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…

M. Harding.

M. Hardinge.

Such unhonest toys better become Brentius, that shameless railing Heretic. Now to you, Sir Defender. You belie Hosius, as Brentius of whom you borrowed this, belied the Reverent Father Peter a Soto. Either you have readen the place of Hosius, or you have not. If you have not, then are you to blame, to say so much evil, that you know not. If you have readen the place, then is your fault plain malice, in putting that to Hosius, the contrary whereof you find in the place by your self alleged by which you lead us, as it were by the hand, to behold and consider your own dishonesty. How just cause you have to reprehend Hosius, for that he wrote against Brentius in defence of Petrus a Soto, touching the Council in which Christ was condemned by Caiaphas, it should best appear to him, that would read the whole place, where Hosius treateth that matter. The same would I here have rehearsed, to the discovering of your false dealing, and shameless lying, ⟨p. 621⟩were not the same very long.¹

Suche vnhonest toies better become Brentius, that shamelesse railinge Heretike. Now to you, Syr Defender. You belie Hosius, as Brentius of whom you borowed this, belied the Reuerente Father Peter ae Soto. Either you haue readen the place of Hosius, or you haue not. If you haue not, then are you to blame, to saie so mutche euill, that you knowe not. If you haue readen the place, then is your faulte plaine malice, in puttinge that to Hosius, the contrary whereof you finde in the place by your selfe alleaged by which you leade vs, as it were by the hande, to beholde and consider your owne dishonestie. How iuste cause you haue to reprehende Hosius, for that he wrote againste Brentius in defence of Petrus a Soto, touchinge the Councell in whiche Christe was condemned by Caiphas, it shoulde beste appeare to him, that woulde reade the whole place, where Hosius treateth that matter. The same would I here haue rehearsed, to the discoueringe of your false dealinge, and shamelesse lieing, ⟨p. 621⟩were not the same very longe.¹

1. 1The Sprite of Truth in Annas, and Caiaphas.The Sprite of Truthe in Annas, and Caiphas.

First, this is the Truth, touching the whole^* The Acts of those Priests of the Jews Synagogue were wicked, and contrary to Christ. * But their Sentence, though them selves were never so evil, was not only true, but also to mankind most profitable. And S. John in his Gospel witnesseth, it was the oracle of God. For when after long deliberation of the Council, Caiaphas the high Bishop and president of that Council, had pronounced his sentence, whereunto all the rest almost gave their consent,² It is expedient for us, that one man die for the people, and not that all the Nation perish: the Evangelist thereto added his verdict, saying, This he said, not of him self, but whereas he was high Bishop of that year, he Prophesied. Therefore let this be the true conclusion of the whole matter. The acts of that council were wicked, the sentence was true and good. Now Hosius treateth this matter so learnedly, and so substantially, as you can not truly take any advantage of his words to reprehend him. He stateth him self upon the Scripture, a good ground to stand upon. Which Scripture referreth doubt full, and hard questions to the Priests of the Levitical order. Of whom it is saide, Indicabunt tibi Judicij Veritatē: ^‡They shall show unto thee the Truth of Judgement. In this judgement, sayeth Hosius, though it were never so wicked, yet was the truth of judgement. How that might be, there he proveth it to Brentius by most manifest arguments.

Firste, this is the Truthe, touchinge the whole^* The Actes of those Priestes of the Iewes Synagog were wicked, and contrary to Christe. * But their Sentence, though them selues were neuer so euil, was not onely true, but also to mankinde most profitable. And S. Iohn in his Gospell wi•nesseth, it was the oracle of God. For when after longe deliberation of the Councell, Caiphas the highe Bishop and president of that Councell, had pronounced his sentence, whereunto all the reste almost gaue their consente,² It is expedient for vs, that one man die for the people, and not that all the Nation perishe: the Euangeliste thereto added his verdite, sayinge, This he saide, not of him selfe, but whereas he was highe Bishop of that yere, he Prophecied. Therefore let this be the true conclusion of the whole matter. The actes of that councell were wicked, the sentence was true and good. Nowe Hosius treateth this matter so learnedly, and so substantially, as you can not truely take any aduantage of his woordes to reprehende him. He stateth him selfe vpon the Scripture, a good grounde to stande vpon. VVhiche Scripture referreth doubt full, and harde questions to the Priestes of the Leuiticall order. Of whome it is saide, Indicabunt tibi Iudicij Veritatē: ^‡They shal shewe vnto thee the Truth of Iudgement. In this iudgement, saieth Hosius, though it were neuer so wicked, yet was the truthe of iudgement. How that might be, there he proueth it to Brentius by moste manifest argumentes.

1. *A discrete, and a worthy proctor. The Acts were naught, and the sentence good. The Sentence was, That Christ should die the death.A discrete, and a vvoorthy proctoure. The Actes vvere naught, and the sentence good. The Sentence vvas, That Christ should die the deathe.
2. 2Joan. 19.Ioan. 19.
3. ‡This Truth of Judgement was, That the Sonne of God was a Blahpsemer, and had deserved to die.This Truthe of Iudgemente vvas, That the Sonne of God vvas a Blahpsemer, and had de••rued to die.

Where ye impute to Hosius, to have said, that the same plainly was a just decree,^* whereby they pronounced that Christ was worthy to die, that is your slanderous lie, not Hosius saying. * For he sayeth the clean contrary, and that sundry times, that it was a wicked Council, and most unjust decree. God forbid any Christen man should say, that Christ was worthy to die.^‡ He saith, it might have been truly pronounced by Caiaphas, that he was guilty of death. And there he showeth how, very religiously, and wisely admonishing the reader, that he was most innocent, and deserved not to die. And thus, Sir, you may see, we take not part with Annas, and Caiaphas, as you rail, and yet be able, God be thanked, to defend our true cause, and declare you to the world to be false teachers. Therefore belie us no more.

VVhere ye impute to Hosius, to haue saide, that the same plainely was a iuste decree,^* whereby they pronounced that Christe was woorthy to die, that is your slaunderous lie, not Hosius saieinge. * For he saieth the cleane contrary, and that sundry times, that it was a wicked Councell, and moste vniuste decree. God forebidde any Christen man should saie, that Christe was woorthy to die.^‡ He saithe, it might haue benne truely pronounced by Caiphas, that he was gilty of deathe. And there he sheweth how, very religiously, and wisely admonishinge the reader, that he was moste innocent, and deserued not to die. And thus, Syr, you may see, we take not parte with Annas, and Caiphas, as you raile, and yet be able, God be thanked, to defende our true cause, and declare you to the worlde to be false teachers. Therefore belie vs no more.

1. *Untruth For thus said Caiaphas: And his Judgement Hosius defendeth, as true, and godly.Vntruthe For thus saide Caiphas: And his Iudgemente Hosius defendeth, as true, and godly.
2. ‡Christ, by Hosius Judgement, was guilty of death.Christe, by Hosius Iudgemente, vvas guilty of death.

The B. of Salisbury.

The B. of Sarisburie.

Good Christian Reader, this whole matter concerneth only the credit, and certainty of General Councils. Sotus, and Hosius say, what so ever is determined in Council, must be taken, as the undoubted Judgement, and Word of God. Hereunto the Godly Learned Father, Johannes Brentius, replieth thus, Councils sometimes have erred, and have utterly wanted the Sprite of God: as it may appear by that in a Council the Son of God was condemned, and judged to die the death. Hosius answereth, When Annas, and Caiaphas sate as Presidents in the Council, and Christ y• Son of God, was by them condemned to die, yet nevertheless y• same Council had the assistance of the Holy Ghost, and the undoubted Sprite of Truth. For, ¹speaking of the same Council, he saith thus, Vides, Brenti, quemadmodum non defuerit Sacerdotio Levitico Spiritus Propheticus, Spiritus Sanctus, Spiritus Veritatis: Yee see, friend Brentius, how that the Levitical Priesthood (that pronounced sentence of death against Christ) wanted not the Sprite of Prophecy, the Holy Ghost,² the Sprite of Truth. Again he saithe, Ex quo tempore Primus Parens noster de vento ligno gustavit, factus est Mortis Reus Christus Dei, &c. Nec falsum fuit illud,³ quod dixerunt, Nos legem habemus, & secundum Legem hanc debet mori: From the tune, that our First Father tasted of the forbidden fruit Christ the Son of God became guilty of death: Neither was it false, that the Jews said, We have a Law, and according to that Law he ought to die. With this Sprite, I trow, he was inspired, that wrote this Marginal Note upon your Decrees, Judaei mortaliter peccassent,⁴ nisi Christum Crucifixissent: The lewes had committed mortal sin, if they had not nailed Christ unto the Cross. Again, Hosius saithe,⁵ Nulla esse potest tanta Pontificum improbitas, quae impedire queat, quo' minùs vera sit illa Dei Promissio, Qui indicabunt tibi Judicij Veritatem: Be the wickedness ⟨p. 622⟩of Bishops never so great, it can never hinder, but that this promise of God shall ever be true, The Bishops shall show thee the truth of Judgement.

Good Christian Reader, this whole mater concerneth onely the credite, and certainetie of General Councelles. Sotus, and Hosius saie, what so euer is determined in Councel, must be taken, as the vndoubted Iudgemente, and VVoorde of God. Hereunto the Godly Learned Father, Iohannes Brentius, replieth thus, Councelles sommetimes haue erred, and haue vtterly wanted the Sprite of God: as it maie appeare by that in a Councel the Sonne of God was condemned, and iudged to die the deathe. Hosius answeareth, When Annas, and Caiphas sate as Presidentes in the Coūcel, and Christe y• Sonne of God, was by them condēned to die, yet neuerthelesse y• same Coūcel had the assistance of the Holy Ghoste, and the vndoubted Sprite of Truthe. For, ¹speakinge of the same Councel, he saithe thus, Vides, Brenti, quemadmodum non defuerit Sacerdotio Leuitico Spiritus Propheticus, Spiritus Sanctus, Spiritus Veritatis: Yee see, frende Brentius, how that the Leuitical Priesthoode (that pronounced sentence of deathe against Christe) wanted not the Sprite of Prophesie, the Holy Ghoste,² the Sprite of Truthe. Againe he saithe, Ex quo tempore Primus Parēs noster de vento ligno gustauit, factus est Mortis Reus Christus Dei, &c. Nec falsum fuit illud,³ quod dixerunt, Nos legem habemus, & secundum Legem hanc debet mori: From the tune, that oure Firste Father tasted of the forebidden fruite Christe the Sonne of God became guilty of deathe: Neither was it false, that the Iewes saide, VVee haue a Lavve, and accordinge to that Lavve he ought to die. With this Sprite, I trowe, he was inspired, that wrote this Marginal Note vpon your Decrees, Iudaei mortaliter peccassent,⁴ nisi Christum Crucifixissent: The levves had committed mortal sinne, if they had not nailed Christe vnto the Crosse. Againe, Hosius saithe,⁵ Nulla esse potest tanta Pontificum improbitas, quae impedire queat, quo' minùs vera sit illa Dei Promissio, Qui indicabunt tibi Iudicij Veritatem: Be the wickednesse ⟨p. 622⟩of Bishoppes neuer so greate, it can neuer hinder, but that this promisse of God shal euer be true, The Bishoppes shal shevve thee the truthe of Iudgemente.

1. 1Hosius, Li. 2. contra Brentium.
2. 2Pagi. 62. b.
3. 3Pagi. 63. a.
4. 4Dist. 13. Item. In Margin.Dist. 13. Item. In Margine.
5. 5Hosius contra Brent. Pag. 63. b

This therefore, M. Harding, is your Doctors meaning: It is sufficient, that Bishops only meet in Council. God will supply all the rest. What so ever they determine, the Holy Ghost will assist them: they cannot err. Al this is as true, as that Hosius your Doctor saith, Annas, and Caiaphas could not err in pronouncing Sentence of death against Christ.

This therefore, M. Hardinge, is your Doctoures meaninge: It is sufficiente, that Bishoppes onely méete in Councel. God wil supplie al the reste. What so euer they determine, the Holy Ghoste wil assist them: they cannot erre. Al this is as true, as that Hosius your Doctoure saithe, Annas, and Caiphas coulde not erre in pronouncinge Sentence of deathe againste Christe.

But, for excuse hereof, somewhat to salve a festry matter, ye tell us a long tedious tale, without head, or foot: & that your Reader may think, ye say somewhat, ye cry out aloud, Shameless railing Heretics: We belie Hosius: we belie Sotus: Our false dealing: our shameless lying: we are impudent, and continue in lying. These, M. Harding, be the proofs, and grounds of your Doctrine, and the most savoury, and fairest Flowers in your garland.

But, for excuse hereof, sommewhat to salue a festry mater, yée tel vs a longe tedious tale, without heade, or foote: & that your Reader maie thinke, yée saie somewhat, ye crie out alowde, Shamelesse railinge Heretiques: VVee belie Hosius: vvee belie Sotus: Our false dealinge: our shamelesse lieinge: vvee are impudente, and continevve in lieinge. These, M. Hardinge, be the proufes, and groundes of your Doctrine, and the moste sauerie, and fairest Floures in your garlande.

The substance of your tale is this: The Acts of the Council, where Christ was condemned, were lewd, and wicked: But the Sentence of death pronounced by the Bishops against Christ, was just, and true. And thus by your dalliance in dark words, and by your blind Distinction, between Act, and Sentence, ye seek shifts, to mock the world. Ye should plainly have told us, what were these Sentences: and what were these Acts: and what great difference ye can espy between Act, and Sentence: or, when ever ye heard of Sentence in Judgement without Act: or, of perfect Act without Sentence: or, how the Sentence of the Judge may be true, if the Act be false: or, how the Act may be right, if the Sentence be wrong. For your credits sake, leave these toys, M. Harding. Ye have used them over long. They are too childish for a child: they become not your gravity: they deceive the simple.

The substance of your tale is this: The Actes of the Councel, where Christe was condemned, were lewde, and wicked: But the Sentence of deathe pronounced by the Bishoppes against Christe, was iuste, and true. And thus by your dalliance in darke woordes, and by your blinde Distinction, bitweene Acte, and Sentence, yée seeke shiftes, to mocke the worlde. Yée shoulde plainely haue tolde vs, what were these Sentences: and what were these Actes: and what greate difference yee canne espie bitweene Acte, and Sentence: or, when euer yee hearde of Sentence in Iudgemente without Acte: or, of perfite Acte without Sentence: or, howe the Sentence of the Iudge maie be true, if the Acte be false: or, how the Acte maie be righte, if the Sentence be wronge. For your credites sake, leaue these toies, M. Hardinge. Yee haue vsed them ouer longe. They are too childishe for a childe: they becomme not your grauitie: they deceiue the simple.

In deed, I can easily believe, that neither Sotus, nor Hosius was ever so wicked, to say, that Christ was rightly, and worthily done to death. How be it, he, that saith, The sentence of death, pronounced in Council against Christ, was just, and true, seemeth in deed to say no less. The very case, and course of your Doctrine undoubtedly forced them thus to say. For, if all Councils be good, and Holy, without exception, then must that also be a good, and a Holy Council, that was assembled against God, and against his Christ.

In deede, I can easily beleeue, that neither Sotus, nor Hosius was euer so wicked, to saie, that Christe vvas rightly, and vvorthily donne to deathe. How be it, he, that saithe, The sentence of deathe, pronounced in Councel againste Christe, vvas iuste, and true, seemeth in deede to saie no lesse. The very case, and course of your Doctrine vndoubtedly forced them thus to saie. For, if al Coūcelles be good, and Holy, without exception, then muste that also be a good, and a Holy Councel, that was assembled againste God, and againste his Christe.

Hosius your Doctors, ¹to make the matter plain, saith thus, Judásne sit, an Petrus, an Paulus, Deus attendi not vult: Sed solùm hoc, quo'd sedet in Cathedra Petri: quo'd Apostolus: quo'd Christi Legatus: quo'd Angelus est Domini exercituum: de cuius ore Legem requirere jussus es. Hoc solùm spectari vult. Si Judas est, quandoquidem Apostolus est, nihil te moveat, quo'd Fur est: God will never have thee consider, whether the Pope be a Judas, or a Peter, or a Paul. It is sufficient, only that he sitteth in Peters Chair: that he is an Apostle: that he is christs Ambassador: that he is the Angel of the Lord of Hosts: from whose mouth thou art commanded to require the Law. This thing only Christ would have thee to consider. Be it Judas: for as much as he is an Apostle, let it not move thee, though he be a Thief.

Hosius your Doctours, ¹to make the mater plaine, saithe thus, Iudásne sit, an Petrus, an Paulus, Deus attendi not vult: Sed solùm hoc, quo'd sedet in Cathedra Petri: quo'd Apostolus: quo'd Christi Legatus: quo'd Angelus est Domini exercituum: de cuius ore Legem requirere iussus es. Hoc solùm spectari vult. Si Iudas est, quandoquidem Apostolus est, nihil te moueat, quo'd Fur est: God wil neuer haue thee consider, whether the Pope be a Iudas, or a Peter, or a Paule. It is sufficiente, onely that he sitteth in Peters Chaire: that he is an Apostle: that he is christes Embassadoure: that he is the Angel of the Lorde of Hostes: from whose mouthe thou arte commounded to require the Lawe. This thinge onely Christe would haue thee to consider. Be it Iudas: for as mutche as he is an Apostle, let it not moue thee, though he be a Theefe.

1. 1Hosius in Confessione Petricovien. Ca. 29.Hosius in Confessione Petricouien. Ca. 29.

But Caiaphas said, It is good, that one man die for the people, lest all the people perish. Ergo, say you, Caiaphas had the Sprite of God. Alas, M. Harding, although you little pass for your Divinity, yet why have you no more regard unto your Logic? Every child knoweth, that this is a Paralogismus, or a deceitful kind of reasoning, called Fallacia Accidentis. And, that ye may the better espy your oversight, Like as ye say, Caiaphas prophesied blindly, him self not understanding, what he said, Ergo, he had the Holy Ghost:

But Caiphas saide, It is good, that one man die for the people, leste al the people perishe. Ergo, saie you, Caiphas had the Sprite of God. Alas, M. Hardinge, although you litle passe for your Diuinitie, yet why haue you nomore regarde vnto your Logique? Euery childe knoweth, that this is a Paralogismus, or a deceiteful kinde of reasoninge, called Fallacia Accidentis. And, that yee maie the better espie your ouersight, Like as yée saie, Caiphas prophesied blindely, him selfe not vnderstandinge, what he saide, Ergo, he had the Holy Ghoste:

Even so may ye say, Balaam's Ass reproved his master, and spake the Truth, as Caiaphas did. Ergo, Balaam's Ass had the Holy Ghost. S. Paul saith, No man can say, The Lord Jesus, but in the Sprite of God. Hereof, by your Logic, ye may reason thus: The Devil said unto Christ, I know, that thou art Christ the Son of the Living God: ¹Ergo, the Devil had the Sprite of God.

Euen so maie yée saie, Balaams Asse reproued his maister, and spake the Truthe, as Caiphas did. Ergo, Balaams Asse had the Holy Ghoste. S. Paule saithe, No man can saie, The Lorde Iesus, but in the Sprite of God. Hereof, by your Logique, yée maie reason thus: The Diuel saide vnto Christe, I knowe, that thou arte Christe the Sonne of the Liuinge God: ¹Ergo, the Diuel had the Sprite of God.

1. 11. Corin. 12.