which forgette themselues to be Christians and in whose â—ares nothing standeth so much as Obey the higher povvers obey the King as the chief which is by the interpretation of blinde Gospellers and Flatterers that euery Prince is for his own Countrie Suprem vnder God in al maters both Ecclesiastical and Temporal such Emperours woulde not onely haue contemned the sentences of Priestes in comparison of their Maiesties Iudgement but also haue punished such as would signifie it by neuer so smal a token that the Emperour can not wel be Supreme Iudge in maters Ecclesiasticall But The Christian Emperoure durst nâ—t receiue their the Donatistes Seditiâ—usâ— and decâ—itful â—â—mplaintes in such sorte as that him self â—â—vâ—uld iudge of the sentence of the Bishopes that sate at Rome but he apointed as I haue said â—ther bishâ—pes And that for the causes aboue mentioned which were the frovvardnes and the Impudencie of the Donaâ—istes A quibuâ— tamen illiad ipsum rursum Imperaâ—orem prouocare maluerunt From â—vhich Bisshoppes for al that they châ—se to prouoke againe to the Emperour And what saied he vnto them Forsoothe he Iudged Câ—cilianum Innâ—centissimum illos improbissimos Caecilian to be most Innocent â–ª and them most vvicked Yea but you will Replie did not the Emperour 〈◊〉 Iudge vppon the mater when it had been twise before 〈◊〉 to Bishoppes True it is in deede that you saie But consider that they were Heretiques which appealed from Bysshoppes to the Emperour and that although he heard their Cause yet he detested their Contentiousnesse and thought also before vpon it to aske pardone of the Bisshoppes for medling in the matter after them For thus it foloweth in Sainct Augustine Qua in re illos quem admodum detâ—stetur audistis Atque Vtinam saltem ipsiâ—â— Iudicio insanissimis animositatibus suis finem posuissent Atque vt eis ipse cessit vt de illâ— causa post Episcopos iâ—dicaret à Sanctis Anâ—istâ—â—ibus postea veniam petiturus dum tamen illi quod vlterius dicerâ—nt non haberent s 〈◊〉 eius sententiae non obtemperarent ad queâ— ipsi proâ—ocauerunt sic illi aliquandâ— cederent Veritati In vvhich thing that they appealed vnto him after they had been with two seueral Iudges of the Clergie hovv he detested them you haue heard And Vvould God they had made an ende of their most â—utragious stomaking of the mater if it had ben for no more then for his sentence sake And as he the Emperour yelded vnto them to iudge of that cause after the Byshopes minâ—ing to askâ— pardâ—nâ— aftervvarde of the holy Bishoppes 〈◊〉 that they the Donatistes â—hould nâ—t han◠〈◊〉 say further if they vvould not obey his seâ—tence vnto vvhom they appealed So vvould God that they once yet vvould yeelde vnto the truth Consider now indifferently with me vpon this whole mater gentle Reader And this appealing of the Donatists vnto the Emperour and his hearing of the whole cause being not once or twise but very oft alleged by M. Iew. it is worth while to be wel remembred that which I haue already said that which by occasion hereof may be further gathered and wel be noted See then first what busie Heretikes these Donatistes were and how ful they were of Shiftes and Quarels making From the Emperour to Rome From Rome they go to the Emperour againe From him then by appointement and agreement they goe to Arls and the Bisshops there And froÌ„ Arls they returne with complaint to the Emperour yet againe At last the Emperour himself heareth y â— cause yet would they not stand to the Emperours sentence but mainteined stil their false Bishope whom to put in the See of Carthage they thruste out Cecilian and they continued stil in their heresie accompting al the Christians of y â— world accursed which were not of the syde of Donatus Such is the nature and practise of Heretikes they pretend conscience they commend holy and Auncient Fathers They appeale to the Primitiue Church They craue for General Councels for free disputations for surcease of Inquisition for Seruice in the vulgar tongue for Commâ—â—â—on in both kindes and other such thiâ—ges moe If the Princes 〈◊〉 resist them in any point straite waies they make exclamations they sturre vp angers â—hey complaine of sentence geauen vpon them before they be heard of the lack of ghostly coÌ„solation which should come to the people by vnderstanding of Scriptures and receiuing the Sacramentes of the penalties of lawes and Statutes What is it so litle thâ—t they wil not murmur against if they maie not haue their fâ—l wil â–ª In respect then of peace and publike tranquilitie â–ª if you wil not striue w t them vpoÌ„ materâ— indifferent but dispense with them in theyr requestes or demaundes yet will they not suffer the Catholikes to be in rest And if you put them out of feare of the Inquisition they wil troble yet the whole Countrie with preaching in the open field And if you prouide a General Councel to satisfie them they will not come at it if at euery masse there should be Communicantes they wil not alow the Sacrifice And when the Prince is made by them the Supreme Gouernour vnder God â–ª in any countrie yet wil they stoutly disobey y â— prince in a smal mater of wearing a 〈◊〉 gowne cap. So y â— al y â— they doe is 〈◊〉 to mainteine talke and finde alwaies somewhat in whiche they maie occupie the Catholikes vntil that at length when theyr power is so greate that they â—are meete in field with their Aduersaries they maie boldely and dâ—sperately leaue al reasoning conferring Applealing demaunding protesting and Lawleying and with open face comâ— against the Catholikes Pull downe Churches 〈◊〉 officies Take awaie Sacramentes Alter the staâ—e of common weales hang draw and quarter Priestes Set Inquisition againste Catholikes And confirme their Gospel by terrour These and suche like thinges we in our daies see by experience Constantinus the Emperour dyd not see so much Yet fearing the busie nature of Schysmatykes and hoping by faire demeanes to bring the Donatistes to a peace with al Christendome he yelded as much vnto them as he could and as ye haue heard he receiued theyr prouoking to hym not because he thought that hym selfe was the chiefest Iudge in all the world euen in maters Ecclesiastical but because he hoped in yelding vnto the Donatistes in al their requestes aboute apointynge or changing of y â— Iudges to bring them at length vnto suche a remembrance of themselues that they should cease for shame to make any further brable about that in which by euery Iudge that dyd heare the cause they were condemned Now if at those daies either the wyse and lerned aboute hym or he hymselfe had beleued the hearing of causes Ecclesiastical to belong vnto his court or consistorie what needed hym to boroweâ— point of the law to accompte vpon askyng of pardon of the Bishopes for his meddling with that
thinke wel vpon that it maie be perceiued howe wel the Protestantes and Arrians agree together in their prowde and rebellious behauyours how wel the testimonie of blasphemous Heretikes maie serâ—e to disproue any Catholike and honest conclusion An other Example is Donatus being condemned by threescore ten Bishops in Aphrica Appealed vnto the Emperour Constantinus and was receiued But what was Donatus A singular prowd heretike For profe wherof let y â— Epistles and bookes whiche S. Augustin wrote against him and his folowers be witnesses Let that 〈◊〉 also be witnesse which S. Augustine wrote purposely of heresies In which the Donatiani or Donatistae haue their proper place For when Cecilanus A Catholike and good man was made against their wils Bishope of Carthage they obiected certaine crimes against vs which being not proued and sentence going against their Donatus being their Captain they tooke such a Stomake that they turned their Schisme into heresie and helde the opinion that al they whatsoeuer they were in the worlde bysides that agreed not with them were infected and excommunicated persons And herevpon as the nature of heresie is to goe deeper and deeper still into desperate blindnes and presumption they dyd baptise againe suche as had ben alreadie baptised in the Catholike Churche It appeereth alsâ— what an honest and Catholike man 〈◊〉 was in that M. Iewel confesseth hym to haue been condemned of three score and ten Bishopes whiche was not I beleue for any humilitie Obedience Faith or Charitie of his Donatus then beinge an Heretike what hath M. Iewel to doe with hym Lyke will to lyke perchaunce and the same Sprite y â— inflamed Donatus warmeth M. Iewel otherwyse it is not to be gathered out of the practises of Heretikes what the Order that we ought to folowe was in the Primitiue Churche But of the Catholike and alowed Examples And if M. Iewel could shewe that this Appeale of Donatus vnto the Emperour from the Bishopes that condemned hym was good and lawful in the Iudgement of any Father or Doctour of that age then might this example haue some lykelyhoode in it to serue his purpose otherwise him selfe doth minister the Catholike an Exception againste his owne witnesse the Auncient and Reâ—â—rend Heretike Donatus But Constantinus the Emperour â—eceaued his Appeale What of that Is al wel done that Emperours doe And are noâ— manie thinges permitâ—â—d vnto them for Ciuile Policie and quiet sake which by right folowing to Ecclesiasâ—ical orders should not be suffered Againe Constantinus was a Christian Catholike and good Emperour and he receiued in deed Donatus Appeale but receaâ—ed he it willingly or no And thought he hymselfe to doe therein lawfully as A Supreme head and Gouernour or els to passe the bondes of his Imperial Authoritie and to medle with a Iurisdiction belonging to more excellent Officers UVndoubtedly he would faine haue been rid of the importunitie of the Donatistes and lyked it not in his owne conscience that himselfe should be taken for the highest Iudge in maters Ecclesiastical HJow proâ—e I this now Sufficiently inough by S. Augustine And marke the place well Indifferent Reader that thou maiest see the deuotion of that so mightie an Emperour First Donatus and his felowes perceiuing that although they had condemned Cecilianus y â— Bishope of Carthage and set an other of their ownâ— making in his place Yet the rest of the Bishopes of the world dyd stil write and send to Cecilianus as the true Bishope in deede and such as they communicated withal they I saie perceauing this made sute to Coâ—stantinâ—s the Emperour that they might haue the cause of Cecilianus examined before the Bishopes of beyond the seas In which point S. Augustine findeth that they had a duble fetche and subtiltie The one that if those Bishoppes whom the Emperour had procured to heaâ—e the whole mater should condemne Cecilianus then loe they should haue their lust fulfilled The other that if those should absolâ—e him then would he with his fellowes say that the Iudges were not indifferent and so by consequence appeale from them In which case though as S. Augustin saith there remained a general Councel of the vniuerfal Church in which the cause betweene them and their Iudges shoulde haue ben handeled yet what did they Mary they went to the Emperour and accused the foresaid Bishopes before him And how was this taken thinke we of the Catholikes Uerely not wel as appeereth by S. Augustine which noteth the Donatistes of folish boldnes therein Iudices enim Ecclesiasticâ—s c. For the Ecclesiastical Iudges Bishopes of so great Authoritie by vvhose sentence and iudgement both the Innocencie of Cecilianus and their naughtinessâ— vvas declared these men of such worthines saith S. Augustine they durst accuse not before other their felâ—vvebishopes and Collegies but vnto the Emperour that they had 〈◊〉 iudged vvel But now when they had broken the order of the Ecclesiastical Law and were come to the Emperour what did he Did he commende their Obedience or Wisedome Did he preferre his owne Courte and Authoritie before the Consistoâ—ie and Iudgement of Bishoppes What he did the Actes and Registers of his owne Courte declare as S. Austine recordeth out of it For after y â— Donatistes were now coÌ„demned by y â— Pope of Rome other Bishopes assistant and refused to stand to their sentence requiring helpe at the Emperours handes Dedit ille aliud Iudicium Arelatense aliorum scilicet Episcoporum He gaue and appointed vnto them other Iudges at Arles I meane other Bisshoppes Why if the Emperour had in those daies taken the Pope for chiefe Bishope in al the worlde would he haue further committed vnto the Bishop of Arls the sitting vpon that cause which already was decided by the Bishop of Rome It seemeth altogeather vnlikely And therefore M. Iewel may be thought to bring in deede an inuincible Argument for the Emperours Supremacie against the Supremacie of the Bishop of Rome But marke the Circumstances and Considerations which moued the Emperour and then wil the contrary conclusion be manifestly proued that the Emperour tooke him selfe to be the inferiour vnto Bishops euen in that cause which was brought vnto him after Bishopes and which he caused to be examined againe after it was sufficiently iudged For thus it foloweth in S. Austin Dedit ille aliud Arelatense Iudicium non quia iam necesse erat sed eorum peruersitatibus cedens omnimodo cupiens tantam Impudentiam Cohibere That is He gaue other Iudges not because it vvas novv necessarie but because be yelded to the frovvardnes of them the Donatistes and desired by al meanes to restraine so great Impudencie of them Neque enim aâ—sus est Christianus Imperator sic eoruÌ„ tumultuâ—sas fallaces querelas suscipere vt de iudiciâ— Episcoporum qui Romae sederant ipse Iudicaret sed alios vt dixi Episcopos dedit For the Christian Emperour as who should say other Emperours
cause which they alreadie had ended Can we haue any thing more plaine and manifest that this Christian and worâ—hie Emperour dyd in conscience thinke himself to base to sit and Iudge after Bishopes whereas enforced thereunto by the importunitie of the Donatistes and trusting by that his yelding to pacifie the commotion y â— was reysed in the catholike Church yet was not sure of his doeinges herein but determined to aske forgeauenes of the holy Bishopes As if he should saie The Donatistes here trouble the Church They appeale vnto me as though I were chiefe If I wil not heare their cause there is no man shal Rule them And if I take open me to heare it the Bishops which alreahaue decided it wil be offended Wel I wil venter yet And if the Donatistes wil stand to my iudgement and be quiet for euer after that is so greate a benefite that to cumpasse it I maie stretche my conscience And if for al that pretense my fact shal be misliked I wil aske pardon of the holy Bishopes which haue alreadie iudged of the mater This is the very trueth of the Emperours receiuing of the Donatistes Appeale He dyd it vpon occasion and if it were not wel done he was readie to take a pardon for it In all thinges he sought the beste waie to helpe the Church and shewed his moste due and humble and Obedient affection towardes Bishopes Yet doth M. Iewel bring in this Story to proue that It is vvel knovven that Appeales euen in the Ecclesiastical causes vvere made to the Emperours and Ciuil Princes Seconly that the Bishope of Rome determined such cases of Appeale by vvarrant and commission from the Emperour Thirdly that maters being heard and determined by the Bishope of Rome haue ben by Appeale from him remoued further vnto others Which Conclusion wil seeme well inough to folowe vpon the Appeale of the Donatistes vnto y â— Emperour and y â— Emperours sending of them first vnto the Bishope of Rome and then to the Bishope of Arles but consider the mater truely and M. Iewels Arguments muâ—t be these Schismatikes Appealed in an Eeclesiastical cause â–ª vnto the Emperour Constantinus Ergo Catholikes maieâ— like causes appeale to Ciuilâ— Princes Againe Constantinus the Emperour receiued for 〈◊〉 sake the Schismatikes appeale and 〈…〉 Rome there to be tried and durste not him selfe iudge of that cause vvhen the Bishope of Rome had determined it Ergo the Bishope of Rome had a vvarrant and commission sent vnto hym to heare and determine that mater Againe Constantinus the Emperour yeldinge vnto the importanitie of Schismatikes vvhen they vvould not obeie the Sentence of the Bishope of Rome sent thâ—m to the Bishope of Arls and vvheÌ„ they vvould not be ruled neither by that Sentence he heard the cause hymselfe and mynded to aske pardon of the holy Bishopes for his sitting vpon that mater vvhich alreadie by them vvas determined Ergo Appeales maie be lavvfully made from the Bishope of Rome to other Bishopes and the Emperour is Supreme heaâ— vnder God in earth So that al causes must in the end be referred vnto hym These be the only premisses which the Storie geaueth vnto which if he can ioine his conclusion then shal he make contraries agree but whereas he can not whi maketh he conclusions without premisses Or why maketh he Argumentes out of y â— which either Schismatikes vsed or that which Catholikes yelded vnto in conâ—â—deration of Schismatikes Wyl M. Iewel neuer leaue his impudenâ—ie But let vs go further The Councel of Antioche deposed Pope Iulius Yet was not Iulius therfore deposed This you bring in M. Iewel to declare that the sentence geuen in Councels was not alwaies put in execution To which I answer that if the Councel be lawfull and Catholike the decrees ought to be put in 〈◊〉 if thei be not it foloweth not that the Sentence of the Councel maie be 〈◊〉 or neglected but that they which being of Authoritie do not see the Councels 〈…〉 are to be 〈…〉 Councels neither their 〈…〉 their examples are to be 〈◊〉 You reason muche like as if one should saie against the Obedience due vnto the priuye Councel of a Realme The Sonnes of King Dauid the Capitanes of the hostes Abiathar also the high Priest consented and agreed saieing Viuat Rex Adonias God saue Adonias the King and yet Adonias was not king ergo the Proclamations or Determinations of lawful Authoritie maie be litle estemed For this Councel of Antioche was a Schismatical assemble and wheras they deposed hym ouer whom they had no Authoritie there is no absurditie at al nor fault to be laied vnto any mans charge that wil not obey or lyke their procedings doings therein But when y â— lawful head Bishope of the worlde doth define and subscribe in a Generall Councel though there folow no execution in acte yet there is one to be done by right And it can be no sufficient excuse before God when the conscience shal be examined to allege that because Schismatikes decrees haue not ben executed therfore the Obedience which is due to the Sentence of Catholikes maie be diminished But see yet an other ExaÌ„ple M. Iewel wil proue that Bishops of other Countries neuer yeelded to the Popes Supremacie For faith he The Bishopes of the East writing vnto Iulius allege that the faith that then was in Rome came first from them and that their Churches as Sozomenus writeth ought not to be accompted inferiour to thâ— Church of Rome And as Socrates further reporteth that they ought not to be ordered by the Romaine Bishope You haue much to do M. Iewel with the Bishopes of the Easte and no man I thinke that readeth your Booke wil iudge otherwise but that they were learned and good men such as whose opinions both your selfe allow and commend vnto others to be regarded And truely if they were such men I wil say nothing but that he that is disposed may esteeme their sayinges but if it shal be proued most manifestly y â— thei were rank and obstinate Arrians then truely the more ignominiously and coÌ„temptuously they spak against the Bishops of Rome the better they do declare of what kind and succession they are at this present which set their whole studies against the See Apostolyke and will not be ruled by the highest Bishop in Christendom For proufe of your assertion you refer vs to Sozomenus and Socrates Auncient and lawful Historiographers whome we also do admit And as though any man would striue with you herevpon that the Bishopes of the East did not so litle set by y â— Bishop of Romes Authoritie as you seme to gather you put in the margen the greeke text it self that he which knoweth no greeke at all may yet say to him selfe Bi r Lady M. Iewel alleageth y â— expresse Text for himselfe and it apeareth by y â— English therof that the Bishopes of the East made no such accompt
of the xiiij Chapiter of the first to the Corinthians altogeather out of purpose But as it appeereth by this place which I haue opened S. Augustine was of an other mind would haue geueÌ„ such Protestantes an other lesson that they should not mocke at poore Syr Iohns which praie in latine and yet vnderstand not latine like as his counsel is to eloquent and smoeth tounged Gentlemen that come from secular Scholes to the Church of Christ there to be instructed And because the opening of so much would haue ben a great disauantage to M. Iewel and his felowes therefore he speaketh only of Priestes whom S. Augustine willed to correct the errours of their latine tounge and dissimbleth the answer which S. Augustine geueth to those ioly felowes which would be ready to mocke at Priests because of their barbarouse and false praieng in the Publike Seruice By which we vnderstand that the publike Seruice was then in Latine and that it was so strainge also vnto the vulgar people that some of the Priestes and Bishopes did not vnderstand it Of this also it foloweth that the conclusion which M. Iewel peeketh out of this testimonie of S. Austine is so grosse and vnsensible that I wonder where his wittes were when he wrote it Thus he saieth This of S. Augustin seemeth to be spoken generally of al tounges Seemeth it so in deede And do not your self so vnderstaÌ„d the place in y â— very begynning of your alleging thereof that you saie S. Augustine willeth the Priestes to correct the errours of their latine tonge If then it be the latine tongue by name for which he reasoneth how doth it sâ—me vnto you that he speaketh generally of al Tounges Againe if he spake generally of al tounges ergo of the Punike tounge I aske you then which of the two it is like that the Aphricanes vnderstoode better the Aphricane and Punike tounge Or the Latine If the Aphricane as being their natural and vulgar tounge was more familiar with them why doth S. Augustine wil the Priests to studie the Latine tounge that the people might vnderstaÌ„d them the better wheras by your accoÌ„pt they should haue spoken in their owne vulgar tongue and so with lesse labour the people should haue ben more edified If the Latin was more familiar how could any Priest or Bishope in Aphrica be so ignorant thereof that he should not pronounce his Latine praiers and vnderstand them Or how doth S. Augustin seeme to speake generally of al tongues which extendeth out his Reason and argument no not vnto the Punik tongue Here againe I praie thee Indifferent Reader to consider whether M. Iewel hath not clerckly alleged the Doctours S. Irenens abused S. Ireneus hath a manifest tastimonie for the Supremacie of the Church of Rome 〈◊〉 Church saieth he must resort to this Church of Rome because of the mightier Principalitie of the same And this place trobleth M. Iewel very much as it appeereth by y â— extraâ—â—gants and idle discourses which he maketh about it But out of his Aâ—swers is this that The Principalitie that Ireneus meant was the Ciuile Dominion and Temporall Staâ—e of the Citie of Rome in which God had then planted the Empire of the world and made al nations subiect vnto it See the impudencie or blindenes of the man Are ye not very carnal in your Iudgement and make ye not the like argumentes as the worldlings do What societie betwene light and darknes and what participation betwene Christ and Belial what hath the euerlasting kingdom to depend vpon the transitorie and temporal kingdom â–ª And why should the wealth or dominioÌ„ of any Citie diminish or increase the Eâ—â—imation of any one Church Consider I pray thee IndiffereÌ„t Reader what a wise interpretour M. Iewel is He maketh y â— lerned Father â— Ireneus to haue this dul grosse sense in him All the Churches of the world must resort vnto the Church of Rome because the ciuile dominion and state thereof is the greatest in the world Or thus Al the faithful in the world must resort to S. Peters Successours because the Romain Emperours are the migthtiest Princes in the world By what consequence The cause vndoubtedly whiche should moue the Faithful to come to Rome must haue ben spiritual and not temporal They should haue resorted thither to be instructed in their faith against the heresies that trobled their vnderstanding and not to aske any Counsel or seek any wordly benefite Againe in this one sentence S. Ireneus dath twise name Ecclesiam Church If therefore in the first place M. Iewel wil haue the Ciuil dominion of Rome to be vnderstand by hanc EcclesiaÌ„ this Church thâ—n is it reason that he meane by omnem ecclesiaÌ„ euerie Church which words foâ—â—â— in the sentence the Ciuil dominion in euerie parte of the world But S. Ireneus by euerie Church vnderstandeth as him selfe expoundeth it eos qui vndique sunt fideles y â— faithful that are euerie where about Ergo by Ecclesiam the Church in the former part of his senteÌ„ce he meaneth the companie of the Faithful that are in Rome of which the Bishop there is the principal head I adde further If the Principality of the Ciuil dominion in Rome did seme a worthie cause vnto the lerned and auncient Father Ireneus why al Faithfull should resort chiefly thither than which Conclusion he thought nothing lesse yet if M. Iewel will needes haue that consequence how chaunced it that when Constantine the great gaue place to S. Peter and went with his Principalitie of Ciuil dominion vnto Constâ—ntinople that al the Churches of the world did not for all that so resorte vnto the Church of Constantinople but that the Church of Rome continued stil in her Supremacie As for that which you say that principalis Ecclesia is sometime vsed of old Fathers to signifie the ciuil dominioÌ„ and principalitie of the Citie where the Church is although in the Examples whiche you bring in the first of them 7. quâ—sâ— 1. placuit principalis cathedra doth properly signify a spiritual office not a worldly dominion And in the second inter epiâ—tolas Augustini 35. epi. although the word principalis be referred to Alipius as Bishope yet let me graunt so much and consider your diâ—ine Logike After the alleging as the foresaid testimonies which in dede make quite against you you conclude saying Thus the principality that Iren meaneth stoode not in the preaching of the Gospel but in the ciuile estate and worldly dominion not in the Bishoppe that professed Christ but in the Emperour that was an heathen not in the Church but in the persequutours and enemies of the Church If you would haue said â–ª Ireneus taketh Principalitas in this sense Ergo Paulinus in vsing the word Principalis may be interpreted to haue the like sense Although this also were no good Argument when the word hath more
S. Bregorie or Iustinian ye folow both and ye are contrary vnto your selfe at one time defying the Title at an other alleaging it Certainly Balaam notwithstanding he were a False Prophete yet he opened his mouth and Blessed the people of God Cayphas although he were a wicked Bisshop yet he pphesied and spake the truth A Seale although it be cast in Leade yet it geaueth a perfite Printe The Scribes and Phariâ—eis although they were Hypocrites and liued not wel yet they instructed the Congregation and saied wel By these Examples then it appeareth that A Doctrine is not to be forsaken because of the euil lyfe of the Preacher What faulte then is Doctour Harding in for saying that Be the Bishoppe of Romes lyfe neuer so wicked yet may we not seuer our selues from the Churche of Rome For if other causes be alleaged wherefore we should do it they are to be Aunswered but this Obiection of the euil lyfe of the Bishoppes of Rome is sufficiently confuted by these Examples which M. Iewel here hath clearely allowed Yet see the nature of the man when D. Hardinge had saied so much he could not abide it but straitewaies commeth against it with this Authoritie How be it S. Cyprian saith otherwise Plebs obsequens c. The people obeying Gods CommaundemeÌ„ts must seuer them selues from the Wicked that ruleth ouer them S. Cyprian speaketh of Basilides and Martialis Bishops that had defiled them selues with Libels in which they gaue their names to Idolatrie For which cause they were excommunicated of other Bishopes and the people were forbid to come to their Sacrifice But it is no mater to M. Iewel how the case standeth with anie Testimonie that he bringeth So desyrous he is to gaynsaie D. Harding that he falleth into Contradictions with himselfe also â–ª speaking at one time for credite to be geuen to Priestes notwithstanding theyr euil life And at an other time making it lawful to forsake the Doctrine of the Preacher or Ruler for because of his euil life When Christ had deliuered both kinds vnto his Disciples he sayd vnto them this doe ye the same that you see I haue done But where did Christ euer say Minister vn to yourselues one way and an other wai vn to the people The like Argument he maketh pa. 119. Where did Christ. caet As who should saie Christ hath not expressed it Ergo it is not to be obserued Here loe we see that M. Iewell aloweth the Argument called in Scholes Ab Autoritate Negatiue except you wil say that him selfe vseth that which him selfe alloweth not But heare now what he saith in other places of his Replie M. Harding Gheasseth thus It appereth not by Beda the Seruice was in English Ergo the Seruice was in Latine What kinde of Logique haue we here Or how may this Reason hold It concludeth Ab Autoritate negatiuâ—â— I beleue M. Harding him selfe wil not allow it The Argument in deede he wil not allow as you haue made it But for as much as Bede purposely speaketh of such thinges as concerned Religion It is not to be thought that he would haue passed it ouer in Silence if the Masse had been translated into the English tongue But how agree you M. Iewel with your selfe that can both refuse and vse one and the selfe same kind of ArgumeÌ„t You haue I trow some defense for you selfe in this mater For you say in an other place The weight of M. Hardinges Argument is taken as they name it in Scholes Ab Autoritate negatiuè and vnlesse it be in consideration of some other circumstaÌ„ce it is so simple that a very Child may sone Answere it What Circumstance then is that which being obserued maketh the Argument ab Authoritate negatiuè good Surely that Circumstance were wel worth the learning that we might perceaue both how to make such Arguments ourselues without doubt of your reprehension and also howe to warne you thereof when yourselfe goe without the Cumpasse of your owne Circumstance Perchaunce you meane hereby not more but that which you haue alreadie expressed in the first Article where H. Harding obiecteth vnto you the Common vse of this kind of Reasoning which is ab Authoriâ—ate negatiuâ—â— For thus you say and it is I beleue the moste you can say that The Argument ab Authoritate negatiuâ—â— is thought to be good when so euer prouf is taken of Gods word and is vsed not only by vs but also by S. Paule and by many of the Catholike Fathers S. Paule sayeth God sayed not vnto Abraham In thy SEEDES al nations shal be blessed but in thy SEEDE which is Christ. And thereof he thought he made a good Argument Suffer me than to make a like Argument out of Good woord and let me haue your Answer vsed it Christ saith to S. Peter Feede my sheep he said not these or them Ergo vvithout Exception he comâ—â—itted his sheep vnto S. Peter But you like not this Argument For you say it is against the Rules of Logique and that it was An Errour in Bonifacius to reason thus Dominus dixit Generaliter c. The Lord said Generally vnto Peter feede my Sheepe he said not specially feed these or them therefore we must vnderstande that he committed them vnto Peter altogeather Yet this Argument is like to that of S. Paules of SEEDES and SEEDE which in deede is not 〈…〉 negatiuè but Affirmatiuè For he presseth the woorde of the Scripture SEEDE in the Singular nuÌ„ber which to make the better obserued he biddeth it to be noted y â— it was not said SEEDES But how so euer that be M. Iewels Art may be wel inough espied which al at pleasure affirmeth and denieth saieth and vnsayeth maketh Rules and Obserueth them not and is Contradictorie vnto him self in very many places This very name the HEADE of the vniuersal Church is the very thing that we deny Then are you a very vnwise man to sett the State and Substance of your question vpon a Name And to contend vpon words affirming them to be the very thinges And there appeereth here vnto me to be a manifest Contradiction that the name should be the thing For if it were so that al this writing on both sides were no more but an Alteration of Brammarians or Rhetoricians then in deede it might be a questioÌ„ whether this woorde HEADE were euer Readen in such a Case or such an Author or euer applied to such and such a person then â—roprely the Name should be the thing But now wheras al our coÌ„flict is about the Truth of thinges that are to be beleued and we seeke not after Termes and Phrases of Speache but sense and meaning of Truthes And whereas the vnderstanding which both partes thinke to instructe is not bettered by any NAMES but by the very thinges them selues It is al togeather vnreasonable to
seeme the lesse No remedy M. Iewel hath so appointed Againe Bessarions Authoritie in this case can not seeme greate bothe for other sundry causes which you leaue And Also which must needes be a good cause and not forgoten for that he liued at the least fourtene hundred yeres after Christ. And againe Pope Nicolas was the second Bishop in Rome after Pope Iohane the Woman Note here that Other men recken from S. Peter downeward this man compteth from Pope Iohane An English woman as the reporter of the tale sayth borne at Magunce in Germany Which was almost nine hundred yeres after Christ. Wherfore his Authoritie might well haue bene spared Thus we see then by manifest Examples the exact Accompt that you make of the first six hundred yeres after Christ As though the whole Truthe of A mater were lost if it come to knowledge any long time after the thing was done Let vs consider now Whether any honest Cause and Reason may be alleaged for your so doing Or whether you did it without cause Or els were sturred vp with some vnlawfull Affection and Reproâ—eable Cause And here now take no skorne M. Iewel if I appose you in a few Questions For either you be hable to Answer them and that shall be to your worship either not Answering them you shall occasyon Trueth therby to be knowen And that shall be to Gods glorie and the Cumfort of the doubtfull Surely if it were to my selfe and if so much might be obtained that I should be Answered in some One thing thoroughly and be bid to choose out of all that which I haue to demaunde that One thing which seemeth strongest agaynst my Aduersary and surest of the Catholikes I would be glad of the Occasion and all other maters quite and cleane put to Silence I would speake of these fewe poyntes which folow And either wythout more wordes holde my peace If in them I were satisfied Or requâ—re that our Aduersaries neuer trouble their hearers or Readers any further with other conclusions before these fâ—we questions were Answered Therefore I pray the Indifferent Reader to consider thys plaâ—e which foloweth though thou Reade no more of all the Booke First I aske of you M Iewel whether you haue any Faith at all or no If you haue none what meddle you with any Religion except it be for Ciuil Policie sake For which to doe as you doe though it would proue you lesse mad or vnreasonable yet should you be for lacke of Faith as deade in soule and as Godlesse as any Infidel in al the world If ye haue any how came you by it for we are not borne Christians but Regenerate neither doe we receiue faith by Nature but by Teaching And faith is by hearing sayeth the Apostle Of whome then haue you heard and lerned your Faith Of them that liued and died before you were borne Or of such as preached and taught in the world sens your selfe were of remembrance If you lerned of the first how could they teache without A tongue Or how could you heare without an care For they were now deade in body and cleane dissolued and you were not yet made of body and soule nor had any instruments of senses If you lerned of the Quicke and Liuing your self also quicke and liuing were those your Teachers of such Authoritie with you that you submitted your senses and vnderstanding to theyr iudgment Or examined you by your selfe their Doctrine and Sayinges If you the Scholer did iudge of the Master you were without all doubt a Malapert and Folishe Scholer Malapert because you would breake order and proudly goe before him whome you ought meekly to haue folowed And Folishe because in maters of Faith of which we now speake all Wit and Reason of man is altogeather vnworthy and vnable to Iudge of that which is Proponed If you then folowed their Authoritie and submitted your vnderstanding and will vnto their Doctrine without Mouing or Mistrusting any doubt about it VVhat were they in all the world vnto whome you gaue such credite I aske you not this question for the time of your Childhode in which though true Faith be Habitually in them that are Baptised yet there is not that Discretion or Consideration by which they may returne their mindes vpon theyr ownâ— actes Or put a difference betwene their GraÌ„dmothers tale of Bloudy bone Raw head Bloudelesse and Ware woulf and the Churches Doctrine of Hell and the Deuill But I speake now as to one that hath Understanding and knowledge of his owne state And Experience of many thinges And Lerning inough for the purpose And such a one whose part and profession it is to be able to geaue a good Cause and Reason for the Faith and Religion which he foloweth Of you therefore I aske what Authority that was Or is which moued you to be and continue A Christian Here you must not say vnto me that you considered the wrytinges of the Fathers of the first six hundred yeres And that you gaue your minde to Reading of the Scriptures c. For what so euer such tale yoâ— tell me it will alwaies remaine to be Answered of you what Instruction or Authoritie that was which either Taught you Or 〈◊〉 you to esteeme those Auncient Doctors of the Christian Religion Or these Scriptures of which you make your self so certaine For by your selfe you could no more know the difference betwene Writers and Writers or true Scriptures and lying Fables than A Blinde man caÌ„ iudge of Colours Or a Stranger know the right way in A Wildernesse or he Rede that knoweth no letter on the booke You are not I am sure wiser thaÌ„ S. Augu. Neither haue you better thought vpoÌ„ these maters than he did He saith of himself y â— concerning the Faith which he had in Christ. He savv himselfe to haue beleued none but the established opinion of Peoples Nations and the very Common and renoumed Fame of him Than which cause if you can geue any better it is time y â— you shew it As for vs neither we finde any like And we neede not be ashamed to be perswaded by it which moued S. Augustine him selfe to come vnto Christ. And I think verely that neither you studying neuer so much for it can bring any so perswasible a Reason why you beleued Christ as this is that So many Nations and peoples of the world doe beare witnesse to him For this is so Great and so Stronge to induce vs into Faith that we should not now be desirous of visible Miracles for Prouing Or Confirming of it S. Augâ—stine moste wisely and Reasonably warning vs Quisquis adhuc prodigia vt credat inquirit magnum est ipse prodigium Qui MVNDO CREDENTE non credit VVho so euer doth yet seeke after Straunge and vvonderfull thinges to make him beleue he is himselfe a straunge felovv or Greate
ods For neither D. Harâ—nor his Inferiors are so ignoraÌ„t of y â— seÌ„se strength of this word Catholike y â— they shuld be addicted to any one two or thre mens priuate sayings of what degree or time so euer they haue ben without thâ— consent or warrant of the Church neither shuld M. Iewel alleage vnto them any Testimony of the last nine hundred yeres himself referring the triall of the the whole mater to the first vj. C. only And hauing such Aduersaries as are very well content to be ordered by the sentence and Iudgment of that first age and that Primitiue Church Yet go to for a while let M. Iewel be suffered And let it be his excuse that he hath argued alwaies ad hominem to the man when he hath vsed the Testimonies of later times thereby to impugne D. Harding Let him say I meane that he hath recited in his Replye Durand Gerson Biel Denyse Hugo Cardinall Thomas Duns c. not because himself aloweth them but because they are estemed of y â— party against whoÌ„ he wryteth But is this true And hath not he vsed their Testimonies in respect also of hys owne opinion confirmed himself in it because of their Testimonies When he reasoneth Substantially and Directly and Plainly to his Purpose and ad rem to the mater and out of his owne Principles as it were and Authorities doth he not alleage the forsayde Doctours although they were all the sort of them farre vnder the first six hundred yeres to whiche onely he would haue the Decision of the controuersies referred Whether this be so or no let Examples try it M. Iewel is of the Opinion that no Christian Churches wer built in the Apostles tyme And muche lesse then Aulters if his Logicke be good For may wee thinke sayth he that Aulters were built before the Churche Of whiche Lye we shall speake in an other place But to my purpose It foloweth in him Neyther afterward when Aulters were first vsed and so named were they straite waye built of Stone as Durandus and such others saie they must needes be and that Quia petra erat Christus Because Christ vvas the Stone Whereof then were they built according to your Opinion And what Cause or Authoritie haue you for it It foloweth For Gerson saith that Siluester Bisshop of Rome first caused Stone Aultars to be made c. Is Gerson then of Authoritie with you And a man of so late yeares and little Fame and Estimation in comparison of many Fathers and Doctours of the ix C. yeares last past all which you refuse is hee nowe a witnesse for yourâ— Here it is plaine that you bring in this late writer to serue directly your owne Opinion and that he standeth you in suche steede that without him you proue not that whiche you saide You depende not therefore vppon your Aduersaries allowing of Gerson as who shoulde saye if he admit the Testimonie of him then doe I confirme my Assertion and if he doe not yet haue I other Authorities to proue my sayinges true but you doe so absolutely and proprely for your owne Opinion vse him that without him you leaue your matters vnproued But let vs see an other Example It is required of M. Iewell that forasmuche as the Catholikes coulde neuer yet finde that the Publike Seruice in the Primitiue Churche was in any other than Greeke or Latine and hee yet is sure of the Contrarye that it was euery where in a tongue knowen to the Uulgare People he shew therefore his Profes and Authorities suche by all likelyhode as himselfe is perswaded withall before he woulde haue other to allowe them Marke then what hee sayth And to auoyde multitude of woordes the case beeing plaine Eckius sayth the Indians had their Seruice in the Indian tongue Durandus saith The Iewes that were Christened had their Seruice in the Hebrew tongue Nycolas Lyra and Thomas de Aquine saye The Common Seruice in the Primitiue Churche was in the Common vulgare tongue And in the next leafe folowing he aleageth Aeneas Syluius and an Extrauagant de Officio Iudicis Ordinarij and Iohn Billet in Summa de Diuinis officijs But what are all these Were they not writers of very late Yeares Were they not Popisshe Doctours or Popysshe Proctours not woorthe the naming by M. Iewels Accompt and much lesse worth the Crediting Why theÌ„ doth he alleage them Will he saye he condescended herein to D. Hardinges Infirmitie And that he vseth his owne Doctours for the better contentation of his mind No verely he must not say so For he was required to bring his owne groundes and witnesses and not such as are alowed only per accidens that is because it so happeneth that an other maÌ„ liketh them He was content allso to shew his profes and to yeld to the foresaid Request both for the goodnesse and pregnancie of the cause and also specially Good Christian Reader sayeth he for the better Contentation of thy mind If the cause then be good and pregnaÌ„t why vse you so ill and baren Testimonies as all theirs are if your accompt be true which come furth after the first six hundred yeres And if you seeke after the Contentation of your Readers mind you signifie thereby that the Authorities which you alleage are worthy and alowable Not because Doctor Harding will make no Exception perchaunce against them but because yourselfe like them and esteeme them Otherwise what Contentation of the Readers mind call you this to Reason vpon their Authorities whom yourself would haue to be contemned Or to establish any opinion vpoÌ„ such groundes vpon which you can build nothing except vnto him which holdeth them for sure and good Of which sort of men you make not I trust euery your good Christian Reader to be Especially many of them by your oft Appealing to the first six hundred yeres being occasioned to set litle by anye Testimonie of lower time and degree Thus we see againe that M. Iewel hath vsed the late wryters Testimonie Eckius Durand Thomas Aquinas and Iohn Billet not because of D. Hardinges opinion or regard of them which how greate or litle it is he dothe not know but because of his owne liking of them Neither doth he peeke as it were an occasion to vse them out of his Aduersaries estimation of them but whether D. Harding aloweth them or no M. Iewell flatly vseth them nor is ashamed of the latenes of them A thing at other times so materiall with hym that on paine of forfaiting all a mans labour none must be brought in for witnesses but suche as are within little a thowsand yeare olde See one place more and with that we shall ende this Chapiter It is a question betweene the Catholikes and the Heretikes Whether the woordes of Christe in the sixt of S. Iohn are to be vnderstanded onely of the spirituall eating of his body Or of the Spirituall and
so euer should thinke so might be President of that Councell where Postes and Pillers should meete togeather and heare the cause of our Religion debated But did he meane by the Church of Rome al the Christians of Rome Who then should keepe the Citie whiles they were from home Or how was al Carthage able to receiue them Or what hath the Laitie to do in Councels Yf then neither the walles c. of Rome neither al the Christen people of it be rightly vnderstanded by the Churche of Rome which B. Eugenius would haue to come to the CouÌ„cel at Carthage what other thing may be meant thereby You wil say perhaps the Clergie thereof Whether al or some Yf al do you thinke Eugenius to be so simple as to require that al Priestes Deacoâ—s SubdeacoÌ„s Lectours Exorcistes Sextines Clerkes belringers and Quieresters might come to the Councel Yf some what should they be Exempted from the IurisdictioÌ„ and Gouernement of the Pope Or subiect vnto him Yf Exempted who should they be in al Rome with whom the B. of Rome should haue nothing to do If subiect how could they come without his leaue and licence Or how should not he that sendeth them be much more higher and worthier then those which must aske leaue to goe What so euer you Answere If the Church of Rome be heade of al Churches because of some parte of the Clergie therof must it not much more be heade of al Churches because of the Bishop there which is head ouer that Clergie For if the lesser thing be in Estimation and Authoritie much more the greater in the same kinde must be in Authoritie As if an Angel naturally doth passe in degree of worthines euery man much more he â–ª that by the giftes of nature doth excel among Angels must consequently be farre aboue man We neede noâ— vse so many wordes in opening this Argument if we had to do with Quiet and Reasonable men but M. Iewel wil needes be Ignorant or Contentious For saith he Uictor which reporteth the forsaid Aunswere of Eugenius the Bishope Doth not cal the Bishop of Rome the Head of the vniuersal Church only he saith Rome is the Chiefe or Head Church of al other No he saith not Rome but y â— Churche of Rome And if you wil defend your self that by Rome the Church of Rome is meant in common speache I pray you Syr can you not also remember that in naming the Church of Rome the Bishop of Rome is vnderstanded to be spoken of And if in other places it might be somtimes otherwise yet in this testimonie of Uictor it can not but be meant of the Bishoppe of Rome especially For consider I pray thee Indifferent Reader the Circumstancies of the Storie Obadus the Capitaine required a CouÌ„cel to be kept in Aphrica In which it is for Bishoppes not onely to sitte when it is called but first to determine whether it shal be called or no. He required it also of the Bishope Eugenius For although Huneryke his Maister King of the Uandales was in those partes a CoÌ„queror yet there were not at that time such Flatterers or Gospellers as might tel his Grace that him selfe was Supreame head of the Church aâ—d that he needed not to care what the Popishe Bishopes would thinke in any mater Thirdly Eugenius answered that â—e would write to his Bretherne that his felowbishopes might come By which it is cleare that he wisshed not either for the material Church of beyonde the seas or al the Ministers and officers of those Churches but only for Bishopes Fynally and Chiefly he would write he answered that the Church of Rome the head Church of al Churches might come And howe can this otherwyse be vnderstanded but according to y â— nature of the Mater and Persons which he spake of before For whereas A Councel requireth Bishopes to be present And hymselfe expressly declareth it that he would haue his Felowbishopes come In saying immediatly after that aboue all other he would the Churche of Rome to come he must so take these wordes the Churche of Rome â–ª as they maie serue for A Councel and for the meeting together of Catholike Bishoppes But to suche A purpose it was neither possible to bring the externall Churche of Tymber and Stone neither was it conuenient profitable or customable to haue y â— who le Clergie of euery countrie to be present at Councels Ergo he meant it of the Bishoppe of Rome hymselfe Then whereas he would the Church of Rome most Chiefely to come because it is heade of all Churches he signifieth thereby that his mynde and desire was to haue other Churches to come also For els he would haue saied I beseech the Churche of Rome only to come and not Chiefely Because the word Chiefely hath A Relation to other that should come also though not so principally and agreablie to his intent and purpose Nowe in expressing this his mynde that he would haue other Churches of beyonde the Seas to come what words vseth he Doth he not cal straitewaies for his Felowbyshopes And in respecte of them doth he not require that most Chiefely the Church of Rome should come And what other sense can that haue by any reasoÌ„ but that the Bishop of Rome should come For if he had said thus I vvil vyrite to my Brethren that the Churches of beyond the Seas may come and most chiefly to the Church of Rome â–ª then had the seÌ„tence gone forwarde in like termes And in this case who but Rude and Ignorant would deny that by Churches he meaneth the Bishops them selues Or by theyr appointment some to represent or fil their place But he changed the Termes and in one parte speaking of Bishops in the other he nameth not the Bishope but the Church of Rome Yet what of this Shal this changing of Termes alter his meaning Aâ—d wishing in the former parte of his sentence that Bishoppes should come but especially the Churche of Rome what can he rightly meane by the church of Rome but the Bishoppe of Rome yf one part of the sentence hangeth with the other For this were al together out of reason that naming first Bishops and then a thing more requisite in the same kinde of purpose then Bishops he should meane by that thing which he preferreth a lesse in effect and Authoritie then they were whom he had lesse compted vpon This place then making so plainly for the Authoritie of y â— Bishop or Church of Rome for al is in effect one to them that vnderstand the common phrases of Speach what wil M. Iewel do Subscribe to antiquitie Or maintain stil his Heresie No he loueth him selfe and his owne vaine glory so much that rather then he wil seme to take a foyle and to haue spoken more then he is hable to assure he wil not lacke his Exceptions against the witnesses of the First six hundred yeares For thus he openeth him selfe more and more saying Touching
of the Pope as at these Daies is allowed But what shall we say It can not be denied but the Bishoppes of the Easte those of whome Sozomenus and Socrates speake did take themselues to be as good as the Bishop of Rome and disdayned to yâ—lde obedience vnto him But were they Catholiks or Heretiks Undoutedly Heretikes and that of the worste â—â—king For they were Arâ—ians Howe proue I this Mary by Sozomenus and Socrates both which agree in telling the Storie And that is this At what tyme S. Athanasius fled to Rome being persequâ—ted of the Arrians â—or defending of the Consubstantialitie of God the Sonne with the Father it so â—ame to â—asse that at the same time Paulus Bisshoppe of Constantinople and Marcellus Bisshoppe of 〈◊〉 and Asclepas Bisshoppe of 〈…〉 Bisshop of Hadrianoâ—le 〈◊〉 also to Rome being al Catholike Bisshoppes and al dryuen out of their Churches and Sees through the Accusations and Iâ—uasions of the Arrians Herevpon Iulius the Bisshoppe of Rome vnderstanding what faultes were layed to their charges And perceiuynge that all were of one mynde concernynge the Decrees of the Nicene Couâ—cell he thoughte it meete to communicate with them as with men of the same faith and opinion with him And as Sozomenus writeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because of the vvorthines and digniti of his See or as Socrates saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 forasmuch as the church of Rome had the Prerogatiues priuilegies â–ª he restored euery one of them to his See And wrote freely and sharply to the Bishops of the East which had expelled them declaring that they had troubled the Churche and that they had not iudged aright of the forsaid Bishops Requiring furthermore y â— some of them should appere at an appointed day before him aâ—d that he would not suffer it if they ceased not to be newfangled The Arrian Bishoppes vppon the receipt of this letter and for indignation that the Bishop of Rome had restored to their lauful Sees the catholike Bishops â—â—hanasius Paulus Marcellus Asâ—leâ—â—â— Lucius whom they had vnplaced they called a Councel at Antioche and 〈◊〉 againe a faire letter to Pope Iulius ful of prety scoffes and tauntes and not without sharpe threatenings also And emong other points these that M. Iewel reckeneth are some that forsoth they ought not to be accompted inferiour to the Church of Rome And that they ought not to be ordered by the Romaine Bishope Hitherto is the storie as I gather it out of Socrates and Sozomenus Consider now of it indifferent Reader Was Athanasius an holy Bishope or no Was he a most worthy and tried defendour of the Catholike faith or no Did almighty God miraculously defend him against al his enemies or no Eusebius Sozomenus Socrates Theodoritâ—s al y â— euer wrote the storie of y â— time speak so much good of him 〈◊〉 declare such a prouidence of God to haue ben about him that he must be a very blinde and wretched Arrian which seeth not his worthines Or 〈◊〉 at his Glory And whom then follow you M. Iewel Those Bishops of the East whom your wisdome and Religion bringeth in for substantial witnesses They condemned Athanasius And for what other cause so principally as for his defending of the Catholike faith against the blasphemies of y â— Arrians Alow yow then his condemnaâ—oâ— Utter now your stomake and speake plainly whether you beleue y â— Christ is of one the selfe same Substanâ—ce with his Father Shew yourselfe as you are in your Opinions and put of the name and person of an honest Superintendent which you would seeme to beare and with al boldenesse vtter your secrete Diuinitie For hâ—re nowe I chalenge you here I charge you Alow you the Condemnation of â—thaâ—asius which your Bishops of the East concluded vpon If you doe Auaunt Arriaâ—â— â–ª If you doe not how can you but thinke euil of such arrogant and wicked Arrians which not oÌ„ly put him our of his See but also when he was restoâ—ed againe vnto it by the Iudgement of the Bisshop of Rome contemned that his SenteÌ„ce with greater spite and Insolencie than they had expelled Athâ—nesius and others at the first I say further If Athanasius Paulus Marcellus Asclepas and Lucius so 〈◊〉 Fathers â–ª â—eing â—râ—elled by the 〈◊〉 of the Easte thought themselues safe inough against all their Enemies hauing the letters of the Bishop of Rome for their lawful Returne vnto their Sees should not this alone be Argument inough to any Indifferent Protestant in all y â— world that he should not Contemne Abandone and Accurse the Authoritie of the See of Rome For whereas the Examples of Learned and Holy men are to be followed And whereas M. Iewel the Challenger w t others of his vaine doe pretend greate Reuerence towardes Antiquitie prouoking their Aduersaries to bring Testimonies out of the Primitiue Church And exhorting their Hearers and Readers to consider the practise of the Auncient tymes and Fathers how should he not haue the Bishop of Rome in greate Admiration whom he seeth to haue ben so highly estemed of the greate Bishops or Patriarches rather of y â— Easte Church Athanasius Paulus Marcellus c. y â— his letters were of more force w t them to restore them to their Sees than their own Power Habilitie was to kepe theÌ„selues in their own places when they had them Note also that whereas they were expelled by violence And wer seâ—t home again not with an Armie but with Letters onely Yet those letters preuailed so much with the People also of their Cities and Countries that straite wayes they were gladly receiued And had it not ben for the Conuenticle and Conspiracie of the forsaid Arrian Bishops of the East in which they not onely set al their owne Power against the Catholike Bishops Athanasiâ—s Paulus c. restored by the Pope of Rome but accused them to the Emperour CoÌ„stantinus making him to vse Uiolence against them the Catholike people of Constantinople Alexandria and other places would haue honored and Obeyed them stil as their owne true and lauful Bishopes Of which it is easy to gather that First the Blessed and Reuerend Bishops themselues Athanasius Paulus c. did seâ— very much by y â— Bishop of Romes letters and sentence And then that the Catholik and deuout people also of those quarters did regard and obey the same Thirdly that such as resisted then the Authoritie of y â— Bishope of Rome were plaine Arrians And last of al that it was not done by law or any order that those holy Bishopes Athanasius Paulus c. enioyed not the right of their own Seeâ— but by false Accusations of the Arrian Superintendenteâ— and Indignation Stomake Ediâ—â— Uiolence Persecution of the Emperour Constantius How litle then doth this Example of the Arrian Bishoppes make for M. Iewels purpose Yea rather how much doth it make cleane against hym For when wicked and nawghtie mens
the Canons of Auncient Councels But as I doe grauÌ„t vnto you that the Councel of Laâ—dicea hath that such only bookes as are of the old new TestameÌ„t should be readen in the Church so that y â— like also is declared as you boldly say in the Councel of Carthage it is so manifestly vntrue y â— it may not be suffered For these are the verie wordes of the Councel Item placuit vt praeter Scripturas Canonicas â—ihil in Ecclesia legatur sub nomine Diuinarum Scripturarum that is Vve like it also that nothing besides the Canonical Scriptures be readen in the Church in the name of the Diuine Scriptures The Councel therefore forbiddeth not other things bysides the Canonical scriptures to be readen in the Church but it prouideth that nothing be readen there as in the name of Scripture which is not true Scripture in dede And this appeereth most euidently by other wordes which folowe in the selfe same Canon where it is sayed Liceat etiam legi Passiones Martyrum Cum Anniuersarij eoruÌ„ celebrantur Be it lauful also to haue the Passions of Martyrs readen vvhen their yerely Daies are celebrated and kept holy By this it is most euident that other thinges bysydes the Canonicall Scriptures as the Passions of Martyrs such vndoutedly as we haue for a great part in the Legends of the Church were permitted to be readen in the publike Seruice And that M. Iewels comparison that the Lessons then read in y â— Church were taken out of y â— holy Bible ONLY as he meneth as it is now vsed in the church of England hath no agreablenes and Proportion For whâ—t one Martyr is there in al the whole booke of the Common praier of England S. Sâ—euen only excepted which hath any Festiual day appointed out for him or any storie of his Passion declared But like perfite Diuines you wil no other thing but Scripture onely readen in your Churches in which pointe you would be seene to follow the Councel of Carthage You deceaue the people by your glorious lying The Counâ—â—l of Carthage as you perceiue by the wordes which I haue alleged alloweth not onely Caâ—onical Scriptures but Martyrs Passions also to be Readen in the Church Why say you then so impudentlie that it it was there Decreed that nothing should be read y â— Church vnto the People sauing onely the Canonical Scriptures I aske of you also where the Passions â—f those Martyrs are which at the beginninge had their Holidaies in the Churche And should to this daie haue them if as you doe chalenge it you were of the holie and Catholike Church S. Clement Cornelius Cyprian â—istus Lawrence Uincent Sebastiane and other whom the whole world honoreth what solemme Feastes haue you of them or what Lessons and Homilies are Readen in your Churches of their Passions Were there no Martyrs in the world after the Apostles were once departed this lyfe Or know you any more excellent than these whome I haue named Or haue you no mynde or affection to any of them Or haue you spied a Canon in the Councel of Carthage that nothing but Canonical Scriptures shal be readen in the Church And could you noâ— see the plaine Exception which is straite waies in the same Canon made against it that notwithstanding the former wordes the passions of martyrs should be readeÌ„ in the Church when their yerelie daies are celebrated But of the beggarlines of this new Religion â–ª and how it is altogether dâ—stituted of Martyrs Confessors â–ª Uirgiâ—s of all kinde of Sainctes it is to be spoken at more leasure in the meane tyme this I leaâ—â— most euidentlie proued thâ—â— M. Iewel hath abused Councels How M. Iewel hath abused the Decrees of the Canon Lawe THere is smal hope that he whiche dareth wrest Beliâ— and Peruerte Councels wil spare to vse al Losenesse and Libertie in squaring oâ— Decrees and Decretals to his purpose And manie will thinke on the other side that M. Iewel is so honest and good of nature that he would not no noâ— of the diuell himselfe if he might winne â—ny thing by lying and muchlesse in the cause of God his true Religion reporte any thing of any man that euer yet wrote otherwyse ther â–ª the Trueth is and the wordes of the Author Examples then muste confirme my obiection emonge which this is one Fabianus sâ—â—â—th M. Iewel Bishop of Rome hath plainely decreed that the people should recâ—aue the Communion euery sondaie His wordes be plaine Decâ—rnimus c. We decree that euery sondaâ— the Oblation of the Aultare be made of al men and women both of bread and wine True it is that Fabianus willed such Oblations of bread and wine to be made and them to this end 〈◊〉 à peccatoruÌ„ suorum â—ascibus liberentur that the people might be deliuered of the burden of their sinnes But offering euerie Sonday and Receiuing euerie Sondaie are two thinges To prouide that the people should Offer Bread and Wine euerie Sondaie it was necessary because that is the proper mater of which the Sacrament of the Aultare is made and because the Clergie also liued then of the offerings of the people But to decree that al men and women should Receiue euâ—rie Sonday it is altogether vnreasonable that it should haue ben Fabianus mynde For in the verie same place there is an other Decree of his that men should Communicate thrise at the least if no oftener in a yere that is At Easier â—ittesoâ—â—ide and Chrisimasse except perchaunce some man be letted by anie kind of the grevous crimeâ— If then â—e required no more but that the people should Receaue thrise a yere how is it possible that by this decree of which M. Iewel speaketh and in which there is no mâ—ntion of the peoples receauing â—ut of their Offering only of Bread and Wine any charge should be laied vppon al men and womens consciencies to Receaue euery Sondaie Ye might as wel conclude that in euery parish of England thâ—re was some one or other of the laie people that Receaued alwaies on Sondaie in one kinde at the leaste with the Priest because an holy loafe as we cal it was Offered euery Sondaie But consider yet further Indifferent Reader how finely and properly M. Iewel gathereth Argumentes out of Auncient Popes decrees He noteth out of the foresaied wordes not only that men and women Receaued euery Sondaie but also that they Offered bread and Wine euery Sondaie according to the Order of Melchisedech By which accompte so manie Priestes and Sacrificers were in the Church as were men and women that offered bread and wine Yea not only men and women that are of perfitte discreation but all the boâ—es and wenches of the Parishe may with litle charges be quickly within orders For as M. Iewel compteth there is no more in it but to Offer bread and wine to the Aultare and straitewaies al that doe so are
of the Glose as though the text were much more for his purpose For the very Glose saieth he putteth the mater vtterly out of dout Let vs see then first of al what is the Text. Lucius the Pope writing to certaine Bishops which were trobled with heretikes And shewing them where vppon to staie themselues that they might no wauer hither and thither willeth them to solow the Church of Rome 〈◊〉 praise of which thus he saieth 〈◊〉 sancts â—posâ—olica mater omnium Ecclesiarum Christ 〈◊〉 qua per Des Omnipotent is graiaâ—â— a tramite Apostolica traditiones nunquam errass probatur This holy and Apostolike Church is the mother of all churches of christ â—hichs through the Grace of almightie God hath neuer ben proued to haue erred froÌ„ the right trade end pathe of the Tradition of the Apostles Thus saieth Pope Lucius and he maketh expressely for D. Harding as far downeward as Lucius owne Popedome was â—nno Do 258. This conclusion then being certaine by the expresse text of the law what saith the Glose therevpon Doth it folow the text or no If it do not Remember then I praie you M. Iewel your charitable and affectuous wordes to D. Harding O M. Harding It is an old saying Maledicta Glosa quae corrumpit textum Accursed be that Glosing construction or Glose that corruppteth the text RemeÌ„ber wel this old saying forget not yourselfe which bring furth with so great a confidence a Glose that impugneth the text But doth the Glose folow the text If it do be ashamed man then of yourself which doe so Certainely warrant it that the very Glose putteth this mater out of doubt that the See of Rome maie erre in Faith the text it selfe making to the contrarie But of this perchaunce you haue litle regaâ—de how the Glose agreeth or disagreeth with the Text. And where you find your vantage there you are determined to take it hauing a simple and plaine eye neither loking to that which goeth before nor that which foloweth neither that which is of any side of you And so â–ª the Glose saiting that Certaine it is the Pope maie erre that is inough for yâ—u and that putteth the mater vtterly out of doubt that the Churche of Rome may errâ— You are deceaued M. Iewel through your Simplicitie For if you or your â—rindes about you had ben circumspect you woulde neuer haue broughte this Glose surth with such confidence as you haue done It is two thinges to saie The Pope maie erre and the Churche of Rome maie erre The first is graunted 〈◊〉 it maie possibly be that the Pope concerning his owne priuate mynd and opinion maie crre in vnderstanding as IoaÌ„nes 22. dyd or whom soeuer els you can name vnto vs. The second is vtterly denied that the Church of Rome can erre For that presupposeth y â— the Pope should â—e geauen ouer to decret Sette â—â—rth or determine by his Iudicial Sentence some thing contrarie to the Apostolike Faith that it should be receiued beleued in the Church Which absurditie that any error should be suffered in haue credit in that Church which is y â— Mother of al Churches that vnder the gouernement of the holy ghost which coÌ„tinueth with it is the spirit of Trueth becasue it is impossible therfore it is also impossible y â— the Church of Rome should erre in any point of y â— Faith And in such extremities where y â— Pope for his owne person is perswaded in a contrary coÌ„clusion vnto our Faith almighty God that his care ouer the church may be manifest prouideth alwaies to take such persons out of the way when they might if they had liued done harme as he did Ioannes 22. and â–ª Anastasius Now that the Glose faith no more but the Pope may erre which we wil not denie and not that the Churche of Rome may erre which was D. Hardings affirmation by whom shal I better proue it thaÌ„ by y â— glose it self which is a litle before in this very cause 24 q. 1. out of which M Iew. peeked his Certainti y â— out of doubt the See of Rome mai erre In y â— chapiter Quodcunque ligaueris the Glose vpoÌ„ a certaine word there gathereth an ArgumeÌ„t that the sentence of the whole Churche is to be preferred before the church of Rome if thei gainsay it in any point And he coÌ„firmeth it by y â— 93. Distinction Legimus But doth the Glose rest there as M. Iew. Certainly auoucheth it doth it put the mater vtterly out of doubt thâ—â— the church of Rome may erre â–ª Iudge of the mind of the Glosator by y â— words of y â— Glose For thus it foloweth Sed 〈…〉 And for coÌ„firmatioÌ„ of his belief he referreth vs to y â— Chap. 〈◊〉 which foloweth in y â— cause questions Nis faith he erraret Romana Ecclesia quod no credo posâ—e fieri quia Deus noÌ„ mitteret Arg. infra ead c. 4 Rect a c. PudeÌ„â—a Except the church of Rome should erre vvhich I beleue caÌ„not be because God vvould not suffer it As it is proued in the Chapiters folowing which begin A Recta Padenda Consider now Indifferent Reader iudge betwene vs both M. Iew. saith The Glose putteth the mater vtterly out of doubt that y â— Church of Rome may erre because it saith the Pope may err I answer y â— the Glose vpon y â— chapiter a Recta 〈◊〉 it that the Pope may Erre but in the third Chapitâ—â— before Quodâ—â—quâ— ligaueris it beleueth that it can not be that the church of Rome should erre because God vvould not permit it Wherof I gatder that the Pope to erre the Church of Rome to erre are 〈◊〉 pointes that if it be graunted vnto him y â— the Pope in his owne prinaâ— sense may hold an heretical opinioÌ„ yet y â— church of Rome for al y â— cannot erre because God wil not suffer it y â— any thing should be decreed by y â— Pope y â— is coÌ„trary to faith And this is manifest euen by y â— very Glose which M. Iewel trusteth so much y â— he toke y â— mater to be vtterli out of dout when the Glose had once spoken it What is abusing of testimonies if this be not what coÌ„science is there either in preferring of Gloses before y â— text either in expouÌ„ding of Gloses against y â— Text either in setâ—ing of one and the selfe same glose against it self wheras being rightly interpreted it agreeth wel inough w t it self either in obiecting y â— part of y â— glose against y â— Aduersarie which being grauÌ„ted hurteth nothing dissembling or not seing an other part of y â— same glose which clearly coÌ„firmeth y â— purpose of the Aduersarie except the Glose could speake more plainly for D. Harding then it hath don when it saith Credo non posse fieri quia Deus non
must be vsed necessarily one Restriction at the least of the lawes Generalitie Wherefore then doth M. Iewel so lyke dodger come in with such Rules as deceaue the simple Reader and fil his papers to no purpose Wherefore maketh he Obiections which he knoweth to haue casie answer Or why hath he no care by what meanes he bringeth his maters to passe so that for the present he say somewhat to his Aduersarie Upon confidence of these general Rules which at the first feeme reasonable he carieth the Readers away with him into blinde knowledge maineteyning his owne heresies and their errours by the superficial wordes of the Ciuile Law either not atteiuing to the sense thereof Or quite leauing it And this wil I proue by a manifest example so much the more willingly because I shal haue in the end a further Occasion to shew an other limitation vnto this rule which M. Iewel would haue to be taken Generally D. Harding alleaged out of an Edice of Iustinians this euident place for the Supremacie of the B. of Rome Sancimus c. Vve ordeine according to the determinations of the Canons that the most holy Pope of the Elder Rome be â—ormost and chief of al Bishopes But it is worth the marking to heare how Iustinian bringeth in these words Vve Decree saith he that the holy Ecclesiastical Rules vvhich haue ben set forth and established of the foure Councels of Nice Coustantinople Ephesus and Chalcedone shal stand in stede of Lavves For vve receiue the Decrees of the foure Synodes as the â—oly Scâ—â—â—res and the Rules of them vvcâ—h serue as Lavves And therfore vve ordeine according the determinatoions of them that the most holy Pope of the Elder Rome shal be formost and Chiefe of al Priesâ—es Now vnto this so â—laine an ArgumeÌ„t for y â— Supremacie what Answereth M. Iewel Forsothe The Emperour lustinian had a special inclinatioÌ„ to the Citie of CoÌ„stantinople for that it was now gro weÌ„ in welth puissaÌ„ce c And for that it was as he saâ—th Mater pictatis nostrae the Mother of his Maiestie Wel â–ª here is some cause why he should fauour the Citie of Constantinople but what is this to Rome It foloweth For like Consideration the Emperour gaue out this special Priuilege vpoÌ„ which D Harding groundeth his Argument in fauour of the See of Rome Let this also be graâ—nted that he fauoured Rome as wel as CoÌ„stantinople But what reason can ye shew wherefore hâ— should prefer it vefore CoÌ„stantinople and sâ—t Rome in the first degree place and Constantinople in the next For by al likelyhod Constantinople being the place where he kept his court to which most resorte was made concerning maters of the Empire if the geuing of Prinilegies vnto See and Bishops had depeÌ„ded of his fauour only he would haue honored first of al the Patriarche of his Chief and Imperial Citie But is it not a manifest lie that the Emperour gaue the Chiefdom to the B. of Rome vpon a special inclinatioÌ„ which he had to y â— Citie Consider the wordes of his Edice What are they Vve Ordeinâ— saith the Emperour according â—o the determination of the CanoÌ„s that the Pope of Rome be Chief of al Priesetes He folowed then the Law of the first foure general Councels not his own InclinatioÌ„ And he honored y â— See of Rome with his Edict not because he fauored Rome in his special aâ—â—ectioÌ„ aboue al other Sees but because y â— former CouÌ„cels which he regarded as y â— Scriptures themselues as inuiolable lawes had so decreed determined y â— the B. of Rome should be Primus First or Chief of al Priestes How impudeÌ„tly then doth M. Iew. abuse y â— Emperors edict by making y â— to be y â— chief cause therof which in dede was not the cause But let him go forward And by the way least any errour happen to grow of this woorde Papa it behoueth thee Good Reader to vnderstand that Papa in olde times in the Grek tong signified a Father c. And further in S. Augustines time before the same name was geuen generally to al Bishopes c. You say truely and you proue it excedingly and if ye would be rather called Pope Iewel then Bishope Iewel be it at your owne choyse and your friendes most wise But returnem I pray you againe into the way and Aunswere the Edict of Iustinian But to returne to the mater M. Harding may not of euery thing that he readeth conclude what he listeth If he doe you can with fewer Circumstancies tel him of it But Primus â—mnium Sacerdotum â–ª is in English the First and Chiefe of al Priestes And he which hath so much geuen vnto him by General Councels of the Primitue church he is higher I trow then any of his Felowes And therefore it is much looked for that you should Answere directly to the Priuilege This Priuilege graunted vnto the Bisshop of Rome to be the First of al Priestes was not to beare the whole sway and to ouer rule al the world Ye speake like a man that were offended with tyranny and ye speake of ouer ruling But we thinke not that as the chief emong the Brothers when he hath gotten Hugonoâ—es Guses Loiterers Lutherans Caluinistes Anabaptistes and other diuine felowes inough aboute him then he beginnneth to ouer rule and ouer run the Countrie by spoiling of Churches killing of Religious persons rauishing of holy Uirgins and doing of other feates of your Gospel so the Pope may set and let pul in plucke out kil and saue and do what him listeth vpon a Furie or Brauerie but that power onely we require to be geauen him which they acknowleged that determined him to be First or Chiefe of al Priestes And we aske you of his Power that he hath to rule ouer al the world and not of ouer rule al the world For although y â— places to which his Iâ—risdiction extendeth it selfe are not limited yet his power to rule them is limited and he that ouer ruleth any one Countrie be it neuer so much his owne doth more then he ought to do by that which is ouer measure and Rule Leauing therfore to presse vs w t your odious slauÌ„dcrous termes as though any Catholike were of y â— opinion y â— the Pope might or should play y â— part of a Tyran care for no law nor reson but ouer rule al the world and beare the whole sway in the world Answer to y â— Authoritie of Iustiniaus Edict shew wherin was the Priuilege graunted vnto the Bishope of Rome It was not you say to ouer rule al the world But onely in General meetinges and Councels to sitte in place aboue al others and for auoiding of Confusion to directe and order them in their doinges How proue you this And remember that you must proue that the Priuilege graunted
vnto the Bishope of Rome was to sitte onely aboue others cet The Emperours woordes be plaine Praerogatiuea in EpiscoporuÌ„ CoÌ„silio vel extra ConciliuÌ„ ante alios residendi A Prerogatiue in the CouÌ„cel of bishops â–ª or without the Councel to sit in order aboue other Oh Desperatenesse The Emperours woordes you say be plaine They are so in deede plaine to the eye both in your Booke which is wel printed and in the Code of Parise printe where they may be readen without spectacles except a mans sight be very yll But dare you say that this place perteineth to the Bishoppe of Rome For of the Bishoppe of Rome our question is whether his Priuilege to be First and Chiefe of al Priestes consisted onely in sitting aboue other in Generall meetinges I wil tel thee Indiffetent Reader the Sense of these foresaid woordes and the Cause of making the Decree in which thei are found that thou maist iudge whether M. Iewel be a fine and vpright Lawyer Whiles the Emperour Leo was gone towardes the Easte Odactus A Tyranne inuaded in the meane tyme the ChurchesÌ„ and set foorâ—h many Lawes and Statutes against the Liberties and the Priuilegies of them The Emperour here vpon made a Law after the Countrie was diliuered of the Tyranny that those thinges being abrogaâ—ed and taken away which had ben done against the true Religion of God al other concerning Churches and Martyrs Chappels should stand in the same state which they were in before his time And further he Decreed that it should be vtterly abrogated what so euer had bene newly brought vp against the Churches and the Bishopes of them Seu de iure Sacerdot alium â—reationum seu de expulsione cuiusquam Episcopi à quolibet his temporibus facta seu deprarogatiua in Episcoporum Concilio â—el extra Concilium ante alios residendi Either concerning the right of making of Priestes either the expulsioÌ„ of any bishop made by any maÌ„ at this time or the prerogatiue of sitting before other either in the Councel of Bishopes or vvithout it Consider now Indifferent Reader whether the Preâ—ogatiue of which the Law here speaketh was meant only of the Bishope of Rome Or whether y â— Emperours vvoo dâ—s here be plaine to proue that the Bishope of Rome should â—it â—irst 〈◊〉 General meetings whereas there is no mention at al in this place of the B. of Rome but only of Acatius by name Patriarche of Constantinople and of other Bishoppes in general which had taken wronge vnder Odoactus the Tyranne And whether the B. of Rome were one of that number it appeereth not by any word of the Decree so that it is altogether boldely and nothing discreetly said that the Prerogatiue spoken of in this place is plaine for the Popes sitting aboue other or that the Popes Prerogatiue is no more but to sit aboue al others It foloweth This Prerogatiue in Greeke is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the Priuilege of the first place So is the faining of a Person and making of that to speake which hath no sense or tongue called in Greke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but we require not here of you to tel your Countriemen what is Greeke for this or y â— thing but what is y e answer to the Argument that is made against you For let it be so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in greeke signifieth the Priuilege of the first place you do not yet shew vnto vs that the Priuilege spoken of in this Edict of the Emperours is so called or that it is meant of the Bishope of Rome to proue that his Prerogatiue is to more but A 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A priuilege of the first place But you procede out of the pupose and saie That these phrases in that tongue be knowen and CoÌ„mon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Like as also theâ—e in he latine tongue obtinere primas secuÌ„das Tertias that is to haue the Preominence of the first Second and Third place This woulde serue well if either we doubted Or were ignorant of these phrases or if the declaring of them perteined any point to the quesion and yet I saie vnto you that Obtinere primas or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not only to haue the first place but also to wynne the best game Or to haue the Chiefeste parte in any Fâ—are or Acte Or to beare the highest Office and so furthe So that to your matter of the Place they doe not serue necessariâ—y And if by Obtinere Primas this only thinge were meant to sitte in the First Place yet should not this proue that the Edicte of the Emperour in whiche you shewe not that the selfe same Phrase is vsed doeth plainely make for it That the Popes Prerogatiue is no greater than to sitte first at Generall meetinges For this is the question And not what Obtinere Primas or Secundas signifieth in good Latine And to this we looke for your Answer But you saie as though you had proued so much in further confirmation thereof And that the Emperour Iustinian meant ONLY thus and none OTHERWISE it is manifeste euen by the selfe same place that M. Harding hath here alleged Mary Syr that is worth the hearing but marke thou Indifferent Reader M. Iewels wordes ONLY and NONE OTHERWYSE For except I be fowly deceaued he wil not proue so much as he pretendeth But let vs heare the Emperour and M. Iewels Comment vpon him Sancimus c. We ordeine Your c. Here first of all hath no Place For it putteth these wordes out which are much to the mater And they â—re these Sancimus secundum Canonum defiâ—tiones vâ—â— ordaine according to the determinations of the Canons that c. By which it appeereth that Iustinian dyd no more but exquute the former Dâ—crees â–ª and was not hymselfe the Authour or Geauer of the singular Priuilege which is due to the See of Rome And now lette M. Iewel goe forewarde We ordeine caet that the Pope Reade Sanctissimum moste holy of the Elder Rome shal be Reade is the first of al the Priestes and that the moste holy Archebishope of Constantinople which is named Newe Rome haue the seconde place It foloweth in the Decree After the holy Apostolike See of the Elder Rome But what concludeth M. Iewel hereof It foloweth Hereby it is plaine that this Priuilege standeth ONLY in placing the B. of â—ome in the first Seate aboue others It is so plaine that no man seeth it Be thou Iudge Indifferent Reader Yea lette any Protestant in al the worlde tell Trueth lâ—e and not Doth he find in the foresaied woâ—â—s of 〈◊〉 Decrec this worde ONLY Doth he find that the 〈◊〉 of the B. of Rome is declared by the Emperour to stand in none other thinge but in sitting first A warthie mater in deede for An Emperour to set furth Seates for Bisshoppes
the Church of Rome either the Prerogatiue which himselfe â—ath from the Church of Rome without asking of leaue of y â— B. of Rome No surely the Effect can not worke vpward towardes the cause or worke so excellently douneward as the cause neither the Bisshops of Constantinople or Iustiniana taking their Prerogatiues from Rome can endue others with like Priuileges without consent of the Bishop of Rome Therefore although the Bisshop of Constantinople hath the Prerogatiue of the Litie of Rome it foloweth not that the Bisshop of Rome is nothing superiour to the Bishop of Constantinople And if y â— Lord President in Wales should haue geauen vnto him all the Prerogatines of the Kings Court in England it foloweth not that the King and he are Hayle felowes wel mette for euer after And Christ our Sauiour although he said vnto his Apostles As my father sent me so I send yow geauing thereby vnto them as greate Prerogatiue as himselfe had yet he meant not that y â— Apostles should think themselues as good as their head euen in those thinges which they should doe as wel as Christ. M. Iewel therefore doth very unteasonably conceiue of the Law that the Popes Supremacie was not acknowledged because the Communicating of his Prerogatiue with some other Bisshops is found expressed in the Law But it wil be replied that Generaliter dictum generaliter est accipiendum The thing that is spoken generally must be taken Generally I answer this Rule fayleth when by other expressed texte of the Law that which seemeth to be spokeÌ„ Generally in one place is restricted limited in an other For in the next title before this of which we speak the Emperour sayth to y â— B. of Rome Omnes Sacerdotes vniuersi Orientalis tractus subijcere vnire Sedi vestrae Sanctitatis proper auimus Vve haue made speede both to subiecte and to vnite vnto the See of your Holmes all the Priestes of the Vvest partes Againe in the same law a litle after Vve vvil not suffer sayeth Iustinian that anything vvhich perteineth to the state of Churches although that vvhich is in controuersie be vndoubted and manifest shall not also come to the knovvledge of your Holines Quae Caput est omnium Sanctarum Ecclesiarum Vvhich is the Head of al boly Churches Let the Bishope then of Constantinople enioy the Prerogatiue of the Citie of Rome in as large and General sense as M. Iewel wil yet this must be prouided for first of al that the Prerogatiue which the B. of Constantinople shal enioye doe not contrary the former law which Subiecteth al Priestes of the vvest vnto his holynes And which confesseth him to be head ouer al Churches Thus haue I sufficiently and manifestly proued that M. Iewel hath abnsed the Canon Law The Lawiers themselues haue more to say vnto him for his impudencie if he be so impudent as euer to shew his face before them And nowe to the Olde Fathers and Doctoures How M. Iewel hath abused the Auncient Fathers IT is incredible how M. Iewel hath abused the Doctours Incredible I meane not in respect of Protestantes which thinke so wel of him that they beleue no oue euident vntruth to be within all his Replye but of Catholikes which knowing the cause that he defendeth to be vtterly false may iustly suspect euery Witnesse that he bringeth in for his Doctrine And which hauing already taken him in manifest corrupting of Witnesses cannot but know him for one that loketh suspitiously wheÌ„ so euer he is about Auncient Fathers Yet I assure thee â–ª Indifferent Reader the Catholikes themselues did not thinke that any man would so haue corrupted true Sentences as he hath done Or so ofre haue folowed such vnlawful craftes as are not once to be vsed of honest men But these you will say are but wordes let us therefore come to the thinges themselues And first concerning such Illations of M. Iewels as he vseth in geuing of the cause or proufe of his sayinges He applieth thereto the Testimonies of Auncient Fathers so loosely and so disagreeably as if a man would saie The Waters of Bath are exceding good against the Ache in the Ioyntes And 〈◊〉 the Prophete saieth Omnessitientes venite ad aquas Alye that be a thirst come to the waters Yea M. Iewels Applications doe worse agree with the premiâ—â—es For his position lightly is heretical or erronâ—ous and his Authoritie for it is no more proper vnto it than the foresayed sentence of Esaie serueth to the commendation of the Baâ—hes in England For proufe hereof I wil choose but our place in which for establishing of his Assertion he bringeth one vppon an other very thicke foure Auncient Doctours togeather Of all which there is not one that serueth his purpose M. Hardinges Athanasius saieth Power to bind and loose is geauen to the holy See of Rome And yet the old Catholike Fathers could neuer vnderstand any such special Priuilege Marke now Indifferent Reader whâ—ther the places whiche M. Iewell wil allege do proue any such thing at al. S. Cyprian abused S. Cyprian saieth Quà muis Dominus Apostolis omnibus c. The Lord read And although our Lorde after his Resurrection gaue like power vnto his Apostles Reade all his Apostles yet to declare vnitie he disposed by his Authoritie the Original of vnitie Reade of the same vnitie beginning of one The rest of the Apostles were euen the same that Peter was endewed with like felowship both of honour and of power here doth M. Iewel make a full pointe yet it foloweth in the same very sentence But the Original cometh of vnitie to declare that the Church is one In this testimonie of S. Cyprian those wordes And although which M. Iewel left out in the beginning of the 〈◊〉 are first to be considered as depending of the sentences which immediatly went before And opening the question which now we haue in hand For after S. Cypriane had declared that the Deuil seeing the Idols and Temples which he occupied before to be forsaken and lefte void through y â— increase of the Faithfull conuerted his craft to deuising of Schismes and Heresies by whiâ—h he might ouerturne the Faith corrupte the trueth and cut or diuide vnitie After this he â—â—ferreth â—oc eò fit fratres dilectiss dum â—d veritatis origâ—em non reditur nec caput quaeritur nec magistri coelestis doctrina Seruatur This moste deere brethren vnderstand that Heresies are set abroad doth therefore come to passe for that vve return not vnto the original of truth And for that an Head is not sought for nor the Doctrine of our heauenly Master is obserued Now because euery man perceiueth not the force of this saying and diuerse would haue it better opened and expressed vnto them He addeth Probatio est ad fidem facilis compendio veritatis that is The proufe hereof to make thee beleue it is easy because of the compendiousnes of the truth
Short and clear Iew. 306. Ra. Iew. 1. Ra. Iew. 310. Iew. 310. Consider by this that foloweth how willing M. Ieâ— iâ— to admitte Antiquitie how profoundly hâ— reasonetâ— Iewel 151. Iewel Iewel Confesâ— lib. 9. Iewel â—ial lib. â—in praef Ps. 67. Psal. 138. 〈◊〉 lib. â—dial 〈◊〉 Iew. 〈◊〉 Impudently Ra â–ª A LurkiÌ„g sprite and watching for more oportunitie to breake openly out S. benet defended 〈…〉 Iew. 83. Shame 〈◊〉 thee Aug. de ciui Dei lib. 4 â–ª cap. 27. 〈◊〉 The storie of the holy Monke Marcus defended 〈…〉 Sozomeâ—us lib. 6. cap. 29. 〈…〉 tymâ— is â–ª y â— world is nâ—t yâ—t at the worst Geâ—e 1â— 32. Gen. 21. Iosu. 5. Nâ—m 22. Iud. 13. â— Paral. 21 3. Re. 1â— 4 Re. 6. Mach. 2. Mar. 16. Acto 1. 12. Iew. 89. 90. Râ— Iew. â— 10 Chrysostoms Liturgie confessed by M. Iew. Iew. 〈◊〉 Hard. De Consdist 1. caâ— Hoc quoque Iew. 66. Note the processe of M. Iew. Soters Decree refused by M. Iew. Dist. 19. Fine M. Iewel Iew. 12. Iew. â—8 A bâ—ndle of shiftes Soters decree aloâ—wed by M. Iew. Iew. 76. Ra. Iew. 76. Ra. Iew Iew. Ra. Iew. 67. Iew. â— â–ª 136. 66. 223. The firsâ— Examplâ— â–ª Can. Apost Can. 9. Ievvel pag. 39. Chrysost ad popul AntiocheÌ„ Hom. 61. Ievvel pag. 23. Ra. Compelling of catholikes to come to the Congregation Fol. 79. The secoÌ„d Example Iew. 11. Iustinus Martyr in 2. Apol. Iewel fol â–ª 27. Chrysost. 〈…〉 Hom â–ª 61. Iew. 〈◊〉 48. August â—onâ—ra lit 〈…〉 23. Ra. Water and wine migled togeather Geauing of a cosse Iew. 153. Ra. The third Example Iew. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost. in Litur 〈…〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉 Con. Tolâ—â— 4. cap. 17. Ra. Distinction of places The fourth Example Basil. exe ad piet serm 4. Iew. paâ— 3. Ra. The fifth Example Chrysost. in opere imper Hom. 11. Ra. Ra. Church gooâ—â—s The. â— Example Iew. 74. Râ— The â–ª 7. Example Iew. 174 â–ª Ra. Basil. in epist. ad Clericos Neocâ—s The. 8. Example Chryâ—ost in Mat. Hom. 〈◊〉 Iew. â—08 Ra. The. 9. Example Concil Chalced. actione prima Iew 245 Ra. The â–ª 10. Example Cod. de Episc Clericâ—â— Omnes Iew. 267 Ra. Priuilegies graÌ„to priestes moâ—kes The. 11. Example Iew. 196 Ra. 〈…〉 CoÌ„c Niâ— primum Caâ— 5. Iew â–ª 26â— Ra. The. 13. Example Liberaâ—us Cap. â—0 Iew. 283 Ra. Iew. â—6â— Sozome lib. 3. â—a 3. Arrians witnesse for M. Iewel Iew. 272 Ra. Aug. de â—â—â—resibus ad Quodâ—ulâ— deum Donatus the Heretike â— present witnesse for M. Iew. The true storie of y â— Donaâ—â—sâ—es appeale to y â— â—mperor August Epist. 16â— Iew. 272 The third Example Iew. 289 Râ— The. 4. Example Iew. 278 Râ— Arrians alleaged by M. Iewel ful â—adly Sozomenus lib. 3. Cap. 8. Socrates lib. 2. ca. 15. See with what Authoritie Pope Lucius writeth to the Bishopes of y â— East 〈…〉 The Chalenger chalenged Iâ— Fathers shal be folowed here they are 〈…〉 Iews 15. Ra. 〈…〉 Ra. Iew. Ra. Con. Toleâ— 1â— cap. 5. 〈…〉 Iewel Flat lye Ra. Iew. 140. Concil Carth. â— â–ª Ca. 6. Ra. A worthy coÌ„sequeÌ„ce of M. Iewels Marke this trick Iew. 153. Ra. What answerye 〈…〉 〈…〉 Can. 47. Passions of Martyrs readeÌ„ in y â— Church their yeerely daies kept An Impudent lie of M. Iewel 〈…〉 Râ— â–ª 〈…〉 〈◊〉 Leu. ◠〈◊〉 〈…〉 〈◊〉 154 â–ª 〈…〉 Ra. Coâ— Câ—â— 40. Dist. 9â— In Sanctâ— Româ—na â–ª Iew. How â—â—â—â—tainly h◠〈…〉 â—a Iew 18â— â–ª Neither true inter preâ—ation nor Collection Râ— Iewel iâ— y â— Answer to D. Hardings Preface Ra. Iewel Mat. 5. 〈…〉 Diuelish Rhetorik â–ª Iew. â—0 〈…〉 The glose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Math. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Obiection 〈◊〉 â–ª 〈…〉 Ra. Iew. 〈◊〉 This is not the mater Ra. How 〈◊〉 dely 〈…〉 〈…〉 Let M. Iew answer or geue ouer 〈…〉 the Pope to err and y â— Church of Rome to err â–ª are two suntry things euen by y â— very gloâ—e which M Iew. alleageth Causa 24 quâ—st â— In Glos◠〈◊〉 M. Iew. the Glose if ye like not the Text. 24. quaâ—sâ— Iâ— Glosâ— Iew. 17. Auth. Collat. â— vt determinatus sit numtrus Clericorum Ra. 〈…〉 〈…〉 What should al 〈…〉 〈…〉 Iew. 172 〈◊〉 lye at the first Ra. Exâ—d 10. M. Iew. apposed in his owne Rules Iew. 172. Aliciatus de vet sig lib. 1 Euerard in loco à ratiâ—us lâ— gisstrictâ— What thus heth M. Iew â–ª in this case dodger In Auther De Ecclesiâ—is Iew. 241 The 〈…〉 Ra. Iew. Ra. Note the Lie Iew. To what purpose Ra. Iewel Feare where no cause is shewed Ra. Iew. Ra. Ieweâ— Ra. Iew. This was not spokeÌ„ for therâ— of Rome Câ—d de Sacrosact Eccle. Decernimus Iew. 142 Greeks for the 〈◊〉 â—riuilege of y â— first place Ra. Iew. 242 Who wil learn phrases of y â— Greek or latine tonue Ra. Iew .142 You doe not proue it Ra. Iew. Ra. 〈…〉 〈…〉 Ra â–ª 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ra. â—ho saith M. Iew. deth not lye Iew. â—41 Ra. Iew. Ra. Iew. More 〈◊〉 of senteaces that is more of M. Ieweâ—s 〈…〉 〈…〉 Iew. 242 Ra. How can it be Answered De SuÌ„â—â— Trinit â—id Cath. l. Nos reddentes Iew 23â— you proue 〈◊〉 not by any of the testimonis 〈◊〉 folow Ra. Iew. Faultes 〈◊〉 in 〈…〉 Ra. Cypr. de Simplicitatepâ—â—lat Note vnâ—easarable foule dealing Ys not this mangling of senteÌ„ces Clipping of Sentences The vnitie of the Church iâ— proued by the one Head ther of Simple coÌ„clusions The Priuilege of S. Peter must be more then to sitte or 〈◊〉 first Iew 239. In a mistical sense this is true not in the literal Ra. Absurdities folowing vpoÌ„ M Tewels sense 1. Cor. 12 Eph. 4. Gala. 4. 1. Cor. 10 Orig. trâ—â—1 in Maâ— â—rigen himselfe 〈◊〉 I Difference betwene the Literal and Mystical sense of the foresaid place Note wherein consisteth 〈…〉 Do â—o no 〈…〉 Iew. 139 He falsiâ—ieth the place for is no mention of power Cyril in Ioan. l. 3. cap. 20. Is not this wickedly don of M. Iewel 〈…〉 〈…〉 vita Solitaria .c. 23 quemadâ— modaÌ„ ille Ra. Rom. 13 Heb. 13. How liketh M. Iewel this Obedience Basil. c. 23. Consâ—it Monast. Iew. 239 S. Basile for the supremacie Ra â–ª Al that do one thing equally are not of like Authoritie Ioan. 20. Iew. 20. Ra. 1. Cor. 11 Todispose and sette 〈…〉 Iew. 20. Ra. â— Iewâ— boldâ—â—s The reuerence geueÌ„ to the Sacrament S. 〈…〉 Iâ—w 76. impudeÌ„cie Ra. it agreeth not here it to like â–ª was a 〈◊〉 masse so longe agoe I wonder what caÌ„ be answered Ergo M. Iew hath belied him Iew. 106 Ra. Marke what is to be proued Iew. Cypri li 2 Epist. 3. Ra. Iew. Truely saied but to no purpose Ra. Iew. 〈◊〉 Ra. Iew. Craftely Ra. M. Iew. apprehended Iew. Ra. 〈…〉 Answer directly 〈…〉 Wine and water to be mingled togeather in the Chalice is y â— Tradition and CoÌ„maundement of Christ. 〈…〉 Iewel See the fetch least 〈…〉 M. Iewels fetch dissapointed In Inuincible ArgumeÌ„t except M Iew wil denie S.