AN

ANSWER

ΤΟ

THE FORMER CHALLENGE.

To uphold the religion which at this day is maintained in the Church of Rome, and to discredit the truth which we profess, three things are here urged, by one who hath undertaken to make good the Papists' cause against all gainsayers. The first concerneth the original of the errors wherewith that part standeth charged; the author and time whereof he requireth us to shew. The other two respect the testimony, both of the primitive Church, and of the sacred Scriptures; which, in the points wherein we vary, if this man may be believed, maketh wholly for them and against us.

First then would he fain know, what Bishop of Rome did first alter that religion, which we commend in them of the first 400 years? In what Pope's days was the true religion overthrown in Rome? To which I answer: First, that we do not hold that Rome was built in a day; or that the great dunghill of errors, which now we see in it, was raised in an age: and therefore it is a vain demand to require from us the name of any one Bishop of Rome, by whom or under whom this Babylonish confusion was brought in. Secondly, that a great difference is to be put betwixt heresies which openly oppose the foundations of our faith, and that apostasy which the Spirit hath evidently foretold should be brought in by such as speak lies in hypocrisy. (1 Tim. iv. 1, 2.) The impiety of the one is so notorious, that at the very first appearance it is manifestly discerned the other is a mystery of iniquity, (as the Apostle termeth it, 2 Thes. ii. 7), iniquitas, sed mystica,

A 2

id est, pietatis nomine palliata, (so the ordinary gloss expoundeth the place;) "an iniquity indeed, but mystical, that is, cloked with the name of piety." And therefore they who kept continual watch and ward against the one, might sleep while the seeds of the other were a sowing; yea, peradventure might at unawares themselves have some hand in bringing in of this Trojan horse, commended thus unto them under the name of religion and semblance of devotion. Thirdly, that the original of errors is oftentimes so obscure, and their breed so base, that howsoever it might be easily observed by such as lived in the same age, yet no wise man will marvel, if in tract of time the beginnings of many of them should be forgotten, and no register of the time of their birth found extant. We read that the Sadducees taught, there were no angels: is any man able to declare unto us, under what High Priest they first broached this error? The Grecians, Circassians, Georgians, Syrians, Egyptians, Habassines, Muscovites, and Russians, dissent at this day from the Church of Rome in many particulars: will you take upon you to shew in what Bishop's days these several differences did first arise? When the point hath been well scanned, it will be found, that many errors have crept into their profession, the time of the entrance whereof you are not able to design and some things also are maintained by you against them, which have not been delivered for catholic doctrine in the primitive times, but brought in afterwards, yourselves know not when.

2

Such, for example, is that sacrilege of yours, whereby you withhold from the people the use of the cup in the Lord's Supper; as also your doctrine of Indulgences and Purgatory which they reject, and you defend. For touching the first, Gregorius de Valentia, one of your principal champions, confesseth, that the use of receiving the Sacrament in one kind began first in some Churches, and grew to be a general custom in the Latin Church not much before the Council of Constance, in which at last (to wit, 200 years ago) this custom was made a law. But if you put the question to him, as you do to us, What Bishop of Rome did first bring in this custom? he giveth you this answer,

1 Acts xxiii. 8.

2 Valent. de legit. usu Euchar. cap. 10.

that it began to be used, not by the decree of any Bishop, but by the very use of the Churches, and the consent of the faithful. If you further question with him, Quando primum vigere cœpit ea consuetudo in aliquibus Ecclesiis? When first did that custom get footing in some Churches? he returneth you for answer, Minime constat : it is more than he can tell.

The like doth Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, and 'Cardinal Cajetan give us to understand of Indulgences; that no certainty can be had, what their original was, or by whom they were first brought in. Fisher also further addeth concerning Purgatory, that in the ancient Fathers there is either none at all, or very rare mention of it; that by the Grecians it is not believed, even to this day; that the Latins also, not all at once, but by little and little, received it; and that, Purgatory being so lately known, it is not to be marvelled, that in the first times of the Church there was no use of Indulgences; seeing these had their beginning, after that men for a while had been affrighted with the torments of Purgatory. Out of which confession of the adverse part you may observe: 1. What little reason these men have to require us to set down the precise time wherein all their profane novelties were first brought in; seeing that this is more than they themselves are able to do. 2. That some of them may come in pedetentim (as Fisher acknowledgeth Purgatory did) by little and little, and by very slow steps, which are not so easy to be discerned, as fools be borne in hand they are. 3. That it is a fond imagination to suppose that all such changes must be made by some Bishop, or any one certain author: whereas it is confessed, that some may come in by the tacit consent of many, and grow after into a general custom, the beginning whereof is past man's memory.

And as some superstitious usages may draw their original from the undiscreet devotion of the multitude; so some also may be derived from want of devotion in the people and

a Roffen. Assert. Lutheran. Confutat. Art. 18.

Cajet. Opusc. Tom. 1. Tract. 15. de Indulgent. cap. 1.

So saith Bonfrerius the Jesuit of the

:

vulgar Latin edition of the Bible. Pedetentim usu ipso et tacitâ Doctorum approbatione cœpit esse in pretio, hâc æstimatione sensim sine sensu crescente. Præloqu, in Scriptur. cap. 15. sect. 2.

7

some alterations likewise must be attributed to the very change of time itself. Of the one we cannot give a fitter instance, than in your private Mass, wherein the Priest receiveth the Sacrament alone; which Harding fetcheth from no other ground, than lack of devotion of the people's part. When you therefore can tell us, in what Pope's days the people fell from their devotion; we may chance tell you, in what Pope's days your private Mass began. An experiment of the other we may see in the use of the Latin service in the Churches of Italy, France, and Spain. For if we be questioned, When that use first began there? and further demanded, Whether the language formerly used in their Liturgy was changed upon a sudden? our answer must be, That Latin service was used in those countries from the beginning; but that the Latin tongue at that time was commonly understood of all, which afterward by little and little degenerated into those vulgar languages which now are used. When you therefore shall be pleased to certify us, in what Pope's days the Latin tongue was changed into the Italian, French, and Spanish, (which we pray you do for our learning;) we will then give you to understand, that from that time forward the language, not of the service, but of the people, was altered. Nec enim lingua vulgaris populo subtracta est, sed populus ab eâ recessit, saith Erasmus: "the vulgar tongue was not taken away from the people, but the people departed from it."

8

9

If this which I have said will not satisfy you, I would wish you call unto your remembrance the answer which Arnobius sometimes gave to a foolish question, propounded by the enemies of the Christian faith: Nec si nequivero causas vobis exponere, cur aliquid fiat illo vel hoc modo, continuo sequitur, ut infecta fiant quæ facta sunt. And consider whether I may not return the like answer unto you. If I be not able to declare unto you, by what Bishop of Rome, and in what Pope's days, the simplicity of the ancient faith was first corrupted; it will not presently follow, that what was done must needs be undone.

6 Hard. Answer to the first Article of Jewel's Challenge, fol. 26. b. edit. Antuerp. Ann. 1565.

7 Allen. Art. 11, demand. 9.

8 Erasm. in declarationib. ad censuras Parisiens. tit. 12, sect. 41.

9 Arnob. lib. ii. contra Gentes.

10

Or rather, if you please, call to mind the parable in the Gospel, where the kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man, which sowed good seed in his field; but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. These that slept, took no notice, when or by whom the tares were scattered among the wheat; neither at the first rising did they discern betwixt the one and the other, though they were awake. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares and then they put the question unto their master, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? Their master indeed telleth them, it was the enemy's doing; but you could tell them otherwise, and come upon them thus: "You yourselves grant, that the seed which was first sown in this field, was good seed, and such as was put there by your master himself. If this which you call tares, be no good grain, and hath sprung from some other seed than that which was sown here at first; I would fain know that man's name, who was the sower of it; and likewise the time in which

it was sown. Now, you being not able to shew either the one or the other, it must needs be, that your eyes here deceive you or if these be tares, they are of no enemy's, but of your master's own sowing."

To let pass the slumberings of former times, we could tell you of an age, wherein men not only slept, but also snorted: it was (if you know it not) the tenth from Christ, the next neighbour to that wherein hell broke loose that

6613

6 14.

13 unhappy age," (as Genebrard and other of your own writers term it,) "exhausted both of men of account for wit and learning, and of worthy princes and bishops;" in which there were no famous writers, nor councils;" than which (if we will credit Bellarmine) there was never age 15 more unlearned and unhappy." If I be not able to discover what feats the devil wrought in that time of darkness, wherein were not so vigilant in marking his conveyances; and

men

10 Matth. xiii. 24, 25.

11 Ib. 26, 27.

12 Apoc. xx. 7.

13 Infelix dicitur hoc seculum, exhaustum hominibus ingenio et doctrinâ claris,

sive etiam claris principibus et pontificibus. Genebrard. Chronic. lib. iv.

14 Bellarmin. in Chronol. Ann. 970.

15 Id. de Rom. Pontif. lib. iv. cap. 12.