DOctor storie (before I was called into an inner parler where they satte) came out into the hal where I was, to vewe me among other, that there were. And passyng by me, sayd: Ha maister Philpot. And in re­turning immediatly agayne stayed a­gainst me, beholdyng me, and sayeng that I was wel fedd in dede.

Yf I be fat and in good lykyng (maister doctor) it is no maruayle, synce I haue ben staulled vp in prison this twelue moneth & an halfe in a close cor­ner. I am come to know your pleasure, wherfore you haue sent for me.

We heare that thou arte a sus­pecte person, and of heretical opiniōs: and therfore we haue sent for thee.

I haue ben in prison thus long, only vpon the occasion of the disputaciō [Page] made in the conuocation house: and vp­on suspect of setting furthe the report therof.

Yf thou wilt reuoke the same, and become an honest man, thou shalt be set at libertie, and do ryght well: or elles thou shalte be committed to the B. of London. How sayest thou? wilt thou reuoke it or no?

I haue already answered in this behalfe to myne Ordinarie.

Yf thou answerest thus, when thou commest before vs anone, thou shalt heare more of our myndes. And with this he went into the parler, and I (within a lytle while after) was cal­led in.

Sir, what is your name?

My name is Iohn̄ Philpot. And so he intytuled my name.

This man was Archdeacon of wynchester, of doctor Ponets presen­tement.

I was Archdeacon indede, but none of his presentment, but by the ver­tue of a former vowson, geuen by my lorde Chauncelour that now is.

Ye maye be suer, that my lorde Chaūcelour would not make any such as he is, Archdeacon.

Come hyther to me M. Phil­pot. we heare saye, that you are out of the catholyke churche, and haue ben a disturber of the same: out of the which who so is, he can not be the chylde of saluacion. Wherfore yf you wyl come into the same, you shalbe receyued & fynde fauour.

I am come before your worship­full maisterships at your appointment, vnderstanding that you are magistra­tes, authorised by the Quenes maiestie, to whome I owe and wyll do my due obedience to the vttermost. Wherfore I desire to knowe, what cause I haue offended in, wherfore I am nowe cal­led before you. And yf I cā not be char­ged with any particular mater done cō trarie to the lawes of this realme, I desire your masterships, that I maye haue the benefit of a subiecte, and to be dely­uered out of my long wrongful impri­sonment, where I haue lyen thys twelue moneth and this halfe, without any callyng to answer before now: And my lyuyng taken from me, without all lawe.

Though we haue no particular matter to charge you with all, yet we maye both by our commission, and by [Page] the lawe dryue you to answere to the suspicion of a slaūder, goyng on you: And besydes this, we haue statutes to charge you herin withall.

Yf I haue offended any statute, charge me therwithal: and yf I haue in­curred the penaltie therof, punyshe me accordingly. And bycause you are ma­gistrates & executours of the Quenes maiesties lawes, by force wherof you do nowe syt: I desyre, that yf I be foūde no notorious trāsgressour of any of thē, that I may not be burdened with more than I haue done.

Yf the Iustice do suspect a fe­lon, he maye examine hym vpon sus­picion therof, and commit him to pri­son, though ther be no fact done.

I perceyue wherabout this mā goeth he is playne in Cardmakers case, for he made the selfe same allega­tions. but they will not serue thee.

For thou arte an heretike, and holdest agaynst the blessed masse, howe sayest thou to that?

I am no heretyke.

I wil proue thee an heretyke. Whosouer hathe holden agaynst the blessed masse, is an heretyke: but thou hast holden against the same, therfore [Page 4] thou arte an heretyke.

That which I spake, that you are hable to charge me withall, was in the conuocacion, where (by the Quenes maiesties will, & her hole councell) lyber­tie was gyuen to euery mā of the house, to vtter his conscience, and to saye his mynde freely, of suche questions in reli­giō, as there were propounded by y^e Prolocutor, for the which now I ought not to be molested & imprisoned, as I haue ben, neither nowe be compelled of you, to answer to the same.

Thou shalt go to the Lollardes tower, and be handled there lyke an heretyke, as thou art: and answere to the same, y^t thou there diddest speake, and be iudged by the B. of London.

I haue already ben conuented of this matter, before my lorde chaūcelor myne ordinary: who this lōg tyme hathe kept me in prison, therfore & yf his lordshyp wil take awaye my life, as he hath done my libertie and liuing, he maye: the which I thinke he cā not doo of his conscience, and therfore hath let me lye thys long in prison: wherfo­re I am content to abyde the ende of hym herin that is myne ordinarie, and doo refuse the auditory of the bi­shop [Page] of London: because he is an vncon­petent Iudge for me, and not myne or­dinarie.

But syr, thou spakest the wor­des in the conuocation howse, which is of the bishop of londōs diocese: and therfore thou shalt be caried to y^e lol­lardes tower, to be Iudged by hym, for the wordes thow spakest in his diocese, agaynst the blessed masse.

Syr you know by the lawe, that I may haue exceptionem fori. And it is agaynst al equyte, y^t I should be twyse vexed for one cause, and that by suche, as (by y^e lawe) haue nothing to do w^t me.

You cā not denye, but that you spake agaynst the masse in the conuo­cation howse.

Doest thow now denye y^e which thou spakest there, or no?

I can not denie that I haue spo­ken ther. And yf by the lawe you maye put me to death therfore, I am here ready to suffer whatsoeuer I shalbe adiud­ged vnto.

This man is ledde of vayne glorie.

Playe the wyse gentilmā, & be cōformable & be not stubborne in your owne opiniōs, neyther cast your selfe [Page 5] away. I would be glad to do you good.

I desyre you (syr) w^t the rest here, that I be not charged farther at your handes, than the lawe chargeth me, for that I haue done: synce ther was thā no lawe agaynst that directly, wher with I am nowe charged. And you maister Doctor (of olde acquayntaunce in Oxford) I trust, will shewe me some frendshype, and not extremitie.

I tell the, yf thow wouldest be a good Catholike man, I would be thy frende, and spend my gowne to do the good. Now co­meth in the bochers axe. But I wylbe no frēd to an heretyke, as thow art: but wyl spend both my gowne and my cote, but I wil burne the. How sayst thow to the sacrament of the altare?

Syr I am not comme nowe to dispute with your maistership. And the tyme nowe serueth not therto. But to answere to that I maye be lawfully charged withall.

Well, synce thow wilt not re­uoke that thou hast done, thou shalt be had into the lollardes towre.

Syr, sence you wyll nedes shewe me this extremitie, and charge me with my conscience, I do desyre to see your [Page] commission, whether you haue this au­toritie so to do. And after the vewe therof, I shall (according to my dutie) make you further answere, yf you maye by the vertue therof, burthen me with my con­science.

Let hym se the commission, is it here?

Shal we let euery vyle person see our commission?

Let hym go from whence he came, and on thursdaye he shal se our commission.

No let hym lye in the meane whyle in the lollardes tower: For I wyll swepe the kynges Benche, and al other prisons also, of these heretikes, they shall not haue that resorte as they haue had, to skatter their heresies.

You haue power to transferre my bodye, from place to place, at your plea­sure: but you haue no power ouer my soule. And I passe not whither you cō ­mit me. For I cā not be worse intreated then I am, kept al daye in a close cham­ber. wherfore it is no maruaile, that my fleshe is puft vp, wherwithal M. doc­tour is offended.

Marshal take hym home with you agayne. And se that you bringe [Page 6] him agayne a thursdaye, and then we shal ridde your fyngers of hym, and afterwarde of your heretikes.

God hath appointed a daye short­ly to come, in the which he will iudge vs with ryghteousnes, howe so euer you iudge of vs nowe.

Be content to be ruled by ma­ster doctour, and shewe your selfe a catholyke man.

Syr. yf I should speake otherwyse then my conscience is, I should but dis­semble with you. And why be you so earnest to haue me shewe my selfe a dis­sembler both to God and you, which I can not do.

We do not require you to dis­semble with vs, but to be a catholyke man.

Yf I do stande in any thing, a­gaynst that which any man is hable to burthen me, with one iote of the scrip­ture, I shalbe content to be counted no catholyke man, or an heretyke, as you please.

Haue we scripture, scripture? & with that he rose vp, sayeng: who shall be iudge, I praye you?

This man is lyke his felowe Woodmā, which the other daye would [Page] haue nothyng elles but scripture.

And this is the beginning of this tragedie.

AT my commyng, a mā of Al­gate of myne acquayntaunce sayd vnto me: God haue mercy on you. For you ar already cōdempned in this worlde: for S. story sayd, y^t my lorde Chaūcelour hath cōmaūded to do you away. After a litle consultacion had betwene them, master Cholmeley called me vnto hym, sayeng.

Master Phylpot, shew your self a wyse man. And be not stubburne in your owne opinion, but be conforma­ble to the Quenes procedinges, and [Page 7] lyue, and you shalbe well assured of greate fauoure and reputacion.

I shal do, as yt becommeth a Christian man to doo.

This man is the rankest here­tike: y^t hath ben in al my Lorde chaū ­celers diocese, & hath done more hurt, than any man elles there. Therfore hys pleasure is, that he should haue the lawe to procede agaynst hym. And I haue spoken with my lorde herein. And he wylleth hym to be committed to the bishop of London. And he there to recant, or elles burne. He howled & wept in the conuocacion howse, and made suche a do, as neuer man dyd. As al the heretiks do, when they lacke learning to answere. He shal go after hys felowes. Howe sayst thou? wilt thou recant.

I knowe nothing I haue done, that I owght to recant.

Well than I praye you, let vs commit him, to the lollardes tower, & there remayne, vntyll he be further examined before the bishop of Londō. For he is to fyne fedde in the kynges Benche, & he hath to muche fauour ther. For his keper sayd at y^e doore ye­sterdaye, that he was y^e fynest felowe, [Page] and one of the best learned in Englād. And with this he rose vp, and went his waye.

This man hath most stoutly mayntayned heresies, synce the Que­nes comming in, as any that I haue heard of. Therfore it is most mete, he should be adiudged by the bishop of Lō don, for the heresies he hath mayn­tayned.

I haue mayntayned no heresies.

No haue? Dyd ye not openly speake agaynst the sacrament of the altar, in the cōuocacion house? cal you that no heresie? wilt thou recant that or not?

It was the Quenes Maiesties pleasure, that we should reason therof, not by my sekyng, but by other mens procuryng, in the hearing of the coūsel.

Dyd the Quene gyue you lea­ue to be an heretyke? you maye be sure, No Cook. But ye take leaue to be a trayter. her grace wyl not so do. Wel, we wyl not dispute the matter with you. My lorde of London shall procede, by inquisicion vpon thee, and yf thou wilt not recant, thou shalt be burned.

My lorde of London is not myne ordinarie in this behalfe: and I haue alreadye answered vnto myne ordina­rie [Page 8] in this matter. And therfore as I haue sayd before, you shall do me great wrong, to vexe me twyse for one mat­ter: synce I haue susteined this long in­prisonment, besydes the losse of my ly­uyng.

You were a very vnmete man to be an Archdeacon.

I knowe I was as mete a man, as he that hath it now.

A mete man ꝙ a? he troubled master Roper, and the hole countrey.

Ther was neuer poore Archdea­con so handled at your handes, as I am: and that without any iuste cause ye be hable to laye vnto me.

Thou art no Archedeacon.

I am Archedeacon stil, although an other be in possession of my lyuyng: for I was neuer depriued by any lawe.

No syr, that nedeth not: for a notorious heretyke shoulde haue no ordinarie proceding about his depri­uacion: but the Bishop may at knowlege therof, procede to depriuacion.

Master doctour, you knowe, that the common lawe is otherwyse. And besydes this, the statutes of this real­me be otherwyse, which geueth this benefyte to euery persone, though he be [Page] an heretyke, to enioye his lyuyng, vntyl he be put to death for the same.

No, ther thou arte deceyued.

Vpon the lyuyng I passe not.

But y^e vniust dealyng greueth me, that I should be thus troubled for my con­science, contrary to al lawe.

Why, wyll you not agree, that the Quenes maiestie maye cause you to be examined of your fayth?

Aske you of master D. Cooke, and he wyll tel you, that the temporal magi­strates haue nothyng to doo with ma­ters of fayth, for determinacion therof. And S. Ambrose sayth, Diuina imperato­riae maiestati non sunt subiecta. That the thinges of God are not subiect to y^e power and authoritie of princes.

No? may not the temporal po­wer commit you to be examined of your fayth to the bishop? That is an other mater.

Yea syr I denie not that, but you will not graunt, that the same maye examine any of theyr owne authoritie.

A sure so­lucion. Let hym be had away.

Your mastership ꝓmised me, y^e last tyme I was before you, I should see your commission, by what autoritie you do cal me, and whether I (by the same) be boūde to answere to so muche as you [Page 9] demaunde.

Let hym see the commission,

What? thā he exhybited it to master Roper, and was about to opē the same.

No, what wil you do? he shal not see yt.

Than do you me wrong, to call me and vexe me, not shewing your autoritie in this behalfe.

Yf we do you wrong, cōplayne on vs: and in the meane whyle thou shalt lye in the lollardes tower.

Syr, I am a poore gētelmā: therfore I trust of your gentlenes you will not cōmitte me to so vyle and strayte a place, being founde no haynous tres­pacer.

Thou art no gentilman.

Yeas that I am.

An heretyke is no gentilman, for he is a gentelmā, that hath gentil condicions.

The offēce can not take away the state of a gentilman, as long as he ly­ueth, although he were a traytour, But I meane not to boast of my gētleman­ship, but wil put it vnder my foote, synce you do no more esteme it.

What? wil you suffer this here­tyke [Page] to prate with you al this daye.

He sayth he is a gentilman.

A gentilman ꝙ A? he is a vyle heretike knaue. Naye, he wil not ta­ke your name from you. For an heretyke ys no gentilman: Let the Keper of lollar­des tower comme in, and haue hym awaye.

Here syr.

Take this man with you to the lollardes tower, or els to the bishops Cole howse.

Syr, yf I were a dogge, you could not appoint me a worse and more vyle place. But I must be cōtent with what so euer iniurie you do offer me, God gyue you a more merciful hart, you are verye cruel vpon one, that hath neuer offended you. I praye you (master chol­meley) shewe me some frēdship, that I be not caried to so vyle a place. And he called me asyde, and said.

I am not skylfull of theyr do­yng, neyther of theyr lawes: I cā not tel what they meane, I would I could do you good.

I am content to go whither you will haue me. Ther was neuer man more cruelly hādled, than I am at your hādes that without any iust cause kno­wen, should thus be intreated.

Shal we suffer this heretyke, thus to reproue vs? haue hym hence.

God forgyue you, and gyue you more merciful hartes, & shew you more mercy in the tyme of nede. Et quod facis, fac citius. So quickly that you haue in hande.

Do you not heare, howe he maketh vs Iudases?

That is after your owne vnderstā ding.

After thys I with .iiij. other moo, were brought to the kepers howse, where we supped in pater noster rowe, and after supper I was called vp to a chāber by the arch­deacon of Londons seruaunt, and that in his masters name he offred me a bedd for that night.

To whome I gaue thankes, sayēg: that yt should be a greffe to me to lye wel one night, & y^e next worse. Wherfore I would begynne, as I am like to continue, to take suche part, as my felowes doo. And with that, we were brought through paternoster rowe, to my lord of Londons colehowse. Vnto the which is ioyned a lytle blind howse, with a great payre of stockes, apoynted both [Page] for hand and foote. But thankes be to God, we haue not played of those or­gaynes yet, although som befor vs had tried them. And ther we founde a Mi­nister of Estsex, a maried priest, a mā of godly zeale, with one other pore man. And this minister (at my comming) de­syred to speake with me, and did great­ly lament hys owne infirmitie for that through extremitie of imprisonment, he was constrayned by wryting to yeld to the bishop of London. Wherupon he was once set at libertie: And after­ward felt suche a hel in his cōscience, y^t he could scarce refrayne from destroy­eng hymselfe, and neuer could be at quiet, vntyl he had gone to the bishopes regester, desyring to see hys byl agayne, the which as sone as he had receyued, he tare yt in peaces. And afterward he was as Ioyful as any man might be. Of the which when my lorde of Londō had vnderstanding, he sent for hym, and fell vpon hym like a lyon, and like a manly bishop buffeted him wel, and plucte awaye a great pece of his beard. But now thankes be to God, he is as Ioy­ful vnder the crosse, as any of vs, and verye sorye of his former infirmitie. I write thys, because I would all men [Page 11] to take heede, howe they doo contrary to theyr conscience: which is to fal into the paynes of hell.

MAster Phylpot, yt hath pleased my lordes to take paynes hereto daye, to dyne with my pore arch­deacon, Naye your cou­syn Archediacō, and you bothe bastardes, and .ij. priestes sonnes. and in the dinner tyme it chaunced vs to haue commu­nication of you. And you were pitied here of many, y^t knewe you, in y^e new college in Oxford. And I also do py­tie your case, because you seme vnto me (by the talke I had with you the other night) to be learned. And therfore nowe I haue sent for you, to com be­fore them, that yt might not be sayd herafter, that I had so many learned byshopes at my house, and yet would not vouchesafe them to talke with you. And at my request (I thāke thē) they are cōtented so to do. Now ther­fore vtter your mynde frely, & you shal with al fauour be satisfied. I am [Page] sorye to see you lye in so euel a case, as you do, and would fayne you should do better, as you maye yf you lust.

My lordes here, haue not sent for you to fawne vpō you, but for cha­rities sake, to exhort you to cōme in to the right catholike waye of y^e churche.

Before he beginneth to speake, yt is best that he calleth to God for grace, and to praye: y^t yt myght please God, to open hys hart, that he maye conceyue the truth.

With that I fell downe vpon my knees before them, and made my pray­er on this maner: Almyghtie God, which art the geuer of al wisdome and vnderstanding, I beseche the of thyne infinite goodnes and mercy, in Iesus Christ, to gyue me (most vile sinner in thy sight) y^e spirite of wisdome, to speake and make answere in thy cause that it maie be to the contentacion of the hea­rers, before whom I stand: And also to my better vnderstanding, yf I be decei­ued in any thing.

Nay (my lorde of Worcester) you did not well to exhorte hym to make any prayer. For this is y^e thing they haue a singular pride in: that they can oftē make their vayne pray­ers, [Page 16] in the which they glorie moche. For in this point, they are moche like to certayne arrāt heretikes, of whom Plinie maketh mentiō, that dyd day­ly syng [...]n e [...]u [...]ano [...] hymnos, prayse vnto God before the dawnyng of the daye.

My lord, God make me and all you here p̄sent, suche heretykes, as those were, that sōg those mornyng hymnes: for they were ryght Christians, with whom the tyrānes of the world weare offended for theyr well doing.

Procede to that he hath to saye, he hath prayed I cā not tell for what.

Saye on master Phylpot, my lordes wyll gladly heare you.

I haue (my lordes) bē this twelue moneth and an halfe in prison without any iust cause, that I knowe: and my liuing taken from me, without any law ful ordre: And nowe brought (contrary to ryght) from myn owne territorie and ordinarie into an other mans iurisdicti­on, I know not whie. Wherfore if your lordships can burden me with any euill done, I stand here before you, to purge me of the same. And if none suche thing may be iustlye layed to my charge, I de­syre to be released of this wrongfull [Page] trouble.

Ther is none here goeth a­bout to trouble you, but to do you good, yf we can. For I promise you, ye weare sent hither to me, without my knowledge. Therfore speake your conscience, without any feare.

My lord, I haue learned to an­swere in matters of religion in Ecclesia legittime vocatus, In the congregacion be­ing ther to lawfully called: but nowe I am not lawfully called, neyther ys here a iust congregacion, wher I owght to answere.

In dede this mā tolde me, the last tyme I spake with him y^t he was a lawer: And would not vtter his con­science in maters of faith, onlesse yt were in y^e hearīg of y^e people, wher he might speake to vayne glorie.

My Lorde, I said not I was a lawer, neither do I arrogate to my selfe that name, although I was once a no­uice in the same, wher I learned some thyng for myne owne defence, when I am callyd in Iudgement, to answere to any cause, and wherby I haue ben taught, not to put my selfe further in­daunger, then I nede, and so farre am I a lawer, and no farther.

Yf you wil not answere to my lordes request, you seme to be a wilfull man in your opinion.

My lord of Londō is not mine or­dinarie, before whome I am bounde to answere, in this behalfe: as master D. Cole (which is a lawier) can wel tel you by the lawe. And I haue not offended my lord of London, wherfore he should call me.

Yes, I haue to laye to your charge, that you haue offended in my diocese by speaking agaynst the blessed sacrament of the altar: and therfore I may call you, and procede agaynst you, to punishe you by the lawe.

I haue not offended in your dio­cese, for that which I spake of the sacrament, was in Paules churche in the cō uocation house, which (as I vnderstād) is a peculiar Iurisdiction, belonging to the deane of Paules, and therfore is counted of your lordshipes diocese, but not in your diocese.

Is not paules churche in my diocese? Well I wot, it cost me a good deale of mony by the yere, the leading therof.

That maye be, & yet be exempted [Page] from your lordships iurisdiccion. And albeit I had so offended in the place of your diocese, yet I ought (by the lawe) to be sent to myne Ordinarie, yf I re­quire it, and not to be punished by you, that are not myne ordinarie. And alrea­dy (as I haue tolde you) I haue ben conuented of myne Ordinarie for this cau­se, which you go about to enquire of me

How saye you M. doctor Colle? maye not I procede against hym by the lawe for that he hath done in my diocese?

Yea fur­ther him to the fyre Me thinketh, M. Philpot nedeth not to stande so muche with your lordship in that point, as he dothe, sythen you seke not to hynder him, but to further hym. Therfore I thynke it best, that he go to the matter, that is layde agaynst hym of the conuocacion, and make no longer delaye.

I would willynglye shewe my mynde of that mater, but I am sure it wylbe layd against me to my preiudice, when I come to iudgement.

Why, then you may speake by protestacion.

But what shal my protestacion a­uayle, in a cause of heresie (as you cal it) yf I speake otherwyse thē you wil haue [Page 18] me: synce that which I spake in the con­uocacion house (beyng a place priuiled­ged) can not now helpe me?

But M. D. Colle, maye I not procede agaynst hym, for that offence he hath done in my diocese?

You may cal him before you (my lorde) yf he be founde in your diocese.

But I haue by force ben brought out of myne owne diocese, to my lordes: & require to be iudged of myne owne ordinarie. And therfore I knowe, M. D. wil not say of his knowledge, that your lordship ought to procede agaynst me. And here M.D. would saye nothyng.

Do you not thynke to fynd, before my lorde here, as good equitie in your cause, as before your owne ordi­narie?

I can not blame my lorde of Lon­dons equitie, with whom (I thanke his lordship) I haue founde more gentle­nes, synce I came, then of myne owne ordinarie (I speake it for no flatterie) this twelue moneth, and thys halfe be­fore, who neuer would cal me to an­swere, as his lordship hath done nowe twyse. Sed nemo prohibetur vti iure suo. But I ought not to be forstalled of my right. And therfore I chalenge the same, for [Page] diuerse other consideracions.

Now you can not say herafter, but that ye haue ben gently cōmuned withall, of my lordes here. And yet you wylfull and obstinate in your er­rour, and your owne opinions: & will not shewe any cause, why you wil not come, into the vnitie of the churche with vs.

My lordes, that I do not declare my mynde, according to your expectaci­on, is as I haue sayd, because I can not speake without present daunger of my lyfe: but rather then you should reporte me by this, eyther obstinate or selfe wil­led, without any iuste groūde, whervp­on I stande, I wyl open vnto you som­what of my mynde, or rather the hole: desyring your lordshippes, which seme to be the pillers of the churche of Eng­lande, to satisfye me in the same And I wil referre al other causes, in the which I dissent from you, into one or two ar­ticles, or rather to one, which includeth them both, in the which, yf I can (by the scriptures) be satisfied at your mouthes, I shall as willyngly agree to you, as a­ny other, in al pointes.

These heretikes com alwayes with their yffs, as this mā doeth now. [Page 19] sayng: yf he cā be satisfied by the scriptures, so that he will allwayes haue this exception, I am not satisfi­ed, although the mater be neuer so playnly proued agaynst him.No proofe, but prailyng.But wil you promise to be satisfied, yf my lor­des take summe paynes about you?

I saye (my lorde I wilbe satisfi­ed by the scriptures, in that I stande. And I processe here before God, & his eternal sonne Iesus Christ my saueour, and the holy gost, hys angelles, & you here present, that be Iudges of that I speake: that I do not stand in any opinion, of wilfulnes, or singularitie, but on­ly vpon my conscience, certaynly infor­med by Goddes worde: from the which I dare not goo, for feare of damnacion. And this is the cause of myne earnest­nes in this behalfe.

I will trouble my lordes no longer, seing that you wil not declare your mynd.

I am about so to do, yf yt please your lordship to heare me speake.

Gyue hym leaue (my lorde) to speake that he hath to saye.

My lordes, it is not vnknowē to you, that the chyef cause why you do count me, and suche as I am, for here­tikes, [Page] because we be not at vnitie with your churche. You saye you are of the true churche. And we saye we, are of the true churche. You say, that who is out of your churche, is dampned. And we thinke veryly on the other syde, that yf we departe from the true church, wheron we are graffed in Godes worde, we should stande in the state of dampnaci­on. Wherfore yf your lordships can bring any better auctorities for your churche, than we can do for ours: and proue by the scriptures, that the church of Rome nowe (of the which you are) is the true catholike churche, as in all your sermons, writinges, and argumē ­tes you do vpholde: And that all christē persons owght to be ruled by the same vnder payne of dāpnation (as you saye) and that the same churche (as you pre­tend) haue auctoritie to entreprete the scriptures, as it semeth her good: and that all men are bounde to folowe suche interpretacions only: I shalbe as conformable to the same church as you maye desire me, the which otherwyse I dare not. Therfore I require you for Goddes sake to satisfie me in this.

Yf you stād vpō this point onlye, you maye sone be satisfied & you list.

It is the thing that I require. And to this I haue sayd, I wil stand, & referre al other controuersies, I stande nowe agaynst you, & wyl put my hande therto, yf you mistrust my worde.

I praie you maister Philpot, what fayth were you of .xx. yeares a­go? this man will haue euery yeare a new fayth.

My lord to tell you plain, I thinke I was of no fayth, for I was thā a wicked lyuer, and knewe not God, thā as I owght to do: God forgyue me.

No were? that is not soo, I am sure, you were of some fayth.

My lord I haue declared you on my conscience, what I than was, and iudge of my selfe. And what is that to the purpose, of the thing I desire to be satisfied of you.

Maister Archdeacon Colle I praye you, say your mynd to hym.

What will you saye, yf I can proue, that it was decreed by a vniuersall counsel, in Athanasius tyme: that al the christiane church should folowe the determinacion of the churche of Rome? but I do not nowe remembre where.

If you (master doctor) can shewe [Page] me the same graunted to the sea of Rome by the auctoritie of the scripture, I will gladlye herken therto. But I thinke, you be not hable to shewe any such thing: for Athanasius was preci­dent of Nicene counsell, & there was no suche thing decreed, I am sure.

Though it were not than, yt might be at an other tyme.

I desire to see y^e profe therof. And vpon this, maister Harpesfyld Chaūce­ler to the bishop of London, brought in a boke of Ireneus, w^c certayne leaues turned in, & layd it before y^e bishops, to helpe them in their perplexitie, yf it might be: the which after y^e bishops of Bath & Glocester had reade together, the bishop of Glocester gaue me the booke.

Take the booke (master Phil­pot) and loke vpon that place, and ther may you see, howe the churche of Rome is to be folowed of all men.

I toke the booke, and read the place. The which after I had read, I sayd, it made nothing against me, but against the Arriās and other heretiks, against whom Ireneus wrote, prouīg that they weare not to be credityd [Page 21] because they did teache, and folowe af­ter straunge doctrine in Europa: & that the chefe churche of the same was foun­ded by Peter and Paule, and had to his tyme continued by faythfull succession of the faythfull Bishops, in preachyng the true Gospel as they had receyued it of the Apostles, and nothyng lyfe to the late sprong heretikes. &c. Wherby he cō cludeth against thē, that they were not to be heard, neyther to be credited. The which thing, yf you (my lordes) be able to proue nowe, of the churche of Rome: then had you as good autoritie against me, in my cause nowe, as Ireneus had against those heretikes. But the church of Rome hath swarued frō that truthe, and simplicitie of the Gospell, which it maintained in Ireneus tyme: and was vncorrupted frō that, which it is nowe. Wherfore your lordships can not iustly applie the autoritie of Ireneus, to the churche of Rome nowe, which is so manifestlye corrupted from the primatiue Churche.

So wil you say stil, it maketh nothing for the purpose, what so euer autoritie we bring, and wil neuer be satisfyed.

My lorde when I do by iust rea­son) [Page] proue, that the autorities which be brought against me, do not make to the purpose, as I haue already proued: I trust you wil receyue myne answere.

It is to be proued most mani­festly by al auncient wryters, that the sea of Rome hath alwayes folowed y^e truthe, and neuer was deceyued, vntil of late certayne heretikes had defaced the same.

Let that be proued & I haue done.

Nay, you are of suche arrogā ­cie, singularitie, & vayne glorie, y^t you wil not se it, be it neuer so wel proued.

Ha my lordes, is it nowe tyme (thynke you) for me, to folowe singula­ritie or vaynglorie, synce it is nowe, vpō daunger of my lyfe and death: not onlye presently, but also before God to come? and I knowe, yf I dye not in the true faythe, I shall dye euerlastingly, & again I knowe, yf I do not as you would ha­ue me, you will kyll me, and many thou­sandes moo. Yet had I leuer perishe at your handes, than to perishe eternally. And at this tyme, I haue lost al my cō ­modities of this worlde, and nowe lye in a colhouse, where a man would not laye a dogge, with the which I am wel contented.

Where are you hable to proue, that the churche of Rome hath erred at any tyme? and by what historie? certaine it is by Eusebius, that the chur­che was stablyshed at Rome by Peter and Paule: and that Peter was Bis­shop .xxv. yeres at Rome.

I knowe wel, that Eusebius so wryteth, but yf we compare that which S. Paule writeth to the Galathiās the first: it wil manifestly appere the cōtra­rie, that he was not halfe so long there. He lyued not past .xxxv. yeares, after he was called to be an Apostle. And Paul maketh mencion of his abidyng, after Christes death more then .xviij. yeres.

What did Peter wryte vnto the Galathians?

No, I saye Paule maketh mencion of Peter, wrytyng to the Galathians, & of his abiding. And further I am hable to proue, bothe by Eusebius and other historiographers, that the church of Rome hath manifestly erred, and at this present doth erre, because she agreeth not with that, which they wrote. The primatiue churche dyd vse according to the Gospel. And ther nedeth none o­ther profe, but cōpare the one with the other.

Hearke my lordes wise para­bable. I maye compare this man, to a certayne man I reade of, which fell into a disperation, and went into a wood to hang him selfe. And when he came there, he went vewyng of euery tree, and could fynde none, on the which he myght vouchesaffe to hang himselfe. But I wil not applie it, as I myght. I praye you (maister doctor) go forth with him. Nother you nor they are hable in this case.

My lorde, there be on euery syde on me, that be better hable to answer him. And I loue not to falle in dispu­tacion, for that nowe a dayes, a man shall but sustayne shame and obloquy therby of y^e people. I had leuer shewe my mynde in wrytyng.

And I had leuer that you should so do, then otherwyse. For thē a mā may better iudge of your wordes, then by argument. And I beseche you, so doo. But yf I were a ryche man, I durst wager an hundreth poundes, that you shal not be hable to shewe, that you haue sayd, to be decreed by a general coūsel in Atha­nasius tyme. For this I am sure of, y^t it was concluded by a general counsel in Affrica, many yeres after, y^t none of Af­frica (vnder payne of excōmunication) should apeale to Rome, the which de­cre [Page 23] I am suer they would not haue made, yf by the scriptures it had bene (& by an vniuersall counsell) that all men should abyde, and folowe the determinacion of the churche of Rome.

But I can shewe that they reuo­ked that errour agayne.

So you saye maister doctour. But I pray you shewe me where. I haue he­therto heard nothing of you, for my con­tentation, but bare wordes, without a­ny autoritie.

What (I praye you) ought we to dispute wyth you, of our fayth? Iu­stinian in the lawe hath a tytle, De fide catholica, to the contrarie.

I am certayne the ciuil lawe hath suche a constitucion: but our fayth must not depende vpon the ciuil lawe. For as S. Ambrose sayeth, Non lex sed fides con­gregauit Ecclesiam. Not the lawe but the gospel (sayeth he) hath gathered the church together.

Maister Philpot, you haue the spirite of pryde, wherwith ye be ledde, which wil not let you yelde to y^e truth. Leaue it for shame.

Sir, I am suer I haue the spirite of fayth: by the which I speake at this present. Neither am I ashamed to stand [Page] in my fayth.

What? do you thynke yourselfe better learned, then so many no­table learned men as be here.

Elyas alone had the truthe, whē there were foure hundreth priestes a­gainst him.

Oh, you would be coūted now for Helyas. And yet I tel thee, he was deceiued. For he thought, ther had ben none good, but him selfe, and yet he was deceyued, for ther was .vii. hun­dreth besydes hym.

Yea, but he was not deceyued in doctrine, as the other .vii. hūdreth were.

By my fayth you are greatly to blame, y^t you can not be content to be of the churche, which euer hath ben of that faythful antiquitie.

My lorde I knowe Rome, & haue ben there, where I sawe your lordship.

In dede I dyd flye from hence thither. And I remember not, that I sawe you there. But I am sorye, that you haue ben there, for the wycked­nes, whych you haue sene there, peraduēture causeth you to do, as you do.

No my lorde, I do not as I do, for that cause. For I am taught otherwyse by the Gospel, not altogether to refuse [Page 24] the minister for his euell lyuyng: so that he bryng sounde doctrine out of Goddes boke.

Do you thinke, that the vniuersal churche may be deceyued?

S. Paule to y^e Thessalonians prophecied that ther should come an vniuersall departing from the fayth, in the lat­ter dayes, before the comming of Christ, sayeng: Non veniet Christus nisi venerit defe­ctio prius. That is, Christ shall not come, tyl ther come a departing fyrst.

Yea, I pray you, howe take you the departyng there, in S. Paul? It is not ment of fayth, but of y^e departing from the empyre. For it is in Greke Apostasia.

Mary in dede you (M. Doctour) put me in good remembraunce of the meanyng of saynt Paule in that place. For Apostasia, is properlye a departyng from the faythe, and therof commeth Apostata whiche properlye sygnyfyeth one that departeth from his fayth. And saynt Paule in the same place after speaketh of the decaye of the Empire.

Apostasia. doth not only signifie a departing from the fayth, but also frō the Empyre, as I am hable to shewe.

I neuer red it so taken, and when [Page] you shalbe hable to shewe it, as you saye in wordes, I wil beleue it, and not be­fore.

I am sorye, that you should be a­gaynst the christen world.

The worlde cōmonly and such as be called christians (for the multitude) hathe hated the truth, and ben enemyes to the same.

Why maister Philpot, do you thynke, that the vniuersall churche hathe erred, and you only to be in the truthe?

The churche, that you are of, was neuer vniuersal. For two partes of the worlde (which is Asia and Affrica) ne­uer consented to the supremacie of the bishop of Rome, as at this daye they do not, neither do folowe his decrees.

Yes, in Florentines coūsel they did agree.

It was sayd so by false reporte, af­ter they of Asia and Affrica were gone home. But it was not so in dede, as the sequel of them al hitherto doth pro­ue the contrarye.

I praye you, by whom wyl you be iudged in matters of controuersie, which happen dayly?

By the worde of God. For Christ [Page 25] sayeth, in S: Iohn̄, the worde that he spake, shalbe iudge in the later daye.

What yf you take the worde one waye, and I an other waye: who shal­be iudge then?

The primatiue Churche.

I knowe you meane y^e doctours that wrote therof.

I meane verely so.

What yf you take the doctours in one sence, and I in an other: who shalbe iudge then?

Then let that be taken, which is most agreable to Goddes worde.

My lordes, why do you trouble your selues, to answer him in this mater? it is not the thing, which is layd to his charge, but his errour of the sa­crament: and he to shyfte him selfe of that, brought in an other matter.

This is the mater, maister Cole, to the which I haue referred al other que­stions, and desire to be satisfyed.

It is wonder to se, howe he stā deth with a fewe, against a great multitude.

We haue almost as many as you. For we haue Asya, Affryca, Germany, Denmarke, and a great part of Fraun­ce, and daylye the nombre of the Gos­pel [Page] dothe increase: so that I am cre­dibly informed, that for this religion, in the which I stād, and for that which I am like to diē: a great multytude dothe daily com out of Fraūce through persecucion, that the cities of Germanie be scarse hable to receaue them. And therfore your lordship may be sure, the worde of God wil (one day) take place: So what you can to the contrarie.

They were wel occupied, to bring you suche newes, and you haue ben well kept, to haue suche resort vnto you. thou art the arrogauntest and stoutest fond felowe, that euer I knewe.

I pray your lordshipe, to beare with my hastye speache: for it is parte of my corrupte nature, to speake somwhat hastly. But for all that, I meane with humilitie, to do my dewty to your lord­ships.

Master Philpot, my lordes wil troble you no further at this tyme But you shall goo from whence you cam, and haue suche fauour, as in the meane while, I can shew you, and v­pon wednesdaye next, you shalbe cal­led agayne, to be heard, what you cā say, for the mayntenaunce of your er­ror.

My lord, my desire is to be satisfi­ed of you, in that I haue required: and your lordship shall fynde me, as I haue said.

We wyshe you as well as our selues.

I thinke the same (my lordes) but I feare you are deaceuyd: and haue a zeale of your selues, not according to knowledge.

God send you more grace.

And also God increase the same in you, & open your eyes,Nay God ryd his shepe from such wol­ues. that you maie se to maintaine his truthe, and his true church.

Than the bishopes rose vp, and cō sulted together, and caused a writing to be made, In the which, I thinke my bloude by them was bought and sold, and therto they put to theyr handes, and after this I was caryed to my cole howse agayne.

[Page 27] MAster Philpot come you hyther, London. I haue desired my lordes here, & other lear­ned men to take som pay­nes once agayne, and to do you good: and because I do mynd to sit in iudgemēt on you to morowe (as I am commaunded) yet I would you should haue as muche fauour, as I can shewe you, yf you wilbe any thing conformable. Therfore plaie the wyse mā, and be not singular in your opinion, but be ruled by these learned men.

My lorde that you saye, you will sit on me in iudgement to morowe, I am glad therof. For I was promised by them, which sent me vnto you, that I should haue ben Iudged the next daye after: but promise hath not ben kept w^t me, to my farther grefe. I looke for none other, but death, at your handes. And I am as ready to yeld my lyfe in Christes cause, as you be to require yt.

Loo, what a wilful man this is. By my fayth it is but folye to rea­son with him, neyther with any of these heretiks. I am sorye, that you wylbe no more tractable, and that I am compelled to shew extremitie a­gaynst [Page] you.

My lorde, you nede not to shewe extremitie against me, onles you lyst. Neyther by the lawe (as I haue sayd) you haue any thing to do with me: For that you are not myn ordinarie. Albeyt I am (contrarie to al right) in your pri­son.

Why, the Quenes commissio­ners sent you hyther vnto me, vpon your examinacion had before them, I knowe not wel the cause. But I am sure, they would not haue sent you hither to me, onles you had made som talke to them otherwise, then it becō ­meth a christian man.

My lorde, in dede they sent me hither with our any occasion than mini­stred by me. Only they layd vnto me the disputacion I made in the conuocacion house: requiring me to answere to the same, and to recant it, the which by cause I would not doo, they sent me hyther to your lordship.

Why did you not answers them therto?

For that they were temporal mē, and owght not to be Iudges in spirituall causes, wherof they demaunded me without shewing any auctoritie, [Page 28] wherby I was bounde to answere thē: and hervpon they cōmitted me to your prison.

In dede I remember nowe, you mayntayned open heresy in my diocese, wherfore the commissioners sēt you vnto me, that I should proce­de agaynst you, for that you haue spoken in my diocese.

My lord I stande styll vpon my lawful plea in this behalfe, y^t though it were as great heresie, as you suppose it, yet I owght not to troubled therfore, in respect of the preuilege of the parlia­ment house, wherof the conuocacion house is a membre, where all men in maters propounded maye fraunklye speake their myndes: and here is presēt a gentlemen of the Quenes maiesties, that was present at the disputaciō, and can testifie, y^t the questions which were there in controuersy, were not set furth by me, but by y^e prolocutor, who requi­red in the Quenes maiesties name, all men to dispute theyr myndes frelye in the same, that were of the house.

Though the parliament house, The Que­nes gentil­man. be a place of priuiledge for men of the house to speake, yet maye non speake any treason, agaynst the Quene, nor [Page] mayntayne treasō agaynst y^e crowne.

But yf any mater (which other­wyse were treasō to speake of yt) were it treason for any person to speake therin, specially the thing being proposed by y^e speaker? I thinke not.

The Quenes gentil­man. You maye make the mater easy inough to you yet, as I perceyue, yf you will reuoke the same, which you did there so stubburnly mayntayne.

This mā did not speake vnder reformacion, as many there did, but agonicos and catagoricos, which is earnestly & persuasiblye, as euer I heard any.

My lordes, sence you will not ceasse to trouble me, for y^t I haue law­fully done, neither will admitt my Iust defence, for that was spoken in the par­liament house by me, contrarie to the lawes and custome of the realme, I ap­peale to the hole parliament house, to be iudged by y^e same, whether I owght thus to be molested, for y^t I haue there spoken,

But haue you not spoken and mayntayned the same, sence y^e tyme or no?

Yf any man can charge me iustlie therw^t, here I stāde to make answere.

How saye you to it nowe? will [Page 29] you stand to that you haue spoken in the conuocacion house? and do you thinke, you sayd then wel or no?

My lord you are not myn ordina­ry to procede ex officio against me: and therfore I am not bounde to tel you my conscience of your demaundes.

What saye you nowe? is not there in the blessed sacrament of the altar (And with that they put of al theyr cap­pes for reuerence of that ydol) the presence of our saueour Christ, reallye, and substā cyally, after de wordes of consecraciō?

I do beleue in the sacrament of Christes body duly ministred to be such maner of presēce, as the word teacheth me to beleue.

I praie you how is that?

As for that I will declare an o­ther tyme, whā I shalbe laufully called to dispute my minde of this matter, but I am not yet dryuen to that poynt. And the scripture sayth: al thinges owght to be done after an order.

This is a froward and a vayne glorious man.

It is not lawful for a mā (by the ciuile lawe) to dispute his faith o­penly, as it appeareth in the title, de sū ­ma trinitate & fiide catholica.

My lord, I haue answered you to this question before.

Why? I neuer asked the of this before nowe.

Yes, that you did, at my last exa­minacion, by that token, I answered your lordship by S. Ambrose, that the churche is congregated by the word,Note wel. and not by mās lawe, wherfore I adde nowe further of this sayng, quod qui fi­dem repudiat, & legem obijcit, iniustus est, quia Iustus ex fide viuit. That he which refuseth the worde, and obiecteth the lawe, is an vniust man: because the Iust shal lyue by fayth. And more ouer (my lord) the title which your lordship alledgeth out of the lawe, maketh it not vnlawfull, to dispute of all the articles of the fayth, but of the Trinitie.

Thou lyest, it is not soo. And I will shewe you by the booke, how ignoraunt he is.

And with that, he went with all hast to his studie, and fett his book, and openly red the text and the title of the lawe, and charged me with suche wordes, as semed to make for his purpose, sayeng: how sayst thou to this?

My lord, I saye as I did before, that the lawe meaneth of the catholike fayth, determined in the coūcel of Cal­cedonia, where the articles of the Crede were only concluded vpon.

Thou arte y^e veriest beast, Naye thou art a beast. that euer I heard. I must nedes speake it, thou compellest me therunto.

Your lordship maye speake your pleasure of me. But what is this to the purpose, which your lordship is so ear­nest in? You know that our fayth is not groūded vpō y^e ciuil lawe. Therfore it is not materiall to me, what soeuer the lawe sayth.

By what lawe wylt thou be iudged? wylt thou be Iudged by the common lawe?

No my lorde, our fayth depēdeth not vpon the lawes of man.

He wilbe Iudged by no lawe, but as he list him selfe.

The common lawes are but abstractes of the scriptures and doctors

What so euer you do make them, they are no ground of my fayth, by the which I ought to be Iudged.

I must nedes procede against the to morowe.

Yf your lordship so do, I wil haue Excepcionem fori, for you are not my com­petent iudge.

By what lawe canst thou re­fuse me, to be thy iudge?

By the Ciuile lawe De cōpetente Iu­dice.

There is no suche tytle in the lawe. In what boke is it as connyng a lawer as you be?

My lorde, I take vpō me no great connyng in the lawe, but you dryue me to my shyftes for my defence. And I am sure, yf I had the bokes of the lawe, I were able to shewe, what I saye.

What? De competente Iudice? I wil go fet thee my bokes. There is a tytle in dede De officijs Iudicis ordinarij.

Verely that is the same Competente Iudice which I haue alleged. With that he ranne to his studye, end brought the hole course of the lawe betwene his hā ­des, which (as it myght appeare) he had wel occupied, by the dust they were en­brued withal.

There be the bokes, fynde it out (yf thou canst) and I wyl promyse thee, to release thee out of pryson.

My lorde, I stāde not here to rea­son maters of y^e Ciuile lawe (althoughe [Page 31] I am not altogher ignoraunt of the sa­me) for that I haue ben a student in the same sixe or seuen yeres: but to answere to the articles of fayth, with the which you maye lawfully burthen me. And where as you go about vnlawfully to procede, I chalenge according to my knowlege, the benefyte of the lawe, in my defence.

Why, thou wilt answere dire­ctly to nothyng thou art charged with al. Therfore saye not herafter, but you myght haue ben satisfyed here by learned men, yf you would haue declared your mynde.

My lorde, I haue declared my mynde vnto you, and to other of the bysshops, at my last beyng before you, desy­ring you to be satisfied but of one thing wherunto I haue referred al other controuersies, the which yf your lordships nowe or other learned men can symply resolue me of, I am as contented to be reformable in al thinges as you shal re­quire, the whych is to proue y^t the chur­che of Rome (wherof you are) is the ca­tholyke churche.

Why? do you not beleue your Crede, Credo ecclesiam catholicam.

Yes, that I do, but I can not vn­derstande [Page] Rome (wherwith al you now burden vs) to be the same, neither lyke to it.

It is most euident, that S. Pe­ter dyd buylde the catholyke churche at Rome And Christ sayd, Tites Petrus, & super hanc petrant edificabo ecclesiam meam. Moreouer the succession of byshops in the sea of Rome can be proued, from tyme to tyme, as it cā be of none other place so wel, which is a manifest pro­bacion of the catholike church, as dy­uerse doctours do wryte.

That you would haue to be vn­doubted, is moste vncertaine: and that by the autoritie, which you allege of Christ, sayeng vnto Peter, Thou art Pe­ter, and vpon this rocke I wyll buylde my churche:Marcke wel. onles you cā proue the rock to signifye Rome, as you would make me falsly beleue. And although you can proue the succession of bishops from Peter, yet this is not sufficiēt, to proue Rome to be the catholike church: onles you can proue the successiō of Peters fayth, whervpon the catholyke church is buylded, to haue cōtinued in his successours at Rome, & at this present to remayne.

Is ther any mo churches thē one catholike churche? and I pray you [Page 32] tel me, into what fayth were you bap­tized?

I acknowledge one holye catho­lyke and Apostolyck churche, wherof I am a membre (I prayse God) & I am of that catholike fayth of Christ, wherin­to I was baptised.

I praye you, can you tel what this worde catholyke doth signifie? shewe yf you can.

Yes that I can, I thanke God.

The catholyke faythe or the catholyke churche is not as nowe a dayes the people be taught, to be that which is moste vniuersal, or of moste part of men recey­ued, wherby you do inferre our fayth to hang vpon the multitude, which is not so. But I esteme the catholyke fayth and the catholike churche to be as S. Austen defineth the same. Estimamus fidem catholi­cam a rebus praeteritis, praesentibus & futuris.

We iudge (sayth he) the catholike fayth, of that which hath ben, is, and shalbe.

So y^t yf you can be hable to proue, that your fayth and churche hath ben from the beginning taught, and is, and shal­be: then maye you count your selues catholikes, otherwyse not. And catholike is a Greke worde, compounded of cata which signifieth after, or according, and [Page] holon: a sum̄, or principle, or hole. So that catholike church or catholike fayth, is as muche to saye, the fyrst, hole, soū ­de, or chiefest fayth.

Doth S. Austen saye so, as he alledgeth it? or dothe he meane thus, as he taketh the same? howe saye you maister Curtoppe?

In dede (my lorde) S. Austen hath suche a sayeng, speaking against the Donatistes: that y^e catholike faythe ought to be estemed of thinges in ty­mes past, and as they are practised ac­cording to the same. And ought to be through al ages & not after a new maner, as the Donatistes begā to ꝓfesse.

You haue sayd wel (M. Currop) & after the meaning of S. Austen. And do cōfirme that, which I haue sayd, for the significacion of catholike.

Let the boke be sene my lord.

I praye you my lorde be con­tent, or in good fayth I will breake e­uen of, & let all alone. Do you thinke y^e catholyke church (vntil it was with in these fewe yeres, in the which a few vpon singularitie haue swarued from the same) hath erred?

I do not thynke that the catholike churche can erre in doctrine, but I re­quire [Page 33] to proue the churche of Rome to be thys catholike churche.

I can proue y^t Ireneus, (which was within an hundreth yeares after Christ) came to Victor then bishop of Rome, wisely Curtop. to aske his aduise about the ex­communicatiō of certayne heretikes, the which he would not haue done (by al lykelyhode) yf he had not taken him to be supreme head.

Marke wel this argument.

Howe are you able to answere to the same? Answere yf you can.

It is sone answered, my lorde: for that it is of no force, neither this facte of Ireneus proueth nomore for the supre­macie of the bishop of Rome, thē myne hath done, which haue ben at Rome as wel as he, and myght haue spoken with the Pope yf I had list: and yet I would none in Englande dyd fauour his su­premacie more then I.

You are the more to blame (by my fayth of my bodye) for that you fa­uour the same no better: Your othe is as great, as if a dog sware by his christendom. sence al the catholyke churche (vntil these fewe yea­res) haue taken hym to be supreme head of the churche, besydes this good man Ireneus.

That is not lykely that Ireneus so [Page] toke him, or the primatiue churche. For I am hable to shewe seuen general coū sels after Ireneus time, wherin he was neuer so taken, which maye be a suffici­ent profe that the catholike primatiue churche neuer toke hym for supreme head.

This man wil neuer be satisfyed, saye what we can. It is but folly to reason any more with him.

Oh my lordes, would you haue me satisfyed with nothing? Iudge (I praye you) who of vs hath better autori­tie: he which bringeth the exāple of one man goyng to Rome, or I that by these many general councelles, am hable to proue, that he was neuer so taken in many hūdreth yeres after Christ, as by Ni­cene, Ephesyne the fyrst and the second, Calcedonen̄, Constantinopolitane, Car­thaginen̄, Auilien̄.

Why wil ye not admit the churche of Rome, to be the Catholyke churche?

Bicause it foloweth not the pri­matiue catholyke churche, neyther agreeth with the same, no more then an ap­ple is lyke a nutte.

Wherin doth it discent?

Yt were to long to recite all, but [Page 34] two thinge I wil name: the suprema­cie, and transubstāciation.

As for transubstantiation, albeyt yt was set furth and decreed for an article of fayth, not muche aboue thre hūdreth yeres, yet yt was alway­es beleued in the churche.

Yea that it was, very well sayd of you master Curtoppe.

Ye haue sayd right, that transub­stanciation is but a late plantacion of the bishop of Rome, and you are not hable to shew any auncient wryter, that the primatiue churche did beleue any suche thinges. And with this Curtop shranke awaye. And immediatly after, the ambassadoure of spayne cam in, To whom my lord of London went, lea­uing y^e other with me. To whō I said: my lordes, yf you can shewe me, that this churche of Rome (wherof you are membres) is the true chatolik churche. I shalbe content to be one therof. And as conformable to the same, as you can require me, in all thīges. For I knowe ther is no saluacion but within the churche.

Can you disproue that the churche of Rome is not the catholike churche?

Yea that I am hable, but I desire rather to heare of you for the profe therof. And seyng I can not haue my re­quest at your handes, neyther be satisfi­ed with any probable auctoritie, I wil shewe yowe good profe, why it is not the catholike churche (as it was in deade) and owght to be the forme, and scolemaistres of the churche to the worldes ende: than is not the churche of Rome nowe the catholike churche, which dissenteth so farre from the same bothe in doctrine and vse of the sacra­mentes.

Howe proue you, that the churche of Rome nowe dissenteth in doctrine and vse of the sacramentes, from the primatiue church?

Compare the one with the other, & yt wil sone appeare as you maye see both in Eusebius, and in other Ecclesi­asticall and auncient writers.

What haue you to saye more, why it is not the catholike churche.

Because it is not (by your owne interpretacion of the catholike) vniuersall, neyther neuer was, albeyt you fal­sely persuade the people, that it is soo. For the world being diuided in three partes, Asia, Affrica & Europa: twoo [Page 35] parts therof, Asia and Affrica (professīg Christ as well as we) did neuer consēt to the church of Rome, which is of Europa which is a sufficient testimonie, that your faith was neuer vniuersall.

How proue you that?

All the historiographers which write of y^e procedinges of y^e churche, do testifie the same. Besides that this pre­sent tyme doth declare that to be true, which I saye. For at this present the churche of Asia, and Affrica do not con­sent to the churche of Rome. Yea and besides al this, the most part of Euro­pa doth not agre neyther alowe the churche of Rome. As Germanie, the kingdome of Denmarcke, the king­dome of Poole, a great part of Fraūce, England, and Zealande: which is a manifest probacion, that your churche is not vniuersall. And after this, the bi­shop of London called awaye the other bishops, & left with me diuers gentle­men, with certayne of his chaplaynes as doctor Sauerson an englisheman, which had proceded doctor in Bonno­ny, who after began with me in this maner.

Master Philpot, I remembre you beyonde the sea synce y^e tyme you [Page] reasoned with a fryer, (a notable learned man) comming from Venece to Padua in a barge.

I can not forgett that, for the fryer thretned me to accuse me of heresye, as sone as he cam to Padua, for that I tal­ked with him so boldly of the truth.

He was no suche learned man as you name hym to be, but onlye in his scoole poynts, a good purgatorie frier.

Well, he was a learned man for all that. And I am sorye to heare, that you this daye, hauing com­muned with so many notable lear­ned men, are no more conformable to them, than you be.

I wilbe conformable to all them, that be conformable to Christ in his worde. And I praye you (good master Doctor) be not soo cōformable to please men more than God, contrarie to your learnīg, for worldly estimaciōs sake.

No that I am not, vpon what occasiō should you thinke thus of me?

Vpō no euil y^t I do knowe of you, master doctor, but I speake as one wis­hing y^t you should not be led away frō y^e truthe for promocions sake, as many doctors doo nowe a dayes.

I haue heard your argumētacions [Page 36] hitherto, & me thinketh y^t a great many of y^e olde auncient writers be agaynst you, in y^t you do not alowe y^e churche of Rome, neyther the supre­macie. For S. Cipriane (which is an olde aunciēt writer) doth allowe y^e bi­shop of Rome, to be y^e supreme head of the churche.

That I am sure of, he doth not.

For he writing vnto Cornelius then bishop of Rome, calleth hym but his cō ­panyon and felowe bishop: neither attributed to hym the name eyther of Pope or elles of any other vsurped termes, which now be ascribed to the bishop of Rome to y^e setting forth of his dignitie.

You can not be hable to shewe, that S. Ciprian calleth Cornelius his felow bishop.

I wil wager with you that I am hable to make, that I can shewe it you in Ciprian, as I haue sayd.

I wil lay non other wager with you, but booke for booke, it is not so.

I agre therto, and I pray you one of my lordes chaplaynes, to set vs Ci­priane hyther, for the triall herof. And with that one of thē went to my lordes studie, & brought furth Cipriā. And by & by he turned to the fyrst booke of his [Page] epistles, the .4. epistle, and there woulde haue semed to haue gathered a strong argument for the supremacie of the bis­shop of Rome: because he sayeth, it goeth not wel with the churche whē the hygh priest is not obeyed which supplieth the [...]ede of Christ, after Goddes worde, and the consent of his felow bishoppes, and the agrement of the people.

Howe can you auoyd this place which maketh so playnly for the B. of Rome his supremacie?

It maketh not so playne (M. doc­tour) on your sede, as you gather: as by and by I wyl gyue you to vnderstande. But fyrst I chalenge the wager whiche we made, that your boke is myne. For here you may see, that he calleth Corne­lius his felowbishop, as he dothe also in other places. And nowe for the vnder­standing of that place, you do miscon­strue it, to make the hyghe priest only for the B. of Rome, and otherwyse then it was in his tyme. For ther were by Ni­cene coūsel foure Patriarkes appointed. The Patriarke of Hierusalem, the Pa­triarke of Constantinopole, the Patri­arke of Alexandria, and the Patriarke of Rome: of which foure the Patriarke of Rome was placed lowest in the coūsel, and so continued many hundreth yeres, [Page 37] for y^t tyme of .vij. or .viij. general councelles: as I am hable to shewe. Therfore s. Cipriā wryting to Cornelius Patriarke of Rome, (whom he calleth his felowe bishop) fyndeth him selfe offended, that certaine heretikes beyng iustly excōmu­nicated (as the Nouaciās were) by him, dyd flee from his diocese (which was theyr chefe bishop) refusing to be obedi­ent vnto him, and to be reformed, as to the bishop of Rome, or to the Patriarke of Constantinopole. And there were re­ceyued in communion of congregacion, in derogacion of good ordre and disci­pline in the churche, and to the maintayning of heresies and scismes. And that heresies did spring vp and scismes day­lye aryse herof, that obedience is not ge­uen to the priest of God, nor once consy­dered to be in the churche, for the tyme the priest, and for the tyme, the Iudge, in Christes steade (as in the decre of Ni­cene coūsel was apointed) not meaning the B. of Rome only, but euery Patri­arke in his precinct. Who had euery one of them a college or cathedrall churche of learned priestes, in hearing of whom by a conuocacion of all his felowes bis­shoppes, with the consent of the people, al heresies were determined, by y^e word [Page] of God. And this is the meanyng of s. Cyprian.

You take it so, but it semeth to me otherwyse.

Vpon what ground it should seme otherwise vnto you, I knowe not: but this meaning, which I haue declared, the general counsels .vij. or .viij. (one af­ter an other) confirmed it so to be, whi­che did not alowe one supreme head onlye.

Ther were not so many generall councelles, but foure only alowed.

That is not so, M. Pendleton. Al­though ther be foure specially alowed, for the confirmacion of the Trinitie, but beside these foure, ther were many other general councelles, as you maye learne by many wryters.

Did not Christ buylde his churche vpon Peter? S. Cyprian say­eth so.

S. Cyprian De simplicitate prelatorum, declareth, in what respect he so sayd. In persona vnius, he is. Dedit Dominus omnibus claues, vt omnium vnitatem denunciaret. God gaue in persone of one man, to all the keyes, that he myght signifye the vnitie of all men. And also S. Austen sayeth in the .10. homelie of saint Iohn̄.

[Page 38] Si in Petro non esset ecclesiae misterium, nō ci diceret Dominus, tibi dabo claues, si au­tem hoc Petro dictum est, non habet eccle­sia, si autem ecclesia habet, quando claues accepit, ecclesiam totam designauit.

Yf in Peter had not ben the mysterie of the churche, y^e lorde had not said vnto hym: I will geue vnto thee the keyes. Fo: yf that were sayd vnto Peter: the churche hath them not, yf the churche haue them when Peter receyued them, he signifyeth the hole church. As also s. Hierome a priest of Rome, wrytyng to Nepotian, sayeth, that al churches do leane to their owne pastors, where he speaketh of the Ecclesiastical hierarchie or regiment, where he maketh no men­cion of the bishop of Rome. And ad Eua­gium, he sayeth that where so euer a bis­shop be, whether it be at Rome, or at E­uagie, or at Regiū he is of one power, and of one iurisdiccion.

S. Hierom De celesti hierarchia? It was Dionisius you meane.

I say not, that Hierom wrote any boke so entytled, but I saye that in the epistle by me alledged, he maketh mencion of the ecclesiastical regiment.

I wōder you wil stand so stedfast [Page] in your errour to your owne destructiō.

I am sure, we are in no errour, by the promise of Christ made to the faythful ons, which is, that he wil gyue to his true churche suche a spirit of wis­dome, that the aduersaries therof should neuer be hable to resist. And by this I know, we are of the truth, for that ney­ther by reasonyng, neyther by writing your synagog of Rome is hable to ans­were Wher is ther one of you all, that euer hath ben able to answere any of y^e godly learned ministers of Germanie, who haue disclosed your coūterfaict religion? Which of you all (at this daye) is hable to answere Caluynes institucion, which is minister of Geneua?

A goodlye minister in deade, of receyt of cuspurses & rūnagates tray­tours. And of late I can tel you, there is suche contention fallen betwene hym and his owne sects, that he was fayne to flee the towne, about predesti­nacion. I tell you truth, for I cam by Geneua hyther.

I am sure you blaspheme that godly man, and that godlye churche where he ys minister, as it is your churches condicion, when you can not answer mē by learnyng, to oppresse thē [Page 39] with blasphemies and false reports. For in the mater of predestinacion, he is in non other opinion thē all the doc­tors of the churche be, agreyng to the scriptures.

Men be hable to answer hym, yf they lust. And I praye you, which of you haue answered bishope Fysshers boke?

Yes (master Doctor) that booke is answered and answered agayne, yf you lyst to seeke, what hath ben written a­gaynst hym. And after this Doctor sto­rie came in: to whom I sayd, master doctor, you haue done me greate iniurie, & without lawe haue straytlye impriso­ned me, more lyke a dogge then a man. And besides thys you haue not kept promise with me. For you promised, that I shuld be Iudged the next day after.

I am come nowe to kepe pro­mise with y^t. Was ther euer suche a fā tasticall man as this ys? Nay he ys no man, he ys a beaste. Yea those he­retikes be worse then brute beastes: for they will (vpon a vayne singula­ritie) take vpon them to be wyser thē all men being in dede veray fooles and asseheades, not hable to mayn­tayne that which of an arrogaunt obstinacie [Page] they do stande in.

Master Doctor, I am content to abyde your rayling Iudgement of me nowe: saye what you will I am contēt. For I am vnder your feete, to be troden on, as you list, God forgyue it you, yet am I no heretike, neyther you nor any other shalbe able to proue y^t I holde any iote agaynst the worde of God, other­wyse then a christian man ought.

The worde of God? forsoth the worde of God. Yt is but a follye to reason with these heretiks, for they ar incurable and desperat. But as I maye reasō with the, not that I haue any hope to wynne thee, whom will thou apoynt to be iudge of y^e worde, wherto thou standest?

Verely the worde it selfe.

Do you not see the ignoraun­cie of this beastly heretike? he willeth the word to be Iudge of the worde, cā the word speake.

Yf I can not proue that which I haue sayd by good auctoritie, I wilbe cōtent to be coūted an heretike, & an yg­norāt persō, & further what you please.

Let vs heare, what wyse aucto­ritie thou canst bring in.

It is y^e sayng of Christ in S. Iohn [Page 04] verbū quod locutus sum iudicabit in nouissimo dic. The worde which I haue spoken (sayth Christ) shall Iudge in the last daye. Yf the worde shal iudge in the last daye, muche more it ought to Iudge our doinges nowe. And I am sure, I haue my Iudge on my side, who shall absolue & iustifie me in an other world, howsoeuer now it shall please you, by auctoritie, vnrighteouslye to Iudge of me and others: sure I am in an other worlde to Iudge you.

What? you purpose to be a stin­king martyr, and to syt in Iudgemēt with Christ at the last daye to Iudge the twelue trybes of Israel.

Yea syr. I doubt not therof, ha­uing the promise of Christ, yf I die for righteousnes sake which you haue be­gon to persecute in me.

I told you it is but vayne to argue with this heretike, he is drow­ned in his heresies, w^tout al learning.

Syr I haue brought you for that I haue sayd, good auctoritie out of Goddes booke, to the which you answere nothing: but goo about stil to gyue raylīg iudgemēt agaynst, me w^tout any cause.

I wil com to you by & by when y^e iudge in westminster halle geueth [Page] sentence, doth y^e worde gyue sentence or the iudge, tel me?

Ciuil maters be subiect to ciuil mē, and they haue autoritie by the worde, to be iudge of them. But the word of God is not subiecte to mans iudgement, but ought to iudge al y^e wysedome, though­tes, and doynges of men. And therfore your cōparison disproueth nothing that I haue sayd, neither answereth any whyt therto.

Wilt y^u not alowe the interpreta­cion of the churche, vpon the scripture?

Yes, yf it be according to the word of the true churche, and this I saye to you, as I haue sayd heretofore, that yf ye can proue the churche of Rome (wherof ye are) to be the true catholyke churche, which I ought to folowe, I wylbe as ready to yelde therto (as long as it can be so proued) as you may desire me.

What a felowe is this? he wil be­leue nothing, but he list him selfe. Are we not in possession of the church? haue not your forfathers, these many hundreth yeres taken this churche for the catholyke churche, wherof we are now? And yf we had none other profe but this, it were sufficient. For prescri­ption of tyme maketh a good tytle in [Page 41] the law

You do wel (M. doctor) to alledge prescription of many yeares,That al is nothing but a lye. for it is al that you haue, to shewe for your selues.

But you must vnderstande Ex diuinis nul­la occurrit praescriptio, that prescriptiō hath no place in maters belonging to God, as I am hable to shewe by y^e testimonye of many doctors.

Wel syr, you are lyke to go after your fathers, Latimer the Sophister, Now Sto­ry ye shewe your selfe in your Colours & Rydley, who had nothyng to alledge for hym selfe, but that he had learned his heresie of Cranmer: where I came to him with a poore bacheler of art, he trēbled as though he had had the pal­sey, as these heretikes haue alwayes some token of feare, wherby a man maye knowe them, as you may se this mans eyes do tremble in his head.

But I despatched them. And I tel thee that there hath ben yet neuer a one burnt, but I haue spoken with him, & haue ben a cause of his despatche.

You haue the more to answere for M. doctor, as you shal fele it in an other worlde, how moche so euer you do now triumphe of your procedinges.

I tel thee I wil neuer be cōfes­sed therof. And bicause I cannot now [Page] tarye to speake with my lorde, I pray you one of you tel my lorde, that my cō myng was to signifye to his lordship, that he must out of hande ryd this he­retike awaye. And goyng away he sayd vnto me. I certifye the, that thou maist thanke none other man for it, but me.

I thanke you therfore with al myne hart: and God forgeue it you.

What, doest thou thanke me? yf I had thee in my study half an houre, I thinke I should make you syng an other song.

No maister doctor, I stande vp on to sure a grounde, to be ouerthrowen by you nowe. And thus they departed al awaye from me, one after an other, vntyl I was left al alone. And afterwards with my keper goyng to my colehouse (as I went) I met with my lorde of London, who spake vnto me gently, as he hath hitherto in wordes, sayeng.

Philpot, yf ther be any pleasu­re, I maye shewe you, in my house: I pray you require it, & you shal haue it.

My lorde, the pleasure that I will require of your lordship, is to hasten my iudgemēt, which is cōmitted vnto you, and so dispatsche me forth of this miserable worlde, vnto my eternal rest.

[Page 42]And for all his fayre speache, I can not attayne hytherto this forthnight space, neyther fyer nor candle, neyther yet good lodgyng. But it is good for a man to be brought lowe in this world, and to be counted amongest the vylest, that he may in tyme of rewarde receyue exaltacion and glorie. Therfore praysed be God, that hath humbled me, and gy­uen me grace, with gladnes to be con­tent therwith all.

The sixt examinacion of Iohn Phylpot had before the right honorable lordes, lord Chamberleyne to the kinges ma­iestie, the Vicount Hereforde common­ly called lord Ferrers, my lord Ryche, my lord saynt Iohns, the lord wyndsore, the lord Shandoys, Sir Iohn of brydges Lieutenaunt of the tower: and two o­ther mo, whose names I know not with the bishop of London, & D. Chedsey the syxt daye of Nouēbre Anno Dn̄i. 1555.

BEfore that I was called be­fore the lordes, and whyles they were in sitting downe: the bishop of London came a­syde to me, and whystred in myne care, willīg me to vse my selfe be­fore the lordes of the Quenes maiesties councel prudentlye, and to take hede what I sayde. And thus he pretēded to gyue me coūcel, because he wysshed me to do well, as I might nowe do, yf I list. And after the lordes & other worshypfull gentelmen of the Quenes maiesti­es seruauntes were seit, my lorde of London placed hymselfe at thend of the table, and called me to hym. And by the lordes I was placed at the vpperend agaynst hym, where I kneling downe, the lordes commaunded me to stād vp, and after in this maner the bishop be­ganne to speake.

Master Phylpot, I haue her­tofore both priuatlye my selfe and o­penlye before my lordes of the clear­gye (mo tymes then once) cauled you to be talked withall, to reforme you of your errours, but I haue not foūd you yet so tractable as I would wysshe. Wherfore now I haue desired these honorable lordes of y^e tēporaltie [Page 43] & of y^e Quenes Maiesties coūcel, who haue takē paynes w^t me this daye (I thāke thē therfore) to heare you what you cā saye, y^t they maye be Iudges, whether I haue sought all meanes to do you good, or no. And I dare be bold to saye in their behalfe, that yf you shew your selfe cōformable to y^e Que­nes maiesties proceadinges, you shall finde as muche fauour for your deli­ueraūce, as you cā wisshe. I speake not this to fawne vpon you, but to bring you home into the churche. Nowe let them heare what you haue to saye.

My lord I thāke God of this daye, y^t I haue suche an honorable audience, to declare my minde before. And I can not but commende your lordships equi­tie in this behalfe, which agreeth w^t y^e ordre of y^e primatiue churche: which was, yf any body had bē suspected of heresie (as I am nowe) he should be called before the Archbishop or bishop of y^e diocese wher he was suspected, in the pre­sēs of others his felowships & learned elders, & in y^e hearing of y^e laytie: where after y^e iudgemēt of Goddes worde declared, & w^t y^e assēt of other bishops & cō sent of y^e people he was cōdēpned for an heretike, or absolued. And y^e secōd poynt [Page] of y^e good ordre, I haue founde at your lordships handes already, & now haue y^e third fort of men, at whose handes I trust to fynd more righteousnes in my cause, then I haue foūde w^t my lordes of y^e clergie, God graūt I may haue at last the iudgemēt of Goddes worde cō ­cerning the same.

Master Philpot, I praye you, er you go any further, tell my lordes here plaīly, whether you were by me, or by my procuremēt cōmitted to pri­son or not. And whether I haue she­wed you any crueltie, sythē you haue ben committed to my prison.

Yf yt shall please your lordship to gyue me leaue, to declare furth my ma­ter, I wil touche that afterward.

Answere fyrst of all to my lor­des two questiōs, & thē furth procede to y^e mater. Howe saye you, were you imprisoned by my lorde or no, cā you finde any faulte since, with his cruell vsing of you?

I cā not laye to my lordes charge y^e cause of my imprisonment, neither I maye saye y^t he hath vsed me cruellye. But rather for my parte I might saye, y^t I haue founde more gentlenes at his lordships handes then I did at mine [Page 44] owne ordinaries for y^e tyme I haue bē within his prison: for that he hath cal­led me thre or foure tymes to myne answere, the which I was not twelue monethe and a halfe before.

Wel now, go furth to your mater

The materis, that I am imprisoned for the disputacion had by me in y^e conuocaciō house, agayne the sacramēt of the altar, which mater was not mo­ued principally by me, but by the prolo­cutor with the consent of the Quenes maiestie, and of the holl house. And y^e house (being a membre of the parliamēt house) ought to be a place of fre speche for al mē of the house, by the auncient & laudable custome of this realme. Wherfore I thinke my selfe to haue sustayned hytherto greate iniurie, for speaking my conscience frely in suche place as I might laufully do it. And I desire your honorable lordships iudgemēts which be of y^e pliamēt house, whether of right I ought to be empeched therfore & sus­tain y^e losse of my liuīg (as I haue done) & morouer of my life, as it is sought.

You are deceyued herin, for the conuocacion house is no part of the parliament house.

My lorde I haue alwayes vnder­standed [Page] the contrarie, by suche as are more expert men in thinges of this real me then I. And agayne the title of euery acte leadeth me to thinke other­wise, which alledgeth the agrement of the spiritualtie & tēporaltie assembled together.

Yea that is mēt of the spirituall lordes of the vpper house.

In dede the conuocation house is called together by one wryt of the sō mons of the parliament of an olde cu­stome: notwithstandyng that house is no parte of the parliament house.

My lordes, I muste be contented to abyde your iudgementes in this be­halfe.

We haue tolde you the truthe. Mary yet we would not, y^t you should be troubled for any thyng, that there was spoken, so that you hauyng spokē amisse, do declare nowe, that you are sorye therfore.

My lordes, he hath spokē there manifest heresie, yea and there stoutly mayntayned the same, against y^e bles­sed sacrament of the alter (and with that he put of his cap that al the lordes myght reue­rence and vayle their bonets at that ydol as they dyd) And would not alowe the real pre­sence [Page 45] of the bodye an blood of Christ in the same. Yet my lordes, God forbid that I should go about to shewe him extremitie. For so doyng, in case he wil repent and reuoke his wicked sayen­ges. And in fayth yf he wyl so do, with your lordships consent, he shalbe released by and by. Mary yf he wyl not, he shal loke for the extremitie of the lawe, and that shortly.

My lorde of London speaketh reasonably vnto you, take it whiles it is offred you.

How saye you? wil you acknowlage the real presente of the blood and bodye of Christ, as al the learned men of this realme do in the masse, and as I do, and wyl beleue as long as I ly­ue, I do protest it.

My lorde, I do acknowlege in the sacrament of the bodye & bloud of Christ suche a presence, as the worde of God dothe alowe and reache me.

That shalbe none otherwyse, then you lyst.

A sacramēt is the signe of a holy thyng. So that ther is bothe the signe which is the accidens (as the whitnes, roundnes, and shape of bread) and theris also the thing it selfe, as very Christ [Page] bothe God and man. But these hereti­kes wil haue the sacramētes to be but bare signes. Howe say you? declare vnto my lordes here, whether you do a­lowe the thing it selfe in the sacramēt or no?

I do confesse the sacrament bothe to be a signe, and the thing it selfe, when it is duely ministred after the institution of Christ.

You maye se, howe he goeth a­bout the bushe (as he hath done before) with my lordes of the clergie, and dare not vtter his mynde playnly.

Shewe vs what maner of pre­sence you alowe in the sacrament?

Yf it shal please you my lorde of London, to geue my leaue, to procede or­derly therunto: and to let me declare my mynde w^tout interruption, I wil throu­ghly open my mynde therin.

I pray you my lorde, let him speake his mynde.

My lordes, that at the first I haue not playnly declared my iudgement vn­to you, is this: bicause I can not speake herof, without the daunger of my lyfe.

Ther is none of vs here, that se­keth thy lyfe, or meane to take any a­uauntage of that thou shalt speake.

Although I mistrust not your ho­nourable lordshippes, that be here of y^e temporaltie, yet here is one that fytteth against me (appointing to my lorde of London) that wil laye it to my charge, e­uen to the death. Notwithstandyng se­yng your honours do require me to de­clare my mynde of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, that ye maye perceyue, that I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, neither do mayntayne any opini­on without probable and sufficient autoritie of the scripture, I wil shewe frank­ly my mynde without al colour, what so euer shal ensewe vnto me therfore, so that my lorde of London wyll not let me to vtter my mynde.

My lorde, permit hym to saye what he can, seyng he is willyng to shewe his mynde.

I am cōtent my lordes, let him saye what he can, I wil heare him.

That which I do entend to speake vnto you (right honourable lordes) I do protest here, first before God & his An­gels, y^t I speake it not, neither of vain-glorie, neither of singularitie, neither of wilful stubburnes, but truly vpō a good conscience, groūded on goddes worde, against y^t which I dare not do, for feare [Page] of dampnaciō, which wil folowe that is done contrary to knowledge. Neither do I disagre to the procedinges of this re­alme in religion, for that I loue not the Quene (whō I loue frō the bottō of my hart) but because I ought to loue & feare God in his worde, more then man in his lawes. Though I stande (as I seme to do) in this consideration, and for none other,By what thinges the cleargie deceaueth the hole realme. as God I cal to witnesse. There be two thinges principally, by the which the cleargie at this daye dothe deceyue the hole realme. That is, the sacrament of the body and bloud of Christ, and the name of the catholike churche: the which bothe they do vsurpe, hauing in dede none of them bothe. And as touching their sacrament, whych they terme of the Altar, I saye nowe as I sayd in the conuocacion house, that it is not the sacra­ment of Christ, neither in y^e same is ther any maner of Christes presence. Wher­fore they deceyue the Quenes maiestie, and you of the nobilitie of this realme, in making you to beleue that to be a sa­crament, which is none, and cause you to commit manifest idolatrie, inworship­pyng that for God, which ys no God. And in testimony of thys to be true, be­sydes manifest profe which I am ha­ble [Page 47] to make to the Quenes maiestie, and to al you of her nobilitie, I wil yelde my lyfe. The which to do, yf yt were not vpō a sure grounde, yt were to my vtter dāp­nacion.Note. And where they take on them the name of the catholike churche, wherby they blynde many folkes eyes, they ar nothyng so: callyng you frō y^e true religi­on, which was reueled & taught in kyng Edwardes tyme, vnto vayne supersticiō. And this I wil saye for the trial hereof, that yf they can proue them selues to be the catholyke churche (as they shal neuer be hable to do) I wil neuer be against their doynges, but reuoke al that I haue sayd. And I shal desyre you (my lordes) to be meane for me to y^e Quenes maiestie, that I maye be brought to the iust trial herof. Yea I wil not refuse to stande a­gaynst tenne of the best of them in this realme. And yf they be hable to proue that otherwyse then I haue sayd, eyther by writyng or by reasonyng with good & lawful authoritie, I wil here promise to recant what so euer I haue sayd, and to consent to them in al pointes. And in the declaration of these thinges more at large, which nowe I wryte in somme, the bishop of London eftsones would haue interrupt me, but the lordes pro­cured [Page] me lybertie to make out my tale, to the great grefe of my lorde bishop of London, as it appeared by his dumpes he was in.

It hath ben tolde me before, that you loue to make a long tale.

All heretikes do boast of the spirite of God. And euery one would haue a churche by him self, as Iohn of Kent and the Anabaptistes. I had my selfe Iohn of Kent a seuen nyght in my house, after the wrytte was out for her to be burnt, where my lorde of Can­torburye and bishop Rydley resor­ted almost daylye vnto her, but she was so hyghe in the spirite that they could do nothyng with hir for al their lernyng. But she went wilfullye vnto the fier was burnt, & so do you nowe.

As for Iohn of Kent, she was a vayne woman, I knewe her wel and an heretike in dede, wel worthy to be burnt, because she stode against one of the ma­nifest artikles of our fayth, contrarye to the scripture. And suche vayne spirites be sone knowen from the true spirite of God and his churche, for that the sa­me abydeth within the lymittes of Goddes worde, and wyll not go out of the same, neither stubburnly mayntayne a­ny [Page 48] thing, contrarye to the worde, as I haue Goddes worde throughly on my syde, to shewe for that I stande in.

I praye you, howe wil you ioyne me these two scriptures toge­ther, Pater maior me est. Et pater & ego vnum sumus. I must interprete the same, by­cause my lordes here vnderstande no latyne: that is to saye: the father is greater thē I: and I and the father are one.

But I crie you mercie my lordes, I haue mispoken in sayng you vnder­stande no latyne: for the most parte of you vnderstande latyne as wel as I.

But I spake in cōsideraciō of my lorde Shandois and maister Brydges hys brother, whom I take to be no great latine men. Now shew you your con­nyng, and ioyne these twayne scrip­tures by the worde yf you can.

Yes that I can ryght well. For we must vnderstand that in Christ there be two natures, the diuinitie and humani­tie. And in respecte of his humanitie, it is spoken of Christ, the father is greater then I. But in respect of his deitie, he sayd agayne, the father and I be one.

But what scripture haue you.

Yes I haue sufficient scripture for the profe of that I haue sayd. For the [Page] fyrst it is writtē of Christ in y^e psalmes. Diminuisti cum Paulominus ab angelis. Thou hast made hym a litel lesser then an­gelles. It is y^e fyftē spalme, begynning: Celi enarrant. And there I misrekened, wherwithall my lorde toke me.

It is in Domine Dominus noster. Ye maye see my lordes, how well this man is vsed to saye his matyns.

Though I say not matyns in suche order as your lordship meaneth, yet I remember of olde that Domine Dominus noster, & Celi enarrant, be not far a sūdre. And albeit I misnamed the spalme, it is no ꝓiudice to y^e truth of y^t I haue proued.

What saye you then to the se­conde scripture? how couple you that by the worde to the other?

The text it selfe declareth, that not withstāding Christ did abase hym selfe in our humain nature, yet is he stil one in deitie with the father. And this S. Paule to the Hebrues doth more at lar­ge set furthe. And as I haue by y^e scrip­tures ioyned these two scriptures together, so am I hable to do in al other articles of fayth, which we ought to be­leue by the manifest worde of God to expounde them.

How can that be, seyng S. [Page 49] Paule sayth, that the letter kylleth, but it is the spirit that gyueth life.

S Paule meaneth not, that the worde of God written in it selfe kylleth, which ys the word of lyfe, and the faythful testimony of the Lorde. But that the worde ys vnprofitable, and kylleth him that is voyde of the spirite of God, al­though he be the wysest man of the worlde. And therfore S. Paule sayed that y^e gospel to some was a fauour of lyfe vnto lyfe, and to some other a sa­uour of death vnto death. Also an exam­ple herof we haue in the syxt of Iohn, who hearing the worde of God with­out the spirite were offended therby. Wherfore Christ sayd, the fleshe profi­teth nothing, it is the spirite that quick­neth.

What? do you vnderstād that of S. Paule and of S. Iohn so?

Yt is not myne owne interpretacion, it is agreable to the worde in other places. And I haue learned the same of aunciēt fathers interpreting it likewise. And to the Corinthians it is written. Animalis homo non percipit ea que sunt spiritus Dei: Spiritualis dijudica [...] omnia. The natu­ral man perceyueth not the thinges y^t be of the spirite of God: But y^e spiritual [Page] man which is indued with the spirite, iudgeth al thinges.

You se my lordes, that this mā will haue but his owne minde, and wil wilfully cast away him selfe. I am sory for hym.

The wordes that I haue spoken be not of myne but of the gospel, wher­on I ought to stand. And yf you (my lorde of London) can bring better aucto­ritie for the fayth you woulde drawe me vnto, then, that which I stande vpon, I will gladlye heare y^e same by you, or by any other in this realme.

Wherfore I kneling downe, besought the lordes, to be good vnto me a poore gen­tlemā, that would fayne lyue in the world yf I might: & to testifie as you haue heard me to saye this daye, that yf any man can approue that I ought to be of any other manner of fayth, then that which I now am, and can proue the same sufficientlye, I wil be neither willfull, neyther desperat, as my lorde of london would make you be­leue me to be.

What contreiman be you? are you of me Phylpots of Hampshere?

Yea my lord, I was syr Peter Philpots sonne of Hampshere?

He is my nere kinseman, wherfore I am the more sorie for hym.

I thanke your lordship, that it pleased you to chalenge kinred of a pore prisoner.

In faith I would go a hundreth miles on my bare fete, to do you good

He maye do wel ynough yf he list.

Master Philpot you are my contreiman and I would be glad you should do well.

You sayd euen now, that you would desyre to mayntayne your be­lef, before ten of y^e best of this realme. You did not wel to compare with the nobilitie of the realme. But what yf you haue ten of the best of the realme to heare you, wil you be tried by thē?

My lorde, your lordship mistaketh me, to thinke that I chalenge ten of the best of the nobilitie in this realme, it was no part of my mynd. But I ment of the best learned on the contrarie syde

Wel I take your meanīg. What yf meanes be made to the Quenes maiestie, that you shall haue your re­quest? Wil you be iudged by them?

My lord, it is not mete that a mā should be iudged by his aduersaries.

By whom then woulde you be iudged?

I will make your honors iudges, that shalbe hearers of vs.

I dare be bould to procure for you of the Quenes maiestie, that you shall haue ten learned men to reason with you, and twentye, or fourtie of the nobilitie to heare, so you will ꝓmise to abide their iudgement? How saye you, wil you promise here afore my lordes so to do?

I wilbe contented to be iudged by them.

Yea, but you will not ꝓmise to agree to their iudgement.

There be causes, whye I maye not so do, onles I were sure they would iudge according to the worde of God.

O, I perceyue you wil haue no man iudge but your selfe, and thinke your selfe wyser then all the learned men of this realme.

My lorde, I seke not to be myne owne iudge: but am content to be iud­ged by other, so that the ordre of iudge­ment in maters of religion be kepte, y^t was in the primatiue churche, whyche is, fyrst that Goddes will by his worde was sought, & thervnto bothe y^e [Page 51] spiritualtie and temporaltye gathered together gaue their consents and iud­gement. And suche kynde of iudgement I wil stande to.

My lordes, he would make you beleue, that he were profoundly sene in auncient writers, of the iudgementes of the primatiue churche, and ther was neuer no suche maner of iudgement vsed as he nowe talketh of.

In the epistles of S. Ciprian I am hable to shewe it you.

A, I tel you, there is no suche thing, fet me Cyprian hither.

You shal fynde it otherwyse, when the boke commeth. And doctor Chadsey his chapleyne (whome he appointed to fet his boke) whistered the bishop in his eare, and fet not the boke, by lyklyhode that he should haue susteyned the repro­che therof, yf the boke had ben fette. Wel my lorde (ꝙ I) maister doctor knoweth it is so, or elles he would haue fet the boke ere this.

You would haue non other iud­ge (I see) but the worde.

Yeas my lorde, I wyl be tried by the worde, and by suche as wil iudge according to the worde. As for an exāple, yf ther were a controuersy betwyxt your [Page] lordship and an other vpon the wordes of a statute, must not the wordes of the statute iudge and determine the contro­uersye?

No mary the iudges of the lawe maye determine the meaning therof.

He hath brought as good ex­ample against him self, as cā be. And here y^e bishop thought he had good hād fast against me: and therfore enlarged it with many wordes to the iudgemēt of the churche.

He hath ouerthrowen him selfe by his owne argument.

My lordes, it semeth to your honores, that you haue great aduauntage of me, by the example I brought in, to ex­presse my cause, but yf it be pondered throughly, it maketh holly with me, and nothing against me: as my lorde of Lon­don hath pretēded. For I wil aske of my lorde Ryche here, whom I knowe to ha­ue good knowledge in the lawes and statutes of this realme. Albeit a iudge may decerne the meaning of a statute agrea­ble to the wordes, whether the same may iudge a meaning cōtrary to the expresse wordes or no?

He can not so do.

Euen so saye I that no man ought [Page 52] to iudge y^e worde of God to haue a mea­nyng contrarye to the expresse wordes therof, as this false churche of Rome dothe in many thinges. And with this the lordes semed to be satisfyed & made no further replicacion herin.

I maruel thē why you do deny the expresse wordes of Christ in the sa­crament, sayeng this is my body, & yet you wil not sticke to saye it is not his body. Is not God omnipotent? And is not he hable aswel by his omnipotēcy to make it his body, as he was to make man fleshe of a pece of claye? did not he saye this is my body, which shalbe be­trayed for you? and was not his verye body betrayed for vs? therfore it must nedes be his bodye.

My lorde Ryche you haue said wonderful wel and lernedly. But you myght haue begon with him before also in the sixt of Iohn̄, where Christ promised to gyue his body in the sacrament of the altare: sayeng, panis quem [...] ­go dabo caro mea est? The breade which I wil gyue is my fleshe. Howe can you answere to that?

If it please you to gyue me leaue, to answere fyrst my lorde Ryche, I wil al­so answere the obiection.

Answere my lorde of London first, and after come to me.

My lorde of London may be sone answered, that the sayeng of S. Iohn̄ is that the humanitie of Christ which he toke on him for the redemption of man is the bread of lyfe, wherby our bodyes and soules be susteyned to eternal lyfe, of the which the sacramentall bread is a lyuely representacion and an effectuall cohabitatiō, to al suche as beleue on his passion, and as Christ sayeth in the sa­me syxte of Iohn̄. I am the bread that came from heauen: but yet he is not ma­terial neither natural breade. Lykewyse the bread is his fleshe, not natural or substanciall, but by signification, and by grace in a sacrament. And nowe to my lorde Ryches argument. I do not deny the expresse wordes of Christ in the sacrament, this is my bodye. But I denye that they are naturally and corporally to be taken, but sacramentally and spiritu­ally, according to the expresse declaraci­on of Christ, sayeng, that the wordes of the sacrament, which the Capernaites toke carnally (as the Papistes nowe do) ought to be taken spiritually, and not car­nally, as they falsely ymagine, not way­eng what interpretacion Christ hathe [Page 53] made in this behalfe. Neither folowe the institution of Christ, nether the vse of the Apostles and of the primatiue churche, who neuer taught neither de­clared no such carnal maner of presēce, as is nowe exacted of vs violently, with out any grounde of scripture or antiqui­tie, who vsed to put out of the church, al suche as dyd not receaue the sacrament with the rest: & also to burne that which was left after the receyuyng, as by the Canon of the Apostles, and by the decre of the counsel of Antioche.

No that is not so, they were only Cathecumeni, which went out of the churche at the celebration of the cōmu­nion, and none other.

It was not only of suche as were Nouices in fayth, but al others, that did not receyue.

What saye you to the omnipotency of God? is not he hable to per­forme that which he spake, as my lord Ryche hath very wel sayd. I tel thee, that God by his omnipotency maye make hym selfe to be this carpet, yf he will.

As concerning the omnipotency of God, I saye that God is hable to do (as the prophet Dauid fayeth) what so [Page] euer he willeth. But he willeth nothing that is not agreable to his worde, as that is blasphemy, which my lorde of Lō don hath spoken, that God may become a carpet. For as I haue learned of aun­cient wryters: Non potest Deus facere quae sūt naturae suae contraria. That is, God can not do that which is contrary to his nature, as it is contrary to the nature of God, to be a carpet. A carpet is a creature, & God is the creator: and the creator can not be the creature, wherfore onles you can declare by the worde, that Christ is other­wyse present with vs, then spiritually, and sacramentally by grace, as he hath taught vs: you pretende the omnipoten­cy of God in vayne.

Why, will you not saye that Christ is really present in the sacra­ment? or do you denye it?

I denye not that Christ is really in the sacrament, to the receauer therof, ac­cording to Christes institution.

What meane you by really present?

I meane by really present, present in dede.

Is God really present euerywhere?

He is so.

Howe proue you that?

The prophet Esay sayeth, that God filleth all places, and where so euer be two or thre gathered together in Chri­stes name, there is he in the middest of them.

What? his humanitie?

No my Lorde, I meane the Deitie according to that you demaunded.

My lorde of Londō, I pray you, let maister doctor Chedsey reason with him: and let vs see, how he can answer him, for I tel thee he is a learned man in dede, & one that I do credit before a great many of you, whose doctrine the Quenes maiestie and the hole realme dothe wel alowe: therfore heare him.

My lordes, I praye you, wil it please you to drinke. You haue talked a great whyle, and muche talke is thru­stye. I wyl leaue maister doctor and him reasoning together a whyle, with your leaue, & wyl come to you by and by agayne, They went (as I suppose) to make rowme for more drinke, after the lordes had dronke.

My lorde Ryche sayd to the lor­des, I praye you let the poore man drinke: for he is thristy. And with that, [Page] he called for a cup of drynke, and gaue it me, and I dranke before them all: God requite it him, for I was athirst in dede Afterwardes doctor Chadsey began in this wyse, making a great processe, of the which, this is the effect.

Maister Philpot fyndeth fault with y^e conuocation house, Note Chadseys sha­meful lye. before your lordshippes, that he hath layen this long in prison, & that he had there a dolyn argumentes, wherof he could not be suffered to ꝓsecute one through­ly, which is not so. For he had leaue to saye what he could, and was answe­red to asmuche as he was hable to bryng, and when he had nothing elles to saye, he fell to weping. I was there present, and can testifye therof, albeit there is a boke abrode of the reporte of the disputacion to the contrary, in the which there is neuer a true worde.

And where as you require to be satis­fyed of the sacramēt, I wil shewe you the trueth therof, bothe by the scrip­tures, and by the doctors.

It is a shrewed lykely, that you wyll conclude with any trueth, synce you haue begōne with so manyfest vn­truthes, as to say, that I was answered [Page 55] whyles I had any thing to say: and that I wepte for lacke of matter to say. And that the boke of y^e report of y^e disputaciō is nothing trew. God be praised, there were a good meany of noble men, gentleman, and worshipfull men, that heard and sawe the doinges therof, which can testifie, that you here haue made an vniust report, before these ho­norable lords. And that I wept, was not for lacke of mater, as you slaunder me: for I thanke God, I haue more mater, then the best of you all shall euer be hable to answere, as litle lerning as I haue: but my weping was, as Chri­stes was vpon Ierusalem, seyng the destruction that should fall vpon her. And I forseing thē the destructiō which you (through violence and vnrighteousnes, which you there declared) would work against the true churche of Christ and his faythfull membres, as this day beareth witnes, I was cōpelled to wepe in remembraunce of that, which I with infinite mo haue fealt and shall fele. All these wordes I did nor then speake out, being interrupted by my lord Ryche, sayeng that I should suffer him to procede out in his mater, and afterwards I should haue leasure [Page] to answere him in euery article. But he promised more than he could performe as y^e ende did wel declare. For he had not the consent of the spiritualty to his promise, which nowe rule the roste. God shorten their cruell dayes, for his elects sake. And therfore I adde this, I had purposed to haue spoken yf then I might haue ben suffred, lest any that perfectly know not y^e thinges done in y^e conuocacion house, and nowe layd to my charge, vnanswered by me, might reken doctor Chadsyes sayenges to be true, and as concerning the boke of the report of the disputacions, I wrote the same. And it is true in euery argument, as master Sean of Rochester, and ma­ster Cheynye archdeacon of Harforde (yet being a lyue & within this realme) can testyfie.

You haue of scriptures the foure euāgelistes for the probaciō of Christes real presence to be in the sa­cramēt after y^e wordes of consecraciō, with S. Paule to the Corinthians. Which all say, Hoc esi corpus meū. this is my body, they do not as you would haue me to beleue, this is not the bo­dy. But specially y^t .6. of S. Iohn pro­ueth y^e same most manyfestlye, where [Page 56] Christ, promised to gyue his body which he ꝑformeth in his last supper, as it appeareth by these wordes Panis quem ego dabo, caro mea est, quam ego dabo pro mūdi vita. The bread which I wil gyue is my fleshe, which I will gyue for the lyfe of the world.

My lord Riche, with your leaue, I must nedes interrupt him a litle, by­cause he speaketh open blasphemye, agaynst the death of Christ, for if that promise brought in by S. Paul was performed by Christ in his last supper then neded he not to haue died after he had gyuen the sacrament.

Let master Doctor make an ende of his argumēts, and afterward obiect to him what you can.

You must note that there is twyse dabo in this sayeng of S. Iohn, and the fyrst is referred to the sacra­ment of the altare, and the second to the sacrifice vpon the crosse, and besi­des these manifest scriptures, ther be many auncient doctors prouing the same, as Ignatius, Ireneus and S. Ciprian whose auctorities he recyted at large which I do omit, because I was not permitted to answere y^e same.

Now answere, and obiecte to [Page] him what you can, and you shall be heard.

My lorde the chefest grounde wher he with the rest of his syde do groūde themselues against vs, be these wordes. This is my body, with a false pretence of the omnipotency of God. And before I wil com to the partycular answeres of al that he hath alleaged, for that your lordships may the better vn­derstande me, what I meane, & wher­vpon I stande, I will require master doctor to answer me one question. But fyrst of all, I do protest to your honors that I thinke as reuerently of the sacra­ment, as a christian man ought to do, and that I acknowledge the sacrament of the body and bloude of Christ, myny­stred after Christes instituciō, to be one of the greatest treasures & conforts, y^t he lefte vs on the earth. And contrary wise it is most discomfort and abominable, not being ministred as it ought to be, as it is vsed now adayes. And now to my question, which is this. whether these wordes onlye, Hoc est corpus meum, This is my body, spokē by a priest ouer the bread and wine, may make the body & bloud of Christ, as you suppose or no?

Staggering what he might [Page 57] say, at last sayd, that these words alon (ꝓnounced by the priest) be sufficiēt to make the bread and the wyne, the ve­ry body and bloude of Christ really

That is blasphemy to say, and a­gaynst al the scriptures & doctors, who affirme that the forme and substaun­ce in consecracion must be obserued, which Christ vsed and did institute, as S. Ciprian sayth. In sacrificio quod Christus est, non nisi Christus sequendus. In the sacri­fice which is Christ, only is Christ to be folowed. And by y^e lawe it is forbiddē, to adde or take away frō Goddes word. And S. Peter sayth, yf any man speake, let him speake as y^e word of God. Wherfore whosoeuer sayth, that these wordes onlye, this is my body, do make a reall presence of Christ, without blysse, take, and eate, wherby be three as substanci­all poyntes of the sacrament, as this is my body, is: he is hyghly disceaued. Therfore S. Austyne sayth, Accedat ver­bum ad elementum, et fit sacramentum. Let the worde be ioyned to the element, and it becommeth a sacrament: so that yf the entier worde of Christes instituci­on be not obserued in the ministraci­on of a sacrament, it is no sacrament, as the sacryfices which y^e ten tribes did [Page] offer at Bethel to God, were not accep­table, because they were not in al poīts done according to Goddes worde. Wherfore except blessing be made after the worde, which is a dewe than­kes geuyng for our redēption in Christ, and shewing forth of the Lordes death in suche wise as the congregacion may be edified, and also a taking and eating after Christes commaundement, as it is not in the masse. This ys my body, which is the latter parte of the sacra­ment, hath neuer no place, neither can be verefied. For Christ cōmaunded as­well take ye, and eate ye, as this is my body.

Christ sayd, take, eate, this is my body, and not take ye, eat ye.

No did master doctor? be not these y^e wordes of Christ accipite manducate,: & do not these words in y^e plural nōber, singnifie, take ye, eat ye: & not take thou, eat thou, as you would suppose?

I graunt it is as you saye.

Lykewyse of consequency, you (ma­ster doctor) must nedes deny, which you haue sayd, that these words this is my body, being only spoken, be sufficyent to make the body & bloude of Chryste in the sacramēt, as you haue vntruly sayd.

Then came in y^e bishop agayne, and sayde, what is that you would haue master doctor deny.

My lord, master doctor hath affir­med y^t these words this is my body spokē by y^e priest, only do make the sacramēt.

In dede if master bryges should speake these wordes ouer the bread & wyne, they would be of none effect, but if a priest speake them after a due maner, they are effectuall, and make a reall body.

Master S. hath sayd otherwise.

I thinke you mystake him, for he meaneth of the words duely pronounced.

Let him reuoke that he hath sayd, & thē must it nedes folowe, y^t this is my body hath no place, except blisse, take, & eate, duely go before. And because the same do go before this is my body, in your sacramēt of the masse, it is not the sacrament of Christ, neyther hath Christ present.

If this is my body onelye do not make the sacrament, no more do blysse, take, and eate.

I graūt that the one without tho ther can not make the sacrament. And it can be no sacrament, onles the hole [Page] action of Christ doth concurre together, according to the fyrst institucion.

Why, then you wil not haue it to be the body of Christ, onles it be receyued.

No verely, it is not the very body of Christ, to none other, but to suche as condignely receyue the same, after his institucion.

Is not a loafe a loafe, being set on y^e table, though no body eat therof?

It is not like my lorde. For a lofe is a lofe before he be set at the table. But so is not the sacrament a perfect sacrament, before it be dewly ministred at the table of the lord.

I pray you, what is it in the meane while, before it is receiued af­ter the wordes of consecraciō spokē? answer me.

It is (my lord) the signe begon of a holy thing, and yet no perfecte sacra­ment, vntil it be receiued. For in the sa­crament there be two thinges to be cō ­sidered, the signe and the thing it selfe, which is Christ and his hole passion: & it is that to none, but to suche as wor­thily receyue the holy signes of bread & wine, according to Christes instituciō.

Ther were neuer none y^t deny­ed [Page 59] the wordes of Christ as you do, did not he saye this is my body?

My lord I pray you be not discey­ued. we do not deny y^e wordes of Christ. but we say, these wordes be of none ef­fect, being spoken otherwyse than Christ did instuute them in his last supper, for an example, Christ bydde the church to baptyze, in the name of the father, the Sonne, & the holy Goost, yf a priest saye those words ouer the water, and there be no chyld to be baptised, those words onely pronounced do not make baptys­me. And agayne, baptysme is only bap­tysme to such as be baptized, & to none other standing by.

I pray you my lorde, let me aske him one question. what kind of presence in the sacrament (duely ministred according to Christes ordi­naūce) do you allowe?

Than do I confesse the presence of Christe holly to be with all the frutes of his passyon, vnto the worthy receyuer, by the spirit of God: and that Chryst is therby ioyned to him, & he to Chryst.

I am answered.

My lordes take no hede of him. For he goeth about to disceyue you. His similitude y^t he bryngeth in [Page] of baptisme, is nothing lyke to the sa­crament of the altare. For yf I should saye to syr Iohn Bryges being with me at supper, My lorde is better skilled in bely chea­re, than in Chri­stes sacra­mentes. and hauing a fatt capō, take, eat, this is a fat capon. Although he eat not therof, is it not a capon styll? and lyke wyse of a pece of beefe or of a cup of wine, yf I saye: drinke, this is a good cup of wine, is it not so, because he drinketh not therof?

My lord your similitudes be to grosse for so highe mysteries, as we haue in hand, as yf I were your equall I could more playnly declare: and ther is muche more dissimilitude betwene common meates and drinkes, than ther is betwene baptysme and the sacramēt of the body and bloud of Christ. Lyke must be compared to like, and spiritual thinges with spirituall, & not spiritual thinges with corporal thinges. And meates & drinkes be of their owne na­tures good or euil, & your wordes com­mēding or discōmēding, do but declare what they are. But the sacramentes be to be cōsidered according to the word, which Christ spake of thē, of the which, take ye, and eate ye, be some of the chief concurrent to the making of the same, without the which ther can be no sacra­mentes. [Page 60] And therfore in Greke, the sa­crament of the body & bloude of Christ is called Coenonia, a cōmunion. And ly­kewyse in the gospel Christ commaun­ded sayeng, Diuidite inter vos, diuide it a­mong you.

S Paul calleth it a communicacion:

That doth more expresse­ly shewe that there must be a participa­on of the sacrament togyther.

My lordes, I am sory I haue troubled you so long with this obsti­nate man, with whom we can do no good. I wil troble you no lēger now.

And with that the lords rose vp, non of them sayeng any euil word vnto me, halfe amased in my iudgement, God worke it to good.

[Page] SYrra come hither. How chaūce you come no soner? is it wel done of you to make maister chaunceler and me, to tary for you this houre, wel sworne my lorde. by the fayth of my body, halfe an houre before masse, and halfe an houre euen at masse, lo­kyng for your cōmyng?

My lorde, it is not vnknowen vn­to you, that I am a prisoner, and that the dores be shut vpon me, and I can not come whē I lyst. But as sone as the do­res of my prison were open, I came im­mediatly.

We sent for thee, to thintent thou shouldest haue come to masse.

Howe saye you, would you haue come to masse or no, yf the dores had soner ben opened.

My lorde that is an other maner of question.

Lo maister chaunceler I tolde you, we should haue a froward felowe of him, he wil answere directly to no­thyng. I haue had him before both the spiritual lordes and the temporal, and thus he fareth stil, yet he rekeneth him selfe better learned then al the realme. Yea before the temporal lordes the o­ther daye, he was so folyshe to chalēge [Page 61] the best. He would make himself lear­ned, You sayd before he was learened. and is a very ignoraunt foole in dede.

I reken, I answered your lordship before the lordes playne ynough.

Why answerest thou not di­rectly, whether thou wouldest haue gone to masse with vs or no, yf thou had­dest come in tyme?

Myne answere shalbe thus, that yf your lordship can proue your masse wherunto you would haue me to come, to be the true seruice of God, wherunto a Christian ought to come: I wil after­warde come with a good wil.

Loke I praye you: the Kyng & the Quene, and al the nobilitie of the realme do come to masse, & yet he wyll not. By my fayth thou arte to wel han­dled: thou shalt be worse handled her­after, I warrant thee.

Yf to lye in a blind colehouse, maye be coūted good handlyng, both without fyre & candle: then it maye be sayd, I am wel handled. Your lordship hath power to entreate my body, as you lift.

Thou arte a foole, and a verye ignoraunt foole. Maister chaunceler, in good fayth I haue handled hym & his felowes with as muche gentlenes [Page] as they can desyre. I let their frends come vnto them to releue them. And wote you what? the other day they had gottē them selues vp into the toppe of the leades, with a meany of prentiles, gasyng abroade, as though they had ben at lybertie: but I shall cut of your resort. And as for the prentises, they were as good not to come to you, yf I take them.

My lorde, we haue no suche resort to vs, as your lordship ymagyneth, and ther cōmeth very fewe vnto vs. And of prentises I knowe not one, neither haue we any leades to walke on ouer our colehouse, that I wote of, wherfore your lordship hath mistaken your marke.

Nay now you thinke (bycause my lorde Chaunceler is gone) that we wil burne no moo, yes I warrāt thee. I wil dispatche you shortly, onles you do recant.

My lorde, I had not thought that I should haue bene alyue nowe, neither so rawe as I am, but well rosted vnto ashes.

Cast not your selfe wilfully a waye, maister Philpot. Be content to be ruled by my lord here, and by other learned men of this realme, and you [Page 62] maye do wel ynough.

My conscience beareth me record, that I seke to please God, and that the loue and feare of God causeth me to do as I do, that I were of all other creatu­res most myserable, yf for myne owne will only, I dyd lose al the cōmodities I myght haue in this lyfe, and afterward to be cast to dampnatiō. But I am sure, it is not my will, wheron I stande, but Goddes wil, which wil not suffer me to be cast awaye, I am sure.

You are not so sure, but you maye be deceyued.

Wel, synce thou wilt not be cō formable by no faire meanes, I wil ꝓ­cede against thee, Ex officio. And ther­fore herkē here to suche articles, as I haue here written. And I charge the to make answere to them. And with that he red a lybel which he had in his hāde of diuers articles. And when he had done, he had me answere.

Your lybel (my lorde) contayneth in sūme, two special pointes: The fyrst pre­tēdeth, that I should be of your diocese, and therfore your lordship vpon diuers suspectes & infamies of heresie, goyng vpon me, is moued to procede a­gainst me by your ordinarie office. The [Page] which first is not true, for that I am not of your lordships dioces, as y^e lybel doth pretende. And the seconde is, that I be­yng baptised in the catholike church, and in the catholike fayth, am gone frō them, the which is not so. For I am of that catholike faith and churche, as I was baptised vnto.

What, art thou not of my dio­ces? where are ye nowe, I praye you?

My lorde, I can not denye, but I am in your colehouse, which is in your dioces, yet am I not of your dioces.

You were sent hither vnto me by y^e Quenes maiesties cōmissioners, and thou art nowe in my dioces, wherfore I wil ꝓcede against thee as thine ordinarie.

I was brought hither through vi­olence, and therfore my present beyng nowe in your dioces, is not ynough ta­brydge me of myne owne ordinarie iu­risdiction, neither maketh it me vnwil­lingly subiect to your iurisdictiō, sence it commeth by force, and by suche men as had no iust auctoritie so to do, no more then a sanctuarie man beyng by force, brought forth of his place of priuilege, dothe therby lose his priuilege, but al­wayes may chalenge the same, where so [Page 63] euer he be brought.

Hath not the Quenes maiestie auctoritie by her commissioners, to re­moue your body whither she wil? And ought you not to obeye herin?

I graunt that the Quenes maies­tie (of her iuste power) maye transpose my body, whither it shal please her grace to cōmaunde the same. But yet by your lawes, Spiritualia non sunt subiecta Imperatoris potestati. Spiritual causes be not subiecte to the temporal power. As for example, you maister doctor, yf the Quenes maie­stie would appoint two temporal men to be iudge ouer you in certayne spirituall maters: myght not you alledge the pri­uilege of a clearke, and demaūde compe­tent spiritual iudges in your causes?

Doth not a man (I praye you) Sortiri forum ratione delicti?

My lorde your rule is true in tem­poral maters. But in spiritual causes it is not so: which be otherwyse priuileged

What sayest thou then to the seconde article, and to the other?

My lorde, I sayd that I am not bounde to answere the seconde neither the reste, onlesse the first be proued.

Well, suppose the fyrst may be proued (as it wilbe) what wyll you say [Page] then to the seconde, that you are not of the same catholike fayth neither of the same churche nowe, as you were bapti­sed in?

I am of the same catholike faythe, and of the same catholike churche which is of Christ, the piller and stablishemēt of truthe.

Naye that you are not.

Ye as that I am.

Your godfathers and godmo­thers were of an other fayth, then you be nowe.

I was not baptised neither into my godfathers faith nor my godmothers, but into the fayth & into the churche of Christ.

Howe knowe you that?

By the worde of God, which is the touche stone of faythe, and the lymites of the churche.

Howe long hath your churche stande, I praye you?

Euen from the beginning, frō Christ & from his Apostles, & from theyr imme­diate successours.

He wil proue his churche to be before Christ.

Yf I dyd so, I go not amisse. For ther was a church before the cōming of Christ, which maketh one catholike churche.

It is so in dede.

I wil desyre no better rule, thē that which is oftē tymes brought in of your syde, to proue both my fayth and church, catholike: that is, antiquitie, vniuersali­tie, and vnitie.

Do you not se, what a bragging folyshe felowe this is? He would seme to be very wel sene in y^e doctors, & he is but a fole. By what D. art y^u able to ꝓue thy church? name hī, & y^u shalt haue him

My lorde let me haue al your aunci­ent writers with penne, & ynke & paper, & I wil proue both my fayth & my churche out of euery one of them.

No y^t thou shalt not haue▪ you shal see howe he lyeth. S. Cipriā sayeth, Ye lye my lorde. ther must be one high priest, to y^e which y^e residue must obeye. And they wil allowe no head, neither vicar general.

S. Ciprian sayeth not, y^t ther should be a vicar general ouer al. For in his bo­ke De simplicitate praelatorum, I am sure he sayeth the cōtrarie, Vnus episcopatus est, cuius pars in solidum a singulis tenetur. Ther is but one bishoprike, which is holly possessed of euery bishop in part.

Fet hyther the boke, thou shalt se the manyfest place against the. S. Chedsey brought y^e boke, & turned to the place in an Epistle written vnto Corneli­us [Page] then B. of Rome, & recited these worldes in sūme, that it went not well w^t the church, where the hyghe priest was not obeyed. And so would haue cōcluded for the confirmacion of the bishops sayeng.

M. doct. you misconstrue the place of S. Cipriā, for he meaneth not ther (by the hygh priest) the B. of Rome: but eue­ry patriark in his precinct, of whom ther were foure apointed in his tyme.

And in wrytyng vnto Cornelius, he meaneth by the hyghe priest hym selfe, which was then chief B. of Affrica, whose auc­toritie the heretikes began to despice.

Wherof he complayneth to Cornelius, & sayeth, the churche can not be well orde­red, where the chief minister by order, after the iudgemēt of the scriptures, after the agremēt of the people, and the cōsent of his felow bishops he is not obeyed.

Hath not the bishop of Rome alwayes ben supreme head of the chur­che, and Christes vicar in earth euen from Peter?

No that he was not. For by y^e word of God he hath no more auctoritie, then the bishop of London hath.

Was not Peter head of y^e church? and hath not the bishop of Rome which is his successour, y^e same auctoritie?

I graunt that the bishop of Rome, as he is the successor of Peter hath the same autoritie as Peter had. But Pe­ter had no more auctoritie, then euery one of the apostles hadde.

Yes that S. Peter had, for Christ said specially vnto him, Tibi da­bo claues regni Coelorum, I will gyue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen: the which he spake to none other of his disciples syngularly but to him.

S. Austyne answereth otherwyse to the obiection, & sayeth, that yf in Peter, there had not bene the figure of the churche, the Lord had not sayd vnto him, to the I will geue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen. The which if Pe­ter receyued them not, the churche hath them not. Yf the churche hath them, thē Peter hath them not.

What yf I can proue and shewe you out of the ciuill lawe, that all Christendome ought to folowe the holy catholike churche of Rome, as there is a speciall tytle therof De catho­lica fide & Sancta Romana ecclesia.

That is nothing material, seing the thinges of God be not subiecte to mās lawes. And diuine maters must be ordered by the word of God, & not of man.

What will you saye, yf I can proue, that Christ buylded his church vpon Peter: and that out of S. Cipri­an? will you then beleue, that the bi­shop of Rome ought to be supreme head of the churche?

I knowe what S. Ciprian writeth in that behalfe. But he meaneth nothīg so as you take it.

S. Ciprian hath these wordes: quod super Petrum fundata suit ecclesia tan­quam super originem vnitatis. That vpon Peter was builded the churche, as v­pon the fyrst begynning of vnitie.

Be declareth that in an example: y^e vnitie must be in the church, he groū ­ded on Peter his churche alone, & not vpon men: The which he doth more manifestly declare in the booke De simplicita­te praelatorum sayeng, in persona vnius Chri­stus dedit Dominus omnibus claues, vt omnium vtatatē denotaret. In y^e person of one mā, God gaue the keyes to al, that he in sig­nificaciō therby declareth the vnitie of all men.

Howe wil you vnderstand S. Ciprian? So? y^t were good in dede.

I thinke you can not vnderstande S. Ciprian better, then he dothe decla­re him selfe.

I will desire you (master chaū celer) to take some paynes, w^c master doctor Chadsey & master Dee, about his examinacion. For I must god to the parliament house: And I will de­sire you to tary diner with me.

Then maister Dee toke agayne his former auctoritie in hande, for want of an other. And would haue made a farther circumstaunce, dysgressing from his purpose. To whom I sayd he knewe not wherabout he went, and here withall he laughed. And I sayd, his diuinitie was nothing but scof­fing.

Yea? then I haue done with you. And so went awaye.

maister Dee, you are to yong in dy­uynytie to reach me in the maters of my faythe: though you be learned in other thinges more then I, yet in diui­nitie I haue ben longer pracrysed then you, for any thing I can heare of you: therfore be not to hastie, to iudge that you do not perfectly knowe.

Peter and his successours (frō the beginning) haue ben allowed for the supreme head of the churche: & y^t by y^e scriptures. For that cause Christ said vnto him, in S. Iohn thryse, feade [Page] my shepe, pasce oues meas.

That is none otherwise to be takē, thē Ite, predicate, goo ye & preache: which was spoken to al y^e Apostels, as wel as vnto Peter. And y^e Christ said thrise, pasce oues meas, feade my shepe, it signifieth no­thing elles, but the earnest studie, that the ministers of God ought to haue in preaching the worde. God graunt that you of the cleargy would waie your duetie in this behalfe, more then you doo. Is this a iuste interpretaciō of the scripture, to take pasce oues meas, for to be lorde of the hole world? In this meane while came in an other bacheler of diuinitie, which is a reader of Greke in Oxforde belonging to the bishop. And he toke v­pon him to helpe master chaunceler.

What will you say, yf I can shewe you a Greke Autor (called The­ophilacte) to interprete it so? Will you beleue his interpretacion?

Theophilacte is a late wryter, and one that was a fauourer of the bishop of Rome: and therfore not to be credi­ted, synce his interpretacion is cōtrary to the manifest words of the scriptures, and contrarie to the determinacion of many general councels.

In what generall coūcel was [Page 69] it otherwyse, that the bishop of Rome was not supreme head ouer al.

In Nyce counsel I am sure it was otherwyse. For Athanasius was there the chief B. and president of the councel, and not the bishop of Rome.

Nay that is not so.

Then I perceyue you are better sene in wordes, then in knowlege of thinges. For I wil gage with you what you will, it is so. As you maye see in the Epitome of the councell.

I wil set Eusebius, and shewe y^e contrarie, and the boke of general coū ­cels. He went into my lordes closet, and brought Eusebius, but the general councels he brought not, sayeng (for sauyng of his honestie) that he could not come by them. And there woulde haue defended that it was otherwyse in Eu­sebius, but was not hable to shewe the same. And so shranke away cōfounded.

The church of Rome hath ben alwayes takē for the hole catholike chur­che: therfore I would aduise you, to co­me into the same with vs. You se al the men of this realme do condemne you. And why wil you be so singular?

I haue sayd, and stil do saye, that yf you can be hable to proue it vnto me, [Page] that I wil be of the some. But I am sure that the church which you make so much of,Note. is a false churche, and a Synagoge of Satan. And you with the learned mē of this realme do persecute y^e true churche, and condempne suche as be ryghteouser then you.

Nay the Deuylles daughter. Do you heare (maister doctor) what he sayeth? that the churche of Ro­me is the deuil.

I wishe you did thinke more reuerently, of the churche of Rome▪ What wil you saye, yf I can showe you out of S. Austyne in his epistle writtē to Po­pe. Innocentius, that the hole generall coūcel of Cartage dyd allowe the chur­che of Rome to be chefest ouer al other?

I am sure you may shewe no suche thyng. And with ther he set the boke of S. Austyne, and turned to the epistle: but he could not proue his allegacion many­festly,Thou fal­sifiest S. Austyne Chadsey. but by coniectures in this wyse.

Here you maye see, that the coū ­cell of Cartage wrytyng to Innocenti­us the Bishop, calleth the sea of Rome the Apostolike sea. And besydes this, they wryte vnto him, certifyeng him of thinges done in the councel, for the condemnacion of the Donatistes: re­quiring his approbations in the same. [Page 70] Which they would not haue done, yf they had not taken the church of Rome for the supreme heade of others. And moreouer you maye see, howe S. Au­styne dothe proue the churche of Rome to be y^e chatholike church,The suc­cession of false bi­shops, and not of Christes faithe.by continual successiō of the byshop vntil his tyme, which successyon we can proue vntyl our dayes. Therfore by y^e same reason of S. Austine, we saye nowe, that the churche of Rome is the catholike chur­che.

Maister doctor, I haue considered howe you do waye S. Austyne And contrarye to his meanyng and wordes you would infer your false conclusion.A false cō clusion indede. As cō ­cerning that it was called by him the A­postolical sea, that is not material to pro­ue the churche of Rome nowe to be the catholike churche. I wil graunt it now that it is the apostolike sea in respect that Paule and Peter dyd once there preache the Gospel, and abode for a certayne sea­son. I would you could proue it to be the Apostolical sea of that true religion and synceritie, as the Apostle lefte it, and dyd teache the same: The which yf ye can do, you myght boast of Rome, as of the Apostolical sea, Otherwyse it is now [Page] of no more force, then yf the Turke at Antioche, and at Ierusalem should boast of the Apostolike seas, bycause the Apo­stles once dyd there abyde, and founded y^e churche of Christ. And where as by y^t y^e hole coūcel of Carthage dyd wryte vnto Pope Innocētius, certifieng him of that was done in the generall counsell, and willyng him to set his helping hande to y^e suppressing of the Donatistes, as they had done. That facte of the councel pro­ueth nothyng the supremacie of the bi­shop of Rome, no more then yf the hole conuocacion house nowe gathered toge­ther, and agreyng vpō certaine articles, myght sende the same to some Bishop, that vpon certaine impedimentes, is not present, willyng him to agree therto, and to set them forth in his dioces. The whi­che facte doth not make any suche bishop of greater auctoritie then the reste, by­cause his consente is brotherly required. And touching the successiō of the bishop­pes of Rome brought in by saynt Au­stine, maketh nothyng nowe therby, to proue the same the catholike churche, onles you can conclude with the same reason as S. Austyne dothe. And [Page 71] y^e rehersall of y^e succession of the bishops doth tende to this only, to proue y^e do­natistes to be heretykes, because they beganne, aswel at Rome as in Affrica, to foūde an other churche, then was groū ded by Peter and Paule, and by their successours. whom he reciteth vntil his tyme, which all taught no such doctri­ne, neyther no suche church, as the Do­natistes. And yf presently you be hable to proue by the succession of bishops of Rome (wherof you do glory) that no suche doctrine hathe ben taught by any of the successours of Peters sea as is nowe taught and beleued of vs, you haue good reason Agaynst vs. Other­wise it is of no force, as I am hable to declare.

Well master doctor, you se we can do no good, in persuadīg of him, let vs mynyster the articles, which my lord hath left vs, vnto him. Howe faye you master Philpot to these arti­cles? M. Iohnson I pray you write his answeres.

Master chaunceler, you haue no autorytye to enquire of me my belefe in such articles, as you go about, for y^t I am not of my lorde of Londōs diocese, & [Page] to be brefe with you, I will make no further answere herin, then I haue al­ready to the bishop.

Why then, let vs go our waies, and let his keper take him away.

At night I was conducted by three or foure to my collehouse, and in the morning the next day called downe by tyme by my keper, and brought agayne in to the wardrobe, wher I remayned vntill the bishop had hearde his masse, and afterward sent vp for me vnto his inward parler, & ther he called for a chayre to sit downe and braught his infamous Libell of his forged articles in his hand, & set downe, willing me to draw nere vnto him, and sayd.

I Am this daye appointed to tary at home from the parliamēt hou­se, to examine you & your fello­wes, vpon these articles, and you stand dalieng with me and will neither answere to nor fro. I wys al your exceptions will not serue you. will it not be a fayer hōnestie for you (thinke you) that whē thou comest a­fore my lord Mayer and the shriffes, and other worshipfull audience, when I shall say before them al, that I haue had the these many times before me, & before so many learned men, & then thou couldest say nothing, for that y^u standest in, for al thy bragges of lear­nyng, [Page] nether woldest answer direct­ly to any thing.

My lord, I haue told you my mind plaine ynough, but yet I do not intēd to lose that priuilege the law gyuethe me, the which is free choyse to answer, where I am not bounde, and to this priuilege will I cleaue vnto vntyll I be compelled otherwyse.

Well, I perceyue you wil play the obstynate fole. Lay thyn appella­tion, when thou comest in iudgemēt, and answere in the meane while to these articles.

No my lord by your leaue, I wil not answer to them, vntill my lawfull ap­peale be tryed.

Well thou shalt heare thē, and with that he began to reade them.

I shranke backe into the windo, & loked on a boke, and after he had read them ouer, he sayd vnto me.

I haue read them ouer, al­though it hath not pleased you to hear me. I maruell (in good fayth) what thou meanest, to be so willful and so stubburne, seyng thou mayest do wel ynough yf thou list. It is but of sigu­laritie, doest y^u not see al the realme agaynst thee?

My lord, I speake vnto you in the witnesse of God, before whō I stāde, y^e I am nether wedded, vnto myne owne will, nether stande vpon myne owne stubbernes or singularitie, but vpō my conscience instructed by Godes word. And yf your lordship can shewe better euidence than I haue for a good fayth, I wil folowe the same.

What? thou wilt not (lo) for al y^t. wel al that is past shalbe forgottē: & be conformable vnto vs? I wis thou myghtest fynd as muche fauour as thou wouldest desire.

Then I perceauing that he faw­ned so muche on me, thought it good to geue him some cōfort of relēting to the ende I might openly geue him and his hipocritical generaciō openly a fur­ther foyle, perceyuing that they dare reason openly with none, but with such as be vnlearned, and forlacke of knowlege not hable to answere, or elles with such as they haue a hope, that (for feare or lo­ue of the worlde) wil recant. I sayd my lorde it is not vnknowen to you, that I haue openly in the audience of a great nombre stande to the maintenaunce of these opiniōs I am in, and by learning dyd offer to defende them. Therfore (my [Page] Lorde) I would it myght opēly appeare to the world, that I am wonne by lear­nyng, or els what wil they saye, but that either for feare or loue of the worlde, I am without any iust groūd, turned frō the truthe? And yf I haue any fynde of learning openly shewed, I shalbe as cō formable as you maye require me.

Yea mary, nowe ye speake sō ­what lyke a reasonable man. I wis you myght haue had a great deale more fauour in my house and libertie thē you haue had. And you shal lacke nothyng that is within my house, call for it & you shal haue it. And what is it that you would openly by learning somwhat be satisfyed? tel me.

My lorde I haue openly sayd, and do beleue it also, that your sacrifice of y^e masse is no sacrament.

What? do you denye the pre­sence of Christ in the sacrament?

No my lorde, I denye not the pre­sence of Christ in y^e sacramēt, but I ha­ue denyed y^e sacrament of the altar, as it is vsed in your masse, to be the true sacrament of Christes institution. And first it must be ꝓued a sacrament, or ther can be any fynde of presence graūted.

Why, do you deny the masse [Page 83] to be a sacrament? I praye you what is a sacramēt? is it not a signe of a ho­ly thing, as. Austine doth defyne it?

Yes verely, that it is.

Then I make this argument, vnto you. A sacrament is the signe of a holy thing: but the masse is the signe of a holy thing, ergo it is a sacrament.

You must adde this to your maior, or first proposition, as S. Austine doth meane: that a sacrament is the signe of a holy thing instituted of God and commaunded: for otherwyse it can be no sa­crament, for all men can not make a sa­crament.

I graunt that, and suche a si­gne of a holy thing is y^e masse of Chri­stes institution.

I denye that, my lorde?

I wil proue this by S. Austine by and by. I will go shewe you the boke, and you shall haue any boke I haue, that you will demaunde. Hoo? who is without ther? cal me maister doctor Chadsey, maister Archdiacon, maister Cosins, and other chaplaynes hither. M. Cousin and his morow masse cha­playne.

Here my lorde. M. doctor Chadsey is gone to westminster: and maister Archdeacon was here euen nowe.

Maister Cosyns, I pray you examine him vpon these articles, and wryt his answer he maketh to euery one of them. I wil go examin his fe­lowes, and sende you S. Austyne by and by. I fynde this man more con­formable then he was before.

I trust my lorde you shal fynd him at lenght a good Catholike man. Mary here be a syght of heresies, I dare say, you wil holde none of them, neither stande in any of them. Howe saye you to the first?

M. Cosyns, I haue tolde my lorde already, that I wil answere to none of these articles, he hath obiected against me. But yf you wil w^t learnīg answere to that which is in question betwene my lord and me, I wil gladly heare and common with you.

No wil you? Why, what is that then, which is in questiō betwene my lorde and you?

Whether your masse be a sacra­ment or no.

What? the masse to be a sacra­ment? who euer douted therof?

Yf it be an vndoubted truthe, you maye the soner proue it: for I doubt moche therof.

Why I wil proue it. It is the si­gne of a holy thing: Ergo it is a sacra­ment.

I deny your antecedent.

What wil you so? then ther is no reasoning with you. Thus master Cosins gaue ouer in y^e playn fylde, for wāt of farther profe. And thā y^e morow masse chaplaī begā to speake for his oc­cupaciō & w^t y^e M. harpesfild came out frō my lord w^t S. Austīs epistles, saiēg.

My lord hath sent you here S. Austin to loke vpon. And I pray you loke what he sayth in a certen e­pistle, which he writeth, I wil reade ouer the hole. Here may you heare the celebracion of the masse, and howe he reproueth them that wēt a hawkīg and hunting before the celebracion of the same, & y^t on y^e sabbat & holy daies.

I perceiue the contentes of this e­pistle. And I see nothing herein agaīst me, nether nothing that maketh for the profe of your sacrament of the Masse.

No? doth he not make mētiō of the masse, and the celebraciō ther­of. What can be spoken more playne?

S. Austin meaneth of the celebra­cion of the communion, and of the true yse of the sacrament of the body & bloud [Page] of Christ, and not of your priuat masse, which you of late yeares haue erected in the steade therof. For this word Masse hath ben an olde terme attributed to the communion, euen from the primati­ue church. And I pray you tel me what Missa doth signifie, I thinke not many that say masse, can well tel.

No can? that is marueil.

Then tell yf you can. But master Cosins and my morow masse chaplayn were dūme loking vpō master Harpes­feld for help, and at lenght he spake.

You thinke it cometh of the Hebrue word Massahe, as though none were seen in Hebrew but you.

I haue not gone so long to scole, to deriue the significaciō of missa, which is a latin worde out of Hebreu. But I haue lerned to interprete Greke words by Greke, and Latin by Latin, and He­breu by Hebreu. I take the commu­nion to be called missa, a Mittendo, of suche thinges as (at the celebracion of the communion was sent by such as were of habilitie, to the relefe of the poore wher the ryche brought after theyr deuotion and habilitie, and requi­red the minister in the celebraciō of the communion, to pray vnto God for them, [Page 85] and to accepte their common almes, whyche they at suche tymes dyd send for the helpe of their poore brethern and systers. And for this cause was it cal­led Missa as learned men do withes. At the which celebracion of the masse all that were present dyd communicate vnder bothe kindes, according to Christes institucion, as they dyd in S. Austines tyme. But onles you can shewe that your masse is vsed as that was, you shall neuer by the name of masse (which S. Austine attributed to y^e true vse of y^e cōmunion) proue your priuat masse to be a sacrament, onles you can proue the same vse nowe to be in your masse, as was then: which is cleane contrary.

What? deny you the Masse to be a sacrament? for shame speake it not.

I will not be ashamed to deny it, yf you can not proue it.

Why, it is a sacrifice, which is more then a sacrament.

You may make of it, as muche as you list, but yet shal you neuer make it a sacrifice, as you ymagine therof. But fyrst it must be a sacramēt, for of the sa­crament, you deduce your sacrifice.

Why, doth not Christ say, this is [Page] my body, and doth not the priest pro­nounce the same, that Christ did?

The pronunciatyon is not only y­nough, onles the wordes be therwith all applied to the vse, as Christ spake thē to. For though you speake the wordes of baptisme ouer water neuer so many ty­mes yet ther is no baptisme, onles ther be a christian person to be baptised.

Nay that is not like: for Hoc est corpus meum, is an indicatiue propo­sicion, shewing a working of God in the substance of orcad and wine.

It is not only an indicatyue propositiō, but also imperatiue or cōmaūding For he that sayd. Hoc est corpus meum, sayd also, accipite, māducate, take ye, eat ye. And except the former parte of the instituciō of Christes sacrament be accomplished according to the commaundement, the later parte this is my body, can haue no veryficacion: take it which way you will, and howe you will.

Morow Masse chaplain. Why than, you wil make the sacrament to stand in the receyuing, & that receauing maketh it a sacrament.

I do not say, that y^e receyuing ma­keth it the sacrament only, but I saye, that a cōmen receyuing must nedes be concurrent with the true sacrament as [Page 86] a necessary member, without the which it cannot be a sacramēt, bicause Christ hathe made this a principall part of the sacrament, take ye, eat ye, which you do not in your masse, according to Christes institution. Wherfore it can be no sacrament, for that it wanteth of Christes in­stitucion.

We do not forbid none to come to it. But as many as list, may be partakers with vs at the masse, yf they require it.

Nay that they shal not, though they require it. You will minister but one kind vnto them, which is not after Christes instituciō. Besides that you ought before you goo to masse, to exhorte all that be present, to make a sacrifice of thankes geuing for Christes passion with you, and to exhort them to be par­takers with you, according to Christes commaundement, sayeng vnto all that be present, take ye, eate ye. And likewi­se by preaching shewe forthe the Lordes death, which you do not.

What and if all thinges be do­ne euen as you would haue it. And whiles the minister is about to mini­stre the sacrament before any haue receaued it, ther rise a soden hurly burly [Page] that the cōmunicantes be compelled to go awaye: is it not a sacrament, for al that none hath cōmunicated besyde the priest.

In this case where al thinges are appointed to be done accordīg to God­des worde, yf incydēt necessitie had not let, I can not saye, but it is a sacrament, and that he which hath receaued, hath receaued the true sacrament. After this the morow Masse priest made this a­pishe reason.

Morow masse Priest. Yf the sacramēt of the masse be no sacrament, onles all do receaue it, by­cause Christ sayd, take ye, eate ye: thē the sacramēt of baptisme is no sacramēt, wher ther is but one baptised. Bycau­se Christ said to his Apostles, go prea­che the Gospel to all creatures, bapti­syng al nations in the name of the fa­ther. &c.

Baptising al nacions, in that say­eng of Christ is a cōmaundement to the Apostles, to baptise al sortes of mē, and to exclude none that do beleue, be he gē ­til or Iewe, not meaning al at once, for that were impossible. And there is ma­ny examples that baptisme may be sin­gularly ministred to one person, as we haue exāple in Christ baptised of Iohn̄, [Page 87] and in y^e Eunuche baptised of Philip, with many mo suche lyke. But so haue you not of the sacramēt of the body and bloud of Christ, but cōtrary wyse by the expresse wordes of S. Paule, you are cōmaunded to vse it in a cōmunion and participation of many together: the xi. to the Corin. Quoties conuenitis ad mandu candum, alius alium expectate. As ofte as you come together, to eate (meaning the Lordes supper) tary one for an other.

And also the minister in the celebration of the sacrament, speaketh vnto al that be present in Christes behalfe, to cōmu­nicate with him, sayeng: take ye, and eat ye. Wherfore as many as be present, & not cōmunicate, do breake goddes com­maundemēt in not receauyng the same, and y^e minister is no iust minister, that dothe not distribute the sacrament, as Christ dyd, to al that are presēt, & where Goddes worde is transgressed, there is not Christ present, and consequently is no sacrament.

What would you haue it no sacrament without it be a cōmunion?

I make it not so, but Goddes ex­presse worde teacheth me so, yea also all the auncient wryters. As S. Chrisostōe wryting vpon the epistle to the Ephesi­ans, [Page] sayeth, that y^e oblatiō, is in vayne, where as none doth communicat with the priest. If by his iudgement the action of the priest alone is in vayne, where is no communion, howe can that be a sacramēt, which he calleth a vayne ob­latiō, & a vayne standing at the altare?

You are such an other felow, as I haue not heard, y^t will not haue the masse to be a sacrament: you are no man for me to reason with all. Come, let vs goo, poyntyng to the morow masse chaplayn, we wil leaue you (master archdiacon) and him together. And so they went away. Afterward the archdiacon fell into earnest persuasions with me, sayeng:

Master Philpot, you and I haue ben of old acquayntance a long tyme, we were scolefelowes, both in wynchester and in Oxforde many yeares, wherfore I must wyshe you as well to do as my selfe: and I praye you so thinke of me.

I thanke you for your good will towardes me, but yf you be deceaued, (as I am sure you are) I shall desyre you, not to wyshe me deceaued with you, For afore God I tell you playnely, you [Page 88] are highly deceaued, and mayntayne false religion, and be not those men you take your selfes for. And yf you do not repent, & leaue of your persecuting of christes trueth, you wil go to the dyuell for it. Therfore consyder it in tyme, I gyue you warnyng, for in the day of iudgement ells I shalbe a wytnes a­gaynst you, that I told you this here talkyng together.

Fye, that is but your owne vayne syngular opinion. I perceaue you are styll now, that man you were in Oxforde.

I trust you can reporte no noto­rius euill, that euer you knew by me there.

I can saye no euill of your conuersacion, but I knew you to be a studious man. Mary if you remembre, when we met in disputa­cion in paruis, you wold not lyghtly gyue ouer, and for that cause I speake that I haue sayd.

Master Harpesfeld, you knowe in the scoles at Oxforde, when we were yong men, we dyd stryue moche vpon vayn glory, and vpon contention, more than for the trueth. But nowe our yea­res [Page] and our ryper learnyng teache vs, to fal to a truthe, which must be our portion for euer. And yf I was then (in my tyme of ignoraunce) earnest in myne owne cause, I ought now to be earnest in my maister Christes cause, & in his truth. I know now, that nothing done vpon vayne glorie and singularitie, can please God, haue it neuer so goodly a shewe. Wherfore I praye you, iudge not so of me nowe.

What? wil you thinke your selfe better learned, then all the lear­ned men in this realme?

My fayth hengeth not vpō the learned of the worlde, but vpon the learned after Goddes worde.

Wel, I wil talke with you no­more as nowe, but pray to god to opē your harte.

I pray God open both our hartes, to do more his wil, then we haue done in tymes past.

Ho keper take him away w^t you

I pray you M. Harpsfeld, tel me what this pronowne Hoc doth demon­strate and shewe in this indicatiue pro­position as you cal it, Hoc est corpus meum, This is my body.

It dothe demonstrate the sub­staunce [Page 89] of bread, which by the wordes spoken by the priest, & by the omnipo­tency of God, is turned into the sub­staunce of Christes very body.

Is the substaunce of the bread (as you saye) turned into Christes bodye?

Yea that it is.

Why then, Christes body receaueth dayly a great increase of many thousād peces of bread into his bodye. And that is his body become nowe, which was not before, and by this you would seme to make, that ther is an alteracion in Christes glorifyed body: which is a wic­ked thing to thinke.

Then he fet about agayne, and remembring better him selfe, and se­yng the inconuenience of his first as­sertion, of the transubstantiacion of the bread into Christes bodye, he sayd, that the substaunce of bread after the wordes spoken by the priest, was euacuated or vanished away, by the om­nipotency of God.

This is an other song, thē you said fyrst. And here you maye see, howe con­trary you ar to your selues. For in dede your scole mē do holde, y^t the verye sub­staunce of bread is really turned into y^e substaunce of Christes body. And nowe [Page] you perceauing of late y^e inconuenience which is obiected agaīst you in y^e opini­on of late you ar dryuē to imagin a new shyfte, and say, the substance of bread is euacuated contrary to y^t your churche hath fyrst beleued and taught. O what contrarietie is ther among you, and all to deface the syncere truth?

Is not God omnipotent? & cannot he do, as he hath sayd?

But his omnipotency will not do as you say, contrary to his word and to his honour: it is not Goddes honour to include bodely in a pece of bread, and of necessitie to tye him therto. It is not Goddes honour, for you to make a pece of bread, God & mā: which you se before your face doth putrifie after a certen tyme. Is not Goddes omnipotency as hable to geue his body w^t the sacra­mental bread, as to make so many tur­ninges away of the bread as you doo? And that directly against the scripture which calleth it bread many tymes af­ter the cōsecraciō. Are you not ashamed to make so many alteracions of the lor­des holy institucion, as you do? And to take away the substanticall parts of the sacrament, as, take ye, eate ye,: drinke ye all of this. So ye this in remembraūce [Page 90] of me: and to place in their steades, heare ye, gase ye, knocke ye, worship ye, offre ye, sacrifice ye for the quicke and the deade. If this be not blasphemy to God and his sacrament, to adde and to plucke away in this sorte, and that con­trary to the mynd of all auncient wri­ters, and contrary to the example of Christ and his Apostles, tell me.

I know you haue gathered the saienges of the doctors together, which make for your purpose. I will talke no longer with you. And so to the end as is written afore.

The next daye after dyner I was brought into my lordes vpperhalle, and there he called me before him, and his Regester, & before Doctor Chadsey, in the presēce of two homely gē ­tilmen, and a priest, which I knew not sayeng.

I Do here laye vnto this man in your presence, requiring you to be witnes against him, as much as you know in any of thē, these artycles, this boke of the cathe­thisme made in king Edwards daies. Also these conclusyons agreed vpon, [Page] both in Oxforth and Cambryge: also I lay vnto him, that he hath despised the censures of the churche, and hath standē accursed more then this twelf-moneth, and neuer required absolu­tion therof. Howe say you? wast thou not accursed by my lord Chaunceler?

I was excommunicated by him wrōgfully, and without any iust cause, and without order of law, being neuer personally cyted.

Dyddest thou not tell me the other day, when I required thee to come to the masse, that thou wast ex­communicated, and therfore by the lawe couldest not heare masse? How lōg hast thou ben thus excōmunicat?

More than this twelfe moneth & this halfe.

Lo, you may heare what he saith, write it.

But as you would haue written that I haue sayd, I haue ben thus long excommunicated, so also let him write, that I dyd require of my lord chaūceler that dyd excommunicat me, my absolutiō, but he would not geue it me, sayēg, y^t I was excōmunicatus ipso iu­re, because I was an heretike, as it ple­sed him to call me, therfore accursed by [Page 91] your lawe, and so cōmaunded me to prison, where I remayne.

Why do you not require absolutiō at my lordes handes here nowe? A gentil­man.

Because he is not myne ordinarie, neither hath by the lawe any thing to do with me of ryght.

What an obstinate fole is this? I tel thee, I wil be thyne Ordinary, whether thou wilt or no.

And bycause of this your vnrigh­teous force towardes me, I haue appealed from you, and require you (maister Regester) that my appeale may be en­tred in wryting.

Haue you heard suche a fro­ward felowe as this? he semed yester­daye to be very tractable, and I had a good hope in him. I tel thee, thou art of my diocese.

I am of Wynchester dioces, and not of London dioces.

I praye you, maye not a man be of two dioceses at once?

No that he can not.

Lo, wil you see what an igno­raūt foole this is in y^e law, in y^t which he would seme to be sene. I tel y^e a mā may be of thre dioceses at once: as if y^u were borne in Londō, by reasō therof [Page] thou shouldest be of my dioces, or els yf thou were not borne but haddest a dignitie here, also thou arte to be coū ­ted of my dioces, or els by reason of thy habitacion in my dioces.

In none of these respectes I am of your lordships dioces. But for al that this wil not folowe, that I dwellyng at Winchester am (at that present) of Lon­don diocese.

What wil you laye therof: wilt thou recant, yf I proue it?

But what shal I winne, yf you do not?

I wil gyue the my byshoprik, yf I proue it not.

Yea but who shal delyuer it me, yf I winne?

Thou arte an arrogaūt foole. Entre their othes, and take these wyt­nesses depositions. I must be gone to the parliament house.

A straūge kynsman of myne. After this spake vnto me a priest, standing by, askyng me whether I was kyn to my lorde Ryche or no?

I said, he said so himselfe vnto me the other daye: but how I knowe not.

I heard him say, that he was his very nigh kynsman.

Balaeamit kynsman. Why then you & I must be of kyne, [Page 92] for he is my very nygh kynsmā. How chaunce it that you & I be of contrary iudgementes?

It is no maruel that, for Christ prophecied, y^t the father shalbe deuided a­gainst the sonne, & the sōne against the father, for his truthes sake.

You do hold (as I vnderstād) against the blessed sacramēt of the al­tare, & against the holy masse.

Yf you can proue it a sacrament, I wil not holde agaynst you.

What? proue it a sacramēt, ꝙ a? Doth not S. Paule saye: Quae ocu­lus non vidit, & auris non audiuit, quae prepara­uit Deus diligentibus, that such thinges as the eye hathe not sene, neither eare heard, God hath prepared for them that loue him?

That sayeng of S. Paule concer­neth nothing your sacrament, but is ment of the heauenly ioyes, that be pre­pared for al faythful beleuers.

Why thē I perceyue you vnderstande not S. Paule: by God you are deceaued.

You ought not to sweare kynsman (yf you wil I shal so cal you) & without disworship of our kynred, I vnderstand S. Paule as well as you, and knowe [Page] what I say. And with that shewed him a Greke testament, with Erasmus trāslacion, and with the olde also, demaun­ding him which text he was best ac­quaynted withall.

I knewe Greke to once, as well as you: I care not, which you reade.

You knowe them then all alyke, you vnderstande the one as well as the other. with this my Balaamit kins­man departed in a furye.

The next day after, I was brought downe agayne after dyner, to the chapel: and ther my Balaamit kinsman (to verify the scriptures, that a mans owne kins­folks shalbe his ennemis) came in with the bishop, as a witnes agaynst me. And there the bishop caused an other that came to him about other maters, to sweare also to be a witnes agaynst me, which was a priest also, sayeng.

YOu shall sweare to depose all the truth of certen artic­les you shalbe enquired of, concerning this man. And here I (according to the [Page 93] lawe) do bring them forth in thy pre­sence.

My lord, I do not agre to the pro­duction of them, but do appeale from al these and others your procedinges a­gaīst me. And require you master rege­ster, y^t my appeale may be entred, & I wil geue you for your laboure.

Your appeale shalbe entred at leasure, whom do you appeale vnto? tell me.

I appeale to a hygher iudge,Phil. as to the lieutenaunt of the archebishopryke of Cantorbury: for I know not who is bi­shop therof at this present. With that the bishop went away, & my balaamit kinsman loked byg vpon me, but sayd neuer a worde.

This I haue in hast scribled out all myne examinaciō hitherto, that the same which hath ben done vnto me in darke, might co­me to light, and that the papistes vniust ꝓcedinges and naked­nes in theyr false religi­on might be know­en to their con­fusion. AMEM.

I Was cōming being sent for with my keper, and the bishop of Lōdon met me at his hal dore, and full manerly he played y^e gētilmā [...], to bring me before y^e lordes, sayēg.

My lordes, I shall desire you to take some paynes with this man, he is a gentilman, and I would be should do wel, but he wil wilfully cast away him selfe.

Come hither syr, what is your name?

My name is Philpot.

I haue heard of that name to be a worshipfull stocke, and synce you be a gentilman, do as you may lyue [Page 94] worshipfully among other gentilmē. what is the cause of your troble now?

I told him the cause as in my for­mer examinacions is expressed.

Well, al causes set apart, will you nowe be a conformable man to the catholike fayth, and leaue al new fangled opinions and heresies? I wis I was in Germany with Luter, at the beginning of this, and can tell, howe they began. Leaue them, and fo­lowe the catholike churche through out the world, as the hole realme nowe doth.

My lord I am of y^e catholike fayth and desire to lyue and die in the same. But it is not vnknowē to your lordship, that I with others these twenty yeres haue ben taught an other ma­ner of fayth, than you nowe go about to compell vs vnto. Wherfore it is re­quisite that we haue a tyme to waigh y^e same, and to heare, howe it agreeth w^t Goddes worde. For fayth is not at a so­den, nether won nether remoued, but as S. Paule sayth, fayth cōmeth by hearing, & hearīg by y^e word. Fides ex au [...]iu [...], auditus per verbum.

And if you wil geue m leaue my lord, I wil shewe him, howe he taketh [Page] the sayeng of S Paul amisse, as many other now of dayes allegeing the same do, that they ought not be cōpelled to beleue: where as S. Paul meaneth of infideles, and not of the faythfull. And so S. Austin writing a­gainst y^e Donatistes, sayth, that the faythfull may be compelled to beleue

S. Barnard (and it please your lordship) doth take that sense of S. Paul as I do, sayeng that Fides est suadenda & non imponenda, fayth must be persuaded to a man and not enioyned. And S. Austin speaketh of suche as were fyrst throughly persuaded by manifest scriptures, & yet would resyst of stubburn wilfulnes.

So Bernard meaneth of in­fidels also.

No my lord that he doth not: for he writeth not of y^e infideles, for he writeth of such as were deceyued by errours.

My lord of Duresme, I haue ben so bold to interrupt your lordship of your tale, I pray you now ꝓcede on.

M. Philpot, wil you be of the same catholike fayth & churche w^t vs, you wer baptized in, and your godfa­thers ꝓmised for you, and hold as we do? and then may you be rydd out of trouble. I perceyue you are lerned, and it is pitie, but you should do wel.

I am of the same catholike fayth & catholicke church I was baptized vnto, and in that will I liue and dye.

That is wel sayd, yf you hold ther, you can not do but well.

Yea my lord, but he meaneth otherwise than you do. Are you of the same fayth, your godfathers and god­mothers were or no?

I can not tel what fayth they were of certaynly, but I am of y^e fayth I was baptized vnto, which is in y^e fayth of Christ: for I was not baptized in y^e faith of my godfathers, but in y^e faith of christ

S. Austin sayth, that infantes are baptized in fide susceptorum, In the fayth of theyr godfathers.

S. Austin yet in so sayeng meaneth of y^e faith of Christ, which y^e godfathers, do or ought to beleue, & not otherwise.

Howe say you, wil you beleue as we do, & al the learned of y^e realme, or no? and be of one churche with vs? My lordes it is not vnknowē vnto you,Phil. y^t ther hath ben alwayes two churches.

Nay, that is not so, there is but one catholike churche.

I shal desyre your lordships to hea­re out my tale, and to take my meanīg, for I know there is but one trewe [Page] churche, but alwayes from the begin­ning ther hath ben ioyned to the same true churche a false churche, aduersarye to the true, and that was declared at the fyrst in Abel and Cayn, who persecuted and slewe his brother, in whom (as S. Austine witnesseth) is represented the false and true church. And after that as sone as God had chosen his peculiar people, and shewed vnto them his san­ctuary, holy statutes, and wil, anone af­ter arose the false church, & ten of y^e .xij. tribes of Israel diuided thē selues from the true churche of Iuda and Benia­min, and made to thē selues at Bethel, and set vp golden calues, and yet pretē ­ded therwith to serue God, & so abused his worde. No withstāding God was displeased with them, and ceassed not his wrathe, vntil he had vtterly destroy­ed them.

I wil graūt you, before the cōming of Christ ther were two chur­ches in the olde lawe, but in the newe lawe, sence Christes cōmyng, you can not shewe it to be so, by the scripture.

Yes my lorde that I can, yf you wil geue me leaue. After Christ had chosen his twelue Apostles, was ther not a Iudas in the newe lawe, and a Symon [Page 96] Magus? And were not they of y^e false churche?

Yea but I meane after y^e Gos­pel was written, where can you fynde me two churches, after Christ had as­cended, and sent the holy Goost?

The Gospell was within eyght yeres after the Ascensiō written by S. Mathieu, & the wryting therof is not material to the declaration of these two churches, to haue ben alwayes from ty­me to tyme, as by examples it maye be shewed. And yet as euill as my memo­rie is, I remēbre in the newe testamēt, is mencion made of two churches, as it appeareth in the Apocalips, and also S. Paule to the Thessalonians maketh mention, that Antichrist with his false generaciō shal sit in the temple of God, to the which Chichester replied not.

The church in the scripture is likned to a great fishers net, which contayneth in it both good fishes and bad fyshes, I truste you wilbe of the better sorte and leane to the trueth.

My lorde, it is my hole desyre now to folow y^t which is good, what soeuer I haue don in tymes past, and to cleaue to Goddes truthe.

Do you so, and then shal you [Page] do wel. It is almost nyght my lorde of London, I must nedes be gone.

Nay my lorde of Duresme I must desire your lordship, and my lord of Chichester, to tary a lytle whyle. And before he had so said, the bishop of Bathe went his way, w^tout sayēg any worde. What my lorde of Bathe, wil you be gone? I praye you tary. My lordes I haue earnest maters to char­ge this man withal, wherof I would your lordships to be made priuie. And I haue them here written in a lybel. I praye you syt downe agayne, or els I wil. First I laye to him here, that he hath written in a Bible which I toke from him, this erroneous sayeng, ꝙ spiritus est vicarius Christi in terra, wilt thou abyde by this sayeng of thyne, that y^e spirite is Christes vicar on earth?

My lorde, it is not my sayeng, it is a better learned mans then myne. For I vse not to wryt mine owne say­enges, but the notable sayenges of other auncient wryters, as al the other be, where ye fynde the same wrytten.

And as I remember, it is in the sayeng of S. Bernarde, and a sayeng that I nede not to be ashamed of, nether you to be offended, as my lorde of Duresine & [Page 97] my lorde of Chichester by their learning can discerne, and wil not recken it euil sayd.

No wil? why? take awaye the first sillable, and it soundeth Arius.

That is farre fetched in dede: yf your lordship wil scan mens sayengs in suche wise, you may fynde out what you lyst.

But to helpe this, I fynde moreouer writtē with his owne hāde in an other boke: In me Ioanne Philpotto, vbi abundauit peccatum, superabundauit & gratia. That is: in me Iohn̄ Philpot wher synne did abound, grace hath super­aboūded. I pray you what superaboū daunt grace haue you more thē other men? So said Arius, that he had the a­boundaunce of grace aboue al other.

My lorde you nede not to be offended with that sayeng, more thē y^e other, for it is the sayeng of S. Paule of hym selfe, and I did applye it to my selfe for my comforte, knowyng that though my synnes be huge and great in the syght of God, yet is his mercye and grace a­boue them all. And cōcerning Arius and his adherentes, I defye them, as it is wel knowen, I haue written against them.

Also I lay to thy charge, that thou killedst thy father, & wast accur­sed of thy mother in her deathbed, as I can bring witnes herof.

O lord, what blasphemy is this? hathe your lordship nothing of truth to charge me w^tal, but (as I may speake it with your honours) such forged blasphemous lyes? If any of these cā be ꝓued, I wil promis here to recant at Paules crosse, what you wil haue me. I am so sure they are as great blasphemies, as may be obiected agaynst any man: Ha my lordes, I pray you considre how my lord of London hath hitherto proceded agaynst me. For in dede he hath none o­ther but such pretensed slaūderous lies.

They be parorga: That is ma­ters besyde the purpose.

My lord, I must nedes bid you fare well.

Nay my lord, here is a letter which your lordship I shall desire to heare or you goo. This man (being in my keping) hath taken vpon him to write letters out of prison, and to per­uerte a yong gentilman, called Ma­ster Grene in my house (cal him hy­ther) and hath made a false report of his examinacion, as you shall heare, [Page 98] not being content to be euill him sel­fe, but to make others as bad as him selfe, he all to tare the letter, when he sawe my man went about to searche him. But yet I haue pieced it agayne together, and caused a copy to be writ­ten therof, and he read the torn letter bidding master Christo for sō, and doc­tor Morgan to marke the copy therof.

The contentes of the letter was the examinacion of master Grene before the bishop of London, in the presence of master Feknam Deane of Pauls, and of dyuers others whose redy an­sweres in the scriptures and in the doctors was wōdered at, of the deane him self, and of many others, as ma­ster Feknam dyd report. And that he was first committed to doctor Chad­sey, and after to doctor Dee the great coniurer, and to haue his meate from the bishops owne table. How say you my lords? was this wel done of him, being my prisoner to write this? And yet he hath written as shamfully, that he was in doctors Chadseys keping. how say you maister doctor Chadsey? is it not a shamfull lye?

Yes my lord, he was neuer in my keping.

Art thou not ashamed to write suche shamfullyes? come hither ma­ster Grene, did not I shewe you this letter?

yea forsoth my lord, you shewed it me.

Howe thinke you my lordes? Is not this an honest man to belye me, & to call my chaplayne a great cō ­iurer? my lord of Duresme smyled therat.

Your lordship dothe mystake all things: this letter (as your lordship may perceaue & al other y^t haue herd y^e same) was not wryttē by me, but by a frēd of myne certyfyēg me at my request, howe master Grene sped at my lord of Lōdōs hādes: & there is nothīg in y^t letter y^e o­ther I or he y^e wrote it, nede to feare, but that myght be wrytten, as my reporte.

Then tel me, who wrote it, if you dare.

No my lord, it is not my deuty to accuse my frende: specyally seyng you will take all thinges to y^e worst. Nether you shal neuer knowe of me, who wrote it. Your lordship may se in y^e ende of y^e letter, y^t my frēd did wryte vnto me vpō the occasion of my appeale, which I haue made to y^e hole parlyament house, [Page 99] about suche maters as I am wrong­fully troubled for.

I would see any so hardy, to put vp thyne appeale.

My lord I cānot tel, what God wil worke: I haue writtē it, spede as it may.

My lord, I haue vsed him w^t muche gentilnes, synce he cam to me, howe sayst thou? haue I not?

If to lye in the vilest prison in this towne (being a gentilman and an arch­diacon) and in a cole house by the space of v. or. vi. wekes already, without fyer or candel, be to be counted gentilnes at your handes, I must nedes say I haue foūde gētilnes. But there were neuer mē so cruelly hādled as we are at these dayes.

Lo, what a varlet is this? besy­des this (my lords) euen yesterday he procured his man to bring him a bladder of blacke powder, I cannot tel for what purpose I.

Your lordship nedeth not to mis­trust y^e mater, it is nothing but to make ynke withall, for lacke of ynke, as I had it before in the kinges benche, whē my keper toke away my inthorne.

And why shouldest thou goo a­bout any such thīg vnknowing vnto [Page] me being thy keper? for I am thy ke­per in this house, I tel the.

My lord, bicause you haue caused my pennar and ynkhorne to be taken from me, I wold yet fayne, y^t my frēdes myght vnderstand what I lacke, not that I intended to wryte any thing, that I would be afearde should come to your syght.

More then this my lordes, he caused a pigg to be rosted, and made a knyfe to be put betwene the skyn and y^e fleshe, A great heresie, for what purpose iudge you, how sayst thou? dydest thou not so?

I can not deny but ther was halfe a pig sent me, and vnder the same a knyfe lyeng in the sawse, but for no yll pourpose y^e I know: your lordship may iudge what you will. It was not to kyll my selfe, nor none other as you would haue men to beleue, for I was neuer yet without a knife, synce I came to prison therfore all these be but fal­se surmises, and not worth rehear­sall.

I haue here to lay to his char­ge (chefest of al) his boke of y^e report of y^e disputaciō had in y^e cōuocaciō hou­se, which is y^e rankest heresy y^t may be, [Page 100] against the blessed sacrament of the altare. How say you M. doctor weston? dyd he maintaine the same there stubbornly or no?

Yea my lorde, that he dyd, and would neuer be answered. And it is pytie, that the same worshipful cōgre­gation should be slaundered with such vntrue reportes.

You answered me in dede M.S. (beyng then prolocutor) goodly, with holde thy peace, and haue him to prison and put him out of the house. I haue red the boke, and I fynde the reporte of euery mans argument to be true in all pointes. And yf ther be any fault, it is bicause it setteth furth your doynges to fauourably, & nothyng lyke to that you dyd vse me, beyng an archdiacon, & not of the worst of the house.

Thou art no Archdeacon.

In dede M. S. ye haue among you vnarchediaconed me as nowe (I thanke God of it) and that without all order of lawe.

I pray you my lordes harken what he writeth of him selfe, I red it ouer this mornyng, and made a note of it. He sayeth that D. Weston called him frantike and mad man, and sayd [Page] he should go to Bethlehem.

In dede my lord, so it pleased M. weston to taunt at me, & saye his shameful pleasure: but yet I was no whyt the more so, for al his sayenges, then Christ was, when the Scribes and the Pha­risies sayd likewyse, he was mad, & that he was possessed of a deuell, most blas­phemously.

My lorde of London, I can tary no longer. I must nedes byd you farewel M. Philpot me thynketh you haue sayd wel, that you will abyde in the catholike fayth and in the catho­like churche: I praye you so do, & you shall do ryght well. And so he departed with M. weston and M. Hussey.

I haue purposed so to do (how so euer I spede) by Goddes grace.

I praye you my lorde of Chichester, and M. prolocutor, and M. doctor Morgane to cōmon with him, whiles I bring my lorde of Duresme goyng

M. Philpot, I was ac­quaynted with you at Rome, yf you be remembred, but you haue forgottē me, and talked somwhat with you of these maters, and I fynde you nowe the same man as you were then, I wyshe it were otherwyse. For goddes [Page 101] sake be conformable to men that be better learned then you, and stande not in your owne conceat.

Where as you cal me to remem­braunce of acquayntaūce had at Rome, in dede it was so, though it were but very straunge on your parte to me warde beyng dryuen to necessitie.

You knowe the worlde was daungerous at that tyme.

Nothing so daungerous as it is nowe, but let that passe: where as you saye you finde me the same man I was then, I prayse God for that you se not me lyke a rede wanderyng with euerye wynde. And where as you would haue me folowe better learned men then my selfe: in dede I do acknowlage that you with a great meany other ar farre better learned then I, whose bokes in respecte of learnyng I am not worthy to cary after you, but fayth and the wysedome of God consysteth not in learning only, & therfore S. Paul willeth that our faith be not groūded vpon the wysedome of man. Yf you can shewe by learnyng out of Goddes boke that I ought to be of an other fayth then I am, I will heare you & any other mā what so euer he be.

I maruel why you should dis­sent [Page] from the catholike churche synce it hath thus long vniuersally ben re­ceaued, excepte within this fyue or syx yeares here in Englande.

I do not dissent from the true ca­tholike churche, I do only dissent from the churche of Rome, which yf you can proue to be y^e catholike church of Christ, I will be of the same also with you.

Wil you beleue S. Cyprian, yf I can shewe you out of him, ꝙ Ecclesia Romana est talis ad quam perfidia accedere non potest. That the church of Rome is such a one, vnto the which mysbeleue can not approche.

I am sure you can not shewe any suche sayeng out of S. Cyprian?

What wil you lay theron.

I wil laye as muche as I am able to make.

Wyl you promise to recant yf he shewe his sayeng to be true?

My fayth shal not heng vpon no doctours sayeng, further then he shalbe hable to proue y^e same by goddes worde

I wil go fet the boke and shew it him by and by, and ther withall he went into the bishops studie & fet Cy­priā, and appointed out these wordes in one of his epistles, Ad Romanos autem [Page 102] quorum fides Apostolo praedicante laudata est nō potest accedere perfidia. Cipri. ad Corne. vel ad Ste [...] pha. But vnto the Ro­mayns whose fayth by the testimony of the Apostle is praysed: misbelefe cā haue no accesse.

These wordes of Cyprian do no­thing proue your pretensed assertion, which is, that to the churche of Rome there could come no mysbelefe.

Good Lorde, no dothe? what can be sayd more playnly?

He speaketh not of the churche of Rome absolutely.

By God, a childe that can but his grammar, will not deny that you do, the wordes be so playne.

Sweare not M. D. but way Cy­prianes wordes with me, and I shall make you to saye as I haue sayd.

I am no D. but I perceaue it is but labour lost to reason with you.

And with that the B. of Lon­don came in blowyng agayne, & sayd: what? is my lorde of Chichester gone awaye also? (for he euen a lytle before departed also without any other word sayeng, but he must nedes be gone) what is the mater you now stāde vpō?

M. Christoforson hath shewed M. Philpot a notable place for the au­thoritie [Page] of the churche of Rome, and he maketh nothing of it.

Where is y^e place, let me se: by my fayth here is a place alone. Come hither sir, what say you to this? Nay tary a lytle, I will helpe this place, w^t S. Paules owne testimony the first to the Romaynes, where he sayeth, that their fayth is preached through out the worlde, how can you be hable to answere to this?

Yes my lorde, it is sone answered if you well consider all the wordes of Ciprian: for he speaketh of suche as in his tyme were faythfull at Rome, that folowed the doctrine of S Paul, as he had taught them, and as it was no­tyfied throughout y^e world by an epist­le, which he had written in the commē ­dation of theyr fayth. With such as are praysed of S. Paull at Rome, for folo­ing the true fayth, mysbelefe can haue no place. And now if you can shew, that the fayth which the church of Rome holdeth, is that fayth, which the Apost­le praysed and alowed in the Romains in his tyme, then wil I saye with S. Cyprian, and with you, that infidelitie can haue no place there, but otherwyse it maketh not absolutely for y^e authoritie, [Page 103] of the church of R. as you do mistake it.

You vnderstande Cyprian wel in dede, I thynke you neuer red hym in your lyfe.

Yes M. S. that I haue. I can shewe you a boke noted w^t myne owne hande: though I haue nor red so muche as you, yet I haue red somwhat. It is shame for you to wrast and wryth y^e doc­tors as you do, to mayntaine a false re­ligiō, which be altogether against you, yf you take them aright, & yf your false packing of the doctors together hath geuen me and others occasion to loke vpon them, wherby we fynd you sham­full lyars and mysreporters of the aun­cyent doctors.

What, wil you be in hāde to a­low doctors now? they of your sect do not so, I maruel therfore you wil a­lowe them.

I do alowe them, in asmuche as they do agre w^t the scriptures: & so do al they which be of y^e truthe, how so euer you terme vs: & I praise God for y^e good vnderstanding I haue receaued by thē.

What? you vnderstande not y^e doctors: you may be ashamed to say it.

I thanke God, I vnderstāde thē better thē you. For you haue excoecationem [Page] cordis, the blindnes of hart, so y^t you vn­derstande not truely, what you read, no more thē the wal here, as the taking of Cipriā doth wel declare. And afore god you are but deceauers of y^e people, for al your brag you make of learning: neither haue ye scripture or auncient doctor on your syde beyng truely taken.

Why, al the doctors be on our syde, & against you altogether.

Yea, so you say, when ye be in your pulpits alone, and none to answer you. But yf you wil come to cast accōptes w^t me therof, I wil ventre w^t you a recan­raciō, y^t I (as lytle syght as I haue in y^e doctors) wil bring more authorities of aunciēt doctors on my syde, thē you shal be able for yours, & he y^t cā bring most, to him let the other syde yeld. Are you cō tent here with?

It is but foly to reasō w^t you: you wil beleue no mā but your selfe.

I wil beleue you or any other learned mā, yf you cā bring any thing wor­thy to be beleued. You cā not winne me w^t vayne wordes frō my faythe. Before God ther is no truth in you.

what no truth, no truth? ha, ha, he

Except the articles of the Trinitie you are corrupt in al other thīges, & are [Page 104] soūd in nothing.

What say you? do we not beleue wel on y^e sacrament?

It is the thing, which (among all other) you do most abuse.

Wherin I pray you tel vs?

I haue tolde you before this (M. S.) in y^e cōuocaciō house.

Yea mary in dede you told vs there very well, for there you fell downe vpon your knees & fell to we­ping: ha, ha, ha.

I dyd wepe in dede, & so dyd Christ vpon Ierusalem, & am not to be blamed therfore, yf you cō ­syder y^e cause of my weping.

What make you your selfe Christ? ha, ha, ha.

No syr, I make not my selfe Christ: but I am not ashamed to do as my M. & saueour did to bewaile & lament your infydelytie and idolatry, which I there forsawe through tyrannye you would bring agayne to this realme, as this daye doth declare.

That is your argument.

Wherin do we abuse the sacrament, tel vs?

As I may touche but one of the least abuses: you minister it not in both kyndes, as you ought to do, but kepe the one halfe frō the people cōtrary to Christes institution.

why, is ther not asmuch cōtained [Page] in one kind as in bothe and what nede is it then to minister it in bothe kindes?

I beleue not so, for yf it had, Christ would haue geuen but the one kinde only: for he instituted nothīg superfluous and therfore you cannot say that the hole effect of the sacrament is aswell in one find as in both, synce the scripture reacheth otherwise.

What if I can proue it by scripture, that we may minister it in one kinde? the Apostles dyd so, as it may appeare in the Actes of the Apostles in one or two places, where it is written that the Apostles contynued, in orationibus & fractione panis, in prayers and in breaking of bread, which is ment of the sacrament.

Why master doctor, do you not knowe, that S. Luke by making mentiō of the breaking of breade meaneth the hole vse of the sacrament according to Christes institution? by a figure which you haue learned in gramer metinomia, where part is mentioned, and the hole vnderstanded to be done as Christ com­maunded it.

Nay that is not so. For I can shewe out of Eusebius in Ecclesi. hi­storia, [Page 105] that ther was a man of God whom he named, that sent the sacra­ment in one kind by a boy to one that was sicke.

I haue red in dede, that they dyd vse to gyue that was left of the commu­nion bread, to children, to maryners, & to women, and so perauenture the boy might cary a piece of that was left to y^e sycke man.

Nay as a sacrament it was purposely sent vnto him.

Yf it were so, yet can you not pre­cysely say, that he had not the cup mini­stred vnto him also by some other sent vnto him: but what though one mā did vse it thus, dothe it folow, that al men may do the like? S. Ciprian noteth many abuses of the sacrament in his time, which rose vpō singular mens exāples: as vsing of water in stede of wine, ther­fore he sayeth Non respiciendum quid aliquis ante nos fecerit sed quid Christus qui omnium est primus antea fecit & mandauit. That is, we must not loke what any man hath done before vs, but what Christ first of all men dyd and commaunded.

Hath not the church taught vs so to vse the sacrament? and howe do we know that Christ is, Homousios, [Page] that is of one substaunce with the fa­ther, but by the determinacion of the church? how cā you proue that other­wise by expresse wordes of scripture, and where fynde you Homoufios in all scripture?

Yes that I do, in the first to the Hebreus, where it is written, y^e Christ is the expresse ymage of Goddes owne substance, eiusdem substantiae.

Nay that is not so, it is there no more, but expressa imago substantiae the expresse ymage of Goddes substance, and ymage is accidence.

It is in the text, of his substance, substantiae illius, or of his owne substance, as it may be right wel interpreted. Be­sydes this y^t which Christ spake of him selfe, in S. Iohn̄ manifesteth the same saieng, I & the father be one thing, Ego & pater vnum sumus. And where as you say Imago here is accidence, the aun­cient fathers vse this for a strong ar­gument to proue Christ to be God, bi­cause he is the very ymage of God,

Yea do? is this a good argument, bicause we are the ymage of God, ergo we are God?

We are not called the expresse yma­ge of God, as it is written of Christ, & [Page 106] we are but the ymage of God by parti­cipation, and as it written in the Genesis, we are made to the lykenes and si­militude of God. But you ought to knowe (M. Christoforson) that there is no accedēce in God, and therfore Christe can not be the ymage of God, but he must be of the same substāce with God.

Tushe.

Howe say you to the presence of the sacrament? will you stande to the iudgement here of your boke or no, or will you recant.

I know you go but about to catche me in words, yf you can proue y^e boke to be of my setting furth: lay it to my charge, when I come in iudgemēt.

Speake, be you of the same mynd as this boke is of or no? sure I am you were once, oneles you becom an other maner of man thā you were.

What I was you knowe, what I am, I wil not tell you nowe: but this I wil say to you by the way, that yf you cā proue your sacrament of the masse (as you nowe vse it) to be a sacrament, I will than graunt you a presēce: but first you must proue the same a sacrament, and afterward intreat of the presence.

Hoo, doo you doubt that it [Page] is a sacrament?

I am past doubting, for I beleue you can neuer be hable to proue it a sa­crament.

Yea do? good Lord, doth not S Austine call it the sacrament of the altare, howe say you to that.

That maketh nothing for the pro­bacion of your sacramēt,Note. for so he with other auncient writers do cal the holy communion or the supper of the Lord, in respect that it is the sacrament of the sacrifice, which Christ offred vpon the altar of the crosse, the which sacrifice al y^e altars & sacrifices done vpon y^e altars in the old lawe did prifigure & shadow, the which partayneth nothing to your sacrament, hanging vpon your altars made of lyme and stone.

No doth? I pray you, what signifieth altar?

Not as you flalslye take it materi­ally, but for the sacrifice of the altar of the crosse.

Where fynd you it euer so taken.

Yes that I do, in S. Paule to the hebrues. 13 wher he sayth Habemus altare de quo nō est fas edere his qui tabernaculo deser­uiūt, we haue an altare, of the which it is not lawfull for thē to eat, that serue [Page 107] the tabernacle. Is not altare, ther takē for the sacrifice of the altare, and not for the altare of lyme and stone?

Wel, god blysse me out of your company. You are suche an obstinat heretike, as I haue not heard the lyke.

I pray God kepe me from suche blynd doctors, which when they ar not hable to proue what they say, than they fall to blaspheming (as you now do) for lacke of better profe.

In the meane while the bishop of London was talking with some other by, and at lenght came in to supply his part and sayd.

I pray you masters herken what I shall sayl to this man: come hy­ther master Grene. And nowe syr (poynting to me) you can not thinke it sufficyent to be nawght your selfe, but must go about to procure this yong gentilman by your letters to do the like.

My lord he can not saye that I euer hitherto wrote vnto him, concer­ning any such matter, as he here can testifie.

No, you neuer wrote vnto me.

Why, is not this your les­ser which you dyd write concerning him?

I haue shewed your lordship my mynd concerning that letter already: It was not written to master Grene, ne­ther he was priui of the writing therof.

Howe say you then, yf a man be in an errour and you knowe ther­of, what are you bound to do in suche case?

I am bound to doo the best I cā to bring him out of it.

If master Grene here, be in the like, are you not boūd to refor­me him therof yf you can?

Yes that I am, and will do the vttermost to my power therin.

The bishop remembring him selfe thinking that he should but shrewdly af­ter his expectacion be holpen at my mouthe but rather confirmed in that which he called an errour, cessed to pro­cede any further in his demaund, and called master Grene a syde, and before his regester red him a letter, I knew not the contentes therof: and therwith all gaue master Grene the boke of my disputacion in the conuocacion house. And afterward went a syde cōmoning [Page 108] with master Christoforsō, leauing doc­tor Morgan, master Harpesfild, and master Cosins, to reason with me, in the hearing of master Grene.

Master Philpot I would aske you, how old your religion is.

It is older than yours, by a thousand yeares and mo.

I pray you, where was it fyf­ty or fourthy years ago?

It was in Germany apparēt by y^e testimonies of Husse, Ierome of Pra­ge, & Wyciene, whō your generaciō a hundred years ago and more did burne for preaching the truthe vnto you: and before their tyme and synce hath ben, although vnder persecution it hath ben put to sylence.

That is a maruelus strāge relygion, which no man can tell cer­taynly wher to fynd it.

It ought to be no maruell vnto you, to see goddes truth through violēs oppressed: for so it hathe ben from the begynnyng, from tyme to tyme, as yt appeareth by storyes, and as Christes trewe relygion is now to be founde here in Englande, although hypo­crysy hath by vyolens the vpper hande, And in y^e Apocalyps you may se, it was [Page] prophesied, that the true church should be dryuen into corners, and into wyl­dernes, and suffer great persecution.

A, are you seen in the Apoca­lyps? ther is many strange thinges.

If I tell you the trueth, which you are not hable to refel, beleue it, and daly not out so earnest maters. Me thinke you are liker a scoffer in a play,Morgan ryghtly painted out. than a reasonable doctor to instruct a man: you are bare arced and daunse naked in a net, and yet you se not your owne nakednes.

What (I pray you) be not so quicke with me. Let vs talke a lytle more coldly together.

I will talke with you as myld­ly as you can desyre, if you wil speake learnedly and charytably. But yf you goo about with tauntes to delude the truthe, I will not hyde it from you.

Why will you not sub­mit your iudgement to the learned men of this realme?

Bycause I see they can bring no good ground, wher vpon I may with a good conscience settle my faythe more suerly, then on that which I am now grounded by Goddes manifest [Page 109] word.

No do? that is maruel that so many learned men should be deceaued.

It is no maruel by S. Paule: for he sayth, that not many wyse, neither many learned after the world, be called to the knowlage of the gospel.

Haue you thē alone the spirit of God and not we?

I say not, that I alone haue the spirit of God, but as many as abide in the true faith of Christ, haue the spirit of God aswell as I.

Howe know you, that you haue the spirit of God?

By the fayth of Christ which is in me.

A, by faith, do you so? I wene it be the spirit of the butterye, which your felowes haue had, that haue ben burned before you, who were dronke the night before they went to theyr death, & I wene went dronken vnto it.

It appeareth by your communica­cion, that you are better acquainted w^t the spirit of the buttrye, then with the spirite of God, wherfore I must nowe, tell the (thou paynted wall and hypocryte) in the name of the lyuing Lord, whose [Page] truth I haue told the, that God shal rayne fyer and brymstone vpon suche scorners of his word and blasphemers of his people, as thou art.

What, you rage now.

Thy folishe blasphemies haue compelled the spirite of God which is in me, to speake that which I haue said vnto the, thou enemy of all righteousnes.

Why do you iudge me so?

By thyne owne wicked wordes I iudge of the, thou blind and blasphe­mous doctor: for as it is written, by thy wordes y^u shalt be iustified, and by thy wordes thou shalt be condempned. I haue spoken on Goddes behalfe, & now haue I done with the.

Why then I tell the Philpot, that thou arte an heretyke, and shalt be burnt for thy heresy, & afterwards goo to hell fyer.

I tell the, thou hypocryte, that I passe not this, for thy fyer and fa­gots, nether (I thanke God my lord) stand in feare of the same: my faythe in christ shall ouercom them. But the hell fyer which thou thretnest to me, is thy porcyon, and is prepared for thee, (one­les thou spedely repent) and for such hy­pocrites [Page 110] as thou art.

What you speake vpō wyne: thou hast typled well to day by lyke­lyhode.

So fayd the cursed generation to the Apostles being replenished with the holy gost, and speaking the wonde­rous workes of God: they sayd they were dronke whē they had nothing els to say as thou doest nowe.

Why I am hable to answere the ywis, I trowe.

So it semeth, with blasphemies & lyes

Nay euen with learning, say what thou canst.

That appeared well at my disputacion in the conuocation hou­se, where thou tokest vpon thee, to an­swere those few argumentes I was permitted to make, and yet wast not hable to answere one, but in thyne an­sweres dyddest fomble and wonder, that the hole house was ashamed of thee. And thy fynall conclusion of all thyne answers was, that thou couldest answere me, yf I were in the scoles at Oxforde.

What dyd I so? thou belyest me.

I do not belye the, the boke of the report of the disputation beareth record therto, and all that were present can tel (yf they list) thou saydest so. And I tel thee playne, thou arte not hable to an­swer y^e spirite of truthe, which speaketh in me, for the defence of Christes true religion. I am hable (by the myght ther of) to dryue thee rounde about this ga­larie before me. And yf it would please the Quenes maiestie and her counsell to heare thee & me, I would make thee for shame shrynke behynde the dore.

Yea, would you so lo?

Thou hast the spirite of illusion & sophisirie, which is not hable to coun­teruayle the spirite of truthe. Thou arte but an Asse in the true vnderstanding of thinges pertaynyng vnto God: I cal the asse, not in respecte of malice, but in that thou kickest agaynst the truthe, & art voyde of all godly vnderstandyng, not hable to answere to that thou bra­gest in.

Why, haue I not answered thee in al thinges thou hast sayd vnto me? I take them to recorde.

Aske of my felow whether I be a [Page 111] these.

Hearke, he maketh vs al theues.

You knowe the phrase of that Prouerbe, that like wil holde with lyke. And I am sure, you wil not iudge with me against him, speake I neuer so true. And in this sense I speake it, the stron­gest answer that he hath made agaynst me, is, that you wil burne me.

Why, we do not burne you, it is the temporal mē that burne you and not we.

Thus you would (as Pylate dyd) washe your hādes of al your wicked do­ynges. But I praye you inuocate seculare brachium. Cal vpon the secular power to be executioners of your vnryghteous iudgementes. And haue you not a rytle in your lawe, De haeruicis comburendis, for to burne heretikes?

I haue heard you both a good while reason together, and I neuer heard so stoute an heretike as you are, maister Philpot.

Neither I in al my lyfe.

You are not hable to proue me an heretike, by one iot of Goddes worde.

You haue the spirite of arrogā cye, I wil reason with you no more. And so he was departing, and M. Co­sins [Page] also. And with that the bishop and Christoforson came in agayne, & sayd.

M. D. howe dothe this man and your agree?

My lorde, I do aske him where his churche was fyfty yeares ago.

Are you not halfe agreed, as one man sayd ones to tway partes, of whom the one was equally disagre­yng from the other.

My lorde, it is but foly to rea­son with him any further: your lorde­ship shal but lose tyme, for he is incurable.

Wel then, let his keper haue hym away. And with that D. Chadsey led me a waye by the which we coulde not passe, and therfore came backe a­gayne through the bishops chamber, where al these doctours were clustred together. And as I was passing, the byshop toke me by the gowne, & sayd, Wot you what M. Christoforson tel­leth me? I pray you (M. Christoforsō) rehearse the sentence in latin. And so he dyd. The cōtentes wherof was, that an heretike would not be wonne.

S. Paul sayeth. Haereticum homis nem post vnam at (que) alterā admonitionē deuita. Flee an heretike after once or twyse [Page 112] warning.

Yea my lorde, it is best you so do, and trouble your lordship no more with him.

You must first proue me iustlye to be an heretike, before you vse the iudge­mēt of S. Paul against me: for he spea­keth of suche as holde opinion agaynst the manifest worde, the which you can not proue by me. And bycause you want in your profe, and be hable to proue nothyng against me, therfore you go a­bout falsly to suppose me to be an here­tike, for the safegarde of your owne coū ­terfait honesties. But afore God you ar the heretikes, which so stoutly and stub­burnly mayntayne so many thynges di­rectly against goddes word, as God in his tyme shall reuele. As I went out of his chamber, the B. called me asyde, and sayd.

I praye the in good sadnes, what meanest thou by wryting in the beginning of thy Bible: Spiritus est vica­rius Christi in terris, the spirit is the vicar of Christ on the earth. I wis you haue some special meanyng therof.

My lorde, I haue none other meanyng but as I haue tolde you already, that Christ sence his Ascēfion worketh [Page] worketh al thinges in vs by his spirite, & by his spirite doth dwel in vs. I pray you my lord, let me haue my Byble w^t o­ther lawfull bokes & writinges, which you haue of myne: wherof many of thē be none of myne, but lent to me by my frendes.

Your Bible you shal not haue, but I wil perhaps let you haue an o­ther: & after I haue perused the rest, you shal haue suche as I thynke good.

I praye your lordship thē, that you would let me haue candel lyght.

To what purpose, I pray you?

The nyghtes be long, & I would fayne occupie my selfe about somwhat, and not spende my tyme ydlely.

You may then praye.

I can not wel saye many prayers without lyght.

Can you not saye your pater noster without a cādle? I tel you syr, you shal haue some meate and drynke of me, but candel you get none.

I had leuer haue a candel then your meate or drynke: but seyng I shall not haue my request, the lorde shalbe my lyght.

Haue hym downe.

I wyl bryng him to his keper [Page 113] my lord. Master Philpot I wonder, that all these learned men whom you haue talked withall this day, can no­thing perswade you.

Why M. doctor, would you haue me to be persuaded with nothing? Or would you haue me build my fayth v­pon sand? what do you al bring, wher­by I ought by a sufficient autoritie to be persuaded vnto you.

I am sory you will so wilfully cast away your selfe, wher as you might lyue worshipfully: do you not thinke other haue sowles to saue as well as you haue?

Euery man shall receaue according to his owne doinges, sure I am you are disceaued, and mayntayne a false religion: and as for my casting away, I would my burning day were to mo­rowe, for this delay is euery day to dye and yet not to be dead.

you are not like to dye yet, I can tell you.

I am the more sory therfore. But the wil of God be done on me, to his glory AMEN.

IN the morning I was fet downe to the wardrobe adioynyng to the chapel, and within a whyle after, came thre of the B. chaplaynes vnto me, sayeng.

Maister Philpot, my lorde hath sent vs vnto you, to desyre you to come to masse, certifyeng you, that there is a doctor of diuinitie, a chap­layne of my lordes, a notable learned man, called doctor Chadsey, goyng to masse. Therfore we also praye you (good M, Philpot) be content to come: it is euen hard hereby.

I wonder my lorde would trouble you, in sendyng you about this mater, seyng he knoweth I am a man (by your lawe) that can not heare masse, be cause I stande excommunicate.

Your excōmunication is vpō but a contumacie, and my lorde will dispense with you, yf you wil come.

My lorde can not, for he is not myne ordinarie, and I wil not seke any [Page 114] suche thing at his hādes. With this answere they went their waye. And after masse the B. called me before him into his Chapel, and there in the presence of his register (after he had said his mind, bicause I woulde not come to masse) recyted the articles, which he often ty­mes before had done in that behalfe, w^t the depositiōs of the wytnesses, of whō some were not examined.

Sir, what can you now saye, why I should not procede to geue sen­tence against thee, as an heretyke?

Why my lorde, wil you procede to geue sentence against me, before your witnesses be examined: that is playne against your owne lawe, as al your do­ynges haue ben hitherto.

See what a foole thou arte in the lawe. I nede not recite the deposi­tions of the witnes, but yf I lyst. For I knowe them wel ynough already.

It appeareth in dede, you may do what you lyst.

Tel me I saye, whether thou wilt answere or no: and whether yf thou were absolued of thyne excōmu­nicatiō, thou wouldest come to masse or no?

I haue answered as muche as I [Page] entende to do, vntil I be called to law­full iudgement: and as concernyng my conscience, I wil not make you God, to sit there as yet: it is Goddes parte only to be searcher of the heart.

Loke howe foolishly he spea­keth. Art thou God? and yet doest thou not syt in thyne owne conscience?

I sit not in myne owne conscience: but I knowe it, and God there onlye ought to sit and no man else.

Thou art a naughtye felowe and hast done muche hurte, and hast seduced other poore felowes here in prisō w^t the, by thy cōforting of them in their errours, and hast made them reioyse and syng with thee.

Yea my lorde, we shal syng, when you and suche as you are, shall crye, vae, vae, wo, wo, except you repent.

What an arrogaunt fole this is? I wil handle the lyke an heretyke, and that shortly.

I feare nothyng (I thanke God) you can do vnto me. But God shal de­stroye suche as thou arte, and that shortly, as I trust.

Haue him away, this is a kna­ue in dede.

And I was had into y^e wardrobe [Page 115] agayne, by my keper: and within an howre after was sent for to come before him, and the bishops of Worcester, and Bangor.

Syr, I haue talked with you many tymes, and haue caused you to be talked with all of many learned men, yea and honourable bothe tem­porall and spirituall, and yet it auay­leth nothing with you. I am blamed, that I haue brought thee afore so ma­ny, for they say thou gloryest to haue many to talke withal. Well, nowe it lieth the vpon to loke to thy selfe, for thy tyme drawith nere to an ende, yf thou be not become conformable. And at this present we are sent from the synod, to offer you this grace, that yf you wil come to the vnitie of the churche of Rome with vs, and acknowled­ged the reall presence of Christ in the sacrament of the altare, with vs: all that is past shalbe forgeuen, and you receyued to fauour.

M. Philpot, we are sent (as you here haue heard by my lord of Londō) frō the synod, to offer you mercye, yf you wil receiue it. And of good will I beare you, I wishe you to take it whi­les it is offred: and be not a singular [Page] man agaynst a hole multytude of learned men, which nowe in fasting and prayer are gathered together, to ymagyne thinges to do you good. There haue many learned men talked with you: why should you thinke your selfe better learned thā them all? be not of suche arrogauncy, but haue humilitie and remembre ther is no saluacion, but in the churche.

Me thinketh my lord hath sayde wonderfully well vnto you, that you should not thinke your selfe so well learned, but other men are as wel learned as you, neither of so good wyt, but other be as wise as you: ney­ther of so good memory, but other haue as good memory as you. Therfore mystrust your owne iudgement, and come home to vs agayne. I­wis I neuer lyked your religion, bi­cause it was set further by violen­ce and tyranny,The same token pro­ueth your religion false.and that is no to­ken of true religion. And I was that same maner of man then that I am nowe, and a great meany mo. Mary, for fear we held our peace, and bare w^t y^e tyme: wherfore M. Philpot, I would you did wel, for I loue you [Page 116] and therfore be cōtent to come home with vs agayne, into the catholyke churche of Rome.

Where my lorde as I maye be­gynne first to answere you, that you say that religion is to be misliked, which is set forth by tyrāny. I pray God you giue not men occasion to thinke the same by yours at this daye, which hath none o­ther argument to stande by, but violēce. Yf you can shewe me by any good suffi­cient grounde, wherby to grounde my conscience, that the churche of Rome is the true catholike churche, whervnto you cal me, I wil gladly be of the same; otherwise I can not sone chaūge the re­ligiō I haue learned these many yeres.

Where was your religion (I pray you) a hundred yeres ago, that any man knewe of it.

It was in Germany & in diuers other places apparent.

Iesus, wil you be stil so singu­lar a man, what is Germany to the hole worlde?

My lordes, I praye you geue me leaue to tell you, that I sent for him to hear masse this mor­ning, and wote you what excuse be made vnto me? for soth that he was accursed [Page] cursed, allegyng his owne shame? He playeth as that varlet Latimer dyd at Cambrige, Harke how fyne my lorde is in dog­ges elo­quence. If he had come to mass he had ben cursed in dede. when the vice Chaunceler sent for him (who entended to haue excommunicated him for some of his he resies) and the chaunceler was com­myng to his chamber, which as sone as he herde that the chaunceler was come, made answer that he was sicke of the plague, and so deluded the chaū celer: euen so this man sayeth, he is accursed, because he will not come to masse.

My Lorde (I am sure) here dothe behaue him selfe lyke a father vnto you, therfore be admonished by hym, and by vs that come now frendly vnto you, and folowe your fathers before you.

It is forbidden vs of God, by the prophet Ezechiel to folow our fathers▪ neither to walke in their cōmaūdemēts.

It is written also in an other place, interroga patres, aske of your fa­thers.

We ought to aske in dede our fa­thers that haue more experiēce & know­lage then we of Goddes will, but no­more to allowe them, then we perceaue they agree with the scriptures.

You wilbe a contentious mā, I see well: and S. Paule sayeth that we neither the church of God haue no suche custome.

I am not contentious, but for y^e veritie of my fayth in y^e which I ought to contende with al suche as do impug­ne the same without any iust obiection.

Let vs ryse my lorde, for I see we shal do no good.

Nay I praye you tary, & hear the articles I laye to his charge: and after he had recited them, they arose; and afterwarde standing they reaso­ned with me a whyle.

M. Philpot, I am very sorye, that you wilbe so singular. I neuer talked with non yet of my diocese, but after once cōmunicatiō had with me, they haue ben cōtēted to reuoke their errours, & to teache the people, howe they were deceaued, and so do muche good, as you may yf you list. For as I vnderstande, you were archdiacon of winchester (which is the eye of the B.) & you may do much good in y^e coūtrey, yf you would forsake your errours, & come to the catholyke churche.

Wher withal you so sone persua­ded them to your will, I see not. Er­roure [Page] that I knowe I holde none, and of the catholike churche I am sure I am.

The Catholike churche doth acknowlege a real presence of Christ in the sacrament; and so wil not you.

That is not so. For I acknowlage a very essensial presence in the sacramēt duely vsed.

What a real presence?

Yea a reall presens by the spirite of God, in the ryght administracion.

That is wel sayd, and do you agree, with the catholike churche also?

I do agre with the true catholike churche.

My lorde of London, this mā speaketh reasonably nowe.

You do agree in generalties. But when it shal come to the particu­larities, you wil farre disagree.

Wel, kepe your selfe here, and you shal haue other learned bishops to common farther with you, as my lord of Duresme, & my lorde of Chichester (whome I heare say) you do lyke wel.

I do lyke them as I do all other that speaketh the truthe. I haue once already spoken with them, & they foūde no fault with me.

Praye in the meane season for grace to God.

Prayer is the comfortablest exer­cise I feale in my trouble, and my con­science is quiet, and I haue the peace of mynde, which can not be the frutes of heresye.

We wil byd you fare wel, for this tyme.

After dyner, they called for me a­gayne, and demaunded of me, whether I ment, as I spake before dyner, & not go from it: to whom I answered, that I would not go from that I had sayd.

You sayd at my departing from you before dyner, y^t yf we dyd burne you, we should burne a catholike mā. Wil you be a catholike mā, & stande to the catholike churche?

I wil stande to the true catholike churche.

Wil you stande to the catholike churche of Rome?

Yf you can proue the same to be y^e catholike churche, I wil be one therof.

Dyd not Christ saye vnto Pe­ter and to all his successours of Ro­me, Pasce oues meas, pasce agnos meos, Fede my shepe, fede my lambes, which doth signifye, that he gaue hym more au­thoritie [Page] than the rest.

That sayeng pertayneth nothing to the autoritie of Petre aboue others, but declareth what Christ requireth of his beloued Apostles, that they should with all diligence preache to the flocke of Christ, the way of saluacion, and that doth the iterracion of feding spoken to Petre only signifie. But the bishop of Rome lytle regardeth this spiritual fe­ding, and therfore he hath ymagined an easyer waye, to make him selfe lord of the hole world, yea and of Goddes word to, and doth not fede Christes flocke, as Petre dyd,

Howe can you tell that?

Yes I haue ben there, & I could not learne of al his contrey men, that euer he preacheth.

Though he preached not one way, he preacheth an other, by procu­ring good order for the churche to be kepte in.

I am sure that it wilbe his dam­nacion before God, that he leaueth that he is commaunded of Christe, and set­teth furthe his owne decrees to deface the gospel.

It is the euill lyuing that you haue sene at Rome, that causeth you to [Page 119] haue this yl iudgement of the church of Rome. I can not tary nowe w^t you to reasō further of this mater. Howe say you to the reall presence of the sa­crament? wil you stand to that?

I do acknowledge (as I haue sayd) a reall presence of the sacrament in the dewe administracion therof, to the worthy receauers by the spirite of God.

You adde now a great meany mo wordes thē you did before, yet you say more of the sacrament then a great meany will do. Thus they departed.

MAister Philpot here is maister Archdeacon of Oxforde come to you, Chadsey. to gyue you good councel, I pray you heare him.

I will refuse to heare none that will councell me any good, and yf any can bring any mater better thā I haue, I wil sticke thervnto.

I would wyshe you (master [Page] Philpot) to agre with the catholike church, and not to stād in your owne cōceyt, you see a great me any of lear­ned men agaynst you.

I am (master doctor) of the vnfay­ned catholike churche, and will lyue and dye therin: and yf you can proue your churche to be the true catholike church, I wilbe one of the same.

I came not to dispute with you but to exhorte you, here be better learned than I, that cā enforme you bet­ter than I

Thy hart knoweth that thy mouth lyeth Chad. What profe would you haue? I wil proue vnto you our church to haue his being & foūdatiō by y^e scriptures, by y^e Apostles & by the primatiue church cōfirmed w^t y^e bloud of martirs and the testymony of al confessours.

Gyue me your hand, master doctor: proue that, and haue with you.

If I had my bokes here, I could sone proue it. I wil go fette som. & with that he went, & fette his boke of annotaciōs, saieng, I cannot bring my bokes wel. Therfore I haue brought my boke of annotaciōs. And turned ther to a common place of the sacramēt, asking me whether y^e catholike church did not allowe y^e presēs of [Page 120] Christes body in the sacramēt or no? I heare say you do confesse a real pre­sence, hangyng is to good for thee. but I wilbe hanged if you will abide by it, you will deny it by and by.

That I haue sayd I cannot deny, neither intend not what soeuer you say.

If there be a real presence in the sacrament, than euill mē receyue Christ: which thīg you wil not graūt, I am suer.

I deny the argument. For I do not graunt in the sacrament, by transubstā ­ciacion any real presence, as you falsely ymagyne. But in the dewe administra­tion to the worthy receyuers.

I wil proue y^t y^e euel & wicked men eat the body of Christ, as wel as the good men, by S. Austine here.

And in the beginning of his text, S Austine semed to approue his asser­tiō, but I bad him reade out to the en­de, and there S Austine declareth that it was quodam modo, after a certayn ma­ner, the euill men receyued the body of Christ, which is sacramētally only, in y^e vtter signes & not really, or in dede, as the good doth. And thus al y^e doctors, that you seme to bring in for your pur­pose, be quite against you, yf you did vp rightly way them.

By God you ar a subtil felow, se [Page] howe he would wrythe S. Austines wordes.

See who of vs wryeth S. Au­stine more, you or I which take his meanīg by his owne expresse wordes. And seing you charge me of subtiltie, what subtilty is this of you to say that you wil proue your mater of the churche, euen from the begynning, promysyng to shew your bokes therin, and when it commeth to the shewing, you are ha­ble to shewe none, and for want of profe slip into a bye mater, and yet faynt in the profe therof. Afore God you ar bare arst, in all your religion.

You shalbe constrayned to come to vs at lenght, whether you wyl or no.

Holde that argument fast, for that is y^e best you haue, for you haue nothing but violence.

The thursdaye after I was called in the mornyng before the Archbishop of Yorke, the B. of Chichster, the B. of Bathe, and the B. of London, the B. of Chiche­ster beyng fyrst come, began to talke wyth me.

[Page 121] I Am come of good will, to talke with you, to instructe you what I can, to come to the catholyke churche, and to will you to mi­strust your owne iudgement, and to learne fyrste to haue humilite, and by the same to learne of others, that be better learned thē you, as they did learne of suche as were theyr bet­ters before them.

We must be all taught of God, and I will with all humilitie learne of them that will enforme me by Goddes word, what I haue to do. I confesse I haue, but lytle learning in respecte of you, that both for your yeares, & great exercyse, do excell therin: but fayth cō ­systeth not only in learning, but in sim­plicytie of beleuing that which Godes word teacheth, therfore I wil be glad to heare bothe of your lordship, or of any other (that god hath reuealed vnto by his worde) y^e true doctrine therof, & thanke you, that it dothe please you to take paynes herein.

You take y^e first alleged amisse, as though al mē should be taught by inspiration, & not by learnyng. Howe do we beleue the Gospel, but by the authoritie of the church, and because the [Page] same hath allowed it?

S. Paule sayeth, he learned not the Gospel by men, neyther of men, but by the reuelatiō of Iesus Christ: which is a sufficiēt profe, y^t y^e gospel taketh not his authoritie of mā, but of God only.

S. Paule speaketh but of his owne knowlage how he came therto.

Naye he speaketh of the Gospel generally, which cōmeth not from mā, but from God, & that the churche must only teache that which cōmeth frō God and not mans preceptes.

Doth not S. Austine saye, I would not beleue the Gospel, yf y^e au­thoritie of the churche dyd not moue me therto?

I graūt that the authoritie of the churche dothe moue the vnbeleuers to beleue, but yet the churche geueth not the worde his authoritie: for the worde hath his authoritie only frō God, & not of man. Men be but disposers therof, for fyrst y^e worde hath his beyng before the churche, and the worde is the foun­dacion of the churche, and first is the foundacion sure, before the buyldyng theron can be stedfast.

I perceaue you mistake me, I speake of the knowlage of the Gos­pell, [Page 122] and not of the authoritie: for by the churche we haue all knowlage of the Gospel.

I confesse that: For fayth cometh by hearyng, and hearyng by the worde: and I acknowlage, that God appoin­teth an ordinary meanes for mē to come vnto knowlage nowe, and not miracu­lously, as he hath done in tymes paste, yet we that be taught by men must take hede, that we learne nothing else but y^t which was taught in y^e primatiue chur­che by reuelation. Here came in the B. of Yorke, and the bishop of Bathe, and after they had saluted one an other, and commoned a whyle together, the Arch­bishop of Yorke called me vnto them, sayeng.

Syr, we hearyng that you are out of the waye, are come of charitie to enforme you, and to bring you into the true fayth, & to the catholike chur­che agayne, willyng you first to haue humilitie, and to be humble, and wil­lyng to learne of your betters, for else we can do no good wyth you: and God sayeth by the Prophete. On whome shall I reste but on the hum­ble and meke, and suche as tremble at my worde. Nowe yf you will so be, [Page] we wil be glad to trauail with you.

I know that humilitie is the dore wherby we enter vnto Christ, & I thāke his goodnes, I haue entred in at the same vnto him, & wil with al humilitie heare whatsoeuer truth you shal speake vnto me.

What be the maters you stāde on, and require to be satisfyed?

My lorde and it please your gra­ce, we were entred in a good mater be­fore you came, of the churche, and howe we should knowe the truth, but by the churche.

In dede that is the heade, we nede to beginne at: for the churche be­yng truly knowē, we shal soner agre in the particular thynges.

Yf your lordships, can proue the churche of Rome to be the true catho­like churche, it shall do muche to per­suade me towarde that you would haue me inclyne vnto.

Why, let vs go to the definiti­on of the churche, what is it?

It is a cōgregation of people, dis­persed through the worlde, agreyng to­gether in the worde of God, vsyng the sacramentes and al other thinges ac­cordyng to the same.

This diffinitiō is of many wor­des, to no purpose.

I do not precisely diffyne the chur­che, but declare vnto you what I thinke the church is.

Is the church visible or inui­sible?

It is bothe visible and inuisible: the inuisible church is of all the electes of God only, the visible consisteth of bothe good and bad, vsing all thinges in fayth according to Goddes word.

The churche is an vniuersal cō ­gregaciō of faythful people in Christ through the worlde, which this word catholik doth wel expresse: for what is catholike elles, doth it not signifie vniuersal?

The churche is diffined by S. Au­sten to be called catholike in this wyse. Ecclesia ideo dicitur catholica, quia vniuersaliter perfecta est & in nullo claudicat. The church is called therfore catholike, bicause it is throughly perfyt, and halteth in no­thing.

Nay it is called catholyke, bycause it is vniuersally receyued of all Chrystian nations, for the most parte.

The churche was catholike [Page] in the Apostles tyme, yet was it not vniuersally receyued of the world: but bi­cause their doctrine which they had re­ceyued of Christ, was perfect and ap­pointed to be preached and receaued of the hole world, therfore it is cal­ed the catholike fayth, & all persons receyuing the same, be to be counted the ca­tholike churche. And S. Austine in an other place writeth ad Neophitos, y^t y^e catholike church is y^e, which beleueth a right.

Yf you will learne, I wil shewe you by S. Austine, writing against the Donatistes, that he proueth the catholike churche by two principall pointes, which is vniuersalitie, and successiō of bishops in one apostolycal sea from tyme to tyme. Nowe thus wil I make myn argumēt. The chur­che of Rome is vniuersal, & hath had his succession of bishops from tyme tyme, Ergo it is y^e catholike churche. howe answere you to this argumēt?

I deny the antecedent. That the catholike churche is only knowen by vni­uersalitie, & by succession of bishops.

I wil proue it. And with y^t he brought furthe a boke, which he had noted out of the doctors, and turned to his commō places therin of y^e churche & recyted one or two out of S Au­sten, [Page 122] & specially out of his epistle writ­ten against y^e Donatistes. Here S. Austen manifestly proueth, y^t y^e Donati­stes were not the catholike churche, bicause they had no succession of bishops in their opinion, neyther vniuersali­tie, and the same force hath S. Au­stins argument against you.

My lord I haue wayed the force of that argument before nowe. And I perceiue it maketh nothing against me, nether it commeth to your purpose, for I will stand to the tryall of S. Austen, for the apꝓbacion of the catholike chur­che, where of I am. For S. Austine speaketh of vniuersalitie, ioyned with veri­tie, & of faythful successours of Peter, before corruption came into the churche, and so yf you can deduce your argumēt for the sea of Rome now as S. Austen might do in his tyme, I would say it might be of some force, otherwise not.

S. Austine proueth the catho­like churche, principally by succession of bishops, and therfore you vnderstā de not S. Austine: for what I pray you was the opinion of the Donatis­tes against whom he wrote, can you tell? what contrey were they of?

They were a certen secte of men affirming [Page] among other heresies, that the dignitie of the sacramentes, depended vpon the worthynes of the minister: so that if the minister were good, the sacrament which he ministred were auayli­able, or els not.

That was their errour and they had none other, but that. And he red an other authoritie of S. Austins out of a boke, which he brought euen to the same purpose, that the other was.

I chalenge S. Austine to be with me throughly in this poynte, and wil stand to his iudgement, takyng one place with an other.

If you wil not haue the church to be certen, I praye you by whom wil you be iudged in maters of con­trouersy.

I do not deny the churche to be certen: but I deny that it is necessarily tyed to any place, longer then it abideth in the word, and for all maner of controuersies the word ought to be iudge.

But what yf I take it one way, and you an other, howe than?

S. Austen sheweth a remedy for that, & willeth quod vnius locus per plu­ra [Page 123] intelligi debeat, that one place of the scripture ought to be vnderstanded by the mo.

How answere you to this argument: Rome hath a knowen successiō of bishops, which your churche hath not: Ergo that is the catholik churche and yours is not, bicause ther is no suche successiō can be proued for your churche.

I deny (my lord) that succession of bishops is an infallible point to knowe the churche by: for there may be a suc­cession of bishops knowen in a place, and yet there be no churche, as at Anti­oche and at Ierusalem, and in other places, wher the Apostles abode as­well as at Rome. But if you put to the succession of bishops, succession of doc­trine with all (as S. Austine doth) I will graunt it to be a good profe for the catholike churche, but a locall suc­cession only is nothing vayleable.

You will haue no churche then I se well.

Yes my lord, I acknowledge the catholik churche, as I am bound by my Crede, but I can not acknowledge a false church for the true.

Why is ther twoo catholike [Page] churches then?

No I knowe ther is but one catholike churche, but there haue ben and be at this present, that take vpon thē the name of Christ & of his church, which be not so in dede, as it is writtē, that there be that call them selues A­Postles and be not so in dede, but the sinagoge of Sathan, and lyers. And nowe it is with vs, as it was with the two women in Salomōs tyme, which lay to gether, and the one suppressed her child, and after went about to cha­lenge the true mothers childe.

What a babling here is with you nowe? I se you lacke hu­militie. you wil go about to teach, and not to learne.

My lords, I must desire you to beare with my hastie speche, it is my infirmitie of nature, all that I speake is to learne by, I would you did vnder­stand all my mind, that I might be sa­tisfied by you, through better authori­tie.

My lord, and it please your grace, turne the argument vpon him which you haue made, and let him shewe the succession of bishops [Page 124] of his church, as we can do. How say you? can you shewe the succession of bishops in your churche from tyme to tyme? I tell you, this argument troubled doctor Ridley, so sore that he could neuer answere it. Yet he was a man well learned, I dar say, you will say.

He was a man so learned, that I was not worthy to cary his bookes for learning.

I promise you he was neuer hable to answere that, he was a man that I loued well and he me. For he came vnto me diuers tymes being in prison, and conferred with me.

I wonder my lord, you should make this argument, which you would turne vpon me, for the tryal of my churche, wherof I am, or that you would make bishop Rydley so ignoraunt that he was not hable to answere it, since it is of no force. For behold, fyrst I denyed you that locall succession of bishops in one place is no necessary point alone to proue the catholike chur­che by, & that which I haue denyed, you can not proue, and is it then reason that you should put me to the tryall of that, which by you is vnproued and of [Page] no force to conclude against me?

I se my lords we do but lose our labours, to reason with him, he taketh him selfe better learned than we.

I take vpon me the name of no learning, I bost of no knowledge, but of faith and of Christ, and that I am boūd vndoubtedly to know, as I am sure I doo.

These heretikes take vpon thē to be sure of all thinges they stand in. you should say rather with humilitie, I trust I knowe Christ, than that you be sure therof.

Let him doubt of his faith, that ly­steth: God gyue me alwayes grace to beleue that I am sure of his faith and fauoure in Christ.

Howe will you be hable to an­swere heretiks, but by y^e determinatiō of the knowen catholike churche?

I am hable to answere al here­tikes, by the worde of God, and cōuince them by the same.

Howe arrogantly that is spo­ken? I dare not say so.

My lord I pray you beare with me, for I am bold in the truth syde, and I speake some what by experience, that I [Page 125] haue had with heretykes, and I knowe the Arrians be the subtilest that euer were, and yet haue I manifest scriptu­res to beat them downe with all.

I perceaue nowe you are the same maner of man, I haue heard of, which will not be satisfied by lear­ning.

Alas my lord, why do you say so? I do desire most humbly to be taught, if ther be any better way, that I should learne, and hitherto you haue shewed me no better. Therfore I pray your lord ship, not to misiudge without a cause.

If you be the true catholike churche, than will you hold with the reall presence of Christ in the sacra­ment, which the true churche hath e­uer mayntayned.

And I (my lord) with the true churche do holde the same in the dewe mi­nistracion of the sacramēt, but I desire you my lord, ther may be made a better conclusion in our first mater, before we entre in to any other, for if the churche be proued, we shall sone agre in the rest. In this meane while my lord of Yorke was turning his boke for mo places, to helpe forthe his cause.

I haue found at lenthe, a very [Page] notable place which I haue loked for all this while of S. Austine, de simplici­ate credendi.

It is but folly (my lord) that your grace do reade him any mo pla­ces for he estemeth them not.

I esteme thē in as muche as they be of force, as your lordship dothe heare me deny no doctors you bring, but re­quire the true applicacion of them, ac­cording to the writers meaning, as by his owne wordes I do proue.

I wil reade him the place, and so make an ende. After he had red the sentence he said, that by fowre speciall pointes here S. Austine proueth the catholike church. The first is by y^e consēt of al nations, y^e secōd by the Apostolike sea, the thryd by vniuersalitie, & the fourthe by this word catholike.

That is a notable place in dede, and please your grace.

I pray you my lord of what church doth S. Austine write the same? of Rome or not▪

Yea he writeth it, of the churche of Rome.

I wil lay with your lordship as muche as I can make, it is not so. And let the boke be sene,

What arte thou hable to laye, that hast nothing?

Dothe he not make mention here of the Apostolike sea, wherby he meaneth Rome.

That is very straytly interpreted my lorde, as though the Apostolike sea, had ben no where els but at Rome. But let it be Rome, and yet shal you neuer verifye y^e same, onles all y^e other cō ­dicions do go ther with, as S. Austine dothe procede withall, wherof none ex­cept the Apostolike sea, can nowe be ve­rifyed of the churche of Rome. For the faythe which that sea nowe maintay­neth, hath not the consent of all nations nether euer had, besydes that it can not haue the name of catholyke, bycause it diffreth from the catholike churches, which the Apostles planted almost in all thinges.

Naye he goeth about here to proue the catholike churche by vniuersalitie. And howe can you shewe your churche to be vniuersall fyftye or an hundred yeres ago?

That is not material, neither any thing against S. Austyne. For my chur­che (wherof I am) were to be counted vniuersall, though it were but in .x. per­sons, [Page] bicause it agreeth with the same that the Apostles vniuersally did plāte.

I perceyue you are an obsti­nate man in your opinion, and will not be taught. Wherfore it is but lost labore to talke with you any lenger, you are a member to be cut of.

I haue heard of you before, howe you troubled the good bishop of Winchester before, and nowe I see in you, that I haue heard.

I trust you see no euill in me by this, I desire of you a sure ground to build my fayth on, and if you shewe me none, I pray you speake not yll of him, that meaneth well.

Thou arte an impudent fe­low, as I haue commoned with all.

That is spokē vncharytably (my lord) to blaspheme him whom you can not iustly reproue.

Why you are not God, blas­phemy is counted a rebuke, to God­ward and not to man.

Yes it may be aswel verified of an infamy layed to man, speaking in Goddes cause, as you nowe do laye vnto me for speaking frely the truthe afore God, to mayntayne your vayne religion, you are voyde of all good [Page 127] grounde. I perceyue you are blinde guydes and leaders of the blind, and therfore (as I am bound to tel you) ve­rye hypocrites, tyrānously persecuting the truthe, which otherwise by iust or­der you are hable to do by no meanes. Your owne doctors and testimony­es which you bring, be euidentlye a­gainst you, and yet you wil not see the truthe.

Haue we this thanke for our good will, comming to instructe thee?

My lordes, you must beare w^t me, synce I speake in Christes cause, and bicause his glory is defaced and his people cruelly and wrongfully slain by you, bicause they will not consent to the dishonour of God, to hypocrisie with you. Yf I told you not your fault, it should be required at my handes in the day of iudgement, therfore knowe you (ye hipocrites in dede) that it is the spirite of God that telleth you your synne, and not I. I passe not (I thanke God) of al your crueltie, God forgeue it you, and gyue you grace to repent. And so they departed,

The same day at night before supper, the bishop sent for me into his chappel in the presence of Archdeacon Harpesfild & doctor Chadsey, in the presence of o­ther his Chaplayns, and his seruauntes.

MAster Philpot, I haue (by sundry meanes) gone a­bout to do you good, and I maruail, you do so litle considre it. By my truthe I can not tell what to say to you. Tel me directly, whether you wilbe a con­formable man or no, and wher vpon you chifly stand.

I haue told your lordship of­ten tymes playne ynough, where on I stand chiefly, requiring a sure probatiō of the churche wherunto you cal me.

S. Austine writing against the Donatistes declareth foure special notes to knowe the church by, the cō ­sent of many nations, the faith of the sacraments confirmed by antiquitie. succession of bishops, & vniuersalitie.

I pray you master Archdeacō fett the booke hither, it is a notable place, let him se it. And the boke was brought, and the bishop red it, demaunding [Page 128] howe I could answere the same.

My lord I like S. Austins foure points for the tryal of the catholik churche, wherof I am. For it can abide eue­ry point therof together, which yours can not doo.

Haue not we succession of bi­shops, in the sea and church of Rome? wherfor then do you deny our chur­che to be the catholike churche?

S Austine doth not put succession of bishops only to be sufficient, but he addeth the vse of the sacramentes, ac­cording to antiquitie, and doctrine vni­uersally taught and receyued of most nations from the beginning of the pri­matiue church, the which your churche is far from. But my churche can auou­che all these better then yours: therfore (by S. Austins iudgement which you here bring) myne is the catholike chur­che, and not yours.

It is but foly (my lord) for you to reason with him, for he is irrecuperable.

That is a good shift for you to runne vnto, when you be confounded in your owne sayenges, and haue no­thing els to say, you are euidently de­ceyued, [Page] and yet will not see it, when it is layd to your face.