A
REIOYNDER
TO
BRISTOWES
REPLY
IN
DEFENCE
OF
ALLENS
SCROLL
OF
ARTICLES
AND
BOOKE
OF
PVRGATORIE
.
By
W.
F.
D.
in
diuinitie
.
The
first
Chapter
.
I
will
shew
briefely
that
Fulke
confesseth
,
out
of
the
true
Church
FVlke
hath
alwayes
beleeued
that
it
is
openly
practized
in
the
Popish
Church
,
to
take
in
men
by
Baptisme
first
,
and
then
by
reconciliation
to
receiue
them
if
any
went
out
,
or
were
cast
out
:
thereby
to
insinuate
,
that
the
Popish
Church
is
the
true
Church
,
it
is
an
argument
voyde
of
al
consequens
.
For
if
the
ceremoniall
outward
practise
of
baptisme
&
reconciliation
,
were
able
to
proue
the
practizers
to
bee
the
true
Church
,
not
onely
the
papistes
,
but
all
other
sects
of
heretikes
practizing
the
same
,
should
be
the
true
Church
.
This
is
the
first
argument
,
and
as
good
as
the
best
he
maketh
,
to
proue
the
heresie
of
Popery
to
be
the
true
Church
of
Christ
.
CAP.
II.
That
he
confesseth
the
knowne
Church
of
the
first
600
yearès
I
beleeue
that
the
Church
of
Christ
,
hath
continued
from
the
Apostles
vnto
this
day
,
and
shall
doe
from
Other
bymatters
there
be
in
this
Chapter
,
in
which
I
am
carped
of
Bristowe
.
First
,
that
ignorantly
I
affirme
,
somewhere
,
namely
Purg.
371.
that
the
controuersie
betwene
the
Britains
and
Saxons
about
the
celebration
of
Easter
,
was
the
same
,
that
was
betweene
Victor
Bishoppe
of
Rome
,
and
the
Christians
of
Asia
:
whereas
I
saide
,
they
defended
a
ceremonie
receiued
of
the
East
Church
,
euen
as
the
East
church
did
long
before
against
Victor
〈◊〉
.
of
Rome
:
for
they
defende
it
by
example
and
authoritie
of
S
Iohn
the
Euangelist
,
Bed
.
hist.
lib.
3.
cap.
25.
and
so
did
the
Asians
,
Euseb.
lib.
5.
Cap.
24.
Secondly
where
I
saye
,
that
Athanasius
and
a
fewe
other
,
that
were
banished
and
persecuted
,
were
the
true
Catholike
Church
:
he
noteth
in
the
margent
,
such
is
his
skill
in
the
story
of
that
time
:
Belike
he
is
offended
,
that
I
say
they
were
but
a
fewe
,
that
tooke
parte
with
Athanasius
.
How
smal
or
great
my
skill
is
in
the
storie
of
that
time
,
Bristows
practise
of
logike
is
but
little
,
which
remembreth
not
that
many
&
fewe
are
relatiues
,
and
spoken
in
comparison
:
I
say
againe
they
were
but
few
in
comparison
of
the
Arrians
,
that
tooke
parte
with
Athanasius
against
his
aduersaries
,
when
he
was
banished
.
How
many
councels
helde
the
Arrians
in
the
East
against
the
trueth
?
The
Emperor
himselfe
infected
with
the
heresie
:
let
the
worlde
iudge
where
the
greater
shewe
of
multitude
was
,
with
the
Emperor
,
and
with
the
councels
;
or
with
Athanasius
and
his
fautors
.
Yea
when
Liberius
Bishop
of
Rome
in
the
West
,
had
subscribed
to
the
same
heresie
of
the
Arrians
,
&
Constantius
after
both
his
brethren
were
deade
,
ruled
both
in
the
East
,
and
the
West
:
what
thinke
you
was
the
vaunting
multitude
of
the
Arrian
faction
,
insulting
against
the
true
Christians
,
calling
them
heretikes
,
Homousians
,
Athanasians
,
&
c
?
Vincentius
Lyrinensis
saith
:
Arrianorum
vene●●●
non
iam
portiunculam
quandam
,
sed
penè
totum
orbem
contaminauerat
,
ade●ut
prope
cunctis
latini
sermonis
episcopis
,
partim
vi
,
partim
fraude
deceptis
,
caligo
quaedam
mentibus
offunderetur
:
The
poyson
of
the
Arrians
had
defiled
not
nowe
a
little
portion
,
but
almost
all
the
worlde
,
insomuch
that
almost
all
the
Bishops
of
the
Latine
speach
,
partly
by
force
,
partly
by
fraude
being
deceiued
,
a
certaine
myst
couered
their
minds
.
You
see
what
skill
this
proude
censor
hath
of
the
hystorie
of
that
time
.
Last
of
all
,
he
saith
I
make
a
proper
distribution
,
the
Popes
of
all
ages
,
to
be
theirs
,
and
yet
the
Apostles
and
doctors
to
be
mine
.
But
he
maketh
an
vnproper
application
of
the
name
of
Popes
to
the
Bishops
of
Rome
of
al
ages
,
where
as
a
great
number
of
the
most
auncient
were
godly
men
,
and
of
true
religion
,
members
of
the
same
Church
wherof
the
Apostles
and
Doctors
were
,
and
not
antichristian
tyrants
,
as
the
later
sort
of
degenerated
bishops
haue
shewed
themselues
to
be
.
I
doe
not
meane
to
prosecute
euery
trifling
matter
after
this
manner
,
but
to
let
the
reader
see
by
these
fewe
what
great
pyth
is
in
his
marginall
notes
and
friuolous
quarels
.
CAP.
III.
That
he
confesseth
the
foresaide
true
Church
to
haue
made
so
playnely
with
vs
,
in
verie
many
of
the
same
controuersies
of
I
confesse
indeede
,
that
the
Popish
Church
holdeth
some
errors
,
that
were
helde
within
the
compasse
of
Also
I
confesse
,
that
the
true
Church
may
erre
,
and
hath
erred
,
yea
euen
that
Church
whereof
Caluin
was
a
teacher
,
and
that
Caluin
himselfe
in
some
things
both
might
erre
and
did
erre
,
although
Bristow
like
a
scoffing
parasite
,
doth
except
the
same
.
But
where
he
chargeth
me
to
confesse
,
sometime
,
also
the
long
continuing
of
the
Church
in
incorruption
,
thereby
to
conuince
me
of
contradiction
:
I
answere
,
if
he
charge
me
with
confessing
the
continuing
of
the
Church
in
incorruption
,
for
600.
yeares
next
after
Christ
,
hee
lyeth
in
his
throat
,
I
neuer
confessed
any
such
continuance
:
If
I
had
affirmed
that
it
continned
after
the
first
planting
in
incorruption
for
a
long
season
,
I
might
say
without
contradiction
,
that
afterward
it
was
corrupted
with
diuers
errors
,
which
I
haue
so
proued
,
that
Bristowe
himselfe
cannot
deny
them
.
But
I
must
follow
his
sections
of
this
Chapter
.
The
first
part
that
the
true
Church
may
erre
.
I
confesse
the
true
Church
may
erre
.
The
seconde
part
that
the
true
Church
did
also
erre
:
and
in
the
same
poyntes
as
we
doe
nowe
erre
in
.
1.
Where
he
chargeth
them
with
many
pointes
together
.
I
confesse
the
true
Church
did
also
erre
,
and
in
some
Particular
errors
,
that
I
confesse
to
haue
beene
taken
of
the
Gentiles
,
or
heretikes
,
he
numbreth
8.
The
signe
of
the
crosse
,
from
the
Valentinians
:
Oblations
for
the
dayes
of
birth
and
death
,
from
the
Gentiles
:
prescripte
times
of
fasting
,
&
immoderate
extolling
of
sole
life
in
the
ministers
of
the
Church
,
from
the
Montanistes
,
Manichees
,
Tacianistes
:
Prayer
for
the
dead
,
of
the
Montanistes
:
purgatorie
fier
,
from
the
Origenistes
:
Hierom
almost
condemning
of
seconde
mariages
,
from
Tertullian
:
The
name
of
sacrifice
,
from
the
Gentiles
:
Also
in
the
later
writers
,
inuocation
of
sainctes
,
prayers
for
the
dead
,
and
diuerse
superstitious
and
superfluous
ceremonies
,
confessed
by
me
to
be
maintained
.
2
As
touching
Vigilantius
and
inuocation
of
Sainctes
by
it
I
confesse
that
Ambrose
,
Augustine
and
Hierom
3
As
touching
Iouinian
of
fasting
,
of
Virginities
merite
,
of
Votaries
Mariage
.
If
Iouinian
contemned
Christian
fastes
,
he
erred
,
neyther
We
neither
boast
vpon
Augustine
nor
Ambrose
,
when
they
dissent
from
our
doctrine
:
Neither
are
ashamed
of
Vigilantius
nor
Berengarius
,
when
they
agree
therewith
:
But
my
wordes
are
these
:
Seeing
God
himselfe
is
the
father
of
that
doctrine
,
which
wee
haue
receyued
by
his
holy
worde
,
we
neither
boast
vppon
Augustine
nor
Ambrose
,
when
they
dissent
therefro
:
neither
are
ashamed
of
Vigilantius
nor
Berengarius
,
when
they
agree
therewith
.
4
As
touching
Ceremonies
.
I
confesse
they
had
many
superfluous
Ceremonies
,
yea
such
as
the
Papistes
them selues
haue
not
,
for
the
5
As
touching
Purgatorie
and
prayer
for
the
dead
.
I
acknowledge
,
that
prayer
for
the
dead
is
an
auncient
What
he
saith
of
particular
Doctors
,
and
their
particular
times
for
it
.
I
say
,
that
most
of
the
particular
Doctors
,
from
the
Exemplis
talibus
plena
sunt
omnia
,
All
places
are
full
of
such
examples
.
And
that
which
Bristow
citeth
out
of
Ruffinus
in
exp.
Symb
,
that
no
heresie
did
spring
at
Rome
,
is
to
be
vnderstode
onely
of
such
heresies
as
he
speaketh
of
before
,
against
the
danger
of
which
,
some
clauses
were
added
to
the
creede
:
For
otherwise
,
Ruffinus
could
not
forget
what
hee
him selfe
had
translated
out
of
Eusebius
lib.
6.
cap.
33.
of
Nouatus
,
which
being
a
Priest
of
the
Church
of
Rome
,
was
author
of
the
heresie
of
the
Nouatians
.
2
What
he
sayeth
of
the
whole
Church
in
some
of
those
I
say
the
practise
of
prayer
for
the
dead
is
not
generall
,
3.
To
what
Origen
he
confesseth
the
doctors
to
referre
it
,
to
witte
,
vnto
scripture
and
tradition
of
the
fathers
.
I
confesse
,
that
some
of
the
fathers
referre
the
custom
How
Tertullian
denyed
,
prayer
and
oblation
for
the
dead
to
be
taken
out
of
the
scriptures
,
is
referred
to
the
ninth
Chapter
,
where
it
shall
be
answered
.
But
he
is
fayne
to
denye
(
sayeth
Bristowe
)
the
most
certeine
workes
of
the
Apostles
schollers
,
Clemens
Romanus
,
and
Dionysius
Areopagita
,
saying
that
we
haue
them
of
some
counterfaiting
knaue
,
&c.
(
quoting
for
my
saying
)
Pur.
268.
which
I
desire
the
reader
to
peruse
,
and
tell
mee
how
honest
a
man
he
is
,
that
chargeth
a
man
to
say
of
the
works
of
Clemens
and
Dionyse
,
that
which
I
speake
onely
and
expressely
of
the
counterfeit
epistles
of
Clemens
.
Concerning
the
change
of
the
olde
Liturgies
:
we
shall
heare
more
in
the
sixt
Chapter
.
4
He
contraiewise
feareth
not
,
nor
basheth
not
to
say
,
they
had
it
from
the
diuell
and
his
lymmes
.
I
see
no
cause
,
why
I
should
feare
or
bash
to
affirme
,
5.
As
touching
the
Popes
supremacy
.
Concerning
the
Popes
primacy
,
he
chargeth
mee
to
teach
,
that
the
Church
vanished
quite
away
,
vpon
a
souden
,
in
causa
autocephalias
,
that
shee
would
haue
no
head
ouer
her
,
but
he●
owne
bishop
,
as
the
histories
affirme
.
Bristowe
,
to
excuse
the
Pope
for
doing
contrarie
to
Gregories
reproofe
of
the
bishop
of
Constantinople
,
sayeth
,
that
he
neuer
vseth
the
style
of
vniuersall
bishop
,
but
of
s
〈…〉
seruorum
,
the
seruant
of
seruants
,
as
though
it
was
for
the
bare
style
,
and
vsurpation
of
the
title
,
that
Gregorie
was
so
earnest
,
and
not
for
the
vniuersall
authoririe
,
which
was
claimed
by
that
style
,
in
which
respect
Gregory
of
humilitie
,
the
rest
of
his
successors
of
hypocrisie
,
called
them selues
,
seruants
of
the
seruants
of
God
.
Now
at
length
Bristowe
alledgeth
three
causes
of
this
his
tedious
rehearsall
of
my
sayings
:
first
,
that
the
reader
may
see
,
in
how
many
points
we
dissent
from
them
,
whome
we
confesse
to
haue
bene
of
the
true
church
.
I
answer
,
so
long
as
we
agree
in
the
foundation
,
we
are
all
of
one
church
.
The
second
cause
,
that
the
reader
may
see
,
I
confesse
the
Papistes
to
agree
with
them
of
the
true
church
,
in
the
same
.
A
great
glorie
,
that
you
agree
with
them
in
a
fewe
errors
,
and
dissent
in
the
most
waightie
matters
of
saluation
.
Thirdly
,
that
I
haue
not
,
for
these
points
,
or
any
depending
of
these
,
iust
cause
to
denye
the
Papists
the
true
church
&c.
If
you
erred
onely
in
these
points
,
as
they
did
,
holding
all
other
trueth
,
which
those
auncient
fathers
helde
,
wee
woulde
no
more
deny
you
to
be
members
of
the
true
church
,
than
wee
do
them
:
but
seeing
beside
these
errors
,
you
hold
many
blasphemous
heresies
,
which
they
neuer
helde
,
and
vtterly
deny
the
office
of
Christ
,
the
foundation
of
our
saluation
,
therefore
wee
iustly
deny
you
to
be
of
the
true
church
of
Christ
.
Neither
is
your
excuse
to
be
admitted
,
that
you
erre
by
authoritie
of
them
,
who
if
the
trueth
had
bene
as
plainly
reuealed
vnto
them
,
out
of
the
scriptures
,
as
it
is
to
you
,
would
neuer
haue
so
obstinatly
defended
their
errors
,
but
as
they
alwayes
professed
,
yelded
to
the
trueth
,
against
custome
,
prescription
of
time
,
authoritie
of
councels
,
or
any
practise
whatsoeuer
.
CAP.
IIII.
That
he
chargeth
the
sayde
primitiue
true
church
,
with
sundry
I
affirme
that
diuerse
godly
fathers
of
the
primitiue
That
there
may
be
a
company
which
erreth
,
not
onely
some
principall
members
,
but
also
the
whole
body
of
it
,
and
which
erreth
obstinatly
,
and
moreouer
,
which
erreth
the
grossest
errors
that
can
be
,
&
them
〈◊〉
no
small
number
,
and
yet
the
same
company
may
be
the
tru●
church
.
This
is
vtterly
false
,
I
neuer
made
such
confession
,
neither
can
Bristow
bring
any
wordes
of
mine
,
that
sound
to
the
same
effecte
:
and
therefore
I
here
charge
him
before
God
and
the
worlde
,
for
a
shamelesse
lyer
,
and
an
vngodly
slaunderer
.
As
for
the
errors
wherewith
I
charge
either
the
auncient
writers
,
or
the
auncient
church
of
Rome
,
do
followe
afterward
discussed
in
the
sixth
Chapter
.
CAP.
V.
What
reason
he
rendreth
,
why
they
in
those
auncient
time●
,
First
repeating
my
confessions
:
That
the
true
church
may
erre
,
that
it
hath
erred
in
some
articles
wherein
we
erre
,
&
in
many
other
wherein
we
do
not
erre
,
wherof
it
followeth
plainly
(
qd
Bristowe
)
that
neither
our
erring
,
nor
these
our
errors
,
no
nor
any
other
our
errors
,
are
alone
sufficient
for
him
to
depriue
vs
of
the
true
church
.
Marke
this
consequens
of
Bristowe
,
some
errors
which
the
Papistes
,
hold
common
with
the
olde
church
,
cannot
depriue
them
of
the
true
church
,
ergo
none
other
errors
that
they
hold
,
contrary
to
the
auncient
church
,
are
alone
sufficient
to
depriue
them
.
This
is
popish
logike
.
And
yet
I
will
in
this
argument
,
charge
his
conscience
rather
then
his
science
:
for
common
sense
abhorreth
such
reasoning
,
from
the
particular
to
the
vniuersall
.
But
let
vs
see
,
if
such
reason
as
alloweth
the
fathers
to
haue
had
the
true
church
,
notwithstanding
their
errors
,
may
serue
the
Papistes
to
proue
them
the
true
church
,
their
errors
notwithstanding
.
The
reason
I
alledge
,
that
the
fathers
had
the
true
church
,
is
because
they
held
the
onely
foundation
Iesus
Christ
,
and
the
article
of
iustification
by
the
onely
mercie
of
God
.
Now
(
sayth
Bristowe
)
who
knoweth
not
,
that
we
beleeue
in
the
onely
sonne
of
God
,
and
in
the
onely
mercy
of
God
,
and
that
therefore
wee
looke
not
to
be
saued
by
our
owne
works
,
that
is
,
which
we
did
without
him
,
in
Paganisme
,
Iudaisme
,
or
Caluinisme
,
in
heresie
or
deadly
sinne
,
&c.
but
onely
by
his
workes
,
that
is
,
by
his
sacraments
and
the
good
deedes
that
of
his
great
mercy
,
he
hath
created
in
vs
in
Christ
Iesus
?
&c.
therefore
the
same
reason
serueth
vs
,
notwithstanding
our
errors
.
I
answere
,
your
minor
is
false
:
you
beleue
not
in
the
onely
begotten
sonne
of
God
,
because
you
beleue
not
in
God
.
Cyprian
de
duplici
Martyrio
,
sayeth
:
Non
credit
in
Deum
,
qui
non
in
eo
solo
collocat
totius
foelicitatis
suae
fiduciam
:
He
beleueth
not
in
God
,
which
placeth
not
in
him
alone
the
trust
of
all
his
felicitie
.
You
place
not
your
trust
in
God
alone
,
for
you
trust
in
your
merites
,
yea
,
in
the
merites
of
others
,
both
liuing
and
dead
,
and
in
an
hundreth
things
beside
God
alone
.
Secondly
,
where
you
say
,
you
beleeue
in
the
onely
mercy
of
God
,
it
is
false
:
for
you
beleeue
no
iustification
by
the
only
mercy
and
grace
of
God
,
which
excludeth
all
workes
and
merites
,
as
the
Apostle
sayeth
,
Rom.
11.
Thirdly
,
you
says
you
beleue
to
be
saued
by
his
sacraments
,
which
in
deede
after
a
sort
,
are
sayde
to
saue
vs
,
namely
,
not
as
principal
●fficient
causes
,
but
as
instruments
and
meanes
that
god
●seth
to
confirme
his
promises
,
which
proceede
of
his
onely
grace
and
mercy
.
Fourthly
you
saye
,
you
beleeue
to
be
saued
by
those
good
deeds
,
that
God
of
his
mercy
hath
created
in
vs
:
which
plainly
declareth
that
you
looke
not
to
be
saued
,
by
the
onely
grace
&
mercy
of
God
,
purchased
by
the
redemption
of
Christ
:
but
by
such
good
workes
as
proceede
from
your selues
,
although
you
ascribe
vnto
the
grace
of
God
,
that
you
be
able
to
do
them
,
as
both
the
Pharisee
did
,
which
iustified
him selfe
by
his
owne
workes
,
and
yet
acknowledged
God
to
be
the
author
of
them
,
in
him
,
Luk.
18.
And
the
Pelagians
also
affirmed
generally
,
that
by
Gods
grace
we
are
saued
,
because
God
of
his
grace
hath
giuen
such
a
lawe
,
by
keeping
whereof
,
wee
might
attaine
to
saluation
.
But
you
cite
S.
Paul
,
Tit.
3.
to
shewe
,
that
his
mercie
&
sacrament
may
stande
together
,
which
no
man
denyeth
:
yet
can
you
not
shewe
,
that
his
mercie
is
so
tyed
to
his
sacrament
,
that
he
saueth
not
without
it
.
For
Abraham
was
iustified
by
faith
,
before
he
was
circumcised
,
and
receiued
circumcision
as
a
seale
of
the
faith
he
had
,
being
vncircumcised
:
Rom.
4.
And
where
the
Apostle
speaketh
of
workes
generally
,
excluding
them
from
being
cause
of
our
saluation
,
you
restreine
them
only
to
works
done
before
baptisme
:
for
this
cursed
glose
you
make
vpon
the
text
,
Not
for
any
workes
of
*
righteousness
which
we
did
(
before
baptisme
say
you
)
but
for
his
mercie
,
hee
hath
saued
vs
by
baptisme
.
But
that
S.
Paul
excludeth
al
maner
of
works
,
done
by
vs
,
from
iustification
,
the
sentence
following
declareth
:
That
being
iustified
by
his
grace
,
we
might
be
made
heires
according
to
the
hope
of
eternall
life
.
For
grace
and
workes
can
neuer
stande
as
a
ioynt
efficient
cause
,
Rom.
11.
but
the
one
of
necessitie
,
excludeth
the
other
.
As
for
the
receiuing
of
the
Sacramentes
is
no
worke
of
ours
,
as
you
truely
say
,
but
an
accepting
of
the
grace
,
which
God
giueth
.
The
place
Ephes.
2.
which
you
●ite
to
proue
,
that
we
are
saued
by
good
workes
,
done
after
baptisme
,
is
cleane
against
you
,
if
you
had
rehetsed
the
whole
text
.
You
are
saued
(
saith
S.
Paul
)
by
grace
,
through
faith
,
(
and
this
not
of
your selues
,
it
is
the
gift
of
God
)
not
of
workes
,
least
any
man
shoulde
boast
.
For
we
are
his
workemanship
,
created
in
Christ
Iesus
vnto
good
works
,
which
God
hath
prepared
,
that
we
should
walke
in
them
.
The
argument
of
S.
Paul
is
taken
out
of
the
effect
,
Good
workes
are
the
effect
and
aide
of
our
iustification
,
ergo
not
the
efficient
cause
thereof
.
And
marke
againe
,
that
hee
saith
we
are
saued
by
grace
and
not
of
workes
.
Marke
also
the
reason
why
we
are
not
saued
by
any
workes
done
by
man
:
namely
least
any
shoulde
boast
.
For
boasting
of
man
,
is
not
excluded
,
so
long
as
any
workes
that
he
doth
,
may
be
the
cause
of
his
saluation
.
For
if
Abraham
be
iustified
by
workes
,
hee
hath
whereof
to
boast
,
but
not
with
God
:
Rom.
4.
where
is
then
boasting
?
It
is
excluded
.
By
what
lawe
?
of
works
?
No
,
but
by
the
lawe
of
faith
.
Wherefore
not
onely
the
workes
done
before
baptisme
,
but
all
other
are
excluded
from
iustification
,
that
no
man
should
boast
as
the
Pharisee
,
but
that
all
glory
of
our
saluation
,
might
be
ascribed
wholy
to
God
by
Iesus
Christ
.
You
therefore
building
saluation
vpon
good
workes
,
done
after
baptisme
,
doe
manifestly
builde
vpon
another
foundation
,
then
the
onely
true
foundation
Iesus
Christ
:
and
therefore
,
your
errors
notwithstanding
,
you
cannot
(
as
the
olde
fathers
erring
in
small
matters
)
be
yet
the
church
of
God
.
What
Flaccius
Illyricus
an
intemperate
man
iudged
of
S.
Hierom
,
I
haue
not
to
aunswere
for
him
.
CAP.
VI.
An
aunswere
first
to
all
the
foresaide
errors
,
wherewith
he
Hetherto
we
had
nothing
in
a
manner
,
but
a
rehersall
Fulkes
zeale
in
aunswering
for
Caluin
,
and
others
being
in
deede
of
his
Church
.
First
he
chargeth
me
to
holde
,
that
our
Church
at
that
the
very
reading
of
his
aunswere
,
hath
turned
many
earnest
Protestants
,
into
earnest
Catholikes
,
as
both
by
the
numbers
,
and
by
the
noblenesse
of
the
persons
is
notoriously
knowne
.
I
thinke
the
number
and
the
nobilitie
of
the
conuerts
is
all
alike
.
There
runneth
such
a
tale
of
Copley
,
the
great
barron
of
Haie
,
created
by
the
Spanish
,
I
wot
not
howe
,
Lorde
of
the
Maze
,
an
auncient
rotten
house
in
Southwarke
,
that
he
shoulde
be
so
conuerted
,
if
some
popish
treason
discouered
caused
him
not
to
faine
such
a
souden
and
straunge
conuersion
.
But
yet
Bristowe
cannot
abide
,
that
I
should
exhort
English
papists
,
to
reade
that
booke
,
and
pray
to
God
for
direction
in
the
trueth
.
No
sir
(
saith
he
)
that
is
not
the
way
to
trueth
,
no
more
then
to
swallowe
poyson
and
pray
,
is
the
way
to
get
or
keepe
health
of
bodie
.
Alas
poore
Bristowe
,
hast
thou
so
soone
forgot
,
that
which
thou
saidst
immediatly
before
,
that
Iewels
booke
is
such
a
soueraigne
antidote
,
that
hath
expelled
the
poyson
of
Protestants
from
so
many
and
so
noble
personages
,
and
made
them
so
earnest
Catholikes
,
that
thou
nowe
wouldest
haue
them
fly
from
it
,
as
from
a
poyson
?
We
see
thy
wittie
pollicie
,
it
is
not
the
way
to
trueth
(
thou
sayest
)
to
reade
our
aunsweres
:
but
it
is
the
way
to
continue
men
in
error
,
to
suffer
them
to
see
nothing
but
that
you
say
your selues
.
A
sure
way
to
winne
credit
,
but
yet
with
fooles
onely
:
For
hee
that
dare
not
let
his
aduersaries
aunswere
bee
seene
,
sheweth
plainely
that
hee
dare
not
abide
the
tryall
,
but
requireth
all
men
to
beleeue
him
vppon
his
bare
worde
.
Where
you
say
,
I
should
rather
exhort
men
to
reade
the
auncient
writers
,
I
aunswere
,
that
is
needelesse
,
for
such
whom
I
exhort
to
reade
maister
Iewels
replie
,
namely
such
as
cannot
wade
well
out
of
these
controuersies
without
such
conference
,
as
they
may
see
betweene
maister
Harding
,
and
maister
Iewell
.
The
first
part
concerning
the
errors
that
he
layd
(
ap.
3.
par.
2.
)
both
to
the
fathers
,
and
to
vs
,
and
first
of
the
crosse
and
images
.
First
,
where
I
charge
them
,
that
the
estimation
of
the
signe
or
figure
of
the
crosse
was
taken
of
the
Valentinians
,
Concerning
the
images
of
Iesus
,
which
the
Carpocratians
and
other
like
heretikes
made
,
and
worshipped
,
Bristow
sayth
,
it
toucheth
not
the
papistes
,
because
they
also
made
and
worshipped
the
images
of
heathen
Philosophers
,
like
as
the
Samaritans
ioyned
the
worshipping
of
false
Gods
,
with
the
worshipping
of
our
Lorde
.
If
I
shoulde
obiect
vnto
you
,
the
worshipping
of
the
images
of
saint
Sonday
,
saint
Hardhuffe
,
saint
Vncomber
,
yea
saint
Christopher
,
and
saint
George
on
horseback
,
which
al
were
meere
Idolls
after
your
owne
diffinition
of
Idols
,
I
wote
not
howe
you
coulde
quite
your selfe
,
from
the
case
of
the
Samaritanes
.
But
Irenaeus
and
Epiphanius
charge
the
heretikes
,
not
onely
for
ioyning
the
images
of
Philosophers
and
Poets
with
the
Image
of
Iesus
,
but
also
for
fayning
the
Image
of
Iesus
,
and
worshipping
it
.
Irenaeus
againste
Basilides
lib.
1.
cap.
23.
saith
absolutly
,
Viuntur
autem
&
imaginibus
&
incantationibus
,
&
invocationibus
&c.
They
vse
images
,
and
inchauntmentes
,
&
inuocations
and
all
the
rest
of
superstitions
.
Here
he
placeth
the
vse
of
images
with
inchauntementes
,
inuocation
of
spirites
,
and
other
superstitions
of
magike
,
and
chapter
24.
against
the
Gnostikes
and
Carpocratians
he
saith
,
Etiam
imagines
quasdam
&c.
Also
they
haue
certayne
images
painted
,
and
some
made
of
other
matter
,
saying
that
the
forme
of
Christ
was
made
by
Pilate
,
in
that
time
which
Iesus
was
with
men
.
If
it
had
not
beene
a
faulte
to
haue
had
these
counterfete
images
,
Irenaeus
woulde
not
haue
ioyned
it
amonge
other
hereticall
practises
of
the
Carpocratians
.
The
like
sayth
Epiphanius
against
Basilides
and
the
Gnostikes
,
Haere
.
24
Habent
imagines
&c.
They
haue
images
paynted
in
coulers
,
some
also
haue
them
of
golde
and
siluer
and
other
matter
,
which
they
say
,
are
the
images
of
Iesus
,
and
that
these
images
of
Iesus
were
made
vnder
Pontius
Pilate
,
when
he
was
conuersant
amongest
men
.
And
these
images
they
haue
closely
.
Moreouer
they
haue
the
images
of
certaine
Philosophers
&c.
Who
seeth
not
by
this
context
,
that
Epiphanius
accompted
it
hereticall
,
to
haue
such
images
in
any
vse
of
religion
,
although
they
had
not
made
any
other
images
of
philosophers
besides
?
Also
against
the
Collyridians
,
which
with
certayne
cakes
offering
as
the
Papistes
doe
candles
,
worshipped
the
image
of
the
virgin
Marie
:
he
asketh
,
what
this
desire
of
making
images
can
be
,
else
,
but
a
deuilish
enterprise
?
yet
the
Collyridians
worshipped
no
heathen
Philosophers
with
the
virgin
Marie
.
Neither
doeth
hee
simply
charge
them
that
they
worshipped
her
,
as
a
God
,
but
siue
velut
ipsam
,
&c.
Whether
these
foolish
women
offer
this
cake
to
her
,
as
worshipping
Marie
her selfe
:
or
whether
they
go
about
to
offer
the
saide
stincking
offering
for
her
,
the
whole
matter
is
folishe
and
straunge
,
and
a
fraude
and
deceite
of
the
motion
of
diuelles
.
Therefore
that
I
extende
my
speech
no
longer
,
let
that
which
hath
beene
sayde
,
suffice
.
Let
Marie
be
in
honor
,
let
the
Lord
be
worshipped
.
And
what
thinke
you
,
woulde
he
haue
iudged
of
the
pilgrimage
and
offering
of
men
and
women
,
to
the
images
of
the
virgin
Marie
,
which
coulde
not
abyde
to
see
a
vaile
in
which
was
painted
the
image
of
Christ
,
or
some
sainct
,
hanging
in
a
Church
of
Christians
,
but
rent
it
in
peeces
,
at
Anablatha
?
Epiph.
Epist.
ad
Ioan
,
Hieron
.
But
for
the
defence
of
Images
:
Bristowe
referreth
the
reader
to
Sanders
booke
of
Images
:
and
I
likewise
to
my
confutation
of
the
same
.
In
the
meane
time
,
it
is
a
small
matter
,
that
Bristowe
vrgeth
my
confession
,
that
crossing
at
euery
step
,
(
which
is
,
saith
he
,
a
making
and
great
religion
of
Images
)
is
referred
by
Tertullian
vnto
tradition
of
the
Apostles
,
seeing
that
is
shewed
to
haue
a
later
and
corrupter
beginning
,
and
other
fables
beside
by
Tertullian
referred
to
Apostolike
tradition
.
2
Of
inuocation
of
sainctes
,
and
worshipping
of
their
reliques
.
You
remember
since
the
3.
chapter
(
sayth
Bristow
)
by
your
owne
report
that
the
true
Church
counted
Vigilantius
For
wee
worship
not
,
sayth
he
,
the
reliques
of
Martyrs
,
no
nor
the
sunne
and
Moone
,
no
not
Angelles
and
Archangels
,
Cherubim
and
Seraphim
&c:
But
we
honor
the
reliques
of
the
martyrs
,
that
wee
may
worshippe
him
whose
witnesses
the
martyrs
are
.
By
which
saying
,
and
other
to
the
same
effecte
,
it
is
manifest
,
that
although
Hierome
defended
some
honoring
,
or
moderat
reuerence
of
reliques
,
yet
he
abhorred
idolatrous
worshipping
of
them
,
and
much
more
of
their
images
.
Where
I
say
,
the
superstition
of
reliques
is
receiued
of
the
Ossenes
:
Bristowe
sayth
it
perteyneth
not
to
them
,
because
the
Ossenes
worshipped
them
for
Gods
,
whose
reliques
they
had
in
such
,
estimation
.
But
that
is
false
:
for
they
helde
Marthys
and
Marthana
for
Sainctes
,
proceeding
out
of
the
holy
seed
of
Elxai
whom
they
neuer
worshipped
,
but
as
a
great
Prophet
and
teacher
,
although
Epiphanius
saith
pro
diis
adorabantur
,
they
were
worshipped
as
Gods
:
meaning
that
worship
which
is
proper
vnto
God
onely
,
was
giuen
to
them
,
as
it
is
of
Papistes
vnto
sainctes
,
whome
they
worship
as
God
,
geuing
that
worshipp
vnto
them
,
which
is
proper
onely
vnto
God
,
as
faith
&
inuocation
.
But
Bristow
would
haue
the
snottie
cloutes
of
Thomas
Becket
,
that
were
worshipped
after
his
death
,
to
bee
all
one
with
the
napkins
and
partletts
,
that
were
caried
from
the
bodie
of
S.
Paul
the
Apostle
to
cast
out
vncleane
spirites
,
when
hee
liued
:
which
napkins
and
partletts
,
yet
he
cannot
proue
either
,
that
they
were
euer
worshipped
,
or
that
they
were
reserued
for
reliques
,
after
the
worke
of
miracles
was
wrought
by
them
.
As
for
the
argument
that
Chrysostome
taketh
,
against
the
Pagans
,
of
the
reliques
of
Babylas
the
Martyr
,
which
he
would
haue
me
to
applie
to
my
disease
,
was
to
the
confusion
of
Idolatrie
and
sorcerie
,
not
to
the
setting
vp
or
mainteyning
thereof
.
And
what
worshippe
I
pray
you
,
was
giuen
to
the
reliques
of
Babylas
?
If
God
shewed
miracles
by
the
presence
of
his
bodie
in
Daphne
,
as
by
the
bones
of
Elizeus
,
yet
it
followeth
not
,
that
his
body
or
ashes
,
were
worshipped
more
then
the
bones
of
Elizeus
were
.
Concerning
inuocation
of
Angels
,
which
they
haue
common
with
the
Caianes
,
Bristowe
sheweth
,
that
the
Caianes
had
other
greater
heresies
,
which
the
papistes
holde
not
,
as
though
those
greater
errors
coulde
excuse
this
lesser
.
The
superstition
of
Angels
,
that
Saint
Paul
warneth
the
Ephesians
,
and
Collossians
to
beware
of
,
hee
sayth
,
they
be
cleare
of
it
,
because
in
all
their
prayers
,
they
conclude
per
Christum
&c.
Through
Christ
our
Lorde
:
as
though
they
that
taught
the
superstition
of
Angels
,
did
cleane
exclude
Christ
,
or
that
it
was
to
be
doubted
,
lest
the
Ephesians
and
Collosians
,
would
forsake
Christ
,
and
cleaue
to
Angels
,
but
rather
lest
with
the
religion
of
Christ
,
as
the
cheefe
,
they
woulde
also
admitte
the
superstition
of
the
Angels
,
whereof
were
named
the
sect
Angelici
in
Angelorum
cultu
inclinati
,
bowed
downe
in
the
worship
of
Angels
as
S.
Augustine
saith
,
which
therefore
helde
not
the
heade
,
because
they
worshipped
not
him
alone
,
but
ioyned
Angels
in
part
of
his
glorie
.
That
Angels
are
ministring
spirits
,
it
proueth
not
,
that
therefore
they
must
be
prayed
vnto
,
but
the
contrarie
,
for
inuocation
is
due
onely
to
him
on
whome
wee
beleeue
,
which
is
God
onely
.
So
much
the
more
blasphemous
is
Bristowe
,
that
chargeth
Saint
Iohn
,
Apoc.
1.
to
haue
prayed
to
the
Angels
,
where
he
sayth
,
Grace
and
peace
bee
to
you
from
him
,
that
is
,
and
was
,
and
is
to
come
:
and
from
the
7.
spirites
,
that
are
before
his
throne
,
and
from
Iesus
Christ
.
Whereas
the
consent
of
all
auncient
writers
is
,
that
the
seuen
spirites
are
taken
for
the
holy
Ghost
,
which
is
seuen
folde
in
his
graces
,
according
to
the
prophecie
of
Isay
11.
The
spirite
of
the
Lorde
shall
rest
vppon
him
,
the
spirite
of
wisedome
and
vnderstanding
,
the
spirite
of
counsell
and
power
,
&c.
And
it
is
also
euident
,
that
S.
Iohn
speaketh
of
the
spirit
of
God
as
he
was
shewed
to
him
in
the
vision
,
according
to
the
dispensation
of
his
manifolde
giftes
in
the
figure
of
the
seuen
lampes
which
are
the
7.
spirites
of
God
according
to
the
number
of
seuen
Churches
of
Asia
,
to
whome
he
sendeth
the
copie
of
his
reuelation
,
for
the
instruction
of
all
Churches
in
the
worlde
.
Apoc.
4.
And
albeit
wee
shoulde
expounde
these
seuen
spirites
for
seuen
Angels
,
as
some
late
writers
do
,
yet
it
followeth
not
,
that
S.
Iohn
shoulde
pray
vnto
them
,
in
those
wordes
,
but
rather
to
God
for
their
ministerie
to
the
preseruation
of
the
Churches
:
No
more
then
if
he
shoulde
wishe
grace
vnto
them
from
heauen
,
it
followeth
that
he
prayeth
vnto
heauen
.
That
phrase
is
often
in
the
Psalmes
,
wherein
saluation
or
helpe
is
prayed
to
bee
sent
from
Sion
,
from
the
holy
Hill
,
from
the
Temple
,
from
heauen
:
and
yet
no
man
was
so
madde
to
say
,
that
prayers
was
made
to
Sion
,
to
the
Hill
,
to
the
Temple
,
to
heauen
.
And
yet
it
is
more
monstrous
,
that
hee
chargeth
me
to
forget
,
that
in
the
same
booke
of
the
Apocalips
,
God
doeth
promise
to
make
the
obstinate
Iewes
to
come
,
and
to
adore
before
the
feete
of
one
Angell
.
And
they
shall
know
that
I
haue
loued
thee
&c.
I
speak
vnto
thee
Th.
Stapleton
which
profesiest
that
thou
hast
perused
this
booke
of
Bristowes
and
allowed
it
.
Wast
thou
awake
when
thou
didest
p●ruse
this
argument
,
and
allowed
it
?
Tell
me
by
thy
credite
,
is
this
the
Angell
of
the
Church
of
Philadelphia
,
of
whome
this
is
writen
to
bee
vnderstood
,
for
one
of
those
heauenly
spirites
concerning
whose
worshippe
and
inuocation
we
nowe
speake
in
this
controuersie
?
Are
epistles
then
written
from
the
Apostle
on
earth
to
Angels
in
heauen
?
is
any
of
those
Angels
neither
whote
nor
colde
in
the
seruice
of
God
?
hath
any
of
them
a
name
that
he
liueth
and
is
deade
?
hath
any
of
them
left
his
first
loue
?
doth
any
of
them
suffer
the
woman
Iesabell
to
preach
&
c
?
Out
vpon
thine
impudence
,
if
thou
affirme
all
this
,
and
fie
vpon
thy
negligence
,
if
thou
didest
peruse
it
and
allow
this
argument
,
if
thou
be
ashamed
to
affirme
all
the
rest
.
As
for
thee
Bristowe
,
it
shall
be
sufficient
to
heare
thy
Master
reproued
for
thy
fault
at
this
time
,
to
make
the
blushe
if
any
sparke
of
honest
shame
bee
lefte
in
thy
breast
,
that
darest
set
abroad
such
an
intollerable
corruption
of
the
holy
scripture
,
against
all
wit
and
reason
that
euer
was
hearde
of
.
3
Of
abstinence
from
fleshmeate
,
and
from
marriage
.
Bristow
would
haue
the
question
of
prescript
fasting
con.
Iouin
.
lib.
2.
Nec
hoc
dicinius
quòd
negemus
pisces
,
&c.
Neither
say
we
this
(
sayth
Hieronyme
)
that
we
deny
fishes
and
the
rest
of
meates
,
if
a
mans
will
may
be
taken
in
meate
,
but
as
wee
preferre
virginitie
before
marriage
,
so
fasting
and
the
spirite
,
before
fulnesse
&
flesh
.
Likewise
,
in
diuers
places
,
he
speaketh
of
the
abstinence
from
wine
.
Furthermore
,
he
chargeth
me
to
bring
no
proofe
of
that
I
say
,
the
fathers
tooke
prescript
times
of
fasting
and
vnmeasurable
extolling
of
sole
life
in
the
clergie
,
from
the
Tatianistes
,
Manichees
;
&
Montanistes
.
If
I
brought
no
proofe
in
that
place
,
it
was
because
I
presupposed
that
Allen
knewe
,
what
Eusebius
reporteth
out
of
Apollonius
,
lib.
5.
Cap.
18.
That
Montanus
was
the
first
that
prescribed
lawes
of
fasting
.
And
that
the
Manichees
in
their
electes
,
and
the
Tatianistes
in
their
perfectes
,
allowed
not
marriage
,
out
of
Epiphanius
&
Augustine
.
But
where
I
charge
the
Papistes
which
Aerianisme
for
abstinence
from
flesh
,
Bristowe
sayeth
,
I
take
Richard
for
Robert
,
because
the
Aerians
abstained
from
fleshe
,
as
the
Manichees
,
Tatianistes
,
&
Montanistes
,
as
perteining
to
the
yll
god
,
according
to
the
heresie
of
the
Valentinians
.
Admit
it
were
so
,
yet
how
can
either
Richard
or
Robert
dischardg
them selues
of
the
doctrine
of
diuels
and
spirite
of
errour
,
whose
fruite
is
forbidding
of
marrying
&
eating
of
meates
,
1.
Tim.
4.
which
is
hereticall
and
abhominable
,
for
what
cause
of
religion
so
euer
it
be
?
And
seeing
the
Apostle
chargeth
them
with
hypocrisie
,
it
is
more
probable
that
he
speaketh
against
the
Papists
,
than
against
those
open
blasphemers
.
But
howe
proueth
Bristowe
,
that
the
Aerians
were
of
the
opinion
of
the
Eucratites
or
Apotastites
?
Forsooth
,
because
Augustine
sayeth
:
Quidam
perhibent
istos
sicut
Eucratitas
vel
Apotastitas
,
non
admittere
ad
communionem
suam
nisi
continentes
,
&
eos
qui
seculo
ita
renuntiaverint
,
vt
propria
nulla
possideant
,
ab
es●a
tamen
carnium
non
eos
abstinere
dicit
Epiphanius
:
Philaster
verò
&
hanc
eis
tribuit
abstinentiam
:
Some
say
,
that
these
men
as
the
Eucratites
or
Apotastites
do
not
admit
into
their
societie
,
but
onely
such
as
conteine
from
marriage
,
and
haue
so
renounced
the
world
,
that
they
possesse
no
proper
goods
,
yet
Epiphanius
sayeth
not
,
that
they
abstain
from
eating
of
flesh
:
but
Philaster
layeth
to
them
also
this
abstinence
.
The
similitude
(
which
Bristowe
by
falsifying
S.
Augustine
and
displacing
his
wordes
)
would
haue
to
be
in
the
whole
sect
of
the
Eucratites
,
is
onely
in
the
abstinence
from
marriage
and
meates
,
and
possessions
,
not
in
the
opinion
or
cause
for
which
they
abstained
.
For
seeing
Aerius
was
an
Arrian
,
he
could
not
hold
the
pluralitie
of
Gods
.
For
the
Arrians
so
held
the
vnitie
of
the
godhead
,
that
they
denyed
the
Trinitie
of
the
persons
in
equall
substance
.
And
although
he
were
the
scholer
of
Eustachius
,
yet
it
followeth
not
that
he
held
all
pointes
as
his
maister
did
.
Augustine
chargeth
him
to
haue
added
these
matters
of
his
owne
.
Beside
that
,
diuerse
of
Eustachius
articles
differ
little
from
the
opinion
of
the
Papists
,
concerning
the
marriage
of
priestes
,
and
the
abstinence
from
meates
,
howsoeuer
the
papistes
will
not
seeme
to
be
so
boysterous
as
Eustachius
in
denying
the
kingdome
of
heauen
to
them
that
marry
,
and
hope
to
them
that
eate
fleshe
:
yet
Pope
Syricius
is
affirmed
to
write
,
that
they
which
be
marryed
be
in
the
flesh
,
and
cannot
please
God
:
Ep.
ad
Him
.
Tarrat
.
And
what
a
daungerous
matter
the
Papistes
count
it
,
to
eate
flesh
in
tymes
by
them
prohibited
,
all
the
world
doth
know
.
4
Of
Ceremonies
,
and
Liturgies
.
The
church
is
S.
Augustines
times
approued
vnprofitable
Ep.
ad
Ianuar.
118.
and
wisheth
,
that
they
might
be
abrogated
so
soone
as
occasion
serued
.
Bristowe
quarreling
,
that
my
quotation
is
missing
which
was
but
the
printers
omission
:
answereth
that
Augustine
in
the
same
epistle
sayeth
,
Tamen
ecclesia
,
&c.
Yet
the
church
of
God
approueth
not
any
thing
that
is
against
the
faith
,
or
against
good
life
.
And
I
reply
notwithstanding
,
that
they
may
be
vnprofitable
and
hurtfull
vsages
.
For
so
the
same
Augustine
writeth
in
thesame
Epistle
.
Quamuis
enim
,
&c.
For
although
neither
this
can
be
founde
,
howe
they
are
against
the
faith
,
yet
they
oppresse
the
religion
it selfe
with
seruile
burdens
,
which
the
mercie
of
God
would
haue
to
be
free
with
moste
fewe
and
manifest
sacraments
of
celebrations
,
so
that
the
condition
of
the
Iewes
is
more
tollerable
,
which
although
they
haue
not
knowen
the
time
of
libertie
,
yet
they
are
subiect
to
lawfull
burthens
,
&
not
to
humaine
presumptions
.
But
Bristowe
proceedeth
and
vrgeth
an
other
saying
of
Augustine
,
that
if
the
whole
church
vse
any
thing
,
it
is
a
point
of
most
insolent
madnesse
to
call
in
question
,
whether
that
should
be
so
vsed
.
I
answere
,
wee
speake
of
approuing
of
vsages
,
not
of
any
thing
that
is
generally
vsed
.
The
church
is
S.
Augustines
time
,
approued
diuerse
vnprofitable
vsages
by
secrete
consent
,
without
open
abrogation
,
which
yet
were
diuerse
in
diuerse
places
.
Where
I
proue
they
were
vnprofitable
by
this
reason
,
that
many
of
them
are
abrogated
,
he
answereth
,
that
is
no
good
argument
,
for
there
might
be
good
cause
to
abrogate
them
,
although
they
came
of
the
tradition
of
the
Apostles
:
as
the
decree
of
not
eating
blood
nor
strangled
,
Act.
15.
and
the
custome
of
the
Apostles
and
of
the
churches
of
God
for
men
to
praye
and
prophesie
bareheaded
.
To
the
former
decree
I
reply
,
that
it
was
temporall
,
and
not
meant
by
the
makers
to
be
eternall
,
but
to
beare
with
the
infirmitie
of
the
Iewes
for
a
time
.
To
the
other
custome
of
praying
or
preaching
bareheaded
,
whatsoeuer
the
pompous
doctors
of
the
popish
church
obserue
,
I
saye
it
is
perpetually
to
be
obserued
for
the
distinction
of
the
man
and
woman
in
couering
and
vncouering
of
the
head
,
and
the
obseruing
of
naturall
comlinesse
in
both
,
although
for
necessitie
of
health
a
nightcap
,
kercheffe
or
such
like
couering
,
according
to
the
custome
of
the
country
,
be
not
absolutely
prohibited
.
As
for
the
forbidding
of
solemne
fastes
and
genuflections
on
sundayes
,
which
Bristowe
sayeth
was
ordeined
by
the
Apostles
to
plant
the
article
of
the
resurrection
,
and
more
straitly
obserued
of
the
church
against
the
Manichees
,
which
might
be
abrogated
,
nowe
that
article
is
receiued
and
the
heresie
extinct
is
but
a
dreame
of
his
owne
head
without
proofe
,
&
so
〈…〉
et
it
passe
,
although
I
knowe
not
what
he
meaneth
to
say
,
that
forbidding
of
solemne
kneeling
is
still
obserued
:
for
the
papistes
kneele
as
solemnely
on
sundayes
as
on
other
dayes
.
As
for
the
libertie
the
church
hath
in
altering
of
ceremonies
,
is
neuer
denied
of
me
:
but
fondly
alledged
of
him
,
which
pretendeth
that
traditions
of
the
Apostles
are
as
necessarily
to
be
obserued
,
as
commaundements
of
the
scripture
,
referring
euery
blynde
ceremonie
,
whereof
he
knoweth
none
author
,
to
tradition
of
the
Apostles
.
Nowe
concerning
the
Liturgies
,
he
sayth
,
Proclus
answereth
why
Basil
&
Chrysostome
changed
the
auncient
Liturgies
that
were
before
them
:
he
sayth
,
forsooth
they
did
but
abridge
and
make
shorter
the
Liturgie
of
S.
Iames
,
which
was
too
long
for
the
peoples
cold
deuotion
.
But
his
reason
will
soone
proue
all
the
three
Liturgies
that
nowe
are
called
by
the
names
of
S.
Iames
,
Basil
,
and
Chrysostome
,
to
be
counterfeits
,
for
ther
is
small
difference
in
the
length
of
them
,
and
in
a
manner
none
at
all
.
As
for
the
Councell
of
Constantinople
in
Trullo
,
doth
in
deede
name
the
Lyturgies
of
S.
Iames
,
Basil
,
&
Chrysostome
,
but
that
proueth
not
these
which
we
haue
at
this
day
,
to
be
the
same
,
seeing
there
are
manifest
arguments
to
the
contrary
,
as
of
the
Monasteries
spoken
of
in
that
which
goeth
vnder
the
name
of
Iames
and
of
Alexius
the
Emperour
,
&
Nicholas
the
bishop
,
in
Chrysostome
,
which
were
not
borne
many
hundreth
yeares
after
his
death
.
But
that
prayers
for
the
dead
,
were
vsed
in
the
ancient
Liturgies
,
that
were
before
Chrysostomes
tyme
,
Bristowe
sayeth
he
hath
proued
by
plaine
demonstration
,
Cap.
3.
where
there
is
nothing
but
a
saying
of
Chrysostome
cited
by
me
,
in
Epist.
ad
Philip.
Hom.
3
Non
frustra
,
&c.
It
hath
not
been
in
vaine
decreed
by
the
Apostles
,
that
in
the
celebration
of
the
holy
mysteries
,
memorie
should
be
made
of
them
that
are
hence
departed
,
&c.
This
saying
proueth
a
remembrance
,
but
not
a
prayer
,
neuerthelesse
of
this
remembrance
vsed
in
the
elder
times
,
they
gathered
prayers
to
be
profitable
.
But
more
clearely
,
that
it
was
a
remembrance
without
prayers
,
it
appeareth
by
Epiphanius
,
which
interpreteth
the
same
remembrance
to
be
as
a
prayer
for
the
sinners
,
and
for
the
righteous
of
all
sortes
to
be
a
distinction
of
them
from
our
sauiour
Christ
,
cont.
Aer
.
ser.
75.
5
Of
sacrifice
:
and
for
the
deade
.
The
name
of
sacrifice
,
which
the
fathers
vsed
commonly
for
the
celebration
of
the
Lords
supper
,
they
tooke
of
Also
as
blinde
as
you
make
me
,
I
see
the
Altar
,
Heb.
13.
of
which
it
is
not
lawful
for
the
Iewes
to
eate
,
so
long
as
they
remaine
in
Iudaisme
,
but
that
sacrifice
is
the
death
of
Christ
,
whereof
none
that
continue
in
obseruation
of
the
Leuiticall
Lawe
can
be
partakers
.
As
for
the
table
of
the
Lorde
,
and
the
table
of
diuels
,
in
one
forme
of
speach
,
1.
Cor.
10.
proueth
no
sacrifice
of
the
Lordes
table
,
opposite
to
the
sacrifice
of
the
Gentils
,
but
the
feast
of
the
Lordes
table
,
contrarie
to
the
feast
of
the
idoll
offerings
,
whereof
the
controuersie
was
,
and
not
of
communicating
with
the
sacrifices
of
the
Gentils
.
For
if
hee
had
ment
of
the
sacrifices
of
both
,
he
woulde
haue
na
〈…〉ed
the
altar
of
the
Lorde
and
the
altar
of
diuels
.
For
〈◊〉
alter
is
proper
for
a
sacrifice
,
as
a
table
for
a
feast
or
●past
.
So
that
yet
I
stande
to
mine
olde
assertion
,
I
can●ot
finde
one
worde
or
one
syllable
in
the
scripture
,
of
●ny
sacrifice
instituted
by
Christ
at
his
last
supper
,
But
●ontrariwise
I
finde
in
the
scripture
,
that
he
offered
on●y
one
sacrifice
propitiatorie
,
and
that
but
once
vpon
the
●rosse
:
Heb.
9.
&
10.
Purgatorie
.
Where
I
shewe
out
of
Tertullian
de
anima
,
cap.
de
recep●u
,
that
the
opinion
of
Purgatorie
after
this
life
came
first
from
the
hethen
philosophers
as
most
notable
heresies
did
,
seing
all
philosophers
that
graunted
the
immortalitie
of
the
soule
,
as
Pythagoras
,
Empedocles
,
and
Plato
,
assigned
three
places
for
the
soules
departed
,
Heauen
,
hell
,
and
a
thirde
place
of
purifying
.
This
argument
(
saith
Bristowe
)
proueth
as
wel
,
that
heauen
,
hel
,
&
●he
immortalitie
of
the
soule
,
had
their
originall
of
the
●hilosophers
.
He
is
a
perillous
Logician
that
can
so
con●ude
.
For
heauen
,
hel
,
and
the
immortalitie
of
the
soule
,
●re
founde
in
the
scriptures
,
which
are
before
all
philosophers
,
but
of
the
thirde
place
of
purifying
,
we
may
say
as
Augustine
doth
,
contra
Pelag.
hypognost
.
lib.
5.
Tertium
pe●itus
ignoramus
.
The
thirde
place
we
know
not
at
al
,
neither
doe
we
finde
it
in
the
holy
scriptures
.
But
if
I
would
reporte
the
trueth
(
Bristowe
saith
)
there
is
no
worde
of
any
thirde
place
of
purifying
,
but
that
those
philosophers
,
made
onely
two
sorts
of
receptacles
.
But
if
I
find
three
and
the
third
a
place
of
purifying
,
what
shall
we
thinke
of
Bristowes
trueth
?
First
hee
graunteth
supernas
mansiones
,
the
high
mansions
for
the
soules
of
the
Philosophers
and
wise
men
onely
:
secondly
Inferos
,
hell
,
or
the
lowe
places
,
whereof
Tertulian
saith
Reliquas
animas
ad
inferos
deijciunt
,
the
rest
of
the
soules
they
cast
downe
into
hell
:
3.
What
say
you
Bristowe
,
al
the
soules
except
Philosophers
soules
?
Could
you
not
see
betweene
them
,
imprudentes
animas
,
the
foolish
soules
,
remayning
(
according
to
the
Stoikes
)
about
the
earth
,
which
shoulde
bee
instructed
of
the
wise
soules
.
What
was
this
,
but
a
third
place
,
and
a
place
of
purifying
?
But
if
you
woulde
haue
your
purgatorie
more
plainely
described
,
you
may
resort
to
Virgil
,
Aeneid
.
6.
where
Anchises
out
of
the
opinion
of
Pythagoras
,
rehearseth
howe
the
soules
of
good
men
are
purged
:
Quin
&
supremo
cum
lumine
vita
reliquit
,
&c.
After
this
life
hath
left
them
(
saith
he
)
yet
is
not
all
euill
,
nor
all
the
infections
of
the
bodie
departed
from
them
,
and
it
is
necessarie
that
such
things
as
haue
beene
long
gathered
together
,
shoulde
by
meruailous
meanes
be
done
away
.
Therefore
they
are
exercised
with
paines
,
and
suffer
the
punishment
of
their
auncient
euills
:
some
soules
,
are
hanged
vp
against
the
voyde
windes
,
to
some
their
sinne
remayning
,
is
washed
away
vnder
great
raging
waters
,
or
burned
vp
with
fire
.
Euery
one
of
vs
suffer
our
punishments
,
and
then
being
but
fewe
wee
are
sent
into
the
ioyfull
Elysian
fieldes
&c.
Nowe
concerning
the
three
kindes
of
Purgatorie
,
which
I
saide
that
Carpocrates
the
heretike
inuented
,
&
proued
by
the
payment
of
the
vttermost
farthing
,
as
the
papists
doe
theirs
:
Bristow
saith
,
by
this
argument
,
I
wil
winne
much
honestie
,
bicause
the
purgatorie
that
Carpocrates
inuented
,
was
a
wallowing
in
all
sinfull
operation
&c.
What
is
that
to
mine
honestie
?
I
saide
he
inuented
a
kinde
of
purgatorie
,
and
Bristowe
saith
it
was
an
absurde
kinde
of
purgatorie
.
I
said
he
proued
his
purgatorie
as
the
papists
doe
theirs
,
but
to
that
Bristowe
aunswereth
neuer
a
worde
.
But
this
is
small
honestie
,
for
Bristow
,
that
such
things
as
are
ioyned
together
by
me
,
to
shewe
by
what
degrees
popishe
purgatorie
came
to
perfection
,
they
are
seuered
by
him
,
as
though
I
ment
to
charge
the
Papistes
by
such
argumentes
,
to
confute
their
purgatorie
.
Purgatorie
fire
.
I
said
that
purgatorie
fire
was
taken
of
the
Originists
.
For
Origen
brought
in
the
purging
fire
by
better
reason
out
of
1.
Cor.
3.
for
all
soules
,
then
the
papistes
doe
〈…〉
r
some
soules
:
and
the
name
of
purgatorie
fire
,
began
〈…〉
bout
Augustines
time
by
some
Mediators
that
would
〈…〉
ccorde
Origens
error
,
which
was
of
purging
all
soules
,
〈…〉
i
th
the
erronius
practise
of
praying
for
the
deade
,
out
●f
which
,
they
gathered
the
purging
of
some
soules
.
That
I
say
of
Origen
,
although
Bristowe
confesse
it
to
〈…〉
e
true
in
effect
,
yet
he
saith
I
speake
it
without
proofe
.
My
proofe
is
in
Psal.
36.
Ho.
3.
Si
verò
in
hac
vita
contem●imus
&c.
But
if
in
this
life
we
contemne
the
words
of
the
diuine
scripture
admonishing
vs
,
and
will
not
be
healed
or
reformed
by
the
reprehensions
thereof
,
it
is
certaine
that
fire
abideth
vs
which
is
prepared
for
sinners
,
and
we
shal
come
vnto
that
fire
,
in
which
of
what
sort
euery
mans
work
is
,
the
fire
shall
trie
.
And
(
as
I
thinke
)
it
is
of
necessitie
that
wee
must
all
come
vnto
that
fire
.
Although
one
be
Paul
or
Peter
,
yet
he
commeth
to
that
fire
.
But
they
that
are
such
do
heare
.
Although
thou
passe
through
fire
,
the
flame
●hal
not
burn
thee
.
But
if
any
be
a
sinner
like
me
,
he
shal
●ome
in
deede
vnto
that
fire
as
Peter
&
Paul
,
but
he
shall
●ot
so
passe
through
it
as
Peter
&
Paul
.
More
of
his
ge●eral
purgation
of
al
men
,
and
not
the
damned
onely
,
you
●ay
read
in
Num.
Hom.
25.
Vides
quomodo
,
&c.
Thou
se●st
howe
euery
man
that
departeth
out
of
the
battel
of
this
life
,
hath
neede
of
purification
,
&c.
yet
saith
Bristow
,
that
of
the
purgation
of
such
as
die
in
gods
fauour
,
there
is
no
word
,
which
although
he
speak
of
Augustin
whose
wordes
he
citeth
Ad
quod
vult
.
Hae.
43.
yet
he
saith
vntruely
,
for
thus
he
writeth
in
the
same
place
:
Sunt
&
alia
,
&c.
There
be
other
opinions
of
this
Origen
which
the
Catholike
Church
doth
not
receiue
at
all
,
in
which
it
doth
not
falsely
accuse
him
,
neither
can
be
so
excused
by
his
defenders
especially
:
concerning
purgation
&
deliuerance
:
and
againe
after
long
time
the
reuolution
vnto
the
same
euils
of
euery
reasonable
creature
.
I
suppose
he
that
speaketh
of
the
purgation
of
euery
reasonable
creature
,
speaketh
of
the
purgation
of
such
as
die
in
Gods
fauour
also
,
wherefore
it
is
manifest
,
that
Origen
erred
not
only
about
hell
&
heauen
,
and
the
purgation
of
the
damned
,
but
also
about
the
purgation
of
such
as
dye
in
Gods
fauour
.
Therefore
Bristowe
neede
not
gather
mine
argument
,
as
he
doth
in
scorne
.
There
is
no
such
Purgatorie
as
Origen
&
Carpocrates
would
haue
,
therefore
there
is
no
purgatorie
at
all
.
But
what
should
Carpocrates
come
in
this
title
?
but
for
a
sorie
sophisme
,
when
we
speake
of
Origen
onely
.
Wherefore
if
you
wil
giue
mee
leaue
to
frame
mine
argument
(
although
I
meant
not
an
argument
out
of
Origens
purging
fire
onely
)
it
should
be
thus
:
There
is
no
such
purging
fire
as
Origen
would
for
them
that
dye
in
Gods
fauour
:
such
as
Origens
fire
,
is
the
fire
that
the
papistes
would
haue
:
therefore
there
is
no
such
purging
fire
as
the
Papists
woulde
haue
.
Releeuing
of
the
dead
by
prayer
.
If
the
dead
be
not
releeued
,
we
say
(
quod
Bristowe
as
S.
Paul
saith
)
they
must
indure
a
fierie
and
therefore
a
most
painefull
purgation
.
And
for
this
saying
,
hee
quoteth
most
impudently
1.
Cor.
3.
But
I
pray
you
Bristowe
,
where
saith
S.
Paul
the
deade
must
endure
a
fierie
purgation
,
or
where
maketh
he
any
exception
of
their
releeuing
?
Hee
saith
the
fire
shall
trie
euery
mans
worke
.
Is
euery
man
onely
some
kinde
of
deade
men
?
or
is
euerie
mans
worke
the
man
him selfe
?
or
is
the
triall
of
euerie
mans
worke
of
what
sort
it
is
,
a
purgation
either
of
the
man
or
of
the
worke
?
Arte
thou
not
ashamed
to
charge
S.
Paul
to
say
that
,
whereof
hee
saith
nothing
at
all
?
euen
by
the
iudgement
of
S.
Augustine
.
But
that
Aerius
was
not
the
first
that
denyed
prayers
for
the
dead
to
be
profitable
,
I
shewed
by
that
of
the
most
auncient
writers
.
The
Heracleonits
among
other
their
heresies
were
charged
to
burye
their
dead
with
inuocations
,
and
to
redeem
them
with
oyle
,
balme
and
water
,
and
inuocations
said
ouer
their
heades
,
as
Augustine
and
Epiphanius
shewe
out
of
Irenaeus
.
Nowe
commeth
Bristowe
,
and
in
many
needelesse
words
,
rehearseth
other
partes
of
their
heresie
,
with
their
manner
of
seasoning
or
receiuing
those
that
beleeue
in
them
,
by
a
counterfait
marriage
and
baptisme
,
and
by
anoynting
with
balme
,
&c.
concluding
that
this
practise
of
theirs
,
maketh
as
much
against
true
baptisme
&
solemnizing
of
matrimony
as
against
prayer
for
the
dead
,
anealing
,
or
anoynting
,
&c.
Likewise
might
they
conclude
,
that
all
their
ceremonies
are
as
good
as
baptisme
and
marriage
.
But
whatsoeuer
wee
reade
of
the
practise
of
heretikes
,
we
must
learne
to
distinguish
that
which
is
their
owne
inuention
,
from
that
which
is
the
ordinance
of
God
.
And
how
shall
wee
knowe
Gods
ordinance
from
heretikes
inuention
,
but
by
the
holy
scriptures
?
Separating
therefore
baptisme
and
marrying
,
which
are
the
ordinance
of
God
contained
in
the
scriptures
,
from
the
rest
that
haue
no
ground
in
the
same
,
prayers
for
the
dead
which
they
vsed
with
such
like
matters
,
were
the
inuention
of
heretikes
.
Howbeit
(
saith
Bristowe
)
of
prayer
for
the
dead
in
all
this
was
neuer
a
worde
.
No
was
?
Howe
read
you
Irenaeus
lib.
Cap.
18.
out
of
which
you
cite
so
much
&
could
not
see
,
that
after
he
hath
spoken
of
their
seasoning
of
their
disciples
aliue
,
he
telleth
how
they
redeeme
them
when
they
are
dead
:
Alij
sunt
qui
mortuis
redimunt
,
&c.
Other
there
be
,
that
redeeme
the
dead
at
the
end
of
their
departing
,
powring
on
their
heads
oyle
&
water
,
or
the
foresaid
oyntment
,
with
water
,
and
with
the
foresaid
inuocations
&
c
?
Do
you
not
heare
the
same
prayers
sayde
by
the
heretikes
for
the
dead
,
which
they
vttered
before
for
the
liuing
?
But
if
the
Heracleonites
should
faile
mee
,
I
affirme
that
Montanus
had
in
all
pointes
the
opinion
of
the
Papistes
,
because
Tertullian
a
Montanist
vttereth
al
those
pointes
in
such
bookes
as
he
made
being
a
Montanist
,
and
especially
in
his
booke
de
anima
.
That
Terrullian
vttereth
the
opinion
of
the
Papistes
in
all
pointes
,
Bristow
wil
not
denye
:
But
he
asketh
,
whether
all
be
Montanisme
that
Tertullian
hath
in
that
his
booke
de
anima
,
and
in
so
many
other
bookes
as
he
wrote
being
a
Montanist
?
No
forsooth
sir.
But
Montanus
the
heretike
helde
whatsoeuer
he
wrote
in
those
bookes
.
Howe
then
shall
we
discerne
that
which
is
proper
to
Montanus
,
from
that
which
he
hath
common
with
the
catholike
church
?
I
deliuered
a
rule
euen
nowe
,
concerning
the
practise
of
the
Heracleonites
.
Prayer
for
the
dead
and
Purgatorie
are
not
found
in
the
holy
Scriptures
,
but
they
are
found
in
a
disciple
of
Montanus
,
therfore
they
stinke
of
Montanisme
.
Adde
hereunto
that
in
so
many
bookes
as
Tertullian
did
write
being
a
catholike
,
there
is
no
mention
of
prayer
for
the
dead
,
or
suffering
after
this
life
of
the
faithfull
.
Last
of
all
,
Tertullian
him selfe
telleth
you
plainly
,
that
Paracletus
,
the
comforter
(
by
which
he
meant
the
spirite
of
Montanus
)
had
reuealed
very
often
,
that
euery
small
offence
must
be
punished
after
this
life
,
in
that
the
soule
of
any
except
martyrs
,
shall
not
go
immediatly
into
Paradise
,
but
tarie
in
prison
vntil
it
haue
payde
the
vttermost
farthing
.
What
needed
he
to
cite
the
authoritie
of
his
Paracletus
,
if
he
had
spoken
nothing
but
that
which
was
commonly
receiued
in
the
catholike
Church
?
Which
saying
,
sith
I
haue
set
downe
in
Tertullians
wordes
in
the
page
of
Purg.
417.
by
you
quoted
,
you
needed
not
to
haue
made
a
question
,
whether
this
opinion
were
Montanisme
or
no.
But
when
you
can
saye
nothing
against
this
assertion
your selfe
,
you
would
make
me
vncertein
of
it
,
and
say
that
it
is
but
a
light
suspicion
of
mine
,
because
in
one
place
,
before
I
come
to
the
found
proofe
of
it
,
I
say
it
is
a
probable
coniecture
.
And
doeth
it
followe
therefore
,
that
I
doubt
of
it
,
because
I
offer
a
probable
coniecture
to
other
mens
vnderstanding
,
before
by
order
of
the
discourse
,
I
am
brought
to
the
manifest
probation
of
it
?
The
other
phrases
by
which
you
gather
a
doubtfulnesse
,
shewe
your
ordinarie
manner
of
collections
.
And
therefore
it
is
not
otherwise
to
be
thought
,
but
that
the
Montanistes
added
prayers
for
the
spirites
of
them
that
were
dead
,
&c.
Purg.
417.
What
vncerteintie
is
of
that
matter
,
whereof
it
is
not
otherwise
to
be
thought
?
Againe
:
Finally
,
it
appeareth
,
that
the
faithfull
in
Tertullians
time
allowed
no
prayers
for
the
dead
.
Pur.
419.
Call
you
that
doubtfull
which
appeareth
by
plaine
demonstration
before
,
pag.
417
?
But
for
all
your
fine
frumpe
in
the
margent
(
all
in
Tertulian
is
Montanisme
that
Cyprian
doth
not
mention
)
it
is
a
probable
coniecture
,
that
prayer
for
the
dead
,
whereof
Tertullian
speaketh
,
was
vsed
onely
in
the
conuenticles
of
Montanistes
,
because
Cyprian
which
long
after
liued
in
Carthage
,
in
all
his
workes
,
maketh
no
mention
of
prayers
for
the
dead
.
But
I
weene
Cyprian
maketh
expresse
mention
of
prayers
for
the
dead
,
by
my
confession
,
as
Bristowe
would
haue
men
thinke
,
because
I
saye
,
of
one
place
alledged
by
Allen
,
that
it
hath
some
couler
for
Purgatorie
,
which
by
flowe
of
arguments
I
easely
washe
of
,
that
I
neede
not
sticke
in
the
lyme
,
as
Bristowe
sayeth
I
doe
:
but
howe
I
am
fastened
therein
,
he
sayeth
neuer
a
worde
.
Oblations
for
the
dead
.
I
sayde
that
oblations
for
the
dead
,
although
at
the
first
they
were
but
of
thankesgiuing
,
were
taken
of
the
Gentiles
,
as
appeareth
by
Tertullian
,
who
counteth
them
of
one
originall
or
beginning
with
oblations
for
the
birth
dayes
,
falsely
fathering
them
vpon
tradition
of
the
Apostles
,
as
he
doth
other
vanities
in
the
same
place
,
whereas
those
oblations
pro
natalitijs
were
taken
from
the
Gentiles
,
as
witnesseth
Beatus
Rhenanus
,
a
Papist
,
affirming
,
that
by
the
Canons
of
the
Nicen
councell
and
other
councels
which
he
had
seene
in
librarijs
,
they
were
abrogated
and
taken
away
.
Bristowe
sayeth
,
he
is
but
a
poore
antiquarie
,
which
knoweth
not
,
that
Natalitia
in
olde
time
,
were
as
they
nowe
are
the
dayes
of
Martyrs
sufferings
:
And
yet
he
can
name
neuer
an
olde
writer
iustly
,
that
calleth
them
natalitia
.
He
nameth
in
deede
Augustine
in
Psal.
118.
Con.
30.
Res.
Insignita
sunt
tempora
natalitijs
martyrum
:
the
times
are
notably
marked
with
the
byrthdayes
of
Martyrs
.
What
print
he
followeth
I
knowe
not
,
but
my
booke
hath
natalibus
and
not
natalitijs
:
betweene
which
wordes
there
is
some
difference
.
As
for
Martyrologies
whether
hee
sendeth
vs
,
I
knowe
none
of
such
antiquitie
,
that
they
may
be
iudges
in
this
case
.
Tullie
is
a
better
witnesse
what
natalitia
,
being
a
substantiue
,
in
olde
time
did
signifie
,
namely
,
the
feasts
that
were
kept
for
the
ioye
of
mens
birthdaye
in
Ant.
Hodie
non
descendit
Antonius
.
Cur
?
Dat
natalitia
in
hortis
.
Antonie
commeth
not
downe
to
day
.
Why
so
?
He
keepeth
the
feaste
of
his
birthdaye
in
his
garden
.
Wherefore
Pamelius
,
as
great
an
antiquarie
as
you
make
him
,
vniustly
reproueth
Rhenanus
,
for
vnderstanding
natalitia
in
Tertullian
,
to
be
feastes
of
the
birthdayes
vsed
after
the
example
of
the
Gentiles
.
The
places
you
cite
out
of
Cyprian
,
speake
neither
of
natales
nor
natalitia
,
but
of
celebrating
oblations
and
sacrifices
for
the
commemoration
or
remembrance
of
the
Martyrs
sufferings
,
which
could
be
none
other
but
sacrifices
of
thankesgiuing
,
according
to
your
owne
doctrine
.
Wherefore
you
shewe
nothing
to
the
contrary
,
but
that
Tertullian
vsing
the
worde
natalitia
,
vnderstandeth
it
for
feastes
of
the
birthdaye
,
and
not
of
the
death
of
Martyrs
.
And
beside
the
authoritie
of
Rhenanus
and
Tully
,
for
the
signification
of
the
worde
natalitia
,
I
oppose
against
you
these
reasons
.
First
,
that
he
addeth
not
the
name
of
Martyrs
,
as
all
they
that
vse
natalitia
or
natales
for
the
daye
of
their
departure
,
but
sayeth
generally
,
pro
natalitijs
.
Secondly
,
that
he
spake
immediatly
before
of
oblations
pro
defunctis
,
for
the
dead
,
which
you
vnderstande
for
all
faithfull
departed
out
of
the
worlde
:
therefore
pro
natalitijs
,
signifyeth
the
oblation
for
the
birth
of
all
Christians
come
into
the
worlde
.
Thirdly
,
seeing
he
had
before
named
oblations
for
the
dead
,
it
were
absurde
to
vnderstand
pro
natalitijs
for
the
dead
also
,
without
any
more
explication
.
Fourthly
,
if
natalitia
should
signifie
the
feastes
of
the
death
of
Martyrs
(
as
you
say
,
)
it
will
followe
also
,
which
I
do
vrge
of
the
place
,
that
oblations
pro
defunctis
for
the
dead
,
were
but
oblations
of
thankesgiuing
as
those
for
the
death
of
Martyrs
,
which
are
conteined
in
one
worde
or
phrase
.
As
for
that
you
adde
out
of
Origen
,
in
Iob.
lib
3.
Wee
celebrate
not
the
daye
of
birth
,
&c.
But
the
daye
of
death
,
sheweth
the
custome
of
the
Greeke
Church
,
and
not
of
the
Latine
,
and
their
celebrating
of
their
daye
of
birth
with
ioye
and
thankesgiuing
,
as
the
daye
of
the
beginning
of
felicitie
,
and
ende
of
all
sorrowes
vnto
the
deade
,
cleane
ouerthroweth
your
opinion
of
Purgatorie
,
and
prayer
for
the
dead
,
as
in
his
time
,
not
yet
entred
into
the
Greeke
Church
.
Beside
that
,
he
speaketh
of
the
death
of
all
men
,
and
not
of
Martyrs
onely
,
as
you
violently
would
wrest
him
.
Beeres
to
carry
home
the
corpses
.
He
maketh
a
foolish
quarell
vppon
my
saying
,
that
George
of
Alexandria
inuented
beeres
for
lucres
sake
,
as
the
Papistes
their
bearing
clothes
,
and
other
toyes
,
for
funerall
pompe
.
And
first
he
sayeth
,
that
George
did
not
inuent
beeres
.
For
Epiphanius
sayeth
,
he
deuised
to
make
the
number
of
them
certeine
,
and
without
those
that
he
ordeined
,
no
corps
to
be
buryed
,
and
all
for
lucres
sake
.
Ep.
H.
76.
I
neuer
thought
,
that
they
carryed
dead
men
on
their
neckes
like
beastes
to
the
graue
before
Georges
dayes
,
and
therefore
they
had
some
kinde
of
comely
carriage
for
them
.
But
I
sayed
truely
,
that
George
inuented
peculiar
beeres
,
for
lucres
sake
,
as
the
Papistes
vse
their
bearing
clothes
and
like
stuffe
.
Secondly
he
sayeth
,
I
commend
such
ceremonies
as
are
conuenient
for
laying
vp
of
the
corps
.
I
do
so
:
But
superstitious
beereclothes
,
and
other
ceremonies
of
poperie
,
so
dearly
payde
for
,
are
neither
needfull
nor
conuenient
.
Againe
he
asketh
,
whether
I
thinke
it
much
,
that
the
Church
should
reape
their
carnalia
,
to
whome
shee
soweth
spiritualia
?
No
verily
:
but
I
could
neuer
learn
out
of
the
scriptures
,
that
bearing
cloathes
,
crosses
,
candels
,
torches
,
&c.
were
such
spiritualia
,
as
the
ministers
of
the
Church
ought
to
sowe
.
Last
of
all
,
where
he
asketh
,
whether
I
would
prouide
a
beere
and
bearing
cloathes
against
I
be
buryed
,
rather
then
to
paye
my
dueties
to
my
parish
Church
,
hee
declareth
,
that
hee
doth
wilfully
mistake
my
saying
of
beeres
and
bearing
clothes
,
as
though
I
denyed
any
thing
that
is
comelye
,
when
I
speake
against
superstition
and
couetuousnesse
.
The
seconde
parte
concerning
the
errors
that
hee
layed
(
cap.
4.
)
to
the
fathers
and
not
to
vs
.
1.
Touching
the
heresies
that
were
in
their
times
.
He
demaundeth
what
a
thing
it
is
that
I
charge
the
Church
in
the
Apostles
time
with
heresies
,
that
were
in
The
true
Church
of
Christ
hath
alwayes
stoode
stedfast
and
inseparable
from
Christe
her
heade
,
when
all
heretikes
haue
beene
and
shall
bee
consounded
,
although
shee
haue
not
alwayes
florished
in
worldly
peace
.
For
vntill
the
time
of
Constantine
the
great
,
the
Church
had
small
reste
:
And
soone
after
vnder
the
Emperours
Constantius
,
Constano
,
and
Valens
,
it
was
greatly
infected
with
the
heresie
of
Arrius
.
Where
Bristowe
falsifieth
my
wordes
,
reporting
that
I
saye
,
The
true
Church
was
infected
&c.
the
name
of
the
Church
is
oftentimes
generally
taken
for
the
whole
number
of
them
that
professe
Christianitie
,
as
when
I
saye
,
the
Church
was
persecuted
by
the
heathen
Emperours
,
I
meane
all
that
woulde
professe
Christianitie
,
among
whiche
were
manye
heretikes
that
suffered
persecution
also
.
Lykewise
when
I
say
,
the
Church
was
infected
,
I
meane
the
visible
Church
,
in
whiche
are
alwayes
manye
hypocrites
,
according
to
the
parable
of
the
nette
and
of
the
tares
,
&c.
yea
I
doubt
not
but
many
of
GODS
electe
,
were
infected
with
that
heresie
in
those
times
,
which
afterwarde
repented
and
returned
to
the
knowledge
of
the
trueth
:
wherfore
my
meaning
was
nothing
lesse
,
then
to
charge
the
true
Church
of
Orthodoxie
and
true
profession
with
the
heresie
of
Arrius
,
or
any
other
which
it
did
openly
detest
and
abhorre
.
An other
quarel
he
hath
against
me
,
where
I
saide
,
Ar.
35.
That
the
true
Church
decayed
immediately
after
the
Apostles
times
.
In
which
place
,
after
I
had
shewed
what
corruption
of
doctrine
had
beene
receiued
of
that
greatest
lights
and
pillers
of
the
Church
,
from
which
it
was
not
like
,
that
most
of
the
inferior
members
could
bee
free
:
I
conclude
according
to
the
demand
(
which
was
to
declare
by
good
history
or
reasonable
likelyhood
,
when
the
true
church
did
decaie
?
)
that
it
decayed
immediately
after
the
Apostles
times
,
meaning
as
the
demaunde
serueth
also
,
to
vnderstande
the
word
of
decaying
,
when
it
began
to
decay
,
&
not
as
Bristow
cauilleth
,
when
it
was
vtterly
decaied
&
came
to
nothing
,
for
such
decaying
I
vtterly
deny
,
that
euer
it
was
,
or
euer
shal
be
.
If
we
see
some
principall
postes
of
an
house
,
begin
to
putrifie
,
may
wee
not
say
,
this
building
doth
decaye
?
Or
being
asked
when
it
decayed
,
after
it
is
come
to
a
more
ruinous
state
,
and
yet
standeth
,
may
wee
not
aunswere
,
it
decayed
first
,
when
such
a
beame
or
post
began
to
put
rifie
?
I
doubt
not
but
euery
man
of
reasonable
vnderstanding
,
wil
acknowledge
how
folish
these
cauils
are
,
which
are
taken
of
ambiguitie
of
words
,
and
misconstruing
of
phrases
cleane
contrarie
to
my
meaning
,
expressed
in
plaine
euident
tearmes
,
and
hundreth
times
at
least
,
in
these
my
bookes
,
namely
that
the
Church
,
although
it
be
persecuted
by
tyrants
,
assaulted
by
heretikes
,
vndermined
by
hypocrites
,
enuyed
and
maligned
by
the
diuell
himselfe
,
yet
the
gates
of
hell
shall
neuer
preuaile
against
it
,
to
roote
it
out
of
the
worlde
,
or
to
hinder
the
saluation
of
any
one
true
member
thereof
.
Touching
the
errors
of
S.
Cyprian
,
S.
Irenee
,
&
S.
Iustinus
.
If
these
doctors
haue
erred
(
saith
Bristow
)
in
any
thing
,
yet
this
thing
is
notable
,
that
not
so
much
as
in
any
one
We
resist
(
you
say
)
their
ful
&
whole
consent
.
That
is
vtterly
false
,
you
haue
not
their
ful
&
whole
consent
,
for
any
point
of
popery
:
prayer
for
the
deade
is
the
oldest
error
you
haue
,
except
the
superstition
of
Angels
and
the
pharisaicall
doctrine
of
iustification
.
Shew
me
the
ful
&
whole
consent
of
al
the
fathers
for
it
,
whose
writings
are
extant
,
shewe
me
Iustinus
,
Irenaeus
,
Origenes
,
Cyprianus
,
Clemens
Alexandrinus
,
or
any
within
200.
yeares
after
Christ
(
except
Tertullian
a
Montanist
)
that
in
his
writings
maintaineth
prayer
for
the
deade
.
But
you
will
tell
vs
,
whereto
you
papists
ascribe
infallible
truth
:
First
to
the
canonical
scriptures
&
tradition
of
the
Apostles
,
to
the
decrees
of
Peter
&
his
chayre
,
to
the
whole
church
,
to
the
consent
of
fathers
&
councels
,
both
generall
and
prouincial
,
confirmed
by
Peters
successor
.
We
know
this
wel
inough
,
but
I
doe
rehearse
it
in
your
owne
termes
,
that
it
may
appeare
you
are
not
ashamed
to
match
diuerse
autorities
equal
in
truth
infallible
,
with
the
holy
scriptures
inspired
of
God
,
that
alone
are
able
to
instruct
a
man
to
saluation
,
and
prepare
him
to
euerie
good
worke
.
For
these
autorities
,
you
vrge
not
onely
where
they
agree
with
the
scriptures
,
but
also
wher
you
blasphemously
suppose
the
scriptures
to
be
vnperfect
,
as
that
they
haue
omitted
any
thing
needeful
to
saluation
,
or
the
aduancement
of
Gods
glorie
in
true
religion
.
The
errors
of
the
fathers
,
we
doe
not
reueale
to
their
dishonour
,
but
to
the
honour
of
God
.
Let
God
onely
be
true
&
euery
man
a
lyer
,
yea
Peter
&
Peters
successor
a
thousand
times
.
Whereas
you
take
vpon
you
,
to
mitigate
the
errors
of
the
fathers
,
named
in
the
title
,
you
labour
in
〈…〉
e
:
we
know
they
erred
not
of
malice
,
but
being
de〈…〉
ued
with
similitude
of
trueth
.
But
where
you
say
,
it
〈…〉
s
no
great
matter
for
Irenaeus
,
Papius
,
and
other
to
〈…〉
ue
erred
in
the
opinion
of
the
Chiliasts
,
vntill
the
Church
had
condemned
peraduenture
that
opinion
in
the
heretiks
called
Mellenaries
:
you
shewe
what
certeintie
of
trueth
you
haue
out
of
the
scriptures
,
&
yet
you
make
it
but
a
peraduenture
,
that
the
Church
hath
condemned
that
error
.
Last
of
all
,
where
you
say
in
excuse
of
the
error
of
Iustinus
,
concerning
angels
,
that
expresse
mention
is
made
Gen.
6.
of
the
sinne
of
the
Angels
,
calling
the
translation
of
the
septuaginta
authenticall
,
which
translateth
the
Angels
of
God
insteede
of
the
sonnes
of
God
,
you
geue
great
cause
of
suspicion
that
you
are
not
cleare
of
that
error
your selfe
.
3
Touching
second
mariages
,
and
S.
Hierom.
Where
I
say
Act.
35.
it
seemeth
that
the
Church
in
the
The
place
of
Iustinus
out
of
which
such
a
matter
seemeth
is
Apologia
secunda
ad
Antoninum
Pium
,
&c.
where
he
hath
these
wordes
:
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
‑
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
As
they
that
by
mans
lawe
enter
into
seconde
marriages
,
are
sinners
by
our
maisters
iudgement
.
I
knowe
the
wordes
are
otherwise
interpreted
by
some
,
and
the
sinne
not
referred
to
seconde
marriages
,
but
to
wanton
beholding
of
women
:
And
therefore
I
doe
not
precisely
charge
Iustinus
.
And
yet
againe
I
say
it
seemeth
,
that
the
Church
in
his
time
was
in
some
error
,
because
Athenagoras
a
Christian
philosopher
,
that
liued
in
a
manner
in
the
same
time
,
doth
expresly
call
the
seconde
marriage
speciosum
adulterium
,
a
faire
kinde
of
adultery
.
Qui
namque
repudiauerit
,
inquit
&c.
For
hee
that
shall
forsake
his
wife
(
saith
Christ
)
and
marry
another
,
doth
commit
adulterie
:
suffering
a
man
neither
by
diuorcement
to
put
her
away
,
whose
flower
of
virginitie
he
hath
defiled
,
nor
to
goe
vnto
seconde
marriages
.
For
he
that
depriueth
him selfe
of
his
former
wife
(
although
after
she
is
deade
a
diuorcement
is
made
)
is
a
secrete
and
couered
adulterer
,
transgressing
the
hand
that
is
the
creature
or
workemanshippe
of
God
.
Because
in
the
beginning
hee
made
one
man
and
one
woman
,
and
dissoluing
fleshe
from
flesh
,
the
vnion
of
commixtion
instituted
for
the
participation
of
kinde
and
sexe
,
&c.
And
this
seemeth
to
be
the
common
error
of
his
time
,
because
he
writeth
this
in
that
Apologie
,
which
he
made
in
defence
of
all
Christians
,
which
it
is
not
like
he
woulde
present
to
the
Emperor
,
in
the
name
of
them
all
,
except
he
had
written
that
,
which
was
the
common
receiued
opinion
of
the
Christians
doctrine
in
his
time
.
Concerning
Hieronyme
,
Bristowe
is
angrie
also
that
I
say
hee
was
almost
falne
into
Tertullians
error
,
when
it
is
manifest
hee
was
fayne
to
purge
himselfe
,
not
onelye
against
malicious
enuiers
,
but
also
towardes
Godly
Bishoppes
,
and
Christians
.
Apol.
ad
Pammachium
.
Where
as
I
laye
vnto
Hierom
,
two
other
perilous
Assertions
,
whereof
the
one
tendeth
to
destroye
the
humanitie
of
Christ
,
the
other
to
giue
diuinity
to
the
martyrs
,
where
hee
saith
,
The
soules
of
the
martyrs
,
follow
the
Lambe
whether
so
euer
hee
goeth
:
and
thereof
concludeth
,
If
the
Lambe
be
euery
where
,
those
also
that
are
with
the
Lambe
,
must
bee
beleeued
to
bee
euerie
where
.
Bristowe
aunswereth
,
that
the
sainctes
are
not
euerie
●here
in
personall
presence
.
How
then
?
But
of
such
power
〈…〉
ey
be
,
that
they
heare
their
suters
in
all
places
at
once
,
and
〈…〉
n
be
personally
present
to
heale
&
helpe
whom
they
will
.
Euen
〈…〉
s
the
lambe
that
is
Christ
according
to
his
humanitie
hea〈…〉eth
suters
in
all
places
,
and
in
personall
presence
assi
〈…〉ed
Saint
Stephen
,
and
whomsoeuer
else
hee
will
:
I
say
according
also
to
his
humanitie
&c.
But
what
say
you
according
to
his
humanitie
,
is
hee
euerie
where
?
that
is
the
question
,
and
not
of
his
power
in
hearing
suters
,
or
helping
them
.
If
you
will
defende
the
vbiquitie
of
Christ
according
to
his
humanitie
,
speake
plainely
,
and
ioyne
with
Hieronyme
if
you
dare
.
If
you
interprete
euerie
where
for
all
power
,
how
can
you
giue
all
power
to
the
soules
of
Martyrs
,
which
they
ascribe
onely
to
GOD
and
the
Lambe
?
Apoc.
7.
And
whereas
you
attribute
vnto
the
soules
of
Saintes
,
such
power
,
that
they
heare
the
suters
in
all
places
at
once
&c:
Let
the
reader
see
howe
much
you
ascribe
to
Christe
,
that
make
the
sute
of
euerie
saincte
equal
with
him
in
infinite
power
of
hearing
,
vnderstanding
and
helping
.
For
to
heare
vnderstande
and
helpe
all
suters
at
once
,
is
a
diuine
priuiledge
not
communicable
to
any
creature
,
that
is
not
GOD
.
The
argument
therefore
of
inuocation
of
sainctes
,
whiche
you
acompte
to
bee
so
stronge
,
without
horrible
blasphemie
,
against
the
diuine
nature
,
can
neuer
bee
defended
.
The
Sainctes
followe
the
Lambe
,
not
to
bee
of
diuine
nature
,
or
equall
power
with
him
,
but
to
bee
partakers
of
his
glorie
,
according
to
his
grace
,
and
the
measure
and
capacitie
of
nature
created
.
Touching
praying
to
the
Sonne
,
and
to
the
holy
Being
vrged
by
the
Popishe
Articles
to
shewe
the
Ad
Monimum
,
&
Petrum
diaconum
,
that
the
prayers
,
although
they
bee
directed
to
the
father
,
yet
are
made
to
the
holy
Trinitie
,
especially
because
of
the
conclusion
,
which
hath
in
it
the
name
of
the
sonne
and
the
holy
Ghost
.
And
whereas
hee
sendeth
me
to
the
Canon
of
his
Masse
for
proofe
of
the
same
,
I
must
put
him
in
remembraunce
,
that
in
Agnus
Dei
,
qui
tollis
peccata
mundi
,
O
lambe
of
GOD
which
takest
away
the
sinnes
of
the
worlde
&c:
which
is
also
sayde
in
his
Masse
,
both
the
prayers
is
directed
to
God
the
sonne
,
&
yet
no
conclusion
there
is
,
naming
the
father
and
the
holy
Ghost
.
Let
Bristow
therefore
choose
,
whether
hee
will
defende
the
error
of
the
councell
of
Carthage
,
or
else
acknowledge
that
the
Romishe
Church
doth
erre
,
in
directing
the
prayer
at
the
altar
to
the
Sonne
,
without
any
conclusion
including
the
father
and
the
holy
Ghost
.
5
Of
minisiring
the
blessed
Sacramentes
to
infantes
.
I
charge
all
the
Churches
in
S.
Augustines
time
&
In●ocentius
Fulke
neuer
redde
the
councell
of
Trent
,
and
that
i●●tterly
false
,
for
as
I
knowe
I
haue
redde
it
,
so
suppose
〈◊〉
haue
redd
it
before
Bristowe
.
But
admitte
I
had
ne●er
seene
,
the
report
of
that
5.
session
vnder
Pius
the
4.
which
was
helde
the
16.
day
of
Iuly
1562
,
are
all
blinde
guides
that
neuer
sawe
that
session
?
O
waightie
censure
of
a
proude
papist
,
whiche
by
a
fault
called
of
the
Greekes
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
thinketh
that
to
bee
the
highest
point
of
learning
,
which
he
hath
learned
latest
!
But
what
if
the
councell
of
Trent
doe
not
onely
acknowledge
it
to
bee
an
error
,
but
also
doe
anathematise
all
them
that
holde
the
contrarie
?
Then
haue
I
not
slaundered
the
Papistes
,
but
Bristowe
hath
slaundered
mee
.
The
verie
wordes
cited
by
Bristowe
out
of
the
4.
Cap.
shewe
that
the
Papistes
helde
it
for
an
error
,
that
it
is
necessarie
for
infantes
to
receiue
the
communion
:
That
infantes
lacking
the
vse
of
reason
,
are
by
no
necessitie
bound
to
the
sacramentall
receiuing
of
the
Eucharist
.
Also
the
fourth
Canon
of
the
same
session
,
thundereth
out
anathema
,
against
them
,
that
say
otherwise
.
Si
quis
dixerit
parvulis
antequam
ad
annos
discretionis
pervenerint
necessariam
esse
Eucharistiae
communionem
,
Anathema
sit
:
If
any
man
shall
say
,
that
the
communion
of
the
Eucharist
,
is
necessarie
for
infants
,
before
they
come
to
the
yeares
of
discretion
,
let
him
be
accursed
.
But
the
same
councel
in
the
Chapter
by
Bristow
cited
,
affirmeth
,
that
Antiquitie
is
not
to
be
condemned
,
if
it
practised
that
maner
,
sometime
,
in
some
places
,
and
that
without
controuersie
it
must
be
beleeued
,
that
they
did
it
not
,
for
anie
necessitie
of
saluation
.
And
this
declaration
(
saith
Bristow
)
may
suffice
not
onely
all
Catholikes
,
to
whom
it
is
the
declaration
of
the
holy
Ghost
himself
,
but
also
any
other
reasonable
man
.
Indeede
if
any
resonable
man
,
wil
be
satisfied
with
such
a
grosse
ledging
of
the
whole
matter
in
controuersie
,
it
is
a
good
satisfaction
.
The
councel
of
Trent
saith
so
,
therefore
although
Augustine
,
Pope
Innocentius
,
&
other
witnesses
of
antiquitie
say
the
contrary
,
of
themselues
,
yet
we
must
not
beleue
them
.
That
Kemnitius
a
Lutheran
toucheth
not
this
error
of
the
councell
of
Trent
,
it
is
a
great
argument
,
&
such
as
Bristowe
often
vseth
,
that
it
is
no
error
.
Kemnitius
if
he
had
beene
as
quicke
eyed
as
Bernard
,
yet
saw
not
all
things
,
neither
was
he
bound
to
confute
all
errors
that
he
sawe
.
But
for
further
satisfaction
of
all
men
,
Bristow
will
open
the
case
particularly
,
which
is
this
in
effect
:
The
Pelagians
affirmed
,
that
children
without
baptisme
,
should
haue
euerlasting
life
,
although
not
in
the
kingdome
of
God
.
Wherevnto
the
Catholikes
replied
,
they
could
not
haue
eternall
life
,
except
they
did
eate
the
flesh
of
Christ
,
and
drinke
his
bloud
in
the
communion
:
but
the
communion
they
could
not
receiue
,
before
they
were
baptised
,
therefore
without
baptisme
,
they
could
not
haue
eternal
life
.
Now
Bristowe
putting
the
case
,
that
a
childe
were
baptised
,
and
then
immediately
dyed
before
he
receyued
sacramentally
the
Eucharist
,
demandeth
,
whether
the
father
granting
to
such
a
childe
by
force
of
baptisme
remission
of
sinnes
,
do
not
also
allowe
him
eternall
life
and
the
kingdome
of
God
.
And
let
any
man
(
saith
he
)
bring
me
one
place
of
those
Doctors
speaking
to
this
case
&
holding
the
contrarie
.
I
aunswere
,
seeing
they
vsed
immediately
after
●aptisme
,
to
communicat
the
infant
,
the
case
that
Bristow
●utteth
,
is
too
rare
,
to
happen
in
500
yeres
that
any
que●●ion
might
grow
vpon
it
.
But
what
their
opinion
was
,
●f
the
necessitie
of
the
one
sacrament
,
as
much
as
the
o●her
,
it
is
easie
to
proue
both
by
their
argument
,
which
Bristow
confesseth
they
vsed
,
&
also
by
their
own
words
,
whatsoeuer
the
blind
guides
of
the
Tridentine
councel
●ay
in
their
defence
.
They
brought
in
the
Eucharist
(
saith
Bristow
)
onely
to
proue
that
baptisme
is
necessary
to
the
euerlasting
life
of
children
.
Verie
well
:
but
what
force
●n
the
worlde
hath
that
argument
of
the
Euchariste
,
for
the
necessitie
of
baptisme
,
if
the
Eucharist
also
bee
not
necessarie
for
children
?
For
the
Pelagians
might
reply
,
that
if
the
Euchariste
be
not
necessarie
,
no
more
is
baptisme
for
the
atteyning
of
eternal
life
.
But
those
fathers
labored
to
prooue
the
necessitie
of
baptisme
for
infants
,
by
the
necessitie
of
the
Euchariste
for
infantes
:
And
this
appeareth
by
many
places
of
S.
Augustine
.
As
cont.
Iul.
●ib.
1.
cap.
2.
Where
he
speaketh
of
Innocentius
Bishosh
of
Rome
,
Qui
parvulos
&c.
which
hath
defined
that
infantes
except
,
they
eate
the
flesh
of
the
son
of
man
can
haue
no
life
at
all
in
them
.
And
there
he
meaneth
of
eating
sacramentally
:
as
his
owne
words
cited
by
Augustine
declare
,
Cont.
duas
Epist.
Pelag
lib.
2.
cap.
4.
speaking
of
the
rescript
of
Innocentius
to
the
Bishops
of
Numidia
:
Nónne
apertissimè
de
parvulis
loquitur
?
Haec
enim
ejus
verba
sunt
&c.
Doth
he
not
most
manifestly
speake
of
infantes
?
For
these
are
his
owne
wordes
:
Illud
verò
quòd
eos
vestra
fraternitas
asserit
,
praedicare
&c.
But
concerning
that
your
brotherhood
affirmeth
them
to
preach
,
that
infants
,
may
be
rewarded
with
the
rewards
of
eternal
life
,
euen
without
the
grace
of
baptisme
,
it
is
a
verie
foolish
thing
.
For
excepte
they
shall
eate
the
fleshe
of
the
sonne
of
man
and
drinke
his
bloud
,
they
shall
haue
no
life
in
themselues
.
But
they
which
defend
them
to
haue
this
life
without
regeneration
,
seeme
to
me
that
they
would
make
frustrate
baptisme
it selfe
,
when
they
preach
them
to
haue
that
which
we
beleue
is
not
to
be
conferred
vpon
them
but
by
baptisme
&c.
And
within
fewe
lines
after
Augustine
saith
:
Ecce
beatae
memoriae
&c.
Beholde
Pope
Innocentius
of
blessed
memorie
saith
:
that
infantes
haue
not
life
,
without
the
baptisme
of
Christ
and
without
participation
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
.
Agayne
,
lib.
1.
Cap.
2.
hee
speaketh
against
the
Pelagians
,
which
granted
that
baptisme
was
necessarie
for
infantes
,
to
attaine
to
the
kingdome
of
heauen
,
but
not
for
remission
of
sinnes
.
Nec
illud
cogitatis
&c.
Neither
doe
you
consider
this
,
that
they
cannot
haue
life
,
which
are
expertes
without
part
of
the
body
and
bloude
of
Christ
,
seeing
hee
sayth
himselfe
:
Except
you
shall
eate
my
fleshe
and
drinke
my
bloude
,
you
shall
haue
no
life
in
you
.
Agayne
,
Contra
Pelagianos
Hypognost
lib.
5.
Si
enim
intelligeretis
,
crederetis
quare
dixerit
Dominus
:
Non
opus
est
san●
medicus
&c.
If
you
did
vnderstande
,
you
woulde
beleeue
wherefore
our
Lorde
saide
,
The
whole
neede
not
the
Phisition
,
but
they
that
are
sicke
:
you
would
beleeue
truely
,
that
they
are
not
whole
,
but
wounded
,
which
are
offered
to
be
healed
to
our
sauiour
the
Phisition
,
at
the
station
of
Baptisme
:
and
that
they
shoulde
not
haue
life
,
except
they
eate
the
fleshe
and
drinke
the
bloud
of
him
which
is
life
.
For
he
him selfe
hath
said
,
Except
ye
shall
eate
the
fleshe
of
the
sonne
of
man
and
drinke
his
bloud
,
you
shal
not
haue
eternall
life
in
you
,
and
hee
which
eateth
my
flesh
and
drinketh
my
bloud
,
hath
eternall
life
.
Howe
therefore
doe
you
promise
the
life
of
the
kingdome
of
heauen
to
infantes
,
not
borne
againe
of
water
and
the
holy
Ghost
,
Non
cibatis
carne
atque
non
potatis
,
not
fedd
with
the
flesh
of
Christ
and
which
haue
not
dronke
the
bloud
of
Christ
,
which
is
shedde
for
the
remission
of
sinnes
?
For
it
is
his
decree
:
If
any
man
bee
not
borne
againe
of
water
and
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
he
cannot
enter
into
the
kingdome
of
heauen
.
For
to
enter
into
the
kingdome
of
heauen
is
none
other
thing
,
but
to
liue
in
a
blessed
life
which
remayneth
for
euer
and
euer
.
Beholde
hee
which
is
not
baptised
and
he
also
which
is
depriued
of
the
vital
meate
and
cup
,
is
diuided
from
the
kingdome
of
heauen
&c.
To
the
like
effecte
hee
writeth
,
Contra
duas
Epist.
Pelag.
ad
Bon.
lib.
4.
cap.
4.
Si
omnibus
&c.
If
reconciliation
by
Christ
be
necessarie
,
for
all
men
,
sinne
hath
passed
oouer
all
men
,
by
which
wee
were
enimies
,
that
we
haue
neede
of
reconciliation
.
This
reconciliation
is
in
the
lauer
of
regeneration
,
and
in
the
body
and
bloude
of
Christ
,
without
the
which
,
no
not
infantes
can
haue
life
in
themselues
.
Also
Contra
Iulian
,
lib.
3.
cap.
11.
deriding
his
pietie
,
that
infantes
shoulde
be
damned
for
not
doing
that
which
they
coulde
not
doe
,
he
addeth
,
Vbi
etiam
ponis
&c.
where
also
wilt
thou
place
them
,
because
they
shall
lacke
life
,
seeing
they
haue
not
eaten
the
flesh
of
the
Sonne
of
man
,
nor
drunke
his
bloude
?
Also
de
peccatorum
meritis
&
remissione
lib.
1.
cap.
20.
a
place
cited
by
Bristowe
but
mingled
with
many
intersections
of
his
owne
,
as
his
maner
is
.
After
Augustine
hath
rehearsed
the
text
,
Ioan.
6.
Except
ye
eate
&c:
hee
addeth
Quid
vltrà
querimus
?
&c.
What
seeke
wee
further
?
What
can
they
aunswere
to
this
,
except
stubbornes
doe
stretch
their
striuing
sinowes
against
the
constancie
of
the
manifest
trueth
?
Or
dare
any
man
say
this
also
,
that
this
sentence
pertayneth
not
to
infantes
,
and
that
they
may
without
the
participation
of
this
body
and
bloud
,
haue
life
in
them
&
c
?
Likewise
cap.
24.
he
saith
,
Optimè
Punici
&c.
Best
of
all
,
the
Christians
of
Africa
,
do
call
baptisme
it selfe
nothing
else
but
health
,
and
the
sacrament
of
the
body
of
Christ
,
nothing
else
but
life
:
Whence
,
but
of
an
auncient
(
as
I
thinke
)
and
apostolike
tradition
by
which
they
holde
it
ingrafted
vnto
the
Church
of
Christ
,
that
without
baptisme
and
participation
of
the
Lordes
table
,
no
man
at
all
can
come
,
not
onely
,
not
to
the
kingdome
of
God
,
but
neither
to
health
&
life
euerlasting
?
For
this
also
the
scripture
testifieth
according
to
those
thinges
which
wee
haue
sayde
before
.
For
what
other
thing
doe
they
holde
,
which
call
baptisme
by
the
name
of
health
,
but
that
which
is
sayde
,
hee
hath
saued
vs
by
the
lauer
of
regeneration
,
and
that
which
Peter
saith
,
so
also
doeth
baptisme
in
like
manner
saue
you
?
What
other
thing
also
doe
they
holde
which
call
the
sacrament
of
our
Lordes
table
,
life
,
but
that
which
is
saide
,
I
am
the
breade
of
life
,
which
came
downe
from
heauen
:
and
the
breade
which
I
will
giue
,
is
my
fleshe
,
for
the
life
of
the
worlde
:
And
except
ye
shall
eate
the
fleshe
of
the
sonne
of
man
and
drinke
his
bloud
,
ye
shall
haue
no
life
in
you
?
If
therefore
as
so
many
and
so
greate
testimonies
of
GOD
doe
consent
,
that
neither
health
nor
life
eternall
without
baptisme
,
and
the
body
and
bloud
of
our
Lord
is
to
be
hoped
to
any
body
,
in
vaine
without
these
is
it
promised
to
Infantes
.
Furthermore
,
if
from
health
and
life
eternall
,
nothing
but
sinnes
do
separate
,
by
these
sacramentes
,
nothing
but
the
guilt
of
sinne
is
loosed
in
infantes
.
These
places
of
Augustine
I
haue
rehearsed
the
more
at
large
,
that
the
impudencie
of
the
councell
of
Trent
and
of
their
poore
patrone
Bristowe
,
might
appeare
,
whiche
would
excuse
the
errour
of
the
auncient
Churche
,
and
of
the
Bishoppe
of
Rome
in
those
times
,
in
saying
that
albeit
they
vsed
to
minister
the
communion
to
infantes
,
yet
they
did
it
not
for
any
necessitie
to
saluation
:
whereas
the
contrary
by
so
many
places
,
and
more
then
I
haue
rehearsed
,
doth
most
manifestly
appeare
.
As
for
the
practise
whiche
he
confesseth
of
giuing
that
sacrament
to
infantes
,
he
saith
is
not
against
Probet
seipsum
,
&c.
Let
a
man
examine
himselfe
,
&c.
Because
that
infantes
may
examine
them selues
by
others
,
(
whiche
is
a
monstrous
kinde
of
speache
)
as
well
as
beleeue
and
repent
by
others
.
Here
is
one
errour
of
Augustine
defended
by
an
other
of
his
:
for
infantes
are
not
baptized
for
the
faith
of
other
men
,
but
because
they
are
comprehended
within
the
covenant
of
GOD
,
to
whome
baptisme
is
no
more
to
be
denied
,
then
circumcision
was
to
the
infantes
of
the
Iewes
.
The
Prophet
sayeth
,
Iustus
&c.
The
righteous
man
shall
liue
by
his
owne
faith
.
It
is
not
the
faith
of
other
men
that
can
procure
life
vnto
vs
.
Neither
is
faith
required
of
infantes
,
before
they
can
heare
the
worde
of
God
,
which
is
the
onely
ordinary
meanes
by
whiche
faith
commeth
.
But
infantes
(
sayeth
Bristowe
)
bee
in
no
mortall
sinnes
,
being
newely
baptized
,
and
therefore
they
neede
no
examination
for
feare
least
they
should
come
vnworthily
.
Saint
Augustine
confesseth
that
hee
was
in
mortall
sinne
,
euen
in
his
infancie
:
Imbecillitas
membrorum
infantium
innocens
est
,
non
animus
infantium
:
The
weakenesse
of
the
members
of
infantes
is
innocent
,
not
the
minde
of
infantes
.
Afterwarde
hee
bringeth
examples
of
enuie
euen
in
an
infant
,
and
at
last
concludeth
:
Quod
si
,
&c.
And
if
it
be
so
that
I
was
conceyued
in
iniquitie
,
and
that
in
sinnes
my
mother
in
her
wombe
nourished
me
;
where
I
beseech
thee
my
GOD
,
when
LORDE
was
I
thy
seruant
,
where
or
when
was
I
innocent
?
By
this
you
see
,
there
is
no
shorte
time
of
mans
life
free
from
sinne
.
Neither
may
you
cavill
,
that
Augustine
was
not
baptised
in
his
infancie
,
seeing
he
speaketh
generally
of
the
condition
of
all
infantes
,
which
is
not
chaunged
by
baptisme
,
although
sinne
be
not
imputed
vnto
them
.
Wherefore
to
speake
after
your
Popishe
supposition
of
Baptisme
,
that
by
the
worke
wrought
all
sinne
committed
before
baptisme
,
is
abolished
in
baptisme
;
what
if
the
infant
not
knowing
the
mysterie
of
baptisme
,
be
angry
with
them
that
haue
taken
him
out
of
his
warme
clothes
and
plunged
him
in
baptisme
?
is
this
no
sinne
?
But
what
infant
can
examine
himselfe
of
this
sinne
?
And
what
can
the
examination
of
other
men
profite
him
whome
the
holy
Ghoste
will
haue
to
examine
himselfe
?
As
for
the
distinction
of
Votum
explicitum
&
implicitum
,
he
sendeth
vs
to
Allens
booke
de
Euch.
lib.
1.
Cap.
31.
&c.
For
how
can
we
be
assured
,
that
children
haue
a
close
desire
to
baptisme
more
then
to
the
communion
?
Or
how
can
it
be
proued
,
That
they
haue
any
desire
explicite
or
implicite
to
either
of
both
the
sacramentes
?
If
〈◊〉
be
lawful
to
imagine
of
infantes
,
against
all
reason
,
and
without
all
scriptures
,
wee
may
fill
bookes
with
distinctions
and
deuises
innumerable
.
Last
of
all
,
hee
chargeth
mee
,
with
falsification
by
adding
,
because
the
councell
of
Trent
saith
,
that
manner
was
aliquando
in
quibusdam
locis
,
some
times
and
in
some
places
.
But
I
pray
thee
Bristowe
,
what
haue
I
falsified
?
the
councel
of
Trent
,
which
thou
affirmest
that
I
did
neuer
read
?
Thou
sayest
they
that
did
communicate
infantes
,
were
not
so
many
,
as
Fulke
doeth
make
them
.
Why
,
howe
many
doe
I
make
them
?
I
sayde
that
the
Pope
of
Rome
and
all
they
that
tooke
his
part
in
S.
Augustines
time
,
were
in
this
error
,
that
the
sacrament
of
the
bodie
and
bloude
of
Christ
,
was
to
bee
ministred
to
infantes
.
And
haue
I
not
playnely
,
and
now
also
plentifully
prooued
it
out
of
Saint
Augustine
?
where
is
then
this
falsification
?
If
I
had
not
prooued
that
which
I
sayde
,
yet
there
is
difference
betwixt
falsification
,
and
a
false
affirmation
.
And
because
the
Tridentine
councell
sayth
,
it
was
Aliquando
as
though
that
error
had
not
long
continued
,
it
is
manifest
that
it
began
to
bee
ministred
to
infantes
before
Cyprians
tyme
,
and
continued
fiue
or
sixe
hundreth
yeares
after
.
Witnesse
Beatus
Rhenanus
in
Tertulli
.
de
Coron.
mil.
where
he
sheweth
that
this
manner
was
continued
vntill
the
times
of
Ludouicus
Pius
,
and
Lotharius
and
after
:
citing
these
wordes
out
of
the
bookes
of
ceremonies
called
Agendae
of
infantes
newely
baptised
.
Si
Episcopus
&c.
If
the
Bishop
be
present
,
it
must
bee
immediately
confirmed
and
then
communicated
.
If
the
Bishop
bee
not
present
,
before
the
infante
doe
sucke
or
taste
any
thing
,
let
the
Prieste
giue
him
the
communion
of
the
body
and
bloude
of
CHRIST
,
yea
before
the
Masse
,
if
necessitie
require
.
By
this
Testimonie
it
appeareth
not
onely
that
this
custome
was
long
obserued
,
but
also
that
it
was
ioyned
with
opinion
of
necessitie
,
so
that
masse
should
not
be
taried
for
,
if
the
infant
were
in
any
danger
.
Concerning
the
errors
that
he
layeth
to
the
Church
of
later
tymes
,
and
not
of
olde
,
and
1.
touching
the
bodies
of
Angels
.
According
to
the
demaunde
of
the
challenger
,
And
touching
the
bodies
of
Angels
,
where
I
say
,
Ar.
60.
the
seconde
councell
of
Nice
determined
that
Angels
and
soules
of
men
had
bodies
,
were
visible
and
circumscriptible
,
and
therefore
must
bee
paynted
,
affirming
this
to
be
the
iudgement
of
the
Catholike
Church
:
Bristowe
answereth
,
that
I
misreport
the
matter
,
for
it
is
not
the
councells
determination
,
nor
saying
,
but
the
saying
onely
of
Ioannes
Bishoppe
of
Thessalonica
,
rehearsed
in
the
councell
,
with
an
admonition
giuen
by
Tharasius
B.
of
Const
against
the
madnes
of
them
that
ouerthrew
the
images
of
our
Lorde
&
his
vndefiled
mother
,
seeing
this
holy
father
doth
shew
,
that
Angels
also
may
be
painted
.
But
the
trueth
is
(
as
may
apeare
to
euery
man
that
wil
read
the
Councel
,
act.
5
)
that
this
is
a
vaine
glosse
of
Bristow
to
elude
the
matter
.
After
the
saying
of
Ioannes
is
rehearsed
,
in
which
this
grosse
error
is
conteined
,
Tharasius
the
archb.
of
Const.
thereupon
concludeth
:
Ostendit
autem
pater
,
quòd
&
angelos
pingore
oporteat
quando
circumscribi
possunt
,
&
vt
homines
apparuerunt
.
This
father
sheweth
,
that
we
ought
to
paint
the
angels
also
,
seeing
they
may
be
circumscribed
,
&
haue
appeared
as
men
:
by
which
it
is
manifest
,
that
Tharasius
approueth
the
opinion
of
Ioannes
.
Would
you
now
haue
the
determination
of
the
Councel
?
It
followeth
immediatly
,
Sacra
synodus
dixit
etiam
domine
:
The
holye
synode
sayde
yea
forsooth
my
lorde
.
By
this
it
is
manifest
,
that
not
I
,
but
Bristow
hath
misreported
the
matter
.
Where
I
sayde
(
If
this
be
not
to
induce
an
errour
to
make
men
beleeue
that
angels
and
spirites
haue
bodies
visible
and
circumscriptible
,
there
was
neuer
any
errour
since
the
world
began
:
)
Bristowe
pulleth
me
backe
and
saith
,
Soft
man
,
other
manner
of
errours
haue
beene
defended
since
the
world
began
.
I
wot
well
,
&
greater
,
but
if
any
of
them
be
a
manifest
errour
,
this
is
as
manifest
as
any
of
them
all
.
Yet
is
Bristowe
so
zealous
in
excusing
this
error
,
that
he
shameth
not
with
that
ignorant
bishop
of
Thessalonica
to
slaunder
many
of
the
most
catholike
and
auncient
fathers
with
it
,
Basilius
.
Athanasius
,
Methodius
,
yea
,
Augustine
(
he
sayeth
)
make
a
question
of
it
.
In
which
poynt
he
sheweth
great
ignorance
or
wilfull
malice
.
For
whatsoeuer
is
founde
in
any
of
those
auncient
writers
,
sounding
to
such
a
purpose
,
it
onely
by
mistaking
the
worde
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
corpus
,
which
they
vsed
generally
,
for
that
which
nowe
in
the
schooles
(
according
to
Aristotle
)
is
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
substantia
,
substance
comprehending
both
bodies
and
spirits
,
not
that
euer
they
thought
that
angels
,
spirites
&
soules
of
men
had
visible
and
circumscriptible
bodyes
,
such
as
may
be
set
forth
by
painting
,
or
such
as
the
bodies
of
men
&
beastes
are
,
or
that
they
consisted
either
of
ayery
of
fyery
matter
,
as
that
blynd
Bishopp
so
imagined
out
of
that
verse
of
the
Psalme
.
104.
He
maketh
his
Angels
spirits
,
and
his
ministers
a
burning
fyer
.
Last
of
all
he
sayeth
there
is
no
determination
of
the
Church
to
condemne
the
assertion
as
heretical
,
thoughe
there
be
sufficient
to
count
it
temerarious
&
erronious
:
whither
it
be
hereticall
,
I
will
not
nowe
dispute
,
seeing
by
Bristowe
it
is
granted
to
be
an
errour
,
&
I
haue
sufficiently
proued
,
that
it
was
mainteined
by
the
whole
Councell
,
which
was
as
much
as
I
required
for
that
point
.
2
Touching
the
Popes
superioritie
ouer
the
Councell
.
The
determinations
of
the
Pope
and
of
the
generall
But
where
I
shewe
a
manifest
errour
in
the
popish
church
by
the
interchangeable
condemning
and
approuing
one
of
another
,
of
the
Pope
and
the
councell
:
Bristowe
sayeth
,
the
matter
is
not
so
vncerteine
amongest
them
,
as
I
make
it
.
For
first
he
graunteth
,
that
the
councell
of
Ferrara
and
Florence
,
determined
that
the
Pope
was
aboue
the
councell
,
and
that
the
councell
might
erre
,
and
that
Pope
Eugenius
4.
was
of
the
same
iudgement
.
He
graunteth
also
that
the
councels
of
Constance
and
Basil
determined
the
contradictorie
,
namely
that
the
councell
was
aboue
the
Pope
,
and
that
the
Pope
may
erre
.
But
where
I
sayde
,
that
Martinus
quintus
,
chosen
Pope
by
the
councell
of
Constance
,
was
of
the
same
iudgement
,
there
he
cryeth
,
hoe
,
you
proue
not
that
,
nor
neuer
shall
proue
.
No
shal
,
Maister
Bristow
?
why
sir
,
is
it
like
,
that
the
councell
which
had
deposed
three
Popes
,
would
choose
a
fourth
man
Pope
,
that
was
of
a
contrary
iudgement
vnto
them
?
Yea
,
how
coulde
he
accept
the
Papacie
,
beeing
not
voide
,
if
the
councell
had
not
authoritie
to
depose
the
Pope
,
whosoeuer
hee
was
of
the
three
,
that
was
the
right
Pope
.
But
seeing
Iohn
the
23.
was
of
the
Emperour
and
the
councell
accounted
the
right
Pope
,
who
also
before
his
deposition
,
affirmed
that
the
councell
of
Constance
was
a
most
holy
councell
and
could
not
erre
:
it
is
manifest
,
that
this
Martyn
beeing
a
Cardinall
,
consented
to
the
deposition
of
Iohn
the
23.
session
.
12.
therefore
he
was
of
the
same
iudgement
that
the
councell
was
.
But
if
you
would
saye
,
that
as
soone
as
he
was
made
Pope
,
the
spirite
of
Peter
comming
vpon
him
,
he
was
soudenly
changed
into
a
contrary
iudgement
:
his
Epistle
written
to
the
inquisitors
is
plainly
against
you
,
where
you
saye
,
that
at
the
petition
of
the
Polonian
Ambassadour
,
he
confirmed
〈…〉
ose
determinations
alone
of
the
councel
of
Constance
which
were
〈…〉ainst
the
errours
of
Wickeliefe
,
Hus
,
and
Hierom
of
Prage
.
〈…〉
or
he
did
so
generally
confirme
all
decrees
of
that
〈…〉
uncell
,
that
he
commaunded
it
to
be
enquired
of
persons
suspected
,
in
articles
as
followeth
:
Item
vtrum
credat
,
teneat
&
asserat
,
quòd
quodlibet
concilium
generale
,
&
〈…〉
am
Constantiense
vniuersalem
Ecclesiam
repraesentet
.
Item
,
whether
he
beleeue
,
holde
and
affirme
,
that
euery
generall
councell
,
and
namely
the
councell
of
Constance
doeth
represent
the
vniuersall
churche
.
If
Martyn
the
5.
would
haue
euery
man
to
beleeue
that
the
councell
of
Constance
representeth
the
vniuersall
church
,
he
would
also
haue
them
beleeue
that
the
councell
of
Constance
cannot
erre
,
which
councel
condemned
the
Pope
of
heresie
,
and
deposed
him
of
his
Papacye
.
Again
,
another
Article
:
Item
vtrum
credat
quòd
illud
quod
sacrum
concilium
Constantiense
vniuersalem
Ecclesiam
repraesentans
,
〈…〉
probauit
&
approbat
,
in
fauor
em
fidei
&
ad
salutem
anima
〈…〉
m
quod
hoc
est
ab
vniuersis
Christi
fidelibus
approbandum
&
〈…〉
endum
.
Et
quid
condemnauit
&
condemnat
,
esse
fidei
vel
〈…〉
nis
moribus
contrarium
,
hoc
ab
iisdem
esse
tenendum
pro
condemnato
,
credendum
&
asserendum
.
Also
,
whether
hee
beleeueth
,
that
that
which
the
holy
councell
of
Constance
,
representing
the
vniuersall
Church
,
hath
approued
and
doth
approue
in
fauour
of
the
faith
,
to
the
health
of
mens
soules
,
that
the
same
is
of
all
faithfull
Christians
to
be
approued
and
holden
.
And
that
which
it
hath
condemned
and
doth
condemne
,
to
be
contrary
to
faith
or
good
manners
,
that
the
same
is
of
them
to
be
holden
beleeued
and
affirmed
as
a
thing
condemned
.
But
the
councell
of
Constance
approued
this
assertion
,
that
the
councell
cannot
erre
,
and
that
the
councell
is
aboue
the
Pope
to
condemne
him
of
error
,
which
is
a
matter
greatly
pertaining
to
the
faith
,
&
the
health
of
mens
soules
,
therefore
Pope
Martyn
the
5.
was
of
the
iudgement
of
the
councell
of
Constance
.
Finally
in
the
end
of
the
councell
of
Constance
the
approbation
of
Pope
Martyn
is
recorded
of
all
things
decreede
●nd
determined
in
matters
of
faith
:
Among
which
wee
must
needes
account
this
question
of
the
Popes
erring
,
and
the
councels
not
erring
,
which
is
accompted
so
necessarie
an
article
of
faith
,
that
the
Papistes
striue
for
nothing
so
much
at
this
daye
,
as
for
that
which
was
there
condemned
by
the
Councell
.
Quibus
sic
factis
sanctissimus
dominus
noster
Papa
respondendo
ad
praedicta
,
quòd
omnia
&
singula
,
determinata
,
conclusa
&
decreta
in
materiis
fidci
per
praesent
concilium
conciliariter
tenere
&
inuiolabiliter
seru●●
volebat
,
&
nunquam
contraire
quoquo
modo
.
Ipsáque
sic
conciliariter
facta
approbat
&
ratificat
,
&
non
aliter
nec
alio
modo
.
Const.
Sess.
45.
which
things
being
so
done
,
our
mo●te
holy
lorde
the
Pope
sayde
,
answering
to
the
foresayde
things
,
that
he
would
holde
and
keepe
inuiolable
all
and
singular
things
,
determined
,
concluded
,
and
decreede
in
matters
of
faith
,
by
the
present
Councell
in
fourme
of
Councell
:
and
that
he
would
neuer
go
against
them
by
any
meanes
.
And
the
same
things
so
done
in
forme
of
Councell
,
he
approueth
and
ratifyeth
,
and
not
otherwise
nor
after
any
other
manner
.
Nowe
it
is
certeine
that
nothing
was
done
or
decreede
more
Councellike
,
then
that
solemne
canon
,
That
the
Councel
is
aboue
the
Pope
,
and
hath
authoritie
to
depose
the
Pope
,
which
Pope
Iohn
23.
confirmed
and
confessed
,
that
the
Councell
could
not
erre
,
&c.
And
therefore
it
is
vtterly
false
,
that
Pope
Martin
confirmed
those
determinations
alone
,
which
were
against
the
errours
of
Wicliff
.
Hus
,
&
Hieronym
,
at
the
petition
of
the
Polonian
Am●
assadour
,
as
Bristowe
sayth
.
For
the
request
was
made
vnto
the
Pope
,
not
by
one
Ambassadour
,
but
by
diuerse
,
and
them
not
from
the
king
of
Polonia
onely
,
but
also
from
the
duke
of
Lituania
,
that
a
certeine
booke
of
one
fryer
Iohn
Falkenberge
,
conteining
notable
heresies
(
as
they
said
)
&
condemned
by
the
deputies
of
the
Councel
,
&c.
might
be
condemned
in
an
open
session
of
the
Councel
,
&
so
pronounced
before
the
Councel
were
dissolued
:
otherwise
they
protested
in
that
name
of
their
princes
,
that
they
susteined
grieuance
,
&
would
appeale
vnto
the
next
Councell
,
vnto
whom
the
Pope
answered
as
before
generally
,
that
whatsoeuer
was
decreed
by
the
Councel
in
fourme
of
a
Councell
,
concerning
matter
of
faith
,
he
did
〈…〉
owe
and
woulde
obserue
,
and
according
to
a
decre
of
〈…〉
e
same
councell
,
calleth
another
councell
to
follow
a
●apia
&c.
shewing
therein
not
onely
his
iudgement
,
but
●lso
his
obedience
to
the
decree
of
the
Councel
.
Concer●ing
Nicolaus
5.
(
Bristow
saith
)
he
did
but
onely
ratifie
●●e
collations
of
benefices
and
such
like
things
done
in
●●e
Councell
of
Basil.
Herevnto
I
aunswere
the
wordes
●re
so
generall
in
that
Bull
of
approbation
of
thinges
c●acted
and
done
in
the
councell
of
Basil
by
Pope
Nico●as
,
as
they
may
containe
all
manner
of
decrees
of
the
same
Councell
.
Omnia
&
singula
tam
iustitiam
&c.
all
&
euery
thing
concerning
as
well
iustice
as
grace
,
in
persons
or
places
,
which
in
time
of
the
grauntes
and
other
the
premisses
obeyed
our
foresaide
reuerende
and
welbeloued
brother
Amadeus
Cardinall
,
Bishop
,
Legat
,
and
Vicar
aforesaid
,
then
called
Felix
the
fift
and
the
congregated
aforesaide
or
either
of
them
,
as
well
by
the
Councell
of
Basil
which
then
was
,
and
Amadeus
in
his
obedience
called
Felix
the
fifte
,
as
also
them
which
in
the
cities
of
Basil
and
Lausanna
,
remained
congregated
vnder
the
name
of
a
generall
councell
;
or
any
other
or
others
by
his
or
either
of
their
authoritie
yea
legates
de
latere
,
delegates
or
any
other
whomsoeuer
,
from
than
or
either
of
them
,
hauing
power
ioyntly
or
seuerally
,
)
howe
soeuer
done
,
performed
,
granted
,
giuen
,
indulted
,
disposed
&
ordeined
,
although
they
be
greter
&
weightier
matters
,
or
of
any
other
nature
whatsoeuer
from
the
premises
,
&
such
as
require
to
be
specially
expressed
,
which
we
wil
&
decree
to
be
accompted
as
if
they
were
specially
expressed
with
all
things
therof
following
And
also
al
&
euery
thing
don
by
the
ordinaries
in
the
same
places
,
for
the
benefite
of
peace
&
vnity
of
the
church
of
our
own
motion
,
of
our
certain
knoledg
&
of
the
fulnes
of
the
apostolike
power
,
by
the
councell
&
assent
of
our
reuerende
brethren
the
Cardinals
of
the
holy
church
of
R.
by
tenor
of
these
present
;
we
approue
ratifie
&
also
confirm
,
&
wil
haue
to
be
taken
for
ratified
&
confirmed
.
Here
you
se
al
&
euery
thing
done
&
ordeined
in
the
Councell
of
Basil
whatsoeuer
they
be
,
expressed
,
or
not
expressed
,
confirmed
and
ratified
by
the
Bull
of
Pope
Nicholas
the
5.
And
in
the
Councell
of
Basil
,
the
councell
of
Constance
,
and
especially
that
decree
of
the
superioritie
of
the
councell
aboue
the
Pope
,
was
decreed
,
&
pope
Eugenius
,
for
his
contumacie
was
deposed
and
another
elected
,
all
whose
actes
also
pope
Nicolas
confirmeth
and
ratifieth
.
Likewise
where
as
Bristowe
saith
that
Pope
Eugenius
●he
4.
did
no
more
but
declare
that
the
councell
of
Basil
from
the
beginning
to
a
certaine
time
was
a
lawfull
councell
and
lawfully
continuated
:
The
truth
is
,
hee
did
both
by
his
owne
Buls
and
by
his
owne
deputies
a
great
deale
more
then
Bristow
confesseth
:
and
euen
by
this
that
he
confesseth
,
it
is
easie
to
proue
that
Eugenius
graunted
the
councel
to
be
aboue
the
pope
.
For
Eugenius
had
done
what
he
coulde
to
dissolue
the
councell
of
Basil
,
and
sent
out
three
buls
for
the
same
purpose
,
notwithstanding
the
councell
was
continued
by
authoritie
of
the
councell
against
his
decrees
:
wherfore
seeing
he
declared
,
(
as
Bristowe
confesseth
)
that
the
councell
was
lawfully
continued
,
contrary
to
his
decrees
(
which
he
was
compelled
to
reuoke
)
he
declared
that
the
councell
was
aboue
the
pope
,
and
had
authoritie
to
controll
him
and
his
decrees
.
And
that
he
did
more
then
Bristowe
saith
he
did
:
It
is
manifest
in
the
recorde
of
the
councell
,
session
16.
That
Eugenius
declared
the
councell
of
Basill
to
be
lawfull
and
lawfully
continued
vntill
Anno
dom.
1433.
18.
Cal.
Ian.
reuoking
three
bulles
by
which
he
had
taken
vpon
him
before
to
dissolue
the
same
councell
,
in
which
bulles
hee
complained
that
the
councell
vsurped
autoritie
aboue
the
pope
.
Afterwarde
sess.
17.
Anno.
1434.
24.
of
April
.
being
Saturday
,
the
Popes
legates
were
incorporated
into
the
councell
of
Basil
,
being
sworne
to
defende
the
councell
,
and
by
speciall
words
,
the
decree
of
the
councel
of
Constance
Sessi
.
4.
by
which
the
councell
is
decreed
to
be
aboue
the
Pope
,
and
the
Pope
bound
to
obey
the
councell
and
the
decrees
thereof
.
And
6.
Cal.
Maij.
The
praesidents
of
pope
Eugenius
were
admitted
with
these
conditions
vnder
written
:
Videlicet
sine
omni
iurisdictione
coactiuo
,
saluo
etiam
modo
procedendi
in
hoc
sacro
concilio
hactenus
obseruato
,
That
is
to
say
,
without
all
iurisdiction
of
compelling
,
also
hauing
the
manner
of
proceeding
he●herto
obserued
in
this
holy
councell
.
By
this
you
see
,
●hat
pope
Eugenius
did
not
onely
declare
the
councell
〈◊〉
be
lawfully
continued
,
but
also
he
declared
his
owne
●rror
in
reuoking
of
his
bulles
of
dissolution
.
Also
by
●is
legates
he
sware
to
defend
the
councel
and
to
keepe
●he
decree
of
the
councel
of
Constance
,
sessi
.
4.
which
was
●ade
against
the
Popes
superioritie
ouer
the
councell
.
And
thirdly
that
by
his
presidents
he
accepted
such
pre●idency
as
the
councell
woulde
graunt
,
without
all
iu●isdiction
of
compulsion
,
being
himselfe
compelled
to
●●taine
that
order
of
proceeding
which
the
councell
before
●is
presidencie
was
admitted
,
had
obserued
.
What
Leo
●he
tenth
in
his
Laterane
councell
decreed
against
the
●ouncell
of
Basil
,
I
haue
nothing
to
doe
with
it
,
except
〈◊〉
be
to
proue
that
one
pope
going
against
the
decrees
of
●nother
pope
,
and
one
councell
against
another
,
that
●either
of
both
is
to
be
credited
.
Howe
childish
my
in●ultation
is
,
howe
voide
of
victorie
my
triumph
,
howe
●nsoluble
forsooth
mine
arguments
are
,
as
Bristow
scof●eth
,
I
leaue
to
all
reasonable
men
to
consider
.
3.
Touching
the
Constance
councels
presumption
.
I
sayd
it
was
horrible
praesumption
,
that
the
councell
That
notwithstanding
Christ
instituted
the
sacrament
to
bee
receiued
in
both
kindes
,
and
that
the
faithfull
in
the
primitiue
Church
did
so
receiue
it
:
yet
the
custome
of
the
Church
of
Rome
shall
preuaile
,
and
whosoeuer
saith
contrarie
it
●an
heretike
.
These
wordes
he
saith
I
print
(
as
though
I
were
a
printer
which
was
70.
miles
off
at
least
from
the
place
where
they
were
printed
)
in
a
distincte
letter
as
the
plaine
wordes
of
the
councell
,
whereas
these
are
not
the
wordes
of
the
councell
.
Heere
is
the
quarell
.
No
sir
,
I
neuer
ment
to
print
these
wordes
as
the
wordes
of
the
councell
,
but
as
the
summe
and
contente
of
them
,
which
because
they
were
large
I
woulde
not
set
downe
at
large
in
a
bymatter
.
But
now
being
urged
with
falsification
or
at
least
false
collection
.
I
wil
set
them
down
as
they
a
〈…〉
Cō.
Const
sess●
.
13.
without
any
such
interruptions
as
is
vs●al
with
you
to
make
,
that
you
might
carie
away
the
simple
readen
mind
from
the
true
sense
of
them
.
Cùm
in
nonnullis
&c.
wheras
in
certaine
partes
of
the
worlde
,
certeine
parsons
presume
rashly
to
affirme
.
that
Christian
people
ought
to
receiue
the
sacrament
of
that
Euchariste
,
vnder
both
kindes
o●
bread
&
wine
,
&
do
communicate
the
lay
people
euerie
where
,
not
onely
vnder
the
kind
of
bread
,
but
also
vnder
〈◊〉
kinde
of
wine
,
yea
after
supper
,
or
otherwise
not
fasting
,
and
stubbernely
affirme
that
they
ought
so
to
be
communicated
against
the
laudable
custome
of
the
church
resonably
approued
,
which
as
sacrilegious
damnably
they
goe
about
to
reproue
:
hereof
it
is
that
this
present
holy
generall
councell
of
Constance
,
lawfully
gathered
together
in
the
holy
ghost
,
entending
to
prouide
for
the
saluation
of
the
faithfull
against
this
error
,
hauing
had
before
ripe
deliberation
of
many
Doctors
both
of
the
lawe
of
god
and
of
man
,
declareth
,
decreeth
,
&
defineth
,
that
although
Christ
after
supper
did
institute
,
&
minister
vnto
his
disciples
this
holy
sacrament
vnder
both
kindes
of
bread
&
wine
,
yet
this
notwithstanding
,
the
laudable
authoritie
of
holy
Canons
&
the
approued
custome
of
the
Church
hath
obserued
&
doth
obserue
,
that
this
sacrament
ought
not
to
be
made
after
supper
,
neither
to
be
receiued
of
the
faithful
not
fasting
,
but
in
case
of
sicknesse
or
other
necessitie
of
right
or
of
the
Church
graunted
or
admitted
.
And
as
this
custome
to
auoide
certeine
daungers
and
offences
is
reasonably
brought
in
,
that
although
in
the
primitiue
church
,
this
sacrament
was
receiued
of
the
faithfull
vnder
both
kinds
,
&
afterward
of
them
which
make
it
,
it
is
receiued
vnder
both
kinds
,
&
of
the
lay
people
only
vnder
the
kind
of
bread
;
seeing
it
ought
most
stedfastly
to
be
beleeued
&
by
no
meanes
to
be
doubted
,
but
that
the
whole
bodie
and
bloud
of
Christ
is
truly
contained
as
wel
vnder
the
kind
of
bread
,
as
vnder
the
kind
of
wine
.
Whervpon
seeing
such
a
custome
by
the
church
&
holy
fathers
is
reasonably
brought
in
,
&
hath
beene
very
long
obserued
,
it
must
be
taken
for
a
law
which
it
is
not
lawful
to
reproue
,
or
with
out
the
authority
of
the
church
to
change
at
mens
pleasure
.
●herfore
to
say
,
that
to
keep
this
custom
or
law
is
sacrilege
〈◊〉
vnlawfull
,
it
ought
to
be
iudged
erroneous
:
and
they
●hich
stubbernly
affirme
the
contrary
of
the
premisses
,
are
〈◊〉
be
driuen
away
as
heretiks
,
&
to
be
greuosly
punished
●y
that
dyocessanes
of
the
places
or
their
officials
,
or
by
the
in●uisitor
of
heretical
prauity
,
in
those
kingdomes
or
pro●inces
,
in
which
any
thing
perhaps
shal
be
attempted
or
●resumed
against
this
decree
,
according
to
the
Canonicall
●nd
lawful
functions
which
haue
ben
solemnly
invented
〈◊〉
fauour
of
the
Catholike
faith
against
heretikes
and
●heir
fautors
.
Here
you
see
the
prelates
of
the
councel
take
●pon
them
as
great
authority
in
altering
the
matter
of
the
sa●rament
,
which
is
a
necessarie
part
of
the
institution
therof
,
●s
in
ordering
the
time
in
which
it
shal
be
ministred
,
which
●s
no
part
of
the
institution
therof
.
Also
that
they
confes
that
●n
the
primitiue
church
the
sacrament
was
receiued
in
both
●inds
,
therfore
they
are
presumptuous
to
say
hoc
non
obstante
,
●his
notwithstanding
,
the
custome
of
later
yeares
brought
in
●s
reasonable
&
shal
be
obserued
as
a
law
,
the
gainsayers
●herof
being
condemned
&
punished
as
heretikes
.
Brist
.
ca●illeth
,
that
they
say
not
the
custome
of
the
church
of
Rome
,
as
I
said
:
As
though
,
when
they
speake
of
the
custome
of
the
church
,
they
meane
any
other
church
but
the
church
of
R.
Such
bables
B.
hath
to
couer
their
blasphemous
&
sacri●legious
presumption
.
Touching
certain
false
interpretations
of
scripture
.
To
color
the
false
interpretations
folowing
,
he
commendeth
the
sayings
of
August
.
de
doct.
Christ
.
li.
1.
ca.
36.
&
lib.
3.
ca.
27.
in
which
first
he
requireth
euery
man
principally
to
shoote
at
that
sense
of
the
writer
in
exposition
of
the
scripture
,
but
if
he
misse
that
sense
&
hit
any
other
which
is
not
repugnant
to
right
faith
,
or
is
profitable
to
build
charity
towards
god
&
our
neighbor
,
he
is
not
perniciously
deceiued
&c.
Vpon
this
Allen
in
his
offer
to
that
protestant
saith
,
Ar.
86.
&
87.
Let
any
man
proue
vnto
me
,
that
the
true
&
only
church
of
god
may
falsely
interprete
any
sentence
of
holy
scripture
,
&
I
recant
.
This
generall
offer
without
any
qualification
of
not
erring
perniciouslye
,
or
wilfully
lying
,
as
is
conteined
in
Saint
Augustines
sayinges
,
vnto
whiche
Bristowe
woulde
nowe
seeme
to
make
relation
,
I
did
accept
.
And
first
I
proued
that
pope
Innocent
with
S.
Augustine
and
all
the
Westerne
Church
did
falsely
interprete
this
scripture
Ioan.
6.
Except
ye
eate
&c.
and
that
to
maintaine
a
false
opinion
of
the
necessitie
of
the
communion
for
all
persons
,
and
euen
infantes
,
that
should
haue
life
euerlasting
,
and
therefore
repugnant
to
right
faith
,
as
is
more
declared
in
the
2.
part
of
this
chapter
.
Secondly
I
noted
diuerse
places
of
scripture
,
not
onely
falsely
but
also
ridiculously
expounded
,
in
the
second
councell
of
Nice
,
to
maintaine
idolatrie
against
the
expresse
commaundement
of
God
,
and
therefore
contrary
to
the
right
faith
and
the
loue
of
God
.
Concerning
these
interpretations
Bristow
saith
,
that
they
are
not
the
interpretations
of
the
councell
(
whose
interpretation
they
are
not
bounde
to
defende
,
but
onely
their
definitions
)
but
they
are
the
interpretations
of
particular
persons
.
To
this
I
answere
,
they
are
contained
in
the
synodal
book
sent
into
the
Westerne
Churches
,
to
stirre
them
vp
to
idolatrie
(
which
booke
was
aunswered
by
Carolus
Magnus
or
by
Alcuinus
at
his
commaundement
,
and
in
his
name
)
therefore
they
are
approued
by
the
councell
,
yea
some
of
them
are
contained
also
in
that
report
of
the
councell
,
which
is
set
downe
in
the
bookes
of
councels
.
The
text
of
lighting
a
candell
,
and
putting
it
vnder
a
bushel
,
is
affirmed
of
Bristowe
to
be
well
applyed
in
the
Epistle
of
Constantinus
,
&
his
mother
to
the
synod
.
But
he
is
deceiued
.
For
there
is
no
argument
of
setting
of
images
vpon
the
altar
drawne
out
of
that
text
which
is
so
abused
in
the
Synodal
aboue
rehearsed
,
confirmed
by
Carolus
or
Alcuinus
.
The
seconde
text
,
God
made
man
according
to
his
image
:
therefore
we
must
haue
images
in
the
Church
:
Bristowe
confesseth
to
bee
contained
in
the
Epistle
of
pope
Adrian
to
the
Emperour
.
But
the
same
is
approued
in
the
councell
,
and
is
the
popes
Epistle
,
whose
credit
is
greater
with
you
than
the
councels
.
But
he
doth
not
conclude
(
you
say
)
that
therfore
we
must
haue
images
in
the
Church
.
What
then
?
forsooth
that
a●
Adam
being
the
image
of
God
is
to
be
honoured
,
so
euery
image
is
holy
that
i●
made
in
the
name
of
God
,
be
it
an
image
of
Angels
,
prophets
,
Apostles
,
martyrs
or
iust
persons
.
This
conclusion
conteineth
more
than
I
vrged
,
namely
the
worshiping
of
images
,
&
not
the
making
of
them
only
.
And
because
you
are
so
impudent
to
say
,
it
is
not
the
councel
,
but
pope
Adrianus
that
so
saith
&c:
I
wil
let
the
reader
vnderstand
,
that
in
the
seconde
action
,
there
were
two
Epistles
of
Pope
Adrian
,
reade
in
the
synode
,
one
to
the
Emperours
,
the
other
to
Tharasius
the
patriarche
of
Constantinople
.
Afterward
Peter
and
Peters
liuetenants
of
the
Pope
,
required
Tharasius
to
declare
,
whether
he
consented
to
the
Popes
letters
or
no.
Tharasius
answered
,
that
concerning
the
worshiping
of
images
,
he
did
allow
the
Popes
letters
.
Then
said
the
Synod
,
Vniuersa
sancta
Synodus
&c.
The
whole
holy
synod
doth
so
beleeue
and
teach
.
Peter
and
Peters
Legates
of
the
sea
Aposto
like
saide
:
Let
the
holy
synode
tell
vs
,
whether
it
receiue
the
letters
of
the
most
holy
Pope
of
the
elder
Rome
or
no.
The
holy
synode
aunswered
:
we
follow
them
,
we
receiue
them
,
and
allowe
them
.
The
3.
text
(
As
we
haue
heard
,
so
we
haue
seene
in
the
citie
of
our
God
.
ps.
48.
to
proue
that
God
must
not
be
knowne
by
onely
hearing
of
his
word
,
but
also
by
sight
of
images
:
)
Bristowe
affirmeth
that
it
is
not
the
councell
that
citeth
it
,
but
a
Deacon
called
Epiphanius
,
which
readeth
it
to
the
councell
out
of
a
booke
of
his
owne
:
I
answere
hee
readeth
it
with
approbation
and
good
liking
of
the
councell
,
which
in
effect
is
al
one
.
But
he
citeth
it
not
(
saith
Bristowe
)
to
shew
how
God
must
be
knowne
,
but
about
the
storie
of
Christs
manhoode
,
nor
to
proue
immediately
,
that
the
said
story
must
be
painted
&c.
as
though
God
can
be
knowne
but
by
Christ
,
for
knowledge
of
whom
,
by
imagery
,
he
cyteth
this
text
of
the
Canticle
also
,
Can.
2.
shew
me
thy
face
,
&
let
me
heare
thy
voyce
.
And
whether
it
be
immediately
,
or
mediately
,
certain
it
is
,
that
he
citeth
this
text
,
Pal.
48.
to
proue
,
that
the
pictures
of
saincts
are
rightly
deliuered
in
the
Church
,
none
otherwise
,
then
the
reading
of
the
holy
gospel
.
The
4.
text
falsely
interpreted
in
sense
,
&
falsified
in
words
is
Ioan.
10.
ver.
29.
My
father
which
gaue
them
vnto
me
(
speaking
of
his
sheep
)
is
greater
then
al.
Which
text
in
the
Councell
of
Lateran
,
holden
vnder
Pope
Innocent
the
thirde
,
is
falsified
in
words
after
this
manner
.
Pater
quod
dedit
mihi
maius
est
omnibus
.
That
whiche
the
father
hath
giuen
me
is
greater
then
all
:
and
interpreted
to
proue
the
eternall
begetting
of
Christ
of
the
substance
of
his
father
.
To
this
Bristow
aunswereth
her●
is
no
false
interpretation
in
D.
Allens
sense
.
What
sense
Allen
hath
of
false
interpretation
,
I
knowe
not
,
sure
I
am
,
that
a
text
cannot
be
truely
interpreted
in
sense
,
when
it
is
corrupted
in
wordes
,
which
make
the
sense
.
Secondly
he
saith
that
of
my
two
crimes
,
I
must
strike
out
one
:
for
supposing
the
text
to
be
as
the
councell
alledgeth
it
,
the
interpretation
is
not
vnapt
.
But
I
reply
,
supposing
the
text
to
be
as
it
is
in
deede
:
Such
falsifying
or
corrupting
of
the
words
must
needes
drawe
with
it
not
onely
an
vnapt
but
also
a
wrong
interpretation
.
But
what
couler
of
reason
haue
you
(
saith
he
)
that
the
councell
hath
falsified
the
words
of
that
text
?
Is
it
not
in
the
vulgar
Latine
translation
verbatim
,
as
the
councell
alledgeth
it
?
yes
verily
.
And
so
is
the
councell
cleared
of
that
crime
also
.
Not
so
soone
as
you
weene
:
for
if
any
falsifying
or
corrupting
of
the
words
of
the
scripture
,
haue
crept
into
your
translation
,
it
had
beene
the
councels
dutie
,
not
to
haue
winked
at
it
,
if
it
could
haue
seene
it
,
much
lesse
to
haue
confirmed
it
,
so
farre
forth
,
as
of
so
many
texts
which
cleerely
proue
Christ
to
bee
consubstantiall
with
his
father
,
it
coulde
finde
none
,
but
take
this
corrupted
and
falsified
text
.
But
the
most
auncient
Latine
writers
,
saint
Augustine
,
saint
Ambrose
,
and
saint
Hilarie
doe
reade
iumpe
as
we
doe
,
saith
Bristowe
.
That
doth
not
amende
the
matter
one
whit
,
but
sheweth
the
errour
of
the
Latine
Church
to
haue
the
longer
continued
,
which
in
the
councell
of
Lateran
(
if
it
could
haue
espied
it
)
ought
rather
to
haue
bene
reformed
then
confirmed
.
But
will
you
chaunge
your
copie
(
saith
Bristowe
)
and
frame
your
accusation
anewe
against
the
translation
as
differing
from
the
Originall
,
that
is
from
the
Greeke
?
Sir
I
neede
not
chaunge
my
copie
,
for
my
accusation
is
alreadie
framed
that
this
text
is
falsified
and
corrupted
contrarie
to
the
originall
trueth
:
yet
Bristowe
goeth
on
.
But
afore
you
doe
so
,
take
my
counsaile
with
you
,
and
bee
sure
first
that
the
Greeke
is
so
as
you
say
.
For
some
Greeke
copies
,
of
auncient
also
had
euen
as
we
haue
:
as
namely
,
the
copie
which
saint
Cyrill
,
being
a
Greeke
Doctor
,
expoundeth
Cyr.
lib.
7.
in
Ioan.
cap.
10.
In
deede
it
were
not
amisse
,
to
take
the
councell
of
such
a
learned
Grecian
as
Bristowe
is
,
that
I
might
bee
sure
howe
the
Greeke
text
is
.
For
hee
can
tell
me
of
auncient
Greeke
copies
,
yea
namely
of
that
which
saint
Cyrill
a
Greeke
doctor
did
followe
,
and
expounde
,
which
agreeth
with
the
vulgar
translation
in
this
text
.
Verely
the
sight
of
such
a
copie
woulde
doe
mee
great
pleasure
.
But
vntill
I
may
see
it
,
I
will
suspende
my
iudgement
,
and
in
the
meane
time
,
I
woulde
borrowe
a
worde
or
two
with
Thomas
Stapleton
the
peruser
and
allower
of
this
booke
of
Bristowe
.
I
praye
you
sir
,
Haue
you
perused
and
allowed
thi●
booke
?
What
els
?
doe
you
not
see
it
printed
in
the
first
leafe
,
Perused
and
allowed
by
mee
Thomas
Stapleton
?
And
are
you
so
good
a
peruser
and
allower
of
bookes
,
Maister
Stapleton
,
that
you
cannot
espie
in
them
Chalk
taken
for
Cheese
?
Doe
you
not
see
your
scholer
Bristowe
alledge
saint
Cyrill
a
Greeke
doctor
to
proue
the
truth
of
the
greeke
text
lib.
7.
in
Ioan
cap.
10.
and
when
all
commeth
to
all
,
there
is
no
such
booke
of
Cyrill
the
auncient
Greeke
doctor
extant
,
but
it
is
poore
Iodocus
Clicthouius
a
late
Latine
writer
,
that
hath
supplyed
those
4.
bookes
of
Cyrill
that
are
lost
.
Wherefore
to
returne
to
you
M.
Bristow
except
your
councel
be
better
and
sauour
more
of
good
learning
and
knowledge
,
you
may
keepe
it
for
your
friendes
.
As
for
your
assertion
,
without
doubt
that
the
copie
which
your
authenticall
translator
followed
,
had
euen
as
hee
translated
,
helpeth
you
little
or
nothing
:
which
if
it
were
graunted
,
howe
can
you
proue
that
hee
translated
it
as
you
nowe
reade
it
?
Seeing
it
is
certainly
knowne
to
them
that
haue
conferred
his
translation
with
the
originall
,
that
beside
that
in
diuerse
places
he
giueth
not
the
true
sense
of
the
Greeke
,
in
many
texts
also
he
is
corrupted
,
where
he
had
translated
right
.
Wherefore
how
fully
I
am
aunswered
on
euery
side
concerning
this
text
as
you
boast
in
the
end
,
let
the
readers
iudge
.
In
the
last
place
you
set
down
my
words
Ar.
7.
in
which
I
accuse
the
Church
of
Rome
for
thrusting
vpon
vs
that
corrupt
Latine
translation
,
which
all
learned
men
doe
know
to
be
corrupt
,
in
such
texts
as
are
the
most
coulerable
places
for
the
defence
of
popish
doctrine
,
of
which
I
giue
one
example
for
all
.
They
allege
the
text
(
1.
Cor.
10.
Qui
stat
,
videat
ne
cadat
:
he
that
standeth
,
let
him
take
heed●
he
fall
not
)
against
the
certaintie
of
faith
,
where
as
the
Greeke
hath
not
,
hee
that
standeth
,
but
,
hee
that
thinketh
he
standeth
,
&c.
Bristowe
biddeth
mee
looke
better
in
the
text
,
their
translation
is
not
as
I
charge
it
,
but
euen
as
I
say
the
Greeke
to
be
:
Qui
se
existimat
stare
&c
:
And
therefore
in
the
margent
he
biddeth
,
stand
out
of
his
light
that
the
childe
may
see
.
Might
not
I
say
shore
vp
your
eyes
syr
.
Richarde
,
and
see
that
I
doe
not
say
,
the
text
is
so
translated
,
but
so
alledged
.
They
alledge
the
text
,
Qui
stat
,
videat
ne
cadat
.
And
if
you
require
mine
author
who
allegeth
it
so
:
looke
in
Haymo
vpon
the
verie
place
,
and
you
shall
finde
these
verie
wordes
.
Qui
stat
in
fide
&
operibus
,
videat
ne
cadat
:
He
that
standeth
in
faith
and
workes
,
let
him
see
that
he
fal
not
.
And
if
you
woulde
haue
a
later
writer
that
so
alledgeth
it
,
looke
in
Gregory
Martin
one
of
your
broode
,
who
in
his
booke
of
schisme
alleageth
it
in
so
many
wordes
:
Qui
stat
,
videat
ne
cadat
,
in
the
first
chapter
of
his
booke
.
And
what
hath
brought
them
to
this
vnderstanding
,
but
your
corrupt
translation
?
Qui
se
existimat
star●
,
hee
that
iudgeth
or
is
perswaded
that
he
standeth
.
For
existimare
signifieth
properly
to
iudge
or
esteeme
vppon
good
groundes
,
to
thinke
certeinely
,
and
not
like
putare
,
which
worde
Ambrose
vseth
in
the
interpretation
of
this
text
,
and
signifieth
to
thinke
vainly
.
And
so
is
existimare
vsed
by
your
translator
in
other
places
.
Rom.
6.
Ita
&
vos
existimate
,
&c.
So
you
esteeme
or
iudge
your selues
to
be
deade
vnto
sinne
&c.
And
againe
1.
Cor.
6
Sic
nos
existimet
homo
vt
ministros
,
Christi
&c.
Let
a
man
thus
esteeme
or
iudge
of
vs
,
as
of
the
ministers
of
Christ
.
Againe
Iac.
1.
Omne
gaudium
existimate
&c.
My
brethren
count
it
all
ioy
when
you
fall
into
diuerse
temptations
.
In
all
which
places
existimare
signifieth
to
thinke
certeinely
&
not
vainely
,
as
in
this
text
,
1.
Cor.
10.
It
should
be
qui
se
putat
stare
,
he
that
vainely
thinketh
that
he
standeth
,
let
him
take
heede
that
he
falleth
not
.
I
confesse
I
might
haue
brought
an
hundreth
places
of
scripture
in
which
the
corruption
is
more
cleere
vnto
euery
simple
mans
vnderstanding
,
but
this
I
tooke
to
be
sufficient
,
seing
to
proue
the
corruption
of
the
translation
,
was
not
the
principall
matter
of
the
demaunde
which
I
aunswered
,
but
to
yeelde
a
reason
why
the
popishe
Church
did
not
as
wel
corrupt
the
text
of
the
Testament
as
the
true
doctrine
conteined
in
the
same
.
CAP.
VII
.
That
he
hath
no
other
shift
against
our
manifolde
Euidences
First
he
chargeth
me
with
shamefull
confessions
,
that
I
haue
been
faine
to
make
against
mine
owne
side
,
and
The
first
part
.
Howe
he
excepteth
by
onely
scripture
,
against
all
other
euidences
Hee
rehearseth
many
sentences
of
mine
mangled
&
de
Haer.
which
he
saith
was
the
purpose
of
Epiphanius
also
,
not
to
confute
but
only
to
report
of
heresies
that
had
benbefore
his
time
:
Seeing
it
is
inough
to
know
that
the
catholik
Churches
iudgement
is
against
them
:
And
that
it
helpeth
much
the
faithfull
hearte
onely
to
know
what
must
not
be
belieued
,
although
he
be
not
able
to
confute
it
by
disputing
.
And
why
seeme
I
ignorant
of
this
purpose
?
except
it
be
because
I
said
,
that
neither
Epiphanus
nor
Augustine
,
reproued
by
scripture
,
that
which
in
Aerius
they
compted
to
be
an
error
.
But
the
case
is
so
cleare
(
saith
Bristow
)
that
the
very
aduersary
confesseth
,
that
it
was
the
Catholik
Church
that
iudged
Aerius
to
be
an
heretike
.
Yea
sir
for
his
Arrianisme
,
but
I
neuer
confessed
,
neither
can
you
euer
prooue
that
any
iudgement
of
the
Catholike
Church
in
general
councel
passed
against
Aerius
for
denying
prayer
for
the
dead
,
before
the
dayes
of
Epiphanius
or
Augustine
,
although
the
error
of
prayer
for
the
●ead
in
that
age
was
commonly
receyued
,
not
vpon
any
good
ground
of
Canonical
scripture
,
but
vpon
a
corrupt
custome
first
brought
in
by
heretikes
.
Afterward
where
I
following
an
allegorie
of
dogges
vsed
by
Allen
,
tell
him
that
hee
must
not
teach
his
scholers
to
barke
&
baule
against
vs
,
nothing
but
The
Church
,
the
Church
,
like
●inkers
curres
&c.
he
cryeth
out
in
the
margent
,
O
worthy
estimation
that
he
hath
of
the
Church
,
as
though
,
I
think
lesse
worthily
of
the
Church
,
because
I
deride
the
vaine
boasting
of
the
name
of
the
Church
in
them
which
are
nothing
lesse
then
the
true
church
.
Neither
do
I
appoint
mine
enimy
not
to
inuade
me
with
a
gunne
(
as
he
saith
)
when
I
make
the
scripture
onely
to
be
my
weapon
both
inuasiue
and
defensiue
.
But
it
is
a
great
absurditie
as
he
●weeneth
,
that
I
say
an
heretike
is
he
which
in
the
Church
,
obstinately
mainteyneth
an
opinion
contrarie
to
the
scriptures
:
seeing
S.
Iohn
saith
,
exierunt
a
nobis
,
they
are
gone
out
from
vs
.
And
if
an
heretikee
be
a
man
in
the
Church
we
are
cockesure
,
with
all
heretikes
,
and
the
Papistes
onely
in
daunger
.
Why
Bristow
,
make
ye
no
difference
betweene
him
that
is
in
the
Church
,
and
him
the
is
of
the
Church
?
They
be
not
al
members
of
the
Church
,
that
be
in
the
Church
,
and
therfore
S.
Iohn
saith
of
them
that
are
gone
from
vs
,
If
they
had
bene
of
vs
they
would
haue
tarried
with
vs
.
And
doe
you
account
him
an
heretike
that
holdeth
an
error
cleane
out
of
the
Church
?
then
may
you
count
all
Paganes
,
Turkes
,
and
Iewes
,
to
be
heretikes
.
What
say
you
of
Antichrist
that
sitteth
euer
in
the
Temple
of
God
?
it
helpeth
not
heretikes
,
that
they
rise
vp
in
the
visible
Church
,
from
whence
also
they
are
often
times
cast
out
,
so
long
as
they
bee
not
members
of
the
body
of
Christ
,
which
is
the
inuisible
Church
,
and
heauenly
Ierusalem
,
which
is
the
mother
of
vs
all
.
Where
I
sayde
,
that
whosoeuer
holdeth
an
opinion
obstinately
,
which
hee
is
not
able
to
proue
by
the
worde
of
God
,
although
hee
haue
many
authors
before
him
,
yet
hee
is
neuerthelesse
an
heretike
.
Bristowe
addeth
in
the
margent
,
though
it
bee
S.
Augustine
himselfe
,
and
though
he
holde
the
foundation
heere
.
cap.
5.
Touching
the
former
part
,
I
say
not
onely
though
it
were
Saint
Augustine
,
but
although
it
were
Saint
Peter
himselfe
or
an
Angell
from
heauen
,
Gal.
1.
Touching
the
later
parte
,
I
aunswere
,
my
meaning
is
of
such
opinions
,
as
are
against
the
foundation
,
and
so
is
my
whole
discourse
,
purg
412.
whence
this
saying
is
borowed
.
Agayne
,
where
hee
concludeth
that
I
confesse
Aerius
,
Iouinian
,
and
Vigilantius
to
haue
beene
condemned
by
the
true
Church
of
Christ
,
in
such
poyntes
of
doctrine
,
as
wee
agree
with
him
:
I
aunswere
as
before
of
Aerius
alone
,
I
neuer
made
such
confession
.
In
that
I
refuse
to
finde
the
firste
authors
of
all
their
errors
,
he
saith
,
I
am
faine
to
flee
to
my
colde
exception
of
onely
scripture
,
as
though
to
iustifie
our
doctrine
,
by
the
Apostles
,
and
that
so
sensibly
,
were
not
inough
.
O
sensible
iustification
,
by
which
all
errors
,
whose
first
authors
cannot
be
found
must
be
layd
vpon
the
Apostles
.
But
most
ridiculous
of
all
is
Fulke
,
where
he
commeth
in
with
this
exception
vpon
Tertullians
rule
.
Id
esse
verum
&c.
That
is
true
what
soeuer
is
first
,
that
is
false
&
forged
which
is
later
.
But
how
shall
the
first
doctrine
bee
knowne
,
but
by
the
worde
of
God
,
wherein
all
the
doctrine
of
God
is
taught
?
What
is
here
I
pray
you
to
bee
laughed
at
?
Forsooth
,
Bristowe
saith
,
T●●●ullian
hath
there
an
other
rule
against
such
heresies
,
as
presumed
to
say
,
their
founders
liued
in
the
Apostles
time
.
But
this
rule
hee
giueth
against
all
such
,
as
rise
any
time
after
as
Aerius
,
Luther
Caluine
,
&c.
bidding
vs
consider
what
was
taught
and
belecued
immediatly
before
they
arose
:
for
that
vnd●ub●●dly
is
the
trueth
,
and
their
later
doctrine
is
falshood
.
But
what
if
Bristow
take
Richard
for
Robert
,
is
not
he
then
ridiculous
?
The
rule
of
Tertullian
whereof
I
speake
,
Purg.
410.
&
Ar.
42.
is
written
in
his
booke
aduersus
Praxeam
.
although
Allen
doe
falsely
quote
it
de
praescriptionibus
.
But
what
if
Tertullian
euen
in
this
rule
giuen
against
heretikes
in
his
booke
de
praescriptionibus
doe
expresly
affirme
the
worde
of
God
to
bee
the
triall
of
that
which
〈◊〉
former
and
true
to
conuince
that
which
is
latter
and
●lse
,
is
not
Bristowe
most
ridiculous
of
all
?
His
words
●e
these
:
Sed
ab
,
excessu
reuertar
ad
principalitatem
veritatis
&
●osteritatem
mendaci●atis
deputandam
ex
illius
quoque
parabo
〈…〉
patrocinio
,
quae
bonum
semen
frumenti
a
Domino
seminatum
●rimò
constituit
auenarum
aut
sterilis
foeni
adulterium
,
ab
ini●ico
diabolo
postea
superducit
.
Propriè
enim
doctrinarum
di●tinctionem
figurat
,
quia
&
alibi
verbum
Dei
seminis
simili●do
est
.
Ita
ex
ipso
ordine
manifestatur
,
id
esse
dominicum
&
●erum
,
quod
sit
prius
tradi●●m
:
id
autem
extraneum
&
sal●um
,
quod
sie
posterius
immissum
.
Ea
sententia
manebit
aduer●s
posteriores
quasque
haereses
,
quibus
nulla
constantia
de
con●ciencia
compettt
ad
defendendam
sibi
veritatem
.
But
from
this
●xcesse
,
I
will
returne
to
shew
the
priority
of
truth
&
po●terioritie
of
falshood
euen
out
of
the
defence
of
the
parable
●hich
first
of
al
setteth
forth
the
good
seed
of
wheat
sowne
●y
our
Lorde
,
and
afterwarde
bringeth
on
the
coun●erfeiting
of
Otes
or
baren
grasse
by
the
enemie
the
●iuel
.
For
it
figureth
properly
the
difference
of
doctrines
,
●ecause
elsewhere
also
the
worde
of
GOD
is
the
si●ilitude
of
seede
:
So
by
the
very
order
,
it
is
made
ma●ifest
that
to
bee
the
Lordes
&
true
which
was
formost
●eliuered
,
that
to
be
straunge
and
false
which
is
cast
in
●fterward
.
This
decree
shal
remain
against
later
heresies
whatsoeuer
,
which
haue
no
constancie
of
conscience
to
de●end
the
truth
to
be
on
the
irside
.
Where
is
there
here
any
word
of
Bristows
glosse
of
Tertullian
bidding
vs
consider
&
c
?
I
thinke
he
had
not
redde
the
place
in
Tertullian
himself
,
but
followed
some
papistes
collection
vpon
it
,
and
because
hee
coulde
not
auoyde
that
which
I
sayd
,
hee
thought
it
best
by
calling
it
so
much
and
so
often
ridiculous
,
to
laugh
it
out
,
as
they
say
,
when
hee
was
not
able
otherwise
to
aunswere
it
.
Likewise
I
sayd
,
that
we
refuse
not
the
rule
of
Vincentius
Lyrinensis
concerning
antiquitie
,
so
you
can
prooue
God
to
bee
the
author
,
the
Prophetes
and
Apostles
for
witnesses
:
vnder
this
antiquitie
that
which
had
an
erroneus
beginning
shall
haue
a
shamefull
ending
,
Purg.
399.
Heere
Bristowe
taketh
aduantage
of
the
Printers
error
,
although
he
be
admonished
〈◊〉
of
in
the
Corrections
,
and
not
content
with
that
,
〈…〉
fieth
my
wordes
making
me
to
say
,
as
for
witnesse
〈◊〉
this
antiquitie
we
passe
not
for
them
.
Yes
〈◊〉
we
esteeme
all
good
witnesses
of
that
auncient
〈◊〉
whereof
God
is
the
author
.
But
you
say
the
rule
w
〈…〉
receyue
,
proueth
the
Apostles
to
be
authors
of
sole
〈…〉
payer
for
the
dead
in
the
Masse
,
&
such
like
articles
〈◊〉
taught
and
beleeued
,
before
Luther
began
such
〈…〉
uations
&c.
But
I
reply
,
that
Vincentius
rule
,
is
〈◊〉
such
fooles
fable
,
but
requireth
antiquitie
to
bee
〈…〉
tinued
alwayes
euen
from
Christ
,
which
seeing
you
〈◊〉
not
shewe
,
no●
other
conditions
which
hee
requi
〈…〉
for
your
articles
,
his
rule
helpeth
you
nothing
at
a●
〈◊〉
rule
which
he
handleth
at
large
throughout
his
b
〈…〉
is
briefly
set
downe
in
this
sentence
.
In
ipsa
〈…〉
Ecclesia
mag
〈…〉
〈◊〉
est
,
〈◊〉
id
〈◊〉
q●●d
〈◊〉
,
q●●d
〈…〉
er
,
〈◊〉
ab
〈…〉
us
〈…〉
est
〈…〉
propri●que
C
〈…〉
n
(
q●●d
i●sa
〈…〉
)
q
〈…〉
d
〈…〉
.
A
〈…〉
the
Catholike
Church
it selfe
wee
must
greatly
〈◊〉
that
wee
hold
that
thing
which
hath
bene
euery
〈…〉
,
which
hath
beene
alwayes
,
which
hath
beene
of
all
〈◊〉
beleeued
,
for
that
is
truely
and
properly
Ca
〈…〉
(
which
the
verie
force
and
reason
of
the
name
d
〈…〉
reth
)
that
comprehendeth
al
thinges
truely
〈…〉
ly
.
Examine
your
articles
by
this
rule
a●d
you
〈◊〉
finde
not
one
of
them
catholike
.
So
that
my
excep〈…〉
of
the
soueraigne
authority
of
only
scripture
〈…〉
deth
〈◊〉
well
with
the
rules
both
of
Tertulli●●
and
Vince
〈…〉
Lyri
〈…〉
.
For
to
the
trueth
,
as
Aristotle
saith
,
all
〈…〉
ges
agree
that
are
true
,
but
f●lshoode
soone
bewrayeth
itselfe
.
2
Aga
〈…〉
the
A
〈…〉
〈◊〉
.
F
〈…〉
.
Aga
〈…〉
〈◊〉
〈…〉ed
traditions
of
the
Apo
〈…〉
,
I
make
exception
▪
of
the
writinges
of
the
Apostles
to
b●●
the
onely
c
〈…〉
yne
〈…〉
esse
of
the●●
true
tradition
.
A●d
I
saye
All●●
bl●●ph●mously
f●thereth
●ppon
the
Apo
〈…〉
,
the
institution
of
popish
prayer
and
sacrifice
for
the
〈…〉
.
〈…〉
we
chargeth
me
neuerthelesse
to
affirme
,
that
〈◊〉
,
Cyprian
,
Augustine
,
Ierome
,
and
a
great
ma
〈…〉
are
witnesses
hereof
,
Pur.
362.
wherin
he
shame
〈…〉
y
belyeth
mee
,
for
that
I
do
onely
rehearse
parte
of
〈…〉
s
wordes
which
affirmeth
them
to
be
witnesses
.
〈…〉
ch
thing
Bristowe
might
easily
see
by
the
diuersi
〈…〉
of
print
,
if
he
had
not
beene
disposed
to
●●●under
me
.
〈…〉
er
this
by
the
example
of
Allen
,
which
is
a
great
po
〈…〉
,
I
pose
the
Papistes
with
this
question
:
Why
God
〈…〉
uld
haue
none
of
the
Apostles
to
put
this
matter
or
〈…〉
e
worde
thereof
in
writing
,
which
afterward
shoulde
〈◊〉
disclosed
by
Tertullian
,
Cyprian
,
Augustine
,
&c.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Bristow
after
much
bibling
out
of
S.
Augustin
,
〈…〉
e
Apostles
haue
not
left
in
writing
the
whole
order
〈…〉
celebration
of
the
sacraments
:
answereth
,
that
one
piece
of
〈◊〉
that
it
was
omitted
by
the
apostles
,
was
for
bre
〈…〉
s
sake
.
But
I
(
Bristow
)
do
not
speake
of
any
order
or
〈…〉
me
of
ceremonies
,
which
because
they
are
variable
,
〈…〉cording
to
times
,
places
&
persons
,
the
apostles
haue
〈◊〉
prescribed
:
but
of
the
doctrin
of
praying
&
sacrifising
〈…〉
r
the
dead
,
which
in
much
lesse
b●●uitie
then
the
〈…〉
stles
vsed
,
might
haue
beene
without
any
tedi
〈…〉
nes
let
downe
,
at
the
least
in
one
worde
mentioned
.
〈…〉
herfore
breuitie
could
be
no
piece
of
the
cause
,
but
a
〈…〉
ore
&
miserable
refuge
of
a
papist
driuen
to
the
wall
〈…〉
r
want
of
a
better
answere
.
But
if
this
be
a
piece
,
what
is
then
〈◊〉
supplement
of
the
whole
cause
?
Bristow
answereth
in
these
words
:
〈…〉
to
〈…〉
in
〈…〉
g.
Which
〈…〉
so
many
●f
〈…〉
one
of
●wspan●
w●●ld
〈…〉
.
Do
I
imagine
(
Bristowe
▪
&
am
so
greatly
〈…〉ceiued
▪
I
follow
not
mine
own
imagination
but
their
〈…〉
ne
writing
.
S.
Iohn
testifieth
that
those
things
which
〈◊〉
had
written
,
were
su
〈…〉
to
obtaine
euerlasting
life
〈…〉
y
beleeuing
them
.
Io
〈…〉
.
S.
Luke
●●eweth
his
purpose
〈◊〉
〈…〉
th
in
a
〈◊〉
summe
,
the
trueth
of
all
thinges
,
〈…〉
the
〈…〉
les
deliuered
,
concerning
the
doc●●ine
&
〈…〉
ngs
of
Christ
L
〈…〉
.
Ac
〈…〉
.
S.
Paul
〈…〉eth
that
the
holy
scriptures
were
able
to
make
the
man
of
God
perfe
〈…〉
prepared
to
all
good
workes
,
2
Tim.
2.
But
you
haue
greate
reason
to
proue
that
they
purposed
not
to
put
all
in
writinge
:
because
neither
so
many
of
them
,
nor
o
〈…〉
of
them
so
often
,
would
haue
mentioned
one
thing
:
wh
〈…〉
as
contrariwise
it
is
manifest
thereby
,
that
they
studie
not
so
much
for
breuitie
but
that
they
might
haue
expressed
in
a
word
or
two
prayers
&
sacrifice
for
that
dea●
seing
so
manye
of
them
,
&
some
one
so
often
,
doeth
mention
one
thing
.
Againe
it
were
againste
reason
,
that
they
shoulde
mention
one
thing
so
often
,
whic●
though
it
be
profitable
,
yet
it
is
not
necessarie
to
bee
often
mentioned
:
&
to
omitte
altogether
such
matten
as
are
necessarie
to
bee
knowne
,
and
not
in
one
worde
mention
them
.
The
purpose
of
the
holy
ghost
,
that
Bristowe
doth
imagine
,
were
in
writing
the
scriptures
to
a
bare
effect
:
that
the
gospels
were
written
onely
to
shewe
Christ
to
say
Consummatum
est
and
al
things
to
be
fulfilled
of
him
which
were
written
of
him
:
the
Actes
of
the
Apostles
to
shew
,
but
as
it
were
the
first
birth
of
the
Church
:
the
Apocalipse
to
shew
the
whole
course
of
the
Churche
,
to
the
ende
of
the
worlde
,
The
other
bookes
were
written
(
saith
he
)
specially
against
the
perfidious
Iewes
&
other
false
maisters
of
that
time
:
As
likewise
in
euerie
age
afterwarde
we
haue
the
Ecclesiasticall
(
I
say
not
the
Canonicall
)
writers
and
councels
.
See
you
not
how
the
blasphemous
dog
▪
restraineth
the
vse
of
the
Apostles
epistles
specially
to
the
time
in
which
they
were
written
,
&
compareth
Ecclesiasticall
writers
and
councels
,
with
the
canonical
scriptures
?
If
this
that
he
saith
were
true
,
the
scriptures
were
not
sufficient
to
make
a
man
wise
to
saluation
as
S.
Paul
saith
without
traditions
&
Ecclesiastical
writers
.
2.
Tim.
3.
Those
thinges
which
S.
Paul
promiseth
to
set
in
order
when
he
commeth
,
1
Cor.
11.
I
said
must
be
vnderstood
not
of
doctrine
but
of
ceremonies
,
as
the
worde
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
doth
signifie
.
Bristowe
aunswereth
,
that
the
solemne
prayer
for
the
deade
in
the
celebration
of
the
sacrifice
,
is
one
of
Saint
Paules
ordinances
.
I
reply
,
if
the
doctrine
of
praying
for
the
dead
were
contayned
Saint
Paules
writing
,
yea
,
or
in
any
part
of
the
cano
〈…〉
all
Scriptures
,
wee
would
not
striue
for
the
forme
〈◊〉
prayer
.
But
if
wee
may
adde
newe
doctrines
vpon
〈…〉
ler
of
the
Apostles
tradition
,
neither
is
the
Scrip
〈…〉
e
so
perfect
as
the
holy
Ghoste
affirmeth
it
to
bee
,
〈…〉
ther
can
the
gappe
be
shutt
from
any
heresie
,
to
〈…〉
a
st
it selfe
of
the
tradition
of
the
Apostles
,
as
the
Va
〈…〉
tinians
,
and
other
heretikes
haue
done
,
and
all
he
〈…〉
ikes
may
do
.
But
tradition
of
the
Apostles
is
as
good
as
their
writings
.
To
this
obiection
I
aunswere
,
that
their
writings
〈◊〉
the
onlye
true
testimonie
of
their
tradition
to
vs
.
〈…〉
stowe
replyeth
:
So
were
they
not
to
the
Thessalonians
,
〈◊〉
they
had
of
S.
Paul
traditions
partly
by
worde
of
mouth
,
〈…〉
tly
by
writing
.
I
reioyne
,
that
wee
haue
no
traditions
〈◊〉
the
Apostes
,
but
by
their
writing
wee
neuer
hearde
〈◊〉
deliuer
any
thing
by
word
of
mouth
,
but
we
know
〈…〉
ir
writings
contein
the
summe
of
their
preachings
.
Concerning
the
doubtfulnesse
and
contradiction
that
〈…〉
yde
was
in
the
fathers
them selues
,
about
those
mat
〈…〉
s
that
are
not
conteined
in
the
Scriptures
:
Bristowe
〈…〉
nswereth
first
,
their
doubts
are
not
of
the
traditions
,
〈…〉
t
of
circumstances
of
persons
,
and
other
matters
con
〈…〉ning
the
traditions
,
which
is
as
much
as
I
shewed
by
〈…〉
amples
and
testimonies
out
of
their
writings
,
Purg.
〈…〉
7.
Ar.
39.
Pur.
317.
The
contradiction
supposed
to
be
in
Chrysostome
(
where
he
sayeth
,
first
that
small
helpe
can
be
procured
for
the
dead
,
afterwarde
he
sayeth
,
the
Apostles
knewe
that
much
commoditie
came
to
the
dead
by
praying
●or
them
)
Bristowe
aunswereth
is
none
at
all
.
For
in
〈…〉
e
first
place
,
he
speaketh
of
riche
men
which
did
not
pro
〈…〉
e
any
comfort
to
their
soules
by
their
riches
,
that
their
friends
〈…〉
n
procure
but
little
in
respect
of
that
they
might
haue
procured
〈…〉
em
selues
:
because
a
mans
owne
workes
are
also
meritorious
〈◊〉
euerlasting
rewarde
so
are
not
his
friends
workes
meritori
〈…〉
vnto
him
at
all
,
no
nor
so
satisfactorious
of
temporall
paine
,
〈…〉
his
owne
nothing
like
.
But
how
a
mans
owne
workes
〈…〉
his
friendes
workes
,
may
be
either
meritorious
or
satisfactorious
any
thing
at
all
,
he
bringeth
no
proofe
〈◊〉
all
.
And
that
he
sayeth
of
Chrysostome
is
vtterly
false
for
if
istos
be
referred
in
the
former
sentence
defleam
〈…〉
istos
,
vnto
those
riche
men
so
dying
onely
,
what
reaso●
is
there
,
why
orantes
pro
istis
,
should
not
be
referred
vnto
them
also
?
But
seeing
the
memory
which
he
sai●●
was
decreede
of
the
Apostles
,
was
generall
for
all
the●
that
departed
in
faith
,
why
should
not
that
,
much
profite
comming
thereby
,
pertaine
to
them
,
of
who●●
he
sayde
before
,
that
small
helpe
they
could
haue
?
Likewise
,
that
I
added
further
of
the
Cathecumeni
wh●●
Chrysostome
iudged
of
helping
them
,
Bristowe
pas
〈…〉
ouer
and
sayeth
neuer
a
worde
vnto
it
.
3
Against
the
Churches
authoritie
.
I
saye
plainly
,
the
practise
and
authoritie
of
the
church
,
without
the
worde
of
God
,
reuealed
in
the
scripture●
,
Where
Allen
alledgeth
a
rule
of
S.
Augustine
,
Quòd
legem
credendi
lex
statuit
supplicandi
:
that
the
order
of
the
ch●●ches
prayer
(
saith
Bristowe
)
is
euen
a
plaine
prescription
to
all
the
faithfull
what
to
beleeue
,
because
Fulke
could
not
make
his
florish
with
that
ende
,
forwarde
,
he
turneth
the
staffe
,
as
though
S.
Augustine
&
D.
Allen
had
sayed
,
that
the
lawe
of
beleeuing
should
make
a
lawe
of
praying
.
And
here
he
cryeth
out
of
falsification
by
changing
.
So
sayeth
S.
Augustine
(
saith
Bristowe
:
)
in
that
sense
speaketh
S.
Augustine
often
against
the
Pelagians
(
sayeth
Allen
)
but
in
what
booke
or
chapter
neither
of
both
doeth
shewe
among
so
many
treatises
as
Augustine
hath
written
against
the
Pelagians
.
Wherefore
if
I
haue
altered
the
forme
of
wordes
yet
without
falsification
,
especially
seing
it
is
a
more
probable
sense
and
agreeable
to
the
scriptures
,
〈…〉
t
faith
should
teach
vs
to
praye
,
rather
then
prayer
〈…〉
che
〈◊〉
to
beleeue
.
For
howe
shall
they
call
vppon
〈◊〉
,
sayeth
the
Apostle
,
in
whome
they
haue
not
belee
〈…〉
d
?
Rom.
10.
But
seeing
there
is
a
mutuall
relation
〈…〉
weene
the
cause
and
the
effectes
,
the
one
argueth
&
〈…〉
oueth
the
other
.
For
as
faith
teacheth
men
first
to
〈…〉
ye
,
so
the
prayer
is
an
argument
of
the
faith
,
accor
〈…〉
g
to
which
it
is
conceiued
.
But
true
faith
com
〈…〉
th
onely
by
hearing
the
worde
of
God
,
therefore
〈…〉
e
prayer
commeth
onely
by
hearing
the
worde
of
〈…〉
d
,
and
is
not
acceptable
to
God
except
it
be
framed
according
to
the
worde
of
God
.
After
this
,
he
sayeth
,
I
〈◊〉
as
bolde
to
except
against
the
practise
commen
〈…〉
d
euen
in
the
canonicall
scripture
,
because
I
allowe
〈…〉
t
the
practise
of
Iudas
Machabaeus
conteined
in
the
〈…〉
phane
and
lying
booke
of
the
Machabees
.
I
sayde
Ar.
86.
There
is
neuer
heresie
but
there
is
as
〈…〉
at
doubt
of
the
church
as
of
the
matter
in
question
:
〈…〉
erefore
only
the
Scripture
is
the
staye
of
a
mans
con〈…〉
nce
.
Hereof
Bristowe
gathereth
this
great
absurdi
〈◊〉
:
Because
heretikes
make
doubt
of
the
Church
,
this
heretike
〈◊〉
that
no
Christian
leane
vnto
it
.
Yes
verily
,
I
will
haue
〈◊〉
men
that
know
the
Church
,
leane
to
the
Church
,
de
〈…〉
ding
truth
against
heresies
:
but
for
them
that
doubt
〈◊〉
the
trueth
,
and
of
the
Church
,
I
saye
only
scripture
i●
〈◊〉
staye
of
their
conscience
,
to
trye
the
trueth
and
the
Church
both
:
seing
both
heretikes
&
Catholikes
make
as
great
challenge
to
the
Church
as
to
the
trueth
.
But
some
heretikes
make
doubt
of
the
Scriptures
(
sayeth
he
)
either
all
,
or
some
peece
,
as
you
doe
of
the
●achabees
.
I
aunswere
,
if
any
denye
all
Scriptures
,
〈…〉
ey
are
more
like
Paganes
and
Atheists
then
heretiks
,
〈…〉
th
whome
wee
are
not
to
reason
by
authoritie
of
〈…〉
riptures
,
but
by
other
inducements
,
such
as
were
〈…〉
d
to
the
Paganes
.
Against
those
heretikes
that
re〈…〉
iue
some
part
of
the
Scriptures
,
wee
are
to
dispute
〈…〉
t
of
those
Scriptures
which
they
receiue
,
as
our
saui
〈…〉
r
Christ
confuted
the
Saducees
out
of
the
bookes
of
〈…〉
oses
,
because
they
receiued
none
other
Scripture
.
For
the
book
of
Macha
bees
we
doubt
not
,
but
are
certaine
,
it
is
a
prophane
booke
,
as
I
haue
shewed
by
many
arguments
,
neuer
receiued
in
the
primitiue
Church
f●●
400.
yeares
after
Christ
.
Where
I
say
we
submitted
our selues
to
al
Churche●
,
but
so
that
they
allow
no
consent
or
submission
,
but
〈◊〉
the
trueth
which
must
be
tryed
onely
by
gods
word●
Bristow
saith
with
that
,
but
so
we
wil
consent
the
true●●
to
Iacke
strawe
.
Verily
to
consent
vnto
Iacke
stra●●
in
truth
,
I
take
it
to
be
none
absurditie
:
but
I
speake
not
onely
of
consent
,
but
also
of
submission
which
we
are
not
readie
to
yeeld
to
any
but
such
whose
authoritie
〈◊〉
reuerence
.
As
for
the
4.
rules
enacted
by
Parliament
,
for
condemning
heresie
,
if
Bristow
woulde
vnderstand
them
like
a
quiet
subiect
,
and
not
deride
them
like
a
scornefull
traitor
,
he
might
vnderstand
,
that
the
three
later
are
not
contrarie
to
the
first
,
which
determineth
heresie
by
contrariety
to
the
canonicall
scripture
,
which
is
declared
either
in
the
4.
first
general
councels
,
or
in
any
other
generall
councell
agreeing
with
the
scripture
,
or
may
vpon
occasion
be
declared
by
Parliament
hereafter
:
Not
that
the
Parliament
euer
did
imagine
that
it
had
authoritie
to
make
truth
heresie
,
or
to
make
any
thing
heresie
,
which
is
not
contrary
to
the
canonicall
scriptures
.
After
this
he
chargeth
me
that
I
will
not
beleue
the
Apostles
nor
the
Angels
without
scriptures
.
What
if
I
woulde
not
?
were
I
worse
then
the
Thessalonians
,
or
Bereans
,
which
dayly
searched
the
scriptures
,
to
see
if
those
things
that
were
taught
by
the
Apostles
were
euen
so
?
Act.
17.
But
I
abuse
the
scripture
(
saith
Bristowe
)
and
turne
the
curse
that
saint
Paul
pronounceth
,
Gal.
1.
which
was
of
preaching
,
as
if
it
were
of
onely
scripture
.
I
aunswere
,
my
wordes
are
these
,
if
any
man
teach
otherwise
then
the
word
of
God
alloweth
,
he
is
to
be
accursed
:
but
seing
wee
haue
no
certeinty
of
the
worde
of
God
,
since
the
Apostles
departure
,
but
the
canonicall
scriptures
,
which
doe
containe
al
that
they
preached
,
the
same
curse
is
rightly
applyed
to
them
that
teach
any
other
way
of
saluation
,
then
that
which
is
taught
in
the
holy
Scriptures
.
The
rest
of
this
diuision
is
spent
in
shewing
that
I
hold
〈…〉
ill
my
exception
of
onely
Scriptures
against
councels
,
〈…〉
he
see
apostolike
and
succession
of
bishops
,
with
a
note
〈◊〉
the
ende
,
what
a
franklin
I
am
to
renounce
such
goodly
euidence
,
whereof
if
I
had
any
couler
my selfe
,
〈…〉
o
mountybanke
pedler
,
is
so
facing
and
boasting
,
as
I
●nd
my
fellowes
.
As
franke
as
I
seeme
in
renouncing
●hat
goodly
euidence
,
I
trust
to
be
carefull
enough
;
to
●olde
fast
the
euidence
of
eternall
life
,
which
is
the
ho
〈…〉
y
Scriptures
of
God
:
and
if
I
and
my
fellowes
boast
in
●hem
,
because
our
boasting
is
in
God
,
I
doubt
not
but
●ee
shal
be
better
accepted
of
him
,
then
they
that
count
●hat
boasting
a
stale
exception
,
and
boast
in
vanitie
,
〈…〉
ust
in
lying
,
and
at
least
make
flesh
for
their
arme
,
&
●heir
heart
departeth
from
the
liuing
God
.
4
Against
the
fathers
.
Although
I
challenge
the
Papists
to
proue
their
do
〈…〉
rine
Nowe
,
concerning
other
by
quarrels
,
and
cauils
,
whereas
I
sayde
:
Whatsoeuer
we
finde
in
the
fathers
agreeable
to
the
Scriptures
,
wee
receiue
it
,
with
their
praise
:
and
whatsoeuer
is
disagreeable
to
the
scriptures
,
we
refuse
with
their
leaue
.
Bristowe
noteth
within
a
parenthesis
:
He
meaneth
expressed
in
the
Scriptures
.
But
who
made
him
so
priuie
of
my
meaning
?
my
wordes
import
no
such
thing
:
for
many
things
are
agreeable
to
the
scriptures
that
are
not
expressed
in
them
.
I
borrowed
my
phrase
out
of
S.
Augustine
Contra
Crescon
homil.
lib.
2.
Cap.
32.
which
speaketh
of
Cyprian
,
that
which
I
spake
of
all
the
fathers
in
generall
.
Ego
huius
epistolae
authoritate
non
teneor
,
q
〈…〉
literas
Cypriani
,
non
vt
canonicas
habeo
,
sed
ea●
ex
canonic●●
considero
,
&
quod
in
eis
diuinarum
scripturarum
authori
〈…〉
congruit
,
cum
laude
eius
accipio
,
quod
autem
non
congruit
,
cu●
pace
eius
respuo
.
I
am
not
holden
by
the
authoritie
of
this
Epistle
,
because
I
doe
not
account
the
writings
of
Cyprian
as
canonicall
,
but
I
consider
them
by
the
canonicall
,
and
that
which
in
them
agreeth
with
the
authoritie
of
the
holy
Scriptures
,
I
receiue
it
with
his
praise
,
but
that
which
agreeth
not
,
I
refuse
it
with
his
leaue
.
I
thinke
Bristowe
will
teache
S.
Augustine
shortly
,
by
that
which
agreeth
with
the
Scripture
,
to
meane
onely
that
which
is
expressed
in
so
manye
wordes
.
Where
I
sayde
,
that
when
the
fathers
are
opposed
against
the
manifest
worde
of
God
,
and
the
credite
of
the
Apostles
,
there
is
no
cause
that
we
should
be
carryed
away
with
them
.
Bristowe
sayeth
,
in
the
margent
,
a●
though
we
opposed
the
doctors
to
the
Apostles
.
And
what
call
you
this
but
an
opposition
of
the
doctors
to
the
Apostles
,
when
wee
saye
,
The
Apostles
haue
not
taught
prayers
for
the
dead
in
any
of
their
writings
:
you
aunswere
,
but
the
doctors
haue
taught
prayers
for
the
dead
in
their
writings
.
Where
I
saye
the
authoritie
of
mortall
men
,
is
not
to
be
receiued
,
he
noteth
our
absurditie
,
because
not
onelye
Melancton
and
such
like
(
as
Allen
hath
tolde
●s
)
were
mortall
men
:
but
also
in
the
same
terme
of
mortall
men
,
are
the
Apostles
them selues
comprehended
.
And
what
of
this
?
Doe
wee
buylde
vppon
the
authoritie
of
Melancton
,
or
of
Peter
and
Paul
,
as
they
were
mortall
men
?
No
verily
:
Wee
buyld
vpon
the
foundation
of
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
,
Iesus
Christ
beeing
the
corner
stone
,
and
the
onely
author
of
the
doctrine
,
whereof
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
are
witnesses
,
who
spake
and
writte
as
they
were
moued
by
the
holy
ghoste
,
and
therefore
their
writings
wee
receiue
as
the
worde
of
God
,
which
the
spirite
of
God
hath
endyted
by
the
penne
of
the
Apostles
.
Where
I
sayde
:
We
dare
not
depend
vppon
any
one
man●●udgement
,
for
wee
must
depend
onely
vppon
Gods
worde
.
Bristowe
answereth
:
Euen
so
dealt
the
vnbeleeuers
,
and
the
doubtfull
and
weake
with
the
Apostles
in
their
life
time
,
yea
,
and
●ith
Christ
him selfe
:
and
yet
to
winne
such
persons
,
both
the
Apostles
and
Christ
him selfe
,
condescended
to
them
accordingly
.
And
why
do
not
you
follow
the
example
of
Christ
,
&
of
his
Apostles
,
to
winne
so
many
thousandes
,
as
doe
refuse
your
doctrine
,
because
you
doe
not
iustifie
it
by
the
authoritie
of
the
holy
Scriptures
?
But
the
faithfull
,
(
you
thinke
)
for
all
that
were
not
so
straite
laced
,
but
beleeued
them
vppon
their
owne
worde
,
both
Christ
and
his
Apostles
,
because
of
the
spirite
of
trueth
,
that
he
sent
to
them
.
And
God
be
thanked
,
we
as
faithfull
men
,
acknowledge
without
controuersie
,
the
spirite
of
trueth
in
Christ
,
and
his
Apostles
.
But
he
hath
not
sent
his
spirite
to
them
onely
(
sayeth
Bristow
)
but
also
to
his
Church
after
them
for
euer
.
We
doubt
not
,
but
he
hath
giuen
his
spirite
to
his
Church
,
but
not
in
such
full
measure
,
as
to
his
Apostles
.
And
if
he
had
,
how
should
wee
knowe
that
Church
that
hath
the
same
spirite
,
but
by
tryall
of
the
scriptures
,
which
were
vndoubtedly
written
by
the
same
spirite
.
Bristow
saith
,
the
faithfull
will
no
lesse
beleeue
the
Church
,
at
all
times
,
for
the
same
spirite
,
then
the
Apostles
.
He
must
first
proue
,
the
spirite
so
giuen
to
the
Church
,
that
shee
can
no
more
erre
in
her
decrees
,
then
the
Apostles
could
in
their
writings
.
Secondly
,
if
that
were
proued
,
the
tryall
of
the
Scriptures
is
necessary
to
discerne
the
true
Church
from
all
false
congregations
,
which
all
boast
of
the
spirite
of
trueth
,
as
much
as
the
true
Church
.
And
seeing
the
holy
ghost
by
his
instrument
S.
Iohn
,
biddeth
vs
not
beleeue
euery
spirite
,
but
trye
the
spirites
,
whether
they
be
of
God
,
we
knowe
none
so
sure
a
triall
,
as
the
consent
of
their
doctrine
with
the
holy
scriptures
,
whether
it
be
a
multitude
of
men
,
or
seueral
persons
,
of
one
age
,
or
another
,
of
one
degree
or
other
,
that
offreth
to
teache
any
doctrine
,
which
he
or
they
pretende
to
haue
of
the
spirite
of
God
.
Last
of
all
,
where
I
sayde
:
Age
can
neuer
make
falshod
to
be
trueth
,
and
therefore
I
w●y
not
your
prowd
bragges
worth
a
strawe
.
Bristowe
noteth
in
the
margent
,
It
is
pryde
to
follow
the
fathers
,
and
humilitie
to
condemne
them
.
Whereto
I
aunswere
,
to
boast
of
the
fathers
to
maintaine
an
olde
errour
,
is
stinking
pryde
,
and
it
is
not
against
true
humilitie
to
make
fathers
and
mothers
,
and
all
things
else
subiect
to
the
trueth
of
Gods
worde
,
reuealed
in
the
holy
scriptures
.
The
second
parte
.
Being
tolde
that
the
question
betweene
vs
is
not
(
as
he
maeketh
When
in
all
this
Chapter
,
you
deny
,
onely
scripture
do
aunswer
nothing
whether
the
likelihood
b●
on
our
side
,
or
on
the
auncient
doctors
side
,
for
the
meaning
of
the
scripture
.
What
then
?
I
aunswere
,
the
question
of
the
meaning
of
the
scriptures
is
needelesse
in
that
controuersie
:
where
some
of
the
doctors
confesse
prayer
for
the
dead
not
to
be
grounded
on
the
Scriptures
,
other
wrest
the
Scriptures
so
manifestly
,
that
the
Papistes
them selues
are
ashamed
to
vse
those
textes
for
such
purposes
.
This
aunswere
I
trust
,
will
satisfie
reasonable
men
for
that
controuersie
.
After
this
,
he
sayeth
,
I
count
my selfe
and
my
companions
happie
,
for
such
blinde
presumption
,
to
search
the
meaning
of
the
Scriptures
,
only
out
of
the
Scriptures
,
without
the
commentaries
of
doctors
,
but
as
he
troweth
,
not
without
the
commentaries
of
Caluine
.
But
herein
,
as
in
all
things
almost
,
he
belyeth
mee
:
for
I
neuer
spake
word
against
the
reading
of
the
commentaries
of
doctors
in
search
of
the
Scriptures
meaning
,
but
onely
against
absolute
credite
to
be
giuen
to
their
exposition
,
without
weying
how
it
agreeth
with
the
holy
Scriptures
in
other
places
.
Likewise
,
where
I
compare
the
whole
heape
of
superstition
&
errour
,
out
of
which
Allen
raiseth
a
mist
of
mens
deuises
to
a
dunghill
:
Bristowe
noteth
,
that
I
make
the
doctors
writings
a
dunghill
.
Surely
what
superstition
or
errour
so
euer
be
in
the
doctors
,
as
the
sweeping
of
a
faire
house
,
is
meete
to
be
cast
on
a
dunghill
.
Let
Bristowe
or
Allen
,
if
he
list
,
say
there
is
no
superstition
or
error
in
any
of
the
doctors
.
And
yet
it
followeth
not
,
that
the
doctors
writings
are
a
dunghill
,
more
then
that
a
kings
pallace
is
a
dunghil
,
because
the
sweepings
thereof
are
meete
for
the
dunghill
.
To
passe
ouer
his
rayling
termes
of
drunkennesse
,
&
blindnesse
,
&c.
Let
vs
come
to
the
meaning
of
the
scriptures
,
where
I
sayde
,
wee
shal
be
neuer
the
more
certeine
of
the
trueth
,
whether
wee
challenge
,
or
leaue
the
likelihod
of
vnderstanding
the
scriptures
to
the
doctors
.
Bristowe
aunswereth
,
whosoeuer
expoundeth
the
scripture
vnto
that
wherein
the
doctors
doe
agree
,
shall
bee
euer
most
certaine
of
trueth
(
which
is
inoughe
)
though
not
alwayes
certain
of
that
same
verie
places
meaning
.
Wee
are
then
much
the
neere
,
when
the
question
is
of
the
scriptures
meaning
,
if
by
the
consent
of
the
doctors
,
we
cannot
be
certaine
of
the
scriptures
▪
meaning
.
And
if
that
trueth
(
as
we
beleeue
that
all
trueth
)
is
in
the
scriptures
,
howe
can
we
be
certaine
of
the
trueth
by
the
agreement
of
the
doctors
,
where
we
cannot
be
certain
of
the
meaning
of
the
scriptures
?
Where
I
aunswere
,
that
wee
haue
our
measure
of
Gods
spirite
,
as
the
doctors
had
,
although
wee
agree
not
with
them
in
all
interpretations
,
euen
as
Cyprian
and
Cornelius
,
were
both
indued
with
Gods
spirite
,
although
they
agreede
not
in
exposition
and
iudgement
of
the
scriptures
:
Bristowe
replyeth
,
that
Cyprian
was
of
Cornelius
his
iudgement
implicitè
,
though
explicitè
,
hee
were
of
an
erronious
iudgement
.
And
so
is
euerie
Catholike
erring
of
ignorance
,
in
effect
of
the
trueth
with
other
Catholikes
not
erring
,
because
hee
q●e●ly
.
continueth
in
vnitie
with
them
,
and
doth
not
obstinately
holde
his
error
against
them
.
But
so
is
not
the
case
betweene
the
olde
Doctors
and
vs
:
for
neither
will
wee
bee
reformed
by
them
,
neither
woulde
they
be
reformed
by
A●rius
,
Iouinianus
&c.
whom
he
calleth
our
forefathers
.
If
you
haue
no
greater
diuersitie
then
this
,
the
case
will
be
all
one
,
for
neither
woulde
Cyprian
be
reformed
by
Cornelius
,
neither
woulde
Cornelius
bee
re-Formed
by
Cyprian
.
But
if
the
olde
Doctors
had
heard
as
good
reasons
against
prayer
for
the
deade
,
of
Catholikes
in
their
time
,
as
wee
can
make
in
this
time
,
although
they
woulde
not
bee
reformed
by
Aerius
an
heretike
,
yet
charitie
moueth
vs
to
thinke
,
they
would
haue
yelded
to
the
trueth
reuealed
by
a
Catholike
.
Where
I
conclude
,
that
the
harde
places
of
scripture
▪
are
best
vnderstoode
by
conference
of
the
easier
,
adding
the
ordinarie
meanes
of
witt
,
learning
,
&c.
adding
that
whosoeuer
is
negligent
in
this
search
may
ea●ie
bee
deceiued
:
Bristowe
noteth
,
a
comfortable
do
〈…〉
rine
for
the
ignorant
forsooth
:
As
though
any
Christi
〈…〉
man
or
woman
,
ought
to
bee
ignoraunt
in
the
〈…〉
riptures
,
so
farre
forth
as
they
teache
the
way
of
sal
〈…〉ation
:
otherwise
it
is
no
discomfort
vnto
them
,
al●●ough
they
vnderstande
not
euerie
harde
place
of
the
●criptures
.
After
this
he
gathereth
,
that
I
place
all
in
a
mans
owne
〈…〉
iligence
to
trust
no
man
nor
men
,
but
to
reade
the
scriptures
,
〈…〉
onferre
the
places
,
and
so
gather
the
meaning
by
him selfe
.
So
that
with
him
,
it
is
nothing
that
saint
Augustine
saith
〈◊〉
Doct.
Christ
.
libr.
Chapter
6.
where
I
receiued
my
〈…〉
ule
,
Magnificè
igitur
&
salubriter
,
&c.
Magnificallye
●herefore
and
wholesomely
,
the
holy
Ghost
hath
so
〈…〉
empered
the
holy
scriptures
,
that
with
open
places
,
hee
●ight
satisfie
hunger
,
with
darke
places
he
might
wype
●ff
lothsomnesse
:
for
nothing
in
a
manner
is
brought
●ut
of
those
obscurities
,
which
may
not
bee
founde
in
●ome
other
place
most
plainely
spoken
.
It
is
nothing
●hat
I
require
the
holy
ghost
the
author
of
the
scrip●ures
,
by
earnest
prayer
to
bee
obtained
of
the
interpretors
.
But
if
diligence
may
doe
so
much
,
hee
tel●●th
vs
of
the
greate
diligence
vsed
in
the
Popes
semi●arie
,
for
Englande
,
vnder
the
gouernement
of
Doctor
Allen
(
which
prooueth
it selfe
to
bee
a
semi●arie
of
treason
)
in
much
reading
and
conferring
of
the
scriptures
,
with
all
other
helpes
and
meanes
,
whereby
they
must
bee
more
certaine
of
trueth
then
wee
,
by
mine
owne
rule
.
No
,
Bristowe
,
not
they
that
reade
the
scriptures
with
such
minde
as
you
doe
(
without
the
extraordinarie
grace
of
God
)
shall
neuer
come
to
the
knowledge
of
the
trueth
,
which
they
seeke
not
in
them
,
but
the
confirmation
of
their
preiudicated
,
erronious
,
and
hereticall
opinions
.
There
is
a
fragment
of
Clemens
cited
in
the
decrees
.
Dist.
37.
Chapter
Relatum
,
which
sheweth
the
lette
of
your
vnderstanding
,
and
in
the
ende
concludeth
,
Non
enim
sensi
〈…〉
,
&c.
you
ought
not
to
seeke
a
forrain
and
straunge
sense
,
without
the
scriptures
,
that
you
may
by
any
meanes
confirme
the
same
by
the
authoritie
of
the
scriptures
,
but
you
ought
to
take
the
sense
of
truth
out
of
the
scriptures
themselues
.
Concerning
the
bragge
of
Hebrewe
and
Greeke
texts
,
to
be
proued
against
vs
,
when
we
see
the
booke
,
wee
will
shewe
you
our
iudgement
.
In
the
meane
time
if
the
authour
shewe
not
more
witte
in
suppressing
his
labour
,
then
you
in
vaunting
of
it
before
it
come
forth
,
I
assure
you
he
will
shewe
himself
to
the
world
to
haue
neither
learning
wisdome
,
nor
honestic
.
The
3.
part
.
What
he
meaneth
by
his
onely
scripture
:
and
that
thereby
he
excepteth
also
against
scripture
.
I
meane
by
onely
scripture
,
what
soeuer
is
taught
in
plaine
wordes
,
or
may
be
gathered
by
necessarie
conclusion
,
The
4.
part
.
What
great
promises
he
maketh
to
bring
most
euident
scriptures
against
vs
,
and
also
by
scripture
to
proue
his
sense
of
the
Before
he
rehearse
my
words
of
promise
,
he
repeteth
Thirdly
hee
saith
,
I
admit
no
scripture
which
I
con
〈…〉sse
to
be
canonicall
,
vnlesse
it
make
so
expressely
,
so
plainely
,
so
manifestly
,
&
so
necessarily
with
them
,
that
it
cannot
by
any
subtiltie
be
auoyded
.
This
proposition
being
in
the
copulatiue
is
false
,
for
I
admit
arguments
,
taken
either
out
of
the
expresse
and
plaine
words
of
scripture
,
or
of
collection
necessarily
concluding
.
Let
him
make
a
newe
logike
,
if
hee
will
haue
me
admitte
argumentes
that
doe
not
conclude
necessarily
.
Howe
I
obserue
that
law
that
I
so
rigorously
exact
,
〈…〉
e
will
examine
in
the
next
Chapter
.
Then
fol●oweth
a
large
rehersall
of
sentences
wherein
I
affirme
,
●hat
by
the
grace
of
God
,
I
am
able
to
proue
euery
arti
〈…〉
e
of
faith
that
wee
holde
against
the
papistes
,
by
ne
〈…〉
essarie
argu
〈…〉
ents
out
of
the
scriptures
.
Bristowe
saith
in
the
next
chapter
,
I
shall
haue
ynowe
,
yet
if
〈◊〉
will
,
one
article
shall
be
this
.
That
Antichrist
is
not
one
certaine
person
:
That
I
shall
easily
proue
thus
:
One
certaine
person
is
not
many
Antichrists
,
there
ha●●
beene
manie
:
therefore
Antichriste
is
not
one
certaine
person
.
The
minor
is
saint
Iohn
.
Epist.
1.
Cap.
2.
vers.
18.
Againe
,
Antichrist
is
hee
,
whosoeuer
denyeth
that
Iesus
is
Christ
:
One
certaine
person
onely
denyeth
not
that
Iesus
is
Christ
:
Therefore
Antich
rist
is
not
one
certaine
person
onely
,
1.
Iohan.
2.
vers.
22.
Againe
,
Euery
spirite
that
confesseth
not
Iesus
Christ
to
bee
come
in
the
fleshe
,
is
the
spirite
of
Antichrist
:
but
this
is
not
the
spirite
of
one
certaine
person
:
ergo
Antichrist
is
not
one
certaine
person
.
The
beast
described
Apocalips
13.
and
expounded
Apocalips
17.
is
Antichrist
,
but
manie
kinges
are
the
partes
of
that
beaste
,
therefore
Antichrist
is
no
one
certaine
person
.
The
whoore
of
Babylon
whiche
is
expounded
Apoc.
17.
to
be
the
citie
of
Rome
,
is
borne
by
the
beast
beforesaide
which
is
Antichrist
,
but
the
citie
of
Rome
is
not
borne
by
one
certayne
person
,
therefore
Antichrist
is
no
one
certaine
person
.
An other
article
that
hee
requireth
me
to
proue
is
:
That
the
Churches
flying
into
the
wildernesse
,
at
the
comming
of
Antichrist
,
is
to
become
inuisible
to
the
worlde
:
Although
this
article
bee
not
a
matter
of
faith
,
in
controuersie
betweene
vs
,
neither
yet
so
affirmed
of
mee
,
as
though
to
bee
in
the
wildernesse
,
were
nothing
else
,
but
to
bee
inuisible
to
the
worlde
:
yet
I
will
proue
so
much
as
I
affirmed
,
that
the
Church
being
in
the
wildernesse
,
is
inuisible
to
the
worlde
.
The
Church
being
where
the
multitude
of
wicked
men
are
not
,
is
to
them
inuisible
:
But
the
multitude
of
wicked
men
are
not
in
the
wildernesse
:
Therefore
the
Church
being
in
the
wildernesse
is
to
the
multitude
of
wicked
men
which
is
the
world
,
inuisible
.
Thirdly
hee
requireth
mee
to
proue
that
the
beginning
of
that
comming
and
flying
shoulde
bee
so
soone
after
Christes
passion
.
Before
I
proue
this
,
it
were
reason
you
should
tell
how
sone
you
meane
,
or
I
said
,
such
〈…〉
mming
and
fleeing
shoulde
bee
.
And
the
like
I
say
〈…〉
the
continuance
of
so
many
ages
and
the
ende
so
〈…〉
g
before
Christes
seconde
comming
.
The
holy
〈…〉
ost
declareth
Apoc.
12.
ver.
5.
that
immediately
after
〈…〉
rist
was
taken
vp
to
God
and
his
throne
,
the
woman
〈…〉
hich
is
the
Church
,
being
persecuted
by
the
dragon
〈…〉
d
into
the
wildernesse
.
The
time
of
continuance
is
〈…〉
uratiuely
&
obscurely
described
by
dayes
,
monethes
,
〈…〉
d
yeares
,
and
generally
by
a
time
,
times
,
and
halfe
a
〈…〉
e
,
which
I
neuer
tooke
vppon
me
to
define
howe
〈…〉ng
they
should
be
,
in
account
of
our
yeres
,
nor
when
〈…〉
comming
of
Christ
should
be
.
After
this
hee
saith
,
I
triumph
in
lying
,
when
I
af
〈…〉
me
the
Papistes
dare
not
abyde
the
tryall
of
onely
〈…〉
ipture
,
whereas
he
laboreth
nothing
so
much
in
all
〈…〉
is
Chapter
,
as
to
prooue
,
that
the
tryall
of
true
do
〈…〉
ine
ought
not
to
bee
onely
by
scripture
.
And
〈…〉
terwarde
hee
sayth
playnely
,
they
refuse
the
tryall
〈…〉
onely
scriptures
,
but
not
by
scriptures
,
no
more
〈…〉
eu
they
refuse
faith
,
because
they
refuse
onely
faith
.
〈…〉
here
hee
noteth
mee
for
foysting
in
the
worde
one
〈…〉
,
in
the
minor
of
this
argument
.
The
spouse
of
〈…〉
hrist
heareth
the
voyce
of
Christ
and
is
ruled
there
〈…〉
y
:
But
the
Romishe
Church
will
in
no
wise
bee
〈…〉
led
onely
by
the
voyce
of
Christ
:
therefore
shee
is
〈…〉
ot
of
the
spouse
of
Christ
.
I
thought
euerie
reasona
〈…〉
le
man
woulde
haue
vnderstoode
,
onely
,
in
the
maior
〈…〉
so
,
seeing
she
is
no
honest
spouse
that
will
bee
ruled
〈…〉
y
the
voyce
of
an
other
man
then
her
husbande
,
or
〈…〉
hat
will
bee
ruled
by
her selfe
,
or
take
vppon
〈…〉
er
to
ouerrule
her
husbande
,
I
added
also
in
the
〈…〉
inor
,
which
Bristow
omitteth
,
that
the
Romish
church
〈…〉
goeth
a
whoring
after
her
owne
inuentions
,
and
com
〈…〉
mitteth
grosse
idolatrie
.
Ar.
99.
Where
I
charge
the
Popishe
Church
with
blasphemie
,
for
submitting
Gods
word
to
her
owne
iudgement
:
〈…〉
he
answereth
it
is
al
one
as
if
I
shold
say
,
the
Apostles
did
blasphemously
submit
the
scripture
to
the
own
will
,
b●
cause
they
tooke
vppon
them
to
iudge
of
the
true
s
〈…〉
and
because
S.
Peter
sayde
the
vnlearned
,
being
hi●
selfe
a
fisherman
,
and
vnstable
,
did
misconster
S.
Pau●
epistles
&c.
to
their
owne
damnation
:
which
is
all
〈◊〉
as
if
Bristowe
coulde
make
vs
beleeue
,
that
the
Ap●
stles
tooke
vppon
them
without
the
spirit
of
God
,
〈◊〉
contrarie
to
the
scriptures
in
other
places
,
to
iudge
〈◊〉
sense
of
any
scripture
,
as
the
Popish
Church
doeth
:
〈◊〉
that
Saint
Peter
,
being
an
Apostle
indued
with
so
m●
ny
graces
,
was
vnlearned
,
because
hee
had
beene
a
〈◊〉
sherman
.
Agayne
where
I
sayde
,
the
Popishe
Church
ma
〈…〉
festly
reiecteth
the
whole
autoritie
of
all
the
Cano
〈…〉
call
scriptures
,
when
shee
affirmeth
that
no
booke
〈◊〉
holy
scripture
is
Canonicall
,
but
so
far
foorth
as
sh〈…〉
will
allowe
it
:
This
sayth
Bristowe
,
is
as
though
〈◊〉
Apostles
and
the
Church
after
them
,
manifestly
rei●cted
the
whole
&c:
because
they
made
a
Canon
or
C●nons
,
whereof
the
sayde
scriptures
were
and
are
call
〈…〉
Canonicall
,
wherevppon
him selfe
also
counteth
th
〈…〉
as
confirmed
by
the
holy
Ghost
.
That
the
scriptu
〈…〉
are
called
Canonicall
of
such
a
Canon
it
is
not
yet
proued
,
for
they
may
bee
called
the
Canon
and
Canonicall
,
because
they
are
the
certayne
rule
to
directe
〈◊〉
matters
of
religion
.
But
admitte
the
Apostles
or
〈◊〉
Church
immediately
after
them
,
in
hauing
the
spir
〈…〉
of
discretion
,
made
such
a
Canon
to
discerne
true
a●d
diuine
bookes
from
false
and
conterfeite
books
or
writen
by
the
spirite
of
man
,
what
is
this
like
to
that
bl〈…〉 phemous
authoritie
which
the
Popishe
Church
chalengeth
?
that
shee
gaue
authoritie
to
the
scriptures
and
might
as
well
haue
receiued
the
Gospell
of
Bartholomewe
as
of
Mathew
,
of
Thomas
as
of
Iohn
&c:
whereby
it
followeth
,
that
by
the
like
power
shee
may
now
reiect
the
Gospells
of
Mathewe
and
Iohn
,
and
receiue
the
Gospels
of
Bartholomew
and
Thomas
.
Where
I
sayde
,
the
popish
Bishoppes
durst
not
abyde
the
conference
at
Westminster
,
first
he
quarelleth
〈…〉
my
phrase
,
because
I
saide
it
was
before
the
whole
〈…〉
rlde
,
as
one
that
care
not
what
I
say
.
In
deede
I
〈…〉
de
accompt
of
the
iudgement
of
reasonable
rea
〈…〉
s
which
woulde
not
take
my
wordes
as
though
I
〈…〉
〈…〉nt
that
all
the
whole
worlde
was
gathered
into
〈…〉
estminster
Church
:
but
that
the
conference
and
dis
〈…〉
tation
was
so
open
and
so
notorious
that
all
the
world
〈…〉ght
haue
knowledge
of
it
.
Secondly
hee
calleth
it
a
mocke
conference
,
in
com
〈…〉
rison
of
the
councell
of
Trent
,
yet
was
there
no
or
〈…〉
r
taken
,
but
such
as
was
well
liked
of
by
the
Papistes
〈…〉
m
selues
,
vntill
they
sawe
their
cause
coulde
carie
no
〈…〉
dite
.
Hee
chargeth
vs
for
refusing
to
come
to
the
councell
〈◊〉
Trent
,
being
so
solemnly
&
honorably
inuited
,
with
〈…〉
h
safeconductes
&c.
To
your
safeconductes
I
aunswere
briefly
the
councel
of
Constance
hath
discredited
〈…〉
m
for
euer
on
your
behalfes
.
And
to
your
disputati
〈…〉
there
offered
,
I
say
it
was
to
no
purpose
,
in
such
a
〈…〉
cke
councell
,
where
the
Pope
which
is
the
princi
〈…〉
ll
partie
that
is
accused
of
heresie
,
shall
be
the
onely
〈…〉
dge
and
disposer
of
all
thinges
passed
therein
against
〈◊〉
good
examples
,
lawes
,
equitie
and
reason
.
Where
you
make
Allen
such
a
great
exhibitioner
〈◊〉
our
whole
countrie
,
I
will
not
quarell
at
your
phrase
,
〈…〉
t
I
maruell
what
great
reuenewes
hee
hath
in
Flaun
〈…〉
rs
that
hee
receyueth
no
exhibition
as
you
say
from
any
bodie
.
But
nowe
to
the
fourefolde
offer
:
wherein
first
you
say
,
that
the
councell
of
Trent
compted
vs
subiectes
〈◊〉
much
as
we
compte
you
the
subiectes
of
Englande
.
●e
compt
you
as
you
shew
your selues
to
bee
,
errant
●aytors
to
Englande
and
the
most
godly
prince
of
the
〈…〉
me
,
our
soueraigne
Lady
Queene
Elizabeth
:
as
for
〈…〉
e
conuenticle
of
Trent
,
we
owe
no
more
subiection
〈…〉
to
it
,
them
to
the
citie
of
Louaine
.
The
first
offer
is
,
that
wee
must
proeure
a
safecon
〈…〉
uct
for
you
from
the
Court
in
such
forme
as
the
coun
〈…〉
ll
gaue
vs
,
and
some
of
you
will
come
ouer
and
ioyne
with
vs
in
any
conference
that
shall
bee
prescribed
,
according
to
the
common
lawes
of
a
conference
,
〈◊〉
there
you
refer
mee
to
your
19.
and
1.
demaunde
,
wheret●
I
haue
made
aunswere
alreadie
.
But
as
concerning
yo
〈…〉
request
,
that
we
shoulde
procure
safeconduct
for
yo
〈…〉
it
is
altogether
vnresonable
,
because
you
are
not
on
〈…〉
heretikes
,
but
also
rebelles
,
conspirators
and
traytors
,
to
whome
no
wise
state
will
graunt
safeco●ducte
.
Your
seconde
offer
,
is
that
I
shoulde
ioyne
wi〈…〉
you
vppon
Collatio
Carthaginensis
,
touching
whic
〈…〉
you
haue
mine
aunswere
in
my
Retentiue
against
yo
〈…〉
moriues
.
Your
slaunderous
and
shamelesse
complaynt
,
of
o
〈…〉
Bishoppes
and
commissioners
oppressing
papistes
with
heauie
y●ons
,
&
butchers
axes
,
the
whole
world
(
if
you
w
〈…〉
giue
me
leaue
to
speake
so
)
may
knowe
to
bee
false
.
Their
gretest
seueritie
is
lenity
,
if
it
be
compared
with
popishe
tyrannic
,
practised
by
your
Bishoppes
and
bu●ning
butchers
in
Queene
Maries
time
.
Your
thirde
offer
is
,
that
I
shoulde
sende
you
so●●
of
my
fellowes
or
scholers
(
it
is
well
you
require
n
〈…〉
me
to
come
my selfe
)
which
shall
neede
no
other
sa●●conduct
,
but
their
quiet
and
modest
behauiour
:
as
the
example
of
some
●ugitiues
hath
prooued
,
all
satisfied
by
your
conference
,
and
seeing
and
hearing
your
dayly
reading
and
examination
of
the
scirptures
:
I
aunswere
,
if
you
coulde
procure
as
good
a
safecondicte
〈◊〉
Sygismond
the
Emperor
gaue
to
Iohn
Hus
&
Hiero●
of
Prage
,
I
durst
not
aduenture
to
sende
them
(
if
h
〈…〉
any
fellowes
or
scholers
whome
I
might
send
)
into
the
handes
of
Papistes
and
traytors
:
much
lesse
dare
I
sende
or
exhorte
any
,
to
goe
vpon
your
credite
without
safe-conduct
.
Your
fourth
offer
is
,
to
aunswere
such
scriptures
as
I
haue
alledged
in
both
my
bookes
,
in
the
next
chapter
,
whereto
you
shall
by
the
grace
of
God
receiue
a
reply
without
any
long
delay
.
Your
translation
of
the
bible
that
you
make
some
〈…〉
omise
of
,
when
it
commeth
foorth
,
we
shall
con
〈…〉
er
of
it
.
But
where
you
say
,
Wee
haue
serued
our
〈…〉
ntrie
with
the
olde
Testament
of
the
late
obstinate
Iewes
〈…〉
welling
,
diuiding
,
and
reading
,
it
beeing
it selfe
but
one
verse
〈◊〉
the
whole
Psalter
,
and
ech
other
particular
booke
,
and
onely
〈…〉
sonantes
,
and
to
bee
rcade
according
to
the
tradition
of
the
〈…〉
thfull
,
which
tradition
you
knowe
by
your
authenticall
tran
〈…〉tions
,
and
not
of
the
incredulous
and
per●idious
&c.
you
〈…〉
rite
both
like
an
ignorant
asse
,
and
like
an
impudent
〈…〉
asphemer
.
For
first
where
you
say
,
the
vowelling
,
diui〈…〉ng
,
&
reading
is
of
the
late
obstinate
Iewes
:
you
declare
〈…〉
neither
you
haue
seene
nor
reade
the
auncient
commen
〈…〉
ries
of
the
Iewes
that
are
extant
,
in
which
this
vowel
〈…〉ng
,
diuiding
,
and
reading
is
contayned
,
nor
once
haue
〈…〉
ard
of
the
most
auncient
trauell
of
the
Mazorites
〈…〉
hich
sone
after
the
dispertion
of
the
Iewes
,
with
won
〈…〉
rful
care
and
diligence
,
almost
vnto
superstition
haue
〈…〉
gistred
the
vowelling
,
diuiding
,
and
reading
,
as
it
〈…〉
as
then
receiued
,
euen
from
the
Patriarkes
and
Pro
〈…〉
etes
,
of
euerie
verse
and
worde
in
the
olde
Testa
〈…〉
ent
:
in
so
much
that
if
any
letter
or
point
by
the
〈…〉
ult
of
the
writer
in
the
copies
which
they
vsed
were
〈…〉
ch
as
might
easily
be
corrected
by
the
Grammer
,
yet
〈…〉
ey
durst
not
amend
it
,
but
haue
euen
so
commended
〈◊〉
vnto
vs
,
as
if
there
bee
any
learned
in
that
tongue
,
of
●hich
you
make
some
bragges
,
they
are
able
to
make
report
vnto
you
.
Again
,
what
a
monstuous
thing
is
this
,
that
there
should
be
but
one
verse
or
sentence
in
the
whole
Psalter
,
and
in
ech
booke
without
my
distinction
or
diuision
:
you
might
as
well
say
there
is
but
one
worde
in
euery
booke
.
Againe
where
you
say
there
bee
onely
〈…〉
onsonantes
,
although
they
that
be
exercised
in
the
He●rewe
tongue
,
and
in
the
grammer
thereof
,
can
reade
●ithout
the
vowelling
pointes
,
yet
they
cannot
alwaies
●aue
certaintie
,
seeing
some
words
with
diuerse
points
,
〈…〉
oe
not
onely
signifie
diuerse
thinges
,
but
some
〈…〉
imes
also
contrarie
thinges
.
Howe
then
coulde
eue
〈…〉
ie
godly
man
,
exercise
him selfe
day
and
night
in
the
〈…〉
tudie
of
Gods
lawe
,
according
to
his
commandement
,
when
it
were
not
possible
for
one
among
an
hundreth
,
to
reade
it
without
poyntes
and
distinctions
of
sentences
.
Our
sauiour
Christ
in
affirming
that
not
so
much
〈◊〉
one
iot
or
point
of
the
law
shal
perish
,
doth
sufficiently
declare
,
that
the
lawe
of
God
had
vowelling
&
diuiding
pointes
as
wel
as
letters
consonants
.
As
for
your
authenticall
translations
you
prate
of
,
we
knowe
that
in
m●ny
places
,
they
erre
not
onely
by
missing
the
vowell
〈…〉
,
but
also
by
peruerting
the
consonantes
.
And
if
it
b
〈…〉
so
as
you
threaten
in
the
seconde
part
of
this
Chapter
,
that
one
of
your
side
shall
shortely
set
foorth
a
booke
,
to
shewe
to
the
worlde
,
that
the
Hebrew
and
Greek●
textes
,
in
nothing
make
for
vs
,
against
you
,
and
in
verie
many
thinges
make
for
you
against
vs
,
much
mo●e
plainely
then
your
vulgar
latine
texte
,
wee
haue
not
serued
our
countrie
amisse
in
translation
of
the
olde
Testament
according
to
the
Hebrewe
which
maketh
more
for
you
then
your
owne
vulgar
latine
,
&
so
much
as
you
say
against
vs
.
But
nowe
to
all
your
foure
offers
,
I
will
oppose
one
more
reasonable
,
more
easie
,
more
indifferent
,
which
without
daunger
,
without
suite
,
without
fraude
,
me
thinkes
in
equitie
,
you
may
not
refuse
.
And
that
is
such
as
I
made
concerning
mine
aunswers
vnto
your
popish
treatises
,
prefixed
before
my
Retentiue
againste
your
motiues
,
that
if
you
will
conclude
anye
controuersie
of
religion
that
is
betweene
vs
,
in
the
stricte
forme
of
Logicall
argumentes
(
which
is
the
best
triall
of
trueth
in
matters
of
doubt
)
I
will
aunswere
you
as
breefely
,
and
either
shewe
plainely
the
inconsequens
of
your
argument
,
or
else
by
sufficient
authoritie
or
conclusion
of
syllogisme
,
aduouch
the
contradiction
of
your
maior
or
minor
,
or
both
,
if
they
both
happen
to
be
false
.
In
the
meane
time
if
you
had
rather
be
respondent
then
opponent
,
there
is
a
littell
treatise
called
Syllogisticon
that
hath
beene
set
foorth
by
Maister
Foxe
allmost
twentie
yeares
agoe
against
transubstantiation
and
the
carnall
presence
of
Christes
body
in
the
sacrament
of
his
supper
,
if
your
stomak
serue
you
,
you
may
endeuor
〈…〉
our selfe
to
aunswere
that
chalenge
.
CAP.
VIII
.
To
shewe
his
vanitie
in
his
foresaide
rigorous
exacting
of
〈…〉
ayne
scripture
,
and
great
promises
to
bring
playne
scripture
,
〈…〉
nferring
place
with
place
so
euidently
.
All
the
scriptures
that
he
〈…〉
ledgeth
are
examined
and
aunswered
.
And
first
concerning
the
〈…〉
estion
of
onely
scripture
.
First
Bristowe
(
as
his
common
maner
is
)
slandereth
I
answere
,
the
true
catholike
Church
,
hath
alwayes
resisted
al
〈…〉
lse
opinions
contrary
to
the
word
of
god
,
&
fought
against
them
with
〈…〉
e
sword
of
the
spirit
,
which
is
the
word
of
God
,
and
by
the
aide
〈◊〉
God
obteined
the
victory
and
triumphed
euer
them
So
did
Paul
〈…〉
ercome
the
Iewes
,
Act.
18.
So
did
the
fathers
of
the
primitiue
〈…〉
urch
from
time
to
time
confute
heresies
by
the
scriptures
,
and
in
〈…〉
eir
writing
declare
that
by
them
they
are
to
be
confuted
&c.
To
〈…〉
is
Bristow
answereth
,
that
he
findeth
not
that
his
arguments
〈…〉
gainst
the
Iewes
were
none
but
scriptures
,
wherein
he
is
〈◊〉
be
patdoned
,
because
the
quotation
is
a
misse
,
and
hath
Act.
18.
for
28.
in
which
chapter
&
23.
ver.
S.
Luke
declareth
how
he
proued
the
whole
doctrin
of
the
gospel
out
of
the
law
of
Moses
&
the
Prophets
.
Wherefore
if
Bristow
had
remembred
this
,
he
might
haue
found
that
S.
Pauls
arguments
,
were
the
same
against
the
Iewes
of
Corinth
,
which
he
vsed
against
the
Iewes
of
Rome
.
For
what
other
authority
shold
be
vsed
against
than
,
that
denied
Christ
,
&
beleue
not
his
Epistles
,
but
the
authoritie
of
the
scriptur●
,
which
they
receiued
?
Wherfore
he
vsed
none
other
arguments
,
but
taken
from
the
authoritie
of
the
scriptures
.
Also
he
might
find
in
the
same
chapter
,
&
last
verse
,
that
Apollo●
(
who
vsed
the
same
arguments
that
S.
Paul
did
)
proued
by
the
scripturs
,
that
Iesus
was
Christ
.
If
he
will
cauill
,
that
it
is
not
said
,
onely
by
scriptures
,
let
him
accuse
S.
Luke
,
which
hath
omitted
other
arguments
,
necessarie
to
proue
Iesus
to
be
Christ
.
But
read
you
Act.
13.
(
saith
Brist
.
)
and
you
shal
find
that
he
vsed
against
the
Iewes
,
the
testimonie
of
certaine
men
,
namely
of
Iohn
the
Baptist
&
of
his
owne
disciples
.
This
is
as
good
an
argument
,
to
proue
that
he
confuted
them
not
by
the
onely
authority
of
Gods
word
conteined
in
the
scriptures
,
as
if
a
man
wold
deny
,
that
a
traytor
was
apprehended
by
the
onely
authoritie
of
the
Prince
,
because
the
constable
arested
him
&
the
Iustice
made
his
warrant
to
the
Iayler
to
receiue
him
.
Iohn
the
Baptist
testified
nothing
of
Christ
,
but
that
which
was
written
of
him
before
in
the
scripture
,
no
more
did
the
disciples
or
Apostles
of
Christ
.
Besid
that
the
testimony
of
the
Apostles
is
not
alledged
for
proofe
of
any
doctrine
concerning
Christ
,
but
only
for
witnes
of
a
fact
,
namely
that
Iesus
was
risen
again
from
the
dead
,
according
to
the
scriptures
.
Furthermore
Bristow
willeth
●e
to
read
Act.
4.
for
the
argument
of
miracles
,
where
it
is
said
,
seing
the
man
also
stand
with
Peter
&
Iohn
,
which
was
healed
:
The
gouernours
had
nothing
to
gainsay
.
A
man
hauing
such
daily
exercise
of
conferring
of
scripture
,
as
Bristow
boasteth
himself
to
haue
,
might
haue
alledged
twentie
places
more
proper
for
the
argument
of
miracles
.
But
euen
in
the
same
place
by
him
cited
,
the
argument
of
miracles
serueth
not
to
prooue
any
article
of
doctrine
,
not
conteined
in
the
scriptures
,
but
to
〈…〉
onfirme
the
doctrin
of
the
scriptures
which
was
alledged
by
the
Apostles
,
to
prooue
Iesus
to
be
Christ
.
The
second
text
of
scripture
is
,
in
the
boke
of
Pur.
6.
where
I
say
,
that
other
persuasion
then
such
as
is
grounded
vpon
hearing
of
Gods
word
,
will
neuer
of
Christians
be
counted
for
true
beleefe
,
so
long
as
the
10.
cap.
to
the
R●m
.
remaineth
in
the
Canon
of
the
Bible
.
To
this
Bristow
answereth
,
that
the
word
of
God
is
not
only
in
writing
,
but
in
preaching
,
of
such
as
be
sent
.
And
therefore
wee
account
it
the
word
of
God
,
which
we
heare
of
the
Church
of
God
,
either
in
her
councels
,
or
in
her
doctors
,
or
any
other
.
For
so
said
God
to
thé
,
he
that
heareth
you
,
heareth
me
.
I
answere
that
I
spake
not
of
the
word
of
God
only
in
writing
,
but
in
preaching
,
in
councels
or
doctors
,
or
howsocuer
it
be
the
word
of
God
,
but
I
say
,
the
only
scriptures
are
a
sufficient
warant
for
me
&
euery
Christian
to
try
what
is
the
word
of
God
,
&
what
is
the
word
of
man
.
For
he
that
commanded
vs
to
heare
the
Apostles
&
ministers
,
willeth
vs
not
to
beleue
any
doctrin
which
they
teach
,
if
they
haue
not
the
warrant
of
holy
scripture
to
proue
vnto
vs
,
that
it
is
the
doctrin
of
God
.
For
since
god
gaue
his
word
in
writing
,
al
spirits
&
prophets
,
signes
&
miracles
were
to
be
tryed
thereby
.
Deut.
13.
The
third
text
Gal.
1.
which
S.
Paul
spéaketh
of
preaching
,
Bristow
saith
I
alledge
it
of
writing
,
&
of
onely
writing
.
In
these
words
:
Pur.
449.
It
vexeth
you
at
the
verie
hart
,
that
we
require
the
authoritie
of
holy
scriptures
to
confirme
your
doctrine
,
hauing
a
plaine
commandement
out
of
the
word
of
God
,
that
if
any
man
teach
otherwise
than
the
word
of
God
alloweth
,
he
is
accursed
?
First
he
chargeth
me
with
falsification
by
changing
.
But
what
change
I
haue
made
,
let
the
Lorde
God
iudge
.
Indeed
I
haue
drawne
mine
argument
from
the
worde
of
God
,
to
the
holy
scriptures
,
because
they
are
the
only
certeine
assurance
of
the
word
of
God
.
For
how
can
I
knowe
certainely
what
S.
Paul
preached
to
the
Romaines
,
and
other
Churches
,
but
by
the
scriptures
,
both
of
the
old
testament
and
the
new
,
which
he
affirmeth
to
be
able
to
make
a
man
wise
vnto
saluation
2.
Tim.
3
?
yea
wherefore
was
the
newe
Testament
written
,
but
to
assure
vs
,
what
is
the
doctrine
of
Christ
and
his
Apostles
?
Therefore
accursed
be
he
,
that
saith
the
newe
Testiment
is
vnperfect
,
and
doeth
not
contayne
in
writing
al
pointes
of
the
Gospell
,
that
Christians
are
bound
to
beleeue
to
their
saluation
.
But
the
scripture
saith
not
,
that
the
Apostles
did
write
al
that
they
taught
,
saith
Bristow
:
yes
verily
,
and
that
I
prooue
by
this
argument
.
The
scripture
testifieth
,
that
all
which
the
Apostles
taught
,
was
first
taught
of
Christ
himself
before
them
,
Heb.
2.
but
whatsoeuer
Christ
taught
,
is
written
in
the
Gospel
,
Luk.
1.
Act.
5.
Iohn
.
20.
&c.
therefore
whatsoeuer
the
Ap●stles
taught
,
is
written
.
And
therfore
the
Church
pretending
the
Apostles
tradition
,
receiued
by
preaching
,
i●
bound
to
bring
forth
the
Apostles
writing
or
other
holy
scriptures
,
giuen
by
the
same
spirit
.
The
fourth
text
i●
2.
Tim.
3.
which
I
alledge
in
these
words
(
saith
Bristow
)
Purg.
410.
All
goodworkes
are
taught
by
the
scriptures
:
which
are
able
to
make
the
man
of
God
perfect
and
prepared
to
all
good
workes
.
First
he
taketh
exception
,
that
these
are
not
the
wordes
of
S.
Paul
.
Indeede
my
wordes
are
an
argument
against
prayers
for
the
dead
grounded
vpon
the
scripture
which
Bristowe
suppresseth
:
But
supposing
that
Saint
Paul
had
saide
so
,
what
a
fonde
reasoning
is
this
(
saith
Bristo●
)
because
one
euidence
proueth
all
,
therefore
I
can
not
haue
any
other
euidence
,
but
that
onely
?
Sir
,
if
one
euidence
prooue
all
,
that
which
is
not
prooued
by
that
euidence
,
is
not
prooued
at
all
.
But
if
to
prooue
that
which
is
prooued
alreadie
,
by
that
one
euidence
,
you
haue
other
good
euidence
,
no
man
letteth
you
to
vse
them
.
Wherefore
this
is
no
fond
kinde
of
resoning
(
Maister
Br●stow
)
but
such
as
the
best
Logicians
do
teach
.
All
good
workes
are
taught
by
the
scriptures
:
therefore
that
which
is
not
taught
by
the
scriptures
,
is
no
good
worke
.
But
nowe
S.
Paul
saith
not
,
that
all
good
workes
are
taught
by
the
scripture
,
saith
Bristowe
.
Hee
saith
the
scriptures
are
profitable
,
he
saith
not
,
are
able
or
sufficient
to
teach
all
good
works
.
Againe
he
speaketh
only
of
the
worke
of
an
Euangelist
,
and
not
of
all
good
workes
.
To
this
I
aunswere
that
immediately
before
Paul
saide
,
The
scriptures
are
able
to
make
Timothie
wise
vnto
saluation
,
through
faith
in
Christ
Iesu
:
but
no
man
can
bee
wise
vnto
saluation
,
but
he
that
knoweth
all
good
workes
meete
for
a
Christian
man
to
doe
:
therefore
all
good
workes
meete
for
a
Christian
man
to
do
,
may
be
learned
by
the
scripture
.
And
euen
in
this
very
text
,
where
he
saith
,
Al
the
scripture
inspired
of
God
is
profitable
to
teaching
of
trueth
,
to
disprouing
of
falshoode
,
to
correcting
of
vices
,
to
instructing
in
righteousnes
,
that
the
man
of
God
that
is
the
Euangelist
,
be
perfect
,
furnished
to
euerie
good
worke
▪
although
you
restraine
euerie
worke
to
the
only
worke
of
an
Euangelist
,
yet
that
I
saide
,
is
necessarily
concluded
thereof
.
For
it
is
some
part
of
an
Euangelists
worke
to
giue
example
in
all
good
workes
,
that
are
meet
to
be
done
by
other
men
:
but
by
the
scripture
he
may
be
perfectly
furnished
&c.
therefore
all
good
workes
are
taught
by
the
scripture
.
Againe
,
when
all
the
office
of
an
Euangelist
,
which
consisteth
in
teaching
,
disputing
,
correcting
,
instructing
in
righteousnes
,
may
be
perfectly
furnisht
at
the
scriptures
:
what
can
be
more
playne
to
prooue
,
that
nothing
ought
to
bee
taught
for
truth
,
disprooued
for
error
,
corrected
for
vice
,
instructed
for
righteousnesse
,
but
that
which
is
taught
,
disproued
,
corrected
,
instructed
out
of
the
holy
scriptures
?
Seeing
therfore
,
that
prayers
and
oblations
are
to
be
made
for
the
dead
,
is
not
taught
by
the
scripture
,
it
is
no
trueth
.
To
deny
prayer
to
be
profitable
for
the
deade
,
is
not
disproued
by
the
scripture
,
therefore
it
is
no
error
.
To
omit
prayer
for
the
dead
is
not
corrected
in
the
scripture
,
therfore
it
is
no
vice
.
Men
are
not
instructed
in
the
scripture
to
pray
for
the
dead
,
therefore
it
is
no
worke
of
righteousnes
.
The
5.
&
6.
texts
,
I
alledge
together
Pur.
434.
Search
the
Scriptures
,
and
trie
the
spirites
,
to
proue
that
the
certeintie
of
trueth
in
vnderstanding
the
Scriptures
,
is
not
to
be
had
but
by
the
spirite
,
and
the
spirites
are
not
tried
but
by
the
Scriptures
.
Against
this
conference
Bristow
saieth
,
Who
euer
alledged
Scripture
more
blindly
?
And
why
so
I
pray
you
?
because
Christ
saieth
in
the
same
place
,
that
Iohn
did
beare
witnesse
to
the
truth
.
My
workes
doe
beare
witnesse
of
me
:
Also
,
My
father
who
hath
sent
mee
,
hee
hath
giuen
witnesse
of
mee
.
In
dèed
,
〈◊〉
Bristowe
could
proue
,
that
Iohn
Baptist
,
Christes
miracles
,
or
God
his
father
,
did
testifie
any
thing
of
him
,
which
was
not
before
contained
in
the
Scriptures
,
neither
had
Christ
giuen
a
perfect
rule
to
find
him
in
the
scriptures
,
neither
is
that
sentence
able
to
proue
that
Christ
may
be
sufficiently
learned
out
of
the
holy
Scripture
.
But
if
the
testimonie
of
Iohn
,
of
the
workes
of
God
the
father
,
do
all
confirme
the
Scriptures
,
who
euer
alledged
scripture
more
blindly
then
Bristow
,
to
proue
that
Christ
may
not
be
learned
sufficiently
out
of
the
newe
Testament
,
&
the
old
,
when
Christ
sendeth
the
Iewes
to
the
old
Testament
,
as
a
sufficient
witnesse
of
him
?
Concerning
the
triall
of
spirits
,
Bristow
biddeth
me
looke
in
the
text
:
by
this
we
knowe
a
spirit
of
trueth
&
a
spirite
of
error
namely
by
hearing
or
not
hearing
of
the
Apostles
.
I
like
it
very
well
.
For
where
shall
wee
heare
the
Apostles
speaking
,
but
in
their
writings
&
in
the
other
holy
writings
,
according
to
which
they
spake
all
,
that
they
taught
.
Wherfore
here
is
no
tryall
of
the
spirites
,
but
by
the
scriptures
.
And
where
he
sayeth
the
Romanes
doe
moste
manifestly
continue
in
that
they
heard
of
the
Apostles
,
because
no
man
can
name
that
time
,
the
noueltie
,
the
seducer
,
that
they
went
after
,
although
it
were
true
,
that
no
man
could
in
any
point
shew
(
as
he
sayeth
)
yet
the
argument
is
naught
,
seeing
it
is
proued
by
the
Apostles
writings
,
that
they
holde
many
things
,
not
onely
beside
,
but
also
contrary
to
the
doctrine
of
the
Apostles
.
The
7.
text
i●
,
Pur.
285.
The
worde
of
the
Lord
is
a
light
vnto
our
steppes
,
and
a
lanterne
vnto
our
feere
,
therefore
wee
will
not
walke
in
the
darknesse
of
man●
traditions
.
The
faithfull
testimonie
of
Gods
word
,
only
giueth
true
light
vnto
the
eyes
.
But
the
Prophet
(
sayeth
Bristow
)
neither
hath
the
worde
only
,
nor
saith
that
Gods
word
,
is
not
but
in
writing
,
for
S.
Paul
referreth
that
text
to
the
preaching
of
the
Apostles
.
To
the
fi●st
quarrell
,
I
aunswere
,
that
I
alledge
not
the
wordes
of
the
Prophet
,
but
his
meaning
,
which
Bristowe
cannot
denye
to
be
the
onely
worde
of
God
that
giueth
〈…〉
ue
light
to
the
eyes
.
That
Gods
worde
is
not
but
in
〈…〉
riting
,
I
neuer
sayde
or
thought
:
but
that
there
is
no
〈…〉
erteintie
of
Gods
worde
,
but
in
the
Scripture
,
I
affirme
:
〈…〉
and
that
the
Apostles
preached
nothing
but
that
which
〈…〉
as
before
conteined
(
though
not
so
clearely
)
in
the
lawe
〈…〉
and
the
Prophets
.
Last
of
all
,
you
alledge
and
saye
against
Iudas
Ma
〈…〉
abaeus
,
saith
Bristowe
,
Pur.
210.
In
the
law
not
so
much
●s
one
pinne
of
the
tabernacle
was
omitted
,
lest
any
●hing
might
be
left
to
the
will
of
man
to
deuise
in
the
worship
of
God
.
You
shall
not
doe
,
sayth
the
Lorde
,
what
seemeth
good
in
your
owne
eyes
,
but
that
which
I
commaunde
you
,
that
onely
shall
you
do
without
adding
any
thing
to
it
,
or
taking
any
thing
away
from
it
.
After
a
fonde
quarrell
of
the
quotation
omitted
by
the
printer
,
and
his
coniecture
thereupon
:
Moses
sayeth
not
(
saith
Bristowe
)
That
onely
which
I
doe
write
,
but
that
onely
which
I
commaund
.
And
so
our
sauiour
Christe
commaundeth
the
Iewes
accordingly
.
The
Scribes
and
Pharisees
sit
in
Moses
chaire
:
and
therefore
whatsoeuer
they
commaund
you
,
obserue
it
.
I
aske
no
better
,
wee
must
obserue
that
only
which
God
commandeth
,
whether
Moses
or
any
other
of
the
Prophets
,
apostles
,
or
Euangelists
haue
written
it
,
whether
the
Scribes
or
Pharisees
,
pastors
or
teachers
do
preach
it
.
But
where
shal
we
finde
that
which
God
hath
commaunded
?
but
in
the
law
&
the
prophets
,
in
the
writings
of
the
apostles
&
euangelists
,
which
are
able
to
make
vs
wise
to
saluation
,
which
are
profitable
to
make
that
man
of
god
perfect
,
prepared
to
al
good
works
.
As
for
the
pinnes
saith
Bristow
,
you
may
see
in
the
doctors
,
they
were
not
for
that
cause
you
imagine
,
of
leauing
nothing
to
mans
deuise
in
that
worship
of
God
.
For
how
say
you
then
by
Dauid
&
Salomon
,
who
changed
not
only
a
pinne
,
but
all
the
pinnes
&
the
whole
tabernacle
into
the
temple
,
&
ordeined
musicall
instruments
,
and
manye
other
thinges
for
the
worship
of
God
,
that
the
lawe
did
not
mention
.
I
aunswere
,
whatsoeuer
Dauid
and
Salomon
chaunged
and
ordeyned
,
they
did
not
by
the
deuise
of
man
,
but
by
reuelation
from
God
,
who
had
ordeined
them
to
doe
it
.
But
mine
error
is
(
sayeth
Bristow
)
because
I
do
not
distinguish
betwene
men
that
haue
onely
their
owne
humaine
spirites
,
and
men
that
haue
the
spirite
of
God
,
as
Moses
,
the
Prophe●●
and
Apostles
,
and
the
catholike
Church
.
I
were
in
deed●
in
a
grosse
errour
,
if
I
could
not
distinguish
the
spirite
of
God
from
the
spirite
of
man
.
But
Bristowe
erreth
because
he
confoundeth
men
that
were
specially
chosen
,
to
receiue
the
worde
of
God
by
reuelation
,
and
the
same
to
preach
and
write
,
as
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
:
with
the
Church
,
which
consisteth
of
men
hauing
the
spirite
of
adoption
:
but
for
the
certeintie
of
trueth
,
buylded
vpon
the
foundation
of
the
Prophets
&
Apostles
,
or
else
erring
if
they
depart
from
that
foundation
.
The
digression
he
maketh
to
the
vnlearned
brother
,
because
I
knowe
not
the
treatise
against
which
he
writeth
,
I
omitt
.
But
where
he
returneth
to
admonish
mee
,
his
fellowe
Fulke
,
as
he
calleth
mee
,
to
looke
better
to
my
Logike
,
concerning
mine
argument
ab
authoritate
n●ga●iu●
,
I
do
him
to
witt
,
that
,
God
I
thanke
,
I
am
not
to
learne
Logike
,
nor
the
force
of
an
argument
of
authoritie
negatiuely
,
of
him
.
The
argument
that
angreth
him
,
is
this
:
All
true
doctrine
is
taught
in
the
Scriptures
:
Purgatorie
is
not
taught
in
the
scriptures
:
therefore
Purgatorie
is
no
true
doctrine
.
Here
are
two
faultes
sayeth
Bristowe
,
one
because
the
maior
is
false
,
the
other
supposing
the
maior
were
true
,
yet
cannot
the
argument
be
opposed
to
our
arguments
of
traditions
,
councels
,
fathers
.
I
will
first
proue
the
maior
.
That
whereby
the
man
of
God
may
be
made
perfect
,
furnished
to
all
good
workes
,
is
taught
in
the
Scriptures
.
2.
Tim.
3.
All
true
doctrine
is
that
whereby
the
man
of
God
may
be
made
perfect
,
prepared
to
all
good
workes
:
Therefore
all
true
doctrine●s
taught
by
the
scriptures
.
Againe
:
That
which
is
able
to
make
a
man
wise
to
saluation
,
teacheth
all
true
doctrine
needefull
to
saluation
(
for
of
other
truethes
we
speake
not
)
but
the
scriptures
are
able
to
make
a
man
wise
vnto
saluation
:
ergo
〈◊〉
Scripture
teacheth
all
true
doctrine
.
And
concer
〈…〉
g
the
seconde
fault
,
which
supposeth
the
maior
&
mi
〈…〉
were
true
,
yet
denyeth
the
argument
.
I
woulde
〈…〉sh
you
fellowe
Bristowe
to
looke
better
to
your
〈…〉
gike
,
howe
an
argument
that
is
true
in
matter
and
〈…〉
rme
,
may
not
be
opposed
against
you
.
But
you
〈…〉ing
a
wittie
example
,
if
you
prooue
a
doctrine
vnto
〈…〉
c●
out
of
the
olde
testament
,
and
I
oppose
therunto
〈…〉
y
negatiue
argument
,
and
saye
:
All
true
doctrine
〈…〉
aught
in
the
newe
Testament
,
that
doctrine
is
not
〈…〉ght
in
the
newe
testament
,
therefore
that
doctrine
〈…〉
o
true
doctrine
.
You
aske
mee
,
whether
this
be
well
〈…〉
posed
of
mee
.
I
aunswere
,
no
:
neither
woulde
I
euer
〈…〉
pose
such
an
argument
against
you
,
which
though
it
〈◊〉
true
in
forme
,
yet
it
is
manifestly
false
in
matter
.
〈…〉
r
if
you
suppose
the
maior
to
be
true
(
as
you
say
that
〈…〉
olde
it
,
and
must
holde
it
especially
if
you
say
so
)
then
〈…〉
he
minor
vtterly
false
:
for
then
no
doctrine
is
taught
〈◊〉
the
olde
testament
,
but
the
same
is
taught
also
in
〈◊〉
newe
Testament
.
Wherefore
this
example
prooueth
〈…〉
t
,
but
that
mine
argument
ab
authoritate
negatiuè
is
〈…〉
ghtly
opposed
against
traditions
,
councels
,
fathers
,
&
〈…〉
ch
like
,
as
auouch
any
doctrine
for
true
,
which
is
not
〈…〉ght
in
the
Scriptures
,
in
which
all
trueth
is
taught
.
The
second
part
.
Of
Scriptures
alledged
concerning
the
question
of
the
Church
,
●●d
first
,
what
he
alledgeth
indefinitely
,
that
the
Church
may
The
firste
text
cited
Ar.
86.
Euery
man
is
a
lyar
,
●herfore
the
whole
Chuch
militant
consisting
of
men
,
Against
this
,
Bristowe
asketh
:
Why
I
doe
not
saye
〈…〉
e
Church
triumphant
:
And
demaundeth
whether
〈…〉
at
also
doe
not
consist
of
men
:
I
aunswere
,
the
scrip
〈…〉re
Psalm.
116.
speaketh
of
men
liuing
in
this
worlde
,
〈…〉
d
such
as
are
meere
men
,
lest
he
should
cauill
at
our
〈…〉
uiour
Christ
,
which
is
a
man
,
and
yet
not
contained
in
this
generall
rule
.
As
for
the
members
of
the
triumphant
Church
,
whether
they
may
properly
be
c●lled
men
,
I
will
not
dispute
,
but
wee
speake
as
the
scripture
speaketh
of
men
on
earth
,
and
the
Church
o
〈…〉
●arth
.
And
therefore
although
it
be
true
,
that
som●
men
by
the
gifte
of
God
are
veraces
,
true
:
yet
nere
which
may
not
erre
.
And
therefore
the
absurdi
〈…〉
which
I
gather
,
Purg.
451.
God
onely
is
not
true
,
if
〈◊〉
Pope
cannot
erre
,
is
not
auoided
by
saying
the
Apostles
cannot
erre
.
For
vndoubtedly
the
Apostles
did
erre
.
That
their
preachings
and
writings
were
not
erronious
,
it
was
because
they
were
not
theirs
,
but
the
enditing
of
the
holy
ghoste
by
them
.
But
that
the
holy
ghost
speaketh
not
so
by
the
Pope
,
it
is
manifest
by
this
,
that
he
hath
spoken
contrary
to
the
spirite
of
God
in
the
Scriptures
,
not
onely
in
matters
of
controuersie
betweene
him
and
vs
,
but
also
in
heresies
condemned
by
both
partes
.
The
2.
text
is
Ar.
88.
where
I
saye
:
The
true
&
onely
Church
of
God
,
hath
no
such
priuilege
graunted
,
but
that
she
may
be
deceiued
in
some
things
:
for
her
knowledge
is
vnperfect
,
&
her
prophecying
is
vnperfect
.
Bristowe
replyeth
,
that
S.
Paul
in
that
speach
includeth
him selfe
:
Our
knowledge
&
our
prophecying
&c.
is
vnperfect
,
whether
we
speake
or
write
.
And
sayth
,
that
he
troweth
I
will
not
say
,
that
S.
Paul
might
be
deceiued
in
his
writings
&
epistles
:
&
no
more
may
the
Church
be
,
I
answere
if
S.
Paul
had
proceeded
further
in
prophecying
,
then
according
to
such
knowledge
as
he
had
by
reuelation
,
&
argumentation
out
of
the
scriptures
,
he
might
haue
erred
.
That
he
did
not
erre
in
his
writings
,
it
was
not
because
it
was
impossible
for
him
to
erre
,
but
because
he
did
write
nothing
but
that
he
had
,
either
by
reuelation
of
Iesus
Christes
spirit
,
or
by
argumentation
out
of
the
holy
scriptures
.
And
therfore
,
except
the
church
haue
such
warrant
,
as
the
Apostles
&
elders
had
by
reuelation
&
the
Scriptures
Act.
15.
she
cannot
truely
say
,
It
hath
beene
thought
good
to
the
holy
ghost
&
vs
.
The
3.
text
is
Ar.
88.
where
I
saye
.
It
is
true
that
S.
〈…〉
gustine
saith
,
euen
the
whole
Church
is
taught
to
say
〈…〉
ry
day
,
Forgiue
vs
our
trespasses
.
But
why
so
(
saith
〈…〉
stow
)
because
the
whole
Church
doth
erre
in
her
de
〈…〉
minations
euery
day
?
It
were
ridiculous
so
to
say
.
〈…〉
t
Augustine
speake
for
vs
both
.
Propter
quasdam
igno
〈…〉
tias
&
infirmitates
membrorum
suorum
,
for
certaine
ig
〈…〉
rances
and
infirmities
of
her
members
.
The
whole
〈…〉
urch
for
the
ignorance
of
her
members
must
say
,
for
〈…〉
ue
vs
our
debts
:
but
the
whole
Church
neede
not
say
〈◊〉
,
except
she
may
be
deceiued
through
the
ignorance
of
〈…〉
r
members
:
therefore
the
whole
church
may
be
decei
〈…〉
d
,
Apostles
and
al
:
which
did
not
erre
in
their
writings
〈…〉
d
determinations
,
because
it
was
impossible
for
them
〈◊〉
to
doe
,
whatsoeuer
they
had
written
or
determined
,
〈…〉
t
because
in
their
writings
and
determinations
,
they
〈…〉
ere
directed
by
such
reuelation
,
as
they
had
according
〈◊〉
the
holy
scriptures
.
The
4
text
is
,
that
the
whole
synagogue
did
erre
,
but
〈…〉
ot
the
Church
of
Christ
,
and
that
but
in
a
fact
,
not
in
〈…〉
octrine
,
nor
the
whole
synagogue
,
but
a
peece
onely
.
〈…〉
hich
was
the
example
of
Dauid
carying
the
Arke
of
〈…〉
od
vpon
a
newe
Chariot
,
which
should
haue
ben
cary
〈…〉
d
vpon
mens
shoulders
.
1.
Chron.
13.
So
that
there
be
no
〈…〉sse
,
then
three
walles
saith
Bristow
betweene
the
Church
〈…〉
and
your
shotte
.
But
by
the
grace
of
God
,
I
will
shewe
〈…〉
hat
they
are
al
but
paper
walles
,
that
are
erected
against
the
trueth
of
●od
,
to
binde
it
to
the
persons
or
places
of
men
.
First
(
saith
Bristowe
)
it
was
the
synagogue
,
and
not
the
Church
of
Christ
.
Why
Bristow
,
was
not
the
Church
of
Christ
,
before
Christ
came
into
the
flesh
?
at
least
remember
that
S.
Paul
writeth
1.
Cor.
10.
Al
our
fathers
were
baptised
and
communicated
with
the
bodie
and
bloude
of
Christ
,
or
else
finde
vs
some
other
way
of
saluation
,
then
in
the
bodie
of
Christ
,
whose
member
whosoeuer
is
not
,
is
sure
of
damnation
:
or
say
that
the
Iewes
being
the
members
of
the
bodie
of
Christ
,
were
not
the
Church
of
Christ
.
The
second
wal
,
that
this
was
a
fact
,
and
no
doctrine
,
is
soone
blowne
downe
if
wee
doe
consider
,
that
the
fact
had
neuer
beene
attempted
,
but
that
it
was
tho
〈…〉
lawfull
and
Godly
,
which
was
an
error
in
doctrine
.
The
thirde
wal
is
,
That
the
whole
synagogue
erred
no●
For
he
did
not
consult
with
the
priest
,
saith
Bristow
,
w
〈…〉
with
his
Tribunes
,
Centurions
&
nobles
,
but
onely
w
〈…〉
the
Lordes
temporall
,
&
hereupon
he
noteth
my
be
〈…〉
ly
blindnesse
:
but
much
rather
may
I
note
his
m
〈…〉
strous
and
more
then
beastly
impudence
,
where
the
〈◊〉
according
to
his
own
vulgar
translation
addeth
to
th
〈…〉
whom
he
nameth
,
Et
ait
ad
omnem
coe●um
Israel
.
and
〈◊〉
the
whole
congregation
of
Israel
.
If
it
please
you
(
quo●
he
)
and
if
the
motion
be
of
God
,
let
vs
sende
vnto
〈◊〉
rest
of
our
brethren
in
all
the
coastes
of
Israel
,
and
〈◊〉
the
priestes
and
Leuits
which
dwell
in
the
suburbs
of
the
ci●ies
.
that
they
may
be
gathered
vnto
vs
,
&c.
These
(
saith
Bristowe
)
were
as
you
woulde
say
the
hedge
priestes
.
Very
well
,
ergo
all
the
heade
priestes
were
present
.
For
otherwise
howe
coulde
it
be
a
perfect
congregation
of
Israel
,
where
there
wanted
the
principall
members
of
the
priests
,
and
Leuites
,
for
their
tribe
and
degree
?
And
when
he
saith
,
let
vs
sende
to
the
rest
of
our
brethren
,
and
those
which
he
sent
to
of
that
degree
were
none
,
but
〈◊〉
it
were
hedge
Priestes
,
as
Bristowe
affirmeth
,
who
will
doubt
but
the
chiefe
Priestes
were
present
,
except
hee
thinke
they
were
not
brethren
vnto
the
rest
?
But
three
monethes
after
,
saith
Bristowe
,
hauing
founde
out
his
error
,
he
gathered
not
onely
all
Israel
●●d
Ierusalem
,
but
also
the
sonnes
of
Aaron
,
Sadoc
and
Abiathar
,
&c.
〈◊〉
though
they
were
no
part
of
Israel
.
But
these
(
saith
Bristowe
)
he
gathered
as
two
Bishoppes
,
and
six
other
,
as
it
were
Archdeacons
,
and
said
vnto
them
:
You
that
are
the
heades
of
the
Leuiticall
families
,
prepare
your selues
with
your
brethren
,
and
bring
the
Arke
of
our
Lorde
God
of
Israel
,
to
the
place
which
is
dressed
for
it
:
least
that
as
before
,
because
you
were
not
present
,
our
Lord
did
sm●te
vs
,
so
nowe
also
it
happen
for
our
vnlawfull
doing
.
The
words
that
Bristowe
taketh
holde
off
in
his
vulgar
translation
,
are
that
these
principall
priestes
and
Leu●tes
were
not
present
,
which
as
before
it
is
proued
〈…〉
e
,
so
are
they
not
in
the
Hebrew
text
LO
ATT●M
,
No●
〈…〉
the
verbe
is
vnderstood
,
which
is
in
the
sentence
before
:
〈…〉
t
omitted
,
which
now
they
were
commaunded
to
do
,
〈…〉
t
is
,
to
carie
the
Arke
:
So
the
sense
is
,
because
you
did
〈◊〉
carie
it
,
and
not
,
because
you
were
absent
.
For
beside
〈…〉
t
hath
beene
saide
before
,
of
all
the
cheefe
Priestes
in
〈…〉
nerall
,
howe
coulde
it
be
saide
,
that
Aminadab
one
of
〈◊〉
sixe
was
absent
,
when
the
Arke
was
first
brought
〈…〉
t
of
his
house
,
who
if
he
had
not
ben
deceiued
,
should
〈…〉
ue
tolde
the
king
of
his
error
before
?
The
5.
text
is
Ar.
86.
where
I
say
,
the
true
and
onely
〈…〉
rch
of
Christ
can
neuer
be
voide
of
Gods
spirite
,
and
ye●
she●
〈…〉
y
erre
from
the
trueth
,
and
be
deceiued
in
some
thinge●
:
●uen
〈…〉
there
is
no
true
Christian
man
that
is
voide
of
Gods
spirite
,
ye●
〈…〉
y
euery
true
Christian
erre
,
&c.
This
my
sophisme
(
saith
〈…〉
istowe
)
consisteth
in
speaking
confusely
of
Gods
spi
〈…〉
e
,
as
though
the
gift
of
it
were
one
,
in
the
whole
church
,
〈…〉
d
in
euery
particular
true
Christian
man
.
But
I
say
,
〈…〉
t
,
cleane
contrarie
to
that
he
chargeth
me
,
I
distin
distinguish
of
the
gift
of
the
spirite
of
God
concerning
adop
〈…〉
n
,
that
is
in
euery
one
of
the
faithfull
,
by
which
hee
〈◊〉
priuiledged
from
erring
vnto
damnation
:
and
the
〈…〉
rite
of
trueth
which
is
not
giuen
in
such
measure
ei
〈…〉
r
to
the
whole
Church
,
or
to
euery
member
,
but
that
〈…〉
ey
may
erre
in
some
thinges
,
though
not
finally
in
〈…〉
atters
necessarie
vnto
saluation
.
As
for
the
promise
,
〈…〉
ohn
14.
ver.
16.
of
the
comforter
euen
the
spirit
of
truth
,
to
remaine
with
vs
for
euer
,
and
to
leade
vs
into
al
truth
:
If
the
later
bee
not
restored
to
the
Apostles
,
howe
can
Bristowe
proue
,
that
it
must
needes
bee
vnderstoode
of
〈…〉
e
whole
Church
onely
,
and
not
of
euery
member
s
〈…〉
g
our
sauiour
Christ
,
Iohn
17.
prayeth
not
onely
for
〈…〉
is
Apostles
,
but
for
all
and
euery
one
that
should
be
〈…〉
eeue
in
him
,
through
their
preaching
,
that
they
might
〈…〉
e
sanctified
in
the
trueth
,
which
is
the
worde
of
God
.
●nd
euen
in
the
verie
place
cited
,
Iohn
14.
ver.
15.
promiseth
〈…〉
he
comforter
the
spirite
of
trueth
,
to
euerye
one
〈…〉
hat
beleeueth
in
him
.
And
as
he
sent
his
spirite
to
leade
〈…〉
he
Apostles
into
all
trueth
,
so
his
Apostles
fayled
not
to
deliuer
that
trueth
as
well
in
writing
as
in
preaching
considering
that
the
one
is
more
subiect
to
forgetful
〈…〉
and
corruption
then
the
other
.
Wherefore
the
Church
〈◊〉
called
the
piller
of
trueth
.
1.
Tim.
3.
because
it
is
buil
〈…〉
vpon
the
foundation
of
the
prophets
and
Apostles
.
Ep
〈…〉
2.
which
had
the
whole
trueth
of
the
gospel
reuealed
〈◊〉
to
them
,
not
because
the
Church
shoulde
haue
the
spirite
of
trueth
,
to
reueale
any
trueth
vnto
her
,
which
w
〈…〉
not
reuealed
to
the
Apostles
,
and
by
them
as
well
i●
their
writings
,
as
in
their
preachings
.
So
that
the
sa
〈…〉
gift
of
the
spirite
being
in
the
whole
Church
,
that
is
i●
euerie
member
,
and
distinct
from
the
gift
of
the
spirite
in
such
measure
as
the
Apostles
had
it
in
their
preaching
and
writing
,
the
argument
by
me
set
downe
,
is
sound
&
no
sophisme
at
all
.
2
That
the
Church
may
be
diuorced
.
I
neuer
saide
that
the
true
&
Catholike
church
of
Christ
But
I
am
too
too
ignorant
(
Bristow
saith
)
in
the
scriptures
,
if
I
know
not
herein
the
difference
betweene
the
synagogue
of
the
Iewes
and
the
Church
of
Christ
,
to
wit
that
the
synagogue
with
her
Ierusalem
might
&
shuld
be
diuorced
,
but
the
Church
of
Christ
with
her
Ierusalem
(
which
is
Rome
saith
Bristow
)
if
you
haue
any
sight
in
the
Actes
of
the
Apostles
should
neuer
,
nor
neuer
might
be
diuorced
,
&c.
If
mine
ignorance
be
so
great
,
why
do
you
not
with
one
text
at
the
least
help
to
teach
me
,
that
the
visible
Church
of
Christ
since
his
incarnation
,
consisting
of
the
Gentiles
,
may
not
as
wel
be
separated
from
him
,
as
the
Church
of
Christ
before
his
incarnation
,
consisting
of
the
Iewes
?
As
for
〈◊〉
diuorcement
you
imagine
of
all
the
whole
on
the
〈…〉
th
,
it
neuer
was
ne
shal
be
.
Againe
,
that
Rome
is
the
〈…〉
usalem
of
the
Church
of
Christ
,
where
finde
you
in
〈…〉
c
Acts
of
the
Apostles
,
which
haue
so
good
sight
in
〈…〉
em
?
I
gesse
this
is
your
argument
:
S.
Luke
beginneth
〈…〉
s
stor●e
at
Ierusalem
,
and
endeth
at
Rome
:
ergo
Rome
the
Ierusalem
of
the
Church
of
Christ
.
But
when
you
〈…〉
n
proue
the
consequens
of
this
argument
,
I
wil
say
as
〈…〉
ou
say
.
In
the
meane
time
,
I
say
there
is
small
likely
〈…〉
od
that
Rome
should
be
the
Ierusalem
of
the
Church
〈…〉
f
Christ
,
seeing
Peter
being
at
Rome
,
is
not
once
menti
〈…〉ed
in
all
the
Actes
of
the
Apostles
,
nor
in
any
other
〈…〉
ooke
of
holy
scripture
.
But
if
you
had
as
great
sight
〈◊〉
the
Epistle
to
the
Galathians
,
as
you
imagine
your
〈…〉
lfe
to
haue
in
the
Actes
of
the
Apostles
,
there
might
〈…〉
ou
learne
Cap.
4.
that
the
Ierusalem
of
the
Church
of
●hrist
,
is
not
Rome
on
earth
,
but
Ierusalem
which
is
a
〈…〉
o●e
,
which
is
the
mother
of
vs
all
.
As
for
the
reiecting
〈…〉
f
the
Iewes
,
and
calling
of
the
Gentiles
euen
vntill
the
〈…〉
lnesse
and
the
restoring
of
the
Iewes
,
of
which
you
pro
〈…〉
hecy
without
the
booke
,
that
they
shal
be
al
Christened
in
〈…〉
e
end
of
the
world
,
are
matters
impertinent
,
to
this
que
〈…〉tion
of
the
visible
Churches
diuorcement
.
3
That
euen
the
Church
of
Christ
shoulde
prepare
the
way
〈…〉
o
Antichrist
.
This
,
saith
Bristow
,
is
a
straunge
imagination
of
him
But
I
pray
you
Bristowe
,
who
euer
saide
,
that
the
Church
of
Christe
prepared
the
way
to
Antichrist
?
I
said
Ar.
35.
Manie
abuses
entred
into
the
Church
of
Christ
immediately
after
the
Apostles
time
:
which
the
diuel
planted
as
a
preparatiue
for
antichrist
.
Do
I
not
here
plainely
say
the
diuell
planted
them
as
a
preparatiue
?
Againe
Ar.
38.
I
saide
,
The
scripture
telleth
vs
that
the
mysterie
of
iniquitie
preparing
for
the
generall
defection
,
and
reuelation
of
Antichrist
wrought
euen
in
S.
Paules
tim
〈…〉
2.
Thessa.
2.
First
he
quarreleth
,
that
,
general
,
is
my
wor●
and
not
saint
Paules
:
I
confesse
,
but
it
is
S.
Paules
m
〈…〉ning
,
which
speaketh
not
of
a
small
or
particular
,
but
〈◊〉
that
great
and
generall
defection
,
which
in
other
pa
〈…〉
of
scripture
is
foreshewed
to
bee
from
Christ
vnto
Antichrist
.
Apoc.
13.
&
17.
and
yet
not
so
generall
,
but
th
〈…〉
Christ
shall
haue
his
Church
still
vpon
earth
.
Secondl●
he
demaundeth
whether
the
scripture
tell
me
,
that
it
wr●ug●
in
the
Church
of
Christ
:
and
aunswereth
himselfe
,
no
word●
so
.
〈◊〉
wrought
in
the
persecuters
&c.
of
the
Church
of
Christ
.
And
what
scripture
telleth
you
so
?
Is
open
persecution
a
myste●i●
of
iniquitie
?
You
say
better
in
the
seducers
,
and
where
began
the
seducers
,
but
in
the
visible
Church
,
although
they
be
no
members
of
the
true
and
Catholike
Church●
That
our
heresie
is
the
last
,
or
next
the
last
before
the
reuelation
,
before
you
goe
about
to
shewe
,
as
you
promise
,
you
must
proue
it
to
bee
an
heresie
,
otherwise
then
the
religion
of
Christ
,
was
or
the
Infidels
,
Iewes
,
&
Gentile●
,
called
an
heresie
.
That
the
Church
of
Christ
is
alwayes
a
con●emp●ible
companie
.
I
neuer
saide
so
,
but
after
diuerse
authorities
and
re●sons
Ar.
81.
That
as
the
Church
in
th●
sight
of
God
and
his
sancts
,
is
most
glorious
and
honorable
,
so
in
the
sight
of
the
worlde
it
hath
alwayes
beene
most
base
and
contemptible
.
To
the
scriptures
I
alledge
1.
Cor.
〈◊〉
.
Gal.
6.
Ro.
1.
that
the
crosse
,
and
Christ
crucified
thereon
,
which
are
all
the
glorie
of
the
Church
,
are
condemned
of
the
worlde
,
Bristowe
saith
,
that
may
be
,
and
yet
the
Church
not
be
in
their
sight
a
contemptible
companie
,
no
more
then
the
olde
Romanes
and
Turkes
are
to
vs
,
though
we
contemne
their
religion
.
I
aunswere
,
I
speake
of
the
contempt
of
the
Church
,
&
not
of
the
persons
of
men
,
which
often
times
are
great
Emperors
and
princes
of
the
world
.
To
the
place
Matth.
10.
You
shal
be
hated
of
all
men
〈…〉
r
my
names
sake
.
Bristowe
inferreth
the
company
that
〈◊〉
hated
is
not
alwayes
contemptible
.
I
confesse
,
neither
●id
I
bring
that
texte
,
but
to
shewe
the
perpetuall
hatred
●f
the
world
against
the
Church
.
But
Cyprian
writeth
,
●hat
Decius
was
more
patient
to
heare
that
an
Emperor
〈…〉
as
set
vp
against
him
,
then
that
an
other
priest
should
●e
ordeined
at
Rome
in
the
place
of
Fabianus
.
This
saith
●ristowe
,
was
not
contempt
,
but
of
feare
.
Although
I
●eny
not
,
but
tyrants
feare
the
church
of
God
,
more
then
●hey
haue
cause
in
respect
of
their
earthly
kingdome
:
〈…〉
t
it
followeth
not
,
but
they
do
also
contemne
it
,
and
〈…〉
inke
their
power
greater
and
their
glorie
superior
vnt●
it
.
And
in
the
example
of
Decius
,
his
indignation
was
●he
greater
,
because
the
base
and
contemptible
compa●y
of
the
Church
,
as
he
esteemed
them
,
durst
choose
an
●ther
Bishop
,
after
he
had
slaine
Fabianus
,
purposing
to
●estroy
the
Church
vtterly
.
That
I
alledge
,
1.
Cor.
1.
Not
many
wise
men
,
&c.
He
●●yeth
it
was
so
in
the
beginning
of
the
Church
,
but
not
●lwayes
.
And
so
I
do
blindly
alledge
the
text
againste
●y
selfe
:
Because
afterwarde
the
text
saith
,
the
wise
them●●lues
and
the
strong
were
confounded
,
that
is
to
saye
conuerted
.
〈◊〉
deede
,
if
confusion
and
conuersion
be
all
one
,
it
is
●●mewhat
that
you
saye
:
but
howe
will
the
text
beare
,
●●at
(
beside
the
improprietie
of
the
speach
)
that
God
hath
〈…〉
osen
the
foolishe
things
of
the
worlde
,
that
he
might
●onuert
the
wisemen
;
and
the
weake
,
that
he
might
con●ert
the
strong
?
Last
of
all
God
hath
chosen
the
inno
〈…〉
e
and
contemptible
things
of
the
worlde
,
and
those
●hings
which
are
not
,
that
he
might
destroy
those
things
●at
are
.
As
you
say
,
to
confound
,
is
to
conuert
,
so
you
here
best
saye
,
to
destroy
is
to
saue
,
or
else
you
cannot
●●rooue
the
multitude
of
wise
,
noble
,
and
honourable
●ersons
,
that
God
hath
chosen
to
be
greater
,
then
those
●hat
are
reiected
.
As
for
the
textes
of
Esay
60.
&
10.
●ited
by
you
and
mee
,
speake
of
the
spirituall
glorye
of
the
Church
,
not
deliuering
her
from
the
contemptof
the
worlde
,
where
and
among
whome
shee
is
a
stranger
.
That
the
church
was
,
and
also
should
become
inuisibl●
.
Concerning
the
inuisiblenes
of
the
church
,
Bristowe
But
another
while
I
say
,
Ar.
80.
it
sufficeth
,
that
the
church
be
knowne
to
Christ
the
head
;
as
he
sayeth
,
My
sheepe
heare
my
voice
,
and
I
know
them
;
and
to
them
that
be
the
members
of
the
same
body
.
Here
Bristowe
quarelleth
with
me
:
if
your
text
import
,
that
it
sufficeth
to
be
knowne
to
the
head
,
why
doe
you
iumble
in
the
members
afterward
?
whether
he
be
sober
that
vnderstande●●
not
a
copulatiue
proposition
,
let
wise
men
iudge
.
And
yet
the
text
proueth
as
wel
the
sheepe
to
knowe
one
another
by
hearing
Christes
voice
,
as
Christe
knowi●g
them
by
his
diuine
election
and
prouidence
.
But
B●●stowe
so
great
a
craftes
man
of
good
conclusions
,
d
〈…〉
deth
this
consequence
:
Christ
knoweth
his
sheepe
,
〈◊〉
the
church
(
forsooth
)
may
be
inuisible
:
and
so
he
may
,
for
it
is
of
his
owne
making
,
and
not
of
mine
.
I
had
no
more
to
proue
,
but
that
Christ
should
not
be
head
of
an
vnknowen
body
,
because
he
knoweth
his
owne
body
and
the
members
knowe
one
another
,
although
neither
he
nor
they
be
knowen
vnto
the
worlde
.
Yet
another
while
I
alledge
,
that
though
not
alway●
,
〈…〉
et
at
one
certeine
time
,
it
should
become
inuisible
,
at
〈…〉
he
comming
of
Antichrist
,
or
rather
when
Antichrist
〈…〉
at
h
preuailed
,
I
speake
of
the
church
in
this
world
,
&
of
the
inuisiblenes
vnto
the
wicked
world
,
what
scrip●ures
haue
you
for
that
?
sayth
Bristowe
,
Ar.
27.
&
77.
It
●as
propheci●d
,
that
the
church
should
flye
into
the
Wildernesse
.
The
defection
which
saint
Paul
speaketh
of
,
concerning
the
churches
inuisiblenesse
,
I
haue
pro●ed
,
howe
substantiall
the
argument
is
before
,
Cap.
7.
Par.
4.
But
nowe
Bristowe
opposeth
scriptures
to
proue
,
●hat
the
church
in
the
time
of
Antichrist
should
be
both
●isible
and
vniuersall
;
For
there
shal
be
preaching
all
the
time
of
persecution
by
the
true
witnesses
,
Apoc.
11.
euen
1260.
dayes
,
or
42.
monethes
,
which
commeth
to
three
yeares
and
an
halfe
.
But
after
they
be
slaine
and
●lye
vnburied
3.
dayes
and
an
halfe
;
which
is
also
the
time
of
Antichristes
tyranny
,
and
the
greatest
ruffe
of
●is
crueltie
,
who
shall
preache
then
openly
against
Antichrist
?
for
of
such
preaching
we
speake
.
But
lest
you
should
imagine
these
dayes
to
be
common
dayes
of
24.
houres
long
,
as
you
seeme
to
doe
of
the
1260.
dayes
&c.
you
may
see
,
that
the
inhabitants
of
the
earth
,
could
not
haue
time
to
publish
their
death
and
send
giftes
,
&c.
in
so
short
a
season
as
three
dayes
and
an
halfe
of
naturall
dayes
account
.
But
you
say
the
preaching
shall
be
as
generall
as
the
persecution
.
That
cannot
be
of
so
smal
2
number
of
witnesses
.
For
that
you
quote
Apoc.
14.
pertaineth
to
the
time
of
Antichristes
consumption
towarde
the
end
,
and
his
final
destruction
,
for
immediatly
followeth
the
Angell
,
shewing
the
fall
of
Babylon
.
Last
of
all
,
you
obiect
Apoc.
20.
that
the
persecutors
being
in
number
as
the
sande
of
the
Sea
,
shall
ouer
the
wide
worlde
compasse
the
campe
of
the
faithfull
,
&
the
citie
of
God
:
therfore
the
church
shal
be
at
the
same
time
vniuersal
,
&
super
latitudinem
terrae
.
I
doubt
not
but
the
church
shal
be
vniuersall
in
her
greatest
straits
,
&
dispersed
ouer
all
the
earth
,
when
shee
is
fled
into
the
wildernes
,
which
signifieth
her
desolate
condition
,
&
not
her
place
wout
the
world
but
neither
of
both
is
proued
by
the
text
before
alledged
.
For
it
followeth
not
,
although
th●
enimies
with
their
multitude
shall
come
vp
,
and
as
it
were
couer
the
face
of
the
earth
,
and
so
compasse
the
campe
of
the
faithfull
,
and
the
beloued
citie
:
that
therfore
the
campe
of
the
faithfull
and
the
beloued
citie
is
as
large
and
as
many
in
number
,
as
their
enimies
:
when
experience
proueth
the
contrary
,
at
this
daye
,
if
all
that
be
baptized
were
true
Christians
,
and
the
Church
of
Christ
,
yet
are
they
nothing
in
multitude
,
in
comparison
of
the
Turkes
and
Infidels
:
wherfore
for
any
thing
that
is
here
shewed
,
the
Church
should
be
inuisible
to
the
worlde
,
when
Antichrist
should
be
in
his
greatest
tyrannie
.
Namely
of
their
church
and
of
ours
:
by
conference
of
places
that
are
about
Antichrist
.
That
neither
Antichrist
nor
the
apostasie
agreeth
to
Bon●face
the
third
.
Being
demaunded
,
Ar.
35.
what
yeare
the
religion
of
Papistes
came
in
and
preuailed
:
I
answere
,
that
although
Likewise
,
Ar.
16.
After
I
had
shewed
the
persecution
of
the
true
Church
vntill
Constantine
,
and
soone
after
by
the
Arrians
,
then
the
ouerthrowe
of
the
Empire
by
the
barbarous
,
hereticall
&
idolatrous
nations
:
I
conclude
,
But
when
Mahomet
in
the
East
,
and
Antichrist
the
Pope
in
the
West
,
seduced
the
world
with
most
detestable
heresi●
,
then
was
fulfilled
that
which
was
reuealed
to
S.
Iohn
,
Apo●
.
12.
The
woman
clothed
with
the
Sunne
,
which
is
the
Church
,
was
so
persecuted
by
the
dragon
,
that
shee
fled
into
the
Wildernesse
,
there
t●
remaine
a
long
season
.
These
sayings
of
mine
,
Bristowe
rehearseth
,
cut
off
in
the
wast
,
as
though
I
referred
the
dragons
persecution
,
only
to
the
Pope
:
which
I
say
plainly
began
before
,
but
was
most
perfect
concerning
the
apostasie
,
in
the
raigne
of
the
popish
Antichrist
.
Againe
,
he
sayeth
,
I
doe
apply
this
prophesie
onely
,
because
of
the
Popes
primacy●
which
is
false
,
but
because
of
his
false
doctrine
and
heresie
also
.
For
that
he
sayeth
the
Popes
primacie
is
a
trueth
of
the
Gospell
,
and
practised
before
Bonifacius
,
●he
referreth
vs
for
proofe
to
Saunders
tray
terous
booke
of
Monarchie
,
and
I
for
aunswere
,
will
send
the
reader
●o
my
ouerthrowe
of
his
Romish
Rocke
.
The
suppo●ed
contradictions
I
referre
alwayes
to
the
proper
place
,
Cap.
11.
But
,
O
sir
,
where
is
the
Scripture
that
you
promised
●o
bring
so
cleare
?
&c.
sayth
Bristowe
.
Sir
my
promise
was
,
for
articles
of
doctrine
in
controuersie
between
vs
,
●nd
not
for
the
fulfilling
of
euery
prophesie
,
which
the
●ffect
must
better
expound
oftentimes
,
then
the
words
.
But
furthermore
(
sayth
Bristow
)
you
make
shewe
of
a
●ext
which
is
against
you
,
and
vse
most
detestable
fal●ification
,
saying
the
Church
should
remaine
in
the
wildernesse
a
long
season
,
but
the
text
is
cleane
contra●y
,
a
very
short
season
.
Say
you
so
,
Bristowe
?
where
haue
you
these
wordes
in
the
text
,
a
very
short
season
?
But
you
haue
1260.
dayes
,
and
a
time
,
two
times
,
and
●alfe
a
time
.
And
can
you
tell
vs
the
length
of
these
●imes
or
of
the
dayes
either
?
In
the
weekes
of
Daniell
,
●nto
whome
you
referre
the
exposition
of
the
two
times
(
for
you
haue
not
two
times
,
but
times
indefinitely
in
the
reuelation
)
the
propheticall
dayes
are
as
long
as
common
yeres
.
As
for
the
time
,
two
times
,
and
halfe
a
●ime
,
who
is
able
to
define
the
length
of
them
?
But
by
Scripture
you
will
proue
a
very
short
season
,
and
first
you
iumble
together
,
two
diuerse
prophecies
,
of
Apoc.
12.
&
20.
of
the
loosing
of
Satan
for
a
short
season
.
Why
man
?
short
and
long
be
Relatiues
.
The
time
of
Satans
loosing
is
short
,
in
comparison
,
either
of
the
long
time
that
he
was
bound
,
or
of
the
long
and
eternall
time
in
which
he
shall
remaine
in
perpetuall
bondage
.
For
though
Antichrist
raigned
in
open
reuelation
,
and
not
in
mysterie
of
iniquitie
onely
,
by
the
space
of
807.
yeares
,
more
or
lesse
,
and
yet
be
not
vtterly
consumed
,
but
yet
in
his
consumption
:
Neuerthelesse
,
for
a
whole
1000.
yeares
after
Christ
,
the
gospell
of
saluation
continued
in
the
church
,
though
much
defiled
with
superstition
,
yet
sounde
in
the
onely
foundation
,
Christe
,
openly
testified
by
sundry
publike
teachers
,
vntill
Syluester
the
seconde
,
Anno
Domini
1000.
by
the
diuell
him selfe
(
as
euen
the
Popish
stories
confesse
)
was
put
in
possession
of
the
See
of
Rome
,
&
then
was
the
church
driuen
into
greater
straightes
then
euer
before
;
the
doctrine
of
saluation
being
turned
into
idolatry
and
blasphemie
.
But
it
is
monstrous
,
that
Bristow
expoundeth
the
consummation
of
the
1000.
yeares
,
by
the
gospell
,
speaking
of
the
consummation
of
the
worlde
,
Matt.
24.
Marke
13.
and
confoundeth
those
things
that
are
spoken
of
the
destruction
of
the
temple
and
Ierusalem
,
with
the
ende
of
the
worlde
.
And
where
he
citeth
Matth.
42.
sta●i●●
post
,
streight
after
the
persecution
of
those
short
dayes
,
considering
that
from
the
destruction
of
Ierusalem
vnto
the
ende
of
the
worlde
,
so
many
hundreth
yeares
are
passed
,
he
might
learne
at
the
lest
,
not
to
measure
the
length
and
shortnesse
of
times
,
by
mens
reckonings
,
but
to
remember
,
that
with
the
Lorde
a
thousand
yeres
are
as
a
day
,
and
a
day
as
a
thousand
yeares
,
2.
Pet.
3.
His
other
patching
of
Centones
,
like
Valentinians
,
in
steede
of
conserence
of
scripture
,
because
they
consist
of
his
onely
assertion
,
without
reason
or
authoritie
,
I
neede
not
to
confute
.
As
that
the
dayly
sacrifice
,
which
Daniel
prophecieth
,
should
be
taken
awaye
by
the
death
of
Christe
,
Daniel
the
9.
&
.
12.
he
expoundeth
it
of
the
sacrifice
of
the
Masse
;
By
the
which
●aint
Paul
prophecied
,
that
wee
shoulde
announce
our
●ordes
death
:
as
though
Saint
Paul
spake
that
of
a
sa●rifice
,
and
not
expresse
of
eating
that
bread
and
drin●ing
that
cuppe
of
the
Lorde
.
Like
wise
,
speaking
of
the
abomination
of
desolati●n
,
he
sayeth
:
Daniel
agreeth
with
the
gospell
&
the
●pocalips
,
where
he
sayeth
:
Daniel
12.
From
the
time
●hen
the
dayly
sacrifice
shal
be
taken
away
,
and
the
ab●omination
set
vp
for
desolation
,
dayes
1290.
Blessed
is
〈…〉
e
that
expecteth
and
cometh
to
dayes
1335.
What
agreement
is
betwene
1260.
dayes
and
these
two
num●ers
?
beside
that
Daniel
9.
the
Angel
sheweth
,
that
●he
abhominatian
of
desolation
in
the
temple
,
and
the
●esolation
shall
continue
euen
to
the
consummation
●nd
end
.
Last
of
all
,
he
will
prooue
,
that
the
season
is
short
,
●ut
of
the
Apostle
,
2.
Thess.
2.
where
he
chargeth
the
Thessalonians
,
that
they
be
not
troubled
as
though
the
●ay
of
the
Lorde
were
then
instant
,
for
Antichrist
must
●irst
be
reuealed
.
And
then
in
deede
(
sayeth
Bristowe
)
●he
day
of
our
Lorde
is
instant
.
And
howe
knowe
you
●hat
?
For
our
Lorde
Iesus
Christe
(
sayeth
he
)
will
kill
●im
with
the
breath
of
his
mouth
.
What
immediatly
,
Bristowe
?
so
soone
as
he
is
shewed
openly
,
will
you
●llowe
him
no
time
,
to
exercise
the
power
of
Satan
in
all
lying
signes
and
wonders
?
shall
he
be
killed
before
he
haue
practised
all
deceite
of
vnrighteousnes
in
them
that
perish
,
to
whome
God
shall
●ende
the
efficacie
of
errour
,
that
they
may
beleeue
lying
,
that
all
they
which
haue
not
beleeued
the
trueth
,
but
had
pleasure
in
vnrighteo●snesse
may
be
condemned
?
This
will
aske
a
longer
time
,
then
three
yeares
and
an
halfe
of
the
Sunnes
reuolution
,
or
42.
months
of
the
Moones
circuite
.
It
is
not
one
mannes
person
or
age
that
can
suffice
to
deceiue
all
them
that
haue
not
beleeued
the
trueth
.
His
last
conceite
,
in
distinguishing
the
apostasie
from
the
reuealing
of
Antichrist
,
by
the
token
giuen
of
the
abolishing
of
the
Romane
Empire
,
which
should
come
to
passe
before
the
reuealing
,
but
not
before
the
apostasie
,
because
it
is
his
owne
drousie
imagination
,
without
grounde
,
I
will
not
vouchsafe
to
confute
,
especially
,
seeing
the
Apostle
ver.
3.
ioyneth
the
Apostasie
and
the
reuelation
immediately
together
.
Whether
Antichrist
or
the
Apostasie
agree
to
the
Protestantes
.
In
this
title
is
nothing
but
surmises
,
wherof
he
him
The
seuen
heads
are
seuen
hilles
,
vppon
which
the
woman
sitteth
:
And
they
are
seuen
kings
:
whereof
fiue
are
falne
,
which
are
the
persecu●ing
kings
,
before
the
time
when
this
was
spoken
.
What
then
?
One
is
presently
,
who
therefore
is
ment
of
the
Romane
Emperors
,
and
all
other
kings
persecuting
with
them
.
The
other
is
not
yet
come
,
and
when
he
commeth
,
he
must
remaine
a
short
season
,
who
euidently
is
Antichrist
in
proper
person
.
This
exposition
hitherto
may
agree
with
the
Pope
:
Nay
(
sayth
Bristowe
)
for
he
must
remaine
not
a
long
season
,
as
the
fiue
,
and
as
the
one
,
but
a
short
season
,
only
three
yeares
and
an
halfe
.
But
where
haue
you
the
length
of
his
continuance
compared
with
the
fiue
and
one
?
All
the
time
of
the
Churches
persecution
is
but
short
,
in
comparison
of
the
infinite
comfort
,
that
she
shal
haue
euerlastingly
,
though
it
be
long
in
the
iudgement
of
fleshe
and
blood
,
measuring
the
time
by
the
breuitie
of
mans
life
,
and
the
seasons
of
this
worlde
,
as
Bristowe
doeth
the
three
yeares
and
an
halfe
.
But
this
is
worthie
to
be
noted
,
that
he
expoundeth
the
sixt
king
for
the
whole
state
of
Romane
Emperors
,
and
other
persecuting
kings
,
as
he
doeth
the
fiue
kings
that
were
past
,
and
yet
against
all
reason
and
analogie
,
wold
haue
the
seuenth
(
which
is
antichrist
)
to
be
one
singular
man
,
so
to
auoide
,
that
the
whole
rabble
of
Popes
cannot
be
antichrist
.
Nowe
followeth
the
exposition
of
the
tenne
hornes
,
which
are
tenne
kings
,
which
haue
not
yet
taken
kingdome
,
but
they
shall
take
power
as
kinges
euen
in
one
houre
with
the
beast
,
that
is
,
together
with
Antichrist
(
sayth
he
)
to
serue
him
as
his
feede
knights
.
I
maruell
whether
he
will
not
expound
the
houre
in
this
place
for
the
24.
part
of
a
naturall
daye
.
For
otherwise
wee
see
by
histories
,
that
the
aduauncement
of
the
Pope
,
was
the
decay
of
the
Empire
in
the
West
,
and
with
him
arose
a
multitude
of
kings
in
euery
prouince
,
which
before
were
subiect
to
one
Emperour
.
And
so
you
see
euidently
(
sayth
Bristowe
)
by
these
seuen
hilles
,
thus
expounded
,
that
the
woman
which
sitteth
vpon
them
,
is
not
so
little
a
one
,
as
you
do
make
her
,
but
that
shee
is
Mundus
impiorum
:
the
whole
worlde
of
wicked
men
.
But
where
do
we
see
this
euident
exposition
of
the
seuen
hilles
?
wee
haue
seene
the
exposition
of
the
seuen
heades
,
to
bee
seuen
kings
,
and
also
seuen
hills
:
but
we
see
no
exposition
of
the
hills
,
who
must
needs
be
taken
in
their
proper
sense
,
because
they
are
the
exposition
of
anothe●
figuratiue
speach
,
namely
seuen
heades
.
But
the
woman
(
you
say
,
)
is
no
little
one
,
which
sitteth
on
the
seuen
hilles
,
but
the
worlde
of
wicked
men
.
Let
the
holye
ghost
I
pray
you
expounde
the
woman
,
as
well
as
the
heades
of
her
beast
.
And
the
woman
which
thou
sawest
is
that
great
citie
which
hath
the
kingdome
ouer
the
kinges
of
the
earth
.
This
is
a
cleare
exposition
of
the
whore
of
Babylon
,
the
woman
;
and
as
cleare
a
description
of
the
citie
of
Rome
,
which
in
that
time
,
had
the
kingdome
ouer
the
kinges
of
the
earth
,
and
is
the
citie
builded
vppon
seuen
hilles
,
before
expounded
to
be
one
of
the
significations
of
the
seuen
heades
,
a
persecuter
of
the
sainctes
vnder
the
Emperors
,
and
a
poisone●
and
persecutor
of
the
Church
vnder
the
Popes
.
And
therefore
Mundus
impiorum
is
a
false
exposition
,
which
I
will
prooue
by
this
reason
.
The
whore
of
Babylon
is
a
great
citie
,
hauing
dominion
ouer
the
kings
of
the
earth
:
but
the
whole
worlde
of
wicked
men
is
not
a
great
citie
,
hauing
dominion
ouer
the
kinges
of
the
earth
:
therfore
the
whore
of
Babylon
is
not
the
whole
worlde
of
wicked
men
.
Againe
,
The
whore
of
Babylon
is
a
citie
situated
vpon
seuen
hilles
:
The
whole
worlde
of
wicked
men
is
not
a
citie
situate
vppon
seuen
hils
:
therefore
the
whore
of
Babylon
is
not
the
whole
world
of
wicked
men
.
The
third
part
.
Concerning
the
question
of
purgatorie
,
and
first
ab
authoritate
I
saide
.
Purg.
44●
.
It
is
no
good
logike
,
to
conclude
speaketh
nothing
of
their
quiet
rest
after
death
,
although
he
name
them
that
are
asleepe
in
the
Lorde
.
If
they
sleepe
in
the
Lord
,
they
are
not
onely
at
rest
,
but
in
happinesse
.
Can
you
interprete
to
sleepe
in
the
Lord
,
to
be
in
hellish
torments
,
such
as
you
faine
your
purgatorie
paines
to
be
?
Are
they
not
blessed
which
die
in
the
Lord
?
The
Prophet
Esay
saith
,
cap.
57.
of
the
righteous
after
their
death
,
that
there
shal
be
peace
,
they
shall
rest
in
their
beddes
:
Ergo
,
they
that
sleepe
in
the
Lord
,
enioy
a
quiet
rest
.
The
2.
argument
is
out
of
1.
Cor.
11.
Saint
Paul
reherseth
what
he
receiued
and
deliuered
concerning
the
sacrament
,
but
oblation
for
the
dead
,
he
rehearseth
no●
ergo
he
neither
receiued
nor
deliuered
it
.
So
you
make
(
sayth
Bristowe
)
as
though
the
Apostle
there
prescribeth
the
whole
order
of
ministration
contrary
to
that
he
sayeth
afterwarde
,
of
setting
other
things
in
order
.
I
answere
,
that
obiection
is
auoided
in
the
same
place
immediatly
after
,
Pur.
362.
&
therefore
I
will
not
here
repete
the
answere
.
And
that
it
is
not
of
one
place
negatiuely
,
you
your selfe
here
confesse
,
that
I
denye
it
to
be
written
by
any
of
the
Euangelistes
which
entreat
of
the
sacrament
.
But
you
are
not
ashamed
to
affirme
,
that
the
Apostle
intended
no
more
in
that
place
,
but
to
correct
the
sinne
of
vnworthie
receiuing
,
vppon
coulot
of
a
place
of
Augustine
,
Ep.
ad
Ian.
118.
Cap.
3.
Inde
enim
.
For
that
respect
,
the
Apostle
also
sayeth
,
that
they
receiue
it
vnworthily
,
who
do
not
by
a
reuerence
singularly
dewe
,
discerne
it
from
other
meates
,
as
sufficiently
appeareth
through
that
same
whole
place
in
the
first
Epistle
to
the
Corinthians
,
if
it
be
diligently
considered
.
Doth
Augustine
say
,
or
can
any
man
proue
out
of
his
saying
,
that
he
ment
,
that
S.
Paul
intended
no
more
,
but
to
correct
the
sinne
of
the
vnworthie
receiuing
?
But
admitt
it
were
so
,
how
could
he
better
correct
that
sinne
,
then
by
shewing
the
whole
institution
,
substantiall
matter
and
fourme
,
ende
and
vse
of
that
sacrament
,
and
so
he
doth
,
although
ceremonies
and
externall
obseruations
about
it
,
he
doth
not
expresse
.
The
third
argument
is
out
of
Leu.
21.
and
Numer.
19.
which
prescribe
what
law
was
appointed
for
lamenting
the
dead
and
diuerse
other
ordinances
concerning
the
dead
,
in
which
was
no
sacrifice
,
or
prayer
for
the
dead
was
offred
,
but
that
they
were
so
separated
from
the
liuing
,
that
the
priestes
might
haue
nothing
to
do
with
them
but
in
speciall
cases
.
Bristowe
sayeth
,
I
might
as
well
conclude
that
the
dead
should
not
be
buryed
.
In
●eede
so
to
conclude
,
were
to
conclude
of
one
place
●egatiuely
,
but
I
presuppose
my
former
assertion
,
that
●n
no
place
of
Scripture
there
is
mentioned
prayer
or
offering
for
the
dead
,
no
not
in
those
which
conteine
●peciall
order
for
the
dead
.
I
adde
further
,
that
the
●riest
to
whom
specially
offering
of
sacrifice
perteineth
,
●s
so
separated
from
the
dead
,
that
he
is
forbidden
to
●ourne
for
them
,
much
more
to
offer
sacrifice
for
than
,
●r
to
pray
for
them
,
which
can
not
be
without
lamen●ation
for
their
miserable
estate
&c.
From
these
particular
places
,
I
come
to
the
whole
●awe
,
and
conclude
negatiuely
thus
:
All
lawfull
sacri●ices
were
prescribed
by
the
lawe
:
Sacrifice
for
the
dead
●as
not
prescribed
by
the
lawe
:
therfore
it
was
no
law●ull
sacrifice
.
The
answere
he
sayth
is
by
returning
it
●ppon
my selfe
,
but
in
deede
hee
maketh
it
by
denying
●he
minor
:
affirming
that
sacrifice
for
the
dead
was
pre●cribed
vnder
the
name
of
sacrifice
for
sinne
.
I
might
●ere
reply
,
out
of
your
owne
doctrine
,
that
not
the
●uiltinesse
,
but
the
paine
of
sinne
is
in
many
to
be
pur●ed
,
which
haue
obteyned
remission
of
all
their
sinnes
,
●ither
by
Popes
pardon
,
or
priestes
absolution
,
or
by
●ods
forgiuenesse
vnto
the
penitent
.
But
I
will
fol●owe
the
argument
I
shewed
that
the
forme
of
sacrifice
●as
such
,
as
could
not
be
offered
but
of
the
liuing
or
●or
the
liuing
,
because
they
are
commaunded
in
all
sa●rifice
for
sinne
generally
to
lay
their
hand
vppon
the
head
of
the
beast
to
be
sacrificed
.
Hereunto
Bristowe
replyeth
,
that
this
grosse
absurditie
would
follow
,
that
●acrifice
for
sinne
could
not
be
offered
,
but
of
them
that
were
present
:
therefore
not
for
the
children
,
the
sicke
,
●or
captiues
,
for
kings
and
cities
of
the
world
vncircum●ised
,
and
diuerse
other
sortes
.
I
reioygne
,
that
no
sacri●ices
for
sinne
,
but
sacrifices
of
thanksgiuing
or
prospe●ities
,
coulde
be
offred
for
the
absent
:
and
especially
for
the
vncircumcised
which
could
not
haue
remission
of
sinnes
,
before
they
were
ingraffed
into
the
people
of
God
,
but
temporall
benefites
at
the
prayers
of
Gods
people
they
might
obteine
.
As
for
children
,
sicke
,
captiues
,
&c.
they
might
haue
remission
of
sinnes
without
sacrifice
,
which
was
but
the
Sacrament
thereof
,
as
well
in
their
childhoode
,
sickenesse
,
captiuitie
,
when
they
coulde
not
offer
according
to
the
lawe
,
as
in
time
of
desolation
and
destruction
of
the
Temple
,
when
no
sacrifice
for
sinne
coulde
be
offered
by
any
or
for
any
,
but
onely
in
the
place
where
the
tabernacle
or
temple
was
.
Wherefore
the
sacrifice
of
Iudas
Machabaeus
wheresoeuer
hee
learned
it
,
hath
no
warrant
i●
the
law
.
The
fourth
argument
,
of
the
whole
scripture
negatiuely
to
conclude
,
I
saide
it
is
good
logike
,
after
this
manner
.
All
true
doctrine
is
taught
in
the
scripture
:
Purgatorie
is
not
taught
in
the
scripture
:
therefore
purgatorie
is
no
true
doctrine
.
Bristowe
denyeth
both
the
maior
and
minor
.
The
maior
I
haue
prooued
in
this
chapter
,
part
1.
after
the
examination
of
the
8.
text
of
scripture
.
The
minor
hee
would
prooue
to
be
false
by
these
reasons
.
First
purgatorie
is
taught
in
the
scripture
in
the
Machabees
,
Which
he
saith
is
in
the
canon
of
the
true
Church
,
which
I
also
confesse
,
to
be
the
true
Church
in
the
thirde
counce
〈…〉
of
Carthage
,
and
therefore
it
is
canonicall
,
if
any
other
scripture
be
Canonicall
.
Supposing
that
which
is
false
,
that
the
Macabees
were
canonicall
,
yet
is
not
Purgatorie
prooued
by
them
:
prayer
for
the
deade
doeth
not
necessarily
drawe
purgatorie
after
it
.
The
Grecians
of
longe
time
haue
vsed
prayer
for
the
deade
,
yet
they
doe
not
receiue
the
doctrine
of
purgatorie
.
But
to
prooue
the
Machabees
to
be
Canonical
,
he
citeth
the
third
councel
of
Carthage
,
wherein
the
two
bookes
of
Machabees
are
accounted
amongest
the
rest
.
But
there
are
also
fiue
bookes
of
Salomon
,
whereas
wee
knowe
there
are
onely
three
,
namely
the
Prouerbes
,
the
Canticles
and
the
Preacher
.
Therefore
that
canon
prooueth
a
manifest
error
of
the
councell
to
allowe
fiue
bookes
of
Salomon
in
steede
of
three
.
Let
Bristowe
now
bring
out
the
fourth
and
fifth
booke
of
Salomon
,
and
say
they
bee
Canonicall
,
if
any
other
scripture
bee
Cano
nicall
.
The
Councell
of
Laodicea
more
auncient
,
nameth
not
the
Machabees
.
Hierome
a
Priest
of
Rome
expressely
denyeth
them
to
bee
Canonicall
,
Praefatione
●n
Prouerbia
.
Ruffinus
also
,
in
his
exposition
of
the
Creede
,
affirmeth
the
Church
not
to
receiue
them
as
Canonicall
:
beside
so
many
argumentes
as
the
bookes
them selues
,
doe
minister
which
agree
,
that
they
were
writen
by
the
spirite
of
man
,
and
not
by
the
spirite
of
God
.
To
proceede
,
Bristow
saith
that
purgatory
is
taught
so
plainely
1.
Iohn
5.
that
I
could
not
auoyde
the
place
but
by
falling
into
this
horrible
absurditie
,
that
wee
may
not
praye
for
all
men
liuing
.
I
saide
in
deede
we
ought
not
to
pray
for
them
that
sinne
vnto
death
,
of
which
Iohn
saith
:
I
say
not
that
you
shoulde
pray
for
it
,
or
that
any
man
should
pray
for
it
,
as
your
vulgar
translation
hath
it
:
But
howe
it
is
prooued
out
of
that
place
,
he
saith
neuer
a
worde
.
Last
of
all
purgatorie
is
taught
(
saith
Bristowe
)
Specially
against
you
sir.
Iohn
11.
For
you
say
after
your
manner
passing
confidently
,
that
Martha
and
Marie
(
as
the
scripture
is
manifest
)
did
not
hope
for
any
restitution
of
their
brother
Lazarus
to
his
bodie
,
before
the
generall
resurrection
.
If
that
bee
so
manifest
,
what
else
was
it
then
but
the
rest
of
his
soule
that
Martha
woulde
haue
Christ
to
pray
for
,
when
shee
saide
thus
,
vnto
him
:
But
also
nowe
I
knowe
that
what
soeuer
thinges
,
thou
shalte
aske
of
God
,
God
will
graunt
thee
?
To
which
purpose
also
some
auncient
writers
expounde
the
place
.
Thus
farre
Bristowe
.
But
I
pray
you
sir
,
why
doe
you
not
tell
vs
the
names
at
least
of
those
auncient
writers
that
so
expounde
the
place
;
Peraduenture
they
were
not
worth
the
naming
.
But
are
you
such
a
cunning
disputer
ex
concessis
,
to
wrest
that
I
say
of
Martha
and
Marie
before
the
comming
of
Christe
,
to
all
times
after
?
as
though
I
sayd
,
that
they
neuer
hoped
for
their
brothers
restitution
,
because
they
hoped
not
before
Christe
came
to
Bethanie
,
as
Allen
impudently
coniectureth
,
that
Lazatus
was
restored
to
his
bodye
at
their
prayers
made
at
his
tombe
:
where
there
is
no
mention
of
any
prayers
,
but
of
lamentation
only
.
I
can
not
tel
whether
I
shuld
here
require
in
you
more
wit
or
honestie
,
or
else
lesse
impudence
,
&
malice
.
But
this
was
your
purpose
of
cauilling
and
quarilling
,
when
you
durst
not
attempt
the
confutation
of
my
bookein
such
plaine
order
as
I
aunswered
Allen
,
but
in
this
confuse
manner
,
to
bring
all
my
argumentes
first
out
of
ioynt
,
and
then
to
play
with
them
at
your
pleasure
.
2
Ab
authoritate
scripturae
,
affirmatiuè
First
about
certaine
foundations
of
purgatorie
,
and
prayer
for
the
dead
.
I
saide
,
the
worde
of
God
ouerthroweth
the
popish
distinction
of
sinnes
mortall
&
Veniall
,
shewing
that
Againe
,
euery
one
,
in
the
saying
of
the
Apostle
,
is
not
meant
of
Christians
,
but
of
them
,
which
trust
in
the
lawe
it selfe
&c.
Doe
you
not
heare
playnely
the
olde
serpentes
voyce
,
Nequaquam
moriemini
:
Tush
you
shall
not
die
,
the
curse
of
God
doeth
not
bring
eternall
death
,
you
neede
not
be
so
greatly
affraide
of
it
,
&
c
?
But
where
learned
you
Bristowe
,
that
the
curse
of
God
,
which
is
vppon
him
that
hangeth
on
tree
,
is
not
a
visible
token
,
that
hee
deserueth
eternall
death
?
Is
●ot
the
text
plaine
against
you
,
Deut.
21.
When
a
man
●ath
sinned
worthy
of
death
,
and
is
iudged
to
death
,
&
●anged
on
the
tree
,
his
carcase
shall
not
remaine
vppon
〈…〉
e
tree
,
but
shal
be
buryed
the
same
day
,
for
he
is
accur
〈…〉
d
of
God
that
is
hanged
on
the
tree
:
therefore
thou
〈…〉
alt
not
defile
the
lande
which
the
Lord
thy
God
hath
●iuen
thee
to
possesse
.
He
is
not
therefore
accursed
,
be●ause
he
is
hanged
on
the
tree
,
if
he
were
innocent
;
but
●ecause
he
hath
sinned
worthie
of
death
,
&
so
is
hanged
:
〈◊〉
which
respecte
our
sauiour
Christ
,
being
hanged
on
〈…〉
e
tree
,
though
most
innocent
in
his
owne
person
,
〈…〉
et
bearing
the
guiltinesse
of
all
our
sinnes
,
became
●ccursed
for
vs
,
not
to
discharge
vs
of
such
a
curse
〈◊〉
did
not
bring
eternall
death
(
but
by
your
imagi
〈…〉tion
might
fall
vppon
an
innocent
person
)
but
〈◊〉
redeeme
vs
from
the
curse
of
the
lawe
,
whiche
wee
●aue
incurred
more
then
tenne
thousand
times
through
〈…〉
r
manifolde
sinnes
and
transgressions
.
And
that
〈…〉
e
curse
pronounced
Deuteronom.
27.
bringeth
with
it
〈…〉
e
payne
of
eternall
death
,
I
wishe
euerie
man
〈…〉
at
will
not
bee
deceyued
,
with
the
flattering
voyce
〈…〉
f
the
Serpent
,
to
giue
eare
to
the
worde
of
GOD
,
●here
hee
shall
see
,
that
this
is
a
conclusion
of
the
〈…〉
rses
,
solemnely
to
bee
pronounced
by
the
Levites
,
〈◊〉
which
Amen
was
to
be
aunswered
of
all
the
people
:
●gainst
idolaters
,
cursers
of
parents
,
murtherers
,
ince〈…〉uous
uous
persons
,
remouers
of
their
neighbours
markes
,
oppressors
of
the
fatherlesse
and
straungers
,
&c.
and
generally
against
all
transgressours
of
the
Lawe
,
vnto
whome
the
curse
of
eternall
damnation
is
threatned
●n
the
same
wordes
'
,
that
it
is
to
the
rest
.
Marke
also
,
where
the
Apostle
to
the
Galath
3.
by
this
curse
,
pro●eth
all
them
that
bee
vnder
the
lawe
,
to
be
subiect●
vnto
this
curse
,
howe
the
serpent
denying
this
curse
to
bee
the
assurance
of
eternall
death
,
maketh
the
case
of
them
to
bee
nothing
so
daungerous
,
but
continuing
vnder
the
Lawe
,
they
may
auoyde
eternall
death
.
And
where
he
saith
euerie
one
in
the
Epistle
,
is
not
meant
of
Christians
,
I
woulde
knowe
of
him
whether
the
Galathians
,
to
whome
saint
Paule
writeth
,
were
not
Christians
,
but
yet
seduced
by
false
Apostles
,
to
take
vpon
them
the
obseruation
of
the
lawe
,
which
as
it
was
impossible
,
so
it
would
bring
them
from
the
blessing
of
Christ
,
vnto
the
curse
of
God
.
That
true
Christians
are
discharged
of
this
curse
,
it
is
by
the
onely
merite
of
Christes
satisfaction
,
and
not
that
the
sinnes
themselues
deserue
not
euerlasting
death
,
though
they
b●●
neuer
so
small
of
their
owne
nature
,
by
the
sentence
of
Gods
curse
,
which
is
a
iust
rewarde
for
transgression
.
Heb.
2.
The
two
other
places
that
I
cite
for
this
purpose
:
The
soule
that
sinneth
shall
dye
:
Ezech.
18.
and
,
the
rewarde
of
sinne
is
death
:
Rom.
6.
he
will
expounde
by
the
saying
of
saint
Iames
Chapt.
1.
sinne
when
it
is
consummate
,
gendreth
death
:
as
though
this
place
of
S.
Iames
denyed
sinne
,
not
brought
into
acte
,
to
deserue
death
,
because
shewing
that
the
cause
of
mens
destruction
i●
in
themselues
,
from
the
first
concupisence
to
the
laste
and
grosest
Acte
,
hee
concludeth
that
those
grosse
acts
bring
a
man
into
eternall
death
.
Our
sauiour
Christe
saith
,
this
is
condemnation
,
that
light
is
come
into
the
worlde
,
and
men
haue
loued
darknes
rather
then
light
.
Were
it
not
good
Logike
and
Diuinitie
also
,
of
this
place
to
conclude
,
that
condemnation
perteineth
not
to
men
,
but
where
the
light
offered
is
refused
;
or
that
if
Christ
had
not
come
,
none
had
ben
condemned
?
Iohn
.
3.
and
likewise
,
yea
much
rather
,
wher
Christ
saith
:
If
I
had
not
come
and
spoken
vnto
them
,
they
shoulde
not
haue
had
sinne
?
Iohn
.
15.
Were
the
obstinate
Iewes
cleare
of
sinne
by
Bristowes
iudgement
,
before
Christ
came
?
But
let
vs
examine
his
reason
.
It
is
sinne
(
saith
he
)
as
soone
as
it
is
gendred
,
but
it
gendreth
not
death
so
so
one
as
it
is
gendred
:
Therefore
some
sinne
there
is
,
that
gendreth
notd
each
.
The
minor
is
false
,
for
Sainct
Iames
,
saying
that
sinne
consummat
gendreth
death
,
doth
not
say
that
sinne
gendreth
not
death
,
so
soone
as
it
is
gendred
.
But
beholde
yet
his
impudent
wresting
of
the
scripture
,
hee
addeth
also
an
exception
,
vnto
sinne
consummat
,
that
not
euery
sinne
consummat
gendreth
death
,
except
the
matter
bee
of
weight
accordingly
.
For
els
that
the
lightnesse
of
the
matter
,
as
an
idle
worde
bringeth
not
death
,
hee
sufficiently
signifieth
in
saying
,
that
in
a
weightie
matter
,
the
lightnesse
or
imperfection
of
consent
doth
it
not
.
These
are
his
wordes
,
by
which
you
may
see
,
that
without
all
shame
,
hee
imputeth
such
sayings
to
Sainct
Iames
,
as
hee
can
finde
neuer
a
worde
in
hi●
,
sounde
like
such
〈◊〉
saying
.
But
this
is
the
manner
of
heretikes
,
which
learne
not
all
trueth
out
of
the
Scriptures
to
bring
their
opinion
to
the
scripture
,
and
to
inforce
the
wordes
thereof
,
against
all
equitie
,
to
signifie
and
say
,
whatsoeuer
it
pleaseth
them
.
Nowe
that
saint
Iames
holdeth
that
euerie
sinne
deserueth
death
,
I
will
proue
out
of
his
owne
saying
,
by
this
argument
:
Whosoeuer
is
guiltie
of
all
the
lawe
and
commaundements
,
deserueth
eternall
death
:
Whosoeuer
offendeth
in
one
,
is
guiltie
of
all
:
therefore
whosoeuer
offendeth
in
one
,
deserueth
eternall
death
.
The
maior
I
truste
you
will
graunt
:
The
minor
is
Sainct
Iames
cap.
2.
Whosoeuer
shall
keepe
the
whole
lawe
,
and
offende
but
in
one
pointe
,
hee
is
guiltie
of
all
:
Then
seeing
euerie
sinne
is
a
breach
of
Gods
Lawe
,
as
Sainct
Iohn
affirmeth
,
Iohn
3.
not
onely
greate
sinnes
,
but
also
small
sinnes
,
wherein
soeuer
men
offende
against
the
lawe
of
GOD
deserue
eternall
death
,
which
cannot
bee
auoyded
but
by
remission
for
Christes
sake
:
for
bee
the
sinne
neuer
so
small
,
it
is
committed
against
GOD
the
authour
of
the
Lawe
,
who
thereby
hath
forbidden
all
sinnes
,
which
reason
the
Apostle
vseth
,
to
prooue
that
hee
which
offendeth
in
one
,
is
guiltie
of
all
.
And
therefore
the
textes
by
mee
alleged
doe
sufficiently
proue
,
that
all
sinnes
of
their
owne
nature
are
mortall
.
Whether
after
sinne
remitted
,
payne
may
remayne
.
That
God
remitteth
the
punishment
,
with
the
fault
,
in
respect
whereof
the
punishment
is
due
,
I
proue
by
The
fatherly
pytie
of
GOD
towardes
vs
as
his
children
which
keepe
his
couenant
and
are
mindefull
of
his
commaundements
to
doe
them
,
is
there
set
forth
,
which
euery
man
that
is
not
blinde
with
hereticall
malice
,
will
acknowledge
to
bee
extended
towarde
vs
in
this
life
,
&
therefore
also
the
forgiuenesse
of
our
sinnes
,
and
remouing
of
them
as
farre
as
Heauen
from
earth
,
and
East
from
West
.
As
for
the
argument
of
singing
that
Psalme
in
the
popishe
Church
,
vppon
the
feaste
of
Christs
ascension
,
to
proue
,
that
it
pertayneth
altogether
to
the
later
day
,
is
as
good
,
as
it
is
true
,
●hat
the
wordes
there
spoken
,
are
onely
of
our
finall
●estitution
at
the
later
day
.
To
the
example
of
the
publican
,
hee
aunswereth
●hat
there
is
no
more
saide
,
but
that
hee
went
home
●ustified
more
then
the
Pharisee
.
yes
,
there
is
saide
,
that
●ee
was
iustified
by
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
,
which
hee
●onfessed
,
not
trusting
in
him selfe
that
hee
was
●ighteous
,
although
hee
ascribed
all
his
vertues
to
the
grace
of
GOD
as
the
Pharisee
did
:
O
GOD
I
thanke
thee
&c.
Iumpe
with
the
Papistes
,
Luke
18.
But
Bristowe
asketh
me
,
howe
I
proue
that
hee
which
is
iu●tified
may
not
bee
in
some
debt
?
seeing
all
the
iu●tified
children
of
GOD
,
are
taught
to
pray
,
forgiue
●s
our
debtes
.
I
proue
it
thus
.
Hee
that
is
by
GOD
●ustified
,
is
accounted
for
iust
:
But
hee
that
is
iuste
,
is
●n
no
debte
for
sinne
:
therefore
he
that
is
iustified
,
is
in
●o
debte
for
sinne
.
That
the
faithfull
are
taught
to
●raye
daylie
,
forgiue
vs
our
debtes
,
it
is
because
they
●inne
daylie
,
and
by
sinne
enter
into
debte
,
and
there●ore
haue
neede
of
dayly
remission
to
continue
iusti●ied
.
The
Prodigall
childe
Luke
15.
hee
saithe
,
is
the
Gentile
receiued
by
baptisme
,
who
if
after
baptisme
he
became
prodigall
,
hee
saith
,
I
haue
not
proued
,
that
being
receiued
by
penaunce
,
wee
must
enioyne
him
no
more
punishment
,
then
at
his
other
receiuing
.
Beside
that
he
restrayning
this
parable
onely
to
Gentiles
,
comming
first
to
Baptisme
,
depriueth
the
faithfull
of
inestimable
comforte
,
hee
neither
hath
any
worde
in
the
scripture
so
to
restrayne
it
,
and
the
whole
contexte
is
against
him
.
For
Saincte
Luke
sheweth
the
occasion
of
the
three
parables
of
the
loste
sheepe
,
of
the
loste
Groate
,
and
of
the
prodigall
Childe
,
to
haue
beene
,
because
the
Scribes
and
Pharisees
murmured
,
that
he
receiued
the
Publicanes
,
and
sinners
,
which
all
were
Iewes
and
circumcised
,
yet
fallen
from
the
couenant
of
God
by
infinite
and
notorious
sinnes
:
therefore
according
to
right
analogie
,
the
lost
Childe
,
euen
as
the
lost
sheepe
,
and
lost
Groate
,
is
euerie
penitent
sinner
;
the
elder
brother
,
as
the
99.
sheepe
,
and
9.
groates
are
the
Scribes
and
Pharisees
,
which
through
hypocrisy
in
their
owne
iudgement
,
are
righteous
and
neede
no
repentaunce
.
To
the
2.
debters
Luke
7.
he
answereth
,
that
although
Christ
forgaue
them
both
,
yet
they
both
had
to
be
forgiuen
after
,
according
to
the
proportion
of
their
loue
.
This
importeth
manifest
contradiction
,
he
forgaue
all
,
yet
something
was
not
forgiuen
.
Yea
saith
Bristowe
,
Marie
had
much
sinnes
forgiuen
her
,
because
she
loued
much
,
and
therefore
long
after
her
hartes
conuersion
,
and
therefore
after
her
first
forgiuenesse
,
Christe
sayeth
:
Thy
sinnes
are
forgiuen
thee
.
This
is
a
strange
kinde
of
reasoning
.
Christe
shewing
the
cause
of
Maries
great
loue
,
to
haue
bene
for
that
great
sinnes
were
forgiuen
her
,
expresseth
in
voyce
,
that
which
she
before
conceiued
by
faith
,
that
her
sinnes
were
forgiuen
her
,
Ergo
after
her
first
forgiuenes
,
she
had
need
of
a
second
,
which
she
procured
by
loue
.
And
yet
it
is
more
fonde
,
that
in
saying
to
Simon
and
of
Simon
the
Pharisee
:
To
whom
lesse
is
forgiuen
,
he
loueth
lesse
,
he
giueth
him
to
vnderstand
,
that
he
owed
more
then
he
was
aware
,
and
therefore
he
should
increase
as
Marie
did
in
penitentiall
loue
.
First
howe
proueth
he
that
Simon
was
this
other
detter
,
to
whom
lesse
was
forgiuen
?
Secondly
,
admit
that
he
was
,
howe
proueth
he
,
that
he
should
shewe
as
great
penitentiall
loue
as
Marie
,
seeing
his
debt
was
not
so
great
as
Maries
,
and
therefore
needed
not
so
great
a
proportion
of
his
loue
,
according
to
his
owne
heresie
of
merite
?
Thirdly
,
when
Christe
sayeth
,
To
whom
lesse
is
forgiuen
he
loueth
lesse
,
he
speaketh
not
so
much
of
the
quantitie
of
sinnes
,
but
the
acknowledging
of
them
greater
or
lesser
.
For
he
that
confesseth
great
sinnes
to
be
pardoned
,
acknowledgeth
that
he
is
bound
to
great
loue
,
as
Marie
did
:
the
Pharisee
,
who
,
though
his
sinnes
were
as
great
as
Maries
,
&
in
GODS
sight
,
by
meanes
of
hypocrisie
more
abhominable
,
yet
was
so
blinded
in
opinion
of
his
owne
righteousnesse
,
that
he
sawe
them
not
,
and
therefore
this
loue
was
as
colde
,
as
he
imagined
his
sinnes
forgiuen
to
be
fewe
and
small
.
Thus
the
historie
of
the
sinneful
womans
great
loue
,
proueth
nothing
that
punishment
remayneth
due
to
be
payed
after
the
debt
is
forgiuen
.
Whether
this
woman
were
Marie
Magdalen
,
as
Brîstowe
calleth
her
,
I
wil
not
here
dispute
.
Saint
Luke
giueth
her
no
name
.
Whether
Purgatorie
follow
vpon
this
last
foundation
.
The
foundation
is
ouerthrowen
,
for
all
sinnes
are
Concerning
those
that
repent
at
the
houre
of
death
,
I
sayde
they
haue
rewarde
of
eternall
life
,
as
well
as
they
that
repent
sooner
,
by
authoritie
of
the
parable
Matthew
20.
of
them
that
came
the
last
houre
,
to
worke
in
the
vineyarde
.
Bristow
saith
,
I
am
deceiued
,
because
I
cannot
see
any
iustice
in
mercie
.
Yes
verily
,
I
see
the
iustice
of
God
fully
answered
in
Christ
,
not
in
the
person
that
needeth
mercie
,
who
is
pardoned
and
iustified
gratis
freely
,
Rom.
3.
&
11.
But
the
spirite
of
God
sayeth
,
Apoc.
2.
that
he
will
giue
to
euery
one
of
you
according
to
his
workes
:
wherevpon
Bristowe
inferreth
,
the
God
is
not
alike
good
to
al
,
that
he
hath
once
shewed
mercie
vnto
,
for
Christ
,
to
all
the
baptised
.
I
aunswere
that
texte
is
a
threatning
to
Iesabel
,
&
them
that
commit
fornication
with
her
,
if
they
do
not
repent
from
their
workes
.
For
it
foloweth
immediately
.
But
to
you
I
say
and
the
rest
in
Thyatei●●
,
that
haue
not
this
doctrine
,
and
which
haue
not
knowen
the
deapth
of
Satan
,
as
they
say
,
I
wil
not
lay
vpon
you
any
other
burthen
,
&c.
although
it
be
true
,
that
God
rewardeth
euery
man
according
to
his
workes
,
which
is
in
qualitie
good
or
euill
,
not
in
quantitie
as
much
or
as
little
as
they
deserue
.
What
shall
I
say
that
Bristowe
bringeth
in
a
varietie
of
pence
,
contrary
to
the
scope
of
the
parable
,
&
affirmeth
the
pence
to
be
wages
for
the
working
&
that
also
by
bargaine
?
So
that
eternall
life
is
not
the
gift
of
God
,
neither
are
men
saued
by
grace
&
not
of
workes
,
in
his
iudgement
,
contrary
to
the
Apostles
plaine
doctrine
.
Eph.
2.
In
the
conclusion
he
saith
,
If
you
can
prooue
that
God
will
shewe
as
full
mercie
also
where
he
findeth
not
that
fulnesse
of
Christes
grace
,
then
call
vs
hardly
enimies
,
for
not
suffering
God
to
shewe
mercie
to
whom
he
will
.
But
where
wanteth
that
fulnesse
of
Christes
grace
,
in
any
of
Gods
electe
?
Is
it
where
greatest
sinnes
be
?
The
Apostle
answereth
,
where
sinne
hath
abounded
,
grace
hath
more
then
abounded
.
Rom.
5.
Wherfore
the
fulnesse
of
the
grace
of
Christ
being
extended
to
the
greatest
sins
,
what
should
we
doubt
that
the
lesser
should
not
be
swallowed
vp
of
it
?
Whether
in
Christ
the
workes
of
one
may
helpe
another
.
I
saide
Purg.
198.
I
haue
learned
in
the
scripture
,
that
To
whom
I
aunswere
as
I
saide
before
,
to
Allen
:
I
learne
in
scripture
,
that
the
bloud
of
Christe
purgeth
vs
from
all
sinne
,
Iohn
.
1.
But
if
there
be
any
which
are
not
purged
of
all
their
sinnes
,
by
the
bloud
of
Christe
,
(
as
the
Papistes
affirme
them
to
be
which
haue
neede
of
other
purgation
)
I
haue
not
learned
that
they
can
haue
any
helpe
elsewhere
.
Or
if
you
say
,
the
bloud
of
Christ
h●th
purged
them
from
all
sinne
,
why
doe
you
invent
another
purgatory
to
purge
them
,
which
is
not
the
bloud
of
Christ
?
for
fierie
torments
according
to
Gods
iustice
are
not
the
bloud
of
Christ
shed
for
our
redemption
,
by
which
men
are
iustified
freely
,
Rom.
3.
through
which
we
haue
remission
of
our
sinnes
through
the
riches
of
his
grace
.
Eph.
1.
Another
reason
of
mine
is
grounded
vpon
Allens
wordes
,
which
saith
:
that
they
which
are
in
purgatory
,
can
not
by
any
motion
of
minde
,
attaine
more
mercie
,
then
their
life
past
deserued
.
Whereof
I
inferre
,
that
their
faith
being
a
notable
motion
of
the
minde
,
cannot
profite
them
,
except
the
merites
of
other
men
should
profite
them
without
faith
,
the
Scripture
saying
,
that
without
faith
,
it
is
not
possible
to
please
God
.
Bristowe
icsting
at
these
iron
conclusions
,
letteth
the
argument
stand
,
and
denyeth
the
latter
conclusion
,
affirming
that
by
their
faith
,
they
are
in
case
to
be
profited
by
other
mens
workes
:
which
if
it
be
true
,
then
is
Allens
conclusion
false
,
that
they
can
not
profite
them selues
,
by
any
motion
of
minde
,
whereon
it
will
followe
that
they
cannot
profite
them selues
by
beleeuing
,
that
other
mens
workes
may
helpe
them
,
beeing
destitute
of
their
owne
.
They
cannot
atteine
mercie
by
any
motion
of
minde
,
Ergo
not
by
faith
.
Fulkes
common
argument
of
the
Omnisufficiencie
of
Christes
As
though
I
defended
the
onely
omnipotencie
of
No
sir
,
for
against
him
,
is
not
onely
the
wil
of
Christ
,
but
his
Act
also
past
,
hauing
sufficiently
onely
for
his
elect
:
which
satisfaction
he
communicateth
vnto
them
,
not
in
respecte
of
their
workes
,
but
according
to
his
grace
,
whiche
can
abide
no
workes
to
ioyne
with
it
in
merite
,
but
onely
faith
in
receiuing
confirmed
by
the
sacramentes
in
the
persons
of
all
them
,
that
heare
his
word
,
and
in
them
that
cannot
heare
,
only
his
grace
working
either
in
the
sacrament
or
without
it
:
so
that
no
degrees
,
proportions
,
meanes
or
instruments
,
wherof
Bristow
babbleth
,
can
make
any
merite
to
detract
from
Christs
death
,
the
most
plentiful
&
free
grace
of
satisfaction
,
for
all
our
sins
committed
either
before
baptisme
,
or
after
.
For
this
purpose
,
I
cited
1.
Iohn
.
2.
Pur.
42.
to
proue
that
if
any
man
sinne
after
baptisme
,
Iesus
Christ
is
our
Advocate
with
the
father
,
and
the
propitiation
for
our
sinnes
.
Bristow
answereth
,
That
is
true
,
But
that
in
playing
the
Advocate
for
our
sinnes
after
baptisme
,
he
request●th
the
like
&
equal
grace
,
as
he
did
in
baptisme
for
sinnes
afore
baptisme
,
where
haue
you
that
?
If
you
make
Christes
advocation
a
playing
matter
,
I
will
take
no
charge
of
you
.
But
to
let
passe
your
vnreuerent
phrase
,
what
doe
you
ascribe
vnto
him
in
his
office
of
advocate
,
but
onely
to
be
a
requester
,
as
euery
common
Saint
is
counted
with
you
?
But
you
must
vnderstande
,
that
the
office
of
an
Advocate
or
patrone
is
,
to
pleade
for
his
clientes
,
and
not
to
require
only
,
and
what
hath
he
to
pleade
for
vs
against
the
debte
of
our
sins
,
either
before
or
after
baptism
but
his
owne
satisfaction
in
his
death
&
suffering
?
And
therefore
euen
that
which
you
aske
,
where
I
haue
i●
I
haue
euen
in
the
very
same
words
,
that
he
requesteth
as
an
advocate
,
for
our
sins
after
baptisme
the
like
and
equall
grace
,
as
he
did
in
Baptisme
for
sinns
afore
baptisme
.
For
there
I
finde
him
a
propitiation
for
our
sinnes
committed
after
baptisme
,
which
word
I
maruel
your
blind
heresie
could
not
see
,
whereof
I
reason
thus
.
The
same
propitiation
,
as
course
of
grace
working
after
baptisme
,
that
was
in
or
before
baptisme
,
must
haue
equall
effectes
of
grace
:
But
Christ
is
the
same
propitiation
after
Baptisme
that
he
was
in
it
,
or
before
:
Ergo
he
must
haue
the
same
effectes
of
grace
,
working
the
satisfaction
of
our
sinnes
euen
at
the
full
.
Where
I
alledge
Purg.
9●
.
that
the
bloud
of
Christ
purgeth
vs
from
all
our
sins
:
1.
Ioh.
1.
Bristowe
answereth
,
It
is
taken
out
of
the
same
place
,
and
ha●h
the
same
answere
,
to
wit
,
that
his
bloud
doth
worke
more
graciously
in
the
sacrament
of
baptisme
,
then
in
the
sacrament
of
penance
.
Of
pe●ance
being
a
sacrament
,
I
wil
not
here
dispute
,
but
fol●owe
the
principall
matter
in
controuersie
,
whether
all
●innes
of
the
repentant
,
after
baptisme
,
be
as
clearly
purged
,
as
they
were
in
baptisme
by
the
bloud
of
Christ
.
Although
the
propitiation
in
the
former
argument
,
doth
●ufficiently
proue
it
,
yet
euen
this
very
place
is
manifest●y
to
be
vnderstood
of
the
bloud
of
Christ
purging
all
our
sinnes
committed
after
baptisme
,
as
well
as
before
.
The
bloud
of
Christ
,
saith
S.
Iohn
purgeth
vs
,
that
is
,
me
&
you
(
baptized
Christians
,
I
doubt
not
)
of
al
sinne
,
which
if
we
say
we
haue
not
,
we
deceiue
our selues
,
and
the
trueth
is
not
in
vs
.
The
worde
is
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
doth
make
pure
and
cleane
,
and
so
is
the
vulgar
latine
emundat
.
Againe
he
saith
in
the
same
place
:
if
we
confesse
our
sins
,
●e
is
faithful
and
iust
that
he
may
forgiue
vs
our
sinnes
,
and
make
vs
pure
from
all
iniquitie
.
If
the
bloud
of
Christ
,
in
which
we
haue
forgiuenesse
,
doeth
purge
vs
from
all
our
sinnes
,
and
make
vs
pure
from
all
iniqui●ie
,
whensoeuer
we
acknowledge
them
with
hartie
repentance
;
what
place
is
left
for
any
other
purging
or
clensing
of
that
,
which
the
bloud
of
Christ
and
the
mercie
of
God
hath
made
pure
and
cleane
?
That
I
cite
out
of
S.
Iohn
,
being
washed
by
Christ
,
we
are
throughly
cleane
.
Iohn
13.
&
out
of
Esay
:
Although
our
sinnes
were
as
red
as
scarlet
,
they
are
made
as
white
as
snowe
:
He
answereth
these
places
are
euident
of
baptisme
.
And
therefore
he
admitteth
that
I
sayd
of
them
so
clensed
,
that
they
are
made
capable
immediatly
of
the
heauenly
inheritance
.
But
why
,
I
pray
you
,
are
they
euident
of
baptisme
?
because
there
is
mention
of
washing
in
both
places
?
Is
there
no
washing
but
in
baptisme
?
At
least
wise
,
will
you
saye
,
that
the
Prophet
Esay
preaching
to
the
people
of
his
age
,
when
hee
called
them
to
washing
,
called
them
to
baptisme
,
so
manye
hundreth
yeares
before
baptisme
was
instituted
?
Is
it
not
therefore
euident
,
that
hee
calleth
them
to
repentaunce
?
Or
else
,
hauing
first
so
grieuously
accused
them
of
their
present
sinnes
,
doeth
he
shewe
no
comfort
,
but
in
the
sacrament
of
baptisme
,
which
no
man
liuing
could
then
possibly
obteine
in
such
manner
as
you
meane
,
no
not
the
Prophet
him selfe
.
I
might
well
say
to
you
,
as
you
say
to
mee
in
another
place
,
In
good
sooth
Dauus
,
these
things
are
not
aptly
diuided
according
to
their
times
.
And
that
Christ
Iohn
.
13.
speaketh
not
of
the
ceremonie
of
baptisme
,
it
i●
manifest
by
diuerse
reasons
,
but
of
his
grace
by
which
he
washeth
vs
from
all
our
sinnes
.
And
therefore
be
sayth
to
Peter
,
except
he
were
washed
of
him
,
he
coulde
haue
no
part
with
him
.
But
neither
Peter
,
nor
any
other
was
or
is
baptised
of
him
with
water
:
Iohn
4.
therfore
he
speaketh
not
of
the
sacrament
of
baptisme
.
And
where
you
adde
,
that
he
which
is
so
washed
,
must
neuerthelesse
wash
his
feete
,
that
is
,
say
you
,
his
veniall
sinnes
,
which
he
committeth
afterwarde
,
although
he
continue
withall
in
the
cleannesse
of
baptisme
,
before
he
be
all
cleane
,
and
aske
mee
,
what
if
he
dye
before
he
wash
his
feete
?
Admitting
that
the
feete
should
signifie
none
but
veniall
sinnes
.
I
aske
you
againe
,
who
shall
wash
his
feete
,
but
he
which
washed
Peters
feet
?
for
the
true
text
is
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
he
hath
no
neede
but
that
his
feete
be
washed
.
Peter
could
not
wash
his
owne
feete
in
this
figuratiue
signification
,
but
except
Christ
did
wash
him
he
could
haue
no
part
with
him
.
But
if
we
should
take
the
feete
onely
for
veniall
sinnes
,
and
the
generall
washing
for
baptisme
,
this
inconuenience
would
follow
of
Christes
wordes
:
that
he
which
is
baptised
and
purged
from
veniall
sinnes
,
neede
no
purgation
to
clense
him
from
mortall
sinnes
,
but
is
perfectly
cleare
.
The
wordes
of
our
sauiour
are
generall
,
&
cannot
admitt
your
exception
,
of
continuing
in
the
cleannesse
of
baptisme
:
therefore
the
feete
signifie
all
sinnes
to
be
pardoned
,
after
the
first
grace
purging
vs
,
which
is
in
deede
represented
and
ratified
in
baptisme
,
but
yet
is
perfectly
distinct
from
the
sacrament
,
and
often
times
deuided
.
For
Iudas
of
whome
you
speake
,
if
he
had
dyed
immediatly
after
he
was
baptised
,
should
not
haue
gone
to
heauen
,
as
one
throughly
washed
or
clensed
by
●aptisme
.
Where
the
Papists
vrge
the
saying
of
Dauid
,
Psal.
●1.
Amplius
laua
me
,
&c.
Wash
me
more
from
mine
in●quitie
:
Bristow
saith
,
I
haue
nothing
to
answeare
,
but
●hat
it
was
at
Gods
hand
,
and
by
the
meanes
of
Christes
●lood
,
that
he
prayed
to
be
clensed
.
Purg.
97.
&
78.
Whether
I
haue
nothing
else
to
say
,
let
the
readers
of
●hose
places
iudge
.
But
that
which
I
here
saye
,
taketh
a●ay
Purgatorie
and
all
satisfaction
of
mans
merite
,
al●hough
Dauid
,
as
all
the
faithfull
do
pray
,
that
they
may
●aily
more
and
more
feele
the
mercy
of
God
and
grace
●f
Christes
redemption
,
to
the
full
satisfying
of
their
●onscience
,
and
perfect
assurance
of
faith
and
hope
of
e●ernall
life
,
which
though
it
receiue
daily
increases
,
yet
●he
vertue
of
Christes
death
,
in
which
God
is
reconciled
●nto
vs
,
is
alwayes
one
and
the
same
.
Where
I
charge
Allen
,
that
the
sufficiencie
of
Christs
●assion
,
is
counted
a
light
argument
vnto
him
:
Bristow
●aith
,
it
is
too
light
in
deede
,
to
beare
downe
any
doctrin
●f
Christ
.
But
when
,
or
out
of
what
scripture
shal
wee
●eare
the
doctrine
of
Christ
for
mens
merites
,
satisfa●tions
,
propitiatorie
,
or
purgatorie
it selfe
?
Where
I
denye
,
that
our
workes
are
any
parte
of
sa●isfaction
for
our
sinnes
,
of
which
the
price
is
through●y
payed
in
the
passion
of
Christ
:
Bristow
obiecteth
the
●aying
of
the
Apostle
,
Phil.
2.
Worke
your
owne
saluation
:
and
yet
it
is
God
that
worketh
in
you
.
As
though
there
were
no
working
of
our
saluation
,
but
by
satisfaction
for
our
sinnes
.
Wee
worke
our
saluation
,
when
we
walke
in
the
way
that
God
hath
called
vs
to
passe
through
,
vnto
the
free
gift
of
eternall
life
,
namely
in
faith
,
obedience
,
thankfulnes
,
&c.
which
are
so
farre
from
merite
,
that
it
is
God
which
worketh
in
vs
,
both
to
will
and
to
perfourme
any
good
thing
,
according
to
his
good
pleasure
.
Phil.
2.
And
therefore
wee
neede
not
the
schoole
distinction
of
causes
,
for
the
satisfaction
of
our
sinnes
by
our
workes
,
which
is
onely
the
effect
of
Christes
death
and
passion
,
needing
no
helpe
of
our
workes
,
which
worde
(
Bristowe
sayth
)
mine
ignorance
so
much
abhorreth
,
and
yet
the
scripture
often
sayth
,
that
God
helpeth
both
Christ
,
Ps.
17.
&
vs
.
2.
Cor.
2.
Heb.
13.
and
also
that
Christs
helpeth
vs
,
Heb.
2.
But
where
sayeth
the
Scripture
,
that
our
workes
helpe
the
passion
of
Christ
?
I
abhorre
not
the
worde
of
helping
,
when
it
is
vsed
in
that
sense
,
that
God
and
Christ
should
helpe
vs
;
or
God
helpe
Christ
in
respect
of
his
humanitie
:
but
that
man
by
merite
should
helpe
God
&
Christ
,
in
the
worke
of
our
redemption
,
satisfaction
for
our
sinnes
,
or
purging
of
them
,
I
abho●●e
with
all
my
heart
:
yea
,
I
spit
at
it
,
and
tread
it
vnder
my
feete
.
But
if
the
mercie
of
God
(
saith
Bristowe
)
although
i●
be
singularly
omnisufficient
doth
not
exclude
neither
Christs
passion
,
nor
the
working
of
it
,
or
merites
of
that
man
:
how
doeth
the
omnisufficiencie
of
Christs
passion
,
enforte
you
to
exclude
either
his
baptisme
&
his
good
workes
in
his
members
,
or
also
the
working
of
his
baptisme
,
and
the
working
or
efficacie
of
those
good
works
▪
especially
seeing
the
scripture
is
plaine
for
all
.
Bristow
vnderstandeth
not
,
how
the
mercie
of
God
is
omnisufficient
,
which
is
not
as
e●ery
one
will
imagine
,
but
as
it
may
stande
with
his
iustice
,
which
is
not
otherwise
satisfied
,
but
in
the
passion
of
Christ
:
which
being
thereby
fully
satisfied
,
we
exclude
nothing
that
the
scripture
admitteth
,
but
that
which
not
onely
the
scripture
denyeth
,
but
nature
it selfe
abhorreth
,
that
contradictories
should
be
both
true
:
Namely
,
the
iustice
of
God
is
fully
satisfied
by
the
onely
suffering
of
Christ
:
And
the
iustice
of
god
is
not
satisfied
by
the
onely
sufferings
of
Christ
,
but
by
other
meanes
also
,
as
by
our
own
workes
,
or
suffrings
,
or
other
mens
for
vs
.
Neither
doeth
any
text
of
scripture
that
Bristowe
citeth
,
proue
this
later
part
of
the
contradiction
to
be
true
.
First
,
where
he
citeth
Tit.
3.
He
hath
saued
vs
by
the
lauer
of
regeneration
:
The
text
is
,
when
the
louing
kindnesse
&
gentlenes
of
God
our
sauiour
appeared
,
not
of
the
works
of
righteousnes
,
which
we
wrought
,
but
according
to
his
owne
mercy
,
he
hath
saued
vs
,
by
the
lauer
of
regeneration
and
the
receiuing
of
the
holy
ghost
,
which
he
hath
powred
foorth
plentifully
vpon
vs
by
Iesus
Christ
our
sauiour
,
that
being
iustified
by
his
grace
,
we
might
be
made
heires
according
to
the
hope
of
eternal
life
.
Here
it
is
manifest
,
we
are
so
●aued
by
baptisme
,
that
we
are
iustified
by
his
grace
,
ther
●ore
not
by
the
merite
of
baptisme
or
satisfaction
of
our
〈…〉
nnes
in
baptisme
:
but
we
are
saued
by
baptisme
,
as
we
●re
in●eo●fed
by
a
deede
,
that
is
sealed
,
that
is
,
assured
of
●aluation
:
as
Abraham
receiued
circumcision
,
the
seale
●f
the
righteousnes
,
which
he
had
by
faith
,
before
he
was
●ircumcised
.
Ro.
4.
and
euen
so
he
clenseth
his
church
by
●he
lauer
of
water
,
not
by
the
merite
of
the
worke
of
bap●isme
,
but
in
that
he
gaue
him selfe
for
it
,
that
he
might
sanctifie
it
,
Eph.
5.
After
the
same
maner
doth
baptisme
saue
vs
.
1.
Pet.
3.
not
the
putting
off
of
the
filth
of
the
flesh
,
●ut
the
interrogation
of
a
good
conscience
before
god
,
tho●ough
the
resurrection
of
Iesus
Christ
,
which
presuppo●eth
his
death
,
for
satisfaction
of
our
sinnes
,
as
his
resur●ection
is
the
speciall
cause
of
our
iustification
.
Last
of
●ll
,
saith
Bristowe
:
he
hath
made
vs
kings
&
priestes
to
God
,
Apo.
1.
If
spiritual
priests
,
ergo
,
to
offer
vp
spiritual
sacrifices
,
as
of
〈…〉
ur
mortification
.
Rom.
12.
our
almes
deedes
,
Heb.
13.
both
for
our
●wne
sinnes
,
&
for
the
sinnes
of
other
.
Here
in
the
last
point
,
●he
quotation
of
scripture
so
plentiful
before
faileth
:
but
we
shal
haue
reason
confirmed
by
scripture
:
because
the
●xternall
priest
is
ordeined
to
offer
externall
sacrifices
for
sinnes
,
●oth
for
him selfe
&
for
the
people
.
Heb.
5.
But
this
cause
is
many
wayes
auoided
:
for
we
are
priests
to
offer
vp
the
on●y
sacrifices
of
thanksgiuing
,
&
not
of
propitiation
for
sinne
,
which
cannot
be
without
shedding
of
bloud
Heb.
9.
Secondly
,
although
we
be
all
made
priests
,
yet
we
are
not
made
high
priests
,
of
which
the
text
speaketh
.
Heb.
5.
which
office
one
only
can
enioy
at
one
time
,
which
is
our
sauiour
Christ
,
for
terme
of
his
life
,
which
is
without
end
.
Thirdly
,
those
sacrifices
which
the
externall
priest
offered
for
sinnes
,
could
neuer
take
away
sinnes
,
Heb.
10.
much
lesse
our
spirituall
sacrifices
of
thanksgiuing
for
Gods
benefites
bestowed
on
vs
,
&
his
whole
church
.
I
cited
further
.
Apoc.
7.
These
are
they
that
came
out
of
that
great
affliction
,
&
haue
washed
their
stoles
,
and
made
them
white
in
the
bloud
of
the
lamb
:
therfore
they
are
in
the
presence
of
the
throne
of
god
.
Brist
.
saith
,
this
word
therefore
,
is
referred
to
their
comming
out
of
affliction
,
and
so
whited
their
stoles
:
And
yet
this
gloser
(
saith
he
of
me
)
taketh
it
away
from
the
affliction
,
whereas
that
whiting
was
nothing
else
but
that
affliction
.
O
impudent
and
blasphemous
heretike
:
when
the
holy
ghost
expressely
sayeth
,
they
made
their
stoles
white
in
the
bloud
of
the
lamb
,
darest
thou
open
thy
mouth
and
saye
,
not
only
,
that
that
whiting
was
somewhat
else
then
the
bloud
of
Christ
,
but
also
that
it
was
nothing
but
that
affliction
,
so
vtterly
excluding
the
bloud
of
Christ
?
But
I
forgot
to
conferre
other
places
of
scripture
,
as
he
chargeth
me
.
Is
there
any
scripture
that
ascribeth
purification
of
our
sinnes
,
to
any
other
thing
,
than
to
the
bloud
of
Christ
?
Let
vs
heare
what
,
whoso
ouercommeth
,
shal
be
clothed
with
white
garments
.
Apoc.
3.
But
the
Martyrs
ouercame
the
diuell
,
not
onely
by
the
blood
of
the
lambe
,
but
also
by
their
owne
patient
confession
,
or
affliction
vnto
death
.
Apoc.
12.
The
text
is
:
and
they
ouercame
him
by
the
bloud
of
the
lambe
,
and
by
the
word
of
their
testimonie
,
and
they
loued
not
their
liues
vnto
death
.
Here
is
no
cause
of
victorie
,
but
the
bloud
of
the
lambe
,
and
the
worde
of
their
testimonie
,
which
was
the
confession
of
their
faith
,
the
onely
instrumentall
cause
of
their
iustification
and
victorie
:
who
is
he
which
ouercommeth
the
world
,
sayth
S.
Iohn
,
but
he
that
beleueth
?
1.
Iohn
5.
Faith
therefore
the
onely
shilde
to
haue
victory
against
the
worlde
and
the
diuell
,
hath
no
power
in
it selfe
to
clense
our
sinnes
,
but
leaneth
altogether
to
the
bloud
of
Christ
.
But
it
is
a
proper
thing
to
see
Bristow
forsake
his
vulgar
latine
authenticall
translation
,
and
to
turne
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
by
their
owne
martyrdom
,
which
is
in
deede
by
the
worde
of
their
testimonie
,
or
which
they
did
testifie
:
whereas
by
his
translation
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
‑
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
should
signifie
no
more
then
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
should
be
taken
for
suffering
of
death
,
as
I
thinke
it
is
in
no
Greeke
author
,
sure
I
am
it
is
neuer
so
taken
in
the
newe
testament
.
But
Bristow
addeth
:
that
S.
Paul
also
accordingly
calleth
it
the
mortification
of
Iesus
,
when
the
Apostles
were
mortifyed
for
Iesus
,
and
sayeth
they
carryed
the
same
about
continually
in
their
bodies
,
that
also
the
life
of
Iesus
might
also
be
manifected
in
their
bodies
,
2.
Cor.
4.
I
wot
well
,
wee
must
be
conformable
to
Christ
in
sufferings
,
that
we
may
be
partakers
of
his
kingdome
and
glorie
:
but
doeth
it
therefore
followe
,
that
our
sufferings
merit
this
glorie
by
his
bloud
?
or
that
his
bloud
without
all
respect
of
our
merites
,
doeth
not
alone
purge
and
clense
vs
from
all
our
sinnes
?
After
he
had
finished
the
cleansing
of
our
sinnes
by
his
owne
selfe
,
sayeth
the
Apostle
,
he
is
set
downe
at
the
right
hande
of
magnificence
in
the
highest
.
Heb.
1.
Last
of
all
,
Bristowe
opposeth
that
Saint
Paul
sayth
:
This
our
affliction
although
it
be
but
short
and
light
,
worketh
vs
euerlasting
weight
of
glory
exceeding
measure
aboue
measure
.
2.
Cor.
4.
I
answere
,
it
worketh
not
by
meriting
,
not
by
purging
our
sinnes
,
or
by
satisfying
for
our
iniquities
,
but
by
making
vs
conformable
vnto
our
head
,
in
passing
by
the
same
way
of
tribulations
vnto
glorie
,
that
he
did
,
euen
as
the
way
or
steppes
which
leadeth
vnto
an
high
place
of
dignitie
,
maketh
not
them
worthie
of
the
dignitie
that
must
ascende
by
those
steppes
vnto
it
,
and
yet
it
is
necessarie
for
them
that
will
come
to
that
dignitie
,
to
sit
in
such
places
,
to
take
that
ordinary
way
.
Therefore
as
the
passage
of
such
way
worketh
their
dignitie
,
so
doeth
affliction
worke
our
glory
.
Not
to
abridge
any
part
of
the
glorie
or
merite
of
Christes
suffering
,
by
which
onely
wee
are
made
worthie
of
glory
when
all
our
sinnes
being
cleansed
by
his
bloud
,
wee
appeare
righteous
before
God
,
not
in
the
merite
of
our
owne
workes
,
nor
hauing
our
owne
righteousnes
,
which
is
by
the
lawe
,
but
the
righteousnesse
of
God
,
which
is
by
faith
of
Iesus
Christ
,
that
wee
may
knowe
him
of
the
power
of
his
resurrection
,
and
the
fellowship
of
his
sufferings
being
made
conformable
vnto
his
death
,
Phil.
3.
Wherefore
it
remaineth
,
that
seeing
the
bloud
of
Christ
purgeth
vs
of
all
our
sinnes
,
and
Iesus
Christ
is
the
propitiation
for
our
sinnes
,
committed
either
after
baptisme
or
before
,
that
all
other
purgings
and
satisfactions
are
ouerthrowen
,
and
so
popish
purgatorie
remaineth
without
any
foundation
:
the
purging
of
Christs
bloud
making
vs
most
pure
:
and
Christ
our
propitiation
being
throughly
&
only
sufficient
to
reconcile
vs
.
Secondly
:
directly
of
Purgatorie
it selfe
&
prayer
for
the
dead
,
whether
all
the
elect
goe
streight
to
heauen
.
Afore
Christes
comming
Limbus
patrum
.
His
childish
rayling
on
mine
argumentes
,
with
that
That
the
fathers
of
the
olde
testament
before
Christ
were
not
in
hell
,
it
is
to
be
proued
with
manifest
arguments
&
autorities
out
of
holy
scriptures
.
Although
they
were
not
,
nor
yet
are
in
perfect
blessednes
,
God
prouiding
a
better
thing
for
vs
,
that
they
without
vs
,
shuld
not
be
made
perfect
.
Heb.
11.
But
by
this
text
(
saith
Brist
.
)
S.
Paul
doth
meane
,
that
their
soules
were
not
yet
admitted
into
heauen
.
How
proueth
he
that
?
forsooth
,
the
old
testament
did
consummate
nothing
,
&c.
but
their
sinnes
remaining
not
perfectly
remitted
,
Christ
died
,
&c.
A
sore
bolt
,
as
though
any
man
had
his
sinnes
forgiuen
,
but
by
the
new
testament
,
or
could
be
heire
of
the
kingdom
of
heauen
,
but
by
the
death
of
Christ
.
But
the
same
apostle
saith
.
Heb
9.
That
the
way
of
the
saints
,
was
not
yet
opened
,
while
the
first
tabernacle
stood
.
Bristow
addeth
to
the
text
of
his
own
,
into
soncta
or
heauen
:
wher
the
apostle
meaneth
of
the
worke
of
Christs
redemption
in
his
death
,
resurrection
&
ascension
,
the
effect
wherof
,
neuertheles
was
extended
no
lesse
to
the
fathers
of
that
olde
testament
,
then
to
vs
.
Thirdly
,
the
apostle
saith
,
Heb.
10.
that
we
haue
confidence
to
enter
in
to
the
holy
place
,
by
the
bloud
of
Iesus
,
which
hath
dedicated
that
new
&
liuing
way
for
vs
,
through
the
vayle
that
is
his
flesh
.
All
which
proueth
nothing
,
but
that
there
is
no
entrance
into
heauen
,
but
by
Christ
,
which
way
is
comon
to
all
the
saintes
of
God
,
of
all
ages
.
But
Bristow
biddeth
me
conferre
the
end
of
my
text
.
Heb.
11.
with
the
beginning
:
where
he
saith
,
they
receiued
not
the
promise
which
is
the
exposition
of
their
not
consummating
:
I
admit
it
:
for
no
Christian
receiueth
the
promise
consummate
before
the
resurrection
of
their
bodies
.
The
consummation
of
which
promise
,
&
perfection
of
the
saints
,
God
reserueth
vnto
one
time
,
when
we
shal
all
receiue
the
promise
&
consummation
together
:
that
they
without
vs
(
saith
he
)
shoulde
not
be
consummate
,
the
same
reason
is
of
the
apostles
&
fathers
of
the
primitiue
church
,
&
vs
of
the
later
church
,
&
them
that
shal
be
to
the
end
of
the
world
.
Now
to
mine
arguments
&
autorities
of
scripture
.
I
reason
,
that
seeing
they
all
beleeued
in
Christ
,
they
had
euerlasting
life
,
&
entred
not
into
condemnation
,
but
passed
from
death
to
life
.
Ioh.
5.
To
what
life
(
saith
Bristow
)
but
the
life
or
resurrection
of
their
bodies
?
for
vntil
the
last
day
,
all
the
dead
are
in
death
.
O
prodigious
heretike
,
call
you
that
a
passage
from
death
to
life
,
to
continue
in
death
5.
or
6.
thousand
years
?
Is
God
then
to
this
new
Saducee
,
the
god
of
the
dead
&
not
of
the
liuing
?
yea
,
he
saith
,
that
life
after
corporal
deth
in
the
new
testament
,
lightly
euery
where
,
signifieth
the
resurrection
of
the
bodies
.
What
is
it
then
to
take
hold
of
eternall
life
in
this
world
,
which
shal
be
interrupted
with
so
long
abyding
in
death
?
1.
Tim.
6.
And
how
can
it
be
true
which
our
sauiour
saith
:
he
that
beleueth
in
me
,
hath
alreadie
eternal
life
,
if
they
that
are
passed
out
of
this
world
are
all
in
death
?
wherfore
then
is
this
eternall
life
interupted
with
any
Purgatorie
,
Limbus
patrum
,
or
death
.
The
second
argument
is
,
of
that
Christ
is
called
the
lamb
that
was
slaine
from
the
beginning
of
the
worlde
;
because
the
benefite
of
his
passion
extendeth
vnto
the
godly
of
all
ages
alike
.
Apoc.
13.
To
this
,
the
beast
hath
nothing
to
answere
,
but
that
it
is
not
said
,
that
the
lambe
was
slaine
from
the
beginning
of
the
world
:
but
that
all
the
reprobates
shal
adore
antichrist
when
he
cometh
.
And
because
Apoc.
17.
the
words
be
:
whose
names
were
not
written
in
the
booke
of
life
from
the
beginning
of
the
world
:
he
would
haue
those
wordes
from
the
beginning
of
the
world
,
by
a
monstrous
construction
,
contrary
to
the
manifest
composition
and
pointing
,
both
in
the
Greeke
&
vulgare
Latine
,
to
be
referred
not
to
the
lamb
slaine
,
but
to
the
booke
of
life
.
As
though
both
those
textes
in
their
seuerall
sense
might
not
be
true
,
except
such
manifest
violence
were
offered
to
the
construction
composition
&
pointing
in
this
text
of
the
Apoc.
Yet
he
confesseth
it
to
be
true
,
that
the
lambe
was
slaine
from
the
beginning
of
the
world
,
which
is
no
where
else
written
in
the
scripture
,
but
heere
:
the
cause
of
the
trueth
,
he
will
not
haue
to
be
my
fonde
sense
,
but
because
his
death
was
preordeined
of
God
,
and
prefigured
so
long
before
.
A
substantiall
cause
by
which
we
may
say
,
that
Bristowe
was
dead
from
the
beginning
of
the
world
,
because
his
death
was
so
long
before
ordeined
of
God
,
and
prefigured
in
the
death
of
Adam
.
The
third
argument
is
,
that
Esay
speaking
of
that
righteous
that
are
departed
out
of
this
life
,
sayeth
that
there
is
peace
,
and
that
they
shall
rest
in
their
beddes
,
Esa.
57.
like
as
he
affirmeth
that
Topheth
which
is
Gehinnon
,
or
hell
,
is
prepared
of
olde
for
the
wicked
.
To
this
he
answereth
,
that
Esay
speaketh
not
of
his
owne
time
,
but
as
a
Prophet
,
of
the
time
now
since
the
comming
of
Christ
,
who
is
our
peace
,
as
though
Christ
were
not
their
peace
as
well
as
oures
.
And
what
a
shamelesse
answere
is
this
,
to
denye
the
doctrine
of
the
Prophet
concerning
the
comfort
of
the
faithfull
after
death
,
to
perteine
to
the
faithfull
of
his
owne
time
,
to
whome
then
it
was
in
vaine
preached
and
published
by
the
Prophet
?
After
a
little
quarreling
against
my
translation
,
the
sense
wherof
he
cannot
deny
:
he
asketh
,
if
the
rest
of
the
soules
must
needes
be
the
blisse
of
heauen
?
and
telleth
vs
that
their
Limbus
was
not
a
place
of
sensible
paine
:
But
sir
,
Salom
whereinto
the
Prophet
sayeth
the
righteous
doe
goe
,
will
not
onely
giue
them
rest
,
without
sense
of
paine
:
but
peace
with
happinesse
and
prosperitie
.
Finally
,
he
sayeth
,
Topheth
or
Gehenna
,
was
not
the
onely
hell
,
because
our
Creede
and
the
Scripture
sayeth
,
that
Christes
soule
was
in
hell
:
I
answere
,
that
hell
signifyeth
either
the
place
,
or
state
of
torments
for
sinnes
:
in
the
former
,
Caluine
(
whome
you
slaunder
)
sayth
not
that
Christ
was
in
,
but
in
the
later
,
when
he
complained
that
he
was
forsaken
of
God
:
there
is
not
therefore
proued
,
by
Christes
discending
into
hell
,
any
other
place
or
receptacle
of
soules
in
hell
,
but
Topheth
and
Gehenna
the
place
of
the
damned
.
The
fourth
argument
against
Limbus
,
is
,
that
Lazarus
was
carryed
by
Angels
,
not
downe
to
hell
,
but
vp
to
Abrahams
bosome
.
But
the
riche
man
being
in
hell
,
looked
vp
and
seeth
Abraham
afarre
of
.
Bristowe
asketh
whether
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
signifie
to
be
carryed
vp
?
sir
,
it
signifieth
to
be
carried
away
,
and
seeing
the
riche
man
looking
vp
,
seeth
Lazarus
afarre
of
,
it
followeth
that
Lazarus
was
carried
vp
and
not
downe
.
But
you
reply
,
it
foloweth
not
that
he
was
carryed
into
heauen
.
Then
you
may
say
he
was
carried
vp
to
hell
.
But
the
places
you
say
might
be
nigh
together
in
respect
of
the
distance
of
heauen
,
although
one
were
vpwarde
,
and
also
farre
off
both
in
state
and
situation
(
purgatorie
peraduenture
betwixt
them
.
)
This
is
a
goodly
faith
,
that
standeth
vpon
peraduenture
,
and
this
may
be
,
&c.
The
Scripture
saith
,
ther
was
a
great
Chaos
which
is
an
infinite
distance
betweene
them
,
which
cannot
agree
to
Limbus
,
which
must
be
harde
adioyning
to
hell
,
or
else
it
is
not
Limbus
.
But
if
they
were
no
way
nigh
together
(
sayth
he
)
it
will
not
followe
that
Abrahams
bosome
was
heauen
.
I
answere
,
if
they
were
no
way
nigh
together
,
it
could
not
be
hell
,
nor
Limbus
of
hell
,
which
is
the
thing
I
was
to
proue
.
Also
the
text
is
plaine
,
that
Abrahams
bosome
was
a
place
of
comfort
.
And
other
place
of
comfort
then
heauen
or
Paradise
,
which
is
all
one
,
for
the
soules
departed
,
I
finde
none
in
Scripture
.
The
last
argument
is
this
:
If
righteousnesse
belong
to
Abrahams
children
,
the
rewarde
of
righteousnesse
also
perteineth
to
them
.
Therefore
Abrahams
bosome
was
open
to
receiue
all
the
childrem
of
Abraham
,
euen
as
the
bosome
of
God
was
readie
to
receiue
Abraham
,
because
he
was
his
sonne
through
faith
.
Heere
Bristowe
noteth
no
small
blasphemie
,
proceeding
of
grosse
ignorance
,
saying
,
That
which
is
proper
to
vnigenitus
,
the
onely
begotten
sonne
of
God
,
hee
maketh
common
to
Abraham
.
Why
Bristowe
?
because
vnigenitus
is
eternally
,
and
after
his
proper
manner
,
in
the
bosome
of
the
father
,
doth
it
thereof
followe
,
that
none
can
be
in
the
bosom
of
GOD
,
but
the
proper
place
of
Christ
is
made
common
to
them
?
You
threaten
in
the
12.
Chapter
oftentimes
to
bewray
my
grosse
ignorance
in
the
scriptures
,
and
haue
you
such
fine
knowledge
in
them
,
that
you
coulde
not
see
what
Esay
writeth
Chap.
40.
according
to
your
owne
translation
,
Ecce
dominus
Deus
,
&c.
Beholde
the
Lorde
God
shall
come
in
strength
,
and
his
arme
shall
haue
the
dominion
:
beholde
his
rewarde
is
with
him
,
and
his
worke
before
him
:
As
a
sheepheard
hee
will
feede
his
flocke
,
hee
will
gather
the
Lambes
together
on
his
arme
and
beare
them
in
his
bosome
:
in
sin●
suo
leuabit
?
Beholde
you
greate
and
mightie
doctours
in
the
scriptures
,
the
bosome
of
GOD
as
of
a
shephearde
,
is
open
to
receiue
all
his
Lambes
;
howe
much
more
as
a
father
to
receiue
his
children
?
But
to
the
argument
you
aunswere
:
The
rewarde
of
righteousnesse
may
belong
to
one
,
and
yet
not
payed
him
,
as
soone
as
hee
dyeth
.
Saincte
Paule
saying
expresly
of
Abraham
and
many
of
his
children
,
that
they
departed
not
receiuing
the
promises
,
but
beholding
them
a
farre
off
:
and
all
these
renouned
by
faith
,
receiued
not
the
promise
.
That
is
(
saith
Bristowe
)
the
inheritance
,
the
rewarde
of
righteousnesse
:
I
replye
,
the
rewarde
of
righteousnesse
cannot
belonge
to
one
,
but
it
must
bee
payed
him
as
soone
as
it
is
payed
vnto
others
,
to
whome
the
same
rewarde
,
vppon
the
same
cause
belongeth
:
therefore
seeing
it
is
payed
to
some
immediately
after
their
death
,
it
is
likewise
to
all
.
That
manie
dyed
not
receiuing
the
promises
,
is
partelie
vnderstoode
of
the
promises
of
the
lande
of
Canaan
,
partelye
of
the
full
fruition
and
perfection
of
rewarde
,
which
to
all
men
is
denyed
before
the
laste
iudgement
,
and
so
no
inequalitie
or
vniustice
vnto
any
.
Whether
since
Christ
all
goe
straight
They
that
liue
vnto
Christe
,
dye
vnto
him
,
and
being
To
leaue
his
iugling
of
seeing
Christes
godheades
glorie
,
and
manhoodes
glorie
,
whereof
I
speake
no
worde
,
hee
confesseth
the
example
of
Sainct
Paul
declareth
,
that
a
per●ect
iust
man
goeth
straight
to
Christ
:
Likewise
the
example
if
the
theefe
declareth
,
that
a
penitent
sinner
,
goeth
straight
to
Christ
,
if
either
his
penaunce
bee
full
and
perfect
,
or
his
pardon
,
which
is
a
remission
of
his
penance
be
plenarie
.
By
this
you
perceiue
that
penance
with
him
is
taken
for
punishment
satisfactory
,
and
not
for
repentaunce
of
the
hearte
and
true
conuersion
vnto
GOD
:
But
there
is
a
plenarie
pardon
and
satisfaction
for
all
sinnes
giuen
to
euerie
penitent
sinner
:
therefore
euery
penitent
sinner
goeth
streight
to
Christ
whom
we
knowe
and
beleeue
to
be
in
heauen
.
The
minor
is
proued
,
by
sainct
Iohn
,
1.
Iohn
2.
Iesus
Christ
is
our
aduocate
and
propitiation
for
our
sinnes
.
The
bloude
of
Iesus
Christe
doth
purge
vs
from
all
sinnes
.
Secondly
hee
saith
,
I
allude
to
a
place
,
Romans
14.
wee
liue
to
our
Lorde
,
and
wee
die
to
our
Lord
:
whereby
nothing
else
is
ment
,
but
that
hee
is
our
iudge
in
life
and
death
.
A
bare
exposition
,
if
wee
haue
no
more
comforte
by
liuing
to
the
Lorde
,
then
that
hee
shall
bee
our
iudge
at
our
death
.
Howe
be
it
I
grounde
not
myne
argument
onelye
,
of
that
phrase
,
to
controll
Augustines
exposition
of
them
that
die
in
the
Lorde
,
Apoca.
14.
for
martyrs
onely
,
as
you
slaunder
mee
,
but
compare
other
places
of
the
faithfull
,
that
are
asleepe
in
Christ
,
1.
Corin.
15.
And
they
that
are
deade
in
Christ
,
1.
Thessalonians
4.
where
the
phrases
being
all
one
,
with
that
of
Apoca.
14.
blessed
are
the
deade
that
dye
in
the
Lorde
,
that
text
cannot
bee
restrained
onely
to
the
blessednesse
of
martyrs
,
but
extendeth
to
the
happinesse
of
all
that
are
deade
in
the
Lorde
,
which
are
all
the
faithfull
.
But
the
circumstance
of
the
place
(
saith
Bristowe
)
giueth
it
to
bee
meant
of
martyrs
.
I
aunswere
,
there
is
no
circumstance
that
can
proue
it
to
bee
spoken
onely
of
Martyrs
)
seeing
the
argument
of
their
blessednesse
,
is
dying
in
the
Lorde
,
whiche
is
common
to
all
the
faithfull
,
therefore
blessednesse
also
,
and
that
is
the
iudgement
of
S.
Augustine
de
ciu.
dei
lib.
20
Cap.
9.
whatsoeuer
Allen
or
you
prate
to
the
contrarie
.
For
after
the
text
rehearsed
he
writeth
thus
vpon
it
.
Reg.
nat
itaque
:
The
Church
therefore
nowe
first
reineth
with
Christ
in
the
lyuing
,
and
in
the
deade
.
For
therefore
(
as
the
Apostle
saith
)
Christ
dyed
,
that
he
shoulde
be
Lorde
ouer
the
liuing
and
ouer
the
deade
.
But
therefore
he
named
onely
the
soules
of
the
Martyrs
,
because
they
as
the
chiefe
,
reigne
being
deade
,
which
vnto
death
striued
for
the
truthe
.
But
by
a
part
we
vnderstand
the
whole
,
euen
the
rest
that
are
deade
pertaining
to
the
Church
which
is
the
kingdom
of
Christ
.
Whether
that
iudgement
may
stande
with
Purgatorie
.
My
first
argument
he
maketh
of
the
true
falling
to
the
North
or
South
and
so
resting
,
which
in
deede
is
De
〈…〉
b.
arb.
lib.
3.
Cap.
23.
To
this
he
aunswereth
first
that
saint
●ugustine
there
saith
the
contrary
,
as
I
shal
see
if
I
reade
〈…〉
e
place
.
Why
sir
,
I
read
it
thus
:
Superfluo
quaeri
de
meri
〈…〉
s
,
&c.
In
vaine
doe
men
moue
a
question
of
his
merits
,
which
hath
deserued
nothing
,
speaking
of
the
death
of
〈…〉
n
infant
)
neque
enim
:
for
it
is
not
to
be
feared
,
least
his
〈…〉
fe
coulde
haue
beene
media
,
meane
or
indifferent
,
be●weene
well
doing
and
sinne
:
Et
sententia
iudicis
media
es
〈…〉
non
possit
inter
praemium
atque
supplicium
,
and
the
sentence
〈…〉
f
the
iudge
cannot
bee
meane
or
indifferent
,
betweene
〈…〉
ewarde
and
punishment
.
This
I
trust
shall
suffice
of
my
〈…〉
eading
,
vntill
wee
see
what
you
reade
to
the
contrarie
.
〈…〉
ut
to
mine
argument
,
Bristowe
aunswereth
for
them
〈…〉
at
are
condemned
to
hell
,
prayers
boote
not
:
of
them
〈…〉
at
are
acquited
,
some
streight
rewarded
in
their
soules
,
〈…〉
o●
which
they
neede
no
prayers
,
but
yet
not
rewarded
〈◊〉
their
bodies
for
which
they
pray
,
Apoc.
6.
vntill
they
〈…〉
e
hearde
,
Apoc.
11.
other
not
streight
rewarded
in
their
〈…〉
ules
,
of
which
some
be
without
sense
of
punishment
,
as
〈◊〉
Limbo
other
be
punished
temporally
,
&c.
If
it
bee
〈…〉
wfull
to
make
such
diuisions
and
subdiuisions
,
with●ut
the
authoritie
of
the
scriptures
,
we
may
imagine
what
we
will
.
But
sir
,
for
them
that
be
acquited
of
sin
,
and
can
haue
no
meane
sentence
betweene
reward
and
punishment
,
how
can
their
rewarde
be
deferred
or
how
can
they
be
punished
for
sinne
,
which
are
acquited
therof
?
As
for
them
that
lacke
the
rewarde
of
their
bodie
,
it
●s
that
they
may
receiue
it
in
time
most
conuenient
,
both
for
the
glorie
of
God
and
for
the
commodities
of
●ll
the
saincts
of
God
together
.
As
for
the
martyrs
,
Apoc.
6
,
I
finde
they
complayned
for
iustice
against
their
murtherers
,
I
finde
not
that
they
prayed
for
the
reward
of
their
body
:
which
complaint
is
to
be
vnderstoode
rather
of
the
desert
of
the
wicked
persecuters
then
of
the
affection
of
the
holy
martyrs
.
The
bloude
of
Abel
cried
vengaunce
,
yet
Abel
patiently
suffered
death
.
The
differences
of
punishment
for
being
angrie
saying
●ac●
,
&
fatue
,
proue
difference
of
damnation
greater
for
greater
offences
,
but
not
of
punishment
lesse
then
damnation
due
for
the
least
,
seing
our
sauiour
Christ
appointeth
the
same
guiltinesse
for
vnaduised
anger
,
which
the
Pharisees
did
for
murther
:
who
neuer
were
so
farre
past
all
shewe
of
honestie
,
to
make
murther
a
veniall
sinne
,
not
deseruing
damnation
,
as
you
doe
.
Another
argument
is
out
of
Matth.
7.
of
the
two
wayes
,
if
there
bee
but
two
wayes
in
this
life
,
there
are
but
two
abiding
places
after
this
life
.
To
this
Bristowe
aunswereth
,
although
the
argument
bee
not
mine
,
but
an
obiection
that
Allen
taketh
on
him
to
aunswere
:
First
that
in
the
wide
way
some
goe
wider
then
some
,
with
infinite
varietie
,
but
all
to
damnation
presently
:
Secondly
in
the
narrowe
way
,
some
goe
narrower
then
some
with
infinite
varietie
,
yet
all
in
the
narrowe
way
:
Ergo
say
I
,
all
straight
to
saluation
.
Although
in
a
way
so
narrowe
,
that
it
is
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
thrusting
way
,
or
a
way
,
whose
sides
are
thrust
together
,
that
there
shoulde
bee
such
infinite
varietie
of
narrownesse
,
which
must
also
import
an
infinite
widenes
,
it
is
against
all
reason
,
and
the
worde
of
the
texte
.
Wherefore
it
cannot
bee
the
way
of
merites
but
of
faith
.
Another
argument
is
of
the
text
2.
Cor.
5.
We
shall
all
stande
before
the
iudgement
seate
of
Christ
,
that
euerie
one
may
receiue
in
his
bodie
according
to
such
things
as
he
hath
done
either
good
or
euill
.
Therefore
the
prayers
or
deedes
of
other
men
helpe
not
.
To
this
he
aunswereth
out
of
Augustine
,
that
the
deade
in
our
Lorde
,
hath
in
his
life
deserued
,
that
these
workes
after
his
death
might
be
profitable
to
him
.
Against
which
authoritie
,
he
saith
,
I
haue
no
reply
,
to
maintain
that
scripture
against
such
prayer
,
but
onely
oppose
a
saying
of
Hierom.
I
think
the
scripture
it selfe
is
a
sufficient
replie
against
all
authoritie
of
man
.
Euerie
man
shall
receiue
according
to
his
owne
workes
,
and
not
according
to
the
workes
of
other
men
,
as
for
the
deserte
of
man
,
it
is
nothing
but
vnto
damnation
.
And
yet
that
argument
is
〈…〉
ected
by
Allen
,
not
framed
by
me
.
An other
argument
I
haue
of
the
iudgement
of
God
,
〈…〉
r.
85.
If
Purgatory
be
so
necessarie
to
satisfie
Gods
iu
〈…〉
e
by
temporall
paynes
of
sinners
according
to
the
〈…〉
e
,
&c.
and
Purgatory
shall
cease
,
as
you
affirme
out
〈…〉
Augustine
:
How
shall
the
same
be
satisfied
in
them
〈…〉
t
dye
immediately
before
the
day
of
iudgement
,
so
〈…〉
t
they
haue
not
had
time
inough
there
to
be
suffici
〈…〉
tly
purged
?
The
like
may
be
demaunded
of
all
them
〈…〉
ich
in
a
moment
shal
be
chaunged
from
mortalitie
〈…〉
immortalitie
at
the
very
comming
of
Iesus
Christe
〈…〉
to
iudgement
?
These
are
two
doughtie
questions
〈…〉
yeth
Bristowe
,
for
aunswere
of
which
he
asketh
me
,
〈…〉
here
I
finde
that
principle
in
Allen
?
That
Purgato
〈…〉
is
necessarie
to
satisfie
according
to
the
time
.
For
〈…〉
o
th
sir
,
Where
he
sayeth
,
if
any
debt
remaine
to
be
dischar
〈…〉
d
it
must
needes
rise
by
proportion
,
weight
,
continuance
,
number
〈…〉
d
quantitie
of
the
faultes
,
whereby
it
must
of
necessitie
be
indu
〈…〉
d
,
that
because
euerie
man
cannot
haue
time
to
repay
all
in
his
〈…〉
e
,
that
there
is
all
,
or
some
part
aunswerable
in
the
worlde
to
〈…〉
e.
Here
sir
of
faultes
we
haue
proportion
,
weight
,
〈…〉
ntinuance
,
number
,
quantitie
,
therefore
we
must
〈…〉
aue
satisfaction
in
purgatorie
according
to
propor
〈…〉
on
,
weight
,
continuance
,
number
,
quantitie
of
them
,
〈…〉
xcept
you
wil
as
well
denie
the
proportion
,
weight
,
number
,
&
quantitie
of
faultes
to
bee
regarded
in
Purgatory
,
as
the
time
.
Wherefore
if
a
great
proportion
of
faultes
deserue
a
greate
proportion
of
punishment
,
heauy
faultes
,
heauie
punishment
,
many
faultes
,
many
strypes
,
great
faultes
,
great
paynes
:
what
reason
haue
you
,
why
long
continuance
in
faults
should
not
deserue
long
continuance
in
Purgatorie
?
You
aunswere
a
short
time
in
great
paine
,
will
satisfie
for
long
penance
in
this
life
.
But
where
is
the
continuance
of
sinnes
by
Allens
necessitie
to
be
payed
in
proportion
of
long
time
in
Purgatorie
?
So
that
in
effecte
,
you
aunswere
,
but
without
book
that
the
fornace
of
Purgatorie
toward
that
〈◊〉
of
the
world
must
be
heated
whot
,
because
the
soules
〈◊〉
tary
there
the
shorter
time
.
With
such
inuentions
〈◊〉
may
answere
any
question
.
But
I
seeke
a
resolution
〈◊〉
of
the
word
of
God
,
or
good
reason
agreeable
thereto
.
To
the
2.
question
,
you
answere
,
it
is
not
〈◊〉
to
Gods
mercie
,
to
remit
such
punishment
at
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
quest
of
his
glorious
Saintes
,
as
he
nowe
doeth
●or
〈◊〉
Churches
prayers
.
But
seeing
the
Saintes
know
not
〈◊〉
sodennes
of
that
moment
,
howe
shall
they
pray
for
〈◊〉
discharge
of
them
that
deserue
to
goe
to
purgatorie
.
〈◊〉
they
pray
for
it
continually
,
why
pray
they
not
,
as
〈◊〉
to
discharge
all
other
men
from
purgatory
,
as
those
th
〈…〉
shal
remaine
aliue
at
the
comming
of
Christe
?
And
where
you
say
it
is
not
repugnant
to
his
mercie
,
it
is
not
the
matter
in
question
,
but
howe
it
may
stand
with
〈◊〉
iustice
,
which
as
you
holde
,
requireth
satisfaction
by
temporall
punishment
.
For
otherwise
we
know
it
standeth
both
with
his
iustice
,
and
his
mercie
,
that
they
whiche
obteine
forgiuenes
of
their
sinnes
by
Christ
,
should
immediately
after
their
death
be
receiued
into
the
fellowshippe
of
them
that
are
likewise
made
righteous
by
him
.
Augustine
is
quoted
De
Ciu.
Dei
.
lib.
21.
Cap.
24.
where
the
question
is
moued
,
but
not
answered
,
and
yet
the
place
is
corrupted
and
inforced
,
as
Ludovicus
Vives
confesseth
.
In
that
Chapter
Augustine
reasoneth
,
against
them
which
helde
that
God
after
the
iudgement
,
would
release
all
the
damned
at
the
prayers
of
his
saints
.
In
the
27.
Chapter
,
which
he
also
quoteth
,
there
is
nothing
to
the
question
.
Whether
faith
,
hope
,
and
Gods
will
,
may
stand
with
Purgatorie
.
This
argument
is
gathered
Pur.
381.
If
it
be
against
the
hope
of
Christians
,
to
mourne
for
the
deade
,
much
〈…〉
nother
argument
in
the
same
place
is
:
All
places
〈…〉
cripture
that
forbidde
prayers
without
faith
,
for
〈…〉
de
prayers
for
the
deade
.
For
faith
is
an
assurance
〈◊〉
of
the
worde
of
God
,
&c.
This
argument
(
saith
Bristow
)
supposeth
,
that
the
〈…〉
de
of
God
is
only
Scripture
.
Yea
verily
it
suppo
〈…〉
,
that
only
Scripture
is
the
warrant
of
Gods
worde
,
we
haue
before
mainteined
and
also
answered
,
to
〈◊〉
Apocryphall
Booke
of
the
Machabees
.
A
third
argument
is
,
Pur.
281.
We
learne
out
of
Gods
〈…〉
rde
,
that
whatsoeuer
we
pray
for
according
to
his
〈…〉
ll
,
we
shall
obteine
.
1.
Iohn
.
5.
Prayers
for
the
dead
〈◊〉
not
according
to
the
will
of
God
,
and
therefore
they
〈◊〉
not
heard
at
al.
Bristow
denieth
the
minor
,
which
he
〈…〉
th
,
I
haue
not
proued
.
Yes
verily
,
I
proue
it
because
the
〈…〉
dgement
followeth
immediately
after
death
:
and
in
〈…〉
dgement
,
God
wil
heare
no
prayers
.
And
therefore
〈…〉
istowes
exposition
for
him
that
sinneth
a
sinne
not
〈…〉
to
death
,
and
shameful
addition
,
Let
him
after
his
death
〈…〉
quest
of
Christ
,
and
life
shal
be
giuen
vnto
him
,
is
false
,
and
〈…〉
surde
,
although
he
saith
,
he
hath
giuen
the
plaine
&
smoth
〈…〉
se
of
the
whole
place
,
which
is
to
be
vnderstoode
of
men
liuing
and
not
of
the
dead
.
A
smooth
expos
〈…〉
If
one
see
his
brother
sinne
,
he
must
pray
for
him
a
〈…〉
his
death
.
Againe
,
he
vrgeth
the
present
temps
,
who
〈◊〉
knoweth
his
brother
to
sinne
a
sinne
not
to
death
,
〈◊〉
one
(
saith
Bristowe
)
that
liued
in
schisme
,
but
yet
〈◊〉
reconciled
before
he
died
.
O
monstrous
and
more
th
〈…〉
palpable
blindenesse
!
be
these
verbes
,
liued
,
reconc
〈…〉
dyed
,
of
the
present
or
preterperfect
temps
,
which
t
〈…〉
deniest
the
Apostle
to
haue
vsed
.
But
omit
the
te
〈…〉
which
he
calleth
him
,
a
brother
which
liueth
in
schis
〈…〉
How
much
more
soundly
may
I
reason
vpon
the
present
temps
?
Saint
Iohn
biddeth
vs
pray
for
a
brother
〈…〉ning
:
but
a
brother
sinning
,
is
onely
liuing
:
therefore
S.
Iohn
biddeth
vs
pray
only
for
a
brother
liuing
.
For
they
that
are
in
Purgarorie
,
neither
deserue
nor
sinne
,
by
your
owne
confession
.
As
for
the
sinne
against
the
holy
Ghost
,
which
we
say
is
not
to
be
prayed
for
at
all
,
he
threateneth
often
,
to
confute
in
the
12.
Chapter
.
In
the
meane
time
it
is
euident
that
Purgatorie
for
any
thing
that
is
hitherto
applyed
by
Bristow
,
remaineth
confuted
by
sufficient
argumentes
and
authoritie
of
the
Scriptures
.
The
fourth
parte
concerning
all
other
questions
,
that
he
mentioneth
Remitting
the
questions
of
the
witnesses
of
Gods
And
that
Saint
Paule
speaketh
generally
of
all
good
workes
,
it
is
manifest
by
this
reason
,
that
he
saith
,
boa
〈…〉
ting
is
excluded
,
not
by
the
lawe
of
workes
,
but
by
the
〈…〉
awe
of
faith
:
what
manner
of
exclusion
were
it
,
to
shut
●ut
boasting
for
a
moment
,
while
one
is
baptized
,
and
●mmediately
after
receiue
it
againe
,
by
defending
iustification
by
workes
.
Againe
he
sayeth
immediately
after
,
●t
is
one
God
which
shal
iustifie
circumcision
which
is
of
faith
,
and
vncircumcision
through
faith
,
that
is
the
circum
〈…〉
ised
,
&
the
vncircumcised
are
al
iustified
by
faith
,
as
A●raham
in
both
the
states
was
iustified
by
faith
,
without
the
workes
of
the
law
,
although
,
(
as
Iames
sayth
)
he
was
●ustified
before
men
,
by
his
oblation
,
which
was
but
a
〈…〉
riall
of
his
faith
,
and
obedience
.
Where
the
Apostle
〈…〉
ayeth
,
Tit.
3.
not
by
the
workes
of
righteousnes
which
we
haue
done
,
but
according
to
his
owne
great
mercie
,
〈…〉
e
saved
vs
by
baptisme
:
Bristowe
asketh
,
if
I
marke
the
temps
.
Yea
,
very
well
,
he
speaketh
of
workes
before
faith
.
And
doth
it
therefore
followe
,
that
works
done
after
faith
,
doe
iustifie
?
Saint
Paule
extendeth
the
saluation
(
which
is
sealed
vnto
vs
by
the
lauer
of
newe
birth
,
and
renewing
of
the
holy
Ghoste
,
which
he
hath
poured
richly
vpon
vs
by
Iesus
Christ
our
sauiour
,
vnto
eternall
life
:
therefore
it
followeth
,
that
beeing
iustified
by
his
grace
,
we
might
be
made
heires
according
to
the
hope
of
eternall
life
.
Vpon
the
2.
text
Es.
64.
I
saide
:
the
Popish
Church
is
not
content
to
be
clothed
in
the
white
shining
silke
,
which
is
the
iustification
of
Saintes
,
made
white
in
the
bloud
of
the
lambe
,
but
with
the
filthy
ragges
of
mannes
righteousnesse
.
Bristowe
asketh
where
I
learned
,
to
call
the
good
workes
done
in
the
Church
,
the
filthy
ragges
of
mans
righteousnesse
?
Verily
,
euen
of
Esaie
who
speaketh
in
the
person
of
the
Church
:
All
we
are
as
an
vncleane
person
,
and
all
our
righteousnesse
,
as
filthy
ragges
.
For
although
God
accept
our
workes
,
that
are
done
in
faith
,
and
pardon
their
imperfection
,
yet
when
they
are
obtruded
vnto
him
,
to
iustifie
vs
,
he
abhorreth
them
,
as
in
the
Pharisee
Luke
18.
That
the
iustifications
of
the
Saintes
.
Apoc.
19.
are
good
workes
,
Bristowe
would
haue
it
appeare
by
conference
of
1.
Iohn
.
3.
He
that
worketh
iustice
is
iust
,
where
he
reasoneth
of
the
effectes
of
a
iust
man
,
&
not
of
the
cause
.
No
flesh
is
iust
by
workes
of
the
law
,
but
by
faith
,
by
which
God
maketh
iust
,
euen
the
vngodly
man
.
But
how
much
better
conference
is
it
,
to
know
,
what
the
white
〈◊〉
meaneth
,
which
is
the
iustification
of
Saintes
,
to
compare
it
with
other
places
of
the
same
prophecie
,
as
Apoc.
7.
where
it
is
shewed
,
howe
the
stoles
of
the
faithful
are
made
white
,
with
the
bloud
of
the
lambe
,
and
with
the
place
of
Saint
Paule
shewing
how
the
Church
is
made
white
,
and
without
spotte
and
wrinckle
by
the
death
of
Christ
?
Ephe.
5.
Touching
freewill
,
I
saide
,
we
beleeue
,
that
man
after
his
fall
,
hath
not
free
will
,
no
not
aptnesse
of
will
to
thinke
any
thing
that
is
good
.
2.
Cor.
3.
Bristow
translateth
the
worde
,
we
are
not
sufficient
,
but
the
text
is
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
We
are
not
apte
,
to
thinke
any
thing
of
our selues
as
of
our selues
,
but
our
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
aptnes
,
is
of
God
.
To
this
Bristowe
replyeth
,
that
naturall
free
will
is
not
taken
from
vs
,
nor
naturall
aptnes
of
will
.
I
hope
he
speaketh
like
a
Philosopher
,
and
not
like
a
flat
Pelagian
.
But
I
speake
as
a
Christian
of
the
fredome
of
mans
will
vnto
good
,
which
is
none
but
bondage
vnto
euill
,
except
he
be
regenerate
,
and
then
is
his
will
framed
of
God
in
parte
,
to
good
,
but
not
perfectly
in
this
life
,
as
regeneration
is
not
perfectly
finished
before
the
redemption
of
our
bodies
:
as
for
freedome
opposite
to
coaction
,
if
Bristowe
meane
that
,
by
reteyning
of
free
will
,
I
graunt
euery
mans
will
to
be
free
from
constreint
,
but
not
from
seruilitie
vnto
sinne
.
Whereof
Saint
complaineth
,
Rom
7.
Moreouer
I
saide
Pur.
35.
how
should
your
free
will
〈…〉
e
mainteined
,
if
Gods
spirite
haue
any
place
,
that
di
〈…〉
ributeth
to
euerie
one
according
to
the
good
pleasure
〈…〉
f
his
owne
will
?
1.
Cor.
12.
Bristowes
aunswere
is
,
that
God
can
worke
his
owne
will
vpon
our
willes
,
which
is
〈…〉
ery
true
,
but
without
working
of
Gods
spirite
,
our
will
〈…〉
at
h
no
aptnesse
vnto
any
good
thing
.
Againe
he
saith
,
〈…〉
hat
Saint
Paule
speaketh
of
the
giftes
,
that
are
freely
gi
〈…〉
en
,
and
not
of
them
,
that
make
a
man
acceptable
,
as
〈…〉
hough
there
were
any
gifts
,
which
are
not
freely
giuen
.
And
it
is
euident
that
he
speaketh
generally
of
all
working
of
Gods
spirite
,
euen
of
confessing
Iesus
to
be
Christ
,
and
not
of
speciall
graces
onely
.
So
that
Bristowes
aunswere
is
nothing
to
the
purpose
,
or
matter
〈…〉
n
question
.
For
I
holde
,
that
we
haue
no
aptenesse
vnto
〈…〉
ny
good
,
of
our
owne
freewill
,
but
onely
of
the
grace
of
God
.
Bristow
saith
,
I
imagine
that
God
is
not
omni
〈…〉
otent
,
if
we
haue
willes
of
our
owne
,
which
I
neuer
〈…〉
enied
:
but
that
we
haue
willes
of
out
owne
vnto
good
,
before
they
be
framed
therto
by
Gods
spirit
,
is
the
thing
〈◊〉
denye
.
About
good
workes
in
speciall
,
namely
prayer
to
Saintes
,
〈…〉
astinge
,
merites
.
Concerning
inuocation
of
Saints
,
I
saide
Purg.
451.
He
quoteth
also
Philemon
,
whose
loue
&
faith
the
Apostle
commendeth
towardes
the
Lorde
Iesu
,
and
towards
all
his
Saints
,
where
euerie
wise
man
seeth
that
faith
is
referred
to
Christ
,
and
loue
to
the
Saints
.
But
the
scripture
reacheth
him
to
beleeue
(
he
saith
)
in
Christ
according
to
his
humanity
and
namely
in
his
blood
.
Iohn
.
14.
Rom.
3.
He
will
proue
an
Arian
or
a
Nestorian
shortly
.
The
place
of
Iohn
proueth
the
diuinity
of
Christ
,
because
he
is
to
be
beleeued
on
,
euen
as
God
.
And
where
the
Apostle
saith
,
that
God
hath
made
Christ
a
propitiation
through
faith
in
his
blood
,
he
meaneth
not
that
we
must
beleue
in
the
blood
of
Christ
,
as
it
is
a
creature
,
but
that
the
death
and
blood-shedding
of
Christ
,
is
the
meane
of
our
reconciliation
vnto
God
.
But
the
Nicene
Creede
&
Hieronyme
,
contra
Lucif
.
vse
the
phrase
of
Credere
in
Ecclesiam
,
to
beleeue
in
the
Church
.
I
answere
,
they
meane
no
more
thereby
,
then
they
which
vse
the
distinction
Credere
in
Deum
,
Credere
Deo
,
&
Credere
Deum
,
which
Bristowe
saith
hath
deceiued
me
.
Augustine
(
as
Bristowe
confesseth
)
maketh
it
proper
to
God
,
that
we
beleeue
in
him
We
beleeue
not
in
Peter
,
we
beleeue
not
in
Paule
.
In
Iohn
.
129.
Neither
saith
the
Nicene
Creede
,
or
Hieronyme
contrary
thereto
,
that
we
should
put
our
whole
trust
and
confidence
in
the
Church
,
but
in
God
only
.
Therfore
although
they
speak
otherwise
then
Augustine
,
they
meane
not
otherwise
then
he
.
Ruffinus
also
in
his
exposition
of
the
Creede
,
writeth
both
plainly
and
effectually
:
Sequitur
namque
post
,
&c.
For
it
followeth
after
this
saying
:
The
holy
Catholique
Church
,
the
remission
of
sinnes
,
the
resurrection
of
the
bodie
:
he
saith
not
in
the
holy
Catholique
Church
,
in
the
remission
of
sinnes
,
in
the
resurrection
of
the
fleshe
.
For
if
he
had
added
,
the
preposition
,
In
,
the
sense
should
haue
bene
made
one
,
and
the
same
with
the
former
articles
.
But
euen
in
those
termes
truly
,
where
faith
is
ordered
of
the
diuinitie
,
it
is
saide
,
in
God
the
father
,
and
in
Christ
his
sonne
,
and
in
the
holy
Ghost
.
But
in
the
rest
,
where
the
speach
is
not
of
the
Godhead
,
but
of
creatures
and
the
mysteries
,
the
preposition
,
In
,
is
not
added
,
that
it
should
be
said
we
must
beleeue
in
the
holy
Church
,
but
the
holy
Church
:
not
as
God
,
but
as
the
Church
gathered
into
God
.
And
that
men
should
beleue
,
that
there
is
remission
of
sinnes
,
not
in
the
remission
of
sinnes
,
that
they
should
beleeue
the
resurrection
of
the
body
,
not
in
the
resurrection
of
the
body
.
Therefore
by
this
syllable
of
the
Preposition
,
the
Creator
is
distinguished
from
the
creatures
,
and
things
diuine
,
are
separated
from
things
humane
.
Neuerthelesse
,
Bristowe
saith
,
they
beleue
both
in
God
,
in
Christ
and
in
his
Saints
,
and
inuocate
them
all
,
though
not
all
alyke
,
but
then
let
him
heare
,
what
Cyprian
saith
,
De
duplici
Martyrio
.
Non
credit
in
Deum
,
qui
non
in
eo
solo
collocat
totius
faelicitatis
suae
fiduciam
.
He
beleueth
not
in
God
,
which
placeth
not
in
him
alone
,
the
hope
of
his
whole
felicity
.
Whervpon
it
followeth
,
that
they
which
beleeue
in
saints
,
&
place
some
part
of
their
hope
of
felicite
in
them
,
&
not
in
God
alone
,
by
his
iudgment
,
&
by
the
iudgment
of
the
Apostle
also
beleeue
not
in
God
.
Where
I
said
,
if
Saints
also
are
to
be
inuocated
,
then
God
alone
knoweth
not
the
heartes
of
all
men
,
and
God
onely
is
not
to
be
worshipped
and
serued
,
and
Christ
is
not
our
onely
Mediatour
and
Aduocate
:
Bristowe
calleth
it
iangling
,
without
allegations
.
I
supposed
these
principles
had
bene
sufficiently
knowen
to
euerie
learned
Papist
,
without
allegations
,
but
seeing
Bristowe
will
not
take
knowledge
of
them
,
because
he
knoweth
not
how
to
shift
his
handes
of
them
.
For
the
first
,
my
allegation
shall
be
1.
Reg.
8.
Salomon
in
his
prayer
sayth
vnto
God
:
What
prayers
or
supplications
shal
be
made
of
any
man
,
or
of
all
thy
people
Israel
,
when
euerie
one
shal
knowe
the
plague
in
his
own
hart
,
and
stretche
foorth
his
handes
in
this
house
,
Heare
thou
then
in
heauen
in
thy
dwelling
place
,
and
be
merciful
,
and
doe
and
giue
euery
man
according
to
all
his
wayes
as
thou
knowest
his
heart
,
for
thou
onely
knowest
the
harts
of
al
the
children
of
men
.
For
the
second
,
that
God
only
is
to
be
worshiped
and
serued
,
it
is
the
saying
of
our
sauiour
Christ
,
Math.
4.
&
Luk
4.
Thou
shalt
worship
the
Lorde
thy
God
,
and
him
only
shalt
thou
serue
.
That
Christe
onely
is
our
Mediator
and
Aduocate
,
Saint
Paule
testifieth
1.
Timoth.
2.
there
is
but
one
God
and
one
mediatour
of
God
and
men
,
the
man
Iesus
Christ
,
in
which
place
he
speaketh
of
Prayer
,
supplications
,
intercessions
,
&c.
to
be
made
for
all
men
.
And
Saint
Iohn
1.
Ioh.
2.
If
any
man
sinne
,
we
haue
an
aduocate
with
the
father
Iesus
Christ
the
righteous
and
he
is
the
propitiation
for
our
sins
.
But
,
saith
Brist
,
as
I
say
to
Ambrose
,
&
others
whom
I
confesse
to
be
of
the
true
Church
,
so
must
I
saie
it
to
Saint
Iohn
Apoc.
1.
for
inuocating
the
holy
Angells
.
But
I
finde
not
that
Iohn
did
inuocate
the
holy
Angels
,
in
that
place
,
although
the
seuen
spirites
from
whom
he
wisheth
grace
,
should
not
be
the
holy
Ghost
,
but
Angels
the
ministers
of
the
holy
Ghost
.
For
he
that
prayeth
that
God
will
sende
raine
from
heauen
,
doth
not
inuocate
heauen
.
But
I
must
saie
the
same
to
God
him self
,
for
making
an
Angell
to
be
worshiped
as
Apoc.
3.
as
he
hath
told
me
in
the.
6.
Chapiter
,
where
I
haue
told
him
mine
answere
.
likewise
to
the
Angell
Apoc.
8.
Which
made
a
perfume
with
the
prayers
of
Saintes
,
and
to
the
24.
Seniors
which
had
sweete
odours
,
that
is
,
prayers
in
bowles
,
&c.
But
there
is
no
such
neede
,
the
Angell
Apoc.
8.
representeth
Christe
,
the
onely
high
priest
that
hath
authoritie
to
stande
at
the
altar
in
heauen
,
and
offer
incense
,
and
to
present
the
prayers
of
the
Churche
,
that
they
may
be
acceptable
to
God
.
Heb.
13.
The
Elders
are
the
Churche
of
God
,
in
the
whole
world
,
whose
prayers
and
supplications
,
only
our
sauiour
Christ
maketh
acceptable
.
But
it
maketh
nothing
against
our
Mediatour
to
God
,
saith
Bristowe
,
though
we
are
and
haue
neuer
so
many
Mediatours
,
so
that
all
make
suite
to
God
by
him
.
Then
it
maketh
no
matter
howe
many
petie
Gods
we
haue
,
so
one
be
principal
,
as
Plato
taught
.
Againe
he
saith
:
it
is
nothing
against
God
alone
,
to
be
worshipped
,
so
that
we
worshippe
none
but
for
him
.
If
this
were
true
,
it
were
lawfull
to
worship
the
Diuel
,
because
hee
is
Gods
minister
,
and
hath
great
power
vnder
him
:
yea
our
Sauiour
Christ
had
not
aunswered
his
temptation
,
when
he
required
to
be
worshipped
,
as
one
that
had
all
the
glorie
of
the
world
committed
by
God
to
him
to
bestowe
at
his
pleasure
,
in
saying
it
is
written
,
Thou
shalt
worship
the
Lorde
thy
God
,
and
him
only
shalt
thou
serue
.
Last
of
all
,
he
saith
it
is
nothing
against
God
aboue
,
to
know
our
harts
,
so
that
all
others
knowe
them
by
him
.
But
Salomon
reasoneth
that
God
onely
is
to
be
called
vpon
,
because
he
onely
knoweth
the
heartes
of
all
men
.
And
where
findeth
Bristowe
,
that
all
others
,
or
any
one
by
God
,
knoweth
the
heartes
of
all
men
?
To
conclude
,
the
worde
onely
,
excludeth
no
more
with
Bristowe
,
then
he
list
to
admitte
by
his
blinde
distinctions
,
which
if
they
may
be
permitted
against
the
plaine
sense
and
wordes
of
the
Scriptures
,
nothing
shal
be
left
proper
to
God
,
nothing
proper
to
our
Sauiour
Christe
,
nothing
proper
to
any
thing
,
that
the
Scripture
maketh
peculiar
vnto
it
.
The
next
title
is
fasting
,
about
which
Bristowe
reporteth
,
that
I
say
:
Purg.
391.
You
are
they
that
attend
to
spirites
of
errors
,
&
doctrine
of
deuils
,
forbidding
to
marry
,
&
abstaining
,
or
commaunding
to
abstaine
from
meates
,
which
God
hath
created
to
bee
receiued
with
thanksgiuing
.
1.
Tim.
4.
There
is
the
brandmarke
of
Romish
religion
,
that
all
the
water
in
Tiberis
,
nor
in
the
Ocean
sea
,
shall
not
be
able
to
wash
out
.
Against
this
:
Soft
alitle
(
sayeth
Bristowe
)
and
you
shall
see
mee
drawe
inough
&
inough
againe
,
euen
out
of
your
owne
puddle
,
to
wash
all
sufficiently
.
But
what
draweth
hee
?
I
confesse
that
Aerius
&
Iouinian
condemned
fasting
or
fasting
dayes
?
what
then
?
Abstinence
from
certeine
meates
is
a
question
distinct
from
fasting
,
which
is
abstinence
from
all
meates
.
But
Iouinian
(
sayeth
hee
)
taught
abstinence
from
certeine
meates
to
profite
nothing
.
Well
:
Aerius
contrariwise
taught
abstinence
from
fleshe
to
be
a
religious
matter
,
as
you
Papistes
doe
.
For
to
absteine
from
wine
,
fleshe
,
fishe
,
spices
,
fruites
,
or
any
thing
which
perteyneth
to
sobrietie
,
is
not
to
thinke
it
vnlawfull
to
eate
or
drinke
any
of
these
,
at
this
tyme
,
or
that
time
,
as
it
is
thought
of
you
Papistes
,
and
a
matter
of
more
holynesse
,
to
fill
your
belly
with
fishe
,
then
with
fleshe
,
although
the
fish
,
wyne
,
fruites
,
spices
,
and
such
like
confections
as
you
eate
,
be
tenne
times
more
dangerous
vnto
sobrietie
and
chastitie
,
then
a
piece
of
beef●
or
bacon
,
which
a
poore
man
eateth
on
a
fryday
to
satisfie
his
hunger
,
and
giueth
God
thankes
for
it
.
Your
publike
admitting
of
all
incentiue
meates
&
drinkes
,
except
flesh
or
white
meate
on
your
fasting
dayes
,
sufficiently
declareth
,
that
neither
fasting
nor
chastisement
of
mens
bodyes
is
your
intent
:
but
as
the
Apostle
sayeth
,
false
speaking
in
hypocrisie
.
But
whome
and
what
doeth
Saint
Paul
meane
(
sayeth
Bristowe
?
)
Hee
aunswereth
,
the
Manichees
,
the
Tacianistes
,
and
other
heretikes
,
which
sayde
,
that
certeine
meates
were
the
creatures
of
the
diuell
.
Nay
Bristowe
,
not
them
onely
,
nor
principally
;
but
all
other
heretikes
that
sayde
,
fleshe
was
vncleane
,
although
they
confessed
it
to
be
the
creature
of
God
,
as
the
Aeriaus
and
Priscillianistes
,
and
specially
the
Papistes
,
which
vnder
pretence
of
holynesse
,
as
fasting
and
chastitie
,
commaunde
to
abstaine
from
meates
and
marriage
.
For
they
that
abstaine
from
these
things
,
saying
they
are
the
creatures
of
the
diuell
,
speake
not
a
lye
in
hypocrisie
,
but
an
open
blasphemie
.
As
for
the
example
of
them
,
whose
voluntarie
abstinence
from
meates
or
marriage
,
Saint
Augustine
defendeth
,
contra
Faust.
lib.
30.
Cap.
6.
cannot
excuse
you
,
which
forbid
meates
and
marriage
,
more
imperiously
to
some
men
at
all
times
,
and
to
all
men
at
some
times
,
then
euer
the
Manichees
did
to
their
cleargie
,
or
priests
,
which
they
called
perfect
ones
.
Another
saying
of
myne
,
Art.
46.
Bristowe
repeateth
:
If
Iouinian
taught
that
fasting
,
abstinence
from
certeine
meates
,
and
other
bodily
exercises
,
of
them selues
profite
little
,
his
doctrine
agreeth
with
the
doctrine
of
Saint
Paul
,
1.
Timothie
.
4.
But
if
he
taught
,
as
hee
is
charged
,
that
such
thinges
profite
nothing
at
all
,
wee
agree
not
with
him
in
that
opinion
.
To
this
(
Bristowe
sayeth
)
I
woulde
fayne
wype
myne
handes
of
Iouinians
heresie
,
but
it
will
not
bee
:
For
his
heresie
was
,
that
fasting
and
abstinence
is
not
more
meritorious
then
eating
with
thankesgiuing
.
If
you
call
this
heresie
,
I
am
nothing
ashamed
of
it
:
there
is
no
more
merite
in
the
one
than
in
the
other
.
But
howe
prooue
you
that
was
his
heresie
?
Forsooth
Augustine
De
dogm
.
Eccles.
Cap.
68.
so
sayeth
.
But
who
shall
graunt
vnto
him
,
that
bastarde
collection
to
be
of
Saint
Augustines
penning
?
Well
then
the
vndoubted
Augustine
,
ad
Quodvult
enim
sayeth
:
meritis
adaequabat
,
hee
made
equall
to
the
merites
,
of
chaste
and
faithfull
matrimonies
,
the
virginitie
,
&c.
But
hee
that
is
acquainted
with
Saint
Augustines
writinges
,
shall
perceiue
that
by
merites
,
often
times
he
meaneth
not
as
the
Papistes
doe
,
the
desert
of
good
works
,
but
the
dignitie
,
excellency
,
commendation
.
For
merites
in
that
signification
as
the
Papistes
vse
,
he
alwayes
condemneth
them
in
the
Pelagians
,
and
all
other
,
saying
that
God
crowneth
or
rewardeth
in
vs
his
giftes
,
not
our
merites
.
For
our
merites
are
nothing
but
sinnes
in
Psal.
70.
Con.
2.
in
Psa.
101.
in
Psa.
144.
Now
haue
we
to
see
,
what
Saint
Paul
calleth
bodily
exercise
.
Bristowe
sayth
:
walking
,
ryding
,
hunting
,
hawking
,
and
such
like
exercises
,
vsed
for
preseruation
of
mens
bodies
.
And
thinke
you
Timothie
,
which
to
chastice
his
bodie
,
vsed
to
absteine
from
wine
,
was
doubted
of
S.
Paul
,
lest
he
should
giue
him selfe
ouermuch
to
walking
,
riding
,
hawking
,
hunting
?
At
least
wise
,
heare
what
S.
Ambrose
writeth
vppon
the
text
,
Exercitium
autem
corporale
,
&c.
He
saith
,
that
bodily
exercise
is
profitable
to
litle
.
For
to
fast
and
abstaine
from
meates
,
the
authoritie
of
the
creator
remaining
,
doth
not
profit
much
,
except
godlinesse
be
added
vnto
these
things
,
&c.
Let
Bristowe
s●ye
,
that
S
Ambrose
knewe
not
white
from
black
,
as
he
saith
of
mee
,
and
looke
better
to
his
conference
,
of
S.
Paules
abstinence
,
1.
Cor.
9.
from
all
things
the
were
offensiue
.
But
where
he
concludeth
,
the
measure
of
all
abstinence
is
to
tame
the
bodie
,
and
bring
it
in
subiection
to
the
spirite
,
but
with
such
moderation
,
that
it
fainte
not
in
our
necessarie
worke
,
I
agree
with
him
,
that
so
it
ought
to
be
,
but
that
so
it
is
not
,
nor
yet
entended
in
the
popish
commaundment
of
abstinence
,
as
I
haue
shewed
before
sufficiently
:
As
for
the
fasting
of
that
children
of
the
bridegrome
,
like
to
the
fastes
prescribed
by
the
disciples
of
Saint
Iohn
,
and
of
the
Pharisees
,
it
is
impertinent
to
speake
of
,
where
the
question
is
not
of
Christian
fasting
,
but
of
apostaticall
abstinence
from
meates
and
marriage
:
although
Christian
fasting
,
is
nothing
like
to
the
Pharisaicall
fasting
,
but
onely
in
refraining
from
meate
,
in
the
ende
and
manner
altogether
differing
and
vnlike
.
Math.
6.
Luke
.
18.
About
the
Sacraments
in
generall
.
Of
the
Sacraments
in
generall
,
I
say
:
Pur.
450.
Wee
Secondly
,
supposing
they
are
sacraments
of
the
new
●estament
,
by
Christ
instituted
,
he
asketh
what
reason
●t
is
,
to
argue
of
one
place
negatiuely
,
onely
two
are
●amed
,
ergo
onely
two
are
instituted
.
I
aunswere
,
the
argument
is
not
of
the
onely
naming
of
two
,
but
of
the
whole
argument
of
the
Apostle
,
which
is
,
to
proue
,
that
●he
fathers
in
participation
of
the
sacramentes
,
were
equall
with
vs
,
which
were
not
sufficiently
proued
,
if
hauing
named
onely
two
,
there
were
other
fiue
,
wherein
wee
are
superior
to
them
:
So
that
the
naming
of
two
,
is
in
this
place
the
excluding
of
all
other
except
those
two
.
Nowe
let
vs
discusse
Bristowes
reasons
for
the
number
of
Sacraments
to
be
seuen
.
Wee
read
of
the
other
fiue
in
other
places
.
Where
I
pray
you
?
Of
Confirmation
,
Iohn
the
7.
You
reade
more
then
I
can
finde
there
named
or
signified
,
except
you
meane
of
the
increase
of
Gods
spirite
in
more
excellent
and
euident
graces
,
which
the
faithfull
shoulde
receiue
after
the
resurrection
and
ascension
of
Christe
,
which
differeth
farre
from
confirmation
of
children
by
imposition
of
handes
.
Of
Penance
,
you
read
Iohn
.
20.
Of
power
giuen
to
the
Apostles
to
remit
and
reteine
sinnes
:
I
reade
but
of
auricular
confession
and
satisfaction
,
I
reade
not
.
Of
extreme
vnction
,
you
reade
Iac.
5
:
of
annoynting
the
sicke
with
oyle
,
which
by
a
speciall
gift
recouered
health
of
body
,
as
well
as
remission
of
sinnes
,
at
the
prayer
of
the
faithfull
,
I
reade
:
but
of
anealing
men
desperatly
sicke
,
which
hath
no
hope
of
bodily
recouerie
,
I
reade
not
.
Of
orders
,
you
reade
,
Math.
26.
but
I
reade
nothing
at
all
,
although
I
reade
that
the
Apostles
were
commaunded
to
continue
the
celebration
of
his
supper
instituted
by
him
,
which
were
before
ministers
of
his
sacramentes
and
preachers
of
his
worde
;
but
of
Bennet
and
Collet
,
coniurer
,
subdeacon
,
or
masse
priest
,
I
reade
not
in
all
the
Scripture
,
nor
of
Deacon
in
that
Chapter
.
Of
Matrimonie
,
both
yet
and
I
reade
Math.
19
but
not
instituted
at
that
time
by
Christ
,
but
long
before
in
Paradise
,
and
is
no
more
a
sacrament
of
the
newe
testament
,
then
the
raynebowe
,
which
yet
with
the
couenant
thereof
remaineth
in
vse
among
Christians
.
But
you
confesse
you
reade
not
in
those
places
,
that
they
are
sacramentes
,
no
more
doe
you
reade
,
1.
Cor.
10.
that
baptisme
,
or
the
Lordes
supper
are
sacraments
or
any
where
else
.
This
is
a
stale
quarrell
,
of
the
name
of
sacramentes
,
which
is
not
founde
in
Scripture
,
although
the
thing
signified
by
the
name
,
that
is
the
seales
of
Gods
promises
,
and
the
name
of
signe
of
Gods
couenants
be
often
founde
.
But
your
laste
refuge
is
,
that
the
Apostle
speaketh
onely
of
the
firste
entrance
into
Christianitie
,
which
in
antiquitie
was
by
baptisme
,
confirmation
,
the
complement
of
baptisme
,
and
the
Euchariste
,
and
therefore
speaketh
not
of
the
rest
.
Beside
that
this
fantasie
is
manifestly
contrarie
to
the
Apostles
purpose
,
which
was
to
shewe
,
that
the
externall
sacramentes
of
Gods
grace
,
without
a
godly
life
,
woulde
not
serue
to
assure
vs
,
that
God
was
pleased
withvs
:
it
is
cleare
,
that
the
Corinthians
,
among
whome
Saint
Paul
so
long
had
preached
,
coulde
not
bee
without
all
other
sacraments
,
if
any
other
were
.
They
had
children
to
bee
confirmed
,
they
themselues
were
married
,
elders
were
to
bee
ordered
,
offenders
by
penaunce
were
to
bee
reconciled
,
manie
were
sicke
,
and
some
were
fallen
a
sleepe
,
to
bee
anealed
.
And
Saincte
Paule
saith
expressely
,
they
were
behinde
in
no
grace
or
gifte
of
Gods
spirite
.
1.
Corinth
.
1.
Wherefore
,
that
they
were
younge
nouices
newely
entred
the
barres
,
and
not
knightes
exercised
in
battell
,
it
is
a
dreame
of
Bristowes
drowsi●
heade
,
and
no
trueth
to
bee
verified
of
the
Corinthians
.
Secondly
I
say
,
of
the
sacramentes
in
generall
,
that
they
giue
not
grace
ex
opere
operato
,
of
the
worke
wrought
,
but
after
the
faith
of
the
receiuer
and
according
to
the
election
of
Go●
.
〈◊〉
.
Corin.
10.
Againe
,
howe
should
the
sacrament
giue
grace
of
the
worke
wrought
,
if
faith
were
requisite
in
them
that
receiue
them
?
This
argument
,
saith
Bristowe
,
holdeth
aswell
against
the
working
of
Christs
passion
.
Why
sir
,
the
passion
of
Christ
giueth
not
grace
,
but
to
the
faithfull
and
electe
of
God
.
But
faith
,
you
say
,
is
no
work
,
nor
instrument
,
but
only
a
dispofition
as
drynesse
in
wodde
,
that
the
fire
worketh
vppon
.
I
will
not
enter
into
any
philosophicall
disputation
with
you
,
whether
it
bee
drinesse
or
moysture
in
the
wodde
that
the
fire
worketh
vpon
,
perhaps
you
thinke
,
that
water
is
moyster
then
ayre
,
which
error
,
if
you
had
no
more
,
cannot
make
you
an
heretike
.
But
I
meruaile
,
what
cause
you
will
make
faith
,
seing
you
exclude
it
from
efficients
,
except
you
make
it
a
matter
,
for
the
sacraments
to
worke
vpon
,
or
else
I
know
not
what
you
meane
by
that
your
disposition
lyke
drienesse
in
woode
,
which
in
deede
is
the
thinne
ayer
,
more
apte
to
receiue
inflammations
,
then
the
thicke
water
,
but
perhaps
you
make
it
onely
a
potentia
,
like
materia
prima
,
for
you
adde
,
that
by
our
indisposition
wee
doe
not
put
obicem
.
But
you
hold
that
the
sacraments
giue
grace
of
the
work
wrought
,
without
the
good
motion
of
the
vser
,
onely
so
hee
doe
no
part
obicem
,
that
is
,
so
he
doe
not
withstand
the
working
,
as
if
a
man
be
baptised
sleeping
,
and
thinking
nothing
of
it
.
Neuerthelesse
seing
the
scripture
often
affirmeth
that
God
worketh
in
vs
by
faith
,
faith
must
needes
bee
an
instrumentall
efficient
,
when
you
haue
saide
all
that
you
can
,
except
you
will
teach
vs
newe
gramer
and
Lògike
.
You
confesse
the
scripture
sayth
,
that
by
beleeuing
and
other
good
actions
,
wee
worke
our
owne
saluation
,
Phil.
2.
as
by
way
of
meriting
,
but
it
saith
not
that
we
worke
the
effect
of
any
sacrament
:
neither
doe
I
say
,
that
wee
worke
the
effecte
of
any
sacrament
,
but
that
God
worketh
in
vs
according
to
faith
,
which
he
giueth
vs
,
and
his
election
.
You
say
further
;
that
the
scripture
teacheth
,
that
the
passion
of
Christ
giueth
to
our
deedes
vertue
to
merite
:
where
is
that
scripture
written
?
for
vntill
you
shewe
me
where
it
is
written
,
I
will
say
still
to
you
as
I
saide
to
Allen
,
the
Church
of
Christ
abhorreth
that
blasphemie
,
beleeuing
stedfastly
,
that
we
are
iustified
freely
by
his
grace
through
the
redemption
of
Christ
Iesus
,
without
respect
of
our
works
.
Rom.
3.
4.
But
yet
Bristowe
will
make
men
beleeue
,
that
I
shew
manifolde
ignorance
,
where
I
say
Purg.
35.
The
meane
on
Gods
behalfe
by
which
we
are
made
partakers
of
the
fruites
of
Christes
passion
,
and
so
graffed
into
his
bodie
,
is
his
holy
spirite
of
promise
,
which
is
the
earnest
and
assuring
of
our
inheritaunce
:
who
worketh
in
vs
faith
,
as
the
onely
meane
by
which
the
righteousnesse
of
Christ
is
applyed
vnto
vs
,
Ephe.
1.
And
as
for
the
sacramentes
,
(
which
you
seeme
to
make
the
only
conduites
of
Gods
mercie
)
we
are
taught
in
the
holy
scriptures
that
they
are
the
seales
of
Gods
promises
giuen
for
the
confirmation
of
our
faith
,
as
was
circumcision
to
Abraham
,
when
he
was
iustified
before
through
faith
.
Rom.
4.
Bristowes
eyes
being
daseled
at
the
cleere
light
of
this
trueth
,
turneth
his
heade
away
from
the
matter
,
and
wrangleth
against
diuerse
points
of
Caluinisme
,
as
hee
saith
,
but
in
deede
of
meere
Bristowisme
.
For
Caluin
neuer
helde
any
such
matter
as
he
imagineth
:
He
asketh
whether
this
be
to
say
,
that
all
men
are
iustified
before
they
come
to
the
sacrament
,
as
though
Caluin
said
they
were
.
Whereas
a
great
number
are
iustified
neither
before
,
nor
after
the
receipt
of
them
.
But
this
is
to
say
,
that
as
Abraham
was
iustified
by
faith
,
without
respect
of
the
sacrament
,
so
are
all
they
that
are
iustified
,
iustified
by
faith
,
without
respect
of
the
sacrament
.
Secondly
he
asketh
,
whether
all
sacraments
be
seales
of
such
a
matter
.
Yea
verely
,
or
else
saint
Paul
proueth
the
iustification
of
the
Gentiles
by
faith
,
very
feebly
,
after
the
example
of
Abraham
.
Thirdly
hee
asketh
whether
all
Iewes
were
iustified
,
before
they
came
to
circumcision
,
which
I
neuer
hearde
any
man
to
affirme
,
but
that
as
many
Iewes
as
were
iustified
,
were
iustified
by
faith
,
as
Abraham
was
,
circumcision
no
more
regarded
in
their
iustification
,
then
it
was
in
the
iustification
of
Abraham
.
Last
of
all
he
asketh
,
whether
circumcision
were
to
the
Iewes
a
seale
of
such
a
matter
?
still
he
calleth
it
such
a
matter
,
because
he
dare
not
name
iustification
by
faith
.
O
the
stinge
of
a
wicked
conscience
.
But
to
the
question
.
I
aunswere
that
to
the
Iewes
which
were
iustified
by
faith
,
circumcision
was
a
seale
of
the
righteousnesse
of
faith
,
which
is
imputed
to
them
,
as
it
was
to
Abraham
without
merite
,
or
respect
of
their
circumcision
.
Other
pointes
of
mine
ignorance
,
he
saith
,
are
about
the
holy
spirite
of
promise
,
whereof
Saint
Paul
speaketh
Ephe.
1.
which
I
say
is
the
meane
,
to
make
vs
partakers
of
the
fruites
of
Christes
passion
:
Item
the
meane
to
graffe
vs
into
his
bodie
:
Item
,
that
it
worketh
in
vs
faith
.
In
the
conclusion
,
he
noteth
the
ignorance
of
the
Protestantes
,
where
they
holde
,
this
spirite
promised
to
be
nothing
else
,
but
the
gifte
of
tongues
,
that
is
to
say
,
Christs
greatest
gifte
,
to
be
his
least
gifte
.
Out
vpon
the
shamelesse
lyer
,
which
of
the
Protestantes
canst
thou
name
,
that
so
holdeth
?
We
all
holde
that
the
holy
spirite
of
promise
,
Ephes.
1.
is
the
spirite
of
adoption
,
by
which
we
are
assured
of
eternall
life
.
Rom.
8.
And
as
for
the
spirite
,
prophecyed
by
Ioel
,
and
Iohn
Baptist
,
promised
by
Christ
to
be
sent
after
his
ascension
,
we
holde
not
to
be
specially
of
the
spirit
of
adoption
,
which
the
Apostles
&
al
the
faithfull
had
before
Christes
death
,
and
much
lesse
of
that
spirit
,
which
your
Bishops
giue
by
imposition
of
hands
,
in
their
counterfeit
confirmation
,
which
is
the
spirit
of
vanitie
,
whose
fruites
appeare
not
in
any
of
the
receiuers
:
But
we
holde
that
promised
gifte
of
Gods
spirit
,
to
be
that
wonderful
reuelation
of
knowledge
and
vnderstanding
&
vtterance
in
all
states
&
degrees
of
true
Christians
generally
,
beside
a
great
number
of
particular
giftes
,
not
perpetuall
,
bestowed
vpon
the
Church
in
diuerse
speciall
members
,
for
the
certifying
thereof
in
the
first
publishing
of
the
gospel
.
As
for
your
conference
of
scriptures
,
whereof
you
prate
so
much
,
is
a
meere
confusion
of
matters
of
diuerse
senses
.
According
to
which
manner
of
conference
,
not
weighing
the
sense
of
euery
place
,
by
the
proper
circumstances
thereof
,
but
following
onely
a
sounde
and
similitude
of
some
wordes
,
euerie
heretike
might
colour
his
heresie
,
were
it
neuer
so
absurde
,
as
the
Valentinians
of
whom
Irenaeus
testifieth
,
that
they
patched
diuerse
sentences
together
,
to
make
a
shewe
,
as
though
their
heresie
were
contained
in
holy
write
:
which
was
nothing
else
,
but
as
if
a
man
breaking
a
goodly
image
of
a
king
in
peeces
,
shoulde
of
the
peece
after
his
owne
manner
ioyned
together
,
make
the
image
of
a
dogge
,
or
a
foxe
or
other
foule
beaste
,
Iren.
lib.
1.
Chapt.
1.
such
is
your
conference
of
the
spirite
of
promise
,
wherewith
the
faithfull
are
sealed
Ephes.
1.
with
the
spirite
of
tongues
and
prophecie
which
came
vppon
the
twelue
,
on
whom
saint
Paul
layed
his
hands
.
Acts
19.
The
last
errour
of
faith
hee
chargeth
mee
,
to
bee
the
onely
meane
,
which
hee
saith
,
is
no
meane
but
a
disposition
,
hee
thinketh
it
sufficiently
discouered
before
,
wherevnto
I
also
thinke
that
I
haue
made
answere
sufficiently
.
About
the
sacramentes
in
speciall
.
The
necessitie
and
effecte
of
baptisme
.
Concerning
baptisme
,
I
say
it
is
necessary
for
al
christians
it
is
necessarie
for
all
men
,
but
when
it
cannot
be
actually
had
,
the
effectuall
desire
of
it
supplyeth
the
want
:
which
desire
infantes
haue
not
,
and
therfore
onely
the
actuall
hauing
of
baptisme
,
doth
quicken
them
in
Christ
,
being
dead
in
Adam
.
Touching
the
saluation
of
infants
of
the
faithful
dying
without
baptisme
,
I
said
nothing
but
by
implication
,
that
there
is
no
such
necessitie
of
Baptisme
,
that
the
want
of
the
outwarde
sacrament
shoulde
condemne
the
seede
of
the
faithful
,
perteining
to
gods
election
&
couenant
,
where
there
is
no
default
,
either
of
contempt
or
neglect
of
it
.
Ro.
9.
Ge.
17.
And
seeing
Bristow
alloweth
the
effectuall
desire
in
men
of
yeares
to
supply
the
want
,
which
yet
the
wordes
of
his
text
,
Iam.
3.
of
which
he
taketh
colour
and
authoritie
of
his
doctors
,
that
condemne
all
vnbaptised
infants
wil
not
beare
,
what
reason
is
it
,
why
he
should
not
extende
his
supply
,
vnto
the
effectuall
desire
of
those
infants
,
parents
,
and
friends
,
whose
faith
he
acknoledgeth
to
supplie
the
want
of
actuall
faith
in
the
infants
that
are
baptised
?
Beside
this
hee
saith
that
he
did
mark
wel
ynough
where
I
said
that
the
sacraments
giue
grace
according
to
the
election
of
God
.
As
though
all
infants
baptised
,
&
so
dying
be
not
of
Gods
electe
,
or
that
some
be
not
saued
,
although
they
be
baptised
,
&
asketh
what
scripture
I
haue
for
this
geere
?
But
in
deede
he
bowleth
at
the
wrong
marke
,
for
in
saying
that
the
sacramentes
tooke
effect
according
to
the
faith
of
the
receiuer
and
according
to
gods
election
,
I
ment
,
that
God
in
baptisme
giueth
grace
to
infants
,
which
haue
no
actual
faith
of
their
owne
,
according
to
his
eternal
election
in
mercy
.
But
whether
al
infants
baptised
&
so
dying
be
of
the
number
of
gods
elect
,
as
I
do
not
know
,
so
I
wil
not
contend
.
But
this
I
know
,
that
if
they
were
not
elected
of
God
before
the
foundations
of
the
world
were
laide
,
the
receiuing
of
baptisme
,
cannot
make
them
Gods
elect
.
Ephe.
1.
Where
Bristowe
vrgeth
the
saying
of
saint
Peter
,
1.
Pet.
3.
baptisme
saueth
vs
now
,
it
is
a
weake
argument
to
proue
the
baptisme
of
infants
,
either
to
saue
them
all
that
receiue
it
,
or
to
condemne
all
that
receiueth
it
not
.
For
explicating
him
selfe
of
what
baptisme
hee
speaketh
,
he
addeth
,
not
the
putting
away
of
the
filth
of
the
flesh
,
as
you
woulde
say
,
outwarde
washing
,
which
is
the
externall
sacrament
,
but
the
interrogation
of
a
good
conscience
towardes
God
,
which
is
the
thing
signified
by
outwarde
washing
,
and
yet
not
founde
in
infantes
,
but
in
them
that
haue
knowledge
,
among
whom
,
whosoeuer
hath
it
not
,
hee
shall
no
more
bee
saued
then
any
was
preserued
from
drowning
that
was
not
in
the
Arke
of
Noah
.
In
which
Arke
one
at
leaste
was
saued
from
bodily
drowning
,
which
was
not
inwardly
baptised
with
the
spirite
vnto
saluation
.
The
figure
of
whom
,
I
might
vrge
as
probable
as
Bristow
doth
of
the
whole
number
saued
,
from
drowning
,
like
vnto
whom
al
they
that
are
baptised
are
brought
into
the
visible
Church
,
although
some
with
Cham
,
are
not
members
of
the
mysticall
bodie
of
Christ
.
Real
presence
transubstantiation
.
Touching
the
Eucharist
I
saide
,
Christ
is
present
at
Concerning
transubstantiation
,
I
said
,
Of
all
follyes
this
is
the
greatest
,
that
when
the
Papistes
haue
prated
neuer
so
long
of
the
sacrifice
of
breade
and
wine
,
at
the
laste
they
wil
haue
no
breade
nor
wine
in
their
sacrifice
.
First
he
saith
,
this
wise
argument
,
proueth
the
papistes
&
their
fathers
the
old
writers
,
to
be
fooles
.
To
this
I
replye
,
those
old
writers
,
which
are
none
of
the
papistes
fathers
,
although
they
supposed
Melchizedechs
bread
and
wine
,
to
bee
a
figure
of
our
sacrament
,
yet
they
were
not
such
fooles
to
denye
breade
and
wine
to
remaine
in
our
sacrament
.
But
for
answere
,
Bristow
saith
,
that
I
my selfe
confesse
,
that
the
drink
of
the
water
of
the
rock
,
was
a
figure
of
our
drink
in
Christs
Chalice
,
although
that
were
water
,
&
this
is
no
water
,
no
nor
made
of
water
,
how
much
more
,
might
Melchizedechs
bread
and
wine
be
a
figure
of
it
,
although
there
bee
no
breade
nor
wine
in
it
,
considering
it
was
made
of
breade
and
wine
,
and
retaineth
the
formes
of
breade
and
wine
?
&c.
But
where
hath
he
this
confession
of
mine
?
I
neuer
saide
the
water
of
the
Rocke
was
a
figure
of
Christes
cuppe
,
but
euen
Christs
cuppe
it selfe
,
and
the
very
bloud
of
Christ
in
a
sacrament
,
to
the
faithfull
,
as
the
wine
in
the
cuppe
is
to
vs
.
For
Christ
did
euen
then
feede
his
true
members
with
his
flesh
&
bloud
vnto
eternall
life
.
Iohn
.
6.
Marriage
of
Votaries
:
as
Bishops
,
Priests
,
Deacons
.
Because
we
say
,
the
marriage
of
votaries
is
sinne
and
we
are
the
forbidders
of
marriage
,
that
saint
Paul
speaketh
off
.
1.
Tim.
4.
But
this
saith
Bristow
,
I
haue
shewed
to
pertaine
to
the
Eucratites
,
&
Maniches
&c.
and
I
haue
shewed
that
it
pertaineth
more
properly
to
the
Papistes
.
But
saint
Augustine
aunswereth
them
&
Fulke
at
once
,
saith
Bristowe
,
Cont.
Faust.
lib.
30.
Cap.
6.
Ille
prohibet
nubere
,
qui
hoc
malum
esse
dicit
:
Hee
forbiddeth
to
marrie
,
that
saith
it
is
a
naughtie
thing
,
non
qui
huic
bono
aliud
melius
,
anteponit
,
and
not
he
,
which
to
this
good
thing
,
preferreth
an
other
better
thing
.
Well
,
if
he
forbidde
to
marrie
and
to
teache
the
doctrine
of
Deuills
,
which
saith
marriage
is
a
naughty
thing
,
then
you
Papists
,
which
(
as
you
confessed
before
)
saie
that
the
mariage
of
votarics
is
sinne
,
saie
it
is
a
naughty
thing
,
and
consequently
forbidding
to
marry
doe
teache
the
doctrine
of
Deuills
:
neither
can
you
shift
a
waie
to
saie
,
you
doe
not
affirme
,
that
which
is
marriage
indeede
,
to
be
a
sinne
but
that
which
is
falsely
called
marriage
:
for
you
saie
euen
as
the
Manichees
in
this
point
,
it
is
a
naughty
thing
,
for
the
Clergie
,
and
them
that
be
in
holy
orders
to
marry
,
and
therefore
you
compell
them
to
the
vowe
,
and
forbidde
mariage
to
all
that
will
enter
into
those
orders
,
and
also
into
moonkery
,
which
you
call
religion
,
as
though
holynes
and
religion
could
not
stande
with
marriage
.
And
therefore
to
you
,
as
well
as
to
the
Manichees
Saint
Augustine
speaketh
in
the.
4.
Chapter
of
that
Booke
,
in
defense
of
the
catholique
Church
which
in
his
time
forbadde
not
marriage
,
nor
compelled
any
to
virginity
.
Hoc
nobis
primum
responde●tis
velim
,
&c.
I
would
you
should
answere
this
thing
first
vnto
vs
,
whither
it
be
the
doctrine
of
Deuills
to
make
any
virgins
at
all
,
or
only
to
make
them
by
prohibition
of
marrying
?
if
by
prohibition
,
it
perteyneth
nothing
to
vs
,
for
we
our selues
doe
iudge
it
as
foolishe
a
thinge
to
staie
one
that
is
willinge
(
to
be
a
virgine
)
as
it
is
a
wicked
&
verie
vngodly
thing
to
compel
one
that
is
vnwilling
.
As
for
the
preferring
of
virginity
,
in
them
that
haue
the
gift
,
and
for
whom
it
is
conuenient
,
for
setting
forth
of
the
kingdome
of
God
,
before
marriage
,
according
to
the
doctrine
of
Saint
Paule
,
wee
agree
with
Saint
Augustine
and
dissent
from
Iouinian
,
if
his
doctrine
were
as
it
is
reported
.
But
if
Iouinian
taught
(
as
I
saide
)
Ar.
45.
that
such
as
coulde
not
conteyne
,
though
they
had
vowed
virginity
,
should
neuerthelesse
be
married
,
this
was
the
doctrine
of
Saint
Paul
,
it
is
better
to
marry
then
to
burne
.
And
although
Ambrose
&
Augustine
,
account
such
marriage
to
be
adultery
,
or
worse
then
adultery
,
yet
the
holy
Ghost
saith
:
marriage
is
honorable
in
all
men
and
the
bedde
vndefiled
.
Heb.
13.
And
for
them
that
cannot
conteine
,
although
they
haue
vowed
virginity
,
it
is
better
to
marry
then
to
burne
,
1.
Cor.
7.
except
Bristowe
thinke
it
better
to
quenche
the
fier
of
lust
,
with
fornication
and
vncleanes
:
For
all
men
cannot
conteine
,
neither
can
all
men
make
them selues
chaste
for
the
kingdome
of
God
.
Math
19
,
But
this
conference
of
Scripture
pleaseth
not
Bristowe
,
for
he
counteth
it
none
at
all
,
comparing
mee
for
want
of
conference
of
scripture
to
a
cloude
without
water
:
well
then
,
let
vs
heare
what
sweete
dewe
commeth
from
Bristowes
cloude
.
First
hee
asketh
what
it
is
to
burne
.
Hee
aunswereth
,
to
bee
troubled
with
the
pricking
of
the
fleshe
,
say
the
heretikes
.
Not
so
,
say
wee
:
for
Sainct
Paul
himselfe
was
troubled
much
,
with
such
pricking
,
2.
Corin.
12.
and
yet
hee
was
not
bidden
to
marrie
,
when
hee
prayed
so
instantly
against
it
,
but
it
was
saide
vnto
him
by
Christ
,
My
grace
is
sufficient
for
thee
,
my
strength
is
perfected
in
infirmitie
,
&c.
First
he
belyeth
vs
,
whome
hee
calleth
heretikes
,
to
say
that
to
burne
,
is
nothing
else
but
to
bee
troubled
with
the
pricking
of
the
flesh
:
for
wee
holde
,
there
is
no
praise
of
virginitie
,
where
there
is
no
naturall
prouocation
vnto
luste
.
But
to
burne
wee
say
,
is
to
bee
so
troubled
,
as
men
are
,
that
are
inflamed
with
lust
,
and
haue
no
lawfull
meanes
to
quench
the
same
.
Secondly
,
beholde
howe
shamefully
hee
slaundereth
Saint
Paul
,
to
be
much
troubled
with
such
pricking
of
the
flesh
,
where
he
complayneth
of
the
generall
rebellion
of
the
fleshe
,
against
the
spirite
,
the
messenger
of
Satan
to
buffet
him
,
euen
that
lawe
of
his
members
,
of
which
hee
complayneth
Rom.
7.
which
brought
him
captiue
vnder
the
lawe
of
sinne
.
As
for
that
pricking
,
which
Bristowe
speaketh
of
to
bee
so
much
in
a
bodie
so
exercised
with
afflictions
and
trauels
,
with
hunger
,
and
fastings
,
and
in
a
man
of
such
age
,
as
Sainct
Paul
was
at
that
time
,
when
he
wrote
vnto
the
Corinthians
the
second
Epistle
,
it
is
altogether
incredible
.
And
confessing
a
generall
rebellion
of
the
fleshe
,
against
the
spirite
vnto
all
sinne
,
it
is
not
probable
that
he
should
in
this
place
,
complaine
of
that
one
kinde
onely
,
from
which
age
and
weakenesse
of
bodie
woulde
priuiledge
him
,
if
godly
exercise
did
not
ridde
him
.
What
is
it
then
to
burne
,
saith
Bristowe
,
or
to
be
burned
?
saint
Paul
himselfe
telleth
vs
,
it
is
,
not
to
containe
:
If
they
doe
not
conteine
,
let
them
marrie
,
for
it
is
better
to
marrie
then
to
burne
,
for
marriage
is
honorable
and
vndefiled
,
but
fornicatours
and
adulterers
God
will
iudge
.
The
conference
whereof
is
this
:
Let
married
folke
vse
their
owne
bedde
,
&c.
and
let
the
vnmarried
folke
enter
into
marriage
,
rather
then
not
to
containe
,
to
burne
,
to
commit
fornication
.
So
that
to
burne
,
not
to
containe
,
and
to
commit
fornication
,
by
Bristowes
conference
,
is
all
one
:
So
that
hee
which
committeth
not
fornication
,
although
hee
bee
continually
inflamed
with
filthie
luste
,
yet
by
Bristowes
iudgement
,
hee
burneth
not
,
he
is
continent
,
hee
is
a
virgine
.
Againe
,
if
not
to
containe
,
and
to
burne
be
nothing
else
,
but
to
commit
fornication
,
it
woulde
followe
in
saint
Paules
wordes
,
that
men
are
not
commaunded
to
marrie
,
before
they
haue
made
triall
of
their
incontinence
by
committing
fornication
,
which
seeing
it
is
horrible
absurditie
:
it
followeth
,
that
the
Apostle
to
preuent
fornication
,
exhorting
men
to
marrie
which
containe
not
,
seeing
it
is
better
to
marrie
then
to
burne
,
vnderstandeth
incontinence
and
burning
,
for
an
inflammation
of
lust
,
without
fornication
,
or
actuall
filthinesse
committed
.
But
whatsoeuer
saint
Paul
speaketh
of
marriage
of
them
that
doe
not
containe
,
hee
meaneth
it
of
such
as
haue
made
no
vowe
to
liue
vnmarried
.
For
of
those
that
haue
vowed
,
his
sentence
is
(
saith
Bristowe
)
that
they
incurre
damnation
if
they
marrie
,
because
they
haue
broken
their
first
faith
:
1.
Tim.
which
faith
with
S.
Augustine
hee
vnderstandeth
for
their
last
vowe
of
widowhood
,
notwithstanding
,
that
I
shewed
,
both
by
conference
in
the
same
chapter
,
by
the
title
of
,
first
,
and
by
the
name
of
faith
,
that
it
cannot
properly
bee
so
taken
,
but
for
the
faith
of
Christianitie
,
euen
as
he
saith
:
if
any
prouide
not
for
his
family
,
he
hath
denied
the
faith
.
Where
I
finde
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
in
the
scripture
is
neuer
vsed
for
a
vowe
or
promise
made
to
God
.
Bristowe
aunswereth
,
why
?
doe
not
you
say
your selfe
,
that
both
there
&
once
afore
in
the
same
chapt
.
it
is
vsed
for
the
vow
or
promise
made
in
baptisme
?
no
sir.
I
neuer
said
it
.
I
said
that
the
first
faith
may
aptly
be
taken
for
the
faith
of
baptisme
,
and
Christianitie
,
except
you
wil
say
that
the
faith
of
Christianitie
embraced
by
baptisme
,
is
nothing
else
but
a
vowe
or
promise
made
to
God
.
Againe
,
can
you
remember
neuer
a
place
(
saith
he
)
where
the
faith
of
god
is
the
promise
of
God
?
looke
Rom.
3.
yea
sir
,
I
remember
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
taken
for
the
trueth
of
Gods
promise
,
but
I
finde
not
yet
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
taken
for
the
vowe
or
promise
made
to
God
,
which
because
you
your selfe
,
so
great
and
daily
a
conferrer
of
scriptures
,
coulde
not
finde
,
you
cur●olled
my
saying
,
repeating
my
wordes
for
a
vowe
or
promise
,
and
leauing
out
that
I
added
,
made
to
God
.
The
Latine
phrase
of
the
faith
or
promise
of
marriage
vsed
by
Saint
Augustine
and
other
Latine
writers
,
aunswereth
not
to
my
demaunde
,
of
the
vse
of
the
greeke
worde
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
‑
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
in
the
scriptures
:
which
if
the
Apostle
had
taken
for
the
promise
of
widowhood
made
in
their
admission
,
it
is
more
like
he
woulde
haue
called
it
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
their
former
faith
,
and
not
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
their
first
faith
.
Againe
the
conference
whiche
Bristowe
vrgeth
,
of
them
that
are
alreadie
turned
back
after
Satan
,
most
aptely
agreeth
to
them
that
had
forsaken
not
onely
their
widowhood
,
but
also
their
Christianitie
,
Loe
,
saith
Bristowe
,
your selfe
are
compelled
to
graunt
,
that
which
you
denyed
,
to
wit
that
they
shall
be
damned
because
they
forsake
widowhoode
?
and
how
forsake
they
widowhoode
but
by
marrying
?
ergo
,
Saint
Paul
saith
they
shall
be
damned
for
marrying
:
so
inuincible
is
the
texte
,
in
our
exposition
.
Fulke
,
it
goeth
harde
with
you
.
And
all
this
,
because
I
saide
such
wanton
young
huswiues
,
proceede
so
farre
,
that
at
length
they
forsake
widowhood
,
Christianitie
and
al.
Saide
I
onely
because
they
forsake
widowhoode
?
No
,
but
because
they
waxe
wanton
against
Christ
,
because
they
haue
forsaken
the
first
faith
,
which
is
Christianity
,
and
not
only
because
they
haue
married
,
and
giuen
ouer
theyr
widowhoode
:
whereof
whether
there
were
a
vowe
or
no
,
it
is
not
proued
.
Although
it
be
probable
,
there
was
a
promise
made
vnto
the
Church
,
because
such
poore
widowes
susteined
of
the
Churches
almes
,
were
imployed
to
be
helpers
1.
Cor.
12.
in
the
office
of
Deacons
.
Rom.
16.
Considering
that
it
was
not
sufficient
for
the
sicke
and
impotent
,
that
men
should
be
collectors
and
distributers
of
the
almes
,
but
women
also
were
necessary
,
for
diuers
seruices
about
them
which
were
not
conuenient
for
men
to
exercise
.
But
if
I
should
graunt
vnto
you
,
that
the
first
faith
here
,
signifieth
the
last
vowe
of
widowhoode
,
yet
it
foloweth
not
of
this
place
,
that
all
that
haue
married
after
rashe
vowes
made
to
the
contrary
,
are
damned
.
For
Saint
Paule
speaketh
not
of
them
that
were
constreined
by
the
necessity
of
incontinencie
(
which
it
is
not
euery
mans
gift
to
auoyde
)
to
flye
to
the
generall
remedy
appoynted
by
God
,
for
auoyding
of
fornication
,
that
euery
man
should
haue
his
wife
,
and
euery
woman
should
haue
her
husband
,
without
any
exception
:
but
only
of
them
he
speaketh
,
that
waxed
wanton
against
Christ
,
which
being
liuing
to
the
worlde
,
were
dead
to
God
.
What
is
this
against
them
,
which
ignorantly
rashly
or
constrainedly
made
a
vowe
to
performe
,
that
which
they
were
not
able
?
namely
continence
or
chastity
,
without
mariage
,
the
breache
whereof
is
not
only
by
mariage
,
but
much
more
by
fornication
and
vncleanes
,
yea
by
continuall
burning
,
without
actuall
filthinesse
,
which
with
Saint
Paule
is
incontinence
.
And
yet
the
Papistes
,
as
though
there
were
no
way
to
breake
such
vowe
,
but
by
marriage
,
which
is
the
best
meane
of
chastitie
,
for
them
that
can
not
be
chaste
in
single
life
,
crie
out
damnation
only
against
married
votaries
,
affirming
that
infinite
whoredoms
and
vncleanes
,
are
lesse
breach
of
vow
,
then
marriage
,
and
the
marriage
of
votaries
to
be
no
marriage
.
Yet
Saint
Ambrose
,
who
counteth
it
an
adulterie
against
Christe
,
for
a
vowed
virgine
to
marrie
,
counteth
the
marriage
of
such
a
one
,
in
respect
of
her
bodily
husbande
to
be
lawfull
matrimony
,
and
a
much
lesse
fault
,
to
enter
into
mariage
,
then
once
to
committe
fornication
.
Ad
Virg.
Laps
.
Cap.
5.
And
more
plainly
Saint
Augustine
which
counteth
the
mariages
of
such
,
of
whom
the
Apostle
speaketh
to
be
worse
then
adulteries
,
in
respect
of
the
breache
of
theyr
vowe
,
made
to
Christ
:
yet
counteth
them
to
be
mariages
,
and
no
adulteries
,
and
detesteth
the
separation
of
such
married
persons
,
De
bono
Vid●
.
Cap.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Where
Allen
railing
against
our
Bishops
,
and
as
he
termeth
our
disordered
newe
ministery
,
saith
,
that
ere
euer
they
be
well
warmed
in
theyr
benisices
,
they
must
for
the
most
part
,
as
it
were
Annexum
ordini
,
haue
a
wife
.
I
answered
,
Belyke
Saint
Paule
taketh
marriage
to
be
so
annexed
to
the
order
of
an
ecclesiasticall
minister
,
that
he
neuer
describeth
the
perfect
paterne
of
a
Bishop
or
Deacon
,
but
one
of
the
first
pointes
is
,
that
he
be
the
husband
of
one
wife
.
Bristowe
saith
,
I
alledge
the
text
to
salue
our
Bishops
itching
lust
:
and
more
blasphemously
speaketh
Allen
against
our
ministers
marriage
,
whom
yet
they
account
to
be
but
laie
men
.
Where
are
they
nowe
that
saye
mariage
is
a
naughty
thing
?
But
concerning
the
terme
of
Annexum
ordini
,
although
I
saide
in
derision
therof
,
Belyke
,
&c.
as
before
,
yet
I
ment
not
,
that
it
was
necessary
for
euery
perfect
minister
to
be
married
,
but
that
none
is
more
perfect
,
then
they
that
are
married
.
Notwithstanding
some
men
considering
that
the
Apostle
requireth
hospitality
,
that
is
the
charitable
entertainment
of
poore
straungers
,
as
a
speciall
vertue
in
a
Bishoppe
or
minister
of
the
Church
,
thinke
marriage
to
bee
more
conuenient
then
sole
life
,
for
that
degree
,
because
diuerse
partes
of
hospitality
,
of
whiche
Saint
Paule
maketh
,
the
washinge
of
the
Saintes
feete
,
one
,
and
suche
like
,
are
not
conuenient
but
for
women
to
exercise
,
whome
it
were
inconuenient
,
that
a
Bishop
should
kepe
in
his
house
,
and
not
be
a
maried
man
.
But
Bristowe
will
teache
me
to
vnderstand
,
what
Saint
Paule
meaneth
by
the
husband
of
one
wife
,
by
conference
of
that
place
.
1.
Tim.
5.
where
he
will
haue
a
widowe
to
be
chosen
,
such
a
one
,
quae
fuit
vnius
viri
vx●r
,
as
hath
bene
the
wife
of
one
husband
:
so
that
he
requireth
in
a
Bishop
,
Priest
,
or
Deacon
,
to
be
made
,
that
he
haue
had
only
one
wife
.
Indeede
Bristowe
:
I
learne
by
this
conference
,
that
Saint
Paule
who
knewe
how
to
write
his
minde
in
Greeke
,
although
he
had
not
spoken
expresly
of
the
behauiour
of
Bishops
,
and
Deacons
wiues
.
1.
Tim.
3.
yet
vsing
the
present
temps
,
in
speaking
of
Bishops
,
Elders
,
and
Deacons
,
to
be
the
husbande
of
one
wife
,
&
the
preterperfect
temps
,
in
speaking
of
widowes
,
which
haue
had
one
husband
did
meane
,
that
he
requireth
such
a
one
to
be
made
Bishop
,
Elder
or
Deacon
,
which
presently
hath
a
wife
:
and
not
which
had
a
wife
,
that
at
the
time
of
their
election
were
deade
,
as
the
widowes
husbande
.
It
behoueth
a
Bishop
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
to
be
vnreprouable
,
the
husband
of
one
wife
,
sober
,
&c.
except
you
will
likewise
say
,
a
Bishop
must
be
such
a
one
,
as
hath
bene
sober
,
&c.
although
he
be
not
so
nowe
.
Againe
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
let
Deacons
be
the
husbandes
of
one
wife
.
And
againe
Tit.
1.
●i
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
if
any
man
is
vnreprehensible
,
the
husbande
of
one
wife
.
Therefore
a
Bishoppe
,
Elder
,
or
Deacon
,
may
be
he
,
that
hath
a
wife
,
presently
,
and
not
he
that
hath
had
one
which
is
dead
,
onely
.
Moreouer
I
learne
by
conference
of
that
place
,
1.
Tim.
5.
that
Polygamie
,
which
is
many
wiues
at
one
time
,
is
forbidden
a
Bishop
,
and
not
second
mariage
,
as
it
hathben
commonly
and
of
olde
time
taken
of
many
:
seeing
there
is
no
reason
to
exclude
a
poore
widow
from
almes
and
office
in
the
Church
,
that
hath
liued
continently
with
more
husbands
then
one
,
so
that
she
haue
kept
her
to
one
at
one
time
:
But
it
is
not
meete
,
that
she
should
be
elected
to
an
office
in
the
Church
,
which
hath
bene
an
adulteresse
,
or
vnlawfully
diuorced
from
her
husband
,
hath
maried
an
other
,
although
she
may
be
releeued
by
almes
,
if
she
be
penitent
.
But
Bristowe
would
haue
men
to
marke
it
well
,
that
yet
neuer
from
the
Apostles
time
,
to
this
day
,
any
one
Bishoppe
or
Prieste
,
that
is
confessed
to
haue
beene
a
good
one
,
did
marrie
afterwardes
,
no
not
Iouinian
him selfe
.
Hee
would
faine
if
he
durst
,
say
that
no
Bishoppe
or
Priest
had
a
wife
:
but
that
were
easily
refelled
out
of
Eusebius
and
all
auncient
histories
.
Clemens
Alex.
Strom.
lib.
3.
sheweth
that
the
Apostles
Peter
and
Philip
,
had
wiues
and
did
beget
children
.
Also
he
saith
of
Saint
Paule
,
Vnius
quoque
vxoris
virum
utique
admittit
,
seu
hoc
Presbyter
,
seu
Diaconus
,
seu
Laicus
viens
matrimonio
citra
reprehensionem
.
He
alloweth
the
husband
of
one
wife
,
whether
he
be
Elder
,
or
Deacon
,
or
lay
man
,
vsing
matrimony
without
reprehension
.
Seeing
therefore
he
putteth
no
difference
in
respect
of
matrimony
,
betweene
a
Laye
man
,
and
a
Cleargie
man
,
it
is
plaine
,
that
it
was
as
lawfull
for
Elders
and
Deacons
to
marrie
in
his
time
,
as
for
Lay
men
.
Againe
the
same
Clemens
saith
against
them
that
denyed
the
lawfulnesse
of
generation
,
after
he
had
cited
diuerse
textes
of
Scripture
.
Quid
autem
ad
haec
dicunt
,
qui
in
legem
,
&c.
But
what
say
they
to
these
thinges
,
which
inueygh
against
the
lawe
,
and
against
matrimony
,
as
that
it
was
graunted
onely
in
the
law
,
&
not
also
in
the
new
Testament
?
What
can
they
say
to
these
lawes
that
are
made
,
which
abhorre
sowing
and
generation
,
when
he
maketh
a
Bishop
also
,
him
that
ruleth
his
house
wel
,
guide
of
the
Church
?
And
the
marriage
of
one
woman
buildeth
the
house
of
our
Lorde
.
Therefore
he
saith
,
that
all
thinges
are
cleane
to
the
cleane
.
Seeing
therefore
that
marriage
is
as
free
by
his
iudgement
by
the
new
Testament
,
as
by
the
lawe
,
and
Aarons
Priestes
,
were
at
libertie
to
marrie
,
no
man
neede
to
doubt
,
but
the
Bishops
and
Elders
of
the
Churche
of
Christe
,
are
at
as
great
libertie
,
and
vsing
their
libertie
in
his
time
,
were
allowed
for
good
ones
.
Long
after
his
time
,
the
councell
of
Gangra
in
their
Epistle
to
the
Bishops
of
Armenia
complaine
of
Eustachius
and
his
sect
,
saying
,
Presbyteros
verò
,
qui
matrimonis
contraxerunt
,
sperni
debere
dicunt
.
They
saie
that
Elders
or
Priests
which
haue
ioyned
them selues
in
matrimony
,
ought
to
be
despised
.
Therefore
these
catholique
Bishops
thought
those
Priests
good
ones
,
which
did
ioyne
them selues
in
matrimony
,
&
so
they
made
their
Canon
:
Si
quis
discernit
Presbyterum
coniugatum
,
&c.
If
any
man
make
difference
of
a
married
Priest
,
as
though
by
occasion
of
his
marriage
,
he
ought
not
to
offer
,
and
doth
therfore
absteine
from
his
oblation
,
let
him
be
accursed
.
Cap.
4.
Of
Deacons
also
the
Ancyrane
councell
decreeth
Cap.
10.
Diaconi
quicunque
,
&c.
Whosoeuer
be
ordeyned
Deacons
,
if
at
the
same
time
when
they
were
ordeined
,
they
protested
,
saying
that
they
would
be
ioyned
in
marriage
,
because
they
could
not
so
continue
,
if
afterwarde
they
haue
married
wiues
,
let
them
remaine
in
the
ministerie
,
because
the
Bishop
hath
giuen
them
licence
:
But
so
many
as
haue
helde
their
peace
,
and
taken
imposition
of
handes
professing
continencie
,
and
afterwarde
be
ioyned
in
marriage
,
ought
to
ceasse
from
the
ministerie
.
Finally
the
Decree
of
Pope
Stephanus
is
cited
Dist
,
31.
Aliter
se
by
Gratian
and
Iuo
:
lib
4.
allowing
the
tradition
of
the
orientall
Churches
for
marriage
of
theyr
Church
ministers
.
Aliter
se
Orientalium
,
&c.
The
tradition
of
the
Easterne
Churches
hath
it
otherwise
,
and
otherwise
is
the
tradition
of
this
holy
Church
of
Rome
.
For
the
Priests
,
Deacons
,
and
Subdeacons
of
their
Churches
,
are
coupled
in
marriage
:
but
none
of
the
Priestes
of
this
Church
,
from
the
Subdeacon
vnto
the
Bishoppe
hath
licence
to
enter
into
mariage
.
It
were
hard
if
there
were
neuer
a
good
one
among
all
the
Cleargie
of
the
East
Churches
,
since
the
Apostles
time
,
which
haue
ben
married
and
yet
are
.
To
conclude
,
I
trust
it
is
apparant
to
the
indifferent
reader
,
that
such
texts
of
Scripture
as
I
alledged
in
those
two
bookes
,
which
Bristow
vndertaketh
in
this
confuse
manner
to
confute
,
were
rightly
applyed
,
and
without
all
violence
or
wresting
,
doe
proue
sufficiently
that
for
which
they
were
called
to
witnesse
.
And
as
for
the
popish
conference
of
Scriptures
,
wherof
Bristowe
once
againe
with
great
lothsomnesse
doeth
bragge
,
how
sound
it
is
,
you
may
perceiue
by
this
example
,
&
taste
,
giuen
by
him
in
this
Chapter
.
Wherefore
I
maruell
much
what
learned
ministers
of
our
church
these
were
,
whom
Bristow
affirmeth
(
being
in
number
more
then
a
dozen
,
and
diuerse
of
no
vulgar
wittes
)
by
their
onely
hearing
of
your
conference
of
scriptures
to
haue
become
papists
.
By
like
some
vagabonde
,
irregular
,
and
vnhonest
persons
,
being
depriued
of
their
ministerie
for
their
vngodly
behauiour
,
haue
sought
fauour
among
them
by
reuolting
,
or
at
least
counterfaiting
to
be
reuolted
to
papistrie
,
when
they
be
of
no
religion
,
commended
by
Bristow
for
their
wittes
,
but
neither
for
their
honestie
nor
learning
.
CAP.
IX
.
To
defende
,
that
the
doctors
,
as
they
be
confessed
to
be
ours
in
very
many
pointes
,
so
they
be
ours
in
all
pointes
,
and
the
Protestants
The
first
part
of
his
doctors
,
generally
his
challenging
words
.
I
confesse
not
the
doctors
to
be
yours
in
very
manye
points
,
nor
simply
in
fewe
pointes
,
nor
all
in
any
point
2
A
generall
answere
to
his
challenge
,
declaring
that
〈◊〉
neede
not
to
answere
his
doctors
particularly
.
His
first
reason
is
,
because
I
sayde
:
wee
stande
for
authoritie
His
second
reason
is
,
for
that
I
do
answere
all
mine
own
doctors
for
him
,
if
it
be
wel
considered
:
&
what
is
your
consideration
?
In
that
I
confesse
them
to
haue
helde
with
you
the
very
same
points
,
for
which
wee
must
bee
condemned
(
no
remedie
)
as
differing
from
the
doctors
in
the
greatest
pointes
.
What
are
those
I
pray
you
?
Bristowe
answereth
.
For
why
doeth
he
saye
,
that
we
are
against
the
honor
of
God
,
&
against
the
offices
of
Christ
,
but
because
wee
holde
inuocation
of
saints
,
and
worshipping
of
their
reliques
?
yes
sir
,
for
other
more
grosse
idolatrie
and
defacing
of
the
kingdome
,
priesthod
,
and
propheticall
office
of
Christe
,
and
for
holding
these
two
pointes
more
absurdly
and
grossely
then
any
of
the
doctors
did
.
Againe
,
why
doth
he
say
,
that
we
are
against
the
authoritie
of
Gods
worde
,
but
because
we
hold
with
traditions
,
as
the
doctors
did
?
I
aunswere
,
the
doctors
held
with
no
traditions
that
were
proued
to
be
against
the
written
worde
of
God
,
they
made
not
the
decrees
of
Councels
and
Popes
,
of
equall
autoritie
with
the
worde
of
God
as
you
do
.
But
of
one
of
the
greatest
pointes
he
repeateth
my
wordes
,
in
which
I
say
expressely
:
I
confesse
with
M.
Allen
,
that
the
old
writers
,
not
only
knewe
,
but
also
haue
expressed
the
value
of
our
redemption
by
Christ
,
in
such
wordes
,
as
it
is
not
possible
that
the
Popish
satisfaction
can
stande
with
them
.
And
yet
on
the
other
side
(
saith
Bristowe
)
see
what
followeth
immediatly
.
Against
the
value
of
which
redemption
,
if
they
haue
vttered
any
thing
,
by
the
worde
of
satisfaction
,
or
any
thing
else
,
we
may
lawfully
reiect
their
authoritie
,
not
onely
though
they
be
doctors
of
the
church
,
but
also
if
they
were
angels
from
heauen
.
But
what
I
pray
you
concludeth
Bristowe
of
these
two
sayings
.
His
wordes
followe
immediatly
:
So
that
nowe
we
no
more
neede
to
defende
against
him
,
that
wee
are
not
contrarie
to
the
doctors
,
then
that
the
doctors
are
not
contrary
to
them selues
.
As
though
it
were
impossible
for
men
to
be
contrarie
to
themselues
.
And
yet
I
say
no
more
of
them
,
then
of
the
angels
,
that
they
are
contrary
to
the
trueth
in
this
point
,
but
that
if
they
were
,
wee
might
reiect
them
as
lawfully
as
the
angels
,
if
they
brought
another
gospell
.
Last
of
all
he
sayth
:
Wee
neede
not
defend
that
we
are
contrarie
to
our selues
in
the
same
.
For
in
what
wordes
the
doctors
speake
thereof
,
the
same
do
wee
.
Neither
is
the
antecedent
true
,
nor
if
it
were
,
doth
the
argument
followe
.
For
you
will
not
saye
as
the
olde
writers
doe
,
that
through
the
redemption
of
Christ
,
a
man
is
iustified
before
God
by
faith
onely
.
without
respect
of
his
workes
or
merites
.
And
where
you
vse
the
doctors
wordes
,
you
either
vse
them
in
a
contrary
sense
,
or
else
elude
them
with
additions
&
distinctions
,
neither
grounded
on
the
Scriptures
nor
on
the
olde
doctors
,
but
inuented
out
of
your
owne
hereticall
braines
.
After
which
manner
it
is
easie
to
defend
that
they
say
nothing
against
any
heresie
,
which
they
doe
not
condemne
by
name
,
although
they
plainly
aduouche
the
trueth
,
against
such
errour
.
3
I
ioygne
with
him
neuerthelesse
particularly
.
Although
they
ascribe
not
infallibilitie
to
a
fewe
,
The
second
parte
.
Of
his
doctors
particularly
:
First
,
whether
they
expound
any
scripture
against
vs
.
As
touching
antichrist
,
I
sayd
,
Pur.
249.
The
seat
of
antichrist
was
apointed
to
be
set
vp
in
the
Latin
church
Ecclesia
Italica
.
The
consent
of
all
which
names
,
signifying
the
region
,
the
citie
,
the
kingdom
,
beare
so
harde
vpon
the
Pope
&
the
popish
church
of
Rome
,
that
Bristowe
,
though
he
laye
both
his
shoulders
to
it
,
shall
neuer
be
able
to
remoue
it
.
Secondly
I
sayde
of
Hierom
,
Pur.
373.
Hee
was
not
such
a
slaue
to
the
church
of
Rome
,
that
whatsoeuer
pleased
the
bishops
of
that
see
,
he
was
readie
to
accept
:
For
then
he
would
not
haue
beene
so
bold
to
call
Rome
the
purple
whore
of
Babylon
,
Praef.
ad
Paul
.
in
lib.
Didym
.
Bristow
replyeth
:
as
though
when
he
calleth
Rome
so
,
or
when
Augustine
calleth
it
the
Westerne
Babylon
,
they
meane
the
church
of
Rome
.
I
sayed
not
they
meane
the
church
of
Rome
,
as
it
was
in
their
time
,
but
that
antichrist
shoulde
sit
at
Rome
,
whome
the
scripture
sayeth
,
must
sit
in
the
temple
or
Church
of
God
,
2.
Thes.
2.
Neither
doeth
Augustine
meane
it
of
the
empire
,
but
of
antichrist
,
which
should
arise
in
the
Romane
empire
.
Neither
doeth
Hierom
meane
of
the
Paganisme
of
Rome
,
that
remained
in
his
time
,
which
in
the
place
by
Brist
.
cited
ad
Marcell
.
Ep.
16.
he
testifieth
to
haue
ben
trovnder
feete
,
but
of
the
purple
whore
sitting
aloft
,
vpon
the
rose
coulered
beast
,
of
the
wine
of
whose
fornication
,
all
nations
were
made
drunken
,
of
the
blasphemie
written
in
her
forehead
,
of
the
seuen
hilles
&c.
although
in
his
tyme
,
he
confesse
there
was
the
churche
of
God
,
the
tryumphe
of
the
Apostles
and
Martyrs
,
&c.
&
gentilitate
calcata
&
Gentilitie
being
troaden
vnder
feete
,
the
Christian
name
dayly
lifting
it selfe
aloft
.
But
that
Hierom
in
doubtes
did
seeke
for
resolution
of
Damasus
bishop
of
Rome
,
and
that
all
other
must
likewise
doe
.
Bristowe
citeth
his
Epistle
ad
Damasum
.
To
〈…〉
.
2.
in
which
he
consulteth
with
Damasus
,
whether
hee
should
vse
the
name
of
Hippostasis
,
and
saith
further
,
that
whosoeuer
gathereth
not
with
Damasus
,
doth
scatter
:
that
is
to
saye
,
whoso
is
not
Christes
is
antichrists
,
I
aunswere
,
all
this
was
well
,
so
long
as
Damasus
was
a
Catholike
bishop
,
but
that
Saint
Hierome
was
not
readie
to
accept
whatsoeuer
it
pleased
the
bishop
of
Rome
,
it
is
manifest
by
that
he
affirmeth
Liberius
to
haue
subscribed
to
the
Arrians
,
in
Catal.
script
.
which
he
would
neuer
haue
done
,
if
he
had
thought
it
impossible
for
the
bishop
of
Rome
to
erre
,
or
necessarie
for
him
to
followe
the
bishop
of
Romes
doctrine
in
all
things
.
The
place
cited
ad
Damasum
with
answere
to
it
,
is
in
my
confutation
of
Saunders
Rocke
,
Cap.
15.
And
therefore
the
saying
of
Leo
Epist.
89.
That
Christ
tooke
Peter
into
the
participation
of
the
vndiuided
vnitie
,
proueth
not
,
that
it
is
all
one
to
be
Peters
and
to
be
Christes
,
when
Peter
erreth
from
Christe
,
and
much
lesse
,
that
it
is
all
one
(
as
Bristowe
sayeth
)
to
be
in
vnitie
with
Peter
and
his
successours
,
meaning
the
Popes
,
and
to
be
in
vnitie
with
Christ
,
from
whome
,
not
onely
all
Popes
in
matter
now
of
controuersie
doe
.
But
diuerse
of
the
Bishops
&
Popes
of
Rome
haue
beene
deuided
into
horrible
and
confessed
errours
and
heresies
,
of
both
partes
:
as
Gentilisme
,
Arrianisme
,
Eu●ichianisme
,
Menothelitisme
,
Sadduceisme
.
Againe
,
I
saide
Pur.
320.
Which
of
your
prelates
wil
follow
Ambrose
in
his
commentarie
vpon
the
Apocalipse
,
where
he
interpreteth
the
whore
of
Babylon
to
be
the
citie
of
Rome
?
whose
wordes
Bristow
wil
recite
for
me
.
This
whore
doth
betoken
in
some
places
Rome
in
special
,
which
then
did
persecute
the
church
of
God
:
in
some
places
in
generall
,
the
citie
of
the
diuel
,
that
is
to
saye
,
the
whole
body
of
the
reprobat
.
Bristowe
asketh
if
it
be
not
a
perillous
point
to
touch
the
citie
of
Rome
in
saint
Iohns
time
,
when
it
did
persecute
the
church
of
Rome
?
As
though
S.
Iohn
telleth
a
storie
of
his
owne
time
,
and
not
a
prophecy
of
the
time
to
come
.
Ambrose
therfore
,
or
whosoeuer
writeth
that
commentarie
,
interpreteth
that
prophecy
,
Cap.
17.
to
be
fulfilled
of
the
citie
of
Rome
:
which
was
not
onely
of
persecution
,
but
of
seduction
.
But
the
vndoubted
Ambrose
(
if
you
remember
,
sayeth
Bristowe
)
of
the
church
of
Rome
sayeth
:
In
al
things
I
couet
to
followe
the
Romane
church
,
De
sac
.
lib.
3.
Cap.
1.
but
yet
that
he
was
not
bounde
to
followe
the
church
of
Rome
,
he
sayeth
immediately
after
:
Sed
tamen
&
nos
homine
sensum
habemus
,
&c.
But
yet
we
being
men
,
haue
vnderstanding
.
Therefore
,
that
which
is
more
rightly
obserued
elsewhere
,
we
also
do
rightly
obserue
.
We
follow
the
Apostle
Peter
him selfe
,
we
sticke
vnto
his
deuotion
,
what
doth
the
church
of
Rome
answere
to
this
?
Verily
,
Peter
him selfe
,
which
was
a
priest
of
the
church
of
Rome
,
is
author
to
vs
of
this
assertion
.
In
this
Chapter
he
noteth
an
error
of
the
church
of
Rome
in
that
they
vsed
not
to
wash
mens
feete
in
baptisme
.
Vniustly
indeede
,
he
vrgeth
that
ceremonie
as
necessarie
,
but
yet
he
sheweth
,
that
his
iudgement
was
,
that
the
church
of
Rome
might
receiue
a
custome
contrarie
to
the
scripture
.
Beside
this
(
saith
Bristow
)
he
calleth
Peter
the
first
&
the
foundation
in
the
verie
same
place
,
where
say
you
,
Pur.
320
he
affirmeth
,
that
Peter
is
not
the
foundation
.
Howsoeuer
I
deale
with
my
reader
,
you
deale
vnfaithfully
with
me
:
for
my
wordes
are
these
:
He
affirmeth
the
not
Peter
,
but
the
faith
&
the
confession
of
Peter
,
is
the
foundation
of
the
church
:
and
that
the
primacy
of
Peter
was
a
primacie
of
faith
,
not
of
honour
,
of
confession
,
not
of
autoritie
or
higher
order
.
De
incaern
.
dom.
Ca.
4.
&
5.
Ambrose
his
words
are
,
Cap.
4.
Vos
autem
&c.
But
what
do
you
say
of
mee
?
Immediatly
(
Peter
)
being
not
vnmindful
of
his
place
,
he
exercised
the
primacy
:
The
primacie
of
confessing
truely
,
not
of
honor
,
the
primacie
of
faith
,
not
of
order
or
degree
.
And
Cap.
5.
Faith
is
the
foundation
of
the
church
.
For
it
was
not
said
of
Peters
flesh
,
but
of
his
faith
,
that
the
gates
of
death
shal
not
preuailc
against
it
,
his
confession
ouercommeth
hel
.
The
former
of
these
places
,
Brist
.
corrupteth
by
adding
this
worde
,
worldly
,
to
the
words
of
Ambrose
,
honor
,
&
degree
,
a●
though
Ambrose
had
meant
,
that
Peter
excelled
in
ecclesiasticall
honor
&
degree
,
being
equal
to
his
fellowes
in
worldly
honour
and
degree
.
But
such
folly
was
farr
from
Ambrose
,
to
say
Peter
was
not
better
then
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
in
worldly
honor
&
degree
,
when
neither
Peter
nor
the
rest
had
any
worldly
honour
or
degree
of
dignitie
at
all
.
But
he
expresseth
wherein
all
his
primacie
was
,
when
he
sayeth
,
he
was
first
in
confession
,
first
in
protestation
of
his
faith
,
not
being
therefore
of
greater
honor
or
higher
degree
then
his
fellowes
,
who
all
helde
the
same
faith
and
confession
.
And
this
of
Peters
person
,
neuer
a
worde
of
his
successours
,
which
yet
are
not
onely
the
bishops
of
Rome
,
when
they
were
at
the
best
,
but
all
other
bishops
are
the
successors
of
the
Apostles
,
Hierom
,
Euagrius
which
succession
cannot
be
esteemed
by
places
,
in
which
the
Apostles
sat
in
person
,
but
by
authoritie
of
teaching
receiued
from
them
with
soundnes
of
doctrine
.
To
the
later
place
(
Bristow
saith
)
the
diuel
may
preuaile
against
the
fleshe
of
a
Pope
:
but
his
faith
,
but
his
confession
(
as
well
in
all
articles
that
be
nowe
in
controuersie
,
as
in
those
at
that
time
)
wil
stand
,
when
they
shall
all
be
sonke
downe
into
their
due
place
.
But
Saint
Ambrose
speaketh
not
of
euery
bishop
of
Romes
faith
and
confession
,
but
onely
of
the
singular
faith
and
confession
of
Peter
:
Thou
art
Christe
the
sonne
of
the
liuing
God
,
which
is
against
all
sectes
and
heresies
.
Dies
me
citius
&c.
the
day
should
sooner
faile
mee
then
the
names
of
heretikes
and
diuers
sectes
.
Yet
this
faith
is
generall
against
them
all
,
that
Christ
is
the
sonne
of
God
both
sempiternall
of
his
father
,
and
also
borne
of
the
virgine
.
Let
nowe
the
reader
iudge
,
whether
of
vs
hath
dealt
more
faithfully
with
Saint
Ambrose
.
Fourthly
he
gathereth
,
that
I
saye
in
diuerse
places
:
that
Irenaeus
,
Polycrates
,
Dionysius
,
Alexandrinus
,
Cyprianus
,
the
Councell
of
Africa
,
and
Socrates
the
historiographer
,
did
preach
or
write
against
the
Popes
authoritie
,
when
it
first
began
to
aduance
it selfe
,
in
Victor
,
Cornelius
Stephanus
,
Anastasius
,
Innocentius
,
Zozimus
,
Bonifacius
&
Celestinus
.
To
this
Bristow
answereth
:
First
,
that
all
these
Popes
by
my
confession
were
of
the
true
church
,
therfore
I
am
against
my selfe
in
making
other
Popes
to
be
antichrist
,
for
claiming
such
authoritie
as
these
did
.
Whereto
I
replye
,
the
former
bishops
did
but
begin
a
little
in
comparison
to
discouer
the
mysterie
of
iniquitie
,
those
later
Popes
that
are
antichrists
,
did
openly
shewe
them selues
in
the
temple
of
God
as
God
,
and
therefore
great
difference
.
Secondly
,
Bristowe
answereth
,
that
all
those
writers
did
communicate
with
those
Popes
:
therefore
our
separation
cannot
be
excused
.
I
replye
,
their
ambitious
vsurpation
tended
not
to
heresie
,
and
therfore
they
were
content
to
admonish
them
,
but
the
latter
Popes
,
from
whome
we
dissent
,
are
fallen
into
open
heresie
and
apostasie
.
Thirdly
,
he
saith
,
that
no
one
of
these
writers
wrote
against
the
Popes
authoritie
,
as
he
wil
shewe
of
Irenaeus
,
Polycrates
,
Dionysius
,
&
Cyprian
,
Cap.
10.
in
28.
demaunde
,
where
I
will
shewe
that
they
did
write
against
such
vniust
authoritie
as
those
bishops
did
claime
.
Yet
concerning
Saint
Cyprian
in
this
place
,
hee
sayeth
,
that
hee
exhorteth
Cornelius
to
bee
as
stout
in
not
loosing
certeine
African
heretikes
,
as
their
owne
bishop
had
beene
in
bynding
of
them
.
By
which
hee
woulde
haue
men
thinke
,
that
Cornelius
had
authoritie
to
vndoe
,
that
which
Cyprian
had
done
,
as
the
Pope
in
these
dayes
taketh
vpon
him
.
But
Cyprian
yeldeth
to
no
such
authoritie
,
but
maruelleth
that
Cornelius
was
anye
thing
moued
with
the
threatening
of
those
heretiks
,
to
receiue
them
into
his
chur●●
,
vnder
pretence
that
Cyprian
had
not
written
to
him
immediatly
of
the
constitution
of
Fortunatus
a
counterfeit
bishop
by
a
fewe
heretikes
,
counting
it
sufficient
that
Cornelius
knewe
before
,
that
they
were
excommunicated
by
the
bishops
of
Africa
,
saying
of
their
gadding
to
Rome
,
Cùm
statutum
sit
,
&c.
Seing
it
is
decreede
of
vs
all
,
and
that
it
is
meete
&
also
right
,
that
euery
mans
cause
shoulde
be
heard
there
,
wher
his
crime
is
committed
:
and
a
portion
of
the
flock
is
ascribed
to
euery
pastor
,
which
euery
one
should
rule
and
gouerne
as
he
will
giue
an
account
of
his
doing
to
the
Lord
,
verily
,
they
ouer
whome
we
are
set
,
must
not
gad
about
,
nor
with
their
subtile
&
craftie
rash
,
craze
the
concord
of
the
bishops
,
which
cleueth
together
.
But
there
to
plead
their
cause
,
wher
both
they
may
haue
accusers
&
witnesses
of
their
crime
,
except
to
a
fewe
desperate
men
&
castawayes
,
the
authoritie
of
the
bishops
placed
in
Africa
seemeth
to
be
lesse
,
which
haue
alreadie
iudged
of
them
,
&
by
the
weight
of
their
iudgement
condemned
their
conscience
bounde
with
the
snares
of
many
trespasses
.
Their
cause
already
hath
beene
heard
:
the
sentence
is
alreadie
pronounced
of
them
,
neither
is
it
congruent
to
the
censure
of
priests
to
be
reprehended
by
Leuits
of
mouable
&
inconstant
minde
,
&c.
You
see
that
Cyprian
meant
nothing
lesse
,
than
to
giue
Cornelius
bishop
of
Rome
authoritie
,
to
reuerse
the
sentence
of
the
bishops
of
Africa
,
whose
authoritie
he
iudged
to
be
nothing
lesse
then
the
bishops
of
Rome
or
other
places
.
Moreouer
Bristow
saith
that
Cyprian
doth
also
note
in
S.
Stephan
some
little
negligence
,
but
much
more
wilful
obreption
,
in
those
two
lapsed
bishops
of
Spaine
,
Basilides
&
Martialis
,
who
had
concealed
from
him
the
trueth
,
that
in
their
supplication
they
should
haue
expressed
,
which
because
they
did
not
,
he
saith
well
,
that
their
restitution
by
the
Pope
could
not
stand
them
in
steed
against
their
former
deposition
by
the
bishop●
of
their
owne
prouince
.
This
which
so
plainly
maketh
for
the
Popes
authoritit
(
saveth
Bristowe
)
you
are
so
blinde
to
bring
against
it
.
Not
so
blinde
but
I
can
see
,
that
you
acknowledge
〈…〉
e
Pope
i●●udgement
of
bynding
and
loosing
may
〈…〉re
.
But
what
I
pray
you
maketh
this
for
the
Pope
?
you
〈…〉
eane
perhaps
,
that
Cyprian
doeth
graunt
by
impli●ation
,
if
the
foresaide
errour
had
not
deceiued
Stepha●●s
,
he
had
full
authoritie
to
haue
restored
those
two
〈◊〉
apsed
bishops
.
But
Cyprian
sayeth
not
so
,
you
hearde
●efore
what
his
iudgement
was
of
them
that
were
condemned
in
one
Prouince
,
that
their
sentence
could
not
●e
reuersed
in
another
,
but
if
they
woulde
returne
to
the
Church
,
they
should
there
be
receiued
vppon
their
●epentance
,
where
they
were
first
condemned
,
and
in
this
4.
Epistle
he
sayeth
:
Quare
etsi
,
&c.
wherefore
although
some
of
our
fellowe
bishops
there
haue
been
(
moste
welbeloued
brethren
)
which
thinke
the
diuine
discipline
is
to
be
neglected
,
and
doe
rashly
communicate
with
Basilides
and
Martialis
,
this
thing
ought
not
to
trouble
our
faith
.
You
see
,
that
he
reproueth
Stephanus
and
such
as
tooke
his
parte
,
for
neglect
of
diuine
discipline
,
in
communicating
with
those
heretikes
which
were
lawfully
condemned
in
their
owne
prouince
,
and
therefore
coulde
not
by
any
other
bee
restored
.
As
concerning
the
Councels
of
Africa
&
Mileuis
,
(
sayeth
Bristowe
)
the
question
between
them
and
those
other
fiue
Popes
,
was
not
about
the
matters
of
the
vniuersall
church
,
as
for
example
,
matters
of
faith
.
No
was
,
is
not
the
Popes
authoritie
of
you
counted
a
matter
of
faith
,
and
of
the
vniuersall
church
?
although
they
agreed
in
all
other
matters
.
But
Bristow
shameth
not
to
say
,
it
was
not
about
the
Popes
authoritie
in
receiuing
of
bishops
appeales
,
but
what
order
the
Nicene
Councel
had
taken
therein
.
As
though
that
counterfeit
Canon
was
not
alledged
,
to
iustifie
the
Popes
authoritie
in
receiuing
such
appeales
.
But
there
are
examples
you
saye
,
of
appeales
,
and
namely
of
the
Patriarkes
of
Alexandria
and
Constantinople
,
but
of
which
Patriarks
&
to
whom
you
shewe
not
.
yea
,
S.
Augustine
him selfe
,
you
say
.
vseth
it
as
a
plea
:
That
Cecilianus
was
readie
to
pleade
his
cause
before
other
churches
out
of
Africa
.
Ep.
162.
This
prooueth
not
,
that
Cecilianus
,
although
trusting
in
the
innocency
of
his
cause
,
refused
no
indifferent
iudges
:
yet
that
he
appealed
to
the
Church
of
Rome
,
and
least
of
all
to
the
singular
iudgment
of
the
Bishop
of
Rome
,
but
to
all
other
churches
.
And
the
appeales
that
were
made
in
his
cause
were
made
to
the
Emperour
,
and
from
the
Bishop
of
Rome
,
being
once
delegate
of
the
Emperour
to
heare
his
cause
with
other
Bishops
,
vnto
him
the
seconde
time
,
who
gaue
aliud
uidicium
Arelatense
aliorum
scilicet
Episcoporum
&c.
an
other
iudgement
of
A
relate
,
of
other
Bishops
,
as
it
is
plaine
in
the
same
Epistle
.
But
such
appeales
were
lawfull
,
(
saith
Bristow
)
by
the
councell
Sardicense
cap.
7.
in
the
same
Carthage
councell
cap.
3.
whose
authoritie
none
of
those
Africane
Bishops
did
denie
,
for
the
same
Bishops
were
of
it
,
that
were
of
the
Nicene
:
and
Sainct
Augustine
chap.
7.
did
expresly
admitte
in
the
Canon
of
the
inferiori
appealing
from
their
own●
Bishops
.
In
deede
in
the
3.
chap.
of
the
6.
Councell
of
Carthage
,
that
forged
Canon
of
Bishops
appeales
was
aledged
,
which
is
nowe
read
for
the
7.
Canon
of
the
Sardicense
councell
,
but
it
was
alledged
as
a
canon
of
the
Nicene
Councell
,
and
if
it
had
beene
a
true
canon
of
Sardica
Councell
,
why
did
not
those
Bishops
alledge
it
as
a
Canon
of
Sardica
,
as
well
as
the
other
Canon
of
the
inferiors
appealing
from
their
owne
Bishop
vnto
the
Bishops
next
adioyning
,
seeing
the
Bishops
of
Africa
and
S.
Augustine
himselfe
,
were
so
ready
to
yeelde
to
the
authoritie
of
the
Councell
of
Sardica
.
Therefore
it
appeareth
,
that
the
Canon
of
bishops
appeales
to
Rome
being
first
forged
as
a
Canon
of
the
Nicene
Councell
,
when
it
could
not
find
any
setling
there
,
was
afterwarde
foysted
in
the
Sardicen
Councell
.
Thirdly
(
saith
Bristow
)
these
appeales
were
lawfull
by
the
Nicene
Councell
also
,
wherevppon
you
say
verie
insolently
trusting
ouermuch
your
lying
Lutheran
frinds
,
the
Magdeburgiens
that
S.
Augustine
&
his
fellowes
tooke
those
Popes
with
plaine
forgery
of
the
Canons
of
Nice
,
and
fetched
them
ouer
the
coles
meetely
wel
for
it
.
Bristow
will
still
defend
that
forged
Canon
,
for
other
there
is
none
in
the
Nicen
councell
that
alloweth
such
appeales
.
As
for
the
Magdeburgiens
I
neuer
read
them
:
but
the
report
of
the
councels
gathered
by
Peter
Crab
,
I
haue
read
〈◊〉
dosen
yeares
before
I
wrote
against
Allen
.
And
in
the
end
of
the
African
Councel
I
read
this
Epistle
of
the
councell
to
Celestinus
byshop
of
the
citie
of
Rome
.
Domino
dilectissimo
&
honorabili
fratri
Celestino
,
&c.
To
our
most
welbeloued
lord
&
honorable
brother
Celestinus
.
We
Aurelius
,
Palatinus
,
Antonius
,
Tutus
,
Seruus
dei
,
Terentius
,
Fortunatus
,
Martinus
,
Ianuarius
,
Optatus
,
Celticius
,
Donatus
,
Theasius
,
Vincentius
,
Fortunatianus
,
and
the
rest
which
were
present
in
the
vniuersal
African
councel
of
Carthage
:
We
wold
haue
wished
if
as
thy
holynes
hath
insinuated
by
letters
sent
by
our
fellow
elder
Leo
,
that
you
reioyced
of
the
comming
of
Appiarius
:
so
we
also
might
send
with
gladnes
these
writings
of
his
purgation
.
Verily
both
our
and
your
chearfulnes
should
be
now
more
certaine
,
neither
might
seeme
too
much
hasted
and
ouer-speedy
which
as
yet
had
gon
before
aswell
of
one
to
bee
heard
as
of
one
that
is
alredy
heard
.
Surely
when
our
ho
ly
brother
,
and
fellow
bishop
,
Faustinus
came
vnto
vs
,
we
gathered
a
Councell
,
and
beleeued
that
he
was
therfore
sent
with
him
,
that
as
by
his
helpe
he
had
beene
before
restored
to
the
Eldership
,
so
rrow
by
his
labour
he
might
haue
beene
purged
of
so
great
crimes
as
are
obiected
by
the
Tabracenes
,
whose
so
great
&
so
heynous
wicked
factes
,
the
examination
of
the
course
of
our
councell
hath
found
out
;
that
the
saide
persons
hoped
for
patronage
rather
then
iudgment
,
and
the
aide
of
a
defender
rather
then
the
iustice
of
an
examiner
.
For
first
of
al
,
how
much
he
withstoode
the
whole
congregation
,
offering
dayly
diuers
iniuries
as
one
that
mainteined
the
priuileges
of
the
Romaine
Church
,
and
that
would
be
receiued
into
communion
of
vs
,
whom
thy
holynes
(
beleeuing
that
he
had
appealed
,
which
he
was
not
able
to
proue
)
had
restored
to
the
communion
,
which
neuerthelesse
was
not
lawfull
,
and
thou
maist
know
also
better
by
the
reading
of
the
actes
.
Notwithstanding
holding
a
most
painfull
iudgment
by
the
space
of
three
dayes
,
when
being
verie
much
troubled
,
wee
inquired
of
diuerse
thinges
obiected
vnto
him
,
GOD
the
righteous
iudge
,
strong
,
and
long
suffering
,
to
our
great
profite
hath
cutte
off
either
the
delayes
of
our
fellowe
Byshop
Faustinus
,
or
the
craftie
shiftes
of
Appiarius
himselfe
,
by
which
hee
went
about
to
hide
his
filthinesse
,
not
to
bee
named
.
For
his
more
vile
and
stinking
obstinacie
being
subdued
,
by
which
he
would
haue
ouerwhelmed
so
great
and
filthie
myre
with
impudencie
,
our
GOD
strayning
his
conscience
,
and
publishing
euen
vnto
men
,
the
secrete
crimes
which
he
did
alreadie
condemne
,
which
were
as
it
were
wrapped
close
in
his
hearte
,
sodainely
this
craftie
denyer
brake
forth
into
confession
of
all
the
wicked
factes
that
were
obiected
against
him
:
And
at
length
,
of
his
owne
accorde
conuicted
himselfe
of
all
those
incredible
reproches
,
and
turned
into
mourning
euen
our
hope
by
which
wee
both
beleeued
and
wished
that
hee
might
haue
beene
purged
of
so
shamefull
blottes
,
but
that
hee
mitigated
this
our
heauinesse
,
with
one
onely
comfort
that
both
he
discharged
vs
from
the
labour
of
longer
inquirie
,
and
also
prouided
for
his
woundes
such
a
medicine
as
it
was
,
although
it
were
by
vnwilling
confession
,
and
his
owne
conscience
striuing
against
it
,
our
Lorde
and
brother
.
Therefore
reseruing
our
dutie
of
due
salutation
wee
earnestly
desire
you
that
henceforwarde
you
doe
not
easily
admitte
vnto
your
hearing
,
such
as
come
from
hence
,
nor
that
you
wil
any
more
receiue
into
communion
those
that
are
excommunicated
by
vs
,
because
your
worship
may
easily
perceiue
,
that
this
matter
is
also
defined
in
the
Nicene
Councell
.
For
although
the
prouision
seeme
to
be
there
made
of
inferiour
Clarkes
,
or
lay
men
,
yet
howe
much
more
woulde
it
,
that
the
same
shoulde
be
obserued
concerning
Byshops
:
that
being
suspended
from
the
communion
in
their
prouince
,
they
shoulde
not
seeme
by
your
holynesse
,
either
ouerhastily
or
vnduely
,
to
be
restored
to
the
communion
.
Also
let
your
holynesse
refuse
the
lewde
refuges
,
or
shiftes
of
Priestes
,
and
other
clarkes
as
it
is
meete
for
you
to
do
,
because
that
by
no
decree
of
the
fathers
,
this
is
taken
away
from
the
Church
of
Africa
,
and
the
decrees
of
Nice
haue
most
manifestly
committed
them
,
whether
they
bee
clarkes
of
inferior
degree
,
or
whether
they
be
Bishops
themselues
vnto
their
owne
Metropolitanes
.
For
most
wisely
and
iustly
they
foresawe
,
that
all
businesses
should
be
ended
in
their
owne
places
where
they
began
,
and
that
the
grace
of
the
holy
ghost
,
shoulde
not
be
wanting
to
euery
prouince
,
whereby
equitie
by
the
priests
of
Christ
might
both
be
seene
wisely
,
&
also
held
most
constantly
,
especially
because
it
is
graunted
to
euerie
man
,
if
he
shal
be
offended
with
the
iudgement
of
them
that
shall
heare
his
cause
,
to
appeale
to
the
Councels
of
his
owne
prouince
,
or
else
to
a
generall
councell
.
Except
peraduenture
there
be
any
man
which
beleeueth
,
that
our
GOD
can
inspire
the
iustice
of
examination
and
triall
,
into
any
one
man
whomsoeuer
,
and
doth
denie
the
same
to
innumerable
priestes
gathered
together
in
councell
.
Or
howe
can
the
same
iudgement
giuen
beyonde
the
sea
,
be
stedfast
and
sure
,
vnto
which
the
necessarie
persons
of
witnesses
,
either
for
infirmitie
of
sexe
,
or
of
age
,
or
for
many
other
letts
that
may
happen
,
cannot
bee
brought
?
for
that
any
iudges
shoulde
be
sent
as
it
were
from
the
side
of
your
holynesse
,
we
finde
it
decreed
in
no
Synod
of
the
fathers
:
For
that
decree
which
you
sent
vnto
vs
long
agoe
,
by
our
saide
fellowe
Bishop
Faustinus
,
as
a
decree
of
the
Nicene
councell
,
in
the
truer
councell
copies
which
are
receiued
of
the
Nicene
councell
,
being
sent
vnto
vs
,
out
of
the
authenticall
copie
,
by
holy
Cyrillus
our
fellowe
Byshop
of
the
Church
of
Alexandria
,
and
by
the
worshipfull
Atticus
Byshop
of
Constantinople
,
which
also
haue
beene
sent
from
vs
before
this
time
,
by
Innocentius
priest
,
and
Marcellus
subdeacon
(
by
whom
they
were
directed
from
them
to
vs
)
vnto
Bishoppe
Bonifacius
of
worshipfull
memorie
,
your
predecessour
in
which
wee
coulde
finde
no
such
matter
.
Also
your
clarks
as
executors
of
your
commaundements
,
neither
send
ye
,
nor
graunt
yee
,
to
any
that
shall
require
them
:
least
we
should
seeme
to
bring
the
smokie
pride
of
the
world
,
into
the
Church
of
Christ
,
which
to
them
that
desire
to
see
God
,
sheweth
forth
the
light
of
simplicitie
,
and
the
day
of
humilitie
,
for
touching
our
brother
Faustinus
(
now
that
Appiarius
a
man
to
bee
lamented
is
remoued
out
of
the
Church
of
Christ
for
his
vnspeable
wickednesse
)
we
are
sure
that
(
sauing
the
honestie
&
moderation
of
thy
holinesse
)
thy
brotherly
loue
will
not
suffer
him
to
remaine
any
longer
in
Africa
:
And
written
with
an
other
hande
,
our
Lord
preserue
your
ho
lynesse
,
praying
for
vs
in
long
life
,
Lorde
brother
.
Thus
haue
I
set
downe
the
whole
Epistle
,
though
it
be
somwhat
long
,
that
the
English
reader
may
see
,
and
iudge
of
the
whole
matter
in
controuersie
betweene
the
Bishops
of
Rome
,
and
all
the
bishops
,
of
all
the
countries
of
Africa
which
was
the
third
part
of
the
world
,
and
howe
truely
Bristow
first
denyeth
the
forgerie
which
was
proued
by
copies
sent
from
Alexandria
&
Constantinople
,
out
of
the
authentical
copie
of
the
Councell
of
Nice
.
Secondly
that
he
saith
the
same
matter
in
question
for
appeales
,
was
decreed
by
the
councell
of
Sardica
,
when
this
Epistle
affirmeth
,
y●
,
by
no
decrees
of
any
Synod
,
any
such
thing
was
appointed
,
but
the
cleane
contrary
by
the
councell
of
Nice
defined
.
Thirdly
where
he
saith
,
those
African
fathers
had
smal
cause
to
stand
so
much
with
the
Popes
in
those
appeales
,
that
they
shew
great
cause
.
Fourthly
,
where
Bristow
saith
,
that
by
this
their
doing
nothing
can
be
inferred
against
the
Popes
authoritie
aboue
prouinciall
Councels
,
more
then
against
a
generall
Councels
authoritie
aboue
a
prouinciall
,
when
they
shewe
the
last
appeale
to
be
permitted
to
any
man
that
findeth
himselfe
grieued
,
vnto
the
general
councels
.
Fiftly
,
where
he
saith
that
popish
kings
&
bishops
,
at
this
day
stand
with
the
Popes
in
the
right
of
giuing
benefices
,
appeales
&c.
with
his
owne
good
leaue
,
without
any
preiudice
to
his
superiority
,
I
aunswere
,
the
bishops
of
Africa
,
without
the
Popes
leaue
,
&
against
his
wil
,
decreed
,
that
whosoeuer
did
appeale
out
of
Africa
,
shoulde
not
be
receiued
into
communion
of
any
in
Africa
.
What
the
Pope
of
seruile
feare
is
constrained
at
this
day
to
yeald
,
least
he
shoulde
be
vtterly
forsaken
of
all
,
as
hee
is
of
most
,
it
is
nothing
to
the
purpose
.
But
I
am
moste
ridiculous
,
in
Bristowes
iudgement
,
where
I
alledge
Socrates
the
Nouatian
,
speaking
against
Pope
Celestinus
,
for
taking
away
the
Nouatians
Churches
in
Rome
,
and
counting
it
a
point
of
forren
Lordshippe
,
not
of
Priesthoode
.
Thus
the
Papistes
defame
such
as
write
plainely
against
them
,
Eusebius
they
make
an
Arrian
,
Socrates
a
Nouatian
,
euen
as
he
diffamed
Saint
Paule
in
the
last
Chapter
,
with
much
pricking
of
bodily
lust
.
But
what
cause
hath
hee
to
charge
Socrates
with
the
heresie
of
Nouatus
?
He
alledgeth
none
at
al
,
neither
is
he
able
euer
to
proue
the
crime
.
In
deed
Socrates
liuing
at
such
time
,
as
the
Nouatians
ioyning
in
faith
of
the
holy
Trinitie
with
the
Catholikes
against
the
Arrians
,
Macedonians
,
and
such
other
heretikes
,
were
not
so
odious
,
speaketh
lesse
sharply
of
them
,
then
of
other
heresies
.
Yet
alwayes
he
accounteth
them
among
heretikes
:
As
Lib.
5.
Cap.
19.
Ab
eo
tempore
quo
Nouatiani
,
&c.
Euer
since
the
time
that
the
Nouatians
departed
from
the
Church
.
Is
it
like
that
Socrates
was
a
Nouatian
,
when
he
confesseth
that
they
were
departed
from
the
Church
?
Likewise
hauing
spoken
of
the
diuisions
that
were
in
the
Catholike
Churche
,
he
commeth
to
speake
of
the
schismes
that
were
among
heretikes
,
and
nameth
the
Arrians
,
Nouatians
,
Macedonians
and
Eunomians
Supr.
&
Trip.
Hist.
lib.
9.
cap.
36.
Thus
much
for
the
credite
of
Socrates
:
nowe
to
the
matter
:
where
Bristowe
saith
,
he
counted
it
a
point
of
forren
Lordship
to
expell
the
Nouatians
,
&c
it
is
false
.
But
he
sheweth
the
cause
,
why
Celestinus
coulde
not
preuaile
to
doe
any
good
with
them
,
his
wordes
are
:
Verumillos
invidia
corripuit
Romano
episcopai●
iam
olim
perinde
atque
Alexandrino
vltra
Sacerdotii
limites
ad
externum
dominai●m
progresso
.
But
enuie
tooke
hold
of
them
,
because
the
Bishoprik
of
Rome
,
long
before
euen
as
the
Bishoprike
of
Alexandria
,
was
proceeded
beyond
the
bandes
of
Priesthoode
into
forren
Lordship
.
Finally
that
Socrates
blameth
the
immoderate
authoritie
of
S.
Chrysostom
,
he
doth
it
not
alone
,
but
other
writers
as
much
as
he
,
&
Socrates
reporteth
more
of
his
seuerity
toward
his
own
cleargie
,
then
toward
the
Nouatians
of
whom
he
was
counted
too
much
a
fauourer
,
&
therfore
Socrates
writeth
,
that
some
iudged
,
that
he
was
iustly
deposed
Eo
quòd
multas
Ecclesias
Novatianorum
,
Quartodecimanorū
,
&
aliorum
tulisset
haereticorum
.
Because
he
had
borne
with
many
Churches
of
the
Nouatians
,
Quartodecimanes
and
other
heretikes
.
Trip.
Hist.
lib.
10.
cap.
20.
Last
of
all
whereas
I
alledged
againste
the
Popes
supremacie
,
the
decree
of
the
Aphrican
councell
Cap.
6.
that
no
Bishoppe
of
the
first
see
,
should
be
called
highest
Priest
,
or
Prince
of
Priests
,
but
onely
Bishop
of
the
first
see
:
Bristowe
saith
,
it
perteyneth
onely
to
the
Primates
of
Affrica
,
and
concerneth
not
the
titles
,
much
lesse
the
primacie
of
the
Bishop
of
Rome
.
But
the
trueth
is
,
that
it
was
made
specially
to
represse
the
ambition
of
the
Romane
Prelates
,
and
therfore
in
the
end
of
the
Canon
,
as
it
is
conteined
in
the
decrees
,
Dist.
99.
cap.
Primae
.
it
is
added
,
Vniversalis
autem
,
nec
etiam
Romanus
pontifex
app●lletur
,
and
let
none
,
no
not
the
Bishop
of
Rome
be
called
vniuersall
.
By
which
it
is
manifest
that
his
titles
and
authoritie
also
are
commanded
to
be
kept
within
their
owne
bounds
,
and
not
to
be
acknowledged
to
haue
any
thing
to
doe
in
the
Churches
of
Affrica
,
by
commandement
or
authoritie
such
as
then
was
claymed
.
But
the
Affricanes
(
saith
Bristowe
)
as
appeareth
in
Saint
Augustines
workes
,
neuer
called
him
Bishop
of
the
first
see
,
but
Bishop
of
the
Apostolike
see
.
Although
Saint
Augustines
workes
can
not
bee
witnesse
,
howe
the
Affricanes
called
him
alwayes
:
yet
what
gayneth
the
Pope
or
Bristowe
for
him
by
this
?
What
if
they
neuer
called
him
primate
or
Bishop
of
the
first
see
?
(
for
other
inferior
Bishoppes
were
called
Bishoppes
of
the
second
see
.
)
The
councel
forbadde
them
to
giue
any
other
titles
of
authoritie
beside
this
Bishop
of
the
first
see
,
it
did
not
binde
them
that
they
should
of
necessitie
call
them
by
that
title
.
For
it
was
sufficient
to
cal
them
the
Bishops
of
Carthage
,
of
Alexandria
,
of
Rome
,
of
Antioche
,
&c.
And
that
they
called
the
Romane
Prelate
Bishop
of
the
Apostolike
see
of
Rome
,
they
gaue
him
no
more
authoritie
ouer
the
Churches
of
Affrica
,
then
when
they
called
the
Bishop
of
Hierusalem
,
Antioch
,
Ephesus
,
Corinth
,
or
of
any
other
Churches
founded
by
the
Apostles
Bishoppe
of
the
see
Apostolike
.
Thus
my
Doctours
(
for
any
thing
Bristowe
can
bring
)
remaine
constant
witnesses
of
my
side
,
against
the
vsurped
and
Antichristian
authoritie
of
the
Bishop
of
Rome
.
2
About
onely
faith
.
I
quoted
Ambrose
,
Origen
,
and
Cyprian
,
for
iustification
by
faith
only
.
To
this
Bristowe
answereth
First
Origen
,
after
he
had
brought
the
example
of
the
theefe
iustified
by
faith
only
,
bringeth
in
the
example
of
the
sinnfull
woman
.
Luk.
7.
Ex
nullo
legis
opere
,
sed
pro
sola
fide
ait
ad
eam
,
remit
〈…〉
ur
tibi
peccata
tua
:
&
iterum
,
fides
tua
saluam
te
fecit
,
&c.
For
no
worke
of
the
lawe
,
but
for
faith
only
,
he
saith
vnto
her
,
Thy
sinnes
are
forgiuen
thee
:
And
againe
,
thy
faith
hath
saued
the
,
goe
in
peace
,
But
also
in
many
places
of
the
Gospell
we
reade
,
that
our
Sauiour
vsed
this
speache
,
that
he
saith
,
the
faith
of
the
beleeuer
,
is
the
cause
of
his
saluation
.
By
all
which
it
is
cleare
,
that
the
Apostle
iudgeth
,
rightly
that
a
man
is
iustified
by
faith
without
the
workes
of
the
lawe
.
See
you
not
that
iustification
is
not
only
to
sett
a
man
in
free
will
,
discharged
of
his
sinnes
committed
before
baptisme
,
but
continueth
with
him
vnto
saluation
?
Also
where
I
saide
that
Origen
answereth
this
obiection
,
which
the
Papists
make
against
vs
,
for
teaching
iustification
by
faith
only
,
(
though
Bristowe
say
it
is
false
)
it
is
very
true
Lib
3.
Cap
3.
in
epi.
ad
Rom.
Sed
fortassis
,
&c.
but
peraduenture
some
body
hearing
this
,
may
become
idle
and
negligent
in
doing
good
workes
,
if
only
faith
suffice
to
iustification
.
Is
not
this
one
of
the
Papists
obiections
?
Againe
that
this
doctrine
of
iustification
perteineth
only
to
them
that
are
newly
conuerted
to
Christianity
,
against
which
Origen
sheweth
by
example
of
the
Pharisee
trusting
in
himselfe
that
he
was
righteous
,
and
boasting
thereof
.
Luk
18.
that
it
perteyneth
to
all
men
,
that
boasting
may
be
excluded
,
and
that
none
boast
in
any
thing
,
but
in
the
crosse
of
Christ
,
Vides
Apostol
〈…〉
non
gloriantem
,
&c.
Thou
seest
the
Apostle
not
glorying
of
his
righteousnes
,
nor
of
his
chastity
,
nor
of
his
wisdome
,
nor
of
his
other
vertues
and
acts
,
but
most
manifestly
pronouncing
and
saying
,
let
him
that
gloryeth
glory
in
the
Lorde
,
&c.
and
so
at
length
sheweth
,
that
all
this
doth
verifie
the
saying
of
the
Apostle
,
we
iudge
that
a
man
is
iustified
by
faith
,
without
the
workes
of
the
law
,
which
before
he
had
interpreted
by
faith
only
,
whether
they
haue
no
works
going
before
as
the
theefe
,
the
sinfull
woman
,
or
whether
they
haue
workes
of
the
lawe
without
the
faith
of
Christe
,
as
the
Pharisee
,
or
whether
they
haue
neuer
so
many
workes
and
vertues
with
the
faith
of
Christe
,
as
the
Apostle
Paule
,
there
is
but
one
way
of
iustification
,
for
all
men
,
which
is
by
remission
of
sinnes
,
through
faith
onely
.
Where
Cyprian
saith
:
that
faith
onely
profiteth
Ad
Quirin
.
Cap.
42.
Bristowe
saith
,
he
meaneth
that
faith
profiteth
,
and
without
faith
nothing
profiteth
.
I
confesse
in
deede
he
meaneth
all
that
Bristowe
saith
,
and
more
too
,
namely
that
faith
profiteth
,
therefore
workes
do
not
profite
vnto
iustification
,
as
appeareth
by
that
testimony
of
Scripture
which
he
citeth
,
to
proue
his
saying
:
Abraham
beleeued
God
,
and
it
was
imputed
to
him
for
iustice
.
Gen.
15.
By
which
Saint
Paule
proueth
,
that
Abraham
was
iustified
by
faith
without
workes
,
and
yet
Abraham
was
not
voyde
of
good
workes
.
Out
of
the
Booke
De
duplici
Martyrio
I
cited
Cyprians
saying
:
That
he
beleeueth
not
in
God
at
all
,
which
placeth
not
the
trust
of
all
his
felicity
in
him
only
.
To
this
Bristowe
answereth
without
shame
,
that
the
Booke
De
duplici
Martyrio
is
thought
to
be
supposition
,
coyned
by
Erasmus
:
as
though
it
were
credible
that
Erasmus
being
such
an
vtter
enemy
to
all
forgery
and
supposition
,
would
himselfe
counterfet
a
booke
vnder
the
name
of
Cyprian
.
But
Bristowe
doubting
,
least
he
may
be
conuicted
by
auncient
copies
of
this
booke
,
remaining
in
Libraries
,
as
no
doubt
,
but
that
he
may
,
for
a
second
aunswer
saith
,
That
this
sentence
is
of
it selfe
Catholike
inough
.
For
to
trust
Gods
giftes
,
as
in
the
Catholike
faith
,
and
good
workes
that
he
worketh
in
vs
,
also
to
trust
in
Saints
:
to
trust
in
these
,
I
say
,
as
they
be
his
,
is
to
trust
in
him
onely
.
I
say
,
(
sayeth
Bristowe
,
)
what
neede
we
further
witnesse
or
reason
?
But
Christe
telling
a
parable
,
against
them
that
trusted
in
themselues
,
that
they
were
righteous
,
telleth
of
a
Pharisee
,
that
trusted
in
his
woorkes
,
as
they
were
the
giftes
of
GOD
,
to
whome
hee
gaue
thankes
for
them
.
Luke
.
18.
This
auctority
of
Bristowe
is
inough
to
discharge
Pelagius
,
Celestinus
,
and
all
the
rable
of
freewill
men
,
who
trusted
in
nothing
,
but
that
was
the
gift
of
God
,
and
so
acknowledged
by
them
,
in
so
much
as
they
confessed
,
that
a
man
was
iustified
by
the
grace
of
God
,
when
he
was
iustified
by
his
owne
workes
,
because
God
gaue
free
will
,
and
power
to
worke
well
,
also
a
law
by
keeping
whereof
,
men
might
be
righteous
.
Finally
this
rule
of
Bristowe
,
will
iustifie
a
man
,
which
putting
his
trust
in
Angels
,
worshippeth
them
as
Gods
Angells
,
yea
which
putting
his
trust
in
any
of
Gods
creatures
,
trusteth
in
him
alone
.
So
that
nothing
is
so
singular
,
but
he
can
make
it
generall
,
nor
any
thing
so
generall
,
but
he
can
restrayne
it
at
his
pleasure
.
Now
that
Ambrose
also
extendeth
the
grace
of
iustification
by
faith
only
vnto
eternal
saluation
,
it
is
manifest
as
generally
throughout
his
commentarie
vppon
the
Epistle
to
the
Romanes
,
so
notably
in
1.
Cor.
Cap.
1.
vpon
these
wordes
of
the
Apostle
,
I
thank
my
God
alwaies
for
you
,
for
the
grace
of
God
which
hath
bene
giuen
you
in
Christ
Iesu.
Datam
dicit
,
&c.
He
saith
this
grace
which
hath
bene
giuen
you
in
Christ
Iesus
,
which
grace
is
so
giuen
in
Christ
Iesus
,
because
this
is
decreed
of
God
that
he
which
beleueth
in
Christ
,
should
be
saued
,
without
workes
,
obtaining
freely
remission
of
sinnes
,
by
faith
only
.
Also
in
Praef.
ad
Gall.
a
praedicatione
,
&c.
that
from
the
preaching
of
Iohn
,
the
lawe
doth
cease
,
that
only
faith
may
suffice
vnto
saluation
,
which
is
an
abridgment
of
the
law
.
Likewise
Exhortatione
ad
virgines
:
Videtis
mysteria
,
&c.
you
see
the
mysteries
,
you
see
the
grace
of
Christ
,
the
grace
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
which
is
deliuered
as
it
were
by
a
certaine
lot
,
because
not
of
workes
,
but
of
faith
,
euery
one
is
iustified
of
the
Lorde
.
For
as
the
falling
out
of
the
lott
,
is
not
in
our
power
,
but
is
such
,
as
chaunce
hath
brought
,
so
the
grace
of
our
Lorde
,
is
not
as
it
were
of
the
merite
of
hire
,
but
is
deliuered
,
as
of
his
will
.
This
writeth
Ambrose
of
al
that
are
partakers
of
the
grace
of
God
,
and
not
of
them
that
are
newly
baptised
or
conuerted
only
.
Againe
in
the
same
Booke
,
he
saith
,
speaking
of
all
men
that
attaine
to
saluation
,
Hîc
quidem
luctamur
,
sed
alibi
coronamur
,
&c.
here
truly
we
do
wrestle
,
but
in
an
other
place
we
are
crowned
.
I
haue
spoken
not
of
my selfe
only
,
but
of
all
men
generally
.
For
whence
should
I
haue
so
much
merite
,
to
whom
pardon
is
in
steed
of
a
crown
?
What
can
be
said
more
plainly
,
to
exclude
the
merite
of
good
workes
from
iustification
?
whereas
the
reward
of
good
workes
that
is
freely
giuen
to
the
iustified
man
by
faith
only
,
both
Ambrose
and
we
doe
neuerthelesse
acknowledge
.
3.
About
Purgatorye
.
Touching
Scriptures
expounded
against
He
sayeth
I
am
taken
in
a
vaine
bragge
,
because
The
place
in
deede
as
(
Bristowe
saith
)
is
in
his
Comment.
vpon
Gal.
6.
although
he
in
exposition
allude
to
2.
Cor.
5.
we
must
all
appeare
before
the
iudgment
seate
of
Christe
.
But
the
answere
of
this
place
of
Hierome
,
Bristowe
saith
,
I
might
learne
of
the
glose
,
which
expoundeth
it
of
them
that
die
without
repentaunce
only
,
but
in
deede
it
is
spoken
generally
of
all
men
.
As
the
very
wordes
declare
vpon
this
texte
,
Euery
one
shall
beare
his
owne
burthen
.
Videtur
superioribus
contrair●
,
vbi
ait
,
&c.
He
seemeth
to
goe
against
the
former
sentence
,
where
he
sayth
:
Beare
the
burthens
one
of
an
other
:
For
if
euerie
one
shall
beare
his
owne
burthen
,
one
cannot
beare
the
burthens
of
an
other
.
But
we
must
consider
that
there
he
commanded
,
that
we
which
commit
sinne
,
should
in
this
life
helpe
one
an
other
,
and
in
this
present
worlde
should
be
an
aide
one
to
an
other
:
but
here
hee
speaketh
of
the
iudgment
of
the
Lorde
vpon
vs
:
that
not
of
other
mens
sinn
,
or
of
comparison
of
the
worser
,
but
according
to
our
own
worke
,
we
shal
be
iudged
of
him
,
either
sinners
or
holy
,
euery
one
receiuing
according
to
his
owne
worke
.
Obscurè
licet
doce
〈…〉
r
per
han●
sententiolam
,
nouum
dogma
quod
latitat
:
We
are
taught
by
this
short
sentence
though
darkely
,
a
newe
doctrine
,
or
opinion
whiche
lyeth
hidde
:
that
while
we
are
in
this
present
worlde
,
we
may
helpe
one
another
,
either
by
prayers
or
by
counsels
:
but
when
we
shall
come
before
the
iudgement
seate
of
Christe
,
that
neither
Iob
,
nor
Dauid
nor
Noe
can
intreate
for
any
man
,
but
that
euerie
one
doth
beare
his
owne
burthen
.
That
which
Hierome
speaketh
of
himselfe
,
and
of
all
other
,
that
prayers
can
not
auaile
them
,
beeing
out
of
this
world
,
when
the
glose
restreyneth
onely
to
them
that
die
in
mortall
sinne
,
without
repentance
,
it
is
as
good
as
the
olde
iest
,
Statuimus
,
id
est
abrogamus
.
It
is
also
worthy
to
be
considered
that
Hierome
as
it
seemeth
against
the
errour
of
his
time
,
calleth
this
a
newe
doctrine
which
he
gathereth
of
that
sentence
.
That
the
moste
auncient
doctours
doe
not
interprete
the
Scriptures
by
name
against
Purgatorie
,
I
said
it
was
because
Purgatorie
in
their
time
was
neither
heard
nor
named
.
Bristowe
replyeth
,
that
I
confessed
Cap.
3.
that
the
olde
doctours
heard
both
the
name
and
the
thing
,
&c.
Thus
he
chargeth
me
still
with
confessions
falsely
.
For
although
Augustine
heard
of
the
name
of
Purgatorie
,
whereof
he
sometimes
doubteth
,
sometimes
denyeth
all
places
but
two
,
yet
no
writer
before
him
.
Neither
were
prayers
for
the
dead
heard
in
the
Churche
,
before
the
heresie
of
Montanus
.
But
to
returne
to
Hierome
,
whom
I
saide
in
Eccle.
11.
to
expound
the
North
and
South
,
not
for
the
states
of
grace
and
wrath
,
but
for
the
places
of
rewarde
or
punishment
:
Bristowe
sayeth
of
both
.
But
I
denie
that
he
speaketh
of
the
state
of
grace
,
in
that
sort
that
Allen
meaneth
:
namely
,
that
any
man
so
dieth
in
the
state
of
grace
,
that
he
obteineth
release
of
punishment
after
this
life
,
which
is
the
matter
in
question
,
but
that
Bristowe
is
disposed
to
cauill
.
For
although
a
man
in
this
life
,
may
be
remoued
out
of
the
North
into
the
South
,
yet
when
the
tree
is
fallen
,
there
is
no
more
remouing
by
Hieroms
iudgement
.
Wheresoeuer
thou
preparest
thee
a
place
,
and
a
seate
hereafter
,
whether
it
be
in
the
South
,
or
in
the
North
,
there
when
thou
art
dead
,
thou
shalt
continue
.
This
whiche
the
Doctor
speaketh
expressely
of
a
place
,
a
seate
of
euerlasting
continuance
,
Bristow
for
want
of
a
better
answere
,
expoundeth
of
merite
,
as
though
it
might
stande
with
Hieronyms
authoritie
,
that
the
place
might
be
changed
although
the
merite
can
not
be
bettered
.
Touching
scriptures
for
Purgatorie
and
prayer
for
the
dead
,
whether
the
Doctours
say
,
No
Scripture
to
make
for
it
.
I
said
that
Tertullian
confesseth
,
that
oblations
&
prayers
for
the
dead
were
not
taken
of
the
scriptures
but
of
tradition
.
Bristow
in
diuers
places
denieth
any
such
confession
of
Tertullian
,
restraining
his
meaning
to
an
onely
ceremonie
of
oblation
and
prayers
on
the
yeares
day
of
their
departure
:
as
though
oblation
and
prayer
for
the
dead
generally
,
were
clearly
taught
in
the
scriptures
,
which
thing
if
it
be
:
why
doth
not
Allen
or
Bristowe
,
or
any
writer
yong
or
olde
,
bring
one
place
out
of
the
canonicall
Scriptures
,
allowing
prayer
and
oblation
for
the
deade
?
and
as
touching
Tertullian
,
his
wordes
are
such
,
as
with
no
equity
may
be
restrained
to
so
particular
a
ceremonie
:
Oblationes
pro
defunctis
,
pro
natalitiis
,
annua
die
facimu●
.
We
make
oblations
for
the
deade
,
for
the
day
of
mens
byrth
on
the
yearly
daie
.
If
Oblationes
pr●
natalitiis
,
be
not
founde
in
the
Scriptures
at
all
,
neither
on
the
yearly
daie
,
nor
any
other
daie
,
Why
saie
we
not
the
like
of
Oblationes
pro
desunctis
?
Againe
,
why
maie
it
not
be
,
that
the
yearly
day
of
celebration
is
meant
only
of
mens
byrth
,
and
oblations
for
the
deade
left
at
larg●
for
to
celebrate
the
yearly
festiuity
of
mens
birth
,
was
vsual
among
the
Gentiles
,
euery
man
for
himselfe
.
But
to
obserue
the
yearely
day
of
al
mens
death
were
infinite
,
either
for
their
friends
or
for
the
Priests
to
doe
.
Wherefore
it
remaineth
,
that
oblations
for
the
dead
,
what
soeuer
they
were
in
Tertullians
time
,
were
not
taken
of
the
Scriptures
.
And
if
they
were
Masse
and
prayers
for
the
dead
,
as
the
Papistes
say
,
Masse
and
prayers
for
the
dead
are
not
taken
out
of
the
Scriptures
by
Tertullians
confession
.
The
contradictions
that
he
layeth
to
me
,
I
alwayes
reserue
to
their
peculiar
Chapter
.
Augustine
also
denyeth
a
third
place
to
be
found
in
the
Scriptures
,
D●
Verb.
Apost.
ser.
14.
Contra
Pelagian
.
Hyp.
lib.
5.
And
De
Verb.
Apostol.
Ser.
33
For
praying
for
the
dead
,
he
alledgeth
the
tradition
of
the
fathers
,
which
he
is
not
wont
to
doe
,
where
scripture
doth
not
faile
him
.
Epiphanius
likewise
against
Aerius
bringeth
no
Scripture
,
but
the
custome
and
tradition
of
the
Churche
in
naming
the
dead
in
their
prayers
.
And
which
of
the
olde
writers
except
Chrysostome
,
once
goeth
about
to
alledge
Scripture
for
prayer
for
the
dead
?
Wherefore
I
made
no
vaine
bragge
in
saying
most
of
the
olde
writers
,
that
defende
such
prayers
,
confessed
they
had
them
not
of
the
Scriptures
.
Of
certaine
particular
textes
.
I
saide
that
Saint
Augustine
is
cleare
,
that
the
text
(
1.
Ignis
enim
de
quolocutus
est
eo
loco
Apo●tolus
,
talis
debet
intelligi
,
vt
ambo
per
eum
transeant
,
&c.
For
the
fire
whereof
the
Apostle
in
that
place
speaketh
,
ought
to
be
vnderstoode
such
,
that
both
may
passe
thorough
it
,
that
is
,
both
he
that
buildeth
vpon
this
foundation
,
Golde
,
Siluer
,
pretious
stones
,
and
he
also
which
buildeth
Woode
,
Strawe
,
Stubble
.
For
when
he
had
saide
this
,
he
added
:
The
fire
shal
trie
euerie
mans
work
,
such
as
it
is
,
if
any
mans
worke
remaine
,
that
which
he
hath
builded
vpon
,
he
shall
receiue
rewarde
:
But
if
any
mans
worke
be
burned
,
he
shall
suffer
losse
,
but
he
himselfe
shal
be
saued
,
yet
so
as
it
were
through
fire
.
The
fire
truely
,
is
the
tentation
of
tribulation
,
of
which
it
is
manifestly
written
in
an
other
place
,
The
fornace
proueth
the
potters
vessels
,
and
tentation
of
tribulation
,
iust
men
.
This
fire
in
this
present
life
,
worketh
that
which
the
Apostle
saith
,
&c.
By
this
you
see
that
fire
interpreted
of
tribulation
in
this
life
,
&
denied
to
be
spoken
of
Purgatorie
fire
,
thorough
whiche
by
their
owne
consent
all
men
do
not
passe
.
Againe
he
speaketh
not
at
all
,
against
the
Origenistes
opinion
of
hell
fire
,
that
it
shall
haue
an
end
,
but
against
such
as
in
his
time
did
holde
,
That
they
which
forsake
not
the
name
of
Christ
,
and
are
baptised
with
his
lauer
in
the
Church
,
and
are
not
cut
off
from
it
by
any
schisme
or
heresie
,
although
they
liue
in
neuer
so
great
wickednes
,
which
they
neither
wash
away
by
repenting
,
nor
redeemed
with
almes
,
but
continue
most
stubburnely
in
them
vnto
the
end
of
this
life
,
shal
be
saued
through
fire
,
although
they
be
punished
according
to
the
greatenesse
of
their
sinnes
and
wickednesse
with
long
,
but
yet
not
eternal
fire
.
But
they
which
beleeue
this
,
&
yet
are
catholikes
,
seeme
to
me
to
be
deceiued
by
a
certeine
humane
beneuolence
.
For
the
holy
scripture
being
consulted
,
answereth
another
thing
&c.
Enc.
ad
Laurentium
.
C.
67.
Thus
his
reasons
are
against
a
temporal
purging
fire
,
through
which
some
should
passe
&
not
all
,
therfore
against
the
popishe
purgatorie
,
although
he
denye
not
but
such
a
thing
may
be
,
yet
it
cannot
be
proued
by
this
place
,
nor
by
any
other
place
of
scripture
,
as
hereafter
we
shall
see
more
at
large
in
the
3.
diuision
of
this
chapter
,
where
Bristowe
promiseth
I
wot
not
what
,
to
shewe
of
Augustines
iudgement
for
Purgatorie
.
I
answered
Allen
,
apposing
vs
,
where
we
had
that
new
meaning
of
our
sauiours
wordes
,
that
he
which
is
cast
into
prison
for
neglecting
of
reconciliation
while
he
is
in
the
way
,
is
cast
into
hell
,
from
whence
he
shal
neuer
come
,
I
alledged
for
that
sense
Chrysostome
,
Augustine
,
Hierom
,
&
Chromatius
.
This
is
passing
childish
(
saith
Bristow
:
)
For
D.
Allen
demaundeth
no
such
thing
.
But
this
in
deede
is
passing
impudence
:
for
Allens
words
in
the
same
diuision
(
after
he
hath
posed
Caluin
,
Flaccus
,
Luther
,
Iewel
,
about
their
interpretation
of
scriptures
,
are
these
:
But
I
will
not
make
a
reckoning
of
their
vnseemely
gloses
,
I
would
their
followers
would
only
but
aske
them
in
all
matters
,
from
whence
they
had
such
newe
meanings
which
they
falsely
father
on
Gods
word
.
Nowe
the
whole
discourse
of
that
Chapter
as
appeareth
by
the
title
,
is
of
that
place
,
Math.
5.
Pur.
132.
Yet
saith
Bristow
,
it
is
not
true
,
that
all
those
doctors
haue
that
sense
,
which
I
affirme
them
to
haue
.
But
he
only
saith
it
,
let
their
wordes
be
read
,
Pur.
145.
Where
Allen
alloweth
all
interpretations
of
the
place
,
1.
Cor.
3.
so
long
as
they
affirme
no
error
:
I
sayde
he
may
by
the
same
reason
allowe
contradictories
to
be
true
.
As
in
that
saying
,
Matth.
5.
of
him
that
shall
not
come
out
,
vntill
he
haue
payde
the
vttermost
farthing
,
some
haue
expounded
,
that
he
shall
alwayes
be
punished
:
some
,
that
hee
shall
not
be
alwayes
punished
.
Howe
is
it
possible
that
both
these
interpretations
can
be
true
?
Mary
(
sayth
Bristow
,
with
as
fine
Rhetorike
,
as
strong
Logike
:
)
Thus
it
is
true
,
those
he
and
he
,
are
not
one
he
:
but
he
that
shal
be
alwayes
punished
,
is
he
,
that
to
the
end
of
the
way
,
that
is
this
life
,
agreeth
not
with
his
aduersarie
,
whome
he
hath
deadly
iniuryed
,
as
saying
to
him
,
fatue
,
and
thereby
incurring
the
guylt
of
Gehennae
ignis
,
which
i●
the
prison
of
the
damned
.
He
that
shal
not
be
alwayes
punished
,
is
he
whose
iniury
was
but
veniall
,
as
Racha
.
And
so
both
interpretations
agree
well
,
not
onely
together
,
but
also
with
the
text
it selfe
.
In
deede
,
this
is
a
fine
distinction
of
he
and
he
:
but
that
hee
which
agreeth
not
with
his
aduersarie
in
the
way
,
shal
be
cast
into
prison
,
from
whence
he
shall
neuer
come
,
whatsoeuer
the
matter
were
betwixt
them
,
there
is
but
one
prison
,
from
whence
there
is
no
deliuerance
,
vntil
the
last
farthing
be
payde
,
which
by
those
doctors
exposition
,
is
neuer
payde
.
Whether
the
iniurie
be
greater
or
lesser
,
the
punishment
is
eternall
,
without
reconciliation
,
or
as
Saint
Luke
sayeth
,
diligence
to
be
reconciled
.
If
thou
being
readie
to
offer
thy
gifte
at
the
altar
,
doest
remember
that
thy
brother
hath
any
thing
against
thee
,
goe
and
reconcile
thy selfe
,
sayeth
Christe
,
and
agree
quickly
with
him
while
thou
art
in
the
waye
.
Marke
that
hee
speaketh
of
all
iniurie
euen
offered
by
anger
,
or
saying
Racha
,
and
not
onely
of
saying
Fatue
.
But
as
for
,
that
he
,
which
agreeth
with
his
aduersary
while
he
is
in
the
way
,
what
trespasse
soeuer
hee
hath
done
him
,
he
is
not
at
all
committed
to
prison
,
were
his
iniurie
great
or
small
.
So
that
which
He
soeuer
commeth
into
prison
,
there
is
no
waye
of
escape
,
vntill
hee
haue
payde
the
vttermost
farthing
,
which
debt
is
alwayes
in
paying
and
neuer
discharged
.
Secondly
,
whether
the
doctors
giue
any
other
kinde
of
testimonie
against
vs
.
First
,
about
the
booke
of
Machabees
.
Where
I
sayde
,
that
Allen
pretendeth
to
proue
the
Where
I
take
exception
,
to
the
Councel
of
Carthage
,
which
numbreth
this
booke
among
the
canonical
scriptures
,
as
a
Councell
prouinciall
:
Bristowe
sayth
,
it
was
by
my
confession
confirmed
in
the
sixt
generall
Councell
of
Constantinople
in
Trullo
,
therfore
it
hath
the
authoritie
of
the
whole
true
church
.
But
I
tooke
no
exception
to
the
generalitie
therof
.
But
let
it
be
as
generall
as
you
will
,
both
that
and
the
Councel
in
Trullo
erred
by
your
owne
iudgement
,
seeing
Carth.
3.
Ca.
26.
decreed
against
the
authoritie
of
the
Romane
prelate
,
euen
by
name
,
as
Gratian
witnesseth
,
Dist.
99.
That
in
Trullo
condemned
Pope
Honorius
for
a
Monothelite
heretike
Art.
16.
&
17.
Beside
this
,
I
alledge
,
that
this
Councel
of
Carthage
3.
among
Canonicall
Scriptures
,
nameth
fiue
bookes
of
Salomon
,
whereas
the
church
alloweth
but
three
.
Bristowe
answereth
out
of
Augustine
(
which
hee
saith
was
one
of
the
Councell
)
that
the
booke
of
wisedome
and
Ecclesiasticus
,
of
a
certeine
similitude
,
were
called
Salomons
bookes
,
whereas
they
were
written
by
Iesus
the
sonn
of
Syrach
,
although
the
former
he
retract
in
rest
.
li.
2.
Ca.
4.
I
aske
no
better
to
proue
the
errour
of
the
Councell
,
but
that
they
named
fiue
of
Salomon
for
three
.
Secondly
,
it
appeareth
by
Augustine
which
was
one
of
the
Councell
,
that
although
they
called
these
books
canonical
,
yet
they
meant
them
not
to
be
of
equall
authoritie
with
the
rest
of
the
scriptures
,
Aug.
contra
Gaudent
.
lib.
2.
Ca.
23.
And
this
scripture
of
the
Machabees
,
the
Iewes
count
not
as
the
Lawe
&
the
Prophets
&
the
Psalmes
,
to
whome
our
Lord
giueth
testimonie
as
to
his
witnesses
,
saying
,
it
behoueth
that
all
things
should
be
fulfilled
that
are
written
of
me
in
the
law
&
in
that
Prophets
&
in
the
Psalms
.
But
it
is
receiued
of
the
church
not
vnprofitably
,
if
it
be
soberly
read
&
heard
.
Bristowe
saith
I
ascribe
vnto
S.
Augustine
.
that
which
he
reporteth
of
the
Iewes
,
when
I
say
that
he
alloweth
them
not
in
full
authoritie
with
the
law
,
the
Prophets
&
the
Psalmes
:
fraudulently
omitting
,
that
which
I
cited
out
of
Augustine
in
the
continued
sentence
that
our
Sauiour
Christ
appealeth
to
these
onely
witnesses
,
namely
the
law
,
the
Prophets
&
the
Psalmes
,
&
so
the
Iewes
by
ancient
tradition
,
diuide
all
the
canonical
bookes
into
these
three
orders
.
Secondly
,
where
I
note
that
Augustine
alloweth
not
these
bookes
without
condition
of
sobrietie
in
the
reader
or
hearer
:
Brist
.
saith
,
that
all
Catholikes
&
S.
Peter
do
require
the
same
condition
in
the
reader
of
the
whole
scriptures
,
as
S.
Augustine
doth
in
the
Donatistes
,
which
defended
the
murthering
of
themselues
by
example
of
Rasis
out
of
the
Machabees
.
Wherunto
I
reply
,
that
although
sobrietie
be
required
in
al
readers
of
the
holy
scripture
,
&
other
writings
also
:
yet
it
is
not
required
,
as
a
condition
making
the
scriptures
to
be
profitably
receiued
of
the
church
,
if
they
be
soberly
read
:
for
howsoeuer
the
canonicall
scriptures
be
read
,
&
by
whomsoeuer
,
although
he
be
mad
&
drunk
that
readeth
or
heareth
them
,
yet
are
they
not
only
profitably
,
but
also
necessarily
receiued
of
the
church
,
but
this
scripture
of
the
Machabes
(
saith
Augustin
)
it
is
receiued
not
vnprofitably
,
if
it
be
soberly
read
or
heard
.
Who
seeth
not
a
gret
difference
between
this
scripture
receiued
vnder
condition
,
&
the
canonical
scripture
authorized
by
Christ
him selfe
?
But
Augustine
(
saith
Brist
.
)
&
the
Councel
,
call
these
canonical
,
de
doct.
Chr.
li.
2.
Ca.
8.
In
that
place
Augustine
nameth
al
that
by
any
church
are
counted
canonical
,
confessing
in
a
maner
as
Bristow
granteth
,
that
they
were
not
all
generally
receiued
of
the
whole
church
,
&
therfore
instructeth
the
student
of
diuinitie
to
prefer
some
before
others
.
The
reasons
that
I
brought
to
proue
this
booke
,
not
to
be
canonical
,
are
these
,
first
because
the
author
commendeth
Rasis
for
killing
himself
,
which
is
contrary
to
Gods
commaundment
.
Bristow
answereth
out
of
Augustine
,
that
the
scripture
hath
only
told
it
,
&
not
commended
it
.
But
the
place
is
manifest
,
2.
Mach.
14.
that
the
author
of
the
booke
doth
not
only
report
his
murthering
of
him self
,
but
also
doth
highly
commend
his
manfulnes
therin
,
willing
(
saith
he
)
rather
to
dye
valiantly
,
than
to
giue
him selfe
into
the
hands
of
wicked
men
,
&
to
suffer
reproch
vnworthie
for
his
noble
stock
,
&
so
forth
to
the
ende
of
the
Chapter
.
Secondly
,
I
said
,
that
writer
abridgeth
the
fiue
bookes
of
Iason
:
but
the
holy
ghost
maketh
no
abridgement
of
other
mens
writings
.
Bristowe
sayth
,
the
booke
of
Kings
in
many
places
abridgeth
stories
,
telling
where
they
be
written
in
other
bookes
that
are
not
canonicall
.
To
this
I
answere
:
the
holy
ghost
abridgeth
not
the
stories
written
by
the
spirite
of
man
,
but
for
ciuile
affaires
,
sendeth
the
reader
to
other
writers
,
seeing
they
are
out
of
his
purpose
to
writ
of
them
.
Furthermore
he
sayeth
,
S.
Marke
is
commonly
called
the
Abridger
of
S.
Matthewe
,
I
aunswere
,
not
so
commonly
,
as
falsly
,
for
many
things
he
rehearseth
more
largely
then
S.
Mathewe
,
and
something
he
vtterly
omitteth
,
which
is
not
the
office
of
a
true
abridger
.
And
albeit
that
he
did
,
it
were
no
answere
to
mine
obiection
,
that
because
the
spirite
of
God
telleth
shortly
,
that
which
he
himself
had
told
at
large
,
as
in
the
Actes
,
the
sermons
of
the
Apostles
,
he
is
an
abridger
of
Chronicles
written
by
prophane
men
.
The
citing
of
the
saying
of
Poets
,
Act.
17.
&
Tit.
1.
proueth
not
that
the
holy
ghost
intending
to
write
an
historie
of
the
church
,
vseth
the
labour
of
the
prophane
man
Iason
the
Cyrenian
.
I
trow
it
is
one
thing
to
cite
a
verse
or
a
piece
of
a
verse
to
confute
men
by
their
owne
receiued
witnesses
,
another
thing
to
bring
fiue
bookes
of
an
historie
into
one
.
Thirdly
I
sayd
,
the
author
of
that
booke
confesseth
,
that
he
toke
that
matter
in
hand
,
that
men
might
haue
pleasure
in
it
,
which
could
not
away
with
the
long
tedious
stories
of
Iason
.
But
the
spirit
of
God
serueth
not
such
vaine
delightes
of
men
.
Brist
.
asketh
,
if
profitable
breuitie
be
a
vaine
delight
?
but
I
speake
not
of
the
breuitie
,
but
the
cause
why
he
affected
breuitie
,
namely
,
that
men
might
haue
pleasure
in
his
worke
.
Fourthly
,
I
said
,
the
author
sheweth
what
labor
&
sweat
it
was
to
him
to
make
this
abridgement
,
ambitiously
commendeth
his
trauell
,
&
sheweth
the
difference
between
a
storie
at
large
,
&
an
abridgement
,
all
which
things
sauour
nothing
of
Gods
spirit
.
Also
he
confesseth
his
infirmitie
,
and
desireth
pardon
if
he
haue
spoken
slenderly
and
barely
,
whereby
hee
testifieth
sufficiently
,
that
he
was
no
scribe
of
the
holy
ghost
.
Bristow
saith
(
that
he
ambitiously
commendeth
his
trauel
)
is
but
my
blasphemy
,
all
the
rest
standeth
well
ynough
with
the
assistance
of
the
holy
ghost
.
Concerning
his
ambitious
commendation
of
his
trauel
,
where
to
serueth
his
great
complaint
of
the
great
labour
,
sweat
,
&
watching
the
it
cost
him
?
&
the
wise
similitude
that
he
taketh
of
him
that
maketh
a
feast
,
&
seeketh
other
mens
commoditie
,
&
hath
no
smal
sauor
:
so
we
also
for
many
mens
sake
(
saith
he
)
are
very
well
content
to
vndertake
this
great
labour
.
A
great
labour
I
promise
you
,
and
to
great
profite
of
many
.
Likewise
in
the
ende
,
a
passing
good
similitude
of
wine
,
to
finishe
his
booke
which
hee
beganne
with
a
feast
.
As
it
is
hurtfull
to
drinke
wine
alone
,
and
then
againe
water
;
and
as
wine
tempered
with
water
is
pleasant
,
and
delighteth
the
taste
:
so
the
setting
out
of
the
matter
deliteth
the
eares
of
them
that
reade
the
storie
.
But
to
the
rest
,
Bristowe
asketh
,
if
the
scribes
of
the
holy
ghost
,
must
bee
alwayes
eloquent
,
or
able
to
doe
all
without
sweat
or
labour
?
I
aunswere
,
as
vaine
eloquence
is
not
profitable
for
them
,
so
they
neuer
complain
for
the
lack
of
it
,
but
spirituall
vtterance
they
haue
abundantly
,
and
that
without
sweat
and
watching
,
when
they
write
as
the
spirite
of
God
doth
moue
them
.
Neither
doth
S.
Paul
confesse
,
that
he
lacketh
vtterance
,
when
he
said
he
was
rude
in
speaking
:
2.
Cor.
11.
but
rehersed
what
the
false
Apostles
did
obiect
against
him
,
for
otherwise
his
speech
was
so
eloquent
in
diuine
eloquence
,
that
he
was
of
the
pagans
at
Lystra
taken
for
Mercurie
.
Act.
14.
Neither
doth
hee
excuse
his
boldnes
writing
to
the
Romans
,
as
Bristowe
saith
blasphemously
,
but
sheweth
that
he
was
bold
,
vpon
his
office
,
because
he
was
the
minister
of
Christ
vnto
the
gentils
.
Ro.
15
That
he
vsed
the
hand
of
Tertius
in
writing
that
Epistle
,
or
any
other
,
it
was
not
to
auoid
the
labor
of
endi
ting
:
Finally
,
that
he
vsed
intollerable
paines
in
preaching
,
It
proueth
not
,
that
it
cost
him
great
labor
,
&
trauel
in
studying
,
what
to
write
or
preach
either
,
which
the
spirit
of
God
did
minister
vnto
him
plentifully
:
But
neuer
doth
he
craue
pardon
,
as
one
vncerteine
whether
he
haue
don
well
or
no
,
as
the
writer
of
the
Machabees
doth
,
confessing
in
the
end
that
he
hath
done
as
wel
as
he
could
,
and
in
the
beginning
,
leauing
to
the
author
the
exact
diligence
of
euery
particular
,
so
submitting
his
labour
as
inferior
in
perfection
to
the
worke
of
Iason
the
Cyrenian
.
That
I
speake
not
of
so
many
falshods
and
fables
as
hee
affirmeth
for
truth
,
which
are
refelled
both
by
the
former
book
of
Machabees
and
by
Iosephus
.
Where
Allen
alleged
the
authority
of
Ierom
in
Prol.
Mac.
I
said
I
knew
not
what
place
he
noted
therby
,
for
in
S.
Ieroms
works
none
such
is
found
:
now
commeth
Bristow
,
&
telleth
me
it
is
in
a
preface
before
the
booke
of
Machabees
,
in
the
vulgar
latine
Bybles
,
taken
out
of
the
sense
of
Ierom
,
as
diuers
of
those
prefaces
be
,
and
that
wil
appeare
by
these
two
places
,
which
I
cite
out
o●
him
to
proue
that
booke
not
canonicall
:
The
former
is
in
his
preface
vpon
the
book
of
kings
,
where
rehersing
the
names
of
the
canonical
books
,
he
omitteth
this
,
and
after
saith
expresly
it
is
not
in
the
Canon
.
Bristow
aunswereth
,
it
is
not
in
the
Canon
of
the
Hebrewes
.
As
though
the
church
of
God
,
since
Christ
shoulde
haue
more
bookes
of
the
olde
testament
in
the
canon
,
then
the
church
of
the
Hebrews
had
.
Ierom
saith
that
this
preface
of
his
,
may
be
set
before
al
the
books
which
he
hath
translated
out
of
Hebrew
into
latin
,
v●
scire
valeamus
,
quicquid
extrahos
est
,
inter
Apocripha
esse
ponendum
.
That
we
may
be
able
to
know
that
whatsoeuer
is
beside
these
,
is
to
be
placed
among
the
apocriphall
writings
.
So
that
Ierom
speaketh
expresly
,
that
not
onely
among
the
Iewes
,
but
among
Christians
also
these
&
al
other
books
without
the
canon
,
are
to
be
taken
for
apocriphall
.
The
other
place
of
Ierom
is
in
his
preface
vppon
the
prouerbs
,
that
they
were
neither
in
the
Churches
canon
.
Therefore
euen
as
the
church
readeth
in
deede
the
bookes
of
Iudeth
,
Tobias
&
Machabees
,
but
yet
receiueth
them
not
among
the
canonicall
scriptures
:
so
also
these
two
books
Ecclesiasticus
and
Sapientia
,
she
may
reade
to
the
edifying
of
the
people
,
but
not
to
confirme
the
authoritie
of
the
churches
doctrin
:
To
wit
(
saith
Bristow
)
against
the
Iewes
,
as
though
the
Churches
doctrin
,
is
not
to
be
confirmed
against
heretikes
,
and
euen
to
the
Catholiks
themselues
,
by
authoritie
of
the
canonicall
scriptures
.
That
Augustine
accounteth
these
bookes
canonicall
,
after
a
sort
,
it
was
of
me
confessed
,
and
therefore
needed
none
other
testimonies
as
Bristow
bringeth
,
de
praed.
sanct.
&
de
ciuit
.
Dei
lib.
18.
cap.
36.
But
Ierom
is
also
cited
in
his
preface
vpon
the
booke
of
Iudith
to
affirme
the
booke
of
Iudith
to
be
canonicall
by
the
councell
of
Nice
:
if
that
were
so
,
what
pertaineth
it
to
the
book
of
Machabees
?
But
in
deede
it
is
not
so
:
for
though
we
shoulde
doubt
nothing
of
the
credit
of
that
preface
in
Iudith
,
the
words
are
these
:
With
the
Hebrewes
the
booke
of
Iudith
is
redde
among
the
hagiographaor
books
called
holy
writings
,
whose
authoritie
to
strengthen
those
things
that
come
in
controuersie
,
is
iudged
lesse
conuenient
:
yet
being
written
in
the
Chaldee
tongue
,
it
is
counted
among
the
stories
.
But
because
the
Synod
of
Nice
is
redde
to
haue
accounted
it
in
the
number
of
holy
scriptures
,
I
haue
yelded
to
your
request
,
&c.
First
he
saith
it
was
reade
of
the
Hebrewes
among
the
Hagiographa
,
which
is
false
,
as
Hierom
affirmeth
Prolog
.
Gal.
in
lib.
reg
.
Secondly
,
as
Erasmus
hath
noted
,
he
affirmeth
not
,
that
this
booke
was
allowed
by
the
Nicen
councell
,
but
saith
it
is
read
to
haue
accounted
perhaps
in
some
such
writer
,
as
coyned
the
canon
sent
vnto
the
Aphrican
councell
.
Thirdly
,
if
we
shall
vnderstand
Hagiographa
heere
as
Bristowe
woulde
haue
them
,
not
for
those
nine
that
be
canonicall
,
but
others
that
be
Apocriphal
,
&
yet
holy
writings
,
why
shoulde
we
not
likewise
say
,
that
the
computation
of
the
Nicen
councel
,
was
to
receiue
it
among
such
Apocriphall
holy
writings
,
and
not
among
the
canonical
scriptures
of
irrefragable
authoritie
?
And
therfore
Fulke
is
euen
where
he
was
before
,
in
saying
that
Ierom
doth
simply
refuse
the
books
of
the
Machabees
,
&
saith
the
church
receiueth
them
not
for
canonicall
,
&
euen
that
which
Bristow
saith
,
I
should
haue
shewed
,
that
the
church
neither
did
then
nor
ought
afterwards
to
receiue
them
,
that
we
might
be
able
to
know
(
saith
he
)
speaking
I
dare
say
of
himselfe
&
all
other
members
of
the
Church
,
that
whatsoeuer
books
are
without
the
Canon
of
the
Hebrews
are
to
be
taken
or
placed
among
the
apocriphal
:
where
I
saide
that
Luther
and
Illyrieus
were
not
the
first
that
doubted
of
the
Epistle
of
Saint
Iames
,
but
Eusebiu
:
before
them
,
saith
plainly
it
is
a
counterfait
,
protesting
that
I
speake
it
not
to
excuse
them
that
doubt
of
it
,
Bristo●
is
not
content
,
except
I
woulde
condemne
them
for
heretikes
,
which
afterwarde
reuersed
their
error
,
especially
Luther
.
Also
he
chargeth
me
to
be
a
falsarie
of
Eusebius
,
in
saying
that
he
refuseth
that
Epistle
as
a
counterfeite
,
when
he
saith
the
cleane
contrary
,
and
so
rehearseth
the
words
of
Eusebius
,
I
know
not
out
of
whose
translation
But
the
words
of
Eusebius
are
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
It
must
bee
knowne
that
it
is
a
bastard
or
counterfeit
.
2
About
onely
scripture
.
I
said
Cyprian
would
haue
nothing
done
in
the
celebration
Likewise
where
Chrysostom
saith
,
it
was
decreed
by
the
Apostles
that
in
the
celebration
of
the
holy
misteries
,
a
remembrance
should
be
made
of
them
that
are
departed
,
I
said
we
wil
be
bold
to
charge
him
with
his
owne
sayings
:
first
Hom
de
Adam
&
He●a
:
satis
sufficere
,
&c.
wee
thinke
it
sufficeth
ynough
whatsoeuer
the
writings
of
the
Apostles
haue
taught
vs
according
to
the
foresaid
rule
,
insomuch
that
we
count
it
not
all
catholike
whatsoeuer
shall
appeare
contrary
to
the
rules
appointed
.
By
this
Bristow
seeth
,
that
I
am
a
great
reader
of
the
doctors
.
For
whosoeuer
made
this
homily
(
saith
he
)
he
took
those
words
out
of
the
instructions
which
followeth
the
Epistle
of
Pope
Celestinus
,
in
the
first
tome
of
councels
,
where
the
wordes
are
not
,
the
writings
of
the
Apostles
but
the
writings
of
the
see
apostolike
,
which
are
thought
sufficient
.
Whatsoeuer
my
reading
be
,
for
the
maker
of
the
Homily
,
I
cannot
depose
,
but
I
trust
he
will
not
deny
,
but
it
hath
in
al
printed
books
gone
vnder
the
name
of
Chrysostom
,
and
it
containeth
nothing
vnworthy
the
iudgement
of
Chrysostom
.
It
is
therefore
more
like
that
Celestinus
or
whosoeuer
gathered
that
instruction
,
borrowed
those
words
out
of
this
homily
,
and
from
the
writings
of
the
Apostles
peruerted
them
to
the
writings
of
the
see
apostolike
,
many
such
borrowing
&
peruersions
are
commonly
found
in
those
pontifical
Epistles
.
For
admit
that
not
Chrysostom
,
but
some
later
man
made
that
Homily
which
borrowed
such
words
out
of
that
Epistle
or
instruction
:
Why
did
he
alter
them
,
if
hee
thought
the
writings
of
the
apostolike
see
sufficient
,
to
approue
all
catholike
doctrine
?
except
perhaps
his
copie
had
also
apostolica
scripta
,
&
that
copie
which
Peter
Crab
followed
in
gathering
the
councels
is
corrupted
.
Certaine
it
is
,
the
homily
is
auncient
,
and
made
in
the
time
when
the
Pelagian
heresie
begun
to
spring
,
which
was
in
the
later
time
of
Chrysostom
,
&
therfore
I
haue
vsed
no
fraude
,
or
misdemeanour
in
citing
this
saying
for
Chrysostoms
,
wherto
Bristow
maketh
no
answere
,
but
denyeth
the
authority
.
Likewise
wher
I
cite
out
of
Chrysost.
in
Ge.
Ho.
58.
Thou
seest
into
how
great
absurdity
they
fall
which
will
not
follow
the
Canon
or
rule
of
the
holy
scripture
,
but
permit
al
to
their
owne
cogitations
.
Bristow
answereth
nothing
,
but
that
Chrysost.
answereth
heretikes
which
said
our
Lord
took
not
true
flesh
:
as
though
his
sentence
is
not
general
against
al
heretiks
which
go
besid
the
scripture
.
Thirdly
I
saide
,
if
we
be
further
vrged
,
we
wil
allege
that
he
writeth
in
Euang.
Iac.
Hom.
58.
He
that
vseth
not
the
holy
scripture
,
but
clymeth
another
way
that
is
a
by
way
not
allowed
is
a
theese
.
To
this
Bristow
replyeth
,
that
I
will
call
Chrysostom
a
theefe
by
his
owne
saying
,
for
vsing
tradition
,
yea
verely
if
he
be
obstinate
:
and
why
not
as
well
as
S.
Paul
,
or
an
Angel
accursed
,
if
they
bring
an
other
Gospel
?
Secondly
he
saith
,
as
though
he
vseth
not
scripture
,
which
vseth
tradition
,
or
that
scripture
doth
not
warrant
tradition
as
2.
Thessa.
2.
I
aunswere
such
tradition
as
is
warranted
by
scripture
we
refuse
not
,
but
if
al
your
traditions
were
warranted
by
scripture
,
wher
should
be
your
vnwritten
verities
?
Thirdly
(
saith
Bristow
)
the
thing
that
he
speaketh
of
,
is
that
Antichrist
&
Pseudochrists
,
cannot
shewe
any
commission
out
of
scripture
.
I
answere
that
proueth
the
Pope
to
be
Antichrist
,
who
neither
for
his
authoritie
,
nor
for
his
doctrine
,
can
shewe
any
commission
out
of
the
scripture
.
Fourthly
I
saide
,
we
may
bee
as
bolde
with
Chrysostome
,
as
he
saide
he
would
be
with
Paul
himselfe
,
in
2.
ad
Tim.
Hom.
2.
I
will
say
somwhat
more
,
wee
must
not
be
ruled
by
Paul
himselfe
,
if
he
speake
any
thing
that
is
his
owne
,
and
any
thing
that
is
humaine
,
but
wee
must
obey
the
Apostle
,
when
he
caryeth
Christ
speaking
in
him
.
Bristow
asketh
,
whether
he
spake
onely
by
scripture
.
No
verily
,
but
by
reuelation
he
spake
to
S.
Paul
,
by
aud●ble
and
humaine
voyce
hee
spake
to
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
,
and
whatsoeuer
hee
spake
any
way
pertaining
to
our
instruction
,
is
committed
to
writing
,
and
therefore
I
beleeue
not
Chrysostom
,
alledging
a
tradition
of
the
Apostles
which
is
not
founde
in
their
writings
.
Another
place
of
Chrysostom
,
I
cite
in
Luke
,
Chap.
16
saying
that
ignorance
of
the
scriptures
hath
bredde
heresies
:
Therefore
hee
woulde
haue
heresies
kept
away
by
knowledge
of
the
scriptures
.
We
would
the
same
(
saith
Bristowe
)
but
what
maketh
this
for
onely
scripture
to
be
of
authoritie
?
yes
forsooth
.
If
all
heresies
come
through
ignorance
of
the
scriptures
,
that
which
commeth
not
through
ignorance
of
the
scriptures
,
is
no
heresie
:
And
that
opinion
which
is
not
contained
in
the
scriptures
,
commeth
not
of
ignorance
of
the
scriptures
:
therefore
he
that
knoweth
the
scriptures
,
knoweth
all
truth
.
Vnto
Leo
the
great
alledging
custome
and
tradition
,
I
oppose
his
owne
saying
,
for
onely
Scripture
to
be
sufficient
.
Ep.
10.
They
fall
into
this
follie
,
which
,
when
they
be
hindred
by
some
obscuritie
,
to
know
the
truth
,
haue
not
recourse
to
the
wordes
of
the
Prophets
,
nor
to
the
writinges
of
the
Apostles
,
nor
to
the
authorities
of
the
Gospell
,
but
to
themselues
.
He
doth
not
say
(
saith
Bristowe
)
that
all
truethes
are
expressed
in
the
Scripture
.
For
he
blameth
the
heretike
,
for
not
hauing
recourse
to
our
common
Creede
,
as
though
there
were
any
thing
in
our
common
Creede
,
which
is
not
expressed
in
the
Scripture
.
And
if
onely
Scripture
were
not
sufficient
for
men
to
know
the
truth
in
any
obscuritie
,
howe
could
they
be
blamed
for
not
hauing
recourse
vnto
them
,
for
that
which
they
cannot
find
in
them
?
The
words
of
the
councel
of
Constantinople
the
6.
Act.
18.
of
Bristows
true
translation
are
these
:
If
all
men
had
simply
,
and
without
calliditie
from
the
beginning
receiued
the
Gospels
preaching
,
and
bene
content
with
the
Apostles
institutions
,
the
matters
verily
had
beene
well
a
fine
,
and
neither
the
authors
of
heresies
,
nor
the
fautors
of
the
Priestes
,
had
bene
put
to
the
paynes
of
conflictes
:
but
because
the
diuell
not
resting
,
rayseth
vp
his
squires
,
therefore
Christe
also
in
time
conuenient
hath
raised
vp
his
warriours
against
them
,
to
wit
,
the
general
councels
,
which
to
this
time
haue
bene
holden
being
sixe
in
number
.
So
expressely
(
saith
Bristowe
)
they
auouch
the
authoritie
of
councels
,
and
you
alledge
them
for
only
Scriptures
.
I
crie
you
mercie
sir
:
Doe
they
alledge
the
authoritie
of
Councels
,
as
though
the
preaching
of
the
Gospell
,
and
the
institutions
of
the
Apostles
in
their
writings
were
not
sufficient
:
when
they
saide
before
,
if
men
would
haue
bene
content
with
them
,
there
needed
no
councels
?
But
you
adde
,
that
in
their
wordes
,
there
is
no
mention
at
all
of
Scripture
,
but
onely
of
preaching
and
teaching
.
What
I
pray
you
,
is
the
Gospel
,
which
they
should
preach
no
scripture
?
are
not
the
constitutions
of
the
Apostles
conteined
in
their
writinges
?
I
know
you
will
answer
they
are
not
all
contained
in
their
writinges
.
At
leastwise
what
sworde
did
these
warriers
vse
against
Satan
,
styrring
vpp
his
squires
?
doth
not
the
councell
say
expresly
the
sworde
of
the
spirit
,
which
is
the
worde
of
God
contained
in
the
Scriptures
?
for
what
other
worde
doth
Saint
Paule
commend
to
the
Eph.
6.
but
the
holy
Scripture
which
is
profitable
to
reproue
all
heresies
into
perfection
?
2.
Tim.
3.
Against
Basil
maintaining
vnwritten
tradition
I
opposed
his
owne
auctority
,
De
Ver.
Fid.
in
Proem
.
Morall
.
We
knowe
that
we
must
now
and
alwaies
auoyde
euery
worde
and
opinion
that
is
differing
from
the
doctrine
of
our
Lorde
.
But
all
is
not
differing
,
saith
Bristowe
,
that
is
not
expressed
in
the
Scripture
.
Neither
doe
I
say
so
,
but
all
is
differing
that
can
not
be
proued
by
Scripture
.
And
so
saith
Basil
in
his
short
definition
,
to
the
first
interrogation
.
Whether
it
be
lawfull
or
profitable
for
a
man
,
to
doe
or
saie
any
thing
which
he
thinketh
to
be
good
,
without
testimony
of
the
holy
Scriptures
:
He
answereth
:
For
as
much
as
our
sauiour
Christ
saith
,
that
the
holy
Ghost
shall
not
speake
of
himselfe
,
what
madnes
is
it
that
any
man
should
beleeue
any
thing
without
the
auctority
of
Gods
worde
?
Here
you
see
,
he
extendeth
the
worde
of
God
no
farther
then
the
holy
Scriptures
.
Yet
Bristowe
saith
:
If
I
sawe
the
place
,
my
malice
passeth
.
For
the
wordes
are
these
.
Who
can
be
so
madde
,
that
he
dare
so
much
as
to
thinke
any
thing
of
him selfe
?
And
it
followeth
.
But
because
of
those
things
&
words
that
are
in
vse
amongest
vs
,
some
are
plainly
taught
in
the
holy
Scripture
some
are
omitted
.
Concerning
them
that
are
omitted
(
saith
Bristowe
)
We
haue
this
rule
,
to
be
subiect
to
other
men
for
Gods
commandement
renouncing
quite
our
owne
wills
.
In
very
deede
I
abridged
the
place
,
and
gaue
the
true
sense
,
because
it
is
large
.
But
if
Bristowe
vnderstand
Basills
language
,
his
wordes
are
these
:
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
&c
,
Seeing
our
Lorde
Iesus
Christ
saith
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
for
he
shall
not
speake
of
himselfe
,
but
what
things
so
euer
he
shall
heare
,
the
same
shall
he
speake
:
and
of
him
selfe
:
the
sonne
can
doe
nothing
of
himselfe
.
And
againe
,
I
haue
not
spoken
of
my selfe
,
but
the
father
which
hath
sent
me
,
he
himselfe
hath
giuen
me
a
commandement
what
I
shall
saie
and
speake
.
And
I
knowe
that
his
commandement
is
life
eternall
.
Therefore
the
things
which
I
speake
,
euen
as
the
father
hath
said
vnto
me
,
so
I
speake
.
Who
is
come
into
so
greate
madnes
,
that
he
dare
of
him selfe
take
vpon
him
any
thing
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
euen
vnto
knowledge
?
which
hath
neede
of
the
holy
and
good
spirite
as
a
guide
that
he
mayde
directed
into
the
waie
of
truth
,
both
in
minde
and
speache
,
and
deede
,
but
walketh
blinde
and
in
darknes
without
the
sonne
of
righteousnes
,
yea
our
Lorde
Iesus
Christ
,
him
which
giueth
light
with
his
commandements
as
it
were
with
beames
?
For
the
commandement
of
the
Lorde
saith
he
is
bright
,
lightning
the
eies
.
Seeing
then
that
of
such
things
as
we
haue
in
vse
,
some
are
vnder
the
com
mandement
of
God
prescribed
in
the
holy
Scripture
,
&
some
are
not
spoken
of
concerning
those
that
are
written
,
no
liberty
at
all
is
giuen
to
any
man
,
neither
to
do
any
thing
of
those
that
are
forbidden
,
nor
to
omit
ought
of
those
things
which
are
prescribed
.
Seeing
the
Lorde
hath
once
charged
and
saide
:
thou
shalt
keepe
the
worde
which
I
command
thee
this
daie
:
thou
shalt
not
adde
vnto
it
,
neither
shalt
thou
take
from
it
.
For
there
is
a
terrible
expectation
of
iudgment
and
zeale
of
fyer
,
which
shall
deuoure
all
those
which
shal
be
bolde
to
do
any
such
thing
.
And
concerning
those
things
,
which
are
not
spoken
of
,
the
Apostle
Paule
hath
set
vs
a
rule
saying
:
all
things
are
lawfull
for
me
,
but
all
things
are
not
expedient
.
All
things
are
lawfull
for
me
,
but
all
things
do
not
edify
,
Let
no
man
seek
his
own
profit
but
euery
one
an
other
mans
.
So
that
in
euery
matter
,
it
is
necessary
to
be
subiect
to
God
,
according
to
his
commandement
.
For
it
is
written
,
be
ye
subiect
one
to
an
other
in
the
feare
of
Christ
.
And
our
Lord
saith
,
he
that
will
among
you
be
great
,
let
him
be
least
of
all
,
and
seruant
of
all
,
that
is
to
say
,
estraunged
from
his
owne
will
,
according
to
the
imitation
of
our
Lorde
himselfe
,
which
saith
:
I
came
downe
from
heauen
,
not
that
I
should
doe
mine
owne
will
,
but
the
will
of
my
father
which
hath
sent
me
,
Where
hath
Bristowe
,
that
we
should
be
subiect
to
other
men
in
such
thinges
,
as
are
omitted
by
Scripture
;
therefore
not
my
malice
,
but
his
ignorance
passeth
,
and
that
willful
also
,
although
he
follow
the
old
barbarous
translation
of
Basil
when
he
may
haue
a
better
.
An other
place
of
Basil
I
cited
in
his
Moral
.
defin.
26.
Euery
word
or
deed
must
be
confirmed
by
the
testimony
of
holy
Scripture
for
the
persuasion
of
good
men
,
&
the
confusion
of
wicked
men
.
Bristow
saith
,
he
admonisheth
his
monkes
being
students
in
diuinity
,
to
be
so
perfect
in
the
Scriptures
,
that
they
may
haue
a
text
redy
,
at
euery
need
as
when
we
bidde
them
,
cast
all
away
that
is
not
written
,
they
haue
this
text
ready
,
where
Saint
Paule
biddeth
vs
the
contrary
.
To
holde
the
traditions
which
we
haue
learned
,
whether
it
be
by
his
Scripture
,
or
by
his
worde
of
mouth
.
2.
Thess.
2.
And
doth
Paule
bidde
them
holde
such
doctrine
as
was
not
to
be
proued
out
of
the
Scriptures
?
did
hee
preach
any
such
doctrine
among
the
Thessalonians
,
when
those
to
whom
he
preached
daily
,
searched
the
Scriptures
,
tosee
if
those
thinges
were
euen
so
.
Act.
17.
And
where
I
pray
you
,
did
you
heare
any
tradition
by
worde
of
Saint
Paules
mouth
,
that
you
may
obiect
it
to
vs
?
we
doubt
not
but
whatsoeuer
he
preached
was
as
true
,
as
that
he
did
put
in
writing
,
if
you
can
assure
vs
of
it
:
but
seeing
that
is
impossible
,
and
it
is
certaine
he
preached
no
doctrine
but
such
as
he
committed
to
writing
,
Basills
rule
must
still
stande
in
force
,
that
euery
worde
and
deede
must
haue
confirmation
of
holy
scripture
,
or
else
it
is
not
good
,
for
all
good
workes
are
taught
in
the
Scripture
,
and
all
true
doctrine
may
be
found
in
them
.
1.
Tim.
3.
Now
commeth
Bristowe
,
to
answere
such
things
as
I
obiect
out
of
Augustine
against
vnwritten
traditions
:
which
he
digesteth
into
three
sorts
.
The
first
are
quotations
of
11.
or
12.
places
in
which
he
preferreth
the
autority
of
the
canonicall
Scripture
,
before
all
writinges
of
Catholike
Doctours
of
Bishops
,
of
Councels
,
before
all
customes
and
traditions
.
But
this
Bristow
denieth
to
be
the
question
,
but
whether
nothing
but
Scripture
be
of
authoritie
:
I
aunswere
,
those
places
proue
that
nothing
is
of
infallible
veritie
,
but
the
scriptures
,
therfore
they
proue
that
they
only
are
of
irrefragable
authoritie
.
The
second
sorte
of
places
are
about
this
question
,
who
hath
the
true
Church
.
Of
which
question
I
affirme
,
that
S.
Augustine
would
haue
the
Church
sought
only
in
the
Scriptures
.
And
he●e
he
biddeth
me
reade
his
first
demande
,
likewise
I
wil
send
him
to
mine
answer
vnto
the
same
.
At
length
he
confesseth
,
that
Augustine
is
content
in
that
question
,
to
set
aside
all
other
authorities
,
to
trie
it
by
the
Scriptures
:
But
that
nothing
els
is
good
authoritie
in
that
question
,
that
he
neuer
sayeth
.
Neither
doe
we
say
it
,
or
refuse
any
authoritie
,
that
is
agreeable
to
the
Scriptures
.
And
as
that
one
question
,
which
was
betweene
S.
Augustine
,
and
the
Donatistes
was
determinable
by
the
onely
authorititie
of
Scriptures
,
so
are
all
questions
that
are
betweene
the
Church
of
all
times
,
and
all
heretikes
.
The
Donatistes
helde
that
the
Church
was
perished
out
of
all
partes
of
the
world
,
except
Affrica
,
as
the
Papistes
holde
,
that
it
is
perished
out
of
all
partes
except
a
peece
of
Europa
.
Saint
Augustine
by
the
Scripture
proueth
,
the
continuance
in
the
Churche
dispersed
ouer
all
the
worlde
,
and
that
we
holde
against
the
Romishe
synagogue
of
Popish
Donatistes
,
who
haue
separated
them selues
from
the
Catholike
Church
,
into
the
function
of
an
Italian
Priest
,
as
the
other
did
of
an
Affrican
.
But
Bristowe
sayeth
,
I
am
as
blinde
as
a
beetle
,
in
saying
that
the
Papistes
did
separate
themselues
from
our
Church
,
seeing
it
is
certain
,
that
Luther
did
separate
him selfe
from
the
Popish
Church
.
The
like
might
be
said
to
all
them
that
forsoke
the
fellowship
of
any
heretikes
,
to
come
vnto
the
Churche
of
God
.
But
Bristow
is
as
madde
as
a
marche
Hare
,
that
bragging
so
much
of
the
title
of
the
church
,
he
is
driuen
to
trie
it
only
by
the
Scriptures
,
as
Augustine
calleth
vpon
the
Donatists
.
The
other
places
which
I
aledge
out
of
Aug
,
(
saith
Bristowe
)
are
about
al
questions
with
heretikes
,
whatsoeuer
.
As
that
he
would
oppresse
the
Arrian
Maximinus
with
the
authoritie
of
the
Nicene
councel
.
Lib.
3.
Cap.
14.
Bristowe
asketh
,
whether
he
might
not
presse
them
with
the
authoritie
thereof
,
as
he
doth
the
Donatistes
?
But
aske
Augustine
him selfe
who
saith
,
he
ought
not
in
that
case
,
that
he
charged
the
Donatistes
,
which
it
was
by
their
own
concession
,
because
they
allowed
it
.
But
he
saith
in
the
same
place
,
the
Fathers
of
the
Nicene
councell
ratified
Homousion
,
that
is
,
equalitie
of
the
sonne
with
the
father
,
Veritatis
autoritate
,
&
autoritatis
veritate
,
by
authoritie
of
trueth
,
and
by
trueth
of
authoritie
.
This
truth
of
authoritie
,
Bristowe
will
haue
to
be
the
authoritie
of
the
Nicene
councell
,
as
though
the
councel
could
not
erre
:
but
then
what
needed
the
authoritie
of
trueth
?
In
deede
where
the
councel
decreeth
with
the
trueth
,
it
is
the
trueth
of
authoritie
,
for
other
authoritie
a
Councell
hath
not
,
but
of
trueth
:
to
declare
trueth
,
and
not
to
make
trueth
,
for
if
it
declare
errour
,
as
the
councell
of
Arimine
did
,
it
hath
no
trueth
of
authoritie
,
because
it
hath
no
authoritie
of
trueth
.
Moreouer
Bristow
saith
,
I
translate
falsely
these
wordes
,
Nec
ego
huius
autoritate
,
nec
tuillius
detineris
.
Neither
am
I
bounden
to
the
authoritie
of
the
one
,
nor
thou
of
the
other
.
Whereas
it
should
be
:
Neither
doth
the
authoritie
of
the
one
hold
me
,
nor
of
the
other
holde
thee
.
There
is
greate
difference
betweene
,
beeing
holden
,
and
beeing
bound
.
To
the
bare
authoritie
of
the
councell
of
Nice
,
Maximinus
was
no
more
bounden
,
then
Augustine
to
the
bare
authoritie
of
Ariminum
.
It
was
the
trueth
of
Nice
,
that
the
Arrian
was
bounde
vnto
,
and
the
falshod
of
Ariminum
,
that
Augustine
was
not
holden
with
vs
.
But
after
the
example
of
Augustine
(
saith
Bristowe
)
we
will
not
alledge
the
councell
of
Trent
,
as
our
proper
witnesses
to
our
side
,
but
the
authoritie
of
Scriptures
common
to
both
.
Witnesse
hereof
,
Bristowes
motiues
,
where
he
would
ouerthrowe
vs
by
the
bare
name
of
Catholike
,
and
heretike
,
&c.
Againe
he
saith
,
that
we
make
challenge
of
600.
yeares
also
.
And
what
then
?
Witnesses
of
trueth
we
take
wheresoeuer
they
be
,
but
authoritie
of
trueth
onely
out
of
the
Scriptures
.
Where
I
said
,
that
Augustine
,
setting
all
other
persuasions
aside
,
prouoketh
onely
to
the
Scriptures
,
to
trie
the
faith
and
doctrine
of
the
Churche
:
Bristowe
answereth
:
Howe
true
that
is
,
appeareth
in
the
same
booke
,
De
Vnitate
Eccle.
which
you
cite
.
For
when
he
hath
proued
against
the
Donatistes
,
the
Church
to
be
his
,
he
saith
expressely
,
that
to
be
inough
also
,
for
all
other
questions
.
Sufficit
nobis
:
It
is
inough
for
vs
that
we
haue
that
Church
,
which
is
pointed
too
,
by
most
manifest
testimonies
of
the
holy
and
Canonicall
Scriptures
.
De
Vnit
Eccle.
Cap.
19.
Doth
he
say
expressely
,
it
is
inough
for
all
other
questions
?
I
must
needes
say
expressely
you
lie
.
For
the
onely
question
,
being
how
the
Donatistes
should
be
receiued
,
if
they
would
come
to
the
Catholike
Church
,
as
though
they
were
the
true
Church
,
because
baptisme
giuen
among
them
was
not
repeated
in
the
Catholike
Church
,
Augustine
after
much
concertation
saith
.
Quapropter
cum
dicatur
haereticis
,
&c.
Wherfore
seeing
it
is
said
to
the
heretiks
:
Rightousnes
is
wanting
to
you
,
which
without
charitie
,
and
the
bonde
of
peace
,
no
man
can
haue
,
&
seeing
they
themselues
confesse
,
that
many
haue
baptisme
,
which
haue
not
righteousnesse
,
and
if
they
would
not
confesse
it
,
the
holy
Scripture
conuinceth
them
,
I
maruell
howe
they
thinke
,
when
we
wil
not
baptise
them
again
,
hauing
not
their
own
,
but
the
baptisme
of
Christ
,
that
we
do
so
,
as
though
we
iudged
nothing
to
be
now
wanting
to
them
&
that
because
baptisme
is
not
giuen
to
them
in
the
Catholike
Church
,
which
they
are
founde
to
haue
already
,
they
thinke
they
receiue
nothing
there
,
where
they
receiue
that
without
which
,
that
which
they
haue
,
auaileth
them
to
their
destruction
,
and
not
to
their
saluation
.
Which
if
they
wil
not
vnderstand
,
it
is
sufficient
for
vs
,
that
we
holde
that
Church
,
which
is
shewed
forth
by
most
manifest
testimonies
of
the
holy
and
canonical
Scriptures
.
Where
he
speaketh
not
of
the
authortie
of
the
Church
to
determine
questions
,
but
sheweth
it
is
sufficient
to
haue
proued
by
the
Scriptures
,
that
they
are
the
true
Church
,
although
the
Heretikes
will
not
vnderstand
how
baptisme
being
ministred
out
of
the
Church
,
hath
not
effect
,
but
in
the
true
Church
,
for
if
it
be
manifest
by
the
Scriptures
that
Augustine
holdeth
the
true
Church
,
that
last
question
of
theirs
,
how
they
should
be
receiued
,
though
it
be
not
resolued
,
yet
can
not
disprooue
them
to
be
the
true
Church
,
nor
proue
the
Donatists
to
be
the
Church
,
seeing
there
can
be
but
one
.
Where
out
of
this
Booke
Cap.
16.
I
shewe
,
that
Augustine
declareth
,
first
that
Heretikes
must
be
confuted
only
by
Scriptures
,
secondly
that
neither
councells
,
succession
of
Bishoppes
vniuersality
,
miracles
,
visions
,
dreames
nor
reuelations
,
are
the
notes
to
trie
the
Catholike
Church
,
but
only
the
Scriptures
:
Bristowe
saith
,
they
are
notes
with
the
Scripture
,
as
he
hath
shewed
in
his
demaund
,
I
answere
whatsoeuer
agreeth
with
the
Scripture
,
may
well
be
receiued
.
But
the
Scripture
without
all
these
is
sufficient
,
to
trie
the
Church
as
Augustine
sheweth
,
&
therefore
all
the
rest
of
Bristowes
motiues
,
might
be
spared
,
if
he
durst
ioyne
issue
vpon
the
Scripture
only
,
as
Augustine
doth
,
but
that
he
dare
not
do
.
He
hath
a
great
quarrell
of
Augustine
,
for
translating
manifestatur
is
proued
,
as
though
Augustine
saide
,
that
true
miracles
and
visions
lacke
waight
and
fashion
of
iust
probation
.
If
you
call
true
miracles
,
that
are
done
indeede
and
not
counterfeited
,
I
say
that
all
such
make
no
iust
probation
.
For
God
tempteth
his
Church
by
such
,
to
see
if
they
will
forsake
his
commandement
.
Deut.
13.
But
those
that
be
true
miracles
indeede
,
are
ioyned
with
the
truth
of
doctrine
,
which
being
tryed
by
the
worde
of
God
to
be
such
,
confirme
it
or
prepare
mens
mindes
vnto
it
,
of
themselues
neuer
sufficient
to
auouch
true
doctrine
,
without
Gods
worde
:
and
therefore
I
will
stil
t●●nslate
,
manifestatur
is
manifestly
prooued
or
shewed
,
which
is
alone
.
Moreouer
out
of
Augustine
Cont.
Epist.
sundam
.
Cap.
4.
I
shewed
,
that
though
consent
,
and
vniuersality
,
antiquity
,
succession
,
be
good
confirmation
,
when
they
are
ioyned
with
truth
:
yet
when
trueth
is
seuered
from
them
,
it
is
more
to
be
regarded
then
they
all
.
Bristowe
saith
,
that
Augustine
graunteth
not
that
the
truth
can
be
separated
from
them
.
Yes
verily
,
or
else
he
should
haue
stood
vpon
that
poynt
only
,
that
truth
can
not
be
seuered
from
those
markes
,
which
vndoubtedly
the
Catholique
Church
had
,
and
the
Manichees
wanted
.
And
although
he
saide
,
the
Church
had
most
syncere
wisdom
,
yet
he
saith
not
,
that
wheresoeuer
was
antiquity
,
succession
,
&c.
there
must
needs
be
the
most
syncere
wisdome
.
Lastly
out
of
the
booke
De
Pastoribus
Cap.
14.
I
affirmed
,
that
mans
auctority
is
too
weake
to
carry
away
so
waighty
a
matter
,
as
was
in
question
,
vsing
the
wordes
of
Augustine
:
Auferantur
chartae
humanae
,
&c.
Let
mens
papers
be
remoued
,
let
the
voices
of
God
be
heard
,
shewe
me
one
place
of
Scripture
for
Donatus
side
,
&c.
Bristowe
rehearsing
the
saying
more
at
large
as
I
did
,
Ar.
14.
asketh
what
maketh
all
this
for
Fulke
?
vnlesse
hee
thinketh
he
hath
any
vantage
in
his
owne
false
translation
of
Acta
,
turning
it
decrees
.
Surely
whether
the
worde
be
well
or
ill
translated
,
I
seeke
no
vantage
therof
,
and
yet
if
I
should
change
my
translations
,
I
would
rather
call
Acta
actes
of
the
Court
or
recordes
,
then
Courtrolles
as
you
doe
.
But
euery
man
may
see
,
what
vantage
you
clasp
at
,
among
ignorant
persons
,
by
your
false
translation
of
Chartae
humanae
mens
Court
papers
,
as
though
the
worde
of
Augustine
were
not
generall
to
remoue
all
mens
writings
,
and
to
vrge
only
the
Scripture
.
But
the
Church
beginning
at
Hierusalem
&
spreading
ouer
all
Nations
,
to
the
very
last
time
,
which
Augustine
in
all
places
proueth
against
the
Donatists
,
maketh
much
against
vs
in
Bristowes
opinion
.
Nay
rather
against
the
Papists
,
which
restraine
the
Church
into
the
Romishe
rable
,
which
we
affirme
,
both
is
and
was
alwaies
,
scattered
ouer
al
the
world
,
although
greater
in
number
at
some
times
then
at
other
some
,
seeing
that
Mahomet
hath
infected
a
greate
part
of
the
worlde
,
and
yet
among
the
Mahometists
we
doubt
not
but
Christ
hath
his
members
,
that
neuer
bowed
their
knee
either
to
Mahomet
of
Mecha
,
or
to
the
Pope
of
Rome
.
3
About
certaine
traditions
.
The
oblations
Pro
natalitiis
spoken
of
before
Cap.
6.
Par.
1.
5.
I
saide
those
oblations
,
with
other
superstitions
Bristowe
answereth
that
he
speaketh
neuer
a
worde
of
any
other
traditions
.
Yet
Bristowe
confesseth
him selfe
,
that
many
of
them
are
abrogated
.
Cap.
6.
Par.
1.
4.
&
5.
4
About
the
marriage
of
Votaries
.
The
two
places
one
of
Epiphanius
,
the
other
of
Hieronyme
,
whiche
I
cited
for
the
Marriage
of
Votaries
,
But
he
slaundereth
me
as
he
doeth
often
:
I
saide
Epiphanius
doth
count
it
an
offence
to
marry
,
because
it
was
a
breache
of
vowe
,
but
neither
he
,
nor
I
,
saide
that
mar●i●ge
is
a
sinne
Bristowe
saith
likewise
,
the
Apostles
tradition
calleth
it
a
sinne
.
But
he
slandereth
the
tradition
or
Epiphanius
the
reporter
thereof
euen
as
he
did
me
.
The
words
are
Hae.
61.
Tradiderunt
,
&c.
The
holy
Apostles
of
God
haue
deliuered
,
that
it
is
a
sin
after
virginity
decreed
,
to
be
turned
to
marriage
.
They
say
not
marriage
is
a
sinne
,
but
by
breache
of
vowe
to
marrie
is
a
sinne
.
For
their
sinn
cannot
pollute
the
ordinance
of
God
.
But
the
wholsome
medicines
are
penance
&
reconciliation
,
saith
Bristowe
.
And
why
not
marriage
I
pray
you
?
whatsoeuer
is
good
for
the
diseased
,
is
an
wholsom
medicine
:
to
take
a
wife
openly
,
is
good
for
the
diseased
:
therefore
marriage
also
is
a
wholesome
medicine
.
As
for
your
distinction
of
solemne
vowe
,
and
sole
vow
is
a
very
bable
:
Epiphanius
speaketh
generally
of
al
that
had
vowed
virginity
.
To
the
place
of
Hierome
Ad
Demetriadem
,
he
answereth
that
they
which
of
two
sinnes
will
needes
committ
one
,
they
counsell
them
to
committ
the
lesse
rather
then
the
greater
.
But
Hierom
maketh
no
comparison
of
sinnes
,
but
saith
to
such
virgins
as
liued
incontinently
.
It
must
be
plainly
saide
to
them
,
that
either
they
should
marry
if
they
cannot
containe
,
or
else
they
should
containe
if
they
will
not
marry
.
5.
About
the
reall
presence
and
transubstantiation
.
About
these
pointes
I
will
not
stande
,
considering
I
Where
I
saide
,
it
was
not
the
beleefe
of
S.
Aug.
that
the
sacrament
is
the
natural
body
and
blood
of
Christ
.
Bristow
asketh
if
it
be
his
mystical
body
,
or
whether
Christ
haue
any
more
bodies
.
It
were
an
easy
matter
to
shewe
that
it
is
called
by
Augustine
the
mysticall
body
of
Christ
,
which
is
his
Church
,
but
I
pardon
Bristowes
ignorance
:
and
answere
him
,
that
the
sacrament
is
neither
his
naturall
,
nor
his
mysticall
body
in
proper
speeche
,
But
secundum
quendam
modum
,
as
Aug.
saith
,
after
a
certain
manner
,
both
,
And
I
read
in
Theodoret
of
a
third
body
,
which
the
sacrament
is
,
De
typico
symbolicoque
corpore
,
a
typicall
or
sacramentall
body
.
The
place
of
Augustine
in
Psalm.
58.
with
the
cauillation
of
Adoration
,
which
Bristowe
maketh
,
is
examined
in
mine
answere
to
Heskins
.
Lib.
2.
Cap.
45.
And
in
mine
answere
to
Sander
.
Lib.
6.
Cap.
2.
The
place
of
Augustine
,
which
I
translated
worde
for
worde
,
and
faithfully
gaue
the
sense
thereof
,
as
euerie
man
may
see
that
readeth
it
,
Purg.
309.
Bristowe
shamefully
peruerteth
,
setting
the
carte
before
the
horse
,
in
rehearsing
of
it
to
make
a
contrary
sense
.
But
euen
in
that
same
booke
and
Chapter
De
Trinitate
,
Lib.
3.
Cap.
10.
Augustine
is
cleare
,
against
that
monstrous
opinion
of
transubstantiation
,
speaking
of
signes
,
&
namely
of
the
bread
which
is
spent
in
receiuing
of
the
sacrament
:
Sed
quia
haec
,
&c.
But
because
these
thinges
are
knowen
to
men
,
because
they
are
done
by
men
,
they
may
haue
honour
,
as
religious
things
,
but
wonder
as
miracles
,
they
cannot
haue
.
Whereof
if
he
had
known
the
carnal
presence
,
&
change
of
the
bread
,
such
as
the
papistes
speake
of
,
he
must
needes
haue
acknowledged
many
wonders
and
miracles
contrary
to
the
order
of
nature
,
which
they
are
constrained
to
faine
,
although
no
man
can
see
them
,
wheras
al
corporal
miracles
wroght
by
God
are
sensible
The
place
of
Iustinus
with
Bristowes
cauil
confuted
,
is
in
mine
answere
to
Heskins
Lib.
2.
Cap.
43.
The
place
of
Irenaeus
in
the
same
answere
.
Lib.
2.
Cap.
4●
.
And
Theodoret
the
last
Doctor
that
I
cited
,
who
perchance
might
he
ignorant
of
transubstantiation
(
saith
Bristowe
)
because
it
was
not
clearely
defined
to
be
in
fourme
and
matter
,
before
the
last
councell
of
Trent
,
you
shall
finde
with
his
cauill
confuted
Lib.
3.
Cap.
●2
.
&
56.
Against
Sanders
booke
of
the
sacrament
.
Lib.
6.
Cap.
5.
6
About
the
sacrament
of
penance
.
Absolution
.
About
the
sacrament
of
penance
,
the
Popish
Church
The
second
thing
is
temporall
debt
,
remaining
after
absolution
.
Touching
this
matter
,
I
said
Purg.
42.
That
Augustine
saith
of
the
deathes
of
Moses
and
Aaron
,
that
they
were
signes
of
things
to
come
,
not
punishments
of
Gods
displeasure
.
Quaest.
in
Num.
lib.
4.
cap.
53.
Here
Bristowe
complayneth
of
my
synceritie
,
and
rehearseth
the
wordes
before
.
When
it
is
said
to
them
,
that
they
should
be
gathered
to
their
people
:
It
is
manifest
,
that
they
be
not
in
the
wrath
of
God
,
which
separateth
from
the
peace
of
the
holy
eternall
societie
.
Thereby
it
is
manifest
,
that
also
their
deathes
were
signes
of
thinges
to
come
,
&
not
punishments
of
Gods
indignation
.
What
want
of
synceritie
is
here
,
except
there
be
so
great
difference
betweene
indignation
and
displeasure
?
But
Bristowe
cauilleth
of
the
wrath
that
separateth
for
euer
,
as
though
they
were
in
a
wrath
that
separateth
for
a
time
.
Yet
the
scripture
presseth
,
where
God
saide
you
shall
die
,
because
you
did
not
beleeue
me
.
This
was
no
satisfaction
for
their
temporall
debt
remaining
after
absolution
,
wherof
the
question
is
,
but
a
fatherly
correction
to
them
,
and
an
example
vnto
other
.
Yea
such
a
correction
as
was
a
greater
benefite
,
namely
to
be
receiued
into
the
eternall
land
of
promise
,
then
the
punishment
was
,
that
they
should
not
enter
into
the
earthly
possession
.
Likewise
I
reported
,
that
Augustine
Cont.
Faust.
Lib.
22.
Cap.
67.
and
De
Pecc
.
mer.
ac
rem
.
Lib.
2.
Cap.
23.
saith
that
the
punishment
laide
vpon
Dauid
after
●his
adultery
remitted
,
was
the
chastisment
of
Gods
fatherly
scourge
.
Bristowe
asketh
,
if
it
be
no
punishment
,
because
it
is
a
scourge
?
yes
verily
:
and
whether
it
be
not
for
sinne
?
yes
truly
.
But
neuer
the
sooner
a
temporall
debt
remaining
after
absolution
,
when
it
is
the
scourge
of
a
fathers
chastisement
.
For
I
chastice
not
my
childe
,
that
his
punishment
should
satisfie
any
part
of
his
fault
,
but
to
keepe
him
in
humility
,
and
feare
for
committing
the
like
,
and
for
example
to
the
rest
of
my
family
,
as
wise
a
father
and
diuine
as
Bristowe
will
esteme
me
.
And
how
can
Bristowe
defend
Augustine
against
the
Pelagians
,
shewing
why
death
that
came
in
by
sinne
,
stil
remaineth
euen
vpon
them
whose
original
sinnes
he
confesseth
to
be
so
fully
forgiuen
in
baptisme
,
that
they
owe
nothing
,
neither
eternally
nor
temporally
for
them
:
if
death
in
such
,
be
any
temporall
debt
,
remaining
after
absolution
,
when
he
will
haue
the
fatherly
scourge
of
God
to
be
a
punishment
to
satisfie
the
debt
of
sinne
.
But
for
a
contradictorie
of
Allens
assertion
,
I
cited
out
of
Chrysostome
in
Rom.
Ho.
8.
where
there
is
forgiuenesse
,
there
is
no
punishment
.
Bristow
saith
,
he
speaketh
of
the
forgiuenesse
in
baptisme
to
a
Iewe
:
Allen
of
forgiuenesse
in
penance
.
But
he
may
not
creepe
out
at
that
hole
,
it
is
too
straight
for
him
.
Chrysostome
speaketh
generally
,
wheresoeuer
there
is
forgiuenesse
,
there
is
no
punishment
,
yea
he
saith
,
Vbi
gratia
ibi
&
venia
,
where
grace
is
,
there
is
forgiuenesse
therefore
if
there
be
grace
in
penance
there
is
forgiuenesse
,
and
where
there
is
forgiuenesse
,
there
shal
be
no
punishment
:
neither
doth
Chrysostome
in
that
place
speake
a
word
,
either
of
Iewe
,
or
Baptisme
,
but
of
all
Christians
escaping
by
grace
,
the
wrath
which
the
lawe
worketh
,
and
beeing
made
heires
of
the
promise
by
faith
.
The
third
thing
is
satisfaction
,
against
which
,
Bristow
saith
,
I
alledged
Chrysostome
,
and
Ambrose
so
fondly
,
that
the
wordes
which
I
alledge
will
declare
,
Chrysost.
De
Compunct.
Cord.
lib.
1.
Non
requirit
,
&c.
God
requireth
not
the
burthen
of
shirts
of
haire
,
nor
to
be
shutte
vp
in
the
streightes
of
a
little
cell
,
neither
doth
he
commaunde
vs
to
sitte
in
obscure
and
darke
caues
:
This
onely
is
that
which
is
required
of
vs
,
that
we
alwayes
remember
our
sinnes
.
He
requireth
onely
compunction
of
the
heart
,
therefore
he
requireth
no
workes
of
satisfaction
,
neither
those
,
nor
any
other
.
Bristow
will
see
nothing
,
but
the
streight
mourning
of
Monkes
.
The
worde
onely
is
so
litle
for
his
purpose
,
that
he
cannot
see
it
.
And
when
he
hath
praised
this
mourning
as
much
as
he
can
,
Chrysostome
saith
it
is
besides
Gods
commandement
.
To
the
place
of
Ambrose
in
Luc.
22.
lib.
10.
He
saith
of
Peter
.
I
read
of
his
teares
,
I
reade
not
of
his
satisfaction
.
Bristowe
replyeth
,
that
he
saith
immediatly
before
,
I
finde
not
what
he
said
,
I
finde
that
he
wept
.
Wherevpon
he
will
gather
,
both
confession
,
and
satisfaction
necessarie
.
I
would
faine
see
that
collection
in
a
syllogisme
.
Surely
if
they
were
both
necessarie
,
S.
Peter
,
by
iudgement
of
Ambrose
,
lacked
two
necessarie
pointes
of
repentance
,
which
Iudas
had
,
and
yet
obteyned
not
forgiuenesse
:
But
teares
(
saith
he
)
are
a
speciall
kinde
of
confession
and
satisfaction
.
And
yet
where
Ambrose
sayeth
,
they
obteine
pardon
,
Bristowe
saith
,
they
are
not
sufficient
:
so
that
Peter
weeping
,
hauing
beside
his
inward
contrition
a
speciall
kinde
of
confession
and
satisfaction
,
had
not
that
which
wold
serue
.
But
Br.
leauing
this
place
as
obscure
,
referreth
vs
to
a
plain
place
.
Ad
vir
.
Lap.
c.
8.
For
a
passing
great
crime
,
is
necessary
a
passing
great
satisfaction
.
wherto
I
answered
before
,
that
an
heinous
offence
must
be
earnestly
bewailed
,
if
the
repentance
be
not
counterfet
,
Brist
.
saith
,
He
doubted
not
of
her
repentance
to
be
vnfeined
.
What
then
?
He
exhorteth
her
to
continue
her
repentance
,
not
for
satisfaction
to
God
,
whose
iustice
cannot
be
sa●isfied
by
mans
worke
,
but
by
her
earnest
sorrowe
,
to
satisfie
the
Church
which
was
offended
by
her
whoredome
.
The
fourth
thing
is
pardons
,
whereof
Bristowe
speaketh
as
he
doth
commonly
,
with
wonderfull
confusion
.
I
saide
the
olde
satisfaction
was
in
respect
of
the
offence
vnto
the
Church
,
and
not
to
satisfie
the
iustice
of
God
,
which
is
not
satisfied
but
by
the
death
of
Christ
.
The
penance
enioyned
by
the
Church
,
vpon
good
consideration
,
might
be
and
often
was
released
by
the
Church
,
as
appeareth
by
many
places
of
Cyprian
,
which
Bristowe
citeth
and
many
other
,
but
not
by
the
Bishop
only
,
and
this
release
or
remission
,
was
called
indulgence
or
pardon
,
which
is
no
more
like
to
Popish
pardons
,
then
the
creaking
of
a
goose
,
is
like
the
songe
of
a
swanne
.
But
as
for
pardoning
of
sinne
,
they
affirmed
that
it
was
proper
to
God
,
as
Ambrose
to
the
virgine
.
Sticke
to
penance
euen
to
the
end
of
thy
life
,
and
presume
not
that
pardon
may
be
giuen
thee
of
mans
day
,
for
he
deceiueth
thee
that
so
promiseth
the.
For
thou
that
hast
in
speciall
sinned
against
the
Lorde
,
it
is
meete
that
of
him
only
thou
looke
for
remedy
in
the
day
of
iudgement
.
Bristowe
saith
,
He
did
binde
her
to
penance
all
her
life
,
bidding
her
not
to
hope
for
any
pardon
at
his
hand
,
as
he
bounde
the
Emperour
Theodosius
indefinitely
,
and
loosed
him
after
eight
moneths
penance
,
with
a
pardon
.
Who
seeth
not
,
quoth
Bristow
,
that
all
this
maketh
plainly
for
pardons
?
But
Ambrose
telleth
her
,
not
,
that
he
would
not
pardon
her
,
but
that
no
man
can
pardon
the
offence
committed
against
God
,
and
that
if
the
Pope
himselfe
should
promise
to
pardon
her
,
he
should
but
deceiue
her
.
And
yet
the
Church
might
pardon
the
offence
and
slander
where
with
they
were
iustly
offended
,
by
her
whoredome
,
and
restore
her
to
the
Communion
,
as
I
doubt
not
but
they
did
;
although
she
should
continue
her
repentance
,
al
the
daies
of
her
life
,
&
when
Ambrose
did
binde
and
loose
the
Emperor
,
he
did
only
vse
the
discipline
of
the
Church
,
to
bring
him
to
repentance
,
that
God
might
forgiue
his
sinnes
,
not
that
he
might
make
satisfaction
for
the
slaughter
of
7000.
men
,
of
whom
the
greatest
part
were
innocents
by
8.
moneths
penance
,
but
after
such
time
,
seeing
him
to
be
sorrowfull
in
deede
,
receiued
him
againe
into
the
communion
.
The
place
of
Cyprian
In
Sermon
.
de
Lapsis
is
very
cleare
to
shewe
that
God
and
not
man
,
forgiueth
the
sinnes
.
Let
no
man
deceiue
himselfe
,
let
no
man
beguile
himselfe
,
only
our
Lord
can
giue
mercy
,
only
he
can
graunt
pardon
to
sinnes
,
as
beeing
committed
against
him
,
who
hath
borne
our
sinnes
,
who
hath
suffered
sorrow
for
vs
,
whom
God
hath
deliuered
for
our
sinnes
.
Man
cannot
be
greater
then
God
,
neither
can
the
seruant
by
his
indulgence
remitt
or
●orgiue
that
which
by
so
greate
offence
,
is
committed
against
the
Lorde
,
least
this
offence
also
be
added
to
him
,
that
is
fallen
,
if
he
knowe
not
that
it
is
foreshewed
,
Cursed
is
he
that
putteth
his
trust
in
man
.
Our
Lorde
must
be
entreated
,
our
Lorde
must
be
pacified
,
with
our
satisfaction
,
which
saith
,
he
doth
denie
that
man
that
denieth
him
.
Against
this
so
plaine
a
place
:
Bristowe
cauelleth
,
that
he
speaketh
to
impenitents
,
that
trusted
also
in
laie
mens
pardons
:
which
is
false
,
for
they
were
not
altogether
impenitent
,
but
not
sufficiently
repentant
,
neither
did
they
trust
in
laie
mens
pardons
,
but
without
dewe
repentance
tried
,
made
hast
to
be
reconciled
by
entreaty
of
the
Martyrs
,
yet
with
the
hurtfull
facility
of
the
priests
,
whereof
Cyprian
complaineth
:
Sic
oportet
Dei
Sacerdotem
:
So
it
behoueth
the
priest
of
God
not
to
deceiue
with
the
deceiuable
ye●lding
,
but
to
prouide
with
wholesome
remedies
.
As
for
the
pardons
whose
antiquity
Bristowe
would
haue
to
be
noted
,
were
not
pardons
of
sinnes
,
but
release
of
time
of
separation
enioined
by
the
Church
to
shewe
repentance
for
their
sinnes
,
as
I
declared
before
.
Which
is
euen
as
auncient
as
the
Gospell
,
whereas
popish
pardons
Apoena
&
culpa
,
are
of
a
much
newer
stampe
,
and
contrary
to
the
auncient
custome
in
the
giuers
,
for
they
were
geuen
by
the
whole
Church
,
in
the
persons
,
for
they
were
giuen
to
men
a
liue
only
,
in
the
time
,
for
they
were
giuen
but
of
a
short
time
of
penance
enioyned
in
this
life
,
and
not
of
so
many
thousand
yeares
,
&c.
in
the
thing
released
,
for
they
were
neither
pardons
of
punishment
,
nor
of
sinne
dewe
to
Gods
iustice
,
but
of
time
of
satisfaction
to
be
made
to
the
Church
,
when
the
Church
was
otherwise
satisfied
.
7
Of
Purgatorie
,
of
the
Canonicall
memento
,
of
oblations
,
&
Bristowe
chargeth
me
to
vse
the
arguments
from
Lib.
4.
Con.
gra
.
I
confesse
,
but
how
proueth
Bristowe
,
that
he
was
about
the
time
of
Iustinus
,
or
Tertullian
,
when
he
confesseth
it
was
300
,
yeares
since
Christians
were
named
,
Lib.
1
?
and
vnder
Dioclesian
he
florished
,
saieth
Hierome
,
which
was
sixe
or
seuen
score
yeres
after
Tertullian
,
the
later
of
the
two
who
florished
vnder
Seuerus
.
The
olde
liturgie
of
the
Greeke
Church
in
Epiphanius
time
,
had
a
memorie
of
the
dead
,
but
seeing
it
was
an
oblation
for
the
Patriarches
,
Prophetes
,
Apostles
,
&c.
in
the
first
institution
thereof
,
it
could
be
but
an
offering
of
thankes
giuing
,
although
Epiphanius
expounded
it
after
the
errour
of
this
time
,
to
be
a
prayer
for
the
sinner
,
&
a
separation
of
Christ
from
the
order
of
men
.
This
is
the
effect
of
that
I
saide
.
Bristowe
saith
,
I
am
deceiued
,
by
thinking
it
is
but
one
memorie
,
whereof
Epiphanius
speaketh
,
and
sendeth
me
to
the
countefeit
liturgies
of
Saint
Iames
,
Chrysostome
,
and
Basil
,
which
were
written
long
after
their
age
,
according
as
well
to
the
error
of
the
time
,
in
which
they
were
written
,
as
in
some
expressing
the
name
of
the
Emperour
,
and
Bishop
,
in
whose
time
they
were
written
.
Also
he
sendeth
me
to
diuers
places
of
S.
Augustine
,
but
which
I
knowe
not
,
for
the
place
Encherid
C.
110.
&
Dulci
.
q.
4.
are
of
one
sacrifice
offered
for
all
baptized
persons
that
are
departed
,
which
he
saith
for
the
very
good
are
thankesgiuing
,
for
them
that
were
not
very
ill
asking
of
mercie
,
for
the
verie
ill
no
helpe
,
but
a
comfort
of
the
liuing
.
Chrysostome
also
speaketh
of
a
generall
memorie
of
all
that
were
departed
,
instituted
by
the
Apostles
Ad
Philip.
hom.
3.
in
which
if
there
had
bene
an
expresse
forme
of
prayer
for
the
dead
,
he
needed
not
of
that
memorie
,
to
haue
proued
prayer
to
be
profitable
to
the
dead
.
The
place
of
Origen
he
mangleth
,
euen
as
his
Maister
Allen
doth
,
but
he
more
vsually
,
suffering
no
sentence
of
any
writer
almost
to
be
read
together
,
without
preiudice
of
his
interlacing
.
In
Iob
lib
3.
The
former
men
did
celebrate
the
day
of
their
birth
,
louing
but
one
life
,
and
not
hoping
for
any
other
after
this
.
But
now
doe
we
not
celebrate
the
day
of
natiuitie
,
seeing
it
is
the
entrance
of
sorowes
&
temptations
,
but
we
celebrate
the
day
of
death
,
as
that
which
is
the
putting
away
of
al
sorowes
,
&
the
escaping
of
al
temptations
.
We
celebrate
the
day
of
death
,
because
they
doe
not
die
that
seeme
to
die
.
Therfore
also
do
we
make
memories
of
the
Saints
,
&
deuoutly
kepe
the
memories
of
our
parents
or
friends
,
dying
in
the
faith
,
as
much
reioycing
in
their
rest
,
as
desiring
also
for
our selues
a
godly
finishing
in
faith
.
So
therfore
we
do
not
celebrate
the
day
of
natiuitie
,
because
they
which
die
shall
liue
perpetually
.
And
thus
we
celebrate
it
,
calling
together
the
deuoute
men
with
the
Priestes
,
the
faithfull
with
the
Cleargie
,
inuiting
also
the
needie
and
poore
,
filling
the
fatherlesse
and
widowes
with
foode
,
that
our
festiuitie
may
be
done
in
remembrance
of
the
rest
,
which
is
vnto
the
soules
departed
,
whose
memorie
we
celebrate
,
and
may
be
made
of
vs
a
sauour
of
sweetenesse
in
the
sight
of
the
eternal
God
.
First
concerning
my
translation
,
Bristowe
will
haue
Religiosos
to
signifie
Monkes
,
as
though
none
were
deuout
,
but
they
,
or
as
though
the
Church
in
Origens
time
,
were
so
full
of
Monkes
,
as
it
was
afterward
.
Secondly
he
saith
,
that
death
is
a
putting
away
of
the
sorowes
of
this
life
only
,
where
Origen
saith
of
all
,
and
it
were
small
cause
of
reioysing
,
to
put
off
the
small
sorrowes
of
this
life
,
if
men
should
enter
the
horrible
torments
of
Purgatorie
.
Againe
,
the
rest
of
the
dead
,
he
will
haue
to
be
onely
of
their
bodies
.
That
were
a
poore
refrigerium
,
if
their
soules
should
frie
in
Purgatorie
.
The
sauour
of
sweetenesse
he
wil
not
haue
to
be
a
sacrifice
of
thankesgiuing
,
but
a
worke
meritorious
,
as
though
it
was
a
worke
meritorious
,
that
Noe
offered
cleane
beastes
after
the
floode
,
when
the
text
saith
,
the
Lorde
smelled
a
sweete
sauour
,
Gen.
8.
and
not
rather
a
sacrifice
of
thankesgiuing
for
his
deliueraunce
.
The
like
ignorance
(
he
saith
)
I
shewe
,
to
thinke
that
memorie
for
one
,
cannot
be
a
prayer
for
him
.
As
S.
Paule
to
the
Colloss.
Remember
my
giues
:
and
to
the
Hebrues
,
Remember
them
that
are
in
giues
,
&c.
But
where
did
I
say
so
ignorantly
,
that
prayer
may
not
be
ioyned
with
remembrance
?
For
I
trust
Bristow
is
not
so
brutish
,
to
say
that
all
memorie
is
a
prayer
.
But
how
skilfull
is
he
,
to
compare
the
memorie
of
imprisonment
,
which
is
an
admonition
to
pray
for
the
imprisoned
,
with
the
memorie
of
rest
which
beeing
obteined
,
what
should
we
pray
for
?
As
for
the
wordes
in
S.
Iames
his
Masse
,
which
was
written
by
some
Sir
Iames
,
many
hundreth
yeares
after
Origens
death
,
I
cannot
be
persuaded
that
Origen
should
allude
vnto
them
.
Where
Cyprian
saith
,
that
Victor
deserued
not
to
be
named
at
the
altar
in
the
prayer
of
the
priests
,
I
shewed
by
diuerse
good
reasons
,
that
he
meaneth
not
of
prayer
for
him
,
but
such
as
was
of
thankesgiuing
for
the
dead
,
and
for
the
like
godly
departure
of
the
faithfull
liuing
.
For
his
offence
in
making
a
Clarke
executor
,
was
not
to
be
punished
with
eternall
torments
,
wherto
Bristow
answereth
by
telling
of
three
things
done
in
their
Masse
,
which
he
saith
were
done
in
Cyprians
time
,
but
that
is
the
matter
in
controuersie
.
my
reasons
alledged
Pur.
284.
he
toucheth
not
at
all
.
I
noted
Pur.
259.
that
Allen
had
falsified
2.
Councells
at
once
,
the
Councell
of
Carthage
the
4
,
Cap.
95.
&
the
Councell
of
Vase
,
which
speaking
of
such
executors
as
defrauded
the
Church
of
the
oblations
of
the
deade
,
which
they
had
bequeathed
to
the
vse
of
the
poore
:
Allen
saith
to
excommunicate
them
,
that
hinder
the
oblations
for
the
deade
.
Now
commeth
Bristowe
and
saith
,
it
is
but
meere
cauelling
to
distinguish
oblations
of
the
deade
,
&
oblations
for
the
deade
,
because
Cyprian
saith
,
there
should
be
no
offering
for
Victor
.
I
haue
shewed
,
Pur.
284.
that
this
offering
was
but
a
thankesgiuing
,
and
this
discipline
was
not
to
cutt
him
from
the
Church
,
but
an
admonition
to
other
.
As
for
the
other
Councells
of
Toledo
11.
Bracharense
,
with
this
of
Carthage
and
Vase
,
I
haue
answered
Pur.
426.
against
which
,
Bristowe
here
saith
nothing
,
but
repeateth
them
with
his
vsuall
interlardings
.
The
Councell
Bracharense
,
which
I
twise
promised
to
shewe
forth
against
Purgatory
,
when
I
came
to
it
,
Bristow
saith
,
I
plainly
confesse
the
contrary
,
to
wit
a
memory
for
the
deade
.
I
said
that
for
them
that
kill
them selues
,
that
Councell
decreed
,
that
no
commemoration
should
be
made
.
Ca.
34.
&
what
this
commemoration
i●
,
I
said
it
appeareth
in
the
next
Canon
,
where
they
cal
it
the
commemoration
of
the
holy
oblation
,
that
is
,
they
decreed
,
that
no
communion
should
be
celebrated
,
in
which
being
a
commemoration
of
the
sacrifice
of
Christ
,
no
mention
of
them
that
so
died
should
be
in
their
thankesgiuing
,
as
was
vsed
for
them
that
died
well
.
Out
of
the
3.
Toletan
.
Cap
22.
I
shewed
that
it
was
decreed
that
the
bodies
of
the
faithfull
should
be
buried
only
with
singing
of
psalmes
,
which
must
be
thought
sufficient
for
all
Christians
:
this
I
said
,
excluded
both
prayers
and
oblations
for
the
deade
.
Bristow
cauelleth
,
that
although
in
carrying
the
corps
to
the
grane
,
they
vsed
to
singe
psalmes
,
yet
they
might
haue
prayer
&
oblation
for
their
soules
in
the
Church
.
I
answere
,
the
councell
thinketh
singingof
psalmes
sufficient
for
the
office
of
their
buriall
,
therefore
prayer
and
oblation
were
thought
needelesse
.
But
that
they
had
prayer
and
oblation
in
Spaine
,
for
the
deade
,
he
would
proue
by
a
saying
of
Augustine
De
cur
.
pro
mor.
Cap.
1.
where
he
saith
the
custome
of
the
vniuersall
Church
is
,
that
in
the
prayers
of
the
priest
,
which
are
made
to
God
at
the
altar
,
the
commendation
also
of
the
deade
hath
his
place
.
This
commendation
might
be
without
prayer
,
as
in
the
olde
liturgie
the
oblation
for
all
the
Patriarkes
,
Prophets
,
Apostles
&c.
or
if
it
were
in
speciall
forme
of
prayer
for
the
deade
in
Affrica
,
it
proueth
not
that
it
was
in
Spaine
.
For
Augustine
speaketh
of
the
vniuersall
Church
,
no
farther
then
his
owne
knowledge
,
or
if
it
were
in
his
time
,
it
might
afterward
be
reformed
in
Spaine
,
as
diuers
other
errors
were
,
namely
in
that
Councell
of
Toledo
,
and
other
before
it
.
But
Bristowe
vrgeth
me
farther
,
and
saith
,
I
might
as
well
say
,
the
Papists
pray
not
for
the
deade
,
because
they
carry
the
corps
with
psalmes
.
But
he
will
neuer
see
the
litle
worde
,
only
,
ioyned
in
the
Canon
to
psalmes
,
nor
the
sufficiency
of
the
office
for
the
buriall
of
all
Christians
.
Againe
he
demandeth
of
De
profundis
,
being
a
psalme
,
Is
it
not
a
prayer
for
the
deade
,
trowe
you
?
I
trowe
no.
Except
all
prayers
that
men
make
for
them selues
,
be
prayers
for
the
deade
.
As
for
the
buriall
of
papists
,
claimed
by
ministers
in
England
,
I
thinke
you
belie
them
,
for
they
could
be
content
you
had
all
the
obstinate
papists
in
your
bosome
at
Loueine
,
quicke
and
deade
:
But
such
as
die
among
vs
,
we
are
not
nice
in
denying
them
buriall
in
the
vsuall
cemiteries
,
although
we
communicate
not
with
them
in
their
life
,
yet
alwaies
protesting
,
that
more
seuere
discipline
were
meete
for
them
in
their
life
,
and
to
be
executed
vpon
them
euen
in
their
death
,
after
the
example
of
Cyprians
time
although
we
think
worse
of
them
then
Cyprian
did
of
Victor
.
I
saide
farther
,
that
the
place
of
Possidonius
speaking
of
the
funerall
of
Saint
Augustine
,
proueth
that
the
sacrifice
offred
for
the
commending
of
his
bodies
deposition
,
was
the
sacrifice
of
thanksgiuing
.
Here
first
Bristowe
accuseth
mine
ignorance
in
antiquity
,
that
I
vnderstand
deposition
for
the
putting
of
his
body
by
death
,
where
it
is
the
laying
downe
of
it
in
the
earth
,
as
Leuatio
corporis
,
is
the
taking
vp
of
Saints
bodies
or
reliques
,
a
worshipfull
witnesse
of
antiquity
.
For
Cyrillus
testifieth
that
they
were
not
in
his
time
taken
out
of
the
earth
Lib.
10.
Cont.
Iulian.
But
marke
how
skillfully
Bristowe
expoundeth
Possidonius
,
saying
,
The
sacrifice
was
offred
to
God
,
for
the
commending
of
his
bodies
deposition
.
That
is
,
saith
Bristowe
(
expositione
prima
)
for
the
laying
downe
of
it
in
the
earth
by
burying
.
Why
might
not
his
body
be
laide
in
the
graue
without
a
propiciatory
sacrifice
?
The
second
exposition
is
,
that
by
commending
the
deposition
of
his
body
,
which
is
the
laying
it
downe
in
the
graue
,
he
meaneth
,
the
commendation
of
his
soule
to
God
.
With
such
expositions
hee
may
prooue
what
hee
will
out
of
the
Doctors
.
But
to
admitt
this
monstrous
interpretation
,
how
agreeth
it
with
popery
?
or
Augustines
owne
opinion
,
that
seing
he
was
a
perfect
man
&
died
in
persecution
,
while
his
City
was
besieged
,
&
the
same
day
it
was
taken
,
that
any
sacrifice
,
should
be
offred
for
his
soule
,
seeing
he
himselfe
saith
,
it
is
iniury
to
pray
for
a
Martyr
,
De
Verb.
Ap.
517
?
But
that
prayers
for
the
deade
were
vsed
in
Saint
Augustines
time
,
and
at
the
celebration
of
the
Lords
Supper
,
it
is
not
of
me
denied
,
and
therefore
needed
not
of
Bristowe
to
be
proued
.
But
he
will
make
me
both
answerer
and
replyer
,
Because
I
graunt
that
S.
Augustine
prayed
for
his
parent
,
and
yet
taunt
Allen
for
translating
Memoriam
sui
,
a
memorie
of
her
to
be
a
memorie
for
her
,
as
though
she
would
haue
her
sonne
to
be
a
Chantrie
Priest
,
to
sing
for
her
.
First
I
say
,
that
if
the
Pope
himselfe
,
translate
Memoriam
sui
,
a
memorie
for
her
,
the
translation
is
false
.
Secondly
,
where
he
saith
,
the
sacrifice
of
our
price
was
offered
for
her
:
I
shewed
that
before
,
that
so
he
called
the
celebration
of
the
Lordes
Supper
,
vnderstanding
it
neuerthelesse
not
to
bee
the
sacrifice
it selfe
,
that
beeing
once
offered
,
did
perfectly
redeeme
vs
,
but
a
memorie
and
thankesgiuing
for
the
same
,
as
I
shewed
out
of
Augustine
and
other
Doctours
,
Pur.
316.
and
so
forth
in
the
rest
vnto
the
leafe
327.
Finally
,
Bristowe
citeth
Augustine
De
Verb.
Ap.
Hom.
34.
This
as
a
tradition
of
our
Fathers
,
the
whole
Church
doth
obserue
,
that
for
them
which
are
departed
in
the
communion
of
Christes
bodie
and
bloud
,
when
at
the
healthfull
sacrifice
they
are
remembred
in
their
place
,
prayer
is
made
,
and
it
is
rehearsed
that
it
is
offered
for
them
also
:
I
answere
this
oblation
,
being
generall
for
all
that
are
departed
in
the
faith
of
Christ
,
can
be
but
a
sacrifice
of
thanksgiuing
,
considering
that
the
sacrifice
of
bread
and
wine
,
as
they
called
it
,
in
remembrance
of
the
onely
and
insacrificable
sacrifice
of
Christ
,
as
S.
Augustine
calleth
his
propitiatorie
sacrifice
,
coulde
be
no
propitiation
,
but
a
sacrifice
of
thankesgiuing
,
or
prosperitie
,
or
praise
.
August
.
Contra
Faustum
lib.
6.
lib.
20.
Cap.
18.
&
21.
Contra
aduers.
Leg.
&
Prophet
.
lib.
1.
cap.
6.
7.
19.
20.
and
many
other
places
through
out
his
workes
.
Of
particular
Doctours
.
Whether
Saint
Augustine
doubted
of
Purgatorie
.
That
Saint
Augustine
allowed
prayer
for
the
dead
,
Bristowe
citeth
many
places
but
without
neede
,
seeing
It
is
not
incredible
,
that
such
a
thing
is
done
,
euen
after
this
life
,
and
whether
it
be
so
or
no
,
it
may
be
enquired
.
And
either
it
may
be
found
out
or
remaine
hid
,
that
some
faithfull
men
by
a
certaine
Purgatorie
fire
,
by
how
much
more
or
lesse
they
haue
loued
perishing
goodes
,
to
be
saued
sooner
or
later
:
yet
not
such
of
whom
it
is
saide
,
that
they
shall
not
possesse
the
kingdome
of
GOD
,
except
the
same
crimes
be
remitted
to
them
conueniently
repenting
.
Bristowes
answere
is
,
that
there
are
two
Purgatorie
fires
,
the
one
to
punish
soules
for
sinne
,
wherof
S.
Augustine
is
certaine
:
the
other
not
to
punish
sinne
,
but
onely
to
weare
out
by
little
&
little
,
such
affections
to
worldely
lawfull
thinges
,
as
to
wiue
,
&c.
that
without
griefe
of
minde
,
he
cannot
parte
from
them
,
so
as
the
other
which
builded
Golde
,
&c.
whereof
Augustine
is
vncertaine
.
Afterwarde
he
concludeth
,
they
are
two
operations
of
one
Purgatorie
,
the
one
to
purge
sinne
with
punishment
,
the
other
to
purge
worldly
lawfull
affections
.
If
there
be
but
one
Purgatorie
fire
,
Augustine
doubteth
not
onely
of
the
punishment
,
but
of
the
purging
fire
.
But
Augustine
speaketh
not
of
purging
lawfull
affections
,
for
what
purgation
should
there
neede
,
where
no
vnlawful
thing
is
to
be
purged
?
But
of
vnlawfull
affections
of
worldly
lawfull
thinges
,
which
are
loued
so
farre
aboue
measure
,
that
they
cannot
be
lost
for
Christes
sake
,
without
greefe
:
these
Cupiditates
greedie
desires
,
Augustine
calleth
the
wood
,
Strawe
,
and
stubble
,
which
is
builded
vpon
the
foundation
Christ
,
vpon
whome
it
is
sinne
to
builde
any
thing
,
but
Golde
,
Siluer
,
or
pearles
,
&c.
1.
Cor.
3.
so
that
it
is
sinne
that
Augustine
speaketh
of
.
Whereof
he
doubteth
,
whether
it
is
purged
by
a
Purgatorie
fire
after
this
life
.
Againe
vtterly
excluding
impenitent
sinners
,
from
hope
of
this
purging
fire
,
it
is
manifest
,
that
of
penitent
sinners
he
maketh
this
doubt
,
whether
they
may
be
saued
by
this
Purgatory
fire
,
after
their
death
.
Wherfore
Bristows
distinction
is
cleane
contrary
to
Augustines
meaning
.
Likewise
wher
he
maketh
a
doubt
whether
such
worldly
lawful
affections
remain
in
the
soules
of
the
elect
,
departed
,
as
loue
of
wife
&c.
he
shamefully
slaundereth
Saint
Augustine
,
as
though
he
helde
any
such
opinion
,
when
no
such
thing
can
be
gathered
out
of
his
wordes
falsifying
to
his
purpose
the
Doctors
wordes
,
which
are
Rerum
secularium
quamuis
licitè
concessarum
tales
cupiditates
:
Such
greedy
desires
of
worldly
,
although
things
lawfully
graunted
,
to
call
them
such
worldly
lawfull
affections
,
whereas
Augustine
saith
not
,
that
such
affections
are
lawfull
,
but
that
the
worldly
things
are
lawfull
,
on
which
such
affection
is
sett
.
Likewise
Ad
Dulci
.
quaestion
.
prima
.
he
bringeth
for
example
,
a
certaine
carnall
affection
towarde
riches
,
a
cogitation
of
those
things
which
are
of
this
worlde
,
how
a
man
should
please
his
wife
&c
to
be
this
wood
,
haie
,
&c.
and
likewise
doubtfully
concludeth
whether
therefore
in
this
life
only
,
men
suffer
these
things
,
or
whether
certaine
such
iudgments
followe
after
this
life
&c.
excluding
againe
murderers
,
fornicators
,
lyers
periurers
,
&c.
The
like
doubt
he
maketh
De
Ciuit.
Dei
Lib
21.
Ca.
26.
saying
,
that
peraduenture
it
is
true
that
this
purging
fier
is
in
this
lite
onely
,
peraduenture
after
this
life
onely
,
or
both
in
this
life
and
after
,
but
yet
for
all
men
to
passe
through
,
the
perfect
without
sense
,
they
that
are
entangled
with
these
veniall
sinnes
,
with
sense
of
paine
and
losse
&c.
But
Augustine
(
saith
Bristowe
)
sheweth
himselfe
certeine
of
purging
paines
De
Ciuitate
Dei
Lib.
21.
Cap.
24.
saying
it
is
certeine
that
such
men
are
purged
before
Doomesday
by
temporall
paines
&c.
As
for
this
place
,
being
not
founde
in
many
auncient
written
coppies
as
Viues
sheweth
,
seemeth
to
be
a
corrupted
place
added
by
other
,
not
written
by
Augustine
.
The
like
may
be
suspected
of
the
place
Cap.
13.
of
the
same
Booke
,
where
he
reporteth
what
he
had
said
before
of
remitting
sinnes
in
the
worlde
to
come
,
which
yet
is
not
to
be
founde
in
that
Booke
,
as
for
the
places
of
Enchirid.
Cap.
110.
and
Ad
Dulc.
〈◊〉
.
2.
which
he
quoteth
,
haue
nothing
but
of
praiers
for
the
dead
.
Wherfore
Augustine
although
he
allowed
prayer
for
the
dead
,
to
auaile
them
remaining
in
secret
receptacles
,
as
he
termeth
them
Enchirid.
Cap.
109.
yet
he
was
not
certeine
of
Purgatory
.
Touching
inuocation
of
Saints
(
which
I
confessed
Augustine
to
allowe
according
to
the
error
of
his
time
)
and
prayers
to
be
profitable
for
the
deade
,
I
said
Pur.
317.
that
Augustine
is
full
of
doubts
and
questions
in
the
matter
,
and
first
whether
the
mothers
supplication
to
the
Martyr
profited
her
sonne
,
Augustine
said
,
that
did
profite
him
buried
in
the
holy
place
,
if
any
thing
profited
.
Whereof
I
gathered
,
that
he
speake●h
doubtfully
.
Bristow
crieth
out
that
I
am
past
all
shame
:
for
Augustiue
neuer
doubted
whether
such
supplication
might
profitte
,
but
whether
the
mother
had
any
such
cogitation
.
I
aunswere
,
he
doubted
at
least
,
whether
such
kinde
of
supplication
did
profite
or
no
:
for
the
doubt
of
her
cogitation
was
expressed
before
in
an
other
condition
,
Si
quidem
credidit
,
if
she
beleeue
,
&c.
But
to
refell
my
impudencie
,
as
it
should
seeme
,
he
hath
heaped
vp
a
sorte
of
places
,
to
proue
that
Saint
Augustine
clearely
affirmed
supplication
to
Saints
to
profitte
the
deade
:
first
,
Non
inaniter
fiun●
,
they
be
not
made
in
vaine
.
Cap.
1.
But
these
wordes
are
not
in
that
Chapiter
.
He
saith
there
Neque
Ecclesia
inaniter
,
Neither
the
Church
nor
the
frendes
care
for
the
deade
bestoweth
in
vain
such
deuotion
as
it
can
:
where
he
speaketh
of
prayers
for
the
deade
,
but
not
of
supplication
to
the
Martyrs
.
Secondly
he
citeth
Prosunt
quibusdam
mortuis
,
they
profitte
one
sort
of
the
deade
Cap.
vlt.
but
neither
are
there
such
wordes
,
nor
for
such
purpose
.
Thirdly
,
Non
sunt
praetermittende
,
they
must
not
be
omitted
,
C●
4.
also
,
Fiunt
recta
fide
,
ac
pietate
,
they
be
made
with
right
faith
,
and
pietie
,
Cap.
4.
These
wordes
in
deede
are
there
,
but
of
prayers
for
the
deade
generally
,
although
there
also
in
the
same
Chapiter
to
his
purpose
which
he
noteth
not
:
last
of
all
,
Religiosus
amicus
,
&c.
they
be
necessary
,
the
deuout
frend
must
in
no
case
omitte
them
Ca.
5.
the
necessarie
supplications
he
speaketh
of
,
are
prayers
generally
,
not
that
prayer
to
Saintes
,
are
of
him
called
necessarie
supplications
.
But
vnto
all
the
other
doubtes
,
which
I
in
the
place
aboue
quoted
,
had
noted
out
of
that
treatise
of
Augustine
Bristowe
speaketh
not
a
worde
.
Whether
S.
Augustine
denied
Purgatorie
.
Bristowe
rehearseth
my
wordes
(
with
such
fidelitie
Hypog
,
Cont.
Pel
De
Verb.
Apost.
Ser.
14.
Bristowe
sayeth
,
I
answere
it
my selfe
,
in
saying
,
he
writeth
against
the
Pelagians
,
that
imagined
a
third
place
for
the
euerlasting
rest
of
infantes
that
were
not
baptized
.
But
what
saith
Bristowe
to
my
reply
?
which
is
this
,
The
same
reason
serueth
as
well
against
the
Popish
Purgatorie
,
because
we
finde
it
not
in
the
holie
Scriptures
.
Bristowe
asketh
whether
Saint
Augustine
doth
so
reason
against
it
?
As
though
that
were
materiall
,
when
the
reason
will
binde
one
man
as
wel
as
another
,
and
one
matter
as
wel
as
another
.
As
for
his
opinion
of
prayer
for
the
dead
,
as
I
haue
often
saide
,
proueth
not
a
thirde
place
:
as
for
the
two
places
De
Ciu.
Dei
.
lib.
21.
cap.
13.
&
24.
the
one
manifestly
corrupted
,
the
other
iustly
suspected
,
I
haue
spoken
to
them
both
alreadie
.
Other
Doctors
about
prayer
for
the
dead
.
I
cited
Purg.
382.
Gelasius
24.
92.
C.
Legatur
,
That
no
man
can
be
absolued
of
the
Pope
after
his
death
:
and
Quodeunque
,
&c
Whatsoeuer
thou
shalt
loose
vpon
earth
,
it
shal
be
loosed
in
heauen
,
&c.
if
this
be
your
commission
,
as
well
for
giuing
pardons
,
as
for
absoluing
excommunicate
persons
,
this
commission
cannot
be
exercised
but
vpon
the
liuing
.
We
read
,
saith
Gel●sius
,
that
Christe
did
raise
the
dead
:
we
reade
not
that
he
did
absolue
them
that
died
in
errour
.
(
If
I
had
pleasure
to
enterlarde
the
Doctors
sayinges
as
you
haue
,
I
should
adde
that
we
reade
not
that
Christ
gaue
pardon
to
any
in
Purgatorie
.
)
And
because
he
alone
had
power
onely
this
to
doe
,
he
committed
it
to
Peter
the
Apostle
principally
,
Whatsoeuer
thou
shalt
loose
vpon
earth
,
it
sha
be
loosed
also
in
heauen
,
&c.
He
saith
vpon
earth
,
for
he
neuer
saide
,
that
he
was
to
be
absolued
which
died
in
his
binding
.
Likewise
that
this
authoritie
giuen
by
this
texte
,
be
it
more
or
lesse
,
is
to
be
exercised
onely
vpon
men
liuing
on
the
earth
:
you
may
read
,
C.
24
q.
2.
Quod
autem
.
And
that
no
man
can
be
excommunicated
or
absolued
after
his
death
,
it
is
shewed
by
the
wordes
of
the
Gospell
,
in
which
it
is
said
:
whatsoeuer
you
shal
binde
&c.
he
saith
:
vpon
the
earth
,
not
vnder
the
earth
.
Where
I
cited
out
of
Cyprian
Cont.
Demetr.
Pur.
140.
when
men
are
departed
from
hence
,
there
is
no
place
of
repentance
,
no
effect
of
satisfaction
,
Here
life
is
either
lost
or
saued
,
Here
prouision
is
made
for
euerlasting
life
,
by
the
worshipping
of
the
fruite
of
faith
:
Bristowe
chargeth
me
with
clipping
,
because
I
left
out
the
last
periode
,
which
is
neither
to
nor
fro
my
purpose
.
Likewise
where
I
said
,
he
exhorteth
Demetrianus
himselfe
to
repentance
,
which
had
bene
a
wicked
man
and
a
persecutor
of
Christians
,
he
chargeth
me
with
changing
,
for
I
should
haue
said
,
which
presently
was
.
I
changed
no
worde
of
Cyprian
,
in
saying
,
he
had
beene
,
and
a
reasonable
man
would
haue
vnderstoode
me
,
that
he
presently
was
such
a
one
,
when
I
said
Cyprian
exhorteth
him
to
repentance
.
But
what
is
the
answere
?
This
which
is
expresly
written
of
Infidells
in
hell
,
and
of
baptisme
,
I
pretend
to
be
written
of
the
faithfull
in
Purgatory
,
and
of
penance
after
baptisme
.
I
answere
,
Cyprian
speaketh
generally
of
all
men
,
&
not
of
Infidels
only
,
&
of
al
men
in
this
world
and
not
of
Infidels
in
hell
.
Nec
quisquam
,
&c.
Neither
let
any
man
be
staide
:
either
by
sinnes
or
by
yeares
that
he
should
not
come
to
obteine
saluation
.
To
him
that
remaineth
still
in
this
worlde
,
no
repentance
is
to
late
.
The
way
is
open
vnto
pardon
:
and
to
them
that
seeke
and
vnderstand
the
trueth
,
the
accesse
is
easie
.
Finally
after
he
had
saide
,
that
passage
is
from
death
to
life
,
the
place
by
me
cited
,
he
addeth
,
Hanc
graiiam
,
This
grace
Christ
bestoweth
,
this
gift
of
his
mercie
he
giueth
by
subduing
death
with
the
trophee
of
his
crosse
,
redeeming
the
beleeuer
with
the
price
of
his
bloud
,
reconciling
man
to
God
his
father
,
quickening
a
mortall
man
by
heauenly
regeneration
.
Him
,
if
it
may
be
,
let
vs
all
followe
,
let
vs
be
esteemed
by
his
sacrament
and
signe
,
he
openeth
vnto
vs
the
way
of
life
,
he
restoreth
vs
to
Paradise
,
he
bringeth
vs
to
the
kingdome
heauen
:
with
him
we
shall
alwayes
liue
,
&c.
These
wordes
declare
that
Cyprian
acknowledgeth
one
meane
of
saluation
,
as
well
for
the
Gentile
to
be
baptised
,
as
for
the
penitent
Christian
by
the
onely
mercie
of
God
in
Christe
obteined
in
this
life
,
without
any
satisfaction
of
paine
,
for
euer
after
this
life
:
and
therefore
he
saith
moreouer
,
That
beeing
made
the
sonnes
of
God
by
Christ
,
restored
by
his
bloud
,
we
shall
alwayes
reioyce
with
him
.
We
Christians
shall
be
together
with
Christ
glorious
,
blessed
of
God
our
father
,
reioycing
of
perpetuall
pleasure
,
alwayes
in
the
sight
of
God
,
and
alwayes
giuing
thankes
to
God
.
For
he
can
not
be
but
alwayes
ioyfull
and
glad
,
which
when
he
was
guilrie
of
death
,
is
made
sure
of
immortality
.
Thus
doth
Cyprian
promise
to
Demetrianus
,
if
he
did
repent
,
but
euen
immediately
before
his
death
,
and
were
baptised
,
that
he
should
enioye
the
same
state
of
felicitie
,
with
all
faithfull
Christians
,
in
perpetuall
ioy
after
death
with
Christ
.
In
like
maner
he
exhorteth
them
that
were
fallen
in
persecution
to
repent
in
this
worlde
,
while
confession
may
be
receiued
,
and
satisfaction
and
remission
made
by
the
Priest
is
acceptable
to
God
,
which
he
speaketh
generally
,
as
if
he
had
saide
,
no
satisfaction
or
remission
made
by
the
Priest
,
auaileth
to
them
that
are
departed
.
To
the
place
of
Chrysostome
whiche
I
cited
against
himselfe
:
Pur.
251.
Bristowe
after
he
hath
remoued
the
question
from
the
cause
to
the
person
,
answereth
that
no
friend
,
no
iust
man
shall
helpe
him
,
that
dieth
in
mortal
sinne
,
either
committing
euil
or
doing
no
good
.
I
say
no
more
but
as
I
saide
before
,
Let
it
be
compared
with
Chrysostomes
other
saying
,
the
Homilie
next
before
41.
in
1.
Cor.
and
with
Allens
exhortation
in
the
same
Chapter
.
Pur.
242.
If
thou
yet
chance
,
&c.
Out
of
Ambrose
although
allowing
prayer
for
the
dead
,
I
cited
in
Psalm.
4.
Bene
,
&c.
The
Prophet
did
well
to
adde
on
earth
,
for
if
he
be
not
cleansed
here
,
he
can
not
be
cleansed
there
.
I
should
haue
saide
,
cleane
(
saith
Bristowe
:
)
for
though
he
be
not
cleane
from
veniall
sinnes
,
he
may
be
cleansed
there
,
as
also
from
the
temporall
debt
of
his
remitted
mortall
sinnes
.
But
he
forgetteth
the
worde
of
the
Psalme
,
out
of
which
Ambrose
maketh
his
note
:
Vt
emundet
cum
in
terra
,
that
he
may
cleanse
him
on
earth
:
why
was
it
well
added
on
earth
,
if
he
might
be
cleansed
after
this
life
?
There
is
no
cleansing
but
on
earth
.
Where
Ambrose
was
alledged
by
Allen
Pur.
104.
to
proue
that
euerie
man
immediately
after
his
death
,
doth
feele
that
he
must
looke
for
in
the
day
of
iudgement
,
I
saide
Purgatorie
105.
I
maruell
wherefore
it
is
brought
in
,
if
it
bee
not
to
ouerthrowe
Purgatorie
.
For
if
it
be
true
,
no
man
feeleth
paine
after
this
life
,
but
he
that
shall
feele
it
eternally
.
This
laste
conclusion
although
Bristowe
confesse
,
that
Saint
Ambrose
him selfe
sayeth
it
expressely
in
other
places
,
yet
he
asketh
howe
I
can
inferre
it
of
the
wordes
of
Saint
Ambrose
In
ep.
ad
Rom.
Cap.
5.
which
I
inferre
not
of
his
wordes
,
but
of
Allens
wordes
,
citing
the
place
of
Ambrose
,
as
though
the
wordes
were
these
:
And
therefore
Saint
Ambrose
saith
:
that
without
delay
the
good
poore
man
was
carryed
to
rest
,
and
the
wicked
rich
out
of
hand
suffered
torments
.
THAT
EVERY
MAN
(
saith
he
)
MAIE
FEELE
BEFORE
THE
DAIE
OF
IVDGEMENT
,
WHAT
HE
MVST
THEN
LOOKE
FOR.
Bristowe
leauing
Allen
,
as
he
doth
commonly
,
breechelesse
,
sheweth
the
wordes
of
Ambrose
to
be
otherwise
,
as
they
are
in
deede
.
Which
I
will
rehearse
somewhat
more
at
large
then
Bristowe
hath
done
.
Maxima
pars
mundi
&c.
The
greatest
part
of
the
worlde
did
not
knowe
,
that
God
should
be
their
iudge
:
and
very
fewe
there
were
,
ouer
whom
death
did
not
raigne
.
But
they
ouer
whom
it
raigned
,
after
this
death
,
which
is
called
the
first
,
were
receiued
of
the
second
deathe
vnto
paine
and
destruction
to
come
:
but
they
ouer
whome
death
raigned
not
,
because
they
haue
not
sinned
in
the
similitude
of
the
transgression
of
Adam
,
were
reserued
vnder
hope
vnto
the
comming
of
our
Sauiour
in
a
free
place
,
as
it
is
read
of
Abraham
,
that
although
he
was
in
the
lower
partes
,
yet
he
was
disseuered
by
a
large
distance
,
so
that
there
was
a
greate
goulphe
betwene
the
iust
and
the
sinners
:
how
much
more
should
there
be
to
the
godly
and
iust
a
c●olinge
,
to
the
sinners
parching
heate
,
to
the
vngodly
burning
heate
,
that
it
might
not
be
hidden
before
the
iudgement
,
what
euery
one
was
worthy
of
.
This
that
Ambrose
speaketh
of
the
difference
of
the
paines
of
the
damned
,
before
Christ
,
Bristowe
by
his
accustomed
interlacing
would
haue
it
seeme
,
as
though
he
spake
of
Purgatory
:
for
to
sinners
he
addeth
Catholiques
,
to
the
impious
or
vngodly
,
beretikes
.
But
he
marketh
not
the
conclusion
,
that
such
heate
as
they
felte
after
their
death
,
they
should
feele
after
the
iudgement
.
Againe
,
Non
latet
he
translateth
might
be
partly
knowne
,
as
though
that
which
is
not
hidde
,
is
not
manifestly
and
wholy
knowne
.
That
I
cited
out
of
Saint
Ambrose
De
bono
mortis
:
That
death
maketh
no
mans
state
worse
,
but
such
as
it
findeth
in
euerie
one
,
such
it
reserueth
to
the
iudgement
to
come
:
Bristowe
saith
,
that
Purgatorie
altereth
not
the
state
of
the
euill
to
worse
,
nor
promoteth
the
state
of
the
good
to
better
,
but
euery
mans
state
is
according
to
the
merites
of
his
life
,
nor
hee
that
is
cleansed
in
Purgatory
hath
his
merites
multiplied
or
amplified
,
but
veniall
sinnes
and
temporall
debts
taken
away
.
In
deede
if
the
state
of
a
thing
were
nothing
,
but
that
you
will
allowe
it
to
be
,
it
were
somewhat
that
you
say
:
but
who
will
say
,
that
he
which
is
in
torments
in
Purgatory
,
is
in
as
good
state
as
he
that
is
in
pleasure
or
ease
of
this
life
?
or
that
he
which
is
discharged
of
such
debts
,
as
you
say
must
be
paide
in
Purgatory
,
is
not
in
better
state
,
then
he
that
now
dieth
and
must
be
cast
into
the
scalding
house
,
for
such
payment
?
But
that
you
may
vnderstand
he
speaketh
not
of
the
death
of
the
wicked
,
which
must
abie
for
it
,
as
Bristow
saith
:
he
addeth
Ipsa
quiete
fouet
,
it
cherisheth
with
rest
:
this
cannot
be
of
the
wicked
to
whom
there
is
no
rest
,
but
to
the
godly
,
which
al
immediatly
after
death
enioye
rest
,
notwithstanding
they
be
not
all
alike
good
,
for
of
two
sortes
only
Ambrose
speaketh
,
the
wicked
in
torments
after
death
,
because
of
their
wicked
life
,
&
the
godly
in
rest
.
He
speaketh
therefore
of
the
godly
that
death
maketh
not
their
state
worse
,
as
he
saide
immediatly
before
,
Quia
portus
quidan●
ect
,
because
death
is
a
certaine
hauen
of
them
which
being
tos●ed
in
the
great
Sea
of
this
life
,
desire
a
harborow
of
faithfull
rest
.
To
the
counterfet
auctority
of
Eusebius
Emissenus
,
that
hath
serued
for
a
patch
to
peece
so
many
Homilies
like
the
Cukcowes
song
,
I
will
say
no
more
then
I
said
Pur.
143
The
auctority
of
Bernard
in
this
case
I
alwaies
refused
,
as
a
late
writer
not
sufficient
to
testify
of
the
old
faith
or
errors
either
.
Whether
Purgatory
be
only
for
veniall
sinnes
.
Standing
vpon
Augustines
iudgement
Enchirid.
Cap
But
Bristowe
passeth
impudence
it selfe
,
while
he
alledgeth
for
the
same
with
Allen
Enchir.
Ad
laurent
.
Cap.
71.
Where
Augustine
saith
of
the
Lordes
praier
in
them
that
are
regenerate
.
Delet
omnino
,
&c.
That
praier
altogether
putteth
away
those
small
and
daily
sinnes
.
Also
it
putteth
away
euen
those
sinnes
,
from
which
the
life
of
the
faithfull
that
hath
bene
wickedly
ledde
,
but
by
●epenting
beeing
chaunged
into
better
,
departeth
.
Here
he
saith
expresly
,
that
by
repentaunce
and
praier
,
great
offences
are
cleane
wiped
away
,
euen
as
small
.
But
how
doth
Bristowe
proue
hereof
,
that
mortall
sinnes
are
become
venial●
?
Which
also
in
the
next
worlde
hee
admitteth
.
Cap.
6●
.
(
saith
Bristowe
)
.
But
what
doth
he
admitte
?
that
small
sinnes
may
be
purged
peraduenture
in
the
next
life
.
What
,
B●istowe
?
haue
you
forgotten
what
you
helde
euen
in
this
Chapter
,
vnder
the
title
(
whether
Saint
Augustine
doubted
of
Purgatorie
Fol.
250.
)
that
he
speaketh
not
of
purging
sinnes
,
but
of
purging
worldly
lawfull
affections
,
wi●h
greefe
of
minde
,
&
c.
?
But
admitte
he
speaketh
of
purging
small
sinnes
in
that
place
,
by
Purgatorie
fier
,
as
indeede
he
doth
,
although
before
you
denied
the
same
:
how
proue
you
our
present
controuersy
,
that
mortall
sinnes
forgiuen
,
become
veniall
,
and
may
be
purged
in
Purgatorie
▪
you
say
Cap.
70.
Infanda
crimina
,
&c.
The
hainou●
offences
,
if
they
be
forgiuen
.
Si
conuenienter
poenitentibus
eadem
crimina
remitiuntur
:
He
granteth
they
may
be
saued
by
Purgatorie
fier
,
after
this
life
.
Good
Lorde
,
what
will
you
be
ashamed
to
affirme
?
There
is
no
such
thing
in
that
Chapter
,
no
nor
in
that
which
goeth
before
,
these
wordes
are
not
.
But
after
he
hath
declared
his
doubt
of
them
,
that
haue
loued
perishing
goodes
,
whether
they
may
be
saued
by
purgatorie
fire
after
this
life
:
he
saith
,
Non
tamen
tales
de
quibus
dictum
est
quòd
regnum
Dei
non
possidebunt
,
nisi
conuenienter
poenitentibus
eadem
crimina
remit●●ntur
.
Yet
not
such
,
of
whom
it
is
said
,
that
they
shal
not
possesse
the
kingdome
of
God
,
except
vnto
them
conueniently
repenting
the
same
crimes
be
forgiuen
.
Here
although
perhaps
you
may
gather
,
that
such
persons
are
not
excluded
,
yet
can
not
you
inferre
,
that
for
their
great
sinnes
remitted
,
they
should
goe
thither
,
but
for
their
small
sinnes
,
such
as
he
spake
of
before
.
What
the
opinion
is
of
him
that
made
the
41.
Homilie
De
Sanctis
vnder
the
name
of
Augustine
,
it
forceth
not
greatly
,
seeing
he
doth
not
expounde
th●t
place
1.
Cor
3.
as
Augustine
himselfe
doth
in
many
places
:
and
yet
holdeth
that
not
capitall
,
but
small
sinnes
are
purged
with
that
fier
.
8
Of
Limbus
Patrum
.
I
denied
not
but
Augustine
was
of
opinion
that
the
Contr.
Feliciam
.
Arrian
.
But
I
wished
his
reason
to
be
marked
,
wherefore
he
counted
it
blasphemous
to
say
,
that
our
sauiours
soule
was
committed
to
prison
in
he●
,
because
the
soules
of
good
men
are
immediatly
called
to
Paradise
,
much
more
the
soule
of
Christ
,
who
commended
the
same
into
his
fathers
hand
,
and
promised
to
be
with
the
theefe
the
same
daie
in
Paradise
.
To
this
reason
Bristowe
aunswereth
nothing
.
In
the
saying
of
I
renaeus
Lib.
3.
Cap.
33.
cited
by
Allen
,
I
said
it
seemeth
the
name
Adam
to
be
taken
for
a
common
name
of
mankinde
.
But
Bristowe
wondereth
at
my
blinde
ignorance
,
as
not
knowing
,
that
Tatianus
against
whom
Irenaeus
writeth
,
denied
the
saluation
of
Adam
the
first
man
.
As
though
it
were
necessary
therefore
,
that
Adam
in
this
place
must
signifie
that
singular
man
:
whereas
it
is
euident
,
that
rendring
a
cause
why
Saint
Luke
beginning
the
genealogie
at
Christe
,
endeth
it
in
Adam
,
he
disputeth
first
,
of
the
mystery
of
our
redemption
generally
,
from
Christ
extending
vnto
all
ages
:
and
saith
,
Necesse
fuit
&c.
It
was
necessary
,
that
our
Lorde
comming
vnto
the
lost
sheepe
,
and
making
a
recapitulation
of
so
greate
a
disposition
,
and
seeking
his
owne
workemanship
,
to
saue
euen
the
same
man
which
was
made
hi●
image
and
similitude
,
that
is
Adam
filling
the
times
of
his
condemnation
which
was
for
disobedience
&c.
I
see
not
what
greate
blindnesse
it
is
here
to
take
Adam
for
mankinde
,
as
well
as
the
lost
sheepe
:
but
admitt
he
meaneth
our
first
parent
,
which
I
denied
not
:
of
what
skill
proceeded
it
in
Allen
,
to
interpret
these
wordes
of
Christs
descending
into
hell
,
which
is
the
matter
there
in
question
,
when
they
are
manifest
of
Christs
incarnation
,
to
saue
all
mankinde
both
the
Fathers
and
vs
?
The
other
place
of
Irenaeus
Lib.
5.
almost
in
the
end
,
I
saide
to
ouerthrowe
the
Popish
fantasie
of
Limbus
,
I
might
haue
added
also
of
Purgatory
,
where
Irenaeus
affirmeth
,
that
Christ
after
his
death
,
went
into
such
a
place
,
as
all
his
disciples
shall
rest
in
,
vntill
the
time
of
the
generall
resurrection
,
which
was
the
place
where
the
deade
were
before
.
Bristowe
replyeth
,
he
saith
not
,
that
the
disciples
shall
goe
into
the
same
place
that
Christ
went
,
but
into
an
inuisible
place
&c.
whereto
I
answere
,
how
is
it
manifest
that
they
shall
goe
into
such
a
place
,
but
by
the
example
of
Christ
,
who
went
into
the
place
where
the
deade
were
?
And
how
can
the
text
which
he
citeth
,
proue
it
?
The
disciple
is
not
aboue
the
master
,
if
euery
disciple
should
not
goe
into
the
same
place
,
but
as
you
holde
,
some
to
a
much
better
,
some
to
a
worse
,
wheras
he
speaketh
of
one
inuisible
place
,
appointed
by
God
for
all
the
disciples
of
Christ
.
And
thus
an
end
of
al
your
caueling
vpon
such
places
of
the
Doctours
,
as
were
cited
by
me
.
Which
how
rightly
I
haue
discharged
from
your
manifolde
wrangling
,
that
the
indifferent
teader
might
more
throughly
perceiue
,
I
wish
him
to
compare
your
cauills
with
those
places
of
mine
,
which
you
quote
,
where
he
shall
see
that
you
haue
taken
greater
paines
to
pick
quarrells
at
me
,
then
vsed
diligence
to
defend
your
Author
,
whose
bookes
you
haue
vndertaken
to
mainteine
:
beside
that
of
euerie
ten
reasons
that
I
bring
against
him
,
you
haue
not
touched
one
.
The
tenth
Chapter
.
That
notwithstanding
all
which
Fulke
hath
saide
against
D.
To
Bristowes
motiues
and
demands
,
I
haue
answered
Omitting
therefore
the
two
first
demandes
of
Collatio
Carthaginensis
,
and
building
of
the
Church
,
in
the
third
of
Going
out
,
he
saith
that
Against
our
imagined
Church
in
the
wilde●nesse
,
we
are
expresly
warned
Math.
24
Beholde
Christ
is
in
the
wildernesse
,
doe
not
goe
out
.
This
aunswere
as
senselesse
as
it
is
,
is
borrowed
of
Stapleton
in
his
demonstration
of
doctrinall
principles
,
which
I
haue
confuted
in
a
breefe
aunswere
,
shewing
that
although
we
seeke
not
Christ
either
in
the
wildernesse
or
in
the
secrete
places
,
no
not
in
the
Popish
pixe
,
but
in
heauen
only
,
yet
we
are
to
seeke
his
pilgrime
Churche
,
in
what
corner
of
the
earth
soeuer
she
be
,
and
seeing
the
holy
Ghost
hath
expresly
a●sirmed
that
she
should
be
hidden
in
the
wildernesse
,
from
the
crueltie
of
the
bloudy
Dragon
,
what
impudent
ignorance
,
or
malicious
blindnesse
is
it
in
Stapleton
and
Bristowe
,
to
say
we
are
warned
by
Christ
neuer
to
seeke
the
Church
in
the
wildernes
?
as
though
we
were
forbidden
to
see●e
her
,
or
else
to
acknowledge
her
to
be
where
somtime
she
shold
be
.
In
the
4
,
demand
of
rising
after
he
would
maintaine
2
arguments
,
the
first
is
this
.
Our
first
auctors
can
not
be
named
:
Ergo
they
were
none
but
the
Apostles
.
This
argument
hath
no
consequens
,
and
yet
the
antecedent
i●
false
.
For
of
many
of
your
errors
,
we
name
the
auctors
,
and
of
praier
for
the
dead
,
Montanus
the
heretike
,
vntill
you
can
name
vs
a
Catholique
that
helde
it
,
which
was
more
auncient
then
he
,
and
although
you
would
cleare
your selues
of
theft
,
because
you
haue
not
stollen
that
article
but
receiued
it
,
yet
seeing
it
came
first
from
a
theefe
,
your
possession
can
not
be
iust
:
and
therefore
ye
must
restore
it
to
the
heathen
,
from
whence
Montanus
stoale
it
.
Where
I
brought
example
of
the
heretikes
,
called
Acephali
,
and
diuerse
other
,
Pur.
388.
to
proue
that
the
first
auctor
of
euery
heresie
can
not
be
named
;
Bristow
saith
,
that
he
findeth
his
name
,
to
haue
ben
Seuerus
,
&
that
they
were
but
a
peece
of
Eutyches
as
the
Puritanes
are
of
Caluin
But
when
writers
dout
,
&
the
common
voice
gaue
them
their
name
,
because
their
bead
was
not
knowen
,
the
coni●cture
of
a
name
,
will
not
serue
the
turne
.
If
they
had
added
nothing
to
Eutyches
,
they
should
haue
bene
called
Eutychians
,
as
for
the
cauill
of
Caluine
,
and
the
Puritanes
,
deserueth
none
aunswere
.
More
like
are
the
friers
obseruants
and
general
Franciscanes
,
to
those
headlesse
heretikes
,
&
the
Eutychians
.
But
Bristowe
being
driuen
from
the
auctor
,
falleth
to
the
beginning
of
an
heresie
,
which
being
shewed
to
haue
bene
later
then
Christ
and
his
Apostles
,
is
indeede
an
vndoubted
argument
,
to
reproue
an
heresie
.
And
the
begining
(
saith
he
)
is
shewed
by
this
,
that
the
primitiue
name
of
Christians
would
not
serue
them
,
but
they
must
haue
new
names
to
be
called
by
.
By
this
demonstratine
Logike
,
none
shill
so
●ptly
be
proued
heretikes
,
as
Monkes
,
Friers
,
Nunnes
,
&c
who
disdaining
the
primitiue
name
of
Christians
,
haue
chosen
to
themselues
newe
names
,
as
Benedictines
,
Franciscanes
,
Iesuites
,
&c.
Whereas
the
olde
heretikes
did
not
willingly
chuse
the
names
that
they
were
called
by
,
but
by
like
names
,
reproched
the
true
Catholikes
:
which
argueth
that
the
new
name
,
except
it
be
chosen
by
them
●elues
,
is
no
good
argument
to
conuince
heretikes
.
Bris.
asketh
,
if
the
Papists
do
acknowlege
any
founders
of
their
faith
,
but
the
Apostles
of
Christ
?
yea
verily
the
Pope
&
the
popish
councel
,
which
haue
giuen
you
new
articles
of
faith
,
that
the
Apostles
neuer
taught
,
but
the
contrary
,
as
transubstantiation
,
&
communion
vnder
one
kind
,
&c.
That
Te●tul
.
&
other
latter
writers
do
father
praier
for
the
dead
vpon
tradition
of
the
Apostles
,
it
is
no
warrant
for
vs
,
seeing
the
doctrine
therof
is
not
found
in
all
the
holy
canonicall
scriptures
,
but
is
contrary
,
to
the
same
,
&
Montanus
is
found
to
be
the
first
that
since
Christ
,
taught
praier
for
the
dead
.
That
transubstantiation
was
lately
decreed
,
he
answereth
it
was
the
name
&
not
the
thing
,
as
Homousion
was
alwaies
beleued
euen
before
the
Nicen
Councell
,
which
first
receiued
that
name
.
A
fit
comparison
:
but
how
can
Brist
.
say
,
that
transubstantiation
was
alwais
beleued
?
when
the
common
opinion
almost
of
al
the
scholemen
is
,
that
before
the
determination
of
the
Laterane
councel
,
it
was
no
heresie
,
to
hold
impuration
or
adnihilation
of
the
Elements
,
and
he
himself
confessed
in
the
last
Chapter
that
perfect
transubstantiation
was
not
decreed
before
the
last
Tridentine
session
.
The
second
argument
is
this
:
your
first
auctors
can
be
named
after
the
beginning
of
the
Churches
rising
with
their
newe
opinions
:
Ergo
their
opnions
were
heresies
,
&c.
To
this
argument
I
answer
,
denying
the
antecedent
,
for
we
hold
no
new
opinion
,
but
the
foundation
of
the
Prophetes
and
Apostles
,
Iesus
Christ
,
beeing
the
head
corner
stone
.
Where
I
take
exceptions
to
Allens
rule
.
Pur.
413
:
Bristow
expoundeth
his
meaning
,
to
be
of
such
an
opinion
as
is
contrary
to
the
truth
,
first
preached
by
the
Apostles
,
and
vpon
his
exposition
not
necessary
vpon
Allens
wordes
,
chargeth
me
with
nugation
or
triseling
,
in
adding
mine
exception
,
which
is
the
same
with
his
exposition
.
I
pray
the
reader
vouchsafe
to
peruse
the
place
,
and
see
if
there
be
any
droppe
of
shamefast
bloud
left
in
this
blundering
papist
,
which
blusheth
not
to
scoffe
at
me
for
triselings
when
he
doth
nothing
but
cauil
and
trifle
himself
,
and
that
without
al
wit
,
or
reason
,
truth
or
likelihoode
.
In
the
5.
demand
of
contradiction
of
heresies
in
their
first
arising
,
where
I
had
shewed
,
how
some
fewe
plausible
errors
of
praier
for
the
dead
&
to
the
dead
Ar.
39
by
litle
and
litle
preuailed
,
without
any
great
contradiction
mentioned
in
Histories
.
Bristowe
saith
,
It
is
a
fonde
parte
to
tell
why
and
how
a
thing
was
done
,
which
was
neuer
done
.
For
the
Scripture
Es.
62.
and
August
.
Ep.
119.
Cap.
19.
affirme
that
there
ne
should
be
,
ne
was
any
such
silence
in
the
true
pastors
,
&c.
I
answere
both
the
Scripture
and
the
Doctor
speake
of
silence
,
which
may
bring
present
ouerthrowe
of
the
Citie
,
or
damnation
of
the
Citizens
.
Otherwise
the
true
pastors
in
Saint
Augustines
time
,
not
only
in
silence
passed
,
but
by
speache
and
writing
allowed
,
the
error
of
communicating
of
infants
and
the
necessity
thereof
,
as
I
haue
shewed
before
.
And
seeing
prayer
for
the
deade
and
to
the
deade
,
by
the
holy
Scriptures
,
are
conuinced
to
be
errors
,
it
can
be
no
iustifying
of
them
to
say
,
no
man
preached
against
them
at
their
first
rising
.
And
seeing
the
Histories
of
the
auncient
time
are
very
fewe
and
short
,
it
is
more
boldlie
affirmed
,
then
soundly
proued
,
that
no
man
preached
against
them
.
Epiphanius
doth
not
tell
who
preached
against
euery
heresie
at
the
first
arising
thereof
.
And
euen
some
of
Origens
heresies
,
of
which
Bristowe
taketh
example
,
slept
almost
200.
yeares
in
his
bookes
,
before
they
were
openly
contradicted
in
the
daies
of
Hieronyme
,
Ruffine
and
Augustine
.
Touching
that
I
alledge
of
the
mystery
of
iniquity
working
in
the
Apostles
time
.
2.
Thess.
2.
Bristowe
chargeth
me
to
say
,
that
the
Church
of
Christ
wrought
this
mystery
of
iniquity
,
wherein
he
doth
me
open
iniury
:
for
I
knowe
it
was
Satan
which
wrought
it
,
but
yet
in
the
Church
where
Antichrist
should
sitte
,
and
not
without
it
.
He
asketh
whether
my
text
say
,
There
was
no
preaching
against
it
.
I
answere
my
text
saith
,
it
was
a
mystery
not
reuealed
,
and
therefore
could
not
at
the
first
be
openly
preached
against
.
But
Antichrist
being
openly
shewed
,
was
preached
against
by
the
two
witnesses
,
Apoc.
11.
although
he
were
not
espied
in
the
first
mystery
of
iniquity
,
yea
when
he
was
yet
in
fashioning
he
was
preached
against
by
Irenaeus
,
Pollycrates
,
and
others
Ar.
36.
and
in
this
book
.
Cap.
9.
The
case
of
Cyprian
and
the
Affricanes
,
being
true
pastors
and
yet
contradicting
the
truth
,
and
other
true
pastors
denying
that
such
as
were
baptised
by
heretikes
were
to
be
rebaptised
,
I
haue
clearely
set
down
Pur.
413.
but
that
Bristowe
can
do
nothing
but
cauill
.
Allens
rule
is
of
the
first
rising
of
the
persons
,
wherevnto
I
require
to
be
added
that
their
opinion
must
also
be
newe
,
which
if
Bristowes
blinde
malice
could
haue
seene
,
he
needed
not
to
haue
painted
his
margent
,
with
so
many
quotations
,
to
proue
that
the
true
opinion
was
auncient
and
perpetuall
.
Where
I
shewed
Ar.
93.
that
the
Pope
in
secret
,
&
not
by
open
contradiction
,
caused
a
most
horrible
blasphemous
lake
,
called
the
Gospell
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
&c.
written
by
the
Friers
to
be
priuily
burned
,
for
shaming
their
order
,
which
continued
.
55.
yeares
,
without
reprehension
of
the
Pope
,
or
any
,
but
such
as
were
accounted
heretikes
,
Bristowe
calling
it
fauourably
,
but
a
new
scandalous
booke
,
asketh
what
fault
it
was
.
Verely
such
a
fault
,
as
proued
him
to
be
more
zelous
of
the
glorie
of
beggerly
friers
,
then
of
Christ
and
his
Church
,
neither
can
it
be
shadowed
by
the
example
of
Augustine
,
at
the
first
forbearing
the
name
of
Pelagius
,
while
there
was
hope
of
amendment
in
him
,
and
he
not
throughly
vnderstoode
his
heresie
.
But
contrary
wise
the
Pope
fauoureth
the
blasphe●●ous
friers
and
condemneth
their
reprehenders
for
heretikes
.
Where
I
saide
,
this
was
an
argument
from
mans
auctority
negatiuely
,
&
therfore
nothing
worth
:
No
man
preached
against
Purgatory
,
and
prayer
for
the
dead
,
at
their
first
entry
:
therefore
they
are
true
.
Bristow
saith
,
it
is
according
to
the
Scriptures
,
Fathers
and
Histories
,
that
All
heres●es
haue
b●ne
preached
against
at
their
first
entrie
.
Beside
that
he
flitteth
from
errors
to
heresies
,
as
though
there
were
no
difference
betwene
them
:
those
Scriptures
,
Fathers
and
Histories
,
are
not
yet
shewed
by
which
it
may
be
apparant
,
what
men
and
of
what
names
,
and
in
what
time
did
openly
preache
against
all
heresies
,
at
their
first
entrie
,
which
is
the
thing
that
is
vrged
vpon
vs
.
In
the
sixt
demand
which
is
of
the
name
of
Catholiques
,
where
I
saide
he
is
a
foolish
Sophister
,
that
reasoneth
from
names
to
the
things
.
Bristowe
saith
he
knoweth
not
in
what
Logike
,
I
haue
that
axiome
.
He
is
a
greate
straunger
in
Aristotel
,
that
knoweth
not
that
a
carcase
,
although
he
be
called
a
man
,
yet
is
not
a
man
in
deede
:
moreouer
he
chargeth
me
to
reason
so
my self
in
the
seuenth
demand
,
where
indeed
I
do
only
deride
the
vaine
kinde
of
reasoninge
from
the
name
to
the
thing
,
when
the
name
is
not
rightly
giuen
,
retorting
the
argument
vpon
the
Papists
,
who
of
vs
are
called
heretiks
,
as
we
are
of
them
.
But
Saint
Augustine
reasoneth
of
the
name
of
the
Catholique
Church
.
Aug.
in
Psa
Cont.
Part.
Donat.
Dici●is
,
&c.
You
say
that
you
be
with
me
,
but
you
see
it
is
false
,
I
am
called
Catholique
,
and
you
of
Donates
part
:
I
aunswere
Saint
Augustine
doth
not
by
the
only
name
of
the
Catholique
Church
,
as
a
sufficient
motiue
,
proue
the
Catholique
Church
,
but
by
many
other
weighty
reasons
proueth
that
shee
was
iustly
called
so
,
because
the
question
was
betwene
the
Donatistes
and
the
Church
,
not
onely
of
the
Church
,
but
euen
of
the
name
of
Catholique
.
Where
I
shewed
Ar
6.
that
the
Grecians
are
called
Catholiques
by
as
many
Nations
,
as
the
Papists
:
Bristow
hath
nothing
to
replie
,
but
that
the
heretike
Grecians
and
Latines
,
do
not
mistake
the
person
,
when
common
talke
and
bookes
call
Catholique
Latines
,
or
Catholique
Gr●cians
:
therefore
they
be
true
Catholiques
.
A
miserable
conclusion
vpon
a
false
antecedent
,
for
the
Grecians
by
the
name
of
Catholique
Grecians
,
vnderstande
enemies
to
the
Pope
,
and
by
the
name
of
heretikes
Pap●sts
,
either
Latines
or
reuolted
Grecians
.
That
in
publique
edicts
,
by
men
of
our
side
,
papist●
are
called
Catholiques
,
it
is
more
then
I
knowe
,
or
think
to
be
true
,
although
edicts
penned
by
papists
or
neuters
,
call
the
papists
Catholiques
,
as
they
call
vs
,
of
the
religion
reformed
,
which
appellations
proue
neither
the
one
nor
the
other
.
Where
I
compared
the
papists
Ar.
67
glorying
in
the
name
of
Catholique
&
Church
,
to
the
Infidel
●ewes
,
criing
:
The
temple
of
the
Lorde
,
when
they
had
made
it
〈◊〉
denne
of
theeues
:
Bristowe
aunswereth
,
That
our
Lord●
both
in
the
Prophet
Ier
7.
and
in
the
Gospell
Math.
21.
acknowledgeth
it
to
be
his
Temple
,
although
they
in
it
were
theeues
and
wicked
persons
.
The
place
indeede
had
bene
the
Temple
of
God
,
and
therefore
Christ
vsed
his
auctority
as
high
Priest
in
purging
it
of
corruptions
,
but
of
their
making
,
it
was
not
Gods
Temple
,
but
a
den
of
theeues
,
except
Bristowe
will
say
that
a
denne
of
theeues
may
be
Gods
Temple
.
And
although
vnto
the
godly
,
notwithstanding
the
corruptions
,
it
was
still
the
Temple
of
God
,
yet
had
not
the
vngodly
the
Temple
of
God
,
nor
were
in
it
,
as
in
Gods
Temple
,
but
as
in
a
theeuish
denne
,
so
are
papists
in
the
Catholique
Church
.
Where
I
said
,
supposing
we
were
not
called
Catholique●
,
we
should
not
be
in
worse
case
then
Christ
&
his
Apostles
,
who
not
only
had
not
that
name
,
but
were
of
the
Iewes
(
who
were
as
rightly
called
Gods
people
,
as
the
papists
are
called
the
Christian
worlde
)
called
heretikes
and
deceiuers
.
Bristowe
biddeth
me
bate
an
ace
of
that
,
except
I
can
shewe
by
predictions
of
the
Prophets
,
the
reprobation
of
the
Christian
worlde
,
in
these
daies
,
as
they
shew
the
reprobation
of
the
Iewes
in
those
daies
.
A
wretched
refuge
,
as
though
papists
were
only
named
the
Christian
worlde
,
or
that
the
Iewes
were
reprobated
in
the
time
of
Christes
preaching
,
or
the
Apostles
either
,
before
the
extreme
obstinate
refusing
of
the
Gospell
.
Or
as
if
it
were
not
sufficient
,
to
shewe
the
popish
apostasie
from
the
faith
by
those
vndoubted
notes
,
which
the
spirite
speaking
euidently
doth
giue
of
them
.
1.
Tim.
4.
Beside
this
,
Bristowe
derideth
me
,
for
requiring
the
Iewes
to
vse
those
names
which
they
neuer
hearde
of
.
And
is
Bristowe
so
well
redde
in
the
Scriptures
,
that
the
name
of
true
Church
was
neuer
hearde
of
the
Iewes
in
his
opinion
,
as
for
the
name
of
Catholique
I
required
it
not
of
them
,
neither
do
I
thinke
we
ought
to
be
tried
by
the
bare
name
of
Catholique
,
seeing
we
beleeue
not
barely
and
simply
the
Catholique
,
but
the
holy
,
Catholique
,
and
Apostolique
Church
.
Which
Church
is
not
called
Catholique
,
because
it
should
be
euery
where
,
(
for
that
it
neuer
was
,
nor
neuer
shal
be
)
but
because
that
wheresoeuer
it
be
in
parts
,
it
is
one
bodie
of
Christ
.
But
here
Bristowe
taketh
me
vp
for
haulting
,
charging
me
to
be
the
first
of
all
heretikes
,
that
say
it
is
called
Catholica
,
because
it
is
Vna
:
but
he
playeth
his
olde
parts
,
for
I
say
it
is
Catholique
,
because
that
being
in
diuerse
parts
,
it
is
one
,
so
that
my
reason
is
not
only
of
vnitie
but
of
vniuersality
of
the
Church
,
which
is
Catholique
in
all
the
parts
of
it
,
being
knitte
in
one
,
and
not
of
being
in
euery
particular
place
of
the
worlde
,
nor
at
all
times
in
most
places
of
the
worlde
.
And
with
this
holy
Catholique
Church
of
the
whole
worlde
,
our
Church
doth
and
alwaies
hath
communicated
,
when
it
was
not
so
openly
nor
abundantly
spredde
in
so
many
Nations
as
it
is
now
.
And
therefore
Augustine
in
the
place
by
Bristowe
quoted
Coll.
3.
Die
,
&c.
reproueth
as
well
the
Romane
;
as
the
Affricane
Donatisme
,
whereinto
Bristowe
manifestly
incurreth
,
when
most
impudently
he
affirmeth
,
that
the
olde
fathers
in
their
Creede
,
beleeuing
one
,
holy
,
Catholique
and
Apostolique
Church
,
meant
the
Romane
Church
,
as
though
the
vnity
,
holynes
,
vniuersality
,
and
Apostolique
foundation
of
Christs
Church
,
were
nothing
but
the
Romish
Church
.
Where
I
proue
,
that
the
Popish
Church
is
not
in
euery
part
of
the
worlde
,
and
therefore
cannot
be
called
Catholique
,
in
that
respect
:
Bristowe
saith
it
is
iumpe
the
argument
of
Cresconius
,
and
referreth
vs
for
the
answere
to
Saint
Augustine
.
Con●
.
Cresc
.
Lib.
3.
Cap.
63.
but
the
aunswere
is
such
,
as
he
durst
not
sett
it
downe
.
For
Augustine
confesseth
the
Church
is
not
called
Catholique
,
because
it
is
euery
where
,
(
for
it
was
not
in
all
places
in
his
time
)
but
because
it
is
to
be
dilated
into
all
parts
of
the
world
,
whereas
the
Donatists
helde
,
it
to
be
only
in
Affrica
as
the
Papists
only
in
a
peece
of
Europa
.
And
therfore
it
is
false
,
that
Bristow
saith
,
both
the
interpretations
of
Catholique
giuen
by
Saint
Augustine
De
gen.
ad
Lit.
imperf.
Cap.
1.
Because
she
is
vniuersally
perfect
,
and
because
she
is
spredde
ouer
all
the
worlde
,
agree
to
their
mother
Romish
Babylon
,
for
she
hath
nothing
perfect
,
neither
was
she
euer
nor
at
this
day
is
spreade
ouer
all
the
worlde
,
no
not
wh●re
Christ
is
and
hath
long
bene
named
in
Grecia
,
Macedonia
,
Moscouia
,
Armenia
,
Persia
,
Assyria
,
A
Ethiopia
,
&c.
in
most
of
which
places
are
the
Churches
founded
,
euen
by
the
Apostles
themselues
,
and
yet
neuer
subiect
to
the
Romish
faction
.
It
is
also
false
,
that
we
renounce
the
latter
,
for
we
communicate
with
the
Church
of
all
Nations
,
that
hath
communion
with
Christ
,
and
farther
the
Catholique
Church
doth
not
extende
.
As
for
the
names
of
Church
,
Catholique
,
baptisme
,
heretike
,
schismatike
,
which
he
saith
our
Apostasie
hath
changed
into
congregation
vniuersall
,
ablution
,
or
washing
,
chuser
,
and
cutter
,
it
is
a
most
grosse
&
sham●lesse
lie
,
for
although
we
may
be
hearde
sometimes
perhaps
,
and
not
often
to
interprete
the
Latine
and
Greeke
tearmes
,
by
English
wordes
,
yet
all
that
heare
vs
.
or
reade
our
writinges
,
can
testifie
that
we
most
commonly
and
vsually
,
yea
daily
and
hourely
vse
the
tearmes
of
Catholike
,
Church
,
and
Baptisme
Heretike
,
or
Schismati●e
,
as
often
as
occasion
serueth
to
speake
of
those
matters
.
As
for
the
Greekish
names
of
Priest
,
and
Bishop
,
if
they
be
vnderstoode
,
for
such
ministers
,
as
Saint
Paule
meaneth
by
the
names
of
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
&
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
we
striue
not
for
them
.
But
when
priest
is
taken
for
a
Popish
sacrificer
,
and
Bishop
for
a
Baptizer
of
belles
,
&c.
we
like
the
names
no
whit
better
,
then
the
thinges
.
Otherwise
it
is
not
the
●●unde
of
wordes
,
that
troubleth
our
eares
,
but
the
pestilent
poyson
that
is
hidde
vnder
such
tearmes
,
which
our
heart
abhorreth
In
the
7.
demande
of
heretikes
,
where
he
chargeth
me
to
affirme
,
that
whosoeuer
of
true
Christian●
were
called
heretikes
,
without
doubt
are
heretikes
in
deede
:
and
therefore
Aerus
,
Iouinianus
and
Vigilantius
,
so
called
and
counted
by
true
Christians
,
were
heretikes
in
deede
.
Of
Aerius
there
is
no
question
,
but
he
was
an
heretike
,
although
not
in
that
matter
Bristowe
meaneth
.
The
errour
of
Iouinian
we
defende
not
:
but
Vigilantius
,
although
baited
by
Hierome
,
was
neuer
generally
condemned
for
an
heretike
.
Howbeit
,
that
which
I
spake
but
in
de●ision
,
and
imitation
of
the
Popish
manner
of
reasoning
,
Bristowe
taketh
it
as
though
I
had
plainely
affirmed
,
such
a
principle
,
which
was
farre
from
my
purpose
Hierome
,
and
Ruffine
,
were
both
true
Christians
,
yet
either
chargeth
the
other
with
he
resie
in
their
heat
.
And
what
wil
Bristow
say
of
the
two
general
Councels
of
Constantinople
the
6.
&
Nicen
the
2
?
Will
he
not
say
they
consisted
of
true
Christians
?
Yet
both
the●
doe
call
,
account
,
and
accu●se
.
Pope
Honorius
for
an
Heretike
.
Will
Bristowe
conclude
,
that
therefore
he
proued
so
in
deede
?
He
dare
not
for
his
life
.
Hierome
chargeth
Pope
Liberius
with
subscription
of
he●esie
in
Ca●al
.
Liberatus
accuseth
Pope
Vig
〈…〉
us
of
Eutychianisme
Cap
22.
Yet
Pope
Syluerius
by
his
Epistle
,
accu●seth
his
successor
Pope
Vigilius
,
yet
are
Hierome
,
Liberatus
,
&
Syluerius
commonly
accounted
for
true
Christians
,
and
as
for
Liberius
,
&
Vigilius
,
Bristow
date
not
for
both
his
eares
say
they
were
heretikes
.
Where
I
saide
,
the
Deuill
stirred
vp
tyrantes
,
Heretikes
,
Popes
,
Saracenes
,
and
Turkes
to
destroy
the
Church
:
Who
(
saith
Bristowe
)
that
counteth
Popes
to
be
heretikes
,
would
so
deuide
?
Verily
he
that
counteth
Popes
to
be
in
an
higher
degree
of
impietie
,
then
particular
heretikes
,
namely
to
be
autors
of
Apostasie
&
Antichristes
.
Where
I
obiect
against
this
Popishe
rule
,
that
the
true
Christians
were
of
the
Arrians
called
,
heretikes
,
Bristow
asketh
whether
they
were
of
the
Arrians
commonly
called
Heretikes
?
Yea
verily
,
as
commonly
as
we
are
of
Papists
.
Bristow
saith
,
if
we
should
in
our
talke
&
writing
,
say
heretikes
simpliciter
,
as
they
doe
,
we
could
not
be
vnderstanded
to
speake
of
them
.
Yes
in
deede
,
as
well
as
they
among
their
owne
,
are
vnderstood
to
speake
of
vs
.
And
what
other
thing
is
ment
by
the
name
of
Papistes
,
but
heretikes
,
and
traitours
,
Antichristians
,
and
Apostataes
,
enimies
to
God
their
Prince
,
&
their
country
.
In
the
8.
demande
,
beside
that
which
is
confuted
in
answer
to
the
3
motiue
,
he
denieth
,
Franciscanes
,
Dominicanes
,
&c.
to
be
sects
,
because
a
sect
importeth
a
diuision
.
And
i●
there
no
diuision
betweene
secular
,
and
spiritual
,
Nominal
,
&
real
,
one
sect
&
another
?
S.
Paul
complaineth
,
that
Christ
was
diuided
,
when
one
said
I
hold
of
Paul
,
&
I
of
Apollos
,
&
I
of
Cephas
,
&
I
of
Christ
.
And
howsoeuer
you
wil
now
extenuate
your
schoolebrals
,
&
contrary
sects
,
ech
hath
contended
against
other
,
as
for
the
truth
of
Catholike
religion
,
&
against
heresie
,
as
the
Dominicanes
,
&
Franciscans
,
Scotists
&
Thomistes
,
that
I
speake
nothing
of
the
Guelphes
,
&
Gibellines
,
the
firebrands
of
the
world
,
In
the
9.
demand
(
of
the
conuersion
of
Heathen
nations
)
if
sufficeth
not
Bris.
the
we
hold
the
same
Gospel
,
which
is
taught
in
the
writings
of
the
Apostles
,
which
conuerted
the
first
of
al
Heathen
nations
,
that
were
conuerted
to
Christian
faith
:
except
wecan
proue
that
the
same
nations
are
stil
of
our
religion
But
he
asketh
,
if
we
wil
be
tried
by
Affrike
,
(
for
example
)
whose
religion
we
know
by
Tertullian
,
S.
Cyprian
,
S.
Augustine
,
Optatus
,
&c.
Or
if
we
haue
any
better
moniments
of
any
nations
religion
,
he
biddeth
me
to
name
it
,
and
let
vs
trie
it
betweene
vs
.
How
often
haue
I
named
the
holy
Scriptures
,
the
best
and
the
onely
true
moniment
,
whereby
we
may
trie
what
Gospell
the
Apostles
preached
,
and
into
what
faith
they
baptised
the
nations
?
And
as
for
those
whome
you
name
for
Affrike
,
although
they
testifie
of
some
corruptions
receiued
and
allowed
in
their
time
,
yet
I
dare
take
them
for
triall
of
the
greatest
controuersies
that
are
betweene
vs
,
of
iustification
by
grace
,
and
not
by
merite
of
workes
,
of
the
Popes
antichristian
supremacie
,
of
the
Lordes
supper
,
of
worshipping
of
images
,
and
many
other
controuersies
.
As
for
that
brabbling
of
conuerting
of
nations
by
them
,
or
vs
,
it
is
not
worth
the
while
,
but
a
matter
of
meere
contention
,
which
can
not
be
decided
,
but
by
triall
whether
they
or
we
holde
the
true
faith
of
the
Gospell
,
for
into
that
were
all
nations
conuerted
,
that
were
turned
by
the
true
Apostles
.
As
for
the
conuersion
of
any
nation
into
false
Christianitie
,
proueth
not
the
conuerters
to
be
Apostles
.
But
Bristowe
bragging
of
their
wonderfull
conuersion
of
nations
of
India
and
Affrica
,
(
which
no
man
reporteth
,
but
lying
Friers
,
and
shamelesse
Papistes
)
seemeth
to
denie
,
that
any
were
conuerted
vnto
false
religion
,
by
any
false
Apostles
or
Heretikes
.
And
first
,
where
I
saide
,
there
are
people
in
Aethiopia
,
which
,
by
circumcision
and
obseruation
of
the
lawe
,
declare
that
they
were
conuerted
by
the
false
apostles
:
Bristowe
opposeth
the
authoritie
of
Eusebius
,
reporting
the
conuersion
of
Aethiopia
to
haue
beene
of
the
right
stampe
,
&c.
imagining
belike
that
Aethiopia
is
so
smal
a
countrie
,
that
it
were
not
possible
for
one
peece
to
be
conuerted
into
true
Christianitie
,
and
another
part
into
corrupt
.
That
there
are
such
people
as
I
saide
,
Munster
in
his
Geographie
of
Aethiopia
,
doth
testifie
.
As
for
the
fable
of
their
Emperours
submission
,
and
the
Abbots
approbation
of
Poperie
in
all
pointes
,
may
serue
to
play
mocke
holiday
among
the
Papistes
,
they
can
haue
no
credite
among
vs
.
As
great
a
mockerie
it
is
,
that
Bristow
abuseth
the
saying
of
Irenaeus
,
concerning
the
Church
of
Rome
in
his
time
,
lib.
3.
cap.
3.
In
qua
&c.
In
which
alwaies
of
them
that
are
round
about
,
hath
bene
kept
that
tradition
or
deliuerie
of
doctrine
,
which
is
from
the
Apostles
.
But
the
praise
of
the
Romane
Church
of
that
time
,
is
the
shame
of
the
Popish
synagogue
of
this
time
,
which
hath
forsaken
that
tradition
,
and
embraced
newe
doctrine
,
neuer
heard
of
,
from
the
Apostles
daies
,
vnto
the
time
of
Irenaeus
.
Where
I
say
it
is
manifest
,
that
the
nations
of
the
Alanes
,
Gothes
,
and
Vandales
,
were
first
conuerted
by
the
Arrians
:
Bristowe
replieth
,
that
in
so
saying
,
I
declare
that
I
neuer
read
the
ecclesiastical
stories
:
such
is
Bristows
Logike
.
It
were
possible
I
had
read
them
,
and
forgotten
them
.
But
what
could
I
either
reade
or
remember
in
the
places
by
him
quoted
?
First
,
Socrates
lib.
2.
cap.
32.
where
it
is
said
,
that
Vlphilas
Bishop
of
the
Gothes
assented
to
an
Arrian
or
neutrall
confession
,
giuen
at
Constantinople
,
whereas
before
that
time
he
had
followed
the
steps
of
Theophilus
,
which
was
Bishop
of
the
Gothes
,
and
being
present
in
the
Nicene
Councel
,
had
subscribed
thereto
,
&
he
also
had
embraced
the
faith
confirmed
at
Nice
.
First
of
the
Alanes
,
&
Vandales
here
is
no
word
,
nor
in
any
of
the
places
folowing
;
of
the
Gothes
it
is
said
,
that
Theophilus
sometime
their
Bishop
,
was
of
right
faith
,
and
Vlphilas
also
,
before
his
subscription
,
and
consequently
a
fewe
that
were
conuerted
to
Christianitie
,
before
the
heresie
of
Arius
.
But
what
saith
Socrates
of
the
first
nation
of
the
Gothes
,
that
was
conuerted
,
and
of
the
second
also
,
lib.
4.
cap.
27.
which
is
the
second
place
quoted
?
There
were
two
nations
of
the
Gothes
,
the
one
gouerned
by
Phritigernes
,
the
other
by
Athanarichus
:
Phritigernes
being
oppressed
by
the
power
of
Athanarichus
,
sought
aide
of
Valens
the
Arrian
Emperor
,
and
obtaining
it
,
put
Athanarichus
to
flight
.
Quae
causa
fuit
&c.
Which
was
the
cause
(
saith
Socrates
)
that
verie
manie
of
the
Barbarians
receiued
the
Christian
faith
.
For
Phritigernes
,
that
he
might
shewe
him selfe
thankefull
for
his
benefite
receiued
of
the
Emperor
,
beganne
to
embrace
his
religion
,
and
to
exhort
his
people
to
doe
the
same
.
And
for
that
cause
manie
Gothes
which
then
to
please
the
Emperors
humour
,
had
addicted
them selues
to
the
Arrian
sect
,
vnto
this
time
cleaue
fast
vnto
it
.
At
the
same
time
V●phil●s
Bishop
of
the
Gothes
inuented
the
Gothian
letters
,
and
as
soone
as
he
had
turned
the
holie
Scripture
into
their
tongue
,
he
purposed
that
the
barbarous
people
should
learne
the
holie
Oracles
of
God
.
But
as
soone
as
Vlph●las
had
taught
the
Christian
religion
,
not
onely
to
them
which
obeyed
Phritigernes
,
but
also
to
them
that
were
vnder
Athanarichus
,
the
same
Athanarichus
mouing
persecution
,
put
to
death
diuers
of
the
Arrian
sect
.
&c.
The
same
historie
rehe●rseth
Sozomenus
lib.
6.
cap.
37.
which
is
the
third
quotation
interposing
his
opinion
.
At
verò
non
istam
&c.
But
truely
I
doe
not
thinke
,
that
this
was
the
onely
cause
,
whie
the
whole
nation
of
the
Gothes
vnto
this
time
,
is
adioyned
to
the
Arrians
:
but
that
Vlphilas
their
bishop
,
although
in
the
beginning
he
dissented
nothing
from
the
Catholike
Church
:
yet
afterward
in
the
reigne
of
Constantius
,
through
lacke
of
knowledge
,
he
was
present
at
the
Councel
held
at
Constantinople
,
with
Eudoxius
and
Acacius
,
which
were
of
the
number
of
Bishops
that
had
bene
in
the
Nicen
Councel
.
And
so
being
become
an
Arrian
,
separated
the
whole
nation
of
Gothes
from
the
Catholike
faith
.
This
storie
sheweth
,
that
Phritigernes
was
not
the
only
cause
of
conuersion
of
the
Gothes
:
for
Vlphilas
the
Bishop
of
those
fewe
,
that
were
before
that
time
christened
,
being
long
before
peruerted
into
Arrianisme
,
was
the
principall
cause
of
turning
both
the
nations
vnto
Christianisme
infected
with
Arrianisme
.
But
Theodoret
,
●aith
Bristowe
,
lib.
〈◊〉
.
ca.
37.
Who
was
a
Catholike
Bishop
,
of
purpose
to
take
from
the
Arrians
that
vaine
bragge
of
theirs
,
sheweth
that
the
Gothes
were
first
Catholikes
,
and
not
as
you
say
,
first
conuerted
by
the
Arrians
:
but
only
by
false
informations
,
&
too
much
trusting
of
their
bishop
Vlphilas
,
being
an
other
Balaam
lead
out
of
the
way
.
This
purpose
Bristowe
dreameth
of
,
for
no
such
appeareth
in
his
wordes
cap.
36.
Sed
ego
operaepretium
&c
:
But
my
thinke
I
shall
do
a
thing
worth
the
labour
,
if
I
shal
shew
to
them
that
knowe
not
,
howe
the
infection
of
the
Arrian
disease
came
to
the
Barbarians
.
And
then
sheweth
that
by
persuasion
of
Eudoxius
.
Vlphilas
which
was
the
Bishop
of
those
Gothes
,
which
before
were
lightened
with
the
beames
of
diuine
knowledge
,
entred
into
communion
with
the
Arrian
Emperor
Valens
,
and
so
deceiued
the
whole
nation
.
Where
Theodoret
saith
nothing
contrarie
to
other
histories
,
which
shewe
that
Phritigernes
first
brought
the
whole
nation
of
the
Gothes
that
was
vnder
him
vnto
Arrianisme
,
and
after
Vlph●las
turned
the
other
nation
,
the
was
vnder
Athanarichus
,
vnto
the
same
corrupt
forme
of
Christianitie
,
sauing
that
he
is
contrarie
to
Socrates
and
Sozomenus
,
which
affirme
that
Vlphilas
was
brought
into
Arrianisme
at
the
heretical
Councel
of
Constantinople
,
in
the
daies
of
Constantius
which
reigned
before
Valens
manie
yeres
.
That
I
said
of
them
that
were
conuerted
by
the
Nouatians
and
Donatists
,
Purg.
337.
Bristow
vnderstandeth
of
whole
nations
,
&
requireth
my
histories
&
autors
to
proue
that
I
said
not
.
If
Bristowe
will
say
,
that
none
from
Paganisme
were
conuerted
to
Christianitie
by
the
Nouatians
,
Donatistes
,
or
other
heretikes
,
I
wil
see
what
I
haue
in
store
to
proue
it
.
The
conuersion
of
the
Moscouites
by
the
Grecians
,
Bristowe
asketh
whether
it
were
before
their
schisme
or
after
,
and
concludeth
it
was
in
the
time
of
their
emulation
,
and
not
in
time
of
their
schisme
.
I
reade
the
conuersion
of
the
Moscouites
,
to
haue
ben
into
the
Greekish
forme
of
Christianitie
,
An.
Do.
987.
Ioachimus
Cureas
in
Mieslao
primo
.
about
which
time
,
the
controuersie
of
the
proceeding
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
began
to
arise
,
but
long
before
,
the
Greeke
Church
refused
subiection
to
the
Church
and
Pope
of
Rome
,
which
if
you
call
but
an
emulation
,
you
ouerthrow
the
rocke
of
your
owne
religion
,
&
breake
off
the
band
of
your
vnitie
,
which
you
affirme
to
consist
only
in
subiection
to
the
Romish
bishop
.
In
the
11.
Demaund
,
of
Brittanie
,
where
I
saide
the
Actes
of
the
Apostles
is
the
best
monument
to
shewe
,
into
what
faith
as
well
this
Island
,
as
all
other
nations
were
conuerted
by
the
Apostles
:
Bristowe
asketh
,
Whether
the
Actes
of
the
Apostles
were
written
to
shewe
into
what
faith
all
nations
were
conuerted
,
that
were
turned
by
the
Apostles
?
Yea
verily
:
they
were
written
to
shewe
that
the
Apostles
preached
the
same
faith
vnto
the
Iewes
and
Gentiles
,
which
they
receiued
of
Christ
according
to
the
holie
Scriptures
:
and
thereof
the
b●oke
is
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
practise
of
the
Apostles
,
according
to
such
instruction
as
thei
receiued
of
Christ
.
Secondly
he
asketh
is
there
so
much
as
any
mention
of
the
twelue
Apostles
,
preaching
to
any
nation
of
the
Gentiles
?
There
is
mention
of
the
twelue
Apostles
preaching
to
the
Iewes
,
and
of
their
agreement
in
doctrine
to
be
preached
to
the
Samaritans
and
Gentiles
,
although
it
was
neither
possible
,
nor
needfull
,
nor
conuenient
,
that
they
should
all
twelue
in
person
goe
to
euery
nation
.
But
what
faith
so
euer
any
one
preached
to
any
nation
,
the
same
did
they
all
preach
without
difference
in
euerie
nation
,
that
they
conuerted
.
There
is
not
one
of
the
articles
of
the
Creede
necessarie
to
saluation
,
but
it
is
to
be
proued
by
the
Actes
of
the
Apostles
,
that
they
did
preach
it
.
But
Bristowe
wil
tell
vs
an
other
cause
,
why
that
booke
was
written
.
No
sir
(
saith
he
)
that
booke
was
written
to
shewe
,
onely
the
beginning
of
the
Church
(
according
to
the
prophets
)
to
wit
,
at
Ierusalem
,
&
among
the
Iewes
,
and
the
taking
of
it
from
them
for
their
deserts
,
and
giuing
it
to
the
Gentiles
,
euen
from
Ierusalem
the
head
of
the
Iewes
,
to
Rome
the
head
of
the
Gentiles
.
If
this
were
the
only
purpose
of
the
Euangelist
,
(
as
Bristowe
most
impudently
affirmeth
)
he
should
haue
spared
much
labour
in
setting
foorth
the
sermons
,
and
summe
of
the
doctrine
,
which
the
Apostles
preached
both
to
the
Iewes
and
Gentiles
.
But
let
vs
heare
Bristowe
goe
forward
.
And
there
Saint
Luke
endeth
it
,
not
caring
to
tell
,
so
much
as
the
fulfilling
of
that
which
our
Lord
had
foretold
Act.
27.
to
Saint
Paule
(
in
whose
person
this
translation
was
wrought
,
and
not
in
S.
Peters
for
causes
too
long
to
be
here
rendered
)
Thou
must
stand
before
the
Emperor
.
Because
his
purpose
was
no
more
,
but
to
shewe
the
newe
Ierusalem
of
the
Christians
,
and
so
to
leade
them
to
it
,
to
knowe
what
are
the
particulars
that
the
Apostles
taught
.
If
this
be
true
,
all
the
testimonie
and
report
that
he
maketh
of
their
doctrine
,
was
beside
his
purpose
:
yea
,
the
historie
of
the
gospell
which
he
writ
of
all
things
,
that
Iesus
beganne
to
do
and
teach
,
was
out
of
this
purpose
.
And
he
tooke
the
wrong
way
in
writing
his
gospel
to
Theophilus
,
to
teach
him
the
certaintie
of
those
things
wherof
he
had
bene
instructed
,
as
Saint
Luke
him selfe
had
receiued
of
the
Apostles
them selues
,
whereas
according
to
Bristowes
imaginatiue
purpose
,
seeing
there
had
ben
manie
writings
of
the
gospel
alreadie
,
he
should
haue
sent
him
home
to
the
newe
Ierusalem
of
the
Christians
,
and
so
haue
left
him
to
it
,
to
knowe
what
are
the
particulars
the
Apostles
taught
.
But
where
on
gods
name
learne
wee
,
that
whore
of
Babylon
that
sitteth
vpon
the
seuen
hilles
,
Apoc.
17.
to
be
this
newe
Ierusalem
on
earth
?
when
S.
Paul
.
Gal.
4.
bringeth
all
Christians
from
the
earthly
Ierusalem
,
vnto
the
heauenly
Ierusalem
which
is
aboue
,
and
is
the
mother
of
vs
all
:
not
to
an
other
Ierusalem
on
earth
,
and
that
the
mother
of
all
abhominations
of
the
earth
.
Apoc.
17.
And
howe
falleth
it
out
,
that
S.
Luke
hauing
a
purpose
,
so
long
and
certainely
continued
,
and
so
necessarie
for
the
Church
,
not
in
one
word
commendeth
to
vs
this
newe
Ierusalem
,
on
the
seuen
hils
,
nor
in
one
word
maketh
mention
of
that
,
which
only
changeth
(
if
any
thing
can
chaunge
hell
into
heauen
)
Rome
into
Ierusalem
,
namely
the
translation
of
Peters
chaire
or
his
person
,
or
the
least
haire
of
his
head
,
or
thred
of
his
garment
to
Rome
?
But
this
belike
is
reserued
among
the
Apocriphal
causes
;
as
these
are
,
why
the
translation
was
in
the
person
of
S.
Paule
,
and
not
of
S.
Peter
.
Where
I
required
one
of
those
nations
,
to
whome
the
Apostles
preached
purgatorie
or
praier
for
the
dead
,
to
be
named
out
of
the
Actes
of
the
Apostles
:
Bristowe
answereth
,
continuing
his
former
speach
:
And
so
withall
you
haue
one
of
those
nations
named
;
and
that
no
common
one
,
to
wit
,
the
Romanes
,
which
receiued
of
the
Apostles
not
only
that
article
you
require
,
but
all
the
rest
which
at
this
time
it
hath
,
&c.
When
this
is
shewed
out
of
the
Actes
of
the
Apostles
,
or
any
other
Canonical
scripture
,
I
am
answered
.
Where
I
require
it
to
be
proued
,
that
the
same
Apostle
which
first
conuerted
Britanie
,
taught
praiers
or
sacrifice
for
the
deade
:
Bristowe
answereth
,
If
you
require
vs
to
proue
it
out
of
the
Scripture
,
considering
that
the
Scripture
doth
not
tell
of
our
lands
conuersion
you
declare
your selfe
to
be
but
a
pratler
.
At
the
least
wise
you
declare
,
that
you
cannot
proue
it
out
of
the
scriptures
.
But
we
can
proue
out
of
the
scriptures
,
euery
article
that
we
beleeue
,
to
haue
bene
taught
by
that
Apostle
or
Apostolike
man
,
whosoeuer
first
preached
the
saith
of
Christ
in
this
lande
,
although
our
landes
conuersion
be
not
by
name
mentioned
in
scripture
.
Yet
seeing
the
doctrine
of
euerie
one
of
the
Apostles
was
the
same
that
is
expressed
in
the
scriptures
,
we
are
able
to
proue
,
that
he
preached
the
same
which
we
beleue
,
considering
that
we
beleue
al
that
is
written
in
the
holy
scriptures
.
As
for
the
confirmation
of
Eleutherius
,
which
Bristowe
saith
was
an
accomplishing
of
that
which
was
begun
by
the
Apostles
&
Romanes
,
if
he
meane
of
a
supply
of
doctrine
,
it
is
false
:
for
Christianitie
hauing
bene
in
Brittanie
planted
by
the
Apostles
in
the
time
of
Tiberius
,
and
continued
more
then
a
100.
yeares
before
Eleuthe●ius
;
was
perfect
Christianitie
.
To
passe
ouer
that
pe●ke
of
troubles
,
in
which
Bristow
placeth
me
,
because
I
do
quietly
confesse
,
that
Augustine
brought
much
superstition
into
this
Island
,
&
yet
:
not
the
whole
substance
of
Poperie
,
but
the
principal
&
most
necessarie
grounds
of
Christianitie
:
where
I
affirmed
that
in
many
things
the
faith
&
religion
of
the
old
Saxons
,
was
contrarie
to
that
the
Papists
now
do
hold
,
as
by
diuers
monuments
of
antiquitie
may
be
proued
,
Bristowe
with
a
double
negatiue
,
would
haue
it
seeme
impossible
,
Because
in
S.
Bedes
storie
,
and
in
all
his
workes
▪
&c.
we
find
nothing
against
the
Pope
,
nor
against
any
one
point
of
his
doctrine
.
What
I
haue
found
in
S.
Bedes
storie
,
and
other
monuments
of
the
Saxons
religion
,
I
haue
set
forth
in
confutation
of
Stapletons
Fortresse
.
As
for
that
printed
Saxon
Homily
;
which
is
against
real
presence
&
transubstantiation
,
which
Bristowe
saith
,
was
so
soone
&
so
diligently
called
in
againe
,
it
is
abroad
in
the
hands
of
many
▪
neuer
called
in
,
that
euer
I
heard
of
,
but
hath
since
the
first
setting
forth
of
it
,
bene
printed
three
or
foure
times
,
in
Maister
Foxes
booke
of
Actes
and
Monumentes
.
In
the
tenth
and
twelfth
Demands
of
Miracles
and
visions
,
where
I
had
cited
the
admonition
of
the
Apostle
,
2.
Thessalon
.
2.
that
the
comming
of
Antichrist
should
be
in
all
lying
signes
and
wonders
:
Bristowe
asketh
me
,
what
Scripture
telleth
me
,
that
after
the
reuelation
of
Antichrist
,
there
shall
be
none
but
feigned
miracles
?
Wheras
I
inferred
no
such
thing
vpon
the
text
,
but
shew
euen
that
which
he
blameth
me
not
to
haue
shewed
,
howe
to
knowe
seigned
miracles
from
vnfeigned
,
namely
by
the
doctrine
which
they
are
saide
to
confirme
,
according
to
the
Scripture
.
Deut.
13.
Where
I
saide
,
that
Augustine
De
vnit
.
eccle.
cap.
16.
will
allowe
no
miracles
and
visions
for
sufficient
proofes
,
without
the
authoritie
of
Scriptures
:
Bristowe
saith
,
I
doe
shamefully
abuse
my
reader
,
for
he
saith
expressely
,
What
so
euer
such
thinges
are
done
in
the
Catholike
Church
,
therefore
they
are
to
be
allowed
,
because
they
are
done
in
the
Catholike
Church
.
Yea
sir
,
but
it
followeth
that
the
Church
is
not
shewed
to
be
Catholike
,
because
such
things
are
done
,
but
as
he
saith
there
and
else
where
,
onely
by
the
Scriptures
.
But
Bristowe
will
haue
me
allowe
all
the
miracles
that
Saint
Augustine
speaketh
of
,
because
they
were
done
in
the
Catholike
Church
.
As
though
Saint
Augustine
made
that
the
sufficient
cause
to
allowe
any
thing
that
was
done
or
saide
to
be
done
,
without
ioyning
that
they
were
done
to
confirme
the
Catholike
faith
,
Cyprians
miracles
could
not
iustifie
his
error
.
In
the
Popish
Church
,
the
sectes
of
Dominicanes
and
Franciscanes
in
their
dissention
,
about
the
Conception
of
the
virgin
Marie
,
boasted
both
of
their
miracles
,
yet
Bristowe
will
not
I
weene
allowe
both
their
miracles
,
except
he
will
allowe
both
their
opinions
,
which
were
contradictorie
.
Againe
,
many
things
are
feigned
,
euen
in
the
Catholike
Church
by
peruerse
zeale
,
to
confirme
truth
,
as
the
historie
of
Paule
and
Tecla
,
confessed
by
a
Priest
of
Asia
Tert.
de
bapt.
.
Neither
wil
Bristow
I
thinke
defend
,
that
al
the
miracles
contained
in
the
Alcoran
of
Frances
,
Vitas
patrum
,
Legend●●●rea
,
dormi
securè
,
sermones
discipuli
promptuarium
exemplorum
,
Festiual
,
and
liues
of
so
manie
Saints
as
are
written
,
be
all
true
,
and
none
feigned
,
although
they
all
serue
to
proue
Poperie
.
Wherefore
it
may
be
,
that
euen
some
of
those
miracles
that
S.
Augustine
doth
report
,
might
of
emulation
and
vnordered
zeale
be
feigned
by
some
Catholikes
,
to
winne
credite
to
the
Church
,
against
heretikes
.
That
Luther
and
Caluine
whome
he
affirmeth
,
not
able
to
heale
a
lame
horse
,
attempted
wonders
,
it
is
as
impudent
a
lie
,
and
grosse
forgerie
,
as
that
Li●danus
telleth
,
that
Luther
was
begotten
of
the
diuell
.
And
yet
there
be
diuers
horseleaches
among
the
Protestants
,
that
haue
healed
more
lame
horses
then
euer
S.
Loy
did
,
either
when
he
liued
,
or
since
he
was
worshipped
of
the
Papistes
as
an
excellent
horseleach
.
Passing
ouer
5.
Demandes
,
which
he
doth
only
name
:
In
the
18.
of
destroying
idolatrie
,
he
saith
,
that
to
all
that
he
said
,
I
say
nothing
,
but
like
a
cuckowe
:
You
haue
not
destroied
idolatrie
,
but
set
vp
idolatrie
,
not
waying
(
saith
Bristowe
)
that
I
tell
him
according
to
the
Prophets
,
that
we
haue
throughly
conuerted
all
nations
from
idolatrie
,
that
we
haue
made
them
forget
also
the
names
of
their
idols
.
In
deede
,
that
which
Bristow
telleth
me
,
is
of
great
weight
,
and
therefore
I
am
belike
to
blame
,
to
wey
it
no
more
but
as
bare
wordes
without
matter
,
and
winde
without
reason
or
authoritie
.
Otherwise
I
thinke
I
haue
proued
,
that
the
Papistes
haue
conuerted
fewe
nations
from
Paganisme
,
and
them
whome
they
haue
turned
,
they
haue
rather
chaunged
the
idols
,
then
taken
away
the
idolatrie
,
or
rather
the
verie
names
,
then
the
idols
themselues
,
seeing
there
was
neuer
an
idol
almost
among
the
Gentiles
,
but
they
retaine
the
idolatrie
,
vnder
the
name
of
one
Saint
or
other
.
They
had
Castor
and
Pollux
,
you
haue
Loy
and
George
:
they
had
Februa
or
Febris
,
you
haue
Fiacre
:
that
which
Iuno
Lucina
was
to
their
women
,
the
virgine
Marie
is
to
yours
.
&c.
In
the
19
Demaund
of
Kings
and
Emperors
,
Bristowe
saith
,
that
although
I
chalenge
the
Kings
of
the
first
600
yeares
,
to
be
of
our
religion
,
yet
I
bring
no
proofe
at
all
,
as
though
the
proofe
of
the
doctrine
of
saluation
receiued
in
that
time
,
which
we
hold
,
is
no
proofe
at
all
.
But
I
〈◊〉
not
aunswered
so
much
,
as
that
Allen
alledgeth
,
●●we
Constantinus
receiued
the
sentence
of
the
priestes
〈◊〉
at
Nice
,
as
pronounced
of
God
.
What
neede
any
〈…〉
were
to
this
?
we
honour
it
likewise
.
But
Bristowe
such
,
I
confesse
there
was
praier
for
his
soule
,
according
〈◊〉
the
error
of
his
time
.
And
he
addeth
,
that
there
was
〈◊〉
for
his
soule
,
with
intercession
of
the
Apostles
,
in
〈…〉
ose
honour
it
was
offered
at
their
reliques
and
their
●●mple
,
and
all
by
procurement
of
Constantinus
him selfe
.
Euseb.
in
vita
Const.
lib
4.
cap.
58.
59.
60.
66.
71.
First
cap.
58.
there
is
nothing
,
but
that
Constantine
builded
a
Church
,
which
should
be
called
the
memorie
of
the
Apostles
:
Cap.
59.
followeth
the
description
of
the
same
Church
and
his
intent
,
that
the
memorie
of
Christes
Apostles
by
that
sumptuous
building
,
should
be
continued
alwaies
among
all
nations
:
Cap.
60.
his
purpose
is
shewed
,
that
he
being
buried
there
,
might
be
made
partaker
of
the
praiers
,
that
should
be
there
made
in
the
honour
of
the
Apostles
:
meaning
the
praiers
made
to
God
,
which
manie
moued
by
deuotion
of
that
glorious
memorie
of
the
Apostles
,
should
make
:
Cap.
66.
is
nothing
but
a
description
of
a
magnificent
funerall
pompe
prepared
:
Cap.
71.
are
those
praiers
which
the
people
made
for
his
soule
that
I
spake
of
,
and
beside
that
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
&c.
The
tombe
of
the
thrise
happie
soule
,
beautified
with
the
name
of
the
Apostles
,
and
adioined
to
the
people
of
God
,
and
made
worthie
of
the
diuine
ceremonies
and
mysticall
liturgie
or
seruice
,
and
inioining
the
communion
of
holie
praiers
.
But
of
sacrifice
for
his
soule
,
with
the
intercession
of
the
Apostles
,
in
whose
honour
it
was
offered
,
at
their
reliques
,
there
is
no
word
:
although
by
any
figure
you
vnderstand
the
Emperors
tombe
whereof
he
speaketh
,
to
signifie
his
soule
,
which
is
rather
a
rhetoricall
exornation
,
shewing
howe
his
tombe
was
honoured
,
as
cap.
67.
he
sheweth
that
all
the
princes
of
the
armie
,
and
the
Senate
,
worshipped
his
dead
bodie
,
euen
as
they
did
when
he
was
aliue
:
which
vaine
pompe
,
he
commendeth
as
an
honour
appointed
and
allowed
by
God
,
to
be
giuen
to
the
Emperors
.
But
in
effect
you
can
shewe
no
more
of
Constantius
fauouring
of
your
religion
,
but
in
that
one
error
of
praying
for
the
dead
:
to
which
I
oppose
his
commandement
,
laide
vpon
Metriades
bishop
of
Rome
,
to
heare
the
cause
of
Cecilianus
,
E●seb
.
lib.
10.
cap.
5.
His
calling
of
the
Nicen
Councel
de
lit
.
Const.
lib.
3.
That
I
omit
his
admission
of
the
appeale
from
the
bishop
of
Rome
,
and
other
like
matters
,
shewing
his
souereigne
authoritie
ouer
the
bishop
of
Rome
and
other
Prelates
.
I
said
,
that
although
Theodoret
report
,
that
Theodosius
the
younger
,
praied
for
his
parents
foules
,
yet
the
storie
saith
not
,
that
he
praied
to
Saint
Chry
so
stome
for
them
.
Bristow
opposeth
the
Tripartite
storie
,
and
Theodoret
in
Latine
lib.
5.
cap.
35.
where
is
nothing
of
the
matter
,
&
36.
where
Theodoret
in
his
owne
words
speaking
of
the
tombe
of
Chrysostome
,
saith
of
Theodosius
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
He
setting
vpon
the
tombe
,
both
his
eyes
and
forehead
,
offered
a
supplication
for
his
parents
,
desiring
pardon
for
them
,
that
had
done
iniurie
of
ignoraunce
.
These
wordes
inforce
not
praier
to
Saint
Chrysostome
,
although
praier
to
the
dead
,
was
at
that
time
erroniously
practised
.
That
Allen
citeth
out
of
Ambrose
,
of
Honorius
standing
by
the
holie
altars
,
while
the
solemnitie
of
his
fathers
funerall
was
celebrated
,
maketh
little
to
proue
Honorius
to
haue
bene
a
Papist
,
although
in
that
point
I
denie
not
(
which
can
not
yet
of
those
wordes
be
proued
)
that
he
might
be
occupied
in
praier
for
the
deade
,
according
to
the
errour
of
his
time
.
One
errour
can
not
make
a
man
to
be
altogether
of
the
Popish
faith
,
who
is
knowne
to
haue
bene
of
that
religion
which
Ambrose
setteth
foorth
in
his
writings
,
contrarie
to
Papistrie
,
in
the
most
,
and
most
necessarie
pointes
vnto
saluation
.
The
40.
dayes
minde
,
which
Allen
would
begge
out
of
that
place
,
to
resemble
their
Popish
monethes
minde
,
I
haue
sufficiently
reproued
,
by
shewing
the
continuance
of
the
fourtie
daies
solemnitie
,
without
intermission
.
That
the
last
day
was
one
of
the
fourtie
,
and
kept
with
singular
solemnitie
(
as
is
vsuall
in
such
cases
)
which
Bristowe
opposeth
,
can
not
make
a
iust
resemblance
of
the
Popish
mone
thes
mindes
,
which
are
a
renouation
of
a
mourning
or
solemnitie
intermitted
.
Where
I
challenge
the
Christian
Emperors
which
were
before
the
generall
desection
,
to
haue
bene
of
our
religion
:
Bristowe
in
a
lurious
rage
,
noteth
in
the
margent
,
Sce
the
impudent
heretike
,
them
whome
he
condemned
before
.
But
who
is
this
impudent
heretike
,
that
condemned
those
Christian
Emperors
before
?
or
where
is
there
any
word
of
their
condemnation
?
Is
there
no
difference
betweene
reprouing
of
an
errour
,
and
condemuing
of
the
person
?
But
let
that
passe
among
Bristowes
impudent
and
malicious
slaunders
.
The
Kings
of
the
earth
(
saith
he
)
haue
not
committed
fornication
with
the
whore
of
Babylon
,
when
they
humblie
adored
the
Church
of
Rome
,
and
licked
the
dust
of
her
feete
,
as
they
are
commaunded
by
the
Prophet
.
Esai
.
49.
60.
&c.
This
shall
be
confessed
when
it
is
proued
,
that
the
Popish
Church
is
the
spouse
of
Christe
,
and
not
the
strumpet
of
Babylon
,
although
the
Prophet
speake
not
of
bodily
bowing
,
kissing
,
or
licking
.
Where
I
name
Ziska
&
Procopius
,
and
George
king
of
Bohemia
defenders
of
the
Protestants
:
Bristow
saith
,
it
was
an
100.
yeares
before
the
name
,
&
much
more
the
religion
of
the
Protestants
was
coined
,
as
though
their
religion
might
not
be
before
that
name
was
vsed
to
cal
them
by
?
But
that
Edward
the
third
was
a
Wicleuist
,
who
euer
heard
?
saith
Bristow
.
And
who
euer
heard
me
say
or
write
,
that
he
was
a
Wicleuist
?
I
saide
,
Ar.
34
that
king
Edward
&
other
noble
men
in
his
time
defended
Wickleues
cause
:
and
for
that
you
may
read
at
large
M.
Foxes
storie
of
Wickleue
.
Concerning
the
booke
of
Carolus
Magnus
,
against
images
,
I
haue
aunswered
Sander
&
Bristowe
else
where
.
The
booke
of
Berttam
is
entituled
ad
Carolum
magnum
,
although
Trithemius
say
,
it
was
vnto
Charles
the
king
,
brother
of
Lotharius
,
the
antiquitie
of
which
inscription
,
is
elder
then
Trithemius
,
except
he
bring
better
arguments
then
his
bare
affirmation
.
But
Bertram
went
about
the
bush
in
Bristows
fansie
,
&
durst
not
openly
declare
his
opinion
against
real
presence
&
transubstantiation
,
therefore
Charles
the
King
or
Emperor
did
hold
this
opinion
.
He
that
will
read
the
booke
,
shal
see
he
doth
plainly
expresse
his
iudgement
,
against
the
corporall
presence
,
and
as
for
transubstantiation
,
there
was
no
question
thereof
in
his
time
.
In
the
21.
Demaund
of
Churches
,
where
I
say
the
Papistes
had
wonne
no
more
,
if
we
could
shewe
neuer
a
Church
,
but
such
as
haue
bene
builded
by
Papistes
,
and
to
Popish
vses
,
then
the
idolaters
against
the
Apostles
,
which
could
shewe
no
temples
,
but
builded
vnto
idols
:
Bristowe
saith
,
the
challenge
were
not
one
,
because
the
Apostles
renounced
both
those
temples
and
their
religion
,
we
renounce
Popish
religion
,
but
not
all
their
Churches
.
The
cause
wh●e
the
Apostle
renounced
their
temples
,
was
for
that
manie
of
them
were
not
for
the
vse
of
Christian
religion
,
although
if
credite
may
be
giuen
to
our
countrie
histories
,
the
Pagans
temples
were
conuerted
to
Christian
Churches
,
both
by
the
Brytons
&
Saxons
.
But
those
conuerters
,
saith
Bristowe
,
were
the
founders
of
them
:
be
it
so
,
yet
were
they
not
the
builders
of
them
.
Yet
such
as
were
builded
by
Christian
princes
,
were
builded
that
their
soules
might
be
praied
for
in
them
,
as
that
Church
of
the
twelue
Apostles
builded
by
Constantine
the
great
,
whereof
mention
is
before
&c.
Of
so
manie
Chruches
as
he
builded
,
onely
in
building
that
one
,
he
had
that
erronious
conceit
.
Where
I
say
,
the
olde
Churches
were
builded
onely
in
the
honor
of
God
,
and
the
Popish
temples
in
the
honor
of
creatures
,
Saints
,
and
Angels
:
Marie
wellymet
,
quod
Bristowe
:
They
were
called
Basilicae
Martyrum
&
Apostolorum
,
the
Apostles
and
the
Martyrs
Churches
,
&c.
Ergo
,
They
were
not
builded
to
the
honour
of
God
onely
,
but
to
the
honour
of
creatures
,
when
the
olde
writers
whome
I
cite
Ar.
53.
55.
affirme
,
that
a
temple
belongeth
onely
to
God
.
And
Augustine
expresly
denieth
,
that
they
were
the
temples
,
but
the
memories
of
those
Martyrs
,
whose
names
they
bare
,
and
as
foraltars
,
he
vtterly
denieth
them
vnto
creatures
.
Where
I
said
,
that
Constantine
made
his
great
grants
to
the
married
Bishops
of
Rome
:
Bristowe
crieth
,
blessing
on
Iouinian
.
Whie
Bristowe
,
Was
there
neuer
any
Bishop
of
Rome
married
?
Was
there
no
priest
married
in
Hierome
and
Augustines
time
,
although
Iouinian
could
not
persuade
anie
priest
which
had
purposed
continencie
to
marrie
?
To
that
I
saide
of
manie
of
the
Cathedrall
Churches
in
England
,
builded
for
preachers
and
their
wiues
to
dwell
in
,
Bristowe
saith
,
I
haue
wonne
a
whetstone
as
bigge
as
a
mountaine
,
but
against
the
authoritie
of
the
histories
,
Ranulph
.
Cest.
Math.
Westm.
Petriburgens
.
and
other
which
I
cited
,
Bristow
bringeth
nothing
,
but
railing
in
filthie
termes
,
meete
for
the
colledge
of
Cardinals
life
,
&
not
for
the
holie
estate
of
matrimonie
.
Where
I
shewe
the
differing
forme
of
the
chauncels
&
altars
of
the
auncient
Churches
,
with
crosse
yles
from
the
latter
Popish
erections
:
Bristowe
maketh
me
a
souden
proctor
of
theirs
,
as
though
a
chauncel
and
altar
,
a
crosse
barre
,
might
not
be
named
but
by
a
Papist
.
Yea
,
he
maketh
me
contrarie
to
my selfe
,
for
saying
that
Popish
chauncels
,
which
are
at
the
East
end
of
Churches
,
are
but
late
additions
:
and
sanctifieth
,
that
we
can
abide
no
chauncels
,
no
crosse
yles
,
no
length
to
the
East
,
&c.
of
which
things
we
make
small
account
,
either
to
haue
them
,
or
to
be
without
them
.
But
it
is
more
materiall
,
that
he
saith
,
Constantinus
had
tabernaculum
crucis
,
a
tabernacle
or
moucable
Church
of
the
crosse
,
wheras
we
can
abide
no
crosse
or
roode
in
our
Churches
,
Euseb.
in
vit.
Const.
lib.
2.
cap.
12.
lib
4.
cap.
56
,
Sozomen
lib.
1.
cap.
8.
The
two
latter
places
shewe
,
that
in
his
warres
he
vsed
to
haue
a
tent
or
tabernacle
,
as
a
Church
,
for
praier
and
ministration
of
the
sacraments
:
the
first
place
onely
calleth
it
tabernaculum
crucis
,
which
might
be
of
the
forme
;
but
of
any
crosse
that
was
in
it
,
there
is
no
mention
,
and
much
lesse
of
a
rood
,
which
is
a
crosse
with
an
image
on
it
.
As
for
the
crosse
which
Paulinus
the
superstitious
Bishop
of
Nola
,
saith
was
kept
in
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
,
worshipped
by
the
Bishop
and
the
people
,
if
it
were
true
,
yet
it
proueth
not
creeping
to
the
crosse
on
Good
Friday
,
as
Bristow
saith
,
for
there
might
be
worshipping
without
creeping
,
or
Popish
worshipping
either
.
Againe
,
worshipping
of
that
same
crosse
that
Christ
died
on
,
proueth
not
creeping
to
any
idol
of
it
.
Finally
,
where
he
would
proue
out
of
Paulinus
and
Beda
,
the
multitude
of
altars
in
one
Churche
,
he
laboureth
in
vaine
.
Eusebius
whome
I
cited
,
is
cleare
both
of
the
vnitie
of
the
altar
in
his
time
,
and
of
the
manner
of
standing
,
which
was
not
after
the
popish
manner
.
Of
like
wisedome
it
is
,
that
he
will
not
allowe
me
to
talke
of
chalices
of
wood
and
glasse
,
because
I
say
their
vestiments
be
as
good
stuffe
as
their
chalices
,
which
the
olde
Church
knewe
not
.
Thereof
he
chargeth
me
not
〈◊〉
haue-read
in
Theodoret
,
lib.
2.
cap.
27.
of
that
Stola
sacra
&c.
Holie
cope
wouen
with
golden
threads
,
which
Consta●tinus
gaue
to
the
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
,
that
he
might
weare
it
,
when
he
did
baptise
.
Yes
I
haue
read
it
,
but
I
spake
of
an
elder
Church
then
Constantines
time
,
in
which
such
pompe
was
not
vsed
.
And
yet
that
robe
is
lewdly
translated
of
Bristowe
a
cope
.
Although
neither
the
Papists
in
baptisme
,
haue
alwaies
,
or
ordinarily
worne
a
cope
.
The
rest
that
he
citeth
,
out
of
antiquitie
for
gorgeous
attire
,
and
golden
chalices
,
partly
is
false
,
and
partly
superfluous
.
For
Ornatus
,
is
by
him
translated
into
ornaments
.
Valens
commended
Saint
Basil
,
Quòd
tanto
ornatu
támque
decenter
&c
,
that
with
so
great
comelinesse
and
so
decently
,
he
exercised
his
priestlie
office
.
Againe
,
Sozomen
,
lib.
8.
cap.
21.
sheweth
that
Chrysostomes
priestes
taken
by
force
in
ornatu
vt
erant
,
in
their
attire
as
they
were
,
which
was
but
a
white
garment
,
as
appeareth
by
diuers
places
of
Chrysostome
in
Matth.
Hom.
85.
&c.
Likewise
he
asketh
whether
there
were
such
neede
for
redeeming
captiues
,
building
of
Churches
,
or
that
requies
defunctorum
might
be
at
the
buriall
of
the
deade
,
that
chalices
were
broken
and
solde
,
seeing
Ambrose
alloweth
,
but
these
three
causes
of
breaking
and
selling
of
chalices
.
As
though
Ambrose
spake
of
buying
of
Trentals
of
Masses
,
with
the
price
of
the
chalices
,
where
he
saith
,
Off.
lib.
2.
cap.
28.
Nemo
potest
dolere
,
quia
in
sepulturis
Christianor●●n
requies
defunctorum
est
.
No
man
can
be
griened
,
because
in
the
buriall
of
Christians
,
the
rest
of
the
deade
is
.
Which
he
speaketh
of
enlarging
the
places
of
buriall
,
which
is
the
third
cause
,
Nemo
potest
indignari
&c.
No
man
can
be
angrie
,
because
the
spaces
are
enlarged
,
for
burying
of
the
reliquijs
fidel●um
,
the
bodies
of
the
faithfull
.
Yet
he
asketh
,
if
I
be
not
ashamed
,
to
cite
such
places
of
antiquitie
,
seel
hate
chalices
,
because
they
be
chalices
,
and
because
they
be
consecrated
?
Whereas
I
saide
nothing
against
the
necessarie
vse
of
cuppes
in
the
Communion
,
but
of
the
superstitious
pompe
of
the
Papistes
in
their
golden
chalices
,
and
idolatrous
manner
of
consecrating
them
:
while
they
suffer
the
poore
to
sterue
for
lacke
of
necessarie
susten●nce
,
but
once
againe
most
impudently
he
chargeth
Ambrose
to
say
,
that
the
sacred
chalice
is
called
there
a
vessell
of
our
Lordes
bloud
,
and
golde
in
which
our
Lordes
bloud
is
powred
:
where
he
speaketh
of
breaking
the
cuppes
,
before
they
be
solde
,
least
they
should
offensiuely
be
abused
to
wicked
purposes
.
But
there
,
saith
he
,
is
not
any
such
worde
of
them
,
and
in
the
middest
of
the
chapter
,
where
these
wordes
are
,
they
are
not
spoken
of
the
materiall
cuppe
,
but
of
the
godlie
vse
of
them
,
when
they
are
solde
to
redeeme
captiues
,
aunswering
the
obiection
of
such
thinges
,
that
be
once
dedicated
to
Gods
seruice
.
Ille
verus
est
thesaurus
Domini
&c.
That
is
a
true
treasure
of
the
Lorde
,
which
worketh
that
which
his
bloud
wrought
.
Then
I
acknowledge
a
vessell
of
the
Lordes
bloud
,
when
I
see
redemption
in
both
,
that
the
cup
may
redeeme
from
the
enimie
,
them
whome
the
bloud
hath
redeemed
from
finne
.
And
againe
,
Agnosco
infusum
auro
&c.
I
acknowledge
the
bloud
of
Christe
powred
into
the
golde
,
not
onely
to
haue
made
it
redde
,
but
also
to
haue
imprinted
in
it
the
vertue
of
diuine
operation
,
by
the
gift
of
redemption
.
Such
golde
the
holie
Martyr
Laurence
reserued
to
the
Lord
,
&c.
But
seeking
to
giue
the
Papistes
a
blowe
,
Bristowe
saith
,
I
care
not
though
the
stroke
light
vpon
the
Primitiue
Church
,
which
had
vessels
of
gold
,
not
onely
in
these
princely
buildings
erected
by
Constantine
&c:
but
also
in
the
crypts
or
caues
of
the
earth
,
in
time
of
persecution
.
How
Ambro●e
and
Acacius
vsed
,
&
thought
these
golden
vessel●
best
bestowed
,
I
haue
shewed
.
But
in
the
persecution
time
,
howe
proueth
Bristowe
they
had
such
plentie
of
golde
and
siluer
?
Forsooth
out
of
Prudentius
the
Poet
,
who
bringeth
in
the
tyrant
speaking
to
Laurence
,
and
r●quiring
the
treasures
of
the
Church
,
as
the
cups
of
gol●e
and
siluer
in
which
they
did
sacrifice
,
and
set
their
waxe
candles
.
But
what
answere
did
Laurence
the
Deacon
returne
,
what
chalices
or
candlestickes
did
he
render
,
but
the
poore
that
were
relieued
by
the
aimes
of
the
Church
and
sale
of
the
golden
vessels
,
if
they
had
any
,
as
witnesseth
S.
Ambrose
in
the
place
before
cited
?
Where
I
affirme
,
the
auncient
Churches
were
without
images
,
because
the
tempse
of
God
,
and
images
can
not
agree
&c.
Bristowe
saith
,
I
may
roll
in
such
rhetorike
before
fooles
,
that
receiue
our
absurde
principles
,
to
wit
,
That
the
idols
of
the
Pagans
,
were
images
of
the
Christians
.
But
thinketh
Bristowe
,
that
any
of
our
auditors
is
so
foolish
,
to
beleeue
so
absurde
a
principle
,
as
he
is
malitious
in
feigning
vs
to
affirme
such
an
impossible
paradoxe
?
I
am
sure
,
it
neuer
entred
into
the
opinion
of
any
preacher
,
to
imagine
,
that
the
idols
of
the
Pagans
were
the
images
of
Christians
.
But
this
we
say
,
that
Popish
images
,
although
they
be
not
the
same
that
were
the
images
of
the
Heathen
,
yet
they
are
as
abhominable
idols
as
theirs
,
&
the
worshipping
of
them
as
much
to
be
abhorred
of
all
true
Christians
,
as
the
worshipping
of
the
images
of
the
Gentiles
,
and
for
proofe
of
that
,
neither
you
,
nor
Sander
shall
euer
finde
me
non
plus
,
as
you
say
you
make
me
,
by
denying
that
absurd
principle
,
which
is
of
your
owne
fantasticall
imagination
,
and
not
of
our
ignorant
and
vnlearned
affirmation
,
as
you
feigne
it
.
As
touching
our
liuings
,
we
are
nothing
discouraged
by
the
storie
of
Ambrose
de
Basilicis
tradendis
,
but
that
we
may
enioie
them
with
a
better
conscience
,
then
you
compare
vs
,
with
the
Arrians
,
and
our
most
Christian
Prince
,
to
the
Arrian
Empresse
.
In
the
22.
Demaund
of
seruice
of
the
Church
,
howe
vainly
he
affirmeth
the
seruice
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
to
be
the
same
that
the
Popish
Church
now
hath
,
because
two
errors
of
praier
for
the
dead
,
and
to
Saintes
,
were
in
the
olde
Church
,
of
three
or
foure
hundreth
yeares
after
Christ
,
I
will
not
tarie
to
declare
.
But
where
I
note
out
of
S.
Augustine
,
affirming
that
no
sacrifice
ought
to
be
offered
to
Martyrs
:
seeing
praier
is
a
sacrifice
,
that
therefore
it
ought
to
be
offered
only
to
God
:
and
that
Martyrs
were
not
called
vpon
in
the
time
of
the
sacrifice
,
but
onely
named
for
remembrance
:
Bristowe
to
proue
that
they
were
called
vpon
,
contrarie
to
the
expresse
wordes
of
Augustine
,
citeth
Augustine
,
Tract
in
Ioan.
84.
speaking
of
the
blessed
Martyrs
:
Non
sic
eos
commemoramus
&c.
We
doe
not
so
rehearse
them
,
as
other
that
rest
in
peace
,
that
we
also
pray
for
them
,
but
rather
that
they
may
pray
for
vs
,
that
we
may
cleaue
to
their
steppes
.
These
words
proue
not
,
that
they
did
in
publike
seruice
call
vpon
the
Martyrs
with
solemne
praiers
,
but
onely
interpret
,
what
Augustine
supposed
the
meaning
of
the
publike
liturgie
to
be
,
in
that
place
,
where
the
Martyrs
were
named
among
other
that
are
in
rest
,
for
whome
they
did
pray
,
as
appeareth
more
plainely
,
by
the
other
place
,
which
Bristowe
quoteth
De
verb.
Apost.
17.
Perfectio
tamen
,
&c
Yet
there
is
some
kinde
of
perfection
in
this
life
,
vnto
which
the
holie
Martyrs
are
come
.
Therfore
the
Ecclesiasticall
discipline
hath
that
which
the
faithfull
doe
knowe
,
when
the
Martyrs
are
rehearsed
in
that
place
at
the
altar
of
God
,
where
praier
is
not
made
for
them
;
but
for
the
rest
of
the
departed
,
that
are
rehearsed
,
praier
is
made
.
For
it
is
an
iniurie
to
pray
for
a
Martyr
,
by
whose
praiers
we
ought
to
be
commended
.
Note
also
in
the
former
sentence
,
that
they
praied
for
them
that
did
rest
in
peace
;
therefore
they
praied
not
for
deliuerance
out
of
purgatorie
,
where
they
are
saide
to
be
in
paine
without
rest
.
The
other
places
,
which
he
noteth
,
of
priuate
persons
praying
to
Saints
,
proueth
not
,
that
such
praier
was
vsed
in
the
publike
seruice
of
the
Church
,
which
although
perhaps
it
were
not
syncere
in
all
points
,
yet
was
it
much
elder
,
than
the
error
of
inuocation
of
Saintes
.
Where
I
note
that
no
sacrifice
was
to
be
offered
vnto
Martyrs
:
Bristowe
saith
,
it
is
to
be
vnderstoode
,
of
externall
sacrifice
,
as
though
the
Christians
had
any
but
eucharisticall
or
of
prosperities
But
admitting
his
distinction
of
externall
and
internall
sacrifice
,
howe
are
the
Gentiles
answered
by
Saint
Augustine
,
that
we
worship
not
Saintes
as
Gods
,
when
we
offer
spirituall
sacrifice
to
them
,
which
is
most
proper
to
God
,
which
is
a
spirit
,
and
challengeth
the
spirituall
worship
vnto
him selfe
?
You
might
as
well
graunt
them
externall
temples
,
as
spirituall
sacrifice
,
and
much
rather
.
For
if
they
must
haue
spirituall
and
internall
sacrifice
,
they
must
haue
a
spirituall
and
internal
temple
,
wherein
and
vpon
which
,
it
must
be
offered
;
which
is
all
one
,
as
if
you
will
dispossesse
the
holy
Ghost
of
his
temple
,
and
set
vp
an
other
altar
in
mans
heart
,
to
offer
vp
sacrifice
vnto
Martyrs
therevpon
.
But
Bristowe
,
as
it
were
,
giuing
ouer
his
former
distinction
,
saith
praier
to
Saintes
,
is
no
more
a
sacrifice
to
Saintes
,
then
those
dishes
of
meate
,
which
of
some
Christians
were
superstitiously
brought
into
the
Churches
,
as
Augustine
sheweth
,
to
be
sanctified
by
the
merites
of
the
the
Martyrs
,
de
ciuit
.
lib.
8.
cap
27.
But
the
Prophet
saith
,
A
troubled
spirite
,
(
which
sendeth
foorth
praiers
)
is
a
sacrifice
vnto
God
,
Psal.
51.
and
therefore
ought
not
to
be
offered
to
creatures
;
and
Psal.
140.
he
desireth
,
that
his
praier
may
be
as
incense
,
&
the
euening
sacrifice
,
&c.
Concerning
ceremonies
,
he
chargeth
me
to
refuse
al
,
by
mine
argument
of
authoritie
of
Gods
worde
negatiuely
,
and
yet
in
other
wordes
to
allowe
some
.
Who
so
will
conferre
the
places
,
shall
easily
see
his
witlesse
and
senselesse
cauelling
.
I
refuse
all
superstitious
and
idolatrous
ceremonies
,
but
the
word
of
God
alloweth
such
as
are
necessarie
for
order
and
decencie
,
not
hindering
,
but
furthering
edification
.
The
order
of
seruice
and
ministration
,
which
Iustinus
describeth
the
Church
to
haue
vsed
,
containeth
a
summe
of
all
that
we
vse
in
our
liturgie
.
Bristowe
saith
,
it
is
the
summe
of
the
Masse
also
,
and
there
is
water
mingled
with
wine
,
plaine
against
the
Communion
booke
.
As
for
the
mingling
of
water
with
wine
,
howe
proueth
he
,
that
it
is
named
as
a
necessarie
ceremonie
vsed
in
that
time
,
and
not
rather
to
declare
,
how
soberly
the
Christians
vsed
wine
in
those
meetinges
,
which
were
so
malitiously
slaundered
?
But
if
it
were
a
ceremonie
,
what
hath
it
contrarie
to
the
communion
booke
,
which
although
it
require
no
more
then
Christ
vsed
,
yet
it
forbiddeth
not
the
addition
of
water
,
if
any
necessarie
occasion
doe
require
it
?
But
I
would
faine
see
the
masse
disciphered
out
of
that
description
of
Iustine
,
which
Bristowe
saith
,
is
the
verie
summe
of
the
masse
.
Vnlesse
Fulke
be
so
foolish
to
thinke
,
saith
he
,
that
the
Bishoppes
sermon
,
the
receiuing
of
all
present
,
the
carying
of
it
to
them
that
be
absent
,
the
rich
mens
offering
may
not
to
be
omitted
in
any
masse
,
or
for
any
cause
.
What
so
euer
may
be
vsed
or
omitted
at
any
masse
,
or
for
any
cause
,
I
am
not
so
wise
,
that
I
knowe
,
nor
so
carefull
that
I
desyre
to
knowe
.
But
is
Bristowe
so
madde
,
to
make
any
indued
with
reason
to
thinke
,
that
Iustinus
describeth
,
that
which
was
seldome
or
neuer
vsed
among
them
,
rather
then
that
which
was
vniformely
obserued
in
all
their
meetinges
?
But
out
of
the
scripture
I
reason
affirmatiuely
reiecting
all
the
beggerly
ceremonies
of
poperie
,
because
God
is
to
be
worshipped
in
spirite
&
truth
,
and
yet
in
an
other
place
,
I
admit
som
furniture
:
therefore
(
saith
Bristowe
,
)
that
I
haue
misused
this
text
,
with
much
babbling
to
little
purpose
.
Mine
answere
is
,
that
although
some
external
rites
,
are
necessarie
for
order
and
decencie
,
yet
the
true
and
proper
worshippe
of
God
,
is
onely
in
spirite
and
veritie
,
and
consisteth
not
in
externall
rites
,
no
not
when
they
are
best
vsed
.
Secondly
,
against
popishe
lessons
,
responses
,
versicles
,
lewde
lyes
and
vncertaine
tales
,
read
and
songe
as
Gods
seruice
:
&c.
I
alledged
Mathewe
,
15.
In
vaine
doe
they
worship
me
&c.
Here
he
taxeth
mine
ignorance
in
the
scripture
saying
,
that
the
precepts
of
men
are
those
which
be
of
men
and
not
of
GOD
.
And
are
not
lewde
lyes
,
and
vncertaine
tales
such
?
yea
,
all
your
vaine
distinctions
of
popish
seruice
:
for
which
you
cannot
shewe
any
one
commaundement
of
GOD
,
nor
allowance
of
the
Godly
Church
,
but
of
the
synagogue
of
Sathan
,
which
your
beggerly
Logike
craueth
in
this
aunswere
,
to
be
taken
for
the
Catholike
Church
of
Christ
.
After
this
he
chargeth
me
,
to
falsifie
the
Councel
of
Laodicea
cap.
59.
when
I
say
it
decreed
,
That
nothing
should
be
song
or
read
in
the
Church
,
but
the
Canonicall
bookes
of
the
holie
Scripture
.
Vnto
which
accusation
,
I
aunswere
,
that
I
gaue
the
summe
of
the
Councel
,
truely
and
without
any
falsification
.
That
nothing
should
be
read
in
the
Church
beside
the
Canonicall
bookes
of
the
Scripture
,
which
are
there
named
,
Bristowe
confesseth
,
and
the
wordes
of
the
Canon
are
plaine
.
This
is
sufficient
to
ouerthrowe
Popish
lessons
,
where
of
nine
,
most
commonly
not
one
is
of
the
Scripture
.
But
Bristowe
will
make
three
Councels
of
Carthage
,
ca.
47.
to
expound
this
Canon
of
Laodicea
,
where
it
is
commaunded
that
nothing
be
read
vnder
the
name
of
the
diuine
Scriptures
,
but
only
the
Canonical
Scriptures
.
If
this
exposition
were
allowed
,
yet
Popish
seruice
is
not
discharged
;
for
therein
,
the
Machabees
and
other
Apocryphall
Scriptures
,
which
the
Councel
of
Laodicea
doth
reiect
,
are
read
as
the
diuine
Scriptures
.
And
as
for
matters
to
be
soung
,
the
Councel
reiecting
Psalmes
made
by
vnskilfull
persons
,
meaneth
to
admit
none
but
either
the
Psalmes
and
Hymnes
of
the
Scripture
,
or
at
least
,
such
as
are
consonant
vnto
them
:
and
therefore
would
neuer
haue
admitted
that
blasphemous
versicle
,
or
what
the
diuel
so
euer
you
call
it
:
Tu
per
Thomae
sanguinem
quem
pro
te
impendit
,
Fac
nos
,
Christe
,
scandere
,
quò
Thomas
ascendit
.
By
the
bloud
of
Thomas
which
for
thee
he
did
spend
,
Make
vs
,
Christ
,
to
climbe
whither
Thomas
did
ascend
.
Nor
a
great
number
of
such
,
not
onely
vnlearned
songs
,
but
wicked
and
hereticall
ditties
,
that
are
contained
in
your
Popish
portuise
.
Where
I
said
,
the
festiuall
daies
were
kept
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
not
in
honour
of
the
Saints
,
as
they
are
of
the
Papistes
,
but
only
for
the
memorie
of
the
Martyrs
,
&c.
to
imitation
:
Bristowe
opposeth
a
saying
of
Augustine
,
which
to
imitation
addeth
consociation
to
the
merites
,
and
aide
of
their
praiers
.
Cont.
Faust.
lib.
20.
cap.
21.
As
for
fellowship
of
their
worthinesse
,
is
the
fruit
of
imitation
,
the
helpe
of
their
praiers
,
is
a
smacke
of
that
declining
time
,
which
Bristowe
alwaies
obtrudeth
to
vs
,
as
the
onely
primitiue
Church
,
which
I
vnderstand
for
the
first
Church
of
the
Apostles
,
and
that
which
was
most
auncient
next
vnto
them
.
Where
I
cite
out
of
Augustine
,
de
ver.
rel.
cap.
55.
that
Saints
and
Angels
were
of
Christians
in
his
time
honoured
,
with
loue
,
not
with
seruice
;
for
imitation
,
not
for
religion
:
First
Bristowe
asketh
,
whether
he
doth
not
expressely
here
auouch
their
honouring
?
Yes
verily
,
and
as
expressely
he
denieth
that
they
are
to
be
honoured
with
seruice
of
religion
.
But
seruitus
with
Bristowe
,
is
not
the
Latine
of
the
Greeke
word
Dulia
,
it
is
but
mine
vnacquaintance
is
Saint
Augustines
writings
.
If
mine
acquaintance
in
S.
Augustines
writings
,
were
as
smal
as
his
skill
is
in
the
Greeke
language
,
I
might
be
accounted
a
great
straunger
in
them
.
But
let
vs
heare
what
Bristowes
familiaritie
with
Saint
Augustine
hath
found
of
the
signification
of
Dulia
.
De
ciuit
.
Dei
.
lib.
10.
cap.
1.
Latriam
quippe
nostri
vbicunque
&c.
Where
so
euer
in
the
holie
Scriptures
,
is
put
Latria
,
our
interpreters
haue
translated
it
seruitus
&c.
verie
well
:
therefore
the
olde
Latine
interpreters
iudged
Latria
and
Doulia
to
be
all
one
.
For
euen
so
haue
they
translated
Doulia
,
alwaies
by
the
word
seruitus
.
as
Exod
6.
13
20.
Rom.
8.
Gal.
4.
5.
Heb.
2.
Wherefore
Saint
Augustine
not
finding
a
proper
Latine
worde
,
to
expresse
the
worship
of
God
,
and
chosing
Latria
the
Greeke
word
,
doth
onely
shewe
howe
it
was
his
pleasure
to
vse
the
terme
,
and
not
what
the
worde
doth
properly
signifie
.
For
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
differeth
not
from
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
in
signification
,
as
euen
Suidas
doth
confesse
,
although
he
say
that
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
is
a
seruice
,
(
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
)
for
wages
.
And
therefore
like
a
learned
Grecian
,
Bristowe
,
saith
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
is
synonomum
to
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
whereas
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
is
neuer
vsed
but
for
worship
of
GOD
,
or
superstition
,
or
religion
:
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
is
a
generall
name
for
any
kinde
of
seruice
due
either
to
GOD
or
men
.
But
what
shall
I
reason
with
such
a
blocke
,
as
challengeth
all
authenticall
seruice
,
that
euer
hath
bene
in
any
Church
to
be
the
Popish
seruice
,
although
it
differ
from
it
both
in
forme
and
matter
,
euen
as
before
he
saide
,
that
Iustines
description
is
the
verie
summe
of
the
Masse
.
Concerning
the
tongue
in
which
the
seruice
is
,
Bristowe
saith
,
it
maketh
no
difference
in
the
seruice
it selfe
:
but
because
I
holde
that
it
ought
to
be
in
the
vulgar
tongues
,
he
will
consider
my
groundes
thereof
.
First
,
the
fourteenth
of
the
first
to
the
Corinthians
,
proueth
it
not
,
because
he
speaketh
there
of
a
miraculous
gift
of
tongues
.
A
strong
reason
,
I
promise
you
,
nay
much
rather
if
a
speciall
gift
of
the
holie
Ghoste
,
must
giue
place
to
the
edifying
of
the
Church
,
much
rather
an
vnknowne
tongue
,
superstitiously
vsurped
,
must
be
abolished
.
Secondly
he
saith
,
Saint
Paule
doth
not
reiect
the
gift
,
but
moderate
it
,
for
the
varietie
of
certaine
,
much
like
to
some
Protestantes
,
that
thinke
all
learning
to
be
the
tongues
,
and
quoteth
Pur.
7.
It
was
not
meete
,
that
Saint
Paule
should
reiect
a
gift
of
the
holie
Ghost
,
but
shewe
the
right
vse
of
it
.
But
where
Bristowe
noteth
me
to
thinke
all
learning
to
be
the
tongues
,
and
quoteth
the
place
,
he
sheweth
him selfe
to
bee
a
shamelesse
lier
:
for
although
I
exemplifie
such
learning
,
as
is
most
necessarie
for
the
vnderstanding
of
the
Scriptures
,
by
knowledge
of
tongues
and
rationall
sciences
:
yet
it
followeth
not
,
that
I
thinke
all
learning
;
or
all
learning
needefull
for
that
purpose
,
to
be
knowledge
of
the
tongues
and
rationall
sciences
,
much
lesse
to
be
the
onely
knowledge
of
the
tongues
,
as
this
proude
Asse
ignorant
in
the
tongues
,
and
almost
in
all
good
learning
,
without
all
foreheade
,
or
with
an
yron
or
brasen
face
,
doeth
lewdly
belie
me
.
But
if
any
man
thinke
(
saith
Bristowe
)
that
one
may
argue
of
that
Chapiter
a
simili
:
Let
him
consider
,
first
,
that
so
,
the
manner
of
simple
Catholikes
,
who
praie
to
them selues
priuately
in
the
Latine
tongue
,
which
they
vnderstande
not
,
is
not
condemned
,
but
iustified
.
A
harde
matter
,
to
iustifie
superstitious
ignoraunce
,
by
similitude
of
the
heauenly
giftes
of
Gods
spirite
,
which
is
the
spirite
of
trueth
and
knowledge
.
Yes
,
saith
Bristowe
,
he
that
speaketh
in
a
tongue
,
speaketh
not
to
men
but
to
God
.
Yea
sir
,
but
doth
he
say
,
he
that
speaketh
in
a
tongue
which
he
vnderstandeth
not
him selfe
?
Againe
the
Apostle
saith
,
he
that
speaketh
in
a
tongue
,
doeth
edifie
him selfe
:
Verily
he
that
speaketh
in
a
tongue
,
which
he
vnderstandeth
no
more
then
a
Parot
,
edifieth
not
him selfe
,
nor
any
other
.
Againe
he
saith
:
if
I
pray
in
a
tongue
,
my
spirite
praieth
,
but
my
vnderstanding
or
minde
is
vnfruitfull
:
which
wordes
Bristowe
hath
impudently
falsified
,
saying
,
For
if
I
praie
in
a
tongue
,
my
spirite
(
or
affection
)
praieth
,
though
my
vnderstanding
be
without
fruite
.
Where
not
onely
hee
taketh
spirite
for
a
blinde
affection
,
which
is
meant
of
a
spirituall
gift
,
but
also
would
beare
vs
in
hande
,
that
Saint
Paule
iustified
praier
with
affection
voide
of
vnderstanding
,
where
it
followeth
immediatly
,
that
he
will
him selfe
,
and
exhorte
all
other
to
pray
,
not
onely
in
spirit
,
or
spirituall
gift
,
but
also
with
mind
or
vnderstanding
,
which
shall
be
fruitfull
vnto
other
.
But
he
saith
further
,
as
Bristow
maketh
him
to
say
,
If
thou
blesse
or
giue
thanks
in
spirit
,
thou
doest
it
well
:
Where
neither
his
wordes
,
nor
meaning
is
such
,
but
speaketh
of
them
which
vse
that
spirituall
gift
of
tongues
,
to
expresse
godlie
praier
or
thankesgiuing
,
which
serue
not
to
edifie
the
congregation
,
but
doth
not
iustifie
that
what
so
euer
a
man
shall
speake
in
praier
or
thankesgiuing
with
affection
,
is
well
spoken
,
although
the
speaker
vnderstand
not
what
he
say
.
For
howe
can
he
blesse
or
giue
thankes
well
,
that
knoweth
not
whether
he
blesse
or
cursse
,
in
the
wordes
which
he
vttereth
,
with
neuer
so
good
affection
?
Lastly
,
hee
citeth
out
of
Saint
Paule
:
If
there
bee
no
interpreter
,
let
him
be
silent
in
the
Church
,
and
speake
to
him selfe
and
to
GOD
.
And
hereof
Bristowe
will-conclude
,
that
mother
B.
is
iustified
to
say
her
Aui
Mari
,
Daminus
stickum
&c.
As
though
he
that
spake
in
such
a
tongue
as
no
man
present
could
interprete
,
and
he
him selfe
that
spake
it
,
did
not
vnderstand
what
he
spake
:
but
spake
meerely
in
the
aire
.
The
second
thing
that
Bristowe
would
haue
to
be
considered
,
is
that
the
Church
in
her
publike
prayers
,
doth
not
speake
in
a
tongue
,
because
the
Latine
tongue
is
not
in
England
a
straunge
tongue
,
so
as
it
were
if
one
should
say
Masse
at
Rome
in
the
English
tongue
.
And
whie
so
I
pray
thee
,
Bristowe
?
Because
in
England
heere
and
there
one
,
vnderstandeth
the
Latine
tongue
?
Verily
in
Rome
there
be
some
also
that
vnderstand
the
English
tongue
.
Thinke
you
Bristowe
could
haue
this
consideration
without
his
considering
cap
?
and
therevpon
concludeth
,
And
so
the
question
is
not
nowe
the
same
as
was
betweene
the
Apostle
and
the
Corinthians
:
But
whereas
the
Church
would
doe
all
thinges
for
edification
,
the
question
is
,
whether
this
be
obtained
in
the
publike
prayers
of
the
whole
world
,
rather
by
the
Latine
tongue
,
that
is
to
say
,
by
the
common
tongue
,
or
else
by
the
seuerall
tongues
,
that
is
to
say
,
by
the
priuate
tongues
.
Whie
,
howe
nowe
Bristowe
?
is
the
Latine
tongue
the
common
tongue
of
the
whole
worlde
?
You
that
haue
all
learning
beside
the
tongues
,
will
you
denie
all
other
tongues
to
be
common
,
but
the
Latine
?
But
to
let
that
passe
,
the
Catholikes
haue
one
aunswere
to
this
question
,
drawing
all
●o
common
or
vnitie
,
with
a
little
helpe
you
may
by
the
same
corde
,
drawe
in
the
communitie
and
vnitie
of
Plato
and
the
Anabaptistes
:
but
in
the
meane
while
,
your
edification
is
voide
of
instruction
.
But
that
is
a
small
matter
with
you
,
to
driue
all
men
into
a
common
heape
of
ignorance
and
superstition
,
which
is
your
drawing
all
to
common
or
vnitie
.
But
to
come
to
examples
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
he
saith
I
can
not
denie
,
but
that
all
nations
of
the
Latine
Church
,
had
the
seruice
in
Latine
:
I
say
,
all
nations
that
vnderstoode
the
Latine
tongue
,
as
their
vulgar
speach
,
but
not
all
nations
of
the
West
,
which
vnderstoode
it
not
.
That
most
nations
vnderstoode
the
Latine
tongue
,
which
he
calleth
an
absurde
position
,
he
saith
I
proue
it
,
by
the
Germane
or
French
Councels
of
Toures
,
Magunce
,
and
Rhemes
,
by
which
I
rather
shewe
the
decaie
of
the
Latine
tongue
in
those
regions
.
But
my
proues
are
other
then
he
is
able
to
aunswere
,
and
therefore
he
letteth
them
passe
,
cauelling
that
the
Latine
tongue
was
hard
vnto
the
people
,
where
I
shewe
the
decaie
of
it
:
As
also
that
the
French
tongue
at
this
day
is
in
some
places
called
the
Romane
,
where
I
shewe
the
continuaunce
of
the
rusticall
Romane
tongue
in
Fraunce
,
out
of
the
Councel
of
Turon
3.
cap.
17.
as
though
the
French
tongue
at
this
day
,
were
not
much
declined
from
the
similitude
which
it
had
with
the
pure
Latine
tongue
,
seuen
or
eight
hundreth
yeares
agoe
.
To
the
decree
of
the
Councel
of
Laterane
cap.
9.
which
commaunded
,
that
Ministers
should
be
prouided
,
which
according
to
the
diuersitie
of
rites
and
languages
,
should
celebrate
diuine
seruice
,
and
minister
the
sacraments
,
to
people
of
diuers
languages
,
being
conuersant
in
one
citie
.
Bristowe
aunswereth
,
the
Bishoppes
were
not
commaunded
to
translate
the
seruice
into
English
,
and
other
vulgar
tongues
,
but
to
prouide
Ministers
according
to
the
rites
and
languages
in
which
the
seruice
presently
was
.
Yes
sir
,
they
were
commaunded
to
prouide
Ministers
to
serue
them
according
to
the
diuersitie
of
languages
,
that
were
in
euerie
citie
,
where
were
people
of
diuers
tongues
.
But
otherwise
Bristowe
asketh
me
,
whie
it
prouideth
for
those
cities
and
diocesses
in
which
were
people
of
diuers
languages
,
and
not
for
all
in
generall
.
I
aunswere
the
prouision
is
generall
,
according
to
the
diuersitie
of
languages
in
any
citie
or
diocesse
.
Last
of
all
,
he
asketh
whie
suche
translation
was
in
no
place
put
in
execution
?
But
first
I
must
aske
him
howe
he
proueth
that
in
no
place
it
was
put
in
execution
?
And
although
it
were
not
,
it
declareth
the
negligence
of
the
Bishops
,
not
the
vnderstanding
of
the
Canon
.
In
the
foure
and
twentie
Demaund
of
Priesthoode
and
sacrifice
,
he
chargeth
vs
with
apostasie
,
for
translation
of
the
Priesthoode
,
whereof
must
followe
a
translation
of
the
lawe
.
Which
apostasie
falleth
right
vpon
the
Papistes
,
which
translated
the
Priesthoode
of
Christ
which
he
hath
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
without
succession
,
vnto
their
blasphemous
sacrificing
Priesthood
.
But
let
vs
see
what
balde
reason
he
bringeth
,
to
proue
that
we
haue
translated
the
Priesthood
.
First
we
haue
laboured
to
chaunge
the
Apostolicall
names
of
Episcopus
and
Presbyter
,
into
superintendent
&
elder
.
So
a
translation
out
of
Greeke
into
Latine
,
or
English
,
is
a
chaunge
with
him
:
and
such
as
may
not
be
abidden
,
for
he
reproueth
me
for
translating
Presbyterum
in
Cyprian
,
an
elder
.
Secondly
,
I
helpe
an
other
argument
of
theirs
,
concluding
out
of
Ephes.
4.
that
the
Popish
Hierarchie
is
no
part
of
Christian
Ministerie
:
by
which
I
declare
,
that
we
haue
chaunged
the
Priesthoode
of
the
Primitiue
Church
,
which
had
Popish
Bishops
,
Priestes
,
Deacons
,
Subdeacons
,
Exorcistes
,
Cantors
,
Acolytes
,
Ostiaries
,
for
which
he
citeth
Eusebius
lib.
6.
cap.
34.
where
there
is
no
such
matter
named
,
either
in
the
Greeke
or
Latine
computation
of
Grynaeus
.
I
confesse
the
names
are
auncient
,
and
the
offices
in
the
Primitiue
Church
,
were
some
necessarie
,
some
profitable
,
but
I
speake
of
the
Popish
Hierarchie
,
in
which
nothing
remaineth
but
the
names
.
But
Bristowe
thinketh
I
do
not
consider
,
that
S.
Paule
nameth
there
,
the
onely
Ministers
of
the
worde
or
preachers
.
Yes
verily
:
and
therfore
I
exclude
all
these
Popish
orders
,
which
are
such
euery
one
of
them
as
may
be
and
are
giuen
to
men
,
that
are
no
preachers
or
ministers
of
the
word
.
As
for
the
order
of
Christian
Deacons
,
for
ministring
to
the
poore
,
and
Elders
of
gouernement
,
I
knowe
they
are
not
to
be
sought
in
that
rehearsall
.
But
for
those
Popish
orders
that
Bristow
saith
,
belong
to
the
ministerie
of
the
altar
,
the
Scripture
speaketh
no
one
word
of
them
.
Yet
he
saith
,
I
may
see
the
distinction
of
them
,
Act.
13.
where
some
preachers
had
not
orders
,
&
1.
Tim.
3.
where
some
good
Priestes
do
not
labour
in
the
word
and
doctrine
.
Concerning
the
first
place
,
I
knowe
not
what
he
meaneth
,
except
he
thinke
Paule
and
Barnabas
were
not
Apostles
,
before
handes
were
laid
on
them
,
and
they
dismissed
to
preach
abroad
among
the
Gentiles
.
Or
else
,
that
those
Prophetes
and
teachers
named
in
the
beginning
of
the
Chapter
,
had
nowe
orders
,
which
howe
he
proueth
I
maruell
,
specially
seeing
other
Papistes
doe
vnderstand
the
worde
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
which
signifieth
ministring
,
for
their
sacrificing
.
As
for
the
other
place
is
of
Elders
of
gouernement
,
and
not
Priestes
of
the
Altar
.
That
the
auncient
writers
vsed
the
names
of
Sacerdotes
,
Leuitae
,
Pontifices
,
it
was
not
because
the
ministers
of
the
Gospell
are
a
species
or
kinde
of
them
,
but
abusiuely
,
for
a
certaine
similitude
of
the
Leuiticall
order
and
Priesthoode
,
with
the
ministers
of
the
word
and
sacraments
.
Thirdly
he
saith
,
the
Apostles
,
Bishops
,
and
Priestes
,
were
made
by
other
Bishops
and
Priestes
;
ours
by
Lay
men
,
as
of
Kings
and
ciuile
Magistrates
,
which
is
an
impudent
slaunder
.
Fourthly
,
wee
confesse
their
orders
to
bee
good
ynough
,
because
we
reorder
not
them
,
which
is
false
:
for
I
saide
,
their
admission
of
the
Church
is
a
newe
calling
.
Bristowe
saith
,
that
is
a
newe
way
to
giue
orders
,
shewing
him selfe
ignorant
,
that
euen
in
the
olde
Church
,
suche
as
were
ordained
by
some
heretikes
,
were
receiued
after
they
had
abiured
their
heresie
,
to
continue
in
the
degree
of
the
Cleargie
,
as
of
the
Nouatians
,
Concil.
Nicen.
cap.
8.
Wherefore
the
rest
of
his
babbling
,
O
your
Diuinitie
,
O
your
Scripture
,
as
that
I
bring
nothing
to
defend
Pilkington
,
not
to
be
a
mocke
Bishop
,
but
his
excellent
learning
and
diligent
preaching
&c.
I
passe
ouer
,
as
also
the
great
preaching
,
which
nowe
at
the
last
,
is
in
Popish
countries
,
where
within
these
threescore
yeares
,
was
as
great
silence
as
in
England
at
the
same
time
.
Fiftly
,
arguments
neede
not
,
where
I
denie
all
Priesthoode
,
but
the
spirituall
Priesthoode
common
to
all
Christians
.
Sixtly
,
If
I
will
inuent
a
thirde
Priesthoode
,
hee
saith
that
the
Primitiue
or
Fathers
Priesthoode
was
according
to
the
order
of
Melchisedech
,
and
to
offer
sacrifice
in
breade
and
wine
as
Melchisedek
&
Christ
did
.
Beware
what
you
say
,
of
a
sacrifice
of
bread
and
wine
offered
by
you
&
Christ
,
as
by
Melchisedek
:
But
you
regarde
not
our
arguments
,
they
be
but
obiections
.
At
leastwise
I
pray
you
answere
our
obiections
,
or
else
they
wil
be
argumentes
to
proue
you
all
blasphemous
vsurpers
of
Christs
singular
priesthood
.
But
that
you
wil
doe
at
leasure
,
&
first
you
will
proue
your
priesthood
out
of
Augustine
,
Contr.
aduers.
Leg.
&
Prophet
.
Lib.
Cap.
19
&
20.
Where
he
defendeth
the
sacrifice
of
the
Church
to
be
after
the
order
of
Melchisedek
,
and
yet
but
a
sacrifice
of
praise
.
So
that
you
haue
neither
your
sacrifice
propitiatorie
,
whereof
the
controuersie
is
,
nor
your
particular
priesthood
,
for
he
saith
:
The
Church
from
the
Apostles
time
&c.
doth
offer
to
God
in
the
body
of
Christ
a
sacrifice
of
praise
&c.
not
after
the
order
of
Aaron
,
but
after
the
order
of
Melchisedeck
.
Now
who
knoweth
not
,
that
the
sacrifice
of
praise
,
is
a
spiritual
sacrifice
,
common
to
al
the
Church
,
and
not
peculiar
to
any
special
order
of
priesthood
?
So
that
S.
Augastine
naming
the
order
of
Melchisedek
,
alludeth
to
those
places
of
the
scripture
,
in
which
all
Christians
are
called
a
royall
priesthood
,
&
Kinges
and
priestes
1.
Pet.
2.
Apoc.
1.
but
neuer
intended
to
make
the
singular
priesthood
of
Christ
,
confirmed
to
him
by
oath
,
Psalm
.
110.
and
which
passeth
not
from
him
,
Heb.
7.
common
to
ministers
of
the
Church
.
If
you
obiect
,
He
speaketh
of
celebration
of
the
sacrament
which
is
peculiar
to
them
:
I
answere
although
the
ministration
of
the
sacrament
be
proper
vnto
them
,
yet
the
sacrifice
of
praise
offered
in
the
celebration
,
is
common
to
the
whole
Church
,
as
Augustine
both
here
and
else
where
affirmeth
.
So
that
although
a
sacrifice
be
graunted
,
yet
a
special
priesthood
is
not
proued
.
But
the
sacrifice
of
the
crosse
was
both
of
thankesgiuing
,
&
of
propitiation
,
he
troweth
:
and
therfore
the
memoriall
sacrifice
of
the
altar
to
be
the
one
,
what
doth
it
let
to
be
the
other
?
This
argument
standing
vpon
Bristowes
trowing
,
and
confounding
the
members
of
a
diuision
,
shall
haue
none
other
answere
for
me
.
The
places
that
I
cite
out
of
Ambrose
,
ad
virg.
laps
.
&
de
virgin
.
Lib.
1.
to
proue
that
he
vseth
the
names
of
sacrifice
and
propitiation
,
vnproperly
,
as
other
of
the
fathers
doe
,
Bristow
will
not
allow
as
sufficient
,
saying
I
might
as
wel
so
argue
,
that
S.
Paule
speaketh
vnproperly
,
because
he
saith
our
bodies
by
mortification
to
be
made
a
liuing
sacrifice
.
whereas
the
Apostle
,
Heb.
10.
saith
Christs
body
by
death
to
be
made
a
sacrifice
.
And
what
offence
is
it
to
say
S.
Paule
speaketh
vnproperly
,
where
he
speaketh
figuratiuely
?
as
when
he
saith
the
rock
was
Christ
.
Howbeit
in
this
example
of
Bristow
,
there
is
great
difference
,
but
that
such
a
blunderer
as
he
cannot
see
it
,
which
confoundeth
the
propitiatorie
sacrifice
of
Christ
,
with
the
eucharisticall
sacrifice
of
Christians
,
as
he
confounded
them
both
in
the
sacrifice
of
the
Crosse
:
the
one
could
not
be
offered
,
without
death
of
the
sacrifice
and
sacrificer
,
the
other
is
offered
continually
,
the
sacrificer
liuing
.
As
for
his
rule
to
know
proper
and
vnproper
speaches
,
let
him
trie
to
teach
his
pupils
:
when
I
am
disposed
to
learne
,
I
will
chuse
a
better
learned
teacher
.
But
now
he
commeth
to
answere
obiections
.
First
I
sayd
the
bringing
foorth
of
bread
and
wine
,
was
no
part
of
Melchisedeks
priesthood
,
seeing
the
Apostle
comparing
him
with
Christ
,
in
all
thinges
in
which
he
was
comparable
,
neuer
teacheth
it
,
as
any
part
of
his
priesthood
.
This
argument
Bristow
maketh
to
be
of
one
place
of
Scripture
negatiuely
,
not
consideting
it
is
the
onely
place
,
where
such
comparison
is
made
,
and
that
it
is
absurd
to
thinke
,
the
Apostle
would
omit
so
principall
a
part
of
Melchisedeks
and
Christs
priesthood
.
But
Bristow
will
examine
the
text
.
First
their
vulgar
translation
,
begining
at
proferens
,
both
gelding
the
text
,
&
falsely
translating
At
verò
Melchisedek
rex
Salem
,
proferens
panem
&
vinum
(
erat
enim
sacerdos
dei
altissimi
)
benedixit
ei
,
&c.
But
truly
Melchisedek
King
of
Salem
,
bringing
foorth
bread
and
wine
(
for
he
was
the
priest
of
the
highest
GOD
)
blessed
him
saying
.
What
doth
this
context
helpe
him
,
which
is
as
much
to
say
as
he
blessed
him
because
he
was
a
priest
?
Bristow
,
fraudulently
omitteth
the
parenthesis
,
and
in
translation
,
changeth
the
participle
into
the
verbe
.
But
in
the
Hebrue
(
If
we
beleeue
Bristowe
)
the
poynting
declareth
,
that
also
the
Rabbines
themselues
take
it
in
the
same
sort
.
What
a
greate
Rabbine
is
Bristowe
sodenly
growne
to
be
,
since
his
departure
out
of
Oxforde
?
But
what
poynting
should
declare
this
,
he
sheweth
not
,
neither
can
I
gesse
.
The
text
is
:
And
Melchisedek
King
of
Salem
brought
foorth
bread
and
wine
:
there
is
the
middle
of
the
verse
:
then
it
followeth
:
And
he
was
a
Priest
,
of
the
highe
GOD
,
there
is
the
end
:
then
it
followeth
,
And
he
blessed
him
&c.
In
deede
Rabby
Salomon
,
but
not
in
respect
of
any
poynting
sayth
of
the
bringing
foorth
of
bread
and
wine
,
for
a
true
exposition
,
First
that
it
was
vsuall
to
doe
so
to
men
,
that
were
wearied
in
warre
:
also
that
thereby
he
shewed
,
that
he
was
not
offended
with
him
for
killing
of
his
Children
,
for
he
taketh
Melchisedek
to
be
Sem
,
the
middle
sonne
of
Noach
:
Secondly
for
a
Mideash
,
or
vaine
exposition
,
that
it
was
to
signifie
the
Minchoth
and
Nesecuth
the
meat
offeringes
,
and
the
drinke
offeringes
,
which
his
children
or
posteritie
,
should
offer
in
that
place
,
not
that
Melchisedek
in
respecte
that
he
was
a
Prieste
,
did
bring
foorth
bread
and
wine
.
But
all
the
Fathers
doe
agree
in
this
similitude
of
Melchisedeches
Priesthood
with
CHRIST
.
I
knowe
that
many
doe
so
,
but
one
Apostle
is
of
greater
authoritie
then
they
all
,
yet
none
of
them
all
speaketh
of
a
Priesthoode
,
to
offer
vp
the
naturall
bodie
of
Christ
in
a
propitiatorie
sacrifice
,
which
is
the
principall
matter
in
question
.
But
if
Melchisedek
were
a
Prieste
,
Bristowe
will
aske
me
,
what
was
his
sacrifice
,
if
it
were
not
bread
and
wine
,
seeing
none
other
is
mentioned
?
For
my
part
,
I
am
not
ashamed
to
be
ignorant
of
that
,
which
the
Holy
Ghost
hath
not
reueiled
.
Sure
I
am
,
if
bread
and
wine
had
beene
his
sacrifice
,
and
the
sacrifice
of
Christ
also
:
the
Apostle
would
not
haue
omitted
it
,
which
compareth
much
smaler
matters
in
him
,
with
Christ
then
that
.
Where
I
say
,
it
is
horrible
blasphemie
,
to
challenge
the
Priesthoode
according
to
the
order
of
Melchisedek
,
which
is
singular
to
Christ
:
Psalm.
110.
and
Heb.
7.
Bristowe
asketh
,
if
the
scripture
say
not
,
that
there
is
one
baptizer
which
is
Christ
,
and
yet
all
are
not
blasphemers
that
are
baptisers
.
I
answere
,
if
any
take
vpon
him
to
baptise
,
with
the
holy
ghost
and
with
fire
,
he
is
an
horrible
blasphemer
.
But
to
baptise
with
water
,
that
is
to
be
ministers
of
the
outwarde
sacrament
,
in
which
onely
Christ
baptiseth
inwardly
,
Christ
hath
called
all
those
ministers
of
his
word
and
sacramentes
.
Shewe
you
the
like
calling
for
your
blasphemous
Priesthood
,
after
the
order
of
Melchisedek
,
or
else
your
example
of
baptisers
will
not
discharge
you
of
horrible
blasphemie
.
But
you
haue
another
docterlike
argument
,
when
you
haue
scoffed
out
my
poore
doctershippe
.
Were
not
all
the
rest
in
the
olde
time
the
ministers
of
Aaron
,
but
Aaron
himselfe
was
Priest
onely
in
his
owne
time
,
and
after
him
euerie
one
in
his
time
was
Priest
as
well
as
he
,
and
therefore
in
that
law
were
many
Priestes
.
He
asketh
the
question
,
as
though
it
were
out
of
question
.
Were
not
all
.
&c.
O
famous
and
illuminate
doctor
,
where
did
your
docters
hoode
learne
,
that
all
the
high
Priestes
successiuely
,
(
whereof
euerie
one
was
a
figure
of
Christ
as
much
as
Aaron
)
were
ministers
of
Aaron
?
For
you
speake
of
high
Priestes
,
or
else
what
meane
you
to
say
,
that
Aaron
him selfe
was
priest
onely
in
his
owne
time
,
for
all
his
sonnes
were
priests
,
although
he
onely
the
high
priest
in
his
time
.
Vpon
this
stronge
foundation
,
you
build
a
similitude
and
dissimilitude
.
So
that
the
olde
testament
was
like
to
England
since
the
conquest
,
hauing
successiuely
many
Kinges
,
But
the
newe
testament
is
like
to
England
duduring
the
time
of
one
King
:
who
being
but
one
,
yet
hath
many
ministers
,
as
one
might
say
so
many
ministerial
kinges
.
You
shew
learning
ynough
in
this
similitude
and
dissimilitude
to
make
you
a
doctor
after
the
popes
order
.
But
let
vs
vnder
correction
of
your
doctors
hood
,
examine
your
comparison
.
The
olde
Testament
was
like
England
since
the
Conquest
,
hauing
successiuely
many
Kings
.
Had
not
euerie
of
those
kings
,
many
Ministers
vnder
them
?
And
euerie
Aaronicall
priest
had
also
many
Priestes
and
Leuites
vnder
him
?
And
was
not
Christ
head
of
the
Church
of
the
Iewes
,
in
the
seuerall
times
of
euery
the
high
Priest
?
Wherefore
the
olde
testament
is
as
like
to
England
during
the
time
of
one
King
,
as
the
newe
in
those
pointes
,
but
the
difference
is
this
:
that
the
figuratiue
high
priestes
were
many
,
because
they
could
not
continue
,
but
by
death
were
alwaies
chaunged
:
Christ
being
an
euerlasting
Priest
,
hath
a
priesthoode
that
descendeth
not
by
succession
:
so
that
although
he
haue
many
ministers
,
yet
he
onely
hath
the
euerlasting
priesthoode
,
which
is
according
to
the
order
of
Melchisedek
,
Heb.
7.
As
for
your
terme
of
ministeriall
kings
,
howe
well
it
agreeth
to
your
shauen
crownes
,
I
will
not
stand
here
to
discusse
.
My
third
argument
,
as
Bristowe
calleth
it
,
is
this
:
The
Apostle
to
the
Hebrues
cap.
10.
teacheth
vs
,
that
Christ
offering
but
one
sacrifice
for
our
sinnes
(
and
that
but
once
cap.
9.
)
hath
made
perfect
for
euer
those
that
are
sanctified
:
that
our
sinnes
are
taken
away
by
that
sacrifice
,
and
therefore
there
is
no
more
sacrifice
for
sinnes
left
.
To
this
Bris●owe
aunswereth
,
that
I
doe
not
vnderstand
,
what
the
Apostle
meaneth
by
those
that
are
sanctified
;
by
their
making
perfect
;
by
sacrifice
for
sinne
.
The
sanctified
are
onely
the
newe
baptized
by
his
iudgement
,
for
which
he
quoteth
1.
Cor
6.
where
the
Apostle
saith
:
But
nowe
you
are
washed
,
you
are
sanctified
,
you
are
iustified
,
by
the
name
of
our
Lord
Iesus
,
and
by
the
spirit
of
our
God
.
By
which
he
plainely
sheweth
,
that
although
they
were
baptized
long
before
,
and
had
committed
many
sinnes
sithence
their
baptisme
,
yet
the
cleannesse
of
their
washing
,
the
holinesse
of
their
sanctification
,
the
righteousnesse
of
their
iustification
,
they
retained
still
,
and
therefore
exhorteth
them
to
keepe
it
to
the
end
.
So
that
while
Bristowe
(
as
he
doth
alwaies
)
chargeth
me
with
ignorance
,
not
knowing
what
is
meant
by
their
making
perfect
:
he
incurreth
great
forgetfulnesse
,
euen
of
the
Apostles
words
where
he
expoundeth
,
which
are
not
onely
,
he
hath
made
perfect
,
but
,
he
hath
made
perfect
for
euer
,
them
that
are
sanctified
.
So
that
if
sanctification
were
restrained
to
baptisme
,
which
no
logike
can
proue
,
yet
it
followeth
,
that
they
which
are
sanctified
by
Christes
death
in
baptisme
,
are
made
perfect
not
for
a
moment
,
as
these
obstinate
blinde
Papistes
teach
,
from
which
perfection
they
fall
immediatlie
,
and
must
recouer
it
by
masses
,
and
as
Bristowe
saith
,
by
penance
,
&c.
But
Christ
by
that
one
sacrifice
but
once
offered
,
hath
made
perfect
for
euer
,
all
those
that
are
sanctified
.
That
the
purpose
of
the
Apostle
(
in
all
that
Epistle
to
the
Hebrewes
)
was
no
more
but
to
exhort
the
standing
to
perseuerance
,
as
Bristowe
in
so
many
wordes
affirmeth
,
let
him
beleeue
,
that
can
thinke
,
the
greatest
part
of
his
disputation
,
for
the
abolishing
of
all
ceremonies
,
and
sacrifices
of
the
lawe
,
to
be
idle
and
beside
his
purpose
.
Likewise
that
if
they
fall
,
he
telleth
them
that
Christes
death
will
not
worke
in
them
an
other
baptisme
,
but
remedie
he
telleth
them
none
.
Verily
there
is
no
remedie
,
for
them
that
make
the
death
of
Christ
of
none
effect
vnto
themseues
,
by
an
vtter
and
vniuersall
fall
from
CHRIST
.
But
it
is
an
horrible
slaunder
of
Gods
spirite
,
that
he
telleth
no
remedie
by
repentance
,
from
particular
faulles
and
daylie
offences
:
when
he
sheweth
the
perpetuall
clensing
of
our
conscience
by
the
bloode
of
Christ
,
Hebrews
,
10.
verse
,
14.
and
in
the
12.
Chapter
he
hath
many
and
earnest
exhortations
to
repentance
,
verse
,
1.
and
12.
shewing
the
necessitie
of
Gods
fatherly
correction
to
bring
vs
to
repentance
,
Verses
5.
6.
7.
&c.
But
I
shewe
great
ignorance
,
where
I
conclude
,
that
if
the
greatest
parte
be
left
to
the
sacrifice
of
the
masse
,
namely
to
take
away
all
sinnes
committed
since
baptisme
,
Christ
hath
not
made
them
that
are
sanctified
perfect
for
euer
by
a
sacrifice
once
offered
for
all
.
For
Papistes
deuide
not
remission
of
a
mans
sinnes
betwene
baptisme
and
the
masse
.
No
:
but
you
ascribe
the
whole
in
such
sorte
to
either
of
both
,
that
you
diuide
the
powre
of
making
perfect
for
euer
,
from
the
onely
once
offered
sacrifice
of
Christ
.
But
you
thinke
it
is
highly
for
the
honor
of
that
one
high
Priest
to
haue
many
ministers
,
and
many
ministeries
,
as
it
were
conduites
to
deriue
his
purchase
,
&
his
redemption
to
his
people
.
In
deede
,
if
he
had
not
one
spirite
that
were
of
power
to
apply
the
grace
of
his
redemption
vnto
all
his
elect
,
he
had
neede
of
many
conduites
,
such
as
you
speake
of
,
for
which
purpose
he
vseth
not
the
ministerie
of
man
,
but
the
vertue
of
the
Holie
Ghost
.
The
ministerie
of
man
is
such
as
man
can
execute
,
that
is
by
the
worde
,
audible
and
visible
,
to
speake
to
the
eares
and
eyes
of
men
,
and
beeing
●●i●red
vp
by
the
holy
spirite
,
to
commende
the
whole
effect
of
his
word
to
the
grace
of
God
.
But
you
thinke
to
auoyde
exclamation
,
if
you
ascribe
nothing
to
any
man
,
nor
any
thing
,
but
from
that
Priest
,
and
from
that
sacrifice
:
as
though
it
were
lawfull
for
you
to
take
any
thing
from
the
Prieste
and
sacrifice
,
and
bestowe
it
vpon
any
man
or
thing
,
without
commission
:
yea
,
against
commaundement
,
and
against
the
excellencie
of
perfection
of
that
singular
Priest
and
singular
sacrifice
,
which
being
once
offered
neede
,
noe
more
to
be
repeated
.
The
scriptures
thus
examined
,
he
commeth
to
the
doctors
:
And
first
to
Augustine
,
or
rather
Fulgentius
,
de
fide
ad
Petrum
.
cap.
19.
cited
by
me
Pur.
316.
&
292.
to
proue
that
the
olde
doctors
,
vsinge
the
name
of
sacrifice
,
ment
not
the
popish
sacrifice
propitiatorie
of
the
naturall
bodie
and
bloode
of
of
Christ
,
because
he
calleth
it
Sacrificium
panis
&
vini
,
the
sacrifice
of
bread
and
wine
.
Bristowe
replieth
,
that
he
also
calleth
it
the
the
sacrifice
of
the
body
&
bloode
of
Christ
,
wherein
as
it
is
cited
by
him
,
so
is
it
answered
by
me
,
cap.
6.
of
this
booke
.
Secondly
where
he
saith
,
In
this
sacrifice
is
thankesgiuing
&
commemoration
&c.
Bristow
replieth
,
that
he
saith
also
that
in
this
sacrifice
is
euidently
shewed
,
what
is
giuen
for
vs
,
&
he
is
announced
alreadie
killed
.
But
because
this
is
nothing
to
the
purpose
,
he
compareth
it
to
the
martyrdomes
of
Peter
&
Paule
commemorated
vpon
their
feast
at
Rome
euidently
shewed
and
announced
by
their
verie
bodies
and
heades
there
seene
and
visited
.
A
newe
way
to
vnderstand
olde
doctors
,
by
practise
of
Idolatrous
iugling
and
faining
of
reliques
.
If
these
Apostles
by
their
bodies
be
whole
at
Rome
,
so
many
Churches
of
Peter
and
Paule
as
haue
presently
,
or
haue
had
in
times
past
,
reliques
of
their
bones
,
were
greatly
deceiued
.
For
notwithstanding
that
Petres
whole
head
is
at
Rome
,
his
nether
iawe
,
with
his
bearde
is
at
Poyters
,
and
many
of
both
their
bones
at
Triers
,
Saint
Paules
shoulder
at
Argentina
:
yea
a
peece
of
Saint
Peters
braine
was
at
Geneua
,
where
it
was
tried
to
be
a
good
pumice
stone
.
The
second
doctor
is
,
August
.
de
ciui
.
dei
,
lib.
22.
cap.
10.
saying
,
the
martyrs
are
that
body
,
which
is
offered
in
sacrifice
,
whereof
I
conclude
,
that
it
is
not
the
naturall
body
of
Christ
,
but
his
mysticall
body
,
which
is
offered
in
a
sacrifice
of
thankesgiuing
.
Bristowe
answereth
,
that
the
mysticall
body
is
offered
in
the
offering
of
the
natu●ll
body
.
But
Augustine
neuer
saith
,
that
the
naturall
body
of
Christ
is
offered
,
but
expressing
what
body
is
offered
,
sheweth
that
the
mysticall
body
is
offered
.
Neuerthelesse
Bristowe
compareth
it
to
the
oblation
of
Christes
naturall
body
,
in
offering
whereof
for
his
Church
,
he
offered
his
Church
to
God
with
it
.
But
how
proueth
he
that
Christ
offered
his
Church
to
God
for
a
sacrifice
?
The
sacrifice
of
himselfe
was
propitiatorie
for
the
sinnes
of
his
Church
,
which
before
he
had
purged
by
his
sacrifice
,
he
could
not
offer
as
a
cleane
and
acceptable
sacrifice
vnto
God
.
The
third
doctor
is
,
Tertullian
,
which
saith
,
that
prayer
is
the
greatest
sacrifice
that
God
hath
commanded
.
Bristow
saith
,
That
in
the
name
of
that
prayer
,
he
comprehendeth
all
that
is
saide
and
done
in
the
masse
,
which
to
this
day
the
priest
therfore
begineth
saying
vnto
vs
after
the
gospell
,
Dominus
vobiscum
,
oremus
,
let
vs
pray
,
&
immediatly
goeth
to
the
bread
and
wine
&c.
You
may
thinke
I
iest
:
they
be
the
very
,
words
of
Bristow
and
his
onely
answere
.
Yea
,
but
there
be
reasons
of
this
saying
:
Because
that
pure
sacrifice
is
made
&
celebrated
with
prayer
,
as
Hierom
saith
,
by
the
p●iestes
prayers
.
What
are
then
the
wordes
of
consecration
?
And
because
euen
the
olde
howse
of
those
leuiticall
bloode
sacrifices
also
,
was
Domus
orationis
,
the
howse
of
prayer
:
Therefore
the
masse
is
nothing
but
a
prayer
.
So
is
Tertullian
answered
.
Who
would
not
wonder
at
this
clearkely
answere
?
For
I
thinke
no
man
can
vnderstand
of
what
reason
it
holdeth
.
The
last
doctor
is
Irenaeus
saying
of
the
sacrifice
of
the
Church
,
Libr.
4.
cap.
34.
The
conscience
of
him
that
doth
offer
being
pure
,
doth
sanctifie
the
sacrifice
,
and
causeth
GOD
to
accepte
it
as
comming
from
a
frende
.
The
sacrifices
doe
not
sanctifie
a
man
,
for
GOD
hath
no
neede
of
sacrifice
.
&c.
This
cannot
be
verified
of
the
naturall
body
of
Christ
.
Bristowe
answereth
,
they
say
the
same
.
Yea
doe
,
Bristowe
?
Is
the
sacrifice
you
offer
,
the
bodie
of
Christ
?
Yea
?
doth
the
conscience
of
the
offerer
,
sanctifie
the
body
of
Christ
?
Out
vpon
thee
filthie
blasphemous
dogge
,
if
thou
dare
affirme
it
.
But
Bristow
asketh
Wether
any
heretike
canpleade
by
their
verdit
,
that
he
pleaseth
God
in
offering
to
him
bread
and
wine
?
As
though
that
were
the
question
.
Yea
or
also
the
body
it selfe
and
bloode
of
Christ
,
so
as
all
Priestes
doe
in
their
Caluinicall
communion
,
no
lesse
then
we
doe
in
the
masse
?
What
newes
is
this
?
doe
all
Priestes
in
the
Caluinicall
communion
,
offer
the
body
and
blood
of
Christ
as
much
as
you
papistes
doe
in
your
masse
?
I
thinke
euen
the
same
:
for
none
that
communicate
with
Caluine
,
doe
at
all
offer
Christes
naturall
body
and
blood
,
and
no
more
doe
you
,
although
arrogantly
and
blasphemously
you
presume
to
doe
it
.
In
the
25.
demaund
of
Monkes
,
where
I
say
the
olde
Monkes
were
nothing
but
Colledges
of
studentes
:
Bristowe
saith
,
in
ouerthtowing
of
Popish
Abbeis
,
in
which
was
nothing
almost
but
ignorance
and
filthmes
,
and
Idolatrie
,
we
haue
spoyled
the
Church
of
God
,
of
great
vtilitie
.
But
he
saith
further
,
they
were
votaries
,
and
so
they
be
not
in
colledges
of
studentes
:
their
vowes
were
not
such
that
could
make
them
other
then
students
,
they
vowed
to
serue
God
vprightly
,
and
his
Church
,
when
they
were
called
,
and
they
in
Colledges
which
hauing
once
promised
the
same
,
forsake
this
holie
purpose
,
haue
smale
commendation
among
studentes
.
I
know
in
time
superstition
preuailed
,
and
that
which
first
was
free
,
at
last
became
coact
:
and
that
which
was
of
conueencie
,
was
thought
of
necessitie
,
euen
as
true
religion
declined
,
and
in
the
Romish
Church
at
length
degenerated
into
Idolatrie
and
superstition
.
In
the
27.
demaund
of
Councels
,
where
I
proue
that
Councels
may
erre
.
First
by
the
prayer
vsually
saide
after
the
ende
of
euerie
generall
Councel
:
Bristowe
saith
,
the
prayer
is
not
in
respect
,
for
any
false
decrees
or
beleeuings
of
their
whole
bodies
,
but
by
reason
of
certaine
ignorances
and
frailties
of
their
members
:
when
in
the
prayer
,
they
expresly
declare
their
feare
,
lest
ignorance
hath
driuen
them
into
error
,
which
can
be
vnderstoode
of
none
other
common
errors
of
this
life
,
but
of
their
error
in
decrees
,
seeing
the
prayer
is
appropriate
vnto
the
Councel
.
And
that
the
wordes
going
before
,
&
after
do
manifestly
declare
.
Te
in
nostris
principiis
&c.
Thee
in
our
beginninges
we
require
an
assister
,
thee
also
in
this
ende
of
our
iudgementes
or
decrees
,
we
desire
to
be
present
a
pardoner
for
our
faultes
,
that
is
,
that
thou
wouldest
spare
our
ignorance
and
pardon
our
error
:
that
to
our
perfect
desires
,
thou
wouldest
graunt
a
perfect
efficacie
of
worke
.
And
because
our
conscience
accusing
vs
,
we
doe
fainte
for
feare
,
lest
either
ignorance
hath
drawne
vs
into
errror
,
or
rashnes
of
will
perhaps
hath
driuen
vs
to
decline
from
iustice
;
therfore
we
desire
thee
,
&
we
pray
thee
,
that
if
we
haue
drawne
vnto
vs
,
any
offence
in
the
celebritie
of
this
Councell
,
thou
wouldest
vouchsafe
to
pardon
it
,
and
to
make
it
remissible
.
Who
would
pray
thus
,
in
the
name
of
the
whole
Councell
,
which
he
thought
could
not
possiblie
fall
into
any
error
.
That
I
alledge
out
of
Augustine
,
de
baptismo
contra
Donat.
libr.
2.
cap.
3.
That
generall
Councells
are
and
may
be
reformed
,
the
later
by
the
former
:
Bristowe
vnderstandeth
of
Councells
not
confirmed
by
the
Pope
,
which
may
be
reformed
euen
by
the
see
Apostolike
alone
.
That
was
a
poynt
more
then
S.
Augustine
sawe
.
But
how
can
they
be
called
Plenaria
concilia
full
and
whole
Councells
,
where
lacketh
any
necessarie
confirmation
?
This
is
a
shamelesse
eluding
of
the
Doctors
sayinges
.
For
first
Augustine
includeth
all
catholike
Bishops
,
in
possibility
of
erring
in
doctrine
,
not
excepting
the
Bishop
of
Rome
,
then
prouinciall
,
&
last
of
all
generall
Councells
:
onely
the
scripture
cannot
be
amended
,
as
that
which
hath
no
error
in
it
.
Where
I
saide
,
the
Councells
are
receiued
,
because
they
decreed
truly
according
to
the
worde
of
God
,
and
not
the
truth
receiued
,
because
it
was
decreed
in
Councells
:
Bristowe
saith
,
I
might
as
well
say
,
the
scriptures
are
receiued
,
because
they
are
written
truly
:
and
not
the
truth
receiued
because
it
is
written
in
the
scriptures
.
But
I
say
the
comparison
is
not
like
:
For
truth
is
not
so
necessarilie
bound
vnto
generall
Councells
,
as
it
is
to
the
holy
scriptures
;
and
therefore
both
the
scriptures
are
receiued
because
they
are
written
truly
,
and
the
truth
is
receiued
because
it
is
knowne
by
the
scriptures
.
It
followeth
not
so
of
councells
:
that
what
soeuer
they
haue
decreed
is
truth
,
although
the
Bishop
of
Rome
haue
confirmed
them
.
Leo
Bishop
of
Rome
confirmed
the
6.
of
Constantinople
,
which
condemned
Pope
Honorius
his
predecessor
for
an
heretike
,
whom
you
hould
cannot
erre
in
doctrine
,
which
is
an
argument
sufficient
,
to
strangle
any
papist
in
either
of
these
two
blasphemous
assertions
:
The
pope
cannot
erre
:
The
generall
Councel
confirmed
by
the
Pope
,
cannot
erre
.
In
the
28.
demaunde
,
of
the
See
Apostolike
,
where
I
bring
the
example
of
Victor
Bishop
of
Rome
,
withstoode
by
Irenaeus
and
Polycrates
,
when
he
went
about
to
vsurpe
authoritie
ouer
other
Churches
in
excommunicating
all
the
Churches
in
Asia
,
and
yet
Irenaeus
and
Polycrates
with
other
so
reprouing
the
Bishop
of
Rome
,
were
not
heretikes
:
Bristow
babling
about
the
cause
of
Victors
displeasure
,
which
is
no
matter
in
question
,
saith
he
vsurped
no
authoritie
,
nor
was
so
charged
,
but
that
his
censure
did
seeme
to
harpe
to
S.
Irenaeus
,
as
if
the
Pope
would
nowe
excommunicate
all
them
that
would
not
receiue
the
Councel
of
Trent
,
it
would
seeme
likewise
to
many
,
who
confesse
he
hath
authoritie
ouer
al.
But
none
of
these
Bishops
,
that
withstoode
Victor
,
confessed
,
that
he
had
authoritie
ouer
them
,
or
that
he
could
not
erre
.
But
contrariwise
Polycrates
chargeth
him
with
vsurpation
,
where
he
saith
he
will
not
be
troubled
with
his
terrifying
censure
,
seeing
he
followeth
(
as
he
thought
)
the
scripture
and
ancient
traditions
of
the
Apostles
.
Likewise
Eusebius
saith
,
that
Victor
was
sharply
reproued
of
many
,
and
namely
of
Irenaeus
in
the
behalfe
of
all
the
brethren
of
Fraunce
,
whom
he
gouerned
.
Yea
,
he
saith
expresly
,
that
Victor
with
his
censure
was
countermanded
,
by
many
Bishops
:
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
They
did
countermaund
him
,
or
gaue
him
contrarie
commaundement
,
to
set
his
minde
on
things
pertaining
to
peace
and
vnitie
,
and
loue
of
his
neighbour
.
Irenaeus
in
his
Epistle
to
Victor
shewing
,
that
Polycarpus
could
not
be
persuaded
by
Anicetus
Bishop
of
Rome
in
some
small
things
,
wherein
they
differed
,
declared
,
that
it
was
not
then
of
Polycarpus
or
him selfe
otherwise
thought
,
but
that
the
Bishop
of
Rome
might
erre
.
The
other
example
,
I
brought
,
was
of
Stephanus
Bishop
of
Rome
,
misliked
by
Dionysius
:
Euseb.
lib.
7.
cap.
2.
3.
4.
5
&c.
&
sharply
reproued
by
Cyprian
,
accusing
him
of
presumption
and
contumacie
,
Epist.
ad
Pomp.
because
he
threatened
excommunication
to
Hilenus
and
Firmilianus
,
and
almost
all
the
Churches
of
Asia
,
thinking
that
such
as
were
baptized
by
heretikes
,
should
be
baptized
againe
.
Also
Cyprian
in
his
Epist.
ad
Quirinum
,
saying
that
Peter
himselfe
was
not
so
arrogant
,
nor
so
presumptuous
,
that
he
would
say
,
he
held
the
primacie
,
and
that
other
men
should
obey
him
,
as
his
inferiors
:
Bristowe
saith
none
of
these
denied
the
primacie
of
Peter
.
I
say
they
al
denied
the
primacie
of
autoritie
,
although
Cyprian
in
the
same
place
saith
:
For
neither
Peter
,
whom
our
lord
chose
first
(
which
argueth
no
primacie
but
of
order
)
vpon
whom
he
builded
his
Church
,
when
Paule
did
afterward
dissent
from
him
,
about
circumcision
,
did
boast
him self
or
take
vpon
him
any
thing
insolently
or
arrogantly
,
that
he
should
say
,
he
held
the
primacie
,
and
that
he
ought
rather
to
be
obeyed
of
newe
scholers
and
aftercommers
.
Here
you
see
it
had
bene
in
Cyprians
iudgement
,
a
point
of
insolencie
and
arrogancie
in
Peter
,
if
he
had
challenged
the
primacie
of
authoritie
,
and
certaintie
of
trueth
against
al
men
.
But
Bristowe
saith
,
when
there
was
no
remedie
,
but
they
must
yeeld
or
be
Schismatikes
,
because
Stephanus
would
no
longer
tolerate
them
,
they
did
like
Catholike
men
,
for
all
their
Councels
,
conforme
their
newe
practise
to
the
old
custome
,
and
quoteth
August
.
de
bapt.
cont.
Donat.
lib.
5.
cap.
23.
&
25.
where
there
is
no
such
matter
,
also
he
referreth
vs
to
his
fift
Demaund
,
where
he
citeth
Euseb.
lib.
7.
cap.
2.
3.
4.
5.
but
neither
is
it
there
testified
.
Only
cap.
6.
Dionysius
chaungeth
his
iudgement
,
being
admonished
in
a
vision
,
and
that
he
had
learned
that
not
nowe
onely
,
but
of
olde
time
,
both
in
Aphrica
and
other
places
,
the
trueth
was
receiued
,
&c.
but
of
any
constraint
for
feare
of
being
Schismatikes
,
if
they
dissented
from
the
bishop
of
Rome
,
there
is
no
word
.
The
place
of
Hierome
ad
Euagrium
,
which
I
cited
Pur.
374.
defending
a
custome
of
the
whole
Church
,
against
a
custome
of
the
Church
of
Rome
,
Bristowe
saith
,
doth
not
proue
a
Church
,
a
rule
of
trueth
,
and
Christianitie
,
without
the
bishop
and
Church
of
Rome
,
because
Hierome
saith
,
as
also
there
I
cite
:
Nec
altera
&c.
we
must
not
thinke
,
that
there
is
one
Church
of
the
citie
of
Rome
,
and
an
other
of
all
the
world
,
&c.
By
which
wordes
,
he
sheweth
,
that
the
Church
of
Rome
,
if
she
will
be
a
member
of
the
Catholike
Church
,
must
conforme
her selfe
to
the
Church
of
all
the
world
,
and
not
the
Church
of
all
the
world
conforme
her selfe
to
the
Church
of
Rome
.
Where
I
say
,
we
beleeue
the
Catholike
Church
,
hath
no
chiefe
gouernour
on
earth
but
Christ
,
vnto
whome
al
power
is
giuen
in
heauen
and
earth
:
Bristowe
obiecteth
:
suppose
,
that
one
Christian
King
or
Emperour
should
reigne
sometime
,
as
farre
as
the
Church
reacheth
.
To
this
impossible
supposition
,
I
aunswere
,
that
one
King
should
haue
no
more
authoritie
,
than
euerie
King
hath
nowe
.
But
Bristowe
obiecteth
,
that
Kings
and
Queenes
be
no
more
named
among
S.
Paules
officers
,
&c.
Ephes.
4.
&
1.
Cor.
12.
and
therefore
as
a
Puritane
belike
,
I
would
pull
them
downe
.
In
the
motiue
of
Apes
,
he
discharged
me
from
being
a
Puritane
,
by
his
censure
;
but
now
he
burdeneth
me
to
be
a
Puritane
so
farre
,
that
I
should
also
be
a
traitour
,
as
he
and
all
his
fellowes
are
.
To
his
wise
obiection
I
aunswere
,
that
as
Kings
and
Queenes
are
not
named
among
Saint
Paules
officers
,
so
they
are
no
Ecclesiasticall
,
but
ciuill
Magistrates
,
and
the
Church
may
be
without
them
,
as
it
was
many
hundreth
yeares
.
Yet
when
Kings
and
Queenes
are
Christians
,
they
haue
chiefe
authoritie
ouer
persons
and
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
,
as
farre
as
the
godlie
Kings
of
Israel
and
Iuda
had
,
Dauid
,
Solomon
,
Iehosophat
,
Ezechias
,
Iosias
,
&c.
But
Christ
professing
that
all
power
is
giuen
him
,
Matthew
28.
signifieth
that
with
good
authoritie
,
he
might
commit
what
authoritie
he
would
,
and
therefore
biddeth
all
his
Apostles
goe
,
teach
,
and
baptize●
and
to
one
of
them
singularly
,
feede
my
lambes
and
my
sheepe
.
No
maruel
,
though
my
ignorance
in
the
scriptures
be
often
reproued
,
when
such
learned
conclusions
come
from
Bristowe
.
Christ
saide
to
one
,
feede
my
lambes
and
sheepe
,
therefore
he
saide
it
singularly
,
and
he
hath
vniuersall
charge
,
and
all
his
successors
to
.
But
for
the
Popes
supremacie
,
the
Apostle
saith
expresly
,
1.
Cor.
12.
the
heade
(
vnder
Christ
)
can
not
say
to
the
feete
,
you
are
not
necessarie
to
me
.
But
who
taught
you
to
foyst
in
your
owne
glosse
,
vnder
Christ
?
when
the
Apostle
speaketh
of
the
members
of
a
naturall
bodie
;
wherevnto
euerie
seueral
congregation
and
the
whole
church
also
is
like
.
If
you
seeke
the
head
of
euery
seuerall
congregation
,
you
must
looke
to
the
chiefe
gouernours
thereof
,
but
if
you
seeke
the
head
of
the
whole
Church
,
the
scripture
teacheth
but
one
,
which
is
Christ
,
for
one
head
vnder
another
,
in
one
whole
body
is
monstrous
.
But
you
thinke
perhaps
,
Christ
as
he
is
head
of
his
Church
,
may
say
to
the
feete
,
he
hath
no
neede
of
them
,
and
therefore
it
must
be
vnderstoode
of
an
head
vnder
Christ
,
but
then
you
must
remember
,
that
although
Christ
be
most
perfect
in
him selfe
,
yet
as
he
vouchsafeth
to
take
vpon
him
this
office
to
be
head
of
the
Church
,
he
is
not
perfect
without
al
his
members
,
which
is
the
singular
comfort
of
Gods
children
,
Ephe.
1.
ver.
last
.
But
Saint
Paule
,
Ephe.
4.
as
Bristowe
saith
,
vnder
the
name
of
the
Apostles
includeth
the
successors
of
the
Apostle
S.
Peter
,
whose
see
for
that
cause
is
called
the
Apostolike
see
in
singular
maner
,
and
their
decrees
and
actes
esteemed
of
Apostolike
authoritie
in
al
antiquitie
.
This
cause
is
a
shameles
and
senseles
lie
,
for
no
antiquitie
,
for
600.
yeares
after
Christ
so
esteemed
the
see
,
or
the
decrees
therof
.
Again
.
,
what
reason
is
it
,
that
Peters
successors
should
be
included
,
more
than
the
successors
of
the
other
Apostles
,
seeing
this
souereigntie
of
Peter
,
is
not
grounded
vpon
his
Apostleship
,
but
vpon
his
Bishoplike
office
,
as
Sander
maintaineth
?
As
for
the
principalitie
of
Apostleship
,
&
principalitie
of
the
Apostles
chaire
,
which
he
quoteth
out
of
August
.
de
bapt.
Cont.
Don.
li.
2.
ca.
1.
&
epi.
162.
haue
often
bene
shewed
to
be
vnsufficient
,
to
make
euery
one
of
Peters
successors
equal
with
Peter
in
authoritie
,
or
Peter
him selfe
superiour
to
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
.
And
consequently
there
is
no
cause
to
thinke
,
that
calamitie
of
the
Greekes
to
be
fallen
vpon
them
for
departing
from
that
see
.
In
the
29.
Demaund
of
Traditions
,
where
I
charge
Papistes
out
of
Irenaeus
lib.
3.
2.
to
be
like
to
the
Valentinians
,
which
accused
the
scriptures
of
imperfection
,
saying
,
that
they
are
ambiguous
,
and
that
the
trueth
can
not
be
found
in
them
,
by
such
as
knewe
not
the
tradition
,
which
was
not
deliuered
by
writing
,
but
by
worde
of
mouth
,
&c.
Bristowe
answereth
,
that
S.
Irenee
him selfe
,
as
al
Catholikes
,
will
haue
both
scripture
and
tradition
.
Yea
sir
,
but
what
tradition
?
any
trueth
of
doctrine
,
conserued
by
tradition
,
which
is
not
contained
in
the
holie
scriptures
?
nothing
lesse
.
But
appealeth
to
the
testimonie
of
the
Churches
tradition
,
for
confirmation
of
that
which
is
taught
in
the
scriptures
.
Hunc
patrem
&c.
This
father
of
our
Lorde
Iesus
Christ
to
be
preached
of
the
Churches
,
they
that
wil
,
may
learne
out
of
the
scripture
it selfe
,
and
vnderstand
the
Apostolike
tradition
of
the
Church
,
seeing
the
Epistle
is
auncienter
than
they
which
nowe
teach
falsely
&c.
So
that
what
so
euer
the
Apostles
deliuered
,
is
contained
in
their
writinges
,
and
it
is
still
an
hereticall
assertion
to
say
,
that
all
true
doctrine
is
not
deliuered
by
writing
,
but
some
by
word
of
mouth
.
In
the
34.
Demaund
of
Authoritie
,
where
I
affirme
,
the
order
of
the
Apostles
schoole
,
is
first
to
heare
the
word
of
God
preached
,
and
then
to
beleeue
,
Rom.
10.
reprouing
Allen
which
commended
his
friend
,
that
he
first
beleeued
,
and
afterward
sought
to
vnderstand
:
Bristowe
obiecteth
the
authoritie
of
Augustine
,
lib
Retr
.
1.
cap.
14.
where
he
sheweth
the
cause
,
whie
he
did
write
his
booke
de
vtilitate
credendi
to
haue
ben
,
for
that
the
Manichees
derided
the
discipline
of
the
Catholike
faith
,
that
men
were
commaunded
to
beleeue
not
taught
,
by
most
certaine
reason
,
what
was
true
,
whose
slaunder
Augustine
confuteth
in
that
booke
,
and
not
defendeth
Bristowes
preposterous
order
.
As
for
examples
of
beleeuing
Christ
and
his
Apostles
,
without
requiring
a
reason
of
their
doctrine
;
howe
vaine
it
is
,
I
leaue
to
children
to
laugh
at
,
seeing
I
speak
not
of
reason
,
but
of
the
word
of
God
preached
,
which
must
needes
goe
before
faith
:
Neither
doth
Augustine
meane
any
otherwise
in
his
booke
de
vtil.
cred.
cap.
13.
where
he
saith
:
It
is
rightly
appointed
by
the
maiestie
of
the
Catholike
discipline
,
that
faith
before
all
things
is
persuaded
to
them
which
come
to
religion
.
But
howe
should
faith
be
persuaded
,
but
by
the
preaching
of
the
word
of
God
,
without
curious
inquisition
,
according
to
the
reason
of
man
?
Where
I
say
,
that
Protestants
wil
be
ruled
by
their
superiors
,
so
far
as
their
superiors
are
ruled
by
the
word
of
God
:
Bristow
derideth
their
authoritie
,
who
by
our
own
confession
may
swarue
from
the
truth
of
Gods
word
:
as
though
the
Popish
superiors
might
not
,
or
their
supreme
head
,
although
beside
so
many
blasphemous
errors
,
as
he
holdeth
,
wherof
the
controuersie
is
with
the
Papistes
,
it
haue
not
bene
oft
proued
,
that
diuers
Popes
haue
bene
condemned
,
euen
by
generall
Councels
for
heretikes
.
Where
I
saide
the
Greeke
Church
will
be
ruled
by
the
Patriake
of
Constantinople
,
and
the
orientall
Churches
by
their
Patriarkes
and
Bishops
.
Bristowe
saith
,
if
I
knewe
the
storie
of
the
Florentine
Councel
,
wherein
the
Patriarkes
agreed
with
the
Catholikes
Church
in
all
things
,
and
yet
could
not
reduce
their
countries
from
schisme
,
I
would
not
so
say
.
But
I
knewe
that
storie
before
Bristow
knewe
whether
he
would
become
a
professed
Papist
or
no.
This
consent
is
a
forged
paper
,
found
in
the
hande
of
Ioseph
the
Patriarke
,
who
died
soudenly
:
but
in
no
acte
of
that
Councel
any
such
submission
or
agreement
in
all
things
,
appeareth
,
but
the
contrarie
.
Where
I
saide
,
that
to
beleeue
the
Catholike
Church
,
is
not
to
beleeue
all
and
euery
thing
which
the
Catholike
Church
doth
maintaine
:
Bristowe
would
haue
me
suppose
,
the
Apostles
had
said
,
Credo
.
S.
Romanam
ecclesiam
,
and
then
asketh
,
howe
I
would
haue
construed
it
.
Verily
euen
as
I
conster
Credo
ecclesiam
Catholicam
.
And
so
would
I
conster
Credo
Sanctas
scripturas
Canonicas
&c.
But
if
the
Apostles
would
haue
taught
vs
,
to
giue
credite
to
the
Church
of
Rome
in
all
things
,
they
would
haue
taught
vs
to
say
,
Credo
Romanae
ecclesiae
.
And
Credo
scripturis
Canonicis
,
duodecim
Apostolis
,
quatuor
Euangelistis
,
&c.
I
giue
credite
to
the
holy
scriptures
,
to
the
twelue
Apostles
,
and
to
the
foure
Euangelistes
.
For
Credo
with
an
Accusatiue
case
,
to
signifie
I
giue
credite
,
howe
so
euer
you
deride
my
grammatication
,
will
not
be
admitted
in
the
kingdome
of
Grammarians
,
except
his
holinesse
will
doe
as
much
for
that
terme
,
as
he
is
reported
to
haue
done
once
for
fiatur
.
In
the
35.
Demand
of
Vnitie
,
where
I
said
,
the
Church
may
be
called
the
house
of
peace
,
because
there
is
in
it
peace
and
agreement
in
the
chiefest
articles
of
faith
:
Bristowe
saith
,
by
this
reason
,
many
olde
heresies
were
with
in
the
house
of
peace
,
because
any
one
article
be
it
of
the
chiefest
or
of
the
meanest
,
may
breake
peace
,
as
that
of
quartadecimani
,
who
disagreed
onely
in
the
day
of
Easter
but
that
and
such
like
disagrements
in
opinion
,
might
be
in
the
house
of
peace
,
as
Irenaeus
testifieth
,
if
obstinate
contempt
of
generall
order
did
not
make
a
schisme
,
and
of
a
schisme
an
heresie
,
as
in
the
Donatistes
.
Otherwise
difference
in
a
ceremonie
(
as
I
said
)
maketh
not
diuision
of
faith
:
Bristowe
saith
,
yes
,
if
they
holde
their
ceremonie
necessarie
.
But
then
they
holde
it
not
as
a
ceremonie
,
or
the
Churches
ceremonie
vnlawfull
.
But
that
maketh
not
diuision
.
Polycarpus
thought
his
ceremonie
to
be
the
right
ceremonie
,
against
Anicetus
,
yet
he
was
not
diuided
from
him
,
for
he
considered
the
errour
in
a
ceremonie
not
to
be
of
such
importance
,
that
it
ought
to
breake
the
vnitie
of
the
Church
.
And
therefore
he
refused
not
to
communicate
with
Anicetus
,
nor
Anicetus
with
him
.
No
more
doe
they
among
vs
,
that
differ
in
opinion
of
ceremonies
,
except
some
fewe
schismaticall
heades
,
that
are
condemned
of
all
men
for
their
contention
and
stubbornesse
.
The
difference
of
opinions
betweene
the
Popish
Diuines
and
Canonistes
,
Bristowe
saith
are
such
,
as
may
be
among
Christians
,
as
Augustine
testifieth
,
Cont.
Iul.
lib
1.
cap.
2.
de
bapt.
Cont.
Don.
lib.
1.
cap.
18.
vntil
a
general
Councel
allowe
some
part
for
cleare
and
pure
,
but
we
will
not
allowe
the
authoritie
of
any
generall
Councel
,
if
Bristowe
may
be
beleeued
:
If
we
might
haue
a
Christian
generall
Councel
for
such
matters
,
as
are
in
controuersie
among
vs
,
I
doubt
not
but
we
should
agree
,
better
then
the
Papistes
which
boast
so
much
of
vnitie
.
As
for
the
contention
of
the
Popes
and
Councels
superioritie
,
remaineth
still
among
you
,
notwithstanding
the
Florentine
Councel
,
which
you
say
most
impudently
,
that
I
confesse
to
haue
resolued
the
matter
,
when
an
other
Councel
,
and
an
other
Pope
at
the
same
time
,
determined
against
it
.
In
the
36.
Demand
of
Owners
or
Keepers
of
the
scriptures
,
where
I
say
the
primitiue
Church
,
which
commendeth
the
scripture
vnto
vs
,
doth
not
condemne
Luther
or
his
doctrine
for
heresie
:
Bristowe
saith
,
it
doth
in
Aerius
,
Iouinian
,
Vigilantius
,
&c.
as
though
there
were
no
primitiue
Church
before
these
men
,
which
commended
the
scripture
vnto
vs
,
and
yet
knewe
neither
praier
for
for
the
deade
,
nor
superstition
of
reliques
,
or
any
thing
that
Luther
held
with
those
men
.
Where
I
taxe
the
blindnesse
of
the
Popish
Church
,
not
discerning
the
scriptures
Canonicall
,
from
Apocryphall
:
Bristowe
bringeth
in
a
saying
of
Augustine
,
shewing
that
it
is
of
necessitie
,
for
him
to
beleeue
the
Actes
of
the
Apostles
,
if
he
beleeue
the
Gospell
:
because
the
Catholike
authoritie
commendeth
both
the
scriptures
alike
vnto
him
.
But
I
haue
shewed
,
that
the
Maccabees
,
Ecclesiasticus
,
Iudeth
,
&c.
are
not
commended
to
vs
by
the
Catholike
or
vniuersall
authoritie
of
the
Church
.
After
other
contentious
pointes
stoutly
affirmed
or
denied
,
without
proofe
,
he
commeth
to
charge
me
with
a
substantiall
lie
,
because
I
say
our
Church
which
is
the
onely
true
Catholike
Church
,
hath
alwaies
had
right
and
possion
of
the
worde
of
God
,
as
appeareth
by
this
,
that
our
Church
beleueth
nothing
but
that
she
learneth
in
them
.
If
this
be
not
a
notable
plea
,
Bristowe
reporteth
him
to
our
Lawiers
.
But
I
report
me
to
al
Logicians
,
whether
it
be
not
a
good
argument
,
by
prouing
vs
to
be
the
true
Church
,
to
claime
continuall
right
and
possession
of
the
scriptures
,
as
for
the
noueltie
of
Luther
,
&
our
congregation
,
is
a
weake
plea
to
dispossesse
vs
of
the
Church
,
when
the
antiquitie
of
our
faith
and
religion
,
proueth
vs
to
be
of
the
oldest
Church
,
and
therefore
the
only
true
Church
.
Where
Allen
made
his
offer
,
that
if
I
could
shewe
any
Church
,
that
hath
safely
kept
the
scriptures
,
sauing
the
Popish
Church
,
he
would
recant
:
I
shew
him
the
Greeke
and
Easterne
Churches
,
which
are
not
Popish
,
whervpon
he
is
bound
by
his
offer
to
recant
:
yet
Bristowe
without
all
shame
saith
:
Euery
article
of
D.
Allens
is
not
to
proue
absolutely
,
that
we
be
the
Church
;
but
some
only
that
you
be
not
the
Church
.
True
it
is
,
that
neither
euery
one
nor
any
of
them
all
,
are
sufficient
to
proue
,
that
you
are
the
Church
and
not
we
.
But
that
Allen
meant
they
were
sufficient
,
it
is
manifest
by
that
he
promiseth
to
recant
,
if
any
of
them
can
be
proued
to
agree
to
any
other
,
than
to
the
Popish
Church
.
In
the
eight
and
thirtie
Demand
of
old
Heresies
,
where
I
shewed
that
many
of
the
Popish
ceremonies
,
were
first
instituted
by
heretikes
,
aunswering
directly
to
Allens
challenge
,
that
offered
to
recant
if
any
man
could
proue
,
that
any
Church
but
theirs
had
instituted
all
their
ceremonies
:
Bristowe
saith
they
are
such
matters
,
as
agree
none
otherwise
to
them
then
to
those
whome
I
dare
not
condemne
&c.
Which
if
it
were
so
,
yet
doth
it
not
shewe
but
that
I
haue
aunswered
Allens
challenge
,
and
therefore
do
,
according
to
his
promise
,
claime
his
recantation
.
Of
the
Messalians
or
Martyrians
I
saide
,
they
learned
first
to
shaue
their
beardes
,
and
let
their
lockes
growe
long
:
Bristowe
out
of
Epiphanius
saith
,
they
did
let
their
haire
growe
long
like
women
The
Popish
Priestes
doe
not
so
,
but
round
them
.
Yet
can
he
not
proue
out
of
Epiphanius
,
that
the
Messalians
did
not
keepe
their
haire
in
order
by
rounding
or
otherwise
.
Further
he
saith
,
some
Protestants
doe
so
.
I
aunswere
,
none
of
ceremonie
doth
so
.
Thirdly
,
Priestes
in
Italie
and
Spaine
doe
poll
their
heads
and
keepe
their
beardes
.
I
answere
,
they
keepe
the
text
of
the
decree
,
and
you
the
glosse
,
which
saith
,
statuimus
,
id
est
abrogamus
&c.
We
decree
,
that
is
we
abrogate
that
Clearkes
neither
weare
long
haire
,
nor
shaue
their
beardes
.
Last
of
all
he
saith
,
I
haue
no
great
matters
to
charge
them
with
,
when
I
lay
their
haires
to
their
charge
.
My
reply
is
,
that
my
charge
goeth
no
further
then
Allens
challenge
,
which
vrgeth
me
to
shewe
any
other
to
haue
first
instituted
any
one
ceremonie
in
Poperie
,
but
the
Popes
only
Catholike
Church
.
And
so
I
say
to
the
superstitious
masking
garmentes
,
instituted
by
the
Pharisees
,
although
the
auncient
Church
about
foure
or
fiue
hundreth
yeares
after
Christe
,
receiued
such
robes
in
vse
.
Also
the
daily
vse
of
Popish
holie
water
,
to
put
men
in
minde
of
baptisme
,
had
an
elder
institution
of
the
Hemerobaptistae
that
were
baptized
or
washed
euerie
day
.
Here
Bristowe
with
a
verie
stale
iest
,
acknowledgeth
their
fault
,
and
layeth
it
vpon
Saint
Paule
,
who
hath
deceiued
them
,
Rom.
6.
where
baptisme
is
in
deede
remembred
,
but
holie
water
I
trowe
is
not
there
.
O
,
then
it
is
1.
Tim
4.
where
Saint
Paule
was
to
blame
(
saith
Bristowe
)
to
tell
vs
,
that
the
creatures
of
God
are
sanctified
by
the
worde
of
God
and
by
prayer
.
Wonderfull
Diuinitie
,
that
can
bring
Popish
holie
water
to
so
holie
a
beginning
!
No
maruell
if
we
be
blinde
,
which
thinke
the
Apostle
speaketh
there
of
the
lawfull
vse
of
meates
(
forbidden
by
the
Pope
)
and
of
all
other
of
Gods
creatures
being
sanctified
by
the
worde
of
God
,
which
giue
vs
the
vse
so
by
praier
,
that
we
may
vse
them
well
.
But
specially
saith
Bristowe
,
he
was
to
blame
for
saying
.
The
holy
Ghost
doth
helpe
our
weaknesse
,
praying
for
vs
with
groanes
vnspeakeable
,
how
so
euer
blinde
heretikes
thinke
he
will
doe
nothing
by
water
for
praier
.
In
deede
when
the
scriptures
be
so
plaine
for
holie
water
,
it
is
wonder
that
any
be
so
blinde
they
can
see
it
.
Of
the
Ossenes
I
saide
,
they
tooke
their
hallowing
of
water
,
salt
,
oyle
,
breade
,
&c.
and
vse
to
sweare
by
them
.
Bristow
asketh
if
I
be
an
Anabaptist
,
that
will
condemne
all
swearing
or
swearing
by
creatures
.
I
aunswere
,
I
will
not
condemne
all
swearing
,
but
this
customable
swearing
of
Papistes
,
by
this
bread
,
by
this
salt
,
&c.
and
as
for
swearing
by
creatures
,
I
am
of
the
same
iudgement
that
our
Sauior
Christ
is
,
Matth.
5.
34.
But
Papistes
sweare
not
by
them
as
the
Ossenes
did
,
what
then
?
the
controuersie
is
not
therein
,
but
of
their
resemblance
with
the
Ossenes
in
some
part
.
Elxai
the
father
of
the
Ossenes
taught
his
scholers
a
praier
in
a
straunge
tongue
,
whose
interpretation
they
might
not
seeke
,
whome
the
Papistes
followe
in
teaching
the
people
to
pray
in
a
tongue
vnknowne
,
and
will
not
,
(
if
they
may
chose
)
let
them
knowe
the
interpretation
.
Bristowe
aunswereth
,
that
Epiphanius
saith
,
his
praier
was
nothing
at
all
when
it
was
interpreted
.
Is
it
like
Epiphanius
would
say
so
?
Howe
could
it
be
interpreted
,
if
it
had
no
signification
?
Epiphanius
in
deed
sheweth
it
was
a
vaine
thing
,
whereof
he
made
so
great
a
mysterie
,
and
your
ignorant
people
of
the
great
mysteries
of
the
Lordes
prayer
,
the
Salutation
and
the
creede
,
make
vaine
and
ridiculous
matters
while
they
can
scarce
pronounce
their
wordes
together
truly
.
The
Marcosians
in
baptisme
vsed
for
greater
admiration
certaine
Hebrewe
wordes
;
so
doe
the
papistes
:
Bristowe
asketh
,
whie
S.
Marke
in
his
greeke
writing
,
vseth
that
word
Eppheta
?
I
answere
,
more
liuely
to
expresse
the
miracle
of
Christ
:
yet
doth
he
it
not
without
interpretation
.
Likewise
Saint
Iohn
,
in
his
Apocalipse
vseth
Amen
and
Alleluia
,
wordes
,
whose
signification
was
as
commonly
knowne
to
all
Christians
,
as
their
owne
mother
language
.
What
is
this
to
iustifie
the
vse
of
that
word
in
baptisme
,
which
neither
Marke
nor
Iohn
speake
of
?
But
it
was
vsed
in
the
time
of
Ambrose
.
So
De
doct.
Chri.
lib.
2.
cap.
11.
&
inter
Epist.
174.
but
in
neither
of
them
do
I
finde
any
such
matter
.
Certaine
it
is
that
Augustine
doth
giue
the
signification
of
them
both
in
latine
.
Of
the
Marcionistes
(
I
said
)
they
learned
to
giue
women
leaue
to
baptise
:
Bristow
saith
,
we
doe
our selues
therein
by
order
of
our
booke
as
much
as
they
doe
,
but
he
is
deceiued
:
there
is
no
permission
in
the
booke
for
women
to
baptise
.
Touching
the
necessitie
of
baptisme
,
we
haue
spoken
before
cap.
6.
Finallie
I
saide
the
Papistes
are
Pelagians
for
holding
free
will
,
and
merites
of
workes
,
as
they
did
,
&
not
predessination
and
grace
as
S.
Augustine
did
,
Bristow
citeth
Hierom.
Cont.
Pela
saying
,
that
it
was
the
heresie
of
the
Manichees
,
to
take
away
free
will
.
So
it
was
in
deede
to
affirme
that
the
wil
of
man
was
inforced
or
constreined
.
But
that
the
will
of
man
,
is
free
from
the
thraldome
of
sinne
,
and
hath
power
to
merite
,
without
grace
,
or
with
grace
more
easily
,
it
was
the
heresie
of
the
Pelagians
as
Augustine
in
whole
bookes
written
against
them
doth
declare
:
But
August
.
Epist.
46.
saith
,
That
by
the
grace
of
God
a
wicked
man
may
be
made
a
iust
one
,
and
so
may
begin
to
haue
good
merites
,
which
God
shal
crown
when
the
world
shal
be
iudged
.
I
answere
by
merites
he
meaneth
workes
and
not
desertes
:
for
else
how
saith
he
elsewhere
(
in
Ps.
101.
&
diuers
places
beside
)
that
God
crowneth
his
giftes
and
not
our
merites
,
where
he
vseth
the
name
of
merites
,
for
desertes
?
where
I
saide
the
papistes
colour
Pelagianisme
with
their
distinction
,
De
congruo
&
condigno
:
Bristow
saith
we
do
like
hypocrites
conceale
before
the
people
,
the
distinction
of
merites
before
grace
,
and
after
grace
,
for
they
hold
that
a
man
cannot
merite
the
grace
of
God
De
congruo
without
Gods
healpe
,
although
they
haue
no
resolute
warrant
to
call
the
contrarie
Pelagianisme
or
heresie
.
And
why
haue
you
no
warant
?
for
reare
you
should
condemne
diuers
of
your
cheife
pillers
the
scholemen
for
heretikes
,
which
hold
contrary
to
that
you
hold
,
and
yet
you
all
hold
that
a
man
may
dispose
him selfe
vnto
a
certaine
aptnes
to
receiue
the
grace
of
God
by
the
power
of
his
free
will
.
Where
I
said
God
is
as
much
bound
to
congruitie
as
to
condignitie
:
Bristow
saith
I
immagine
that
if
God
do
not
that
which
is
congruous
,
he
doth
against
congruitie
.
Now
good
sir
saith
he
,
It
is
congrue
to
his
mercie
,
to
saue
the
simple
that
are
out
of
the
Church
,
which
is
not
congruus
to
his
iustice
But
good
sir
,
I
pray
you
dispute
not
so
of
congruine
,
that
you
oppose
Gods
mercie
to
his
iustice
,
there
is
nothing
congrue
to
hismercie
,
which
is
not
congrue
to
his
iustice
,
for
vnto
whomsoeuer
he
wil
shew
mercie
,
he
hath
receiued
for
them
satisfaction
to
his
iustice
,
in
the
person
of
Christ
:
yet
Bristow
hath
another
example
for
condignitie
:
For
God
to
saue
al
the
world
,
it
is
condigne
to
the
merites
of
Christ
,
yet
he
damneth
innumerable
,
because
it
is
condigne
to
their
owne
merites
.
By
this
it
may
be
inferred
,
that
God
yeeldeth
not
to
the
merites
of
Christ
,
so
much
as
they
deserue
,
because
the
merites
of
many
men
doe
hinder
,
as
though
the
merites
of
al
men
do
not
deserue
damnation
of
condignitie
,
&
then
what
cause
is
this
,
why
God
giueth
not
to
Christs
merites
so
much
as
they
are
worthie
to
receiue
,
because
many
deserue
damnation
?
This
foolish
sophistrie
riseth
by
reasoning
from
possibilitie
of
Christes
worthynesse
,
to
the
acte
of
mens
worthynesse
.
But
compare
acte
with
acte
,
and
God
saueth
all
his
elect
for
the
worthynesse
of
the
merites
of
Christ
by
his
mercie
:
and
damneth
all
the
reprobate
for
the
worthinesse
of
their
sinne
,
by
his
iustice
of
predestination
denied
by
the
papistes
,
as
it
is
defended
by
S.
Augustine
Bristow
speaketh
neuer
a
word
.
In
the
39.
demaund
which
he
calleth
Inconfessed
heretikes
onely
:
where
I
answering
to
the
question
of
Allen
Pur
421.
422.
with
an
other
question
or
demaunde
why
it
was
reueiled
,
first
to
the
Arrians
in
councell
,
that
the
article
of
Christes
descent
into
hell
was
meete
to
be
added
to
the
Creede
which
was
not
in
anie
symbole
before
.
Bristowe
first
surmising
,
as
his
manner
is
,
that
which
was
neuer
thought
of
,
at
last
confesseth
this
article
to
be
added
in
an
Arrian
Creede
,
Theodor.
Lib
2.
cap.
21
:
affirming
that
it
was
before
that
,
in
the
Apostles
Creede
,
but
thereof
he
bringeth
no
proofe
nor
witnesse
.
The
iudgement
of
the
scriptures
and
not
of
mens
opinions
argueth
heresies
.
Let
the
writinges
of
the
Apostles
trie
whether
of
vs
is
departed
from
the
doctrine
of
the
Apostles
.
In
the
40.
demaunde
which
he
termeth
,
They
neuer
afore
now
.
Where
I
saide
we
agree
with
the
most
ancient
fathers
in
the
cheefe
and
most
substantiall
articles
of
faith
:
Bristowe
saith
,
I
confesse
his
purpose
.
For
Vigilantius
,
Iouinianus
&c.
did
much
more
agree
with
them
in
such
articles
,
yet
were
not
of
their
church
,
could
not
be
,
and
would
not
be
.
How
proue
you
that
Vigilantius
was
not
of
the
Church
,
or
woulde
not
be
,
although
he
dissented
from
Hierom
?
As
for
Iouinian
,
although
we
hold
no
part
of
his
assertion
in
manner
as
he
helde
,
yet
his
error
was
not
so
great
,
that
he
might
not
be
saued
with
it
.
Fewe
of
those
fathers
but
had
as
great
errors
as
that
.
It
seemeth
you
would
haue
no
man
to
be
of
the
ancient
Church
,
except
he
agree
with
the
ancient
fathers
in
al
their
errors
:
if
it
be
proued
out
of
the
holy
scripture
that
Hierom
erred
,
in
that
wherein
he
dissented
from
Vigilantius
,
why
is
heto
be
allowed
in
that
error
,
more
then
in
other
thinges
wherein
he
and
other
of
those
antient
fathers
erred
.
Where
I
doubt
whether
Apostolici
in
S.
Bernard●
time
were
slaundered
:
Bristow
saith
it
is
a
poore
and
fowle
shifte
,
because
Bernard
himselfe
is
witnes
against
them
,
as
though
it
were
not
possible
that
Bernard
might
be
deceiued
by
miss●information
,
of
them
that
enuied
such
kinde
of
men
as
they
were
.
Where
I
say
it
is
certaine
that
Panperes
de
Lugduno
were
slaundered
:
Bristow
saith
I
proue
it
not
.
They
proue
it
themselues
,
being
now
and
long
since
openly
knowne
to
haue
continued
in
their
vnitie
from
the
time
of
Ioan.
Waldo
,
who
separated
them
by
his
doctrine
and
example
from
the
whore
of
Babilon
,
in
Calabria
,
Mora
〈…〉
,
&
Fraunce
.
Where
haue
beene
whole
ci●ties
or
townes
of
them
,
as
Merundal
,
Cabriers
&c.
Wherefore
it
is
an
impudent
assertion
of
Saunder
,
to
say
they
were
friers
.
&c.
In
the
41.
demaunde
of
studying
all
truth
,
Bristowe
affirmeth
,
that
with
friers
and
other
catholikes
,
all
lea●ning
had
beene
packed
away
,
if
the
princes
had
not
erected
a
fewe
petite
schooles
,
so
he
calleth
not
onelie
great
colleges
,
but
also
whole
Vniuersities
lately
erected
.
But
is
there
any
man
so
ignorant
of
the
time
of
suppression
of
Abbies
,
that
he
would
thinke
all
learning
was
in
friers
and
other
papistes
?
Where
I
say
there
was
neuer
greater
store
of
learning
in
any
age
,
then
is
now
in
protestantes
:
bristow
,
maketh
me
still
a
childe
in
the
grammer
schoole
,
which
thinketh
no
man
can
be
better
learned
then
his
maister
,
saying
:
We
that
knowe
your
and
the
Catholike
schooles
,
can
but
laugh
at
your
childishnes
.
Why
Bristowe
,
doth
no
man
know
the
learning
of
popish
vniuersities
but
you
?
I
haue
seene
and
heard
somthing
in
the
most
famous
vniuersitie
in
Europe
,
and
yet
I
sawe
nothing
,
that
Cambridge
and
Oxford
may
not
be
bould
to
compare
with
it
,
except
it
be
in
multitude
of
studentes
.
Where
I
speake
of
the
tongues
and
rationall
sciences
:
Bristowe
is
boulde
to
affirme
.
There
are
more
declamations
in
Greeke
in
one
common
schoole
of
the
Iesuites
,
then
in
both
your
vniuersities
(
I
dare
say
being
ioyned
together
.
What
dare
you
not
say
,
that
haue
determined
to
supply
in
bragging
,
that
you
Iacke
in
learning
?
if
you
had
named
the
number
,
we
must
perhaps
haue
yealded
to
you
,
if
happilie
our
number
of
Greeke
declamations
be
not
so
great
as
yours
.
But
to
giue
you
an
estimation
,
by
that
I
knowe
of
one
,
and
one
of
the
lesser
sort
of
colledges
in
Cambridg
,
for
the
number
of
Greeke
declamations
,
there
are
a
dosen
poore
schollers
of
newe
erection
,
since
her
Maiesties
reigne
which
are
bounde
to
declaime
in
greeke
euerie
Terme
,
beside
their
weekely
exercise
of
versifying
in
greek
and
latin
,
and
their
competent
knowledg
in
the
hebrewe
tonge
,
required
in
them
by
their
foundation
,
before
they
can
be
elected
to
those
places
.
By
which
you
may
gesse
,
that
the
knoweledge
of
the
laerned
tounges
,
are
not
so
daintie
in
our
vniuersities
,
as
you
thinke
.
Yea
,
he
dare
say
they
haue
better
masters
of
art
of
two
or
three
,
teaching
through
out
all
Logike
and
Phylosophie
,
then
with
vs
in
seuen
yeares
.
This
childishe
bragge
,
whereof
there
is
no
triall
,
commeth
of
the
spirite
of
pride
,
wherewith
Sathan
puffeth
vp
the
Papistes
,
that
although
in
the
multitude
they
be
farre
inferiour
to
the
professors
of
the
truth
,
in
any
kinde
of
good
learning
,
and
for
the
best
of
them
nothing
superior
:
yet
euerie
one
of
meanest
knowledg
,
among
whom
I
take
Bristowe
for
one
,
so
swelleth
in
opinion
of
his
learning
,
that
he
contemneth
euen
them
whose
skill
he
neuer
assayed
.
But
their
masters
of
Hebrewe
,
Greeke
,
Latine
,
Poetrie
,
Logike
,
Philosophie
,
doe
not
count
themselues
learned
in
diuinitie
,
which
they
neuer
studied
,
or
better
learned
in
it
,
then
the
professors
of
it
,
lacking
the
tounges
,
or
eloquence
,
as
Saint
Thomas
Aquinas
,
Saint
Augustine
,
the
Apostles
.
And
what
I
pray
you
,
doe
masters
of
other
sciences
among
vs
challenge
the
knowledge
of
diuinitie
which
they
neuer
studied
,
or
thinke
themselues
better
learned
in
it
,
then
the
professors
of
it
?
But
wherefore
ioyne
you
to
Thomas
Aquinas
,
who
in
deede
lacketh
both
tounges
&
eloquence
.
S.
Augustine
,
who
was
a
master
of
eloquence
,
and
not
ignorant
in
tongues
,
&
especially
the
Apostles
,
which
were
indued
with
heauenly
eloquince
,
and
knowledge
of
all
tongues
?
But
it
is
rudenes
and
barbarousnes
(
saith
Bristow
)
in
our
countrie
,
to
thinke
ae
meere
grammer
schoolemaster
sufficient
to
be
doctor
of
diuinitie
,
yea
and
a
Bishop
also
,
not
for
other
quali●●es
,
but
euen
for
diuinitie
.
I
cannot
denie
,
but
it
were
rudenes
and
barbarousnes
so
to
thinke
.
But
I
vtterly
deny
,
that
any
meere
grammer
schoolemaster
in
our
countries
is
so
preferred
as
you
most
slaūdeiously
aff
〈…〉
me
.
For
the
person
whom
you
pricke
at
,
is
well
knowne
,
to
be
excellently
wel
learned
in
diuinitie
,
&
so
to
haue
been
many
yeare●
before
his
preferment
,
as
his
learned
labors
,
euen
against
poperie
,
are
in
handes
of
men
to
testifie
.
But
seeing
you
make
it
so
strange
a
matter
for
a
man
,
to
be
called
from
a
grammer
scholemaster
to
be
a
doctor
in
diuinitie
:
It
seemeth
you
haue
not
obserued
(
for
I
know
you
haue
read
all
thinges
)
what
Eusebius
writeth
of
Origenes
,
who
being
a
teacher
of
Philosophie
,
Geometrie
,
Arithmetike
,
&
other
liberall
artes
,
for
his
knowledg
in
diuinitie
,
was
made
a
doctor
of
the
Church
.
And
why
might
not
this
our
Bishop
be
taken
out
of
the
grammer
schoole
,
as
well
as
your
White
in
Queene
Maries
time
?
Is
the
same
matter
that
was
wisedome
in
you
,
become
barbarousnes
in
vs
?
But
regnum
gramma●icorū
is
post
date
,
all
are
not
children
,
as
they
were
when
this
geare
beganne
:
your
tonges
will
not
now
serue
,
no
nor
your
studie
of
diuini●ie
in
Caluines
schooles
:
come
once
to
the
Catholiques
schooles
(
saith
Bristowe
)
and
you
will
be
ashamed
of
your selfe
,
as
many
a
one
is
,
that
●hought
,
himselfe
at
home
,
and
was
thought
of
others
a
iol●ie
fellowe
.
No
no
master
Bristow
(
for
I
must
requite
your
curtesie
,
seeing
once
in
your
life
you
call
me
master
Pulke
)
we
neede
not
come
to
your
popish
schooles
,
to
see
your
learning
,
you
bewray
it
sufficiently
by
your
publike
writings
.
And
as
for
the
kingdome
of
gramarians
,
I
marueile
whie
you
scorne
vs
with
it
,
as
though
we
had
not
atteined
to
the
kingdome
of
any
other
science
or
learning
.
But
although
we
list
not
to
make
such
large
brags
of
our
learning
as
you
doe
,
I
for
my
part
would
be
ashamed
,
if
there
were
any
knowledg
that
in
any
age
was
counted
good
learning
,
wherein
our
side
should
not
be
found
as
forward
in
England
,
as
any
Papist
in
the
world
.
As
for
the
slaunderous
and
witlesse
railings
,
of
the
heretike
Stancarus
,
preferring
the
Maister
of
the
sentence
,
before
so
many
Luthers
,
Melancthons
,
Caluines
,
&c.
we
esteeme
as
much
as
the
barking
of
a
dogge
against
the
the
Moone
.
Would
God
we
might
all
meete
in
some
Vniuersitie
,
where
better
triall
might
appeare
of
both
our
knowledges
,
then
wise
men
may
gather
by
our
boasting
.
In
the
three
and
fourtie
Demand
of
succession
,
where
I
saide
,
there
is
no
such
succession
of
persons
and
places
,
promised
,
as
the
Papistes
boast
of
:
Bristowe
saith
,
the
saying
of
the
Apostle
,
Ephes.
4.
promiseth
a
continuance
of
Pastors
and
Doctors
vnto
the
end
:
which
I
confesse
,
but
yet
is
not
the
orderly
succession
of
persons
and
places
thereby
proued
,
there
shall
alway
be
Pastors
and
teachers
in
the
Church
,
but
it
followeth
not
,
that
they
shall
continue
in
succession
of
the
same
roomes
,
in
the
same
places
,
as
the
Papistes
boast
of
the
succession
of
Popes
.
That
he
defendeth
the
offices
of
Apostles
,
Prophetes
and
Euangelistes
,
to
continue
alwayes
in
the
Church
by
succession
,
being
a
grosse
error
,
I
will
not
stand
to
confute
,
because
it
is
none
of
the
principall
matters
in
controuersie
.
Where
I
saide
,
that
if
succession
of
persons
and
places
were
sufficient
,
the
Greeke
Church
is
able
to
name
as
many
,
as
the
Latine
Church
,
and
in
as
orderly
succession
,
Ar.
27.
Bristowe
asketh
,
what
of
that
,
but
onely
this
,
that
they
therefore
may
better
claime
the
Church
than
we
?
Yes
this
one
thing
more
,
that
by
this
my
shewing
of
succession
in
the
Greeke
Church
,
which
you
can
not
denie
,
Allen
is
bound
to
recant
;
and
that
the
Greekes
by
title
of
succession
,
may
claime
the
Church
as
well
as
you
.
But
those
hereticall
and
schismaticall
Greekes
(
saith
Bristowe
)
can
no
more
shewe
succession
than
your
false
Bishops
,
which
are
in
the
sees
of
Poole
,
Bonner
,
Thirlby
,
&c
,
and
yet
I
●ro●e
,
he
will
not
thereby
claime
succession
.
We
may
by
as
good
right
as
you
claime
succession
to
the
Apostles
,
and
godly
Bishop
of
Rome
,
whome
you
succeede
not
in
doctrine
.
For
neither
haue
you
any
right
succession
,
but
from
them
that
began
your
heresies
and
separation
from
the
Christian
Church
,
Boniface
the
third
and
his
fellowes
.
But
Gregorie
saith
,
the
Church
of
Constantinople
is
subiect
to
the
Church
of
Rome
.
But
so
doth
not
the
Councels
of
Constantinople
,
which
before
Gregories
time
decreed
,
that
the
Church
of
Constantinople
should
be
equall
in
all
thinges
with
the
Church
of
Rome
,
the
title
of
senioritie
onely
reserued
:
because
Constantinople
was
newe
Rome
.
Socr.
li.
5.
cap.
8.
Sozomen
.
li.
7.
ca.
9.
Euag.
li.
2.
ca.
4.
Conc.
Constantinop.
1.
ca.
2.
&c.
In
the
44.
Demaund
of
the
Apostolike
see
,
where
I
say
it
auaileth
not
the
Papistes
,
that
the
Church
was
planted
at
Rome
,
by
the
Apostles
,
except
they
can
proue
succession
of
doctrine
,
as
well
as
of
men
:
Bristowe
saith
:
In
prouing
the
succession
of
men
only
,
we
do
as
much
as
the
Fathers
did
.
But
I
say
that
is
false
,
for
the
fathers
alledge
succession
of
doctrine
in
the
persons
succeeding
.
In
the
45
Demaund
of
chaunging
,
where
I
cite
the
Epistle
of
Hulderichus
Bishop
of
Auspurge
,
witnessing
that
Gregorie
was
the
first
that
compelled
Priestes
to
liue
vnmarried
:
Bristowe
answereth
,
that
seeing
I
confesst
,
that
he
reuoked
his
error
,
he
made
no
change
from
his
fathers
faith
:
Yes
sir
,
although
he
reuoked
his
decree
,
yet
was
the
same
receiued
by
them
that
came
after
him
.
But
the
storie
of
that
Epistle
is
derided
by
Cope
,
which
affirmeth
,
that
Pope
Nicholas
the
first
was
dead
56.
yeares
before
Vdalrichus
was
made
Bishop
.
Thus
these
impudent
Papists
,
when
they
can
neither
corrupt
,
nor
wrest
to
their
purpose
,
the
monuments
of
antiquitie
,
they
will
vtterly
denie
them
.
Whereas
the
Papists
contrarie
to
the
old
vsage
of
the
Church
by
Allens
confession
,
doe
absolue
before
satisfaction
:
Bristowe
saith
,
both
manners
haue
bene
alwaies
vsed
,
and
bringeth
example
of
men
absolued
i●
sicknesse
,
which
if
they
recouered
,
performed
their
satisfaction
after
.
But
Papistes
absolue
them
that
are
in
health
before
satisfaction
,
which
is
contrarie
to
the
old
vsage
.
Where
I
tell
them
,
that
Sabinianus
condemned
the
decrees
of
his
predecessor
Gregorie
,
and
Stephanus
of
Formosus
:
Bristowe
saith
,
not
one
Pope
,
hath
condemned
any
decrees
made
of
doctrine
.
It
were
hard
for
him
to
proue
,
that
none
of
those
Popes
,
all
whose
actes
their
successors
disanulled
,
made
any
decrees
of
doctrine
.
And
certaine
it
is
,
that
Gregorie
made
decrees
of
doctrine
,
or
else
the
Popes
Canon
lawe
doth
lie
,
al
whose
decrees
,
yea
and
bookes
also
,
as
containing
heresie
,
his
successor
Sabinianus
condemned
and
burned
.
But
supposing
(
saith
he
)
that
Pope
Honorius
was
a
Monothelite
,
both
in
opinion
and
in
some
secrete
writing
,
yet
did
he
not
change
,
nor
go
about
to
change
the
Romanes
into
Monothelites
.
What
meant
he
then
to
write
hereticall
Epistles
,
but
to
drawe
other
into
his
heresie
?
Did
not
his
writings
to
Sergius
Bishop
of
Constantinople
,
plainely
discouer
him
to
the
Councel
,
that
he
followed
that
heretikes
minde
in
all
things
,
and
confirmed
these
vngodly
opinions
?
Con.
Constantin
.
6.
Action
.
13.
And
to
what
end
?
but
betwene
them
to
change
the
faith
of
the
whole
Church
,
both
of
the
East
and
of
the
West
.
into
Monothelitisme
?
But
that
you
may
see
a
plaine
contradictorie
vnto
Bristowes
bolde
and
lying
affirmation
,
I
will
rehearse
the
wordes
of
Pope
Leo
the
second
,
in
his
Epistle
vnto
the
same
Councel
,
Act.
18.
Pariterque
anathematizamus
&c.
Also
we
accurse
,
the
inuentors
of
the
newe
error
&c.
naming
them
,
&
among
them
Honorius
which
did
not
lighten
this
Apostolike
Church
,
with
doctrine
of
Aposto
like
tradition
,
but
by
prophane
treason
,
did
go
about
to
ouerthrowe
the
immaculate
faith
.
Yet
against
al
this
testimonie
of
antiquitie
,
Sander
in
his
Monarchie
proueth
,
that
Honorius
was
no
Monothelite
,
and
that
Iohn
22.
did
not
,
as
Caluine
and
we
belie
the
storie
,
denie
the
immortalitie
of
the
soule
,
and
resurrection
of
the
bodie
,
neither
was
any
such
thing
laide
against
him
by
his
contentious
enimies
,
but
whether
the
soules
doe
see
God
before
the
generall
resurrection
,
but
he
also
denied
that
error
&c.
To
this
I
must
needes
say
,
that
Bristowe
is
either
an
ignorant
reporter
,
or
an
impudent
lier
,
except
he
will
say
that
Caluine
or
some
of
vs
wrote
,
the
report
of
the
Councel
of
Constance
,
where
he
was
accused
and
conuicted
by
witnesse
,
to
haue
denied
the
mortalitie
of
the
soule
,
and
the
resurrection
of
the
body
,
and
life
euerlasting
,
Session
.
II.
And
in
the
next
Session
he
confessed
,
that
the
Councel
of
Constance
was
most
holie
,
and
could
not
erre
.
As
for
the
assertion
of
Pope
Ioane
the
feminine
Pope
,
I
referre
the
reader
to
Maister
Iewels
replie
to
Harding
,
where
he
proueth
it
,
by
auncienter
testes
,
than
Martinus
Polonus
,
howe
so
euer
Bristowe
sawe
it
in
a
marginall
note
,
I
wot
not
where
,
not
in
what
Protestantes
hand
,
as
he
reporteth
.
In
the
sixe
and
fourtie
Demaund
of
our
auncetors
saued
or
damned
,
he
maruelleth
where
my
wit
was
,
when
I
alledged
against
Canonization
,
the
example
of
burning
Hermannus
the
heretike
in
Ferraria
,
where
he
was
worshipped
twentie
yeares
Apocryphally
.
But
if
he
had
not
bene
canonized
as
you
say
,
where
was
the
Popes
care
of
the
Church
,
that
so
neare
him
in
Italie
,
he
would
suffer
such
grosse
idolatrie
,
so
long
time
to
be
committed
and
continued
?
Wherefore
except
you
bring
better
prose
for
your
negatiue
the
affirmatiue
that
he
was
canonized
,
which
so
long
had
bene
worshipped
,
without
contradiction
is
more
probable
,
seeing
you
hold
that
the
Romish
Church
can
not
suffer
any
vngodly
vsage
,
so
long
to
be
vncontrolled
.
Where
I
saide
,
the
Papistes
can
not
proue
,
that
the
Pope
and
Popish
Church
hath
canonized
the
Apostles
&
principall
Martyrs
:
Bristowe
asketh
,
if
making
of
holie
daies
,
and
to
name
them
in
diptychis
among
Saintes
,
in
the
holy
Canon
of
the
Masse
is
not
proofe
sufficient
,
of
their
canonization
.
No
sir
,
if
that
be
canonization
,
which
your
late
Canons
and
practise
doth
allowe
:
but
if
it
were
,
I
say
,
the
Apostles
and
principal
Martyrs
had
daies
of
remembrance
of
their
godly
life
,
and
doctrine
,
names
in
the
tables
,
and
at
the
celebration
of
the
Lordes
supper
,
before
canonization
was
thought
to
pertaine
onely
to
the
Pope
.
As
for
our
abrogating
of
Saintes
dayes
,
doth
not
disproue
our
Communion
with
the
Saintes
,
which
is
in
consent
of
their
faith
,
not
in
celebrating
of
their
feastes
.
Concerning
the
canonization
of
King
Henrie
the
sixt
:
Bristowe
requireth
mine
authour
for
a
dilatorie
plea
,
because
he
can
not
otherwise
defend
the
Popish
corruption
.
Mine
authour
is
Edward
Hall
in
his
Chronicles
of
Henrie
the
seuenth
,
where
I
said
we
acknowledge
those
to
be
Saintes
,
whose
names
are
written
in
the
booke
of
life
.
Bristowe
like
a
blacke
dogge
scoffeth
at
it
,
and
saith
,
we
might
doe
well
to
set
out
that
booke
in
print
,
that
they
might
correct
their
Calender
by
it
.
Or
else
the
Churches
declaration
is
the
most
certaine
way
to
knowe
who
are
written
in
it
.
If
none
should
be
written
,
but
such
as
the
Pope
doth
canonize
(
for
that
is
your
Churches
declaration
)
innumerable
Papistes
,
should
haue
no
place
therein
,
and
not
onely
Papistes
,
but
the
true
Saintes
of
God
,
of
whome
not
one
among
tenne
thousand
,
hath
bene
canonized
.
Where
I
say
,
the
Popish
Church
doth
iniurie
to
the
Saintes
of
God
,
that
she
doth
not
so
account
them
while
they
liue
:
Bristowe
saith
I
would
be
called
Saint
Fulke
,
by
mine
owne
industrie
,
and
that
out
of
hande
.
Thus
hath
he
nothing
but
Heathenish
scornes
,
to
delude
the
textes
of
Scripture
,
which
I
cited
,
to
proue
that
the
Church
of
GOD
counteth
all
true
Christians
Saintes
,
euen
in
this
life
,
not
by
their
owne
industrie
and
merites
,
but
by
the
sanctification
of
the
bloud
of
Christ
.
He
is
angrie
that
I
compare
the
Popes
canonizations
with
the
Heathen
Senates
canonizing
of
their
Goddes
,
saying
,
wee
doe
the
like
in
canonizing
our selues
,
because
wee
account
our selues
Saintes
,
and
true
Christians
,
which
is
all
one
,
and
because
I
shewe
,
the
emulation
of
the
Bohemians
,
in
solemnizing
the
memories
of
Iohn
Hus
and
Hierome
of
Prage
,
which
differeth
as
much
from
Popish
canonization
,
as
their
faith
and
religion
differeth
from
Poperie
.
In
the
47.
Demand
of
communion
of
Saints
,
he
boasteth
of
increase
of
Papists
in
England
,
affirming
,
that
beside
them
which
are
Catholike
in
heart
and
of
their
communion
,
there
be
innumerable
of
them
reconciled
,
which
he
saith
,
to
prepare
the
minds
of
his
friendes
vnto
their
intended
massacre
and
rebellion
.
I
suppose
in
deede
,
there
are
too
many
of
those
dissembling
and
professed
traitors
:
but
yet
not
so
many
,
but
they
may
be
numbred
.
But
howe
many
so
euer
they
are
,
I
doubt
not
,
but
there
are
Christians
of
such
number
and
power
in
England
,
as
are
able
to
giue
all
the
Papistes
both
on
this
side
the
sea
,
and
beyond
it
,
as
blacke
a
day
as
the
Popes
armie
found
in
Ireland
,
if
euer
they
attempt
to
put
in
practise
their
long
intended
and
certainly
purposed
treasonable
deuises
.
In
the
48.
Demaund
,
where
I
shewe
the
fruites
of
the
Gospell
,
being
vrged
thereto
by
Allen
,
Pur.
241.
to
appeare
notably
in
the
liberall
prouision
for
the
poore
of
all
sorts
in
England
,
and
namely
in
the
citie
of
London
:
Bristowe
calleth
it
beastly
impudencie
:
yet
is
he
not
able
to
name
any
Popish
citie
,
that
maketh
such
prouision
;
but
falleth
into
open
railing
,
vpon
the
corrupt
manners
of
all
the
citie
,
as
though
for
the
fault
of
many
,
(
which
yet
Gods
name
be
praised
,
are
not
the
most
)
the
whole
citie
were
not
inferior
to
Sodome
and
Gomorrhe
in
wickednesse
:
In
which
place
as
being
very
populous
,
there
are
many
offenders
,
so
are
they
punished
if
their
offences
may
be
knowne
.
But
who
so
knewe
London
in
the
time
of
Poperie
,
and
nowe
also
considereth
the
manners
of
the
multitude
,
must
be
a
very
vnequall
iudge
,
if
he
acknowledge
not
great
reformation
in
a
great
number
,
though
he
can
not
see
it
all
.
As
for
the
citie
of
Rome
,
which
Bristowe
compareth
with
Solomon
,
whose
Priestes
were
more
excellent
than
the
report
that
went
of
him
:
as
by
the
storie
and
relation
of
them
which
knewe
it
before
this
time
,
so
by
report
of
some
which
euen
in
this
time
haue
visited
the
same
,
we
haue
sufficient
vnderstanding
,
that
without
great
reformation
,
it
still
continueth
the
mother
of
all
abhominations
of
the
earth
,
and
reaching
forth
the
cup
of
poisoned
wine
,
vnto
such
as
seeke
her
whorish
familiaritie
,
maketh
them
therewith
so
drunke
,
that
there
is
no
cause
why
Bristowe
should
maruell
why
nothing
confirmeth
more
our
countrimen
in
Poperie
,
nor
alienateth
them
from
the
Protestants
,
than
to
goe
and
see
Rome
.
The
eleuenth
Chapter
.
What
grosse
contradictions
Fulke
is
driuen
to
vtter
against
As
in
his
whole
replie
,
he
hath
drawen
almost
all
the
arguments
The
first
Contradiction
he
noteth
,
that
I
say
,
Art
96.
You
are
neuer
able
to
aunswere
the
arguments
that
Peter
was
neuer
at
Rome
.
And
then
where
is
the
Apostolike
see
?
&c.
And
then
on
the
conirarie
side
:
the
Church
of
Rome
was
founded
by
the
Apostles
,
it
was
an
Apostolike
Church
.
For
this
he
quoteth
Purg.
361.
363.
374.
To
this
I
aunswere
:
In
the
first
part
he
falsifieth
my
wordes
,
which
are
these
:
You
are
neuer
able
to
answere
the
arguments
,
that
are
brought
to
proue
that
Peter
was
neuer
Bishop
at
Rome
,
and
then
where
is
all
your
bragges
of
Apostolike
see
and
succession
?
&c.
The
Church
of
Rome
might
bee
an
Apostolike
see
,
though
Peter
was
neuer
there
:
but
all
your
bragges
of
Apostolike
see
,
and
succession
are
vaine
,
if
Peter
was
neuer
Bishop
of
Rome
.
The
second
:
Those
auncient
Fathers
did
appeale
to
the
iudgement
of
the
Church
of
Rome
against
all
heresies
,
and
among
the
Catholike
Churches
,
especially
named
the
Church
of
Rome
,
because
it
continued
in
the
doctrine
of
the
Apostles
,
Pur.
373.
374.
Contrat
And
by
the
way
note
here
the
bragge
of
the
Romane
faith
Pur.
405.
The
former
proposition
is
not
mine
,
but
patched
by
him
,
yet
if
I
graunt
the
sense
and
wordes
to
be
,
as
he
hath
forged
them
,
they
are
not
contradictorie
to
the
latter
proposition
.
For
heretikes
may
bragge
of
that
which
Catholikes
vse
to
doe
:
and
yet
not
be
Catholikes
.
The
thirde
:
It
had
by
succession
(
speaking
of
the
Church
of
R
〈…〉
)
retained
euen
vntill
their
dayes
,
that
faith
which
it
did
first
receiue
of
the
Apostles
.
Pur.
374.
Contra
:
She
the
Church
of
Rome
hath
had
no
orderly
succession
of
Bishoppes
,
except
so
many
schismes
as
they
write
of
,
be
orderly
successions
.
By
the
time
of
these
Fathers
(
saith
Bristowe
)
there
had
bene
foure
schismes
.
Ar.
85.
Aunswere
.
In
the
first
proposition
I
speake
of
Tertullians
time
and
succession
of
doctrine
,
and
name
succession
simplie
.
In
the
second
proposition
I
speake
of
the
whole
time
vntill
our
dayes
,
and
of
succession
of
persons
,
and
of
orderly
succession
:
therefore
no
contradiction
.
The
fourth
:
It
continued
at
that
time
in
the
doctrine
of
the
Apostles
,
it
retained
by
succession
that
faith
which
it
did
first
receiue
of
the
Apostles
.
Pur.
373.
374.
Contra
:
he
chargeth
it
with
sundrie
errors
here
cap.
3.
&
4
namely
P.
Liberius
with
Arianisme
.
P.
Innocentius
for
housling
of
Insantes
,
and
eight
Popes
for
the
supremacie
.
I
might
aunswere
,
that
the
charging
of
the
Popes
,
chargeth
not
the
Church
.
but
in
the
first
proposition
,
I
spake
of
the
Church
of
Rome
,
in
the
time
of
Irenaeus
,
and
Tertullian
,
holding
the
doctrine
of
the
Apostles
,
contrarie
to
those
heresies
against
which
they
write
.
The
fift
:
It
was
a
true
Church
,
and
Apostolike
Church
,
a
faithfull
Church
,
true
and
Apostolike
faith
and
religion
haue
dwelled
in
her
.
Pur.
374.
Ar.
79.
Contra
:
The
Church
of
Rome
neuer
preached
the
trueth
.
She
neuer
had
since
she
first
arose
the
ministring
of
sacraments
according
to
Christes
institution
.
The
true
Catholike
Church
hath
ouerthrowen
heresies
of
all
sortes
.
But
the
Popish
Church
was
neuer
able
to
encounter
with
heretikes
.
Rome
may
be
a
nurse
of
Antichristi
〈…〉
ns
,
but
neuer
did
good
to
Christians
.
I
am
able
to
proue
that
the
primitiue
Church
affirmed
your
Church
to
be
the
Church
of
Antichrist
.
Ar.
85.
16.
106.
10.
27.
The
latter
part
of
this
contradiction
,
with
as
many
falsifications
as
there
be
quotations
,
doe
sufficiently
declare
,
that
in
all
those
places
,
I
speake
of
the
Popishe
Church
of
Rome
that
nowe
is
,
and
not
of
the
true
Church
which
of
olde
time
was
at
Rome
.
Yet
to
giue
the
reader
a
taste
of
his
falsification
of
my
wordes
Ar.
106.
which
hee
rehearseth
thus
.
Rome
may
be
a
nurse
,
&c.
in
truth
they
are
these
:
Rome
which
feedeth
her
babes
with
poison
of
mans
traditions
,
in
steade
of
the
milke
of
Gods
worde
,
and
will
rather
see
them
famish
than
they
should
taste
of
Gods
worde
,
may
well
bee
a
nurse
of
Antichristians
,
but
neuer
did
good
vnto
Christians
.
The
sixt
:
The
Popish
Church
is
a
puddle
of
all
false
doctrine
and
heresie
,
whereof
the
whore
beareth
a
cuppe
full
,
out
of
which
all
nations
haue
dronke
.
Ar.
102.
38.
Euen
from
the
Apostles
●ime
the
diuell
neuer
left
to
set
in
his
foote
,
for
his
sonne
Antichristes
dominion
,
vntill
he
had
placed
him
in
the
temple
of
God
,
and
prepared
the
wide
world
for
his
walke
,
and
then
came
the
generall
defection
.
Pur.
287.
Contra
:
all
nations
neuer
consented
to
the
doctrine
of
the
Papistes
.
For
it
hath
bene
often
saide
,
the
Greeke
Church
and
(
all
)
other
Orientall
Churches
(
of
Assa
and
Africa
)
neuer
receiued
the
Popish
religion
,
in
many
chiefe
points
,
and
specially
in
acknowledging
the
Popes
authoritie
,
they
will
not
vnto
this
day
acknowledge
her
doctrine
to
be
Catholike
,
nor
her
authoritie
to
be
lawfull
.
Ar.
38.
16
33.
34.
These
places
being
both
full
of
falsifications
,
yet
if
they
had
bene
in
so
many
wordes
set
downe
by
me
,
imploy
no
contradiction
.
For
it
may
be
,
that
all
n●tions
,
(
meaning
as
the
scripture
,
whose
wordes
I
cite
Apoc.
18.
not
all
of
euerie
nation
,
but
some
of
all
nations
)
haue
dronke
of
the
whores
cup
,
and
yet
neuer
receiued
her
religion
in
al
things
.
And
the
general
defection
is
meant
of
that
great
apostasie
that
S.
Paul
speaketh
of
,
in
which
the
greatest
number
shall
fall
from
Christ
,
though
they
fall
not
all
to
the
Pope
.
For
many
are
fallen
to
Mahomet
,
many
reuolted
to
idolatrie
,
many
to
other
heresies
beside
Poperie
.
The
7.
The
religion
of
Papistes
came
in
,
and
preuailed
in
the
yere
of
our
Lord
607.
in
which
the
Pope
first
obtained
his
Antichristian
exaltation
to
wit
,
Boniface
the
third
of
Phocas
the
Emperor
,
that
the
Bishop
of
Rome
should
be
called
and
counted
the
heade
of
all
the
Church
.
Ar.
36.
Contra
in
the
same
place
:
Because
you
speak
of
the
first
entring
of
Popish
religion
,
which
dependeth
chiefly
vpon
the
Popes
authoritie
:
it
first
beganne
to
aduaunce
it selfe
in
Victor
,
about
the
yeare
of
our
Lord
200.
What
contradiction
is
here
?
Popish
religion
in
one
piece
first
beganne
to
aduaunce
it selfe
Anno
200.
and
after
came
in
and
preuailed
,
Anno
607.
The
8.
The
Popish
Church
is
a
puddle
of
all
false
doctrine
and
heresie
.
Euen
in
the
Apostles
time
,
and
from
that
time
,
in
all
times
,
when
so
euer
,
and
where
so
euer
was
any
piece
of
myste
or
darke
corner
,
there
were
the
steppes
of
your
walke
.
It
may
be
a
shame
for
you
Papistes
,
to
leaue
and
condemne
for
heresie
,
all
that
is
true
in
the
Fathers
writings
,
and
agreeable
to
the
scriptures
.
Ar.
102.
Pur.
287.
238.
Contra
:
Where
he
dictinguisheth
the
religion
of
the
papistes
,
from
the
great
heresies
,
and
open
aduersaries
,
that
sought
to
beate
downe
the
chiefe
foundations
of
Christian
faith
,
as
the
Valentinians
,
Marcionistes
,
Manichees
,
Arrians
,
Sabellians
,
and
such
like
monsters
.
Ar.
43.
He
falsifieth
my
distinction
,
which
is
not
of
the
religion
of
the
Papistes
,
but
of
the
first
beginnings
of
such
errors
in
the
time
of
the
auncient
Fathers
,
which
among
the
Papistes
are
growne
to
be
in
manner
as
great
as
the
monsters
of
Valentinians
,
Marcionistes
,
&c.
And
yet
there
can
be
no
contradiction
,
where
the
subiectes
of
both
propositions
are
not
all
one
.
But
here
the
one
is
of
the
Popish
Church
(
which
is
a
member
of
the
malignant
congregation
of
Satan
)
the
other
is
of
the
religion
of
Papistes
.
The
Papistes
by
communion
of
the
diuels
Church
,
communicate
with
all
heresies
.
The
9.
We
say
not
that
the
religion
of
Papistes
came
in
soudenly
,
but
that
it
entred
by
small
degrees
at
the
first
:
and
therefore
●a●●esse
espied
by
the
true
Pastors
being
earnestly
occupied
against
great
heresies
,
not
preached
against
,
winked
at
,
because
it
had
a
shewe
of
Pietie
and
Charitie
,
and
at
length
allowed
of
Augustine
and
others
,
who
followed
the
common
errors
of
their
time
.
Specially
when
a
generall
defection
,
and
departing
from
the
faith
was
foreshewed
,
what
marueile
were
it
,
if
none
colde
preach
against
it
as
it
first
entred
?
Ar.
43.
36.
38.
Contra
:
The
Church
of
Christ
in
such
places
as
she
is
,
suffereth
no
man
damnablie
abusing
her
religion
,
without
open
reprehension
.
Ar.
92.
36.
37.
The
former
proposition
hath
manifest
forgeries
,
as
that
I
should
say
,
The
religion
of
papistes
was
not
preached
against
&c.
Winked
at
&c.
Allowed
of
Augustine
&c.
For
I
neuer
said
so
of
the
whole
religion
of
papists
,
but
of
some
fewe
errors
budding
vp
in
antient
times
.
But
both
Ar.
36.
where
I
aske
What
maruaile
&c.
as
an
obiection
,
I
doe
neuerthelesse
shewe
who
preached
against
the
vsurpation
of
the
Bishop
of
Rome
,
which
yet
tended
not
to
a
damnable
error
;
&
Ar.
38.
I
affirme
,
there
was
both
preaching
,
teaching
,
and
writing
against
it
.
The
10
The
true
,
catholike
Church
hath
alwaies
resisted
all
false
opinions
,
contrarie
to
the
word
of
God
,
as
her
dewty
was
,
and
fought
against
them
,
and
obteined
the
victorie
,
and
triumphed
ouer
them
.
Ar.
11.
Contra
:
In
those
antient
times
they
of
the
true
Church
,
did
not
alwaies
weigh
what
was
most
agreeable
to
the
word
of
God
:
but
if
heretikes
had
any
thing
that
seemed
to
haue
a
shew
of
pietie
or
charitie
,
they
would
drawe
it
into
vse
.
So
they
tooke
into
the
Church
of
Christ
,
many
abuses
and
corruptions
,
vntill
at
the
length
,
An.
607.
the
religion
of
the
papists
preuailed
.
And
since
that
time
that
diuelish
heresie
hath
alwaies
increased
in
error
vntill
the
yeare
1414.
Pur.
419.
Ar.
35.
36.
The
former
proposition
is
directly
spoken
and
meant
by
me
,
of
heresies
against
the
truth
,
and
other
articles
of
faith
:
That
which
is
mine
in
the
latter
patchery
and
falsification
,
is
spoken
of
small
errors
and
idle
ceremonies
.
The
11
That
blasphemous
heresie
of
purgatorie
,
which
is
most
blasphemous
against
Christ
,
against
the
blood
of
Christ
,
against
his
merites
and
satisfaction
for
our
sinnes
,
and
against
Gods
vnspeakable
mercies
:
and
occasion
of
most
licentious
wickednes
in
all
them
that
beleeue
it
,
nothing
conuenient
for
the
disciples
and
members
of
Christ
.
No
suffrages
were
made
for
the
dead
by
the
Apostles
or
their
lawfull
successors
.
To
the
reader
,
Pur.
26.
166
;
184.
177.
269.
362.
363.
419.
186.
Contrà
:
here
.
cap.
3.
he
confesseth
that
the
fathers
held
it
,
and
yet
notwithstanding
,
that
they
were
members
of
the
true
Church
(
cap.
2.
)
and
held
the
foundation
of
Iesus
Christ
(
cap.
5.
)
&
all
the
substance
of
true
doctrine
:
And
also
that
they
did
inuocate
Saintes
:
denying
in
other
places
that
such
be
true
Christians
.
The
like
of
fasting
.
Pur.
●93
.
405.
I
neuer
confessed
those
godly
fathers
to
hold
purgatorie
in
such
blasphemous
sense
,
as
the
papistes
doe
,
nor
yet
prayer
for
the
dead
,
or
inuocation
of
Saintes
.
By
fasting
,
I
knowe
not
what
he
meaneth
,
for
in
the
page
,
whereto
he
sendeth
me
141.
is
no
such
matter
spoken
of
,
nor
fasting
once
named
.
12
The
opinion
of
Purgatorie
and
satisfaction
of
sinnes
after
this
life
,
is
the
verie
doctrine
of
licentiousnesse
,
to
maintaine
wicked
men
in
their
presumptuousnesse
.
For
what
hast
will
they
make
to
amendment
and
newenesse
of
life
,
when
they
haue
hope
of
release
after
their
death
?
Pur.
51.
26.
166.
177.
184.
Contra
:
As
Saint
Augustine
saith
,
it
is
but
for
small
faultes
:
or
as
M.
Allen
saith
,
for
great
faultes
that
by
penance
are
made
small
.
And
is
God
such
a
mercifull
father
to
punishe
small
faultes
so
extremely
in
his
children
,
whom
he
pardoneth
of
all
their
great
and
heinous
sinnes
?
Pur.
448.
The
latter
part
of
this
pretensed
contradicton
is
not
mine
,
but
Allens
assertion
,
which
I
rehearse
to
shew
the
absurditie
of
his
exposition
of
the
happy
rest
promised
.
Apo.
13.
13
How
long
soeuer
the
true
Church
were
hidden
,
whether
i●
were
a
1000.
years
,
or
2000.
yeares
,
this
is
certaine
,
that
out
of
this
Church
none
could
be
saued
.
Ar.
73.
Contra
,
here
cap.
5.
he
counteth
it
ynough
,
if
the
faith
of
their
saluation
were
in
the
onely
foundation
Iesus
Christ
,
and
that
in
such
a
sense
as
agreeth
to
men
indeed
out
of
the
Church
.
The
whole
faith
of
their
saluation
is
in
the
onely
foundation
Iesus
Christ
,
in
such
such
sense
as
I
speake
cannot
be
out
of
the
Church
.
14
They
which
hold
the
foundation
,
that
is
Christ
(
to
wit
the
Article
of
Iustification
by
the
onely
mercy
of
God
,
and
of
the
onely
sonne
of
God
)
are
doubtlesse
members
of
the
true
Church
of
Christ
.
Ar.
61.
●4
.
Pur.
2●8
.
Contra
:
here
cap.
10.
where
he
saith
,
that
the
Anabaptists
are
abhominable
heretikes
,
and
that
they
are
not
Protestants
:
who
yet
do
hold
that
article
i●mp
as
the
Protestants
do
.
It
is
a
loudly
,
and
neuer
saide
of
me
,
that
the
Anabaptists
do
hold
that
article
iump
as
the
protestants
.
15
A
generall
departing
from
the
faith
,
was
foreshewed
,
and
it
was
fulfilled
An.
607.
Contra
:
The
Church
was
neuer
lost
(
neither
when
the
departing
was
generall
)
but
hidden
(
in
the
wildernesse
,
that
is
)
from
the
eyes
of
the
world
.
She
is
to
this
day
preserued
,
and
shal
be
to
the
worlds
end
.
Christ
hath
neuer
wanted
his
Spouse
in
earth
,
he
hath
euer
beene
a
head
without
a
body
.
Ar.
36.
38.
Ar.
71.
78.
79.
80.
The
generall
departing
from
the
faith
,
was
not
of
all
persons
,
but
of
most
in
all
nations
:
and
therefore
the
Church
neuer
failed
.
16
The
primitiue
Church
of
the
Apostles
hath
continued
vnto
this
day
by
succession
not
of
persons
and
places
,
but
of
the
doctrine
,
faith
,
and
trueth
.
These
verte
wordes
conteine
a
manifest
contradiction
.
For
how
can
a
Church
,
or
doctrine
,
faith
,
and
trueth
continue
,
but
in
persons
and
places
?
in
so
much
that
he
saith
also
:
We
doubt
not
,
but
God
hath
alway
stirred
vp
some
faithfull
teachers
,
that
haue
instructed
his
Church
in
the
necessarie
pointes
of
Christian
Doctrine
.
Ar.
2.
96.
26.
27.
These
wordes
conteine
no
contradiction
.
For
the
Church
may
continewe
in
persons
and
places
,
although
not
by
continual
succession
of
persons
in
the
same
places
.
Bristow
forgetteth
his
rules
of
contradiction
,
opposing
continuance
by
succession
of
persons
and
places
,
to
continuance
in
persons
and
places
.
17
The
true
Church
of
Christ
hath
alwayes
stoode
stedfast
&
inseparable
from
Christ
her
head
,
though
the
blinde
world
,
when
they
see
her
,
will
not
acknowledge
her
to
be
his
Spouse
,
but
persecute
her
,
as
if
she
were
an
adultresse
,
Contra
:
in
the
same
place
:
The
true
Church
vnder
the
Emperours
Constantinus
,
Constans
,
and
Valens
,
was
greatly
infected
with
the
heresie
of
Arius
.
And
in
another
place
:
The
visible
Church
may
become
an
adultresse
,
and
be
diuorsed
from
Christ
.
And
so
is
that
faithfull
Church
of
Rome
become
an
harl●●
.
This
contradiction
is
made
vp
with
a
falsification
of
my
wordes
:
The
true
Church
vnder
the
Emperours
Constantius
,
&c.
For
I
say
not
,
the
true
Church
,
but
speake
generally
of
the
Church
,
which
suffered
persecution
vntill
Constantine
,
which
was
the
visible
Church
,
vnder
which
name
many
heretikes
were
persecuted
.
Visible
Church
is
not
alwaies
the
true
Church
.
The
18
The
true
Church
consisting
of
Gods
elect
,
and
the
liuely
members
of
the
body
of
Christ
,
shall
neuer
commit
such
adulterie
&c.
But
the
visible
Church
may
separate
her selfe
from
Christ
.
As
though
there
were
an
other
Church
besides
the
visible
Church
,
and
so
two
churches
.
Contra
:
Wheresoeuer
the
Catholike
Church
be
in
partes
,
it
is
one
body
of
Christ
.
There
are
not
two
Churches
,
but
one
.
The
catholike
Church
is
alwaies
inuisible
:
the
militant
Church
on
earth
,
which
is
a
part
thereof
,
is
to
the
world
sometime
visible
,
and
sometimes
not
seene
of
the
world
.
The
19
Anno.
607.
the
Church
fled
into
the
wildernes
,
that
is
,
out
of
the
sight
and
knowledg
of
the
world
,
there
to
remaine
a
long
season
:
where
all
this
while
God
hath
preserued
her
vntill
such
time
as
he
thought
good
,
now
in
our
dayes
to
bring
her
out
of
her
secret
place
in
the
wildernes
,
into
the
open
sight
of
the
world
againe
.
Ar.
16.
27.
79.
36.
Contra
:
Diuers
times
it
was
bold
to
chalenge
preaching
&
ministring
of
the
sacramentes
,
yea
and
so
boldly
,
that
it
cost
many
of
the
chalengers
their
liues
:
As
Berengarius
,
Brumo
,
Marsilius
de
Padua
,
Ioannes
de
Gaudano
.
Ioannes
Wickleue
,
Waldo
,
Ioannes
Hus
,
Ieronymus
de
Praga
,
&c.
Ar.
77.
The
onely
shew
of
contradiction
,
is
a
falsification
of
of
Bristow
,
reporting
my
wordes
,
Where
all
this
while
&c.
As
though
the
Church
hath
alwaies
bin
so
hidden
,
the
no
members
thereof
might
appeare
.
But
those
wordes
be
of
his
own
cauillous
composition
,
&
not
of
my
writing
.
But
here
beside
the
contradiction
,
he
noteth
two
thinges
against
me
,
One
,
that
it
cost
not
all
these
,
yea
,
verie
fewe
of
these
there
liues
.
Neither
did
I
say
,
it
cost
al
,
but
many
,
to
iustifie
this
multitude
:
Iohn
Hus
and
Hierom
are
expressed
beside
many
hundrethes
that
are
conteined
vnder
&c.
The
other
matter
is
that
neither
these
before
appearing
,
were
secret
protestans
,
but
open
papistes
.
Belike
he
would
beare
vs
in
hand
,
that
their
open
appearing
&
conuersion
from
popery
,
was
both
in
a
moment
of
time
.
But
what
if
some
of
them
were
first
papistes
,
and
afterward
returned
from
popery
to
the
catholike
Church
,
as
Hus
&
Hierom
,
being
conuerted
by
certaine
Englishmen
,
yet
weere
they
not
al
such
,
for
Waldo
was
neuer
any
papist
,
but
a
christian
Catholike
,
who
seeing
the
horrible
enormities
of
the
Romish
synagogue
,
openly
with
many
thowsands
,
I
renounced
her
communion
,
when
she
would
not
be
reformed
at
his
godly
preaching
.
20
To
bring
her
againe
into
open
light
.
Which
is
now
brought
to
passe
in
our
dayes
.
Ar
,
16.
9●
.
Contra
:
from
the
yere
of
our
Lord
1414.
(
being
the
time
of
the
Councell
of
Constance
)
the
bright
beames
of
the
Gospell
haue
shined
in
the
world
.
Ar.
36.
I
see
no
signe
of
contradiction
in
these
words
,
except
these
propositions
be
contradictorie
:
The
bright
beames
of
the
sun
do
shine
in
the
morning
before
the
sun
be
ful
risen
:
&
,
the
same
is
seene
in
open
light
after
he
is
fully
risen
aboue
the
earth
.
The
21
The
reuelation
of
Antichrist
(
with
the
Churches
flight
into
the
wildernes
)
was
An.
607.
when
Bonifacius
the
3.
&c.
For
vntill
then
the
mysterie
of
iniquitie
was
preparing
for
his
reuelation
&
comming
,
&
for
the
generall
defection
.
Ar.
38.
36
16.
Contra
:
She
hath
not
decaied
there
in
the
wildernes
,
but
beene
alwayes
preserued
,
vntill
God
should
reueile
Antichrist
,
which
is
now
brought
to
passe
in
our
dayes
.
Ar.
16.
The
reuelation
of
the
mystery
of
iniquitie
was
,
when
Antichrist
himselfe
did
openly
shew
that
iniquitie
which
before
was
not
throughly
discouered
.
God
reueileth
Antichrist
,
when
he
openeth
vnto
men
his
horrible
wickednes
,
which
to
them
were
vnknowne
.
A
wonderfull
contradiction
of
Antichrist
reueiling
himselfe
,
and
God
reueiling
Antichrist
.
The
22
The
Churches
being
in
the
wildernes
,
was
,
to
be
out
of
the
sight
&
knowledg
of
the
wicked
.
Ar.
27.
95.
Contra
,
speaking
of
the
same
space
,
She
was
narrowly
persecuted
of
the
Romish
Antichrist
for
a
long
season
.
Againe
:
Although
it
were
knowne
to
the
papists
,
yet
it
was
in
Italie
when
Marsilius
of
Padua
preached
:
in
Fraunce
,
when
Waldo
:
in
England
,
when
Wickleue
:
in
Bohemia
,
when
Hus
,
and
Ierom
of
Prage
did
florish
.
Why
?
all
these
were
well
knowne
to
the
papistes
.
As
though
the
Church
could
not
be
persecuted
in
her
members
,
except
she
were
al
knownen
,
or
knowne
to
be
the
Church
by
her
persecutors
.
23
A
rule
of
the
Logicians
:
No
man
knoweth
a
relatiue
,
except
he
know
the
correlatiue
thereof
:
Therefore
though
Christ
had
a
body
in
earth
.
yet
could
it
be
known
of
none
,
but
such
as
knew
Christ
the
head
of
that
body
,
of
whom
the
papistes
were
ignorant
.
A
1.
80.
Contra
:
Our
Church
is
now
againe
brought
to
light
and
knowledge
of
the
world
.
Ar.
96.
So
that
now
belike
the
papistes
know
Christ
,
or
the
Logicians
rule
is
verified
onely
for
the
time
of
the
Churches
being
in
the
wildernes
,
according
as
in
other
places
he
moderateth
the
matter
,
saying
:
We
beleeue
that
the
Church
is
not
alwayes
knowne
to
the
wicked
vpon
earth
.
Pur.
150.
Ar.
77.
79
,
80.
Whether
the
papistes
know
Christ
or
no
,
certaine
it
is
,
they
will
not
acknowledg
him
,
who
came
into
the
world
,
which
was
made
by
him
,
and
yet
the
world
knew
him
not
,
whom
they
would
not
acknowledge
.
The
papists
cannot
say
,
they
know
not
our
Church
,
although
they
will
not
acknowledge
her
to
be
the
true
Church
,
and
so
my
saying
is
true
,
that
our
Church
is
brought
into
knowledg
euen
of
the
world
of
papistes
.
The
rules
of
Logicians
are
alway
true
,
but
they
are
often
ill
kept
by
popish
sophisters
,
as
the
rules
of
contradiction
here
by
Bristow
.
24
We
beleeue
that
the
vniuersal
Church
is
not
seene
at
all
of
men
,
because
it
is
in
heauen
Pur.
405.
Ar.
95.
82.
74
80.
Contra
:
Our
Church
,
when
it
was
most
hidden
,
might
rightly
be
called
Catholike
(
that
is
vniuersall
)
&c.
Here
Cap.
10.
Dem.
6
:
And
whereas
you
say
,
that
no
man
aliue
could
name
the
place
where
it
was
,
you
make
an
impud●nt
lye
:
For
although
it
were
vnknowen
to
the
Papistes
and
enimies
thereof
,
yet
was
it
knowen
to
the
true
members
thereof
.
I
see
no
opposition
,
except
you
will
say
,
there
is
no
knowledge
but
by
bodilie
sight
,
or
that
some
members
of
the
Church
,
may
not
be
seene
in
earth
,
because
Ierusalem
the
mother
of
vs
all
,
is
aboue
.
25
And
as
for
our
Mother
Church
is
no
certaine
place
,
or
companie
of
men
in
any
one
place
vpon
earth
,
but
Ierusalem
which
is
aboue
,
is
mother
of
vs
all
.
Pur.
377
Contra
:
That
no
man
aliue
could
name
the
place
where
it
was
,
is
an
impudent
lie
.
It
was
in
Italie
,
when
Marsilius
preached
,
&c.
Vt
suprà
in
contrad
.
22.
Christe
hath
neuer
wanted
his
spouse
in
earth
,
though
the
blinde
worlde
when
they
see
her
,
will
not
acknowledge
her
to
bee
his
spouse
,
but
persecute
her
as
if
she
were
an
adultresse
.
She
was
knowne
to
them
that
were
her
children
.
The
church
of
Christ
is
the
nurse
of
Christians
.
Ierusalem
that
is
from
aboue
,
is
mother
of
vs
all
.
Ar.
95
79
82.
106.
Those
are
as
great
contradictions
as
these
.
Bristowe
is
at
Louane
.
Bristowes
foote
is
in
his
shooe
.
The
whole
Church
and
mysticall
body
of
Christ
is
in
heauen
:
therfore
some
members
and
parts
therof
can
not
be
on
earth
.
26
It
is
not
called
Catholike
,
because
it
should
be
euery
where
.
For
that
it
neuer
was
,
nor
neuer
shall
be
.
Ar.
95.
Contra
:
It
should
ouerflowe
and
fill
all
the
world
with
righteousnesse
.
Esai
.
10.
That
God
hath
an
holie
vniuersall
congregation
,
it
is
necessarie
to
beleeue
.
It
is
dispersed
in
many
places
ouer
all
the
world
.
Ar.
73.
83.
80.
It
is
not
euery
where
:
and
it
is
in
many
places
:
be
not
contradictorie
.
And
the
remnant
may
ouerflowe
and
fill
the
world
with
righteousnesse
,
as
Esai
saith
:
although
it
fill
not
euery
place
and
person
thereof
,
nor
most
places
and
persons
alwaies
.
27
Christes
church
is
nowe
by
GOD
enlarged
further
than
the
Popish
church
.
Ar.
12.
3.
69.
Contra
:
It
is
but
a
small
flocke
in
comparison
of
the
malignant
church
(
of
Antichrist
)
whose
number
is
as
the
sand
of
the
sea
.
Apoc.
20.
The
Popish
Church
is
not
so
large
as
the
malignant
Church
of
Sathan
by
many
partes
,
which
containeth
all
the
wicked
of
the
world
,
the
name
of
Antichrist
is
added
by
Bristow
.
Yet
are
there
more
Antichristes
than
the
Pope
,
although
he
be
the
chiefe
that
sitteth
in
the
temple
of
God
.
28
It
is
a
good
argument
,
that
the
Popish
church
is
not
the
church
of
Christ
,
because
it
was
neuer
hidden
since
it
first
sprang
vp
:
in
so
much
that
you
can
name
the
notable
persons
in
all
ages
,
in
their
gouernement
and
ministerie
,
and
especially
the
succession
of
the
Popes
,
you
can
rehearse
in
order
vpon
your
fingers
.
And
it
were
a
token
that
our
church
were
not
the
true
church
,
if
wee
could
name
such
notable
persons
in
their
gouernement
and
ministerie
.
Ar.
27.
Contra
:
Such
officers
as
are
necessarie
for
the
conseruation
of
Gods
people
in
the
vnitie
of
faith
and
the
knowledge
of
Christe
,
our
Church
hath
neuer
lacked
,
notwithstanding
that
through
iniurie
of
the
time
(
because
our
Church
had
not
so
many
Registers
,
Chroniclers
,
and
remembrauncers
)
the
remembraunce
of
all
their
names
is
not
come
vnto
vs
.
For
the
authoritie
of
the
Bible
,
we
haue
the
testimonie
of
the
true
Church
in
all
ages
.
Our
congregation
hath
euer
had
possession
of
the
Scriptures
.
GOD
hath
neuer
suffered
the
true
Church
to
be
destitute
of
the
necessarie
vse
of
the
Scripture
:
Which
the
Popish
Church
hath
so
kept
in
an
vnknowne
tongue
,
that
the
people
could
haue
no
vse
,
much
lesse
the
necessarie
vse
thereof
.
The
Church
of
GOD
hath
alwayes
had
Schooles
and
Vniuersities
for
the
maintenance
of
godly
learning
.
The
true
Catholike
Church
hath
alwayes
resisted
all
false
opinions
.
It
was
neuer
so
secrete
nor
hidden
,
but
it
might
be
knowne
of
all
those
that
had
eyes
to
see
it
.
That
a
thousand
yeares
there
was
gathering
together
for
preaching
,
ministring
,
and
correcting
.
God
hath
alway
stirred
vp
some
faithfull
teachers
.
The
Church
hath
neuer
bene
afraide
to
doe
her
office
towardes
her
children
and
true
members
,
in
teaching
,
exhorting
,
comforting
,
confirming
,
&c.
Ar.
28.
27.
9.
6.
5.
52.
11.
74.
75.
26.
82.
In
these
large
propositions
,
howesoeuer
they
be
patched
,
I
see
no
contradiction
.
Except
these
be
contraditories
:
The
Church
was
sometime
hidden
from
her
enemies
:
and
yet
where
shee
was
gathered
,
did
performe
all
duties
to
her
friendes
and
children
.
It
was
not
seene
of
the
blinde
,
but
it
was
seene
of
them
that
had
eies
.
29
The
Popish
Church
was
neuer
hidden
since
it
first
sprang
vp
.
Ar.
27.
Contra
:
The
Church
of
Rome
hath
not
alwayes
practised
open
preaching
,
and
neuer
preached
the
worde
of
trueth
.
Ar.
85.
There
was
small
preaching
before
the
orders
of
begging
friers
began
to
supply
the
want
of
the
pastors
.
And
yet
the
popish
Church
glistered
in
her
whorish
pompe
.
30
Touching
the
text
Matthewe
5.
of
a
citie
built
vpon
an
hill
,
which
can
not
be
hidden
,
after
he
hath
giuen
his
sense
of
it
,
he
saith
:
Hereby
it
appeareth
howe
fondly
some
Papistes
(
and
some
of
the
Doctors
in
their
errour
)
doe
expound
this
place
to
groue
,
that
the
Church
must
alwayes
bee
visible
.
Ar.
100.
Contra
:
euen
in
his
owne
exposition
there
:
It
is
properly
meant
of
the
Apostles
and
their
su●●essours
the
Ministers
of
the
Church
:
he
teacheth
them
aboue
all
other
men
,
to
looke
diligently
to
their
life
and
conuersation
:
for
as
they
excell
in
place
and
dignitie
,
so
the
eyes
of
all
men
are
set
vpon
them
.
As
a
citie
builded
vpon
an
hill
,
must
needes
be
seene
of
all
that
come
neare
it
,
so
they
being
placed
in
so
high
an
office
and
dignitie
,
shall
be
noted
and
marked
aboue
all
other
men
.
One
part
of
the
Church
is
alwayes
visible
to
the
eyes
of
all
men
,
and
can
not
be
hidden
:
and
yet
the
whole
Church
,
and
so
also
that
part
,
is
not
alwayes
visible
,
but
may
be
hidden
,
and
was
hidden
for
a
thousand
yeares
.
So
he
saith
.
The
whole
Church
,
which
is
the
mysticall
body
of
Christe
,
is
inuisible
.
Although
the
ministers
of
the
Church
and
their
conuersation
,
can
not
be
hidden
from
the
members
of
euery
particular
Church
.
31
The
true
Church
decaied
immediatly
after
the
Apostles
time
.
And
so
the
errour
of
praying
for
the
dead
was
continued
from
a
corrupt
state
of
the
church
of
Christ
,
vnto
a
plaine
departing
away
into
the
Church
of
Antichrist
.
Contra
:
The
Primitiue
pure
church
for
the
space
of
an
hundreth
yeares
after
Christ
.
Againe
:
Anno
607.
The
church
fled
into
the
wildernesse
,
there
to
remaine
a
long
season
,
where
she
hath
not
decayed
,
but
bene
alwaies
preserued
,
vntill
God
should
bring
her
againe
to
open
light
nowe
in
our
daies
.
The
true
church
shall
neuer
decay
,
but
alway
reigne
with
Christ
.
The
false
synagogue
shall
'
daily
more
and
more
decay
,
vntill
it
be
vtterly
destroied
with
Antichrist
the
head
thereof
.
If
this
be
not
contradiction
,
it
is
much
worse
,
to
wit
,
that
Luther
and
his
Apostles
haue
giuen
vs
a
visible
church
which
shall
not
decay
,
Whereas
Christ
and
his
Apostles
gaue
vs
a
visible
church
which
did
decay
,
yea
and
plainely
depart
away
into
Apostasie
.
The
places
shew
that
decaying
hath
double
vnderstanding
.
The
true
Church
soone
after
the
Apostles
,
decayed
in
syncerity
,
yet
neuer
decayed
nor
shall
decay
in
continuance
.
Luther
gaue
no
Church
;
but
euen
that
Church
which
is
best
lightened
by
his
preaching
,
may
decay
in
sincerity
,
if
the
pastors
be
not
diligent
to
teach
the
word
of
God
simply
.
32
At
euery
word
hee
calleth
the
Pope
Antichrist
,
and
the
head
of
the
malignant
church
.
Contra
:
in
some
places
he
maketh
two
distinct
heades
and
their
distinct
companies
.
As
,
when
Mahomet
in
the
East
,
and
Antichrist
the
Pope
in
the
West
,
seduced
the
world
,
then
the
church
fled
into
the
wildernesse
.
Againe
:
The
Popish
church
is
not
in
euery
part
of
the
world
:
for
Mahomets
sect
is
in
the
greatest
part
.
Ar.
16.
65.
I
call
the
Pope
Antichrist
oftentimes
:
but
that
I
call
the
Pope
head
of
the
malignant
Church
,
though
Bristowe
saith
I
doe
it
at
euery
word
,
yet
he
is
not
able
to
note
one
place
where
I
doe
it
,
rather
Bristowe
maketh
a
flat
contradiction
in
saying
of
me
,
At
euery
word
he
calleth
the
Pope
the
head
of
the
malignant
church
.
Contra
:
In
some
places
he
maketh
two
distinct
heades
,
and
their
distinct
companies
.
33
That
the
true
church
may
erre
,
and
hath
erred
,
notwithstanding
any
priuiledge
it
hath
by
Gods
spirit
,
we
heard
him
say
,
cap.
3.
Nowe
to
the
contrarie
.
Neither
hath
the
spirit
of
God
failed
to
leade
her
into
all
trueth
.
There
be
some
prerogati●es
of
Gods
spirite
,
that
are
necessarie
for
the
saluation
of
Gods
elect
,
as
the
gift
of
vnderstanding
,
the
gift
of
faith
,
&c.
And
these
the
spouse
of
Christe
hath
neuer
wanted
.
True
faith
,
&c.
might
be
signes
of
the
true
church
.
The
spouse
of
Christe
heareth
the
voice
of
Christe
,
and
is
ruled
thereby
.
The
church
of
GOD
is
the
piller
and
stay
of
truth
,
so
called
,
because
that
where
so
euer
the
church
is
,
either
visible
or
inuisible
,
there
is
the
trueth
.
Saint
Paule
by
this
title
doth
admonish
Pastors
and
preachers
,
howe
great
a
burthen
and
charge
they
sustaine
,
that
the
trueth
of
the
Gospell
can
not
be
continued
in
the
world
,
but
by
their
ministerie
in
the
church
of
God
,
which
is
the
piller
and
stay
of
truth
.
This
their
duetie
true
preachers
considering
,
are
diligent
in
their
calling
to
preach
the
trueth
.
As
our
church
is
the
piller
and
stay
of
trueth
,
so
is
she
also
the
house
of
trueth
,
which
knoweth
nothing
but
him
that
is
the
trueth
it selfe
Iesus
Christ
,
and
his
most
holy
Scripture
,
in
which
this
trueth
is
signed
and
testified
.
We
require
you
to
beleeue
the
true
Catholike
church
onely
:
and
immediatly
againe
to
the
contrarie
:
We
require
you
not
to
beleeue
any
one
companie
of
men
,
more
than
an
other
.
Ar.
82.
81.
93.
99.
62.
77.
100.
108.
62.
This
contradiction
is
easily
reconciled
.
The
true
Church
may
erre
,
but
not
in
any
point
,
that
is
necessarie
to
euerlasting
saluation
.
We
require
men
to
beleeue
the
true
Catholike
Church
only
,
not
for
the
companie
,
but
for
the
trueth
.
34
The
error
(
of
Purgatorie
and
praying
for
the
deade
)
is
continued
from
a
corrupt
state
of
the
church
of
Christe
,
vnto
a
plaine
departing
away
into
the
church
of
Antichrist
.
Contra
:
The
t●ue
and
onely
church
of
God
is
so
guided
by
Gods
spirite
,
and
directed
by
his
word
,
that
she
can
not
induce
any
damnable
error
to
con●●n●●
:
No
,
nor
suffereth
any
man
damnably
abusing
her
religion
,
without
open
reprehension
:
and
yet
Purgatorie
,
&c.
came
in
with
silence
.
The
error
of
praying
for
the
dead
,
was
not
damnable
,
while
it
continued
in
the
Church
of
Christ
,
the
Church
of
Antichrist
by
derogating
full
satisfaction
from
the
bloud
of
Christ
,
hath
made
it
damnable
.
35
The
church
of
Christ
hath
of
the
holie
Ghost
a
iudgement
to
discerne
true
writings
from
counterfets
,
and
the
worde
of
GOD
of
infallible
veritie
,
from
the
writing
of
men
which
might
erre
.
She
hath
commended
the
bookes
of
holy
Scripture
to
be
beleeued
of
all
true
Christians
.
We
persuade
vs
of
the
authoritie
of
Gods
booke
,
because
we
haue
most
stedfast
assurance
of
Gods
spirite
for
the
authoritie
of
it
,
with
the
testimonie
of
the
true
church
in
all
ages
.
Ar.
5.
4.
9.
Contra
:
All
other
writings
are
in
better
case
than
the
Scriptures
are
with
you
.
For
other
writings
may
be
counted
the
workes
of
their
authours
,
without
your
censure
:
the
holy
Scripture
may
not
be
counted
the
worde
of
God
,
except
you
list
so
to
allow
it
.
Other
writings
are
of
credite
according
to
the
authoritie
of
the
writers
:
The
holie
Scriptures
with
you
houe
not
credite
according
to
the
authoritie
of
God
the
authour
of
them
,
but
according
to
your
determination
.
Pur.
219.
Here
is
no
shewe
of
contradiction
,
but
a
wretched
begging
of
the
principle
,
that
the
Popish
Church
is
the
true
Church
of
Christ
.
Of
such
contradictions
you
may
make
not
50
but
500000.
36
Those
that
by
true
Christians
haue
bene
called
and
counted
for
heretikes
,
haue
proued
so
in
deede
.
Ar.
65.
Contra
:
This
Demaund
hath
a
false
principle
:
that
the
church
ought
to
be
a
Christian
mans
(
onely
:
it
is
not
in
Doctor
Allens
principle
)
stay
in
al
troubles
and
tempestes
.
The
first
proposition
is
an
Ironicall
imitation
of
Allens
absurd
proposition
,
and
not
an
absolute
assertion
of
mine
.
37
And
therefore
the
Papistes
,
being
called
and
counted
heretikes
of
true
Christians
(
that
is
,
of
the
Protestantes
)
without
doubt
are
heretikes
in
deede
.
Ar
65.
Contra.
He
is
a
foolish
Sophister
,
that
reasoneth
from
names
to
things
:
as
you
doe
most
vainely
and
childishly
.
Ar.
66.
The
former
proposition
,
is
the
conclusion
which
I
retort
vpon
Allens
principle
,
that
whosoeuer
by
true
christians
are
called
heretikes
,
do
proue
so
in
deede
.
38
There
is
neuer
heresie
,
but
there
is
as
great
doubt
of
the
church
,
as
of
the
matter
in
question
.
Ar.
86.
Contra
:
Augustines
argument
of
the
publike
prayers
of
the
church
,
tooke
no
hold
of
the
Pelagians
by
force
of
trueth
that
is
in
it
,
but
by
their
owne
confession
and
graunt
,
of
that
prayer
to
be
godly
,
and
them
to
be
of
the
church
that
so
prayed
.
But
now
the
controuersie
is
not
onely
of
the
substance
of
doctrine
,
but
of
the
church
it selfe
also
.
The
Donatistes
challenged
the
church
to
themselues
.
Pur.
367.
Here
is
not
so
much
as
any
shadowe
of
contradiction
,
for
in
the
heresie
of
the
Donatists
,
the
chiefest
controuersy
was
of
the
Church
:
as
for
the
prayer
of
the
Church
,
they
vsed
it
themselues
as
well
as
the
true
Catholikes
,
out
of
which
prayer
Augustine
gathereth
an
argument
against
them
.
39
But
for
the
chiefe
pointes
of
christian
religion
,
and
the
foundation
of
our
faith
,
that
is
,
Reall
presence
,
&c.
the
most
approued
writers
are
vtterly
against
you
,
and
therefore
can
not
be
of
your
church
.
Contra
:
But
the
Lutheranes
and
Zuinglians
(
as
it
pleaseth
you
to
call
them
)
are
of
one
true
church
,
although
they
differ
in
one
opinion
concerning
the
Sacrament
,
the
one
affirming
a
Reall
presence
,
the
other
denying
it
.
The
contradiction
is
easily
auoided
,
by
shewing
,
that
the
reall
presence
among
a
number
of
thinges
in
that
place
rehearsed
,
may
be
one
chiefe
point
of
religion
,
and
yet
not
a
foundation
of
our
faith
.
For
I
say
the
auncient
fathers
agree
with
vs
in
the
chiefe
points
of
religion
,
and
the
foundation
of
our
faith
,
which
seeing
the
Lutherans
hold
with
vs
,
the
dissent
in
one
chiefe
point
of
religion
,
can
not
disseuer
them
from
the
Church
,
and
yet
they
dissent
not
vnto
idolatrie
,
as
the
Papists
doe
.
And
where
Bristow
slandereth
mee
to
say
,
that
I
count
the
errors
of
some
of
that
latter
sort
of
old
fathers
(
in
honoring
reliques
inuocation
of
Saints
,
merits
,
traditions
,
vnwritten
verities
,
images
of
the
crosse
)
to
be
contrary
to
the
foundation
,
he
is
able
to
shewe
no
place
where
I
so
affirme
.
And
albeit
they
did
so
earnestly
maintaine
some
of
those
errors
,
that
they
condemned
by
their
priuate
sensure
,
the
contrary
truth
,
for
heresies
:
yet
it
followeth
not
that
they
were
heretikes
.
For
it
is
one
thing
to
hold
an
error
earnestly
,
an
other
to
holde
it
obstinatly
,
so
that
he
is
condemned
of
his
owne
conscience
,
when
he
will
not
yeeld
to
the
manifest
truth
plamly
proued
out
of
the
worde
of
God
.
40
We
knowe
that
Luther
did
not
obstinately
and
maliciously
erre
in
any
article
of
faith
,
concerning
the
substance
of
religion
.
Luther
,
Caluine
,
and
Bucer
,
shall
come
with
Christ
to
iudge
the
world
.
As
for
Illyrians
,
if
you
call
them
of
Flaccius
Illyricus
,
they
be
Lutherans
in
opinion
of
the
Sacrament
,
and
differ
onely
in
ceremonies
,
which
can
not
diuide
them
from
the
faith
.
Ar.
10.
61.
Pur.
403.
Contra
:
What
Flaccius
,
or
any
such
as
he
is
,
hath
saide
,
neither
doe
I
knowe
,
neither
doe
I
regard
,
let
them
aunswere
for
them selues
:
But
whereas
you
charge
M.
Caluine
,
&c.
Because
I
knowe
not
how
Illyricus
,
and
such
contentious
persons
as
he
,
expoundeth
the
annointing
in
Saint
Iames
,
but
referre
them
to
aunswere
for
them selues
,
therefore
I
speake
contrary
to
my selfe
,
where
I
say
they
differ
not
in
faith
,
from
the
Lutherans
.
41
There
is
neuer
heresie
,
but
there
is
as
great
doubt
of
the
church
as
of
the
matter
in
question
.
Therefore
only
the
Scripture
is
the
stay
of
a
Christian
mans
conscience
.
Ar.
86.
Contra
:
The
Church
is
the
●ay
of
trueth
.
If
that
argument
of
the
Church
without
triall
which
is
the
Church
,
might
take
place
,
it
would
serue
you
both
for
a
sword
and
a
bucklar
.
The
church
saith
it
,
and
we
are
the
church
.
Therefore
it
is
true
.
Pur.
367.
It
seemeth
Bristowe
is
beside
himselfe
,
in
coyning
of
contradictions
.
These
words
,
The
Church
is
the
stay
of
truth
,
for
which
he
quoteth
Pur.
367.
are
not
mine
in
that
place
,
but
his
owne
addition
:
although
in
other
sense
I
confesse
the
Church
is
the
stay
and
piller
of
truth
,
not
that
all
is
true
which
is
alwaies
in
the
Church
,
but
that
truth
can
not
be
preserued
on
earth
by
the
Church
.
42
Among
the
arguments
that
Augustine
vseth
against
the
Pelagians
,
one
(
though
the
feeblest
of
an
hundred
)
is
,
that
their
heresie
was
contrarie
to
the
publique
praiers
of
the
church
.
Contra
:
All
other
persuasions
set
aside
,
hee
prouoketh
onely
to
the
Scripture
,
to
trie
the
faith
and
doctrine
of
the
church
,
namely
in
beating
downe
the
schisme
of
the
Donaistes
,
and
the
heresie
of
the
Pelagians
.
Where
also
he
contradicteth
him selfe
againe
,
in
shewing
the
reason
whie
he
argued
against
the
Donatistes
of
only
Scripture
,
but
against
the
Pelagians
of
the
churches
praiers
also
:
The
Pelagians
graunted
them
to
be
of
the
church
that
so
praied
.
And
therefore
when
Augustine
had
to
doe
with
the
Donatistes
that
challenged
the
church
vnto
them selues
,
he
setteth
all
other
trials
aside
,
and
prouoketh
onely
to
the
Scriptures
.
Let
the
readers
iudge
:
for
I
can
not
imagine
where
there
be
should
be
so
much
as
the
shadowe
of
a
contradiction
,
gathered
out
of
these
wordes
,
except
he
meane
,
that
he
which
prouoketh
onely
to
the
scriptures
,
may
not
vse
an
hundreth
argumentes
out
of
them
,
yea
or
many
persuasions
beside
the
scriptures
,
and
yet
stand
onely
vpon
the
auctority
of
the
scriptures
.
43
We
stand
for
autoritie
only
to
the
iudgement
of
the
holy
scriptures
.
Pu.
432.
Contra
:
The
ground
that
we
haue
to
persuade
vs
of
the
authoritie
of
gods
booke
,
is
,
because
we
haue
most
stedfast
assurance
of
Gods
spirit
,
for
the
autoritie
of
that
booke
,
with
the
testimonie
of
the
true
church
in
alages
.
The
church
of
Christ
hath
a
iudgement
to
discerne
the
word
of
God
,
from
the
writings
of
men
.
The
primitiue
churches
testimonie
of
the
word
of
God
we
allow
and
beleeue
.
You
should
bring
a
great
preiudice
against
vs
and
passing
wel
prouide
for
the
credit
of
your
cause
,
&
the
discredit
of
ours
,
if
you
could
bring
the
consent
and
practise
of
the
primitiue
pure
church
for
the
space
of
a
hundreth
yeares
after
Christe
,
or
something
out
of
any
Authenticall
writer
,
which
liued
within
one
hundred
yeares
after
the
Apostles
age
.
Ar.
9.
5.
10.
Pur.
364.
331.
Ar.
21.
39.
42.
The
first
proposition
(
as
in
the
place
quoted
is
manifest
)
is
spoken
of
questions
of
doctrine
:
and
not
of
our
persuasion
of
the
scriptures
to
be
the
word
of
God
.
The
last
sentence
,
You
should
bring
,
&c.
being
patched
out
of
two
places
of
my
booke
,
Pur.
364.
and
331.
are
not
contradictory
to
the
first
proposition
:
for
although
we
stand
for
auctority
onely
to
iudgement
of
the
holy
scriptures
,
yet
we
are
content
to
giue
you
this
aduantage
against
vs
,
if
you
can
bring
any
thing
out
of
those
eldest
writers
for
Purgatory
or
prayer
for
the
dead
.
44
Saint
Paul
1.
Cor.
11.
declareth
without
colour
or
couerture
,
the
onely
right
order
of
ministration
.
Contra
,
in
the
next
line
:
I
knowe
the
Papistes
will
flee
to
those
wordes
of
the
Apostle
,
The
rest
I
will
set
in
order
when
I
come
.
That
is
manifest
to
be
spoken
of
matters
of
externall
comelinesse
,
and
therefore
(
say
we
)
of
the
order
of
ministration
.
Pur.
362.
In
rehearsing
my
wordes
,
he
leaueth
out
fiue
lines
of
my
saying
,
betwene
the
words
Couerture
,
and
The
onely
right
,
&c.
which
declare
that
I
speake
of
the
ess●ntiall
order
of
ministration
,
against
Allen
which
affirmeth
oblation
of
the
hoast
for
the
quicke
and
the
dead
,
both
generally
and
particularly
,
and
a
solemne
prayer
for
all
departed
in
Christ
,
to
be
necessary
parts
of
the
order
of
ministration
of
that
Sacrament
.
45
The
olde
Doctors
neuer
heard
Purgatorie
named
,
nor
praier
for
the
deade
.
Pur.
438.
Contra
:
About
S.
Augustines
time
,
the
name
of
Purgatorie
was
first
inuented
.
And
long
afore
that
also
,
Montanus
had
in
all
points
the
opinion
of
the
Papists
,
&c.
Here
cap
3
pag
23.
And
yet
againe
,
Before
Chrysostomes
time
it
was
but
a
blinde
error
without
a
head
.
Pur.
356.
My
wordes
are
of
the
heresie
of
Purgatory
,
and
my
meaning
of
those
olde
Doctors
,
in
comparison
of
whom
Saint
Augustine
is
but
a
punie
,
being
younger
almost
by
300.
yeares
,
in
whose
time
although
the
name
of
Purgatory
were
inue●ted
,
yet
the
heresie
was
elder
in
Montanus
.
How
prayer
for
the
deade
came
into
the
Church
,
it
was
vncertaine
in
Chrysostomes
time
,
and
therefore
I
say
it
was
a
blinde
error
without
a
heade
.
46
In
Saint
Augustines
time
,
Sathan
was
but
then
laying
his
foundation
of
Purgatorie
.
Pur.
54.
Contra
:
That
error
of
Purgatorie
was
somewhat
rifely
budded
vp
in
his
time
.
Pur.
161.
And
specially
here
,
cap.
3.
pag.
14
saying
:
And
this
I
thinke
is
the
right
pedigree
of
praiers
for
the
dead
and
Purgatorie
,
where
he
putteth
the
very
last
generation
of
it
to
haue
bene
in
S.
Augustines
time
,
and
the
foundationlong
afore
Christes
time
.
It
were
a
strange
contradiction
,
that
could
bee
picked
out
of
these
two
allegories
,
laying
the
foundation
,
and
rifely
budding
;
seeing
the
foundation
is
the
beginning
of
a
building
,
and
budding
is
the
first
towardnesse
of
fruite
As
for
the
pedigree
,
is
not
to
the
last
generation
,
as
Bristow
saith
,
layed
in
Saint
Augustines
time
,
but
from
the
first
auctor
howe
it
was
continued
vnto
Saint
Augustines
time
,
since
which
there
haue
beene
many
dissents
before
popish
Purgatory
were
throughly
shaped
and
brought
forth
.
47
M.
Allen
affirmeth
that
after
mens
departure
,
the
representation
of
almes
by
such
as
receiued
it
,
shall
moue
God
exceedingly
to
mercy
.
O
vaine
imagination
,
for
which
he
hath
neither
Scripture
nor
Doctor
.
Pur.
242.
243.
Contra
:
Chrysostome
alloweth
rather
almes
that
men
giue
before
their
death
,
or
bequeath
in
their
Testament
,
because
it
is
a
worke
of
their
owne
:
than
that
almes
which
other
men
giue
for
them
,
howbeit
also
such
almes
are
auaileable
for
the
dead
,
he
saith
.
Pur.
236.
237.
That
which
Chrysostome
speaketh
of
litle
helpe
,
wil
not
serue
Allen
to
proue
that
almes
shall
moue
GOD
exceedingly
to
mercy
.
48
The
auncient
Doctors
did
holde
the
foundation
.
Contra
:
cap.
4
pag.
28.
He
saith
,
The
third
Councel
of
Carthage
did
define
,
that
it
is
vnlawfull
to
pray
to
God
the
Some
,
and
GOD
the
holy
Ghost
.
The
Councel
of
Carthage
by
that
decree
denied
,
neither
the
person
nor
office
of
Christ
,
nor
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
therefore
they
held
the
foundation
.
49
Here
cap.
8.
he
saith
,
that
the
iust
of
the
olde
Testament
went
not
to
Lymbus
Patrum
after
their
death
,
but
to
heauen
immediatly
.
Contra
:
The
fierie
and
shaking
sword
that
was
set
to
exclude
man
from
Paradise
,
was
taken
away
by
the
death
of
Christ
,
when
he
opened
Paradise
,
yea
the
kingdome
of
heauen
(
whereof
Paradise
was
but
a
sacrament
)
vnto
all
beleeuers
,
so
,
that
the
penitent
theese
had
passage
into
Paradise
.
The
vertue
of
Christes
death
extendeth
to
the
old
fathers
for
their
saluation
:
as
much
as
vnto
vs
,
yet
the
cause
which
opened
paradise
and
the
kingdome
of
heauen
,
was
the
death
of
Christ
,
by
Gods
ordinance
appointed
to
worke
righteousnesse
for
all
the
elect
,
as
well
before
the
time
of
his
suffering
,
as
since
.
50
Who
so
denieth
the
authoritie
of
the
holy
scriptures
,
thereby
bewraieth
him selfe
to
be
an
heretike
.
Contra
:
I
say
not
this
(
here
cap.
9
pag.
170.
that
Eusebius
was
not
accounted
an
heretike
)
to
excuse
them
that
doubt
of
the
Epistle
of
S.
Iames.
As
Martine
Luther
and
Illyricus
,
for
I
am
persuaded
that
they
are
more
curious
than
wise
in
so
doing
.
My
words
be
not
alledged
truely
,
in
neither
of
both
propositions
.
In
the
former
they
are
these
,
I
will
not
gainesay
,
but
whoso
denieth
,
&c.
I
doe
not
alwaies
affirme
,
that
I
will
not
gainesay
.
I
may
be
in
doubt
.
But
to
graunt
that
I
had
affirmed
the
first
proposition
absolutely
:
what
contradiction
do
I
make
in
saying
that
Eusebius
although
he
affirmed
the
Epistle
of
Saint
Iames
to
be
a
counterfet
,
was
not
accounted
an
heretike
?
Shall
other
mens
account
be
ioyned
to
mine
affirmation
,
to
charge
me
with
contradiction
?
Againe
,
the
former
proposition
,
Who
so
denieth
,
&c.
If
it
be
affirmed
,
must
be
vnderstoode
of
such
as
denie
the
scriptures
which
are
once
receiued
generally
,
because
they
are
contrary
to
his
opinion
.
If
he
meane
the
contradiction
to
be
,
for
that
I
say
:
I
will
not
excuse
Martine
and
Illyricus
which
doubt
of
the
Epistle
of
Saint
Iames
,
for
that
I
am
persuaded
they
are
more
curious
then
wise
in
so
doing
:
I
must
tell
him
,
that
doubting
of
the
scriptures
is
not
denying
them
,
neither
is
foolish
curiosity
like
by
heresie
.
Last
of
al
,
where
he
chargeth
me
with
falsification
of
Allens
words
to
auoide
a
shameful
absurditie
ensuing
of
his
affirmation
,
he
plaieth
his
old
parts
,
first
in
falsifying
my
words
:
where
I
say
to
reduce
,
he
saith
to
redeeme
:
secondly
he
saith
,
that
Allen
speaketh
of
him
that
nowe
leadeth
a
godly
life
,
but
will
not
be
reduced
to
the
perfection
thereof
by
repentance
,
or
satisfaction
of
his
lothsome
life
past
.
The
very
words
of
Allen
be
these
:
This
our
aduersarie
,
Math.
5.
here
signifieth
our
brother
,
which
hath
iust
quarell
against
vs
in
iudgement
,
for
that
we
would
not
giue
eare
vnto
him
sharply
admonishing
vs
of
our
faults
,
being
therefore
an
aduersary
to
our
vices
and
fleshly
conuersation
.
In
which
sort
to
vs
that
are
flesh
and
bloud
,
and
ready
to
euill
from
our
youth
,
all
be
aduersaries
that
preach
Christ
,
the
amendment
of
licentious
maners
,
repentance
of
our
lothsome
life
past
,
or
else
vse
against
vs
the
rod
of
correction
and
bodily
punishment
,
that
our
soules
may
be
saued
in
the
day
of
the
appearing
of
our
Lord
.
To
this
kinde
of
aduersary
Christ
counselleth
and
commandeth
vs
,
for
our
great
good
,
to
agree
and
consent
whiles
we
be
here
in
the
way
of
this
our
pilgrimage
and
transitorie
life
,
least
all
these
meanes
which
he
wrought
to
reduce
vs
,
to
the
perfection
of
a
Christian
godly
life
,
be
as
it
were
,
a
witnesse
of
our
contempt
,
and
him selfe
our
accuser
before
the
Iudge
,
that
shall
so
iustly
reward
euerie
man
according
to
his
deedes
:
that
is
Christe
him selfe
,
to
whome
the
father
hath
giuen
all
iudgement
.
Nowe
the
wordes
in
which
I
reproue
this
absurditie
of
Allen
,
are
these
.
But
before
we
goe
any
further
,
let
vs
see
howe
the
doctrine
of
this
chapter
agreeth
with
that
we
had
in
the
chapter
next
before
.
There
we
were
told
,
that
Purgatorie
serueth
but
for
veniall
sinnes
,
or
else
for
such
mortall
sinnes
,
as
by
forgiuenesse
in
this
life
obtained
,
are
made
veniall
trespasses
.
But
here
not
onely
vices
and
fleshly
conuersation
,
but
also
contempt
of
all
that
preach
Christ
,
and
repentance
of
our
lothsome
life
past
,
&c.
are
saide
to
be
the
debt
that
must
be
discharged
in
Purgatorie
to
the
vttermost
farthing
,
then
the
which
no
vice
is
more
mortall
,
nor
further
from
forgiuenesse
.
For
he
that
not
onely
leadeth
a
lothsome
life
,
but
also
contemneth
all
those
meanes
that
Christ
hath
wrought
,
to
reduce
him
to
the
perfection
of
a
Christian
godly
life
;
(
I
vse
his
owne
wordes
)
howe
can
he
haue
remission
of
his
sinnes
in
this
life
?
and
yet
Maister
Allen
dare
promise
him
,
that
the
tolleration
of
bandes
in
the
prison
of
Purgatorie
,
shall
recompence
his
debt
,
and
bring
him
from
thence
into
the
blessed
presence
of
Christ
.
The
twelfth
Chapter
.
A
nosegaie
of
certaine
strange
flowers
picked
out
of
Fulke
,
The
first
flower
is
that
I
say
,
Pur.
283.
the
sacrifice
The
second
flower
of
mine
ignorance
is
,
where
to
deface
the
sacrifice
of
Iudas
Macha
〈…〉
aeus
,
I
say
that
both
the
high
Priest
at
that
time
was
a
wicked
and
vngodly
man
,
to
wit
,
either
Iason
,
Menelaus
,
or
Alcimus
,
and
namely
Menelaus
,
the
worst
of
them
all
three
:
and
also
that
the
other
Priestes
of
that
time
,
were
giuen
to
the
practises
of
the
Gentiles
,
2.
Machab.
4.
In
so
much
,
that
it
is
like
that
Iudas
Machabaeus
,
if
hee
deuised
not
the
sacrifice
of
his
owne
heade
,
yet
tooke
by
imitation
of
the
Gentiles
.
Frst
hee
maruelleth
,
howe
I
could
thinke
that
Machabaeus
had
any
commnion
with
the
Gentilizers
,
against
whom
all
his
fighting
was
,
seeing
it
is
written
first
of
Macab
4
that
he
chose
priestes
without
spot
,
hauing
their
heart
in
the
lawe
of
God
.
I
aunswere
being
such
as
they
were
described
.
2.
Machab.
4.
hee
had
hard
choise
to
finde
a
sufficient
number
of
vnspotted
priestes
.
But
although
he
were
an
enimy
of
gentility
,
in
that
corrupt
time
and
state
,
he
might
be
drawen
into
imitation
of
the
gentiles
in
some
point
that
had
a
shewe
of
pietie
,
although
it
were
not
agreeable
to
the
lawe
of
God
.
His
next
accusation
is
,
that
I
call
them
high
priestes
which
were
but
antipontifices
and
vsurpers
.
I
aunswere
,
I
iustifie
not
their
title
,
more
then
their
maners
and
religion
,
but
whereas
by
his
greekelatine
word
,
he
supposeth
that
there
were
other
true
high
priestes
in
their
time
,
he
bewraieth
his
owne
grosse
ignorance
.
For
whereas
he
saith
that
the
succession
of
the
true
high
priestes
for
that
time
was
this
:
Onias
,
Mathathias
,
Iudas
.
Ionathas
,
Simon
:
The
truth
is
,
that
Mathathias
and
Iudas
were
neuer
high
priestes
,
neither
doth
the
Story
1.
Macc.
2.
or
1.
Macc.
3
which
he
quoteth
,
shewe
any
thing
to
proue
that
they
were
:
It
sayeth
that
Mathathias
was
a
priest
,
but
not
that
he
was
the
high
priest
.
And
Iosephus
who
did
write
an
history
of
the
Maccabees
,
testifieth
plainly
that
from
Iacimus
to
Ionathan
,
for
7.
yeares
there
was
no
high
priest
,
which
Ionathan
was
made
high
priest
in
the
yeare
160.
Ioseph
.
Antiqu.
Lib.
20.
Cap.
8.
1.
Maccab.
Cap.
10.
verse
21.
which
was
many
yeares
after
Iudas
his
brother
was
slaine
.
Therefore
at
such
time
as
Iudas
should
send
the
offering
to
Hierusalem
,
there
was
no
such
good
Bishop
,
as
Allen
saith
:
but
euen
Onias
cognomento
Menelaus
,
as
Iosephus
calleth
him
,
which
was
depriued
both
of
his
life
and
of
his
high
priesthood
at
Berytus
or
as
the
corrupt
story
of
the
Machabes
saith
,
at
Berea
.
2.
Macc.
13.
called
in
the
first
of
the
Machabees
Bethzetha
.
But
whereas
Bristow
maketh
Ionathas
or
Simon
chiefe
priestes
in
the
absence
of
Iudas
,
and
not
Menelaus
,
he
forgetteth
that
in
those
expeditions
which
Iudas
made
from
Hierusalem
,
for
which
he
quoteth
1.
Macc.
4.
5.
it
is
plaine
in
the
same
chapter
,
that
Simon
was
sent
with
an
hoast
into
Galilee
,
and
Ionathan
went
with
his
brother
Iudas
ouer
Iordane
into
Gilead
:
which
story
,
how
he
wil
reconcile
with
the
2.
Mac
12.
either
for
time
or
persons
,
I
haue
great
meruaile
.
But
that
Menelaus
,
as
he
was
then
in
office
of
the
high
priest
,
though
vnworthy
,
so
that
he
was
at
Hierusalem
,
it
appeareth
by
this
record
of
the
time
.
The
Temple
was
purged
(
as
Bristowe
confesseth
,
)
and
it
is
written
1.
Macc.
4.
Anno
148.
in
the
25.
of
the
Moneth
Cislewe
,
and
in
the
same
yeare
Antiochus
Eupator
by
letters
sent
to
Lysias
commandeth
that
the
Temple
should
be
restored
to
the
Iewes
,
whereof
Lysias
writeth
to
the
Iewes
the
24.
of
the
moneth
of
Iupiter
,
Corinthus
and
king
Antiochus
himselfe
,
with
letters
bearing
date
the
15.
of
the
moneth
Panticus
sendeth
Menelaus
to
comfort
the
Iewes
.
5.
Mac.
11.
And
the
next
yeare
after
Anno
149.
Antiochus
came
into
Iewrie
,
and
did
execution
vpon
Menelaus
,
and
made
warre
vpon
Iudas
,
&c.
2.
Macc.
13.
and
ordained
Iacimus
high
priest
,
which
continued
in
that
place
3.
yeares
.
Iosep.
Antiqu.
Lib.
20.
cap.
8.
If
that
this
account
of
the
second
booke
of
Maccabees
,
agree
not
with
the
story
of
the
first
booke
,
as
in
deede
it
doth
not
,
let
Bristowe
looke
●●to
it
,
that
defendeth
these
bookes
to
be
Canonicall
:
it
is
sufficient
for
me
to
iustifie
that
I
cited
out
of
this
latter
booke
,
by
the
report
of
the
same
booke
:
and
by
Iosephus
,
who
knewe
the
succession
of
the
high
Priestes
of
his
nation
,
better
than
Bristowe
,
whose
arrogant
ignorance
is
so
much
the
more
odious
,
that
hee
would
charge
me
with
ouersight
,
in
that
hee
is
most
ignorant
him selfe
:
and
that
against
his
Maister
Allen
,
who
supposeth
some
other
to
be
high
Priest
or
Bishop
,
and
not
Iudas
him selfe
.
The
third
chapter
,
of
my
grosse
or
rather
malicious
ignorance
,
is
saide
to
be
about
Antichrist
:
As
that
the
Church
of
Christ
should
prepare
his
way
,
or
worke
his
mysterie
.
But
this
is
a
fable
of
Bristowe
,
neuer
affirmed
by
me
.
As
for
the
other
assertions
of
the
time
of
his
reuelation
,
of
the
Churches
fleeing
into
the
wildernesse
,
of
the
time
of
Antichristes
reigne
,
&c.
because
they
are
condemned
by
the
onely
authoritie
of
Bristowe
,
without
any
argument
or
testimonie
of
Scripture
,
or
Fathers
,
I
will
referre
the
reader
to
such
places
,
where
I
affirme
any
of
them
,
to
consider
my
reasons
,
and
to
iudge
indifferently
.
The
fourth
point
is
,
that
the
body
of
Christ
is
not
offered
to
him selfe
,
but
thankesgiuing
is
offered
to
him
for
the
offering
of
his
body
for
vs
.
Pur.
316.
Against
this
,
his
reasons
are
these
.
Why
sir
,
did
not
he
vpon
the
crosse
offer
his
owne
body
as
a
Man
,
and
a
Priest
to
him selfe
as
to
God
?
Sir
,
the
Scripture
telleth
me
,
that
Christ
being
an
high
Priest
,
by
his
eternall
spirite
,
offered
him selfe
vnreproueable
to
GOD
:
Hebr.
9.
verse
14.
Ergo
,
you
will
say
to
him selfe
as
God
,
because
the
persons
of
the
godhead
are
vndiuided
.
Yet
I
trust
you
will
distinguish
the
humanitie
from
the
deitie
,
&
so
Christ
offered
not
his
body
to
him selfe
,
that
is
,
neither
to
his
humanitie
,
nor
to
the
person
of
the
mediatour
,
which
is
God
and
man
.
For
though
God
was
made
man
,
yet
God
the
Father
was
not
made
man
,
nor
God
the
holy
Ghost
,
but
God
the
Sonne
onely
.
And
although
it
were
graunted
,
that
Christ
offering
him selfe
to
God
,
was
offered
to
him selfe
,
yet
it
followeth
not
that
men
of
whome
I
spake
,
can
offer
the
body
of
Christ
,
yea
whole
Christ
to
him selfe
,
then
the
which
nothing
is
more
absurd
.
An other
reason
Bristow
bringeth
:
that
I
noted
others
for
saying
,
it
is
not
lawful
to
pray
to
God
the
sonne
.
As
though
it
were
al
one
to
pray
to
Christ
,
&
to
offer
his
body
to
Christ
,
him self
to
him self
.
The
fift
:
That
I
call
it
a
vaine
amplification
and
fond
supposition
to
extend
the
force
of
Christes
death
beyond
the
limits
of
his
will
.
My
words
are
of
Allens
supposition
,
that
the
ful
force
of
Christs
death
would
sup
vp
al
sinne
&
al
paine
for
sinne
,
death
temporall
,
and
eternall
,
hell
,
purgatorie
,
and
all
paine
,
&c.
But
what
reasons
hath
Bristow
against
my
saying
?
First
:
my
assertion
is
(
saith
he
)
As
though
it
were
not
of
force
to
worke
any
whit
more
than
it
worketh
in
acte
,
as
to
saue
so
much
as
one
of
them
that
shal
not
be
saued
.
I
say
,
it
is
of
force
to
worke
euen
as
much
as
God
will
,
but
not
to
worke
against
the
will
of
God
.
But
I
speake
contrarie
to
the
expresse
scripture
.
He
is
the
propitiation
for
our
sinnes
,
and
not
for
our
sinnes
only
,
but
also
for
the
sinnes
of
the
whole
world
.
1.
Ioh.
2.
If
you
vnderstand
the
whole
world
,
for
euery
man
in
the
world
,
then
it
foloweth
,
that
God
is
reconciled
for
al
men
,
&
so
no
man
shall
be
damned
.
But
S.
Iohn
meaneth
by
his
general
word
,
al
the
elect
of
the
world
:
as
when
he
saith
,
The
whole
world
is
set
on
mischiefe
;
he
meaneth
not
euery
person
,
but
all
the
reprobate
1.
Ioh.
5.
And
that
Christes
death
is
not
a
propitiation
of
the
sinnes
of
al
the
wicked
of
the
world
and
reprobates
,
it
is
certaine
,
by
that
he
refuseth
to
pray
for
the
world
,
that
is
,
for
the
reprobates
of
the
world
,
Iohn
17.
But
Bristowe
vrgeth
me
with
mine
owne
saying
,
in
an
other
contrarie
to
this
.
Concerning
the
sufficiencie
of
Christes
redemption
,
there
is
nothing
that
can
be
spoken
so
magnifically
,
but
that
the
worthinesse
thereof
passeth
and
excelleth
it
.
This
should
haue
come
in
among
the
contradictions
,
if
Bristowe
had
remembred
it
.
But
I
beseech
you
sir
,
in
commending
the
sufficiencie
of
Christes
redemption
,
doe
I
extend
the
force
of
his
death
beyond
the
limits
of
his
will
?
Are
any
more
redeemed
than
Christ
would
?
The
sixt
:
I
say
,
that
to
remit
sinnes
,
is
proper
to
his
diuinitie
.
That
is
(
saith
Bristowe
)
as
though
Christ
doth
not
remit
sinnes
,
according
to
his
humanitie
.
I
say
Christ
which
is
a
person
consisting
of
God
and
man
,
doth
remitte
sinnes
by
absolute
auctority
,
but
that
is
proper
to
his
diuinity
and
not
to
his
humanity
,
as
for
the
power
which
he
hath
giuen
to
his
ministers
,
to
remit
sinne
,
is
not
absolute
,
but
to
declare
remission
of
sinnes
in
his
name
.
Neither
did
the
people
which
glorified
God
for
giuing
such
power
to
men
Matth.
9.
acknowledge
the
doctrine
of
the
Church
for
the
remission
of
sinnes
by
the
ministery
of
man
,
but
praised
God
for
giuing
the
gift
of
healing
vnto
Christ
,
whom
yet
as
young
scholers
,
they
acknowledge
not
to
be
God
,
but
an
holy
Prophet
sent
of
God
.
And
so
the
other
Euangelists
report
their
praising
of
God
to
haue
beene
for
that
they
neuer
sawe
it
so
:
they
had
seene
wonderfull
things
that
day
.
Mark
.
2.
Luk.
5.
The
7.
he
chargeth
me
to
teach
a
pestilent
doctrine
of
desperation
,
Where
I
say
,
there
be
sinnes
for
which
the
Church
ought
not
to
pray
,
euen
of
men
remaining
in
this
life
:
for
which
it
is
not
lawfull
to
pray
:
which
by
the
mercy
of
God
are
not
pardonable
:
it
is
false
,
that
so
long
as
men
are
in
this
worlde
,
they
may
repent
.
For
which
he
quoteth
Pur.
274
127.
128.
135.
283.
After
he
asketh
how
many
such
sinnes
there
are
?
and
saith
in
one
place
I
name
two
,
and
after
more
,
and
after
concludeth
that
in
some
I
say
,
that
it
is
vnlawful
to
pray
for
any
wicked
person
,
of
what
sort
so
euer
his
wickednesse
be
,
so
long
as
he
continueth
in
his
wickednesse
:
yea
,
and
it
is
vnpossible
for
the
wicked
but
to
continue
in
his
wickednesse
.
This
is
a
pestilent
slander
,
for
I
neuer
accounted
any
sinne
irremisible
,
but
onely
the
sinne
against
the
holy
Ghost
:
for
obstinate
and
willfull
apostasie
is
the
sinne
against
the
holy
Ghost
,
whereof
a
fruite
is
finall
contempt
of
all
that
preach
Christ
,
and
of
all
meanes
that
Christ
hath
wrought
to
bring
vs
to
repentance
,
such
was
the
sinne
of
Saul
and
of
the
obstinate
Iewes
,
for
whome
Samuel
and
Ieremie
are
forbidden
to
pray
.
As
for
that
I
should
say
,
it
is
not
lawfull
to
pray
for
any
wicked
person
,
&c.
I
neuer
thought
it
,
but
onely
for
those
that
sinne
against
the
holy
Ghost
,
of
whom
Saint
Iohn
saith
,
they
sinne
vnto
death
,
and
I
say
not
that
any
man
should
pray
for
that
.
1.
Ioan.
5.
Neuerthelesse
Bristowe
affirmeth
,
that
we
are
worse
then
the
Nouatians
,
when
I
say
,
That
some
sinnes
neither
by
the
mercy
of
God
are
pardonable
.
But
where
doe
I
say
so
?
he
quoteth
before
,
Pur
128.
And
what
be
my
wordes
there
?
Verily
who
so
will
turne
the
booke
,
shal
reade
them
thus
:
For
by
the
iustice
of
God
all
sinnes
are
mortall
,
but
by
his
mercy
they
are
all
pardonable
,
except
that
sinne
vnto
death
,
wherof
Iohn
speaketh
.
1.
Ioh.
5.
Thus
am
I
worse
than
a
Nouatian
,
for
saying
,
the
sinne
against
the
holy
Ghost
shall
neuer
be
pardoned
,
neither
in
this
life
,
nor
in
the
world
to
come
.
But
perhaps
Bristowe
will
cauill
,
that
euen
that
sinne
is
pardonably
by
Gods
mercy
,
if
God
would
:
which
is
not
contrary
to
that
I
saide
.
For
I
speake
of
that
which
may
be
,
Gods
eternall
will
standing
,
according
vnto
which
the
Apostle
saith
,
it
is
impossible
that
they
which
so
offende
can
be
renewed
by
repentaunce
.
Hebrewes
6.
The
heresie
of
the
Nouatians
as
Bristowe
affirmeth
of
the
report
of
Aresius
their
Bishop
was
:
That
they
who
after
baptisme
,
fall
into
that
kinde
of
sinne
.
which
the
holy
scriptures
call
sinne
vnto
death
,
ought
not
to
be
admitted
to
receiue
the
diuine
mysteries
,
but
to
be
exhorted
to
repentaunce
,
and
to
looke
for
hope
of
forgiuenesse
,
not
of
the
Priestes
,
but
of
God
,
who
both
can
and
hath
authoritie
to
forgiue
sinnes
.
In
which
sentence
,
a
double
error
of
the
Nouatians
is
included
:
first
that
they
tooke
that
sinne
vnto
death
wherof
Saint
Iohn
speaketh
.
1
Iohn
.
5.
to
be
falling
through
frailty
in
time
of
persecution
,
euen
as
Bristowe
doth
,
the
willfull
prolapsion
and
Apostasie
that
the
Apostle
speaketh
of
.
Heb.
6.
Secondly
that
they
thought
the
sinne
vnto
death
might
be
remitted
of
God
,
contrary
to
the
manifest
denunciation
of
our
Sauiour
Christe
.
Matth.
12.
As
Bristowe
doeth
the
sinne
against
the
holy
Ghoste
,
which
is
all
one
and
the
same
.
But
that
the
Catholique
Churche
did
then
by
her
Priestes
forgiue
all
sinnes
without
accepting
the
sinne
against
the
holy
Ghost
,
which
Bristowe
affirmeth
out
of
the
confession
of
Acesius
,
I
maruell
howe
he
proueth
.
Yea
,
he
is
so
impudent
to
say
,
that
the
Protestantes
also
doe
admit
all
to
their
Caluines
breade
,
so
the
blasphemous
dogge
barketh
against
the
holie
Communion
:
whereas
we
neuer
receiue
any
whome
we
knowe
to
be
excommunicated
,
and
much
lesse
would
we
receiue
any
apostata
,
that
is
cleane
fallen
from
Christianitie
,
not
of
weakenesse
or
ignorance
,
but
of
malicious
contempt
;
or
any
whome
we
might
knowe
to
haue
sinned
that
sinne
vnto
death
,
and
to
haue
blasphemed
against
the
holie
Ghost
.
But
nowe
let
vs
see
what
miserable
comfort
Bristowe
will
minister
against
desperation
,
in
answering
such
places
of
scripture
,
as
I
brought
,
to
proue
the
sinne
against
the
holie
Ghost
to
be
irremissible
.
First
the
place
of
1.
Iohn
5.
he
saith
is
meant
of
them
that
be
deade
and
damned
in
hell
,
as
he
hath
taught
vs
:
cap.
8.
but
because
I
refuse
that
interpretation
,
as
false
and
newe
,
he
citeth
Augustine
.
in
ret
.
li.
19.
cap.
12.
whose
interpretation
at
the
first
was
as
I
holde
,
but
afterward
he
addeth
,
if
he
end
his
life
in
this
peruersitie
.
For
we
must
despaire
of
no
man
,
be
he
neuer
so
wicked
,
so
long
as
he
is
in
this
life
.
Neither
is
praier
made
vnwisely
for
him
,
who
is
not
despaired
of
.
Here
are
two
contrarie
expositions
of
one
man
,
in
which
we
must
consider
whether
is
more
proper
to
the
place
,
and
not
whether
better
or
last
pleased
the
authour
of
them
.
That
no
man
is
to
be
despaired
of
,
while
he
liueth
,
as
it
is
contrarie
to
the
scripture
,
so
to
the
practise
of
the
Church
,
which
refused
to
pray
for
Iulianus
the
apostata
,
and
prayed
to
God
against
him
.
Maris
also
the
Bishop
of
Chalcedon
,
denounced
him
to
his
face
to
be
impious
,
and
an
apostata
,
and
enimie
of
God
.
Socrat.
lib.
3.
cap.
10.
Sozo
.
lib.
5.
cap.
4.
The
second
text
,
Heb.
6.
Bristowe
expoundeth
it
of
falling
through
frailtie
in
persecution
,
of
them
which
can
not
be
renewed
by
baptisme
,
but
the
Apostle
saith
expressely
by
repentance
,
and
therefore
speaketh
not
of
lapsion
or
falling
,
but
of
prolapsion
or
falling
cleane
away
from
Christ
,
with
manifest
contempt
of
his
grace
and
redemption
.
The
terrible
denuntiation
of
Christ
against
the
obstinate
and
malicious
Pharisees
Matt.
13.
Mar.
3.
Bristowe
faith
,
he
speaketh
it
not
to
driue
them
to
desperation
,
but
to
moue
them
to
repentance
.
What
if
that
be
graunted
,
that
by
shewing
the
daunger
of
malitious
obstinacie
,
which
groweth
to
irremissible
wickednes
,
he
should
admonish
them
to
beware
in
time
,
as
the
Apostle
doth
,
Heb.
6.
Doth
it
therefore
followe
,
that
no
man
sinneth
irremissiblie
,
while
he
liueth
?
Although
it
is
plaine
,
that
our
sauiour
Christ
denounceth
their
damnation
as
men
so
obdurate
in
their
wickednes
,
that
nothing
could
reclay
me
them
,
or
bring
them
to
repentance
.
But
Bristow
would
make
me
contrarie
to
my selfe
,
who
though
in
expresse
words
I
count
D.
Allen
&
his
fellowes
such
as
(
by
you
)
Heb.
6.
cannot
repent
,
yet
do
exhort
them
truly
to
repent
.
&c.
Pur.
461.
But
how
proueth
he
,
that
I
count
Allen
and
his
fellowes
such
as
cannot
repent
?
Forsooth
because
I
say
,
they
haue
sometime
beene
lightened
and
tasted
of
the
good
gifte
of
God
.
Why
sir
,
are
all
such
come
to
prolapsion
?
I
trow
not
,
In
deede
I
admonish
them
being
in
the
way
of
prolapsion
,
that
are
curable
.
Whether
Allen
were
euer
a
protestant
,
I
know
not
:
but
certaine
I
am
,
that
some
of
his
fellowes
haue
beene
lightned
and
were
protestants
,
of
whom
I
speake
,
and
not
of
him
.
If
I
say
Bristow
and
his
fellowes
which
are
lay-men
:
doe
I
say
Bristow
is
a
lay
man
?
This
wilfull
&
malicious
cauilling
(
Bristow
)
if
you
take
not
heede
of
it
in
time
,
argueth
that
you
are
fallen
verie
deepe
,
if
you
be
not
yet
at
the
bottom
of
apostasie
.
But
this
is
a
cunning
conforter
of
them
that
are
in
desperation
,
which
affirmeth
,
that
Christ
doth
no
otherwise
say
that
such
sinne
and
blasphemie
shall
not
be
remitted
,
then
he
saith
that
all
other
sinne
and
blasphemie
shal
be
remitted
:
and
therfore
many
one
,
yea
,
and
aboue
all
number
may
be
and
is
forgiuen
,
the
sinne
against
the
holy
ghost
.
He
meaneth
,
because
the
condition
of
repentance
is
not
expressed
in
them
that
are
forgiuen
.
But
if
that
condition
were
to
be
vnderstoode
in
them
also
that
sin
against
the
holy
ghost
,
what
distinction
were
there
for
which
he
should
say
?
that
blasphemie
and
sinne
shall
not
be
forgiuen
,
neither
in
this
world
,
nor
in
the
world
to
come
?
Such
a
sinner
hath
no
remission
of
sinnes
,
but
is
guiltie
of
eternal
damnation
.
For
that
none
shal
be
forgiuen
,
without
repentance
,
as
euerie
man
knew
without
that
distinction
.
But
Bristow
would
haue
it
to
be
an
extraordinary
matter
for
God
to
forgiue
the
sinne
against
the
holy
ghost
,
and
so
he
forgaue
one
of
those
Pharisees
,
and
he
the
verie
worst
of
them
all
:
namely
S.
Paule
,
who
had
bin
indeede
a
Pharisee
,
as
he
confesseth
.
Act.
23.
&
26.
but
none
of
those
Pharisees
:
for
he
knewe
not
,
Christ
in
the
flesh
.
2.
Cor
5.
yea
,
he
had
beene
a
persecuter
and
a
blasphemer
,
as
he
confesseth
1.
Tim
1.
but
not
the
worst
of
all
Pharesees
,
for
he
was
an
elect
vessel
of
God
,
and
his
persecution
and
blasphemie
was
not
of
malice
or
sinne
against
the
holy
ghost
,
but
of
ignorance
and
blinde
zeale
of
God
:
for
he
addeth
immediatly
,
but
I
obteined
mercie
,
because
I
did
it
ignorantly
in
vnbeleefe
.
As
for
those
Pharisees
,
against
whom
our
Sauiour
Christ
thundreth
that
iudgement
,
did
blaspheme
the
holy
ghost
against
their
owne
conscience
,
and
knowledge
,
malitiously
attributing
vnto
the
diuell
,
that
which
they
knew
to
be
the
finger
of
God
.
That
which
I
speake
out
of
Samuel
,
Ieremie
,
and
Ezekiel
,
Bristow
saith
,
is
all
spoken
in
one
sense
,
of
temporall
matters
,
to
wit
of
casting
Saule
from
his
kingdome
,
and
the
Iewes
into
captiuitie
.
But
except
the
persons
had
bene
incurable
,
God
would
haue
beene
intreated
to
giue
them
repentance
,
&
to
haue
continued
Saule
in
his
kingdome
,
and
the
people
in
their
countrie
.
The
rule
that
Ezechiel
.
33.
is
vnderstoode
of
sinnes
that
are
not
against
the
holy
ghost
,
as
the
examples
doe
plainely
declare
.
The
8.
poynt
is
,
that
strange
interpretation
of
the
creede
,
(
a●
he
calleth
it
)
Christ
descended
into
hell
to
redeeme
vs
out
of
hell
,
by
suffering
the
wrath
of
God
for
our
sinnes
.
Heb.
5.
First
Bristow
saith
,
there
is
neuer
a
word
of
that
article
,
and
much
lesse
of
the
interpretation
thereof
,
in
that
chapter
,
yet
after
to
proue
that
to
bee
prayer
,
which
I
saide
was
a
complaint
,
as
though
it
might
not
be
be
a
complayning
prayer
,
he
citeth
the
7.
verse
of
the
same
chapter
of
Christ
,
who
in
the
daies
of
his
flesh
,
with
a
mightie
crie
,
and
with
teares
,
offered
vp
prayers
and
supplications
to
him
that
was
able
to
saue
him
,
out
of
death
,
and
was
heard
from
his
feare
or
from
that
he
feared
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
But
by
this
text
,
Bristow
would
proue
,
that
Christ
was
not
forsaken
of
his
father
,
no
not
corporally
,
although
he
complayned
,
that
he
was
forsaken
,
as
though
his
lamentable
complaint
hadbeene
more
then
needed
,
when
he
sayde
,
My
God
my
God
,
why
hast
thou
forsaken
me
?
which
to
him
that
was
God
,
was
greater
torment
of
hell
,
then
any
heart
of
man
can
conceiue
.
And
therefore
Bristow
,
which
maketh
all
to
stand
in
the
bodilie
death
of
Christ
,
and
raileth
at
Caluine
for
shewing
how
necessarie
it
was
for
Christ
,
to
suffer
in
soule
as
much
as
in
body
,
for
the
redemption
of
the
whole
man
,
doth
nothing
but
cauil
&
slaunder
,
one
while
fayning
that
Caluine
should
make
two
deathes
of
Christ
,
another
while
,
that
he
was
in
feare
lest
he
should
haue
bin
damned
for
euer
&c.
Which
he
saith
also
shal
be
my
reply
.
But
when
Bristow
saith
that
Christs
bodily
death
without
any
suffering
of
his
soule
was
the
full
redemption
of
the
world
,
he
maketh
his
tormentes
of
minde
,
whereof
he
complaineth
that
his
soule
was
heauie
vnto
death
,
which
made
him
to
sweate
bloode
before
his
body
was
touched
,
to
be
of
no
force
,
except
it
were
to
argue
great
imbecillitie
of
Christ
,
who
feared
so
much
bodylie
death
,
that
many
of
his
seruantes
haue
ioyfully
imbraced
,
and
that
strange
crie
and
teares
with
which
he
vttered
his
prayers
on
the
crosse
,
and
that
most
lamentable
complaint
,
that
God
had
forsaken
him
,
were
for
nothing
,
but
for
that
he
was
not
deliuered
from
the
crosse
,
(
as
Bristow
writeth
)
it
is
too
much
iniurious
to
his
most
bitter
passion
to
imagine
,
and
therefore
we
must
needes
acknowledge
,
that
he
suffered
more
in
the
sight
of
God
,
whose
iustice
he
was
to
satisfie
,
then
he
suffered
in
the
sight
of
men
.
And
so
the
question
that
Bristow
propoundeth
to
me
,
is
answered
,
why
descendit
ad
inferos
,
cometh
after
sepultus
,
because
the
order
of
the
Symbole
is
first
to
shew
,
what
suffered
before
men
,
and
then
what
hesuffered
in
the
sight
of
God
.
As
for
the
blasphemy
of
Theodorus
Mopseuestenus
that
Christ
had
inclination
to
sinne
,
&c.
there
is
no
more
reason
why
Bristowe
should
charge
vs
with
it
,
then
with
those
other
blasphemies
,
that
Christ
did
dispaire
in
God
,
or
blaspheme
God
,
or
commit
some
other
sinne
against
God
,
for
our
redemption
,
which
he
affirmeth
to
be
maintained
of
some
Caluinistes
.
For
which
detestable
slaunder
,
if
he
haue
no
better
ground
then
he
sheweth
,
let
him
remember
that
the
mouth
which
lyeth
killeth
the
soule
.
I
wil
spare
to
amplifie
,
though
I
lack
no
matter
,
albeit
that
Bristow
fayneth
monsters
of
slaunders
,
as
Iupiters
Giantes
,
&
then
casteth
them
downe
with
thunderbolts
,
deriding
myknowledge
in
amplification
.
The
9.
is
about
the
honor
of
the
virgin
Marie
,
wherein
first
he
chargeth
me
with
the
heresie
of
the
Heluidians
&
Antidicomarianites
,
who
were
condemned
for
heretikes
for
denying
her
perpetual
virginitie
;
whereas
he
cometh
neerer
to
the
Colliridians
,
likewise
condemned
,
them
we
to
the
Heluidians
.
But
let
vs
see
his
impudent
quarels
.
First
I
say
:
As
for
the
perpetuall
virginitie
of
the
mother
of
Christ
,
as
we
thinke
it
is
true
,
so
because
the
scripture
hath
not
reueiled
it
,
neither
perteineth
it
vnto
vs
,
we
make
no
question
of
it
.
Here
is
a
great
coniunction
with
heretikes
,
which
trobled
the
Church
with
contention
a
bout
a
matter
which
they
were
not
able
to
proue
by
the
scriptures
:
yet
saith
Bristow
,
you
forge
a
principle
of
onely
scripture
in
their
fauour
.
Surely
that
principle
as
it
is
not
forged
,
so
it
fauoreth
them
nothing
at
al.
For
their
contentious
assertion
they
were
not
able
to
proue
by
the
scriptures
,
but
within
4.
lines
afore
,
I
am
contrary
to
my selfe
,
where
I
say
all
truth
may
be
proued
by
the
scripture
.
If
I
had
to
doe
with
a
man
of
reason
,
as
I
haue
to
do
with
a
papist
,
he
would
vnderstand
my
proposition
according
to
the
whole
matter
in
controuersie
,
of
such
things
as
are
necessarie
or
profitable
for
a
christian
man
to
know
vnto
saluation
.
For
otherwise
I
thinke
many
things
to
be
true
,
that
are
not
conteined
in
the
scriptures
:
As
I
thinke
that
Bristow
lacketh
wit
,
learning
,
&
honesty
,
thus
to
quarell
which
is
not
written
in
the
scriptures
,
but
gathered
by
other
reasons
:
yet
he
saith
,
I
might
which
more
honestie
haue
saide
,
that
it
may
be
proued
by
scripture
,
where
she
saith
,
Luk.
1.
Because
I
know
no
man
,
that
is
(
saith
he
)
because
I
haue
made
a
vow
of
virginitie
.
A
like
matter
,
that
she
would
marie
if
she
had
made
a
vow
of
viginitie
.
Yet
Bristow
confesseth
this
place
proueth
not
inuincibly
her
perpetuall
virginitie
,
although
it
so
proue
her
vow
.
But
if
Bristow
were
condemned
,
or
had
vowed
to
lie
in
prison
vntil
he
could
frame
an
inuincible
argument
to
proue
her
vow
,
out
of
that
place
,
yea
,
or
any
other
place
of
the
scriptures
,
it
were
all
one
,
as
if
he
were
condemned
to
perpetuall
prison
or
vowed
the
same
.
Another
poynt
of
that
dishonor
is
,
where
I
controld
Allen
for
excepting
the
mother
of
Christ
,
when
he
speaketh
of
sinners
,
which
is
all
one
as
if
he
had
said
,
Christ
was
not
a
sauiour
of
his
mother
,
or
that
she
had
no
neede
of
his
saluation
.
And
here
he
chargeth
me
with
reading
Caluine
more
then
Augustine
,
as
though
Augustine
defended
the
virgin
Marie
to
be
free
from
sinne
,
because
he
saith
against
the
Pelagians
,
that
he
would
haue
no
question
of
her
for
the
honour
of
our
Lord
,
when
he
speaketh
of
sinnes
.
For
hereof
we
know
that
more
grace
was
giuen
to
her
,
to
ouercome
sinne
of
all
partes
,
which
was
worthy
to
conceiue
and
bring
forth
him
,
〈…〉
om
it
is
certaine
that
he
had
no
sin
,
Denat
.
&
grat
.
136.
It
is
all
one
with
Bristow
,
to
ouercome
sinne
,
&
to
be
voyde
of
all
sinne
.
What
victorie
is
there
without
a
battel
?
if
the
flesh
in
the
virgin
Marie
,
did
not
rebel
against
the
spirite
,
what
victorie
had
she
by
grace
?
But
it
is
plaine
Pelagianisme
,
to
hold
that
she
was
voyde
of
sinne
or
perfectly
righteous
.
The
Pelagian
nameth
also
,
ipsam
etians
domini
&c.
the
verie
mother
of
our
Lord
and
Sauiour
,
which
he
saith
it
is
necessarie
for
godlines
,
that
we
confesse
that
she
was
with
out
sinne
.
But
thereof
Augustine
for
the
honour
of
our
Lord
will
haue
no
question
:
signifying
that
although
she
were
not
cleere
and
exempted
from
fi
〈…〉
e
,
but
had
grace
to
ouercome
sinne
,
yet
for
reuerence
of
Christ
her
sonne
,
he
would
not
reason
thereof
to
bring
her
within
the
common
compasse
of
al
siners
.
But
Bristow
perceiueth
that
I
would
not
haue
so
answered
,
seeing
I
affirme
that
by
the
reprehension
of
Christ
,
Iohn
,
2.
she
did
offend
,
for
he
would
neuer
haue
reproued
his
mother
without
a
cause
.
And
said
,
what
haue
I
to
do
with
thee
,
woman
?
except
she
had
intermedled
in
his
office
,
more
then
of
dutie
she
ought
.
But
Bristow
would
colour
his
reproofe
,
two
wayes
:
one
by
false
translation
of
the
words
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
?
what
to
me
and
thee
,
O
woman
?
not
vnderstanding
the
greek
phrase
,
which
is
by
those
words
to
refuse
to
haue
to
doe
with
one
.
As
the
diuels
Matt.
8.
cried
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
?
What
haue
we
to
do
with
thee
,
Iesus
,
thou
sonne
of
God
,
and
not
as
Bristowe
translateth
,
What
to
vs
and
thee
Iesus
&c.
But
because
Bristow
saith
,
that
if
Christ
should
meane
,
that
the
want
of
wine
perteined
neither
to
him
nor
to
his
mother
,
yet
she
were
not
discharged
of
error
,
to
moue
him
in
a
matter
,
which
belongeth
neither
to
him
nor
her
:
He
sayth
,
I
might
doe
well
to
tell
him
,
what
were
those
sinnes
of
hers
.
I
thinke
the
answere
of
Christ
sheweth
what
her
offence
was
here
,
and
Luk.
5.
that
she
presumed
to
intermeddle
vnder
colour
of
her
motherly
authoritie
,
with
matter
apperteining
to
his
diuine
office
,
of
being
Christ
the
mediator
,
with
which
she
had
nothing
to
doe
,
as
a
mother
,
but
was
esteemed
of
him
as
a
woman
,
who
knew
when
it
was
conuenient
for
him
to
doe
,
whatsoeuer
were
for
the
glorie
of
Gods
kingdome
,
to
be
done
,
without
her
or
any
other
bodies
admonition
.
Neither
doe
I
charge
her
as
Chrysostom
in
Ioann
.
Hom.
20.
Optabat
.
enim
.
&c.
For
she
wished
that
he
might
now
winne
the
fauor
of
men
,
and
that
she
might
be
made
more
noble
by
the
fauour
of
her
sonne
.
And
perchance
she
was
moued
with
some
humane
affection
,
euen
as
his
brethren
,
when
they
saide
,
shew
thy selfe
to
the
world
,
being
desirous
by
his
miracles
,
to
winne
themselues
a
fame
.
Therefore
he
answered
more
sharpely
:
what
haue
I
to
doe
with
thee
,
woman
?
my
houre
is
not
yet
come
.
For
that
he
did
reuerence
his
mother
,
Luke
doth
testifie
,
that
he
was
subiect
to
his
parentes
,
and
this
Euangelist
doth
shew
,
how
great
care
he
had
of
his
mother
in
the
time
of
his
passion
.
For
where
his
parentes
did
nothing
hinder
the
mysteries
of
GOD
,
did
offend
nothing
,
it
was
meete
and
necessarie
for
the
sonne
to
be
obedient
,
neither
could
he
deny
obedience
without
greate
perill
.
Contrarywise
,
when
they
desire
an
vnseasonable
thing
,
and
that
which
would
haue
beene
an
hinderance
to
spirituall
thinges
.
Who
is
my
mother
and
my
brethren
?
quoth
he
.
For
as
yet
they
had
not
such
opinion
of
him
as
they
ought
:
but
Marie
after
the
manner
of
mothers
,
thought
she
should
haue
commanded
her
sonne
in
all
thinges
,
by
her
authoritie
&c.
But
the
councell
of
Trent
(
saith
Bristow
)
sheweth
that
she
had
more
neede
of
Christes
grace
then
all
other
saints
,
to
preserue
her
from
sinne
.
But
in
the
meane
time
,
she
had
no
neede
of
his
redemption
,
for
the
remission
of
sinne
,
who
was
appoynted
to
saue
his
people
from
their
sinnes
,
who
came
to
seeke
and
to
saue
that
which
was
lost
,
both
of
the
house
of
Israel
,
and
of
the
Gentiles
,
so
many
as
attained
saluation
.
So
therefore
howsoeuer
Bristow
scorneth
at
my
diuinity
,
I
will
still
conclude
that
the
virgin
Mary
,
beeing
so
principal
a
person
of
Christs
people
,
was
saued
from
her
sinnes
,
by
the
redemption
of
his
bloode
,
was
lost
,
but
sought
vp
,
and
saued
by
him
.
Which
diuinitie
being
taken
out
of
the
scriptures
,
I
trust
is
more
commendable
,
then
the
contrarie
doctrine
deriued
from
the
Pelagians
,
and
defended
by
the
Papistes
.
The
10.
poynt
of
mine
ignorance
is
,
about
the
definition
of
an
heretike
,
whom
I
saide
to
be
a
man
in
the
Church
.
I
haue
shewed
before
,
that
I
distinguish
betweene
him
that
is
in
the
Church
,
and
him
that
is
of
the
Church
;
a
Papiste
,
an
Anabaptist
,
may
be
in
the
Church
,
but
they
cannot
be
of
the
Church
,
except
they
repent
.
Where
I
added
vnto
my
definition
,
that
if
any
of
vs
can
be
proued
obstinately
to
mainteine
our
opinion
,
contrarie
to
the
doctrine
of
the
scriptures
,
we
refuse
not
to
be
counted
heretikes
.
Bristow
saith
,
they
may
say
the
like
.
But
the
triall
is
all
.
Bristow
saith
,
they
bring
plaine
scriptures
to
proue
that
all
the
doctrine
of
the
Apostles
traditions
,
is
the
doctrine
of
the
scriptures
.
And
we
say
the
same
,
that
whatsoeuer
the
Apostles
deliuered
in
speech
,
they
deliuered
also
in
writing
,
and
neither
contrarie
to
other
.
But
that
all
true
doctrine
necessarie
to
saluation
,
is
not
conteined
in
the
scriptures
,
that
you
proue
not
,
neither
that
such
things
were
of
the
Apostles
deliuerie
,
as
you
call
traditions
of
the
Apostles
.
As
for
the
particular
poyntes
you
prate
of
,
concerning
the
time
of
the
Churches
persecution
,
and
Antichristes
raigne
,
haue
beene
answered
in
their
proper
places
.
The
wordes
of
Christ
,
This
is
my
body
:
we
acknowledge
to
be
true
,
in
such
sense
as
he
spake
them
,
neither
can
you
prooue
that
they
importe
your
carnall
Carpernaiticall
presence
,
what
you
hold
of
Iustification
by
workes
,
Worshipping
of
Images
,
Insufficiencie
of
Christes
redemption
,
Impeccabilitie
of
Marie
&c.
contrarie
to
the
expresse
and
plaine
textes
of
the
scripture
,
it
were
out
of
place
here
o
make
rehersall
.
The
11.
is
mine
ignorance
in
wondring
at
Allen
for
saying
,
that
a
christian
scholer
should
first
beleeue
,
and
after
seeke
for
understanding
,
he
hath
noted
cap
10.
Dem.
34.
and
there
haue
I
answered
.
The
12.
poynt
proceedeth
of
like
ignorance
,
where
I
am
said
to
wonder
,
when
I
heare
that
the
sacrifice
of
the
masse
is
a
likenesse
of
the
sacrifice
of
Christs
death
vpon
the
crosse
.
And
then
I
am
asked
whether
I
know
not
that
sacramentes
are
not
likenesses
of
other
thinges
:
and
Augustine
is
called
to
witnesse
,
with
much
adoe
,
as
though
it
is
all
one
to
haue
sacramentes
which
are
similitudes
of
Christs
death
,
and
to
haue
a
sacrifice
of
similitude
or
likenesse
,
which
I
saide
truly
was
contrary
to
the
whole
scope
of
the
Epistle
to
the
Hebrewes
,
that
there
should
be
any
shadowes
or
resemblances
,
when
the
body
and
substance
it selfe
is
come
:
which
I
spake
,
supposing
that
Allen
by
likenes
of
the
exemplar
,
meaneth
the
masse
with
all
the
apish
pageants
thereof
,
to
be
like
the
sacrifice
of
Christes
death
.
And
indeede
it
was
that
monstruous
saying
of
Allen
,
which
I
wondered
at
.
By
likenesse
of
the
exemplar
(
as
indeede
being
in
an
other
maner
the
verie
selfe-same
.
But
Bristow
setting
a
good
countenance
,
vpon
so
great
an
absurditie
,
asketh
what
boy
hath
not
hearde
it
saide
,
of
one
&
the
same
man
being
changed
by
age
,
sicknesse
,
apparel
,
shauing
,
&c.
he
is
like
or
vnlike
himselfe
?
But
tontrariewise
,
what
boy
in
Oxford
or
Cambridge
,
would
not
reply
,
that
this
similitude
or
likenesse
or
vnlikenesse
,
is
of
two
seuerall
shapes
,
and
not
of
one
and
the
same
substance
vnto
it selfe
:
as
Allen
saith
,
the
sacrament
is
like
the
body
of
Christ
,
and
is
the
very
same
in
another
maner
that
is
vnder
couerture
of
accidentes
that
belong
to
another
kinde
of
substance
.
But
Bristowe
is
not
so
quicke
to
vnderstand
me
where
I
vnderstand
not
my selfe
as
he
weeneth
,
where
I
say
:
neither
will
it
helpe
,
that
Allen
saith
,
it
is
the
selfesame
in
another
manner
,
so
longe
as
the
same
respect
remaineth
:
I
am
sorie
that
Bristowe
is
so
dull
headed
,
that
he
cannot
vnderstand
,
what
the
same
respecte
meaneth
in
opposition
,
which
if
it
not
obserued
in
the
thinges
opposed
,
they
are
not
alwayes
opposite
,
and
specially
relatiues
who
hange
altogether
vpon
respect
.
But
Bristowe
asketh
who
can
imagine
,
that
the
verie
same
respecte
remaineth
,
when
the
same
manner
doth
not
remaine
?
Why
sir
?
what
is
the
respect
of
the
likenesse
of
the
sacrifice
of
the
masse
,
with
the
exemplar
?
seeing
you
confesse
the
manner
tobe
vnlike
,
but
the
verie
identitie
of
the
thing
sacrificed
,
which
is
the
monster
that
I
maruaile
at
:
as
also
that
you
cannot
imagine
the
same
respect
,
where
there
is
not
the
same
manner
.
Is
not
God
,
the
father
of
our
Lord
Christ
,
in
the
same
respect
that
Abraham
is
the
father
of
Isaak
,
but
yet
after
a
farre
other
manner
?
yea
,
to
follow
your
owne
wise
examples
,
is
not
Abraham
father
of
Isaak
in
the
same
respecte
,
when
Isaak
is
yonge
,
and
when
he
is
olde
;
when
he
is
cloathed
,
and
when
he
is
naked
;
when
he
is
shauen
,
and
when
he
was
bearded
;
when
he
is
sicke
,
and
when
he
is
whole
?
Such
are
the
manners
in
which
you
houlde
that
the
sacrifice
of
the
masse
,
is
the
same
after
another
manner
.
The
13.
is
where
I
attribute
to
diuorsement
,
which
the
scripture
in
many
places
doth
deny
to
diuorsement
,
and
doth
attribute
onely
to
death
.
What
is
it
?
to
make
her
no
wife
,
that
was
a
wife
.
Verily
diuorsement
for
adulterie
maketh
her
no
wife
,
that
was
a
wife
,
as
is
gathered
euen
by
those
textes
of
scriptures
which
Bristowe
quoteth
Matt.
5.
&
19.
Mark
.
10.
&c.
where
the
exception
of
fornication
,
maketh
the
case
to
be
the
same
that
was
vsed
by
permission
of
the
lawe
,
in
diuorsementes
,
and
mariage
after
diuorsementes
.
But
Bristowe
saith
,
I
vtter
herein
my
skil
,
in
many
thinges
.
As
in
saying
that
mariage
after
diuorsements
is
dispensed
with
all
by
the
Pope
.
And
doe
I
not
say
true
,
although
the
Popes
law
denyeth
such
mariage
to
be
lawfull
?
Are
there
not
many
examples
of
such
dispensations
?
Secondly
I
say
,
that
the
Popes
canon
lawe
hath
farre
many
more
causes
of
diuorsement
then
for
adulterie
.
Bristow
distinguisheth
the
perpetuall
diuorse
,
for
adulterie
,
where
the
innocent
partie
cannot
be
compelled
to
receiue
the
guiltie
partie
,
although
he
become
neuer
so
chast
;
and
separation
,
where
the
furie
of
a
man
is
so
great
,
that
the
wife
is
in
danger
of
her
life
:
asking
if
we
doe
not
allow
her
to
dwell
away
from
him
vntill
he
be
amended
:
No
verily
,
but
we
would
compell
him
to
lie
in
prison
from
her
,
vntill
his
amendement
might
sufficiently
appeare
.
But
what
saith
your
lawe
,
concerning
frigiditie
,
concerning
error
in
the
condition
of
the
person
,
as
if
she
marie
a
man
which
is
bond
,
whom
she
supposed
to
haue
beene
free
&c.
Doth
not
your
lawe
allow
diuorsements
perpetuall
in
such
cases
?
But
where
I
wish
that
adulterers
might
be
punished
with
death
,
first
he
quarelleth
,
as
though
I
held
that
the
Iudiciall
lawe
were
stil
to
be
obserued
:
as
though
it
be
not
free
in
such
poyntes
,
as
it
is
conuenient
for
other
common
welthes
to
receiue
it
,
albeit
,
it
is
not
necessarie
.
Secondly
he
houldeth
that
a
man
was
not
punished
by
death
,
if
he
sinned
against
his
wife
with
a
single
woman
.
Where
as
the
case
is
expresly
of
a
single
man
,
lying
with
another
'
mans
wife
,
or
of
one
that
was
betroathed
to
another
man
,
which
must
needes
be
all
one
,
of
a
maried
man
lying
with
a
single
woman
.
Leuit.
20.
and
Deut.
22.
And
yet
he
noteth
mine
ignorance
of
the
lawe
:
because
I
charge
the
Papistes
to
allow
dispensation
for
such
persons
to
marie
,
as
the
lawe
of
God
and
nature
abhorreth
.
Then
he
asketh
me
,
what
lawe
of
God
do
I
meane
?
but
Leu.
18
?
and
whether
I
thinke
that
law
to
binde
Christians
?
Yea
verily
,
for
the
sense
of
nature
abhorreth
all
those
forbidden
coniunctions
.
What
else
moued
the
heathen
Romanes
to
make
lawes
euen
of
the
same
?
But
Bristow
bringeth
in
Gods
dispensation
in
the
old
Testament
,
which
is
false
:
for
after
the
propagation
of
mankinde
,
for
which
it
was
of
necessitie
allowed
,
it
can
neuer
be
proued
that
God
allowed
any
one
of
those
mariages
forbidden
.
18.
But
the
Pope
dispenseth
not
onely
with
marying
of
the
brothers
wife
in
affinitie
,
but
euen
with
the
Vncle
to
marie
his
Neece
,
in
consanguinitie
,
as
we
see
in
the
mariage
of
King
Philippe
of
Spaine
in
our
daies
.
The
14.
after
such
ignorance
in
Gods
lawe
discouered
,
Bristow
marueileth
not
if
I
be
ignorant
in
the
Popishe
Churches
lawe
and
diuinitie
,
in
making
it
a
certaine
thing
,
that
the
Pope
giueth
his
pardons
by
the
sacrament
of
penance
.
Athough
it
be
no
great
shame
for
me
to
professe
mine
ignorance
in
many
of
the
popes
lawes
&
some
part
of
his
diuinitie
:
yet
herein
Bristow
doth
me
wrong
,
to
charge
me
to
say
absolutely
,
that
the
Pope
giueth
his
pardons
by
the
sacrament
of
penance
.
As
though
the
Pope
being
at
Rome
,
might
minister
a
sacrament
to
one
in
England
.
And
that
so
great
a
D.
doth
not
trowe
that
the
power
of
binding
and
loosing
is
exercised
many
other
wayes
besides
that
sacrament
.
Seeing
the
Master
of
the
sentences
comprehendeth
vnder
the
title
of
the
sacrament
of
penance
,
al
that
power
or
what
soeuer
he
can
enquire
or
define
of
it
Lib.
4.
Dist.
14.
15.
16.
17.
But
if
sins
may
be
forgiuen
in
popery
without
repentance
,
&
that
the
Popes
pardons
require
no
repentance
in
them
that
should
take
the
benifite
of
them
,
it
is
one
poynt
of
poperie
that
I
am
content
to
confesse
that
I
haue
learned
of
Bristow
.
The
15.
poynt
is
,
that
I
am
ignorant
in
our
own
diuinity
,
because
I
wonder
that
a
Papist
should
say
,
that
God
sometime
punisheth
sinne
with
sinne
,
and
complaine
that
when
we
say
,
but
halfe
somuch
,
they
chardge
vs
to
make
God
the
auctor
of
sinne
.
For
Bristowe
asketh
,
if
it
be
not
a
common
position
&
large
discourses
vpon
it
in
our
masters
bookes
,
that
God
is
the
author
of
sinne
?
O
impudent
and
malitious
lyer
,
hast
thou
read
those
bookes
of
Caluine
Insti
.
lib.
1.
cap.
17.
18.
&
Melancthon
.
ad
Rom.
which
thou
quotest
,
and
darest
thou
for
shame
of
the
world
,
if
thou
haue
no
feare
of
God
,
to
charge
them
with
holding
such
a
blasphemous
position
,
when
they
in
the
same
bookes
doe
refute
it
,
as
an
horrible
slaunder
which
they
neuer
thought
of
:
but
alwayes
affirmed
that
God
as
a
righteous
iudge
,
not
as
an
euill
author
Ioseth
Satan
,
and
vseth
his
ministerie
for
the
punishment
of
sin
&
sinners
,
and
for
the
trial
and
amendment
of
his
children
as
in
Dauid
&
Iob
?
As
for
those
blasphemies
that
God
worketh
sinne
in
vs
by
himselfe
,
willing
,
appoynting
,
and
predestinating
vs
to
sin
,
no
lesse
than
he
,
which
leadeth
a
blind
man
out
of
his
way
&c.
are
nothing
else
but
Bristowes
lies
&
slanders
alwaies
detested
of
those
godly
writers
,
&
of
all
them
that
truly
professe
and
imbrace
the
Gospel
.
The
16.
poynt
is
of
mine
ignorance
in
histories
ecclesiastical
,
as
of
the
celebration
of
Easter
by
the
Britons
and
Grecians
,
noted
before
and
answered
.
Secondly
because
I
say
(
as
it
seemeth
)
that
Iulianus
the
Apostata
was
Emperour
after
Valens
the
Arrian
.
Surely
where
I
learned
that
he
was
a
persecutor
of
the
Church
,
I
might
haue
learned
the
time
of
his
Emipre
,
that
he
was
next
to
Constantius
,
&
after
him
Iouianus
,
Valentinianus
,
&
Valens
,
&
sure
I
am
that
I
learned
it
out
of
Carions
Chronicle
30.
yeares
agoe
.
Which
being
so
vulgar
a
matter
,
I
thought
none
had
beene
so
malicious
to
charge
me
with
ignorance
therof
.
But
indeede
he
chargeth
me
very
iniuriously
,
for
when
I
say
after
that
when
Iulianus
the
Apostata
was
Emperour
,
I
meane
to
shewe
how
persecution
and
Gentility
was
restored
after
that
Constantine
had
giuen
peace
,
beside
the
trouble
of
heresie
which
was
in
the
time
of
Constantius
and
Constans
,
to
whom
I
ioined
Valens
,
as
agreeing
in
that
same
heresie
of
Arrianisme
.
Againe
where
I
saide
,
the
newe
Testament
is
printed
in
the
Syrian
tongue
at
the
Emperors
charges
,
for
the
encrease
of
Christian
faith
among
them
:
Bristowe
asketh
me
,
what
Emperor
,
or
what
faith
,
but
Catholike
or
Popish
?
That
which
I
saide
of
the
Syrian
Testament
,
was
to
shewe
that
the
Churches
in
Chaldea
haue
preserued
the
scriptures
,
which
yet
are
not
subiect
to
the
Church
of
Rome
;
with
the
Emperors
profession
I
delt
not
,
but
his
purpose
I
suppose
,
was
to
encrease
Christian
faith
,
and
I
am
persuaded
the
reading
of
the
scriptures
in
the
mother
tongue
will
not
encrease
Popish
faith
,
seeing
Papists
are
so
vnwilling
,
that
the
people
should
read
the
worde
of
God
in
the
natiue
language
.
Fourthly
that
I
say
the
fathers
alledging
the
succession
of
Bishops
against
heretikes
,
specially
named
the
Church
of
Rome
,
because
those
heretikes
for
the
most
part
had
ben
somtimes
of
the
Church
of
Rome
,
as
Valentinus
,
Marcion
,
Nouatus
.
Against
this
Bristowe
telleth
me
,
that
Allen
speaketh
also
of
the
Arrians
,
Donatists
,
and
al
heretikes
.
But
I
spake
of
those
fathers
,
that
alledged
the
succession
of
Bishops
,
namely
Irenaeus
,
Tertullian
and
Cyprian
.
Irenaeus
testifieth
of
Valentinus
,
Cerdon
and
Marcion
,
that
they
were
at
Rome
vnder
Hyginus
,
Pius
,
and
Anicetus
,
and
that
Cerdon
came
often
into
the
Church
and
made
his
confession
,
and
yet
taught
his
heresie
priuily
and
was
excommunicated
.
For
Nouatus
that
he
was
a
Prieste
of
the
Church
of
Rome
,
Eusebius
is
cleare
.
Lib.
6.
Cap.
42.
But
Cyprian
calleth
him
Nouatianus
,
whereas
Nouatus
had
beene
of
Carthage
,
but
from
thence
was
also
gone
to
Rome
.
I
deny
not
but
the
similitude
of
the
names
might
cause
the
Greeke
writers
to
be
deceiued
,
as
Bristowe
saith
,
and
it
may
be
that
the
name
of
Nouatianus
in
Cyprian
is
corrupted
for
Nouatus
,
and
the
other
called
Nouatus
in
steade
of
Nauatus
,
which
name
was
then
in
vse
.
But
seeing
the
person
of
the
heretike
is
certaine
,
it
is
folly
to
striue
for
his
name
,
I
haue
shewed
mine
authour
for
Nouatus
〈◊〉
Rome
,
and
so
for
the
rest
:
wherefore
I
haue
not
bewraied
any
ignorance
therein
,
as
Bristowe
pretendeth
.
The
17.
and
last
point
of
mine
ignorance
is
,
where
I
shewe
,
wherein
the
communion
of
Saintes
consisteth
:
In
that
I
say
,
one
can
not
merit
for
an
other
,
no
not
for
him selfe
,
but
euery
man
hath
his
worthinesse
of
Christe
.
As
though
(
saith
Bristowe
)
neither
Christ
could
merite
for
any
other
,
no
nor
for
him selfe
,
because
he
had
his
worthinesse
of
God
.
But
I
say
that
Christ
,
because
he
was
God
,
had
his
worthinesse
of
him selfe
,
and
therefore
did
merite
for
vs
.
And
see
what
secret
blasphemie
is
contained
in
this
comparison
of
Bristowe
:
Where
he
would
make
a
similitude
of
meriting
betweene
vs
which
please
not
God
,
but
onely
through
his
mercy
;
with
Christe
,
who
satisfied
the
iustice
of
God
.
But
Bristowe
chargeth
me
so
to
define
the
communion
of
Saints
,
that
I
allow
no
place
for
the
praiers
of
the
members
aliue
,
made
for
others
that
are
aliue
.
A
vile
slander
,
when
I
speake
of
the
grace
and
giftes
of
God
,
which
as
euery
one
hath
receiued
of
God
,
so
of
charitie
he
is
bound
to
imploy
the
same
to
the
profite
of
his
fellowe
members
here
on
earth
.
But
if
we
be
bound
of
charitie
to
pray
one
for
an
other
(
saith
Bristowe
)
whie
are
not
these
members
in
heauen
as
well
?
Because
there
is
not
a
lawe
appointed
for
them
that
are
in
heauen
,
and
them
that
be
in
earth
,
we
knowe
praier
is
commaunded
vs
,
we
knowe
not
any
praier
commaunded
them
:
neither
are
we
to
trust
to
any
such
thing
.
But
the
Scripture
saith
,
that
Christes
friendes
doe
reioice
in
heauen
with
his
penitents
in
earth
,
It
saith
so
in
deede
of
the
Angels
,
and
I
doubt
not
of
the
like
affection
of
the
blessed
spirites
,
but
of
their
knowledge
:
and
if
their
knowledge
were
certaine
,
yet
it
followeth
not
,
that
they
pray
for
the
conuersion
of
sinners
:
and
much
lesse
that
the
mutuall
offices
of
loue
,
whereby
one
member
hath
compassion
with
an
other
,
can
by
any
meanes
touch
the
state
of
the
deade
,
to
receiue
any
benefite
thereby
.
But
an
other
quarrell
is
,
where
I
make
the
communion
of
the
whole
body
,
to
be
the
participation
of
life
from
Christ
the
head
.
If
this
be
all
(
saith
Bristow
)
then
there
is
no
communion
.
For
what
communion
were
it
betweene
the
members
of
your
naturall
body
,
if
they
did
onely
receiue
life
from
your
head
,
and
could
not
vse
the
saide
life
to
profite
one
an
other
?
&c.
This
man
hath
great
leasure
to
trifle
without
any
matter
.
Who
so
shall
reade
my
wordes
,
Pur.
199.
which
he
quoteth
,
shall
finde
me
to
say
,
That
the
communion
of
the
whole
body
,
is
the
participation
of
life
,
and
all
other
offices
of
life
that
euery
member
and
the
whole
body
hath
of
the
head
,
as
S.
Paule
teacheth
plainely
.
Ephes
4.
If
it
be
any
office
of
a
Christian
life
,
for
one
member
to
assist
an
other
in
that
it
may
,
and
as
it
ought
,
I
haue
comprehended
it
,
but
that
Bristowe
doth
wilfully
holde
my
saying
,
and
then
play
with
it
at
his
pleasure
.
Yet
he
chargeth
me
with
belying
of
Allen
:
that
he
will
haue
other
workes
&
waies
of
saluation
,
besides
the
bloud
of
Christ
,
because
he
groundeth
all
works
and
waies
of
saluation
in
the
bloud
of
Christ
.
But
I
reporting
his
words
truly
,
by
plain
distribution
do
gather
,
that
Allen
will
haue
other
workes
and
waies
of
saluation
beside
the
bloud
of
Christ
:
except
you
will
say
,
that
is
no
way
nor
worke
of
saluation
of
it selfe
,
without
these
waies
and
works
of
men
.
If
the
bloud
of
Christ
of
it selfe
be
one
way
and
worke
of
saluation
:
and
there
be
other
waies
and
workes
,
though
grounded
in
it
,
then
are
there
more
waies
and
workes
of
saluation
,
than
the
onely
redemption
of
Christe
,
which
I
vnderstand
by
the
bloud
of
Christ
,
so
I
haue
done
Allen
no
iniurie
,
but
he
hath
offered
hainous
iniurie
to
the
bloud
of
Christe
,
and
so
doe
al
they
which
mixed
it
with
any
to
purchase
Gods
fauour
,
who
is
reconciled
by
none
other
merite
or
satisfaction
,
but
only
by
the
bloud
of
the
crosse
of
his
Sonne
our
Lorde
Iesus
Christe
,
to
whome
be
praise
for
euer
more
.
In
the
thirtienth
chapter
or
conclusion
,
Bristowe
doth
only
shew
,
that
there
is
in
my
two
bookes
stuffe
ynough
to
make
an
other
booke
as
bigge
as
this
,
to
the
discredit
of
my
partie
.
I
trust
this
booke
of
his
,
as
bigge
as
it
is
,
hath
wrought
no
discredite
to
the
cause
I
maintaine
,
because
I
haue
shewed
howe
it
is
stuffed
with
lies
,
slaunders
,
falsifications
,
and
cauillations
;
such
stuffe
he
may
haue
great
store
in
the
diuell
his
maisters
schoole
,
to
make
a
booke
tenne
times
as
bigge
as
this
was
:
but
for
so
much
as
he
hath
not
aunswered
any
one
of
mine
arguments
,
or
refelled
any
one
of
mine
aunsweres
to
Allen
,
in
any
right
order
,
leauing
the
defence
of
him
(
as
he
pretendeth
to
defend
the
Church
,
I
confesse
he
hath
left
matter
sufficient
,
for
any
man
,
that
will
vndertake
the
confutation
of
my
bookes
(
which
this
his
vnorderly
and
vnsufficient
replie
,
notwithstanding
)
I
protest
to
remaine
still
in
their
strength
and
vnanswered
.
GOD
BE
PRAYSED
.