prouide for the safetie of the Church vijs modis as they traiterously reach and vpon that ground disclaime the authority of infidels but to cōmit our cause to him that iudges iustly c. Does not the point I say in hand about the Princes Supremacie spring a great deale clearer from these words especially beeing exemplified by our Sauiours practise and explained as of late by S. Peters commentarie that we must not repugne the infidel Magistrate nor flie to any higher tribunal in earth but commit our cause to God onely then Campians rebellion can be patronized by the Creed which he so vainly desired to haue rehearsed at his death That so we may fetch it not onely out of the Creed which you see how well we may without crossing the Bishop and yet wringing the Adioynder when he thinks hee is safest but out of the Pater noster too which is the second part of Catechisme wherein now we are As for the Commaundements and the Law of Moses to them I haue spoken sufficiently already and the Adioynder denies it not Also he seemes to graunt it of the Pater-noster though we should not euict it as we haue The Sacraments onely remaine which are the fourth part of Catechisme shall we see how this truth appeares from them too that the scoffing Adioynder may bee concluded euery way for all his descants First then as we are not baptized into the name of the Apostles Paul or Cephas 1. Cor. 1. 13. nor any of their successors but into the name of Christ and the obedience of the doctrine which he brought Math. 28. 20. which we haue shewed already how fauourable it was to Princes and therefore Baptisme speakes for their supremacy not for the Popes So in the other Sacrament which is the Sacrament of the Lords Supper in which we are to preach the Lords death vntill he come 1. Cor. 11. 26. we haue a farre clearer glasse of the aforesaid assertion for so much as his death was nothing but his submission to the Ciuill Magistrate who vniustly persecuted him to the very death Which Saint Paul thinks worth the noting when he fashions his scholler Timothy least he should turne aside to faction and to Iesuiticall garboyles 1. Tim. 6. 13. Or else what needed S. Paul to name Pilate in that place But it is reason that the Supremacy should be confirmed from euery place Yet our Sauiours obedience ended not in death no not the death of the crosse mortem autem Phil. 2. but there is a step after death wherein also it was most eminent In that Ioseph of Arimaethea begd his body of the Magistrate by his inspiration no doubt and aduentured not to vsurpe vpon it no not for the vse of buriall when he was dead without leaue See we what a subiect we haue of our Sauiour what a proclaimer of the Supremacie belonging to Princes Both in wombe and tombe both an embryo and a corps both afore birth and after death and straight afore death and straight after birth an early beginner and a most constant perseuerer euen somewhat beyond the tearm prefixed for vsque ad mortem was wont to be the last Reuel 2. 10. if any man can goe further let him Shall we see what followes now in the Adioynder § 57. Marry Sir if the Supremacy be not a matter of faith and yet we haue seen how neer of kin to the Creed though nothing is truer then the Bishops saying that it is not an article nor de fide properly but what then does the Adioynder infer thinke you First that we may not sweare to it then that it is not to be gathered out of Scripture neither expressely nor by consequence also that we may choose whether wee will beleeue it or no and a great many more such idle collections for want of setting out from a right ground 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saies the Poet in Suidas that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So here All falls to ground because his ground failes For shall we sweare to nothing but to the articles of faith How many oaths are taken in Courts daily both assertory and promissory yea and without the Courts too that are no way so much as bordering vpon the Articles of faith and much lesse of the ranke of them properly so called Insomuch as this one place if there were none other in the booke is of force to shew the toyishnesse of our Adioynder or else his sottishnesse or for certaine his egregious impudence and boldnesse that dares abuse his Readers in such vile sort as to perswade them that they may not sweare to the Kings Supremacy because the Bishop said it is no article of faith Does not the Bishop say it is a point of perswasion though it be short of faith and that not waueting but firme stedfast and vndoubted Therefore also he prooues it by places of Scripture though we may swear to many things which are not euident by the Scriptures and we sweare so daily Shall I not sweare that King Iames is lawfull King in his Dominions and also Supreame to all persons of the same as it followes in the oathes both of Supremacie and of Allegeance vnlesse I read it in the Creed or else in Scriptures But the Diuines and the Canonists hold him guiltie of sinne that sweares to a thing which hee doth not certainely beleeue What vnles he beleeue it by the Christian faith or the Christian beleefe properly so called Like as the Incarnation of Christ his passion his resurrection his ascension into heauen with the rest of those mysteries which either the Godhead in Trinitie or his blessed person containeth in it selfe You see what a dizzard either the Adioynder is himselfe or forswearing all shame chasing away the blood he would make his Readers For faith being a word of diuerse significations as Canus and Valentia and the whole crew of them can tell him he distinguishes not the faith of intellectuall verities touching the mysterie of saluation reuealed by God from that which is a certaine perswasion of the mind either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the truth of things which S. Gregorie can tell him that we haue of many more then come into the Creed yea or the main Scripture either or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the lawfulnesse of any action which we are to performe Of which kind it is said Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne that is whatsoeuer we doe with a perplexed conscience wanting full resolution but not Whatsoeuer falls not within the compasse of those principles by which the Christian religion differs from the heathen and are comprised in the Creede By that meanes we might not sweare vpon the Pater noster neither if we may sweare to nothing but that which is Creede which the Adioynder meant to leaue vs I dare say of his honestie when he had taken away the other And yet oathes de credulitate also are daily
be deposed by none but only by the grand-master of the Family which is God in the world as the Steward in the State is the King by analogie Not but that his meaning is as trayterous as euer for he vnderstands it of his Pope but I suppose Your MAIESTIES name was partly fatall to giue him light which is the character of Supremacy engrauen in you by God and partly it confirmes my opinion of him that if Your MAIESTES Bookes and rare trauailes in this cause out of which we all take that now write any thing had been but read of him when he was young and afore he was embondaged in this damnable preiudice he would haue yeelded to the spirit and power which they are fraught with acknowledged your proofes submitted to your reasons admired Your MAIESTIES cor linguam and finally thanked God for him his conuerter whom now he is faine to endure his confuter But longa dies quid non captiuat making vs as S. Chrysostome sayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to preferre euen garlicke before Ambrosia But although not he froward as he is yet there are others infinite both forreiners domesticks that profit by Your MAIESTIES peerelesse writings daily not onely to the enlarging of their skill and knowledge whereof your Works may seeme to be an Vniuersall Seminarie but to their redeeming from ruine which Vn-subiection drawes to and building them vp to euerlasting saluation in the world to come with quiet mindes and content in this present which before they wanted And truely our hope is that the Rights which Your MAIESTIE shall transmitt to your posteritie as nobly cleared by Your pen as euer they were wonne by your Auncestors swords will both breed much peace to the Land in generall and great security to Your royall offspring the inheritours confusion to the aduersaries and barkers against Soueraignty euen as long as either learning shall be held in price or a man shall be left aliue to reuolue bookes Whereof because this worke pursues the remainders and treads the same way though in a most improportionable distance once againe imploring Your MAIESTIES sacred Patronage worthie to be a Sanctuarie to a greater trespasser both out of Your loue to the cause and out of Your loue to the coate which is so great and so gratious as no fame will be so niggard but to record it to the furthest ensuing ages I beseech the GOD of ALL things euen for his deare SONNES sake which is our hope and our glorie defending Your MAIESTIE and by Your MAIESTIE defended to accōplish his rare Graces vpon Your MAIESTIES Royall Head Or in stead of augmenting them to adde but this one more blessing to the many that he hath multiplied super virum dextrae suae super Regem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 eundemque Phil-ecclesiasticum in whome no bodie could euer discerne any cause of doubt saue onely whether Your zeale to the Church or to the Clergie were greater euen PERPETVITIE and AETERNITIE the Imperiall style and patrimonie of Kingdomes in the most Orthodoxe language Your MAIESTIES most humbly-bounden and deuoted seruant in all dutifull and gratefull subiection S. COLLINS TO THE READER BEfore I come to the maine matter I thinke it not vnfit Courteous Reader to acquaint thee a little with the conditions of the man against whome this is intended for intending against one so much better thē himselfe to vse no more then Dauids phrase about the murthering of Abner by vnmanly violence and butcherly force which base circumstances no doubt encreased the tragedie of that worthie Champion in the opinion of Dauid And surely so it is A noble hand eases much a grieuous stroake insomuch as Tullie bemoanes the Common-wealth of Rome in one place that shee was not so happie as to be borne downe by valiant aduersaries but cowards gored her and sotts insulted ouer her and foxes and recreants ran vpon the battlements of her as the Prophet complaines Serui dominati sunt nostri saies Ieremie Slaues haue ridden ouer our heads Not that I would haue the glorious Faith of our LORD IESVS CHRIST to be held in the partiall respect of persons which S. Iames forbids where Baronius saies Kings are secretly nipt at and why forsooth but for the description of the man with the gold ring whereas now we may find pearles vpon the Popes shooes S. Iames beeing so farre from nipping Kings in that Epistle that as if he had foreseene that one of his own name should lead the field in time to come against the impugners of Soueraigntie he giues the onset so well as to call that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he meanes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Kingly or the royall Law vnderstāding the Diuine not so then Nor that I would not haue all to open their mouthes of what sort soeuer in the cause of God and his holy truth it is not we that exclude Eldad from prophecie or Medad from consultation but Bellarmine that blesses them with Populus qui extra est non nouit legem and therefore maledictus The people which is without they are accursed But yet me thinks some decorum would be obserued in these conflicts and though all cannot be coped with by their matches in worth as Kings by Kings as Alexander said for the sword deuoures now one now another and so Bishops by Bishops which the auncient Canons haue a speciall care of that euery rakeshame should not challenge a Bishop no not a Priest saies S. Paul vnder some store of witnesses yet modestie might be kept and faire dealing maintaind and respectiue warre of both sides nourished that which wants in other points to make euen the encounters beeing supplied by humility and courtesie and moderation as the Masters of the prizes are wont to equall the weapons of the combatants afore they begin From which this man is so farre that like the Orators in Tullie who the worse they spake the lowder they cried whom therefore he compares to lame riders that not able to goe on foote would needes be prauncing on horsebacke so he mends his stature by a false shooe as it were and as another Publican after Matthaeus Tortus climbes the sycomore of his owne wild fancies to ouerlooke the croudes or like the painters boy that beeing to paint Helen cùm pulchram pingere non posset pinxit diuitem so what he lacks in learning he laies on load in lies in taunts in tearmes and in abominable raylings Which for my part I cannot see what effect it is like to haue with the iudicious Readers if at least any such cast their eyes vpon these pamphlets for we are not ignorant to what kind of people they are consecrated then to strippe them quite of all credit and euen pitch them ouer the barre like forlorne lawyers for not caring what they say nor of whome they affirme as the Scripture prophecies of such like fellowes in one place that their owne tongue shall
this mention that S. Peter was exalted to the likenes or fellowship of our Sauiours martyrdome Which the Bishop hauing abated them in his citation of S. Austen I confesse also they should neuer haue heard from me but that this man complained of lame allegations As for the force it might seeme to carry against our Sauiours single and soueraigne sacrifice I shall neede to say no more then in the Apostles words If one member suffers all suffer with it euen the head and all but then especially I trow when they suffer for the head as S. Peter did suffer for the honour of his Master in some likenes with his Master and yet not daring to die too like his Master And our Sauiour though in glorie yet he cried from heauen that you may knowe hee is the true Dauid whome Saul annoyeth Saul Saul Why persecutest thou me Which words as if they had taught S. Paul what to thinke of the fellowship of sufferings of the bodie mysticall he is bold to say afterwards in his owne case Adimpleo in corpore meo relliquias passionum Christi pro corpore eius quod est Ecclesia I fulfill in my bodie the remainder of Christs sufferings for his bodie which is the Church Where pro is exemplarie not satisfactorie against the Rhemists that dreame of a masse of passions vpon that place So doth the Masse forsooth runne in their mindes But we speake of his calling them passiones Christi for sympathie and for proportion of which enough § 22. To returne to S. Austen and to conclude this whole matter with relating his text as largely as you can desire The summe is that the Church must bee gratious toward her children conuerting and returning by repentance as our Sauiour was to Peter the image of the Church or the proxie of the Church for I feare not to vouch that name by him which hath euery where so good grounds in S. Austen as you haue heard and bearing her person not without cause For euen Peter quoth he found fauour after many defaults Let her shew her selfe like Peter then whome Peter figured and the rather figured because himselfe was a sinner yea a great sinner as the Church containes many offenders in her That here also you may see another reason Sir though you haue beene twice answered to this question before why Peter rather then another figured the Church namely because Peter beeing a great sinner and yet after his sinnes finding greater grace was so much the apter to represent her which in both these kinds is verie notorious both abundantis peccati and super-abundantis gratiae of surpassing grace after exceeding guiltinesse Rom. 5. Our Sauiours Parable is not vnknowne to this purpose Luk. 7. propounded to a Simon though not this Simon which of the two debters ought more The case was Peters owne both a great debter and released of much and perhaps our Sauiour deliuered it as in his hearing so not without some reference to him standing by But at least for this cause he bare the person of the Church And so Petri lapsus potiùs confirmat primatum Pap◠as Bellarmine saies Peters fall rather confirmes the primacie of the Pope But you see what primatum what kind of primacie not to be vniuersall Lord or rector but the Churches type or the Churches figure to teach the Church as you would say by way of liuely instance to shew grace as hee had found grace and shee both in her owne and his person This was his masterie that he had ouer the Church to be master of mildnesse and we denie not but aboue the rest of the Apostles Doest thou loue mee more then these Alas how could he choose to whome so much was forgiuen then shew compassion § 23. Now the faults of S. Peter that S. Aust had set down but not so F. T. no more then he durst set downe his owne name aright nay which purposely he leapes ouer though they were incident to his allegation as you may see in his first chap. num 3. and yet blames the Bishop for maimed quotations they are these insuing First his doubting vpon the sea And if the sea be his seat or the whole Church as they imagine you see in what danger the Church is to haue a staggering gouernour I say staggering euen in faith Secondly his disswading our Lord from death You will say that was no great matter of which neuerthelesse you may be pleased to remember what our Sauiours censure was heauie no doubt He called him Satan Thirdly the snipping off of Malchus his care with a sword wherein his pretended Successors imitate him but too truely What though they strike no blow themselues Executio saies Bellarmine ad alios spectat Let Seneca be heard It is thou saith Seneca speaking to Alexander who transported by anger commanded Lysimachus to be cast to a lyon and so torne in peeces and deuoured it is thou that openest thy iawes vpon him it is thou that tearest him in peices with thy teeth Tuum illud os est tua illa feritas O quà m cuperes c. The like may be said of Daniel and his enemies But this F. T. durst not so much as once to mention he knowes it makes so harsh a sound And therefore he fetches a leap from Peters doubting to his denying and pares away three of his errors with an caetera which S. Austen had comprehended and set downe in specie I haue heard of some that thinke for Peter to drawe his sword at Malchus because Malchus in Hebrew signifies a King as we are taught by S. Ierome de vitâ Malchi was either a presage or a iustification of the Popes practises at this day A presage it might well be But as for iustification they may call to mind how our Sauiour approoued it threatning the sword to them that tooke the sword though it were Peter himselfe for euen to Peter were those words directed Not to them that beare the sword as committed to them by God which is the right and the duty of the ciuill magistrate but to them that take it that is manage it without cōmission either by themselues or others as the Popes at this day Therefore Tertull. most wittily Patientia Domini in Malcho vulnerata est Our Lords patience was wounded in Malchus or That which Malchus felt in his care our Lord felt at his very heart It displeased him so much that a Churchman should strike Therefore also hee healed the wound by miracle and restored his care vnto him againe Which was not ordinarie to doe miracles for the cure of vnbeleeuers specially oppressours and impugners of his person but that the importance of the cause so required it and to shew how iniurious he accounted such curtesie when those which are Church-men will draw the sword though it be in defence of his truth or person § 24. The fourth error there named was his ter negâsse
fratres or bono vnitatis preferred for his maturitie to preuent schisme and disorder as hath beene told you Though the name Apostles is common to some without the companie of the twelue and the Scripture vseth it so Phil. 2. 25. whom Peter might be charged with and with the other Fathers of the Church as Leo here calls the Bishops of their making without derogating from the Colledge of them properly so called Therefore heare how S. Leo qualifies this saying in the same Sermon a little after Transiuit quidem etiam in alios Apostolos vis potestatis istius ad omnes Ecclesiae principes decreti huius institutio commeauit sed non frustrà vni commendatur quod omnibus intimatur It cannot be denyed but the force of this authoritie passed also vnto the other Apostles and the same ordinance comprehends all the peeres of the Church But not without cause is that deliuered to one which concernes all Why so Petro enim ideò hoc singulariter creditur quia cunctis Ecclesiae rectoribus Petri forma proponitur That is For therefore is this particularly recommended to Peter because Peter is made a patterne of all Church-gouernours And S. Austen de verbis Domini secundum Iohannem Serm. 49. Dominus in vno Petro format Ecclesiam Our Lord still fashions his Church in Peter Leo saies the gouernours Austen the whole Church is exemplified in Peter So that Peter you see still stood for a generall man and not for a particular and as S. Austen said afore to commend vnitie so Leo both takes in that vni commendatur and giues the reason withall because Peters example was most worthy the imitating Cunctis Petri forma proponitur and Ecclesiae rectoribus to all rulers of the Church to shewe that Peter was not ruler alone I might oppose you with other sentences in that Sermon which you could hardly salue that wrest all so violently to your turne as Vt cum Petrus multa solus acceperit nihil in quenquam sine illius participatione transierit yet the Scripture neuer sayes that of Peters fulnesse we haue all receiued And againe Leo Nunquum nisi per ipsum dedit quicquid alijs non negauit Yet S. Austen de verb. Dom. secundum Matth. Serm. 13. Quod nemo potest in Petro hoc potest in Domino But his MAIESTIE in his Apologie hauing preuented all that might be alleadged in this kind your silence shewes you haue not what to answer Neither will I therefore trouble my selfe with the rest of your citations till you haue qualified these Facile est Athenienses laudare Athenis so it was easie for Leo to rhetoricate at Rome in the praise of Peter Let vs passe say you to some other matter And let vs see say I if you bring any better § 54. AS for the law in the Code the next thing in your booke it is a signe you lacke proofes for Popedome else you would neuer bring so cast a law first controuert and then counterfeit besides importing so little for your side Yet you say this lawe is brought by you in your Supplement to prooue the dutifull respect and obedience of the auncient Emperours to the Romane Sea The respect we graunt you as long as it was Catholicke For what good man would not respect both Church and Bishop Christian I except not him that weares the diademe as S. Chrysost speakes in another case but as for dutie and obedience certes neither any that we find in this law greatly and the clearer monuments as Gregorie as Agatho as diuerse others often brought you and often told you will shew it rests on the Popes side And what if Iustinian writing to the Pope had followed the veine of an Epistle so far as to besmeare him with all the kind tearmes that might bee All that you bring is that the Romane Church is caput Ecelesiarum which no way derogates from the Emperours authority nor inioynes him no such durie or obedience as now is vrged and when all is done caput is nothing but ecclesia prima in ordine not tanquam habens authoritatem in cateras which is no more then was determined in the Councel of Chalcedon Can. 28. that the highest Church in Christendome after Rome should neuertheles be magnified in Ecclesiasticall menages no lesse themshee And this hath been told you and rung into you of the difference of order in the equalitie of power and yet you stand vrging a stale phrase out of a law of the Code no sounder then it should bee and adde no strength to your blunt yron So still might the Bishop say Poterat abstinere Cardinalis à criando the Cardinall might haue abstained from quoting this law and the law inter claras is scarce a cleare law Yet Baldus you say calls it Clarissimam legem And yet he vouchsafes not to glosse it scarce in three words you know His calling of it Clarissima with an allusion to Inter Claras is nothing but as euery pettie Master is wont to praise the author that he expounds to his schollers as Persius notes ab insano multùm laudanda magistro As for Accursius his glossing of it and some one or two more of how much lesse force is that to proue the soundnes of it then the silence of so many that thinke it not worthy a glosse to condemne it Of whom you may presently reckon these more afterward if they come to your mind Bartholomeus de Saliceto Cynus Iacobus de Arena Iason Antonius also de Rosellis if I mistake not Franciscus Aretinus Paulus Castrensis Butrigarius And this last saies It is neither ordinarily nor extraordinarily read when he wrote who wrote when the Pope was at the highest Adde to them Bartholus and Angelus Perusinus By which you see what is to be attributed to Alciates coniecture that some later heretikes and wishing ill to the Pope haue rased it out of the bookes Is the Pope such a Dionysius that he dares not trust the razors Yet consider how long those Lawyers flourished afore Luthers time which is the time no doubt that Alciat glances at Iacobus de Arena ann 1300. Butrigarius who was Bartholus his Master ann 1320. Cynus ann 1330. Salicet 1390. Aretine 1425. which beeing the last of all that I haue now named is iust a hundred yeares afore Luther Castrensis later and Iason later then he yet both short of the 500 yeere Sichardus whome before I named not ann 1540. yet he also passes it ouer without a Glosse Since Alciat it hath been censured by other Papists in like sort whose iudgement Alciat could not turne as Gregorie Haloander and Antonius Contius the setter out of the law in his Praetermissa I passe by Hotoman because he was ours otherwise no obscure Father of the law and hath written the largest of all in the cause Whome he that hath vndertaken of late to answer Andreas Fachineus Count of Lateran in his eight booke of
did beare the Churches person since the keyes are too great a depositum for Peter to be receiued in his owne name but in the Churches And so much he had deliuered before vpon the 108. Psalm I will not now trouble the Reader to repeat it Onely this may bee remembred that there he saies Tibi dabo claues is among those sayings which howsoeuer videntur pertinere ad Petrum non tamen habent illustrem intellectum nisi cum referuntur ad ecclesiam c. which howsoeuer they may seeme to belong to Peter yet cannot clearely be construed but when they are referred to the Church This there But now in this place he addes another example to shew that Peter did beare the Churches person and not his owne As when Pasce oues is said to him Et cum ei dicitur ad omnes dicitur Amas me Pasce oues meas Where I cannot demaund without some passion what can bee said more pregnantly to the Bishops purpose that Pasce oues was not said to Peter onely when S. Austen makes it common to all all of the ranke at least and vouches it as an instance that Peter did beare the person of the Church and not his own only in diuers things that passed vpon him Me thinks vpon the alledging but of thus much out of S. Aust if truly if in his sense the question should be at an end Yet because this man cries out against maimed allegations I will keepe promise as I said to set downe so much of S. Austens text as no man comming after shall neede more and that by the way it may be seene whether this fellow can clip a text or no for his aduātage leaue out that which is too hoat for him to meddle with practising that impudently at the very same time which he traduces the Bishop for most wrongfully Thus then S. Austen Debet ergò Ecclesia Catholica correctis pietate firmatis filijs libenter ignoscere cùm ipsi Petro personam eius gestanti cùm in mari titubâsset cùm Dominum carnaliter à passione reuocâsset cùm aurem serui gladio praecidisset cùm ipsum Dominum ter negâsset cùm in simulationem posteà superstitiosam lapsus esset videamus veniam esse concessam eumque correctum atque firmatum vsque ad dominicae passionis gloriam pervenisse That is to say The Church Catholicke therfore ought to pardon her children amending their faults and established in godlines sith we see pardon affoarded to Peter himselfe sustaining the person of the church both after that he had wauered in the sea carnally dehorted our Sauiour frō suffering and with a sword cut off the high Priests seruants eare and finally fallen into his superstitious hypocrisie yet pardon I say affoarded him notwithstanding all these faults in so much as amended now and confirmed he came in the ende to partake of the glorie of our Sauiours suffering Here is nothing against vs for ought I can perceiue vnlesse Peter to haue come to the glorie of our Lords suffering may seeme to any to make against vs. Which yet I hope they will not construe as if Peter had died for the sinnes of the world and so equalled our Sauiours glorie Wicked though they are yet not so wicked as to diuide that praise between Christ and Peter Howsoeuer S. Austen in his tractat vpon S. Iohn 123. makes this to be one of S. Peters errors to haue offered to die for Christ in all hast pro liberatore liberandus c. Wherein he might seeme to haue aspired to a glorie more then our Sauiours that he dying to saue the world Peter should die for him that died for the world which is a point aboue the other But howsoeuer they magnifie Peters authoritie I hope they will attribute to him no such vertue as this although he may seeme I say to haue said as much himselfe when time was by S. Austens collection but rather repent with him repenting as afterwards we know he changed his minde and no doubt cried out as Iob doth his eyes beeing opened and his weaknes discouered I bewaile my selfe in dust and ashes I haue said once but I will say it no more As for the wordes of S. Austen that Peter attained to the honour of our Lords suffering it is a storie in Eusebius worth the considering how for the exceeding honour that he bare to his Master though he were nailed to a crosse of wood like his yet he refused to dic with his head vpward Which we may beleeue the rather because we read euen in heathen stories of that time of diuers that were crucified with their heads downeward And as Peter for humilitie begd that boone of the tormentors so it is like they were not nice to graunt it to him as the more disgracefull This was the reuerence that our Sauiours conuersation begat in his Disciples In figure where of Iob whome I named euen now to shew the authoritie that he bare in his house with semblable loue of all sides My seruants said he thought themselues happie in my presence if I smiled vpon them they did not beleeue me yea they cryed Who vvill giue vs to eate of his flesh for the vnspeakable sweetnes they found by me See S. Chrysost in his 2. Epist to Olympias Who can write of these things without melting passion To consider the strange conflict betweene our Sauiour and S. Peter a conflict of humilitie not of pride of loue not of anger like that betweene our Lord and the Baptist erst refusing to thinke himselfe worthie to baptize him Which yet in Peter is more to thinke himselfe not worthie to die like him Besides that Iohn was faine to yeild in the ende but herin Peter had his desire And which is more singular not onely the kind of strife to striue for loue but against the nature of loue which delights in likenesse that he should choose a contrarie positure of bodie to testifie his loue to his Lord and master Indeede we haue those now a daies in the Popedome that loue to beare themselues 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contrarie to Christ both liuing and dying true Torti as the Bishop hath prooued them but S. Peter affected this of meere modestie which is able to make impression into a marble heart These whither not climbing and soaring in the meane time with the wings of such ambition as not I but F. T. euen now described where it is thought T should stand before F but for crookednes sake not onely to controll Kings and Countries with their Vniuersall dominion but to challenge as much power as Christ himselfe the Head of the Church And yet they make as if it were doubtfull whether Anti-Christ be come yea or no whether he sit in the Church of God shewing himselfe for God or no. But we haue strayed out of the way by occasion of
yet he talkes of a King if you be remembred one time as chasing away all wickednesse with his eye suppose heresies and all another time enacting and decreeing righteousnesse sculpens iustitiam c. 8. which cannot be without the cheife part of it that is relligion as we read in Theodoret. l. 4. c. 5. that Valentinian taught all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beginning with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all equitie as Salomon here saies beginning with piety another time as one against whom there is no rising vp and with many such like elogiums he aduances him as supreame in each kinde Neither Salomon onely but Aristotle himselfe as if it were the lawe of nature in the third of his politicks Assuerus Cyrus the King of Nineue were they not all supreame ordainers in relligion who neuerthelesse were strangers to the law of Moses This Eudoemon might haue told you who twits the Bishop for ioining those aforesaid with the kings of Israel Belike then they are distinct Therefore not onely Israel or they that were guided by the law of Moses but meere Naturalists haue acknowledged thus much that supremacie is the kings by originall right and not of ceremony So as our Sauiour said once about circumcision Non ex Mose sed ex Patribus in like sort here It is neither ceremonie nor iudiciall neither from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 9. this authoritie of Kings in all causes and ouer all persons which you so carpe And if it be lawfull as you tell vs to argue from the old Testament to the newe by way of signe to the thing signified we haue enough in that kind to maintain our assertion though wee had no other argument For who found a type in Nabuchodonosor euen now first fierce against Daniel and Daniels God afterward making lawes as zealously in his behalfe The ouen that was heated to consume the three children consumed their aduersaries And so Daniels Lyons prepared against him deuoured his accusers These are types if you beleeue S. Austen of heathen Emperours turning Christian and countenancing religion with all their might as before they vsed the aduantage of their place onely to suppresse it and destroy it I might tell you of other types that haue gone before in the old testament touching the supremacie of Kings appertaining to the newe As Abrahams harnessing 318. houshold seruants against Kedar-Laomer for the redeeming of Lot which is a type of Constantine say the Fathers of a certain Councell managing and mustering iust so many Bishops in the Nicene Synode to the confusion of Arius The lyon that slew the transgressing Prophet is a figure of Leo the Christian Emperour suppressing heresies c. as Varadatus whome they call excellentissimus Monachus in his Epistle to Leo aforesaid construes it In a word though you be impudent and your fore-head full of blasphemies yet mee thinks you should bee ashamed to bewray your selues so much as to affirme that Kings lost any part of their stroke by our Sauiours appearing in the new Testament as needs they must if the authoritie was but ceremoniall or iudiciall either which they exercised before And therefore I spare from further confutation § 39. As for that the Emperours in the new Testament were heathen and so neither by Christ nor his Apostles obeyed I hope Sir it is enough they were not resisted And if they made no good lawes yet they might haue made them and the Church in such case had beene bound to obey them Neither do the Bishops I trow alwaies preach the truth in which case S. Austen and S. Cyprian giue vs leaue to abandon them So is it when Kings transported by error forsake their dutie yet forfeit not their supremacy Though our Sauiour and his Apostles did no more turne away frō the edicts of Princes cōcerning relligion then from the Scribe and the Pharisee and the chaire of Moses it selfe which you perhaps would haue heard and obeyed in all things Will you say therefore that the chaire was not supreame in those matters To omit that if Princes had been neuer so impious for the time present yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gal. 3. the Scripture that foresees might haue confirmed the type that went of their authoritie in spirituall matters euen in the old Testament against such time as God should raise vp better in the new Yet you say that in the new Testament there is not the least syllable to that purpose Not Rom. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gods Minister v. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 6. which is rather more then the other but still Gods or to God belonging And not in Gods matters trow you In terrorem malis that is to hereticks and all In laudem bonis yet no goodnesse without true relligion in S. Pauls estimation who saies soone after that whatsoeuer is without faith is sinne the last verse of the next chapter So Coge intrare Luk. 14. to the spirituall banquet that is Kings in speciall haue this compelling power saies S. Austen often So Gal. 5. where heresies are reckoned among the works of the flesh which flesh at least the kings authoritie stretches to according to the similitude that you are wont to quote out of Gregorie Nazianzene of the flesh and the spirit though Athanasius Orat. de incarnat verbi makes the King to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the vnderstanding part that sets all on worke Lastly 1. Tim. 2. 1. where shewing that God would haue all men saued the Apostle from thence argues to prayers for Kings knowing Kings if they be Christian are the notablest instruments to worke the worlds saluation Can this be if Kings be not supreame in relligion and the causes thereof as wel in the new as in the old Testament For least you say they are to doe these things indeed but at the Clergies becke and subordinate to them they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 supreame Magistrates in the places that assigne them what to doe Rom. 13. 1. 1. Pet. 2. 13. c. But now if a man should aske you where your Pontificall supremacie is established in the new besides that you may fetch it by authoritie frō Moses which we may not and so from Aaron his sonnes nay à maiori saies Bell. de Pontif. Rom. l. 4. c. 16. though Moses figured not the Pope but Christ Heb. 3. 2. and so likewise Aaron Heb. 5. 4. yet perhaps you would quote Luk. 22. Vos autem non sic for that is more pregnant then Duo gladij in the same chapter or Qui maior vestrum est fiat sicut minimus or Regnum meum non est de hoc mundo or for loue to Peter Non dominantes Cleris 1. Pet. 5. 3. Doe not these shew the meaning of Pasce oues meas § 40 You say againe the Bishop equiuocates in this that though Dauid and Peter were both called to
Controuersies hath not satisfied so fully in all points as is thought Neither about the contradiction of the Dates nor especially to the contradictions between Iustinian and himselfe one time not consulting with the Pope of Rome about Ecclesiasticall matters as he professes to doe here notwithstanding namely in his so many Nouell Constitutions another time making the Church of Constantinople to be Head of all Churches lib. 24. c. de Sacrosancta Ecclesia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the same againe L. Decernimus 16. eodem titulo which here you would haue him seeme to giue to Rome So as still the law is no law de claris Your oppositions to the contrarie are little worth vnlesse because Hypatius and Demetrius were the messengers no letter could be cog'd with their names or that this must needes be the true Epistle because Pope Nicholas quotes a shred out of it or that Iustinian confesseth he wrote to Pope Iohn in a letter to Agapetus which letter of Iustinians you referring vs onely to Binnius for some would sooner question for Binnius his sake then for the credit of it embrace the other Though for my part I like well of what I finde there that Iustinian calls it the faith quam sequendam DVXIMVS which shewes he depended not vpon the Popes approbation no not for his faith And the Pope receiuing it with willing gratulation as he also there signifies not his assent onely but the whole Church of Romes was added to it which if the Pope were infallible what needed it But the truth is that you haue not yet resolued whether it be the Pope of Rome or the Church of Rome that cānot erre Enough belike if either of thē keepe vp the ball Lastly to returne to the Epistle to Pope Iohn let me aske you what you thinke of the good Latin in it I speake to a Priscian to a Latine Aristarchus Which not onely Iustinian but perhaps Bellisarius himselfe would not haue vttered in those daies As Properamus crescere honorem sedis vestrae for We make hast to increase the honour of your seat They did indeed that meant to doe it by faining To omit that if Iustinian gaue aduancement to the seate it is beholding to the Empire not the Empire to it and so we know from whence the worship of it flowed I haue heard of some that this was the cause why certain would not glosse it because it fauours the opinion that the primacie of Rome is iuris humani or Imperatorij not diuini And yet doe you bring this law against vs As if our selues could more despight the Pope then by so saying But proceed in your eloquence Alieni Catholicae Dei Ecclesiae which sounds well in Greeke not so in Latin and no better that Quae ad vos est vnitas sanctarum ecclesiarum Lastly Petimus vos orare pro nobis prouidentiam Dei nobis acquirere All which your elegancie would neuer digest for good Latine nor worthy of Iustinian if you are the man that you are taken for The testimonie that you insist vpon of the perpetuall integritie of your Romane Sea that as often as any heretikes had risen in those parts they had still beene corrected by the sentence thereof was no warrant for the times to come You did runne well but who hath set you backe Thou knowest not saith Salomon what a day brings forth And if we be forbidden to boast of to morrow how much lesse of the consequence of all times and ages for the blessing of God hitherto affoarded Yet these are your goodly proofes that the Chaire of Rome neuer tottered since because it corrected heresies in Iustinians dayes As if more hath not been said of priuate men as Prosper of S. Austen that where he was present it was impossible for the Councell to goe awry and yet no man would hold him thereupon excused from possibilitie of error much lesse perhaps promise for a whole Church S. Chrysostome saies that diuerse Bishops came to learne of Antioch and went away instructed euen of the people there Neither say saies he that Rome is famous for her greatnesse but shew me a people if you can for your life as diligent at hearing Gods word in Rome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For Sodome had the stately buildings saies he whiles Abraham remained in an obscure tent And he sticks not to call Antioch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same place the mother citie of the whole world What greater style doth Iustinian giue to Rome though there were no question of the sinceritie of his style Whereas Antioch otherwise was called Theopolis Gods owne citie which must needs be the largest I trow for regiment And afore Hierusalem inherited that title Ciuitas magni Regis Gods citie or the citie of the great King by our Sauiours own acknowledgement Matth. 5. 35. Againe Nazianz. Ser. Epitaph in Caesarium cals Byzantium that then was the nowe Constantinople 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first city 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Are you not afraid least that be more then order euen a presidence of authoritie ouer all Europe Whereas Hierome speaking of Rome cals it quondam caput the sometime head of the world No doubt because it was head in the right of the Empire and that changing the spirituall preheminēce of it changed also So vncertaine are these things and not built as you would haue it vpon diuine ordinance but either following the fauour good liking of the Emperours or the other variable streame of causes To conclude your Law about the Vniuersall authority of the Romane Sea for so much as you quote Accursius his glosse heare what a stout obseruation hee hath mode on both sides of that cause Iustinian cals the Bishop of Constantinople fratrem vestrum the Popes brother Parificat ergo therefore he equalls them sayes Accursius But straight againe and with the turning of a hand because the Emperour saies sequi festinans sedem vestram that the Bishop aforesaid labours to follow the iudgement of your seat Minor est ergo therefore he is vnder him Is not this well shot now As if sequi were to come behind in place not to accord in opinion And whereas the Pope sets the Emperours name before his owne in the beginning of his Epistle Iustiniano Iohannes c. Note saies Accursius Papa praemittit Imperatorem quod hodie non faceret the Pope sets the Emperours name before his owne which at this day he would not belike because prouder So much of this Lawe § 55. THE labell and the last of your first chapter is this The Bishop to the Cardinall alleadging the words of the Pataran Bishop suing to Iustinian to restore Sylverius whom he had condemned to banishment which words seeme to spread the Popes authoritie verie farre answered briefly and in his wonted style the style of wisedome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as the auncient Diuines say of taking the Sacrament
Peters primacie does not onely not helpe but euen crosse this Canon If the Canon then be good Peters primacie is none § 36. That Leo excommunicated Dioscorus by the Synode restraines his power of excommunicating Patriarchs rather then establishes it You know it was a question whether the Pope might inflict censures promiscue without a Synod yea or no. Of which more Gelasius in his Epistle before cited ad Episcopos Dardaniae And yet Leo does nothing here but by the Synod re stylo directly mentioning it his Legates I meane for him fetching assistance from it And Peter is put in the last place after Leo and the Synode as whose authoritie the Synode as well as hee participated Might not this therefore haue beene better left out § 37. You omit not so much as that Leo is said to be ordained to be the interpretour of the voice of blessed Peter to all men I wonder what you would say if what Nazianzen ascribes to Athanasius had beene said of your Leo in that Councel One time that he was the fanne that cleansed the floare suppose you the fanne in our Lords hand to separate as it were betweene the wheat and the chaffe so betweene true opinions or erroneous in the faith yea you would say iudging betweene the nations of the world and diuiding the good from the bad by sentence Behold 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Alexandria euen before Cyrill Another time that as our Lord ridde the asse so Athanasius managed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the people of the Gentiles as farre spread as they were throughout the world Another time that he was the two tables of Moses and his verdict 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the very law of veritie another time the tuft of Sampsons head which as we know appropriated the holy Ghost to him Yet Leo was the rather praised because President of the assembly and to his face also enioying the grace that accompanieth Councells Athanasius in his particular and after death and not onely at one time but continuedly And I pray you what saies the same Coūcell of the Emperours Leo by name but not your Leo Leo Imperator inexpugnabilis palma honor fidei accepit a Deo super omnes homines sine prohibitione aliquâ potestatem What is this to beeing the interpretour of Peters voice whereas S. Peter would haue euery bodie to be to God as they that you speak of make Leo to be to Peter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the oracles of God so let-euery man speak 1. Pet. 4. 11. But there is more in that authoritie for which cause I must english it Leo our Emperor the impregnable garlād honour of the faith hath receiued of him that is of God power ouer all men without any controule We see here for matters of faith and of relligion what the Emperour might challenge beeing called the garland of it and impregnable or inuincible 2. He hath command ouer all men Clerks and all 3. from God 4. without any checke or controule which would haue made great titles in the Popes style Againe Nerui arma virtus Ecclesiarum vos est is Christianissimi Imperatores c. You most Christian Emperours are the sinewes the weapons and the puissance of the Churches c. This out of the Councell that your selfe quote And of the difference of the testimonies giuen to the two Leo's let the Reader iudge § 38. The last thing that I will note in your second chapter shall be this remembring my promise to obserue breuity from which I am but too easily blowne awry with the storme of your fopperies You make it an argument of Leos supremacie you call it Monarchie very roundly a little after and are not ashamed at it chap. 4. num 3. that first Leo was admitted President of the Councell held in Greece then that Leo beeing absent Anatolius kept not his place but Legates of his owne sending whereof one was a Priest The answer is most easie Leo beeing denied one part of his will to haue the Councell in Italy it was a poore recompence I meane for his monarchie and in regard to that to be employed to be their President as a wise man a learned man and a stout man likewise also in order surmounting them all as hath beene acknowledged whereas diuerse Presidents had beene in Councels that were inferiour to Leo in these points and therefore much more remooued from the stately Monarchy that you from hence gather § 39. But Why not Anatolius say you Was not hee fit to be President whome the Councell thought fit to be so aduanced in their Canon as to haue the like stroke in Ecclesiasticall affaires that the verie first of the ranke had Once againe I must tell you belike that the Canon aduances not Anatolius but Constantinople And it was the parting of stakes betweene Leo and him that though the Councell were in Greece yet Leo should be the President As for his Legates it was no matter after once they had concurred vpon Leo to bee the man whome he sent in his place so long as they were sufficient since himselfe could not be there And I hope they brought instructions From Leo as themselues say often and might haue reference to him if any doubt should arise Also it was the fitter that Italian Bishops should be Presidents and not Grecian that the Canon might be the authenticaller which was enacted for Constantinople as farther from partialitie of the lawmakers To which purpose they say in their Epistle to Leo the Fathers of that Councell that the Emperours affecting the exaltation of Constantinople Volebant celebrari ab vniuersali Concilio for more authoritie sake no doubt and so likewise by forraine Bishops as Leo and his Legates But if you thinke his Legates had any such stroke that Anatolius should enuy them for their greatnesse you may remember how boldly the Councell dissented from them and the Canon was confirmed notwithstanding their demurres § 40. Neither despise you Priests to come into Councells gentle friend This shewes how vaine your discourse was before num 52. that Concilium Episcoporum est the Councell consists of Bishops onely Doe you not knowe the difference betweene suffrages some decisiue some deliberatiue definitine or consultiue Hath Ego definiens subscripsi so often repeated in this Councell no better setled into you Or wil the Iesuites be content to refraine from Councels as many as are not Bishops Perhaps because they are loath to bee called away from Princes Courts But that you may know Priests haue their interest in Councels at least Sir by conniuence of Bishops as in diuerse other things as we read in the Canons Athanasius a Deacon stood the church in good stead in the Nicen Councel yea an idiot a man wholly illiterate confuted a Philosopher one of the Princes of the world as S. Paul calls them In Conc. Moguntino three turmae were set apart
Episcoporum one Abbatum another and the third of Laymen that is lesse then Priests as you are wont to reckon I say nothing of S. Ambrose made a Bishop before baptized and Nectarius an Archbishop Sozom lib. 7. cap. 8. So much shall suffice to your second Chapter To his third Chapter 1. Places of the Fathers S. Cyprian and S. Hierome 2. The Bishop farre from Ievinianizing 3. Nothing is deducible out of his doctrine which fauours the Popedome § 1. THe Fathers follow First S. Cyprian de vnitate Ecclesiae Whereas the Cardinall had said that Cyprian makes Peter the head the roote and the fountaine of the Church the Bishop most truly and soundly answered not Peter of the Church but the Church her selfe head of the members belonging to her roote of the branches shooting out of her fountaine of the waters issuing forth from her c. one in substance but many in propagation which is no new thing in this mysterie or in any such bodie as the Philosophers call deiuncta corpora rising of many moities into one summe Nay lastly S. Cyprian to shew whome he speakes of calls her matrem mother in plaine tearmes which is not mother Peter but the Church saies the Bishop And this so vexes the gall of our Iesuit as you would not thinke For indeede what more compendious victorie could there be insomuch as F. T. is faine to say that Cyprian had no occasion to name Peter there but the Church onely like the Rhemists annotation vpon 16. to the Rom. that Peter was out of towne when he should haue beene saluted by Paul so we must beleeue iust there the occasion failed of naming Peter whereas in all the other current he onely is meant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as S. Chrysostome saies most excellently 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epist 190. ad Pentadiam Diaconissam Such a thing is truth in one short word shee confutes the cauiller and stops his mouth For the words lying thus as they doe in Cyprian Vnum tamen caput est origo vna vna mater foecunditatis successibus copiosa yet the head is but one the spring but one the mother but one plenteous in her blessed and happie fruitfulnesse who can imagine that Peter is the head here and the church the mother and not rather that the whole sentence belongs but to one whether that be Peter or the Church or whosoeuer For as the sentence runnes on in an euen line so doubtlesse it comprehends but one and the same subiect But Peter is not the mother as F. T. confesses Therefore neither the head nor the spring nor any thing els And indeede so it followes in S. Cyprian Illius foetu nascimur illius lacto nutrimur illius spiritu animamur shee breeds vs feedes vs and enliues vs which may well be vnderstood of the Church our mother but of whome else whether Peter or any other I see not I confesse I S. Austen so lib. 2. contra Crescon Grammat c. 35. 36. and againe l. 3. contra eundem c. 58. 65. vnderstands these words quoting S. Cyprian not of Peter but of the Church And I meane the words de fonte riuo de sole radio that I may fetch it as high as F. T. himselfe euen from the place where if any where S. Cyprian speakes of Peter by his owne acknowledgement And Pamelius their owne author commenting vpon S. Cyprian though he greedily drawe all aduantages that may be from other places of this Father to establish the Popedome yet passes this ouer in deepe silence as nothing fauouring their desired Headship nay crossing it rather For he had read immediately before in the same place Hoc erant vtique eaeteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis i. The rest of the Apostles were vtterly the same that Peter was endewed with equall fellowship both of honour and power Where by the way we may note S. Ambrose and S. Cyprian their agreement about this point not onely for matter but for words For so Ambrose before quoted Hoc erant quod Paulus and here Cyprian Hoc erant quod Petrus As if there were no diffeâ—… neither betweene Peter and Paul nor betweene the other Apostles and them both For quae alicui tertio vna sunt inter se quoque vna or aequalia saies the light of nature Will you know then why he makes mention of Peter in singular Sed exordium ab vnitate proficiscitur vt ecclesia Christi vna monstretur But the beginning proceedes from vnity or from one man to shew that the Church of Christ is but one How does the beginning proceede from one but as S. Austen shewes in the place before quoted Onely Peter was spoken to that others beeing not excluded yet this pretious vnitie might be commended in one As we read vnder Salomon that the people were all like one man and Act. 2. in the first times of the new Testament the people were all of one heart and one minde Where by the way you see how Salomon prefigured Christ and those times these latter with strange accordance And if this become the people how much more the pastors or the master builders that they should all set to their worke like one man To which nothing can be more contrary then the Popish vsurpation ouer-bearing other pastors which neuertheles they would ground vpon these places for vnity S. Cyprian also declares his owne meaning in the same place to be as I haue said in these words Quamnis omnibus Apostolis parem tribuit potestatem though our Sauiour gaue equall power to all his Apostles tamen vt manifestaret vnitatem disposuit originem eius ab vno incipientem yet to shew the vnity so he construes monstretur not as if that Church could be pointed to with the finger from whence other Churches receiue their vnity as F. T. may imagine but vt manifestaret vnitatem to make knowne the vnity of the Catholicke body and that the Church is but one congregation of the faithfull though branched and billetted out into sundry parcells he tooke order that her originals should beginne at one which is short of authority and much more of supremacie but most of all of the monarchy that the Iesuites would crowne Peter with by vertue of this place And when the same Cyprian a very few lines afore the words last alleaged makes this to be the cause of abuses in the Church quòd ad veritatis originem non reditur nec caput quaeritur nec magistricoele stis doctrina seruatur what is plainer then that by caput which they so catch at he meanes nothing else but the originall verity which our Sauiour Christ first deliuered euen that same Sic ab initio as both origo veritatis doctrina coelestis magistri declares which encompasse the word Caput like two torches of both sides of it to giue light vnto it that
you did our forefathers while your power lasted Thanks be vnto God that hath shortned those dayes abridged your malice Yet Elias confounded Baals priests with a ieast and S. Chrysostome commenting vpon the 140. Psal bids vs make much of the frumpes of the godly which is your fault to haue profited no more by the Bishops kinde reproofes Yet in all the passages of that Reuerend man there is no one word contumelious to pietie or disgracefull to relligion or preiudiciall to grauity and good manners Whereas Sir Thomas More the champion for your Clergie as it were vicarius in spiritualibus he was such a buckler to the Bishops as Stapleton saies the common voyce was in those dayes yet he I say vndertaking the Churches cause wrote a booke so gamesome and so idly idle that dissembling his owne name he was faine to father it vpon Gulielmus Rossaeus a title that one of your fellowes hath taken vpon him of late to shroud his virulences vnder as he did his vanityes and lastly the great Philosopher kept a foole at home as the same Stapleton records to make him merry no doubt though his wit was able to prouoke laughter in others as full often it did And if More be of no more authority with you you may looke backe to your owne Cardinall that dry Child that sage Sobrino yet he excuses himselfe in one place of his controuersies a worke a man would thinke that did not fit so with mirth Ignoscat Lector quòd temridiculè Tilemannum exceperim Let the Reader pardon me for beeing so merrie or so pleasant with Tilemanne This he Yet because you haue descried such a veine in the Bishop as you thinke at least might you not haue answered your selfe touching that which you obiect to him here about Iouinian that it sauoured but of Ironie For what more fit to be hit in your teeth who euery where crake to vs of Iouinians heresies then when you bring that in earnest to countenance your Poperie which S. Hierome puts vpon Iouinian by supposall At dices tu Iouiniane scilicet Though the Bishop doth not challenge him for such an absolute Iouinianist but onely saies Probè in to secutus Iouinianum the Cardinall therein following Iouinian very handsomely Which words are enough to dissolue your cauill that the Bishop should lay absolute Iouinianisme to his charge which you say surpasses all impudencie Such a rustique you are an arrant clowne not discerning what is ieast and what is earnest Howbeit it will be hard for you to prooue Iouinian to haue beene an hereticke Epiphanius and Philastrius doe not recken him among the catalogue and they that may conclude him to haue held a falshood will finde some a doe to condemne him for an hereticks Neither is the meaning of that word by all agreed vpon neither doe all take it in euery place alike Yet because this scandall rests vpon Iouinian for the most part you may be pleased to remember Sir out of S. Austen what other monsters Iouinian fostered and therein if you thinke good compare his doctrine with ours As that all sinnes are in like degree heinous which is the Stoicall paradoxe no way cleauing to vs though you slaunder vs so vniustly for not holding veniall sinnes which Roffensis himselfe held not That fasting and abstinence profits nothing Can you charge vs with any such impietie That the regenerate man cannot sinne after baptisme wherein he comes neerer to you then to vs. As for your merits you may keepe them the badges of your insolencie and in you Sir of your ignorance not to know what merit meanes all this while Yet beware how you magnifie the Virgin against the married least the Councell of Gangra condemne you not for an hereticke now but a cursed hereticke Can. 20. giuing you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if you doe but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though you condemne not marriage if you but swell out of the conceit of your single life And so Minutius Foelix most diuinely Inuiolati corporis virginitate fruimur potiùs quà m gloriamur After that he had said Vnius matrimonij vinculo libenter inhaeremus S. Chrysostome goes further If the perfection of Monkerie it selfe may not stand with marriage all is spoil'd See Comm. in ad Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in ipso fine And why should Virginitie then be exalted aboue marriage if the perfection of the strictest Monks themselues be compatible therewith And he closes his discourse with that diuine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Pindar saies should be taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a iunket alwaies in the ende of a feast 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Vse marriage moderately and thou shalt be the very first in the kingdome of heauen Indeede therefore all the Saints are lodged in Abrahams bosome in the married mans bosome as the same Father cannot denie lib. de Virg. in extremo Once the Trinitie in his tent and now the Saints in his bosome Yet still the married man and not the worse for his marriage As for the rewards of the faithfull that they are not equall in the heauen that we looke for and that the sacred Virgin suffered no decay of her maidenly honour by the stainlesse and immaculate birth of our Sauiour let Iouinian thinke what he will though S. Hierome neuer imputes this latter to Iouinian in the 2. books that he wrote against him yet not onely you but troupes in the English Church so teach And would the time giue leaue is there not a Montane and a Tatian to make you blush for your abhominable heresies about meates and marriages as well as you haue a Iouinian to twitt vs withall But because I now onely assoyle the Bishop from your wicked slaunders it is well his integritie hath so acquitted him without me that your selfe dare not speake of him but with It may be and Except such a hooke his fame hath put in your nostrills who onely in this may be resembled to Iouinian to Paphnutius rather that in single life he defends the libertie of other folkes marriages But hast we to an ende § 17. To the other places of S. Hierome as Matth. 16. which in great good will you aduise the Bishop to read ouer forsooth what saith S. Hierome there That our Sauiours dicere is facere his saying is doing therefore calling Peter a rocke he made him so But I hope good Sir as doing and saying went together in our Lord so both of them in his owne meaning not in your mistaking What is this then to prooue Peters Monarchie or smaller regencie either if such could content you And if it could yet it were hard I say to boult it out of this place of S. Hierome where no syllable of authoritie or power once appearing for explanation sake as reason was if you meant to speede he saies onely that Peter for beleeuing in the rocke our Sauiour bespake him and yet not properly but in
Flavianus good demeanure and other such considerations then the Popes sentence or bare definition For then what neede long time to worke it Neither was that a signe of Damasus his supremacie that Flavianus sent his embassage to Rome For when two are to meete why should not the inferiour come to the superiour rather then otherwise I meane inferiour in order as Flavianus here to Damasus Antioch to Rome but not in authoritie Though the embassage was not intended so much to Damasus as to cleere the scandall that went of Flavian and to satisfie the whole Church of God in those parts that East and West might no longer continue in iealousie and alienation § 26. And now to come to his successor Syricius as your owne words are how doe you prooue his vniuersall iurisdiction I know it wrings you to be held to this point but there is no remedy to that you must speake Forsooth the Councell of Capua committed the hearing of Flauianus his cause to the Bishop of Alexandria and the Bishop of Egypt with this limitation as S. Ambrose witnesses I report your owne words that the approbation and confirmation of their sentence should be reserued to the Roman sea and the Bishop thereof who was then Syricius Suppose this were so how farre is it from arguing vniuersall iurisdiction For as the Councell might make choice of the Bishop of Alexandria and the Bishops of Egypt to take the first knowledge of Flavianus his cause into their hands so out of the same authoritie might it reserue the after iudgement and the vp shot of all to the Bishop of Rome it might doe this I say out of it owne libertie and for the personall worth of Syricius Pope not for any prerogatiue of his Sea And rather it shewes the preheminence of the Councell that might depute the Pope to such a busines as likewise the Bishop of Alexandria and Egypt The Eusebians made an offer witnes Athanasius in his Apologie to Iulius Pope of Rome to be their iudge if he thought good Iulio si vellet arbitrium causae detulerunt But if Iulius had no other hold it was a poore supremacie that might content him Yet Ambrose in the Epistle 78. which you quote saies not so much Rather of Theophilus somewhat magnificently Vt duobus istis tuae sanctitatis examen impartiretur confidentibus Aegyptijs that your Holines might haue the scanning of these mens cause while the Bishops of Egypt were your assessors And againe Sancta Synodus cognitionis ius unanimitati tuae caeterisque ex Aegypto consacerdotibus nostris commisit The holy Synod of Capua committed the power of iudging this matter to your agreement and the Egyptian Bishops What then of the Pope Sanè referendum arbitramur ad sanctum fratrem nostrum Romanae sacerdotem Ecclesiae Sure we are of the minde that it were good it were referred to our holy brother the Priest of Rome First brother then Priest of Rome lastly arbitramur The Synod belike not ordering so but Ambrose giuing his opinion thus And Quoniam praesumimus te ea iudicaturum quae etiam illi displicere nequeant because we presume you will resolue in such manner as shall not be displeasing to him See you how one of them is as free from error as the other in S. Ambrose minde And he is content that Syricius should haue the cognusance of the cause after Theophilus not that Theophilus errour might be corrected by Syricius but that ones concurrence might strengthen the other § 27. Doe you looke I should answer to Syricius Decretall sent to Himerius or does the conueying of it to France and Portugall prooue vniuersall iurisdiction exercised by the Popes in S. Austens time But with such baggage you make vp your measure Himerius askt and Syricius answers What then And Himerius was within the Romane Patriarchship caput corporis tai not caput corporis vniuersalis saies Syricius himselfe in the ende of his Rescript But proceede Optatus say you calls Peter principem nostrum our Prince Now he could not meane Peter to be that Prince for he was dead and gone and so nothing worth Therefore Siricius who then liued and was his successor in the Popedome Brauely shott and like a Sadducee Yet in the same booke Optatus calls Siricius in plaine tearmes not princeps noster but socius noster our frend and fellow as S. Ambrose a little before his brother and priest § 28. That in the African Councell Can. 35. the Fathers decreed that letters should be sent to their brethren and fellow-Bishops abroad but especially to Anastasius to informe them how necessary their latter decree was in fauour of the Donatists contradicting a former Canon made against them what is that to Anastasius his vniuersall iurisdiction Doe you see how you are choaked if you be but held to the point yet they sent to others no lesse then to Anastasius But to him especially you say It might be so for the eminencie of his Sea as we haue often told you And the Donatists beeing too strong for them as appeares by that decree which controules the former they were glad to take any aduantage I warrant you to countenance their proceedings Durum telum necessitas est § 29. That the Bishops of Africa requested Innocentius to vse his authoritie to the confirmation of their statutes against the Pelagian heretiques it was not because the ordinances of prouinciall Synods are not good in their precincts without the Pope as I thinke your selues will not denie but that the Pelagian heresie beeing farre spread throughout the world might be curbed within the places that Innocentius had to doe in as well as in Africk where the Councel was held Which taking so good effect as it seems it did S. Austen cries out that they were toto Christiano orbe damnati condemned ouer all the Christian world not that Innocentius authoritie was irrefragable but the concurrence of so many Pastors in the cause of Gods truth was of force at that time to rectifie the consciences of such as wauered before In this sense Possidius might well call it iudicium catholicae dei Ecclesie the iudgement of the Catholique Church of God when Innocentius Zoâ—â—mus accursed the Pelagians because it sprang from the consent of so many godly Fathers as incited those Popes to that act of iustice and lead them the way in this daunce of zeale as I may so call it Not that the Church stood in them two or as if they had the vniuersall iurisdiction that he talkes of or rather dares not talke of but captiously and crookedly inuolues onely in impertinent allegations § 30. I might spend time about S. Austens authoritie Epist 92. writing thus to Innocentius That the Lord hath placed thee in sede Apostolicâ And doth this prooue vniuersall iurisdiction or is there no Apostolique sea but the Romane By which reason wee shall haue many vniuersall iurisdictions Or that it were negligence to coÌ„ceale ought from his
that the mysticall sense is farre more cleere and euident and therefore that he omitting the literall exposition would expound those places figuratiuely forsooth This is the constancie of these men that as Benhadad for feare and guilty conscience ran from chamber to chamber so they to avoide what makes against them change sense for sense sometime literall for allegoricall then allegoricall for the literall about the words spoken to Peter by our Sauiour The former they thinke they may doe with S. August and avouch him for it there the allegory is the cleerer As for the latter they will not endure that Origen should doe so by any meanes Here all is spoild vnlesse you stick to the Letter And a Chaos a confusion is brought in by vs Lay folk and Clerks Men and Women promiscuously inuading both the keyes and the office no difference left nor signe of difference if we allowe of this Thus he But howsoeuer you rowle and ruffle in your Rhetorique declaiming against the supposed Anarchy of our Church and not discerning which euen Balaam did the beauty of those tents to which you are a professed enemy so thicke is the fogge of your malitious ignorance that stuffes vp your senses I beleeue Sir the keyes are conueighed to the commonalty rather by you then vs and to the worser sexe too not so to be honoured as in your Abbesses to be gouernours in your gossips to be dippers and baptisers and I knowe not what And doubtles you would haue admitted them to be Preachers too by this time if you had not thought it fitter to discharge your men then to licence your Women Neither if Origen extend this to more then Peter must it therefore presently be communicated to all There are Apostles besides Peter there are Pastors besides the Apostles there are the iust and faithfull of all sorts besides diuers that belong to the bodie of the Church in shew It is not necessary we should open so great a gappe as you thinke though wee take Origen litterally Though this I must tell you that Origen in all likelihood would not haue applied it so by allegory vnlesse he had stretched it beyond Peter in the very property For assurance whereof consider his words Si super vnum illum Petrum existimas aedificari totam ecclesiam quid dicturus es de Iohanne filio tonitrui Apostolorum vnoquoque If thou thinkest the whole Church is built onely vpon Peter what wilt thou say of Iohn the sonne of thunder what of euerie one of the Apostles besides It seemes incredible first to Origen that the whole Church should bee built vpon one man onely though it were Peter himselfe Therefore he insists vpon totam Ecclesiam and considerately opposeth vnum illum And makes the one but existimas or si existimas If thou thinkest so saith he by Peter but the other is quid dicturus es how wilt thou answer it how wilt thou defend it against Iohn and against the rest And sure as Origen was of the minde that no Apostle of the Twelue sate out from beeing a foundation of the Church in the sense that Peter was so hee names Iohn you see in particular of whome afterwards you shall see how great opinion he conceiued and how ful of reuerence not inferiour to Peter In the meane while it is euident how he pleades for the Apostles all in generall whom he cannot digest to be denied this priuiledge of supporting the frame equally with Peter For which cause he deales so peremptorily and takes vp his aduersarie as we noted before Si existimas Petrum quid dicturus es de caeteris c. Which differs from his moral collection as you call it which is a great deale more mawdlen where he affirmes by fortasse Fortasse autem quod Petrus respondens dixit c. Perhaps if we say the same that Peter said wee shall be priuiledged like him this is but perhaps Yea the practise of the Church implyes no lesse then we now stand for which Origen there declares towards the ende of his discourse Quoniam ij qui Episcoporum locum sibi vindicant vtuntur eo dicto sicut Petrus claues regni coelorum acceperunt c. Because they that are Bishops take this to themselues euen as Peter and haue receiued the keies of the kingdome of heauen Heare you not euerie Christian now nor predestinate man which is his morall doctrine and offends you so mainly but the Bishops good Sir the Bishops in speciall take this to belong to them and claime the keyes Is not this a signe the keyes were committed to all the Apostles For the communitie of Bishops descendes from all the Apostles If the Keies had been Peters onely onely the Pope should claime them pretending to come of him as now he doth But Origen saith the Bishops doe this in plural Episcopi vtuntur eo dicto sicut Petrus The Bishops make vse of this saying euen as Peter did And they haue receiued the Keies c. § 4. Now when you tell vs that Origen neuer mentions in this place the commission of feeding pasce oues meas though the Bishop brings this place to answer the other by about Summa rerum de ouibus pascendis out of his Commentary vpon Rom. 6. and so the Bishops answer fits not with the obiection You are to know that as the one so the other is to be construed either of Peter or of all If Tibi dabo claues belong to them all and specially if Super te aedificabo ecclesiam meam so doth Pasce oues too by proportion either equall or maioris virtutis as they call it For what so singular and so individuate as Super te aedificabo Sure pasce oues is not so much The one a promise the other a precept and precept is not broken if it extend to many promise either is or is the weaker for it without all doubt And yet Origen himselfe teacheth you as much in this tractate as it were preuenting your obiection when thus he saith towards the middle of it Si dictum hoc commune est caeteris cur non simul omnia velut dicta ad Petrum tamēsunt omnium communia That is If this belong to all though spoken to Peter as he doubts not but it does why not all the rest then though directed to him yet are to be meant of all § 5. Another place you quote out of the same Origen vnquoted by the Cardinall but belike to help him post aciem inclinatam out of Hom. 2. in diuersa Euang. namely that Peter was Vertex which is no more then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which before giuen by S. Baesil to the great Athanasius Yea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no bare toppe nor no bald vertex as your Popes is at this day Martial hath an Epigram against one that had three sculls and when almes were distributed came for three mens parts Si te viderit Hercules
in them they will helpe vs and beeing potent they can and that they know our case and behold our estate or else they were not compleatly blessed if they should wish vs well and yet not know how we did With a great deale more of such fiddle-faddle-stuffe which S. Paul condemnes in one word in the place before named Coloss 2. Instatus sensu carnis sua puffed vp with his owne carnall reason or carnal sense and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strutting and pacing in things that he hath not seene Not seene indeed but yet picked out by F. T. his occulta philosophia◠§ 10. You knowe not saies he how the sea â—â—s and flowes how the load-stone drawes iron how the eye sees whether extramittendo or intromittendo c. And surely though we doubt of them we are in no great danger Simple may we be but not sacrilegious Quae sine periculo ignorantur oppugnantur etiam quandoque cum laude Faith hath her assurance and sense hers That Saints should be praied to is accompanyed with neither Were it as euident as the former though we might sift it happily with an argument or two for discourse sake yet we would not persist in the denyall of it as now when neither Scripture abets it and sounder antiquitie makes against it He saies We know not how the Saints pray for vs Suppose we doe not the matter is not great Yet we must be sure they heare vs and perhaps know how before we pray to them For they may doe vs good though we be not aware of it haue reference to them we may not vnlesse we haue good ground for it Howbeit whereas he sayes wee cannot conceiue how the Saints pray for vs if the Saints haue reason and affection remaining with them as doubtlesse they haue what difficultie is it to conceiue howe they should pray for vs § 11. And dare you question of our Sauiour how hee sees our praiers Doe you not rather wonder how he should bee ignorant of any thing haue you forgot what flowes from the hypostaticall vnion Which Saints haue not Angels haue not You are wont to taxe vs with the Agnoites heresy who is the Agnoite now but he that doubts how Christ should know all things and that not in pilgramage but in blisse § 12. To your 15. and 16. numb out of S. Austens lib. 22. de Ciuit. Dei That God workes wonders at the Tombes of Saints and yet we know not how Therefore we may pray to Saints though we discerne not how they heare vs. Resp Nothing like For neither does the Scripture euer say that God shewes no miracles at the tombes of Martyrs that we should question this so nicely before wee beleeue it by the Virgins Quomodo Luc. 1. Rather it most often witnesses of Almighty God qui facit mirabilia magna solus indeed solus so as no bodie cooperating with him none suffered to see and to inquire how he does them Quis consiliarius fuit ei Rom. 11. 34. But forsomuch as it denies that the dead know any thing of our condition here and such a gulfe as I may so say is pight betweene vs them as all entercourse and commerce is debarred the places are too common to be here recited therefore first shewe vs how or worthily wee beleeue you not § 13. The Angels may reioyce vpon the rising of a sinner when they conduct him into heauen as they did Lazarus his soule though they be not priuie to his passages here in earth And yet in earth they may see by outward demonstrations such signes of repentance as they cannot alwaies trace our supplications by which for the most part are cordiall and within the vaile The heart is deceitfull and who shall search it who gage it saies Ieremie For which cause S. Iohn saies God is greater then our heart onely God We are strangers to it our selues and shall they be no strangers which are so much estranged from vs both in place and qualitie In Cassians Collations a godly Abbot vseth this similitude As certaine the eues when they would know what store of gold is hidden in a house that they beset they fling in some handfulls of smaller sands at the windowes that by the sound of that in the fall they may iudge whether any treasure be within or no and not loose their labour so the thoughts of the heart are subiect to knowledge by such or such signes vpon prouocation Which may hold well enough in matter of repentance to see whether the sinner will returne to his old courses or no but is no way to know what he begs in prayer To omit that our Sauiours words might be construed by supposition that so great is the ioy for repenting sinners as Angels would haue their part in it if they knew it and when they know it then they haue de facto Heauen and earth in another place are inuited to reioyce ouer Babylon your Babylon by a figure of hyperbole for the wrongs that you haue done them Lastly Revelatio vicissitudinis or intervalli is one thing as I told you before statae permanentiae another The first may suffice to verifie the saying Luk. 15. of the ioy of Angels ouer repenting sinners but that they should know our prayers whensoeuer we make them more is required § 14. The like I might say to your instance of Samuel who told Saul all that was in his heart namely concerning the matter then in hand Of Elizeus that saw Gehezi by transitory reuelation and discouered what the king of Syria did in his priuy chamber The presenting of our Sauiours glorious body to S. Steuens eyes is not comparable with an intuitiue speculation of the thoughts though this also was at a glimpse and not ordinary whereas the Saints must haue ordinary to heare vs at all times if they will be called vpon § 15. Athanasius is counterfeit yet he meanes but of things belonging to their beatitude Sine his autem satis beati esse possumus Both we and they too may be happy enough without this Then post mortem in die Iudicij After death and in the day of iudgement Time enough therefore if they know all things in the last iudgement What is that to prayer to them which must be in the meane while if it be at all § 16. As for S. Basil he meanes intra sphaeram onely within their quarter For though they are quicker sighted then wee yet they haue a limitation both of act and vertue The Custodia hominum which S. Basil ascribes to them may be with knowledge of our outward wayes without knowledge of the inward to which our prayers belong And yet againe he may be custos or protector of vs that watches ouer our safetie with prayers and with good wishes though he know not so much as our outward estate As Iob when he praied for his children vnknowing to them as S. Paul
right to heauen but for the promise whether Vasquez and Bellarmine sauour not of a rancker contagion then so that aduance vs to heauen and to the highest fauour of God out of the worth of what is within vs though his promise were no where though his pactum salis were cleane plowed downe Can there be any thing more contrarie then the aforesaid opinions are betweene themselues Or is not the Bishop most constant while the Iesuites are thus at oddes like the Armites among themselues One of them beeing so humble and so humbly conceiting of his owne sufficiencies as it seemes at least that you would thinke he might enter in euen through the needles eye the others so swelling as heauen it selfe large though it be is scarce able to containe them But if this be their speculation about infused righteousnes which is Gods entire worke what doe they thinke of their owne workes trow you which for certaine they will challenge more reward vnto because they are more voluntarie and of their freer concurrence And indeede the question was betweene the Bishop and the Cardinall about the merit of works not of habits These make habits and all to be meritorious one absolutely ex naturâ rei the other so as God cannot hinder condignitie though he denie pay Yet S. Paul not onely vilifies his habite of righteousnes Phil. 3. that I may be found in him not hauing mine owne righteousnes but his workes of righteousnes Tit. 3. and which is more then both these his sufferings for righteousnes Rom. 8. He had plaied the Auditour he had cast vp his accounts and his totall is what thinke you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. I find saies he by computation or by exact casting that the present sufferings of this transitorie life 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they are so short they are not worthie of the glorie that shall be reuealed He keepes the word you see 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they are not worthie Yet Vasquez saies God cannot hinder their worthines no not onely by his ordinarie power but not by his absolute though he may denie the wages by the later of these two that is scarce iustly or very vniustly onely as I conceiue it But what saies Bellarmine The Apostle saies he meanes that the sufferings here are temporall the blisse to come eternall and that betweene them there is no proportion Now surely a worshipfull solution of an insoluble authoritie Whereas the Apostle does not say they are not proportionable ratione durationis but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they are not worthie which is the very question And was this a sentence worthie of S. Pauls wisdome to tell vs that there is no proportion betweene finite and infinite Who does not know that We may say vnto him as he does to Calvine in another place about the wisdome of Vlysses pronouncing for Monarchies Ad hoc certè pronunciandum non fuit opus sapientiâ vel Pauli vel Apostoli De Pontif. Rom. l. 1. c. 2. The very Centurion to whome the Iewes had giuen that testimonie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he is worthie yet he ouerthroweth it in the same place againe with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I did not count my selfe worthie Luc. 7. 7. They thought him worthie that Christ should come to him when he does not thinke himselfe worthie so much as to come to Christ And not to come to him in earth I say yet into heauen trow you to finde him out there too As he must if he meane to be saued by his works But so is merit and worthines euery way hissed out so is it one thing for the Iewes to ponder other bodies merits another thing for the conscience to weigh it selfe in vnpartiall ballance The builder of the Synagogue is modester then the Iewes that enioy his buildings § 17. Many things might be noted in the Adioynders discourse wherein he choakes himselfe though he indite the Bishop of preuarisation Num. 7. he saies the Bishop alludes to the pennie in the Gospells that was giuen to the labourers by which the Fathers as he confesseth vnderstand eternall life and saluation He quotes Hierome in Iovinian lib. 2. Aug. de Virgin c. 26. Greg. in Iob. l. 4. c. 31. also the Commentaries vpon S. Matth. cap. 20. But if this be so what more aduerse to himselfe For if the pennie be but one and all receiue that common pennie then are we not saued by our works which all that are saued are not furnished with alike but some more some lesse as is euident It comes therefore of the goodnes of Almightie God alone giuing mercedem diei horario operi awhole daies wages for an houres worke as the Bishop most godlily Can this be but of the free mercy of God without respect to our merits yea to our workes themselues though we entitle no merit to them § 18. Numb 11. he brings that for an example of meriting by workes Centuplum c. Matth. 19. a hundreth fold in this life And if God doe not giue vs an hundreth fold in this life I meane them that serue him in most deuout fashion doth he not reward merits or doth he therefore come short of paying the score Yet the Adioynder saies we merit the centuplum to be paid vs in this life because our Sauiour promiseth so Whereas how many depart this life daily without the receiuing of such a pay the hundreth fold pay in temporall commodities And are merits vnrewarded shall we say in all these What is this but to doe as the Apostle complaines Rom. 10. statuentes suam iusticiam iusticiae Dei non sunt subiecti Seeking by all meanes to establish their owne righteousnes they were not subiected to the righteousnes of God We slander God to flatter men and wrong his scale to aduance ours Saue that all is Centuplū I grant which we receiue here though neuer so little if we compare it with our merits Whether it be so then or not that the Centuplum is here paid merit is dasht § 19. In his 9. numb he brings that out of Rom. 4. To him that worketh the reward is imputed not according to grace but according to debt Why this Because the Bishop had answered his other authoritie of vnusquisque accipiet Euery one shall receiue reward according to his labour I say the Bishop had answered it most pithily and most properly According to his labour but not for his labour It is the square of the reward but not the formall cause whereby In genere comparatorum non efficientium as the worthy Bishop most worthily had explained By all which their inference of merit is confounded To this then he opposes that wages is of debt not of grace to him that worketh Rom. 4. 4. Yet they are wont to say both of grace and of debt as they haue many more such vntempered morterings and mungrel daubings Cornelius Muss in his Comment in 6. ad Rom. in the very end thus speaking of
taken in Courts notwithstanding his mustering here of his Canonists to little purpose but the oaths de credulitate perhaps in matters of fact when the case is doubtfull to the oath of Supremacie we haue euidence enough which respects not fact but is the auerring of our iudgements concerning his MAIESTIES iustest title to the Imperiall Crowne and the rights thereof with promise on our parts not onely not to oppose but to assist him and to abet him to the vtmost of our abilities § 58. As for that he addes moreouer that if it bee not of faith the Scriptures no where containe it neither expressely nor by implication c. what more rude and more vnlearned iust like all the rest Would the Bishop be so contradictory doth he thinke to himselfe from whome I hope they will not derogate the praise of so much iudgement as to heede his owne methodes though most maliciously they depraue him otherwise at pleasure as to alleadge diuerse Scriptures for the Kings Supremacy and yet not impertinently as he here crakes and saies he hath answered them but most soundly and most seasonably as we before haue shewed and then conclude it is no point of faith properly so called but of perswasion onely yet most grounded perswasion if he had not well perceiued the vnrepugnancie of these two and how compatible they are betweene themselues which the Adioynder cannot skill of But so I haue heard of an old plodder in Logicke that to his dying day could neuer conceiue how the accident of blacknes might be separated from a Crow so much as in cogitation and another that was as hardly brought to digest that euery thing either is or is not So here the Adioynder as if his wits were be-breecht If it be not of faith saies he then it is not in Scripture neither directly nor yet implicitely Belike not Pauls cloake or Peters scabberd both reuealed in Scripture and yet neither of theÌ„ of faith And to defceÌ„d a little lower to their other kinds of Scriptures Tobyes dogge I ween or rather his dogs tayle which the Text saies he wagged and Campian your Martyr made such mirth with in the Tower proouing thence the verie point which you now deny that all is not de fide which is comprehended in Scripture But he petulantly and profanely enough as his guise was yet with you a graue disputant in matters of religion or a mortified man drawing on to martyrdome For though nothing be of faith which is not reuealed in Scripture as we hold though you deny yet there are many things in Scripture which are not of faith as neither we deny and your selues hold at least when you are not captious as now it seemes you are to crosse your selfe rather then you will not carpe another I say some things are not de fide which are contained in Scripture not but that we must beleeue all to be most true which the holy Scripture containeth but some things are so without the circuit of our faith as it is no preiudice to vs though we take no notice of them as Pauls cloake perhaps as Peters net and sword-sheath or if you will as Tobies dogge and the like others most necessary and most wholesome to be receiued as our dutie to Superiours our deportment to Ethnicks and them that are without our discreet and laudable conuersation towards all which the Creed is no rule of that narrow verge though the Scripture in her latitude thinke no scorne to be It remaines therefore that the Bishoppe might argue for the Supremacy either from Moses Law or Moses his practise though it bee not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only not a matter of faith but of firme perswasion which yet is more then Bellarmines Pie credimus § 59. Neuerthelesse to infringe the Bishops argument you say Moses did not lay aside his Priesthood but Aaron and he remained Priests together So as from thence we can draw no proofe for the Temporalties preheminence aboue the Clergy in what degree soeuer Moses stood to Aaron But who euer heard of two high Priests together viz. Moses and Aaron both at one time Or how could they both be the High Priests that is each of them supreame to all Priests What greater corruption was in those declining times when Annaâ— and Caiphas both possest the seate if at least such corruption then were But when couetousnesse and ambition preuailed most and drew them most aside into degeneration what greater deflexion I say could there be then this from the originall institution Yea how could the Priesthood of our Sauiour Christ be typically shaddowed and prefigured by two whereas he is our one and onely High Priest without copartner How the Popes sole-regencie be deduced from thence as Bellarmine would and diuerse more Vnlesse they meane to admit multitudes into the chaire and then where is Monarchy Sure Theodoret in Numer Quaest 23. calls Aaron the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the roote and fountaine of Priest and Priesthood which how could he be if Moses were equally participating with him in that preferment and the Priestly of spring of succeeding ages to deriue their pettigree as well from the one as from the other Where is the vnitie now that the Papists so hunt after Where the reducing of all particular propagations spreadings Ecclesiasticall as they speak to one originall and primitiue head May we not say that the Adioynder was dreaming all this while in bicipiti Parâ—â—sso of a double head of Priesthood in Moses and Aaron For as for the word Cohen Psalm 1. 18. it signifies not the Priest onely but a principall man such as Moses and Aaron might be both at once though in diuerse kinds So as Caietan in his exposition of Psal 100. sayes onely thus Aaron fuit summus Sacerdos Moses fons sacerdotij inuenitur dum ipse consecrauit Aaron Where we may note three things First that he does not giue the name of summus sacerdos the standing high Priest to Moses at all but to Aaron only Secondly that Moses was fons sacerdotij Yet not to crosse with Theodoret who said a little before that Aaron was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but rather that we may hold Ecclesiasticall Iurisdictions to be deriued after a sort from the temporall Prince of which hereafter For it should seeme he esteems Moses here as a temporall gouernour hauing giuen away the name of high Priest to Aaron Thirdly and lastly he makes Moses priesthood to be resigned againe and laid downe in that he vses the word dum Dum consecrauit Aaron which the Adioynder saies is to make it like a ierkin or a iacket Numb 41. this is his merriment but wee proceede § 60. To the authoritie of S. Austen lib. 3. in Leuit. Quaest 23. I see not what S. Austen could say more for vs if hee meant to plead our cause most but
Christ loues vs lesse in the state of miserie then he wil doe vs one day in the kingdome of glorie We also lesse loue the view of truth and of the face of God whiles we are as we are because we neither haue it yet nor know it as we shall doe This life therefore of ours is signified by Iohn who loued Christ lesse and therefore waits for his comming til the other life may be reuealed and the loue of it perfited as it should be in vs but the same Iohn was more loued of Christ because that life makes vs blessed which in him was instanced or figured Then Nemo tamen istos insignes Apostolos separet Yet let no man seuer these two excellent Apostles So then as one figures so the other figures as the one represents so the other represents and represents onely Iohn was not hereby installed Monarch of heauen no nor yet free denison thereof by actuall possession It was long after that that S. Iohn went to heauē No more was Peter then of earth or any earthly prerogatiue for they must not be separated but as one so the other Nemo separet saith S. Austen Et in eo saith the same Father quod significabat Petrus ambo erant in eo quod significabat Iohannes ambo futuri erant significando sequebatur iste manebat ille c. That is Both in that life which Peter signified they were both of them and in that which Iohn signified they were both of them to be He followed this staied for signification sake c. Doe you see that if Peter be a Monarch of the Church Iohn must needes be too which is a thing impossible For in eo quod significabat Petrus ambo erant saith S. Austen That is In that which Peter signified they were both of them In whome yet it follows plainer Nec ipsi soli Peter and Iohn forenamed sed vniuersa hoc facit sancta Ecclesia sponsa Christi ab istis tentationibus eruenda in illa foelicitate seruanda Neither Peter onely Iohn that is two of the Apostles but the whole Church of God the spouse of Christ doth the very same auoiding the tentation which is here present creeping on to the saluation which is laide vp for vs in heauen Quas duas vitas Petrus Iohannes figurauerunt as before significabant so now figurauerunt singuli singulas c. That is Which two liues Peter and Iohn figured the one the one the other the other c. Lastly Omnibus igitur sanctis ad Christi corpus inseparabiliter pertinentibus propter huius vitae procellosissimae gubernaculum ad liganda soluenda peccata claues regni coelorum primus Apostolorum Petrus accepit ijsdemque omnibus sanctis propter vitae illius secretissimae quietissimum sinum super pectus Christi Iohannes Euangelista discubuit Quoniam nec iste solus sed vniuersa Ecclesia nec ille in principio c. That is In lieu therefore of all the Saints of Christ which are inseparably grafted into his mysticall bodie as concerning their steerage the direction of their course in this most troublesome and tempestuous world the prime Apostle Peter receiued the Keies of the kingdome of heauen for the binding and loosing of their offences And againe in lieu of all the same Saints with respect to that most quiet either bosome of secresie or harborough of blisse the Euangelist Iohn leaned vpon the breast of our blessed Sauiour Because neither he alone but the whole Church nor the other in the beginning c. § 20. Against this I know what Mr. F. T. will say for he sayes no more then out of the mouth of his best masters As Iohn really so Peter really as the one lay vpon our Sauiours breast and it was no fiction so the other receiued the keies of heauens kingdome and it was more then a bare representation Who doubts but S. Peter receiued the keies as well as Iohn leaned on Christs bosome But Peter receiued the keies in the person of the Church militant because our Lord would honour vnitie Iohn rested and repasted himselfe on his sacred bosome as a figure of the triumphant to shadow out vnto vs the estate of glory and blissefull immortalitie Each did as wee read they did but with a drift to intimate some farther thing vnto vs. Non tibi sed vnitati may we say to S. Peter and Non tibi sed aeteruitati may we say to S. Iohn Omnibus Sanctis ad Christi corpus pertinentibus saies S. Austen And Quoniam nec iste solus nec ille solus sed vniuersa Ecclesia In this stands the answer that both Peter receiued and receiued for himselfe for he had a part in the keyes as well as others wee denie it not but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 portionally and particularly not wholly and entirely saue onely as hee stood in the Churches roome to grace vnitie And this prooues no vniuersall authoritie As not Iohn in the triumphant as not Iudas in the malignant so neither Peter in the militant But so much may suffice to haue spoken herof § 21. THE last place of S. Austen that is cited for this purpose is that which I first began with de Agone Christ c. 30. which because this hobby-horse cryes out vpon the Bishop so for alleadging fraudulently and lamely as hath bin said I will keepe my promise to report it euen at large Though in the 20. chapter of that booke before we come to the place that is now to bee scanned S. Austen sufficiently shewes what he meanes by his wonted phrase of gerere personam Where he doubts not to say speaking of the head in a mans bodie wherin all the senses are lodged and recollected that Caput ipsius animae quodam modo personam sustinet not as if the head did rule the soule which were very vnreasonable as they would make Peter to bee gouernour of the Church they care not how but happily for resembling the invisible soule in visible forme most liuely and most apparantly euen as Peter did the Church one for many And so it followes in S. Austen Ibi enim omnes sensus apparent But speake we to the 30. chapter which is the thing in question Intreating there how the Church ought to shew compassion to her children conuerting by repentance he thus saies Non enim sine causâ inter omnes Apostolos huius ecclesiae catholicae personam sustinet Petrus That is For not without cause doth Peter among all the Apostles sustaine the person of this Catholicke Church Huic enim ecclesiae Claues regni coelorum datae sunt For to this Church the keies of the Kingdome of heauen were giuen Which latter FOR is not to show that Peter was chosen to beare the person of the Church non sine causâ not without cause as he had said before but to prooue what hee had supposed that Peter