of their popes But if popes may be charged with heresie how can we thinke but that in their talke in their sermons if they did preach and vpon all such occasions as were offered vnto them they would by foure means or other commend that which they liked of and condemne the contrary And their very words when they speake of matters of faith are indeede instructions to all and their examples also are publike instructions to y â— whole church Neither must we imagine that those holy fathers forsooth had one religion in secret and an other that they would publish Therefore if we proue that they did erre I trust also it will followe that this errour was a stumbling blocke to the church and that they may erre when they giue lessons to all the church Lastly let vs consider the foundation whereupon they raise this building Because Christ said vnto Peter Simon Simon behold Sathan hath desired to sift you as wheat But I haue praied for thee that thy faith should not faile To whom was this said To Peter although not to him alone as before out of Theophilact I haue shewed But Peter immediatly after erred so as that he thrise denied his maister as Saint Luke in the same chapter sheweth yea and that as Saint Matthew reporteth with cursing and swearing Whereby it most plainly appeareth that Christ did not pray that Peter or the rest of the apostles should be free from all infirmities and should as it were put of the nature of man but that finally he or they should not fall from the faith But I cannot but maruell here at maister Bellarmine that he cannot see that Peters faith at this time failed For euen handling these words and this fact of Peters we know not saith he that Peters faith euer failed He feared at the question which the damosell asked of him he denied his master and that with cursing and swearing Did he this for feare No doubt he did it for feare What was the cause of so great feare Was it not weaknesse and want of faith Had he litle faith when hee feared drowning in so much as Christ reprouing him said O thou of litle faith why diddest thou doubt And can master Bellarmine find no want of faith in his so excessiue feare that he forswore his master Peter therefore notwithstanding Christs prayer both could and did erre And shall we thinke the pope to be more holy of a more sanctified nature of a sounder iudgement then Peter was They will not so say themselues therefore they also may erre But for master Bellarmines subtill distinction betweene perseuerance and not failing making not failing and not falling all one but perseuerance to be such as that a man may fall and yet by rising againe is said still to perseuere I confesse it is more subtil then sound For perseuering and continuing is all one and continuance hath no ceasing or intermission And further I must put the godly reader in remeÌ„brance that if this were granted to Peter that the pope doth claime that he could not erre yet must he proue himselfe to be Peters successor and that the priuilege is also successiue to that seat before he caÌ„ by these wordes prooue his infallible iudgement And what they can do for these points I haue shewed before their great weaknes if it be but weaknes in so great light and sunshine of truth not to see y â— right way I omit of purpose many popes to whom â—rrour is imputed by some ancient histories I come to Honorius of whome it is written by many histories that he was a Monothelite whose heresie was that Christ God and man had but one will And to omitte all the ancient Records that may be aleadged to prooue him so to be I rest specially vpon Melchior Canus his confession in his theologicall places and one proofe vrged by him amongst many others For hee doth not onely acknowledge Honorius to bee an hereticke but also telleth vs how Adrian the second in the first action of the eighth generall councill confesseth that Honorius was by the Greeke church condemned as a hereticke and that Agathe bishop of Rome consented vnto the same his condemnation In which argument although master Bellarmine dessent vtterly from Melchior Canus yet hee is not any thing able to take away the waight of that reason but that Honorius although a pope must be pronounced and holden for an hereticke euen by the detree of a generall councill What should I speake of the errour that was most apparent in those seditious popes Steuen the sixth and Sergius the third against Formosus another pope now long dead And against the dooings and decrees of pope Theodore and Iohn the tenth Steuen reuoked whatsoeuer Formosus had done vp a councill called belike for that purpose Iohn the tenth afterwards maketh good the dooings of Formosus disamulling that that Steuen did yea their â—â—ntention was so great that they commaunded such as had taken orders of one that they should as if these first orders were nothing worth take orders of another These thinges are reported by all histories and therefore are also confessed of themselues that are our aduersaries If pope Formosus did not erre then Steuen that dâ—â—lt so hardly with him and so disannulled his dooings and decrees did erre If Steuen did right then Iohn who afterwardes vndid all that he had done did wrong Yea they disannulled the very orders that the popes that were their aduersaries had giuen Which thing maister Bellarmine in his fourth Booke and twelfth chapter confesseth to be a matter of faith Therefore heere the pope erred in faith No saith he this is onely a matter of fact it is not decreed by any of them Let vs marke out question that is whether the Pope may erre or not Maister Bellarmine saieth these Popes did wrong but they decreed nothing of disanulling those orders which men booke of their predecessours and therefore erred not in iudgement Sigebert saieth that Steuen decreed that Formosus his ordinations were or should be voyne Platina saieth that Iohn the tenth iudged amisse because hee iudged that they must take orders againe that did take orders of Formosus So Iacob Bergomensis and Stella agree with Platina These therefore condemne Steuen the sixt to erre 〈◊〉 iudgement and so doe manifestly 〈◊〉 that the pope did erre and confute maister Bellarmine his answere to this obiection Iohn the two and 〈◊〉 pope of that name did not beleeue onely but euen teach that the soules should not see God before the latter day as master Bellarmine himself confesseth But it was saith he no heresie in him so to teach because there was not then anie decree or destinction of the church for that point If it true master Bellarmâ—◠〈…〉 heresie 〈…〉 not defined it A thing defined in the scriptures set downe in Gods word and plainly taught in Gods booke may I perceiue
his malitious persecuting and pursuing of them What neede we to produce examples of forraine countries or former times We haue amongst vs in our dayes better proofe thereof then either we desire or they can denie Is it not too proude and insolent a part for either Pius the fifth or Sixtus the sith to call our soueraigne Queene and most gratious prince Elizabeth whom God hath mercifully placed amongst vs and ouer vs and mightely and maruelously defended from innumerable popish practises and Henry king of Nauarre and nowe also the French king hereticks schismaticks and I know not by what names of reproch he not prouing no nor daring to offer any reasonable triall or lawfull way to prooue the same Why is hee afraid to haue religion tried by a free generall council Why doth he hinder it by all meanes that he can The question is whether his religion that I say which he commendeth to christians and commaundeth to be onely and that vpon paine of death beleeued is true or not We denie it we haâ—e vnanswerable arguments for vs. The religion that he would haue vs to content our selues withall is not catholike that is it is not preached or taught at all times in all places with full consent as he and his frends must confesse when it is examined It hath not any sufficient warrant out of Gods booke which onely should be the ground of our relgion Nay it is so contrarie to Gods written words that it is impossible that that which God in the scripture teacheth vs and that which the popish church requireth of vs should both be true As for Gods worde we know it cannot lie And therfore we haue great cause to say that that which is contrarie to it cannot be true Again the church of Rome as they al confesse prooueth many points of their religion by traditions onely that is to say by the doctrines of men only These things we alleage Admit that it were not euidently true that we say Is it not good reason yet that we should be heard howe we can prooue that we alleage Were it not fit that before indifferent iudges the matter should be tried For why should the pope that is a principall partie in this controuersie or his legats that are his sworne adherents and seruants take vpon them to be iudges in their owne cause We accuse them of Idolatrie superstition many heresies manifest breach of Gods lawe despising of Gods word yea of plaine apostacie from the true faith Shall we euer imagine that they will pronounce sentence against themselues And confesse themseules guiltie of these great crimes No no as we are not so foolish as once to hope that they who with tooth and naile seek to maintaine their owne pride will so subiect themselues to Christs yoke so we are not so mad as to thinke them to be fit iudges to pronounce whether the truth be on our side or theirs For we knowe that they will not speake for vs because they will neuer speake against themselues Let them then permitte this question that is amongst vs to be tried by a free council Let the matters in controuersie be debated let the reasons on both sides be heard and wayghed let indifferent iudges be appointed such as sincerly sighing in singlenes of hart seek to know the truth serue the Lord. TheÌ„ will it appeare who teach the tru religion But this can neuer be tried by such ouer-ruled conuenticles as that of Trent wherein indeed the protestants were admitted to speake But they might say but placet wee are content with that you haue done They might not set downe their reasons against Romish errorn they might not be heard to dispute But that was before concluded in som priuat meeting of a few popish diuines alowed at Rome for catholike doctrine and thence sent to the council to haue approbatian of them that durst not denie it to that they might say Amen Yea and what they could haue said the council wold not greatly haue regarded as it seemeth For Clement the seuenth when the emperour Charles the fift and the French king were earnest with the said Clement to haue a free generall conncil permitted wherein matters might maturely be discussed on both sides he answered that was a perillous matter and preiudiciall that the protestants should be suffered to dispute of those things that had beene before coâ—cluded by councils As though God by his word were not sufficient to giue lawes to his church or that he should be tied to the iudgements of men Not that we thinke the auncient lawfull councils to be against vs but because that vnder the name of generall Councils they bring in their later wicked and vngodly conuenticles of the times wherein corruption grew more and more in the Church which Councils haue concluded manie things that were neuer heard of in the purer age wee would therefore let them vnderstand that as manie of their councils are worthily reiected so euen the best are not to be bleeued but as they consent with Gods vndoubted and infallible worde And that this was the bondage of that Councill of Trent which our aduersaries would so faine haue so much accounted of it appeareth by Sleydon in his historie Brocard who was one in that councill writing vpon the Apocalipse Gentillet and Caluin against that council How theÌ„ dare those arrogant popes whose doctrine can not abide the touch whose decrees do shun the light condemne princes for heretikes or enemies to the catholike faith yet will not permit their faith and religion to be laid to the rule square of the catholike doctrine Theodoret saith truly The decrees of the church must be tried and proued not pronounced as an ouer ruled case or as a sentence of a Iudge And shall we then receiue as an Oracle from God that which is deliuered vnto vs after this maner the church of Rome or the bishop of Rome hath said it God forbid We will trie the spirits whether they bee of God We seeke to trie all their doctrines that we may holde fast that which is good This then I say is an euident argument of arrogant insolencie in Pius 5. and Sixtus 5. that so wickedlie they dare presume as to giue such slaunderous names to princes that professe so vndoubted a truth as then they both did and yet our most gracious Soueraigne dooth But to depriue them of their kingdomes to release their subiects from their bonde of obedience to dispose of their dominions according to their pleasures as they would doe if they could is as intollerable pride as their predecessours before did euer vs to other And so maliciouslie to prosecute this their conceiued mischiefe as they haue done these manie yeares whiâ—h open tumult with secrete conspiracies with poysoning of some principall Princes with murthering of other by other meanes with prepairing the hearts of doubtfull subiects agaynst the time of inuasion to take
keis besides the testimonie of Theophilact we haue most plaine proofe out of Gods word Whatsoeuer is promised Mathew the sixteenth chapter in these words I will giue thee the keis is performed Iohn the twentieth chapter in these words whose sinnes ye remit they are remitted and whose sinnes ye retaine they are retained but in Saint Iohn no chiefe power is giuen but such as is generall and common to all the apostles therefore in Saint Mathew there is not promised any chiefe power but such as is common to them all and so to all pastours in them My minor needeth no proofe for it is confessed by master Bellarmine But master Bellarmine denieth my maior and yet hath no ground of his deniall but this onely that he taketh it not be all one to binde and to retaine sinnes or sinners and to loose or remit Which subtil difference the fathers did not see And therefore Theophilact doth not onely expound this place of Matthew the sixteenth chapter by that place out of Saint Iohn the twentieth chapter making this later to bee a perfourmance of that promise I will giue thee the keies but also hee flattely there opposeth remitting to binding whereas by master Bellarmines doctrine if hee had beene brought vp in his schoole he should haue set remitting against retaining and not against binding For saith hee it is a greater matter to binde then to retaine to loose then to remit Saint Ambrose also maketh to binde and to retaine to remitte and to loose all one For whilest the puritie of doctrine in some measure remayned this subtile Sophistirie was vnknowen in Gods church But nowe for defence of popery such stuffe must serue the turne when they haue no better And heere I cannot but maruell at master Bellarmine his answere vnto this argument out of the centuries For they that wrote those bookes reason thus if in these wordes to thee will I giue the keies c. there were promised any supremacie the Apostlles could not haue doubted which of them should haue beene chiefe but they doubted of this therefore there was not in those wordes any such supremacie promised Maister Bellarmine maketh no question but that they doubted of it for there was among them some contention about that matter but for the maior hee answereth that the apostles did not vnderstande plainelie that there was anie promise made to Peter vntill after that Christ rose againe but then they suspected some such matter and that made them striue Is it not great boldnes in master Bellarmine in so waightie matters to bring no other warrant but his foolish fancie Or to answere such an vnanswerable argument by such silly shiftes They knewe not saith master Bellarmine that Christ made such promise to Peter vntill after Christ was risen againe But if it had beene an article of such importance as now it is made why shoulde they not haue knowne it They heard what Christ said to Peter they heard the promise of the keies and this is asmuch as our Romish Rabbines can nowe bring for their proofe If they vnderstoode it not so as master Bellarmine heere confesseth they did not what newe reuelation haue our newe Romish teachers to assure this to be the meaning of those wordes But they seeme to be whelpes of one haire with those hereticks whome Tertullian reprooueth because they saide the apostles knewe not all thinges that if their doctrine were not agreeable to that which the Apostles taught they might the lesse bee condemned As Bishoppe Fisher not knowing better howe to excuse their additions vnto the auncient doctrine which the church of Rome hath brought in saith that later wits knowe thinges better then before they did Well master Bellarmine you see confesseth that the apostles vnderstoode not then that promise as nowe the papistles doe When did they reforme their iudgement Where in what place doe they shew any signification that they euer vnderstood it otherwise If they neither vnderstood it so before Christs resurrection neither yet gaue anie signification afterwardes by woorde or deede by their writings or examples that their knowledge was in this pointe reformed howe can wee saie that they euer tooke that to bee Christes meaning But the first of these is confessed as before is shewed by Maister Bellarmine the latter they cannot shewe Therefore it maie be gathered that the apostles neuer vnderstood the words of Christ as the papistes doe And howe doeth hee prooue that which hee boldlie affirmeth that then they suspected such a thing Or that after Christes resurrection they did striue It is mentioned in the storie of the gospell that twise they did striue who shoulde be chiefe Of both which times the three Euangelistes doe make report And Saint Iohn also in his gospell seemeth to pointe vnto the latter strife when hauing washed his Apostles feete Christ giueth them good lessons of humilitie But that after Christes resurrection they did consende for this it cannot bee prooued For both these times were before his death And therefore I cannot but maruell that Maister Bellarmine will bring such proofelesse stuffe to open light as though hee imagined that his counterfaite coyne must goe for currant And whereas afterwardes hee alleadgeth out of Origen Chrysostóme and Hierome that the apostles did striue amongst themselues because they suspected this supremacie of Peter himselfe doeth not in this giue credite to these fathers For if it bee true that maister Bellarmine saide before that this suspition was not vntill Christ was risen then howe is this true that they affirme that they suspected thus much when they did striue first of all Which was at the least about a yeare and a halfe before Christ rose againe Neither doe these fathers heerein deserue to bee beleeued For the grounde of this their conceite is that they imagined the paying of the tribute money to haue beene before this contention For they surmise that because Christ said paie for mee and thee therefore the rest of the apostles suspected that Peter shoulde haue some superiority ouer them and grudged at it But this their imagination as it is farre from the thought of the apostles for any thing that may be gathered so is it flatly confuted by the scripture For this contention was before the tribute money was demaunded namely in the way before they came to Capernaum as is most plaine in the euangelist saint Markes gospel the ninth chapter and three and thirtie and foure and thirtie verses And the tribute was not demaunded before they were entred into Capernaum and into a house there Matthew the seuenteenth chapter and xxv verse Therefore that suspition of supremacie was not the cause of their contention which maister Bellarmine woulde prooue out of these fathers But perchance rather that ambitious affection that was in Iames and Iohn the sonnes of Zebedee which afterwardes they shewed more plainely in asking that one might sit at his
endangered by this subtile but false perswasion which wholly possesseth the heartes of many that if they will be saued and auoide the danger of damnation they must stedfastly beleeue that the Bishop of Rome is the vniuersall Bishop hauing authoritie ouer all that he is the head of the church and the generall shepheard of Christ his flocke For that man of sinne hauing so bewitched the hearts of his fauorites that they are once persuaded that it is good religion so to beleeue and that to defend this his pride is christian constancie what shamelesse villanies will not they thinke to be lawfull practises what cruell murders will not they account to be commendable attempts what vnnaturall deuises and drifts wil not they esteeme most godly and catholike vertues I neede not stand long in dilating this point Our natiue soile hath too much and too lamentable experience of such vnkindly slips Who when they did and do owe to their countrey wherein they were bred and brought vp the sweete fruit of loue to her and sacred obedience to her lawes bring forth almost nothing else but the sowre grapes of treasons and treacheries Which all spring out of this bad roote that they falsly perswade themselues that they owe their chiefe obedience to the Bishop of Rome whose commaundements if they obey and follow his directions and hearken to his perswasions then must they suffer no princes with qnietnesse to enioy their ancient and vndoubted inheritance and rightfull crownes but such as will be tenants at will to their lawlesse master Which the more I doe thinke of it the more I feare we haue no great hope as yet to be free from such villainous practises as may bring danger vnto her Maiestie and ruine to this realme because I see that stubburne Recusants who if they haue any conscience in religion it is very strange for many of them shew little conscience in any thing else wilfull Papists I say are not in some reasonable maner forced in this point to shew their obedient and dutiful hearts but may freely without controlment professe themselues enemies to the truth that we acknowledge For how can there be any certainety to this estate that is so pestered with a great number of false hearted subiects whose very religion is to be deuoted to him and to the maintainance of his kingdome that is grieued at nothing more than at our happinesse neither seeketh any thing so much as our destruction To plucke away therefore this visard of Religion from this their disobedient and dissolute affection I thinke it to be the duetie of euery good christian according to our calling and talents wholy to indeuour our selues And as this dutifull affection of christian obedience should effectually moue vs vnto this attempt so the very ruine of religion and the decay of all true deuotion which foloweth that perswasion should forâ—e vs to make haste to take this stumbling blocke out of the way of the simple lest at vnwares running thereupon they should make shipwracke of their faith For the Bishop of Rome by this his pretended priuiledge doeth take vpon him to make lawes to binde the conscience to adde to Gods word to dispence against the same to chop and change religion it selfe as seemeth good to him to doe and vndoe at his owne pleasure And do he neuer so much hurt in the church of Christ yet no man must say Sir why do you so And thus hauing gotten by this prowd name his fulnes of power he hath filled all christendome with horrible superstitions I speake not heere of the prophane or rather blasphemous praises which the flatterers of this vniuersall Bishop do giue to him to make the world not so much to reuerence him as a B. as to honour him rather almost as a god Which if it had bin done onely by his Canonists who liued in the dayes of darkenesse and saw not so much as men now do yet the fault and folly had bin very great But that master Bellarmine a man doubtlesse learned in so cleare light of the trueth as now shineth should so farre ouershoote himselfe as he doeth in this point in his Preface to his bookes of the bishop of Rome it maketh me not a little to wonder at his grosse folly and to detest his irreligious flattery But of this more shall be said hereafter if God permit Seeing therefore the truth of this doctrine is so necessary both for the sinceritie of religion and also for the quietnesse of common wealths my desire purpose is if God giue good successe thereunto to shew and proue that the Bishop of Rome maketh herein an vniust claime and hath possessed himselfe of an vntrue Title To come therefore to the point in controuersie The holy catholike church the spiritual house of God the mystical body of Christ comprehendeth two sortes of members Some that are triumphing in heauen others that are here trauelling vpon the earth some profiting as saint Augustine saith in this life others perfited in an other Now the question is whether this part of the catholike church that is here wandering in this vale of misery which is called militant for here is the place of striuing else-where the place of crowning must needes haue the Bishop of Rome to bee the head thereof This is it that they vntruly and without any good warrant do affirme This is it which iustly and vpon good ground as I trust it shall appeare we deny Master Bellarmine laboureth very much to prooue that the gouernement of one ouer all is the best indeuouring thereby to prooue that if it be best in ciuill regiment it should also be the best gouernment in the church as it appeareth in his Bookes of the bishop of Rome Howsoeuer the monarchicall regiment within euery kingdome or country is liked of yet that vniuersal rule of one ouer al hath not bin thought good of at any time as may appeare by those great monarchies so commended vnto vs in histories To whose subiection kingdomes and nations did not subiect themselues willingly but were subdued to them by might Neither is it necessary that that kind of gouernement which is thought best for worldly kingdomes whose Law-makers are men and whose lawes are alwayes new to be made as new inconueniences do arise in the common-wealth and to be short whose glory is here in this world should also be most conuenient for the church of God whose kingdome is not worldly whose beauty is not outward or external But to knit vp this point with one argument thus I reason That kind of gouernement is fittest for the church that bringeth most profit to them that are gouerned but master Bellarmine confesseth that the mixed gouernement is most profitable therefore it is fittest But because it pleaseth master Bellarmine so well that one should beare rule ouer the whole church let him and his fellowes submit hemselfe to Christ that King
right hand and the other on his left hand was cause of their strife And indeed the euangelist concerning this saith that the other tenne disdained at them for it But the other contention that was among the apostles is not saide to be against Peter as this is said to be against Iames and Iohn But it seemeth that euery one would be aboue other and no suspition then that Peter shoulde be aboue all And whereas they that wrote those Bookes called the Centuries alleadge that if there had beene in Peter any such Supremacy Christ woulde haue saide to them when they did striue contend no more for I haue made Peter chiefe amongst you but say they hee spake no such wordes Now master Bellarmine will prooue that Christ tolde them that Peter was appointed to bee chiefe And howe He that is greatest among you saieth Christ let him bee as the least and the chiefe as he that serueth Therefore saieth Maister Bellarmine it is plaine that one is called chiefe If hee had meant that the trueth should appeare hee woulde by comparing this place with others where the same thing or storie is reported haue sette downe the true meaning of the wordes and not take aduantage to peruert the true meaning and deceiue the simple Reader For Matthew in his twentieth chapter and twentie sixe and twentie seuen verses and Marke in his tenth chapter and fortie three and fortie foure verses reporting this storie doe plainely teach that Christ doeth not speake of any chiefenesse that was among them but that they woulde haue or desired For they say not if any be but if any would be chiefe so reproouing their ambitious affection and teacheth them rather to indeuour to be humble Because as Chroysostome saieth hee that seeketh Supremacie shameth himselfe And therefore neuer any I suppose before Maister Bellarmine out of these wordes of Christ hath gathered this proclaiming of Peters superioritie Hitherto wee haue seene howe little hee can prooue by the first of his two places of scripture Now let vs trie what weight the other testimonie hath And this is drawen also out of the wordes of our sauiour Christ to Peter who when he had thrice asked of him whether hee loued Christ and stil he answered that hee did loue him hee willeth him to feede his sheepe Now these wordes saieth maister Bellarmine are spoken to Peter onely It is true But that Lesson is not giuen to Peter onely For to all the apostles it belongeth to feede Christs sheepe and therefore are all Pastours and Sheepeheards Yea it is confessed by maister Bellarmine in his answere to an authoritie alleadged out of Cyprian that all the apostles were like in apostolike power and had euen the same authoritie ouer christian people If they had the selfe same authoritie ouer christians that Peter had which here he confesseth then to the rest as well as to Peter was this charge of feeding Christs sheepe committed And therefore Saint Augustine will haue Christ to be the onely good sheepheard and that all other are good in him and are equall in this their worke for he maketh no difference But Christ feedeth they also feede yea enen when they feede hee feedeth and Christ saith that then he feedeth in them because his voice is in them and his loue is in them But what should I stand vpon this point It is more plaine then that maister Bellarmine himselfe can deny it although he would blinde the eies of the simple with this distinction that it is principallie spoken to Peter but in some sort to all What was Peter bound to feede more diligently then the rest of the Apostles Christes sheepe None may be negligent in this office And he that doth the worke of the Lord especially this worke negligently is accursed by Gods owne mouth We must all doe it to the vttermost of our power And Saint Paul was not afraid to saie that he laboured more aboundantly then all the Apostles meaning in the preaching of the word So that it seemeth that this office was not especially committed to Peter but that I may say with Theophilact vpon these wordes Let Bishops and preachers heare what is commended vnto them Feede saith Christ my sheepe bring with thee thy ministerie if thou wile set foorth thy loue to the great sheepehearde Then also maister Bellarmine will proue out of these wordes and that easilie as he saieth that Peter hereby hath the chiefe power But indeede he onely prooueth that to feede is to rule whereas he promiseth to proue with ease that to feed is to haue the chiefe rule But you must heare with him the brightnesse of Peters chaire at Rome hath so daseled his eies that he cannot espie so small a misse But the weight of all consisteth in the last point that he handleth concevning this place and therefore about it he bestoweth some more labour And first he affirmeth that he is sure and certaine that euen all christians yea euen the Apostles themselues are as sheepe committed to Peter For his trifling coniectures of the difference betweene lambes and sheep they are not worth speaking of But let vs see what force is in his notable reason for himselfe so calleth it he so well liketh of it Christ most manifestly saieth he committeth to Peter all those sheepe of which he may say they are mine but he may saie so of all christians therefore all christians are Peters sheep If maister Bellarmine had good store of strong reasons to proue his assertion he would neuer make so much of so blunt a weapon For he can neuer proue his maior Christ saide not feede all my sheepe for he knewe that he could not doe but onely feede my sheepe Now this is as the Logicians doe tearme it an Indestuite proposition Which hath no limitation but may be vnderstoode as occasion serueth so that to make it more particular or generall we must haue regarde to the circumstances of the place And is it not verie strange that he which here will make a vniuersall proposition of that that is not so to force out of it an argument where in truth there is none will be as bolde at another time to make of a vniuersall proposition a particular No man saith Saint Paul assisted mee all men forsooke mee that is saieth he none of them that should haue helped me with the Emperour And so he applieth perchance to one or two that the apostle speaketh doubtlesse of all that professed religion then at Rome as though he were euen the creatour of Lodgicke and would haue it as his creature to frame it selfe to serue his turne But to come to the point As he affirmeth all euen the apostles by these wordes to be committed to Peter so I doe confidently pronounce that out of these wordes and some other circumstances great reasons may be gathered to shewe Peters authority in these wordes
a windowe in a basket when hee was in great danger in Damascus doth prooue Paule to hee the head of the church Of the nineteenth I haue spoken before pag. 10. The twenteenth prerogatiue Paule went to Hierusalem to see Peter What must he therefore needes be head of the church Belike then for the three yeares wherein he sawe him not but went preaching into Arabia and to Damascus he confessed him not to be head but as if he had forgoten himselfe all this while hee now at the last yeldeth him seme reuerence But if he had done it in any such respect he would and should at 〈…〉 before he had taken his office vpon him haue had Peters alowance And thus much concerning Peters priuileges or prerogatiues which they alleage out of Gods booke Which although many of them are euident arguments of excellent graces that God had bestowed vpon him and great mercies which God shewed to him yet if master Bellarmine or any other will out of them conclude Peters supremacie the weaknesse of his argument will be seene of very children But yet because before he made Peters prerogatiues his second proofe of this his supremacie I haue thought it necessarie to reckon them for other confutation of them needeth not that all may see what weak proofes they doe bring for this their chiefe point of doctrine As for the other eight prerogatiues they are not worth speaking of Both because we may iustly doubt of the truth of many of them as being proued but by fabulous writings and also because if they were true it were not matteriall for the point in question And therefore letting them alone as rotten propes which will fall in pieces of themselues if any weight be layed vpon them I hasten to his third proofe that hee promised And that is out of the fathers And herein it is needles to examine euerie particular testimony Onely I will set downe in what sense the fathers truly may and often doe ascribe vnto Saint Peter many excellent titles that thereby examining the fathers and finding them to keepe within the bounds of gods word we may with reuerēce receiue them But if they passe those lists I trust master Bellarmine and al his friends will beare with vs if we reiect the doctrine of men as himselfe in this very booke before refuseth the iudgement of Origene and Theophilact and of others in other places First therefore this word in latine primatus which wee now call Supremacie but indeede doth signifie that I may make such a word Firstnesse is ascribed vnto Peter of the fathers in respect of time as in the place alleaged here out of Ciprian neither Peter saith Ciprian whom the Lord chose first and vpon whom he did build his church whereas Paul did afterward reason of circumcision did boast himselfe or did take vpon him any thing insolently or proudly saying he had the primacy and that new ones and aftercommers shall rather obay him him This place is alleadged by master Bellarmine often to proue Peters supremacy or iurisdiction ouer others But the wordes are very plaine that Cyprian speaketh of his being first not in dignity but in tune as appeareth not onely in that he saith he was first chosen but also by the wordes of newe ones or after-commers But maister Bellarmine wil say that Andrew was chosen before him to be an apostle and therefore that Cyprian was deceiued if so he meant It may so be For men may erre But the question is not nowe whether Cyprians iudgement herein be true or not but vpon what occasion or in what respect Cyprian giueth Peter the primacy which is most plainly in this place set downe to be in respect of time And so may other of the fathers in this respect vse this word and giue him this title And sometime this title of primacy is giuen vnto him in regarde of some excellent thinges that he was indued withall by reason whereof his fellowes and brethren amongst themselues and the fathers after might giue vnto him some kinde of reuerence in name or otherwise But this wil do no good for proofe of popish supremacy For they doe hold that Peter in his owne right and by that iurisdiction which by Gods word he hath is head of the church and hath the supremacy aboue all other We say that because of his gifts of zeale knowledge constancy or boldnes he was admitted and allowed to speake and to doe many things but that in his owne right he was but equall with the rest and as he calleth himselfe a fellowe elder with them that were meaner then apostles Therefore to be a chiefe man or a head man among them is not to prooue him to haue iurisdiction ouer them In all corporations or fellowships as aldermen in citties although in regarde of that place they are alike none more or lesse an alderman then another yet among them some are better esteemed of euen of themselues because of their learning wisedome dexterity in gouernement credit power or wealth not because they can in right claime it but because other doe for such things as they see in them yeelde it vnto them not that they haue power ouer them but onely they are of good accompt among them And thus much to proue that that is not sufficient which maister Bellarmine saith will serue the turne to proue that the fathers say that Peter was head or had primacy ouer y e church For neither his estimation in respect of his gifts neither if by voluntary subiection they did submit themselues vnto him it can proue him to haue right to rule ouer them And this they must proue or els they gaiue nothing to their cause that Peter by the word of God hath authority ouer the whole church and ouer the apostles And therefore it maketh no great matter what men say of Peters authority but how truely they grounde their sayings vpon Gods word And thus I trust it appeareth to the indifferent reader that the minor proposition of that argument which I haue set downe in the end of my answere vnto maister Bellarmine ninth chapter of this booke wherein consisteth the great strength of the popish Monarchy is not agreeable vnto the truth or catholike doctrine howsoeuer that church of Rome reioiceth in that title that is none of hers thereby deceiuing the world as if all that shee taught were sound and catholike The proposition is this that Christ gane iurisdiction vnto Peter ouer the vniuersal church The chiefest profes that either they all haue or that maister Bellarmine can alleadge is out of Saint Matthew the xvi where they say this iurisdiction is promised and Saint Iohn xxi where they say it is giuen which their interpretation as I haue shewed cannot stand with the text it selfe or the interpretations of the sounder fathers His second reason which consisteth of the prerogatiues which Saint Peter had is grounded either vpon
fables that deserue no credit or vpon impertiment matters that proue nothing to the purpose as if I be forced hereafter therto I doubt not by Gods grace with ease to proue His third and last reason is of it selfe sufficient to shew that themselues haue no great hope to proue it to be a catholike doctrine that is a doctrine taught and beleeued of all the godly or almost of all at all times in all places for Vincentius Lyrinensis thus defyneth catholike But the first authour that maister Bellarmine alleadgeth is more then two hundreth yeers after Christ So that the doctrine that cannot be proued to haue bene beleeued for two hundreth yeares in the purest times of the church cannot be called catholike or be said to haue the true antiquitie And yet there is nothing that soundeth so much in the mouthes of our aduersaries as Catholike Catholike Antiquitie Antiquitie whereas in trueth nothing can be catholike vnlesse it haue the true antiquitie And the true antiquitie must begin at God himselfe It must spring from him as from the first fountaine As most notably and more than once that ancient and learned father Tertullian hath said That there is nothing true but that onely which the church receiued of the apostles the apostles from Christ Christ from God And this is indeede ancient trueth and true antiquitie Now I must also take a view of the maior proposition which is this whatsoener iurisdiction Christ gaue to Peter and not to the rest of the apostles al that belongeth to the church of Rome And master Bellarmine beginneth to prooue this in his second Booke beginning with Peters being at Rome But whether he were there or not it maketh no great matter For it is laide of Paule and Marke and others that they were there also but that maketh them not supreame heades of the church But whereas he confidently affirmes that many of the fathers teach that Peter first of all preached to the Romanes and founded the church there because perchance he thereupon would inferre that he was then bishop of Rome it is not amisse to examin his proofe herein First that which he alleageth out of Iraeney that the church of Rome was founded by Peter and Paule maketh nothing for proofe of Peters first founding the church there for Iraeny maketh them both alike in that worke Neither by founding the church can be meant the first beginning of the same but rather that they by their testimony and death did confirme the godlie there and perfected and established the church that was already begunne by all likelihoode as after shall be shewed And whereas master Bellarmine addeth to Iraeny his own glose that is to say saith he first of Peter and after of Peter and Paule as it is affirmed without proofe so it may go without answere That which he reciteth out of Eusebius for Peters first preaching at Rome though he write First with great letters is not true In Musculus interpretation there are no like words to thē that are heere alleadged And that out of Arnobius who saith that Rome was conuerted to Christ because it sawe the fierie charets that Simon Magus had caused to bee blowen awaie with the blast of Peters mouth may well bee vnderstoode of the more plentifull conuersion of christians there not because there were none before For I will say nothing of the iust causes that may be alleadged to doubt of this storie alleadged out of Agisippus of Simon Magus his fierie charetes And Epiphanius is wrong delt withall by maister Bellarmine For whereas hee saieth that Peter and Paule were first apostles and bishops in Rome he maketh him saie that Peter and Paule were first in Rome thereupon inferring that first they preached there which Epiphanius saith not That which out of Chrysostome hee alleageth prooueth not Peter first to haue preached there as neither that out of Leo or Theodosius For Chrysostome saieth that hee did occupie the kingly citie Leo that hee was appointed to the chiefe place of the Romaine Empire and Theodosius speaketh of the religion deliuered by Peter But this doeth not proue that it was first deliuered by him Orosins and Gregorie of Turon say that Peter being there Christians beganne which may be vnderstoode of their more bolde profession of Christianitie then before For that there were christians before Peter came there are in my iudgement strong reasons to prooue Indeede Theodoret saith that great Peter first preached to them the doctrine of the gospell Perchance he meant that he not first of all but first of the apostles did preach the gospell there For Sadolet a Cardinall and a Romish catholike in his commentaries vpon Paules epistle to the Romaines doth thinke that the gospell was first preached and the church at Rome first assembled by some of the disciples that fled out of Iury. And he nameth Priscilla Aquila Andronicus and Iunia And in this respect it seemeth that Paule giueth this commendation vnto Andronicus and Iunia that they were notable among the apostles because their ministery was so necessary for the church there for he doeth not in anie other Epistle speake of them But in this epistle Sadolet saith that Saint Paule doth giue vnto them this great commendation that they might haue the better credite among the godly at Rome and the greater reuerence might be shewed towardes them in discussing and ending of these controuersies which were begunne amongst them and for staying of which Saint Paule doth write this Epistle as Sadolet confesseth And of these Primasius an ancient father saith in like sorte that Andronicus and Iunia were accounted notable amongst others that were sent to Rome by whom they might beleeue or by whose example they might haue beene confirmed Now if Peter had beene the first that preached there which master Bellarmine a papist affirmeth but Sadolet a Cardinall very confidentlie denieth Saint Paule who woulde not builde vppon anothers foundation as he writeth vnto the Romanes would not haue taken vpon him to haue decided their controuersies and to haue commended vnto them the ministerie of others also to that ende but would either not at all haue medled with them or haue put them in minde of Peter their Bishop But contrariwise hee challengeth them for his owne flocke and as belonging to his charge which wrong he would neuer haue offered to Saint Peter if he first had planted the church and his seat there Neither would the Iewes who in euery place were Peters especiall charge that were at Rome when Paule came thither bee so desirous to be instructed of Paule as they were if they had beene taught before by Peter and he had beene their Bishop and had beene there at this time for this Epistle was written long after they say that he was bishop of Rome or if they had knowne their owne bishop to be the vniuersall bishop or head of all
And out of Sozomen that the emperour made a lawe that heretickes shoulde neither haue churches neither be permitted to preach of the faith a good lawe to be earnestly thought vpon and practised in these our dayes nor ordaine bishops or others All these things being set downe in the Bookes of Councils by them deliuered vnto vs who can thinke that Master Bellarmine who alleadgeth this Councill for strength of his cause and that falsely also wherein all things are so direct against him would see the truth if it were neuer so plaine before him The third councill is that which was assembled at Ephesus that also M. Bellar. belike by some wonderful attractiue vertue wil draw to his side The third Councill saith he as Euagrius doth witnesse saith that it deposeth Nestorius by the commaundement of Caelestine bishop of Rome How now master Bellarmine haue you quite fallen out with truth and made a league with falshood haue you purposed still to abuse your reader by most shamelesse affirming that which is not true The counsell said we by the necessitie aswel of the canons as also of the epistle of the most holy father our felow minister Celestine bishop of Rome compelled c. Where is this that master Bellarmine affirmeth Celestine bishop of Rome wrote perchance to shew his detestation of the heresie of Nestorius and they willing to doe him that honour that they would seeme much to esteeme of his zeale in faith that beeing so farre distant in place he would be vnited as it were to them in their iudgement against Nestorius they shew that they were mooued much by his letters and incouraged to proceede against Nestorius But here is no word of any commaundement that he gaue them but rather the contrarie For they call him their felow minister and so acknowledge not him to be a commaunder ouer them Yea and in a mandate to Philip priest vicar or vicegerent to Celestine then bishop of Rome and others sent to Constantinople they tell the popes vicar plainly and his felowes thus Wee will your holinesse to vnderstand that if you despise any of these things neither this holy synode will ratifie it neither shall you be permitted to be pertaker of our communion Yea and before that council directeth euen the popes legate and the rest that if the emperour sent for them they must in any wise be obedient to his commaundement and must not refuse to goe which doctrine were heresie in our dayes but they should not agree with Iohn of Antioch and the rest but vpon such conditions as not the pope the council did set them downe vpon the paine aforesaid And that this Councill was assembled by the Emperours is in many places declared as out of Euagrius that it was at the appointment of Theodosius the younger and after by the commaundement of the most religious Emperours The like is also testified in the superscription of the former mandate that I haue spoken of And it is also worth noting that the councill writing to the Emperours for the credite of their councill doeth not vrge that the pope is head there but indeede they craue that Cirill and Memnon not Cirill onely whom they say the pope Celestine deputed for him be restored to them again that their councill be not without a head but they say that Celestine Archbishop of Rome doth sit ioyned with them there he doth assidere sit I say with them not praesidet he ruleth not he coutroleth not the councill and so it is also said of Aphrica and Illyricum that they assident sit with the councill And out of this that hath beene spoken as also by such other thinges as in that councill are recorded we may gather what truth is in that also that maister Bellarmine alleadgeth of an Epistle sent by the councill to Celestine reseruing the cause of Iohn of Antioch as more doubtfull to be decided by the bishoppe of Rome But as I finde not any such Epistle in that councill so this is plainely written in the report that the councill maketh of their doings to the Emperours that they excommunicated Iohn of Antioch the president of the Apostatas councill and them that were with him and depriued them of all priestly ministery and reuoked all their vnlawfull doings If this be to referre his cause to the pope let the world iudge Then he commeth to the council of Chalcedon and that maketh for him too if we wil trust him but in examining it we shal finde it much like the rest directly against the supremacy of the bishop of Rome For first in the beginning of that councill it is declared that it is gathered by the decree of the most godly and faithfull Emperours Valentinian and Martian who also professeth that he desired to be there to confirme the faith wherein were iudges appointed to moderate their doings and sayings and to conclude their articles not the pope or his legates for they as it appeareth in this councill were at the commaundement of these iudges as well as others but lay men officers vnder the Emperour It will be hard then for maister Bellarmine in respect of some fewe excellent names that may be giuen to Leo bishop of Rome whereof also it may be he was worthy in respect of some good parts that were in him it will I say bee harde by such names to proue his supremacie by this councell which hath almost done what it can in preiudice of any such prerogatiue that he might claime For if it belong not to him to call councils neither to rule in them when they are called he hath but little supremacie ouer others And we see in this councell both these things are done by others and not by him But what doth Maister Bellarmine finde in this councill for the popes supremacy That in that the pope Leo is called the bishop of the vniuersall church This tale hee hath tolde but a little before perchance that maketh him more perfect in it saying that three letters are sent from the East church to Leo bishop of Rome and in them all he is called the pope of the vniuersall church there are indeede foure such letters euen togither to the bishop of Rome and the councill of Chalcedon and in none of them is he called the pope of the vniuersall church but only the vniuersall archbishop or patriarch But there is a great difference betweene a vniuersall bishop and a bishop of the vniuersall church But such misses are smal faults with master Bellarmine Indeede Paschasinus the popes owne legat doth call him pope of the vniuersall church who did also seeke afterwardes by falsifyiug the coppies of the councill of Nice to procure the supremacie vnto his maister and therfore we must not ground our faith vpon his wordes But for that name of vniuersall bishop which is often giuen to the bishop of Rome it is not yet a name peculiar to him as
to bring some plaine proofe and not so to stand vpon strange coniectures Againe Sozimus bishop of Rome willed hini to go to a councill at Cesarea and hee therefore saide that hee must needes goe If Sozimus did commaund and Augustine would not stand vpon his right in such a matter where perchance his going might be profitable to Gods church yet that would not make Sozimus head of the church No at that time they did not gather any such hard conclusions For although they would not refuse to do good euen being more imperiously commaunded then reason would yet supremacie as I haue shewed they would not acknowledge in the Bishop of Rome but rather were content to bee at great charges to conuince the popes falshoode In the last two places saint Augustine commendeth the bishop of Rome in that being so high as he was yet he would be friendly to them that were humble or lowe and then confesseth euery Bishoppe to be high yet him to be higher A man may be friend to them that are lower then he is and one Bishop may be higher than others and yet not haue iurisdiction ouer them Higher I say in gifts credite place or many other waies In England we see differences of bishoprickes where yet the one hath not iurisdiction ouer the other Now for Prosper it were hard if his poeticall amplifications should be able to carry away the weight of so great a cause But for his words if he say that Rome is Peters seat in respect of the doctrine that there was taught and maintained as before Optatus and Augustine of whome he was a great follower haue done wee yeelde vnto him Otherwise I leaue the godly Reader to the arguments before alleadged to consider what he should think concerning this point whether Peter was Bishop there or not And where he saith that Rome is made vnto the world the head of pastorall honour wee yeelde vnto that also that at that time there was no church that either more sincerely did keepe that which the apostles taught or had more credit and authoritie amongst other churches then Rome had in respect that she was able and willing to do good vnto many other But where he saith that what by armes shee could not by religion shee hath subdued is not simply true For there are manie that neuer were nor will be by likely hood subdued to Romish religion But in some respect we also confesse that to be so in that religion subdueth the heart and winneth the affection of men to bee subiect whereas that outward force can onely preuaile against the outward man Now for Victor Vticensis who calleth the church of Rome head of all other churches I haue often shewed that it may truly so be called in respect of the authoritie which by many occasions it had goten not in respect of any inrisdiction that Christ gaue vnto it more then to other The next is Vyncentius Lirinensis who alluding vnto the name or indeede rather giuing vnto Rome that name that was commonly giuen vnto it saith that the head of the world gaue testimonie vnto it meaning the council of Ephesus You see saith master Bellarmine that the bishop of Rome is called head of the world Nay you see howe our popes catholiks incroch more and more for that vnsatiable gulfe of the church of Rome which will neuer haue honour and authoritie enough Who euer before master Bellarmine hath called the pope the head of the world He hath wont to be but head of the church But I feare that if his kingdome continue a while Acharonta mouebit hee will keepe a stir in hell also But Vincensius giueth no such name to Iulius bishop of Rome He would not be so iniurious to the ciuil authoritie he had learned better then so to giue to Caesar that that belongeth to Caeser and to God that that is Gods although the church of Rome might quite blotte out of their bookes that lesson for any regarde that they haue to keepe it As for Vincentius his meaning is plaine enough to them that will see the trueth For hauing spoken of sundry places from whence learned men came to that councill of Ephesus first out of the East then also out of the West churches he nameth Iulius bishop of the citty of Rome which citty he calleth the head of the worlde as immediately after he calleth Carthage one of the South and Millaine one of the North the sides of the world But if he had made so very great accompt of the church of Rome as in these daies men would haue vs to doe he would haue had perchance some more regard in placing that church in some other order then to make it almost the last that he mentioneth Out of Cassiodor a senatour and a great officer in Rome maister Bellarmine alleadgeth somewhat You saieth he to Iohn Bishop of Rome sit as watchmen ouer christian people as you are called father you loue all I see nothing heere that can helpe maister Bellarmine or his cause For who euer did thinke otherwise then that the Bishoppe of Rome was a watchman ouer christian people Or who will say that the Pope hath not or at the least shoulde haue a fatherly affection towardes all Well it followeth It is our part to looke to somewhat you looke to all Cassiodor liuing vnder the popes nose is content either by this praising of him to teach him what care he indeede should haue not onely to doe good to the people of Rome where he was Bishop but also as occasions should be offered to helpe others also Or els it may be that hee giueth him greater praise then he deserueth But what is this for the popes supremacy Must not the building needes fall that standeth vpon such weake propes Much like is that which followeth that the seat which is pope Iohns peculiar place is giuen generally to the whole worlde that is as I take it to doe good to all If a Romane magistrate to the bishop of Rome doe extoll more then in truth he may the power of that citty or els tell how farre their benefits doe extende must this be so strained and wrung to prooue supremacie The last testimony alleadged by maister Bellarmine doth so little helpe his cause that if he had done wisely he should neuer haue spoken of it For by that Epistle and others that are set before that councill of Chalcedon it may easily appeare that Leo Bishop of Rome did then bestirre him vsing the discention of the East church as a meane to increase his owne authoritie For it is most plaine and cannot be denied that afterwardes in that councill by his legates he sought the supremacy very earnestly and in sundry of his Epistles disanulleth that the councill did against it And in these Epistles he maketh mone to many to procure Theodosius the Emperour to stand his friend Anâ— in this Epistle
cannot erre or be remoued but to admonish euen vs also that professe the gospell that vnlesse we repent wee shall all perish likewise We are the figtree for which the dresser of the vineyard intreateth that yet this fourth yeare we may be spared for we haue beene three long yeares yea three times twelue yeares vnfruitfull Our owner looked for figes but we yeld none for grapes but we beare none but sower ones Now is the time wherein much digging and dunging is bestowed vpon vs. If we continue still fruitfesse as we haue beene there is no hope of mercie but without sparing we must be cut downe and so shall be cast into the vuquenchable fire And this is in trueth a more christian and necessarie collection and more agreeable to Gods iustice and to the whole course of scripture which promiseth good things to them that walke in the feare of God and threatneth Gods wrath to them that are disobedient and delight in sinne then that which master Bellarmine gathereth out of the sinnes and schisms of the popes For hereby will he proue that the church of Rome is the true church because they haue had very many most grieuous schismes euen among the popes themselues now where is the vnitie that so much they bragge of And because there haue beene many wicked popes amongst whome himselfe nameth Steuen the sixt Leo the fifth Christopher the first Sergius the third Iohn the twelfth with others not a few as his owne words are And yet notwithstanding that they haue had many vices as hee saith the glorie of that seate is increased and amplified thereby greatly Indeede such pearles doe best become such swines snowts But what maketh master Bellarmine to like the better of the Romish church and the rather to be induced to imagin that it is a true church because euen the heades thereof haue beene so bad companions and so abounding in all wickednesse Forsooth because if the bishop of Rome had not beene of Gods appointment saith he and that church the true church it coulde not haue stood and continued so long being so full fraught with so many sinnes But that is it that is in question whether the church of Rome be the true church or not We deny it wee finde not in it the ancient faith the doctrine of the apostles the sincere word Wee see not there the pure administration of Gods holy Sacraments They teach vs outward hypocrisie for true holines foolish toyes for spirituall worshipping These and such like things doe strongly perswade vs that God hath done to Rome as he hath done to Silo and to Ierusalem long since and will he prooue it to be the true church because the bishops are euill Now if the name and outward shew of a church haue so blinded the eies of maister Bellarmine that hee will that it must needs be as it is called that is to say the catholicke church I would haue him looke to Ierusalem how in the time of Christ when the church was in them that followed Christ yet the name and outward glory of the church remained with the priests and that company which were the greatest enemies to Christ and his church As therefore we see not in the church of Rome when we try their doctrines any probability that they are the true church of Christ so we set this downe as the infallible course of his iudgments with whom it is counted a righteous thing to set himselfe against such as delight in sinne that he that spared not the angels that left their first estate neither delighted in his owne people whom he had brought out of Aegypt when they sinned against him will haue no pleasure in the church of Rome any longer then shee hath pleasure in his law but will remooue their candlesticke fight against them with the sword of his mouth and spew them out when they reiect his truth Thus then we see that God left the priests whom he had appointed the people whom he had brought out of Aegypt and taken to be his peculiar inheritance the place that hee had chosen the temple that hee commaunded to be made because of their sinnes Let these things make vs with indifferent iudgement and without partialitie to trie whether God be also departed from that church of Rome or not For there is no doubt but if any people whatsoeuer sinnes as they did they may also be punished as they were But that church of Rome hath sinned in as abundant measure as euer did Ierusalem as themselues and their owne stories doe shew therefore why should they flatter themselues imagining that God will not deale with her as he hath dealt with others And here wee may consider howe vntrue that popish position is that the church of Rome or the Bishoppe of Rome can not erre Can hee sinne They confesse that hee can not Yea and their owne sinnes doe record such sinnes of theirs as ascend vp before the Lord and cry vnto God for vengeance No doubt then but such may erre and fall into heresies also For it is truely said of Saint Augustine that men by their sinnes doe fall into heresies and heresies are the very punishment for sinne For he that is the iust iudge must needes poure foorth his wrath vpon such as detaine the truth in vnrighteousnesse and vpon such as knowe God by his workes but will not glorifie him as God and therefore in their excesse of folly doe turne the glorie of the incorruptible God into the similitude of corruptible man yea and of things most base and vile for man to worship Thus then wee see howe sinne deserueth that God in his wrath shoulde strike with blindnesse such as do delight therein For when the loue of the trueth is not receiued God sendeth vnto such as refuse the trueth strong illusions that they should beleeue lies Thessalo 2. 10. 11. And if you would haue example thereof none is better then Salamon who was for wisedome the wonder of the world and yet when he gaue himselfe to sinne with women he was by that meanes drawen to idolatrie In somuch as Nehemiah fearing lest for the like offence the like iudgement of God should fall vpon the people of his time warneth them by the example of Salomon to take heede Did not saith he Salomon king of Israel sinne by those things And Sathan knew well enough that this was the readiest way to drawe men to idolatrie which is deede detestable heresie by moouing them to carnall and filthie adulterie Therfore also he preuaileth against Gods people by that wicked practise Shall wee then thinke that the church of Rome whose sinnes are greater then were the sinnes of Sodome and Gomorah cannot be left vnto it selfe and plunged in errour Or that the pope cannot erre whose wicked doings are as excessiue as his power is great Master Bellarmine in his booke of the bishop of Rome taketh great paine
in iudgement Liberius a pope did not only consent to the condemnation of Athanasius that great learned and catholike father as many ancient histories doe report and our aduersaries deny not but also did communicate with two notable Atrian heretikes which was a great offence to the godly and an incouraging of those heretikes But maister Bellarmine answereth that neither he taught any heresy or was an heretike The question is whether the pope may er or not Now our aduersaries draw vs from the questiō not answering whether Liberius did erre or not but they tell vs that he was no heretike and that he taught no heresie And admit he did neither of these two I meane that he neither became an heretike neither yet taught heresie yet he may erre Yea Liberius did fouly erre in that externall action whereby our aduersaries confesse that he consented to the banishment of Athanasius and in communicating with those two Arrians Valence Visacius and by help of Arrians get again to be bishop of Rome deposing Felix For to er is to wander or go out of the right way whether it be for ignorance or feare or through any other affection he that steppeth aside doth erre And because this giueth great light to al that is to be said of this question it shal not be amisse somewhat more throughly to consider of the same First you see that whereas their doctrine is briefly deliuered that the pope cannot erre they wil haue it thus to be vnderstooed the pope cannot be an heretike that is he cannot continue obstinatly in heresie nor he cannot teach heresie when he giueth generall precepts that should belong to the whole church For that is the meaning both of Melchior Canus in his Theological places and of maister Bellarmine in this place before alleadged The intent also of their doctrine is to commend vnto vs that their Italian head as a fit head for to guide the vniuersal church and able to be ahead to the whole body Nowe therefore let vs see how well their doctrine and their meaning agree together For the head of the church should be such as should in nothing no not for a time leade the body of the church awry But the church may be led into many foolish opinions strange conceites and dangerous doctrines euen by such as cannot be called heretikes For an heretike is he as Saint Augustine telleth vs that being of any euill and corrupt opinion in the church and being reproued or monished to amend resisteth stubbornly and will not reforme his contagious and perilous doctrines but defendeth the same and is drawen to deuise or follow such opinions for his own profit especially for his own glory and to aduance himselfe Now who seeth not that a man in place of credite and authoritie as the bishop of Rome hath beene by such bad means as he hath vsed these many yeares may wonderfully indamage and indanger the church of God before any body wil or dare reprooue him for any opinions that he will holde And when he is found fault withall as he must be before they can count him an heretike how many subtile shifts can euil men haue to continue a long time in their wicked opinions without reuoking the same or reforming themselues and yet to auoide the danger of being accounted stubborne or obstinate The Pelagians against whom saint Augustine writeth many bookes did turne many waies their lewd opinions changed often in some shewe of words their positions and did adde as by reason they were forced and by arguments compelled some such wordes vnto their errours as that thereby they might auoide the note of contumacy and deceiue the more vnder a shew of truth as may appeare by saint Augustine who confesseth plainly that if their meaning were not knowen to be euill their wordes could well enough haue beene borne withall Admit then that a bishop of Rome being of such absolute authority as now they are could as cunningly as did the Pelagians couer and cloake an heresie Might not he be an heretike many yeares before he would be driuen to recant And might not he then by such meanes bring irreparable hurt to the church of God Thus we see that as by this doctrine that the pope cannot erre they goe about to assure vs that the head which they haue set ouer the church cānot deceiue vs if we wil be lead by him so their interpretation of that their position argueth in them great doubtfulnes y t they dare not defend their own fayings vnlesse they may expound their words after this manner that the pope cannot erre that is he cannot obstinately or stubbornly teach as a doctrine to be receiued of the whole church any heresie And I pray you what safety can the godly finde in following such a head as when he hath guided them into many errours yet he will not stubbornly stand in defence of them Such may wel be compared to souldiers that by the rash leading of an vnskilfull captaine are brought into the hands of their enemies and when the captaine seeth his folly he would faine mend it if he coulde and is sory for that he hath done But what helpeth this his late repentance the distressed souldiers nothing at all Euen so that the bishop of Rome cannot continue in his errour if it were true that he had some such priuiledge it might be good for himselfe But such a head is for others very dangerous because y ◠not all they who are seduced by such mens instruction or example are also reduced by their recantation or amendment as appeareth by multitudes of examples And so we see that this their interpretation standeth not with either their common receiued doctrine or with their intent and meaning which is to promise safety from errour vnto them that receiue that head Whereas in truth their meaning is to tell vs that the pope may be of a wrong iudgement but if he be much vrged he cannot be obstinate he wil not stand to it And whereas they defend that the pope cannot teach heresie as a doctrine publikely to be receiued in some respect I thinke it to be most true For seldome or neuer are there any popes that can teach either truth or heresie They cannot preach they cannot with wholesome doctrine feede their flocke they cannot deuide the foode of life and breake the bread of the word vnto Gods houshold seruants For want of knowledge they cannot of themselues doe much either in defence of truth or to maintaine errour But this exposition will not please them They haue another meaning For when they tell vs that the pope cannot be an heretike when he teacheth the whole church their meaning is plaine enough that in particular iudgements they may erre but not in their generall decrees or preachings or instructions Which they are forced to say for the auoiding of such inconueniences as might growe by defending the doing of many
might get the true copies of that Nicen council from those places making no doubt but if those copies did agree which came from thence they must be most true as they all acknowledge writing to pope Boniface When the copies came they could finde no such thing Is it not then very plaine that the Bishop of Rome his legate vsed false writings for proofe of a bad cause But maister Bellarmine telleth vs that Saint Augustine and all they of they council mistooke the matter being deceaued by ignorance because they knew not what the council of Sardis did set downe concerning that point The question is whether the council of Nice did giue superiority ouer all other to the bishop of Rome as his legates did affirme And it is most plaine that it did not And therefore that which is in the councill of Sardis which if we shall beleeue the booke of councils set forth by Peter Crab a frier and a papist was at the least fortie yeares after the councill of Nice it maketh nothing to iustifie them and excuse their falsehoode that for the decrees of the Nicen council doe alleadge that which was ordained in that council of Sardis And of that council of Sardis it may truly be said as in the Lateran council or at the least in the Tripartit worke added vnto it complaint is made that now adaies it is harde to finde either olde or newe councils insomuch as the authour doth there maruell that the church of Rome hath beene so negligent in that pointe as not to take order for the better keeping of them Augustine writeth of that council of Sardis that is was an Arrian council holden against Athanasius The time also when it was kept is very vncertaine Yea almost al the circumstances argue great doubtfulnes of that council They that write the story of that council doe write thereof so diuersly both for the number of bishops assembled there and also concerning the Arrians being there which some affirme some deny that therby we may learn how little credit is to be giuen to it for to ground any vncertain or doubtful doctrine vpon y â— it might haue credit But that which maister Bel. doth afterwards say is yet more absurd For hauing affirmed that he is indeed perswaded that these canons which the church of Rome alleadgeth for her supremacy are not in the Nicen couecil but onely in that of Sardis yet he thinketh that Zozimus and Boniface two bishops of Rome did therefore name them the decrees of the Nicen council because they were both written together in a booke at Rome the ignoraunce whereof did much trouble the fathers as he saith Can master Bellarmine suppose that those fathers whose earnest indeuour was at that time to keepe the decrees of the councill of Nicen were ignorant what was to be accounted of that council or what articles belonged to the same Or is it likely that the copies of the councill of Nice shoulde bee more perfect at Rome so many hundreds of miles distant from Nice then at Constantinople which is hard by it or at Antioch or Alexandria not so far distant from it Or doth he thinke it reason that one Romish and another vnknowen copie writen perchance with that councill of Nice by some that sought thereby to increase the dignitie of the church of Rome of set purpose to bring it to that credit that it should be accounted as parcel of the council of Nice can he I say thinke it reason that those two copies should correct and control so many of better credit by a great deale then they are No these are but shifts to blind mens eies and indeede but bables for fooles to play withall Master Bellarmine doth also labour in this place very earnestly to prooue that the council had many decrees moe then those that are in the first tome of councils set forth by Peter Crab or spoken of by Ruffâ—nus To what end is all this Forsooth to excuse his holy fathers that they should not be thought to giue counters for gold or lead for siluer But how can hee excuse them for that they added to the begining of the sixt canon that the church of Rome hath alwaies had the supremacie in which false tricke Paschasinus Legate vnto the Bishop of Rome was taken in the council of Chalcedon For it is not the translation out of Greeke of Dionyse an Abbat almost three hundred yeares after that council was kept that Alan Cope speaketh of and master Bellarmine before hath aleaged for his defence that can haue credit against so many authenticall copyes so diligently sought and sent for so carefully examined by so many hundreds of learned men and so faithfully deliuered for discussing euen of this controuersie for Paschasinus hauing alleadged in that councill of Chalcedon for his maister the Bishoppe of Rome the wordes before mentioned was by those copies disprooued And whereas maister Bellarmine doth set downe this as the intent of the Bishop of Rome in the Councill of Carthage that he meant to shew that not onely all men might appeale to him but also that it were expedient for the church that so they should do Marke how directly the councill of Carthage doeth oppose it selfe against the Pope therein in their epistle which hath this title The Epistle of the Affrican Council to pope Celestine bishop of the citie of Rome For whereas master Bellarmine did confesse that the causes of inferiour ministers might be heard at home but Bishops must be heard at Rome this councill in this epistle saith directly contrary vsing it as an argument from the lesse to the greater If say they the causes of inferior clarks by the councill of Nice are prouided for how much more is it ordered then that bishops if they be excommunicate in their prouince shall not of your Holinesse be hastily or rashly or against order thought to be restored to the communion Thy will him to banish from him such as seeke such wicked refuges because say they the Nicene decrees haue plainely committed not inferiour clarkes onely but also the Bishops to their metropolitanes They assure themselues that no prouince shall want the grace of Gods spirit to order these things And that euerie man may if he mislike of the iudgement of them that haue heard his cause appeale to a councill either prouinciall or generall no wordes of appealing to the pope Unlesse a man will imagine say they that God will grant his spirite of triall of matters to euery one and deny it to all assembled in a Councill And further they alleadge that the trueth of matters examined farre from home can hardly be found out by reason that witnesses can not well be carried so farre For as for the legates à latere that should come from the popes side for examination of such matters they vtterly mislike as a thing not to be found in any of the synods of the
of Rome But howe will they excuse the slauish seruitude wherunto they brought the greatest princes Saint Iohn offered to fall downe before the Angell but the angell would not suffer him to worship him I am saith he thy fellow seruant worship God But these vile wretches will suffer kings and emperours to kisse their feete Constantine the pope was the first that euer accepted of this honour done to him by Iustinian the emperour And then Stephan the second whose feete Pipin the french king did kisse But afterwards this grew to be so ordinarie a matter that the kissing of an old fooles foule feete is the greatest honour that can be done to the greatest prince at Rome And Pope Steuen hauing gotten into his handes the exarchie of Rauenna whereby he became great in Italy and al by the meanes of the said Pipin whom he also rewarded by making him king of Fraunce thrusting Childrick the true lawfull king into a monastery and intruding Pipin in his roome he now in triumphing manner is carried vpon mens shoulders And he is the first that I knew of any of the popes that thought the earth too good to beare so wicked a lumpe as himselfe was For I trust hee thought it not too base to touch his sacred feet Well the reason of his doings is not for vs to search but he was first carried of mens shoulders Neither will I here inquire of the cause of deposing the right king of Fraunce whether it were iust or not although no cause could make it a iust fact in him that had nothing to doe with it Onely this will I say that where master Bellar. would make the insufficiencie of the French kings to be the cause why either Zachary or Steuen that was next after him did depose the French king from his rightfull crowne yet Platina whose words I rather beleeue then master Bellarmine confesseth that Pipin being greedie of a kingdome sent his embassadours to the pope that he would by his authoritie confirme vnto him the kingdome of Fraunce Whereunto the pope agreed in respect of such former good turnes as hee had receiued of that house And so by the popes authoritie the kingdome of Fraunce is adiudged to Pipin the yeare of our Lord seuen hundred fiftie and three Thus much Platina Whereby it appeareth that the ambition of Pipin and wrong dealing of the bishop of Rome was a cause that Childerick was deposed But to returne to my matter againe we see what pope it was that was first so proude that he could not let his owne legs carrie him But it was set downe afterwards for a lawe vnto which the emperour must be also obedient if he will not be rebellious to the decrees of the church And it is decreed that the emperour himselfe if he be by must helpe to carry that loytring lubber For thus I reade it cited out of their owne booke of ceremonies Although the emperour or any other be he neuer so great a personage be by hee shall carry vpon his shoulders a litle while the chaire and the pope And againe it is decreed in the same place that the most noble lay man shall carry the end or traine of the pluuiall that the pope weareth be it the emperour or any king What a slauerie is this that he by his vngodly and wicked ordinances doth tie princes vnto as though they were his very staues Why should he looke that emperours should be his hacknie horses to cadge him vp and downe Or what reason hath he what warrant out of the scripture What example in Gods booke or of any good man so to disgâ—ace and deface the anointed of the Lord whom he as well as others should seeke by all meanes to honour and reuerence Yet let vs see what more reuerence these proud prelats can suffer to be done vnto them Pipin the new made Frence king did teach the pope a very euill vse For he slattering the pope that hee might make him more frendly to him in assuring him of his kingdome meeting him three miles from his lodging alighteth from his horse and leadeth the popes horse all the way not leauing him vntill he had brought the pope to his lodging It is also recorded that another time the king of England on the one side and the French king on the other performed him that seruice But what neede I seeke for the particular examples This is also a booke case It is alreadie ordered That the emperour shall leade his horse and kings shall goe before him as performing their seruice to this earthly God or God on earth But yet we haue not seene his fullnesse in pride For the emperour if he be by when the pope alighteth must hold his stirop So did Frederick Barbarossa the emperour vnto the pope Adrian the fourth although he had no great thankes for his labour For hee chanced to hold the the wrong stirop the pope was so offended thereat that when the bishop of Bamberg in the name of the emperour had by a pithy oration signified his ioy for the popes presence the pope replied that he heard indeede words of gladnesse but he could not by deedes perceaue any such thing And his reason was because the emperour held not his right stirrop The emperour although angry yet smiling answered that he vsed not to hold any bodies stirrop and that made him the lesse skilfull For he was the first whose stirrop he held And for that time they parted neither of them being well pleased But the next day the emperour made amends for his former offence holding the right stirrop And the same emperour Frederick did afterwards also hold the stirrop to pope Alexander the third a cruel and shamelesse enemie to the said emperour as appeareth by a letter which master Fox in his Actes and Monuments aleadgeth out of Roger Houeden and William of Gisborough In which Letter it doeth most plainely appeare not onely that the Emperour did holde his stirrop for the pope confesseth so much in writing vnto the Archebishoppe of Yorke and to the Bishop of Durham and would haue them to reioyce for the good successe of the church for the church is much increased when the popes stirrop is holden by such but also he cause they said to Moses and Aaron that they tooke too much on them seeing all the people were holy howe great then shall their iudgement be that abuse all euen the mightiest Monarchees at their pleasure Doest thou see O Peter thy successour and thou O sauing Christ behold thy vicar Marke well howe farr the pride of the seruant of thy seruants is gone vp saith an Abbat long since and therefore I trust no Lutheran no Caluenist no Hugonot but a flat papist and yet speaketh this in detestation of the pride of popes and namely of pope Boniface the eight who the second day of his Iubilie apparelled like an