But to conclude this matter with Luther words He 1. Galat. fol. 11. saith Luther Let the Preacher of the Gospel be sure that his calling is from God and he calleth phantasticall spirits who intrude them selues He that preacheth vnsent cometh to kil And fol 12. It is not saith he ynough to haue the word and pure doctrine but also he must be assured of his calling and he that entreth without this assurance entreth to no other end but to kill and destroie People need be assured of Preachers sending Ibid. the people haue great need to be assured of our calling that they maie know our word to be the word of God And in the same chapter Ther are manie saith Luther who complaine that they haue the talent of the Lord and therfore are vrged by commandment of the Gospel to teach otherwise with a most foolish conscience they beleue that they hide the Lords money and are guiltie of damnation The diuel saith he doth this that he may make them instable in their vocation O good brother let Christ quitt the of this The Gospel saith he gaue his goods to seruants called Notē Expect his calling in the meā time be secure yea if thou wert wiser than Salomon or Daniel yet if thou beest not called flie more thā hell to preach If God need the he will call the. And againe The diuel vseth to stir vp his Ministers that they run vncalled and pretend this most burning zeal that they are sorie that men are so miserably seduced that they wold teach the truth and deliuer the seduced from the snares of the diuel Thus Luther and likwise Beza epist 5. and others which I wold they had followed in their first preaching Protestancie Aptnes to preach far short of authoritie to preach 14. As for Caluins reason before cited I saie that abilitie to preach cometh far more short of that spirituall and supernaturall power to preach and administer sacraments which Gods Pastor hath than abilitie to gouerne mens bodies goods in a kingdom cometh short of temporall power to gouerne such matters And therfore if none how able soeuer he be or think him self may take vpon him to be an officer in the common wealth vnles he be apointed much les may one take vpō him to be a Pastor in the Church and gouerne soules vnles he haue authoritie therto giuen which the Declarer of the disciplin noted p. 32. When he said How fit soeuer a mā semeth to be for anie charge yet nothing is to be taken in hand without the authoritie of God who will vse in his affaires whom him pleaseth VVhy the Ieues did ill to ask Christ for his commission As for the example of the Iews brought by Bilson I graunt they did ill in asking Christ and S. Ihon for their commission because their preaching was both plainly fortold before by God and then confirmed by the daily miracles of Christ others wrought for authorizing of Saint Ihon both in his conception and Natiuitie If Luther were Christ or Caluin S. Ihon and their preaching as plainly fortold by God and confirmed by present miracles we shold do like to Iews in asking them for their Commission But seing they produce nether extraordinarie holines nor miracles VVhy vve do vvell to aske Luther for his nor prophetie not anie thing els to testifie their sēding we shold shew great lightnes of hart yea madnes to beleue them to be Gods messengers without all Commissiō The similitudes which Bilson bringeth make nothing against as may be returned against him self For vs any man or woman too when the house is on fire or the cittie in danger Gteat difference betuen-teahhing of priuat men and ptoaching as Pastors may crie fire alarme if officers do not perceaue the danger So we saie that when a man or womā also perceaueth heresie to be taught which the Pastor doth not he or she ether may giue notice or warning therof But yet as not withstanding this none can in what danger soeuer take vpon him to be Captaine and command others of authoritie but he onely who hath such authoritie giuen him So none in what danger of heresie soeuer can take vpon him to be a Pastor and guider of soules preaching tanquam authoritatem habens but onely he who is lawfully called therto But Bilsons error is in that he distinguisheth not betwene the aduertising or teaching of priuat mē and the preaching of Pastors which is an act of spirituall function and authoritie and therfore must suppose that authoritie From the same procedeth his bringing of the example of Frumentius and Aedesius who as priuat men yea as woemen maie in case of necessitie when no others is to be had being captiues amongst infideles taught them the Christian faith Socrat. lib. 1. c. 19. Raffin lib. 1. cap 9. Theodoret. lib. 1. c. 23. But nether of them tooke vpon him to be Pastor to the Infidels or as such to administer to them the word and Sacraments Theodoret. lib. 1. c. 24. before Frumentius came to S. Athanasius was by him made Bishop and lawfully sent And by as good example might Bilson haue proued that women may preach euen without sending because a woman being in like sorte captiue among infidels taught them the Christian faith and was cause of their conuersion 15. And thus thou seest Gentle Reader euidently proued both by manifest proofs and open confession of Protestants VVhat the Protestāte and their doctrin be if Luther vvere not sent to preach that Luther preached Protestancie without sending and so without all authoritie and consequently that the Protestants Church is a companie without a Pastor their doctrine a message without an Embassador and their Bishops and Ministers without prelacie or pastorall authoritie but such as S. Cipriā describeth l. de vnit Eccles vvho amongst stragling companions of them selues take authoritie vvithout Gods giuing make them selues prelats vvithout anie orderlie course and no bodie giuing them a Bishoprick chaleng the name of Bishops English Ministers condemn◠the calling of the English Clergie And not Catholiks onely thus think but euen the purer sorte of our English Clergie For the dangerous Positioner lib. 3. cap 6. telleth how it was concluded by them in a Synod at Couentrie An. 1588. That the calling of Bishops is vnlavvfull That it is not lawfull by them to be ordeined into the Ministerie That Bishops are not to be acknowledged for Doctors Elders or Deacons as hauing no ordinarie calling And cap. 14. he recounteth how some Ministers renounce the calling which they had of Bishops and account ther orders onely a ciuil thing necessarie for them to keep the ministerie And c. 16. that the English Prelats haue no authoritie to make Ministers And thus much of Luthers want of Mission Now let vs see his orders CHAP. XI That Luther was neuer ordered to preach the Protestants word or administer their sacraments 1.
our speciall Letters Patents in the zeale of our faith haue giuen authoritie and licence vnto the forsaid Archbishops and all and euery of his Suffragans to arest all and euery one of them that will preach or mantain any such Conclusions repugnant vnto the determination of our holy Mother the Church And in other letâ—ers chargeth all not to hinder the Bishops of hereford in suppressing the Lolards Yea pag. 406. Edit 1596. Fox citeth a lawe made Anno 2. Richard 2. for burning of VVicklefists Thus saith Fox pag. 505. King Richard taking parte with the Pope and the Româ—sh Prelats waxed somwhat strait and hard to the poore Christians of the contrary side of VVicklef and saith that though none were burnt vnder him yet some were condemned diuers abiured and did pennance And pag. 513. saith King Richard those to serue the humor of the Pope K. Richard gathereth a Councel against VViclef VViclef condemned by 10 Bishopâ— 44. deuines 20 lavviers To this Bale Cent. 6. cap. 1. addeth that Wicklef was banisht for â—ome yeares And cap. 77. that Anno 1382. Wicklef was condemned by ten Bishops and fourty four Diuines and twenty Lawyers And cap. 82. saith that King Richard at the commandement of Boniface 9. Cent. 7. cap. 11. gathered a great Councell Anno 1392 against the Wicklefists And Fox pag. 507. K. Richard leaueth all to suppresse vviclefists and Walsingham An. 1395. others write that King Richard being in Ireland left all as sone as he heard increase of Lollards and calling the cheefe of them vnto him threatned them greatly if they followed Lollards any more and making one of them sweare therto the K. swore to him that if he broke his oath he should die a foul death So earnest was that King against those whome Protestants account now their brethren And albeit he consented to the Law made Anno 1391. against those that procured or brought any excoÌ„munication of the Pope against any yet that Law was not made to deny any point of the Popes authority but because as Polidor saith l. 20 many were vexed dayly for causes which they thought could not be known at Rome easely The King and Lords Temporal and Commons for the Lords spirituall recâ—amed as Fox witnesseth pag. 512. thought it expedient that in this point the Pope should not vse his authoritie Besides that when Pope Boniface 9. sent to haue these Lawes recalled the King saith VValsingham in Ypodâ—gmate Anno 1391. Vt silius obediens As an obedient child determined to fulfill the Popes demaundes but the Knights of the Parliament would not abrogate the Statute against Prouisors because they would not haue English Benefices at any time giuen to strangers And the times of King Richard were so manifestly Roman Catholick as the Kings Attorney in the araignment of Garnet calleth theÌ„ the midniâ—ht of Poperie Bale Cent. 6. cap 96. Saints saith that Almost all that were in those darck times did erre through ignorance of Gods lawe In this kings time dyed Saint Iohn of Bridlington whose life is written in Capgraue who saith Bale Centur. 6. c. 63. Caelesti Theologiae assiduus cultor adhaesit And VVilliam Fleet an Austin Frier who was canonized as Bale Cent. 6. c. 41. reporteth out of Sabellicus Henrie 4. XLV IN the yeare 1399. succeded king Henrie 4. granchild to king Edward 3. by Iohn Duke of Lancaster VVorthines of K. Henrie 4. and dyed Anno 1413. hauing reigned 14. yeares He was saith Polider lib. 21. of a great corage after the ende of ciuill warrs entertained all most gently His Rom. Religion The same hath Cooper Anno 1399. and Stow Chron. pag. 424. His Roman Catholick religion is most notorious For as Fox Acts pag. 523. and others write he made the Statute ex officio Where is apointed That who so euer is conuicted of Wicklefs heresie before his Ordinarie or Commissioners that then the Shriefes Maiers and Bay lifs of the Cittie Contrie or Towne shall take the persons after sentence is pronounced cause them openly to be burned in sight of the people And pag. 517. Fox setteth down the Kings Decree in parliament wherin he professeth to be zelous in religion and reuerent louer of the Catholick faith And minding to roote out all heresies out of his Kingdom And ther commandeth one VVilliam Santrey a conuict heretick to be burnt which perhaps is he whome Bale Cent. 6. cap. 75. saith was burnt in Smithfield An. 1401. In this tyme was burnt saith Bale Cent. 8. c. 5. that relaps William Swinderby a smith in London for denying the reall presence a Tayler the same yeare 1410. for the same cause Fox pag. 481. nameth his brother Iohn Badby burnt then who as VValsingham ypodig pag 174 who then liued writeth said that the Eucharist is not the body of Christ but worse than a toade or a spider And perhaps he is that VViclesist of whome that graue Author Thomas VValden who was ther present reporteth Tom. 2. c. 63. That standing befor the Archbishop Bishops in presence of the Duke of yorke many nobles Miracle fâ—â—â— not of the Bâ— sacrament he said that a Spider was more to be worshipped thaÌ„ the Eucharist and sodainly from the top of the Church came a great spider sought to enter into his mouth would scarce be kept out by any mans helpe Moreouer Fox Acts 5. 8. saith that this King was the first of all English Kings that began the burning of Christs VViclef Saints for standing against the Pope That K. Henrie burnt VViclefs Saints is euident But he was not the first which burnt such as stood against the Pope as appeareth by what hath bene sayd of Edward 3. K Henrie 4. vvholie bent to the Pope And finally he concludeth that this king was bent altogether to vphould the Popes Prelacie And therfore in his Considerations Considerat 10. saith Protestants rather dyed than liued in the dayes of King Henrie 4. And when the Lollards or Wicklefists requested him as saith Walsingham An. 1410. either to alter or mitigate the forsaid Statute he answered them that he would rather inforce it And when they proposing to him the same bait VVhat baite the VViclefists Proposed to K. Henrie 4. to ouerthrovv religion The like offer made Protestants vvhich Syr Thom more confuted as Protestants did to King Henrie 8. desired him to take away the Church liuings because with them he might maintain 15. Earles 1550. Knights 6200. Squirs and 100. Hospitals he detesting their malice commanded them to silence King Henrie 5. XLVI IN the yeare 1413. succeded K. Henrie 5. sonne to King Henrie 4. and died An. 1422. hauing reigned 9. yeares The rare vertues of K Henrie 5. He was saith Polidor lib. 22. the onely glorie of that time then whome none borne ether for greatnes of courage or for vertue was more famous or excellent whose loue euen yet remaineth amongst men The like commendations giue to
commission to direct him 10. But diuers learned Protestants finding no colorable answer to make to this demand Protestāts confesse that their Ministers vvant laufull sending and authoritie do plainly confesse as Sadeel a Minister of Geneua testifieth in a book written against such that their ministers are legitima vocatione destituti destitute of lavvfull calling Others though not so plainly do graunt the same in saying that such as ate fit may teach the word without sending Which Caluin insinuateth in cap. 13. Actor wher he saieth that we need no testimonie from heauen that God sendeth some Because saith he vvhome God hath indued vvith sufficient gift seing they are framed and fashioned by his hand we receaue them giuen to vs of him no otherwise than as the prouerb is from hand to hand VVhom Calvin allovveth to preach vnsent And to this same end tended Bilsons complaint l. of obed pag. 300. that the wicked saith he alwaies asked the godly for their authoritie as the Ievvs asked S Ihon Baptist and Christ Bilson And Ib. So long as we teach saith he the same doctrin vvhich the Apostles did vve haue the same povver vvhich they had And pag. 301. He that defendeth truth is armed vvith authoritie sufficient though all the vvorld vvere against him And that a man may preach without commission he bringeth a similitude that when a cittie is on fire or entred by enemies euerie one may crie Alarme though he be no officer and pag. 310. and 311. he produceth the example of Frumentius and Aedesius who taught infidels the Christian faith hauing no sending to that purpose 11. Here thou seest Gentle Reader that confessed by learned Protestants which I intended in this chapter to wit that Luther his first partners were not sent to preach ether of God or man but seing forsooth the Church al on fire with idolatrie See Bal. Cent. 6. c. 85 Cent. 8. cap. 100. Manie principal Ministers preached vnsent The vvāt of sending in Luther Caluin and such like vvold alone conuince them to be false Prophets entred by enemies and thinking thē selues fit for that purpose came rūning of their own accord crying Alarme which Luther did not stick to bost of saying as Caluin reporteth l. de reformat p. 463. Behold I call my self Preacher and with this title haue I adorned my self And who readeth the liues of our first Protestant preachers ether in Bale or Fox shall see that euerie one of them fel to preach vnsent of anie And the forsaid Declaration of disciplin p. 141. saith plainly that manie of their worthie mē for the loue they had to the Gospel thaught it lawful for thē in these times to take vpō thē this Apostolical office 12. But this alone that Luther Caluin such like did preach and administer sacraments as Pastors being not sent nor hauing authoritie giuen them therto wold suffice to cōuince them to haue bene false prophets vsurpers theeues though no other exceptiō cold be takē against them For to preach that is as Pastor to teach without lauful sending or Commission is flatly against Scripture against the example of Christ his Apostles and all the Pastors of Gods Church against reason and Finally against the doctrin and practise now observed of Protestants It is flat against Scripture For Rom. 10. S. Paul asketh how shall they preach vnles they be sent VVant of sending the verie brand of false prophets In so much as both the Prophets Christ and the Apostles do brād false Prophets with this mark of coming vnsent I sent not saith God Hierem. 23. Prophets they ran As manie saith Christ Ioan. 10. as came of them selues are theeus robers Some going out of vs saie the Apostles Actor 15. haue trobled you with words whom we commanded not Loe how the holie ghost hath branded false Prophets with this note of coming vnsēt It is also against the example of Christ the Apostles For of Christ it is said Hebr. 5. Nether doth anie take honor to him self but who is called of God as Aaron So Christ did not clarifie him self to be made a Bishop And Ioan. 17. and 20. Christ him self auoucheth his sending by his Father And of the Apostles it is manifest that they preached not before they were sent of Christ To preach vnsent is to imitate Core Dathan ande Abiron Nether can Protestants produce anie Pastor of Gods Church since the Apostles time which preached before he was sent And to do the contrarie is not to imitate Christ and his Apostles but that schismaticall crue of Core Dathā Abirō whome the earth therfore swallowed hell deuoured See S. Cipr. lib. de simplic Prelat Tertul. de prascrip It is also against reason For as Pastor to preach and administer Gods Sacraments is an act of spirituall and supernaturall authoritie which none can haue vnles it be giuen vnto him and learning vertue or other talents what soeuer wherwith a man is fit to execute such authoritie are things far different from it as is both euident by it self and appeareth in woemen who may haue as much learning vertue and other habilities as some men yet none of them can as Pastors preach or administer the Sacraments because they are incapable of Pastorall authoritie Moreouer to be a Preacher and Pastor is to be Gods Embassador and steward or dispenser of his spirituall goods and misteries And if none can be Embassador of an earthly Prince vnles he be sent none steward of his house vnles he be apointed none officer ouer his people vnles he be constituted How can any be Embassador to God without sending steward of his goods without apointing gouernor of his people without his authoritie And I maruel how Protestants can call Luther Latimer and such like their Apostles and ether confesse that they were not sent at all but came of their owne good wills or can not shew of whome they were sent seing that the verie name of an Apostle signifieth one sent 13. Finally Protestants them selues condemne such preachers as come vnsent Bilson him self l. cit we detest saith he these that inuade the pastorall function without lavvfull vocation and election It is not lavvfull saith the English Clergie in the 23. Article of their faith for any man to take vpon him the office of publik preaching or administring the Sacraments No man saith their Synod in Haga Art 3. ought to take vpon him to preach or administer the Sacraments vvithout a lavvfull calling although he be a Doctor or a Deacon or an Elder And their Synod at Rochel 1607. Art 32. none must intrude him self into the gouernment of the Church Thus teach all Heretiks after they haue gotten possession But before their owne aptnes and talents the glorie of God and the saluation of soules and truth of their doctrine was warrant and authoritie ynough for them to preach as appeareth by what hath bene cited out of Bilson Caluin and others
other to Ministers Iudg then good Reader what kind of orders they haue if they haue any by their owne verdit Ministers vtterly shame their religion to wit impious prophane horrible and sacrilegious Iudg also what is to be thought of them and their religion who hitherto haue and yet doe permit Popish Priests that is as they accouÌ„t slaues and shauelings of Antichrist and enemies to Christ prophane and mere laie men yea impious sacrilegious no way degraded or new ordered of them but but by vertue only as they speak of their greasing of the Romish Antichrist the mortal enemy of Protestancy by power of their prophane impious sacrilegious orders to be sufficieÌ„t Ministers of their word and sacram O impious Antich word which can be sufficieÌ„tly ministred by vertue of impious AntichristiaÌ„ orders Note ministers Can Antich order Christs lawful Ministers Shal his orders become Christs orders shall Antichrists shaueling slaues be sufficient Pastors for Christ Shall Christ be serued by no other officers theÌ„ such as ether mediatly or immediatly were made by Antichrist See Doue of Recusancie Luth. cont Anabapt Is Christ comen to beg orders at Antichrists haÌ„ds to receaue pastors of his making Can Antichrist giue spiritual supernatural authoritie And haue Christs pastors no other then what came from Antichrist o shameful Christian religion if this be christian religion which hath no bible or word of God but what came from Antichrist no sacrament but from Antichrist no preacher but from Antichrist no orders but from Antichrist no spiritual authoritie or iurisdiction but from Antichrist Sâ—e Suruey cap. 8 3. 1â— Dangor Posit lib. 2. cap. 13. what then maie we conclude but the religion is Antichristian And why shold ProtestaÌ„ts maruail to heare their owne brethren call their Bishops and Ministers Bishops and Ministers of the diuel enemies of God pettie Antichrists and such like sith all the orders they pretend they must deriue from the pope whom they all account the true Antichrist No true religion vvithout true calling and right orders God open the eyes of my deere Countrymen that as they partly see that their Ministers haue nether right calling nor lawfull orders so they maie also see that they haue no true religion which without pastors both rightly called lawfully ordered can not stand And thus hauing shewed how vnfit Luther was to be Preacher both for his life learning calling and orders now let vs come to his doctrine to see whether that be any whit better CHAP. XII That Luthers doctrine was contrarie to the vniuersall faith of Christendom in his time 1. THat Luthers doctrine was contrarie to the vniuersall faith of Christendom at that time I proue by many waies First by the condemnation therof by the cheefe heades spirituall teÌ„porall of the ChristiaÌ„ people of that time For Luthers doctrin condemned by P. Leo. 10. as Protestants confesse Leo 10. than Pope spirituall head of Christian people condemned it An. 1520. whose Bull therof is extant in Fox p. 1166. And not longe after Hieremie Patriarch of Constantinople head as he accounteth him self of the Greeke or East Church condemned their doctrin in a booke which is called Censura Orientalis By Heremie Patriarch of Constantinople wherin he saith ther doctrine was altogeather new and directly both against the Gospell of Christ By charles 5 Emper. Sleid. also lib. 1 fol. 3. setteth doune Emper Maxmil letters against Luther Sleid. lib. 3. fol. 30. 33. 50. 51. By K. Henrie 8 Sleid. lib 3. fol. 34. and right reason and calleth them Hereticks And in the yeare 1521. Charles 5. then Eemperor of Germany King of Spain Naples Sicilie and Sardinia and Lord of all the low Countryes first writ a letter to the States of Germany which is set downe in Fox pag. 778. in which he professed to pursue Luther and all his adherents by all meanes that can be deuised for to extinguish his doctrine And sone after directed a solemne writ of outlawrie against Luther and all them that tooke his parte commanding the said Luther to be apprehended and his bookes burnt Likewise the same yeare 1521. King Henrie 8. of England wrote a booke against Luther in which saith Fox pag. 780. By the French King Sleidan lib. 6. fol. 68. lib. 8. fol. 120. First he reproueth Luthers opinion about pardons 2. He defendeth the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome 3. Laboreth to refel Luthers doctrine of the sacraments And againe in the yeare 1523. writ saith Cooper in Chron. to the Princes of Germany against Luther And in the yeare 1525. as the same Cooper writeth he entred league with the French King to suppresse the sect of the Lutherans vvhich they thought to be no lesse dangerous than the Turkes power And Anno 1535. he writeth that six were burnt in Paris for Lutherans before the French King his sight And Anno t543 that the French King made strait proclamation against the Lutherans By Iames 5 King of ScotlaÌ„d And as for Iames 5. King of Scotland and Grand-father to his Maiesty Hamilton Confut. Caluin a Scottish writer testifieth that when King Henry 8. hauing fallen into one point of Lutheranisme promised to make K. Iames his heire if he would do the like he rather refused so great a profer than consent to his desire And behold the different reward from God of the two Kings King Henrie 8. issue is quite extinguished Note and Iames his royall progenie wee behould not only florishing but possessing King Henries crowme and Kingdome So hath God euen in thie life recompensed By the States of Suizerland Sleidan ib. 3 fol. 54 55. By the learned men of all partes of Christendome the religious zeale of that most Catholick King And as for Swizerland Fox p. 792. writeh that Anno 1524. the States of that countrie in their assembly Decreed that no opinion of Luthers should be tought priuatly nor openly and wrote to the men of Zurich and do much lament saith Fox and complaine of this new broached doctrine which hath set all men togeather by the eares through the occasion of certaine rash and nevv fangled heades and vvill bring destruction both to body and soule And as for the learned men of that age in all Christian Countries their detestation of Luthers doctrin is euident By vniuersities For first the Vniuersities of Louain and Colen condemned Luthers bookes as hereticall in the year 1520. And in the next yeare the Vniuersitie of Paris did the like Sleid. Engl. lib. 1. fol. 14. lib. 3 fol. 32. And in all Christian Contries almost the cheefest learned men wrote against him as Eckius Cocleus Gropperus in Germanie Silueuester Caietan Catherin in Italy Petrus a Soto Alfonsus a Castro Canus Turrianus in Spaine Clictoneus and others in France By a general Councel Bishop Fisheâ—and Syr Thomas More in England Driedo Tapper Erasmus in Flanders Hosius in Polonie
Church where he addeth that this is cleare and out of all controuersie And p. 368. Christ said of his whole Church that the gates of hell c. Therfore the whole Church was founded on Peter The same he repeateth Conclus 1. p. 615. and Conclus 2. p. 625. and generally all Protestāts graunt the same For out of this place they proue that the Elect can not fall from God because Christ here sayd that Hell gates should not preuaile against his Church That is say they against his Elect. In like sort the said Reinolds Conf. p. 386. saith that these words My Sheepe Iohn 10 where it is sayd my sheepe heare my voice included all the Elect. Therfore Ioan. 21. the very same words include all the Elect beside Peter who is excepted because he is apointed to feede them vnles we will not vpon any different occasion ministred by scripture but vpon our own preconceited opinion expound the same word now one way now an other Finally the sayd Reinolds Conf. pag. 103. confesseth that by Thy Bethren Luc. 22. Christ ment all the faithfull Then surely he included all the Apostles Thirdly by authoritie of Fathers 6. Thirdly I proue that S. Peter was head of the whole Church by the authoritie of holy Fathers whome because Whitaker cōfesseth as yow heard before to teach most clearly that the Church i◠founded vpon Peter I wil omit their words and remit those that list read them to Bellarm. l. 1. de Pont. c. 10. Onely I will shew that they teach that the Church as it includeth the rest of the Apostles is founded vpon Peter onely Cyprian epist ad Iulian. Ecclesia quae vna est super vnum The Church which is one is founded vpon one who by the commaundemēt of our Lord receaued the key therof In which words we see that as the Church is sayd to be one onely so it is said to be founded vpon one onely And lib. 1. epist 8. Ecclesia vna Cathedra vna c. One Church and one Chaire was by our Lords word founded vpon Peter And Saint Hierom. in 2. Isaiae after he had said that the Apostles were Montes mountains addeth Super vnum montium Christus fundat Ecclesiam loquens ad eum Tu es Petrus c. Vpon one of the Montains Christ foundeth his Church and speaking to him thou art Peter c. S. Leo serm 2. de Anniuers saith Saint Peter was plus ceteris ordinatus c. ordained more than the rest whiles he is called a Rock a Foundation and apointed porter of the kingdome of heauen And for this cause the Fathers when they speak of Peter in respect of the rest of the Apostles they manifestly prefer him in authority before them ceteris praelatus discipulis Preferred before the rest of the disciples saith S. Basil homil de Iudicio Eccles And this is so euident as D. Reinolds Confer pag. 179. confesseth that the Fathers call Peter the mouth the Top the highest the President the head of the Apostles and. pag. 562. The Prince the Top the Cheefest of the Apostolick company the Teacher of the whole world and a Father of the houshould And graunteth also that some of these Titles touch gouernment and signifie a preheminence in gouernment Reinolds deuiseth an authoritie in S. Peter to auoid his supremacie Whervpon he is inforced pag. 180. to acknowledg that Saint Peter was superiour among the Apostles as a President of a Parliament in France or as a Consull among the Romans But who wel considereth shall easely perceaue that this is but an authoritie deuised of purpose to delude the words of the Fathers who speaking of Saint Peters authoritie ouer the Apostles vse the very words which we do to declare his supremacy And therfor if they be vnderstood by their own words and not as Reinolds pleaseth to expound them they vsing the same words as we do must be vnderstood as we are But because this question is some what beside my present purpose I will vrge it no farther Onely I would know of Reinolds how Peter did come by his Consulship ouer the Apostles which he graunteth to him Did the Apostles giue it him But where readeth he that Did Christ bestow it on him But where if not Math. 16. and Iohn 21. In which places if Christ gaue him any authoritie ouer the Apostles he gaue him as full power ouer them as ouer other Christians For ther is no limitation of his power towards some more than towards others but they are as well to be foūded on him as others are he was to feede them as wel as others Nether doth this his authoritie ouer the rest of the Church and the Apostles too preiudice the supreme authority of Christ ouer all any more than the lyke authority which the Protestāts graunt euery Apostle had ouer the rest of the Church Secōdly I would know of Reinolds why he doth not graunt this Consulship ouer the whole Church to the Pope or at least to some one Bishop or other but wil make euery Prince head of the Church in his Kingdome That S. Peters authority remaineth in some Bishop of the Church 7. Now that this authority of Saint Peter remaineth still in the Church and descended from him to some Bishop I proue because all the ends for which ether Christ declared or the Fathers affirme that Christ instituted this authoritie to remaine as well after his death as before The first was that the gates of hell should not preuaile against the Church Math. 16. Secondly that what is loosed in earth may be loosed in heauen ibi Thirdly that Peter might cōfirme his Brethren Luc. 22. Fourthly that he might feede Christs sheepe Io. 21. Fiftly that one being made head occasion of Schisme might be taken away Hierom. lib. 1. cont Iouinianum Sixtly that the origine of the vnitie of the Church might appeare Cyprian de simpl Praelat because as he saith lib. 1. epist 3. Priestly vnity rose from Peters chaire And epist ad Fulcian Our Lord began the origine of vnitie from Peter This cause alleadgeth also Leo. epi. 84. and Anast and Optat. l. 2. contra Parmen But all these ends remaine after Saint Peters death Therfore the authoritie also remaineth Besides S. Austin saith l. de Pastor c. 1. Christiani sumus propter nos Praepositi non nisi propter vos Therfore Saint Peter being made Cheefe of Gods Church for the good of it left his authoritie in the Church Whervpon S. Austin tract 50. in Ioannem saith that when Peter receaued the keyes Ecclesiam sanctam significauit he represented the holy Church because he receaued them as her Gouernour vnder Christ and for her good And therfore as long as she remaineth the authority which Saint Peter receaued for her good must remaine Aarons authoritie remained in his Successors Therfore Peters Secondly I proue it because God in the ould law instituted one high Priest who vnder him in
that a while before the Conquest and somwhat after Kings tooke vpon them to inuest Bishops and Abbots as appeareth in Ingulp pag. 806. But this fact of theirs done of som ignorantly as must be thought of King Edred and others before the Conquest who were perfect Catholicks in faith as shall appeare herafter and also vertuous in life of others perhaps presumptuously and couetously against the order of the Church proueth no more that they were no Catholicks than worse facts of theirs against the law of Christ proueth them to haue bene no Christians For if Princes maye by euery fact of theirs be iudged of what religion they are they would sometimes seeme no Christians nor yet to haue a God As for S. Edward he might wel doe what he did for he was apointed by the Pope to be his Vicegerent and as it were Legat as we shall shewe in his life obiec ∣ tion 3 2. Thirdly they made saith Abbots lawes for the order and gouernment of the Church as is to be seene in the lawes of Edward of Alfred of Ethelstan and Canutus in Fox Volum 1. in fine and by many laws made since the Conquest against intrusions of the Pope as is to be seene in Syr Edward Cookes reports part 5. Ansvver Touching the lawes of the Christian Kings before the Conquest I answer that they are not Ecclesiasticall lawes such as define any thing as a point of faith or prescribe any thing concerning Religion and worship of God but are meere commandements partly for execution of former Ecclesiasticall lawes partly for procurement and conseruation of externall peace quietnes and order of the Church which kinde of lawes Princes may make as is to be seene in Stapleton Relect. Controu 2. q. 5. Ar. 1. See stapleton Besides that Christian Princes apoint thus some times things in ecclesiasticall matters not of authoritie but vpon zeale and not to dispose of faith and religion As for the lawes made since the Conquest which may seeme preiudiciall to the Popes authoritie the cheefest Authors of them were Edward 3. and Richard 2. who as shall appeare heerafter plainly professed the Popes Supremacie And therfor what lawes they made were no way to denie his authoritie but to restrain the execution therof in some cases because as the Apostle saith Omnia licent sed non omnia expediunt All things are lawfull but all things are not expedient So they thought that some execution of his authority in some matters would be preiudâ—ciall to their temporall state and therfor thought it not expedient that in those cases it should be practised As for Cookes reports they haue bene so answered as I thinck neither him self nor any for him will obiec ∣ tion 4 replie Fourthlie saith Abbots Then were the scriptures in foure seuerall languages of so many seuerall Nations besides the Latin tongue common to them all Beda lib. 1. cap. 1. This is vntrue Ansvver and Beda rather saith the contrarie His words are these This Iland at this present to the number of the 5. bookes of Moises doth studie and set forth the knowledg of one perfect truth that is with the language of the English the Britons the Scotts the Picts and the Latin which by studie of the scripture is made common to all the rest In which words he saith that the Inhabitants preached and published Christs truth in fiue seueral languages but the scripture they studied onely in Latin and therby it became common to all the Inhabitants And before in the life of Theodor we shewed by the confession of diuers Protestants that masse was in his tyme which was before S. Beda in Latin onely But admit that the scripture were then in Latin and in English too how proueth that that English men then were no Catholicks Haue not English Catholicks now the scripture in English Fiftlie saith Abbots obiec ∣ tion 5 Then were they in Monasteries commanded to be exercised in the reading of scriptures and euery one was required to learn the Lords prayer and Creede in the English tongue This is not worth the answering Ansvver For what doth the Monks reading scripture or the peoples learning the Lords prayer and Creed in English make against Catholick Religion 3. Sixtly saith Abbots Then was the CommunioÌ„ obiec ∣ tion 6 ministred in both kindes as Paris in Heraldo and Rafo reporteth of some soldiers Ansvver What Paris saith of soldiers I knowe not For at this present I haue him not at hand But that English men in our Primitiue Church communicated onely with form of bread appeareth by Beda lib. 2. cap. 5. Wher Pagans say to S. Mellit VVhy dost thou not giue vnto vs of that white bread which thou didst giue to our Father Seba and dost yet giue to the people in Church But if S. Mellit had communicated people in both kinds it is lykly they would haue demanded both Besids that Beda expoundeth that place of Luke Cognouerunt eum in fractione panis where mention is of one onely kinde of sacramental communion Therfor he and consequently our English Church then alowed communion in one kinde But whether they communicated in both or one kinde maketh little to proue that they were not Catholickâ— because til lay people were forbidden it was lawful for them to communicate Obiec ∣ tion 7 in both kindes 4. Seauenthlie theÌ„ saith Abbots was Transubstantiation vnknowne and when it began to be broached or not long after Elfricus Archbishop of Canterburie contradicted it Ansvver How vntrue this is of TraÌ„substantiation hath bene shewed before in the life of S. Greg and S. Odo As for Elfric the Protestant Bishops them selues who published that sermon confesse See befor hovv Bale confesseth Archb. Alfric to haue bene a Papist and of Transubstant in S. Odo Archb. that the Author therof was no Archbishop of Canterbury More likly it is to be true which Fox Acts. pag. 1148. saith that it was Elfric surnamed Bata an Heretick who as S. Dunstan appearing to one in a vision said as reporteth Osbern attempted to disherit his Church but I haue stopped him saith S. Dunstan he could not preuaile Albeit indeed that sermon doth more approoue Transubstantiation than disprooue it For in that is saide that Christ turned through inuisible might the bread to his owne body and wine to his blood And that holy howsel is by might of Gods word truly Christs body and his blood And that after their halowing bread and wine trulye are Christs body and blood And what other do Catholicks now say but what here is said Vz. That bread and wine are by inuisible power turned into Christs body and blood and become after consecration truly not figuratiuly his body and blood And though the Author of the sermon ad that the sacrament after consecration is not bodily but Ghostly Christs bodie yet the word ghostly is not added to deny the word Truly which is absolutly affirmed but onely to deny the word Bodily that is carnally
Preacher whence comest thou vvho sent the vvhere are the miracles that vvitnes thy sensending from God Patere legem quam ipse tuleris And to 2. fol. 455. If he say that he vvas sent of God and his spirit as the Apostles let him proue this by signes miracles or suffer him not to preach for vvhensoeuer God vvill change the ordinarie course there he alvvaies vvorketh miracles And 1. Galat. fol. 40. It vvas necessary for S. Paul to haue the outvvard testimony of his calling And shall not we think it necessary for Luther If any saith the Declarat of discipline printed at Geneua 1580. please themselues in this gadding abrode throughout the Churches and vvill contend that they may do so let them shevv vs the signes of their Apostleship as S. Paul did to the Corinthians let theÌ„ proue that they are endued vvith those Apostolicall gifts of tonges healing doing of miracles let theÌ„ proue that they are immediatly called therunto of God Finally I proue that Luther was not extraordinarily sent of God because he was not extraordinarily assisted by him from teaching false doctrine For as our English Protest coÌ„fesse he tought false doctrin in many points But they can produce no other assuredly sent extraordinarily of God who taught false doctrin And in my iudgment English Protestants much condemne their owne doctrine in defending that Luther was sent extraordinarily from God English ProtestaÌ„ts condemne them selues in defending Luthers calling For seing he hath condemned much of their doctrine for heresie they must therby confesse that their doctrine hath bene coÌ„demned of a man especially lightned of God and extraordinarily sent of him to teach his truth Wherfore I wold they took better aduise and followed the counsell of the forsaid Declarator in these words pag. 30. Let enquirie be made into euerie ones calling Good aduise of a Protestant from Geneua let them shew how they were chosen and ordeined as the letters and seall of their calling Let them rehearse their genealogies and the race of their descent Let them bring their rodds and set them before the Arke of God And who can not shew the marks and tokens of their election and Creation they that can not fetch their pedigree from Aaron and whose rodds remaine dead before the Arke let them be by the most iust authoritie of Gods word displaced Thus he whose aduise if it be followed I doubt not but Luther wil be displaced as a false Prophet 8. The forsaid sixt agument touching miracles much trobleth Protestants and therfor they answer it diuersly Some by granting that miracles are necessarie for the attestation of extraordinarie mission and saie as Feild doth lib. 3. of the Church c. 48. and Fox p. 789. that Luther wrought miracles But these we shall disproofe of purpose herafter Wherfor others despairing to make anie probable preteÌ„ce of miracles Bâ—â—â— denie that they are necessarie to assecure vs of extraordnarie missioÌ„ Because Isaies Daniel Zacharias wrought none because S. Paul proued his missioÌ„ rather by the efficacie of his doctrine than by miracles And Caluin l. de scandal saith that howsoeuer miracles were necessarie to the extraordinarie vocation of others yet not of theÌ„ because they teach no new doctrin but the same which befor hath bene confirmed with miracles and because their doctrin is euideÌ„t needeth no miracles to proue it But these their reasons are manifestly false For Isaias miraculously cured K. Ezechias prolonging his life 15. years caused the shadow of his diall to returne back 10. lines Daniel miraculously tould both what the K had dreamed what his dreame signified Dan. 2. 4. which is one of the greatest tokens of Gods assistance that is And in like sorte Zacharias c. 1. 4. fortold diuers things which soone after were fulfilled S. Paul and Barnabas proue their doctrin by miracles Act 15. wher they tell what great signes miracles God had wrought by them among Gentils in testimonie therof And 2. Cor. 11. S. Paul proueth his Apostleship because saith he the signes of my Apostleship were wrought vpon you in miracles prodiges and powers 9. That which Calu. saith besid that euery Sectmaister saith it with as much color as he is euidently falfe Though Luthers doctrin vvere good yet he needed miracles to proue his extraordinarie calling For as for the newnes of his doctrine it partly appeareth by what hath bene said sup c. 1 shall euideÌ„tly be shewed in the 2. parte of this Treatise And how ancieÌ„t euideÌ„t soeuer his Luthers doctrine wete and therfor that it needed no miracles yet if their mission to preach their doctrin be extraordinarie it caÌ„ not be denied but their missioÌ„ is both new vneuideÌ„t they needed miracles at least to approue their mission vnto vs. For God hauing no wher auouched by word that he wold send Luther to preach ProtestaÌ„ts beleue that Luther vvas extraordinarily sent vvithout all profe testimonie or reason All right beleuers haue not authoritie to preach if he auouch not by deeds nether what certaintie haue we ether from God or maÌ„ besides Luthers owne word that Luther came from God nether let anie maÌ„ answer that Luther proueth his doctrine by the word For now the question is not about his doctrine but about his authoritie to preach which a maÌ„ maie waÌ„t yet teach true doct Wherfor absurd is that which Bilson affirmeth l. of obedience p. 300. As long as we teach the faith of the Apostles we haue their authoritie For so euerie right beleuer shold haue Apostlick authoritie to preach al shold be Apostles or doctors contrarie to S. Paul 1. Cor. 12. all shold be Pastors and none sheep all laie men yea woemen and children might administer the word and sacraments None could be prohibited or suspended from preaching Finally this licence of preaching graunted to all that haue true faith is graunted besides Gods word or warrant Wherfore Bilson vpon better aduise perhaps in his booke of gouernment of the Church cap. 9. writeth that they haue no parte of Apostolik Commission that haue no shew of Apostolik succession And that Pastors do receaue by succession power and charge of the vvord and Sacraments from and in the first Apostles And I wold he wold shew to whom Luther succeeded in his new doctrine or els confesse that he had no part in Apostolik Commission Certain therfore it is that though euerie right beleuer may confesse his faith and also teach it priuatly when necessitie requireth yet none but Pastors who are lawfully sent can preach it of authoritie take care of soules and administer the Sacraments And how I pray you shold we be assured that Luther was sent of God to do this rather than anie other right beleuer This I wold gladly know Tell me this o Ministers and euerie one shold know before he commit his soul to his guiding whome he knoweth not to haue anie charge or