AGAINST IEROME OSORIVS Byshopp of Siluane in Portingall and against his slaunderous Inuectiues. An Aun­swere Apologeticall: For the necessary de­fence of the Euangelicall doctrine and veritie.

First taken in hand by M. Walter Haddon, then vnder­taken and continued by M. Iohn Foxe, and now Eng­lished by Iames Bell.

Esay. Cap. 11. 65.

There shall no man hurte, nor slay an other in all my holy hill, sayth the Lord.


AT LONDON Printed by Iohn Daye, dwellyng ouer Aldersgate.

Anno. 1581.

To the Christian Reader.

EXperience hath taught me (gentle Reader) that it is ve­ry daungerous in this trouble­some age to cōmitt any thyng to Printe for thy behoofe. So farreforth hath that frettyng cāker of carping curiosity pre­uailed: So busily pryeth in e­uery Printers shoppe that way­ward churle Zoilus: So diuers and variable are the wittes and dispositions of our age, readyer to breake downe open roades thorough other mens hedges, then to stoppe neuer so little a gappe with any frythe of their owne. To such be it aunswered, that the greatest barkers be not commonly the best byters: and it falleth out for the more parte, that such bytesheepe curres smell of the cud­gell, when the gentle houndes feede of the croomes. And so I leaue them to them selues, whose sinister Iudgement as I litle regarde, so I groape not after their prayse. Onely my pur­pose is to profitt the vnlettered English men: Emongest whom the gentle natured will interprete the best, and findyng ought amisse, will with courtesie rather correct (I trust) then with carpyng condemne the course of my labours, for whose onely behoofe and benefitt I aduentured vpon this translation, and published the same in Printe. Some bytternesse of speache will now and then occurre, which at the first blushe may happely breede some offence. But if we call to remembraunce the sharpenes of speach, vttered by kyng Dauid, by the Apo­stle Paule, and by all the holy ones them selues almost, in their feruencie of zeale, agaynst the Enemies of God, and aduersaries [Page] of the Crosse of Christ, this offence will be lesse offensiue in re­spect of the opposed aduersary, whose mouth ruffleth and run­neth ouer euery where, with more then Ruffianlike and rascal­like tearmes agaynst our most dread Souereigne, agaynst her highnesse Nobilitie, agaynst her subiectes, and the whole state of her most gracious Gouernemēt, to the vtter defacing of the Gospell of Grace: which no true harted Englishman can endure to Read without greeuous anguishe of mynde. This licentious lauishenesse of rayling tounge sithence outraged so monstruous­ly, was conuenient to be mette withal with some libertie of free speache: That so the gentle Prelate, beyng otherwise squeymishe to heare shrewde wordes, might hereafter learne to wryte more modestly, and more beseemyng his Pastorall dig­nitie and functiō, and geaue lesse occasion of iust reproche. The rest I commende to thy gentle consideration, requiryng none other guerdon at thy handes for my trauaile, then thy frendly acceptaunce, and some spare of thyne idle tyme, to be employed in perusing for thy better instruction. So shalt thou encourage me (as knowledge shall increase and oportunitie serue) to acquaynte the with the fruites of the rest of my la­bours, Which I shall hereafter vndertake by the conduct of Gods holy Spirite: who enlighten thyne hart with spirituall vnderstan­dyng, to the glory of his name, and the establishement of thy Fayth, Farewell.

To the right honorable and my very good Lord Phillippe Earle of Arundell, grace, peace, and spirituall consolation in Christ Iesu.

IT might iustly be won­dered (right honorable) that in this so bright a Sunneshyne of the Gos­pell of Grace, so plenty­fully ouerspreading this noble Island with such resplendisaūt beames, so many Englishe Endi­mions could cōtinue so long, so amazedly dazeled of sight, as not to be able to lift vpp the eyes of their sleepy affections to con­ceaue, much lesse to pearce into the amyable closettes thereof: If the old auncient Enemy of mankynd, and sworne aduersary of all true Religion, were not more vigilaunt to lulle in securitie, then those sluggardes are willyng to be awakened out of their lamentable blindnes. For if we behold the most happy course of this our floorishing continuaunce in sincere Religiō, if we ponder with vpright ballaunce of vnstayned affection, the glorious manifestation of the auncient Apostolicke doctrine, & withall looke into the mar­uelous discouery of that counterfaict Synagogue of Rome, who could not but wonder at so blockishe in [Page] sensibilitie in so manifest light? A man would haue thought, though Sathan hadd transformed him selfe into an Angell of light, that yet he should not so long haue preuayled, especially emongest so sharpe sighted Deuines, so cunnyng caruers of Scriptures, and profoūde Doctors of Schoole, where a thorough Anatomy is vsually made of all manner of Artes, discipline and doctrine. A man would haue thought that of all other knowledge, the heauenly doctrine of Christ, beyng of all partes so forcible and mighty in operation, so able of it selfe to drawe, moue, stirre, renew and chaūge men, to seàrch, examine, to cutt to the quicke, to opē the filthy soares of sinne, to launce the festered impostumes of our fowle affections, to pearce the inward & most secrett partes of the hart, to sacke and subuerte the kingdome of Sathan, and destroy his whole armye, could with the authoritie and maiestie thereof, haue stayed, holden backe, and crushed in peeces, all the deuises, attemptes, and coū ­termoyles of Sathans ministers, in such sort, as that either with admiration amazed they might be a­stonyed, or with their mouthes stopped they might be vtterly confounded. Such is the strength of the Gospell, accordyng to that which we read, Neuer man spake like vnto this man. Iohn. 7.Iohn. 7.

Yet loe such is the carefull watchefullnesse of that Emperour of darkenesse, as will not suffer the care­lesse drowsinesse of our Scribes and Pharisees to ac­knowledge [Page] their promised Messiah, though he come emongest his owne: yea though with their eyes they see the blind restored to sight, the dumme to speake, the deafe to heare, and the very man of Sinne to sitt in the chaire of pesti­lence, moyling, turmoyling, peruertyng, subuertyng, razing, defacyng, reuelyng, and ruffling in all ma­ner of horrible abhominations. But euen as the Iewes deluded by that fanaticall Spirite, cōceaued a vayne and foolishe opinion of their Messiah, as that he should come with worldly pompe, in Princely magni­ficence, after the maner of some earthly Potentate, to make them Lordes of the earth: Euen so our more then Iewishe Romanistes, carryed with like phancie in their forged Vicar of Christ, and bewitched with false persuasion of the stately Royalties of their visible glorious Synagogue, haue their myndes bu­sied about nothyng so much, as about the magnifieng, exaltyng, and glorifieng thereof, blazing a­broad to the world the vayne glitteryng shewes of stagelike ceremonies, friuolous traditions, peltyng deuises, & drowsie dreames of their owne idle bray­nes, which they deliuer ouer as so many Oracles from heauen, contrary to the expresse word of the Testa­ment of Grace, which doth minister to all men aboū ­dauntly, all thynges sufficient for the obteinyng of euerlastyng health and saluation.

The whole earth swarmeth euery where with [Page] their bookes and wrytinges testifieng the same: and this our Age is to to much pestered with them, the Authours of which notwithstandyng allready are, or may be satisfied (if they were not altogether cast ouer into a reprobate mynde) with the manifold aū ­sweres of many learned Fathers, and faythfull ser­uauntes of God, euen to the full. So might this ghost­ly Byshopp Ierome Osorius, vpon the learned aun­swere made by M. Haddon, to the slaunderous Li­bell of his, presumptuously pearching to her highnes with flattery and lyes, haue stayed his course, and by scilēce prouided more wisely for his creditt and good name, which otherwise hadd not bene made so nota­bly infamous to the world, if this rayling Reply a­gaynst M. Haddon had not bene published abroad.

But who can tell, whether it hath pleased the Lord to rayse vpp this Iambres against Moyses? and to styrre vpp this proude Popishe Holofernes, a most notable champion of that Romaine Nabu­chadnezer to make so prowde a challenge agaynst his poore Cittie Bethulia? who can tell if the Lord haue appointed this Semey to rayle so outragiously agaynst our Dauid? who can tell if God haue harde­ned the hart of this Pharao, that so his people Is­raell might with greater glory passe fromout that miserable captiuitie of that oppressing Egipt? Great is the God of Israell, and maruelous in his workes. He it is, who by the onely touche of a small rodde, [Page] deuided the readd Sea, and made the same to become drye lande, and a passable way for his people, retour­nyng the waues thereof vpon the pursuyng Enemy, to the vtter ouerthrowe of Pharao, his Charettes, and all his hoaste. He it is, that gaue the headd of that stought warriour Holofernes into the handes of a seely woman. He it is, that caused the rodd of Aaron to eate vpp all the roddes of thenchauntours, and Sorcerers of Egipt. He it is, that with the one­ly breath of his mouth hath daunted the insolencie of this Popishe challenger, who beyng esteemed e­mongest our Englishe Papistes, the most notable Prelate of our Age, is now by the hand of a weake Englishe Pastour discouered in his colours, to be nought els, then a vayne bablyng Rhetorician full of wordes, altogether voyde of matter.

All which notwithstanding, such is the malicious peruersenes of the world, that he onely & alone bea­reth the price, and carryeth the greatest creditt and estimation of all the writers of our tyme, euery whose sentence is reputed an Oracle from heauē: The odde man of the whole world Ierome Osorius: not able to be aunswered, much lesse to be confused by any Pro­testaunt whatsoeuer. It was hartely wished, That the Authour him selfe would haue deliuered his tra­uayles herein in the Englishe toung, that so the vn­lettered Englishe man, by the Argumentes herein comprised, might haue bene able to stoppe the mou­thes [Page] of the wayward English cauillers, and suppor­ters of his quarell. But he respected an other ende, though not so plausible to his owne countreymen, yet much more cōmodious for the generall common weale of Christendome. For he right well perceaued, though Osorius roaued at England by name, that yet he bent his shotte agaynst the generall state of all Christia­nitie, and therefore most necessary, that as Osorius made his challenge knowen to the whole world, so the world also might be made acquainted with the encounter (I would haue sayd) the vtter ouerthrow of the same. The benefite whereof, though haue re­dounded to many particuler persons within this Re­alme, yet hath not bene so vniuersall, as was neede­full in respect of the multitude, who onely regar­dyng the name and fame of the man, will (as I sayd before) scarsely be persuaded, that he may possibly be aunswered.

I passe ouer the worthy prayses, which the booke it selfe most iustly deserueth, both in excellencie of matter, and in worthynes of the maner, as the fayth­full seruaunt of Christ, M. John Foxe hath handled it. Yet this I dare promise, and boldly pronounce, that all men that will, may by readyng, embracyng, belee­uing, and followyng the doctrine conteined in this booke, be throughly furnished, as well with the most especiall and principall pointes of Christiā Religion, namely, our Iustificatiō, Election, Regeneratiō, and [Page] Redēption by the onely merite and meane of the most pure, and precious bloudshed of that immacu­late Lambe, slayne before the foundatiōs of the world were layed, to the singuler comfort of their soules: as also by the Argumentes herein contei­ned, armed at all pointes, agaynst all assaultes, and practizes of all the massemoungers, meritemoūgers, pardonmoungers, Confessionmoungers, and all other of the Popish rable whatsoeuer in the world. As to the trāslation I dare not affirme otherwise, thē that I haue trauailed therein faythfully, accordying to the measure of grace, which the Lord hath geauen me, not doughtyng but it will atteyne the wished suc­cesse, if mē will but vouchsafe, with the same simpli­citie of eye, and willingnesse of hart to read, search, examine, and stand vpright in perusing of the same, with the which I haue to my poore abilitie tra­uayled therein. Certes my purpose was to profitt my countrey men generally all.

These fruites of my labours I haue thought good to present, & dedicate to your honorable patronage, moued hereunto by the most cōmendable report, and opinion that all men do cōceaue of your honours god­ly zeale, and zealous godlynes, to the singuler glory of your name, and vnspeakeable cōfort of all the god­ly. To the well acceptyng and good liking whereof, I iudge it not altogether so necessary to seeke by any o­ther circumstaunce, and persuadible speeches to en­duce [Page] your honour, saue onely the bare cōsideration of the wōderfull fruite, that may be reaped by readyng the contentes, namely, proceedyng frō so well knowen a Spirite, of so godly and faythfull a seruaūt of God. Wherein albeit the translation atteyne not to so abso­lute excellencie and perfection, as the dignitie of the matter doth require (as of right it ought haue bene deliuered in such wise, as should not in any respect diminishe the worthynes of the Author) yet for as much as it retcheth the ende, whereunto it was dire­cted, namely, the benefitt of the Church of God, and the vtter ouerthrowe of that malignaunt Church of Sathan and his ministers, I dought not but your ho­nour will vouchsafe thereof accordyngly.

Iesu Christ the Sonne of our heauenly, eternall, and euerlastyng Father preserue your honour in all spirituall grace, and heauenly wisedome, prosper your proceedinges, establish your fayth, fructifie your stu­dies, multiply your consolations, and direct all your wayes, finally blesse your hartes desire, with increase of much honor in this world, to the glorifieng of your body and soule, in that immortall and glorious kyng­dome of heauen for euer and euer. Amen.

¶ To the most Renowmed and Puissaunt Prince Sebastian king of Portingall euerlasting grace, peace, and most prosperous Reigne in our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ.

IF I hadd vndertaken this enter­prise, not beyng enduced more of earnest cōsideration of the cause I take in hand, and present neces­sitie of the tyme, then of any allu­rement of priuate commoditie, or presumptuous oftentation, or vayneglorious persuation of mynde (most Renowmed and vertuous Prince kyng Sebastian) I should not one­ly haue bene accoumpted blameworthy in the Iudge­ment of all the godly, but also haue willfully plunged my selfe into deserued obloquy of all the world: that beyng a poore despised abiect, a seely wretched vnder­lyng, so meere a straunger, and so farre seuered from you by distaunce of place, without all maner of ac­quaintaunce either of name, or of Title, neither called nor cōmēded by any desert, nor by any person cōmaū ­ded hereunto, dare so boldly presume to write vnto your highnesse beyng the mirrour of all Princely dig­nitie. But as the occasion that moued me to attempt your Maiestie, seemed of no small importaunce: so the oportunitie of the matter it selfe yelded vnto me no lesse euident Argument of assured affiaunce and auda­citie (though in vtter apparaunce vnseemely) yet par­donable (I trust) vpon due examination of the cause. And yet besides this alleadged necessitie emplyeng reasonable excuse, I wanted not many others as com­mendable aydes to defend my enterprise, if like exam­ple [Page] applyed in like cause may be allowable. For if Ie­rome Osorius beyng as then but a priuate man, no lesse estraunged from the Societie of this common weale of ours, then a professed Enemy to the Religiō, which we embrace in Englād, prouoked either of some vayne glorious oftentatiō, or of greedy desire to maintayne his owne Religion, and to deface ours, vnder zeale of pretensed good will and affection borne, durst be so bold not onely to write so long and tedious an Epistle to our most Royall excellent Queene Elizabeth, but also so vnprouokedly to aduertize her highnes of mat­ters inconuenient, daungerous to her soules health: why should I be condemned of insolency? if inflamed with sincere inclinatiō of most humble dutie towardes the most valiaunt Prince Sebastian kyng of Portingall, no lesse famous in Princely vertues, then valiaūt in ad­ministration of power, if allured by the notable Re­porte of his incomparable bounty, do send most hum­ble greetyng in the Lord Iesu, in two or three wordes to his Maiestie, in recommendyng his highnesse to the gracious protection of the allmightie, with no lesse in­crease of perfect peace and tranquillitie to him and his by Letter, then inwardly I wishe to his Maiesty frō the bottome of my hart. Neither do I see any reason to the contrary, why I should be more embraced in cōceipte, and driuē from my endeuour, hauyng so many notable commendations vttered by euery godly personadge in the behalfe of the famous kyng Sebastian, Renowmed in eche Coast for his excellencie in prowesse, and No­blesse in dignitie: sithence Osorius through the plea­saunt blast of the Trompe of fame, hath presumed so farre vpon the vnspeakable clemency of our Queenes most excellent Maiestie, whom he neuer sawe: when as also her highnesse of her aboundaunt grace hath with [Page] so great lenitie entertayned the Letters of Osorius, and so gently perused them (though otherwise perhappes vnworthy so noble a personadge) why should not I persuade my selfe to obteine as much, yea more rather of your Princely magnificence, and heroicall clemen­cy, especially sithence it cann not be credible that kyng Sebastian beyng a man, cann any ioate be inferiour to Elizabeth a womā Queene, in any Princely ornamētes or dutie of Humanitie?

But there will some peraduenture be founde not farre from emongest vs, to whō this comparison which I do make betwixt vs two Osorius and me, will seeme in no respect agreable: for as much as he beyng a con­staunt frend to the true and Catholicke Churche (as they will alleadge) doth take vpon him a most commē ­dable and necessary cause: But my defence, they will say, of sett purpose proclaimyng opē warre agaynst the most aūcient Catholicke Church, agaynst sincere Re­ligion, agaynst the approued supremacy of the Byshop of Rome, hath bene allwayes hitherto atteinted by Iudgement of all Monarches, and by consent of all de­grees condemned and banished [...] and ought not by any meanes be admitted into the Courtes and eares of Princes, as matter exempt from all protection and pri­uiledge of godly Lawes. This Obiection is no new thyng, & whereof I haue long agoe well & aduisedly debated with my selfe, yea the very selfe same thyng (most Royall kyng) wherein I am become at this presēt your Maiesties most humble Suppliaunt, and whereof I determined to beseech your highnesse in the bowels of our Lord God (whose aucthoritie and person you do represent in your Realme) that ye would vouchsafe due consideration, Ierome Osorius Byshop of Syluain ban­dyng and enforcing all his knowledge and skill agaynst [Page] the professed doctrine of our Religion publiquely re­ceaued in England, hath published in Printe three fa­mous Libelles vnder the Title of an Aunswere to Mai­ster Haddon: for Reply wherof we haue framed accor­dyng to our slender capacitie this Apology, how con­ueniently to the purpose I haue not to say, to what suc­cesse it will come, is in the handes of the Lord, surely for the garnishment of phrase and Stile thereof I haue no great regard. For this our contention tendeth not to the blazyng of excellency in eloquence, neither treate we here of the delicacy and finesse of speach, neither descant we lyke Minstrelles of warblyng of stringes, ne yet tosse we our questions to and fro in vaunt of brauery of witte, Sophisters vse to argue of moates in the Sunne in their triflyng and Dunsticall Schooles: But we dispute as Deuines in matters of greatest importaunce, of true righteousnes, of the way to eternall saluation, and euerlastyng damnation, and of the true woshippyng of allmighty God. This Apo­logy or Aunswere to the quarrellsome and slaūderous reproches of Osorius, how simple soeuer it appeare, we haue thought for no man so meete to be presented, as to your Maiestie (most excellēt kyng Sebastian) whom we most humbly craue and desire to be both a wittnes and a Iudge of the controuersie.

As for the questions wherewith Osorius doth in­ueigh agaynst vs, we suppose are allready well knowen to your grace. Now therefore the petition that we de­sire to obteyne of your highnesse is this in effect. That for as much as Osorius hath vttered all his cunnyng and eloquence by all meanes he may possibly to de­praue vs (whō he vnhonestly reprocheth by the name of Lutheranes) not onely vnto your Maiestie, but to all other Princes of Christendome also, thereby to bryng [Page] vs into vnappeasable hatred, it may please the Royall Maiestie of all godly Princes, not to conspire to geaue sentēce agaynst vs, before the matter be heard and de­bated betwixt vs. And your highnesse especially (most noble kyng of Portingall) hauyng allready seene the clamours and brables of Osorius, beyng the best and chiefest Arguments that he vseth to deface the orders and obseruation of our profession, will vouchsafe also with like equitie and patience of minde, to admitte our confutation thereof into your presence: whereby eche partie beyng discouered according to truth, your high­nes may more certeinly determine of the cause. There is a notable Law and an othe established in the Iudge­mentes of the auncient Athenians: To heare with both eares, that indifferent eares should be open to eche partie. But what maner of custome is vsed now a dayes in this per­plexitie and cōbate of opinions, where Byshops armed with the aucthoritie of Princes doe stand raunged in mayne battell agaynst the manifest veritie, and doe so bende the whole cōsent of their fayth to the one partie that all libertie once to mutter is vtterly cutte of from the other partie?

But here may some contrary doubtfullnes parad­uēture trouble your Royall thought, not so much pro­ceedyng from your gracious nature, as whyspered into your godly eares by the subtill and slaunderous practi­zes of glaueryng glosers: who vnder the counterfaict vysour of this glorious coūterfaict Church, haue won­derfully bewitched the eyes and eares of many noble personadges, & vnder pretēce of succeeding course of many yeares, do make glorious bragges, that this new-fangled Church, wherein the Romish Byshopp in en­thronized is the onely Catholicke Church, and the su­premacy thereof to be onely obeyed, alleadgyng the [Page] same Church to be the Empresse and gouernesse of all other Churches, and which of right ought to be estee­med aboue all Kinges & Emperours, as ouer the which Christ hath substituted the Byshopp of Rome his sole Vicar and Vicegerent earth: and therfore that all de­grees ought and may safely submitt themselues to the aucthoritie and determination of that Churche, as which beyng continually vpholden by the power and blessing of the holy Ghost, was neuer seene hitherto to haue erred, ne yet could by any meanes swarue one title from the right lyne and knowen trade of the true fayth taught in holy Scriptures. And that all other per­sons whatsoeuer sequestering thēselues frō the prescript Rules and Cannons of that Churche, cann not chuse but runne headlong into wandryng errours, amazed blindenes, and extreme maddnes. Wherefore those Lutheranes and Hugonoughtes are worthely to be ex­pelled from the vnitie of that Church, and deseruedly adiudged to fier and fagottes as most dampnable here­tiques, not worthy of any fauorable protection, no not their writinges so much as to be touched with any mās handes, bycause they dare presmoūte once to quacke agaynst the supremacy of that Angelicke Ierarchy.

As touchyng which slaunderous surmises, albeit nothyng cann be more falsely and shamefully imagi­ned, then those Sorcerous enchaūtementes, it is won­der, how much this poysoned Dolldreanche hath be­typpledd the sences of many great personadges, and hath so long preuailed in great admiration with sundry estates, through the onely ignoraunce of learnyng and ouermuch credulitie of godly Princes: vntill of late by the incomprehensible prouidence of Almightie God, the worthy Arte of Emprintyng was erected, by meanes whereof good Letters and Bookes came to the [Page] Marte: and Printers shoppes discouered the foggy and darkened cloudes of this olde mothe eaten barbarous­nes. Hereby it came to passe, that the tedious & deepe doungeons of lothesome ignoraunce beyng surprised with a certein new and cleare dawnyng day of purer doctrine, as also of all other liberall Sciences beganne to shyne abroade, nor will leaue (I trust) to ouer­spread his brighte glisteryng beames dayly more and more, vntill with the inaccessible brightenes thereof it do either thoroughly vanquishe the whole kyngdome of darkenes, or at the least chaūge the same into some better countenaunce. And to the ende we may con­ceaue assured hope of good successe herein, two thynges do minister vnto vs especiall comfort. Wher­of the one consisteth in the mearcy of the Lord, the o­ther remayneth in your handes that be Kynges and Princes next vnder the God, being the Lordes watchmen. For the first we haue an infallible Argument which cann neuer deceaue, the assured testimony of Iesus Christ, who hath prophecied in his holy Scriptures, that the same shalbe brought to passe: the greater part whereof we haue allready experimented to be accom­plished in these our dayes. That the Lord with the breath of his mouth shall confounde the pride of the Beast so arrogant­ly vaunting him selfe in his holy Temple. For the next:2 That other is of no small force, I meane your vigilant wisedomes and singuler godlynes, which causeth vs to cōceaue well of you that are Princes, whom the Lord of his infinite mearcy hath ordeyned to exercize chief rule and gouernemēt next vnder him vpon the face of the earth, especially whenas him selfe hath pronoun­ced out of his owne mouth in the Reuelation of Saint Iohn, That he will lende his helpyng handes hereun­to saying.Apoca. 17. ‘And the tenne hornes (sayth he) which thou [Page] didst see vpon the Beast, are those [...]enne Kinges, which shall abhorre the Babylonicall Strampett, and shall make her deso­late and naked, and shall deuoure her fleshe, and burne her Carkasse in flames of fire: for the Lord hath inspired into their hartes to bring this to passe, euen as it hath pleased him. Apocal. 17.’

Wherfore awake you noble Princes and Christian Captaines, march on in Gods name: Atchieue an ex­ployte worthy your noble Race, and be no longer tray­ned with the trayterous sleightes of subtill sycophātes: but pursue with the power the godly guidyng of the Lord of hostes. Emongest whom I most humbly call vpon your highnes (most singuler Paterne of Princely Roy­altie) not to the ende to teaze you to exercize cruelty agaynst that viperous generation. Onely my petition is (that for the loue you beare to Iesus Christ, and your owne soules health) ye vouchsafe to deliuer simple innocentes from the bloudy iawes of those rauenyng Wolues, and horrible blouddsuckers. That enter­chaunge of thynges beyng made, the true and pure word of God may be heard what it teacheth. And that ye lett lowse the reynes of their licentious insolency no longer, so that they do not hereafter abuse you, as the Iewes did handle our Lord Iesu Christ, whose facē when they had blindefolded, they beate his body with whippes. There hath bene to many broyles allreády emongest vs Christians: to much Christian bloud hath bene spilte: to much crueltie and horror hath bene exequuted, whiles you in the meane space (in whose power rested the staye of this outrage) either wincked at their bootchery, or at the least, left poore innocentes succourlesse in their slaughter houses. How long shall this Romishe Nymrod vaunt in his throne? how long shall he make a scorne of your patience (most excel­lent [Page] Princes) when will your Royall hartes and noble courage daunte his pride? when will you resume into your handes the whole sword of Iustice, the better part whereof the Romishe Russian hath bereft you? when will you surcease to be bondeslaues vnto them, whom the mighty God hath made vassalles to your lawfull Regimēt? how long will ye suffer your mouthes to be mooseled, and your eyes muffeled with such blynde errours contrary to the manifest light of the Gospell? If the questions (whereof ariseth our con­trouersie) were so harde and intricate, that they excee­ded your capacities, I would not haue entruded my selfe into your presence with this maner of persuasion, but would haue referred my selfe rather to the censure of the learned. But for as much as this Religion of Gods holy Gospell, which we professe, is so resplēdi­sant in the eyes and eares of all men, as the bright shy­ning Sunne in whott Sommers day, the doctrine (I say) wherewith we are enstructed, which preacheth Repē ­taunce to the bruysed cōscience, which agayne impu­teth vnto the penitent persons free righteousnesse and deliueraunce from Sinne by fayth without workes in Christ Iesu onely, which forbiddeth Idolatry, which restrayneth to adde or diminish any title from the pres­cript rule of holy Scriptures, which forbiddeth the in­uocation of the dead and prayeng to straūge Goddes, which acknowledgeth the humanitie of Christ the Sonne of God to be in no place, but at the right hand of the Father, which approueth honest and honorable estate of Wedlocke in all persons indifferently: which hath made all foode and sustenaunce both fishe and flesh without choyse (beyng receaued with thankesge­uyng) subiect to the necessary vse of man, which taketh away all confidence and affiaunce vsually ascribed vn­to [Page] merites and workes, which calleth vs away from the opiniō of soules health, to be set in obseruation of pres­cribed dayes and monethes: which reduceth vs from the naked elementes of the world, from worshippyng of signes and outward ceremonies, which (I say) clea­reth our hartes and myndes from the bondage of mens traditions and dreames, and doth ensure and establish vs in mearcy and grace: which allureth all persons in­differently to the readyng of holy Scriptures: which denyeth to no man the participation of the Cuppe of the new Testament in the bloud of Iesu Christ: which abbridgeth all Ministers of the word from desire of all worldly superiority. And to stay here frō the reckoning vpp of all the rest, which are more notable and mani­sest then the bright shynyng Sunne in mydday, what cann your Maiestie atchieue more worthy, or more beseemyng your highe excellency, then to admitt in­to the secrett closett of your soule this most euident trueth of heauenly discipline? If your highnesse be not as yet made acquainted therewith: or if ye know the same to be infallible and true, that ye will no longer shrowde vnder your protection such pestilent errours allready disclosed and repugnaunt to the knowen veri­tie: wherewith your grace may one day hereafter par­aduenture desire to be shielded before the dreadfull Iudgemēt seate of the Lord of hostes, accordyng to the promise of Iesu Christ. And the trueth (sayth he) shall de­liuer you. Iohn. 8.

And if your highnes shalbe persuaded, that this re­formatiō of Religion, whereof I haue treated, doth not apperteigne to your estate, or to the charge of seculer Princes: what doth the wordes of Osori. emporte thē? wheras writyng of our gracious Queene Elizabeth, he doth so carefully admonish her Maiestie to vouchsafe [Page] especiall regard to know, what the glory of Christ mea­neth, what the law of the Lord teacheth, & how much the rule of sacred religiō doth exact of her highnes. A­gain whereas in the same Epistle he doth very learned­ly pronoūce, that the speciall duty of Princely gouer­nemēt ought to be wholy employed to the preseruatiō of true and pure Religion? Pag. 10. But els otherwise if your grace do thoroughly conceaue that is most true, that the gracious restitutiō of gods holy word doth no lesse cōcerne the furtheraūce of the Gospell, then the preseruatiō of your Royall estate, & Saluation of your subiectes, I most humbly then beseech you (most noble kyng) by that redoubled linke of pietie, wherewith you are first bounde vnto the Lord: That as your Maiestie shall playnly perceaue this cause which we are entred vpon, not to varye or decline any iote awrye from the true touchestone of the liuely word neuer so litle, that your highnesse of your excellent clemency will vouch­safe to aduertize your Bysh. Osorius: That being mynd­full of his professiō he do behaue him selfe in debatyng the state of Religion, in the vprightenes of iudgement so as the cause requireth, and frō henceforth he desiste frō backbyting his neighbours with clamorous lyeng, and slaunderous reproches, who haue rather deserued well of him, then in any respect offended him. If he be of opinion that errours ought to be rooted out of the Church, lett him first cōuince those for errours, which he gaynesayth, and shew him selfe abler man to make proofe by Argumēt, thē to resist with onely cauillyng: By such meanes will he be deemed a more profitable member of the Church, and procure him selfe lesse ha­tred. It is an easie matter for euery common rascall to vomitt out disdaynefull names of infamous persons as Protagoras, Diagoras, Cicloppes, Blindsinckes, Epicu­res, [Page] gortellguttes, and monsters. But it fitteth comlyer for learned men, and more profitable for the Christian congregation, to lay aside distompered choler, and in­struct the vnlearned, and reclayme the obstinate with sounde Argumentes and expresse testimonies of the Scriptures. If this order be not obserued, euery carter may soone by aucthoritie clayme to be a cōmon ray­ler. An other methode of writyng was requisite in O­sorius more effectuall to edifie, then as he hath vttered in his bookes. For this sufficeth not for him to reuile men with odious names, as callyng them madd, impu­dent, childish and infaūtes, and to declame whole cō ­mon places vsed agaynst heretiques. I doe know and playnly confesse. That it is most necessary to oppugne erronious sectes & heresies. But it is not errour forth­with that hath somewhat a bitter smatclie, and is vn­sauory to euery queysie stomacke, neither is it all­wayes trueth, that is plausible to eche fonde and do­tyng phantasie.

But wise men ought chiefly haue considered, how euery mans assertiō is framed to the agreablenes of the word of God. Yet now a dayes I cann not tell how, the carte is sett before the horse, and the preposterous fro­wardnes of some persons haue brought to passe, that bycause men shall not be guided by the Gospell, they will runne before it, & so mens imaginatiōs shall not o­bey but beare the principall Banner before. But where as the right squaryer of Christian fayth hath none o­ther sure foundation but that onely, which is groun­ded vpon the holy Scriptures, our dutie hadd bene to direct the buildyng of our Religion by this lyne and le­uell, and to ramme fast the wallworkes hereof with this cemente and morter. But now I cann not tell how it is so come to passe, that many do worke guyte contrary. [Page] For they despise this well fenced order, and hauyng as litle regarde to the meanyng & purporte of the word, they rayse to them selues a Church (which they call Catholicke) and the same they assigne to be the onely guide and gouernesse: yet notwithstandyng they make no demonstration whether it be the Church of Christ yea or nay. But measuryng the same by the onely Title of the Romish See, through swiftenesse of opiniō, doe affirme her to be such a Church, as cann by no meanes goe astray, and whatsoeuer this Church doth denoūce and commaunde, the same they doe most greedely catche after with the whole bente of their fayth, and defende it with tooth and nayle. Out of this sincke were plumped at the first mens traditions, and sundry preiudiciall opinions, as certein vnreproueable deter­minations, they call them Vnwritten Verities which by leysure they do cōferre with the Scriptures, but in such sorte, that whatsoeuer shall seeme to serue for their purpose, they Canonize the same as inuiolable: but if ought be founde contrary to their expectation, then either they submitt it to the Iudgemēt of the Church, or with violent wrestyng, do racke the same to colour their suggestions.

And hereof sprang all that Darnell and Cockell of errours and dissensions, bycause many men did fashion their fayth after this frameshapen chaungelyng, and not after the simple conduct of the word. In which Church when they perceaued those and such other doctrines to be embraced, as these, to witte, that the Romish See ought to be supreme Empresse ouer all o­ther Churches: that Purgatory must be beleeued: That Pardons were necessary: that vowes made to re­mayne vnmaried were meritorious: That Mounckery and cowled profession hadd a certein wonderfull per­fectiō: [Page] That Images ought to be worshipped: Sainctes prayed vnto: and that the Grace and deseruynges of Iesu Christ could not of it selfe suffice to the attayne­ment of Saluation: That no man could obteyne righ­teousnes through fayth without workes. That Christ him selfe flesh, bloud, and bones was conteined and sa­crificed in the Masse vnder bare accidentes: That lay persons should be denied the vse of readyng the Scrip­tures, & participatyng the cuppe of the Lord. All these and many other like drugges, though they neuer could finde in the liuely wellsprynges of holy Scriptu­res, yet bycause they perceaue them to be shryned in the Decrees and Decretalles of Rome, they doe con­stauntly beleeue that they must be of as autentique au­cthoritie, as if they were so many Oracles lettē downe from heauen. Hereby cometh to passe, that vnder the vysour of the Churche, sondry deformed byshapes of doctrine are fostered vpp in the Church: and vnder the pretence of Christ, the true Gospell of Christ is in no small daunger to be vtterly defaced. So that the la­mentable complaynte vttered by Chrisostome, could neuer so aptly be applyed as to this our Age: Many doe walke (sayth he) vnder the name of Christians, but very fewe in the trueth of Christ. But bycause we haue debated these matters with Osorius hereafter at large, I will not deteigne your Royall Maiestie with any further Register thereof.

It remayneth, that we make humble intercession to almightie God the Father of our Lord Iesus Christ, that of his immeasurable mearcy and loue, wherewith he disdayned not to disclose him selfe vnto mankynde by his Sonne, he will vouchsafe to beautifie and esta­blishe, and with his mighty power and outstretched arme to defende and make permanent from all errours [Page] and bloudy bootchery the true light of his holy Gos­pell, the bright beames whereof hath allready enligh­tened the earth. We beseeche him likewise, that by the Trompett and dewe administration of his Gos­pell, the kyngdome of darkenesse may dayly more and more be subuerted, and the Church and kyngdome of his Sonne Iesu Christ may be dispersed abroad, ouer the face of all the earth, and preached thorough our all Nations and tounges. Lastly we pray, that he will endue all Christian Kynges and Princes beyng sett in aucthority, and especially the puissaunt and victorious Sebastian Kyng of Portingall, with all Princely orna­mentes, to enriche him with all perfect and absolute clemency, in vertue and true godlynesse, and to en­lighten him with the knowledge of his glorious coun­tenaunce, and establishe his throne, to the settyng forth of his glory, and aduauncement of his Church, through the merites of the same our Lord Iesus Christ: who graunt you in this world millions of his grace, and in the world to come lyfe e­uerlastyng.


¶Faultes escaped in them printyng with corre­ction of the same. Wherein note that the figures direct to the Foland and A. B. to the first and second Page.

FOl. 3. b. President, Presidentes, ibidem. is verified, which is verified. 15. b. lyfe hereof lyke hereof. 15. b. groundewordes, groundeworkes. 16. a. en­dyng, enduyng. 23. b. iugglyng, ianglyng. 4.2. a. you say, lay you. 43. b. can vvith, can not with. 46 b. slaunder, slaunderer. 56. b. in a, by a. 61. a. knowen, an vnknowen, ibidem. to the, of the. 66. b. was no litle, was litle. 96. b. with, which. 97. a. pitie, pictie .105. a. of him, in him .106. b. ofter, after .10 [...]. b. that may, that we may .111. b. excludeth, excluded .112. a. in other, in an other. 114 .b. Sophistically, a Sophisticall lye. ibidem, rather of the, rather the .116. a. of a. for a .117. a. requireth, required .118. a. geauen, be geauen .122. b. they do, they that do, ibidem, the sentence, these sentences .130. b. not one no, not one .135. b. obiect, obiecteth .136. a. of Luthers owne workes, he alledgeth Luthers owne wordes .136. b. deny, denyeth .137. b. do to, to do. 137 .b. nature, the nature .151. a. frameth, frame .165. a. do thteach, doth teach. 177. a. iud­ged, be iudged .190. a. deliuered, be deliuered .195. a. to onely, to the onely. 208. a. eare, are .231. a. is it not .237. b. may be not, may not be .239. b. in­cludeth, included .258. b. finally which, finally in which .259. a. not but wonder, not wonder .266. a. agaynst, agayne .275. a. is neither, as neither .278. the, by the .280. a. to credite no, no credite to .285. a. Minister, Minster. 286. a. fourth, a fourth .292. a. yee, he .293. b. circumuerted, circumuented .300. b. agaynst, agayne .303. b. passe, to passe .305. a. successours, predecessours .313. a. pardon, pardoned .329. b. nevves, nevv .336. a. same, the same. ibidem. yea, yee .357. b. Romeo. Rome do .360. b. this, these .373. b. dot, do not .379. a. hun­dred, hyndred .392. a. by, be .426. b. proued, prouided .430. a. our, your .437. a. sword, word .446. a. seduced, enduced .446. b. I he, it he .462. b. this, these, 504. b. herefore there, hereof therefore.

To the godly Reader Walter Haddon sendeth greetyng in our Lord Iesu Christ

A Few yeares past a certeine Portingall named Ierome Osorius wrate a tedious Epistle to the Queenes Maiestic: In the which he imagined many monstru­ous errours to bee frequented in our church, & with reprochful rayling most vnreuerently depraued the professours of the Gospel. This publicke quarell a­gainst my nature countrey troubled me not a litle: To some particular pointes wherof I thought good to aunswere, although not to all in ge­nerall. Partly, bycause I wated tyme thereunto, & partly bycause I supposed, that Osorius was deluded by some malicious report of our aduersaries: & therefore I hoped, the man would haue bene somewhat satisfied with myne aunswere. There passed ouer one year [...] or two, and I in the meane tyme appointed the Queenes highnes Agent in Flaunders, was lydgear in Bruges. At what tyme one Emanuell Dalmada a Portingall borne,Emanuell Dalmada a Portingall, Byshop of Angrence. Byshop of An­grence sodenly sprang vp in Bruxelles. This worshypfull Pre­late vndertaking the defēce of his frend Ierome Osorius did stuffe a great Uolume full of wounders & brabbles, & in the ende of his booke, caused certein ougly pictures to be portrayde, thereby to deface my personage as much as he might. I perused this Apo­logie (for to be entituled that cōfused llipe) I neuer saw so foolish & vnsauery a writing, full ofskoffes & absurdities, which two be­yng taken away, there remained els nothyng besides. Whereu­pon I debated with my selfe a whiles, whether I might aun­swere the doltish Asse: But at the last I determined to despise the scely wretched dottarde, as one not onely altogether vnlettered, but also so dull and blockysh by nature, & many tymes so voyde of common sence, that he became a iestyng stocke among the wi­ser sorte of his owne fraternitie. About two yeares sithence my familiar frend Thomas Wilson returnyng from Portingall into Englād,Thom [...] Wilson. brought ouer from thence at the request of Osorius, cer­tein Volumes of Osorius framed into three bookes: wherof one he deliuered seuerally vnto me. I receiued it gladly, and perused the same ouer once or twise, trustyng that Osorius beyng now enstalled a Byshop would be much more modest thē before. But the matter fell quite contrary. For in steede of a Liuill and sober person, I finde him a most friuolous Sophister, for a graue Di­uine [...] [Page] [...] [Page 1] [Page] nine, a childish counterfaite: and for a discrete byshop, a most im­pudent rayler. Hereunto was added such store of vanitie, and proude hawtynes, that in respect of him, Thraso might be well adiudged a very discret person. I sorrow to speake so much, for it had bene more acceptable to me, and more honesty for him (ac­cording to the ordinary course of commō conference) to haue de­bated our matters frendly, and quietly, rather then to cōbat to­gether with such tauntyng and snatchyng. But sithence Osorius disputeth not as a Byshop, neither will I argue to him as to a Byshop. Neither is it requisite, that I should be myndefull of Osorius estate, sithence he forgetteth his owne & myne also. And it standeth with good reason, that if he haue takē any pleasure in euill speakyng, he loase the same in euill hearyng. Here of (gentle Reader) I thought good to premonishe the: partly, that thou mayest perceaue the, course and processe of our writyng: partly, that if I shall seeme sometymes somewhat to sharpe in myne aunswere, thou mayest impute it to the enforcement of myne ad­uersarie, rather then to the bitternesse of my nature. Now I will request two thynges of thee. The first is: that as I shall haue briefly and throughly confuted the most foolish and spitefull braules of Osorius, so thou wilt be cōtēt therewith, not requiring many woordes in matters of so small substaunce. For albeit O­sorius can lunite to him selfe no measure nor ende of pratlyng, yet will I so temper my talke, that I neither abuse thy leysure, nor myne owne. Not bycause it is a hard thyng, but a matter rather of no difficultie to fill whole Uolumes with scribling and toyes: But that it is odious to be accused of yt selfe same faulte, wher­of a man doth condemne an other. My last request is, That thou yeld thyne attentiue mynde voyde of parcialitie in opinions: which two if thou graūt vnto me. It shall easely appeare (I trust) both that I haue no lesse godly, then necessarily entred into the honest defence of my countrey. And thou also as playnely perceaue, how malici­ously and wickedly England hath bene accused and de­praued by her cursed enemy Osorius.


¶An Aunswere of Walter Haddon, to the rayling Inuectiues of Ierome Osorius.

IN the entrey of this Tragedie, this prattling brawler hath framed a long discourse to shew,Osorius beginneth with a double excuse. how my booke cer­teine yeares after the publicatiō ther­of came to his hādes, wherein he sup­posed to finde some mysticall matter. As though to know, when hee recea­ued my booke were any iote to yt pur­pose, whereof we doe entreate: or as though any man may doubt, whether a writyng sold in euery shoppe, might in foure yeares space be transported into Por­tingall. Or that myne aunswere publiquely Imprinted, could by no meanes els be brought to Osorius, vnlesse that worship­full Prelate of Angrence, had come ouer into Flaūders. Nay surely. For as this maketh litle to the matter to know when, or at what tyme my booke came to your sight, so is it not credible that you wanted him foure yeares after the Imprinting. And there is no doubt, but that there were messēgers enough, that would haue conueyed the same vnto you, though this Byshop of Angrence had neuer sene Bruxels, yea though he had neuer bene borne. And therefore this friuolous painted Preface of yours might haue bene spared altogether, if it had not bene ac­companyed with two iolly mates. The one, that ye might vp this meanes yeld your honorable testimonie of your frende E­manuell, whō you aduaūce for his excellency aboue the skyes. But you come to late Osorius for this your carrion Emanuell departyng frō Flaunders, hath left behynd him a most euident monument of his folly, bewrayng his blockyshnesse: wherein alone hee hath vttered so many proofes of his ignoraunce, and impudencie, that no man will beleue you, though you extoll his worthynes with an othe. Wherfore if you haue any delight in his felowshyp, vse the same rather in couert in your owne countrey at home: for els where Osorius shall neuer get honor or honesty by praysing Emanuell. The secōd part of your nar­ration declareth the laudable custome of your countrey, where bookes of corrupt Religion may not be admitted: and therfore [Page] that Emanuell durst not commit myne aunswere vnto you, vn­lesse he had first obteined licence thereunto. What do I heare? Are our bookes so dayly infamed with the slaunderous accusa­tions of your fraternitie, and yet so curiously deteined frō you, whom the world doth acknowledge the most sturdy champions of the Romish Sea? By what exāple, with what reason, with what learnyng doe you iustifie this? For where as our writers do publikely inueighe agaynst your Ierarchy, & wholy cōuince your superstitions, it is enacted by your Canon Law, and rea­son yeldeth no lesse, that the writinges of your aduersaries should bee deliuered vnto your Doctours and Pillers of the Churche pardye, that you may burne them and broyle the Au­thours of them, if they come in your clawes. Reason doth re­quire this, & custome hath this farre forth preuailed with you. This is also established by your doctrine. And yet onely Portingall is so squeymish at our writynges, that Osorius beyng him­selfe the most couragious champion of the Romishe facultie, may not handle any leafe therof:Emanuell Byshop of Angrence in Portin­gall a Po­pish Inqui­sitour. no, nor Emanuell a Bishop of Angrence may not dare to send any title therof to his fami­liar and felow Osorius, though otherwise Emanuell be a most pestilēt enemie of the Gospel, a visitour (as he reporteth of him selfe) and an Inquisitour of heretiques. O pleasaūt parasites. O delicate deuises, Tully hath a pretie sentēce worthy to be no­ted in this place, which sayth. That hee can not but wonder to ése, how two Southsayers talkyng together can refrayne frō open laughter, when they make mentiō of their blind supersti­tious opinions. Euen so do I much marueile truely, how you two worshipfull Prelates cā keépe your countenaunces, when you meéte together vsing such fonde & dotyng ceremonies tou­chyng the reiectyng of our bookes. When I name you, I com­prehend you two alone, your selfe, and your sweéte brother E­manuell: of the rest bicause I know no certeintie, I conceaue frendly as reason requireth. After this superstitious nycetie, you begyn to declare the causes that moued you to inueigh a­gainst my poore defence.Two causes shewed by Osorius why hee writeth a­gaynst M. Haddog. And here you note if especiall causes, wherof the one you assigne to the holynesse of Religion, which beyng defiled by me, you must of necessitie purifie agayne. As though I accused your Religion, and did not rather defend our [Page 3] owne: or as though I moued this cōtrouersie first, and not ra­ther prouoked by you, did vndertake the defence of my coūtrey agaynst your malicious snarling, except perhaps ye be of opi­nion, that a Porting all borne may with greater reason cauil a­gaynst Englād, then an English man stād to succour the same. But we will see hereafter whereunto this tendeth.

Your second cause you say proceéded of dutiefull charitie,The second part of the excuse of Osorius. that so you might depraue me for some lacke of modestie, in that to your iudgement my writinges doe represent I know not what arrogancie, so that I seeme to you in some places to ouer reache so much, as standyng still amased in myne owne cōceite, I seéme to gape after my frendes cōmendations. This is a new kinde of charitie truely, with such viperous rācour of wordes to charge your Christiā brother of that horrible crime of arrogancie, whom you neuer saw nor knew.Rom. 2. S. Paule doth detest this charitie, pronouncyng that man inexcusable whiche iudgeth an other. And therfore redreth a reason: Bicause (saith he) in that he iudgeth an other he cōdemneth him selfe. In this therfore Osorius being hym selfe a most vayne & arrogant mā bewrayeth his owne beastly canckred stomacke, vpbraydyng hawtines to Haddō, especially sithēce the demeanour of Had­don by the testimonie (I trust) of such as doe know him, doth as farre differre from all hawtines, as the poysoned Pamphlet of Osorius is voyde of all ciuilitie & shamefastnesse. But what shall I say to this babler, who is so captious, that he will not admit one good word of my mouth? For hee vtterly disdayneth the prayses that I do geue hym: as where I denounce him to be artificiall in his wordes and phrases, hee thinketh I mocke him, or els that I doe so commende his vtteraunce in stile, as otherwise I doe discommend him for lacke of iudgement and knowledge. You are to to nyce Osorius to prye so narrowly into your own prayses. And yet to cōfesse the truth simply, you are not to be reprehended for it. For thus I iudged at the first, and euen the same I iudge of you still, that you are plentifully flowyng in very apt wordes, but are so drowned in them, that you haue very slender or no vnderstandyng at all in science. Neither shall I neéde any long search to discouer the same: for in your gallant writyng, euen at hand is there a very exquisite [Page] discourse vpon this worde Priuate, the whiche I will so ex­presse by peéce meale, that all the world may discerne how much skill and wit is in Osorius.

The name of a priuate persō, what it signifiethFirst you repeate my wordes, in the whiche I seéme to re­prehend your saweynesse, that beyng a Priuate man, a meére straunger to our common wealth, so farre distaunt by land and sea, would yet so malapertly write to the Queénes Maiestie. And forthwith you moue a deépe questiō, and desire to know, what I thought this word Priuate might signifie? There is no Carter but knoweth it, and you (if you doubt therof) must be sent to women and childrē to schoole. Then you demaūd whe­ther it be a word of reproche? As though you do at any time doubt hereof? wherein you doe erre very childishly: For this name Priuate doth alwayes signifie a difference in degreé, but is neuer named by way of Reproche. But you are not yet con­tented, and require to be taught farther whether all persons, that be not Maisters of Requestes, ought to be restrained from their Princes presence? Whom euer heard you say so? And how came this into your braynes, vayne Tritler? As it seémely for an old mā, yea and a bishop to daunce thus in a net? And doth Osorius so openly shewe him selfe so vnskilfull in all mēs sight & hearyng? But at the last you come to the pricke, yt seémeth most to rubbe you on the gal. Ye do vpbraide me (say you) with this name Priuate, as though ye iudged it a word of Reproche. This is your owne dreame Osorius very fitte for so rotten a mazer. Did I name you to be a Priuate mā? And what if I did? were you not so in deéde? Truly all mē knew this to bee true. For when you wrote your letters to the Queénes Maiestie, you had not yet purchased the dignitie of a Byshop as you are now: yea long time after the receipt of your famous Epistle, it was reported that you were a bishop elect. But I did obiect this name Priuate, as in Reproche ye say, how I pray you? whē as this name Priuate is in no respect contuinelious? nay rather is many tymes applyed (as your selfe doe know) to most honest and honorable Personages. That you may ther­fore know playnly what my meanyng was therein, and with­all learne some witte of me: By this word Priuate, I had res­pect to your estate onely, as whē being a Priuate person scarse [Page 4] peépyng out of your cowle, and not yet credited with admini­stration of any publicke functiō, it was nothing sitting for your personage to be an entermedler in fore in Princes causes, such especially, as were already established, and most firmely rati­fied by expresse Edict and agreable cōsent of all Estates, mea­nyng hereby to call you home from your vnaduised rashnes no­thing seémely for your degreé, This was my purpose. This I thought, and by this meanes of frendly aduise I supposed you would the better bee reclaymed to some modestie beyng other­wise vndiscreét by nature. And yet ye make no end of your tri­flyng, for immediatly you proceéde on this wise.

As though you would say, that I came of some clownes race, and fostered in some base Villadge, and neuer beheld any kyng in the face, and therefore had committed some haynous offence worthy of punishmēt, that durst presume to write to Queene Elizabeth, whom for the honor due to Princely Maiestie I alwayes name Gracious. Are ye not asha­med of so many lyes couched into one sentence? As though I tooke any exception to your birth or parentage, or that I could be ignoraunt that you had sene a kynges personage, knowyng for certeintie, that ye were dayly conuersaunt in the kynges Court? or as though I were displeased with your writyng to the Queénes Maiestie, whenas I did reprehend nothing in you, but your sawey arrogancie and slaunderous pen in mat­ters of so great importaūce? and wherewith you were nothing acquainted? or as though this your tedious quarell about this word Priuate did ought els, but bewray you grosse ignoraūce, and shamelesse impudencie? Whereof the one denounceth how voyde you are of learnyng: the other, how you dare impudent­ly attempt all thinges: which may be easely discerned by your proude speach aunexed thereunto. For before I was (say you) aduaunced to be a Byshop, I did surmoūt many of your or­der in fauour, authoritie and dignitie. I pray you Sir, whe­ther doth the modestie of a Christian Prelate appeare here, or that disdaineful craking of that glorious souldiour in Plautus? Plautus in milite glo­rioso. I was borne the day after Iupiter which came of Opis &c. what should I here say, but we haue thus in a stage of Osorius newly Sprong vp a proude braggyng Thraso, and vnder the visour of [Page] a most reuerend Prelate, a most vayne painted Peacocke: who to make his follie more apparaunt demaūdeth of me a profoūd questiō. To what end letters were deuised at the first? Whe­ther to make such as are absent by distaunce of place ac­quainted with enterchaūged affaires? Yes forsooth M. Doc­tour. Euen so do Scholemaisters instruct their boyes in com­mon Scholes. And what hereof I pray you?

Wherfore then doe you impute this (say you) as a fault into me? that being distaūt and seuered from your Queene so farre by land and sea, of very loue that I owe to her Ma­iesty I aduertised by letters her highnesse of matters apper­teining to the establishment of her estate? I blamed you no­thing because you wrote, but bicause you bent the force of your penne so maliciously & slaunderously agaynst my Natiue coun­trey, whiche is no lesse deare vnto me then Portingall is vnto you: herein surely I noted in you no lesse default of loue, then defect of wit, knowing that you are familiarly acquainted with that comicall nippe, videl. Are your owne businesse so nothing worth the lookyng vnto at home, that you may so carefully at­tende the affaires of others, yea those also, which concerne you nothyng at all? But here you haue not pleasure enough to daunce in a nette your selfe, vnlesse you drawe me also into the same rebuke of follie with you, makyng me to speake wordes, which were neuer myne, but of your owne deuising as though I should in this speach write vnto you.

Acknowledge now I pray you, this your vnaduised re­meritie of toung, for such is your talke: with what face dare you presume to attēpt the Queenes Maiestie by let­ters? being a mā neuer trayned in Court, neuer aduaunced to any office in the common weale, as altogether vnskilfull in the Ciuill Law, nor haue at any tyme exhibited to the Prince any Billes or Supplications, whiche of right belon­geth to me onely and such as I am. And thus concludyng vp­on my wordes. If you doe not perceaue (say you) how Chil­dish this sentēce is, I must needes a diudge you a man more then halfe frāticke. These be yours, and your owne foolish ly­ing wordes properly (Osorius) forged in that hammerhead of yours. First you would haue me to yeld, that those wordes bee [Page 5] myne, whiche I neuer knew, nor were once in my thought, as that I should vtter such monstruous speaches, wherof I neuer dreamed so much as one sillable, and which Mydas would not acknowledge if he were now aliue, much lesse any wise or sober person would blūder out, vnlesse he had bene instructed therun­to by this vayne glorious Gentleman Osorius. As to that you tearme me to be more thē blockish, if I do not vnderstand how childish your former sentēce is, I do gladly yeld and do simply confesse my selfe a naturall dolt, if I could seéme ignoraūt in ei­ther of these both, either in reknowledging that your Momish communication by you applied vnto me to bee very doltish, or your selfe also the deuisor thereof to bee as wise as Walthams Calfe. Both these I doe know aud acknowledge, & this much more also. That where you abuse my name to colour your scof­fing toyes, if you were not already enstalled a brawlyng By­shop, you might be inuested a delicate Sicophant. And where as you accuse me as one yt doth prohibite godly personages frō their due accesse to her Maiestie, chargyng me also with ambi­tion: I trust my dayly conuersation will cleare me of both those crimes, where in as myne innocencie shall appeare the greater to all mē, so much the lesse wil your venemous quarell preuaile to cracke my credite with any person that knoweth me. It seé­meth also vnto you, that I am a man of very meane capaci­tie, that in this basenes of myne estate I become so lofty & stately: how lofty I pray pouedo I chalēge to my selfe any preé­heminēce before others in fauour, authoritie, or dignitie? yet were not your self ashamed to bragge of these Titles whē you were but a Priuate man. Do I boast that I surmoūt others in wit or learning? yet you a litle after spare not to vaunt the same of your self most arrogātly. I would to God (Osorius) I would to God that your horned cockescombe did no more puffe you vp in pride, thē my seély hūble bils of Requestes do me. Truly thē should your threé Inuectiues haue vomited lesse slaunders and reproches, and denounced you a more charitable man, & farre deéper Diuine. Ye take further occasion yet to charge me, by­cause I affirmed, that you accused all England guiltie of hor­rible noueltie: I perceiue I must now plucke of your spec­tacles, and turne you to your owne Epistle, where you haue [Page] set downe these wordes.

For if after this doctrine of this new Gospell and new Religion was brought into England, there were brought therewithall also honestie and integritie of life. &c. Then a little after. But if none of those were performed through the studie of this new doctrine: nay rather if euer sithence, all rashnes, vnshamefastnes & lechery haue bene embraced in all places, if intollerable pride and arrogancie haue now taken suter footing then before, if seditiōs, vprores and re­belliōs haue bene more easily raysed, if treason haue more boldly attēpted the Royall Maiestie, and haue more freely pursued the bloud of Princes, &c. What now? Doe you not hereby name condēne all England of a certeine new Gospell? & do you not accuse this Gospell to be the very forge of all wic­kednes? I confesse (say you) that I accuse Englād, but not all England. But haue you any smatch is Logicke? Who that wil prayse or disprayse London, Olyssipone, England or Portin­gall by name, doth he not vnderstand all England thereby and all Portingall? O chattering Rethorician, but lumpish Logi­ciā: which can not cōceaue that an indefinite propositiō (to vse a schole terme) doth reteine the efficacie of an vniversall. And whereas you write, that it is reported vnto you, that a great number of our subiectes do remaine in their old Mumpsimus: either this is not true (as it is most vntrue) or if it were true: it would easily argue you to be a common lyar. Who haue slaun­dered all England with a certeine new Religion in generally, & yet alledge no persō particularly. You turne this also to my reproch, that promising to vndertake the defence of my coun­trey against you, without any dissente of mynde, yet contrary to promise, I do wonderfully dissente frō you. What? may any man or beast iudge me so mad, that I would promise to differre from myne aduersary without any cōtrary affection of mynde? what haue I thē professed? what haue I spoken? myne aūswere is extant, I referre me to bee tryed by the same. Wherefore with good reason you should haue pardoned me, if I an English man borne, the Queéne highnes subiect, did in myne aunswere vnto you deale somwhat franckly, without all rācour of minde (without all bitternesse of dissention. &c. I make promise to dis­pute [Page 6] with you without all disagreéyng of stomacke, without all bitternesse of contention: but you peruert my saying, as if I would differe frō you without contradiction of cōsent. Which no mā cā honestly promise, much lesse performe. Are you not a­shamed of this your cold & friuolous quarell? Surely you may be ashamed therof. But this childish fault is commō with you, as I will make euident hereafter in place fit for the same.

Then ensueth your lamentable complaint concernyng the death of the Bishop of Rochester.Syr Thom More. Thomas Moore and certein Charterhouse Monckes,Iohn Fisher Byshop of Rochester. who were (you say) must cruelly mur­thered, and that England hath euer sithence remained in mar­ueilous infamie. Uerely I confesse, that Moore and Rossens. were both endued with great store of singular learning, and la­ment to seé such excellent learned men runne headlōg into such absurde and pesfilēt errour, as to preferre a foreine and extra­ordinarie power before their liege and soueraigne Kyng. But when as it was enacted by the law of the land, that this crime should be deémed high Treason, it was requisite, that all such subiectes as would wilfully infringe that law, should incurre the punishment prouided in that behalfe. As for the Charter­house Monckes, the losse was the lesse, how much more they li­ued to them selues, vnprofitable to their countrey, and could alledge nothyng in their defence but custome and contumacie. The Statutes and Lawes in that behalfe prouided, could not iustly be challēged, or accoūted blameworthie, nor were at any tyme, vnlesse with you, and such as you are, whose disliking we accept for our prayse. Other trifles of myne aūswere you hunt after with a great kennell of superfluous wordes, plodding of­ten vpon one thyng. But I will passe, thē ouer bicause you note nothyng in them worthy defence.

Two points you carpe at in ye ordering of our lawes: the one is, that euery man particularly may not geue his voyce, as though any cōmon wealth doth admit such custome? Sūmons are made by wordes, by courtes, by hundreds, but it was ne­uer seéne that euery particular person should bee required by Poll. And therfore that sentēce of Liuie. The greater part pre­uaileth oftentymes agaynst the wiser, hath alwayes bene seéne in all auncient ages, and our predecessours also, that a spe­ciall [Page] choise beyng selected out of all estates, the same should be adiudged for law, which the greater number approued, and not that whiche the fewer liked of: what order obserue you in making you lawes? Doe you take together Cobblers, Tyn­kers, Butchers, Cookes, Mullettours. &c. & other like dregges and outcastes of the people, & enquire their seuerall opinions? or do ye reduce your infinite multitude to the choice of your wi­ser Citizes? But ye accuse this in vs, that our voyces are wre­sted out from vs violently, and agaynst our willes: No truely: there is no where els more freédome: whiche is wel knowen to all mē that are but meanely acquainted with the proceédynges of our assemblies, which we name our Parliament. But here you vrge vs with exāples, and with vnsatiable practfling, you runne backe agayne to Moore and Rochester, and demaunde. What those holy and most pure persons had committed? A very small offence pardye:More, and Rochester rightly cō ­uicted and condemned for traytors by the law. and I can not tell how they offended nothyng at all: forsooth they were condemned for high treason, which is accoumpted the most execrable and horrible fact vn­der heauen. But here you cauill & say, that force was vsed in the law, or in the iudgement agaynst them. Neither of thē both Syr. It was orderly proceéded agaynst them accordyng to the auncient custome and statutes of the Realme. For when as they violated the dutie of allegeaūce, which they did owe vn­to their coūtrey ordinaunces, and to their liege and souereigne Lord, lineally discended and true inheritour of the Crowne, & erected to thē selues a foreine Romish monarche through their waywardnes of opinion, they were worthely punished as dece­stable traytours to their coūtrey. But in this point they seémed vnto your iudgement propre holy and pretie Religious men: what then Syr? We expect not your bald sentence, nor esteéme it of a rushe. We doe not preiudice you in your ordinaunces, no more is it meéte that you should entermedle with vs in our Statutes. Whereas you haue placed in your headroll the ter­rours of imprisonement and chaines, and the horrible punish­mentes that our late Byshops do endure, we doe playnly con­fesse that this their rebellious obstinacie, whereby they refuse the most lawfull authoritie of their souereigne Princes establi­shed by the lawes of the lād, ought to be yoked and tamed with [Page 7] extremest punishments prouided in that behalfe. Neither was any iniurie done vnto those men in administratiō of Iustice, as you do imagine. But they were worthely dismissed frō all bene­fite of law for their intollerable pride, and pestilent example, that refused to bee ordered by the expresse and knowen authori­tie of the law. Lament you therfore, and howle as loude as ye list, they were neuerthelesse rightfully punished. For in all well ordered common weales, high treason hath bene alwayes ac­coumpted most horrible, and worthy of death.

You prayse your purpose of writyng to the Queenes Maiestie as procoedyng of a very zelous affection, that you beare to the truth, and to the publicke sauetie of soules: and this you auowe with a very solemne protestatiō. Osorius is writing to our Quene vnder pre­tence of charitie & goodwill couereth extreme ha­tred against true Reli­gion. Tou­chyng the secretes of your thoughtes, I referre you ouer to God whō you take to witness herein. But as farre as men may discerne by your wordes and phrases of speache. That stile of yours is enflamed as hoate as fier agaynst the truth of God, & against the publicke state of our saluation. And yet you beare fayre wether with vs, and would make vs beleéue, that you cō ­ceaue no malice against vs, but loue vs wt a bagge full of loue. The rather bycause you do vnderstand ye some English mē haue your Epistle in great admiration I wene. If this be true, what obteine you els hereby, but to be esteémed ye most vnciuil person of all mē, that cā finde in your hart to rēder so churlish a requi­tall for such gay benefites? But I do not condēne all England (say you) I doe onely confute the errours of some whiche haue brought this new Religion into England. You name England by generall wordes, once, twise, thrise: you barcke a­gainst ye whole state of our religiō: you accuse all ye lawes made touchyng the same: you doe violently rend in peéces our whole Ecclesiastical gouernement with most vnshamefast cauillatiō, you inueigh against the honest conuersatiō of our maners with most outragious slaunders. And yet to untwyne your selfe out of this manifest flame of cancred malice, you would seéme to charge but a few, whom you call seditious Schismatiques to their countrey. Not so (my good Lord) you may not so escape. England vnderstandeth the Latine toūg very well, is also of a ripe iudgement, and is myndfull what her selfe hath done, and [Page] cā not forget, how much and how greuously you haue diffamed her: nor will not admit this your painted satisfaction in threé wordes, especially beyng manifestly false: when she throughly cōsidereth ye ouerlauish backbytinges of the rest of your labour­some volume. And whereas you persuade your selfe to haue iust cause of quarell bycause you write in the behalfe of Religion: herein truly you bewray your ignoraūce, euen as in all the rest of your doynges: For albeit you be appointed a Sphepheard o­uer the sheepe of Siluan in Portingall, you may not therefore sheare the fliece frō English and foreine sheépe, vnlesse you had bene called thereunto by lawfull authoritie: vnlesse Paule par­aduenture did appoint ouer euery congregation seuerall pa­stours in vayne: especially when as the same Paul doth charge euery of vs with our vocation (I vse here his own wordes) and commaundeth vs to abyde in the same. As for you Syr, I be­seéch you, who hath called you vnto vs? or how will you preach vnto vs beyng not sent? for I doe here gladly vse the simple wordes of the Scriptures.True chari­tie is sooner pretēsed in wordes thē truely per­formed in deedes. Your burnyng charitie I trow, is so whote, that if your bold bragges may be beleéued, you will shed your bloud in the defence of Religiō. Be not to bold Bay­ard. It is an easie matter (Osorius) to despise a tempest in a quiet calme, but if any perillous flaw shall happen, the very sounde therof I feare me, will make our glorious Thraso eft­soones to thrust his head in a mousehole. But if you bee of such inuincible courage, stand to your tackle at home, and as neéde shall require, hasarde your lyfe for your owne sheépe. We haue pastours of our own, and seuerall Seés, we neéde no raungyng Prelate out of Protingall.

Afterwardes you beleue that I can not shew you, how that you enforce your writyng of malice, rancour and greedy lust to cauil, bicause as you propes, you were hereun­to moued of very loue onely, & pure denotiō: Truely if you may be a witnesse in your owne cause, you will easely persuade what you list. But if it be lawfull to vrge your owne Epistle a­gaynst you as reason requireth, there is nothyng more easie, then to shew by euident demōstration your incredible despight & viperous hatred agaynst our Preachers. Where euery sen­tence doth swarme with manifest stinges of Scorpion like ve­nime. [Page 8] At the last you come downe nearer to the flat accusation it selfe: the which bycause I perceaued so farced with pestilent poyson, and creépyng for couert into the Queénes highnes pre­sence: I tooke it in very ill part, that my coūtrey was so cruel­ly and wickedly accused and slaūdered by you: wherfore I desi­red to haue the causes set down, the persons named, the tymes noted, and all circumstaunces to bee described, that we might haue some sure grounde to begyn our controuersie vpon. Here our clamorous titiuiller taketh occasiō to scorne my to to fore­ward diligence, beyng him selfe most ridiculous in confoun­ding all thinges, making mingle mangle of all thinges, distri­butyng nothyng into his partes, openyng nothyng distinctly: And beleueth forsooth, that I came to late when Rethoricke was a dealing. Surely my Lord you are come tyme enough to the dole. For in this controuersie which is now betwixt vs, I doubt not but I shal seare you with so good a whote yron, that the very Printe therof shall remaine whiles the world doth en­dure as a perpetuall testimonie of your grosse ignoraunce. Yet foreward proceédeth his worshypfull Maistershyp and deépely debateth vpon old rules and principles of schooles, and at the last cōcludeth very grauely, that in criminall and iudiciall cau­ses due order of circumstaunces ought to be obserued: But that his Epistle is of an other hewe, altogether of the perswadyng kinde. What do I heare? is not your raylyng backbityng E­pistle a most slaunderous accusation and execrable Inuectiue?

No (you say) for the Iudge and the place of Iudgement wāted and there was no trespassour somonned. Ueryly you are a very vntoward scholer, that haue so soone forgottē the les­son your Maister taught you, especially beyng beaten into you with so many expresse examples. A good fellowship Syr. What doth Cicero, when hee declameth agaynst L. Piso and Gabi­nius? doth he not accuse thē?Cicer. Orat. in Lucium Pisonem. if you seéke for the Guildhall here and the offendours, there was neither of them. For the matter was determined in the Counsell Chamber amongest the Se­natours. And yet no man of any founde iudgement will deny that they were accused, and that all circumtaūces of tyme and place were ripped vp against thē. The same order is to be seéne in his second Phillip. Cicer. Phil­lip. 2. in Anthoniū. agaynst Anthonius, and in the Inuec­tiue [Page] which he made agaynst Saluste. In Salustiū. Many like examples may be shewed, but these beyng the Presidens of your Maisters shop chiefly, will suffice to conuince you of Childishe ignoraunce: But you affirme that your quarellsome Epistle lacketh no argument: for that we yeld vnto all those haynous crimes, which you throw out agaynst vs. It is vntrue: we deny all, in the same plight as you haue set them downe. And for your own part, if you had any sparcle of shame or honesty, you would neuer haue defiled your paper with so manifest a lye. You rush vpon me wt a sharpe battry of wordes, as though I did not per­ceiue what were comely, nor could discerne what ye cause doth require. Those be yours Osorius your owne drousie dreames, as I haue made manifest by your owne schoolemaister Tullie, the same is also apparaunt enough by your own Epistle, which I can vouche agaynst you for a most euident witnesse. You say that you haue reckoned vp many monsters of Religion. I confesse it. & in how much the number of them is the greater, so much the more deadly haue you helped our pastours cōsidering none of them can be founde in England, as your selfe seéme al­so somewhat to doubt: for this your write.

If those monsters haue not inuaded England, I do hart­ly reioyce in your commō wealthes behalfe, and confesse my selfe to be in errour to thinke that your Ilād was vexed with many such furies. Do ye confesse at length wise wisard? Wherfore then do you so expressely pronoūce in those wordes which I recited out of your Epistle. That a certeine sauadge herde of all Swinish filthynes was crept into Englād? So ye first you diffame this noble Iland to be a sincke of horrible abo­minations euen to the Queénes Maiestie her selfe: And after­wardes stand in a dumpe amazed how you may colorably pray pardon of so great a crime so maliciously conceaued. Doth cha­ritie teach you this? is this seémely for a Byshop, & an old mā? Is this the wisedome of Osorius that blameth lacke of discre­tion in others? But you seéme not to be satisfied, bycause with one worde I haue ouerthrowen all your cursed babling. Why sufficeth not to be denied in one worde, that is verified in one word? You haue taken vpon you to accuse most spitefully & ma­liciously, which accusatiō if you be not able to iustifie, you must [Page 9] yeld. For it sufficeth ye accused to deny: who vnlesse he be cōuin­ced by good proofe ought to be acquired.Cod. de pro­ba. lib. [...]. But I accuse no man (say you) before a Iudge, what is it materiall who sit in iudge­ment? The court of Christians doth stretch farre & wyde in the whole world, & extendeth it selfe to all natiōs. Ierome Osorius hath by his infamous Epistle cited England vnto this Consi­story as guiltie: and doth earnestly perswade that it is defiled with all maner of monstruous abominatiōs, yea in the prefence of ye Queénes Maiestie. Do ye not accuse, Osorius? Do ye not here (as much as in you lieth) deface, nay rather vtterly subuert the good estimation of this noble Iland? Did ye lacke no argu­ments to furnish this your horrible enterprise? or did ye beleue, that your onely affirmatiue was of sufficient credite in so peril­lous & pestiferous an exāple? But you deny that I do perceaue how you haue displayed all things most euidently. In deéde so I say, if we will admit your own cauill for a witnes of your own cause (for what should I els call it, but a mere cauill) Peruse your Epistle who litle, and he shall finde my saying true. I doe write vnto you, that you conceaue of the doctrine of the Gos­pell, which our Pastours on professe, as a matter detestable, a­bominable and dānable, & the Authours therof haynously wic­ked, common barretiours, subuertours of commō weales, ene­mies of mankind. These speaches you will not acknowledge to be yours, but myne. Nay in deéde these pernitious and pestilent wordes are your owne, the whiche though I repeated in myne owne wordes, yet the whole sentence of wordes is your owne: & though ye speake not the selfe same, yet ye speake that, which in effect is all one, like a peruerse Sophister. I did also disclose all your filthy rayling, in so much that no kynde of ignominie, no crime of haynous offence, no spot of beastlynesse, no sparke of impietie could almost be reckoned by, but you had therewith defiled the doctrine of the Gospell, and the professours of the same. The selfe same slaunderous Inuectiue is extant abroad. Iudge of it who will. And yet as though you had played the proper Speareman therein, and as though it sufficed not that this doggishe eloquence was ones throughly swallowed vp by me with toylesome irkesommes, yet are you nothyng asha­med to barke the same agayne in our eares. Truly it greéueth [Page] me to be encombred with such friuolous brauling. But bycause this gallant pedler doth make so proude crakes of his braue wares, let vs seé them (sith it must neédes be so) and note dili­gently what metall they be made of.

Osor. pag. 8.I sayd in that Epistle of myne (quoth he) that Nonnes cōsecrated vnto God were defiled with incestuous mariage:’ Osorius cō ­plaineth of subuertyng Religion in England. I sayd that Saintes, Images, Crosses, Crucifixes, and many other godly monumentes were throwen downe from their places, & broken in peeces: I sayd that the auncient Maie­stie of Religion was subuerted in your Temples, and other straūge orders supplied in the place. Other thyngs I passe ouer, and reserue them for place fitt for it. You haue sayd Syr. You haue said in deéde, or rather in that vnciuil cauilling Epistle, you haue spurled out all those, & sixe hundred such like slaunderous reproches. But let vs seé what substaunce any of them bringeth. First in the vauntegarde you haue placed the Nonnes:Nonnes. and those you say bene defiled wt incestuous ma­riage. We reply to the cōtrary, and say, yt such virgines beyng bounde apprentices to gluttony, idlenesse, & lust, entred after­wardes into lawfull and honorable Matrimonie. Next to the Standerd & mayne battel,Images of Saintes. you place Banuers, Saints, Ima­ges, Crosses,Picture of the Crosse. Crucifixes, & other holy monumētes, & those you say are throwen down and broken in peéces. We way not so: but we say, that Ioals, and such tromperies were by good aduise, & for great reason taken frō the gaze of Christiās eyes: bycause they occupied the places of great perill of Idolatry. In the re­reward commeth foorth old raynebeaten bruysed souldiours, which you name the old auncient maiestie of Religion,Auncient ceremonies of the Ro­mane Church. and the same you say is supplanted in our Temples, and other straūge orders supplied: we on the other part do boldly pronounce, that the auncient Religion is restored by vs: and your new stinking superstitions worthely abolished. And for proofe hereof aswell in these, as in all ye rest, which you seéme to keépe in store for an other tyme, we appeale to the testimonie of the most auncient primitiue Churche, founded and established in the most blessed age of our Sauiour Iesus Christ and his Apostles: which be­yng of all partes absolutely pure, and vndefiled, did neuer ac­knowledge the durtie dregges of your filthy single life, your [Page 10] superstitious Idolatries, nor your cold naked mockeries of Sacramentes and Ceremonies. But here you require of me to euery of them seuerall proofes. I haue satisfied already eue­ry point, as much as was neédefull for so bluntish an aduersa­ry: Moreouer if the controuersie were debated before indiffe­rent Iudges, the onely authoritie of that sacred tyme, in the which our Sauiour Iesus Christ lyued vpō earth, and the next age, wherein his Disciples preached, would easely confounde and crushe in peéces all those scattered stinkyng maymed sha­dowes of your Religion. Last of all if alleadgyng nothyng for my selfe, I should onely deny your poysoned accusation: This onely might suffice for all reasonable men, vnlesse you make better demonstration of your assertion by more probable argu­mentes. And therfore sithence you can not procure me as guil­tie to confesse (as you seé) you must suborne other witnesses ac­cordyng to your promise.

In the meane space you recite certeine wordes of myne, which are these.The words of M. Had­don cited by Osorius. You exclame as much as you may heapyng a masse of foule words together, which you seeme to haue hoorded vp for the same purpose to deface that your pain­ted Religiō, and cutte some throates, whom no man doth know but you alone. In this speach of myne you play the tall man: at these wordes you hurle out your cancred stomacke, ob­braydyng me with dronkēnes forsooth, and hereunto you haue pretyly stollen the wordes of Cicero agaynst Anthonius, that with you Maisters tooles ye might wounde me the deéper with a false crime.Cicer. in Anthon Phil.2. But I pray you Syr, where is this haynous of­fence? where is this blockish errour neuer heard of before? wher with this milde & sober father chargeth me, wishing in me so­brietie some litle while. As though I were alwayes drunken: bearyng me in hand, as though I were furiously mad, that would commit such monsters to writyng: forsooth (if it please your Prelacie) it will so be found in these two. First, that your selfe had made ougly your new glased Religion with all ma­ner of filthy taūtes: The other that I added thereunto, is, that some persons throates were cutte, whō no man knew but your selfe. How say you Syr? are not both these true? I will alledge examples to discouer the matter clearely, you challenge vs [Page] further that we mainteyne a kynde of fayth, whereby eue­ry man settyng aside all sorrow of mynde, not regardyng good workes, and drowning all endeuour of charitie, pro­mi [...]eth to him selfe hope of euerlastyng saluation. Osor. pag. 9No ma­ner of person with vs doth acknowledge this glaueryng fayth, no man doth defend it: nay rather all men doe abhorre it and spitte at it. This therfore is your own fayth, hammered out of your own forge: This is your owne lye: This is your own ca­uill: the which sithence your selfe doe pursue with such oppro­brious infamie (as you doe) your selfe do disfigure your owne whelpe, you dishoneste your owne creature. In the Treatise of Freéwill, you bring into your stage a certeine kynde of persons decked and apparelled with your owne wordes.

Osor. pag. 9. b. What els (say you) is meant hereby? they keepe mās rea­son in bondage, they bereue him of his freedome of aduise­ment: mans will they entangle fast snarled in perpetuall chaynes, and the whole man they doe vnclothe of iudge­ment and sense: and so turne him ouer, spoyled of all free choyse, that there remaineth no more difference betwixt him and a stone: for all maner of thynges which men doe imagine in their braynes, endeuour and practise in theyr actions, whether they be good or bad, these men do ascribe to God the Authour therof, and doe linke them together with a certeine fatall and vnaduoydable necessitie endu­ryng for euer. By this tedious talke of yours, you haue for­ged vnto vs certeine new Tyrauntes very fearefull in deéde, of whom we neuer haue heard any mention before this tyme, and which are meere straungers vnto vs: Broyle them you on the gredyerne therfore, and burne them with all your fagots and firebrandes of eloquence: for here you doe scourge none but Hobgoblines and Buggebeares,Osorius maketh Bugge beares and fighteth with sha­dowes. with whom we were neuer acquaynted. And therfore we suppose that these be your owne painted Poppettes, deuises of your owne dreames, vpon the whiche when you rushe with your doodgeandagger eloquence, what els do you, then murther shadowes of your own forgyng? whom no man knoweth besides your selfe. So the same offence and shame wherewith you do accuse others, must neédes reboūd vpon your owne head: when you can not finde them, whom you [Page 11] haue accused. Take a familiar example. You call me dron­kard, whom all mē els (I beleue) do know to be sober enough, except you that are scarse well aduised. This dronkennes ther­fore, if any be, is your owne, your owne lye, and your owne re­proch. You exclame that I am madde: whiche, for that you do so manifestly lye, wilbe adiudged your owne errour, your owne rage, & your owne ignoraunce. You perceaue now at the length, except you be more then franticke, how truly I wrate, that your selfe had misshaped your owne Religion, & had mur­thered those persons whom no man knew besides your selfe. A­wake therfore hereafter, if you be wise, and deliuer your gorge from this surfet of rancour, and malice, wherewith you are en­glutted: and charge me no more with dronkennes & madnes, that am in all respects your equal, your Myter onely excepted.

You affirme that you haue wounded Luther and his Champions onely. Osor. pag. 9. b. Luther falsely ac­cused. But herein you haue dubbed a double lye: For whē you charge Luther with monstruous opinions, where with that godly man was neuer acquainted, you doe nothyng diffame Luther, but batter downe your owne credite, by coy­ning a certeine newfangled Diuinitie, begynnyng now, and e­rected first by your owne cauillations. Luther did neuer allow this your owne counterfaite fayth (I say counterfaite fayth,) marke what I speake, nor euer affirmed it: nor did at any tyme argue so fondly and absurdly of Freéwill, as you report of him, how soeuer you barke at him in your writynges. It is no hard matter to espy, and to barke at some one sentence of his, vtte­red perhaps in heate of disputation, which may haply disagreé with the rest of the processe. But read Luther ouer,Luther to be take whole, and not by pecces. and marke his whole doctrine, & this will remayne certeine and vndoub­ted at the length, yt Luther hath in the Church of God, through Gods singular prouidence, planted inestimable treasure of Christian discipline: And that Ierome Osorius is a most per­uerse ouerthwarte brauler, who besides a cōmendable facilitie in the Latin toūg, can profite the cōmon wealth nothyng at all.

Thus much briefly once for all do I conceaue of M. Luther: whom I did neuer vndertake to defend, he hath other notable Aduocates, exquisite mē in all kynde of learning, who can with no labour auenge him from your cancred toung. I stand in de­fence [Page] of my countrey, and will persist therein so long as breath is in my body: and although you assayle and wish vpon the same with most poysoned dartes and venemous battry, yet I trust some part therof will recoyle backe vpon your owne breast, and sticke so fast in the very entrailes of your carcasse, that you shal neuer bee able to rubbe out the frettyng sistula of your slaunde­rous Inuectiue agaynst England: And in this your second fault you were more then poreblind, that, though you would seéme to poste ouer your whole malice agaynst Luther and his associates, you do notwithstandyng endite and accuse England by expresse wordes, rayle on our Byshops with most filthy and false accusations outragiously, condemne our subiectes in ge­nerall of stiffenecked crookednes most iniuriously: Our Tem­ples, our ceremonies, our lawes, and our whole Religion with shamelesse toung and most insolent Inuectiue you doe deride most scornefully, cōdemne most arrogantly, and slaunder most impudently. These your furious assaultes I will for my slen­der abilitie withstand in the behalfe of my Natiue countrey. I wil encoūter your outragious force as much as I may. Wher­in I will not speake so confusedly as not to bee perceaued, as you thinke that I do. But I will so expresse all & euery scabbe of your wickednes and ignoraunce in such colours, that all mē shall perceiue what maner of man Osorius is, if they will not be willfully blind. At length you come downe by litle and litle, to that slaūderous crime of poysonyng: wherewith when I saw you charge our frendes, of a very insolencie to quarell without any proofe at all, I returned the same into your owne bosome, with approued circumstaunces of tyme and persons. But here­unto our new vpstarte Pythagoras maketh none aūswere, but that my examples are counterfaite and reiected of approued writers. Of whom I pray you? where? & how? what booteth it to enquire further? my Lord Byshop doth affirme it, & we must needes beleue it. Herein yet your companion of Angrence is somwhat more tractable, who, rather then he will leaue ye mat­ter vnconfessed, will set two Monkes by the eares, and confute the one with the testimonie of the other. O gay payre of By­shops, which are so intangled in two examples onely, that the one is enforced vtterly to disclayme: the other to take such wit­nesses, [Page 12] whom no wise man will admit.

But Osorius forsooth hath gottē an other couert to play boe peépe in, where he shrowdeth him self alwayes when he is nar­rowly chased.Osor. pag. 10. I force not (sayth hee) what rules of lyfe our Monkes obserued, for such haynous offences as are com­mitted in common weales by men not altogether endued with heauenly wisedome should haue bene cured or vtter­ly abandoned by the sinceritie of your most holy discipline, & by the wholesome medicine of this Gospell and by that excellēt remedy, which your Doctours haue deliuered vn­to the world. O notable Diuine, is this speach meéte for a di­uine and a Byshop? is it lawfull for you to be murtherers, mā ­quellers & bloudsukers vnpunished? Is there not one baptisme onely? one profession: one onely Lord father of all? one onely re­deémer Iesus Christ? what prerogatiue then cā your sect cha­lenge more vnto your wickednes, then ours? We allow no a­mendement of maners, but such as yt authoritie of the Gospell & sacred Scriptures do approue: none other integritie of life, but that whiche the Gospell doth exact: if you be exempt from this discipline, the world goeth well on your side: lōg may you enioy that your freédome a Gods name. But if there be but one profession, one name, one bonde of peace: why do you so dismē ­ber this vnitie? or rather rend it in peéces? as though it were nothyng materiall in what sorte you behaue your selues, by­cause we haue an especiall profession, and regard of innocencie and vprightnes of life? If this were so, as you do most absurde­ly confesse, what could this auayle to your Monkes? how could they be cured of their festered vlcers beyng aboue an hundred yeares old, by these our newly vpstarte lieches; as you tearme them? You see here how you rubbe your selfe on the gall where soeuer ye touch: so hard it is to finde a startyng hoale for such frameshapen cauils. And yet beyng altogether vnlucky in handlyng your matters, you hauke after tiltes of wordes, that so at the least ye may fease vpon gnates. I affirmed that you dwelt nearer the worke maister of poyson then I: You de­maunde what I meane by that? whether I note your per­son, your countrey, or any other nation. Whereunto I demaunde agayne, whether the wordes be not Latin wordes, [Page] and playne enough? But they note nothyng of certeintie (say you.) This is your owne fault, who vse to chop of the head of the sentence, and slyly huddle the rest. And I otherwise ac­cusing no man willingly,The cauil­ling of O­sorius vpon wordes and sillables. am ashamed to depraue any whole Natiō. Wherfore though you haue endited Englād by name it shalbe lawfull for me to vse more modestie: for more arrogā ­cie and impudencie I can not. You snatch at an other vocable, which is Perpessa, Perpessa. Printed for Persparsa. Persparsa. But yet at the last you release me of this quarell, & cōfesse that it might be ye ouer­sight of the Printer as though you or any other hauyng any smatch of learnyng, could doubt that I had written, the seédes of warres to be scattered abroad. But you are an immoderate brabbler, that can scarcely admitte that which your selfe do seé must of necessitie seéme to be true.

Here you play hickscorner concernyng the reformation of our maners after the rules of the Gospell: Where you spor­tyngly promise, that you will sayle ouer vnto vs, to learne this notable discipline of life. Come not at vs I pray you, ex­cept you throw away your hypocritical visour, and cal to your memory the saying of the Propheticall kyng.Psal. 119. Thy worde O Lord is a lanterne to me feete: which sentence lyeth drowned amongest you in so deépe a dongeon of bald ceremonies and mens traditions, that like night owles you are starke blynd in the midday: and are not able to endure the bright beames of the cleare shynyng Gospell. Now to the end I might more sensi­bly disclose the ouglinesse of your fonde superstitions, I noted two speciall botches of your lothsome customes.Two soule abuses no­ted in Oso­rius his Re­ligion. Whereof one consisteth in that vnbridled licēcious Bulles of Pardons: The other entreateth of prayers ouerunne, and mumbled vp with­out feélyng, sence or vnderstandyng. These two forlorne mat­ters you ouerskip in the playne field succourles, without touch of breath: wherein surely you deale very discreétly, for your Schoolemaister Cicero him selfe, if he were now aliue, could not perswade this blacke to be white, the matter beyng so ab­surde. And yet you haue here illfaudredly prouided for your ho­nestie, that so playnly deny, that men were not accustomed to assigne the affiaūce of their saluation to those two plaisters a­boue mentioned. For as touchyng those leadden Bulles, what [Page 13] prerogatiue they obteined, how wyde, and how farre they stret­ched, with how cruell bondage they had cramped mens consci­ences, not onely the auncient age and receaued custome of ma­ny yeares most truly recordeth, but the rotten carcasses also bu­ried in graue will beare sufficiēt witnes against you.Trust in Popish pardōs vayne and wicked. Amongest a great number of whom, were foūde caskettes full of pardons safely folded, and lapt together in the bottome of their graues: Which I suppose would neuer haue chaunced, vnlesse vnmea­surable superstitious affiaunce had bene attributed to this pel­tyng leadē pilfe. Now if the liuely authoritie of the holy scrip­tures haue so vtterly quasshed & blurred out this bald ceremo­nie, yt at length you confesse now, yt all confidence of saluation ought to bee ascribed to the onely bountie and mercy of Iesu Christ, (as your selfe protest in the selfe same wordes) Uerely I do hartely reioyce in the behalfe of Spayne. But as I haue no quarell with that famous Natiō at all: so haue I very great agaynst you: whose communicatiō is so wonderfully variable, that a man may scarse trust you in this matter. For if it be true,Osorius a­gaynst hym selfe. that our righteousnesse doth partly depend vpon good workes: agayn if it be meritorious to pray to the virgine Marie, which both you do verifie, and likewise earnestly auow that she hath bene oftentymes founde mercyfull to your petitions: of these then proceédeth a good consequente, that all the hope of our iu­stification ought not to be ascribed to Christ onely.

But these thyngs shalbe better cōsidered hereafter in place fit for them: in the meane tyme call to your remembraūce what a thyng it is to speake honorably, and largely of the incompre­prehensible mercy of God, when as otherwise you make but a very slender accoumpt therof. As to that you seéme not to be re­solued, whether any Christian were euer so bussardly blind, as to beleue any other clensing of sinne besides that, which consi­steth in the onely freé mercy of Iesu Christ: surely (good Syr) you can not bee vncerteine of this, vnlesse you doubt whether your selfe doe liue, whether you take breath, or whether you walke a man amongest men. For that pure and vndefiled foun­teine of auncient Religion was long sithence dried vp, when as a certeine deformed counterfaite of outward holynesse was priuely crept into the Church, & had so garnished it selfe, with [Page] such a prāckyng cloake of Shole commentaries and scattered br [...]ggs of foolish superstition, that ye same inestimable treasure of Christes bloudsheadyng was almost altogether ouerwhel­med. This is true Osorius. Yea, to true. I would it had neuer bene true, yea rather I would to many remnaunts of this stin­king carion were not now in vre: I would those rotten & bleare eyed [...] Traditions had not ouer many Aduocates, men of great renowme. Lastly I would that our Ierome Osorius were not the very ryngleader amongest them. Truly if Osorius were not, as he is, he would not be so bitterly clamorous agaynst me, in that I doe so earnestly abhorre that lumpishe leaden Idoll: which hath bene most wickedly esteémed for the onely ground­worke and foundation of all other trecheries. For after this gaynefull market of redeémyng of soules was proclaymed a­broad by the trumpet of the Pardoner, and the price of saluatiō valued euery where at a few pence, there ensued such outragi­ous licentiousnesse of lyfe by the meanes of this speady forge­uenes of sinne, that we seémed to haue no neéde of Christ sitting aboue at the right hand of his Father, hauyng here in earth his Uicar generall with vs, who for a small trifle could absolue vs dayly. But here Osorius blameth me further as well for the thyng, as for the name, bycause I do so oft, and so malitiously (as he sayth) make mention of lead.Osorius ca­uilleth a­bout the word, of lead. Wherein the famous O­ratour bewrayeth him selfe to be not onely vnskilfull but also a blūtish leaden scholer. For if we call to remembraūce the vsage of the f [...]repassed aunciencie, no ordinaunces, no contractes, no obligations, no Testaments, no Commissions shalbe founde to haue any force, power or authoritie, vnlesse the same were sea­led with waxe, signed with writyng, or ratified with some en­grauen markes: herein if no man can be ignoraunt beyng ne­uer so meanely lettered, or any tyme acquainted with the com­mon affaires of the world, with what face doe you so storme at me, for that I call lead by the name of a publique Instrument (I vse here knowen wordes) sealed with lead? doe ye not know the figure Synechdoche? Synech­doche. or haue you not heard of Metonymia? Metony­mia. if happely you remember not these trifles, you may learne of litle children by whom these rules are dayly practised. But if you do know them, as of necessitie you must, why do ye dissembles? [Page 14] And hereof you say some men tooke great gleé, who doe loathe my trade of liuyng, as well as yours. But at the last, you de­part from this lead, and for your better credite vouch your Ro­mish monarche the first founder therof: for proofe of whose au­thoritie you thinke it not neédefull to spend much winde, for that your copemate of Angrence hath most learnedly establi­shed the same already. Truly this saying maketh me to smile at the old meéry Prouerbe, one Asse claweth an other by the el­bow. In deéde your companion hath herein played the tall man before you as well as hee might:The Bishop of Angrēce. and therefore you play the good felow with him agayne, lendyng him a lye for a tyme, and helpyng to vphold his credite already crusht in peéces. But as I sayd at the first, you lose your labour, the worke is not reco­uerable. For that infamous Apologie of Angrence, hath geuen his estimation so deadly a wounde, that AEsculapius him selfe can not cure this poysoned fistula, if he were now aliue. Ther­fore let vs passe ouer that seély wretched butterflye, and stoppe your nose from the ayre of that carion, the remembraunce of whom is either vtterly extinct, or blemished for euer with euer­lastyng ignominie. We will harken to you agayne the most ar­rogaunt slaūderour, not of priuate persons and Diuines one­ly, but of Princes and common weales also.

First let this be graunted (you say) that there is but one Church not many Churches. One Church. Nay rather you graūt the same fondly & falsly. For generally there is but one onely Church of Christ: but out of the same one, many particular Churches are deriued as prouinces. Hereof the seuerall Churches to whom S. Paule entituled his Epistles are sufficient witnesses.Apoc. 1. The Churches also whiche S. Iohn doth recite in his Reuelation doe witnesse the same. After that you take this for a maxime. That it is not enough for a Prince to establishe wholesome lawes, vnlesse he ordeine Magistrates and Gouernours o­uer them. This is true surely: but this hangeth nothyng toge­ther with your former Maxime: neither can I perceiue to what end it is spoken. Of your third proposition you take hand­fast vpon my wordes, wherein I consented with you, tou­chyng a Monarchie. One Mo­narchie. Truely I did confesse, and will not yet deny, that you did dispute of a Monarchie very aptly. What [Page] then? doe ye conclude hereof that I doe despise or finde fault with other common weales? doth that person disprayse poli­tique gouernement, which prayseth a Monarchie? doth he con­demne the estate of Uenice, that prayseth the gouernement of Florence? he that commendeth Wittemberghe, doth he ther­fore reprehende Auguste, or Argentine?Liuius 3. Decad. As though that aun­cient Rome, when it was gouerned by Consuls & Senatours, was not the Empresse of the whole worlde? or as though that politique Regiment of Athens was not a most florishing Regi­ment? And as though in this our age many famous Prouinces are not well ordered, with most sweéte lawes and ordinaunces, which were neuer subiect to one ruler alone? Let this therfore be the cause that enduced me to esteéme of a kyngly prehemi­nence: either bycause I had learned so, or bycause I was enu­red thereunto, or bycause ye loue of my coūtrey did so persuade me. Shall your determination be inuiolable therefore in this sort vttered? For many persons do rend in peeces a commō wealth, but one mā doth vnite fast Citizens harts together, with great authoritie. If you set downe this as an infallible truth, you do erre monstruously:Polycrates. Phalereus. Dionysius. for the cōtrary hath bene very often experimented, & sundry notable Regiōs, which haue bene miserably ouerthrowen through the barbarous crueltie of Ty­rauntes, and many common weales beyng at the very brink of ouerwhelmyng, haue bene comfortably recouered, and preser­ued by the wisedome of many.

Out of these pretie reasons partly false, partly vncerteine and chaungeable, you multiply your cōclusion neither true, nor probable. That is to say. That Christ determinyng to esta­blish his heauenly common weale vpon earth, did first or­deine lawes, then assigne his Magistrates the Apostles. Last­ly, that this bonde of mutuall societie might not be bro­ken, and so the couenable agreement of this Citie distur­bed, he did erect a Monarchie, and therein inuested Peter with the highest soueraigntie. First of all, what heauenly commō wealth do you dreame of vpon earth,Apoc. 21. 22. when as that hea­uenly Ierusalem is aboue? wherein dwelleth God him selfe, and our Lord and Sauiour Iesu Christ? & whereas the earth can haue none other Citie then earthly? Neither did Iesu [Page 15] Christ take vnto him mans nature to the end hee would coyne new lawes but to accomplishe the old: that the glad tydynges might be preached: That prisoners might bee loosed:Luce. 4. ex Esaia. Ad Heb. 10 Timoth. 1. that the sicke might be healed: lastly that by offring vp his most preci­ous body on the Crosse, our sinnes might be clensed, As for any superioritie in gouernement the Apostles receaued none, nor any other authoritie was committed vnto them, but that they should wander through the whole world emptie of all worldly furniture cariyng nothing wt them,Luce. 9. Mar. 6. and should sow in all places abroad the comfortable doctrine of the Gospell. Nay rather when arose betwixt them a question, who should be greatest a­mongest them: our Lord and Sauiour Christ did so vtterly suppresse that ambicious contention, that he briefly denounced, that he which was left, should be greatest amongest them. A­gayne when Iames & Iohn had besought of our Lord and Sa­uiour, that the one of them might sit on his right hand the o­ther on his left hand, when he were ascended into heauen vnto the throne of Maiestie, he reproued them both so sharpely bla­myng their ignoraunce, that he told them,Math. 9. They knew not what they asked: and immediatly callyng the rest of the twelue toge­ther, he so tempered vnto them lowlynes, humilitie and obedi­ence by manifest Arguments, that they might easely perceiue how they were forbidden all maner of superioritie. Sith these thyngs therfore are true, I wōder what came into your mynde to dreame of so dry a Summer, that a Monarchie was erected amōgest the Apostles: and that vnto Peter was geuen the pre­heminence thereof. Was Peter so appointed the chief ouer the rest of the Apostles, when as Christ him selfe doth so embace them and fearefully terrifle them from all maner of suprema­cie? was Peter so worthy to be a Monarche, when as Christ him selfe did hyde him out of the way bycause they would haue made him a kyng? must we be so subiect to Peter, and his Suc­cessours as vnto Princes? when our Sauiour Iesu Christ came downe from heauen for this entent & purpose, to become a seruaūt vnto others, requiryng of his Apostles the selfe same duetie of abacement?

But there is nothyng (you say) more cleare, then these wordes, Thou art Peter: and vpon this Rocke I will builde my [Page] Church:Touchyng supremacie of Peter & his succes­sours.And what soeuer thou byndest vpon earth, shall be bound also in heauen. And I haue prayed for thee, that thy fayth may not fainte: And thou at the last beyng cōuerted confirme thy brethren. And many other like. Whereby you will cōstreine vs to beleue. That Peter was preferred before ye rest of the Apostles. I will treate therfore of euery of these seuerally. That it may be eui­dently knowen, what a deépe insight this Reuerend Prelate hath in Diuinitie. For if he haue made here a strong and soūde foundation, his passage wilbe the easier to the rest of his Asser­tions. But if his groundewordes be planted vpon Sande, the rest of his buildyng will quickely shiuer in peéces, and come to ruine. First of all therefore: Note this to bee commonly vsed throughout the whole Scripture: That when our Lord and Sauiour Iesu Christ would demaunde any question of all his Apostles, Peter would make aūswere in the name of the whole generally, and not in his owne name particularely. So to that question:Marg. 9. But whom do you say I am? Peter maketh aūswere for them all.Iohan 6. Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuyng God. Agayne, when the Lord demaunded, Whether they his Disciples would depart away from him with the rest of the Iewes? Peter not one­ly for him selfe, but for his whole company, denyed, saying, Lord whether shall we goe. Thou hast the wordes of eternall lyfe. The life hereof is in Peters Sermon, when he exhorted the Iewes to repose their whole affiaunce of saluation in Iesu Christ, whom they Crucified, and was risen agayne frō death to life. For in the same place it is sayd, that Peter alone did not preach to the Iewes, but with the other eleuen. The wordes were pronounced by Peters mouth onely, but the mynde, sen­tence, & entēt was agreed vpō by all ye Apostles. Now therfore, if those Scriptures do admitte these phrases of speach, as ap­peareth playnly by the wordes of the holy Ghost. Then this is a necessary consequent. That our Lord Iesu Christ did in lyke maner apply his wonted communication vsed with the Apo­stles, to Peters cōmon aunswere.Aug. Retra. Cap. 11. In the like phrase of speach were those wordes: Thou art Peter, and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church. For as Peter in the behalfe of all his fellowes affirmed, that hee was Christ the sonne of the liuyng God,Chrisost. in Hom. Pen­thec. To. 3. so Christ likewise though he named Peter onely, yet acknowled­geth [Page 16] the vniuersall consent and confession of all the rest,Hillar. de Trim. lib 6. Cipr. Epist. 3. and in the same doth promise to establish his Church: which interpre­tatiō if you will not allow without witnesses, behold (O [...]otius) I haue alledged auncient Fathers,Orig. in Math. Cap. 16. mainteinyng myne allega­tion agaynst you, and haue noted their places, not obseruyng your disorder herein,Gregor. 1. Distinct. 10. Considerā ­dum. whiche vse to packe together a Rable of names of Fathers omittyng the matter: as though to the re­solution of doubtfull matters, neéded nothyng but names.

Next hereunto you place in order the promise of Christ in these wordes. What soeuer thou shall bynde vpon earth, shall also be bounde in heauen: what then? ought this promise to bee re­strained to Peter onely? or was this promise equally cōmuni­cated to the other Apostles? whose speach is this then? Receaue ye the holy Ghost, whose soeuer sinnes ye do forgeue, shalbe forgeuē them, and whose sinnes soeuer you doe reteine, the same are retei­ned. Is not this the gift of Christ? is not this Christes promise made vnto his twelue Disciples, standyng in the middest of them, and preachyng vnto them all, endyng them all with his heauenly blessing, somewhat afore his Ascention? Is not this sentence manifest enough the witnesse approued? the authori­tie not comptrollable? vnlesse paraduenture you will contend like a child, and stand vpon the nycenes of these sillables byn­dyng and loosing, wherof you made mention before. And yet if ye will obstinately persiste herein, you shalbe vrged with sillables, and titles of like wordes.Math. 18. Verely verely I say vnto you, whatsoe­uer you shall bynde on the earth, the same shalbe bounde in heauen also: and whatsoeuer you loose vpon the earth shalbe loosed also in heauen. Here you this? Do you also perceaue it? and are ye not ashamed? will you attribute that vnto Peter particularly, yea and in earnest? will you vrge and defende stoutly the very same sentēce wherein Mathew & Iohn by manifest proofe do cōuince you? who expresly do protest that the very same power of byn­dyng and loosing, was geuen by our Sauiour Christ to ye other Apostles in generall? what will you not dare to do in the darcke (good Syr) that practize to defraude vs of the cleare shynyng sunne, how will you peruert and wrest the fathers, that will so craftely iuggle with the expresse wordes of the Scriptures? truely you must either bewray your pestilent [...]eger de mayne [Page] in this place, or confesse your grosse errour. Your thyrd place is this. I haue prayed for thee that thy fayth saynte not, and thou beyng at last conuerted, confirme thy brethren. And what here­of? Can any man bee so witlesse to say, that those wordes of our Sauiour Christ were not aswell spoken to the rest of the Apostles, as to Peter by name? I will therfore first scanne the wordes of the Euangelist in order, that they may be more ap­paraunt:Luc. 22. But you are they, which haue perseuered with me in all my temptations. And I do prouide for you, euen as my Father hath prouided for me a kingdome that you may eate and drinke at my ta­ble in my kingdome and may sit on seates iudging the xij. Tribes of Israell. And the Lord sayd. Symon, Symon behold, Sathan hath de­sired to sist you as wheate, but I haue prayed for thee, that thy fayth faint not, and thou at length being cōuerted confirme thy brethren. In this parcell of Scripture is nothyng particular to Peter, but the same is common to all the Apostles. That they perse­uered with Christ was common to them all.Amongest the Apo­stles no sin­gular pow­er geuen to any one more then all the rest. Iohan. 17. Iohan. 17. The reward like­wise is common to them all, videl. to sit at the heauenly table. Agayne the thyrd parcell had relation to them all. Symon, Symon, Sathan hath desired to sift you as wheate. Sithence the whole processe of the Text therfore was referred to them all, by what Argument, may it be applyed vnto Peter onely? Namely sithence our Lord Iesus goyng a whiles after suf­fer death, and makyng preparation for his Ascention into hea­uen, poured out most earnest prayers vnto his Father, with a long and vehement repetition of wordes, not for Peter parti­cularly, but for all the rest of the Apostles in generall, whiche last and generall prayer of Christ to the Father, who so adui­sedly considereth, shall easely conceaue, that our Lord Iesu Christ made not intercession for Peters faith alone, but for all the rest of the Apostles: And hereof will also maruell much, how great learned Clarkes dayly exercised in the Scriptu­res, can Iudge therof otherwise. Truly the most notable of the auncient Fathers do constantly affirme,Orig. in Math. Cap. 16. that the very same sentences wherewith Supremacie is challenged vnto Peter, are commō to all the other Apostles together with Peter. And this haue I most manifestly proued by the selfe same places, which your selfe vouched. And albeit we passe ouer all these, & [Page 17] geue eare to the holy Ghost, speakyng vnto vs by the mouth of the sacred Scriptures, yet all this Monarchie of Peter which you do so exquisitely aduaunce aboue the Moone,Augustin. de Agone Christi. and the seuen Starres, shalbe founde to haue bene vsurped by the inordinate ambition of Byshops of Rome, and not by any authoritie grosi­ded vpon the doctrine of the auncient Apostolicke Church.

I will begyn with our Lord and Sauiour Iesu Christ, who hauyng spoken these wordes Thou art Peter &c, Math. 16. immediately after calleth Peter Sathan, and commaunded him to departe from him: bycause hee knew not the thynges that apparteined vnto God. How did Christ then (I beseéch you) erect the supre­macie of his Church in the person of Peter, whom immediate­ly, & almost with one breath, he rebuked bytterly, by that most execrable name of Sathan? and that not without cause: for hee dissuaded him from goyng to Ierusalem. Moreouer if Christ made intercession to the Father for Peter onely, that his fayth should not faynt: how came it to passe, that within a few dayes after, Peter onely with open mouth denyed, & forsware Christ his Lord and Maister? But I doe much miscontentedly make mention of the fall of so notable an Apostle, whō I do acknow­ledge the most excellent amongest the famous Apostles. One­ly this I would to be knowen, that he was ordeined to no seue­rall supremacie in the Churche of Christ, by any authoritie of the Scriptures. We haue heard Christ: let vs come now a litle lower to his Apostles, and namely vnto Paule, who labou­red in the Churche of God (as hee reporteth of him selfe) more then they all: he therefore doth playnly and constantly affirme, that he had receaued as great authoritie from Christ, to be an Apostle ouer the Gentiles, as Peter had ouer the Iewes:Gal. 2. and addeth further, that he had conference with Iames, Cephas, and Iohn, whom he nameth Pillers of the Church, as the chief of all the rest. Yet in the meane whiles hee acknowledgeth no singular prerogatiue of prheminence in Peter. Nay rather he vseth great libertie of speach agaynst Peter him selfe with­out all respect of Principalitie, or mention of dignitie. But why seéke we other testimonies? Peter is a good witnesse con­cernyng him selfe.Petri Epist. 1. Cap. vlt. I beseech the Elders, whiche are amongest you (sayth heé) that am also an Elder, and a witnesse of the Passion of [Page] Christ, and partaker of the same glorie, which shalbe reuealed &c. Behold here the dignitie, behold the Supremacy, and Monar­chie of this reuerend father. He is an Elder amongest Elders: A witnesse amongest other witnesses of the Passion of Christ: partaker with the rest of the same glory to be reuealed. Here is a Triple Crowne truely, yea a most precious Crowne, not made of gold [...], nor beset with precious stones. A most honora­ble Ambassadour of the heauenly glory to bee reuealed, not of any Temporall or earthly dominion. Lastly a most Reuerend Father not in any singular Lordlynes, but by especiall ordina­ry power of his fellow brethren. Who so will throughly sift the doctrine, the ordinaunces, the lyfe, and conuersation of the A­postles,Act. Cap. 1. 2.5. shall finde a most perfect patterne of vnchaungeable consent, but shall not smell any tast, no not one sparke so much of this Lordly Monarchie, wherof this ghostly Prelate doth so subtlely, and largely dispute. Unlesse perhaps he will driue vs to friuolous gesses, as to picke vp children kyckesses together. As that Peter went before: That hee spake oftentymes first: that hee looked into Christes Sepulchre before Iohn. But if we shall hunte after such gnattes.Act. Cap. 15. The honour geuē to Iames is of more substaunce. Namely when in their publicke assem­bly, the rest of the Apostles did subscribe to the ordinaunce that he made: And that other also: to wit when Peter was desirous to know who should betray our Lord & Sauiour Iesu Christ to the Iewes, him selfe did not enquire therof, but beckened to Iohn, whiche did leane vpon the breast of our Lord, that hee might demaunde the question.

But howsoeuer these thynges are construed. The callyng of the Apostles was equall: one maner of function amongest them all, the authoritie indifferent: one selfe same holy Ghost poured vpon eche of them at one tyme, the promises generall, & the reward proportionall. The which though I doe knit vp briefly, makyng hast foreward: yet if any man will behold eue­ry seuerall parcell, and withall enter into a deépe considera­tion of the most pure, and vndefiled Church of Christ, and his Apostles, as he shall perceaue an enterchaūgeable communion in that strickte societie of Apostleshyp, so shall he soundly iudge of that Monarchie and superioritie in possessiōs, in giftes, and [Page 18] other functions, and all other priuiledges of dignitie especial­ly: That they were vtterly renounced of Peter, and of all that sacred Brotherhood. These former positions therefore beyng now thus well fenced, your cutted Apishe Sophisme is cut of by the rumpe, wherewith you conclude so ridiculously: If it be euidēt (say you) yea more apparaūt then the sunne in mid­day, that Peter was aboue all the other Apostles in superio­ritie of degree, then is it most manifest, that the same ho­nour and preheminence in dignitie is due to all them that suceede him in place. O leaddagger Argumēt, in which what shall I blame first? If Peter (you say) were a Prince. It is all one forsooth, as if this our holy father had wynges, perhaps he would flye like a Wildgoose. But admit that Peter were pla­ced in Pontisicalibus, as you would haue it, though it be quyte contrary, as I haue already proued. But we will graunt it vn­to you for a tyme. What will you gayne hereby? That the same dignitie is due to the Successours? wherfore I pray you? The priuiledge of the person is not extended beyond the per­son:The priui­ledge of the person rea­cheth no further thē the partie him selfe, vnlesse it be limited by name. And therefore if the Maiestie of Peter were peculiar to Peter, euen so it ended in him selfe. But if you had no leysure to learne the Ciuill Law, can not common reason teache you, that whatsoeuer priuiledge is geuen to one person alone, may not bee translated to his successours, vnlesse it bee limited by name? But if these two crooches deceaue you, come of, and learne of our Sauiour Iesu Christ him selfe, what kinde of su­periority that was, wherof Christ made mentiō to Peter.Math. 16. Bles­sed art thou Symon Bariona, for fleshe and bloud haue not reuealed this vnto thee: but my father which is in heauen. Thou art Peter &c. Which wordes doe playnly conuince, that flesh and bloud were not partakers of this promise, nor yt any especiall choise was made of the person of Peter, but of his fayth and confes­sion onely:Galat. 2. For God doth not accept the person of any man. In like maner neither flesh nor bloud may challenge any succession in this promise, whether it be Iuly, Boniface, or any other: But the fayth and confession of Peter is the true succession of Peter. For if his succession were due vnto personages, then should this dignitie be oftentymes committed to Sorcerors, and heretiques, but this is altogether repugnaunt to the sa­cred [Page] institution of our Sauiour Christ, to builde his Churche vpon so stinkyng a puddle.

Therfore cast away this your patched conclusion, lame, and haltyng of euery legge. For without all question Peter obtei­ned no such interest in Principalitie: or if he did, it was but in his confession of fayth onely: And therfore can no man clayme any other succession, as lineally from him, vnlesse perhaps you may cōmaunde God to loue an Italian Prelate, because he is borne in Italic, better then an English or Spanish Byshop: or that ye will locke fast the holy Ghost to the Citie of Rome.Iohan. 3. But the Spirite will blow where him listeth, and the tyme commeth and is euen now already come, that neither in this Mount, nor in Ieru­salem, nor in any appointed place God shall be worshipped. Iohan. 4. God is a spirite, and his true worshippers, shall worship him in spirite and truth. But will ye come nearer home? harken to your own Do­ctour Ierome, whose iudgement I haue here noted, worthy surely to he engrauen in letters of gold. If authoritie bee en­quired for,Iero. and Euagr. the world is greater then a Citie whersoeuer a By­shop be, either at Rome, or at Eugubium, or at Rhegium, or at Constantinople, or at Alexandria, all be together equall of like merite and of like Priesthoode. The power of riches or ba­senes of pouertie maketh not a Byshop higher or lower. They all are the successours of the Apostles, wheresoeuer they sit, and of what estate so euer they be &c. To the same effect wri­teth Cyprian,Cypri. ad these wordes. ‘The same thyng verely were the Apostles that Peter was, endued with like partakyng of honour and power:But the begynnyng, first entered by vnitie, to the entent that the vnitie of the Church might be shewed to be one.’ Is it euen so Cypriā? is this thy verdite? that all the A­postles were endued with like partakyng of honour and pow­er? But you my Lord affirme cleane contrary.Osorius pag. 17. That Peter was appointed chief of all the Apostles, and that this is more manifest then the Sunne in midday, and that hereunto a­gree the Scriptures, auncient fathers, and that generall cō ­sent of antiquitie. Truly you speake many wordes, but no mā besides your fraternitie will beleue you, not of any pleasure of gaynesaying: but bycause you alledge nothyng that may en­duce to yeld.

[Page 19]And bycause you seéme somewhat tymorous of ye successe of your Diuinitie, in this deépe & principall cause of Monarchie, you catch hold fast of a Sophistical target.Osorius ibidem. That in the church wiche is but one, ought to be one chief Ruler vpon whom all men may depende, by whose authoritie troubles may be appeased, and outragious opinions may be suppressed. &c. There is in deéde but one Church generally, as there is but one confession of Christian fayth, yet this generalitie of the Church is distributed into many particular congregatiōs: as all Nations haue their seuerall administrations of Iustice. Now therefore as euery dominion is deuided into seuerall di­stinctions of gouernement, so to euery particular Church are ordeined seuerall Pastours: and yet in the meane whiles finde no lacke at all of your new vpstart Monarchie, whereof was neuer question moued in ye golden age of the primitiue church. But you Reply with pretie poppet reasons. That contenti­ous can not bee calmed, nor outrages suppressed, except some one be ordeined chief and head of the Church. Ibidem. This fonde distinction the common course of humaine actions doth vtterly extinguish. For euery seuerall Prince doth gouerne his common weale with wholesome distinct ordinaunces, and yet make not so great aduauncement of this stately Monarchy, as you do phantastically dreame. But perhappes this is neédefull in matters of Religion: why I pray you more then in tempo­rall regiments? The gouernement of Rome it selfe (for the singularitie wherof you play the champion) wil minister exam­ples vnto vs of either part. Augustus was an honorable Em­perour. Vespasian indifferent, but Caius Caligula, Sueto. in the lyfe of xi [...]. Empe­rours. and Nero were horrible monsters, who did not onely weaken the Maie­stie of the Romane Empire, but ransacked and rent in peéces the whole world almost. Euen so the Romishe Byshops in the first swathling cloutes of the first primitiue time of the church, were very godly and sounde, and to vse the wordes of the scrip­ture, did many tymes withstand the enemies of the Gospell e­uen with losse of lyfe.Platina de vitis Ponti­ficum. But after they had erected this Lordly superioritie of the Papane Monarchy, there was of godlynes, and integritie of lyfe no dramme at all: but of intollerable am­bition, & vnbridled licentiousnes, whole swarmes did appeare. [Page] And yet I speake but a litle. It is not therefore requisite to hang all the keyes vnder one maus gyrdle alwayes, nor yet scarse good pollicie. For if it were so, there might be some daū ­ger therein, lest the frowardnesse of one person might ouer­throwe the whole estate of Christianitie. There is farre lesse ieoperdy, where seuerall Prouinces are ruled by their seuerall Pastours: for proofe wherof if it be not sufficient to haue alled­ged reason & experience, I will recite vnto you out of the Regi­ster of Romish Byshops for witnes, Gregorie the first: Who in this matter vttereth the same reason, in the same wordes. And for playnesse of the matter, I will set them downe as hee hath spoken them whiche are these.Grego. in Epist. ad Mauri. lib. 4 Epist. 32. If we haue but one onely head, the fall of that head, is the fall of the whole Churche: it any mā presume to take vpon him this name of vniuersall By­shop, the whole Church falleth downe from her estate, when he falleth which is called vniuersall. But farre may this name of blasphemie be from all Christian myndes, whereby the honour of all Priests is diminished in part, whiles this arrogaunt sin­gularitie is presumed vpon, &c. May any thyng be sayd more playnly or plentyfully? can any thyng be pronounced more ve­hemently, or effectually agaynst this extraordinary and pre­sumptuous Lordlynes of Papacie? Neither did Gregorie o­therwise, then he spake: For when this Satanicall name of vniuersall Byshop was offred vnto him by the Coūcell of Cal­cedon,Grego. in Epist. 30.50 36. hee refused it with great detestation, and would by no meanes be acquainted therewith: although you deny the same most shamelesly, as shalbe declared afterwardes.

Cant. 2. Osor. pag. 17.But here you obtrude agaynst vs the misticall Sonet of Salomon. Wherein he commaundeth his spouse to catch the Foxes destroying the vynes: which be (as you interpret it) heretiques peruertyng the Churche: And this you af­firme cā by none other meane be brought to passe, except some one be set in authoritie, that may roote vp the mores of hereticall contagion before they be ripe. First of all (O­sorius) it is hard to establish a firme doctrine by an Allegorie: Moreouer the denomination of Foxes doth no more resemble heretiques, then any other wicked persons. But to graunt this vnto you in some respect, by what argument do ye proue that [Page 20] heretiques can by no meanes els be apprehended, vnlesse your singular Monarchy be admitted? The Emperour Phocas did first of all erect this Papal Empire in Boniface the iij. What then? Had not Peter long before Foxes in chase? and the other Apostles likewise?Act. of the Apost. the 5.15. Chap. Call to your remembraunce Ananias, Sa­phira and Elymas the sorcerour: forget not other pestilent ex­amples like vnto the same, and you will be better aduised. Pro­ceéde a degreé lower to those graue Fathers, the first Byshops of the Romish Church, Clemēs, Anacletus, Marcellus, & ma­ny others. Could the holy Martyrs haue sealed our Religion with their bloud, vnlesse they had first daunted the pride of Ty­rauntes, and heretiques with the sword of the Scriptures? But here paraduenture you will Triumph, bycause? I make so honorable mention of the Romish Seé. I wis it is neédelesse: For I doe here commend Byshops, not Popes: Martyrs, not Monarches. And yet in truth I haue no quarell with the Ro­mishe Seé, or the Byshop therof, nor euer had: It is that vsur­ped authoritie that exalteth it selfe aboue all earthly power, which I do challenge and will proclaime open warre agaynst, whiles breath is in my body, except I finde a stronger Goliath then you are hetherto.

But we will returne to your Foxes, whereof I haue noted the ouerthrow of sondry most subtill and craftie before the Pa­pacie. This our later age (praysed be God) doth punish and vt­terly suppresse whole sects of heresies, although the same doth not acknowledge your Papane principalitie I dare be bold to vouch England, and I conceaue no lesse frendly of other com­mon weales, agaynst the which you can not forge any probable reason to the contrary, or why it should not be so. For if there were no vniuersall Monarche of the Churche, sittyng in that stately chayre at Rome, ought that be any estoppell to the By­shops of England, Scotland, Poland, or Germany, yea of Spayne or Portingall, or any other dominion or common weale, but that they may apprehend hereticques, yea and pu­nish them? Haue they no Magistrates, do they lacke lawes? are they voyde of sense and vnderstanding? Put on your spectacles Osorius, and behold all Christian Nations, and marke wel the maners of the people. Are they not sufficiently prouided for [Page] their common safetie, and tranquilitie by their owne peculiar lawes? do not Princes gouerne their seuerall territories in or­derly pollicie? may they administer all other matters well, and can not confute the absurdities of heresies, without this Ty­rannous Ierarchy of Rome? Can not we touch an heretique? or can not other Regions do the like, which are in the further­most part of the world, seuered from the costes of Italy, except they gad to Rome for a Pelting Oracle? do you iustifie this, O­sorius? is this the wisedome of an old man? are you so altoge­ther voyde of learnyng, experience, and discretion also? Yea ra­ther, before any Pope was at all, heretiques were layd handes vpon. Euen now also rigour of law is executed agaynst them: Neither can any Foxe be foside so crafty, as your reasons allu­ded vnto thē, are vtterly friuolous & vnskillfull. But ye skippe from Salomon to Paule, and of him you write in this maner.

Osorius pag. 18. b. Therfore Paule in his second Epistle to the Thessaloniās denyeth that it may come to passe that Antichrist shall come, before there be a departyng from the fayth. First of all, this is somewhat straunge in you, that you note the place. And surely in very good tyme haue ye done it: for euen here your vnshamefast imprudencie is taken tardy. Paule pronoun­ceth in that place, that our Lord Iesu Christ shall not come be­fore a departyng be of the fayth first: but you for our Lord and Sauiour Christ, haue placed Antichrist. Paules wordes are these.Ad Thessa. 2. Cap. 2. Let no man deceaue you by any meanes, for the Lord shall not come, except there come a departyng first, and that sonne of perdition be reuealed. You are caught Osorius and so entangled in this snatch, that ye can not escape. Are you not ashamed to depraue Paules sentence so blasphemously? can you with so ex­ecrable impietie, and horrible ignoraunce, place Antichrist in steéde of Christ? and the sonne of perdition, in the place of our Lord Iesu? And as though Paule had spoken so in deéde, can you so beastly proceéde to the confirmation of that your Baby­lonicall Empire, with a sentence of Paule pestilently peruer­ted? Is this the profession of a Byshop? is this the Diuinitie of Osorius? Downe with that Pecockes tayle, away with this arrogancie: be no more so collhardy, and write hereafter more aduisedly, and take better regard to your penne, lest you bryng [Page 21] your name into odious contempt with all Christendome. Take your pleasure in my wordes, wrest them as ye list: but handle Paule more discreétly. But you are learnedly plentyfull in ex­amples, heaping together Iohn Husse, Ierome of Prage, Mar­tin Luther, and many others. Who, as you do affirme,Osorius pag. 18. b. haue re­uolted from this your Romishe Monarche of set purpose,bycause beyng exempt frō his Iurisdiction, they might be more freely licentious in writyng and speakyng. Why doe ye coniecture so (vayne Southsayer)? They were men of lau­dable conuersation, voyde of all maner ryotte, not culpable in any notorious or haynous crime: Therefore how may they be duely charged of any suspition of dissolute behauiour, that ly­ued alwayes discreétly and soberly?

But this is but a trifle with you, to defame a fewe persons by name: you rushe vpon all England with open mouth,pag. 19. As though after the abolishyng your Romishe Monarche, it were forthwith caried violētly into all vnbridled lust. This is a false suggestion by your leaue Syr, for assoone as we had shaken of the foreine yoke from our shoulders, and yelded our selues to the lawfull authoritie of our souereigne Prince, all thynges went better, and more peacibly with vs: especially in this later age of the Gospell renewed, which beyng cōpared to those elder yeares, wherein your Romish Prelate did insolent­ly treade vpō & triumph ouer vs, may wel be adiudged to haue enioyed most blessed prosperitie. Then which heauēly benefite our victorious Ilād doth most thākefully cōfesse neuer to haue receaued greater at the hands of God. God for his inestimable mercy, graunt that it may be permanent vnto the worldes end: and that weé most humbly submittyng our selues to our natu­rall and liege souereigne, vnited together in this most duety­full amitie, may most be estraunged from your extraordinarie Babilonicall Idoll: turnyng the same ouer to you and your fra­ternitie for euer. And now ye runne foreward with more lyes. Rehearsing a rable of sectes, and these you doe imagine to haue entred sithence the Banishmēt of the Pope. pag. 19. As though in the old time were not great swarmes of sectes? wherof Paul doth so oft premonish vs? or as though they raged not wonder­fully, in the tyme of that godly Father Augustine? whose hart [Page] did so boyle against them, that he wrate great volumes against their pestiferous errours? Or as though that sacred father, Peters successour, Pope Liberius were not a mainteyner of that poysoned canker of Arrius? Or as though Celestine and Anastase the second were not stoute champions of that horrible Scorpion Nestorius? Can you obiect sectes, when as no age euer wanted some? Dare you so boldly name sectes when as threé of your Romish graundsiers were mighty patrones them selues of two most pernitious errours? But you affirme that these godly Fathers are maliciously belyed. Call forth your own Alphonse, Alphonsus de Castro. contra hae­ret. lib. 4. Cap. 4. who being a Moncke, and a Spanyard borne, ought to bee of some credite with you beyng a Prelate of Por­tingall. O worthy successours of Peter. O excellent pillers of Christs Church. This it is forsooth to cōmit sheépe vnto Wol­ues: This is it to deliuer the people of God to bloudy But­chers. Yet you blush nothing at this to blame factions of sectes in vs, whiche you reporte to exercise perpetuall warre one a­gainst an other in diuersitie of contrary opinions, and the same to proceéde hereof pardy, bycause they are not in seruitude to Libertines and Celestines, that is to say, to Arrians and Ne­storians. But be it so, as you would haue, that some contrarie­tie were amongest the later sort of our writers. Is there, or can there bee any more monstruous dissention, then hath burst out amōgest your Friers and Monckes? hath euer sharper stormes bene raysed, then betwixt your Schoolemen, brawlyng often­tymes about moates in the sunne?pag. 19. You rush vpon Lutherans and Zuinglians by name. First you doe this besides the mat­ter, bycause I do not defend them: I stand for my countrey, I do defende England, I vndertake the cause of litle Britaine against you, wherein I will abide whiles breath is in my body. If you prouoke enemyes els where, I doubt not but that you shall easely finde them. Yet in the meane space I will recite your wordes, whereby men may know the manifest iniuries, that you vomite agaynst the soules of these sweéte personages, and how vsually you blunder out at all aduenture whatsoeuer your franticke braynes doe imagine. For this you proceéde in accusation.

The Zuinglians doe inueighe agaynst the Lutherans, [Page 22] and the Anabaptistes keepe continuall warres with the Zuingliās. Osori. pag. 19. b. Why do not I here thrust in also Coelestianes and Interemistes, and other names of Scismes? First of all there is no contradiction betwixt Luther and Zuinglius in the prin­cipall pointes of Christian Religion. They doe differ in the Sacrament of the Eucharistie, not in the substaunce thereof, but in the maner of the presence of Christ. And yet perhaps this quarell is more about wordes, then matter. But you haue not onely wickedly transubstātiated (to speake like a Schoole­man) our Sauiour Iesus Christ into bread, with most mon­struous deuises, but also thrust vpon vs vj. hundred lyes, euery one contrary to other: whiles you amaze the eares and myndes of Christians, with this absurde and newfangled doctrine. And therfore your graund captaine of Schoolemen, Peter Lōbard, Peter Lom­barde. in this doubtfull conflict, broyling and turmoyling him selfe, and throughly wearied with your mockeries, doth conclude at the last, That Transubstantiation ought to bee inuiolable, for the autenticke authoritie of the Church of Rome: but that it cā not be founde in the Scriptures. As for the Anabaptistes you did name them without all reasons. For you are not ignoraūt, that the vniuersall consent of all Churches haue condemned them: vnto whom Luther and Zuinglius were as earnest ene­mies as your Maistershyp, or any of all your brotherhoode. Surely in our common wealth, they can reteine no footyng, nor in any other coūtrey that I know or, cā heare of. What ma­ner of men those Celestianes be, I would fayne learne of you, & of your durtie cōpanion of Angrence, bycause you haue geuen that name first: as farre as I can perceaue. The other sortes are Interemistes, by this name (as I gesse) notyng those men, which to make a certeine qualification in Religion, haue pat­ched vp a certeine booke of peéuishe Romish dregges, and haue entituled it by the name of Interim. If this be true: what came into your braynes to reckon two of your souldiours or graund-captaines vnder our Banner? That Commentarie of Interim is yours (I say) your owne. These were your owne Doctours and their whole doctrine is yours. They were tractable for a tyme in the mariage of Priestes, in the receauyng of the Sa­crament, vsing the necessitie of the present tyme, but in all the [Page] rest, (as much as in them was) they did gorgiously garnishe their Romish kyngdome. And therefore in this last place you were fondly foolishe, to affirme that your owne chieftaines dis­played banner vnder your enemyes enseignes. Truly either your memory is very slipperie, or your wittes went a wollga­theryng, when you were ouer earnest in your slaunderous ima­gination. Yet are you much miscontented with these men like­wise, bycause they seéme to varie amongest them selues.

For they correct (I will vse your intricate wordes by your leaue) they alter, they turne in and out, they blotte out the old and make new places &c. When you name places, I sup­pose you meane common places of Scriptures, or litle bookes of common places. If it be so, you ought to haue remembred the Grecian Prouerbe. The secōd determinations are accōp­ted wiser then the first. Neither can any thyng resemble the Christian modesty more nearely, then if we amend our selues as neéde requireth. We haue a notable example hereof, Aurel. Augustine who made a booke of his errours entitled a Retra­ctation. The Retra­ctation of August. But you are in an other predicament: That is to say, you are apprentices and so addicted bondslaues to these drow­sie dreames (the dayly practize whereof hath so betwitched your senses) that no strēgth of the truth cā mollifie your harts, cloyed altogether in that phantasticall puddle of schoolemyre. But howsoeuer you shall remaine stiffenecked your selues, you ought not yet reproue the modestie of others, whiche fashion them selues nearest to Christian simplicitie. Neither was any exāple at any tyme more cōmendable in the Church of Christ, then this of Augustine was. You seé now what a stinckyng re­ward you haue gotten for this pursuyte of Sectaries: and yet as if you had besturred your stumpes hādsomely, you triumph in these wordes.

What can you Replie to this? was there a generall con­sent betwixt them that sprang out of Luther? no disagree­ment? no contradiction in opinions? But how much bet­ter had it bene for you, to haue reuerenced that lead where­at you scorne so much? then to haue opened such a gappe to so mōstruous pestiferours errours? I aunswere that these your metie questions concerne me nothyng at all. For I am an [Page 23] English man, not a Lutherane. I stand for England and not for Luther agaynst you. Yet do I pronoūce this also, that there was a generall consent amongest the Lutherans:There was no disagreement a­mōgest the Lutherans. no disagreé­ment, no contradiction in opinions. For they all sticke fast to Augustines cōfession, nor will suffer them selues to be drawen from it. But that confession (say you) I do not allow. Nei­ther is this matter now in question, what maner of confession that was: for howsoeuer that be, it is most certeine that the Lu­therans did perseuer stedfastly therein.Coelest. Anabap. Interem. As for the rest whiche you heape together, are either fayned, or coyned by you, or ba­nished from all men, as well from vs as from you. Or els they be your owne sweéte sworne brethren, sauyng that they haue somewhat more modestie & discretion then you. Therfore this is but a slender Argumēt to enduce me to reuerence your lead, except I were too too leaddish by nature. But sithence you haue shronke from your tackle, and forsaken the leaden Bulles of your Monarche in so succourlesse a shipwracke, without helme or cable in such dispayred perplexitie, you are to be esteémed not onely a leadden and woodden, but a durtie aduocate also of your Romish Monarchie: if at the least any thyng may be more fil­thy then durte. Yet that ye may the better proceéde, you spitte on your handes, and take hold of my wordes, which are these. But there came a thundercracke into our eares out of the hea­uenly authoritie of the sacred Scriptures, that made our con­sciences afrayde: and compelled vs to abandonne and for­sake all mens Traditions, and too putte our whole confi­dence in the onely freémercy of God. Well: I acknowledge this speache to be myne owne, yea and gladly also: And I finde nothyng therein blameworthy.

But what sayth Osorius to this grace? Doe ye not say gramercy to Luther (sayth hee) that linked you so fast with such a singular benefite to abandonne all fearefulnes from you? What is the matter my Lord? what Planet hath distem­pered you? I haue nothyng here to do with Luther nor with his doctrine of fayth. I shewed that our consciences were terrified with the authoritie of sacred Scriptures, and constrained to fleé to the freé mercy of God: you say, Luther hath written er­roniously touchyng fayth: forsooth these two hang together like [Page] a sicke mans dreame. As if a man would argue in this wise. Osorius is a most impudent rayler, Ergo, his companion of An­grence is a perfect Logician. Are you not ashamed to cite whole sentences from an other writer, beyng vnable to frame any probable obiections agaynst any one of them? For as con­cernyng Luther albeit, I haue not vndertaken to defende him (as I haue oftentymes protected) yet this doe I suppose, that neither he, nor any other interpretour of yt Scriptures ought to bee admitted vpon euery particular Assertion, but to haue relation to the whole discourse and meanyng of the Authour. If this especiall regard bee had vnto Luther (as in deéde it ought) he shalbe founde a profounde scholemaster both of fayth, and a good workes: and so farre to excell you in learnyng, that ye shall not be worthy to beare his bookes after him, howsoeuer you delight your selfe to gnaw vpon a few wordes of his, vnad­uisedly throwen out in some heate of disputation. But by the way you stūble also at an other straw of myne, bycause I wrate that we haue forsaken and reiected the traditions of men: And with many i [...]gglyng wordes challenge vs, that we are be­holdyng herein to Luther, Zuinglius, Melancthon, Bucer, Caluin, and Peter Martyr. O my ouer tedious and toylesome lucke, that hoped to dispute with a learned and discrete Di­uine, who would without good grounde haue blamed nothyng, nor vsed any cauillatiōs: but now finde all contrary. For I am pestered with a fonde brabblyng clatterer, which delightyng altogether in vncessaunt chatteryng snatcheth and snarleth at thynges ratified and approued by all men. I am therfore con­strayned now to play the child agayne, in the principles of Di­uinitie as he doth, and those questions must be debated, wher­of no man hauyng any skill, can be ignoraunt. In the same ma­ner therfore, we haue cast away traditiōs of men, as our Lord and Sauiour Iesu Christ hath pronounced in the Gospell, vn­der the person of Esay the Propet, But in vayne they worshyppe me teachyng the doctrine and traditions of men: And as our Lord Iesu a litle before rebuked the Phariseis.Math. 25. You haue made fru­strate (sayth he) the commaundement of God, through your owne traditions. We geue eare vnto men as they be men: but if they ones teach contrary to God, we despise and set them at naught. [Page 24] And enen so we doe allow of Luther, Bucer, and of the rest, so long as they explane the mysteries of the sacred Scriptures vnto vs: wherein those famous men haue oftentymes trauai­led very cōmendably, though you iangle neuer so much agaynst them. As for those beggerly fragmentes of mans inuention, beyng without all couer of Scriptures, yea rather contrary to the same, though they, and you also doe warraunt them vnto vs, we will not receaue them. Now you are taught sufficient­ly enough (I thinke) how we haue forsaken those peltyng phan­tasies of men: likewise how we conceaue of those notable lear­ned fathers, whose workes wilbe thākefully embraced, whiles the world doth endure, though you slaūderously barcke at them neuer so much. And yet I deny not, but they were subiect to sinne and errours, which happened also to the auncient fathers Augustine, Tertullian, Origine, & Cyprian. Who sometymes wandred out of the way, & were estranged from the truth. Yet do I not now compare, nor at any time heretofore did compare our [...]ate writers with those auncient fathers, as you cauill a­gaynst me: but I iudge of them as beseémeth me, and I pro­fesse that they were the seruauntes of God.

Whereas you vpbrayde vs with our maner of lyfe by the reportes of our cursed enemyes, such as you are: you follow herein your owne gyddy brayne. For true innocencie will ne­uer desire better witnesses, then such filthy and slaunderous backbyters: wherin your request to be pardoned is so much the more vnreasonable, by how much you do boldly defend, with­out all regarde of the grauitie of a Byshop, or the naturall due­tie of an honest man, such scattered rumours rashly conceaued of headles report, in steéde of well knowen and approued offen­ces. This also you seéme to mislike in me, as a matter intolle­rable, that I commende the prosperous raigne of our Queénes Maiestie, and herein your coūsell is to for seé the tyme to come, & the troublesome estate of other Princes. The Queénes high­nes belike without the aduise of Osorius can not cōceaue those matters, wherof no man can be ignoraunt that is but meanely practized in the dayly actions of mās life. Haue an eye to your owne charge of Siluan, and be ye carefull for them. Her Maie­stie surmountyng in knowledge and wisedome, regardeth not [Page] your peéuishe and dotyng counsell, especially beyng conceaued rather of malice to true Religion, then of any loue to her safe­tie. Ye keépe a great sturre about the Tumultes in Fraunce, and complayne much of treason conspired agaynst the kyng, and safetie of his person, and with all, that his aduersaries re­quired not his bloud onely, but that the whole bloud Royall should be rooted out of Fraunce. O licencious venemous toūg, worthy to be pluckt out by the rootes, from out that execrable mouth, except it recant in tyme. Dare you presume so impu­dently to make guiltie of so cruell and horrible treason, so ma­ny worthy personages of ye florishyng Realme? Namely when as the kyng him selfe by his open Proclamation, acknowled­ged some of them, (agaynst whom you rayle so pestiferously) to be his deare kinsmen, the other his beloued subiectes: and that their beyng in armes concerned the generall safetie of Fraūce? Many variable, vnciuill, and malicious rumours haue bene blowen abroad in many places, touchyng those ciuill warres: but neuer was any man heard to haue spoken so blockishly, so barbarously, so voyde of reason, and so monstruously as this Gentleman speaketh beyng a Byshop & an old man. And ther­fore we shall the lesse wonder at your rashnesse and impudencie in controuersie of Religiō hereafter, seyng your sauadge bold­nesse in this detestable & bloudy accusation of the greater part of Fraunce, without cause, without reason, and without proofe.

When matter and reason doe openly fayle you, then you wrangle about wordes: Bycause I named Luthers doctrine yours: agaynst the which you stand stoutely, and doe most deadly hate it. What shall I say to so captious and bussardly a Sophister? I terme it not yours, as though you defend it, but bycause you depraue it, bycause you peruert and iumble it with lyeng, that it can not be discerned as you haue mishapen it: whereas otherwise of it selfe, it is a most comfortable trea­sure of the Gospell somewhat infected with poysoned contagiō of childish errours: but in these latter dayes through the inesti­mable benefite of God discouered, and clensed by the commen­dable industrie of those singular learned Diuines Luther, Bu­cer, Caluin, Melanchton, and others: whom though you des­pise at your pleasure, yet whē Osorius shalbe dead and rotten, [Page 25] and the name of this reuerend Prelate of Portingall out of all remembraunce,Osorius his ignoraunce in iudge­ment and triflyng a­bout words. their names wilbe commended to eternitie to their immortall prayse. For what man will esteéme of you, who (besides your foolish and vnskilfull handlyng the matter wher­of you entreate) are altogether ignoraunt in the proprietie of wordes, wherein you may seéme to make a pretie shewe. You thinke this spokē vnproperly by me: videl. that your slug­gishnes should be awakened and your dulnes pricked for­ward, what say you drousie Prelate? Truly you sleape so soūd­ly, yt you snorte agayne that cā deny this kynde of speach: A mā may be awakened out of sleape, and be pricked forward beyng dull. Learne out of the Gospell: The blynd do see, the lame doe walke, leapers are cleansed, the deafe do heare, the dead do ryse a­gayne. Luce. 7. Which wordes of our Sauiour doe not argue that the blynd do see, or that the lame doe walke: but that those whiche were blynde and lame, were restored to sight and walkyng. Learne againe of Cicero, Cicero pro Mar. Coe­lio. who speaketh on this wise. Let yoūg men obserue the boundes of their owne chastitie, lest they defile the chastitie of others, lest they consume their patrimonie, & be deuoured wt debt: Let them not offer force to virgines, nor dis­honestie to the chast, nor infamie to ye vertuous, &c. what? Can virgines be defloured? no surely: not so long as they are vir­gines, but by allurements they may be carried frō their shame­fastnes. Cā the chast be defiled? no truely, but yet this chastitie may be seduced in processe of tyme to loosenesse. Learne at the last what the old Prouerbe emplyeth, whereby is forbidden to pricke foreward the willyng: which Prouerbe if we do admit, this also is spoken properly enough: The dull are to bee pric­ked foreward, and the sluggish to be awakened. Neither would you haue euer gaynsayd the same, vnlesse the malice you owe vnto me, had drowned your sences. In good sooth I am asha­med of you Osorius: and so haue bene lōg agoe: neither would I contend any further with so bluntish & blockish a person, if I were not determined to open euidētly, what a senselesse aduer­sary of this holy father England hath, and how vnmeasurable a bragger he is: in whom besides a vayne sounde of friuolous wordes, no mettall can be founde at all. Hereafter therfore I will spende as litle labour as I may, nor will willyng touche [Page] ought of all that huge lumpe of idle wordes, scattered abroad by you euery where, without reason, or measure, more then the necessitie of the cause will require.

After that you haue waded in your accustomed grosse ray­ling agaynst the lyfe of our preache [...]s, imputyng vnto them all maner of wickednesse (where with your Sinagogue swarmeth most euidently) you recite at the last certeine of my wordes, vouched out of Augustine which be as followeth. Augustine doth greuously cōplayne that in his tyme such a rabble of beg­gerly ceremonies did ouerwhelme the Churche of Christians, that the estate of Iewes was much more tollerable.Osori. fol. 24. Osorius affirmeth that I did neuer read this sentence in Augustine. This is well. I will cite Augustine his owne wordes, which are these.August. E­pist.19. For although it can not bee founde, how they are a­gaynst the fayth: ‘yet doe they ouerwhelme Religion it selfe (which the mercy of God willed to be freély exercised vnder a very fewe most euident Sacramentes) with seruile burdens. That the estate of the Iewes is much more tollerable: who though knew not the tyme of libertie, were subiect onely to the ordinaunces of the law, and not to mens constitutions.’ What say you? haue I not cited Augustine truly? doth he not speake the same, and in the selfe same wordes playnly that I speake? doth hee not render a reason also, why the state of the Iewes was more tollerable in ceremonies then ours? which beyng cō ­fessed,Osorius his vanitie také tardy. is not your ignoraunce linked wt singular vnshamefast­nes manifestly conuinced? deny it if you can may rather bycause you can not, yeld to the truth in the open light. For manifest ly­ers are not to be winked at, though they bee Byshops. In lyke maner you be ouerseéne in that godly Father Ierome, who re­quiryng all persons to searche the Scriptures, and to learne them, you would notwithstandyng coyne vs out of the same Ie­rome, Iero. ad Marcel. in Epist. cuius initium est. Mensur. charit. non habet. a contrary doctrine. Bycuase he wrate vnto Paulinus that certeine persons hauing no vnderstandying, nor being commendable in cōuersation of lyfe, did handle the Scrip­tures to licenciously. In whiche speach of yours what would you haue vnderstoode els, but that certeine wicked persons doe abuse the benefite of the Scriptures? wherof no wise mā doth doubt. You are ouerseéne therfore Ierome, that will so foolish­ly [Page 26] and so wyde from the matter, obiect Ierome agaynst hym selfe. If you seéke to be further satisfied herein, peruse Chri­sostome, Chrisost. in 1. & in. 3. Concione de Lazaro. who hath written of the same matter so much and so plentyfully, as nothyng can bee more copious, and more manifest.

I praysed Basile, and besides him also those later Monckes which obserued Basiles rules, as men that suffred lest losse. O­sorius denyeth it, and affirmeth that we doe not contend with men, but with chastitie it selfe. What say you dotterell? how happeneth that you rehearse the name of chastitie, where­of I made no mention at all? And with what face do you make our Nation guiltie of monstruous and barbarous crueltie, as though it employed her whole endeuour to the rootyng out of chastitie from out our coastes, whereas that kynde of sauage­nes can not be seéne amongest the Turkes? You proue it by the example of certeine Charterhouse Monckes forsooth, whiche were worthely executed for hygh treasō about xxx. yeares past, If those men (say you) would haue yelded to the wicked de­crees of mariage, then should they haue bene acquited of all other punishment. As though the estate of Wedlocke were in any Realme accoumpted a punishment? or as though we did constrayne Monckes to marry Wiues agaynst their willes? or as though this most impudent father and shamelesse Byshop cā vtter any thing in word, or deéde sensibly? When as he bealcheth out such foolish and filthy speaches agaynst our common weale, beyng so voyde of all credite and truth, as hauing no droppe of any probabilitie at all. But let vs heare what a worthy conclu­sion this deépe wise man hath brought for his Lurdeines those mockemonckes.Of the sup­pression of Monkes. But admit (sayth hee) that the greater part of them were full of all filthynes, was it therfore forth with necessarie to suppresse the whole order? First of all you doe notably defend your order, which you confesse was full of all vice. Then, we deny that we subuerted any order; but that those disorderous runneagates were reduced to the commō societie of subiectes, & their own commoditie, by meanes of our whole­some Statutes and Lawes. In deéde traytours were executed accordyng to their desert, as belonged to equitie. The rest we remoued from their stinckyng Smynestyes, defiled with all [Page] lazynes and fithynes: & deliuered whole and Iustie to publicke labour and exercise, to prouide so for their liuyng, accordyng to brotherly charitie. But in the meane space (say you) they forsooke their orders of Dominicke, and Benedicte, Bar­narde and Frauncisce, of whom Portingall hath many per­fect professours. Let Portingall reteine such Ioselles a Gods name. We hold our selues contented with that heauenly O­racle, whiche was heard from heauen.Luce.3. Thou art my welbeloued sonne, in whom I am well pleased: Him doe we attende vpon: we harken vnto his Prophetes and Apostles, and withall do per­forme our profession in Baptisme, as farre forth as the frayltie of mans nature will permit: other teachers, other rules, other orders we neither esteéme nor admit. So do we also feéle, and throughly know your superstitious vanitie herein.

You do inueigh bytterly agaynst me, bycause I do com­pare our later Deuines in all maner of commēdation to the auncient fathers, and herein you turmoyle your selfe won­derfully. You shoote at randone my Lord. I do not make com­parison betwixt them, nor euer thought to compare them toge­ther: and therefore you striue here in vayne, and your whole Turkish eloquence is not worthe a straw. My meanyng was to declare, that the auncient Fathers did agreé with out De­uines: And for examples sake, I noted specially some common places, reseruyng the rest, for more conuenient place, bycause all can not be expounded at once. Ouerthrow this my course if you can: but abuse not your tyme, nor myne, nor the Readers with such friuolous lyes, nor seéme to be ouer eloquent, where you haue no aduersary. You are highly offended bycause I prayse Luther. Let not this coūber you, I will prayse him for a very prayse worthy man: so will all the posteritie also: and his studious trauaile in the enlargyng of the Gospell will remaine to yt worldes end to his euerlastyng renowme, though you and such as you are chaufe and fume neuer so much agaynst him. And yet I thinke there be few like vnto you, besides that durty pigge of Angrence your sweéte cabbemnate, resemblyng you as it seémeth in nature and maners nearest.Luther vn­truly char­ged with vprores in Germany. But as to that you accuse Luther, as authour of the vprores in Germany: herein you reporte a manifest vntruth: for no man did more earnestly [Page 27] defend all obedience due to the Magistrates, and higher pow­ers then Luther. Whereas you adde hereunto the tumultes in Sueuya. You do erre therein more then childishly, where as the Switzers are farre vnlike vnto him in nature, in situatiō, in maners and in discipline. You accuse him also as a rayler agaynst Princes, amongest whom you name the Emperour, our famous Henry, of worthy memory, and George Duke of Saxone. You do helye him in Caesar impudētly, for Luther did reuerence him most humbly. In deéde he did mainteine the cause of the Gospell agaynst our kyng, and somewhat sharpe­ly confuted his Epistle written agaynst him at the first, whom afterward (beyng amended and reformed in doctrine) hee em­braced most louyngly, and aduaunced with all kynde of hono­rable title. Lōg tyme he instructed George Duke of Saxone,George Duke of Saxone. & with most sweéte aduertisementes perswaded him, called vp­on hym with incessaunt prayers and Supplications. But af­ter the Duke had hard harted him selfe, and waxed insolently obstinate in all thynges, nor would make any ende of spoyling, and turmoyling Gods people: Lurther beholdyng the lamen­table ruine of his Christian brethren round about him, did bit­terly inueighe agaynst that trayterous outrage of Duke Ge­orge, induced thereunto by the example of the holy Prophets agaynst the Princes of Iuda [...] and of Iesu Christ our Sauior agaynst Herode the Tetrarche.1. Kyngs. 18 Luke.18.

At the last you conclude That all Luthers preachyngs did tende to prouoke the people to sedition. O shamelesse toūg. How would you delude vs, if no man had read Luthers bookes but your selfe? how would you abuse our age in heapyng lyes vpon lyes, if we had no witnesse agaynst you? when as Luther left behynde him as many pledges of Christian humilitie, as he wrote bookes. No man more constantly mainteined the au­thoritie of Magistrates, no mā did more often inculcate, more plentyfully preach, more vehemently Imprinte, more earnest­ly exact Christian obedience, then he did. His writyngs are ex­taunt, liuely, and florishyng, and will with a whole searyng y­ron of detractiō, marke you for a backbiter to your euerlasting reproch. That was a great and manifest errour that I made: but here ensueth a greater, farre more horrible agaynst renow­med [Page] Princes, notable common weales, yea in matters of high treason: by the which as by degreés this reuerend Prelase ad­uaunceth his shamelesse and execrable vanitie so much, that all men may iudge him not onely to haue forgotten all truth, and modestie, but also vtterly abandoned the same.

This matter hee affirmeth to be most apparaunt, that Lewes kyng of Hungarie, and a great multitude of Christi­ans were slayne in battell through the folly and wickednes of Luther, Luther charged with the ouer­throw of the Hunga­rians most vntruly. and that hereof ensued the Conquest of Buda, by the Turkishe Emperour. O venemous toung to bee dete­sted of all men, that haue any loue of the truth, or regard of hu­manitie. Can you doubt or be ignoraunt of this (most peruerse dissembler) that this lamentable death of the king, and the losse of Buda, came by the onely outragious vnmeasurable rashnes of that cowled prelate Tomorraeus Archb. of Tholosse:Tomorrae­us Archb. of Tholosse. Which had so bewitched ye people with hautie & arrogaunt preachyng, that they rushed out headlong, with a small and weake handfull agaynst an huge hoste, and inuincible power of Solyman: in so much that after ye Conquest, Solyman him selfe could not keépe countaunce, but smilingly scorned the insolencie of the Hun­garians, which had so vnaduisedly yelded into his hands their kyng to be slayne, & their kyngdome to be spoyled? Is not this true? do ye not know it perfectly?Paulus Io­uius in his 23.booke of Histories. Doth not Paulus Iouius your chief a counsell report this story parcell meale? yea euery title therof? was euer any man besides you so franticke, as to charge Luther therewith? The place it selfe doth conuince you, where­in at that tyme scarse any Lutheran had set any footyng: The tyme doth confute you, for Luthers name was as yet scarsely knowen. The circumstaunces of the History doe condemne you, whiche doe cry out agaynst that Monkishe Archbyshop of Tholosse, for that pityfull losse, & lamentable effusion of Chri­stian bloud, as I haue declared before out of Paulus Iouius.

But it is no maruell, if hee can so franckely coyne a lye a­gaynst a Region so farre distant from vs, when as hee spareth not to presse vpon vs Englishmen here in English, with a most exectable lye.Osorius slaūder tou­chyng the death of kyng Ed­ward the sixt. For hee affirmeth that Edward the sixt our Royall kyng of famous memory was haynously poysoned in his Childhode. O monstruous beast, can you beyng a Por­tingall [Page 28] borne so impudently diffame our Region with ye horri­ble crime, without all likely or probable proofe now that swētie yeares he spent and gone? when as no sober or discreét English man did euer conceaue any such thought in his mynde? The Phisitians reported that he dyed of a consumption. The same was affirmed by the Groomes of his priuy Chamber, whiche did keépe cōtinuall watch with the sicke kyng. All his subiectes did beleue it for a confessed truth. Neither could your slaunde­rous Fable haue bene blowen abroad, but amongest tattlyng women, foolishe children, and such malicious English loselles like vnto you: nor yet could this rotten vnfauorie cauill haue had any discreét Authour, had it not bene whispered into that Asse head of Osorius.

He coupleth hereunto Caesar, who he saith was betrayed and destroyed by treason. Of the o­uerthrow of the Em­perour. Truely Caesar did not onely pur­sue, but also vanquishe the Germaines, chasing them in Ger­manie with a great army of Spanish and Italian souldiours. The which ouerthrow the Germaines shooke of as well as they might. But the last warres raysed by Maurice, what they pur­ported, and what successe they tooke I will passe ouer, nor will blame in the dead, whom I confesse a victorious Emperour when hee lyued.Osor. slaū ­derous lye touchyng the poyso­nyng of Queene Mary. He ioyneth Queene Mary a Princesse that raigned very lately, and her also auoweth to haue bene de­stroyed with poyson. Who euer beleéued or reported this but you (railyng Scorpion) All the English Nation, and all other Straūgers, yt were then in England, will manifestly reproue & condemne this your malicious and shamelesse impudencie.

There raunged at that tyme a certeine outragious bur­nyng feauer, which infected all the estates in ye Realme, and a­mōgest the rest,The death of Queene Mary. shortned the liues of the richest and most hono­rable personages: at what tyme Queéne Mary in many things most commendable, after a few monethes dyed of the same dis­ease. In like maner Cardinall Poole, The death of Cardinal Poole. an excellent learned mā, beyng sicke of a quartan, departed this world the same tyme. You demaunde of me [...]ery mala [...]ertly, as if the matter were manifest and confessed, whether I vnderstode any thyng of that conspiracie, wherewith most wicked men practized the destruction of Queene Mary, and Cardinall Poole. Ue­ryly [Page] I do simply confesse, that there was neuer any such matter spoken, writtē, fayned, or surmised, vnlesse by some such madde dogges, as your selfe: which hauyng els nothyng to snarle at, do barcke and houle at ye cloudes, moone, and starres, and ma­ny tymes at their owne shadowes. You tell vs a tale of some flying vapours and drousie dreames (Osorius) imagined in that rotten mazer of yours, when you clatter out such matters, whereof neither I, or any man els euer heard, or could heare one word, except he might chaunceably light vpō some Synon of Osorius trayning, that could with most craftie conueyaunce make a mowlehill seéme a mountaine.

The foreine mariage of Queene Mary.The foreine Mariage of the Queéne was somewhat dis­pleasaunt at the first, and the same was gaynsayd by some men in armes: yet was there nothyng attempted agaynst her high­nes person, neither did any man dreame of the returne of Car­dinall Poole into Englād at that tyme: & the solemnization of the Mariage proceéded in most peacyble order: & euery limme of your monstruous lye is trusht in peéces.Osorius doth accuse Fraunce of highe trea­son. Hereunto Osorius annexoth, as a place fit for it, the vprores, treasons, outra­ges, and the ouerthrowes of Religion in Fraunce: For with such haynous offences our holy prelate boldly chargeth ye grea­ter nūber of the nobilitie of Fraūce. Amongest these are enter­laced some of the royall bloud: & many other vertuous & hono­rable personages: whose godlynes and integritie of life, did as much deteste such outragious insolencie, as the toung of this Thraso is voyde of all truth and modesty.Thraso. There are many pro­bable presumptions conceaued of some persons, who were sus­pected to sowe the first seédes of this Tragicall tumulte in Fraunce: but I will not imitate your Iunaticke waywardnesse in accusing the Nobilitie. Neither will I pursue any man be­sides you, and your dotyng dearlyng Dalmada of Angrénce, yet much miscontentedly do I this also, and cleane contrary to the milde inclination of my nature: but your hautynes hath al­tered my modestie, and your excessiue pride hath distempered & broken the gall of my patience: yours especially, whose arro­gancie passeth all measure: for I accompt it sufficient to pinche that saély abiect grashopper Dalmada now & then in the chase.

Now let vs returne to Henry the Scottish king, Whō you [Page 29] affirme was cruelly murthered through high treason. The most miserable murthering of Henry the Scot­tish kyng. Tru­ly you say well herein: For in our age was neuer seéne a more horrible acte committed, then in this lamentable slaughter of the kyng: But why do ye not disclose the traytors? why name you not the persons? why do ye conceale any parcell of the fact, in so notorious a murther? The matter, say you, is manifest: they were Lutheranes, that executed this bloudy practize: They were Lutheranes, that enterprised all the former abho­minations: They were Lutheranes all, that at any tyme in our age, haue raysed all troubles, and tumultes agaynst Princes, and agaynst common weales. Cursed be that franticke scalpe: Blystered be that blasphemous toung: Cursed be those Swy­nishe senses, whiche can wroote together all rootes of wicked­nesse, to oppresse the poore innocent Lutheranes withall. But it is all false that you haue suggested, and this your surmise neuer entred the thought of any discreét person so much as in his dreame, as I haue shewed by particularities before. And the kyng of Scotlād (whom you haue reserued to the last) ma­keth most agaynst you: whom your sect (marke what I say) your owne sect, most trayterously entrapped, and smoulthe­red to death with gunnepower. I could declare the very or­der thereof, but that I am determined to dwell in my former purpose vnto the ende, not to detect any person besides you, agaynst whome neighter I, nor any other person can exclame sufficiently.

This was also a great blocke in your eye, that I sayd Lu­ther was a man of God. I gaue vnto him his right: and euen as truely doe I call you an vncharitable person, voyde of all Christian loue, a slaunderour of Princes, a backbiter of com­mon weales, a very forge of lying: I adde also hereunto most truly, ye very bondslaue of Lucifer. You runne ouer certeine cō ­mon places of Luther, and those you rende in peéces, but after your wonted guise, of a very shamelesse impudencie, without proofe, without reason, without example, without witte, lyke a Lordly comptroller, or like an Emperour rather, whose autho­ritie may not be gaynesayd: wherof I haue resolued some part in my first aunswere: and the rest I wil confute in their places, whē I shall come nearer to the Diuinitie of this glorious Pre­late. [Page] Afterwardes this graue father inueigheth agaynst the lyfe of Luther: which Erasmus reporteth to haue bene commē ­ded of all persons,Erasmus his commen­dable re­port of Lu­ther. and whiche no man hath reproued hetherto, besides this Doctour Dottipoll, who yet can pike no iust qua­rell agaynst his manners, more then that hee was somewhat sharpe in his writynges. At the last to shewe him selfe in his own colours. This foule mouthed Gentleman depraueth and defileth the death of that godly man vpbraydyng him with surfetyng, and dronkennes. Whereas it is well knowen that Luthers yeldyng to nature was so calme,The death of Luther, which was most holy, sinisterly depraued by the ma­licious slaū ­derers. & so quyet, in the very last gaspes wherof he expressed so contant profession of Chri­stian fayth, that all men that were present wondred thereat. Which I pray God we may accomplishe when our end appro­cheth. But we haue spoken of Luther sufficiently: whose lyfe and doctrine I did not vndertake to defende, nor of any other person els. My onely purpose was to acquite this famous I­land, my deare natiue countrey from your vnmeasurable and shamefull rayling. Luther and that golden couple of Fathers Martyr, and Bucer are well enough shielded with their owne armour of vertue and pietie, whose estimation bycause you could by no meanes empaire, you affirme briefly, that this was a sufficient reproche vnto them, that I did commend them so plentifully.

Therefore sithence this troubleth you, I will exasperate your malice agaynst them, and will boldly proteste, that herein I receaued a singular and enestimable benefite of God, that I did once heare, seé, and know these notable Fathers, esteemyng more of one dayes conference with them, then of all the vayne glorious Pompe of your hawty Lordlynes: and that those two worthy personages did as farre surmoūt you in wisedome and learnyng, as that caluish dole Dalmada is inferiour to you in eloquence, and cleanesse of stile. And so we will passeouer the persons, whom the godly disposed will regarde accordyng to their deseruings. Neither will I hereafter trace out the tracke of your durtie cauillations, nor firrett out all your follies and errours, for I should finde no end of that endlesse maze. I will nowe prye into your cunnyng Diuinitie, and herein will I wrestle a plucke with you, bycause you bragge so lustely of [Page 30] your skill, as though no man were able to wynne the Coller from you.

In this point you charge me with inconstancie, bycause I sayd that our Preachers do alleadge Scriptures onely: and yet within a whiles after I added, that they did vouche the authoritie of the Fathers also. Are you not ashamed (holy fa­ther) beyng an old man and a Byshop, to lye so manifestly?In the Epi­stle to the Queene. pag. 11. and to poast ouer your fayned imagination vnto me. This is your owne lye, yours I say, a whelpe of your owne lytter, very often snarlyng agaynst me with your currishe speaches, but beaten backe agayne, & throwen into your owne bosome by myne aun­swere.In myne aunswere. pag. 8. Conferre the places (gentle Reader) I pray theé, and thou shalt seé how Osorius bewrayeth his obliuious dotage. I do deny that our writers do vrge Scriptures onely, as you did cauill, & sayd, that they did alledge the Doctours for their defence also: as appeareth playnly by their bookes, but I enter­laced this withall, that if our writers had vsed scriptures one­ly, they had followed herein, the example of Iesu Christ and his Apostles. What sayth our graue father to this? Forsoth he Preacheth much of the Diuine power of Christ our Sa­uiour, how that he was the mynde and wisedome of the fa­ther, and the accomplisher of the Law, and did make new ordinaunces of our Religion, which were not expressed in the whole course of the old Law. First of all this vnweldie old man perceiueth not how hee hath ouerthrowen him selfe in his owne turne: for if Christ be the mynde, and wisedome of the father as he hath most truely sayd: hereupon consequently fol­loweth, that all the particular testimonies of Christ, are speci­all Oracles of the truth: and that all his particular sayinges ought to be engrauen in our harts, as heauenly Oracles. This did our heauenly Father pronounce vnto Moyses, and Moyses declared the same vnto the people in these wordes.Deut. 18. The Lorde thy God will rayse vp a Prophet lyke vnto me from among you ouer thy brethren, him shall ye barken vnto: Wherfore if we must har­ken vnto Christ as vnto Moyses, then are we bounde as neces­sarely to his preceptes, as to the ordinaunces of Moyses. Be­hold the same more playnly yet in the Gospell,Math. 3. Iesus beyng bap­tised, came forth of the water, and behold the heauens were opened, [Page] and he saw the spirite of God, descendyng as a Doue, and standyng ouer him, and loe there came a voyce from heauen. This is my wel­beloued sonne in whom I am well pleased: Therfore sith the autho­ritie of Iesu Christ is sealed vnto vs by the mouth of almighty God, what greater Maiestie of Scriptures, may be pronoūced in ye Scriptures, taught or imagined more excellent then this doctrine?Iam. 4. Iames doth recorde That our Lord and Sauiour Iesu Christ, is the onely Lawmaker, which can saue, and destroy. Wher­fore in his onely right and interest, he did partly establishe new lawes, partly amend the old, partly expoūde the obscure, part­ly restore them that were worne out of mynde, and partly abo­lishe them that were receaued. But what maketh this to your purpose? when our Lord Iesus doth vse Scriptures, doth he alledge any other then the sacred testimonies of the old Testa­ment? it could not otherwise bee, say you: doth he vouche any o­ther interpreters then the holy Ghost sent downe from heauen? he neéded not,Iohn. 3. say you: For he whom God hath sent, speaketh the wordes of God: for God doth not geue him the Spirite by measure. The Father loueth the Sonne, and hath yelded all thynges vnto his hand. This is a true saying of Iohn concernyng Christ, which beyng so in deéde, that must bee also true whiche I enterlaced. That Iesus Christ beyng contented with the testimonie of the holy Scriptures alleadged none other interpretour, besides him selfe. This is also vndoubted true at the last. That you are a very vnskilfull and blockishe Deuine, whiche professing the knowledge of God, do wauder so erroniously in the nature and power of God.

If I should sift out the examples particularly, that you haue taked together for this purpose, I should finde them altoge­ther voyde of all maner probabilitie, stuffed full with grosse er­rours. Two onely will I shake out amongest all the rest, which shall condemne you of your disguised maskyng. You deny that this sentence can be founde in the Law, in the Prophets, or in the Psalmes: that the way is narrow that leadeth to salua­tiō, or that we must turne the left checke to him that hath striken on the right. If you exact wordes, you play by yt So­phister: If you require substaūce or sentence, I do affirme it to be found euery where both in the Law, in the Prophetes, and in [Page 31] the Psalmes. The old law hath an expresse commaundement. That we shall not bow to the right hand nor the left hand, Deut. 4. nor adde to the Law, nor diminishe there from. Is it not apparaunt ther­fore, that we are placed in straightes? Truly Dauid perceaued it well,Psal. 27 who beyng a kyng and a Prophet chosen by yt singular prouidence of God to gouerne the people of Israell, yet doth greuously complayne, that hee was partly placed in narrowe straightes: partly forsaken in the darke:Psal. 25. and sometymes ma­keth most humble supplication to God to direct his feete in the right way:Psal. 119 but very often confesseth that the word of the Lord is a Lanterne to his feete, and a light to his pathes. But what neé­deth a Lanterne, but in combersome and narrow straightes, where a man may easely goe amasked? if you be ignoraunt in all those places, what doe ye vnderstand that is requisite in a Deuine and Byshop? or if ye know them, and dissemble them, what can be more wayward then you?

Likewise you obiect that saying, of geuyng a blow on the cheékes, which wordes do employ nothyng els, but that we are commaūded to be patient. But patience is most learnedly con­teined in that first and speciall commaundement of God. Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe. There is no mā that will of­fer iniurie to him selfe in any matter, wherfore he ought not to wrong his neighbour at all: cā you haue any thyng more plain­ly spoken? The vngratefull people of Israell did exclame and rage agaynst their good, mild, & paynfull guide Moyses, some­tyme with secret conspiracies, sometimes with open exclama­tions, many tymes with threatnynges, and very oftē with wic­ked cursinges. What might this gentle Captaine doe in the meane space? Beyng stricken, yea and buffeted also vpon the cheéke, doth hee not turne ouer his other cheéke? What els, I pray you, is meant hereby, that he doth often pray vnto God for such cursed caytiues his enemies? when he doth so earnest­ly and vehemently cry out to God, either to forgeue them,Exod. 3. or to blotte his name out of the booke of life? if you require yet a more notable example of patience: Behold our Lord Iesus Christ is prefigured vnto vs in Esay the Prophet, drawen vnto death as a Lambe to be slayne, who beyng rayled vpon on euery side,Esai. 53.vexed by the Iewes, and buffeted with fistes on the face, held his peace: [Page] and as a sheepe before the Shearer neuer opened his mouth: what may be thought of the whole history of Iob, but a conquest of patience, and in most miserable calamitie a most ioyfull Tri­umphe thereof? And yet this veépe Deuine is so voyde of com­mon sense, that he vtterly deuyeth any sentence to be founde in the Scriptures touchyng patient sufferaunce of our enemyes wronges: You say that you haue passed ouer many thyngs. It had bene better for you truely, that you had passed ouer all thynges, then in all thynges, with malice and foule speakyng, so to turne the catte in the panne, that your wordes can neither finde head, nor foote to stand vpon: can explane nothyng sound­ly, cōclude nothyng duely, proue nothyng effectually, but raūge in rayling, brawle with bare affirmatiues, and with pratlyng past measure, pester and peruert the myndes, and eares of all men. You quarell with Paule, and demaunde where he lear­ned, that those persons should be restrained from the com­munion and societie of Christians, which retayned Circū ­cision? Hee did learne it of Christ our new lawgeuer as I re­cited before:Iaco. 1. hee did learne it of the holy Ghost, whom by the singular benefite of God,Act. 20. he knew to be yt reuealer of the truth, hee did learne it of God, by whom he was by especiall callyng chosen to preache the Gospell.Ad Galat. 1 He did not (say you) alledge therfore the old Law to this effect. As though any man is so madde besides your selfe, that will mainteine sundry sentēces to be alledged out of the old Testamēt, which are not conteined there? This do I say. This is my meanyng: This do I veri­fie, that our Lord Iesus Christ did obserue this order continu­ally in enlargyng the Gospell, to witte, to vouche testimonies out of the law and the Prophetes: and the same order was also continued by the Apostles. This to be vndoubted true not one­ly all Deuines, and Byshops, but all mowers also, carters, children, and women do know and confesse, if they haue either them selues handled, or heard the Gospell preached by others. And yet this our graue grayheaded Prelate, in this so manifest light cauillously quarelleth as though the matter were doubt­full, and stuffeth whole leaues with toyes gayly knittyng vp the knot at the length, on this wise.

What is it (sayth he) which the Apostles speake in their [Page 32] assembly: It seemeth good to the holy Ghost and vnto vs. They do not say, It is written in the Scriptures. O rotten & gyd dye brayne. How could the Apostles vouch the old Testa­ment, in a new matter, when they made a new ordinaunce? But in all thynges that were conteined in the law and the Pro­phetes, these wordes were alwayes vttered in the speaches of our Sauiour Iesu Christ and his Apostles. These selfe same wordes (I say) we shall finde many tymes repeated, and euery where redoubled, whiche you doe reiect maliciously, and impu­dently, It is writtē. And this also: That the Scriptures might be fulfilled. Shall I annexe hereunto examples? It neédeth not (say you) The matter is euident. So is this also manifest, that you doe wickedly abuse the holy Scriptures, to peruert ye truth of the Gospell. For where as you do demaunde of me a litle after: How I dare be so bold to say, that the auncient Fathers dyd adde nothyng to the gouernement of the Church, but that they founde in the Scriptures. I will like­wise demaunde of you what came into your braynes, beyng an old man, a Byshop, and so reuerend a father, to burden me with wordes which I neuer spake, neuer wrate, neuer once thought vpon? If it shame you nothyng to make so open a lye, to the ma­nifest viewe of all the world, how will you behaue your selfe in matters of Diuinitie, wherein the vnleattered people haue no iudgement? I affirmed that the auncient Fathers of the primi­tiue Church did vouch the Scriptures and the holy Ghost. I do acknowledge these wordes to be myne owne: Tosse them, & tumble them, as ye list, and the more ye gnawe vpon them, the more will your teéth be on edge. For as then your Councels, whereunto you leane so much, were not hatched, neither any in­terpretours as yet fully plumed. These two, wherof I made mention, were the onely soūde foūdations and pillers, namely the holy Ghost, & the Scriptures: after them whole flockes of interpretours flusht in: all which I do not generally condēne. Neither had any iust cause of contētion bene betwixt vs in this matter, if you were not vnmeasurably quarellsome. For wher­as I had set downe in playne wordes that our late Deuines do produce the Assertions of the Fathers in their bookes (as eui­dently appeareth by their monumentes) what neéde you to pro­uoke [Page] me to a tedious and vnnecessary an aunswere? and to plunge your selfe into questions, partly false, partly imper­tinent? as I haue heretofore declared. But our gentle Byshop is so vnmeasurably geuen to chatteryng (wherein he deligh­teth beyond reason) that he will willyngly permit nothyng to proceéde in order, though it be altogether contrary to the pur­porce of the disputation.

Out of this corruption of your mynde commeth to passe, That you deny, that lust, Rebellion and outrage are recko­ned sinnes, with vs: What say you reuerend father? do not we accoūpt lust, rebellion, & outrage to be sinnes? For this do you affirme in these wordes. Here I aske an other questiō of you if you had but one crūme of shamefastnes, humanitie, wit, or modestie, would you with such foule slaunders dissame any kynde of people liuyng in the world? & yet not so foule as foolish? for nothyng cā be imagined more foolish, then to rayle so absurdely aswell without all shew as likelyhode of truth. Pause here a whiles Osorius & ponder well this your vndiscreét accusation, and henceforth write more aduisedly, except you meane to bewray your amazed madnesse to all the worlde. But how can you handle any matter discreétly, that to pike a quarell to brawle vpon, will wrangle about playne wordes, nay rather gnaw in gobettes, seély sillables and titles of wordes? For where as I wrate on this wise. You do accuse vs,Aristarchus was a great quareller. as though we had turned out our Nunnes and droues of Monckes to lust, and lowsnes of lyfe, and had sold their houses for money. This sentence our proper witted Aristarchus doth not cōceaue: and doth beleue, that these wordes: Their houses sold for money: should bee construed, as though I did meane that the Selles of Nunnes and Monckes were sold for their owne behoofe. When as I affirmed playnly, that their houses were sold to the vse of the weale publique: whiche wordes no man could haue wrested so monstruously but this brablyng ras­call. Paraduenture this will seéme a great fault to call a By­shop rascall. And I confesse no lesse in deéde. But I do not ar­gue with a Byshop, but with a very Beast crowned with a Myter: who oftentymes calleth me franticke, sometymes dron­ken, euery where wicked and lyar. Wherfore sithence he hath [Page 33] forgotten and vtterly layd away the personage of a Byshop, he may not gape for any softer speach from me. But if he chaunce to call him selfe home hereafter, and gather agayne some gra­uitie and modestie agreable to his profession, it shalbe very ea­sle for me to returne to mildnesse and fayre speach, which I doe commonly vse with myne acquaintaunce, and with straungers also, vnlesse they bragge in brawlyng, praūce proudly as Prin­ces in ostentation of learnyng, and pietie, disdaynefully despi­sing all other mens iudgementes in respect of them selues. It displeaseth this our Gentleman also, that my stile is so in­flamed agaynst those stinckyng sinckeholes of that cowled generatiō. I spake of ours which I might more easily accuse, then you can defend: for I knew them better you did, my Lord. So had they bene lesse knowen vnto me, if by the espe­ciall prouidence of God I had not happely escaped out of these filthy mischieuous dennes betymes.

You reserue a place for the defence of your Monckes by it selfe and in drawyng their petigreé, you play the Philosopher at large. Wherein you are not onely to childishe and tedious, but so farre estraunged frō the purpose, that ye seéme rather to dreame of S. Patrickes Purgatory, thē to note our Religiō.Osorius a Proctour for monkes. Let vs marke the begynnyng which is this: There be ij. sortes of men (say you) that are empaled within the boūdes of the Churche. The one, whose function consisteth in generall practize of maners, in a meane course of vertue and godly­nes: The other that desire to aduaunce thē selues in a more exquisite endeuour of heauenly discipline. Behold here a new Diuinitie. Two sortes of Christians are sprong vp, if we beleeue my Lord Byshop, where as the Scriptures haue au­thorized but one onely state of Christians hitherto.1. Cor. 12. There are diuersities of giftes, yet but one spirite, and there are differences of administrations, yet but one Lord: there are diuers maners of ope­rations, and yet but one God, which worketh all in all. For as the body is one, and hath many members, and where as also many mem­bers be of one body: Euē so is Christ. For we are all Baptized into one body by one spirite, whether we be Iewes, or Gentiles, bondmen, or free, and we haue all dronke of one spirite. These are ye wordes of S. Paule. Wherfore there can not be two sortes of Christi­ans, [Page] if there be but one body of Christians: nor a distinct pro­fession, bycause the spirite is one, and the selfe same: Will you haue this made more manifest by sillables and titles?Ephes. 4. One body, and one spirite, euen as you are called in one hope of your callyng. One Lord, one Fayth, one Baptisme, one God, & Father of all, which is aboue all, and through all, and in you all. All are one, and in vs all as Paule doth affirme. Where is your distinction therfore? There is no respect of persons with God: but in euery nation hee that doth feare him, and worketh righteousnesse is accepted of him. So doth Peter preach, whō if we admit for our Scholemai­ster, all your distinction (wherein you haue trauailed so much) will lye in the durte.Act, 10. and 11. And therefore sith our profession is but one, and the same common also to all Christians, out of An­tioche were all called once first by this common name, Christians. But if you will not be satisfied with the testimonies of the Apo­stles: Let vs heare our Lord and Sauiour Iesu Christ, sen­dyng his eleuen Disciples abroad into the whole world spea­kyng vnto them in this wise.Math. vlti. All power is geuen vnto me in hea­uen and in earth. Goe ye forth therfore, and teach all nations, Bap­tizyng them in the name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost, teachyng them to obserue all those thynges, whiche I haue commaunded you. This is the pure, and onely profession of Christian Religion, grounded vpon the authoritie of Christ his owne wordes: repeated by the preachyngs of the Apostles, confirmed with the generall consent of the Catholicke and A­postolicke Church, and ensealed with the bloud of the Martyrs in all ages. Leaue this Religion to vs, and reteine to you and your fraternitie that newfounde two horned sect,Cicero in his booke of dueties. Aristotle in his Ethic­kes. whereof you can vouch no Authour besides Cicero or Aristotle. But let vs pause yet a whiles vpon my Lordes diuision, and consider the speciall pointes of his discreét destruction, distinction I would say. For after he hath enstalled two sortes of Christians, hee doth geue them cognizaunces whereby they may be discerned. There is one sort of them (sayth hee) whose function consi­steth in common practize of maners, and in a meane course of vertue and pietie. The other desire to aduaunce them selues to a more exquisite endeuour of heauenly discipline. Now I beseéche you my Lord, what mediocritie of vertue and [Page 34] pietie do ye speake of? Sithence, our profession doth exact of vs a perfect, and most absolute keépyng of the commaundements, by expresse testimonie of both old and new Testament how oft is this sentence repeated in the old Testament Be ye holy: Leuit. 21. for I am holy: Wherfore we ought not to stand still in a meane, but must endeuour couragiously to yt perfect holynes of God. This is an expresse cōmaundement. I am the Lord, your God, Leuit. 19. 20.26. you shall obserue all my ordinaūces and all my Statutes &c: He cōmaūdeth all, maketh no exception. And therfore this your newfangled meane betwixt both, must bee throwen away, nay rather this meane is execrable & dānable, our Lord & God the Father thū ­dryng the same frō heauen. If you will not harken vnto me (sayth he) and will not obserue all that I commaunde you, Deut. 27. I will visite you with feare, with tremblyng, and burnyng feauers. &c. The very same wordes are so oft and so manifestly repeated in Deutero. That who so will diligently behold them, can not but wonder at your dulnesse, and ignoraunce in Scriptures: God doth ac­curse the person, that will not obserue all the preceptes of the law perfectly, to doe them and all the people shall say. Amen. What will you aunswers to this conclusion of Moyses? he commaundeth a perfection, the Lord doth accurse him that doth not fulfill it, yea euen by his owne mouth, and all the people say Amen. And you contrary to this doctrine do deuide the Christians congre­gation, or rather disseuer it into partes, & practize to plante in place thereof a frame shapen meane of pietie, whiche neither old, nor new Testament doth acknowledge. You haue heard out of the old law, we will now come to the new. There is also an expresse commaundement of our Lord Iesu Christ to his A­postles in these wordes. Preach ye the Gospell to all creatures, Math. 28. who soeuer beleueth and is baptized, shalbe saued, but he that doth not beleue shalbe damned: Go ye forth therfore and teach all Na­tions, Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost, teachyng them to keepe all thynges, that I haue commaunded you. Behold here one maner of professiō, dis­persed abroad ouer all Nations, behold, all thyngs must be ob­serued that are commaunded. Wherefore there is but one sort of Christians, not two: and the same one also endeuoureth to perfection, standeth not still in amediocritie. Our Lord Ie­sus [Page] standyng vpon the mount, compassed about with the people of the Iewes, preached in most godly maner the chief princi­ples of Christian Religion vnto them, and amongest the rest gaue this commaundement seuerally.Math. 5. Wherfore be ye perfect as your heauenly Father which is in heauen is perfect. What impu­dencie is this Osorius to thrust a mediocritie into our Religi­on, when our Lord Iesu Christ by expresse commaūdement re­quireth perfection? But I tary to long vpon matters clearer then the Sunne: And yet this our deépe Deuine doth vnder­proppe his lazie Monckerie vpon these pillers, whiche beyng wormeaten & rotten (as I haue shewed already) will at length bryng all his other buildyng to ruine, and cause it to shieuer in peéces to the grounde.

Osorius doth preferre vnmaryed lyfe before wedlocke alleadgyng hereunto Paule to the Corinthes. 1. Cor. 7. We also con­fesse euen as much as Paule sayth, yea very gladly, so that ye alledge Paule whole, and vnmangled. It is good (sayth Paule) for a man not to touche a wife, but hee addeth a correction, yet for auoyding fornication, let euery man haue his owne wife. I would (sayth Paule) euery man were as I am, hereunto hee knitteth fast a correction likewise. But euery man hath his proper gift of God, one after this maner, an other after that. I might rehearse more to the same effect out of the same Chapter. But Paules meanyng is conceaued sufficiently in these few sentences. And yet to confesse the truth, this your disputation of single lyfe a­uayleth not properly to mainteine your Monckerie, for vnma­ried life extendeth it selfe to all estates of Christians general­ly, and is not restrained to Monckes onely. But you oppresse vs with exāples partly auncient, as of Basile, Paule, Ierome Nazianzene. Partly of these later yeares, as Dominicke, Bruno, Fraūcisce. Here I might take lawfull exception to your testimonies if I would: for Frauncisce was no Moncke, be­sides that also vnlearned altogether, a forger of friuolous su­perstitions, as appeareth by those durtie dregges, whiche you call Golden Legendes.Legenda Aurea. And who that Bruno was must be en­quired amongest the Friers, for els where is no mētion made of him, neither yet of Dominicke. The residue of the Fathers except Gregory, professed a solitarie lyfe: but enduced hereun­to, [Page 35] partly through desire of learnyng, partly for vprightnesse of lyfe, yelded more commoditie to the Christian profession, then may easily be expressed: whose dayly conuersatiou & rules of maners did as farre differre from the rules of our Mōckes, as the heauens are distant from the earth, and good from euill. But let vs graunt all that you will, and admit those Monckes (whom you speake of) to bee godly and commendable persons (for in deéde some were such) may they therfore be compared in equabilitie of estimatiō to those men, who were conuersaunt a­mongest the fellowshyp and common societte of men? will you know whom I will name? I will first of all name Iesus Christ our Lord and Sauiour: then some that were before him: A­brahā, Isaac, Iacob, the Patriarches, Esay, Ieremie, notable Prophetes: next after the commyng of Christ, the glorious cō ­pany of ye Apostles: All these almost (except Christ alone) were maryed, and euery of them adioyned them selues to the commō societie of men, that they might profite the generall felowshyp of mankynd. What say you M. Ierome? May your Monckes, though neuer so commendable, be compared to this felowshyp of so excellent and famous personages? May any equabilitie seéme to bee betwixt them? either in the excellencie of the holy Ghost? or in sinceritie of lyfe? or in antiquitie of tyme? There can be no comparison betwixt them my Lord, neither was any neéde at all to rehearse these examples, if you had well ordered your talke herein: for this generall company beyng the floure of the auncient primitiue Church, standyng in the face of your drowsie lozelles, will so dazell their sight, that they shall not be able to lift vp their eyelyddes for the inaccessible brightnesse of them.

And yet do not I condemne vnmaried lyfe, or that kynde of sole lyfe. I condemne your false and wicked argument, where­by you would persuade the vnmaried Christian to be better and more holy then the maried, and the solitarie, better then the Ci­tizen. S. Paule is of a contrary iudgement.Rom. 3. But the righteous­nesse of God by the Faith of Iesus Christ, is with all men and vpon all men that beleue, for there is no differēce. We haue all sinned, and haue neede of the glorie of God, but we are iustified freely by his grace, through the redemption which is in Christ Iesu. Paul doth [Page] speake here playnly: There is no difference: Osorius doth make a difference: whom shall we beleue? Agayne: The same Paule. Glorie honor and peace to euery person that worketh good, to the Iewe first, then to the Gentile, Rom 2. for there is no respect of persons be­fore God. If God doe not respect the person, where is then the singularitie of your Mōckes? if he regard not the place, as ap­peareth by the wordes of Christ to the womā of Samarie: The tyme shall come, and now is. &c. Iohn. 4. whereunto tendeth your solita­rines, wherof you dispute so idlely? All persons (sayth Paule) which are Baptized, haue put on Christ: Galat. 2.3. here is nother Iewe, nor Gentile, bonde, nor free, man, nor womā, for we are all one in Christ Iesu. If Christians bee all one in Christ Iesu, as S. Paule witnesseth, what shall become of your differēces of tymes, and professions? But we will leaue the scriptures, whiche euery where do confute your vayne superstitions, and false forged distinction. How shall we satisfie the auncient fathers, who do prayse Monckery wonderfully? They doe commende men ex­cellent in learnyng and vertue, which doe employ their quyet leysures to the commoditie of the Church. Such men will I a­boundaūtly prayse as well as they. For Iohn Baptist liued in the deserte, then whom arose not a greater amōgest the childrē of women. But what will ye conclude hereof? Was Iohn Bap­tist a more perfect Christian liuyng in the wildernes, then our Lord Iesus Christ that was cōuersaunt amongest men? Truly your wicked distinction doth emplye this doctrine in effect: but ye auncient Fathers say not so, of whō you rehearse nothyng be­sides bare names: & although they would iustifie your wordes, I would not beleue them agaynst the Scriptures: neither do they desire to be credited otherwise. And to this point forsooth, your gay defence of Monckerie so stoutly trauailed, garnished with such a trimme Coape of paynted wordes, wherew̄t whole leaues are beblotted, is come at the last: as to be adiudged ei­ther altogether superstitious, or wicked, or nothyng necessary. At the last you departe from men and come to women: and with a flat deniall affirme that virgines were not forced into Nun­neries. I neéde not to make any great proofe hereof, for all mē that do know any thyng at all, are well acquainted herewith: I will therfore for this tyme content me with your own wordes: [Page 36] For you say that it was forbidden by the Tridentine Coun­cell, that frō thence forth they should do so any more. How say you fine man? He that forebyddeth a thyng to be done in af­ter tyme, doth hee not couertly emplye that the same was done before? Write more circumspectly (my Lord) if you can, and if you can not, you were better speake nothyng at all.

But our reuerend father is now at very good leysure, for he now begynnes to Fable with vs.Osor. Fable of an hypo­criticall Monckes. He sayth that he had much conference with an idiot or simple Moncke, who was often as any mention is made of the loue of God, so often he fal­leth grouelyng on the grounde, as if his senses were raui­shed, and yet the mā is prettie witted enough, and is busied about heauēly thyngs and godly cōtemplation. Truly this your speach doth not describe vnto vs any godly Moncke, but either some notorius hypocrite, or happely some drunkard, or some one distraught of his wittes. For why should his senses be ouerwhelmed at the namyng of God? They should rather be liuely and ioyfull. Wherfore should he fall to the ground (on the deuils name) if he were a true Christian? he should rather rayse him selfe vp, and reioyce in him, from whom onely com­meth all saluatiō. How chaunceth this holy father, that you an old man, a Byshop, a Deuine of so great estimation are so fal­len to Fables? Certes a meéte aduocate for so monishe a mat­ter. You demaūde of me, why we suffered our Mōckeries to escape vnpunished if there were such licentiousnes of lyfe amongest them? How did they escape vnpunished good Syr? we ouerthrew their durtie dennes: The Brothelles them sel­ues beyng bondslaues to all vnthriftynes, we haled out of their swynestyes, & set a libertie: we did abolish the occasiōs of their treachery, as much as we might, not hatyng yt persōs but their vyces: when their vyce was rooted out, what els might haue bene exacted, not of you onely (who blinded with malice know nothyng) but of any other reasonable person? To this daūce, you hauge the Uestale virgines, whom the aūcient Romanes reuerēced greatly: & so in lyke maner require our Nunnes to be honored of vs. Surely you handle this matter very kindly: Salij Priestes of Mars did daūce naked in their opē filthy Pa­geantes, for this was a speciall Article of their Religion, why [Page] then do not you likewise beyng an old priest, thinke it as seéme­ly for you to daunce for Religion sake? Herein I may seéme to scoffe ouer bytterly: No truely. For what can be lesse tollera­ble then an old grayheaded Byshop and a Deuine (as he per­suadeth him selfe) to march with the madde superstitiōs of the Romaines, agaynst the veritie of the Gospell of our Lord and Sauiour Iesu Christ?

Of the vowes of widowes.You turmoyle your selfe much about ye vowes of widowes, which doth not cōcerne our disputation, and argue as though virgines vowyng chastitie could not bee ioyned in lawfull mariage without great haynousnesse. How can men or may­dens promise single life? or if they promise rashly, how can they performe truly? when as chastitie is the peculiar gift of God, and is not in our own power? Get you to S. Paule, whom you produce in your behalfe touchyng the same matter. These be his wordes.1. Cor. 7. But euery man hath his proper gift of God, one after this maner, and an other after that: What can be alledged more manifest then this? If you be not yet satisfied, annexe hereunto our Sauiour Christ, and withall his owne wordes touchyng Eunuches, wherein you triumph so Iollylye, bycause that our Lord, Iesus reported, that some did geld them selues for the kyngdome of heauen. Is not this also added a litle before? He that can take it, let him take it, all men can not conceaue this say­ing, but those to whom it is geuen. Luke. 19. Wherefore if chastitie be the proper gift of God: we may not assure to our selues the thyng that is the proper gift of God. And if none can be chast, but to whom it is geuē, how can we promise to our selues, that which we know not whether we shall euer attaine or no? Great is the force of the truth, & greater then this our great Maister of Is­raell can cōprehend. And howsoeuer he lyst to iangle here, he confesseth the same a litle before in expresse wordes,Osorius fol. 37. Hoc tantum mu­nus. &c. that cha­stitie is the gift of God, as in deéde it is. And for proofe therof vrgeth the same wordes of Christ mentioned before: namely: All men can not comprehēd this saying, but vnto whom it is geuen. I maruell much Osorius, that you haue so quickely forgotten your selfe. But I ought not maruell thereat, bycause of a very greédy affection to cauill an [...]rabble, you rush headlong many tymes into most pestilent errours.

[Page 37] You accuse Luther, Bucer, Zuinglius, Oecolampadius, Caluin, and Martyr of lust. As though men liued not chastly which hold them selues within the limittes of lawfull Matri­monie? or as though all the Cowled droues of Sophisters as­well of your Nation, as of any part of the world els, were com­parable with these godly fathers in commendable conuersatiō of life, or excellencie of learnyng? or as though the namyng of those persons made your cause any myte yt better? or as though Paule (whom you do wrest and peruert for the mainteynaunce of your single lyfe) did not sufficiently interprete him selfe? or as though there were any thyng in you besides arrogancie, ca­uillyng, and choler? You moue a very saucie question of Chri­stian libertie: Whether the same appeare greater in your Cowled generations, then in maryed folkes? I aunswere: that the pure Eunuches whom God hath endued with the gift of chastitie, do enioy most excellent freédome of mynde: but the question cōcerneth not those persons in this place. But the rest of your mocke Eunuches, haue no freédome, of mynde: except you lift to tearme it a wicked fréedome, & an horrible libertie to whoredome. Neither am I alone of this iudgement, for that were of no credite. Paule is of the same mynde. Who hauyng sayd, It is good for a man not to touch a wife, immediatly addeth:1. Cor. 7. But for auoyding fornication, let euery mā haue his owne wife: and thereof presently rendreth this reason: For better it is to marry then to burne. The first part of this sentēce you vrge very stout­ly, Osorius, but the later you doe wickedly wincke at. But we may not halt so bycause (as Paule sayth) we goe the right way to the Gospell, not haltyng as you do: But halt you as ye lift,Gal. 2. dis­semble still, & wincke still at ye horrible actions of your cowled Lurdeines, yet is this true, yea to true (alas) that these hypo­criticall professours of chastitie, doe not burne onely, but swell also, and are enflamed with insaciable firebrandes of Lecherie. And it is not a whiueryng voyce of a vow, blowē out in respect of gayne or idlenes, that can very easely quenche & suppresse in ye myndes of young persons, those intollerable flames of natu­rall corruptiō. There be great droues, nay rather vnmeasura­ble herdes of your drousie Uotaries (to be so bold as to coyne a new name for a new thyng) whose poysoned filthynesse hath so [Page] defiled the earth, that they may with horrible feare, looke for Gods iust terrible vengeaunce to bee poured vpon them, with Gomorrhean and Sodomiticall brimstone, and fire hea­uen, vnlesse they repent be tymes.

Luthers Mariage re­proued. You do reproche Luther with his Mariage: and slaun­derously rayle that at the celebratyng thereof, Venus was President, not Venus of Paphia nor Erycina, but Venus the furie of hell. O vncleane mouth. Dare you so blasphemously rayle agaynst the estate of Matrimonie commēded with so glo­rious titles, as which the holy Ghost commaunded to be hono­rable amongest all persons? whiche our Lord Iesus Christ did honor with his presence? which was ordeined of God the father in Paradise? confirmed by the Patriarches and Prophetes? e­stablished by the Apostles and Martyrs?Gene. 1. & continued most ho­norable in the best and purest ages of the world, and by most no­table personages? Dare you with so blasphemous a mouth de­file the dignitie of this Matrimonie, beautified with so many ornamentes? Dare you name that execrable furie of hell to be President at this honorable Mariage? Beseémeth an old man, a Byshop, a Minister of the Sacraments so to dally and scoffe in matters of so great importaunce? Forsoth I do reprehend (say you) the Mariages which the Votaries do contract to­gether. Uery well remēbred Syr, what monument then can you geue vs of those gay professours of chastitie, in that golden age of the primitiue Church, when our Lord Iesus Christ and his Apostles did dwell vpon the earth? If you can shewe vs no one exāple of those chast soules in that most blessed tyme: Nay rather if that pestilent cōtagion of Uotaries did long after be­gyn to infect the Churche: Packe ye hence with that deuilishe Priest of hell from vs, and acknowledge your owne Priest that Satanish hellhounde Hildebrand, Pope Gre­gory the 7. Hildebrand by name, was the first that did e­stablishe single lyfe by Decree. who first of all enacted by publicke authoritie that infamous Canon of cōstrained vnma­ried life. Curse ye that your own hellhounde Priest, and batter him with your thunderboltes of wordes and Sentences. For Beelzebub him selfe, withall ye furies of hell, could neuer haue practized a more pestilent infection of lyfe.

You proceéde to defend Images, wherein you fight so stout­ly agaynst your selfe, that you neéde none other aduersary. But [Page 38] first ye furnish your selfe with a startyng hole, wherein you may shroude your selfe from a showre. For you deny that Images are worshypped, Of Images. that pictures are honored, but you con­fesse that in them is a certeine naturall power, which may bryng some helpe to vnlettered persons. If it were so (O­sorius) we could be somewhat tractable herein: & would some­what frendly tollerate the rude weakenesse, and grosse igno­raunce of the people. But how say you? Is not worshyp geuen to Images? Truly people fall prostrate before thē, they stretch out their handes vnto them: they perfume them with franken­cense: they set cādles before them: they call vpō them by name: they decke them gorgeously: they carry them solēnely abroad, and make a shew of them openly: they waxe hoarse with scri­chyng and cryeng out vnto them in their sicknes and diseases: They gadde many a wéerysome iourney on pilgrimage vnto them: they powre out prayers vnto them with great reuerence: they enlarge vnto then magnificently: yea they do beléeue that they do worke miracles. If all these doe not playnly denounce worshyppyng: by what other Argument may a man discerne the nature of worshyppyng? But if ye yeld not that these blas­phemies are committed in your Romishe Church, yea in your owne Temples of Siluania, it is very well, and I would to God it were true for your credites sake. But if you graūt it (as ye can not deny it) why doe you so impudently deny in wordes, the thyng whiche you know to bee haynously handled in dayly practize? How much better had it bene for you (Osorius) to haue defended worshyppyng of Images as well as ye could (though without all colour of truth) thē so stoutly to deny that, which your women and childrē do sée to be dayly, & hourely fre­quented in your Churches? yea your selues the very Authours therof, ministryng example to others? But you haue lost both your witte and modestie, that in so dayly and manifest abuses will séeme to be ignoraunt, and withall mainteine your vntruth with pretie popet demaundes, so blockish and so farre from the purpose, that a man may iudge you to be fast a sleépe with your eyes open.The Ima­ges of Che­rubins. You demaunde earnestly of me whether the I­mages of the Cherubines were placed before the Arcke of Couenaunt in the old tyme? and whether the Brasen Ser­pent [Page] were erected, that such as were wounded with Ser­pentes might behold it, The brasen Serpent. and be made hole? what then wise man? as though any man could or would deny that Images & pictures were made in all ages? or that it came euer into my thought to condemne the commendable Arte of Engrauyng & Paintyng: I graunt that there may bee some vse of Images, but I deny worshyppyng of them: I doe allow that there may be pictures, but I do abhorre all honor in them. And the same hath our Lord and heauenly father prohibited by expresse com­maundement.Exod. 20. Deut. 5. You tell vs that the Auncient Israelites had diuers Images of Cherubines. I confesse it, but you can not shew, that they were worshypped at any tyme. The Image of the Brasen Serpent [...] as a remedy for them that were bytten with Serpentes: I graunt it. But when in processe of tyme, the people came at length to worshyp it, the godly kyng Eze­chias detestyng their Idolatry,Ezechias. cōmaūded the Image to be ta­ken downe, and broken in peéces: and herein your selfe do won­derfully cōmende him. You marre therfore all your owne mat­ter (Osorius) by this your owne example. For ye graunt that the worshyppyng of Images is damnable, & defiled with poy­soned Idolatry.

Ye deny that men are now at this present or euer here­tofore were at any tyme so blockish and senselesse as to be­leue that godlynesse was included in Images: and withall yeld your selues to be accoūpted for madde and buzzard­ly blynd, if this can be iustified agaynst you. What els do ye then? whenas you throw your selues prostrate before pictures, and neuer make any end almost of embracyng them? lickyng them? kissyng them? deckyng them? presentyng them with giftes? goyng on pilgrimage vnto them? when you call vpon & inuocate the Images of dead persons, by the proper names of your Saintes pictured there? when you keépe such a sturre before stockes and stones, and confesse neuerthelesse that in thē is neither vertue nor sense? your selues surely be worse thē rot­ten blockes, that will geue such reuerēce to dead stockes. But I will sticke somewhat neare to your skinne in this matter.

The people of Israell (as ye know) were a chosen Nation, an holy kinred, a peculiar and elect people: and yet in the ab­sence [Page 39] of Moyses they forged a golden Calfe, and beleued that there was in this Image, not onely lyfe and sense, but with o­pen mouth did professe also, that it was God, yea the very same God that brought them out of the land of Egypt. For when they had commaunded that this Image should be borne before them, as the cōduct of their iourney, they added hereunto these blasphemous wordes also.Exod. 32. These be thy Gods O Israell, whiche brought to passe that thou were deliuered out of the land of Egipt. There followeth yet more. And Aaron seyng this, erected an Aultar before it. What say you Osorius? Truely though you conceaue neuer so well of your selfe, and loue your coūtrey (as meéte is you should) neuer so much: yet you do not beleéue (I suppose) that those your countrey men what soeuer they be, are more deare now vnto God, then the children of Israell were at that tyme: no nor deéme your selfe more holy thē Aaron. Ther­fore where you seé so manifest Idolatry in them, why make you so proude bragges of the innocencie of your Nation? But you will happely say, that those dayes are out of memory, & no such matter sticketh now in your fingers: will ye therefore that I bryng you home? and euidently disproue the ignoraūce and vn­aduised follie of you, & your people, by the testimonies of your owne fraternitie? Truly I am contented so to doe and I will paint out your Idolatry so playnly in the sight of all men that can seé, and be willyng to seé, that no well disposed persons may doubt thereof hereafter. Peraduduenture your eyes will dazell through corruption of dayly custome: as it happened to Cerbe­rus, Sence. in Hercul. fur. the dogge of hell sodenly drawen out of his darcke doun­geon into the bright sunne shyne.

First,The Pa­pistes are taken tardy in commit­tyng mani­fest Idola­try. you will graunt me this, as I suppose, which all your Papisticall Godmakers will yeld vnto: that in that your tran­substantiated white Wafers is inclosed a certeine Diuine es­sence, and the onely substaunce of bread flowen quyte away (I know not whither) but that the accidents of bread remayne as at the first: to witte, the roundnes, white colour and such like. Hereof then followeth of necessitie euen by your owne Argu­ment, that who soeuer doth worshyp ye white colour, or any ex­ternall thyng therof subiect to the senses & spectible view, is a manifest Idolatour. Aunswere me to this place my Lord I be­seéch [Page] you, if there be any sparckle oftene fayth in you: Tell me when your simple vnlettered people, cluster in heapes toge­ther to your Altares, heaue vppe their handes, knocke their brestes, reuerently behold and humbly worshyp that your white rounde singyng Cake holden betwixt your fingers and lifted ouer your heades, as if it were our Lord and Sauiour Christ Iesu him selfe: when (I say) this seély rude multitude doth so humble them selues, and are moued in affection, can they dis­cerne betwixt the accidentes of the bread and the substaunce? if they can, surely your nation is deépely seéne in Logicke. But if they cannot. Then we may rightly conclude vpon the suppo­sitions of your owne Deuines, that they commit open. Idola­try: bycause they do worshyp not onely the essence of God farre hidden within, & wholy remoued from their senses, but also the outward signes which they behold and seé with their eyes. You are taken here (Osorius) neither can you escape me, for either you must serape out your Decreés and Canōs, which will pro­cure you mortall hatred, or els you must neédes cōfesse the day­ly Idolatry of your people, except ye deny that the outwarde forme of bread is worshypped by them: wherein they will wit­nes agaynst you if neéde shall require. And therfore if your fay­ned God may euidently be founde culpable of euidēt Idolatry. Your errour is much more apparant in worshyppyng of Ima­ges. I did set downe before the wordes of our Sauiour Iesu Christ vsed to the woman of Samaria touchyng the true wor­shyppyng of God: Aboue alledged also the auncient custome of the Primitiue Church, when as no grauen or paynted Ima­ges were permitted to be worshipped.

In this most assured testimonies and ordinaunces of our Religion, this our great Deuine and Maister is altogether mumme, but that hee cauilleth a litle (I know not what) about the Images of the Crosse,Of the I­mages of the Crosse. to witte: That the fame was deepely emprinted in the harts of mē in that aūcient and florishing age of the primitiue Church, but that pictures were neede­lesse sith that tyme. The same doe we also confesse franckly. For there be two notable rules very true, & prescribed by God as Principles whereby the auncient vse and rule of Christian Religion and dueties of Christian lyfe may be dayly enured & [Page 40] preserued. The one is, that we apply our myndes to read the holy Scriptures. The other is that we yeld attētiue eare vn­to them. For all Scripture (sayth Paule) is geuen by inspiration of God, and is profitable to teache, to admonish, to improue, 2. Tim. 3. to a­mende and to instruct in righteousnes. that the man of God may be perfect and prepared vnto all good workes. If we bee made abso­lute and perfect by the holy Scriptures, what neéde we any helpe of your pictures? In those holy Scriptures is the liue­ly Image of God the Father, the liuely picture of Iesu Christ our Sauiour, the true Crosse, true worshippyng, true Reli­gion to bee founde. But you are fouly fallen away from this auncient veritie, you haue wickedly buryed in darkenesse the Testament of Iesu Christ, you haue treacherously discredited the authoritie of holy Scriptures: and in place of these pure and knowen founteines of our true Religion, ye haue in your Churches planted a wonderfull rabble of wo [...]meeaten pictu­res, and portraictes of dead bodyes to be worshipped: you haue instructed the rude and vnlettered people with mens traditi­ous, and haue vtterly drowned the holy Scriptures beyng the most pleasaunt and plentyfull foode of the soule with ouerflow­yng puddles of stinckyng Ceremonies. This is very true O­sorius, yea it is to true: And you beyng a Byshop and a distri­buter of the holy misteries of God shall to your intollerable an­guish of mynde, feéle this to be true, which you shalbe sommo­ned before the dreadfull: Iudgement seate of the Lord: From whence you shalbe throwen into euerlasting tormentes, if ye amende not in tyme. But there is no droppe of sounde or sober witte in you: for amyddes your disputation touchyng the wor­shyppyng of God, you sodenly skippe from the matter, and returne to your wonted shiftes and demaunde of vs. If wee haue founde our selues more inclinable to praye sith the abolishyng of Images then before? First of all. This con­cerneth not the controuersie anythyng at all. Then who hath authorised you beyng a Portingall, to be Iudge and Inquisi­tour ouer vs Englishmen? Enquire ye for the demeanours of your owne people of Siluain, and let vs alone with our owne Byshops. It greéueth you much that the Reliques of Thomas of Caūterbury are defaced:Thomas of Canterbu­ry. whom it pleaseth you to call a most [Page] holy man beyng in very déede an exectable Traytour. O good­ly Doctour of the Church, that require vs to worshyp the rot­ten stinckyng carkase of a pielde trayterous Priest. Persuade that els where, for in England women, children, and naturall fooles do detest the stincking Rames, crauyne, and Idolatrous Shryne of that Rebellious traytour.

Neither are you pleased bycause I rubbe your Schoole­men on the gall, a very sacred societie (if we credite you) most pure pillers of Christian Religiō, agréeyng & consentyng with the auncient Apostles: but if they be tryed by their owne trinc­kettes,Of Schoole Diuinitie. they wilbe founded a pestilent generation of Uipers, full of vnsauory brabbles, corrupt doctrine, altogether boyde of witte, & addicted to all superstitiō. And there is no discréet per­son amongest our aduersaries that hath any smatche of founde learnyng (except a very fewe) but doe vtterly detest and reiect this filthy puddle of Schoolemē. And yet you sir Ierome, sup­pose to bolster out & uphold this sowsie ragged rabble wt stout countenaūce. But it will not be, you come all to late. And your labour is all lost. It was not without reason, that I noted haw this huge heapes of Pictures were the offcombe of that vnsa­uory schoolekitchen. Neither did I erre in notyng the certeine limitation of their whelpyng: no more can you cease from your old cankred custome of cauilling scarse one minute of an houre. You flée ouer to your Councell of Nice as to an inuincible bul­warke:The second Coūcell of Nice. as though what soeuer a Councell doth thrust vpon vs ought to be holden of vs for inuiolable. In déede your filthy vn­maryed life crawled first into the Churche after this maner. So also your friuolous and Sophisticall Transubstantiation was commaunded in the begynnyng. But let vs scanne this Deuine Decrée of the Councell touchyng Images which was vttered in that second Nicene Coūcell vnder these wordes. I­mages ought to be worshipped as reuerētly as God is wor­shipped. But you will not admit this to be true I trow,Osori. fol. 47. when as els where you are of opinion that Images and Pictures re­maine to be viewed onely, all worship set apart: wherein ne­uertheles you disagrée in your selfe also. For in the same place, you tell vs a tale of Robinhoode alledgyng miracles withall, to witte, that bloud hath bene séene to gush out of Images perdy, [Page 41] and certeine uertue of healyng hath issued frō thē. And that for this cause they ought to be worshypped. Hereby meanyng to proue both: of the whiche a litle earst you admitted neither. What grossenesse is this Osorius? what ouersight? what for­getfulnesse of your selfe and your owne wordes? you reporte that Eusychius did behold the Images of the Apostles ex­quisitely paynted. What hereof? This was but a commen­dation of Paynters my good Osorius, and not a prayse of Pic­tures. Yet you notwithstādyng as though you had made a fayre speake, do affirme that it is without all cōtrouersie, that Ima­ges were in the Apostles tyme. How? or from whence doe you persuade this Osorius? is this a good Argument to proue that Images were uisited in the Apostles tyme, bycause without comptrollement you tell vs a smoath tale of Thomas of Inde? of Eusebius and of Pope Siluester? Do ye so conclude my Lord beyng an old man, a Priest and a Byshop?

Semblable and lyke drousinesse is in you, where you charge me that I did accuse your Scholemen to be the first founders of Images? This is false: I doe not charge them withall: but I will abyde by this, that this uenemous doctrine was wonderfull encreased with the corruption of this poyso­ned Schoole. [...]y wordes are as followeth.In myne answere to Osor. Epist. When true Reli­gion began to decay: Images crept into the Churche by title and litle, and that former earnest desire of pure doctrine wa­xed cold in mens hartes: and that bastard and deformed super­stitious Schoole Diuinitie vaunted it selfe at the length, and immediatly all places were patched vppe with Images. &c. Now speake Parrotte of Portingall, I pray you. Did I not orderly enough distinguish the seasons of tymes? By litle and litle crept Images in, yea long before the péepyng of Schoolemen abroad: but beyng settled in their stalles, all places were stuffed with Pictures. You sée their Originall before Schoo­lemen, but the increasinges thereof, in the chief reigne and sway of that brotherhoode: And yet ye dare impudently affirme that I named Schoolemen to bee the very wellsprynges of Pictures. And at length ye crye out. What dulnesse? what negligēce? when as I might more iustly haue exclaimed, O for­getfull dottard, O rayling scolde. After that you haue long [Page] turmoyled your selfe in this gulfe, sometymes treatyng of Pictures, sometymes inducyng them as representations of holy personages: you packe vp your trunckes, and returne to your former course of exhortation, wherein you persuade that bycause Images be sauory Instrumentes to enforme the vn­lettered people, therefore they ought bee reserued to that vse. But learned and godly men will rather say, that Images are daungerous Rockes of manifest Idolatry. And as I will not much gaynesay, that discréete men and well exercized in the Scriptures may haue in their Closettes without any perill, the Image of the Crucifixe, so doe I boldly pronounce that without great daunger of Idolatry, Images can not be pla­ced in Churches, to the uiewe of the rude people beyng natu­rally incliuable to all superstition. And therefore it is most ne­cessary to abandone Images out of Churches, and to instruct the people in the holy Scriptures, the often hearyng and rea­dyng wherof, will make the diligent and uertuous followers, to finde no want of any such paynted bables: Sathan cary­ing our Lord and Sauiour Iesus into the wildernesse willed him to fall downe and worshyp him. Our Lord Iesu despising and rebukyng him sayd.Luke. 4. It is written. Thou shalt worshippe the Lord thy God, and him onely shalt thou serue. Ueryly when I pon­der the Maiestie of these wordes throughly in my mynde, and the dayly practizes of your Churches, wherein so perillous and euident tokens of Image worshyp and knéelyng to Pictu­res is frequented, my very hart panteth and trembleth with­in me, to thinke, how this expresse commaundement of God the Father, and of our Lord Iesus Christ séemeth vtterly bu­ried in obliuion with you.

But runne on, sith it so pleaseth you, and scorche your soules in the flames of Idolatry: we beyng terrified with the Deuine Oracles of the sacred Scriptures, haue vtterly subuerted I­mages and Pictures, and exiled them from our Churches. In like maner we passe ouer the Saintes in our prayers, & make intercession onely vnto God the Father and our Lord and Sa­uiour Iesu Christ, and vpon them do we call onely for succour. Unto whom with the holy Ghost we do confesse and professe all glory, all honour, all power, & euerlastyng eternitie to be due. [Page 42] And to confirme this our confession to bee most pure and true, the testimonies of eche Testament are plentyfull: wherein we doe also follow the manifold examples of the Patriarches, A­postles and Martyrs. As for you, there is nothyng vttered of your part sauoryng of the auncient, pure founteine of the pri­mitiue Church, either in cōuersation of life or profession in Re­ligion. We haue heard the voyce of our Lord Iesu: Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onely shalt thou serue. Certes if ye onely Maiestie of God must be worshipped alone, the wor­shipping of saintes ought in no case to be admitted thē. The E­uangelist Iohn begā to worship ye Angell:The last chap. of the Apocal. but the Angell with­stood him & yelded the reason. ‘I am (quoth he) thy fellow seruant.’ If we haue Angels our fellow seruaunts Osor. surely we haue no Saints to be our Aduocates.1. Timo. There is but one Aduocate be­twixt God and man: The God and man Christ Iesu. If Saintes make no intercession for vs, then to worship them is but vayne. Semblably take worshyp away, to what purpose serue Ima­ges? For to gaze vpō them auayleth litle. Let the people heare the Scriptures. Let them be busied therein: There is Christ painted vnto vs: there may the eyes of the soule behold him: in them doth hee breath, in them doth hee lyue, in them doth hee reigne and triumphe.

My Dylemma, or double Argument doth not content you, wherein I did conclude agaynst Images, to witte, that hauing life there was no want of them, & wantyng breath there was no vse nor profite in them. How you say thē hereunto? may not [...] parcell be iustified by the Scriptures?Exod. 1 [...]. Why doest thou cry vnto me (sayth God the father vnto Moyses) And yet Moyses in his prayer opened not his mouth. Therfore the spirite beyng pre­sent, doth present the prayers vnto God though all the sences els be silent. On the other side. If the hart be otherwise occu­pyed. God will not accept the prayers though neuer so many and neuer so laboursome. For after this maner the Lord Ie­sus doth recite out of Esay the Prophet. This people doth ho­nour me with their lippes, but their hart is farre awaye from me but they worshyp me in vayne. &c. Behold here worshyppyng is to no purpose, the spirite beyng absent: Why doe ye therefore spurne agaynst matters so manifest?

[Page] [...]ay but you presume to contend agaysnt the holy Ghost in these wordes, saying. The spirit being present, Images do no hurt: and being absent, they do very much auayle. Amiddes our prayers thynges may not be enterlaced, yt do not hurt (good Syr) but matter wherewith our prayers may haue accesse vn­to God. But whereas you would haue Images to bée auayla­ble being without spirite. This is very straunge & monstruous in a Deuine to affirme that our prayers can be commended vn­to God by Images or by any other way els without the spirit. God is a spirite (sayth our Lord Iesus Christ) and it behoueth his worshippers to worship in spirite and truth. Iohn. 4. The Lord Iesus doth pronoūce that the true worshippers ought to worshyp in spirit. Our Prelate doth contend that pictures may auayle to prayer without spirite: Away Osorius Away. For euen on this wise and in the same cause the Lord Iesus did put Sathā to flight. We assuryng our selues vpon the authoritie of God the father and of our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ, wil together with the Prophetes and Apostles, honour the Lord God the father, and him onely will we worshyp, the Lord Iesus Christ and the holy Ghost makyng intercession vnto him for vs. As for you (if you be so altogether persuaded) raunge on in this your crooked procession together with these gorgeous titles of Councels & Fathers, and with that filthy raggema [...]oll of your schoolemen. There will come a day, when this matter will be more déepely sifted before the Iudgemēt seate of our Sauiour Iesu Christ. Then shall we know whether part haue more safely and more duetyfully profited in the worshyppyng of Gods Maie­stie. And so now at the last your first goodly Inuectiue is come to an end: from out the whiche if a man will plucke awaye your outrage in cauillyng, your venemous scoldyng & your superfluous sen­tences: surely very litle will remayne wherein the learned Reader may be desirous to spend any tyme.

The second Booke.

I Am ashamed (you say) to vse so ma­ny wordes in the confutatiō of your Booke. It is modestly done of you to confesse your fault. But your vnmea­surable braulyng hath altogether we­ryed me: of the same opinion are all o­thers also that haue séene your wri­tyng, who with one cōsent do wōder­fully condēne this your idle superflui­tie of toung in an old man. Yet can we sée no amendement in you: for the further ye procéede, so many the more Fables you do vtter, wherby all men may perceaue, that you are not indu­ced to writyng of any iudgement or discretion: but enflamed with excessiue malice & violēt outrage: with neither of yt which your person and grayheaded yeares ought in any wise bee ac­quainted. But whereas you reporte that I seeme to haue ta­ken wonderfull pleasure in that my litle booke. Herein you follow the example of wayward men, whiche estéemyng other mens affections by their owne be of opinion that scarse any mā ­els can be well disposed bycause they bee vndiscréete them sel­ues. You begyn to quarell at the ouerthrowe of the Sacra­mentes, wherewith, you say also, that I do séeme somwhat dis­pleasaunt: and therfore you commend me with a scoffe, no lesse vnpleasaunt then vnsauory. But mocke on & spare not. You do trauayle with your contumelious wordes to bryng this noble Iland my deare beloued coūtrey into obloquie with all men, & with an abhominable lye doe exclame, that our Deui [...]es haue vtterly subuerted all Sanctuaries, Ceremonies, and Sacra­mentes. This your infamous, shamelesse,Hyperbole is called an excessiue vehemency of speach. and reprochfull Hi­perbolycall speach I haue scattered abroad, crusht in péeces, and brought, to nought, & haue so déepely emprinted your flesh with an. S. for a slaunderour to your perpetuall shame, that neither you nor any of all your feet shalbe euer able to wipe it out agayne. You do accuse Luther, Carolostadius, Oecolā ­padius, Zuinglius, and my Peter Martyr as men that do vn­reuerently rende asunder the Lordes Supper.

First of all. I haue sundry tymes heretofore protested, that [Page] your controuersse concerned vs, and not them. For your qua­rell was agaynst our English Deuines,Whereunto the Apolo­gie of Had­don had es­peciall re­gard. whom I vndertooke to defend: you slaundered our England, I stoode to the defence of ye same. And therfore I might well haue referred all this con­tention touchyng their doctrine to them selues: & so I do: yet I will presume to say this much by the way, that you deale ve­ry vngently herein, to scold so importunately agaynst the good name of them, which can not now plead their owne cause: I do adde hereunto, that the rest (except Carolostadius onely, of whom I can say nothyng, bycause I doe not know him) all the rest I meane, were men of such excellēcie, not onely in ye know­ledge of toungues, and other liberall sciences, but also such sin­gular Deuines, as that Ierome Osorius might haue bene scho­ler to the meanest of them. I say this withall, that you vtter your vnskilfulnesse herein, to couple Luther and Zuinglius to­gether in matter of the Sacrament, whose opiniōs were som­what discrepāt in the same. Lastly touchyng the matter it selfe, I aunswere briefly: That those famous and worthy patrones of the Gospell and true Religion (whose names you rehearse in reproch) did reuerently and religiously treate of the Sacramēt of the body, and bloud of our Lord if they may be tryed by ye true touchstone of the scriptures: in whō likewise you can finde no iust cause of reprehēsion cōcernyng the other Sacraments, vnlesse you suppose, that with your naked clamorous affirma­tiues ye may expell them out of the Church, as mē are wont to driue common players from the Stage with hissing and clap­pyng of handes. But they can not be so quayled Osorius. They haue obteined better footyng and déeper roote in the harts of mē by their learnyng & vertue, thē you can be able to remoue with your penne though it bee neuer so cruell: whom the bootcherly crueltie of your side be it neuer so sauadge, can with fire & Fa­got cōsume out of the myndes of the godly. But this our new maister dispatcheth all thyngs in scoffes & a petie questiōs. He demaundeth of vs, what is to be vnderstanded of those Sa­cramentes which we doe reteine? First of all, if we doe vse a­ny Sacraments at all, you are taken tardy for a common lyar agaynst vs especially: for you rayled a litle earst, that all Sa­cramentes were vtterly abolished by our preachers, and that [Page 44] you haue as many witnesses of this solemne lye, as England hath inhabitauntes.

But you proceede, and would know. What Sacraments be. If you doe know already and will dissemble, why doe you playe the foole in so earnest a matter? but if you bee ignoraunt hereof, what maner of Deuine will you be accoumpted? that know not the first principles of Religion? Nay (say you) I am not doubtfull of the Sacraments of Scholemen: but I know not your bare and naked Images, by the whiche you deny the grace of God to bee obteined. How many faultes O­sorius, in so few wordes? For first of all, who euer called Sa­cramentes, by this name Images, but you alone? in déede they are named signes, and markes of holy thynges, many tymes seales of our saluatiō, many mē call them tables: and so diuers men geue diuers names. But your selfe are the very first, that euer gaue this tearme of Images to Sacramēts. But as tou­ching wordes, though you be oftētymes ouer captious, we wil­be more tractable with you therein, and will prosecute the mat­ter. You say that our Deuines doe place naked Images in steade of Sacramentes. How naked, my Lord I pray you? we do agrée with S. Augustine, that Sacramentes are signes of holy thynges: or thus: that Sacramentes are visible signes of inuisible grace. I trust you will permit me the same libertie of wordes, which you vse to take to your selfe. We do graūt, that we are by Baptisme regenerate to eternall lyfe: we doe also yeld, that in the holy Communion our Lord Iesus is truely re­ceiued of the faythfull in spirite by fayth. Whereby it appea­reth, that our Deuines do not accoumpt the Sacramentes as bare naked signes, but for thynges most effectuall, most holy, & thynges most necessaryly apperteyning to our comfort: they be sacred mysteries of our Religion, they be assured pledges of heauenly grace:Exod. 32. And yet God ye father which made vs of clay is not tyed to his workemāshyp, nor bounde to his creatures,Rom. 9. But taketh mercy of whom he will haue mercy, and forgeueth our sinnes for his owne sake, not for the Sacraments sake. Lastly,Rom. 6. Life e­uerlasting is the gift of God through Iesus Christ, not through o­peration of the Sacramentes. And therfore we do refuse and detest such naked & falsely forged Images, as dreames of your [Page] owne drousie braynes,How we ought to e­steeme of the Sacra­mentes. and vse the true Sacramentes as most sacred thynges, as pledges of our fayth, and seales of our salua­tion: & yet we do not attribute so much vnto them, as though by the meanes of them, the grace of God must of necessitie be pou­red our vpō vs,Ex opere operat. Rom. 4. by the Workes wrought, as through conduct pipes. This impietie we turne ouer to your Schoolemen, the very first sprynges of this poyson, For inheritaunce is geuen of faith, accordyng to grace. The Sacramentes are reuerend sig­nes of Gods grace vnto vs, are excellēt monumētes of our Re­ligion, are most perfect witnesses of our saluation. If you can not be satisfied with these commendations of the Sacramēts, heape you vp more vnto them at your choyse, we shalbe well pleased withall, so that you binde not the grace of God to these signes of very necessitie. For we are not saued by the receauing of these Sacramēts,Rom. 10. But if we cōfesse with our mouth our Lord Iesus Christ, and with our hartes beleeue, that God raysed him a­gayne from death, this confession onely will saue vs. Iulian the Emperour was Baptized in the name of Iesus, yet dyed in manifest blasphemie: Iudas Iscariote did féede vpon the Sa­crament of Euchariste, yet immediatly after Supper, hee de­parted to the enemyes of our Lord Iesu, and betrayed innocēt bloud: what néedeth many wordes? Sacramētes are most pre­cious tokens of Gods fauour,Sacraments are tokens of saluatiō, but do not worke sal­uation. 1. Cor. 1. but they doe not obteine Gods fauour: Sacramētes are excellent monumentes of godlynes, but they do not make godlynes: He that will glory, let him glory in the Lord, not in the Sacraments. For by God, we are engraf­fed into Christ Iesu, whiche was made vnto vs by God, wisedome, righteousnes, sanctification and redemption.

And this much to your generall obiections framed agaynst our order of administryng the Sacramentes. Now I will come to those two principall points, which you séeme specially to haue culled out, that in them you might braue out ye nimble­nes of your witte, & eloquence of toung: Confession, Confessiō. Sacrament of the Al­tar. you name and the Sacrament of the altar, as you tearme it: Of Confes­sion you draw forth a tedious talke, and in the same endeauour to include the Sacrament of Repentance. First of all, you cast your accōptes amisse in your numbryng, Osorius, for if you re­ceaue Repētaunce in the name of a Sacramēt, either you must [Page 45] admit eight Sacramentes contrary to the old custome of your Church, or els you must turne one of your other seuen Sacra­ments out of the doores: wherein vnlesse you deale more circūspectly, you will haue more fistes about your eares then your owne, euen amongest your owne fraternitie. But please them as well as you may, and vs you shall easely winne to wincke at you, which do content our selues with two Sacramentes one­ly, to witte, Baptisme, and the Supper of the Lord: Two Sa­cramentes. yet do we also exercize the rest withall as matters singularly profitable, and so fast knitte to the rule of true godlynesse, that Christian pro­fession can not want them. When I name the rest, I do not cō ­prehend all, but Confession, and yet not your hypocriticall and schoole cōfession (wherof we will treate hereafter) but the pure, and auncient confession, authorized by the Scriptures, & pra­ctized by the Prophetes, and Apostles: I adde hereunto amen­dement of lyfe, ordination of Ministers, celebration of Matri­monie, and prayer: although you passe by this last as a foreine straunger. All these (I say) are in dayly vse with vs, and had in great estimatiō, though they reteine neither name nor nature of Sacramentes properly: There be some other also, wherof it is néedelesse to make any mentiō at this present: for these are the chiefest: which though we do not vsurpe for Sacraments, as you do: yet we do allow of them reuerently, and religiously accordyng to the ordinaunce of the Gospell of God. Whiche I thought méete to touch briefly by the way, left any person vnac­quainted with our orders, and geuyng to much credite to Oso­rius, may estéeme so much the lesse of our Religion. Now I re­turne to your Cōfessiō whispered into ye eares of your Priests:Au [...]icular Confessiō. whō though you embrace as your swéet babe, and enriche with a great dower of wordes, and decke with gay copes of senten­ces: yet ye lose herein both your trauaile & coste. For you gar­nishe but a schooleharlotte, a nurse of superstition, a drudge of couetousnes, and the common shoppe of all abomination. And therfore you do well, that in the enshryning of so filthy an inuē ­tion of man, you flye from all ayde of Scriptures: And yet by­cause ye produce some, somwhat sty [...]ye, & according to your dis­cretion apply them as wisely, though ye promise quyte contra­ry, we will sift them a litle by your leaue, and sée how they will [Page] helpe you in your iourney.

I speake nothyng here (you say) how in the old law [...] in their sacrifices offred for cleansing of sinnes, a certein con­fession of vnpure liuyng was brought to the Priestes. But speake aloude rather, what confession was that you speake of? by what custome receaued? in what place, when, and with what circumstaunces was it frequented? either you ought haue vtte­red one of these, or els we must playnly iudge, that this confes­sion was a certeine somewhat, we know not what. Whereof is no such thyng in all Scriptures, as you make it: or if any such were amongest the ordinaunces of the Priestes,Heb. 9.10. the same is worne out of [...]re euen as the old sacrifices are, & quyte for­gotten: and this you can not deny: vnlesse you be altogether ig­noraunt in Diuinitie, No nor that you thinke worthy to be noted (you say) that those whiche came to the Baptisme of Iohn Baptiste did of an earnest zeale confesse their sinnes. You do wel (Osorius) yt you do not, note it, but you had done bet­ter, if you had neuer touched yt place. For at that tyme were no Massemōgers nor Cowled lozelles, into whose eares the wret­ched rude people might particularly whisper their offences, without whom this your goodly confession is of no value. No, nor it pleaseth you (you say) to rehearse the confession that Christiā men made to the Apostles of Christ, mētioned in the Actes of the Apostles. If it pleased you not to rehearse it, why do you rehearse it thē? nay rather why do ye make a speci­all note out of ye Actes,Actes. 2. of that which is not there? The hartes of the Iewes were pricked at the preaching of Peter, whom also Pe­ter doth exhort to amendemēt of lyfe. Here is no word of Con­fession: and yet I doubt not, but they did confesse their sinnes vnto God. But I would not haue you (Osorius) beyng a De­uine, and a Byshop so vnaduisedly to vouche any thyng out of scriptures wherof is no mentiō made there. You say also that you will passe ouer in silence the Commaundement which Iames gaue cōcernyng Confession. Truly you ought to haue made no mention therof, bycause that cōmaundement cā not be restrayned to Priests onely, but extēdeth it selfe to all persons indifferently, and belongeth no lesse to common prayer, then to mutuall confession:Iames the last chap. as is euident by Iames his owne wordes.

[Page 46] Lastly (you say) that you will not vse these wordes where with Christ did manifestly commit vnto Priestes the iuris­dictiō of the soule. Osorius. Ye do very well truly that you will not vse those places, I would to God you would not abuse them. But you do corrupt them fouly (Osorius) and that laudable & whole­some order of the Apostles in remittyng offences, whiche they vsed with prayers openly spoken, in the name of our Lord Ie­su, you do depraue with a certeine authoritie of your owne, in blynd corners, either for lucre of some powlyng pence, or for someother worse matters. In a straunge toung ye send away ye people that come vnto you, nothyng amēded, nay rather oftē ­tymes, more apte to deuise mischief: surely for the more part, much more corrupted rather then amended. I do not lye, Oso­rius, though you stomacke my wordes. Dayly practize, & com­mon experience, and the perpetuall hystorie of all ages, will witnes the same to be true. And beyng here destitute of Diui­nitie, you hauke for other helpes abroad, and you raunge to two vertues very godly ones I promise you, yet such as they be, as farre wyde from your forged Cōfession, as heauē is di­stant frō the earth. You suppose it a goodly matter, that we do know our selues. And so it is in deéde. You commende hu­militie much, & I agreé with you therein: But from whence come these vnto vs? out of Friers Cowles or Priestes wyde sleéues, or from the bosome of God the father?Iames. 1. from whom eue­ry good and perfect gift is deliuered vnto vs? Peruse you yt Psal­mes of Dauid, what shall you finde in them but submission,Psal. 22.30. hu­militie, knowledge, and embacyng of a mans selfe? and yet that Prophet of God did not learne them of your Priests, but of the creatour of all thynges God our most louyng, and bountefull father, of that same great & mighty God (I say) who pronoun­ceth of him selfe, saying:Deut. 32. Behold therfore that I, euen I, I say, am the same Lord, and that there is no God besides me. I do kill, and I make aliue agayne, I doe make the wounde, but I will heale a­gayne. &c. Wherefore we must obey Iames, who pronounceth in this maner. Humble your selues in the sight of the Lord, and he will exalte you: But wherfore bryng you these thynges seue­rally? The whole discourse and tenour of the Scriptures doth teach humilitie, and submissiō of myndes, it breaketh ob­stinacie, [Page] it abateth pride, and [...]ameth arrogancie. And yet O­sorius a Deuine, and a Byshop doth leade vs away from the Scriptures, and will thrust vs vnto market Confession, to ga­ther preceptes of good lyfe from Massemongers, and Cowled Friers: O blynd guide of the blind. It is no maruell truely, though you and your sheépe of Siluain fall both together into the ditche. But at the length hee bringeth forth an inuincible Argumēt and doth testifie of him selfe in earnest and as it were with Protestation.

Mercena [...]ie Confessiō. That the holy Ghost hath wrought all that goodnesse that is in him by the meane of Confession. He doth playnly Confesse, that confession hath bene his Schoolemystres, and nurse of all his godlynes, in so much that he hath not one spar­kle of the loue of God (for so hee speaketh) besides that, whiche hath bene reuealed vnto him by illumination of this eare. Con­fession. First of all (Maister Doctour) I am easely persuaded this to bee true that you speake of your selfe: and next I am a­shamed, and wery of you, that haue altogether so hanged vp­on Cōfession, that neither prayers, nor study, nor preceptes of holy Scriptures, haue preuailed in any respect to enduce your mynde to godlynesse, beyng a grayheaded Deuine, a man of threé score yeares almost: Then also I can not but beleue, that either you haue bene a very blockheaded Scholer, or that your maisters of Confession, were very vnlucky, which in so many yeares, after so much buzzing in their eares, after so many cō ­ferences of godly matters, could worke nothyng els in you, thē to shape a madde Byshop, of a senselesse Priest. Epicure (as you know) was accustomed to glory, that hee had neuer instru­ctour in Philosophie: I beleue it (quoth Cicero) for if you had bene taught any thyng at all, you would neuer haue written so absurdely. Euen in like maner may I beleue no man better thē Osorius him selfe, that he neuer had any other Schoolemisters besides Confession. For of a wicked and corrupt Schoolemy­sters, is hatched a proude and hautie sholer, standyng in his owne light, a despiser of all others, an importunate brauler, a prattlyng Sophister, a shamelesse rayler, an vnmeasurable slaūder and a peruertour of holy Scriptures, and true godly­nes. How much better had it bene for you, if you had had lesse [Page 47] conference with Massemongers, and bene more acquainted with S. Paule? Hee would haue instructed you in all sobrietie, modestie, iustice, pietie, fayth, charitie, patience and meckenesse: Whereof you seéme to haue le [...]rned no title in all your sweéte confessions, nor so much as heard, whether any such matter be, or euer haue bene: So farre and wyde doth both your speach & your reason dissent, and disagreé, as altogether estraūged from them. Yet ye proceéde notwithstandyng in this desperate tra­uaile of Confession, which beyng staggeryng and ready to fall, you doe vnderproppe with workes, least it fall to the grounde, For thus ye write.

Yet notwithstandyng we doe not so content our selues with this Confession of sinnes, but that we exact fruites of Repentaūce, which we vse to name Satisfactions, a word that you scorne at most insolētly. Behold this fine scholer of Confession, so well poolished in ye schoole of his Massemongers, that hee hath learned, that Christians are required to bryng foorth fruites worthy of Repentaunce. O deépe and profounde doctrine: as though any Cobbler or Carter did euer deny, or were ignoraunt in this point? but you haue coupled hereunto an other new companion a meare straunger to Christiā eares. For you say that the fruites of Repentaunce are named of you by this name Satisfactiōs. I do know very well that your Massemōgers, Friers & schoolemen haue thrust into the church this new wicked name of Satisfaction: but I know this also, that you haue done this, to your great shame, and reproch. For it is a manifest vntruth contrary to all holy Scriptures, con­trary to the doctrine of the sacred and Apostolicque Church, & contrary to the iudgements of the approued auncient fathers. But we do heare Iohn (say you) exhorting them, which had confessed their faultes, to bryng forth fruites worthy of Repentaunce: and you adde, that the same wordes were re­peated by that great maister of righteousnes the Redemer of mankynd. I doe confesse this Osorius, what conclude you hereof? we must bryng forth fruites worthy of Repentaunce, Ergo, fruites worthy of Repentaūce must be named Satisfac­tiōs. Cursed be your Confessours Osorius, that could instruct you no better in Logicke. Osorius hath suckt out of Confession [Page] the rules of good lyfe, Ergo, he must do nothyng els. A very like conclusion, a fit whelpe of that schoole where you were trayned vp. But let vs seé, if your Satisfactions be not vtterly ouer­throwen with the same Scriptures, wherewith you thinke to establish them. Iohn pointyng vnto Christ with his finger, Be­hold (quoth he) the Lambe of God which taketh away the sinnes of the world: Iohn. 1. If Christ take away the sinnes of the world, how cā workes satisfie? but harken vnto Christ him selfe whom you do worthely name the great Schoolemaster of righteousnesse. When you haue done all (sayth hee) that are commaunded you, say yet, we are vnprofitable seruauntes, we did no more then we ought to doe: Luke. 17. Behold we are vnprofitable seruauntes in the chiefest perfection of our workes, Ergo, your Satisfactions are cold & nothyng worthe.

That pure and chosen vessell of God Paule, doth teache in this maner.1. Cor. 4. I am not guiltie of any thyng, yet am I not iustified hereby. If Paules vndesiled conscience, cleare of all crimes, were not auaylable to iustification: then of very necessitie all your owne, and the Satisfactiōs of all your sect, are lame and cripled. But let vs learne of the same Paule from whe [...]ce true Christians ought to fetche full Satisfaction and absolute per­fection. Christ (sayth he) hath by one onely oblation made perfect for euer; them whiche are sanctified. This one onely Sacrifice of Christ, offred vp in the Altar of the Crosse, is our Satisfaction, our perfection, and our witnessing, and shalbe for euer, not ours one­ly, but of all those also, which shalbe made perfect in tyme to come. We doe beleue Paule, we doe beleue Iohn, and we doe beleue Christ. If you do not beleue those, there be other companions fit for you to company withall, namely, the Pharisies whiche scorned Christes preachyng, vnto whom he sayd.Luce. 16. You be they, which iustifie your selues before men, but God knoweth your harts: for that whiche is glorious in the sight of men, is abhomination be­fore God. Take heéde Osorius, take heéde (I say) yt you be not of the nūber of those Pharisies, lest God abhorre you, & turne his face frō your glorious Satisfactiōs, shyne they neuer so gor­giously in the sight of mē. You cauill after your old maner, I can not tell what, agaynst the vanitie of me, and our Deuines: wherein I will not braule with you, lest I fill whole Uolumes [Page 48] with superfluous matters, as you do, but I will meéte with you in those thynges onely, wherein seémeth some matter of cōtro­uersie. You bryng a very sit and elegant cause surely, whereby you would shewe, why we should not confesse to God alone, but rather fleé out to your Confessours.

For that God (you say) can not be so easily perceaued of vs, hee hath appointed his Vicares on the earth, whiche should exercise his authoritie so that who would refuse them, would refuse God him selfe. &c. First of all, ye deny that God cā be clearely perceaued: as though the sight of God were necessarie to ye dānation of sinners. This is to to lumpish Osorius more fit for that Cowled Asse your companiō then for you.1. Tim. vlt Ad Heb [...]. vlt. No mā euer hath sene God, nor cā seé him, and yet through Christ, we do offer vnto God the father, the sacrifice of thankesge­uyng, and magnifie his holy name. This matter apperteineth not to the sight of the eyes, it apperteineth to the mynde, and in­ward seélyng of the soule which clyming vnto God in harty sor­row, and sighyng is neuer throwen downe from the beholdyng of his infinite goodnesse.Ezech. 33. I liue, sayth the Lord, and take no plea­sure in the death of a sinner, but rather that the wicked conuerte from his wicked way, and liue: be ye conuerted therfore, be ye con­uerted, from your wicked wayes, wherfore will ye dye, O ye house of Israel? With like gētlenes doth our Sauiour Iesus Christ call vs vnto him. Come vnto me, all ye that are laden, and I will refresh you, I will geue to them that are thirstie of the well of life, freely. And yet Osorius beleueth, that bycause of ye absence of Christ, Uicares must be substituted: Paule taught vs farre o­therwise, saying.Apoc. 21. The Lord is neare vnto all them, that call vpon his name: Christ teacheth farre otherwise, of him selfe.Apoc. 3. Behold I stand at the doore, and knocke, if any mā heare my voyce, and o­pē vnto me the gate, I will enter vnto him, and will suppe with him, and hee with me. O sweéte and most comfortable voyce of our Lord, & Sauiour Iesus Christ, which if once may be through­ly rooted in the inward partes of our soule, will easely rase out, & abolish that priuy blind buzzyng in the eares of those Masse­mongers and Friers. But Osorius sticketh fast to his substi­tution and mainteineth earnestly, that the Apostles were assig­ned to be Christes Uicares on earth, whiche should supply his [Page] iurisdiction, and should enterlace their owne definitiue senten­ces with his. These are both false. God is a ielous God, and will not geue his honour to any other. Hee hath appointed no Uicare, and the holy Scripture doth acknowledge no such word, neither was it his will, that the Apostles should enter­medle in his Iurisdiction. Your surmise is false, quite contra­ry to his heauenly prerogatiue.

Apoc. 1. For Christ onely hath the keyes of hell, and death. Christ onely, is the slayne Lambe, and the Lyon of the Tribe of Iuda, the roote of Dauid, which openeth the booke, and louseth the seuen seales ther­of, neither was there any besides him in heauen, in earth, or vnder the earth, that could open the booke, and looke into it. Apoc. 5. Our Lord Iesus beyng raysed from death, and appearyng vnto his Apo­stles spake vnto them in this maner:Math. 28. All power is geuen vnto me in heauē, and in earth. Of this power was neuer iote empaired in any respect, and neuer shalbe. What was the Commission of the Apostles then? Christ him selfe doth open it in the selfe same place. Goe ye therfore, and teach all nations, Baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost: teachyng them to obserue all those sayings, which I haue commaū ­ded you. This was the Embassie of the Apostles, this was their Commissiō, & Iurisdiction, or to speake more playnly & blunt­ly, this was their function, this was their office. To this au­thoritie the keyes of heauen, and remission of sinnes and what­soeuer els of the same kynde must be applyed. S. Paule doth comprehend all these briefly in these wordes.Ad Cor. 4. Let men so esteeme vs, as Ministers of Christ, and Stewardes of the mysteries of God. You be not Uicares thē Osori you be Ministers: ye be not iud­ges to constitute Lawes (as you do wickedly take vpō you) but ye be Stewardes to dispose ye mysteries of God: or at the lest you ought to bee. But how belongeth this doctrine of Christ and his Apostles to your Massemongers & Confessours? They haue an other Romishe doctrine, whereby they doe receiue the seély rude people, runnyng in heapes, vnto them, rehearsing their sinnes priuily, and in some close corner, superstitiously: & when they haue vttered what them listeth, they pronounce ouer them, of their own power, an absolution in a straūge language: & in steade of Satisfaction, they do enioyne them some fastyng [Page 49] dayes or some long pilgrimages: and to make an ende of the play, they pike from them a few pēce for their labour. This is your vsurped power of Cōfessiōs (Osorius) which you affirme was geuen first to the Apostles, afterwardes to you, by a cer­t [...]ine title of Succession. Tell me now, did you euer read, that any thyng was whispered into the Apostles eares priuily? or that sinnes were seuerally repeated? or the people absolued by their owne absolute power? or any thyng done in a language not vnderstanded? or any penaūce (as you tearme it) enioyned? or at the last any reward taken?

What vnshamefastnes is this? what impietie is it to defend this close superstitious, and mercenarie eare confession vnder pretence of the authoritie of our Sauiour Christ? & example of his Apostles? especially whē as none of these was euer institu­ted by Christ, or frequented of his Apostles. But your braynes are so be witched and intoxicated with eare confessions, that ye shame not to alledge other stuffe yet whiche is most absurde of all the rest, You say that it is daungerous for men to bee left in their owne libertie, whē they should confesse them sel­ues to God. For if it were so, we would not willingly yeld to that embacing and throwyng down of our selues, which Dauid named to bee the most acceptable sacrifice to God. You do heare and acknowledge your owne wordes, my Lord, then the which I neuer heard any thyng vttered more blockish: The matter shalbe made manifest by the same example of Da­uid, which your selfe do alledge. Dauid beyng a Patriarche, a Kyng and a Prophet, and a mā accordyng to Gods hart (to vse the wordes of the Scripture) was notwithstandyng continu­nually exercized in this kynde of Confession, whiche is betwixt God onely & vs: in whom there is such store of sorowyng, sigh­yng, lamentyng, weépyng, afflictyng, and bewayling: as the like hath neuer bene in all your se [...]et whisperyngs, no not sith the first whelpyng of the same. For [...] els is there in all that heauenly & golden Psalmes of Dauids p [...]ayer? then a mourne­full, and lamentable confession of sinne? ioyned with hartie re­pentaunce, & sure hope of pardon?Psal. 51. Be mercyfull to me. O Lord (sayth hee) accordyng to thy manifold mercies, wash me throughly frō my wickednes, and clense me frō my sinnes: for I do acknowledg [...] [Page] my faultes, and my sinne is [...]er before me. Agaynst thee onely haue I s [...]ed, and done wickedly in thy sight. Loe here a true and soūde forme of Cōfession fully described in Dauid, A true forme of Confession out of Da­uid. whō you haue al­ledged. In this cōfession we do exercize our selues: In this we remaine, & in this we do dwell. We do also poure out publicke Confessions of sinnes in our Churhes,Publique Cōfession. where the godly Mini­ster is harkened vnto, which may minister an wholesome plai­ster to our wounded consciences, some sentence [...] of the au­thoritie of the Scriptures. These be the keyes, wherewith he doth opē the kyngdome of God, to thē which do vnfaynedly re­pent, & pronounceth vs that are boūde with the chaines of our sinnes, freély loosed, and deliuered from them in the name of our Lord, and Sauiour Iesu Christ. These Confessions as well priuate as publicke, these keyes, this power of byndyng & loo­sing we doe acknowledge appointed by the Scriptures, and practized in the tyme of the Apostles. Neither was any thyng done with Iohn in a corner, touchyng Confession, nor yet with the Disciples of Christ. This matter was referred and ended also to and before God: wherof we haue a most manifest exam­ple in the Gospell, which ought not onely enter the eares, but also pearce the very hartes of all well disposed persons.

Luce. 15.When the lost and prodigall sonne, had riotously consumed and wasted all his substaunce in so much that he was driuen to eate Peascoddes with hogges, he begynneth at the last, to call him selfe home, and earnestly to deuise how he might be recon­ciled to his father: herein he prayeth no ayde of any Leuite, nor sittyng in a corner vnfoldeth vnto him by peécemeale how wic­kedly, and filthyly, he had behaued him selfe, in all his misdo­ynges, in hope to receaue pardon of him, who could not relieue him: but with an assured confidence, commeth to his heauenly father, and maketh his humble Confession into his eares, in this wise.An exam­ple of pri­uate Con­fessiō in the prodicall Sonne. Father I haue sinned agaynst heauen, and before thee, and am no more worthy to be called thy sonne, make me as one of thy hired seruauntes. Truly this is both an humble, and lowly Confession, the sentence wonderfully effectuall, nor any whit tedious in wordes: And yet it came to passe hereupō, that this most myld father was very ioyous, and clothed his sonne gor­giously, rendryng therof this reason: My sonne was dead, and it [Page 50] aliue: was lost, and is founde agayne. Behold here a pure and Gos­pel like Confession, by the which we passe from death vnto life, from destruction, to saluatiō. And therfore we that are instru­cted with these godly preceptes, ought to obey the holy Ghost, which teacheth vs by the mouth of S. Paule, That,Heb. 4. because we haue an high Priest, that hath pearced the heauens, euen Iesus the sonne of God, we should boldly approch to the Throne of his grace, with affiaunce, that from thence we may obteine mercy and grace and finde necessarie relief. Yet for all this, our great Proctour of Confession speaketh on, and faceth out the matter endeuou­ryng to fetch the petigreé therof out of the Prophecies of Esay and demaundeth of me How I thinke that place of Esay must be vnderstode: Esay. 11. that it Should come to passe, that after the birth of Christ, the suckling Babe should thrust his hand into the denne of the Cockatrice and draw him out from thence? First let vs heare the famous interpretation of this reuerend father.

If you will interpret this place (sayth he) as becommeth a Christian, by children, you must vnderstand those persons to whom Christ hath geuen power to treade downe Ser­pentes, and Scorpions, that is to say all sauadgenes of wic­kednesse, the deceites of Deuils, and all crueltie lurkyng in the very Dennes of the soules. For although those persons be of a childishe simplicitie, yet are they endued with such force and strength, that they may easely kill Vipers, beyng baled out of the most inward entrailes of the soules. Marke here Reader this deépe interpretatiō of this graue father, By­shop and Deuine. But what shall I reprehend in this old Dot­terell first? He resembleth Confessours to sucklyng babes. By what reason? by what resemblaunce? by what likelyhoode? Paul doth enforme the Ministers farre otherwise, whom hee requi­reth amongest other thynges,1. Tim. 3 To hold fast the mysterie of faith in a pure conscience, then, that a triall be had of them first, and af­ter admitted to the Ministerie. Both which are farre beyond the age of Childish simplicitie: but the power to treade vpō Ser­pentes,The place of Esay wrongfully wrested by Osorius. & Scorpions, was graūted to the Disciples of Christ, as apperteinyng to their bodyes, not to their soules: That they should be dayly conuersaūt amongest poyson, without any em­pairyng of their health: for euen so doth our Lord Iesus pro­mise [Page] thē. Behold I geue you power to tread vpon Serpēts, and Scor­pions, and vpon all the force of the enemie, and nothing shall hurt you. Luke. 10. So did Paule shake from his hand into the fier the Uiper, which by chaunce stacke fast vpō him, beyng him selfe safe and whole, when all men did looke that hee should haue swollen and burst in peéces. Wherfore this promise of Christ, whereby the health of the Apostles was preserued, that nothyng might hurt them, can not bee so mistourned, and wrested to the edifieng of soules through Confessiō, vnlesse it be, by you and your schoole­men: which in mydday ouerspread all thynges with cloudes, disguise all thynges licentiously at your owne will, whiche chaūge white blacke, and blacke white, that by such meanes yt peéuishe and cold inuentions of your Commētaries may be im­puted vnto our charge. In like maner, bycause God did place in the firmamentone great light, and an other lesse, in the first creation of the world: ye will haue this also to be almost an Ar­ticle of our fayth, that hereof it came to passe, that the Pope is in degreé aboue the Emperour. O passing witte, that can make of the Sunne a Pope, and of the Moone an Emperour. But ye route so soundly in these drousie dreames, that you can not bee awakened out of them: and therfore I will leaue you snortyng in them, and will aūswere you of the true meanyng of the Pro­phecie whereof you moued your question. Esay the Prophet doth in that place treate of the commyng of our Sauiour Ie­su Christ, and doth foreshew, that in that tyme, shall peace and full tranquillitie of all thyngs be: which peace after a Prophe­ticall maner he doth beautifie and make apparaūt, vnder allu­sions and variable figures, that by them we might be enduced to haue a better tast and feélyng therof.

And to expresse the same more playnly. I will recite that part of Esay frō the begynnyng which you haue slightly runne ouer.Esay. 11. The Prophecy is knit together in this phrase of wordes. And there shall spring a braunche out of the roote of lesse, and ae blossome shall grow out of his roote. &c. Vpon whom the spirite of the Lord shall rest. &c. then a litle after. The Wolfe shall dwell with the Lambe, and the Leoparde shall lye downe by the Kidde. And agayne. The Bullockes, Lions, and Cattaile, shall keepe com­panie together, so that a litle Child shall leade them. The Cowe, [Page 51] and Beare, shall feede together, and their yoūg ones shall lye toge­ther. The Lyō shall eate straw like the Oxe or the Cow, the suckling babe shall haue delight to the Serpentes neast, and when he is wea­ned, he shall put his hand into the Cockatrice `Denne. This much Esay: who did most eloquently describe vnto vs the cōmyng of Christ into the earth, florishyng to the great benefite of vniuer­sall peace and publike prosperitie, by way of allusion of the cō ­corde and agreément of sauadge beastes accompanyeng toge­ther peacybly. And because he would Emprinte the same more deépely into our inward senses, he is plētyfull in comparisons, and figures:The place of Esay ex­planed amongest the which, he bringeth in, this comfor­table similitude of the sucklyng babes, desirous to playe with the Serpentes: whereby, he doth most manifestly expresse vn­to vs, the happy estate of those dayes, and the wonderfull cle­mencie, and innocencie of Christ. All men may well know, that this was the true, and vnfayned meanyng of the Prophecie, whiche will consider the purpose of the Prophet: and withall will know this also, that your Fable therof is very triflyng, a meéte lesson for your peltyng schoole of Cōfessours and schoole­men. Now here is your goodly Confession so gorgiously pain­ted by you, which you affirme to be the Queéne of all Christian discipline, beyng in very deéde (as you haue set her out in stage) a most filthie handmayde of your Schoolemen, and most pesti­lent bondslaue of the Romish Seé.

Now come we to deale with you of ye Supper of the Lord:Of the Sa­crament of Euchariste. whiche beyng of it selfe a most precious and sacred monument of our redemption, you haue so defiled and corrupted with your traditiōs, that the true vse therof is almost vtterly extinct. Yet in the meane space You accuse vs as violatours of the Maie­stie of this sacred Sacrament, and that we haue in the same, I know not, how haynously offended. Which horrible accu­sation beyng enflamed with outragious burnyng firebrandes of Sentences, if it be vnfolden & throughly perused, will seéme to sauour of nothyng at all, but of malicious smoke of your shameles railing. You make a preface hereūto in some leaues, with a great rable of wordes, but altogether contrary to the matter, As that we do not cōceaue all the creatures of God by reason: and a litle after, you roll in your Rhetoricke com­myng [Page] downe to the fashionyng of mans body, and the whole creatiō of the world and herein bycause you will be accoumpted no small Ciceronian, Osori. Tul­lyes coūter­saite. you besturre your selfe: & packe and stuffe together a whole sarpler full of Tullies owne sentences, and at length with a long & laboursome talke, ye conclude that, wher­of no sensible man of our Deuines euer doubted: That is to say:Cicero. de natura Deo [...]um. That mās reason onely must not be vsed to the conceauyng of all the creatures of God, but that fayth must be many tymes enterlaced withall: And last of all you name our Lord Iesus Christ commyng downe vnto vs from heauen, and of his infi­nite mercy takyng vpon him our frayle nature, the whiche you preach to exceéde reason aboue measure. What say you Osori­us? what do you meane hereby? who hath distempered you? you do suppose (I thinke) that ye write to stones, and blockes, not to men. Who did euer doubt that there are as many thyngs to be woūdred at, as be creatures in nature? Let vs behold all the workes of God. Or what Christian person hath euer bene foūd amongest vs so blockish, and so voyde of perseueraunce, which doth not confesse the commyng downe of Christ from heauen? and all the Articles of our belief, to be vnto vs, as secrete and heauenly mysteries of our fayth? wherfore do you so wastfully lose your own and other mens tyme in so euident, approued, & confessed matters? why are you so madde in the introduction onely of so great a matter, to make so long a discourse, of Maximes already manifest, and whereof our children can not be ignoraunt.

Forsooth to this end I do it (you say) thereby to display your errour. Who doe not comprehend the Sacrament of Euchariste by the mysterie of fayth, but esteeme the same by reason onely. That is false (my Lord) it is vntrue: we doe earnestly vrge fayth:Actes. 1. we adioyne the Spirite, we do graūt, & defend it to be both a Sacrament, and a mysterie also. You on the other side, do plucke God out of heauen, contrary to the ex­presse Article of our fayth: and beyng pluckte from thence (the holy Ghost crying out agaynst you in ye Scriptures) you shut him vp into bread, and beyng shut vp therein ye doe transub­stantiate him, & disguise him with your Argumentes, & illusi­ons of schooleianglers chopt together, framed vpō accidentes, [Page 52] substaunces, quantities, and qualities, and to helpe your iug­glyng, you borow a point of Paule, cleane contrary the cause: videl. He that hath not spared his owne Sonne, but hath deliuered him vp for vs all, how hath he not geuen vs all thynges together with him? I would to God Osorius you did as firmely and sin­cerely beleue this sentence of Paule, as we doe. There would not then be such a swarme of ceremonies, and superstitions in your Church, there would not bee such gaddyng on pilgrima­ges, and lyeng grouelyng before Images, neither should we seé the Uicare of God enstalled a Lord ouer mens consciences, vtteryng his pardons of sinnes for a fewe pence, tossing and turmoyling the poore and wretched soules in ye flames of Pur­gatory, not enhaunsing market of the holy Scriptures, after hiw owne pleasure. Lastly your Confessours and cowled gene­ration of Uipers would not esteéme the worthynes of workes as a portion of our Iustification. Yea if you had beleued Paul, you would neuer haue admitted those poysoned monsters of Religiō, but would haue cōfessed with vs: That all thyngs are geuen vnto vs together with our Lord Iesus. But I pray you what doth that sentence of Paule auayle to the Exposition of the Sacrament of the Supper of the Lord? Truely nothyng at all: yet this our goodly graue father turmoyleth all thyngs, confoundeth all thynges, not regardyng what may be agrea­ble to the cause, but poureth out all thynges at happe hassard as they come into his vagaraunt quill.

Now followeth a decreé of your owne stāpe in these wordes. I am of this opiniō that those persōs which do professe the true fayth, should cōsider nothyng els herein, but how that thyng, that is decreed vpon to bee beleued, may be agrea­ble to the goodnes of God. That no man might doubt by any meanes the mysterie of our Redemption. What speake you (Osorius) shall we iudge how agreable any thyng may be to the goodnes of God? Who hath made vs iudges of the good­nes of God, that we should determine what may bee agreable, and not agreable to the same? but your toung doth folter: for you would haue sayd, the will of God, or ye should haue so sayd: as farre forth as we can vnderstād, it as farre forth as the Pa­triarches,Hebr. 1. Prophetes our Lord Iesus also & his Apostles hath [Page] reuealed vnto vs by the sacred Scriptures. And if your decreé tende to this effect, we will accept thereof. For we make no doubt of the power of God (although you falsely reproche vs herein) but do grope after his deuine will in his word, and do humbly apply all our actions thereunto, as farre forth as the imbecillitie of our frayle and weake nature will permit. And therefore teache you I pray you, what thyng God would haue to bee made in that Sacrament, we will neuer enquire whe­ther God be able to performe it: sor whē we are made assured of Gods good will, we will acknowledge with all reuerence and humblenesse his power, as meéte is: Next after your foo­lish and childish Preface ensueth a very graéuous accusation a­gaynst Peter Martyr, a meéte hotchepot for your Confessours, Schoolemē & Friers. For if they had couchte all their noddles together, they could haue vomited out scarsely halfe so much poyson in so short a tyme. To make this matter somewhat playne of all partes what maner a thyng it is, we will rippe a­broad his Budget of tales euen as Osorius hath patchte it to­gether. These therefore are the wordes, wherewith Osorius doth challenge the combate agaynst the soule of Peter Martyr.

Osori. Pro­lopopo [...]ia agaynst Pe­ter Martyr. O thou most wicked mā, how came it into thy mynde to handle that most sacred mysterie? I would to God my sweéte Peter were alyue agayne, & did heare this franticke slaunder agaynst him. Forsooth he would easely suppres this brawlyng toung, with the chaynes of holy Scriptres, and tame your waywardnes. Now therfore, albeit God hath called him hence vnto him selfe: let vs imagine that hee were alyue, and in fewe wordes confutyng your cursed declamation after this maner. First of all,The aun­swere of Peter Mar­tyr agaynst the Prolo­popo [...]ia of Osorius. how may I take this (reuerend Prelate) that you beyng an old man, a Deuine, and a Byshop, at the first choppe should call me most wicked man? whereas I am not knowen vnto you, nor haue euer bene sene o [...] you, nor haue deserued any euill of you? Is this the brotherly loue, which Christ requireth of his Disciples? Is this the mildnesse and modestie of a By­shop, wherof Paule maketh mention? I haue written (I con­fesse it) & haue spoken in the commō Argument of Religiō, as seémed good vnto me: I haue not offēded you, in any thyng, nei­ther haue I had any disputation with you touchyng matters of [Page 53] Religion, neither was any contention betwixt vs at any tyme. Wherfore then doe you storme agaynst me so vnciuilie? why do ye call me most wicked, which can not duely charge me with any wickednes at all? But be it, that your maners are so natu­rally of an euill disposed inclination, that ye can not choose but oppresse your brother with infamous reproches, whom of due­tie you ought gently haue admonished, beyng in errour: why do ye haynously offende in the cause, whiche you haue vnderta­kē, that you must neédes stampe out so manifest a lye in the very begynnyng: for ye write that the Sacrament of Euchariste, is defaced, defiled & peruerted by me. This is false, and you here­in are iniurious and slaunderous: I call to witnes myne owne bookes, let them be brought forth & perused, & it shall euident­ly appeare, that I haue beautified this excellent Sacrament with most honorable titles, & haue spoken therof alwayes with greatest reuerence: But whereas you demaunde of me, and my maisters, with what face we durst attempt so execrable a fact, contrary to so many former ages: and where you also demaūde if so many Martyrs, and so many Religious men haue strayed from the truth, and we onely haue seéne the truth: Truely I cā not coniecture what Maisters, what Martyrs and what Reli­gious men you doe meane. Neither doe I presume any thyng vpon my selfe, nor do derogate from any other man, neither cā I iudge you to be sober enough, which in matter of nothyng cā gush out such a Sea of idle words. But you are come somwhat nearer the matter, and would bee certified of me, What great matter our Lord Iesus Christ did, if in his last Supper he did leaue nothyng els vnto vs but a naked remembraunce of his death? In this question I turne you ouer to the Anabap­tistes, whose speaches are these: A bare signe, bare bread, and bare remembraunce: which their nakednes of speach I do ab­horre and condemne as well as you. I do speake honorably, & iudge most reuerently of the excellencie of this godly Sacra­ment. The Sacrament is the most excellent, and effectuall vi­sible signe of inuisible grace, ye heauenly bread, mysticall bread, the pledge, and vessell of our redemption: finally, it is the true body of our Lord Iesus Christ, euen in the same maner, as the true body of our Sauiour may be present in a Sacrament spi­ritually, [Page] by fayth, and in a mysterie. Therfore away with those your bare signes, your bare remembraunce: I call them yours bycause they are your slaūders, your manifest quarels agaynst me: for I do not acknowledge, nor defend any such matter for myne. As often therfore as you do repeate the same (which you do very often) so oftē you do repeate not myne errour, but your owne lye. You imagined in my writyng very monstruous interpretations, and absurde disputations. Wherof I neuer thought of once so much as in my dreame: All whiche come to this onely effecte, as if I had taught, that nothyng had bene in the Sacrament, but a bare signe of Christ Crucified for vs. Wherein you are very farre wyde, not onely from the duety of a Byshop and person of a Deuine, but also from the profession of a true Christiā man, for you thrust vnto me a Bastard whelpe as it were myne own, and the same also you tosse topsie tyruie, from post to piller after your own [...], as if it were mine. But this whelpe is not myne, it is a Bastard, I hate it and abhorre it, and will forsweare it also, if you will haue me so do.

At the length you are come to the very bowels of the contro­uersie, and do stoutly affirme, that the matter is most manifest, & proue the same with the wordes of Paule. But let a man first proue him selfe, and so eate of that bread, and drinke of that cuppe, alledgyng also these wordes of our Lord Iesu. This (sayth hee) is my body, do ye this in remembraunce of me, You will therfore that we should stand fast to these wordes beyng so notable and euident, and accuse my wicked interpretation of Chri­stes wordes, & affirme that I do make none accoūpt of the meanyng of Paule. Doe I apply a wicked interpretation of Christes most sacred wordes (Syr Ierome) Do I esteéme the sence and mynde of S. Paule of no value? shewe the place, re­cite the wordes, bryng forth in the face of the world this hay­nous crime, that all men may abhorre myne impudencie, detest myne impietie, and spitte at myne ignoraunce. If you can dis­couer nothing in so notorious an escape, if you exclame against me without cause, if you be clamorous without reason, if none of all these be in me, but if it be your foule and vnshamefast slaū ­der: what maner of Christian, what Deuine, and what kynd of Byshop shall mē surmise you to be? Now I will returne to your [Page 54] allegations, whereby (to deale in playne & open tearmes with you) if vpon those wordes you will haue it cōcluded, that Christ is truely deliuered in the Sacrament, to the true beleuers, in fayth, and spirite: I will not gaynsay you. But if you meane to grounde the foundation of your grosse, & Idolatrous Tran­substantiation vpon the same (wherof you make mention a litle after) I must neédes tell you, that I doe vtterly dissente from you, and your Maisters the Schoolemen herein: and do so no­thyng refuse to debate this controuersie by the very selfe same testimonies, whiche you haue alledged, that I doe rather de­sire, and most earnestly require the same. This is therfore the sentence of Paule. Let a man examine him selfe, and so eate of that bread, and drinke of that cuppe: 1. Cor. 11. Which word, Bread, Paule through the whole discourse of that Chapiter, once, twise, yea many tymes doth inculcate. Whereby it appeareth playnly, that when a man hath tryed him selfe to the vttermost, when he hath done all that apperteineth to the due receiuing of the Sa­crament, he must yet at the last eate Bread. So that after your consecrations, Bread, remaineth: and neuertheles the Sacra­ment, yea Bread remaineth euen to the last. Wherfore the sub­staūce of the materiall Bread can not passe into an heauēly sub­staunce (as you do imagine) for Bread can not remaine materi­all Bread without the substaunce of Bread, no nor be surmised by thought to be Bread.

Paule doth sondry tymes call the Sacrament,1. Cor. 11. Bread.

But naturall Bread is not the body of Christ.

Ergo. The Sacrament can not be the naturall body of Christ.

I do speake here euen of the consecrated Bread, as you call it, or as Paule calleth it, the Bread whi [...]h is blessed. Whereof Paule hath an infallible sentence in his Epistle to the Corin­thians. The bread which we breake, is it not the partaking of the body of Christ? 1. Cor. 10. This Sacramentall Bread therfore after bles­sing, when it is taken to be eaten, is euen then Bread, and brokē as naturall Bread. Ergo, it loseth not his naturall substaunce, nor is trāsubstanciated into the naturall body of Christ, as you vse to speake monstruously in a monstruous matter.

How then (say you) doth Paule call Bread the participa­tion of the body of Christ? For sooth in the same maner: in the [Page] which a litle before, he doth call Christ a spirituall Rocke. They did all drinke (sayth Paule) of one spirituall Rocke which folowed them, and the same Rocke, was Christ, and by and by after, is set downe in the same Chapiter, We many are one bread, and one bo­dy. In both which we do acknowledge the most wholesome, and familiar speache of the holy Ghost, but can not acknowledge your monstruous and newfangled Trāsubstantiation. To this purpose are the wordes of our Sauiour Christ to bee applyed. This is my body whiche is deliuered for you, doe ye this in remem­braunce of me. For the latter part doth explane the first part of the sencence most expressely. For if the transubstantiated bread should conteine in it selfe the very naturall body of Christ, han­ged vpon the Crosse and thrust into the side for vs (as you doe dreame) what neéded then so often a rehearsall to be made vnto vs of the Remembraūce of his body, especially the body it selfe beyng presente, and subiect to our senses, and dayly handled in our handes? But for as much as our Lord Iesus in the sight of the Apostles (and the Angell declaryng the same) did ascende vp into the heauens,Actes. 1. and sitteth there now at the right hand of his father, of his infinite mercy, hee hath left behynde him this most fruitefull, and most healthfull Sacrament vnto our vse: by the receauyng wherof, we might be exceédyngly comforted, and should emprinte deépely in our memory, and reserue inuio­lably the liuely and effectuall remembraunce of his most bitter death and Passion, apperteinyng to the sauetie of our soules. Now if any man doubt whether this bee so or no, let him heare our Lord Iesus in the Gospell of S. Iohn,Iohn. 6. so playne and per­fect an interpretour of him selfe, that nothyng can be added to make it appeare more manifest. My fleshe (sayth our Lord Ie­sus) is meate is deede, and my bloud is drinke in deede. He that eateth my sleshe and drinketh my bloud, the same dwelleth in me and I i [...] him. Many therefore of his Disciples hearyng this, sayd. This is an hard saying, who can abide it? But Iesus knowing with in him selfe that his Disciples did murmure at this saying, said vn­to them. Doth this offende you? Thē what if you shall see the sonne of [...] ascendyng where he was before? it is the Spirite that geueth life, the flesh profiteth nothing at all: my wordes are spirite and life. Your speach is a hard speach (Osori.) it is a hard speach of trā ­substantiating [Page 55] the bread into the naturall body of Christ. Tou­chyng the carnall and fleshly eatyng of Christes body your say­ing is hard, yea as hard as yron: who can heare or abide it?

Let vs here take our Lord Iesus to be the Expositour of his own wordes, who doth so attēper & mollifie this his speach be­yng in outward apparaunce most hard of all other with a most sweéte interpretation, as yt nothyng cā be thought more mylde, & more apte for our cōsolation. Be not offended at my wordes sayth our louyng Lord and most sweéte Sauiour Iesus: for I must ascēde vp vnto my father, from whence I dyd de [...]cēd vnto you at ye first: And my body I must neédes take vp wt me, which you may not frō thenceforth hādle here on the earth. Therfore in this case, to witte, to conceaue this mysticall eatyng of my flesh whiche I haue commended vnto you, behoueth of very ne­cessitie that you bee endued with a spirituall vnderstandyng. For it is the Spirite that doth quicken, the flesh pro [...]iteth nothing at all. Iohn. 6. That is to say, the spirituall feédyng vpon my body, which is, geuen for you, shall nourishe you to life euerlastyng. But that fleshly eatyng, which doth trouble you so much, profiteth nothyng at all. At the last our Lord Iesus cōcludeth this place wholy vnto them in this wise. The wordes that I do speake vnto you, are spirite, and life. Iohn. 6. The wordes which Christ spake of the eatyng of his flesh are spirituall. The flesh profiteth nothyng at all, if we may beleue our Lord Iesus speaking of him selfe. Let vs therefore take hold of that quickenyng spirite, whiche may make vs partakers of euerlastyng lyfe, beyng authorized here­unto by Christ him selfe: and sithence you can not disgest this sweét and comfortable foode of the heauenly Table, by fayth, & spirite, we will leaue that other carnall and grosse banquet of the transubstantiated bread to you, and to your Capernaites. You seé now whereunto your testimonies, that you trusted so much, are come at the last, whose authoritie I do not refuse, but reuerence them: and suppose that your transubstantiation is o­uerthrowē and vtterly brought to naught by conferryng those two sentences, with the other processe of the text. Neither am I alone of this iudgement in the interpretatiō of these places. For S. August. August. de doct. christi. Tertullian. writyng vpon Iohn alledgeth the same sentence in expresse maner of speach. Tertul. also pronoūceth the same [Page] most euidently in his treatize vpon the distribution of the Sa­cramentall bread: which two haue bene alwayes accoumpted learned and auncient Authours.

You presse me with a whole forest full of slaūders affirming that this Sacramēt is fowly deformed by me, the body and bloud of Christ is troden vnder feete, the power and force of this wonderfull Sacramēt is dusked and vtterly extinct by me. I demaunde of you agayne, what my wordes be? where these botches doe lurcke in my bookes? what I haue written? what I haue done, where? and by what meanes? I am ready ei­ther to repulse your errour, or to cōfesse mine own: if I haue cō ­mitted any such fault, I craue no pardō. But if there be no such matter, if it be rather all cōtrary, if mine innocēcie be blameles herein, I call to witnesse God & men, heauen and earth agaynst that most wicked toung, whiche hath practized falsely to con­demne the credite of your brother, with so greéuous an accusa­tion, and so horrible a crime. Fie fie (Osorius) what vnbridled licentiousnesse of Scorpionlike stinge is this, to make guiltie of the body and bloud of Christ, your naturall brother, that hath not offended you? as though he had written that which he neuer wrate, as though he had done yt which heé neuer did, as though you haue affirmed that which you do not proue nor can euer iu­stifie: nay rather which you haue not endeuoured to proue: for what haue you alledged of myne? what wordes what sentences haue you noted out of my writyngs, lastly what one thing haue you explaned? whereby you may not bee adiudged of all men a most shamelesse slaunderour and notorious rayler.

Your processe that ensueth is stuffed full with demaundes, wherein albeit I dyd pittie your singular amazednesse very much, yet could I scarse hold my laughter in them, they were so cold, so friuolous, so variable, and to speake my mynde at a word, so altogether like Osorius him selfe. Your first question is That though myne eyes are so dazeled in matters of Di­uinitie, that I can not cōceaue that wonderfull chaunge of earthly bread into the nature of heauenly bread yet why I would notwithstādyng with quarelling peruert so wonder­full a benefite of God? Truely I doe confesse, right reuerend Prelate, yt myne eye sight hath bene alwayes so dymme, that I [Page 56] could neuer discerne this your counterfait Trāsubstantiation. But I ought to haue beén pardoned herein, bycause it hath beén a generall disease, and blindnes of all tymes, of all ages, and of all Nations. The Apostles neuer saw so foolishe a thyng. The auncient Fathers could neuer discerne so cloudy a forgerie: at the last Sathan opened the eyes of your Schoolemen, & made them so sharpe sighted, that in Distinctions, eccyties and quid­dities, they could many time easely seé that thing which was no where at all. This kinde of people, enlumined by the Prince of darkenes, furnished wt the authoritie of the Laterane Coūcell, and Innocentius Pope of Rome, not much aboue 300. yeares past, did rayse out of hell, this newfangled monster of Trāsub­stantiation. Euen then, when that Councell had sitte abrood: Transubstantiation began first to peépe out of the shell,What tyme Transubstā ­tiation was brought in first. beyng neuer heard of before any where, nor knowē so much as by any name. Why then do ye vpbrayde me with blindnes so sharpely, sith your selfe (I say) your selfe do know, that all the world was as blind, as I, before that Laterane Coūcell? But do you as ye list. I for my part, will continue blind still, wt Christ, with the Apostles, with the aūcient Fathers, with all the commendable company of godly Deuines, in this Laberinthe of Transubstā ­tiation, rather then I will acquaynte my selfe with so monstru­ous a frameshapen new start vp puppet, with your Schoole­ianglers, confessours and lousie Friers. But you begyn here to waxe very whote and teastie and spurre questions at me on all sides: What is it (you say) that you do vnderstand? what do you conceaue in your mynde, and reasons? Lastly what is it, that your vnderstandyng doth feele and know? I will tell you, my good father, and without any cholor, I promise you, if you will heare me patiently. First I do seé that you doe childishly wander in this bitter talke, that demaunde one and the selfe same thyng in threé seuerall distinct questions. Then I do also playnly seé, that you are so doltishe, and blockishe a pa­trone of Transubstātiation, that ye can not with any honesty, open your packe amongest your owne pedlers. But you neuer cease demaundyng.

You aske of me what doth trouble me in the mysterie of the Sacrament. Truly nothyng at all, graue Prelate, trou­bleth [Page] me there, but your vnmeasurable vnskilfulnes in so great a mysterie, which is no small reproch to your profession and di­gnitie, yea & to your gray heares also. But ye will know more yet. Whether I doe mistrust the power or the clemencie of God? Neither of both, finewitted Gentleman: no more doe I trust your selfe, nor yet your Transubstantiation, bycause ye goe about to throw it vpon vs, contrary to the meanyng of the holy Scriptures, in the which God the Father hath most fully declared vnto vs, his power, and will, by his Sonne our Lord and Sauiour Iesu Christ. Lastly ye demaūde What the cause should be, why I should thinke wherefore you should be­leue, that the body, and bloud of Christ, is cōteined in the Sacrament in a wonderfull meane, and that I my selfe can not beleue the same? whereunto you annexe this, that in witte and learnyng ye doe farre surmonte me: It is a very hard matter (holy father) to descry any peculiar cause, whiche moueth you to beleue, and defende Transubstantiation: but I will gesse somewhat nearer the chiefest. Forsooth you are addi­cted wholy to your Schooletriflers, and Confessours, but very litle to the Scriptures: by meanes wherof it is come to passe, that ye skyppe ouer the open Oracles of truth, and are entan­gled in the weuett of errour: peraduenture also ye are become an apprētice to the Romish Seé, and ye meane to procure with the prety Marchaūdize of your pedlers pilfe, some Cardinals Hatte. It may likewise be, that for countenaunce sake ye will face out your false packe with a carde often, bycause ye thinke it will empaire the credite of your gray heares to be ouersene in any thyng. Besides all these, custome perhappes of many yeares had made your iudgement rotten before it was ripe, as men vse to say of common lyers, which redouble a lye so often, that by their often rehearsall beleue it to be true at the length: euen so may you thinke to establishe the countenaunce of your imagined Transubstantiation by alledgyng in defence therof, a continuall allowaunce of long tyme. If none of all these haue moued you: I thinke surely ouermuch pride hath blinded you, wherewith ye swell in such sort, that you dare boldly without blushyng make vaunt of your selfe, more like vnto a bragging Thraso, or if any thing cā be more vayne thē Thraso, then like [Page 57] a Deuine.A shew of Osorius pride. For you doe not exceede me in witte (say you) nor excell me in learnyng. Truely I will not compare my selfe with you, nor with any other person. Neither do I professe my selfe to know any thyng at all, but Iesus Christ, and him also Crucified. As for you, if one droppe of Christian humilitie, or ciuill modestie, were in you, so hautie a bragge of your braue witte, and learnyng, would neuer haue escaped you. Consider with your selfe in good earnest, my holy father, this your foolish communication, and learne somewhat of Christian humilitie, lest almightie God besides this your most vnsauory errour of Transubstantiation, adde a more heauie plague vpon you for your vnmeasurable arrogancie.

You accuse me that I doe trust to much to my naturall senses, but that you doe direct all the course of your life to the fayth of the Churche: and that I doe shake of from my shoulders the yoke of Christ, but you take it vpon you: and that I doe forsake the benefites of God, but that you doe leane stedfastly to fayth. All which are cleane contrary. For you apply your senses to ye vnderstādyng of Transubstātiatiō, wherby you will haue Christ to be felt, to be tasted, & to be swal­lowed downe into ye stomacke. But I accordyng to ye doctrine, & approued vse of the true Catholicke & Apostolicke Churche, doe vtterly renounce senses, accidētes, substaunces, & transfor­matiōs: & do aduisedly behold, and comprehend in my mynde, ye Sacrament, the mysterie, and the Spirite. You cast away the yoke of Christ, and embrace the licentious outrage of the Ro­mishe Bulles. I am a poore miserable exile of Christ, and his afflicted seruaunt. You doe choppe and chaunge the benefites of Christ: with the peéuishe trinckettes of your Schoolemen: I do search for the true doctrine of Christian fayth in the most approued preachyngs of Christ, & his Apostles. Ye do snarle at my conuersation of lyfe as if it were most wicked. Wher­in though you doe me a great iniurie, yet ye geue your selfe a deéper wounde, which in so open and manifest a lye, doe put all your credite in hassarde of losse. For albeit I am a miserable sinner in the sight of God, yet I hope, I haue so led my whole lyfe, through his onely great mercy, that I neéde not to feare Ierome Osorius to be myne accuser. I could call to witnesse [Page] for my innocencie here in Italy, Germanie and England: in e­uery of which Regiōs I haue so behaued my selfe, that hauyng testimony of all good & commendable personages, I may easely despise your slaunderous, & shameles rayling. Wherfore a way with this your friuolous, and insolent custome of scolding once at the last, for it empaireth not the estimatiō of honest persons, whiche though be vnknowen vnto you, yet haue commendable report els where abroad: but it rather hurteth your profession, diminisheth your credite, and loseth your estimation. You doe prayse the Sacramēt plentifully, and with many good wordes beautifie the benefites therof. Wherein you doe very well: for what thing vnder the heauens can be founde, more prayse wor­thy, more comfortable, more honorable, more precious, more heauenly, then this sacred Supper of the Lord? whiche we not onely call by the names of Synaxim, & Euchariste, as you doe, but also bread come downe frō heauen, and Angels foode. Nei­ther can you deuise to speake so fully and aboundauntly, in the displaying of the excellent worthynes of this most singular sa­crament but I will gladly consent with you therein.

Cyprian. You say that Cyprian was accustomed to geue this hea­uenly foode to Martyrs, and that he would lykewise re­moue from this heauenly Banquet, men that were notori­ous for any great crime. We doe acknowledge this godly v­sage of Cyprian: and the same do I for myne owne part Imi­tate as much as I may: and I know not, whether I haue em­ployed any so great endeuour, in any one thyng so much, as that the pure, and naturall honour of this Sacrament might be established, and the same dayly frequented in all Churches. Let my bookes bee perused, let enquirie bee made of my fami­liars, and such as I haue bene conuersaunt withall, let the con­tinuall course of my maners, and lyuyng bee examined, and I shalbe founde of all men to haue bene a most humble, and day­ly folower, and guest of this heauenly Supper. Wherfore thē do you so immorderatly exclame agaynst me, That I doe main­teyne combate agaynst the ordinaunce of Christ, agaynst the doctrine of Paule, agaynst the excellencie of so delicate fruites, agaynst the knowen experience of that wonderfull commoditie and pleasauntnesse, and agaynst the vndefiled [Page 58] fayth of the vniuersall Church? Wherfore do you adde here­unto, That I haue reprochfully abused the body and bloud of Christ, and outragiously peruerted the benefite of Gods mercy? Why do you knitte vp your knot at the length and say, That I doe sport my selfe in these mischiefes and doe infect many persons with the poyson of this pestilēt errour? God cōfounde that vnshamefast and blasphemous mouth with some horrible plague, most cursed Semei, whose cancred toung can finde no end, nor measure in rayling. I haue alwayes most re­uerētly esteémed of ye Euchariste, as of a most precious, & most fruitefull sacramēt of Christes death, as a most assured pledge and Seale of our redemption, as a most precious treasure and mysterie of our fayth, and hereunto haue I bene enduced by the ordinaunce of Christ our Sauiour, by the doctrine of Paule, by the iudgement of aūcient Fathers, and by the discipline and receaued custome of the vniuersall Catholicke and Apostolicke Church. Touchyng the doctrine therof I haue oftē tymes spo­ken before: now therfore touchyng the Custome: The same is perceaued by the dayly Custome of the Disciples, which after Christ was takē vp into heauē, did continually perseuere toge­ther in the doctrine of the Apostles,Actes. 2. and in participation and breakyng of bread and prayers, as appeareth by these wordes: Vpon a day of the Sabbaoth, Actes. 20. when the Disciples came together to breake bread. &c. Awake Ierome Awake: you do heare the holy Ghost call it Bread, and bicause you should not doubt therof, you heare it agayne and ägayne, yea and brokē also, and this much more ye finde, that the Disciples of Christ continually remay­ned in this holy custome: And yet it was not bare Bread, as you do wickedly diffame my sayinges therein: but it was mysticall Bread, sacred Bread, finally, it was the participation of the bo­dy of Christ, in the same maner, as the body of Christ may bee deliuered in a Sacrament, by fayth, and Spirite.

Therfore,The confu­tatiō of the Transub­stantiation. for as much as our Lord Iesus hath so instituted this Sacramēt, to the euerlastyng Remēbraunce of his death, & passiō, sithence Paule doth make mention of the sayd institu­tion after the same maner, sithence the auncient Fathers haue applied their doctrine to the same sense, sithēce the primitiue & Apostolicke Churche hath confirmed the same with perpetuall [Page] Custome, Awake (Ierome) at the lēgth for shame awake if you can, and rid your stomacke of that dronken Schoolesurfet of Trāsubstantiation, which neither Christ did ordeine, nor Paul acknowledged, nor the Fathers euer thought of, ne yet the A­postolique Church did euer medle withall. It is a new deuised mockerie, foūded first by Innocētius, proclaymed by Schoole­ianglers, scattered abroad by Sathā, to the rootyng out of the true remembraunce of Christ, from out our soules: to the vtter ouerthrow of the power of that euerlastyng sacrifice of ye crosse: Lastly to the erecting of a damnable Idoll in our myndes, sup­plying the place of Christ him selfe to be worshipped of vs. For what els meaneth this your Transubstantiated bread, so much adorned with all ceremony of Religion, so reuerently carried abroad? so superstitiously reserued, and kept in boxe? lastly so blasphemously holden vp to the gaze, & worshypped? did Christ our Sauiour do or teach euer at any tyme any of all these? did Paule? did the first and primitiue Church? did the auncient Fa­thers? Christ gaue Bread to his disciples. Paule pronoūceth it by ye name of Bread, once, twise, thrise. The Apostolicke church brake Bread in the remembraunce of Christes death, and per­seuered in the same Custome. The Fathers name it Bread, and a Sacrament, a mysterie, and a figure of Christes body. And yet Pope Innocentius commyng lately out of hell with a de­testable superstition & horrible Sacriledge doth Transubstan­tiate this mysticall Bread into our Sauiour Iesus Christ.Pope Inno­centius the thyrd.

There followed him certeine phantasticall Schoolemen, which did most wickedly defile the pure Supper of our Lord, with durtie schoole dregges. And now at the length starteth by our Osorius a braue champion of this Schoole tromperies, Ie­rome Osorius I say, that great Maister in Israell, a deépe and incomparable Deuine, whō no man exceédeth in witte, nor sur­mounteth in learnyng, if a man may beleue him as hee repor­teth him selfe. Wherfore I would now aske one question (good maister Proctour) of you, of this Transubstātiation: whether our Lord Iesus Christ when hee did first institute the Sacra­ment of the Euchariste, did make any mention in his speach, of any remouing of the substaunce of Bread? of the accidentes that should remayne? or whether the substaunce of his body, should [Page 59] supply the substaunce of Bread? Did Paule touche any of these? did the primitiue and Apostolique Churche receiue any such thyng? haue the auncient Fathers made mention of any such matter in their bookes? Sithence therefore this your wonder­full conuersion of the Substaunce of Bread, into the body of Christ (whiche your Schoolemen by a more grosse name call Trasubstantiatiō) hath bene shapen & forged out of these Mo­nasteries, whereof not so much as one title can be founde in the holy Scriptures, in the Custome of the Apostles, in the bookes of auncient Fathers: it is a wonderfull straunge matter that a bishop, so exquisite in diuinity, as you are, or would seeme to be, would yet vndertake so desperate a cause, and obtrude vpon vs such cold schoole dreames, in steéde of most apparaūt & knowen thynges. Ye seé now how pitthily my Peter Martyr hath aun­swered you in all thyngs: whose soule you would not haue tea­zed to quarell, if you had had any witte. For he was worthe­ly esteémed an excellent Deuine amongest the chiefest De­uines of our age: whose Scholer you might haue bene in all knowledge and litterature, except your eloquence onely in the Latine tounge.

But you do leaue our Peter now at yt length, whō if you had neuer prouoked, you had done better: so neéded you not to doe me so great iniurie as to challēge me for my familiar acquain­taunce with him. For if you thinke that ye may with your ho­nesty keépe company and vse frendly familiaritie with that dol­tish Calfe Angrence hauyng no vtteraunce, no witte, no sence & no vnderstādyng: why should not I rather acquainte my selfe with a man not onely excellēt in learnyng but replenished with all comlynesse & ciuilitie of maners? Make choise of your fami­liars Osorius, as you please. Suffer me to enioy myne owne: neither is it reason that you should limitte me, or I you in this kynde of affaires: humanitie, & cōmon course of mās life requi­reth that choise be made of frendship as liketh eche mans owne iudgement best, & not to be ruled by others phantasies. Be not you squeymish therfore at the cōmēdations of godly & learned men, my especiall frendes Martin Bucer, and Peter Martyr, I loued thē when they lyued, I will not forget them beyng dead, I frequēted their familiaritie whiles they lyued as much as I [Page] might, their names, & remēbraūce of thē though they be dead, I will defende as much as I may, and if they were now alyue, I would esteéme more of a whole yeares conference with them, then of one day with you, for their conuersation had a certeine discreéte pleasauntnes, their conference had a wholesome wise­dome, ye whole course of their demeanour was a most absolute paterne of honestie and godlynesse: And I am throughly per­suaded that nothing could haue aduaunced my estimation (such as it is) more, then myne acquaintaunce and familiaritie with these two godly Fathers.

You come at the length to our Church, the orders whereof you do captiously snatch at, but this ye do so disorderly & stāme ringly, that all men may iudge that ye did roaue at it in your dreame rather then dispute beyng awake. I affirmed, that fayth came by hearyng. What say you? is it no so? I sayd also, that our Preachers are sent abroad into all the coastes of our Realme, to teach the cōmon people their duties in all thynges: what? will you deny this to be done? You can not: the matter is manifest. But you exclaime, and say that our Preachers are Lutherans, Bucerans, and Caluinistes. First of all, how know you this to be true? then, if it be so, let the names goe: confute their doctrine, if you can: But this lesson you learned of your Cowled Coockowes, to braule alwayes with bare names, whē you cā not ouerthrow a sillable of their doctrine. Your Maister shyp will not allow that our Parliamēt and publicke assem­blie of the Realme should entermedle with matters of Re­ligion, for herein ye suppose that the dignitie of Priestes is empayred. First what thyng can be publiquely receaued, vn­lesse it be proclaymed by publique authoritie? Then, our Pre­lates and Ecclesiasticall Fathers do propoūde the rules of Re­ligion: after that, the Prince, with the consent of the whole e­states, do ratifie the same. What may be done more orderly or more circumspectly? This custome was obserued in the tyme of the kynges of Israell: This vsage preuayled in all Coun­seils, vntill that Romishe Ierarche had burst in sunder these lawes, with his false ambitious picklockes, and had commaū ­ded all thyngs to be subiect to his absolute power. I wrate al­so, that there was great reuerence geuen to the holy Scrip­tures [Page 60] in our Churches, and that vnitie and the bonde of peace was wonderfully preserued. You demaunde on the other side, From whence so troublesome contentions in opinions are raysed in our Churches? Shew what contentions there be, and we will satisfie your request. But if you will not, or cā not, hold your toūg most wicked rayler, & require not to be beleued for your onely affirmatiues sake. Deale in this maner with your charge of Siluain, for ye shall obteine nothyng here, but by meare force of Argument.

I did affirme likewise,1. Cor. 14. that our deuine seruice is ministred with vs in the mother and vulgare toūg accordyng to Paules doctrine, & the approued custome of the Apostolicke Churche:Of vn­knowē and straunge tounges in Churches. what say you to this? forsooth you can not like of it, bycause it is repugnant to the ordinaūce of Rome, and yet you can not well deny so manifest a truth: for S. Paule did establish this doc­trine of the holy Ghost, with so many and so strōg Argumētes, as though hee did euen then foreseé in mynde that some such er­ronious botches would infect our Religion, yt by such meanes they might blot out, & vtterly extinguish out of our Churches this most fruitefull worshyppyng of God, beyng the very foun­dation of all Christian godlynes. And therfore this godly mā,Ibidem. and most excellent seruaunt of God, Paul, trauaileth very ear­nestly in this place, partly by course of nature, partly by rea­son, partly by examples, partly by similitudes to proue that cō ­mon prayers should bee ministred in Churches in the vulgare, and knowen language, and herein is so plentyfull, and so aboū ­daunt, and vseth so many infallible Argumentes, that if the whole swarmes of Schooleiāglers, and Friers, and couled ge­neration did conspire together, they were not able to abyde the force and strength of his disputation. And therefore Osorius, craftely cloakyng this matter, slydeth away from thence to the vices of men. And sayth that some of our Preachers are puf­fed vp with pride of their science, many of them be entan­gled in snares and difficulties and doubtfull questiōs. This is true: & this also is as true, that there is a great rable of false Christiās, amōgest whom our Doctour Ierome seémeth chief­taine & standard bearer which call light darkenes, & darkenesse light, whiche forbid wedlocke, deny lawfull vse of meates, ob­serue [Page] serue dayes and monethes, yeares & minutes of tymes, which are turned to the naked and beggerly elementes:Gallat. 4. Enemyes of the Crosse of Christ, flow bellyes.Phil. 3. And yet may not godly men be defrauded of the Gospell, bycause such Lurdaines do abuse the holy Scriptures, to their lust & filthy lucre. For our Lord Iesus Christ doth thunder with manifold curses agaynst such Pharisies, Maisters of ignoraunce and darkenesse: saying,Luke. 11. Wo be to you Lawyers, for you haue taken away the keye of knowledge, and haue not entred in your selues, and those that would haue en­tred in, you haue forbidden. Math. 33. And agayne. Woe bee to you Scri­bes and `Pharisies hypocrites. For you shut fast the kingdome of hea­uen from men, whereunto you enter not your selues, nor will suffer others to enter in that would enter. You are a Byshop Osorius, you haue ye keyes of knowledge, or ought to haue, but you keépe it close and hyde it, and will not suffer it to bee opened to your selfe nor to others. You are a Shepheard of Christes flocke, or you ought to bee, you locke fast the Gospell (wherein is the kyngdome of God) from your sheépe, and enter not your selfe, nor will suffer others to enter. This is daungerous, this is damnable, you are accursed by the very mouth of our Lord and Sauiour Iesu Christ, yea euen by the testimonie of your owne mouth, Osorius.

For after your long, idle and counterfaite deuises imagined vpon the wordes of Paule, you conclude at length in this ma­ner:Osori. fol. 69. Paule doth not forbid to vse straunge language. Yet he doth preferre and commende prophecyeng, that is to say the expoūdyng of the will of God, & the maner of edi­fieng the Church. If Paule doe preferre prophecieng more, why do you embace it? if Paule would haue the congregations to be edified, why do you practize to destroy them.1. Cor. 14. If Paule of an infinite loue, do commaunde all thynges to be expounded in Churches, by an interpretour, by what tyrānie do you procure all thynges to be kept in couert in Churches? and the people to bee defrauded in all thynges of vnderstandyng by meanes of straunge tounges? For it is true in deéde that you say, that to speake with toūges is allowed of Paul, if you admit also an in­terpretour, whiche may expresse the meanyng of the tounges, But it is false that straunge languages shalbe receaued in cō ­gregations, [Page 61] without an interpretour. For this speaketh Paul.1. Cor. 14. If a man speake with tounges, let the same be done by two, or at the most by three, and so by turnes, & let one interprete: if there be no interpretour, let him holde his peace in the congregation, or let him speake to him selfe and to God. Saint Paule commaundeth straunge lāguages to be silent in the congregation, if there be no interpretour. Let vs therfore obey him, or rather the holy Ghost speakyng in him with all humilitie, and banish from vs this chatteryng chough of languages to his Confessours and cowled generation.

But we can not so driue away this vnportunate fleshfly frō ye godly banguets of soules, for he is alwayes bussing about thē & at the last fleéth to this desperate cariō, That this doctrine of Paule was but for a tyme, and enioyned to be receaued to the Corinthians, and not of vs, bycause we are not so apte to be taught therein, as they were, and are also more inc [...]i­nable to arrogancie. Doth this kynde of Expositiō please you Osorius, and will you be accompted a Deuine and a Byshop in this your Diuinitie to say that ye doctrine of the holy Ghost in matters of fayth, in thynges eternall, in ordinaūces assured & permanent, not in any part chaūgeable in them selues, is but a doctrine for a tyme? Our Lord Iesus commaūdeth otherwise. Searche the Scriptures (sayth he) the same be they which beare re­corde of me. How shall we searche that whiche we do not vnder­stand? or how shall we receaue testimonie in a toung vnknowen vnto vs? There is a commaundement of God the Father from heauen.Luke. 3. This is my beloued sonne, heare ye him. And how shall we heare him, except he speake vnto vs in a knowen toūg? The Lord Iesus commaundeth vs to watch, and to pray, yea to do the same continually, for that we know not in what houre he will come: what therfore, shall we pray in an vnknowen language? Truly if it bee so, the spirite shall pray,1. Cor. 14. but the soule shall receaue no fruite therof, by the euident te [...]monie of Paule. Whē I name the spirite, I doe meane thereby, the breath that issueth out of ye mouth: for so doth Paule interprete it in that place. Did our Lord Iesus vse a knowē or a straūge language, whē he taught ye Apostles the forme of prayer? Lastly I demaūde of you whe­ther you can finde one sillable in the whole doctrine of the pri­mitiue [Page] Churche, or whether any remembraunce or vse of this praying in a straunge toung, was frequented in the tyme of the Apostles. I adde hereunto, that after the opinion of S. Au­gustine prayer is nothing els, thē a communicatiō betwixt vs, & almightie God. What request then shall we make vnto God the father, for our necessities, when we vnderstand not what we aske? No sober man will seéme so franticke before men, much lesse will he trifle so pernitiously with God. That foule mouth Osorius, that foule mouth therfore would be choaked vp with euerlastyng infamie, whiche contrary to the manifest doctrine of the holy Ghost, contrary to the receaued custome of the Apo­stolicke Churches, contrary to nature, to reason, and contrary to all feélyng of common capacitie, will auowe that prayers ought to bee made in the congregation in straunge and vn­knowen tounges.

You demaunde further of me. Why we haue cōmitted the interpretatiō of Scriptures to all Carters and Porters? I aske of you likewise wt what face you could write so vnshame­fast a lye in your paper? You say that all order is subuerted with vs, for that all are Pastours, all are Prophetes, all are teachers and therupō that confusiō of all thyngs doth en­sue amōgest vs. Both these are false Osorius, and it becōmeth you nothyng at all, beyng a Bishop and an old man, to imagine all thynges so licentiously & disorderly in the face of the whole world after your owne phantasie. Yet make you no ende of de­maundyng. And therfore you desire to know, what we dyd lacke at any tyme heretofore to the sober discipline of good myndes? There lacked both the old and the new Testa­ment, which is the onely instrumēt of the health of our soules, beyng close locked fast from vs, by the wicked practize of your Confessours, and Friers and Monckes:Iohn. 21. we wanted godly Pa­stours, and especially good Byshops, vnlike vnto you, whiche should haue fed the flocke of Christ committed to their charge, with that heauenly foode of the holy Scriptures, accordyng to Christ his own institution. And yet ye demaunde once agayne. Whether we wanted learned Priestes, who could deliuer out so much of the holy mysteries, as was needefull, which without daunger might haue bene expoūded to vnlearned [Page 62] men? What is this that you say (Osorius) so much as is neéde­full? do ye beleue that in the Scriptures is any thing to much? will ye prescribe any boundes or limites to the holy Ghost? our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ was of an other mynde, who spake in this maner.Luce. 4. Man doth not liue by bread onely, but by euery word proceedyng from the mouth of God. Your meanyng is that some tast bee taken onely of the holy Scriptures: Christ commaundeth vs to be instructed in euery word: you teach that men should warely touch so much of the heauēly doctrine, & as farre forth as may be without daunger. But the holy Ghost by the mouth of Paule teacheth farre otherwise, in these wordes.2. Timo. 3. All Scripture inspired by the holy Ghost, is profitable to teach, to admonishe, to reproue, to instruction, which is in righteousnesse, that the mā of God may be made perfect, & prepared to all good workes. Paule doth commende vnto vs all heauenly Scripture, & iud­geth that we ought to be instructed with the same vnto all per­fection of godlynes. It pleaseth Osorius that so much onely be taken, as may be deliuered without daunger. O blasphe­mous toung, do you feare ieopardie in the doctrine of the holy Ghost? do you thinke that there is to much in the Scriptures? or any thyng neédelesse that may be cut of, and left out?

But this foolish demaunder proceédeth yet forewardes and enquireth, If heretofore wanted any that might supply the place of the vnlearned, that might pronounce this worde, Amen. Truly I dare not tearme you by the name of an Idiot, my Lord, beyng a stately Prelate and a profound Deuine, but I shall not do amisse if I call you a playne blockish Asse. Paule commaundeth all doctrine and all prayer to bee vttered in the congregation, in a knowen tounge, that all the people vnder­stāding the matter may say. Amen. You in steade of the whole cōgregation, do appoint some one Idiote or vnlearned Parish Clarke to vtter this word. Amen. But I beseéch you with what reason, by what Custome, wt what Argumēt do you proue your Assertion? except you will obiect vnto vs the monstruous rable of your Cowled generation and Confessours, late vpstartes, whose wickednesse and ignoraunce we do condemne as execra­ble and abhominable: at the last our Syr Ierome concludeth. That errours, vprores, pride, and a thousand other discom­modities, [Page] are wont to ensue by the vnderstanding of Scrip­tures. These do so in deéde as you say Osorius, The know­ledge of Scriptures ignoraunce accordyng t [...] Osoriu [...]. but they come from the deuill, they proceéde out of the durtie pudles of your Massemongers, Confessours and Monckes, not from the pure riuers of holy Scriptures, whiche are plentyfull vnto vs into euerlastyng lyfe:Iohn. 4. Not from the engraffed worde, which is able to saue our soules:Iames. 1.not out of the preachynges of the Prophetes, to whom we must geue diligent heede as to a candle geuyng light in the darke: Peter. 1. Lastly not from the readyng of holy Scriptures, whiche our Lord Iesu Christ commaunded vs to searche, bycause they bee the same that hold most faithfull testimonie of our Sauiour Iesu Christ. You may now perceiue by these most true and inuinci­ble sentences, partly taken out of the Decreés of our Lord Ie­sus, partly out of the Apostles, how detestable, & blasphemous your conclusion is, which doth make the Scriptures to be Au­thours of all wickednes: when as by the infallible testimony of the holy Ghost,Psal. 12.19. The law of the Lord, is an vndefiled law, conuer­tyng soules, the testimonie of the Lord is true and geueth wisedome to the simple, whenas the Statutes of the Lord are right, and re­ioyce the hart, and geueth light vnto the eyes. In deéde this is the wisedome of your scarlet Doctours, whiles you are not cōten­ted to persecute the professours of the Gospell with all maner of crueltie, but also diffame the Gospell it selfe, & make it guil­tie of all naughtines. When notwithstandyng that godly reue­rend Elder Peter (whom ye do shamefully alledge as founder of your Churche) doth in expresse wordes pronounce,1. Peter. 1. That the word of the Lord, which endureth for euer, is deliuered vnto vs by the Gospell: Now you doe perceaue Osorius, or the Christian Reader may easely vnderstand (although ye will exclame a­gaynst it) how you haue behaued your selfe in this question, not onely mischieuously and wickedly, but blockishly and ignoraūt­ly, whiles ye doe so blasphemously defend that prayers should be ministred in the cōgregation in an vnknowen language, cō ­trary to reason, contrary to auncient Custome, contrary to na­ture and contrary to the holy Ghost.

And now glauncyng along by the rest of the doctrine of the Church, you make a long rehearsall of my wordes, & yet touch not one sillable of thē so much as to confute them. Surely (my [Page 63] Lord) you are at very good leysure, when you can spare so much tyme to entermixt whole sentences of myne in your writyngs, & play mumme budget in thē all, if you do allow them, why doe ye recite them? if you doe not allow them, why do ye not repre­hēd some one of them? was euer any man besides your selfe, so franticke, that would in a long discourse recite whole sentēces out of the writyngs of his aduersary, and would refell nothyng in any one of them? This is very fond, foolish, childish, & vtter­ly to be scorned at, but it is altogether your owne, the common fault of your selfe Osorius. Consider I pray theé (Christian Reader) and behold what a sage and wise aduersary I haue. At the last you take vp that by the toe, which I did confesse. That we had shaken from our neckes the Popes yoke. At this you seéme to bee wonderfully displeased, yet I know no cause why you should not be pleased withall. For you proue nothyng, you discouer nothyng with any Argument, but after your old ma­ner heape vp a number of slaunders together, wherein is nei­ther truth, nor any likelyhoode of truth. At the last, you adde hereunto a deuise no lesse wicked then false. To witte, that the auncient Churche is peruerted by our Deuines and a new Church fashioned after our owne phantasies. Whiche doe you call the auncient Church Osorius? truly you name the Catholicke and Apostolique Churche to be auncient, or so you ought to say, founded in the Patriarches and Prophetes, en­larged by our Lorde Iesu and his Disciples with vndefiled doctrine, and vprightenesse of conuersation. Haue we peruer­ted this holy Church Osorius? haue we erected a new? nay ra­ther, the matter is quite contrary. We do most reuerently em­brace this blessed Churche, sealed vnto vs by the finger of our Lord Iesu and ordered by the pure ordinaunces of his Disci­ples: we do appeale vnto this Church, the same Church do we urge agaynst you: and the same we do oppose agaynst you, we combate agaynst all your filthy corruptions with the decreés of this Churche. Herein we do persiste, and cleaue fast vnto this Church, and fight agaynst you in her defence directly with her owne weapons.

You are fallen away by litle and litle from this auncient Churche the inuincible fortresse of all truth, and haue set your [Page] trust vpō the whyueryng reéde of the Romish Seé. Then also you are so whirled vp & downe as it were with whirlewyndes, with the whirlyng and vnsauory Constitutions of Schoolemē, ech contrary to other, that ye cā finde no ankerhold any where. Out of these tempests and whirlewindes of vpstart doctrines, out of this immoderate gulfe of your idle braynes, so manifold routes of fayned Gods peéped abroad, so many sundry sortes of prayers, made vnto them, so many and so tedious pilgrima­ges, to dumme blockes, so many impieties of offrynges, inuo­cations, massinges, adorations: Finally so many blasphemous markets, and fayres of pardons, and redeémyng of soules out of Purgatory pickpurse are made. To this beadroll may bee linked, superstitious swarmes of Friers, Mōckes & Nunnes, sproutyng and dayly buddyng one out of an other, in infinite droues and innumerable factions: This euen this, is the true Image of your Church, Osorius, wherupon you doe bragge so much, increased with the ofscombe of rascall brothells, made dronken with the drousie dregges of Schoolemen, and so farre estranged from the right trade of the auncient and Apostolicke Church, that there is scarse any hope, that it wil euer haue any regarde to her former duetie, or euer returne frō whence it is estrayed. In this your new Churche or rather Conuenticle of lozelles, which you haue newly erected vnto your selues with the motheaten mockertes of your Schoolemen, you moyle and wallow after your accustomed maner. We are desirous to re­newe the auncient dignitie of the Catholique Church, as much as in vs lyeth. Hereunto we do employ all our endeuoures, to this we doe direct all our thoughtes: that siftyng through, and throwyng away all the dānable darnell whiche the enemy hath scattered abroad at this present in these newe Churches, we may at the lēgth be vnited and gathered agayne into the true, and auncient worshyppyng of God, prescribed vnto vs by Ie­su Christ in his Gospell.

Of Christ being a king and a By­shop.And here our old peéuish wayward, piketh a new quarell a­gaynst me, bycause I will not acknowledge any other chief Bi­shop, but Iesus Christ, and that I do also by the name of a By­shop, call him a kyng. Truly I hartely confesse, that our Lord Iesus was both a Byshop, and a Kyng, but that the name of a [Page 64] kyng, is cōteined vnder the tearme of a Byshop is false, as you haue set it downe as all other your doynges are, for the most part Osorius. But our vnconquerable Logiciā goeth onward, & demaūdeth, Why we do admit any other kyng besides the Lord Iesus, and yet abandone the chief Byshop? whereas both dignities are conteined in the person of our Lord Ie­su: and in this place our glorious Peacocke pounceth out his feathers, and the same question repeateth agayne and agayne very boyeshly, in other wordes and sentences. If it be lawfull (sayth he) that ye may haue vpon earth an other Kyng, Vi­care of that great kyng: what reason is there that ye will not haue an other most holy Byshop, Vicare of that hygh Byshop? Will ye know why we do acknowledge a kyng vpon earth Uicare of that great and heauenly kyng? The holy Ghost shall most euidently and expressely aunswere for vs, and shall aunswere by the mouth of Peter, from whom you deriue your clayme of supreme Byshop:1. Pet. 2. Bee ye subiect (sayth hee) to euery humane creature for the Lord, whether it bee to the king as chief ouer the rest, or to the Magistrates whiche are appointed by him, to the punishment of the euill doers, and the commendation of well doers, for this is the will of God. &c. Behold how playnly, how distinctly, and how plētyfully, Peter doth aunswere you:A kyngly power. which by expresse speache, hath settled the Maiestie of kynges, in the highest place aboue all, vnto whom hee commaundeth vs to be subiect for the Lord. Then next vnder that authoritie, he pla­ceth other Magistrates, whom notwithstandyng he ordeineth, to be Ministers of his highe power. Besides this, heé instruc­teth vs withall, how commodious this authoritie of kynges is, and whereunto it ought to belong. Lastly to take away all doubt, he concludeth that this Is the will of God.

If you had any droppe of shame at all in you Osorius: You would not haue moued this question so malapertly. Why we doe acknowledge a kynges authoritie vpon earth: When as ye can not be ignoraūt of this doctrine of Peter: nay rather of ye holy ghost, being so euidēt, so firme, so notable, so plētyful, and so of all partes defensible: When as also Peter a litle after cōmaundeth in this wise, Feare God, honor the king. Rom. 13. When as Paule likewise doth pronounce that A king is the Minister of [Page] God, to whom he commaundeth euery soule to bee subiect, to whom hee geueth the sword, and willeth Tribute to be payde, in euery of which thynges most royall and principall souereignetie is con­teined. And to ye end the sentēce of Paule should stand firme out of all controuersie,1. Tim. 2. he commaundeth That prayers, intercessions, petitions, thankesgeuynges be frequented for kinges, and all others, that are set in authoritie. What say you now, brablyng Sophi­ster, what cā you hisse out agaynst so many, so strong, and so no­table testimonies approuyng the authoritie of kynges? What shalbe done vnto you (brablyng Sophister) that will so madde­ly, so proudly, so blasphemously kicke agaynst the doctrine of the holy Ghost? But ye allowe of the authoritie of a kyng (say you) in some respect, so that we will likewise admit the supre­macie of the hyghe Byshop. We haue already iustified the au­thoritie of a kyng, by the inuincible testimonies of ye holy scrip­tures, if you can in lyke maner coyne vnto vs out of the same Scriptures, a chief Byshop, we will yeld. But you can not, for there is not one sillable of chief Byshop to bee founde in the Gospell besides our Lord Iesus alone, and besides that que­stion moued of the rites and ceremonies of chief Priest, vsed of old amongest the Iewes.To the He­brues euery where. Sithence therfore these thynges are so apparaunt, either you doe wickedly dissemble the truth, or you bee shamefully ignoraunt in all Diuinitie, when as in the meane time you being an old man and a Bishop, will neédes be accoumpted a most passing Deuine. Here our Ierome tosseth and tumbleth to and fro, and snatcheth after Sophisticall sha­dowes, but the more he trauaileth to get out, the more he is en­tangled in perplexities.

He sayth that we defende the title of kyngs not the au­thoritie, bycause many are foūde aswell in Portingall as in England which do exercise kyngly authoritie without the name of kyng, and those (a Gods name) he thinkes must be called petty kynges. Truely I am not able to speake any cer­teintie of your vsage in Portingall. But of Englād I dare af­firme, yt no mā as of him selfe doth presume vpō authority roy­all, further thē he is thereunto authorized by the kyng, neither doe we know any such pettye kynges: but of your shamelesse custome in lyeng we are most assured, & the same can not choose [Page 65] but abhorre, in respect of your person. Like idle tyme ye bestow vpon debatyng of your Monarchie. As though it were as ne­cessary, that there should bee one chief supreme Byshop o­uer the vniuersall Church of Christ, as we defende in Eng­land the supreme power of the kyng. O most senselesse So­phister. Perceaue ye not how your comparison is wrested to thynges that are meére contrary eche to other? Can you not seé that the one part of your comparison, cōcerneth the particular Churche of England, the other part indirectly altogether, all the whole Churches of Christendome? And yet sufficeth it not that you play the foole mōstruously your selfe, vnlesse with your supposall ye make me partener also of your errours, which all and euery of my senses doe vtterly abhorte and detest: nay ra­ther your cōparison ought to haue bene framed contrarywise. As bycause in all seuerall cōmon weales, seuerall kynges haue the principall and chief preheminence, so in all seuerall Chur­ches, seuerall Priestes should gouerne, who ought to haue sin­gular authoritie in matters of Religion. After this maner should your cōparison haue proceéded, if you had followed here­in the aduise of Philosophie. But sithēce we argue now as De­uines, settyng Philosophie apart, we must enforce onely the testimonies of holy Scriptures, wherein bycause we finde cō ­maūded by expresse wordes, yt it is ye will of God, That we must honour the king, that we must obey the king, that we must be sub­iect to the king, that we must feare the kinges sword, that we must pay Tribute to the king, that we must make our supplication and prayers to God, first and chiefly for the king, We can not choose but acknowledge, & reuerēce this chief royall & kyngly autho­ritie, so oftē & in so many sondry maners mētioned in ye Scrip­tures. As for your high & chief Byshop we will make no more accoumpt of, then of a straunger vntill ye can iustifie his supre­macie by the authoritie of the holy Scriptures. And yet in the meane tyme shall you finde amongest vs, all degreés of Iu­risdiction Ecclesiasticall: by the which all matter apperteining to the Church is duely and orderly executed. Which albeit can not cōtent our troublesome Prelate, yet we doubt not but will throughly satisfie all vertuous, wise, & well disposed persons.

I did write that the garmēt of Christ was not cut in peéces [Page] amongest our Deuines, as you seémed to conster of vs; but that the Byshop of Romes Pall peraduenture was somewhat scratchte. What do you say to this? Do you make any demon­stration by holy Scriptures that we have deuided or rente a­sunder the vnitie of the Church? (I meane alwayes the Catho­licke & Apostolicke church) do you alledge any argumēts here­unto? do you proue it with exāples? you do nothyng lesse. What do ye then? truly euē as you are wont, and as you haue accusto­med to doe, & as ye haue learned of your father the deuill: that is to say, you doe continually throw out of that foule mouth, most noysome poyson of slaūderous lyeng: Wherein though ye be so nooseled yt hee haue stuffed vp the greater part of your In­uectiues with false & venemous accusations: Yet bycause this place doth bewray your mōstruous insolēcie by singular demō ­stratiō, I will set down here your own wordes, as you haue pē ­ned thē, that the Christiā Reader may by the same, discerne the meékenes of a Byshop, the modestie of an aunciēt Deuine, and wt what spirite also ye were inspired, when ye vomited out this foule filthy cholericke baggadge. And these are your wordes.

When as ye do dayly behold swarmyng rounde about you, such pestiferous dissensiōs of sectes and so horrible di­uisions, whereas you haue no sure fayth, no agreement in Religion, whenas dayly almost you bryng in newe con­fessions, Articles of the Creede amended, old places blot­ted out, and new places propte vp in their places, when as many sundry sectes growe and encrease, and the auncient Churche is rent and cut in so many gobbettes, dare ye yet say, that this fallyng awaye hath not cut the garment of Christ in peeces? A shewe of Osorius slaunderous speach. When as also ye see with your eyes, inso­lencie, arrogancie, rebellion, lauishnes of toung, slaunde­rous backbyting, lust, wickednesse, vncleanesse, tumultes and vprores to attempt all thynges in all places boldly, wheresoeuer your maisters take once footyng? with what face dare ye affirme, that your maners and conuersatiō of lyfe hath bene well ordered amiddes all this rebellion? The matter declareth it selfe euidently: dayly examples make good profe therof, the places of publicke gouernemēt, yea the most secret closettes do bewray the same. Behold here [Page 66] (good Reader) the liuely paterne of Osorius his eloquence. Be­hold a mighty & vnconquerable champion of the Romish Seé, is not this felow worthie to be made a Cardinall suppose you? that in so many choloricke, sharpe, venemous and Scorpion­like wordes hath vttered nothyng, but that the most Rogishe Rascall commyng out of some Brochellhouse would haue bene halfe ashamed of? hath hee not made a trimme speake agaynst vs, & proued thereby that we haue most haynously scattered a­broad, and torne in sunder the vnitie of Christes Churche? in this that he doth nothyng els, but exclaime agaynst vs backe­biters, insolent, slaunderous, lecherous, wicked, vncleane and rebelles? O franticke and mischieuous raylour? of whose cur­sed speach, bycause I haue deliuered this litle tast, I will from henceforth as much as I may in silēce despise & passe ouer his infinite accusatiōs, & will deale with his pretty poppet Argu­mentes briefly. I dyd cite out of Paule. One God, one Fayth. Now (sayth he) neither one God, nor one Fayth is receaued amongest the Ministers of your Gospell. First of all, I did not signifie of what opinion euery of vs were particularly, but I shewed what ought to be receiued of all Christiās generally. Then where you affirme that we do not worshyp one God one­ly, nor professe one fayth onely, how can you persuade so incre­dible a matter? It is very manifest (you say) for one of you doth sacrifice to lust, an other to frensie, an other to the paunche, an other to slaūderyng. Cursed be thou, thou Chap­plein of the deuill. Thy sect doth publickly worshyp a peéce of bread, insteade of a golden Calfe, and lyeth grouelyng on the grounde before a God made of bread: your solemnities be ló Bacchus, ló Venus. You are defiled and contaminated with all kynde of wickednesse, you do most abhominably mainteine slewes, and Brothelhouses, and yet in the meane whiles will translate your Idols vnto vs. But ye cā not Osorius, Printe, and painte and do what ye list, ye cā not bring that to passe. All the world almost is so well acquainted with your horrible fil­thy lyfe, that a boye of seuen yeares of age, can point with his finger at the places, the persons, and the whole course of your abhominations.

But where as you adde further, that there is one fayth of [Page] Luther, an other fayth of Bucer, an other of Zuinglius, and an other of Caluine. This is your old quarell, alwayes hacked vpon, but neuer proued. These worthy persons and graue Fa­thers of the Churche were alwayes of one fayth: and of most a­greable constācy, to the ouerthrow of your erreonious deuises. In some pointes they did varie, but in the substaunce of fayth they were of one mynde. The like blemish happened to Augu­stine, Ierome and Cyprian, men very famous for their lear­nyng & vertue: in Origine & Tertulliā were somewhat greater blottes: whose fayth notwithstandyng, as farre forth as is a­greable wt the Scriptures, is not discredited by our Deuines, ne yet by your owne Maistershyp (if a mā may be so bold to tell you, as also what I thinke you shall perhaps know hereafter) in those your huge Uolumes entituled De Iusticia, The bookes of Osorius De Iustitia. wherin you are of a cleane contrary opiniō to that learned man August. in ye thiefest part of all, not in any small matter, but in ye Treatise of righteousnes it selfe, wherein is conteined the foundation of our fayth: and herein ye wrangle so bitterly, so obstinately, and so ouerthwartly that Cardinall Poole did wonderfully repre­hend your arrogancy herein, and thereunto replyed with most godly wordes.Cardinall Pooles iud­gement of Osorius bookes of Iustitia. That the abilitie of man could not bee to much embaced, and the power of God could not be to much aduaun­ced. But sith you can presume so much vpon your selfe, as with such proude boldnesse to attempt the ouerthrow of so notable a father, in the principall point of our Religion: We neéde not marueile, that ye can not forbeare vs, if we varie in small mat­ters of no value: for amongest them truely was no litle contro­uersie in matters of great importaunce, if they might haue had vpright iudges and learned, vnlike to this our Osorius. The functiō of the Apostles was equall, their Iurisdiction in all re­spect one, whereby it commeth to passe, that amongest them no one may be in hyghest authoritie, and this haue we partly ap­proued before by the examples of Paul, Peter and Iames, and the same also haue I made so manifest in this Booke, where I treated of ye Monarchie of the Romish Prelate: That you haue now no startyng hole to hyde your head in.

You say that it is euident in the writynges of Clement, of Euaristus, Lucius, Marcellus and Pius, that they were of [Page 67] opinion alwayes that the supremacie of the vniuersa [...]l Churche of Christendome was attributed to the Romishe See. You rehearse vnto them Irenaeus, Augustine and other holy auncient Fathers. Afterwardes you vouche the whole Register of Antiquitie. What impudencie is this? What vn­tollerable arrogancie, nay rather what retchiesse negligence and singular foolishnesse is this? you doe recken vp many By­shops of Rome by name, and yet alledge no one sillable so much out of their writinges, to establish this prerogatiue of this Ro­mish See: no more do you cite out of Augustine and Irenaeus, any one title for the maintenaūce of this your Ierarchie. Last­ly you make mention of all the auncient antiquitie, & yet vouch no one worde out of all that great number of yeares: whereby that may appeare to bee true, whereof you make so stoute a warraunt by your bare affirmatiue. Is this to be accoumpted a Deuine? Do ye defende the Romishe Seé, no better? Haue you no better a Target to couer this your holy and Emperour­like power? Belike ye come vnto vs a new Pithagoras, & would haue the old Poesie in vre agayne [...]. [...] Hee hath sayd. But we yeld not so much Osorius, we receaue not your affirmatiue: neither can you wryng any thyng out of our hands, in the cōference of mat­ters apperteinyng to fayth, more then that you shalbe able to Iustifie by good and sounde Argumentes. We follow not your sayth, as the which we haue tasted to bee almost in all thynges most detestable. Wherfore if you meane to wynne any credite herein: Let this be a watchword for you, that ye must vnfold a­gayne, all that lumpe of confused disputation, and abandone those vnmeasurable raylinges, forsake those clamorous excla­mations, & renounce that vnaduised rashnesse of bare affirma­tiues: and argue with probable reasons, iustifie with appro­ued Argumentes, and make good proofe by expresse sentences of holy Scriptures & aūcient Fathers. But you are well fur­nished with Fathers forsooth, for in your Bedroll, ye haue lap­ped together not onely the old fathers, but vnfold also vnto vs a certeine new Schoole of Fathers. That is to say Ecckius, Coclaeus, Rossensis & Pighius. Auaunte with all these sworne bondslaues of your Monarchie: whereof part were common dronkardes, some lechers, & some traytours, the remembrance [Page] of whom is odious as yet, and notoriously infamous for sun­dry their notable crimes. Or if ye will neédes allowe of these dregges of the Church, beyng in deéde the sworne humble vas­sals of the Romish Seé. Yeld me this much agayne my re­quest, to peruse the writynges of Bucer, Melancthon, Zuin­glius, Oecolampadius, Peter Martyr, Caluin and Beza, men most excellent in conuersation of life, and of singular learning. And ye shall seé the contagious botches of your Papacie, so ra­ked abroad and ransackt by them, that ye will neuer hereafter take any regard to any such scabbed Iades, if you be wise.

You seeme to marueile much that I beyng a Ciuiliā, and exercized in pleadyng temporall causes would spend my tyme to knowe your mysteries. Truly you are herein some­what to inquisitiue Osorius. For albeit I do professe the Ciuill Law, yet am I a Christian and desire to be edified in the law of the Lord: And if you will haue this much graunted vnto you, to apply your selfe to the knowledge of the tounges, to be addict wholy to the study of eloquence, to raunge in the bookes of Phi­losopers, and will notwithstanding be accompted a ruler of the Roast in Diuinitie, as in the speciall peculiar of your own pro­fession: looke not so coye vpon vs poore Ciuilians I pray you, bycause we geue our endeuour to learne ye Statutes of Chri­stian Religion, and are desirous to bathe our selues somewhat in the liuely wellsprynges of holy Scriptures, wherewith we acknowledge our soules to bee throughly watered to eternall lyfe. You are very much offended with me, bycause I did write That Gregory would not acknowledge this extraordinary Papane preheminence: and ye do beleue, that I can not iu­stifie this to be true. If therfore I do cite the place, if I do di­rect your singer to Gregories own speaches, wherein he doth mislike the name of vniuersall Byshop once, twice, thrise, and more, yea and as much as in him lyeth, vtterly detect and re­iect the same from him selfe, what shall men deéme of you reue­rend Prelate? which either of a singular ignoraunce know not, or of an horrible impietie of gaynsaying, will dissemble so ma­nifest a matter? so confessed & so often rehearsed? and how dare you desire to bee credited in all the rest of your Protestations, when as your selfe haue wiped away your whole estimation by [Page 68] facyng out so false a proposition?Gregor. lib. [...]. Epist. [...]0. 24. lib. 7. E­pist. 3 [...]. lib. 4. Epist. 34. 38. 36. &c. Looke vpon Gregory who that list, turne to the places that I haue noted in the Margent, and iudge the honestie of this man. Nay rather haue recourse therunto your selfe, & learne at the least to shake of this shame­lesse custome of cauillyng. I proued by the examples of the A­postles, that the pure, & primitiue Churche did neuer acknow­ledge this Papall Monarchie. I cited to the same effect, their successours Byshops of Rome, some that were godly men, and Martyrs, which did neuer aspire to that superioritie, and here­upon I argued, that the same principallitie beyng altogether vnknowen to those best, & purest ages of the Church, might al­so haue bene let slip ouer of vs. What say you vnmeasurable brabler? why do you quarell so bitterly? why do ye so contume­liously stomacke agaynst me? why report you that I proue no­thyng, when as I do make all thyngs euident with examples? why do ye finde fault with the sequele of thyngs then the which there can be none greater or more assured? Finally why do ye reiect those sayinges as meére false, the falseshoode wherof, ye endeuour not in one sillable so much as to discouer? vnlesse par­aduenture you be of opinion that your bare braules, shalbe re­ceaued as infallibe truthes: whiche I will neuer yeld vnto, as I haue sayd before. I added also a litle after that we might lacke this Papane Monarchie well enough, yea that we ought to be without it, aswell bycause the Gospell interditeth it, as also bycause reason reclaimeth agaynst it (At which wordes, the Gospel enterdityng) Our Syr Ierome sets vp his bristles & although he know my meaning, yet mooseleth at the wordes, & accuseth me that I can not expresse myne own meanyng sen­sibly, what say you Osorius. Are ye so sodenly fallen an old Do­ctour of Diuinitie to a punie Scholer and carper of wordes, are ye so sodenly disgraded from a Reuerend Prelate and be­come a malitious and hungry fawconer of titles & sillables? O grauitie beseéming a Byshop, O fūctio most agreable for those gray heares. But let vs view the matter it selfe. We ought to lacke this Papane Monarchie (the Gospell interdityngit) yt is to say bycause the Gospel doth enterdite it, forbid it, cōmaū ­deth ye contrary, letteth it, hindereth it, withstādeth it, resisteth it, openly exclaymeth yt no such Monarchie be admitted. Do I [Page] not speake after ye Latin phrase? doth not euery of these wordes properly and playnly expresse the thynges that I meane? En­quire amongest all your Massemongers and of that betlehead Dalmada your familiar and companion. They will all con­demne you for tomme trifler. And your sweét piggesnye Ema­nuell will smoyle close in his sleaue, that somewhat is founde out in the world at the last, that exceédes his filthy Commen­taries, and blockishnesse.

But our Aristarchus proceédeth notwithstādyng Peacock-lyke, and requireth proofe, whereby the countermaunde may be manifest, that we should now be subiect to this one­ly great Vicare of Christ? First of all, this do I aunswere, that it is sufficient for me to deny all things with a bare nay, to him that affirmeth all things by a bare yea: for there is no differēce of authority betwixt our estates, but ye [...]urisdictiō of a Bishop, whiche may hold your charge of Siluain to consent, but tou­cheth not me. And therefore after that you had packt together a tedious Epistle to the Queénes Maiestie full of reproches & slaunders, and had in the same vttered all your cankred malice, agaynst the professours of true Religion, yet all the whiles had vsed thereunto neither proofe nor probabilitie, it sufficed for me to haue confuted that pestilent inuectiue, fortified with bare affirmatiues onely, euen by the contrary therof, to witte bare negatiues. But now for asmuch as you haue stopt vp a fewe shardes in these your last tedious Commentaries, though very hardly and quyte from the purpose, yet as well as you could: I thought good to reply likewise with some Argumentes, there­by to ouertake you at euery loupe hoale. So that I haue now so entāgled and snarled fast in coupe your Lordly Ierarchy, by force of holy scriptures, euē with ye same tooles, that you bele­ued to haue erected & established it, that I neéde nothing doubt, of ye consent of all ye godly, but yt they are fully satisfied herein. As for you nothyng can content you, yt are so captious in titles of wordes, as to slippe from Diuinitie to extreme Sophistrie.

I affirmed that an Italian Monarche could not aptly be a ruler ouer vs, and I alledged the cause in these wordes. For the head cā not Conueniently be distaunt from the members so farre asunder: Here Osorius playeth the man, and vttereth [Page 69] all his skill at a brunt. And beleueth that some monster I cā not tell what, lurketh in those wordes, and therfore rusheth vpon me, with pretie young questions. Must ye be taught to speake Latine (sayth hee) for what meaneth this? What is this, cōueniētly to be distaūt? For that which agreeth with it selfe, doth not dissent, wherfore when you say that some one thing is conueniently distaunt, To be con­ueniently distaunt. ye doe not speake true Latine but vse a monstruous kynde of Latine phrase. Listen hereunto agayne prattlyng Sophister. I doe not affirme, that any thyng doth conueniently disagreé, as you doe maliciously i­magine: but I do playnly deny, that the head cā conueniently be distaunt frō the members. But you beyng ignoraunt what difference is betwixt an affirmatiue, & a negatiue proposition, must be turned downe agayne behinde the Schoolehouse doore, amongest the apsie boyes, to learne this lesson agayne. And bycause you are so grosse of cōceauyng, that ye cā not perceaue a thyng spoken briefly, and aptly, I will rehearse my wordes agayne, and will apply hereunto other phrases of the lyke ef­fect. That all men may know, what a childishe and blockehea­ded aduersary I haue. This is it therefore. For the head can not conueniently bee distaunt from the members so farre of. That is to say, it is not conuenient that the head should bee so farre asunder from the members, A frend doth not conueni­ently disagreé from his frend: nor the Scholer from his Mai­ster, nor the Seruaunt from his Lord, ne yet the wife from the husband: That is to say it is not conueniēt that the frend from his frend, the Scholer from his Maister, the Seruaunt from his Lord, or the wife should disagreé from her husband. What say you Osorius, is any of these not spoken after the Latine phrase? are they not vttered playnly? and properly? doe ye not in all these conceaue the negatiue and not the affirmatiue? Are you not ashamed? doe ye blush nothyng at all at this manifest fault and marke of your follie? I haue a boye of sixten yeares age, whom I keépe to Grammar Schoole, who shoulde haue felt the smarte hereof, if hee had made so foule an escape in these Grammer principles. Truely I am wery long sithence (gentle Reader) to bee so childishly occupyed in siftyng out the titles and sillables of wordes after this maner, but you may [Page] note the amazednesse and ouerthwartenes of myne aduersary, to whom the fault must be imputed accordyng to reason, which beyng both bussardly blynd in ponderyng bare wordes, and al­so fondly franticke, and senselesse in the substaunce of thynges, doth altogether deny any difference to be in this: how farre so euer a sunder the head bee separated from the members so that they be vnited in one fayth. Surely experience hath not onely taught vs here in England, but the practize of all other natiōs also doth playnly bewray his singular ignoraūce and blockish­nesse, what it is to be seuered from Italy, by farre distaunce of regions when as in matters of Religion iustice & equitie could not bee ministred, but it must bee procured with immesurable charges, and tedious pursuite of many yeares. From whiche inconueniēces we have good remedy prouided through the spe­ciall goodnesse of God. For we haue in our owne Realme both Iudges and Consistories.

But our reuerend Father cā not disgest this by any meanes, that the Queénes Maiestie should entermedle with ye Churche, and after a long friuolous preamble after his accustomed ma­ner at the length choppeth downe to a sentence of myne, videl. The Queenes Maiestie is Lord ouer all maner of persons in England. Dominari. And these wordes he supposeth to be spoken barba­rously: bycause the gouernement of a kyng is not with force & Tyranny, nor tendeth to keépe his Coūtrey people, (whom he hath vndertake to defende of a fatherly loue) in seruile subie­ction nor is referred to the consideration of his owne profite, but to the publicke sauetie of his subiectes: And therfore, sayth he, it is false that a kyng doth rule as a Lord vnlesse we should take him for a Tyraunt rather then a kyng. Harken I pray you, harken vnto this Aldermā brable, harken vnto this most subtill corrector of the Latine toung. There was neuer such an other Valla, or Varro in our tyme: for this our notorious Prelate doth farre surmount all Vallaes and Varroes who by his fine pythe and polished Iudgement hath fishte a Poole and caught a Foole: and with his new sharpenesse of witte, hath es­pied that, wherof no man could euer conceaue so much as a sha­dow in his dreame, what say you, my Lord Byshop, doth no mā rule as a Lord, except he be a Tyraunt? Ergo, no man is a Lord [Page 70] vnlesse he be a tyraūt, if at least he bare any rule. Truly you had neéde of Helleborous to purge that Calues braynes.Rom. 14. Our Lord Iesus Christ is sayd sometymes to bee a Lord of the quicke and the dead, sometymes to be a Lord in heauen, and in earth, and in all the holy Scriptures throughout is called by this name Lord. Therefore this your blasphemous and horrible Grammar di­stinction ought be accompted a Tyraūt, this can not be denied. Becommeth you an old Byshop to vtter such mockeries? can you beyng a Prelate either through fury or maddenesse to be so frame shappenly translated to bee openly franticke and make your selfe a laughyng stocke to litle boyes? Truely I am asha­med in your behalfe, for I did neuer seé so great, so foule, & so monstruous absurdities in a mā of such yeares, that hath bene all his life long conuersaunt in learnyng.A miserable distinction of Osorius. Afterwardes you do make a very subtill distinction I promise you of the authoritie of kynges: yt is to say, though they gouerne all their subiectes, yet are they not Lordes ouer all causes. Yes in deéde (good sir) they are Lordes ouer all causes, aswel Ecclesiasticall as Tem­porall, which may seéme to apperteine to the good gouernemēt of the cōmon wealth.How far & in what causes kynges doe beane rule. And yet they do not minister in their own persons in matters Ecclesiasticall, as I wrate before: for how can they so do? but they doe assigne and authorise other Magi­strates vnder them, who may execute euery thyng in due or­der. In like maner albeit Emperours be onely chief of their Armyes, yet haue they vnder them Centurians, Lieutenaūts, Serieauntes, Corporals, and other meaner officers, which do trayne in due order and exercize the whole affaires, the rest of the Souldiours. So doe Maisters of Nauies and Shippes, appointe vnder them their Mates, and Boateswaynes, and o­ther meaner degreés to their seuerall offices, by this meanes to preserue their course the better at Seaboorde: whereby appea­reth that the chief authoritie is resiaunt alwayes in the chief and knowen estates, but the trauaile, toyle, and execution of or­ders, is ministred by inferiour Magistrates.

But ye require to make demonstration how these things can be so? First of all, your question is worthy to bee scorned, beyng so voyde of reason: to haue euident demonstration to be made of those thynges which common course of mans lyfe, and [Page] dayly practize of all common weales, may assure you, were you neuer so voide of sense. But I will satisfie that captious grosse­head of yours in this matter, wt threé wordes. I do affirme that the authoritie of kynges is aboue all other, and yet that kyngs them selues do not minister in Ecclesiasticall matters. Which two are most manifestly proued aswell by the gouernement of kyngs in the old Testamēt, as also in the later age, in the tyme of the new Testament. For Dauid, Salomon, losias, Ezechi­as, and other godly kynges amongest the people of Israell, did commaunde the Priestes in matters of Religion: yet did not they entermedle with execution of any thyng. In the tyme of the Gospell, Paule that great teacher of the Gentiles cōmaū ­deth That intercessions and publicke prayers bee made with fayth and truth, first of all for kinges, then for all others that are set in authoritie. 1. Timo. 2. Peter also that excellent Elder, (For other name then Apostle or Elder did hee neuer acknowledge, howsoeuer you do cōuey your false Papisticall Seé frō him) Peter (I say) in open and expresse wordes doth verifie my saying,Peter. 1.2. when as he geueth commaundement in this wise. Submit your selues to euery humane creature for the Lordes sake, whether it [...]ee to the king as most excellent, or to the Magistrates as to them that are sent by him, assigning the punishement of the wicked doers and the laude and prayse of them that doe well, for so is the w [...]ll of God. Beholde you haue both my propositions out of Peter. First the chief and most excellent authoritie of kinges, then rulers and Magistrates sent and assigned by kinges, for the punishment of the vngodly, and the cōfort of the godly. Lastly you heare also, that it is the will of God, that by this meanes executiō of Iustice may duly proceéed. Wherfo [...] cast away all your cauillations, and beyng an El [...]r your selfe (if you bee wise) geue attentiue and speédy eare to Peter the Elder. You thunder out your malici­ous slaunders agaynst the demeanour and ignoraunce of our Byshops, & discharge your venemous stomacke agaynst them. And here vnhappely as it chaunced, ye begyn your talke wt ex­treme incongruitie, yea redoubling ye same for your more skill.

Il [...]ne.For thus ye write. What Byshops name you (Illino) whe­ther they whom you haue disgraded from their Sees, and deteine them in chaines? Illi. or (Illi) they rather whō you haue [Page 71] takē out of Brothelhouses and Tauernes and haue enstal­led in the degree of holy Byshops? False Latin in Osorius, puttyng Il­li, for Illos, Is it euē so proude comp­troller? Can you make so euident a fault contrary the princi­ples of Grāmar and write Illi they, in steéde of Illos them? En­quire of your wormeeatē companion Dalmada, he will amend your escape, and will be sory that you haue s [...]ypped your penne so childishly, I doe medle with these trifles much agaynst my will, neither would I haue done it at all but to treade downe your hautynesse a litle, which can continually quarell with me for titles, and sillables, yea & without cause. I know that such escapes chaunced many tymes to Tully him selfe: but I ought not forgeue you any fault at all, consideryng you do so wt cruell wordes [...]ourge my poore speach, though otherwise both cleane and pure Latin. And now this I do aūswere to that your filthy accusatiō agaynst our Byshops:Ofori. ray­ling agaynst our Bishops of England. 1. Timo. 3. that they are replenished with more ornamentes of true Byshops (wherof Paule made men­tion to Timothe) then Osorius hath, or euer will haue except he shape him selfe to a new mā betymes. And how much ye more their vertue & godlynes, beau [...]ified with singular learnyng, is manifestly approued & extaūt to all our eares & eyes: so much more detestable & hatefull is your quarell agaynst those aun­ciēt Fathers, especially for that you do rage so beastly agaynst your brethren, whō ye neuer haue seéne, nor do know. Paule cō ­maundeth that a Byshop bee vnreprouable, but you do not onely reproue, but maliciously deface the estimatiō of Byshops, who haue neuer offended you in word or deéde, I pray you good sir, how can you cleare of reprehension and fault, that your cākred choler so lauishly vomited agaynst those graue Fathers whom you know not? You demaunde also why those same Byshops, did not vndertake the defence of Religion agaynst you? and by what meanes I crept thereunto beyng a Ciuilian? Tru­ly I do franckely acknowledge my selfe to be a Ciuilian (Oso­rius) and not a Deuine. As for you, you are neither Ciuilian nor Deuine, and therfore I might be the more [...]old to try Mai­strie with you. Let any men that will peruse that your tedious Epistle to her Maiestie, and he shall finde nothyng therein, but huge heapes of idle wordes, madde mazes of long Sentēces, full of yrkesomnesse, vnmeasurable and haynous lyes and slaū ­ders [Page] agaynst true godlynesse. Agayne let your second great Uolume bee layde abroad, what is in it els but a dounghill of tauntes and reproches agaynst me? No sparcke of Diuinitie except those pestilent deuises forged out of Schoolemen, of pardons, of couled Uipers, Confessions, flames of Purgatory, and other patcheries of these late vpstartes. Wherefore if ye will prouoke our Byshops to disputation, you must open your Budget, and make a shewe of better ware, of purer, or at lest somewhat more learned Diuinitie: then you shall finde what spirite and courage they be of, in the meane tyme, whiles they are occupyed in matters of more importaunce, you may con­tent you with Haddon, beyng but a meane aduersarie, whiche hath and will alwayes haue skill enough to suppresse your in­solencie, and confute your trifles.

You demaunde an other question touchyng our Byshops. By what Religion, by what Ceremonie, by what authori­tie they were instituted? who layd handes vpon them? who consecrated them? how holyly? how sincerely this matter was executed? I aunswere you at a word. Handes were layd vpō them lawfully, and prayers likewise poured out for them, accordyng to the prescript ordinaunce of the Gospell, we doe vse our owne ceremonies, like as you doe yours, and as other Nations doe minister their owne. At the last you Enquire of their holynesse, foolishly forsooth, consideryng it is an inward action of the mynde, and wherof no man liuyng can pronounce any certaintie: Ye murmur I can not tell what Of a confused functiō of Byshops and Deuines, bycause I ascribed the of­fice of administration of the Sacramentes to Byshops, but of determinyng causes to Deuines. As though Byshops are not Deuines, and Deuines Byshops? or as though seuerall functions may not be vndertaken many tymes in ye Church? or as though Byshops beyng the chiefest of ye Clergy, haue not a charge to execute matters apperteinyng to the Church in their own right: or as though this question seémeth not to haue pro­ceéded from a captious Sophister, rather thē from a gray hea­ded Byshop. You say That the rumour goeth abroad how that our Byshops are chosen to this end especially, that be­yng contented with some portion of Reuenewes of their [Page 72] Byshoprickes, the rest should be confiscate vnto our posses­sion as a cleare gayne. If this bee a rumour, this rumour is wicked and slaūderous, and such a one, as the grauitie of your person should stoppe your eares from, and deceit in hart. But if this lye be deuised by you, and your fraternitie, into how hor­rible a sinne doe ye wilfully drowne your selues, that will scat­ter such wicked slaunders agaynst your brethren whō ye know not? But you say that I & such as I am, are charged with the greater part of this infamie, for when we choose such By­shops, we geue iust cause to men to conceaue some suspi­tion of our auarice and couetousnesse: Ye write monstru­ously Osorius: Do we choose Byshops? or do I choose Byshops? how long and in what places hath this custome preuayled, that euery particular subiect or the vulgare multitude should choose Byshops? your frāticke communication denounceth you a mā more worthy to be whipped in Bedlem, thē to be disputed with all in Schooles. For ye seéme to be altogether voyde of commō sense. The election of our Byshops Syr Ierome, is ordered accordyng to the auncient, and best receaued Canons: & choyse is made by the Deane and Chapter of the most excellēt in ver­tue, and learnyng: The Prince doth confirme the election. The Archbyshops do consecrate them that are chosen: Of whō some are nothyng inferiour to your Maister shyppe in auncientie of race, wherein you vaunt your selfe so much, yet this discent in gētry, was not valued of Paule amongest the vertues, & quali­ties, which he assigned to a Christian Byshop: But other orna­mentes, where wt I wishe you were better acquainted: perhaps ye would then seéme somewhat a woorse Rhetorician, but sure I am you would bee farre better Byshop. But now you haue enured your selfe so much to vnmeasurable raylyng, that ye seéme rather a cōmon brauling Thersites, Thersites a notable brauler Homer in I­liad. thē a meéke Prelate.

You thinke that I yelde to much to the authoritie of kynges, because I affirmed that the kynges of Israell dyd rule the Priestes in matters of Religion. And this you say is not true. Why so, I pray you?Out of the bookes of the Kynges and Parali­pom. is it false bycause you say that it is false? O notable Pithagoras, the credite of your naked af­firmatiues beyng bolstered vp with no reason nor witnesse bee not crept so farre on high benche as yet, to be takē for Iudges, [Page] I did alledge a litle before Dauid, Salomon, Iosias, Ezechias. Peruse who so list, the Chronicles of them, and thē let him de­cide this controuersie betwixt vs. The sentences of Paule and Peter in the new Testament are very manifest, as I haue sayd before. For Paule Commaundeth prayers to be made for kinges, and for all other set in authoritie. In which sentence you may di­scerne a distinct degreé of Power, and Nobilitie, & vnlesse you will bee blinded with malice conceaued agaynst the truth, you may also seé the kyng to be placed first and highest. In the same wise Peter Submit your selues to euery humune creature for the Lord, whether to the king, as most excellent, or to the Magistrates, as beyng appointed by him. Loe here the lyke degreés, loe here al­so the kyng placed chief, and most excellent. Here you cry out & exclame Comically, or rather tragically. O heauē, O earth, O the Seas of Neptune. When as it had bene better for you to stoppe that lauishe foule mouth, with the euident testimonies of the Apostles. But you proceéde on rather Saying, if kynges obteine the highest authoritie, the whole world would be turned vpsidowne as ye thinke: for that kynges would bee subiect to flatterers, and so nothyng could bee executed in due order and truth, but all thyngs would be gouerned af­ter the lust of flatterers. First of all, kings of this our age are much beholdyng vnto you surely, and amongest the rest your owne kyng especially.The courtes of Princes subiect to flatterers. For if it bee true that you stampe out so boldly, that all Counsels of kyngs are corrupted by flatterers, what one thyng do ye leaue vpright in their gouernement? Be­holde (my good Lord) and behold earnestly, how trecherously and perillously you beguile your selfe with rashnesse and igno­raunce, that blemish all regiment of kynges with so cōmon an infamie. But admit vnto you for this time, that your saying is true in this respect that to to great store of flatterers swarme in Princes Courtes. What then? doth this let, that in the Pa­laces of your holy Monarchies, this kynde of vermine (that we call a flatterer) is not fostered? is not dallied with all? yea n [...]u­rished, & had in high price? I will passe ouer myne owne neigh­bours and will referre you to all that new puddle of Schoole­men, amongest whom you shall not finde any one sounde Ex­position of Diuinitie, but whole Commentaries of flatteries [Page 73] and Parasiticall poyson.

For they beautifie the Pope with these Titles videl. The Popes Parasites. They call him the Sunne of the worlde, they ascribe vnto him both swordes Temporall & Spirituall. They create him the Lord of Purgatory. They aduaunce him aboue the authoritie of the Canon Lawes. They deny that hee is to be directed by any o­ther person. They affirme in their writynges that the Pope hath all lawes engrauen, or rather lockt fast in the closet of his hart. They say that the Pope can be guilty of no fault, though hee throw many thousandes Soules into hell, they make the Pope high Steward of Pardōs, as though they were the tre­asurie of the Churche, so that hee may forgeue infinite sinnes both past already, and sinnes not yet committed. Furthermore they haue enthronized him chief Uicare of Christ vpon earth, who can neither erre him selfe, nor bryng others into errours: vnto whom onely all generall Councels must be in subiection, at whose feéte Emperours and Kyngs ought to prostrate them selues: last of all whom all Christendome must honor, and wor­ship as an earthly God. These blasphemous flatteries, detesta­ble and horrible blaunchyngs, are not vttered onely by mouth, at all aduenture, but are extaunt in the monuments and bookes of the Romish patrones, written by them aduisedly and in ear­nest. Can you charge any kynges Courtes with the lyke? Ye name Henry the eight a most excellent kyng endued with all kyngly ornaments,Kyng Hen­ry the viij. who ye say tooke vnto him absolute au­thoritie ouer his subiectes, through the enticemēts of flat­terers & loue that he bare vnto thē, boylyng also with ma­lice agaynst the Byshop of Rome, frō out whiche fountaine forsooth, I know not how many floudes of wickednes and mischief did issue. These be no proofes of a sober Byshop (my good Lord) but drōkē dreames of a drousie Sophister. For the noble kyng of most famous memory attempted nothyng, either of loue, or of hatred, or by procurement of flatterours. But whē he perceaued that it was most euidēt by the Gospell that gene­rally all England was committed vnto him, as his proper pe­culiar charge aswell by the authoritie of Gods law, as mans law, he banished out of his Realme that foreine authoritie, and resumed his owne lawfull gouernement wholy into his owne [Page] handes, studying to reserue the same inuiolable to him selfe, as meéte was: wherein he performed the duetie of a wise, and per­fect kyng, and easing so his subiectes of great, and importable trauailes, and charges, he left vnto his successours a very riche and florishyng kyngdome. But touchyng the Iustice executed vpon More and Roffensis, was not without much sorow of his Royall hart, in respect of their witte, and learnyng: But after that they were publickly attainted of high treason, and would by no persuasion be reclaymed from their wilfull errours, hee must neédes suffer the law to proceéde agaynst them, left wyn­king at their treachery, he might haue opened a greater gappe of obstinacie and rebellion to others.

At ye length you are come to Peters wordes, but by ye way spurnyng at me, and calling me a most filthy person. Wher­in you do me no small iniurie like a wicked Sophister. You de­maūde of me out of what wordes of Peter, I framed my sen­tence, which I vouched before, touchyng the superioritie of kynges? whether that enduced me, bycause Peter doth name the kyng to be most excellent? Not that onely (graue Gentleman) but the whole processe of Peters communication. You doe argue in this wise: That men are many tymes cal­led excellent either in nobilitie or learnyng, bycause they be very notable therein, not bycause they are set in autho­ritie aboue all men: and here a Gods name it pleaseth you to produce me for example: whom though some may bee of opiniō to excell in the knowledge of the Ciuill Law, yet will not forthwith vnder that title, yeld vnto me the lyke commendation in the interpretyng of holy Scriptures. All this matter is resolued at a word (O counterfait Grammariā) For if accordyng to the doctrine of Peter, and Paule, certaine degreés bee limited in eche dignitie, and by the same doctrine likewise determined, that ye royall dignitie of a Kyng doth ex­cell aboue all other power: Then is it manifest by the same de­creé, that the authoritie of the kyng must be honored without all cōparison as chiefest: But after your wonted guise ye runne at raundon with many wordes, concernyng the meanyng of Paule, and of a distinction to bee made betwixt the ciuill and Ecclesiasticall authoritie. First of all no mā can so snaffle [Page 74] that vnbridled toūg, but that it will roue and raunge triflyngly whether it lusteth: And yet the meanyng of Paule and Peter can not bee vnknowen to any men, that will haue but a will to vnderstand it: for they doe make a diuision, or speciall distin­ction of Magistrates by certaine degreés, and in the same doe precisely, and manifestly ascribe chief rule, and highest autho­ritie to kyngs: And albeit ye triumphe iolylye in your differēce of tymes, yet this will nothyng preuayle you.

For ye beleue that this speache of the Apostles, ought not to be applyed to Christiā kynges, bycause it was writ­ten in the tyme of wicked Emperours, which were enemies to Christian Religion. Consider the sayings of the Apostles more aduisedly peéuish Prelate, and acknowledge once at last your owne vnskilfulnesse. Peter writeth in this maner. Sub­mit your selues to euery humane creature for the Lord, whether it be to the king as to the most excellēt, or to the Rulers as vnto them who are sent by him to punishe the wicked doers, and to aduaunce the well doers. Now therfore I demaunde this question of you (Osorius) whether God did send Nero that sauadge and beast­ly cruell Tyraunt,Sueto. in the lyfe of Nero. & (as you know) an horrible bloudsucker of Christian professiō, to punish the wicked & aduaunce ye well do­ers? if ye affirme that he dyd, you are madde: if ye deny it, then all your former Assertiō, lyeth in the durte. Let vs seé likewise what Paule sayth. Whose sentence herein is much more plen­tyfull:Rom. 13. Princes (sayth he) are not fearefull to well doers, but to the wicked: wilt thou not feare the power? doe well then, and thou shalt haue prayse of the same, for they be the ministers of God ap­pointed for thy wealth. But if thou doe euill, then feare thou, for they beare not the sworde in vayne. For they bee the ministers of God to take vengeaūce on them that do euill. What say you now? could this speach of Paule touch Nero in any respect, whiche embrued his sword in ye bloud of innumerable Christiās? who alwayes oppressed the innocentes? who wallowed all his lyfe long in all maner of outrage and crueltie? No discreét or sober person, will thinke so. But albeit the Apostles beyng enspired with the holy Ghost, gaue these preceptes in the time of tyran­nous Emperours, yet they had relation thereby to Christian and godly kynges: because they should vndertake the defence [Page] of their subiectes, and should be nurses of the congregation of Christ, accordyng to the Prophecie of Esay. And yet due obe­dience is not thereby forbidden to be geuen vnto kynges in Ci­uill causes, though they bee in [...]idels: as appeareth manifestly both by the example and doctrine of our Sauiour Christ. You are contented that kinges should be placed aboue the No­bilitie, Ciuill Magistrates and other officers in temporall causes, accordyng to the saying of Peter, but not to be a­boue the holynesse of Churches, nor the profession of Reli­g [...]ous persons, ne yet to reconcile the fauour of God. Paule commaundeth euery soule to be in subiection to the hygher power, amongest whom the kyng is chiefest:Rom. 13. Math. 17. [...]uce. 20. And therfore all ye Byshops, together with all other what soeuer Ecclesiasti­call orders, are holden subiect vnder the authoritie of the kyng, vnlesse ye bee without soules, as perhappes your maistershyp is: if then ye be subiect to kynges, ye ought to obey their com­maundementes,Wherein the office of a kyng consisteth. vnlesse they prescribe agaynst God. And yet they beare no function in your Churches, nor [...]it in your Chur­ches as rulers of them, nor administer the Sacramentes: but they may and ought to chastize you, & reduce you into good or­der, if happely ye neglect your dueties, or behaue your selfe vnseémely in your function, which is to be approued by the au­thoritie of both the old and new Testament, as it is oftētimes repeated before.

To cōfirme your Assertiō you bryng for example Core, Dathan, and Abyron, of a singular blockishnesse and igno­raunce. For they made Rebellion agaynst Moses, and to vse the very wordes of the holy Scriptures. They were gathered together agaynst Moses and Aaron,Numb. 16. and sayd vnto them. Ye take enough and to much vppon you, seyng all the multitude are holy euery one of them and the Lorde is amongest them. Why lifte you your selues vppe aboue the Congregation of the Lord? Behold here in this their execrable speach, ouer and be­sides a most pernitious rebellion, we heare also in the same one onely equabilitie in all degrees. For asmuch therefore as they did abrogate all maner of authoritie from Magistrates, beyng appointed by God, as the Anabaptistes of our age do practize, they were accordyng to their desert swallowed vp of ye gapyng [Page 75] gulfe, prouided by God for that purpose: But why do ye thrust these persons into the stage, who cā occupy no part of the play? For we doe neither entreate of any Rebellion, nor of any tray­terous suppression of Magistrates, but our cōmunication ten­deth to this ende, whether kynges haue any lawfull gouerne­ment ouer Ecclesiastical persons? No lesse foolishly haue ye patcht to your purpose, Oza, Ozias and Balthesar, whom ye do affirme to haue bene greuously plagued of the Lord, bi­cause they did rashly handle holy thynges: and thus ye say was done accordyng to their deserte. Likewise should our kynges be worthely punished of the Lord, if they would vnder­take to minister Baptisme to infantes, or would in their owne persons distribute the Lordes Supper, or clymbe vp into pul­pittes, and vsually preache. For they should entrude into other mens functions, namely Ministers, and Elders, whom God hath peculiarly chosen to execute those orders in Ministerie. Euen so the Lord hath aduaunced kynges in hyghest superio­ritie, bycause they should commaūde, and prouide that all mat­ters should be executed, by others their subiectes in due & con­uenient order. This doctrine beyng both [...]ounde and profita­ble, approued by the testimonies and examples of the purest a­ges, and most applyable to the ordinaūce of holy Scriptures, yet this our pelting Prelate seémeth so squeymishe at it, that he spareth not to curse vs to the pitte of hell, bycause we will not agreé with him in his most friuolous Assertions.

Ye maruell much, why I am so hatefully bent agaynst the Byshop of Rome & why I doe alwayes inueighe at him. Truely I doe not hate the Byshop of Rome, for hee neuer did me any iniurie personally: it is his extraordinarie superioritie, that I write agaynst. Bycause in my opinion it is a manifest rebell agaynst the holy Scriptures, agaynst saluation and the whole state of Christianitie: Neither doe I reproue their Ca­nons, especially those, whiche were established in that first and purer age of the Churche: ne yet those later Canons such I meane, as doe concerne Iudiciall Courtes. Which teach good and commendable preceptes and rules for the administration of Iustice. But I do vtterly detest and as much as in me lyeth abhorre those ambitious, and flatteryng constitutions, and pe­stilent [Page] dispensations, and such like infinite filthy absurdities, erected for the procurement of dignities, or for pillyng and pollyng of coyne. I will alledge two holy constitutions for ex­ample sake. Wherof the one is described in these wordes:Distinct. 22. Cap. Om­nes. The Lord hath committed the charge of all earthly & heauenly Em­pire, vnto Peter beyng appointed porter of eternall life. What Christian hart can willingly suffer such Sathanicall arrogan­cie to be yelded vnto a mortall creature? And yet I will shewe one other of the same stampe farre more horrible.Decrees ful of blasphe­mie. The Pope hath an heauenly will, and in those thinges that his will is bent vnto, his will must bee taken for law, neither can any man say the contrary why he should not doe so: For he may dispence be­yond all law, and make that to bee right, that is quyte cōtrary, in amendyng and alteryng of lawes: bycause the fulnesse of all power resteth in him. These be those golden Decreés for sooth, wherewith our Syr Ierome would haue vs yoked. This is that notable Iurisdiction of that Papane Seé, for the whiche our Osorius waxeth so whotte: That (though I burst in son­der) yet ought all Christian Nations be subiect vnto it (as he affirmeth.) But I on the contrary part do iustifie, that this Papane supremacie is no more mentioned in the Scriptures then a meare straūger,The Popes power. & so altogether vnknowen vnto Peter, vnto Paule, and the rest of the Apostles, and to the succeédyng course of the primitiue and purer Churches, that there was ne­uer one worde spoken of it, vntill the reigne of the Tyraunt Phocas, at what tyme was the very first hatchyng of it. After­wardes in deéde by litle and litle through pride, pillage, & pel­tyng flatteryng, it enhaunced it selfe so farre aboue measure, that it claymeth now Iurisdiction ouer Heauen, Earth, and Seas, as I haue declared somwhat before, & doth more plēty­fully appeare by other blasphemous Decretalles, published by the very mouthes of these holy Popes them selues. Wherfore this extraordinarie Iurisdiction of the Pope, is a most friuo­lous, paynted, disguised, and deformed frameshapen chaunge­lyng, though Osorius would hange him selfe therefore. And kingly authoritie shall beare chief preheminence vpō the earth, accordyng to the sundry and euerlastyng testimonies both of the old and new Testament, vnto the whiche Peter and Paule [Page 76] do in expresse wordes subscribe, & whereunto all cōmēdable an­tiquity, & most approued aūcientie, haue willingly yelded their agreable cōsent, which hath alwayes exercized their gouerne­ment in so well disposed moderation, as beyng contented with her owne limites & territories, hath not licentiously presumed vnlawfull clayme ouer all the worlde, as your most arrogant chaire of pestilēce doth challenge: whose vnsatiable greédy ga­pyng for filthy lucre the heauens, the earth, nor hell it selfe is able to satisfie. You affirmed in your Epistle: that through the abolishyng of your Canons, all feare, and care was vtter­ly rooted out of our hartes. I made aunswere, that many men were wonderfully enriched by your Canons: but very fewe en­duced to haue any especiall regarde to feare God by ye know­ledge of them. But you trustyng to discredite myne aunswere, demaunde a question of me, Whether the Ciuill Law doe in­struct men in the feare of God? whiche albeit they doe not (say you) yet the monumentes therof ought not be consu­med with fire. What is the matter Osorius? How hanges this together? The question was moued of Canon Lawes, and you on eche parte vbrayde agaynst vs the Ciuill Law. Our communication was concernyng the feare of God, You deny that the Ciuill Lawes ought to be burnt. Are ye starcke dronke? or doe ye bable this out in a dreame? Are ye not asha­med of this monstruous talke? truely it is very irkesome to me, and I am throughly tyred out with so blockish an aduersary.

I affirmed that the authoritie of the Canon Lawes dyd so farre forth preuayle with vs, as they were founde agreable to godlynes: and that Iustice was ministred by the Decreés ther­of in our Ecclesiasticall Courtes. You maruaile how this cā be true for so much as Luther had already burnte them all. First of all I demaunde this question of you. Why do ye mar­uaile at that thyng now, which earste ye did so constauntly de­ny? why did you so wtout all shame dissemble in matters so eui­dent? Wherewithall neither all Portingall nor your Maister­shyp could, but bee acquainted, consideryng the dayly enter­course and continuall traffique betwixt vs. Agayne what mo­ueth you to name Luther herein? Uerely we for our partes haue the name of Luther in such great admiration, that we do firme­ly [Page] beleue that you might likewise haue easely bene his Scho­ler in Diuinitie. All which notwithstandyng, we name not our selues Lutheranes, but Christians: neither doe we iudge any man so absolutely perfect amongest the whole ofspryng of A­dam: whose wordes and deédes we may accoumpt without ex­ception vnreproueable. Furthermore I founde fault with you, bycause you accused our Preachers, as though they taught in their publicke Sermons, vnpunishable libertie in sinning: and herein I likened your saucie malapertenes, to litle better then to blasphemie, because with so horrible reproche you did infa­mously slaunder ye doctrine of the Gospell, preached by our De­uines: whiche sentence after your wonted guise you turne in and out, and peruert the same from thyngs to persons: and say that I doe ascribe Deuine Godhead to Luther, Bucer, and Martyr. O monstruous vermine: did I euer speake or thinke any such matter? I did esteéme them in deéde, when they lyued as famous & worthy personages, in respect of their learnyng and godlynesse, in like maner now they are dead, I will defend the remembraunce of their names as much as I may, namely Bucer, Martin Bu­cer. and Martyr, Peter Mar­tyr. with whom I was familiarly acquainted: and did know them, to be auncient godly Fathers exquisite in all vertue & learnyng, and so much more furmountyng you in Diuinitie, as you do excell that your drawlatche derlyng Dal­mada in your deintie delicacie of ye Latin toūg. But sithence it hath pleased you with so grosse and foolish a lye, to forge new gods for me, whō I should worshyp: I will be bold by our leaue to disclose your Idoll,The Idoll of Rome. whom maugre your teéth ye shall not de­ny, but your selfe doe worshyp with Deuine honour, I meane that Romishe Prelate of the Papall Seé: The whiche for as­much as (accordyng to your owne saying) hath authoritie to dispence with sinnes, by vertue of his Bulles, not for a day, a moneth, or for a yeare onely but for euer & euer, which also keé­peth the keyes of heauen at his pleasure, wherewith he geueth the kyngdome of heauen vnto some persons, and from others locketh it fast, which is inuested in the fulnesse of all power: & is ye vndoubted Uicare of God: to whose most royall maiestie: all and euery other powers and Magistrates must humble, yeld & submit them selues: Whereas (I say) you allowe of all those [Page 77] titles of dignitie, and not onely teache and defend them in this your vnbridled insolēcy, but also so lustely & couragiously vaūte and rayse vp your crest: What doe you els in that blazyng bra­uerie of speach, but coyne to your selfe & others, a most mani­fest Idoll which you may worshyp, before whom you may pro­strate your selfe, & most lowly & humbly make intercessiō vnto.

And therfore dissemble Ierome as ye liste, yet that is your Romish Idoll. Your selfe also a manifest Idolatour. You must with all willyngly endure all trauaile be it neuer so hard, to at­taine the fauour and blessyng of that your God: perhappes you may picke vp some crommes thereby, and through him be pro­moted so highe, that ye may more nearely behold yt your earth­ly God, and be enstalled vnder his elbow in his palace, wherin you may do sacrifice vnto his Maiestie. You say that I do pro­uoke you to disputation. This is vntrue. I do not prouoke you, but confute your false accusations, wherewith you charge vs as mainteinours of a fayth voyde of all vertue and Religi­on. And euer amōg you thrust in the name of Luther. What perteineth that to vs? Cast out your challenge to some one De­uine in England by name,The bookes of Osorius de Iustitia. Tenne. you shall seé how quickly he will take vp your gloue, & with no labour crush your Sophisticall canes in peéces, You do wish me to peruse those your bookes en­titled De Iustitia, and in thē you say that I may throughly satisfie my selfe touchyng the iustifyeng of fayth. Truly I haue perused your Uolumes deuided into threé bookes entitled De Iustitia, in the first wherof ye speake much in the commen­dation of fayth, and therein vse testimonies and Argumentes, who doth reprehend you herein, I pray you? And yet all that your endeuour hath obteined no more, but to shewe your selfe an vnnecessary arguer in an vndoubted controuersie. Of the same stampe also is your second booke, wherein you commend much the worthynes of good workes: and herein we do nothing dissent from you, but will aduaunce the same as much as you will wish vs. But your thyrd booke, is almost altogether a Pe­lagian, and beyng throughly poysoned with the heresies of the Greéke Church, doth blasphemously inueighe agaynst the freé mercy of God the Father in Christ Iesu: and namely agaynst S. Augustine, an vnvanquishable patrone of the heauēly grace. [Page] And therfore this your gaye poppet, so gorgiously paynted, whiche liketh your selfe so well, is partly friuolous, ouerwhel­med with to much tattlyng, and partly wicked and execrable, whiles it practizeth to trāsforme vs from naturall men almost to be Gods. Neither am I alone of that opinion, for Cardinall Poole also was for the most part of the same Iudgement: whō although Rome had maruailously disguised, yet all men knew to be farre better man in liuyng, and much more expert in Di­uinitie then you are: he did alwayes withstand your attempt of publishyng in printe, that your delicate impe, which you as thē did so louyngly embrace, and had in so great estimatiō, as your owne derlyng. And accomptyng the same to be most perillous and pestiferous, gaue this famous verdit thereof worthy to be deépely engrauen in the very entrailes of all Christian hartes.Cardinall Poole his iudgement of Osorius his bookes. It is not possible (sayth Cardinall Poole) it is not possible to yelde to much to the mercy of God, nor to abase the strength of man to much. If you had had so much grace, as to haue concea­ued and emprinted in your braynes this doctrine of humilitie & abacement, you would neuer haue so nakedly stripped Christ of his grace, nor so hautely and arrogantly enhaunced the pow­er of mans will: ne yet so proudely and boldly reproued and de­spised S. Augustine.

This worde Osor. signi­fieth bolde in the Por­tingall toung. Ascham.But what dare not Osorius doe, who accordyng to the na­ture of his name dare boldly presume vpō all thyngs? peraduē ­ture you will demaunde, how I knew Pooles mynde herein. I will tell you. Our familiar & very frēd not vnknowen vnto you M. Ascham did sondry tymes aduertize me therof, affirmyng yt he did heare ye same vttered by the mouth of the Cardinall him selfe. This also doth trouble you very much, bycause I affir­med it to be your own errour, as which being imagined in your own braynsicke mazer, you would falsely lay to others charge. What then? did I not say the very truth herein? is it not your owne lye, your owne haynous acte? your owne slaunder? yea your owne errour? fayned, coyned, and imagined by your selfe, though afterwardes you would poast it ouer to others without cause? And yet you spare not to pinche me cruelly for so saying. And amongest other scornes reproche me of my stamme­ryng speach as though I can not speake playnly? But in the [Page 78] meane whiles you wryng your selfe by the nose, and geue your selfe two foule blowes. First of all in the matter it selfe, as e­uen now, and els where I haue declared sufficiently. Then in the maner of speache: where in steéde of barbarous endytyng, ye reprehende me for my stammeryng toung. Which neuer a­ny person would doe, that hath bene enured to write pure and cleane Latine. Surely Syr I do speake very playnly and di­stinctly through the inestimable benefite of God,Stāmeryng of [...]he toūg turned vpō Osorius necke. but your toūg doth both stammer and stutte, if the report of them be true, who haue had conference with you, which blemish, bycause it proceé­deth of nature, I would neuer haue obiected against you, if you had not first of all vpbrayded me with ye same fault, wherewith your selfe are naturally encombred.

At the length you are entred into the treaty of Iustification but first ye snatche at a few sentences of Scriptures,Of the cause of Iu­stification. which I haue set downe. And the same without all reason after a cer­teine cōtinuall crooked vsage of cauillyng, ye writhe and wrest ouerthwartely. And therfore I will bid adewe to that your vn­measurable captious Sophistry: and will sift your Diuinitie a whiles, which wil appeare to be your own, that is to say most foolish & detestably corrupt. You rehearse out of my writing, e­uē as it is, that these workes are vnprofitable to Iustification, & yet that they ought not be despised: bycause Paule doth seéme to verifie both positions. Let vs seé what our Doctour Ierome sayth to this? for sooth he raungeth abroad to originall sinne al­together besides the cushian. He doth cruelly accuse Luther, Caluine and Melancthon, bycause they do cōdemne all the workes of the most holy men, being cōpared with the glo­ry of God. And that the same could not be forgeuen, but through the merites of Iesu Christ. What then? doth not Paul affirme truly that Iewes and Gētiles are all cōcluded vnder sinne? Doth not ye Propheticall kyng Dauid likewise lōg before him pronoūce truly?Psal. 13. There is not one righteous person, no not one, there is not one, that will vnderstand, not one that will seeke after god. All are gone out of the way they are all together become vnprofitable, there is not one that doth good, no not one. If there be not one righteous mā, no not so much as one, what shalbe come of the worthynes of your workes then, yea euen amōgest the most [Page] perfect and godly? If there bee no man that will vnderstand, then also the best workes of the godly are of no value. If no mā seéke after God, what can be duly performed of any person? If all haue declined out of the way, where be they that haue wal­ked perfectly in the right way? Lastly if there be no person that doth good, whether then are all your excellent workemaisters vanished a Gods name? if all, I say all, as well Iewes, as Gē ­tiles, that is to say, if all generally are concluded vnder sinne, where can those pretie holy men bee founde, of whom ye will neédes haue some, but Paule vtterly none at all? Through the sinne of one man, sinne is poured vpon all fleshe to condemnation. These be the expresse wordes of Paule, which will not admitte any startyng hole, yet your Mastershyp notwithstandyng will vrge a certeine perfection of our workes, contrary to the ma­nifest authoritie of sacred Scriptures.

But this Prelate doth make more accompt of the wordes of Christ our Sauiour, saying. Not he that sayth Lord, Lord: but he that doth the will of my Father shal enter into the kingdome of heauen. And then hee demaundeth. If the yoke of sinne bee so alwayes fastened vnto our shoulders, that it can by no meanes be remoued, how we may then obteine the state of righteousnesse through the grace and goodnesse of Christ? Your selfe haue told it wise man, truely euen through the very same grace and goodnes of Christ, which you haue named. And therfore Dauid being full of ye holy Ghost, lifting his hādes vp vnto God, cryeth out in this maner.Psal. 50. Wash me throughly from my wickednes, and clense me frō my sinne, for I knowledge my faultes, and my sinne is euer before me: Why should we desire to bee wa­shed, if we did not welter in the filthy puddle of sinnes? and why should we require to bee clensed, and throughly purified? if we were not corrupted, & wholy defiled with ye stinckyng dregges of sinne?Rom. 13. As by the fall of one mā (sayth Paule) sinne is deriued by way of propaganaciō vpon all men vnto condēnation, euen so by the righteousnesse of one, good is extended vnto all men to iustification of life. Agayne. The same Paule:Rom. 11. God hath shut vp all men vn­der vnbelief, that he might haue mercy vpon all. Frō our selues therfore proceédeth euill vnto damnatiō. And from God com­meth Iustification vnto lyfe. Of our selues riseth vnbelief: but [Page 79] mercy issueth from God. But let vs heare our Lord and Sa­uiour Iesus Christ him selfe most sweétely cōfortyng vs with these wordes.Math. 11. Come vnto me all ye that doe trauaile and be heauy laden, and I will refresh you. And therfore all anguish and grief of sinne, all burden of trespasses, wherewith we are ouerladen and haled down not onely to the groūde, but euen to hell gates, spryng out from our owne selues: euen so the asswagyng of all sorrowes, and ease of all our importable burdens come from Iesu Christ onely. If you bee ignorant of these sentences good Syr, wherewith the holy scriptures doe euery where swarme so plentyfully, what is it I pray you that you vnderstand in the Gospell? if you doe know them, why doe ye so maliciously in­ueighe agaynst those learned men and singular seruauntes of God without cause, especially being as now departed this life? agaynst whom if they could speake for them selues, ye durst not mutter one worde. For what are you beyng compared with them? But to let them passe, whom I did not vndertake to de­fend: what extreme amazednesse is this in you, to rehearse my wordes, and cull them out of purpose, to carpe at them, and from them to glaūce away to Luther and Caluin? if your qua­rell be to me, why do you not let them alone? if ye liste to striue with them, then also cauill not with me. Doth not reason re­quire this? and is not my request allowable? Surely it is ex­treme maddenesse, to challenge me vnto the Barriers, and then to sckyppe ouer away to others, and to pursue them with your venymous toung.

You say further that it seemeth by my maisters doctrine (for so it pleaseth you to tearme thē) that the force of sinne is not as yet extinguished in vs through the bloud of Christ. Truely you and I both may acknowledge those men whose names you did recite before, to be our maisters, not in Diuini­tie onely but in practize of pietie also. But whereas ye would haue them to teache that the force of sinne is not as yet extin­guised through the bloud of Christ (I doe expresse here your owne wordes) This is onely your horrible and most shamelesse slaūder agaynst them. For vnto this marke alwayes they bent their whole endeuour to expresse vnto you Iesu Christ liuely, before your eyes, & the same also crucified, to emprint through­ly, [Page] in the very bowels of your soules the most precious bloud of Iesu Christ shed for vs vpon ye Crosse:Gallat. 3. to preach vnto vs remis­sion of sinnes through his bitter death and passion, to beate into the blind and deafe eares of the world this glad tydyngs of the Gospell, beyng ouerwhelmed & oppressed by your couled gene­ratiō, massemongers, confessours and mens traditions, & alto­gether choaked & buried vnder grounde, through the silence of holy Scriptures, and to disclose agayne abroad into the open light, and put miserable captiues in remembraunce of the sayd doctrine, beyng vtterly subuerted by the tyrannous trechery of your gallauntes. And therfore in all their sermons, lessons, and writynges, they vsed these and such like speaches.1. Iohn. 1. The bloud of Iesu Christ doth clense vs frō all sinne. You do know that you were redemed from your vayne conuersation which you receaued by the traditiō of your forefathers not with transitorie thyngs as gold and siluer, 1. Peter. 1. but with most precious bloud as of an vndefiled lambe. &c. Apoc. 1. neither whoremōgers, nor worshippers of images, nor adulterers. &c. shall inherite the kingdome of God. 1. Cor. 1. And such ye were, but you are clensed, but you are sanctified, but you are iustified through the name of Iesu Christ, and through the spirite of our God. You heare, men clensed from all sinne, redeémed from their vayne conuer­sation, washed, sanctified, and iustified through the bloud of Iesu Christ: Ye know likewise that these men did take vpon them alwayes infinite labours and trauaile about the establi­shyng and enlargyng of the Gospell of Christ: and are you not ashamed to obtrude vnto them this grosse errour whiche is ech where most euidently conuinced in the whole discourse of the Gospell, & treatise of holy Scriptures? Cākred malice hath not onely blinded you (Osorius) but so bewitched your senses that as ye can not seé the truth your selfe, so yet of a most ar­rogaunt waywardnesse, you will frowardly kicke agaynst the Preachers of the truth.

Rom. 7.And yet this notwithstāding is most true, That sinne doth al­wayes dwell within vs, and that there is alwayes a law lurking in our mēbers rebellyng agaynst the law of the mynde, which draweth vs as bondeslaues to sinnyng. But the Lord doth deliuer vs from this body of death through the bloud of Iesu Christ, not by rootyng out sinne from vs altogether, but for Christes sake pardonyng the [Page 80] sinnes of them that repent. And hereof arise those comfortable reioysinges of the faythfull. He that spared not his onely begot­ten Sonne but deliuered him to be slayne for vs all, how can it bee possible, but that he should geue vs all thynges together with him? Rom. 8. Agayne, who shall accuse the elect of God? Thirdly, it is the Lord that doth Iustifie, who shall condemne vs? These are not spoken to the end to set out our innocencie & perfection, where­unto we can not aspire whiles we are pilgrimes in this mise­rable flesh:Luke. 5. but doe expresse vnto vs that God doth geue vs freé remission through Iesu Christ: so that we will set our whole affiaunce and hope vpon him, which pronounceth of him selfe that hee was sent not to the righteous but to the Sinners, by­cause they should repent and amende their lyues. But you can not well disgest these sayinges, my Lord, for what can you be­yng an old Byshop, allow in the Scriptures, that haue bounde your selfe apprentice to such bussardly Schooledregges? And yet this confidence in the death and bloud of Christ, will rayse vs vp into heauen at that dreadfull day, when you and your couled generation, with all your peltyng trinkettes of super­stitious workes shalbe throwen headlong into hell, vnlesse ye repent in tyme. For we doe assuredly knowe, that if we confesse with our mouthes our Lord Iesus, and beleue stedfastly in our hart that God hath raysed him from death to lyfe, we shalbe saued. Rom. 10. For with the hart we beleue vnto righteousnesse, and with the mouth we confesse to Saluation. And yet this confession of fayth, doth neuerthelesse want no testimonie of good workes, as where withall she is alwayes accompanied, for we are not so indebted to the fleshe, that we should walke accordyng to the flesh, for if we liue accordyng to the fleshe, we shall dye. But if in the spirite we mortifie the sinnes of our bodies we shall liue. For all those that are guided by the spirite of God, the same are the sonnes of God. Rom. 8. Wher­fore renoūce once at the length such lothsome communicatiō: where withall, lyke a most filthy hogge mooselyng in the dur­tie swynesty of Epicure, you vse most wickedly to scorne and deride the faythfull seruauntes of Christ. For ye write that it is the maner of their thought: We are in good case enough, for we are most acceptable vnto GOD through fayth. Wherfore we are as righteous as Peter and as Paule, yea as [Page] the most holy mother of God. Ye goe amasked altogether (Osorius) the faythfull Ministers of Christ doe not acquainte them selues with this vnsauory and hautie spirite of pride: but rather doe earnestly call to their remembraunce the sayinges of Paule.Rom. 13. The night is passed, the day is come nye, let vs there­fore cast awaye the workes of darkenesse, and let vs put on the ar­mour of light. Let vs walke honestly as it were in the day light, not in eating and drinking nother in chambring and wan­tonnesse. &c. But let vs put on Iesu Christ, and not make prouision for the fleshe fulfill the lustes thereof. &c.

The residue aunswered by I. F. begynnyng where Maister Haddon left agaynst Osorius.

APelles the most famous Painter of the worlde,Plinius lib. 35. cap. 10. endeuouryng in most curious & exquisite maner, to expresse the fea­ture of Venus, at Coe, in Greéce,That is to say cōmyng out of the Sea. cal­led in Greéke [...] was preuen­ted by death (as Plinie reporteth) whē as yet he had drawen but the halfe of ye portrait, and thereby cōpelled to re­linquishe the residue so vnperformed, that no man of the Arte, were he neuer so expert, durst at any tyme after presume with pencill to pursue the President. The like lot albeit in vnlike endeuour, that ouertooke Apelles amid­des his blazing the beautie of Venus, seémeth to haue encoun­tred our noble Gentleman, Walter Haddon, in displaying the veritie of the Gospell. For after hee had vndertaken the com­mendable, and prayse worthy defence of the truth, agaynst Ie­rome Osorius: albeit he neither obteined to beautifie the part, which he had begon, nor to accomplish his purpose in the rest, and yeldyng ouer to nature, was amyddes his race, constrai­ned to surcease his exploite, yet hath hee so poolished that part, whiche hee left vnfinished, with Apelles Pencill, that is to say, hath framed so singular a Paterne in excellencie of Arte, that with the sight therof the whole posteritie, may be afrayde to set hand to the attempt. For determinyng with him selfe to aun­swere the slaunderous Inuectiues of Ierome Osorius, compi­led into threé bookes, although it was not graunted him to per­forme the whole, yet hath he so singularely endited one booke, and the halfe of an other agaynst the same, & confuted the rea­sons, which were none at all: discouered his lyes, whiche were most shamelesse: daunted his hauty pride, and vtterly discomfi­ted his vaine glorious Peacocklike Rhetoricke, with such gra­uitie, wisedome, and so well disposed stile, that if there were no supply made by any other, the truth of the Gospell beyng of it selfe otherwise vnuanquishable, might seéme to haue no [Page] neéde of any other patronage.

Wherefore so long as we enioyed the lyfe of this excellent learned man, and him selfe endured amongest vs, as the Churche of Christ had a very worthy and valiaunt Captaine: So had Osorius also a couragious and puissaunt an enconte­rer, and meéte conquerour for such a monster. But now sithence he is taken from vs, albeit the veritie it selfe haue no iust cause to dispayre, yet can not we chose but be vnderfully dismayed, if not for M. Haddons sake, yet for our losse chiefly. For as con­cernyng M. Haddon, hee can not but be in most happy estate, whom Gods good prouidence hath mercyfully trāslated out of this furious wretched world into more blessed, & quyet calme: euen then especially, when as beyng conuersaunt in the race of perfect godlynes, he employed his vertuous endeuour in so sa­cred a cause, where now neither Ierome Osorius, nor any o­ther braulyng barker can from henceforth disquyet or molest him.The decease of M. Had­don. There is greater cause rather to moue vs, & all the lear­ned to much sorrow and grief of mynde, who haue lost so great and learned a ryngleader of learning, the losse of whom doth by so much more encrease our heauynes, in respect of this present entreprise vndertaken agaynst Osorius, chiefly, by how much we feéle our selues bereft of so singular a Patrone, and so alto­gether dispoyled herein, that without wonderfull difficultie, scarse any person of knowledge wilbe founde able to supply the rest of the aunswere, with like successe, and commēdation: Not for that the matter is of so great importaunce, (for what can be more easie then to refell the reasons of Osorius, wherin is no substaunce at all? and his triflyng toyes, which are manifold, as also to despise his slaunders, wherewith he is ouerlauishe?) but bycause the person will not easily hee founde (I suppose) which after learned M. Haddon dare presume to entermedle in the cause, and to ioyne his owne deuises with M. Haddons writynges. So that I feare me, now M. Haddon is dead, the same wil come to passe in this discourse, that Plutarch maketh Relation of, of a certeine mā that was not well thought of: who rashly and youthfully seémeth to coūteruaile with the politicke prowesse of Themystocles.

What then? bycause we can not atteyne to M. Haddons ac­tiuitie, [Page 82] shall we therfore like dastardes fleé the field, and leaue the truth of the Gospell succourles in the campe of her enemy? (the quarell not so much apperteignyng to M. Haddon, as to almightie God him selfe) and suffer shame to preuaile more with vs, then pietie and godlynesse? or bycause one champion is takē from the Barriers, which was approued at all assayes, shall we therfore yeld ouer the conquest of the whole challenge to Osorius? And permit this glorious Thraso to triumph and treade downe our cowardize? or bycause we preferre our M. Haddon to the first onset in armes, shall we therefore beare no brunte of the battell? or shall not his valiaunt attempt ra­ther teaze, and prouoke vs to pricke on with courage? And yet I neither speake, nor thinke in this wise, as though I did ei­ther mistrust the tyme, or the wittes of our age, so plentyfully florishyng at this season especially, wherein I doe know very many that are skilfull enough to mainteyne the quarell, if they would either vouchsafe to yeld their endeuour thereto, or could be persuaded to thinke, that their trauaile would counteruaile their studies. And yet albeit happely may be founde some one, so nymble of mynde, and endued with learning, that can Iudge him selfe able enough to performe, yet scarse shall ye finde that mā, who beyng not otherwise exercized in weightyer affaires, will so litle esteéme the losse of his tyme, as in such vnprofita­ble contention, snarlyng, and snatchyng, to spend one houre vpon Osorius, Osoria me­lancholycke brauler. that is to say vpon so wayward, and melancho­licke an aduersary, beyng nothyng els but a raylyng brabler. Whereby neither profite may redounde to the Reader, nor prayse to the victor.

There is no cause therfore (gētle reader) why thou shouldst require at our handes, that exact and absolute furniture in the supply that is commyng forth, & should haue bene perfited by M. Haddon, either bycause it is not so easie a matter to reach vnto that exquisite plot of his singular Presidēt, (as to the ta­ble of Apelles) or els bycause the chiefest of our aduersaries ar­guments haue bene by sondry persons long sithence crushte in peéces already, and are such in effect, as deserue rather with discretion to be scorned, then with reason to be scanned. I will touch onely certeine chief places of the controuersie scattered [Page] here, and there, as they come in ye chase, and seé to auayle most for his challenge, reteinyng my selfe within the lystes of Neoptolemus law, that is to say briefly, and in summary pointes to touch, and away. Neither doe I thinke it neédefull to stay long vpon the through debatyng of euery particular point, especially, bycause threé wordes onely may suffice to o­uerthrow the whole Battrye of these threé Inuectiues, be they neuer so tedious. Forasmuch as the Authour hath vttered no­thyng in all his confused worke els, but that which sauoreth of lyes,The summe of all Oso­rius worke, briefly cō ­prehended in three wordes. slaunders, and errours, what other reasonable aunswere may any discreét person require, then threé wordes onely, which when I haue spoken, I shalbe thought to haue expressed in few wordes, all what soeuer that huge rable of that scoldyng, and triflyng Sophister doth conteine.

1. Mentiris.
1. You doe lye.
2. Maledicis.
2. You do slaunder.
3. Falleris.
3. You doe erre.

And to the end it shall not bee sayd, that I charge him with a lewde deuise of myne owne imagination, cōtrary to the truth of the matter, I will alledge certeine euident proofes, although not all, (for it were can infinite labour to number the Sandes of the Sea) whereby the diligēt Reader may easily descry his wonderfull vanitie in lyeng, his execrable wickednes in slaun­deryng, and his monstruous blindnes in Diuinitie.

And first of all this one place offereth it selfe to the viewe: wherein two especiall pointes full of haynous accusation are contained. That is to say, two detestable lyes whelped at one lytter (so pregnant is this worme) in the one wherof hee doth accuse Martin Luther, as though hee did wickedly teache ex­treme Desperation, in the other, a bold & presumptuous Con­fidence of Saluation. Truely this is a greuous and perillous accusation if it be true. Afterwardes out of these two monstru­ous falsely forged propositions, he stampeth a conclusion forth with no lesse false thē malicious: wherein he exclameth against Luther, Exclamat [...]ō of Osorius agaynst Lu­ther. as the onely subuertour of all vertue, studious In­dustrie, and carefull endeuour. Nor is this to be wondred, that Osorius doth argue in this wise. For whereas euen from [Page 83] the very begynnyng of his booke, he hath accustomed him selfe to nothyng els but to a cōtinuall course of lyeng, I should mar­uell more a great deale, if hee would now altogether chaunge his Typpet vnlyke him selfe, and begyn to speake any thyng truly. But the matter goeth well with Luther, that his workes are extaunt as yet, and are vsually frequented, whiche as are true witnesses of his doctrine, so cā testifie truely of their mai­sters innocencie herein. Whereupon two thyngs may be easi­ly coniectured, whereof the one of great likelyhode is to be sus­pected either that Osor. hath neuer read those thynges, where­at hee cauilleth: or that of very nature hee is a notably shaped Sicophaunt.Osorius pag. 141. Martin Luther (sayth he) doth teach extreme Desperation. I would fayne know where, or from whence you haue pyked out this? Luther preached many Sermons: Cōpi­led many bookes: some published in his owne coūtrey lāguage: Many also turned into the Latine toung: The readyng & per­using of the which hath recouered many persons (I doubt not) standyng vpon the very brincke of Desperation, & in greéuous anguish of mynde: amongest whom I do with an vnfained, sim­ple, and humble conscience thankefully acknowledge before God, my selfe to bee one. But I did neuer heare of one person so much, that hath perished through Desperation, by readyng Luthers bookes,The doc­trine of de­speration, whether is it more proper to the Papistes, or to the Lu­therans. or hearing his doctrine: On the contrary part, diuers monumentes and histories are replenished with exam­ples of such as haue runne headlong into vtter dispayre, which haue gaynesayd, or withdrawen them selues from the doctrine of Luther. As touchyng Frauncisce Spira, who reuolted from the participation of the doctrine, whiche he had once receaued by Luthers preachyng, bycause the Recorde thereof is some­what old, I will for this present omit, what remaineth in hi­story of him. I will more willyngly vse fresher examples of our later age, and yet not all ingenerall, for it neédeth not, neither is any one man able so to doe. But I will rehearse some of the most notable. And first of all a certeine mā called Iacobus La­tomus, a man sometymes wellbe seéne amongest the Deuines of Louayne. I can not tell whether you your selfe knew him (Osorius) when he liued. This mā mainteinyng the same qua­rell, wherein you do now turmoyle your selfe agaynst Luther, [Page] is reported to departe this life in the selfe same Desperatiō, whereof you make mention: who at his very last gaspes bray­eng out most horrible and feareful roaring noyse, vttered none other sounde in the eares of all men that heard him, but that he was vtterly damned, and forsaken of God, and had no hope of Saluation layed vp in store for him, bycause hee did wilfully resiste the manifest truth, which he knew before to be most true. I will couple two others with hym of the same fraternitie, Guarlacke Reader of Diuinitie Lecture amōgest the Gertru­dianes, and Arnolde Bomelye Scholer to Tilman: of the first of whō it is sayd, that euen in the last panges before his death, he spake in this maner, that he had liued desperately, & could not endure the Iudgemēt of God, bycause he did acknowledge his sinnes to be greater, then that they could obteyne for geue­nesse. The other (hauyng fully gorged him selfe with the doc­trine of Desperatiō, wherein he was instructed by his Schoo­lemaister of distrust) surprised at lēgth with intollerable gnaw­yng of conscience practised first to kill him selfe with his owne Dagger, at the last beyng wholy swallowed vp of Despera­tion, dyd cut his owne bowelles out of his body with an other mans knife.

It shall not be amisse to ioyne vnto those Sadolet Cardinall of Rome, who after sondry disputations mainteined agaynst Luther, gaue vp the ghost, not without horrible trembling and torment of conscience. I suppose also that you are not igno­raunt of the like that happened to Cardinall Crescentius Le­gate of the Apostolique Seé, and President of the Tridentine Councell, beyng astonyed with sodeine horrour, and trouble­some abashement of mynde in the same Citie. 1552. of whom Iohn Sledan hath made relation in his Commentaries. What shall I speake of Castellane Archbyshop of Aurelia? & of Pon­chere Archbyshop of Turone? who procured to them selues Gods indignation and vengeaunce, as appeared by the won­derfull fearefull passiōs wherewith they were oppressed at the tyme of their death: not bicause they did heare Luther and read his bookes, but bycause they did cruelly persecute his doctrine. In ye same Beadroll may be reckoned the remēbraūce of Iohn Eckius, Iohn Ecki­us with o­thers. whose whole course of lyfe as was nothyng els but a [Page 84] continuall mortall combate agaynst Luther, so his yeldyng to nature was so altogether voyde of spirituall consolation, that euen in the last gaspes hee vttered no other wordes, but of mo­ney, and certeine thousand of crownes. And what neéde I here rehearse out of the Recordes of aūcient Chronicles Minerius, Cassianus, Renestenses, Martinus, that miserable Mōcke cal­led Romanus, Prattes, Lysettes, Rusius, Morines, who beyng horribly plagued by the seuere Iustice of God, may be sufficiēt Presidentes to teach you, what it is insolently to kicke agaynst the pricke of Gods vnsearcheable prouidence.

The History of the French kyng Henry ye second,Henry se­cond Frēch kyng his death. is yet but freshe in memory, and deépely emprinted, not in the myndes onely, but in the eyes also of all men: who extremely boylyng with inward hatred agaynst the same doctrine, receaued his deathes wounde in the selfe same eyes, wherewith he was de­termined to view the execution of others: and was forced him selfe to become a manifest spectacle of Gods Iustice to all the world, before he could bathe his eyes in the bloud of ye innocēt. And not long after the sayd Henry, followed also the kyng of Nauarre, who procured vnto him selfe most iust cause not one­ly of Desperation, but of death also, through none other occa­sion, but by persecutyng this doctrine, which you doe slaunde­rously reproche to be the doctrine of Desperation. I could here make a Register of an infinite nōber, not in Englād onely, but of other Regions also, which after they had receaued wonder­full cōfort out of ye sweéte iuyce of this doctrine, which you call Lutherane, fell headlong into miserable anguishe and gnaw­yng of conscience, by reuoltyng from this doctrine: who could neuer attayne one sparckle of quyet mynde, before they had re­claymed them selues from their first Apostasie. Last of all, how many thousandes of men, wemen, and children young and old, can this our age truely recorde, who haue shewed them selues more willyng to yeld their carcasses to fier, fagottes, sword, rackyngs, and all maner of horrible Torture, rather then they would recante, and renounce that comfortable doctrine, where with they were enstructed: which I suppose they would neuer haue done, if they had suspected neuer so small embres of De­speration to haue lurked therein. But I perceaue what Oso­rius [Page] doth meane by this word Desperation. If he could either expresse his mynde aptly, and distinctly, or were willyng to deale simply and playnly. To the ende therefore I may frame myne aūswere, hauing regarde to the meanyng of the man, ra­ther then to his speach, I will examine the maner of his dispu­tyng somewhat more aduisedly.

The affi­aunce and assuraūce of saluation, wherein is it to be pla­ced. Luther doth teach (sayth he) that no mā ought to place affiaunce of his righteousnes in merites and good workes. Goe to and what is concluded hereof? Therfore Luther doth teach the doctrine of Desperation. A very new founde and straūge maner of Argument, framed perhappes after the rule which concludeth from the staffe to the corner. I suppose men of Syluane vse this kynde of arguyng in their wooddy forrests. But I make this aunswere to the Argument. If God had de­termined, that our Saluation should haue bene purchased through godly actions, and vertuous endeuour of mans life: it were not altogether without reason that Osorius doth speake. But for as much as our hope and confidence is limited within the boundes of the fayth of Christ, and the foundation thereof builded vpon this Rocke onely, I suppose surely, that the per­son which doth allure vs home vnto Christ, from confidence of workes, and teacheth vs to repose our whole trust in him, as in the onely Sanctuary, and shoteanker of our Saluation, doth declare rather the true way to assured hope, then abolishe the same: Neither doth he by and by, rende in sunder the sinewes of mans endeuour, who doth but embace and disable that part from mās power, which doth properly apperteine to the sonne of God: I thinke that he discouereth rather the well sprynges of the comfortable glad tydynges of the Gospell. But lysten I pray you to Osorius disputation, and wonder a whiles at his deépe insight in Logicke. For in matters past recouery (sayth he) and in most assured confidēce, there is no man that wil­be enduced to rayse vp his mynde earnestly to any vertuous endeuour. You haue here geuen vs a right Rhetoricall posi­tion: now marke a concludyng determination more then Ca­tholicke. Ergo (saith he) Whereas Luther doth partly dispoile vs of the hope of righteousnesse, and partly doth place the the same wholy in the righteousnesse of Christ, which hope [Page 85] ought to be proper and peculiar to ech person, what doth he herein els then vtterly subuerte and extinguishe all due­ties and endeuours of godlynesse in vs? Truely I do not de­ny, but that in all maner of enterprises, which happen in vsuall and dayly practize, well conceauyng hope doth minister won­derfull courage to the mynde of man: the whole force, and lyue­lynes wherof, through Desperatiō or distrust, is many tymes vtterly daunted. But to what purpose is this alledged agaynst Luther? Whose teachyng & Lessons tende to this onely marke, not so much to instruct vs in the rules of good lyfe (which is the onely peculiar office of the law) as to lead vs to know, whether we ought in these good workes of ours to repose our affiaunce, or elles to ascribe the same wholy to the freé mercy of GOD, through Iesu Christ: not bycause godly endeuours and ver­tuous workes are not prayseworthy, but whether our workes be of so great estimation, as may satisfie Gods iudgement, and deserue eternall lyfe, so establishe our consciēces in sauetie. This is the grounde, and principall point of the controuersie, which ought in this place to be decided.

For as much therfore,Two kynd [...] of despera­tion. as there be two kyndes of Despera­tion (as we haue sayd) it behoued you (Osorius) to haue distin­guished the same, before you had raysed your Battrye agaynst Luther. There be some persons, which doe vtterly dispayre of forgeuenes of their sinnes, and of the mercy of God towardes them. As for example: the Desperation of Cain, Saul Esau, Antiochus, Iudas, Minerius, Latomus, Sadolete, and such o­thers. And this kynde of Desperatiō belongeth properly to the vngodly and wicked, whiche are altogether estraunged from God, and nothyng agreable with Luthers doctrine. There is besides this an other kynde of Desperation: as in the attempt of any enterprise, if a man be wholy discomfited to attaine the Maistrie, and can not be the foremost, will not yet bee discou­raged, but wil employ his abilitie as much as in him lieth, that he may be the second at the left:

For the Archer that shooteth somewhat neare the sticke,
Deserueth his prayse though he hitt not the pricke,

In lyke manner we all, euery one of vs, doe marche on­warde paynefully, in this warrefarre of Gods law, as it were [Page] in a runnyng game, to trye Maistric, wherein albeit was ne­uer founde man, whiche could in this lyfe assure him selfe to attayne the appointed goale: yet are we not therewith so throwen downe in conceite, as to bee in dispayre of our Sal­uation. Neither ought we so to interprete the law, as though through the practise and guidyng thereof onely, and by no meanes elles, we could obteine euerlastyng lyfe. The law hath other purposes, and endes to direct vs vnto, whiche Oso­rius might haue learned out of Paule and Augustine, and di­uers others, if he would not wittyngly, and wilfully haue bene blynd.The ende and office of the law. The first Rule and vse of the Law is, to represent vnto vs the inestimable righteousnesse of our creatour, after whose Image we are created. The next, to condemne our vnrighte­ousnesse, and abate our pride. The other, to bee for a tyme in steéde of a Schoolemaister to lead vs to Christ: whiche albeit could not of her selfe geue full righteousnes to that people vn­to whom it was deliuered first, might neuertheles in the meane space, through wholesome seueritie, hold them backe and keépe them in feare, and restrayne the vnbrideled licentiousnesse of their fleshe, in some orderly comlynesse, lest-they should runne headlong into all execrable, and wicked impietie. Truly these seéme to me bee the principall vses of the law, the absolute and exact perfection wherof, as neuer any man of that race he­therto was able to satisfie, though vpholdē altogether with the gracious ayde of God: So if you (Osorius) can remember a­ny one man, sithence that tyme (the sonne of God onely except) that hath throughly performed all, and euery part, and duetie required by the law, I beseéch you name him, or if you cā name no one of all the ofspryng of Adā, which hath perfectly accom­plished the whole law, what moueth you so furiously to rage agaynst Luther, who teacheth that all our righteousnes is vn­perfect? But be it, that he hath likewise affirmed (as the truth is) that our righteousnesse is not onely vnperfect, but had con­demned all our righteousnesse to be more lothsome, thē the de­filynges of a foule menstruous clothe? euen as Esay the Pro­phet did? or what if accordyng to the saying of our Lord Iesus Christ, hee had adiudged not onely all our deédes, and wordes what soeuer, though neuer so precisely handled, not in the [Page 86] tyme of the old law onely, but after the commyng of Christ al­so, neither of vs alone, or the rude vnlettered multitude, but e­uen of the Apostles them selues performed, to bee altogether vnauaylable to the purchasing of eternall lyfe? yea and that thē selues also were in no better plighte, and condition: then ser­uauntes, and vnprofitable bondeslaues? what a sturre would this Da [...]s haue kept? But now, sithence no man can be igno­raunt of the most manifest sayings of Christ and the Apostles, either must Osorius cite these felowes vnto the Chapter house together with the Lutherans, or if he do acquyte them, he must not from henceforth quarell with Luther in the cause.

Agayne where the same Lord in the Gospell doth promise a teacher,The lawe vnprofita­ble to saluation. the holy Ghost, Which should cōuince the world of sinne and of righteousnesse, what shall we thinke that he mente by sen­dyng this teacher other, then that hee purposed to establishe those two thynges especially, which Osorius doth seéke chiefly to discredite? That is to say, that godly hartes beyng enlighte­ned by the inspiration of the holy Ghost, may bee instructed to feéle their owne weakenesse, that from them selues as frō their owne power, they haue no hope of Saluation, and that for the attainement thereof nothyng wanteth in Christ Iesu: and how that without Christ, all that euer we haue, is but in dispayred case:A whole­some kynde of trust and mistrust. but in him all thynges rest most safe, and assured. Out of the one wherof ariseth vnto vs a very cōfortable Desperation, out of the other floweth a most holy Affiaunce. A Desperation (I say) not such a one as doth exclude true trust in Iesu Christ, but which doth abrogate vayne confidence of our workes one­ly. Neither doe I here meane the confidence, whiche doth let louse the reynes to licentious boldnes, and vnpunishable liber­tie, but the same confidence which doth minister necessary and comfortable gladsomnes, to the godly & afflicted consciences.

But our Porting all can in no wise allow of this confidence, fearyng this thyng forsooth, Lest this way be to swift, Osori. pag. 141. and to easie to the attaynement of saluation, as that whiche will drawe awaye the variable mynde of man from labour to slouthfulnesse, and therfore it were much better, that euery man beyng vncertaine of his owne sauetie, should be hol­den still in feare rather. And this perhappes he might seéme [Page] to haue spoken not without some reason, if eternall lyfe were such a thyng, as did depend vpon any couenaunt or condition of workes. But whereas now it consisteth wholy, in the freé mer­cy of God, whiche neither can deceaue, nor hath respect to the worthynesse of him that receaueth this grace,The trust of saluatiō de­pēdeth vpō promise & not vpō the Law. Ergo, the more assured. but resteth vpon the onely credite of hym, that promiseth: is not apportioned to our good workes, but freély geuen, not to them whiche de­serue, but vnto them which doe beleue in him that doth Iustifie the vngodly: what remayneth, but that Osorius must either strippe the Scriptures naked of Gods promise towardes vs, or of necessitie, conclude our trust, and assured affiaunce vnder that promise: or that him selfe is vtterly ignoraunt, what that promise of the Gospell purporteth: and so bewraye his sin­gular blockishnesse herein? whiche is rather likely to bee true. Now I would haue him first make me an aunswere vnto this. Whether God haue made vs any promise at all?Promise made be­fore the Law and without the law. Then, whe­ther that promise be the law it selfe? or some other thyng ordei­ned besides, and before the law. And hereof Paule seemeth to bee a very fitte interpretour: who reporteth that the promise was first of all geuen to Abrahā: Then, that after ii [...]. C. and xxx. yeares, the lawe was published, and therefore, that it could by no meanes make frustrate the Testament, which was geuen first: For if inheritaūce came of the law, then is it not now of promise: Galat. 3. If we thinke good to beleue Paule rather then Osorius.

The pro­mise of sal­uation free and simple without condition.These thinges beyng now graunted, I demaunde further, (if this Gentleman will vouchsafe to teach vs) What kynde of couenaunt that was of the promised inheritaūce vnto vs? whe­ther he will confesse the same to be freé, or not freé? If he deny it to be freé, then will S. Paule forthwith cry out agaynst him, who doth ascribe all that promise made vnto Abraham of the blessyng, of the seéde, of the inheritaunce, of the kyngdome, of eternall lyfe vnto grace, and not vnto the law yea: and so also not onely before the law, but euen when hee was not as yet in Circumcision. But if he will confesse (as he neédes must) that the bare promise proceéded not of any couenaunt made in res­pect of our workes, but was freély offred by the freé goodnesse of the geuer onely, what reason will Osorius render vnto vs, why we should not receaue the same with all assurednesse, and most [Page 87] certeine assuraunce called in Greéke [...]. For if fayth, as Osorius hath described it in his bookes entituled De Iusti­tia, bee deriued of hauyng affiaunce: vpon whom may a man settle his affiaunce more safely, then vpon God? or when, more assuredly, then when he promiseth simply without condition: or what can be of more certeintie, then that which is promised by God the Father almightie, to all men, without exception, freé­ly, and of his owne accorde, yea and that through fayth onely? Freély (I say) whereby the bountifull mercy of God poured vp­on all fleshe, may shyne more liuely to the comfortable cheare­fulnesse of afflicted consciences. Through fayth I say, bycause all thynges depende vpon this one condition. That is to say, ‘That we all should beleue in the sonne of God, in whom all the pro­mises of God, are yea and Amen.’ Fayth onely howe it doth ex­clude and not exclude good wor­kes. I adde also, fayth onely, not bycause I will exclude good workes from her company, simply, as though they should not be put in vre, but in such sort, as that they shall not be esteémed to bee of such valewe, as to be able to Iustifie: not that beyng Iustified, we should not exercise our sel­ues in them: But that we geue not vnto them, the chief prehe­minence in Iustification: not bycause we should let lowse the reynes to voluptuousnesse, and treade the tract of vnbrideled lust, or dissolue the seueritie of auncient godly discipline: nor that we should vtterly extinguish all vertuous endeuours, blot out the glory of honest actiōs, or choke vp the light of true Re­ligion and vndefiled sinceritie: finally not to the end we should defile the commendable prayses of worthy renowne, vnder co­lour of vnpunishable libertie of sinnyng: in deede these are the paynted florishyngs of Osori. forge, & glorious glytteryngs of his Sophisticall talke. Wherin this our Simme suttle, doth nothyng at all degender from the slye craftinesse of his prede­cessours. Neither is this any new deuise, or practize of those, whiche, when they are ouercharged with argumentes, whiche they can not resolue, cast vp presently, such smocky, and con­fused mistes of wordes and slaunderous reproches, of purpose to dazell the eyes of the Readers, that they may not seé the o­pen light. After the very same fashion Tertullus the Aduocate of the Iewes did behaue him selfe agaynst Paule.Tertull. Actc. 24. Whose do­ctrine when hee could by no meanes emproue, he rusheth vpon [Page] him like a Iolye Sycophaunte, with slaunders and reproches, vttered in smoathe and delicate order of speache with lyes, vn­true reportes, forged accusations and outcryes, exclaimyng a­gaynst him that he was a troublesome man, seditious, a raiser of new sectes, & a defiler of the Temple. For euen with all the selfe same cōtumelies Tertullus did then reproch S. Paule be­fore Foelix then Presidēt, like as now this our Tullian Tertul­lus with like vanitie; and no lesse impudencie doth accuse Mar­tin Luther: of all whiche generally hee is as innocent and cleare now, as Paule was at that tyme of his araignement. Surely good consciences wayeng the matter indifferently, cā not be ignoraunt, nor Osorius him selfe (I suppose) will deny, if he bee willyng to yelde to the truth, but that neuer any such braynesicke thought dyd enter into Luthers head, as to geue any scoape to the vngodly to pursue wickednesse: but rather that hee was alwayes of this mynde, to comfort afflicted con­sciences, and to discouer the most sure founteines of consola­tion in Christ Iesu Crucified for vs.

Whereby you may perceaue most vayne glorious Tertul­ly, what maner of Desperation, and what kynde of Affiaunce Luther doth teach, not that Affiaunce which is enemy to Sal­uation, but that necessary and vndoubted Confidence, which is able to approue it selfe allowable by the infallible promises of God, and most assured testimonies of holy Scriptures. For o­therwise if Christian fayth had no other fortresse whereunto it might safely trust,Christian peace and affiaunce. I would then fayne know of you, where that peace, where that reioysing in Christ Iesu is, whereof Paule doth certifie them, Whiche beyng Iustified by fayth, haue peace with God through our Lord Iesus Christ? wherein we stand assu­red, and reioyce in the hope of the glory of God. Rom. 5.Rom. 5. Where is that accesse with confidence and boldenesse, through fayth in him? Ephe. 3.Ephes. 3. Where is that accesse to the throne of grace with assured Affiaunce? Hebr. 4.Hebr. 4. To what ende doth our Lord so oft in the Gospell encourage vs to conceaue couragious boldnesse? vsing this reason, That he alone had ouercome the world for the behofe of all people? Iohn. 16.Iohn. 16. If as yet euery one of vs must be enfor­ced to purchase to him selfe, the victory by his owne endeuour, Where is that fulnesse of ioye in the holy Ghost? If employeng our [Page 88] seruice after the maner of bonde seruauntes, not as children, we must lyue vnder the law, and hope to attayne the possession of our inheritaunce, as a rewarde of our workes, and not tho­rough freé adoption rather?Galat. 4. Where is then that Spirite of Adop­tion, cryeng in our hartes, Abba Father? Wherof S. Paule doth so oftentymes make mention? or if you be not yet satisfied with these sentences, what aūswere shall we make to Esay the Pro­phet,Esay. 35. Where he foresheweth euerlasting ioye vnto them, which be­yng redeemed by Christ are cōuerted in Syon? Esay. 61. Where is that chere­fulnesse of hart? Comfort in steede of mournyng? glory in steede of Ashes? the oyle of gladnesse in steede of the spirite of sadnesse? Esay. 52. Pro­mised in ye behalfe of the Messias, that was yet to come? More ouer where the same Prophet doth wonderfully commende the feéte of those, which should preach peace to the people: what o­ther thyng els doth he note in these wordes, then that most ex­cellent glory of the Churche, which should aboundauntly flow through affiaunce of the Mediatour, vpon all that should be­leue on him? what meaneth that chearefull Prophecie of Iere­mie concernyng the commyng of the Messias, and the comfor­table consolation of the Gospell to come?Ierem. 23. 32. In those dayes (sayth hee) Iuda shalbe saued and Israell shall dwell with confidence. A­gayne the same Prophet. And I will make them to dwell in Sa­uetie. Whereunto accordeth likewise the saying of the Pro­phet Ezechiel: who prophecying of the raysing vp of a She­pheard, and of the blessednesse of that age, euen in the same phrase of speache almost, doth promise,Ezech. 39. That it should come to passe, that men should dwell and rest in securitie, without all feare. &c. Now remayneth to learne of you (Osorius) what this say­eng, to dwell in securitie without all feare doth emporte? whiche for as much as your selfe will not confesse to haue relation to the fleshe, then it must follow of necessitie, that we interprete the same to bee spoken of the Spirite. But in what sorte shall it appeare that this saying must bee applyed to the confidence of the Spirite? whenas ye shall defraude the Christian fayth of assurednesse of Affiaunce, as though ye would dispoyle the world of the benefite of the Sunne? Finally what certeinetie of confidence shall remayne, if the same doe depende (as you say) wholy vpon workes, and not vpon fayth of the promise, [Page] & freé mercy of him that doth make the promise? If you graunt thereunto, one of those two ye must neédes confesse, either that you ought to obteyne so much by the vprightenes of your wor­kes as shall aūswere and satisfie the Iudgement of God: which you can neuer doe: or els that the variablenesse of your mynde shall alwayes stagger hether, and thether, in perpetuall ama­zed vncerteinetie. Doe ye not perceaue (Osorius) into what streightes this your Diuinitie forceth you? Goe ye to therfore Maister Tertullus, & thinke with your self whether of you two, either Luther, or Osorius with your Tullianisme doe more stiffely maintaine the doctrine of Desperation? Surely S. Paule will teach you a lesson farre vnlike this: who abro­gatyng all cōfidence in workes, which is none at all, or at the least most vnassured, doth cōclude all thynges vnder fayth one­ly.Rom. 4. Therefore through fayth (sayth hee) that it may be knowen to proceede accordyng to grace. That thereby the promise may be as­sured, to the whole seede. And wherefore I pray you so through fayth? forsooth bycause if the proportion of affiaunce must bee measured by the deseruynges of our workes: It is so farre of that any man may possibly conceaue neuer so litle hope of sal­uation, that he shalbe forced rather to procure vnto him selfe a headlong downfall into the bottomles gulfe of Desperation.

The righte­ousnesse of the law and of fayth.And therfore S. Paul discoursing vpō both sortes of righ­teousnesse aswell of that of the law, as that other of fayth: after that hee had very exquisitely distinguished the one from the o­ther: bycause of the mutuall contrarietie or disagreément be­twixt them wherewith they do varie eche from other, doth con­clude at the length: That the Principall substaunce of the whole matter dependeth vpō fayth, wholy accordyng to grace. And wherfore accordyng to grace? verely bycause hauyng a­bandoned all the righteousnes that commeth by the law, which worketh indignation, and therfore engendreth vncerteinetie, ye soule might be established in Grace, & takyng holdfast of the promise, through fayth, might attende for nothyng els, from whence she should conceaue any other assurednesse of hope, to attayne euerlastyng lyfe. For as it is an vsuall custome a­mongest men earnestly to awayte for due performaūce of these thynges that are promised, so contrariwise such thyngs as are [Page 89] graunted conditionally, are then, & neuer till then assured, but when the conditions are obserued. Now if the conditions were such, as might bee throughly accomplished accordyng to that absolute perfection of fulnesse, wherewith they are limited: thē no doubt, the law were of it selfe effectuall enough to Salua­tion.Leuit. 18. For hee that doth keepe the Commaundementes shall lyue by them. But as the case standeth now, for as much as we are all (will we nill we) subiect to the breache of the law: and that no creature can bee founde whiche dare affirme him selfe able to performe all the conditions annexed to the law of God (that I may be so bold to place your Maistershyp one of the number) then must we all of necessitie, seéke the meanes of our Salua­tion not from the law, but from somewhere els: bycause this eternall lyfe must be ascribed to an other mans death, and not to our lyfe: neither after the opinion of our workes, but vnto the freé mercy of God, Whiche doth onely ouercome when hee is Iudged. Wherein for examples sake, let vs heare, how Dauid him selfe though neuer so well beloued of God, doth as it were tymorously humble him selfe in his prayers, beseéchyng God that he will not enter into Iudgement with his seruaūt. Psal. 142. And where with was hee dismayed I pray you? Bycause (sayth he) no fleshe shalbe Iustified in thy sight.

If so be then,The affi­aunce of workes. this so noble a Kyng, and worthy a Prophet, standyng to be arrayned before almightie God, durst not com­mit the protectiō of his cause to the deseruyngs of his workes, shall then Osorius, or Hosius, dare bee so bold to doe it? We read what remayneth in Recorde of Barnarde, beyng other­wise a prayseworthy man, that when her foresawe the ende of his lyfe to approche, and that he was then Summoned to ap­peare before the Iudgement seate of the eternall God, that he began to expresse a wonderfull fearefulnesse, and to bee very much dismayed in his mynde: whom as his frendes standyng about him would haue recomforted, and encouraged to cheare him selfe with confidence of the good lyfe that hee had lead: ‘in deéde (sayth he) I perceaue,Barnard. I may seéme to bee in such estima­tion amongest you: but I feare me, least the Iudgement of God is farre vnlike the Iudgement of men.’ Truely this was aptly remembred of Barnarde: Who albeit knew it well e­nough [Page] before paraduenture, yet as then beyng at the pointe of death, he perceaued much more effectually: Euen as we seé to haue chaunced to many others of this Popishe brood: Who though they delite, and flatter them selues neuer so much in the glory of their merites, and vprightnesse of their workes, yet when death knocketh at the doore of their consciences, and willeth them to bidde adiew to the worlde, then forthwith ca­styng away all trust of merites, and as it were accordyng a re­cantation of ye doctrine, they shrowde them selues wholy in the death of Christ, and hereupon fasten the chiefest shooteanker of sauety, as it were in the most assured hauen of perfect blessed­nesse. Whereby you may vnderstand (ye Porting all Prelate) how all that your frame of righteousnesse, which you builded vpon the deseruynges of workes, is vnioynted, and shaken in peéces: the force wherof was neuer yet of such efficacie, and va­lew in any creature, as could not onely not abyde the incompre­hensible vnmeasurablenesse of Gods Iudgement, but also bee so wholy appalled, at the encoūtryng of death, that it can not endure the sight thereof, but must neédes yelde as throughly vanquished.

How farre the workes of the lawe come short to true righteous­nesse.Moreouer sithence this place offereth it selfe to debate of vertues, I would wish you to cōsider aduisedly with your selfe, what that wellknowen saying of Augustine doth purporte, and how farre it doth dissent from this your contentious quarell of righteousnesse: whereas treatyng of vertue, and charitie, he speaketh in this wise.Augustine. ‘Uertue, sayth he, is a kynde of charitie, wherewith we loue that thing, which ought to be beloued: This charitie appeareth more in some, in others lesse, in some also nothyng at all. But the fulnes thereof whiche can not be incre­ased, whiles man liueth in this world, was neuer seéne in any: for as lōg as it may be encreased, truely all what soeuer is lesse then ought to be, & will admitte a supply, commeth of default: through which default, all flesh can not be Iustified in his sight:’ wherein pause a whiles I pray you with me, & debate through­ly with your selfe, whether if that charitie, whiche is in Chri­st [...]ans, though it be neuer so apparauntly discernable, yea after their regeneration also, be lame, and defectiue, what may be thought of them, in whom scarse appeareth any meane resem­blaunce [Page 90] thereof? but what shalbe iudged of your selfe Osorius chiefly, amongest all other, in whom not one sparcke so much of true charitie, nor any iote so much of humanitie can be seéne? in so much, that who so shall read those Inuectiues of yours, may easely coniecture, that he heareth not the modestie of Osorius a Christian Byshop, but rather some Tragicall Orestes furious­ly ragyng vpon some Stage. But to returne to Augustine, of whose iudgement in Diuinitie I know not how well Osori­us will allow: truely what small accoumpt he made of the wor­thynesse of our righteousnesse, he could neuer haue more vehe­mētly vttered then in these wordes:Aug. Con­fes. Lib. 9. Cap. [...]3. wee be to the most vpright life of mā (sayth he) if God examine the same settyng mercy a­side: In like maner Gregory doth very litle varie from Augu­stine in wordes, though nothyng in sence. But altogether dis­senteth from you (Osorius) where expoundyng the sayeng of Iob in their.Gregor. in Iob. Cap. 9 Chapter, videl. Man can not bee iustified beyng compared to God. ‘The holy man (sayth hee) doth perceaue that all the deseruynges of our best workes are faultie, if they be wayed in the righteous ballaunce of the iust Iudge.Gregor. Com. Cap 11. And by and by in the xi. Chapter, as it were redoublyng the selfe saying of Augustine. Bycause (sayth he) if excludyng mercy, workes be examined, the lyfe of the most righteous wilbe founde to folter and faynte vnder the burthen of Sinne.’ Hereunto may be an­nexed the consent of Barnarde (of whom we made mention be­fore) worthy to be noted,Barnardu. touchyng the same matter. Who ma­kyng a long discourse of the vnrighteousnesse of mans righte­ousnesse, demaundeth a question at the last, of what valew all our righteousnesse may be in the sight of God? ‘Shall it not be reputed filthy (sayth he) lyke vnto a foule menstruous clothe ac­cording to the saying of the Prophet? and if strickte and narrow examination be made therof, shall not all our righteousnesse be foūde vnrighteous & nothyng worthe? at the last, as though the matter were confessed, and without all cōtrouersie, he cōcludeth saying: And what shall become then of sinne whenas righteous­nesse it selfe hath nothyng to alledge for defence?’

For as much therefore as it is so, and that this doctrine is so manifold, so manifest, confirmed by so many, and so famous Authours, emprinted in holy writte, allowed with so many in­uincible [Page] testimonies of sacred Scripture, published by the ap­proued writynges of the best learned interpretour, established with the vnuanquishable authoritie of the holy Ghost, ratified with the common consent of the auncient primitiue Church, fi­nally so manifestly knowen by experience of all ages: where is then that haynous crime, Osorius Pag. 142. that cruell offence, that shameles trespasse, and that intellerable facte (as you say) not to bee suffered in Luther? Nay rather to speake as the truth is, from whēce, or out of what puddle haue you sucked ye shameles impu­dencie (Osorius) singular foolishnes, vnmeasurable Sycophā ­ticall rage, frantique tragicall furye, and so cruell and vnrea­sonable a custome of raylyng agaynst your Christian brethren, without all cause, or reason, who haue rather deserued well, thē euill at your handes? I know not whether this proceéded from any cankred malice lurkyng within you, or through corruption of your nature. Sure I am that you neuer learned that insolen­cie out of holy Scriptures, or out of the rules of the Gospell, or by ensuyng the example of Christ and his Apostles, or their mylde and curteous conuersation. But perhaps Osorius hath determined with him selfe, to leaue to ye posteritie some especiall Iewell, as a monument of his eloquence: as Cicero did his In­uectiues called Phillipica. &c.Phillipica. Yea it had bene more cōuenient for him, to haue chosen some other Methode to treate vpon, and farre more seémely to haue bent the rage of his penne agaynst some others, rather then agaynst Luther, Bucer and others the lyke. For if he were willyng to confesse the truth simply, what other doctrine doth Luther, Bucer, Haddon and all others, (who discourse vpon one selfe same Gospell) teache, then the ve­ry same matter that S. Paule in so many his Epistles, doth so earnestly enforce? That is to say. That we should ascribe all ye hope of our saluatiō in Iesu Christ onely, and in him alone re­pose all our whole ankerhold of righteousnesse, not in our sel­ues, but in ye sonne of God: not in the law of workes, but in the law of fayth: not in the preceptes of godly lyfe, as Augustine witnesseth,August. E­pist. 105. but in the fayth of Iesu Christ: not in the letter, but in the spirite: not in the merites of good deédes, but in the mer­cy of God: Finally after that sorte in his mercy, that we should not accoumpt this mercy, to be mercy at all, accordyng to the [Page 91] saying of Augustine, vnlesse it bee altogether freély geuen. How now? are Christiās now a dayes straighted in such bram­bles, that it may not be lawfull to speake franckely in the con­gregatiō the selfe same, which the Prophetes, Apostles, Christ him selfe, the holy Ghost and the purest Authours of auncient antiquitie haue set downe in writyng, but that the partie so do­yng shalbe forthwith detected as though hee practized to sub­uert all honestie, and vertuous endeuour? and shalbe constray­ned to pleade for him selfe, as if he were arrayned a cōmō Bar­retour, and had committed some haynous horrible, and execra­ble fact more detestable then high Treason?

Neither are these all the crimes yet wherewith this Ter­tullian rayler doth rage in his raylyng: but crawleth foreward by enceasing degreées of amplificatiō. For beyng not satisfied to haue accused Luther, as an vndermyner of all honestye, and vertue: to haue cutte in peéces the very sinewes of godly exer­cise, and vertuous endeuour: besides this horrible accusatiō he chargeth him also, with a crime passing all measure intollera­ble. And what is that? Bycause (sayth he) hee doth wrest the mynde and wisedome of Paule to serue his owne lust. pag. 142. And redoublyng the same agayne in other wordes, bycause he will not seéme to be an vnskilfull Ciceronian, hee addeth further. And he doth abuse the testimonies of holy Scriptures to e­stablish his owne vnshamefastnesse. &c. Where Syr I pray you? For sooth in sundry places of the Apostle, and especially in the Epistle written to the Romanes. Wherein bycause it shall not onely bee conceaued in mynde, but also perceaued by the viewe, how disorderly Luther the Standard bearer of all he­ritiques, and his Cabbenmate Haddon, and all the counter­faites of this new Gospell haue alwayes hetherto in the inter­pretation of that Epistle, gropyngly lyke nightowles lumpred in darkenesse: Let vs all and euery of vs open our eyes, & eares now, and lysten to this new starte vp Prophet, whiles this our most elegant Tertullus sittyng at high deske, may instruct vs all blockyshe Asseheades, and as it were an other Archyme­nides with lyne vpon the sande, chalke vs out a way, and set vp some speciall markes, whereby we may finde out the lyuely & naturall sence, mynde, and meanyng of that Epistle.

[Page] Osori. Ex­positiō vpō the Epistle of S. Paule to the Ro­maines. And first of all concernyng the Gentiles (bycause he may begyn with them as Paule doth) he sayth, that it is euident e­nough, that they were enlightened with a singular gift of nature, endued with excellent vnderstādyng, adorned and beautified with wonderfull ornamentes of Nature. Who hath euer denyed this? Goe to what followeth hereof?Pag. 142. Where­fore for asmuch as this so great force of nature, excellencie of vnderstandyng, knowledge in learnyng, yea so great worthynesse of reason and capacitie, could auayle nothyng at all with the Gentiles to perfect and righteous liuyng: (for they did exceede in all iniquitie and outragious lust) thereby appeareth playnely, that nature was voyde of all ayde and helpe to attayne the righteousnesse of eternall lyfe. And this much by the waye touchyng the Gentiles. From whom after the Apostle had remoued away all con­fidence, whiche was vsually ascribed to the law of nature, he turneth his speach forthwith to the Iewes. And bycause the Iewes them selues did in lyke maner place their whole affiaunce in those shadowes and outward ceremonies: The Apostle likewise, yea more sharpely also inueyeth agaynst them, declaryng that all those Ceremonies of the law, and Ordinaunces prescribed by Moyses did profite them no­thyng at all, whereby they might bee any iote more re­strained from running headlong into all kynde of wicked­nesse, nothyng lesse enclined to all filthynesse of conuersa­tion, neither any myte lesse estraunged from vertuous en­deuour then the prophane Gentiles: whereby appeareth that the effect of Paules Conclusion tēdeth to this end: To make this manifest, that neither nature, nor the Ceremo­nies of Moses law, that is to say, washyngs, Sacrifices, clen­singes, Circumcision, and such like corporall ordinaunces, (with the cōfidence wherof that people did swell and were puft vp in pride) did take away sinne, or did any thyng at all auayle to righteousnes. By this discourse of Osorius, I doubt not (gentle Reader) but that thou doest sufficiently vn­derstand, if thou bee of any capacitie, what the meanyng of Paule, and the whole sence and disposition of his doctrine in this Epistle to the Romanes doth purporte, accordyng to O­sorius [Page 92] his Diuinitie. That is to say. That we may learne, how that we may not hope for any ayde towards our Saluatiō, frō nature, or any ordinaūces of the old law: which beyng graūted, it remaineth further to learne out of this Oracle of our great Maister, from whence we ought at length to seéke for the true way of Saluation, and in what poynt it chiefly consisteth: for­sooth in righteousnes (saith he) that is to say as Osorius doth define it.Wherin the sauetie of a Christian consisteth accordyng to Osorius. In Eschewyng sinne, and earnestly embracyng all godlynesse, vertue, and pietie: vnto the which righteous­nesse onely we ought to referre all surety, and ankerhold of our saluation. And hereupō is coyned a new Oracle, not from Delphos in Boeotia, but forged by Osorius in the wildernes of Syluain, worthy to be Registred to eternitie of all people and tounges.Pag. 142. For righteousnesse onely (sayth he) doth reconcile God to mankynde. The man hath spoken.

This mystery beyng exquisitely piked out of the hiddē my­steries of Diuinitie, sithence Osorius requireth so earnestly to be graunted him without contradiction, what shall become of that Fayth onely, wherewith those Lutheranes and Bucerans do prattle so much, them selues to be iustified by? Nay rather what shall become of any Fayth at all (Osorius) if the onely righteousnesse of workes, doe accomplish the absolute fulnesse of our Iustification? Oingenious head, and wonderfull deépe conclusion, framed through conference of reasons, and apt ap­plication of the middle proposition with the first, and Clarcke­ly concludyng, and shuttyng vp the same into one knotte toge­ther. Unlesse this our deépe Deuine had cunnyngly culled this Argument out of the closet of the Popes own breast, as out of some horsepoole, within whose bosome all knowledge of God, and man is enclosed: or vnlesse this Endymyon had soundly snorted in Aristotles Ethickes, as it were in the hill Parnas­sus: can any man doubt, whether hee could euer haue bene able so happely, to haue pearced into the inward, and hidden mea­nyng of the Apostles doctrine, with so great sharpenesse and force of witte, and vnderstandyng? or haue euer descried the sence therof so effectually? and discouered it so aboundauntly? Why doe we not triumphauntly reioyce in this happynesse of learnyng in this blessed estate of the Catholicke people, & this [Page] our age? & be ioyfull for ye good successe of that notable Realme of Portingall especially? Which beyng otherwise renowmed for the great treasure of their trade in Marchādizes, is yet be­come most fortunate in respect of this inestimable Iewell of ye world: which except in this great darkenesse of vnderstandyng had gratified vs wt this wonderfull Deuine, who might restore vnto lyfe all pietie & Religiō suppressed by Luther, who could wt such singularitie expresse the meanyng of Paule, beyng sini­sterly corrupted after the sensualitie of naughtie packes: and could so exquisitely haue hitte ye nayle on the head: all men might iustly haue doubted, lest Diuinity should haue growē into great perill of vtter vndoing, & haue bene throwē into an vnrecouera­ble downfall. For what mā in the world would haue interpreted Paules Epistle in this wise, if he had not heard this mā before?

Truely I for my part and others like vnto me, beyng not inspired with so profoūde & deépe capacity, did alwayes hereto­fore conceaue of the matter after this maner: That the Apo­stles whole endeuour and trauaile in that Epistle tēded to none other end, then by makyng men behold the greatnesse of Gods wrath first agaynst sinne, hee might the better enduce them to perceaue and feéle how all nations and people, aswell Heathe­nishe, as the Iewes also them selues chiefly, continuyng in the profession of Gods law, were yet concluded vnder sinne: and so might dispoyle them all of all matter to glorye vpon, and so hauyng humbled, and brought them into subiection before God, might rayse agayne their comfort in Christ, by denoun­cyng vnto them firme assured hope, wherewith who soeuer did as then, or would beleue in him afterwardes, should ob­teine euerlastyng lyfe: not through the merite of any worke, but by the especiall grift of the freé promise: not for our worthy­nesse, but for our faythes sake simply, without workes: that the promise might be infallible, not through any our merite, which is none at all, but by the mercy of God: not accordyng to the proportion of that singular righteousnesse whiche is of our sel­ues, and peculiar to euery of vs, but accordyng to that righte­ousnesse, whiche is through the fayth of Christ Iesu, whiche is of God: euen that onely righteousnesse which is through fayth.Phil. 3. I haue bene alwayes hetherto persuaded that this was the ve­ry [Page 93] naturall meanyng and sence of Paules doctrine:The true vnderstādyng of iustifica­tion accor­dyng to S. Paule. and this the right rule of Iustification: neither could I euer gesse, that when Paule pronounceth vs to bee Iustified by fayth without deédes of the law, that part of the law was excluded onely which did treate of Ceremonies, and had relation to the body, and ap­perteined not to the soule. But I accordyng to my grosse dul­nesse rather, did conceaue of his saying in this wise: and not I alone, but many other good men iarryng alwayes vppon the same stryng, mistooke the note as I did, and were of opinion, that Paule by that his exemption, did not exclude the Cere­moniall, and shadowishe law onely, which serued the letter one­ly, but that most absolute and perfect part of the law also indif­ferently, whereof he maketh his whole discourse in that Epi­stle: the whiche also he doth note by name, to be spirituall, and sayth that it procureth wrath: which was common to the Iewes and Gentiles all alyke. Euen the same part of the law whiche commaundeth that thou shalt not lust: Rom. 7. by examination whereof Sinne is discerned: Rom. 4. Finally the same handwrityng conteyned in the tenne Tables written agaynst vs, Rom. 3. which was fastened vpon the Crosse of Christ. Ephes. 2. Bycause all those sayinges could not bee refer­red to the Ceremoniall law, but to that part of the law whiche was conteyned in the preceptes of maners, we could neuer o­therwise interprete the sense & meanyng of the Apostle then by such comparison of his owne wordes together, vntill this new Doctour had published to the world this new light of Expositi­on. Cōsideryng therfore the matter is in this plight: It remay­neth now (gentle Reader) that I appeale to thy Iudgement, and abyde thy verdite herein: whether it may seéme to theé that Lu­ther haue wrested the mynde and wordes of the Apostle after his lust, or Osorius rather haue peruerted the same to his owne folly. But goe to: I thinke good now to note the Argumentes wherewith Osorius iudgeth him selfe to be strongly fenced.

If Paule (sayth he) had sayd,
Pag. 143.
that the Iewes were commē ­dable for their integritie and innocencie of lyfe, and yet that those deedes of godlynes did nothyng auayle them to attayne righteousnesse, and so had concluded after­wardes, that they were not iustified through the workes of the law, the matter would then haue opened it selfe, [Page] that by the name of workes, he did meane the best acti­ons and dueties of vertue.

Here is a strong foundation enough (I suppose) of an infallible Sillogisme deliuered vnto you, attende now the other propo­sition of the same.

But this (sayth hee) is not founde in that whole discourse of Paule, nay rather hee doth condemne them as guiltie of all wickednesse and crueltie.

This groundworke beyng this layd, it remayneth that we rāme fast this buildyng vp with some good morter, which in the ma­ner of a conclusion, is applyed in this wise.

Therfore Paule doth rightly conclude, that where he af­firmeth no man to be iustified through the deedes of the law, he meaneth, that the Ceremonies, shadowes, and Cleansinges of the law, which consisted in outward ob­seruation, dyd nothyng at all profite to the attaynemēt of Righteousnesse.

O passing pearcyng witte of Chrysippus. O miserable Lu­ther vtterly ouerthrowen with this Argument. But goe to, let vs ayde Luther somewhat, and helpe to vnloose this Gordian knotte if it bee possible. And although we may vtterly deny the forme of this Argument at the first choppe, bycause it contei­neth more in the cōclusion, then was spoken of in the premisses: yet either pardonyng, or wynking at this escape: Let vs exa­mine the substaunce of the first proposition. If Paule (quoth he) had perceaued the life of the Iewes to haue bene vndefiled, and all the endeuoures and workes of their lyfe sincere and perfect: and then had concluded that no man had bene Iu­stified by the workes of the law. &c. In deéde (good Syr) I confesse the same to bee true. If the Apostle had perceaued this at the first, and then had added that also that you speake, it might happely then in some respect haue followed as you haue conclu­cluded. But it could not bee possible Osorius, that the Apostle would euer speake after that sorte. For it is euident by Gods Scripture, that it is impossible but that he which performeth the Commaundementes shall liue by them. Deut. 4. 5. Wherfore if their conuer­sation had bene voyde of all blame, and with like integritie could haue aunswered and throughly satisfied the perfect law of God [Page 94] vnto the vttermost title thereof: it can not bee doubted but that Paule would neuer haue denyed that those should be iustified by the workes of the law, who do lead a perfect and vpright life. Yea rather he would haue affirmed this that he spake there, which is most true:Rom. 2. Glory, honour, and peace bee vnto euery one that wor­keth righteousnesse, to the Iewes aswell as to the Gentiles. &c. But now when as he foresaw, that the Iewes did swell with a certeine Pharisaicall opinion of their workes, and proudly vaunted them selues vpon them, disdaynefully detestyng all other as Heathe­nish, vngodly, in respect of them selues, neither seémed to stand in any neéde of the Mediatour: Therfore to the end he might shake away from them that pestilent persuasion of their owne righte­ousnesse, and force them to seéke succour at Christ: hereupon he did vtterly dispoyle all workes of abilitie to Iustifie: that is to say, he so taketh away all Affiance of our workes beyng of all partes vnperfect, bycause hee may ascribe it wholy to fayth onely, and repose the same in Christ alone.

Therfore that I may orderly and distinctly make aūswere to that your Maior, beyng Hypotheticall, & Copulatiue which you doe so intricately entangle, and miserably choake vp with obscu [...]e speach. First of all we must remember that the obseruation of the law hath a double vnderstandyng:A double obseruation of the law. for after one sorte Christ dyd obserue the law of his Father: but mortall men obserue it after an other sort: Christ most perfectly and absolutely: but we weak­ly and rawly, yea I know not if we performe any portion there­of very meanely. Whereupon ariseth a double consideration of righteousnesse: the one perfect, and is peculiar to Christ, and is onely of valew with God: the other vnperfect, & lame which pro­perly apperteineth to man, and perhappes carryeth some resem­blaunce of holynesse in the opinion of men, but is of no estimation before God, nor sufficeth to Saluation. Moreouer to the pur­chasing of that first and sincere righteousnesse, man must bee fur­nished with two principall Tallentes: the one, that hee so accom­plish the whole law, that no part thereof be defectiue: The other, that hee so throughly performe euery part thereof, that nothyng may be added to absolute perfection. Or els hee may heare what the Scripture threateneth.Deut. 27. Cursed be he that persisteth not in all the wordes of the law to doe them. &c. Gallat. 3. Agayne, He that breaketh [Page] the least of them, is guiltie of them all. Iames. 2. Now for as much as ne­uer any man was able to bryng that thyng to passe but Christ onely, it is out of all controuersie, that all other mortall men, as well Iewes, as Gentiles, are fast holden vnder the curse: Whereupon the Apostle, after long debatyng of the matter, con­cludeth: That no man can bee Iustified by the workes of the law. Which sentence is not yet so to be taken, as though no deédes of the law beyng sincerely, and, perfectly done, accordyng to the prescript rule of lawe, could profite any thyng at all towardes Saluation, for the very same was performed in the person of Christ, whose life being of all partes, freé altogether, from all ble­mish of Sinne, could not be attaynted with that saying of Paule, That no man could bee Iustified by the workes of the law, for that he was iustified through his owne workes, especially. With as good right also, might we mainteine our lyke challenge therein, if our infirmitie were able to rayse it selfe, to that perfection of Christ. Whereupon we heare the Apostle very aptly arguyng in this wise.Galat. 3. If that law (sayth he) had bene deliuered, that could haue geuen life, then no doubt righteousnesse had come by the law. Gallat. 3. But wherefore is it sayd that the law can not geue life?Wherefore the law iu­stifieth not. Not bycause the law wāted her efficacie to geue life, but by­cause we were destitute of sufficient power to accomplish the per­fection of the law. For otherwise what can bee of more force to righteousnesse, then the law? or what more effectuall to eternall life, then righteousnesse? if at the least the same were perfect, or that our nature were capable of that righteousnesse absolutely. But now beyng enuironed with so great weakenesse of the fleshe, and of all sides beset with Sinnes, yea and sold vnder Sinne, when all our endeuour is yet so vnperfect, that we neither per­forme the whole law, neither comprehend any small portion ther­of with duetyfull and exact righteousnesse. Therfore that saying of the Apostle may rightely be applied vnto vs, wherein hee affir­meth That no man is Iustified by the workes of the law.

What wor­kes doe sig­nifie by Paule.For as to that, which Osorius with his crooked conueyaunce doth wrest these deédes of the law to the Ceremoniall law, is alto­gether fonde, friuolous and worthy to be scorned, as beyng ouer­throwen with many sounde reasons. First, besides that it doth manifestly appeare, by the whole discourse, and phrase of that E­pistle [Page 95] it selfe, that Paule treated there, of none other law, then the morall law, it is to be approued chiefly in these wordes, where the Apostle doth not onely testifie him selfe, of what law he made men­tion in that place, but also of what part of the law: he doth reason in this wise, of the selfe same law. For that whiche the law could not bryng to passe, euen in that part, wherein it was weake by rea­son of the infirmitie of the flesh. &c. But this part surely consi­sted not in the Ceremoniall law, but in the Morall law of the ten Tables: whereupon we doe argue agaynst Osorius in this wise:

No man is bereft of righteousnesse, but in that part onely, wherein offence is committed.

But the Iewes offended nothyng in the Ceremoniall law, onely they sinned in the Morall law.

It is manifest therfore, that Paule spake not there of the Ceremoniall law, but of the law of the tenne Tables.

Moreouer whereas Paule did discourse of that Law whiche procureth wrath. Rom. 4.Rom. 4. 5.2. Which was geuen that sinne might be more sinnefull. Rome. 5. Which is sayd to be written in the hartes of the Gentiles. Rom. 2. Whiche doth discouer the knowledge of Sinne. Rom. 3. Which forbiddeth to lust, which is called holy, and is spirituall, by the whiche Sinne doth shewe it selfe more aboun­dauntly to purchase damnation. Rom. 7. From whiche law we be deliuered by the death of Christ. Rom. 7. Which is called the law of righteousnesse. Rom. 9. Finall the full accomplishing whereof is loue. Rom. 13. These and many other places if you haue not perused in Paules Epistles I desire you to vouchsafe to read them. If you haue read them, then I beseéch you to aunswere me, whether to your Iudgement these sayinges seéme to con­cerne the Ceremoniall law, or that part of the law especially, which consisteth in the actiōs and dueties of maners, and com­mon conuersation of lyfe?

But you say that the Iewes dyd put ouer much confi­dence in their Ceremonies:The righte­ousnesse of the Iewes. And therefore to driue away the confidence whiche they reposed in them, the Apostles meanyng was to aduertize them, that they should ascribe true righteousnes to those outward Ceremonies shadowes and cleansinges. What a iest is this? as though the Iewes did settle their cōfidence in the Ceremonies onely? and did not [Page] much more rather glory in their Race? in their Parentage? in their worshippyng and callyng vpon God? in their Prophetes? in Gods promises? in the deédes and workes of holynes? Fur­thermore whereas this Epistle was not written to the Iewes, but to the Romaines, what aunswere will Osorius make here? Were the Romaines also instructed to the obseruation of those Ceremonies? or did they rest so much vpon them, that it behoo­ued the Apostle of necessitie, to forewarne them in his letters written vnto them? But what better weapon shall I vse in this conflict agaynst Osorius then one taken out of his owne armo­ry? for thus he speaketh.Pag. 143. If the Apostle had first praysed the Iewes for their vertues, and good deedes, and afterwardes had sayd that those vertues and good deedes were of no valew towardes the purchasing of righteousnes, and then at last had concluded, that they could not haue bene Iusti­fied through the workes of the lawe, then the matter had bene cleare that Paule had not excluded the Ceremoniall law onely, but the Morall law also frō righteousnes. Marke well gentle Reader, and note aduizedly what hee speaketh. If Paul had first praysed the workes of the Iewes, & afterwardes had derogated Iustification from these workes. &c. Uery well: and what if out of the same Nation I doe name some men, whose singular integritie of lyfe and study of righteousnesse Paule could by no meanes reproue, yea whose godly endeuour & vpright dealyng procured them no droppe of righteousnes notwithstandyng? what will this Sophister say then?

The fayth and righte­ousnesse of Abraham.And first of all let vs behold the workes of that most holy Patriarche Abraham, who for his inestimable godlynesse, can neuer be condignely enough commended of any of vs. And yet will ye heare (Osorius) the testimonie of the Apostle touchyng the same Patriarche?Rom. 4. What shall we say (sayth hee) that our Fa­ther Abraham did finde accordyng to the flesh? For if Abraham were Iustified through workes, he hath wherein he may glory, but not in the sight of God. Rom. 4. What then? did he not obteine of God to bee called righteous? Yes veryly: but let vs seé by what meanes, not through workes sayth the Apostle: but by the com­mendation of his fayth, which onely maketh vs appeare worthy in the sight of God.Gene. 15. For Abraham beleued God, and it was Im­puted [Page 96] vnto him for righteousnesse. It is manifest therefore that he was accoumpted righteous, but by what meanes? forsooth not simply nor in respect of his workes, but by way of Impu­tation onely. Now what soeuer commeth of Imputation, pro­ceédeth from meére mercy of him that Imputeth, and is not ge­uen in reward after the proportion of duetie, or of dette. For no man Imputeth that to an other, that is duely owyng vnto him. Now let vs here the testimonies of the Scriptures cōcernyng that whiche was Imputed. Not bycause hee did the thynges which he was commaunded (albeit he did many thynges won­derfully well) but bycause he beleued God, this was sayd to be Imputed vnto him for righteousnesse. And why was not righ­teousnesse imputed vnto him aswell in those respectes, bycause he did sacrifice vnto God? Bycause he forsooke his natiue coun­trey? Bycause hee offred his onely sonne to be slayne? Neither doth the Apostle ouerskippe, or conceale those causes, especi­ally bycause that he which was the Parente of the Posteritie, ye same also should be the Authour of the doctrine. For why? this was written (sayth Paule) videl. That it was Imputed vnto him for righteousnesse, not for his sake onely, but for vs also to whom it shall likewise bee Imputed, that beleue in him, which raysed our Lord Iesus from death to life. &c. Rome. 4.Rom. 4.

And thus much concerning Abrahā, who though alone may suffice in place of all others, so that we neéde none other exam­ple, yet let vs ioyne to this holy Patriarche, as holy a Kyng:The fayth and righte­ousnesse of Dauid. Dauid with Abraham both beyng deare vnto God, both equal­ly endued with like excellent ornamētes of godlynesse and ver­tue. Whereof the one as he had nothyng whereupon to glory before God, so the other did so disclayme altogether from righ­teousnesse, that he besought nothyng more carefully of God in his prayers,Psal. 142. Then that hee would not enter into Iudgement with his seruaunt. And rendreth a Reason of his most earnest prayer. Bycause all flesh shall not be Iustified in thy sight. And what other thyng is meant by this, then that which Paule affirmeth in the selfe same wordes almost, That no man is Iustified by the workes of the law? Goe to then: And where are now those wonderfull fruites of workes? Where is that glorious shewe of righteous­nesse? Finally where shall Osorius him selfe appeare with all [Page] his cleannes? good disposition? temperaunce of mynde? singu­lar humanitie? lenitie? patience? chastitie? vnfayned charitie? and with that absolute huge Chaos of bountyfull vertues so vnseparably vnited and linked together as it were chayned fast with yron ropes? When as Dauid so great a Kyng and Pro­phet, a most choyse vessell, accordyng to Gods owne hart, dare not presume to offer him selfe to Iudgement?The righte­ousnesse of Iob. when as Iob a man commended of God for his singlenesse of hart, and appro­ued holynesse, beyng asked a question of God, durst not aun­swere one word.

The fayth and righte­ousnesse of Paule.It will not be Impertinēt to the matter, if we speake some­what here of Paule him selfe. Whose conuersation (whiche he led vnblameable, beyng as yet a Pharisie) Tertullus him selfe could not charge with any fault. The same beyng afterwardes engraffed into Christ, liued in that vprightenesse of conscience, that Osorius cā not iustly reprehende him, as worthy of crime. And yet all those so great and so many ornaments of holynesse, did so nothyng auayle him to righteousnesse, that hee him selfe accompted them for drosse. Wherefore consider here with me Christian Reader a good felowshyp, how much difference is be­twixt Osorius and Paule: where as the same workes whiche Osorius doth with so glorious pompe of eloquēt wordes, gar­nishe so gorgiously, Paule in playne termes, doth compare thē to durtie drosse and filthy dounge,Phil. 3. whereby he may be found in Christ not to haue any his owne righteousnesse by the operatiō of the law, but that onely righteousnesse grounded vpon fayth which is through the fayth of Christ. &c.

The fayth and righte­ousnesse of Cornelius before god. Cornelius of whom mention is made in the Actes of the A­postles: was a holy man, and feared God, together which his whole houshold, dealyng much almes to the poore, and makyng continuall intercessions to almighty God. This was a great, and glorious commendation truely, of excellent godlynesse, which no sensible mā would say, ought to be referred to the Ce­remoniall law, but to the Morall law rather. And yet the selfe same Cornelius, beyng neuer so notable for his commendable bertues, vnlesse by ye aduertizement of ye Aungell, had sent for Peter, which might haue endued him with the fayth of Christ, what profite had he gotten towardes the attaynement of righ­teousnesse, [Page 97] by all those helpes, and aydes of pitie?

What shalbe sayd of the riche yoūg man in the Gospell who beyng commaunded to keépe the cōmaundementes,The riche young man in the Gos­pell. made aun­swere that hee had obserued the same all the dayes of his lyfe? What shall I recite the example of the Pharisaé prayeng in the Temple,The Phari­sie praying in the tem­ple. who vauntyng him selfe proudly vppon trust of his workes, gaue thankes to God, that he was not as others were, that he lyued not of the spoyle, did not fraudulently deceaue a­ny man by contractes, nor prodigally cōsume his owne goodes, nor defile his neighbours wife, committed not adultery, was not murtherer, or wrong doer to his neighbours, neither was of that sorte like vnto the Publicane, but fasted twise in the Sab­both, gaue the tenth of his goodes, to the poore? &c. What neéde I to produce Nathanaell, Nathaniell the true Is­raelite. whom Christ him selfe did both ac­knowledge to be a true Israelite, and praysed him for his vnfai­ned simplicitie? Do ye not perceiue that these persons, besides their duetyfull obseruaunce of the Ceremoniall law, did in vtter shewe expresse a certeine resemblaunce of good workes, and stu­dious endeuour in the Morall law? all which notwithstandyng they were not ye valewe of one myte more regarded in the sight of God. Albeit I do not alledge these things to the end I would extenuate the fault of the Iewes, whom S. Paule affirmeth to be inexcusable. But Osorius doth not seé the groūde of Paules accusation agaynst them. First of all the Apostle did very well forseé, that the law of God is of all partes most perfect, and that it requireth an exquisite, full and absolute obediēce to the same: which (as he conceaued) could not possibly be performed by any industry of mā. Neither was he ignoraunt of the vnmeasurable and arrogaunt pride of that Nation lynked with lyke vanitie: which beyng by a wonderfull farre way distant from the meane obseruation of the law, did yet swell, and were puft vp with a most false glaueryng conceite of their owne excellency and per­fection, as though they had left no part therof vndone, persua­dyng vnto thēselues saluation thereby, wherein they had much rather deserued vtter destruction. And so did incurre double of­fence. First, bycause they did sundry wayes horribly dishonour and defile Gods most sacred law: Then, as though it were not materiall that they had not perfitely accomplished the whole [Page] law: a man might iustly marueile, how wonderfully they flat­tered them selues, and as though they had trimmely behaued them selues at all assayes, seemed in their owne conceite to bee prety holy men, despising with a certeine Pharisaicall hautines all other Nations besides them selues. Wherfore the Apostle indifferētly tenderyng the miserable errour of eche Nation as­well Gentiles as Iewes, doth earnestly debate threé thynges chiefly in that place.The scope of Paules disputation to the Ro­maines. First, that he might conuince the Iewes, as also the Gentiles indifferently, that they were sinners be­fore God. Then, that he might remoue from them all false o­pinion of Affiance. Lastly, that hee might emprinte into them the true way of Confidence. And in this last purpose of the A­postle, Osorius doth openly bewray his blockishe ignoraunce, swaruyng and varyeng altogether from the entent of the Apo­stle. For although his Iudgement bee sounde, and agreable with the Apostle in this, that the trust whiche the Iewes repo­sed in the law of Moyses was no lesse vayne, and voyde of rea­son, then the Confidence of the Gentiles, who framed their life after the law of nature: yet when question is moued touchyng the assignyng of true righteousnesse, Paule will teache one thyng, but Osorius an other.

Workes of the Cere­moniall and Morall law both are excluded frō Iustificatiō.For whereas Paule doth bende the whole force of his dis­putation to this onely marke, that excludyng all other deédes, workes, and endeuours, whether they apperteine to the Cere­moniall or Morall law, or to the rule and doctrine of maners, hee might referre the summe of our Iustification, and hope of Saluation wholy, and onely, in the fayth of the sonne of God. What other thyng els doth this Ciceronian Tertullus dis­course in those bookes entituled `De Iustitia? Wherein he play­eth so much the Philosopher, as though he were in ye Schoole of Morall Philosophie, what els doth he breath, practize, and and so greédely mainteine? then to persuade vs, that wheresoe­uer S. Paule doth exclude workes from Iustification,Osori. doth take the workes ex­cluded frō Iustification for the Ce­remonies of the law. he doth exempt nothyng els but the Ceremoniall law: And so for con­clusion, that true righteousnesse is not that righteousnesse in the sight of God, whiche Christ doth Impute to the beleuers through fayth, but that righteousnesse, which euery man doth properly procure, and make peculiar to him selfe, through his [Page 98] owne vertue, sinceritie, innocencie and good conuersation: Of­fryng the combate pardy to Paule: whether in this quarell of Iustification, S. Paule shall with more probable Arguments exclude Confidence from workes, or Osorius driue fayth into vtter exile: vnto the which fayth in all his bookes he leaueth no maner of place, truly yeldeth very litle credite thereunto. Nei­ther is it any maruell:Pag. 142. [...], 140. [...]. For if the matter be as Osorius doth re­porte, That we ought to be iuste before God, and not Iusti­fied before God:Fayth hath no place al­most with Osorius. And if righteousnesse onely doe procure the fauour of God and Reconcile God to mākind, wherein onely we ought to settle all our sauety and worthines: And if no man an be righteous but hee that keepeth the lawe. That is to say: if the iuste mā shall now liue but by workes and not by Fayth. Iudge I beseéche theé (gentle Reader re­deémed with the bloud of Iesus Christ) of what efficacie either Christes bloud shed for theé may be, or of what estimation thy fayth towardes Christ must be. Truly by this meanes Osorius wt his glorious eloquence, may aswell plucke downe Christ out of heauen, banish Fayth out of the earth, snatche Paule out of our handes, roote the Gospell out of our hartes, and all com­fortable consolation from our consciences: Finally despoyle the world of the light of the Sunne, that we may all together lumper and groape in darkenesse, after this blynde guide and Capteine of darkenesse.

But here are one or two places of Paule obiected agaynst Paule him selfe, whereby Osorius may ye better mainteine his challenge agaynst Paule with Paules owne weapons.Pag. 143. What? had not Paule (sayth he) a most sharpe cōflict with the Iewes alwayes touchyng the Ceremonies? What hereof thē? Doth he not in his Epistle to the Galathians, protest in this wise? If ye be Circumcised, Christ doth nothyng profite you: I confesse this to bee true. In lyke maner writyng to the He­brues, doth he not say that the lawe doth auayle nothyng to perfection, meanyng the Ceremoniall law? Conclude at the length therfore Osorius in despight of Logicke though she be neuer so angry. Ergo, wheresoeuer Paule doth make mē ­tion of abandonyng the law in the treatie of our Saluatiō, there we must of necessitie interprete the same to be spokē [Page] onely of the Ceremoniall law, and in no wise of the Morall law. Ueryly I would not much sticke with you herein good sir, if accordyng to your Logicke it may be lawfull to deriue a con­clusion from the part to the whole.Osori. obie­ction confu­ted. But what kynde of Argu­ment is this? or who instructed you to frame an Argument in this sorte? In some places Osorius sporteth bitterly enough, vsing his Rhetoricall digressiōs, and is sometymes very plea­sauntly disposed to play with Haddones Schoolemaister his nose, who soeuer hee were that enformed him in the principles of Rhetoricke, when hee was young: but how much more iust cause might I take here, if a man would vse the offered occasiō, to geue the counter scoffe agaynst your own Maister quareller, whosoeuer he was whiche nooseled your youth in Logicke,Osori. doth erre in the rules of Lo­gicke. and taught you so foolishly and senselesly to make bald Argumēts, and to fetche a Conclusion from an vnsufficient numbryng of partes to affirme ye whole? For this is your disordered order of arguyng in this place. Paule once or twise, or perhaps spea­kyng oftentymes of the law, hath relation to the Ceremoniall law. Ergo, wheresoeuer hee maketh any discourse about the law of God, there his meanyng tendeth to the same constru­ction, euē through his whole discourse, and in all his Epistles: Nay rather, if you did vnderstand Paule throughly, and would not crookedly wrest his meanyng after your owne grosse sen­sualitie: Ye should easily perceaue,Osori. Pa­ralogisme from the insufficient, enumera­tion of partes. that by way of Negatiue, hee doth orderly proceéde, after the surest maner of arguyng, from the whole, to the partes, and from the vniuersall, to the particular: For if the vniuersall proposition may iustly be de­nyed, it followeth of necessitie, that the particular propositiōs may not be admitted. As where he doth say. No workes at all of the law do Iustifie, ye may duely conclude hereof. Ergo, nei­ther the Ceremoniall, Morall, Naturall, Politicke, Ciuill, nor any other law doth worke Iustification.

And marke here Osorius how much I doe beare with you when as I doe cut of so much of myne owne right vnto you, whiche you could neuer bee able by Argument to wynne at my handes. For to admit the foundation of your Argument, which is otherwise altogether false, we will yet for this present tyme graunt it to seéme true, as you would your selfe it should bee: [Page 99] that when Paule doth reason of the law, he doth chiefly meane thereby the Ceremoniall law. Yet what a monstruous Argu­ment is this, whereby ye trauaile to cōfirme the affirmation of one part, by ye nagation of ye other part, in this wise: Paule doth deny that ye Ceremoniall law doth Iustifie ye Iewes. Ergo, the Morall lawe doth Iustifie them. Nay rather how much more soundly should you haue reasoned turning your cōclusion back­ward? If ye Ceremoniall law which was ye principall substaūce of Moyses law doe not Iustifie, Ergo, neither any other part of the law doth Iustifie. Albeit I will not deny, but that in the very swathlyng cloutes of the primitiue Church, many doubts arose amongest the Disciples them selues, touchyng the retei­nyng of Moyses Ceremonies, in so much that Peter him selfe durst not be so bold as to receaue Cornelius the Captaine into the felowshyp of the Gospell, before he was cōmaunded by the heauenly Oracle. Neither could the strife about the Ceremo­niall law, be yet so appeased amongest the brethrē: for the false Apostles, and such as were of the Circumcision, did stiffely, as it were, with tooth and nayle,The Cere­monies of the law ve­ry hardly a­brogated in the primi­tiue church, Actes. 15. defende the obseruaunces of the Ceremoniall law, neither would geue their consent, that the Gentiles should be receaued into the cōgregation, vnlesse they would be Circumcized after Moyses law, and endeuoured all that they could to charge the Christians with ye yoke of the Ce­remoniall law, Vntill in a Counsell holden at Ierusalem the holy Ghost did determine, that the Gentiles, should not be charged with any Iudaicall Traditions, except a very fewe onely. And it is not to be doubted, as Osorius doth say, that Paule had much adoe in euery place, about this Ceremoniall law, yea and dealt oftētymes therein, not without manifest pe­rill of lyfe. Yet all this whiles, appeared not so much as one sparckle of dissention, or doubtfulnesse, nor any one question was raysed amongest the brethren, agaynst the Morall law, the keépyng whereof was yet adiudged most necessary. The con­trouersie remayned as yet about the Ceremonies & customes of Moyses law. At the last, when this question was decided, further enquirie began to be made afterwardes of that part of the law, which seémed to challenge chief authoritie and especi­all gouernement ouer the consciences of men.

[Page] The morall law abro­gated, not in respect of the vse, but in respect of Iustificatiō.And euen here through the inestimable benefite of GOD sprang vp vnto vs S. Paule. Who first of all did call backe the controuersie of this question, from the speciall, or particu­lar, to the generall or vniuersall: disputing not onely of the out­ward Ceremonies, but of the whole doctrine of the Morall law also. Whereunto I suppose hee was moued not without great cause. For he had an incklyng surely, that the very same thyng would ensue thereof, which afterwardes came to passe. That the Ceremoniall law beyng once made altogether vneffectuall, many persons would wrongfully ascribe their freé Iustification purchased with the bloud of Iesus Christ, to the workes of the Morall law: which thyng as Paule did foreseé in the false Apo­stles, the selfe same wee may easily perceaue now to happen in our Pharisaicall Rabbynes in these our dayes: and amongest all other in this our Osorius chiefly, at this present: wherfore it is not to be doubted, but that S. Paule was raysed vp by the speciall prouidence of God, euen for this purpose: who discour­sing throughly vpon the whole law, and vpon the effect, vse, of­fice and end of the law, doth fully describe vnto vs, how much we ought to attribute to our workes, and how much we ought to yelde to the grace of God: & herein discouereth the very well-sprynges of sounde doctrine: finally declareth vnto vs, whiche is the false, and which is the true righteousnesse in the sight of God: and wherein the same doth consist. Likewise whereunto it ought not be referred:Psal. 142. Not to workes (sayth he) for no man li­uyng shalbe Iustified by workes. Well then: if not by workes, how then?Galat. 3. Through Fayth (sayth he) in Iesu Christ. Yet is not this all that he speaketh: But adding thereunto a proofe, he yeldeth this reason.Rom. 4. Bycause if through workes (sayth he) then is it not now of promise. After this maner teacheth Paule both learnedly, and playnly. But our Osorius practizeth to wype away this nega­tiue proposition of Paule with a trimme shift, as though Paule in all those places, where he dischargeth workes from Iustifica­tion, did meane nothyng els, but that no man should repose trust of assured sauetie in the Ceremoniall law onely. Uery well: then is it reason that he teach vs whereupon we should grounde our Aff [...]aunce. Veryly in Fayth, sayth the Apostle Paule, and so in Fayth, that if in workes, then not in Fayth at all. This is truely [Page 100] spoken by the Apostle. But what sayth Osorius? in the Cere­monies of ye old law? no, not so: for that were altogether Iewish: in Fayth therfore? neither yet so in any wise, for this is the very doctrine of Luther. Uouchsafe therfore a good felowshyp (Oso­rius) to escry out one safe Hauen for vs, wherein we poore for­lorne abiectes may cast Anker, & saue our selues frō shipwracke.

Forsooth in workes (sayth Osorius) and in keépyng the pres­cribed rules of vertuous lyfe.Osori. Iud­gement of Iustificatiō. That is to say, in Innocencie, in chastitie, in modestie, in abstinence, in vprightnesse of mynde, in holynesse of Religion, in feruentnesse of the spirite, in aboū ­daunce of the loue of God, in earnest endeuour of godlynesse, in deédes of righteousnesse, dueties of pietie, in geuyng much almonesse, in obedience, in keépyng peacible vnitie, and such like ornamentes & treasures wherof Osorius in many wordes maketh a long rehearsall. Of all whiche vertues, there is not so much as one croome, or sparckle in these Lutherans, and Bu­ceranes, and these new Gospellers: thē which kynde of people nothyng can bee named more wicked, nothyng thought vpon more pestiferous, nothyng more troublesome in the common wealth, nothyng more readyly armed to rayse maliciousnesse, to sow contentious quarelles, strife, & enemitie, nothyng more pernicious to procure the destruction of Princes, none more geuē to bloudsuckyng and Treason, who beyng embrued with all wickednesse, licentiousnesse, libertie, lust, with all manner shamelessenesse, crueltie and madnesse, outragiously rushe into all places, whereby they may thrust their Gospell in place, and defile all thynges with filthy stenche: wheresoeuer they make neuer so litle abode, they corrupt the land with trecherous vil­lanies: finally they doe poyson the ayre, they doe abandone cha­stitie, geue full scope to voluptuousnesse, roote out all feare of Gods law, and mans law: and in all this outrage they promise vnpunishable libertie. On the contrary parte,The fruite of good workes be­twixt the Papistes & Protestates to be wayed indifferent­ly. I meane in the Court of Rome, and in all that most sacred Citie florisheth a farre other maner of countenaunce and Maiestie of seuere di­scipline, and vertuous lyfe. And first of all in that most royall hygh and chief Prelate, and most renowmed Monarche of all Prelates, sittyng in Peters owne chayre. In those Reuerend estates of the Tridentine Councell, in the worshypfull Masse­mongers [Page] of the Romish Church, in the great Doctours of that old Gospel, in Monasteries, and Dorters, the very forgeshops of most pure doctrine, in ye most chast Selles of holy Nunnes, finally in all that sacred Senate, and Catholicke people, no such Presidentes of wickednesse, and abhomination may bee seene: no spotte so much of corrupt infection raigneth: no am­bition, no lust, no insolencie, neither any kynde of malice, no quarellyng, no crueltie, no foule or vnseémely thyng sauoryng of any earthly contagion can be discernable amongest this ge­neration: But whole heapes yea huge mountaines of godly and heauealy store doth florishe and abounde: no vnquietnesse or molestation of Empires, and Princely gouernement, no seéde plottes of mortall warres, no shew so much of bloudy battell, no Treason, no ouerthrowe of Kynges, and publicke authori­tie, nor any seditious plātes of cōtentious discorde: finally no earthly thyng in the secret closettes of the Romishe Court, in so much that if Diogenes would in midday, with torche in hād, prye neuer so narrowly, he should no be able to finde in all the Citie of Rome, one Harlot, or strumpet so much: To conclude, it is not possible to heare amōgest that most sacred Catholicke conuenticle, any sounde of cauillation at all, no mutteryng of outragious slaunders, no blaste of cunnyngly forged lyes, wherof as all others of that sect are cleare, so are these bookes of Osorius chiefly most purely purged: wherein appeareth no smatche of brabling distempered affections, no lyeng slaunder, nor iarre of erronious doctrine, no significatiō of a mynde trou­bled and seuered from the Castle of Reason. But all thynges are debated and expounded with peaceble gentlenesse, quyet tranquillitie of mynde, wonderfull lenitie and mildenesse, not with rigorous and malicious wordes, not with slaunderous & carterlike reproches, but with inuincible Argumētes, as forci­ble as the dartes of Achilles, or Hector, discharged (I thinke) out of the very guttes of ye Troian horse, nothyng vttered to ye vayne ostentatiō of witte, or reuengemēt of spightfull hatred, as it were in Triumphe of victory (fie beware of that gentle Reader) but of a very simple & earnest desire to aduaunce ver­tue & pietie, for this especiall cause forsooth, that those sparkes and Embres of honesty, and godlynesse, which Luther hath ra­ked [Page 101] vp, buryed and vtterly quenched out, might once agayne be quickened and florishe in that most sacred Seé of Rome.

These, euen these same,The markes of true righteousnesse among the Papistes. bee the workes (if ye will neédes know them Catholicke Reader) and good deédes of those men, wherewith they doe prepare an entyre to true righteousnesse, and furnish their iourney to heauen, and wherewith, as it were with ladders, they clymbe by steppe to the purchase of eternall inheritaunce. And how els? this euen this must bee the right way to heauen. But in the meane space with how many foggy, and thicke cloudes, hath S. Paule the seruaunt of God, & A­postle of Iesus Christ, ouerwhelmed the Christiā people? And into how deépe, and darkened doungeons hath he drowned our senses? Who albeit was rapt into the thyrd heauen, had not as yet conceaued this incomprehensible wisedome out of the very forgeshops of mysticall Philosophy? Belike he could not escry throughout all the heauens, this hidden secret, that men are not Iustified by workes, but are made righteous by the Fayth of the sonne of God, & so by fayth, that in no respect by workes: Finally that the especiall meanes and singular substaunce of our Iustification, is in this sorte to bee wayed, as that it may not be attayned els where then in Christ onely, nor by any o­ther meanes, then through Fayth onely in Christ. But if S. Paule had not receaued this doctrine from heauen, or had not taught vs the doctrine which he receaued from thence, or if you for your part (Osorius) had disputed after this sort as ye teach now, in any Paynyme common wealth, or before any Ethnicke Philosophers, or amongest the Iewes or Turkes, it might happely haue come to passe (I suppose) that this your Aristo­tlelike Iustice might haue obteined at the least some resem­blaunce of truth, or perhappes crept into some credite: nay ra­ther it is not to bee doubted, but if the Iewes them selues, or Turkes, were now consederate with you in Portingall, in the same Argument, they could not scarsely alledge any other proofes then you bryng forth vnto vs at this present, neither would, I thinke, expoūde ye same in any other phrase of words, then your selfe do vse. But now, for as much as we contend not together in Tullies Tusculane questions, nor in his Academy­call probabilities, nor in Platoes common wealth, nor in the [Page] Iewishe Thalmude, ne yet in the Turkes Alcaron, but in the Churche of Iesu Christ: surely ye ought to haue regarded the place chiefly, where you were when ye wrate this: and to know how you ought to haue behaued your selfe, whē you were there: what doctrine you ought haue published in so great an Audito­rie, what personage ye doe represent in your countrey, not the person of a common Ruffian (I suppose) but of a Byshop: ma­ry now you haue played so the part of a very rascall vnder the visor of a Byshop (pardon me I pray you speakyng the truth) that no common barrettor, nor Rogish Ruffian could vomitte out more shamelesse scurrilitie. S. Paule doth so little esteéme the credite of any other Gospell, That hee holdeth him no better then accursed, yea though an Aungell from heauen doe bryng a contrary one to this same. And shall we beare with this collouer­thwarte Osorius like a vice in a play, with a new founde chaū ­gelyng, to make myngle mangle with the sacred worde of the Lord? and with such vnsauorie subtelties, to peruert the pure, and vndefiled sinceritie of the Gospell of grace? and like a wild Boare, to moyle vp by the rootes, the florishyng and most plen­tyfull Uynearde of our blessed felicitie planted by the Lord him selfe? If that blynd bussardly Owle eyes of your mynde (Oso­rius) be as yet wrapped in so darkened a cloude, that this cleare light of the gracious mercy of God, shynyng from aboue, can not pearce into those dull dazeled senses, to seé the manifest light of the truth: it should yet haue bene much more seémely for you to haue comforted them, whom the holy Ghost had enabled with better grace to teache the truth, & so simply to haue yelded to the same: Truely it behoued you to haue quallified your rage, and vsed more modesty at the least, towardes them that did dissence from you. And if your selfe were not willyng to pursue the true pathe to heauen, ye should not yet haue foreclosed the entrye to o­thers, that were willyng to enter in: And knowyng your owne disabilitie in teachyng, ye should yet more, shamefastly haue be­wrayed your vnskilfulnes, and made some end once at the lēgth, or at the least reteyned some reasonable order, from that rascal­lyke raylyng, and immeasurable insolencie: and not so wilfully haue rushed into such Tragicall exclamations, before you had bene better acquainted with the cause. But as now you tosse and [Page 102] turmoyle your selfe in these questions as though ye were of some other profession, and a meére straunger to the matter: wherein you scarcely sauour any thyng at all, surely vnderstand so little, so coldly and senselesly, as no man more brutishly, and with all vse your selfe therein so disorderly and outragiously, as the very furies of Hell could not more horribly.

You must pardon me (Osorius) if I spake playnly, & franck­ly as I thinke, wherein I will not speake as moued of malice, or of any melancholicke affectiō, agaynst your person: whom I wish well vnto truly, and beseéke God hartely, to graunt a more sound Iudgemēt. But I feare me (Osorius) least within this Osorius dwelleth some other guest besides Osorius, & hee not all the best perhappes, whatsoeuer he be, that doth continually teaze, and pricke foreward those busie braynes of yours, to poysoned and pestiferous deuises: of whom I wish you to be well assured (O­sorius) if you loue your soules sauetie. But if wholesome Coū ­sell of a wellwiller shall litle preuayle with you. I would aduer­tize the tender vnskilfull youth of the posterite in the bowels of Iesus Christ,An exhor­tatiō to the Readers. that they take diligent beédefulnesse to the rea­dyng of Osorius his bookes, left beyng allured with sweéte poy­soned bayte, as with Mermaydes melody (do vse the wordes of S. Ierome) they bee hooked vnwares, and carryed away into delusions and errours. I know how plausible, and easie a mat­ter it is to the Iudgement of the flesh, learnedly and plentyful­ly to preach of the payse, and commēdation of vertue, or righ­teousnesse, of the rules and preceptes of mans lyfe, of Ciuill gouernement, of polliticque Statutes and ordinaunces, and of the excellencie of lawes. And there happeneth not for the more part in any other Theame, a more swifter readynesse of speach, a more sensible sharpenesse of deuise, or more vsuall ad­miration of worldlynges:The prayse of Cicero and other aūciēt Phi­losophers discoursing vpō vertue. Wherein many notable Rhetorici­ans, & most subtill Philosophers heretofore haue thought best to employ their endeuours, and whole force for their eloquence, not without great commendation of witte, and singular prayse of ingenious inuention: whole laudable trauaile therein, I ought and can not chuse but accompt prayseworthy, as men that were desirous to emparte to the posteritie most worthy mo­ [...]umentes atchieued through excellencie of learnyng, and nym­blenesse [Page] of capacitie, and seuere pursuyng of vertue and vertu­ous discipline, wherewith they were wouderfully beautified. But I returne to Osorius, whose diligence also in Imitation I doe commende, for that he hath made his choyse of such especi­ally, after whom he may direct his Imitation. But whereas he doth nothyng els but affect their Heathenishenesse, I doe not onely not prayse him, but vtterly disallow and refuse his order of study herein. These men hauyng none other so commendable an exercize, wherein they might bestow their tyme, as by all meanes possible to beautifie the giftes and ornamentes of na­ture, and to allure men thereby to honest and seémely Ciuilitie, did worthely deserue the prayse of that, whiche they so earnestly pursued. And therfore M. Tullius Cicero hath of right obtey­ned the garland of an honest Citizen, and learned Philosopher: who bendyng all the powers of his excellent vnderstandyng, in blazyng the dueties and offices of mens lyfe, and defence of ver­tue agaynst the beastly and swynish pleasures of Epicure, esteémed that matter worthy his study and trauaile. Wherein he be­stowed such diligence and actiuitie of witte, as that him selfe did neuer better in any other Theame, nor any man els could haue handled the same more aboundauntly. And euen the same dyd he as then, accordyng to the necessitie of the present tyme, with singular learnyng: for as yet, besides the orderly course of na­turall doctrine, were not any other preceptes of purer disci­pline, extaunt amongest those Nations, wherein the fine and nymble wittes might exercize them selues. And therefore it was no maruell if hee beyng a man endued with wonderfull in­stinct of nature, did embrace that thyng, as the chiefest felicitie, worthy whereupon he might discourse, and whiche he sawe to be most notable, and had in greatest prize amongest all the workes of Nature: neither could rayse his mynde beyonde the limites of Nature, nor stretche out the force of his capicitie, further then to that outward righteousnesse, obteyned by speciall pur­suite of vertue.

But now as the state of the tyme is altered from that which was then, so haue we now receaued an other Schoolemaister frō heauen, whose Maiestie, as surmounteth in glory all worldly state & condition, so his doctrine being not straighted within the [Page 103] boundes of Nature, doth disclose vnto vs thynges farre passing the reach of all Nature, whose Scholer you ought to haue bene (Osorius) especially sithence ye be aduaūced to so high dignitie in the Church: for we haue receaued now not a M. Cicero play­eng the Rhetoriciā in his Tusculane walkes, but the very sonne of God him selfe from out the bosome of the Father, who beyng sent downe into the earth may teach vs, not the hidden secretes of mans Philosophye,The diffe­rence be­twene Mo­rall and Christian Philoso­phy. but make discernable the will of his Fa­ther vnto vs: not define by reason, distinguish by Arte, and pro­pose in order the Morall principles of prophane Phisolophye, (albeit he doth describe the same many tymes as occasion is of­fred) but commeth forth with farre higher mysteries, instru­structing vs of the kyngdome of God, of eternall life, and of true and euerlastyng felicitie, neither instructyng vs onely, but by his doctrine powryng also the same blessednesse into vs: obtey­ned it by his death, confirmed it with his rising agayne, doth dispose it by his dayly raignyng ouer vs, doth enseale it vnto vs by his Sacraments, and promiseth it in his word. To conclude doth geue the same felicitie of his owne liberatie without all re­spect of reward freély, to all that beleue vpon his name. Now therfore, since the tyme is altered, & the Schoolemaister chaun­ged, the order of doctrine must likewise neédes be chaunged: not bycause we reiect those things in meane whiles as vtterly false, which the auncient Philosophers did in tymes past deliuer vn­to vs, teachyng the preceptes of orderly liuyng, wherof you de­bated earst concerning good maners and godly actions: But by­cause the Euangelicall Philosophye doth call vs higher to farre deéper mysteries, the doctrine whereof consisteth in greater and better rudiments: Our study therfore must haue regarde to an other marke: That is to say. We must not onely learne serious­ly to know, how to direct the course of this transitory lyfe, but also,The end of Christian Philoso­phie. by what meanes we may attayne euerlastyng lyfe: not how much our righteousnesse auayleth in the sight of men, but what thyng doth Iustifie vs in the sight of God. You beyng addicted altogether to the rules of your old Maister of Ethnicke Philo­sophy, heape together many good and commendable preceptes of perfect righteousnesse, wherein you are not so much to be mis­liked: But in that ye doe nothyng els but the selfe same thyng, [Page] whereof they haue treated much more cunnyngly and plentyful­ly before your tyme,Whom O­sorius doth chiefly imi­tate. as Cicero in his bookes of Offices, Aristo­tle in his Ethickes, Plato in his bookes De Legibus, and many other learned men in their bookes likewise: herein surely you cā not be excusable nor voyde of blame: not bycause you agreé with them in those good preceptes, whereof they dispute well, but by­cause you are so fast tyed to their opinions, that ye skippe away from Christ, and obstinately resist his Gospell: not bycause you Imitate them whom we accompt to be learned, the ensuyng of whole studious industry we do not neglect, but for that you do so much Imitate the prophane writers, as that ye seéme to doe no­thyng els then Imitate thē, as though with Paganes you would become a professed Pagane: & for that disputyng so carefully of righteousnesse and good workes, ye make stay, and rest your selfe wholy there, from whence you ought haue stept a degreé further, and pursued the better way to higher mysteries, and matters of greater importaunce.Vertue to be embra­ced of all men. And as though there were no difference betwixt Morall Philosophy and Christian Diuinitie, ye so racke all thynges to the practize of vertue, and pursuyng the perfect plotte of righteousnesse: and (with I know not how huge a heape or wordes) blaze out vnto vs a certeine absolute portraite of in­nocencie (whereof happely ye can painte some shewe or shadowe in your bookes, better then expresse in your conuersation.) And yet are we not so much displeased with that imaginatiue deuise how­soeuer deuised and engrauen by you. For we know, and doe con­fesse together with you (Osorius) & all the whole secte of auncient Philosophers, that there is nothyng more beautyfull amongest all the actions of mans lyfe, then vertue: and nothyng of more e­stimation then righteousnesse: and do withall as hartely, and ear­nestly, as you wishe and desire, that this integritie of life might be throughly emprinted in all mens maners, and conuersation, ] whereof you finde so great a mayme, and want in these new Ges­pellers. But will you heare agayne Osorius?True inno­cencie in mankynde loste long sithence. This integritie of innocent and vndefiled lyfe, whiche you require so earnestly, yet performe nothyng lesse, will we, will we, is lost long agoe, not in you or in me onely, but in the whole nature of mankynd general­ly also, and so altogether lost that it can neuer by any meanes be restored with good life, but by beleéuyng onely.

[Page 104]But you will say. That this righteousnesse though alto­gether lost in vs, may bee restored through the grace and boūtie of Christ, and so many times is restored in the faith­full. Ueryly I would graunt vnto you as much as ye speake (Osorius) if you would either aptly define that Grace,Osor. obie­ction cōfu­ted. whereof ye make mention, or rightly distinguish that rigthteousnesse. For it is not to be doubted, but that the comfortable Grace of Christ doth purchase vnto vs perfect Righteousnesse.By what meanes we doe recouer true inno­cencie. But this Righte­ousnesse (if ye will know it good Syr) consisteth not in that which we doe procure by well doyng, but in that which by onely forge­uyng is not Imputed. Wherefore all that Righteousnesse and blessednesse whatsoeuer is in vs, is grounded rather vpon the re­mission of sinnes, then vpon any vertuous workes. Will you heare the summe of all your felicitie described vnto vs, and knit vp in few wordes, in the mysticall Psalme, and mentioned by the recitall of the Apostle?Psal. 31. How the grace of God doth geue righ­teousnes to men. Blessed are they (sayth he) whose sinnes are forgeuen, and whose Iniquities are couered, blessed is the man to whom the Lord hath not Imputed his offences. Psal. 31. Further­more whō that Mysticall melodious Psalmiste doth call blessed, the same man onely Bernarde doth denounce to be blessed, mea­nyng thereby the same thyng in deéde, which is most true, that there is no meane nor ayde from whence mā may hope for eter­nall felicitie, besides this onely and alone. Why so? Ueryly by­cause the whole Nature of mankynde is so ouerwhelmed with sinne, that vnlesse the continuall mercy of God dyd preuent vs, winkyng at our wickednesse, who (I praye you) could stand in Iudgement? not I. No, nor yet your selfe Osorius. For we haue all sinned, and we all haue neede of the glory of God. And yet not­withstandyng through his onely mercy pardoning vs, our offen­ces are in the case as though they neuer had bene committed, wherein if you, beyng an old raynebeaten souldiour, dare not geue credite to our new Gospell: Let it not loathe you yet at the least to heare Bernarde him selfe, a witnesse both of our Gospel, and of our Iudgement herein: who albeit is reported not to haue seéne all things, yet did discerne this perfectly enough. For thus he speaketh. Whatsoeuer he hath decreéd not to Impute,Bern. in Sermo. 23. super Cant. is as though it neuer were: & hereunto addeth an other saying which I would wish you to note aduisedly. ‘Not to sinne is the Righte­ousnesse [Page] of God, but the righteousnesse of man is the mercyfull indulgence of God. And the same sentence hee doth reiterate a­gayne in an other place in the selfe same wordes, or at least doth cōfirme it with wordes not very much differēt from ye same. For the sinne (sayth he) that is committed can not be vndone, and yet if God doe not Impute the same, it shalbe as though it neuer were done. &c.’ Surely if the sinne shall not be accompted sinne that hath bene committed, no more shall the Sinner bee taken for a Sinner that hath committed the sinne. And so it follow­eth necessaryly hereupon, that he must neédes be righteous and blessed. Whereby you do perceaue (I suppose) from whence all this sappe or iuyce of our Righteousnesse and Saluation sprin­geth, not out of the workes of our righteousnesse, which is none at all, but from the onely meére mercy of Gods freé pardon, as hath bene declared by the testimony of Bernarde.

Or if the authoritie of Bernarde cā not obteine so much cre­dite with you, yet let the Fayth of Basile, Augustine, Origene and Ierome persuade you, or their auncientie moue you, for I perceaue that you are much delighted with antiquitie. And first what cā be more notable then the wordes of Basile?Basil. in Psal. 32. ‘For he that trusteth not to his owne good wordes, neither looketh to be iusti­fied by the deseruyng of good deédes, all his hope of saluation he reposeth onely in the meéte mercy of almightie God.’

Orig. ad Rom. Lib. 9. Cap. 12.I will adioyne vnto him a companion of the same iudgemēt and auncientie, that notable Clarcke Origene. ‘Bycause all thynges (sayth he) are concluded vnder sinne, therfore mans sal­uation consisteth not in merites of workes but in the freé mercy of God.’ Neither doth S. Augustine differre from them, who treatyng of ye ende of the last Iudgement seémeth to haue setled all the hope of our sauetie in the onely mercy of God:Aug. Epi. 105. Ad Sixtum. God will crown vs (sayth he) in the end of the world with mercy and com­passions: Yeldyng the same in the Latine toung almost, which Basile before him dyd expresse most manifestly in the Greéke toung in this wise.Baūl. in Psal. 32. There is Iudgemēt not without mercy by­cause here is no such man to bee founde pure and immaculate without some spotte of sinne, yea though hee be an Infante dy­eng the same day that he is borne. ‘And agayne the same Augu­stine in his booke De Ciuitate Dei. 19. booke and 27. Chapter,Aug. de Ci­uit. Lib. 19. Cap. 27. [Page 105] purposing to declare, what accompt may be made of our righ­teousnes in this transitory life, affirmeth it to be such, as ought, rather to be valued by the forgeuenesse of sinnes, then by perfe­ction of vertues. And agayne the same Augustine in his first booke of Retractations. 19. Chap.Aug. Retra. Lib. 1 Cap. 19. All the Commaundementes (sayth hee) are then reputed to be performed, when that whiche is left vndone is pardoned. And I know not whether Ierome haue declared ye same more euidently,Ierome. Our salua­tion consi­steth not in our owne righteous­nesse but in the free mercy of God. who referryng all thyngs to the freé mercyfulnesse of God forgeuyng vs, speaketh in this wise. In Christ Iesu our Lord in whom we haue our hope, ac­cesse, and affiaunce by the faith of him, not by our righteousnes, but by him, through whose fayth our sinnes are forgeuen vs.

But why doe I stand so long vpon a matter that ought to be without all cōtrouersie? when as the generall consent and agreément of all learned Authours and antiquitie, can not be founde more constaunt, nor for the more part more consonaunt, in any one thyng so much, as in this. The matter therefore beyng so playne, it remayneth that of two meére contraries, we allow the one, and vtterly forsake ye other; that is to say: either that, which you doe cauill, touchyng righteousnesse or els that, which they doe teache vs touchyng Gods gracious forbearyng. For these two are farre different eche from other, and can not be admitted both: for it righteousnesse be obteyned by integritie of workes, then what neéde haue we of any further forgeuenesse? But if this come vnto us by the onely freé benignitie of the forgeuer. I be­seé you then for the loue ye beare to your Myter, where is now that integritie of workes? that vprightenesse that may make our righteousnesse perfect? For as farre as I can gesse, pardon is not geuen to well deseruynges, but reward rather offred as of duety: Neither can it be truely sayd: That pardon must be cra­ued where no offence is committed. But ye will say paraduen­ture, that some imperfections doth lurcke secretly in our deédes, though they be wrought by the grace of God, which yet wanteth the mercyfulnesse of God. It is well sayd truely. And why then doth your darkyng penne so cruelly rage agaynst Luther? Who franckely & of his own accorde doth professe the selfe same thing, though in other wordes, which you are driuē by force to yeld vn­to, whether ye will or no. That is to say: That our deédes are [Page] vnperfect, lame, blynd, naked and so altogether barren and hun­gry, that vnlesse they bee clothed and vpholden by the mercy of freé pardon, no defence wilbe pleadeable before the Iudgement seate of God: and shalbe accompted rather in place of sinnes, then seéme to deserue any reward of vertue. If ye be not satisfied with these testimonies, but will obstinately persiste in this your opinion still: that our workes may be so absolutely perfect as to deserue: I beseéch you make proofe therof by some reasonable authoritie, either vouched out of holy Scriptures, or out of some approued auncient Authours: And if ye can make no soūd proofe in that behalfe, deale yet somewhat more soberly with vs. For these your reproches, rebukes, lyes, scoldynges, out­cries, spyttynges, cursinges, glorious & hauty speaches, and tri­flyng wordes make nothyng to the purpose. On the other part, if ye can neither make proofe vnto vs of this perfect Righteous­nesse of workes by any demonstration of your owne workes: nor any mā els besides you dare presume to offer him selfe in iudge­ment to tryed by his workes, what els doe ye, in chargyng Lu­ther so sharpely, when ye so condemne him for a franticke, and braynesicke mā: Then Tertullus did sometyme, accusing Paul to bee a seditous person? sauyng that he accused Paule but at one tyme, once: and your penne vomityng out nothyng els be­sides furies, frensies, and madnes of Luther, doth so continu­ally crawle in ragyng by degreés, as will seéme neuer to make any ende at all thereof, vntill ye bryng your selfe amongest the Iewes at the last, and crye out as they did, Crucifige vpon him, Crucifige vpon him.

Iob. Euen the most perfect workes of men of no valew with God.Iob a most vpright lyuear did stand in doubtfull feare of all the workes of his life. Esay the Prophet doth cōpare all our righ­teousnesse to a foule menstruous cloth. Christ him selfe doth pro­nounce that all our endeuours and workes are vnprofitable. Paule as it were loathyng the remembraunce of his owne righteous­nes,Paule. how glorious so euer his works appeared, yet did adiudge them so farre distaunt from true righteousnesse, that hee estee­med them no better then doung. Dauid durst not presume to en­ter into Iudgement with God. Dauid. Augustine feareth that if God be­hold his workes he shall finde more offences then merites:August. in Psal. 94. and "if he shall deale with vs accordyng to our desertes, he shall finde [Page 106] nothyng in vs but damnable. Ierome doth so call vs backe frō all confidence in our deédes,Ier. in Esay Cap. 64. that he boldly pronounceth that, if we cōsider them in their own nature we should vtterly dispayre. What? and may it not be lawfull for Luther to vtter his mynde with Christ? with the godly Prophetes? with the holy Apostles, with the learned auncient Fathers? Are they commēded in the old Gospell for that they spake well, and shall Luther, Melan­cthon, Bucer, and Caluin [...] be reproched in scoffyng wise, with a new foūde name of new Gospellers, bycause they thinke, and speake the selfe same thyng that they did? If Luther were such a kynde of felow as would take part with Epicure,Luther de­fended a­gaynst O­sorius. and would practize to let louse the reynes to voluptuousnes, turning mens myndes vpsidowne, and carry them away quyte from vertuous endeuour, from loue of godlynesse, from their duetie, and honest trade of godly lyfe, to lust and licentiousnesse, and would place all mans felicitie in this corruptible body, and the vayne tick­lyng delightes therof: it were not altogether from the purpose that ye speake (Osorius) nor you should be much blamed for ma­kyng him companion with Epicure: neither would I refrayne my penne (so Christ helpe me) but would inueigh agaynst him with all my power as sharpely as your selfe. But peruse now all Luthers bookes, searche, sift, consider and ponder all Luthers writynges, all his exhortations, his doctrine, his Lessons, his Sermons, and all his imaginations: yea prye narrowly into his lyfe and conuersation: if you can shewe out of all these, I will not say one place, or example, but one worde or sillable so much, which doth sounde agaynst the loue, and practize of ver­tue, which may seéme to rende the sinowes of righteousnesse and holynesse, or breéde dislikyng to the embracyng therof: or which doe bruyse the fruites of good workes, weaken serious trauaile, breake of honest industry, or hinder godly enterprises from do­yng well, or by any maner of meanes doe extenuate the feare due to the lawes of God and man. Finally where he may seéme to thinke lesse then may bee seéne a perfect Deuine: or behaue him selfe more dissolutely in his maners, thē he resembleth in honest iudgement: Nay rather if he do not employ all the care possible to rayse vp all men in euery place, to the dewe feare of Gods law, to true obedience, and to all honest conuersation, and ear­nestly [Page] emprinte into the sight and myndes of all men, the re­nowne, dignitie and worthynesse of vertue, pic [...]e and godlynes, you shall haue the Conquest.

Osori. pag. 141. But euen the same thyng (say you) Epicurus did. I con­fesse that to be true Osorius, which ye reporte of Epicurus, and which you haue very finely pyked out of your M. Cicero. Cicer. Tus­cul Lib. 3. Who doth deny in his thyrd booke of Tusculane questions. That Epi­curus was Authour of any voluptuous sentences, and with all sayth, that he vttered many and soudry notable sayinges seéme­ly enough for a true Philosopher: But what doe ye conclude hereof? Epicurus doth commende vertue in some place. Luther doth also the lyke. Ergo, Luther is an Epicurean. Osori. accu­seth Luther to be an E­picurean. Why doe ye not also conclude agaynst S. Paule that hee is an Epicurean, bycause he doth also the selfe same thyng. O rare and singular sharpe witted Chrisippus: whiche if had not altogether beéne nooseled in his old Gospell, could neuer haue knitte such knots together of meére particular propositiōs: neither would this wō ­derfull Logician haue euer coupled Luther with Epicurus. But bycause Osorius hath borowed this Argument out of Cicero, we will open his iugglyng boxe in fewe wordes: and first of all shew what Cicero speaketh, next how west this Ciceroniā doth agreé with Cicero. And first as concernyng Cicero. Whenas he maketh mētion of Epicurus sentēces, he doth not reprehend the quicknesse and nymblenes of his witte: but rather prayseth him therfore: onely he noteth the scope and end of his doctrine. Neither doth he condēne those sentēces which Epicurus spake well, but bycause he did so define chief Felicitie, as though it cō ­sisted onely in voluptuousnes, herein he founde fault with him, and not without cause. For Epicurus amongest other his say­inges wrate in this maner. That mans lyfe could not be plea­saunt if it were not ioyned with vertue: he denyed that fortune was of any such force, as to apall the courage of a wise man: That the meane lyfe of the poore, was better then the riche. He denyed also that there was any wise man, but the same was al­so happy. Truely all those sayings are worthely spoken by him as Tully him selfe reporteth. Now let vs see what Argument our Ciceroes Ape will shape out of all this.

Pag. 141. And Luther (sayth hee) doth offer the same order per­happes [Page 107] exhorte his Auditory in his writyngs and Sermons to the same dueties of lyfe. &c. If Luther doe so (Osorius) he doth very well. What then? will you finde fault with this? No, but as Epicurus disputyng sometymes gloriously of vertue, How ab­surdely O­sorius doth cōpare Lu­ther with Epicurus. did notwithstandyng with his preceptes vtterly wipe away vertue, euen with lyke craftie conueyaunce Luther doth subuerte and ouerthrowe all dueties of vertue and godly­nesse. Speake out Parrotte, in what place doth Luther sub­uerte the dueties of vertue? Where doth hee blotte out honesty and godly carefulnesse of good men? May this be tollerable in you, with slaūders, and lyes, to deface the good name of a man, that neuer deserued it, who is also dead? to condemne his wri­tynges? & after you haue geuen him a most cruell wounde, to be so voyde of all reason, as to be vnable to alledge one Title, one place, one sillable so much of iust accusation wherfore ye should so do? Nor make your slaunderous reproches to carry any shew of truth? let vs throughly peruse the begynnynges of Luthers doctrine, the proceédyng and dayly increasinges therof, let vs sift out the ende, and the whole course and purporte of his pro­ceédyng, what? doth he forth with plucke vp the rootes of vertue, which abateth the Affiaunce of mans workes? and ascribeth all our saluation to the onely bountie and mercy of God? Which doth likewise affirme that the workes of the Saintes in this world, if they be examined to the vttermost pricke, are not able to counteruaile Gods wrath, nor satisfie his iudgement? but preacheth that of all partes they neéde mercy, directyng vs in the meane whiles to the true marke of assured Confidence? is this man to be coupled with Epicurus, as though hee should be Authour of the ouerthrow of all honesty? or rather shal he be ad­iudged a good Phisition of the Soule? as one that doth minister wholesome medicine agaynst poysoned errours?

But you will inueigh to the contrary. That if that maner of doctrine be admitted wherof Luther is Authour,Osorius. then will all studious care of pietie decay, and hauocke will bee made of all godly endeuour, and licentious liberty will be made free for all estates. In deéde this may happely chaunce amōgest some persons: for what cā be so well spoken at any tyme, or so circumsplectly handled, but that the malice of the wicked will [Page] take thereof euill occasion to wrest to their filthy lust? So in the tyme of Paules preachyng, there wanted not peruerse peo­ple, which in like maner tooke occasion to slaunder his doctrine with his owne wordes:Rom. 3. videl. Let vs doe euill that good may come thereof. There were also some whiche were not ashamed to say, that Paule did destroy the law, & did geue to much scope to libertie. Of that kynde of people Peter doth cōplayne, which wt sinister deuises practized to wrest Paules writyngs crooked­ly to their own confusiō. Shall not good men therfore frequent his Epistles? Euen by the same Reason (Osorius) let not flow­ers grow in the spryng tyde, bycause the Spyder doth aswell sucke poyson out of them, as the Beés matter to make theyr honnycombe. But if so bee that, when good men doe geue ver­tuous and necessary exhortation of those thynges, whiche they do thinke worthy to be embraced, accordyng to their duety, and profession of their fayth, wicked men in the meane space starte vp betwene, whiche will abuse the same good thynges to their owne destruction, is this the fault of the teacher, or rather the fallax of the accident, as Logicians do terme it?

Luther falsely accused to bee the Authour of wicked boldnesse. Many persons (say you) do take occasion of wicked con­fidence and vnpunishable libertie through that new Gos­pell of Luther. But many on the contrary part do receaue frō the same very comfortable consolation, and finde them selues thereby to be much more pricked foreward to pursue godlynesse with more carefulnesse. If Luther teach the truth, shall not his doctrine therfore be published bycause wicked men doe abuse it? But if you thinke his Assertions to be erronious: Why do not you (O Thales I pray you) vouchsafe to prescribe, as becom­meth the fulnesse of your wisedome, some pretie rules of soun­der doctrine, whereunto Luther might more safely haue direc­ted his opinions?The opiniō of Schoole­mē and Pa­pistes tou­chyng the waye of righteous­nes is false & wicked. I beleue that he should by your aduise, haue associated him selfe with the Schoolemen and Monckes, and with that sacred Inquisitiō of Spayne, and vsed these kyndes of speaches, videl. That the kyngdome of heauen is a due re­ward for our good workes, if it were not, we should otherwise be vncerteine thereof. Bycause that which is of duetie is most assured, but that proceédeth from mercy is vncerteine. Or els ye will require perhappes that he should teach vs as your Ho­sius [Page 108] doth preach,Hosius. who doth affirme that euerlastyng Saluation is obteyned by deseruinges proceédyng from the grace of God. Or els as our Osorius doth:Osorius. Who calleth faith onely, to be one­ly rashnesse, & boldly pronounceth that all the meanes and wor­thynesse of our Saluation consisteth in righteousnesse, not that righteousnesse whiche we receaue by imputation from Christ through fayth: but that same, which euery mā maketh peculiar to him selfe, by his owne purchase, through workes. Or els as the Schoolemen of your old Gospell do professe, who bablyng very much about Iustification, haue decreéd at the length, that it must be taken two maner of wayes: one way which is obtey­ned before any workes be done, through grace geuen freély as they say,Rosfenfi [...] against Lu­ther. as in Infantes beyng Regenerated by Baptisme. The other in elder yeares, through great store and perfectiō of workes: That is to say, through the resistyng of the froath & en­ticementes of sinne, & dayly subduyng therof: which they call in their phrase of speach, Grace making acceptable, or acceptyng Grace. And although good workes doe not bryng to passe that first Iustification, yet they do geue the second maner of Iustifi­eng, the grace of God workyng together with the same: which doth minister strength sufficient as well to worke stoutly, as to striue agaynst the very stynges and prickes of the flesh effectu­ally: so that it may not onely be possible to lyue cleare frō dead­ly sinne, but also to atteine to be Iustified, pe [...] Congruum & Con­dignum. Congruum Cōdignum Conueni­encie and worthynes. You knowe well enough these fayre flowers Osorius (if I be not deceaued) and glorious speculatiōs of your old Di­uinitie: Whiche how agreably seéme to accorde with your old Gospell I know not: Sure I am that Christ neuer knew this Gospell: the Apostles neuer taught it, nor the Euāgelistes, no, nor the approued auncient Catholicke Fathers had euer any smatche thereof. Nay rather Christ, Paule, the Apostles and Euāgelistes, and auncient Doctours of the Church when soe­uer they treated of Saluation, and of lyfe euerlastyng, do en­deuour nothyng more seriously, thē that (seueryng our workes from the cause of Iustification altogether) they might dispoyle vs wholy of Confidence of our owne sauetie, and so referre vs ouer to the onely mercy of God, who onely geueth the kyng­dome of heauen, not for any our deseruynges, but for his pro­mise [Page] sake onely. But we haue sayd enough herein. Let vs now proceéde to other cauillatiōs of this troublesome trifler though it be somewhat greéuous, and as neare as we may, if we cā not all, yet let vs briefly and orderly cut of the toppes of them.

Pag. 141. [...] There is no man that will geue him selfe to any good workes if he haue once heard Luther for his Schoolemai­ster. &c. Whereas Luther doth not take vpon him the person of a Schoolemaister, nor hath challenged to him selfe the digni­tie of high deske, nor euer taught any Schooles of new factiōs, nor euer lead any trayne of Scholers, but amōgest other Chri­stians followed alwayes Christ the common Schoolemaister: And was neuer knowen to haue vttered any other doctrine, thē that whiche he receaued of Christ, what should moue this qua­rellsome Doc [...]or to reproch him with this enuious title of mai­ster? Many good and vertuous men haue heard Luthers prea­chyng, but no man (as I suppose) acknowledged him for his Maister. For that neéded not, for through all Christendome, in Uniuersities and common Schooles, are whole droues of Mai­sters scattered abroad, as though they dropped out of the Troi­ane horse. Whom we doe heare also, whē they teach, what they teach. I will not here stand to discusse: nor I make any estimate thereof. The Christians did sometymes heare the Scribes, and Phariseés teachyng in Moyses chayre, neither doth the A­postle forbyd vs: [...]. Thess. 5. But that may take a tast of all doctrines, but pet so tast them, as we hold fast nothyng but that which is good. If Luther teach any doctrine of his owne imaginatiō, him selfe refuseth to be beleued therin: but if the teach ye doctrine of Christ, and those thynges, which he hath sucked out of the sweéte iuyce of Christes Gospell: I beseeche you Syr, doth he therfore pro­fesse him selfe a Maister to Scholers? or a Scholer rather to his Maister Christ? And therfore this scornefull title of schoole­maister wherewith ye reproche him, is a scoffe more fitte for a common Ruf [...]ian, then a Deuine: surely altogether vncomely and vnseémely for a Byshop.

Osori. ibid. O [...]or. cauill agaynst the Lutherans workes. But whereas ye pronounce that Luthers Auditory haue not geuen them selues to any good workes. How know you this to bee true? For I am assured that in Porting all and in Spayne good prouiso is made, that no mā be so hardy to touch [Page 109] any of Luthers bookes: if you referre your Assertion to Eng­land or Germany: I doe not a litle marueile how this monstru­ous Spynx can cast his eyes ouer so many Seas, so many high mountaines, and so great distauuce of Countreys, and so curi­ously behold the lyues of men? and prye so precisely into their maners? vnlesse some Phebus haue cloured vpon this Mydas head not the eares of Osorius, but the eares of some lolleared Asse, in the truncke wherof he may catche euery blast whatsoe­uer, any where blowen abroad or deuised in secrete, through the reportes of whisperyng Talebearers: & like a credulous soole beleue the same forthwith. But howsoeuer those Lutheranes in Englād and in Germany do exercise them selues in no good workes, it goeth very well in the meane tyme with Porting all and Spayne that men lyue there holy and Angellike. For I do beleue surely that men in those Countreys do so glytter in since­ritie of life and brightenes of vertues, that their very shadowes do shyne in the darke, and glyster more lyke Aungels then men, that they are such men as plante their feéte no where, but that they leaue behynd thē a certeine wonderfull fragrant sauour of modestie, curtesie & singular chastitie, & so make the very hea­uens in loue with their puritie, & sweétenes of their vertues.

But goe to Osorius tell vs at the length a good fellowshyp what the cause should be, that such as doe geue eare to Luther will not apply them selues to doe good workes? Truely I sup­pose, that bycause he teacheth, that mē are Iustified in the sight of God by fayth onely and not by workes, therfore it must be an infallible consequent: That whosoeuer attende to Luthers do­ctrine will forthwith abandone all thought to lyue vertuously, and yeld him selfe carelesly ouer to all idlenesse and filthynesse. As though with honest and well disposed persons fatherly cle­mencie shall cause the children to be sluggish to do their duties? or as though the voyce of mercy doth at once vtterly abolish all Morall vertues? To what ende therefore doth Christ so much not commende vnto vs that fatherly affection in the mercyfull father mentioned in the Gospell towardes his prodigall sonne: but also painte him out vnto vs for an example? if that doctrine of the freé mercyfulnesse of God be not true, or if it be true, that it ought not therefore be published, bycause many vnchast and [Page] corrupt persons will abuse the same? Nay rather why ought net ye truth of God of greater reason be generally and openly preached, for the necessary comfort of the godly? Neither beho­ueth vs to be inquisitiue how much this doctrine doth worke in certeine particular men, but rather to know, how true this do­ctrine is of it selfe. And accordyng as we doe finde the same to be true and constant, so to preach the same, accordyng to the ca­pacitie of the hearers.

A threefold lye of Oso­rius.But Osorius doth vrge vs agayne with threé Argumentes chiefly as it were with a threé square battell, & lyke a threé hea­ded Cerberus doth rushe vpon Luther with threé sondry as­sautes, attemptyng to proue by his Logicke, that this Luther of whom we speake, doth ex [...]irpe and roote out all vertue, hone­stie, and godly endeuour. First by his disablyng of workes,Disablyng of workes. se­condly through desperation of honestie,Desperatiō. thirdly, by Confidence of false righteousnesse.Confidēce. In threé wordes as it were threé lyes. And first of all touchyng Desperation and Cōfidence, I thinke we haue spoken enough before: where we haue so proued both to be falsely imputed to Luther, as that we doe yet acknowledge them both in Luther.After what maner Lu­ther tea­cheth Con­fidence and Desperatiō and how not. For Luther doth describe Cōfidence, but the same which is the true Confidence: he teacheth also Despe­ration, I confesse it: but the same very comfortable: And there­in teacheth nothyng els, but the same, that the Euāgelistes, and Apostles haue alwayes taught. For what can be more true, and assure [...] Confidence, or more comfortable Desperation, or more [...]onson unt with the Gospell of Iesu Christ and his Apostles, then that we beyng in full dispaire of the righteousnesse of our owne workes, doe shroude our selues wholy vnder the mercy of Christ and in his freé bounty and elemency? That is to say, not in workes, whiche the grace of Christ hath wrought in vs, but for vs? As touchyng the brablyng that he maketh about the de­spising of good workes, by what Logicke will hee proue his ca­uillatiō? And now pause here a whiles (good Reader) & note the passing pearcyng witte, nurtured not in ye Schoole of Stoicke Philosophy, but nooseled by rather I suppose in some swynesty.

Luther doth strippe our merites and workes naked frō all Confidence.

Ergo, Luther rendeth in peeces the very sinewes of all

[Page 110]godlines, setteth at nought and vtterly abolisheth all the efficacie and dignitie of good workes.

And though Osorius haue not placed his wordes after this order, yet the bent of his conclusion tendeth to the same effect. For what did Luther els in all his writynges and Sermons, but cut of all hope of workes, and so by that meanes allure vs to take ankerhold in the onely ayde & helpe of the Mediatour? if this be the waye to choake vp vertue, and to bury her vnder groūde, I confesse that Luther was an abolisher of vertue, and S. Paule also as well as he.

But Osor. doth many tymes deny this Assertion of the Lu­therans to be true, that our righteousnes & hope of our salua­tion so depēdeth vpō Christ, as that ye same should be Imputed to vs of God, & accoūted our own by Imputatiō through fayth onely. For he supposeth this way to be ouer easie, and that it will hereof come to passe, Pag. 141. that no man wilbe carefull, stu­dious or desirous to accomplish any good worke. In deéde I thinke Osorius is of the mynde of many persons, whiche vn­lesse be continually beaten, & pricked foreward, lyke dull Oxen with goades and cudgels, will neuer yeld their bodies to la­bour, but forced as it were with threatenynges and stripes, are drawen to the yoke quyte agaynst their willes. But this neuer happeneth in natures of mylde and good disposition: but rather the contrary: so as by le [...]ie and remembraūce of receaued be­nefites they are rather encouraged chearefully to doe their du­ties. The bountifulnesse of almighty God is not to be measu­red after the proportion of mans imagination. Neither ought we regarde how the wicked doe interprete thereof: but rather what Christ doth cōmaunde to be preached: how much the will of God will permitte: and what thynges true discipline will al­low of. I know that there hath bene euer great store, and that we shall neuer want to great a number of that sorte of people, which will wickedly abuse all thynges, that otherwise of their owne nature ought chiefly bee embraced. Neither is it reason to defraude vertuous personages of their right, for the abuses of euill and peruerse disposed persons. Yet such is the maner of of Osorius disputation, as though no man could be founde that would amende his life, or embrace godlynes at the preachyngs [Page] of the Gospell. And as though nothyng ensued therof els, but vnbrideled licentiousnesse and outragious boldnesse, to rushe and range headlong into all vnpunishable libertie and lust, the decay and ouerthrowe of all vertue, the subuersion and drow­nyng of all godly discipline, finally the very sinke and recepta­cle of all abhomination, whiche as is most falsely belyed vpon him, so I can not yet gesse, to what end it is alledged, vnlesse he meane thereby to persuade vs to abandone and banish the prea­chyng of the freé mercy of the Gospell, and so to slide backe a­gayne to old Iewishnesse with the Scribes and Phariseés,margThe marke of Osorius accusation cōsidered. and that in steéde of Christ & Paule, Moyses may rule ouer our con­sciences agayne, & Cicero may be preached in our Churches. Truely this is the marke that Osorius, or rather in Osorius the auncient enemy of mankyng seémeth to shoot at: who hauyng now spent all his shot and pouder, vnable at the last to enfeéble or resiste the glory of Christ any longer, practizeth by subtill engynes of crafty lyeng and slaunderous cauillations to vn­dermyne, and batter his doctrine, and to bryng this deuise to passe, findeth none so fitte an instrument as Osorius chief cham­pion of his garde. I haue now set out vnto theé (gentle Reader) the substaūce of Osorius Diuinitie, the grauitie of his doctrine, and the forme of his accusation. Whereby thou mayest perceaue the poysoned fistula, whereof he would empeache Luther. For this is his practize, to enduce men to beleue, that Luther doth teach extreme Desperation, boldnesse to sinne, and contempt of good workes. Now remaineth to discusse by the sequele of his discourse, what force of Argumentes and sleight of deuise he is furnished withall to mainteine his challenge.

Pag. 145. Two lyes vttered by Osorius. And therefore Paule doth not in any wise promise inhe­ritaunce of the kyngdome of heauen to those persons who rest them selues vpon the onely fayth of Luther, but vnto them which do exercize them selues in good workes, and do direct all their labour and trauaile, to set forth the glory of Christ through the whole course of their lyfe. &c. In one sentence two euident lyes: the one imagined agaynst Luther, ye other deuilishly deuised agaynst S. Paule. First of all wher­as hee burtheneth Luther to be the founder of this doctrine of Onely Fayth: Onely faith doth Iust [...] ­tie. it is as false, as there is no truth in Osori. mouth. [Page 111] In deéde Luther wrate much touchyng Fayth onely, but neither he alone, nor he the first: nor taught he other doctrine, then ma­ny famous Doctours of aūcient antiquitie did teache besides him: Who did not onely excell him farre in learnyng, but ly­ued many hundred yeares before he was borne. And namely a­mongest all other S. Paule: who through all his whole Epi­stles, doth with a wonderfull vehemencie harpe (as it were) al­wayes vpō this one string, That true righteousnes cōmeth to no man by the law, nor by the workes of the law, but through the fayth of Christ freely, without workes, and so without workes (as it hath often bene spoken before) that if any mā will take hold of workes, he is excludeth forthwith from Fayth. The testi­monies of most aunci­ent writers touchyng Onely Fayth.

But Osorius will say. That no mention is made any where in S. Paule of this exclusiue word Onely. Whereupon these Lutherans doe stand so much. In Letters perhaps, as you say Osorius or in sillables: But why prye we after sillables, when we hold the substaunce of the worde? or to what purpose striue we about wordes, when we are assured of the matter? First of all I suppose no man will deny, but that Paule doth denounce men to be Iustified by fayth. Now hee that doth tye righteous­nesse so fast to fayth, that he vtterly abandoneth the law, and all the workes of the law from Iustification, what doth he meane els thereby (though he professe it not in bare wordes) then that fayth is the chief, yea and onely foundation and builder of Iu­stification? vsing herein the very same rule, that Logicians doe vse in their Schooles, framyng a sounde & probable Argument from the proposition Exponent,An Argu­ment from the propo­sitiō expo­nent to the exclusiue. to the Exclusiue. Euen as if a man disputyng with you would proue by Argument. That Christ is the knowen and assured head of the Churche, would argue thus: that besides Christ, is none other head of the whole Church vpon earth. I beseéch you Syr, what meaneth he elles that argueth so, then that Christ onely ought to be acknowled­ged the head of the whole Church?

If it be so: that this word Onely, The voca­ble Onely. seéme so haynous to you, and others of your fraternitie, that it may not be admitted, as in a­ny respect tolerable, yet can ye not accuse Luther for the same, but you must withall endite guiltie of the same crime, the best and most approued Doctours and interpretours of elder age, [Page] who to expresse the meanyng of ye Apostles doctrine more liue­ly, haue not onely accustomed them selues sundry tymes to this word Onely in their Commentaries, but also deliuered the same to the posteritie to be vsually frequented: so that Luther now shalbe founde to coyne no new thyng herein, but rather make report of the studious carefulnesse, and carefull trauaile of the auncient Father in this behalfe.

And first of all we will begyn with Ambrose, vnto whom I pray you geue eare what he writeth herein: who as it were one of the same number whō Osorius doth reproch to be wholy bent to this doctrine of Luther, many hundred yeares before the name of Luther was knowen,Ambr. in 1. Cor. 1. hath written in this maner. God hath decreéd from eternitie (sayth hee) that the beleuyng man "shalbe Iustified by Fayth Onely. Whereby appeareth that this word Onely came not first from Luther but from Ambrose ra­ther. But bycause the truth shall not want substaunciall wit­nesse, and authoritie worthy the same witnesses, we will ad­ioyne to Ambrose the like testimony of Ierome, whose wordes if may obteyne any credite with Osorius will be of such force & efficacie for our present purpose, as that they will seéme to haue bene written for none other entent, then to cōuince this Iewish opinion of Osorius. Chrisost. in Epist. Paul. ad Galat. Cap. 3. And these are his wordes. The Iewes (sayth he) did affirme that he which trusted to Fayth Onely was to bee abhorred. But Paule on the contrary part doth auerre that whosoeuer trusteth in Fayth Onely is blessed &c. I beseéche "you tell me for your Myters sake, what can be spoken agaynst you more substaūcially? Let vs now conferre your saying with Chrisostome. You do adhorre them as Lutherans which doe rest them selues vpon Fayth Onely, bycause Paule doth promise the kyngdome of heauen, as you say, to them that worke good deédes: on the contrary part Chrisostome doth note them for Iewes especially, and accompteth them execrable which deny that men ought to trust to fayth, vsing this reason, bycause Paule (sayth hee) doth professe those men blessed that trust to Fayth Onely. Now chuse you therfore one of these two whiche ye will, whether we shall adiudge Chrisostome a Lutheran bycause he trusteth to Fayth Onely: or your selfe an execrable Iewe which set your Confidence vpon workes. Agayne, the [Page 112] same Chrisostome in other place, makyng a Commentary vp­on the Epistle to the Ephes. vseth the selfe same exclusiue word. By Fayth onely (sayth hee) shall Christ saue the offendours of the law. And bycause ye shall know his meanyng perfitely, not the offendours of the ceremoniall law, but of the same law namely, which was endited by the finger of God, in ye most sacred Ta­bles conteinyng the tenne Commaundementes.

Adde also hereunto the saying of the same Doctour in his fourth Homely vpon the Epistle to Timothe.Chrisosto. Homel. 4. in Timoth. ‘What thyng is so hard to beleue, as that such which are enemies, and sinners not Iustified by the law nor the workes of ye law, obteined forth­with to be placed in ye chiefest dignitie of merite through Faith Onely? &c. We haue recited a litle before the wordes of Basile vpon the Sermon De Humilit. Basil. in Homel. De Humilit. so that it neédeth no further re­hearsall, where in expresse speach, excludyng from mā the glory of his own righteousnes, he doth testifie that we are euery of vs Iustified by fayth onely in Christ Iesu.’ I might cite his owne wordes agayne vpon the 32. Psalme,Basil. in Psal. 32. as effectuall as the rest, where he describyng a perfect man, doth describe him to be not such a one as trusteth to his own good deédes, but such a one as reposeth all his whole confidence in the onely mercy of God.

In like maner also Theophilact.Theophil. in Epist. ad Rom. Cap. 3. Now doth ye Apostle (sayth he) declare euidently that very Fayth Onely is of power to Iu­stifie. And by any by he citeth the Prophet Abacuc as most cre­dible witnesse thereof. Briefly what shall we thinke that those auncient Fathers of the purer age and primitiue Churche dyd determine therof. Whenas Thomas Aquinas him selfe chief champion of this Sinagogue of Schoolemen, being otherwise in many thynges a very wrongfull and false interpretour. Yet vanguished herein with the manifest truth was enforced no len­ger to dissemble in this questiō of Fayth Onely. For in his thyrd lesson vpon the first Epistle to Timothe the 3. Chap. disputyng of the law, and concludyng at length that the wordes of Paule did not apperteine to the ceremoniall law but vnto the Morall law.Thom. A­quin. in. 1. Tim. 1. Lect. 3. There is not (sayth he) any hope of Iustificatiō but in Faith Onely, and arguyng agaynst Osorius of set purpose as it were, he citeth to this effect the testimonie of S. Paule, We suppose (sayth the Apostle) that man is Iustified by Fayth without the [Page] workes of the law. Rom. 3. Rom. 3. I am not yet come to this point [...] to discusse, how true this doctrine of Luther is touchyng Iustifi­cation by Fayth Onely. But whether this doctrine was erected first by Luther. And I trust I haue sufficiētly proued that it be­gan euen from the first age of the primitiue Church, and in the very dawnyng of the Gospell, and hath bene so deliuered ouer from the most auncient writers, and continued vnshaken, euen vntill our age: so that no man neédeth hereafter to geue credite to Osorius: makyng so shamelesse a lye vpon this doctrine, of Fayth Onely Iustifieng. And this much hetherto concernyng Luther.

I come now to that point wherein Osor. did likewise shame­full belye Paule. And what doe I heare now Osorius? Doth Paule (as you say) so promise the inheritaunce of the heauē ­ly kyngdome to them which worke good deedes? Pag. 145. and not to them also whiche rest vpon fayth onely? That is to say. Which haue reposed all their affiaunce in Iesu Christ onely? How shall we conceaue this? where finde you this? and how doe ye enduce vs to beleue this? out of the Epistle as I thinke to the Vtopēses. Looke there Reader at thy bestleysure: for Osorius was at good leysure to lye, but had no tyme at all to confirme his lye. But he alledgeth somewhat I suppose out of the Epi­stle to the Gallat. 5. Chapt.Osori. his Obiection framed out of the Epi­stle to the Galat. Cap. 5. That is to say that the Apostle doth threaten vtter banishement from the kyngdome of God, to the wicked and haynous sinners, which yeld them selues ouer wholy to all filthynesse of sinne. This truely is a true saying of the Apostle. Who denyeth it? But what doth Osorius in the meane space gather hereof? Forsooth bycause the horrible wickednesse of men doth exclude those per­sons from the kyngdome of God, which are endued with a false fayth onely, or none at all rather, hereof doth he con­clude his Argument by opposition of contraryes. That life euerlastyng is promised to the good and vertuous workes of men. The Aun­swere. O clownishe Coridon. But we are taught by the ru­les of Logicke that if a man will frame a good Argument of cō ­traries, hee must bee first well aduised, that those propositions which are appointed for contraries, must dissent and disagreé eche from other by equall and proportionable degreés. Wher­by [Page 113] it is cleare, that this is not a good consequent.

The silthy lyfe of the wicked doth exclude men from the inheritaunce of euerlastyng habitations.

Ergo, the honest and vpright lyfe doth obteine euerla­styng habitations.

And why is this no good Argument? bycause the propositi­ons [...]oe not agreé together in proportionable qualitie. The of­fences that are committed by vs, are of their own nature of all partes vnperfect & euill, & purchase to them selues most iust dā ­natiō. But on the contrary part, our good and ver [...]uous deédes (yea beyng most perfectly accōplished by vs) want yet alwayes somethyng to absolute perfection, and of their owne nature are such, as rather stand in neéde of the mercy of God, then may de­serue any prayse in the sight of men.Bernarde. To the same ende spake Bernarde very fittely. Our righteousnesse is nothyng els then" the indulgence of God. But here commes yet an other place of S. Paule out of the whiche this wylde wiffler may rushe vpon vs with his leaden dagger not altogether so blunte and rustye herhaps. The wordes of ye Apostle a Gods name, in the second to the Romaines.Rom. 2. Not the hearers of the law onely, but they that performe the law in their lyfe and conuersation, shalbe accompted righteous before the Iudgemēt seat of God. &c. To aūswere brief­ly I will gladly allow that, which this enemy to Paule doth ob­iect out of Paule, so that hee will not in like maner refuse the the whole discourse of the Apostle, and ioyne the first with the last. For the whole Argument of the Apostle in those iij. Chap. is concluded in this one Sillogisme.

All men shalbe rewarded with the cōmendatiō of true righ­teousnesse (God him selfe witnessing the same) whosoeuer be able with their owne workes to accomplish the whole law published in the tenne Tables,The summe of Paules disputation comprehē ­ded in one Syllogisme. and commaunded by God to be kept absolutely, as the law requireth.

But there is no liuyng creature whether he be a Iewe, and is ruled by the law of the tenne Tables, or a Gentile and ly­ueth after the law of nature, that is able to accomplishe the law as he ought to do.

Ergo, No man linyng is able to attaine the true commenda­tiō of his righteousnes, but in respect of his workes is of ne­cessitie [Page] subiect to the Iudgement and curse of God.

In this Argument doth the whole force & pithe of Paules disputatiō cōsiste, if I be not deceaued. In the Maior & first pro­position whereof, he setteth down before vs the seueritie of Gods Iudgement: In ye Minor or second proposition, he condemneth all men generally as guilty of sinne. By the conclusion he allu­reth and as it were driueth all men to Christ necessaryly.

By this Argument you may playnely perceaue vnlesse you wilbe wilfully blind like a want, how you haue piked out not one scrappe so much of all that you haue hitherto raked toge­ther, to salue the credite of your cause. Finally to make shorte with you. I referre you to note, marke, examine and search out all whatsoeuer the Churche doth acknowledge of the sayd Apo­stles Letters, Epistles, yea all his sentences. Ye shall finde in them all, so nothing agreable to this your Assertiō: That Paule should attribute righteousnes to workes, or promise be meanes therof possession of euerlastyng inheritaunce, as that his whole bent and endeuour may seéme to bee in no one thyng els so ear­nest as in this, wherein he trauaileth earnestly to persuade, that the promise of God poureth out vpō all them that beleue in Ie­su Christ most plentyfull and assured freédome: yea such a freé­dome, as is clearely deliuered from all entanglyng of workes. So that the same Apostle doth inferre his conclusion on this wise:Gallat. 3. If inheritaunce come by the law, then not of promise. And in an other place. If we bee made heyres through the law, then is our fayth made frustrate, and the promise of none effect. Rome. 4.Rom. 4. And agayne. If righteousnesse come by the lawe then did Christ suffer in vayne. Gal. 2.Galat. 2. And least that your lying spirite should with sinister interpretation wrest those sentences spoken of the law to the ceremoniall law, you may heare the Apostle there tre­ating of that law, which was geuē for offendours vntill the pro­mised seéde should come: which law should in steéde of a Schoole­maister lead vs (as it were) by the hād directly to Christ: which law did shut vp all vnder sinne, as well Iewes as Gentiles, that the promise might be geuen vnto the beleuers through fayth in Iesus Christ. All whiche titles of the law can not be construed to haue any apte agreément with the ceremonies of the Iewishe Sinagogue. And where are now those workes of the law (mai­ster [Page 114] Osorius) vnto whom Paule doth promise possession of the kyngdome, if you exclude those wherof Luther preacheth? Si­theace Paule him selfe doth so wisely and carefully not onely ex­clude all presumption of mans righteousnesse, from the inheri­taūce of the kingdome, but also rēder a reason wherfore he doth so. By what law (sayth he) by the lawe of workes. No ye may not beleue so Osorius. And therfore that ye may the better vnder­stand, how no matter of Confidence at all is left to the conside­ration of the workes of the law: But by the law of fayth (sayth S. Paule) the same lawe which consisteth in fayth and not in workes. That is to say, if we beleue the Paraphrast. The very same law which requireth nothyng but fayth.

Now therfore sithence these matters are so throughly deba­ted in the holy Scriptures,Right of inheritaūce is not promi­sed to wor­kes, as Paul affirmeth. & discouered manifestly by the holy Ghost: with what shamelesse face dare Osorius thrust those wor­kes in the doctrine of freé Iustification, whiche the Spirite of God doth so openly reiect? or with what impudencie dare he af­firme that Paule doth promise the right and title of inheritaūce to them whiche worke good deédes? Whereas the same Paule mainteynyng the challenge of fayth, and not of workes, pronoū ­ceth so expressely, That God doth accept his fayth for righteous­nesse, whiche doth not worke but beleueth on him that doth Iustifie the wicked. Which two sentences beyng so meérely opposite and contrary eche to other, I referre me to the Readers Iudgemēt whether Paule shalbe accōpted vnconstaunt,Osori. takē tardy. or Osorius a false Fabeler. But I heare a certeine gruntyng of this Pigge be­yng no lesse an enemy to the Crosse of Christ thē to Paule: who assoone as he heareth good workes to be banished from the effect of Iustification, doth straightway cite vs to the Consistorie, as though we did vtterly choake vp all care & studious endeuour to liue vertuously, and destroy all preceptes and rules of godly conuersation. And hereupon conceauyng a vayne errour in his idle braynes, he rageth and foameth at the mouth outragious­ly, not much vnlike to Aiax Sometyme: called [...].That is [...]o say a scour­ger. Who beyng swallowed vp of extreme frensie did most foolishly assayle and batter poore seély sheépe in steéde of Agamemnon and other noble Pieres of Greéce. But let vs once agayne geue eare to his gay Logicke, which being sometyme esteémed the Schoole­mystres [Page] of Inuētion, and displaying the truth, this Gentlemā hath made therof an Arte of lying and desceit: as thus.

Luther doth exclude all good workes from the cause of Iustification.

Ergo, Luther doth extinguishe all vertue, and abolishe all Morall and Ciuill actions.

Agayne. Luther doth make fayth onely beyng voyde of good workes the cause of Iustification.

Ergo, Luther doth require nothyng in Christians but Fayth Onely.

I aunswere that this is a Fallax and a Sophisticallye deri­ued from the proposition that is tearmed in Schooles Secun­dum quid, Fallacia a dicto secun­dū quid ad Simpliciter. to Simpliciter. Furthermore herein also hee doth be­wray his Sophisticall iugglyng, whereas by his liedger de mayne, he conueyeth away the state of the questiō which concer­neth the thynges onely, to the circumstaunce of the persons. For whereas we (agreéyng herein with Luther) do enquire ye thyng onely, which is the instrumentall Cause of our Iustification be­fore God, he in his aunswere doth describe vnto vs, what maner of life they ought to lead that are already Iustified. And bycause it is most requisite, that those which are Iustified by the freémer­cy of God through fayth, shall continually exercise thē selues in good workes, hereupon he concludeth. That Luthers proposi­tiō wherein he affirmeth that fayth onely doth knit vp the knot of our Iustification without all ayde of workes, is vtterly false. As though Luthers disputation concerned the actions, and en­deuours of them to whom righteousnesse is geuen, and not ra­ther of the cause of Iustification onely? or as though he did not as carefully require all faythfull persons to the dayly and cōti­nuall practize of godly lyfe, as any of all ye Byshops of Portin­gall doe. But if you be so vnskilfull Osorius as you seéme to be, you must learne, that it is one thyng to treate of the persons, whiche are made righteous, and other thyng of the Cause that doth make them righteous. And therfore this is a deceitfull and a friuolous Argument.

The possession of heauenly kyngdome is promised to them which doe good deedes.

Ergo, Onely fayth doth not Iustifie.

[Page 115]This conclusion is altogether false,Fallacia a non Causa, vt Causa. and the subteltie therof transposed frō that which is not the Cause, to ȳe which ought to be the Cause. In deéde ye inheritaunce of heauē is geuen to them which doe good deédes, but not in respect of those good deédes whiche they doe. But there is a certeine other thyng, whiche doth both Iustifie the persons, & the good workes of the persons also. That is to say, which doth make the persons and the wor­kes good also.Fayth doth iustifie both the persons and the workes. And therfore you do confounde those thyngs ve­ry vnskilfully, which ought of necessity haue bene distinguished. If you will make this the grounde of the question, to enquire of what behauiour those persons ought to be, whiche are called to the inheritage of euerlastyng lyfe. Luther will neuer deny, but that they ought to be such, as must be conuersaūt in this world godly, holy, & vnblameable, as much as may be possible: But if the state of the question tende to this end, to shew, what maner of thyng amongest all the good giftes of God, that one thyng is in vs, whiche doth procure our Iustification in the sight of God: Luther will boldly pronounce, that is Fayth Onely, yea and ap­proue ye same with inuincible testimonies of Gods scriptures. Neither will Osorius deny it without great reproch of errour. Afterwardes he proceédeth to his accustomed trade of lyeng.

Workes do follow fayth (as the Lutherans say) not by­cause they prepare a way to saluation (for they shall not of them selues be cyted to iudgement) but bycause they are deriued from faith as by a certeine way of procreation:Pag. 141. 146.for as the tree bryngeth forth fruite by force of nature, so doth fayth of necessity engender good workes which both pro­positions are false. Or els Osorius doth lye for that wanted to make vp the periode. But go to, let vs seé what those two false propositions be, which the Lutheranes do teach: The first is,A double lye made by Osorius. that workes do prepare no way for vs to obteine Saluatiō, by­cause of them selues they shall neuer be cited to Iudgemēt. The second is: That workes do follow fayth of necessitie none other­wise, then as fruite by force of nature is engendred of the treé: Upon these he hath geuen sentence that they are both false. But what reason alledgeth hee thereto? Forsooth bycause workes (sayth he) do either procure vnto vs Saluation, or Damnatiō vndoubtedly. And yet Osorius ceaseth not to keépe his old wōt [Page] to lye.Pag. 146. And hereof no mā ought to be in doubt, but that our deedes shalbe throughly examined apart by thē selues by Gods sharpe Iudgemēt. Yea? say you so Osorius? What shall they stād apart by thē selues? what? naked & vnclothed of all suc­cour of Christ? of the promise? & of mercy? Go to, & what shalbe come of fayth thē? Shall she stād [...] the meanes whiles with her finger in a hole,Workes are not exami­ned a part by thē sel­ues in gods Iudgemēt. Tit. 3. like a Mome in a corner vnprofitablye? whiles (mercy being banished) mēs deéds shal by thē selues be arrained before gods iudgemēt seate? If this be true, why do we not rase & scrape cleane out of all bookes yt saying of S. Paule? Not tho­rough the workes of righteousnesse which we haue done, but accor­ding to the greatnes of his mercy hath he saued vs: For if saluatiō be yet to be measured by the law of workes, & to be wayed after yt Standard of Iudgemēt, what place thē remayneth for fayth, or for mercy?Collos. 2. And by what meanes is that hādwrityng of the law blotted out by the Crosse and bloudsheadyng of Iesu Christ, if as yet we be holden fast yoaked vnder the curse of the law, and not deliue­red by grace? for what doth the law elles (if we dare beleue S. Paul)Rom. 3. but engēder wrath, and procure to be accursed? not bycause the law is of it selfe vneffectual, if it might be accomplished: but bycause we are all vnprofitable seruauntes vnable to performe the law. And for your part, doe ye thinke any mans workes to be of such valew, as beyng throughly examined after the vtter­most exaction of Gods Iustice, can either endure the immeasu­rable horrour of Gods wrathfull indignatiō, or by any meanes escape it?Dauid ter­rified with the terrour of the law. Surely Dauid that godly Kyng and great Prophet perceauyng that there was no mortall creature but was ouer­paised, and pressed downe with this heauy burden, and weight of Iudgement, beseécheth of God nothyng more earnestly, then that he would not way his seruaūt in the ballaūce of his Iudge­ment. And therfore in an other place he addeth: If thou examine our iniquities Lord, who abyde it? Of this mynde was he e­uen then, when he was a most trusty seruaunt of God. As for O­sorius I know not whose seruaunt he is, neither am I hereof a­ny thyng Inquisitiue: but what Lord soeuer he serue, I doe not a litle marueile at this, in what place of heauen this Gentlemā shall stand, whenas his wordes, deédes, yea all his thoughtes, when so many his lyes, slaūders, errours, blasphemies reproch­full [Page 116] speaches, furies, impieties (whiche as it were to discharge his gorge he hath belched out in his bookes without measure or end) shall come forth into brightnesse of Iudgement: and shalbe seuerely measured by the playne and streight squyer of Gods exact Iustice?

But let vs now ponder by the rules of the Scriptures the pretie reasons taken out of the same whereupon hee buil­deth his defence.Pag. 146. Osor. obie­ction in the behalfe of righteous­nes by wor­kes agaynst righteous­nes of faith.And first of all that sentence offereth it selfe vouched out of the mysticall Psalmes, where the holy Ghost doth witnesse, that God will render to euery man accordyng to his workes. This sentence I suppose is to be foūde in the 62. Psalme, for Osorius had no leysure to note the place. And I know not whether him selfe euer cited the same out of the very founteines them selues, or rather scraped it out of the mustie Ambry of Hosius, sinisterly applyed by him there, and so this Marchaunt would wrest the same crookedly to fitte his owne drift. After this S. Paule is vouched of a witnesse but no place noted,Rom. 2. where the Apostle doth affirme that all men generally and euery of vs particularely shalbe summoned to Iudge­ment: where euery one shall render accompt of the life that he hath lead, and receaue reward accordyngly. You shall finde this in the second Chap. to the Romaines. Hereunto is annexed an other testimony of the same Paule: All shall appeare and be arraygned before the Iudgement seate of Christ, that euery man may receaue reward according to the deserte of his life, and euery mans peculiar worke may bewayed and measured in the iust and vpright ballaūce of seuere Iudgement. Where is this Osorius?2. Cor. 5. Thou must seéke for it Reader. The place is extaūt in the second to the Corinth. the v. Chap. Here withall is also coupled that faying of Christ with like vncited place.Iohn. 5. They that haue done well (sayth he) shall come forth into resurrection of life, but they that haue done euill to the resurrection of death. He had many other places to this ef­fect besides these (saith he) if he lifted to prosecute euery of thē, but bycause they were beyond number, the mā beyng otherwise occupied in other studies pardy, seémeth well enough furnished with these few, whiche he hath piked out of Hosius (if I be not deceaued) and so thought good to rehearse no more.

Well now. Let vs seé what peéce of worke hee meaneth to [Page] frame out of these places of Scriptures so raked together, and whereunto to he bendeth his force. We shall all be summoned be­fore the Iudgement seate of Christ. This is true. Euery per­son shalbe clothed agayne with his own body. Those that haue done well shalbe crowned with immortall felicitie, and those that haue done euill shalbe throwen into euerlastyng torments. This is also vndoubtedly true. Agayne, the most iust and vp­right Iudge shalbe present, which shall reward euery one accor­dyng to his workes and deseruynges. I heare it and confesse [...]t to be true. For who is ignoraunt hereof? But what hereof at length? what will Osorius Logicke conclude vpon this?

Pag. 146. Ergo, not fayth but workes (sayth he) doe iustifie, which shall purchase for vs Saluation or Damnation. But this il­fauored shapen consequent which you haue most falsely deriued from true thynges and confessed, we doe vtterly deny vnto you: and not we onely, but the holy Scripture doth deny & cōdemne: all holy write doth reiect, the whole fayth of the Euangelistes, and doctrine of the Apostle, and all the promises of God with generall consent do crye out agaynst & hisse at it. If out of these places of Scripture you would haue framed an Argument a right, and accordyng to the true meanyng of the holy Ghost, ye should more aptly haue concluded in this wise. For as much therfore as there remayneth for euery of vs such a Iudgement, wherein euery one must yeld an accoumpt of his lyfe spēt, there is no cause why any mā should flatter and beguile him selfe with a vayne promise, that his wicked deédes or wordes shall escape vnpunished after this lyfe, but rather that euery man so behaue him selfe in this transitory world, that neither his good workes may appeare without fayth, nor his faith want testimony of good workes. Truely this conclusion, would haue bene preached to them (the number of whom is infinite, not onely amongest the Papistes) but also euen amongest the professours of the Gospel, who professing the name & fayth of Christ, liue notwithstandyng so dissolutely as they bryng the name and doctrine of Christ in­to open obloquy. And as though it sufficed them to professe Christes most sacred Religion in wordes onely, or as though there should be no Iudgement at all to come, make no accompt of their callyng, but are caryed headlong agaynst equitie & con­science [Page 117] into the gulfe of all licentious filthyues, to the great dis­honour of almightye God, and the manifest ruine of their owne Saluation. Surely I am of opinion if you had directed your conclusion in this maner agaynst those persons, and others lyke vnto them, which do so wilfully rash and throw them selues care­lessely into manifest abhominations without all respect of equi­tie and conscience, the consequent would more aptly haue bene applyed and of more force.

We shall all be summoned before the Iudgement seate of the hygh Iudge, where accoumpt shalbe made of the whole course of our lyfe.

Ergo, who that wilbe carefull for his Saluation, let him haue especial regard to the vttermost of his abilitie that his life be agreable to his professiō, and stand assured (as much as in him lyeth) in the testimony of a good conscience knit together with a true fayth voyde of all hypocrisie.

For otherwise we doe heare what the truth it selfe speaketh. And those that haue done euill shall goe into the resurrection of Iudgement. We shall likewise heare what Paule sayth,Collos. 3. Euen for these thynges (sayth he) the wrath of God doth come vpon the chil­dren of disobedience.

But to what purpose Osorius is this alledged agaynst the Iustification of fayth in them, who hauyng receaued the fayth of Christ, doe ioyne withall fruites of obedience as companions if not altogether pure and absolutely perfect, yet do yeld their en­deuour and abilitie at the least such as it is, after the small pro­portion and measure of their weakenesse. This trauaile & ende­uour though it be farre distaunt from that exact requireth perfe­ction of the law, is yet neuertheles accepted in place of most full and absolute Iustification in the sight of God, who doth supply the want of our workes with his owne freé Imputation, for the fayth sake in his sonne onely, whiche is not Imputed for righte­ousnesse to them that do worke, but to them that do beleue in him: For what although the horrible rebellion of the vngodly whiche walke not after the spirite but after the fleshe, doe procure vnto them selues most iust Iudgement of condēnation, yet shall this saying stand alwayes inuiolable notwithstandyng, and remayne assured for euer, The righteous shall liue by fayth: And he that be­leueth [Page] in me shall not dye for euer. Iohn. 11.Iohn. 11. But yet that promise (say you) doth abyde most euident and vnuanquishable, whiche doth promise resurrection of lyfe to them, that do liue godly and good deédes. Goe to, and what conclude ye hereof? Ergo, Faith onely doth not iustifie vs (say you).The Obie­ction cōfu­ted. Nay rather neither Faith One­ly, nor fayth any way els taken doth Iustifie a man, or auayle a­ny thyng at all to Iustification, if workes accordyng to your in­terpretation bee examined by them selues, by the waightes and ballaūces of Gods Iudgement, shall make full satisfaction. But ye conceaue amisse of the matter Osorius, and therfore your cō ­clusion is as ilfauoredly shapen. Doe ye expect a reason? For­sooth bycause you fayle in the rule Topicke: whereby we are taught to apply true proper Causes,Fallacia a nō causa, vt causa to true effectes. And ther­fore your consequent is faultie, and a Sophisticall cautell de­riued from that which is not the cause, to that which is the pro­per cause. Let vs discusse the very order of your wordes. And they which haue done well: What they? shall come, (sayth he) into the resurrection of life. &c. First of all, ye perceaue that the wor­kes alone are not treated of simply, but the persons that doe the workes. Surely in Iudiciall Courtes is no small obseruation vsed chiefly of the difference betwixt the circumstaunces of the Causes, and circumstaunces of the persons. As when a Ser­uaunt shall commit the very same which a Sonne shall doe, al­though the factes be of all partes equall, yet I suppose that the Sonne shall finde more mercy in his cause, of his Father being Iudge, then the seruaunt of his Maister being Iudge, especial­ly where the Iudge is not constreined to yeld Iudgement by a­ny coaction, or expresse rigour of Statute and Law, but is at libertie to vse consideration of the trespasse, accordyng to his own discretion. Euē so, neither do I thinke it all one, if a Chri­stian mā (I say a true Christian man) shall mainteine his cause before Christ his Redeémer, as if a Turke or Infidell should pleade before the same Christ his Iudge. And why? bycause the one is very much holpen by yeldyng his fayth to the promise, the other hath none other ayde to trust vnto, but ye rigour of the law. But let vs proceéde, that we may come at the last to the pricke that is shot at. I vnderstand therfore by these wordes of Christ, what shalbe betyed of thē at ye last that haue liued well, [Page 118] that vnto those that are founde such in the Iudgement shall ge­uen possession of eternall life.The words of Christ expounded. I heare this well. But I would fayne know at the length, what the Cause should be, why this mercyfull Iudge will vouchsafe to reward those workemen so highly? For our controuersie consisteth not in this point, that re­ward is geuen, but in this, for what Cause reward is geuen:The person accepted not for the workes sake but the workes for the persons sake. Whether of any desert, or without all desert? whether for the proper worthynesse of the workes them selues whiche you call good, or rather for the Fayth of the person, from whence those workes doe obteine both to bee called good, and to bee esteémed for good?

You will say that the spring of this together working grace floweth vnto vs out of the founteine of Fayth,An Obie­ction. from whence all abilitie to do good deédes is so aboundant within vs, whiche be­ing receiued: afterwardes through the bountifulnesse of Christ, fruites of holy workes do issue out from vs, which do make vs worthy to be Iustified, and to place vs in the possession of euer­lastyng kyngdome. I do aunswere,The Aun­swere. that ye do neither speake as much as ye ought, nor that altogether true, that ye doe speake. For albeit we confesse, that all the good whatsoeuer we do, pro­ceédeth from the bountyfull gift of God: yet this is farre wyde from the marke of our controuersie now in hand, neither is this matter in handlyng now, to know from whence the fruites of good workes do spryng: but after they are come vnto vs, ye que­stion is, how much they do auayle vnto vs: whether they them selues through their owne worthynesse do worke our Iustifica­tion before God? or whether they stand destitute of any other ayde, whereby they may be Iustified them selues? whether doe ye thinke workes of their owne nature so effectuall, as to bee a­ble alone to endure the heauye burden of Gods Iudgement, or that the operation of the Fayth of the beleuer, rather thē of the worke, doth present the persons together with their workes, to Gods freé Imputation, and so accomplish Iustification?

But I doe heare a continuall ianglyng of this Portingall Coockoe chatteryng alwayes one maner of laye in myne eares, Pag. 146. The words of Christ not wel vn­derstoode but croo­kedly wre­sted by O­sorius. Not fayth but workes (sayth hee) wayed in the ballaūce of Gods Iudgement do purchase either Saluation or Damna­tiō vnto vs. Where finde you this? Out of the wordes of Christ: [Page] And those that haue done well, shall goe into euerlasting life: but those that haue done euill into euerlasting destruction. I aūswere, it is most true that the Lord speaketh, but most vntrue that O­sorius concludeth hereof. Christ comprehendyng the fruites of workes together with the whole treé, and ioynyng the Causes together with the persons, doth encourage them with the hope of eternall lyfe, which do yeld their endeuour manfully to their vtterest abilitie to performe ye rule of the Gospell, not defiuyng what the proportion of their workes doe deserue, but declaryng how bountyfully and manifoldly he will require their labours, whiche haue suffered any kynde of afflictiō for his names sake. Osorius framyng hereof meérely false propositions doth with his crafty conueyaunce wrest & force those thynges to the wor­kes them selues onely, whiche the Lord doth apply to his fayth­full that liue vertuously, and so at length turnyng awry, that is to say:Osor. fallax a Concreto ad Abstra­ctum. From the Concreto to the Abstractum (to vse here the termes of Sophistry) & seueryng the persons from the thyngs doth conclude disorderly after this maner of false conclusion.

Faythfull and godly Christians liuing vertuously shal­be rewarded with eternall lyfe.

Ergo, Good workes by them selues wayed in the bal­launce of Gods Iudgement doe deserue eternall lyfe.

What cā be more falsely imagined or more foolishly cōcluded thē this lye? In deéde workes are the fruites of Christiā fayth, and tokens, not causes of Saluation. Euen as a treé that brin­geth forth fruites, if the treé be good, it appeareth by the fruites, not bycause the fruite maketh the treé good, but bycause the treé maketh the fruite good. In lyke maner the deédes of the godly, haue nothyng in them selues that may enable them to stand vp­right in Iudgemēt. But if they finde any grace or reward, the same may not bee ascribed to their owne merite,Mercy for­geueth our ill deedes. Imputation acknowledgeth our well do­ynges for good. but partly to Mercy, partly to Imputatiō, through the sonne that is the Re­deémer: to Mercy, I say, which doth forgeue our euill deédes, to Imputation whiche accepteth our good workes though they be of them selues neuer so vnperfect, as though they were per­fect, and doth reward them with a crowne of glory: so that the glory hereof is not now to be ascribed to men but to God, not to righteousnesse but to grace, not to workes, but to fayth, not to [Page 119] Iudgement but to mercy. For confirmation wherof, if we seéke for authoritie, who may require any one a more faythfull wit­nesse, or of more approued authority then the Apostle? who be­yng sent vnto the Gentiles as to his proper & peculiar charge, what doth he preach vnto thē? Not by the workes which we haue done (sayth he) but for his mercy sake he hath saued vs: If wordes may obteine any credite with you, what can bee spoken more playnely? if the authoritie of the witnesse may preuayle, what more assured testimony can be sought for, then Paule, that spea­keth him selfe?

But Osorius lacketh not a shift of descante here,An other Obiectiō of Osorius. thinkyng thereby to craze the force of veritie. For whereas Paule affir­meth that we are saued for his mercyes sake, he doth interprete this saying to be verified after this sort. Bycause mercy doth endue vs with abilitie and power to worke, that hereof those godly deedes of pietie doe ensue, In what wise Osori. doth as­cribe Salua­tiō of Gods mercy. which may make vs vs righteous before God, and that hereof likewise it com­meth to passe, that all whatsoeuer true righteousnesse ap­peareth in vs, doth proceede from the mercy and bountie of God, and not from our own nature. Such is the doctrine that he scattereth abroad euery where in these bookes, & in those other also, which he hath entituled De Iustitia, followyng here­in (as it seémeth) his forerunner Hosius, Hosius. who maskyng in the like maze, doth affirme that life euerlastyng is geuē to men so farreforth through the grace of God, as it is deliuered to mens merites, which do issue out of the mercy and grace of God. But Augustine will helpe to vnlose this knot easely: so will also all ye most famous and auncient interpretours of the Greeke & La­tine Churche, who altogether with one voyce doe so ascribe all our saluatiō to the mercy of God, not that which is obteined by doyng good deédes in this corruptible body, but which consisteth rather in remission of sinnes, and which after this lyfe will sup­porte the neédy and naked weakenesse of our workes (be they ne­uer so feéble) agaynst the importable burden of the rigour of the law. Of which mercy Augustine maketh mention in this wise.August. de temp. 49. Stand not in Iudgemēt with me O Lord, exactyng all thyngs which thou hast cōmaunded me: ‘For if thou enter into Iudge­ment with me thou shalt finde me guiltie. Therefore I haue [Page] more neéde of thy mercy then thy manifest Iudgement. Agayne in an other place treatyng of the last Iudgemēt. He shall crown theé (sayth he) in mercy & compassiōs. This shall come to passe at that dreadfull day, whenas the righteous kyng shall sit vpon his throne, to render to euery mā according to his workes, who then can glory that hee hath a pure and vndefiled hart? or dare boast that he is without sinne? And therfore it was necessary to make mention there of the compassions and mercy of the Lord. &c.August. de Spirit. & Li­ter. Cap. 33. And agayne somewhat more playnly, where hee describeth what maner of mercy shalbe in the day of Iudgement, he doth set it forth in this wise. This is called mercy (sayth he) bycause God doth not regarde our deseruynges, but his owne goodnesse that thereby forgeuyng vs all our sinnes, he might promise vs euerlasting life.’ Hereunto also may be annexed the testimonie of Basile no lesse worthy to bee noted, touchyng the mercyfull Iudgement of God towardes his chosen people, you shal heare his owne wordes as they are. ‘For if the Iudgement of GOD were so rigorous and precise in it selfe,Basil. in Psal. 32. to render vnto vs after our worthynesse accordyng to the workes that we haue done, what hope were then, or what man should bee saued? But now he loueth both mercy and Iudgement, that is matchyng mercy equall with him selfe, to beare chief rule in the regall seate of Iudgement, and so bryngeth forth euery man to Iudgement. That is to say, if Gods Iudgement should proceéde of it selfe precisely and exactly, requityng euery of vs accordyng to the deseruynges of our deédes that we haue done, what hope should remayne for vs? or what one person of mankynde should be sa­ued? But now God loueth mercy and Iudgement: And reser­uyng mercy for him selfe, he hath placed her before the Royall Throne of Iustice, as chief gouernesse and so citeth euery man vnto Iudgement.’ You seé here mention made of mercy and the grace of God, not that grace onely that doth engender in vs good workes, but the same rather whiche doth forgeue sinnes and Sinners through the bloud of his sonne,Ephes. 1. In what thyng our redemption chiefly con­sisteth. in which forgeue­nesse consisteth our whole redemption, accordyng to the testi­monie of Paule the Apostle: In whom (sayth hee) we obteine re­demption through his bloud, and remission of sinnes through the riches of his grace. &c.

[Page 120]If I neéded in this matter to vse a multitude of witnesses, rather thē substaūce of authority, it were no hard matter for me to cite for defence of ye Cause, infinite testimonies out of Am­brose, Ierome, Gregory, Bernarde, & others. But what neéde I protract the time of the Reader, in vouching a nūber, whenas it is euident enough already (I suppose) by those sayinges spo­ken before: that our saluation can by no meanes obteine place, in Iudgement without the mercy of God, and his freé Imputa­tion. The first wherof our Sinnes neéde to be couered withall, the next euen our best workes shall want of necessitie. Whereu­pon that saying of Bernarde, wherof we made mention before, as diuers other Sentences of his to the same effect, bee very pitthye: Not to sinne (sayth he) is the righteousnesse of God,Remission. the righteousnesse of man is the freé pardon of God.Bernard. Serm. 23. in Cant. ‘Of which par­don Augustine very litle differring from Bernarde maketh re­hearsall in these wordes. Thou hast done no good thyng (sayth hee) yet thy sinnes are forgeuen theé:August. in prima quin­quagena in Prolog. hitherto thou hearest the worke of mercy: Marke now for Imputation. Thy workes are examined, and they are founde all faultie: and forthwith conclu­ding addeth.Psal. 31. Imputatiō. If God should require these workes after their de­seruynges, he should surely condemne theé. But God doth not geue theé due punishement, but graunteth vndeserued mercy.’ Thus much Augustine. Euen as though hee would say. Our best deédes seéme in none other respect good, then as farreforth as they be vpholden by his pardon and freé Imputation: who if otherwise should searche all our workes euen to the quicke, af­ter the most precise rule of his seuere Iustice, hee should surely finde nothing sounde in our best deédes, many things lothsome,The defeéco of mercy doth not abolish Iu­stice. and wicked in our workes, all thyngs in vs altogether corrupt and defiled. Wherein we do not so aduaunce the mercy of God in his Iudgement, as though we would haue all the partes of his Iustice excluded from thence. But we doe mitigate rather ye frettyng wounde of his Iustice (which you do so stiffely main­teyne with your speache) applyeng thereunto the sweéte and wholesome playster of his mercyfull Imputatiō. For who cā be ignoraūt hereof, that God shall Iudge the quicke and the dead with Iustice and equitie? And who on the other part is so blind, that can not discerne this to bee most false, that Osorius main­teineth? [Page] who rakyng all thynges to amplifie the estimation of pure righteousnes, doth so stoutly defende this pointe: That all our wordes & workes are of such force and value in this Iudge­ment, that of their owne nature they are auaylable towardes ye purchase of the euerlastyng inheritaunce, or els do procure vs a ready downefall to euerlastyng destruction: In deede he spea­keth truly in respect of the condemnation of the vnfaithful, and vnbeleuyng persons: and of them which beyng estraunged from fayth, haue not acknowledged Christ in this world: and of such as abusing their fayth, haue despised Christ: and of them also, which seékyng to establish their own righteousnesse, would not submit thē selues to the righteousnesse of Christ. Neither is it any maruell, if God doe execute his Iustice somewhat more sharpely agaynst those persōs, whenas their deédes beyng foūde guilty, haue no ayde to pleade for them, that may stand them in steéde besides Christ.Ill workes whom they do condēne and whom not. Iohn. 3. For Christ is nothyng elles but a seuere Iudge to them that are not within the fortresse of Fayth, as in effect the Gospell doth denounce vnto vs. Who so hath not bele­ued the Sonne, the wrath of God dwelleth vpon him. Iohn. 3. But the matter goeth farre otherwise with them that are engraffed in Christ by faith, of whom we read in Iohn the same Chap. He that beleueth the sonne hath euerlasting life. How christ is called a Iudge, how a Redemer. Wherfore as Christ appeareth not a Redeémer, but rather a Iudge to them, which without the Castle of Fayth, seéke to be rescued by the law: so on the contrary part: Those that shrowde them selues wholy vn­der the assured Target of fayth, and protection of the Sonne of God, shall not finde Christ a rigorous Iudge, but a mercyfull Redeémer. The whiche sentence he doth verifie him selfe by his own testimony and promise, where prophecyeng of the tyme of his commyng of Iudgement.Luce. 21. When you shall see the beginning of those thinges (sayth Christ) looke vp, and lift vp your heades: and so proceédyng yeldeth therof this Reason: Bycause then your re­demption draweth nye: Marke well Osorius he doth not say your Iudgement, but your redemption draweth nye. And why did he choose to put his Disciples in remembraūce of their redemp­tion rather, keépyng the name of Iudgement in silence? Ueryly bycause there is so no Iudgemēt of condēnation to them, which are of the fayth of Christ Iesu, as thereis no redēptiō for them, [Page 121] who without the fayth of Christ Iesu, do wholy yeld their ser­uice to the world and to the fleshe. Whereupon we may heare him agayne debatyng the same matter touching the freédome of Iudgement in the v. of Iohn.Iohn. 5. Whosoeuer heareth my voyce, and beleeueth on him whiche hath sent me, shall not come into Iudge­ment, but hath already passed from death to life. And in an other place turnyng his speache to his Disciples, whenas hee could promise them no reward of more excellēcie:Luke. 22. And you (sayth he) shall sit together vpō seates Iudging the xy tribes of Israell. Luke. 22. What neéde I rehearse Paule writyng to the Corinthians?1. Cor. 1. Doe ye not know (sayth he) that the Saintes shall Iudge the world? And raysing vs vp beyond the reache of earthly thynges to the excellencie of Aungels. Doe ye not know that we shall Iudge the Aungels? 1. Cor. 1. What then (will you say) shall we not all come into Iudgement? shall we not all be arraigned before the Royall seate of the Maistie?Gods iudgement two fold accor­ding to Au­gust. De Consens. E­uang. Lib. 2. Cap. 30. Yes Osori. we shall all come to Iudgement: But Augustine will discouer vnto you a Di­stinctiō of this Iudgement. That the one part therof shall con­cerne Damnation, the other sequestration, whereby the Goates shalbe seuered from the Lambes, but the Lambes not condem­ned with the Goates. And therfore I do firmely beleue, that we shall come all vnto Iudgement: but my assured hope and Affi­aunce is, that the elect shall not come into Iudgement of condē ­nation. I know that all shall yeld accoumpt, but this Awdite shalbe so easie, and so voyde of all feare vnto them which are en­graffed into Christ, as on ye other side it will be most rigorous & dreadfull to them, which shall come forth into Iudgement with out Christ, and the weddyng Garment. And why so? veryly, by­cause whom Fayth doth clothe with her Roabes, the same doth Christ so shield, defende, and saue harmelesse with his innocen­tie, agaynst all bytternes of tempestuous Iudgemēt, as though they should neuer appeare before any Iudge at all, but passe presently from death to life.

And this truely, euen this same innocencie of Christ is that pure righteousnesse of Christians,The Inno­cencie of Christ is the righte­ousnesse of Christians. which the Father doth none otherwise Impute vnto vs that beleue in his Sonne, then he did once Impute to the same his Sonne all our sinnes, when he suffred his Passion for sinners. And he (sayth the Prophet) did [Page] beare vpon his backe all our Iniquities. Gods Imputation in re­spect of Christ, and in respect of vs. Esay. 53. On the con­trary part such as refusing this ankerhold of Christ, and tru­styng to their own tackle, will hazard the sauetie of their soules before the seuere Iustice of God, otherwise then clothed with this weddyng Garment, must neédes suffer shipwracke of their soules, voyde of all hope to recouer the hauen of perfect felicitie: & so beyng turned ouer to the furniture of their own store, must neédes be bulged through, and ouerpa [...]sed at [...]ast with the buroē of Iustice, whiche they could neuer reach vnto in this life. And hereof ariseth all that difference betwixt them which are ioyned to Christ, and the rascall rable of Infidels. For although in this iust Iudgement, a reckonyng shalbe made of all the deédes of all men before God, and likewise reward decreede vndoubtedly ac­cordyng to euery mās deseruynges: yet the order of this Iudge­ment shall farre otherwise proceéde with the faythfull, thē with the Reprobate.Of the rec­konyng to be made in the last Iudgement. For such as will challenge their Saluation as due vnto them, for obseruyng the righteousnesse of the law, tho­rough their owne workes, and not through fayth and Imputatiō of Christ: Those mē surely shalbe rewarded according to the de­serte of their own workes, vnder this cōdition: That whosoeuer haue accomplished the rule of the law, with that absolute perfe­ction that he ought to haue done, shall lyue accordyng to the de­creé of the law. But if he haue fayled one tittle in performaance, lesse then the law required: what may he hope for els, then accor­dyng to the sentence of the law (which holdeth all men fast chay­ned vnder euerlasting malediction, that haue not continually in all the course of their lyfe perseuered vpright and vnblameable of all partes therof) That no blemish, be it neuer so litle, may be founde in the breache of any one iote of the law, whiche may procure most heauy matter of vtter condēnation vnto him. And euen here most manifestly appeareth the Iustice of God: for hee that of him selfe is altogether vnable to atteyne perfect righte­ousnesse, and will likewise wilfully refuse ye same, beyng offered vnto him by another:The diuer­sitie of thē which shal rēder an ac­compt is di­stinguished if he suffer punishement for his owne vn­righteousnes, hath no cause to accuse ye law of iniustice, but must referre his plague to his owne infidelitie. On the other part. Those that departing hence with fayth & repentaunce (I speake here of sinners which are truly penitent in Christ) do so prepare [Page 122] them selues, as men reposing all their whole righteousnesse in the onely innocency of Christ, and not in their workes, shall nei­ther bee impeached for their sinnes, whiche Christ hath healed with his woundes: And yet if they haue done any good worke, they shalbe rewarded with ye inheritaūce of eternall lyfe, not for the worthynesse of the workes, but bycause of his freé Imputa­tion, he doth vouchsafe those weake workes, bee they neuer so barren and naked, worthy to obteine the promised inheritaunce: not bycause they haue deserued it, but bycause hym selfe hath promised it.

I suppose these manifold and manifest sayings hitherto are sufficient enough to declare the truth,In Osorius writynges order wan­teth, and in distingui­shyng thin­ges Me­thode. and discouer the falshoode of all this quarell of Osorius: nay rather to shewe how many sondry faultes he hath couched vp into one cōclusion: how many errours he hath clouted together, and into how many absurdi­ties hee hath tombled him selfe headlong. For endeuouryng to proue agaynst the Lutheranes: That there is none other way to attayne true righteousnesse, then by liuyng vertuously: he seé­meth to pretende a colour of a certeine few sentences pyked out of the Scripture, such, as him selfe scarsely vnderstandeth, or hath ilfauouredly disguised to make a shewe in his maske: and makyng no distinction meane whiles betwixte the persons and the thynges, disposing nothyng in his due place and order, but choppyng and shufflyng all thynges together in a certeine con­fused hotchpotte (as it were in the old vnformed Chaos) though they be as farre distaūt as heauen and earth, iumbleth them to­gether without all discretion, confoundyng the law wt the Gos­pell: the persons with the thynges them selues: righteousnesse of fayth with righteousnesse of workes: neither noteth which are the naturall causes of the thynges, nor which are the proper ef­fectes of the causes: but disguiseth the causes vnder title of ef­fectes, and effectes likewise misturneth into causes. For where as workes are properly the effectes of fayth, neither are of their owne nature good, nor can be esteémed for good, but through Iu­stification goyng before, yet our Osorius frameth his discourse, as though the chief and especiall bullwarke of all our righteous­nesse were built wholy vpō workes.Accordyng to workes. For the works sake. And that which he readeth in Scriptures shall come to passe accordyng to workes, ye same [Page] forthwith he cōcludeth to be done for the workes sake, as though heauen were now a due reward for our trauaile and labours: & not the gift of grace: & as though they do worke, might clayme it as due dette for their workes sake, and were not rather pro­mised to them that beleue for ye Sonne the Redeémer his sake. But we haue discoursed enough vpon this matter: it remaineth that we pursue the tracke of the rest of his disputation. And by­cause we haue spoken sufficiently (as I suppose) of the one of those two propositions, which he calleth false, and whereof hee hath accused Luther to be the Authour: Let vs now fyritte out the other, and seé what vermine it is, and how it is able to de­fende it selfe.

First of all, whereas Luther hath noted this saying, to be ye chief piller and foundation of Christian doctrine: That no man ought to ascribe the meane of his Saluation, in any thyng els then in the onely fayth of Iesus Christ: afterwardes he proceé­deth to the other pointe: That ye fruites of good workes are en­gendred, and doe issue from this fayth, euen as the fruite is en­gendred of the roote of a good treé: and that workes doe follow fayth of necessitie, none otherwise, then as a fertile treé budding out first his greéne leafe, and beautifull blossome, doth at the last by course and force of nature, bryng forth fruite. The sentence Osorius iudgeth to be haynous & in no wise sufferable: and yet in the meane tyme denyeth not, but that good workes do follow fayth.Osori. doth deny that good works to followe Luthers fayth. But he cryeth out with an opē mouth this to be false that good workes doe follow Luthers fayth. But it is well yet that we heare in the meane whiles, that good workes are en­gendred out of Fayth, but in no wise out of Luthers fayth. I would therfore learne of you Osorius out of whose Fayth good workes doe proceéde.

Pag. 146. Forsooth my fayth (sayth hee) is not Luthers nor Had­dones fayth if he bee Luther Scholer herein. Come hither Osorius a good fellowshyp that I may stroke ye smoath shaue­lyng of yours a whiles. Truely I can not choose but all to be­loue you, and beleue you also when you speake the truth, for I I suppose that the Oracle of Apollo can bee no more true then this Oracle is, that workes doe follow your fayth as you say. They follow in deéde apasse in great clusters. And bycause ye [Page 123] vouchsafe not your selfe to expresse vnto vs what kynde of wor­kes those are,What ma­ner of wor­kes doe fol­low Osori. fayth. it shall not greéue me to do so much in your behalf. And yet what neéde I make proclamatiō of them? whenas your owne bookes do so aboundauntly and manifestly vtter the same, as that no man can be so blynd or deafe, but he must neédes seé & heare them. What? art thou desirous (Reader) to haue descri­bed vnto theé as it were in a painted Table, what blossoms this pregnaunt fayth of Osorius doth shewe forth? Peruse his wri­tynges and his bookes, especially those Inuectiues compiled a­gaynst Luther, & Haddon. Was euer man in this world, that hath heaped together so many lyes vpon lyes: hath compacted so many blasphemies and slaunders? hath vttered so many er­rours? hath euer by writyng or practize imagined, expressed, & vomited out so many tauntes, reproches, madde wordes, vani­ties, cursinges, bragges, follies, and Thrasonicall crakes? so much rascallike scoldyng mockes doggishe snarllyng as this beast hath brayed out in this one booke? wherein you shall neuer finde Luther once named, but coupled together with some title of reproche, as outragious, frāticke, or madde: If those trimme monuments of your gay workes, do cleaue as fast to your day­ly conuersatiō, as they are ryfe to be founde euery where in your bookes, and the testimonies of your witte: I Appeale to the iud­gement of the indifferent Reader, what consideration may bee had of that your fayth, which whelpeth out vnto vs such a mon­struous lytter. For if a good [...]growyng vpon a sounde roote, do not commonly bryng forth fruites vnlike to the stocke: And if children doe vsually represent their progenitours in byrth, in some lineamentes of personage, resemblaunce of maners, or o­ther applyable feature of Nature (for the Gleade, as the Pro­uerbe is, doth not hatche forth Piggeons) it must surely follow of necessitie, that either your workes whereof you vaunt your crest, do by no meanes follow your fayth: or els we must neédes adiudge you a man scarse of any fayth at all. And therefore to aunswere briefly to those glorious vauntes, whiche you make touching workes that follow your faith, and not Luthers fayth: if you meane those workes which I haue rehearsed, I will glad­ly agreé with you: but if your meanyng tende to good workes, truly your owne writynges will without any other witnes con­demne [Page] you for a great lyar. But go ye to. Let vs allow this vn­to you, which you require to be graunted, that is to say. That your Fayth doth necessaryly drawe after it good deédes, as the Southeast wynde doth draw along the cloudes: yet what should be thestoppell in the meane space, to barre good deédes from Lu­thers or Haddones fayth more then from yours?

Pag. 146. Bycause (say you) fayth commeth by hearyng, and hea­ryng by the word of God. I do acknowledge this a very Ca­tholicke maxime, & a sentence meéte for a true Christian. But I wonder what monster these moūtaines will bryng forth at the last. But Luthers fayth commeth not of hearyng, for hee doth not heare the wordes of Christ. What wordes I pray you? and where are they writtē? Forsooth where Christ (as he sayth) doth promise euerlastyng life to them that Repente: and doth man ace hell and destruction to them that are im­penitent. Where is this? Seéke it Reader.

Luthers fayth yel­deth no good wor­kes accor­dyng to O­sorius. Pag. 146.And bycause Luther doth not heare those wordes of Christ.

Ergo, his fayth commeth not by hearyng, and therefore yel­deth no fruites of good workes, but starke bryers & bram­bles onely.

Go to. And what doth your fayth in ye meane space Osorius? Let vs heare what grapes it produceth. But my fayth (sayth he) that is to say, the faith of holy Church, whenas it cōsen­teth to the wordes of Christ: And whenas also Christ hym selfe doth threaten destruction to the impenitent sinners, this fayth therfore wherewith I doe beleue these wordes of Christ causeth me to be repentaunt. What do I heare Oso­rus? why? what neédeth repentaunce at all, where so manifold, & so great treasures of good workes doe flow so plētyfully out of that riuer of fayth, which workes do prepare an assured way to perfect righteousnes? For what mā is he that dare presume to challenge ye name of a righteous man, in respect of his vnrigh­teous dealyng? or who is he yt repenteth him of his good deédes? But let vs marke the sequele of this tale.

Ibidem. Agayne whenas the same Lord doth say: you shall bee my frendes if ye do the thynges that I commaunde you. If I do geue credite to Christes wordes, The fayth and workes of Osorius. and doe earnestly de­sire to be receaued vnto his frēdshyp. I will employ all the [Page 124] power of my soule to fulfill all his Commaundements. &c. Truely I do commēde you Osorius, and accompt you an happy man also, if you performe in deédes, that ye protest in wordes. But what neédeth then to make any playster of Repentaunce, for as much as you do accomplish all Gods commaundementes as you say? No, but I doe apply all the power of my soule that I may accomplish them. How so (I pray you) Bycause I doe beleue Christes wordes, and therfore yeld my carefull endeuour that if I doe any thyng amisse, I may purge the same with Repentaunce, and that I may obserue all his good preceptes to the vtterest of my abilitie. Behold now Reader the platforme of Osorius his fayth: Whiche by succeé­dyng encreasinges of dayly buddyng blossomes yeldeth conti­nuall fruites of most beautifull and holy workes, cōteined in the sappe, braunches, and barke of that pleasaūt stocke. How com­meth this to passe? First of all: bycause hee is endued with that fayth, which fayth is proper and peculiar to holy Church: Thē bycause he doth beleue the wordes of Christ: Furthermore by­cause he doth prepare him selfe through this fayth, that he may clense his sinnes with Repentaunce (and what shall become in the meane space of righteousnesse of workes in the Confession of sinnes) Lastly bycause he doth addresse the conuersation of his lyfe, as neare as he can, after the line and leuell of Christes ru­les. Go to. Let vs compare this platforme of his fayth, and the fayth of Luther and Haddon together. Osorius a Gods name doth credite Christes wordes: Luther and Haddon distrusting Christ, hath geuen no credit at all to the wordes of Christ. O­sorius beleuyng Christ, and esteémyng aright of his wordes, gaue him selfe to Repentaunce, as became a good Christian mā, and so enured him selfe thereunto, that hee abhorreth his owne wickednesse, and is become obedient to Christes Commaunde­mentes. These iollyfellowes haue raunged all their lyfe long in such carelesse securitie, as men neuer touched with any re­morse of Repentaūce, or regarde of amendemēt of lyfe after the doctrine of Christ. Auaunte therefore cursed Luther and his cōpanion Haddon both byrdes of an ill feather, with this your vnbelief, which could neuer be enduced to haue a will neither to beleue Christ, nor to come to Repentaunce, nor yet to accom­plish [Page] Christes preceptes. You might at least haue taken exam­ple by Osorius patterne, and thereby haue learned fayth, and bytternesse of Repentaunce.

A shewe of Osorius fayth.But goe to now. Bycause Osorius doth triumph so glori­ously of the credite that hee geueth to Christes wordes: Let vs discusse the truth of his speach: and search out the difference be­twixt this his fayth, whereof he maketh such bragges, and Lu­thers Fayth. Take an example. The wordes of Christ in the Gospell are these:Iohn. 6. This is the will of my Father that hath sent me, that euery one that seeth the Sonne, and beleeueth in him shall haue euerlastyng lyfe, and I will rayse him vp in the last day. Iohn. 6. And immediatly after ye same Christ redoubleth ye same wordes agayne, and agayne, thereby to emprinte thē more deépely, into their mindes. Veryly, veryly, I say vnto you, he that beleueth in me, hath euerlasting lyfe. Iohn. 1. 3. Agayne Iohn the first. To as many as belee­ued in him, he gaue power to be made the Sonnes of God. And by & by in the 3. Chapter. He that beleeueth in the Sonne, hath lyfe euerlasting. And how oft doe you heare in the Gospell, the son­dry sentences, and the notable titles, and Testimonies, where­with the Lord doth aduaūce the fayth of his Elect, and the won­derfull commēdation, wherewith he doth amplifie the force, and efficacy therof? Thy fayth (sayth hee) hath saued thee: Be it vnto you accordyng to your faith. Math. 9.Math. 9. Be it vnto thee as thou hast beleeued. Math. 8.Math. 8. Feare not beleeue onely: Mar. 5.Mar. 5. Beleeue onely and thy daughter shalbe made whole. Luc. 8. If thou canst beleeue all things be possible to the beleuing mā. Math. 9. And he that be­leueth in me shall do the workes which I do, and greater workes thē I do, shall he do. Iohn. 14. You doe acknowledge these wordes of Christ (I suppose) which you can not deny:A compari­son betwixt the fayth of Osorius and Luthers Fayth. I demaūde of you now whether your fayth, or Luthers fayth do agreé better wt the wordes of Christ? Luthers, that doth call backe all thyngs vnto fayth? Or yours, that doth yeld ouer all to ye workes of righte­ousnesse. Whenas the Lord being dayly conuersaunt: with the Pu­blicanes (as the Gospell reporteth) doth preferre the Publicane before the Pharisee: Mary Magdalene before Simō: Banqueteth his prodigall Sonne more sumptuously, then his obedient brother: whenas he carrieth vpon his shoulders his scattered and lost sheepe: looketh narrowly for his lost groate: bindeth vp the woundes of him [Page 125] that fell among theeues: offereth him selfe a Phisition to the sicke more gladly,The righte­ousnesse of sayth accor­dyng to the Scriptures.then to them that were sounde and whole: whenas hee placeth Harlottes and Sinners in the kingdome of God, before the Pharisees: when hee requiteth their trauaile with equall wages, that came to worke the last houre of the day, with them, that bare the brunte, and heate of the whole day in the Vynearde: when hee compareth, and setteth the last, before the first: when hee promi­seth Paradise to the theefe, for his faithes sake onely: when he fa­shioneth Paule, of a deadly Enemie, to be an Apostle: whenas he doth not onely receaue to mercy the Gentiles castawayes by nature, excluded from the promise, voyde of all hope, Reprobates for their Idolatrie, but hath them in greater estimation, then his naturall Sonnes: What did hee meane els by all these examples, then to disclose vnto vs the secret mystery of our Iustification? Which consisteth rather in forgeuenesse of Sinnes, then in doyng good deédes: which is to be esteémed by the onely mercy and promise of God: wherof we take hold fast through fayth, and is not to be wayed by ye valew of righteousnes, nor any merites of workes. Therfore sithence all you opinion doth so wholy discene from this kynde of Doctrine, with what face can you affirme, that your Fayth is consonaunt with the wordes of Christ? and Lu­thers discrepaunt?

The Apostle doth in so many places throughout his whole Epistles thunder out (as it were) that there is no righteousnesse but through the faith of Iesu Christ: Osori. doth neuer name in his booke this worde, Imputatiō. that no saluatiō is to be obtei­ned, but by the Mediatour the Sonne, through whom righteousnesse is Imputed, not purchased by workes, neither to him that worketh (saith hee) but to him that beleeueth in Christ, that Iustifieth the wicked: And yet you seémyng not to bee so much as acquainted with this righteousnes by Imputation, as that ye dare not once name this worde Imputation, doe notwithstandyng stand so much in your owne conceite, as though Christ at his commyng should finde all fayth in Osorius, A playne demonstra­tion that Osori. ge­ueth small credite to the wordes of Christ. but no fayth at all in Luther. If a man might be so bold with you, it were no vneasie matter to pike out diuers other sentences out of Scripture, whiche would quickly cracke the credite of your fayth. As where the A­postle writyng vnto Timothe doth so manifestly Prophecie: That it should come come to passe before the end of the world. That [Page] many should departe from the faith, beleeuing lyeng Spirites and doctrines of Deuilles, forbidding Marriadge, and the eating of meates, which the Lord hath prepared to be receaued with thankes geuing. These doctrines of Deuils for as much as the lying spi­rite of Osorius doth so stoutely mainteine, & bende all his force to vphold in this latter age of the world, as besides him no man more obstinately: what may be thoughe els, but that either he is departed from the fayth? or that the Apostle is an open lyar? A­gayne: Where the same Apostle writeth touchyng Antichrist, paintyng him out in his colours (as it were) & so liuely expres­sing him to the apparasit view of ye world his Throne, his wicked­nesse, his iuggling, 2. Thess. 2. his lyes, his pride, his immesurable arrogancie vauntyng him selfe beyond all hautynesse of mans Nature. What may a man Iudge of these sentences? the meanyng of the whiche can by no meanes possible be applyed to any thyng els thē to the Romish Sée. 2. Thess. 2. Agayne in the Reuelatiō of S. Iohn: where the same Antichrist is set in open stage, hauing the shape and countenaunce of a meeke Lambe, whiche vnder the visour of false hornes, Apoc. 13. should resemble the true Lambe, and restore the I­mage of the wounded beast to lyfe and speache. Whiche place of Scripture bycause can not be wrested any other wayes, then to that Romishe Ierarchie (whiche bendyng to ruine at the first, was restored by that great Archeprelate of Rome) yet in this most apparaunt Text of Scripture, if Osorius faith he demaū ­ded, whether it may be applyable to ye Bishop of Rome, we shall finde him as farre dissentyng from the purpose of this Prophe­cie, as if he were demaunded the way to Canterbury, he might aunswere, a poake full of Plummes. We haue hitherto suffi­ciently enough declared (I suppose) that Osorius for all his bragges is voyde of all ayde to defende his Fayth: And so for this tyme I will commit the cēfure of those gay workes, which flowe so plentyfully out of that glorious Fayth, to that Iudge which shall display the hidden corners of darkenesse: and to the consideration of them, who by the view of his bookes, haue skill to discerne a Lyon by his pawes, or rather an Asse by his lolie­eares. Now remayneth at length to discouer briefly that, which he barketh agaynst Luthers fayth.

Pag. 146. Now let vs see Luthers fayth (sayth hee) whether it can [Page 126] bryng forth any liuely fruite. Osori. doth discusse the sayth of Luther. It cā not by any meanes. &c. Lye on yet more a Gods name. First of all, bycause hee tea­cheth that all workes appeare they neuer so godly are desi­led with sinne. Nay rather: but yt you were by nature of so cor­rupt a Iudgement, yt ye can not frame your selfe so much as to speake ye truth, you would neuer haue patched this lye amōgest ye ragges of your leasings. Luthers disputation cōcerning faith & good workes, tendeth to nothyng els, but that which ye Scrip­tures euery where, the sacred spirite of truth, and S. Paule in­spired with the holy Ghost doe by all meanes, and reasons con­firme, & which we all ought of very duetie to embrace. For Lu­ther endeuouryng to make euidēt the doctrine of Iustification, & comparyng our good workes with the lawe of God, is enfor­ced to confesse the very truth of the matter: that is to say, That there is nothing so holy in workes, but beyng of it owne nature, in some respect vncleane and defiled, must néedes be vnsauorie in the sight of God, if without Christ it bee racked with exact scrutyne of Gods seuere Iudgement. And hereof quarell is py­ked forthwith agaynst Luther, Note here the cauill of Osorius. as though he should affirme that whatsoeuer workes the very regenerated, & engraffed in Christ them selues did worke, were nothyng els, but méere sinnes, and wickednesse. And bycause he doth abbridge good workes in that part onely, wherein they be falsely adiudged to be of valew, to Iustifie before God: Osorius doth argue agaynst him in this wise, as though he did vtterly roote out of mans lyfe, all Ciuill and Morall vertues and vertuous conuersation. Wherein a mā can not easilye determine, whether he doth shewe him selfe more iniurious to Luther, or bewray rather his owne blockish grose­nesse. No man euer taught more soundly,The doc­trine of Lu­ther tou­chyng good workes. no man more highly commended good workes, then Luther did, beyng separated a part from the doctrine of Iustification. And whereas he doth ex­tenuate the force of workes in the treatize of Iustification, he doth not therein so altogether derogate from workes, as rather frendly aduertize them, whiche through vayne Confidence of workes, doe challenge to them selues righteousnesse in the sight of God, and do depende so much vpon the deseruynges of wor­kes, as though there were none other foūteine from whence our Saluation might be deriued. Luther therfore vsing Argumēt [Page] agaynst those persons, doth boldly auow, that all our workes are defiled, yet not simply, but in respect of their application, beyng considered without the fayth of the Mediatour. Whiche beyng most truely spoken by Luther, is as sinisterly wrested by Oso­rius as though he had spoken it simply, that there is no good or commendable thyng in workes, nothyng in them acceptable to God, though neuer so duetyfully, or vertuously performed. And for this cause hee concludeth at last, as with an vnuanquishable Argument. That by no meanes possible, Luthers fayth could bryng forth any frutefull workes, like as that barren figge tree, growyng neare vnto the high way, whereupon grewe nothyng but leaues. But this is Osorius his owne conclusion not Luthers, a Sophisticall cauill concludyng falsely. If S. Paule doubted nothing at all to esteeme all thinges sinnefull which were done without faith. Rom. 4.Rom. 14. Aug. in pri­ma quinqua gena ex Prologo Psal. 31. If it were lawfull for Augu­stine to write in this wise. Thy workes are examined (sayth he) and are foūde all defiled. Why doth he rage so furiously agaynst Luther, bycause he doth professe, that the déedes which we call good, are in none other respect to be daémed for good, thē as they bee valued by the fayth of the Mediatour? The consideration of this doctrine as is of it selfe most assured, so doth it not tende to that end, that Osorius imagineth, to discourage godly myndes from vertuous endeuour. Rather well disposed persons are so much the more enflamed to embrace vertue, by how much they finde them selues more bounde to Gods bountyfull mercy: for as I vnderstand, nature hath so prouided, that fayth workyng by loue, should alwayes be more effectuall, thē the law constrai­nyng through feare.

If this rule of Paule can not yet be beaten into that bussard­ly braynes, how that our déedes be voyde of all prayse, and esti­mation, teachyng you that all thyng is Sinne, that is wrought without fayth.August. Let Augustine yet preuayle somewhat with you. ‘Beléeue (sayth he) in him that doth Iustifie the wicked, that thy good workes may proue good workes: For I will not vouchsafe to call them good, as long as they do issue from an euill trée.’ And therefore our Sauiour him selfe recityng and rewardyng the good déedes of his faythfull,Workes are not in any other res­pect accōp­ted for good in the sight of god then in res­pect of Christ tho­rough faith. doth not speake in this maner as though he spake generally. Thou hast fedde the hungry. Thou [Page 127] hast lodged the harbourlesse: Thou hast refreshed the néedy, and clothed the nacked, but restrainyng all these thynges to ye fayth, which ought to be towardes him. I was hungry (sayth he) and ye fedde me, and I was naked, and ye clothed me: I was in miserie, in chaines, and emprisoned, and you visited me and gētly refreshed me: I was harbourlesse and ye refreshed me. &c. So that he regarded not so much the deédes them selues, which are indifferently em­ployed vpō the relief of the néedy, as he esteémed the fayth which worketh those déedes for Gods sonnes sake & his names sake. Wherefore forasmuch as vpon this fayth dependeth not onely the Iustification of all mankynde,Good wor­kes are Iu­stified by fayth. but of all the actions of mans lyfe, in the sight of God, as vpon this onely roote, and founda­tiō, what absurditie ensueth hereof to say. That all our workes as of them selues, & their owne nature, are filthy in the sight of God, vnlesse they be sprinckled with ye fayth, & bloud of the Me­diatour? Now these thyngs beyng agreéd vpon. Let vs returne to the Argument of Osorius. Pag. 146. The fayth of Luther (sayth Oso­rius) can by no meanes yeld any good fruite. Why so? By­cause hee doth say that all our workes seeme they neuer so holy, are infected, and wholy defiled. Go to, and what more? Ergo. No liuely fruites of good workes (sayth hee) can ensue from Luthers fayth: for as much as all our doyngs are cor­rupt and sinneful, as Luther him selfe witnesseth. I do heare you & aunswere you. That the Antecedent is true, but the con­sequent most salfe. For to confesse that to be true, which Luther hath most truly alledged, that all our good deédes beyng viewed with the eyes of Gods Iustice, without fayth, and without the Mediatour, are of them selues no lesse abhorred in the sight of God, then wicked sinners: yet is not Osorius conclusion there­fore true, that Luthers fayth is the wellspryng and seédeplot of all vngodlynes. The reason therof is euident. For whatsoeuer actiōs, or endeuours of mās life are of their own nature blame­worthy, the fault of the same proceédeth not from fayth, but frō the poysoned corruption of our weake fleshe. And therfore Lu­ther agreéing very wel with Augustin, cōmaūdeth to take hold­fast of fayth. That our workes may thereby be made good wor­kes, For as much as whatsoeuer is not of fayth, and is not one­ly not shielded vnder her protectiō, deserueth not to be accomp­ted [Page] for good, but also after the testimony of Paule, is esteémed in the sight of God no better then very sinne and offence.

The Argu­ment recoy­leth backe vpon Osor. him selfe. This matter beyng confessed, a mā may frame an Argumēt agaynst Osorius much more fitly after this maner.

For as much as the law in her proper effect cā do nothing, but engender wrath, and was for this purpose published, that sinne should appeare much more sinnefull.

It followeth rather by Osor. doctrine (who seémeth to main­teine wt the whole bent of his skil ye glory of the law) that no good workes are engendred of ye law, but sinne rather as from whēce more plentyfull matter of wrath is raysed to our destruction.

But Luther handleth the matter farre otherwise, all whose Diuinitie howe much the more carefully doth enseale vnto vs the fayth of Christ, which is the onely mother, and nourse of all vertuous deédes, so much the greater encrease of good workes must of necessitie spryng by his doctrine. And therefore (as I suppose) we haue handsomely enough, for this tyme, wrong out of Osorius his fingers, this choakyng bone, wherewith he hath kept all this sturre agaynst Luther, and thrust it into his owne throate: That Luthers fayth is the well spring & seede plot of all wickednes, but his faith the founteine of all ver­tue. But here comes an other bolt, out of the same quiuer, as well made, and as wisely shotte. Let vs behold how neare the marke he shootes withall.

Pag. 146. Agayne bycause Luther doth affirme that the force of lust is so strong, that he beleeueth no man able to resiste it. It is a common custome (I perceaue) amongest many persons to extenuate and despise boldly Originall sinne, and that decay of nature in wordes: but I could neuer finde any one, that was able to suppresse and vtterly subdue the strength therof in deéde in this mortall lyfe: except that onely man of whom it is writ­ten: Whiche of you doth accuse me of sinne? vnlesse we will cou­ple this our Osorius next vnto him, and make him his equall: who with singular & vnspeakeable courage, doth fight agaynst nature, so stoutely (I thinke) that no force of naturall corruptiō, no entycementes of ticklyng lust can driue him from his state of innocencie. But I will no more rippevp the lyfe and maners of Osorius I will examine the force and vigour of his Argu­ments [Page 128] and the vnioynted ioyntes, and shiuered sinewes therof.

Luther doth deny that man in this lyfe, is able to van­quishe the strength of sinne vtterly, raignyng in the fleshe.

Ergo, No good workes doe proceede from Luthers Fayth.

Why do ye not by the same Logicke conclude likewise.

Ergo, There is nothyng in the world besides the Crowe that is blacke.

Nor any skill in the learned that is not in Osor. packe.

But go to let vs chaūge the names of men & let the matter remayne. And in place of Luther let vs vse the name of Paule. Marke now as wise a reason, or rather the very same, onely the names of persons beyng chaunged.

Paule complainyng of the sinne, which doth accosiber his flesh, doth protest, yt in his flesh, dwelleth no good thing.

Ergo, No good workes are engēdred out of Paules fayth.

For what difference is there I pray you betwixt the wordes of Paule, & Luthers positiō, if ye compare them together right­ly? whenas eche of them with vnelagreable assent, haue relation to the selfe same vnuanquishable tyranny of Originall Sinne. But now let vs heare how necessarily this consequent must fol­low of this wonderfull reason, wherewith hee would seéme to proue that Luthers fayth is ye vtter subuertour of all good wor­kes: for in this wise crawleth forward that lyeng spirite out of his mouth.

But for as much as no man can enterprise any good ac­tion, vnlesse he doe first utterly cut of the kyngdome of Sinne.Pag. 147.

But the kyngdome of sinne can not be vtterly cut of, if it be true that Luther teacheth.

It remayneth therefore that no man is able to worke any good deede.

As touchyng the forme of this Argument,Osori. Ar­gument faultie in the forme. perhappes the punyes in Sophistey may somewhat allow: but if ye behold the matter thereof. Certes the Doctours of Diuinitie will reiect the same as faultie. Vnlesse (sayth he) the kyngdome of sinne be first vtterly cut of. &c. Truly I would not much stand with [Page] you here Osorius. If you will first expresse vnto vs apely and di­stinctly,A twosold kyngdome of Sinne. what you meane by this worde kyngdome. For where­as Deuines do agreé, that there are two sortes of sinne, whiche we call actuall sinne: whiche also they doe distinguish two ma­ners of wayes, into Sinne reigning, and Sinne rebelling, you must teach vs, whether of those two you meane. For it is not all one thyng to suffer thy selfe to be carryed away with sinne, & to yeld thy selfe willingly captiue into his Tyranny, as to be van­quished of sinne through weakenes: For the first cōmeth of will: the next of Infirmitie: We are all many tymes ouercome of sinne, neither liueth any in this flesh, but offendeth sometymes sondry wayes. Yet are we notwithstanding ouercome agaynst our willes, and drawyng backe as it were. The most chosen ser­uaunts of God are sondry tymes cast down through Sinne rei­gning in their mēbers: But neuer yeld ouer wholy as subiectes to his kyngdome. Uery well therfore doth S. Paule counsell vs: Let not Sinne reigne in your fleshly bodies. Rom. 6. Rom. 6. And yet the same Paule did not alwayes bring to passe the good yt he would. But did worke many tymes the euill that he would not: Not he now but Sinne dwellyng within him.

These thynges beyng thus opened: Let vs search out the pythe of the Argument.The sub­staunce of the Argu­ment is dis­cussed. Hee denyeth that vertue hath any place there, where the kyngdome of Sinne is not vtterly rooted out. If Osorius do meane the kyngdome of Sinne, as a kyng or a tyraunt doth reigne ouer his subiectes. The Ma­ior proposition is true, but the Minor most false. For Luther did neuer teache, no not so much as dreame otherwise, then that Sinne should bee suppressed as much as were possible. But if his meanyng tende to this end. That no man can enter­prise any good worke, vnlesse the tyranny of Sinne beyng first brought vnder yoke, he haue so tamed the fleshe, that no motion so much may bee felt to rebell within, that may wounde or in­fect the conscience: how can Osorius make proofe of that which he verifieth in his Maior? or confute that which he doth obiect agaynst Luther in his Minor? Or where shall he finde that con­querour of Sinne, who hauyng throughly mortified Sinne, and vtterly vanquished the ragyng Rebellion of naturall cor­ruption, dare promise rewarde of perfect righteousnesse vnto [Page 129] him selfe? Iob a man of all other famous for his vprightenesse of lyfe,Iob, was yet so displeasaunt with him selfe, that hee seémed to stand in doubte of all his workes. Esay, Esay doth condemne all his righteousnesse, to be more lothsome then a menstruous cloute. Who was more holy, or more acceptable to God then Dauid?Dauid, And yet besides that he dare not presume to offer him selfe to Iudge­ment, as beyng dismayed with feare of his secret conscience, he doth not spare franckely to pronounce, That no fleshe liuyng can bee founde righteous in the sight of God. The greate Prophete Daniell doubted not to make his humble Confession together with the people, saying,Daniell. That he had Sinned with his forefathers. What shall I speake of Ionas,Ionas. and the other Prophetes? And to let passe the other Apostles, what shall I say of Paule and Peter? S. Iohn declaryng That we all are Trespassours in ma­ny thinges, Iohn. doth not exempt him selfe out of the same number.

Next to the Apostles, ensued the Age of auncient Antiqui­tie and learned Fathers, who although with all their power & might, did valiauntly mainteyne cōtinuall battell agaynst ye as­saultes of sinne, yet could they neuer so surely encampe, & gard them selues in so firme a grounde, but they should be vndermi­ned with the countermoyling of her outragious Pyoners: that lyke dastardes mistrustyng their owne strēgth, they should feéle them selues enforced sometymes to forsake their standyng, and fleé for rescue to the onely mercy and forgeuenesse of God, as to the onely vnpenetrable rocke of their Saluation. And ther­fore S. Ierome in playne wordes doth note truly,Iero. in Ezec. Lect. 14. Cap. 46. that though man did atteine to perfection, hee should yet stand in neéde of Gods mercy: and that mans full and perfect perfection did de­pend vpon grace, and not vpon deseruynges. &c. No lesse effec­tually Augustine writyng to Boniface touchyng perfect righ­teousnesse, or rather of the imperfection of our righteousnesse.August. ad. Bonif. Lib. 3. Cap. 7. ‘Uertue (sayth he) whiche is now in a righteous man, is sayd to be so farreforth righteous, as vnfayned acknowledgement, and humble Confession of his owne imperfection doth admitte the same to bee perfect. Agayne the same Augustine in an other place doth accompt that man to haue profited much in this life,August. de Spirit. & Lit. Cap. [...]. who by profityng doth feéle in him selfe, how farre he is distaunt from true perfection. And bycause the Latin Church shall not [Page] seéme to want the testimonies of the Greékes.’ Let vs heare the wordes of Basile treatyng of mans righteousnesse.Basil. in conc. de hu­milit. ‘This is full & perfect reioysing in God, when as a man is lifted vp not with any righteousnes of his own, but knoweth him selfe empty and naked of true righteousnesse, and so to be iustified by Faith One­ly in Christ Iesu. Whereby Osorius may perceaue, what esti­mate is to be made of our owne righteousnesse, though it seéme neuer so beautyfull:’ which Augustine him selfe adiudgeth wor­thy of execrable curse, if it bee examined besides the mercy of God.Aug. Lib. cont. 9. Cap. [...]. But bycause (sayth he) thou doest not narrowly & sharpe­ly searche our offences, we doe hope assuredly, that we shall ob­teyne some place for pardon in thy sight. It is not neédefull to "make a Register of all ye testimonies of writers (ye matter espe­cially beyng so euident, and so strongly fenced with multitude of authorities) whenas the consent and agreément of all wri­ters, is in no one thyng more generall, and stedfast, then in the abacyng of perfection of workes, and humbly crauyng pardon of our owne imperfection. Aug. Serm. de temp. 49 Whereupon Augustine, stand not in Iudgement (sayth he) agaynst thy seruaūt, requiryng of me all thynges that thou hast taught and commaunded. For if thou enter into Iudgement with me, thou shalt finde me guilty. I had neéde therfore of thy mercyes, rather thē thy seuere Iudge­ment.’ I demaunde now what you cōceaue of the wordes of Au­gustine? Surely although I doe not thinke, that the man was voyde of wonderfull willyng endeuour, yet if he had bene of all partes endued with that integritie of vndefiled lyfe, and had vt­terly rooted out the whole kyngdome of Sinne, with the concu­piscence thereof: and had obteined to be deémed prayse worthy, in respect of absolute accomplishyng the Commaundementes of God: his soule would neuer so humbly haue disclaymed from Gods Iudgement, and submitted all comfort of pardon to the onely freé mercy of God.

Let vs annexe hereunto the same Aurel. August. altogether disagreéyng from Osorius where hee setteth downe the same much more playnly in his booke De Spirit. & Liter. August. de Spirit. & Li­ter. Cap. 11 I said (quoth he) that it was possible for a mā to be without Sinne, if he haue a will thereunto, & Gods assistaunce withall: but I neuer sayd, that euer was, or euer should be, any one, who in this lyfe could [Page 130] be so perfect, except that one onely, in whom all creatures shal­be quickened. &c. Of what force therfore can this your wynde­shaken crooche be, more then Catholicke, which you haue scra­ped out of Hosius, Roffensis, or Cicero (as I suppose) where u­pon your lame cripled workes do rest so boldly?’ namely: that a man may so order his lyfe in this rottē Tabernacle of the flesh, after the right squarier of righteousnesse, by the assistaunce of God: as hauyng throughly conquered the kyngdome of Sinne, he may easely accomplish all the Cōmaundementes of the law? And therfore to aunswere at a word for all, what shall I speake els, then as Ierome reported to Ctesiphon, when he wrate a­gaynst the heresie of Pelagians. So shall I set Augustine a­gaynst Osorius, & S. Ierome agaynst Syr Ierome. Ierom. ad Ctesiphon. cōtr. Pelag. Tomo. 3. Thou doest say, that the Commaundements of God are easie (sayth S. Ie­rome) and yet thou canst name no one man, which hath perfor­med them all. &c. ‘And so the same S. Ierome proceédyng fore­ward: Utter no such blasphemy agaynst the heauens, whereby thou mayst delude ye myndes of simple folke with these wordes. It is, and it may be: for who will graunt vnto theé, that a man may do that, which neuer man could doe? And agayne the same Ierome, what is our wisedome? nay rather what ought our wisedome to be, which are not perfect? Our simple Confession, that we are vnperfect: and that we haue not yet atchieued or attayned full perfection.Ierom. cōtr. Pelag. Lib. 1. This is the true wisedome of man, to know him selfe to be vnperfect. And I willbe bold to speake it, that the perfection of the best and most righteous, whiles hee dwelleth in this fleshely doughill is altogether vnperfect. &c. What neéde I alledge any more in a matter so manifest of it selfe? so throughly confirmed with Testimonies, and so playnly and notably discernable by the dayly examples of mans life?’

But amongest the rest of this innumerable ouerflowyng multitude of Sinners, here shalbe a Reply made (I beleéue) of the Deuine integritie of this one Gentleman Osorius, of his wonderfull conuersation, absolute holynes, Angelike chastitie, culuerlike simplicitie, linked together with a more then Sera­phicall humilitie, and incomprehensible innocencie, who alone amōgest the children of women, hath beautified the whole world with such brightnesse of righteousnes, who carrieth about him [Page] all vertues fast lockt in the sacred cheéste of his breste, and day­ly numbred them: who hath so quenched the boylyng froathe of Originall Sinne: hath so vtterly subdued, and brought into bondage, the whole empire therof euen at one pushe: hath of all partes so absolutely fulfilled eche tittle of the Cōmaundemēts: hath tamed the flesh and all the concupiscence thereof: hath sup­ressed his affections: hath with so well disposed order, addres­sed the whole course of his life: and euen now haled up on hygh,The holy & and perfect life of Oso. compared with S. Frācise. with a certeine out stretched reache of mynde beyonde the hea­uens, and rapted now into the fraternitie of S. Frauncisce him selfe, is enflamed with vnquencheable desire of Deuine zeale, that hee will not once treade awrye so much, nor wilbe blotted with one spotte of crime, or suspition of crime, bee it neuer so litle: will not yeld to any temptations of Sathan, or infirmi­tie of the flesh: will not be seéne with blemish or suspition of Sinne, no not one Solecisme or Incongruitie: no nor yet idle speache in all his wordes, no disorder in his whole lyfe and con­uersation: out of whose mouth shall issue no idle word, nor lye no (I dare boldly say) not one no erronious doctrine, no cōtume­lious cauill in his bookes: no rascallike slaunder: no Sycophā ­ticall outrage: but all thynges shalbe founde within him so at­tempered, and quallified with a certeine marueilous peacible modestie, and lenitie, that no defect may bee founde neédefull to be added to fill vp a full Bushell of perfect righteousnesse. And bycause thou shalt not wonder (Reader) by what meanes, this our most Reuerend Prelate hath climbed to this immesurable excellencie of generall righteousnes, and with what Pillers he vnderproppeth the same, and learne withall, how auayleable and effectuall, this most sacred Sacrament of Confession is: vouchsafe I pray theé to heare Osori. him selfe telling his owne tale.Osor. Lib. 2 Cap. 100. I doe call to witnesse (sayth) he Iesu Christ my Lord and my God, that by the meanes of this comfortable Confes­sion sondry times frequented, How great the force of Popish cōfession is. I haue escaped from infinite wickednesse: wherfore if I haue at any tyme subdued lust, if I haue forsaken voluptuous filthynesse, if I haue bene de­sirous to embrace Chastitie: If I haue bene enlightened with any sparckle of godly zeale: I do wholy ascribe the ef­fectuall operation therof to the same Sacrament: through [Page 131] the whiche the holy Ghost hath emparted vnto me great store of his grace. &c. What a test is this? If beyng first ouer­whelmed with innumerable iniquities, hee haue attayned that righteousnesse at the length through the vertue of that most sa­cred Sacrament, in so much as he hath shaken of the yoake of all concupiscence, hath cut the throate and cut of the head of the kyngdome of Sinne: what neéde hath he then to repeate his cōfessiōs so oft? when the wounde is whoale, what neéde any play­ster or further Surgery? If all Sinne bee abolished, to what purpose serueth dayly custome of Confessiō, and to what end is absolution craued? But if he feéle yet somewhat lurkyng with­in him, that forceth him betwixt whiles, to runne agayne so oft to Confession, and to ye drugges of absolution: how is it, that he affirmeth so boldly, that ye kyngdome of Sinne is wholy cōque­red in vs, so couragiously fightyng agaynst Luthers doctrine in wordes, whereas in very life he agreeth altogether wt Luther.

Finally if Osorius dare presume to stoutely vpon his owne conscience, as hauyng vtterly crusht in peéces the kyngdome of Sinne, that hee is now no more acquainted therewith: what may preiudice him, but he may forthwith frankely Iustifie him selfe with the Phariseé and say, I thanke theé, O Lord Heauēly Father, that I am not as other men are, nor like vnto this Pu­blican Luther, and those seély sheépish Bucerans. I do fast twise in the Weéke: I geue the tenth of all that I possesse: yea besides all this I do also dayly enure my selfe to holy Cōfession. &c. But hereof enough: Let vs proceéde to the remnaūt rable of his ra­ked lyes as they follow.

Furthermore who be holy & vnblameable before God? Pag. 148. Euen those truly which are voyde of all crime, but accor­dyng to Luthers doctrine, you can not bee voyde of crime: for hee denyeth that sinne is extinguished, and affirmeth that the flames of all abomination do broyle out therof, as out of a whotte flamyng Ouē, scorching and cōsumyng all things: by meanes whereof no man can bee founde vnbla­meable & without spotte. The sutteltie of this Sophisticall cauill tendeth at the last to this end.

God hath chosen vs (sayth the Apostle) that we should become holy, and vnblameable.

[Page]But according to Luthers doctrine, no man can be ho­ly, and without fault, in this lyfe.

Therfore hereof ensueth an vnauoydeable conclusion.

Bycause no man liuyng is cleare frō offence, therfore neither Haddon, nor any of all the Lutheranes can be reckoned amongest Gods Elect.

Packe ye hence therefore as banished outlawes all ye vyle Lutheranes, packe ye hence with all your torne & ragged wor­kes into the helles of Osorius damnable curse. For the gate of Election is not opened to any, but vnto Popes, Osorians, Phi­gianes, Hosianes, Eckyans, and others the like Lordynges, in whose most pure and choise behauiour, no droppe of filth can be founde worthy of Reproch. If Osorius him selfe had not bene so shamelesse beastly, as to blaze abroad this trifling Argumēt, it would haue loathed me to haue rehearsed the same in this place: nor would I vouchsaued any aunswere thereto: but that I thought good to geue the Reader a tast of his blockishe igno­raunce, that he might smile at it a whiles, or at the least, learne by this, to esteéme of all other his poppet reasons almost in all his booke: for scarsely any founder matter is scattered in any part thereof.

Osori. Ar­gumentatiō discussed.FIrst of all. The Apostle both teache that we are elected and chosen, that we should become holy. This is true. Whereby you may perceaue (Osorius) that whatsoeuer holynes we be en­dued withall, doth neither goe before, nor accompany election, but that it ought to follow altogether, not in order of tyme one­ly, but in respect of the end and effect thereof. For the Apostle doth not say: GOD hath chosen vs bycause we were holy, or should afterwardes proue holy, but that we should become holy: so that Gods Electiō is now the cause, not the effect of our good workes. And if good workes do follow Electiō in order of time, I seé no cause to the contrary, but by the same reason, our Iusti­fication should likewise necessaryly follow. For as much as the consideration of them both is all one. For whom hath cho­sen, the same he hath Iustified: and with the same grace that he hath chosen vs, hee is sayd also, to haue Iustified vs: by one selfe same meane, and to one selfe same ende. For God hath chosen vs, if ye aske here the cause: of his freé mercy accordyng to the [Page 132] good pleasure of his will, if ye seéke the meane. In Christ Iesu, If ye looke for the ende to worke good deédes, not for the good deédes sake, not for any our deseruinges, but to the prayse of the glory of his grace. Truly none otherwise fareth it in the matter of Iustification. For whom God of his freé mercy hath chosen, the same also he hath freély Iustified, not by any other meanes then in Christ Iesu: not bycause he foresawe, that we would be holy, but to that ende, that we should walke circumspectly and holyly in his sight.

But what emporteth this saying,To be irre­prehensible how it is taken in the Scriptures. that we should become ho­ly and vnblameable? paraduenture Osorius bee of the opinion, that the Catharres, Celestines, and Donatifies were imagi­nyng, that herein our full and absolute regeneration of our re­newed nature was signified vnto vs: and that we should accom­plish such a kynde of thyng as the Grecians do call [...], without the which, Gods Election and our Iustification could not by any meanes consist. Ueryly I could wishe with­all my hart, that we all could direct the course of our lyfe in such sort, accordyng to this Puritanisme of Osorius. And that we were all endued with such integritie, and Angelicke innocē ­cie, that no part of our life might be defiled with blemish or iust reprehension. But what shall we say? Such is the condition of mans life, such is the weakenesse of the fleshe, that euery man hath his infirmitie: And we haue not as yet so put of the Na­ture of man altogether, that we should bee forthwith transfor­med into Angels. Goe to then? what if it come to passe, that in this brickle estate of our frayltie, any of vs doe folter and fall­downe? are we therfore excluded forthwith from our Electiō? or haue we by and by lost the benefite of our Iustification? I doe not thinke so Osorius. For in what sence shall ye Electiō of God he sayd to be permanent, if it may be cut of, and haue an ende? or how shall it be called stedfast and assured, if it hange vpon the vncerteintie of our frayltie? But do not the true elect (say you) fall at any tyme into deserued rebuke? what thē? shall euery one yt is worthy rebuke, be forthwith cast of frō his Electiō? A good felowshyp (Osorius) What if this fall happē before Baptisme? You will say that Baptisme doth washe it cleane away. What? and shall not fayth and Christian Repentaunce clense our offen­ces [Page] after Baptisme likewise? If there be no forgeuenes of those Trespasses which we Christians doe commit after Baptisme: To what ende is that Article in our Christian Creéde, wherein we cōfesse remission of Sinnes? If no offence be made, to what purpose serueth Pardon? Surely where nothyng is blame­worthy their Pardon may goe play. Let vs seé now: will you now dispoyle vs of an Article of our fayth, and withall bereue vs of hope of remission, that erste bosted so boldly of your strong belief in the wordes of Christ? But you say. God did chuse vs that we should be vnblameable. I do heare you Osorius & al­low your Obiection, if you will likewise accept of myne aun­swere. Whatsoeuer is forgeuen to the guiltie by Pardon, and purged by forgettyng and forgeuyng: there is nothyng remay­nyng to terrifie that person from Imputatiō, or make dismayed for any controllement. For (that we may so bold to glory as Paule doth).Rom. 8. What is he that shall accuse the elect of God? God is he that doth Iustifie, who shall then condemne vs? We may law­fully adde hereunto. Who shall comptroll vs?

You seé therfore in what wise Gods elect doe appeare now excusable and righteous: not so much through the cleannesse of their deédes, as through the bountie of him that Imputeth: ‘Not from the begynnyng of vnrighteous nature,August. E­pist. 95. (to speake Augu­stines own wordes) but by conuersion from sinne to righteous­nes. nothyng blame­worthy, but bycause it doth not please the Fatherly clemēcie, to exact sharpe and narrow triall of them, whom he hath chosen in his Sonne.’ And therefore the Apostle notyng the same thyng, sayth.The Cause and end of Election. Whom he hath chosen in Christ Iesu, that they should become holy and vnblameable. &c. Wherein you haue both the cause, & the end of our Electiō. The cause is Christ, or ye grace of God in Christ: The end is herein signed, that we should become holy & vnblameable. For he speaketh not in this wise: he did chuse thē which had lead an vncorrupt life, to the ende he might engraffe them in Christ. But he did chuse vs in Christ Iesu first, that we should liue holy, and vnrebukeable.Osori. Ob­iection. But by what meanes vn­rebukeable (say you) whenas the very elect them selues can not be free from faulte, as Luther doth say? The aunswere is playne and easie.

[Page 133]Whereas Luther doth deny,The confu­tatiō of the Obiection. that Gods true elect are freé frō all guilt, he seémeth therein to haue regard to ye frayltie of mās nature, & making a comparison therof, doth set the same direct­ly opposite against the seuere Iustice of Gods law. This weake nature bēding her force as much as she may, agaynst ye assaults of sinne, although she get the vpperhād sometymes, yet, besides that she yeldeth ouer very oft as vāquished, euē then chiefly, whē she hath obteined the maistry, she doth neuer yet expresse ye im­maculate sinceritie, & vndefiled vprightenes in mainteinyng ye battell, but some default may be foūde in her most perfect obedi­ence: & so pumples will yet sticke fast in ye flesh, that they may be easily espied: For curing wherof she shalbe cōstreined of necessi­tie to pray in ayde for the generall triacle of the Church. Lord forgeue vs our sinnes. &c. So yt Augustines wordes may well be verified here,August. de natura & gra. Cap. 53. why is ye possibilitie of nature so much presumed vpon? It is woūded, maymed, troubled, and vtterly destroyed: it neédeth a true Confession, and not a false purgation. &c.

Furthermore where the Apostle maketh this addition: Thar" we should become holy & vnblameable, he seémeth not therein so much to respect ye naturall perfectiō of innocēcy (which I doubt whether may be foūde in the very Angels) as ye zealous mynde, godly will, & earnestly bent affectiō of euery of vs in this life, & vprightnes in euery our seuerall vocatiō: meanyng nothyng in this placeels, thē as he did in an other place: where speaking of ye vocation of widdowes cōmaūdeth thē to be instructed to lead an vnreproueable life. 1. Timo. 5.1. Timo. 5. Likewise making mētion of By­shops: sayth. That they must be vnblameable, & haue a good testi­mony, left they fall into reproch and reprofe of the slaūderer. 1. Tit. 3.1. Tit. 3. Agayne setting an order for seruaūtes, cōmaūdeth thē to haue regard to their calling,1. Timo. 6.lest the name of God & the doctrine of their professiō should be brought into obloquy. In like maner to Titus the 2. chap. Appointyng a rule of comely cōuersation, he doth ex­borte all persons that euery one so behaue him selfe in his vocation,Tit. 2.that the word of God be not blasphemed: & that the aduersary may be ashamed, hauing no iust quarell to accuse vs. And agayne to the Colloss. the first chap.Collos. 1. That he may deliuer you holy and vndefiled and vnblameable in his sight. &c. Which sayings tend not to this end, as though mās nature could put on that perfection, wher­by [Page] by she might be preserued frō fallyng at any tyme afterwardes by frayltie from the state of integritie: but prouoke vs rather thereby to take heéde, that our will be no more in thraldome vn­der wicked rebellion, & so voluntary yeld ouer the members of ye body to sinne, or by any meanes bryng her selfe in bondage to wickednes. And this is the meanyng of the Apostle (as I sup­pose) That we are therfore chosen of God, not to be delighted in mynde with the cōcupiscence of the flesh, to fulfill the lust ther­of But to become holy: That euery of vs in this world should demeane our selues in our callying soberly, vprightly, and god­ly, as be seémeth the chosen, and holy ones of God.

Whereby you may sufficiently perceaue (if I be not decea­ued) That those sentēces,How holy­nes & frayl­tie be con­curraunt in the holy ones. which Paule hath written cōcernyng holynes, and Luther touching naturall infirmitie, are not so re­pugnaunt one agaynst the other, but they may both be admit­ted well enough. For hereof ariseth no repugnauncie, but that in outward conuersation, and obseruyng the rules of our fun­ction duely, it may be sayd after a simple maner of speach and vnfaynedly: That is to say, in the sight of God a man may de­meane him selfe honestly, in whose nature notwithstādyng some such filthe may cleaue, as may of necessitie compell him to crye out with that elect vessell of God, wretched man that I am, who shall deliuer me from this body of death? Rom. 7. But Osorius perhappes will chaunte vs an higher note, not with this miserable Paule: Vnhappy man that I am, who shall deliuer me? But will descaunt (I suppose) with that blessed Phariseé. I thanke thee, O heauenly Father, that I am not as other mortall men are. &c. But let vs goe foreward, and pursue the Reliques of this notable monument. And sithence we are come now to the treatize of Predestination and Freéwill. Let vs marke well what stuffe this Raunger hath brought out of his Forrest: and what dogges he leadeth to course other mens game withall.

¶Of Predestination and Freewill.

LVther affirmeth that freewill is a thyng in name onely,Of Prede­stinatiō and Freewill. Pag. 149. 150. 151. or a Name without substaunce: That mā is the patiēt and not the agent: That he is drawen, and doth not purpose or Deli­berate any thyng: That man is an instrument onely, and as it were a Sawe, or Axe whiche God doth frame and force whether he will, and whereun­to him pleaseth: and that mā hath no power nor strēgth re­serued him either to doe good, or to cōmit wickednesse: in so much that we are not able not onely not to do good or euill: but also not to thinke any thought by any meanes of our selues. Moreouer when I name Luther, I vnderstād al­so withall Melancthon, Bucer, Caluin and the rest of your Iolly fellowes: whose opinions and writynges tend to this effect at the length. That no difference at all may seeme to be betwixt man, and any other toole or instrument.

In uery good tyme Syr, blessed bee this houre, wherein we are come now at the length to the most combersome and crabby treatie of Freéwill, which beyng heretofore so oft tost to an fro in common Schooles, in assemblies, and disputations of Deui­nes, after so many combates & turmoyles, hath now at the last founde out a champion (hope I) through whose onely force and actiuitie beyng defended, and shrowded (as it were vnder the Target of Aiax) she shall be able to endure and withstād all the assaultes, and coūtermoyles of all heretiques whatsoeuer. For whereas heretofore this vnsearcheable gulfe hath encombred & entangled the wittes, and studies of so many notable Clerkes, Cardinalles, Byshops, and Priestes: the bottome and depth whereof could notwithstandyng neuer yet bee attayned vnto: I suppose the onely let thereof hitherto hath bene, for that our O­sorius was not hatched as then, nor produced to be Proctour in this cause. But now sithence this vpstarte wrestler is skipt o­uer the old barriers, and hath catcht the collers in hand, may a­ny man doubt but that (the whole force of the Enemy beyng vt­terly discomsited and compelled to fleé the field, the Maiestie of Freéwill hauyng bene long tyme wounded and weakened with greéuous maladie, yea and through feéblenesse euen yeldyng vp [Page] the ghost) shall presently recouer health? stand vpon her feéte, and be strong? For this lusty gallaunt disdayneth to encounter as Bythus did sometyme with Bacchius or as Ecerinus with Pacidianus, or as Hercules agaynst two,Hercules not able to stād agaynst two, yet O­sorius a­gaynst foure. or as Horarius a­gaynst threé brethren at once, or with one man hand to hand onely: but of valiaunt courage, challengeth the field agaynst foure choise and tryed souldiours at one choppe together: to witte, Luther, Melancthon, Bucer, Caluine. Yea with them also agaynst the whole armye of Lutheranes. Agaynst whom neuerthelesse if Osorius durst haue cast his gloue, when they li­ued amongest vs: or if they were present now to aunswere the challenge, and defende the cause, no doubt the iustie crakes of proude Iacke bragger would carry but a small coūtenaunce to moue the godly to be displeasaunt withall. But as to rake the dead out of their graues, and to pike quarell agaynst ghostes and spirites, is the common guise of euery rascall varlet: so to the discreét and well disposed hath it bene accompted most filthy and contemptuous: yea most to be abhorred in our Osorius at this present: who in all this his discourse of Freéwill alledgyng no one thyng agaynst them, but that whiche in their writynges and bookes is fully aunswered and satisfied: yet (as though they had made no aunswere at all) crawleth hee foreward neuerthe­lesse, patchyng together his rotten and motheaten trumperie: wherein neither is any thyng of his owne inuētion, nor any new stuffe, but that he hath somewhat furbushed the old rusty Argu­mentes of other raynebeaten souldiours, with a fresh glaze of raylyng and slaunderous tearmes, like the foolish Choughe at­tiryng him selfe wholy with the feathers of other Fowles: and in this respect also more vyle and lothsome: That, where the o­ther doe in their arguyng make a certeine shew of some reason vouched either out of Scriptures, or of Doctours wrongfully wrested: but he for the more part doth so frame his discourse, ra­ther to the accusing of men, then to the discussing of the contro­uersie: and doth so handle his matters,Osori. more couragious in accusing, then in ar­guyng. as one hauyng regarde rather to the persons agaynst whom hee quarelleth, then to the cause, which ought to haue bene discouered by him.

Osori. his stinolous & foolish tre­atyng of Free will.The man is fully persuaded that Freewill ought to be main­teyned by all meanes possible. But what the will or choyse of mā [Page 135] is what thyng is freé, or not freé in the will of man: what is ne­cessary, and what difference is betwixt freé, and necessary, and how many maner of wayes necessary to be taken, he doth neither discouer by definition, nor distinguishe by Argument, nor deuide by partition, nor doth declare what diuersitie and difference ought to be betwixt braunche and braunche. Many & sondry persons before him haue stoutely maynteined the quarell of Freewill, yea wt no lesse courage, then they would haue done, if ye state of their countrey had bene in hazard. In the same quarell long sithence, the Celestines and Pelagians kept a great sturre agaynst Augustin. Amōgest many others of late, yeares, wrate chiefly Roffensis and Eckius agaynst Luther. Cardinall Pi­ghius hath stuffed vp tenne Inuectiues full agaynst Caluine. Likewise many others haue written agaynst Melancthon a­gaynst Bucer and others. All which albeit preuayled very litle agaynst the truth, yet to the end they might the more easily de­ceaue vnder a certeine visour of ye truth, they did shuffle amōgest their owne writynges many sentences of the Scriptures, and many also of the most approued Doctours. After all these our Osorius intendyng to vphold Freewill beyng in great ieopar­die to perish, what doth he? what bryngeth he? what vttereth he at length elles? but certeine simple croppes scattered here and there in the fieldes of holy Scriptures, which he hath gleaned together and wretchedly misordereth, to make his Assertions get some credite, yet nothyng auayleable to his purpose, God knoweth. In the meane whiles he citeth not one world so much out of the autenticke monumentes of the auncient Authours, nor out of Augustine: who was altogether busied in decydyng this controuersie, and by whom he ought chiefly haue bene gui­ded in this cause: either bycause he hath practised other scien­ces, and read nothyng of this writer: or els bycause he is wic­ked and craftely dissembleth the thynges whiche he hath read. And yet all this notwithstandyng this our Portingall cham­pion so carrion leaue in the knowledge of Scriptures, altoge­ther disfournished of Doctours, persuadeth him selfe to be man good enough (if it may please the Muses) to beare ye whole brūt of the battell in the behalfe of Freewill against freély Luther, Me­lancthon, Bucer and Caluine, not with mayne strength onely, [Page] but euen with a proude Portingall looke.

The princi­pall partes of Osor. ac­cusation, re­duced into certeine places.But go to: bycause we will not protract any long tyme with the Reader, in wordes purposing to wrestle somewhat with O­sorius herein. Let vs approche to the marke. And bycause the whole force of his communication seémeth to tend to this end, to accuse men rather then to open any matter worthy to be lear­ned: and for as much he obserueth no order in teachyng, in accu­sing, ne yet in disputyng: but beyng violently whirled and car­ried (as it were) in some forcible whirlewinde of accusation raū ­geth the field without Iudgement and out of all aray, and after a certeine confused maner of talke doth wrappe vp, and mingle all thynges togethers as it were vnder one confused heape: we on the contrary part will to temper our aunswere, that (as neare as the matters will permit) we may dispose in some reasonable frame, the chief pillers and Arguments of his accusation, which him selfe hath set downe most disorderly. And therefore in my simple conceite the whole substaunce of all his accusation what­soeuer, may bee gathered into foure or fiue principall places chiefly, whiche he seémeth to finde fault with all most in Luthers doctrine, as matters full of absurditie, and which he obiecta­gayust Luther in this wise.

1 First, that Luther affirmeth that there is no freé choyse, or freédome in the will of man.

2 That all thyngs haue their begynnyng through absolute and vnanoydeable necessitie.

3 That impossible thynges are commaunded by God.

4 That men are damned, for the thynges which they commit not of their owne freé and voluntary motion, but compelled by fatall necessitie.

5 That God is to be taken for the originall and Authour of all mischief and wickednesse.

For into these few places, as in a short Cataloge may be de­uided all whatsoeuer is comprehended in this huge masse of O­sorius Inuectiues. Which beyng in this wise placed, it remai­neth, that we frame our aunswere to euery of them particular­ly, as oportunitie and place shall offer them in the discourse, and so to purge and wash away (as much as in vs lyeth) all his cauillations & Sophisticall subtelties. For thus would I wish [Page 136] theé to be persuaded (frendly Reader) that besides naturall scol­dyng, and meére cauteles of wordes voyde of all substaunce of truth, there is els nothyng of all whatsoeuer he doth brabble in all this discourse, yea & that also stroakyng him selfe rather with vayne conceipt of his own opinion, then of any grounded know­ledge or Iudgement at all.

And first as touchyng Freewill: In steéde of a proofe & testi­monie of Luthers owne workes and yet the same also, neither doth he alledge whole as they be, nor fully: nor doth hee couple the first with the last: nor directeth to any certeine place of the Authour. But goe to. What maner of haynous crime is this (a Gods name) wherewith this Portingall Inquisitour doth charge Luther so greéuously & cruelly? Forsooth it is this: That he did dare mutter against Freewill, Saying that it was a thing in tittle onely: and whiles it followeth his owne nature, it doth nothyng but sinne deadly. And where is this written? In the volumes of Luther (I suppose) or els in Sybilles leaues. Seéke there Reader, or els where if thou wilt. For as our Re­uerēd Maister Inquisitour assigneth no place to ye Reader, so (I thinke) he neuer did read in Luther the thyng, whereat he cauil­leth: nor thinketh that it concerneth his credite at all to vtter whatsoeuer him listeth, in what sense, wt what phrase of speache, by what authoritie, or with what testimonies it bee bolstered so that somewhat bee suggested whereat hee may frame some qua­rell. But proceéde on, and what followeth? Then afterwardes the same Luther correctyng him selfe, what sayth he farther? I haue erred (sayd hee) I spake vntruely: that Freewill is a thyng in name onely before the tyme of grace:Luther in his Assertiō Article. 36. but I should haue sayd simply. That Freewill is a fayned deuise or a tittle without all substaunce. Luther in his Assertions writ­ten to Leo the tenth the 36. Article. Well and what is it at last, that this Maister Inquisitour will frame vnto vs out of this? Ergo, Pag. 151. Luther is an heretique, who dispoyleth man of all his Freewill, and traueileth chiefly to this end, to affirme that mans mynde is alwayes holden captiue, his will fast bound, all power of workyng taken away, in so much that we can do neither good nor euill, nor cā thinke a thought so much by any meanes. And this doth not Luther teach onely: but [Page] Melancthon also aboundauntly, yea much more plentyful­ly Caluine doth debate the same. I not heare you Osorius & do aunswere, not I for Luther, but Luther shall aunswere ful­ly for him selfe.

And first touchyng that whiche we terme mans choyse, whe­ther ye conster it to be reason, or will: surely Luther did neuer deny. The same dare I boldly affirme in the behalfe of Melan­cthon and Caluine also. Certes these men were neuer so rea­sonably madde, as to despoyle man (whom they define to be en­dued with reason) of reason and of will. For by no reason cā the operation of will be sequested from that part,The repulse of the ca­uill. where the vse of reason resteth. Howsoeuer nature was corrupted through the first originall of Sinne: yet remaineth neuerthelesse that thyng after a certeine sort within vs still, which we receaued of the treé of knowledge of good and euill:Will cā not be seuered frō Reason. but thus must be noted chiefly in what wise it remayneth, not that it can auayle any way to salua­tion, but that it hurteth rather thereunto. And therfore as con­cernyng those naturall properties of will, Luther was neuer so foolishe, nor any of all the Lutheranes, as to exclude that will from nature by any meanes, which nature it selfe had engraffed into men. Let this therfore remayne vnshaken in this cōtrouer­sie as touchyng the substaūce of Freewill, that the essenciall sub­staūce therof vnited together with sensible reason doth alwayes cleaue inseparably to nature:The sub­staunce of Freewill is neuer seue­red from Nature. which neither Luther deny, nor any of all the Lutheranes did euer deny. What is it then (will you say) that Luther did deny in Freewill? I will tell you: so that your vnderstandyng be able to conceaue it.

Adam crea­ted in abso­late free­dome.It is out of all controuersie that Adam in his first creation, was endued with wonderfull and absolute freédome of will: to the vpholdyng of which freédome of will, the grace of God was not wantyng at that tyme, without the which he could not stand fast in that good will, wherein he was created though he would: now to haue a will to stand fast was not geuen him, but was left in the power of his Freewill, and so left, that if hee would haue stoode fast, hee had neuer bene euill, if he would not bene euill. And yet neither could he bee good through the force of his owne Freewill, without Gods speciall grace. But what did he? Be­yng thus left in the power of his owne Freewill, when he neither [Page 137] would stand fast, nor could fall without sinne: By Sinnyng (a­busing his owne freédome) he brought to passe, that he both lost and cast away him selfe, and his freédome withall: and yet not in such wise, as that there remained in him neither sense, nor feé­lyng, nor vse of will: but he so lost it, that, whereas he was be­fore immortall and freé, now hath he both lost his freédome, and also his immortalitie and righteousnesse withall. Whereby it came to passe, that the wretched man (by losing that pure freé­dome of good will, which he receaued in his first creation) pur­chased to him selfe and all his posteritie most miserable and la­mentable bondage. Now therfore beyng clogged and fastened to this state of bondage (as it were cloyed in claye) albeit after a certeine sorte we reteine still that power of vnderstandyng and appetite, whereby the mynde of her freé motiō is able to discerne betwixt sensible obiectes: yet can we neuer of our selues aspire agayne to that vprightenesse and immortalitie, which we haue lost: for beyng now fast yoaked, and sold vnder this yoake of ser­uitude, we doe serue such a seruile thraldome in this fleshe, that we can turne our selues to no one side, through any force of freé­dome, but we shall alwayes be the bondslaues of sinne & death, vnlesse the grace of Christ do helpe vs, and set vs at libertie.

Whereby you may easily perceaue (Osorius) what is the state and condition of Freewill: How mans will is free, & not free. to witte: that in one sense it may be taken not altogether freé, and agayne in an other sense, not o­therwise but freé. For if ye call backe the nature of mankynd to her first creation, and then will demaunde generally, whether there be no freé will in nature? I doe aunswere. That nature it selfe was created vpright at the first, & that God the good Crea­tour endued it with Freewill: but that man him selfe became ene­my to that freédome, & destroyed ye same in nature vtterly. But if you will proceéde, & make a further question, & demaūde what kynde of will (after sinne entred once) was in man towardes na­turall euill thyngs, and towardes deceitfull good thynges? I do aunswere that mās will (which they call Freewill) is altogether prone and enclined to wicked and euill thynges:The title onely of Freewill. And here you haue the bare title of Freewill. But if you demaunde how mās will is affectioned to good and godly thynges: Luther doth af­firme that it is neither freé, nor effectuall of it selfe, or inclinable [Page] thereunto & will boldly confesse yt it is bond, seruile, & altogether captiuate, vnlesse it be hoipen. Not bycause mās will is vnable to will or to attēpt any thyng of it selfe: but bycause of her owne power it is not able to will well, or do to well, in those thyngs yt apperteine vnto God.The name of Freewill without ef­fect. Where agayne you may seé the name of Freewill, but voyde of vse or substaunce. But as concernyng the proper qualitie or operatiō of freédome, albeit it reteine ye name of Freewill in ye Church in respect of the title: bycause it seémeth alwayes freé either to righteousnes, or free from sinne, yet ought it alwayes to be holden in such sorte freé, as not beyng alwayes good, yea rather neuer good in deéde, vnlesse it be gouerned by the goodnesse of the almightie God. Which thyng Augustine doth notably expresse saying.August. vpō the wordes of the A­post. Serm. 13. Freewill (sayth he) is nothing worth vn­lesse God doe gouerne the same. And immediately after. To this effect is thy will, whiche is called free, apt and sufficient, that by doing ill, it becommeth a damnable bondmayde. &c. Harken Osorius. If it be a bondmayde, now is it not freé thē. If by doing ill it bee damnable (for that as Augustine reporteth of it selfe it can do nothyng but euill). Wherefore is Luther condemned for saying that Freewill doth sinne deadly, when it worketh what it cā of it selfe? &c. or what can your selfe Osorius discerne other then a title voyde of substaunce in that Freewill, wherein you cā finde nothing effectuall to the purpose, that is to say, to ye worke of Saluation?

Luther doth not take away will from man, but freedome from will.For as much therefore as it so: what request is it that this accuser maketh? who contendeth so friuolously agaynst Luther for the Mooneshyne in the water, and for a title onely? whether is it bycause hee taketh away will from men, or freédome from will? As touchyng the substaunce of the matter, there is no qua­rell agaynst Luther: The whole controuersie ariseth then about the forme and qualitie of will. Well then Luther doth not deny the will of man (as I do vnderstād) but the freédome of will one­ly. Be it so Osorius: yet this may not suffice in the accuser, that he which is quilty shall make a simple denyall onely. But it be­haueth to consider diligently in what sense, & with what wordes deny all is made, what libertie hee meaneth, & in what maner of persons, and in what thyngs that libertie may be knowen to be. For neither doth Luther so vtterly abandone from nature of mā [Page 138] all freédome, as though there were no freédome at all, or as though it were so fait chayned with yron roapes, that it could moue it selfe to no vse. Albeit (I say) he do deny that will is freé, and confesse it to be a thyng of name and title onely: yet doth he not affirme this so to bee simply a title, as though man had no will at all, or as though it were neuer, or neuer was and neuer should be freé. And therefore in the same Article, he doth very learnedly annexe these wordes of restrainte. Post peccatum, After sinne, whiche wordes of Luther our Osorius doth very craftely dissemble and skippe ouer.The words of Luther touchyng title onely are expoun­ded. Besides this also is added thereunto an exception of tyme, to witte, Ante iustitiam & gra­tiam .i. Before righteousnesse and grace. By whiche playne wordes you might (as you are otherwise sharpewitted enough) haue easely discerned that Freewill is not so, simply, nor altoge­ther taken away, neither from all men, nor out of all order of na­ture: seyng as the state of Adam before sinne was most perfect in that integritie of Freewill: also seyng as after grace receaued Freewill is mighty in those persōs, which are made freé through Christ. As for the rest, who as yet stickyng fast cloyed in that old puddle of Sinne, are not yet come to bee regenerated by grace: in these persons if question be moued, what Freewill is in them, and of what efficacie in her owne nature:Freewill beyng with out grace whiles she doth what it can of it selfe, sin­neth dead­ly. Luther doth aū ­swere truely, that it is a thyng of title onely, and that it sinneth deadly, when it worketh what it can of it selfe, though she ende­uour the best that she can: meanyng hereby, that albeit Freewill continue to bee called Freewill after her first de [...]mination and state, yet that she hath vtterly lost the very substaunciall opera­tion thereof, and so lost the same, that whatsoeuer enterprise it attempt, yet can it not auayle one iote so much to the very sub­staunce of the matter, vntill the first nature beyng renewed by fayth, be fashioned a new, into a new creature. Well then, and what haynous matter at the length conteineth this sentēce that may prouoke you to barke so cruelly? or what haue you espied in this Freewill, that may auayle you or any other person to God­ward? If there be any thyng, declare it I pray you: If there bee nothyng: wherein then hath Luther offended? who perceauyng, as truth is, that Freewill is altogether vneffectuall to profite vs, doth therfore make small accompt therof.

[Page] Of Luthers Hyperboli­call maner of speach.But your Catholicke stomacke is somewhat queysie per­happes at the sounde of that Hyperbole of Luther not vsually frequented in your Schooles, whereby he doth so embase Free­will to be nothing els but a title, and a forged fantasie amongest naturall causes: As touchyng Luthers frequentyng of Hyper­bolicall speaches: Admit I would somewhat yeld vnto you: yet sithence the Scripture it selfe doth not altogether vnacquaynte it selfe with such kynde of figures, reseruyng alwayes the truth of things: what waywardnesse is this of those men not to vouch­safe in Luther to expresse certeine wordes with some sharpe ve­hemencie of speach,Outragi­ous Hyper­bolicall speaches in the Popish doctrine. whenas they them selues meanewhiles, ei­ther for very blockyshnesse doe not marke, or for very malice do not reforme, not onely ye most friuolous barrennes of words, but also the most outragious excesse of speaches, wherewith their whole doctrine swarmeth euery where? And what maruell is it then, if Luther inueighyng agaynst those so monstruous ou­trages of doctrine, waxe somewhat whotte sometymes, after a certeine more vehement maner of speakyng? But if any man adiudge him worthy to be reprehended in that respect, I would fayne haue the same man required: if hee will not vouchsafe to Impute that his heate to ye vehemēcie of Gods Spirite (which after the purpose of his good pleasure directeth his Instru­mentes as him lysteth) that hee will yet at the least bethinke him selfe, of how great Importaunce the cause was wherein Luther trauayled at that tyme: & weighe aduisedly the manifold darke­nesse, and errours of that season: and withall enter into a deépe consideration of the vnmeasurable iniuries of his aduersaries. Luther did then mainteyne the most iust quarell of Gods grace & mercy agaynst the innumerable droues of drousie Monckes, who hauyng ouerwhelmed the glorious Maiestie of the Grace of the Gospell,The Pa­pistes can neither a­way with fayth one­ly: nor with grace one­ly. did of an incomparable shamelesse excessiue Im­pudencie extoll aboue Moone and Starres, yea beyond all com­passe of reason, the force of mans Freewill: in such wise that no­thyng might beare palme besides mans merites onely, and the workes of Freewill (the mercy of God beyng vtterly banished and exiled) Or if they did at any tyme admitte Grace to be cape marchaunt (as it were) with Freewill, least they might seéme vt­terly to exclude Grace: Yet did they so admitte her, as they dyd [Page 139] the Article of Iustification. Wherein as they did with most vayne practize enforce this one point cōtinually: to witte: That fayth onely without workes could not Iustifie: euen so and in lyk [...] maner in this question of Freewill, they would neédes haue this to bee graunted, that the Grace of God was not the onely foundresse of good workes, and of our Electiō, but a seruaūt ra­ther, or at the most a companion of Freewill.

Whose vnmeasurable errour forced Martin Luther to that vehemet sharpnesse of speach,Luthers ve­hemencie whereupon it began. and not without good cause. And yet in all that his heate of wordes, what can any man (I pray you) finde, beyng not otherwise lead by corrupt affection, that is cōtrary to the naturall truth of thyngs? or that is not in all res­pectes faithfully agreable wt the very spirite & wordes of Gods Scriptures? Freewill is denyed to be of any value, not bycause it is of it selfe nothyng (if you respect the substaunce of it) but in respect of the operation therof, it is sayd to be altogether vneffe­ctuall to that worke, whereunto it is supposed to be conducible: not much vnlike to that figuratiue phrase of speach, wherewith Paule doth esteéme of Circumcision, and Uncircumcision to be nothyng worth: wherewith Esay the Prophet doth tearme I­dolles and Idollmakers to be nothyng: and wherewith Ieremy beholdyng the earth with open eyes, was sayd hee saw nought. Or as a man might say, that Osorius doth say nothyng at all, when as otherwise he is ouer lauishe of toung, if you regard his wordes and sillables: but nothyng at all to the purpose, if ye cō ­sider his Argumentes. Semblably Freewill is called a fay­ned deuise amongest thynges, or a tittle without substaunce, from whence ariseth no preiudice to mās nature: onely the cor­ruption of nature is discouered hereby.August. de grat. & Lib. A [...]bit. Cap. 16. For it is vndoubted (as Augustine truly teacheth) that we do will, when we will: and that we doe worke, when we worke. But to be able to will, and to be able to worke bee bringeth to passe in vs, of whom it is sayd, God is hee that worketh in vs both to will, and to doe: geuing most effectuall power to our will: whiche sayd, I will bring to passe that you shall doe. Aud agayne in other place.Aug. in his booke de bono perse­uerentie. Cap. 13. Thinking (sayth he) we do beleue, thinking we doe speake, thinking we doe all whatsoeuer we doe. &c. Loe here you haue the tittle of Freewill. And forthwith in the same Chap. But to the attaining the way of righteousnesse and the [Page] true worshipping of God, we are altogether of our selues insuffici­ent: for all our sufficiencie herein proceedeth frō God. &c. Where you may easily conceaue the substaūce it selfe, which Augustine acknowledgeth to be none at all in Freewill, but affirmeth bold­ly to cōsiste wholy in God. Albeit neither doth Luther him selfe (when he tearmeth Freewill to be a fantasie or deuise in thyngs) simply and barely affirme the same to be so: but annexeth there­unto an addition: namely Post peccatum, & ante gratiam. That is to say. After Sinne, and before Grace. Whereby the godly Reader may vnderstand, that those persones are not noted here, whom either the Grace of Christ hath vouchsafed into Freé­dome or whō, after Grace receaued, Christ will crowne in glo­ry to come.

For there be certeine distinct differences of tymes, and per­sons (if you know them not Osorius) whiche ought chiefly to be obserued:The diffe­rences of tymes and persōs must bee distin­guished. wherein if you be as yet vnskillfull, ye may repayre to your M. Lumbard, who will lead you to a descriptiō of Free­will, deuidyng it into foure braunches as it were.

Wherof the first is: The same that was created ioyntly with mans nature at mans first creation, sounde and perfect.Foure de­grees of Freewill af­ter Lom­band. 2. Lib. Distinct. 25 The se­cond whiche after mans fall, was throwen downe in them that were not regenerated. The third, whiche is proper and pecu­liar to the godly, after their conuersion vnto Grace. The last, which shalbe accomplished in those that shalbe glorified. As tou­chyng the first and last whereof, the Deuines make no question at all (as I suppose) Agayne if you will assigne Freewill to the thyrd braunche, Luther will nothyng gaynsay you: whose dis­putation concerneth those persons chiefly, who after Sinne, & before their conuersion beyng wounded with originall Sinne, haue not as yet recouered health in Christ Iesu, through the tri­acle of better Grace. In which sort of people, if you be of opi­nion that the state of Freewill ought by any meanes to be defen­ded, I would fayne learne of you first, whether ye will inueste those persons with Freewill playnly, perfectly, whole, and not diminished, or otherwise? If you will attribute such a freédome vnto them: it remayneth then, that by way of definition ye ex­pounde the difference betwixt the state, and condition of the first man before his fall, and this latter state and condition after his [Page 140] fall. But if you will dismember it, and will graunt vnto them certeine vnperfect dregges thereof onely, neither will Luther vary much from you herein:Freewill weakened after the fall, but here must be obserued a distinctiō of actions. so that ye will yeld some distinctiō thereunto, and vtter playnly and distinctly what kynde of liber­tie you meane: in what thynges you settle it, and how it ought to be taken: what this word Freewill emporteth: and to what ac­tions of mans lyfe it ought to be referred: and withall will vn­lose those crabbed knottes of equiuocatiōs, wherewith ye seéke to entrappe the truth.

For whereas the actions of mans lyfe are not all of one sort or kynde: some wherof proceédyng from nature it selfe be natu­rall, others altogether faultie and corrupt, others politique and apperteinyng to maners are morall, called good: Agayne some other spirituall, and consiste in the worshyppyng of God: It behoued you here to make manifest vnto vs, whiche of those actions you do meane. If you speake of the first kynde: certes euē vnto these, by ye very law of cōmon nature it selfe, we are all fastened & boūde of necessitie, wherby we are bereft of ye greatest part of our freédome. For what freédome can bee so mighty in mans wil as to preserue mā so, that he neuer neéde to sleépe, but be alwayes watchfull: that he neuer be sicke, but alwayes heal­thy: neuer receaue sustenaūce, not to disgest the foode receaued,Naturall a­ctions. not to prouide for his houshold, not to be carefull for him selfe & his family, not to be busied abroad, not to rest at home, not to en­ioy ye commō ayre, not to lyue, not to dye, not to performe the o­ther dueties apperteinyng to mans lyfe, whereunto we are for­cibly drawen by course of nature, not so much by allurement of will, as by very constrainte of necessitie.Ciuill acti­ons belon­gyng to the vse of com­mon lyfe. I come now to the vse and handlyng of Ciuill trades and forreine disciplines, and to other dutiefull actions, and considerations of the same kynde which are dayly frequented in mans lyfe. In the whiche albeit Luther will confesse many thynges to be conteined that are sub­iect vnto Freewill, yet will he not otherwise graunt thereunto, but that euen in the selfe same, ye vnderstandyng mynde is many tymes deceaued, will defrauded, and freédome altogether ouer­throwen. And yet doe we not for that cause vtterly extinguishe will or freédome, nor wrappe vp and entangle the mynde, nor spoyle reason of coūsell, nor dispossesse mā frō his aunciēt inhe­ritaunce [Page] of choyse or will: howsoeuer the cruell outrage of Sinne hath weakened, and wasted the sinewes and strength of nature, beyng well created at the first: yet remayneth neuerthe­lesse that naturall power of the soule, not onely in those that are renewed in spirite, but in them also that are not regenerate, in respect of those actions especially, wherof I made mention be­fore.Actions merely spi­rituall. But if the question be remoued to those actions, which do not belong to the naturall and common conuersation of life, but apperteine to the spirituall worshyppyng of God, and concerne the kyngdome of Christ: who can not here easily discerne that Freewill before it receaueth Grace, though it be garnished with neuer so gorgeous a tittle, hath besides a glorious tittle onely, nothyng els, whereby it may defende it selfe from seruile bon­dage, or rayse it selfe vp to attaine the true freéedome of Salua­tion. I doe not speake here of that freédome (Osorius) which is properly opposite to constrainte and compulsary violēce, wher­of we vaunte all in vayne: nor of that naturall power of the rea­sonable soule, whiche we seéke not to shake of: ne yet of mans will beyng regenerated, which we do not disable: finally nor yet of those actions wherewith this sensible lyfe is beautified, but I speake of those affections which are ascribed to the spirituall lyfe of the person that is regenerate in Christ.Fiue kyndes of Questi­ons. Whereupon ac­cordyng to those fiue distinctions afore mentioned, as many se­uerall kyndes of questions do arise: which for auoydyng confu­sion, must be seuerally distinguished.

1. Quest.First, if a question be moued of the freédome of nature being pure and sounde: as was before the fall of Adam: who doth not know that the state of that will was most pure and freé.Aug. vpon the worde of the Apo­stle, Serm. 2. And it is not to bee doubted, that mans Freewill was absolutely perfect in his first creation. But that man by sinne, lost the same freedome al­together. August.

2. Quest.Secundarely, if the question bee remoued ouer to the sub­staunce, and to that part of man wherewith the mynde is en­dued with vnderstandyng and appetite: as if this be the questiō, whether mans will which is called freé, were after the fall of A­dam vtterly extinct, and of no substaunce? we do aunswere here with Ambrose, Ambros. of the callyng of the Gē ­tils. Lib. 1. Cap. 3. that the Iudgemēt of will was corrupted in deede, but not vtterly taken away. And agayne. The deuill did not spoyle [Page 141] man of his will vtterly, but bereft him of the soundenesse and inte­gritie of will. For although mans will and the vnderstandyng parte of his soule, was miserably corrupted through originall Sinne, yet was it not so altogether abolished, but that there re­mayneth some freédome to doe: freé I call it in respect of those thynges, which are either naturally carryed to motion without Iudgement, as brute beastes: or whiche are forced by coaction agaynst nature, as stones. By this therefore that is spoken, it appeareth that will (wherewith we are naturally endued in res­pect of the essentiall and naturall disposition thereof) doth al­wayes remayne in mans nature, how corrupt soeuer it be: yea and remayneth in such wise, as hauyng alwayes a freé and vo­luntary operation in naturall causes, without all forreine coac­tion (vnlesse it be hindered) and a naturall sensibilitie also, and capacitie (as Iustine tearmeth it) in heauenly thynges,Capacitie, [...]. if it be holpē. And this is it that Augustines wordes seéme to emporte to my Iudgement, where speakyng in the defence of Freewill vseth these wordes.August. E­pist. 46. Beleeue (sayth hee) the holy Scriptures and that will is will, and the grace of God, without helpe whereof, man can neither turne vnto God, nor profite in God. Agayne in his se­cōd Epistle to Valentin. The Catholicke faith doth neither deny Freewill applyable to good life or badd life, nor doth esteeme ther­of so highly, as though it were of any value without the grace of God, either to turne frō euill to good, or to perseuer stedfast in good, or to attaine to euerlasting goodnes, whereas it feareth not now, left it may fainte and decay. &c. And agayne in an other place.August. de grat. & Lib. A [...]b. Lib. 1. Cap. 15. I con­fesse (sayth hee) that will is alwayes free in vs, but it is not alwayes good. But the maner how it is sayd to bee alwayes freé, must be learned of the same Augustine: It is either free from righteous­nesse (sayth he) when it is the bondslaue of sinne and than is it euill: or it is free from Sinne, when it is handmayd to righteousnesse and then is it good. &c.

It appeareth therefore by this twofold freédome of Augu­stine, Mans free­dome is twofold. How free­dome of will must be cōstrued. that mans will is alwayes freé both in good thynges and in euill thynges. But we ought to conceaue of this freédome in this wise: not that she hath power of her owne strength to make choyse of good or euill, namely in spirituall matters, as our ad­uersaries doe dreame: But accordyng to Augustines interpre­tation, [Page] whē will is naught, it is of her owne disposition naught: when it is good, then is it guided by grace not vnwillyngly, but voluntaryly, without compulsion:How Free­will must be taken. yet freé notwithstandyng al­wayes, whether it be good or bad: bycause it is alwayes volunta­ry & neuer constrained. And this much touchyng the propertie & naturall disposition of mās will, which who so will deny seemeth in my conceite to do euen all one, as if he should deny that man is a reasonable creature, for I seé no cause why reason may be more sequestred from man, then will ought to be seuered from reason. Which two thynges are so vnited together with a cer­teine naturall affinitie, & are so mutually linked together with an inseparable knot in the reasonable soule, that Reason cā nei­ther performe any exployte without will, nor will enterprise any thyng aduisedly without the guidyng of Reason. Therefore as Iudgement belongeth properly to Reason, so to will and to worke, apperteineth properly to will, whether it be to good, or to euil. The one wherof respecteth ye substaūce of will, the other is peculiar to the disposition therof. But as this liuely Reason be­ing enclosed within her certeine limittes & boūdes hath her pro­per & peculiar obiectes, so that she is vnable to rayse it selfe be­yond the cōpasse of naturall & vitall causes, vnles it be enlighte­ned: euē so will, beyng straighted wtin ye same limittes & boūdes of naturall causes, hath no power at all in it selfe either to attēpt or to atchieue those spirituall good things, vnlesse it be holpen.

3. Quest.For as much therefore as reason and will doe in their owne right exercize their actiuitie & dominiō in naturall thyngs one­ly (as I said before) as it were in their lawfull prouinces, here­of springeth the thyrd question. Whether there be any such freé­dome in will, as to be able of it selfe to embrace or eschewe those thyngs, which are gouerned by the externall senses, and by rea­son? Whereunto the aunswere is very easie:Whether will be free to those thynges whiche are ruled by reason. for it is not to bee doubted, but that the mynde and the wil (out of which two Free­will is deriued) do yet still reteine some certein sparckes of freé­dome, such as they be, euen in the forlorne nature: for the mynde after a certeine sorte is able to thinke, to purpose, to take coun­sell, to Iudge, to allow or disallow:The Mai­ster of the Sentences. 2 booke Dist. 24.25. in like maner also will doth enioy her certeine freédome in those thynges, whereunto Sense and Reason do direct. For it as able to wil, or not to will, to chuse [Page 142] or not to chuse, to desire, or to forsake, to stay his purpose or to chaunge it: to moue hether and thether: and after a certein ma­ner to exercize it selfe in her kynde to externall discipline, that is to say: to worke externall honest actions agreable with the law of God, & to eschew the cōtrary. Which thyng besides that many other thynges doe approue to be true: as well the sundry examples of Ethnicke people, as also the whole politicall estate doth verifie. So is it true also, that the same is not performed without Gods guidyng: which thyng Nazienzen did notably aduertize and expresse in his Oratiō.Nazienze­nus in Ora­tione. I know (sayth hee) that the Goale is not attained by the quyuernes of the person, nor successe of battell by prowesse, nor conquest atchieued by fighting, nor yet safe and sure Roade alwayes at skilfull saylers commaundement, but it is the onely worke of God to geue victorie, and to cōduct the Shippe safety vnto the happie hauen. &c. But for as much as these actiōs are referred more properly to politique reason, then to Diuini­tie, nor concerne Luthers discourse very much, it shalbe neéde­lesse to bestow any great labour herein.

Fourthly, to approche somewhat neare to those thynges which are peculiar,4. Quest. and belong chiefly to the doctrine of Deui­nes: and first of all if question be moued, whether mans Freewill do beare any stroake in actions meérely euil and corrupt, the do­yng whereof doth defile man in the sight of God? our aunswere herein will forthwith be supplyed with ye wordes of Augustine. August. de peccat. me­rit. Lib. 1. Cap. 5. God doth not helpe vs to committe Sinne (sayth he) but in that we fall from God commeth of our owne corruptiō. And this is our cor­rupt will. And agayne, where he reciteth the Obiectiō of Iulian, writyng agaynst ye two Epistles of ye Pelagianes, Aug. wri­tyng against 2. Epistles of the Pe­lag. 1. booke Cap. 2. Did the Free­will of the first man perishe therefore (sayth Iulian) to the ende it should compell all his posteritie to Sinne in their flesh of very neces­sitie? To whom Augustine maketh this aunswere: Which of vs dare say that mankinde was vtterly spoyled of Freewill by the sinne of the first man? freedome perished in deede through Sinne, but it was that freedome wherewith man was created in Paradise, free to enioy full righteousnes with immortalitie: for the which the na­ture of man standeth in neede of Gods grace, according as the Lord him selfe doth testifie, saying: If the Sonne do deliuer you, Iohn. 8. thē shall you be free in deede: Free I meane, to liue well and vprightly: for [Page] so farre is it of, that Freewill did so altogether perishe in Sinners, that by the same Freewill men do offende, especially they that take pleasure in Sinne, and which being delighted with the loue of Sinne, do with pleasure greedely folow their owne lust. And in ye 3. Chap.In the same booke the. 3 Chap. We do not say, as they report that we say, that all men are constrai­ned to fall into Sinne through the necessitie of their flesh, and as it were against their willes. But after they be growen to that rypenes of yeares, that they may discerne the inclinatiō of their own minde, and finde them selues fast holden in Sinne, through their owne con­sent, and so suffer them selues to be carried headlong from Sinne to Sinne wilfully and wittingly. This will now whiche is free to euill thinges, wherein it taketh pleasure, is therefore not free to good things, bycause it is not made free. &c. Adde hereunto the wordes of the same Augustine to the same effect discoursing vpon the wordes of the Apostle.Aug. of the wordes of the Apostle Serm. 13. To doe euill thou hast Freewill, without the helpe of GOD, albeit that will is not free. For of whom so­euer a man is holden bounde, to him is hee a bondslane. And a­gayne in an other place, To fall (sayth hee) commeth of our sel­ues and of our sluggishenesse: Moreouer writyng agaynst the same Pelagians. Aug. of the wordes of the Apostle Serm. 2. 11. That person hath Freewill to do euill (sayth he) either whom Sathan allureth to take pleasure therein by couert or open suggestion: or who that persuadeth him selfe thereunto. Fi­nally, if a mā might tarry still in alledgyng ye testimony of Au­gustine, what cā be clearer thē these wordes.De Ecclesiastic. Dog­matibus, 21 Freewill being cap­tiued hath no power to worke any thing but sinne, and is altogether vnable to worke righteousnesse, vnlesse God geue it free passage. Whereby you may perceaue how mās will is at one tyme both freé and captiue:Mans will how it is free, & not free. to witte, freé to doe euill, in as much as pursu­yng lust with voluntary delight, neédeth not any forreine coactiō to worke euill: whiche also Luther doth not deny: but in no res­pect freé to do good, vnlesse it be set at libertie by Gods grace, & to speake Augustines words, vnlesse it be guided to euery good actiō of doyng, speakyng, & thinkyng. And where be these iolly fellowes now, which do so stoutely yeld to mans will equall freé­dome to do good, or euill in this corruptiō of nature? and yet this might be graunted also after a sort, so that it be interpreted ac­cordingly: for if they meane of will regenerated, it is tollerable enough, neither will Luther be agaynst it: all whose discourse of [Page 143] Freewill tendeth not to any other will, then to that wherof men­tion hath bene made out of Augustine, whiche beyng without grace, is altogether vneffectuall of her owne nature to doe any thyng but to Sinne.

And hereof springeth at the length the whole substaunce of the fift questiō.5. Quest. Wherein the chief and speciall state of Luthers discourse consisteth: to witte, touchyng spirituall motions and actions: touchyng heauenly thynges and workes apperteinyng vnto God: touchyng spirituall righteousnesse: inward worshyp­pyngs: fayth: repentaunce: conuersion: loue & new obediēce. &c. As if the question were demaunded now, not of the substaunce of reasonable will: whether after the fall, there remayne in man a power of vnderstanding, & appetite to those thynges, which nature hath made subiect to mans witte and capacitie? or whe­ther man haue any freédome of will to corrupt affections? but rather that the question be after this maner,Whether nature be­yng not re­generated haue any free motiōs in spirituall thinges. whether mās will after Sinne, do reteyne still that force and strength of freédome in those spirituall thyngs before rehearsed, as that it be effectu­all of it selfe before Grace, or beyng holpen by Grace, could pre­uayle so farreforth inspirituall thynges, as that through grace and the naturall force of Freewill workyng together, it might become sufficient cause of it selfe, to enterprise spirituall moti­ons, and with all to put them also in practize? For all those thynges must be duely considered Osorius: If we will shew our selues vpright and hādsome disputers of Freewill: in debatyng of which question, if ye will permit our Cōfession to be coupled with the authoritie of the most sacred Scripture, we must of ne­cessitie hold this rule fast, whiche teacheth: that albeit mans na­ture is fallen from the integritie of that excellent and absolute freédome, yet it is not ouerthrowen into that miserable state of seruilitie, whiche is proper to brute beastes: neither that it is so altogether dispoyled of all the power of the first creation, as ha­uyng no sparkes at all of her aūcient dignitie remaynyng. For the nymblenesse of the mynde deuiseth many thynges with vn­derstādyng, digesteth with Reason,Reason. comprehēdeth with memo­ry, debateth with aduise, gathereth in order with wisedome, in­uenteth Artes, learneth Sciences, Recordeth thinges past, ob­serueth thynges present, and prouideth for thynges to come. [Page] Semblably will doth chuse,Will. and refuse the thynges that seéme either agreable to reason, or profitable to the senses. So that by those qualities appeareth sufficiently (I suppose) the difference that is betwixt vs, and brute beastes, and vnsensible creatures. Which actions beyng naturally engraffed within vs, yea with­out grace, albeit proceéde from the voluntary motion of the vn­derstandyng mynde, yet bycause they extende no further, then to this present lyfe, and perishe together with this mortall body, serue but to small purpose: yea euen then chiefly, when we make our best accompt of them. Moreouer although they bee after a sort freé of their owne nature, yet stand they not alwayes in such an vnchaūgeable integritie, but that reason is many tymes de­luded by great errours, will ouercharged with waywardnesse, & ye power of the mynde suffereth many defectes. Almightie God many tymes by secrete operation communicatyng his handy­worke to gether with these actiōs, doth apply the willes of men hether and thether, whereunto it pleaseth him: confoūdeth their deuises, aduaunceth their endeuours, not after the freé Imagi­nation of men, but according to his own freé decreé and purpose. And this much hetherto concernyng those obiectes, and exter­nall operatiōs onely, which concerne the common preseruation of this present lyfe, and which perish together with the same.

Freewill in respect of spirituall functions is not onely weakened in vs, but al­together blotted out. [...], power.But yet truely as concernyng either the enterprising, or ac­complishyng of those spirituall motions and operations, for as much as they do farre exceéde the capacitie of mans nature, the Scripture doth vtterly deny that man (beyng not as yet rege­nerated) is naturally endued with any force or abilitie of will sithence the first creatiō: but that all those giftes are vtterly lost through the greatnesse of Sinne, and that by this meanes [...] imbecillitie and weakenesse of nature, is by propaga­tion discended vpon all men, and nature it selfe corrupted with miserable faultinesse, yea and not with faultynesse onely (that doth exclude vs from those euerlastyng good thynges) but be­sides this also, that through this corruption of nature hath suc­ceéded in steéde of that auncient integritie, a certeine rebellious contumacie, and filthy infection of Diabolicall seéde, which doth depriue vs of all heauēly knowledge, and carry vs headlong in­to all maner of abhomination: whereupon ye doctrine of Luther [Page 144] is not vnfitly confirmed, wherewt they do conclude with Augu­stine most truly as agaynst the Romish Doctours, that Freewill is not onely weakened in vs, but vtterly extinct also, and so tho­roughly defaced, that if we bee any tyme enlightened with any sparcle of Regeneration, the same ought wholy be ascribed to the grace of God, and not to Freewill, nor to any strēgth of ours, and (to speake the wordes of Augustine) neither wholy,Aug. de bo [...] no perseue. Cap. 6.13. ne yet of any part. For vpon this point chiefly dependeth the whole va­riaunce betwixt vs and the Papistes touchyng Freewill.

These thyngs therfore beyng in thus sort discouered,Luthers proposition of bonde will defended. which ought in deéde haue bene distinguished at the first, for the better demonstration of the manifold diuersitie of questiōs. I will now returne agayne to Luthers position, who doth professe that Freewill is a thyng of Title onely, and a Name or Title with­out substaunce. Wherein if Osorius shall Iudge any worde to be misspoken and blameworthy in him, hee must then first aun­swere me to this question. For as much as Freewill is not all a­like in the persons that are regenerate, and in them that are not regenerate: and for as much as libertie also is to be construed in humane actions after one sort, but taken after a contrary cō ­struction in spirituall exercizes: hee must (I say) tell me which sorte of Freewill, or what maner of actions he doth treate of. If he meane that Freewill, which is now gouerned by the Spirite of God: Surely Luthers position maketh therof no mention at all. Or if he meane those naturall obiectes, whiche proceéde of common nature, or whiche are vsually frequented in the dayly practize of common conuersation, after the conduct of Morall reason, either in doyng right, or executyng wrong: So doth not Luthers position tende to these actions in any respect. But if the question bee after this maner: Of how much force and effi­cacie the bare choyse of man may be of her owne naturall abili­tie, either in enterprising or performyng those thynges,The bare Freewill of man beyng deuoyde of grace, is none other­wise thē as a dead man without a Soule. which doe obteine Gods grace for vs, or make an entrey for vs into heauen: then will Luther aunswere most truly: That there is scarse any substaunce at all in Freewill, auayleable to the pur­chassing of the kyngdome of heauen, except a glorious visour of Title onely: no more substaunce veryly then is in a dead man, who besides the onely shape and denomination of a man, hath [Page] nothyng in him whereby hee may receaue breath, and recouer life to the dead carcasse. For of what force is mans Freewill els towardes the thynges that apperteine vnto God, before it haue receaued grace, then as a dead man without lyfe? And for this cause the Scripture in many places, expressing our natures in their most liuely and natiue colours, calleth vs darkenesse, blinde to see: deafe to heare: vncircumcized of hart: wicked in the de­uises and imaginatiōs of our conceites: stonie harted: cast awayes: enemies in respect of our fleshly thoughtes: Rebelles against the Spirite: vnprofitable Seruauntes: bondslaues: sold vnder Sinne: dead vnto iniquitie: vnexcusable: subiect to wrath. S. Paule des­cribyng the callyng of Gods Elect in the first Chap. of his first Epistle to the Corinthes.1. Cor. 1. And those thinges whiche were not (sayth hee) God hath called. &c. If Paule doe affirme that the thynges which are, were not so at the first, and that truely: How can Osorius Iustifie, that will was any thyng worthe in them which as yet were not? I will rehearse vnto you the saying of our Sauiour in the Gospell, where settyng vs forth to behold our selues, as it were in a glasse: Let the dead (quoth hee) burie their dead, Come thou and preach the kingdome of God. Tell vs here Osorius, in what sense did Christ call them dead, whose bo­dies were not dead, if their life were endued with Freewill able to come vnto God in any respect, howsoeuer they seémed to be alyue in the Iudgement of men? But and if they had no lyfe in God, how then could Freewill be liuely, and forcible in the dead? Goe to: And how can the dead by any meanes restore him selfe to lyfe? May it please you to heare Augustine treatyng of the same matter.Aug. in his booke of Retract. Man can not rise againe (sayth Augustine) of his owne accorde as hee fell voluntaryly: Let vs take holdfast of the right hand of God, which he reatcheth out vnto vs. &c.

So that I would wish you to consider with your selfe adui­sedly, what thyng it is whiche we ought to receaue at Christes handes, without Freewill first: and what afterwardes of Free­will, without Christ: for the which we ought to be thankefull to him for them both. For if accordyng to the testimony of Augu­stine, Aug. En­ [...]hirid. There was none other cause of our destruction greater, then mans Freewill, by abuse wherof man lost both it, and him selfe: by what reason will you proue that to be sounde: which Augustine [Page 145] affirmeth to bee vtterly lost? or how can you restore lyfe to that thyng, whereunto you are indebted for your owne death?Freewill of it selfe vt­terly lost. Or what reliefe can you finde towardes the purchasing of eternall life from nature beyng so vtterly dispoyled? which euen then es­pecially, when it stoode in most perfect integritie, could neither helpe you nor her selfe, nay rather whiche brought you and her selfe both to vtter destruction? The Lord cryeth out in a certein place by the mouth of his Prophet.Os [...]c. 13. O Israell thy perdition is of thy selfe: but in me onely is thine helpe. &c. If there bee no helpe els where, then in the Lord onely, vpon whō alone all helpe de­pendeth, what is there left then in Freewill, that we miserable wretches may trust vnto? If you be ignoraunt therof (Maister Osorius) the Prophet will forthwith declare it vnto you: For­sooth what els think [...] you, but vtter destruction? For in as much as one man by one faulte onely, wherein he alone offended, did through his freédome of will (whenas yet it was most pure and sounde) throw headlong both him selfe, and all his ofspryng into so horrible thraldome, frō most absolute and most perfect Ma­iestie of freédome: what other thynges will Osorius then gape after, out of this his Freewill, sithence nature is altogether defi­led now, who hath made so often shypwracke of his freédome & of all his Freewill also, & standyng (as it were) in dispayred case, is enforced dayly to runne to the second table of Penitentiary Confession for relief, but vtter perditiō? vnlesse he take holdfast by fayth of that right hand of God, whereof S. Augustine doth make mētion before. Therfore let this great Proctour of Free­will take good heéde, least whiles he accuse Luther to much, he cōmit a more execrable fact, & bewray him selfe a more deadly enemy to Gods grace, thē ye other may seéme aduersary to Free­will. For if this controuersie here debated touchyng the merite of Saluation tende to this end onely, to sifte out from whence the cause therof ariseth: to witte: whether from the onely grace of God? or whether from Freewill as a necessary and vnsepara­ble coperterner therewith? truely, if it be true which the Prophe­ticall Scripture doth most truely conclude,The Grace of God without our Free­will onely sounde and perfect, That all helpe consi­steth onely in the Lord, and in our selues nothing but destruction. I can not seé, but that by how much soeuer it shall please Osorius to establishe Freewill, by so much shall hee disployle GOD of [Page] his Grace and that most iniuriously.

But I heare the colorable pretence of Osorius, wherewith he practizeth to make his defence carry a certeine shewe of truth, paintyng it out with a deceauable foyle: so that hee may seéme neither to yeld all to the grace of God, accordyng to the Catho­licke fayth, nor yet (after the errour of the Pelagians) leaue no­thyng at all to the operation of Grace.August. de Nuptijs & cōc [...]p. Lib. 2. Cap. 3. For whereas the deuilish doctrine of the Pelagians (which taught that euery mā was en­dued with sufficient freédome to doe good without the helpe of God) hath bene long sithence condemned for hereticall, accor­dyng to the testimony of Augustine: This Gentleman fearyng to bee deémed a Pelagian, doth deuide his Assertion after such a sort, that he may neither seéme vtterly to exclude Grace altoge­ther, nor yet so yeld ouer all to Grace, but that Freewill must of necessitie be copemate with Grace. But let vs heare Osorius vtteryng his owne wordes.

Pag. 148. Veryly we do cōfesse this to be true, that our thoughtes & our workes which we deuise & bring to passe vertuously and godly ought to be ascribed vnto God, through whose grace and fauour they are accomplished in vs. Behold god­ly Reader, how this godly Prelate, of his Catholicke pietie, at­tributeth some thyng to the Grace of God: whiche doth ascribe our godly sayinges, thoughtes, & deédes to the worke of God. And this much truly did neuer any of the Pelagians deny, but affirmed alwayes, that onely God must bee accompted the Au­thour, not onely of our lyfe, of our beyng, yea of all the actiōs al­so of our lyfe: but also that all our Freewill ought to be referred to him, beyng the Authour thereof. But this is not enough O­sorius: for question is not demaunded here, whether God be the Authour of all good workes, which no man will deny. But the question is whether those thynges,Whether our conuer­sion be the worke of God onely. which belong to the purcha­sing of our conuersion and Saluation in the sight of God, do so proceéde from God the Authour therof, as that his onely Grace do worke ye same altogether in vs: or whether Freewill also doth worke any thyng together with Grace. For herein consisteth the chief knot of all the controuersie. Which shalbe debated af­terwardes more at large in place fit for it by Gods grace. In ye meane space, let vs marke how Osorius goeth foreward.

[Page 146] For vnlesse God had restrayned me from rushyng wil­fully into wickednesse: vnlesse Gods spirite had forewarned me with his coūsell, that I should not throw my selfe head­long into euerlastyng calamitie: vnlesse he had strengthe­ned me with his wholesome and strong protection, & made me able to worke the good worke that he cōmaunded me, I should neuer haue bene able either to thinke a good thought, or to doe a good deede: and all myne endeuour employed either to the purposing or accomplishyng my worke should haue bene vtterly vneffectuall. What neéde I aunswere much hereunto? Neither could Luther him selfe (if he were alyue) speake or professe any sentence more godlyly, if a man regard the wordes, and not the meanyng of the man. For what can be more truely or more substauntially spoken, thē that Freewill can worke nothyng but wickednesse, destruction, headlong ruine, and euerlasting wretchednes? nothyng but noy­some thoughtes, vnlawfull Imaginations? finally nothing that is godly or good, except it be guided by the grace of God? which Grace doth restrayne from wickednesse, doth recouer from de­struction, doth direct from wandring, doth reforme with whole­some counsell, and bryng into the right way those that goe a­stray. Truely if the matter go thus altogether, as the wordes emporte: That is to say: If the very founteine and perfection of all our actiōs, thoughtes, and deuises tendyng to godlynesse and poured abroad into our lyues, doe issue vnto vs from no where els, thē from the onely wellspryng of Gods grace: what other abilitie then shalbe left in wretched Freewill to worke a­ny good worke (if Osorius he the man he would seéme to be) but an vnprofitable and naked name onely? But least peraduenture he may seéme to be hyred by the Lutheranes, to write so effectu­ally in the defence of Grace, our Catholicke Byshop returneth agayne to the patronage of Freewill, endeuouryng to proue by his Diuinitie, that the worke of our conuersion doth not so alto­gether depend vpon Grace onely, but that Freewill also must play his part withall. And why so?

Bycause (sayth hee) it is in our power not to consent to good counsell, Pag. 149. to reiect it beyng offered, to refuse courte­sie, and through wickednesse and outrage to treade vnder [Page] foote profered grace. And who doth deny but that we may so do? Nay rather what els doth Freewill at all, whē it worketh af­ter her owne nature, but by resistyng & refusall throw headlong into errour? (Luther him selfe witnessing ye same?) But for more credite of the matter Augustine shall aunswere for Luther. An auns­were of August. De peccat. & merit. Lib. 2 Cap. 18. In that we turne our selues away from God (sayth he) commeth of our selues, and this is euill will. But in that we turne vnto God, we can not, except he styrre vp and helpe vs thereunto. And this is good will. Thus much Augustin. We may therfore resiste (say you) and withstand the holy Commaundementes of God accordyng to the operation of our Freewill. In deéde there is nothyng more easie, neither neédeth any helpe hereunto. A­gayne, We can geue our consent vnto, and embrase Gods Commaundementes also: Surely this is true, if the Grace of God doe guide vs: But if Gods grace doe not gouerne vs, we do then vtterly deny it, Augustine agreéyng with vs herein. To Sinne (sayth Augustine) we are not holpen by God: August. De peccat. & merit. Lib. 2 Cap. 5. but to doe well or accomplish the Cōmaundementes of righteousnes through­ly, we are not able except God helpe vs: And immediatly after. If we be turned from God, August. De peccat. & merit. Lib. 2. Cap. 5. it proceedeth of our selues, and then we be wise accordyng to the flesh: God therefore doth ayde men beyng conuerted, and forsaketh them beyng reuolted, yea he doth not one­ly helpe them beyng conuerted, but helpeth them also that they may be conuerted. Thus much Augustine. Go to, and what will O­sorius Logicke conclude hereof at the length?Obiection. Forsooth if euery man of his owne freé power be able to dissent from, and consent with the Grace of God, it appeareth then, that Freewill is not altogether vneffectuall. For to this effect I suppose will he di­rect the force of his Argument. But I doe aunswere agayne with Augustine. Aunswere out of Au­gust. That the same might be so construed and graun­ted well enough, if it were not spoken by them, whose meanyng is apparaunt. For to admitte that man him selfe may will, and may condiscende, and yeld, and do somewhat in his conuersion, and spiri­tuall workes: yet hath not man this power of his owne naturall strength neither in whole, nor in part: but he receaueth that strēgth of him, which worketh in man, both to will and to do.

Freewill hath no power of her selfe ei­ther of the whole or of any part to worke.And therfore the reason that Osorius frameth here, of not re­iectyng, and of condiscendyng: if hee meane of naturall giftes: [Page 147] Augustine doth playnely declare, that this is the very errour of Pelagius. If he meane of the power of Grace, hee gaynsayeth Luther nothyng at all: who did neuer so dispoyle mans Free­will of freedome, but that beyng manumysed and aduaunced by Gods grace, it was able to do much: and agayne he did neuer so vphold this freédome, but that man might of his owne proper strength refuse Grace, beyng at any tyme offred: (for neither Luther nor any other did euer dreame (I suppose) that Grace was so necessaryly throwen vpon mans will in his cōuersion, as that he should be enforced to reteine it beyng offered, whether he would or no, lyke as when a marke is emprinted into the fleshe by a who [...]e yron, or as stones that are violently whirled out of a Crossebow. But this is generally affirmed, that the holy Spi­rite of God doth by his secret operation, worke such an effectu­all influence in the myndes of the faythfull, that the grace which he offreth may bee receaued, not with vnwillyng will, but that will may with gladsome cheare delight to embrace it, with most earnestly bent affectiō. But if it happen to be reiected, the fault therof to spryng from out the corruption & malice of the flesh. If Osori. will not be satisfied yet, but will vrge still with this his Argumēt, that euery person accordyng to the proportion of his Freewill, may freély reteyne, or refuse the Grace of God, if he will. I will then aunswere briefly and resolutely, that the disceit of this suttle Sillogisme is framed of the Fallax: A Fallax, a Diuisis ad Coniuncta. to witte: a Diuisis ad Coniuncta, as the Logicians do terme it. For albeit will (beyng seuered from Gods grace) be of it selfe freé to reiect Gods callyng: yet is it not after the same sort freé to obey Gods callyng, vnlesse it bee altogether vpholden by the ayde of Gods grace. Let vs now seé further the remnaunt of his disputation.

I do stand at the doore (sayth he) and knocke:Pag. 149. hee doth not say, I do breake open the doores, or I do rende abroad the henges and doe violently rushe in: but I knocke onely: that is to say: I do admonish: I do foretell the daunger ensu­yng: I doe foreshew hope of Saluation, I promise to geue ayde: and I allure vnto me, with fayre promises. In deéde Osorius hee standeth knockyng at the doore, and they to whom it is geuen do open vnto him, but vnlesse it be geuen vnto them they open not at all. Therefore in that hee doth knocke, this is [Page] proper to the callyng: but in that an opē entrey is made, this is to be peculiarely ascribed to Election and Grace. So likewise he doth not heaue the doores of the hookes, nor rusheth in forci­bly: and yet although hee presse not vpon with any foreine force, he worketh notwithstandyng a secret effectualnesse, and draweth them vnto him, whō he hath chosen, and entirely loueth, through inward operation of voluntary will.Against the 2. Epistle of the Pelag. 1. booke Cap. 18. Neither is any mā good that will not be good (as Augustine reporteth) yet to haue a will to be good, must the grace of God needes be assistaunt: bycause it is not written in vayne: God is hee that worketh in vs, both to will and to do accordyng to his good pleasure, and the Lord doth first frame and fashion the will. &c. Therefore whereas it is sayd that God doth knocke at the gate of our will, I gladly yeld hereunto: but to say that he doth no more but knocke, this I do vtterly deny: In lyke maner whereas you say that hee admonisheth, that hee foretelleth daunger ensuyng: that he feédeth with hope: that he promiseth ayde, and that he allureth with reward, truely these are not vntruely spoken Osorius: But ye speake not all, nor as much as should be spoken. And therefore herein your haltyng bewrayeth it selfe playnely. For you are flowen into a Fallax, which the Logicians do tearme Ab insufficiente causarū enume­ratione. The suttel­tie of the Argument framed by not yeldyng cause suffi­cient. True it is, that the grace of God doth knocke: doth forewarne, and doth allure: what? doth grace therfore nothyng els but knocke? forewarne? promise? and persuade? Doth it not also create within vs a cleane hart? doth hee not renew a new spi­rite within our bowels? doth he not plucke out of our fleshe the stony hart, and engraffe in steéde therof a fleshly hart? Yea doth he not also alter all our whole nature? I meane all those inward naturall qualities: doth hee not make them plyable and (as it were) out of an old deformed lumpe, new fashion it into a new creature? doth he commaunde those thynges, which he willeth by admonishyng onely? by callyng, and persuadyng onely? doth not Gods Grace geue also that which he commaundeth? And where in the meanes whiles lurketh then the law that is writ­ten within, in the hartes of the faythfull?

When we heare these wordes in the Gospel: No man commeth vnto the Sonne, but he whom the Father draweth: Tell vs a good felowshyp, doth he which draweth nothyng els but ad­monish? [Page 148] but call? but allure?August. a­gaynst the 2. Epistle of Pelag. 1. booke Cap. 19. What is he (sayth Augustine) that is drawen if he bee willyng? for the willing are lead, and none are drawen but the vnwilling. And yet no man commeth, but he that is willing: but to this willingnesse he doth draw vs by wonderfull meanes, who is skilfull to worke within, euen in the very hartes of men, not to make the vnwilling to haue fayth, but to frame the vn­willing plyable to be willing. &c. If it be so that ye heauēly Grace by inward operation do make men willyng, that before were not willyng: I would fayne learne now whether Grace do no­thyng els,Grace doth not knocke alone, but openeth mans will also. but knocke onely? Go to, and whiles Grace is a knoc­kyng, who is it within that openeth? Freewill, I suppose: But now for as much as this Freewill is powred into all persons in­differently by a generall influence, as much in one, as in an o­ther, why doe not all alyke open to the heauenly Grace, when the Lord doth knocke? forsooth bycause they will not (you will say) yet doth the wheale runne neuerthelesse as rounde as it did before. For I demaunde agayne, why some seéme to be willyng whiles others are vnwilling? what els thinke you to be the cause hereof, but bycause God doth open their Freewill first, whiche do open vnto God, that they may be able to open, otherwise it could neuer opē vnto him. Whereby you may easely perceaue, that Freewill is not the porter to let in Grace, so much as the ve­ry gate it selfe: and that it doth not els open, but as it is first o­pened by his meanes whiche doth knocke, and that it applyeth not any way els, but as it is made plyable, and so made plyable, that it may seéme rather to be drawen, then to bee lead: neuer goyng before Grace, but followyng altogether, and to speake the wordes of Augustine, August. de verbis A­post. Sermo 13. Neuer as a foregoer, but as an hand­mayden of Grace onely in euery good worke. If you will deny this to be true, what Argument shall I better vse agaynst you then the wordes of your owne mouth? For what meaneth it els that you your selues of the Romish Sinagogue at the begynnyng of your Mattens, pray dayly to the Lord Domine labia mea a­peries, Lord open thou our lyppes, O Lord o­pē thou our lyppes. if they open of them sel­ues, and are not rather opened by him? And in what sorte doe you then desire the Lord to open your lyppes, that your mouth may shew forth his prayse, whom you affirme to do nothyng els but knocke onely? Why therfore doe ye not rather amende your [Page] booke, that your prayer may bee agreable with your desire, and sing an other song on this wise: our Freewill shal opē our lippes O Lord, and our mouth shall chaunte forth thy prayse.

Obiection. What then (will you say) is it not in our owne power to moue our lyppes? Aunswere. Yes truly Osor. there is nothyng more easie then to moue them to contētion, to quarellyng, to lyeng, to blas­phemous communication, to noysome talke, and vayne tittle tattle. But I will in no wise graunt that we are able to moue our lippes, or to open our hartes of our owne will, to shew forth the prayse of God. All which notwithstandyng tend not to this ende, as though Freewill did worke nothyng at all: yes it wor­keth surely: but how it worketh and how it is wrought, bycause Osorius doth not declare sufficiently Augustine shall make playne vnto him.Aug. vpon the wordes of the A­postle the. 15. Sermon. Not they that are carried of their owne motion but as many as are carried by the Spirite of God, they are the chil­dren of God. Here will some man say vnto me. Then are we plyed, and do not plye our selues. I aūswere, yea rather thou doest both ap­ply thy selfe and art applyed: And euen then doest thou plye well, if thou be plyed by Gods spirite, without whom thou canst doe no good thing: euen so also thou doest apply thy selfe of thine owne Freewill without the helpe of Gods Spirite, & thē doest thou euill. To this ende is thy will, which is called free, prone and effectuall, that by doing euill, it become a damnable handmayd. &c. Whiche wordes you must interprete to bee spoken of Augustine in this wise: not that will doth worke nothyng, but that it worketh no good thyng without Gods helpe. And that you may conceaue the same more effectually, harken what the same Augustine teacheth in his treatize De Gratia, & Lib. Arbit. August. de grat. & Lib. Arbit. Cap. 16. It is vn­doubtedly true (sayth hee) that we doe, when we doe: and that we will, whē we will: but he bringeth to passe in vs to will, and to do geuing to our will most effectuall abilitie, which hath sayd: I will make you that ye shall be able to do. Briefly to cōclude. It shalbe lawfull for me to speake the same and in such wise touchyng o­penyng, whiche and in what wise Augustine spake of doyng, when the Lord doth knocke we do open with a Freewill in deéde, bycause when we do open, we do it freely and willingly: but that we may be able to do so, not we, but he doth open our harts first. Whereby you may perceaue to what end this our discourse ten­deth, [Page 149] not that Freewill hath no place,Freewill is made na­ked of all maner me­rite. but that it be voyde of me­rite, vnworthy of prayse, and to be takē for no part of any cause, not bycause we dispoyle her of all maner of motion, but we doe distinguish the maner of motion in such wise, that all the prayse of well doing be ascribed vnto him, vnto whom onely all is due, whatsoeuer we will or can, as Augustine reporteth: and that in this respect Freewill is endued with no actiuitie, whereupon it may vaunte her force:Aug. in the same booke the 13. Chap. For so shall we liue more out of daunger (sayth he) if we yeld ouer all vnto God, and not commit part of our actions to him, and part to our selues. &c. And agayne in the xiij. Chapter of the same booke. I graunt in deede that we will and worke, but God worketh in vs both to will, and to worke, according to his good pleasure. Thus it behoueth vs to speake and beleue. This is godly: this is true, that by this meanes our Cōfession may be hū ­ble and lowly, and all attributed vnto God. &c.

But I heare what this arrogaunt hautynes of Frewill doth whisper agaynst this humble Confession.

If all this (sayth he) be the worke of God,Pag. 149. and no power bee left in mans endeuour that may procure furthe­raunce to our conuersion.

Ergo, sithence there is nothyng left in vs to doe, what are we thē, other then as good as stones & stockes.

Which Argument Osorius hath gathered (as hee sayth) not out of S. Paule, but out of Luthers braynsickenesse. I would haue marueiled if Osorius could haue gathered any Ar­gument from any without some reproche, or could haue repro­ched any man without a lye. But thus to doe is not to gather some thyng frō an other, but to lye rather: not to dispute by Ar­guyng, but to play the part of a captious scoffer. But to let passe this dronken scoffe, as which neither furthereth his cause, nor empayreth Luthers estimation: we will turne our talke a­gayne to ye matter. Luther is here therfore cited for a drunc­kard, who by blazing abroad Medusaes head doth enchaūt men into stones and flyntes. And why so? Forsooth bycause he doth deny, yt we do aspire to ye fauour of God of our own strēgth: but affirmeth that all whatsoeuer we do take in hād,The bea­tyng down of Osorius Argument. or bryng to passe towardes ye attaynement of saluation, we obteine the same wholy through the onely worke of Gods grace, which worketh [Page] all in all in vs. Hereupon Osorius cryeth out forthwith, That will is fast tyed, boūde, and restrayned with euerlasting fet­ters, so that men must of necessitie be chaunged into stones, rockes and stockes. So that it is much to bee feared, least by this Argument he turne Peter also into a stone, bycause Christ called him a Stone: & least he chaunge Christ him selfe Peters Maister also together with Peter into some stony substaunce, bycause Paule calleth him a Rocke, and bycause the Prophetes doe nominate him ye Corner Stone. It is also to be feared, least he bewitche into stones all the whole aūcient race of the old Testa­ment: of whō we heare the Prophetes speake in this wise.Ezechiell. 11. Chap. and 36. Chap. And I will take away from their fleshe their stony hart. &c. If the pro­pheticall Scripture do accustome to resemble the properties of personages by some similitude of domme creatures, after an vsuall phrase of figuratiue speache: may it not likewise be law­full for vs to expresse the hardnesse of mās nature, vnlesse we en­chaūt mē forthwith into stones, stockes, & flyntes? I beseéch you. Or bycause we professe that Freewill is all together vneffectu­all in those thynges, which apperteine vnto God, and to worke or vnderstād things, which passe beyond the reache of mās capa­citie (vnlesse it be plyed by Gods Spirite) is there no force ther­fore in Freewill to worke in other thynges?The Fallax from the proposition Secundum quid, to Simpliciter. or to worke in those thynges, which belong vnto God beyng holpen and assisted by the grace of God? And will you so frame your Argument from the proposition Secundum quid, to conclude with that, which the Sophisters terme Simpliciter?

Osori. dou­ble fault.Wherein though you be a Byshop, your fatherhoode seémeth to me to haue committed a double errour. First bycause you cō ­ceaue not the sense of those men sufficiently, whō you quarell a­gainst: next bycause you deceaue your selfe in ye selfe same Asser­tiō which you do mainteine. For those men, which do call backe all the causes of actiōs frō Freewill, attributyng them to Gods grace onely, doe not conceaue of it after such sort, as though the mynde beyng endued with heauēly strēgth, whē it is made plya­ble, doth not apply it selfe any thyng in the meane space.Aug. contra Iulian. Lib. 4. Cap. 3. For euē as Gods secrete Grace through Iesus Christ our Lord, is not pow­red into stones stockes or brute beastes (as Augustine doth truly record) but into him which was created in the Image of God): euē [Page 150] so God doth not worke in this his owne Image, as hee worketh in a stone: or after the maner as huge heauy burdēs are drawen by mans pollicie: in the which abydeth no inward operation (as Aristotle sayth) which may auayle to motion:Aristotles Ethickes booke. 3. Cap. 1.5. The matter goeth farre otherwise here: and the natures are farre vnlike. True it is that the heauenly grace doth draw vs in deéde, not through a­ny force of externall coaction, as blockes & Images are drawen: but God leadeth and boweth, which way him listeth, euery per­son inwardly by his owne will, or plyeth hee any man other­wise then voluntaryly.

It is well then (say you) If will do nothyng but when she will, Obiection. and if it will alwayes first before it do: how then shall will bee sayd to worke passiuely, whiche both willeth al­wayes those thynges which it doth, and doth nothyng but that whiche it willeth?The Aun­swere. The Aunswere is easie: Will in deéde doth nothyng, but when it willeth: this is true. For otherwise it could be no will, vnlesse it did doe willyngly and voluntaryly. But yet neither doth will alwayes all those thynges whiche it willeth: And agayne to be able to will, it is alwayes made ply­able first. By the one whereof may be vnderstanded the Instru­ment or toole of action,How mans will doth execute the force of an instrument. by the other the cause of action. Wher­fore whenas will is taken after this maner, that it yeld to the guiding of the workeman in ye maner of a toole, by what meanes can it be called either freé, which serueth as bounde? or how can it be sayd to do, which in doyng doth alwayes suffer and is dri­uē? And yet it doth not so alwayes suffer by doyng, that it neuer doth any thyng of it selfe: and agayne doth neuer so doe in those thynges which apperteine vnto God, but that it is made plya­ble to doe. And therfore the maner how it doth, and how it suf­fereth, must be aduisedly considered.By what meanes wil doth both worke and suffer. For we doe confesse that both are true after a certeine sort, as Augustine testifieth in his booke De Correp. & gratia. Let thē not deceaue them selues ther­fore (sayth he) which say. To what purpose are we taught and com­maunded to eschue euill and to do good, if we can not doe it, but as God doth worke the same in vs, Aug. Lib. de Correp. & gratia Cap. 2. to will and to worke? Nay rather let them vnderstand, if they be the children of God, that they are made plyable by Gods Spirite, to doe the thynges that ought to be done, and when they haue done so, to yeld thankes to him, by whom [Page] they were made to do so. For they are made plyable, bycause they should do something, not bycause they should do nothing. &c.

Which saying doth make euident vnto vs, that eche of these two are to be founde in Freewill, both that it is made to do, when it doth well, and agayne that it selfe also doth, when it is made to do.How will demeaneth it selfe pas­siuely and actiuely. So that herein is no contrarietie at all, but that it may both demeane it selfe by suffering, and also by doing (and to aun­swere for Luther with Luthers owne wordes) to witte, after di­uers and seuerall sortes, and after the common phrase of speach in diuers and seuerall respectes. For in respect of the worke it selfe, whenas will occupyeth the place of an Instrument or toole, it both doth, & is made to do, euen as other tooles do in any mat­ter whereunto they are applyed. But if you haue relation to the efficient cause or workeman, to whose vse it serueth in steéde of a toole: in this respect the will of man demeaneth it selfe altoge­ther sufferyngly, as the which in respect of procuryng of Gods Grace (from whence issueth all motion of good will) it worketh nothyng at all, but simply obeyeth & suffereth. For in any good worke, what is mans will elles, then an instrument of the holy Ghost?Mans will is taken for an Instru­ment, yet free neuer­thelesse. voluntary in deéde, bycause it is moued whether soeuer it is moued of her owne accord, yet is it an instrument notwith­standyng, bycause of thynges well done, it is neither the cause it selfe, nor any sparcke of the cause in respect of the worker, but a seruaunt rather, and a handmayde onely: whose seruice, the Spirite of God being the worker, doth apply to do these things which it pleaseth him to haue to be done in vs: for the accompli­shyng wherof it ministreth no helpe at all, as of her selfe.

But the Papisticall generation can not disgest this by any meanes, to whom sufficeth not that Freewill shalbe taken as an instrument,Wherein the papistes do attribute to much to Freewill. or as it were a workeshoppe onely, vnlesse it beare as great a stroke or rather with Gods Spirite wor­kyng together with it: nor doe they thinke it sufficient that the whole action of our Election and regeneration bee ascribed to the onely freé mercy of God, vnlesse we also as felow workemē, be coadiutours of this worke together with God. For euen the same doe Osorius wordes emporte manifestly, which folow in this wise.

Pag. 149.Do ye not therefore perceaue (sayth he) by Paules owne [Page 151] wordes, that Freewill is approued by his authoritie, which Luther doth practise to ouerthrowe? For to what ende would he haue called vs fellow workers with God, if none of vs did further the worke that GOD worketh in vs? to what purpose would he haue admonished vs to worke our owne Saluation, if to do it were not in our owne power? We are together Gods labourers as Paule reporteth. 1. Corinth. 3.1. Cor. 3. [...]. Where I know that the word [...], doth signifie together labourers. But what is this at the length to the purpose? doe you not here playnly put the old Prouerbe in practize? to witte: I aske you for Garlicke, and you offer me Oynyones, I desire to borrow sickles, and you lyke a churlishe neighbour deny that you haue any Mattockes. How carefull the Apostles were in plantyng the doctrine of the Gospell we are not ignoraunt, nor do deny. And it is not to be doubted, that Gods prouidence vsed them as most choyse instrumentes to addresse, and husband his Uynearde, yea and that not without singular profite. But we make no enquiry here as now, how much mans industry did bryng to passe by the outward preachyng of the word, or whom it profited most: but the question is here touchyng the fruite of inward cōuersion, whether Freewill of her selfe do worke, or not worke any furtheraunce towardes the embracyng of fayth, to­wardes repentaūce, towardes spirituall righteousnes, towards attainement of Saluation, and towardes the regeneration of lyfe: So that the state of the question be now, to witte: Whether mās mynde and will beyng of the selfe same nature (that it was when we were first borne) be endued with any actuall or effectu­all power able to worke together,The state & substaunce of the que­stiō of Freewill. with Gods holy Spirite to­wardes the begynnyng of our conuersion, and entryng into our godly consideration of good purposes, and actions of inward o­bedience? Wherein many writers doe vary in Iudgement and opinion, yea that not a litle.

But Osorius propositiō alledged here of ye Apostles toge­ther workers maketh nothyng to the purpose,How it is to be vnderstāded that the Apo­stles were together workers with God. nor auayleth to ye maintenaunce of Freewill a rushe. For to admit that the Apo­stles were together workers with God: yet that those same together workemē should be hypred to worke in this Uyneard, and sent abroad into the Lordes haruest, proceéded not of their [Page] owne voluntary motion or Freewill, but of the freé Election and callyng of God onely. Agayne this their Ministery (as farre forth as concerneth their own persons) euen then when they la­boured most earnestly, was extended no further, then to the out­ward preachyng & dispensation of the word: for as touchyng the inward conuersion of the hearers, & nourishment of their fayth, this was the onely worke of the holy Ghost, and not of the Apo­stles: Paule did plante: Apollo did water. But what doth this helpe to Freewill, when as neither he that plāteth, nor he that wa­tereth are any thing at all, but God onely who geueth the encrease. And what is the reason then, why they are sayd to bee nothyng? Is it bycause he that plāteth, and he that watereth, and he that ploweth doth nothyng at all? was Paule nothyng? or did he not worke at all? who beyng continually trauailyng is reported to haue laboured more then all ye rest? or shall we say that ye rest of ye Apostles did nothyng, which did employ not their trauaile one­ly, but shedd their bloud also in furtheryng ye worke of the Gos­pell? Yeas veryly, wonderfull much, if you respect the outward Ministery of Preachyng the word and their function. But we doe enquyre of the inward operation of conuersion, and the re­newyng of the myndes, which is the onely worke of God, not of Freewill, nor of mans outward endeuour. Godly Preachers in deéde doe pearce into the eares of men with outward voyce, & set downe before them the wordes of fayth and truth: And yet thus to do, springeth not of their own Freewill, but from the freé callyng of God, whereby they are lead to do the same: but to be­leue ye doctrine inwardly, to become faithful hearers of ye whole­some word, is the onely worke of ye holy Ghost, who by secret in­spiration doth dispose ye myndes, doth renew the hartes, doth in­spire with fayth, finally of unwillyng doth make willyng: so that here is no place left now for Freewill to challēge, but yt he onely possesse the whole, which onely worketh all in all: who thrustyng out workemen to preach the word, doth frameth the wills of the hearers that they may beleéue. Whereupō I do aūswere to that suttle Argument of Osorius briefly, and playnly in this wise.

Whosoeuer worketh together with an other, worketh actiuely and not passiuely onely.The Argu­ment of O­sorius and the Papi­stes.

The Ministers of the Gospell are together, workemen [Page 152] with God.

Ergo, The Preachers of the worde, when they worke with God, do not suffer passiuely onely.

I aunswere,Tne Aun­swere. that in the Maior proposition should haue bene added these wordes Per fe, & inys que ngit: That is to say: Of him selfe, & in the things wherein he worketh. For ye thyng that of his owne power worketh together with an others helpe, doth somewhat in deéde in those thynges, whiche it doth, and is not wrought onely. That is true. And for the same purpose the Minor proposition must bee denyed: for the Freewill of Gods Ministers doth neither worke in Preachyng the word Per se, of it selfe, except it be holpen by Gods Spirite: nor doth proceéde any further euen when it is holpen, thē to the outward action of preachyng. But as concernyng the inward fruite of preachyng, (namely nourishment of fayth, and the operatiō of conuersion) all this action proceédeth from the holy Ghost, and not frō Free­will. And this seémeth to bee the very meanyng of Luther, How Lu­thers wor­des are to be cōstrued. to witte, hauyng respect to those thynges onely, wherein Freewill can not challenge to be any meane of effectuall operation, either in workyng, or in together workyng, nor can make any title of clayme therein, nor prescribe to bee any partener with the holy Ghost in the worke.

It remayneth that we arme our selues agaynst the other sut­teltie of Osorius, An other Argument of Osorius, Pag. 149. which he coyneth out of the Apostles wordes.

S. Paule writyng to the Phillipians, doth counsell them in a certein place to worke euery of them their own saluation with feare and tremblyng.

I doe heare it, and I awayte what this choppelogicke will stampe out hereof.

Ergo (sayth Osorius) we are able to worke our Salua­tion of our owne Freewill.

I doe aunswere.An Aun­swere. The antecedent is true, but the consequent most false, and altogether sauoryng of Pelagius errour, nor a­greable with the antecedent. For this word working, which the Apostle vseth, doth not signifie any such thyng as may vphold the force of Freewill, or declare it to be the efficiēt cause of Sal­uation, as though it did depend vpō the dignitie of our workes: but is onely a word of exhortation, to comfort them to goe fore­ward [Page] diligently, and to perseuer carefully in the course of Salua­tion, where they were now settled. Phil. 2. And withall teacheth them fur­ther how they ought to perseuer with feare (sayth he) and trē ­blyng, to witte, exhortyng them to take vnto them the feare of God in humblenesse of mynde, which might hold them alwayes conuersaunt in good workes, whiles they made hast to attaine the goale of Saluatiō. Finally that no man might cauill & say, that this vertue of perseueraūce did farre surmoūt their weake­nes, he addeth forthwith, callyng them backe as it were to a bet­ter hope through cōfidence of greater helpe: For it is God (sayth he) which worketh in you both to will and to worke accordyng to his good pleasure. &c. If God do worke in vs (Osorius) both to will and to worke, what is it then that Freewill can will or doe? Fur­thermore if life euerlasting be the gift of God, not for the workes sake whiche we haue done, how shall Saluation be obteined by good workes? wherefore you trippe twise in your Argument. First, whereas you place Saluation in good workes. Then, whereas you deriue good workes out of mans Freewill, as from the sprynghead therof. For thus ye conclude. If it were not in our own power (to witte in our Freewill) which both are false and most friuolous.The double errour of Osorius.

And yet after all these manifest trackes of Pelagius playne footesteppes, not vnlike that craftie varlet Syrus in Terence, whiche cleareth him selfe to his Maister, as vnacquainted with the Mariage of his sonne: euen so least he should seéme to be de­filed with some spotte of Pelagius errour, addeth immediately: What?Pag. 149. Are we such as will consent with Pelagius? Did we say at any tyme that we were able to worke any godly or prayse worthy worke through our own strength and indu­stry? If you will abide by your wordes Osor. you haue so said in deéde. For he yt doth auow, that it is in our own power to worke our saluation: what doth hee meane els by these wordes, but that we be able of our owne strēgth to worke somewhat worthy cōmendatiō? But whether he agreé herein wt Pelagius or no, let ye indifferēt Reader Iudge as seémeth him best. But I pray you sir, by what meanes do you affirme yt to be in our owne handes, which you deny agayne to be in our owne power? Or how cā ye defend them both, but you must neédes make a lye in ye one? or [Page 153] what slipper deuise will you vse here to couer your lye withall? You say that Saluatiō is not obteined by our own strength; but through Gods grace workyng within vs. And why then chaufe you so maliciously agaynst Luther, Melancthon, Bucer and Caluine, which affirme the same that you do? But a litle earst ye confessed the thyng, which ye do now deny. Be stedfast therfore, and set downe your mynde whereunto you will stand, that we may know once where we may finde you. If you af­firme that all consisteth in our owne handes, then do you not a­greé with Pelagius, but you go farre beyond him: If you ascribe all to the grace of God, what neédeth any more scoldyng? But you will deuide your meanyng perhappes, and will allowe to Gods grace such a parte of the worke, that Freewill also may occupy some part with all.Osori. doth attribute our Salua­tion, partly to Grace, & partly to Freewill, Yet doe ye not vntwyne this meashe notwithstandyng. For if you will so cut asunder this shippe, which can by no meanes bee vnioynted, and will yeld ouer the forepart therof to mās guidyng, & the powpe to Gods tuition: surely S. Paule will gayne say you euery way, which yeldeth ye whole interest of both, aswell the former as the hinder partes to God, whether Osori. will or no: Declaryng That it is God that worketh in vs both to will, and to bryng to passe all thyngs accordyng to his good pleasure. But you will finde out some meane thyng paraduenture betwixt both, whiche you may attribute to Free­will. But euen here agayne you shall be driuen backe, whereas you may heare Paule pronounce That it is God that geueth the increase, so that now not onely the originall of good will, but the encrease also of well doyng, the accomplishyng, proceédyng and successes also flow from out the holy Ghost, and not from man.

If it be so thē (will you say) that Gods grace doth worke all in all in vs, Osorius Obiection. to what purpose serueth the Freewill that is naturally engraffed within vs? or beyng holpen by grace, how is it sayd to doe any thyng, if you shall thinke that it ought not to be accōpted in any respect a partener in wor­kyng a good worke? For aūswere wherof,Aunswere. I would wishe you to harkē not to the wordes that I speake, but vnto Augustine. It is most true Osori. that whatsoeuer good worke is wrought by vs, the prayse thereof ought to redounde wholy not to our Freewill, but to Gods grace, which performeth all whatsoeuer [Page] is performed by vs godly, and worthy prayse. For that is it that the wordes of Augustine emporte, that true and humble con­fession doth require in vs. That is to say. That we referre all vnto God. And yet this grace of God doth not so worke all that whiche is proper to it selfe, by her selfe onely, as workyng in vs without our Freewill. And agayne it neither worketh so toge­ther with our Freewill, that any portion of prayse or rewarde should bee ascribed to Freewill, for any of all whatsoeuer is due vnto God. And therefore where as Augustine in his booke De gratia & libero arbit [...] both affirme,August. de grat. & Lib. Arbit. that neither grace without Freewill, nor Freewill without grace is sufficient: We do confesse both to be true: for either of them worketh with the other I cō ­fesse it: but yet after a certeine seuerall sort. For the Grace of God worketh, when it helpeth mans Freewill, yet it worketh in such wise, as that it is neuer wrought by an other: it doth so helpe Freewill as beyng neuer holpen by Freewill. Furthermore it doth so helpe, but that it is alwayes freé not to helpe, if it will: In fine whēas Gods grace doth worke most effectually by hel­pyng mās will,Otherwise worketh Gods Spi­rite, other­wise mans Freewill & the diuersi­tie of them both. yet worketh it not so with mās Freewill, as stā ­dyng in neéde of the helpe of Freewill by any meanes, but rather vsing ye seruice therof. But the state of Freewill is farre other­wise: For Freewill worketh together with Gods spirite, not as commaundyng his seruice at any tyme, but alwayes wantyng his assistaunce. In the one wherof you perceaue the efficacie of the cause that worketh, in the other the seruice onely of the In­strument.Will doth nothyng in good things but whē it is holpen & applyed. Moreouer when will doth worke most effectually (Gods grace directyng it) yea and freély, bycause it worketh vo­luntaryly, yet doth it neuer attempt any good thyng of her selfe, without the directiō of grace, neither by any meanes otherwise, then as it is holpen, but neuer helpeth grace by which it is both wrought and holpen. Yea and then also when it is wrought it so worketh, that it can not chuse but worke of very necessitie. E­uen as Seruauntes in respect of their birth are freé, but beyng commaūded by their Maisters (whom they be bounde vnto) they must obey whether will they nill they, of very Necessitie. In like maner fareth it with mens Freewilles, albeit they stand in such plight as that they be alwayes carried with freé motiō, that is to say, with voluntary motion to the thynges whatsoeuer they do, [Page 154] yet is it so farre of to be able enough of their owne power to pro­secute their purposed imaginations as they would wishe them selues, that many tymes they are withdrawen agaynst their willes,Grace doth plye, but is neuer plyed from executyng the mischief whiche they conceaued. A­gayne to do good deédes, they are so the Seruauntes of grace, that when they are drawen, they can not chuse but obey of ve­ry necessitie.

What neéde examples in matter most apparaūt?Examples of mās will beyng hin­dered euen in the euill whiche it purposed. How oftē and how many doe we finde, that purpose many thynges in their myndes, which notwithstandyng come to a farre other maner of end then they were deuised for, beyng quite ouerthrowen by the onely countermaunde of almightie God. As appeareth in Ba­laam, and the brothers of Ioseph: of whom the first was bar­red from speakyng that which he determined: the other from ex­ecutyng their deuises by the wonderfull prouidence of God. It would be to much to recite all the exāples mētioned in the scrip­tures to this effect as Pharao, Sennacherib, Hamman, Anti­ochus, Herode, the Pharisees, Iulian and innumerable others of the same sorte: whose Freewill beyng wonderfully interrupted euen amiddes their chiefest practizes, was neither able to do a­ny good thyng well, nor yet accomplishe the euill that they had i­magined accordyng to their determinate purpose. It shall suf­fice to produce one or two examples, whereby it may make both euidētly appeare, how that it neither resteth in the choyse of mā to proceéde in euill doyng after his owne will, nor to leaue of frō doyng well beyng drawen by Gods Spirite. Saule breathyng forth as yet slaughter & threatenynges, whenas he persequuted the Christiās with wholy bent affection of Freewill, Will obey­eth the spi­rite of God many times whether it will or no. what cruel­tie would he haue executed, if he could haue brought to passe the deuise, which he had throughly determined in mynde? And why could hee not doe it? But bycause there is no freédome in mans Freewill of it selfe, euen in workyng wickednesse, but such as be­yng hindered many tymes, & alwayes bonde, must be enforced to acknowledge her owne weakenesse on euery side.

Let vs couple with Paule the Apostle Peter:The exāple of Paule & Peter. that we may learne in thē both, how that we are not able of our selues either to frame our lyues altogether to wickednesse, or to direct the same sometyme to godlynesse. And first touchyng Saules wic­ked [Page] will in his most wicked enterprises, how litle it auayled hath bene declared already. Let vs now behold Peters fayth, not by what meanes he receaued it at the first, but let vs seé what his fleshly will was able to doe, to the vttermost of his power, ei­ther in refusing fayth when it was geuen him, or in forsakyng it when he was holpen. Upō which matter let vs geaue care to the testimonie of Augustine:August. de Correp. & grat. Cap. 8 When it was sayd vnto Peter (sayth hee) Peter I haue prayed for thee, that thy fayth may not fainte: Darest thou presume to say that `Peters fayth should haue fayled though Peter him selfe would haue wished it to haue fayled, consi­dering that Christ prayed that Peters faith might not fayle, as though Peter would haue willed any thing elles, then as Christ had prayed for him, that hee should will? Whereupon appeareth that Peters faith did not depend so much vpon his owne will, is vpon the prayer of Christ: who did both helpe his faith, and direct his will: And bycause his will was directed of the Lord, therfore could not the prayer made for him be vneffectuall. And therfore when hee prayed, that his faith might not fayle, what prayed hee for els, but that he might bee endued with a most free, most valiaunt, vnuan­quishable, and most perdurable will in the faith? Thus much Au­gustine. Ierem. Cap. 10. And therfore Ieremie the Prophet cryeng out vnto the Lord most worthely: I know O Lord (sayth he) that the way of mā is not in him selfe, neither is it in man to walke and to direct his owne steppes. Whiche wordes me seémeth that Luther did note not altogether vndiscretely, whose wordes if I would here set downe, I can not seé which part therof Osorius would be able to confute. For in this sorte doth Luther argue:Luther in his booke of Asserti­ons. Art. 36 If mans way & mans steppes be not at his owne disposition, how shall the way of the Lord, & the pathes of the Lord be at mans direction? And hereupon deriuyng an Argument a Comparatis, as they tearme it in Schooles, addeth forthwith, how then is mā able to dispose him selfe to good, whenas he is not able of him selfe to make his wayes euill? For otherwise if he be able, how then did the Pro­phet say, that he knew that mans way was not in him selfe? or how is it that in ye 16. of his booke of Prouerbes ye wise Kyng beyng enspired with ye same Spirite confesseth, that he knew as he te­stified?Prouer. 16. The hart of man (sayth he) purposeth his way, but the Lord doth direct his steppes. Albeit this is not spoken to this end, as [Page 155] though we did affirme that mās will is no wayes freé towardes wicked thynges:Man is not altogether depriued of free will to euil, though the same be many tymes stayed. for who knoweth not how frayle and prone the disposition of mās will is alwayes to catch hold of euill? though from doyng therof, it be many tymes hindered. The compari­son tendeth to this ende onely, that if mans Freewill beyng hin­dered, and bonde, seéme many tymes lesse freé to put in executiō euill thynges: how much lesse freédome thinke you doth it enioy towardes the thynges that further vnto godlynesse? for as much therfore as this appeareth to bee most true by the euident testi­monies of the Scriptures, and experimented by the continuall course of mens actions and conuersations: Let vs heare what Osorius doth obiect agaynst Haddon.

But I say thus that all good men,Pag. 151.all godly men, all men most endued with heauenly giftes doe testifie, that in this sentence of thine lurketh haynous wickednesse: vnshame­fast impudencie: detestable maddnesse and most execrable treacherie. Unlesse your so manifold lyes hetherto dispersed abroad, and as it were clouted together in one lumpe, vnlesse your shamelesse face Osorius, and that your impudent vsage in lyeng and blaunching, your monstruous vanitie (the lyke wher­of can scarse possibly be founde in any writer, surely more mon­strous in no man) had long sithence disabled all the substaunce and credite of your talke, in the Iudgemēt of all good and god­ly men: you might happely haue founde some one, which would haue soothed this your cōmunicatiō. But now hauyng vttered scarse one true Sentence throughout all this worke of yours, with what countenaunce, and with what face dare ye speake in this wise? But I say this. &c. And what doth this famous speaker tell vs at ye length? I do say this that in this sentēce of Luther, Melancthon and Caluine lurketh haynous wicked­nesse, vnshamefast impudencie: detestable maddnesse and most execrable outrage. Goe foreward then, and tell vs first without a lye (if you can) I pray you, what they haue vttered in their wordes.Pag. 152. Forsooth bycause they stand stiffely herein that mans mynde is alwayes holden captiue, his will fast chayned, dispoyled of all abilitie to doe, in so much that we can neither doe good nor euill, no nor thinke any good thought by any meanes. Finally this is the effect of their [Page] opinion, that there is no difference betwixt vs and any o­ther toole or instrument. &c. Truely I should haue maruei­led much Osorius, if that lyeng spirite in your mouth, if your wicked lippes & deceitfull toung could haue vttered any thyng vnto vs without a lye, or haue made a lȳe without raylyng. Yea Syr? Is the winde in that doore? who that assigneth freé and vo­luntary power to doe good,Osor. lyeng rayling a­gaynst [...]u­ther Melā ­cthon, Cal­uine. &c. not in our owne will, but in Gods grace: who that ascribeth all our actions (especially these which be godly) to the direction and disposition of God: who that af­firmeth that our will is neither freé of it selfe without Gods Grace, and that it doth nothyng els but sinne deadly, when it worketh after disposition of her owne nature: doth he so dis­poyle man naked altogether of all will, as though it could doe nothyng at all? or purpose nothyng at all? or as though he made no difference betwixt man and any other instrument or toole? who that endeuoureth to proue manifestly by the Scriptures this thyng chiefly, that all the thoughtes of mans hart, and all his senses alwayes are prone, and inclined at all tymes to wic­kednesse, doth hee seéme to affirme that man is voyde of all feé­lyng of thought? Tell a good fellowshyppe, the man that doth that which is in his owne power, or the man doyng that whiche is in his owne power, doth nothyng els but sinne: doth this man now nothyng at all, whiles he sinneth? or whiles he imagineth mischief, doth he imagine nothyng at all? And how then, I pray you, doth Luther spoyle men of their will? or how is hee re­ported, to bynde mans will fast in euerlastyng chaynes, in such wise, as that it can not onely not doe, but also not thinke any good or euill?

Osor. Pag. 151.But Luther doth deny that it resteth in mans Freewill to make his wayes euill. And what inconuenience is there in this sentence, if the meanyng therof be taken in the right sense, as it ought to be?Freewill is not of pow­der simply & absolutely to make his wayes euill Truely if our wayes either good or badd were sim­ply and absolutely at our owne disposition: how is it that the Scripture teacheth that mans steppes are directed? or how is it that the Prophet doth deny mans way to be his owne? or how read we in the holy Prouerbes, That when mā hath prepared his hart most, yet it is the Lord that gouerneth the toung? How often doe we finde the old Prouerbe to proue true, that man doth purpose [Page 156] one way and God doth dispose an other way? How rife are the examples of some persons which with halter in hand, and knife ready bent to dispatch them selues of their wretched liues, or whiche haue practized to drowne them selues, haue not accom­plished the wicked fact, that they deuised euen then, when they were most willyng thereto? Surely Gods diuine prouidence doth wonderfully dally with mans thoughtes and imaginati­ons, deludyng, ouerthrowyng, makyng frustrate transposing beyond all expectation of man, the thynges which we haue most firmely determined. And what freédome is this at the length, whiche is alwayes constrained to serue at an others appointe­ment? the strongest force wherof beyng many tymes hindered, must alwayes depende vpon the permission and commaunde­ment of the hygher power? whiche thyng Augustine doth very well declare.August. de Ciuita. Del Lib. 5. Cap. 9. All willes are subiect (sayth he) to the will of God, bycause they haue no power, but such as hee graunteth. The cause therfore that maketh this, and is not made, is God, other causes doe both make and are made, as are all created Spirites, but chiefly such as are endued with reason. And agayne.Aug. in the same place. Our willes are so farre a­ble, by how much God would haue them to bee able and foreknew it. And therfore in what soeuer abilitie they stand they are vndoub­tedly able, and what soeuer they shall doe, they shall surely do, by­cause he did foreknown that they should be able, and should do, whose foreknowledge can not be deceaued. &c. August. de Correp. & gratia. And agayne in an other place. Neither is it to be doubted, that mens willes can not resiste the will of God, but that he must needes doe what God will, for as much as he doth dispose the willes also as him listeth, and when him listeth. Therefore to will, and to nill, is so in the power of him that willeth and nylleth, that it neither goeth beyond Gods power, nor hindereth his will, but is many tymes hindered by the power of God, and alwayes ouermaistered. &c.

But that is somewhat more hard which is obiected out of the same Article, that will is so fast bounde, that we cā thinke no euill thought by any meanes. For so doth Osorius cite the place. Wherein he doth first cast a myste before the Rea­ders eyes, and then deale iniuriously with Luther. For he doth neither faythfully, nor fully rehearse the wordes of his Article. He is also no lesse iniurious to Melancthon and Caluine, whō [Page] he alledgeth as partakers of the same opinion. Albeit I know right well, that they doe not varie from Luthers meanyng, yet did they alwayes of very purpose refrayne from this kynde of speache. Where did Melancthon euer write, that all thynges are performed by vnaduoydeable necessitie? Where did Cal­uine say, that Freewill was but a deuise in thynges? Who euer heard Bucer say, that man was not of power to thinke euill? not bycause they varied from him in meanyng and Iudgement, but they chose rather to quallifie, with some more plausible kynde of stile, that which seémed to be propoūded by him somewhat more roughly. But to returne agayne to Luthers wordes: I doe re­knowledge herein not your new furnished cauill Osorius: but the auncient rusty canker of many others agaynst Luther, as of Leo, Roffensis, Eckius, Iohānes Coclaeus, Albertus Phigius, Iohn Dreidon, Alphansus de Castro, Andrew Vega, Peter Canisius, and such like: which do neither read Luthers writyng with Iudgement, neither consider his meanyng, nor cōferre the first with the last: but catch here and there a worde halfe gelded for hast: and out of these beyng sinisterly construed, if they finde any one thyng more then other fitte to be quarelled withall, that they snatch vp, that they vrge stiffely, and are alwayes rakyng their nayles vpon that scabbe (as the Prouerbe sayth). And by­cause amongest all other his Assertions, they can picke out no one sentence more odious in the Iudgement of the simple peo­ple: it is a wōder to seé, what a coyle they keépe here, and how vi­perously they gnaw and turmoyle this one Sentence, wherein he sayd, That mans will hauyng lost her freédome, is now of no force at all, not so much as to thinke an euill thought. And in this respect surely, I can not but marueile much to seé the vndis­creéte disorder of some, but chiefly the singuler shamelessenes of Osorius. For albeit Luther in so many his Commentaries, Sermons, Bookes, and Aunsweres doth vrge this one pointe alwayes, and euery where trauaile earnestly to proue, that mās Freewill (beyng voyde of Grace) auayleth to nothyng but to cō ­mitte sinne: yet doth Osorius so frame all his writyng agaynst Luther: as though Luther did teach that mans Freewill could not so much as thinke an euill thought.

And frō whence doth he pike this quarell? out of the wordes [Page 157] of Luthers Article before mentioned, I suppose: But for as much as Luther doth in the selfe same Article openly professe,Luthers Artic. 36. that Freewill of her owne nature auayleth to nothyng but to Sinne, and that all the imaginations of the hart do (of a cer­teine naturall inclination) rushe headlong into euill: in what sense can yt mā be sayd not to be able to thinke an euill thought, whiche is alwayes occupied in imaginyng euill? But I beleue he will presse vpon vs with Luthers owne wordes, wherewith he affirmeth that no mā of him selfe is of power to thinke a good thought, or an euill thought, &c. Well, let vs heare what conclu­sion this Logician will coyne out of these wordes.

Mans minde whether it thinke well or euill,Osorius a lyeng Rhe­thoritian & a grosse Lo­gician. doth nei­ther of them both of her owne power.

Ergo, Mans mynde of it selfe cā neither thinke a good nor an euill thought.

I do here appeale to your Logicke Osorius. What kynde of Argumēt is this? by what rule make you this cōsequent? what? bycause the substaunce of the matter doth depend vpon the first causes properly, will you thereupō conclude, that the secōd cau­ses do therfore nothing at all? Or bycause the freédome of doyng is restreined to the first and principall cause, to witte, to the one­ly Maiestie of God, that therefore mans will is no cause at all, bycause it is not freé? and yt therfore it cā thinke no ill thought by any meanes, bycause it doth it not of her owne strength and li­bertie, as though to do a thyng properly? & a thyng to be done of her owne proper power, were all one to say? So then by this reason the Iewes, which crucified the Lord of glory, shalbe sayd to do nothyng, bycause all the outrage whatsoeuer they kept, was determined before, by Gods vnsearcheable coūsell. In like maner Pharao in withholdyng the people of Israell, and Na­buchadonasor in spoylyng them, may be sayd to do nothyng, bycause the hart of the one was hardened by the Lord, and by­cause the other leadyng his armye into Egypt, was constray­ned to chaunge his will in his iourney, and bende his force a­gaynst Ierusalem. Likewise neither the Shippe whiles she sayleth, nor the Pylote within the Shippe, do any thyng at all, bycause their course whether it bee fortunate or vnfortunate, is not alwayes directed after their owne will, but as the wyndes & [Page] the tydes do driue them. For what doth Luthers disputation of Freewill enforce els, but that he may referre all the order of do­yng to Gods freé disposition onely? Neither doth hee dispoyle mā of will altogether, which doth onely disable will of freédome: Neither is it a good consequent to say, bycause mans will is de­nyed to be freé, therfore that man is altogether destitute of will, bycause it is not freé, but alwayes captiuate, bounde, & an hand­mayde, as the which in euill thyngs is either alwayes seruaunt to Sinne, or in good thynges handmayde to grace, euen as an Instrument or toole is alwayes at the bestowing of him that wor­keth withall.Mans Free­will is an Instrument of Gods Grace. For what should let but Luther may as well call Freewill, by the name of a toole, as Esay doth name the wicked by the name of Sawes in the band of the Lord? and as well as in many places of Ezechiell those hartes are called stoany hartes which the Lord doth promise to soften and mollifie with his grace? Esay.

Ezechi. Cap. 11. 36.And yet I will not much trouble Osorius herein. For whe­ther will be freé vnto euill, or be seruaunt vnto euill: it maketh litle to the present purpose, nor will stād Osorius much in steéde. This is vndoubtedly true, that mans naturall strength (bee it freé, or be it bond) is more thē strong enough to all wickednesse. So were all these stormes raysed agaynst Luther neédelesse al­so, consideryng that he doth so frankely oftentymes, and in ma­ny places professe in playne wordes, that mans mynde is al­wayes prone, and inclined to all euill cogitations: consideryng also that he doth confesse euery where, that to thinke euill is as properly naturall to mans will, as that of it selfe it neither can, nor doth acquainte it selfe with any thyng elles, but with euill thoughtes. And I thinke it is not so neédefull to stand much vp­on the name of freédome, especially sithence we doe agreé vpon the truth of the matter. And it may happen that Osorius is de­ceaued in doubtfull cōstruction of the word, or rather deceaueth others therewith: takyng the same in an other sense thē Luther vnderstode it.This worde freedome is discussed & distingui­shed. For whereas some thynges are sayd to bee freé of necessitie in respect of outward coaction, some freé of necessitie in respect of bōdage: Will may right well be called freé after the first maner of necessitie: as the which is neuer cōstrained to will vnwillyngly that which it willeth, be it good, or badd: For com­pulsary will (as Augustine sayth) is no will. Accordyng to the lat­ter [Page 158] maner of necessitie, man hath neuer power ouer his owne will so, but that (whiche way soeuer it is carried) it alwayes o­beyeth his commaūdement of whom it is carried, albeit it doth alwayes serue both voluntaryly, and willyngly. Whereupon S. Paule discoursing vpon the euill whiche hee would not, but did it neuerthelesse, sayth, that he did it not: but imputed the do­ing therof to Sinne dwellyng within him, and to the law of his members, the force wherof being greater then his own strēgth, did drawe him into bondage, though hee stroue agaynst it. And surely that is the bondage that Luther did meane accordyng to Paules saying,Luther. Lib. de S [...]r [...]o Arb. Cap. 46. when writyng of bond will on this wise: Mans will (sayth he) is after this sort common to vse, as is a horse or a beast: if God do ride vpō it, then it willeth & goeth whyther God will haue it: if the Deuill sit vpon it, then it willeth and goeth whyther the Deuill will haue it: nor is it in his owne choyse to runne to either of those riders, or to get either of them: but the riders do contend for the hauyng and keépyng of him. &c. If O­sorius do seé any meane betwixt these two riders, I would fayne haue him shew it. He will say perhappes, that betwixt these two there is a meane in will, whereby will is able to apply it selfe to this, or to that; Augustine doth make aunswere,August. that the very begynnyng of this applyeng, if it be towardes good, ariseth not with­out Gods good will and grace: if it be towardes euill: then it sprin­geth not but out of euill:: Euen as Bernarde doth teach that the whole begynnyng must be ascribed to Grace.

In fine: to shutte vp the matter in fewe wordes,The power of doyng wāteth not, but it [...] the freedome of power that wanteth. as concer­nyng Luthers proposition, wherein he denyeth that Freewill is of power to do good, or euill of it selfe. Two thynges seéme wor­thy to be noted here. The one concernyng the power of doyng, the other concernyng the freédome of power: If we enquire of the power of will, how effectuall it may be to good or euill of her owne naturall force: neither Luther nor any other will deny, the propertie of will to bee otherwise, but that it may will the thynges that it willeth: neither that the force of will is so alto­gether blotted out, but that it may apply when it is applyed ei­ther to good, or to euill: and that it doth so farre forth not apply, by how much it is either destitute of Grace, or ayded by Grace, after none other sorte, then as the horse doth beare his rider hee [Page] trauerseth in his ryng, and runneth his race, he sweateth vnder his rider, he trauaileth his grounde, is very nymble, chaufeth & champeth vpon the bridle, commeth a loft, porketh out with his heéles behinde, he runneth rounde in his carryer backward and foreward, and performeth all other qualities and properties of his kynde, which are subiect to his senses. All which motions if you respect the naturall qualitie and force of the horse, seéme to be not altogether out of his owne power: But if ye respect the libertie of motiō, the actiuitie therof will appeare to consiste not so much in the naturall power of the beast which is ruled, as in the power of the ryder, which doth mannage him. Euē so ought we to Iudge of mans will, whose naturall inclination if you re­gard, and what it may doe of her owne strēgth: who will deny, yt the property of will is to will, but to be able to will, is proper to habilitie? For of will it proceédeth, that we will, but of habilitie it cōmeth, that we performe. So with our will we will, with our mynde we conceaue: and with our habilitie we doe performe. And, as Augustine sayth,August. de bono perse­uer. Lib. 2. Cap. 13. thinking we do beleeue, thinking we doe speake, and thinking we doe whatsoeuer we doe. And in an other place the same Augustine doth confesse: that nature may be of power not onely to do euill, but also to haue fayth, hope, and charitie, yet to haue all these, hee doth affirme to come of Grace altogether. August. de grat. Chri­sti contra Pellag. Lib. Cap. 20. Wherfore we agreé well enough together as touchyng ye habili­tie of will. But to let passe this treatie of habilitie: if question be moued touching freédome of will, bycause hereupō hangeth all our cōtrouersie (for neither do we enquire here, what ye property of will is: or what will cā do properly? but what euery man may do,Luther de seruo Arb. Cap. 48.47. or not do in all thyngs, by the freédome of his owne proper will) Luther doth aūswere forthwith, that the name of freédome seémeth to be a name of more maiestie, thē that it ought, or may agreé cōueniently to any thyng properly, but to ye onely Maiestie of God, or to him, whō the holy Ghost hath made freé by grace.

Obiectiō of the Defen­dours of Freewill taken out of the booke of Hypera­spistes.But ye great Proctours of Freewill are wont to obiect, that in some sense this is true in deéde: That there is no power abso­lutely & fully freé, but the onely omnipotēt power of Gods Ma­iestie: yet neuertheles as we call Angels immortall, men holy, wise, and good (though we doe acknowledge God onely to bee truly immortall, onely wise, and onely good) so nothyng withstā ­deth, [Page 159] but we may call men after their certeine maner freé. I do Aūswere.Aunswere. Angels in deéde are called immortall, and that truly: bycause they obteined that state of their creatour at the first: be­sides that also, they neuer lost that state of immortalitie where­in they were placed, although some fell frō the blessednes of im­mortalitie. But as for our freédome, the condition & state therof is of a farre other condition and kynde. For albeit mā in the be­ginnyng was created in the freé estate of will through ye benefite of his creatour, which he might haue reteigned still without any contradiction if he would: yet did hee loase the same freédome, and Paradise withall, by his own default: so that he turned that blessed estate, into miserie: and his freédome, into bondage: that beyng out of Paradise now, by how much we are sequestred frō all felicitie, euen so farre seéme we to be cut of from all freédome, without the Grace of the Redeémer. For shyppe wracke beyng once made of vniuersall blessednesse, I can seé none other reme­dy, but that freédome must be drowned withall. Therefore the selfe same thyng whiche doth open Paradise, beyng shut fast a­gaynst vs, must of necessitie restore freédome agayne: which can not by any meanes be brought to passe through force of nature, or through any power of our owne: It consisteth onely in the Grace of the Redeémer. As our Redeémer him selfe witnesseth in S. Iohns Gospell.Iohn. 8. If the Sonne shall make you free, then shall you be free in deede. Notyng vnto vs this one thyng chiefly, by those wordes, the state of our bondage to be such, as except it be renewed with Grace of the Redeémer, that in all this nature of ours is nothyng freé. Moreouer as concernyng the vsuall ma­ner of speach: that men are called good, holy, and wise:In that men are called holy and wise must be referred, not to their deseruyngs, but to grace wholy. I know that men haue bene accustomed to bee tearmed so. But what is this to the purpose? The question here is not, by what name mē are called, but of what value euery thyng is in the sight of God. And yet do I not doubt at all, but yt many men may bee in their kinde good, holy, and wise, & euen so to be esteémed well enough. But howsoeuer this holynesse, godlynesse, and wisedome of mē seémeth in mans Iudgement, yet is nothyng whatsoeuer it be, if it proceéde not from the grace of God. (For what hast thou, that thou hast not receaued?) After the same sorte do I aunswere touchyng freédome, whiche beyng once lost through Freewill, [Page] must of necessitie sticke fast cloyed in ye puddle of thraldome, vn­lesse it be renewed agayne by Gods grace.Aug. Epist. 89. ad Hil­larium. Whereupō August, very aptly, Freedome (sayth he) without grace, is no freedome but co [...]tumacle. And as in this place August, denyeth that to be li­berty, which is seuered frō grace, so in an other place he will not graunt that to bee named will, except it be conuersaunt in good things.August. de serm. Dom. in monte. Lib. 2. Will (sayth he) is not will: but in good thyngs, for in euill & wicked thinges, it is properly called Luste, & not will. Wherfore if there be neither freédome, where Gods grace is not present: nor will, where wickednesse is practized: by what meanes then will Osorius mainteyne, that Freewill is in euill thinges, whenas in that respect, there is neither freédome, nor will? There is also in the same August. & in the same his Epistle to Hillary, that may well be gathered and framed into an Argument on this wise.

The lyfe of libertie is the perfect soundenesse of will.An Argu­ment out of the wordes of August. to Hyllary.

But in doyng euill mans will is not sounde.

Ergo, In doyng euill mans will is not freé.

For euen so are we taught vp Augustines wordes.

The lyfe of libertie (sayth he) is the soundenesse of will, and by so much euery man is more free, by how much his will is most sound.

Albeit I will not striue much about the contention of tear­mes. If any mā be minded to name the choyse of will applyable towardes good or euill, to be voluntary, rather then freé, he shall not erre much in my Iudgement. Neither will I be offended, if a man do say (as Augustine doth) that mās will is freé towardes euill thinges, so that he hold the meanyng of Augustine, as well as the wordes. For I am of this mynde, that when Augustine doth name mans Freewill, & couple it to grace: he calleth it freé in this respect,In what sense Aug calleth will Freewill. Will see­meth ra­ther to bee termed vo­luntary thē free. bycause beyng freé frō all forcible constrainte, it bēdeth it selfe through voluntary motiō that way, whereunto it is directed, be it to goodnes through Grace, or to euill, through naturall lust. And in this sense, accordyng to August. meanyng, ye Confessiō of Auspurgh doth expoūde mās will to be freé: that is to say: yeldyng of his owne accord. The selfe same do Bucer, and Melancthou also: & this also doth Caluine not deny: who doth neither striue much about this tearme of freédome,The Con­fession of Auspurgh. & doth learnedly also professe, that the originall cause of euill, is not to be sought elles where, then in euery mans owne will. But as [Page 160] concernyng Luther: for that he doth vpon some occasion some­tyme expresse his minde in writing somewhat roughly, wherein afterwards he discouereth his meanyng in a more mylde phrase of speach: it was not seémely in my conceite to racke out those thynges onely whiche might breéde offence, cloakyng meane whiles those thynges fraudulently, which do wipe away all mis­likyng. He doth set downe in his Assertion thus: That it is not in mans freé power to thinke a good or euill thought. Agayne in the same Assertion the same Luther doth not deny, that all mans imaginations of their owne inclination are carried to all kynde of naughtynesse: & that Freewill can do nothyng of it selfe but Sinne. On this wise with lyke heate of disputation rather, then of any errour he calleth Freewill sometyme a fayned or de­uised tearme, not to bee founde in deéde any where, makyng all thynges to be gouerned by vnauoydeable necessitie. Which ve­hemencie of speach many men do cast in his teéth reprochful­ly now and then.Caluinus contra Alb. Ph [...]gium. Lib. 5. And yet in other places agayne exp [...]undyng him selfe, he doth graūt without all Hyperbolicall speéche, that in inferiour causes Freewill can do somewhat, and withall doth franckely affirme, that it can do all thynges beyng assisted with Grace. And why is hee not holden excused as well for this, as snatcht at for the other? why doe the aduersaries shut fast their eyes, and blindfold them selues willyngly at matter well spokē, and neuer looke abroad, but when they liste to carpe and cauill.

Was there euer any so circūspect a writer, whose latter di­ligence & more attentiue heédefulnes might not alwayes amend some ouersight escaped at the first? either in Exposition, or Iud­gement of thynges? The more that Solon the Sage grewe in yeares, the more he increased in knowledge: and may it not bee lawfull for vs to encrease vnderstādyng with our age likewise? Surely August. could not excuse the errours of his youth, nei­ther shamed he to confesse in his age, the ouersight that escaped his penne in youth vnaduisedly, & not onely to reforme them by ouerlickyng them, (as the Beare licketh her whelpes) but also to reuoke them openly, with an open, graue, and grayheaded retractation: and to pray Pardon of his errours franckly: nor doth in vayne permitte those bookes to be preiudiciall vnto him, whiche hee wrate beyng a young man,August. de bono perse­uer & pros­per Cap. 12 and [...] 21. saying very modestly of [Page] him selfe that hee began then to write like a learner, but not a [...] grounded in Iudgement. Neither was such perfection to be re­quired in Luther: who albeit vttered somewhat at the first in wordes, otherwise then common custome of Schooles were ac­quainted with, it had bene the partes of graue Deuines, not to prye narrowly into ye vnaccustomed phrase of wordes so much, as to sift out the substaunce of the doctrine, how agreably it ac­corded with the Scriptures in truth, and sinceritie. And if the matter would admitte some other interpretation, yet ought As­sertiō haue bene compared with Assertion, and place with place: Finally consideration ought to haue bene had of the entent and meanyng of the writer: then also of the first originall, & scope of his doctrine, whereunto it tended, and what it emported. And if ye would examine vprightly the opinions and assertions of mē, accordyng the true touchstone of Gods truth, and not sinisterly for eiudge them: whether opinion I pray you seémeth in your cō ­ceite most sounde, of those which doe aduaunce the Maiestie of Gods grace? or of those whiche doe enhaunce the weakenesse of mans nature? of those which doe make mens merites, & workes, the effectes of Saluatiō? or of those which do ascribe it to Gods freé imputation, through Iesu Christ? of them which doe deter­mine that righteousnesse commeth by fayth? or of them which say it is obteyned by the workes of the law? of those whiche spoyle Freewill of all matter to glory vpon?A compari­son of Lu­thers Asser­tiōs and the Papistes. or of them which do call mē backe to a true, and humble acknowledgement of them selues? of those whiche razing out the euerlastyng and vnchaungeable decreé of Gods Predestination, doe committe the successes of thynges to happe hazard, and blynd chaunce, and to freé affectiō of mans will? or of them whiche settyng aside all chaunceable euentes of fortune, and all power of mans will, doe referre all things to the assured gouernaunce of Gods infallible foreknow­ledge, guidyng all thyngs after his own pleasure, in most stayed and stable order? And yet doth not Luther so roote out all Free­will altogether, and all chaunceablenesse of fortune, but that he doth admitte the vse of them in some respect: to witte in respect of inferiour causes, although in respect of hygher causes, & in those thynges whiche concerne saluation or damnation, he be­leueth surely, that no force of Freewill, ne yet any chaunceable­nesse [Page 161] of fortune doe preuayle any thyng at all.

For as much as this is the chief grounde of Luthers doc­trine,The fruite and cōmo­ditie of Lu­thers doc­trine. what els may the well affectioned & indifferent Reader (I pray you) cōceaue of this his Assertiō, then that which may mag­nifie the glory of God? extoll his omnipotencie? may establishe the sauetie of the faythfull, dependyng vpon the freé promise of God through fayth, & not vpō the worthynes of merites through Freewill? may terrifie the wicked with a wholesome feare of God? may restrayne them frō outrage: may comfort vs agaynst death with lyfe yt is in God: agaynst miserie, with grace: against infirmitie with strength: & agaynst destruction with Gods mer­cy? may rayse vp the godly to loue and embrace their God? The fruite of all which thyngs as the godly Reader may easily reape by this doctrine, let vs seé now on the other side, what poyson O­sorius doth sucke out of the fame, as one that seéth nothyng in this Assertiō,Osorius Pag. 151. but horrible wickednes (as he fayth) shamelesse arrogācie, detestable maddnes, execrable outrage. And now would I fayne heare how he will confirme this proude affirma­tiue so vehemētly vttered. For (sayth he) this beyng graunted, I doe say, that lawes are abolished: decrees put to silence: sciences rooted out, learnyng extinguished, peace and trā ­quillitie disturbed, and vtter confusion made of all, right and wrong without all order. If Osorius require this at our handes, that whatsoeuer his lauishe tounge shall rashly roaue at large, be coyned for an vnreproueable oracle, thē is this matter soone at an end. But that world is gone long sithēce Osor. wher­in this Pythagoricall Prouerbe [...], was takē for a law.The man hath spoke. We thinke it not now enough to harken to all that a man will speake, but to cōsider what, & vpon what groūde a mā speaketh. Well: & what say you vnto vs at the lēgth Osorius? That lawes will decay, statutes be put to silence, sciences rooted out, learnyng extinguished, trāquillitie disturbed, and right and wrong confounded together. Certes you haue heard of this man here many hygh and absurde speaches (gentle Reader) but heare yet much more absurditie.Ibidem. I say furthermore that here­upon doth follow, that mā is spoyled of sense, bereft of ad­uise, and depriued of reason, and driuen to that passe, as no difference may seeme to be betwixt him & a stone throwen [Page] out of a mans hād. And yet haue you not heard all. Osori. crau­leth forward still, & is come now (as it seémeth) into some mayne playne, where he purposeth to make vs a course of his harysh e­loquence. I say also: that the holy cōmaundements of God, his preceptes & statutes, his exhortatiōs and threatnyngs, rewardes promised for well doyng, and punishmēt threate­ned for malefactours, were all in vayne prescribed to the posterity by Gods word. O Heauē, O Earth, O Sea of Her­cules. But is there any more yet? tush all these be but trifles yet. For ouer and besides this ensueth so haynous a fact, more horri­ble then toung can speake, or hart cā thinke, so vnspeakeably fil­thy, & so monstruously straūge, that all the rest beyng layd toge­ther, may in respect of this, be accompted scarse worth the spea­kyng. And what is it a Gods name?Osori. Pag. 152. Forsooth that Luther or Melancthon, Bucer or Caluine, or whosoeuer were the first foūder of this doctrine, besides that he doth thereby turne all states and cōmon weales quite vpsidowne, he breaketh yet further into such vnmeasurable impiety, as that he doth imagine God him selfe (the most holy of holy ones) & our most deare Father (to whō no iniquitie can by any meanes be imputed) to be the author of all wickednes and cruelty. We haue heard a tedious Catalogue of haynous absurdities, which (as he sayth) must needes ensue vpō Luthers doctrine: And if it be not true. He requireth vs to make him a lyar, as that either Luther neuer spake so: or els to teach him that Luthers doctrine may well be mainteined. As though there were any such pitthe in all this your rayling (M. Osorius) that might not easily be confuted; or any such weakenes in Luther, that might not much more easily be defended? yea & so defended as that neither he may seeme to haue taught the doctrine of Ne­cessitie, without good cōsideratiō, nor you able to deface ye same without great perill of cōmittyng horrible sacriledge? I speake now of Necessitie, not that Necessitie, that is called violēt coa­ctiō, but of that which is named of vndoubted assuraūce, & abso­lute infallibilitie: not that Necessitie which the schoolemen call Consequēti [...], but which is called Consequētia, or ex Hypothesi. The mani­fold consi­deration of Necessitie. For Necessitie is neither takē after one onely significatiō amongest ye Deuines, nor yet amōgest ye Logiciās & Philosophers, wher­of [Page 162] of (I suppose) you be nothyng ignoraunt, at the least you ought not be ignoraunt therof surely. Therefore they that haue em­ployed their studyes somewhat more carefully about ye scannyng of this matter, haue defined Necessary after this maner:What is Necessary. to be such a thyng, as can not bee altered, a certeine settled and firme vnmoueablenes, which can not be chaūged by any meanes from that whiche it is. Of this Necessary, Aristotle hath se [...] downe two principall begynnynges: the one internall, the other exter­nall. Then also distinction is made of this Necessitie, Two begin­nynges of Neccessitie, which is moued force of the internall cause, and inward proprietie of Nature: So that some thynges may be called simply, and ab­solutely necessary: as God: and those thynges whiche beyng chaunged do emply contradiction: as if a man would say: that foure were not an euen nomber, that foure and threé, were not seuen in nomber: And this is called Geometricall Necessitie, which will not admitte any chaunge by course of nature. There is an other Necessitie; called Naturall Necessitie. Which al­beit bee of her selfe the begynnyng of her owne motion, yet it consisteth not in so simple and absolute an estate, but followeth onely the vsuall course of her owne nature: And after this ma­ner [...] fier is sayd to bourne of Necessitie: The Sunne is con­tinually carried about in his course of Necessitie: whiche can not chuse, but doe as they doe, accordyng to the proprietie of their naturall disposition: yet doe they not follow their naturall inclination so absolutely, and vnauoydeably, but that God may hinder, and alter their dispositiō, or make them cease from their naturall operation. Such a kynde of Necessitie to Sinne, we say that man is clogged withall sith the fall of Adam, if the ho­ly Ghost and Grace be absent: For of them selues they can not but sinne, albeit there is no let in their nature, but that they may bee holpen or chaunged, and otherwise altered: as we seé come to passe in those that are regenerate in Christ. That Necessitie therefore whereby wicked men are sayd to bee lead to sinne, is not so absolute, and vnaduoydable, that they can not chuse but sinne: for assoone as the holy Ghost, and the Grace of Christ com­meth, this Necessitie is vtterly cut of. And thus much of that internall Necessitie.

But the Necessitie that spryngeth from externall causes is [Page] also deuided two maner of wayes. Whereof the one is violent,Necessitie of Coactiō. and is called Compulsary Necessitie: As when a thyng is for­ced to moue, or to styrre agaynst her own nature. And this Ne­cessitie can by no meanes fall into mans will: for it is impossi­ble that will shall will any thyng vnwillyngly. The other is sta­ble and infallible, or of the Hypothesis, or by reason of the Consequence, which Logicians do take to be in Sensu composito, & not in Senfu `Diuiso. Now this Necessitie, called of the Con­sequēce, is on this wise. As when a thyng may be true by occasiō of the Necessary couplyng together of one proposicion with an other, though the thyng that is concluded for true, bee not Ne­cessary of it selfe. And in this respect, we do affirme that all our actions are done of Necessitie, not by the force of the inwarde cause or els their owne nature, that is to say, if they be conside­red apart, & referred to their next cause, to witte, vnto will. E­uen so will beyng considered apart, in her owne nature from the externe begynnyng, to witte, Gods prouidence and foreknow­ledge, it is sayd to be freé in his certeine kynde, so that it is en­dued with a certeine facilitie to encline it selfe, to whether part it will, although it bee not able of her selfe to moue and en­cline at all but vnto that part, which God did foreknow. Whereby you perceaue Osor. in what sense this Neces­sitie, which we do affirme is not alwayes absolutely tyed to our actions, as farreforth as they doe pro­ceéde from our owne will, but through the cou­plyng & conioynyng of Gods Predestina­tion with our workes. Which thing to be euen so, the Deuines did seéme to signifie `Per Sensum Com­positum and Necessita­tem Consequentiae.

¶ A Description of Freewill, and the thynges apperteinyng thereunto after the rules of Diuinitie, taken out of August. P. Lombard an [...] others.

Fiue thyngs chiefly to bee cōside­red in Free­will.
  • 1. What Free­will is
    • Will.

      Is a thyng properly perteinyug to reason, whereby man doth lis­cerne good frō euill, what is to be desired, or what to be eschewed.

    • Free.

      Freedome is a thyng properly perteinyng to will: whereby of voluntary appetite without fo­reine coaction it may either will good or euill, but to will good cōmeth of Grace, which maketh to will and to doe.

      ¶ The des [...]ption of Freewill talen out of Arg [...]na [...]. l [...]b. 2. Dist. 24.

      Freewill is an [...]initie of rea [...]on and will, whereby good is chosen through the assistaūce of Grace, or euill, if Grace b [...] absent, or thus.

      Freewill is a facuine of the Soule which can will good or euill, discernyng them both.

  • 2. In what thyngs Freewill doth consiste.
    • In God first and chiefly.

      Whose wi [...]l is of it selfe simply and absolutely most [...] frō all bōdage of [...] and all infec­cion of sinne, for God can [...]ot of his own nature sinne: not bycause any force restrayneth him, but bycause of his own nature he cā not so will, so that God is both holy of necessitie, and yet this necessitie [...] Freewill from God in whō all [...]ccessitie ioyned with all free­dome is reliaunt.

    • In blessed Angels.

      Whose state and condition is this, that their will is made stedfast and vnchaungeable in all goodnes, not of them selues, but through Grace.

    • In mans nature, and that foure maners of wayes according to the fourefold diuision of mans state.
  • 3. In what respect it is called mans Freewill.

    Not in respect of things present, nor thyngs past, bycause present thyngs and thyngs past be of this qualitie, that beyng done they cā not be vndone, nor thynges pa [...]. can be reuoked.

    But is called Freewill in res­pect of thyngs to come. And these be the thynges that our Lombar­dines do affirme are in [...] pow­er, but vntruely, for mās habilitie (to confesse truth) is directed by gods euerlasting decree neither is it in mās habilitie to order chaū ­ceable thynges at his pleasure.

    • 1. In the state of innocen­cie.

      Whose freedome was once such which could both sinne & not sinne. And in this sense the auncient wri­ters must be vnderstanded as often as they speake of mans Freewill, that is to say, of the Freedome of mans nature.

    • 2. In the state of blessed­nesse.

      or of his heauenly coūtrey, as schole­men terme it, where man shalbe en­dued with a freedome that can not Sinne by any meanes.

    • 3. In the state of life after sinne, & before regenera­tion by Grace.

      In which state man hath no Freewill to do any thyng, but to Sinne dead­ly as Lombard sayth? and of this state meaneth Luther writyng of bonde will.

    • 4. In the state of life after sinne, & after re­genera­tion by Grace.

      In whiche state man hath freedome not to Sinne except veniall Sin [...]e as sayth Lombard. But although Au­gustine and Luther doe yeld an habi­litie not to Sinne after a certeine sorte: Yet in respect of actuall Sinne they doe not except man either from veniall or deadly Sinne. Bycause was neuer any man yet found (Christ onely excepte) endued with such [...] of Grace that had not in all his ly [...]e Synned, yea and that deadly.

  • [Page 164]
    4. Of what thynges Free­will taketh his denomination.
    • 1. From necessi­tie or coaction whiche is called the Freedome of nature.

      This Freedome the scholemen do attribute to mē in all states. But this necessitie must bee distin­guished & pro­portioned by his principall cau­ses, whereof

      Some be called internall. As be the thynges whiche are mo­ued of their own nature and of inwarde ope­ration: And those.

      Are either simply and abso­lutely necessary as God and his holynesse, and as those thynges which b [...]yng chaū ­ged emply contradiction, whereof the one partie m [...]st needes bee true the other needes false: as foure is not an equall nōber, foure & three are not sen [...] in nō ­ber: and this is called Geo­metricall Necessitie which alteration nature do [...]h not admitte and this Necessi­tie perteyneth nothyng to Luthers Disputation of Freewill.

      Or be no [...] simply and abso­lutely necessary, but after the common course of na­ture, as [...]er doth burne of Necessitie. The Sinne is alwayes moued and other such lyke, beyng naturall thynges, whiche yet are not of such Necessitie, but may bee [...]indered by God and so cease from opera­tion.

      Some haue ex­ternall begyn­nynges: and of these there is two maner of Necessities.

      Either violent. Whiche is called the Necessitie of ex­ternall coaction: as wh [...] thynges are constreyned to moue or to do contrary to their nature, as stones and heauie thyngs, as the schole men call Necessitie in re­spect of the consequence not of the consequence or it Sensu Diuiso and not in Sensu Composito and frō this Necessitie the freedome of mans will is vtterly exēp­ted.

      Or stable and infallible by reason of the consequence not of the consequent or in Sensu Composito not in Sen­su Diuiso. This Necessitie of the consequence not of the consequent is to be vn­derstanded, when a thyng may bee true in respect of the necessary aff [...]tie of proposition from proposi­tion, although the thyng concluded be not necessary of it selfe: or true in Sensu Composito, which otherwise is false in Sensu Diuiso, or false in Sensu Composito, which otherwise is true in Sensu Diuiso, as if a man say, that white may bee blacke by distinction of contrary tymes it may bee true, but ioynyng the tymes and in Sensu Compo­sito, it can not be true.

    • 2. From sinne or from bondage of sinne, whiche is called freedome of Grace. And this freedome is attributed to them onely, which are made free by Grace. Where­in if they meane of the imputa­tion of Sinne, it is true: but if they meane of actuall Sinne, it is false.
    • 3. From miserie, which is called the freedome of Glory, and this freedome had free will in the state of innocēcie once, and shall haue the same much more perfect hereafter in the state of glory.
  • 5. How much Freewill is em­payred in man through sinne.

    It is woūded in her naturall qualities, to witte, in Reason, in vn­derstādyng, in memory, witte. &c. Dispoyled altogether in thynges as bee heauenly, and appertey­nyng to God.

    And this much well agreeth with the doctrine of Luther.

    Lombard. Lib. 2. Dist. 25.

[Page]Sithence we haue now layd this foundation for our better furniture to be able to make aunswere: We will now addresse our selues to our aduersaries Argumentes. Wherein although he obserue no course, nor forme of cōmon Disputatiō, let vs yet helpe his lame Logicke as well as we may. And first of all, tou­chyng ye ouerthrow of Lawes (wherewith bycause it lyketh Mai­ster Osorius to vrge this point chiefly before the rest) let vs geue our attentiue eares to his wordes, and marke well how cun­nyngly he argueth.Pag. 151. The shamelesse and ly­eng cauill of Osorius. But I say (sayth he) that by this doctrine of Luther (whereby he doth teach that things are directed to their end by Necessitie) that Lawes are subuerted, De­crees put to silence: and right and wrong confoūded toge­ther. And why doth he not adde this much more also? that whole common weales are ouerthrowen? Well go to. I do heare very well what you say Osorius. But I haue not heard yet any sub­staunciall Argumēt, whereby you proue this that you say to be true. Certes there be at this present within Christendome ma­ny Natiōs, many Prouinces, many Kyngdomes, many Duke­domes, many Cities and common weales that fauour Luthers doctrine: Wherein I appeale to your owne conscience (speake it if you can) haue you euer heard amongest all these (I say not of any one commō wealth or Citie) but of any one litle Uillage, or Ciuill familie, that hath bene any one iote defrauded of the benefite of their Lawes, or become lesse prouident for the cōmon quyet of their countrey, by followyng Luthers doctrine? Al­though we haue not yet receaued frō Spayne and Portingall into our common wealth your bloudy lawes of Inquisition, em­brued with Chriscian bloud, and do suppose also that no discrete common wealth will euer receaue them: Yet through Gods in­estimable prouidence we bee not destitute of politique Lawes, nor of honest sciences, nor of vigilaunt Counsellours. Wherein albeit our grosse capacities may seéme vnworthy to bee compa­red to the fine and pregnaunt wittes of Portingall: yet howsoe­uer they seéme, we are by their direction sufficiently enough in­structed to discerne betwixt the limittes of right & wrong, & not to confounde thē: neither haue we euer confounded thē as farre as I know: what maner of hotchpot you make of them in Por­tingall I know not. For as much therefore as common experi­ence [Page 165] teachyng the contrary, doth most manifestly conuince you of open lyeng, with what face dare you so boldly affirme? that through this doctrine of Luther, Lawes are subuerted, Coun­sels put to silence, and confusion and disorder of right and wrong to haue entred in? Whereof you neuer saw any proofe, ne yet can tell a dreame so much of any attempt practized in a­ny common wealth. And therfore I marueile what kynde of le­sing you will coyne at length to make this cauillation of yours to carry some shew of truth. I suppose veryly that (beyng disfur­nished of proofe and recordes, and founde an open lyer in matter so euident) you will shrowde your selfe vnder some close couert of Pelagius. To witte. That where the vse of the law consisteth of two pointes principally, that is to say, in aduancyng vertue, and in punishyng vyce: hereupon Osorius will frame an Argu­ment after this maner and forme.

Lawes are ordeined in vayne, vnlesse there be habilitie to performe them.Osori. Ar­gument.

But there is no habilitie to performe by the doctrine of Necessitie which Luther do threache.

Ergo, Lawes are ordeined in vayne by Luthers doctrine of Necessitie.

I do aunswere the Maior proposition were true,Aunswere, if this bon­dage or Necessitie, which doth preiudice habilitie, were natu­rall, and not of it owne faultynesse, that is to say: If we had bene created without this habilitie by nature, and had not throwen our selues into this inextricable Laberinthe of yelding, through our owne default. But as now hauyng heaped vpon our selues this Necessitie of sinnyng voluntaryly by our owne purchase, and hauyng made Necessitie (as Augustine sayth) of a penall offence: for good cause therefore lawes are of Necessitie establi­shed, which may by some lawfull meane reduce vs to nature, or at least reteyne vs in some couenable order of lyfe:Necessitie of sinnyng is not to be imputed to God, but to our selues. not ouerpas­sing this also withall: that where the Maior treateth of the obe­dience of mans lawes, in the Minor that Necessitie (which Lu­ther doth teach) ought not be referred to mās lawes nor the di­scipline of externall lyfe, but to the obediēce of Gods law onely.

Moreouer, for that I haue promised to helpe to vnderproppe Osorius Logicke, which is of it selfe very ruinous, and ready [Page] to fall to the grounde. I will not refuse to frame by some order and forme, the remnaunt of his allegations into Argumentes, that the Reader may more easily be instructed, what aunswere to make to euery of them particularely.

An other Argument of Osorius.The freedome of mans will beyng takē away, the force of lawes preceptes and rules of good lyfe and all or­dinaunces of Ciuill discipline and statutes do cease.

The Necessitie which Luther teacheth doth abolish all freedome of mans will.

Ergo, This doctrine of Necessitie being allowed. Lawes decay, good statutes and ordinaūces, and all ende­uour of good and godly lyfe is extinguished.

Aunswere. Freedome taken two wayes.First in your Maior proposition this word Freedome must be distinguished: namely to be taken either as opposite to coac­tiō, or opposite to bondage: if in the Maior you vnderstād of co­acted freédome, then is the Maior true. For whosoeuer taketh away freédome from man, doth also dispoyle him of will. But if you vnderst̄ad of bonde freédome, then euen by this meanes is your Maior cleane false.

Necessitie to be taken two maner of wayes.Next we deny your Minor with Augustine, wherein also this word Necessitie must be distinguished. Whiche beyng de­uided into two partes, the one whiche is called Cōpul [...]ary Ne­cessitie, the other whiche is sayd to be of the Consequence, or ex Hypothesi, wherof the first [...]euer any of our Writers dyd de­ny, the other can none of all your Doctours deny: whiche con­sistyng of the foreknowledge of God,The Neces­sitie that Luther tea­cheth, doth take awaye fortune and chaunce, but taketh not awaye freedome from will. by a certeine vnmoueable coniunction of causes, and byndyng Necessitie to thyngs fore-ordeined by God, doth vtterly abolish fortune and chaunce: but doth not take away will, nor withstandeth the freédome therof: as there is no contradiction, but one selfe thyng may be called both Uoluntary, and Necessary also. For freédome of will is not taken away through Necessitie, but through coaction. As for example, when we say that God liueth euerlastyngly, and orde­reth all thynges vprightly: we doe confesse that both these are peculiar to Gods nature of Necessitie, and not by any forreine coactiō. After this maner in the booke of Exod. Whereas Pha­rao did endeuour to stay the children of Israell from departyng out of Egypt, we must neédes confesse, that he did it of Necessi­tie, [Page 166] in respect of Gods secret appointemēt: & in deéde he neither could will, nor do otherwise:Freedome is taken a­way by coa­ction not by Necessitie. But in respect of his owne inclina­tion, which was the very peculiar & nearest cause yt moued him to stay thē [...]o Necessitie of coactiō forced his will to this vnwil­lingly, but that which he did, he did uolūtaryly: and with no lesse earnest willingnes of mynde did he bring to passe ye thing which his greédy affection had willed before. Although a man may be constrayned to do somethyng many tymes agaynst his will yet can he not be framed by any meanes to will a thyng yt he would not. For the will which willeth not, is not now called will, but vnwillyngnesse: nay rather nothyng at all. And for the same ve­ry cause, bycause there is no such thyng at all in the course of na­ture, nor to be founde any where, therfore hath it no denomina­tion nor vsuall name of speache, whereby it may be expressed in Latine: of the same sorte also are the other Argumentes tou­chyng Artes and Sciences, whereof he cauilleth so much after this maner.

If all thynges that happen bee referred to the power of God and are done of Necessitie according to Luthers doctrine,Osori. Ar­gument. Pag. 151. which byndeth all the actions of men to Ne­cessitie.

It would hereupon follow that all Sciences should be o­uerthrowen, all endeuour of mā vtterly frustrate, nor any industry of mē (were it neuer so skilfull employed in husbandry, to byeng and sellyng, to traffique, to prouision for the familie, to Surgery and Phisicke, or any other actions of mans lyfe whatsoeuer) shall pro­fite nor be auayleable.

I do aunswere this to bee most true,The Cōfu­tation. that the operation of all thynges ought to be referred to the will and prouidence of God, as to the chief and principall cause: by whiche prouidence all thynges are ordered of very Necessitie. But this Necessitie ta­keth not away habilitie to endeuour from men, but causeth one­ly that mens actions are not chaunceable. For albeit the thyngs that God willed, doe necessaryly come to passe: yet doth mans will neuertheles yeld her diligent endeuour, which will the pro­uidence of God doth not take away, but gouerneth. In deéde mās will doth worke, yea and freély worketh: that is to say: wor­keth [Page] voluntaryly, not coactly: yet it worketh so, as if God helpe, it worketh well, if God doe not helpe, it worketh ill. And yet whether it worke well, or ill, it alwayes worketh of Necessitie: neither doth will employ her habilitie any io [...]e lesse beyng go­uerned by God, but rather is encouraged to worke so much the more earnestly, bycause the thynges come to passe necessaryly, whatsoeuer Gods will hath foreordeined to bee done by the in­dustry of man.

Certes this saying of Luther is vndoubtedly true, that no­thyng happeneth in all the actions of mans lyfe, either well, or euill, either without Gods knowledge, or without his will, or els without his direction. And yet bycause the successes of those thynges are vncerteine vnto vs, therefore followyng the rule of our will and reason, and withall obeyeng the will of God (who cōmaundeth vs to do our endeuour) we do apply all our diligēce earnestly to worke, cōmending in the meane whiles both our sel­ues, & the successe of our trauaile to the tuitiō of almighty God: at whose especiall commaundement all thynges come to their end necessaryly, & obey his direction of very Necessitie. Wher­by you perceaue that our endeuours and trauailes doe nothyng lesse decrease or waxe more dull to worke, bycause they are fore­knowen, and directed by God: but our will is by so much more encouraged to worke, bycause we will obey Gods will, who cō ­maundeth to worke. And therefore that Sophisme of yours is altogether Sophisticall & deceauable, not much vnlike to that, whiche we read in Origine in his second booke agaynst Celsus: where the Sophister, to dissuade the sicke body from counsell of Phisicke,Origene a­gainst Cel­sus. 2. booke frameth this Argumēt. If thou be Predestinate (sayth hee) to recouer health, thou shalt surely be hoale whether thou take Phisicke, or no: but if thou be Predestinate to dye, the Phi­sition shall both loase his labour, and thou cast away thy money to no purpose. Whom the sicke person perceauyng to be to­wardes Mariadge, with the lyke Sophisme (driuyng out as it were one nayle with an other) aunswereth after this maner. If it be thy destiny to haue issue of thy body, thou shalt haue one, whether thou marry a wife, or not marry a wife: but if thou be predestinate to be childlesse, thou shalt surely be childies, though thou marry a wife neuer so much. The deceite of this So­phisme [Page 167] lurketh herein. Bycause our endeuours,Our actiōs must be gu­ded by ap­proued rea­son and not vncerteine certeinetie. and Imagina­tions ought not to depend vpō an vncerteine certeintie, whiche may be applyable to good or euill indifferently, or vpon chaun­geable aduenture (the successe wherof we know not) but must be ordered by a direct assured rule of reason. For albeit on the one side it may so come to passe, that he that marryeth a wife shall haue no children: yet on the other part, for as much as it is im­possible to haue children without copulation of man and womā: therfore that ought to be yelded vnto, that seémed consonaunt to reason, not that which ye Argument concluded videl. therfore he must not marry a wife. In lyke maner fareth it with the other Argument concernyng the Phisition. Although it may so come to passe that no Phisicke may helpe me, yet bycause it is most a­greable to reason that vnlesse Phisicke be ministred, health will not bee recouered, I will follow herein the most approued rule of reason, and will not wilfully throw my selfe by an vncerteine Necessitie of destiny, into that whiche seémeth impossible, or at least lesse agreable to reason. Wherfore as these assumptions be false, thou shalt in vayne marry a wife, & thou shalt vse Phi­sicke in vayne: in lyke maner I aunswere that Osorius Argu­ment is Sophisticall, where hee argueth that our endeuours are applyed in vayne, & that we do trauaile in vayne. Well: to go foreward to the other triflyng toyes of this Sophister.

An other Argument touchyng rewardes and punishmentes.

For as much as vertue and vyce doe proceede from out the free choyse of will,An other suttle So­phisme of Osorius is opened. Pag. 151. it can not be, but that he which doth bereaue will of her freedome, must also dispoyle the lyfe of man of due reward for vertue, and punish­ment for vyce.

Luther, by byndyng all thynges to Necessitie, doth be­reaue will of her freedome.

Ergo, by Luthers doctrine it doth come to passe, that nei­ther punishment shalbe executed vpon malefactours, nor vertue aduaunced with condigne reward.

The very same Argument did Pelagius long [...]ithence vse a­gaynst August. though not in the selfe same wordes, yet all one in effect. I aunswere the partes therof. And first concernyng [Page] freédome of will mentioned in the Maior, how it ought to be di­stinguished, hath bene declared before already. Then if in the Minor you respect that kynde of Necessitie, whiche forceth vs to yeld whether we will or no, your Minor is false. As touchyng reward for vertue, and punishment for vyce: Celestius the Pe­lagian vrged agaynst Augustine in the same wise.The Obie­ctiō of Ce­lestine the Pelagian a­gaynst Au­gustine. Man is not to be blamed (sayth he) for committing the Sinne, which he can by no meanes auoyde. Augustine maketh aunswere:Aug. Aun­swere. Nay ra­ther (sayth he) man is therefore faultie, in that hee is not without sinne: bycause by mās Freewill onely it came to passe, that he should fall into that Necessitie of Sinnyng, which Necessitie by his owne will he can not withstād