A04468:4129
A defence of the Apology of the Church of England containing an answer to…A defence of the Apologie of the Churche of Englande conteininge an answeare to…
A defence of the Apology of the Church of England containing an answer to a certain book lately set forth by M. Harding, and entitled, A confutation of &c. By John Jewel Bishop of Salisbury.A defence of the Apologie of the Churche of Englande conteininge an answeare to a certaine booke lately set foorthe by M. Hardinge, and entituled, A confutation of &c. By Iohn Iewel Bishop of Sarisburie.
Imprinted at London : In Fleetestreate, at the sign of the Elephant, by Henry Wykes, Anno 1567. 27. OctobrisImprinted at London : In Fleetestreate, at the signe of the Elephante, by Henry VVykes, Anno 1567. 27. Octobris
Part 6 › The Apology, Cap. 6. Division. 3.Part 6 › The Apologie, Cap. 6. Diuision. 3.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
The Apology, Cap. 6. Division. 3.
The Apologie, Cap. 6. Diuision. 3.
In deed Peter Asotus, and his companion Hosius, stick not to affirm,1 that the same Council, wherein our Saviour Jesus christ was condemned to die, had both the Sprite of Prophesying, and the Holy Ghost, and the Sprite of Truth: and, that it was neither a false, nor a trifling saying, when those Bishops said, We have a Law, and by our Law he ought to die: and, that they, so saying, did light upon the very Truth of Judgement (for so be Hosius words) and, that the same plainly was a just Decree, whereby they pronounced, that Christ was worthy to die. This, me thinketh, is strange, that these men are not able to speak for them selves, and to defend their own cause, but they must also take part with Annas, & Caiaphas. For, if they will call that a lawful, and a good Council, wherein the Son of God was most shamefully condemned to die, what Council will they then allow for false, and naught? And yet (as all their Councils, to say truth, commonly be) necessity compelled them, to pronounce these things of the Council holden by Annas, and Caiaphas.
In deede Peter Asotus, and his companion Hosius, sticke not to affirme,1 that the same Councel, wherein our Saueour Iesus christe was condemned to die, had bothe the Sprite of Prophesieinge, and the Holy Ghoste, and the Sprite of Truthe: and, that it was neither a false, nor a triflinge saieinge, when those Bishoppes saide, VVee haue a Lavve, and by our Lavve he ought to die: and, that they, so saieinge, did lighte vpon the very Truthe of Iudgemente (for so be Hosius woordes) and, that the same plainely was a iuste Decree, whereby they pronounced, that Christe was woorthy to die. This, me thinketh, is straunge, that these menne are not hable to speake for them selues, and to defende their owne cause, but thei muste also take parte with Annas, & Caiphas. For, if they wil cal that a lauful, and a good Councel, wherein the Sonne of God was moste shamefully condemned to die, what Councel wil thei then allowe for false, and naughte? And yet (as al their Councelles, to saie truthe, commonly be) necessitie compelled them, to pronounce these thinges of the Councel holden by Annas, and Caiphas.