The Apology, Cap. 4. Division. 1.The Apologie, Cap. 4. Diuision. 1.

The Apology, Cap. 4. Division. 1.

The Apologie, Cap. 4. Diuision. 1.

What would these men (trow ye) have said in those days? Which side would they specially then have taken? And which would they then have forsaken? Which Gospel would they have believed? Whom would they have accounted for Heretics, and whom for Catholics? And yet, what a stir, and revel keep they this day, only upon the two poor Names of Luther, and Zwinglius? Because these two men are not yet fully resolved upon some one certain point of Doctrine, therefore would they needs have us think, that both of them were deceived: that neither of them had the Gospel: and that neither of them taught the truth aright.

What woulde these menne (trowe ye) haue saide in those daies? Whiche side would they specially then haue takē? And whiche would they then haue foresaken? Whiche Gospel would they haue beleeued? Whom would they haue accoumpted for Heretiques, and whom for Catholiques? And yet, what a stirre, and reuel keepe they this daie, onely vpon the twoo poore Names of Luther, and Zvvinglius? Bicause these twoo menne are not yet fully resolued vpon somme one certaine pointe of Doctrine, therefore would they needes haue vs thinke, that bothe of thē were deceiued: that neither of them had the Gospel: and that neither of them taught the truthe aright.

M. Harding.

M. Hardinge.

After many things by these Defenders alleged, for proof of Dissension to have ben among the Apostles, the faithful people in S. Pauls time, the Bishops and Holy Fathers of the primitive Church,