therfore whatsoeuer the Papistes buylde of Peter * it is soone shaken downe as grounded vpon the sandes If Peter continued full seueÌ„ yeares at Antioche in Syria as the Papistes affirme then coulde not hée haue ben at Roome vntill the .iiii. yeare of the Emperour Nero which was .xxvii. yeares after Christes passion By this discourse hée could not haue ben Pope at Roome .xxv. yeares as the Papistes dreame vnlesse that hé had lyued after Nero after Galba after Otho after Vitellius Vespasianus and Titus vnto the tyme of Domitianus as manifestly appereth by their Reignes For Nero reigned .x. yeares after the .iiii. yeares which I haue specified Galba .vii. monethes Otho .iii. monethes Vitellius .viii. monethes which was a yeare a half Vespasianus .x. yeares Titus .ii. yeares So that these .xxv. yeares that Peter should haue ben resident at Rome should haue â—atended too the .ii. yeare of the Emperour Domitianus So that Peter should not haue dyed in the tyme of Nero as the Papistes reporte who affirme with one voyce that Peter was crucefied at Rome with his héeles vpward his head downward the .xxxvii. yeare after Christes passion the .xiiii. yeare of Nero wheÌ„ as wée haue proued by their own reportes Chronicles Histories Authors that hée lyued .xv. yeares longer euen too the seconde yeare of the Emperour Domitian which was after the passian of Christ lii or liii yeares Hithertoo wée haue proued by the hiâ—tory and by argument and also by authoritie that Peter was neuer at Roome Now let vs confute their presumptions and obiections They obiect that the olde Authors saee that hée was there I answer that those olde Authors haue no staffe too stick too no scripture no sufficient authoritie not one woorde neyther out of the olde Testament nor of the newe Let vs confute Egesippus out of whom they haue all their fables whereby they woold proue Peter to haue bin at Roome First this fabulous and lying Egesippus is not hée that Eusebius maketh mention of Lib. fourth Cap. 8.22 For hée gathered his books out of the Ghospell â—ecundum Hebraeos Syros hée wrote commentaries wherin hée wrote the doctrine actes of the preaching of the Apostles in an homely simple stile inmanner of an history and did contend erfectually against Heretiques this fabulous Egesippus wrote in Greke Secondly this Author wryteth an highe stile affecteth an other kynd of phrase the other is an homely stile as HieroÌ„ noteth This suborned Egesippus wryteth fyue bookes of the destruction of Hierusalem out of Iosephus the other the actes of the church froÌ„ the passion of Christ to his own tyme which was after Christes natiuity about .145 yeares Thirdly the trew Egesippus wrote the actes of the preaching and doctrine of the Apostles out of the Ghospell secundum Hebraeos Syros this suborned Egesippus gathered his bookes out of Iosephus neyther doth Hierom nor Eusebius make mention of them Fourthly this Eusebius that wée haue maketh mention of Constantinople vnto the which the citie of Rome was equall in dignitie This was done in the tyme of the Emperoures Gratian and Theodosius in the yeare of Christ as Pantaleon noteth 383. The true Egesippus was about the yeare of Christe 146. and this Councell spoken of in the latter Egesypus was about the yere of Christ 383. so that now it is manifest that this latter Egesippus was 200. yeare and aboue after the former and therefore such a one as serued to set out fables for the mayntenance of the Pope his superstition reade more in Cornelius Gualterus vpon Egesippus and in Vilierius If a man doo well consider those fables that Egesippus writeth lib. 3. c. 2. how that Peter and Simon Magus dyd contende whyther of them should renine Nero his Cosen that was dead and how that if Peter could not doo it hée should dye for it and if Simon could not that Peter could doo it then Simon should suffer death And howe that Peter met Christ at the gates of Rome and asked of Christ Domine quo vadis And how that Christ answered I come ageyne to bée crucified and that Peter returned and was crucified with his héeles vpward It may bée easely coÌ„sidered that hée was one of the Popes friends c. Ireneus in the first chapter of his third booke writeth that Matthewe wrote his Gospell what tyme as Peter and Paule preached the gospell at Rome founded the hurch there If Peter was at Rome at that tyme when Mathewe wrote his Gospell then dyd not hée come to Rome in the second third or fourth yeare of Claudius as the Catholiques reporte For as yit Caligula was aliue and in the third yeare of his Empyre and reigne Matthewe wrote his Gospell Neyther was Paule at Rome in the tyme of Caligula in whose third yeare Matthew wrote his Gospell euen eight yeare after Christes ascension and 41. years after his natiuitie For it was 24. years after Christes deathe before Paule came to Rome Howe could Paule preache at Rome the eyght yeare after Christes ascenâ—ion when as hée came not to Rome vntill the 24. yeare after Christes ascension Could hée preache at Rome before that hée was there It was the seconde yeare of Nero that Paule came to Rome as shall appeare most manifestly to them that will conferre the 28. of the Actes of the Apostles with the order of tyme with the yeares of the Emperours and with Eusebius in Chronice and Hierome in the lyues of Ecclesiasticall writers Consider whether that Ireneus can make the 3. yeare of Caligula which was the eight yeare after Christes Ascension to bée the second yeare of Nero whiche was the 24. yeare after Christes ascension Nowe if Peter came not to Rome tyll Paule was there or if hée were there with Paule at any tyme then could not Peter bée there tyll the seconde yeare of Nero so that hée was neyther at Rome in the tyme of Caligula who reygned thrée yeare nor in the tyme of Claudius who reygned 14. yeare So that by this order and playne demonstration Ireneus woordes are neyther of force neyther woorthy to bée read much lesse to bée credited Hierome writeth that Peter came to Rome the second yeare of Claudius which is no trewer then this that the same Hierome sayeth that Peter was the prince of the Apostles Was hée the Prince of the Apostles when Paule withstoode and reproued to his face Galat. 2. ver 11. whom Christ called Satan who calleth himselfe but an Elder with the reste 1. Petr. 5. who was sent by the other Apostles Actes 8 Could Peter come to Rome the second yeare of Claudius when as Hierome himselfe in the same place sayeth that first hée went to Antioche where hée was Bishop and from thence hée went and preached to the dispersed Brethren in Ponto Gallatia Cappadocia Asia and Bithinia and then went to Rome the seconde yeare of Claudius and continewed there 25.
yeare If he came to Rome after that hée had bene at Antioche and in these other countries as Hierome reporteth then came not hée to Rome the seconde yeare of Claudius as the same Hierome contrudeth For this yeare was the sixt yeare of Nero which was after the second yeare of Claudius 17. yeare as I proue in this booke and as it foloweth necessarely by the computation of yeares and order of the historiographers As concerning Eusebius hée was an Arrian and gathered his historie out of those bookes that were condemned in codice Sancta Romana 15 â–ª dist 11. And when hée was an Arrian hée wrote this historie Tripart lib. 2. cap. 7. Read lib. 2. cap. 11. of the sayd Tripartit Hée is contrarie to himselfe for hée sayeth lib. 3. cap. 2. that Peter came not to Rome tyll the last yeare of Claudius read Molineus Rhenanus you shal find many mo reasons wherby ye may coÌ„fute Eusebius If ther bée any other authours in this errour they may be as easely reiected as these And if we are forbiddeÌ„ to ad any thing or take any thing away if the old authors may cause Peter to be at Rome without authoritie we may affirme that he was not at Rome with authoritie if they of their own heades hold that Peter was at Rome we may by euident demoÌ„strations assured arguments infallible reasons proue that hée was not at Rome If they say and not proue and wée booth saye and proue whether is of more Authoritie They saye that hée was at Rome 25. yeares and came eyther in the tyme of Claudius or Nero wée proue that all that tyme hée was eyther in Iurie Antioche Asia or Egypte They saye that Eusebius an Arian or counterfeyt Damasus sayeth so wée saye that Christian Luke and true Paule prooue the contrarie They write contraries wée concordances they obsurdities wée sensible argumentes they alleadge fables and wée truths They say that Peter was at Rome both quicke dead wée denie both They saye that Peter when hée died willed ClemeÌ„t then being at Rome to write to Iames of his death But Iames was dead by their owne authorities before Peter suffered seuen yeares for Iames was cast downe of the pynacle of the temple at Hierusalem the 30. yeare after Christes passion and Peter as they reported suffered 37. yeare after christes passion could Clement being alyue write to Iames being dead who should carry the letters If hée went to purgatorie who knewe where purgatorie was for than it was not inuented If hée were in Heauen thither ascendeth none with letters Perhaps Clement should sende the letters and laye them vpon Iames graue that he might rise on the night and reade them as in the councell of Nyce they say that Chasantus and Musonius two Bishops of the councell of Nice dyd subscribe to those matters that were concluded in the councel desired bythe rest who layd the actes vpon their graues requiring them to subscribe for a better assertion the next morning they resorted to their graues found both their handes subscribed They write that Eusebius reporteth that Peter was requesâ—ed of his brethren fellowes to departe out of Rome least Nero should persecute him to death Peter went out at their request when he came to the gate he met Christ and saide thus God saue you Syr whether goe you you were best to returne here is to hotte béeing for you and mée Then sayd Chryste doost thou not know mée Peter O Peter Peter returne hither I am come to suffer ageyne Naye sayeth Peter God forbidde I will goe and so Peter returned and suffered at Rome This doctrine taught Doctor Smith I heard him in Whitengton colledge in London in Quéene Maries dayes Hée moued manye affections and tolde the tale on this wyse Maysters sayeth hée you are in a great errour as concerning the blessed Sacrament and all your trust was in Cranmer Rydley Latymer As for Latymer hée sayd in open disputation in Oxforde that hée had no learninge in that matter but out of Cranmers booke Besydes this I disputed with Latymer 20. yeares agone and then hée hadde no learning As for Cranmer hée sayde that his learninge came from Rydley And as for Rydley I disputed with him my selfe now at Oxeford the other day and I proued my Argument thus Ille cui Christus obuiauit Romae fuit Romae At Christus obuiauit Petro Romae Ergo Petrus fuit Romae Hée whom Christ met at Rome was at Rome But Christ met Peter at Rome Ergo Peter was at Rome By this Argument I proue twoo thinges and singuler mysteries of our fayth First that Peter was at Rome ageynst them that clatter that Peter was neuer at Rome Secondly that if Peter met Christ bodely as Abdias reporteth and whiche I am sure is true or else suche an auncient and holy Father would neuer haue written it Then consequently hée maye bée aswell bodely in the blessed Sacrament as hée was met bodely To this Rydley stoode lyke a block and féelinge hym selfe conuicted aunswered nothing Then sayde I Cur non respondes haeretice haereticorum haereticissime Dyd not I handle hym well Then denyed hée the minor which I proued thus Christ met Peter goeing out of Rome and sayed good morrowe Peter whether goest thou Peter aunswered good morrowe good man whether goest thou Then sayde Chryste I goe to Rome too suffer what sayeth Peter I trowe onlesse I take my markes amisse you are Ihesus Christe good Lorde howe doo you I am glad I haue met you here Then sayd hée to Peter goe backe and suffer or else I must et pro te me When Rydley had heard this my profe and Abdias authoritie a Doctoure auncient and irrefragable hée aunswered neuer a woorde And thus I cenfuted Rydley in the audience of a thousand that hée hadde not one woorde to saye yet you sayâ— that Christ was neuer in earth since the Ascension bodely beléeue with mée that hée is vnder fourme of bread and wyne Let this argumente of myne confounde you as it did Ridley your chief champion Thus mucth Doctoure Smith and more in Whitengton colledge churche in London standing in the streat called towre Ryall a little aboue the thrée Cranes in the Uynetrée If saye the papistes wée holde not and defende ageynst these heretiques that Peter was at Rome than our churches estimation is doone our prerogatiue perisheth our preeminence no better then others our glorie diminished our holinesse empayred our authorities annihilated our honors negnected our dissimulation detected our customes waâ—e colde our perdones peruerted our Iubilees iested at our Religion rayled vppon and all our pompe fall to nothing I aunswere Peter sought no such vanities Christ willeth him that would presume aboue the rest to bée inferiour to the rest Paule gaue no place to Peter Chrysostome sayeth that hée that in earth séeketh supremacie shall finde in
Anacletus were chiefe citties Metropoles where were Archiflamines and Protoflamines and therfore Pontianus in Atheneus calleth vinum omnium malorum Metropolin and so say these forged Archiflamines were turned into Archibishoppes Because that the first Emperours were at Rome therefore it was called ta presbeia t is timis that is the chief honour was gyuen to Rome It was the first and Constantinople was the second Of this equalitie or Superioritie or inferioritie read the Councell holden at Chalcedon in the yeare of Christe .453 And Vielerius where it was concluded that Constantinople was of the same authoritie with Rome though it be the second after and Alexandria the third and Hierusalem the fourthe In the yeare of Christ 590. Ihon Bishope of Constantinople ambitiously desired to be Supreme head oikoumenikon pasis t is oikoumenis the Uniuersall Bishoppe of the whole world that was habitable And therefore Gregorie the firste Bishop at Rome of that name called the same Iohn the forerunner of Antichriste Epist. lib. 2. cap. 194. Halfe a score yeare after or little more Boniface the Thirde of that name was made Bishop at Rome and the firste that was ordeined or named Pope or Summus Pontifex the Highe Bishop and this dyd the Emperoure Phocas to haue ayde of the Pope which killed the Emperour Mauritius his wyfe his brother and his sonne with many other and made himselfe Emperour The Pope had this beginning After him euery Pope encreased his authoritie with priuiledges statutes decrées and preceptes tyll that they grewe to such dignitie that they created Emperoures who were wont to create them they deposed them they fought with them they trode on their neckes they rebelled ageynst thē they cursed them with booke bell and candell lighted they pardoned them all that would fight ageinst the Emperour The first Obiection They alledge Scripture for their purpose as the deuill dyd to christ They obiect this place of the Gospell written by Saint Matthew Thou art Peter and vpon this Peter I will buyld my Church Peter saye they is the foundacion of the Church of him it dependeth in him it resteth and hée is the head thereof Let vs aunswere this Obiection with the true Interpretation and Exposition of Chrystes mynde Thou art Peter c. Thy name sayeth Christ is Symon but hencefoorth it shal be Peter a Rocke or stone or rather one depending of the rocke as I promised in the first of Iohn ver 42. that thou shouldest bée called Cephas a stone but I alter it into Peter bycause thy name shal be deryued of mée For I am Petra and thou Peter I Chryst and thou a christian I a Rocke and thou rockye or buylded vpon the rocke The Allusion and affinetie of the Gréeke woord proueth this sense sy ei petros c. Thou arte Peter bicause thou beléeuest in Petra that is in mée the Rocke vpon the which I will buylde my congregation whom I will to bée called Peters as thou arte deriuing their name of mée the rocke bycause who soeuer shal beléeue in mée as thou doest I will gyue him the same name that thou hast Wherefore who so confesseth mée as thou doest shal be called Peter of mée Petra that is a christian of my name Christ. Hierom vpon the 8. of Mathew affirmeth that Peter had his name of Petra which is christ All are Peters which beléeue in this Rocke I will buylde my famelie and congregation vpon it wherfore al my famelie and people are Peters Peter in this place is put for all christians and is a generall woorde signifying all beléeuers and confessoures of Christe Therefore Hierome vppon the sixte of Amose termeth all christes Apostles Peters And the Christ founded not his church vpō Peter as our Romish catholiques cōtend but vpon this rocke which was Peters confession yée shal vnderstand by the text it self What was his cōfession that Iesus christ was the sonne of god Than this fayth of peters is the foundaciō of the church cleauing to Christ which foundacion Paul defineth to be Christ 1. Cor. 3. ver 11. This church congregation bycause it confessed the same Christ that Peter did is very well termed described by Paule to be the establishmēt and piller of truth and by good reason considering it is defined to bée Christes body out of whose head is deriued whatsoeuer nourisheth the body Who soeuer hath this fayth and is a member of Christes body is a Peter As Christ is called a stone so are his people and seruauntes named lyuely stones by participacion as they are the light of the world and salte of the earth bycause the light and salte that they haue is deriued and procéedeth from him as of Petra Peters of Chryst christians That this is the true meaning of this place it is euident hy the 18. chapter of Matthew ver 15. where the same doctrine is applied to all Christians whan hée sayeth If thy brother trespasse ageynst thée tell him his faulte betwéene thée and him If he heare thée thou hast wonne thy brother What is it too winne a mans brother but to loose him from his sinne wherwith hée was bound By the which if hée will not bée corrected lette him bée as an Heathen and a Publicane And thus hée is bound bycause hée wil not repent For sayeth Christ speaking to all christians what soeuer yée binde or loose vpon earth shalbée bound and loosed in heauen Adam and Eue in Paradise were the true church who when they heard the promise how that the séede of the wooman Iesus Christ should burst the Serpentes head beléeued it vpon y which beléefe Christ buylded his congregation and this is the Rocke They did binde themselues in eating of the frute in not obeinge the cōmaundement in offending the lawe They loused themselues in confessing their faulte obeying chrystes voyce lamentinge their facte and beléeuing in him who should bée borne of the séede of a wooman their faith confession of their offence with amendment of lyfe were the keyes of heauen By them they repossessed their felicitie which was lost and reentred into heauen Christ graunted to twoo or thrée gathered togyther in his name their requestes and hée to bée among them If this power and prerogatiue bée equall and particularly gyuen to euery christian and generally to all than is it not onely proper to the Pope If all the congregation may binde and loose then is the Popes authoritie nothing and hée himselfe to be excluded as a reprobate abhorred as a dissembler defaced as an hipocrite reiected as Psichicus in Tertullian was who bragged as the Pope dooth that he had authoritie to forgyue sinnes deposed as an vsurper and condemned as an Antichrist ▪ The congregation is buylded vpon the rock Who is the Rocke Christ not the Pope faith in Iesu Christe not execrable pardones hope in the Lorde not in man. If the Churche
but Christ prayed for Peter ergo Peter could not erre I deny the proposition which you call the Maior for Christ prayeth for all men as well as for Peter and also for them that persecute him ergo by your argument all men should bée head of the Church yea euen they that persecute Christ as the Pope doth Augustine wryteth that Peter figureth all Christians the vniuersall Church ergo when Christ prayed for Peter that hée should not erre hée prayed also for all Christians and for the vniuersall church that it should not erre And that this is Christes meaning ye shall vnderstand by the often fall of Peter after this prayer of Christ for hée denyed Christ thrise was also reproued of Paule after this prayer The tenth Obiection Peter féede my shéepe these woords giue too Peter a superioritie I answer that Christ did commaund Iames and Iohn with the rest of the Apostles to doo the lyke Did they not féede the shéepe of Christ also Did not Iames preache at Hierusalem and Iohn at Ephesus Moreouer Paule exhorteth the elders of Ephesus too féede the flock and church of God committed too their charge wherfore too féede Christes shéepe is as well proper too all men that haue the gift as too Peter Of this matter reade Ambrose in his pastorall The .xj. Obiection As Christ came too doo the will of his Father so must you doo the will of your mother the churche of Rome I answer that you call the church of Rome the Pope his Cardinalles but Christ calleth his church generall and not speciall a communion of Saincts and not a rable of Bishoppes as Tertullian writeth Catholique and not Priuate For Christ sayeth wheresâ—euer there be two or thrée gathered together in his name there is hée among them yea though they bée Laye men as Tertullian noteth Is the Pope the churches sonne or is hée her father If her sonne what a sonne is hée that vsurpeth and preferreth him self before his mother Therfore sayeth Augustine God will not acknowledge him self to be his father that will not confesse the church to be his mother If her father ergo not her child You say the Pope is the head I answer that when the Pope is cut of by death where is your head is it not dead where is the body is it not dead But the body that is the Church lyueth alwayes eyther Militant or Triumphant or rather both Ergo wée must looke for an other head that can not dye euen Christ aboue The .xij. Obiection Had not Pope Paschalis in the yeare of Christ .1100 a girdell hauing seuen keyes and seuen seales in token of his seuenfolde power according to the seuenfolde grace of the holy Ghost of binbing loosing shutting opening sealing resigning and iudging I answer that it is blasphemy to compare the Pope with the holy Ghost Is not hée Antichrist that attributeth to him self all the giftes of the holy Ghost The .xiij. Obiection No Councell may bée called without the Pope I answer to this obiection on this wyse Wée reade that Christ called the first councell willing the Apostles not too departe out of Hierusalem but to looke for the promise of the Father In the election of the seuent deacons which was the second councel Peter did not call the councell but .12 Apostles called the multitude The thyrd councel was called in the .15 of the Actes Where it apereth that Iames was the chéefe and not Peter Was the Pope called to any of these councels Nay surely they neuer knew him And many yéeres after Christ all the councels til the Pope began to rule were gathered togither by the Emperours Kiâ—â—es princes and other magistrates The .xiiii. Obiection Omnino definimus declaramus pronuÌ„ciamus omnem creaturam subesse Romano pontifici de necessitate salutis We define declare and pronounce that euery creature must be vnder the Pope of necessitie or els it cannot be saued I answer that saluation commeth nether from the East nor the west neither from Rome neither from priest prelate nor Pope but from God only Your welth and riches giue you aucthoritie you are rich in reuenues but poore in heauenly treasures Blessed bee the poore in sprite you are arrogant and presumptuous since that venym I meane riches entred into the church as the Lord Cobham sayde whom the Archebishop of Caunterburie Thomas Arundell asked what hée meaned by that venyme I meane sayd hée your Possessions Lordeshippes and Iurisdictions For than cryed an Aungell in the ayre as your owne Cronicles make mention wo wo wo Nowe euen this daye is venyme powred into the church Chryst was méeke and mercifull the Pope is proude and a Tyraunt Christ is poore and forgaue the Pope is riche and a malicious murtherer Rome is the nest of Antichrist and out of that filthie nest come out vncleane birdes Prelates Priestes Monkes Cardinalles which are the body of Antichrist and the pilde Fryers the Tayle which couer his most filthie parte For they preache lyes and therfore are the tayle behinde The xv Obiection Ieremie prophecieth of the church of Rome saying beholde I haue set thée ouer all Nations and Kingdomes to pluck vp and to breake downe and buylde and to plant I aunswere that God commaunded Ieremie to pull vp the wéedes of superstition and to pull downe all the monumentes of Idolatrie But the Pope draweth this godly sentence to the defence of his vsurped power peruerting the mynde of the holy ghost and deprauing the Text of Ieremie and by this Text hée vsurpeth that hée may pull down the Gospell and set vp his decréees roote out the truthe plante heresie or superstition as it is written of him in another place Diruit aedificat mutat quadrata rotundis The xvi Obiection Iohannes de turre cremata a holy Cardinall writeth thus Papa est Rex Regum Dominus dominantium verus Dominus totius orbis iure licet non facto The Pope is King of Kings Lord of Lordes and the true Lord of the whole world by right though not in déede And that Constantinus when hee gaue him Rome restored to him but his owne for the Pope as S. Iohn writeth of Christ in propria venit sui eum receperunt Hée came into hys owne and his owne receyued him I aunswere Is not hée Antichrist that peruerteth the Scriptures and that eyther addeth or taketh awaye but hée taketh awaye Non and attributeth the Texte to him selfe whiche vtterly peruerteth the Text. Ergo hée is Antichrist What a presumptuous Prelate is hée that calleth himselfe King of Kinges and Lord of Lordes If yée reade the letter sent to Cardinal Poole by Stoxâ—ye Bishop of London and Tunstall Bishop of Durham and the booke of Obedience written by Stephan Gardner Bishoppe of Wynchester which all were ranck Papistes ye shall vnderstand that they proue that the Pope is not the heade of the Church