76.

to be antichrist's forerunners, or rather to be antichrist himself. Much good do it them with their popes, that so reward their followers: and, seeing their master gives them that name, they may be glad of it, and neither refuse it, nor be angry with them that so call them.

It were an easy thing to take many such like sayings out of other doctors; but because he cries out so oft of this holy father's religion, I keep me within his compass, and allege his Lib.iv. Epis. writings only. Gregory in his epistle to Maurice the emperor, among many other words, says thus: "Who is this that against the ordinance of the gospel, and against the decrees of the canons, presumes to take this new name? Let this blasphemous name be far from christian men's hearts, to be called the universal bishop, by which the honour of all priests is taken away, when it is foolishly claimed of one man. This name was offered in the synod of Chalcedon to the Romish bishop, but none of them did take this name of singularity, nor did agree to use it; lest, while any private thing should be given to one man, all priests should be robbed of their due honour. He is to be bridled, which does wrong to the universal church, which by this private name sets himself above the honour of your empire, &c.1"

Thus much Gregory. I marvel that the later popes scraped not these sayings out of Gregory's works, or else condemned not his books for heresy, seeing he does so plainly condemn their proud prelacy. But surely, as God has preserved the true text of the bible by the Jews, that are his enemies, to the comfort of his people; so for the glory of his name he has saved the writings of good popes, to condemn the foolishness of the

[ Quis est iste qui contra statuta evangelica, contra canonum decreta, novum sibi usurpare nomen præsumit? • Sed absit a cordibus christianorum nomen istud blasphemiæ, in quo omnium sacerdotum honor adimitur, dum ab uno sibi dementer arrogatur. Certe pro beati Petri, apostolorum principis, honore per venerandam Chalcedonensem synodum Romano pontifici oblatum est. Sed nullus eorum unquam hoc singularitatis vocabulum assumpsit, nec uti consensit, ne dum privatum aliquid daretur uni, honore debito sacerdotes privarentur universi. Ille coercendus est, qui sanctæ universali ecclesiæ injuriam facit, qui corde tumet, qui gaudere de nomine singularitatis appetit, qui honori quoque imperii vestri se per privatum vocabulum superponit. Ibid. Lib. IV. Epist. xxxii. Tom. 11. p. 793. Basil. 1564. ED.]

late presumptuous tyranny of popes after their times. Remember that he calls it a blasphemous name, and that it is against the gospel and canons, that it was never used, and is a wrong to all the rest. Thus many years it was, six hundred and five, afore the pope had any supremacy granted him; but straight after his death, when Phocas had murdered the emperor Maurice his master, and made himself emperor, pope Boniface the third and fourth obtained at his hand, that Rome and the bishop there should be the head of other churches and bishops. A meet man to set up a bishop like himself! the one murdered his master, and the other kills souls. When they have answered this pope, that denies any of his predecessors to have had this name and authority, then they may crack that they have had it one thousand five hundred since St Peter's time.

And where he says in the latter end, that when the people fell from this religion that Gregory send and Austin brought in, they felt great calamities by the conquest of the Danes and the Normans; if he had advised himself well, he would not have said thus. But as Caiphas prophesied truly, saying, that "it was necessary that one man Christ should die for the people, and not all perish," not understanding what he said; so this unlearned proctor has spoken more truly than he wots of. For God indeed plagued this realm for falling from true religion taught in his holy word, rather than by Austin, and submitting themselves to the pope, who, as ye heard, refused that name and authority. The conquest of the Danes was not long nor great, but then followed the Normans, five hundred year since save five. And if ye mark, even about that time was Hildebrand, commonly called Gregory the seventh, pope, who with his fellows brought more wicked superstition into the church of God than ever was afore. Afore his time there was no swarm of idle monks and friars in England, nor in the world, but they wrought for their living; no such gadding of pilgrimages, selling of masses, &c. And therefore God justly plagued the world for falling from him, and defiling themselves so filthily with the dregs of popery. I speak not this because I think all was well afore, or that all the doings of Gregory and Austin were perfect, but to let you see that our papists leave the best, and pick out the worst to follow, as meetest for their purpose.

V. Now, whether the people of this realm be declined from the steps of St Austin, and other blessed fathers and saints, which had mass and seven sacraments in the church, and God was honoured night and day in the church with divine service, I think there is no man so simple but he may easily perceive, except malice have blinded his heart. As in St Paul's church in London, by the decrees of blessed fathers, every night at midnight they had matins, all the forenoon masses in the church, with other divine service and continual prayer, and in the steeple anthems and prayers were had certain times.

That the people of this realm be swerved from the steps of Austin, I will not greatly stick with him to grant: but how? Not in falling from any goodness that he used (for that they either keep still, or the better instead of it), but in refusing such abuses as he first began, and since his time the church of God has been overloaden by the pope's oppression withal. And because he says, that we swerve from Austin and other blessed fathers and saints, which had mass and seven sacraments; who those fathers and saints be, I would he had named them, that it might be seen how truly he says. I think he durst not, nor yet can, lest he be taken with a loud lie. I think he means that Austin which is called the apostle of England, and not that other Austin, which is taken for one of the four doctors of the church. There is great difference betwixt them two, both in ancienty of time, in learning and godliness. The English Austin lived here six hundred year after Christ, the other in Afric four hundred and that the elder Austin and blessed fathers afore him agree better with our reformed religion than with their popery, I boldly affirm; and if he or his partakers have or can say any thing to the contrary, they should prove it better than they have done hitherto, or else the world may judge, that they more proudly brag (as Golias did God's 1 Sam. xvii. people) than can truly prove it. But as David with his sling

and stone overcame that mighty giant, so I doubt not but they shall find many, that with the simplicity of God's truth shall be able to confound their wicked subtlety.

I am sure, he means chiefly the doctrine of the sacrament of Christ's body and blood: but in that he is already overmatched. I remember, in the time of that blessed king, Edward the sixth, Doctor Ridley, late bishop of London, came in visitation to Cambridge; and because that doctrine of the sacrament seemed strange then to many, he propounded this propo

sition to the whole university to dispute on: That it could not be proved by any ancient writer, Greek or Latin, which lived a thousand years since, or within five hundred year after Christ, that the substance of the bread was changed in the sacrament There was the eldest and

to the substance of Christ's body'. stoutest champions of the whole university, and the pertest lusty young princocks also that could be picked out, to say what they could two or three days together: and one while they had liberty to speak what they could in defence of it, and another while to speak against them that withstood it with what reasons or authorities they could devise. But the pithy solutions of that godly learned bishop were so strong then, that, unto the world changed, his enemies praised him, and wondered at his learning, and liked the doctrine so well, that their lusty younker would have turned bishop Cranmer's book into Latin, yea, and married too (as was needful), if the good king had lived awhile longer. If this be true in the chiefest point of their religion (as it is most true indeed), that they have not one ancient writer without wresting to seem to make for them, it is much more true in the rest. There is another conference of late betwixt the reverend bishop of Sarum3 and Doctor Cole, wherein that learned father lays to their charge, that for the rest of their trash (which they reverence as holy relics) they have neither scripture, ancient writer, doctor, nor general council, to defend their doings. The writings of good Cranmer and these learned bishops are in print, and yet unconfuted and in strength, although one attempted with small praise of late to defend Doctor Cole's part; but if they could have gainstand it, no man doubts of their good will. They need not to fear their recognizance, fire nor fagot, nor any punishment according as they deserve; their bloody laws are laid on sleep, though their hearts be bloody still.

And because he but only names particularly mass and [See Foxe, Acts and Monuments, Vol. 11. p. 1378. ed. 1583. for a full account of this disputation. Ridley's Determinations are given p. 1387. See also Ridley's Works, Parker Society, p. 171. ED.]

[ Princocks: pert forward youths. Perhaps from the Latin præcox. ED.]

[3 Bishop Jewell, whose challenge given in his sermon at Paul's Cross led to a correspondence with Dr Cole. These letters were printed A.d. 1560, and are reprinted in bishop Jewell's works. ED.]

James v.

seven sacraments, and proves it not to be so, I will not use many ways in disproving it; for he is not a man of that authority, learning, nor credit, that because he says it is so, therefore straight it must be so, and be believed: for I may say it is not so with as good reason as he, if saying without proof were sufficient. For their mass I said enough afore, and proved of what ancienty it was. I declared afore', how Gregory's mass-book was allowed seven hundred and seventy-seven years after Christ; and also how Austin, by Gregory's commandment, out of such diverse orders of massing as ye see in other countries, patched their order of mass together that they used here in England. Seeing then by their own doctors' confession it is manifest to be so many years after Christ, afore their mass took place here or elsewhere, I may boldly say, that never one holy father, afore Gregory, knew nor allowed any such kind of massing for then was no such thing made nor used. These, unto they be answered, are sufficient.

For their seven sacraments I will not say much at this time, because he stands not any thing in the proof of them. The question is meeter for the learned sort than the people, to try out such narrow points. The controversy is more about the word and name, than the thing itself and use of it. We use six of them that he calls sacraments as well as they, though not without great reason we forbear to call them all sacraments; and differ much in the doctrine, the order and using of them, with other ceremonies and language than they do. Baptism, the Lord's supper, confirmation of children, marriage, ordering of ministers, we use them all as well as they, though not in the same sort that they, and teach the people to have them in reverence better than they. Confession is left free to all that feel themselves burdened in conscience, and want either counsel or comfort, and the weak and ignorant are moved to resort to a learned minister to receive the comfortable promises of absolution and forgiveness of sin by the lively word of God, applied to so troubled a mind as a sovereign salve for all such griefs.

The only controversy in number then betwixt us is for extreme unction, whether that be so necessary to be observed continually in the church. The chief reason whereon they ground it, is the saying of St James, "If any be sick, let him [See pp. 508 and 517. ED.]