dastardes which you set against them My former wordes of the Apostles as being equall in power agrée well with these of Peter and Paule For I say not that Paule was aboue Peter but that he might haue bene aboue him in power for all the honour which he gaue him And this is sufficient to ouerthrowe your reason But if my example of the Pope and Emperour did cause you to mistake me you may take an other and fitter for the purpose the Colledge Apostolike as the Pope dooth call them I meane the Cardinalles of Rome Who though they be in states orders and liuings one aboue an other yet in all things and with all curtesies they all giue hie reuerence one vnto an other And when any of them doth come into the chappell of the Popes holinesse to say his deuotions he turneth towardes the Cardinalles of his owne order and goeth not directly to his own place vnlesse he be the lowest but beginning at the lowest as though he wold abide there he is desired entreated of euery one to go higher vntil hee come directly to his own place vnlesse he be the lowest himselfe demurely once again desireth him who is next vnto him that he will go before him at leÌ„gth he sitteth down in his place This is a foule trouble to make so much adoo at the comming in of euerie Cardinall to prayers chiefly when prayers are begun Yet to shew how modestly they thinke of themselues and how they honour one an other euery one that commeth after others dooth it whither the Pope be there or no. Out of doubt Cardinalles men of such wisedome would not commit this folly if euery one whom they honour must be aboue them in power But you deale iniuriously with me to say that you framed your reason out of the scriptures and Fathers and I bring the booke of Ceremonies to kill it For neither did you ground vpon the wordes of scripture but onely on a circumstance obserued by the Fathers that Paule went to Peter of reuerence to honour him and I slew the reason which you made thereof with the sword of scriptures I vsed the booke of Ceremonies but as an Irish Lackey to cut off a dead mans head I would not haue vouchsafed as much as to name him but to cast the doong of your solemnities in your faces and to shewe the fondnesse of a Popish reason by practise of a Papall mockery Though I sée not why you should preferre so the scriptures and Fathers before the booke of Ceremonies For the booke of Ceremonies speaketh more good of the Pope in one leafe then both the other doo throughout all their volumes And it is solemnely printed at Rome with Peters picture in the front and the keies in his handes and Feede my sheepe written about him as a booke of great account where many of the Fathers doo lye in the dust of the Vatican Library and cannot come into the light Notwithstanding if you be willing to yéeld your selfe prisoner to the Fathers as Gentlemen thinke the booke of Ceremonies to be a raskall souldiour whom you disdaine to yéeld vnto behold your owne witnesses who make not Paule inferiour to Peter otherwise then in the time of his Apostleship the one made first the other last S. Ierome who putteth an equalitie betweene them though Paule did honour him as an Apostle before him S. Chrysostome who pronounceth that Paule to say no more of him was Peters peere in dignitie S. Ambrose who giueth a primacy to them both and saith that Paule was euen such an other as Peter S. Austin who declareth their authoritie to haue beene equall and that for Paules honor what he wanteth in time is supplied by Christes glory in that he made him an Apostle not as the rest vpon the earth but when he raigned now in maiestie And these things are written by the same Fathers whose wordes touching the honour that Paule gaue to Peter your Doctor setteth in a beadrole as though in their iudgement Paule acknowledged Peter his supreme head thereby Wherein you may perceiue both his deceitfull dealing that alleageth their wordes as setting one aboue the other who in expresse words doo make one equall to the other and your expositions how iumpe they méete with the Fathers who gathered an equalitie of Peter and Paul by the epistle to the Galatians whence you conclude Peters supremacy ouer Paule Hart. How the Fathers all agrée with one consent of Peters supremacy it shall be shewed hereafter As for the circumstance which I obserued out of them touching the fact of Paule yâ— when he went to see Peter he went of reuerence to honour him I doo not account so greatly thereof as of the fact it selfe nor vrge I the Fathers so much obseruing that as the report of this made by the Scriptures For they set it forth with so liuely wordes as if it were of purpose to paint out Peters primacie Then after thre yeares I went to Ierusalem saith Paule to see Peter and taried with him fifteene daies Marke his words I pray and sée what weight they cary with them He went to Ierusalem so farre so long a iourney and he went notwithstanding his great affaires ecclesiastical and he went to see Peter not in the vulgar maner but as S. Chrysostom noteth that the Gréeke word importeth to behold him as men behold a thing or person of name excellencie and maiestie Neither did he go onely to see him but he abode with him also to fill him selfe with a perfit viewe of his behauiour And he abode with him no common time but fifteen daies fiftene daies a great matter and more then many would thinke who doo not search the depth of scriptures In such estimation was Peter with Paule and will you yet deny his primacy Rainoldes King Agesilaus when one praysed an Orator that he could amplifie thinges and make them of small to séeme great I saith hée would neuer count him a good shoomaker who would put a great shoo vpon a small foote You play the Orator M. Hart with your amplifications and that in such sort as you passe the shoomaker of Agesilaus For you do not only put a great shoo vpon a small foote but you stretch the leather with your â—éeth too And yet when you haue wéeried your selfe with stretching it you will haue stretched it in vaine For though your shoo be too great for the primacy of Peter yet will it be too small for the supremacy of the Pope Hart. We speake not of the Pope now but of Peter Why stray you from the point Rainoldes I thought they had béene things both of one nature and differing in name only But I will speake of Peter And that you may sée that the shoo which you made is too great for his foote I will shew it by a plaine demonstration to the
you complaine I know you may haue more bookes if you would haue such as are best for you to read But you would haue such as might nourish your humor from reading of the which they who restraine you are your friendes If a man do surfet of varietie of dishes the Phisicion doth well to dyet him with one wholsome kinde of meat Perhaps it were better for some of vs who read all sortes that we were tyed to that alone suffred part of your restraint We are troubled about many things but one thing is needfull Many please the fansie better but one doth profit more the minde He was a wise preacher who said The reading of many bookes is a wearinesse vnto the flesh and therefore exhorted men to take instruction by the wordes of trueth the wordes of the wise which are giuen by one pastor euen by Iesus Christ whose spirit did speake in the Prophets and Apostles and taught his Church the trueth by them Howbeit for as much as God hath giuen giftes to men pastours and teachers whose labour might helpe vs to vnderstand the words of that one pastor we do receaue thankfully the monuments of their labour left in wryting to the Church which they were set to builde eyther seuerall as the Doctors or assembled as the Councels we do gladly read them as Pastors of the Church Yet so that we put a difference betwene them and that one Pastor For God did giue him the spirite not by measure the rest had a measure of grace and knowledge through him Wherfore if to supply your whatsoeuer wants you would haue the bookes of Doctors and Councels to vse them as helps for the better vnderstanding of the booke of Christ your wants shal be supplyed you shall not need to feare disaduantage in this respect For M. Secretarie hath taken order that you shall haue what bookes you will vnlesse you will such as cannot be gotten Hart. The bookes that I would haue are principally in déed the Fathers and the Councels which all do make for vs as do the scriptures also But for my direction to finde out their places in all poyntes of controuersie which I can neither remember redily nor dare to trust my selfe in them I would haue our writers which in the seuerall poyntes whereof they treate haue cited them and buyld themselues vpon them In the question of the Church and the supremacie Doctor Stapleton of the Sacraments and sacrifice of the Masse Doctor Allen of the worshipping of Sayntes and Images Doctor Harpsfield whose bookes were set forth by Alan Cope beare his name as certaine letters in them shew Likewise for the rest of the pointes that lie in controuersie them who in particular haue best written of them for them al in generall S. Thomas of Aquine Father Roberts Dictates and chiefly the confession that Torrensis an other father of the societie of Iesus hath gathered out of S. Augustine which booke we set the more by because of al the Fathers S. Augustine is the chéefest as well in our as your iudgement and his doctrine is the common doctrine of the Fathers whose consent is the rule whereby controuersies should be ended Rainoldes These you shall haue God willing and if you will Canisius too because he is so full of textes of Scriptures and Fathers and many doe estéeme him highly But this I must request you to looke on the originalles of Scriptures Councels Fathers which they doe alleadge For they doe perswade you that all doe make for you but they abuse you in it They borrow some gold out of the Lordes treasure house and wine out of the Doctors presses but they are deceitful workmen they do corrupt their golde with drosse their wine with worse then water Hart. You shall finde it harder to conuince them of it then to charge them with it Rainoldes And you shall finde it harder to make proofe of halfe then to make claime of all Yet you shall see both youre claime of all the Scriptures and Fathers to bee more confidente then iust and my reproofe of your wryters for theyr corrupting and forging of them as plainly prooued as vttered if you haue eyes to see God lighten your eyes that you may see open your eares that you may heare and geue you both a softe hart and vnderstanding minde that you may be able wisely to discerne and gladly to embrace the trueth when you shall heare it Hart. I trust I shall be able alwayes both to see and to followe the trueth But I am perswaded you will be neuer able to shew that that is the trueth which your Church professeth As by our conference I hope it shal be manifest Rainoldes UUill you then to lay the ground of our conference let me know the causes why you separate your selfe and refuse to communicate with the Church of England in prayers and religion Hart. The causes are not many They may be al comprysed in one Your Church is no Church You are not members of the Church Rainoldes How proue you that Hart. By this argument The Church is a companie of Christian men professing one faith vnder one head You professe not one faith vnder one head Therefore you are not of the Church Rainoldes What is that one faith Hart. The catholike faith Rainoldes Who is that one head Hart. The Bishop of Rome Rainoldes Then both the propositions of which you frame your argument are in part faultie The first in that you say the church is a companie of Christian men vnder one head The second in that you charge vs of the church of England that wee professe not one faith For we do professe that one faith the catholike faith But we deny that the church is bound to be subiect to that one head the bishop of Rome Hart. I will proue the pointes of both my propositions the which you haue denied First that the church must be subiect to the Bishop of Rome as to her head Next that the faith which you professe in England is not the catholike faith Rainoldes You will say somewhat for them but you will neuer proue them Hart. Let the church iudge For the first thus I proue it S. Peter was head of all the Apostles The Bishop of Rome succeedeth Peter in the same power ouer Bishops that he had ouer the Apostles Therefore the Bishop of Rome is head of all Bishops If of Bishops then by consequent of the dioceses subiect to them If of all their dioceses then of the whole church The Bishop of Rome therefore is head of the whole church of Christ. Rainoldes S. Peter was head of all the Apostles The Bishop of Rome is head of all Bishops I had thought that Christ our Sauiour both was and is the head as of the whole church so of Apostles of Bishops of all the members of it For the church is his
the shew of wordes UUherefore it was néedfull sith we séeke herein to finde out Christes will that first we agreed what way the right sense of the scripture may be knowne UUhich séeing you would haue me to fetch from the Pope and I haue no lust to go vnto Rome nor thinke it lodgeth in the Vatican so that by this way no agréement can be made or ende of controuersie hoped for I will take a shorter and a surer way confessed by vs both to be a good way whereby the right sense of the scripture may be found and so the will of Christ be knowne Hart. UUhat way may that be Rainoldes To learne of Christ him selfe the meaning of his word and let his spirit teach it that is to expound the scripture by the scripture A golden rule to know and try the truth from errour prescribed by the Lord and practised by his seruants for the building of his church from age to age through all posteritie For the holie Ghost exhorting the Iewes to compare the darker light of the Prophetes with the cléerer of the Apostles that the day-brigtnesse of the Sonne of righteousnes may shine in their hartes saith that no prophecy of Scripture is of a mans owne interpretation because in the prophecie that is the scripture of the Prophetes they spake as they were moued by the holie Ghost not as the will of man did fansie UUhich reason sith it implieth as the Prophetes so the Apostles and it is true in them all the holie men of God spake as they were moued by the holie Ghost it followeth that all the scripture ought to be expounded by God because it is inspired of God as natures light hath taught that he who made the law should interpret the law This rule commended to vs by the prescript of God and as it were sanctified by the Leuites practise in the olde Testament and the Apostles in the new the godlie auncient Pastors and Doctors of the church haue followed in their preaching their writing their deciding of controuersies in Councels UUherefore if you desire in déede the churches exposition and would so faine finde it you must go this way this is the churches way that is the churches sense to which this way dooth bring you For S. Austin whose doctrine your selfe doo acknowledge to be grounded on the lawes the maners the iudgementes of all the catholike church whom you call a witnesse of the sincere truth and catholike religion such a witnesse as no exception can be made against who assureth you as you say not onely of his owne but also of the common the constant faith and confession of the ancient Fathers and the Apostolike church this S. Austin hath written foure bookes of Christian doctrine wherein he purposely entreateth how men should vnderstand the Scripture and expound it The summe of all his treatise doth aime at this marke which I haue pointed too that the meaning of the Scripture must be learned out of the Scripture by the consideration of thinges and wordes in it that the ende whereto the matter whereof it is all writen be marked in generall and all be vnderstood according to that end and matter that al be read ouer ouer those things chiefly noted which are set downe plainly both precepts of life and rules of beliefe because that all things which concerne beliefe and life are plainly written in it that obscure darke speeches be lightned and opened by the plaine and manifest that to remoue the doubt of vncertaine sentences the cleere and certaine be followed that recourse be had vnto the Greeke and Hebrue copies to cleare out of the fountaines if the translation be muddie that doubtfull places bee expounded by the rule of faith which we are taught out of the plainer places of the scripture that all the circumstances of the text bee weighed what goeth before what commeth after the maner how the cause why the men to whom the time when euery thing is saide to be short that still wee seeke to know the will and meaning of the Authour by whom the holie Ghost hath spoken if we finde it not yet giue such a sense as agreeth with the right faith approued by some other place of scripture if a sense be giuen the vncertaintie wherof cannot bee discussed by certaine and sure testimonies of scripture it might be proued by reason but this custome is dangerous the safer way far is to walke by the scripture the which being shadowed with darke and borowed words when we mind to search let either that come out of it which hath no doubt and controuersie or if it haue doubt let it be determined by the same scripture through witnesses to be found vsed thence wheresoeuer that so to conclude all places of the scriptures be expounded by the scriptures the which are called Canonical as being the Canon that is to say the rule of godlines and faith Thus you sée the way the way of wisedome and knowledge which Christ hath prescribed the church hath receiued S. Austin hath declared both by his preceptes and his practise both in this treatise and in others agréeably to the iudgement of the auncient Fathers Which way sith it is lyked both by vs and you though not so much followed of you as of vs I wish that the woorthinesse thereof might perswade you to practise it your selfe but it must enforce you at least to allow it Hart. I graunt it neither can nor ought to be denyed that euery one of those things and specially if they be ioined all togither doo helpe very much to vnderstand the scriptures rightly But yet they are not so sure and certaine meanes as some other are which we preferre before them Neither do they helpe alwaies nay sometimes they do hurt rather and deceiue greatlie such as expound the Scripture after them This is not onelye said but also proued at large out of the Doctors and Fathers by that worthie man of great wit and iudgement our countriman M. Stapleton Doctor of Diuinitie the Kinges Professor of controuersies in the vniuersitie of Doway Of whose most wholesome worke entitled A methodicall demonstration of doctrinall principles of the faith one booke is wholly spent to shew the meanes way and order how to make authenticall interpretation of the Scriptures In the which hee layeth this for a ground that the Scripture cannot be rightly vnderstood but by the rule of faith Whereupon he condemneth the Protestantes opinion that the sense of Scriptures must be fetched out of the Scriptures Which errour of yours to ouerthrow the more fully he deliuereth foure meanes of expounding the Scriptures the first very certaine and sure the rule of faith the next no lesse certaine the practise of the church the third at least probable the consent of the Fathers the last most
not begotten or borne Hart. Hée séemeth to haue meant it And Torrensis who gathered S. Austins Confession out of all his workes alleageth these places to proue that Christians ought to belieue manie things which haue come to vs from the Apostles themselues deliuered as it were by hand although they bee not written expresly in scriptures Rainoldes The Iesuit Torrensis dooth great wrong herein to the truth of God to S. Austins credit and to you who reade him And yet with such a sophisme in the word expresly that if it should be laid vnto his charge he would wash his handes of it as Pilate did of Christes blood For he alleageth those places of S. Austin thereby to proue Traditions as though we had receiued that doctrine touching God by tradition vnwritten not by the written word S. Austin no such matter But dealing with an Arian who required the verie word consubstantiall to be shewed in scripture doth tell him that the thing it selfe is there founde though not that word perhaps Wherevpon he presseth him in like sort with the word vnbegotten which the Arian hauing giuen to God the Father and defending it S. Austin replieth that as he had termed the Father vnbegotten well although the word not written so might the Sonne also be termed consubstantiall sith the scripture proueth the thing meant therby And as with this Arian so with their bishop Maximinus Who hauing himself termed God the Father vnbegotten or vnborne denied the holie Ghost to be equall to the Sonne because it is not written that he is worshipped To the which cauill of his S. Austin answereth that although it be not written in flat termes yet is it gathered by necessarie consequence of that which is written Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God the holy Ghost is God therefore to bee worshipped Thus S. Austins meaning was of these pointes that the scripture teacheth them Whereby you may perceiue the fraude of Torrensis Who saying that they are not expresly written in the scriptures left him selfe this refuge that hee might say they are not in expresse wordes though for sense and substance they are in the scriptures And yet by referring that title to traditions induceth his reader to thinke that they are taught by tradition not by scripture A doctrine which Arians will clappe their handes at that the Sonne of God is not by scripture of one substance with the Father But let it be far from you M. Hart to thinke so prophanely of the word of God And if you rest so much on Doctors of your owne side rest here on Thomas of Aquine rather who saith that concerning God wee must say nothing but that which is founde in the holie scripture either in words or in sense Which as he confirfirmeth by Denys and Damascen so was it the common iudgement of the Fathers of S. Austin chiefly as his bookes touching the Trinitie doo shew And in the conclusion thereof for euident proofe of that which you denied he giueth the name of the rule of faith to that which is plainly set downe in scripture of the Trinitie Wherfore the scripture cōpriseth the rule of faith for that point And as for that point so for all the rest which in that very booke whereof we spake S. Austin noteth It remaineth therfore that S. Austin meant not by the authoritie of the church more then he signified by plainer places of the scriptures Hart. Yes his own words in that verie sentence doo yéeld sufficient proofe me thinkes that he did For if he signified by plainer places of the scriptures as much as he meant by the authoritie of the church then was it idle when he had named the one to adde the other to it chiefly in such sort as that is added by S. Austin For both the coniunction the places of scriptures and the authoritie of the church should import thinges different and I may say of wordes as the Philosopher saith of things That is done in vaine by more that may be done by fewer Rainoldes Nothing is done in vaine that is done to edifie The church might well be mentioned as an interpreter of the worde though it teach not any thing beside the word of God The people of Israel did beleeue the Lord and his seruaunt Moses yet Moses did nothing but that the Lorde commaunded him The wise man doth charge his sonne to hearken to the instruction of his father and forsake not the doctrine of his mother yet they both the father and mother teach one lesson the chiefest wisedome the feare of God The same is fulfilled in this Moses and the Lord or rather in this mother and our heauenly Father of whom it hath bene said well He cannot haue God to be his Father who hath not the church to be his mother For God hauing purposed to make vs his children and heires of life eternall as he prepared his word to be first the séede the immortall seed of which we are begotten a new afterward the milke the sincere milke whereby wee béeing borne grow so he ordeined the church by her ministerie to teach it as it were a mother first to conceaue and bring foorth the children afterward to nourish them as babes new borne with her milke Which appeareth as by others so chiefly by S. Paul who traueiled of them in childbirth whom he sought to conuert and when they were new borne he nourished them with milke to set before our eyes the duetie of the church and all the churches Ministers in bearing children vnto Christ. Now the milke which the church giueth to her children shée giueth it out of her brestes and her two brestes are the two testaments of the holie scriptures by S. Austins iudgement the old Testament and the new S. Austin therefore saying the rule of faith is receiued of the authoritie of the church meant not that the church should deliuer any thing but onely what shee draweth out of the holie scriptures Hart. Not for milke perhaps which babes are to sucke but for strong meate wherewith men are nourished For mothers féede not their children being growne with mylke out of theyr brestes Rainoldes But S. Austin addeth that the holy scriptures haue both milke for babes and strong meat for men milke in plainer thinges and easier to be vnderstood strong meate in harder and greater mysteries Yea where Christ said that euerye Scribe which is taught vnto the kingdome of heauen is lyke vnto an housholder who bringeth foorth out of his treasure thinges both newe and olde S. Austin iudgeth that hée meant by newe thinges and olde the olde and newe testament Wherefore sith euery pastor and teacher of the church is meant you graunt by this Scribe it foloweth by S. Austin that the meate which he is to fetch out of his storehouse for the
proofe whereof you cited them namely that Paule went to see Peter for a reuerent respect and honor of his person But I deny the argument which you inferre thereof that Peter had therefore a singular power whereby you meane the supremacie You should haue laid the Fathers if you would néedes bestow them on this which is denied not on that which is graunted But this is the world Men will rather giue to the rich who need not then to the poore who need Hart. I thought you would rather haue denied that then this for this is cléere of it selfe and néedeth no proofe The common vse of men sheweth it For they giue honor and reuerence to them in whom they acknowledge a superioritie Rainoldes Perhaps a superioritie yet not a supremacie Hart. If Peter were Paules superior in power the supremacie is proued Rainoldes If in power you say somewhat Though neuerthelesse he might be full hie in power and yet come short of your supremacie But he was superior to him in some things els and not in power Hart. That he was superior to him in power I proue S. Peter had honor giuen to him of Paule therefore he was in power aboue him Rainoldes Euill newes for husbandes that haue shrewes to their wiues if this argument be good For they are commaunded to giue honor to the woman as to the weaker vessell whereof by your Logicke the wiues may claime authoritie and power aboue their husbandes S. Peter saw not this consequence he did not thinke on his supremacie For although he teach that the husband should giue honor to his wife yet he calleth the wife the weaker vessell not the stronger and he commandeth wiues to be subiect to their husbands that is to be inferior I trow in power vnto them Which S. Paule noteth also more expressely when he saith the woman ought to haue power vpon her head Hart. This answere doth not weaken the strength of mine argument For the name of honor when husbandes are commanded to giue it to their wiues is taken improperly But honor as I take it as Paule gaue it to Peter is vsed in his proper sense to signifie a reuerence the which an inferior doth owe to a superior a subiect to him that is in power aboue him Rainoldes The honor which husbands are bound to giue vnto their wiues as to the weaker vessels doth signifie an honest care and regard of bearing with their weakenes prouiding for their wantes and shewing all husbandly loue and duetie to them Such a reuerence as you mention it doth not signifie I graunt yet doth it signifie a reuerence which is implied in the loue and duetie that their husbands owe them S. Paule saith to Timothee honor the widowes which are widowes in deede He meaneth that they should be charitably relieued but this reliefe is no reason why they should not reuerently bee regarded too For you are deceiued if you thinke that none are bound to reuerence others but onely the inferiors their superiors in power The Gentiles were taught by nature it selfe that a reuerence is due to euery state of men to children with an héed that no vnhonest thing be done in their presence because their tendernes is proue to learne it to old men with an honor in respect of their wisedome their experience their grauitie wherewith the gray heares are wont to be accompanied to all but chiefly to the best with a modest account of their good opinion and an honest desire to be approued of them Wherefore if your argument do stand vpon the proper signification of honour you shall perceiue your selfe that it can neuer proue a supremacie of power For honour is an outward profession and testimonie of a reuerent opinion which we haue conceiued of some kind of excellencie in him to whom we giue it So the chiefest honor is due vnto God the father of lightes the fountaine of all excellencie and after him to men in seuerall degrees according to their seuerall estates and giftes of excellencie wherewith the Lord hath blessed them to the king as preeminent and all that gouerne vnder him to the ministers of the gospel the more the better they do their duetie to them whom nature most doth bind vs our fathers and mothers to the aged the wise the vertuous the learned in a word to all men but chiefely to the faithfull as members of the bodie of Christ none so base but hath an excellencie the excellencie of a Christian. And hereby appeareth the weakenes of your argument that Paule was inferior to Peter in power because hee gaue him honour Did not Salomon in his maiestie giue honor to his mother and was not he the king and she a subiect to him Are we not all taught to go one before an other in giuing honour as well the rich as the poore as well the high as the lowe What a proud and arrogant mind had that bodie vnlesse his mind and tongue dissented who thought that hee must giue honor to no man but to them only that are in power aboue him Belike this diuinitie was learned out of that chapter of the booke of Ceremonies which I touched afore that the Pope doth do reuerence to no man of duetie and right for then he is afraid least it should be thought that some man is in power aboue him Yet in the same booke to see a good nature we reade that he did honour Fridericke the Emperour in so much that he placed him next vnto him selfe aboue all the Cardinalles and the place in which the Emperour did sit was no lower then the place where the Pope did holde his feete Nowe the seate of the Emperour declareth that the Pope was aboue him in power and yet the Pope did honour him Paule therefore might haue beene aboue Peter in power though hee did honour Peter If he might the honour which hee gaue to Peter dooth strike no stroke for the supremacie Wherefore you may dimisse it as a coward out of the field not fitte to fight the Popes battailes Doth not this mine answere touch honour taken properly Or will you set the Emperour aboue the Pope in power Or is it a lie that the Pope did honor him Hart. You triumph ouer me at euery small occasion as though you had a conquest But you see not your owne absurdities and follies You spake ere-while of the Apostles as equall in power now you speake of Paule as if hee were aboue Peter like a Pope aboue an Emperour And I did frame my reason out of the Scriptures and Fathers and you do bring the booke of Ceremonies to kill it Will you subdue vs with such warriours Rainoldes I would faine triumph not ouer you but ouer your errours if I could The strength of my cause and valure of my proofes maketh me the chéerefuller in dealing with the
feathers They report that Plato defined a man so a man is a liuing creature two-footed vn-feathered For which definitioÌ„ when he was commended Diogenes tooke a Capon and hauing pluckt his feathers off did bring him in to the schoole of Plato saying This is Platoes man The holy word of God is the same in the Church that reason is in a man Whereupon we giue it for an essential marke as I may terme it of the Church by which the Church is surely known and discerned But the shew of Gods word is such in many heretikes as of reason in brute beastes that some who haue no skill to discerne that marke doo thinke it impossible to know the Church by it Your felowes hereupon describe the Church by outward and accidentall markes as namely by antiquity succession consent These are very plausible and many do commend them highly But he that hath halfe an eie of a Philosopher I meane a wise Christian néede not playe Diogenes in plucking feathers off to shew that these markes may agrée to a capon Now as they deale with the markes of the Church so doo you M. Hart with the markes of the truth Not Vincentius but you who couer your errors with the name of Vincentius and take thinges as necessary and sure proofes of truth which he did note as probable and likelye tokens of it onely For he deliuered them not as neuer failing but as holding often and such as albeit they doo hit sometimes yet do they misse sometimes also Whereof him selfe is witnesse in that he disproueth them the first vniuersality by the example of the Arians and flyeth from it to antiquitie the second antiquitie by the example of the Donatistes and flyeth from it to consent Hart. But the third consent he speaketh of as neuer failing as a necessarie token to know and trie the truth by as an essentiall marke and proper to the pointes of Catholike faith and truth And this is the marke which chiefly I regarded when I alleaged Vincentius that our questions might be tried by the consent of the Fathers Rainoldes In déede he preferreth this marke before the rest as hauing held when they fayled Neuerthelesse he speaketh not so of it neither as that it may serue for tryall and decision of questions betwéene vs. For what doth he acknowledge to bee a point approued such as we are bound to beléeue by this marke Euen that which the Fathers all with one consent haue held written taught plainely commonly continually And who can auouch of any point in question that not one or two but all the Fathers held it nor onely held it but also wrote it nor onely wrote it but also taught it not darkely but plainely not seldome but commonly not for a short season but continually Which so great consent is partly so rare and hard to be found partly so vnsure though it might be found that him selfe to fashion it to some vse and certainetie is faine to limit and restraine it First for the matters that we are to seeke and follow their consent not in all litle questioÌ„s of the scripture but in the weighty pointes of faith Then for the persons that we must folow all or the greater part because in many pointes all of them consent not Finally which cometh néerest to our purpose he graunteth that there may such heresies arise as must be dealt withall by the scripture onely and not by the Fathers for purposing to shew both in what maner and what kind of heresies may be found out and condemned by the consenting sentences of the Fathers he saith and confirmeth that neither all heresies must be assaulted in this sort nor alwaies but only such as are new and greene to weete when first they spring vp before they haue falsisied the rules of auncient faith the very straitenes of time not suffering them to do it and before the poyson spreading abroad farther they endeuour to corrupt the writings of the Fathers But heresies that are spread abroad and waxed old must not be set vpon in this sort because they by long continuance of time haue had long occasion to steale away the truth And therefore whatsoeuer profanities there be either of schismes or heresies that are waxed auncient we must in no case deale otherwise with them then either to conuince them if it bee nedeful by the authoritie of scriptures onely or at the least auoid them being of old time conuicted and condemned alreadie by the generall councels of Catholike Bishops Lo when heresies are growne to be in yeares auncient and ample in places when they haue got antiquitie and vniuersality then must we fight against them not by consent of Fathers but by the authoritie of the scriptures only This is the sentence of Vincentius Lirinensis in that passing fine booke against the profane innouations of all heresies Is it not a golden senteÌ„ce Hart. The cause why Vincentius affirmeth that heresies when they are spread far and haue long continued are to be confuted by the scriptures onely not by consent of Fathers is that which he dooth point too of endeuouring to corrupt the writings of the Fathers a common practise of heresies if occasion and time serue them But there is no colour why therefore you should refuse to deale with vs by the consent of Fathers For neither are the doctrines which we professe heresies much lesse olde and ample heresies such as he speaketh of nor haue wée endeuoured to corrupt the writings of the Fathers nay wée haue kept them and endeuour daily to set them foorth most perfitly But your heresies in déede although they sprang of late and may be counted new and greene yet haue they endeuoured to corrupt the Fathers since and haue done it The practise of Erasmus is famous therein Of whom to say nothing what censures haue béen giuen by other worthy men whoÌ„ Torrensis nameth Marian Victorius in CoÌ„mentaries that he set foorth vpon the former thrée tomes of S. Ierome reproueth most learnedly more then sixe hundred errours thrust into them by Erasmus either in expounding or ill correcting them And Torrensis in his preface to the Confession of S. Austin declareth sundry bookes to be S. Austins owne which Erasmus had noted as falsly fathered on him Wherefore if by Vincentius you minde to touch them who endeuour to corrupt the writings of the Fathers cast out the beame out of your owne eie before you séeke a mâ—atâ— in ours Rainoldes Yet you sée by the way though you make hast away from it what rotten postes they be whereon as principall pillars your church and faith is built vniuersalitie antiquitie consent Of which it is shewed by Vincentius himselfe that heresies may iustly claime the two former vniuersalitie and antiquitie and make a faire chalenge to the third consent in processe of time so cunningly can they file the Fathers to their
purposes But you may not be touched with any such suspiciō Why Because the doctrines which you professe are not olde and ample heresies you say no not heresies ours are so not yours Whether in opinions of faith and religion which are in controuersie betwéene vs you or we doo hold heresies that is the point in question Your or mine yea or nay is no sufficient proofe of either But of which soeuer it shall appeare by conference that they are repugnant to the holy scriptures let them be iudged heresies and the men heretikes who stubburnly mainteine them Thus much you can not choose but grant that your opinions are olde and spread abroad for you claime antiquitie vniuersalitie whereof you say that our opinions haue neither It is more likely therefore by Vincentius that you who by long continuance of time haue had long occasion to steale away the truth should corrupt the Fathers then wée who haue not had it And in very truth as the worship of Images the greatest abomination that first preuailed in Poperie was confirmed by writings very vncertaine and fabulous yea by dreames of women and visions of Deuils in the second Nicen Councell as the thing it selfe and great Clerkes of your owne testifie so the rest of your errours which ouerflowed Christendome in darkenes of superstition haue bene most authorised by forged déedes and bastard writings begotten by some varlets and fathered on the Doctors The Schoolemen and Canonists whose handes were chiefe in this iniquitie did beare the whole sway for many yeares togither in Uniuersities and Churches The Doctors Fathers were pretended much but more pretended then regarded and their bookes corrupted what through ignorance of scriueners who copied them out before the vse of printing what through impudence of forgers who coined counterfeites in their names Now when they lay thus distressed and diseased in the dust of Libraries Erasmus a man of excellent iudgement and no lesse industrious then learned and wittie did enterprise first to cure them and brought them foorth into the light In the workes of S. Ierome which were most of all depraued aboue others chiefly the former tomes he did what he could both to clense them from blemishes and to lighten them with his notes Hee professed that his coniectures in restoring of places had not satisfied himselfe alwaies He promised that if any man should restore them better hee would both embrace his trauaile very gladly and reioyce at the publike profit What sparkle of thankfulnes but I let go thankfulnes what sparkle of ingenuitie was there and good nature in Marian Victorius who requiteth such a worke so carefully attempted so painfully performed so modestly excused with the tauntes and contumelies of erring of lying of craftines of ignorance of heresie of impietie Aristotle writeth of them who begin a thing in pointes of learning that although they seeme to do lesse then others who receiue it of them and after adde thereto yet they do more in deed because the beginning of euery thing is hardest and it is easie to adde Wherevpon he craueth of such as he hath sought to benefite by his labour thankes for that he found pardon for that hee missed If Victorius haue profited no better in the schoole of Christ let him goe to Aristotle and learne first to thinke more humbly of him selfe afterward to deale more modestly with others And you who like of him because hee findeth fault with the dooings of Erasmus as a shoomaker did with the picture of Apelles for missing in a shoo-latchet may know that good and learned men among your selues haue found fault with him for being bold beyond the shoo That dooth Molanus witnes one of your chiefest Doctors and Censors of bookes who in S. Ieromes workes set foorth at Anwerpe hath therefore circumcised the lippes of Victorius Hart. Molanus hath reproued and corrected him for vnciuill spéeches against the person of Erasmus as wherein he past the boundes of Christian modestie not for ouersight in that hée laid errours to Erasmus charge Though the speciall point for which we blame Erasmus is not this so much of errours in S. Ierome His censures on S. Austin are misliked most in that he reiecteth sundry bookes as counterfeit which Torrensis proueth to bee S. Austins owne Whereof the importance and danger is the greater because some will haue nothing taken for S. Austins but what Erasmus hath allowed Rainoldes Molanus did couer the sinnes of Victorius whē he found no other fault with his notes but of vnciuill spéeches If fauour to the man and fansie to the cause had not made him partiall he might haue said of him that as he past the bounds of Christian modestie in railing at Erasmus person so had he past the boundes of Christian truth in noting errours of Erasmus But he that would affirme Erasmus to be ignorant of the Greeke toong wherof his workes so many both in diuinitie and humanitie through all sortes of writers doo proclaime the contrarie néedeth no other Censor to aduertise men with what eyes he looked into Erasmus dooings It was not Erasmus ignorance of Greeke which bredde so many errours in his corrections of or notes vpon S. Ierome It was his knowledge of the Latine the Romane churches faults It was his skil of the Italian abuses of the Pope It was the triacle which he giueth that séemeth poison vnto you These thinges because they moued many to suspect that somewhat in Popery was not of the best it was thought expedient that they should bee taken out of S. Ierome Victorius to doo it with a faire shew pretended other errours but through too much choler hee bewraied his humour He lacked that discretion which hath bene shewed since by the Diuines of Louan in setting foorth the notes of Viues on S. Austin For they haue omitted a great many things wherin Viues touched their Popes and Churches sores yet say they not so much Only they say that certaine things are omitted certaine as not many and errours they name them not neyther tell they what Now if the notes of Viues on S. Austin haue found such disfauour the censures of Erasmus on him may better beare it And to say the truth they haue deserued it at your handes For in those censures hath Erasmus shewed that many bookes doo falsely beare S. Austins name by which as by the warrant of S. Austins iudgement sundry of your Schoolemens and Canonists dreames haue bene aduanced and aided But he reiecteth some as counterfeit you say which Torrensis proueth to be S. Austins owne And what maruell is it if amongst hundreds he were deceiued in one or two And hauing had triall of many false titles he thought somefalse which were not A fish that hath béene touched once with the hooke is saide to feare the hooke vnder euery meate They who
epistle is auncient translated out of Greeke into Latin by Rufinus who liued within foure hundred yeares after Christ. And this touching Linus the storie of whose succession you thinke disproâ—eth it was thought vpon then is answered by Rufinus For 〈◊〉 his preface to the booke entitled the recognitions of Clemens which he translated too some demaund saith he how when as Linus and Cletus were Bishops of Rome before Clemens himselfe in his epistle to Iames saith that the chaire of teaching was committed to him by Peter Whereof this is the reason as we haue heard that Linus and Cletus were in deed Bishops in Rome before Clemens but while Peter liued that they might haue the care of the Bishoply charge he might do the duety of the Apostleship As it is found that also he did at Caesarea where though being present himselfe yet he had a Bishop whom he had ordained namely Zachaeus And thus may eche of these things be thought to be true both that they were reckened Bishops before Clemens and Clemens neuertheles receiued the chaire of teaching after the death of Peter Rainoldes The auncientie of the epistle is no warrant for it but that it might be false and forged The epistles of Seneca to Paul of Paul to Seneca are no lesse auncient which yet haue nothing worthie of either Paul or Seneca There haue béene verie many misbegotten pamphlets wandring abroad euen from the time of the Apostles yea vnder the names of the Apostles themselues The lesse haue you to maruell if there were some miscreant who wrote in the name of Clemens to Iames. As for Rufinus who translated it if yet he did translate it and some haue not abused him as well as Clemens his iudgement was not such but he might be deceiued in a greater matter Which if you beléeue not on S. Ieroms credit because he was his aduersarie looke into these same workes that he translated and you shall perceiue it For the thinges writen in the Recognitions of Clemens which you mention sent to Iames also are the most of them vncertaine many fabulous yea and some hereticall as your selues confesse Yet Rufinus iudged it a hidden treasure of wisedome thought he had a bootie of it Againe in that epistle wherein Clemens maketh him selfe Peters successor he certifieth Iames that he sent him before by the commandement of Peter an other booke entitled the booke of Clemens touching thinges which Peter did in his iourney Now this iourney-booke hath béene so long so famously knowne for a roague that he hath not onely béene burnt through the â—are of olde by sundrie Fathers and Bishops in a Councell but also of late the college of Inquisitors at Rome haue enrolled him in the Register of bookes condemned by the Church Wherefore he was a counterfeit that set abroad these bastardes in the name of Clemens howsoeuer Rufinus thought them of simplicitie to be his owne whose they were named And with this perswasion was he moued to thinke on some probabilitie how that might be true which séemed false therein of Peters ordeining Clemens to be his successor when Linus and Cletus were Bishops before him The only shew whereof being a report receyued by tradition he was faine to take it for lacke of a better But he erred in it either not knowing or not considering times and stories For by his answere Linus and Cletus should be no longer Bishops then while Peter liued and when he dyed Clemens should succéede him next immediatly Whereas it is apparant by records of times that Linus continued Bishop eleuen yeares after Peters death and Cletus twelue after Linus before that Clemens had the roome Which albeit Turrian the Iesuite doâ— gnaw vpon as he is wont to make it away yet is the matter so manifest certaine that Genebrard the freshest of your Popish Chroniclers and passing all the rest as in skill so in zeale for the Popes causes could not but set it downe as true Hart. Yet he saith withall that Peter did nominate Clemens to succeede him But Clemens gaue the roome first to Linus and then to Cletus not so much of modestie as by the counsell of the Lord least the example of this nomination should passe to the posteritie and derogate from the free prouidence of the Church in choosing of her owne Bishop Rainoldes He saith so in deede But who séeth not that this was deuised to make stories agrée with the tale of Clemens and by the way to countenance the election of Popes which now the Cardinals vse For the booke of Ceremonies of the Church of Rome treating of that election affirmeth that Peter nominated Clemens to be his successour with this coÌ„dition it is thought if the Cardinals would admit him But they perceiuing that the forme of this nomination might greatly hurt the Church in processe of time did not accept of Clemens but did choose Linus and made him Pope after Peter Howbeit Clemens afterwarde was chosen by the Cardinals when Linus and Cletus were deceased Though Genebrard in â—â—â—ming the fansie to his purpose doth not so much follow the booke of the Ceremonies as the glose of the Canon law which with better care of the Popes credit saith that Pope Clemens him selfe renounced the Papacie considering that it would be an euill and pernicious thing for the example that any should choose his owne successour Into such follies do you 〈◊〉 your selues to say that the blessed Apostle of Christ S. Peter did ordeine that which was pernicious for the example refused by the Pope mislyked by the Cardinals preiudiciall to the Church and all to maintaine the epistle of Clemens with the tale in it that Peter made him his successour A thing so absurd that where it is mentioned in the Canon law there is it nâ—â—ed to â—e chaffe and Contius a learned lawier of your owne doth note vpon that note that it is counted chaffe worthily for it is all counterfeite and Comestor the autor of the scholastical historie who liued when the darkenes of Poperie was grossest refuteth and reiecteth it as a méere forgerie But whatsoeuer it â—e and hoâ— so euer auncient 〈◊〉 the same it may be which S. Ierom saith did beare the name of Clemens and was reproued by olde writers but be it what you wil you confesse your selfe that to be vntrue for proofe wherof you cited it that Clemens succeeded Peter and not Linus Wherefore séeing Linus did succéede Peter that while Peter liued in the same sort as Zachaeus did you say at Caesarea Euodius at Antioche the Bishops of Antioche of Caesarea may claime as well the Papacy by Peters succession as may the Bishop of Rome Hart. Yet by your owne graunt and the consent of histories Linus who succéeded him in Rome did out-liue him And therefore he was
he noteth two differences betweene a shepeheard and a theefe the one in their doctrine the other in their ende In their doctrine that a theefe entreth not in by the doore the lawfull way but the shepeheard entreth in by the doore that is he preacheth Christ. For Christ is the doore and by him the shepeheard leadeth his sheepe in and out to feede them and saue them In their ende that a theefe commeth to steale kill destroy that is to spoile them of their life of life spirituall and eternall but the shepeheard cometh that they may haue life and haue it in aboundance Whereby it is euident that Christ did meane the same by theeues and robbers here which other where by false Prophets Beware of false Prophets which come to you in sheepes clothing but inwardly are rauening woolues For els neither they could haue béene noted well by the propertie of woolues that is to kill destroy neither had his doctrine and diuision of teachers béene perfit to his purpose neither were his answer fit against the Pharises who touched him as a seducer and not as an intruder not for succession but for doctrine If you beleeue not me that this is the natural meaning of the text you may beléeue S. Austin who saith that to enter into the shepefold by the doore is to preach Christ whom who so preach not rightly they are theeues and robbers Of these for example hee nameth Arius who yet succéeded lawfully as D. Stapleton graunteth though he counte him a woolfe and not a theefe and a robber vpon a point that Austin saw not In which point his fansie carried him so farre that whereas Austin said we must loue the Pastour tolerate the hireling beware of the theefe he would adde to Austin and driue away the woolfe as though S. Austin meant not the woolfe by the theefe and driue away by beware belike nor Christ neither when he said beware of woolues How much more séemely had it béene for Stapleton to haue followed Austin with your best interpreters then so to haue corrected him Hart. He doth not correct him so much as varie from him and that not on his owne but on S. Cyprians iudgement a Father most auncient Whose definition if he liked better then hee did Austins why might he not take it Rainoldes Good reason if it were as true as S. Austins But what is that definition Hart. A theefe is he who climeth vp another way that is as Cyprian writeth who succeeding no man is ordained of him selfe Rainoldes These wordes are Cyprians wordes but the definition is Stapletons definition For Cyprian doth not write them more of a theefe then of a woolfe Hart. He writeth them of Nouatian who entred not in by the doore into the shepefold but climed vp another way Therefore he writeth them of a theefe Rainoldes He writeth them of Nouatian who was a false prophet and came in sheepes clothing but inwardly was a rauener Therefore he writeth them of a woolfe For Cyprian doth count Nouatian the heretike both a theefe and a woolfe Which proueth that sense that I gaue thereof against your distinction who seuer woolues from theeues But Stapleton in handling this place of Cyprian doth playe vs thrée feats which if they be marked will shew with what arte so many sayinges of the Fathers are interlaced in his bookes First he chaungeth the wordes For where it is in Cyprian a se ipso ortus est arose of him selfe Stapleton doth reade it a se ipso ordinatus est is ordained of him selfe Hart. It hath béene heretofore reade so in some printes Rainoldes It hath so but amisse For Nouatian was ordeined of others though vnlawfully as Eusebius sheweth and Cyprian did know Wherevpon that faâ—tie reading is amended in the later printes out of writen copies and a note reprouing it least it créepe in againe is left by Pamelius Whose edition sith Stapleton prayseth as best corrected and foloweth it for aduantage to chaunge a worde of it here in such sort it was a feate and had a purpose But the second feate doth excel this For because Cyprian saith of a théefe that he succeeding no man arose of him selfe Stapleton doth take him as though he had defined a theefe by those wordes Whereof he would haue the reader to conceiue that they who haue succession and are ordeined lawfully can not bee theeues a thing which Cyprian meant not But therein he dealeth with the wordes of Cyprian as if a man should say to define a doctour a doctour is he who interpreteth the scriptures that is as Cyprian writeth who doth corrupt the gospell and is a false expounder of it For these are Cyprians wordes and spoken of Nouatian Doctours But they were not spoken to define a doctour For then they should be verified as well of all doctours as they be of Doctour Stapleton Yet he who should define a doctour so to proue him one and that out of Cyprian should serue him such a feate as he doth serue a theefe and take him in the snare which him selfe hath framed Hart. As though that of theues some might be good and some naught There may be so of doctours Rainoldes No. But as doctours some are good some are naught and sith that both these qualities are incident into doctours a doctour should not be defined by eyther of them so theeues some succéede some doo not succéede and sith that both these qualities are incident into theeues no one of them can open the nature of a theefe nor both in déed pithily Wherefore to say in defining a theefe that he succeedeth no man it is a iuggling feate which conuerteth accidents into the shape of substance and maketh essence of a qualitie A feate that is vsed much by D. Stapleton doth amaze the simple who sée not the sleight where they who discerne the conueiance of it estéeme it as a feat of sophistrie But the third feate is a feate of foly For when he had made foure kindes of teachers the first pastors the next hirelings the third theeues the last woolues and graunted that they all are called to that office by lawfull succession excepting theeues onely he diuideth hirelings into two sortes and hauing proued that both of them do teach the truth concludeth therupon that an vndouted certaintie of doctrine and faith is knit to succession Then the which what kinde of legierdemaine can be more fond to say in the conclusion that they who by lawfull succession are teachers doo surely teach the truth because that hirelings doo and pastours when he had shewed before that not onely they doo succéed lawfully but also woolues who teach errours Hart. It was not his meaning that succession alone hath vndâ—uted certaintie of doctrine and faith but succession with vnitie For other-where he saith that to this prerogatiue of Bishops and Priestes there are required
breath doo say that the same thing is both writen and vnwriten Yet Father Robert dealeth wiselyer and like a Iesuite who séeing the danger of naming speciall men and places doth shrowd himselfe in the generall of Councels Popes and Fathers As if an horse-stealer being to giue account of whom and where he got his horses should say that he bought them of incorporations horse-coursers and honest men within Christendom Hart. Will you leaue your roauing and come vnto the marke now Rainoldes It is a roauing marke we shote at and I am come néerer it then you would haue me But what shall be your next baâ—â— Hart. I told you that I would proue it next by the Fathers It agreeth very well with your spirit that you should call this a bolt Rainoldes Well enough as you shoote it For although the Lord hath planted the writings of the Fathers as trees in his Church as in a Paradise whereof there may be made good shaftes blessed is the man that hath his quiuer full of them they shall not be confounded but they shall destroy their enimies in the gate yet not all the shaftes which you do vse of theirs are good your fletchers at whose handes you take them vpon trust doo marre them in the making that I may iustly call them rather bolts of Papistes then shafts of the Fathers Who if they were aliue might say to you in like sorte as did a Poet to Fidentinus This booke Sir Fidentinus which thou doost reade is mine But thou by reading it amisse beginst to make it thine Hart. Will you promise then to yelde vnto the Popes supremacie if I proue it by the sayings and iudgement of the Fathers alleaged and applyed rightly Rainoldes I truly But I must doo it with a protestation for my defense against such quarrelers as Bishop Iewell fell vpon Hart. With what protestation Rainoldes With this that I promise to yéelde vnto the Popes supremacie if you can proue it by the Fathers not becaâ—â—e I thinke that proofe to be sufficient of doubtfull matters in religion but because I know you are not able so to proue it Hart. Whether I be able or no so to proue it the thing it selfe will shew But if you thinke not that a sufficient proofe why saide you that the writinges of Fathers are as trees whereof there may be made good shaftes such as shall destroy their enimies in the gate yea that the man is blessed who hath his quiuer full of them Rainoldes It is writen in the Psalmes Except the Lord keepe the citie the keeper watcheth in vaine By the which wordes the Prophet séemeth to haue thought that the warde and watch of men is not sufficient for the defense of cities vnlesse the Lord assist them with his watch and ward How say is not this true Hart. So. What of that Rainoldes That is an answere to your question For the Prophet adding how God doth blesse men in giuing them children saith they are as arrowes in the hand of a strong man blessed is the man that hath his quiuer full of them they shall not be confounded but they shall destroy their enimies in the gate If this be truly spoken of children well nurtured who yet are not sufficient to defend a citie without the Lordes assistance why might it not be spoken of Fathers well vsed and yet they not suffice to decide a controuersie without the worde of God For though I acknowledge there is good wood in them to make shaftes for the Lordes warres yet is not all their wood such some of it is knottie some lithy â—ome crooked And the best arrowes which are made thereof vnlesse they haue heades of stronger mettall then them selues out of the Lords armorie they are not sharpe enough to pearce into the harte of the kinges enimies as are the arrowes of our Salomon Wherefore as of your part if you hearken not to Moses and the Prophetes I haue no greate hope that Fathers will perswade you though they should rise from the dead so for my selfe I will assure you that neither dead nor quicke Fathers nor children shall perswade me any thing in matters of religion which they can not proue by Moses and the Prophetes For the Apostles preached not any thing but that which the Prophetes and Moses saide should come to passe And if a Father if a Saint if an Angell from heauen preach beside that which the Apostles preached let him be accursed This lesson I haue learned of Paul the Apostle and I subscribe vnto it If you can like it better out of a Fathers mouth learne it of S. Austin Who writing against the Donatists which could not proue by scripture their erroneous doctrine doth presse them with the same sentence and teach al Christians the same lesson whether it be of Christ or of his Church or of any thing els whatsoeuer pertaining to our faith and life I will not say if we but if an Angel from heauen shall preach to you besides that which you haue receyued in the scriptures of the law and the Gospel that is to say the olde and new testament let him be accursed Hart. You mistake the meaning of S. Austins wordes For they are thus in Latin Proinde siue de Christo siue de eius ecclesia siue dâ— quacunque alia re quae pertinet ad fidem vitamque nostram Rainoldes I haue the right meaning of these wordes I trow for they are plaine of all thinges that doo concerne our faith and life Hart. I but heare the rest Non dicam si nos nequaquam comparandi ei qui dixit licet nos sed â—mnino quod sequutus adiecit si angelus Rainoldes Neither doo I mistake these For he alludeth to the wordes of Paul to the Galatians Hart. But you mistake the meaning of that which doth follow Si angelus de coelo vobis annuntiauerit praeterqà um quod in scripturis legalibus euangelicis accepistis anathema sit Rainoldes Why doth he not meane the old new testameÌ„t as we call them by the scripâ—ures of the law and the gospell Hart. Yes but your errour is in the worde praeterquà m by which he meaneth contra quà m not beside that but against that For there are sundrie thinges of faith and life to be preached beside them in the scriptures of the law and the gospell but not against them Wherefore if it were so that the Popes supremacie could not be proued by scriptures yet the proofe of it by the Fathers might be good For it were not against the scriptures although it were beside the scriptures Rainoldes Praeterquà m id est contra quà m beside that which you haue receyued in the scriptures that is against that This is your Louanists glose Hart. Nay it is S. Austins as you may perceiue by his own wordes in an other place touching the same matter where he saith thus The Apostle did not say
name that is solitarie and not collegiate moonkes But the beléeuers at Ierusalem were at Ierusalem in a citie and liued in fellowship together Doo you not sée that the Apostles and Apostolike men were not such as afterwarde the moonkes whom Ierom meaneth and therefore Ierom was deceiued Hart. I will not beléeue on your worde that so worthie a Father was deceiued Rainoldes If you will not on my worde I will bring his owne worde to make you beléeue it For writing to Paulinus touching the training vp of moonkes he saith that the Apostles and Apostolike men are not paterns for them to folow but S. Antonie and others who dwelt in fieldes and deserts Hart. He saith that the Apostles and Apostolike men are set for an example to Priestes and Bishops not to moonkes True in some respectes And yet me thinkes too But what if the Fathers perhaps might be deceiued so through ouersight Rainoldes If they might be deceiued so through ouersight they might be deceiued through affection also For they were men and subiect to it As Cyprian through too much hatred of heretikes condemned the baptisme of heretikes as vnlawfull wherein a Councell erred with him As Origen through too much compassion of the wicked thought that the diuels them â—elues should be saued at length As Tertullian through spite of the Roman clergie reuolted to the Montanists and called the Catholikes carnall men because they were not so precise as the Montanists in pointes of mariage and fasting Hart. We condemne these errours in them as well as you and doo therein except against them Rainoldes You doo except also I trow I am sure your Doctors doo against Damascene for his tale of Gregorie the Pope and Traian the Emperour that Gregorie while he went ouer the market place of Traian did pray for Traians soule to God and behold a voyce from heauen I haue heard thy prayer and I pardon Traian but see that thou pray no more to me for the wicked A verie great affection to prayers for the dead that moued Damascene to write this For it is against the doctrine of the Schoolemen that prayers may helpe out the soules that are in hell In Purgatorie they say they may Hart. S. Thomas doth confirme the same Yet he beléeueth that of Damascene But he saith that Gregorie did it by speciall priuilege which doth not breake the common law Rainoldes But your Canus saith that Thomas was a young man then beside that he was greatly affected to Damascen And Damascen might easily perswade a well willer he doth affirme so lustily that all the east and west is witnesse that the thing is true Which report of his yet Canus doth maruell at sith it is vnknowne in all the Latin story But Canus as a man of better minde and sounder iudgement then your Popish Doctors are the most of them did wisely sée noteth fréely that not onely later and lesse discreete autours as he who made the golden legend but also graue ancient learned holy Fathers haue ouershot them selues in writing miracles of Saintes partly while they fetched the truth where it is seldom from common rumors and reportes partly while they sought to please the peoples humor and thought it lawfull for historians to write thinges as true which coÌ„monly are counted true Of this sorte he nameth Gregorie and Bede the one for his Dialogues the other for his English story He might haue named Damascene with them Unlesse hee meant him rather perhaps to be of that sorte which did not onely take by heare-say of others but coyned lyes themselues too wrote those thinges of Saintes which their fansie liked though neither true nor likely As that S. Frauncis was wont to take lise that were shaken off and put them on himselfe it was a lowsie tricke and S. Frauncis did it not but the writer thought it an argument of his holinesse Likewise that when the diuel troubled S. Dominike S. Dominike constrained him to hold a candle in his handes till the candle being spent did put him to great grief in burning his fingers Such examples there are innumerable but these two may giue a taste of their affection who haue defiled the stories of Saintes with filthie fables Yet out of such stories many thinges are read in your Church-seruice And Canus although he confesse it as euident notwithstanding which is straunge he thinketh them vnwise Bishops who seeke to reforme it For while they cure the nailesore saith he they hurt the head that is in steede of counterfeites they bring in graue stories but they chaunge the seruice of the Church so farre that scarce any shew of the olde religion is remaining in it A thing well considered of them by whom your Roman Portesse was reformed For though they haue remoued some of those stories which Canus saith are vncertaine forged friuolous and false yet haue they doon it sparingly If they should haue left out all those legend-toyes their Portesse had beene like our booke of common prayer which heretikes would haue laught at and there had remained no shew in a maner of the olde religion saue that their seruice is in Latin Hart. These thinges are impertinent but that it pleaseth you to play the Hicke-scorner with the holy Portesse For what need you mention the writer of S. Francis life or S. Dominikes or the golden legend that old moth-eaten booke as D. Harding calleth it of the liues of Saintes I mind not to presse you with thinges of later writers but of olde and ancient whom Canus iudgeth better of then of the younger For he saith of Vincentius Beluacensis and Antoninus that they cared not so much to write thinges true and certaine as to let go nothing that they found writeÌ„ in any papers whatsoeuer But of Bede and Gregorie he iudgeth more softly and rather excuseth them then reproueth them Though iudge he how he listed he was but one Doctour and other learned men perhaps mislike his iudgement both for younger and elder writers Rainoldes They who deale with taming of lyons I haue read are wont when they finde them somewhat out of order to beate dogges before them that in a dogge the lyon may see his owne desert Euen so when I rebuke the writer of S. Francis life or of S. Dominikes or of the moth-eaten booke as you call it though he who wrote it was an Archbishop in his time a man of name and his booke a legend read publikely in Churches and called golden for the excellencie but when I rebuke that moth-eaten writer or Antoninus if you will and Vincentius Beluacensis who are as good as he welnigh you must not thinke I doo it for the dogges sake but for the lions rather I meane the ancient writers who deserue rebuke too For as not Rupertus
of the forme or of the end I meane as either wrought by deceit or to deceit by deceit ifmen did counterfeit the voice to deceit if they hearde it miraculously in deede As it is writen touching the man of sinne that his coming is according to the working of Satan with all power and with lying signes and wonders and with all deceiuablenesse of vnrighteousnesse among them that perish because they receyued not the loue of truth that they might be saued Take héede M. Hart least that which foloweth be verified in you Therefore shall God send them strong delusion to beleue lyes that al they may be damned who beleeued not the truth but had pleasure in vnrighteouâ—nesse Hart. Take heede vnto your selfe M. Rainoldes that you offend not in this vnrighteousnesse by abusing that famous Doctor of the Church S. Thomas of Aquine For the holy Father Pope Pius the fifth hath honoured his memorie with a double greater feast in his countrie and with a double feast throughout all Christendome to be kept as solemnly as the holy dayes of the foure Doctours of the Church are kept Wherefore you ought to thinke so much the more reuerently of all that he hath writen and not to charge him with forging and falsifying if he haue missed ought but rather to suppose that if the autours haue not that which he alleageth yet he had read it alleaged by some other and of a good affection to the Sée of Rome he thought it to be rightly alleaged and wrote it Rainoldes Of a good affection As you will Let it be so He with such dealing of a good affection hath feasted the Pope and the Pope againe of a good affection hath double feasted him But you graunt then that Doctors of the Church may bee deceyued as through ouersight so through affection too and that these exceptions against them are lawfull Hart. Lawfull if you proue that they be so deceiued For they may be I graunt Rainoldes What And may they not be deceiued also or rather seeme to be deceyued through the affection or ouersight of other men Hart. Of other men How Rainoldes As when a Greeke writer is translated into Latin the translator maketh him sometimes to say that which he neuer meant And before printing the scriueners who copied out bookes with hand committed sundrie scapes Which likewise befalleth vnto printers now So there may be a faute in an autour without the autours faute through ouersight of printers or scriueners or translators For example in the story ecclesiasticall of Eusebius translated by Rufinus it is alleaged out of Clemens that Peter Iames Iohn although Christ preferred them almost before all yet they tooke not the honour of primacie to them selues but ordeined Iames who was surnamed Iust Bishop of the Apostles This had béene a notable testimonie for Iames against the primacie of Peter But I alleaged it not because as I séeke to winne you to the truth so I séeke to doo it by true and right meanes Whereof this were none being an ouersight as it appeereth of Rufinus For in the Greeke Eusebius it is that they ordeined him Bishop of Ierusalem not Bishop of the Apostles Hart. That may be the printers faute or the scriueners perhaps who wrote it out not his who translated it Rainoldes But I thinke it rather the translators faulte For Marianus Scotus doth cite out of Methodius the same touching Iames that they ordeined him Bishop of the Apostles Which belike was taken out of the storie of Eusebius doon into Latin by Rufinus And he hath erred often in in turning Gréeke writers as also his translation of Iosephus sheweth Though I may not charge him with all the faultes therein For where it is auouched by some that Iosephus holdeth the bookes of Maccabees to be holy scripture as in déede he séemeth to doo in the Latin in the Greeke he saith not any such thing nay he doth teach the contrarie but it is vnlikely this came from Rufinus who helde him selfe the Maccabees not to be canonical Howbeit if you say that the Gréeke copie which he translated of Eusebius had that word amisse through the scriueners faulte I will not striue against you But a more certaine example of the faultinesse in scriueners first and printers after is found in Optatus in that he affirmeth Peter was called Cephas because he was head of the Apostles Apostolorum caeput Petrus vnde Cephas appellatus est Upon the which place your lawier doth note that where he had thought it to be an ouersight of a man dreaming that the Syriake word which singifieth a stone is the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a head now he ghessed rather that the words unde Cephas appellatus est were some foolish glose writen rashly in the margent and then interlaced into the text by scriueners Hart. Like enough But you haue no harme by this glose For though you blot it out yet Optatus saith that Peter was head of the Apostles Rainoldes Neither haue we any harme by that text For I haue shewed before it maketh nought for the Papacie But we may haue harme by that kind of gloses chiefely sith as Viues obserueth on S. Austin vpon the like occasion some glosers haue defiled all the writings of noble autours with such vncleane handling of them Hart. Will you make an ende of excepting against the Fathers and let vs heare at length the Fathers speake themselues Rainoldes The fathers them selues With a very good will But looke that you bring me the Fathers them selues For which is my last exception and so an ende there are many bookes entitled to Fathers which the Fathers made not nay whereof sundry were made by such youthes as are not worthy to beare the Fathers shooes The workes of S. Ierom are abroade in nine volumes of the which nine as good as three are none of his And yet Vitae patrum a legend how wrongfully fathered on S. Ierom your Espencaeus Canus shew is not amongst them Though there are amongst them slippes of the same tree a barbarous and sottish fable as Canus calleth it of the natiuitie of S. Marie and many other treatises of the same kinde which Erasmus hath refuted most diligently rightly The workes of S. Austin haue not béene tampred with so much in this sort NotwithstaÌ„ding there is not aboue one or two of his ten volumes that hath not more or fewer such pamphlets patched to it Not onely by the iudgement and censure of Erasmus which yet you sée how Canus estéemeth in S. Ierom but also of the Louanists whose censures are the censures of many of your best Diuines and they shew that sundry things beare S. Austins name whereof some are vnlearned some lewde and heretical But what do I speake of Ierom and Austin when there is scarse any amongst all the
Fathers that hath not beene abused so The Frier whom Stapleton doth commend greatly for diligence and iudgement Sixtus Senensis hath writen a discourse touching the false entitling of bookes whence it cometh and how to finde it out Therein he hath proued that bookes are fathered falsly not onely vpon Austin and Ierom whom I named but also vpon Ambrose Cyprian Athanasius Eusebius Emisenus Iunilius Cyrill Eucherius Arnobius yea Thomas of Aquine too With this discourse he closeth vp the former volume of his holy librarie in which hee hath shewed that Clemens Abdias Origen Chrysostome Hippolytus many mo haue had their names defaced with the same iniury Hart. There are many bookes entitled to the Fathers falsly we confesse I will not bring them in to witnesse against you or if I doo you may refuse them lawfully Rainoldes Then you will not bring in the storie of Abdias to proue that Peter gaue the whole power to Clemens which Christ had giuen him Or if you doo you license me to refuse him as fréely as I refused his coosin Clemens in the same point Neither will you bring Arnobius on the Psalmes to proue that who so goeth out of Peters Church shal perish as doth Stapleton Or if you doo you license me to refuse him as not the man whom Stapleton would haue him taken for Hart. You may refuse Abdias For Pope Paule the fourth reiected him amongst the bookes which he condemned as Sixtus recordeth But Arnobius is an ancient writer indéede more worthy of credit Rainoldes More worthy of credit then Abdias I graunt But he is not that writer most ancient whom Stapleton reporteth him to be For the most ancient Arnobius was elder as Sixtus also noteth then that he might heare of the heresie of Photinus Whereas this Arnobius who writeth on the Psalmes doth mention Photinus and write by name against his heresie Hart. Will you stand then to the iudgement of Sixtus which be the right and naturall graffes of the Fathers and which bee bastard slippes Rainoldes No. For though Sixtus did sée many thinges yet he saw not all and others may sée that which Sixtus ouersaw As for example there are two bookes touching the martyrdom of Peter and Paule bearing the name of Linus the first Bishop of Rome These doth Sixtus iudge to haue indeede béene writen by that ancient Linus as Faber also did before him But Claudius Espencaeus doth maruel that Faber a learned man and witty could be so perswaded sith Peter in that storie is made to withdraw the Roman wiues matrones from their husbands beddes vnder pretense of chastitie Which vnchristian doctrine repugnant to the lawes of godlinesse and honestie nether was it possible that Peter should teach neither is it likely that Linus should belye him with it And thus you sée an autor disallowed by Espencaeus on very sound reason whom Sixtus hath allowed of not so discretely Hart. But if you thus allow and disallow whom you list I may take paines in vaine For when I shall alleage this or that Father speaking most expressely for the Popes supremacie you haue your answere readie that he was ouerséene through error or ouerborne with affection or if he wrote in Gréeke he is mistranslated or if he wrote in Latin he was misse writen or misseprinted or if none of these will serue it is a bastard falsly fathered on him And whether your shifts be sufficient answeres your selfe will be iudge Hart. Nay not so nether For what soeuer I answere I will giue reason of it And whether my reasons bee sufficient proofes I will permit it as I said to the iudgement of the iurie that is of all indifferent men who haue skill to weigh the reasons that are brought and conscience to giue verdict according vnto that they finde Which triall if you like off as you séemed to doo then bring forth your witnesses and let vs heare now the Fathers speake themselues Hart. Content And I will â—irst beginne with the Fathers of the Church of Rome euen the auncient Bishops whom I alleaged before out of D. Stapleton namely Anacletus Alexander the first Pius the first Victor Zepherinus Marcellus Eusebius Melchiades Iulius and Damaâ—us To whom I adde also them whom you mentioned out of Melchior Canus to wéete the two Sixti with Eleutherius and Marcus For though some of them maintain it as by scripture some as by tradition yet all agrée in this that they maintaine the Popes supremacie Rainoldes In déed though their heades be turned one from an other yet their tailes méete together with a firebrand betwixt them as did the foxes of Samson But Samson had three hundred foxes haue you no more but these fewe Hart. Foxes doo you call those holy martyrs and Bishops And will you still vtter such blasphemous spéeches and set your mouth against heauen Rainoldes Against hell M. Hart and not against heauen For I reuerence the holy martyrs whom yoâ— named But foxes I call those beastes who wrote the thinges that Stapleton and Canus quote most lewdly and iniuriously to the martyrs and Bishops whom they are falsly fathered on as I will proue Which that I may doo with lesser trouble all in one I would you brought the rest if you haue any more of them Hart. More Why all the Bishops of Rome from them forward euen till our age haue taught the same doctrine as Canus declareth For it is confirmed by Innocentius the first in his epistles to the Councels of Carthage and Mileuis by Leo in his epistles to Anastasius and the Bishops of the prouince of Vienna by Gelasius in his epistl◠〈◊〉 Anastasius the Emperour and in the decrees which hee made with the seuentie Bishops and in his epistle to the Bishops of Dardania by Vigilius in his decrees the last chapter of them by Pelagius the second to the Bishops that were assembled in the citie of Constantinople by S. Gregorie in his epistle to Austin the Bishop of the Englishmen and by many other Popes whose testimonies are rehersed in the decrees and decretals in the twelfth distinction and seuenteenth and ninetéenth and twentieth and one and twentieth and two and twentieth and the eightieth distinction in the canon beginning with the worde Vrbes and the ninety sixth distinction in the canon Bene and in the foure and twentieth cause the first question throughout many chapters and in the fiue and twentieth cause the first question and in the title of election in the chapter beginning with the word Significasti and the title of priuileges the chapter Amiqua and the title of baptisme the chapter Maiores and the title of election in the sixth booke of decretals the chapter Fundamenta and in the Extrauagants the constitution Vâ—am sanctam which extrauagant constitution was renewe◠〈◊〉 approued by the Councell of Lateran vnder Leo the tenth So that you haue
say this or that against a man you must proue it Rainoldes So I minde to doo And that by demonstration out of the saâ—e booke of Genebrard himselfe in which he â—indeth this faute with the Centurie-writers For about what yeare of Christ did Isidore dye How doth Genebrard recken Hart. In the yeare six hundred thirtie and seuen as he proueth out of Vasaeus Rainoldes When was the generall Councell of Constantinople vnder Agatho kept What saith he of that Hart. In the yeare six hundred foure score and one or two or there about Rainoldes Then Isidore was dead aboue fourtie yeares before that generall Councell Hart. He was but what of that Rainoldes Of that it doth folow that the preface writen in Isidores name and set before the Councels to purchase credit to those epistles is a counterfeit and not Isidores For in that preface there is mention made of the generall Councell of Constantinople held against Bishop Macarius and Stephanus in the time of Pope Agatho Constantine the Emperour Which séeing it was held aboue fourtie yeares after Isidore was dead by Genebrards owne confession by his owne confession Isidore could not tell the foure score Bishops of it And so the foure score Bishops which Turrian hath found out in one Isidore are dissolued all into one counterfeit abusing both the name of Isidore and foure score Bishops Hart. Igmarus who was Archbishop of Rhemes in the time of Lewes sonne to Charles about seuen hundred yeares since did thinke that worke to be S. Isidores and so he citeth it Rainoldes Why mention you that Are you disposed to proue that some haue béene deceiued and thought him Isidore who was not Hart. No But to proue that the worke is Isidores as Father Turrian doth by the testimonie of Igmarus Rainoldes Ignarus can not proue that He must be content to be deceiued in some what as well as his ancestors For it is too cléere by the Councels them selues that Isidore did dye about the time that we agréed of and therefore no helpe but it must be an other who wrote that preface in his name Which maketh me so much the more to suspect that the epistles are counterfeit sith I finde that a Father was counterfeited to get them credit And sure it is likely that about the time of Charles the great when the westerne Churches did commonly-fetch bookes from the Roman librarie some groome of the Popes that had an eye to the almes-box conueied this pamphlet in amongst them and well meaning men in France and other countryes receyued it as a worthie worke compiled by S. Isidore and coming from the See Apostolike But say what may be saide for the silence of olde witnesses which is vrged and iustly as a probable coniecture that those epistles were not extant in their dayes the matters that are handled and debated in them the scriptures alleaged the stories recorded the ceremonies mentioned the times and dates assigned are not coniectures probable but most certaine proofes that they could not be writen by those ancient Bishops of Rome whose names they beare There is a booke entitled to the Poet Ouid touching an olde woman haue you euer séene it Hart. What is that to the purpose Doth he speake of the Popes epistles Rainoldes No but their epistles are like to that booke in sundrie respectes It is ancient it was printed aboue a hundred yeares ago And he who set it foorth saith that Ouid wrote it in his old age and willed it to be laide vp in his graue with him in the which graue it was found at length by the inhabitants of the countrey who sent it to Constantinople and the Emperour gaue it to Leo his principal notarie who did publish it A smooth tale to make men beleeue that it is Ouids Of whom though it sauour no more then these epistles of the Bishops of Rome yet if your Diuines could finde some antike verse there that were an euidence for the Popes supremacie I sée my former reasons would not disswade you from beléeuing but Ouid wrote the booke For to the barbarousnes and basenes of the Latin and style if I should vrge it you might answere that Ouid wrote so for two causes that he might not séeme to be vaine gloriously giuen and that his repentance might bee knowne euen to the simplest To the silence of witnesses that no man maketh mention of it amongst his workes you might answere that it lay hidden in his graue And this you might answere with greater shew of likelyhood then that the Popes epistles lay hidden in the Popes librarie But vnto the matters of which the booke intreateth and thinges that it discourseth on no shadow of defense can be made with any reason For it speaketh in the praise of the virgin Marie that God shall giue her to be our mediatresse and shall assumpt her into heauen and place her in a throne with him yea the autour prayeth to her Which are pointes of doctrine that were not heard of I trow in Ouids time Neither is it likely that Ouid was so well read in the scriptures that he could cite the law of Moses and speake of Iacob and Esau and allude to Salomon in Ecclesiastes Euen so for those epistles of the Bishops of Rome although you haue gloses to shift of other reasons yet I am perswaded that you can lay no colour on the contents and substance of them For the scriptures are so alleaged and such pointes are taught about the gouernment of the Church about religion about rites about stories ecclesiasticall that it is not possible they should be writen by those Bishops Hart. Why Doo you thinke it as vnlikely a matter that they should alleage the scriptures as that Ouid should Rainoldes Nay I doo thinke it or rather I doo know it to be more vnlikely that they should so alleage the scriptures as they doo then that Ouid should allude to Salomon or cite Moses For the bookes of Moses perhaps of Salomon too were translated into Gréeke by the Seuentie interpreters many a yeare before Ouid and he might haue read them But your common Latin translation of the olde testament made a great part of it by S. Ierom out of the Hebrewe whence it is called S. Ieroms could not be séene by Anacletus and other auncient Bishops of Rome For they were deceased before he was borne And yet all their epistles doo alleage the scriptures after that translation An euident token that the writer of them did liue after S. Ierom yea a great while after him as may bee déemed probably For the common Latin translation which the ancient Latin Fathers vsed was made out of the Gréeke of the Seuentie interpreters Tertullian Cyprian Hilarie Ambrose and other of the same ages shew it in all their writings Nether was that olde translation forsaken straight waies as soone as Ierom had set forth his
is it fully written by S. Iohn Let vs heare him selfe speake These things saith he are writen that ye may beleeue that Iesus is the Christ the sonne of God and that in beleeuing yee may haue life through his name In which wordes the summe and end of the gospell is set downe by Iohn the summe that we may beleeue that Iesus is the Christ the Christ that is the soueraine Priest Prophet and King the Sauiour of men the end that we beleeuing in Christ the sonne of God may through him haue life euen that which alone is called life rightly to wit eternall life Which things being so as the Euangelist him selfe teacheth it must néedes be granted that those things which are writen in the gospell are sufficient for vs both to the way of life and to life As much then as sufficeth to faith and saluation so much is writen in the gospell For if the things which are writen had not béene sufficient to faith and saluation there were mo thing◠which might haue bene writen so many as the world could not haue conteined But these were omitted by the spirit of God because the other were enough for his purpose For he giueth this reason why mo were not writen these things are writen that yee may beleeue and in beleeuing may haue life There is contained therefore in S. Iohns gospell so much as is sufficient to faith and saluation Then if S. Iohns gospell alone haue sufficient how plentifully hath Christ prouided for his Church as a most bountifull Lord for his houshold to which he hath giuen so many Apostles and Euangelists witnesses and expounders of the same doctrine Wherefore the scripture doth not onely teach the Church but also amply and plentifully teach it all things behoofull to saluation For although the substance of the Christian faith be single and the same wherewith as with meate the seruants of God are fedde to life eternall yet as the ages of the seruants differ and in ages different their cases differ too so was it méete there should be sundry sortes and waies to diuide that meate and as it were to season it for ech one his part as it might best agrée with him Whereof that we might haue a true liuely paterne set foorth by Christs owne spirit in the word of life for the féeding of the faithfull therefore hée gaue sundry woorkemen so to terme them and writers of his faith that although they deliuered all the same foode yet they did not dresse it all in one sort And so it cometh to passe that in those writers of the faith of Christ both the vnitie of doctrine in the diuersitie of deliuering yeldeth a swéete tast in the spirituall mouth of the godly minde and the manifold vse ministreth holesome nourishment to euery mans stomake the euident plainnesse in the groundes of faith maketh that euen they who are of deintiest mouthes can not refuse it for the toughnes and the hidden wisedome in the secretes of scripture both trieth the strongest and satisfieth them who are sharpest set and to say that in a word which no wordes can expresse enough the infinite treasures bring infinite fruits to the faithfull to procure them a blessednes that is exceeding great and infinite Wherefore it is a thing so cléere and so sure that those secretaries of the holy Ghost ioyned togither doo open to the Church in the holy scriptures all things behoofefull to saluation that he who knoweth it not may be iustly counted ignorant hée who acknowledgeth it not lewde hée who dissembleth it vnthankfull hée who denieth it more then wicked For what can there be in cléerenesse more euident or in peise more weightie or in strength more sound or in truth more certaine then that generall principle which S. Paul deliuereth not as Moses of the law not as Iohn of the gospell but of the whole scripture and holy writt to Timothee The whole scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach to improue to correct to instruct in righteousnes that the man of God may bee furnished throughly furnished to euery good worke Thus if you demaund of what autoritie scripture is it came from God by inspiration if you regard what vse it hath it teacheth improueth correcteth instructeth if you would sée to what end it is that the man of God may be furnished Our dutie in Christ Iesus is faith woorking by loue Faith embraceth sound doctrine loue requireth a godly life Soundnes of doctrine is held if true things be taught and false refuted Godlines of life is kept if we fly from euill and folow good But the holy scripture teacheth the truth improueth errour correcteth iniquitie instructeth to righteousnes as it appéereth by the Apostles wordes Therefore it setteth foorth a mans whole dutie in Christ Iesus that is as I suppose so much as sufficeth to saluation For it is not onely profitable to these things as some doo mince the matter but sufficient too in so much that it is able to make a man wise to saluation through faith and to furnish him Yea to furnish what maner of man the man of God that is the Lordes interpreter the Minister of the worde the teacher of the Church the Pastour of the flocke euen Timothee himselfe much more the flock of the faithfull in whom so great furniture of wisdome is not necessary Howbeit the Apostle neither so contented with saying that the man of God may be furnished addeth to beat the absolute perfection of the scripture into our mindes and memories with as many reasons as he vseth wordes that the man of God may be furnished throughly furnished to euerie good worke Whereupon it foloweth that there is nothing at all that can be wished for either to soundnes and sinceritie of faith or to integritie and godlines of life that is to mans perfection and the way of saluation which the scripture geuen by inspiration of God doth not teach the faithfull seruantes of Christ. It is the iudgement therefore of the holy Ghost whose sentence I defend as I am bound by duetie that the holy scripture teacheth the Church all things necessarie to saluation Here if some perhaps desire the testimonies of the Fathers though to what purpose sith ye haue heard the Father of Fathers notwithstanding if any would heare the scholers iudgement when he hath heard the masters he shall heare the iudgement not of this or that man of whom he might dout but of the whole Church and of all the Saints For they with one agréement and generall consent haue termed the bookes of scripture Canonicall of the word Canon which signifieth a rule because they containe a worthy rule and squire of religion faith and godlines according whereunto the building of the house of God must be fitted Which opinion touching the Canon of the scripture allowed by Andradius himselfe the chiefest patrone of the Popish faith hath béene
they came off in what time they liued how often they gaue orders in what yeare they died and where they were buried Wherefore it is no maruaile that hee noted not what epistles they wrote Though in a writen copie at Rome which Turrian saw there is mention made of one of their epistles namely of Anacletus Rainoldes In a writen copie at Rome it may be but in no printed copie yet An ouersight of some who when Frier Suâ—ius set forth the Councels last did not informe him of it that hâ— might haue mended it in Damasus But if Damasus thought it a matter worth the noting how often they gaue orders it is very likely that he would haue noted how they wrote sometimes too if they had béene such writers As for Eusebius and Ierom though I graunt all writers came not to their hands yet were it very straunge that the one of them being in great fauour with Constantine the Roman Emperour the other attending on Damasus the Roman Bishop in ecclesiasticall writings both of them desirous and curious to know all Christian writers monuments purposely to speake of them neither of them could sée one of these epistles that such and so many Bishops of Rome had writen Chiefely sith they found sundry epistles writen by them which they mention and yet of all which they found there is not one amongst these nether Hart. Those which then were common might be lost since and these which now we haue might be then vnknowne Nether is it reason that all they should be said to haue writen nothing whose writings are not commonly knowne vnto men For euen now there are as Turrian reporteth in the Popes librarie manie bookes of epistles of the later Popes which containe the actes and déedes of each their Popedomes whence they are commonly called registers of Gregorie the seuenth Innocent the third Honorius the third Gregorie the ninth Innocent the fourth Alexander the fourth Vrban the fourth Clemens the fourth Nicolas the third Honorius the fourth Boniface the eighth Iohn the two and twentéeth Clemens the sixth Innocent the sixth and Vrban the fifth And these are known of few men because they are in writing â—nely and not printed besides very few which Gregorie the ninth and Boniface the eighth haue taken out of them and compilâ—d them in the Decretals to the vse of Church-causes But if these perhaps should be set forth hereafter would you say that they are forged because there hath no mention of them beene made by writers nor by the Popes themselues nay which the Popes them selues perhaps neuer saw Rainoldes The comparison is vn-euen when you say that the Popes them selues neuer saw bookes in their owne librarie thereby to shew that many bookes might be there which Ierom and Eusebius knew not For it is likely that the Popes haue many bookes which they sée not they haue other thinges to looke on But Eusebius and Ierom did study through libraries to see all the autours which were extant in them So that they were as likely to know the epistles of the former Popes as Turrian these of the later For Turrian doth not search olde monumentes more carefully to see vp the Pope then Ierom and Eusebius did to set foorth Christ. But whatsoeuer Ierom or Eusebius saw thinke you not that the Popes as litle as they sée the bookes in their librarie yet if the sight of any thereof could auaile them toward the recouering of their supremacy in England they would finde it quickly Hart. I thinke it should be foorth coming to doo good Rainoldes Then haue the Centuries in this place of witnesses a very strong proofe that about the time of Ierom and Eusebius these epistles were not in the Popes librarie For there is no mention made of them at all either in the Councel of Carthage or of Afrike in which the Pope endeuouring to shew that appeales might lawfully be made to him would haue allâ—aged them of likelyhood had they béene extant But this probabilitie noted by the Centuries Turrian passeth ouer in silence very smoothly where yet he maketh semblance of answering al their witnesses belike after Antonies precept in Tully who wisheth men if they be troubled with a hard argument to say nothing to it Howbeit all these I graunt are but likelyhoodes Notwithstanding if you adde to these likelyhoodes of Damasus of Ierom of Eusebius of the Popes them selues this also that neither any other Father or autour worthie of credit may be lightly found that hath alleaged them before the time of Charles the great about eight hundred yeares after Christ it may be well thought that there was good cause why the Centuries should suspect them Hart. Nay that is the later part of their argument which as I saide is vntrue For Isidore who liued aboue a hundred yeares before Charles the great did gather them together at the request of fourescore Bishops So that we haue foure score Bishops in that one to testifie with vs against that lyâ— of the Centuries Rainoldes But how know you that which you tell of Isidore and fourescore Bishops to be true Hart. How By the preface of Isidore him selfe set before the Councels For therein hauing shewed how he was moued by the request of fourescore Bishops to gather the canons together and we haue enterlaced saith he the decrees of certaine epistles of the Bishops of Rome to weete of Clemens Anacletus Euaristus and the rest such epistles as wee could finde yet til Siluester the Pope after the which we haue set downe the Councell of Nice and after that the remnant of the Popes decrees euen vntill S. Gregoriâ— Thus farre S. Isidore And is not he a Father an autour worthie of credit Rainoldes Admit that he is so what doo you conclude thereof against the Centuries Hart. Euen that which Genebrard doth to vtter it with his wordes then doo the Centurie-writers erre who keepe a babling that those epistles decretall of the auncient Popes are not alleaged by any autour worthie of credit before the time of Charles the great Rainoldes Your Genebrard sheweth him selfe a cunning man stil against the Centurie-writers For whereas they sayâ—â— you shall not lightly finde it he clippeth off the word lightly that the thing being found in a preface of Isidores he may charge them with errour to discredit the heretikes But what if S. Isidore did not write that preface What if he be a counterfeit too Hart. Marry now you haue the way if you can hold it Deny all the writers that doo make against you and say they bee counterfeit So shameles a cause you vndertake as shameles patrones that but by sâ—ameles meanes you are not able to maintaine it Rainoldes Nay patience I pray Me thought you were agréed that I might lawfully eâ—cept against a Father if he were counterfeit Hart. True if he were so But it is no good exception in law to