THE PRINCIPAL POINTS OF THE FAITH OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.  
Defended against a writing sent to the King by the 4. Ministers of Charenton.  
BY THE MOST EMINENT.  
ARMAND JOHN DE PLESSIS CARDINAL DUKE DE RICHELIEV.  
Englished by M. C. Confessor to the English Nuns at Paris.  
AT PARIS.  
By SEBASTIEN CRAMOISY, Printer to the King.  
M.DC.XXXV.   

THE AUTHORS ESPIST. TO THE KING.  
SOVEREIGN, Knowing well that it beseems a Bishop to speak in the behalf of the Church and his King and seeing that the writing of the Ministers of Charenton made bold to address itself unto your Majesty both against the Catholic Church and by consequence, against your Majesty since that being her eldest son, her interests are yours, I judged it to be my duty not to remain silent, especially amongst such as triumphed, upon this occasion, as though forsooth, they had borne away some glorious victory over the Faith of our Ancestors.  
This was that (Sovereign) which invited me to employ my vacant time, to make the Church her innocence appear as glorious in your Majesty's sight, as she hath been represented unto you blame-worthy: and the Belief of her Accusers as pernicious, as they strive to have it esteemed holy.  
In the performance hereof I will use the greatest moderation that I can possibly; desiring, that as our Belief, and theirs with whom I am to deal, are contrary, so may also our manner of proceeding be. And in lieu of the bitterness by which they impose upon us sundry calumnies, we may render to them truth accompaigned with such sweetness that if they dispense with their passions, they may receive occasion of content.  
Thence they shalt know that our design is, to do them good, not evil: to cure, not to wound them: and that we are so fare from hating them as they pretend, that we do unfeignedly love them, and in such à measure, as that we hate not their Doctrine but by reason of the love which we bear unto their persons: being a thing impossible, that a man should not have in horror, the kinfe that murders his friend, and the poison which bereeves him of life.  
We love them (Sovereign) in so full a measure of Charity, that instead of wishing their hurt, as they misconceive, we most humbly petition to your Majesty to enrich them with your Royal favour, by endeavouring efficaciously to root up the errors which have taken deep root in their hearts, and to procure their conversion. And that they may not conceive that under pretext of their Good, it is their hurt that I aim at; and, that speaking of their conversion, I would incite your Majesty to force them unto it; I will assure your said Majesty, that the sweetest ways are those, which I apprehend most convenient to reclaim christian souls from error: Experience reaching us, that offentymes, violent remedies serve only the more to exasperate the maladies of the mind. By this means your Majesty corresponding to the glorious title of MOST CHRISTIAN, purchased by the piety of your Predecessors, shall publish yourself the most famous king in the world, and shall more and more establish à constant peace and repose in your dominions. It being indoubtedly true, that it is a thing incomparably greater to gain souls, then to conquer Kingdoms: And by how much more your subjects shall be united to God, by so much shall they be more surely addicted to your Majesty's service.  
Now whereas, in the diseases which do affect the parts noble, remedies are to be applied which are proper unto them; observing, that besides that heresy is as poison which of its own nature tends to the seizure of the hart, the Ministers, have particularly addressed their writing to your Majesty which is the hart that doth quicken this flourishing Realm, though I know, yea it is a thing known to the whole world, that the solidity of your faith preserves it from all peril, yet I conceived that my duty did engage me, to present unto him the Antidote which I hope will be so much more agreeable unto him, as my design, is to testify unto him by this action, that all the endeavours of my life, shall never have other aim then his service. It is the Protestation that he makes who is  
DREAD SOVEREIGN, Your Majesties, Most humble, most obedient, and most loyal subject and servant ARMAND BISHOP OF LUCON   

TO THE READER.  
Having learned of S. Augustine that it is a mere folly to speak without proof in matter of religion; 
Aug. l. 2. contra lit. Pitiliani cap. 29.  and seeing that the writing, which moved me to undertake this defence of the principal points of Faith, touched all questions, without proving any one, I was long time of opinion, that it rather merited to be despised then answered.  
But having understood (as it is the custom of the weak to triumph at small matters, and by cunning out of feigned advamtages, to publish victories which they obtained not) that the pretended Reformers of these parts, sent abroad this writing with a flourishing vogue, and diwlged every where, that it was an Arsenal, which within a little compass comprised all the engines requisite utterly to ruin the truth of Catholic religion; and considering with S. Hilaire by how many guiles, 
Hilar. in Psal. 64.  and subtleties heresy strives to pervert faith, I judged it better to reply, then pass it over in silence, and here upon I resolved to undertake this defence.  
My purpose is to discover.  
That the Ministers of Charenton. are ill grounded in all their pretensions.  
That they have all the reason in the world to commend our Kings, and no occasion at all to complain thereof as they do.  
That their Belief is not hared for the reasons they allege, though worthy of hatred, for many others, which cunningly they conceal.  
In conclusion, that the Catholic Church, her Ministers, and all those whom they accuse, remain free from the crimes which they impose upon them.  
To effect this, I have divided this book into 19 chap. in the first 14. I satisfy the Ministers writing from point to point. The other five are spent in deducing the reasons for which their doctrine ought to be abhorred of all the world.  
The Reader may please to know, that studying brevity in this my answer, I have no intent, to heap together all that might be said upon every point, and yet say enough too to make it impossible for our adversaries, to shake or move what I shall establish.  
Further let him know, that as often as I can possibly, I make use of their confession of Faith with whom I deal, and of the testimony of their own Authors, so that, without blushing and Lying both at once, they shall not be able to call in question the truth which I publish.  
I had tied myself to the only confession of their Faith, if I had found it as complete and entire as full of defects. But whereas they contain not half the points which are in controversy betwixt us and those too which they contain being expressed in an obscure, and reserved manner, I was forced to have recourse to their Authors; to Caluin and Luther amongst the rest, whose authority they cannot reject. Not Caluins, because they make themselues his followers in a peculiar manner; gathering out of his works, their confession, their Church-prayers, their Catechism, and the form of administering, their Sacraments. Nor Luther's, 
Coelum lib. de Arb nont Pigkium. Witak. ad rationem Campians.  since they esteem him the Apostle who reestablished the purity of the Gospel, and accnowlegde that those who embrace his doctrine, do but make up one Church together with them.  
I beseech the Ministers that if they answer me, they do it ingenuously, and give satisfaction to each point of this book, so that I may take as confessed all which they do not contest. I conjure, them that in their answer, they do either ingenuously confess what we hold, or at least, that they make their own defence without ambiguity in words. If they give us clearly to understand what their belief is, we shall be greatly obliged unto them, since we have ordinarily more difficulty to fish it out then to confute it: 
Hieron. ad Ctesiph. count. Pelag. Ecclesiae victoria est vos apertè dicere quod sentitis.  which thing S. Hierome had experienced in his time speaking to Heretics in these terms. It is a victory to the Church, for you to express in clear terms what you hold.  
To conclude, the Ministers may please not to esteem they have answered sufficiently, if, when I have alleged a passage of their anthours for a thing, they produce another of them who affirms the contrary; because they cannot thence conclude, that they taught not that which I pretend, but only confirm that it is the customary proceeding of Heretics to contradict one another.   

THE TRANSLATOR TO THE Gentle Reader.  
THis excellent piece in the opinions of all that read it, was the first sally of that excellent wit whom all that knows admires, and who knows him not that love's à subject of admiration? To comply with a holy and inbred hatred against Heresy (which from his childhood he always perceived in himself, and found with years to grow upon him) he made a retreat from the affairs of the Church and the state to serve them both more profitably. In that short leisure he conceived and brought to light this: conceived also an other, to wit à somme of all controversies, (which I have had the honour to see) wherein he hath drawn all the grounds of Catholic faith into form, making against them the best objections that could be found in any Author, and solued them also in form. This he performed with such assiduity, and earnestness of study, that his domestikes who were eye-wittnesses of it, will speak as much in favour of his singular industry, as others of his incomparable fullness of wit. Howbeit being by the interests of the Church called back from his perito his sword, 
Morinus à Pr. of. the Cong. of the Orat. of jesus in his Deed Ep. 1631.  he had not time to put it out to public view. But as I am a stranger in France, so am I a stranger in the knowledge of his praises. Take them then from such as know them. As learned they are able to judge: as Religious their judgement will be impartial: and I, lest I might mar their testimonies, will make them speak in their own words.  
Vostre eminente capacité qui n'a rien d'egal que vostre pieté, 
De Barrault Archbishope of Arles. Praised for his eminent capacity, equal piety, and Learned Works. Pauline à Pr. of the society in his Ep. to the Card. 1631.  que vous avez tant de fois employé, & employez encore tous les iours si vtilement à la gloire de Dieu, & au bien des aims. Et un peu apres. Les doctes liure; que vous mistes au iour, qui ont instruit & edifié toute la France.  
De liberalitate tua loquentur alij, qua tantis in fortunae copijs ac tantis opibus nihil est tuum. Quid porro moderationi tuae par est tantis in honoribus? haec ornabunt inquam alij, & animi tui victorias, 
He extols him for Liberality Moderation. Counsel.  & sagacissimae mentis praesensiones, & consilia, & dicta & facta persequentur tua, quibus ut omnes omnium retro saeculorum sapientes facilè antecedis, ita nullam posteris, non dicam assequendi, sed laudandi dumtaxat, & ornandi tui modum reliquisti.  
Vnum esse timendum bonis omnibus arbitror, 
Pauline à Pr. of the society, 1631. He extols him for his incomparable virtue Fidelity. Piety Prudence. justice. singular Witt. Counsel. Labour. Industrie. Rob. Denyaldus Decanus. 1633. commends him for the Knowledge of divine and humane things.  ne hanc tantam & tam inusitatam terris, supraque genus hominum excelsam virtutis indolem, denique Caelum nobis invideat. Tua fide ac pietate, prudentia, iustitia, virtute denique tua stas, haec caelestia sunt. Nihil uspiam in terris tibi par habemus ingenio, cor silio, labour, navitate, tanto inquam caelum graviùs timendum est. Sed universae Galliae, & Ludovico justo petenti nihil non indulgere caelites possunt.  
Duplicem in te Heliae & Helizei Prophetarum spiritum, rerum puta divinarum & humanarum cognitionem, usumque contemplantes, atque copiosa caelestis gratiae charismatacum Ecclesiastica purpura Ludovici Christianissimi favorum circundata varietate, laudantes, votis pientissimis apprecamur.  
Is quaerendus opinor, & asciscendus Patronus fuit, primùm minimè profanus homo, sed sacra, & huius argumenti simili dignitate praeditus: tum acerrimi idem ingenij, 
Petavius Pr. of the society. Praiseth him for his excellent Wit and judgement. The same commends him for his love towards Religious. Petavius Kal Apr. 1627. Pereyroles Minime 4. Kal. Octob. 1630.  qui capereista posset, ac de ijs causâ veluti cognitâ iudicaret.  
Ex ea societate sum quae se tibi cùm aliàs semper benevolentiae nomine obstrictam meminit, tum nuper summis suis temporibus recreatam, per te modo sospitem, & incolumem esse profitetur.  
Per te fieret purpura clarior religio auctior, & Ecclesiae status solito augustior: nam quae prius in varijs Gallia plagis sordes contraxerat ob Babilonios', puta haereticos, inductis postmodum mutatoriis, ac reformatis tuo consilio aetatis nostrae corruptelis, iam primaews se ingerit avitae pietatis cultus, & verus emicat religionis habitus.  
Nec tantum vidisti & providisti, 
The same Author.  sed etiam splenduit tuorum operum fulgor irradians, luxit lux tua coram hominibus, quae de aureo caudelabro per septem lampades, id est, per omnimodo lucis exempla coruscans non nisi homericos latet oculos.  
Cuinam potius quam tibi consecrandus erat, qui domi militiaeque tot praeclara facinora edidisti, 
Morinus à Pr. of the Cong. of Orat. of jesus commends for him prowess and patience, and for many famous acts performed in peace and in War.  qualia nec à maioribus nostris, nee à maiorum nostrorum avis atavisque edita fuisse accepimus. Tam prospero autem & foelici successu haec à te perpetrata sum, ut bonorum omnium spes longè superatae sint, desideria coequata, & improborum calumniae coruscante virtutis & patientiae tuae splendore penitus extinct.  
Cuius nomen erudition, 
The same Author commends him for his learning and eloquence.  eloquentia librisque adversus Ecclesie hosts conscriptis universam Galliam gloriosissimè pervasit.  
In Ecelesie igitur conseruationem, Patrie salutem, & literarum decus, 
The same Auth. Praises him for conserving the Church his country, and learning.  res hactenus inauditas & opinionum hominum incredibiles perpetrasti.  
Vn seul escrit de peu de cahiers: mais un pressis de ce qu'il y a de substantieux en tous les livres saints, 
Guillebert in his Ded. Epis. to his Para. upon S. Paul 1631. He prefers him in this little Work before Perron, Bellarmine, and Many other famous and learned Prelates.  ayant eu plus d'efficace en l'esprit des uns & des autres, que tous les gros volumes ensemble de ces illustres Prelates, de Saintes, de Bellarmin, de du Perron, & d'vne multitude incroyable de tres-celebres Docteurs, la conuersion qui s'en est ensuiuie des plus signalés, avec la fuite ignominieuse de ces quatre supposts de l'heresie, nous asseurent que vous l'auez terrassée.  
Qui te non noverit, 
Petavius in one of his Ded. Epis. to the Card Praiseth him for learning and oloquence.  potest ex editis à te libris coniecturam capere, quos partim instituendis Catholicis, partim confutandis Horeticis eruditè ornatéque scripsisti.  
Idem denique ut quae sunt priora omnibus attingam Ludovicum Regem impulit, 
The same commends him for his fidelity and prudence in the King his affairs, Whose judgement of the Card. he reputes as Gods.  te ut adhiberet in regno gubernando curarum omnium consiliorumque participem, ac tuae fidei ac prudentiae gravissima queque committeret. Cuius de te Principis iudicium, non solum ut iusti, non ut sapientis solum, sed ut innocentis ac Deo chari, propeque familiaris; sictanquam à iustitia ipsa, à sapientiae, ab innocentia, postremo ab ipso Deo, profectum debet videri.  
Intelleximus eò te spectasse pridem, 
These same commends him for the purity of his intention in the Catbolike cause.  quod & nondum perfectare, ac ne suscepta, aut deliberata quidem pre te tuleras, ut civilibus pariter ac Ecclesiasticis rebus Galliae compositis, 
The 4. Paragrafes following are found in a better of the Religious (cited below) to my Lord. Card. wherein they commend him for his care and diligence to divert disunion from the Children of the Cath. Church, and to repress the insolence of her enemies: for his many obligations to the Church and his country. for his upright intentions and prudence which guide his designs: for bis zeal of justice: for taking his last counsel from no other than God himself: for his constancy in not permitting the vanishing blasts of calunnte shake his affection to serve the Church, and to endeavour the peace of Christendom.  liber ubique Catholicae fidei campus aperiretur.  
L'experience que nous auons des faults precedentes, qui ont presque rendules maladies incurables, augment in finiment l'admiration que merite uôtre soin & vostre bon-heur à divertir les moindres occasions de des-union entre les enfans de l'Eglise, & de n'en perdre aucune de celles qui pewent seruit, à reprimer l'insolence de ses ennemis. En quoy vous n'apportez pas seulement une indicible utilité à nostre siecle, mais aussi vous preseruez la posterité de la contagion de ces maux qui croissent avec l'âge, & travaillant pour l'Eternité, vous laissez à ceux d'aprés nous des antidotes excellens, & des rares instructions. fol. 40.  
Que s'il nous est permis de prendre part en la reconnoissance de tant d'obligations que vous ont l'Eglise & la France: & si pour nostre consolation nous osons augurer l'accroissement du bien futur, par la reueuë de celuy que le public a receu & reçoit de vous tous les iours: nous pouuons dire, Monseigneur, pour une verité si claire dans l'approbation generale, 
F. Nicholas Gen. of the Domicains.  qu'en la taisant il y auroit autant de subject de nous accuser d'injustice oud'ignorance, 
F Eustake of S. Paul assifiant to the R. F. General of the Fueill F Careat Prior of the great Convent, of the Aust.  qu'en lafoy publiant nous sommes exempts du blasme de flattery, ou de credulité. fol. 40.  
Or laissant aux autres à dire tant de genereuses actions, que vous avez contribué à cette felicité, 
F. P. Gueret Corrector of the Minims of the place Royal in Parts.  nous ne pouuons obmettre en ce lieu la reconnoissance que merite la droite intention & la prudence qui guident vos desseins, 
Low is de la Salle Superieur of the house of the Professed of the Society of jesus at Paris.  & les rendent heureux. C'est ce zele de la Iustice à laquelle appartient ce que l'on doit à Dieu en la religion, & au prochain par la protection du bon droit, 
Stephen Binet Rector of the Coll. of Clairmont of the Society of jesus. F. Claude le Petit Gardien of the Cordeliers in Paris.  qui a conduit vos entreprises avec tant de subjet d'admiration, qu'il semble que es evenemens ont sowent surmonté vos pensées. Ce qui donne à cognoistre, qu'aprés que vous avez preueu tout ce que l'entendement humain peut concevoir, 
F. M. Doles the first Lector and Doctor of Divinity at the Cordelers in Paris, and F. Bonaventure of the Mother of God Prior of the Discalced Carmelites of Paris.  vous avez pris vostre dernier conseil avec Dieu, qui vous a fait esperer & obtenir des choses si importantes à son service. fol. 42.  
Ce nous sera beaucoup d'honneur de marcher de loin apres vous, & d'imiter selon nostre condition vostre fermeté, & ne permette point que le vent passager de la calumny esbranle vostre forte affection de seruir à l'Eglise, 
F. Michael Fovet superior of the Augustins of the Convent in S. Germains suburbs.  & de contribuer vos soins pour appaiser les troubles de la Chrestienté, 
F. Leon de Paris Gardien of the Capueins of the Convent of S. Honorie. Fr. Archangel of Paris Gardien of the Capucins of S. james. Fr. Baltazar Langlois Prior of the Dominicains of S. james street. F. Renault de Vault Prior of the great Convent of the Carmelites of Paris Doctor of Divinity.  où nous prenons un interest bien plus sensible, qu'en ce qui nous pourroit concerner.   

THE PRINCIPAL POINTS OF THE FAITH OF THE Catholic Church.  
DEFENDED AGAINST the writing directed to the king by the four Ministers of Charenton.  

THE FIRST CHAP.  

MINISTERS.  
SOVEREIGN LORD  
The knowledge which we have of the mildness of your natural disposition makes us hope that you will hear us in our just complaints: and that to give judgement in an important cause, you will not be satisfied with hearing the accusation. Again, the greatness of your courage, and the vigour of your wit which out run time, and outstripe your age, and whereof God hath already made use to restore peace to France, fills your subjects with hope to see Peace and Piety flourish, and justice maintained, under your reign.   

ANSWER.  
ONe may see that by experience in the first lines of your writing, which is frequently noted by ancient historians, 
Arrius in ep. ad Constant. apud Sozom. lib. 2. c. 26. Nestoriani tom. 3. Conc. Ephes. c. 18.  that it is an ordinary thing with such as err in Faith, to charm the ears of Princes with specious words, that they may with more facility, make glide into their hearts, and imprint therein, the opinions which they profess. You extol his Majesté thinking under the sweetness of a truth, to make him take down that which is depraved in your beleifs, and to couch under fair appearances the serpent which doth destroy souls, as that Egyptian hid the aspe under figues which slew her. The qualities which you attribute unto the king do truly appertain unto him; nor have I indeed any thing to do upon this subject, but to approve the praises wihich you asscribe unto him, and withal, to add to them; every one knowing, not only the strength of his wit, and the fullness of his courage, but further, the solidity of his judgement, the inbred goodness of his nature, his piety towards his people, and zeal in point of Religion. Yet in truth one that would be rigorous, considering that 
a Respons. ad epist. Luth.  Henry the eight, king of England, whom you so highy esteem, contemns the praises which Luther, whom he condemns of heresy, ascribes unto him; might propose unto his Majesty to impose silence upon you, or at least to stop his ears against that, which, even with truth, you speak to his advantage. But I will neither endeavour the one nor the other; the vehement desire and hope I conceive of your conversion, 
There is nothing said in this Chapter of the Ministers inviting the king to judge of their cause, answer being made thereto in 3. Chap.  oblige me to treat you more mildly. I will content myself to discover unto him your craft which consists in thinking to please him in every thing, to th'end you may please him in this point, and upon this I dwell, praising you for the praises you give him according to your duty, each subject being obliged to speak and think well of his king.    

CHAP. II.  

MINISTERS.  
You have, SOVEREIGN, in your kingdom many thousands making profession of the old Christian Religion, and such as jesus-christ did institute it, and the Apostles did publish, and put it down in writing: who for this cause have suffered horrible persecutions, which yet could never impeach their continual loyalty to their sovereign Prince, yea when the necessity of the kingdom called, they ran to the defence even of those kings who had persecuted them. They, (DREAD SOVEREIGN) served Henry the great, your Father of most glorious memory for a Refuge dureing his afflictions; and under his conduct, and for his defence gave battails, and at the peril of their lives and fortunes, brought him by the point of the sword to his kingdom maugre the enemies of the state. Of which labours, damages, dangers, others than they reap the reward: for the fruit which we reap thereby, is, that we are constrained to go serve God far from Towns: that the entry to any dignities is become to us, for the most part, impossibile, or at least, full of difficulty: That our new born children, who are carried a far of to Baptism are exposed to the rigour of the weather, whence many die: that we are hindered to instruct them: yet that which doth most aggreeve us, is, that our Religion is defamed and denigrated with calumnies in your Majesty's presence, while yet we are not permitted to purge ourselves of those imputations in the presence of the said Majesty.   

ANSWER.  
IT is the custom of those that are tainted with error, to brage most of that which they least have, and to boast of it in advamtagious words which are ordinary with them as S. 
a S. Hieron Osea cap. 10. Spumantibus. verbis rument  Hierome doth remark. This truly is your proceeding, while you some up by millions your followers in France, though now they be reduced to a far less number. Imitating herein the Donatists, who, though but few in number, brought down to a part of Africa, and that a little one too, did yet make brags of the multitude of their followers. You make use of a deceit, yet easy to be discovered: you see that the scripture and all the 
b Hieron. tentra Lucif.  Fathers make the Catholic Church the lawful Spouse of jesus-christ, more fruitful than any adulterer: whereupon you attribute to yourselves many brethren: but in vain, it being clear, even unto the blind, that the number of yours are no more considerable, in respect of the kings other subjects, than all those that are of your profession in the whole world, being compared to those who in all christendom live under the laws of the Roman Church. That this is so, it is easy for me to prove, by the same argument which 
a S. Aug. cap. 3. de vnitat● Eccles & lib. de Past. c. 18.  S. Augustine makes use of against the Donatists for the universal Church, making only appear that your belief hath no place in diverse towns and places of this kingdom, where the Catholic Church is, and that yet the Catholic Church is found in every place where profession is made of your religion, so it is not strange, that when 
b Caluin 2. Colos. 2. v. 19 videmus ut modo procer sit ac amplun Papae regnused prodigios. magnitudine urgeat. Et in Praef. lib. de libero arbit. Nos exiguun sumus home num manus illi (Papistae ingentem faciunt exerc● tum.  some of your own men do compare the number of their followers with the number of Catholics, they confess that theirs is but small, the other very great. For the rest, though it were true that you could count yourselves by millions; that you were spread over all France, yet should you get no great advantage, S. 
c S. August serm. 2. in Psal. 36.  Augustine compareing you, by good reason, to smoke, which doth vanish so much the sooner, by how much it is greater and more dilated abroad.  
From the multitude of your brethren you make a passage to the antiquity of your religion, professing it to be Christian, and such as jesus-christ did institute it, and as the Apostles did publish and put it down in writing: upon which I will obserne four things.  
First I say, that either your meaning is that you have the ancient doctrine of the Church, though received of new; or that you had and conserved i'll from all ages by an uninterrupted succession. If the first, (albeit indeed it is false) suppose it were granted you, it were yet unprofitable, the ancient and true doctrine being insufficient, if a man have not the Church, which have he cannot, unless he have continually retained the true doctrine. If the second, after you shall have spent much labour to prove your assertion, yet shall you gather no other fruit there of, then to show your antiquity bounded with the term of one age, whereas that of the Church of jesus-christ, hath sixteen ages upon its head. It is true that your religion is ancient in a certain sense, sith, as we shall see hereafter, it is compounded of diverse heresies, which were condemned in the primitive Church, yea even from the time of the Apostles, but you cannot style it ancient as though the body of your belief; all the substance of your faith, had from former ages been believed: it being evident that the Article of justification by special faith, which is a part of the life of your religion, was unknown before the age in which we live: I add this word special, because, though Eunomius, and other more ancient 
a Apud S. Aug. haeres. 54. Et lib. de fid & oper. c. 14.  Heretics, said, that man was justified by only faith, speaking of dogmatic Faith, yet none before Luther held that this justifying Faith did consist in the special apprehension that each one of the faithful made of the justice of jesus Christ, which is applied by the belief they have to be justified. For the rest, you being able to name none, who, before 
b Luth. tom. 7. Primus fui cui Deus ea quaevobis praedicata sunt revelare dignatus est.  Luther, made profession of your whole belief: 
Luth. tom. 2. in formula Missae ait. Nostram rationem colen de Deum per Missam fuisse velerem & inolitan, suam verorecentem & insuetam Luth. tom. 2. ad Princip. Bohem. Deus hoc tempore lucem sui Euamgelij rursus accendit. Luth. tom. 5. in cap. 1. 1. ad Corinth. Absque sua opera nullum verbum neiota quidem de Euangelio fuisset auditum.  and that great prophet of your Law, boasting in plain terms, that he was the first to whom God vout safed to reveal what he preached; and further clearly accnowledging the manner of serving and honouring God in the Mass, to have been ancient, and to have taken root; and confessing his, of the contrary side, to be now and unaccustomed; saying moreover, that God in his time, had lightened of new the light of the Gospel, which without him one iota had not been heard of. And Again ᵃ calvin assureing us that it was he, that first undertook the cause of the Gospel, which is, the first who shown the way to others; who can affirm that your religion hath more than an hundred years of antiquity? None, as I conceive, 
Calu. in 2. defence. contr. Vuestphal. ait de Luthero quod causam Euangelij agere caeperit & viam primus demonstraverit.  will dare to think it, especially if they reflect upon that which one of your brethren of the same Age with Luthere, secretary of the Elector of Saxony, first Abettour, saith, such a confession was never made, not only within these thousand years, 
b Spalat. in relat. confess. August. Cont. Epistolam fundamentalem cap. 4.  but even since the world's creation, nor is the like confession found in any history, in any Father, in any Author.  
Secondly I say, that imitating Luther, who puts the word Catholic out of the Creed, you do not in this place attribute it to your religion, knowing in your consciences, that the name Catholic (a name of so great weight that it even retained S. Augustine in the Church) doth in no sort appertain unto you. It appertains not-unto you, as it doth determine that of all Christian societies, which contains the greatest multitude, as I have already shown. Nor yet as it signifies universality and diffusion, whether we regard times, or places, it being evident: both because you derive not your origine from jesus Christ and his Apostles by an uninterrupted succession of your predecessors, who have subsisted in all times; and withal for that you are reduced to so narrow bounds, that you cannot be said to be spread over the greatest part of the world.  
Thirdly I say, that since you are, no Catholics you cannot be termed Christians, if the Fathers may be believed; for 
a Pacianus Epist. 1. Christianus mihi nomen est, Catholicus cognomen illud me nuncupat, istud ostendit.  S. Pacian saith that the name of Catholic is the surname of Christians, and 
b Catholica Ecclesia nomen proprium est huius sanctae Ecclesiae matris omnium nostrum.  S. Cyrille, the proper name of the holy Church of jesus-christ. You cannot truly be Christians because as we have shown, your belief is heretical, and consequently, wholly opposite to Christian religion, which cannot be such: for which cause Tertullian, S. Cyprian, S. Athanasius, S. Augustine and others affirm, 
Lib. de pudicitia Lib. 4. ep. 2. Serm. 2. cont. Arr. Lib. de great. Christ's. c. 11.  that an heretic is not to be termed Christian.  
Fourthly I note, that you do impertinently sustain that your religion was instituted by jesus-christ; published and put down in writing by the Apostles, sithences, being heretical, as I have already said, and as shall be made manifest in the 16. Chap. of this book, it is contrary to the institution of jesus-christ: and that, (seeing at manifestly contradicteth the scripture in diverse points, as I will presently justify,) though it be easy for you to affirm, that it is conformable, to that which the Apostles left in writing, yet will you find it impossible to verify the same, or to hinder a man to accnowledge the contrary.  
The scripture saith, that 
a jacob. 2. verse 24. Operibus iustificatur homo & non ex fide tantum. Confession Françoise article 20 Nous croyous que nous sommes faits participans de ceste Iustice par la seule foy.  a man is not justified by faith only; you say, that he is justified by only faith, which is found in no part of the scripture. Do you not then contradict the Scripture? you do it so openly in this point, 
Confess. Heluet. c. 15. docemus peccatorem iustificari sola fide Luth. in cap. 22. Gen. jacob delirat. Deuteron. 30. circumcide cor tuum & cor seminis tui ut diligas Dominum Deum tuum in toto corde tuo & in tota anima tua Psal. 118. David ait, in toto corde meo exquisivi te. Et 3. Reg. 14. secutus est me in toto corde suo. Et 4. Reg. 23 dicitur de losia quod reversus est ad Dominum in omni corde suo, in tota anima sua & in universa vitasua. Cal. 2. Inst. c. 7. §. 5. neminem Sanctorum extitisse dico qui corpore mortis circundatus ad eum dilectionis scopum pertigerit utex toto cord, ex tota ment, ex tota anima, ex tota potentia Deum amaret. Paraeus lib 4. de iustif. c. 11. Talem dilectionem (ex tota anima, ex tota ment, ex omnibus viribus) nemo sanctorum habuit, vel habere in hac infirmitate potest, manet quidem in Sanctis aliquid 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & hypocriseas. Math. 26. Marc. 13. Luc 22. 1. Cor. 11.  that Luther not being able to reconcile the place of S. james, with that which he taught, saith, that this great Apostle dotes.  
The scripture saith, that we may love God with all our hart; you say that none can love God with all his hart. This is not found in all holy writ. Do you not then contradict the holy scripture?  
The scripture saith, that the Eucharist is the body and blood of jesus-christ, 
En la forme d'administrer les Sacremens'. Contentons' nous d'auoir le pain & le vin pour sign & tesmoignage. Et en leut Ca techisme, au traité de la Cene. Tu n'entends pass done (demand le Ministre) que le corps soit enclos dedans le pain, & le sang dedans le Calais? Non (respond l'enfant) mais au contraire. Et cap. 1. Pet. 3. v. 21. saluos facit baptisma.  and that with addition of such words, as design the true body, and true blood. You say, that it is not the body and blood of jesus-christ, but only the figure, the sign, and testimony, which is not found in any part of the holy pages: Do you not then contradict the scripture?  
The scripture saith, that baptism saves us, that we are washed, regenerated by the laver of water. You say, that baptism doth not save, doth not cleanse, doth not regenerate, but that it is only a Symbol of our salvation, clenseing, and regeration, which is not found in all the bible, do you not then contradict the scripture?  
5. The scripture saith that Priests remit sins: you say, 
Ephes. 5. v. 26.  illam sanctificaret mundans lavacro aquae. joan. 3. v. 5. Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua. Melancthon in locis cap. de signis. Non iustificant signa, ut Apostolus ait, circumcisio nihil est, ita baptismus nihil est, participatio mensae Domini nihil est, sed testes sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 divinae voluntatis erga te. Calu 4. Instit. c. 14., §. 17. Cavendum ne in errorem nos abducant quae ad amplificandam sacramentorum dignitatem paulò magnificentius à veteribus scripta sunt, ut scilicet arbitremur latentem aliquam virtutem Sacramentis annexam, affixamque esse; quo ipsa per se Spiritus sancti gratiam nobis conferant cum hoc tantum illis divinitus iniunctum sit munus testicari nobis acsancire Deiin nos benevolentiam. Matth. 18. v. 18. Quacumque ligaveritis super terram erunt ligata & in caelo, & quacumque solueritis super terram erunt soluta & in caelo.  that they do not remit sins, but only that they bear testimony that they are remitted, which is found in no place of the holy scripture, do you not then contradict the Scripture?  
6. The scripture saith, that if a virgin marry she sins not: you say, that the just man offends in all his works, 
joan. 20. v. 23. Quorism remiseritis peccata, remi●tūti. eyes, quorum retinuericis, retenta sunt.  which is not found in all holy writ; Do you not then contradict the Scripture?  
7. The Scripture saith, that there be some of the wicked and reprobate, 
Calu. Instit. 3. cap. 4. §. 23. Absolutio quae fidei seruit, nihil aliud est quàm testimonium venia ex gratuitae evangelij promissione sumptum. 21. Corinth. 7. si nupserit virgo non peccavit. Luth. art. 2. justus in omni opere binopeccat. idem Calu 3. Instit. c. 12. §. 4. Omnia hominum opera si sum a dignitate cense antur nihil nisi inquinamenta sunt & sordes, & quaiustitia vulgo habetur, ea apud Deum mera est iniquitas joan 12. v. 42. multi crediderunt in eum, sed propter Pharisaeos non confitebamtur ut è Synagoga non ei cerentur: dilexerunt enim gloriam hominum magis quàm gloriam Dei. Act. 8. v. 13. Tunc Simon & ipse credidit. Calu. 3. Instit. c. 2. §. 9 & 10 talibus fidei testimonium tribuitur, sed per catechesin. Item, verum haec fidei seu umbra seu imago, ut nullius est momenti ita indigna est fidei appellatione. Luc. 8. v. 13 Quia ad tempus credunt & in tempere tentationis recedunt.  who believe in jesus-christ: you say, they believe not, but that they have only a shadow of Faith, which is not found in all the scripture; do you not then contradict Scripture?  
8. The Scripture saith, that there are some, 
Calu. 3. Instit c. 2. § 11. Nunquam disperit semen vitae electorum cordibus insitum & in harmony. Matth. 1 v. 20 fidem quam semel insculpsit piorum cordibus evanescere & perire impossibile est.  who for a time have faith, and believe not in another time: you say, that there are none who believe for a time, and lose their faith in another, but that he that believes once, never looseth his faith, which is not found in all holy Scripture: do you not then contradict Scripture?  
9 The scripture saith, if thou wilt enter into life keep the commandments: you say there is no need to keep the commandments, 
Matth 10. v. 19 Si vis ad vitam ingredi serua mandata.  yea that even to say so, is to deny jesus-christ and to abolish his Faith, which is not in all the holy scripture; 
Luth. 2. Gal. Papistae docent, fides in Christum iustificat quidem, sed simul seruare opertet etiam praecepta Dei, ibi statim Christus negatus & fides abolita est Heb 6. v. 4. Quisemel illuminatisunt, gustaverunt etiam donum caeleste & participes factisunt Spiritus S. v. 6. Et prolapsi sunt rursus renovari ad paenitentiam rursus crucifigentes sibimetipsis filium Dei. Calu. 3. Inst. c. 2. §. 11. cit. nunquam disperit semen vita electorum cordibus insitum.  yea that even to say so, is to deny jesus-christ and to abolish his Faith, which is not in all the holy scripture; do you not then contradict the scripture?  
10. The scripture saith, that some being once illuminated and having tasted the heavenly gift, do fall, crucifying again to themselves the son of God.  
You say that those that are once partakers of the holy ghost, cannot fall from his grace, which is not found in all scripture; 
joan. 1. v. 29. tollit peccatum. Isa. 44. v. 21. delevi ut nubem iniqnitates tuas & quasi nebulam peccata tua.  do you not then contradict the scripture?  
11. The scripture saith, that God doth take away and blot out sin as a cloud, removes our iniquities from us, as far as the East is from the west; makes us more white than snow: you say, 
Psal. 10.2. v. 12. Quantum distat ortus ab occideute long fecit à nobis iniquitates nostras.  that he neither takes away nor blots out sin, but only doth not impute it; that he doth not make us more white than snow, but that be leaves in us the fault, and filth of sin, which is not found in all holy scripture; 
Psal. 50. super nivem dealbabor.  do you not then contradict the scripture? 
Luth. art. 2. aliud est omnia peccata remitti, aliud omnia tolli: baptismus omnia remittit, sed nullum penitus tollit.   
12. The Scripture saith that Beatitude, is a salary, are ward, the day-pennie of the workmen, a crown of justice: you say, that it is a mere liberality, and no reward, 
Calu. in antid. sess. 5. manet verè peccatum in nobis: Apostolus fideles his verbis non eximit à cum p●, sed tam ùm reatu liberat. Paraeus de amiss. great. cap. 7. Plurima peccata etiam morta●ia manent in iustificatis. Kemnitius 1. part. tit. de reliquiis peccati. immundities. (peccati) etiam in renatis haeret. Confessio Gallica art. 11. affirmamus concupiscentiam etiam pest baptismum esse verè peccatum quod ad cuipam attinet. Catechismus Palati. quaest. 126. Omnia peccata nustra in nobio etiam nunc haerent. Vnitak. lib. 3. de Concupisc. c. 3. remissio non omnem actu tollit culpam. Matth. 5. v. 12. Merces. Philip. 3. v. 14. Bravium. Matth. 20. v. 9 Denarius. Primo Cor. 9 Coronam incorruptam. 2. Timot. 4. v. 8. corona iustitiae. Calu. 3. justit. c. 15. §. 4. ipsa beat●tudo mera est Dei benificentia & in antid. sess. 6. c. 17. Quod vitam aternam faciunt mercedem in eo abillis dissentio.  which is not yet found in any passage of holy scripture; do you not then contradict the Scripture? Certainly you do, as I could make appear by a number of other places, 
Paraeus 4. de iustif. c. 11. & 13.  if I did not judge it sufficient to have shown it in these twelve points, 
Prescript. c. 38. lib. de haeresi.  which do appear in the eyes of all the world as the true Symbol of your faith.  
What will you say, Sirs, to these manifest contradictions? That they are no contradictions because the scripture is to be understood figuratively? will you fly to that fraud remarked by Tertullian in the Valentinians, by S. Augustine in the Priscillianists; by other Fathers in other Heresiarkes; by yourselves in the Anabaptists. If you do so, 
S. August. lib. contr. Faustum. l. 3. de doctr. Christ. c. 10. si animum praeoccupavit alicuius errerts opinioquicquid alater assernerit scripturae, figuratum homines arbitrantur.  I will say unto you with S. Augustine. What? when we read scripture, do we forget the knowledge we have of our own tongue, do we lose the memory of our manner of speaking? Ought the scripture to speak to us in any other manner than that which is known unto us, and which is ordinary amongst us? I will add further with the same sainte, that as soon as the opinion of any error hath once prepossessed their minds, they esteem all to be figures, which the scripture saith to the contrary.  
Moreover, without touching those places in particular whereof there is question, I will make manifest to all men by two general arguments, that your evasion is of no force both because there is none who doth not accnowledge, that it is impossible that God should teach us so many and so great mysteries of our Faith, not by that which they are, but contrariwise, by that which indeed they are not, it being only the part of an impostor, to speak the contrary to that which is indeed, in a matter of importance; and also because you cannot infer out of scripture that which you believe in the points which we handle, save only by the addition of a humane principle (as we shall see hereafter) which is altogether unjust, since in that, you prefer your own reason before scripture, not believing what it expressly teacheth, but the contrary which it saith not, save only by a discourse grounded upon a principle drawn from your own brain, to wrest that to your own sense, which you accnowledge in truth to make for us.  
We have sufficiently examined these points; 
S. Aug. serm. 9 inter Parisienses. Meletiani apud Epiphan. haer. 68 vide Baron. an. Christi 2.5. August lib 2. contra Petil. c. 23 Non baptizantur san guine suo nis. qui occiduntur prepter iusti tiam te prius est quaerendum propter quid paetimini & postea quiae pa timini. Caprian. l. de unitate S Aug. Epist. 61. & l. 3 contra Cresc. c. 4●. Matryren nonsa. ●● poena sed causa.  let us pass to your persecutions. None can be ignorant that the devil hath his Martyrs; and Lies have so Zealous Advocates, that they will pour out their blood in their defence. wherefore I will not stand to verify it, it shall suffice only to note by the way, that since none can pretend glory for his sufferance for a religion, unless he first prove that it is true: and that as reason, and all the Fathers do teach us, it is not the pain but the cause which makes the Martyr, while it is not yet proved that yours is the true Religion, but contrariwise being a thing manifest, that it is false, you can draw no advantages from your persecution, unless it be to discover yourselves to stand attainted of a double crime, to wit, error and obstinacy. Your sufferances neither give testimony for your piety, nor for your courage, but contrariwise, (following S. Augustine) that you are cowardly. 
S. Aug. lib. 1. contra, Gaud. c. 33. Quisquis pro parte Donati vel simbriam vesti. menti perdiderit cor non habet. Cyprian. l. de unit. Eccles. Non erit illa fidei corona sed poena perfidiae.  They are not crowns of your faith, but, according to S. Cyprian, punishments of your perfidiousness.  
Having spoken of your persecutions you represent your fidelity and services, such, if we believe you, that even the king who persecuted you, (to use your own words) had fully tasted the favourable effects thereof. To what purpose is it to make those indebted unto you, to whom you own all that you are? To what end is it to brag that you were a refuge to that great king in his afflictions and crosses? Why do you represent his crown fastened upon his head by the cement of your blood spilt in many battaills, Frenchmen being no strangers in France, that is, not being ignorant of what passed therein? I cannot see to what end you so magnify your services, if not to give way to all the world, to condemn you out of their own knowledge; for there are none at all, be they never so sharp sighted, be they never so diligent in running over history, that can find out, the services you have rendered under Francis the first, and Henry the second, who are those under whom, you may pretend with most show of reason to have been persecuted, since under their reign endeavour was used to stiff your error in its birth, unless it be, that as there are some who deem they do well when they do no evil, you repute it service not to have disserued, which yet would not be the winning of your cause it being certain, that if a man be obliged to any one for an evil he did not, it is to him who had power to do it, and it is evident, that in the reign of those first kings, if you had a will to hurt, your infancy did not second you with power to put it in execution.  
And if from the reigns of these kings, one pass to those of Francis the second and Charles IX. and that you pretend to have served them, the conspiracy of Amboise against the first, and the Bataills of Dreux, S. Denis, jarnac and Moncontour against the last, the enterprise which was made at Meaux to seize upon his person, are they to be counted in the number of services? Since you make show to have rendered good for evil, there is no question of seeking place of excuse to those actions, but in case one should press you to it you should never be able to fetch out the stain which they fastened upon your Predecessors foreheads. And as little can you cover it by your blood spent in a bloody day, since, this action following the others, one may well aver that it was caused by those, but never that those were caused by it. And concerning Henry the third, the services which he received from you, will appear by those which you afforded to his successor, the Battle of Coutras, the taking of many towns and diverse other actions, clearly demonstrating that in serving the one, you did bad offices to the other.  
Thence it appears in deed that your predecessors had served Henry the Great, marry that which goes amiss for you, is, that it appears withal, that they served him not as king, but as Favourer of their sect, sithence their services went before his coming to the Crown, while yet he did openly favour them, at which time they could not lawfully assist him against their king, and that since the royal sceptre fell into his hands, which was the time indeed in which they were to die for him, yet, abbeit he were their king, because, having embraced the Catholic faith, he stood not in matter of religion promoter of their Cause, their fire became ice, whose coldness he felt, as with his own mouth he witnessed, at the siege of Amienns. You cannot without temereity affirm that you were his refuge, but with verity one may aver that you were cause, why he stood in need thereof: you cannot say that you were cause of his prosperity, but well may you be said to have been the cause of his misfortunes: for who had been more prosperous, or in greater assurance than he, if you separating him from the Church, had not put him in a way to lose his kingdom and life, amidst the hazards of war, where a thousand thousand times he exposed himself, in a way to be deprived of his earthly Crown together with that of heaven. He that should have cast a man headlong into the sea with intention to drown him, and after conceiving his conservation profitable to himself, lends him his hand to fetch him out of the peril in which he had put him, can draw no great glory from that action. If you contributed any thing to the establishment of this great king, who having been cast down by some of yours from the Peters-shippe of the Church, into the sea of error, was constituted in most eminent danger, it is only in this sense; and yet it is so little too, that you ought not to put it to account. In steed of serving him, you serve yourselves of him; he fought for you, not you for him; and so far were your arms. and power from raising him to the Crown, that nothing did so powerfully concur to establish him, as the abiureing of your errors which had put him in peril: and yet he stands indebted to you for all, by your own account: whereupon I cannot but apply unto you what was said of Moab in isaiah. We have heard his pride, 
Isa. 6.  his pride and arrogancy greater than his power. Lo in a few words how yours have served the kings, whom, in lieu of pointing them out by odious names, you ought to style your benefactors, sith it was under them, that you began to get footing in this kingdom in liberty, and that they have made favourable Edicts, which even to this day you enjoy.  
If I have brought upon the stage the comportements of your Predecessors (all trespasses being personal) it was not to impute their faults to you, but only to take notice by the way, upon the occasion which you administered, of what hath past, leaving to such as are addicted to reading, to take a more ample View of them in our Histories. And so far am I from desiring to denigrate you with the faults of your forerunners, that on the contrary side, I conceive, and hold for certain, that the king, under whose authority we all live, shall receive so good services, both of the nobility, who gives ear unto you, and the common people, who follow you, and of yourselves, that France will have occasion, to bury in oblivion the actions of your forefathers, which were prejudicial unto it. In the interim, you will licence me to tell you, that although yours had served, as you pretend, yet by the vanity you take therein, you make your own recompense, whereas you were elsewhere sufficiently rewarded. wherein you commit a double fault, to wit an extreme vanity, and withal a gross misaccnowledgment, complaining of set purpose, of his Majesty's Predecessors, in lieu of expressing a true feeling of the notable obligations by them heaped upon you. It is the part of a subject to serve, without voyceing his services, leaving the accnowlekgment and publishing thereof to the Prince: If the Prince come short of our just expectation, yet hath a man no action of complaint against him. If a man complain he is blameworthy, and consequently much more if he complain, while he hath cause to commend. The Reader shall judge whether those that have been admitted by their kings to establish a new Chair in a state; to erect a new ministry who lie contrary to that which they accnow ledge to be the tive Ministry of the Almighty; who have full liberty to make profession of a Belief directly opposite to theirs: who are admitted, to offices, dignities and estates; who by the benefit of the king's bounty enjoy no small number of towns and Castles for their safety, though all the rest of the French do absolutely rely upon his faith the true and sole Refuge of subjects; finally, if those who have large pensions, who receive grate benefits, in whose favour very advantageous Edicts are made, and inviolably kept, the Reader I say shall judge, whether such people have cause to complain of their kings, and tacitly to accuse them of ingratitude while they declare themselves loaden with injuries, for reward of their services. If the Anabaptists had afforded as much assistance to some one of your Princes for the recovery of his Estates, as you pretend to have afforded to Henry the Great, would you counsel him to permit them more liberty than you enjoy in France? Or enjoying so much, would you admit of their complaints, for that they did not iaioy equal liberty with you?  
To conclude, I appeal to your own consciences, not only whether all the Princes which profess your belief, but whether even any of them do so treat curs in their States; no I will demand yet less, I ask not whether ours receive benefits, whether they bear offices, whether they be preferred to any degree of honour, it is too much, I will yet fall lower, and only ask, if they have liberty given to profess our religion, not openly, but even in secret, with assurance of their life? 
Bezae Epist. 4. Non dubitamus (Magistratus) optimoiure in praefatos Anahaptistas gladium strinxisse. Bezade haeret. puniend. lib. integro. Idem Epist. 1. est hee merè diabolicum dogma sinendum esse vnunquemque ut si voler pereat.  After you shall have wellpondered the question which I have put unto you, you will be able to return me no other answer, save only, that some grace they receive in such States, to wit, that of Martyrdom which we do most highly prize. And indeed your authors do teach that Heretics are to be bainshed and punished, and that liberty of conscience is diabolical, whence you do prohibit it us, in all places where you have power. While yet there is a fair difference betwixt your condition and ours: you are Novellists, and consequently they whose possession you impeach might justly have hindered the exercise of your new belief, Luther and your own Authors teaching, 
Luth in 1. ad Galat. Luth. ●pu● S. e●d l. 5.  that so it ought to be done, and practising accordingly. We are possessors possessing a doctrine which the Apostles left us, by an uninterrupted transmission from hand to hand, and therefore we cannot be lawfully repelled, unless we be first condemned by a general Council, which is so far from ever having been done, that even the Princes which embrace your religion have not yet condemned us, with any show of justice, since we have never yet been heard: herein you use their cunning, who having given occasion of complaint, complain first, 
Colloque de Poissy, Conference de Fontainebelleau.  making show of aggreevance in the same thing: although indeed this liberty is not denied you, and we are exceeding glad that it is given you, knowing well that as many combats as we fight shall be as many Laurels for us, and victories for the Church. And desiring nothing more, then, (by diligently observing the Edicts made in your favour,) to meet with the occasions, wherein we may bring a way, to the advantage of Truth, new spoils over your errors.    

CHAP. III.  

Section I.  

MINISTERS.  
FOr if this were permitted us, we would make him clearly see, that our religion is hated because it admits no other rule of salvation, than the word of God contained in holy writ; nor other head of the universal Church then our Saviour jesus-christ; nor other Purgatory for our sins then his blood, nor other sacrifice propitiatory for our sins then his death and passion; nor other merit before God then his obedience offered up for us to his beavenly father.   

ANSWER.  
THe first thing which we are to mark in this point, is the Art by which you use to gain men's hearts, and to alienate them from the Catholic Church in which we live. You represent your belief hated for many reasons by which notwithstanding you pretend to make it commendable before God and man. You will have it to be hated, for sustaining, in points controverted between us, that which makes most to God's honour, and for condemning in our Faith, that which you hold unworthy of his perfection. In this you imitate the old Heresiarkes, who opposed the principal points of Catholic religion, under pretext of conserving Gods honour more entire. For this reason, the Schismatics, as S. Cyprian delivers, 
Apud Cyprian. ep. 55. Hilar. l. 2. de Trinit. solicit nimium ne patrem filius ab eo natus evacuet. Marc. 2. Quis potest demittere peccata niss solus Deus. Matthae 9  under colour of exalting God his mercy, communicated with the christians who had sacrificed to Idols, before they had showed a lawful repentance. For the same cause, the Arians, as we read in S. Hilary, denied that the son was consubstantial with the Father, lest the dignity of the Father might have been exhausted by this honour of the son. For the same, the jews would not have Christ to have power to absolve from sin; rendering that honour to God, that it might be reserved to him alone. For the same, as we find in S. 
a Amb. l. 1. de poenit. cap. 2. Aiunt (Novatiani) se Domino defer reveremian cui solt remittendorum criminum potestatem resernent.  Ambroise, the Novatians denied that the Church had the same power. For the same, saith S. 
b August. l. 32. contr. Faust. Quiae ta ia ibi sunt quae Christa gloriam decolorent.  Augustine, the manichees, denied certain books of the scripture, which they said contained things which stained the lustre of the glory of jesus Christ. To be short, diverse others took this colourable cloak, yet were they all condemned by the Fathers, and most justly; because God in the establishing of christian Religion did not search that which was most honourable unto himself, especially in our judgement, but that which was most profitable unto us, as we see plainly in these words, 
c Philip. 2. v 7.  he did for us exinaniee himself taking the form of a servant. That of the greater or less honour which doth accrue unto God, is but a bad way to establish one article of Faith, and destroy another. Where upon 
d Hil. l. 1. de Trinit. Religiese impius, & l. 4. irreisgiosam de Deo selt ●tudinem.  S. Hilary terms the Arians, who use that way of proceeding, Religiously wicked, people who do irreligiously serve God. Other grounds are necessaire. We must know what the Church teacheth us: and those that are so careful of God's honour, aught to be very careful to be in struct in it, lest they injure him in deeds, whom they honour in words; which they do in expressing things otherwise then they are indeed, it being certain, as saith 
a Cassian. l. 1. de Incarnate. Quod non dicitur it ae ut est etiamsi honor videatur contumelia est.  Cassian disciple of S. chrysostom, that that which is not expressed as it is, though it seem honourable, is indeed a true contumely. That which is true, be it of what kind it will honours God, because he would have it so, and that all his wills are to his own advantage. But what is false, though in appearance advantageous, turns to disadvantage. And though many things bear no proportion with the greatness of the Almighty, yet have they connection with the infinite perfection of his love, and Charity, which appears somuch the more perfect and accomphished by how much, in virtue thereof, he descends to things more low and abject. And therefore, it is an abuse to allege gods honour to dazzle and blind the people. Yet this you do, while you represent your Religion hated for five points, which you esteem honourable for him, as being honourable, in your opinion, to jesus Christ: which is but yet so in appearance only.  
Hereupon I am forced to tell you with 
a Tertul. l. de pudic. c. 2. talia & tantae sparsilia eorum quious & Deo adulentur & sibi lenocinantur, effoeminantia magis quam vigorantia disciplinam.  Tertullian, that those little shifts, by which you become flatterers of God, and yourselves, do rather weaken than strengthen discipline. So considering Religion in the shape you represent it, me thinks I see, not a chaste wife, but a strumpet, (set out with sundry adulterate colours to seduce the world, and kill you) come from you and become mistress of your life: which moves me, to the end I may deliver the people from error, to undertake to wash her face, unmask her, and discover her deformity; following the example and foot steps of the Prophet who speaking of an Idolatrous 
b Nahu. 3. Propter mu. titudinem fornicationum meretricis speciosa & gratae & habeutis maleficiae quae vendidit gentes in fornicationibus suis & faemiliaes in maeleficiis suis, Revelabo pudenda tua in fancy tua & ostendam gentibus nuditaetem tuam & regnis ignominiam tuam.  nation useth these words. For the abundance of the fornications, of a fair charmeing and mischievous strumpet, who hath sold nations in her formcations, families in her devilish pranks, I will discover thy shame in thy face, and will show thy nakedness to all nations, and thy ignominy to kingdoms. Which I will do so much the more willingly, because I have learned of 
b Concil. in psal. 36. Tanto magis debemus commemorare vanitatem haereticorum quanto magis quaerimus salutem eorum.  S. Augustine, that by how much more we desire the salvation of Heretics, by so much more we ought to endeavour to make the vanity of their error appear.    

SECTION II.  

We would make it clearly appear unto him that our religion is hated, because it admits no other rule of salvation, than the word of God contained in holy scripture.   

ANSWER.  
IT is false that your Religion is hated for that it admits no other rule of salvation than the scripture: but true it is that it is worthy of hatred for the diverse abuses which it commits in Scripture.  
That we teach no other rule of salvation than scripture, will be manifest to any that knows, that these words, an other rule, do import in proper speech, a Rule of a diverse kind (as I will hereafter prove in the ensuing Section) and withal, an entire rule, as I will presently make appear, following your own tenets, who will not admit the Gospel of S. Matthew, to be an other rule then that of S. Mark, considering they are but two parts of the same Rule, and that this word rule simply taken, signifies a complete rule: for as S. Basile saith a Rule admits no addition: but things that are imperfect, are never rightly instiled by the name of Rule. Now we neither admit Rule of any other king than the scripture, nor yet any complete rule other than it; yea we call it the complete rule of our salvation, for two reason: both because it contains immediately and formally the substance of our Faith, all the articles necessary (necessitate Medij) for man's salvation: and also, because it doth mediately comprehend all that we are to believe, in that it doth remit us to the Church to learn the same which it assures us is infallible. Hence it follows, that we draw that truth out of the scriptures, which we receive by the mouth of the Church, if reason may prevail, which teacheth, that whoso ever deputes another to speak for him, speaks mediately by his mouth; and if, 
a Aug. lib. 1. cont. Cresco. c. 33. Quamuis huius rei certè de scripturis Catholicis non proferatur exemplum, earundem tamen scripturarum etiam in hacre à nobis tenetur veritas cum hoc facimus quod universae placuit Ecclesiae quam ipsarum scripturarum commendat authoritas. Etsimi lia lib. de unit Eccles. c. 22.  S. Augustine, who delivers it in express terms, may gain belief: Albeit, saith he, one can produce no example of scripture concerning this matter, yet hold we in it, the truth of the same scripture, since we do that which is conformable to the universal Church, whom the authority of the self same scripture doth commend unto us. Behold in what esteem the Scripture is with us, for which cause we also are to be esteemed. Now we will see whether by reason of it, you deserve not hatred, though, not in that sense in which you say you are hated for it. But before we come to that point, permit me, I beseech you, to extenuate a little the glory you hunt after in establishing the Scripture the only rule of your salvation, by making you share it only with diverse Here tikes who before your time sustained the same opinion.  
So said the manichees. I can in no sort, saith Fortunatus in 
a Aug. l. cont. Fortunatum. Nullo genere rectè me credere ostendere pessum nisieandem sidem scripturarum authoritate firmaverim.  S. Augustine, make appear that I rightly believe, unless I confirm my Faith by the authority of Scripture. So saith the 
b August. l. de natura & great. c. 39 Credamus quod legimus & quod non legimus nefas credamus ad struere quod de cunctis etiam dixisse sufficiut.  Pelagians in the same Author. Let us believe, saith Pelagius, what we read, and what we read not, let us believe it unlawful to be established. Let this suffice in all other matters. So the 
c Aug l. post Collationem. Nos sola portamus Euig lia. Item concio. 1. in Psal. 32. Nos sola offerimus Euangelia.  Donatists in the same Author, saying, we bring with us, and present the gospels only. This was that which Eranistes aimed at, whom 
a Apud Theod. in Dialog. immutabilis. Ego enim soli divinae scripturae fidem habeo.  Theodoret brings in, in his Dialogues, where condemning all reasons, he saith. For I believe in the Gospel only. So 
b Lib. 2. cont. ipsum cap. 1. Fratribus nobiscum constitutisin sancto Euangelio.  Petilianus writing to his brethren under this title: to our brethren constituted together with us in the holy Gospel. So the Maximianists; expressing themselves in these terms fight with us in the truth of the Gospel. Finally, so the Arians, 
Apud S. Aug. In veritate Euangelij nobiscum militantibus.  who were so wedded to the Scripture, that they would not only admit no sense, but even no word which was not comprised therein, rejecting this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, because it was not found there. 
Concil. Nicenum.  All these ancient Heresiarkes condemned by the Church and by yourselves, had the Scripture as frequently in their mouths as you. They termed themselves Evangelicall men, like you. They made the Scripture the only rule of their Faith, as you do: yet whereas they did it in words not in deed, as was fitting, but in publishing its name they abused the authority thereof they were condemned by the Church; their doctrine was judged worthy of hatred, as yours also is, and will be, I am confident, by the judgement of the whole world, when I shall have made manifest, that you abuse the scriptutes to your own ends.  
It is truly worthy of hatred; because, under pretext of scripture, the written word of God almighty, 1. it doth reject his word not written. 2. a great part of the written word. 3. it clearly contradicts, in many passages, that which it doth admit. 4. corrupts it in diverse parts. 5. and lastly, it makes the word of men pass for the word of God, yea even the word of every Idiot, establishing upon them the principal articles of your Faith.  
1. 
Worthy of hatred because it rejecteth the word of God not written.  If he be worthy of hatred, who in establishing a thing, destroys that without which it cannot subsiste, and which is also commanded by it: your doctrine is by a just title hateful for the Scripture, which whilsts it extols, it destroys the Traditions commanded by the same Scripture, and without which it can in no sort subsiste. That holy writ cannot subsiste without Traditions, it is most clear, since by them only we know, that the books of Scripture which we have, came unto our hands pure and entire, such as they proceeded from the mouth of the holy Ghost. You believe as an article of Faith, that you have those books pure and entire. wherefore, either the written word affirmethit; (which indeed is not so) or not affirming it, it follows, that some other word not written doth teach it us; or else we believe that with a divine Faith, which God never spoke; a thing most absurd, seeing that the word of God is the only foundation of our Faith. That Traditions are commanded by the Scripture, the second to the 
a Cap. 2. Tenete traditiones quas didicistis sive per sermonem sive per Epistolam nostram.  Thessalonians makes manifest, where the Apostle speaks so clearly of Traditions of Faith not written, that even 
b Whitat controu 1. q. 6. c. 10. Respondeo Novi Testamenti Canonem non fuisse tune editum at que constitutum cum Paulus hanc Epistolam scriberet .... non sequitut ergo quando Apostolus scripsit ad Thessalon. tum omnia necessaria non sunt scriptae ergo nec postea.  your own men confess, that at he time when S. Paul wrote, there were such like traditions, which since, are inserted in holy Write. A thing indeed easily said, but hardly persuaded, especially to such as consider, that it is not to be found in all holy scripture, that those things which were not yet written while S. Paul wrote that Epistle, were afterwards put down in writing.  
2. 
Worthy of hadted because it rejects part of the Written word of God. Conc. Carthag. 3. Can. 47. Trullan. can. 2. Rom. sub Gelaesio. Trident.  By what authority do you reject many of the books of Scripture, which the Church, at divers times, in divers Counsels, in diverse parts of the world, in Greece, Italy, Africa, and Germany; defines to be canonical and divine. What a senseless thing is it, that you of your own head should establish canons, having neither Father who doth declare, nor Council that doth define (which is to be noted) the Canon of the books of holy scripture, according to your way? The presumption which you use in opposing your judgement against the judgement of the ancient Fathers, and the authority of the Church, is truly worthy to be hated.  
3. 
Worthy of hatted because it contradicts the scripture.  He that opposeth what he ought religiously to follow, is he not worthy of hatred? And ought not all men to follow the scripture? You make profession of doing so, and yet, directly to deny what it affirms, and believe the contrary to that which it teacheth in express terms (as I have proved in the precedent Chapter) is not this to contradict it? If a man can be said to esteem him whom he often belies, you esteem the scripture; and if one can hold that for a Rule, to which he frequently opposeth his judgement, you do undoubtedly hold the scripture for the rule of your salvation. For plainly to affirm that a thing not, whereas the scripture saith it is, what other thing is it then to give the lie to the scripture, and to have a judgement opposite to the judgement thereof?  
4 Your corruptions in the scripture are so perfp cuous, 
Worthy of hatred because it corrupis the Scripture.  that even your own men do reprehend them. Did not Charles du Mullin who is famous amongst you for this cause say, that 
a Molinaesus' in suatranslatione Noni Testaementi. Caluinus in sua Harmonia textum Euangelicum desutare facit sursum versum ut res ipsaindicat, vim infert literae Euangelicae & illam multis in locis transponit. & in super additlitterae.  Caluin in his Harmony, puts the text of the Gospel topsy turvy, as the thing itself makes manifest; violates the letter of the Gospel; transposeth it in many places; adds to it. And speaking of Beza his translation saith he not, 
b Idem Molinae. ibidem, de facto mutat textum.  that indeed he changeth the text? And doth not 
c Castalio in defension suarum translationum ait, Quo omnes eius (Bezae) errores noiarentur magno volumine opus esse.  Castalion going on in the same sense affirm, that it would require a great volume to put down all his error? To conclude, that Great king, whose wit did as far surpass yours, as his person did indignity all his subjects, the king of great Britaignie, whose judgement ought to be taken for the whole Church of England, both because you esteem him the head thereof, and for that it is not credible that he would publish opinions which that Church holds not. Saith not this Prince in the conference at Hampton Court, that the very worst version of the Bible was that of Geneva; and further, that he found, the notes of the Geneva Bible, wonderful partial, false, seditious, and too much smelling of the designs of a most dangerous and perverse mind.  
5 That you have the true canon of scripture: 
Worthy of hatred because it makes the word of men pass for scripture.  That the books which you allow of, are not corrupted: That the body of jesus-christ, is only figuratively in the eucharist: are not these the principal articles of your Faith? And that your only and absolute Faith, that is, the Faith by which every one of the Faithful believes to be justified, by the apprehension of the justice of jesus Christ, doth justify you, is it not the ground work and soul of your Religion? And yet whereate these tenets found in the holy Scripture? Formal and express passages, (such notwithstanding, the ratification of your confession doth oblige you to produce) there are none. 
Toutes lesdites Eglises Françoises approwent & ratifient la susescrite confession on tous ses chefs & articles come estant entierement fondee sur la pure & express parole de Dieu.  You have recourse to consequences, which yet are not grounded upon two divine Principles contained in the Scriptures, but upon two Principles, whereof of the one is drawn from your own brain. which doth clearly demonstrate (unless I deceive myself) that you propose the word of men for the word of God which is found in holy Writ, since that according to your own tenet, your faith can have no other foundation than scripture. Let's see whether I be a Liar.  
In the third Article of your Conf. you put down for an article of Faith, that the canon of scriptures, is the only rule of Faith; you further accnowledge that all the books contained in the said Canon, proceeded from the mouth of the holy Ghost, and are conserved in their original purity, besides those you accnowledge none. But by what syllogism conclude you this? in the margin of the next Article you cite sundry passages of this nature. The pure and unspotted word of God; 
Psal. 12. v. 7. Psal. 19 v. 8.  The Law of God immaculate. The Testimony of God Faithful, giving wisdom to little ones. The Precept of our Lord clear enlightening the eyes. Out of these passages, which do not affirm in express terms that the books you admit of are canonical, you would by consequence infer it, you form the mayor of your argument as followeth.  
The Law of God (say you) is immaculate pure and unspotted.  
But all the books which we hold for Canonical, and no others, are immaculate pure and unspotted.  
Ergo They alone and no others are the Law of God. Whence, I pray you, do you draw your Minor? Doth the Scripture affirm that these books, and no other are pure and immaculate? verily no. Who doth aver it then? You of your own brain. This proposition therefore is humane, and withal false; which yet I will not now prosecute, being sufficient for my present purpose, to show that this principle is but the words of men. Whence it follows, that either your word passeth for God's word; or that your Faith in this point, which virtually compriseth all the rest, (since now the question is touching the Scripture, which you will have to be the only foundation of Faith) is not divine, but only humane: whence it clearly follows that it is of no other kind, every conclusion being of the same nature with the more imperfect part of its cause. But now let us speak of the eucharist.  
You hold as an article of Faith that the words of consecration ought to be understood figuratively, so that the body of jesus Christ is not really under the species of bread, as we sustain it is. The proofs that you bring of your Faith, are diverse passages of holy Scripture, which teaching, as you dream, things that are incompatible with the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, do clearly show, that the words of consecration are figurative. Let us see some of your Arguments.  
One body cannot be in two places by God's omnipotency, to wit, in heaven, and in the Eucharist which is in earth.  
But the scripture teacheth that the body of Christ is in heaven till the day of judgement.  
Ergo it is not in the eucharist.  
The Mayor not being found in all the scripture, it is the word of men, and consequently it is clear, either that you make it pass for the word of God; or else that your conclusion cannot be divine and infallible, for the reason I have touched above. Now let us examine what your Faith is.  
You believe that every one of the faithful is justified by that faith whereby he certanely persuades himself that he is justified in Christ jesus. 
Paraeus l. 3. de iustif. c. 1. l. 1. c. 10.  One of your modern Authors forms this syllogism.  
Who so ever believes in the son of God shall be saved.  
But I believe in the son of God.  
Ego I shall be saved.  
Not to dispute of the Mayor (suppose that it were in the scripture, though in deed in your sense it is not.) The Minor can in no sort be found therein: for it is not said in any place, that Luther for example, Caluin, Beza, Pereus and others believed, whence it is evident, even according to yourselves, that it is the word of men, and not of God, whose whole word you will have to be written.  
Now having made manifest how you use the scriptures, all men, I dare assure myself, will greatly wonder with what face you dare so highly magnify the scripture in words which in deeds you so horribly wrong. But they will cease this admiration, if they call to mind how ordinary a thing it is for heretics to serve themselves of the scripture and to wrong it withal; nay which is worse, they are in some sort necessarily constrained to do both. To serve themselves of the scripture: because the true religion being grounded upon the word of God, it is necessary for every sect that pretends a true religion, to pretend also scripture wherein it is contained. To wrong the scripture: because it is manifestly necessary, that that which of its own nature is good, as it is, must needs be changed, before we can draw any evil out of it, as error for example. And indeed we find both these things observed in the Fathers. For 
a Vincentius Lyren. c. 35. Sive enim apud suos, sive aliencs, sive publicè, sive in sermonibus, sive in libris, sive in convivijs, sive in plateis nihil unquam de suo proferunt quod non etiam scripturae verbis adumbrare conentur.  first, they witness that upon all occasions, at all times, upon all subjects, heretics have still the scripture in their mouth, and do brag of the authority thereof; because 
a Tertul. de resurrectione aliunde scilicèt loqui non possent de rebus fidei nisi ex literis fidei.  they cannot give a more apparent colour to their faith, than the words of faith, nor 
b Ambr. Com. in Tit. Haeretici illi sunt qui per verbaee legis legem impugnant & prop●ium sensum verbis astruunt legis, ve perversitatem mentis sine legis authoritate commendent.  more speciously impugn the law then by the law itself, nor more highly commend their malice, then by the authority of that which is devoid of all evil. And again, they show that the source of heresies is the 
c Aug. tract. 18. in joan. Neque enim natae sunt haereses & quaedam dogmatae perversitatis illaquiantiae animas & in profundum praecipitaentia: nisi dum scripturae bonae intelliguntur non bene & quod in eyes non bene intelligitur etiam temere & andacter asseritur.  wrong which is done to the scripture, deriving their generation from its corruption, 
f Aug. de unit. Eccles. c. 15. cavenda est caliditas Haereticorum volentium convertere verba Dei à veritate propter quam dicta sunt adperuersitatem in qua ipsi sunt.  converting ordinarily the words of truth in favour of which same truth they are uttered, into errors and falsities in which they themselves live the 
e August. 3. de Baptis. ad imaginem enim phantaesmatum suorum cum quibus volutars carnalis anima delectatur convertit omnia Sacramenta & verba librorum Sanctorum.  mysteries and words of holy writ into the forms and shapes of their own fancies, accomplishing that, which the Apostle in the 2. to the Corinthians, observes in false Prophets, who are to walk in the ways of craft, and to corrupt the word of God.    

SECTION III.  

MINISTERS.  
NOr other head of the universal Church than jesus Christ our Lord: Nor other Purgatory of our sins then his blood, Nor other propitiatory sacrifice for our sins, than his death and passion; Nor other merit before God than the obedience which he offered to God the Father for us.   

ANSWER.  
We sustain that there is no other head of the universal Church than jesus Christ, no other Purgatory of our sins then that of his passion; no other merit then his obedience; and therefore it is false that you are hated, for the considerations which you pretend. Marry you are worthy of hatred for deceaseing and abusing the people: while you make them believe that what you teach in this behalf is to the glory of jesus Christ, and what we sustain is injurious and prejudicial to the same, which is false, as I will make distinctly appear, by the examination of all these points one after another.  
That we establish no other head of the universal Church than jesus Christ, is evident even by the Pope himself, who yet you say is interessed in the matter, who declares that there is but one only God. Therefore, 
Bonifacius in extravagante Vnam sanctam de maio. & obedientia. Itaque Ecclesiae unius & unice unum corpus, unum caput non duo capitae quasi monstrum Christus videlicet & Christi Vicarius. Petrus eiusque successor.  saith S. Boniface VIII. there is but one body and one head of one only Church (not two heads, as though it were a monster) to Wit jesus Christ and his Vitair, S. Peter and his successor.  
True it is we sustain, that there are other persons distinct from the person of jesus Christ, who bear under him, by his virtue and power, the name and condition of head. Yet this doth not hinder Christ from being the only head of the universal Church, since scripture, Fathers and reason teach us, that there is a main difference, betwixt this proposition, There is no other head than jesus Christ, and this, no other than jesus Christ is the head of the Church together with him, because this last (no other then jesus Christ is the head of the Church together with him) excluds every man which is not jesus Christ, from having any part in quality of head. And that the first proposition which saith (there is no other head than jesus Christ) doth only import, that though many do partake of the name and nature of head, yet is it by subordination of one to another.  
The scripture doth clearly teach us this distinction, in the second of the 
a Et murus civitatis habens fundamenta duodecim, & in ipsis duodecim nomina duodecim Apostolorum Agni.  Apocalypse, and in the second to 
b Vers. 20. Superaedificat, super fundamentum Apostolorum & Prophetarum.  the Ephesians, where it saith plainly that others then jesus Christ are the foundation of the Church. And in the first to the Corynthians 3. Chap. saint 
c vers. 11. Fundamentum aliud nemo potest ponere praeter id quod positum est quod est Christus jesus.  Paul delivers in express terms, that there is no other foundation of the Church then jesus Christ. Whence it is evident that these propositions are to be taken in a diverse sense; because otherwise they would be incopatible, as being contradictories. Hence it is that amongst the works of saint 
a In Apocal. 21 Necrepellit nos à nostro intellectuillud quod Apostolus dicit fundamentum aliud nemopotest ponere, etc. Non enim aliud fundamentum est Petrus, aliud Christus Iesus quia Petrus membrum est Christi. etc.  Ambrose, to wit, in his treatise upon the Apocalypse, we see that this passage where the Apostle affirms that there is no other foundation than jesus Christ, doth not hinder S. Peter from being a foundation: because being a foundation, as he is a member of jesus Christ by subordination unto him, he is not another foundation. And this was that which S. 
b S. Leo ep. 89. Hunc enim in consortium individuae unitatis assumptum id quod ipse erat voluit nominari.  Leo aimed at, when he said, that jesus Christ admitted S. Peter into the society of an individual unity and would have him to be called that which he was; Whence it is manifest that the nature and name of (Petrae) a rock, a foundation, a head, doth so agree and belong to S. Peter, as that yet jesus Christ remains the only rock, the only foundation, the only head, sithence S. Peter doth not impeach the individual unity. This is his aim again, whilst in another place he brings in jesus Christ, saying to S. Peter, 
a S. Le●serm. ●. in a●iuer suae ●●ssumptionis. C●m ego sim 〈◊〉 is 〈…〉 quoque Pe●ra es, quia ●ea virtute solidaris, ut quae inthi potestate sunt propria sint ●ibi ●necum partic●patione communia.  Albeit I am the inviolable Rock, yet thou art a Rock too, because thou art supported and confirmed by my virtue, to the end that those things Which are proper to me by power, might be common to thee by participation. To the same purpose 
b S. Aug. in Psal. 86 & cum dicuntur duodec●m portae Jerusalem & una porta Christus & duodecim portae Christus quia in duodecim p●rtis Christus.  S. Augustine affirms, that there are twelve gates of Jerusalem which is the Church, to wit the twelve Apostles, though there is indeed but one Gate, which is Christ jesus, because, saith he, Christ is in those twelve gates, for as much as those twelve are subject unto Christ, and do subsist in him alone.  
And in very deed reason doth teach us, that diverse things subordinate one to another, do no ways destroy their unity. Which is evident in this, that the instrument is not termed another cause then the principal cause, in virtue whereof it works. The Mason and his hammer are not two causes of the house, but one only. The man and the sword which kills, are but one only cause of death: whence it is manifest, that whereas S. Peter, doth only participate of Head by reason of the subordination and reference he hath to jesus Christ, it doth not any way hinder jesus Christ to remain the only head of the Church; like as the power of Governor in a Lieutenant, doth not constitute two Governors, the Lieutenant participating only of that power of government by subordination to the Governor. Nor is it to the purpose to say, that a Lieutenant doth not infer two Governors, because he bears not the name of Governor, since it is not the name that makes the thing: and again to find a true similitude in the things we speak of, it is only requisite, that like as the power of a Lieutenant is subordinate to that of the Governor, so the power which S. Peter enjoys in the Church, may be subject and subordinate to Christ's power in the same Church. That the Lieutenant is not instiled Governor, causeth no change at all in the nature of the thing, but doth only show an accidental difference, to wit, that the Lieutenant and Governor do often chance to meet together, in the same town or Province whereof they have the government: whereas jesus Christ in his own species doth never meet with his Lieutenant in the visible government of the Church. And hence it is, that though we do not asscribe the name of Governor to his Lieutenant, to the end we might avoid confusion (otherwise being both together how should the one be discerned from the other) yet do we justly attribute the title of head to the Pope, where the said inconvenience can have no place.  
Yea calvin himself upon that passage of S. Matthew, Nolite etc. be not called Rabbis For one is your master Christ. Let no man saith he, stick or trouble himself about words. Christ cares not how they be entitled who undertake the instruction of others. So there is one only Pastor, and yet he admits many Pastors under himself, so that he may have preeminency above them all and by them he alone may govern the Church. And a little after. The true sense is, That then the paternal honour is falsely attributed unto men, when it obscures God's glory: which happens as often as a mortal man independently of God, is esteemed father. And in another place, having objected unto himself, that the scripture commands that God only be called Father, he saith, I Answer, that Paul doth in such sort take the name of Father, that he doth not abragate, or diminish the least particule of God's glory. It is a common proverb, that what is subordinate doth not repugn. Such is the name of Father in Paul being compared to God. God alone is the Father of all the faithful yet he admits the Ministers, Whom he employs therein, to the participation of his own honour, Without derogating from the same. God therefore was the spiritual father of Tymothie, and that his only father too, properly speaking, but Paul, Who was God's minister in begetting Tymothie, doth by a certain right of subordination chalence to himself the title. And again: It is an ordinary thing that as far forth as God doth exercise his power in creatures, so far doth he transcribe his own names unto them. So he is our only Lord and Father, and yet fathers and Lords are they too, Whom he daignes with this honour, Whence it is, that as well Angels as judges are called Gods. You hear how Christ cares not by what name they be called, who undertake to preach and teach: That he is so the sole Pastor, that he admits many under him: That to call a man Father doth not obscure the glory of God. Unless he be so called independently of God. That things subordinate do not repugn. That by the right of subordination S. Paul did chalence unto himself the name of Father. That the name of God, is customarily ascribed unto creatures, so far forth as by them he doth exercise his power. Finally that the very name of God is translated unto men and Angels. And why may not we by parity of reason affirm the same of the word head?  
Certainly we may affirm the same, and we learn it of the Apostle, who writiting in the 1. to the Cor. 12. Chap. 
1. Corin●●. 〈◊〉. v. 21.  That there is a head in the Church, Which cannot say unto the feet, I have no need of you, doth clearly demonstrate, that he speaks of some other head than jesus Christ, since he might have used that manner of speech to the Faithful, whose assistance indeed he did not stand in need of. It is evident therefore, that the Pope may be called head of the Church, though yet we accnowledge no other head than Christ. And if happily any Author express him by the name of another head, he is to be conceived to have spoken of another head subordinated, even as the instrument, is sometimes termed another cause then the principal Agent.  
Now we must endeavour to manifest unto all men, that it is no ways prejudicial unto God, that another with, and under him, should be the visible and ministerial head of the universal Church. Which may be shown by sundry reasons: for why should it rather derogate from the dignity of jesus, that another with and under him, should be the head of the Church, then prejudicial to the Majesty of God. who is the supreme and principal head of the Church, that Christ as man, under him, should partake of the nature and power of head, since it seems to be more disaduantagious to God that jesus Christ, as man, should be under him, head of the Church; then prejudicial to jesus Christ to admit another man to be Head under him, for so much as he himself is man.  
Again why should it more repugn, that another man should be called head of the Church together with jesus Christ in the law of grace, then in the old law: in which, though jesus Christ was the head of the Church, yet was the High priest also called by that name, as the holy scripture doth remark, and 
a Calu. 4. insl. cap. 6. Magdeburg. cent. 1. l. 1. c. 17.  Caluin doth acconwledge.  
Further, since jesus Christ is king, 
b Psal. 1.  and no less king of the faithful, than head of the Church, how doth the kingly power, wherewith he endowes kings stand with his own royal Majesty, if the participation of the name of head, be repugnant to the power which is in Christ? And why, he being 
a joan. 10.  Pastor, 
b 1. Petr. 3.  Bishope and 
c joan. 8.  light of the world, doth it not diminish his honour, to constitute under him, other Pastors, Bishops, and lights of the world, if it be absurd that any other than he should be held Head of the Church? We may add to this, that whereas in the scripture, it is not found Christ alone is Head of the Church, but only, that Christ is head 
d 2. Coloss. ●. & 2.  of the Church, and whereas Gods is 
e Matth. 19  only good, only 
f 2. Machab. ●.  just, only 
g Apoc. 15.  holy, why do you grant, that both the name and nature of good, just, holy, may be fund in others then God, and yet that the name and nature of head belongs to God alone. Wherefore, since Christ is not only called Pastor: but 
h joan 10. Erit unum ovile & unus pastor.  one Pastor, which imports, one only Pastor, as unus Deus one God signifies one only God in holy Writ, why do you ascribe the essence of Pastors to others, and not that of head?  
Now whereas things ranged in a certain order and subordination, cannot be said to be contradictory; by consequence the authority of S. Peter, ought not to be esteemed prejudicial to the dignity of Christ, to which it is not only subordinate, but inferior and subject by many degrees.  
Inferior in its extent, since Christ is head of Angels and men, as it appears by the ●. of the Ephe. and the first to the Collos. The Pope is only the head of the Church of men, whereas Christ is the head universally of all men as well those that reign above in heaven, as those who live below in earth; being the Head of the Church Militant, even comprehending therein the Pope himself, 
S. August. in Psalm. 86. Quemadmodum aeperte dicitur Sanctus Sanctorum: si● figurate dicitur fundamentum fundament●●um.  whence he may justly be called Head of the Head, as S. Augustine instiles him the foundation of Fundations. But the Pope is not head over himself, but only over the rest of the body of the Church.  
Inferior in point of dignity: sinco Christ is not only the head which doth direct, but also which by his grace, doth infuse life, by whom, as we read in the 2. to the Collos. the whole body doth grow into the augmentation of God. And the Pope ●sa head which doth not infuse life, but directeth only: whereas Christ ●s the Principal head, of himself, with power of excellency, by which ●e instituted the Sacraments; justifies without sacraments, and finally disposeth of all things in the Church, as in his own proprieties: But the Pope is only the Vicaire of Christ and the ministerial Head of the Church, nor is he endued with that power of excellency, nor indeed with any at all, but such as Christ imparts unto him.  
Inferior, in the extent of time, being Christ was head from all eternity, whereas the Pope is Head only in tyme.  
Inferior, To conclude in respect of necessity, sithence Christ is the essential Head, without whom the Church is not able to subsiste one only moment: But the Pope is so head of the same, that without him it could for a time subsiste. Moreover, the Church is the body of Christ, not of the Pope. For Christ being as it were the Hypostasis and basis of this body, he supports all the members thereof, and works all in all. He sees by the eyes, hears by the ears, teacheth by his Doctors, baptiseth by his Ministers; by all he doth all. which doth not suit with the Pope. No man now, in my judgement can apprehend S. Peter's authority in the Church to be prejudicial to that of jesus Christ, since it is wholly of another nature and rank than his, and his withal, inferior and subject to it. Nor can the name of head, any more prejudice Christ, since names do add nothing to the nature of things, neither do they signify the same nature, or equal power with the diverse subjects to which they are attributed, sith even the least similitude and conformity, is sufficient, to allote the same names to subjects of sundry natures. Finally, if Christ be injured, for that, he being the head of the universal Church, yet the name and nature of Head is conferred upon S. Peter, his Lieutenant and Vicaire general over the whole Church; why is there not also injury done unto God, he being as well the head of every particular Church, when the same honour is done to his Lieutenants therein? Or if, as well in the one case as the other, his honour be diminished, why do you, in conserving him from one injury, permit another to come upon him? You will happily deny yourselves to be called the Heads of your Churches: but the answer is frivolous, 
Saenderus de Schismate Anglican. Ribadeneira de codem. Du Chesne in hist Anglic. in vitae Elizabeth.  since deny you cannot, that your brethren in England do accnowledge the king of great Bri●anie to be the Head of the whole Church of England; yea and that which deserves a diligent remark) as well temporal as spiritual. Whence may be gathered, that either the dignity of the Pope, doth not in any sort derogate from the dignity of Christ; or if it do derogate, the same honour also in the king of England doth derogate from God's hononr. But if granting the one, you do yet impugn the other, I demand, (supposing that you mean not to have your own will to stand for a reason) a reason of the disparity. Nor will it a white avail you, to deny the parity, by affirming, that a particular man is sufficient to govern a particular Church, yet not an universal Church: because the question here is not, of the activity or extent of one man's power, but only to know, whether, Christ being the head of the Church, one should contumeliously wrong him, by establishing an other head thereof. which doth cleately show a parity betwixt a Particular head being compared to jesus Christ as such; and an universal head compared unto him in the same nature and quality of universal head. Now whether one man be of sufficient ability to govern the whole Church, is a new, yet a easy question to be decided, sith that which a man performs by the help of a friend, himself is said and esteemed to do.  
But that I may cut of all evasions, ● demand of you, whether, if the whole Church, which you bravingly pretend to be reform, were in England, whom you hold to be the head of it, would be also in your opinion the head of the universal Church? If you grant this, why should a quality which is not injurious in his person, be injurious in the person of Peter? But if you deny it render a reason of your negation. It is not, in that the essence or nature of Head, is, in genere, or generally speaking, contumelious, since you grant it to a prince whom you honour: Nor is it, for that one only is not sufficient to govern the universal Church, because following that supposition the Church is reduced to such circumstances, that it doth not exceed the ability of one man to govern it since one man actually in that extension doth govern it. And therefore it is manifest, that that which we teach is not injurious to jesus Christ: or if it be, impertinently then do you sustain the part of a Plaintive in a crime, wherein you yourselves will be convinced as culpable. Which yet will be made more evident, by the ensuing articles, where I will endeavour to show that it is a greater advantage of honour, to produce a thing by the assistance of another (though one man alone be able to produce it) permitting another to have share in the glory, which he could reserve to himself alone, and will make appear by consequence, that it is more honourable to Christ jesus, who alone is able to govern the Church yea thirty Churches, if so many there could be, to let others share in this government, then wholly to reserve it to himself. And even at this present I will give you a scantling of it, in that which by the light of faith you have seen, to wit, that God did repute it a greater laud and glory, to have constituted Christ, as man, the Head of the universal Church under him, then to have retained, and reserved all that dignity to himself, without communicating it to any other.  
In conclusion I would in treat the Reader, diligently to observe the Minister's subtlety, which is of this nature; that whereas there are two sorts of questions. The one. Whether the Pope be the Head of the universal Church. The other whether supposing him to be the head of the universal Church, he ought to be called another head of the Church then jesus Christ, or not. In like manner: whether good works be meritorious, and supposing them to be meritorious whether that merit ought to be termed another merit then that of jesus Christ? Whether the works of pennane do cleance from sin; and supposing they do cleance from sin whether they ought to be called another cleanceing or purgatory then the blood of jesus Christ? whether the rite and celebration of the Eucharist be a true sacrifice; and supposing it to be a true sacrifice, whether it is to be called another sacrifice then that of the Cross? Of which two questions, the first belongs to the nature and being of the thing and is of Faith. The second, respects the name only, and is not of Faith, 
S. Aug. contr. julianum cap. c.  and therefore, as S. Augustine saith, may be disputed pro & con amongst Catholics Doctors, without impeachment to Faith.  
In these questions, this is the Ministers craft. They pass the first which is of faith overin silence; The other, which is not of Faith, they discuss. To the end that by rejecting these forms of speech. There is another head of the Church then Christ: another merit, than Christ's merit: another sacrifice, than the sacrifice of the Cross etc. they may carry away the Reader to believe, that none is head of the Church but Christ: and finally that no action but that which Christ performed upon the Cross was a sacrifice.  
And be it that following some Catholic Doctors we may use those kinds of speech, either meaning, that there is another head of the Church then jesus Christ, another merit; another sacrifice; etc. not of another kind, but of another order only: or else, that there is another person than jesus Christ, who is head of the Church; other works, meritorious; another actions, sacrifice, etc. In which sense some times I call the eucharist another sacrifice then that of the Cross; and good works, other meritorious works then those of jesus Christ.  
But for as much as I observed, that the Ministers by this slight of impugnig a manner of speech, aimed at the utter destruction of certain Articles of Faith: I thought good to grant them, that we were not barely to sustain that there is another head; another merit; another sacrifice etc. thereby to make evident, that whether we grant, or we deny them this manner of speech, yet can they thence draw no advantage against that which is of Faith?    

SECTION IU.  

MINISTERS.  
NOr other Purgatory for our sins, but his blood.   

ANSWER.  
IF by the word Purgatory, you understand not the place where, but the cause whereby we are purged from our sins, we entirely join hands with you: for in that sense we teach, 
Aust. l. 2. cont. Crescon. c. 12. Mundantur homines baptisms. mun●ātur & ver●o veritatis, mundantur & sacrificio con●riti cordis, mundantur & ●leemosynis, mundantur & ●●sae charitate.  that there is no other Purgatory, then in the blood of Christ.  
We say indeed with S. Augustine, that there are other things, as, baptism; the word of truth; the sacrifice of a contrite hart; alms deeds, and Charity, which do purge and purify men's souls: but whereas they do cleance us, neither by their own virtue, nor by the means of any other thing, which is distinct from the blood of Christ, but by the power and virtue thereof, and that in a far different manner, to wit, inferior and subordinate to that, by which he doth first purge us, one ought not to call it another purgatory: because diverse Purgatories, for the reasons already alleged, import a purifying (diversi generis) of another kind, while yet, no such thing is found in man's justification, there being nothing at all which can purge us, but by the force and efficacy of the blood of jesus Christ. This blood itself, of itself doth expiate our crimes, as being the only and proper prize of our sins, and that whereby our debts are canceled. But the word of God, Penance, Faith, Charity, and such like, do not of themselves expiate, but by the virtue which doth reside in the blood of Christ, but by dependency of that; but by power derived from it. They do not purge as the prize of our sins, but as dispositions and instruments, instituted to the end the efficacy of the blood of our saviour jesus Christ might be applied unto us which doth plainly show that all these purging prepartives, though they be of another order or degree, yet are they of the same kind, and by consequence, that there is but one purgatory.  
Both you and we do jointly hold, that sins are forgiven by the sole and only mercy of God; yet dare none deny but the same sins are remitted by the blood of jesus Christ, which is the fruit and effect of this divine mercy, and the glorious instrument by which it is applied unto us: so In like manner, when we say that sins are forgiven by the blood of Christ, there is no repugnance, to say also that they are remitted by faith, and the Sacraments which are the wholesome and blessed effects of this blood, and instruments appointed to apply it unto our wounds. Wherein if we injure God, how will you purge yourselves of the same crime? for as we sustain that sins are cleanced by Sacraments which apply unto us the prize of our saviours precious blood; so likewise, you hold that by Faith sins are abolished. Whence it is, that though we do greatly differre in the number of the means, which by such application, do blot out sins, yet we agree in the substance of the thing we here defend, which consists in this, that we jointly confess, that some things there are which do cleance us by the communication of the merits and efficacy of our saviours blood. Nor will it avail you to say that you do far differre from us; for that we would have faith to concur to justification, by way of a disposition, whereas you hold that it concurs no otherwise, then that as a hand receives what is presented, so faith doth apprehend or lay hand upon justification which the blood of Christ did entirely produce, For this is said only, and hath no sufficient ground. And again, if there be any thing found which doth derogate from the merit of that blood: it is not to be judged that it is that preparative concourse of merits, whereby it is applied: but even what ever doth concur, as your faith, by any way of application, as though it were not suitable to the worth of this blood that it of itself should apply itself. And so, even your concourse of faith doth no less derogate from the virtue of Christ his blood then the concourse of Sacraments, because you hold faith to be the means, without which that blood can no ways be communicated. But even you yourselves, when you please, do accnowledge diverse means, by which the satisfaction of Christ is is applied unto us: 
Molinaeus in suosento par 1. artic. 19  for thus saith Molins. Behold the means which the word of God doth present unto us, whereby we may apply unto ourselves Christ. First Baptism, than the sacred suppar, and lastly faith. Some times also you do ingenuously teach, with us, that the temporal pains due unto our sins, are mitigated by our works, which in very deed is to accnowledge our works to be expiatory, or to contain in them an expiating virtue. 
Conf. August. cap. de Confess.  Conf. Augustana. And withal you are to know, that sins are often punished with temporal punishments even in this life, as David and sundry others were punished, and we hold that these pains are mitigated by good works and all kind of penance. So teacheth S. Paul: if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. Further, 
a Art. 11.  we accnowledge what by good works our calamities are lessened,  to that of Isaias. 
b Confessio Saxonica.  Conf. Saxonia. Albeit temporal punishments are especially mitigated through the son of God, yet we teach withal, that punishments are lessened by means of our whole conversion, since S. Paul doth say, if we judge etc. We 
c Cap. de Purgatorio.  are not to call in doubt, saith the same, but that saints have their fire of purgatory in this life, as the examples of David, Ezechtel, jonas and others, give testimony. The same also doth the 
d Respons. ad argum.  Apology Conf. Augustanae, 
e In assert. art 2.  Luther, and 
f In Catechesi cap. de satisfactione. Et in locis cap de satisfactione, & in disput. tom. 4. p. 529. & sequentib.  Melancton teach: By how much we are more severe towards ourselves, saith even 
g 1. Instit. c. 3. § 15. etc. 23. § 4.  calvin himself, by so much are we to hope for a more easy encrie to God's mercy. And verily, it is impossible that the soul struck with the horror of judgement, should not prevent gods wrathful hand, by exacting punishment at her own hands, and a little after, to appease Gods wroth, we ourselves do exact punishments at our own hands for trespasses committed.  
But verily so far is the doctrine of the Catholic Church, from drawing a coutumelie upon the merit of the blood of Christ, that contrariwise, even as he should be esteemed injurious to God's mercy, who should say that our sins are so abolished by the means thereof, that they should not in any sort stand in need of the blood of jesus Christ, which yet was disposed by the same divine mercy, as its instrument, so should one do an injury to the blood of jesus Christ, to hold that our sins are so cleanced by it, that Faith and Sacraments, which the son of God instituted in his blood as fit instruments to apply it unto our souls, did not at all cleance them. Men are injurious to their Redeemour, when they change (be in under what ever colour of his honour) what by himself was established for their salvation. And therefore Catholics, (as it is clear by what we have said) being freed from the aspersions and crimes which tacitly you impose upon us of preiudicing the merit of the blood of jesus Christ, it is discovered that yourselves are guilty thereof.  
But me thinks I hear you say that the difficulty of the question consists in this, to wit whether it was the will of jesus Christ that his blood should be applied, by the means we assign. To which I reply: firste, that at least it is manifest, that what we teach in this point, is not of its own nature impossible, as being injurious to jesus Christ, which notwithstanding you pretend, and do daily fill the people's ears with the noise of it. And then, I will make clear to all the world, that whosoever believes the scripture, and gives credit to the Fathers, must necessarily believe that there is some other thing besides the blood of Christ, which doth purge, though in the virtue and efficacy thereof: for the 
a Act. 3. & 15. Ad Rom. 3. ad Ephes. 3. ad Titum 3. 1. Petr. 1. 1 jacob. 2. Prou. 15 & 16.  Scripture in diverse passages in most formal terms saith, that we are purged, purified, justified, cleanced by faith, by works, by Sacraments: and that the 
b Cyprian. de lapsis & epist. 26. & 55. Tertul. de poenit. cap. 3. Origen. in Leuit. cap. 15. Aug. in Enchir. & lib. 1. de symb. c. 6. Hieron. de obitu Fabio. Ambr. ep. 82. & de Elia & ieiunio. c. 22.  father's grounding upon holy Writ, teach in a hundred places, that by Baptism, Penance, tears, works, Marcyrdome, sins are purged, washed, cleanced, removed, redeemed, blotted out abolished, consumed, expiated. And in diverse others, that God is appeased by works, that he is made propitious by works. In a word, as S. 
c Lib. de Elia c. 20. Habemus plura subsidia quibus peccata nestra redimamus. Et alibi multis locis.  Ambrose saith that we have diverse means by which we redeem our sins. And sundry remedies by which we are washed and purged of our offences.    

SECTION V.  

MINISTERS.  
NOr other sacrifice, propitiatory for our sins, than his death and passion.   

ANSWER.  
THat we teach no other propitiatory sacrifice then that of lesus Christ, the reason which above we deduced at large, doth make good; the word, other, signfying a thing of a diverse kind, when it is taken absolutely, as the Ministers in this place do take it. So that the eucharist cannot be called, other, then that of jesus Christ upon the Cross: because being subject to that, and deriving from it its force and efficacy, it is not of a diverse kind, but only of another order, as being far inferior; not by reason of the Host, which is the same, but in regard of the effects, and the visible action by which it is immediately offered. This is yet more confirmed in that we do accnowledge the sacrifice of the Eucharist to be one and the same with that of the cross by a triple identity. Both by reason of the host offered, which is one in both; it is one host, saith 
a Ambr. in Heb. 10. una est hostia non multae.  S. Ambrose, and 
b In Heb. 10.  Primasius, and not many hosts. We offer still the same, saith 
c In Hebr. 9 eumden semper offerrimus, non nunc quidem alium sed semper eundem.  S. Chrisostome not now another, but always the same. And also by reason, of the prime and principal offerer which is jesus Christ, now jesus Christ is offered, saith 
d lib. 1. de officiis c. 48. Nunc Christus offertur sed offertur quasi homo, quasi recipiens passionem, & offered se ipse quasi Sacerdos, ut peccata nostra dimittat.  S. Ambrose, as man: suffering passion, and as priest he offerrs himself, to the end he may pardon our sins. And lastly by reason of the manner of the oblation which is like; for even as jesus Christ truly died upon the Cross, and as his blood was really separated from his body: so is he dead in the Eucharist in appearance as we will explicate more fully in the sixth Chapter. Whereupon 
e Cypr. ep. 63. Amb. lib de officiis cap. 48. Alex. Papa ep. ad omnes Orthodoxos. Isych. l. 2. in Lenit. c. 8. Nyssen. erat. 1. de resurrect. Chrys hom. 24 in 1. Cor. Greg. l. 4. dialog c. 38. & hom. 37. in Euang.  the Fathers call the sacrifice of the Eucharist the passion of jesus Christ: the renewed passion of jesus Christ: yea further they say, he is slain, and as it were suffers his passion, for though he neither die nor suffer indeed, yet doth he both die and suffer in a mystical manner. And therefore, grounding upon this triple identity, we fear not to say with 
f Home 2. in 2 ad Tim. Oblatio eadem est.  S. Chrisostome; that the sacrifice of the Cross and the Eucharist is one and the same sacrifice; and with 
a In cap. 8. ad Heb. Clarum est nos non aliud sacrificium offer.  Theodorete, that it is manifest that we offer no other sacrifice then that of the Cross.  
And that the propitiation of the sacrifice of the Eucharist, doth not destroy the propitiation of the sacrifice of the cross, it is evident, in that it is not opposite unto it, but contrariwise, is substituted, subordinate, and of a far lower degree: the sacrifice of the Cross being propitiatory of it own virtue as the proper satisfaction for our offences; whereas the Eucharist is only propitiatory in virtue of the sacrifice of the Cross, the fruit of whose propitiation it applies unto us. The oblation of the Mass is not propitiatory, as though the sacrifice of the Cross were not alone sufficient to appease Gods wroth, and to make him become propitious: but it is only propitiatory in virtue of the plenteousness of the sacrifice of the Cross, whose virtue is so great, that it can communicate a part thereof to others, and the will of the sacryficed is such, that as he is able, so also he is willing to communicate it. Establishing his glory, not in reserving the whole propitiation of the sins of man to the sacrifice of the Cross, but also in imparting some part thereof, to the sacrifice which men do celebrate as his ministers, in memory of his passion. And like as he who hath an excellent fruit tree, shows himself far more liberal, if making a present of his ripe fruit, he add also a young shoot thereof which of itself may yield fruit: so jesus Christ, is much more bountiful, in bestowing upon men not only the fruit of his propitiation which sprung from his own person in the sacrifice of the Cross, but even another sacrifice which as an excellent shoot, is able to bring forth fruits like to those which we gathered upon the tree of the Cross. Where fore, so far is the propitiation of the sacrifice of the Eucharist, from preiudicing the propitiation of the sacrifice of the Cross, that on the contrary side it makes the perfection and excellence thereof more gloriously appear. Whence it follows that you are truly worthy of hatred, by reason of the calumnies which you falsely impose upon us making us odious to your adherents; as though, forsooth, we taught some thing in this point prejudicial to jesus Christ.  
Nor is this all, you are in this be half worthy of hatred for a reason much more odious than that which I have mentioned above.  
You make a remonstrance that you are hated for sustaining that there is no other propitiation then that of the death and passion of jesus Christ: but you are indeed worthy to be abhorred, for holding that the blood and death of jesus Christ is in no sort propitiatory; that his death, and precious blood have not appeased God's wrath towards mankind: that there was yet need of a more excellent price; and that this price was the torments of a lost, banished, and damned man, which with a sacrilegious mouth you blasplemously affirm that Christ endured in his soul. Damnable doctrine! not of men but of devils! not from Heaven or earth, but issuing out of Hell, whither they that hold it, justly deserve to be condemned, unless they root that doctrine out of their hart, and with their tongue publish a contrary. Of these crimes I accuse you, with what justice I shall make appear. Nothing had been done, saith 
a Calu. 2. Instat. c. 1. §. 10. Nihil actum eratsi corporea tantum morte defunctus fuisset Christus, sed aliud maius & excellentius pretium fuisse, quod diros in anima cruciatus damnati & perditi hominis pertulerit.  Caluin, (you know for how great and admirable a prophet 
b Danaus' in Antibell. Bezaep. 6.  you esteem him) if jesus Christ had died only a corporal death; but it was a greater, and more excellent price to have suffered in his soul the cruel tortures of a damned and lost man. In this torment, saith 
c Beza in Lucam 22. v. 44. In hoc cruciatu pisita est nestra pacis & cum Deo recenciliationis summa.  is placed the sum of our Peace and reconciliation to God. To satisfy in the name of sinners, saith your 
d 10. Sunday.  catechism, it was necessary that he should feel that horrible distress in his own conscience, as though he had been forsaken of God, yea even, as though God had been wrathful against him. That is to say, it was necessary, that he should have bendamned, as your ensuing words do more clearly convince, signifying his dolours in the word, damnation, and saying, that what is perpetual to others, whom God in his wrath punisheth, was only temporal in him. Whereby is apparent that according to your opinion Christ jesus suffered the pains of the damned, and this to satisfy for the sins of man, as though his death had not been of sufficient valour.  

a Scarpus de iustif. contro. 16.  Yea one of your own men relates that there were diverse Protestants of opinion that those places of scrip. wherein Christ was said to die for us, were not to be understood of a corporal death, but only of the sense of God's wrath nor indeed did his corporal death contribute any thing at all to the expiation of sin; nor was it therefore to be esteemed as a part of satisfaction for sins. Some peradventures, may here apprehend that you will betake yourselves to your old solution which consists in the liberty you take at your own liking, to reject all authority, and at your pleasure, to deny your own Masters. Yet seeing, that Whitakere, 
Wittat. l. 8. cont. Durand. sect. 18 Caluinus verissime secri sit nihil actum fuisse si mortem tantum corpoream Christus obiisset.  one of your prime moderns, instead of using this evasion, seconds and sustains calvin in his blasphemy, saying, that he wrote most truly, that nothing had been done, if jesus Christ had only suffered a corporal death. (Nor can I doubt but you will imitate him therein, and therefore take his, as your answer,) I demand of you, whether so many pricking thorns, so many stripes, spittings, blows, derisions, nails, and to comprehend all in a word, that innumerable number of pains to which was annected the ignominious and cruel death of the only son of God, did contribute nothing to the salvation and redemption of mankind? What doth occur in Sctiptures either more frequently, or clearly, then that we are redeemed by the blood and death of Christ? Matt. 26. this is my blood which shall be powredout for many for the remission of sins. Heb. 9 Christ an high Priest by his own blood entered in once into the Holyes, eternal redemption being found. And again in the same place, if the blood of oxen sanctifieth to the cleansing of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, cleanse our conscience from dead works. and Apoc. 5. Thou hast redeemed us to God in thy blood. In the 7. to the Ephes. the first chap. to the Coloss. In the first of S. Peter the first Chapter. In the first of S. john first Chapter. In the first Chapter of the Apoc. it is said, that we are sanctified, washed, cleansed, by the blood of jesus Christ. In S. Matthew, S. Marc, 
Matth. 26. Mars. 22. Luc. 22. Cor. 11.  S. Luc and S. Paul, jesus Christ saith. This is my body, given delivered broken for you. Heb. 10. we are sanctified by the oblation of the body of jesus Christ, and in another place, by one oblation he hath consummated the sanctified for all eternity. The scripture saith that we are redeemed by the blood, which he shed for the remission of our sins. That he doth cleanse our conscience of dead works, that by him we are purged and washed, that, the body of jesus Christ is delivered and given for us, that by him we are sanctified. You contrariwise say, that nothing had been done, without the interposition of some other thing. To which must we give credit? to the mysteries of the scripture, or to your blasphemies? in refutation Whereof I will spend no more time, since they are of the same kind with those of which S. Hierome speaks, when he saith, that to discover them, is to vanquish them, there being no need to convince that which by it own confession is blasphemous.    

SECTION VI.  

MINISTERS.  
NOr other merit before God than the obedience which he offered up to his father for us.   

ANSWER.  
THat it may be perspecuously understood what is in this place in controversy betwixt us, we are first to note, that there is a greare difference betwixt saying, there is no other merit but the merit of Christ, and, there are no meritorious works but the works of Christ. For he that affirms that there are no other meritorious works but those of Christ, doth exclude the works of men from all merit: but he that says that there is no other than Christ's merit, is to be understood, not that the works of men are of no merit, but that they have no efficacy but in virtue of the merits of Christ, since it is manifest, by the reasons above alleged in the like case, that diverse actions which have subordination amongst themselves, do not establish diverse merits. Your religion is not hated for the first point, that is, for that it doth teach, that there is no other merit before God, but Christ his obedience: for, as we have said, that we grant; but by reason of the second, for as much as you teach that this obedience of Christ doth contribute no force to any man, whereby he may merit: pretending, forsooth that this is prejudicial to, the dignity of Christ, and derogating from the price of his merits, which is not so.  
And that we hold no other merit then the obedience of jesus Christ, it is evident because, as we have shown out of Scripture, Fathers, and by the light of reason, these words an other metit, import a merit of another kind, which hath no subordination to the merits of Christ, which is not found in our case, since we openly confess that men's works, are of no merit at all but in virtue of those of jesus Christ; and consequently, according to us, speaking simply and absolutely, the obedience of Christ is the only merit of the whole world. And indeed the works of the just, following the phrase of 
a Isa. 26. Omnia opera nostra operatus es in nobis. 1. Cor. 10. Idem verò Deus qui operatur omniainomnibus. Matth. 10. Non vos estis quiloquimini sed spiritus Patris loquitur in vobis. 2. Cor 13. An experimentum quaeritis eius que in me loqui tur Christus. 1. Cor. 5. Non ego sed gratia Dei mecum. Galat. 2 Vivo ego iam non ego, vivit verò in me Christus.  Scripture, and holy 
b Aug in psal. 83. Christus oratin nobis ut caput nostrum. Petrus Chrysologus serm 11. Deus in te ieiunat in te esurit. Bern. l. de amore Dei est. Tuteipsum amas in nobis.  Fathers, being termed the works of God, of the Holy Ghost, yea of jesus Christ, so that the scripture, to attribute them absolutely to God, deneys them to be ours, no man can even with any show of reason affirm, that the merit of our actions, is any other than the merit of jesus Christ.  
Now that the meritorious works of men do not any ways derogate from the merit of Christ, is manifest by this, that if it were so, our prayers and impetrations would be imurious to the prayers and impetrations of Christ, for there is parity of reason in both. Again it is clear in this, that when 
a Calu. 2. Instit. c. 17. §. 1. Inscitè opponitur Christi meritum misericordiae Dei, regula enim vulgaris est quae subalterna sunt non pugnare.  Caluin observed, that diverse deneyed the merit of Christ, because they apprehened it repugnant to grace, he affirmed that they did foolishly find opposition in those two things, grounding himself upon this axiom quae subalterna sunt non repagnant that things subordinate have n● repugnancy. And 
b Calu. 3. Inst. c. 20. §. 27. Ac tametsi fideles ultro citroque preces pro fratribus apud Deum offerunt hoc nihil vnicaa Christi intercessioni derogare ostendimus simul ea subnixi tam se quam alios Deo commendant. Item §. 19 Quanquam interim & suae Sanctis intercessiones relinquuntur, quibus alij aliorum salutem mutuo inter se Deo commendant, de quibus meminit Apostolus, sed tales quae ab unica illa dependeant, tantùm abest ut delibent ex ea quippiam. Nam ut à dilectionis affectu scaturiunt quae nos ultro citroque amplectimur, ceu unius corporis membra; ita etiam ad capitis unitatem referuntur, etc. Cap. 14. §. 18. & 19  for the same reason, he deneyed that the intercessions of the faithful did in any sort derogate from the intercessions of Christ, because, saith he, those depend of these and are subject unto them: and therefore neither do our merits derogate, or are they repugnant to the merits of Christ being subordinate unto them, no otherwise then his own merits is subordinate to his grace; our prayers and impetrations to his. Whereupon he deneys that the justice of works is opposite to the justice of Faith, because that, is subject to this. In the same place, and for the same reason, he sustains that the hope of salvation, which is conceived by good works, is not contradictory to the hope of salvation, which we demand through the mercy of God. But hence it is yet more manifest, that, as the merit of Christ, doth not diminish the glory of God's mercy towards us, (for that argues no impotency in his mercy, as though of itself it were not powerful enough, to restore us what we have lost) but contrariwise Christ's merit, doth commend and extol the force of the dinine mercy, when it makes apparent, that the divine mercy was not content, to have brought us again in to grace and favour with God, but moreover, it would have Christ to merit this grace for us, which did farsurpasse that. For none can doubt but one that should have lost all his fortunes, should be far more obliged to him who would redeem them, to the end to render them unto him; then to him, who would otherwise render them, not taking the pains to redeem them. Wherefore the merits of men do not lessen the merits of Christ; nor argue taem of insufficiency or impotency, as not being powerful enough to restore unto us what we had lost: for it is a clear thing, that whereas they are of an infinite value, even every least part thereof, could have merited all. But contrariwise men's merits do openly proclaim the virtue of Christ his merits: fos, as the mercy of God, did bountefully bestow upon us the merits of Christ; so Christ's merits do impart unto us, ours; and make a more ample demonstration of his goodness and glory, in that he would not only merit that for our benefit, which we of ourselves were not capable to merit, to wit, remission of the fault, and satisfaction for the eternal pain, but moreover he would have us to merit those things (as the increase of grace) together with him, which do not exceed the capacity of our merits. Which is so far from depressing, that it doth even extol his glory, since that there is nothing more glorious, then to admit another, freely and of our own accord, into the participation of that glory, which we could have reserved to ourselves alone. Thus doth Christ proceed with us as well in this as in that which he doth impetrate for us: because he would not only merit that alone whereof we were incapable, as the first inspirations to good; but he would also merit strength for us, to demand and obtain some things with him: which is a far greater favour: for in that, he doth not only impart unto us the fruit of his prayers but also bestows upon us the virtue thereof; that is, he did not only make us capable of receiving what he produced, but also granted unto us power with him, to produce, and withal to receive some thing. The same happens in the production of natural things, where God, who of himself is able to produce all things, doth yet practise that absolute power, in the production of those things, which are beyond the reach, and actititie of second causes, as for example, the creation of the world, of Angels, of reasonable souls, and leave them to contribute their virtue to all other things that are not placed without their spheere, to manifest thereby the excess of his bounty, and to acquire unto himself a larger proportion of honour, by making them not only partakers of the effects which flow from his power, but of force withal to produce them with him: being a more honourable thing unto God to endow 2. causes with force to cooperate in some things with him, then to leave them without all action in his productions, as though they were altogether incapable of the same. Howbeit the (ratio) or essence of merit which is found in the actions of men, proceeds not from the substance of their work, but from the grace alone which they receive by the metit of jesus Christ, as S. Augustin observes, saying, that the merits of the just are merits, because they are just, that is, for that they proceed from people justified, and grateful unto God, by means of his grace which is in them, who will think that our merits which are the effects of the grace of Christ alone, do disparage the glory of the merits of Christ? yea who will not plainly discover, that the merits of men do redound to the glory of Christ his merits? No otherwise then the splendour of rich gems, and the brightness of the moon and stars, which are effects of the sun's Light, do augment his glory, so far are they from diminishing it! Which moved Brentius to say, 
In Apologia, Confess. Witemberg. cap. de contritione.  that we extolled Christ with too great praises, while we aver, that he merited that our works should be meritorious. And another Author, 
Ericcius l. 4. de Eccles. c. 4.  of no small note, confesseth, that in this thing we make Christ his glory wonderful illustrious.  
Whence it is manifest, that our merits are so far from injuring though merits of Christ, that they even turn to his greater glory. And indeed, since the operations of the members belong to the head, because this commands them, and imparts virtue towards their production, how should the dignity of the works of the members of jesus Christ our Head, become rather contumelious then honourable unto him? By every one of our actions, saith 
a In cap 6. Zachariae. Saluator in singulis coronam acci  S. Hierome, our head is crowned. Our good works being gifts of God the Father, effects of the Holy Ghost the principal Agent, fruits of the passion of jesus Christ, the end for which he suffered, the act of the children of God, and those who are participant of his divine nature; in conclusion, being rather works of God, then of men, as the 
b Matth. 20. 1. Cor. 15. Gaelaet. 2.  holy scripture doth teach us; who will repute the dignity of such works contumelious to God? Yea who will not rather judge those contumelious to God the Father, the Holy Ghost, to jesuns Christ, his sufferances, who like to your selves, impugn the merits of good works, since by impugning them, they do truly impugn the gifts of God; the operations of the H. Ghost; the fruits of our saviours passion; the effects of grace, in fine, the dignity of good works which proceed rather from God then from men? Who will not in contemplation hereof judge your religion worthy of hatred, yea even of horror; and ours for the contrary, praise worthy? And therefore it is apparent that if your doctrine be hated in respect of that which it teacheth touching merit, you cannot, as you pretend, draw any advantage from it, but contrariwise it turns to your disadvantage, since it is hated, not for sustaining a thing which is advantageous, but prejudicial to God's glory. Which happens not only in this point, but in all the rest of the points of this Chapter.  
It is truly hated for sustaining things prejudicial to God, not only in that you deny, as I have already shown, the works of Saints to be meritoriours; but, which is more (and indeed a thing causing horror) because your Prime Authors, whose doctrine you embrace as distending down from heaven, deny that the works of jesus Christ are meritorious. I confess, saith calvin, 
2. Instit. c. 17. §. 1. Equidem fateor, si quis simpliciter & per se Christum opponere vellet iudicio Dei, non fore merito locum quiae non reperiretur in homine dignitas quae posset Deum promereri.  that if any would oppose jesus Christ, simply and nakedly considered in himself, to God's judgement, there were no place for merit, because there is no dignity found in man which can merit God. Whence is plainly gathered, that you repute not the works of jesus Christ meritorious before God for their own dignity and worth, but only by means of God's favourable acceptance thereof.  
There rests no more to be done in this Chapter, but to beseech the Reader, as I instantly do, to note by the way, that though you would be thought to have no other aim in these Articles but God's honour and glory, yet is it but a cloak you take, under which your end is to seek yourselves, freeing yourselves in this world, from all the pain and difficulty which is found in doing well.  
For why do you establish the Scripture the only rule of your salvation, but to deliver yourselves from obedience to the Church, and from subjection to Traditions which are manifestly contrary unto you, imitating herein that, 
Tertul. prescript. c. 17. Necessario ●●lunt agnos●●● ea per quae revincuntur.  which Tertullian, notes in the Heretics of his time, when he saith, that they will in no sort accnowledge that whereby they are convinced?  
To what end do you deny that S. Peter was the Head of the universal Church under jesus Christ, but only to cast off the subjection to his Successors authority, even as Rebels, to be freed from the Vice-Roys authority, would deny that any other but the king had power over him?  
Why will you have the blood of Christ only to purge you, but only to avoid pain and trouble, and to be subject to no satisfaction?  
What reason have you to deny the merit of good works, but only to flatter your own sloyth; and to be obliged to no painstaking for the obtaining of Paradise showing yourselves herein Epicures shollers, who for love of ease, 
l. 8. Conf. c. 16. Negavit tractus meritorum.  as S. Augustine notes, denied the course of merits.  
Why do you reject the propitiation of the sacrifice of the Mass, but by banishing all other propitiation, save that of the sacrifice of the Cross, to take a way all conceit that we ought to endeavour to make God propitious? You have God's honour in your mouth, but your private interest in your hart: two specious ways by which you draw poor sooles to your belief, but to their own perdition, which is indeed that which you will purchase to you and yours, who cannot die in your errors, but withal they perish eternally.     

CHAP. FOUR  

Section. I.  

MINISTERS.  
Your Majesty should also see that we are hated, because we would have the people themselves to know the ways of salvation, in lieu of referring themselves totally to others by an affected scruple, and voluntary ignoronce which is covered with a cloak of obedience and docility: and to this effect we would have the people to hear and read the holy Scripture in a tongue known to all; and that public service should be done in your subjects Wlgaire tongue, that they might be instructed thereby. And that henceforth God should not be suspected by men, as though his word were a dangerous book from which the people ought to abstain: For France stands obliged unto us in this, that we have published holy Writ in the french tongue (which formerly was an unknowen book) and that we have given the children a sight of their Father's Will which was heretofore hidden from them.   

ANSWER.  
YOu continue the guiles which you used in the precedent Chapter, while you represent yourselves as men loaden with hatred for certain considerations which in your conceit might purchase you love. Having insinuated yourselves into the hearts of the people by pretending Christ's interest, you have recourse to their own, with more facility to entice and gain them to yourselves. You promise them wonders, and make show of great obligations: while yet you do but delude, deceive, and lead them to their perdition: impose upon us: manifestly contradict yourselves: condemn in us, what yourselves practise: brag of things which belong not to you; and affect novelties.  

a A word is not a wordexcept in as much as it signifieth and expresseth the conceits of him that speaketh: and for this reason the scripture, to speak properly, is not the word of God, but by reason of the senses which makes us know the conceits or counsels of God. Hieron. Basil. & alij Patres passim. Whit. ad rationem  And since reason, the Fathers, and the common consent even of your own men, 
2. Campiani. Ipsa vis & res & quidammodo anima Sacrarum literarum in sententia consistit. Rectè Hieronymus non in legendo sed in intelligendo scripturae c●nsistunt. Et alibi, non in verbis Scripturarum est Euangeli●m, sed in sensu.  do urge you to grant that the holy scripture doth principally consist in the sense, not in the bare letter, (though it contain the one and the other) I shall with facility make manifest unto all the word, that you do but deride the people. Because while you protest to permit them the full and entire knowledge thereof, you grant them no more liberty in point of sense, than the Catholic Church doth her children: for though all yours have perminion to read the Scripture, yet is it not lawful for any of them to explicate it in any other sense then that of calvin, or your own as is made manifest by sundry examples, and peculiarly by that of the institution of the eucharist, where none can explicate these words This is my body, otherwise then figuratively.  
Wherein you resemble those that promising a great treasure, give only the sight of the coffer wherein it is kept. Nay you give not yet so much, for doubting of the translation of the scripture, and ingeniously 
b Whit. cont. 1. q. 2. c. 7. Nullam nos editionem nisi Hebrateam in 〈◊〉, & Grae c●in n●●o Tes●un ento authenti●am fa●●●us.  confessing that there is no version at all authentical, that is, of sufficient credit, the people have just reason, not only to doubt of the sense of the scripture which you deliver, but even of the very letter of the version which you propose unto them, and consequently of their salvation; it being a clear case, that they can have no greater assurance of that than they have of the means whereby you would conduct them thither. He that promiseth children fruit to eat, and yet gives them only Amands which they cannot crack, doth but mock them: yea he mocks them doubly when the Amands are not true but counterfeit only: So do you doubly delude those who believe you in a matter of importance; since that the letter of the Scripture which you give them, is not authentical; not do you permit them of themselves to gather out of it the true and natural sense which in their judgement it contains. You mock them verily and deceive them both at once.  
You deceive them, because under the name of the word of God, you present unto them the word of men, sithence you deliver them the scripture changed by man's invention, and interpreted against the sense which the words bear as I have already shown; and that, as 
a In 1. Gal. Interpretatione perversa de Euamgelio Christi, hominis fit Euangelium, aut quod peius est diaboli. Luther lib. de Missaprivata.  S. Hierome notes, The Gospel of jesus Christ, is made the Gospel of men by a perverse interpretation, yea which is worse, the Gospel of the Devil, because, (will I add) use is made of it to establish untruth and error, whereof he is the father. And this may be more justly averred of yours, then of any other; because in certain passages you observe the sense which Luther received of the Devil in a visible shape. You delude the people by persuading them that of all the exterior means useful for our salvation, the reading of the Bible is the only certain one: which is manifestly false, for otherwise the blind which cannot read; simple and ignorant people who have no learning, could not be amongst the number of the faithful. They that were Christians before the Gospel was written; they that believed in the time of 
a Lib. 3. c. 4.  S. Ireneus, as he himself is witness, in Carist jesus, without paper and ink, were not of the faithful. They again, who understand not the hebrew and greek tongue were not capable of faith, since, according to you, no version is authentical, nor can faith be attained unto but by a means which is infallible. But if you reply that such people may receive it from the mouth of their Pastors who do faithfully preach unto them the word of God: it follows then that the Scripture is not the only extern means to obtain Faith, since you yourselves adjoin this second, which cannot be sufficient for some, unless it were so for all the rest. And in deed what reason is there so to ty and restrain the word of God to paper, to the character and letter, that it can no further be a means of salvation, than it is contained under these signs? Have they any force of their own nature? If not, why is not the word of God in the hart and mouth of the Church, and her Pastors, an assured means of salvation? You deceive the people, not only by persuading them that the reading of Scripture is the sole means of salvation, but moreover in teaching them that it is a sufficient means, and that none ought to look after any other: which is evidently false for two reasons: first because the Scripture teacheth that faith cometh by hearing, and that it hath so absolute a dependence of it, that without it, faith cannot be had. How, saith 
a Rom. 10. v. 14. Quomodo credent ei quem non audierunt? Quomodo aut●m audient sine pradicante? ergo fides ex auditu.  saint Paul, shall they believe him whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a Preacher? Therefore faith is by hearing. Whereby we see that reading only is not a sufficient means of faith, since according to the Apostle no man can have assurance either of the letter, or of the sense of the Scripture unless he learn of the Church how it is to be understood.  
Secondly, because if this means be sufficient for all the world, the Fathers of the Church, the Lutherans, Anabaptists, and others, who with great care and diligence made use of it, erred not in the fundamental points of faith as in your writings you upbrade them. But if you affirm that reading alone, is only sufficient in quality of an extern means, and that there is further required an inward illustration of the holy Ghost which is not in them that err: I demand a text of holy Scripture affirming that calvin and his followers, had this interior illustration rather than the others: if you can produce no such text; I demand why you believe it without Scripture? Again, I demand by what exterior or interior sign you can be assured to have this illustration of the holy Ghost in the understanding of these words This is my body, more than the Catholics, or Lutherans? Finally since reading only is not sufficient without this internal illustration of the holy Ghost, if you cannot by some infallible argument prove that you are assured of this illustration, I beseech you to accnowledge that you have no certainty of the sense of Scripture, nor consequently of your faith.  
Finally why doth the Eunuch (who had the holy Ghost, and readd diligently that place of isaiah, where the passion of our saviour is cleary foretold, being asked by Philippe one of the Deacons whether he understood what he readd, answer, 
a Act. 8. Et qu●modo possum si non a●● quis ostenderit mihi.  how can I unless some show it me? If to understand the Scripture a man be to rely upon the interior illustration of the holy Ghost, you cannot say as some times you do, that your meaning is not, that every one should understand all the Scripture, but 
b Whit. de perspicuit. script. c. 1. Nostrum axioma est omnia quae sunt ad salutem necessaria opertis verbis in scriptures prop●●●.  only, that which is necessary unto salutation, because the passage which the Eunuch confesseth he understandeth not, concerns not the passion of our saviour jesus Christ, which is the foundation of man's salvation. Nor will you affirm that the Eunuch was ignorant, sith the simple are as well to understand that which is necessary to salvation as the learned. Nor indeed ought he to be ranked amongst the ignorant, whom 
a Hieron. ep. 103. Ego nec sanctior sum hoc Eunucho, nec studiosior, & tantus amator legis divinaeque scientiae, cum librum teneret ignorabat eum, quem in libro nesciens venerabatur.  saint Hierome represents so studious, and so great a lover of the law, that he himself was not more addicted thereunto.  
That the Scripture is not easy to all men, itself doth witness, and the Fathers do teach. Itself doth witness; 
b 2. Petr. 3. In quibus sunt quaedam difficilia intellectu, quae indocti & instabiles depravant, sicut & caeteras scripturas ad svam ipsorum perditionem.  for saint Peter saith that in saint Paul's Epistle, there are certain things hard to be understood which the unlearned and unstable deprave as also the rest of the Scriptures to their own perdition. The Fathers do teach us the same. The Scriptures of the law, saith 
a Aug deutil. ered. c. 6. An istae scripturae legis planisssmae sunt, in quas isti quasi zulgo expositas impetum faciunt.  saint Augustine, are they most clear? And when a certain person told him that he readd and understood the Scripture of himself, he said. Is it so? Thou dar'st not adventure upon Terentianus Maurus Without the help of a Master; An infinity of Authors are required to the understanding of each Poet, and yet thou dar'st enterprise the reading of holy Write without a Guide, and pass thy judgement upon it without a Master. For the same reason 
b Et cap 7. Terentianum Maurum sine Magistre attingere non auderes Asper, Ceonutus, Donatus, & alij innumerabiles requirunturut quiesbet Poetae possit intelligs, tu in eos libros qui sancti divinarumque rerum pleni sunt sine duce irruis, & de his sine piaeceprere audes far sententiam.  saint Hierosine apprehends it very pernicious, that an old Trott, a Dotterel, a sophistical pratter, any one adventures upon the Scripture, Wears it out, gins to reach before they have yet learned it. And 
c Hieron. Epist. 103 ad Pauli. Hanc (scripturam) garrula anus, banc delirus senex, hanc universi praesumunt, lacerant, docent antequam descent. Cap. 1. & 2. Duplici modo munire fidem suam Domins adiwante deberet, primum scilicet divinae legis authoritate, tum deinde Ecclesiae Cathoiteae traditione: quiae videlicet scripturam laeramproipsasua altitudine non uno ecdemque sensu universi acciptunt.  saint Vincent. Leir saith that to avoid heresy, and to be established in the true faith it is necessary to adjoin the Tradition of the Church to Scripture: because the Scripture by reason of its depth, is not understood of all in one and the same sort. Therefore it is evident, that the Scripture alone without the explitation of the Church, doth but afford us a part of the rule of faith: and that you, who promise every one the knowledge of his salvation, of himself, do promise him, to speak with the 
a 1. Timot. 6.  Apostle, a knowledge of a false name, and push him on to know more than is behouffull, in steed of containing him within the terms of a modest knowledge, and teaching him with 
b Contra Epistolam fundam cap. 2. Cateran quip turbam non intelligendi vivacitas, sed credendi simplicitas tutissimam facit.  saint Augustine, that the simplicity of believing, not the vivacity of understanding, is the people's assurance. You have words at will: but your proofs are thinnesowen. And indeed you do nothing else but delude the people, as I have said, and is evident, deceive them, lead them to perdition.  
He that finding a blind man in a bad and rocky way, takes from him his staff and Guide not furinshing him with another doth plainly discover that his design is the poor man's destruction. Every one than must needs clearly discern that you deceive the people and lead them to their ruin, because depriving them of their ordinary guide, which is the Church, you provide them not of another. And it is manifest that you commit them to no sufficient Guide, both because the blind, simple and ignorant, can make no use of the Scripture for their own direction: and also because your versions not being authentical, as you confess, the Scripture which you use, can be no sufficient rule of salvation, even to the learned.  
That the Church is the true Guide, if saint Augustine be believed, whom 
a Luther. in defensio, verbo, Caenae, Meosaneiudicio post Apostolos Ecclesia now habuit meliorem Augustino. Calu. 3. Instit. cap. 3. §. 10. Ex Augustino sumant lectores si quid de sensu antiquitatis certi habere volunt.  you accnowledge to be a faithful witness of antiquity, it is a clear case: 
b August epist, 16. Ait rectissiman discipli namesseveimperiti nitantur authoritate Ecclesia.  It is a most orderly discipline, saith this great light, that the ignorant should rely upon the authority of the Church. There is nothing so behouffull for a soul as to obey, 
a Cone. 2. in Psalm. 70. Nihil tamexpedit anima quam obedire.  he adds in another place. 
b Contra Eplani fundam, cap. 5. Egovero Euangelio nen crederem. nisime Catholicae. Ecclesia commoveret authoritas .... qua infirmatae iamnec Euangelio credere potero.  And again, I would not leleeve the Gospel unless the authority of the Catholic Church did move me thereunto, and after that: which authority being thaken, I should not give credit to the Gospel; where it is manifest that he speaks of himself as a Catholic, not as a Manikie. These words do make a clear demonstration, that the Church is the true guide of the faithful; nor indeed can it be called in question if we consider that the holy Ghost declared it the pillar and strength of truth: that the Fathers 
c August contra Epistolam fundam. c. 5. Epist. 118. l. De utilitate cred. c. 15. & altbi passim. Iren. l. 3. c. 3. & 4. Hieron. contra Luciferi.  do accnowledge it to be infallible; and that 
d Calu. 4. Instit. c. 1. §. 10. Neque enim parui momentiest, quoth uxcatur columna & fundamentum veritatis & domus Dei, quibies verbis significat Paulus ne intercidat veritas Deiin mundo Ecclesiam esse fidem eius custodem. Etc. 2. §. 2. Verè Ecclesia columna est ac firmamentum veritatis. Whitak. cont. 2. q. 4. c. 1. Nos dicinsus eam quae est Christi Ecclesia. In absolute necessariis non posse errare. Id. contra 1. quaest. 3. c. 5 & 7. Fateor & nos & haraticos cogi & convinciposse authoritate Ecclesia, necasio argumento externo validius ac fortius premi hareticos.  yours also allow it to be such in points necessary to salvation. And who would now say that a child were not to hear and follow the documents of a mother most loving to her children, and who in things concerning their salvation, can teach them nothing but truth? We are bound to hear the Church. I will shortly bring your own Authors to make it good. Now let us examine, whether, as I have said, you do not impose upon us.  
You do openly impose upon us, while you make your followers believe, that we make a general prohibition of the scripture, as being a dangerous book. It is true we are not of those, whereof 
a Tertul. Prascript. c. 41. Omnes tument, omnes scientiam pollicentur, ipsa mulieres haveticae audent docere contendere, etc.  Tertullian speaketh: they are all puffed up with pride, they all promise knowledge, yea the very hercticall Women dare undertake to teach and dispute. We are not of that sort of people of whom 
b Traet. 47 in jean. Nihil sic amant isti, ac scientiam promittere & sidem rerum verarum, quas parunls crede we pracipiuntur, velut imperitiam deridera.  saint Augustine affirms, that they are taken with nothing so much as to promis knowledge, and laugh at the belief of true things which the children were taught to believe, as though it had been a mere ignorance. We have no affinity with Pelagius, who will have women to read Scripture, as 
a Hieron dial 1. contr. Pelag.  saint Hierome doth note, and condamne him for it. We are not of your humour who judge the scripture so easy to be understood, that you make no difficulty to command all the world to read it. In a word, we cannot allow of your ways in making Idiots, ignorant persons, and women, their own Doctors and Prophets. Yet is it false to affirm that we prohibit the scripture as a perilous book, we do not so far forget the respect which we own to the spirit that did dictate it: nor disaccnowledge the happiness and truth which it proposeth unto us. Marry we do boldly affirm, that the Scripture, such as you propose it, that is, changed, or taken according to the letter, without giving its true sense, the knowledge whereof depends upon the Church her declaration, is dangerous for those, who either by ignorance, vanity, or malice, would rashly make use of it.  
And in this we do nothing, to which we are not moved, by the Scripture, the Fathers, and your own men. By the Scripture 
a 2. Corin 3. Litera occidit. 2. per 3. Quae indocti & instabiles depravant ad suam ipscrum perditionem.  saying in express terms, that the letter doth kill, and that the unlearned do deprave it to their own perdition. By the Fathers, 
b Lib. de resurrect carn. c. 40. Haereses esse non & perpe vam scriptura intelligi possent. Hilarius l. 2. de Trinit. Vigiltus Martyr. l. 2. contr. Eutych.  Tertullian saying, that there could be no heresies at all, if the Scripture could not be ill understood. and saint Hilatie, showing by sundry examples, that they sprung from the false interpretation of the scripture. By your own, Luther confessing, that the scripture is the Heretics book.  
If it be commendable in a careful mother to take the knife out of her child's hands with which through want of years and discretion he might hurt himself, and to give it to one of more ripnes to use; you ought rather to praise, then blame us, sithence we prohibit the Scripture in a vulgaire tongue, to some that might abuse it, and permit it to such as may reap commodity by it.  
That we permit it to some, it is apparent by the very confessions of 
a Whit. controu. 1. q. 2. c. 13. Papista hac in re certam exceptionem rationemque temporum locorum & personarum haberi volunt. Item Status quaestionis huiusmodiest, utrum vernacule versiones scripturarum sint omnibus promiscuè praponendae, permittendae vel non: illinegant, nos affirmamus.  your own men, who do accnowledge, that in this we make exception of persons, times, and places, and that the question berwixt you and us is not whether any can read them or not: but whether we do indifferently permit all to read them or no: which we affirm; saith whitakere, and they (meaning Catholics) deny that it ought to be done.  
The exception which we make of persons, consists in this, that we permit such only to read scripture, as are able to turn it to their own profit, not such, as would use it to their own damage.  
The exceptions which we make of times and places, consists in this, that we easily permit it in time of heresy, and in places that are pestered with it, as in Germany, France, England, Scotland, Polony, where it is lawful for Catholics freely to read Scripture: marry in places where error hath not gotten footing, there is no such liberty.  
To those it is freely permitted: both because being daily and hourly assaulted with Scripture, reason would that the use of it should be permitted them, that they might defend themselves with the same weapons wherewith they are opposed, while the Scripture well understood doth heal the wounds received by the evil understanding thereof, as the Scorpion is a cure for her own stinging: and also because (since notwithstanding the persuasions and ill examples of error they stand firm in point of Faith) it is to be hoped they will not abuse this reading; especially sith questions of Faith being daily handled in sermons, they understand the explication of passages which are abused to the disadvantage of truth.  
But to these, to wit the country's where this necessity hath no place, licence is not easily granted: because the people not being iustructed by the Preachers touching the sense of Scripture in points controverted, they may more easily be mistaken.  
And in this, The Church imitates her Spouse jesus Christ, who revealed mysteries and secrets to his Apostles, 
S. Aug-Concio 1. inpsal. 36. Non solum sicut magister aliquid docuit, sed sicut magister aliquid non totum tanquam magister enim sciebat & docere quod proderat, & non docere quod aberat.  so far forth as he judged necessary, As Master saith saint Augustine, he taught some things, not all things: as Master he knew how to teach that which might be profitable, and not that which might be hurtful. In like manner the Church permitts some thing, not all: she distributes the sense of Scripture, which doth profit, to all men: but to some prohibits the letter which might hurt. And in this again she follows the example of the good mother, who cracks the nut for her children, that they may eat the kernel: or feeds them with her milk, till they be able to digest more  meats. But you in steed of imitating these good examples follow the pharisees, who, as Isadore Pelusian observes, though they cared not whether they accomplished the law of Moses or not, yet they would make show of it, and would have every one to have the book in their hands. You resemble a lewd woman, who speaks so much more of chastity, by how much she doth less practise it. You imitate the serpent who threw Eve out of Paradise, persuading her, 
Genes. 3.  that she should be so far from dying by eating of the forbidden tree (as it is written) that contrariwise she should be like unto God, knowing good and evil: for you persuade the people, that they will be so far from falling into heresy by reading the the holy scripture, which yet the Church doth teach them, that they will by that means become great Divines.  
And by their own help alone find out their own salvation therein, which draws many headlong into error. This is all the obligation that the people have unto you which is like to that of a mother, who through negligence or malice, leaves a knife wherewith her child doth kill himself.  
Now let us see whether you do not contradict yourselves. Your contradictions are manifest; for after you have licenced all sorts of people to read the bible, and taught them that it is easy to be understood even by the simple people, and that they may clearly know their salvation thereby, without any other assistance then that which the holy Ghost imparts unto them interiorly; yet you teach in other places that the scriptures are difficult; that the common people must consult with the learned; and refer themselves to their Pastors, not being capable of themselves to make use of the holy Scriptures. Pride, contempt, or enuey, saith 
a l. 4. Instit. c. 1. § 5. Multos impellit superbia vel fastidium, velaemulatio ut sibi persuadeant privatim legendo & meditando seposse satis proficere.  Caluin, moves some to persuade themselves, that they may make sufficient profit by reading the scripture privately: and 
b Item, Nobis quodex Paulo citavimus tenendum est, Ecclesiam non aliter edisicari, quam externa praedicatione.  a little after, we must observe that which we cited out of S. Paul, that the Church is only edified by external preaching. There is, saith he in 
c Calu l. 1. Inst. c. 14. Nostri officijest libonter ignorare quae non conducunt. Et 3. Instit. c. 21. §. 2. Neque vero nos pudeat aliquid in ear nescire, ubi est aliqua docta ignorantia.  another place, a certain learned ignorance. We do not say, saith 
d V●hitak. controu. 1 q. 4. c. 1. Non dicimus quod scriptura per seita aperta sit. et sine interpretatione sufficiat ex se ad omnes controversias fidei dirimendas.  whitakere, that the scripture is of itself so clear, that without interpretation it is sufficient of itself to end all controversies of Faith: because the ignorant, saith the 
e Ibid. q. 5. c. 9 Imperiti quia non possunt, uti rectè his mediis debent illi alios peritiores adire.  same author, are not able to make use of those means (which he mentionned before) they must have recourse to the more learned. Is not this to aggree with us and to contradict yourselves? Is not this to condemn in us what yourselves do pactise? Is it lawful for you to teach that the Church and her Pastors ought necessarily to be heard; that the Church is not edifed but by preaching, while you judge us blame worthy for holding the same thing? Why do 
f Capito ad Farellun in ep. Cal. ep. 6. Fraeprorsus excussit-multitudo, quae assueta est & educata propemodum ad licentiam. Nam clamant teneo satis Euangelij, ipse scio legere, quorsum mih● tua opera? praedica volentibus audire, etc.  you preach, if credit be not to be given to the Church and her Pastors? why do you impose upon us that we affect a voluntary ignorance, seeing we teach no other thing in this point, but that which we are taught by the holy Scripture and Fathers, and your own authors confess? You do continually blame us, yea even in those things, in which we are laudable according to your own Principles: and if the crimes wherwhich you load us, be crimes indeed, they are found in you, not in us.  
You say we bring God into suspicion with men: but it appears that we are innocent and you guilty of this accusation; for how could one make God more suspected unto men, then by representing him, as your Authors, 
g Luther. de seru. arbit. Aliter de Deovel voluntate Dei nohis praedicata, revelata. oblata culta, & aliter de Deo non praedicato, non revelato, non culto disputandum est. Item, Non vult mortem peccatoris verbo scilicet, vult autem illam voluntate illa imper scrutabili.  Luther, 
h Cal. de praedestina. voluntas illi (Deo) alia tribuitur quam ea quae abipso in lege patefacta est.  calvin, and 
i Beza de aetern. Deipraedestina Dicimus quandam Dei esse voluntatem nobis patefactam quandam vero occultam. Sic Aphorism. 14. & 20. Martyr. in epist. ad Rom. cap. 1. Quod enim attinet ad peccatum, fatemur Deum illud nolle, si eim voluntatem spectemus, quae nobis legibus divinis & sacris literis est declarata: sed quod omnino & absolutè peccatum non velit, minime concedemus. Calu 3 Instit. c. 23. §. 9 Excusabiles peccando haberi volunt reprobi, quia evadere nequeunt peccandinecessitatem, praesertim cum ex Deierdinatione inticiatur huiusmedi necessitas: nos verô inde negamusexcusari, quandoquidem Deiordinationi sua constet aequitas. Paraeus l. 2. de amiss. great. Necessariò quidem, sed tamex votuntarie, & iustissimo iudicio Dei peccat creatura. Zuingl. lib. de provide. c. 6. At, inquies coactus est (Latro) ad peccandum, permitto, inquam coactum esse.  all the rest do, as having two wills wholly contrary: the one revealed in scripture, whereby he desires man's salvation, not his sin, and damnation: The other hid, whereby he desires the sin and damnation of man, yea necessitates and forceth him there to. Do not such blasphemies make man suspect God? none can deny it, they do indeed; and make your belief, whereby they are taught it, abominable in the sight of God. Your belief is, and you ought to be suspected by men, not only upon this occasion, but also, because they do continually hear from you, that, which they find to be contrario, and that you often vaunt of that, which belongs not to you.  
And indeed to what end do you brag that you were the first that presented the scripture unto France in a vulgar tongue; sithence you confess yourselves in the preface of the Bible printed at Geneva the year 1588. that it had been translated from the time of Charles the V as our Annalles do witness. To what purpose will you make France stand indebted to you, as though you had brought her to the sight of her Father's will which was hidden from her till then: for so far are you from having right to this glory, that contrariwise you are liable to blame, for having violently deprived her of it, by taking away the body and blood of jesus Christ, 
Luc. 22. Hic calix nowm est testamentum in meo sanguine.  which he himself calls his will and Testament? Is it to give a will, to give the figure and shadow thereof? Is it to give a Will, to give it corrupted? to give it so as it cannot be understood? So give you the Eucharist to the people. so do you put the scriptures into their hands; so do you enlarge them with liberty in that kind! Let us now examine what benefit the people can reap by having their public service in french.    

SECTION II.  
IN this point, as in diverse others, you show yourselves lovers and authors of novelty, for it is evident that since the Latin Church was founded by the Apostles, it always made use of this tongue in her liturgies, yea even after the invasion of the Goths deprived the people of the use thereof. Having thus conserved it, while it was now no more their natural tongue, what reason doth urge us at this time to change it? The Church is too old and you too young to teach her speak a new language. It is most reasonable, that as the belief of the Church is one in all nations, so public prayer should be performed in a tongue common to all.  
Why did not the 
a Munster. prafat. su● grammatica Syriacae & Chaldaicae. junius praefat. ante Nowm Testamentum Trimelij dicunt tempore Christi linguam Iudaeorum fuisse Syriacam.  jews (having corrupted their language by the long continuance of the babylonical captivity, and the communication they had with sundry nations speaking commonly Syraick) leave of to continue their office in the Hebrew tongue? If it had been an unlawful thing, jesus Christ would have reprehended them; yea his not reprehending them was the approbation of their and our fact.  
The jews, Grecians, and Abissins' do their service at this day, in no valgaire tongue. The Nestorians do theirs in Chaldaicke, though taey speak the tongue of diverse rations where they live. You say that all the common people ought to understand, and yet those of your sect which are in Bearne, Languedocke, Provence, and Gasconie understand french no better, than the common people who live within the compass of the Catholic Church, do Latin. While notwithstranding the Ministers in those parts do their service in french, and not in the language of those Provinces.  
It is not necessary, nor always profitable that the people should know all: Marry necessary it is, that the celebration of some of the highest mysteries, be not made common to them, their devotion being augmented thereby. For this reason amongst 
a Levit. 16. Nullus hominum sit in tabernaculo quando Pontifex Sanctuarium ingreditur ut roget pro se & pro domo sua & pro universo catu Israel. donec egrediatur.  the jews none entered into the Sancta Sanctorum with the high Priest. Yea 
b Luc. 1. Et omnis multitudo populi erat orans foris horaincensi.  saint Luke, notes some sacryfices, at which, by the divine institution, the common people assisted not, but remained without, not seeing nor understanding any thing that passed.    

CHAP. V.  

SECT. I.  

MINISTERS.  
YOur Majesty should also see that we are hated for proposing a doctrine which doth teach one to die with peace of conscience, and assurance of salvation grounded upon God's promise in jesuschrist, whereby he doth promise that all simers who seriously repenting convert themselves unto him, and believe in jesus-christ shall not perish, but shall have eternal life. which trust in jesus-christ celivers the faithful departing this life, from the horror of Hell, and from that making, whereby it is thought that a man escapes good cheap, though he go into the fire of Purgatory, to be burnt and tormented therein for the space of many ages. From which torment notwithstanding, they are held, in part, or in whole, to be freed, who give part of their means to the Church, and they also to whom it pleaseth the Pope to distribute Indulgences: for by that gate got trading into the Roman church and ingenious avarice made the ignorance of the poor people tributary to itself.   

ANSWER.  
CAtholike Doctors do teach, that since God doth promise remission of sins to converted sinners, such as feel no remorse of conscience, which may make them esteem their repentance defective, aught to have peace of mind, and are morally certain of their salvation. And therefore it is not true simply to affirm, that your doctrine is hated for teaching men to die with peace of conscience, and assurance of salvation: well might you aver that it is worthy of hate for teaching that this certainty of salvation, which the faithful may have, is not only moral, but even infallible, as proceeding from divine faith, which is the doctrine that the Church condemneth, and you sustain. None can know, saith the 
a Sess. 6. c. 9  Council of Trent, by certainty of Divine faith, which is not subject to deceit, that he hath obtained the grace of God.  
Behold, sirs I pray, the true reason for which we may say unto you with 
b In Ezech. 11. Vae his haeresibus hisque doctrints quae requiem pollicentes & omnem aetatem sexumque deci. piuni.  S. Hierome: accursed be the heresies, and doctrine, which promiseng repose, deceive all ages and sexes. And with the 
c jerem. 4.  scripture, that which it affirms of false Prophets, that having peace in their mouth, in effect they have it not. Peace, Peace, and there is no peace. For one may truly say that you deceive the people, seeing you do assure them that this certainty is of Faith, and yet following your own principles, it hath not in scripture sufficient grounds.  
For tell me. (o Miristers) I beseech you; to you Ispeake in your own particular, where do you find in scripture, in express terms, that one of you, for example Peter du Moulin, is assured of his salvation? If you find it not, how do you believe it as an article of faith: since you do not hold the word of God barely, but the express word of God to be the foundation of Faith, as appears by the testimonies of many 
a Calu. Epist. contra Pr●centorem Lugd. Nihil eredendum est quod non expressum sit in scriptures. Whital. controu. 1. quaest. 4. c. 1. Omntae quae sunt ad salutem necessaria apertis verbis in scriptures pro. poni nostrum axioma est. Luth. lib. cont. Reg. Ang Nullum articulum sciat a me admitti nisi apertis scripturae verbis munitum. The King of Eugland in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. First Assure your conscience upon the faundation of the most expressevuord of God: Sadol desacrif. c. ●. Nos expressa seripturae sacrae testimonia efflagita mus.  of yours; and particularly by the 
b The Ratification of the ffrench Confession. All the ffrench (harches approve and ratify the above mentioned Confession in all these heads and articles, as being wholly grounded upon the pure and express vuord of God.  ratification of your confession of faith, signed by the most famous men of your religion, and the most learned Ministers that were then amongst you: wherein you say that your faith is grounded intirly upon the pure and express word of God.  
You will easily grant that this which I demand is not expressy contained in scripture: but that you draw it thence by consequence. This answer will appear frivolous for diverse reasons. First I ask you, out of what passages of the scripture you prove, that it is sufficient to make a thing to be believed by divine faith, that it be inferred out of scripture by discourse and consequence, as though forsooth, faith were discursive and not a simple habit like to that of Principles, becausé as it gives present consent to its object, by reason of the evidence thereof: so faith without reasoning doth forthwith embrace the word of God, which is its object, by reason of infallible authotihe of him who doth reveal it. If you find this supposition in scripture; we are in the wrong; if not; you are ill grounded in your faith: for it is evident that this Principle, to wit, that it is sufficient to make a proposition to be an Article of faith, that it be inferred out of scripture, is purely humane, and no● divine.  
Further, put case it weretrue, and made good by scripture, that an inference were a valide foundation of faith, yet according to yourselves, this would only have place in consequences drawn out of two divine Principles which are both contained in the scripture; seeing it is evident, that one of them being humane, the certainty of the conclusion cannot be divine: seeing that every conclusion is of the same nature with the more imperfect part of its cause; and that that whereby a thing is known, aught to be better known then the thing itself. So that if the Principle whereby a conclusion is known, be only known by a humane knowledge, the conclusion cannot be known by a more perfect knowledge.  
Wherefore albeit, that even an inference of this nature and kind, might serve for a valide foundation of our faith, yet were it nothing to your purpose, since in the syllogism by which you conclude the assurance of your salvation, even admitting of your own ac count, there is but one of the Premises divine, contained in the scripture, that who soever believes is justified, the other which affirms that you believe, being merely humane, as not being mentioned in all the scripture, neither in express terms, nor yet by consequence.  
I add, that though it were granted, which yet is false, that a conclusion drawn out of two principles, the one divine, the other humane, might be a sufficient motive to oblige us to believe: yet should not that be but in regard it were drawn by a company of wise and learned men, no man being of so weak a discourse, as to think a conclusion drawn by an ignorant person, or an Idiot who knows not what belongs to a good inference; drawn, I say, from a Principle which he alone tinowes, is a sufficient and valide fundakon of divine and infallible faith.  
And yet in these terms are you. A poor plough man upon his deathbed can not be sure of his salvation, unless he infer it by consequence on't of a Principle known to himself alone, sith none but himself knows, whether he have truly faith.  
Nor doth it suffice to say that in this behalf he is interiorly guided by the holy Ghost, who assures him of faith. Because in that case, we were to admit of another word of God not written; and given not to the Church, but only to every particular man, whom by that means you make solewittnes and judge in his own cause. Which you cannot with any appearance sustain, since, contrary to your own principles, you should admit of another rule of salvation besides the scripture: whereas also there is none but will confess, that though the express words of scripture were not necessary to ground an article of faith, yet in all reason should they be requisite to ground that by which you believe you have faith: since that is the only foundation of your salvation, the end and scope of all those articles which are expressed in holy scripture, which do only aim at the justification of man.  
Is it likely that God who made the scripture, to teach us thereby the means to become just in his sight would expressly have put down an hundred articles for example, the belief whereof justifies us not, (and which, according to you might be believed by the Devils, and by Hypocrites,) and yet would not expressly put down that, by the belief her of walone you teach, that we are justified, and that wherein you place the essence and foundation of your religion; and which is the crook the 
a Calu. 3. instit. c. 2. §. 16. Hicpraecipuus fidei cardo vertitur.  stern and 
b Whita●. contro. 2. q. 6. c. 3. Articulus iustificationis nostra vide tur omnium praecipuus, & maxim fundamentalis vipote in quo salutis nostrae prorae & puppis consist it. Caluinus' respon ad Sadolet. pag. 125. sublatae eius (fidei iustificantis) cognition & Christi gloria extincta est & abolita religio & spes salutis penitus eversa, dogma ergo istud quod in religione summum erat dicimus a vobis fuisse deletum.  puppe thereof, to use your own words: but left it to the discourse and inference of every man, be he learned or ignorant; be he an I diote or such an one as hath no knowledge of the rules which he is to follow to make a good consequence. Let us see your arguments.  
Who ever doth seriously repent, convert himself to God, and believes in jesus-christ is justified and shall not perish.  
I Peter do seriously repent, and believe in jesus-christ &.  
Ergo I am justified, and shall not perish.  
Suppose the Mayor to be in scripture, yet the Minor is not found in it, since no mention is made of Peter in it, since no mention is made of Peter in thew scripture: hobeit it is only known to Peter sole witness in his own cause. And therefore the certainty of the conclusion which imports that Peter is saved, for two reasons cannot be in fallible: both because it depends of a medium which is humane, and fallible of its own nature; and again because this medium depends upon the knowledge of an ignorant fellow.  
Nay further, it follows by this argument that every one believes by divine faith that he is just, before he knows that God doth say so, which cannot possibly be Gods ' word which is the only object of Faith.  
That this follows, I show it. Peter, for example knows not that God calls him just, but only by means of a syllogism drawn out of scripture; now the Minor, of this syllogism supposeth Peter both to repent and to have saith, which faith consists in believing that he is justified by the apprehension of Christ his justice; true therefore it is, that Peter believes that he is just, before he knows that God saith so.  
It is therefore manifest out of your own principles, that your faith is not infallible but humane, and vain too. Nor have you any thing by which you may distinguiths it from the faith of a reprobate: for though according to you, he can have no faith, yet he believes, as well as you, that saith is in him, and that thereby he is justified. Let us now see what the scriptures and Fathers say upon this subject.  

a 〈◊〉 Rom. 11. T●●●●tem fiae stas● sed 〈◊〉 force 〈◊〉 tibi par●as.  Thost standest by faith, saith the Apostle, be not too wise, but fear, lest God may not spare even thee. 
b C●m meru & trem●re 〈…〉  And again, with fear and trembling work your salvation. Which doth plainly show that we are not sure by assurance of divine faith, of our salvation, for otherwise the Apostle should incite us to infidelity, in exhorting us to fear lest that might not happen, of which we were certain, as though he should say, sear that there may be no resurrection, or that there is no life everlasting: which yet divine faith doth oblige us to believe.  
Now as for the Fathers, since that in diverse places, and diverse forms of speech they do clearly deliver what we sustain against you, if your doctrine be true, you must needs accuse them of error.  
Thou oughtest not be secure that thy sins are remitted, saith S. 
a Greg. l ●. Ep. 22. Secura esse non debes de●peccatis demissis.  Gregory. We know not, saith S. 
b Amb. serm 5. in Psal. 118. nescimus v. trum peceata nostra maneant.  Ambrose, whether our sins remain. We do greatly offend through ignorance, saith 
c In Consti●. Monast. c. ●. Mu●● peccamus quand● nescimus.  S. Basile. We know not our own works, saith 
d Cheysost. Hom. 11. in 1. Corinth. Non scimus operae nostra.  S. Christome. We know not whether our justice remain, 
e Aug. in Psal. 48. Quod non iustitia nostra maneat aut an habeamus bonam conscientiam.  saith S. Augustine, or whether we have a good conscience. The just are uncertain of perseverance, 
f Aug. 11. de civet. c. 12. justs sunt iucertide perseverentia.  as the same Doctor affirms in diverse places, and with him S. Ambrose. Who of the faith full dare presume that he is of the number of the predestinate? 
g De Correp. & gratias. 13. Quis fidelium praesumaise esse in numero praedestinatorun.  saith the same in another place. The opinions of all these fathers condemn you. Yet if all these suffice you not, give care to 
h Bernard. serm. 1. de 70. Scriptura re●lamat ut quis dicat. Ego de electis sum, & quod Deus praestet. fiduciam & neget certitudinem, & quod impossibile sit nosse quales futuri sumus. Epist. 107. Quod habeamus spem de beatitudine, non securitatem. Et serm. 2. de Oct. Pas●●. nem● scit utrum sit dignus amore, certitudo omnino nobis negatur.  S. Bernard who, you 
i Illyric. in Catalo. rest. verit. l. 14. Bernardus fuit a Deo exs itatus.  say, was raised by God. The scripture, saith he, will have no man to say I am one of the elect; He adds further: that God gives us confidence, but denies us assurance. And that it is impossibile to know what shall become of us: that we hope for Beatitude, but are not sure to attain unto it: in fine that none knows, to use the Apostles words, whether he is worthy of love; and that certainty is altogether denied us. What more express words can be produced, to establith our Belief, and to overthrew yours, than those which that great saint, and glory of France, useth?  
We will now only make your own condemnation proceed from your own mouth, by showing you to your advantage, that you have certain lucide interualles, which argue you to be true Heretics, that is, following 
a Ad Tit. 3. proprio iudicio condemnatos.  S. Paul's phrase, condemned by your own judgement? He are therefore 
b Calu. 3. Instit c. 20. §. 11. Fiduciam non iu●●●go quae s●lutam omni anxietudinis sensu mentem suaevi & perfecta quiete demulceat, nam ita plaecide acquiescere eo rum est qui rebus cunctis ex voto fluentibus nullae tanguntur cura, nullo desiderio viuntur nulo timore astuant.  Caluin and diverse others of your Authors. calvin, I understand not a confidence, which doth flatter the soul, freed from all sense of anxiety, with a sweet and perfect repose: for it belongs to them only to enjoy so perfect repose who are touched with no care, possess a with no desire, agitated with no fear. Faith, saith the same in 
c 3. Instit. c. 2. §. 37. Ffide, varijs dubitationibus impellitur, ut raro sedate sint eorum mentes saltem non fruantur tranquillo statu. Et in Rom. 5. Nusquam est sic animus stabilitus & quin multum haereat dubitatione.  another place, is assaulted with many doubts, so that the minds of the faithful are rarely at rest, at least they enjoy not a seatled tranquillity 
a Pet. Mart. tit. de iustif. a. dubitatio illa qua timemus supplicium aeternum, in animis nostris utrunque haeret.  Peter Martyr in his common places; Those doubts by which we dread eternal pains, doth still in a centaine sort stick to our hart. 
b Controu. 4. de justif. Non est fides in maxim fidelibus immunis a dubitatione.  Scarpius a scotish Minister who lived in France. Faith in the most faith full is not freed from fear. 
c In Cathol. reform controu. 3. c. 1. Docemus quod cum certitudine nostra salutis coniuncta esse soleat aliqua dubitatio in cordibus nostris, quodque nemo hominum tam sit securus salutis suae ut non aliquando dubitet de illa.  Parkins an English Minister: we teach, that together with the certainty of our salvation a certain doubt is wont to inhabit our hearts: and that no man is so sure of his salvation, that he doth not sometimes doubt of it. 
d Nullus viator sit certitudinaliter sine revelatione sibi de hoc facta se esse praedestinatum, & nes se esse in gratia.  john Hus: No Pilgrim knows certainly, that he is predestinated, nor consequently that he is in state of grace, unless he have had a peculiar revelation thereof. Noman, sarth 
e Luth. Thesi 30. Nullus securus est de veritate suae contritionis, multo minus de consequutione plenaria remissionis. Et Tract. 10. precept, incertum est homins num sit in statu salutis nec ne. Et Epist. ad Episc. Mogunt. Nec per gratiam Dei infusem fit homo securus desalute, ●d s●mperin ●more ac tremore iu●e● & salu●●m nostram operari Ap●stolus.  Luthere, is assured of the truth of his contrition, much less that it was folo wed with a plenary remission of sins, and in another place, man is uncertain whether he is in state of salvation, or no. Again, man is not assured of his salvation even by the infused grace of God; but the Apostle commands us to works our salvation with fear and trembling. 
f In Anti-Bellar. Fatetur quod eorum certitudo non est absoluta quaelis est in historica fide, aut quae nullam dubitationem patiatur.  Vorstius confesseth that they have not an absolute certainty such as is found in fide historica but a credible persuasion in history, which doth fight with that, perpetu all disquiet and doubt of the soul.  
Doth it not hence appear that you are doubtful of your salvation, and consequently, that you have no divine faith since that by the doctrine of your 
g 18 Sunday.  Catechism, Faith is a true, certain, and firm knowledge of God's love towards us; whereas that which you have, is neither certain nor firm, since it is obnoxious to doubt, as your own Authoursdoe grant? But I will allege no more passages to prove that yourselves confess that you are not sure of your salvation, it being enough to show that you teach, that even jesus Christ himself, (o abominable and detestable blasphemy!) was not sure thereof.  
 he did offere up himself to God, saith your Catechism, 
10. Sund●●  to satisfice in the name of sinners, he was to feel in his conscience that horrible distress, as though he had been abbandoned of God, yea as though God had been offended with him. This abyss, saith calvin, 
In Harmon. Gall. Matth. 26. 〈◊〉  and horrible confusion of damnation, did rudely and to the quick torment him with dread and anguish. And again, 
●. In●tit c. ●6. 〈◊〉 1● in Franc. Death.  he was necessarily to fight against the forces of Hell, and as it were in a single combat, to wrestle with the horror of eternal damnation?  
But to what purpose do you insinuate, that we by means of Purgatory, escape the horror of hell at an easy rate; and by temporal, are freed from eternal pains: since we neither teach, nor believe, that we are delivered by those pains, but by penance and God's grace: yea and we require far more, than you, to our delivery, who by one only act of faith, hold yourselves to be absolutely freed both from fault and pain, that God exacts no other pains at your hands, to satisfy his justice.  
To wit, it is in your market, that the salvation of souls is sold good cheap: and where to save them at too low a rate, you lose them. Again, what a kind of peace of conscience, and certain security of salvation is that, which the express words of scripture do not show, albeit your principles exact the same: which relies upon a humane principle, and that known to one only, be he learned or unlearned: which also is gathered by humane inference; and that by such men too, as do not knowor think of the laws of a consequence; which finally is contrary to the scripture, the Fathers, yea even your own Authors. 
Bolsecus in vita Caluini, Arenius. Seblusselbourg l. 2. Theolog. Caluin.  The chief whereof calvin, that your famous Prophet, died in deep desperation, if we will give credit, not only to the Lutherans, whom you do accnowledge for your brethren, and whose testimonies (which is to be noted) were never authentically refuted, but even to his own followers, yea those who did familiarly converse with him. Dare you yet affirm, that your religion doth teach men to die in peace, with infallible assurance of salvation, while the scripture, Fathers, and your own Doctors, do teach the contrary?  
Your peace of conscience is a true perturbation, and your assurance of salvation, is indeed, a main doubt what shall become of you after your departure. The peace and tranquillity, which can be had in this life, is placed in that confidence of hope, which, according to the counsel of the Apostle, it behoves every good christian to h●ue. We are saved saith he, by hope. And this peace is not found, 
Rom. 8. v. 24. Spe salui facts, suissus.  save in the Catholic Church, where you ought to seek it, imitating the dove, which was forced back to the Ark whence she flow, not finding elsewhere a place wherein she could repose.  
Thus you ought to comport yourselves, and not rashly, as you do, to reject her doctrine, whom you ought to credit and reverence as your dearest mother.  
And indeed what find you reprehenfible in her discipline, while she teacheth that sins are to be redeemed by alms deeds? The scripture affirms it in express words, and the Fathers do unanimously aggree in it. Luke 11. give alms, and all thnigs are clean unto you. Daniel 4. Redeem thy sins by alms deeds. Tob. 12. Alms deeds do free from death. There is no doubt, saith 
a Aug. Serm. 2. de ver. Apost. oratronibus sanctae Ecclesiae & sacrificio salutari & eleemosynts non est dubium montuos adiwari. 2. Hom. 41. in 1. Corinth. juneturmertuus non lach●●mis sed pr●● thus, sup● lieation● 〈◊〉 eleemo●●●  S. Augustine, but that the souls departed are assisted by the prayers of the Church, the healthful sacrifice, and alms deeds. And S. Changed ylostome, the deceased is helped, not by tears, but by prayers, by supplications, by alms deeds. The Fathers are full of the like sentences, which for brevity's sake I will omit.    

SECT. 2. OF INDVIGENCES.  
NOw concerning the power of Indulgences, which consists in remitting the pain of sin out of the Sacrament, by the merits of jesus-christ, and of his saints. Why do you find it strange, that the Church in this age doth chalance the power thereof, which, as practice makes apparent, she stood always possessed of, huaing even in her in fancy pardoned pains canonical and Ecclesiastical? Did not S. Paul remit the pain, which the chusch had enjoined the 
b 2. Corinth. c. 2. Cui autem aliquid donastis, & ego: nam & ego quod donavi, si quid donavi propter vos in persona Christi.  incestuous Corinthian? Doth not the Epistle of the Eutycians produced in the 
c Act. 1. Superuenit & salutaris dies passionis & sacra nox & resurrectionis festiuttas, in qua quid m & plurimis peccatoribus a sanctis patribus nostris damnationes soluuntur.  Council of Chalcedone make mention, that it was the custom in Easter time to pardon sinners the pains which were due unto their crimes? Is not this that which 
d Cyp. lib de lapsis. Potest ilie (Deus) indulgetiam dare sententiam suam potest ilie deflectere: paenitenti, reganti potest clementer ignos●ere, potest in accepeum refer quidquidpre talious & petterint marryres, & secerint face dotes.  S. Cyprian would say, he, to wit God, can give indulgence, he can qualify his own sentence, he can clemently pardon the suppliant offender, he can approve what so ever the Martyrs have demanded, or Priests have done in their favour. It doth manifestly appear by these words, that Martyrs did demand of the Church remission of pains inflicted upon the faith full; and that the Church did sometimes grant their requests. Doth not 
a Cap. 22. At tu iam in martyrs tuos effundis hanc potesta●om.  Tertul. also aim at this in his book de Pudicitia when after he had made a long discourse of the remission of sins by jesus Christ, he upbraided the Church, from which he was then f●●llen, that she imparted this power to her Martyrs?  
And indeed, since the Church hath power to impose canonical pains, it were most absurd to say that she could not remit them, it being manifest in common reason, that this power doth necessarily accompany that.  
If you say that the canonical pains which the Church remitted, were not enjoined to expiate the guilt of our crimes before God, but only to satisfy the Church offended by the scandal of sin; reason, the testimony of holy Fathers, and your own confessions shall condemn you. Reason, in that the satisfact on enjoy aed, was not for public crimes only, whereby the Church suffered scanned all; but for those also, which because they were secret, came not to the knowledge of the church. Which 
b Cyp. lib. de lapsis Plus delinquit qui evadere se paenam criminis, si non palam crimen ad misit. Hoc adeo pro. ficit ut sit minor culpa non ut innocens conscientiae. Nec cesset in agenda paenitentia atque in doa mini misericordia deprecanda, ne quod minus esse in qualitate delicti videtur in neglecta saetisfactione cumuletur.  S. Cyprian and 
c Sozom. l. 7. hist. c. 16.  Soxomene do witness. Whence it follows, that the pain which was remitted by way of Indulgence, was imposed, not to satisfy the Church only, but God also.  
Again the pains which had been enjoined and were remitted were sometimes performed in private, as 
a Gennadius lib. Eccles. dogm. c. 53.  Gennadius assures us. Sometimes also they were enjoined for light offences, as S. 
b Cyp. serm. de laps. cit.  Cyprian witnesseth; and they were imposed, to appease Gods wroth by penance, and to move him to pardon us. so much the more willingly, by how much we did less spare and pardon ourselves, 
c Tertul. l. de paenitentia c. 9 Us paenitentia Deus mitigetur, & in quantum non perpercerim mibi, in tantum mihi Deus paercat.  saith Tertullian. That Christ by satisfaction might be overcome, and by satisfaction our sins might be redeemed, saith S. 
d Epist. 55. ut exoretur satisfactionibus Christus, ●isatisfactionibus delicta redimantur.  Cyp lan, That Christ should blot out sins formerly committed; and lest the punishment of sins should be reserved to the end, that is, to the next world, saith S. 
e Enchirid c. 68 Deleat (Deus) iam facta peccata Et cap. 66 Ne peccata reseruentur in finem.  Augustine.  
Now all these considerations had no place in the satisfactions which were done unto the Church, for those were not enjoined for private sins, nor for sins of less moment, nor yet were they done in private: nor, as you would have it, to pacify God by penance, or to obtain mercy ●f Christ; nor yet that God should blot out sins already committed, and should not reserve them to be punished in the next world. And thesfore the pains which were imposed, were not imposed to satisfy the church alone.  
True it is, happily you will say, that canonical pains were remitted by the Church, and some also there are which are satisfactory; yet whereas they are not all of that kind, it follows not that they which were remitted by the Church, were of that kind. To this lanswere, first that this evasion hath no other ground then your own error. Further, where as reason will, that he that hath power to impose a pain, should have also power to remit the same, it plainly follows that if the Church impose pains, which are satisfactory before God, it can also absolve from them. Again, your cause is manifestly condemned by the Fathers. Because treating of those punishments which the church remitted by Indulgences, they sometimes refer the very same to God. So doth Tertull. 
Tertul. de pudicit. c. 22. Sufficiat martyripropria delictae purgasse. In grati vel saperbi est in altos quoque spargere quod pro magno fuerit consecutu●. Quis alienam mortem sua soluit nisi solus Dei filius? proinde qui illum aemularis donande delicta, si nihil ipse deliquisti plane patere pro me: si vero peccatores, quomodo oleum faculae tuae sufficere ut mihi & tibi poserst?  in the place above cited. where impugning the Catholic truth in nature of an heretic, he evidently shows that the question was of those pains which were due unto God for sin. Who, saith he, doth authorize man, to bestow the things which are proper to God. Let it suffice a martyr to have expiated his own offences. It is the part of anungrarfull or proode person, to lavish that out to others, which himself received as a thing of greatest prize. Who is he that redeems the death of another with his own death, save the only son of God? Thou therefore who wilt imitate him in remitting sins, if thou thyself be not delinquent, endure for me: marry if thou thyself be delinquent; how dost thou think that the oil of thy small Lamp can be sufficient both for thee and me.  
The words do planly show, that the pains which were remitted in the primi tive Church were due unto God, not to men; and that indulgences of that nature were wont to be conferred without the Sacraments: because, as we are to mark, they were done by virtue of the sufferance of Martyrs, whereas Sacraments have all their force from our saviours passion. Why doth Tertullian, (after he had spoken of the pains, which are remitted by jesus-christ) exprobate the Church for asscribing the same power to her Martyrs unless he did accnowledge the pains pardoned in favour of the Martyrs, to be the very same with those which Christ pardoned, to wit, those which are satisfactory in the sight of God? Why did Theophilactus, expounding those words of S. Paul, who did use Indulgences towards the incestuous Corinthian, say, that 
a In 2. Corinth. c. 2. In persona Christi, hoc est, secundum & coram Christc, & tanquam illo hoe inbente aec veluti eius vicem gerens dimisi.  when, he pardoned him, he did it, in the person of Christ, as by Christ his command, and as the vicegerent of Christ, unless the pains which that great Apostle did remit, were satisfactory before God? This truth is so perspicuous, that your own authors condemn you for condemning it. Which is manifest by kemnitius, 
b. Kemnitius part. 4. exam. tit. de Indulgentiis p. 112. Talia sunt quae salua fide (scilicet protestantium) necpossunt nee dehent sicut sonant accipi est intelligi.  upon Whom you put so high a rate, Who When he had cursatily expounded, what the Church and Fathers, for the most part, had written of this subject, ingenuously confesseth, that it cannot be Expounded literally and as the words import, without the overthrow of your religion in this behalf Whence we have even by your own confessions, that the faith which you do impugn, is the self same which the ancient fathers of the church fought for. And if the 
a Conc. Nicenum can. 11. Chalced. Acta.  Church in her primitive purity used that power, why may she not now also use the same? Do you hold it sufficient to improve this power to produce some abuses which you pretend hath crept in? By this artifice you shall one'y gain to yourselves in the opinion of all men the imputation of being of the nature and disposition of those whom. 
Oration 3 de Eunomianis  S. Grego: Nazian: compares to flies, saying, they for sake the sound, and adhere to the ulcered parts of the body, especially your 
c Vbitat. controu. 1. quae 2. c. 14. Abu sus rei non rollit usum siusdem.  own men confessing, that the abuse of a thing doth not take away the use of the same. Wherefore the power of Indulgences is grounded upon scripture, Fathers, and the practice of the ancient Church, yea even upon your own men's confession. The use of them is holy, and if it open a gap to traffic, it is to a spiritual traffic of the merits of Christ and his saints by which he doth inrych the faithful people, by honest and lawful means; nor doth avarice cause any other discommodity in this point then that which is befallen you, in so much as it was the first motive that caused Luthere to question this power of the Church; and which consequently made him Tributary to the Devil.    

CHAP. VI  

SECT. 1.  

MINISTERS.  
YOur Majesty should also see that we are hated, because in the holy sacrament of the last supper we speak and do, as jesus Christ did with his disciples: for sithence all do confess what jesus Christ did and that nothing was to be reprehended in his institution, the Pope might make an end of all the contentions and troubles sprang up amongst Christians upon this point if he would reduce the holy supper to the form in which jesus Christ did celobrat it, speaking and doing as he did, deposing all disputes and centayning ourselves with in the sobriety prescribed by the word of God. By this means all should communcate nor should we have any more private Masses. There should be no elevation of the host: No oblation of sacrifice: Every one should communicate under both kinds.   

ANSWER.  
You are of those men that would never lose if their own plea might be taken. Christ celebrated the mystery of the eucharist in a Dining room you in the Church; he at night you in the morning: he after supper; you before dinner he a little before his death; you along tie me before yours: he in unleavened you in leavened bread: he with men alone: you with men and women promiscuously; he once in his whole life: you often in yours. he after he had washed the Apostles feet whom he did communicate; you without observing this ceremony which yet ho expressly 
a Si ergo lavi pedes vestros dominus & magister, sic & vos debetis alter alterum lavare peaes exemplum dedi vobis ut quemad, medum ego fect vobis ita & ves factatis.  commanded: he according to the ancient custumeling; you standing upright, he permitting his Apostles, if they pleased, to talk together, you commanding silence: he breaking the bread; you cutting it; he blessing the bread; you omitting the same. Is this your imitation of Christ in every thing? Now whereas the scripture is the rule of your actions, produce some one passage by which you are warranted to change, in so many circunstances, what jesus Christ performed, since you are in every thing to follow his footsteps and example. But if you reply, that you are bound to observe the essential parres of the mysteries done by jesus Christ, yet are permitted to change that which he did in indifferent things; it rests that you prove out of scripture why these things which you change are more of that nature, than those which you condemn us for changing. Or if you cnnnot do it, 
Lib. 2. contr. adversa legis. Hoc vanitas & non veritas dicit.  confess that your words, are, as S. Augustine saith, vanity, and not verity, and that unjustly accusing us, you justly condemn yourselves. True it is we ate in tirly and throughly to follow our saviours example in that which is intrinsical and substantial in the mysteries: in this all disputes and contention being laid aside, we are bound to contain ourselves with in that sobriety and moderation which he prescribed, and are to do and speak as he did. And. I would to God you did so, then should you confess that the substace of the eucharist is the body and blood of our saviour jesus-christ, 
Matth. 62. Accepit Iesus panem & benedixit acfregit, deditque dicipulis suis & at, accipite & comedite Hoo est corpus meum.  and not a mere energicall figure of them both. For to what end doth the a scripture deliver in words most express, not once only, but four times, by the mouths of three Evangelists, and one Apostle that the Eucharist is the body and blood of jesus-christ, 
Marc. 14 Accepi● jesus panem & benedicens fregit & dedit eye, & ait sumite. Ho est corpus meum.  without ever saying, in any one place that it is not his body, but only a figure; if it intent to have us believe the one which it saith not and not the other which it affirms? If scripture ought to be the rule of faith, 
Luc. 22. Accepto pane gratias egit & fregit & dedit seis a●cens, Hoc est ●●rpus meum quod pro vo●is datur hoc ●atise mmed ●ommemerationem. 1. Corint 11. Dominum jeumin qua nocte tradebatur, accepit panem & gratias agens fregis & dixst, accepite & manducate. Hoc est corpus meum quod pro vobis ●●adetur.  we are necessarily bound to believe that the Eucharist is the body and blood of Christ which it so often affirms: nor ought we to believe that it is not the body and blood of Christ, since that is not found in all scripture: nor yet do we ever find, that it doth frequently and clearly affirm that a thing is that which it is not, with out expressing in some other place, that it is not the said thing.  
If the scripture be instituted to teach us the connsells of God and of his son jesus-christ, who by it speaks unto us, who will ever be induced to believe, that the scripture to teach us that the sacrament of the eucharist is bread and wine, not the body and blood of Christ who, I say, would ever imagine, that to move us to this belief, it should so frequently inculcate that it is the body and blood of Christ, and yet never once pronounce that it is neither of them? Who will ever frame this judgement of it, unless such as having their brains inverted, will have every thing to be understood preposterously and against the sense; one contrary by another; and the negation of a truth, by the affirmarion of the same. Christ is no mocker of men; nor is he ignorant of the usual manner of their speech: he tells them not one thing, to move them to believe another. Wherefore seeing he doth so plainly tell the Apostles that what he gave them in the Eucharist to eat was his body, nor could he find words in which he could more clearly deliurer himself, there can be no doubt made, but he delivered his own very body unto them; other wise it must needs be said that either he deludes men, 
Aug. l. 33. contr ffaust c. 7. Quid ergo eum legimus obliviscimur quemadmodum loqui soleamus? Anscriptura Dei aliter nobiscum fuerat quam nostro modo loguutura  yea and that in a matter of greatest moment to salvation; or verily, that he was ignorant how to express his mind unto them.  
Whereupon you will give me leave to make that demand to you in this occasion which as I noted above, Saint Aug, made to the Donatists in the like occurrence. Why when we read do we forget how we are wont to speak: aught the scripture of the Almighty to use any other manner of speech to us then our own?  
And whereas jesus Christ doth say plainly and expressly that he gives us his body, delivered for us, than which words we can desire none more significative none more clear, to move us to believe that it is his own true body, what can hinder you to believe, that it is his true body which he gives unto us? Would you have him to have said, this is truly, really, properly, substantially, my body. If some one of these adverbes were necessarily to be added to manifest the truth of the thing affirmed, we should not be obliged to believe the most part of the principal mysteries of our faith, which notwithstanding you believe as well as we; to wit, that Christ was borne of a virgin; that he suffered and died: for in delivering these truths the scripture makes use of none of those Aduerbes: nor had it any more express terms then those which it used to signify the presence of the body of Christ in the eucharist.  
As therefore, if one doubted whether a thing appearing a far of were truly a man, it were not necessary, to give assurance of the same, to add these words, truly, really, but it were assurance enough to say absolutely, it is a man (for as the Philosophers hold, this word, true, 
Verum non additenti.  adds nothing to the thing) so likewise, that jesus-christ might show his body truly to be in the Eucharist, it is sufficient to affirm it in plane words, taken in their own signification. Which was especially to be done here, where he doth not only say, this is my body, but also, my body given and delivered for you, which words do design the true body of Christ, which alone was delivered for us. Howbeit it is evident, that the nature and being of a thing, is more clearly expressed by such words as affirm directly what it is; then by others which do only point at it under a certain name, without affirming expressly that it is that thing, under whose name it is signified; and consequently, we have more reason to believe, that the Euch r●st is the body of jesus-christ, because the scripture saith directly that so it is; then to believe that it is bread because the scripture signifies it under the name of bread; especially sith it adds Ep●●hites to this name of bread, which remove it from its own signification; and contrariwise when it affirms that the Eucharist is the body of jesus-christ, it saith it with restrictions, which do confine as it were, and straig●ly tie the word body to signify the true body of Christ.  
The names of things do not infer the things themselves, unless they be employed to express the being of the things. For example, Christ is said to be 
a Apoc. 5. v. 5.  a Lion, a 
b 1. Corinth, 10. v. 4.  Rock, a 
c joan. 15. v. 1  vine a 
d joan. 10. v. 7.  doree by analogy and similitude only, for as much as the effects, not the nature of these things are in Christ. 
e Psal. 175.  Manna is termed bread in holy scripture, though it contain not the substance of bread.  
If in one place the scripture commande us to communicate; and in another it propose unto us the fruit of communion, and in some pass g s also declare the end: were it not an affected blindness, to undertake to infer out of those places, what the Eucharist were, and not rather to draw it out of the places where the institution thereof is contained? I mean, out of these express words, this is my body, which God pronounced of set purpose, planly to declare what the Eucharist was, 
Lib. de Religio cap. de E●●d●●.  and yet Zuinglius openly professeth, that he depends not upon these words this is my body, but upon this only proposition, the flesh availeth nothing. If I should propose these two propositions, a man is a reasonable creature; and this, a man is borne to serve God: I lo more clearly express the nature of a man by the first, than the second: for by the first I do distinctly explicate his being by his essential parts: Whereas by the second I do only declare, to what that being hath relation, and to what end it is produced. Yet you will needs run the contrary way, sustaining contrary to all reason, that jesus-christ did more clearly express, what the Eucharist is, when he did only declare 
a Luc. 22. Hoc sacite in meam comm●●orationem. Fr●. Cori●th. 11. Quottes' cunqueman. ducabitis panem hune & calicem bibetis, mor●en. domini ●●nunciabitis.  its end, then when he did establish, and express it nature and being.  
Nay you do yet worse. For you do not only choose rather to gather your belief out of the words of the scripture, which ●hew the 
b joan. 5. Qui manducat hunc parem, vivet in ae●ernum.  effect, the 
c Luc. 22. & 1 Corinth. 11 cit.  end, or the 
d Panis ●uem ego da●e ●aro me● est.  promises of the Eucharist, than those wherein are taught the first institution thereof (by which notwithstanding all the rest which concern this mystery ought to be explicated: but you do even ground your faith upon discourses which make no mention thereof: As for example, when you infer that jesus-christ cannot be really in the Sacrament, because the scripture teacheh us, 
e Ephes. 4●  that he is ascended into heaven, and that we ought not to look him under the symbols of the Eucharist, because it is written that 
f Marc. 14. joan. 12.  we shall not always have him with us. What reason, I pray you, nay what appearance or show of reason is there to say, that the scripture speaks more clearly what the Eucharist is, when it speaks not of it at all, or at least but indirectly, then when it undertakes expressly to explicate its nature and being.  
If diligent notice be taken of the large difference, which is betwixt your manner of proceeding and ours, I doubt not, but by comparison, we should have quickly gained our cause, by the judgement of the whole world. For why should we rather believe that Christ is true God; that he assumed hamane nature; that he suffered death and passion, and other the like mysteries, upon the scriptures simple affirmation thereof; then that the true body of Christ is in the Eucharist, it being confirmed by the express word of God, and that with such restrictions, as do oblige us to understand by this word body, the true body of jesus-christ? Why should not credit rather be given to the words of the son of God, then to the conclusions which you gather out of two principles whereof the one indeed is scripture, yet speaks not of the eucharist, nor of its substance; and the other is purely humane, destitute of all probation? A man must neither have eyes nor brains in his head, to give more credit to your imaginations, then to the words of jesus-christ; and follow rather your deceip●fall inferences, than the express words of the Gospel. In things that belong unto God, saith 
a Lib. 1. de p●cc●t. merit. c. 20. In Dei r●bus dominum audiamus non ●oniecturas, suspiciovesque mort●l●●●.  S. Aug. let us give ear to our Lord, and not to the conjectures and dreams of mortals.  
Having now handled this first tru●h, now let us hear the Pastors of God's ch●rch, those especially of the first ages. Do not they say that the Euchariste, 
b An●●●s. l. 6. de ●a●ram c 1. Si ut Chri●lus verus Deut, i●a ve●●aro. Cy●●s A 〈…〉 & saluie.  is the true and proper body of Christ. truly and properly the 
c Hilar. 8. de Trints. Sie●im vere verhum caro factam est, & nos vere verbum carnem cibo dominico sumimus. justinus in Apolog. Theophyl. in Matth. 26.  blood of Christ. That 
d Hilar. 8. de Trinit. in nobis carnalibus manentem per ca●nem Chri●tum habemus.  Christ i● in us by his flesh? That the 
e Cyril. Hi●rosol. Catechis. 4 hic qus vi●e●ur a nobis non est nobissed corpus Christi, & vinum non vinum sed sanguis Christi. Ambro l. 4. de Sacrament. Damasc. 4 defied etc. 14. Nec vero panis & vinum corporis Christi sigurasunt, aebsit en●m hoc, verum ipsummet domini corpus.  Eucharist is not bread, wine, a figure, but the body and blood of Christ? That the 
f Cyrillus tract. 10. in joan. Non negamus recta nos side charitateque symera Christo spiritualiter coniungi, sed nullam nohis naturalis coniunctionis rationem secundum carnem cum illo esse, id profecto per●●●amus, idque divinis scripturis omnino alienum 〈◊〉 Augu●● l●. ●. con●●● adversa. seg. c. 9 Fidelt cord atque oxe sus●pimus mediatorem 〈◊〉 & hominum Christum jesum.  body of Christ is not only recrayed by faith and Charity, but even with the mouth? That Christ is 
g Ambros. l. 3. de spirit. sancto c 12. Carnem Christi in mysterijs adoramus quam Apostoli in domino jesu adorarunt. Aug l 10. contra sfaus●am c. 13.  adored in the eucharist? That his 
h Chrys. l. 3. de saerdot. O ●. ●raculum● o D●● be●ignitat● inqus sursum s●d●● cum Patre, eodem temporis momento omnium manibus per●ractatu●.  body being in the Eucharist, is also in many other places?  
How is it possible that they should posituely say what we believe, and that in so diverse kinds of speeches, a●● of them express, clear, and directly opposite to the words which you use to destroy it, if they had believed what you believe? That cannot be said, unless one would imagine, that the holy fathers, to deceive us, would say one thing, and believe another.  
Nay none dare so much as think it: but contrariwise we have great occasion given to accnowledge the divine providence, because, whereas it is sufficient to teach a truth, to affirm, and aver it to be so in ordinary terms, according to the customary manner of expression: God to whom all things are present, foreseeing the extreme assaults which would be made against his Church in the dreadful mystery of the eucharist, thought it not sufficient, that the holy Fathers should only simply affirm the real presence of the body of jesus-christ therein; but further, he would have them to teach it in a form of speech, quite opposite to that, by which he foresaw this truth would be denied, 
Epist. ad Argentin.  which is so clear, that though Luthere employed six years to enable himself to explicate the words of the institution of the eucharist, figuratiuly, as he himself confesseth, yet he accnowledgeth that he was not able to do it; condemns those that do it as heretics; and confesseth the real presence of the body of jesus-christ; wherein he is followed by the Confession of Ausbourg the first of all yours.    

SECT. 2. OF THE SACRIFICE.  
THe truth of the body of jesus-christ being thus established, the truth of the sacrifice, which you reject, cannot be called in question. For if jesus-christ be truly present in the Eucharist, as I have sufficiently though succinctly proved, it follows, that he is truly sacrificed, as presently I will demonstrate and you yourselves confess. Granting saith ursimus, the opinion of the corporal presence, the papistical adoration and oblation, with the romish mass, must also be granted.  
Sacrifice is no other thing then a real oblation, (offered to God alone) of a thing permanent and subject to sense, changed withal, and ordained to testify, and profess, that we accnowledge his sovereignty over us.  
But the celebration of the Eucharist which jesus-christ instituted under the shape and likeness of a thing without life, is such an oblation.  
Therefore such an oblation is a sacrifice.  
Now that the oblation whereof ●e speak, is a thing permanent and subject to sense, is easily proved, since the body of our saviour is offered under a shape which is within the reach of sense.  
But if you contend that Christ is not visible because he cannot be seen, I reply with the Fathers, 
Chrysostom. hom. 84. in Matth. Ipsum vides, ipsum tangis, ipsum comedis. Et l. 3. De Sacerdot. Qui cum Patre sursum sedet in ipso temporis momento manibus omnium pertrectaiur.  that we see him, we touch him, though not in his own shape and species. Whence is rightly concluded that we cannot discern him, not that we cannot see him: which is manifest by the example of a man wholly covered with a Lion's skin, whom indeed we should not discern; marry see him and touch him every man might.  
Now that the thing is changed in this kind of oblation: so far forth as is requisite to profess and publish Gods supreme power, and that it is instituted to that end, is the thing I am to prove, which I will distinctly and plainly verify.  
The mutation which is made in the Eucharist, consists in this, that Christ who subsists in heaven in his own living form is placed in earth, as a dead man, under the shape of bread and wine. That he is put under the species of bread and wine, is already shown; and that in that state, he existes under the species and likeness of a dead man, is evident, for that diverse ways he is deprived of appearance of life, nor doth a man discover any virall action in him: and also because by the force and virtue of the sacramental words, his body and blood is put under separated species; as by the death which he suffered on the Cross, they were really separated. Finally, because the species under which he is veiled, are commestible, nor is it the custom to eat flesh which is not dead.  
And that this mutation doth sufficiently declare God's sovereignty over us, I prove. The mutation which happened by the true death of Christ, had such prower, as is manifest by the sacrifice of the cross. Therefore, that mutation which is made in the Eucharist hath the same force; The consequence is verified, because all those things are found in the eucharist, for which the mutation which happened in the sacrifice of the cross, did publish the sovereign authority which God hath over us. I will endeavour to make it as plane and intelligible as the difficulty of the matter will permit.  
It is certain than that sensibility, and the nature or essence of a sign, are annexed to accidents and species, not to substances; which of their own nature are not subject to sense, that is, what soever doth signify, signifies by the favour and means of accidents. For example, a man is not known, but by speech, motion, and other accidents. Now it is evident, that sacraments and sacryfices, are of their own nature visible signs; and that their essence consists in signifying hidden mysteries sensibly to men. Wherefore it is manifest, that it imports not, whether Sacraments and sacryfices, whose nature is to signify, be placed in species adjoining to their substances, or else in species separated from them; for whereas every thing can subsiste when it hath all that is essential to it, they will easily conserve their being without the help of substances, which contribute nothing to their Essence. Whence it follows that death is no otherwise apt to signify the supreme dominion of God, then in regard of its external species, in so much as one discovers no accident testifynig life. Now Christ as he is in the Eucharist, appears to be dead, as he was upon the Cross; and consequently hath all that he had upon the Cross, in point of a sensible sign, apt to make demonstration of the sovereignty of God, which is all that is required to a sacrifice. For it is certain, that as a living body in appearance, by the virtue of some charactere, might be made capable to signify as much as a living body indeed, could signify: so a living body appearing dead, by the virtue of Christ's words, may be a sign of all those things, which a creature truly dead, were apt to represent.  
And indeed it is a thing which neither Catholics nor you can doubt of. Not Catholics, because the Eucharisse under the species of bread is no less a Sacrament, then though the substance of bread were joined with its species. 
joan. 3. v. 14.  Not you, since that brass under the species of a serpent, was as proper a sign of the death of Christ, as though the true substance of a serpent, had been joined to the appearance of the same.  
Now we must see whether this mutation which is apt in itself to testify God's sovereignty, were a so instituted to that end.  
Which is apparent, in that, to judge that God hath determined a thing to some certain end, it is sufficient to prove that he endowed it with all things necessary to that end, it being an v● whorthy thought, to conceive that God who doth nothing in vain, yea who ordains every thing to its end, should yet have instituted some one thing, most apt to signify that which notwithstanding he would not have it to signify.  
Ard verily if this manner of gathering the institution of a thing to some certain end, be not sufficient, we have no means to know whether the Eucharist be a Sacrament, it not being said in all the scripture, that it is a Sacrament, but only by our inference, for that it hath all things necessary to a Sacrament. Howbeit the greek text both of the three Evangelists and of S. Paul, which text only you admit to be authentical, bear these senses 
a Lus. 22. v. 20. Matth. 26. Marc. 14. Ibid. v. 19.1. Corin, 11. v. 24.  powered out, given, broken, in the present ten: and 
b Luc. 22. cit. Locis cit. it is.  S. Luke, applies the word powered out to the chalice: which shows planly that the effusion whereof he spoke, is made in the Euch rist, where only the chalice is to le found. Whereupon 
c Irs 1. Cor. homil. 24.  S. Chrisostome speaking of this breaking, saith this may be seen in the Encharist, but upon the cross it cannot; And 
a In 4. Cor. 11.  calvin, her I interpret (frangi) to be broken, to be put for (immolari) to be sacrificed. And therefore who willdoubt but mention was made, of a gift, a powreing-out, of a breaking, in a word, of a sacrifice, offered unto God, since all these things are done for us (as the scripture in plane terms doth witness) and nothing can be offered for man's salvation but to God a alone? To what purpose did the scripture add so many epithets signifynig a sacrifice without interposing any one word which might move us to conceive the contrary, but to give us to understand, that the body and blood of Christ is in the Eucharist, as a true Host? They are truly in it, and a true sacrifice is the Eucharist, seeing it hath all the parts that are essential to a sacrifice. What answer I pray you will you return me to this? Will you reply, that if it be enough to put a creature, under the apparences and species of death, and so to offer it to God, to make a sacrifice, the Picture of jesus-christ offered up to God would be a sacrifice.  
To this I answer, that in such an oblation, one could not affirm that there were any sacrifice either of jesus-christ, or of his Picture. Not of jesus-christ, because he would so neither be effectually and truly dead nor yet in Appearance, whereas yet it is necessarily required that the thing signified be present, one of these two ways. Not of his Picture, because though it were present, yet should it not be destroyed, or changed at all. Now it happens not so in the Eucharist: for jesus Christ is present in it, and suffers death in appearance, for as much as he doth veil himself in a dead species, which he doth Sacramentally unite unto himself; even as being the Word he clothed himself with humane shape, which he did unite unto himself hypostatically or personally. And theifore when we say, that it sufficeth, to sacrifice a liunig creature, that it be put under the species of death: our meaning is not, that it should be put so by way of representation, as though it were purtraited dead: or else, (being represented living) as though it were contained under the only species of the dead picture; because in every sacrifice the presence of the thing is requisite, because the oblation of the sacrifice is accomplished by the delivery of that which is offered and sacrificed. But our meaning is, that the living creature, should in itself, be covered with the species and apparences of death, and so be offered to God. This reason doth (a priore) or demonstratively show, that the celebration of the eucharist is a true saciyfice: How beit the brevity which I have proposed unto myself, shall not hinder me to produce another reason thereof.  
It is said in the 
a Tu es sacerdos in cternum.  109. Psalm that Christ is a Priest for ever; which the 
b Hebrae. 7. v. 17. & 13.  Apostle also repeats confirming that he is a priest for ever. In neither of the places is there any condition adicyned, which might draw these words Priest and Preisthoode, from their proper significatior; yea contrariwise there are some which do restraune them more clesely to it, while the kingly prophet adds, that the son of God is a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech, who was truly a Priest, and offered sacrifice; and that preisthood also was conferred by God on jesus, with on 
c Psal. 10.9. juras it Domtur● & non paemitel● teum.  oath that he should never bedeprived of it; and finally that the 
d Heb. 7 v. 3. Asstu tlatus autem filto Det manet 〈◊〉 in ●●ernum.  Apostle saith, that Melchisedech was a figure of jesus-christ, in that he remained priest for all eternity. Therefore jesus-christ mioyes as yet tive Preisthood as it was conferred upon him; and like as Melchisedech, was continually a true Priest, without ever being destitut of power to saciyfice; so must also jesus-christ be eternally, without ever losing the power of sacryfycing; and consequently there is even to this day a true and proper sacrifice.  
You will deny the consequence lknow, which yet I will easily prove, by the strongest of all proofs, to wit by the definition of Preisshood left us by S. Paul confirmed by the holy fathers, avowed by yours, which definition requrres the power of sacry ficing as an essential part.  
S. Paul. Heb. 5. defines him that is endowed with preisthoode, by relation to sacrifice 
a Omnis pontifex constituitur in his quae suntad Den, ut offerat dona & sacrisicia.  every Bishope, saith he, graecè A 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, chosen out of men, is ordained by men, in the things which belong to God, that he should offer gists and sacrifices for sins. And the 8. to the 
b Omnis Pontifex ad offerendum munera & hostias constituttur.  Hebrews where he speaks not of the Bishops of the old Testament, as your aut hours will have that of the 5. chapter to be understood, but of jesus-christ, whom he calls a Bishope. Every Bishope, saith he. is ordained to offer gists, in greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, sacrifice, concluding thereupon, that since l. Christ is Priest, he must necessarily also have some host to offer, that power being of the essence of preisthoode. Which appears most manifestly out of these passages, as also by the testimonies of the holy fathers, and of your own authors, who openly teach, that S. Paul did in those places define Preisthoode, and ascribed the power of sacrificing unto it.  

c Chrysost. hom. 8. in 5. Heb. Apostolus definit quid sit sacerdos.  The Apostle, saith S. chrysostom upon the first place of S. Paul to the Heb. doth define what a priest is: and upon the second place 
d Et in 8. Hebra. Hom. 14. Sacerdos non est absque sacrificio, opertes ergo quoque eum habere sacrificium.  a priest, saith he, it not without a sacrifice. The Apostle, saith S. 
e Amb. in 5. Hebrae. desinit quid sit Pontifex. Item common esnt Christo & ei qui ex hominibus constituitur ut offerat dona & sacrificia.  Ambrose upon the first place of his Epistle to the Hebrews, doth define what is a priest. and a little after, It is common to Christ, and to him who is constituted by men, to offer gifts and sacrifices.  
The bishops of the old law, saith 
a Amb. in 8. Hebrae. Pontifices veteris testamenti statuti sunt offerre mwera & hostias Vnde necesse est saluatorem nostrum habere aliquid ad offerendum pro nobis.  the same Father, upon the 8. chap of S. Paul to the Hebrews, were ordained to offer gists and hosts &, whence it follows that it was necessary that our saviour I.C. had some thing to offer up for us. It belongs to a Bishope, saith 
b Theodoret in 8 Hebrae. Proprium est Pontificis offerre dona. universorum.  Theodorete upon the latter place, to offer up the gifts of all men. A Priest, saith 
c Theophyl. in 8. Hebrae. Sacerdos sine hostia non est, necesse ergo erat & hunchabere quiddam quod offerret.  Theophilacte upon the same place, is no Priest without an host: It was therefore necessary that he should have, meaning Christ, what to offer.  
This first sentence, saith. calvin upon the same place, is worthy of remark, which teacheth, that no Priest is ordained but to offer gastes. Preisthoode, saith your Cathech me, is an office, and an authority to appear in the presence of God to obtain grace and favour, to appease his anger, by offering up a sacrifice which is acceptable unto him. Therefore the po●er to sacrifice is essē●iall to preisthoode, by the definition of the Apostle, by the explication of the Fathers, and your own men's confessions.  
And if prower to sacrifice be essential to Preisthoode, it follows evidently, that Christ who is even to this present a true Priest, hath also power to sacrifice, and to offer even or his day, a true sacrifice, which in show is another than that which he offered upon the cross, because upon the cross he could not die again. We have therefore what we demand, 
ᵉ Repon. 15. Sunday.  for weonely sustain that in the new law there is another sacrifice then that of the cross to be offered by the Ministers of the new Testamenr. Which is most manifest, for whereas Christ cannot offer sacrifice in heaven, he must necessarily offer by his Ministers in earth, seeing he hath another sacrifice then that of the cross. And this is that which all the Fathers do witness.  
Christ is yet Priest, saith 
a Theod in psal. 109. Sacerdos nunc est Christus non ipse aliquia offerens sed vocatur caput eorum qui offerunt.  Theodorete, not that he himself offers any thing, but he is called the head of them that offer. Albeit I. C. saith S. 
b In shall. 38. Easie Christus nune non videtur offer, tamen ipse offertur in terris cum Christi corpus offertur, tmo ipse offerre manifestatur in nobis cuius sermo sanctificat sacrificium quod effertur.  Ambrose, is not now seen to offer, yet he is offered in earth, when the body of Christ is offered, yea we accnowledg that he himself offers, whose word sanctifies the sacrifice which is offered. We affirm, saith 
c In 7. ad Hebrae dicimus Chrisium cum aeternus sit & immortalis are vera semper esse Srecrdorem nem & none quidim semper se●●●tip ●●m pro nobis of f rre creditur per mini●●●es suos.  The ophilacte, that Christ, being eternal and immortal, is alwaystruly a Priest: for we believe that even to this present he doth daily offer up himself for us by the hands of his Ministers. Nor would he, saith 
d In c. 6. Heb. neque enim de ea quae semel facta est a Deo oblatiove & hosts dixisset in aetarnum, sed respicions ad praesentes sacrificos per qutsme lic Christus sacrificat & scar ficatur, qui etiam in mystica cana modum ill a tradidit huinsmods sacrifily.  Oecumenius, have affirmed, by reason of that oblation and host which he once only offered, that Christ was a priest for ever but he had an eye to the sacrificers which now are, by whose means I. C. doth both sacrifice and is sacry ficed, haeving taught them in his mystical supper the manner of such a sacrifice.  
You will peradventure grant, that it is essential to preisthood to sacrifice, but not to sacrifice at all times: wherefore, to iustile Christ a priest now, it is sufficient that he could once sacrynce, as he did upon the cross. I answer that if power to sacrifice be essential to preisthoode as I have already proved; it follows thereupon, that it must aggtee to it at all times: seeing an essential compound cannot subsiste but by the sustance of all its essential parts. For example a man cannot subsiste without the, ratio formalis, formal cause of a reasonable creature, without both body and soul joined together. It remains therefore, that I. C. being at this present Priest, must have power to offer another sacrifice, then that of the cross, which also is manifest out of S. Hierom saynig, not only that a Pressed aught to sacrifice, but that he doth continually offer sacrifice for the people.  
Your are not able to annoyed the force of this argument, but by sustaining that Christ is not now truly a priest, save only (to use schooe terms) by ampliation for so much as he was truly a pressed; and also metaphorically and anologically, because the virtue and force of his sacrifice, is yet in vigour, since he life's for all eternity, and offers for us in heaven his prayers to God almighty. But admitting Christ to be a true Priest, as we have proved him to be; and confessing also that power to sacrifice is essential to preisthoode, it carries no show of reason to say th●t the eternity of the fruit of a sacrifice, sufficeth to make preisthood eternal, though deprived of power to sacrifice: for it is most manifest that a thing cannot be eternal, unless its essential parts be also eternal. And if it were lawful to infer the permanency of preisthood out of the permanency of the fruit of the sacrifice, by the same reason I would also infer, that an hundred years after the decease of a king, or Magistrate, there charge were permanent in their own persons, since the fruit of their governement doth survive. And therefore this fruit serves to no other end but only to testify that I. C. had preisthoode and that by virtue thereof he had offered a sacrifice of an infinite value, but in no sort to show that he hath preisthood as yet. That I. C. saves us for all eternity, imports, that hes is an eternal saviour, not a Priest; since save us he could without being a Priest. 
Decumenius ncap 6. ad ●ebraeos.  And this truth was so familiarly known to the Fathers, that some of them do expressly deny that the eternity of preisthoode doth agree with I. Christ, by reason of the sacrifice of the Cross: teaching that it aggrees unto him by reason of the sacryfices, which he daily offers, and daily shall offer till the end of the world, by the hands of his Ministers.  
If no more than the fruit of a sacrifice be required to the eternity of priesthood, it follows that the fruit of a sacrifice is the essence of preifthoode: nay more, that nothing else is essential unto it, which is most absurd. In conclusion, this truih of the sacrifice, is taken either for the virtue which the sacrifice hath to justify, or for the effect of this verve which is our justification. In the first acception it is a quality of a sacrifice: in the second, it is an effect of this quality; and therefore howsoever you take it, of the essence of preisthoode it cannot be, since it is the effect of the same, in so much as it is the effect of the sacrifice, and that no effect can be the essence of its cause. It cannot be of the essence, because what so ever is essential to a thing, becomes the same thing with that of whose essence it is, which cannot be said of the effect and the cause which are necessarily distinguished. Finally it cannot be of the essence, because the cause doth precede its effect, whereas a compound precedes not its essential parts. Preisthood is not the virtue and force of the facrynce, but the virtue and force of facryficing. As for example Royalty is not the fruit and commodity which we receive by government; but the power to govern. And therefore, sith I. C. enjoys preisthood for ever, he hath also power to sacrifice for ever, It being a thing most evident that the preisthoode cannot be erernall, while the power of sacryficing, which is essential unto it, is temporal. Nor will it be to the purpose for you to say, that whereas Christ doth continually offer up his payers to God for mankind, he doth also continually offer sacrifice, for since the conditions necessarily required to the essence of a true sacrifice, cannot suit with prayers, as we have showed out of the definition, the oblation of prayers, cannot be a true sacrifice. And this is so clear and manifest, that, when as the scripture calls Christ an eternal priest, it ascribes that dignity unto him by reason of a true sacrifice. Wherefore the fathers also of the primitive Church would have the Eucharist, whereby preisthood doth now appertain to Christ, to be a 
a Cyp. Epist. 51. utique I'll Sacerdos clea Christi vero sungiur, qui id quod Christus fatit, mitatur & ●aerificium ●erum & ●lenum tunc offered in Ecclesta Deo Fat●●, si sic ineeptat offerre secundum ipsum Christum videat obtulisse.  true, a 
b Aug. l. 10. cent. ffaust. cap. 20. Huit ●●mo veroque sacrificio falsa cesserunt.  most true, a 
c Aug. l. de sp. & lit. c. 11. In iplo verissimo & singulari sacrificio (Alisse) demino Deomosteo gratias agere admonemur.  greatest, a 
d Aug. l. 10. cent ●●aust. c. 10. cit.  full, 
e Nazian. 〈◊〉, Ape●●●. Quaian dem modo externum illuc sacrificium magnorum mysteriorun antitypun ips (Deo) offerry aeuderem?  external, and 
f Aug. l. de spir. & lit. ●● 11. cit.  singular suerisice; and 
g Aug. l. 20. de civet. c. 10 inillud Apocalyp. 20. erunt sacer dotes Dei & Christ's. &.  〈◊〉 priests, to be true priests, in the proper and natural signification of the word. Nor would they affirm this, unless they accnow ledged this truth to have been delivered by Christ, his Apostles, and holy scripture. But of this, since none can doubt, we will pass to another point.   

SECT. III. OF THE ELEVATION OF THE HOST.  
IT it be lawful to offer sacrifice, as I hope I have sufficiently proved, why should it be unlawful to erevate the host, since that this elevation doth properly signify the oblation thereof? In the old law, as is to be seen in the 8. of Levit. and else where, the priest did elevate what he offered, and we have it by a clear collection our of 
a Basil. lib. de Spir. S. c. 27. Dogmata quae in Eccle sia praedicantur quaedam habemus & doctrina seriptorum prodita quaedam ex Apostolotum traditione in mysterio id est in occulio tradita recipimus quorum utraque parem vim babent ad pietatem. Inuocationis verba quum ostendum nis Eccle●● & popu●m b●ne●tionis quis actorum in ipto nobis liquit? Lib. 4. hist. Drat. 20.  S. Basile the great his liturgy who was instiled by ᵇ Theadorete, and S. ᶜ Gregory, of Naziancene, the light and sun of the world, that we hold this custom from the Apostles time: for in his said Liturgy, mention is made of this elevation in words of this nature: when the Deacon saw the Priest extend his hands, and touch the sanctified bread to make the holy Elevation, he saith, let us attend. Which thing also is diligently observed by those authors which have made expositions upon the liturgies, as by Nicholas Cabasilas who saith: And he also approaching unto the Table, having taken into his hands, and shown the quickening bread; he calls those that are worthily about to partake of, it as it were, saying. Behold the bread of life which you see: And German the Patriarche of Constantinople saith thus upon the same subject: and that the priest doth lift up the heavenly bread, and make the sign of the cross thrice in the air with the venerable and quickening bread, it doth intimate &.  
And indeed what cause was there of calling this elevation in question, since it is mentioned in the ancient liturgies of S. Basile and S. Chrusostome? and S. Denys also the Apostle of our France delivered the same? In a word, this point is so clear, that you have no other cause to contest against it, but only in so much as it is sustained by the Catholic Church, which you love to impugn. which is manifest by the testimony of one of yours, 
●spinian. histo. sa●●im.  affirming, that Luthere for no other reason did impugn the Elevation, but for hatred of Catholics, and doth accnowledge it to be such, that by good right it ought to be 
a Retinen●●m esse eleationem hi uhi ut npiae prohieiur, & abolendam ubi ut ni cessaria prcipitur.  retained and observed, where it is prohibited as impious. There be also others of yours who place it amongst the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which are neither commanded nor prohibited: finally others confess that it was in use in the primitive Church, as they make good by the testimonies of the Fathers. Where upon 
b Witemberegenses refutation● Orthodoxi consensus p 101. Eleva. tionem ren adiophora● quaea Chris nec praecept nec prohibi sit omnes ir telligentes & pios fateri●● non dubium est Et Hosp●●nian. par 1. Histo. l. 2. foe 31. In prim●tiua Ecclesisymbola Eucharistica paululum elevata & populo ostensa fuetunt.  we are moved diligently to defend and conserve it, and the rather, because, as you affirm, it was the counsel of your first father; or if it please your worp. that we should change it, sith 
c Dionysj Ecclesiae Hierar. cap. 3. Chrysostomihomil. 36. in 1. Corinth. & hom. 3. ad Ephes. & Basilij Lib. d sp. s. c. 27. c. Rom. 4. v. 15.  S. Paul teacheth us that where there is no law, there is no transgression, produce I beseech you one passage of the scripture which doth prohibit it; which if you cannot perform, confess at least, that the Church is endowed with sufficient power to institute the same: for ᵈ S. Augustine holds, it to be a mere madness, to contend that that is not to be done, which the Church is accustomed to do through the universal world. Whereto ᵉ one of yours also doth assent, in these words, that any may be compelled and convinced by the authority of the Church, and that heretics are not more forcibly and efficatiouly urged by any external argument.   

SECT. iv OF MASSES WHERE THE ASSISTANTS DO NOT COMMUNICATE.  
BY this same rule you will lose this cause too, I mean the question which you move about private masses, 
〈◊〉 Epist. 118. 〈◊〉 Whitat. ●ontrou. 1. q. 〈◊〉 cap. 5. & ●●. ffateor & ●os & haere●●cos cogi & ●onuinci pos●● author ●ta●e ●●elesiae, ●ec alto argumento exie ●●o v●●●di●s ac for●ius pre●●i ●areticos.  as you please to term them, and communion under both kinds, in both which kinds, the Church did many years ago practise, what we now practise. How beit I will briefly touch both those points, hoping to make manifest that you are as ill grounded in those, as in the others which we have already examined.  
There is no man that doth not ingenuously confess, that the celebration of the eucharist, when the people do communicate is more perfect, then that, where they communicate not: common reason convinceth that to all the world; both because the fruits of the sacrifice are more fruitfully communicated when the host is consummated by the assistants, worthily disposed, then when it is not received by them: and also, because this mystery, being both a sacrament and a sacrifice, is more perfectly accomplished, when it is not only offered to God in sacrifice, but also imparted to the people as a sacrament. For these considerations the ancient canons, and Fathers, do invite, exhort, yea command christians to communicate at the masses which they hearè, and the Council of Trent doth expressly desire it. 
Sess. 2●.  Where for if you pretend no more but that it were better that the faithful should communicate all at the masses they hear, we do loin hands with you. And in this cause, in lieu of condemning the good and wholesome doctrine of the Church, in this point, as in all the rest, you should complain of the indevotion of the people sith it is their coldness that is cause of their not communicating, not the Pastors' fault. But ●f your bent be to condemn the masses, where the assistants communicate not, to be unlawful, we must oppose, and with great reason in all men's judgement, since none are found who justify your pretensions, and condemn ours.  
If the masses where the people communicate not were unlawful, it must needs be because the oblation of the eucharist, as it is a sacrifice, should be necessarily annected to the participation of the people in the Eucharist, as it is a Sacrament; which could only come to pass two ways, other by reason of the nature of the sacrifice, or because God would have it so. By reason of the sacrifice, it cannot be, since it is manifest that its being doth not depend of the participation of the assistants: none did eat of the holocausts which were wholly cōsumed● none did participate (after the manner we speak of) of that which was ordained by Moses for the remission of sins, 
Levit. 6.  for, as it is written, priests alone had liberty to eat of it. N●y in the sacrifice of the Cross which was offered for us all, none at all did participate in that manner, in which our adversaries would oblige us to partake in the Eucharist. Nether can one affirm, that jesus-christ would have no masses celebrated without communicants, there neither being any formal law, nor express word in all the scripture, whence you will have all the truths of faith to be derived, whereby we may gather it.  
You will happily say that Christ in his last supper communicated his Apostles, and consequently that we are bound to imitate him by distributing the Eucharist to the people. But this proves no more but that the people may communicate, that it is to be desired that they would communicate, and that, when they will, it should not be refused them: but it imports not, that we are bound to thrust the Eucharist upon them against their will, and that we are not to celebrate, unless they communicate. For who is able to sustain, that in case the Apostles had not communicated, our saviour had not celebrated the eucharist? Who dare affirm that it was God's will that so glorious a mystery should have depended upon the will of another, and that the indevotion of the common people should make the Pastor indevoute?  
But I would willingly ask you, since you make our saviours imitation an invio lable law unto you always to communicate the people, 
Cap. de Euchar. Ad rectam Eucharistiae actionem requiruntur ad minus duo, ●idelices Minister bucharistiae benedicens, & ●s cui Eucharistiae Sacramertum dispensatur.  why doth it not oblige you also to communicate all the people? Which yet you do not: for the Confession of Witemberg is content that one only should communicate; and again, many are present at your suppers who communicate not. In a word seeing S. Paul doth tell us, that where there is no law, there is no transgression, and that sin is à trangession of the law: and seeing you produce no place of scripture which condemns us, you yourselves stand guilty of the fault, not in this respect only, but in many others.  
First by the custom of the Church: for 
a Home 〈◊〉 in Ep. ad Ephes. Frustrahabetur quotidiana oblati●, cum nemo sit qui simul participe●.  S. chrysostom confesseth that in his time there was such à negligence amongst the people, that there were many oblations made whereof none did partake: and 
b A●br. 5. de Sacram. c. 4.  S. Ambrose doth witness the same, speaking of the Grecians, who he saith were wont to communicate but once a year.  
Secondly by the confession of your own Authors: for 
c Perkinsus in ●rohlem de Mistress ●a privata. Tē●ore Walfridi ●i●●entur caepisse soliteriae missae & tempore Gregori●.  Perkins doth accnowledge that the custom of saying mass wherein the people communiecated nor, was observed in the Church, even from the time of walfride and Gregory the great, that is, a thousand years ago, whence it is manifest that it hath been observed in all times, since none can show the beginning thereof.  
Thirdly by your men for 
d The history of false Martyrs in ●n thelife of iohn Hus. The memory of ●o. Hus aught to be in holy esteem amongst all the faithful.  john Hus, whose memory is famous amongst you, saith planly, witness 
e Luth. colloq. conu●●alibus.  Luthere, that this custom is not unlawful.   

SECT. V Of Communion under one kind.  
TO improve and reject the ancient customs of the Church, as you do, without alleading any law for their condemnation, is to condemn yourselves. You cry out Anathema against us, because we communicate under one kind only, which yet hath been in all times practised in the Church: you persuade the people that we do them a great injury in not permitting them both the kinds, whereas you produce no làw, which prohibits (as an unlawful thing) what we practise.  
And that this, many ages ago, was the custom of the Church 
a Ser. de Laepsis.  S. Cyprian, S. 
b De obitu Satyri.  Ambrose, and 
c Lib. 2. de uxore Euzeb. l. 6. c. 39  Tertulian, who lived in the second, third, and fourth age, do deliver, 
d Lib. de Lapsis.  witnessing that the primitive Christians conserved the eucharist in there houses, under the only species of bread, to have access to it at all hours, upon sundry occasions, whether it were in time of sickness, to prepare themselves to Martirdorne, or for same other respect. Further it appears out of S. Cyprian who notes particularly, that Children were communicated, under the only species of wine: as also out of S. 
e Basil Epist. ad Caesaream August.  Basile who witnesseth that such as lived solitarily in the wilderness communicated under one kind. Manifest therefore it is by these authorities, that the custom of communicating under one kind hath been obseruerdin the Church above twelve hundred years, and that, which is worthy to be noted, without all opposition either of Geekes or latins, till john Hus his tyme.  
Nay further, whereas in the ᵃ Acts of the Apostles, where mention is made of the Communion of the Church, he speaks only of the breaking of the bread, we have just occasion to conceive, that this custom was not only introduced in the times of the forenamed Ancients, but even in the Apostles tyme. Again whereas the Fathers are of opinion, that our saviour after his resurrection, gave the eucharist to his disciples in Emaus under the only species of bread, we have reason to believe, moved by their testimony, that it was the custom in the very time of jesus Christ. Howbeit none can doubt, but that the communion under one kind, hath been practised in the Church from the second and third age. If you did produce any law which did prohibit this use, we should do amiss to transgress it: But you have produced none, nor are the authorities whereon you rely of any weight or moment against us. As for the passage of S. john the 6. it avails you not, both because, according to you, it is not understood of the eucharist, save in the beginning only; for in the end of the same Chapter, 
Calu. ●n 6. joan. v. 53. Non recti Beh●r●● cum hoc testimon●● probarent, usum calic i● pr ●●missum de●ere ●mnibus esse.  he mentiones that bread only, whereof it is said that it gives life everlasting: and also because that Caluin himself blames the Bohemians for endeavouring to prove out of that text, that the Chalice is to be imparted to all men.  
If you produce that of S. Paul where he speaks of the eucharist, 
1. Corinth. 11.  it will no ways advantage your cause, yea contrariwise, it will prejudice it, since after he had related the institution of jesus Chr. speaking of the eating of the eucharist, he speaks of it with disjunction, saying, who shall eat or drink, whence it appeates that it is not necessary to receive both the knids together.  
If you object our Saviour's example, it will be in vain, since you yourselves confess, that it is not necessari to imitate him in every thing, and place: that it is another thing to instruct Priests as Priests what they are to do, 
Act. ●.  and another thing ●o teach than what they ought to make the people practise; and that the Apost. themselues distributed this Sacrament, without making mention of any thing but bread.  
You will allege without doubt that place of S. Matthew 26. 
Matth. 26.  Drink ye all of this, which calvin extols so much. But that will make as little to your purpose as the rest, because in that passage jesus-christ speaks tò his Apostles only, as S. Mark shows, 
Marc. 14.  saying, they all drank of it, which word all did planly design the Apost. only, since they only drank of it.  
It may be you will object, that if jesus-christ by these words, Drink ye all of this, mean only the Apostles, then by parity he speaks of them only, when he saith, Eat ye all of this, and consequently, the faithful should not be obliged to communicate. But your consequence is false, 
1. Corinh. 11. v. 28 Probet autem se●psum homo & sic de pane illo ●edat & de chalice bibat.  because, albeit in that place, this word, eat, was only addressed to the Apostles, yet is it sufficient that the communion of the faithful is commanded else where, to wit, in the sixth of S. john, and in the first Epist. of S. Paul to the Cor.  
We could sufficiently defend ourselves by the sole title of our possession, and your weakness, which is so great that you cannot convince us, though by condemneth us, you are obliged thereunto. But we will not insiste upon this point, it being an easy task to manifest, that we neither wrong the people, nor yet injure the Sacrament; yea on the contrary side, that that which we teach is advantageous to both: and that your doctrine is injurious to both, as also to the institution of jesus-christ. We do no wrong to the people, because the body and blood of jesus-christ being as well under one kind as both; and the signification of the Mystery remaining entire, the people receive jesus Christ as truly under one kind, and with as great beneciction of heaven, as under both. Nor do we injure the Sacrament, because the essence thereof doth not absolutely require the two kinds, but that it may subsist under one only, without losing any essential part: sithence it doth possess in one, the body and blood of jesus Ch. and innoyes all the significations which belong to its essence; the species of bread most fitly signifying the nourishment of the soul by grace, and the union of the faithful in one body together with their head, for as much as it nourisheth, and its mass is composed of many corns of wheat.  
Now having shown, that the communion under one only kind, is neither injurious, to the people nor to the Sacrament. I will not stay there, but further I will make manifest, that it is profitable and honourable to both. To the Sacrament, because it preserves it, if not from injuries, at least from indecencies contrary to the honour and reverence due to the Sacrament, and yet are most obvious: for it is  that if the species of wine were communicated to all men, they could not avoid shedding of it. To the people: because if it were still necessaire to give both the kinds, it could not easily be kept to communicate the people at all times, all moments, all occurences: for besides that a sufficient quantity of wine, is not every where found to communicate the faithful, there are also some that do so loath wine, that they cannot only not drink it, but not so much as smell it. Whence we may well gather that jesus Christ did not establsh the necessity of communicating under both kinds, 
〈◊〉 Brentius in ●polo confess. ●itemb. Martyr. 〈◊〉 Corinth. 10. & 〈◊〉 ●mo Buceros in colloq. ●atisbonensi cō●sist esse indif●rens sumere ●●am vel vtrāquespeciē idemque concesserunt Thcologs Protestants in Colloq. Augustano. Vade Hospin●an. part. 2 histo. an. 1536. Et in concordiae discordi cap. 41. Coccium lib. 6. do Eucharist. c. 3.  since he cannot oblige us to impossibilities. And therefore diverse of your authors do grant, that this hath place, and is true in abstemious persons.  
But it is you indeed who injure the Sacrament, and people; while you deptive them both of the real and true body of jesus Christ, which we do carefully preserve for them; and you, giving only the appearrences to the people under the species of bread and wine, are justly by Luthere compared to one who having supped up the meat of the egg, doth carefully gather up the shell to the people to eat.  
Further, you are most injurious to the institution of jesus Christ, 
Beza Epist. ●. Rite celebrabitur (Coenae Domini) siquod panis aut vini vicem vel usu communi, vel pro temporis ratione supplet, pan●s aut vini l●●o adhibeatur.  in that you sustain, that albeit he instituted his Sacrament in bread and wine, yet neither the one nor the other of those kinds are necessary; so that it maybe administered in other matters. Let the Reader now judge whether of us are more injurious to the Sacrament, and more prejudicial to the people, and consequently who are to be condemned. Without all doubt you will be held faulty in the judgement of any Reader, yea which is more, even in your own judgement. For albeit you contemn the authority of the Church, 
Hospinian. l. 1. histo. sacram. & lib. de concord. dis●. c. 41. Luther in declarat. Euchar & ●l●bi.  yet by God's special providence, Luther deferrs so much unto it in this point, that by the relation of your own Caluinsts, he confesseth, that it is not necessary to give both the kinds; that the Church had power to ordain one only; that the people are to be satisfied therewith; Further, he approves the Rule made by the Council of Latran to that effect, which being done so, he would find it very strange, saith he, if one Bishope of his own authority should opposeit.    

CHAP. VII.  

MINISTERS.  
YOur Majesty should also see, that our religion is deciphered unto you quite otherwise then it is indeed: for if the things which are imposed upon us, to wit that we are enemies of saints, and of the Blessed Virgin Marie; and that we hold that good works are not necessary unto salvation; and that we made God author of sin, were true, we were abominable creatures, unworthy of the society of men; but they are forged calumnies to bring us into hatred, and are refuted by our writings, sermons, and our very manner of life.   

ANSWER.  
If you be men of your word, 
Enemies of Saintes.  it is high time for you to begin to truss up your baggage, and to remove yourselves out of the society of men, since you have sentenced yourselves to that punishment, in case you be guilty of a crime, of which you will never be able to clear yourselves.  
Is it not to be enemy to the Saints to ascribe contumelious names unto them, which the Devil, Pagans, and the old Heresiarkes condemned by the primitive Church, gave them? names, I say, which the Fathers do disallow, and reject by the authority of Scripture? And yet, witness 
a Kemnit●us Exam. Conc. part. 3. p 228 Vsitat vocantur mortus. Ho●. 58. de S. Babyl.  Kernnitius one of your prime Authors, you do ordinarily term them dead, no otherwise then the Devil according to S. chrysostom: julian the Apostata in S. Cyrille 
b lib. count. julias' : Vigilantius in S. Hierome 
c lib. count. Vigilantium. , who together with the rest of the Fathers reprehend that manner of speech. They are not dead, saith S. Ambrose 
d Serm. 10. d. ss. Pet & Paul Non enim mor tui sunt quor. curamus natalem hodie, sed renati viwnt, etc. : we do not term them dead, saith S. Damascene 
e 4 de Fide c. 16 Eos qui in spresurrectionis si deque erga eun diem extremun clauscrunt, mor tuos haud qua quam appellamus : He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, saith S. Hierome 
f l●b. count. Vigit. Non est Deu mortuorum se● vivorum. Item sancti non appel lantur mortui, se● dormientes.  following the Gospel. The Saints are not said to be dead, but to sleep, saith he again.  
Is it not to be enemy to the Saints to deprive them of all care, and all charity towards men? making them who are in the state of perfection above, less perfect, than those that are here below subject to worldly defects? and yet this you do. They do not, saith calvin 
g Calu. in 1. Cor. 13. Charitatem praesent●b us offie●●s min● me exercent, non sunt pro nobis soliciti, charitatis perpotuitas nihil pert●net ad tempus intermedium. Et in cap 1 Zachar officia charitatis scimus restring● ad c●rsum praesentis vitae , exercise charity, they have no care of us: we know that the offices of Charity are restrained to the course of this prefent life.  
Is it not to be enemy to the Saints to maintain that they neither pray for the living in general nor in particular? Yet this you affirm, the dead, saith Polanus 
h Polanus in disputationibus ●riuatis d●sp. 28. Sancti defuncti non intercedunt apud Deum pro ●obis viventibus ●●ec in genere, ●●ec in particu●a●●. Perkinsius in Cathol. reform Coutrou. 15. de●uncti non ro●ant Deum spe●●aliter pro hoc ●ut illo.  Professor at Basile, do neither in general nor in particular make intercession for the living.  
Is it not to be enemy to the Saints, to term them Monsters, Masques, hangmen, beasts? To affirm of Moses' chosen by God for the head of his old law, that his wisdom is hypocrisy; that his mouth was full of gale, yea of fury? to dare to say that S. james, one of the Apostles doateth. And yet this your do. calvin 
a Cal lib. de ve●arefor. Ecclesia.  doth honour S. Catharine and S. Christofer with the name of Monster; S. George 
b 16. & 3. instit. 〈◊〉. 20. ●. 24.25. & 27  and S. Hippolytus, with that of Masque, S. Dominike 
c lib. de vera resorm. Eccles.  with Hangman: S. Medard 
d Ibid.  and others, with beast: And Luthere 
e Luth in Ps. 45. & in c. 22. Gen.  durst affirm, that Moses his wisdom was hypocrisy, and that S. james, did dote.  
Is it not to be enemy to the Saints, to equalise them and the most imperfect Christians in point of perfection, saying in express terms, that the greatest Saint doth not surpass the least of the faithful? And yet this you do. I will not esteem the least Christian of all, saith Luthere 
f Luth. cap 1●. Genes. Non debe● Christianum minimum omnium inf●riorem astimare D. Petro & ●m ●ibus Sanctis qui sunt in caelo. Enemies of our Blessed Laedye. , any white inferior to S. Peter, and all the rest of the Saints in Heaven.  
Is it not to be enemy to our Blessed Lady, who in the instant of her conception was confirmed in grace, to accuse her of incredulity, to make her an infidel, to affirm that she is repugnant to God's words and works, that she doth, malignantly restrain God's power? And yet this you do. She had within herself, saith Luther 
g Luth. postillae in Euang. de annun. Sensum & insultum incredulitatis in se habuit. , both the feeling and assault of incredulity. She was an infidel, saith a certain 
h Culmamnus lo. cit. fuit in fidelis Sa●er. in Euamg-verbo & operibus Dei ●b Angelo revelatis s● opponit verbis Angels non credit.  German, both in the word and works of God revealed unto her by the Angel. She opposeth herself, saith 
i Calu. in cap. 1. Luc. Videtur non minus maligne restringere potentiam Dei quam Zacharias.  another, against the words of she Angel; she believes not. She seems, saith calvin, no less malignantly to limit God's power, than Zacharias.  
Is it not to be an enemy of our B. Lady, to make her worthy of eternal punishments: to say that she desired to be Christ his companion, in those functions which God had committed to him alone: That she had lost all the confidence which she reposed in God: finally that her offence was not light, yea that it was as grievous as Eve's. And yet this you do. Marry, saith a cerraine 
a Spargenbergius post illa in Dom. post Epiphan. ●sgna fuit suppli●ijs sempiternis.  German, was worthy of eternal punishments. Marry, saith 
b Dominica 2. post Epiphan. Maria non eum tantum hono●em quaerit quae debetur parents●●us, sed etiam ambi● honorem Messiae & cupit esse quasi sociae administrands eius efficij quod Chris●o tantum man●atū eraet.  Brentius, did not only seek that honour which is due unto parents, but also ambitiously aimed at the honour of the Messiah, and demanded to be, as it were, a fellow in the administration of that office, which was committed to Christ alone. She lost, saith 
c Post●●● in Do●●in. post Epiph. Perdi●it omnem sid● c●am erga Deum.  Coruinus, all confidence in God. The sins, of Eve and Marie, are neither of them little. Marry did grievously sin, Profess the 
d Cent. 1. l. 1. c. 10. Viraque delicta non sunt ●exigua. Mariae graviter peccat.  Centurioators.  
Is it not to be an enemy of the B. Virgin to make her importune, uncivil, and arrogant towards her son, and ambitious in such à measure that Christ was ashamed of it? And yet this is that you do. There is no doubt, saith calvin 
e In c. 12. matth. in harmony. Gall. , but our saviour meant to reprehend the importunity of Marie: and indeed she erred, so to interrupt our Saviour's speech. Marry, saith 
f Homil. 78. in Luc. Veh●mēter inh●●este & inciviliter Christum interpellaeun, importuna sua e●ocaetione leges publicae henestatis violavit, evocavit jesum arrog intia quadam & elatione animi Ambitione sua tam graviter peccavit ut palam per Christum pudefiat: & addit, ambitio blasphemia est.  Brentius, did vehemently, dishonestly, and uncivilly, interrupt Christ, by her importune interpellation she ●●●ated the laws of public honesty. She disturbed jesus with her arrogancy and pride she did so grievously offend by her ambition, that Christ did publicly shame her with it. insequall whereof headds, that ambition is blasphemy.  
Is it not to be an enemy of the B. Virgin, to affirm that in the passion of jesus Christ, she was offended at him, and comported herself in such àsort, that it appeared plainly that her thoughts were vain, her hart impious? And yet this you do. They were offended at jesus Christ, saith 
a Brent. hom. 17. in Luc. offendebatur in Christo aedeoque apparebat tunc ipsorum cogitationes vanas & cor impium ensse.  Brentius, speaking of the Disciples, and the Virgin, and thence it appeared that their thoughts were vain, and their hearts impious.  
I will pass over in silence what 
b Bucerus lib. de omnipotentia. Beza lib. cont. jacob. Andrae. Molina. In Harmon.  you teach touching her virginity, I say not that you call in doubt, whether after the birth of jesus-christ, she remained without knowledge of man. That which I have already said shall suffice, being a dear case, that none can use such language, without declaring himself an open enemy, not only of the B. Virgin, but his own, and of all mankind, who by means of her, were replenished with so many benefits.  
Having now shown you to be enemies to the Mother, 
Enemies of jesus-christ.  let us see whether you be not the like to the son too. It might suffice that I have shown above in the 3. chap. sect. 5. that you teach that he was in doubt of his salvation; that he suffered the pains of the damned; that by his corporal death our redemption was not accomplished, that his passion and torments had not been à condign prize of our redemption, unless he had also endured the pains of the damned.  
But this is but little, you say yet many more and greater things, which in a few words I will show. Do not your 
a Da●●us Apolg. ad lacob. Andrae. Christus quatenus & homo non est adorandus nec inuocandus● Peza in Col ●q. Mo●●bel. Negamus humanitatem Christi adorandam esse.  Authors contend, that Christ, as man, is not to be adored, not to be invoked? Doth not calvin 
b In 2. Luc. v. 40. Anima e●us subiectae fuit ignorantiae.  affirm, that his soul was subject to ignorance, and that a voice of Despair 
c In Matth. 27. v. 46. Elapsa est ●s desperationis vox.  issued from him? In a word, you disciphere Christ in such à sort, that that may most justly be imputed to you, which S. August. 
d S. Aug. in Enchir. c. 4. Sienim ●ili●enter quae ad Christum pertinent c●gitantur, nomine tenur invenitur Christus apu● quosdam H●reticos.  ascribes to all heretics. If we diligently consider what belongs unto Christ, we shall find him in words only in all heretics.  
To attribute as many vices to Christ as there are truly virtues in him is not this to hate Christ? If you love Christ, it is in words only; If you know Christ you know him by name only. But if they that teach and defend such blasphemies, be not enemies of Christ, than he cannot be said to be an enemy of the innocent, who by malice makes him nocent. Or if such an one be justly to be esteemed the enemies of the innocent, you shall never avoid the just censure of enemies of Christ, yea even by your own judgements.  
And as concerning good works, 
Enemies of good Works.  with what face can you deni, that you do not hold them necessary unto salvation? what means those words of Luthere 
a Luth. lib. de Libert. Christ. Nullo opere nulla loge Christiane opus est ad salutem. Item, libertas Christiana fuit ne cuiqu●● opus sit lege & operibus ad ●●stitiam aut salutem. , I pray, which he doth so often iterate, and inculcate. A Christian stands in need of no works, no law, to salvation. Whereupon the more rigid Lutherans, as Schusselburgius 
b Tom 7. Catal. haeret.  doth witness, do condemn this proposition, Good works are necessary to salvation. Wherefore did Pareus 
c Perilous l 4 de justify. c 1. Flavians add vitandum scandalum & err●ris periculum contend bant istam propositionem, opera sunt necessaria ad salutem. non esse in Ecclesia usurpandam. qua in parte fa●●le nos eis subscripsimus.  à Caluinist, as you are, after he had related that the Flaccians, which are more absolute Lutherans did profess that this proposition, works are necessary to salvation, was not to be admitted in the Church, adds these words, in which point we do willingly subscribe unto them, but to make public profession of that, which you so audaciously deny? Why doth he also continually add, that the Gospel 
d Ibid. evangel strict est doctrina gratie, sic solum conditionem fides requirit.  requires no other condition but faith? Why doth he also say in another place, 
e Et lib. 3. de iustif. c. 12. Non esse absolute necessaria ad salutem intelligitur.  I understand these works not to be necessary to salvation absolutely? If you reply that he is but one author: I answer that this man makes profession of the Doctrine of your Church, as those words, we subscribe to them, do planly show. Again, Kemnitius, whose learning your men do so much esteem, that they give him immortal praise, and honour him with no other title, than that with which Homer 
f Homer. Odysix O●os 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  adorned Tiresián, that they would have him to be the only wise man of all his fellows, doth sufficiently show that this is the doctrine of your Churches, when he saith, 
g Kemnit. I. par. exam. de fide iustificant In nostris Ecclesijs communibus suffiagijs, explofa sunt b●y opositionas, bona opera ad iustificationem it a esse necessaria ●t impossibilesit quenquam sine operibuisaluar●.  In our Churches, these propositions are rejected by common snffrages; good works are necessary to justification: the 
a In decls. are c. 4  book of the concord of Lutherans, hath the very same in these words. The proposition of good works necessary to salvation, is to be hissed at andreiected out of our Church's ●false. Further; the 
b Confess. Holuet. c. 16. Non sontimus bona opera ad salutom, it a esse necessaria, ut absque illis nemo unquam sit seruatus.  confession of Faith of the Heluetians, whom you accnowledge to be your brethren, and which confession the Church of Geneva approved, doth manifestly confirm the same in these words. We do not judge good works so necessatie to salvation, that none at all can be saved without them. What, I pray you, have you to reply to these so clear testimonies? How will you be ever able to warrant yourselves from the blame and hatred to which these testimoys do worthily expose you? Will you say that he means only, that works are not necessary, as the causes of salvation, though otherwise their presence are necessarily required continually to accompaignie faith, as the shadow the body, though the shadow doth nothing at all contribute to the conservation of the body? This shift shall not yet serve your turn, since they affirm the contradictory to that, which you do simply and absolutely deny without all reserve, whereas Illyricus 
c Apud Schusselbourg. 10.7. Sola necesstas praesentia operum ad salutem excluso omni merito, nihilominus hac incommoda secum affert.  doth also in express words affirm, That the only necessity of the presence of works had ussered in many discommodities. Amongst which he numbers despair of salvation, which of itself and of its own nature doth condemn that necessary presence. Pareus 
d Paraeus l. 4. de justsfic. c. 1. Latronem qui toto vitae cursu nihil boni fecerat cum in agone ad Christum confugeret morte praeventum sine operibus saluatum existimamus.  also doth dispute, that the good thief was saved without works, and contends that they are not absolutely necessary.  
In conclusion doth not the 
e Lib. 3. c. 12. supra cit.  Confession of the Heluetians overthrew the necessity of the presence of good works, where it planly teacheth that salvation may be obtained without them? Yea Luther, Illyricus, Amsdorfius, and others did not only teach that good works were not necessary to salvation, but they added further, that they were pernicious unto it, and that too, according to its own nature and substance, as may be seen in Hospiniane and diverse other Authors.  
Having convinced you to be enemies of the Saints, 
Enemies of God.  of the B. Virgin, jesus Ch. and good works, we will now see whether you be not also enemies of God. And certes you are enemies of the whole Trinity, making God almighty author of sin, and every effect of the three persons, is common, which being without God proceeds from his power. You deny that you teach this blasphemy, I affirm it: we are at variance in this point. But shortly we shall aggree, at least by the judgement of all men that without passion and perturbation do consider the case. For mine own part I will endeavour to speak nothing, which shall not be openly accnowledged to be the same which you affirm.  
Is not this to make God guilty and the cause of sin: if you aver that he wills sin, as sin? That sin was ordained by Christ; that evil is not only foreseen but even predestinated by God? That God would certainly ordain the fall of man, and gradatim dispose the causes of his damnation's Finally that man is blinded by the will and command of God. And yet these things you say: Sin saith Sanchius 
a Zanchius in Miscell. lib. de Excaecat. q. 5. Peccatum consideratum etiam ut peccatum, quatenus ad illustrandan Des gloriam facit, eatenus peccatum & malum culpae praeordinatum est à Deo. , considered even as it is sin, so farforth, as it makes to the illustrating of God's glory, in this sense sin, and the evil of the fault (malum culpae) is ordained by God. By God's ordonnance and beck, saith Caluin 
b Calu. in c. 3. Gen Dico Dei ordinatione & nutu lapsum esse Adam, hominem labi voluit. , Adam fell; He would have man to fall. It is the opinion of our Doctors, saith Pareus 
c Paraeus l 3. de amiss gratiae c. 2. Nostrorun Doctorum sententia est; quod Deus tentationem & lapsum bomini infallibiliter decreverit.  that God did infallibly decree the temptation and fall of man God, 
d Lib. 1. de Praed. Deus non tantum ad damnationem, sed etiam ad causas damnationis praedestinavit quoscumque libucrit.  saith Beza, did not only predestinate who soever he pleased to damnation, but even to the causes of damnation. Man was blinded, saith calvin 
e Calu. 1. instir. c. 18. §. 1 Volente & iubonte Deo excaecatur homo. , by the will and commandment of God. Do not they, who speak in this sort, make God the cause of sin, yea even of the malice of sin, which sin as it is sin, doth formally import and contain?  
Moreover to affirm that God was Author of pharao's obduration, to constitute the divine will the prime and supreme cause thereof; that God doth inflict sin, and that he made man and Angels violaters of the divine law, is not this to make God Author of sin in plane terms? And yet this you aver too. Certain it is, saith Sanchius 
f Zanchius' sup. q. 1. Certum est Deum primarium fuisse huius obdurationis authorem.  that God was the prime Author of this obduration. We resolve, saith 
g Calu. lib de Prad. In Doum transferimus obdurationis causas.  calvin, the cause of obduration into God. And in another place 
h Lib. de Provide. Dei voluntas summa est vel remota causa obdurationis Et 3. Instit. c. 23. § 1. Sequitur absconditum Dei consilium obssurationis esse causam. , the will of God is the chief or remote, that is, the primary, cause of obduration. God's Decree, saith 
i Beza de Praedest. ad art is. Corruptionis causis excludere Des decretum non potest.  Beza, cannot be excluded from the causes of corruption. God, saith 
a Martyr. in Rom. 1. Deus infligit peccatum originale.  Mart. doth inflict original sin. God, saith Zuin. 
b Zuingl. lib. de Provide. c. 5.  makes man ad Angels transgressiours.  
He that affirms that God doth incite, move, necessitate, and doth so compelle men to sin, that they cannot annoyed it; and that the efficacy of the error proceeds from God, doth he not make God, guilty, and cause of sin? 
D●us Angelum transgressorem facit & hominem.  He that attributes the species, attributes without doubt the kind (genus) too: and therefore whosoever ascribes this quality to God: that he doth compel men to sin, doth also doubtlessly make God cause of sin, since compulsion is but a certain species under that general cause: and yet this you do. God, saith 
c Mart. in Rom. 1 Deus in clinat & impellit voluntates impiorum in grauta peccata.  Martyr. doth incline and enforce the wills of the wicked upon grievous sins. God, saith Zuingl. 
d Zuing lib. do Drovid. c. 6. Movet Deus latronem ad occidendum, Deo impulsat occidit, at inquies. coactus est ad peccandum, permitto, inquam, coactum esse. Et in margin. Deus movet sontes ad pec●andum.  doth move the thief to kill: God incites, he kills; but you will say, goes on the same, that he was compelled to offend, and I admit your inference, he was compelled,  
The reprobate, saith Caluin 
e Calu. 3. Instit c. 23. §. 9 Gall , would be thought excusable in offending, because they cannot avoid the necessity of sinning, especially since that depends upon the ordonnance and will of God; but I contrariwise deny, that that can be a sufficient excuse for them, because this disposition of God is just. A Creature, saith Parçus 
f Paraeus li. 2. de amiss. great. c. 13● Nei essario quidem & iustisssmo iudicio Dei peccat creatura Item lapsum hominis ex acciden. te ob Dei decretum necess ●●ium, & inevitabilen fuisse nostri redissime asserun● , doth necessarily offend, and that by Gods most just judgement. Our men, saith the same, do rightly affirm, that man's fall was by accident (by reason of God's decree) necessary, and inevitable. God, adds the same 
a Et cap. 4. Opera malorum Deus quae sunt mala poenae & iusta sua iudicia facit efficacissime. , doth the works of the wicked most efficaciously. Which are the evils of pain (mala poenae) and his just judgements. The efficacy of the error, saith calvin 
b Calu. 1. Instit. cap 18 §. 2. A Deo ipso manat efficacia erroris ut mendacijs credant. , that credit is given to lies proceeds from God.  
They that will have God be Author of all those things, which as we teach happen by God's permission only, do they not deliver in express terms, that God is author of the malice of sin which we hold he permitts only? and yet this you do: Now I have planly enough shown, saith calvin 
c Calu. 1. Instit. c. 18 §. 3. , that God is called the Author of all those things, which those Controwlers, will have to happen by his idle permission.  
They that do teach in express terms, that God, by his pure will, of his own free motion, without all consideration of merit, doth predestinate to damnation, and damns man, do they not speak yet more detestably, then when they make God the Author of sin? And yet this you do. God of his own accord. saith Luther 
d Luth. lib. de seru. arbitrio. Deus mera sua voluntate homines deserit, indurat, damnat. , abbandons, hardens, and damns men. In damning them, saith 
e Et ibid. Non respicit merita en damnandis. Et ib. Immeritos damnat, itam & severit atem spargit in immeritos.  he in another place, he respects not merits; be damns those that have not merited it. He pours out his wrath, and severity upon such as have not merited the same. And yet in another passage, he saith 
f Hic est sidei summus gradus credere illum esse iustum, qui sua voluntate nos necessario damnabiles facit. , that the sovereign degree of faith consists in believing that he is just, who by his sole will make us necessarily damnable. God, saith he 
a Ibid. Deus absconditus operatur vitam mortem & omnia in emnibus: multa vult quae verbo suo non ostendit sese velle: sic non vultmortem peccatoris verbo scilicet, vult autem illam voluntate imperscrutabili. , wills many things, which yet by his word, he shows not to will, so he willeth not the death of sinners, to wit in word, but he wills it by his inscrutable will. By his only will, saith calvin 
b Calu. 3. Instit c. 23. §. 2. Nudo etus in arbitrio & citra proprium meritum in aeternam mortem prae destinantur. , and without consideration of their own merits, they are predestinated to eternal death. calvin, saith Paraeus 
c Paraeus li 2. de Grat. & lib. arb. cap. 16. ait. Caluinus Apostolum secutus praedestinationem peccati praeuisione priorem facit.  following the Apostle, makes Predestination precede the foresight of sin.  
How can you now purge yourselves of blasphemy, whereof you stand indicted, in making God Author and cause of sin? especially being convicted thereof by so many express testimonies of your own principal Authors? To what purpose should you deny with your mouth so detestable a doctrine, since it lies still at your hart, and since your writings, which you should have weighed in the weights of the Sanctuary, ought rather to win credit than your words? For if not to avouch one's crime, were a sufficient means to be purged of it, there would none be found criminal, though they stood convicted of the fact.  
What will you say to this? that our senses deceive us? and that we see what is not? we appeal to your own eyes, which I dare be bold to say will aggree with ours, if you will please to take the pains to open them and look upon your book, to see therein the passages which I have most faithfully coted.  
You will say peradventure that their meaning is only that God is cause of sin, not that he is Author thereof. But this answer is no defence for you, since your Doctors do say again and again that he is Author of sin, either in express terms, or in words equivalent. Add, that though there is indeed a difference betwixt these words, Author and cause, in that the one doth signify more than the other, Author signifying a first cause, which doth move of itself; yet light you of nothing which can free you from crime, since it it is blasphemy not only to make God Author of sin, but even to hold him to be the cause thereof.  
You say that when yours do make God the Author and cause of sin, they speak of the act, not of the malice of sin? But you cannot have recourse to this answer, because you use this reduplication, sin as sin, terming him cause of the evil of sault (mali culpae) and making him the fountain whence flows the efficacy of error. What have you then to reply? That though you deliver in your writings that God is Author of sin, yet do not you believe it? you will not gain credit in this neither: and again, which is yet worse, it is a part of the Devil and his disciples, whose aim is the destruction of souls, to speak one thing and believe another in matter of salvation. You condemn in one place what you profess in another: or rather, you blush, upon some occasions, to make that good, which you are not ashamed to believe at all times. Endeavour your utmost, you shall never be able to persuade, even the most ignorant that those truths, which you miscall calumnies in your writings, are calumnies indeed: for every one will easily discover, that if there be any calumny, and injury, it is that which you impose upon the Saints, the B. Virgin, jesus-christ, good works, God himself. Which calumnies and injuries do indeed make your religion odious; for which yet you can justly blame none but yourselves: seeing it is evident: that you are so far from refuting those blasphemies by your writings, sermons, and lives; that contrariwise your writings, preachings, and lives do teach them.  
In this extremity, and being reduced into these straits, whither are you to betake yourselves; certes, if you stand to your word, you are to departed out of humane society, and to retire your selves into same corner of the world not yet inhabited.  
Yet if you will please to let me have credit with you, you shall do yet . You shall accnowledge your fault, forsake your errors; and then in steed of separating yourselves from the society of men, the Church shall receive you again into the society of her children which you abandoned, and in which only salvation is to be found.    

CHAP. VIII.  

MINIST.  
But principally we could make known to your Majesty, that we are hated, and hardly dealt withal, because we maintain the dignity of your crown against usurping strangers, who do defile, and bring it into slavery. For your Majesty may call to mind, that in the late assembly of the states at Paris, the question was handled whether the Pope Can depose our kings, and whether it is in the Pope's prower to dispose of your crown: and that by the faction of the Churchmen, who drew a long with them a part of the Nobility, you lost your cause. Whereupon the Pope dispatched unto them letters triumphant and full of praise. A thing which we, and diverse of your Catholic Roman subjects would never endure, knowing that we own our lives and fortunes, to the defence of the dignity of your crown: especially to the defence of a right which God bestows upon your Maty and which is grounded upon his word. Hoping that one day, God will open your eyes to discover, that under this specious name of Roman Church, the Pope doth establish unto himself a temporal Moniarchie upon earth, and hath withdrawn from your obedience the fift part of your subjects, to wit, the Church men, who hold not themselves to belyable to the laws of your Court, yea for their temporalities, they have another whom they accnowledge sovereign out of your kingdom. To which add, that which the Pope pretends, and that which he hath already practised, yea even in our time, to wit, that he hath authority to deprive your Ma. of life and crown, what remains, dread soweraigne, but that your kingdom is held in homage to the Pope and that you live and reign at his discretion only.   

ANSWER.  
It is an old trick of craft, when one is guilty of a fault, to put it upon another. Yet I stand astonished to think how you dare make use of if it, against the whole Clergy of this kingdom. whom you strive to make the king suspect: accusing them of faction, whereof they are wholly innocent, and you generally known to be stickers in.  
The nature of your Ministry deptines you of credit in point of accusing priests, for S. Augustine 
a Hareticorum accusationes contra Catholicum prebyterum admittere nec possum●●. nec debemm.  doth teach us, that your accusations neither ought to be, neither indeed can be admitted; and that it is the trick of heretics 
b Aug. Epist. 137. Hoeretici non hahendo quod in causa sua defensionis defendant, non nisi hominum crimina colligere affectant, & ea ipsa plurafalsissime iactant, ut quia ipsam diuine scripturae veritatem qua ubique diffusa Christi Ecclesia commendatur, crimivari & obscurate non possunt, homines per ques pradicatur, adducant in odium, de quibble & fingere quitquid in mentem Generit possunt.  when they have nothing to say to defend themselves, in point of their division from the Catholic Church, to make a list of men's faults, and following their own fancy falsely to enlarge themselves thereupon, to bring them into hatred who teach the truth, which they are notable to find faulty, or to obscure.  
Having already sufficiently manifested in what manner you sustained the dignity of this crown, and how little occasion you had to draw pride or vanity from it; I will only observe in this place, that you do too too far swerve from truth, and modesty, in saying that you are ill used in this kingdom: and by assuring yourselves that if you were not hated, and hardly treated for maintaining the dignity thereof, you should for ever after be exempt from all hatted, and hard usage.  
To what purpose did you tax the two first Orders of State, accusing the one of faction, the other of weakness prejudicial to the king's Majesty, but to let the world see, that when you bear à spleen against any one, wtih a wonderful boldness you feign faults to diffame him, though without all foundation: for none can beignorant, but that, if there were any faction, it got entry by their means, who out of time and season would needs move a question, whereof the Church, Nobility, and the greater part of the three states strive to stop the course; moved thereto by diverse reasons, which in a few wonds I will deduce.  
First, because the question being merely spiritual, whether God had given power to the Church to depose kings, in cases of heresy and in fidelity, when they do not only make profession of them; but do also show them selues persecutors of the name of Christ and the true faith: as also whether this power did aggree with the word of God, or no; final whether it were lawful to urge all the people to take an oath, whereby they should affirm that it was not according to God's word? which being handled in the assembly: a body composed of lay-people, could not intermeddle in it without sacrilege, without entrenching upon the liberties of others; mounting into Moses his chair; laying hand upon the incensoir, and consequently, without exposing themselves to the desasters, which are wont to follow such impious and sacrilegious enterprises. Nay even the Clergy itself, of a particular Church, as of the Church of France could not decide this point, since it belongs to the universal Church only, to define Articles of Faith.  
Secondly, because all the kings and states in Christendom, having interest in this cause, one only kingdom could not judge of it, without the appovall and authority of all the rest.  
Thirdly, because the holy Sea being interressed in this matter, your adherents who have sworn its destruction, and who esteem the ruin thereof their establishment, could not be held impattiall judges, though some of them endeavoured to deal in it.  
Fourthly, because out of the definition which you aimed at, there followed a most evident schism by establishing an article of faith particular to the Churches of France, not Catholic or common to the universal Church, whence there followed a division in faith.  
Lastly, because the decision of this question, was not only of no effect to the health and security of kings (which was yet the sole end of the question) but was even prejudicial unto them, as may be seen by that which that great Cardinal and honour of his age, wrote upon that subject, who doth most amply handle this matter, with eloquence equal to the profundity of learning, which all the world admires in him. These reasons being considered without passion, will leave no doubt in any man but that the Clergymen were worthy of praise not of blame, for refusing to decide a question, which was proposed unto them to a bad end; nor did the decision thereof belong unto them. And therefore it carries no colour, but is quite contrary to truth, to accuse them of faction, adding, that they, and a part of the nobility, made the king lose his cause. For how do you not blush for shame to affirm this, since it is notorious to the word, that in all the articles of the Clergy, and nobility, there was no proposition made, much less any determination, of any thing that tends in any the least measure to the diminution of the sovereign power of our kings, and the dignity of their crown: and that the article presented by the advice of some of the third order was only rejected, without ever deliberating upon the contents thereof? it is a gross impertinence to say that we caused the king to lose a cause, where no judgement was past and to make his Majesty a party in a cause where he only interposed himself, by his authority to conserve things in the same state, in which they stood. If any were cast in their cause, it is you, who under pretext of maintaining the authority of kings, would have brought inn a schism amongst Catholics.  
As for the letters which the Pope wrote upon this matter, if it be a fault in a father to write to his children to receive their father's letters, his holiness is blame-worthy to have done that honour to the two orders whereof we speak, and they culpable in receiving them: Marry seeing common sense doth teach us that there is nothing in all this which is not most convenient, you wrong us in upbrading us with it, and in striving to bring our holy Father into hatred, as though forsooth, by virtue of that letter, he would have made some advantage over this state, which is altogether ridiculous.  
Your strife in this, is, to make the Pope's power be suspected by all the kings of the earth: But regal dignity, and the dignity of the Church have no repugnancy, the duties which we render to the holy Sea do no ways hinder us to make appear by effects what you profess in words: to wit, that a subject owes his life and all his fortunes to the defence of the dignity of his king's crown. In this, you shall continually have us not for companions only, but even for Guides. And doubtless if you second us, as I beseech God grant, and give credit unto us, France shall conserve her peace which hitherto hath been too much troubled by yours.  
But with what face can you affirm that the Pope hath the thirds of the the territories of France; that he hath seduced the fift part of the knigs subjects from their obedience to him? and that out of the kingdom we have another sovereign in point of temporalities?  
It is false that the Pope hath the third part of France, seeing he hath only the County of Amgnion, which his Predecessors bought of the Counts of that Province. It is false that he withdrew the Clergy from their obedience to their king: sith they preach obedience unto and will preach it all the days of their life, in word, and work. It is false that we do not esteem ourselves the king's subjects: sithence in subjection to him we are ready to spend our lives for his service. It is false that we did not submit ourselves to temporal jurisdiction, as though, to pretend exemptions in certain cases, by the concession and grant of our Princes, whose authority is in question, were to franchise ourselves from their jurisdiction; and to enjoy a benefit (granted by a king) in virtue of his Grant, were not rather an accnowledgment of his authority then a withdrawing from it. It is false that we accnowledge any other sovereign in our temporals, than our king.  
It is false that the Pope pretends to have authority to put kings to death. False that he practised this pretended power: false that he holds this kingdom to be a fief which holds on, and owes homage to his chair false to conclude, that the king life's but at his discretion.  
King's would be immortal, if their conservation depended upon Popes, who wish their good, as parents the good of their children. Why did he who to the great happiness of all Christian doom, sits now in the chair of Peter, 
The censure of januarie 1613.  cause Becanus to be censured, who had put out seditious propositions, and with all importing danger to kings, but to provide for their safety? Why did he approve that the Clergy of France in the assembly of the states, and that Sorbone at other times, did renew the publication of the article of the Council of Constance, which pronunceth a curse upon those that do attempt upon kings, unless their lives were as dear to him as his own?  
You pass over these truths in oblivion, and not without reason, seeing they discover to all men, that it is false to affirm, that the Popes, and Clergy of France, do not affect the king's prosperity; they do, and will always do in such a measure, that the Pope will not omit to endeavour any thing which may tend to their good; nor will the Clergymen of France ever spare their own lives, to assure the life of their saveraigne. If accusations were enough to make a man culpable, none would be found without fault: innocence would not be exempt. You are bold in laying aspersions, but that which is your disgrace, is, that you fall short in your proofs. You make us criminal in point of our duty towards our France, while to you she stands bound for benefits: as though forsooth, her defence were only found in your hands: and your weapons were her warrant against the usurpations of strangers. You do wisely to term them strangers, lest your own enterprises might be comprised, which are so frequent and palpable that the weakest wit will with facility deserve, that it is not your affection to your king which makes you so zealous of their greatness but your hatred to the Pope, and the universal Church.  
And that it may not seem that I impose upon you, I will make clearly appear, that you grant a far greater power to the people, then that which you deny the Pope, which is exceedingly disaduantagious to kings: for there is no man that doth not esteement a thing far more perilous, to be exposed to the discretion of the rude multitude, which doth easily, though falsely, esteem itself oppressed, and which is a many headed Hyder which is ordinarily governed by its own passions, then to be subject to the correction, of a tender Father, whose hart is full of affection, for his children's advantage.  
The common people, 
a Lib. de iure regni. Popule ius est de sceptro regni disponends pro libito suo.  saith Bucanan, (whom 
b Epist. 78.  Beza accnowledgeth to be excellent, and a man of great merit) have right to dispose of the sceptres of kingdoms at their will and pleasure. Bad Princes, saith an 
c In Apolog. Godman.  English man who was 
d Epist. 306.  Caluins intimate friend, and whom he called brother, according to the Law of God, aught to be deposed; and in case the Magistrates neglect to do their duty, the people hath also as free liberty to do it as though there were no Magistrate at all; and in those circunstances of time, God enlargeth them with leave to use the sword, 
a Goodman in Apolog. Reges ius regnandi à populo habent qui occasione data illud re●ocare potest.  The same Author in the reign of Marie Queen of England, composed a book, entitled of obedience, printed at Geneva, approved by Beza and calvin, wherein these words are found. King's have right to reign from the people; who upon occasion can also revoke it.  
Nor are you content with saying that kings may be deposed, you step on further, teaching that they may be punished, condemned, and slain. That a reward is to be given to the executioners of so horrible and execrable crimes.  
The People, saith Wicklefs followers, as 
b Osiander in Epist. centur. art. 17. Vulgus provoluntate sua punire potest principes peccantes.  Osian relates, may, as they shall please, punish their Princes which offend. The 
c Goodman in Apolog. Protestant.  book whereof I made mention above, printed at Geneva, in the Reign of Queen Marie of England, saith, that if Magistrates transgress the law of God, and oblige others to do the like, they fall from the dignity, and obedience which otherwise is due unto them, and ought no more to be reputed Magistrates: but are to be accused, examined, and condemned. The people, saith 
a Bucan. de iure regni populus principem in ius capitis vocare. potest.  Bucanan, have power to judge of the life of kings. It were to be wished, 
b Lib. de iure regni. Optandum est ut praemia à plebe decernantur iis qui tyrannos occiderint, ut fierisolet iis qui lupos caedunt.  saith he again, that rewards were appointed for such as kill tyrants, as we are wont to do to those that kill wolves.  
But what form do you observe in these depositions? None at all. What respite do you allow kings that are to be deposed by the people to recant? None at all. In your opinion they depose themselves, when they behave themselves otherwise then they ought: so that the people are only to oppose themselves and rise up against them.  
The kings of the earth, saith 
c in 6. Dan. v. 22. & 25. Abdicant se potestate terreni principes, cum insurgūe contra Deum immò indigni sunt qui in numero hominum censeantur ideoque in capita potiùs corum compuere oportet quam illis parere.  Cal, do deprive themselves of power when they make head against the king of heaven. Yea they are unworthy to be numbered amongst men, and therefore we are rather to spit in their faces then to obey them. If Princes, saith a 
a Rnoxus quem Galuinus epist. 305. virum insignem, eximium virum, & ex animo colendum fratrem. Beza ep. 74. Euangelij apud Scotos restauratorem, quem teste Witakero con trou 2. quaest. 5. cap. 13. Scoti omnes testantur fuisse spiritu prophetico & Apostolico praeditum, in admonitione ad Angliam & Scotiam, si Principes adversus Deum ac veritatem eius tyrannicè se gerant, subditi eorum à iuramento fidelitatis absoluuntur.  scotish man, whom calvin terms an excellent man, Beza, the restorer of the Gospel in scotland: whom all the scots, as Witakere relates, esteemed to have the spirit of prophecy: If Princes, saith this famous personage in your judgement, govern tyrannically against God and his truth, his subjects are absolved from their oath of fidelity.  
But what cause is sufficient to depose a king according to your doctrine? Only religion? no, not that only but many other more; their wicked life; their vices. No man, saith 
b Apud Osiand. in epiton● centur. 9 Nullus est Dominus civilis, nullus est Praelatus, nullus est Episcopus dum est in peccato mortali.  Wiclef, is a temporal Lord, none a Prelate, none Bishope, when he is in mortal sin. 
c In explan. art. 42. Principes quan●● perside & extra regulam egerint, possunt eum Deo depo ●i.  It is lawful to depose Princes, saith Suinglius, when they do disloyally transgress the rule of jesus Christ, which he thinks they do as he himself confesseth, if they 
f Cum seelerates provehit & innovios praegravat, ut cum inutiles ventres, otiosoes sacrificos defendit (Princeps.)  advance the wicked, oppress the innocent, and defend the idle sacryficers, to wit Catholics, as is to be noted.  
I could prove out of a multitude of authors, what is your sense in this behalf; which pains I would willingly undertake if that which you teach upon this subject were as advantageous as prejudicial unto you: I will only invite the Reader to see a book in titled, the Protestants Apology, one of the most profitable, that hath been printed these many years, where he will find far more passages upon this subject, amongst the rest some which do verify, that your Authors have written, that it is lawful by divine and humane law to kill impious kings; that it is a thing conformable to the word of God, that a private man by special instinct may lawfully kill a Tyrant; a most detestable doctrine in every point, which will never enter into the thoughts of the Catholic Church.  
This is not yet all. Having now seen what you, deliver touching the deposition of kings: we must also see by your actions how you behave yourselves towards them.  
Since your etrours were brought into the world by Luthere and calvin, you have let no occasion slip where you could make use of your pretended power, in which you have not done it. You put an army a foot against Charles the V (whom by way of derision you instiled Charles of Gant) to trouble him in his Dominions, 
Surius ann, 1547.  and to deprive him of dominion. You have borne arms against three kings of France Francis the II. Charles the IX. Henry the III. in the reign of Charles the IX. you coined money in the name of another, to whom you gave the name of king. 
Du Chesne in the history of England under Elizabeth and Marie.  How did you use Marie Queen of Scotland? did you not make her captive? Did you not, in prison, cause her to renounce her royal dignity? Did you not thrice take up arms against Marie Queen of England? Did you not set up a pretended Queen against her? Did not one of yours attempt upon her royal person? 
jane borne up by the Duke of Northumberland.   
In Flanders you despoiled Philippe king of Spain of a part of his Provinces. Christiernus, 
Surius.  king of Denmark, was by yours dispossessed of his crown, driven out of his kingdom, afterwards clapped in prison, where, following the opinion of the times, the days of his life were abridged by poison. Sigismond, who at this day reigns in Polony sees himself deprived of the crown which appartaynes unto him by right of inheritance, and which his father did peacably possess, his uncle who was of your profession, being put up into his place by your men. You usurped, upon the Emperor Rodolphus the last diseased, Transsiluania, which he possessed by just title as king of Hongarie. And all this following the example of your predecessor calvin, who cannot endure the Bishope of Geneva, I will not say in quality of Bishope only, but even in the nature of temporal Prince?  
Whosoever shall read the histories, wherein what I speak is contained, shall see that in one age you disturbed two Emperors; acctually spoilt one king: excluded another out of his kingdom, deposed one Queen, made war against another to bereave her of her crown, bore arms against four kings; deposed other temporal Princes: put a king to death: brought a virtuous and wise Queen into captivity, who had power to enlarge others with liberty; whom in conclusion, violating divine and humane laws, you put to death, after a most inhuman and incompassionate manner.    

CHAP. IX.  

MINISTERS.  
TO bring more light and evidence unto this matter, we must give your Majesty to understand, that you nourish in your kingdom a faction of men, who call themselves companions of jesus, as though it were too ●itle to be his disciples, who have made an oath of blind obedience, and that without reserve, to the head of their order, who is, and always was subject to the king of spain: who were condemned by your Courts of Parliament, as enemies of your state, of the lives of kings, and corrupters of youth: who teach the people, that the Pope hath power to depose kings, to cause them to be slain, and to transport their crowns to others. That they are not to detect conspiracies against the king, which they hear in confession: and that being attached they may use equivocation before the judge. Whence effects have sprung pernicious to France, and to all Christendom. Wherpon their books put out by the public approbation of the General of their Order together with a good quantity of jesuite Docteurs, were by the Decree of the Court publicly burnt by the common executioner. And if your Majesty will deign to inform himself, he shall find in the jesuite College of Flesche founded by the bounty of the king your Father of most glorious memory, he shall find I say in the Father's low hall a great Picture, wherein are represented the Martyrs of their Order, amongst whom some are found who were put to death, for having enterprised the death of their kings; and that this punishment is there called martyrdom: and this is placed in the view of a multitude of youths to induce them by their examples, to attain to the glory of Martyrdom by the same means. And yet even those men, without having made any retractation, or public declaration whereby to condemn such books and such doctrine, have at this day the ears of our kings, they search the secrets of their consciences, and have freest access to their royal personns.   

ANSWER.  
GOd's goodness is so great that ordinarily he doth convert, the evil which is intended against his friends, to their benefit. Your aim is to hurt the jesuites, and you do them great service: since all men will confess that it is a great glory unto them, to be blamed with the same mouth, which doth accuse the Catholic Church; rejects good works; calumniates the saints; injures jesus Christ; yea makes even God himself blame-worthy. It is a thing truly whichmakes greatly to their advantage, we see it by experience: for so much as, besides the considerations which ought to make all men esteem them, diverse do love them particularly, because you hate them.  
Let us see the crimes which you lay to their charge. You say, they call themselves the companions of jesus Christ: what proof do you bring to make this good? you will say that to call one's self of the company of jesus, is, to make themselves the companions of jesus: but your consequence is impertinent: for to be said to be of the company of a Prince, no other thing is required then to be one of his followers: marry to be said to be his companion much more is requisite. False therefore it is that the jesuites term themselves the Companions of jesus Christ, though they be said to be of his company. Wherein they do nothing worthy of reprehension, since the words of the Apostle, 
1. Cor. 1. v. 9 1. joan. 1. v. 3.  you are called into the society of his son; and those of saint john, let our society be with the Father and his son jesus Christ, are not only to be understood of those to whom they are spoken, but of all Christians in general, who follow the faith and doctrine of jesus Christ.  
But how is it sufferable, that the Reverend Ministers should blame the jesuites, as though they called themselves the Companions of jesus, while they assume to themselves, that title which they blame for arrogant. Certainly you have forgotten your Catechism, 
6. Sunday.  where speaking of jesus Christ you say in plane terms, we are Companions of his priesthood. And it appears planly that you begin to neglect calvin by reason of the multitude of blasphemies, whereof his works are convinced: for if you had read him, you had observed without doubt, that it being said in the second of S. Peter, 
Cap. 1. v. 4.  that we are partakers of the divine nature; he made us fellows of Christ in the eternity of life. You would also have noted him where he saith, that 
a Calu. in Coloss. 1. v. 24.  Paul was Christ's companion; that Christ 
b In Mar. 13. v. 43.  promised the thief that he would make him his fellow-partner of eternal life: 
c In Hebra. 2. v. 13.  that we are all fellows to the son of God, that the 
d 3. Instit. c. 18. §. 1.  Elect are taken into the fallow ship of Christ, yea of God too. 
e ibid. c. 17. § 6  Or if you had been conversant in 
f Luth postillain Domin. 5. post Pascha.  Luthere, certainly you would have fallen upon these words: Through jesus Christ we are made equal and brothers to him, to wit, to God.  
The jesuites say you, make an oath of blind obedience, and that without all exception. If you were not yourselves blind, you would see that a vow of its own nature contains an exception of all that may be prejudicial to kings: for seeing all vows have good for their object, a man cannot oblige himself by vow to do any thing contrary to the law of God, the Decrees of the Church, obedience due to the king, and love to our neighbours. If you had diligently read the Fathers, you would have learned that the obedience, which you call blind, is not subject to blame, since they teach that a true religious aught to have it. So saith 
a Basil in constit. Mon. c. 23. Quamadmodun igitur Pastori suo oves obtemperant & viam quamcunque vult, ingrediuntur: sic qui ex Deo pietatis cultores sunt, moderatoribus sins obsequi debent, nihil omninò iussa eorum curiosius perscrutantes quando libera sunt à peccaco, etc. Item, ut Faber singulis aertis instrumentis pro arbitrio utitur suo, neque unquam ullum enuentum est instrumentum quod ad quencumque usum elle voluisset non se facile tractandum praebuerit, etc.  S. Basile teaching that it is not the part of a true religious to examine his Superious command, so long as he doth not oblige him to sin; and he compares him to a sheep, which goes which way the Pastor pleaseth; and to an instrument which never resistes his will that useth it. So 
b Bernard. Tract. de pracepto & dispensat c. 9 Perfecta obedientia legem nescit, terminis non arctatur— largiori voluntate fertur in altitudinem charitatis, etc.  S. Bernard, saying, perfect obedience knows no laws no limines, but is carried with a full will into the depth of charity; to all that is commanded. So 
a S. Hieron. epist. 4. ad Rustic. c. 4. credas tibi salutare quicquid praepositus praeceperit, nec. de maiorum sententiae iudices.  saint Hierome, when he saith, be confident that all that thy Superior commands thee is wholesome for thee; and take not upon thee to judge the commands. of thy betters. Finally, so 
b Greg. l. 2. c. 4. in 1. Regum. Vera obedientia nec Praepositorum intentionem discutit. nec praecepta discernit, quia qui omne vitae suae iudicium maiori subdidit, in hoc solo gaudet, si quod sibi praecipitur operatur. Nescit enim iudicare. quisquis perfeclè didiceris obedire.  sainc: Gregory, in these terms, That true obedience doth neither examine the intention of Superiors, nor discern their commands, because he that hath submitted all the judgement of his whole life to one greater than himself, hath no fairer way then to execute what he is commanded; and he that hath learned perfect obedience, knows not how to judge. Therefore the jesuites are not to be blamed for making and observing a vow, which the Fathers of the primitive Church do not only approve, but even ordain as a thing necessary for religious people.  
You say further that they promise this blind obedience to a General who is always subject to the king of Spain. If you had informed your selves well of the truth of the business, you had learned, that it is false that their Generals are, aught to be, or were always such: for even Father Vitelesque who at this present is deservedly possessed of that charge; is a Roman borne, and the last before him who lately deceased, was a Liegois.  
Next, you upbraid them with the Decrees which were made against them: but it is sufficient that they were restored and established by the Edict of Henry the Great, approved by all the Courts of Parliament in France. Which doth sufficiently justify the zeal of this order towards kings, the affection thereof towards the state, and the profit which youths reap of the care they take to instruct them.  
Concerning their doctrine in point of power, which they attribute to Popes over kings; you had spoken otherwise and more to the purpose, if instead of gathering it out of the writings of some particular men, you had received it from the mouth of their General who in the year 1610. made a public declaration, whereby he doth not only improve, and disallow, but absolutely prohibit those of his Order, under most grievous pains, to maintain, upon what pretext of tyranny soever, that it is lawful to attempt upon the persons of kings and Princes.  
As touching the secret of confession, I have not yet understood that they hold any other opinion, then that which the universal Church holdeth. But it is no wonder, since you quarrel with the Sacrament, that you employ all your craft, to make this become odious; thereby to hinder them (whom you hold your enemies, because you are the enemies of God's Church) from having access to king's persons, and from the knowledge of secrets of their consciences, whereat you aim, as the last words of your paragrafe do testify.  
As for the Equivocations which you say they use, and teach others to use before their judges, I refer you to the Answers which they so often have returned you upon this subject: it shall suffice me only to show, that blaming equivocation in in them, you practise it yourselves; nay even most manifest lies in matter of faith.  
Wicklef, 
In the 2. book, on the life of ●videf.  by whom, your french martyrologue saith, it pleased God to awake the world which was buried in the dream of humane traditions, being demanded an account of his faith, did not he and his use tergiversations, if we may credit your said martyrologue, who speaks of them in these words? Striving only to find out tergiversations, and frivolous excuses, thereby to escape through ambiguity of words. Did not your Augustana Confessio use equivocation when it said? 
Cap de Missa.  Our Churches were falsely accused of abolishing Mass; for we do yet retain Mass, and celebrate it with greatest reverence. Did not Melancton use equivocation, 
Apud Hospiman, part. 2. hister. an. 25 41.  when he did confess that he and his, had made the Articles, at Asbroug ambiguous and easy to be turned? To what end doth he say, that the Articles made at Asbroug were to be changed, and to be suited to occasions, if he condemn equivocation? They framed ambiguous and guileful forms of Transubstantiation, saith calvin, 
Epist. 12.  speaking of him and Bucere. He endeavoured, saith Chavaterus, to settle a certain concord in an ambiguous kind of speech, 
An. 1538.  meaning Bucere. We have met with a confessing adversary. For he himself teacheth upon Erasmus: that it is lawful in the affairs of the Gospel to use colours and clocks. Bucere therefore and his fellows, when they grant to Luthere that the body of Christ is truly and substantially in the Eucharist; and also that the unworthy do receive it, do they not without compulsion for their own pleasure, yea and even in matter of faith, use tergiversations and equivocations? Doth not the same say that the Zwinglians differe from Luther (though indeed it is false) but in words only? 
Hospinian, part. 1. hist. Sacram.  Doth not Luther upon this occasion term him a sour of words? as saith Hospiniane? 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Do not the same Hospiniane, and Simblerus swethish authors, relate, that Martyr did use for a time obscure and ambiguous words, in the matter of the last supper? In a word: your Authors confess, that your invisible Church for the space of many ages, did profess our religion, though with hart and mouth they believed yours: which they could not do, not only not without equivocation, but even not without denying God. And yet where is any of ours, who doth not accnowledge that he is rather a thousand times to die, then to use equivacation in matter of Faith: or to deny him not only in hart, but even in word, whom we are bound to confess with both?  
Touching their books, if curtain particular men composed any which were burnt: what need you to stir in their ashes? Do not the same Decrees which adjudged them to the fire, judge many of yours worthy of the same flames, since they handle the same argument?  
The picture which you mention, cannot any way advantage you, since you and they aggree not in the fact: for they sustain, that he whom you esteem convicted of a conspiracy against his king, is wholly innocent of the fact, and hold that he died for the sole defence of the Catholic religion. Whence in comes to pass, that if there be any error in this, it is error of fact (de facto) not of right (non de iure) of Fact, as believing he died for his virtue, not for his vice: not of right, as though they sustained that it were lawful to murder kings; and that to suffer death for that cause, were martyrdom.  
Now to conclude this Chapter, it only remains, that we beseech God, to shower down upon you the waters of the fountains of his Grace, because, being the nature of calumny to obscure and blacken its own authors, not him, whom they would, but cannot stain with it, you stand in so much need of washing, that all the waters of this world are not able to blanche you.    

CHAP. X.  

MINISTERS.  
THese are they (dread Sovereign) who to advance their private designs, do stir up tumults and scandals against us, to cloak their own proceed, and to the end that the troubles which they make arise, may be imputed to their Zeal of religion: for they cannot endure a king, though otherwise Roman Catholic, unless he turn Persecutor of his subjects; and cause a combustion in his kingdom.   

ANSWER.  
IT is a great sign of ignorance or malice, when he, to whom a benefit is done, doth publish that he hath received an injury.  
You complain of the jesuites, and yet you receive nothing but good offices of them: for it is manifest that that wherein you apprehend yourselves injured by them, is only, that they oppose your belief, which indeed is to your great advantage. Saint Augustine doth teach us, 
August. in Psal. 30. Goncil. 1.  that by how much more we seek the saltation of heretics, by so much the more we ought to place before their eyes the vanity of their errors. The jesuits have no other design, than the salvation of souls, and God's glory. All the means which they use, are referred to this end, not to tayse tumults, to cause scandals. To labour to reduce you into the bosom of the Church, is this to stir up troubles? To confirm the king in his belief, is it to move him to persecute you? To invite you to quench the fire, which one day will consume your souls, call you this to set his kingdom on fire? The hurt man hates the surgeon, while he is yet lancing his leg: but his hurt being healed his accnowledgments follow the beloved surgeon. So one day, I hope, you will laud the jesuites, sith now you only complain of them, because they affect your wellfaire, and strive to procure your salvation. They desire peace in this kingdom, and in your consciences. In which they differ far from yours, who take a glory in troubles and tumults, conceiving the fairest fishing to be in troubled waters.  
You will say peradventures that I miss the mark of truth: but to free myself of that imputation, 
Luther. loc. cemm. class. 5. ●u quereris quod per Euamgelium nostrum mundus tumultuatur. Respondeo, Deo gratias, baec voluifieri, & o me misevum sinon ta●●● fierent  I will engage Luthere your first father in the quarrel, assuring myself that in the judgement of all the world, nor he nor you shall ever come off with your honour: Thou complain'st, saith Luthere, that by means of our Gospel all the world is in tumult, I answer, thankes be to God, it was my wish that so it should be: and woe be to me, if so it were not.    

CHAPT. XI.  

MINISTERS.  
AT the least (Sovereign) they cannot serve up in our dish, that any of our religion hath killed his king; nor that any Minister of the word of God, did either in private or public incite any to do it. But contrariwise, after so many oppressions and persecutions, we seek no other revenge, but to pray to God for the prosperity of such as hate us, and esteem ourselves happy enough in seeing your Majesty a peaceable and happy possessor of his kingdom.   

ANSWER.  
I Am constrained against my will to omit that which concerns your religion, to examine that which toucheth your persons. My aim in this, is to please you, by answering you point by point, which of myself I had never undertaken, for fear of displeasing you.  
I will pass over in silence to your confusion what Christiernus king of Denmark, and Marie Queen of Scots suffered by yours: nor will I speak of the conspiracies made against king Francis the II. at Amboyle, and against king Charles the IX. at Meaux, and others which are more ancient, I will only insiste upon that which passed in the person of the greatest king that ever was seduced by your error.  
Is it not to will to kill a king to struggle with him, and hurl him down upon the ground, as Gourrie did in Scotland treat the king of great Brittany, whom he reduced to such an extremity, that his sole courage of mind and fortitude, together with God's assistance, conserved him alive? Will you dare to say that the condemnation of my Lord Gobans brother was unjust, who was convicted of making an attemptupon this sacred person? These two examples do clearly confirm, that such as have taken the tincture of your errors, do attempt upon kings. Yet if you be not satisfied with this proof, cast your eyes, I beseech you, upon the Epistle monitory of this great king, of whom we speak, you shall sinned there, how speaking of the puritans of his kingdom, who are Caluinists like you, he saith, I have not only ever since my birth been vexed continually with Puritans, but I was even almost stifled by them in my mother's womb, before I had yet seen the world. And in the next leaf; I would rather trust myself in the hands of the robbers of the wild mountains, or to borderers, then to that sort of men. Of whom he saith again in his kingly Present, that during his mmoritie, they would have brought on foot a dimocrasie in his kingdom; that they calumniated him in their sermons, not for any harm they found in him, but even because he was king.  
What will you say to these authorities? you dare not call them in doubt. Nor indeed doth Moulins, 
The R. Father Coeffeteau.  writing upon this subject against one of the most learned and famous religious men of his age, deny them. It is manifest therefore that yours do attempt upon the lives of kings. It would yet remain to be shown whether it were done upon the instigation of those that do exercise your ministry, if the testimonies which I have already produced, were not sufficient, if any shame be left in you, to cause, as well your blush, as silence upon this subject.    

CHAP. XII.  

MINISTERS.  
NOw, that which moved us to make these our humble complaints to your Majesty was the last action of Monsieur Arnould jesuite, who openly braged in his sermon, in your Majesty's presence, that he would undertake to show that all the places quoted in our Confession of Faith, are falsely cited: Your Majesty had thereupon a laudable curiosity, to hear him deduce his proofs upon this subject: which he did in his ensuing sermon, in words which tended to make us odious, and execrable to your Majesty, condemning himself to eternal flames, and to undergo all sorts of punishments, if he did not clearly show that all that is coted in the margin of our confession touchnig our controversies, are false allegations: seconding that with many odious words, and proposing the example of the Princes of Germany, who do only allow of one religion in their country's: yea not content her withal, he hath put down his proofs in writing, and delivered them unto a gentleman of our religion, to bring them unto us.   

ANSWER.  
SInce Every man understands his own business best, I have nothing to say upon this paragraph which toucheth F. Arnould, he having in his reply answered it himself, only this I will say, he that knows his merits, learning, Zeal, and moderation of mind, will easily judge him to be a man of greater performance, then undertaking, and more prone to render your souls grateful to God, than your persons hateful to men.    

CHAP. XIII.  

MINISTERS.  
THis, Sovereign Lord, did oblige us to make answer: for this confession having been made to give an account of our faith to our Sovereigns, and to that effect being presented to king Henry the II. your predecessor: we thought fit to address the Defence of the same confession to his successor, in whose presence it was calumniated. And I wish to God we were licenced, to propose our defence verbally in the presence of your Majesty, and were authorised publicly and in presence of the king which God hath bestowed upon us, to maintain, the truth of the Gospel, against those that do diffame it: which is a thing which your Majesty ought also to desire. For seeing a dissension amongst your subjects in point of religion, what is more convenient than that he who is the common father of us all, should know in what the difference consists, and see the ground of the process? and to this effect he should look to the head of the fountain, to discover what Christian religion was in its source. For he that is established on earth, to see that God be served, ought exactly to know the rule of God's service: he who in his charge represents God's royalty, aught in his actions to imitate his justice: which how can it be done without knowing the sovereign rule of justice, which is the word of God? Where upon it is that God commands kings continually to have before their eyes the book of the law, therein to read all the days of their life. But if they permit themselves to be hood winked, and be content to follow without seeing the way before them, the Popes and Prelates have fair occasion to accommodate religion to their private lucre, and crect their own greatness, upon the ruins of the Gospel. For now religion is made a traffic, and those our great Masters have invented rules of piety, which doth entrench not only upon the living but even upon the dead. To no other end have the Popes, for some ages past, probibited the kings your Majesty's Predecessors to read the holy Scripture, but that their Empire is grounded upon the ignorance of God's word. Never had it been permitted to have grown so great, with the diminution of the greatness of our Kings, if they had not wrought upon the advantage of an obscure age, wherein few people discovered their design. He could not have made himself sovereign judge in points of faith, if the people had had the rule of faith before their eyes, which God long ago pronounced with his own mouth.   

ANSWER.  
IT is a great art in him that is feeble and fearful to fain himself bold and valorous, you put a good face upon it, and bear it boldly, to make the world believe that you have a great desire to appear before the king; to make good in his presence, and in public, the truth of your new Gospel. Your words which sound no other thing but a chalance, whereby you provoke all the Clergy of France to a public disputation, makes me call to mind the Trojan whereof mention is made in Homer, 
Iliad. 7  who boldly provoked to combat, marry when it came once to blows, he stood in need of a cloud to cover his flight, and shame.  
We could with facility, if we pleased, refuse to give you battle, without the disadvantage of our dishonour, or affording you occasion of complaint: For Luther doth sustain, that we are not to dispute with such as renew old heresies which were long ago condemned. But we will not proceed so rigorously with you; the Church of France, by God's providence, being provided of store of Prelates, whereof I am the least, and of an infinite number of Doctors, who upon all occasions will make appear, the verity of her doctrine, the vanity of your errors. The only shadow of that great Cardinal will always be able to defeat you, for the same reason, for which the Picture of Alexander made him quake, under whose powerful hand he had sometimes sunk to the ground.  
Is it not a mere flattery to invite a king to discern differences in religion? Will you have princes to assume to themselves the authority of judges in such causes? Though you would, yet would not your brethren consent thereto. Princes themselves have no such pretention; The Holy fathers give testimony, and the Scriptures teach, that justly they cannot do it.  
That your brethren will not have it so, they themselves shall speak: Princes, saith 
a Bezainconfess. c. 5. art. 15. Principes Synodo intersint non ut regnent sed ut seruiant, non ut leges condant, sed ut ex Deiverbo per os ministrorum explicatas & sibi & aliis obseruandas proponant.  Beza, are present in synods, not to rule, but to serve: not to enact laws, but to propose those to be kept by themselves, and the people, which according unto the word of God, are explicated by the mouth of the Minister. The Prince, saith 
b Controu. 5. lib. 2. c. 18. De sensu fidei mec cognoscit Princeps, nec cognoscere officio Principali potest.  junius, neither doth, nor can by virtue of his charge, judge of the meaning of faith. We say, saith 
c Controu. 1. q. 5. c. 4. Dicimus lites Ecclesiasticas decernendas esseex lege divina per Ministrum. Item cap. 6. Respondeo Martinum Ecclesiae vindicare iudicium de genere doctrinae non concedere Imperatort, etc.  Vhitakere, that Ecclesiastical differences are to be decided by the Minister in virtue of the divine law. In another place, I answer, that Martin doth ascribe the judgement of points of doctrine to the Church; he doth not grant it to the Emperor: and who will deny that this judgement appertains to ●ishopes. Finally it belongs not to kings and Princes, to confirm even true doctrine, but they are to be subject to, and observant of it, saith Luthere.  
That Princes do not pretend to make themselves judges in matters of Faith, the 
a Apud Soz. l. 6. c. 7. Mihiquisum de sorte plebis, fas non est talia perserutari, Sacerdotibus ista curae sunt.  Emperor Valentinian doth confirm in these words; It is not lawful for me, who am of the rank of the people, to sound and search into those things: they are committed to the priests care. It belongs me not, saith the same as 
b Epist. 32. non est mecum iudicare inter Episcopos.  S. Ambrose relates, to judge of the differences which rise amongst Bishops. The Emperor Basilius doth also intimate this when speaking to the laiety, 
c In 8. Syn. nullo modo vobis licet de Ecclesiasticis causis sermonem movere, haec investig are & quaerere Paetriarcharum, Pontificum & Sacerdotum est, qui regiminis officium sortiti sunt, & Ecclesiastic as adepti sunt claves, non nostrum qui pasci debemus, etc.  he saith, It is no way lawful for you to meddle with Ecclesiastical causes; to sound and examine them belongs to Patriarches, bishops, priests, who have the government and keys of the Church; It appertains not to us who are to be fed, to be sanctified to be bound, unbound. Of the same sense was Constantine in the Council of Nice Gratianes in the Count: of Aquilea: Theodosius the younger in the Ephesine Council; and diverse other Emperors in many other places. In contemplation whereof 
a Lib. 5. epist. 25. Scimus piisamos Dominus Sarerdo●●●tòus negottis non se immiscere  S. Gregory saith, we know that our most pious Lords do not meddle in the affairs of priests.  
And that the Princes, if they had any such pretention were not well grounded, S. 
b Epist. adsolit. ●i●am agentes. Quandoae conatio aevo anditum est quod indicium Ecclesiae authoritatem svam ab Imperatore accepit? Plurima antea Synodi fucre multa iudicia Eec●esiae habitae sunt, sed neque Patres isliusmodires principi persuadere conati sunt, nec Princeps se in Ecclesiasticis causis curiosum praebuit.  Athanasius doth witness. Was it ever heard, saith he, from the creation of the world that the judgement of the Church had authority from the Emperor? Many Counsels have been celebrated; the Church hath often past her judgement; but neither would the Fathers persuade the Prince to any such thing, nor did the Prince show himself curious in causes of the Clergy, and a little after, 
c Quis videns eum in decernendo principem se facere Episcoporun & praesidere iudiciis Ecclesiasticis, ●●on merito di ●at eum illam ipsam desolaetionem esse quae a Daniele praedicta est?  who is he that seeing him (he speaks of Constantius the Arian Emperor) take upon him to be Prince of Bishops, to decree and preside in Ecclesiastical judgments, that will not say with just reason, that he is the desolation of abomination foretold by the Prophet Daniel? S. Ambrose doth the like, when writing to Valentinian the younger, who being corrupted by the Arians, would judge in matters of faith, he useth these words: 
a Ambros. l. 2. epist. 13. Si vel scripturarum se rien divinarum, vel vetera temporae retractemus, quis abnuat in causae inquam fidei, Episcopos solere de Imperatoribus Christianis non Imperatores de Episcopis iudicare? Eris, Deofavente, etiam insenectutis maturitateprovectior, & tunc de ho censebis qualis ille Episcopi ●● sit qui I aicis ills Sacerdotale substernit .... si conferendum de fide, Sacerdotum debet esse istae collatio sicut fact● est sab● onstantino Augusta mem●riae I 〈◊〉 cipe. Et Tract. de Basil. non tradend Quid honorificentius quam ut Imperator Ecclesiae filius dicatur.  If we either reflect upon the order of Scripture, or times bypast, who will deny but that in points of faith, in points of Faith, I say, the bishops were accustomed to judge of Emperors, not they of Bishops? With the help of God, goes he on, time will ripen thee, and then you will't judge what kind of Bishope he is who will subject Priestly right to laymen: if a conference be to be had of faith, it belongs to the Priests, as it happened under Constantine Prince of sacred memory. What hath an Emperor more honourable then to be styled the son of the Church?  
That that which the Fathers say herein is verified by the Scripture, the punishment which befell those, who would needs lay hand upon the Thurible, doth confirm. Further, it would not 
b 2. Agg. 2. v. 12.  command that things belonging to the law, should be demanded from the mouth of the Priest. without making any mention at all of kings, if both were equally lawful. It would not 
c 2. Paralypom.  say, that Amarias should preside in things belonging unto God, marry in those that apperi ayne to the office of a king Zabadias', if their Courts were not distinguished. To conclude 
d Ephes. 4. v. 11.  S. Paul making a long list of those who have power in the Church, had not begun with the Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, and Doctors, not mentioning kings, if their authority had extended so far.  
Again put case the king had power to meddle in such causes, would you be content he should sit upon yours, with obligation to stand to his judgement? Yes, even as the Donatists who appealed to Constantine, stood to his: you will stand to it, if it favour and like you, appeal from it, if it dislike, or go against you. God (saith 
e Whitak. controu ●. q. 5. c. 4. judicium sibi Deus reseruanit, nulli hominum permisit.  one of your prime Authors following therein the donatists) reserved the judgement of religion to himself alone; and did not grant it to any man. why then will you have the king to judge?  
But let's see whether you have a hart to enter into the lists, as you make a flourish. None will believe in my opinion, that he that will not admit of ordinary weapons, hath a desire to fight, though otherwise he proclaim a loode chalance: and who knows not that in rejecting the authority of the Church, Fathers, Counsels, and Traditions, you refuse the ordinary weapons, which are used in combats of Faith.  
But oh, you will admit of the scripture, and we also most willingly admit of it, yet not as it is in your hands, that is, Scripture not authentical, maimed, corrupted, interpreted according to your own brain, and most ordinarily against the true sense: but the scripture preached and interpreted by the Church the pillar and rock of truth, whereby we are to be delivered from all error. Who could away with him that in a civil cause, in a difficulty of importance, would only stand to the text of written laws, rejecting the explication of Doctors, the credit of the history, practice and common custom, in fine the authority of the judges, who are appointed to do justice to all men? But were he not yet more insupportable, who only admitting of written laws, should reject those that are directly against him, and interpret the rest following his own fanticie? In these terms are you, whereby it well appears, that though you make show to desire a conference, yet indeed you fly it; contenting yourselves to have occasion to bruit abroad amongst your friends, that you offered a disputation, concealing from them in the interim, that you refused the just and reasonable conditions thereof; apprehending that you have done sufficiently, in putting out some small pampletes which decide nothing at all, nor are good for any thing but to give a false alarm, and content such as please themselves to hear calumnies cast out against the Church.  
This moves you to cry out that Catholic religion is made a traffic, and that Prelates entrench upon the living and the dead.  
Is it to entrench upon the dead, to do that which we see hath been practised in the primitive Church, in the time of 
a Tert. ●l. de cer. mil. c. 3. Oblationes pro defunctis, pro natalitiis, annua die faci mus. Item l de Monoga. pro anima eius offerat annuis diebus.  Tertul. 
b Cyprian ep. 66. refert, ut si quis frater clericum tutorem nominas set non offeretur pro eo, nec saecrificium pro dormitatione eius celebraretur.  S. Cyprian and others, and the contrary to which is, condemned, for heresy in the person of Aerius, by the relation of 
a Aug haec. 53. Epiphan. har. 75.  S. Augustine, and S. Epiphanius?  
As your belief resembles that of the ancient Heresiarkes condemned by the Church, so your manner of proceeding is not unlike to theirs: for the Manichees did upbraid S. Augustine, Vigilantius, and S. Hierome, that for their own profit and interest, they defended the doctrine of the Church, which is the very same which now you object against us.  
The Prelates, neither entrench upon the living nor the dead, but do greatly assist the one and the other, whereas you abuse them both. They assist the living by instructions and Sacraments: the living and the dead by their prayers and their sacryfices: whereas you do altogether neglect the dead; and the care which you have of the living hath no other effect then the death of their souls.  
You say that the Pope for some ages past, hath hindered kings to read the Scriptures. Where do you find that prohibition? The Popes would always exceedingly rejoice, that kings who are learned, and are addicted to reading, should exactly read them: being confident that by the assistance of learned men who are able to explicate the sense unto them, they will clearly discover, that the government of the Church is not built upon the ignorance of the word of God, as you calumniate; but that your religion is grounded upon the corruptions and bad interpretations of that sacred word. They will also see that the Pope makes not himself the supreme judge of faith, but that he was constituted such by God and the Church which is the pillar and rock of truth, seeing God did constitute Peter a Petra or rock upon which it is built.  
And indeed S. Hierome, though most conversant in all holy Scripture, did yet beseech Pope Damasus, that he would decree whether we ought to say one, or thee hypostases, professing that he would hold as an article of faith what he defined. Had not S. Bernard also the Scripture before his eyes when he wrote to Pope Innocent the II. that all the dangers and scandals which rise in the kingdom of God ought to be referred to his Apostleship, especially things concerning faith? Was the Scripture unknown to justinian the Emperor, when he saith in his Epistle to Pope john the II. we suffer nothing to pass which belongs to the state of the Church, unknown to your Holiness, who is the head of all the holy Churches. Why did the ecumenical Counsels held in the primitive Church demand the confirmation of their Decrees of the Pope, if they knew not by holy write that they were, obliged thereunto? Was not the Scripture both in the east and west Church, when, as S. H●erome relates, the Synodical consultations of both those parts of the world, were sent to Pope Damasus to be confirmed? King's meet with nothing in Scripture but your condemnation. And if they deign to cast an eye upon history, they shall find, that the Popes whose greatness is represented as prejudicial to this our France, hath not been a little advantageous unto it. But if any have raised themselves to the detriment of France always most Catholic; and with the diminution of the most Christian's kings dignity, you are the men, who being enemies to the Catholic Church, and Christian religion, like true children of darkness, had your birth and growth by means of their obscurity.    

CHAP. XIV.  

MINISTERS.  
THe neglect of these things, hath for the space of many yrares, drawn great inconueniencies upon France, and hath made it a Theatre, whereupon bloody Tragedies have been acted, while God punisheth the contempt of his word, and the oppression of his children. The ripeness of your wit, dread Sovereign, even in the spring of your years, and the tymelynes in princelike and Christian virtues which discover themselves in your Majesty makes us hope for a more happy age under your reign. God who besto wed your Majesty on France in his benediction, will by his providence conserve you, and will settle and confirm your sceptre in your hands, making use of it to the establishment of his son's kingdom who is king of kings, so that God reigning by you, may reign also in you, to the end that you may reign with him for ever. But if contrary suggestions hinder our humble supplications from being received of your Majesty with wished success, yet will we never cease while God grants life to instruct your people in obedience and loyallie to Wards your Majesty, and we will pray. to God for the conservation of your person, and the prosperity of your Kingdom, as it becomes such as are, etc.   

ANSWER.  
IT is not at this present only that the professors of a false belief, impute the calamities which happen in their times to the contempt of their errors: for even Tertull. Arnobius, S. Cyprian, S. August and diverse others do witness that the Pagans ascribed all the disasters of their times, to the honour in which Christian religion was held, and to the contempt of theirs. In this you imitate these old Pagans', and indeed since the end doth crown the work, it was fitting, that your writing which is full of the imitations of ancient heretics condemned by the Church, should be crowned with the imitation of Pagans, condemned by all christian societies.  
If the calamities of France did proceed from the contempt of your religion, it had not so much flourished in the time o● the Albigeois, whom you accnowledge to be your brothers, seeing it did persecute them in open war. And without doubt it had been oppressed with miseries under the reign of Pepin & Charlemain, who religiously honoured the Popes and the Roman Church, whereas it was never more flourishing then in their reign. Again Italy and spain where your errors are not currant, whence those that profess them are banished, and where the holy sea is as much honoured, as in any place of the world, should be most miserable country's. But your assertions have no ground of reason.  
It is true indeed, as the Fathers do observe, that temporal felicity doth follow religion, marry not yours, but that only which was left us by the Apostles, and which to this day is conserved in the Roman Church. This moved S. Ambrose to observe, that as long as Constantinople did nourish the poison of the Arians in her breast her walls were continually environed with the armies of her enemies, and that having once embraced the Catholic faith, she was delivered from them with triumph.  
The tragedies which are represented upon the French stage, proceeds not from the contempt of your religion, but from the contempt which the professors of it, show to the law of God; the authority of his Church; and their duty to their kings. Heresy hath always occasioned greatest calamities in the states wherein it hath gotten footing; and the kings that have abbandoned the Roman faith, have ordinarily been unfortunate.  
Christiernus king of Denmark the first king that was imbued with your errors, was deposed from his kingdom, put in an iron cage, and finally, according to the opinion of the times, poisoned, as I have already mentioned. The elector of Saxony, nephew to the first Abbettour of Luther, was taken prisoner by the Emperor, condemned to death and in the end by commutation of punishment, lost his Electourshipe, and the moictie of his estate: in sequall where of his son died in prison. The Landgrave of Hesse who sustained the same cause, remained for a long time prisoner. Of 28. heretical Emperors of Constantinople, thirteen were slain. Of the rest, some had their eyes pulled out, some were deposed, all died most miserably. 
Hist. Wand.  Of seven Wandall kings subject to the same errors, three were miserably murdered. Of thirteen which the Visigots had, 
Annal. Hist.  twelve did violently die. Of seven of the Ostrogots, two only escaped the enemies sword. 
Hist. Ital.  Of seven which were in Lonbardie, one only escaped an untymly death.  
So manifest it is that heresy is the source of all mischief, and that he that forsakes the Roman Church is ordinarily oppressed with miseries and misfortunes! Wherefore having ●ust occasion to fear, that you might be utterly ruined thereby, if you continue in your errors, I thought good, hoping to reclaim you, and to reduce you to the bosom of the Church, having already refuted your writing, to propose unto you some reasons, which obliging all the world to hate your religion, might administer you just occasion to forsake it. I could easily produce a great number, yet I will content myself with five only, which do convince that your belief is worthy of horror; because it doth introduce schism into the Church: revives the old heresies which were condemned in the primitive Church: banisheth all virtue: authoriseth all vice; and will have no law, whether of the Church or of Princes, to have power to oblige in conscience.    

THE RELIGION PREtended to be reform is worthy of hatred, because it makes a schism in the Church. CHAP. XV.  
SInce we are divided and separated in communion, whereas before we were united in one body, it is evident that you, or we, have made a schism. It rests to be examined who is guilty of this crime, whereof, I assure myself, that by the judgement of the whole world, and of your own consciences, you remain convinced by undeniable proofs, since they are the same, by which the Fathers of old did convince those whom you yourselves accnowledge to be Schismatics.  
It is evident, saith saint 
a Cypr. l. de unit. constat à Christo & eius Euangelio seperari, non enim nos ab illis, sed illi 〈◊〉 nobis exie●unt.  Cyprian, speaking of the Novatians, that they are separated from jesus Christ and his Gospel, because we went not out from them, but they from us Caecilianus, saith 
a Lib. count. Farmen. non enim Cacilianus exivit a Maiorino, sed Maiorinus a Caeciliano. una erat Ecclesia antequam divideretur ab ordinationibus Maiorini: videndum est quis in radice cum toto orbe manserit, quis Cathedram sederit alteram quae ante non fuerat.  S. Optatus against the Donatists, did not separate himself from Maiorinus your greatgrand father, but Maiorinus from Caecilianus, nor did Caecilianus Sperate himself from the Chair of S. Peter, or of S. Cyprian, but Mayor: in the chair in which thou sittest, a chair, which before Maiorinus, had no origine. And a little after, The Church was one, till it was divided by those who ordained Maiorinus. We must now see who remained with the whole univers in its belief, and in its root. who is seared upon another chair then that which was before. These two passages do show that the Novatians and Donatists, were accounted Schismatics: both because they with drew themselves from the Catholics, not the Catholics from them, as also because they erected a new chair, and finally because they stayed not together with the univers, in the root whence they sprung.  
Now all these things do convince you, considering that you went out from Catholics, and not Catholics from you: that you set up a Chair at Witemberg, and at Geneva, which was not before your time; and that you have separated yourselves from the root which produced you, in lieu of remaining together with the whole world in the Roman Church which brought you forth.  
That you went out from Catholics, is justified by your own confessions: and it is evident, in that you cannot name one of the first followers of Luthere, who had not been of ours.  
That you yourselves are the Architectes and Founders of your chair, it is clear; 
Confess. Helueticac. 16. Ecclesiae nostrae se à Romana separarunt. Luther. in c. 11. Gen. Nos sumus sancti Apostatae, defecimus enim ab Antichristo & Sathanae Ecclesia. Calu. 4. Instit. c. 2. §. 6. Abeorum Ecclesia recessimus. Et cap. 6. §. 1. Zanchius' tract. de Eccles. c. 8.  since none before the coming of Luthere did know, at Witemberg nor at Geneva before Farell and Caluin, the Chair where your doctrine is preached: and that you will not affirm, that they which preceded those personages in those places, taught therein the same doctrine which you teach.  
That you remained not in the root from whence you sprunge, 'tis manifest: since you are no more in the Roman Church where you took your origine: therefore it is undoutable, that the arguments of the said Fathers, do convince you of schism.  
Nor doth it serve your turn to say, that our abuses were the cause you withdrew yourselves: for without examining the cause of your separation, it sufficeth to know that you are separated, there being no cause at all which can exempt a Church from schism, which comes entire out of another. This is manifest, in that the Church having drawn her being from no other but jesus Christ cast into a sleep upon the Cross, like as Eve was drawn from no other place, then from the side of Adam laid a sleep in Paradise, in that it preceded every false Christian society, even as the Architype precedes that which is copied from it: in that it was established 1600. years ago, with promise of a perpetuity so assured, that it cannot depart from its primitive establishment, that is to say, from the body first instituted by lesus Christ, while he was in the world: there is none that doth not accnowledge that a Church, like yours, which a small time since departed wholly out of another Christian society, is at least Schismatical.  
And it will be as little for your advantage to affirm, that you were forced out from us, the Church by her excommunication compelling you thereunto: because, as I have said, it is enough to know that you are gone out without searching the cause thereof: and again that it is a clear thing, that the Church of Rome, did never banish you from her communion, till after you had divided yourselves from her belief: which is justified, in that the Pope did not excommunicate Luther till after he had preached against the Faith of the Roman Church. Thus you remain attainted and convicted of schism, nor are you able to purge yourselves of it, as I shall still make more and more appear.  

a S. Aug. lib. 2. cont. litt. Petil. c. 16. Obiicio schismatiscrimen quod tu negabis, ego autem statim probabo, neque enim comm●nicas omnibus gentibus & illis Ecclesiis Apostolico labcrefundatis.  S. Augustine saith to Petilian a Donatist, I object unto thee the crime of schism, thou'lt, deny it, and I will presently convince thee of it, for thou art not in communion with all the people, and Churches founded by the Apostles labour. If S. Aug. convinced Petilian of schism, because he was not in communion with the Church dispersed through all the world and founded by the Apostles: can you yourselves doubt but that you are convinced of the same crime, sith you have no communion with the whole universe no nor with the Apostolical Church? your own consciences, I dare assure myself, will at once both accuse and convince you. Now if the arguments I have used to convince you of schism, have not fully satisfied: I will yet further lay before your eyes, how the same Fathers, and many others, having condemned some of their times as schismatics, only because they did divide themselves from the Roman Church, do in that their fact condemn you also of the same crime, as having forsaken the said Church.  
He, saith S. 
a Cypr. lib. de unit. Eccles. Qui Cathedram Petri super quod fundat● est Ecclesia, deserit, in Ecclesia●se esse confidit?  Cyprian, who forsakes the Chair of S. Peter, upon which the Church is built, doth he conceive himself to be in the Church? Where this great S. doth not only say that such as divide themselves from the Chair of S. Peter, are out of the Church, but withal renders the primitive reason thereof, because they separate themselves from the foundation of the Church, The same 
b Cyp. epist. 55. ad Petri Cathedram atque ad Ecclesiam principalem, unde unitas Sacerdotalis exorta est.  he to acheth in another place, where he saith, that S. Peter's Chair, is that, from whence priestly unity took its origine. Thou art not ignorant, saith S. 
c Optat. l. 2. contra Parm. Igitur negare non potes scire te in urbe Romana Petro primo Ecclesiam Episcopalem essecollatam. 〈◊〉 his qua cathedra unitas ab omnibus ser varetur .... ut am schismaticus & peccatoresset qui contrasingularem Carbedram alteram callen cares.  Optatus to Parmenian Donatist, that the Episcopal Chair was first conferred upon S. Peter in the City of Rome, in which one chair all should be so united, that who soever is disunited, and sets up an other chair against that, is a Schismatic and a sinner. Whence, 
d Lib. 2. Vnde est ergo quod claues regni vobis usurpare contenditis? quicontra Cathedram Petri, vestris praesuntionibus & audaciis sacri legio contenditis?  saith he in the same, do you then pretend to have the keys of the kingdom of Heaven, you that wage war against Peter's 
e l. 2. in qua una Cathedra unitas ab omnibus seruaretur.  Chain, in which alone the unity of the Church is conserved? S. 
f Lib. 3. cap. 3 Ad hanc Ecclesiam propter potentiorem principalitatem necesse est omnem convenire Ecclesiam, hoc esteos qui sunt undique fideles.  Ireneus grounds upon the same foundation when he saith, that it is necessary that all the Church, that is, all the faithful through the whole world, agree with the Church of Rome, in regard of her more powerful principality. It is also for this reason that 
g Deobitu Satyri, utrumnan cum Catholicis, hoc est cum Romana Ecclesia conveniret.  S. Ambrose relating that Satyrus demands of some one, whether he did not accord with the Catholics, adds, that is to say with the Roman Church, taking the Catholic Church, and Roman Church for one and the same thing. In fine this would 
h Ep. 57 Ego nullum primum nisi Christnm sequens, beatitudinis tuae, id est Cathedrae Petri communione consocior, super illam Petram aedificatam Ecclesiam scio. Quicunque extra bano domum agnum commederit: profanus est: non novi Vitalem, Meletium respuo, ignoro Paulinum: Quicunque tecum non colligit spargit.  S. Hierome writing to Pope Damasus to say. Following no other than jesus-christ for the first head, I join unite myself in Communion with your Holiness that is to say, to the Chair of S. Peter, knowing that the Church is buillt upon this Rock. Whosoever eats the lamb out of this house, is profane. jaccnowledge not Vitalis, I reject Meletius, who is Paulinus I am ignorant, whesoever gathers not with thee, disperseth.  
After these so many and so convincing authorities, rests there any more te be said, to force you to accnowledge yourselves to be overcome? Is it not sufficient to have shown that you have erected a chair against the Chair of S. Peter? That you are not in communion with his successor? That you are not in the unity of the Church of Rome? That it is not in this house that you eat the Lamb? That in the Person of Luther you accnowledge Vitalis and in Caluin you embrace Meletius? In fine that you follow Pauline, in following the false Doctors separated from the Church of Rome? May not I say to you with the same S. Hierome 
a Apol. 1. adversus Ruffin. fidem suam quam Gocat? eamue qua Romana pollet Ecclesia? si Romanam responderit, ergo Catholsci sumus. , if you profess the Roman Faith, ergo you are Catholics: and consequently if you profess it not, you are not in the communion of the Catholic Church. What do you answer to all this?  
You will study some evasion I know, and happily say, the father's arguments were good; because the Church of Rome being then the true Church, à man could not separate himself from it without schism, and without straying from the Paths of salvation, but now the times are changed, the circunstances we are in, be others; corruption hath so crept into the Roman Church that she is no more to be termed a Church; and hence it was that you both could, and aught to departed out of it.  
But this evasion will not serve your turn: for the Fathers did not dispute of the truth of the Church's doctrine, and thence inferred that the Donatists were schismatics, because they were separated from the Church who had the true doctrine (though indeed it was true) but they disputed about the Chair of S. Peter, of Pastoral authority brought down from him by an uninterrupted succession concluding the Donatists' Schismatics because they were divided from this Chair, and from S. Peter's successors sitting in the same. No otherwise than one would convince subjects to be rebels, who should separate themselves from the Royal throne and from the successor of the first Instituters of this Throne: and as in the old law the Samaritans, may be concluded to have been heretics because they withdrew themselves from the Chair of Moses, or Aaron.  
That the Principle whence the Fathers drew their arguments, was pastoral authority, and the Chair of S. Peter, and not the truth of the doctrine, it doth manifestly appear in that S. Cyprians 
a De Gnitat. Eccles. & Ep. 55● citat.  reason, is, because the Chair of Peter is the foundation, upon which the Church is built, and from whence priestly unity takes its origine. And that of Optatus 
b lib. 2. Cisat. , because in this only Chair of S. Peter, the unity of the Church is conserved. And S. Ireneus 
c lib. 3.5.3. cis. , son that Peter's Chair, enjoys the chiefest power. S. Hierome 
d Epist. 57 cit. , because the, Chair of S. Peter is that upon which the Church is built. And to conclude because S. Augustin 
e Contrae Epist. fundam. c. 4. Tenet me ab ipsa sede Petri Gsque ad praesentem Episcopatā successio Sacerdotum.  saith, that the succession of Priests which descended from the Chair of S. Peter, held him in the Catholic Church, and that this 
f In Psal. contra partem Donati, ipsa est Petra quam non Gin●ūt superbia inferorum portae.  succession is the Rock, against which the Gates of Hell shall not prevail.  
Nor will your reply be any more to your purpose (to wit that albeit the Fathers did indeed argue as we say, yet had their argument force and efficacy from the truth of the doctrine, which then was adjoined to this authority to this Chair) seeing that the Donatists and Novatians, against whom they disputed, did directly deny the truth of the doctrine, to be in the Roman Church. The 
a Ambr. lib cont. Novatian.  Novatians improving her doctrine touching remission of sins, and the 
b August. l. de hare. haeres. 69.  Donatists condemning her opinion of baptising heretics and admitting the wicked livers into the Church. Which makes a clear demonstration that the Fathers, did not make the truth of the doctrine the Principle of their arguments, because that was as doubtful both to the Donatists and Novatians, as the conclusion itself which they were to deduce from it, for they deneyed both the one and the other. Wherefore S. Donatus doth sufficiently make appear that he argued from their own confessions, and that which they could not deny to wit, that the chair of Rome, was S. Peter's chair. 
c Opt. lib. 2. contra Parmen. titat.  Thou canst not deny unto me, saith he, but that thou knowest, that S. Peter was the first, upon whom in Rome, the Episcopal chair was conferred, in which only Chair unity was to be observed by all. Furthermore, you cannot affirm that they form their argument from the truth of the doctrine, because you do not allow it to have been pure at that time, which is manifest, in that 
d Beza in Rom. 8. Witat. l. 7. contra Durae. scit. 26.  you do condemn the doctrine of Pope Siricius, touching celibate or imgle life, as the doctrine of the devil; and that yet the Donatists were reputed Schismatics even for separating themselues from communion with him. 
e Opt. l. 2.   
For the rest; though to prove â man schismatique, it were indeed necessary, to make good, that he were separated from the Church, as true Church, yet should I not fail of my purpose, being a most facile thing, to convince, even by the testimonies of your own men, that you accnowledge the Roman Church, then, to have been the true Church when you came out of it. You accnowledge it, both by the very confession of 
a Caelu. 4. instit. c. 2. §. 11. & 12. & Epist. 104. Du Plessis in the treatise of the Church c. 12. Osiander in Epito. p. 2.  your own Authors, and because 
b Du Plessis au trascté de l'Eglise, chap. 81. Osiander loco citato.  you yourselves derive your authority from it: whence it manifestly appears that you hold it to be true, since otherwise you should derive your power, not from the Church of God, but from a society of the Devil.  
After all this, there rests so little for you to say, that if your tongue would but faithfully interpret your conscience, we should, without doubt, hear you condemn yourselves, the thing being so clear and perspicuous, that, unless you were more than blind, or that seeing light you would not see it, it were impossible but your souls, casting the error which they row profess, should win their cause. For if the Novatians and Donatists, vere by the Fathers sufficiently convinced of schism, for that they were separated from the Chair of S. Peter, and his successors therein: you are also convinced by the same argument since you are separated from us, who have always kept the possession of the same Chair without interruption of succession.  
Your are certainly convinced, I speak to all your church, and to you Ministers in particular who are not only Schismatics, as are your flock, but withal Schismatical Pastors, for of your own authority you have established yourselves Pastors not having received power from those whose successors you should be. Whence it follows that you are 
a Opt. l. 2. de ●ictore primo Episcopo Donatistarum; erat Filius sine Patre, tyro sine Principe, discipulus sine Magistro, sequens sino antecedente.  Children without Fathers; soldiers without Captains; successors without Predecessors.  
Whereupon you shall give meleave, to say unto you with the Fathers. 
b Tertul de prescript. c. 32. Edant ergo Origines Ecclesiarum svarum, evoluant ordinem Episcoporum suorum, etc. Opt. l. 2. cont. Parm. Vestrae Catbedrae Gos originem reddite, etc.  Show us the origin: of your chair nor return us barely for answer that you are extraordinarily sent, but bring a place of scripture, to verify your assertion.  
You are obliged to produce such à place, seeing the extraordinary Mission of your Ministers, is an arlicle of your Faith, which consequently ought to be verified by the express word of God, And show me, Ibeseech you a formal text of Scripture, which saith that Luther, Caluin, and the rest of your Ministers, were sent extraordinarily. Show it not me, but those that follow you, who without this, have no assurance that they are in the way of salvation: sithence salvation there is none out of the Church, nor can the Church subsiste without Pastors. If my humble petition be not powerful enough to purchase my demand, grant it at least, for that Luther, and your own confession do oblige you unto it; 
c Luth. in Galat. Populus maxime opus habet certitude vocationi● nostrae.  Luther teaching the people, that it doth greatly concern them, to have assurance of their vocation. And your 
a Art. 31. Confess. Gall.  Confession delivernig in express terms, that every Pastor is 
b Art. 31. Credimus semper sequendam esse hanc normam ut omnes pastors, etc. Suae vocationis testimonium habeant.  to have a testimony of his calling to the office. You are to begin there (o Minist.) for what ever doctrine you deliver (though it were cven true) would be of no profit to the people, unless they be within the bosom of the Church, where yet they cannot be, you not being true Pastors. What, saith 
c l. 1. de Baptis. c. 18. Quid prodest homini vel sana fides, ubi lethalt vulnere schismatis perempta est sanitas charitatis.  S. Augustine, doth a sound or entire Faith profit à mare, where Charity is extinguished by the mortal wound of Schism?  
Now having clearly shown that you are Schismatics, I will produce certain passages, which will make evident to all the world, that your doctrine, even in that name, is worthy not only of hatred, but even of horror. It is manifest, saith 
d Epist. 76. Apparet adversarios Domini Antichristos omnes esse, quos constet à charitate atque ab unitate Ecclesiae Catholicae recessisse.  S. Cyprian, that such are Antichrists who have fortaken the Charity, and unittie of the Catholic Church. S. Optatus 
e Opt. l. 1. cont. Parmen.  Doth prove the horror of schism, out of the grievousness of the punishments thereof, and sustains, that of all evils it is the greatest. 
f Aug. lib. 2. de Bap. c. ●.  S. Augustine assures us that schism is a more heinous crime than idolatry: because idolatri is onli punished by the sword, whereas the 
g Num. 6.  earth gapes to swallow up the Authors of schism, and fire descends from heaven to consume their followers. Who can doubt, 
h Aug. l●co citquis dubitaverit hoc esse scelerarius commissum quid & gravius vindicatum?  saith he, but that the fault is more detestable, where the punishment is more grievous. In another place 
a lib. 1. cont. Parmen c. 4.  he saith, that it is a sacrilege which doth surpass all other wickedness. And S. chrysostom 
b Chrysost hom. 11. in Epist. ad Ephes. c. 4. Nihil Deum aeque irritat atque divisaem esse Ecclesiam.  is of opinion, that nothing doth so much draw God almighty's wrath upon us, as the division from his Church.  
But that I may search no further into the Fathers, whose works are full of like passages, I will only, to discover unto you the horror of schism, put before your eyes your own Catechism, and Caluin. 
c The 16. Sunday. All those Who separate themselves from the community of the faithful for to make sects a part, ought not to hope for salvation.  Your Cate chisme, which hath in plain terms, that they are deprived of all hope of salvation who divide themselves from the body of jesus-christ, and by faction cut in piece, his unity, while they do live in this divorce. 
d Calu. Ep. ad Sodolet. Sed omnium teterrimumest illud crimen, quod Sponsam Christi discerpere conat, sumus. Id si verum esset, merito & tibi & orbi universo haberemur pro deploratis.  Caluin, who saith, that of all the crimes, that ever were objected against him, the most horrible was, that he had rend and torn by schism the Spouse of jesus-christ, for which reason, if it were true, he and all his might be held for lost, and without hope of recovery.  
Now I leave to the Reader to judge, whether by the testimony of your own mouth, you be not in a desperate case, and cut of all hope of salvation, as being separated from the Church, wherein it is only to be found.   

That the religion which they call reform, doth renewal the old heresies. CHAP. XVI.  
I Can present the Reader with a great number of points wherein you call à foot again old heresies, but to avoid prolixity, I will only produce four.  

1. Point.  
The principal article of your faith consists in believing, that man is saved by only faith, and that we are not justified by our works. We believe, saith your 
a Art. 20.  Conf. that we are made partakers of this justice by only faith. We teach, saith 
b Art. 116. Docemus hominem iustificari per fidem in Christum & non per ulla opera bona.  that of Suise, by those of Geneva, that man is justified by faith in jesus-christ, and not by any good works.  
That this is the principal point of your belief, is easy to be known, since on it alone depends your salvation: and also because the 
c Praefatio ad Syntagma Confess. At vero hic articulus (de iustificatione) est basis forma & anima religionis Euamgelicae summa, etc.  Preface of your confessions, and many of 
d Whitak controu. 2. q. 6. c. 3.  your writers, say that it is the basis, form, and soul of Christian religion, and the abridgement of the doctrine of the gospel.  
Now it is well nigh, 1600. years since this opinion was condemned in Simon the Magician as heretical, as S. Ireneus doth justify who was scholar to S. Polycarpe one of S. john the Evangelists disciples, as also Theodorete, who relates it so to have been. He taught, saith S. Ireneus 
a lib. c. 20. Docuit homines non saluari secundum operas iustas. , that men are not saved according to their just works; 
b lib. 1. Fab Haereticorum. c 1. Non per bonas actiones, sed per gratiam eos esse saluiem consecutos.  he teacheth, saith Theodorete, in his book of heretical fables, that men are not saved by their good works.  
Nor can you avoid the force of my argument by saying, that Simon the Magician was condemned for other errors. For as it follows not that a man was not condemned to death for a murder because he was also found guilty of theft; Even so, for that Simon the Magician called himself a Prophet, and sustained that men were saved by his grace, it doth not follow, that he was not also reputed an heretic, in sustaining that works were not profitable to salvation. In which matter, S. Ireneus and Theodorete remove all manner of doubt when they bring in his opinion, that men were not saved by their good works, as heretical.  
Howbeit, I undertake not, to prove an entire conformity betwixt your belief and theirs, not being ignorant, that as thiefs disguise stolen things to put them out of the knowledge of their owners; so you disguise the old heresies, that men may mistake them. Marry I most willingly undertake to show, as indeed I do, that that old Heresiarke, held as you do, That we are not saved by good works. And consequently that huing been condemned in this point, the soul of your faith was branded with a sentence of condemnation, in the first age of the Church, whose authority you dare not reject.   

2. Point.  
You believe that the faith of parents is so efficacious, that their children dying without Baptism, are saved. 
a 24. Inslit. c. 15.  Caluin doth teach this doctrine, and withal it is so vulgarly known even to the simplest of your fellowers, that it needs no proof.  
Now, albeit you make profession to detest the Pelagian errors, yet your belief in this point, is one of their heresies, as it is clear out of S. Augustine, who puts it down as such, in his catalogue of heresies. 
b lib. de Haer. 88 Promittunt eis aeternam & beatam quandam vitam.  They promise, saith he, to children not baptised, a blessed and eternal life: 
c lib 1. de anima eius origine 1.9. Noli credere, nols decere infantes an●equam baptizantur morte ●raeuentos peruen●re posse ad originalium indulgentiam peccatorum.  which he doth charge with so heavy a condemnation, that in the books, he wrote against them he adds. Believe not, affirm not, teach not, that children prevented by death before they were baptised, can ever obtain remission of their original sin, if you desire to be Catholic. Ergo  
This article of your faith, is condemned in the person of Pelagius.  
But if you allege for you, that your, and the Pelagian heresy are far different; they holding that every child that died without baptism, did in joy God's Glory; whereas you limit it to the predestinate only. And again they assigned to children dying without baptism, a different place, from that, which those that were regenerated possess: which you do not. I answer that the first difference which you give betwixt you and the Pelagians, consists only in a greater or lesser number of those children, whom you believe to be saved without baptism; and not in the substance of the error impugned by S. Aug. who while he teacheth that no child at all without Baptism can be saved, he condemns you both, in that wherein you agree, to wit that some are saved without baptism. As for the second difference, which consists, in this, that the Pelagians assigned another place to children dying without baptism then to the baptised, it is disaduantagious to yourselves, and yet doth no whit impair the force of my argument: to the validity of which is it sufficient, that you and the Pelagians aggree in this, that without baptism one may enjoy life everlasting. Which S. August. doth clearly condemn, and by way of disgrace object unto them, that they promise a blessed and eternal life, to children not baptised.  
And that this difference doth disparage your cause. By deduction you will plainly discover. The Pelagians held, that children were saved without Baptism. This passage was opposed against them. 
joan. 3.  Unless a man be borne again of water and the spirit he cannot enter, etc. they being convinced by the clearness of this place, granted indeed, that the kingdom of heaven was only prepared for the regenerated; marry beside heaven they assigned a third place, as a Residence for children dying without Baptism. So that they gave way to the clearness of this passage, which you do; for you deny absolutely that it doth exclude children that die without the sacrament, from the kingdom of heaven, though it reach expressly, that they shall have no part therein. Wherein you clearly diseover, that your heresy is more impudent, then that of the Ancient heretics, sith, you audaciously deny, as a thing which is prejudicial unto you, that, which they durst never call in question, though it were absolutely against them.  
It is manifest therefore, nor have you what to say against it, that this article of your faith, whereby you maintain that children dead without baptism are saved, was condemned by the ancient Church, in the person of Pelagius.  
Yet fearing that the differences which are betwixt his errout and yours (abbeit they be not able to save you from the Churchs' curse) might hinder you to confess that you are condemned in his person: to leave you to your own condemnation, I will show you the condemnation of your very error in S. August. 
Lib. de anima & eius origine. c. 9 Isle autem (Vincentius) cum confiteatur paruules origiginali obstrictos esse peccato, eye tamen regnum coelorum non baptizatis ausus est pollicert, quod nec illi ausi sunt, etc.  in the person of one named Vincentius, who without assigning a third place with Pelagius, ahsolutly allowed with you, the kingdom of Heaven to Children not baptised. He durst, saith S. Aug. promise the kingdom of heaven to children not baptised, which the Pelagians durst never do.   

3. Point.  
Your Doctors do teach that our Saviour Christ, did in his birth violate his mother's integrity, as all other children are wont to do 
a Whitak. controu. 2. q 5. c. 7. Docuit ●ouinianus Mariam amisisse Virginitatem in partu. Respondeo tum impudetissimus haereticus fuit. sed ait nos similiter docere & nominat. Bucerum Molinaum. Respondeo. Hoc ait quia non adenittimus fictam ●llam partus ratiorem, etc.  Witakere purging himself of diverse errors, which the great Cardinal Bellarmine justly imputes to his sectaries, doth ingenuously avow this opinion, and strives to defend it, which yet puts no obligation upon me at this present to refute it, contenting myself only to show that it is the ancient heresy of jovinian, which was condemned in, the 4. age, according to S. Aug. 
b Haeres. Virginita●●m Mariae destruebat dieme. eam pariendo fuisse corrupian.  relation in these terms. jovinian, saith he did destroy the virginity of Marie, saying that in her Childbrith she was corrupted.  
Nor is it to the present purpose to show that your belief doth differe from that of jovinian, for that he, forsooth, doth abolish the mental virginity of the B. Virgin (which you de not) it being manifest, that jovinian denid corporal virginity to our B. Lady Both because S. Augustine impugning this Heresiarke, defends her corporal virginity; and also for that the reason which he brings to show that the B. Virgin had not conserved her Virginity, was grounded upon her childbirth, and withal, that he sustained, that the body of jesus Christ, would have been conceived to have been an only Phantom, if it had not been beard and borne after the manner of other children, which belongs not to the Virginity of the mind, but that of body only.  
Therefore my assertion stands firm, that your belief in this point was condemned in the primitive Church, in the person of jovinian.   

4. Poini.  
You hold and teach, that the just only are in the true Church, which is an error condemned in the Donatists more than 1300. years ago. That you are of this opinion, 
a 4. Instit. c. 1 §. 7. In Ecclesiam quae revera est coram Deo nulli recipiuntur nisi qui adoptionit gratia filij Dei sunt.  calvin doth make manifest, in these terms. None is received into the Church, which is truly the Church before the face of God, but he only who is the son of God by the grace of adoption. And 
b Art 27.  your confession doth bear the same, saying, we affirm then, that the true Church, following the word of God, is the company of the faithful, who unanimously follow the same word, and the pure religion depending thereupon, and who profit in the same all the days of their life.  
That this opinion was condemned for heresy in the Donatists, S. Aug. makes evident, by the passages which he allegeth, impugned by him, and other Catholics in the conferences had with them 
c In collat. 3. die c 8. Zizania inter triticum non Ecclesia sed in trundo permixta dixerunt. E●t c. 10. Non bene intelligi aiunt Ecclesiaem inqwa simul & triticum & zizania iussa sunt crescere.  They say, that the dernel is mixed amongst the wheat, not in the Church, but in the world: they say, that one can not well conceive a Church, in which wheat and cockle grow both together.  
You will say here, as in the former points, that there is a fair difference, between the error condemned in the Donatists, and your belief, because they deneyed that the wicked were in the visible Church, which yet you grant, deneying only that they are in the true Church.  
To which I answer, that though it were a visible Church from which the Donatists, did exclude the wicked, yet puts that no impediment why there may not be à comformity betwixt them and you in the point I speak of, to wit, in that both exclude the wicked from the true Church. True it is, there is this difference between them and you, that they accnowledge the visible Church to be the true Church, which you asscribe only to the invisible Church; whence it is manifest, that the difference betwixt you and the Donatists, is, whether the true Church be visible or invisible, not whether the wicked are in it or no, whence you both equally exclude them. Thence it is manifest, that having shown, that that opinion was condemned of heresy in the person of the Donatists, I have shown by consequence, that it ought also to be condemned in you.  
That it was from the true Church from which the Donatists, excluded the wicked, S. Aug. makes it clear 
a lib. 2. cont. Caudent. c. 2. in vera germanaque Catholica Ecclesia. , saying in express words, that they deneyed that the wicked were, in the true and lawful Catholic Church, and again 
b lib. de unit. Eccles. c. 2. in corpore Christi cuius Christus est Saluator. , that they were in the body of jesus-chrst, whereof jesus-christ is the Saviour. Which are 
a Whitak. controu. 2. q. 1. c. 7. In Eccles. Cath. quae est corpus Cristi. Item, possunt esse in visibili Ecclesia reprobi sed non in Ecclesia Catholica.  the very words, in which you express the true Church. And therefore it is a thing not to be called in doubt, that this article of your faith, was condemned in the primitive Church in the person of the Donatists.  
You will say, perhaps, that wellingly you will join hands, if we can convince you, that these 4. points of your faith, were condemned by any general Council in the primitive Church; but that the authority of one or two Fathers is of small consideration, and consequently that you suffer no prejudice, for being condemned by them.  
To this I answer that it is not always necessary to interpose the authority of a general council for the condemnation of an heresy, which is evident by this, that when the Pelagians would not esteem themselves condemned, because it was not performed in a general council, S. Augustine laughs at such frivolous evasions, As though, saith 
b Aug. l. 4. cone. duas Epist. Pelagii c. ultimo. Quasi nulla haeresis aliquando esset nisi Synod● congregatione damnata sit, cum potius rarissime inveniantur propter quas damnandas nesessitas talis extiterit, mulioque sint & incomparabiliter plures quae ubi extiterunt illic improbari damnarique meruerunt atque inde per caeteras terras devitandae in nolescere potuerunt.  he, never heresy had been condemned but by a Synod seeing very few such have been found, as that it was requisite for the condemnation of them to assemble a Council, and that there were incomparably more in number, which deserved to be reproved and condemned, in the same place where they were hatched whence they might be diwlged through out all the world, to the end they might be shunned.  
Secondly I say, that I do not produce the authority of one or two Fathers against our adversaries, as reputing their authority sufficient, to condemn their opinion, but as esteeming it sufficient to declare what was the belief of the Church in their time, whereby we justly judge such condemned of heresy, as by their relation appear so to be. Being a thing most reasonable, and agreeable even to judgements of least capacity, rather to give credit to those ancients in the relation of things, which they affirm to have passed in their times, then to you who fall far short of them, especially seeing S. Augustine teacheth us, 
Lib. count. jul. c. 10. Quod invenerunt in Eccles. tenuerunt, quod didiscerunt docuerunt, quod à Patribus acceptrunt, hoc filijs tradiderunt.  that they held what they found in the Church; that they taught what they had learned, and left to their children, what they had received from their Fathers.  
Finding this answer no armour of proof, you will fly for refuge to another; saying that S. August. S. Epiphanius, Theodoret, and others who had made a catalogue of heresies, did not propose unto themselves to put only into it heresies properly speaking, whence it appears, that to show that an opinion is related therein, is not a sufficient proof, that it was condemned as heretical.  
To which I reply, 1. that this answer is without ground, or proof. 2. that the Father's aim and end, in reducing into a certain order, and framing as it were à list of all the heresies, do clearly show, that they register none therein, but those thatare taken properly, since their design was to gather together, all the opinions which might separate from communion with the Church, to the end, that being known without difficulty, they might be avoided with facility. 3. that besides these general profess, S. Aug. who is one of them now in question, gives particular testimony, that he put down none but true heresies in his Catalogue: For 
a Lib. de Haeresi. Petis à me ut de Haeresibus aliquid scribam dignum lectione cupientium dogmata devitare contraria fides Christianae.  he saith in the beginning, that he doth publish them, for their instruction who desire to fly the opinions contratrarie to Christian faith. Whence is apparent, that he only makes mention of true heresies, and properly taken for such, as he doth also afterwards confirm, 
b lib. de Haeres. Quid contra ista sentiat Catholica Ecclesia superfluoquaeritur, cum propter hoc scire sufficiat eam contra ista sentire, nec aliquid horum in fidem quenquam debere recipere. Possunt & harese aliae quae hoc opere commemoratae non sunt vel esse vel fieri, quarum aliquam quisquis t●nuerit Christianus Catholicus non erit.  saying that the Church condemns all the points which he puts down, that none ought to receive any of them for articles of faith, for in so doing they shall not be Catholics.  
Wherefore notwithstanding all your evasions, it is clear, that in the four points by me alleged, you have renewed the heresies condemned in the primitive Church, and consequently, that in this consideration, your doctrine is worthy of hatred and horror.    

The religion pretended, to be reform, doth banish all virtue. CHAP. XVII.  
THat your Religion doth banish and abolish all virtue, though shame forceth you to deny it, yet will I force your own authors confess it, who, surely will gain belief, no man being suspected in his own cause.  
Let man know, saith 
a Luth. lib. de honis operibus, sciat hemo omnem eius vitam & actionem nihil aliud nisi damnabilia esse peecata in Dei iudicie,  Luther, that all his life, and all his actions is nothing else but sin, damnable in the judgement of God. Those, saith 
b Calu 3. Instit. 1.12. §. 4 Qui serio tanquam sub Dei conspectu de vera iustitiae regula quaerent, illi certo comperiens omnia heminum opera, si suadignitate oenseantur nihil nisi inquinamenta esse & sordes; & quae iustitia vulgo habetur, eam apud Deum meram esse iniquitatem.  Caluin, who shall make a diligent search into the true rule of justice, such as itis in the judgement of God, will certainly find that all the works of men, valued according to their weight and worth, is no other thing but ordure and uncleanness, and that which is commonly termed justice, is in the sight of God very iniquity. If God, saith 
c Beza Confess. Fidei. c. 4. art. 19 Si summo iure inquireret Deus in ipsa quoque praestantissima hominum opera, nihil aliud posset de ijs constitui quam meras esse donorum Dei pollutiones.  Beza, did rigorously sound the most excellent works of men, no other thing could be resolved upon, then that they were pollutions of the gifts of God. If works be exactly examined, saith 
d Paraeus lib. 4. de iustitific. c. c. 15. Eadem opera (bona) si districtum ad legis rigorem examinentur à Deo, mere erunt peccata.  Pareus one of your best modern writers, according to the rigour of God's law, they will be found pure sins. You say also in your 
e 2. Sunday.  Catechism, that there is always, some certain infirmity of the flesh, mixed with our works, whereby they are defiled. Whence it follows plainly that all good works are bad, since the essence and being of Good proceeds from an entire cause, as evil doth arise out of the least iefect.  
Now if all our works before God, who according to the 
f 2. Corinth. 6. Quae enim participatio iustitia cum iniquitate, antquoe societas lucis ad tenebras?  Apostle to the Romans, knoweth and judgeth all things as they are in themselves, are no other thing, then damnable sin, than ordures, uncleanness, pure iniquity, pure sin, pure pollution of the gifts of God; it is manifest that there is, nor good work, nor virtue at all in the world, being a thing altogether impossible that virtue and vice should subsist in the same subject, and yet far less can virtue accompany an action, which is mere iniquity, pure sin, and very filth. It appears therefore that you banish, and directly abolish all virtue, and do indirectly, and in consequence, divert and seduce men from every good action, since all that is reputed good in the judgement of men, is pollution and damnable sin in the sight of God: So that such as both love and fear God, are to abstain from it, as from a thing which is disagreeable in his divine presence.  
But perhaps, will you reply, your doctrine doth not withdraw men from good works, in that we teach that they are as many sins before God, since it teacheth with all, that those sins are not imputed to those that commit them.  
But you shall not thus escape more, because one that hath a filial fear, doth not only weigh weather the faults commetted shall be imputed or no or whether he shall sustain the punishment thereof, but doth principally eye the offence of his father, whom he neither aught, nor will displease; Whereupon he will abstain from every action which may be displeasing unto him, and moreover that he is obliged there unto.  
And it will be as little to your purpose to allege, that you do not teach, that works, are bad of their own nature, but only by the corruption of man, whence you infer that a man is not obliged to fly them: because, besides that 
g Luth in Confut. Latomi, stat opus bonum natura sua esse immundum. Et Assert. art 32. Opus bonum optime factum est peccatum veniale, non natura sua sed misericordia Dei. whitak. li. 2. de peccat. orig. c. 3. Docemus mortaliter semper peccari à tustis ex natura rei & actionum ipsirum, licet pro huiusmodi non reputentur.  some of yours, do sustain that they are bad even of their own nature; whither they be bad by nature or by accident, it is enough to bring an obligation upon us to fly them seeing even the light of nature doth teach us, that what soever is evil is to be eschewed, without all exception; and that God in no sort is to be offended, neither by an action bad in its own nature, nor by accident. Which I will manifest by a familiar example, none being ignorant, that though, an alms, be of its own natute good, and yet by accident, evil, as being given to an ill end, it is not lawful to give it in such terms,   

The Religion pretended to be reform lays open the Gate to all vices. CHAP. XVIII.  
Having learned of the 
a Tertul. count. Valent. cap. 1. Nihil magis curant quam occultare quod praedicant.  Fathers, that it is the ordinary custom of those that are attainted with erour, to disguise their belief, and involve and hide it in obscurity: nothing being more disgraceful unto you, then by your Doctrine to open the gate to all vices, it may seem, a hard thing, to prove you guilty of this crime, yet grounding myself upon an observation which 
b Tertul. Furibus semper aliquid excidere solet ad iudicium.  Tertullian made, that such as you are, may be discovered like as thiefs, who casually leave some thing behind them, which gives evidence to their condemnation, I am not afraid to undertake it, and I shall discharge myself of my undertaking even by the iudgmant of all the world, if I make manifest, that you teach, that Adulteres, Homicides, deneyers of jesus Christ, and such as commit other most grievous crimes, remain notwithstanding in the state of grace, and salvation: every one knowing by experience that it is a main allurment to the faithful to yield to their passions, and to abbandone and give themselves over to vice, if living never so deboystly, they cannot be deprived of God's grace, or assurance of their salvation.  
A Christian, saith 
c Luth. l. de ecptiu. Babylon. de baept. Christiaws sive baptizatus eciam nolens pptest perdere salutem suam, quantiscunque peccatis nisi nolit credere. Nulla enim paeccata eum possunt damnare nisi sola incredulitas.  Luther, is so rich, that he cannot perish, yea though he would, what sin soever he commit, if he will believe only. And in the same place, there is no sin that can damn him, but only incredulity. The holy Ghost, saith the 
d Apud zancli. l. 2. Miscellenun In Thesib●s. In sanctis Spiritus perpetuo manet, quamuis pondere carnis aliquando unicuntur.  university of Zurich, and which is to be noted a Caluinisticall university, perpetually keeps his residence in Saints, abbeit, they be sometime carried a way, and overswayed by the weight of the flesh. The 
e Apud Zanchium l 2. miscell. in Thesibus. Labi electos atque etiam subinde sic cadere ut denuo erigendi sint scimus, & id per refipiscentiam fieri non dubitamus: rerum ista ratio seu via est admodum diversa à prima illa vocatioce insitione, per quam electi Christo incorporantur. Tale inter utramque discrimen slatui posse nobis viaetur, quale est inter mortuum corpus & illud quod morbo seu leviore, seu graviore ac lethali affectum est illud sane vitali ut, ut ita dicam, opus habet: hoc vero solum desiderat, ut quae adhuc in eo residet vita (nota) labefactata ill, quidem & infirma inssauretur, recreetur & refocilletur.  university of Hildeberg doth clearly teach, that the Elect, though loaden with heinous crimes yet lose they not the grace of the holy Ghost, for it makes the same difference betwixt them and infideles, as betwixt a sick and dead man, because even as, the dead man to live again must recover a new life, so he that is deprived of Faith, must receive the life of the soul which he hath not. And as the sick man stands not in need of a new life, but a strengthening of that which he always conserved in him; so he who is defiled with sin having faith, hath no need of new to receive the grace of the holy Ghost, but only to be confirmed in that which he always conserved in his soul.  
But let us hear 
a In antidoto Co. Trid. in Canon. 21. Semen aliquod fidei manner in hominelicet suffocatum, etiam inter gravissimos lapsus non nego. Id quantulumcunque est particulam fateor esse verae fidei, add etiam vivae.  Caluin upon this subject. There remain in man, yea even amidst his greatest transgressions, certain seeds of faith, and afterwards he saith, that these seeds are a parcel of the true and lively faith. Whereby it is evident, that man in this estate, is in grace before God; seeing he saith that his faith is lively. And he teacheth in another place, 
b 3. Instit. c. 2. §. 19 Vbi primum vel minima fidei guttae mentibus nostris instillata. est, iam faciem Dei placidam & serenam nobisque propitiam contemplari incipimus.  That as soon as the least drop of Faith dothrun into our soul, we begin to discover the face of God calm, sweet, and propitious unto us. Which Beza 
c Beza in Confess. c. 4. art. 20. Vera vel sola fidei scintillae hactenus est efficax ut vere nos de nostra salute securos reddat.  confirms, saying, that one spark of lively faith, though sole, yet is it of such efficacy, that it gives us a true assurance of our salvation. The same Author being demanded in his Colloq whether David committing adultery, lost the holy Ghost, 
d In Colloq. Mombell. Thesi de Baptis Nequaquam amisit sed retinuit. Iterum ego dico Dausdem in adulterio perpetrato retinuisse Spiritum sanctum, quod similitudine declarabo. Ebrius non amittit intellectum seu ratio non, etsi ratio sese non exerceat: & ignis cinerib tectus minime extinctus est, sed latet: ita gratia, Fides & Spir. S. in lapsibus Sanctorum ad tempus teguntur, ut non sentiantur, quod in Davidis adulterio factum est, in quo gratin Dei ad tempus tecta, sed non amissa fuit.  makes answer, that he did not lose, but conserve it. Which he declares by the similitude of a drunken man, who looseth not his reason, though it be not then perceived: and by the example of fire, which though covered in the ashes, yet is it not extinguihed. Whereupon, he with whom he discoursed replying, that if he might gain the whole world he would not teach that Fornicatours, and adulterers conserve Faith and the Holy Ghost in their adultery; But I, replies 
a Beza ibid. Ego vellem perire, si aliter docerem.  Beza, should be damned, if I taught any otherwise.  
Nor is it to the purpose to allege that in 
b Respons. ad act. Colloq. part. 2.  his answer to the acts of this Conf: he deneys in express terms that ever he said that David in his adultery retained Faith and the holy Ghost: because this doth only prove, that being convicted of his own turpitude, he contradicted himself, but not that he said not what I object, and that in terms so express, that possibly I cannot put them down in clearer words. And whilst he reprehends himself in this answer, be it that in words he deneys that David conserved the holy Ghost in his sin, in deed and effect he affirms it, for he doth accnowledge in the 
c Illum dixi quamuis adulterum & homicidam, tamen quoniam electus erat aliquid Spiritus sancti in eo fuisse seruatum.  same place, That in his addulterie and homicide there remained always somewhat of the holy Ghost, because he was one of the Elect; seeing that according as I have heretofore shown, following his own opinion, the least sparkle of Faith, and of the holy Ghost, doth justify à man.  
Concerning that which they allege, that his acts were not faithfully put down, the answer is easy. For in this 
a In quaest. & responsionibus Christianis. Nunquam Spiritum penitus eripi dico. Non alite● veram sidem & eius effecta in electis interrum pi dico, ut in ii● qui lethargo laborant, & in ebrijs impediuntur animae facultates, non tamen anima ipsa tollitur, cum inter lethargum, aut ebrietatem & mortem ipsam plurimum intersit  book of Christian questions and answers, he brings the same examples which are put down in his Acts, making a comparison betwixt such as fall into enormous crimes and sick persons, who though sick, yet are they not dead.  
When the flesh overcomes the spirit, saith Pareus 
b Pareus lib. 1 de amiss. gratis cap. 7. Quomo do caro vinci● spiritum ut i● Davide lapso non ideo 〈…〉 Spiritu 〈…〉 sanctis 〈…〉  Professor of Hildeberg, as in the fall of David, the holy Ghost leaves to be in the Saints. God, saith Zanchius 
c In de 〈…〉 ca lumn. Deu ele ctis cum peccan non trascitur, eos nunquam odi● , is offended at the Elect, but never hates them. And in the 
d Ibid. Quia peccata electis condonantur, nec mortem, i'd refpectu personarum, quae sunt in Christo peccata ab ipsis admiss mortalia dici non possunt: quare in renatis & vera fide praeanlctis om nia sunt venalia.  same place, because the sins of the Elect are forgiven them, and are not imputed unto them to death; whence it is, that in regard of those that are in jesus-christ, the sins committed by them cannot be said to be mortal. So that, all things are venial to the regenerated who have truly faith. If men be elected (saith 
e Locis Commun. Tit. de peccato, 〈◊〉 personae in Christo electae ●nt, & fideles, ●onsequitur & ●llorum peccatae nortalia non Esse, sed ve●●alia.  Musculus) and faithful in Christ, it follows that their sins are not mortal but venial only.  
Now we are to note, that venial sins with you, is not only that, which as we teach, is pardonable, but even that which is already pardoned: not venial but veniated if one might so say. Which 
a Lib. 1. de amiss. ●rat. & statu peccats c. 8. Esse veniale & ●mputari sunt ●ugnantia, quia ●ercatum esse ●eniale est pecatum venia do●ar. non puniri.  Pareus plainly teacheth, when he saith; That to be venial, and to be imputed, are contradictories; because for a sin to be venial, is to le remitted, and not to be punished. Whence it follows manifestly, that all the sins of the Elect and faithful being venial, none of them are imputed, none makes them worthy of disgrace: And this is that which 
b Wottonus in Apolog. Protest. ●raect 2 c. 3. ●emittitur pec●● 〈…〉 potius 〈…〉 com●it. 〈…〉 adepto 〈…〉 semel estisell sea plena ●●nium peccatrum praesentum & futuro●m (nota) re●issione.  one of your English writers expresseth more clearly in the Protestants Apology. Sin is remitted as soon as it is committed, or rather before it be committed, man having once acquired justification, which is a plenary remission of all his sins present and to come.  
Now I demand of you whether it be true that one of the faithful let him lead what life and commit what sins he pleaseth, cannot perish: whether it be true, that there remains always in him some seeds of the holy Ghost sufficient for his justification: whether God, though wrathful against him, do never hate him: whether, in respect of him, no sin be mortal: whether the most enormous crime, be not only pardonable in him, but pardoned him: To conclude, whether every one of the Elect, who dies, in what ever sin go strait notwithstanding into Paradise: I demand I say, whether such Doctrine do not make an open passage to all vice: and whether if there be one, that will abstain from sin, for fear of offending his God, and incurring his displeasure, thirty others will not commit it following their own sinful inclination; seeing that, though God be offended indeed, yet sure they are that they shall not be deprived of his grace, nor draw his hatred upon them? I demand further, whether in this name, such doctrine, be not worthy, not only of hatred, but even of horror.   

The Religion pretended to be reform doth teach, that neither temporal nor spiritual laws of Princes, do oblige in conscience. CHAP. XIX.  
Neither Pope, nor Bishope, nor no other man, saith 
a lib. de captivi. Babyl. Neque Papa, neque Episcopus, neque ullus hominum habet ius unus syllabe constituendae super hominem Christianun, nisi fiat eiusdem consensu.  Luther, have power to oblige à Christian to one jote, save only by his own consent. I cry out, saith he 
b Ibid Clamo fidenter Christianis nihil ullo iure posse imponi le gum, sive ab hominibus, sive ab Angelis, nisi quantum volunt; liberi onim sumus ab omnibus.  in the same place, with assurance to Christians, that neither men nor Angels have power to impose any laws upon them, but so far forth, as they themselves please: for free we are from all law. We determine, saith 
c 3. Institut. c. 19 §. 14. Omnium hominum potestate exemptas esse (conscientias constituimus.  Caluin, that the conscience is exempt from all the authority of men. In sequall whereof he proves that political laws cannot oblige in conscience, Our consciences, saith 
d In Antibell. l. de bapt. Ergo mandatis hominum nostrae conscientiae non abstringuntur. Aliae enim nihil ad conscientiam. Leges illae (quae tum à Magistratu fiunt, tum ab Ecclesia) neque perdunt animos.  Daneus, are not tied by the commandments of men, no other law, (than the divine law) hath any thing to do, with consciences, and a little after, Laws made, whether by Magistrates, or by the Church do neither lose, nor save souls. jesus-ch. saith 
e Ad rationem 8. Camp. Christus voluit ut. hominum decretis liberae conscientia pareamus.  Wittakerus, would have us to obey the decrees of men, with liberty of conscience. 
f Lib. 8. Duraeun. Conscientiae nullis legibus adstringuntur nisi divinis.  Consciences are obliged, by no other but the divine Law.  
Hence it is apparent that you teach in express terms, that the laws of men, do in no sort oblige consciences; which is a doctrine detested by the Catholic Church, and aught to be so, by all the world: sithence it lays open a broad gate to disobedience, there being no more efficacious means to teach the contempt of the authority, of the Church, Kings, and Magistrates, and to violate their laws and ordonnances, then by openly persuading all men that none of them oblige in conscience. Now there remains nothing, but that I earnestly beseech you to enter into your own hearts, to dispose yourselves to enter into the way of salvation. What, will you remain in a religion, which bragging of much, can prove nothing? who knows not that it is now 1600. Years since jesus-chr. established his Church, with promise of perpetuity: how can that than which was but hatched within the term of 100 years, be his? who sees not, that, the names CATHOLIC and CHRISTIAN, being the Church her proper names, the religion to which they belong not, and to which the qualities which they signify, cannot agree, cannot justly boast that it hath the true Church? Who sees not that a Religion which manifestly contradictes the Scripture, in many principal points of its belief, is not that which was left us by jesus-christ, and his Apostles? Who sees not that they who under pretext of God's honour, injure him; who in words pretend holy Scripture, and in in deeds foist in place of it, that of men; and rely upon it as the foundation of their faith; who sees not, I say, that those men carry not the torch which we are to follow? Who will believe that he who denies the greatest part of the mysteries, because they are burdensome unto him, who forsakes them to follow his own ways and fancy, who will have no visible Head of the Church, that they may live free from obedience unto him; who to exempt himself from labour, and painstaking, will not have the blood of jesus-christ, to render our actions purgative, propitiatory, or merirorious: who, in a word, banisheth all pain, to pass to heaven in a feather bed: who, I say, will believe, that such an one is in the way of salvation, nay who doth not see, that he runs the strait way to his Erernall perdition?  
Is any so silly as not to discover that they who promise the people full and entire liberty to use the Scripture, and yet give them no other, but to look upon the letters, and receive into their ears the sounds of words: and who put the Bible into their hands, as the way of salvation, which yet they accnowledge not to be authentical, yea depraved, and corrupt, are but mere mockers, and impostures in things of importance towards salvation? Who will not plainly see, that a man hath no assurance in a religion, wherein all the assurance of salvation depends upon the warranty of men's opinions, and of each one, in his own cause; in a religion the authors whereof die desperate. Shall one follow those who profess punctually to follow jesus-christ, yet do the contrary to that which he did in that most sacred mystery which he instituted before his death? Shall one judge that a true religion which banisheth all sacrifice, without which never yet religion was?  
Who will not judge that the true way not to follow the saints, is to follow their enemies, and such as vomit out a thousand blasphemies against their honour, and purity. Will any deem it the ready way to Christ, to load him with blasphemies and contumelies issuing out of a sacrilegious mouth? And will not even blind men see, that to make God author of sin and man's perdition, is to perish in ones judgement, and to adjudge one's self to eternal flames? And verily, following the Father's judgement, he is liable to a more grievous crime, who divides the mystical body of Christ, then though he should tear in pieces, his true body. Who then will not hold your religion abominable, which stands convicted of so great, and detestable a schism? And who is he that will not condemn it, when he observes it to be patched out of the horrid heaps of old heresies, and consequently condemned by it own judgement, since it is condemned by the primitive Church, which it doth accnowledge to be the true Church? Can a lover of virtue and hater of vice follow that society, which shuts up all passages to virtue? And will he not plainly discern, that to lay open the way to all vice, is no other thing then to lay open the broad way to Hell. In fine, who sees not, that that society, which will submit itself to no laws, spiritual or civil, cannot be subject to the laws of God?  
They are worse than blind men that cannot discover this light. Let every one open his eyes, and beware of being misledd by the common error of many, to wit, that the desire they have to be saved, puts them in assurance, where ever they be. They may please to know, that if our desire were sufficient to justify us, than they that thought they did service and sacrifice unto God, in putting to death the Apostles, wrought their own salvation, and not the damnation of their souls. Let them know, that though one have an intention to go to Rome; and yet hold on the way to Geneva, they shall never arrive at Rome. Let them learn of the Fathers, that there is no salvation out of the Church; none is assured against the wroth of God, who is not sheltered under that covert. Let not the simple deceive themselves, by thinking that their Ministers would not have the face to preach with such assurance, what they were not assured of: because if it were enough for heretics for the approbation of their doctrine, to publish it as good, and all contrary to it, as worth nothing, one could not accuse the impiety of the greatest Heresiarkes that ever lived, for with the pretended assurance of truth, they defended their blasphemies.  
I know indeed that the conversion of a soul is a difficult thing. I know that as an empoisoned hart, as the report goes, cannot be consumed by fire: so God, who is a consuming fire, doth hardly inflame hearts infected with the poison of error, by reason of the obstacles which he finds therein. Yet can he, and will he do it, if every one putting of his passion, put on a fit disposition, and embrace the means prescribed by the holy Fathers. If thou desirest, saith 
a Lib. de utilit. credendi c. 8. Si iam tibi satis iactatus Sideris, finemque huiusmodi laboribus vis imponere sequere viam Catholicae disciplinae, quae ab ips● Christo per Apostolos ad nos usque manavit, & optime ad posteros manatura est.  S. Augustine speaking to one that seeks his own salvation, to put a period to thy misery, put thyself into the way of Catholic discipline. which by the Apostles descended upon us from jesus Christ, and which shall be continued in our posterity. That is to say, follow the Roman Church, which alone descended by an uninterrupted succession from jesus Christ. To this Church it is that you ought to repair, whither S. August. by another more express place invites you. 
b Idid. c. 17. Dubitamus nos eius Ecclesia condere  Do we fear, saith he, to betake ourselves into the    

A TABLE OF THE CHAPTERS and Sections contained in this book.  

Chap. j Minister's, pag. 1  
Answer, pag. 2  
Chap. ij. Ministers, pag. 4  
Answer. pag. 6  
Ch. iij. Sect. j Ministers, pag. 32  
Answer. pag. 32  
Section ij. pag. 37  
Answer, pag. 38  
Sect. iij. Ministers. pag. 54  
Answer. pag. 54  
Sect. iv. Ministers, pag. 76  
Answer. pag. 78  
Sect. v. Ministers, pag. 84  
Answer. pag. 58  
Sect. vj. Ministers, pag. 94  
Answer. pag. 94  
Ch. iv. Sect. j Ministers, pag. 108  
Answer. pag. 109  
Sect. ij. pag. 126  
Ch. v. sect. j Ministers, pag. 129  
Answer. pag. 130  
Sect. ij. Of Indulgences, pag. 147  
Ch. vj. Sect. j Ministers, pag. 155  
Answer. pag. 156  
Sect. ij. Of the Sacrifice. pag. 169  
Sect. iij. Of the Elevation of the Host, pag. 187  
Sect. iv. Of masses where the assistants do not communicate, pag. 189  
Sect. v. Of Communion under one kind. pag. 194  
Ch. seven. Ministers, pag. 202  
Answer. pag. 202  
Ch. viii. Ministers. pag. 221  
Answer. pag. 222  
Ch. ix. Ministers, pag. 241  
Answer. pag. 243  
Ch. x. Ministers, pag. 254  
Answer. pag. 254  
Ch. xj. Ministers, pag. 257  
Answer. pag. 257  
Ch. xii. Ministers. pag. 260  
Answer. pag. 261  
Ch. xiii. Ministers, pag. 262  
Answer. pag. 264  
Ch. xiv. Ministers, pag. 276  
Answer. pag. 277  
Ch. xv. The Religion Pretended to be reform is worthy of hatred, because it makes à schismè in the Church, pag. 282  
Ch. xuj. That the religion which they call Reform, doth renewal the old heresies, pag. 299  
Chap. xvij The Religion pretended, to be reform, doth banish all virtue, pag. 314  
Chap. xviij. The Religion pretended to be reform lays open the Gate to all vices. pag. 318  
Chap. nineteen. The Religion pretended to be reform doth teach, that neither temporal nor spiritual laws of Princes, do oblige in conscience. pag. 326   
FINIS.