An answer to a certain book, writtenAn answere to a certeine booke, written

But seeing you have taken in hand to prosecute this matter so largely,¹ why do you fail in that thing wherein most of all we need your hand and help? For this that you bring concerning strawn, hath already been confessed so much as is true: your part had been now farther to have showed, that Luther likewise called the same epistle contentious, swollen, dry, not worthy an Apostolical spirit, as he is accused by Campian in the same place. But for proof hereof you can bring forth nothing and therefore you confess, that Campian laid more to Luther's charge concerning this Epistle then was true: so that if in one poor word you have a little avouched the credit of your Jesuit, for whom you ⟨p. 13⟩fight: yet in three or four other you have condemned him: which you slyly pass over notwithstanding, as though Campian had never spoken so, or you had nothing to do therewith. Indeed I grant it maketh small matter, what Campian hath lied of Luther: but you that take upon you to defend him, may not think you have performed your duty, if of much that he hath said, you be able to justify his saying in one little point, & in three points have failed. Wherefore either cease to quarrel still about this one word, or show your proofs for the rest also, or acknowledge your lewd and miserable wrangling, as in deed you must, howsoever the matter standeth concerning Luther in this behalf. For what if Luther had plainly and constantly affirmed of Saint James Epistle, as much as Campian hath objected, though untruly? Is this a cause sufficient why you should make all these outcries generally against all Protestants? why then may not we by like reason complain of all Papists for that, which Cardinal Caietane hath written both of other books of holy scripture, and namely of this same Epistle, whereof we speak? was not Caietane a pillar ⟨p. 14⟩of your Church, a peer of the court of Room, the Popes Legate in Germany against Luther? Doth not this famous Cardinal of Room set down in plain words, that the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews doth gather insufficient arguments to prove Christ to be the Son of God, that the second and third of John are not Canonical scripture, ²that the Epist. of Jude is Apocryphal, that the last Chap. of S. Mark is not of sound authority, that the history of the adulterous woman in S. John is not authentical, & namely of S. James Ep.