we are forbidden of all mighty god to keep them. All the doctrines of those men which for their false doctrine are justly exomunicated are to be driven away with the men excomunicatede/ But the pope for his false doctrine is first justly excommunicated of Paul/ afterward of the germans and last of our most noble Prince king Henry the eight/ ergo his doctrine which is his/ must be driven a way with him and not held still as ye say/ If ye say that Paul hath not excommunicated him hear what Paul sayeth in the first chapter of the epistle to the Galathianes/ if any man preach unto you any other thing than ye received/ the same/ be accursed/ but the pope preacheth other doctrine than the Galathianes learned of Paul/ for they learned nothing of Paul but that he had learned of god/ be fore/ for the pope teacheth his owen doctrine and ceremonies which neither Paul nor he receydied of god/ theridamas for the pope is accursed and yet shall we hold still his learning? All the doctrines are perilus for man's soul and are to be Casten away/ which when they are taught/ make the teachers there of to worship god in vain/ but all doctrines which are the commandements of men if they be taught make the teachers there of to worship god in vain/ ergo all the doctrines which are the commandements of men are parillous for man's soul and are to be casten away/ but all the doctrines of the pope that i writ against/ and ye defend / are the doctrines and commandmentes of men and only of men and that evil men/ ergo they are perilous for man's soul and are to be casten away/ Now let in different men judge whether ye have more reasons of authority and weight/ taken out of the scripture to prove that an evil man's doctrine should be holden in the church of christ/ or i have to prove that all man's doctrine though they were as holy as Poule was or were angels of heaven if they have not received it of god ought to be driven out of Christis church. And because ye harp much on that string that though a man be evil and a falls Prophet that he may bring forth not with standing good fruits and make wholesome doctrines/ we will examine that saying a little farther yet with the learning of Christ which sayeth thes words concerning the matter that is in strife between you and me. Beware sayeth Christ of false prophets which come unto you in shepis clothing but with in are ravening wolves/ By their fruits shall ye know them/ So men gather a grape of thorns/ or of thistelles' figs? Every good tree maketh good fruit/ but a rotten tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot make evil fruits/ neither can a rotten tree bring forth good fruits. whether is the pope a rotten tree or no● if he be a rotten tree/ and yet ye say that he may bring forth good fruits and make holsum doctrines/ either must ye be a falslyer/ or else Christ's word is not true Christ sayeth also Matth. the xii Ether make the tree good and his fruit good/ or make the tree and his fruit evil/ for the tree is known by the fruit/ ye generation of vepers how can ye speak good things when as ye be evil/ for of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. A good man bringeth forth good ' things out of the good treasure of his heart/ and an evil man bringeth forth evil things out of the evil treasure of his heart. Thus far hath Christ spoken/ Now i desire you that are readers to be judges in this matter/ whether christ which sayeth that an evil man and a falls Prophet cannot bring forth good fruits and doctrines is more worth to be believed with the naked truth/ or master gardener which sayeth that the pope which is a falls Prophet and an evil man may bring forth good fruits and make wholesome doctrines and necessari ceremonies and profitable traditiones for the church of christ/ with his histories and bies oft repeated good good/ and with his natural reasons.  The rescuer 
As much agreeing to the faciones amongst the florentines/ while they were in their common wealth. When on demanded what he said to such a matter being then in consultation/ he looked about/ and esspying out on of his enemies said/ what so ever such a man would say pointing to his enemy/ he was of the contrari opinion. The king's maiesti like a noble prince hath proceeded in this matter not upon faction/ nor upon displeasure/ or enemite/ but only truth & therefore hath rejected the bishop of rome/ so far as he swerveth from the truth And so far as the truth will bear/ his maiesti agreeth with all the world/ intending by the expulsion of the bishop of rome not to confound the truth/ but to purge it from such corruption as by the bishop of romis mantenance did insect it.  The hunter 
Your meaning is that the pope is to be so far rejected and banished away as he swerveth from the truth and no farther/ The bishop of rome is an heretic for stubbornly holding of doctrines contrari to the scripture/ and he his a traitor for making of himself heed of the church of England/ a 'bove the king. Other heretics convicted of heresy arburnt with all their books though they contain and have with in them all the truths and doctrines that are in the hole bible/ and all men that read them are taken for heretics/ and their books are earnestly forbidden/ other traitors convicted once of treason/ are destroyed and put to death with all their good qualities be they never so many 〈◊〉 excellent. But the pope both an archeheretik of the sect of papists/ and a fountain of treason/ and an heed traitor which not only with words denieth the king's supremeci/ but alfo beareth deadly hatred against the king's maiesti/ and would depose him if his power were like unto his will/ by your procurement/ hath gotten a special pardon that thoghe he be a traitor and heretic/ he may abide still in England and that his books which contain both his treason and his heresy may be red of all them that can read them/ and understand then with out all suspicion of heresy and treason/ only so much of his traytourous doctrine and heretical treason banished away as ye his children judge to serve from the truth/ which are so blinded with the darnel of his canon law that ye can/ not see it/ How can ye be judges in matters of truth of Christian religion which have not been exercised and brought up in the truth/ but in decrees/ decretals/ extravagantes/ counsels/ clementines and such other popish learning where of ye have gotten such a taste in the palates of your mouths that what soever scripture cometh in your mouths it hath a taste by your wresting of it/ of the popis decrees and decretals even as he that hath touched coloquintida or aloe/ maketh all thing that he touch the have the taste of them. So much of the popis doctrine must be driven away as ye think contrari to the truth/ the fox must be so long hanged till ye say he is hanged enough/ and them must he be lette● down again/ but half hanged/ because he is a clerk and can say his nekverse/ To speak in good earnest i think that every man may see that is not wilfully blind that the pope thought he be a stranger and justly convicted of ij great offences yet hath more favour showed unto him then any heretic or traitor being an Englisman had showed unto him in England thes seven. years. Therefore he hath thou favourers in england.  The rescuer 
So as this hunter chasethe far at large/ when with the only bishop of romis name/ he would hunt out all/ and destroy with the bad the good also. And so he might have kept all his ye hold still/ with out ye can other wise disprove them/ than because the bishop of rome used them or willed them to be used/ for they remain not be cause he willed or used them/ but because they be good. The man pleaseth himself moche that he proveth by divers examples that like as Aristotellis doctrine is called Aristotel and Terence's comedies Terence/ so the pope's doctrine should be called the pope. But hearken again if Terence spoke that Plato had spoken/ when terence were banished might we not use the speech still of Plato/ because it came ones out of terences pen?  The hunter 
I axe of you again whether this terence was banished for evil speaking or for evil doing? If he were bamnisshed foe evil speaking and learned the same of Plato/ when terence were banished it should not be lawful to use still the speech of Plato/ But if terence were banished for evil doing alone/ & not for evil saying when terence were banished men might follow Plato's speech where it is good though it had ones comed out of terences pen/ and he had used it/ But what is this to the purpose? Can ye prove that the doctrine that came thorough the popis pen was not his own/ but the doctrine of the father of heaven? If ye can prove that the pope can justly say with Christ/ the word which ye hear is not mine but my fathers which hath sent me/ i will also allow the popis doctrine as ye do/ not because it is his but because it came from god/ but foras much as neither ye no: he can prove that his doctrine came from god i will take you both for false Prophets as i have done hither to/ hearken to me once as i have done to you your saying is that Plato's learning that terence had used/ were not to be cast away when terence were banished though it had cum m thorough terences pen well so be it. Wilyam tyndale wrote many books wherein are many true and godly sentences/ and sayings/ which he had taken out of the holy scripture/ and the hole new testament which is the undoubted word of god came out of his pen in to our english tongue willyam tyndale was banished out of england and burnt as an heretic in brabant/ whether is it welland wisely done or no/ that his books which contain so much godly learning and the hole new testament which came thorough his pen/ are for bidden to be red and so banished for an heresy or ij that ye say are in in his books/ and for half a dozen faults that are in his translation? If it be evil don why do ye not amend your doing and why suffer ye not his books to be red why blot ye not out the faults of his translation/ and condemn no more Christis learning because it came thorough W. Tyndalles' pen? If it be well done that W. Tyndalles books and the new Testament of his translation are forbidden to be red and are banished away with him because they have sum faults or an heresy or ij in them and are comed out of his pen/ then all the hole doctrine that ever the pope taught/ with all his traditions and books which are so full of heresies and superstitiones/ and have so little scripture in them/ aught to be much more banished away with the pope and aught to be forbidden to be red then tindalles books and the Testament of his translation ought now to be banished and forbidden. Is there any holier doctrine in the popis law and in his ceremonies and traditiones then is in the new Testameut of tyndalles translation? are there not as many heresies in the popis books as in tyndalles? What reason is it then that tyndallis books and the new Testament of his translation shall be banished away with tyndal/ and be forbidden to be red/ and that the popis doctrine and ceremonies with his books shall not be banished with the pope but shall be kept still and red in the church as a new gospel in the mother tongue that all the hole church may under stand his doctrine/ and learn it when as Christis doctrine must be said and sung in such a tongue as not one among an C. understandeth because as it appeareth that few should learn it? Whether hath tyndal now or the pope more favour showed unto him in england? tyndall which is banished both bodily & with all his books & doctrine, both good and bad or the pope/ whose doctrine & books are red & allowed/ after that he is commanded of the highest pour under god to be banished out of england for his heresy & treason? If the pope have not more favour/ then christ hath in England/ Why may the popis gospel be red of all men in English/ and Christis gospel is forbidden to be red in english/ and only a few of gentle and rich men may read it?  The rescuer 
Christ said/ Doctrina non est mea sed eius qui misit me patris, And much more what so ever is good spoken/ or used by any man is of god.  The hunter 
The common heretic catcher is now becumned an open heretic himself/ and a minissher of Christis glori/ & a preferrer of men before god/ for thus sayeth he/ What so ever is good/ spoken or used by any man is much more of god than Christis doctrine is. He sayeth that the popis ceremonies and traditiones which i writ against are good/ them are they/ by his saying/ much more of god than Christis gospel is. And therefore belike/ he forbade that certain men shall read Christis gospel/ & suffereth all that will to read the popis traditiones/ which he hath of late years set out at large interlaced here & there wit a piece and a pache of Christis learning to purches more authority unto than/ if that he had thought that Christis learning had been as much of god as he thought the popis traditiones decretals decrees & clementines he would as well have fuffered all men that would have red Christis gospel/ as well to read it as he hath permitted all men women & children that list to read the popis ceremonies tradiciones decrees dectetal les & clementines/ Now is it cummedout at leughthe for what cause was there such diligent inqueri made every quarter for the transgression of the popis ceremonies/ & such pains of death ordained therefore/ & so small inquiry & little punishment ordained for the breaking of the commandements of Christ. Now had Christ need of the testimony of johan baptist/ nathamnel/ andre/ & peter to bear him witness that he is the son of god/ which if the popis proctor believed to be true/ he would say that Christis good doctrine were as well and as much of god as the good doctrine of any man/ If that this saying of gardener be unexamined and uncumpelled to be recanted as an abominable heresy that Christis doctrine is not so much of god/ as any good thing used or spoken by any man is of god/ then i say that he hath gotten as they say in cambridge agrace ab omnibus/ and a licens to be a papist and an heretic and that no man's accusation against him shallbe heard.  The rescuer 
And him ought we to make author of all goodness were it balaames ass that uttered it/ If Christ be preached sayeth saint Paul be it per contentionem or judicium/ let it have place modo Christus predicetur/ Look upon the truth & goodness of the thing setting a part the person that speaketh/ preacheth/ uttereth executethe or commandethe the same Ne there was here to fore any man so mad/ as expelling a tyrant/ would cast away with him both that which was good and that which was evil also.  The hunter 
As we ought to make god author of all goodness so we ought to be sure to ascribe and lay no thing unto him but it that we know for a truth is goodness/ or good/ prove once that the popis ceremonies and traditiones are good and then shall i say that they came from god/ but where is your profecye have from the beginning of your book x. times said the ceremonies and ordinances that i have written against/ are good good and good but other proof have ye brought none/ think ye that it which is a falsely of itself/ shall by oft repeating of it wax true? Is it possible to make of an evil thing a good thing by calling if many times good? Is the oft and manifold rehearsing of any thing a sufficient proof of the same? other proof bring ye non/ allearned divine should have brought places of scripture to have proved that the traditiones which ye so oft call good had been good/ as i have brought arguments and texts of the scripture to prove that they are nought and contrary to the scripture/ But here i must pardon you/ for in deed the matters that ye defend are so foolish trifling and so contrary to the scripture that it is no marvel if ye can bring no place of scripture/ for them to defend them with/ And where as ye say that there hath been noman so mad/ as expelling a tyrant/ would cast away with him both that which was good and the bad also/ whether ye mean of good profitable/ or good pleasant/ or by creation/ ye serve far from the truth/ for allmyghty god the well of all wisdom/ commanded the children of Israel when they should drive out the he then kings with their folk of the land of promise/ to drive and put away with them/ all their laws ceremonies and traditiones even then that were lawful/ were they never so profitable or pleasant for the common wealth/ It is to be thought that in so many cities & kingdoms that there was sum good politic laws/ and sum profitable and pleasant for a common wealth/ But for all that were they never so good so politic and profitable/ god gave the this commandment unto the children of Israel concerning them/ saying Levitice the xviij. chapter After the custom of the land of egypt where in y● have dwelled shall ye not do/ and after the manner of the land of chanaan where in to i shall bring you shall ye not do/ neither shall ye walk in their laufulles/ ye shall do my judgements and keep my precepts and walk in them. And in the xx. chapter. Walk not (sayeth allmyghty god) in the laufulles of the nationes which i shall drive out before you. Moses God's true servant sayeth also deuteronom ij the xii. chapter when thou art entered in/ after their destruction/ require not their ceremonies/ saying as this folk hath worshippet their god's/ so will i worship also. Thou shalt not do likewise unto thy lord god/ That which i command thee/ do thou only unto the lord/ put nothing to it neither take any thing from it/ If the pope your father and you had dwelled in the city of Hierico or hay or any other such like which moses josuc or David destroyed/ and had there/ all your holy traditiones/ laudable ceremonies/ good and politic laws/ promoters/ and setters forth of God's honore/ with your decrees decretals/ councils and clementines/ should Moses joshua and David have been mad men to have destroyed all your good and politic laws & all your laudable ceremonies? Make me an answer unto this question? If they should have been mad/ then men are mad for doing of God's commandment. If they should not have been mad if they had destroyed all your father's ceremonies and traditiones/ which were not expressed in Moses law/ and had commanded the people to keep and use only such ceremonies and precepts as were contained in the written word of god/ a prince which would drive out of his realm at this hour/ the pope which is agrevous tyrant/ and an enemi unto God's word/ if he drove out with him all his ceremonies laws and traditiones/ saving only them that are expressed in the word of god/ he should be no more mad/ than Moses joshua and David was/ which in their time did such like/ The xv. chapped. of the first book of the kings is plain against you/ where as god commandethe Saul to kill man woman nuris and child/ ox sheep camel and as/ if that all thing be good that god hath created/ the oxen sheep the camels the asses and young children was good and yet god commanded them not only to be expelled with the tyrant agag/ but also to be destroyed and killed with him/ them men may see how wisely ye have spoken when ye said that noman was so mad as eypelling a tyrant would drive a way with him both it that was good and also the bad/ The deed of king Saul in the foresaid chapter/ Was much agreeable to your deed/ in putting down the pope and his popistri/ As god commanded Saul to destroy agag and with him to destroy all his/ both man woman and child/ ox/ as camel and sheep/ & yet he like a politic fellow/ killed not agag but kept him quick and saved the best of the sheep and other cattal/ and the best clothes & all thing that was fair and goodly to look to/ so when ye were commanded of the king our master to drive away the pope with all his popistri/ ye put down/ a very small sort of small abusis/ but the pope himself with the great abuses ye hold still and say that they set forth God's honour/ as Saul said that he kept the best of the sheep and cattale to make sacrifices of to allmygcy god/ But as allmyghty god perceiving that Saul for covettousnes saved contrari unto his commandment agag and the best of the sheep and other bestis/ though he cloaked his fact with the cloak of God's service/ deposed Saul and for ever kest him out of his favour/ so should our most noble Prince king Henry/ follow god and do very well to depose you and make you a bishop quondam for breaking of his commandment/ in holding still the pope and the greatest abominaciones that ever he ordained.  The rescuer 
Wherefore saying in all his/ ye hold still/ he bringethe no other disprofe but only from the parsonage that hath used them/ i pas them over as of no force/ and cum to his cokking upon the clergy/ when he sayeth/ What say ye gentle men of the clergy/ concerning the laws of the church/ I say here your mastership playeth both the parts/ and as he said at gaming/ ye would win the game if ye played alone/ And yet have ye spent a great many words in vain/ ye put no difference between deeds laws and ordinances/ and because it were in deed a great folly/ for any man by proclamation to cause an other man's deeds to be called his/ as ye put your example right lewedly in sardanapalus/ so by you it shall be like folly, to call and make an other man's laws and ordinances his by proclamation/ Vhere in how much your folly is/ ye evidently declare/ that either do not/ or will not speak the difference/ but abuse the simplicity of the reder/ as though deeds and laws were all one/ Where as in the one/ it were madness by proclamation to make an other man's deeds his and the other of all wise men used and observed/ for in laws and ordinances the Romans sending to the Greeks for them/ made them by approbation thers/ And there is no common wealth/ but it hath taken in sum point example of an other/ concerning the laws which be worthily theirs/ where they have received them/ And amongst the Athenienses/ laws made of solon/ were not solones laws/ but the laws of the city/ as the text of the law sayeth/ which sufficethe to reprove and confound this gentle man's reasoning/ where in he would seem to excel/ But the man concludeth that he would have no law but the gospel in the church/ which is so far out of reason/ that i will not reason with him in it. And he seemeth himself to be ashamed of it/ and/ therefore taketh upon him to prove sum part of such ceremonies as we observe in the church to be repugnant to the scripture.  The hunter 
As a fox dare not adventure to run in the plain way/ for fear of the hounds/ lest they should catch him/ but rumneth in to holes and ledethe them out of the plain way in to bushes brambles and thick thorns/ so do ye the romish foxis protector/ for ye leap away from my arguments and answer nothing to them/ but ye call me craftily away out of my arguments to babble with you whether deeds ordinances and laws be all one or no/ wherefore ye lordly reprove me/ But i axe of you whether a man saying that the ordening of haly water to take venial sins away/ was pope Alexander's deed/ speaketh good and true English or no/ Is not an act and a deed all one? And call ye not the laws and ordinances made in the parliament house the acts of the parliament? Why may not i then call the popis laws his acts and deeds/ sooth he nothing that maketh a law? If he do something it that he doth/ is a deed/ then if he orden a law his law ordained is his deed/ then will not this shift serve you/ to trifle about a word/ and let the argument alone unsoluted/ If this word deed do offend you so sore i will use a term more pleasant unto you/ and make my argument thus/ The popis ordinances and the pope are all one then to whom soever ye give and attribute the popis ordinances him as much as lie the in you ye make pope/ but ye give and attribute unto the king the popis ordinances ergo as much as lie the in you ye make the king pope/ Now what advantage have ye gotten by refusing the word deeds? As concerning your examples fet out of the civil law they do not solute my argument/ for my argument was thus/ As if the king of Denmark should make a proclamation that all the ceremonies of Moses law should be no more called Moses ceremonies but his ceremonies/ yet for all that Moses ceremonies should abide and continue still Moses ceremonies/ for all his proclamation/ so the ceremonies that the pope hath once made/ continue and abide still the popis ceremonies for all that they are commanded by proclamation no more to be called the popis ceremonies but the kings ceremonies/ ye say that the Romans send to the Greeks for their laws and by approbation▪ made them theirs/ i pray you remanded not the Greeks laws still theirs/ for all that the Romans used the same laws? Was not the Romans and Greeks partners in laws together when they used together the self same laws? then it followeth for all your examples and by your examples that the popis ceremonies are yet still his and are occupeed in England and that (by your saying) the kings highness and the pope are partners together concerning ceremonies/ for the after partnership dispossesseth not the fierst hole awner of his former possession/ but he only giveth part of his right unto him that is made afterward partner with him. Have ye any other thing to conclude with your examples? If ye have/ make your argument and i shall shape a solution for it as well as i can/ I trow ye will not be so mad as to argu thus on cite may receive civil laws of an other ergo the church may receive laws of the pope/ Which is a false Prophet and a fervent Pharisee/ when as Christ sayeth in the gospel be ware of false Prophets/ beware of the Levin of the Pharisees/ Where as ye say that i speak so far out of reason (where i say that i would have no other law in the church but the law of the gospel alone) that ye will not reason with me/ ye play as your brother fox did which when he came thorough a wynyarde and saw that the grapes were higher than he could reach to/ said he would eat no grapes/ so when as my saying is strongly defended with God's word that ye can make no reason against it/ ye will not reason/ with me/ scilicet/ becausye can not. This conclusion do ye hold that the law of the gospel in not sufficient for Christ's church to order and rule it/ except the popis traditiones be annexed there to/ and that he speaketh far out of reason that would have only the law of the gospel in the church/ Against this devilish doctrine of yours i will make thes resones/ The la of the gospel is much more perfect/ then the law of Moses/ But the law of Moses was sufficient by itself for all them that was under it/ and needed no man's ordinance to be added unto it/ to order the jews that were under the old Testament/ then is the law of the gospel much more sufficient by itself for all them that are under it/ and much less needeth any man's ordinances to be added unto it to order them that are under the new Testament/ Paul calleth the law of Moses a child leader unto Christ/ a shadow of good things for to cum/ and sayeth that the law bringeth nothing to perfection/ If this law needed nothing to be added to it or mingled with it the law of the gospel which Paul preferreth before the old law ij Corinth. in the third chapter hath now no need of the bishop of romis traditiones to be added to it or mingled with it/ Is not the lau of the gospel perfect? Is not that the most perfect law that the most perfect lawmaker maketh? made not Christ the perfitest law maker the law of the gospel? To that law which is perfect in all points nothing needeth to be added unto it/ Then the law of the gospel needeth not the popis law to be added unto it and so is the law of the gospel sufficient for Christ's church and Christ's church needeth no other law but it that Christ ordained his self for his church. Further more when as the end of a perfect law of the church which alone is sufficiend by itself to order the church/ is to command all thing that is necessari to salvation to forbid all thing that is hynderance to salvation/ to teach/ to reprove/ to correct/ to instruct/ to make aman perfect/ and ready to every good work and to be salvation unto all them that believe/ and the law of the gospel cando all thes things/ what shall we need to have any other law in the church seeing that this law conteneth all thing in it that is necessari for the church of christ/ and hath all the points/ that be long unto a perfect law which ne death no other law to be added unto it? almighty god told his son Christ all laws that was necessari for Christis church/ and christ taught his apostles all that he heard of his father/ and all that the Appostelles' learned of Christ necessari for Christis church/ they and the evangelists have written it in the new testament which is the law of the gospel/ But the evangelists and apostles have made no mention of the popis ceremonies laws and traditiones/ therefore they are not necessari for Christis church/ but the law of the gospel is necessari alone/ Paul speaketh of this law of the church thes words/ I am not ashamed of the gospel for it is the pour of god to salvation to all that believe. Do i yet still speak far out of reason when i would that only the law of the gospel should be in the church? Christis religion came in to the world bithe word of god and not by man's traditiones and Christis religione hath from the beginning been up held with the word of god and not with man's traditiones/ and the Christian religion is not grounded upon man's ordinances/ them the religion of Christ should continue and prosper well enough as it hath done from the beginning to this day if all the popis ceremonies and traditiones were in the deepest pit of hell from whence they came/ The ceremonies and traditiones of men have ever been hindrance to the true religion/ which things caused Christ to say to your brother pharisees manteners' of man's doctrine as ye be/ why break ye the commandment of god for your tradition? They worship me in vain teaching the doctrines which are the precepts of man/ then how far speak you out of reason to say that the popis traditiones ar necessare for Christis church/ and to mean that Christ had need of the popis traditiones and laws to rule his church with all and to promote his honour/ and to purchase authority unto his Sacraments/ Where as ye reason that i seem to allow all those ceremonies that i writ not against/ and only disallow them that i writ against/ i reason with you again/ if i seem to allow althe ceremonies which i writ not against/ then if followeth that ye seem to allow all the popistri ad superstitiones that your conpapist eccius hath taught/ with all other Papists/ for ye have not written against them/ ye seem to allow that i lay unto your charge/ that ye say mes for to hele the french pox for mad dogs and meselled swine/ that the hallowing of the font is all full of blasphemy/ that no pressed neither any man above xxj. may make an unlawful vow that ye hold still the stews that the devil may have a place in england to be worshipped in/ that it is agreater offence for a pressed to marry/ them to defile all the wives in his parish every one after other/ that ye intent to be adulterers and whoremongers/ that ye reckon it the devils service to read Christ's word in English when the priests read Omelias' Gregorij pape in latin/ that ye would forbid Christ to preach/ if he were in england this day/ as he was in ie wry/ if he would preach in English those sermons of his that the Evangelists wrote in Greek/ All thes do i lay to your charge in my hunting of the fox but ye neither answer to them/ nor examine them nor confute them/ as ye go about to examine answer to and confute other matters that i lay to your charge/ wherefore by your manner of arguing which ye ground upon this text/ Qui tacet consentire videtur, ye allow and approve all thes articles which i have above rehearsed.  The rescuer 
And first he beginneth with the creeping to the cross which ceremony he can in no wise digest/ therein he laborethe stoutly from the beginning of Gramner/ to the end of Logik.  The hunter 
When as the creeping to the cross is open idolatri/ and deadly sin/ it is to hard meat for my maw to digest/ if that ye with your companiones which have drunken of the hot wine of fornication of the hore of Babylon/ will needs eat it and with that wine can digest it/ ye schal digest it alone for me/ And whether my arguments which i fetch not alone out of Grammar and Logik but also out of the holy scripture are stronger than ye can confute be made to no purpose orno/ let other men judge/ which knoweth the scripture/ and we shall try the matter here after.  The rescuer 
For by his reasoning to declare this word worship (which he doth right worshipfully) it were idolatri/ for the servant to make courtesy to his master/ where in he should bow his knee/ or the good man to kiss his wife/ but to kneel and to kiss his superiors hand/ were by him foul and filthy abominatione/ for that were both together.  The hunter 
If that the master and the wife/ had hands and could not feel/ feet and could not go/ mouths and could not speak/ ears and could not hear/ noses and could not smell eyes and could not see/ and were as brainless and souls as your cross is/ and so were idols/ and therefore forbidden to be worshipped of allmyghty god/ then if the servant made courtesy to 〈…〉 idol/ or the husband kissed such a wife/ they should worship their master and wife unalwfully and so commit idolatri/ But when as a master is a living creature of god and servants are commanded to honour their masters and to obey them/ and god will be known to be in rulers/ and that all masters and rulers have their mastership and authority of him/ the outward kissing and kneeling of servants which are but tokens of their hearts and inward obedience to their superiors/ is not forbidden of almighty god but allowed/ for the inward obedience is greater than the outward courtesy/ and if he allow the greater he alloweth the less/ And god commanded men to love their wives/ then when as kissing is the sign or token of love/ where the thing is allowed/ the token of the same is not forbidden/ Therefore it is no idolatri for the servant to make courtesy to his master/ neither is it idolatri for the man to kiss his wife/ for neither of those ij facts or forbidden/ but seeing that we owe no love nor obediance unto images/ and the outward worship is in expressed words forbidden to be given unto images in the second commandment/ in thes words thou shall not humble or bow they self unto them/ nor serve them/ it is open idolatri/ to make courtesy to images and to kiss them/ Where for it followeth not/ we may give outward reverence and worship unto masters and to kings ergo we may give outward worship unto images/ for if this be your argument/ ye mean that a blind and lyfeles piece of silver or gold made after the likeness of a mortal man/ by a mortal man/ is as good honourable and as worthy to be honoured as a master & a king which is the highest and most honourable 〈…〉 of God's making in all this wide wo●●●/ and that images are as well/ to be loved as men love their w●●●s/ and that god is as well to be honoured 〈◊〉 ●●ages as in kings/ and worketh and ruelethe as well by them as by kings. Which meaning whether it be agreeing unto the scripture or no/ let them which have authority in england to examine such matters/ judge and give sentence.  The rescuer 
What an argument would▪ this man fet out of a word in Greek or Latin being general/ to make thereby a special conclusion to his purpose Scripture useth the word adoro/ as the word worship is used in English to signify godly honour/ & joseph fuffered himself to be worshipped of his brethren/ with reverent behaviour/ and there is on word adoro in both.  The hunter 
Ether ye writ very darkly for the nonce/ or else your scribe hath left out sum thing for your reason hangeth very evil together/ Howbeit i reckon that this is your meaning. The angel forbade johan to worship him and joseph suffered his brethet to worship him/ and in ●●the the places is adoro/ therefore adore signif●●● Both inward worship dew unto god and also outward worship/ But what ye mean more/ i cannot tell except this be your meaning/ on kind of worshipping that is out ●●rde reverence/ may be given unto me●/ ergo ●●ay also begive unto images/ If ye mean thus your meaning is plain falls/ for allmyghty god by who me all kings reign and all rulers have their pour/ willing that it should be known/ that all that have any governance rule for au●orite over other/ have the same of him alone and not of themselves/ will be honoured in his ministers which are the governors and rulers of his people/ with outward reverence and bodily honour/ reserving ever unto himself the worship which standeth in putting trust of salvation/ and love above all other/ and yet/ he will that the subjects shall not only worship their superioures with out ward worship/ but that they shall love them with their hearts/ and obey them faithfully also/ Then when as josephis brother fell down and worshipped him for as much as they knew he was a prince ordained of god/ they offended not god thereby only signifying the inward obedience and subjection of their minds/ and joseph being God's minister offended nothing in taking that outward worship unto him/ which was a token of the inward submission of his brethers minds toward him/ But shall a Christian man/ to whom by christ/ all the creatures of the world the birds of the air/ the fishes of the water/ and the beasts of the earth are in subjection/ and subdued/ by outward gesture or reverent behaviour/ testify and witness that he is in subjection and subdued unto a man's handeworke/ to a piece of molten silver or gold? Shall the lord of all the noble creatures of god which are in earth/ bow and kneel to a vile piece of silver or gold made after the likeness of a man/ being but the creature of aman? Fie for shame that a man knoweth not his own dignity. Shall aman by outward reverence testify that god is in that image or worketh by that image which hekisseth and worshippethe? Shall christian men that profess the scripture testify by kneeling before images that god will either be worshipped in images/ or by images/ with out scripture and contrari unto the scripture? Set then aside this reason we may give outward reverence unto governors ergo we may do so to images/ And if ye mean that joan in the Apocalyps would have given godly inward honour unto the angel/ i will dissent from you till that i see you bring better reasons than ye have brought yet. think ye that johan that holy man to whom god had showed so much of his secrets/ was so mad as to go about to give unto an angel the godly inward worship dew unto god alone? I judge no/ and i think that johan by his outward worshipping which he would have given unto the angel would have showed that he took the angel for his better/ and superior/ and that the angel knowing his intent/ and that god had not subdued man under angels would not that johan should restifis any subjection unto him by any such reverent behaviour/ and therefore said Deum adora, worship god/ that is/ testify by thy falling down and outward behaviour that thou art under god and that he is thy better and superior/ as for me i am not thy superior but thy fellow servant/ And as touching the nature of this word adoro/ grammarianes which can judge best of the natures of words/ hold contrary unto you/ that adoro is only taken for outward worship and outward gesture/ for thus writeth the abbreviato▪ of Valla.  
Adorare est gestu corporis honorem/ etiam sine ore et voce impendere. And Valla his self sayeth thus Adorare sine ore hoc est sine voce fit/ non sine plicatione genuum et gestu corporis/ Elephas et Phenix et alia quedam irrationabilia solem adorare dicuntur. Saint jerom upon the third chapter of Daniel writeth thes words/ Et notanda proprietas Deos coli/ imaginem adorari dicunt/ Quod utrunque servis Dei non convenit/ The scripture after the translation of jerom most commonly useth adoro to give outward worship and colo to give godly inward worship/ as a man may see both in many other places/ and especially in the xx. of Exodus and in the v. chapter of the Deuteronomy/ then is not this word Adoro so general both to godly inward worship and to outward worship as ye unlearnedly without authority have pronounced. But put the case that odoro betokeneth both the kinds of worshipping/ he that putteth a negation before adoro in such a mode as men forbidden/ forbiddeth nothe both the kinds of worshipping? He that sayeth thou shalt not worship an image when worship is both taken for reverent behaviour/ and for godly inward worship/ forbiddeth he not to worship an image with reverent behaviour? But god putteth a negation before Adoro/ wherefore even by your saying it is forbidden to give any reverent behaviour unto an image/ If that i did reason then from a general term to a particular my argument negatively after good Logik should be as good as ye made any thes seven years/ for where the generalis denied or forbidden all the specials contained under the general are also denied and forbidden/ then if adoro as ye say be general both to kiss and to show a reverent behaviour/ and to give godly inward worship/ when images are forbidden adorari/ to be worshipped/ then is both the outward worship which standeth in kneeling kissing and in such other outward gesture/ and the inward worship of the heart/ is also forbidden to be given unto imagines/ How beit i made no such argument before this time for i reasoned thus a sufficienti division/ There are no more kinds of worshipping but ij. inward and outward/ but neither of them is to be given unto images ergo no worship is to be given unto images the probation of this argument i fet out of the xx. chapter of Exodus where allmyghty god sayeth touching images/ non adorabis ea neque coals, thou shall neither bow to them nor serve them. This is the sum of my argument thoghe i rehearse not the same words/ which whether it be yet soluted or no let learned men judge.  The rescuer 
I may not worship the cross in the church with godly honour for it is against God's commandment but i may use before it reverent behaviour of which expressedly spoke saint jerom when he said/ Adhererem trunco crucis nec prius dimitterem quàm veniam obtinuissem.  The hunter 
Ye play with allmyghty god which forbiddeth you to bow and kneel to images/ as a certain crafty boy did play with his Scolmaster in a grammar school/ which commanded this boy & all other that learned grammar to speak Latin one to an other at all times/ and no English/ This boy as oft as he was disposed to clatter English/ he took unto him and a. b. c. boy and said unto him/ Robin i will speak to thee/ and with this Preface he spoke English all the longday by this boy to his fellows/ and so mokked the spy/ an brak his masters commandment/ But the master came once in at the last and spied his craft/ and took him and ponisshed him for a speaker of English to his fellows for all that he said that he spoke unto the a b. c. boy. So ye perceiving that sum would check you if that ye held always that a man might worship the cross itself/ most commonly ye say that a man may use reverent behovour before the cross but not to the cross/ and that ye worship not the cross itself/ but christ/ which is signified by the cross/ when as ye worship the cross itself and not christ/ and sum time hold in plain words that a man may worship the cross itself/ with reverent behaviour/ so that the heart be away/ as i shall here after god willing/ sufficiently prove it. Ye say that ye may not worship the cross in the church with godly honour for that is against God's commandment/ If that ye will make any answer to apore man/ tell me what is this godly honour that is forbidden/ to be given unto images/ and where and in what words it is forbidden? Ye mean by godly honour/ as far as i can gather by your book/ the inward worshipping of god alone/ which standeth in trust of salvation and in love above all creatures/ for ye say here after in your book that true worship is only in spirit/ & that kissing and kneeling is not godly honour. where of it followeth that your judgement is that a man may worship an image with outward woship that is with kissing of it with kneeling and creeping to it/ Where as ye hold that outward reverent behaviour as kneeling and kissing is no part of God's worship ye speak against Christ which sayeth Matthe iiij. chapter/ thou shalt humble thyself or bow thyself down unto thy lord god/ and only serve him/ whereas humling or falling down is outward worship/ and/ serving is to put confidence of salvation/ and the inner worship of god/ here ye may see that god requireth also that the outward worship/ and will not suffer it to be given to other than to himself and to such as he will be known to rule in. When the devil said unto christ/ Luc the iiij. i will give the all thes if thou will fall down & worship before me/ what if that he had stand by/ and said to the devil give me all that/ thou promised christ/ and i will do that thou requirest of him/ if he promised & ye fell down and worshipped be fore the devil/ whether had ye given any worship dew unto god/ to the devil or no? If that ye say that ye had given no worship dew to god/ unto the devil/ then is it nosin in your books to kneel before the devil and to kiss him so that your heart be away/ & that a man may worship the devil with his body so that he worship him not with his mind/ If that ye say that in falling down and worshipping before the devil ye gave to the devil worship that was dew unto god/ them is worshipping before the devil worshipping of the devil/ and falling down & such other outward worship is dew unto god & on kind of God's worship/ them is not alonely the godly honour which is in the heart/ but also the outward gesture as bowing & kneeling worship dew unto god which neither can be doen to the devil nor to any image with out deadly sin/ and yet ye say that we maynot worship the cross with godly honour/ but that we may use reverent behaviour before it/ that is to kiss it/ to how to it and to creep to it/ which is no other thing than to give at the least unto it outward worship which is contrary to the second commandment of god/ If that ye would fly to this shift & say i worship & use renerent behaviour before the cross but i worship not it i will prove you by the scripture that to worship before god is to worship god to worship before a man is to worship a man and and to worship before an image is to worship the image/ before which it is down/ Genesis iiij. Pharaoh made joseph come up to his chariot/ an the crier to cry that all men should bow their knees before joseph/ and know that he was made rueler over all Egypt. Mark here that to bow knees is to worship/ and to worship before joseph is to worship joseph/ and that the cause why that Pharaoh would have joseph worshipped/ was that he would let all his people know that his pour and authority was in joseph/ Leuitici the x. chapter. Nadab and abiu offered before the lord/ In the first of the kings/ xxv. chapter Abigael lighted of her as and fell on her face before David/ and worshipped on the ground and fell down to his feet/ ij of the kings in the xiv. chapter. The woman fell upon the ground before David and worshipped him/ Psalm. lxxxv. All the people which thou hast made/ shall cum/ and worship before/ the/ lord. isaiah. lxvi. All flesh shall come to worship be fore mi face (sayeth the lord) Apocalypsis. v. The xxiv. elders fell before the lamb. Where Luke said thes shall i give the if thou will fall down and worship before me/ Matthew sayeth i will give the all this if thou will worship me/ iij. of the kings nineteen. chapter. I will leave me 7000. whose knees have not been bowed before baal/ By thes places it is plain that to worship before god/ man or image/ is to worship god man or the image that the worship is done before/ But ye kneel bow and creep before the cross itself ergo ye worship the cross itself/ to kiss with religions behaviour is to give outward worship but ye with religious behaviour kiss the cross itself ergo ye worship the cross itself/ But what need i any other witness to prove that ye worship the cross than your oun words which ye sing on good firday which are thes crucem tuam Domine adoramus, lord we worship thy cross/ Never the les ye would have as long as ye could make the king's highness and all his subyectes believe that ye would worship before the Cros only and not the cross itself/ But when as ye are bet with arguments ye leave of your dissembling and fall earnestly to defend that the cross may be worshipped with reverent behaviour that is with kissing it kneeling and creeping to it/ for ye say that in kneeling and kissing alone understanding of the cross/ is no idolatri/ And that no unlearned man in england should allege any scripture against you/ or should perceive that the worshipping of the cross with creeping and bowing to it/ is contrari to the scripture ye have thevishly/ roberously/ wikkedly & deutlyshly stolen that piece of the second commandment away which forbiddeth to bow or give any outword worship unto images. For thus writ you in your new Catechism which ye call like a masker as ye be the king's book/ Thou shalt not have any graven image nor any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above/ or in earth beneath/ or in the water under the earth to the intent to do any godly honour and worship unto them/ This is your translation/ and in this book where in ye examine me/ ye take away from godly honour bowyngdown/ falling down/ kneeling an kessing/ and such other outward gestures/ and say that thes are not forbidden to be given unto images/ but only the inward godly honour/ is forbidden/ And that ye might the more easily bring the lay people unto your opinion ye steal away as i have said a piece of the second commandment/ for where as ye say only/ thou shalt give no godly honour and worship unto images/ meaning thereby the inward trust and godly love and obedience/ and that outward bowing kneeling and kissing are not forbidden to begive unto images/ The truth of the Hebrew is openly against you/ for thus hath the Hebrew text both in the Deuteronomi and in Exodo Lo chisstachave Lahem velo thaaveden the lxx. interpreters made this text thus in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Saint jerom translated the hebrew thus in to Latin/ Non adorabis ea neque coals That is thou shalt not give outward reverence to images/ neither inward godly worship unto them/ Leo Jude followeth saint Jerome/ and pagnine translatethe the Hebrew text thus/ Non incuruabis te eis et non colestas/ That is thou shalt not bow thyself unto them/ and thou shalt not worship them/ And the Greek/ word for word is thus/ thou shalt not kiss them neither serve them/ wherforr saying that ye have stolen out of the Hebrew text lo thisstachave / 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of the Greek text/ Non adorabis out of saint Ieromis translation/ Non incuruabis te/ out of pagnines translation/ & thou shalt not bow thyself unto them/ out of the English bible it followeth that ye are a shamfup thiefeand have committed shameful sacrilege or church robbery and are so much more worthy hanging than any church robber that was hanged in england thes C. years/ as the thing that ye have stolen is more precious than that the other church robbers have taken out of the church/ in time passed I gather therefore by the authorities above rehearsed/ and by thes last translationes that to worship before an image is to worship an image/ that to bow to an image and to kiss it is to give outward worship unto it/ and that it is contrary to the second commandment to give either inward or outward worship to an image/ then when as the cross is nothing but an image/ ad ye creep to it kiss it and bow to it/ ye give it outward worship/ and to give either outward or inward worship to an image is idolatri/ it follow the that in creeping to the cross and bowing to it ye commit plain idolatri openly forbidden in the second commandment/ Hold ye still now no popish doctrine contrary to the word of god? Now let us come unto the saying of saint jerom which ye bring against/ me/ It would have becumed a learned Bishop to have brought in a matter of religion the holy scripture/ and not a patch of a man's doctrine/ ye say that saint jerom sayeth that he would clevero and not let go the post of the cross till that he purdressed forgiveness/ Where sayeth Jerome this? It is like that ye never read this in saint jerom/ but either in the canon law or elliss in sum of your brother papisties works/ for ij causes i reckon that thes words are either non of saint jeromes' or elliss that ye have mangled them/ first because ye mangle the scripture ye will not be afeard to mangle a Doctor/ and because ye show no place where as jerom writeth thes words/ the second is becaws i know that jerom in an other place is of a clean contrari judgement/ And because ye leave the weapons of the word of god/ and feght against me with the weapons of Doctors/ i will answer with the saying of a doctor. Saint jerom writing upon the third chapter of Daniel sayeth thes words following concerning the worship of images/ Sive statuam ut Simmachus sive imaginem auream, ut caeteri transtulerunt, voluerimus legere, cultores Dei eam adorare non debent, Ergo judices & principes seculi, qui imperatorum statuas adorant & imagines, hoc se facere intelligant, quod tres pueri facere nolentes placuerunt Deo. Et notanda proprietas deos coli, imaginem adorari dicunt, quod utrunque servis Dei non convenit. Whether we will read a standing image/ as symmachus/ or a golden image as the other have translated/ the true worshippers of god ought not to/ humble theirselves unto it/ Therefore let the judges and Princes of the world/ understand which give outward worship to the standing images and liknesses of Emperors/ that they do the same that the iij. children would not do/ and therein pleased god/ And the properti is to be marked/ they say that god is worshipped with inward worship and images with outward gesture. Thus far speaketh jerom/ whose words whether they make for the outward bowing kneeling and creeping to images are no/ let them judge which either have learning in the scripture or any good natural wit.  The rescuer 
Thus they delude the simplicity of the people with the ambiguity of the words/ and as very enemies of the cross of Christ they labour to extinct all ways & means which might set out the glori of the cross/ much agreeable to the turks proceedings who forbiddeth open shows or preaching of Christis Religion/ thes men speak mich of preaching/ but note well this/ they would we should see nothing in remembrance of Christ and therefore can they not abide images/ They would we should smell nothing in memori of christ/ and therefore speak they against anointing & hallywather. They would we should taste nothing in memory of Christ/ and therefore they cannot away with salt and holy breed/ A supper they speak of which they would handle like a dryngking. Finally they would have all in talking they speak so much of preaching/ so as all the gates of our senses and ways to man's under standing should be shit up saving the ear alone/ as by talking the devil were so far onward of his purpose to extinct christ/ which with the subversion of the orders of the world/ seemeth to be the mark where at this sect shooteth.  The hunter 
I delude not the simplicity of the people with ambiguity of words/ as ye falsely belie me/ for i allege the second commandment of god against the creeping to the cross and the kissing of it/ where as both the outward worship and the inward is forbidden/ Be that sayeth eat of no dog neither of the land nor the water/ use the no ambiguity of words/ which should have used ambiguite/ as it appeareth if he had said alone/ eat no dog. Therefore whether worship be taken generally or by excellency for godly worship i wse no ambiguity for i declare openly that both the kinds of worship is forbidden to be given unto images/ both it that standeth in inward faith and love/ and it that consisteth in outward gesture as kneeling and kissing and such like/ Now be cause ye cannot reason against me neither with scripture nor natural reason/ ye begin ta rail against me and say that i am therefore an enemi of Christis cross because i will not suffer the cross neither to be worshipped with outward worship nor inward. If that i be therefore an enemy to Christ/ then is almighty god an enemy to Christis cross for he doth the same that i do/ and it that i do i learned it of god/ Se now as ye fall in to the vice that ye accuse me of/ sum time using the cross for a piece of silver and other while for the Passion of Christ/ where unto if he be not an enemy/ that maketh hallowed salt equal in pour/ giving unto it Salvation of both body and soul/ let learned men judge/ Is there any better mean in the hole world to set out the glori of the cross then the word of god? And this mean do we so exercise and defend that ye moke us and call us talkers/ Then/ like unto a son of the shameless whore of Babylo ye lie where ye say that i would extinct all the means that should set out the glori of the cross/ Where as ye compare me unto the Turc which forbiddeth open shows and preaching of christ/ i marvel with what face ye call me Turkish in that behaff when as ye yourself forbade the players of london (as it was toldme) to play any more plays of Christ/ but of robin hood and little johan/ and of the Parliament of birds and such other trifles. Now sir bishop which of us ij is more like the Turk? The Turks law is partly drawn out of Moses law/ partly out of Christis gospel/ partly out of mahumettis fantases and your law that ye bishops of england now use in the church is partly taken out of Moses law/ partly out the gospel and partly out of the pope's decrees and traditiones/ for with Moses ye use outward sacrifices to take sin away/ hollow temples and vestiments and purifis women/ with christ ye baptize and read the gospel/ with the pope ye creep to the cross forbid priests to mari and occupi infinite swarms of ceremonies/ And we receive no manis doctrine but the word of god alone. Therefore your doings are more light the Turks proceedings than ouris are where as ye accuse use with the Turk for forbidding of preaching/ ye declare your spret to be inconstant and contrari to itself and therefore to be of the devil for ye accuse us a little here after for preaching to much. Ye blame use falsely where ye say that we would have you see nothing in the remembrance of Christ/ for we would that all the people that can read should look and see in the iiij. Evangelists Christis dedis and sermons and thereby call Christ to their remembrances/ we would that the hole church of christ/ no man nor woman except should both see and receive the sacrament of Christ most precious blood/ And ye lot up the word of god for all the hole year from the common people and command all images to be covered as long as lent lasteth/ and suffere no lay man to receive with the priests the sacrament of Christis blood in the remembrane of the blood of Christ which was shed for us/ therefore ye are the blotters out of Christ's memori and not we. We would have Christ's mean/ that he ordained to hold his remembrance with in the church hole/ that is the hole Sacraments and the hole word of god/ to dwell richly in Christis hole church/ & ye mangle and geld the Sacraments/ and like made men/ as it doth apere understanding Paulis word richly/ among rich men/ will suffer none but gentle men and rich men read the scripture which might an hundred thousand times better and with les jeopardy put us in remembrance of Christ then your forbidden and horish images do/ And so ye do according to the proverb steel agous' and for her stik down a feather/ when ye take Christis word away & one deal of his Sacraments and in stead there of/ set up blind blokes and dumb ceremonies. Will we not let you smell nothing in memori of christ/ because we speak against anointing of deed carcases/ and witched water? Who ordained that such stinking oil as yours is should be a remembrance of Christ by smelling of it? & that salted water which hath no smell at all/ the first day/ and with in six days that it is salted yet stinketh shall by the smelling of it put us in remembrance of Christ? Will we not let you taste nothing in memory of Christ because we speak against the conjuring of salt/ What should we do with your salt when as it is all unsavoury and/ hath no taste of the word of god? Christ sayeth that salt when it is unsavoury is good for nothing but to be cast out of doors to be treden with men's feet. We use to give the Sacrament to all that will receive it/ every month and in sum places every sunday in the remembrance of our saviour Christ and ye give a bit of common breed in the remembrance of the Sacrament/ who holdeth Christis memori better? What ie wish and dull Pharisees are thes that either will not/ or can not be cantent with the holy word of Christ and his Sacraments to bring Christ to their memories that they may think on him except they smell sum thing to remembr▪ him and taste sum thing also to remember him thereby/ I never red of more fleshy Pharisees in my life then thes be. Thes be the most forgitful fellows that i have heard of. To that where ye say that we speak of a supper and would handle it like a drinking/ i answer that we do not only drink but also eat at Christis supper/ and so handle it/ as Christ taught us in his word/ with out any players garments or popish knakkes and foolish juggling toys which after the ordinance of the pope ye put to it/ ye handle it not lyk Christis supper but like a dogs dinner/ and both do it and say it amiss/ In saying that we would have all thing in talking and would shit up all your senses saving hearing/ ye do nothing elliss but mok Christ/ which ordained no other means to in gendre faith in us and to call us to remembrance of him/ saving only his word and his Sacraments/ Because ye think that Chyristiss word and Sacrament are not sufficient for the purposes above rehearsed/ and reckon yourselves wiser then christ/ ye have for a great part put a way Christ's ordinances and set other as ye think better in theyrstede/ to put us in remembrance of Christ/ and to stir us up unto godliness/ It is like that if ye had been living in Christis time with your fellow Pharisees and had heard Christ saying unto his Disciples go in to all the world and preach the gospel to every creature/ ye would have laid what meaneth this man so earnestly to give commandment of preaching and teaching/ belike this man will have all things done with talking/ and not with such laudable and seemly ceremonies as Moses and our for fathers have devised/ Where ye say the Mark that we shoot at/ is to extinct Christ and the orders of the world/ i answer▪ that we go not about to extinct Christ but to set him up whom ye with your worldly orders have long holden down as mich as lay in you. Christ is not builded upon your politic orders of the world as ye suppose/ neither at the falling of them should he fall which is builded upon a stronger foundation/ for we have put down viii. of your orders of the world/ iiij. orders of freres/ ij. of monks & ij of chanones/ & yet is not there with Christ extinct but rather brought more to light/ There remain yet ij orders of the world in england un put down/ that is the order of pompose & Popish bishops/ & grieve freres/ which if they were put doum as well as the other are put down before/ i reckon that there should be no kingdom in the world where in Christ should more reign then in england.  The rescuer 
But to the purpose of the words worship in English and Adoro in Latin may be the phrase in scripture/ admit both the significationes of godly service and reverent behaviour/ shall i say that where godly honour is forbidden reverent behaviour is also forbidden/ and by altering the signification juggle and mok with the people/ of which sort be many of their arguments made/ afterward as i shall sho in their places. Scripture sometime, by the outer gesture express in speech the godly honour as in kissing and kneeling/ And not because kissing and kneeling is the godly honour/ but because it was the expressing of the inward affection/ with which when kissing and kneeling is joined directly to the thing kissed or kneeled unto it/ is in deed idolatri/ But if kissing & kneeling be separate from that opinion/ then is it not idolatri/ for as true worship is only in spirit and proceedeth from the heart/ so doth idolatri proceed from the heart also. So that in only kissing or kneeling can not be idolatri/ as this gentle man would go about to persuade by such Logical collation as he would seem clerkly to make upon the significatioo of the word.  The hunter 
allthing is to be understand according unto the matter that is in hands/ ye wot that i entreated this question/ whither the cross might be worshipped with kneeling creeping and kissing of it or no then answer i that to what soever image or likeness the godly honour is forbidden to be given/ reverent behaviour is forbidden to be given unto the same/ for allmyghty god in hes words forbiddeth both godly honour and reverent behaviour to begive to images. Non incuruabis te eis neque coles eas, Thou shalt neither bow thyself unto them neither give godly worship unto them/ your question is therefore like yourself unlearned and full either of ignorance inscripture or of will full malice against the truth. As concerning juggling with the signification of words/ which ye lay falsely unto my charge/ he that knoweth your manners and mine both/ would think that you are the right juggler and not i/ ye juggled ouce at poulis cross in an open audience/ deorsum in to retrorsum, and in your institution of a Christian man ye juggled quite away from the second commandment non incuruabis te, and out of the properties that belong to a Bishop ye juggled away unius uxoris maritum esse, on palm sunday ye juggle wylow bows in to date trees/ who is now the juggler? If that kissing and kneeling be no godly honour but only the expressing of the inward affection/ when as God's honour is God's service/ then it followeth that kneeling and kissing for as much as they are not God's honour they are not God's service/ then they that kneel to the cross on good friday and kiss it serve not god/ there with/ why call you then this creeping and kneeling God's service? why compel ye theu all men to the creeping to the cross as to God's service when as here in this book ye grant that it is none of God's service? Where as ye say that when kissing and kneeling is directly joined with the inward affection to the thing kissed or kneeled unto/ it is idolatri but if kneeling and kissing be separated from that opinion it is no idolatri/ I axe you if that ye should kiss the kings hand & kneeled to him with your inward affection joined direct unto the king's hyghenes/ should ye commit idolatri in deed? If ye did the same unto Christ should ye also commit idolatri in deed? If that ye answer that ye mean of kissing of images and kneeling to them/ then have ye declared plainly at length that it is no idolatri to kiss an image itself and to kneel to itself/ if the inward affection be away from the kissing and kneeling/ but i have proved before that kneeling and kissing of images is worshipping of images/ therefore ye hold that it is no idolatri to worship images with outward reverence/ so that the heart be separat from the worshipping. A little before like a crasty for ye said thes words i may use reverent behaviour before the image of the cross/ as though ye would not that certain wise men should know that you held that the cross itself should be worshipped/ & now ye say that when kissing and kneeling is separate from the opinion/ scilicet of the cross/ then is it no idolatri/ that is to wit to kiss the cross itself and to bow to it/ your mind is known for all your dissembling and your crafty masking/ All though i have fufficiently before confuted this your opinion that aman may worship images with outward worship which ye call reverent behaviour/ with the authority of the second commandment of god which forbiddeth both the worship of the heart and of the body to begive unto images yet i will bring an example out the holy scripture to streyngthen and make more clear my former confutation. Nebuchadnezar as it is written in the third chapter of Daniel/ made agolden image lx. cubits high/ and six cubits broad/ and commanded all men that were with in his dominion in pain of doth to worship this image with outward worship infalling down before it/ and making such gestures as worshippers of images use to make/ But Sadrach/ Mesach/ and Abednego would not worship it/ the king said unto them. Is it true that ye do no godly service unto my god/ neither will worship the golden image which i have set up? If that ye will yet fall down & worship the image which i have made (ye shall have pardon) but if ye will not worship it/ the same hour shall ye be casten in to aburning furnace of fire/ to whom they answered/ o king we would that thou should know/ that we do no godly honour to thy god's/ neither/ will we worship with outward worship the image that thou haste set up. And then the king caused them all iij. to be casten in to the burning furnace/ but god delivered them wondrously out of the fire safe and sound/ Now do i axe you whether thes iij. men might have given reverent hebavour as bowing kissing & kneeling to this image/ with out deadly sin/ & might have directed they: hearts unto god/ that the king knew not of/ and so have escaped the burning furnace/ or no? If ye answer that they might have given reverent behaviour unto the king's image with out deadly sin and might have directed the inward worship of their hearts unto the living god/ that the king knew not of/ and so with out jeopardy might have escaped the furnace/ then was thes iij. evil men/ and did break God's commandment/ which sayeth thou shalt not tempt thy lord god/ that is thou shall not put thyself in jeopardy where no need requireth/ and thou shall require no miraculous help of god where as their are natural means enough. But if ye answer that all though they had directed their hearts unto god that never the less they could not with out deadly sin have kissed that image and kneeled bowed and given out ward worship unto it/ and that they were allowed of god because they would in no wise worship that golden image/ then ye do naughtily and displease god in doing it to an image that good men and allowed of god had liefer be burned in a furnace of fire then to do to an image/ They would not worship a man's image with outward reverence/ and ye both do outward reverence unto images and in pain of death compel other men as Nebuchadnezar did/ to worship a man's image. If the iij. iewe● that choosed rather to be burnt then to worship a man's image/ were of god/ then ye that both worship yourselves/ and compel other/ in pain of burning to worship a man's image/ with outward reverence/ are of the devil/ If ye excuse and say that it is not alone a man's image but both God's image and man's/ i say that the image of god in the second commandment is as much forbidden to be made and worshipped with any kind of worship as man's is/ for thes are the words of the second commandment/ thou shalt make the no graven image neither any likeness of of any thing in heaven above neither in earth beneath neither of any thing that is in the waters under the earth thou shalt neither humble thyself unto them neither shalt thou do any godly service unto them god is in heaven therefore his image is as well forbidden to be made (if it were possible to make an image of him) and to be worshipped with outward reverence as amannis images which is in earth is forbidden to be made & worshipped. Have ye not now seduced the hole realm teaching all men there in that they may worship the cross with outward reverent behaviour as with kneeling and kissing when as it is proved open idolatri? Where ye say as true worship is only in spirit/ and proceedeth from the heart so doth idolatri proceed from the heart also/ it followeth that all your sensing/ kneeling crouching/ crossing/ singing of messes dirges matins and evensonges which are done in and by the body are no true God's service but false service. And against your comparison i set this comparison that followeth here/ As the chief confessing of Chyiste is in the heart and with good work & not withstanding if a man will not confess Christ, to be the son of god with his mouth when the confession of the mouth is required/ but deni Christ with his mouth/ or confesseth an other to be Christ then jesus/ Christ shall deni him before his father in heaven/ so althoghe the worshipping of an image with the heart be the worse idolatri/ yet for all that/ the outward worshipping of an image with the body with outward gesture must nediss be idolatri/ for what soever is contrari to the second commandment must nediss be idolatri/ but to bow and kneel unto an image is contrari to the second commandment/ therefore it is idolatri where soever ye fain your heart to be/ Answer me if it pleas you to this question/ Denied peter Christ with his heart/ or with his mouth alone? If he denied him with his mouth alone and yet that denying was deadly sin/ then if a man should worship an image with his body alone and not with his heart he should commit deadly sin for as Christ will have both the confession of the heart & also of the mouth/ so doth he forbidden both to worship an image with your heart and also with your body. Where ye say that in only kissing and kneeling cannot be idolatri i grant it is true as long as they are applied to nothing/ but when kissing & kneeling are applied to images whereto god forbade them to be applied/ in only kissing of images & kneeling to them/ may idololatri be committed. But teach us now great master doctor how can a man break God's intendment/ and yet love god with his heart and have his heart with god? When as Christ sayeth he that loveth me will keep my word/ Then how can a man break this commandment/ bow not thyself unto images and yet love god with his heart whose commandment he breaketh with his body? Let therefore learned men judge how wisely you have made your distinction inseparating the breaking of godpis commandment from the hatred of god/ Is a man's heart their where he hateth? Nay A man's heart can not be with him whom he hateth/ But a worshipper of images with bowing & kneeling hateth god wihls he breaketh his commandment/ therefore/ the heart of him that boweth and kneeleth unto images can not be with god.  The rescuer 
And yet to streyngthen his argument he bringeth in the devils saying as he doth in other places to set forth his madness/ but what should i reason with this man of crepyng to the cross/ that goeth about to prove right wisely/ that we may have no images at all which if he could do/ it should serve well for his purpose to prove that we ought not to worship the cross/ if he could prove that antecedent, his consequent were insoluble.  The hunter 
They that in england had liefer eat accornes then good wheat breed & will not change their old mumpsimus with the new sumpsimus think that ye are the greatest clerk in england/ but every man that is not blind may see that ye are shamefully unlearned in divinity/ and not able to answer any thing apparently well to an argument/ and therefore trifle like a wanton boy and/ answer never a word to my argument/ And because all men may see your high learning i will rehearse my argument/ that they may compare it with your answer. If it be not lawful to make an image and to have an image it is not lawful to worship an image had and made. But the scripture forbiddeth to make and have images/ then much more it forbiddeth to worship them/ This was my argument/ and thus did i prove by sufficient authority of the holy scripture that it was not lawful to make and to have images. It is written xx. chapter of Exodus/ Thou shalt make the no graven image neither any likeness of any thing that is in heaven a 'bove neither in earth beneath neither of them that are in the waters under the earth/ thou shalt neither bow thyself unto them nor do any service or godly honour unto them. The same words are written in the fift chapter of the Deuteronomis And Leuitici the xxuj. it is written make you no idols neither any graven image/ neither set up any standing image for you/ neither shall ye set any figured stone in your land that ye may worship it/ Allmyghty god sayeth also Deuteronomij the iiij. chapter thes words by his servant Moses. Ye came and stood under the hill/ but the hill burned in afyre to the mids of heaven/ where was darkness clouds and mist/ and the lord spoke unto you out from the mids of the fire/ and ye heard in deed the voice of the words but saw no image saving the voice alone/ Therefore even as ye love your own soul so diligently take ye heed (for ye have seen no image at all on that day that god spoke with you in the hill/ out of the mids of the fire) lest by chance ye should do amiss in making you a graven image what soever likeness it beareth of aman or a woman/ or the likeness of any best that is on the earth/ or the likeness of any feathered fowel in the air or the form of any thing that creepeth upon the earth or the likeness of any fish that is in the waters under the earth/ And lest thou should lift up thy eyes in to heaven and see the son and the moune & the stars with the hole company of heaven and fall down/ and show reverent behaviour or do any godly service unto them/ which the lord thy god hath given unto all people that are under the hole heaven. And in the xxvii. accursed be the man who so ever he be that maketh either a graven or a casten image/ the abomination of the lord/ the work of the artificer/ & setteth it in a privy place. The wise man in the xiii. chapter of his book curseth also both the image and the image maker. Thus did i reason with you with thes places of holy scripture/ Which places if ye would have answered to i should have obtained it that i desired that is/ that thes places at the lest proved substantially that it is not lawful to make any image and to give any worship at all to it/ neither kneeling nor bowing neither any inward worship of the heart/ for even so earnestly as the images are forbidden to be made so ere nestly are they forbidden to be worshipped with outward gesture and with inward honour/ If that ye had answered that images had been forbidden to be made either to be worshipped with outward worship or with inward/ i would have concluded that when the image of the cross is an image that ye do wrong to make it/ and to give any worship at all unto it/ either inward or outward/ But ye knowing aforehand of this conclusion/ & wanting weapons to avoid it/ answer nothing to my argument/ but say that if i could prove my antecedent that we might have no images that then it followed that we might not worship the cross/ as ye would have said/ so long shall it be lawful to worship the cross as ye cannot prove that ye should have no image/ but that shall be ever unproved/ therefore for ever shall it be lawful to worship the cross. Then seeing that i perceive that ye will not leave the worshipping of images so long as ye have them/ to drive away the worshipping of images i am compelled to labour to prove that we that are Christian men should have no images at all in the place of worshipping/ & prayer/ namely their where as images have been worshipped may be worshipped/ & in such places where as the worshipping of images with outward gesture is earnestly defended/ ye say that if i could prove my antecedent that my consequent were insoluble/ Is there any more sufficient probation than the holy word of god is? I have brought vj. places out of the word of god where in all men are forbidden to make images/ then have i sufficiently proved that it is not lawful to make images. If ye require the sum of altogether in an argument thus do i make my argument/ What soever allmyghty god forbiddeth is unlawful/ but almighty god forbiddeth to make images/ therefore it is unlawful to make images/ can ye have any plainer forbidding them this is/ non facies tibi sculptile, how shalt make the no graven image? Is not my antecedent yet proved? Now let us see what places of scripture ye can bring to prove that Christian men may have images. In your institution writing upon the second commandment ye say thes words/ Thou shalt not have any graven image to the intent to do any godly honour unto it. By thes words we are not forbidden to make or to have similitudes or images/ but only we be forbidden to make or to have them to the intent to do godly honour unto them/ as it appareth in the xxuj. chapter of Leviticus. Thes are your words All that are learned men may see how shamefully ye play the thief here and how unlearnedly ye handle the scriptures for thes words of the xxuj. chapter of Leviticus/ non facietis ut adoretis, are no other wise to be expounded then thes words of the iiij. chapter of the Deuteronomis/ non vidist is imaginem ne forte decepti faciatis, ne adoretis & colatis. Therefore where allmyghty god sayeth thou shalt make the no image that thou may worship it/ is as much to say as thou shalt make the no image lest at any time/ thou may chance to worship it/ Exposition of scripture by itself hath hither to always been allowed of wise and learned men/ and is and will be allowed/ then if ye be learned and wise ye will allow this my exposition/ But i pray you where learned ye this new Logik of a negative antecedent to bring in an affirmative consequent? for thus ye gather i may not make an image to worship it ergo i may make an image/ scilicet to be a laymannis book/ There is a father which hath a child which hath wounded himself oft times with a sharp pointed knife/ he forbiddeth his son to wear any more a sharp pointed knife/ lest he should hurt himself there with/ the child with the next money that he gitteth buyeth himself a sharp pointed knife/ & weareth it/ the father blameth the child for breaking of his commandment the child alleging that he weareth his knife to defend himself from dogs/ sayeth that he breaketh not his father's commandment/ and that he weareth the knife not to hurt himself with all/ but to defend him from dogs there with. Whether breaketh this child his father's commandment or no? Whether should this argument of the child follow well or no? I am forbidden to wear a sharp pointed knife lest i should hurt myself with all/ ergo i may wear a sharp pointed knife to defend myself with all. There is an other father which hath many sons/ and he sayeth unto his sons i command you all in the name of god that none of yowly with any of my servants lest ye catch the pox of them/ judas lieth with dromo which hath the french pox as all the other servants have/ when the father blamed judas for lying with dromo/ were this excuse of the child's to be allowed or no? father ye forbade me to lie with any of your servants to the intent that i should catch the french pox/ but ye forbade me not to lie with the servants to learn of them/ all be it dromo have the pocks and many have taken the pox of him/ i am not such a fool as to take them of him i can keep myself well enough/ Moreover Dromo is well learned and can teach me many good lessons and your steward both counseled me and commanded me to lie with him that i might/ as i lay with him/ learn to speak latin/ Would not a wise father say thou foolish boy/ why hast thou broken my commandment? Art thou wiser than i am? how canst thou lie with him that hath the french pocks running upon him and not be infected there with? How canst thou avoid the pox and lie with him/ the which thing all other that lay with him hither to could not avoid? What promise or privilege hast thou mor than other/ granted the of god/ that thou may lie with him with out jeopardy when all other take the pox of him? When thou haste no promise nor privilege of god/ and hast put thyself in jeopardy of taking the pox with out any need/ thou hast both broken God's commandment in tempting of god and also mine which for bad the to lie with any of my servants/ As for the stewards counsel & commandment it is not to be kept when my commandment is contrari. As touching the learning that thou sayest thou may learn of him/ what madness is it to learn it of an unlearned pokky drivel with in avoidable ieperdi of the french pox/ that thou mayst with out jeopardy learn of they elder brother/ whom i have appointed to be thy Scoolmaster who is an hundred sold better learned then dromo is/ think ye then that this use of images in the church which hath been the occasion of mich abominable idolatri as the images lately burned and broken in england do testify/ will be allowed of god the father in the day of judgement? i think no. Was not images in the church a certain season before they were worshipped? And fell not the people by having of them to the worshipping of them? then can they not be h●d with out jeopardy as the images lately broken in england bear witness/ If they were no peril of idolatri in having of images what needed johan to have said in his first Epistel beware of images/ The wise man sayeth that images are made to the injury of god to be stumbling blokkes or mous traps for men's souls/ and to snare the feet of the simple in/ and that/ Initiuns' scortandi excogitatio simulacrorumest, & corundem inventio vitae corruptela, Neque erant ab initio nec in aeternum manebunt. The finding out of images is the beginning of fornication/ and the invention of the same is the destruction of life/ Nether have they been from the beginning neither shall they continue for ever. Then the church can not have images with out jeopardy. And that we need no images in Christ's church it is casy to prove for the scripture teacheth the church all thing that is necessari for it/ What thing can a blind bloke or stone do with jeopardy but a preacher of God's word can do the same? Can an image teach any example of faith of hope charity/ humility/ liberality patience or of any other virtue but a Christian preacher both can do the same & doth the same manyfoldes much better & with out any peril of spiritual fornication/ How can an image teach faith with her example which hath none at all/ & when as true faith cometh of hearing of God's word how can the dumb image teach faith which cannot speak one word of god? How shall the image teach ' charity that loveth no man? How shall the image teach humility that boweth to no man/ or liberality that giveth nothing? or patience which suffereth nothing? Then if ye would let the scripture go abroad in to every man's hand/ and make your priests as diligent in preaching as they are busy in unprofitable plays & shows of ceremonies/ or if ye would admit none to be priests but such that were as able to teach/ as blind images are/ we should need no images at all in the church/ no more than/ there was in the primative church. Then when as images cannot be in the church without ieperdi of idolatri as ye bear witness yourself which will so long give outward worship unto images which is idolatri/ as ye have images in the church/ and we need them not/ and may want them well/ and to put one self in jeopardy where no need is/ is to tempt god/ & that is sin/ it followeth that it is not lawful to have images in the church/ namely where their worship is defended and where men have used and use still to abuse them/ and give to them outward worship as ye do. Thes few reasons have i brought be cause i would not be long/ i could have brought out examples out of histories & allowed writers and out of the civil laws of Emperors to have proved that images have been forbidden to be in the church/ but i differ them until an other time/ If i see not the abuses of images taken away intending to bring them with all the reasons that i can make. Bring ye now as many reasons for the having and outward worship of images as i have brought against them or else chide out your part/ or procure that my book may be forbidden to be red that ye need to take no such importable pain upon you or elliss grant that ye have been deceived and defended unlawful doctrine.  The rescuer 
And so is not his last concluding argument/ which he calleth himself not easy to assoil/ which is this we might not worship the angel Peter and Paul being the better/ ergo not the cross being of less estimation than Peter or Paul/ I to assoil the matter easily say the man useth sophistri in the word worship/ for if he take worship to signify reverent behaviour than i say that the antecedent is false/ and if he will it signify godly honour it is truly said/ but nothing to the purpose/.  The hunter 
If that to say that a● man use the sophistri in a word not able to prove it/ were a sufficient solution of an argument indeed it were an easy thing to solute an argument/ but it is not so easy to solute my argument as ye think ye know that i disputed with you before of outward worship/ of the cross/ & that ye would have it given to the cross and that i held that it should not be given to the cross your distinction is therefore vain and interlaced with a lie/ And as for my antecedent i prove it thus/ No true servant of god forbiddeth any thing that is lawful/ but Peter Paul and the angel forbade men to fall down before them and to do such outward worship unto them as ye do to the cross/ and they were true servants of god/ therefore it was not lawful for men to fall down before them and to do such outward worship unto them as ye do unto the cross/ Moreover/ either must ye say that Cornelius & johan were damnable idolaters/ or elliss that they gave only outward worship unto them whom they took not for god but for/ their superioures set in higher dignity authority than they were/ for to fall down before a man or angel and to give to the man or the angel godly honour is plain idolatri/ which honour if Cornelius or johan have given unto Peter and to the angel/ it can not be denied but they were idolaters.  The rescuer 
For neither Paul neither the cross can be worshipped with godly honour.  The hunter 
If that a calf made of gold may be worshipped with godly honour/ and an other man may be worshipped with godly honour/ the cross and Paul may be worshipped with godly honour but the golden calf that aaron made was worshipped with godly honour exodi the xxxij when as the people said unto it Behold o Israel here are thy gods which have brought the out of Egypt. That images have been worshipped with godly honour/ also it is plain by the first chapter of the Epistel to the Romans. Where as it is written/ When they believed that they were wise/ they were made/ fools & have changed the glori of the in corruptible god/ by the likeness of an image of a corruptible man. In the xii. chapter of the acts the people which spoke thus of Herodis voice/ It is the voice of god & not of man/ gave unto him godly worship/ & because he gave not the glori unto god he was eaten to death with worms. Then may the image of the cross and Paul be worshipped with godly honour/ furthermore what should allmyghty god need to forbid men to give godly honour unto men and images if men & images could not be worshipped (as ye say) with godly honour? Let them that have authority to inquire of heresies look whether this man's saying is heresi or no/ If it be held stiffly it must nediss be heresi for it is contrary to the open text of the scripture.  The rescuer 
In speaking against holy water/ which he intendeth to impugn/ the man's malice putrefieth for lak of salt/ which he cannot abide to be sanctified by the invocation of the name of god.  The hunter? 
In my former book/ i have sufficiently confuted the devilish conjuring of haly water/ and uncovered the crafty juggling of the papists/ which on while/ said that they held it still in the church in the remembrance of Christ's blood/ and an other while/ to drive devils away/ to put venial sins away/ and to heal all sicknesses. The cause why that this proctor of the pope manteyneth this haly water so ere nestly is/ because his holy father alexander ordained it and commanded all popish priests as gardener is to make it not to be a remembrance of Christ's blood and of our baptism but to purge men from sin as his words that ordained it do testify in the book of the popis decrees/ Aquam sale conspersam▪ populis benedicimus etc. We bliss water sprinkled with salt for the people/ that they sprinkled with it/ may be hallowed and clenged. The which thing we command all sacrificers or priests likewise to do/ for if the ashes of a calf sprinkled with blood hallowed and clenged the people/ much more water sprinkled with salt and sanctified with godly prayers/ holloweth & clengeth the people. Thes words speaketh pope Alexander with many more all e like vain & superstitious/ which every man that hath any know ledg dy in the scripture can easily confute/ Now because i cannot abide this popish ordinance that your father made after your judgement i putrefis for lak of salt. If that ye would drink the water as ye do wine/ and eat the salt at your table/ i could be well content that when ye say grace that ye sanctified them with the invocation of God's name with other meats and drinks which ye eat and drink/ But when ye conjure water and salt and abuse God's creatures to other purposes than god ordained them/ i neither will nor can abide your shameful abusion.  The rescuer 
With out learning he calleth it conjuring/ and with out with despiseth the good words.  The hunter 
jugglers and conjurers be cause their names are heinous and hated and their occupations are unlawful/ will be called pretty conveyors and exorcists/ So master gardener be cause ye are a conjuror and your occupation is shameful and forbidden in the scripture/ lest ye should be known/ of the hole realm to be a conjuror/ ye will be called an exorcist/ and ye will have your work called an exorcism/ and all that in Greek that English people should not know what ye be/ Therefore he that calleth you a conjuror and your work conjuring/ must be unlearned/ ye writing upon the first commandment disallow conjuring/ and he that made your book in Latin/ turned conjuring in to Exorcismum, was he unlearned therefore? Ye are so wonderfully learned that ye will teach the scolares of cambridge to pronunce Greek/ and ye will teach me to speak Greekish English. But if your lordship would put of your mitre/ and be as well content to be taught that that ye can not as year arrogantly busy to teach it that ye have not learned/ ye might learn/ that if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek/ be a conjuror in English as ye cannot deny but it is/ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to conture/ & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is conjuring/ Reed the nineteen. chapter of the acts in Greek & there shall ye find that this lesson that i have taught you is true. Then when as ye are not ashamed to occupi conjuring of the devil out of water and salt/ and say in Greek the word of your occupation Exorcizo, ●e that is i conjure the or charge thee/ whiar ye ashamed to be called a conjuror? If the name be evil the deed is worse/ Then if ye will be no more called a conjuror/ have of your conjuring and i shall lay away the name of a conjuror/ or else the deed and the name must go together. As for your good words that ye say that i unwisely despise/ i have proved before to be words all full of devilishness and idolatri where fore i marvel that ye can for shame call them good/ and can neither answer to my reason nor yet prove them good with any scripture.  The rescuer 
If this man had been by Christ/ when he anointed the blind man's eyes with clay/ he would have asked him/ whihe made clay an other god beside himself/ And when the woman was heeled of her disease/ by touching of his garment/ why he made his garment an other god/ & when Christ answered to divers their faith made them hole/ he made every man's faith a special saviour after this noble clerks doctrine/ which is so blinded with malice/ to desprove all that he readeth that he findeth not in scripture. Many & many times that instrumental or occasionative concurrent or ministerial cause hath attribute unto it in speech the hole effect/ with out prejudice or blasphemi of many gods or many saviours as this best pretending to be learned/ would seem to be able to persuade. I shall only use this one place of scripture. Doth saint Paul (answer to this and ye will) go a bout to make many saviours when he writeth to Timothe/ Doo this and then thou shalt sane thyself and other/ all that is good to man is wrought by god in Christ for Christ and by christ/ where he in all creatures may do such ministerial service/ as it shall please god/ and that all may serve man to the health of both body and soul/ Good men by the grace purchased by Christ dare boldly pray god/ and have done from the beginning with prayer and calling for the help of god and expulsion of the devil in all thing/ the devil cannot abide haly water.  The hunter 
Because ye are a conjuror and can rays the devil at your pleasure and compel him with your Exorcisms (lo now i speak gardeners Greekish English) both to tell you what thing shall be done and what thing would have been done/ ye can by the help of the devil that ye Exorcis (plain men of the country call it conjure) tell what i would have done if i had been by Christ. But if ye were no conjuror/ and no better acquainted with the devil than i am/ how could ye tell/ what i would have said so long ago unto Christ? Doth it follow that if i had been by Christ when he healed the blind man's eyes with clay/ and healed many both in body and soul with/ faith that i would have axed him why he made more gods beside himself/ because i say that ye make a god of salted water whiles ye trust to obtain by it salvation of both body and soul? As who say likewise as Christ used clay as a mean to heal the sickness of the body/ and faith as a mean to heal both body and soul/ so may ye use salted water/ to be a mean to obtain/ the health of both body and soul/ By what authority make ye salted water to be means of the salvation of body and soul? What good man hath found out this short way to heaven/ that salted water shall heal both body and soul? If that ye say/ likewise as Christ used the clay which had no such natural properti given it/ to heal the blyndmannis eyes w●●he/ so may we now use salted water/ to heal all diseases their with both hot and cold/ althoghe we know that god hath given no such natural properti unto it/ and that which it wanteth of nature we will obtain by prayer/ To this i say first that Christ which could have healed the blind man with out any outward mean/ used clay as a mean that the miracle might be more evident and better remembered/ and in the healing of this blind man he showed ij. miracles at one time/ first in healing the blind man which fact was a 'bove nature/ & in healing him by clay being a mean that had no natural pour to heal such a disease with all/ for a miracle is a strange and a rare work above nature/ christ had good cause to work such miracles and wonders/ for the jews would not have received his doctrine and believed that he had been of god/ if he had not wrought such wonders/ Therefore christ to purchase credence unto his doctrine which was thought unto the jews a new learning and not of god/ was driven to work miracles/ But what need have ye now to work miracles? doth not all men and women in england believe that Christ is of god and that his doctrine is true? ye work a great miracle if that ye heal all diseases with salt/ and yet a greater miracle when ye can make the soul receive salted water and save it thereby/ for it is not only above nature that ye go about but also contrari to nature. Then when ye need now no miracles/ and never the less go about to work miracles whiles by ove little receipt ye take in hand to heal all the diseases of both body and soul/ your prayers are foolish and wicked where in ye desire god to helped you to work your miracles/ and therefore labour in vain/ and bring never to pass that ye go about/ your prayers are wikked for they are to the disshonor of Christ for they require that salted water should do as much as Christ can do/ Also when as of like things is one judgement/ and like prayers unto yours/ are wikked it followeth that yours are also wikked/ By the same authority that ye have brought water and salt in to the church and desire god that they may drive devils away/ take away venial sins/ and be salvation of both body and soul/ to all them that receive them/ may ye bring in to the church a calf and a sow and/ say allmyghty god/ we beseech the grant us that this calf & this sow may chase away devels & take away venial sins/ and may be salvation of both body & soul/ to all them that eat of them/ By the same authority may ye bring in to the church every sunday a dish full of milk and make this prayer o all mygty & everlasting god we hymbly beseech thee/ grant us that thou will wit safe so to hollow and sanctify▪ this milk thy creature/ that who soever suppeth of it by the invocation of thy name may have pour to draw out of what soever tether he list/ so much milk as he will desire/ for as far as it is contrari unto the nature of a sow and a calf to chase devels away to purge venial sins/ and to be salvation to a man's soul/ and as far as it is contrari to the nature of a tether to give milk/ so much is it contrari to the nature of salt to heal hot burning agues and to the nature water to hele dropses and palses and to them both mixed together to be health of both body and soul/ your prayer is therefore wikked/ then is it no marvel that ye never, obtain that ye axe. How can those prayers be other than wikked/ where in the name of god is called upon in vain? Christ did not hele the soul of the blind man with clay/ but only he delivered him from his blindness with it/ therefore it followeth not because/ he used clay against blindness that ye may use salted water to heal both the body and the soul/ Where as it is said that many were saved by the faith of jesus Christ that is no other thing to say then that many were saved by Christ whom they took hold upon/ by faith/ then is not faith an other saviour beside god/ but it leadeth us unto god/ And when as god is our saviour and he draweth us unto him by the mean of faith/ when i say that faith justifieth i mean that god justifieth us by faith/ Therefore when as faith is a mean ordained of god when i say faith saveth i exclude not god/ admitting his instrument/ neither make i any other saviour but him that worketh by his appointed instrument. But when as salted water is no instrument of our god where with he worketh our salvation/ and yet ye give salvation unto it/ it followeth that after your judgement it is either a god itself or sum instrument of sum other god which worketh salvation by it. And where ye axe whether Paul maketh many saviours where as he sayeth that Timothe reading exorting and teaching of the word of god shall save himself/ i answer that Paul maketh no more saviours but god alone/ for he attributeth salvation unto the instruments whereby god worketh salvation. When as David killed golias with a slinge/ he that sayeth that Davidis sling killed golias/ sayeth not/ their was 〈◊〉 sleers of golias/ be side David/ for the sling was the proper weepen that David killed golias with/ & so is Timothe God's instrument/ whereby he wrought the salvation of Timothe/ and of them that believed his preaching/ But if a man say that a lance killed golias the same man maketh an other killer of golias beside David/ for the lance was none of the weapons that David killed golias with/ So he that giveth salvation instrumentally to any instruments which god hath only appointed and used to work salvation by/ maketh no more saviours but god alone/ but he that giveth salvation unto other instruments than are peculiar and proper unto god which neither god appointed/ neither at any time hath used/ neither will allow for his instruments maketh an other saviour beside god/ Now have i made you an answer to your question that/ saint Paul maketh not many saviours/ Now what will ye gather of this answer? Will ye gather that salted water may as well be an instrument of salvation/ as Timothe was? If this be your gathering i gathere thus of you again that ye hold/ that the pope hath as much authority to ordain salted water to be an instrument of salvation/ as allmyghty god had/ to make Tymothe an instrument of salvation by the reading and preaching of his word/ which if ye do it is more tree that ye are a Papist/ then the devil hateth your falsely called holy water/ which at his motion was by pope Alexander borough in to the church to the mokkage and great injury of Christ's blood/ Mark reader whither thes defenders of ceremonies as i have said oft do any thing against abuses but dissemble/ till they may find a better time/ v. year ago master gardener durst not for his ears/ have defended holy water any other wise but as a putter of us in remembrance of Christ's blood and of our baptim/ neither durst he say that images might be worshipped with outward reverence/ but should be only laymen's books/ but now when he hath spied his time/ holdeth openly that haly water may be used in the church for the same ends and purposes that his father pope hath ordained it for/ and brought it in to the Church/ that is to drive devils away/ to heal all sicknesses/ and to be salvation of both body and soul/ and that images may be worshipped with bowing of the body with kissing & creeping to. What will this bold defending of Popish superstition bring shortly/ if it be unlooked for? surely even it that is in an old proverb/ the Pope home again unto our own doors/ and that with out a viser where as yet he is partly covered.  The rescuer 
From jesting against holy water ye descend to scold with the hole realm/ and go about to prove all those to commit theft and sacrilege that suffer not lay men communicate in ij tyndes/ for your reformation there in there wanteth but on ulysses with his mace to knok you between the shoulders/ as he did thersites for railing unseemly against the governors.  The hunter 
I have argued earnestly against your conjured and abused water/ and not gested against any holy water/ neither have i scolded with the hole realm/ but i have reasoned against a sort of false Prophets and bewrayed a nest of false thieves/ which have stolen a better thing than a golden dyalice from the king and all the hole laite of england/ And where ye want Ulysses to knok me between the shoulders ye may as well command the devil to fet him to you out of his grave/ as ye may command him by your conjuring to cum out of water & salt for no need/ & all elyke/ Are their not officers enough in england to punish me if i offend except ye have sum valiant man of the old world? Now speak ye like a man of war when ye would have me punished with a valiant warriors weepen. It appareth that ye wrote this at after noun when as ye be a knight of the garter/ manfully myndede/ to shed blood overnyght/ that ye may drink in the morning when ye are a blood supping sacrificer.  The rescuer 
By whose authority/ according to God's truth the lay men are there in ordered/ as hath been from the beginning how soever it liketh you to talk in a mask unknown. If ye take it (as it seemeth ye donot) that in on kind of breed only ishole Christis body & blood/ them hath the lay men nothing taken from them/ but reverently abstain from either kind/ the fruit where of/ they receive in form of breed.  The hunter 
All the authority that Princes have/ they have/ it of god/ but god giveth them no authority to break his commandment. but god commanded that anl men should drink of his holy cup/ then the blessed cup is not taken away from the laite by the authority of the Prince/ but by the violent tyranni of the clergy which because they would seime more holy than the lay-men/ have taken it from them. And in saying that the laite hath been so ordered from the beginning/ ye suarue far from the truth/ for from Christ's time to saint Cyprianes time/ the cup was not taken from the lay-men/ the lay-men had also in saint jeromes' time and in saint austenes time/ the hold Sacrament under both the forms/ and was never generally forbidden till the general consel are constance forbade it to be given in both the forms unto lay men/ which was in the year of our lord. 1415. But that your impudent lie may the better be seen/ i will bring in witness against you/ Cyprianus add Cornelium papam in the ij. Epistel/ How teach we them or exhort them to shed their blood in the confession of Christis name/ if we deny them that shall go a war far/ Christis blood/ oder how make we them mere for the cup of mariyrdom/ if we suffer them not by the right of communion to drink in the church of the cup of the lord? Also Cyprian in the fift sermon of them that had fallen/ telleth how that a decon poured the Sacrament in the form of wine in to a young madens mouth/ which would not have taken it. Austen as it is alleged/ libro sententiarum, de consecratione, distinct. ij. can dum frangitur, When the host is broken when the blood is poured in to the mouths of the faithful/ what other thing is there by betokened/ than the offering up of Christis body in the cross/ and the shedding of his blood out of his side? jerom upon the third chapter of sophonias/ the priests which serve the Sacrament/ and divide the lords blood to his people/ do wikkidly against the law of Christ thyngking that the words of the prayer/ make the Sacrament and not the life/ and that the solemn prayer is only necessari and not the merits of the pressed/ Ambrose said to the Emperor as it is written in the ix. book of the threparted stori. With what rashness dare thou receive with thy mouth the cup of the precious blood/ when as there is so mich unjustly shed blood in the furi of the words? Certain pope's also did not allow this kind of theft as gelasius which sayeth/ We have perceived that sum take but a portion of the body and abstain from the chalice of the holy blood which doubtless (can not tell what superstition they are taught to be bound in) shall either receive the hole Sacrament or be holden a way from the hole for the division of one Sacrament can not be made with out great sacrilege. julius also sayeth the consecratione dist. ij. cano. cum omne. They have not received that witness spoken in the gospel/ where they/ for the fulfilling of the communion give the Sacrament dipped (in to wine) to the people where as Ch●●ste gave his body & blood to his apostles/ the desyvering of the breed is recorded by itself & of the giving of the cup by itself alone Moreover that this halfing and parting of the Sacrament was not in the primative church/ & that this doctrine of yours was but stablished of late the words of the Consel of constance which are thes do testify Allthoghe Christ after supper ordained this worshipful Sacrament/ and gave it under both the forms/ of breed and wine/ to his disciples/ yet that notwithstanding/ the authority of the holy canon's/ and the laudable and approved custom of the church/ hath ordained that the lay men should require it only under the one form/ And all though in the primative church/ this Sacrament were received of the faithful in both the forms yet the custom reasonablely brought in/ which is to be taken as a law/ hath ordained that it shall be ●ecey/ ved of the lay people under the one form alone/ So far the words of the Consel. Then are you a shameful liar/ which say that the lay people have had but the on form of the Sacrament from the beginning/ But now let us examine your reason/ Which your Popish brother Latomus the lawyer and ye fet out of the foresaid Counsel/ your reason is this Christis body is a living body/ and a living body is not with out blood/ but under the form of breed is Christ's body ergo there is also his blood/ then the lay men recyving the Sacrament under the form of breed receiveth both the body & b●●de/ therefore the priests taking the cup from the lay-men are not church robbers as ye say/ If that it were lawful to reason after Philosophi in a mystery of our faith then might a turk reason against us thus/ and prove that the blood that ye have in the chalice is none of Christis blood/ all the blood that is in a living body is warm/ but it that ye have in the chalice is cold/ therefore it is in no living body/ but all Christ's blood is in a living body/ therefore it is none of his blood/ that ye have in the chalice/ ye may see now what inconvenience might come if a man might reason after Philosophi of the Sacrament as ye do/ Therefore let your Philosophi lie a side till ye have need of it/ & reason after the word of god/ where upon this Sacrament is builded and not upon Philosophi ye say that in the kind of breed only/ is hole Christis body and blood/ them have the lay men nothing taken from them/ to which saying i answer thus/ Whatsoever of the Sacrament the prestas have that the lay men have not/ the priests have stolen from them/ but the priests have the blessed and hallowed cup of Christ's blood/ that the lay men have not/ ergo the priests have stolen it from the lay men/ Every sacrament hath his element & with out it it can not be a Sacrament/ but ye have that/ & the lay people have it not/ ergo also that have ye stolen from them/ If ye understand not thes arguments i will declare them with ij. similitudes. A certain father sent to his son studying at oxford ij. purses one white with a crown in it and v. shillings of white money/ the other read with as much in it/ he sendeth with thes ij. a letter wherein be biddeth his son remember him when he looketh on the white purse and pray for him because that is his gift/ and when he looketh on the red purse that he should remembri his mother who sent him that/ the carrier liking the red purse well putteth all the money that was in it/ into the white purse/ and delivereth all the money to the scolare in the white purse/ but he keepeth unto himself the red purse/ the scolare after his letters are red/ requireth also a reed purse/ the carrier answereth him frowerdly and sayeth haste thou not all the money that thou should have? what maketh matter whether thou have thy money in one purse or ij. so thou have it all/ and so the child can not get his read purse/ which is worth xiv. d. whether is this carrier a thief or no/ whether hath he done any injury to the child's mother or no? If that he be a thief and have done injury to the child's mother/ for taken a way the remembrance whereby she should have been remembered an prayed for/ then are ye thieves and false carriers/ in putting hole Christ in to the form of breed and taking quite a way from the lay people/ the form of wine/ which ought as well to call to their remembrance by seeing and drinking of it the shedding of Christ's blood for their soul's/ as by breaking eating and seeing of the form of breed they are bound to remember that Christ's body was broken & offered for the redemption of their bodies/ as ambrose writeth according to the vain of scripture/ upon the xj. chapter of the first Epistel of Paul to the corinthians after this wise/ Because we are delivered by the death of the lord/ we remembering this thing/ betoken it with earring his flesh and drinking his blood which were offered up for us. The flesh of our saviour was offered for the health of our body/ and his blood was shed for the soul/ as it was a fore hand figured of Moses/ for so sayeth he the flesh is offered for your body/ but the blood for your soul/ there fore ye may not eat the blood. Thus far ambrose. Nether is the supper of the lord ordained as ye seem to understand it only/ to purches for gynenes of sins/ but it is ordained to be a remembrance of Christ's death/ and a thanking of allmyghty god for the benefits which we have received/ of him/ then all they that have received like benefit ought to be like thankful and mind full/ then lay men ought as well as the pressed to see taste and drink the form of wine/ as the pressed/ that by the seeing tasting and drinking there of they may call as well to remembrance the shedding of our saviours Christis blood/ for their soul's/ as the pressed doth/ Then is your gloes all in vain where ye say that/ when as hole Christ is under the form of breed/ that the lay man receiving it/ receiveth the fruit of the hole Sacrament. What if ye commanded your steward to give every one of your servants to his dinner breed and flesh to eat/ and wine to drink to quence his thirst with/ and he knead all the breed with wine and, gave them no other wine than it that is drunken up in the flower/ and they when they had eaten up their flesh & breed/ were fain for lak of wine to drink water/ and complained unto you/ would ye allow your steward in this his doing or no? Doth the wine drunken up in the breed and so taken as well quench amamnis thirst as it doth when it is taken alone/ if ye say nay then/ so doth not the form of breed received alone so well put us in remembrance of Christis blodshedding and death as when the form of breed is taken firstand the form of wine is immediately taken after it/ after the ordinance of Cyriste/ More over how can he have like sruyt/ that keepeth but half the commandment/ with him that keepeth the hole commandment? He that receiveth only under on form/ keepeth but half of the commandment/ which is accipite & commedite & leaveth our the other half of the commandment/ bibite ex hoc omnes hoc facite etc. drink ye all of this, & do this as oft as ye shall drink do it in the remembrance of me/ it followeth again that your saying is false whereas ye say that under the form of breed alone the lay man receiveth the fruit of both the kinds.  The rescuer 
If ye understand not the mystery of Christis supper as we do/ then it is no great slander for true men to be called thieves of an heretic all though the example were not to be unponisshed.  The hunter 
A man may understand the mystery of Christis super other wise than ye do/ and yet be no heretic/ specially when ye make merchandise of it/ and appli it to heal swine/ and sheep/ and abuse it to bring either deed men to life again/ or else to redeem damned souls out of hell. I called you no thieves till that i showed your theft/ and convict you of it/ so should ye not have called me heretic till that ye had showed my heresy and convicted me of it.  The rescuer 
We deny that the supper hath any half at all/ then is not all your reasoning worth an half penny.  The hunter 
Every divisible thing/ and hold thing hath parts where of it is made but the supper is a divisible and an hole thing therefore it hath parts/ the supper hath in it bread and wine outwardly and mystically the body and blood of Christ/ bred is not wine neither breed is Christis body neither is wine Christis blood/ neither is Christis blood Christ's body and thes are contained in Christ's supper theyrfore it hath parts. The one part of an hole thing is on half and the other part is the other half the supper hath such parts/ then it hath halves.  The rescuer 
Ye make yourself wrong Principles and theridamas upon in gender matter/ To talk on whether the priests receiving may profit other is out of the matter/ which matter ye reason as though ye would deny communionem sanctorum and the mutual help in prayer and oblation of on member for an other.  The hunter 
Every unlearned oldwyfe can say so as ye have now said that i have made myself wrong principles but a learned man should have proved it and not have said it as lone/ let the wise reder compare thes your words with my arguments which i made to prove that the priests receiving could not help other/ and let him judge whether they do clerkly assoil my arguments or no.  The rescuer 
And when ye make argument that no man's receyning can profit himself to remission of sin/ for as ye say/ either he receiveth in sin to his damnation/ or out of sin/ and than needeth he no remission of sin whose sins be forgiven all ready/ And here the man useth Sophistri in the word sins/ only to delude & blind the simple reder with which he desireth to be of the unlearned sort that his talk may be wondered at more than reproved.  The hunter 
Whether the rehearsing of a parr of an argument/ and the saying that their is Sophistri in it be a sufficient assoiling of an argument are no i report me unto all them that can still in Logik or have any natural wit.  The rescuer 
When he speaketh of lent which hath been as origen testifieth in the Greek church ever from the beginning the man speaketh not plainly whether hemiflykethe the prohibition to eat flesh/ or the licens granted for money contrary to the prohibition/ he showeth no other fault here in but because the bishop of rome doth the like. And if the man would add to this that because the bishop of rome in his church would not suffer men to fast on the sunday that therefore we to disagree with him should eat fish upon the sunday and fast also/ he spoke even as wisely as he doth now/ But he hath made this for a degree of folly to a grater that followeth.  The hunter 
As for lent and many other ordinances i did not go about to confute them/ but only the chief and most gorgeous ceremonies and traditiones that your father ordained/ which i thought if i could confute/ the trifling ceremonies should easily give place as unmanly & weak soldiers do when their captains are all taken or slain/ And ye speaking of lent which the grecians used/ use Sophistical speech there in for the grecians used lent diversly. As Eusebius a Grecian by the authority of Ireneus/ in the fist book of his Ecclesiastical histori testifieth saying/ There is strife not only about ester/ but also about the manner of fasting/ for sum reckon that one day only is to be fasted/ sum ij. days & other sum more/ sum forty days. Sum counting both the hours of the day and the night so make days. Which diversities of observing the fast/ began not now first neither in our days but before use. Socrates also a Greciane writeth in the xj. book of the threparted story that sum fasted iij. weeks before ester/ sum vj. sum seven weeks/ and that never the less they called their fast quadrage simam the xl. days fast/ that is lent/ and that sum abstained from/ all thing saving dry bred/ and sum/ eat birds and fish/ sum/ eat of nothing that had life/ and sum fasted to one time of day and sum to an other/ And the cause/ of this diversity he showeth in thes words/ And because no old reading/ is found concerning this last/ i reckon that the apostles have left it to the judgement of every man/ that every man should work that which is god not of fear or compulsion. Now master gardener when as among the grecians as thes ancient historiographers do testify which were Grecianes such diversity of lentes hath bene/ do not ye use Sophistri to say that lent hath been used sense the beginning in the Greek church when as sum of the grecians eat wildfovele in their lents an other/ only fish? If that lent must be holden in england because it hath been holden sense the beginning in the Greek church/ then/ must the marriage of priests/ the supper under both the kinds/ be also holden in England for thes ij. have been holden from the beginning in the Greek church.  The rescuer 
Where for the hatred of the Bishop of rome/ he would we should do away the use of the Latin tongue in the church/ and always he calleth the Latin tongue the popis mother tongue/ denying that the Romans spoke Latin still/ which whether they did or no/ in the learned tongue/ sum have been that have probablely doubted. But what so ever the Romans have done/ they do not so now/ so little cause hath he to call the Latin tongue the popis mother tongue when in sum popis it hath happened and in a great meany of cardinals also that neither father nor mother/ ne they themselves have known any whit of it.  The hunter 
Reed ipray the good reder in my former book the arguments which i made against the singing of the psalms in the Latin tongue where it is not understand/ & compare them with this high clerks answer/ & thou shalt espy that he cannot assoil my arguments & that the fox seeketh holes/ Whether the old pope's of whom we have thes traditiones and ceremonies spoke Latin or no/ whether the old Romans spoke Latin or no/ i report me unto all them that are learned and have red Cicero's orationes/ or Aulus Gelius which writeth that aster the mind of Cornelius nep●s/ Cicero was twenty-three. year old when he pleated the first cause in open judgement/ and defended sextum roscium accused of murder. He said his orationes in Latin before all the hole multitude/ if that the common sort understood him not/ he spoke in vain that they should hear him Erasmus is not of your mind which sayeth. Cnm per universum terrarum orbem roman loquantur quicunque Romanum agnoscunt Pontificem, etc. And so is Virgil also against you which sayeth/ Georgicorum iij. cui nomen asilo, Romannm est, Aestron graij vertere vocantes. If that the Latin tongue were a distinct tongue from the Roman tongue than was not the title which Pilate wrote/ written in Latin as it was written in Hebrew and Greek but in romish for joan sayeth that it was written Hebraisti Ellenisti Romaisti/ & then have all the translatores both Erasmus jerom/ and all other deceived us which have all translated romaisti Latin/ I wot wherefore ye talk of this matter/ surely that ye may seem to say something and to scape so from my arguments/ How beit all wise men can easily perceive that such shifts as ye make now/ are shameful and do not assoil an argument.  The rescuer 
The man speaketh wisely of the Greeks falling from the pope that never was with him/ and they sing in such Greek as the mother can no skill of unless she chanceth to be learned/ no more then the Bishop of Romis mother can skill of Latin.  The hunter 
This Bishop which would be counted a true and a learned man lieth here as he doth oft unlearnedly/ for beside Histori writers/ the counsel had at florence in the year of our lord 1439 under joanne paleologo Emperor of Constantinople and eugenio Bishop of Rome declareth plainly that the Greeks were under the Bishop of Rome/ for thus it is written in the letters of the concordance of the Romans and Greeks/ Diffinimus sanctam Apostolicam sedem & Romanum Pontificem in universum orbem tenere primatum & ipsum romanum Pontificem successoremesse beati Petti principis Apostolorum & verum esse Christi vicarium, totiusque Ecclesiae caput. We determine that the holy Apostolic seat and the Bishop of Rome to hold the primace over all the world & that the said Bishop of Rome to be the successor of blessed Peter the prince of the apostles & the true vicar of Christ & the heed of the hole church. To thes words Ioannes Paleologus the Emperor & bissarion Bishop of niece with a wonders great number of other grecians subscribed and set their hands to/ Where ye speak so boldly of the Greeks that they understand no more their service then the romish wy men understand the Latin tongue that is by your false judgement nothing at all ye speak as arrogantly as ye were in your judgement seat/ as boldly as ye were on horse back at after noun when ye are a knight of the garter/ and as lyingly as ye had been at Rome and therefore might lie by authority. Because ye have been a little in italy & spoken with the pope/ ye take in hand to tell what is done in grecia/ but that like yourself lyingly for i came once from venis with ij. Greeks born in peloponeso which were merchant men and had not learned the learned Greek tongue which understood the Psalter so well that i could not cite no verse in Greek but they could expound the same in Italiane/ And they understood me speating Greek to them and i likewise understood them when they spoke treatablely/ I set this experience against your guessing.  The rescuer 
After this presumptuous ignorance there followeth as shameful a lie when he sayeth in Germany such as have left the Bishop of Rome have also left singing in Latin in their churches. The contrari where of i have heard with in thes iij. years in the church of hala where/ Brentius teacheth and is chief preacher/ where a servant of mine in my hearing played at the organs at magnificat/ when the boys in the quere song magnificat in Latin/ as loud as they could cry/ each one uttering his own breast/ to the loudest with out regard how he agreed with his fellows/ I doubt not but god understood them/ God understandeth popinjays/ can they then pray with fruit? But of the number that song/ i dare say a great meany understood not what they song. And we could much less mark their words/ other than be 'gan the verse and ended it/ so that this noble Clerk should do well to use all his reasons of saint Poule to them there & ask them/ what edification the church can have in the noise of the organs/ which if the player have no other shift/ may fortune be furnished with the descant of o lux in the stead of te Deum/ Unto whom they would answer that at the beginning they were of wraghtonis opinion/ but sense they have considered that the learned part of the church singeth in a learned tongue to praise god in all thing/ And upon the same reason they use also all seemly wyses of instruments with laudate Deum in sono tubae, unto omnis Spiritus laudet Dominum, Which solution at their hands i think wraghton/ if his name be wraghton/ would easily take/ & i think he would be ashamed of his lie it is so manifest and so apparent/ But even as truth must persuade with truth so lies be meet to persuade there with lics.  The hunter 
Ye may see good readers what compasses this fox fetcheth to make my hounds weary. All this long narration is brought for no other purpose/ but to seem to have answered to my arguments/ when as yet indeed he hath answered to never one. I said in my former book the germannes which of late left the pope/ left also the popis roman or Latin tongue/ and now sing all service in their oun duche tongue/ And it that i wrote/ i wrote it of experience for in the churches appointed for preaching at cure/ surek/ Basule/ Strasburg and bon where as i have been i am sure that all service was song in the mother tongue and none in Latin/ What maketh the example of on church against so many/ How followeth this argument in hala they sing in Latin ergo they sing no duche in germani? But for all this man's saying they sing there also in duche as i learned of them that have been their/ If the learned sang to themselves in Latin/ in england and the lay men had their songs in English. I had no cause to write against any abuse in that behalf neither would i have written one word of that matter/ if the laite of england might have had their songs in a tongue that they understand/ as the Clergi hath it in a●tong that they understand/ It is like that the Bishop chanced upon sum College of Scolares or upon sum Popisshe church when he heard this singing in Latin In germany for the avoiding of insurrection in many places it is the manner to drive no man to Religion/ therefore if their be a great sort in a citi that will not part from their Popistri the rulers letteth them have a church as i have seen it in cure & in bon & as i am informed it is at worms and Sphire/ I saw this that i shall tell you done at bon with in thes v. months/ In the college where as the freres was where the word of god was preached all Psalms were song in the duche tongue/ & none in Latin/ But in the great minster the Popish priests which will not leave yet their mumpsimus sing all in Latin/ how be it the Bishop hath ordained that every sunday there is a godly sermon made by one of his preachers in that church/ & after the sermon/ all that can sing both men & children sing Psalms in their mother tongue in duche and not in Latin/ But a none after that song sing the priests & choristers an other song all in Latin/ secundum ordinationem Papae, What if this Bishop came to bon and chanced upon this sort of Papists/ should he worthily blame the gospellerres for the Papists papistry/ Might he honestly say to them in england that would have all the service in English/ what will ye run be for the gospelers of Germani? i hard of late in Germany service song in the Latin tongue. What if Brentius and oseander hold with you (that i believe not) that the sound of the organs is God's honour & service/ and that a man may be edified by saying or hearing that he understandeth not/ what have i to do with Brentius which am not sworn to Brentius neither to any man/ or to any man's doctrine/ saving only to the doctrine of Christ. It is great honest for you to hold and theache such doctrine as when as it is written against ye can not defend it but are fain to send to the gospelers of Germany to fet help to assoil the arguments made against it. But to that particle where ye say that god understandeth the children singing in the Latin tongue which they understand not/ and mean their by/ that the prayers of them that pray not with heart as popinjays speak/ and wot not what they say/ are pleasant and acceptable unto god/ i answer that Christ alleging the saying of Esai the Prophet/ misliketh such prayers in thes words/ This people draweth near me and worshippeth me with their lips but their hearts are far from me/ Paul also in the xiv. chapter of the first Epistel to the corinthians in thes words testifieth that the prayer that is spoken in a strange tongue which he that prayeth understandeth not/ is of no effect & nought worth/ If that i pray in a tongue/ my breath prayeth/ but my mind hath no profit Erasmus Expoundeth thes words thus in his Paraphrasis/ If that i pray in a tongue that the people understandeth not/ for an example in the afrique tongue among the Greeks/ ye rather if that i should speak a language which neither i nor other that are by me understand/ (as certain do which use to sound/ the sung that they have learned in a strange tongue which they understand not themselves (my breath & wind bringeth forth the words that pray/ but my soul or mind hath no fruit there of. It is shame for a bishop to have no other reason to defend his heartless prayer than the old doting wives have/ when they either cannot or will not learn their Pater noster in English/ for thus sayeth the old wife/ ich hop that god understandeth my prayer in Latin as weleas in English/ And all is good that is done for a good intent. Where as ve answer in the gospelers name more like a piper than a preacher that therefore now god is praised & honoured with the sound & piping of the organs because it is written in the old Testament/ Laudate Dominum in sono tubae omnis Spiritus laudet Dominum. Where is your memory master bishop/ have ye forgotten that ye said concerning the worshipping of the cross that all true honour of god is only in spirit & proceedeth from the heart? The organs have no heart nor spirit therefore their can come no true honour or worship from them to god/ therefore the sound of the organs is no true worship or honour of/ god/ Ha●● ye not red that the outward Sacrifices of Moses law/ & that manner of worshipping of god with organs/ shawms offering up of calves and goats is abrogated and that the sabot day of the jews with all their outward fasshiones of Sacrificing is taken away? Reed the iiij. chapter of johan and their shall ye find that god is a spirit and will have spiritual worship/ read Paul to the Hebrews & there shall ye learn that/ thes shaddoes of piping and luting are taken away & that god requireth the things selves and not the shaddoes/ prays god with all the pours of your heart/ and let them be bend earnestly to the keeping of God's commandment thank him with all the hole heart and then have ye done that the instruments did signify/ Reed also the v. chapter of amos the Prophet which speaketh thus of the abrogation of this kind of worshipping/ Take away from me the noise of your songs/ and i will not hear the songs of your harp/ playing on the organs is either a moral Precept or a ceremonial/ if it be a moral Precept it pertaineth unto all men at this hour/ and all men are bound to play on the organs or to praise god with their sound in pain of damnation/ If it be but a ceremonial Precept we are no more bound to keep it then to offer up lambs/ and calves/ for he that said praise god in organs and musical instruments said as well bring unto god the children of Rams/ Take a calf out of the hired for sin/ & a ram to be a burnt Sacrifice/ both with out spot and offer them up before the lord. Then will i neither admit your witless & unlearned solution/ neither of your hands nor theirs if they were so made to make any such solution.  The rescner 
It appeareth that the man is afraid to be called heretic before he were answered/ and he would have sum delay to know whether he would stik in it/ who shall answer him that thinketh noman hath wit but himself/ noman learned but himself/ as this proud arrogant/ presumptuous fool doth in this little book/ Se what herbs grow in gardiner's gardin/ Pride maketh him forgit what he sayeth in the beginning the mids/ and the ending. When he hath condemned our ignorance/ then he would go to scool with us and abide our answer/ He may assoil it thus/ in this part of his book his spirit speaketh meekly/ in the other part of his book where he is so vehement the flesh bresteth forth/ after which solution it should appear/ the man hath a great deal of flesh and little spirit in God's service/ And in reading of the bible the man is all flesh/ and still very angri with the Latin tongue/ where in i remit him to his brethren Brentius and oscander that named holy man/ which ij. because in deeds they disagree from this man's opinion i think they can easily satisfice him with words/ where in i trust he will be content/ And of them who hath pleynty/ borrow so much of the spirit as where with to temper his gross carnalite/ to dissent there in both from us and them.  The hunter 
I desire the good reder to read over the arguments which i have made in my former book concerning the having of the service and bible in the English tongue and judge whether this babbling of this Bishop about my flesh and my spirit/ doth sufficiently assoil my arguments or no. Thanks be unto the king of heaven which hath endued our king of England with such light of true knowledge that he hath contrary to the minds of all Pharisees begun to set out the service in english/ Allmyghty god increase his knowledge every day more and more and give him grace to do there after and grant him victori over all his enemies both bodily and ghostly.  The rescuer 
The rest of this famous work is specially against me where in he calleth me the chief setterfurth of the articles concluded in this realm/ against the marriage of priests/ Where in he speaketh like himself when the man sayeth further that Martin bucer asked me what scripture i had to prove that priests might not marry and this reporteth he also like himself/ And because he would seem to be privy unto the disputation between Martin bucer and me sum what he toucheth that was in our disputation spoken of/ but fasshoneth it like himself at the lest/ that i might know the man lieth even thoroughly/ Thus he reporteth my reason made to bucer/ The same authority hath the king over all priests of his realm and his other subjects that a father hath over his children/ but a father may forbid the priests of his realm to marry then if they marry when he forbiddeth them to marry/ they break the commandment of god who sayeth children obey your father and mother/ i trust no man would think i should have fashioned the argument in this wise/ for it hath no sequence in it/ And the father that hath but children in the maior/ i have given him a Realm and his children priests in the minor. And then in the conclusion/ i have forgotten the king that i spoke of/ and speak only of the father/ whose matter is much what in like perplexite rehearsed as an honest simple man's example was of Johan that married alice & robert that married an/ in process of the matter called an Johannis wife/ and joined to Robert which the audience heard merely and called it plain adulteri/ And after this sort wraghton hath wranglyngly rehearsed my argument/ Then by your oun own confession it was your argument. And then he gathered thes conclusions/ first that a king may forbid all marriage/ second that ones marriage of priests was law●●● be for the thing for bad it/ Thirdly that the Prince maketh sin that before was no sin with god/ To which conclusiones i will answer when i have truly rehearsed my communication with bucer.  The hunter 
Ye accuse me with out & cause for the unhandsome rehearsal of your argument for i wrote your argument in thes words as my written copy can yet be a witness/ The same authority hath the king over all the Priests and other subjects of his Realm that a father hath over his children/ But a father may forbid his children to marry/ ergo the king may forbid the priests and other subjects of his Realm to marry/ Where as it was other ways printed the composer and corrector was to blame and not i which was not present at that time.  The reseuer 
With whom upon the desire he had to confer with me i told him i was glad to speak. Who when he came to me after the manner of Germany made along oration unto me containing only the zeal he had to the truth for trying out where of/ he said he was desirous to talk with me/ I told him i was glad to hear him speak so indifferently. But for as much/ al● 〈…〉/ Where by to press one an other 〈◊〉 clearly taken away by dissension/ I told him that scripture was out of authority/ to any one part/ because both parts would apply to their party/ their own interpretation and there in stand obstinately.  The hunter 
Mark here the crafty subtility of this wily fox. Be doth as a fox of the wood should do if he should bid a great lion battal and say to him/ Brother lion thou and i must fight/ but be fore we go together thou must pull out of thy month all thy long teeth/ and cut of thy tail and thy long claws/ for where as we have been oft before this time at strife yet could we never debate the matter and bring it unto a peaceable conclusion by the trial of ●eth tale and claws/ but ever went away the matter being undehated/ I counsel therefore that we tri this matter by the cares/ Even so this fox gardener perceiving himself so far under Bucer in learning as a fox is under a lion in streynghe/ before he would dispute with Bucer he would make him by craft set a side his weapons the word of god which the fox gardener can not abide that he might set upon him once disharnessed and unwepened/ As for our party the Scripture is/ not out of authority/ which ●●ll/ that all doctrines shall be tried there 〈◊〉▪ But as for your party/ the Scripture is 〈◊〉 authority in deed/ for ye lean more to traditiones of men/ to the custom/ and to General councils then to the Scripture/ where we allege bibite ex hoc omnes for the hole supper/ and qui se non continent contrahant matrimonium, ye will not hear the Scripture but as an aspis stop your ears lest ye should hear the Scripture.  The rescuer 
The spretis defamed by the anabaptists/ miracles their be none wrought/ each part be sinners/ & the Doctores of the church when they made against them/ they called them men/ & esteemed them not/ and therefore i said for want of authority to prove/ i would use Sacrates manner of disputing with him/ & preshym/ which he should himself grant/ he said he was content/ Then i asked him where in/ and he said he cared not/ but he thought/ that the marriage of priests was very cruelly handled/ to forbidden it sub poena mortis. I told he was a sore adversary in this because the matter touched himself how be it the king's maiesti might forbid it/ of the pain i would reason with him afterward/ and doubted not but the extremity of pain was in respect of the multitude mercifully to keep them by fear/ from danger/ rather than cruel as he calleth it. Why quoth Bucer how can the king forbidden it/ i told him then/ ere i entered the matter with him/ de iure divino: i would ask him this question what he meant by this precept/ Honora patrem & matrem, whether the son breaking his father's commandment in such athing as the father might command/ brak the commandment of god or no. Bucer answered yis. I asked him then/ whether pater was understand only of father in nature/ or sather in government/ Also he said of the father in government/ also then quoth i by you/ The Prince hath the same authority to command over his subjects that the father hath toward his children/ He granted that also/ Then upon it that he had granted i fasshoned my argument/ Then is it your argument/ The Prince hath the same pour of commandment & order of his subjects that the father hath over his children/ But by saint Poule the father may order sum of his children not to marry/ ergo the Prince may order sum of his subjects not to marry/ Bucere by and by denied the minor/ We turned to the place of saint Paul/ we red the text which is plain that the father may so do/ at the which text Bucer so stumbled and stayed/ much contrari to my expectation/ as though he had never read it before. And because alisius the scot was by and hither to spoke nothing/ Bucer took the book to alisius & bad him speak his mind/ where unto alisius went to the first part of the chapter/ out of our purpose/ which the said alisius understood so foolishly that there upon rose a new communication/ in which were interlaced/ many matters which Bucer and i afterwards entreated by writing/ where in this argument of the father was not yet answered/ and therein on my part the marriage of priests to be forbidden de iure divino, so defended (how so ever it liketh master wraghton to have me accounted unlearned and so perversely to set forth the argument) that neither he ne Bucer can yet assoil. And i see no cause to yield to Bucere there in.  The hunter 
Because this long narration of your clerkly behaving of yourself with Martin Bucere pertaineth very little to the answer that ye should make me/ & is nothing against me/ i will reason nothing of it/ But where as ye say that neither Bucer nor i have assoiled your argument/ let them judge which have red my former book/ But lest i should dissemble your argument/ and pretend as i read it not as ye have done to shamefully oft in this book of yours/ I will answer to your argument and if god will/ assoil it also. therefore let us rehearse your argument where with ye would have proved that preftes by the law of god may not marry. The Prince hath the same pour of commandment and order of his subjects that the father hath over his children/ But by saint Paul the father may order sum of his children not to marry/ ergo the Prince may order sum of his subjects not tomary/ As for your mayor that a Prince hath the same pour of commandment/ and order of his subjects that the father hath over his children's/ I grant it is true if it be plainly and simply thus understand/ The Prince in all such matters as he long unto him/ hath the same pour of commandment and order of his subjects that a father hath over his children that is as the father in his house hath authority to command his children in all things that are godly & for the profit of his children/ So hath the Prince authority in his Ream in all such matters as be long to a Prince to be orderers of/ over his subjects to command them to their profit to the glori of god & to the wealth of his Realm/ But if ye make no exception your mayor is not always true/ for if the Prince hath the same pour of commandment over all his subjects that/ a father hath to command his children/ When the father and children are with in the Prince's dominion the children are the Princes subjects/ Then when as the father (as ye say) hath authority to command certain of his children either to marry or not marry at his pleasure/ if he commanded Thomas and johan to marry/ and the Prince commanded the same not to marry/ by your mayor it were both sin for Thomas and johan to marry/ and sin to not marry/ for if they married they broke the Prince's commandment/ and so sinned/ if they married not they broke their father's commandment/ therefore tell us whether ye mean by the word same like or the self same/ and tell whether ye make an exception or none/ As for your minor/ that by saint Paul a father may order sum of his children not to marry/ if ye understand it so that he may forbid certain of his children that they shall never marry as long as they live/ I deny your minor/ & put you unto the proof of it/ ye say that it is plain by saint Paul/ & the 7. chapter is quoted in the mergen/ howbeit when as i red over the hole chapter i could find never one word that gave any such authority of commandment/ but very much to the contrari part/ as here after i shall declare/ Ye should therefore have showed us the place and have made an argument there of/ Why have ye not showed us the text/ that maketh so mich for your purpose? Belike ye would as gladly have showed it as ye did show us much glorious and superfluous boasting but that ye were afraid that/ if it were seen/ men of learning and judgement should dame it to make nothing for your purpose/ But for all the hiding of it/ i trust i shall find it out that ye mean of/ A learned man of Germany writeth that ye alleged this text of Paul for your purpose. Be that standeth stead fast in his heart/ having no necessity/ but pour of his own will/ and hath determined that/ in his heart to keep his virgin doth well/ and so he that marrieth his virgin doth well but he that marrieth her not doth better. If this be not the place that ye mean of/ show an other & we shall answer to it as well as we can/ If this be the place form an argument of the text for your purpose and it shall be answered/ And in the mean season i shall prove by evident and clear places of scripture that a father hath no authority to command his children to live all their life time with out marriage/ I shall also prove by ij. learned Doctores which turned Paul out of Greek in to Latin/ which knew the phrase of Paul as well as ye do/ and understood the text as well also that this text maketh nothing for your purpose jerom expounding the same text sayeth thes words/ Ille firmus statuit cuius puellae consensus Patris firmavit voluntatem, He purposeth steadfast whose madens consent hath confirmed the fathers will/ Then by saint Jerome the consent of the made is required with out which the father can orden nothing. Erasmus in his paraphrasi upon the same place writeth thus/ If any man perceiving that he hath liberti to be stow in marriage his virgin or not to bestow her/ and is not compelled by need to either of both/ and hath determined and purposed in his mind to keep his virgin at home which desireth no marriage/ doth right/ for as it is ieperdous to hold her from marriage that is desyrons of marriage/ so it is ungodly to discourage madens minds from the desire and vow of chastity. Ambrose writing upon the same place sayeth. Hoc dicit ut qui virginem habet cui animus ad nuptias non est, servet illam nec illi ingerat fomitem nuptiarum quam videt nubendi voluntatem non habere, This doth he say that he that hath a virgin not minded to marry should keep her and not in tyse her to marriage whom he perceyvedh is not willing to marry/ ye have heard the Doctors now let us see what resones we can fet out of the Scripture/ What so ever authority of order or commandment Paul giveth unto fathers that same hath he received of the lord/ But he sayeth in the seven. chapter of the former Epistel to the corinthians/ that he hath no commandment at all of the lord concerning virgins/ De Virginibus praeceptum Domini non habeo. Therefore have fathers no authority given them of Paul to command their children not to marry/ for noman can receive of Paul it that he hath not/ but he hath no precept or commandment of virginity/ Then can none have that authority of him/ then is it not plain by Paul that a father may command sum of his children not to marry. When Paul which hath as much authority as any other apostle/ and hath received of god as much authority for fathers to their children as any other apostle/ yi● received no authority of god to give fathers where by they might command they children to be virgins/ ye may be sure that/ there is no other apostle that granteth father's authority to command their children to be virgins and to live with out marriage. If that the Prince have the same authority over his subjects concerning marriage that a father hath over his children/ I will reason with you thus/ Where ye say the father hath authority to command certain of his children that they shall never marry/ i axe you whether by thes certain ye mean Richard/ Robert/ and Rolland/ only or all that he list to forbid to marry what soever they be and of what soever name. If that ye grant that the father hath authority to command whom soever of his children he lift to abstain from marriage/ and he Prince hath the same authority over his subjects that a father hath over his children/ then may the Prince forbidden all the lay-men to marry as he hath forbidden the priests/ Also it followeth that when the prince may so order all his subjects by the law of god as a father may order all his children by the law of god/ and a father by the law of god may order all his children to marry/ ergo then may a Prince order all his subjects by the law of god to marry/ but all the priests of this Realm are the Prince's subjects ergo he may order them all by then law of god to marry. Where is now master bishop your bragging de iure divino that a pressed may not may? Doth it not now foow by your oun saying that a priest might marry lby the law of god if the Prince would so order priests & bid them marry? Ye must either bring forth sum other reason or scripture or else priests may marry iure divino by the law of god/ If ye say that therefore the marriage of priests is forbidden iure divino by the law of god be cause the Prince forbidden/ death priests to marry then if the king of france forbade men to eat oystens on the friday and flesh on the sunday/ it were forbidden iure divino to eat oysters on the frayday and flesh on the sunday and so might it be lawful to day and to morrow is deadly sin/ That it is no sin for a pressed to marry & that the forbidding of the marriage of priests is no law of god i will prove it more at large that all the nobles and comones of england may see how shamefully ye mokked them/ bearing them in hand that it was sin/ and forbidden by God's law that a pressed should marry/ first that it is no sin by the law of god i prove it thus/ All sin and all thing that is unlawful is forbidden by the law of god/ Paul sayeth Roman. iij. by the law is sin known/ and Rom. seven. I knew not sin but thorough the law/ that is throw the law of god/ But the marriage of priests is not fotbydden by the law of god/ for Aron and Zacharias testify that it was not forbidden in the old Testament/ Paul unto Timothe and Titus witnesseth in thes word a Bishop must be the husband of one wife that marriage of priests is not forbidden in the new Testament / and allthing that is either bidden or forbidden is forbidden either in the new Testament or in the old/ but ye see it is forbidden in neither/ of both/ therefore it is no sin by the law of god for a pressed to marry. If that the law of forbidding of priests marriages were the law of god/ as ye say/ then it should be general to all countries & the transgression of that law should every where be elyke sin/ but in Grecia/ and in Denmark/ and in hic Germany it is no sin for a pressed to marry/ both be cause they make no vows/ and because the Princes forbidden not there priests to mary. Then is not the forbidding of priests marriages the law of god/ but contrary to the law of god as i shall prove it thus/ It is contrary to the law of god to forbid in pain of death that god commanded in pain of damnation/ but they that forbidden many that cannot leave chaste with out marriage/ to marry forbidden that god commanded for he said by his servant Paul if they live not chaste let them marry/ If ye will that i shall say if they can not line chaste let them marry/ then are their sum that can not line chaste/ If that all the priests should be bound to marry that keep not themselves chaste/ few priests should live single/ Then is it against God's law to forbid all priests to marry namely them that keep not themselves chaste and have not the gift of chastity. If that ye say all that will/ may have the gift of chastity/ for the a●yng according to that which is said what so ever ye axe the father in my name he will give you it/ i answer first/ that this text is to be understand that what soever as man asketh of god which is necessari unto salvation that he will grant him the same/ But when as those things are asked that are not necessari for salvation the askers though they be good men get not at all times of god their asking/ as Paul when he asked thrice of god that he would take from him the prick of the flesh obtained not his asking not withstanding that Christ said what soever ye ask the father in my name/ that shall he give you and why? because that it that he axed was not necessari unto him for his salvation. Then when as the gift of chastity to live honestly with out a companion/ is not necessari unto salvation/ for many men have been saved with out that gift/ god by the foresaid promise is not bound to grant every one it that axe it of him. And that every man is not ordained to receive that gift/ christ our saviour beareth witness/ in the nineteen. chapter of Matthew in thes words speaking of them that might live honestly with out a wife/ All men are not able to receive that word/ but they to whom it is given/ And Paul in the seventh chaprer of the i to the corinthians/ sayeth i would all men were as i am/ but every man hath his proper gift of god/ one so and an other so/ that is one man hath the gift of god to live chaste with out the use of marriage and an other hath it not. That all priests which are commanded in pain of death to live with out wives/ have not the gift of chastity/ neither can have it not only an c priests in england will swear it/ but also the example of following of galba/ doth sufficiently testify. They were ones in Rome about to make alaw that who see ever should be taken in adultery/ that his priuttes should be cut away from him with an hot burning iron/ sed Galba negabat, said Borace/ Galba would none of that/ because he either intended to be anduonterer or else thought that he cold nos choose but be an ad●o●ter. Then wh●● as their are sum that the pope compelleth to to vow chastity which have not that gift/ forbiddeth that Christ commandeth and therefore is Antichrist/ and ye bishops defending his doctrine are limbs of Antechriste/ and as long as that Popish doctrine of the pope abideth in england so long is not the pope driven out of england.  The rescuer 
And now to master wragheonis conclusiones/ Because i made this argument/ Then is it your argument/ Shalhe say that i admit Princes may destroy marriage/ as thought that which upon consideration may be good in sum/ shall be absolutely allowed in all/ They that commanded virginity most/ would not have all virgins ne saint Paul that wisheth all to be as he himself/ intended not thereby the destruction of marriage/ althoghe himself were not married/ But such frantic conclusiones this unlearned arrogancy gathereth.  The hunter 
Whether my conclusiones follow of your minor or no/ i report me unto all then that have learned Logik or have any natural wit. I will form my argument ones again that they that have not my other book/ may see the argument here/ ye say. The same authority hath a Prince of order and commandment of his subjects that a father hath over his children/ But a father by saint Paul may order certain of his children not to marry/ ergo the Prince may order certain of his subjects not to marry. Tell me i pray you whether god hath appointed any children by name/ or any number of children that a father may forbid to marry/ or is it in the father's liberty to forbid whom soever he will to marry and so many as he will? What if he will forbid all his children to marry/ may he not forbid all? show what place of Scripture restraineth him that he may not as well forbidden all as one? The father hath the same pour of order and commandment over all his children/ that he hath over one/ but ye grant that he may command or order on of his children not to marry/ ergo/ he may order or command them all not to marry/ And the Prince hath the same authority over his subjects/ that a father hath over his children/ but a father may forbid all his children to marry/ ergo a Prince/ by your minor or may forbid all his subjects to marry/ for he hath as much authority of commandment over all his subjects/ as over a certain/ or else all were not so much bound to obey him as/ the certain of whom he had the authority of commandment over. Then it followeth thus. He that may forbid all the subjects of his Realm to marry/ may destroy marriage in his Realm/ But by your argument the Prince may forbid all the subjects of his Realm to marry/ therefore by your minor a Prince may destroy marriage in his Realm. Where ye say that they that commanded virginity most/ would not have all virgins/ i reckon that is the truest word that ye spoke in all this book/ for your father the pope which was the greatest commander of virginity/ of all other/ Hath allowed stews in Rome/ and suffereth beside women hores/ the filthiness of the other kind also/ And ye my lord prior of the green freris in the bank/ the greatest commander of virginity in the hole Realm of england/ therefore appoint with in your dominion and lordship an hole street fore open bandry/ and keep a comonstewes/ that their should not be to many virgins but if there be any young madens or young men/ that are disposed to depose and give over their virginity/ they may their offer it up to priapus. And so is it true that they that commanded virginity moste would not have all virgins. Where as ye say that saint Paul though he were not married/ and yet wished that all were as he was not with standing would not destroy marriage/ i say the contrari/ for i say if Paul were a virgin & wished all men to be as he was/ that is a virgin/ then wished he that there should be no father nor mother/ for fathers and mothers are no virgins/ and that no married fol should be but all virgins. Then would he with that wish that marriage were destroyed. But that would not saint Paul therefore ye understand not saint Paul as ye should do/ for Poule had a wife and wished that all the corinthians which anaunced themselves of virginity and widowhede could live chaste with out a woman as he did/ which lest his wife in an other place/ than where he preached/ and that all men were with out care as he was/ which thing commonly followeth marriage. But where as ye knok me on the pate/ and lay unlearned arroganci to my charge/ let us now try it whether you or i am more worthy to be accused of unlearned arrogance/ Ye say that Paul wss not married/ and i hold that he was married/ how shall this matter be best discussed? I know no better means then to call to witness sum that were either alive in Paul'S time or elliss were very near his time/ I call for witnesses ignacius & Clement that Paul had a wife/ Now hear the witnesses speak/ Eusebius in the third book of the Ecclesiastical story in the third chapter reporteth Clementes words thus. Clement whose words/ we have here marked/ writing against them which despise marriage/ sayeth thes words. Do they also disallow the apostles/ for Peter and Philip had wives and gave their daughters to be married unto men/ but also Paul the apostle/ is not ashamed to make mention in a certain Epistel/ of his make or companion and to great her/ whom he sayeth he led not about with him that he might be more ready/ and combreles to preach the gospel. Erasmus in his annotationes upon the iiij. chapter of the Epistel to the Philippianes reporteth the witness of ignatius in this wise. The holy martyr ignatius in an Epistel/ to the Philadelphianes doth plainly grant/ that not only Peter/ but also Paul and other of the apostles had wives/ & that he had them in noless reputation therefore/ because/ the patriarchs/ & Prophets was married/ not for their lustis sake but for childer's sake/ Chrysostom granteth that there were sum which reckoned that Paul in this place did speak unto his wife/ but he dissenteth/ showing no cause of his dissension/ But to whom is it more right that we should stik to Clement and ignatius/ of the which the one was saint Peter's companion/ and the other was saint marks the Evangelists disciple/ or shall we believe better Chrysostom/ which was so long a space after the apostles time? thus far Erasmus/ Letoy indifferent men judge now whether i that bring authority for me/ or ye that pronounce boldly by guess with out all reason and authority/ are more worthy to be accused of arrogant ignorance.  The rescuer 
The second conclusion is as wise/ that i grant by this argument that priests might have married/ if the Prince had not forbidden it. If i prove that priests may not marry/ because of their vow do i therefore grant that the vow faling they might marry? If i took upon me to prove that one oweth me money/ for my labour/ because he promised me/ doth this infer this conclusione that if he had not promised me/ he had aught me nothing for my labour?  The hunter 
There is away from a village to the marcat town over a bridge/ over the which all men with out any toll had wont ever to go to the mercat/ the lord of the village upon a mercat day set one of his servants on the bridge to stop every man to go over that bridge that would not/ for his passage pay vj. d. in the year/ the servant letteth none pass but them that promise to pay vj. d. The poor men be cause they must needs go to mercat/ to sell their corn to get them alyving there with/ promis all to pay that he requireth/ At the day appointed for the receiving of this money/ he by his servant commandeth them to pay the vj. d. and requireth the money also by thyer promis/ whether is this gentle man only the cause of paying this money/ or he is both cause of promising and of paying of it also? If this gentle man had not required of them neither to promise this money nor to pay it/ the poor men might have gone as well toolfre/ to the market as they had wont to do before their lords new request and commandment. Even so is it between the Prince and the priests. For by whose authority/ do ye require of every one that cometh to you for orders of subdecon decon and presihode/ the vow of chastity? By the authority of god or by the authority of the Prince/ ye can show no authority that ye have of god to require of all that shall take those orders/ the vow of chastity. If that ye do it by the authority of the king than it is the lyngiss commandment that ye shall require of every one that shall be subdecone decone and Pressed to vow chastity. Then when it is the kings commandment that this vow shallbe required/ which would not have been offered/ if it had not been required/ and the king commandeth all them/ of whom he commanded you bishops that the vow should be required of/ to keep their vow that is to live single with out wives all their lives/ the vow of chastity concerning priests is as well The king's commandment as the forbidding of marriage is. Then where as i reason/ if therefore the marriage of priests be unlawful because the king forbid them it/ th' if the king would not forbid it it should not be unlawful/ & ye say that it is unlawful also because they have vowed chastity/ i say that if followeth never the les of your saying that if the Prince would not command bishops to require of subdecones decones and priests/ the vow of chastity/ and commanded not the priests to live with out wives that it were not contrari to the law of god for a pressed to marry/ Answer me/ when bishops require no vows/ and priests make no vows and the king forbiddeth no pressed to marry/ why may not a pressed then/ marry? How is it then de iure divino? A man that will take heed may espy that your spirit is an unconstant spirit/ for in sum places when ye are axed in england/ why that priests may not marry/ ye answer that they may not marry be cause they are forbidden by the law of god/ in Germany ye answer that they may not marry because the Prince forbiddeth them to marry/ & in your Catechisine ye show this cause that priests may not marry/ Matrimoni is left at liberty to all men saving priests & other/ which of their fire liberti/ by vow advisedly made/ have chosen the state of continenci. Seem ye not here to say that only the vow hindereth priests and such other to marry? In this place ye make no mention that they are forbidden by God's law/ neither make ye any mention that the forbidding of the Prince hindereth them to marry. Bear do ye play as a fox doth when he is chased out of on hole which rumneth in to an other/ and when that serveth not flieth in to the third. If that ye can bring no other cause that priests should not marry but because they have made a wilful or a fire vow/ I will prove that the vow is neither fire nor wilful but constrained by compulsion/ if not in all the votaries and priests that are this day in england/ at lest in a great number namely in all them that would not have vowed if the vow had not been required of them/ which if i bring to pass there shall no voluntari vow hinder priests & such like to marry. Now to the purpose Nothing is free that is constrained by a commandment to on way/ but the vow of chastity is constrained whiles it is commanded by the Prince to be required of all subdecones decones and priests/ & that they shall live with out wives/ ergo the vows of subdecones decones & priests are not free/ If that ye answer that subdecones decones and priests may chus whether they will be votaries or no before they be decones subdecones or priests/ i say/ it that/ a a man avoideth before he is subdecon/ avoideth not being onis made subdecon/ then when there is no subdecon but he is a votari/ and must either not be subdecon or elliss be avorary/ how can a subdecon avoid the vow? and so with decones and priests/ If that ye say then when men know that the vow is indivisible coupled with priesthood/ all men may chus whether they will be priests or no/ and so is the vow free/ i answer that where so ever the gospel of Christ is/ there must nediss be preachers there of/ and ministers of the Sacraments whom ye call priests/ It that must be/ can not be avoided/ but there must be priests in england/ then are their sum that can not avoid but be priests upon whom soever the lot falleth/ christ commandeth in every Christian Realm that his gospel shall be preached/ and his sacraments shall be ministered/ & when as the ministeri is commanded to be/ it is therbi commanded that there shall be ministers of the same/ then christ commanding that his word shall be prea ch/ commandeth that their shall be certain ministers of it/ and of all the same that Christ commandeth to be his ministers the Prince commandeth you to require the vow of chastity/ & ye will not suffer them that Christ sendeth to be his ministers/ to be admitted to their office/ except they make unto you the vow of chastity/ then it is false that ye said that all men might choose whether they would be votaries or no/ & that all men might choose whether they would be priests or no/ for when as there must be priests/ and the vow of chastity must be required of the same/ of them then that must be priests/ the vow can not be avoded/ what free election and liberti is this? Apore scolare of cambridge is brought up of a child till he be xxiv. year old in learning and canno still of any occupation saving only of learning/ he is a fellow of a college whose statutes require that at the depar ting of one pressed an other shall succeed in his room/ that a certain number of priests may be ever in the college/ on ●lder is beneficed/ & this scolar is eldest and must either be pressed and so becum a votari/ or else he must lose his living in the college/ If he could choose he would not forswear marriage and be a votari/ but for fear of jesing his living he taketh the vow that is offered him/ and so is avotari/ is not this man compelled to be a votari by lady ponerty? The men of monstrel after long besegement pretending to give up the ceti/ let in at their gates so many of our men as they thought they might overcome/ and when they were in/ let doum/ the port culles & killed an c. of our men/ The capitane being there with sore grieved/ incoraging his men setteth mor freshly on the citi then he did before/ and he perceiving that he is able to win the citi by force/ asketh them if they will give over the citi to him and in that condition will let him have an c. men to order at his pleasure to slay them or to do with them what he list/ that all the rest of the citi mayescape or that they will stand to their adventure/ to be filled every mother's son/ They perceiving that they can hold the citi no longer grant the captain his request and give up the citi unto him. He is fully purposed be fore the c. men be chosen out or appointed/ to make bond men of them all. And to make every on of them swear unto him that they shall be his true bond men. An c. men are either chosen out by lotes/ or offer themselves up for the safeguard of the citi/ to the capitane/ he maketh them all swear to be his true bond men as long as they live/ They do swear/ May all thes if they will avoid the oath of bondage? is their one among all thes that can choose but he must be a bondman? Non at all/ so can no more the priests of england avoid the vow of chastity/ for as fully as this capitane is purposed to require of all them that shall offer themselves or shall be offered up unto him/ the oath and promise of bondage/ so fully are ye minded to require the vow of chastity of all them that god sendeth to you to make priests of/ and all them that arsent of themselves or of their friends to you to be ordered. Therefore the vow of chastity that all the subdecones decones and priests make in England/ is servile full of bondage/ constrained and compulsed/ in all them that would not have vowed chastity if no vow had been required. Take now the sum of all our similitudes in this argument. That which is all ways coupled/ and inseparablely joined unto a thing/ cannot be avoided of him that shall take that thing/ as he that will take aloe and lay it on his tongue he can not avoid the bitterness of the same/ but the vow of chastity is always copled/ and inseparably joined to the orders of subdecon decon and prestode ergo noman that will take the order of subdecon decon or prestehod can a woyde the vow of chastity/ But nothing is free that cannot be avoided/ and the vow of chastity that the priests decones and subdecones take cannot be avoided/ ergo the vou of chastity that subdecones decones & priests make is not free/ Answer to the parts of my argument as i have answered to the prates of yours/ But if ye cannot answer/ give over your hold or else/ in the stead of an answer chide scold & brawl as ye use commonly to do when ye have no argument nor resonto help yourself: with all.  The rescuer 
The third conclusione is the self same with the second/ in other terms that by me marriage of priests was no sin before god till the king's maiesti/ made it sin before god. Bucer was of an other mind that if the prince might command/ it was before a sin a fore god to do the contrari/ for he said Princes might only command that god had ordained/ to be commanded/ where in he swerved from that he had first granted me/ where upon i reasoned/ i have his writing to show/ where in shall apere i had more Scripture to show for the purpose/ i spoke of then such as i communed with could well resolve when they were touched with them.  The hunter 
●o fresh men to the helm/ for this Bishop can make me no answer/ What is this to the purpose to tell us here of Martin buceris mind/ A learned man in Scripture would have told us his mind/ and not have said Bucer was of that mind/ It will make wise men laugh at your arrogance & boasting ignorance to bear you so gloriously to crak of the plenty of Scripture that ye had at the counsel and to see how bare ye be in writing/ having in a manner no more places of Scripture to dispute with in every matter/ them thes ij. texts honour thy father & mother/ & every soul obey the high powers. With which texts ye play as a certain Sophister did with cuiuslibet contradictionis altera pars est vera, & as an unlearned painter did which could paint nothing elliss but a cypressire/ which when any man can to him to have any thing painted/ said ever out of season/ will ye have any thing of the cypress tree.  The rescuer 
I will reason no more with this hunter that wanteth all reason.  The hunter 
I heard no reason of you hither to/ therefore ye leave of/ before ye begin/ and because ye neither will nor can reason with the hunter/ ye will chide with him/ scold/ belie him/ befool him/ & all to defile him with the dirt & sklanderous mire of your lies/ following in this point certain unclean birds/ which when they can not make their party good with the hawk all to bewray the hawk with their stinking & burning dung.  The rescuer 
He rangeth in a licentious liberti/ and bresteth in to this church of england/ under colour to hunt the fox/ and ranchseth and halloweth at every dear.  The hunter 
I never knew a right der having such a long tale as ye have and so gorgeous/ neither Peter nor Poule neither any good Bishop had at any time such a pompose tale as ye have/ therefore i take you for no right dear/ but for a proud ij. footed fox/ and so i hollow at no dear but at the fox & his generation/ There are many/ in England that are no foxes but right red dear which would gladly hunt the fox with me if they durst.  The rescuer 
With a purpose to drive all godliness/ all semelynes/ all religions and devout behaviour out of the park.  The hunter 
I intent to drive only out of the park the fox of Rome with his ceremonies & traditiones which ye grant he hath made/ All that have red my book can bear me witness that i have not written one word against god/ or any law or ordinance that god made/ where upon it followeth by your saying that their is no godliness/ no semelynes neither any religious or devout behaviour in God's law/ for if all godliness semelynes & religious behaviour be driven away when the pope with his ceremonies & ordinances is driven away/ i pray you what godliness or semelynes remaineth for Christ & his word which abideth after that the pope and his word is driven away? Is not this to make a god of the pope? Yis surely/ All godliness & seemly behaviour is only in god/ but ye say that in driving away the pope & his ordinances i drive away all godliness & semelynes/ therefore by your saying the pope & his ordinances are god/ If ye be not a papist & an Heretic there is none in the realm of england/ which praise so greatly the pope and his traditiones/ & contrari to the Scripture make a god of him.  The rescuer 
He beginneth with the kings maiesti in alteration of his style/ and then at lerge calleth the hole realm thieves.  The hunter 
I trust that i have offended nothing against the kings style for i have given as much unto him in my book as may be given unto an earthly man/ And though i have not written the same words that ye have written i have written the same sentence/ if your meaning agree with the word of god/ Where ye say that i call all the hole realm thieves/ all that are true men and have red my book can testify the contrari/ for i call you only thieves which have stolen away Christis blessed chalice from the lay people/ and not them which have the theft committed against them.  The rescuer 
His chase is against the cross and all images/ he cannot abide lent and fridays/ he liketh no laws and ceremonies in the church allthoghe they be good. For priests wives he maketh a busy suit. He can not away with divine service/ in the Latin tongue which he utterly abhorreth.  The hunter 
If ye would not have given outward worship unto the cross/ and to images / i had never written so earnestly against them/ But when i see you so earnestly bend to defend the outward worship of them/ & the outward worship could not be taken away except the images were taken away also to the which the worship was done/ i thought that it should be best/ to speak against both together that the one might be taken away with the other. What offence is it to speak against the superstition of lent? All good laws & ceremonies do i allow/ it had been your de●●y to have proved once that ye have said so oft/ that the ceremonies which i have written against/ are good/ ye will belike pres me with your authority because ye are a doctor/ & would that we should be as well satisficed with your bonum est as the scolares of Pythagoras were content with ipse dixit. If ye like a doctor will confirm your saying with reason and scripture it shall be allowed/ but ye will bring no other reason neither authority than ulysses mace/ and your oun saying for all your velvet coats and gilded spurs/ we regard your saying no more than the voice of a dotterel for all that ye be a doctor/ though ye cri good, good good till ye be weary. Call ye argument brought out of the scripture/ to prove that priests may marry suit for priests▪ wives? Well i am content let it be so/ i make suit that priests may have wives/ & ye have made suit that priests may thrice with out peril of life lie with hores/ whose suit is more honest? I can well away with divine service/ but much of it that ye call divine service is superstition idolatri and the devels service. And the Latin tongue i love as well as you/ but i would have it spoken to them & before them that understand it/ & not to the lay people that understand it not & there for get no profit by the hearing of it.  The rescuer 
He hath be like a meruelons platform in his heed to build that he would rid Christis Religion of all thes ornaments/ Calleth he this the hunting of the fox and Romish fox? Rather goeth the fox a huntynge. The best is the man hunteth by day/ and declareth for so much what he is/ only hiding who he is for wragh ton me seemeth should not be his name.  The hunter 
The ornaments of Christ's church are the word of god which ye will not suffer lay men to read in the church/ the Sacraments which ye both pare and forbid/ faith whose commenders ye note for heretics/ hope & charity/ preaching of the word of god which ye moke/ and call it talking/ the ryghe reconciling of them that are at discord/ and the excommunication of stubborn sinners/ are the ornaments of the church which i would have restored again to the church by you and your fellows that have stolen them out of Christ's church & in the stead of them have set in the church a plain boys play of vain ceremonies & have filled the church/ with candles/ tapers/ images/ salt/ water/ ashes/ bows/ and a great sort more of such other trifles/ are thes the ornaments of Christ's church? Nay they are the lakens that the pope hath given the people to play with all/ that they should not cry for the word of god/ Now this is the fourth time that ye have been busy about to seek an other name that should be mine then wraghton/ & because i set no other name to my book ye call me a masker/ The six articles/ and your Catechismi which is called the kings book is of your making as every man can tell/ that hath heard you preach or hath read your other writings/ and yet ye set not your name to them and so under the viser of the kings acts and the kings book ye cover & set out/ nay by force violently thirst in to all men's hands ye & in to the church of Christ even up to the pulpit your Popish coniurynges/ foolish dreams/ rotten ceremonies/ and idle ordinances/ who is now a masker if ye be none? Also to this your book ye have set no name at all/ and yet ye will be no masker/ I have set my surname unto my work/ where by my ancettores have been named in time past/ what if sum have called me by an other name (as ye give me many new names in your book) may not i use the name that i know my ancettores have used before me/ therefore? Your ancettoures have not ever been called gardiner's sense the beginning. What if your great grand father when he was a young man & could lustily follow the ●y●he/ were called Robin Raker/ and when he waxed aged and began to be unlusty/ were made the keeper of sum goodmannis gardin/ & from thence forth were called Robin gardener/ might not ye call yourself knowing this/ Steven Raker? Then why are ye so offended that i name myself as i know my ancettores have been named in time past? I am as well known in england by my name. W. Wraghton to be a true man as ye are known by your name steven winton in Germani to be a popish heretic.  The rescuer 
But what so ever the kindred name of the man is he may have pleynty of other names/ for whether aman call him fool/ proud arrogant/ glorious disdainful/ spitful/ hayt full/ unlearned/ untaught/ busy/ partly liar/ wrangler/ seditious/ malicious/ or many other of that sort/ he can not speak amiss.  The hunter 
As the maned ox banasius perceiving that his horns are so crooked in ward that he can neither hurt the hunter's hundes with them/ nor yet defend himself with them/ as sound as he beginneth to run away/ casteth the space of iij. paces from him/ so hot dung upon the hundes that follow him that wheresoever it lighteth it bringeth of the hear/ so this fox and foxis defender/ now at the end of his book/ ready to run away be cause he cannot defend himself with his natural wit/ which is neither strong i noghe to overcome God's truth neither to defend open idolatri/ as he runneth way & dare not try the matter with authority argument or reason/ all to defileth me with the dung of high niknames/ and sayeth that i may have names cnow/ as worse lightly no man can devise/ Of whom may i have all thes names? of him that hath them/ or of him that hath them not? If thes names may be had all of this Bishop/ what a treasure hath he out of which he can bring out such pleynty of naughtiness/ what an heart hath he that sendeth out such fruits? what a well is this that sendeth out such water as this is? I intent not to scold with you neither to strive with you in dogs eloquence/ where in i give you place and take you for my better. Therefore i will not go about to give you so many names again/ but i will as my duty is/ give you the tenth name again be cause ye are a pressed/ which is busy/ ye will teach cambrige men to pronunce Greek/ brewer's to make bear/ tailors to make garments/ cooks to dress meet/ in bruges ye dissuade men from the Doctrine/ of the Germans/ sum time ye play the knight of the garter/ sumtym the examiner and sometime the judge and accuser both together/ sometime the purue your/ sometime the preacher and other while the Sacrificier in summa allthing saving the good divine which is most required in a Bishop. Now when as ye intermeddle with thes matters which long not unto your vocation / and therefore are more busy than i/ i give you that name again for tithe/ till ye have turned your conditions/ as for your other namesis trust i am as well quite of them be this time as of busy.  The rescuer 
No man can speak here in farther/ then the man in his book will make/ god and a vow/ i would have spoken of heretic/ But he may not so be called till the book be ansured/ therefore he hath made a special request/ as i have before noted/ But now master hunter your hounds have run at riot/ and leaving the fox yearned/ only at the dear/ which in the king's maiestes clos ground/ with your maskery is felony all though ye speak so plainly as it may be accounted day. This is your fault so manifest/ and apparent as it exceedeth your pour to close or hide it. God give you grace to make a more fruit full suit to his goodness/ and to the kings majesty/ for your reconciliation to both their favours than your undiscrete suit in this hunting hath deserved.  The hunter 
I desired you goodman gardener (or else i lie) that ye should not be so rash as ye had wont to be/ to call me heretic with out a cause as ye did once in your hall right proudly because i wear a cloak and a hat of the new fashion/ But i could not get/ my request for ye have called me now twice Heretic and neiher have ye answered to my arguments neither showed me what Heresies i held neither have ye confuted any false Soctrine or Heresi that i hold therefore ye do wrong thus lyingly and falsely to sklander me. think you because that ye have taken it in a custom to call men Heretics god will take it for no sin? Is sin no sin because it is of● used? Well ye are a man in authority & may do what ye list/ and no man can have any right where ye bear rule. I must seek therefore for right of an higher pour/ But now have ye said that ye can say to defend the fox & that he is not in england/ how be it ye have profited nothing at all for ye have neither proved by reason nor scripture that the popis Soctrine which ye have taken in hand to defend/ is good or agreeing with the word of god. Nether have ye confuted my reasons which i brought in my former book against the popis learning which is now holden in england/ Therefore there is nothing to let me but that i may conclude in this book as i did in my former. Who soever holdeth still the pepis doctrine contrary to the word of god/ holdeth still the pope which is Antichhriste/ But ye hold still in england the popis doctrine contrarito the word of god/ therefore ye hold still in england the pope which is Antichrist. And this self doctrine do ye defend/ them are ye a defender of Antichrist. Every defender of Antichrist/ is Christis enemy and the kings/ But ye are a defender of Antichrist/ therefore ye are Christ's enemy & the king's. If that Christis enemy & the kings/ mought still occupi in england that occupation which maketh him Christis enemi & the kings/ with out forbidding or correction after that his fault is openly known/ The officers of england & governors under the king/ were not Christis friends & the kings/ But i trust they are Christis friends & the kings therefore/ i trust that they will at lest forbidden you/ your devilish occupation.  
God save the king.   

Twelve new erroneous articles of Stevengardinars creed taught in his book called the examination of the hunter.  
1 The ceremonies & traditions which the bishop of rome hath ordained/ and are now allowed in England are the pale of the church of england.  
2 The popis ceremonies and traditions/ are good and politic laws/ Wherbi god hath Enclosed the kings subjects under his magesti alone.  
3 As king Richard an evil man made a good politic law for the body & common wealth of england/ so can the pope an evil man make good laws & wholesome doctrine for man's soul & Christ's church.  
4 What so ever is good spoken and used by man is much mor of god/ then Christ's doctrine is his father's doctrine.  
5 He that sayeth that the law of the gospel ought only to be holden in Christ's church and is sufficient alone for it/ speaketh so far out of reason that he is not worthy to be reasoned with all.  
6 They that hold that the cross of silver or gold ought not to be worshipped with kissing of it & bowing & kneeling to it/ are enemies of Christ's true cross & take away the means that might set out the glori of Christis cross.  
7 Nether Paul nor the cross can be worshipped with godly honour.  
8 As Christ used clai for an instrument to heal the blindman's eyes withal and hath saved diverse by faith & made it an instrument of salvation/ & as god hath ordained Timothe to be an instrument of salvation both to himself & for other/ so may the pope orden halli water to be an instrument of salvation both of body and soul to all them that are sprinkled with it.  
9 No man can commit idolatry with his body alone & in only kissing of an image or idol/ and in only kneeling to it can no idolatry be committed.  
10 For as moche as god understandeth them that sing in Latin/ though they unsterstand not themselves there praer is acceptable be for god.  
11 As a father may forbid certain of his children to mari so may a king in his kingdom forbidden certain of his subjects to marry/ that is to say all the priests of his realm.  
12 He that would take a way the popis ceremonies out of the church/ should drive away all godliness/ and semlines/ all religius and denowt behaviour out of the church.   

The faults of this book. In the First sheet marked with. A.  
A. in the ij. leaf/ Strike out or. read god. A three read/ at whom an at &. A vj. read forth. fox own/ out pompous then give this answer. A seven. popis. A viii. benefits of the. for argeing read agreeing. B i read for broken abrogated & broken/ maketh governor. Scripture. B three read cast away/ unto receive/ received. B. iiij. sacrifice. B. v. long spirit & unto/ answer. B. vj. manteyners cannot. B. viii. bishop the rest. C. i popistri them/ now. C. iij. for xv/ read is. C. vj. good/ superstition. C. seven. for an. C. viii. it be nought/ cop/ gorgius. D. i. like ceremonies. D. ij. not. D. v. received. D. seven. is. F. i ad/ mea. F. ij. length/ andrew. F. iij. it read gave & not gavethe. F. v. an a. b. c. boy. F. viii. shameful against. G. ij. to rail. Babylon out of the gospel. G. iij. understanding. Content. G. iiij. sacraments that. G. v. signification. G. vj. out of the. behaviour. I. two. of water. I. v. disciples. L. j read for last/ fast. R. v. Basyl. Strausburg. L. j read for thing king. L. iiij. Children. L. v. show L. vj. the law. for may read marry. for oystens read oysters. L. viii. read privities/ an adulterer/ for prince read prince wraghtonis. M. iij. f or then it th'/ read them it then.   

Imprinted have at winchester Anno Domini 1545. 4. non as Martij. By me Hanse it prick.