The first Gulfe of Apostasy, The forsa­king of the Church of Christ.

TO abandon the Church of Christ, and the Catholike Communion, is the first though not the shallowest gulfe of Hereticall peruersity. All Heretikes (saith S. Hierome) are Apostata's, that is, Reuolters. The Apostle tearmeth the Heretike peruerse, Tit. 3:11. because no man is an Heretike that hath not auerted him­selfe, and swarueth from the way of Truth wherein once he walked. He saith also, that the Heretike delinquit proprio iudicio condemna­tus, that he is a delinquent, condemned by his owne iudgment. That you are in this Gulfe (Antony) is a thing so cleare, that it need not to be proued; yet seeing you deny it, I will proue it, not by common arguments, but such as shall leaue you conuicted out of your owne words.

2. He that forsaketh the Church of Christ and the communion of Saintes, is peruerse, a delinquent, an Apostata. This you will not de­ny, and that you do it, your selfe most mani­festly affirme. For that you fly from the Ro­man Church, that you depart out of it, in the pag. 34. you openly professe. This my de­parting, say you, this my going out of Babylon, or flight, I will haue to be cleare from all suspition of schisme. You depart then out of the Roman Church which you stile Babilon; but the Ro­man Church, is the Church of Christ, the Society of Saintes; therfore you impiously go from it, impiously you call it Babylon. If you aske me, how I can proue the Roman Church to be the Church of Christ, the socie­ty of Saintes: I answere euen by your owne words which are registred in the 28. page. I may not (say you) be wanting in my charge, I be­ing a Bishop in the Church of Christ. And in the 38 page you name the Bishops in the Roman communion, your most holy Colleages, or fellow Bishops. When you writ this, you were in no Church but in the Roman, into no other Church or cōpany were you then by visible & externall profession admitted. Wherfore you were Bishop in no Church of Christ, but as you were Bishop in the Church of Rome: or if you were Bishop in some other Church, then were not our Catholike Bishops your colleags [Page 74]or fellowes. If then you were a Bishop in the Church of Christ, and the Bishops of the Ro­man, were your follow-Bishops most holy; it fol­lowes out of your owne confession that the Church of Rome is the Church of Christ, the society of Saintes. Which seing you for­sake, you cannot deny, but you forsake the company of Christ, and of his Saints, which is to be peruerse, to be delinquent, and to Apo­state. Praes. c. 8. Well saith Tertullian; Erring is without fault where no delinquishing is: He wanders secure­ly, who by wandering forsaketh nothing. This is most true: but he that forsaketh the Church of Christ, he that abandoneth his Saintes, he leaueth somthing, yea a thing of great esteem he leaueth, and so delinquisheth; not without fault, yea with great impiety is such wādring. And if also he leaue that companie whome he iudgeth, whom he tearmeth most holy, which is your case; then questionlesse he is a delin­quent condemned by his owne iudgement. Serm. 30. Marke what S. Ambrose expounding these words of the Apostle, commenteth against your Apo­stasy. The Heretike condemneth himselfe, who casteth himselfe out of the Church of Christ, and not being forced by any, of selfe accord departs from the companie of Saints. Well doth he declare what he deserues at the hands of all, who by his owne pro­per doome, is seuered from the company of all. For whereas other criminous persons by Bishops censures [Page 75]are driuen out of the Church; the heretike preuen­teth all, and becomes a forlorne from the Church by the choice of his owne will. The Heretike then doth suffer the like condemnation that Iudas did, being both delinquent and Iudge himselfe, the authour and the punisher of his owne misdeed.

3. You will say, that you forsake the Ro­man Church with body, not with hart, that you fly for feare of persecution, but are most ready (so you may do it with your safety) to haue peace and communion with the Church of Rome. If you now pleade in this sort, you will not be longe of so good a mind: neither can this answere consort with your other deeds and doctrine. For in the 34. & 35. page you write, that you are ready to communicate with any, that agree with you in the essentiall articles, and creeds of faith, yet so (say you) that we all likewise detest new articles, either openly contrary to the sacred scripture, or els opposit to the aforena­med Creeds. Now I aske you, whether the Church of Rome teach new articles manifest­ly opposite to holy Scripture, or no? If not, then you fly from her without any iust cause, she being subiect to no cleere, or notorious er­rour. If she teach new articles that cleerly re­pugne with Scriptures, and will not detest them, yea seeing you say of her, that she doth obtrude new articles that containe in them manifest falsity, and doth persecute all that dare but mutter [Page 76]against them, euen to the death, this supposed (I say) cleere it is that you haue carried away not only your body, but also your hart, your loue, cōmunion, and profession from the Roman Church, which yet you grant to be the church of Christ, and the Company of Saints.

4. You will say againe, that you indeed abandon the Roman Church, which is a Church of Christ, notwithstanding you for­sake not the Church of Christ, but from one Church of Christ defiled with diuers errours you passe to another Church of Christ more pure and more sincere, both for doctrine and discipline: but this deuise wil not serue to quit you of the crime of Apostasy. For (Antony) the Churches to which you fly, be themselues fugitiue and fleeting Churches, Companies which haue deuided themselues from the Ro­man, which had they not done, no Church, no Company had been now in the world, to haue receaued you in your flight. This do you your selfe in a manner insinuate, when you call the Churches to which you depart, the Churches which Rome hath raised vp to be her aduersaries. The time then was, whē they were not Romes aduersaries, when they were not raised vp, but addicted to that which you call Romish Ido­latry, lay prostrate on the ground at the Popes feet. So that also these Churches haue abando­ned the Church of Christ and the Company [Page 77]of Saints, if the Roman Church be (as you graunt it to be) the Church of Christ and the Company of Saintes. Now then, did these fly to a Church more pure, then the Roman when they reuolted from her? No, but forsaking the Roman Church, they departed to themselues being made purer then the Roman in their owne opinion, not by cleauing to the purity of some Church before extant in the world, but by the purity of a new Company raysed vp, & made more pure then any other, by for­saking and abandoning the rest of the whole Christian world. So Caluin sayth: It is absurd that we that haue departed from the whole world should now fall out and quarell amongst our selues. Caluin. ep. 107. Your strifes and contentions (M. Caluin) are in very truth absurde and ridiculous, but much more absurde is this your confession that you made a separation from the whole world besids. For straight out of S. Augustine I sub­sume, they that forsake the communion of the whole world, must needs be Apostata's. God forbid wil you say; for we haue iustly reuolted from the rest of the world, we runne away from errours & abuses, we haue weighty rea­sons for what we do. No (saith S. Augustine) you haue no iust reasons, you are without doubt reuolting Apostata's, Epist. 48. for we are certaine (saith he) none could iustly separate themselues from the communion of the world; and againe. Ibidem. It [Page 78]is no way possible, that any should haue reason to se­parate their Communion, from the communion of the whole world, & to call themselues the Church, because vpon iust reasons they deuided themselues from the society of all nations. Thus S. Augustine: leauing you (Antony) no way to escape from the gulfe of Apostasy, but by returning to the Roman Communion.

5. But (say you) I will haue this my depar­ture or flight to be free from all suspition of schisme. You speake peremptorily like a Prince, You will; but you should know you haue not au­thority to ouerule the Natures of things. If you will take another mans goods without his leaue, and not be a theef; If you will vpon priuate reuenge bereaue a man of his life, and not be a murderer; If you will abandon the Church of Christ, and not be an Apostata, or Schismatike, verily you will misse of your pur­pose. Theft shall be theft, murder murder, & Schisme schisme, will you, nill you, Antony. Well, but I fly (say you) from errors, I fly from abuses, I fly that I may not be partaker of her sins, not haue part in her punishments. O how liuely did the holy Ghost describe you long agoe. The wicked sonne saith, Prouerb. 30 ver. 12. as S. Au­gustine readeth. that he is iust, yet doth he not wash cleere his going out. You say the Church swarmeth with errours, is ful of abuses, loaden with sinnes, that you are pure, iust, and there­upon fly, not to be partaker of the punishments [Page 79]due to our sinnes, who haue no sinns forsooth of your owne to be punished. You say you are iust, but you do not proue it; notwithstanding though you should in your owne cause say the very truth, yet could not you therby cleere your selfe from the crime of Schisme; which I will make manifest, euen by your owne words. In the 37. page touching S. Cyprian you write in this māner. Cyprian made no doubt, but that Stephen the Roman Bishop did erre very grieuously, yet rather then to make a Schisme in the Church, he chose to communicate not only with Pope Stephen, whose beliefe and practise was con­trary to his, but also with others whome he iudged impure, for this cause only, because Pope Stephē did admit them into his Communion: which example S. Augustine as he sets it before the Donatists, so likewise he sets it before vs for imitation. Now I will iudge you by your one euidence. For why do you not imitate this example, which you say is layd before you a purpose, that you should imitate it? If S. Cyprian could not deuide himselfe from Pope Stephen, whome he most assuredly iudged to erre, without being guilty of the crime of Schisme, may you reuolt from Pope Paul the fifth vnder pretence that he errs, and not be a Schismaticke. If S. Cyprian, had he forsaken Pope Stephen, could not haue iustified his departure, by saying (put case he might truly haue sayd so) I fly his errours, his [Page 80]abuses, his sinnes; do you thinke that your de­fection frō the Roman Church can be washed cleane from the note of Apostasy, by your loud exclaiming, that you fly errour? A protestation vaine though it were true, and indeed false, vt­tered without any proofe. You go about An­tony, to wash a bricke, you loose your labour, your crime cannot be washed away without teares of repentance.

The second Gulfe, Wandring vncer­tainty about Religion.

THE second Gulfe wherein you are drow­ned, I call Nullity of fayth, because you abandoned the Roman Church and Faith, before you had made choice of any other Church or religion, that should succeed in lieu thereof. You seemed at your departure from vs to be a blanke ready to preceaue any Reli­gion or faith that should be written therin so it were contrary to the Roman. A deepe pit of impiety which heretikes do fall into, whos property it is not to establish, but to ouerthrow fayth, to beate downe Christian Churches that stand, not to reare vp Christian Chur­ches amongst Pagans. They ioyne friendship and communion indifferently with all Sectes (sayth Tertullian) nor do they regard though they be different from them in opinion, Praese. cap. 40. so they will concurre [Page 81]with them to ouerthrow the truth. This want of sound and solide faith you shew (Antony) by many signes and tokens. First by your per­petuall silence, not declaring either in the title or in the body of your booke to what sect or Religiō you meane to passe from the Roman. In the title you pretend to shew the reasons of your going, but you tell vs neither whence, nor whither you take your iourney. Motion (as Philosophers say) receaues forme and shape of the end and marke wherein finally the same resteth; which being true, your going, to which your title prescribes not any end, nor restraynes within the compasse of any markes, what may it seeme, but a vast, vncertaine, blind, and inconsiderate wande­ring? This your omitting to set down in your title the finall marke of your iourney, is the more blame-worthy, because straight in the very beginning of your discourse you require that euen we Catholikes should approue your departure. For how can any prudent man pos­sibly approue your iourney, before he know in what Country, Church, or Religion you meane to take vp your rest? We that know not for what place you are bound, can we know or approue your course? Seing then this circumstance whither is the chiefe thing that giues light to them that are to iudge in the vn­dertaking of a iourney, and therfore is the [Page 82]first thing to be declared in the very beginning of the deliberation, why did not you (Anto­ny) expresse it in the Title of your Booke? why haue you not once thoughout your whole pamphlet tould it vs in playne and di­rect termes? The answere is easy: you tould it not, because you were certaine neither of the Church nor of the Religion wherein you should make your finall abode. You compare your selfe forsaking the Church of Rome with the great Patriarke Abraham, who following God, left his Countrey: which comparison though in the mayne point it be very idle, yet heerein you are not vnlike to Abraham, that as he departed from his natiue soyle, not knowing whither he went, so you abandoned the Roman Church and Religion, before you could tell, what other Church or Religion you should imbrace vpon the forsaking therof.

6. Secondly of this your doubtfullnesse in choice of Religion, which you did but insi­nuate in the title, you make open demonstra­tion in your booke: in the 15. pa. wherof you write: Now myne eyes being more opened I might easely perceaue that the doctrines of the Churches, which being very many, Rome hath raysed vp to be her aduersaries, which Churches though we sharp­ly censure & our Deuines maynly impugne, do little or nothing at all swarue from the true primitiue do­ctrine of the pure Church. So you write, nor [Page 83]could you haue more disclosed the vast pit of vncertainty in your breast, gaping for any do­ctrine, so it be opposite to the Roman. For let vs search into the matter. I demaund of you (Antony) whither are you going? to Chur­ches (say you) that swarue very little or no­thing from the true Primitiue doctrine. I heare you. But shew me these Churches; which are they? they be those Churchs which being very many Rome hath raised vp to be her aduersa­ries? O what a deale of vncertainty and con­fusiō lyeth couched togeather in these words? I let passe that vncertainty very little, which how much or little it is, no man knowes; you only may determine, and at your pleasure stretch or contract it. I do not enquire where about in the world those Churches are to be seen which you so highly cōmend. Which que­stiō should I propose, I could pursue you from country to country, and you would sweat to find such Churches in the world as you des­cribe in your booke, Churches I say for num­ber very many, in doctrine all opposite to the Roman, and all agreeing among themselues in the pure primitiue truth. But pretermitting these questions, I only aske, when you say, that the Churches, which being very many Rome hath raysed vp to be her aduersaries, do very little swarue from the pure primitiue doctrine, whether you speake of all the Churches and [Page 84]Companies that in doctine are opposite to the Roman, or of some of them only? You can­not with truth speake it of all, they being so many, and so repugnant, the one against the other, Grecians, Lutherans, Caluinistes, Libertines, Anabaptists, Arians, Trinitarians. How can it be, that they all should very little or nothing disagree from the true doctrine, whose doctrines disagree mainly and allmost infinitly the one from the other?

7. If you say, that though not all, yet some of the Churches aduersaries to Rome, do very little disagree from the primitiue truth, then I demaund, Why do you not distinguish these pure Churches from the other impure, before you prayse them? Why do you thus at random rashly (not to say impiously) cast that great commendation to swarue very litle from the pure primitiue doctrine, vpon the confuse multitude of sects disagreeing from the Roman Church, in which masse euen your selfe being iudge, all be not sincere, yea many be corrupt, many impious, many most food & sottish? And yet by your words no man can perceaue whether this high prayse be bestowed by you on the Grecians, or on the Septentrionals, on the Lu­therans, or on the Anabaptists, on the Calui­nists, or on the Arians. Verily you be not the mouth of God (Antony) you be not the preacher of Truth, who to good & bad layd togeather [Page 85]on an heape, giue your approbation without any distinction, not seuering pretious from vile, noxious from wholsome, hereticall from Ca­tholike, impious from Christian doctrine. And yet herein you are excusable. For what els could you do, who had not as yet made choice of any certaine Church you might ma­gnify before al other, being vncertaine for the present, and ignorant what finally your choice might be, you durst not condēne any Church of the many opposite to Rome, fearing you should perchance condemne that Church, which you might be forced to fly vnto. Had you singled one Church out of that number, extolling it only aboue all other, the rest per­chance would with lesse willingnesse haue in­tertained you, taking your singular prayse of that one Church, as a disparagement to them all; nor durst you commend distinctlie and by name all the sectes that are enemies to the Pope, knowing that thereby you might expose your selfe to iust exception that Catholikes might take at you, as being a friend of damna­ble errours. Wherfore craftily you resolued to shoot at randome in the praise of Churches that oppose themselues to Rome, without spe­cifying the name, or doctrine of any, that so you might haue both freedome to runne to what sect you pleased, and shelter against Ca­tholikes, should they except against you, as [Page 86]fauouring the errours of any particuler heresy. Now (Antony) perceaue you not, that your secret & wily deuise is layd open? & that this your booke brings to light the things which you most of al desired should haue byn hiddē?

8. Thirdly, so great is your vncertainty, that you are not only ignorant to what sect to fly from the Roman Church, but also you know not, from what doctrine of the Roman Church you should fly. I confesse you do par­ticularily mislike the Primacy of the Roman Bishop, but you were not ignorant, that the hatred of this authority is common to all sorts of Heretikes. Whosoeuer are wicked in the world, the more egregiously that they are wicked, the more mortally do they hate the power of the Pope, all being herein combined, Grecians, Protestants, Lutherans, Caluinists, Anabaptists, Arians, Turkes, Iews, Atheists. What other article of the Roman beleife do you condemne besides this? You name no o­ther, but in generall you proclaime that you fly the Roman sinnes errors, abuses, and innu­merable nouelties. Why name you them not? I will tel you: the sects that band against Rome being very many, do not all mislike the same doctrines in the Roman Church? What one condemneth, another prayseth, what some ap­proue, others abhorre: so your religion de­pending on future euents you could not shew [Page 87]detestation of the Roman errours in particuler till you had made certaine choice of your Church. You knew that you were to con­demne in the Roman Church, other articles did you become a Grecian, others did you fall to be a Lutheran, others did you turne Calui­nist, others did you cleaue to the Anabaptists, others should you stay in Germany, others should you fly to France, others should you sayle into Englād. Wherfore wauering in vn­certainties not able to forsee what shall becom of you, without naming any particulers, with all your might and mayne you cry out on the Roman Errours. When you shall haue made your election for your religion, & therein set vp your rest, then shal the Roman Church erre in those poynts, and as damnably as it please that company you liue with to haue you say.

9. But I pretermitt (say you in the 17. page) to set downe particularly the Errours of Rome, because in my booke of the Ecclesiasticall Common wealth I do fully prosecute them, which booke now a good while ready for the print I haue, and will set it forth out of hand, and bequeath it to the first printer in Germany, that by the way I shal find for the purpose. I beseech you, Antony, why did you not performe what here so so­lemly you promise? Met you with no Printer in Germany that was for the purpose? or did the King of great Britany countermand your [Page 88]purpose? or did you of your self shrinke from your purpose? I search not into this secret. This I say, that now you shall not print the booke you brought out of Italy with you, but another. Your selfe growing daily worse and worse, will change therein diuers things, ei­ther taking away some points of Catholike doctrine, or adding some new doctrines got­ten by your reading in the books of heretikes, to say nothing of the things which Ministers by their arguments will winne you to alter. And what shall I say of his gracious Maiesty, so excellent for his knowledge? To change some things in your booke, and to adde other things to it, he will persuade you by his lear­ning, & to leaue out diuers doctrins that sauour to much of Rome, he may compell you by his authority: perchāce also sundry of his sayings, though he vrge you not, yet you to please him, will put them into your booke. Know you not what befell Casaub one? How much chan­ged he was from that affection and mind, that he seemed to carry with him into England: which alteration he going about to excuse to his friend, plainly confesseth, that by entrance into the English Court, he was become a slaue, not daring in any thing gaynesay the Kings pleasure; which basenes notwithstanding I am persuaded did proceed not from the Kings disposition, but from Casaubons dastardy.

10. And as for the changes which I do now aforehand auouch wil be in your booke, we haue a fayre presage, or rather a begin­ning of them in this Pamphlet, which reprin­ted in England differs somewhat from that you set forth at Venice. For in your edition of Venice, declaring the argument of the ninth booke of the ten you promise, you say that you largely shew quàm parca esse debeat Mini­strorum Ecclesiae sustentatio: How scarse the maintenance of the ministers of the Church ought to be. The word scarse maintenance sounded harshly in the eares of English mini­sters. Peraduenture when you wrote at Ve­nice, you prouided maintenance for Bishops only, not also for their wiues and children. Wherefore in the London edition the matter is amēded, & you say, that you declare qualis esse debeat ministrorum Ecclesiae sustentatio: What kind of maintenance Church-ministers ought to haue. And when your bookes come forth, you may happily, to gaine the good will of Ministers wiues, change their scarse mainte­nance into plentifull. You may see that with­out cause you bragge that you will publish a booke brought with you from Italy, contay­ning the Roman errours, togeather with ma­ny cleere sights and visions of truth you had at Venice, and diuers doctrines different from the Roman, which you learned by the only [Page 90]reading of the Fathers. For the booke you now publish (Antony) is not that you wrote at Ve­nice, it is not I say that worthy worke which you (as you vaunt) placed in the midest of the darkenesse of Popery, not hauing the candle of any hereticall booke shining before you, writ only by the light, which diuine illustra­tions falling downe from heauen, yeilded to your pen; these discourses of yours so noble and diuine be now lost, vanished away, peri­shed. Not so (me thinks I heare you say) for though some points of doctrine may be chan­ged in my Booke, yet many, and very many will remaine. Suppose this be true, who will be able to discerne the reliques of the pure ori­ginall, from so many the new corruptions therof? or distinguish the parts of your booke vntoucht from the parts changed? your an­cient opinions from your new? your Vene­tian beliefe from your English? his Maiesties conceyts from those that be properly yours? yours which you lately got by perusing the workes of heretikes, from those whereof you boast, as if you had receaued them immediatly from heauen? No man certainly, though he be neuer so sharpe-sighted.

11. Fourthly, you bewray your vncer­tainty in that to free your selfe from suspition, and to meet with these inconueniences, you haue not in this your writing, set downe any [Page 91]confession of the faith you brought from Ve­nice; which thing was most expected, and it did greatly behooue you to haue done it. For this is the first thing which persons reclaymed from heresy haue care to do, that seeing they now openly forsake the Religion which once they followed, the world may take notice of the Religiō which in lieu therof they imbrace, least otherwise they should thinke them plaine Infidels, vtterly without any certaine religion. Wherfore you should straight in the beginning of your reuolte, haue made a plaine profession of your faith, set down distinctly the doctrines of the Roman Church which you disliked, & also what you approued in the pretendedly re­formed Churches: for when you say of them; that they swarue from the pure doctrine very little, you seeme to insinuate, that none of them do fully and absolutly content you. This you did not; but seruing the time rather then the truth, and (as S. Hilary saith, Lib. 7. de Trinit. Heretiks vse to do) being ready to frame your doctrine to the humours of men, by this negligence you haue changed the ten yeares of your cleere light in­to darkenesse eternal Neither shall any mortal man euer know, what was the faith that ran away with you frō Venice, nor what doctrine of Popery made you runne away; your wri­tings will be not only charged with falshood; but also suspected of fiction, that you write to [Page 92]please others, what you beleeue not your selfe.

12. Nor may you say, that in this Booke you haue made confession of your faith in the 29. page therof, where you write. I am ready to communicate with all, so long as we agree in the es­sentiall articles of our faith, and the creedes of the ancient Church; yet so, if also we togeather detest new articles either openly contrary to the holy Scri­pture, or else repugnant with the aforsayd Creedes. This confession of faith is too wandring and wild, within which all Heresies may range, or at least very few are excluded by it. And yet you are not constant in this profession. For pag. 9 you cōmaund the Roman Church to restore communion to all the Christian Churches that professe Christ by the essentiall Creeds of faith. Where you do not mention what heere you so expressely require, the detestation of new articles that are openly contrary to Scriptures. Moreouer how vncertaine and ambiguous is that phrase openly repugnant with Scripture? For many kindes there be of errours openly contrarie to Scripture, and euen Protestants themselues do mainly disagree, nor can they define which of these errours must needs be detested vnder paine of expulsion from the Church. Againe you say nothing of the Iudge, to whose cen­sure it belonges to decree which errours be new and clearly repugnant with Scripture. For if you require of men, that they detest [Page 93]those errours and articles which to themselues seeme clearly repugnant with Scripture, there is not any Sectary that will not do it. If you will haue all men reiect such errours and ar­ticles which in your iudgment be new, and do manifestly contradict the Scripture; you do them wronge. For who made you their iudge? If you will haue the Controuersy decided nei­ther by your iudgment, nor by theirs; but re­mitted to the finall decision of a third Iudge, why do you not name him? Finally you do not declare what you meane, by essentiall ar­ticles, nor how many they be in number, nor whether all the articles of the ancient Creedes be essentiall, nor what you meane by Creedes essentiall, that being a new phrase with I do not remember to haue read in any Authour Catholike or Protestant; yea the word may without much adoe be drawne to such a sense as no Heresy will reiect any ancient Creed, so farre forth as it is essentiall. And why do you not rather exact full and absolute profession of all ancient Creedes, but still with this re­striction of the Creedes essentiall? verily some­thing lurkes in this phrase, In libro de Synod. Nican. decret. which we as yet vnderstand not: nor without cause did S. A­thanasius warne vs to suspect all the wordes and phrases of Heretikes. Why speake you not plain­ly and ingenuously? Why dally you with doubtful and ambiguous words in the busines [Page 94]of Religion? but only because not being resol­ued of what faith you would be, you meane to frame such a profession of faith, as might sute with diuers occasions & times, with sun­dry countries and sectes. Wherein you do no new thing which your ancestors did not pra­ctise in S. Hieromes dayes. They do (saith he) so temper their words, they range them in such order, they so mince the matter with ābiguous speach, that they make a confession both of our doctrine, and of our aduersaries doctrine, that in one sense taken their profession is He­reticall, taken in another Catholike. Neither hath this our age been without such kind of Prothei, and Changelings, nor without these Camelion-like confessions of faith, which change their colour and sense according to time and place. Such was the confession of Ausburge, which to Charles the fift Emperour, the first Fathers of your Ghospell presented. The articles of which confession Philip Me­lancthon the Authour therof, Hospin. concordia discord. in an. Domi 1527. did of set purpose and studiously cloth with doubtfull wordes. The reason of which his deed, writing to Lu­ther he yields, saying, that those articles were now and then to be changed, and made to sute with occasions. So it is: your faiths be variable and monthly, but the verity of our Lord lasteth for euer.

The third Gulfe, Hypocrisy.

THE third Gulfe of Heretical naughtines is Hypocrisy. Heretikes (saith S. Lib. 5. de ciuit. c. 8. Augu­stine) be crafty people, endued not with the spirit of wisedome, but with the spirit of wily deceit, wherewith their harts are accustomed to boyle, and so trouble the quiet of Saintes. And S. Hilary. Lib. 5. de Trinitate. Vpon defection from the faith (saith he) wayteth lying Hypocrisy, so that they keep the shew of godlines in their words, the truth wherof they haue cast out of their conscience. But it is not easy within the com­passe of the skinne of one Lambe, so to shut vp a whole wolfe, that no part of him be seen. You fayne Piety (Antony,) but you dissemble in such sort, that by your owne wordes you may be detected to be counterfaire, which I will make euident with fiue examples. First in the second page you take vpō you the testimo­ny of a pure cōscience. Our glory (say you) is the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity of hart, & in the syncerity of God, not in carnall wise­dome, but in the grace of God I haue changed place. Thus you appeale from the Iudgement of the Church to the Chancery of your secret Con­science: you turne your selfe from publick knowledge, to your owne priuity, that is, Confess. lib. 10. saith S. Augustine, from truth to falshood. Shall I [Page 96]proue that you went away moued by the wise­dome of the flesh, out of care to sleep in a whole skinne, ouer which you feared some punishment was imminent? that had not this feare giuen you winges to fly away, you might haue been still a Papist at this day in outward shew, and haue adored those thinges which you now tearme Idolls? In the 23. page. Ha­tred against me (say you) was conceyued and harboured in their hartes at Rome, who now had smelt out my labours in writing against her opini­ons: for more then once by the Nuntius Apostolicus abiding in Venice, was I warned hereof & rebuked. Therfore it was my best course to take the winges of the Done, and fly into the wildernesse. Behold how clearly you confesse that feare gaue you the winges wherewith you were carried away from vs; feare, I say, not of the Romish Idola­try, not feare to offend God, or to fall into Hell, but feare to feele the sharpenes of Ro­man seuerity; feare lest the Republike would deliuer you vp, or permit you to be taken and punished according to your desertes by the Inquisition.

14. Secondly, you make shew of great loue of crosses, and of desire to suffer for Christ, apparelling your affections in the words of S. Paul, burning with diuine charity. For my selfe, with Paul I say, it is a very small thing for me to be iudged of men: let me be a foole for Christ, let me be [Page 97]ignoble, let me be buffeted and cursed, let me en­dure persecutions, let me be blasphemed, let me be made the scum of the world, an outcast, and Ana­thema, so only that I make satisfaction to Christ. Thus you speake, and forward you goe with the words of the Apostle, seeming to long to suffer disgraces and torments for Christ. But all is faygned: for if persecution be your desire, why runne you to a Countrey where you may rather persecute others, then endure persecution your selfe? Where you may secu­rely rayle on the Pope, blaspheme him, curse him to the pit of hel, as the outcast of the world and Anathema? The motiue of this your run­ning away you set downe in the 23. pag. What should I (say you) haue tarried longer in the midst of a peruerse and crooked Nation? If I would haue taught and exercised the true Ca­tholike doctrine, I had hastened and brought vpon my head the most terrible Roman stormes, and most foule tempests. And is it so great a misery tody for Christ (Antony?) doth death endured for the true Catholike doctrine seeme foule and hatefull in your eye, it being honorable and pretious in the sight of God? for the Pilot being in a storme to abandon his ship, is foule and shamefull; but for him to en­counter with the tempest, to venture life for ship and passengers is glorious. You desire to be a Pilot, you will needs gouerne the ship of [Page 98]the Church, but to be in stormes and perse­cution, to liue in perill of your life you cannot endure. Verilie you dissemble (Antony) when you make shew of desire to suffer, and little do you feele the affections of S. Paul, whose wordes breathing forth a burning desire of Martyrdome, you borrow for your self, which be no more fit for your desire, then is Hercules shoo for a Childes foote.

15. Thirdly, you make great demonstra­tion of condoling with the Church, and de­ploring the ruines she suffers at the handes of the Pope. This griefe and sadnes (say you, in the 10. page) did in wonderfull manner con­sume me, and still day by day, more and more con­sumes me. Which wordes I could not read without smiling when I remember, how your fall giueth euidence against this your preten­ded pining away for sorow. In your whole body from top to toe there appeare not any signes of the mortification of Christ Iesus, nor of any inward griefe, either wasting your flesh or drying vp your bones. When you write that you were in a consumption by reason of sadnes, I wonder whether you smiled not your selfe Nor is this any new fiction but the com­mon mantell of Heretikes, Lib. 3. mor. ca. 19. which S. Grego­ry discouered longe since. Heretikes (saith he) make shew to condole with the Church, and with this sayre shew of loue do they bayte their bookes of [Page 99]deceyt. You weep the teares of the Crocodile, wherewith that rauenous beast moisteneth and maketh slippery the ground, that when the passenger drawne by that counterfayt we­ping approacheth, his feet fayle him, and sud­dainly falleth a ioyfull pray to the mourner.

16. Fourthly, you faigne that Scriptures fauour you in the fift page. Neuer (say you) did I at any tyme square the motions and thoughts of my mind, by any other ruler, then such as the Holy Ghost prescribeth in Sacred Writ. This is soone said: what Heretike said it not? Nei­ther could their talking (saith S. Hierome) gayne them beleeuers, did they not make shew to confirme their peruerse doctrine by diuine authority. You still gouerned your thoughts & inclinations by the rules of scrip­ture, other ruler or direction you vsed neuer at any time. A great praise, which I cannot say agreeth to any of the Saints, if from that number we exempt Christ and his Virgin Mother. If this be true, surely you neuer sin­ned, vnles one may sinne, and do amisse in fol­lowing the rule and gouernment of Gods spi­rit: perchance you meane not so rudely as you write, and I can beleeue these your words may be more vayne then your mind. I only warne you not to be hasty to beleeue these thoughts and motions of the spirit, that present them­selues to you, vested with testimonies of scrip­ture, [Page 100]wherwith euen serpents are couered and walke about. Will you not beleeue me? then beleeue Luther, who writeth, they are wretches that do not consider, that the Diuell doth dart ve­nemous fiery thoughts into their hartes, Tom. 2. Germ. wit. fol. 122. art. 552. which be nothing els but most fine thoughts adorned with testimonies of Scripture, that they cannot perceaue the subtill poyson that lurketh in them. Wherfore seing you make your boast of Scriptures, you might not wonder, though we should answer you, as S. Augustine did the Manichees. Being bad, you read them not well, being ignorant you vnderstand them not right, being blind you cannot behold their truth.

17. Fifthly, you pretend to follow the Fa­thers. After the inward motiōs of the holy Ghost only the holy Fathers (say you) haue beene the most honorable authors & aduisers of this my enterprise. You be not wise to trimme your selfe with the shew of ācient Fathers authority, seing you go towards those Churches, that professe to fol­low neither Fathers nor Mothers, but only the pure Word. And if you haue your Passe-port frō the auncient Fathers to leaue Rome, why haue you not alleadged so much as one cleere testi­mony out of them in your behalfe, and against the Roman Bishops Preeminency? Pag. 35. You bring indeed out of the Councell of Carthage this testimony, which you call, the most renowned saying of the most renowned Cyprian. We do not [Page 101]iudge any man (saith he) nor remoue them from the right of communion that be of a contrary mind. For not any amongst vs doth make himselfe the Bishop of Bishops, nor by tyrannicall terrour force his fellow-Bishops to obey him. You could not (Antony) haue produced a cleerer testimony to conuince, that in truth you haue found no matter of substance in the Fathers, to obiect a­gainst vs. Cyprian was indeed most renowned for sanctity, learning, and eloquence, but he was also renowned for an errour, which God permitted this worthy light of the Church to fall into. This errour he sought by all meanes to establish in that Councell of Carthage, out of which you bring this testimony: so finding in the approued writings of S. Cyprian not any saying, that might steede you, Septem li­bris de bap­tismo. you fly to the testimony of this erroneous & reiected coun­cell, which S. Augustine hath by name confu­ted in a most renowned worke. And this see­meth to be the weightiest authority of all that in ten yeares study you haue gathered. More­ouer when you prayse the charity, patience, & wisedome of Cyprian, in his contention with Pope Stephen, depressing as much as you can the Pope, it is cleere, that hatred against the present successour of Stephen, makes you forsake the knowne iudgment of antiquity. For S. Augustine a most moderate and friendly Censurer of S. Cyprian doth say in plaine [Page 102]tearmes that in his contention with the Pope he wrote with so great indignation, Lib. 5. de Baptis. c. 25 and ad­deth this prudent aduise, that it were best not to mention all the things which Cyprian irritated a­gainst Stephen, powred forth in his anger, which brought with them danger of pernicious dissention. Finally the words of S. Cyprian, sound more of indignation, then of any errour, nor do they crosse the power of the Roman Bishop in deciding the controuersies of faith. For he doth not say, that none was in the Church ap­pointed by Christ, whome the rest of Chri­stian Bishops were bound to obey, and endu­ed with authority to put an end to the contro­uersies of faith; but he saith, that in that con­cell of Carthage, there was not any Bishop of Bishops, nor any that did challenge to himselfe such authority: by which words he doth rather insinuate, then deny the knowne authority & title of the Roman Bishop, though perchance he grudged and girded at the present exercise therof, accompting it Tyrannous, because he found it opposed to his errour: which shews that S. Cyprian was then ouer feelingly moued against the Pope, as S. Augustine sayth, who with great reason exclaimeth against you, and such mates as would iustify their rebellion by Cyprians example Oh how detestable is their errour who thinke they do laudably imitate the faultes of some worthy men, De vnico Bapt. cont. Petil. lib. 1. cap. 13. when they haue not any part of [Page 103]their excellent Vertues.

The fourth Gulfe, Mendacity against the Church.

NOTHING more notorious in former ages, nothing whereof the books of the Fathers do more sound, then the impious mendacity of Heretikes, whereby they shew themselues to be borne of him, that was false from the beginning, and the Father of falshood. They put their confidence in vntruth, nor is there any man held for perfect amōgst them (saith holy Irenaeus) that hath not fruclified and begot very great and mighty vntruths. Antony, Lib. 3. ca. 1. you de­sire to be perfect in your generation, and the fertility of your soile is sufficiently proued by this little plant you now haue set forth, which is more stored with lies, then with leaues. Out of which multitude I will gather, and present you with ten, which be both notorious for their sent, and very remarkable for their big­nes.

19. The first (whereof before we made men­tion) but heere in the proper place to be repea­ted, is set downe in your 15. pag. I saw now most cleerly, and did fully perceaue that at Rome, with­out any lawfull authority, yea by great violence & wronge, innumerable new articles dayly were coy­ned, and obtruded vnto vs. If you marke well [Page 104]your owne wordes, perchance you your selfe will remaine amazed at the hugenes of this vntruth. You say, that doctrines new, cleerly false, without any ground, by extreamest wrongfull violence, are euery day without number coined at Rome, and forced vpon the Church, euen as articles of faith. And yet you neither do, nor can name any article of the Roman faith, which hath not beene euer in­tertained as a point of faith in former times, or els defined not in Rome, but in some gene­rall Councell.

20. The second vntruth in greatnes equal­leth the first, in malice surpasseth it. This vn­truth standes recorded in your 24. page, where you say, that you left the Church of Rome, & ranne away, fearing the ordinary sequells of hatred, that are, poysoning, & stabbing. For to this passe (say you) matters are brought in this age, that at Rome, & by authority frō Rome, the contro­uersies of the Church are committed no longer to Deuines, nor to Councells, but to racke-maisters, to hang-men, to cut-throats, to bloud-suckers, to parricides. Here (Antony) you are seene to be in a fury, and to haue your hart imbued with the bloudy disposition of the men you haue named. The Church of Rome doth not pra­ctise that which you hatefully charge her with, she referred the Church-controuersies of this age, not to be maintained with poysoning & [Page 105]stabbing, by bloud-suckers, and parricides; but to be treated of, and decided by Fathers, by Bishops, by graue and learned Deuines in the Councell of Trent. Such as obstinatly defend doctrines accursed by Councells, such as re­uiue the controuersies that haue been already decided, such men, I say, being conuicted of the crime, and confessing themselues to be contemners of the Churches Councells, she deliuers vp to be punished, not to bloud suc­kers, nor to Parricides, but to Christian Prin­ces, and to the Iudges by them appointed: she doth not reproue the endeauours of Deuines who discusse points of doctrine that are yet vndefined, but the temerity of Heretikes, whose labours are (as S. Leo saith) to seeke for the things that already are found, Epist. 60. to reuiue con­trouersies that are ended, to repeale the doctrines that haue byn formerly established. You lay to our charge (Antony) the cruell demeanour of your Caluinists, who with swordes and wea­pons do not defend Decrees of Councells which were laudable, do not put an end to controuersies that were neuer before determi­ned, which were an euill not altogeather so vntolerable: but the doctrines that Councells haue builded, and set vp, they with their poy­niards, swordes, and lances beate downe; the beliefe, which the tradition of Ancestours, which the Decrees of generall Councells haue [Page 106]rooted in Christian breasts, togeather with their bowells, they draw out, and cast into the fire.

21. The third vntruth is page 16. that We Romanists haue contracted the Church Catho­like, to which Christ promised the perpetuall assi­stance of the holy Ghost, to be the very Court of Rome. What Catholike euer wrote, spake, thought, or so much as dreamed of this fond conceite? The particuler Church of Rome we tearme the principall Church, with which all Churches must haue agrement and accesse vn­to, in regard of her more powerfull Principa­lity; we tearme the Church of Rome the head of that Catholike Church, to which Christ promised perpetuall infallible assistance: but we say not, that the sole Roman is the vniuer­sall Catholike Church, taking the Roman by it self, without the rest of the Christian Chur­ches adhering vnto her.

22. The fourth vntruth is in the same 16. page, where you say that, It is exacted of vs, that we belieue firmely as an article of our Faith, that the whole spirit of Christ is resident in the Court of Rome only, yea in the Pope only. What greater falshood can be vttered or deuised? The spirit of Christ is indeed but one, nor is he in any one man, in whome he is not whole, if we respect his substance; and in this sense we say that the spirit of Christ is whole in the [Page 107]Pope, yea in euery Christian. But this one and same spirit worketh very different and diuers things, according to which he is not whole in euery one; and in this sense to say, that we beleeue the whole spirit of Christ to be abiding in the Pope only, is a great vn­truth. First the spirit of Christ assisteth the Elect, whome through the dangerous miseries of this life, he guideth by sure meanes to the land of the liuing. Do we make this spirit resi­dent in the Pope only? Do we not acknow­ledge, that there be others Elect besides the Pope? Secondly the spirit of Christ is the spi­rit of adoption, in whome we crye Father, Fa­ther. Do we teach, that this spirit is in none but in Popes? that the Pope only is Iust, Holy, and the Sonne of God? Thirdly the spirit of Christ signeth and sealeth the hartes of euery one that is faithfull, and annointeth them that they may belieue. And is this spirit also made by vs proper to the Pope only? Do we say that there is not any true beleeuing Christian be­sides him? Fourthly, the spirit of Christ tea­cheth his Church so, that the whole Church can neuer erre. And do we not place this spi­rit infallible in the whole Church? So that whatsoeuer hath byn in any age receaued by the vniforme beliefe of the whole Church, that without doubt as being a most certaine Christian verity, we imbrace. Fiftly, the spirit [Page 108]of Christ decideth the controuersies, which concerning faith, in euery age may arise in the Church; neither do we make fast this spirit to the Pope only, but we teach that the same is abiding in the rest of the Catholike Bishops who be the Iudges of Faith, and togeather with the Roman Bishop their Head, do deter­mine assuredly the cōtrouersies of the Church. Wherefore I wonder where your forehead was, when you did not blush to write, that we make the whole spirit of Christ to be abiding in the Pope only.

23. The fift vntruth is in the 26. page, That whatsoeuer hath byn formerly fortould by the Prophets, for the honour of the vniuersall Church, we by extreme violence and wronge draw it all to the Roman Court only. It is certayne that some sayings of Prophets do particulerly concerne the Church of Rome, and haue byn according­ly performed in it. But that whatsoeuer is sayd glorious of the Church in the ancient Prophets, we turne it all to the Church, yea to the Court of Rome only, you speake it indeed in your splene against the Pope, but in speaking it, your knowledge cannot choose but giue a checke to your tongue.

24. The sixt vntruth is, That the Roman Court hath now a longe while suppressed the holy Councells, & so hath put out the eyes of the Church. If you speake of the Councells that haue byn [Page 109]celebrated already, none do more Religiously obserue their Decrees, then the Church of Rome. If you meane of Councells that should be gathered, that she hinders that they cannot be now assembled; did not the Church of Rome (I pray you) call of late the Councell of Trent, to say nothing of Nationall, Prouincial, and Episcopall Councells, which are very frequently held? And if your accusation be limited to General Councels, you must know that to gather so great and vniuersall assembly is not an easy thing, nor necessary for the sup­pression of euery heresy, as S. Lib. 4. ad­uersusduas Ep. Pelag. cap. 13. Augustine wri­teth. You greeue I perceaue, that the Roman Bishop is able to condemne you without a ge­nerall Councell. Vnhappy were the Church, could he not do it. Out of pride innated to heretiks you ayme at this honour, that a Coū ­cell of the whole Church, should be called a­bout you; which glory also the Pelagians, as being most proud Heretikes, sought, greiuing exceedingly that euery where by the Roman Bishop, and others without any Generall Councell, they were condemned & accursed. They desired (saith S. Augustine) a generall Coū ­cell, that at least they might trouble and disquiet the Catholike world, seing they could not (God being against them) peruert it.

25. The seauenth Vntruth is in the 22. pag. That the Episcopall administratiō of Bishops, is [Page 110]wholy perished, the whole gouernment of Churches is altogeather translated to Rome, the Bishops are scarse the vicars and seruants of our Lord the Pope. That Church-busines of most weight should be referred to the Roman Bishop, the Fathers in all ages haue ordayned. This is now adayes still practised in the Church, what besides and aboue this you add, is not the Roman custome, but your slaunder.

26. The eight, That Bishops be subiect, not only to the Pope, Cardinalls &c. but also to innu­merable Religious Orders of Regulars, and to their Friars, who by their priuiledges deuoure and swal­low vp the power of Bishops. Verily (Antony) you seeme to haue lost all regard of your good name, that dare in this manner range without the bounds of truth.

27. The ninth, That Catholike teachers, namely your maisters the Iesuites, do not furnish their Diuinity with the sayings of holy Scripture, exactly discussed and declared; that amongst them, and in the Church of Rome there is extreme igno­rance of Scripture. He that will but peruse some Catholike writers in matters of sacred lear­ning, specially the Iesuites, will soone see how false a slaunder this is.

28. The tenth, That the books of our Aduer­saries are wholy concealed from vs, that such as are excellent for their piety, and knowledge, yea the learnedst Doctours or Bishops we haue, are not per­mitted [Page 111]in any sort to read them. Thus you write, shewing that hatred against the Pope so trans­ports you, that you mind not what you say. How could the Catholiks of all nations con­fute your hereticall books, did none of vs read them? Are they in no sort permitted, no not to the learnedst of vs all? You may see (An­tony) that though your booke be forbiden, yet I haue read it. Therfore S. Cyprian saith truly, Lib. 1. ep. 2. Amongst prophan men, that are departed from the Church, and from whose breasts the holy Ghost is departed, what els is to be found, but a depraued mind, a deceitfull tongue, cankred hatred, and sacrilegious lying? To which whosoeuer giueth cre­dit, shall at the day of iudgment be found to stand on their side.

The fifth Gulfe, Contumelious speach against the Pope.

AFTER the Falshood of Heretiks, follow­eth their railing, as being a neere neigh­bour vnto it. Heretikes (sayth S. Lib. 16. mor. c. 14. Gregory) with violency of words assayle the weake minds of the faithfull, and robbe the poore people. Not being able to supplant the learned, they take from the vnlearned the veyle of faith by their pestiferous preaching. I shall not need (Antony) to search into your booke for stormes of angry and rayling speach, which in euery page meet [Page 112]with the Reader, and rage against the Pope, that so you may take from Catholikes the veyle of faith, by furious blastes of words, seing you can not with solide reasons persuade them to cast it away. In the 16. page thus you thunder out against the Church of Rome. At Rome many thinges are made articles of Faith, which haue not any institution from Christ, yea moreouer the soules of the faithfull be miserably de­ceaued, and consequently being blind, togeather with their blind guides, be lead, and fall headlong into the gulfe of Perdition. And in the 22. page you rage yet more angerly against Rome. It is not a Church (say you) but a Vineyard to make Noe drunke; it is a flocke which the Pastour doth milke till bloud follow, which he pouleth, shaueth, fleaeth, and deuoureth. In the 32. page. It is not for Prophets to deale with the Roman Bishop, that now doth so mainly trouble, scandalize, robbe, op­presse the Church. The Maiesty of the Roman Pope is counterfayt, temporall, proude, vsurped, no­thing at all.

30. Finally your splene against this pre­sent Pope moueth you to reuile the most holy Pope and Martyr S. Stephen. For in the 37. page you say, that S. Stephen out of indiscreet zeale, by importune excōmunications, ranne head­long into a mischeiuous Schisme; But Cyprian by his Patience, Charity, and exceeding great Wise­dome, was the cause, that the separation did not [Page 113]ensue. This you charge the most holy Mar­tyr, as though he had gone headlong into schisme, a sinne in your opinion much worse then Heresy. How wrongefully, and with­out any iust cause? For no man could proceed more religiously, more modestly, and more prudently then Pope Stephen did in this Con­trouersy with S. Cyprian. When S. Cyprian im­pugned mightily a doctrine, which (as he did not deny) was confirmed by the perpetuall custome of the Church; what did this most holy Bishop, appoynted of God to be Iudge, and to giue sentence in this Controuersy, where this perpetuall custome of the Church was opposed against by the excellent learning and sanctity of Cyprian? He shewed a reuerent respect to them both, as farre as truth & con­science would permit him. That the learning and sanctity of S. Cyprian might not ouerthrow a perpetuall custome, without the assent of a generall Councell, Vincent. Lyrinens. com. c. 16. he set out that Decree so much commended by the Fathers, Nihil inno­uandum praeterquam quod est traditum. That no­thing should be innouated contrary to that which had byn deliuered by tradition. On the other side to shew the regard he had of S. Cy­prians learning and sanctity, he would not haue, that custome should so preiudicate a­gainst S. Cyprians doctrine, that thereupon it should be accompted Heretical, before a gene­rall [Page 114]Councell, but that S. Cyprian, though stil cleauing to his opinion, should notwithstan­ding be retayned in the Catholike commu­nion. A most prudent and temperate decision.

31. Neither did he with any bitter speach prouoke S. Cyprian, who yet (as S. Augustine saith) too much moued against Pope Stephen powred forth such speachs as it were better to bury them in obliuion then to record and re­uiue them. Wherfore by the iudgment of an­tiquity, not only truth stood on the Popes side, but also modesty, charity, wisedome in his proceedings for the defence of the truth. Take heed (Antony) that you be not a member of him, Apoc. 15. to whome was giuen a wide mouth spea­king bigge things, and to blaspheme the tabernacle of God, and the Saints that dwell in heauen. You are as good as your word: according to your promise, de vtilitate credend. cap. 14. you barke: But know, that you barke against that Church, which (as S. Augu­stine saith) by succession of Bishops from the Apo­stolike Sea, hath obteyned the height of authority, Heretikes her enemyes round about her, barking in vayne against her. Sampson sent foxes into the corne of the Philistines with their heads loose, but with their tayles tied, which signifies, saith S. Hierome, that Heretikes haue tongues free to barke, but for performing, they be shackled and cumbred. They barke fiercely, but they beat but the ayre; sooner may they breake them­selues, [Page 115]then fright and remoue the Roman Church from the imbracing of the faith, that hath byn deliuered vnto her. She cleauing to the diuine promises, as it were fixed in the firmanent, being on high, secure, despiseth her rayling aduersaryes, as the moone doth the dogges,

The sixt Gulfe, Arrogancy of Doctour­ship, and Authority ouer the whole Church.

THE power which from the Roman Bi­shop you would faine take, you challenge to your selfe, so making your selfe the vniuer­sall curate of the Church in the 29. page. To euery Bishop so is a particuler Church committed, that he must know, that also (when need is) the vniuersall Church is by Christ commended to him. In the 30. page you add, that any Bishop by his owne proper authority, may remoue to other Chur­ches that are afflicted and oppressed. Thus you make a conueyance of power ouer the whole Church for your selfe, yet you do it subtilty, thinking you should not be seen. You offer that vniuersall power to euery Bishop, knowing a­forehand that out of modesty they will refuse it, that so this authority reiected by the rest, [Page 116]may retourne to your selfe, the first authour therof, as being properly and peculiarly yours. Yea (say you) it is most of all properly belonging to my office, to succour (as farre as in me lieth) the Roman Court, that makes a schisme and diui­sion by it selfe, and teareth in peeces the flocke of Christ. You are the new Atlas, you will sup­port the Heauen, the vniuersall Church with your shoulders. For which enterprise you thinke your selfe so sufficient, that if the Pope and the rest of Catholike Bishops will yield to rely vpon your aduise, what will follow? I hope (say you) that shortly it will so fall out that full peace and concorde, and that so necessary vnion of the holy Churches will thereupon ensue, so that we shall beleeue all the same, and all abide in the same rule. Your hopes are vayne (poore soule) you take to much vpon you.

33. Heresies were before you were borne, and will be when you shalbe dead, & the num­ber of Heretiks you now make greater by one through Pride, which deserues to be pittied rather then confuted. For what? Put the case the Roman Bishops would become your sub­iects, and remit the busines of vnion and re­conciliation to your wisedome; do you thinke the matter ended, and that the Sects opposite to the Roman Church, Grecians, Lutherans, Caluinists, Anabaptists, will also without more ado become obedient to you at a becke? Such [Page 117]is your vanity, that you seeme not to doubt, but that all the rest of Christian companyes, besides the Roman, will in this affaire of peace beare humble duty and respect towards you. You know not (Antony) and little do you imagine, what fierce, and furious windes, I meane proud and peremptory sects rage in the Northern parts, which if you can assemble to a generall Councell, or keepe them when they are there in peace, verily you shall be more omnipotent then Aeolus. But afore-hand I tell you, they will not set a rush for you. Maydes and Boyes will laugh you to scorne, they will preferre their skil of Scripture before yours, with sentences flowing thicke and threefold from their tongues, & vttered with one breath, they will ouerload you. If you dare but mutter against what they say, you shall be stiled Papist; if you do not straight yield to be­leeue them, they will take pitty of your eyes, that hauing beene so many yeares togeather accustomed to Popish darkenesse, cānot now behold the cleere shining light of the Gospel. This is the Caluinian nature, which if you be ignorant of, you will learne to your cost.

34. But to returne to the care of the vni­uersall Church, which you presumptuously take vpon you, togeather with authority, to visit any Church at your pleasure, which you shall iudge to haue need of your assistance. [Page 118]Herein you commit a double errour. The first is, to thinke that a Bishop, to help other Churches that are afflicted, may abandon his owne, and in such manner adandon it, as to leaue it destitute of the meanes of saluation, to be rauened & deuoured by wolues. For this in your conceit you do, and this you thinke that lawfully you may do, to succour the Roman. But what ancient holy Bishop can you name that did so? Which of them hath left written, that such practise is laudable? Euen those Bi­shops whome you pretend to imitate, your selfe confesse, that they went to assist other Churchs, leauing their owne well appointed, and prouided of sufficient persons to teach and instruct them.

35. The second errour is, to thinke that euery bishop at his owne good liking, and by his owne authority, may visit other Churches that are in need, & put them in order, though the proper Bishops of such Churches be vn­willing. Which doctrine were it brought to practise, would breake and vtterly ouerthrow the peace and concord of the Church, as any man of iudgment may soone foresee. For if euery Bishop may, whensoeuer he shall thinke it needfull, passe into the boundes of anothers Iurisdiction, there sit as Iudge of cōtrouersies, and pronounce finall sentence vpon them; it cānot be, but Bishops will very often encoun­ter, [Page 119]and be beaten one against another by mu­tuall discord; nor can I imagine what other deuise can be thought of, de vnit. Eccles. c. 4. or feigned so fit to trouble the quiet of Churches. There is (as S. Cyprian saith) but one Bishopricke, whereof a part is wholy possessed by euery one, yet so is the Bi­shopricke one, as the body of man is one, which hath an Head that commandeth the rest of the members. In this manner the one Bishopricke of the world hath one Sea, su­preme aboue the rest, l. 3. ep. 4. which the same S. Cy­prian tearmeth, the principall Sea, from which Priestly vnity and concord floweth, to which perfi­diousnes can haue no accesse. The authority of this Sea spread and diffused ouer the rest, is that Glew of concord, which ioyneth them all togeather in peace and charity. This Sea hath care to prouide for the necessityes of the vni­uersall Church, and to send as Legats other Bishops, whose Churches be well prouided, to giue succour to others that are in need. By this Sea were Osius, Athanasius, Eusebius Bishop of Vercells, Lucifer of Calaris, and others sent, whome you name and affirme (but as your manner is without any proofe) that they put themselues into the busines of visitation of Churches vpon their owne head, and autho­rity.

36. Theodoret writeth, that Lucifer Bishop of Calaris, & Eusebius Bishop of Vercells, went about [Page 120]visiting the Churches of the East, Lib. 3. c. 4. and namely the Churches of Antioch, and Alexandria, to see whe­ther the Decrees of the Nicen Councell were kept. That Lucifer at Antioch, ordayned Paulinus Bi­shop, that Eusebius at Alexandria togeather with Athanasius called a Councell, to which Lucifer sent a Deacon, by whome he signified that he would agree to the things that, that Councell should or­dayne. These things you thinke that those two Bishops but of meane Seas, did performe by their owne proper authority, & that you haue sufficient authority of your selfe to do the like when, and whersoeuer you shal iudge it expe­dient. Lib. 6. ad­uersus Iu­lian. I may with reason exclayme with S. Augustine. What dares not the pride of rotten flesh presume? You should (Antony) haue known what S. Gregory Nazianzen writeth, Monod. in S. Basil. that Euse­bius Bishop of Vercells, and Lucifer of Calaris were sent ex vrbe Româ, from the Citty of Rome into the East, particularly to appease a sedition and tumult at Cesaraea; De viris il­lustribus in Lucifero. and that which S. Hierome left recorded of Lucifer, that he was sent Legat into the East to Constantius Empe­rour, from Liberius the Roman Bishop. Whence you may gather that by power delegated to them from the Roman Bishop, they were able to commaund the East, and ordaine such great affaires, and not by their owne proper autho­rity. Wherefore you haue not Lucifer the Bi­shop of Calaris, but Lucifer prince of Pride for [Page 121]your patterne and president, when you go a­bout to rayse your selfe a throne in the coasts of the North, that as Christ in the South by the Bishop of Rome gouerneth the Vniuersall Church, so in the North, he that seeks to be like to the highest, may by you, as Head, send forth and display his counsells and deuises vpon all Christendome.

37. And what meant you to match your selfe with those most holy and famous Bishops & Worthyes of the Church? Contrary things layd togeather deserue to set forth mutually ech other. In the practise of these Saintes as in a glasse we may behold, how opposite all your proceedings are to the rules of sanctity. They going left their Churches prouided, and well commended to other pastours: You leaue your Church wholy destitute, to be deuoured (as you conceiue) by wolues. They either went to the Roman Church for succour and coun­sell, or were sent by the Roman to giue suc­cour and counsell to others: you fly from the Roman Sea, you detest & blaspheme it. They being men renowned in the whole Church for their learning and sanctity, being earne­stly inuited by diuers Bishops, and by the se­cret suffrages of the whole Church for that interprise designed, went to put an end to the Church Controuersies: you being neither for the dignity of your Sea eminēt aboue the rest, [Page 122]nor commendable for Knowledge and Holy­nes of life, a man vtterly vnknowne, who by your Apostasy now beginne to haue fame: You, I say, offer your selfe for vniuersal Super­intendent and Curate to the world, which before this your offer had neuer so much as heard of your name. They laboured for that faith which had byn settled and defined by Councells: you seeke to bring in Doctrine which you know to haue byn many ages ago condemned by the authority of Councells. They stroue against Heretikes, that seing they had bin accursed in Coūcells, they might like­wise be reiected from the Catholike Commu­nion: your labours are in fauour of damned Heretikes, that though they be proscribed by Councells, yet they may be reteyned in the Church, if so be, that they will professe Christ, by the essentiall Creedes, as you speake. And you seeme to be of the same mind, that some Donatists were, Epist. 48. whome S. Augustine condemns that it is no matter in what part or side a man be a Christian, nor do you consider, that it is sitting, that God should be serued in vnity. Thus by com­paring your selfe with the ancient holy Bi­shops, your sanctity appeares.

The seauenth Gulfe, New flattering doctrine.

THIS Gulfe imbraceth two vices, and both of them properly belong to Heretiks: the one is to coyne new doctrines, the other to flatter their auditours, specially Princes. Lib. 1. ca. 1. Of the first, S. Irenaeus saith, That later Heretiks do day by day inuent some new thing, which neuer any man had thought of before. Of the second S. Hierome writeth, Lib. 1. cōt. Pelag. That flattering properly agreeth to Heretiks, and to them that study how to deceaue soules, according to the saying of the Apostle: such persons serue not Christ our Lord, but their owne belly, and by sweet speaches and benedictions seduce the harts of the innocent.

39. Many new doctrines you haue in your booke, Antony, as are these. 1. That a Bishop for feare of persecution may forsake his flock, and leaue it wholy destitute. 2. That to euery Bishop is giuen the care of the vniuersall Church, so that by his owne proper authority he may intermeddle in the affaires of other Bishoprikes. 3. That none who professe Christ by the Creeds essential of the ancient Church, are to be repelled from the Catholike Com­munion. 4. That Schisme is a farre greater sinne then Heresy. These your new conceits haue been mentioned and refuted already.

40. Other foure sayings you haue, wher­in you make fayre with Kings, by depressing the authority of the Church. The first is, That Kings can do many thinges in the Church. The second, That the Church can do nothing at all in temporalls, specially towards Kings. The third, That all iurisdiction, is to be remoued from the Church. These three propositions you haue in the 28. and 29. page. In the first, the English Parlamētarians agree with you. The two other be new, not only repugnant to the ancient Fathers, but also to the Heretikes of this age, to Puritans, and Protestants, and to the eager defenders of the late English Oath. For these deny not the Churches authority ouer Kings, yea they graunt, that euen in temporalls the Church may commaund them, though they mantayne, that Kings obstinate & rebellious against the Church may not be deposed from their gouernement. And what is Iurisdiction, but power to appoint what is right, to enact Lawes, to call the transgressors of their lawes before them, to sit vpon them, and punish thē being conuinced of punishable offences? Now that the Church did in former times exercise this power, as deriued to her from Christ, is so cleere, that he that is ignorant therof, or so impudent as to deny it, I thinke him not worthy to be disputed with.

41. The fourth doctrine, I dare say is new [Page 125]and properly yours, then which scarse any more base can be deuised to flatter Kings. Which doctrine you may seem to haue coyned of purpose, that therby you might make your selfe a free passage to the Court and Kitchin of the King of Great Britany. The doctrine is, that Kings, though they sin, yet may not they be rebuked or checked, neither by their Fami­liars, nor by Priests, nor by the cheefe Bishop, but only by Prophets, whome God doth extra­ordinarily raise & designe for this office. That you teach this new Diuinity, I will conuince, and leaue you being conuinced to be iudged by his most Gracious Maiesty. The Roman Sage (were he to giue sentence vpon you) would put you in the number of theeues, seing you seeke to depriue Kings of their best trea­sure, Lib. 6. de beneficijs cap. 4. whereof in Courtes there is euer great scarsity. I will shew you (saith Seneca) what is not be found in magnificent Pallaces, what is wan­ting to them that want nothing: they want one to tell the truth & deliuer frō errour the man that sits amazed, & besides his wits in the midest of a great multitude of lyars, brought, by longe vse of hearing pleasing things insteed of true things, to that passe, he knowes not what truth is. Such an admoni­sher and rebuker of Christian Kings, the Ro­man Bishop is by office designed by Christ, the greatest treasure he could bestow on them, which you endeauour by your new Deuinity [Page 126]to take from them. For in the page 31. to proue that a Bishop may reprehend and rebuke the Pope, you beginne to declare the matter by the difference that is betweene an earthly King, and the Pope, writing in this manner.

42. The Maiesty of an earthly King is to be dreaded, who, as Tertullian saith, is second to God, inferiour to God only; and ouer whome, saith Optatus, none is but God only. Wherefore when Dauid was to be rebuked for his adultery and mur­der, not the High-priest, nor any other, either Priest or Leuite, not any man either friend or fa­miliar, durst assume to himselfe that office: But God himselfe for this purpose, appoynted his owne proper and peculiar messenger, and sent the Prophet Nathan to reprehend the King. But for the Ro­man Bishop now most of all troubling, scandalizing, robbing and spoyling the Church, it is not for Pro­phets to deale with him, it is not to be expected that God should stirre vp for this enterprise singular Pro­phets, nor send speciall messengers. The Maiesty of our Roman Pope is not so great, that it ought to feare vs; that temporall stately Maiesty is counter­faite, vsurped, no Maiesty at all; the Pope he is our brother, our Colleague, a Bishop as we are. All these be your owne words (Antony,) where­with you breath forth that flattering doctrine which I layd to your charge. You say the Popes Maiesty ought not so to terrify Bishops, but they may rebuke him. But the Maiesty of [Page 127]an earthly King is so dreadfull, so much to be feared, that no man that is not a Prophet, though he be the chiefe Bishop, may take v­pon him the office to reprehend him. Do you speake this of base feare which Cowardes beare towards them that haue power ouer the body, or of pious feare and reuerence which by right is due to Superiours; which if we ne­glect, we do against our Duty, and offend God? If you speake of the first kind of feare, you faigne a difference betweene the Pope and the King, where there is not any at all.

43. For as the Popes Maiesty ought not to strike into our harts base and seruile feare, which makes vs to neglect our dutyes: so like­wise we ought not to be in this manner affri­ghted by Kingly Maiesty, Christ hauing giuen vs an expresse cōmandment not to feare them, that kill the body, but can do no hurt to the soule. Luc. 16. And de facto, as the King by the terrour of his Maiesty may fright men vniustly, and make them not to discharge towards him the duty that they owe of correction; so may the Pope also; for else why ran you away? Why fly you the Popes paynted Maiesty, paynted Prisons, paynted sires, paynted torments? You be not so farre besides your selfe: so that this feare­fullnes of the Kings Maiesty aboue the Popes is deuised without any ground, speaking of base and slauish feare. For this sort of feare, as [Page 128]neither of their Maiestyes ought, so either of their Maiestyes may strike into base minded mens harts. You speake then (if you speake to the purpose) of pious reuerence and feare of Superiours, due by right vnto them, and therein you put the difference betwixt the Kings Maiesty and the Popes. So you say that the Popes Maiesty ought not of right to be so feared, but that Bishops may freely rebuke him: but the Kinges Maiesty by right and by the Law of God ought to be so dreaded, that no man may reprehend him, no not the Pope, except he haue a Propheticall and extraordi­nary commission to do it. Whence it is conse­quent, that none may without sinne tell Kings of their faultes that be not Prophtes.

44. Now how vngodly and abiect this your new conceyte is, may soone appeare by considering the arguments you bring to con­firme it. They are three contayned in your former words, and deriued from three diffe­rences which you imagine betweene the Pope and the King. The first is, That the Popes Maiesty is counterfayte, temporall, faigned, no Maiesty at al; but the Maiesty of a terrene King is exceeding great (tremenda) to be dreaded and feared: therfore the Popes Maiesty may and ought to be freely rebuked, but the Kings Maiesty in no case, not for any cause, nor by any man that is not specially sent of God for [Page 129]that purpose. This diuersity betwene terrene and spirituall authority, you proue not. And no meruayle: you found it not out by reason, but by reuelatiō of that spirit, which is prince ouer men, that mind earthly things, Philip. c. 3. vers. 18. whose belly is their God, whose glory in their owne confusion. By the same spirit was Luther moued to com­pare the state of Virginity with the state of Marriage, writing, In epist. ad Cor. that the first state is heathe­nish, secular, terrene, mirery; the second spiritu­all, heauenly, diuine, golden. This doctrine flesh and bloud reuealed to Luther, which also moueth you to debase Priestly Maiesty vnder the feete of earthly. In the palate of the an­cient holy Bishops, Priestly dignity had a more diuine sauour, they had it in higher esteeme, which they did so farre extoll aboue Royall, as the heauen surmounted the earth, the spirit goeth beyond the flesh. You, Greg. Na­zian. ad Praesid. iras. O earthly Princes (saith one of them) the law of Christ maketh subiect to our bench, we likewise haue power and commaund, yea power more excellent and eminent then yours is, vnlesse it be reasonable that the spirit should yield homage to the flesh, & heauenly things giue place to earthly things. Behold what an high conceit these pious Prelates did frame of their Pontificall power? You to whome power to binde both in Heauen and Earth, in respect of earthly power seemeth vnsauory and contemp­tible; what wonder though as salt without sa­uour, [Page 130]you were cast forth vnto the dung-hill.

45. The second difference betweene the King and the Pope deuised by you, is, that the Pope is the brother and colleague of Bishops, but the King is second after God, inferiour to God only. By the first, because the Pope is the bro­ther of Bishops, you inferre, that the Pope may be rebuked by his fellow bishops. And your inference is good, if the Pope giue iust cause, if the correction be giuen with due modesty, in due time, place and manner, that it may be for the good both of the Pope & the Church. By the other, because the King is second to God, you gather that no man may rebuke him but God only, and the Prophets that are stir­red vp by God, & sent purposely for that end. You be then of this mind, that the dignity of a King which is to be next vnto God; doth make him not to be the sonne of the Church, nor the brother of Christians. For if his being su­preme after God in temporalls, hinder not but that in spirituall things he is the sonne of the Church, why may he not be rebuked by his Mother? If he be the brother of Christiās, the brother of the Children of the Church, why may not they warne him of his faults, freely yet with modesty, with prudency, and with Charity? Hebr. 12. vers. 7.8. The Apostle saith: What son is it whom the Father doth not correct? If you be not vnder discipline and correction, you be not sonnes, but ba­stards. [Page 131]You can neuer exempt the King from being vnder the discipline and correction of Bishops, except you put him from the number of the children of the Church.

46. But take heed you do not this, not be­cause therein you should contradict the an­cient Fathers (for to do that, you would not greatly care) but for feare least you offend his gratious Maiesty of Great Brittany, whome by this flattering diuinity you endeuour to sooth. For William Tooker Deane of Lich-field in his booke called Duellum aduersus Martinum Beca­num, in the 34. page thereof, hath these words. Our most gracious and potent King Iames doth ac­compt nothing more glorious, and more honorable for him, then with Valentinian to professe himselfe the sonne of the Church, and with Theodoricus King of Italy most willingly to acknowledge him­selfe the pupill of the Church, and the disciple of his Arch-bishops and Bishops. Marke me (Antony.) Either you deny the King to be the sonne of the Church, or you grant it. If you deny it, you take from the King the title which (if we beleeue Maister Tooker) most, and aboue all other he esteemeth. If you grant the King to be the sonne of the Church, and yet will ex­empt him from being vnder her discipline, you make him (if we beleeue S. Paul) not a lawfully begotten sonne, but adulterous. Which way so euer you turne your selfe, you [Page 132]are in bryars; you both dispute impertinently, and flatter foolishly.

47. The third difference you put between the Pope and the King is, that it is not for Pro­phets to meddle with the Pope, but to reprehend Kings, God himselfe appoints speciall messengers, and Prophets. This difference you proue by the example of Dauid, who when he was to be re­buked for murder and adultery, no man, no not the High-priest himselfe durst attempt it, because Dauid being King, was inferiour to God only. Heere you suppose things that are false, & yet were your false supposalls granted you, yet your argument is naught. First it is false that Dauid was to be rebuked for adultery and murder. Dauid sinned closely, he cun­ningly made away with Vrias by the sworde of his enemyes. This his wickednes mortall men could hardly know, much lesse could they reproue him for it. Secondly it is false that the high-priest durst not reprehend Dauid, be­cause he was a King next vnto God. He rebu­ked him not, because he knew not that he was worthy of rebuke: for had he knowne it, why might he not haue dared to do that to Dauid, 2. Paral. cap. 26. which Azarias High-priest did to King Ozias, whome after sharpe reprehensions he turned out of the Temple? And how vaine your dis­course is, though your premisses were solide, hence may it appeare, that by the same kind of [Page 133]argument, I will easily proue, that the Pope may not be rebuked, but by some Prophet and speciall messenger sent for that purpose from God. For God, to reprehend the High-priest hath sent speciall messengers. 1. Reg. cap. 2. & 3. When Hely the High-priest out of fond affection and indul­gence towards his sonnes, permitted them to staine the worship of God with most heynous and scandalous sinnes, and so deserued to be rebuked and soundly tould of his fault; yet none of the Priests, nor of the Leuites, nor of his friends and familiars durst (that we read of) rebuke him for it; but God sent sin­gular Prophets and speciall Heraldes for that purpose. Therfore the high Priest may not be rebuked, but of Prophets, & by singular com­mission from God. This argument is much stronger then yours is, yet if I should seriously bring it, as placing any force therein, I were a foole. But you that would haue earthly power preferred before the heauenly, what wonder though your arguments in this behalfe be earthly?

The eight Gulfe, Fond and idle Talking.

YOvv write in the 28. page, that you heare a voice which doth thunder still in your eares, and say vnto you, Cry. You follow the instinct [Page 116]of this voice; In cap. 22. Isa. you do as Heretikes vse to do, whose doctrine, saith S. Hierome, consistes not in knowledge, but in clamors; and in idle multiplicity of words without sense. You powre forth words and make a noise, wherewith you beate the ayre, and touch no body; yea sometimes you strike your selfe, with one sentence destroy­ing what in another you had set vp. Examples in both kinds of this fond talking are very plentifull in your booke, I shall gather you a few.

49. In the 35. page, being now Gouer­nour of the Vniuersal Church, created by your owne authority, you very grauely exhort and rebuke the Bishop of Rome and other Ca­tholike Bishops in this māner. Articles in them­selues indifferent that were neuer yet in the Church sufficiētly discussed, established or defined, let vs not admit as articles of fayth, except they be first suffi­ciently defined to the full, or be shewed to be suffici­ently already defined. Let vs not also condemne any for Heretikes, except it be first cleare, that they haue been formerly, or now are sufficiently condem­ned by the Church. In things indifferent then, let free scope be left to euery one, to thinke and pra­ctise as they please: let euery one abound in their owne sense, till the Church, taught and gouerned by the spirit of Christ, shall make an end of Con­trouersies, and separate the true chaffe from the true grayne. Thus you talke. And to what [Page 136]end are so many wordes cast into the wind? Whome do they concerne? Who requires that doctrines questionable be admitted as articles of Faith, before they be fully and sufficiently defined? Who would haue any to be accom­ted Heretikes, before the Church instructed by the holy Ghost hath-censured them? We Catholikes hold the Primacy of the Roman Bishop as a doctrine of Faith: the denyers ther­of who haue byn accursed in diuers generall Councells we detest as Heretikes. This grie­ueth you, so many Councells be not full, be­cause you the Pastour forsooke of the vniuer­sall Church, haue not subscribed vnto them. And in the 38. page you thunder againe with­out any bolt, and giue vs idle prescripts. Let vs (say you) hold different doctrines, let vs be of contrary opinions, till things be fully defined which are not yet fully defined, but in the meane time let vs continue in vnity. Do not make the schisme grea­ter then it is. Thus you idly spend pen, inke and paper. What doctrine do we demaund that you should beleeue, which hath not byn established by the Decrees of general Coūcels. Well saith Marcian the Emperour, that they call in question, and dare publikely dispute against that which is already iudged and rightly ordayned; offer great wronge to the iudgmēt of the most Reue­rend Synodes. The doctrine which most you mislike, to wit, that the Pope is appoynted of [Page 136]God, Head and Pastour of the whole Church, the Orient and Occident hath defined in nine Generall Councells. What fuller Councells can you desire? Are you yet fully satisfied? No: but you puffe, and go forward blowing & still demanding fuller definitions, till you come to conclude your Pamphlet with this sentence, which to me seemes wholy deuoyd of any good sense. Let vs driue away, by the light of the truth Euangelicall, without firme ob­stinacy, the darkenes of errours and falsities.

50. Secondly that you not only beate the ayre with idle words, but also fight against your selfe, denying in one place what in ano­ther you affirme, these fiue examples of your contradictions may make manifest.

51. The first contradiction. In the page 8. and 9. you say, that the Roman diligence in forbidding the bookes of her aduersaries did euer displease you. This practise (say you) not to be voyd of suspition, as reason doth shew, so did I euer Iudge. Euer, Antony? did you neuer dis­like the reading bookes that impugne the Ro­man doctrine? did you neuer aboue measure detest it? In the 4. page to proue that you tooke not your resolution to depart from vs, by reading our aduersaries bookes, thus you write. I Religiously call God to witnesse, that I did vehemently abhorre from the reading of the bookes, that the Roman diligence had forbidden. [Page 137]Which bookes if any Prelate addicted to the Roman Court hath detested, then I by reason of vayne feares conceaued against this reading in my child­hood, did aboue measure detest.

52. The second Contradiction. In the 9. page you say, That you still suspected the Ro­man Church, by reason of her forbidding of her aduersaries bookes, that her doctrine was weake, and not able to ouerthrow her aduersaries arguments. But in the 7. page you say the con­trary, to wit, that the proper decrees & doctrines of Rome, were with true captiuity of your vnder­standing wholy imprinted, and rooted in your mind. How were they wholy imprinted in your mind, if you euer supected them? if you still imbraced them, not without feare & stag­gering?

53. The third Contradiction. You say in the 2. and 5. page, That by going from Rome, you incurre great losse of wealth and dignity. And in the 25. page, That vnder the Pope you had honorable dignities, and commodities not to be con­temned. But in the page 22. you say, that, Bi­shops vnder the Pope that are not Temporall Lords (and such a meere Bishop were you) are scarse so much as seruantes of our Lord the Pope, base, contemptible, oppressed, troden vnder foote, mise­rably subiect. Now (Antony) make these things agree, base seruitude and honorable dignity, cōmo­dityes not to be contemned, & miserable subiection.

54. The fourth contradiction. In the 22. page you write, That the Church vnder the Pope, is no Church, but a certaine Common-wealth vnder his Monarchy, meerly temporall. These wordes import that the Church of Rome is no Church: but else where you call it a Church, yea the Church of Christ. Pag. 29. I am Bishop in the Church of Christ, who then were Bishop in no Church but in the Roman. And in the 35. page, you call the Roman Bishops, your Col­leages and fellow-Bishops. And againe page 39. you thus commaund the Catholike-Roman Bishops, Offer your communion readily to all, that still retayne their opinions against you, yet so, that falsityes be driuen away. None can make that common with another, which they haue not themselues. If the Roman Church be not a Christian Communion and society, how can they offer readily their Christian Society and communion to others? If it be meerely and wholy a temporall Common-wealth, what can it affoard to her friends but meere human peace and temporall communion?

55. The fifth Cōtradiction. In the 39. pag. you cōmand Bishops, to restore peace and chari­ty to all that professe Christ by the Creeds essentiall. In these words you require no more, then the profession of the Creeds essentiall, but within three lines after this sentence followes: Offer readily your cōmunion to all, sauing their opinions, [Page 139]yet driuing away falsityes. Here you will haue them that communicate togeather, to agree not only in the profession of your essentiall Creeds, but also in the abnegation of falsities, wherof you expresse neither the quality nor the number. And yet also herein you agree not with your selfe: for in the 36. page you praise S. Cyprian, because he did cōmunicate with such as erred, and whome he iudged to erre most grieuously. Here you will haue errours to be to­lerated, and communion not to be broken for errours: but in the former speach you allow not communion, but with this condition, that on both sides falsities be driuen away. I demand of you (Antony) whether errours & grieuous errours be not falsities? If they be: then how is communion to be giuen without reiecting of errours, and yet not to be exhibited with­out driuing away falsities? Here you shamful­ly contradict your selfe.