words following For if his faith could faile then should hel gates indeede preuaile against him Remig. I answere that Christ did not build his Church vpon Peter I proue it First because the words are changed both in the Greeke which is the fountaine ana originall and also in the romish approued Latin translation which onely must be beleeued and followed by the decree of their Tridentine Councell for the alteration of the word insinuateth significantly an alteration in the sense If Christ had meant to build his Church vpon Peter he would haue said vpon this Peter and not vpon this Rocke And it is not to the purpose to say that Christ spake in the Hebrew of Syâ—â—ack tongue for we haue the originall in Gréek from S. Iohn who being full of the holy Ghost would neuer haue changed the words but to insinuate expresse a different sense and meaning if as Christ had said thou art a Rocke by name and my selfe a Rocke by nature and indéede so strong so permanent so inuincible that hell gates cannot preuaile against it Upon this Rocke therefore of thy consession will I build my Church against the faith of which Church neither hell nor the Diuell shall euer preuaile Secondly because the Apostle affrmeth constantly that no man can lay any other foundation then that which is laid which is Iesus Christ Christ therefore speaking in S Mathew of the Rock of the Church doth by the word Rocke annotate himselfe not S Peter for we see that S Paul doth so expound Christs words whose interpretation may fitly be gathered out of the circumstances of the text in S Mathew either is it to the purpose to cite out of the Reâ—elation of S. Iohn that the wall of the City which he behold had twelue foundations and in them the names of the twelue Apostles of the Lambe for the Apostles were but partiall and mutable foundations but Christ is the totall and permanent foundation of the Church neither can any City wall or other thing haue moâ— total foundatios then one neither yet can the twelue foundations make for Peters prerogatiue â—â—y thing at all for seeing the foundations were 〈◊〉 in number precisely assigned by the vision to the twelue Apostles without distinction oâ— limitation it followeth byâ— necessary 〈…〉 the 〈◊〉 〈…〉 for this â—eâ—peâ—â— doe the holy fathers vsually write that what 〈…〉 Christ spake or did to Peter concerning the Church he spake it 〈…〉 〈…〉 th◠〈…〉 in the name of the â—ho◠〈…〉 conâ—â—â—-â—â—th my expositionâ— Tâ—â—s Petrus c. thou art Peter â—uch Christ and vpon this Rocke which thou hast confessed vpon this Rocke which thou hast acknowledged saying thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God will I â—uil◠〈…〉 Churchâ— that is vpon my selfe the Sonne of the liuing God will I build my Church vpon my selfe will I build thée not my selfe vpon thée Fourthly because S. Chrysostome iumpeth with S. Austens interpretation in these words columnae quidem c the Apostles are the pillers because by their vertue they are the strength of the Church they are the foundation because the Church is built vpon their confession when the Lord saith thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church Fiftly because S. Hylary is consonant to the other holy fathers these are his words this faith is the foundation of the Church by this faith hell gates shal not preuaile against it this faith hath the Keyes of Heauen Sixtly because the receaued Popish glosse vpon this text vnderstandeth by the Rocke Peters faith the confession which he made Seuenthly because Panormitan and Syluester two very famous 〈…〉 are both of the same opinion Out of this discourse I obserue these points for your better instruction First that Christ is the Rocke vpon which Peter is built that Christ is the Rocke vpon which the Church is built that the Sonne of God is the Rocke vpon which the Church is built Secondly that the Apostles are called the foundation because as testifieth S. Chrysostome the Church is built in their confession when the Lord saith thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church Thirdly that the confession pronounced for â—â—der sake by the mouth of one euen Peter by name was the ioynt confession of them all the Church is built in their confession marke well these words of the â—â—lded mouthed doctor S. Chrysostome they are words of great importance they proue the controuersie so sufficiently as no euasion can take place they proue effectually that whatsoeuer was said to Peter touching the Church was meant of the whole Congregation of the faithfull for as Peter spake and answered in the name of the whole Church so Christs demaunds answeres and promises were made and intended for the whole Church for as S. Chrysostome truely saith Peters confession was made in the name of all the Apostles and consequently in the name of the whole Church when he pronounced Christ the Sonne of the liuing God and euen so Christs answere and promise was made to Peter as appeareth by the circumstances of the text in the name of the whole Church and I may not forget to adde hereunto the ioynt-testimonis of all the learned diuines of Paris who as we haue heard already vnderstaÌ„d al things spoken to Peter in Church matters to be meant of the whole Church as when he prayed that Peters faith should not faile he then prayed for the infallibility and perpetuity of the faith of the whole Church all both the holy and auncient fathers and also best approued popish writers our Iesuites and Iesuited popelings only excepted doe willingly subscribe hereunto Obiection 3. Theoph. Christ commanded Peter and onely Peter and that three seuerall times to feede his sheepe Ergo Peter onely Peter had the ordinary charge and gouernement of Christs sheepe and consequently all Priests all Bishops all Arch-bishops all Patriarkes receiue their authority and iurisdiction from the Pope as from Saint Peters successour Remig. I answere that all Christs shéepe were committed to all the Apostles ioyntly and seuerally aswell to Paul the rest as to Peter yea rather to Paul though he were none of the twelue then to Peter for hee saith of himselfe that the Gospel of the vncircumcision was committed to him euen as was the Gospell of Circumcision vnto Peter and consequently since all Christians now were Gentiles then yâ— Pope if he wil néedes haue a superiority ouer all his brethren yâ— Bishops must perforce reduce his succession from S. Paul for this policy perhaps it is that the Pope euer ioyneth Saint Paul and Saint Peter together whether it be in giuing pardons or other faculties whatsoeuer I proue the proposition First because Christ committed the charge of all Nations to all his Apostles alike without any priuiledge or restriction more or lesse to one rather then to another Secondly because Christ for edification sake
and contemning the same Remig. I answere first that neither of both doth follow of necessity the reason is euident because things méerely adiaphora and indifferent of their owne nature may be vsed or not vsed as it séemeth good to the supreme magistrate For example sake whether Kings Quéenes be annointed at their Coronations or not it is méere extrinâ—ecall to their sacred soueraignty as who are as perfect Kings before it as after the same and consequently though our Church haue reiected such ceremonies as vnprofitable or not necessary at the least yet doth shee not condemne other reformed Churches which vse and still reteine the same after the simple vse and manner of the first inst tution thereof all leuity superstition and opinion of necessity set apart Secondly that though our Bishops were consecrated in popish maner with oyle and Chrisme and by the Popes authority yet neither did nor could such externall rites frustrate and euacuate their ministeriall dignity for to vse your Schoole-termes many things are done validè which are not done licitè if the Iesuites and Iesuited papists deny this they must condemne many of their Popes as it is already proued Thirdly that the abolishing of néedles ceremonies superstitiously abused can no wayes preiuâ—ice the lawfull and true calling of our Bishops Theoph. All Bishops and Priests made by them are receiued as true Bishops of you but Bishops and Priests made by you are but meere Lay-men with them which seemeth an euident argument that true Bishopes are onely made by the authority of the Pope Remig. I answere first that the authority of the Bishop of Rome is but like the authority of other Patriarkes as it was defined by the first famous generall Councell vnder Constantine the great Secondly that the famous generall Councell of Constantinople which was celebrated in Anno 681. granted the Bishope of Constantinople equall priuiledges with the Bishop of Rome and to excell in all Ecclesiasticall affaires as the Bishop of Rome saue onely that the chief Patriarchall seat was reserued to him for order-sake and peaceable gouernement of the Church For as Rome was the chiefe seate of the Emperour and therefore called Caput mundi so was the Bishop there for the honor dignity of the Empire to which all the world paid tribute in the daies of Augustus Caesar reputed the chéefest Bishop of the visible Church Thirdly that the Bishop of Romes authority was so farre from being superiour to the Emperours who was euer called the Emperour of Rome that no Bishop there for the space of 684. yeares could haue and enioy any iurisdiction vnlesse the same Bishop were confirmed by the letters pattents of the Emperour This point of doctrine which is of great consequence is already proued and that euen by the testimony of many learned and famous Papists Fourthly that neither the Popes authority neither Oyle nor Crisme nor any other Popish ceremony either is or can be any essentiall part of the Ecclesiastical ministery and consequently that the Papist must néedes be condemned either of too too grosse ignorance or else of extreame malice whilest they reiect our Ministers and repute them méere Lay-men and that for the want of a few curious and vnprofitable ceremonies which are not onely meere extrinsecal to the function but withall superstitiously abused euery where Fifthly that the Papists condemne themselues in their owne practicall proceedings whiles they admit our Sacrament of Baptisme by our Ministers administred and withall reiect as méere Lay-men our Ministers of the same For as they supply the accedentall ceremonies in the one so may they do also with as great reason in the other Wherefore I conclude that as our Church sheweth both charity and wisedome in admitting their Bishops and Priests so doth their Church shew both malice and ignorance in refusing ours And that is all indéed that truly can be inferred of their senslles and péeuish refusall albeit many silly simply seduced papists neither doe nor can so conceiue the matter This my answere is yet confirmed by another Popish practicall vsage They reiect our Ministers because they want their popish beggerly ceremonies and for all that they grant their owne Ministers to be true Priests still euen after they haue degraded them and taken all their ceremonies from them Marke well what I shall relate for it is a wonderment of the new world The Papists tell vs and it is a speciall article of late popish faith that if a popish Priest come into a great market place where there is great store of wheate-bread though a thousand or moe loaues in number and then and there looking on the same bread shall pronounce these words hoc est corpus meum this is my body with intention to consecrate the same then forthwith euery loafe of the sayd wheat-bread is made Christs body and per concomitantiam as their Schooles terme it God almighty so as the people are bound by popish faith and lawes to adore the same loaues euery loafe as the sonne of the euerliuing God trial here of was once made a Rome as my self being in Rome heard from the mouth of a Iesuite For as the Iesuite reported to me and I haue reason to credite him in such a case and cause a Priest being degraded and designed to dye for his homely qualities as he passed in the stréete by a bakers shop beheld a great quantity of wheat-bread and recited these words hoc est corpus meum and then told the people that he had coÌ„secrated the same bread so desiring once to be auenged of the Pope and his godlesse Popelings Wherupon consultation was had out of hand among the learned there and sentence resolutely â—â—en by the Pope that euery loafe was God almighty After which sentence so clearkely pronounced the bread was carryed away with great solemnity and such reuerence and adoration exhibited to the same as was due to the sonne of the euerliuing God Now if Popish Priests can this doe euen after their annointing and greasing taken from them yea after their deare Pope hath degraded and after his best maner vnpriested them they haue no reason doubtlesse to say that our Bishops cannot performe the function of true Bishops séeing our Bishoppes are consecrated of popish truly made Bishoppes though without Popish vnprofitable and superstitiously abused ceremonies This resolution is soundly deduced out of the very bowels of Popish faith and religion Theoph. What was not that religion popish which your nation receiued at their first conuersion from Paganisme did not Pope Gregory affect their conuersion by sending Augustine Melitus â—ustus and others into England how then can yee for shame â—ay our Popes Cardinals and Iesuites deny that faith religion which your natiue country embraced and beleeued at your first receiuing of the Christian faith how can yee contemne and condemne those Popes who bestowed such inestimable and precious treasures vpon your country Would
required a thrée sold confession of Peter in regard of his thréefold negation left nouises and weaklings should haue béene scandalized vnderstanding that such a notorious sinner without publike confession of his faith should haue any iurisdiction ouer them but not to giue any speciall prerogatiue to Peter thereby The reason hereof is euident because our Sauiour had before this charge of féeding giuen a very large commission to all his Apostles of féeding all Nations and therefore he can now meane and intend no other thing but onely to moue Peter to walke warily to be mindfull of his infirmities to be carefull of his charge Thirdly because Saint Austen that mighty pillar of Christs Church confirmeth defendeth this my present doctrine These are his expresse words Ecclesiae Catholicae personam sustâ—â—â— Petrus cum ei dicitur ad omnes dicitur aâ—â—â— me pasâ—â—â—ues meat Peter represented the person of yâ— Church Catholike when it is said to him it is said to all louest thou me féed my shéep Fourthly because S. Cyprian decideth this controuersie 〈◊〉 plainly as caÌ„not but satisfie 〈…〉 indifferent readerâ— these are his expresse words loquitur Dominus ad PetruÌ„ ego dico tibi quia tu es Petrus c. Paulo post hoc eraÌ„t vtique caeteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus pari consortio prediti honoris potestatis sed exordâ—â— aboâ—niâ—ate proficiscitur vt Ecclesia vna monstretur Our Lord speaketh vnto Peter I say vnto thée that thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church c. the same were the rest of the Apostles doubtlesse that Peter was indued with equall fellowshippe both of honour and of power but the beginning procéedeth from vnity that the Church may be shewed to be one And the same holy Father confirmeth this his doctrine in another place in these memorable words Episcopatus vnus est 〈…〉 a singulis in solidum pars tenetur there is but one Bishoprickâ— a part whereof euery Bishop possesseth and enioyeth wholly S. Austen confirmeth S. Cyprians sentence and iudgement in these words Claues non vnus homo Petrus sed vnitas accepit Ecclesiae not one onely maâ— Peter receiued the Keies but the vnity of the Church Fiftly because two famous popish writers are iump of tho same opinion constantly desend yâ— same doctrine Couarâ—viâ—s a profound Canonist a popish Archbishop of great estéeme in yâ— romish Church hath these expresse words enim iuxta Catholicorum viroruÌ„ auctoritates communem omnium traditionem Apostoli parem ab ipso Domino Iesu eum Petro potestatem ordinis iuridictionis acceperunt ita quidem vt quilibet Apostolorum aequalem cum Petro habuerit potestatem ab ipso Deo intotum orbem in omnes actus quos Petrus agere poterat for according to the authorities of Catholike writers and the common tradition of all the Apostles receiued from our Lord Iesus Christ himselfe equall power with Peter both of order and of iuridiction in somuch doubtlesse as euery Apostle had equall power with Peter from God himselfe and that both ouer the whole world and to all actions that Peter could doe Iosephus Angles a famous Fryer and a very learned popish Bishop in that selfe same booke which he dedicated to the Pope hath by the force of Gods spirit testified the same truth both against the Pope against himself these are his owne words si comparemus B. Petri aliorum Apostolorum potestatem ad gubernationem omniumcredentium tantam alij Apostoli habuerunt potestatam quantam B. Petrus habuit ita quod poterant quemlibet Christianum totius orbis sicut modo Rom. Pont. excommunicare in qualibet Ecclesia Episcopos Sacerdotes creare ratio est quia omnis potestas B. Petro promissa tradita fuit caeteris Apostolis collata hoc sine personarum loci vel fori discrimine if we compare the power of S. Peter and of the others Apostles to the gouernment of all the faithfull other Apostles haue euen asmuch power as S Peter had so that they could then excommunicate euery Christian in the whole world and in euery Church make Bishops and Priests the reason is because all power promised and giuen to S. Peter was also giuen to the rest of the Apostles and that without difference of persons place or consistory Thus we haue a full and resolute iudgement both for answere to the obiection and for the supposed prerogatiues and priuiledges of S. Peter which resolution is not onely deduced out of the holy scripture but plainely contested also by the vniforme consent of the holy fathers S. â—vprian and S. Austen and in like maner of the famous and learned papists Couarruvias and â—osephus Angles for they teach vs many sound points in diuinity First that all the Apostles had as great authority and as full and large euery way as Saint Peter had Secondly that euery Apostle aswell as Peter could make and constitute Bishops and Priests euery where throughout the Christian world Thirdly that what act soeuer S. Peter could doe euery Apostle had power and authority to do the same Fourthly that the iurisdiction of euery Apostle was as great and as large euery way as Saint Peters was And this saith Couarruvias is the common receiued doctrine of all Catholike writers this is a poynt of Catholike doctrine so important and so memorable as it well deserueth to be written in golden letters Fiftly that Christs spéeches vnto Peter in the singular number did not argue any superiority of iurisdiction but only signifie the vnity of the Church Sixtly that the authority and iurisdiction of euery Apostle was equal to Peters and that without all difference of persons place or consistory This is another point of great consequence for séeing first all and euery of the Apostles had equal iurisdiction séeing secondly that their iurisdiction was not limited but ouer the whole world seeing thirdly that the whole iurisdiction of euery Apostle ended and expired with his death and séeing fourthly that S. Iohn liued after all the Apostles it followeth of necessity that the Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction of the whole world remained in Saint Iohn after the death of Peter and the other Apostles So then if the Bishop of Rome will haue indéede any such prerogatiue as he falsly pretendeth to haue he must bring and shew vs his comission from S. Iohn and not from S. Peter for S Iohn being the suruiuer had all iurisdiction in himselfe And if the late Bishops of Rome can shew vs such a commission from Saint Iohn viz that Saint Iohn translated and committed his whole power authority and iurisdiction to the Bishop of Rome and his successors I for my part will willingly yeeld obedience to the same not otherwise For I require the Popes charter from S. Iohn Theoph. This is wonderfull which you say and yet you proue the
vs that Constantine the great at his departure from Rome to Constantinople gaue the Bishop of Rome and his successors his crowne and all his royall dignitie both in the Citie of Rome and in Italie and in all the west parts which goodly story inuented for the Popes aduancement we sée by the constant verdit of these foure learned Papists to be nothing else indéede but a lying fable for the the Bishops of Rome were stil subiect to the Emperors receiued their authoritie and iurisdiction by their letters patents aboue 340. yeares euen vntill Benedict the second to which I adde that manie of the popish Cannons are of as good credit as Esops fables Remig. This is a point of great consequence which I should neuer haue espied but by your relation Theoph. I would wish you likewise to obserue that the Emperours Constantinus Iustinianus and others yéelding vp their soueraigne rights to the Bishops of Rome vpon a fond zeale without knowledge opened the window to all antichristian tyrannie for in short time after the Romish Bishops became so arrogant and Lordly that they tooke vpon them to dispose Royall scepters and to translate them to their pleasures Theoph. It is a memorable obseruation I shall keep it in remembrance but let me still reason for the Papists as if I were one of them for when all difficulties are answered I shall be the stronger in the truth The Church of God cannot be without Bishops and Priests as the Apostle recordeth and your selfe graunteth but so it is that when he first reformed the Church as you terme it yee neither had any Bishops nor any Priests of your owne neither could ye finde any in any other place but onely with vs and in our Church when Martin Luther went out from vs our Church therefore and none but ours is the true Church of God as which onely hath the true succession Apostolicall Remig. I answere first that our succession in the Church of England is farre better then theirs of Rome for theirs of Rome as we haue heard and séene is most doubtfull and vncertain but ours of England so constant and so assured as no deniall can be made thereof I proue it because in Anno 596. Gregory the great sent Augustine the Monke with Iustus Melitus and others as our approued Cronicles do relate to preach the Gospell to the Saxons who were kindly receiued of King Ethelbert and he conuerted to the Christian faith gaue to the same Austen the City of Canterbury since which time our Church of England is able to proue her perpetuall succession of Bishops without schisme or interruption at all albeit the Church of Rome as is already proued is not able to performe halâ—e so much Secondly that though the visible Churches were euery where greatly stained and polluted with many grosse errors superstitions and abuses at such time as M. Luther began a Christian reformation yet for all that the Bishops and Priests of the popish Churches were still true Bishops for their calling albeit otherwise very wicked men and consequently that our Bishops and Priests though descended created and made of such deformed popish Prelats are true Bishops and Prists indéede Theoph. If our Bishops and Priests were made of theirs then must either theirs bee good or ours as bad as theirs and so we shall haue no true Bishops at all Remig. Marke well what I say that yée may vnderstand the saint The Philosopher saith that one may bée a good Citizen though a bad man Euen so say I that though the Papists were wicked men and the Popish Bishops that created our Bishops foully polluted both in life and doctrine yet were they still true Christians true Bishops and consequently true members of the visible Church for they still professed held and maintained the chiefe fundamentall points of religion of God of the blessed Trinity of Christ and his two natures of his death passion of his resurrection and assention of the generall doome of all the rest comprised in the summe of religion which we call the Apostles Créede and therefore though they grieuously wounded and in a manner killed themselues by their errours corruptions superstitions and abuses yet in regard of the truth which they kept coÌ„stantly there remained in them some life of Christianity They wanted legges and armes and had their bodies and soules corrupted with many pestilent diseases but they did still draw breath and were not wholy dead We read in the Apostolicall history that there were some that beléeued who being of the heresie of the Pharisées did still hold the ceremonies of the law and vrged others to be circumcised The Prophet Dauid was sore wounded with adultery and murther but yet he still continued the child of God and Peter cursed and sware that hée knew not Christ who for all that still beleeued in Christ to the end Theoph. How can they be both good and bad Bishops at once it seemeth to me a thing impossible Remig. I answere first that the same persons may aswell be both good and bad at once as the same man may be both a father and a sonne at once and yet do all Logicians grant that this latter may be effected with all facility For one and the same man may at one and the same time be both a father in respect of his own child a sonne in respect of his father who is Grandfather to the sayd child Secondly that there is as great disparity betwéene a true Bishop and a good Bishop as there is betwéene a true man and a good man but as he is a true man that hath the nature of a true man how bad soeuer he be in faith life conuersation as Turkes Iewes Traitors Heretickes Apostataes euen so are they true Bishops of the visible Church who haue their calling places iurisdiction allotted them by the same Church how bad soeuer they be in other respects Theoph. Those Popish Bishops that made and created our Bishops and Priests in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths reigne ordeyned and consecrated them after another manner then they are this day and euer haue beene since that time ergo either must their Bishops or else all our Bishops the first onely excepted who were created after the popish manner be false counterfeit and no true Bishops indeed Remig. Neither their Bishops nor ours are false and conterfeit but both true and perfect Bishops in euery essentiall and necessary poynt pertaining to a Bishop Theoph. Theirs were made by the authority of the Pope yours by the authority royall of your gracious Princesse of famous memory Theirs with Oyle and Chrisme and many other ceremonies which yours doe not vse at all Remig. All the things by you named are méere extrinsecall and not of the essence and nature of a Bishop or of a Priest Theoph. Either must they sinne in vsing Oyle Chrisme and other ceremonies or you in reiecting
auncient and most learned fathers by whose iudgements it is very cléere and euident that the chaire of Moyses and the doctrine of Moyses is all one and consequently that not they who occupy the roome of Moyses or Peter are to be followed but they that teach the doctrine of Moyses and Peter are to be heard and their commaundements must be done and ceâ—tes if euer the Bishops of Rome the late Popes I meane shal be able to proue that they preach no otherwise then Saint Peter did if first they preach at all nor decrée or commaund no otherwise then Saint Peter or Saint Paul did I wil obey them I will with a beck doe as they commaund me Fourthly I answere with popish Fryer Lyra whom Sir Thomas Moore called a great Clearke the Pope so estéemeth his writings in these expresse words omnia quaecunque dixâ—rint vobis facite q uia Praelatis etiaÌ„ malis est obediendum nisi in his quae sunt manifestè contra Deum doe all things that they shall say vnto you because we must obey euen those Prelates that be euill vnlesse they teach plainely against God Fifthly with Dionysius Carthusianus in these very words hoc est absolutê vniuersaliter intelligendum quia Scribae Pharisaei multa superstitiosa falsa docuerunt corrumpentes scripturam irritum facientes verbum Dei per suas traditiones intelligendum est ergo de Predicatoribus eorum non contrarijs legi Moysimalis enim PraesideÌ„tibus obedienduÌ„ est quaÌ„diâ— non docent nec iubent contraria Deo this must not be vnderstoode absolutely and generally because the Scribes and Pharisies taught many superstitious and false things corrupting the Scripture and making frustrate the word of God with their traditions we must therefore vnderstand it of their Preachers which teach nothing contrary to the Law of Moyses for we must obey euill Rulers so long as they neither teach nor commaund against God Thus write Lyranus and Carthusianus two famous Popish Fryers teaching the selfe saine doctrine with the holy Fathers Saint Austen and Saint Hylary viz yâ— we must beléeue those Preachers and teachers that teach the same doctrine which Moyses thaught that yâ— is to fit in the chaire of Moyses but not barely to occupy the place The fourth Reply Theoph. God commaunded to obey the Priests and not to swarue in any one iote from their doctrine by turning either to the right hand or to the left this argument seemeth to me to be vnanswerable Remig. Marke well my answere and then you will say it is of no force I answere thus that the Priests of Moyses law might eâ—â—e and did de facto erre indéede which conclusion I haue already proued out of the doctrine of the Scribes and Pharisees for they were not onely wicked men in life and conuersation but they also seduced the people taught false doctrine and corrupted the pure word of God which point because it is a thing of great consequence I will endeuour my selfe by Gods helpe to make it plaine vnto you And because nothing is or can be of greater force against the papists then to confute their doctrine by the testimony of their owne approued Doctors I will after my wonted manner alledge the expresse words of approued papists who were very deare vnto your Pope Nicolaus Lyranus who hath written very learned commentaries vpon the whole Bible the old and new Testament a zealous popish Fryer hath these words hic dicit glosâ—a Hebraica si dixerint tibi quod dextra sit sinistra vel sinistra dextra talis sententia est tenenda quod patet manifestè falsum quia sententia nullius hominis cuiuscunque sit authoritatis est tenenda si contineat manifestatè falsitatem vel errorem Et hoc patet period quod permittitur in textu Postea subditur et docuerint te iuxta legem eius ex quo patet quod si dicant falsum et declinent a lege Dei manifestè non sunt audiendi Here saith the Hebrew glosse if they shall say to thée that the right hand is the left or the left hand the right such sentence is to be holden which thing appeareth manifestly false for no mans sentence of how great authority soeuer he be must be holden or obeied if it manifestly conteine falshood or errour this is manifest by that which goeth before in the text they shall shew to thée the truth of iudgemeÌ„t It followeth in the Author and they shall teach thée according to his law Hereupon it is cléere that if they teach falsly and swarue from the law of God manifestly then are they not to bée heard or followed Thus writeth this learned Popish Doctor out of whose words well worthy to be engrauen in golden letters I note these memorable obseruations First that our Papists now a dayes are so grosse and sensâ—es as were the old Iewish Rabbins as who labour this day to enforce vs to beléeue the Pope though hée erre neuer so grosly telling vs that chalke is chéese and the left hand the right Secondly that Nicholaus de Lyra a great learned Papist whose authority is a mighty argument against the Papists doth here expresly condemne the grosse errour of the Hebrew Doctors and in them the impudent errour of all Iesuites and Romish Parasâ—tes who to satisuÌ„e the humour of their Pope and to vphold his Antichristian tyranny doe wrest the holy scripture from the manifest truth thereof Thirdly that we must neither beléeue Bishop nor the Pope of Rome nor any mortall man of what authority soeuer if he teach vs contrary to the manifest truth of Gods word Fourthly that this learned Popish Doctor doth gather out of the text it selfe that the high Priest might erre preach false doctrine and consequently that the Iesuite Bellarmine doth but flatter the Popes holinesse when he bestirreth himselfe to proue out of this place that the Bishops â—f Rome cannot erre because the Iewish Bishops had the like priueledge and could not teach against the truth The same Doctor Lyra deliuereth the same doctrine in effect in another place where he hath these words Ve vobis Scribae hic ostendit qualiter corrumpebant veritatem doctrinae in his quae pertinent ad salutem Dicebant enim quod obseruare legem erat necessariuÌ„ omnibus ad saluteÌ„ quod falsum est quia multi gentiles sunt saluati vt Iob plures alij ex suppositione autem huius falsi discurrebant alioqui doctores Hebraei per diuersas ciuitates castra vt possent conuertere aliquos de Gentilitate ad Iudaismum Wo to you Scribes here he sheweth how they corrupted the truth of doctrine euen in those things which pertaine to saluation for they said that the kéeping of yâ— law was necessary for all men vnto saluation which is false because many Gentiles are saued as Iob and sundry others by reason of this false supposition some Hebrew