deliuered a certain religioÌ„ to the Romans as wel concerning the Trinitie as other things Secondly that the said religion coÌ„ming from S. Peter was kept stil in the Church of Rome Thirdly that it was kept speciallie by the perpetual succession of Bishops For which cause Damasus the Bisshop of Rome is named in the Law After Damasus a blessed Bisshop of Alexandria called Peter is also named not with the intent to shewe also that the Bisshops of Alexandria kept alwayes the true faith for at that momeÌ„t Lucius a raging wolf occupied the seat in Alexandria but because this Peter of Alexandria who is now named was in deede the true bishop of Alexandria albeit he was now kept out of his Church by violence Nicep lib. 11. cap. 26 Whereas then there were two bisshops of Alexandria one who agreed with the bishop of Rome an other who disagreed â–ª because the said Peter did agree with Damasus and fled out of prison to him he is named with Damasus and therby the other bishop is insinuated to be an vsurper So that the whole force of the Decree resteth vpon the tradition and succession of S. Peter at Rome and of those who agree with him If Peter of Alexandria had not followed that succession of S. Peter he had no more ben esteemed then Lucius Georgius Gregorius or Dioscorus An. Do. 4â—4 Tom. 1. CoÌ„cil distinct 97. who being bishops of Alexandria wree al heretiks Pope Bonifacius the first wrote to the Christian Emperour Honorius in this wise Mihi Deus noster meuÌ„ Sacerdotium vobis res humanas regentibus deputauit Our God hath appointed mie priesthood to me wheras you doe gouern woordlie matters And in the same epistle he requireth the Emperours help not I warrant you for the disposing of his own priesthod but for the conseruation of the peace of the Churche To whome the Emperour promiseth his help confessing that he receaued the writings of his blessednes with dew gratulation of reuerence Apostolatus tuus desiring his Apostoleshippe to pray for the safegard of his Empire Honorius faith then was that the Emperours were heads of the ciuill gouernment for the defense of Ecclesiastical peace and not supreme heads in all Ecclesiasticall things and causes to defend I say the lawes of the Churche made by bishops and not to make new Ecclesiastical lawes wheruÌ„to to bishoppes should be subiect against their wils An. Dom. 450. Let vs adde hereunto that which an Empresse also writeth of the same matter for we may wel beleue that she wrote according to the faith of Church in her tyme. In epistol Gallae Placidiae ante synodum Chalcedonens Thus then Galla Placidia saith concerning the Churche of Rome In Apostolica sede primus ille ê“ coelestes claues dignus fuit accipere principatum Episcopatus ordinauit He that was worthy to receaue first the heauenly keyes that is S. Peter hath ordeined the primacy of the Bishoply office in the Apostolik See If this be so Peter was not only first and prince himself but he also ordeined the bishop of Rome to be the first and chief of bishops after him Ad synoduÌ„ Chalcedo Domino meo Theodosio c. When I say Peter ordeined it I meane that Christ by Peter ordeined it Valentinian is of the same belefe and iudgement saying Fidem à nostris maioribus traditam debemus cum omni competenti deuotione defendere dignitatem propriae venerationis B. Apostolo Petro intemeratam in nostris temporibus conseruare quatenus beatissimê° Romanae ciuitatis episcopus cui principatum Sacerdotij super omnes antiquitas contulit locum habeat ac facultatem de fide sacerdotibus iudicare We ought to defend with all competent deuotion the faith deliuered from our elders And to conserue and keepe in our tymes to the blessed Apostle S. Peter the dignity of his proper and owne worship vncontrolled so that the most blessed bishop of the City of Rome to whome â—ntiquity hath geuen aboue al me the cheefty of priesthood may haue place and power to iudge of faith and of priests Lo the honour that is geuen to the bishop of Rome is geuen to Saint Peter verily because the bishop of Rome sitteth in his chaire And when the bishop of Rome is despised the worship of S. Peter is stained If the old tyme gaue the primacy of priestod vnto the bishop of Rome for S. Peters sake and that super omnes ouer al men if eleuen hundred yeres agoe it was true to say that Antiquity gaue the chiefty of priestly power to the bishop of Rome are not they new teachers who after fiften hundred yeres goe about to pluck the primacy of priesthod from the bishop of Rome An. Dom. 4.57 Act. 3. In Concil Chalceâ—o Autoritate Ro. Episcopi Martianus likewise with Valentinian confesseth of the General Councel which came togeather at Chalcedon in â—â—â—â—wise Quae Synodus dum fidem diligenter inquirit authoritate beatissimi Leonis Episcopi aeternae vrbis Romae religionis fundamenta constituit sanctae ciuitati Flauiano palmam mortis tribuit gloriosae The which councel whiles it maketh diligent inquisition concerning the faith it both appointed the foundations of religion to the holy city the Church by the authoritie of most blessed Leo bishop of the euerlasting City of Rome By the authority of Pope Leo. and also gaue to Flauianus the crown of a gloriouse death Al this was done by the autority of the bishop of Rome And why by his autority the same Martianus gaue the cause therof before in an oratioÌ„ which he made in the fourth general councel Act. 1. Fol. 740. where he said of Leo the Pope qui ApostolicuÌ„ gubernat thronuÌ„ who gouerneth the See Apostolike And it is well knowen he ment only the Apostolike see of S. Peter An. D. 534 In Codicadâ— summa Trinit For the honour of that See IustiniaÌ„ writeth thus to Iohn the secoÌ„d pope of Rome Nos reddeÌ„tes honoreÌ„ Apostolicae sedi vestrae sanctitati qdsemê‘ nobis in voto fuit est vt decet patreÌ„ honoraÌ„tes vestraÌ„ beati tudineÌ„ oiÌ„a quae ad ecclesiaruÌ„ statuÌ„ pertineÌ„t festinauimus ad notitiam deferre vestrae sanctitatis We rendering honour to the See Apostolike and to your Holines the whiche thing euer was and is our desire and we honouring your blessednes as it becommeth vs to honour our Father haue hastened to bring to the knowledge of your Holines all things which doe appertein to the state of Churches If the Pope be as a Father to the Emperour and be so to be honoured it is vtterly impossible for the Emperour who is as it were a Sonne to be the supreme head or gouernour in spiritual causes of his spiritual Father Againe he saith Nec enim patimur quicquaÌ„ quod ad EcclesiaruÌ„ statuÌ„ pertinet quamuis manifestuÌ„ indubitatum sit quod mouetur vt noÌ„
praescript It hath ben alwaies the fashion of all heretikes as Tertullian saith to destroye other mens buildings as to vndoe that which other men doe Ipsum opus eorum non de suo proprio aedificio venit sed de veritatis destructione nostra suffodiuÌ„t vt sua aedificent Their very worck riseth not of their own building but from the destroying of the truthe They vndermine our things that they may build vp their owne And Hippolytus thinketh the seale of Antichrist to be nego In Homi. de consum mat sec I deny For as saith he the deuil did exhort the Martyrs to deny their God who was crucified so at the last day the seale of Antichrist and of his members shal be Nego creatorem coeli terrae nego baptisma nego adorationem à me Deo praestarisoliatam I deny the maker of heauen and of earth I denie baptisme I deny the adoration which I was wont to doe vnto God Thus in the old tyme whereas the Apostles preached Christ to be true God and man VVHat the old hereticke deny Arrius denied his true Godhead Marcion and Valentinus and Manicheus denied his true manhood Apollinaris is denied his true sowle the Monothelits denied his doble will the Donatists the Continuance of the vniuersality of his Church the Pelagians the necessity of Gods grace and the like may be said of all other heretiks whose opinions alwaies detracted some perfection from Christ or from his Church Now I will shew that the Protestants doe the like in our tyme. For whereas the vniuersal Church as wel by the preaching of the Apostles as by the witnesse of Gods writen word was in possession of a publike sacrifice of priesthood of seuen Sacramentes as of most vndoubted instrumentes of grace and of diuerse other godly and diuine orders and Canons haue they any other Gospell any other Churche or any other doctrine then that which consisteth in deniyng Hovv many things the Protestants take avvay froÌ„ the Churche Ioan. 1. and in taking away that which was before The holy scriptures and Churche tawght that a man being iustified is both really deliuered from his synnes and really receaueth faith hoape and charity Thei deny our synnes to be taken away by the lamb of God who came for that purpose saying they tary still but onely that they are not imputed They teache also that no iustice is at all made in vs by spreading charity in our harts Rom. 5. whereas S. Paul saith iusti coÌ„stituentur multi many shal be made iust But they only say iustice is imputed to vs. Again they fiue Sacraments of the seuen They deny that baptism remitteth our synnes or that baptisme is necessarie to children which are born of Ghristian parents Augustin epist 106. Which was the heresie of the Pelagians They deny the vse of holy oyle and of chrism They deny the reall presence of Christes body the adoration and reseruation thereof the transubstantiation of the bread into his body the vnblody sacrifice of Christes supper the communion of one kinde to be sufficient and consequently they deny that whole Christ in vnder eche kinde and the mingling of water with the wine And that one may receaue alone that Aultars are lawfull that there are Priestes of the newe Testament that Bishops are of any higher degree then Priestes that there is any one bisshoppe chief of all other that Priests can forgeue synnes but onelie may preache that they are forgeuen that it is lawfull to appoint certaine daies of fasting or the abstinence from certain meates for obedience although God both willed Adam to absteine from a certain frute Genes 2. and the Iewes to absteine from certain meates They deny that it is lawfull to pray to the Saints in heaueÌ„ or to pray for the faithful which died in Christ wherein they deny any communioÌ„ of praier betwene the faithful which are aliue and their brethern who liue out of this worlde with Christ They deny the infallible authority of generall CouÌ„cels the visible succession of bishoppes the place of purgation after this life the remaining of paine after the synne is forgeuen the chaÌ„ging or pardoming of the said paine by the high bisshop the vse and moderate honour of Images the signe of the healthfull crosse the making of a vowe to liue chaste or to renounce all propriety of goods or to liue in obedience the reuerence don the reliques of the blessed Martyrs the vse of praier in the holy tungs the vniuersall tradition of vnwriten verities and to be short theiÌ„ deny the bookes of the old Bible such as are not in the Canon of the Iewes These things and many other like whiles they deny what other thing do thei theÌ„ pul down the religioÌ„ of Christ which hath ben a building these fiften hundred yeeres And therein they prepare a way to Antichrist who in the end must deny all that they as yet leaue vndenied For if they should openly deny euery whit 2 Thes â— then the mystery of iniquity should not be a working and many simple men should not haue bene deceaued by them who now are deceaued because they pretend to refoorme and not to take away Christes religion But when the tyme is ripe then the iniquity which is now begun must be fulfilled and so is the whole religioÌ„ destroied I would this were not true And yet it is possible that euery Protestant knoweth not so much because Satan the great capitaine of their army keepeth his Counsel to himselfe knowing that how much the closer he worketh the more hurt he is like to doe But God through mercy detecteth his snares aÌ„d warneth them Genes 1â— 6. who wil be saued to flee into the hil with Loth and to the ship of the Churche with Noe there to prouide for their eternal saluatioÌ„ which our Lord graunt through his bitter passion Amen Finis Librum istum de primatu Romani Pontificis Petra Ecclesiae vniuersalis legerunt viri sacrae Theologiae Auglici idiomatis peritissimi quibus iudico meritò tutò credendum esse vt fine periculo imo summa cum vtilitate euul gari possit Cunerus Petri P.S. Petri Louanij 25. Februa Anno. 1566. A BRIEF SOME OF THE chief points of this treatise THE preface conteineth the marks of the true Church The difference betwen a dominion and a primacy 17. The Apostles strife coÌ„cerning superiority is declared 25. 26. 27. That there was one greater among the Apostles 20. vsque 37. To be a ruler and as a minister do not repugne 46. 47. The preeminence of priests aboue Kings 51. 52. caet A King can not be supreme gouernor in all ecclesiasticall causes because by right and Law he can not practise al ecclesiastical causes 61. 64. 67. The highe priest is preferred before the King by Gods lawe 72. 74. 76. The euil life of a bishop taketh not away his authority 78. 79. The differences betweÌ„ the bisshop of Rome and temporal princes 80. vsque 88. That Moises was a priest 83. 84. 85. The literal sense of holy scripture 96. The promise to be called Peter was the first cause why the church was built vpon him 110. The Protestants can not tell which is the first literal sense of these words vpon this rock I will build my Churche 135. How Peter beareth the person of the Church 165. The obiections against S. Peters supremacy are answered 219. vsque 230. How Christ loued Peter aboue others 237. The Church neuer lacked a visible rock 270. 271. The whole gouernment of the Church tendeth to vnity 299. Why S. Peter died at Rome 313. 313. S. Augustins minde touching the supremacy of the Pope of Rome 348. vsque 372. A priest aboue the Emperour in Eeclesiasticall causes 378. The oth of the roial supremacy is intolerable 383. CoÌ„staÌ„tine baptized at Rome 391 Phocas did not first make the See of Rome head of al Churches 405. vsque 410. Why Antichrist is permitted to come 423. Hereticks depart from the Catholik Church 469. Hereticks being once departed out of the Churche haue newe names 471. Why amoÌ„g the Catholiks some are called Franciscans Dominicans caet 477. Heretiks can neuer agree 479. The short reigne of heretickes 489 caet Hereticks preache without coÌ„mission 496. Heretiks doe prefer the temporal reign or sword before the spiritual 499. They are the members of Antichrist who withstand the external and publike sacrifice of Christes Church 518. Hereticks depriue Christ of his glorious inheritaunce in many nations together 517. The intolerable pride of heretikes in making themselues onely iudges of the right sense of Gods word 530. The ProtestaÌ„ts teache the same doctrine which the old hereticks did 553. The Protestantes are the right meÌ„bers of Antichrist in that they spoile Gods Church of very many gifts and graces and articles of the faith 560. FINIS Faultes escaped in the printing Page Line Faultes Corrections 10. 10. shephead shepheard 23. 22. them because them but because 98. 22. resurrection by resurrection by 103. 24. confession Being confession being 106. 13. stedfastnes of stedfastnes or of â—16 9. and promised aÌ„d being promised 145. 8. and in that and that 177. 21. the thing the man 186. 6. rocke of rock or 195. 14. sbme some 208. 23. vvhen Augustine vvhen Augustine 209. 11. hy me by me 214. 1. to true to be true 2â—9 17. in omnibus in ouibus 26â— 1. to the the 273. 15. vvas vvere vvas vvhere 281. 6. the pordinary the ordinary 382. 7. can gouern can not gouern 426. 14. CoÌ„essours Confessours 430. 13. teache teache 432. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 408. 1. out the out of the 496. 2. rom from 516. â— hauen heauen 539. 22. S. Saule S. Paul 553. 21. bishops bishop I F RESPâ—â—ITE VOLATILIA COELI ET PVLLOS CORVORVM
not of that King who is also a bishop is greater then a bishoppes power which is spiriritual and heauenly What is this to say but onlie that the bodie is aboue the sowle the ciuill pollicy aboue the Church of Christ and the temporal reigne aboue the Kingdom of heauen This is a vehement marck to betraie our new brethern by For we speake not now of workes or maners that is to say whether a man loue the world more then God or whether a pope be more gredy of his temporal iurisdistion then of his spirituall dutie We speake not I say of these abuses lette him that hath them yea though he be a pope looke well to himself in that behalf but we speake of doctrine at this tyme. The Pope teacheth that euery spiritual pastour is of a higher dignity theÌ„ any temporal officer whatsoeuer he be And that because he is instituted of Christ for to help vs toward life euerlasting The Protestantes teache Ephes 4. that a Christian Emperour or Kinge is aboue all spiritual pastours in his own realm and may depose them by his own power which is the very doctrine of Antichrist For the Emperours and Kinges though they be Christians may not yet in spiritual matters rule the bishoppes and pastours of Gods people VVhat povver the ChristiaÌ„ pricÌ„e hath but onely they may with their teÌ„poral lawes and power defend the lawes and ordinances which the bisshops haue already made as Theodosius and al other good Emperours vsed to doe But if they wil vse their princelie power to change the old lawes of the Church or to make new lawes in spiritual matters which were not before made by the priests or to depose the auÌ„cient bishops who haue cure of their sowles then they are the members of Antichrist as great Athanasius hath at large declared in describing the heinouse factes of the Arrians in his tyme In epist ad Solitar vi tam agentes who reporteth that when Constantius the Emperour called Paulinus the Bishop of Treuers Lucifer the bishop of Sardinia Eusebius the bishop of Marcels and Dionysius the bishop of Millan before him willing them to subscribe against Athanasius because it was his pleasure and his procedings those blessed bishoppes exhorted him ne ecclesiastica corrumperet neue Romanum imperium ecclesiasticis constitutionibus immisceret that he should not corrupt Church matters and that he should not mingle the Roman Empire with the Ecclesiastical ordinances Here you see that the RomaÌ„ empire is discharged froÌ„ meddling with Church matters It is not onely saied Arrians or heretiks but it is said the Roman Empire ought not to mingle it selfe with Ecclesiasticall causes Euen a Bishoppe being an heretike is remoued from Churche matters but an Emperour is not onelie remoued from them if he be an hereticke but also because he is an Emperour onelie and not a Bisshop Onely this hath bene alwaies the custom that Emperors shuld be careful to maintaine the former coÌ„stitutions of Bisshoppes and the ciuil peace of the Church For they being Christians ought to vse the sword whiche they beare by Gods appointment for the Churche But the outward and ciuil peace aÌ„d the Ecclesiastical constitutions which towche the belefe and the inward direction of the sowle are two things much different Apud Athan. ibidem in so much that Pope Liberiê° said to the messinger of the same Emperour Constantius as Athanasius also doth witnesse after this sort If the Emperour will needes interpose his care for the Ecclesiasticall peace Ecclesiastical peace lette an Ecclesiasticall synode be made longè à palatio vbi nec Imperator praesto est nec Comes se ingerit nec iudex minatur Ecclesiastical synod caet Let the Ecclesiasticall meeting be made a great way of from the palaice where neither an Emperour is at hand nor a County thrusteth in himself nor a iudge threateneth but where the only feare of God and the institution of the Apostles is sufficient Thus he said not that an Emperour might in no case be at a Councel of bishops but because he might not be there to vse his Emperial authority in iudging the bishops or in prescribing what the Church shall decree or beleue but onely in maynteining that which the bishops according to the Apostolike institution either haue or shall agree vpon That Reuerend Father Hosius who after that he had suffered persecution for Christes faith vnder Maximian liued threescore yeres in the Churche being tempted by the same Constantius to subscribe againste Athanasius In epi ad Solitar vit ageÌ„t asketh first of him by letters whether his brother Constans the good and Catholik Emperour did vse to banish bishops or no and then whether ConstaÌ„s his brother aliquando iudicijs Ecclesiasticis intersuit was at any tyme a medler with the Ecclesiasticall iudgements Ibidem Last of all he saith to him Ne te misceas Ecclesiasticis neque nobis in hoc genere praecipe sed potius ea à nobis disce Tibi Deus imperiuÌ„ commisit nobis quae sunt Ecclesiae coÌ„credidit quemad modum qui tuum etiam imperium malignis oculis carpit contradicit ordinationi diuinae ita tu caue ne quae sunt Ecclesiae ad te trahens magno crimini obnoxius fias Date scriptum est quae sunt Caesaris Caesari quae Dei Deo neque igitur fas est nobis in terris imperiuÌ„ tenere neque tu thymiamatum sacroruÌ„ potestateÌ„ habes Imperator Doe thou not intermedle with Ecclesiastical matters neither do thou coÌ„mauÌ„d what we shal doe in this kind of matters but rather lern theÌ„ of vs. God hath committed the Empire vnto thee aÌ„d he hath put vs in trust with â—hose things which concern the Church and like as he that malignly â—arpeth thy Empire doth gainesay the â—rdinaunce of God so doe thow take â—hede lest in takiÌ„g vnto thee those things which beloÌ„g to the Church thow be made gilty of a great crime It is writen Math. 22. geue vnto Caesar those things which are Cesars and vnto God those things that are Gods Therfore it is neither lauful for vs to haue the rule of the Empire in earth neither hast thou ô Emperour any power ouer the holy incense and sacrifices Mark that it is rehersed for a praise in the Catholike Emperour Constans not to haue medled with Ecclesiastical iudgements Also Athanasius himself saith thus for his own part In epist vt antè Si istud est iudicium Episcoporum quid commune cum eo habet Imperator caet quando iudicium Ecclesiae authoritatem suam ab Imperatore cepit caet Paulus Apostolus habebat amicos in Caesaris familia per eos in literis salutabat Philippenses Philip. 4. non tamen eos in iudidicio socios assumpsit If this be the iudgemeÌ„t of bishops what hath the Emperor to doe with it aÌ„d coÌ„trarywise if these iudgements are gathered by the
is altogether in question betwen vs. How then can that be a mark sufficient to shew an other thing to vs which it self is not sufficientlie knowen of vs All which reasons notwithstanding the confidence of our cause is such that I may graunt the woorde of God what soeuer it be to be a sufficient marke whereby Gods Churche may be knowen And then I say that euerie way Gods word standeth more on our syde then against vs. For yf you meane by God worde Gods vvoorde first vvith vs. the writen letter of the olde and of the newe Testament we are before you in that behalfe because you haue no assured Copies thereof which were not preserued by the former Christiās whome yee call Papists of thē you toke as your baptism so your Bible By them not only the old and the new testamēt but also the works of the auncient Fathers were copied out printed and layed vp in libraries ād in other places whence they came to your hands If then the hauing of Gods woorde proue a true Churche that is the more true Church which had it first specially seing we came not by it priuily or violently but receaued it euē at the Apostles hāds For after that day wherein S. Peter and S. Paule deliuered Gods word to the faithfull Romans the Church of Rome hath alwaies kept it safe without either leesing or corrupting it Again we beleue and acknowlege more of the Bible then you doe More of Gods vvoorde vvith vs. by the bookes of Toby of Iudith of Wisedom of Ecclesiasticus and of the Machabees All which we accompt for Gods own word according to the cōsent of many auucient †Aug. de doct Christia lib. 2. c. 8. Gelasius in Synode 70. episco Cōcil Florēt in fine-Trident Session 3. Fathers and councels whereas you call them Apocrypha and so make them vnable to decide any controuersie about religion Thirdly we doe not only graunt the Hebrew text of the old testament such as may appeare vncorrupted and the Greek text of the new testament to be Gods word but we also acknowlege with the aūciēt Fathers the †Iustin in Apol. 2. Ireneus li. 3. c. 25. Euseb de praeparat Euang. li. 8. c. 1. Aug. ep .8 Greek translatiō of the Septuagīts Moe copies of Gods vvord ād with the †Sessio 3. Tridentine Councel the cōmon Latin translation which so many hundred yeres hath bene diligentlie expounded and preserued in the Latin Churche to be of ful authority Where as you geue small credit to either of these translations except by your iudgement they agree with the first Hebrew and Greek copies We then haue Gods woorde in moe authentik tungs and copies then you haue Fourthly we preach expound interpret and translate Gods word in all maner of tungs Better vse of Gods vvord better then you because we doe these things not only by internal but also by such external vocation and commission as may be shewed to haue sprung from the Apostles by the lineal and ordinary succession of our bishops and priests Whereas you can fetch no higher commission then from the common weale which neuer receaued authority of Christ to make priests or to send preachers ād yet how shal they preache Rom. 10. if they be not sent Concerning that you reade Gods word to the people at you Church seruice tyme in the vulgar tungs Of Gods vvord in vulgare tungs it is no perfection at all on your syde For yee lack thereby the vse of the better tungs as of the Greek and Latin which were sanctified on Christes crosse Luc. 23. Ioan. 19. as for all other holy vses so most specially for to serue God withall at the tyme of Sacrifice wherein he requireth the very best in euery kind to be offered vnto Malac. 1. him as to our dreadful Lord and louing father And who douteth but that a lerned a holy and a common tung is more honorable then a barbarouse a prophane and a priuate tung In so much that in respect of the whole body of the Catholike Church wherewith we specially communicate in our seruice and praiers the vulgare tungs are much more to be accompted strange or vnknowen which strange tungs onely S. Paule doth least regard then the common tungs 1. Cor. 14. which were alone deliuered to the very first Christian Churche by the Apostles themselues in the East and west not regarding the infinite multitude of vulgare tungs which were in particular prouinces of the same countries the Greek and Latin Church For of the Greek tung vsed in the East Churches and of the Latin vsed in the west Churches it came to passe that it is al one to say the Greek or the east Church the Latin or the west Churche And surely seing Christ being vpō the Crosse whence the paterne of al◠prayer and oblations is to be taken sithens the Sacrifice which we offer◠saith Cyprian is the passion of our Lord whereas he knewe right well Li. 2. epi. 3 that the common people of the Iewes the pure Hebrew tongue being either lost or much decayed in cōmon speache euery daie more ād more after the captiuitie of Babylon could not vnderstand him Math. 27. Psal 21. did yet recite the beginning of the Psalme My God my God why hast thou forsaken mee in Hebrew and did not either by and by or at al interprete the same in the vulgar tongue need we to doubt but that after his example we may doe the like in those tongues at our seruice whiche Priests ād Clerks do vnderstād though the common people doe not vnderstand the same VVe vse also vulgar tungs in our seruice But lest there should be any one iote wherin to passe Gods Catholik Church we also haue in certaine countries the vse of vulgar tongues in the Churche seruice as in Dalmatia it is to be sene at this daie and the like is said to be in Assyria and in Aethiopia the Christians of which Countries doe acknowledge the Supreamacie of the Bisshoppe of Rome And although by this very meanes Vulgar tungs cause barbarousnes those Countries are become the more barbaous for thereby the Priestes and Preachers can not reade either the Greek or the Latin Doctours yet this good ariseth to the whole Churche of their losse that it both hath all degrees of tungs to wit both lerned and vulgar in her praiers and by the example of those barbarouse countries she warneth the other more ciuil parts to auoid that mischief whereby those other men fel into that reproche of barbarousnes Moreouer those Countries some of which neuer knew any better then their own natiue tung haue their seruice in the vulgar tungs by mere force and necessity Necessity forceth those coūtries to vse vulgar tūgs and that allowed by the good dispensation and toleration of the See Apostolike without breache of vnity whereas the Protestāts hauing once had
by holy water the autority of e Basil de Spi. sancto c. 27. vnwriten traditions the vse of f Hom. in 40. Mart. praying to Saints the g Ambros de poenit lib. 1. c. 7. Sacrament of penance the h Epist 33. name sacrifice and i de Sacra lib. 4. c. 5. 6. Canon of the Masse the forgeuing of synnes by the priestes when they k Chryso lib. 3. de Sacerd. oynt the sick with oile in our Lords name the l Hieron contra Vigilantium lights burning whiles the Gospel was readen that a bishop can not m Lib. 1. contra Iouin begette childern in his bishoply vocation that a fixe or a certain n Ad Furiam nuÌ„ber of praiers is praiers is prescribed which serueth to coÌ„firm the vse of our beads that he can not be a priest who hath had o Ad Gerontiam two wiues that the p Ibidem bishop of Rome vsed to answer the consultations or relations directed to him from the Councels both of the East and of the West that the q Augusti in Psal 37 fyre of purgatorie is more greuouse then whatsoeuer a man may suffer in this life All these things were in the auncient Churche the same are in our Churche the same are not in the Protestants Churche How then can it be that Antiquity should either help the ProtestaÌ„ts or hiÌ„der vs As therfore we are assured of the mark of Antiquity so let vs go forward with certain other markes which are no lesse peculiar to vs. Among other things which staied S. Augustine in the right faith this was one The name of a Catholik Cont. epis fundae c. 4 because no heresie could obtein the name of the Catholike Churche although euery heresie did much desier to obtein it The reason is for that heresies be but parts and peculiar sects of some one country August de vnit eccles c. 1. or the doctrin of a smal tyme whereas the word Catholike doth betoken a certain vniuersall professioÌ„ during froÌ„ the beginniÌ„g to the ending and spread throughout Those therfore who begaÌ„ their doctrine after the Apostles tyme Heretiks were either named of their master as the ArriaÌ„s of Arrius the PelagiaÌ„s of Pelagius the Lutherans of Luther the Caluinists of Caluin or of some place where they liued as the heresy of the Phrygians or of the falsehod which they taught as Quartadecimani Anabaptistes Aquarij or of some like particular circumstance But they were only called Catholiks who kepte the vniuersall faith which the Apostles had first taught Catholike and which was continued alwaies in the whole Churche To our purpose I saie the Protestantes neuer hadde the name of Catholikes nor neuer shall haue it because they beganne after the Apostles tyme to wit within these fiftie yeres But we so had once the name of Catholiks that we shall neuer leese it I doe not onely report me to al kind of histories and writers who accompted for euer the flock and society of the RomaÌ„ church for Catholiks a De obitu fratris as S. Ambrose b In Apol. cont Ruffinum S. Hierome and all maner of other Fathers do witnesse but also I say our ennemies confesse this Marke to haue beÌ„ ours Reade the very title of M. Iewels Reply reade it I say aÌ„d see what God to his euerlasting damnatioÌ„ if he repent not caused him to write there The Title of M. Ievvels Reply A Reply saith he vnto M. Hardings answere by perusing wherof the discrete and diligent reader may easily see the weake and vnstable grounds of the RomaÌ„ religioÌ„ which of late hath ben accoÌ„pted Catholik By I. Iewelbishop of Sarisburie Heare you not what he saith The Romain religion of late hath ben accompted Catholike As men accompt a thing to bee so doe they name it those therefore who accompted the Romain Religion to be Catholike named it also the Catholike Religion But S. Augustine saith Cont. epis Manichai cap. 4. Tenet me in ecclesia Catholicae nomen quod noÌ„ sine causa inter tam multas haereses sic ista Ecclesia sola obtinuit cet The very name of the Catholik Church holdeth me in the Churche the which name this Church alone hath not without a cause so obteyned among so many heresies that whereas all heretiks couet to be called Catholiks yet yf any stranger ask where the Catholik communion is kept no heretike dare shew his own Churche or palace or house Behold the true Church alone hath obteined the name of the Catholike Church and no heresy could obtein the same But we that are nowe called Papists by Maister Iewels confession were of late accompted Catholikes therefore we are the true Churche and we are not heretikes at all This Mark then standeth also on our syde Beside the name of Catholikes we also haue the continuall succession of bishops and priests SuccessioÌ„ or vniuersality Ibidem ab ipsa sede Petri as S. Augustine speaketh vsque ad praesentem Episcopatum euen from the very See of Peter to the bisshoply office which now is Such a continual succession we shew from S. Peter himself vntil Pius the fifth who presently fitteth at Rome in Saint Peters chaire The same Marke as being one of the most euident of all others is approued by S. a li. 3. c. 3 Ireneus by b de praescript TertulliaÌ„ by c Lib. 2. de schism Optatus and d Contra Luciferia by S. Hierome The Protestantes on the other syde neither haue continual successioÌ„ of bishops nor yet of any preachers nor of â—ny peple that are knowen to haue professed their faith So that either no such â—ongregation was Math. 10. Rom. 1. 10. 1. Pet. 3. or they were al damâ—ed because they were ashamed to coÌ„fesse the Gospel of Christ by their word and conuersation before men Marke wel this point I can not see what caÌ„ be reasonably answered vnto it Consyder now good Reader the riches and preeminence of our cause aboue the Protestants 1. Al these Marks Thevv our Churche to be true We haue Gods woorde before them 2. We haue and beleue more of it then they 3. We haue moe authentike copies euen of those bookes which they together with vs doe receaue for Gods woorde 4. We haue a more certain commission to vse it in preaching or otherwise 5. We reade it in more holy and profitable tungs 6. We vse it also in vulgar tungs without breache of vnity 7. The plain meaning thereof maketh for vs 8. The circumstance and conference thereof sheweth our faith to be the truer 9. The auncieÌ„t Fathers verait agreeth with our doctrin 10 The tradition and practise aâ— only with vs. 11. Generall Councels are only with vs. 12. the vnity of one chiefâ— iudge is onely with vs. 13. The lawfulâ— preaching of Gods worde and the lawfull administration of the Sacraments is
In deserto In penetralibus And then for the space of certain huÌ„dred yers together yee can not name what preachers or pastours your Churche had But thê° to flee into priui places aÌ„d to lack opeÌ„ preachers Math. 24 is directly against the word of God Prouer. 8. and expressely against the coÌ„maÌ„meÌ„t of our Sauiour Isai 62. whose wisdoÌ„ crieth in the tops of the waies and in the gates of the cities whose whatchmeÌ„â—ease not to speak both day and â—ight vpoÌ„ the wals of IerusaleÌ„ in whose house the caÌ„dle staÌ„deth vpoÌ„ the candlestick to geue light to al meÌ„ Math. 5. whose faith must be coÌ„fessed with the mouth Rom 10. 1. Philip. 2. Psal 44. whose gospel must not be blushed at whose seruants shine like stars whose spouse being most beawtiful through internal faith aÌ„d charity Circumamicta varietatibus is yet garnished about with variety of diuers tuÌ„gs which are daily heard to preache aÌ„d ceremonies which are daily sene in Gods seruice amoÌ„g the Catholiks Memor ero nominis Populi coÌ„fitebuntur in aeternuÌ„ Which spouse also hath promised to be mindful of the name of Christ from generatioÌ„ to generation in so much that many peple shall confesse and geue praise to God for euer age after age If such a gloriouse a manifest and a beautifull Churche must be beleued then must Wiclef Hus and their fellowes be avoided and our knowen manifest and in all generations most gloriouse Churche must be imbrace which neuer lacked a chiefe bishop iâ— S. Peters chaire with a number of bishops and faithful nations obeying hâ— doctrin and gouerment The truth 〈◊〉 which Catholik Church and chair thâ— I might the more effectally persuade The cause of this treatise 〈◊〉 haue taken in hand to proue the Sâ—premacy of the bishop of Rome according to the reason and meaning oâ— Gods word The which point alone if iâ— be graunted al other controuersies arâ— superfluous For all is concluded vnder one if one be appointed the chiefe shepheard by God ouer al sithens euery maÌ„ must heare aÌ„d obey the shepheards voice Ioan. 10. I request most humbly of your pacieÌ„ce to reade or to heare the whole treatise readen which is not long and not to condemne the matter before it be wel vnderstanded If my discourse be doutfull I am ready to make it plaine If it seme to faile in proof a charitable â—â—swere made vnto it shal shew by the â—ply how strong the Arguments geâ—erally be concerning the chief points Thus taking my leaue I wish as wel 〈◊〉 your worship as I do to my self beseâ—hing you not to miscontrue my doings â—ut to take them so charitably as they â—re meant For God is my witnesse the â—hing I seeke is as well the reducing of â—hem to their Mother Church who are â—on a stray as the staying of them who â—hrough mans frailty beginne to dout of their faith Which effects God grauÌ„t through Iesus Christ our Lord to his own glory Amen The Chapiters of the Treatise following 1 The state of the question fol. 1. 2 That there is a primacy of spiritual gouernment in the Church and how it differreth from secular gouerment 16. 3 Of the diuerse senses of these wordes vpon this rock I wil build my Church aÌ„d which is most literal 93. 4 These words thou art Peter and vpoÌ„ this rock I wil build my Church haue this literal meaning vppon the ô Peter being made a rock to th end thou shouldest stoutly confesse the faith I will build my Church 108. 5 The Fathers teache that S. Peter is this rock 136. 6 The reasons which the Fathers bring to declare why S. Peter was this rock 155 7 The authorities alleaged by M. Iewel to proue that S. Peter was not this rock proue against himself 171. 8 The conclusioÌ„ of the former discourse and the order of the other which followeth 189. 9 That S. Peter passeth far the other Apostles in some kinde of Ecclesiasticall dignity 194. 10 That the Apostles besyde the perogatiue of their Apostleship had also authority to be particular bishops 204. â—â— How far S. Peter did either excel or â—s equal with the Apostles in their Aâ—stolike office 2â—0 â—â— That S. Peters prerogatiue aboue the â—her Apostles is most manifestly sene by â—s chief bishoply power 232. â—â— That the Pastoral authority of S. Peâ—r was ordinary 267. â—â— That his ordinary authority belonâ—th to one bishop alone 279 â—â— That the bishop of Rome is that one â—dinary pastour who succedeth in S. â—eâ—rs chaire 305. â—â— That the good Emperours and prinâ—s did neuer think themselues supream â—eads of the Churche in spiritual causes 378. â—â— That the bishop of Rome is not Anâ—christ himself 421. â—8 That the bishop of Rome is not any â—ember of Antichrist concerning his â—octrine 464. THE STATE OF THE QVESTION CONCERning the Supremacie of S. Peter and of the Bishops of Rome after him The First Chapiter IN writing to and fro concerning the Supremacie of S. Peter and of the Bishops of Rome after him great controuersies are fallen out the which to th' end they may be the better opened I thought good to propose in order the chief points of the said question The Catholiques beleue that the Bishop of Rome sitting in S. Peters Chaier is by the appointment of Christ himself the chief Pastour of the whole militant Church whose voice euery sheepe ought to hearken vnto The Protestants on the other side denie not only the Supremacie of the Bishop of Rome nor onlie the Supremacie of S. Peter but also they affirme that there is no Primacie nor any one chief gouernment in the Church at al. Therefore the first Question must be whether it be against â—he Word of God or no that there shoulde be in his Church any Primacie or chief Authoritie The second is whether S. Peter had the said Primacie or no. The third whether the Bishop of Rome had it after S. Peter Concerning S. Peter we fal againe into diuers new questioÌ„s as it shal now appeare When Simon the sonne of Iona was first brought vnto Christ by his brother Andrew Iesus loking vpon him said Thou art Simon the sonne of Iona Ioan. 1. thou shalt be called Cephas the vvhich by interpretation is Peter that is to say a stone or a rocke Here is the promise made that Simon shal be called Peter which name is deriued of a rocke or stone Verelie because he shal occupie that place in vpholding the frame of Christes militant Church the which a stone occupieth in holding vp the house which is built vpon it And when it pleased Christ to chose vnto him his twelue Apostles then he gaue the said name vnto SimoÌ„ surnaming him Peter Thirdly Mar. 3. Luc. 6. when Simon hauing the Godhead of Christ reuealed to him from heaueÌ„ had confessed the same saying Math. 16. Thou art Christ the son of the liuing God then Iesus answering said vnto
perfit sense is that Peter coÌ„cerning his office in Gods Churche Ioan 1. Math. 16. Ioan. 21. that is to say through the promise of Christ which is past and the faithful confession of his godhead which is presently made and the power of feediÌ„g his â—hepe which then was to come is this â—ock vpon which the Church is built The first sense can not be all the whole sense because then all the other three senses were void For if the Church be meant to be only built vpon Christ then is the Church built neither vpon the faith of Peter nor vpon Peter himself nor vpoÌ„ any disciple of Christ. Againe the word thou which goeth before doth not wel agree with Christ but only with Peter Neither doth the word I wil build aedificabo which folweth after well agree with Christ alone For it were not properly saied at Cesarea where Christ then was I will build my â—hurch vpon Christ vpoÌ„ whome it had ben alreadie built from the time of his incarnation Concerning the second sense no Disciple of Christ is there literallie either spoken vnto or spoken of beside Simon the Sonne of Iona. Therefore the sense of Origen hath no sufficient ground in the letter of Gods word Thirdlie the faith which Peter hath confessed is not the onlie rocke wherevpon the Church shal be built For theÌ„ it had ben built vpon the faith of Iohn Baptist before this tyme. Ioan. 1. Againe seing the said faith hath bene already confessed by Peter himself saying Thou art Christ the SoÌ„ne of the liuing God to what purpose is the building yet also differred Why is it said I will build my Church vpon this Rocke and not rather I haue built it or I do build it vpon this Rocke For if two things only are necessary the one which maie be the Rocke or foundation which is nowe said to be faith the other which is the building of the Church vpon that Kocke seing the foundation is alreadie laid in that the faith is confessed And seing the Church is present for Christ euen theÌ„ had a Church of his owne why is the building yet putte of vntill an other tyme but that there is an other thing besyde faith requisite to the same building But if as the very truth is Peter himselfe concerning his office be pronouÌ„ced this Rock and that not only in respect of his faith although it be a very principal point but also in respect both of the promise past wherein it was said thow shall be called Peter and of the authoritie of feeding Christes sheepe which is to come Ioan. 1. 21. then all absurdities are auoided and all the former truthes are perfitlie conteined in this last sense For if Peter be this rock then Christ who made Peter to be this Rocke is much more proued thereby to be the rock himself for the geuer of any heaueÌ„ly power hath much more that power in himselfe then he that receaueth it If Peter be this Rock in respect of his confession then his confession being in himself is also coÌ„curring as a certain rock for his part vnto the building of the Church If Peter be the Rock seing he was not only a Disciple but the captain Disciple of al that euer were al other Disciples which are coÌ„teined in him as in the chief may also be for their part this rocke wherevpon the Church shal be built Seing then this last sense is moste perfit and conteineth al the other senses not being it selfe fully conteined in any of them out of al controuersie none other is so literal so ful so true as this to witte that Peter confessing the true faith with respect of such autoritie as shal be afterward geuen to him is this Rocke wherevpon the Church shal be built I wisâ—h in the sight of God that malice being layd apart any reasonable man would nowe consider In his Replie 221. what M. Iewel and his adhearents haue done in this behalf He forsaking the most literal sense fall and minglng three opinions of â—hese foure in one not regarding to â—tte euerie thing in his proper place â—oth seeke to confouÌ„d the Reader with â—he multitude of words and with the â—ame of the Fathers whome he moste â—hamefully abuseth But if there be truth in M. Iewel or â—n his adhearents lette him or anie of â—hem descend particularlie to discusse â—he meaning of Christ with alcircumstances belonging thervnto as by Gods grace I wil do to my poore ability And that the discourse which foloweth may be the more easily perceaued this is the somme of it My intent is to proue that not only Christ nor onlie the faithful confession of Peter but Peter himselfe with respecte of his confession and of such other authoritie as God gaue him was this Rocke wherevpon Christ saied he would builde his Churche meanyng that part of his Church which wandereth in this life Christ promised Simon that he should be called Peter Ioan. 1. when he had not yet confessed to th end he might confesse the more stronglie as a rocke He named him Peter before he had confessed Marci 3. so that he was this farre forward in being the rocke before his confession When he had confessed Christ prououÌ„ced hiÌ„ not only a rock or a maÌ„ of the stedfastnes of the propriety of a rock in his faith Math. 16. Apoc. 21. but also such a rock wherevpoÌ„ he wold build his Church For euerie Apostle was a rock in his kind but none beside Peter and the Successours in his office was this kind of Rocke whereof Christ now speaketh That the confession of Peter might tarie immoueable after Christes ascension for the Church should alwaies neede a visible rock Christ praied for Peters faith Lucae 22. euen so farre that he was â—idde to strengthen his brethern â—fter his conuersion from the denial of â—hrist Last of all to shew what kind of â—rength Peter should geue to his breâ—hern Christ bad him feede his lambs The promise of the name of Peter was the first cause of Peters being the Rocke The geuing of the name was the â—erformance of the promise The confession of Christes godhead was the fruit of the gift and of the promise The promise to haue the Church built vpon that Rock was the reward of the confession The praier of Christ for Peters faith was the warrant of the perpetuitie of his strong confession The power to feede Christes sheepe was to make Peter such a rock Ioan. 21. Luc. 10. as should stay vp his Church by teaching and ruling the faithfull as whose voice the sheep should be bound to heare vnder paine of damnation Al these things concurring togeather cause Peter to be this rock whervpon the militaÌ„t Church is built Wherof I wil now intreat more at large The IIII. Chap. Diuerse reasons are alleaged to proue cheefely by the circumstance and coÌ„ference of holy scripture that these words thou art Peter and vpon this rock I
wil build my Church haue this literal meaning vpoÌ„ the o Peter being first made a rock to th end thou shouldest stoutlie confesse the faith and so confessing it I wil build my Church WHen our Lord first saw Simon the son of Iona beholding him he said thou art Simon the son of Iona Ioan. 1. thou shalt be called Cephas which is by interpretatioÌ„ Peter that is a great stone or a rocke By these words a new name is before hand promised to Simon wherevpon Saint Chrysostom saith in Ioan. hom 18. Honorificè de eo praedicit Certa â—utem praedictio futurorum imâ—ortalis Dei duntaxat opus est Animaduertendum autem quòd â—on omnia quae euentura ei erant â—oc primo coÌ„gressu praedixit NoÌ„â—enim appellauit eum Petrum non dixit super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam sed dixit Tu vo â—caberis Cephas illud enim maioris erat potestatis nec noÌ„ etiam auctoritatis Christ doth forespeâ—k honorably of him For the certaine foretelling of things to come is the worck only of the immortal God It is to be noted that Christ did not foretel at this first meeting al thiÌ„gs which shuld come to passe afterward to hiÌ„ The promise of the name goeth before the name For he did not cal hiÌ„ Peter neither did he say vpon this rocke I will build my Church But he said Thou shalt be called Cephas For that was both of more power aÌ„d also of more autority Likewise S. Cyrillê° In Ioan. lib. 2. c. 2 Nec SimoÌ„ fore iaÌ„ nomeÌ„ sibi sed Petrus praedicit vocabulo ipso commodè significans quòd in eo tanquam in petra lapidéque firmissimo suam esset aedificaturus Ecclesiam And he telleth a fore hand that his name shal be Peter or a rock and not now Simon signifiyng by the very word that he wold build his Church on him as on a rock and a most sure stone Theophilact and Euthimius are of the same mind In. 1. cap. Ioan. By these fathers we lerne that this prediction or promise of Peters name is a thing which agreeth with the building of the Church which is to come These words then Thou shalt be called Peter are words of Prophecie or of promise A word of promise spoken by God is effectual to worck all those meanes which are necessarie for the performaÌ„ce of it For as when God had once said Sara vxor tua pariet tibi filiuÌ„ Genes 17. Sara thy wife shal bring thee foorth a son that self word as S. Chryâ—â—stom noteth wrought both in Abraâ—am and in Sara the power and habiâ—itie to begette and to conceaue a child In cap. 9. ad Rom. Genes 21. â—otwithstaÌ„ding that naturally through â—ld age they were vnapt therevnto â—ight so these words Thou shalt be â—alled Peter wrought in Simon the â—ffect whereby he might beleue and in due tyme like a rock confesse Christ to â—e the Sonne of Cod how far soeuer he bad naturally bene otherwise from so highe a grace And as though Abraham did accompany with his wife Sara for the begetting of Isaac yet the birth of the child is not imputed to their lying together but vnto the word of promise wherin it had beÌ„ said Genes 17. Rom. 9. Sara shal bring thee foorth a child euen so albeit Simon be made Peter to the end he maie confesse and therefore not without coÌ„fessing Christ to be the Son of God yet his being Peter concerning the efficieÌ„t cause thereof is no lesse to be imputed to this former word of promise Ioan. 1. thoâ— shalt be called Peter then vnto the faithful confessioÌ„ which he made afterward of Christes Godhead For the first cause was the promise and it wrought the second cause of the confession This matter is put out of aâ—â— question if we consider that this promise â—â—ow shalt be called Peter was fulfilled before the confession waâ— made For when Christ chose to hiâ— twelue Apostles then as S. Marcâ— saieth Marc. 3. Luc. â— he gaue to Symon the name of Peter and S. Luke telleth the same thing Whervpon Euthimius writeth Verefimile est apud IoanneÌ„ Chrisstum dixisse vocandum esse PetruÌ„ nunc autem vocare eum Petrum It is like to be true that in Saint Iohn Christ said he should be called Peter and that he now calleth him Peter neither doth God vse to geue the name without geuing also the thing which is meant by the name For his â—alling not words alwaies haue their â—ffect ioyned with them Therefore when Simon was reallie â—amed Peter then was he in deede made the rock And seing he had not as yet confessed the confession which followeth doth not either only or first make him to be the rock But he is alreadie by Christes promise well entred to be made the rocke to th end he maie confesse the more stedilie and surely And therefore his confession is a most sure rock because it procedeth from him who was before made the rock to thend â—he should confesse most stedily Wherevpon when Christ asked whom the faithful said him to be then the rock did his dutie For as Cyrillus saith Peter as being the PriÌ„ce and head of the rest first cried out In Ioan. lib. 12. ca. 64. princeps ca put saying thou art Christ the Son of the liuing God to whom Christ answered and I say to thee thou art Peter to witte of the qualitie of a rock and vpoÌ„ this rock I wil build my Churche Lo Peter cried out or confessed as being the head He was then the head by some meanes euen before his confession that is to say by promise and name This much being graunted the which is the very order and expresse drift of the Gospel it wil farther follow that seing these words Math. 16 vpoÌ„ this rock I wil build my Church depend vpon these other Thou art Peter for they are iÌ„mediatly inferred vpoÌ„ theÌ„ aÌ„d ioyned to them with a copulatiue coniunctioÌ„ Et super hanc Petram and it wil follow I say that these words vpoÌ„ this rock I wil build my Church are to be vnderstanded according to these thou art Peter And seing these words thou art Peter depend no lesse principally vpon the former prophecie and promise of Christ wherein it was said thou shalt be called Peter then vpon the confession which Simon made afterward of Christes Godhead it is certein that the â—ther words also vpoÌ„ this rock I wil â—uild my Church coÌ„cerning the naâ—ure and order of a certain cause efficiâ—nt depend no lesse principally vpon â—hose former words thou shalt be called Peter then vpon the confession of Christes godhead so that the first coefâ—cient cause why the Church is builded vpon this rock is not the present coÌ„fesâ—ioÌ„ of Simon but the vocation and proâ—ise of Christ which was long before made vnto Simon Which thing being â—rue then Christ wil build his Church vpon this
rock not in dede without the grace of coÌ„fessing but yet not any rather by the force of the confession then of the promise Ioan. 1. For S. Iohn Baptist coÌ„fessed also but because he confessed not as one that was ê“mised to be this rock the Church was not built vpoÌ„ him but to Peter the ê“mise was made before the coÌ„fessioÌ„ and it was the first cause of the coÌ„fessioÌ„ therfore the promise was the chief and first cause of buildiÌ„g the church vpoÌ„ this role If it were so then the whole meaning of these words The vvhole sense of Christes vvords vpon this Rock I will build my Church is this vpoÌ„ him who therefore stronglie and firmly confesseth my true faith because he was before promised to be called this Rocke or which is more vpon him who in part is alreadie this rock and promised to be called this rocke so confesseth my Godhead like a most sure Rocke vpon him I will build mie Church The which most true and certein sense standing the only confessioÌ„ of the faith maketh no man to be this Rocke whervpoÌ„ Christ will build his Church except it be a confession which is wrought by the force of a promise to be called and made a rock going before it The which promise of being assured to be called Peter for as much as it belonged literally to no Prophet to no disciple to no Apostle but only to Simon the son of Iona for that cause Ioan. 1. the whole militant Church is at this tyme promised to be built vpon none other mans faith or confession beside only vpon the confessioÌ„ of S. Peter himself and of those who succede in Peters chaire For as God willing I shal proue hereafter euery bishop of Rome is that for his time vnto the militant Church of Christ which Peter once was Christ then intending to confirme and to make perfit his promise wherein he had said thou shalt be called Peter asked his Apostles whom they thought or rather said and coÌ„fessed him to be S. Peter hauing a reuelation from God the father to thend Christes former promise might be throughly and perfitly verified saith thou art Christ the Son of the liuing God that is to say thou art not only a prophet or a SoÌ„ by adoption but thou art the natural Son of the only true God Here it is principally to be noted that when S. Peter coÌ„fessed Christ to be the Son of God Peter coÌ„fessed the rocke that then he coÌ„fessed the rock of rocks which only Christ is Neither doth any man deny but that these words thou art the Son of the liuing God appertein only to Iesus Christ But our questioÌ„ is not of these words but coÌ„cerning the words which Christ spake afterward vnto Peter For when Peter had confessed the chefe rock then that chefe rock shewed that Peter had played also the rock saying to him after this sort Hilarius de Trinit lib. 6. Simon the Son of Iona thou art happy as S. Peter said Christ to be the Son of God so Christ calleth S. Peter the Son of Iona therby declariÌ„g that as Peter was naturally the Son of Iohn his father so Christ is the natural son of God his father and as Peter speaketh oÌ„ly to Christ at this tyme and to none other person so doth Christ only speake to Peter and to none other person Christ after this meaniÌ„g is alone the son of God aÌ„d SimoÌ„ alone after this meaniÌ„g is Peter Christ goeth forward calliÌ„g Peter happy because flesh aÌ„d blud did not reueale Christes godhead vnto him but Christes father who is in heueÌ„ So that S. Peter oÌ„ly at this time had this high reuelatioÌ„ aÌ„d to hiÌ„ oÌ„ly Christ directeth his words And I say vnto thee that thou art Peter What was S. Iohn or S. Mathew the son of Iona no truly or had any other man in the earth this reuelatioÌ„ at this time beside SimoÌ„ the son of Iona no verely yf we consider the first and most literal sense Thou oÌ„ly art Peter Peter alone is this rock because thou alone both hadst this name ê“mised to the when Christ first sawe thee thou alone haddest it geueÌ„ thee when thou wast chosen an Apostle and thou alone hast now coÌ„fessed me to be God by nature aÌ„d to thee alone I say Thou art Peter It is otherwise most true that Christ is the rock incoÌ„parably aboue Peter Christ the rock and that the whole vniuersal church is built vpoÌ„ Christ far more excelleÌ„tly then any part thereof is built vpoÌ„ any mortal maÌ„ For yf we did not beleue so much of Christ we could not now beleue that he were able by his only word and promise to make Peter also to be a Rock in his kind The confession is a rock It is also true that the confessioÌ„ of S. Peter is a rock aÌ„d in respect also of that confession SimoÌ„ is called Peter And in respect of the same coÌ„fessioÌ„ the Church is built vpon Simon But as vpon one who confesseth because he had before the promise to be called Peter made to him and the name it self geuen him Al things which are true are not euery where principally meant or intended alone of the holy ghost We now seeke the literal and first maening of these words vpoÌ„ this rock I wil build my Church and not of these thou art Christ the son of the liuing God In his Reply fol. 221. And yet M. Iewel professing to dispute of these words vpoÌ„ this rock I wil build my Church priuily conueieth the disputation from them vnto those other Thou arte Christ the Sonne of God But I beseech the good Reader to marke the point and not to suffer him selfe to be deceiued in so weightie a mater At the length to gather al my reasons togeather I saie that the most literal sense of these wordes vpoÌ„ this rocke is to signifie that vpon S. Peter as vpon a man called by office to coÌ„fesse the true faith Christ wil build his Church First Vocaberis 1. because he alone is promised to be called Peter Secondly Imposuit nomen 2. because he alone at the choise of the twelue is named Peter Thirdly because Christ speaketh to Simon the sonne of Iona alone Tibi saying Et ego dico tibi and I say to thee Therby shewing that the words which follow belong to S. Peter alone Fourthly because Christ speaketh againe to him and of him alone saying Tu es Petrus Thou art Peter Tu es I suppose there is a difference betwene I am Peter and thou art Peter Most true it is that Christ is Peter that is to say a rocke And most true it is that Simon in confessing Christ to be the sonne of God confessed the principal and only natural rocke But now that truth is not first of al and chieflie vttered by Christ although it were before vttered by SimoÌ„ but of Christ it is now said most literally thou art
fathers at once Concil Chalced. Act. 3. who in the fourth general Councel teache thus Petrus Apostolus est Petra crepido ecclesiae Catholicae Peter the Apostle is the Rocke and toppe of the Catholik Church What meant you then M. Iewel to say that the olde Catholique Fathers haue writen and pronounced not any mortal man as Peter was but Christ himselfe the Sonne of God to be this Rocke The old Fathers affirm both Christ and Peter to be the Rocke Christ by nature Peter by vocation and election Christ to be both the Rocke absolutelie and also by a consequent to be this Rocke wherupon the militant Church shal be built Peter to be this Rocke but not absolutely the Rocke But what did not M. Iewel know all this that surely is scant likelie sith these things are so riue in the old Fathers and so oft alleaged by the new writers Vnlesse perhaps M. Iewel readeth not the old Fathers and trusteth not the new writers aÌ„d so be ignoraÌ„t of these authorities For in dede id appeareth by his doings that either he neuer saw the originals whence he citeth his testimonies but onlie followeth blind note bookes made and collected by other his auncestours and masters in heresie or els he is one of the most manifest falsifiers that euer was in the Church For willinglie to belie so manie Fathers at once as he now hath done it is a malice not much lesse then Simon Magus or any scholar of his had I rather thinck he saw not the originals Howsoeuer it be he is an horrible instrument of perdition to the childern of perdition O syr Are Tertullian Origenes Cyprian Hilarie Basil Epiphanius Ambrose Hierom Augustine Chrysostome Cyrillus Damascenus Psellus Theodoretus Theophilactus Euthimius Prosper Leo Gregorius no auncient Fathers Al they teache a mortal maÌ„ as Peter was verily euen Peter him self by the gift of Christ to be this Rock whereof it is said vpon this rock I wil build my Church What a lyer now is he who saith they doe not so their bookes be foorth in print let them be sene If M. Iewel be an impudeÌ„t lier let him either openly recant or be auoided as a falsifier of Gods Gospel and of true religion yea as one more worthy of a whetstone then of a bishopricke But now lette vs consider also the reason why the fathers confesse the Church to haue ben built vpon S. Peter For euery thing is made the plainer and surer when the reason of it is knowen The diuerse reasons which the Fathers bring to declare why S. Peter was this rock doe euidently shew that he was most literally this Rocke whereupon Christ would build his Church The VI. Chap. HE that geueth a cause of a thing done or said sheweth himself to be most fully persuaded concerning the truthe of the thinge otherwise he would neuer indeuour to find out the reasons why that should be so doÌ„ or said which he thought not to be don or said at all Seing then the auncient Fathers do shew why and how S. Peter is this Rocke wherevpon the Church is built it is impossible that they should anything dout thereof and much lesse can they denie him to be this rocke wherevpon Christ said he would build his Church And yet M. Iewel hath said most falsely that they doe write and pronounce not any mortal man as Peter was to be this Rocke To beginne with S. Basil he saith Petrus Ecclesiae aedificationem in seipsum suscepit Aduersus EunomiuÌ„ lib. 2. Peter receaued the building of the Church vpon himself But why propter fidei excellentiam for the excellencie of his faith Behold his faith alone was not properlie the Rocke but Peter was the Rocke and that not onlie for his faith for then other faithful meÌ„ might haue ben the like rock but for the excellencie of his faith Two things then are necessarie for being this Rocke that he be Peter and that he haue an excellent faith to wit such as none other had as the which was promised most singularly and for the continuance whereof Christ himself hath praied And because this faith was most excellent Libr. 6. de Tainit Saint Hilarie teacheth farther that Supereminentem gloriam beatae fidei suae confessioâ—e promeruit Peter by the confessing of his blessed faith deserued a passing glorie Peters faith had not excelled yf anie man had ben like to him neither had Peters glorie passed for the confession of his faith yf any man had bene like to him in glorie His glorie was to receaue the building of the Church vppon him for the excellencie of his faith therefore the Churche was more singularlie built vppon him then vpon any other manels S. Cyprian writeth of S. Peter Ecclesia quae vna est super vnum Ad Iubaian qui claues eius accepit Domini voce fundata est The Church which is one is by the voice of our Lord fouÌ„ded vppon one who hath receaued the keies of it This reason can beare but one such Rocke at once as Peter was for els the Church as one is not founded vpon one if there are moe such rocks at once Otherwise what can be saied why if there be many such rocks there should not also be many Churches But the Churche beinge one is built vppon one therefore that one who is Peter hath no fellow in that behalf vntil after him an other doe succede in that one office Homil. de Pastor S. Augustine discoursing vpoÌ„ those wordes of Christ spoken to S. Peter Feed my sheep writeth thus Dominus in ipso Petro vnitatem coÌ„mendauit c. Our Lorde hath coÌ„mended vnitie in S. Peter himself Vni dicitur There were many Apostles aÌ„d it is said to one feed my shepe S. Augustin calleth the other Apostles also good shepherds but S. Peter he calleth the one good shephearde by whose one pastoral office vnitie is commended and set forth verely because it is meant that as many Pastours and particular flocks in this life are vnder Peter one chief pastour and in him â—hey al are one euen so all the states â—nd ages of the Church that euer haue â—en be or shal be are vnder one chief â—astour Iesus Christ and in him they â—al are one But as al the ages of faithful meÌ„ are one Church in Christ the chief pastour because he in deed and in truth conteineth them al vnder his vnitie right so Peter shuld not be the chief one Pastor of al the particular flocks in respect of the other Apostles except in deede he had power geuen him to feede them all within the compasse of his one folde S. Hierome hauing called S. Peter Lib. 1. aduers IouiÌ„ the Apostle of Christ and the Rock afterward confesseth to Iouinian who reioysed to see a maried man so honoured that Super Petrum fundatur Ecclesia The Church is built vpon Peter Adding therevnto Licet id ipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat
cuncti claues regni coelorum accipiaÌ„t ex aequo super eos Ecclesiae fortitudo solidetur tameÌ„ propterea inter duodecim vnus eligitur vt capite constituto schismatis tollatur occasio Albeit the self same thing in an other place be done vpon al the Apostles and al doe receiue the keyes of the kingdom of heauen and the strength of the Church be fastened equally vpoÌ„ them yet therefore one is chosen among twelue that a head being made the occasion of schisme may be taken away Three things are to be noted in this sentence First that the Church is so built vpon Peter the Rocke that in the same place where it is built vpon Peter the like is not done vppon the other Apostles Secondly the Church is equally fouÌ„ded vpon al the Apostles in an other place Ioan. 20. to witte when they are sent of Christ as Christ was sent of his Father to bind or to loose and so foorth Ioan. 20. Thirdly one is chosen head of the twelue to th' intent schisme may be auoided A man may say if al be equal The obiection and ansvvere How is one head This shall be more fully answered hereafter I say for this time Al twelue as touching the office of the Apostlesship were equal and all were Rockes and heades of the whole Church But being considered as particular Bisshops and Pastours wherby they had particular authority to teach some here and some there as now Bisshops doe euery man in his own diocese so one was their head How can it els be that S. Hierome shuld agree with himself al be equal and one is the head Can the head be equal with the other meÌ„bers Or is it not highest of al aÌ„d chief of al We must theÌ„ say that alare equal in the office of theÌ„ apostleship but Peter was otherwise appointed the chief Apostle and head in the Bisshoplie power whiche euery Apostle had beside the Apostolike office as it shal appeare hereafter In the mean time it is certain that S. Hierom writeth Hieron aduersus Iouin li. 2 Propterea inter duodecim vnus eligitur vt capite constituto schismatis occasio tollatur Therefore among the twelue one is chosen to th' end a head being appointed the occasion of schism may be taken away And that there S. Hierome speaketh not of the Apostles owne choise but of Christes own choosing it appeareth euidentlie when he saith afterwarde that the good manâ—er Christ would not prefer S. Iohn before S. Peter Lib. 1. aduers leuiÌ„ least he should cause so yong a man to be enuied at Neither did it suffise that during the Apostles time onely such a Rocke and head should be appointed for so muche as the Churche of God neyther ended in their time And their successours in their Bisshoply autoritie hauing without al controuersie lesse assurance of grace then they had and being also farre more in nuÌ„ber had more need then the Apostles of a head and of a perpetual Rocke among them wherunto they might leane So that Leo the great hath most iust cause to say of S. Peter In Aniuers assumpt serm 3. Super hoc Saxum hanc soliditatem sortitudineÌ„ aeternuÌ„ construam teÌ„pluÌ„ Ecclesiae meae coelo inserenda sublimitas in huius firmitate consurget Vpon this stone this soundnes and strength I wil build an euerlasting temple and the heigth of my Church which is to be graffed in heauen shall rise in the strength of this Rock S. Augustine affirmeth in many places that S. Peter did represent the whole Churche according to whiche sense he writeth thus Epist 165. Petro totius Ecclesiae figuram gereÌ„ti Dominus ait super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam Our Lord sayth vnto Peter bearing the figure of the whole Churche Vppon this Rock I wil build my Churche So that he geueth this cause why this muche is sayed to Peter verely because Peter beareth the figure of the vvhole Church But how commeth it to passe that Peter doth bear the figure of the whole Churche Surely because he is the head and Rocke of the whole For euerie prince doth beare the figure and as it were the generall person of his subiectes and of them who are committed to his Charge For that they all are as it were gathered togeather and vnited in him alone And this to be the true meaning of S. Augustine In Ioan. tract 124 it appeareth euidentlie by his own wordes Ecclesiae Petrus Apostolus propter Apostolatus sui primatum gerebat figurata generalitate personaÌ„ Peter the Apostle by a generalitie which was figured did hear the person of the Church by reasoÌ„ of the primacy of his Apostleship Peter did beare the person of the Churche not as menne cary burthens on their backs but by a figured generalitie that is to say as a general officer For he doth beare their persons not naturallie but figuratiuely To witte by interpretation of the Law and not by real extension of his body to be made so big as to vphold al thir bodies Generalitas figurata S. Augustine calleth that a figured generalitie when it is not ordinarilie and naturallie made but when the lawe doth impute and take it so to be For the Lawe interpreteth and expoundeth the chiefe officer of a common weal to bear the person of the self coÌ„mon weal. And therupon the head being present for the coÌ„mon weals behalfe the law worketh as if the common weale it selfe were present when the head alone is present What was theÌ„ Peters office The primacy of the Apostleship He was first and chiefe propter Apostolatus sui primatum Propter and for the primacie of his Apostleship he signified all his flock in him self alone so that he tooke the keies for al and was the general Rocke for euery other particular Rocke and for that primacie of his he bare the figure of the Churche To shew yet farther the force of this reason the Reader must consyder that first Peter is said to be the Rocke and therein to beare the person of the Church figurata generalitate which is to say as if he were in deede the general or the whole mystical bodie of the Church which yet he is not but is only the officer thereof Secondarily a reason is geuen why Peter should signifie or beare the figure of the whole Church more then any other And the cause is propter Apostolatus sui primatum for the primacie of his Apostleship that is to say because he is chiefe If this cause were not found in S. Augustine the Protestants might haue some pretense to say as they doe verelie that Peter was not in deede the rock nor head but onlie that he is called so to signifie that the whole Church is built vpon Christ But now Peter doth not signifie the Church to be built vpon Christ as Peter is a man nor as he is a faithful maÌ„ nor as he
it will follow that the Apostles in their owne persons needed no head but that S. Peter was set ouer them to geue thereby a forme and a paterne that afterward when the personal priuilege of the Apostles shuld cease yet the rest who should be the successours of the Apostles might al obey one who shuld succede in Peters place Luc. 22. By whose assured faith because Christ prayed for it al they might be sure not to erre in the faith By this meanes it is easie to answere the obiections which are made against the supremacie of S. Peter For if S. Paul did aswel preache to the Gentils Galat. ◠as S. Peter did to the Iewes he did it by the office and nature of his Apostleship which was to goe into the whole worlde Matth. 28 and to preache to euery creature 2. Cor. 11. and to haue the care of al Churches lying vpon him And therfore S. Peter did also as wel before as afterward preache vnto the Gentils with no lesse power then S. Paule Act. 15. And S. Paule to the Iewes no lesse then S. Peter For the order power and grace of their Apostleship was equal as the degree and line of brethern is equall But as God preferred in old time the eldest sonne to the priesthood Genes 49 and to a greater power in gouernment not by the force of the brotherhed but by his own ordinance euen so whereas Peter and Paule were equal Apostles yet Peter by the appointment of Christ was the head not by force of the Apostleship but by the will of God to shew that his Church was one by hauing one pastour in it aboue the reast as a Kingdom is one by hauing one King in it or as a house is one by hauing one master in it Again if S. Paule did reproue S. Peter cōcerning circūcision as one that walked not accordīg to the truth of the Gospel in his behauior S. Paul might do it Galat. 2. both because they were fellowes and brethern in the Apostolike office and also for that he had the same holie Ghost which Peter had But we must consyder as Tertullian in his booke of prescriptions doth witnesse that no doctrine of S. Peters was then reproued as false Conuersationis fuit vitium nō praedicationis but onlie his behauiour concerning an outward fact of his in that he hauing freelie eaten before with the Gentills without respect of keeping the Law of Moyses wherein his deede was right good and did witnesse that he belieued the obseruances of the olde Lawe to bind noman yet at the comming of Iewes he did abstein and withdraw himselfe as perswaded that he should do more good to the Iewes if he forbare certain meats to winne his weake brethern Likewise S. Augustine writeth Neque enim negamus in hac sententia suisse iā Petrum Epist 19. ad Hieron in qua Paulus fuit Non itaque tunc eū quid in ea re verum esset docebat sed eius simulationem qua gentes iudaizare cogebantur arguebat Neither truly we do deny but that Peter was now in the same mind that Paul was Therefore he did not then teach Peter what was true in that cause but he reproued his dissembling whereby the Gentils were compelled to plaie the Iewes So that wheras S. Peter was no lesse perswaded then S. Paul that Circumcision ād the ceremonies of the Law must cease as S. Peter himself pronounced at Hierusalē And wheras S. Paul no lesse then hé Act. 15. had tolerated the obseruāces of the law for a time in circūciding Timotheus the question is not Act. 16. whether Circumcision ought to be abrogated nor yet whether it might be at al for a time permitted but whether it might be now any more winked at as hitherto it had bene For S. Paul beleuing the time to be now com that euery man ought to professe his faith openly concerning the abrogation of the old ceremonies did reproue S. Peters outward simulation as by his fact yelding lōger time to the Iewes then was profitable And herein surely S. Peter proued himself to be in deed the head of al the Apostles For whereas Christ had said he that is greater among you Luc. 22. let him be made as the yonger or lesser he in deed accomplisshed that precept and yelded vnto S. Pauls aduise as S. Cyprian S. Augustine and S. Gregorie doe testifie Nam nec Petrus Cyprian quem primum Dn̄s elegit in Epist ad Quintum supet quē aedificauit Ecclesiam suam cum secum Paulus de circumcisione disceptaret postmodum vendicauit sibi aliquid insolenter aut arroganter assumpsit vt diceret se primatū tenere obtemperari a nouellis posteris sibi potius debere nec de spexit Paulum quòd Ecclesiae prius persecutor fuisset sed consiliū veritatis admisit For Peter whom our Lord chose to be firste and vppon whom he did build his Church did not when Paul did striue with him about Circumcisiō afterward chalenge or attribute any thing to him self insolently or proudlie and saye that he had the primacy ād that he ought rather to be obeyed of Nouices and after commers neither did he despise Paul for that he was before a persecuter of the church but he did admit the counsail of truth By which wordes we perceiue that S. Cyprian did not iudge this reprouing of S. Peter to be any argument against his supremacie but only to be a witnesse of S. Peters humilitie and mekenesse But as it was in deed true that S. Paul had once persecuted the Church so was it also true that S. Peter held the Primacie although as S. Cyprian hath noted he did not then allege it S. Augustine likewise confesseth De baptis cont Donat lib. 2. cap. 1. In scripturis sanctis didicimus Apostolum Petrū in quo primatus Apostolorum tam excellenti gratia praeeminet aliter quam veritas postulabat de Circumcisione agere solitum à posteriore Apostolo Paulo esse correctum We haue learned in the holy scriptures that the Apostle Peter in whom the Primacie of the Apostles appeareth aboue the rest by so excellent and gratiouse fauour that he accustoming to doe otherwise concerning Circumcision then the truth did require was corrected of Paule who was admitted after him to be an Apostle S. Gregorie stablisheth S. Peters supremacy the more by the very same example of his humilitie in bearing gently the correction of his fellow Apostle Quatenus qui primus erat in Apostolatus culmine Gregorius in Ezech. Hom. 18. esset primus in humilitate That he who was chief in the top of th' Apostleship might also be chief in lowlinesse Ecce à minore suo reprehenditur reprehendi non dedignatur non ad memoriam reuocat quòd primus in Apostolatum vocatus sit Behold Peter is reproued of his inferiour and he disdaineth not to be
that S. Peter came to Rome notwithstanding some brainesick men woulde now persuade the contrarie but also the selfe same thing is witnessed by the expresse word of God when S. Peter saith in the end of his own epistle Petrus in epist 1. c. 5 salutat vos Ecclesia quae est in Babylone collecta The Church which is gathered together in Babylon saluteth you For there he called Rome Babylon Because as Babylon was named of the cōfusion of tongs and had in it whiles it was the seat of the monarchy al maner of nations and consequētly al maner of vices euen so had Rome being now the seat of the Romane Empire when S. Peter wrote thence al maner of tonges of nations and of vices in it And of this mind was that Auncient Father Papias Euseb histor lib. 2. c. 15. Graecae scholia and diuerse other holie writers concerning the same place of S. Peters epistle Neither did S. Peter only come to Rome and preache at Rome for a tyme but he also died there ād so died there that it appered euidently God would haue him die no where els For whereas according to the duty of the chiefe pastour he came to Rome chiefely to saue his flocke there from the raging furie of Simon Magus the capitaine of al heretiks who began to be worshipped for a God in Rome whē by his praier he had caused the deuils who caryed Simon Magus a long in the ayer Euseb li. 2 c. 13. 14. 15. Egesippus lib. 3. c. 2. to let him fall whereupon his death insued shortlie after the Emperour Nero who toke no small delight in the sorcerie of Simon Magus being sore offended with S. Peters dede sought straight waies his apprehension and destruction At that tyme the Christians being verie loth to be depriued of so good a pastour as S. Peter was Amhros post epist 32. lib. 5 with much intreating and many teares praied him to goe out of the way and to saue himselfe At whose requeste Saint Peter otherwise vnwilling therevnto beganne to take his iourney out of the citie But when he was come to the gate he seeth Christ comming toward him whome he adoring said Domine quo vadis Ambos episto lib. 5. post epi. 32 O Lord whether goest thow Christ said vnto him venio Romam iterum crucifigi I come to Rome to be crucified againe Peter vnderstoode thereby that Christ would suffer in him at Rome who suffereth in euery of his members not by paine of bodie but by compassion of pitie or rather by the greatenes of glorie which is gotten to him by the victoriouse death which his Saints are put vnto Vpon this vision Peter returned againe into the Citie of Rome and being taken he was putte to death vppon the crosse with his head downward so that Christ himselfe appointed Rome to be the place where S. Peter should rest This matter is witnessed Lib. 5. post epist. 32. Egesip lib. 3. cap. 2. not onelie by Saint Ambrose but also by Egesippus who was a very auncient writer euen straight vpon the tyme of the Apostles albeit his worcke being translated into Latin seemeth to haue certain names of Cities added by him who did translate it about the tyme of S. Ambrose and of Ruffinus Neither is it to be douted but S. Luke would haue writen the same appearing of Christ vnto S. Peter as wel as he wrote the appearing of Christ vnto S. Paule if he had gon so farre forward in his storie of the Acts of the Apostles Actor 9. But seing he did not continue his narration vntill the death of S. Peter and of Saint Paule we must needes credit those faithfull auncient witnesses who reporte the same By which historie we learne that Christe who might easilie haue graunted the the glory of Martyrdom to his Apostle in any other place had a special regard that both hee Vvhy S. Peter shuld die in Rome and his fellow Apostle S. Paul might die in Rome Whereof I find diuerse causes alleaged in the Fathers Augustini de sanctis serm 27. One is for the glory of the Apostles ne alteri Roma deesset that Rome might not lacke to either of them or that they might not lacke the glory of the chiefe Citie Rome concerning the place of their Martyrdom An other is for the destruction of superstition Augustin ibidem Vt vbi caput superstitionis erat illic caput quiesceret sanctitatis Et vbi gentiliū principes habitabant illic Ecclesiarum morerentur That where the head of superstition was there might be the head of holines And where the Princes of the Gentils dwelt there the Princes of the Church might die The third cause is for the honour of the west Church Ibidem Cum Dominus orientis regionem propria illustra uerit passione occidentis plagam ne quid minus esset vice sui Apostolorum sanguine illuminare dignatus est Et licet illius passio nobis sufficiat ad salutem tamen etiam horum Martyrium nobis contulit ad exemplū Whereas our Lord hath made the East part lightsom with his owne passion he voutsafed in his steed that it might be no lesse to geue light vnto the west quarters by the bloud of his Apostles And albeit our Lords passion suffiseth vs for saluation yet their Martyrdome also hath done vs good for example The fourth cause is Leo serm 1. in natali Petri Pauli for the spreading of the Gospel Vt lux veritatis quae in omnium gentium reuelabatur salutem efficacius se ab ipso capite per totum mundi corpus effunderet That the light of the truthe which was reuealed for the saluation of al nations might spread it self more effectuouslie frō the very head through out the whole bodie Now forasmuch as God vsed the Citie of Rome as a most special meane wherby to enlarge and spread his faith through al the world which obeied that one citie it came also to passe that the same citie per sacrā B. Petri sedē caput orbis affecta Leo ibidē latius praesideret religione diuina quà m dominatione terrena Being made the head of the worlde through the holy See of S. Peter shuld rule more largely by Gods religion then by earthly dominion Lib. 6. epist 37. Petrus enī saith S. Gregorie subli mauit sedē in qua etiā quiescere praesentē vitā finire dignatus est For Peter hath lifted vp a high the See wherin he also voutsafed to reast and to end this present life Marke that the glory and prerogatiue of the Romaine Church is most speciallye imputed to S. Peter For although two Apostles died in one Citie at one time for one truthe of Christes Gospel yet they left not two Chaiers or successions there Iren. lib. 3 cap. 3. August ep 162. 165. Neither is the Bisshop of Rome called the successour of
S. Paul or said to sit in his chair but onely in the Chaire of Peter as the whole practise of the Church and all the writings of the Fathers doe witnesse Whereby we are infourmed that Rome is the place chosen by Christ him selfe where S. Peters Chaire shoulde reast Ambros lib. 5. post ep 32. In Pontificali For S. Peter retourninge to Rome vppon the former vision didde before his death consecrate S. Clement Bisshoppe cui Cathedram saieth Damasus vel Ecclesiam omnem commisit dicens To whome he committed also his chaire or al the Churche sayinge Sicut mihi gubernandi tradita est à Domino meo Iesu Christo potestas ligandi soluendique ita ego tibi committo c. As the power of gouerning of binding and loosing is committed to mée of my Lord Iesus Christ euen so I commit to thée also that thou maist ordein others by whom diuerse causes maie be disposed and such acts as be not meet for the Church may be repelled and thou must not be found geuen to the cares of this world but onely endeuour to geue most leisure to prayer and to preaching vnto the people Clemens in epist 1. The like report S. Clement himselfe maketh of this commission whiche S. Peter gaue to him whose Epistle Ruffinus turned into Latine aboue eleuen hundred yeres past Ruffinus in Praefatione Recognit and in the preface whiche he maketh to the Recognitions of S. Clement he so wel declareth that Epistle of S. Clement to haue bene of ful credit in his time and before that he answereth such obiections as might seme to make against that which is said in it Tertullian also coÌ„fesseth De praescript aduersus haeret that the Church of Rome doth shew euidence that S. Clement was ordeined of Peter And S. Hierom namely saith In Catalogo Plerique LatinoruÌ„ secunduÌ„ post PetruÌ„ ApostoluÌ„ putant fuisse ClemeÌ„tem The most part of the Latins think Clement to haue ben second or next after Peter the Apostle And in an other place he saith Aduersus Iouin Clemens successor Apostoli Petri scribit epistolas Clemens the successour of Peter the Apostle writeth Epistles Leo the second Marianus Scotus and diuers other are of the same iudgement Now wheras Linus and Cletus by the life time of S. Peter as Damasus and Ruffinus do witnesse did administer many things belonging to the Bisshoprike as being in the exterior matters coadiutours of S. Peter the Grecians who were farther absent Vbi supra and were lesse expert in the Romaine affaires supposed Linus to haue bene chosen next after S. Peter Whereas Clement was onely chosen but Clement as other think yelded to Linus for a time as to his elder Howsoeuer that be whether Linus or Clement practised that high autoritie once S. Peters Chaire was setled at Rome not without the special prouidence of Christ In so much that Athanasius writeth that S. Peter and Paule audieruÌ„t In Apologia de fuga sua oportere se Romae Martyrium subire heard that they must suffer martyrdom at Rome And what so euer hearing he meaneth surely he meaneth it of a hearing which came from God either by their owne vision or by some prophetical reuelation such as both they did wel beleue and we also ought to credite But to come neare to our present purpose S. Irenaeus speaking of the successions of Bisshoppes in those Churches whiche the Apostles had first instituted calleth the Church of Rome Maximam antiquissimam Lib. 3. aduersus hereses c. 3. omnibus cognitam à gloriosissimis duobus Apostolis Petro Paulo fundatam constitutam The greatest Churche and most aunciente and knowen to all menne being planted and setteled by twoo moste gloriouse Apostles Peter and Paule Ibidem Ad hanc Ecclesiam propter potentiorem principalitatem necesse est omnem conuenire Ecclesiam hoc est eos qui sunt vndique fideles To this Church for the mightier principalitie or authoritie of gouernement euery Churche that is to saie the faithful which are round about must needes come or agree Whereas then euerie Churche hath a certaine principalitie or authoritie of gouernemente committed to it by Christe throughe whiche principalitie it maie preache the faith Tit. 3. ouercom synnes and heresies and excommunicat open synners and hereticks The Church of Rome being founded and planted by the most gloriouse Apostles hath potentiorem principalitatem a mightier principalitie then any other Church For it is a wilfull ignorance whereas Ireneus speaketh only of the successours and traditions of faithfull Churches In his Reply 244. for M. Iewel to say as he hath don that the mightier principalty here mentioned is meant of the Ciuil DominioÌ„ and of the Roman Empire as though Ireneus had spoken any syllable in that place of the Roman Empire He spake of the Churches which the Apostles had founded and instituted The Churche of Rome is the greatest among which he calleth the Church of Rome maximaÌ„ the graetest Why so but because it was founded of the greatest Apostle aÌ„d how fouÌ„ded For if S. Peter had only made a bishop thereof as he did of diuerse other Churches surely therby it had not ben greater then the other But because he being the graetest of th' Apostles as a Hist lib. 2. cap. 14. Eusebiê° aÌ„d S. b In epist ad Galat. cap. 2. HieroÌ„ speake left in Rome a Successour in his own primacy that is to say a rock aÌ„d a chief shepherd as great as hiÌ„self had beÌ„ therfore it was the greatest Church in the worlde And thence cometh the priÌ„pality wherof this auÌ„cieÌ„t father speaketh Rome is the most auncient Churche S. Ireneus calleth the same Churche of Rome aÌ„tiquissimaÌ„ the most auÌ„cient Church how so was not IerusaleÌ„ and Antioche before it Yeas verily in time of hauiÌ„g a bishop aÌ„d of ê“fessing the faith but not in the ê‘petual honor aÌ„d resideÌ„ce of the chief bishop For Peter was the first aÌ„d chief bishop of the new testameÌ„t In him was the roote the fountain the head of al bishoply power De simplicitate praelatorum aÌ„d froÌ„ hiÌ„ as S Cyprian witnesseth priestly vnity toke his beginning touching the ministery of the new testament and for that cause his successors being reckoned as in deede they are one with him concerning his office of feeding Christes sheepe cause the Church of Rome stil to be the most auncient and the mother Church of the Romaine circuit Metropolis ad Solitariam vitam agent as also Athanasius doth name it For this cause the mightier principalitie is in the Church of Rome And for as much as the same succession of Peter is now at Rome which was in the tyme of Ireneus the same Church is still the greatest and the most auncient Church wherunto all other faithful meÌ„ ought to resort by reson of the mightier principality or preemineÌ„ce therof S.
Apostoke Priesthood or Bisshoplie power is made greater by the chiefe Castell or Fortresse of Religion then by the Throne of Imperiall power In anuiuersa assumpt serm 2. Leo the Greate hauing saied that in Saint Peters Seat his own power liueth his authoritie excelleth in an other place sheweth himselfe to haue bene the successour of S. Peter and therefore to be the president of the Churche For thus he writeth to Iulianus the Bisshop epist 30. Memor sum me sub illius nomine Ecclesiae praesidere cuius à Domino Iesu Christo est glorificata confessio cuius fides omnes haereses destruit I am mindfull that I am Praesident of the Churche vnder his name Matth. 16 whose confession was made gloriouse of our Lorde Iesus Christe in epist 82. 87. and whose faith destroieth al heresies It were infinite to bring all that Leo saith in this behalfe Eulogius the Patriarche of Alexandria wrote to S. Gregorie after this sense Lib. 6. ep 37. as S. Gregory himself doth report it Suauissima mihi sanctitas vestra multa in epistolis suis de sancti Petri Apostolorum principis Cathedra locuta est dicens quòd ipse in ea nunc vsque in suis successoribus sedeat Your most swete Holinesse hath said manie things in his letters concerning the chair of S. Peter the prince of the Apostles saying that S. Peter himself sitteth it it euen til this present tyme in his successours And S. Gregory with great humility acknowlegeth it to be true affirming in an other place that Lib. 11. Ep. 54. the Apostolike See is head of all Churches For the honour of our country I wil not omit the testimony of S. Bede who in a sermon made vpon the Feast of a certain Abbate of England named Benedictus In Natali Benedicti inter homilias hyemales de Sanctis affirmeth him to haue gon to Rome vt ibi potius perfectā viuendi formam sumeret vbi per summos Christi Apostolos totius Ecclesiae caput eminet eximium That he might there rather take the perfit example of liuing where the excellēt head of the whole Churche doth appere aboue the reast through the highest Apostles of Christ Whereas much more may be alleaged yet these few testimonies may suffise to proue that the bishop of Rome is the Successour of S. Peter in his most principal and chiefe pastoral office And surely if we may be deceaued in any point of the faith which is so wel groūded in Gods word so vniformly cōfessed by the holy Fathers and so notoriously practised in the Catholike Churche as the Supremacy of S. Peter and of his successours in the See of Rome is I can not deuise when a man may be sure of any article of his faith But if there be a meane whereby a man may be sure of his belefe surely that meane whatsoeuer it be shall wel appeare to be found in the prouf of the supremacy of S. Peter and of his successours That the good Christian Emperours and Princes did neuer thinke them selues to be the Suprem Heads of the Churh in Spiritual causes but gaue that honour to Bisshops and Priests and most speciallie to the See of Rome for S. Peters sake as wel before as after the time of Phocas The XVI chap. An D. 246 PHilippus who was the first Christian Emperour did so litle think him selfe to haue bene the Heade of the Bisshoppes in Spirituall causes throughout his Dominion that wheras on Easter daie he would haue bene at the Vigils and holy watches and would haue communicated of the holy Mysteries the Bisshope of the place would not lette him doe it Nisi consiteretur peccata sua except he hadde first confessed his sinnes and stood amōg them that did penance and so by penance had washed awaie the faults which were reported of him Ferunt igitur libenter eum saith Eusebius quod à sacerdote imperatum fuerat suscepisse eccles histor lib. 6. c. 25. apud Ruffinum diuinum sibi inesse metum fidem religionis plenissimam rebus atque operibus comprobando They saie therefore that he toke gladly that whiche was inioyned to him of the Priest Imperatū making faith by the things and workes that the feare of God and most full persuasion of Religion was in him Is he chief in al causes who in some must obey the Priest the priest vvas aboue the Emperor in Ecclesiastical causes Or can he that is supreme gouernour in all things and causes Ecclesiastical haue an other aboue him in puttng him back from the mysteries and in enioyning him publik penaunce and in constreining him to confesse his sinnes Or is the comming to the Mysteries no cause Ecclesiastical or Spiritual Or is not the Bisshoppe or Priest who in this cause gouerneth the Emperour the Superiour and gouernour of the Emperour in the same cause Or is it not a kind of gouerning to command him to stand back to threaten him if he repine to punish him if he be stubborne Yea how to punish him to come to him in a rod as S. Paule speaketh that is to say 1. Cor. 4. in power and authoritie to beate or to correct And is not he a gouernour who may iustly beate the child If then in prescribing confessiō satisfaction and abstinence from communion the priest be the gouernour of the king I ask whether al other Ecclesiastical causes be greater or lesse then these are Note an infallible argument against your Antichristian supremacy The one parte of the Dilēma M. Nowel If other Ecclesiasticall causes be greater then these were surely the Emperour or king who is gouerned by a priest in the lesser Ecclesiasticall causes and therefore can not be supreme head in them is much more to be gouerned by a priest in the greater causes of the same kind And therefore he is much lesse supreme head in them For if when one thing standeth aboue an other I am to low to reache the lower much more I am to low to reache a higher then the other was But if other Ecclesiastical causes be lesser then the suspending from communion the other part or the inioyning of publike penance then the bishop or priest who is the gouernour of the Emperour or King in the greatest Ecclesiastical causes is much more his gouernour in the lesser Ecclesiasticall causes Because the lesser are of the same order kind and kinred whereof the greater are As therefore he that is supreme head in the greatest temporall causes as in iudging ouer life and death A similitude is much more supreme head in the lesser temporall causes as in iudging ouer lands or goods and as he that is not of sufficient authority to be supreme ruler in sitting iudge vppon mens lands or goods can much lesse sitte iudge ouer their liues by anie his former authoritie euen so neither the King who can gouern in the lesser causes
can by his Kingly power iudge in the greater nor the priest who is the Kings superiour in the lesser can possibly but much more be his superiour in the greater The remouing of the obiection Or haue we diuerse Kinds of Ecclesiastical and of spiritual causes Be there neuer so manie the Act of parliament geueth the highest and the supreme gouernment of them all In al causes vnto the King And yet the King lacketh not onelie practise experience or cunning but also he lacketh spirituall and Ecclesiasticall power to heare confessions to absolue men from their synnes to inioyne penance to consecrate the Sacrament of the altar to Ordre bishops and priestes by the Imposition of hādes or to excommunicate open synners Here Master Iewel wolde say that he neuer meant the prince should be supreme gouernour either in administring or in frequenting or in directing others to frequent the holy mysteries or in any like sacramental functions Why then doth he and his fellowes sweare men The othe of the supremacy generally to acknowledge the secular Christian prince Supreme gouernour in all things and causes Why doth he not rather declame and speake with all his force against that most impiouse and blasphemouse othe Yea so impiouse that those Protestants who most earnestly pressed the setting foorth therof dare not now iustifie the foorm of it Shall men in a Christian realme be sworen vpon the holy Euangelistes to keepe beleue or acknowledge that which noman at all no not they who procured it dare mainteine See good Countrie men see the discretiō of your parlaments in matters of Religion A men aliue abhorre from that act which the Laity made and enacted as a form so warely drawen wherevnto men might commit their euerlasting saluation or damnation Mark I say that M. Nowel M. Horn M. Iewel dare not warrant the King to be suprem gouernour in al Ecclesiastical causes But rather they confesse that a Bisshop or Priest may and ought to gouerne the King concerning his comming to the Mysteries and in such like matters This much being said cōcerning Philippus the first Christian Emperour who obeyed but gouerned not the Bisshop in Ecclesiastical matters let vs now goe forward An. Dom. 324. Constantinus the Great perceiuing the Bisshops which came to the Synod at Nice to haue many quarels and sutes among them selues appoynted a day wherein euery man should offer his complaint in writing and when he had takē al their libels without disclosing the contents of them Ruffinus lib. 10. Eccles histor cap. 2. he said vnto the bishops Deus vos constituit Sacerdotes potestatē vobis dedit de nobis quoque iudicandi ideo nos a vobis rectè iudicamur vos autē nō potestis ab hominibus iudicari propter quod Dei solius inter vos expectate iudicium God hath made you priests or Sacrificers and hath geuen you power to iudge of vs also And therefore we are rightly iudged of you But yee can not be iudged of men For which cause expect yee or tary for the iudgemēt of God alone among you This discourse of Constantine conteineth three thinges worthie to be noted First he saith the bishoppes are Sacerdotes Priestes or men that haue publik authority to make externall sacrifice vnto God for the whole Heb. 5. peples synnes Secondly he saieth that they haue power to iudge euen of the Emperour himself And this their power of iudging dependeth of their power of priesthod For the highest power may iudge the lower But no power can be higher then the power of a priest because he is the minister of God in that office which most directly toucheth Gods honour and seruice Malac. 1. Wherupon S. Augustin hauing said what was Moyses if he were not a priest In Psal 98 geueth this reason of his words Nūquid maior Sacerdote esse poterat Whether could he be greater then a priest as who should say seing Moyses was the greatest officer amōg the Israelits and yet he could not be greater then a priest it must nedes be that he was a priest The priestes then of God being the greatest officers in earth haue power to iudge euen of an Emperour if any be in their parishes or Dioceses Thirdly of these former points Cōstātine deduceth an other conclusion that priestes can not be iudged of mē How then can they be iudged of the Emperour Neither doth it skill that Constantine seemeth to haue iudged certaine priests or Ecclesiastical causes when the Donatists appealed vnto hī for he did it as S. Augustine saieth à sanctis antistitibus postea veniam petiturus In epistol 162. as one that would afterward aske leaue or pardon of the holy bisshops Who asketh leaue or pardon for that which he may doe by his owne power He did it then through the importunat sute of heretickes for the peace of the Church otherwise detesting them that demaunded his iudgement after that the bishoppes had iudged Optat. li 2 August in epist 162. and finding great fault therewith himself as Optatus and S. Augustine also doe witnesse But take away importunity of heretikes and the commission leaue or pardon of the right bishoppes who may for diuerse respectes either committe certain Ecclesiasticall causes to lay mē or winck for a tyme at such iudgemēts take away I say heresie and permission and ordinarily it is against the law of God that any secular Prince who needeth the office of a priest for his reconciliation vnto God should sitte iudge vpon him in causes of the Churche 2. Cor. 5. at whose handes he must receaue the Sacramentes of the Churche and by whose ministery his soule must be purged Now if one priest doe iudge an other that is Gods iudgement Deut. 17. Num. 3 and not the iudgement of men For God hath sette one priest ouer an other as the high priestes was aboue the Leuites in Moyses lawe and as the Apostles wereof a higher degree then the seuenty Disciples or then the seuen Deacons These woordes then of Constantine vos non potestis ab hominibus iudicari Ruffin li. 1. cap. 2. yee ô priestes of God can not be iudged of men are thus meant the order of priesthood is such as is not subiect to anie secular or earthly iurisdiction And seing all the power of iudgement which euen Christian Emperours or Kinges haue by their own state is earthly and secular it wil follow that no King or Emperour can by his owne power iudge a priest in priestlie causes and in Ecclesiasticall matters That all the power of Emperours though they be Christians is secular Constantine himself pronounceth saying to the Donatists as Optatus recordeth Petitis á me in seculo iudicium De schism Donatist lib. 1. cùm ego ipse Christi iudiciū expectem Yee aske of me iudgement in the world whereas I my self looke for Christes iudgement There are then two iudgements one in the world an other
euÌ„deÌ„ statim verum Christi vicariuÌ„ esse omnes credereÌ„t That froÌ„ thence forward whom the Clergy people and the Roman armie should chose to be bishop all men should straight beleue him to be the true vicare of Christ The true VicareÌ„ of Christ He saith not the Vicare of Phocas or the Lieutenant of the Emperor but the Vicar and LieutenaÌ„t of Christ It was then the publicke faith not onlie in the Latine but also in the Greeke church that who so was duely chosen Bisshop of Rome was Christes own Vicare An. Dom. 749. Yf the whole nobilitie and people of Fraunce had not beleued the Pope of Rome to be of such authorie for what purpose would they haue sent to Rome to know the mind of Pope Zacharias who should be King of Fraunce whether Chilpericus Paenè nullius potestatis who hadde the bare name thereof without exercising any kingly power in maner or the greate Stuard Maior domus who exercised the publik office and power of the King without the name In Chron. The Pope answered as Ado testifieth Regem potius illum debere vocari qui rempublicam regeret That he rather should be called the King who ruled the common weal. VpoÌ„ which answere Pipinus was anointed King autoritate Apostolica FraÌ„ corum electione saith Sigebertus by the Apostolike authoritie In Chron. An. Dom. 750. and by the election of the Frenche men Neither may this so great credite whiche the whole people and Nobilitie of France reposed in the See Apostolike be righly imputed to the sentence of Phocas who before that had declared the See of Rome to be head of al Churches For euen after this election of King Pipinus the first Emperour of the French men or rather of the Germans for the French men came out of Germanie Carolus Magnus protesting his reuerence to the See Apostolike sheweth the cause why he honoureth it to be the Chaire of S. Peter and not the iudgement of Phocas His wordes are these In memoriam beati Petri Apostoli honoremus sanctam Romanam ecclesiaÌ„ ApostolicaÌ„ sedeÌ„ An. Dom. 806. 19. distiÌ„ct vt quae nobis sacerdotalis mater est dignitatis ecclesiasticae esse debeat magistra rationis Quare seruaÌ„da est cuÌ„ mansuetudine humilitas et licet vix fereÌ„duÌ„ ab illa sancta sede imponatur iugum tamen feramê° pia deuotione toleremus Let vs honor the holy Church of Rome and the See Apostolike for the remeÌ„brance of blessed Peter the Apostle The see of Rome is the mother of priestly Vvorship that as the same See is to vs the mother of priestlie dignitie so it may be the teacher of the Ecclesiasticall trade Wherefore humility is to be kept with meekenes And although a yoke be putte vppon vs from the same holy See which is scant to be born yet lette vs beare and suffer it with godly deuotion Thus we see that Carolus honoured the See of Rome not for Phocas but for S. Peters sake Ludouicus who for his singular vertue and godlines was surnamed Pius hauing ben triatorouslie ordered by Adalgisus the Duke of Beneuentum Regino in Chron. An. 872. who went about to kill him in his palaice and being afterward forced to sweare that he wold not reuenge that iniury was so far from taking himselfe to be the supreme head ouer the Bisshop of Rome that rather he was content to take absolution from his oth of Iohn the pope Authoritate Dei Sancti Petri by the authority not of Phocas but of God and of Saint Peter I woulde goe forward to shew at large the obedience of all good Emperours and Kings to the See Apostolik euen till this day but that it shoulde be accompted a superfluouse labour sith as I suppose no man doth doubt of it And verilie concerning our own countrie as aboue fourtene hundred yeres past An. D. 188 Lucius the first Christian King of the Britans did send to Eleutherius the Bisshop of Rome to receaue from thence by his authority the ordinary meane of administring the Sacraments for him and his realm eueÌ„ so Ethelbert the first Christian King of the English Saxons toke his faith and the gouernment of the Church from the See of Rome S. Gregorie being theÌ„ Pope by our Apostle S. Augustine An. D. 630 And the good King Osui of NorthumberluÌ„d Bedae lib. histo Angli 3. c. 29 and Ecbert the King of Kent vnderstaÌ„ding that the RomaÌ„ Church esset catholica Apostolica Ecclesia was the Catholik and the Apostolike Church sent Wichardus with the consent of al the faithfull of England to Rome that hauing ther takeÌ„ the degré of an Archbishop he might ordein bisshops to all the Catholike Churches through Britannie From that day forward it is euident by al our Chronicles which at the least were made before that schism and heresie began that as euery King not only of EnglaÌ„d but of all Christian CouÌ„tries was best aÌ„d most geueÌ„ to godlines and to vertue so was he most obedient and frindful to the bishop of Rome And coÌ„trariewise as euery of them was most licentious most geuen to extorsion to tyrannie or to robling of Churches so was he most disobedient to the See of Rome So that as all the heathen Emperours froÌ„ Nero to the Renegat Iulianus did alwaies persecute the Apostolike See of Rome and as afterward al the heretical Emperours did the same as wel those of CoÌ„stantinople as of the West so contrarywise all the good Constantines the Theodosians the MartiaÌ„s Carolus Ludouicus Otho and their good successours did so little thiÌ„ck themselues the supream heads ouer the bishops of Rome and of the other Christians in spiritual causes that contrarie wise they obeied them as their chiefe pastours and as the Vicars of Christ aÌ„d the successours of S. Peter And that they did not only being a part euery man in his own Realm but also when that most famouse battell against the Turkes and Saracens was by the inspiration of the holy Ghost begun at one tyme by the Spaniards Sigebertus in Chron. Anno Do. 1096. Gascons Britans Normans English Scotish and Frenchmen by the Burgundions Almains Lumbards and Italians when diuerse Dukes as Godfrid of Lorrain and Baiamund of Apulia wheÌ„ diuerse Erles as Baldwin of MoÌ„s one Robert of Flanders and an other of Normandy StepheÌ„ of Blese and Raimund when Hugh the brother of Philip the King of Fraunce toke that most holy warfare in hand when I say they were stirred vppe with one spirit and hart to recouer the holy land did not they shew as wel their own belief as the vniuersal faith of al their countries and nations in that they had Hamarus the bishop of Podium sette ouer them Apostolica authoritate by the Apostolike authoritie And how marueilouse successe of victory had they conquering as well Antioche as Hierusalem It can be vnknowen to no man who readeth