thought this a fit course Dionysius Alexandrinus h Niceph. l. 6. c. 8. said of himselfe that he vsed somtime to be occupied in reading the writings and treatises of heretickes though it something polluted his mind with touching their vncleane opinions because he reaped this profit therby that he might the easilier refell them and the more execrate detest them If any will take vpon him to confute me the lawes of Christian conference specially in the points of faith bind him 1. to do it temperately abstaining from railing and reproaching 2. perspicuously that I may certainly know his meaning 3. honestly that what I say be faithfully set downe and what I proue my sayings by be not dissembled For I affirm nothing that concerneth the cause but I proue it either in the text by reason or in the margent by authoritie which I would not haue dissembled or according to an vsuall trade taken vp of late among them traduced with taunts and outcries as if it were false alledged vntill it appeare to be so indeed Which if he performe I shall thinke my lot the better to haue met with so profitable an aduersarie And so wishing the good Reader that with loue to all men and reuerence to Gods truth and care to leade a sanctified life he would pursue the cause of religion I take my leaue beseeching our Lord Christ by the power of his spirit to make way for the truth in all our hearts Amen A Table of the seuerall matters and questions handled and disputed in this Booke The first number signifieth the Section noted with this marke §. The other following the first signifieth the numbers of that Section VVhere the number is but one there the whole Section is meant THe true faith is absolutely necessarie to saluation 1. 1. No part of our faith stands vpon tradition 1. 2. Infolded faith is not sufficient without knowledge 2. 1. 7. There is a Rule whereby the true faith may be knowne 3. 1. This Rule is not visible and knowne to all men without exception 3. 2. The properties belonging to the rule of faith 4. The Scriptures translated into English are the rule of faith and how 5. The true reason why Papists deny the Scriptures to be the rule 5. 7. 8. The Scripture ought to be translated into the mother tongue that the people may reade it 5. 9. Touching the certaintie and truth of our translations and how we know it 6. The last resolution of our faith is into the authoritie of the Scripture 6. 9. 10. Our English translation is purer then that which the Papists vse 6. 11. The obscuritie of the Scripture disableth it not from being the rule 7. 1. All matters needfull are plainly laid downe in the Scripture 7. 3. Why the Papists pretend the obscuritie of the Scripture 7. 7. Whence it is that the Scripture is obscure 8. 1. The Scripture is vnderstood by it selfe and how 8. 1 2 3. How we are assured of the true sence of the Scripture which is it among many sences 8. 7 8. The true cause why men erre in expounding the Scripture 8. 13. Our faith is built on the Scripture not on the Church 8. 17. The Scripture is perfect containing all things 9. How I know this Scripture to be the very word of God 9. 5. All things needfull are fully comprehended in the Scripture 9. 9. The Papists hold that the sence of the Scripture varieth with the time 9. 11. Againe touching the errors of men in expounding the Scripture 10. The place of 2. Tim. 3.16 proueth the all-sufficiencie of the Scripture 11. How priuat men priuat cōpanies may see the truth against a multitude 12. By the Church the Papists meane nothing but the Pope 13. 2. Whether and how the Church of God may erre 14. 1. Tim. 3.15 expounded how the Church is the pillar of truth 15. The Protestants do not say that the true Church at any time failed was not 17. 1. The state of the question touching the visiblenesse of the Church 17. 2. The Protestants say no more touching the inuisiblenesse of the Church then the Papists themselues in effect do 17. 3. The arguments are answered whereby the Church is proued to be alway visible 18. inde The true faith is a sufficient marke of the Church 24. 2. The arguments against this are answered 26. to 31. 1. Ioh. 4.1 proueth that it is lawfull to examine the teaching of the Church 31. One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke are not the marks of the Church 32. What the vnitie of the Church properly is 33. 1. The Protestant Churches want not true vnitie 33. 2. Gods true Church in all ages hath had some contentions 33. 4. inde The Protestant Churches haue the true meanes of vnitie 34. 1. What kind of vnitie the Papists haue 34. 1. 2. The Church of Rome vseth the Scriptures most despitefully fiue wayes 35. 3. The present Roman Church is departed frō the ancient primitiue faith 35. 9. The Church of Rome wanteth vnitie and liueth in manifest contention demonstrated 35. 16. The Popes authority was not receiued of old as the foundation of vnity 36. 2. The very Papists themselues do not yeeld to the Popes determinations 36. 5. The Popes supremacie is no sufficient meanes to preserue vnitie 36. 10. The places of Mat. 16.18 Luk. 22.32 Ioh. 21.15 handled at large shewed to make nothing toward the Popes authoritie ouer the Church 36. 11. inde The Primitiue Church acknowledged not the Popes supremacy foure experiences 36. 26. The Pope may erre euen iudicially and be an hereticke 36. 32. It is vnpossible to proue that the hope is S. Peters true successor 36. 36. No certainty among the Papists how the Popes supremacy is proued 36. 39. A place of Cyprian alledged for the supremacie answered 37. 1 2. The Protestants Church is truly holy and how 38. 1. Certaine words of M. Luther expounded 38. 2. Outward holinesse no proper and essentiall marke of the Church 38. 3. The vnholines wickednes of the Roman Church demōstrated 38. 4. inde What Saints the Protestants haue in their Church 39. 1. Canonization of Saints by the Pope a ridiculous conceit 39. 2. 3. The doctrine of the Protestants induceth not to libertie 40. 1. inde Fasting how the Protestants and how the Papists vse it 40. 2. Auricular confession or shrift iustly reiected 40. 6. Necessitie of good workes taught and defended by the Protestants 40. 11. Touching the merit of workes 40. 12. Touching mans power in keeping the commandements 40. 18. Whether all the good workes we do be sinne 40. 22. The distinction of sinne into mortall and veniall 40. 26. Satisfaction how taught by the Protestants and how by the Papists 40. 28. A short view of long Pardons 40. 35. The doctrine of Iustification by Faith only expounded and defended 40. 37. Predestination how holden by the Protestants 40. 43. What is the roote of Contingencie 40. 44. Freewill and Gods
faith The Answer 1 The Iesuite hauing immediatly before propounded the vnitie of his Romane Church affirming that therein onely the vnitie of faith and concord of the learned is to be found now proceedeth to proue it by shewing the meanes which they haue for the preuenting of discord which he thinketh so all-sufficient that it were impossible there should be any dissention among them The summe of that which he saith is briefly this They which acknowledge one chiefe Pastor to wit the Pope to whose definitiue sentence in all matters they submit themselues cannot possibly dissent But all Catholickes acknowledge this chiefe Pastor and submit themselues to his definitiue sentence Therefore how is it possible they should dissent The second proposition he assumeth as granted though indeed it be vntrue as I will shew the first he proueth thus They cannot dissent who submit themselues to him that hath authoritie and infallibilitie of iudgement But the Pope hath this authoritie and infallibilitie Therefore they which submit themselues to the Pope cannot dissent The second proposition he confirmeth thus We know that to S. Peter and his successors Christ promised the keyes and sayd vpon them as vpon a rocke he would build his Church praying for them that their faith should not faile and bidding them strengthen their brethren and feede his sheepe which importeth this authoritie in ruling and infallibilit it in iudging But the Pope is S. Peters successor The Pope therefore hath this authoritie and infallibilitie This being the summe of his discourse I answer first to that which he assumeth so confidently that all Catholicke men submit themselues to the Popes definitions acknowledging the same to be of infallible truth For whatsoeuer his authoritie and iudgement be yet the Catholickes do not so vniformly as the Iesuite pretendeth submit their opinions to him but contrariwise when occasion is offered they vtterly refuse both him and his definitions and this is so true that he which will denie it must be reputed ignorant of all sense and experience the which manifestly shew that not onely the Christian Catholicks of the Primitiue Church but the Popish Catholickes of the Romish Church this day themselues haue reiected his determinations and held opinion against him Digression 25. Wherein it is shewed that in the Primitiue Church the Popes determination was not thought an infallible truth neither did the Christians for the maintenance of vnitie submit themselues thereunto 2 For many Catholicke Bishops in those dayes dissenting from the Bishop of Rome and refusing his decrees were not thought therefore to breake any vnitie in the Church For Aeneas Syluius who was himselfe a Pope about seuen score yeares since a Epist 301. writeth that before the Councell of Nice euery man liued to himselfe and small respect was had to the Church of Rome b Sozom. l. 3. c. 8. The Bishops of the East withstood Iulius in the cause of Athanasius and charged him that he had done against the lawes of the Church c Theod l. 5. c. 23. Sozom l. 7. c. 11. Flauianus the Patriark of Antioch about his succeeding Meletius in that sea against Paulinus resisted foure Popes one after another when they would haue had him giue roome to Paulinus d Epi. ad Vrsac Valent. Germin apud Baron annal to 3. ann 357. nu 44. Liberius who was Pope in the yeare 360. confessed that Athanasius was separated from the communion of the Church of Rome Yea e Baron ibid. nu 43. 46. the Papists themselues acknowledge this Liberius condemned Athanasius and entred communion with the Arrians which sheweth against all exception that in those dayes the godly Christians did not thinke either that the Pope was the head of vnitie or that all were of the true Church that held communion with him for then the Arrians had bene good Catholickes and Athanasius with all that tooke part with him had bene hereticks which no man dareth say About the yeare 450. f Act. 16. the Councel of Chalcedon wherein were 630. Bishops withstood Leo then Pope of Rome in the question of his supremacie Concerning which matter g Concor Cathol l. 2. c. 20. pag 748. Cusanus a Cardinall beareth witnesse It is manifest saith he that Pope Leo would not in certaine points receiue the constitutions of the Chalcedon Councell specially that the Church of Constantinople should go before the Church of Alexandria but alwayes gainsaid them as some other Popes did after him and yet the decree of the Councell alwayes preuailed Which experience proueth that in those times the Bishops ouer all the world would as occasion serued refuse the Popes iudgement and yet they were counted good Catholickes for all that So likewise in the yeare 418. h Cap. 105. the sixt Councell of Carthage hauing in it 217. Bishops resisted three Popes one after another decreeing things contrary to the authoritie of the Church of Rome as i Contaré sum Concil magis illustr pag. 263. the Papists themselues expound the Councell whereof Cusanus k Vbi supra writeth thus The Councell of Affricke withstood Celestin in that he would do against the Councell of Nice and Celestin replied not that he might do it but alledged for himselfe the Councell though corrupted Which opposition made against the Pope is so apparent that many Papists indeed labour to excuse it but none denie it and l Sic vndique CarthagineÌ„ses patres constringuntur vt elabi nullo modo possint quis iam ferat crassissimae ignoâ—antiae illam vocem in tot tantis patribus vbi illa Augustini reliquorum prudentia Alan Cope dial pag 76. 77. the despitefull speeches of some Papists against S. Austine and the Bishops bewray that they discouer the same resistance made by the Councell against the Pope that I mention 3 Againe in the yeare 167. m Euseb hist l. 5. c. 23. inde Niceph. l. 4. c. 37. inde there arose a contention in the Church about the keeping of Easter whereby the Bishops of the East and West were deuided in which contention the Popes definitiue sentence was not receiued but refused without any offence against the vnitie of the Church For first Polycarpe coming to Anicetus that was Bishop of Rome in his time would not yeeld to him neither could Anicetus perswade Polycarpe to lay by his maner of obseruation n Euseb li. 5. c. 26. saith the story and yet both sides retained vnitie About thirtie yeares after the question was renewed o Cap. 25. and Victor the Bishop of Rome being earnest against the Easterne Bishops excommunicated them But this saith Eusebius pleased them not for they wrote vnto him reprouing him sharply and bitterly as namely Polycrates the bishop of Ephesus and Irenaeus the bishop of Lyons here in the West These had many on their side that stood against the Bishop of Rome and that which afterwards tooke vp the controuersie was not his
Councell are penned so cunningly and i For Apollo his oracles alwaies equiuocated Ambigua semper incerta obliquaque erāt ipsius responsa Iul. Lessign de cognom Deorum lib 1. c. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Scol Aristoph in Pluto oraclewise that they will reasonably beare as many expositions as there shall be opinions and then albeit the contention be neuer so great yet who dares say the contenders submit not themselues to their chiefe Pastor when euerie side shall expound his decree for his owne opinion 8 Moreouer if it were true that all Papists acknowledge the Pope to be their iudge and of such infallible truth in all his teaching that they may and must boldly yeeld all their iudgements and wits to his let them satisfie the world how it fell out that they haue depriued so many Popes yea for heresie for it should seeme in this case that their Church tooke vpon her authority to direct him when he was out of the way and when there haue bene diuers Popes at once k Nullus enim fuit illo tempopore Concilij Constantiēsis certus Papa Caiet tract de author Pap. Con c. 27. ad 6. what time it was vncertaine who was Pope what submission could there be to this chiefe Pastor Or if it be true that a Councell is aboue the Pope which l Cusan concord l. 2. c. 20. 34. Panorm de elect c. significasti Facta capitulorum vniuersitatum quia superiorē habent non sunt aequanda gestis conciliorum vbi solum Deus est superior à quibus non appellatur Aen. Sylu. ep 25. the most and the ancientest Papists beleeue and m Concil Constant Sess 4. 5. Concil Basil Sess 2. two generall Councels decreed how can it be said that Papists holding this opinion depend vpon the Pope as the Iesuite pretendeth 9 Thus we see how the Papists esteeme their Popes at home hey thinke it a perillous matter to be tyed so straightly to him they thinke it lawfull to resist him they beleeue he may fall into heresie yea preach it and practise the destruction of the Church they beleeue a Councell is aboue him and may restraine or depose him they beleeue he and his Councels may erre in euery part and circumstance of his definitions but the conclusion it selfe they haue notoriously maintained opinions against his decrees they haue deposed him and bene in that straight that they knew not who was Pope whereupon I say it is a most intollerable thing to endure the hearing of these loud brags that they make abrode concerning their obedience to him and so willing acceptation of his iudgement for the ending of controuersies and I am firmely perswaded by the experience of their writings behauiour that whatsoeuer they pretend abrode among the ignorāt they haue a most base opinion both of his person and iudgement For Guicciardine a man very neare him n Hist l. 16. writeth that the goodnesse Apostolicke is then commended when he exceedeth not al other men in wickednes And Fr. Victoria speaking of his practise in dispensing o Relect. 4. de potest Pap. Concil Pro. 12. saith Giue me Clements Lines and Siluesters that is Popes as good as were Clemens Linus and Syluester and I wil permit euery thing to their iudgment but that I say no worse against these later Popes certainly they are inferior to those ancient Popes by many degrees 10 But supposing all Papists as the Iesuite speaketh do acknowledge one chiefe Pastor ouer them to whose definitions in all matters they submit themselues yet hence it followeth not that therfore they haue the true vnitie and cannot dissent for p Fere semper seruata haec consuetudo vt acta priorum pontificum sequentes aut infringerent aut omnino tollerent Plat. in Steph. VI. the Pope may be at controuersie with himselfe or possible his mind cannot be known as of a long time it was not when the Friers contended about the conception of the virgin Marie nor is not to this day q Suar tom 2. disp 3. sect 6. the Church hauing defined nothing in this matter and possible r Suar. vbi prius refert as Caietan and Cano haue obserued cannot by reason the opinion that holdeth her conception without sinne is in shew godly but indeed vntrue and vaine But that which is principally to be obiected the spirit of God hath neither giuen him such vprightnesse of iudgment that he can alway define the truth nor put him into such authoritie that men necessarily are bound to obey him the which being true then it will follow that all such as relie most vpon him shall either not consent at all or consent in error and a people may be vnited to the Pope and yet be without the true vnion of Christs Church ſ Nilus l. de primat Neceph Greg. l. 10. hist Rom. c. vlt. And assuredly the Greekes complaine that this vsurpation of the Pope to be head of al Churches and iudge of all matters hath bene the very fountaine of all our diuisions 11 Against this the Iesuite replyeth that the Pope hath infallibility and authoritie of iudgement both giuen him by Christ so that it were impossible his people should dissent and for confirmation hereof he alledgeth 3. texts of Scripture wherein he saith our Sauiour Christ spake of Peter and his successors meaning the Pope and gaue them this power that he speaketh of and so concludeth that by vertue of Christs owne ordinance the Pope is the meanes to vphold the vnitie of the Church whose determinations the Papists receiuing cannot disagree Wherunto I will answer distinctly three things First that in all the words alledged our Sauior meant the rest of the Apostles as well as Peter Secondly whomsoeuer he meant yet the words spoken containe no such thing in them as the Iesuite gathereth Thirdly supposing they were meant of Peter and contained the primacie yet the Pope is not Peters successor and so consequently hath no part in them the which parts of my answer being iustified there wil no doubt remaine but the vnitie of the Romish Church is proclaymed and set forth vpon vncertaine grounds 12 First I say that all these words of Christ I will giue vnto thee the keyes and vpon this rocke I wil build my Church Mat. 16.18 I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not Luc. 22.32 and feed my sheepe Ioh. 21.15 were not meant or intended to Peter alone but to the rest of the disciples with him Of the first place in Mat. 16. it is cleare For t Bell. de Ro. pont l. 1. c. 10. §. Ac vt à primo c. 11. § Catholici autem c. 13. §. At no◠Catholici the rocke and the keyes signifie the same thing so that to whō Christ promised the one he promised the other but the keyes and al the power thereof was promised giuen to al alike as is proued for
it is agreed between vs u Bell. vbi sup c. 12. §. Thomas Caietanus that the whole power of the keyes is contained in binding and loosing x Alexand. 4. q. 79. p. 316. 317. Mag. 4. d. 18. Dura 4. d. 18 q. 1. Ouand breuilo qu. in 4. d. 18 pro 16. Sylu. verbo clauis nu 1. Rosell verbo clauis nu 1. and defined thereby so that to be the rocke or to haue the keyes supposeth or includeth no more then to haue authoritie to bind and loose which authoritie is expresly giuen in the 18. of Math. verse 18. to all the Apostles and the selfe same words touching binding and loosing are there vsed that Christ vsed before to Peter yea y Iansen concord c. 72. RheÌ„ vpon Mat. 18.18 the Papists themselues confesse that all the fathers of the Church thinke that as before to Peter so in these words to the other Apostles and their successours our Lord gaue the power of Binding and loosing Again in Ioh 20.21 our Sauiour after his resurrection breathed vpon his disciples and said to them all As my Father sent me so I send you receiue the holy Ghost whose sinnes ye remit they are remitted and whose sinnes ye retaine they are retained where the ceremony of breathing vpon them seemeth to giue them all a like portion and power of the spirit and his words As my Father sent me so I send you to imply that he sent all with equall authoritie no mans iurisdiction flowing from Peter to him but euery mans coming immediatly and alike from Christ that sent them But the last words whose sinnes ye remit or retaine they are remitted and retained signifie the same that he had said before of binding and loosing and so consequently giue them all the power included in the rocke or keyes for z Ema Sa. Iansen vpon Io. 20.21 Bella. de Ro. Pont. l. 1. c. 12. §. Dices si non in this place is giuen what Mat. 18 was promised Thus all the power of the rocke and keyes is included in binding loosing remitting and retaining and authoritie to do this is giuen to all the Apostles as much as to Peter and yet the Iesuite by meanes of the rocke and keyes thinketh Peter is made chiefe aboue them all Let him and his partakers vntie this knot say directly what they thinke at the argument Peter had no more power giuen him a Planus sensus illorum verborum tibi dabo claues quodcunque solueris c. iste est vt primò promittatur authoritas seu potestas de signata per claues deinde actiones siue officiuÌ„ explicetur per illa vocabula Soluere Ligare ita vt omnino sit idem Soluere aperire ligare claudere Bell. vbi supra §. verùm haec then that which is contained in the keyes mentioned Mat. 16. But all the Apostles had this power giuen them for binding and loosing remitting and retaining include the whole function of the keyes therefore Peter had no more then the rest of the Apostles And if they answer that Peters iurisdiction ouer them was giuen Iohn 20. when Christ bad him feed his sheepe let the zealousest Papist that is lay aside wrangling and say bona fide why is the text of Matthew 16. touching the keyes and rocke vsed then to proue his Primacy if it giue him nothing beyond his fellowes and why go they not directly to worke vrging the 20. of Iohn and letting the rocke and keyes alone as making nothing for them 13 This that I haue answered is also the iudgement of ancient Doctors in that with one consent they all expound the rocke whereupon Christ said he would build his Church b August de verb. Dom. Ser. 13. in Ioan. tract 120. Hilar de trin l. 2. 6. Ambr coÌ„ment in Eph 2. v. 20. Chrys hom 55. in Mat. Basil homil de poenit Emissen hom in natal Pet. Andotâ—ers either of Christ himselfe or of the faith and confession that Peter held whereupon it followeth that they could not thinke those words gaue Peter any more then the rest c De vnit Eccl. Cyprian saith Verily the rest of the Apostles were the same that Peter was indued with equall fellowship both of honour and authoritie but the beginning proceedeth from vnity that the Church might be shewed to be one d Aduers Iouin l. 1. Hierome saith All the Apostles receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and the strength of the Church was stablished equally vpon them all e In Math. 16. Theophylact saith Although it was said to Peter onely I will giue the keyes to thee yet were they also granted all the Apostles When Where he said whose sins ye remit they are remitted f In Math. 16. Anselm saith It is to be noted that this power was not giuen alone to Peter but as Peter answered one for all so in Peter be gaue this power to all My purpose is not to heape much together out of the fathers but by a few places to shew the reader how and in what maner they vsed to speak concerning this matter There are diuers great Papists also who confesse the same whose names I haue set downe in g Digress 30. nu 41. another place 14 The next place of Luc. 22. I haue praied for thee that thy faith faile not therfore when thou art conuerted strengthen thy brethren I confes was spoken to Peter in regard of the sin whereinto more weake then all his brethren he fell shortly after yet notwithstanding it coÌ„taineth nothing which our Sauior meant not to the rest For as he prayed for him so he prayed for all Iohn 17.11.15.17.20 and the contents of his prayer was that their faith should not faile and the very office of Apostleship whereto he called them bound them to strengthen their brethren as h Gal. 2.11 Paul did Peter by reprouing him and made them i Gal. 2.9 pillars and k Eph. 2.20 Apoc. 21.14 foundations wherupon the world being built should recouer strength in which regard our Sauior telleth them they must be l Mat. 5.13.14 the salt and light of the earth m Mat. 28.19 and biddeth them go teach all nations which is as much as he saith to Peter in this place touching the strengthening of his brethren Besides n Plerique patres rectè intelliguÌ„t hanc Christi orationeÌ„ etiam pertinere ad totam Ecclesiam Iansen coÌ„cord c. 133. the Papists cannot deny but this prayer of Christ belongeth to all the Church which it could not if it had bene meant for the making of Peter Prince and head of his brethren whose prerogatiues I hope they vse not so liberally to impart to the whole Church and indeed the ancient writers vse this text indifferently to proue the perseuerance of the elect in faith which were no good kind of reasoning if Christ therein had meant none but Peter 15 The
third text Feed my sheepe Iohn 21. belongeth likewise to all the Apostles For though in that place those words be directed to Peter yet therein our Sauiour did but apply a general commandement to him and put him in mind of a dutie that was common to all For what were the rest of the Apostles Peters sheepe and not rather the people of the world to whoÌ„ he was to preach according to the ordinary opposition that is betweene Pastors and their flockes Or doth feeding suppose any more then preaching the Gospell to all nations which euery Apostle was bidden do And though it should yet Christ saith to all As my Father sent me so I send you and it is like the Father sent his Sonne to feed the sheepe without any subiection to another o Ier. 3.15 Act. 20.28 1. Pet. 5.1 And Pastors inferior to the Apostles are authorised to feed the flocke whereof the holy Ghost hath made them ouerseers They are all Pastors p De Vnit. Eccl. saith Cyprian but the flocke is one which with one consent is fed by all the Apostles Moreouer the fathers out of this text proue that euery Pastor in the Church ought to be diligent in feeding the flocke committed to him which is an argument that they thought these words were meant to more then Peter Saint Austin q Tract 121. in Ioh. saith They which feed the sheepe of Christ with this minde to haue them their owne and not Christs are conuinced thereby that they loue not Christ and against them this speech of Christ if thou louest me feed my sheep is to be vrged Chrysostome r De Sacerd. lib. 2. saith Our Sauiour at that time intended to teach both Peter and vs how deare his Church is to him that so by this meanes we also with all our heart might take vpon vs the cure and charge of the same Church And the practise of Saint Paul reprouing Peter at Antioch sheweth euidently that euery Apostle had equall authoritie to feede not onely the flock but one another else Paul might not haue rebuked him as he did And though our aduersaries sticke reasonable well to this text and are loath to giue the Apostles any share therein with Peter yet are they not all so resolute but that some of them confesse flatly as much as I answer Cusanus Å¿ Concord l. 2. c. 13. saith If Christ said to Peter Feed my sheepe yet it is manifest that feeding is by word and example So also according to Saint Austin in his exposition vpon that place the same commandement was giuen to all there where it is said Go into all the world and preach c. there is found nothing said to Peter that importeth any power Therefore we say truly that all the Apostles in power were equall with Peter the like t Defens pacis part 2. c. 28. saith Marsilius That Christ committing the office of feeding to Peter spake to him in the person of all the Apostles which maner of speaking he testifieth to haue vsed in that he saith what I say to one I say to all And albeit the rest will not grant thus much yet it followeth euidently and vnanswerably of that which they do grant For u Baro. an 34. n. 201. Rhem. Mat. 16.19 they yeeld that no more is giuen Peter here then was promised in Mat 16. where the keyes are mentioned but I haue shewed and no Papist can deny that all the Apostles were equall in the keyes and that those words concerned Peter no more then the other disciples So that it must needes be wilfull obstinacie to say still that these words feed my sheep were meant to none but Peter And let this suffice for the first issue betweene vs. 16 The next part of my answer is that to whom soeuer any of the texts alledged were directed yet none of them intendeth that which the Iesuite assumeth for he saith that to S. Peter and his successors Christ promised the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and that he would vpon him and his successors as vpon a sure rocke build his Church meaning thereby the common conceit of the Papists that Christ in these words gaue Saint Peter and the Pope the fulnesse of power and gouernement ouer the vniuersall Church wherein the Iesuite wilfully misreporteth the text For there is no mention there of Pope or successor but onely of Peter and the Apostles it was his fancie to Rome that put in the Pope And how he is deceiued herein you may perceiue by this that x Caiet tract de instit Pontific c. 13. § Ad huius rei euidentiam the Papists acknowledge the succession of the Pope had not his beginning from Christ and the Gospell but from the death of Peter at Rome which being true then whatsoeuer he said to Peter yet he gaue nothing to the Pope for if he had his institution into the Papacie had bin by the Gospell and the fact of Christ which the Papists dare not say Againe Christ said not to Peter that vpon him he would build his Church but thou art Peter and vpon this rocks I will build it meaning as y Serm 13. de verbis Domini Saint Augustine expoundeth vpon this rocke which thou hast confessed vpon this rocke which thou hast knowne saying thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God will I build my Church I will build thee vpon me not me vpon thee For the rocke was Christ whereupon Peter himselfe was built sith no man can lay any other foundation then that which is layd alreadie which is Iesus Christ And z De trinit l. 4. pag. 106. Cyril saith I thinke that by the rocke Christ meant nothing else but the vnmoueable faith of his disciple wherein the Church is founded and stayed from falling And Hilarie a De trinit l. 2. The building of the Church is vpon this rocke of confession this faith is the foundation of the Church by reason of this faith hell gates preuaile not against her b Hom. in nat S. Petri. going vnder the name of Eusâ—bius Emisenuâ— but Baronius saith the author of those homilies is Eucherius Lugdunensis annal tom 6. ann 441. nu 5. Eucherius saith Let vs see what this is I will build my Church vpon this rocke vpon this rocke which euen now thou laydst to be the foundation of faith vpon this rocke whiâ—h euen now thou taughtest saying Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God vpon this rocke and vpon this faith will I build my Church whereunto the Apostle agreeing saith Other foundation can no man lay but that which is laid Iesus Christ as if he should say there is no other foundation but that rocke which Peter layd for a foundation when he said thou art Christ Yea many learned Papists also refuse this new exposition of the Iesuites and well saw the words could not beare it and therefore after the example of the fathers expound
haue done it This argument fowly troubleth our aduersaries and therefore they would faine out-face it by saluing such Popes as are touched from heresie But all in vaine for what saith g 4. d. 18. pro. 25 coâ—ol 2. Ouandus The which Popes though some Catholikes would faine cleare yet should they not denie as they do that they were heretickes seeing the Pope may erre at least as a priuate man Thus h Conc. Sinues apud Baron an 303. nu 89. Carranz in Marcellin Marcellinus committed idolatry and offered sacrifice to Iupiter Saturn Hercules the Pagan gods and was thereupon examined iudged and condemned by a Councell of 300. Bishops The which storie i Tom. 2. an 302 nu 102. Baronius confesseth was from the beginning beleeued with a generall consent and kept in the auncient martyrologues and breuiaries of the Romane Church k Athan. ep ad Solita Fascic temp an 353. Baron tom 3. an 357. n. 43.44 Liberius that was Pope about the yeare 350. fell into Arianisme subscribing to the vniust condemnation of Athanasius whereupon Athanasius fell from his communitie and himselfe as an obstinate hereticke was deposed and cast out of the Church l Anast Bibliot in Leone 2. Nilus de priâ—at pag. 23. Honorius the first that was Pope in the yeare 626. was a Monothelite hereticke holding that Christ had but one will and so withall but one nature for the which the Church condemned him in m Synod 6. act 4.12.13 Synod 7. act vlt. Synod 8. act 7. three generall Councels n See D Reyn. apolog thes nu 39 inde It is a world to see how the Papists striue to cleare this matter and cannot though they blush not in his defence to discredite all antiquitie yea to flie one in the face of another As Pighius o Hier. l. 4. c. 8. hauing taken great paines to discredite the storie p Pigh diatrib in ep ad lect a certaine learned man wished him to recant q Diatrib de act 6. Syn. whereupon he setteth afresh vpon the matter but Canus r Loc. lib. 6. c. vlt. asketh How can Pighius cleare him whom Psellus Tharasius Theodorus with his Councel at Ierusalem Epiphanius and Pope Adrian affirme to haue bene an hereticke But Å¿ An. 681. nu 31. Baronius turneth vpon Canus againe and t Quem voluissem sensibus potiùs Canum quà m nomine totus praeceps in ferenda de re tanta sententia descanting vpon his name shaketh him off as if he had bene a Protestant that I might a little by the way note the vnitie of Papists euen there where it were most conuenient they should agree 35 And of late dayes when they began first to broach this conceit of the Popes infallible iudgement it pleased God to check that fond opinion by sensible exaÌ„ples of some present Popes to teach them the vanitie thereof that if reason could not perswade them yet experience should conuince them or if they would beleeue none that had written he might be an hereticke yet they should see it with their owne eyes and then let them hold him the rule of faith at their perill u Theod. Nicmens de schism l. 3 c. 44. pag. 91. Antonin sum hist part 3. tit 22. c 5. § 3. For in the yeare 1408. in the Councell of Pisa consisting of a thousand Diuines and Lawyers they were faine to depose two Popes at once Gregory the 12. and Bennet the 13 the tenour of which depriuation calleth them notorious schismaticks obstinate maintainers of schisme heretickes departed from the faith scandalizing the whole Church vnworthy the Papacie cut off from the Church And whereas Bennet continued Pope still for all this x Conci Const sess 37. Anton. vbi supra c. 6. § 2. a second Councel holden at Constance deposed him againe and declared that he had no right to the Papacie commaunding all men to esteeme him as an hereticke and schismaticke y Sess 11. 12. The same Councell deposed also another Pope Iohn 23 where it was proued against him that he held and defended as his iudgement that there is no eternall life nor immortalitie of the soule nor resurrection of the dead z Sess 34. A while after the Councell of Basill deposed Eugenius the fourth declaring him to be a rebell against the sacred Canons a notorious disturber and scandalizer of the peace and vnitie of the Church a simonist a periured wretch incorrigible a schismaticke an obstinate hereticke Thus we see their owne selues in expresse termes lay to the Popes charge schisme heresie scandall breach of the Churches vnitie and for that cause depose him refuse to obey him and yet another while they will defend he cannot erre Christ hath giuen him infalliblenesse of iudgement and supremacy ouer all men all that wil be counted true Catholickes must submit themselues to him and the Protestants can haue no vnitie because they acknowledge not his authoritie Digression 29. Declaring that the Pope is not Saint Peters successor 36 This point is properly proued by shewing the difference between the Pope and Saint Peters faith For if the Pope be departed from that which Saint Peter taught then it will plainly appeare he is not his successor because true succession standeth in holding the same faith But I will not go this way to worke now because I haue touched it particularly in a Digr 22.23 other places and handle it generally throughout this booke and all our writings and doctrine and disputations tend to nothing else but to shew it 37 Next it is proued by this that as Ierome b Ad Euagr. saith and c D. 21. in Nouo the Popes owne canons graunt All Bishops succeed the Apostles For if all the Apostles were equall and all Bishops succeed them then what singular matter is there in the Bishop of Romes succession more then in the succession of others Or why should he be called Saint Peters successor more then others For as Marsilius d Defen part 2. c. 16. noteth They are all successors which in life and conuersation resemble them as e Mat. 12. vlt. Christ said They are my mother and my brethren which do the will of my father Besides if he were Saint Peters successor all the priuiledges giuen by Christ to Peter must be deriued to him as to preach the Gospell which some Popes haue not bene able to do and few of late will take the paines to do to worke miracles to be free from heresie to hold perfect the loue of Christ to indite Scripture which I thinke the Iesuite himselfe will not attribute to the Pope 38 But omitting these and such like reasons the principal thing I now desire to shew is that as loud as the Papists are with the Popes succession and although the triall of all papistrie depend vpon it yet is it but a humane constitution not onely because there is
on the South or the sea and Aethiopia the ninetie seuenth of the Patriarkes the successor of Saint Marke the Euangelist Wherein we see the outward succession to remaine in that Church as entire as it doth in Rome and yet the Iesuite will not grant the same and such as communicate with it to be the true Apostolike Church that hath the true faith 3 And touching this outward succession because it is so much stood vpon I say it is not so entire as is pretended but certaine things may be obiected against it which are sufficient to take it way and plainly proue it to haue bene interrupted The which for the satisfaction of such as are desirous to looke into this matter I will briefly set downe in the digression ensuing Digression 53. Obiecting seuen things against the succession of Popes in the Sea of Rome whereby the same is clearely demonstrated to haue bene interrupted and not to be any certaine or infallible succession 4 First I haue shewed Digression 29. nu 38. that our aduersaries themselues haue no diuine authoritie but onely such as resteth vpon vncertaine proofs to conuince that the Bishop of Rome rather then of Antioch for example is Saint Peters successor For allow them that Peter himselfe was Bishop of Rome and appointed his successor to be the head of his Church after his death which he neuer did yet is there no infallible certaintie that this successor is the Pope Canus f Loc. l. 6. c. 8. saith it is proued but either by history or tradition and g Alphons haeres l. 1. c. 9. another learned Papist coÌ„cludeth that no man is bound to beleeue this or that Pope to be Saint Peters successor The which vncertaintie sheweth the succession of the Present Pope or any other before him to be indemonstrable 5 Secondly supposing Peter were Bishop of Rome yet there is no certaintie who succeeded him and one another a good while after h Euseb châ—on an 70. Opt. l. 2. Some say Linus succeeded Peter i Hier. script eccl in Clem. c. 52. in Esa Marian Scot an 71 Some Clemens k Refert Baro. an 69. Some that neither but Cletus l 8. q. 1. Si Petr. Maria Scot. an 71. Luit prand vit Pont. in Clem. Others say Linus and Cletus were Bishops vnder Peter in his life time but had no power of binding and loosing m Disputat hoc mundus quartus fucritne secundus Gab. lect 32. Touching Clemens all things are vncertaine n Fra. Agricol de primat Some lay the succession thus Linus Clemens Cletus Anacletus o Baro. ann 69. n. 42. Some thus Linus Cletus Clemens Anacletus p Tertull. carm l. 3. Some thus Linus Cletus Anacletus Clemens q Onuph annot ad Clem. Some thus Clemens Cletus Anacletus leauing out Linus r Optat. l. 2. Aug. ep 165. Some thus Linus Clemens Anacletus Euaristus leauing out Cletus Some thus Linus Cletus Clemens Euaristus leauing out Anacletus Here we see all things are intricate and no certaintie can be had The like may be obserued in the lower parts of the succession following 6 Thirdly the Sea hath bene voide a good space together without any Pope at all Å¿ Baro. an 53. n. 28. Ann. 253. vpon the death of Fabian it was voide one yeare and some moneths t Anastas in Honor. Anno 638. when Honorius died it was void one yeare seuen moneths and seuenteene daies Ann. 682. u Anastas in Agatho vpon the death of Agatho it was void one yeare seuen moneths and fiue daies Ann. 767. x Anastas in Paul vpon the death of Paul it was void one yeare and a moneth Baronius y An. 853. n. 63. saith It hath fallen out that it hath bene void above two yeares and fiue moneths the election hauing bene delaied through contention z Suppur ann 296. And in Martinus Polonus it is noted in the margent that the Papacy ceassed seuen yeares six moneths and fifteene daies These vacations cannot be denied and therefore the succession hath bene interrupted because at that time the supposed Head that should succeed was wanting 7 Fourthly about the yeare 850 a woman succeeded that in the habit of a man continued Pope two yeares and fiue moneths vntill being gotten with child she died in trauell in the open streets as she went on procession This is recorded by so many a Marian Scot. an 854. Martin Polo an 855. Palmer Floren. an 854. Sigeb an 854. Laoâ—ic Chalcocondyl reb Tuâ—c l 6 p. 411. Anton. hist part 2. tiâ— 16 c. 1. §. 7. Coel. Rho digni lect antiqu l. 8. c. 1. Historiographers and all Papists them selues some few excepted that receiued it froÌ„ them that now it is too late for the Iesuites to controll it And I care not though Anastasius that liued in Rome the same time wheÌ„ this was and writ the Popes liues mentioneth it not in his booke b Onuph annot Ioan. 8. Bell. Ro. Pont. l. 3 c. vlt. Baron ann 85â— n. 64. which is the best argument our aduersaries haue against it For Anastasius his booke is of small credit with themselues c Praefat. ad lecto He that put it foorth saith himselfe that it is a question among the learned whether this Anastasius be the true author of all the liues contained in the booke For Platina Trithemius and Onuphrius and others thinke Damasus writ their liues that were from S. Peter to himselfe Which being true then it is not certaine that Anastasius liuing in Rome when Ioan should be Pope wrote euery thing in that booke He saith that by reason of the often contradictions contained in the booke Baronius suspecteth it was coÌ„piled by more writers then one by two at least He saith many things are affirmed contrary to the truth which can be proued by the testimony of no graue or ancient author many slips in Chronagraphy are therin and many things repugnant and not agreeing together in many places other men haue added or detracted He saith it may not be denied that in the copy there are places so intricate that there is no hope to get out And he confesseth that after the life of Hadrian the second the liues of three Popes are omitted that went betweene him and Stephen the sixth as the life of Ioan is omitted that should haue gone betweene the liues of Leo the fourth and Bennet the third Yea d an 739. n. 6. Baronius in his owne fauour can espy that many things are fouÌ„d in others which Anastasius hath omitted but we are whooped at for saying so thogh we bring the testimony of e Martin Polo Sigeb Palmer Florent Fascic temp Anton. Volateran diuers authors that say she was put not in the catologue of Popes for the turpitude of the thing which might be the reason why Anastasius or others mention not the story For what should the Popes Library keeper do writing her
the power of ordaining belongeth not to iurisdiction but to order as they call it The which point will serue to auoid all that the Iesuite hath said in this section though we should say no more 3 The Texts of Scripture obiected are easily answered To that of Heb. 5. I say it requireth no more but that the partie be called of God which Luther was as we know by his labour and the fruite of it though Luther had also a lawfull outward calling as I haue shewed Sect. 52. num 5. For the Apostle speaketh of Christ who yet had none of the peculiar consecration mentioned by the Iesuite but onely a calling from God otherwise testified All the other places receiue the same answer For they mention nothing but a lawfull entrance into the ministerie containing no one sillable that bindeth to such an externall kind of succession as our aduersaries call for Whereupon I conclude that Luther and Caluin and all our ordinarie Pastours came in by the doore and satisfied the whole ordinance of God touching a lawfull calling For inwardly God enabled them and opened their eyes to see the Romane corruptions and outwardly they were created Pastors and teachers of Diuinity in the Churches where they liued and where they preached the magistrate authorized the people allowed them which is sufficient vnlesse the doctrine they taught could be disproued And if anie other outward ceremonie or custome were wanting which is vsed in the Church of Rome or hath bene vsed in the purer Church in former ages we care not for that but are readie to maintaine that all circumstances considered no such custome or ceremonie is simply and by the law of God or absolutely necessarie Digression 55. Shewing how vncertaine and contrary the Papists are among themselues touching the power of Priesthood in remitting sinnes and concerning the first institution of Shrift where it began 4 The Iesuite alledging the words of Christ mentioned Ioh. 20.22 to shew the necessitie of coming in by a lawfull calling by the way glozeth two things vpon them that deserue to be noted First that thereby the power to absolue from sins was giuen the Apostles so consequently to all Priests Which I will shew to be but a new opinion and of no certaintie that the reader may see the Church of Rome is not at one with her selfe touching the principallest points of her faith and no man can be certaine of anie thing that the Iesuite saith for these be his words To the Apostles was giuen power to absolue from sinnes But Fra. Victoria d Relect 1. de potest eccles sect 3. saith There be many Catholike authors which to the power of Orders do not simply attribute the remission of sins or collation of grace or any effect truly spirituall at all For they say mortall sinnes can neuer be forgiuen but by contrition and that by the power of the keyes sinnes are neuer forgiuen or the first grace conferred Wherein he hath truly reported of many great and ancient Schoolemen For so thought e Lib. 4. d. 18. the Maister of Sentences And Maior f 4 d. 14. q. 2. concl 3. saith The sacrament of Penance doth no way blot out sinne adding that the Doctors hold this commonly g Mich. AygnaÌ„ Bonon in Ps 31 Bononiensis demaunding whether a Priest can remit sinne by the power of the keyes answereth that the keyes are taken three wayes First for the principall authoritie simply and so they belong to God onely Next for authoritie not simply principall but precellent and so they belong to Iesus Christ onely Thirdly for authoritie neither principall nor precellent but ministeriall onely and thus the Pope and his successors haue the keyes as Christ said to Peter I will giue thee the keyes By this ministeriall power he meanes the same that Peter Lombard whoÌ„ he alledgeth followeth doth h Mag. lib. 4. d. 18. Ouand 4. d. 18. pro. 26. who is now reiected for holding that the key worketh not any absolution from the sinne but onely declareth the partie to be absolued But i Altisiod part 4. tract 6. cap. 8. q. 2. Alexand. part 4. q. 80. m. 1 ad 3. Occh. 4. q 8. lit q. Gabr. 4. d. 14. q. 2. lit d. n. most ancient Schoolemen follow him Occham saith I answer according to the Maister that Priests bind and loose because they declare men to be bound and loosed 5 The which exposition being the truth as it ouerthroweth the present conceit holden touching the Priests absolution that it is a iudiciall act effecting grace and iustifying a sinner whether contrite or not contrite that is not materiall to the Priests authoritie so it ineuitably destroyeth the Sacrament of Penance For this supposed power to remit and retaine sinne is the foundation of that Sacrament For therefore it is beleeued to be a Sacrament because the Scripture mentioneth the remitting of sinnes by the power of the keyes which power being no more but onely to declare them to be remitted by true contrition without conferring anie grace to the partie the Sacrament is destroyed for want of conferring grace properly and so there is no argument in the Scripture that Penance is a Sacrament 6 Againe the Iesuite saith that the Apostles had power to absolue from sin and the people a commandement to confesse their sinnes giuen in those words of Iohn thereby affirming his supposed Sacrament to be instituted by Christ and in those verie words wherein he falleth againe into the former difficulties and worse For in the 40. Section he said the Protestants denying Penance and Satisfaction to be needfull go against that of Iohn Baptist Do workes worthy of penance and that of our Sauiour Mat. 4. Do penance Which cannot be so if Penance were not ordained before Christs resurrection for howsoeuer he will thinke the deniall of Penance is against the Scripture yet if it were not ordained till Christ was risen he is debarred from saying we do against the words of Iohn Baptist Christ Mat. 4. because those words command no Penance or if they do then it was not instituted in Iohn 20. after Christs resurrection Let the Iesuite choose which he will 7 The truth is our aduersaries and the Church whereof they are though they make much ado with this sacrament because it is the net that taketh all their prouision yet can they not tell either when or where it was instituted or who commanded it You heare what the Iesuite saith that Christ did it in the 20. Chapter of S. Iohn which is I grant the currant opinion among the Iesuites since the Councell of Trent but in former times it was not so afore these men the Paracelsians of the text tooke it in hand Now k Ouand 4. d. 16 pro. 15. faith a late Frier out of the Tridentine Councell prouing the necessity of confession by discoâ—rse out of the authoritie of Iohn 20 we haue this to be the germane sence of that
who faile to say no more very much from Apostolike perfection and Angelical puritie of life according to Saint Paul anathema sit yea such a one as not onely bringeth not this Catholicke or generall receiued doctrine but bringeth in a new and contrary doctrine we should not according to Saint Iohn Epist 2. salute or say once Aue to him and much lesse should we giue credite to his words or vse him as a rule of our faith or preferre his teaching before the teaching of the Catholicke Church The Answer 1 And is it true that if God send any one in an extraordinary maner it appertaineth to his prouidence to furnish him with miracles or the people should not be bound to beleeue him How is it then said of Iohn Baptist a Ioh. 10 41. that was thus sent that he did no miracle yet all things that he spake of Christ were true And what will the Iesuite say to his b Boz sign eccl l. 18. c. 1. Baro an 34. n. 274. masters that so ridiculously haue put it in print that albeit in the Acts of the Apostles it be said that signes and wonders were done by the Apostles yet there is no signe reported that was done by any but by Peter the rest of the Apostles therefore either did none at all or almost none and very slender in comparison of those which Peter did And as the fathers say Iohn Baptist did no miracles lest any thing should be diminished from Christs authoritie so may it be said of Christs vicar Peter A grosse and a greasie conceit and swimming with blasphemie yet the Iesuite must sup it off because so skilfull clearks haue giuen it him but when he hath done good reason he recant his present assertion and bind not the Protestants to that which the Apostles themselues wanted in a manner all but Peter It is incredible how scurrilously the Papists behaue themselues in this point of miracles c Staph. apol part 1. Hosius confess Polon c. 92. Not one of these new Gospellers was euer able so much as to cure a lame colt or a halting bitch and yet when they will flatter the Pope they shame not to write that all the Apostles did as little 2 But I will answer the Iesuite directly to the point that ordinarily it appertaineth to Gods prouidence to furnish with miracles such as rise vp in an extraordinarie maner whether it be to abrogate or alter the ancient doctrine of his Church as our Sauiour and his Apostles were furnished And I grant that if Luthers calling were answered by vs to be meerely extraordinarie or if he had preached against the Catholicke Church or ancient doctrine continued in all ages the Iesuite had made a good passage against vs but he did none of these things His calling was not extraordinary in that kind which reuealeth new doctrine not knowne before as Christs and the Apostles was onely the externall gouernment of the Church being corrupted and oppressed by the Papacie declining from the ancient integritie that was in the beginning he vsed that calling which he had and extraordinarily bent it to the preaching of reformation I say extraordinarily first because it was not so visibly done in those ages Next the corruptions against which he dealt were ordinarily embraced in the outward practise of the world Thirdly he vsed his calling giuen him in the Papacie to another end then they meant that gaue it him Lastly considering those times his eyes in an extraordinarie measure and maner were opened to discerne the truth and God enabled him with extraordinarie gifts In all other things which are properly extraordinarie he differed from the Apostles For neither did he reueale new doctrine nor want all vocation of men nor was taught immediatly by reuelation In which case he needed no miracles but it was sufficient for him to proue his doctrine by the Scriptures 3 Whereupon the people were bound to credite him as farre as he taught according to the Scriptures for they are a token sufficient And though our Sauiour required no man to beleeue him but vpon the euidence of his workes yet that was because his place was meerely extraordinarie which Luthers was not whom our Pastors succeeding they haue the same libertie to proue their calling by the doctrine they teach and not by miracle The ordinarie course set downe by Christ was not that which the Papacie practised but the same for substance wherein Luther came the practise of the Papacie being a corruption that incroched vpon that course against which if Luther preached he taught nothing contrarie to the ordinary doctrine of the true Church but contrarie to the Papacie that oppressed the Church Which Papacie if it could be proued to be the true Church then according to S. Paule Gal. 1 Let him be accursed that speaketh against it and as S. Iohn speaketh Epist 2 Let no man salute such a preacher or giue credit to him 4 Let our aduersaries therefore take notice of their errors in this point and diligently marke where they lye First they assume their Papacie to be the ancient Church and the doctrine thereof to be the faith holden taught and alway deliuered in the same which is false confuted Then they assume againe that all mē preaching against this their Papacie preach against the Church and so consequently are not to be credited vnlesse they haue the gift of miracles Thirdly they inferre vpon this that therefore all our Pastors are vnlawfull The which conclusion standing vpon so weake grounds can be of no more credit then the grounds are whereupon it standeth all which I haue shewed to be false in their owne places where they were to be handled Let them proue theirs to be the Church and shew that what Luther taught against them he taught against the Church and then it will be true that no man should preferre his teaching before them and not before Beside we make not our Pastors the rule of our faith but ground our selues them on the Scripture which is the rule § 60. And surely me thinkes though there were none of these euident proofes which I haue brought out of Scripture yet euen reason it selfe would teach that we ought to giue more credit to the vniuersall company of Catholickes which haue bene in all times and are spread ouer the Christian world in all places then to any one priuate man or some few his fellowes It is a prouerbe common among all men Vex populi est vox Dei that which all men say must needes be true And contrariwise to a particular man or his priuate company that will oppose themselues against this generall voice of all men like Ismael of whom it is said Manus eius contra omnes manus omnium contra eum Gen. 16. it may well be obiected which Luther confesseth was obiected to himselfe by his owne conscience or rather principally by the mercy and grace of God almighty seeking to reclaime him while
informe vs to euerie good work to teach vs Christ crucified g 1. Cor. 2.2 and Paul desired to know no more to giue vs light in darknesse to beget our faith Shall we be reuoked from al other teachers to theÌ„ and finally is there no councell no comfort no doctrine no resolution needfull for vs but there it may be found and yet it cannot be the rule it is impious to thinke it blasphemous to say it The primitiue Church spake farre otherwise 4 And consider how the Iesuit can answer the places without tergiuersatioÌ„ h Ep. 80. â—d Eustat medicuÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 334 Basil saith Let the holy Scripture be arbitrator betweene vs and whosoeuer hold opinions consonant to those heauenly oracles let the truth be adiudged on their side Optatus disputing against a Donatist thus presseth him i Cont. ParmeÌ„ lib 5. We are saith he to enquire out some to be iudges betweene vs in these controuersies the Christians cannot because both sides cannot yeeld them and by parts taking the truth shal be hindred The iudge must be had from without our selues If a Pagan he knowes not the mysteries of Christianitie if a Iew he is an enemie to baptisme therefore vpon the earth no iudgement concerning this matter can be found * De coelo quaerendus est iudex et qui in tumulo quiescit tacitis de tabulis loquitur viuus voluÌ„tas eius velut in testamento sic in Euangelio inquiratur the iudge must be had from heauen but to what end should we knocke at heauen when here we haue one in the Gospell k Contra Hermog TertulliaÌ„ calleth the Scriptures the rule of faith And l Hom. 13. in 2. Cor. Chrysostome a most exquisite rule and exact squire and ballance to try all things by And m Orat. de iis qui adeuÌ„t Hicrosol 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gregory Nyssen a straite and inflexible rule Austin n De bono viduit c. 1. tom 4. saith the Scripture pitcheth downe the rule of our faith And againe he o De. Nupt. concup ad Valer l 2. c. 33. saith This controuersie depending betweene vs requires a iudge let Christ therefore iudge and let the Apostle Paul iudge with him because Christ also speaketh in his Apostle And p Ep. 112. ad Paulin. againe If a matter be grounded on the cleare authority of the holy Scripture such I meane as the Church calleth canoniall it is to be beleeued without all doubt but as for other witnesses and testimonies vpoÌ„ whose credit any thing may be vrged vnto vs to beleeue it it is lawfull for thee either to credit or not to credit them according as thou shalt perceiue them of weight to deserue or not to deserue credit q De Error profan relig Arcana ProphetaruÌ„ veneranda paÌ„dantur ad sistat nobis sanctorum oraculorum fides pag. 61 Iulius Firmicus Let the mysteries of the Prophets be opened let the credit of the holy oracles stand by vs. r Ho. 1. in Ier. Origen We must of necessitie call the Scriptures to witnesse for our sences and interpretations without them are of no credit Å¿ De doctr Christ lib. 2. c. 9 Austin All points which concerne faith and good life are found in those things which are plainly set downe in Scripture t Ibid. c. 42. And whatsoeuer thing it be that a man learne out of the Scripture if it be hurtfull there it is condemned if it be profitable there it is found u Catech. 4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag 15. Cyril the Bishop of Ierusalem Concerning the holy and heauenly mysteries of faith we must not deliuer any thing though neuer so small without the holy Scripture neither may we be led away with probabilities and shew of words neither yet beleeue me barely saying these things vnto you vnlesse thou also receiue the demonstration thereof from the Scripture For the security of our faith ariseth from the demostration of the holy Scripture x Theod. â—â—it lib. 1. c. 7. pag. 2â—4 The Empereur Constantine in his speech to the Bishops of the Nicen Councel hath this memorable saying y 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. We haue the teaching of the holy Ghost written For the Euangelicall and Apostolicke bookes and the decrees of the old Prophets do euidently teach vs the things that are needfull to be knowne concerning God Therefore lâ—ying aside all contention let vs out of the diuine-inspired Scripture take the resolution of those things we seeke for Thus the ancient Church would neuer haue spoken if it had bene of the Iesuites mind that the Scriptures alone cannot be the rule to direct our faith 5 And very common sense may confirme their iudgement For if the written word be granted to be the rule in one point as z August de Trinit lib. 15. cap. vltim in the Trinitie for example who may deny it to be the rule in another seeing the rule is but one for all and the nature thereof is to be perfect as the Iesuit himselfe requireth Again what father what councell or Churches iudgement is so absolute what doctrine or exposition so likely a Act 17.11 Ioh. 5.39 but it is examined by the Scriptures And when the Papists haue said what they can they are constrayned to grant that all other authority is finally resolued into the authoritie of the Scripture these are the words of Gregory of Valence b Comment Theolog. in Thom. tom 3. disp 1 qu. 1. punct 1. pag. 31. If a man be asked why he beleeues for example that God is one in nature and three in person let him answer because God hath reuealed it If againe he be demanded how he knoweth that God hath reuealed it let him answer that indeed he knoweth it not euideÌ„tly but beleeueth it infallibly by faith and that vpon no other reuelatioÌ„ c bene tamen ob insallibâ—lem propositionem Ecclesiae tanquam conditionem but yet the infallible proposition of the Church as a condition requisite for the beleeuing it doth wel moue him theruÌ„to d Sirursus vnde cognoscat propositionem Ecclesiae esse infallibilems fimiliter dicat se clarè noÌ„ nosse credere tamen fide infallibili ob reuelationeÌ„ Scripturae testimonio perhibentis Ecclesiae cui reuelationi noÌ„ credit ob aliam reuelationem sed ob seipsam If again you aske And how doth he know the proposition of the Church to be infallible let him likewise say he knoweth it not euidently but beleeueth it infallibly because the Scripture hath reuealed it giuing testimony to the Church which reuelation he beleeues not vpon the credit of any other reuelation but for it selfe though hereunto the proposition of the Church as a requisite condition be needfull Let this speech of the Iesuite be well noted 6 Finally the euidence of this truth is such that it conuinceth the Papists themselues many
the Church and those latter also are certaine to vs else could they not make the other so and why is the Churches authority so absolutely vrged here by the Iesuit when yet in so many cases it may be spared That is not the sole thing that must assure vs without which we may otherwise be secured Digression 13. Shewing against the Iesuits assumption that all substantiall points of our faith are sufficiently determined in the Scripture and the reason why the Papists call for the Churches authoritie 9 Whereas the Iesuite obiecteth against the Scripture that many substantiall points of faith are not expresly contained in the Scriptures this is true of his Popish faith which is in them neither expresly nor by analogie saue that they haue an answer ready t Hosius de express Dei verb. pag. 38. That which pleaseth the Church of Rome is Gods expresse word But of the true faith of Christ u De doctrin Christ l. 2. c. 42. Austin saith Whatsoeuer a man learneth from without the Bible if it be hurtfull there it is condemned if it be profitable there it is found all things which may be learned elsewhere are found there more abundantly x Regul contract q. 95. Basil saith It is necessary and consonant to reason that euery man learne that which is needfull out of the holy Scripture both for the fulnesse of godlinesse and lest they inure themselues to humane traditions which words saith y Non videtur author harum quaestionum admittere traditiones non scriptas Bellar. de amiss grat lib. 1. c. 13 a Iesuite seeme to debarre traditions and the Church of Rome authorizeth the scripture but by traditioÌ„ z In Mat. hom 41. Chrysostome saith Whatsoeuer is required to saluation is all accomplished in the Scripture neither is there any thing wanting there that is needfull for mans saluation Isidorus Pelusiota his scholler a Lib. 1. epi. 369. biddeth we should refuse whatsoeuer is taught vnlesse it be contained in the volume of the Bible b Lib. 12. in Ioh. in illud â—â—ec auteÌ„ scripta sunt vt credatis Cyril Such things as the Apostles saw sufficient for our faith and manners are written that shining in true faith and good manners we might come to heauen by Christ c Comment in Hagg. c. 2. Hierome Whatsoeuer things man find and faine without the authoritie and testimonie of the Scripture as if they were from Apostolicall tradition are smitten by the sword of God d Lib. 3. c. 1. Irenaeus We haue not knowne the order of our saluation by meanes of any but those through whom the Gospell is come to vs the which Gospell they then preached and afterwards by the will of God deliuered to vs in the Scripture to be the foundation and pillar of our faith These places of the Fathers e Bellarm. de verb. Dei lib. 4. cap. 11. Gregor de Valent. anal fid by the confession of the Iesuits themselues shew that all things are written which be necessary for the saluation of all men And so you see the Iesuites rashnesse For if many substantiall points of faith be not set downe then some things necessary are wanting for euery substantiall point is necessary for all men 10 But yeeld the Iesuite that the Church shall be the rule we speake of to assure our conscience and then aske him who shall be this Church whereto he wil answer none but the Pope and his crew of Cardinals nay none but the Pope himself as I haue shewed alreadie and shall declare hereafter who if he leade thousands of people by troupes to hell eternally to be damned with himselfe there yet no man might presume to reproue him because he is iudged of no man f Dist 40. c. Si Papa saith the Canon law which the Iesuit will kindly take too if ye put him to it 11 And how will this Church expound the Scripture when you haue yeelded your self vnto her for no doubt she will discharge the office faithfully which she laboureth for so eagerly Let Cusanus the Cardinall tell you how for I hope he neuer recanted this point as g Stapl. counterbl l. 3. c. 36. pag. 358. they say he did another of greater truth thus he writeth h Epist 2 pag. 833. The Scripture is fitted to the time and variably vnderstood so that at one time it is expounded according to the fashion of the Church and when that fashioÌ„ is changed the sence of the Scripture is also changed i Epist 3 pag. 838. Againe when the Church changeth her iudgement God also changeth his k Epist 7. pag. 857. And no maruell seeing the letter of the Scripture is not of the essence of the Church if the practise of the Church at one time interprete the Scripture of this fashion and another time on that And let the Popes lawyers tell you that say l De translat episcopi c. Quanto in Gloss § Puâ—i The Pope hath a heauenly iudgement and maketh that to be the meaning which is none because in those things that he pleaseth to haue go forward his will is a law neither may any man say why do you so for he may dispense aboue all law So that this is the plaine English wherinto all the Iesuites doctrine concerning the authoritie of the Church is resolued and whatsoeuer any of them say yet their halting in the end cometh all to it and good reason for the Pope is a fast friend to the Romane Church c. § 10. Fourthly this rule of faith which we seeke for must be such that whosoeuer do find it and hauing found it will diligently attend vnto it obediently in all that it teacheth yeeld assent vnto it shall sufficiently in all points be instructed as touching matters of faith in such sort that none that yeeldeth this obedient assent in all points to the teaching thereof can fall into errour of faith But there be many that hauing found the Scripture do with an obedient mind diligently reade it and yeeld assent to euery sentence and word written in it acknowledging whatsoeuer it saith to be the word of God and yet are not sufficiently instructed but may and do sometimes grosly and obstinately erre in matters of faith as it is most euident since men of contrarie minds in religion do in maner aforesaid reade the Scriptures acknowledging them to be the word of God and yet continue opposite in opinion and so one of them in errour Therefore the Scripture alone is not that rule sufficient of it selfe to instruct euerie one in all points of faith The Answer 1 This is the Iesuites third argument against the scriptures and it is thus framed That which doth not instruct such as find it and obey it in all points of faith and preserue them from error is not the rule But the Scripture doth not instruct such as find it and obey it in all points of faith and
Apostles if it reach to the Church so that if that be the sence which the Iesuite setteth downe then all the Apostles had equall priuiledges from error with Peter and particular Churches and men should be as infallible as the whole Church it selfe which I am sure the Iesuite will not grant Thirdly Saint Austine i Tract 96. in Ioh. tom 9. expoundeth the words as I do He shall teach or leade you into all truth this I think cannot be fulfilled in any mans mind in this life for who is he liuing in this bodie so corrupt and loading the soule that can know all truth when the Apostle saith we know but in part But forasmuch as by the holy Ghost it cometh to passe whose earnest we haue receiued that hereafter we may come to the fulnesse it self whereof the same Apostle saith then shall we see him face to face and now I know but in part but then I shall know as I am knowne not that which shall be in this lâ—fe onely but all that which shall befall vs till the perfection come the Lord by the loue of his spirit hath promised saying He shall teach you all truth As for the Iesuites exposition that he may remaine with you for euer not onely for sixe hundred yeares it smelleth either of his malice or ignorance For which of vs euer yet said the holy Ghost departed from the Church after sixe hundred yeares Let the Papists deale sincerely and leaue their coyning 6 The fourth place is Math. 28.19 Go teach all nations Whereto I answer first these words were spoken to the Apostles onely and not to that which the Iesuite calleth the Catholike Church Now I grant their teaching was infallible and all men were bound to heare it for they taught that which afterward they writ in the Scripture yet so they taught and with such commission that k Act 17.11 the people are commended which examined their teaching by the Scriptures Secondly we grant the Pastors of the Church in all ages haue commission to teach likewise but that proueth not all their teaching to be alway infallible because naturall corruption hanging on them they may faile in that which is committed to them Neither is this any inconuenience binding vs sometime to beleeue that which is false for the bond hath a limitatioÌ„ that we heare them so farre as they teach agreeable with the scriptures and no further and by those scriptures we may relieue our selues if they chance to teach falsly 7 The fift place is Luk. 10.16 He that heareth you heareth me Which words were spoken to the Apostles all whose teaching and writing was true infallibly and therefore were sufficient warrant to the hearers to accept it But being applied to the Church and ordinary Pastors therein l Ferus lib. 3 in Math. cap. 23. they must be vnderstood with this caution if they hold them to the instructions that Christ giueth them if they come in the name of Christ deliuering his words truly and consonant to the scripture for such are to be heard as Christ himselfe else m 1. Ioh. 4.1 1. Cor. 14.32 we must trie the spirits and iudge of the Prophets This place therefore being to be vnderstood conditionally proueth not that which the Iesuite concludeth absolutely and vniuersally 8 The sixt place is Math. 23.2 The Scribes and Pharises sit in Moses chaire all therefore whatsoeuer they bid you obserue that obserue and do Which words I grant must be vnderstood of the Ministers of the Gospel that succeed the Apostles as wel as of the Pharises that sate in Moses chaire therefore I answer three things 1. I mislike it not that he compareth the Priests and Bishops of his Church to the Scribes and Pharises 2. By Moses chaire is meant neither outward succession nor iudiciall authoritie but the profession of Moses law 3. n Si quae cuÌ„que dixerint nobis ea facere iubemur cur alio loco Christus cauere voluit à feâ—mento Pharisaeorum cur rursum eorum traditiones exemplo etiam proprio coÌ„temnere docuit aliquid ergo doctrinae propriae puritati euangelij admiscere possunt in quo non solùm non sunt audiendi sed sunt etiam refutandi Id ergo prae cauit Christus ne plebs malis docentium exemplis ad contemptionem verae doctrinae inducatur Nunc ergo quae dixetint nobis Pharisaei eadem facere iubet Christus cum super Cathediam Mosis federint hoc est legem enarrauerint docucrint proposuerint Can. loc l. 5. c. 4. Our Sauior doth not simply commaund the people to obey the Pharisees in all points of their doctrine or teach them that their locall succession did priuiledge them from error but onely that they should not for their euill life be offended at that which they might at any time teach well because though their life were wicked yet that which they taught out of Moses chaire that is to say according to Moses law must be followed Now this was far from enioyning them in all points to do according to the doctrine of the Scribes and Pharises as I proue by foure reasons first o Iansen concord euang cap. 120. Em. Sa. notat in Math. 23. v. 3. the Popish expositors say this place bindeth vs not to obey them if they teach that which is euill for that is to teach against the chaire Which exposition granteth we are not bound to heare them in all points without limitation as p Ecce sine limitatione aliqua Martin Peres de tradit part 3. pag. 328. a Popish Bishop speaketh with the Iesuite and supposeth they may teach vntruly in some points Secondly if I may refuse them in some points then hence it followeth vnanswerably that there is another rule whereby I may be directed in hearing for else how should a man be able to distinguish those points wherein he must follow his teachers from those wherein he must not Thirdly the Pharisees taught many errors and blasphemies both q Math. 5.20 25.3 23.13 against the law of Moses and r Marc. 14.64 Ioh 7.48 8 13. 9.22.24 19.7.15 against the diuinitie of Christ in which regard our Sauiour bad his disciples Å¿ Mat. 26.6.12 to beware of the leauen of the Pharises which was their doctrine Wherein he had gainsaid himselfe if by Moses chaire he had meant any thing but the prescript of the law or by those words had commaunded vs in all points to do according to the Prelates doctrine for then the Iewes must not haue honored parents nor loued their enemies nor beleeued in Christ because the Pharises taught against these things Lastly t Gloss in Mat. 23.2 Nicol. Gorr ibid. Arias Mâ—ntâ—n elucid ibid. the Papists themselues expounding the place write that to sit in Moses chaire is to teach according to the doctrine and rule of Moses law and to commaund things agreeable thereunto that is to say true doctrine and the same
5 when he said I would not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the authoritie of the Church did moue me For though the testimonie of the Church by reason of mens infirmitie afore they beleeue be requisite to draw them on to consent to the Scriptures as children afore they can go hold themselues by the side of a stoole and so learne to go yet is not the credite of the Church or authority of men the thing whereby we know and distinguish the Scripture from other writings but the authoritie of Gods spirit is it that by the help of the Church worketh faith in vs. Digression 19. Touching the place of S. August cont epist. fundam cap. 5. and the matter which the Papists gather from it 4 The Papists haue a principle among them that the Scriptures receiue all their authoritie from the Church meaning thereby g Rhem. Gal. 6.2 that they are not knowne to be true neither are Christians bound to receiue them without the attestation of the Church h Ioan. de Turrecr suê‘ dist 9. Noli meis nu 4. Which testimonie declareth vnto vs which be the Scriptures and which not i Baron annal tom 1. an 53. nu 11. so that by the tradition of the Church all the Gospel receiueth his authority and is built therupon as vpon a foundatioÌ„ and cannot subsist without it Yea k Bosius de sign eccl tom 2 pag. 439. some of them write that the Scripture is not to be reckoned among such * Principia principles as before all things are to be credited but it is proued confirmed by the church * Quasi per quoddam principium as by a certain principle which hath autority to reiect allow Scripture And l D. Standish Treat of the Script c. 6. probat 3. a countriman of ours hath left written that in three points the authoritie of the Church is aboue the authoritie of the Scripture The second is for that the Church receiued the Gospel of Luke and Marke and did reiect the Gospels made by his high Apostles Thomas and Bartlemew The which speeches of theirs when the Papists haue expounded how they can yet this will be the vpshot that in all discourses concerning religion the last resolution of our faith shall be into the Churches authoritie 5 For confirmation whereof they bring you see this of Austine I would not haue beleeued the Gospel vnlesse the Churches authority moued me In which words he speaketh of the time past afore he was conuerted and according to the phrase of his countrey putteth the preterimperfect tense for the preterpluperfect tense meaning thus I had not now beleeued the Gospell and bene a Christian but that the Church by her reasons perswaded me thereunto speaking onely of the practise of Christians who by their perswasions conuert many to the Gospell And that he speaketh of the time pâ—st when he was an vnbeleeuer it is plain not onely by viewing the place but by the testimonie of a learned Papist m Can loc l. 2. c. 8. pag. 34. who saith Austine had to do with a Manichee who would haue a certaine Gospell of his owne without controuersie admitted therefore Austine asketh what they will do if they chance to meet with one * Qui ne Euangelio quidem credat which beleeueth not the Gospell and by what arguments they will draw him into their opinion n Certè se affirmat non aliter potuisse adduci vt Euangeliâ—m amplectâ—retâ—â— quà m Ecclesiae authoritate victum Verily he affirmeth that â—e for his part could not otherwise be drawne to embrace the Gospel but being ouercome with the authorie of the Church therefore he doth not teach that the credite of the Gospell is founded on the Churches authoritie Whereby it is plaine that Austine propoundeth himselfe as an instance of one that beleeueth not which he could not be when he wrote this but by speaking of the time past And though it were throughly proued that he spake of himselfe being a Christian and in that estate said he would not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the authoritie of the Church moued him yet were it not proued hereby that he meant the present Church as it runneth from time to time or the Church of Rome or any other place as it now standeth For if some Papists misse it not he meant the Church which was in the Apostles times which saw Christs miracles and heard his preaching Durand o 3. d. 24. q. 1. in litera o. saith That which is spoken concerning the approbation of the Scripture by the Church is meant onely of that Church which was in the Apostles time Of the same mind are p Dried de var. dogm l. 4. c. 4. Gers de vita anima Occham dial l. 1. part 1. c 4. others whereby he may see that Austine giueth a kind of authoritie to the Church but it is not that Church which should serue his turne Neither is the authoritie giuen large enough to reach the Popish conceit or the Iesuites conclusion if we had not the testimony of the Church we could not be infallibly sure that there were any Gospell at all nor know these bookes to be Scripture for Canus a Doctor of his owne q Vbi supra confesseth I do not beleeue that the Euangelist saith true because the Church telleth me he saith true but because God hath reuealed it And r Triplicat incho 〈◊〉 uers Whitak in Admon Stapleton The inward testimonie of the spirit is so effectuall for the beleeuing of any point of faith that by it alone any matter may be beleeued though the Church hold her peace or be neuer heard And Å¿ Comment theol tom 3. pag. 31 Gregorie of Valence The reuelation of the Scripture is beleeued not vpon the credit of any other reuelation but for it selfe And t qâ—â— Sent. 1 q. 1. art 3. pag 50. liâ—eta C. â—â—ce Greg. Arimin prolog n sent q. 1. art 3. pag. 4. Cardinall Cameracensis The verities contained in the Canon of the Bible onely are the principles and foundation of Diuinitie and receiue not their authority by other things whereby they may be demonstrated And therefore this testimonie of Austine proueth not that he beleeued the Gospel through the Churches authoritie as by a Theologicall principle whereby the Gospel might be proued true but onely as it were by a cause mouing him to credite it as if he should say I would not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the holinesse of the Church or Christs miracles did moue me In which saying though some cause of his beleeuing the Gosp ll be assigned yet u Compare this wâ—â— the place of Bozius alledged in the beginning of this Digress letter a. no former principle is touched whose credite might be the cause why the Gospell should be beleeued These speeches of our very aduersaries which the truth it selfe hath wroong from them deserue to be obserued the more because
are driuen to yeeld the keyes to all the Apostles as well as to Peter and yet they thinke he alone had the primacie which sheweth clearly that the keyes containe it not Fourthly they which expound the power of the keyes to shew what they containe mention therein no more but as I haue answered The Councell of Colen vnder Hermannus x Bell. de poen l. 1 c. 1. penned by Gropper y Defens of the Cens whom the Papists cal the rare man of our age proceedeth thus z Enchir. concil Colon. de sacr confess But what keyes Christ when he departed hence left the Apostles and their successors in the Church that is to be explicated And truly this is plain that he committed to them his owne keyes and no other euen the keyes of the kingdome of heauen as himselfe said to Peter Whatsoeuer thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on earth shal be loosed in heauen These keyes the Fathers deuided into the key of order and the key of iurisdiction And againe each key into the key of knowledge and of power The key of order is the power of priestly ministery which containeth power to preach the Gospell consecrate the bodie of Christ remit and retaine sinnes and to minister the sacraments The key of iurisdiction is power to restraine the faultie this is that power of excommunicating such as offend openly and absoluing them againe In which explanation of the power mentioned in the keyes we see nothing touched but onely the ministery of the word and Sacraments and the execution of discipline But Marsilius a Defens part 2 c. 6. speaketh more fully that the authoritie of the keyes according to Saint Austin and Hierom is that iudiciarie power that standeth in dispensing the word sacraments and discipline although the opinion and title of the fulnesse of power which the Bishop of Rome ascribeth to himselfe tooke his beginning from these words Whose sinnes ye remit they are remitted and whatsoeuer you shall bind vpon earth shall be bound in heauen 20 The second text alledged is Luk. 22.32 where Christ saith to Peter I haue praid for thee that thy faith faile not and thou being conuerted strengthen thy brethrē which the Iesuit expoundeth as if our Sauiour had specially prayed for S. Peter and the Pope that their faith should not faile at least so farre as to teach the Church a false faith to the intent they might alway be able to confirme their brethren if at any time they should faile in the doctrine of faith which all Catholicke men knowing do confesse the Popes definitiue sentence to be always an infallible truth and thereupon submit themselues thereunto and so liue in vnitie But this exposition is soone confuted for first here is no mention of the Pope but of Peter onely whereby it is plaine that no certaintie can be concluded out of the words for any but for the Apostles onely or if they reach to any besides Peter then according to the opinion of the most iudicious Papists the Church is it and not the Pope So saith b Qu. Vesper d. 3. art 3. prob 1. lit G. Cameracensis That which in Scripture is promised to the whole must not be attributed to any part but alway to hold the true faith and neuer to erre against it is promised by Christ to the whole company of beleeuers alone It is plaine therefore that Christ promised Peter his faith should not faile vnderstanding it not of his personall faith but of the generall faith of Gods Church committed to his regiment And Frier Walden c Doctr. fid l. ◠c. 19. saith Peter bare the type of the Church not of the particular Romane Church but of the vniuersall Church not gathered together in a generall Councell but dispersed through the world from Christ to our times Of the same mind are d Concord l. ◠c. 11. Cusanus and e Defen part 2. c. 28. Marsilius So that in the iudgement of foure of the learnedst among our aduersaries the purpose of Christ was not by this text to indow Peter or the Pope but the whole Catholick Church and so accordingly the right of gouernment and freedome from erring should remaine not in the Pope but in the vniuersall Church cleane cōtrary to that which the Iesuit here supposeth 21 Secondly the direct and immediate purpose of Christ in these words is to forewarne Peter of the sinne whereinto he fell afterward by denying him and the meaning is that though Satan desired thereby to destroy him yet he had prayed that his faith might not by the temptation be vtterly extinguished admonishing him that as by his fall he would weaken his brethren the members of the Church so by the example of his true conuersion he should strengthen them againe vnderstanding this faith for which he prayed not of Peters teaching or directing the Church in doctrine but of the habit of faith abiding in his heart whereby he beleeued in Christ and confessed his name and f Confirmandi vocabulo authoritatem in docendo significari saith Greg. de Valen. to 3. pag 197. e. by strengthening his brethren not that he should be supreame head ouer his fellow Apostles but that g Esto a his poenitentiae exemplar ne desperent Theophyl Infirmiores fiatres exemplo tuae poenitentiae comforta ne de venia desperēt Gloss by the exāple of his repentance experience of Gods mercy to him in his infirmitie he should encourage all people against temptation This exposition is proued to be true because first there is no word in the text importing either all infalliblenesse of faith or any authoritie ouer the other Apostles See h Comment in Luc. 22. saith Caietan how Christ biddeth Peter account the Apostles not his subiects but his brethren see how he putteth him in office not to rule ouer them but to confirme them in faith hope and charitie Secondly the words going immediatly before forbid all absolute power of one ouer another The Kings of the nations beare rule and exercise authoritie ouer them but it shall not be so among you Thirdly Bellarmine acknowledgeth i Ex quibus priuilegiis primsi fortasse non manauit ad posteros De Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 3. § Alterum priuilegium Quoad prima non agit Petri successorē Boz de sign eccl tom 2. l. 18. c. vlt. pag. 594. that to persist alway in the faith without falling from it is a prerogatiue that possible is not deriued from Peter to the Pope which being so it followeth that the Iesuites exposition is false and no Papist can be certain that by vertue of this text the Pope can teach no error any more then he is assored he cannot erre himselfe but it is cleare he may erre himselfe and all Papists yeeld it therefore it is also vncertaine whether he be enabled to teach the Church so that in teaching he
in Bonif. 3. Marian. Scot. an 608. Martin Polon an 607. Vrsperg in Phoca Naucler gener 21. in Bonif. 3. all Historiographers with one consent haue left written in these words Boniface with great ado obtained of the Emperour Phocas that he might be made the vniuersall Bishop of the world the which authoritie his successors not onely held fast euen with their teeth but also wonderfully increased The Reader by all this that I haue touched may soone discerne the Popes moderne authoritie exercised among his owne and claimed ouer all to be swolne farre bigger then it was in ancient times But after swelling cometh bursting whereof I reade his followers beware in time Digression 28. Shewing that the Pope is not of infallible iudgement but may erre and fall into heresie as any other man may 32 This point is certaine enough to vs who haue cast off both him and his teaching for no other cause but this that we are assured he is Antichrist and his faith heresie But it may be shewed in another sort also that the Papists themselues may not denie it by making demōstration of his errors in such cases as they allow to be the truth Which they skilfully foreseeing haue lately inuented the distinction vsed here by the Iesuite that he may fall into heresie but he cannot teach it è cathedra that is by way of definition to offer it the vniuersall Church he may erre in his owne person but not as Pope to define and teach error The which is a sensles ridiculous shift though the desperatenesse of their cause haue put them to it For they think their Pope to be a publick person and his whole office to teach the Church wherupon his priuate errors as they cal them cannot but go with him into the chaire and Consistory For he that erreth in iudgement must of necessitie erre also in his determinations because no man can determine otherwise then he thinketh Neither is it likely that God will put him in trust with the faith of his Church that cannot guide his own For the rule must not only make straight that which is crooked but be straight it selfe Therefore if the Popes faith cannot direct himselfe much lesse shall it be able to preserue others Besides n Tom. 2. de sign eccl l. 18. c. vlt. Bozius saith He may be an hereticke yea write teach and preach heresie Which is all one as if he had said he may erre iudicially è cathedra because these three writing teaching or preaching are iudicial exercises of the chaire directed and reaching themselues to the Church for this speciall end to informe men Againe they haue erred in Church canons dispensations Decretals and matters defined by them in Councels therefore they haue erred è cathedra The consequence is proued o D. 19. in Canonicis Et si Romanorum because all these tend to the teaching of the Church and are the meanes whereby he publisheth his iudgement Of his dispensations Franciscus Victoria p Relect. 4. nu 6 saith The Pope in dispensing against the decrees of Councels and former Popes may erre and grieuously sinne Would it were so that we might doubt of this conclusion but we see dayly such large and dissolute dispensations proceed from the court of Rome to the ruine of small and great that the world is not able to beare them Thus Pius Quartus q Sess 8. can 3. sub Pio 4. decreed at Trent that it should be lawful for him to allow those degrees to marry together which God in Leuiticus had forbidden and to forbid those which God had allowed This was an hereticall decree è cathedra and according to it diuers Popes haue taught their people to marrie against the faith r Sum. Angel verbo Papa nu 1. Martin the fift allowed one to marry his owne sister germaine Another allowed K. Henrie the eight to marrie his brothers wife ſ Osor de gest Eman. l. 2. A third taught Emanuel the King of Portugall to marry two sisters Touching decrees t Alphon. adue heres l. 1. c. 4. Celestin ordained for example the mariage to be void when either of the parties fall into heresie u Sigeber chro an 768. 902. Sigon de Reg. Ital. l. 6. an 896. Baron tom 10. an 897. nu 6. Stephen the sixt decreed in a Councell that such as were ordained Bishops by Formosus his predecessor were not ordained lawfully because Formosus was an euill man This is plaine Donatisme x De consecr d. 4. A quodam Pope Nicolas decreed that to baptize onely in the name of Christ is good baptisme contrary to the decrees of y Ibid. Hi vero Gregorie and z Ib. Multi sunt Pelagius a 32. q. 7. Quod proposuisti Pope Gregorie decreed that a man might take another wife in case his wife were so diseased that she could not yeeld him the debt of mariage the which b Ib. §. Sed illud Ambr. saith Gratian is altogether contrary both to the sacred Canons and to the doctrine of the Apostles and Euangelists But what need we be curious in reckoning vp instances when it is a thing granted c D. 4. Si Papa that he may be found negligent of his owne and his brethrens saluation drawing innumerable people by troupes with himselfe to be damned in hell For doth not he erre perniciously enough that may thereby damne himselfe and others or were it possible he should do thus if Christ had priuiledged him as the Papists fancie 33 Moreouer it is granted by the Papists themselues that he may erre in faith not in manners or opinions onely For Occham d Q. 1 de potes sum Pont. c. 9. saith and sheweth that many things are contained in the Decretals which sauour of heresie And Almaine e Qu. in Vesper that the power of not erring in the faith is not alway in the Pope And I haue shewed out of Bozius that he may write and preach heresie and heresie is in matter of faith whereupon it followeth that his iudgement cannot be infallible when he cometh to proceed in determining because the true faith wherein he erreth is it that should rectifie the determination The which consequence f Relect. cont 3 q. 4. concl 4. arg 4. Doctor Stapleton granteth yeelding that if he erre in faith the whole Church also should with him be led into error and so the vnitie of faith should be vncertaine But granting this he denieth that he can erre in faith which is contrary to that which all others confesse and dayly experience demonstrateth 34 The last reason to shew he may erre euen when he teacheth the Church is this that there may be diuers instances giuen when the Church refused to heare him yea cast him out and deposed him as an hereticke which was needlesse if there had not bin a purpose in him to seduce the Church and danger lest his teaching should
speciall priuiledge to exempt them So saith Caietan Of his grace he gaue theÌ„ that power which by the ordinary way they should haue receiued of Peter so preuenting him c. TheÌ„ the which they could neuer haue said any thing more madly first to tell vs they had their authoritie from Peter and then at the next word to fall three farthings in a penny they should haue had it but by speciall grace they were exempted which dispensation they shew not neither 43 The second sort answer that the Apostles had two offices The first was the Apostleship the second their Bishoply or Pastorall dignitie The former they had immediatly of Christ but the later by and through Peter Victoria i Relect. 2. nu 8 saith Many graue writers are of this minde as k Turrecrem d. 21. in Nouo n. 3 d. 66. Porro n. 1. Sum. l. 2. c 54 Paludens de potest Eccl. Richard 4. d. 17 art 3. q. 1. ad 6. Dom. Iacobat de concil l. 10. art 7. Staplet Princ. doctr l. 6. c. 7. they are indeed but their fellowes confute them by vertue of the Romane vnitie as Victoria himself doth l Vbi supra nu 9. affirming They receiued all the power they had immediatly from Christ which he saith is proued in that he made them all Apostles and to the Apostleship belongeth three things authoritie to gouerne the beleeuers the faculty of teaching and the power of miracles so that it seemeth to him firmely to be said and holden that all the Apostles had the authoritie of orders and iurisdiction both immediatly from Christ And Henriquez m Sum. Mora. p. 403. Domin Ban. vbi supra saith There is no likelyhood in their opinion that say the Apostles receiued their iurisdiction of Peter And so we see the deuice of the Apostles delegacy vnder Peter is altogether vncertaine 44 Others propound and order the matter thus The difference of Peters power from the rest was that he alone might vse the keyes but the rest might not without him n De Sign l. 18 c. 1. saith Bozius o Visib Monar l 6. c. 2. Sanders thinketh the other disciples had the same keyes but it was neither before him nor together at the same time with him but afterwards to teach them that Peter had them by ordinarie right as Prince of all * Se autem velut ex â—peciali delegatione Christi extraordinatio iure but they as it were by Christs speciall delegation and extraordinarily p Tom 3. p. 195. Gregory of Valence laieth the primacy of Peter in two points First that he receiued his Apostleship ordinarily to endure ouer the whole Church euen in his successours wheras the other had it by extraordinary priuiledge to be made Apostles ouer all the world and immediatly by Christâ— differing in the maner of receiuing the Apostleship and in the largenesse of it being receiued For Peter had it of Christ and ouer all the world for euer which the other had not Secondly that he obtained power ouer the Apostles themselues as their Pastor to rulec onfirm and direct them in their ministery not as Apostles for so they were equall but as the sheepe of Christ subiect to him Victoria q Relect. 2. de potest eccl nu 11. p. 87. laieth it in foure things First that his power was ordinary theirs extraordinary Secondly that his was to continue in the Church their 's not Thirdly that his was ouer them but theirs neither ouer him nor one another Fourthly that theirs was subordinate to his so that he might ouerrule it Caietan r De Autho. Papae Concil c. 3. §. Et vt Clarius layeth it in fiue things First in the maner of giuing it because he receiued it ordinarily but they extraordinarily and of speciall grace Secondly in the office it selfe for he was Christs Vicar generall * Which he proueth merrily by 2. Cor. 5.20 Eph. 6.20 And by their title Apostles that is sent because Peter sent them they but his delegates Thirdly in the obiect of the power for he had power ouer all they neuer a one ouer another Fourthly in continuance of time for his was to last to the worlds end theirs determined with their life Fiftly in the essence of the power for his was preceptiue to command them their 's executiue to do what he commanded them Å¿ Bibl. sanct 1.6 annot 169. 171. Senensis laieth it thus that Peter had a threefold power one of order another of Apostleship a third of kingdome or monarchy wherin alone he excelled all the rest These men distinguish nicely to finde out somewhat that might tast of the primacy but the spite is they are not agreed which distinction to stand to and the parts distinguished either differ not or haue no foundation in the texts alledged by the Iesuite 45 But that it may appeare what lost labour it is to stand arguing with them about this matter and all men may plainly see they vphold their religion not with reason and arguments but impudency and prodigious impostures deuised to seduce the world let the Scripture be named whereupon they build the distinctions assigned and viewed if it yeeld them either certainty or vnitie therin The 21 of Iohn is said to be it where Christ biddeth Peter Feed his sheepe And let it be one example among fiue hundred of the wofull and forlorne plight wherein their cause lyeth assuring all men there is not an article of their faith controuerted but it lyeth desperatly perplexed with the same vncertainties and contradictions For t Sicut enim quae caeteris Apostolis aequè ac Petro contulit communia omnibus esse voluit euidenter expressit nimirum Luc. 22.19 Mat 28.19 18.18 Ioh. 20.22 Luc. 24.45 Ita etiam quae peculiaria voluit esse Petri apertè significauit Mat. 16.18 Ioh. 21.15 Baronius and others confesse the 16. of Mat. touching the keyes containeth as much as it the which place I haue already shewed belongeth indifferently to all the Apostles And Armachanus u qq Armen l. 11. cap. 14. holdeth that all Ecclesiasticall power whatsoeuer is included in the Apostleship and was giuen the disciples Peter and all in the third of Marke what time they were made Apostles that it were the greatest folly in the world if the prerogatiue of Peter cannot be proued by those places to thinke it may be holpen by this and yet this is the hope of most of our aduersaries But let the place be viewed and see if there be one word that giueth it First they reckon vp diuers circumstances going with the text to proue that Christ spake to Peter onely which no man denyeth But the speaking to Peter maketh him not chiefe vnlesse the words spoken signifie that which should be contained in the soueraigntie Besides though now he spake to Peter onely yet all the matter spoken belonged to the rest as well as to
Thirdly they haue collations which they hold by prescription that are equall to set feasts For in Spaine on the euen of the Natiuitie for example they haue a bountiful supper exceeding the measure of fasting made of fruites conserues marchpanes and such like x Llam vbi sup pag. 393. which they thinke is lawfull though it hold not the nature of fasting Fourthly they haue customes allowing them on fasting dayes to do as much as we do y Llam vbi sup pag. 369. Ouan 4. d. 16. pro. 52. For in diuers places of Spaine and Castile they vse egges cheese butter yea the lard of swines flesh And generally on saterdayes they eate the inwards of any beast with the head and feete yea any part of a swine the buttock excepted Might it please the Papists now either to giue vs leaue to do what they do themselues or else to inuite vs to their table on fasting dayes that we may haue part with them seeing their hospitalitie is so good when we are bound out from feasting at home This is that which z Ioan. Sarisb Policrat l. 7. c. â—â— a Bishop noted in them long ago and is worth the marking They vndertake strict professions and shew vs difficult things and being more familiarly fauorable to themselues when it cometh to performance they do things gentle and possible Digression 33. Concerning Auricular confession or shrift to a Priest shewing that it is not necessary for the remission of sinne and how it is an occasion rather then a remedie of sinne oftentimes 6 Touching the casting away of necessary shrift we are not to be condemned vnlesse our accusers can name some place of Scripture where Christ or his Apostles hath bound vs to it which they cannot do For their owne Canon law a De Poenit. d. 5 in poenitentia Gloss saith it was taken vp onely by a certaine tradition of the Church and not by any authoritie of the old or new Testament And though the new Iesuites and other Papists begin of late with great passion to denie this affirming that Christ ordained it in the 20. of Iohn yet that is no matter for necessitie and shame hath driuen them to say so and their predecessors as learned as they haue writ the contrary For Panormitan b Super 5. de poenit remis c. omnes vtriusque saith That opinion of the Canon law greatly pleaseth him because he findeth no manifest authoritie that euer God or Christ commaunded vs to confesse our sinnes to a Priest And Peresius a Bishop of the Trent Councell c De tradit par 3. consid 3. saith The cleare and plaine maner of this ordinance both in respect of the substance and circumstance appeareth onely by a tradition And about six score yeares since d Carranz in Sixto 4. Ouand 4. d. 16. pro. 2. Petrus Oxoniensis the Diuinitie reader at Salmanca publickly taught as I say that it had the beginning from a positiue law of the Church and not from the law of God Who though he was made to recant this yet e Ouand ibid. Bonauenture whom the Church of Rome honoreth for a Saint was of his mind long before and f Refert Henri sum pag 206. edit Salamant Medina with others at this day hold it Wherby g Rhem annot Ioh. 20.23 Hopk memor of Christian 225. § 2. their rashnes appeareth that say our Sauiour appointed it so euidently in the Gospell and their miserie that are perswaded by such sayings to beleeue it Yea h Annot. ad Tertul de poenit Rhenanus and i Annot. ad Hiero. de obitu Fabiol Erasmus as learned Papists as euer were affirme that neither Christ ordained it nor the auncient Church vsed it which is the truth For when it began in some sort to creepe in k Socr. l 5. c. 19. Sâ—zo l. 7. c. 16. Tripart histo l. 9. c. 35. Niceph. lib. 12. c. 28 Nectarius the Bishop of Constantinople put it downe in his Church and all the Bishops of the East did the like in theirs which the Papists know well enough and l WaldeÌ„ tom 2. de Sacr c 141. Dom. a Soto 4. d 18 q. 1. Henri sum pag. 325. acknowledge m Impudentissimuâ— illud Nectarij factum Andrâ—d orth expl pag 663. Nectariâ—â— a Noâ—aâ—anis seâ—uctuÌ„ fuisse oportet alâ—imare Nec endaemonem illum qui Nectario â—â—asit quin potiùs cacodaemonem credendum est Baron tom 1. an 56 nu 28. Henriq vbi supra railing vpon Nectarius for so doing which is a signe that the Protestants reiecting shrift breake no commandement of God but follow the example of the Primitiue Church that refused it The which is further proued by the preaching of Chrysostome n Hom. 22 ad pop Antioch saying This is wonderfull in God that he not onely forgiueth vs our sinnes but neither doth he disclose them or make them knowne neither doth he inforce vs to come forth and tell them he requireth no more but that we speake to him alone and to him alone confesse our faults This the godly Bishops would not haue done and taught if the confession had bene receiued in theâ—r time as necessary or if Christ had commanded it or if it had bene so soueraigne a remedie against sinne 7 And touching the necessitie of confession in Lent afore they receiue the SacrameÌ„t o Sum. Armill verbo communio § vlt. Caiet super 1. Cor 11. Paâ—orm dâ—â—clebracâ—missat si 〈◊〉 De homine the learnedst Papists that euer were acknowledge it is a custom but newly brought vp though p Hoâ—â— memor tract of confess pag 255 we be called leud preachers most wickedly deceiuing the people because we say so But marke what Caietan q In 3 â—ho q. 80. art 4. writeth and then iudge what such cause there is why we should thus be censured There appeareth no positiue law enioyning shrift before the receipt of the Communion the law of God hath no such precâ— pt but the contrary is insinuated where the Apostle saith Let a man try himself Wherfore out of this document of the Apostle it seemeth vnto me that he which is contrite for his sinne and receiueth the Communion without shrift sinneth not mortally though he haue a confessor at hand The reason mouing me thus to thinke is because it is plaine that a man hauing contrition for his mortall sinne not confessed and so receiuing doth that which is not sinne of it owne kind Yea to receiue the other Sacraments also with contrition onely seemeth no where to be forbidden And that which is not confirmed by the authoritie of the Fathers must not by a superstitious noueltie be commanded The Papists therefore extolling shrift so fast talke out of their ignorance not thinking that we know how basely they thinke of it themselues 8 For they not onely know it to be as I haue said a later tradition and custome
spirit and I will pray and sing with the vnderstanding also And Origen e Cont. Cels l. 8 saith Let euery man make his prayer to God in his natiue mother tongue And many learned Papists confesse f Lyra. Tho. Caiet vpon 1. Cor. 14. Eras declar ad Cens pag. 153. that in the Primitiue Church and long after the prayers and seruice were done in the mother tongue and that it were better for the churches edification to haue it so stil Cassander a great Papist g Liturgic c. 28. penult sheweth this at large and addeth that diuers nations to this day retaine the auncient custome still and neuer vsed any strange language in their prayers See Iustinian Nouel 123. 3 Thirdly touching the forbidding of lay people to reade the Scriptures and to haue them in their mother tongue For h Ioh. 5.39 Christ bad the people search the Scriptures and i Act. 17.11 the Christians of Thessalonica searched them dayly and k Deut. 6.7 Moses commanded all housholders to rehearse them continually to their family and l 2. Tim. 3.15 Timothie of a child was trained vp in them And m Corn. Agrip. vanit c. 100. the Councel of Nice decreed that no Christian should be without a Bible And Chrysostome n Homil. 3 in Laz. biddeth the lay people take the Bible into their hand and reade it and o Homil. 2. in Mat. saith the reading thereof is more needfull to them then to the Monkes And Ierome p Epitaph Paul commendeth it in women of his time that it was not lawfull for them to be ignorant in the Psalmes or to passe ouer any day without learning something out of the holy Scriptures The which things the Church of Rome at this day will not follow 4 Fourthly touching the mariage of Ministers For in q Leuit. 21.7 2. Reg. 4.1 Ezek 24.18 Luc. 1.13 the old law Priests and Prophets had wiues and r Heb. 13.4 the doctrine of Saint Paule is that mariage is honorable among all Å¿ Paphnut apud Sozom. l. 1. c. 22. Theophyl in Heb. 13.4 men t 1. Tim. 3.2 Tit. 1.6 Chrys hom 1. in Tit. who also giueth order concerning the wiues and children of Bishops which were needlesse if they might haue none And that they were ordinarily maried in the Primitiue Church appeareth by many examples Mantuan u Fast l. 1. saith Hilarie a French Bishop was maried and that in his time it was lawfull Nazianzene x Monod reporteth of Basils father who was a Bishop that in the state of marriage he held the life and order of a Bishop And Synesius the Bishop of Ptolemais y Epist ad Euopt Niceph. l. 14. c. 55. writeth thus of himselfe The sacred hand of Theophylus hath giuen me a wife and hereupon I testifie to al men that I will neither forsake her nor yet priuily as an adulterer keepe her companie but I will pray God to send me by her many and good children Athanasius z Epist ad Dracont reporteth that Bishops and Monkes liued maried and had children And the Ecclesiasticall histories a Euseb l 4. c. 23 Socrat. l. 5. c. 22. Niceph. l. 12. c. 34. say expresâ—y that in the Easterne Churches it was counted a yoke too heauie to be layed on the Church-men to binde them from marriage and therefore they might if it pleased themselues auoide the companie of their wiues but no law constrained them And therefore many executing the place of Bishops euen in the houses where Bishops vsed to dwell begat many children of the wiues which before time they had lawfully married and at this present day no Bishop sleeping with his wife is counted vnchast Finally our aduersaries themselues confesse that b Scot. 4. d. 37. Polyd. inuent l. 5. c. 4. Antidid Colon. pag. 128. Coster Enchir. pag. 517. Greg. a Valen tom 4. disp 9. q. 5. puÌ„ct 5. § 1. in the most auncient times of the Church and after the Apostles death they had their wiues c 26. q. 2. Sors that they are forbidden mariage by no diuine law but onely by a humane constitution d Ouan 4. d 25. pro 9 Bellar. cleric c. 18. that this constitution may be dispensed with by releasing the vow e Caiet quod lib. 1. q. 12. pag. 236. in fine coÌ„ment in 3. part Thom. That excluding the Church lawes made by the Pope and standing only to that which we haue from Christ and his Apostles it cannot be proued by any reason or authoritie that speaking absolutely a Priest sinneth in marying but reason rather leadeth to the contrarie in that holy orders neither as they are orders nor as they are holy can hinder mariage f Pius 2. epist 321. That it is better for a Priest to marrie then to burne though he haue vowed not to marry g Pius 2. apud Platin. in eius vita Erasm declarat ad Censur Paris pag. 200. That there be many reasons to forbid Priests mariage but more to allow it 5 Fiftly touching Images For the Church of Rome h Conc. Nicen. 2. act 7. Concil Trid. sess 25. not onely worshippeth them but commaundeth also to do it i Conc. Trid. ib. Suar. to 1. d. 54. s 4. Tho 3. q. 25. art 3. 4. with diuine honour the verie same that is due to God himselfe contrarie to the commaundement which saith k Exod. 20.4 Thou shalt make to thy selfe no image nor the likenesse of any thing thou shalt not bow downe to it nor worship it And Saint Paul l Rom. 1.23 reproueth such as changed the glorie of God into the similitude of men and beasts and fowles And m Apoc. 19.10 22.8 the Apostle was rebuked for offering to haue worshipped the Angell The Councell of Eliberis n Can. 38. decreed that no picture should be made in the Church lest that were adored which is painted on walles o Ep. ad Ioan. And Epiphanius finding an Image painted on a cloth hanging in a Church rent it down and said it was against the authoritie of the Scripture that any image should be in the Church And Origen p Contra Cels l. 7. saith of his time We worship no Images q Clem. Alexand hort ad Gent pag. 14. graec Minut. Felix octou Athenag Legaâ— and the auncient Christians of the Primitiue Church had none Yea eight hundred yeares after Christ when r Zon. Cedren alij the second Nicene Councell had set vp Images Å¿ Ouand 4. d. 2. pro. 8. Baron ann 794. n. 1. a generall Councell holden at Frankford t Abb. Vrsperg ann 793. Rhegin ann 794. where the Popes Legates also were abrogated the decree thereof and by u Opus illust Caroli Mag. contra Synod a booke purposely written confuted it In that booke it is said * pag. 486. lib. 4. cap. 2. the
stood not disputing the matter as the Iesuite doth here with quo tempore quo Pontifice qua via qua vi quibus incrementis Were the workmen all asleepe were they all so cold and negligent For by this argument the tares might haue bin proued to be good corne but it was sufficient for him to espie them when he came into the field and to discerne them from the wheate and to giue charge to his seruants that they should not bind them vp therwith And thus came the change of religion into the church of Rome as these tares were sowne in the husbandmans field 7 Thus I haue sufficiently shewed that forsomuch as we finde the Romish faith to be against the Scriptures we haue iustly condemned it as heresie against the Catholicke faith though we were not able to note any time when it began or person that first deliuered it or people that resisted it But we haue another issue with our aduersaries about the second proposition wherein the Iesuite you see with much confidence assumeth it that there can be no proofe made of any time or persons wherein his Church altered the ancient faith He biddeth vs shew who brought in the profession of a new faith and when the old failed He asketh at what time vnder what Pope what rumors what lamentations did it breed what resistance was made against it what historiographer writ it did none oppose themselues and so concludeth that no mention being made in any storie that such an alteration was it is sure there was no such at all In which words containing the summe of all that remaineth in this section he requireth vs to shew two points first when the Church of Rome changed her religion and who they were therein that brought in a new faith Next what resistance was made against her when she did so Wherein I am resolued the Iesuite speaketh against his owne knowledge onely to set a good face on the matter For is it possible he should be so ignorant as to imagine these demaunds cannot be satisfied Such as he is may speake boldly and peremptorily but they that trust them wil be deceiued as I wil plainly shew in the two next digressions wherein I will out of sufficient records make direct proofe first that the beginning of many principall points of the Romish faith may be shewed both concerning the time and the persons that began them Secondly that in all ages the corruptions of that Church haue bene resisted as they came in The shewing of which two points will fully answer all that is contained in this section Digression 51. Naming seuen points of the Popish religion with the time when and maner how they gate into the Church thereby to shew that there is sufficient record to detect the noueltie of the present Romane faith 8 This point in the matter of PARDONS is so cleare that it cannot be denied for the most learned Papists that are acknowledge the vse of them to be come very lately into the Church Which being so it must necessarily be granted there is some thing altered and begun among them since the Apostles time Durand l 4. d. 20. q. 3. saith There are few things to be affirmed for certaintie concerning Pardons because the Scripture speaketh not expresly of them and the Saints Ambrose Hilary Austin Ierome speake not of them at all Caietan m Tract de Indulg c. 1. saith there can no certaintie be found touching the beginning of Pardons there is no authoritie of the Scripture or ancient fathers Greek or Latin that bringeth it to our knowledge Alphonsus n Haeres verbo Indulgen saith Their vse seemeth to haue come but lately into the Church And Henriquez the Iesuite o Sum. moral l. 7. c. 3. Scol saith There be certaine late Diuines which affirme it is no rashnesse if a man say the vse and practise of Indulgences is not from the Apostles times If there be no mention of them in the Scriptures nor Fathers nor in the ancient Church how can it be shifted off but they had a late beginning and so are not Catholicke 9 The beginning of THE POPES SVPREMACIE vsurped ouer other Bishops was in Boniface the third For Fr. Duarenus a Papist p De sacris eccl benefic l. 1. c. 10. writeth that with great ado he obtained of Phocas that he might be made the vniuersall and oecumenical Bishop which authoritie saith he his successors haue wonderfully enlarged whereas in the beginning as q Respons de priuileg patriar charum in iure Graecoroman tom 1. Balsamon a Greeke writer witnesseth the fiue Patriarks were of equall honor and stood all in steed of one head ouer the whole bodie of the vniuersall Church The beginning of his supremacie ouer Councels was of late since the Councels of r Sess 4. 5. Constance and ſ Sess 2 18. Basil decreed within these hundred yeares in the Councell of t Sess 11. Lateran by a few Italian Bishops whereas in the ancient Church it was otherwise For Cedrenus a Greeke historiographer u Annal. p. 361. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 writeth that the oecumenicall or generall Councels were so called for that by the commaund of the Emperour the chiefe Bishops throughout the Romane Empire were assembled And x Concord l. 2. c. 25. Cusanus a late Cardinall of the Church of Rome saith how all the eight generall Councels were gathered by the Emperour The beginning of his supremacie claimed ouer Princes was but of late For Sigebert mentioning the Popes proceeding against Henry the Emperour about 300. yeares since y Chron. ann 1088. pag. 129. Idem Auentin annal Boio l. 5. pag. 470. saith Be it spoken with the leaue of all good men this noueltie that I say not heresie had not as yet sprung vp in the world that Gods Priests should teach the people that they owe no subiection to euil Princes and though they haue sworne alleageance to him yet they owe him no fidelitie neither shall be counted periured which thinke against the King yea he that obeyeth him shall be counted for excommunicate and he that doth against the King shall be absolued from the guilt of iniustice and periury In which words we see how a Frier of their owne 300. yeares since calleth that noueltie and heresie that now is cherished among our aduersaries and maintained for a peece of the Catholick faith and the Iesuite possible calleth Campian a glorious Martyr because he was tied vp for the practise thereof For it is well enough knowne that neither he nor any other Priest were euer executed in the Queenes time but onely for publishing and practising that which here you see Sigebert calleth Noueltie Besides the Popes clawbacks is it because they are beggerly both in wealth and learning as Fr. Victoria z Relect. 1. de potest eccles pag. 39. noteth of them now adayes publish in print a Carer potest Rom. Pont. l 2.
flesh of Christ § 52. Fourthly the Protestants Church is not Apostolike because they cannot deriue their pedegree lineally without interruption from the Apostles as the Romane Church can from S. Peter but are enforced to acknowledge some other as Luther or Caluin or some such from whom mediatly or immediatly they haue receiued by succession the Preachers of their faith Luther and Caluin themselues being not sent of anie to teach this new faith nor succeeding lawfully to anie Apostolike Bishop or Pastor but being as Optatus Mileuitanus said lib. 2. contra Parmen Victor the Donatist an hereticke was Filij sine patre discipuli sine magistro Children without a father scholers without a maister Or as S. Cyprian lib. 1. Epist writeth of Nouatus Nemini succâ—dentes à seipsis Episcopi ordinati sunt Succeeding to none were ordained Bishops of themselues The Answer 1 Our answer is that the succession required to make a Church Apostolicke must be defined by the doctrine and not by the place or persons that is to say they must be reputed the Apostles successors which beleeue the Apostles doctrine although they haue not this outward succession of Pastors visibly following one another in one place throughout all ages as the Iesuite saith it is in the Romane Church For Saint Paul a Ephes 2.20 telleth the Ephesians they are built vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets in respect of their calling to the knowledge of the Gospel and yet they had not lineally as the Iesuite meaneth it descended from the Prophets And Nazianzene saith b Laud. Athan. Succession in godlinesse is properly to be accounted succession For he that holdeth the same doctrine is also partaker of the same succession as he that is against the doctrine must be reputed to be also out of the succession Which being granted the Iesuites discourse about succession is soone answered To the same effect speaketh his owne c D. 4. Non est facile Canon They are not the children of the Saints that sit in their places but which do their workes Yea the Iesuites confesse this For Posseuine d Not. verbi Dei pag. 328. ad interrog 11. writeth that the true Church is called Apostolicke not onely for the succession of Bishops from the Apostles but also for the consanguinitie of doctrine And Gregory of Valenza e Tom. 3. pag. 141. proprietas 4. telling why the Church is called Apostolicke in the Nicene Creed giueth onely three reasons First because it began in the Apostles next because by them it was spred all ouer the world thirdly because it still followeth their faith and authoritie Waldensis f Tom. 1. doctrinal l. 2. art 2. cap. 18. saith The Apostles filled the whole Church with wholsome doctrine and in that respect the whole Catholicke Church is also called Apostolicke By all which it is plaine that for the being of an Apostolicke Church it is sufficient if it hold the Apostles faith though it want the Iesuites succession mentioned 2 Whence it followeth that although it were granted the Romane Church could shew a perpetual succession of Prelates without interruption from S. Peter which the Iesuit saith may be shewed but g See digress I deny yet were it not thereby proued Apostolike vnlesse these Prelates had also retained S. Peters doctrine that the reader may see all other marks of the Church must be tried by the doctrine and that the Iesuits succession and vnitie and vniuersality proue nothing vnlesse the true faith concurre therewith 3 Whence it followeth again that it is no disaduantage to the Protestant Churches if holding the Apostles doctrine they want externall succession of place persons such as the Iesuite boasteth of because the Apostolicknesse of the Church is not to be defined by it but wheresoeuer the true faith contained in the Scriptures is professed and embraced there is the whole and full nature of an Apostolicke Church 4 And so I answer the Iesuites discourse in particular that we can deriue our faith from the Apostles and that without interruption in that to this day it was neuer interrupted though such as succeeded visibly in bishops thrones did not alway professe it it is sufficient that their malice could neuer extinguish it and the professors and teachers thereof liued in the Romane Church it selfe which beside all other testimonies we know by this that it is the faith of the Scriptures which cannot be extinguished but groweth in the middest of all her enemies 5 And touching Luther and Caluin I answer Touching the calling of Luther that whatsoeuer is said against them dependeth vpon another point which is the faith that they taught For if that were the truth theÌ„ no doubt they were sent of God to teach it we hearing them receiued it of them no otherwise then Gods faithful people are bound to receiue the Gospell of their Pastors And whereas he saith they succeeded no Apostolick Bishop neither had any calling to preach that new faith I answer that for the externall succession whereof I haue spoken we care not it is sufficient that in doctrine they succeeded the Apostles and Primitiue Churches and those faithfull witnesses which in all ages since embraced the same in persecution though they succeeded not in that open manner that was vsed afore heresie and persecution grew And albeit the Romane Church would not heare them yet had they a lawfull calling First inwardly from God who stirred them vp gaue them gifts directed them by his spirit and blessed their labor then outwardly in the Church of Rome it selfe where they were created Doctors of Diuinity and Pastors to teach the people as they were baptized by vertue whereof they might lawfully preach afterward that which by the Scriptures they found to be the truth and did lineally succeed the true Pastors of the Church that liued before them If it be obiected that hauing their calling in the Church of Rome it will follow thereupon that only the Church of Rome is the true Church this is easily answered by denying the consequence For the Church of God and the Papacie were mingled together and were both called by one name the church of Rome by reason that in diuers things that were good and indifferent they communicated So that euen in the Papacie many of the things of Gods Church remained as the Scripture Baptisme and these callings which the Pope and his Clergie occupying did as pirates that occupie another mans ship and his goods therein and therefore conferring baptisme and callings to diuers persons that afterwards forsooke the Pope the said persons notwithstanding rightly inherited them as the true Churches goods which the Papacie vsurped And whereas the Iesuite saith they were not sent to preach this new faith I answer him that this new faith as he styleth it is the true faith therfore euen that sending which they had bound them to preach it though at the first it reuealed it not
And Tertullian lib. de praescript And Optatus lib. 2. contra Parmen The Answer 1 The ancient Fathers affirme not one word of all this First they affirme not that the Romane Church was then gouerned by Popes as now it is For they saw not how it is gouerned now and therefore could not affirme it And that it was not in their time thus gouerned I haue shewed Digression 27. and 49. num 6. and 51. num 9. The Bishops of Rome in their time I graunt were called Popes and Occumenicall as a Ep. Arsen apud Athan. apol 2. Basil ep 52. Iustin Nouell 3. 5. in tit Balsam respons in iure Graecorsi Ioan. Aquipont de Antichr p. 107. other Bishops also were but they had no such authoritie as now they vsurpe Their owne b Concord l. 2. c. 12. Cusanus may teach them that he is gotten beyond the ancient obseruations not hauing that power belonging to him which certaine flatterers giue him And Duarenus a Papist likewise yet c De sacris eccles benef l. 1. c. 16. confesseth as much as I say that Phocas made him the vniuersall Bishop which authority his successors haue maruellously increased 2 Next albeit they affirme the Church of Rome to be the lawfull and Apostolike Church yet they affirmed not the present Romane Church which they neuer saw so to be He that affirmed Lais to be a virgine when she was ten yeares old did not say she was so at tweÌ„tie Rome since their death hath plaied the whore and lost that name and reputation which the fathers had of her Which answereth all the places cited out of Irenaeus Austine Ambrose Hierome and Cyprian For calling Rome the Apostolike Church they spake of their owne time and not of ours 3 Thirdly they do not affirme the Romane Church in their dayes to be lawfull and Apostolike for no other reason but because it had a lineall succession from the primitiue Church but as I haue answered d Sect. 53. n. 2. inde before because it had withall the succession of doctrine which the present Papacie hath not Neither did they thinke that therefore it had succession of doctrine because it had succession of Priests as if the former must needs be inseparably ioyned with the later For their words expresse no such thing as I haue shewed They reuoke schismatickes to the succession indeed of the Romane Church as they did likewise of others and obiect it against them but not it alone nor so as they would assume all succession for euer to be ioyned with the true faith though then in the Churches named it was Neither did they beleeue the Priests whom they so called to be sacrificers or Massing Priests They vsed the name but they gaue it not the definition which the Church of Rome now vseth Vpon all which it followeth that the ancient fathers affirmed not the Romane Church at this day to be the true Apostolicke Church though you see into the places cited an hundred times the which are answered Sect. 53. principally for this cause that the reasons whereupon they so commended it then hold not now in our dayes as they did in theirs If our aduersaries will take benefite by that which the fathers say in commendation of the Romane Church in their dayes they must proue their succession as inuiolated and their doctrine as sound as then it was which they can neuer do § 57. Now to make an end considering all this which I haue said and proued to wit that there is but one infallible and entire faith the which is necessarie to saluation to all sorts of men the which faith euerie one must learne by some knowne infallible and vniueâ—sall rule accommodate to the capacitie of euerie one the which rule can be no other but the doctrine and teaching of the true Church which Church is alway to continue visible to the worlds end and is to be knowne by these foure markes aforesaid agreeing onely to the Romane Church whereupon it followeth that it only is the true Church of which euery one must learne that faith which is necessarie to saluation considering I say all this I would demaund of the Protestants who will not admit the authoritie or doctrine of the Church how they can perswade themselues to haue that faith whereby they may be saued or by what right they can chalenge vnto themselues the title of the true Church since as I now haue proued they haue neuer a one of these foure markes which by the common consent of all are the true markes of Christs true Church How can theirs be the true Church which neither is one because it hath no meanes to keepe it in vnitie nor holy because neither was there euer man of it which by miracle or by some other vndoubted testimonie can be proued to be truly holy Neither is their doctrine such as those that most purely obserue it do without faile become holy nor catholike because it teacheth not all true things which haue bin held in former times but denieth many of them Neither is it spread ouer all the Christian world but euery particular sect is contained in some few corners therof neither hath it bene euer since Christ but sprong vp of late the first founder being Martin Luther an apostata Frier a man after his apostasie knowne both by his writings words and deeds and maner of his death to haue bene a notable euill liuer nor Apostolike because the preachers thereof cannot deriue their pedegree lineally without interruption from anie Apostle but are forced to begin their line if they will haue anie from Luther or Caluin or some later How can they then bragge that they only haue the true holy Catholike and Apostolike faith Since this is not found but only in the true holy Catholike Apostolike Church and remaining alwayes as S Augustine said in ventre Ecclesiae in the bellie of the Church It is vnpossible that they which are not of this Church should haue the true faith according to the saying of the same Augustin afore cited Quisquis ab hoc ventre separatus est necesse est vt falsa loquatur whosoeuer is separated from this bellie of the Church he must needs speake false For who can once haue true faith vnlesse he first heare it because fides est ex auditu Rom. 10. Faith cometh of hearing But how can one heare it sine praedicante without one to preach it truly vnto him The Answer 1 That which the Iesuite hath said and proued is granted him to wit that there is indeed but one true faith which is necessarie to saluation to all sorts of men the which as it must so it may be learned by that rule which God hath left infallible vniuersall and accommodate to the capacitie of euery one the which rule is the Scriptures contained in the bookes of the old and new Testament and not that which the Iesuit meaneth by the doctrine and teaching of the