you haue heard And in the same Book entituled Against all profane Innouations he doth throughout condemne all your new Articles of the now Romane Church by one infallible and inuiolable Rule which is this that No Article as of Faith should be admitted into the Church which was not taught and professed in the dayes of the Apostles Your last Father for due Antiquity is Cassidore who because he saith no more than hath bene formerly said we forbeare to answer more than hath bene answered that from Particular Answers we may now speedily addresse our selues to the more Generall Our Generall Discouery of the Falshood and Vanity of the former Obiections out of the Ancient Fathers SECT 10. DIstingue tempora is a necessary Aphorisme and Caution especially in historicall Obseruations Right glorious things are spoken of thee O City of God saith Dauid of Ierusalem but when when the Inhabitants professed the true worship of God But assoone as they reuolted from God then Bethel became Bethauen and the Virgin Sion an Adulterous whore So say wee Right admirable commendations haue bene often Anciently attributed to the Church and Bishops of Rome for their Integritie of life Constancie in the Faith Care and Conscience for the preseruation of all Churches in the Christian profession But not to distinguish in both these the differences of Times by Was from Is were to confound Chastity with Adultery God with Belial Christ with Antichrist Apply we this to the point in Question Take vnto you this Position When the Fathers say that the Church of Rome cannot erre the word Cannot is not to be taken absolutely and simply How like you this Thesis Do you approue of it Then do all your proofes from Testimonies of Ancient Fathers concerning the power dignity and integrity of the Ancient Church of Rome vanish with their times because the Church of Rome is long since farre degenerated from her first integrity But do you not allow it why it is the Confession of Bellarmine the greatest Champion that your Church hath had in these later Ages He onely addeth to the Thesis this Caution So long as the Apostolicall Sea continueth at Rome he should haue said with vs according to the Generall Doctrine of the Fathers So long as the ancient and sincere Faith and diuine worship is preserued at Rome for it is not Sedes but Fides that defineth a Church And for your further knowledge that the Commendations giuen vnto Rome and other Churches in the dayes of Antiquity were not absolutly and simply vnderstood call but to mind how often Tertullian Irenaeus Augustine Optatus and other Fathers for the proofe of Orthodox Doctrines did instance in the Churches of Corinth Thessaly Antioch Asia and other Churches as well as in Rome To giue you one Example for all in the last of Asia because it commeth first to hand it is that which you receiued but euen now out of Optatus who speaking of the Churches of Asia Whosoeuer saith he is without these Churches namely concerning the Faith professed is an Alien and without Saluation This was then as iustly said of Asia as now it cannot be said thereof and what one Encomium of Presidence onely that of Order excepted or Iudgment or Sanctity hath bene euer exhibited to Ancient Popes by any Excellency of Titles which as you haue heard by iust Parallells haue not bene communicated vnto Athanasius Basil Augustine and some other Fathers Yet are we not contented with this Answer although otherwise most true but add for clearer Demonstration of this Truth and auerre that the glorious Phrases which were anciently ascribed to the Church of Rome and her Bishops were not giuen as absolutely and simply belonging to her no not in those very times of Antiquity when they were more proper vnto her For Cyprian that said in his Epistle to Pope Cornelius that No perfidiousnesse could haue accesse to Rome meant not that this his Commendation should continue in Succession with their Popes who himselfe in his Epistle to Pope Stephen one who a yeare after the death of Cornelius succeeded in the same Popedome did vehemently reproue yea and reproach him for admitting the very same kind of Perfidiousnesse before mentioned euen by his allowing of False and perfidious Excommunicates and Incorrigible persons Appealing to his See And Hierom who accompted euery one Prophane and execrable that did not Communicate with Pope Damasus would not haue so farre honoured Pope Liberius whom hee himselfe brandeth with a blacke marke of Subscribing to Arian Heresie Lastly Saint Augustine that magnified Rome in this style saying The Principality of the Romane Chaire did alwaies flourish extended not this to an Absolute Monarchy who himselfe was one of them that in the Councell of Africke clipped the wings thereof by decreeing that Transmarine Appeales should not be made meaning to Rome The speed we make to new matter will not suffer vs to multiply Instances from other former Examples I. CHALLENGE AS often therefore as you haue obiected vnto vs the Encomiasticall speaches of Ancient Fathers we may challenge you to obserue the difference betweene your Obiections and our Retorsions You vrge onely the Phrase and we the Reason of the speach Againe you haue obtruded the sound of Words of the Fathers we haue opposed their euident Acts and Deeds the best Interpreters of their sayings From their Acts therefore we take confidence to argue that to omit the great and weightier matters if S. Polycarpus would not yeeld to the Church and Pope of Rome no not so much as in a Feast-day Saint Augustine not so much as in a Fast Saint Basil not so much as in exception against onely the word Hypostasis Saint Ambrose not so much as in a Ceremony of Washing of feet which are you will thinke in respect but matters of Mint annise and cummin how shall not our Opposition stand iustifiable who refuse Vnion and Subiection vnto her for the great matter of the Law word of God If vilification of the Sufficiency of his written Testaments if Mutilation of a true Sacrament and which is worse the Addition of fiue false ones if babling in vnknowne prayer if forging of new Faiths and not to speake of the daily tyrannie vpon mens Consciences by her strange 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or New Constitutions if in some respects as absurd as Heathenish Idolatrie may seeme vnto you iust cause of exception against her wherein our Profession is iustified from point to point by the same Fathers So damnable is your now Romane Article of Absolute Necessity of Vnion and Subiection vnto the Church and Bishop of Rome as without which there is no Saluation by which together with your Aduersaries you damne those whom euery where you assume to haue bene your owne Ancient Fathers on earth and now acknowledge them Saints in heauen II. CHALLENGE A Second Consideration which is to be had in this point is to obserue the list
In which difference the Paynime may seeme to haue the aduantage Is there therefore more safetie in the Conuersation of the Infidell because there is lesse truth in his exception against the Christian A mad man thinketh that all other men are beasts a sober man confesseth that mad man to be a man Hence then by Romish sophistrie the mad man must bee iudged to be in the better Case But how farre and why do Protestants conceiue hope of Saluation in Some dying in the Church of Rome both these points are very considerable They say that Some for their beliefe in Christ although otherwise intangled in Antichristian blindnesse yet by reason of Inuincible ignorance being both without Affectation of ignorance and voide of the meanes of receiuing the light of Truth may neuerthelesse be in the state of life But as â—or Them that may heare the preaching of the word for their Conuersion and will not vpon all such in the iudgement of Protestants is the saying of our Sauiour Christ spoken of the Iewes verified If I had not come and spoken vnto them they should not haue had sinne that is their Damnation is now more iust Hence it is that Protestants teach that of two Papists professing the same Romish doctrine the one in Spaine the other in England the Spanish may be saued and the English damned The reason is plaine the first desired light of iudgement in necessary doctrines the other may possibly see the light but loueth the darkenesse of errour and superstition more than the light of Truth The error of the first being purae negationis or incapacitie to come to the knowledge of the Truth the error of the other being prauae dispositionis through the peruersenesse of their will If you demand why Protestants haue so charitable an opinion of some Romanists you are to vnderstand that it is in regard of that without which they cannot be saued that they died in the beliefe of this Protestant Article of Faith which is To be iustified by remission of all their sinnes through the satisfactorie righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by Faith and not by the legall iustice of Perfection of inherent righteousnesse in themselues as your Councell of Trent hath decreed And this opinion we finde verified in the experience of many Papists who howsoeuer in their life time they professe and magnifie your doctrine of Perfection of workes yet on their death-bed as soone as the least glimpse of the Maiesty of Gods Tribunall is reuealed to their consciences and the bookes of their Consciences begin to be vnclasped and so layd open that they cannot but reade their sinnes which in their life time they held as Venial to be written in capitall letters and to bee Deadly then they take Sanctuary in the wounds of Christ from whence flyeth the Ocean of all Expiatorie merit and satisfaction by which it is impossible but euery faithfull Penitent should receiue life Euen as did of late Cardinall Bellarmine who writing his owne last Will and Testament casteth the anchor of his hope vpon the same Rocke which we do saying I pray God to receiue me into the number of his Elect not as weighing my merits but as pardoning my offences So iust cause haue you to thanke God that the doctrine of Protestants concerning Iustification hath brought Some of you as it did your Ecchius and others to their Iustifying Faith and by it to Saluation Neither yet do Protestants a point to be obserued In this their former Grant yeeld more safety to the Members of the Church of Rome in such a Case than they do to whatsoeuer Heretikes whose beliefe doth not vndermine the Fundamentall Doctrine of Faith Will you see in a Similitude what we conceiue of your Church Of many men that are in a Pest-house infected with the Plague some happily may be saued and yet it were but a damnable Presumption for sound men to runne head-long into the Pest-house thereby as much as in them lyeth making themselues guilty of their owne deaths And whether your Romane Articles of a New Faith whether Idolatrie whether professed Obstinacie in errors whether Tyrannie ouer both bodies and soules of men and whether necessarie Periurie in swearing to your foresaid false Articles be plaguy diseases or no iudge you THESIS VI. Your common Obiection What is then become of the soules of our fore-Fathers more iustifieth the Protestants Separation from Papists than it can the Separation of Papists from Protestants SECT 28. HOnour and loue which man naturally oweth to his Parents and Progenitors is felt in euery mans heart as a forcible motiue to draw on a conceite in the Child both of their godlinesse and also of their after-blessednesse and consequently to inforce an inclination to adhere to their Religion whatsoeuer it was Which we in our experience find in your Disciples to be the greatest barre and hinderance vnto vs for their Conuersion Which Motiue if it be alone is onely preualent in them who consult onely with flesh and bloud yea verily and this your Iesuites will not denie who tell vs from their experience among the Indian Pagans that the like conceit of the soules of their fore-fathers was the greatest reason of their obstinacie in Paganisme Whereas if the matter be rightly discerned the whole interest that man hath in his naturall Parents is bodily onely for man's Soule is not by Traduction in which respect the Apostle setteth a plaine Antithesis betweene our naturall Fathers whom he calleth the Fathers of our flesh and God whom he nameth The Father of Spirits saying We haue had fathers of our flesh which corrected vs and we gaue them Reuerence shall we not much rather be in subiection vnto the Father of Spirits and liue Howsoeuer it be in me as a man surely as I am a Christian man this is not by generation naturall but by spirituall Regenaration and Faith is a gift of this Spirit Therefore do the Fathers of our flesh after our naturall birth send vs to the Priest to be baptized and to receiue a spirituall birth wherein we are not baptized in the name of our Parents nor do we vow to professe the faith of our naturall Progenitors but in the name and to the profession of Christ for The iust shall liue by his owne Faith Not but that we ought to haue a reuerend estimation of the state of our Ancestors to imitate them in faith and godlinesse as it is written Be you Imitators of them who in faith and puritie obtained the promised inheritance Yet not simply Imitators neither but with a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Quatenus Be ye followers of me as I am of Christ. Let vs now descend from the Thesis to our Hypothesis First to answer your Obiection against Protestants which standeth thus If your Religion be the Truth what then is become thinke you of all our and your Ancestors who for many ages liued in that which you
vnto Their Chiefe meaning the Pope of Rome and addeth saying I hate the Pride of That Church meaning the Church of Rome Marke wee pray you Their Chiefe and That Church are these notes of his Subiection to the Pope or Church of Rome Nay are they not direct demonstrations of his no Subiection or Subordination to either of both can you conceiue any to bee a true and loyall Subiect who writing to others concerning his owne King and Soueraigne and his Soueraignty should say I writ to their King and I hate the pride of that Kingdome Yet you heare what Saint Basil writ concerning the Pope and his Church and notwithstanding was he â—hen a reall Member of the Catholike Church Nor is this all but he hath furthermore imputed besides the vice of Pride Ignorance vnto them Notwithstanding all which Saint Basil was euen then a Saint Militant and hath beene euer since held in God's Church a Saint Triumphant who for his excellent learning iudgement piety and industrie in protecting and propagating the Catholike Truth obtained in the Church of Christ the attribute of THE GREAT and in the Elegie of Ephrem to be called Chiefe Priest of the Lord. Which may serue as an instrument to launce the Papall Impostume of your Romane Pope who neuer heareth of any such Adiunct ascribed vnto himselfe but he presently swelleth with Pride and taketh it as Appropriate to his person as he is Successor to Saint Peter Although therefore we denie not but that notwithstanding this Opposition made by Saint Basil against the Romane Church hee held Communion with the Church of Rome both in Faith and Charity because at that time Rome was in her integrity Yet that Necessity of Subiection and the Beleefe thereof which your Article requireth of All that shall be saued is a doctrine as you see abandoned by Saint Basil. We therefore choose rather to abhorre your new Article as Imposterous and Impious than to suffer that blessed Father to be razed out of the number of Saints V. Saint Hilary of Poictou did not beleeue the Romane Article of Necessity of Vnion with the Pope of Rome SECT 5. WHat and how great a Saint this Hilary Bishop of Poictou was your Romane Church doth shew in her Kalendar as it were in her Church-Booke wherein is Registred his name as a Prime Saint and that worthily For as your Lippelous truely saith he for his learning and Sanctity was Admirable both in the Greeke and Latine Churches liuing in the yeere 356 in the daies of the Emperour Constantius and of Pope Liberius So he Well then wee are to enquire what was his iudgement concerning this Pope Liberius and the necessity of Communion with him This being a part of that your Article concerning The Catholike Romane Church to beleeue that In matters of Faith the iudgement of the Pope is infallible Saint Hilary no sooner vnderstood that Pope Liberius as your Cardinall hath confessed had subscribed to haue communion with the Arian Heretikes but hee made bold to Excommunicate the Pope out of his Communion and fellowship saying I Anathematize thee Liberius and thy fellowes This you will thinke was too liberally spoken and will iudge it rather not spoken at all But why I pray you was it not alwaies lawfull for any Catholike Bishop to Excommunicate any Hereticall Bishop that is abandon his fellowship and Communion or had not Hilarius iust cause so to vse Liberius at this time This is that Liberius who two yeeres after Banishment for his Catholike Faith became an Heretike Interpretatiuè saith your Cardinall that is in the vnderstanding of men iudging of him by his outward Act of Subscribing to the Condemnation of Saint Athanasius and communicating with knowne Heretikes nor so onely but euen expressely an Heretike If to bee of opinion with Heretikes If to bee made an Heretike If to be ouercome and to consent vnto Arian Heresie may be Testimonies of an expresse Heretike as your owne Platina Alphonsus de Castro Cardinall Turrecremata and out of the words of Saint Hierome Cardinall Cusanus haue confessed Which was the very cause that moued Saint Hilary also to bid the same Pope Auant else could hee not haue complained of the Hereticall Emperour Constantius for releasing of the same Liberius out of Banishment namely vpon such conditions as that Emperour inioyned the said Pope saying I know not O Emperour whether thou hast shewed more impiety in Banishing of Liberius or in releasing him from his Banishment What other sense could this haue than that Liberius was now as full an Heretike in his Releasement as he had beene before a Catholike in his Banishment CHALLENGE SCanne you this matter a right and then you must confesse that the Faith of Saint Hilary was to beleeue that a Pope might become an Heretike in his Publike person as for example Pope Liberius did by his publike Subscribing vnto Heresie and that therefore no Christian is bound to haue further Vnion of Faith with any Pope than a Pope doth stand in the Vnion of the true and Catholike Faith Which beeing the beleefe of all Protestants and the Cause of dis Vnion from the Pope of Rome at this day is therefore censured by you as a note of Heresie in it selfe and as you thinke a sufficient cause of Separation from all hope of Saluation As though Saint Hilary a Father of the same profession were no more to be esteemed a Saint But a Saint you acknowledge him to be know then that he who abandoned the Popes Vnion would neuer haue submitted to his Dominion VI. Saint Hierome beleeued not the now Romane Article concerning the Necessity of Subiection to the Romane Church and Bishop thereof SECT 6. SAint Hierom whom the Church of Rome hath dignified and honoured with the place of a Saint in her Calendar vnder the Title of Confessor and Doctor of the Church liued about the yeere of our Lord 390 and was aboue all the Fathers that we can name of those times the most deuout childe of the Church of Rome Neuerthelesse dare we in the examination of this Fundamentall Article of the same or rather the foundation it selfe referre our selues vnto the iudgement of this Saint And we proceed in this disquisition according to our former Method of your Obiections and our Answer and Reply from the same Father Your Obiection SAint Hierom writing vnto the Pope Damasus acknowledgeth himselfe his Sheepe although hee was vnder the Patriarch of Antioch nameth the same Pope Successor of Peter professeth himselfe to haue Communion with the Chaire of Peter mentioneth as a reason the Rocke whereupon the Church of Christ is built the House without which none may eate the Lambe that is Offer Sacrifice and the Arke of Noah without which whosoeuer is must needs perish So Saint Hierom. Vpon this Foundation some of your Master-Builders would erect an Infallibility of the Popes Iudgement an Vniuersality of his
ancient Councels Churches Sect. 2. CHAP. VIII III. ARgument is taken from the Iudgement of the Catholike Church it selfe in her Generall Councels Sect. 1. Proouing that the now Romane Article falsly damneth the Fathers of the Councell of Nice Sect. 2. The Fathers of the first Councell of Constantinople Sect. 3. The Fathers of the Councell of Ephesus Sect. 4. The Fathers of the Councell of Chalcedon Sect. 5. The Fathers of the second Councell of Constantinople Sect. 6. The Fathers of the Sixt and Seauenth Generall Councels which condemned Pope Honorius for an Heretike Sect. 7. The Fathers of the Eighth Generall Councell Sect. 8. CHAP. IX IV. ARgument is taken from the iudgement of Particular ancient and godly Churches which were opposite to the pretended Iurisdiction of Rome and concerning her Excommunication by diuerse Instances § 1. 1. Instance Proouing that shee by her now Romane Article falsly damneth the Churches of Asia and their Catholike Bishops in the daies of Pope Victor Sect. 2. 2. Falsly damneth the Catholike Churches of Africke Numidia Mauritania in the dayes of Saint Cyprian Sect. 3. Yea and Saint Cyprian himselfe Sect. 4.5.6.7 3. Falsly damneth the Churches of Africke in the dayes of S. Augustine yea and Saint Augustine himselfe Sect. 8.9.10.11.12 4. Falsly damneth the Catholike Church of Britaine with the Scottish Irish c. in the dayes of S. Gregory Sect. 15.16 CHAP. X. V. A Argument is because by this now Romane Article are falsly Damned the most Catholike Emperours who anciently opposed the now pretended Papall Dominion Confessed Sect. 1. Instances in the Confessed Oppositions of Constantine the Great Theodosius the elder Theodosius the younger and Iustinian Sect. 2.3 c. The due estimation of these Emperours Sect. 4. CHAP. XI VI. ARgument because the same Romane Article falsly damneth the First and Best and indeed most Catholike Popes of Rome who acknowledged Subiection to the Emperours of their Times as well Ethnikes as Christian. Sect. 1.2.3.4.5 CHAP. XII VII ARgument because the same Romane Article falsly Damneth the most worthie Seruants of God whose names are Registred for Martyrs and Saints in the now Calendar of the Church of Rome or in the Romane Martyrologe viz. S. Polycarpus Sect. 1. S. Cyprian Sect. 2. S. Athanasius Sect. 3. S. Basil. Sect. 4. S. Hilary of Poictou Sect. 5. Saint Hierome Sect. 6. S. Ambrose Sect. 7. S. August § 8. S. Hilary of Arles § 9. CHAP. XIII VIII ARgument because of the Vanity of the Romane Defence in the behalfe of their Romane Article of Catholike Iurisdiction Discouered by Parallels 1. The Romish Pretence froÌ„ Titles anciently attributed to the Romane Chaire by Councels Confuted by Equiualences Sect. 1. 2. From the Titles attributed by ancient Fathers Confuted first by Equiualences Sect. 2.3 Next by their owne Contradictions Sect. 4. Thirdly by the Blasphemousnesse of sundry Titles attributed to the Pope Sect. 5. 3. The Romish PreteÌ„ce of Supreme Iurisdiction from the Sentences of ancient Greeke Fathers Sect. 6. Among Others are the memorable Examples of Theophilus and S. Cyril Patriarks of Alexandria Atticus and Acatius Patriarkes of Constantinople All neglecting the Popes Excommunieation Sect. 7. The same from the Latine Fathers Confuted Sect. 8.9 A Generall Confutation of the former Falshood Sect. 10. 4. The same Romish Pretence of supreme Iurisdiction from the Authoritie of ancient Popes Confuted Sect. 11.12.13 As also from their Acts. Sect. 14. The same Pretence first taken from the Councell of Sardis for Right of Appeales to Rome Confuted Sect. 15. The same opposed by Examples of Antiquity And secondly confuted by an Argument taken from the Councell of Chalcedon Sect. 16. Thirdly from S. Cyprian Sect. 17. Fourthly from Pope Damasus Sect. 18. Fiftly from the Councell of Mileuis Sect. 19. Sixtly from S. Augustine Sect. 20. CHAP. XIV THE THIRD CONSIDERATION of the Church Catholike is in respect of the latter ages of the world Confuting the now Romane Article of the Catholike Church by Instances of three kinds First of Remote Nations 1. Because it falsly damneth the Greeke Church from age to age Sect. 1. Notwithstanding that it continued still a true Christian Church Sect. 2.3.4 And be now in extent wonderfull spatious and for multitudes innumerable Sect. 5 The extremitie of the Romish Article Sect. 6. A Particular Instance in Ignatius Patriarke of Constantinople neglecting the Popes Excommunication Sect. 7. 2. Because it falsly damneth the Churches of the Assyrians Sect. 8. 3. Because it falsly damneth the Churches of other remote Nations Aegyptians Aethiopians Armenians c. Sect. 9. Secondly in Churches more neare Because it as falsly damneth all Protestant Churches although more Orthodox than Rome it selfe and for number infinite Sect. 10. Third Instance in the Church of Rome it selfe Because it condemneth the Church of Rome it selfe in the latter ages thereof proouing either Pope or Church of Rome Schismaticall in themselues Sect. 11.12 Prooued by manifold and ineuitable Necessities as hauing sometimes bene a Church Head-les Sect. 13. Sometimes with a false Head Sect. 14. Sometimes with many Heads Sect. 15. Sometimes Counter-Headed Sect. 16. Sometimes doubtfully Headed Sect. 17 18 19 20. CHAP. XV. THe Determination of the whole Question concerning the Separation of Protestants from the Romane Church to discerne whether Side is to be accounted Schismaticall or may more iustly pleade Soules Saluation Discussed by certaine Theses consisting of foure Parts Sect. 1. The first Part consisting of VII Theses I. Thesis An absolute decay of the whole Catholike Church was neuer defended by any Protestant Sect. 2. II. Thesis The Church Symbolical properly called Catholike cannot erre in Faith Sect. 3. III. Thesis How the Church Representatiue improperly called Catholike may be said to be subiect to error Sect. 4. IV. Protestants hold not any greater Inuisibility or rather Obscuritie of the Church Catholike than that which the Romanists themselues aâ—e forced to confesse Sect. 5. V. Thesis All Particular Churches are not to be forsaken for euery vnsoundnesse either in manners worship or doctrine Sect. 6. VI. Thesis Some vnsound Churches are necessarily to bee auoided and iust Causes why Sect. 7. VII No vniust Excommunication out of a true Church can preiudice the Saluation of the Excommunicate Sect. 8. The second Part is concerning Departure from the Church of Rome comparing the Church of Rome with other Churches I. Thesis The Cburch of Rome is as subiect to error as any other Church Sect. 9. II. Thesis The Church of Rome is more subiect to Error then any other Church Christian. Sect. 10. III. Thesis There is not in all Scripture any Prophecie of the fall of any Christian Church but onely of the Church of Rome from which it may sometime be necessary to depart Sect. 11. IV. Thesis The Church of Rome hath long bene and still is the most Schismaticall Church of all other Christian Churches that carrie in them a Visible face of a Church § 12. The third Part of this Determination concerneth the
he the Church to be a Companie of men obedient to the Bishop of Rome for the time being and we affirme the Church of Rome to be alone the Catholike and Apostolike Church The Third and last thus None doth communicate saith he with the Catholike Church except he subiect himselfe vnto the Pope yea although otherwise he professe the Catholike Faith For vnion with the Head is a note of the Church So standeth the now Article of your Romane Faith Foure remarkeable Points more distinctly to be obserued in your former Romane Profession concerning the Article of The Catholike Romane Church SECT 5. FIrst obserue that the word ROMANE is not added only for distinction-sake to discerne it from other Churches which in respect of the Catholike doctrine of Faith professed in them haue equally had that Addition as to bee called the Catholike Corinthian or the Catholike Ephesian the Catholike Thessalonian or as we now the Catholike English Church because so it could be no more Catholike than other particular Churches as your Iesuite confesseth and consequently there could be no matter of controuersie But now the word ROMANE is added to the Article of the Catholike Church by way of Transcendencie and as the same Iesuite resolueth supreamly comprehending all other Churches professing the Catholike faith vnder the obedience of the Pope of Rome as the vniuersall Vicar of Christ. So that this Article is become not onely one point of Controuersie but indeede the chiefe Head of all the Controuersies which are between the said Romane Church and all other Churches at this day Secondly you conceiue this Appropriation to be Diuini Iuris in a strict sence ordained by Christ himselfe and not onely by Ecclesiasticall Institution Thirdly vpon this pretended Ordinance you exact from all other Churches Christian a Necessitie of Vnion with your Church of Rome and the Bishop thereof both in Faith Subiection Fourthly this Necessity of Subiection you beleeue to be Absolute as to exclude from hope of Saluation not onely all them that shall refuse to be subiect to the Romane Primacie but euen all them also that do not beleeue euery soule of man to be vtterly Damned that is not subiect thereunto The GENERALL CHALLENGE against this your former Romane Profession and the Summe of our contrarie Defence SECT 6. IF therefore wee may giue credit vnto your now Romane Church to your later Romane Bishops to your Romane Councels and Creed to your selues and other sworne Professors of the same Romane faith then must wee beleeue all the seuerall points and as it were the Particles of this one Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church without subiection whereunto there is no saluation Which notwithstanding wee hold and beleeue to be respectiuely False Vnconscionable Scandalous Schismaticall Hereticall Blasphemous and euery way Damnable And this we coÌ„fidently hope God assisting vs to proue from such your owne Grounds and from so manifest Demonstrations as that you shall fully perceiue vs to plead not so much our owne Cause as the Cause of the holy Apostles of the renowned Martyrs and Confessors of Christ of the most Orthodoxe Christian Professors of the holy Faith euen in the Primitiue Times of other innumerable Churches of Christendoâ—e still partakers of the Common Saluation yea and of the Catholike and Vniuersall Church of Christ it selfe Our proofes for the maintaining of this Challenge may be reduced vnto two heads The first is the Consideration of the common Article of our Christian faith to wit The holy Catholike Church The second from the state of the Visible Church of Christ it selfe as well Primitiue as Successiue CHAP. II. The first Generall Foundation of our CHALLENGE is taken from the Article in the Apostles Creed viz. The Catholike Church SECT 1. WE lay the first ground of our Challenge vpon the Apostles Creed and Symbol so called you know as being A forme of Faith composed by the Apostles accordingly as the ancient Fathers haue commonly taught Which the Schollers of Christ ought to get by hart as a watch-word in our Christian discipline whereby the faithfull Professors as by a perfect Shibboleth may be distinguished from the Iewish and Hereticall Which Christian Symbol although it be called the Apostles Creed yet it is so termed not because they were Deuisers but onely Collectors thereof by reducing the fundamentall Articles into one Briefe euen as a posie is called his that gathered trimmed it not that he created the flowers but because he composed the bundle and like as the writers of the Gospell were not Inuentors and Dictators but onely Pen-men of the holy Ghost and Scribes of Christ as the Fathers vse to speake Which the Euangelists themselues do sufficiently teach by inscribing their worke The Gospell of Iesus Christ. And accordingly all the Apostles in receiuing the doctrine of saluation are called Disciples not Doctors or Masters in respect of Christ. So then we haue in this posie a briefe Collection of those flowers of sauing truth which spring in the Paradise of God the Gospell of Iesus Christ. That the Church hath no power to ordaine any new Article of faith SECT 2. HE onely can make an Article of faith as necessarily belonging vnto the saluation of soules who can create a soule and after make a Gospell or Testament to saue this soule and then giue vnto that soule the gift of faith to beleeue this Gospell and next institute a Sacrament for confirmation of that faith and in the end bestow saluation vpon the same faithfull beleeuer This we should prooue from Scriptures and from the constant iudgement of the Fathers if it were not a doctrine acknowledged in your owne Schooles and professed by all Christians I proceed to that which followeth That the false Additions to the Creed are new Articles SECT 3. THere are two kinds of additions vnto the Apostolicall Creed the one is of Explication the other is of Deprauation The addition onely of Explication is iustifiable as appeareth by the addition of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Consubstantiall filioque which haue bene set downe in Declaratiue Creeds composed by ancient Councels for the clearer vnderstanding of the great mysterie of the Trinitie In which case those additions may be truly called as Lirinensis saith of the like Non noua sed nouè dicta But the Addition of Deprauation of the sence of the Creed in any essentiall and fundamentall part thereof which is to be beleeued as necessary to saluation must needs be a new Article and euery such new Article in true construction a new Heresie Now what one Professor is there in the Romane Church who whensoeuer he repeateth that one Article of our Christian Creed The Catholike Church doth not vnderstand thereby the Romane onely And againe what one is there among you that hearing mention made of the Romane Catholike Church doth not take the addition of the word ROMANE to be a Declaration and exposition of the
not Peter confessing III. ROCKE is that Confession whereupon Christ saith he will build his Church and members thereof but whosoeuer shall truly beleeue that which S. Peter confessed to wit Christ the Sonne of the liuing God is accordingly built vpon the Rocke albeit he should neuer haue heard so much as the name of Peter Ergo the Confession rightly vnderstood had Relation to Christ and not to the person of Saint Peter IV. The thing which Christ spake of was called the ROCKE as Fathers Authors and Professors on all sides do witnesse to signifie that which is Immoueable Impreinable and Eternall such as is Christ and his Truth But Peter found his Confession as it proceeded from himselfe to be moueable and shaken at one time thrice denying this Confession of his Lord when as also he knew himselfe to be mortall Ergo he did not thinke this Confession which Christ calleth the Rocke to haue Relation to himselfe but onely to Christ. So impossible it is that Saint Peter in his Confession should apprehend the ground of your now Romane Faith Whence you cannot but obserue with what modestie your forecited Aduocates Baronius Bellarmine and Roffensis could obiect vnto Protestants Impudencie Singularitie and Blindnesse for defending an Exposition of the word ROCKE so copiously and euidently warranted by all sorts of Witnesses euen within the Romish Church it selfe II. CHALLENGE From the iudgement of the ancient Fathers IN venerable Antiquitie we find some Fathers distinguishing betweene Petra the Rocke and Peter as plainly as between Christ and a Christian Some as directly noting Christ to be the Rocke as Saint Iohn did euer point him out to be The Lambe of God where they say This Rocke was Christ Some that Peter made his Confession As the mouth of the other Disciples And that The Faith confessed was the Rocke Some by way of Diminution Not Peter alone more than others Some exclusiuely Not Peter And though Some for we may not dissemble thus much do expound by Rocke Peter yet do they meane either a Primacie of Order or Honour in Peter not of authoritie and dominion or else a priority of Confession because he vttered the words first And so all the Apostles and Prophets are called Foundations by which is not meant their persons or dominions but their doctrines Else shew vs where euer any Prophet had any Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction in the Church of the Iewes And whereas you are vrgent in obiecting the Testimonie of Saint Augustine as though he would make the Case indifferent yet are you taught by your owne Bishop that Augustine in that place rather held that by Rocke was meant Christ. Albeit that to make this Exposition indifferent which you lay downe as a ground of your Faith would be the vtter destruction of your owne Cause For Faith must stand vpon Infallibilitie and not vpon an Indifferencie of Choosing whether So inconsiderate and precipitant was that your Author in his Obiection Now whatsoeuer may seeme to be wanting in this second Challenge it is plentifully supplied by One whose iudgement ought to be as acceptable as his learning was admirable Cast your eye on the Margent where you shall perceiue how many Fathers Interpreted the ROCKE to signifie either Christ confessed by Peter or else the Confession of Peter so that your Cardinall censuring the interpretation of Protestants not to be the Exposition of Catholikes doth in effect thereby wipe out of the number of Catholikes Ambrose Chrysostome Augustine and diuers other ancient Fathers Next that the Expounding by Rocke Peter doth nothing aduantage the Romish Conclusion which is from Rocke to inferre Saint Peters Monarchie and absolute Iurisdiction ouer all other Apostles because Rocke can be but a Symbol or signe of such properties as are belonging to a Rocke as Soliditie and Vnmouablenesse in the faith but not of Dominion Finally he noteth in your Cardinall a bold licentiousnesse who being a Romanist to make Saint Peter the Rocke durst correct the Vulgar Translation which hath beene pronounced Authenticall by the Councell of Trent III. CHALLENGE BY this time you see that your faith of Peters Monarchie which you beare the world in hand to be infallibly built vpon the word ROCKE mentioned by Christ vnto Peter is according to the iudgement of the Fathers Confessions of your owne Diuines and irresistable demonstrations of truth it selfe meerely built vpon the sands How then shall any conscience of man beleeue you in your Expositions of Scripture seeing you to be so egregiously ouertaken in that which you in all your disputes concerning this Cause obiect as if not the sole yet the most solid Rocke of your beleefe As for any other place of Scripture which can be alleaged in this Cause it were altogether superfluous to discusse in this place both because the euidence which you haue receiued from this one Text may sufficiently warne you not to presume of the learning and iudgement whereof your grand-Leadears make such boasts as also because all other Obiections haue beene fully satisfied elsewhere Where the acknowledgement of Cardinall Cusanus sometimes the Popes Legate excellently studied in the Fathers and primarily exercised in the Councell of Basil is made good who in debating the question of the Popes Iurisdiction with the assent of that Councell did publikely auerre that Peter receiued from Christ no greater authoritie than did the other Apostles nothing was said to him which was not spoken to them Hee proceedeth further particularly insisting vpon the obiected Scriptures and concludeth that the other Apostles were equally called Stones had equally the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen deliuered vnto them equally receiued the charge of teaching that is Feeding of the whole flocke of Christ. As yet then you haue no foundation for your pretended Monarchie of Peter by any promise of Christ made vnto him In the next place we are to examine whether any ground appeare thereof by any Monarchicall or Iuridicall Act of Saint Peter through out the whole course of his Apostleship ouer all or any one of the other Apostles II. That Saint Peter neuer exercised any Act of Iurisdiction as properly belonging to himselfe ouer the other Apostles whereby to testifie that hee had any Dominion ouer them as the Monarch and Head of the Catholike Church SECT 5. TOuching Saint Peters practise and conuersation among the other Apostles wee suppose that the testimony of your Salmeron one of the first in the foundation of the Societie of Iesuites and throughout all his Volumes which are sixteene vpon all occasions every-where a zealous Proctor for the prouing and promoting of Saint Peters Monarchie may as well satisfie your selues as it doth vs. Hee therefore in answer to the Question why the pretended Monarchie of Saint Peter is not demonstrable by any publike Act of Peter telleth vs and his words are worthy of obseruation that Peter although he were Head and Iudge ouer the other Apostles yet he
That which we now contend for in the Popes of Rome may be cleared by an example of him that is called Emperour of Rome who because hee hath neither a foot of possession in Rome nor in the Territories thereof nor yet any professed Subiect inhabiting therein but the whole Princedome is belonging to the Pope your owne Diuines hold it a kinde of Soloecisme to name any at this day The Romane Emperour Therefore to alleadge a few of many that may be produced Lyra The Empire of Rome saith he hath for a long time beene without an Emperour Faber What obedience I pray you saith he doth Rome yeeld to her Monarch meaning the Emperour So to Now saith he is that temporall Dominion of the Citie of Rome ceased and your Iesuite Salmeron The Romane Emperour saith hee was ouerthrowne long agoe II. CHALLENGE THe Romish Babylon then by the Reuelation of Saint Iohn is that Citie of Rome whose place and people must be destroyed No people can be called Romane without they haue relation to Rome nor any people called The Church of Rome except they be Professors of the faith in Rome Therefore Saint Iohn prophecying of these things could not but beleeue that before the end of the world that Church which is now called The Church of Rome shall depart from the faith euen because this Departure must be from the sincere doctrine and worship of God vnto errour and Idolatrie Oh! that this were not at this day a iust Cause to challenge euery one to Come out of Babylon Both which we shall be ready in due time to proue by as true grounds as any haue hitherto beene deliuered That Saint Iohn's faith did not conceiue the now pretended Monarchie of the Pope aboue all other Bishops and Pastors in the Catholike Church SECT 16. WHat that Papall Monarchie is in your faith and how it is deriued we haue heard namely that because Saint Peter was the Vicar of Christ vpon earth as his ordinary Pastor ouer all the other Apostles therefore the Successors of Saint Peter in the same See are of the same authoritie and Iurisdiction ouer the whole Church of Christ and euery member thereof Hence issueth the Article of your now Romane faith that Without obedience and subiection to the Pope as the Catholike Bishop of the Catholike Church None can be saued The meditation vpon this Article begetteth a Probleme viz. whether Saint Iohn the Euangelist who liued 20. yeares after Saint Peter were indeede subordinate and subiect to the Iurisdiction of Linus or Cletus the immediate Successours of Saint Peter Either Saint Iohn was subiect to the Pope or he was not What say you It seemeth vnto mee saith your Iesuite that the Apostles who suruiued Peter were subiect to the Pope because the power of the Pope was alwayes ordinary and to continue in the Church Haue you any ground for this I cannot remember saith hee that I haue read in any Author any thing of this point So he CHALLENGE SAint Paul as hath beene proued reckoned these Three Peter Iames and Iohn equally Columnas that is The Pillars and as it were equally the three Chiefe Worthies among the Disciples who concerning the offices of their Apostleship receiued from Christ as your Cardinall Cusanus hath taught you Euery way an equall charge And without Controuersie the faith of Iohn and Paul was both the same Is it then possible for a Christian man to thinke that Iohn being that Apostle who was immediately chosen by Christ and equall to Peter should thinke himselfe subiect to Linus the Successour of Peter that he who for his sublimitie of knowledge in the mysteries of Christ was called The Diuine who was made the Pen-man of the holy Ghost in writing the Gospell and one for whose infallibility in the truth Christ offered vp praiers to his Father ought hee now to submit his iudgement vnto Linus one of the line of those Popes whereof Some haue beene by Generall Councels and by Popes themselues iudged for Heretikes And againe that Iohn who at the time of the Supper of our Lord leaned vpon the brest of our Sauiour when Peter you know was but next after Iohn should now prostrate himselfe before Linus the Successor of Peter and if this Ceremonie had beene so old to doe him the honour as to Kisse his feet And not this onely but to beleeue this Article of due Subiection to the Pope Without which none can be saued which indeede is more than to Kisse the feet or to licke the dust of the feet of Saint Peter's Successor Sure we are that the Disciples of Saint Iohn to wit the Christians of the Easterne Church were not of your beliefe who to adhere to the orders of Saint Iohn refused to obserue the Easter of the Latine Church which they would not haue done if they had beleeued Saint Iohn to haue beene subiect to those Romane Bishops or yet to Peter himselfe Before we can conclude you are to be exhorted to obserue the Iesuiticall front of Suarez who in a matter of this nature concerning Saluation durst make this Conclusion of the Apostles Subiection and subordination vnder a Pope namely as you haue heard him confesse without any Author besides himselfe Whereby you may discerne with what vntempered morter these men daube vp the Consciences of their Followers CHAP. V. That the Catholike and Apostolike Church of Christ it selfe at or about the Time of the foundation of the Church of Rome had no such Article of faith viz. The Catholike Romane Church without vnion wherewith there is no Saluation SECT 1. THe Churches vnto which Saint Paul writ for we name not the Romanes of whom wee haue intreated before were the Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Thessalonians and the dispersed Hebrewes As for the other Apostles Iames Peter Iohn Iude each one writ to Diuers those their Epistles which are intitled Catholike Epistles And the seauen Churches of Asia were they to whom the booke of the Apoealips or Reuelation was directed Among these the Apostles are instant and vrgent in inueying 1 against the Heresies of Iudaisme Saducisme of worshipping Angels 2 Against Apostasie and Antichristianitie 3 Against Diuisions and Schismes in the Church and abuse of Ecclesiasticall Orders therein And yet in all these there appeareth not any one Syllable or Iota to proue your Article of The Catholike Romane Church without vnion and subiection whereunto and to the Head thereof there is no saluation No nor yet so much as to intimate any one of the particles of this Article as first not to signifie that the Church of Rome was a Catholike much lesse THE Catholike Church as being in right which you say The Mother and Mistris of all others Not to note that in the conuincing of Heretikes Christians ought to looke as to their Cynosura to the Faith of the Romane Church nor that for the discouering
words of Tert. your owne Beatus Rhenanus hath published as much as we can require Tertullian saith hee doth not confine the Catholike and Apostolike Church to one place and although hee giue an honourable testimonie to the Church of Rome yet did he not esteeme her so highly as we see her accounted of at this day He reckoneth her with other Churches yet doth not make her the onely Church but admonisheth his Readers as well to enquire what milke the Church of Corinth gaue as Rome So Rhenanus who addeth that If Tertullian were now aliue and should say so much hee could not escape without punishment Thus your Rhenanus whiles that hee had the vse of his tongue but since you haue Gagged him by your Index Ezpurgatorius a Booke which we may call the Martyrologe of many innocent bookes But no maruaile for this testimonie of Rhenanus was as a poyniard sticking fast in the very bowels of this Cause Notwithstanding Tertullian will be Tertullian still whom whosoeuer shall reade he will be able to auouch as much as Rhenanus hath obserued namely that Tertullian euen whilest hee was a true childe of the Church neuer allowed the Apostolike which we commonly call the Catholike Church to be appropriated vnto any one place nor had he further respect to Rome than he had to Corinth and other Apostolicall Churches which hee calleth Original Mother-Churches for directing of Christians in the Apostolike faith 4 Athanasius reckoneth vp to the Emperour Constantine the Churches that consented to the Councell of Nice thus The Churches of Spain of Britaine of France of whole Italie of Dalmatia without any precise mention of Rome otherwise than it was comprized in whole Italie A great Contempt doubtlesse if your Article had beene then hatch't because the Consent of Rome onely had been more perswasiue to the Emperour than all the rest 5 Vincentius Lirinensis likewise an ancient Father and greatly approued on all sides in his booke written in defence of the Catholike Truth against all prophane Nouelties aduiseth Christians to trie the Truth equally by the ioynt consent as well of the East as of the West-Church and to consult as well with Petrus Alexandrinus and Athanasius in the one Church as with Felix and Iulius Bishops of Rome in the other Concerning whom more hereafter 6 Saint Augustine against Iulian the Pelagian in the question of Baptisme speaking of Chrysostome the Bishop of Constantinople saith Farre be it from him that hee should dissent from his fellow-Bishops Innocentius Bishop of Rome Cyprian Bishop of Carthage Basil Bishop of Cappadocia Gregory Bishop of Nazianzum Hilary a French Bishop and Ambrose Bishop of Milan Is it possible that these orthodoxe Fathers should in this manner and vpon such occasions haue giuen the Bishop of Rome so many Mates in equalizing others with him if your Article of Monarchicall Dominion had entred into their breasts or braines The same comparisons proued by ancient Churches SECT 2. THe generall Councell of Constantinople in the East to make known their Consent in the Faith with the Church in the West doe endite an Epistle and inscribe it thus To their Reuerend brethren and fellowes as well to Damasus of Rome as to Ambrose of Milan and others The Church of Egypt gathered in Councell in their letters vnto the Emperour Leo professe Their Consent in the Catholike faith with the chiefe Priests in the Christian world naming as well Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople Basil Bishop of Antioch Iuuenall Bishop of Hierusalem as Leo Bishop of Rome The Decree of the Church of Carthage in her third Councell standeth thus It is decreed that we consult hereupon with our brethren Syricius viz. Bishop of Rome and Simplician viz. Bishop of Milane Not to omit how you confesse that The Bishops of Constantinople did sometime enioy the title of Vniuersall Bishops equally with the Bishops of Rome but this they did say you by permission of the Bishops of Rome and vpon conniuence Tell you this to them who know not that Maiestie brooking no Corriuall the Monarchie of Popes would neuer dispense or continue at any One vsurping equall Title of Monarchicall Iurisdiction which is as much as to snatch their Papall Miters from of their heads CHALLENGE THe distinction of East and West is not more familiarly knowne to euery vulgar man than is the distinction of East and West-Church by euery babe in Historicall learning vnderstanding thereby that they were anciently held as two generall parts of the Catholike Church and not as one subordinate to another as will afterwards more plainly appeare Againe vnlesse you shall except against the most ancient and vniuersally approued Instructors and guides of the Catholike Church we must conclude that the East part of the world is not more opposite vnto the West than is your now Romane Article to wit The Catholike Romane Church contrary to Catholike Antiquitie Insomuch that as when Protestants are controlled condemned tormented or put to death for renouncing this your Article Ignatius Ireneus to omit the authoritie of Councels and Others Tertullian Athanasius Vinc. Lirinensis and Augustine may seeme to suffer in them because it may be said of the rest which your Rhenanus spake of one saying Tertullian if he were aliue should not escape vnpunished for such his Praescriptions So False and Imposterous is your Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church as hauing Dominion ouer all Others CHAP. VIII Our third Argument taken from the iudgement of the Catholike Church it selfe in the first Six Generall Councels after the Apostles Besides a Seuenth and Eight Councell in Your estimation Generall SECT 1. EVery true Generall Councell you will esteeme to be the Representatiue Church Catholike than which after the euidence of diuine Scriptures the Oracles of God no better proofe can be required by the Professors of the Christian faith For this cause we hold it our duetie for your better satisfaction to giue you Instances in the first Six Generall Councels beginning at the first Generall Councell of Nice I. That the Beliefe of the Romish Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church without which c. damneth all the Catholike Fathers of the Councell of Nice and their Beleeuers SECT 2. THe first Generall Councell in Christianitie after the Synod of the Apostles was that famous first Councell of Nice consisting of CCCXVIII Bishops by whom were made two Decrees vtterly preiudiciall to the now Article of the Dominion of the Romane Church and Pope aboue all other Churches and their Bishops One is against the Appeales of persons Excommunicate in any Dioces vnto remote Churches which the Bishops of the Church of Africke in their Councell wherein Saint Augustine was an Actor did absolutely denie by virtue of the Canon of the Councell of Nice The second Instance in the sixt Canon of the same Nicene Synod decreeing thus That the Bishops of Alexandria should haue the Gouernment ouer Aegypt Lybia and Pentapolis
so they say Both by the Canons and also by your letters and both these had relation to another part of Reasons and inducements premised in that place And is not this then slie Sophistrie to conclude an whole from a Part Yea but the same Councell say that They durst not iudge Iohn the Bishop of Antioch and therefore reserued him to the iudgement of Pope Celestine which plainly sheweth the supreme authority of the Pope So you What signifie these words that They durst not iudge Iohn of Antioch why they do plainly relate in the same Epistle that they had already deposed him We haue say they deuested him of all his Sacerdotall power So after this referring him to the iudgement of the Pope That for so they say they might with lenity ouercome his rashnesse This was not to preferre him to another Censure for there had bene no lenity in that but to the aduise of Celestine that by his perswasion he might be first reclaimed from error and afterwards restored to his place For a further discouerie of the Ecclipse of the Conscience in your Cardinall let vs consider what Supreme authority he would insinuate to wit that if the Councell could not depose Nestorius Patriarch of Constantinople without the Popes Mandate nor durst depose Iohn Patriarch of Antioch but referred the Cause to the iudgement of the Pope the issue hereof must be directly this viz. That the Pope is absolutely aboue a Generall Councell as the Cardinall defendeth else-where This were a Supreme authority indeed but in truth it is a falshood and long since condemned as you know by your owne Councels of Constance and Basil for a flat Heresie Which your Doctors of Paris haue alwaies disclaimed as contrary to antiquity and which no Councell since the beginning of the Christian Faith did as yet expresly decree as your Doctor Stapleton a great Champion in this Cause doth not denie and therefore betaketh himselfe to the Late tacit and silent consent of the Doctors of your Church Was not this then more than boldnesse in your Cardinall to inferre this Supreme authority out of this Councell Our Opposition First this Councell called Celestine Bishop of Rome Fellow-Minister and did as you haue heard Excommunicate and depose the Patriarch of Antioch before they made any Relation thereof vnto Celestine the Bishop of Rome Ergo It did not acknowledge the now pretended Supreme authority and priuilege of the Pope which is to haue Cases of that nature soly Reserued to his owne Determination Secondly looke into the Councell it selfe and into the Epistle alleaged wherein concerning the points which Pope Celestine had constituted Wee say they haue iudged them to stand firme wherefore we agree with you in one sentence and doe hold them meaning Pelagius and others to be deposed Ergo Consent to the Confirmation of the Popes sentence doth gaine-say his Supreme authority But principally we oppose the Acts of this Councell of Ephesus in decreeing that Neither the Patriarch of Antioch who made claime Nor any other should assume authority of ordaining any Bishop within the Isle of Cyprus The Arguments and Reasons whereupon the Synod made this Decree shew that as well the Authority of the Bishop of Rome as of any other is thereby excluded And they adde more peremptorily It is to be obserued say they in all Prouinces and Dioces that no Bishop drawe vnder his subiection any Prouince which was not his from the beginning lest that vnder pretence of Priest-hood he bring into the Church Arrogance and Pride The very selfe-same disease which Saint Basil and Saint Augustine with the whole Councell of Africke haue both expressely noted and openly detested in the Romane Popes euen of their times CHALLENGE NOne of you euer doubted that this Councell of Ephesus was Generall and the Bishops therein truely Catholikes wherein notwithstanding you see diuers Arguments although not of disunion yet of no Subiection And therefore You except you will condemne CC. holy Bishops must needs iudge your Romane Article to be damnably false IV. That the Beleefe of the Romane Article of The Catholike Romane Church without subiection whereunto there is no saluation Damneth aboue CCCC Catholike Bishops in the fourth Generall Councell of Chalcedon SECT 5. FOure hundred and thirty Bishops were assembled in this Councell of Chalcedon with whom we are to aduize concerning your Article of Necessary Subiection to the Bishop of Rome and his Church But first wee are ready to answer and then to replie Your Obiection THis Councell saith your Cardinall said that The custodie of the Vine that is of the Catholike Church is committed to the Pope by God It saith so and so doth that godly primitiue Pope Eleutherius say to the Bishops in France as you know that The whole Catholike Church is committed by Christ vnto them Were They therefore thinke you all Popes What say you The meaning of Eleutherius is say you that for as much as Heretikes doe oppugne the Catholike and Vniuersall Church it belongeth vnto euery Bishop to haue an vniuersal care to defend support it And this is a true Answer indeed else must you grant that Saint Paul was a Pope ouer Saint Peter because he tooke vpon him The cure or care of the whole Church and that Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria was Pope aboue the then Bishop of Rome because Gregory Nazianzene saith of him that He hauing the presidence of the Church of Alexandria may be said thereby to haue the Gouernement of the whole Christian World By these Euidences we are compelled to aske with what Conscience you could make such Obiections in good earnest to busie your Aduersaries and seduce your Disciples with all whereunto you-your-selues could so easily make answer But thus Catchitiue haue you beene at the shadow let vs trie whether we can apprehend the substantiall Truth Our Opposition For what is that which you will say belongeth really to the Supreame and Papall Dominion of the Bishop of Rome Because say you with common consent the Pope hath supreme authority in gouerning the Church therefore can hee change the Canons and decrees of General Councels So you But what then say you to the equalling of other Patriarchall Seates with Rome The Fathers of the Councel of Chalcedon say you did giue Priuileges to the Patriarkeship of Constantinople equall to the Church of Rome but Pope Leo did oppose against the Decree of the Councell and disclaimed it You say true but yet let vs come to the ground of beleefe as well of the Fathers of that Councell in opposing your pretended Papall dignity and authority as of your Doctors in contradicting them Secondly therefore The Pope of Rome say you hath his Monarchie and sole gouernment of the Church from diuine right And The Romane Church was founded by God What Prouince then in the world is free from her Iurisdiction So
you and such is your now Romane Faith But the Fathers of the Generall Councell of Chalcedon were of a contrary beleefe because their reason of withstanding the Pope was as you know For that they held that the See of Rome was founded by humane authority Thinking that the Church of Rome got the Primacie namely of Order by reason onely that it was the chiefe Imperiall Seate So you We haue heard of Oppositions enough Gladly would we vnderstand how you can reconcile these oddes so that wee may not iustly condemne your now Romane Faith of Nouelty by the iudgement of a Generall Councell This was indeed say you the Decree of a great Councell but the Decree was not lawfully proceeded in because the Legates of the Pope were absent and afterwards protested against it And Pope Leo himselfe would not approue it saying that hee did allow onely those Decrees and Canons in that Synod which concerned matters of Faith So you And now vpon this Euidence heare our Verdict CHALLENGE IN these Premisses we finde a Councell in your owne opinion and in the Iudgement of the Christian World lawfull and Generall consisting of more than 400 Fathers without exception Catholike and Orthodoxe These haue opposed your Article of the Necessity of Subiection to the Pope razing the very foundation thereof by beleeuing that his Primacie is not by diuine Authority Vpon this beleefe they easily cast downe the roofe of your Papall building denying the Popes power of gaine-saying the Positiue and humane Decrees and Canons of Generall Councels and by erecting a Patriarch whom They adorne with a Priuilege of power excepting priority of Order in taking place giuing voice c. Equall to the Bishop of Rome What is if this bee not to ruinate your Romane Article Yet much more stand you entangled in your owne Answers For if that so many and so Reuerend Fathers determined against the pretended Prerogatiue of Rome notwithstanding the Contrarie protestation of the Popes Legates they teach vs thereby another crosse point to your Article viz. that the voice of the Pope by his Legates is of no more virtue in a Synod than the suffrage of any other Bishop And what though the Legates of the Pope were absent at the making of this Act in the Councell because they would not bee present and were notwithstanding present the next day and disclaimed the Act yet could nothing preuaile And againe what was the nullity of authority in the Popes Legates whensoeuer they contended against the Maior part of a Synod But Pope Leo say you gainesaid the former Decree of that Councell albeit he did approue of all Canons in the same so farre as concerned marters of Faith This Answer also proueth you faithlesse in all your defence euen by the iudgement of Pope Leo. For if he therefore opposed the Decree of that Synod which oppugneth the Papall Primacie and Dominion because it was no matter of Faith he thereby plainely confesseth your Article which maintaineth the Dominion of the Romane Church without which there is no saluation not to be at all an Article of Faith We conclude Therefore either must those 430 godly most Reuerend Fathers together with Leo the Pope himselfe be damned by your Romane Article or else must your Article be condemned by their contrarie iudgement and Decree Which notwithstanding the Popes Contradiction was afterwards sufficiently confirmed in other parts of Christendome by the vse thereof which as you confesse Continued a long time So large and long a false-hood is that which your Article of Necessary Subiection to Rome doth exact of the whole Church of Christ. V. That the beleefe of the Article of an Vniuersall Subiection to Rome as the Catholike Church damneth the 165 Fathers of the first Generall Councell at Constantinople being the second of that name Anno 553. SECT 6. LEt your owne most priuileged albeit most partial Authors Baronius Binius relate the whole Cause 1. Concerning the authority of this Councell whether it deserue the Title of Vniuersall Councell or no They answer that It was a General Councell and so approued by all Popes Predecessors and Successors to Saint Gregory and by himselfe saying I doe reuerence the fift Councell of Constantinople Now come we to the relation of the Cause First of Pope Agapetus The cause of Anthimius which he had condemned was afterwards ventilated in the Councell of Constantinople This argueth the No-Dominion of the Pope ouer that Councell which will take vpon them to examine that cause which the Pope had before condemned After Agapetus succeedeth Vigilius At what time In the Councell of Constantinople that which they called Tria Capitula was condemned The summe of their Answer is this Pope Vigilius before this Generall Councell of Constantinople defended the Cause of the Tria Capitula which the Councell being gathered together condemned The Pope resisted the Decree of the Councell the Councell endeth Pope Vigilius for not consenting to this Councell is banished by the Emperour Iustinian After that this Councell had so concluded Vigilius confirmed the sentence of the Councell of Constantinople and was thereupon released out of Banishment by the Emperour In all this say you the Popes change of his minde cannot be preiudiciall to him or his See for that the cause being no matter of Faith but onely of Persons he did it vpon iust reason least the East Church and the the West should fall into Schisme and be rent in sunder Thus farre your Authors CHALLENGE BE the Cause matter of Faith or onely of Fact or Persons it mattereth not nor to what end it was done Wee are not to inquire into the doctrines but the dispositions of this Councell nor to respect the point of Vnion of Churches but that which you haue created for a new Article of Faith the point of Necessary subiection to the Romane Church and Bishop thereof First by your owne Confession the Pope defendeth that which afterward the Councell gain-sayeth Next the Pope contradicteth the Decree of the Councell to wit of the same Councell determinately concluding and persisting in their Sentence against the same Pope euen to his Banishment for the same Cause Yet in the end he is glad for Vnions sake to yield vnto the former Decree of the Councel So They who in their Annotations conceale that which the Text expressely deliuereth We condemne say they all that haue defended Tria Capitula But Vigilius say you had before this Councell defended those Tria Capitula Therefore was your Pope also condemned by this Councell Behold now forsooth your Romane Faith Behold your Monarch Behold his Dominion Behold the necessary Subiection of his Subiects If it be called Dominion to Command and be glad to yeeld or accounted Subiection of that Councell to prescribe Decrees against the sentence of your Pope or esteemed Faith of your Article of Necessary subiection to the Romane Church vpon losse of Saluation to persist in
and yet notwithstanding were reputed still in the Church of Christ Catholike Bishops and so farre in the Communion of the Church Catholike that many godly Bishops in the Latine Church would not seuer themselues from their Communion Yet Bishop Christopherson that you might beleeue the Excommunication of Pope Victor to be of an vniuersall power extent translateth the Greeke sentence of Eusebius thus Irenaeus exhorted Pope Victor not vtterly to cut off so many Churches from the body of the vniuersall Church of Christ. Which Interpretation if true might seeme to make the Church of Rome the Catholike Church But as it became a sworne Scribe for the Pope he peruerts the Text which is to be rendred thus Irenaeus exhorted Pope Victor not to cut off whole Churches of God without any mention of the Bodie of the Church Ergò it cannot import an Excommunication from the Vniuersall bodie of the Church but onely from the Church of Rome as from a particular member of that vniuersall as hath beene proued What then may be thought of your new Article but as of a barbarous and Antichristian Paradox which separateth from all hope of life all the Christians of the Easterly parts of Asia who In multitude exceeded the Christians of the Greeke and Latine Churches But God be thanked that by the doctrine of those Primitiue times the Excommunication of the Romane Church made no mortall wound for the Asian Bishops esteemed no better of it than of a Brutum Fulmen And if you will suffer vs to bee somewhat more equally minded to Victor Bishop of Rome than you your selues can be we may perswade our selues that hee did not by this his Excommunication intend to shew or arrogate any Iurisdiction ouer the Greeke Churches as Pastor ouer his flocke but onely to denie participation of brotherly Communion with them as they might if they had beene so forward haue dealt with him this being an Act of Diuision Inter Pares which likewise doth conclude the no-absolute Necessitie of Vnion with the Romane Church Our Second Instance is in the Churches of Africke Numidia and Mauritania in the dayes of Saint Cyprian by 87. Bishops in the Councell of Carthage Anno 256. Who notwithstanding the Excommunication of the Pope of Rome were euer held by the Catholike Church the Essentiall members thereof and in state of Saluation SECT 3. WHen the Case of Basilides and Martial was on foot concerning Appeales from the Church of Carthage to Rome and the Quaestion of Rebaptization of those persons that had renounced their Haeresies was in agitation betweene Stephen Bishop of Rome and Cyprian Bishop of Carthage The Church of Africke and others of that Primitiue age gaue so infallible testimonies of denying the Popes Catholike Iurisdiction ouer other Churches and of despising his now pretended Catholike power of Excommunication as may sâ—ffice for the full determination of this whole Cause in confutation of your new Article to wit The Catholike Romane Church without which there is no saluation This Case therefore being so pertinent and pregnant wee will proceede therein methodically I. The full Opposition of Saint Cyprian and other Bishops against Stephen then Bishop of Rome SECT 4. SVch was the Opposition of Saint Cyprian and others against Stephen Bishop of Rome that euen by your owne Confessions Cyprian gathered a Councell of 87. Bishops out of Africke Numidia and Mauritania which concluded contrary to the Pope and his Councell celebrated in Italy Secondly such that Cyprian iudged the same Pope to erre proudly ignorantly and blindly Thirdly such that he impugned the Popes pretended power of Appeales to Rome accompting the Appellants to wit Basilides and Martial Renegados and desperate Delinquents challenging his right of Iudicature for the proceeding against those notoriously wicked Companions who therefore ought to be sent backe againe saith he to be censured by their owne Bishop Fourthly such that this Councell of Carthage did deny to any whomsoeuer the Title of Bishop of Bishops Fiftly such that Cyprian would not acknowledge the name of POPE per Antonomasiam that is By way of Excellency to be proper to the Bishop of Rome as you teach Insomuch that at the instant when as Cyprian was to lay downe his life to Martyrdome for the profession of the holy Faith Being demanded of the Pro-Consull who then had charge to put him to death saying Art thou Hee who shewed thy selfe POPE among the Christians He answered I am Which may be enough to dash that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which you appropriate vnto the Bishop of Rome by the name of Pope Great therefore was the Opposition of Cyprian against Stephen namely Bishop against Bishop Chaire against Chaire Councell against Councell as flat Diameter as possibly might be II. That Saint Cyprian and Others were Excommunicated by Pope Stephen SECT 5. IT were friuolous to stand vpon presumptions when we haue your owne Confessions You grant that at the same time when Saint Cyprian did contend with Stephen Bishop of Rome the same Pope Excommunicated the Easterne Bishops of Cappadocia Cilicia and Galatia for the same cause of Rebaptization Secondly that th' aforesaid Pope Stephen did also as much as lay in him cast off Cyprian insomuch that Hee would not admit vnto his speach them that were sent from Cyprian vnto him Nor this onely but also commanded them that were of his owne profession not to haue any peace or communion with them nor yet to allow them so much as house-roome or lodging Yea and Pope Stephen signified by writing that no Communion was to be held with them that did rebaptize Not to insist vpon the Popes lauish and reproachfull speach in calling Cyprian a Counterfait Christ and a deceitfull worker All which are prooued out of the Epistle of Firmilianus Bishop of Caesara in Cappadocea which almost in euery point doth manifest the Excommunication of Saint Cyprian CHALLENGE FOR what better proofe of the Excommunication of Saint Cyprian and other Bishops of his Fraternity than denying by writing All communion with them that were of the same Opinion with Cyprian and after in Act Forbidding all communion First by speach and conference Secondly by conuersation and company Thirdly by eating or hospitality Each one of these being according to your owne positiue Conclusions a proper Character of that which is called The Greater Excommunication and consequently in your sense a Separation from the Body of the Romane Church III. That Saint Cyprian held not the Excommunication of the Pope to be anâ— valid Separation from the Catholike Church or hazardous to the state of Saluation SECT 6. NOne euer was more Christianly affected to the Catholike Church than was Saint Cyprian nor more firmly belieued that the Vnion with the Catholike Church is necessary to saluation whose profession was this Although a man saith he were slaine for the name of Christ yet if he be without the Vnion of the Church he cannot
Rome and Bishâ—p thereof without subiection whereunto according to your Faith there is no saluation nor can any be saued that doth not beleeue the truth of this Article If therefore those ancient Popes beliefe had bin of a Subiection due vnto them from Emperours in such Causes wherein they by their practise of Humilitie Reuerence and Obedience denyed all such Right then should their Fact haue betrayed their Faith a faithlesnesse which wee you will pardon vs dare not impute vnto those holy ancient Popes In all these Instances you may obserue that wee haue alleaged onely such Popes who were the FIRST of their owne name because we would not be found superfluous yet these First because they must be so much the more aduantagious to warrant our Conclusion to wit that either must your Article of beleeuing such a Necessitie of Subiection damne so many and in your owne iudgements excellently godly and learned Popes of Ancient times or else must their profession condemne your Article of Noueltie and you consequently of Haeresie in beleeuing a Doctrine so Imposterous Scandalous Schismaticall and so manifoldly Blasphemous against so holy Emperours and Popes CHAP. XII Our Seauenth Argument is because this Article The Catholike Romane Church without beliefe whereof there is no Saluation damneth the most learned Saints and Martyrs that are placed in the Romane Calendar for Saints or Martyrs of Christs Church First from Saint Polycarpus SECT 1. POlycarpus Bishop of Smyrna is Registred a Saint in your Roman Calendar and indeede he was an excellent Saint of whom Ecclesiasticall Historie you know giueth so notable a Testimonie as shewing that hee was the Disciple of Iohn the Euangelist who being now brought to Martyrdome by the Proconsull his persecutor and being moued to sweare Heathenishly By Caesar answered saying I AM A CHRISTIAN being then threatned to be cast into the fire said This fire now flameth and will shortly be extinguished but there is an eternall fire prepared for the torment of the wicked which thou artignorant of being burnt in the fire he yeelded a smell as fragrant as the sweetest spices whom when the Iewes and Gentiles heard professing himselfe a Christian they cried out in their wrath saying This is the Doctor of Asia this is the Father of Christians c. Lastly this Polycarpus is hee by whose authoritie Polycrates in the fury of Pope Victor then Excommunicating all the Bishops of Asia that would not celebrate Easter according to the Romane Custome defended and iustified himselfe saying When Polycarpus came to Rome in the dayes of Anicetus Bishop of that See and fell into dispute about the time of Obseruation of the Feast of Easter yet could not Anicetus perswade Polycarpus to alter his Custome which he had kept with Saint Iohn and with other Apostles with whom he himselfe had beene conuersant and in the end both Anicetus and Polycarpus notwithstanding their dispute about these Rites did mutually communicate with each other Thus farre the Ecclesiasticall Storie CHALLENGE BY this it appeareth that Polycarpus and Polycrates were both of the same spirit to maintaine their old Custome of Easter notwithstanding whatsoeuer Opposition of the Bishop of Rome because they both tooke their Resolution from the same ground to wit an Apostolicall Custome of their Church so that Pope Anicetus could no more preuaile with Polycarpus by perswasion for Alteration thereof than Pope Victor could ouercome Polycrates by his Excommunication The difference then is not betweene the Two Asian Bishops Polycarpus and Palycrates for both had the same Resolution the onely difference is betweene the Two Popes viz. Anicetus notwithstanding this Contrarietie will hold Communion with Polycarpus but Victor will needs breake out into Excommunication against Polycrates and was freely reproued for his presumption by godly Fathers of those times You will say this was but a Question of Rites and a matter of small importance be it so But the meaner the matter is they contended about the mainer and more forcible is our Consequence by good Law of Logicke as for example your whole claime is that the Pope is the Bishop of Bishops and Spirituall Monarch in the whole Christian world and ouer Kings and Monarchs You know that in them Impetrare est Imperare their Couetings and desires are Commands If therefore Saint Polycarpus would not yeeld his consent at the much instancing of Pope Anicetus in as wee may so call it a trifle in respect it plainly argueth that hee ought the same Pope no Canonicall Obedience by Law of Discipline much lesse by Doctrine of Faith if any of the now new Romane Articles had beene imposed vpon him seeing that for all the perswasion which the Pope could vse he kept his owne Conclusion still Nor is it altogether nothing which you may obserue that when both Iewes and Heathen cryed out vpon him calling him in despight The Father of Christians as though there were no Bishop in Christianitie as Monarch aboue him he did not vtter one word in behalfe of the Pope and his Supreme Dignity aboue All other Bishops which doubtlesse hee ought to haue acknowledged if that this kinde of Appellation were as you teach so proper to the Pope as to be an Argument of his Primacie aboue all other Christian Bishops II. Saint Cyprian was Exoommunicated by Stephen Bishop of Rome for not beleeuing the Necessitie of Vnion with him SECT 2. SAint Cyprian is also one of the Saints inrolled in your Romane Calendar vnder the title of Confessor and Martyr This witnesse you doe as vehemently Obiect for defence of your former Romane Article as wee doe to impugne and confute it Your Obiection answered It is an horrour to any man of iudgement to see the violence which is offered by your Doctors vnto Saint Cyprian by racking his sentences and inforcing him to say in defence of Papall Primacy that which he neuer ment nor yet dreamed of For that which hee spake of his owne onely Authority against Schismatikes who troubled his Iurisdiction That soundeth in the preoccupation of your iudgements as though it concerned onely the Pope of Rome and where hee maketh One Vniuersall Bishopricke consisting of All Bishops equally one with another without any respect to Rome more than to any other Church That also ringeth in your eares the onely Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome All which your futilily is exactly confuted by an Author who will surely satisfie any confcionable Reader But Saint Cyprian writing to Pope Cornelius doubtlesse a godly Bishop among other allurements hee inserteth this Perfidiousnesse saith he cannot haue accesse to Rome the chaire of Peter Ergo saith your Cardinall Cyprian affirmed that neither the Pope nor the Church of Rome could possibly erre No Father of the Primitiue times is more vrged by you for proofe of this Conclusion than Saint Cyprian no Epistle more insisted vpon than this now cited no words more inculcated than these which we haue alleaged and
Iurisdiction and a Necessity of Subordination to his Sea as whereunto All other Churches are subiect But all this by a meere fallacy in taking the words of Saint Hierom simply and absolutely which he meant in a respectiue and restrained sense whether you consider Damasus Bishop of Rome or the Church of Rome it selfe For first You Obiect concerning Pope Damasus that Saint Hierom calleth himselfe his Sheepe being notwithstanding vnder the Iurisdiction of Paulinus Patriarch of Antioch As though that he might not be held a Sheepe of the Bishop of Rome in respect of his Baptisme the signe and as it were eare-marke of Christianity being as you know Baptized at Rome in his full age Or as though when the Faith of Paulinus his Bishop was questionable it were not lawfull to submit to the iudgement of another Bishop of knowne constancie in the Truth Secondly That Hierom calleth Damasus The Successor of Peter As though euery Successor in Peters Seat had an hereditary Right to be Successor in Peters Faith which contradicteth the iudgement of Saint Hierom who condemned Pope Liberius who was as lawfull a Successor in the Seate of Peter as was Damasus for Consenting vnto Heresie Thirdly That Saint Hierom addresseth himselfe to Pope Damasus alone As though Damasus were the onely man to resolue him in all the Mysteries of Faith whereas in other Doctrines Saint Hierom ingenuously confesseth that he trauelled to remote Countries as Greece to Gregory Nazianzene whom he calleth his Master Of whom saith he I learned to interpret the Scriptures After that he iourneyed to Alexandria in Aegypt To see Didymus that I might saith he consult with him touching the doubts that I had in all Scriptures This needed not Saint Hierom to haue done if the Oracle of all Truth had resided at Rome and had beene personated in Damasus the Bishop of that See Fourthly Yet that Saint Hierom in this question concerning the vse of the word Hypostasis sought satisfaction onely from Pope Damasus and relyed onely vpon his iudgement for the sense of the word As though Saint Hierom did not for his Resolution ioyne vnto Damasus Bishop of Rome Peter the Bishop of Alexandria as depending vpon Both and professing either to be absolued or else condemned with both Or as though Pope Damasus in points of Diuinity had not more need to be instructed by Hierom than this Saint by Pope Damasus This were to giue Pope Damasus himselfe the lie who desired to haue conference with Saint Hierom that so I may aske questions saith Damasus and Thou mayst answer that is as Baronius confesseth that Hierom might teach and the Pope learne yea and as though if you require the sense of this word Hypostasis Saint Hierom did not teach Damasus yes he did So doth your Espensaeus confesse Hieronymus consuluit Damasum imò consuluit Damaso That is He rather instructed Pope Damasus than was instructed by him For he told Damasus that the word Hypostasis might haue a double sense the one was Catholike to signifie Persons the other Hereticall to signifie Essentiall nature The not vnderstanding of which word Hypostasis was the reason that Basil imputed Ignorance to the Church of Rome as hath beene said You will aske what then was the Resolution which Saint Hierom sought from Pope Damasus concerning the vse of that word seeing that S. Hierom could not be ignorant of the true sence This you may know by the Answer of Pope Damasus which was as your Baronius collecteth to let Hierom vnderstand that He might lawfully communicate with Paulinus the Bishop of Antioch So that your last error is as though you would conclude that he that could determine what person was most like to vse the word Hypostasis in the Catholike sense must therefore bee accompted the onely Competent Iudge of the Catholike sense Concerning the Second Subiect in this Obiection which is the Church of Rome we complaine of your Authors for the like Sophistry For you obiect for the Prerogatiue of your Church First these words of S. Hierom I am vnited to the Beatitude that is to the Chaire of Peter As though by Chaire he meant the See and Bishopricke of Rome and not the true doctrine of Faith then preached in Rome euen as Christ spake of the Chaire of Moses that is saith Saint Hierom the Law of Moses Secondly But Hierom saith of this Chaire that Christ hath built his Church vpon this Rocke As though by Rocke is not meant the same doctrine of Faith which was confessed by Saint Peter as hath beene proued and which was at that time truly and faithfully professed by Damasus and the whole Church of Rome or as though because that Rome was then faithfull shee therefore had a priuilege neuer to turne Apostate which is a pernicious Paradoxe voide of all ground of Faith as hath beene also largely declared and which can haue no support by this sentence of Hierom where by Rocke he meaneth not Rome saith Erasmus because Rome may degenerate but he vnderstandeth the Faith which Peter professed Bring vs now this Faith of Saint Peter and then challenge our Faith to beleeue you This is the Rocke vpon which Christ saith Hierom built his Church He saith not Built the Church of Rome but the whole Vniuersall Church This we confesse with Saint Hierom to bee The House of God without which whosoeuer eateth the Paschall Lambe is profane This is the Arke of Noah within which whosoeuer is not perisheth as well Romane as Grecian as well Bishop of Rome as Bishop of Thessaly Thus many waies haue you depraued the Orthodoxe meaning of Saint Hierome by expounding that which was spoken particularly of Damasus and of the Church of Rome then sound in the Faith and applying it vnto Rome and all the Bishops of Rome from time to time as though Virgine Ierusalem might not at length become an Whore Secondly by peruerting his speach concerning the Rocke and Building that is Faith and Church generally taken and appropriating it vnto the Faith and Church of Rome at all times and in all Causes Which in the next place we are to shew to be diametrally opposite to the iudgement of Saint Hierom. Saint Hierom his Opposition to the pretended Soueraignty and Infallibility of the Church and Pope of Rome What Saint Hierom hath taught vs to conceiue of the Pope Clergie and Church of Rome we shall shew from S. Hierom himselfe not sophistically but plainely and truly For when we aske you of what stature euery Pope ought to bee for his dignity and Authority You answer that hee can bee no lesse than a Monarch and sole Head of the Catholike Church But Saint Hierom in the same Epistle that was obiected speaking to Pope Damasus saith I desire of you my Pastor that you would preserue your sheepe and addeth immediately as followeth Put away enuie and let the ambition of the Romane height
that his Treatise out of the writings of Saint Augustine whereas poore man he oweth his whole worke vnto your Iesuite Hieronymus Torrensis who many yeares since set out a large volume diuided into foure Bookes containing all the particulars which Maister Breerly hath diuulged in his owne name without so much as giuing notice of any such Author But they differ in their Titles Hieronymus Torrensis styleth his booke Augustines Confessions Maister Breerly his Augustines Religion Verifying herein that saying of Tully concerning such kind of Plagiaries that as Theeues change the notes and markes of stolne stuffe so They that father other mens workes vpon themselues vse to change the names and Titles as it were the markes and property thereof Is it not sufficient that you haue dealt thus with Protestant Authors but that you must play such parts among your selues But I shall haue more occasion to put Maister Breerly in mind of himselfe else-where For at this present we haue but one Article of Saint Augustine in hand touching the Necessity of Vnion and Subiection to the Church of Rome as The Catholike Church and are to attend whether either He or your Iesuite or Cardinall can euince so Imposterous a Doctrine out of the Volumes of Saint Augustine Your Obiections out of Saint Augustine Saint Augustine one-where attributeth to the Church of Rome A Principalitie of the Apostolicall Sea Else-where he desireth of the Pope of Rome his Pastorall diligence for the repressing of the Heresie of the Pelagians in Palaestine and Africke In the third place he acknowledgeth A necessary obedience to the Popes Iurisdictions and lastly he confesseth that The Pope of Rome is set in a more high Pastorall watch-tower than others Now what of all these Ergo say you the Church of Rome is the chiefe of all Churches and the Pope thereof hath Iurisdiction ouer all other Churches all other Bishops being subiect vnto him vpon paine of Damnation But if these words Principality or Highest Pastorall watch-tower or Charge or Apostolicall Church or Power to represse Heretikes or an acknowledgment of Necessary Obedience must inforce a Iurisdiction of Popedome ouer all others then ought we to admit of many Popedomes For euery Patriarch hath a Principality and height of a Pastorall watch-tower by reason of the greatnesse dignity of his Patriarchship aboue all Metropolitans and Bishops whatsoeuer and yet haue they not ouer all Bishops power of Iurisdiction but onely Principality of Order And looke into the Epistle of Iohn the first Bishop of Rome written to an Arch-Bishop and you shall find him grant that that Archbishop had as well The charge of the Church committed vnto him for the helpe of all in repressing of Heresies as to himselfe And that also therein there is a Necessity Rationis of Cause and Reason to performe such Admonitions namely as a Patient obeyeth the Physitian for the preuenting of imminent danger and not a Necessity Imperij of Compulsion by right of Authority as a souldier obeyeth his Captaine And if that the Title of Apostolicall Church could carry a Monarchicall Chiefedome then was Saint Augustine farre wrong when in the same Epistle where he called the Church of Rome The Apostolicall Seat he called other Churches and Seats also Apostolicall Lastly remember but what hath bene prooued out of Saint Basil and you shall not need to question why the helpe of the Pope of Rome was sometime desired in some Prouinces rather than other shewing that the Popes exercising of his Office in such Cases proceeded not from his Coactiue Authority but from the Arbitrary consent of other Bishops In a word we haue receiued from you out of Saint Augustine nothing but specious colours of words which we shall recompence with his Acts and Deeds Our Opposition of S. Augustine his no Subiection either in Discipline or in Doctrine to the Church of Rome Nothing can better illuminate our vnderstandings in this case than the light of Comparison You therefore whose Article of Faith is to belieue that although the Church of Rome be a Particular Church and so a distinct member from the other Churches Militant yet in respect of the Vniuersall gouernment which it hath throughout the Christian world it is The Catholike and Vniuersall Church as is the Head ouer all other parts of mans bodie hearken to Saint Augustine comparing the Church of Rome with another Particular Church There are two Bishops saith he of two most eminent Churches Stephen of Rome and Cyprian of Carthage being of diuerse opinions in the point of Baptisme Therefore did not Saint Augustine hold the Church of Rome to be the Catholike Head for there cannot be properly Two Most Eminents of the Catholike Church whereof you say there is but One Head One may say that there are Two Bishops of Two most Eminent Bishopricks in England George of Canterbury and Tobias of York because these are so distant that one is not Subordinate or subiect to the other But to say there are two Bishops of two most Eminent Bishopricks George of Canterbury and Lancelot of Winchester were absurd because making the Bishoprick of Winchester to be one of the Two most Eminents it doth abate and pull downe the true Eminency of Canterbury which is an Arch-Bishopricke and Metropolitan Seate and hath Iurisdiction ouer the other But Saint Augustine you know was iudicious and would not reason absurdly Now you whose Faith requireth Vnion and Subiection vnto the Sea of Rome in all Causes as well Rituall as Criminall or Doctrinall lend your attention vnto Saint Augustine in his Comparisons concerning each one In the point of Rites and Ceremonies the question was whether the Church should weekely obserue a Saturday-fast or no The one side which is brought in as for the Affirmatiue part alleaging that Saint Iames at Ierusalem Saint Iohn at Ephesus and others taught the same which Saint Peter did at Rome viz. that The Saturday-fast is to be kept but other Countries forsooke this Tradition The parties for the Negatiue are supposed to answer saying Yea rather some parts of the West Church wherein Rome is seated haue not obserued the Tradition of the Apostles Saint Peter and others who taught that a Fast ought not to be kept vpon that day Here you haue the East and West-Churches compared together and the credit of them both balanced If we should now aske you whether Church East or West deserueth more credit in this Case you would abhorre the question as men bound by Oath to belieue rather the Westerne Church of Rome than all other Churches in the world in point of Tradition But Saint Augustine what This contention saith he is endlesse and indeterminable And Saint Augustines words Aliqua loca in quibus Roma est that is Some places among which Rome is haue a sting which wounds the Papacy For can the Imperiall Ladie of all Churches be thus sleightly brought in among the Manie Surely if S. Augustine had
see notably Blasphemous Then which what better manifestation can there be of the vanity and impiety of your Papisticall Defence Hauing spoken of the Attributes wee now come to the Sentences of Ancient Fathers Your Obiection from Ancient Fathers is taken from their Sentences both Greeke and Latine First of the Greeke Fathers by discouering the Falshood and Vanity of your Papall Defence SECT 6. POpes of Rome in Primitiue Times by their constancy in the Faith by their integrity of life by the Primacy of their place in their priority of Order and by the Generall estimation which was held of them in each of these respects obtained an Authority of credit to helpe all Bishops and Patriarchs in their extremities onely they had no Vniuersall Iurisdiction or Dominion ouer them Hence are the Sentences of Fathers Obiected in the Margent which doe appeare so notably abused by your Obiections The absurdities of whose Consequence we choose in this place to discouer by Similitudes as the Prophet Nathan dealt with Dauid The Case then standeth thus as if they would haue taught those holy Fathers to haue argued Absurdly As from the First namely Ignatius thus The Church of York hath a Seat of Primacy in the Prouince of York therefore that Church is the Head of all Churches within this Kingdome From the Second to wit Iraeneus as if thus It is now necessary for all sorts of Tradesmen to haue recourse to London for their wares for the abundant store which is in that City therefore this Necessity is absolute no-where but at London and perpetuall neuer any where else can it be but at London From the Third viz. Epiphanius and the Fourth viz. Athanasius as if thus A.R. in the County of Suffolke craued pardon of the Shiriffe of Middlesex for a notorious offence done vnto him Ergo he accounted that Shiriffe to haue Authority of a Shiriffe in the County of Suffolke From the Fifth that is Dionysius Alexandrinus as if thus Two Gentlemen one being Iustice of Peace agreed to haue their difference to be ordered by another Iustice of Peace Ergo one of these Iustices of Peace hath Dominion ouer the other Of the Sixt which is Basil much hath beene said already somewhat more presently after From the Seuenth which is Gregory Nazianzene and the Eight namely Zozomene as if thus The Parish within the Tower of London liueth in peace as becommeth that place which commandeth the whole City As though the word Command in this place did note the Ecclesiasticall part that is the Parish to be Commander and not the Tower it selfe Politickely vnderstood From the Ninth to wit Crysostome as if a King of Poland vniustly deposed by his people and flying to the King of Hungary for helpe to preserue the Law of Nations for rhe Regality of Kings and thanking him for his Fatherly loue and care did thereby acknowledge the King of Hungary to bee a King ouer the King of Poland Of the Tenth to wit Cyrill of Alexandria presently after From the Eleuenth that is Theodoret some-what differing from the former thus As if the Bishop of Arles in France being deposed by a Synod of his fellow Bishops for Heresie desiring helpe for his Restitution from the Bishop of Paris and also from other Bishops within his owne Prouince by auouching vnto him and them his Orthodoxe Faith and being thereupon restored by the same Synod by which hee was repulsed did therefore iudge the Bishop of Paris the Supreme Iudge of all the other Bishops From the Twelfth who was Acacius as if one should argue thus The King of Great Brittaine might haue beene surnamed Pacificus because hee had a Care of the Peace of all Christendome therefore he ought to bee held Supreme aboue the Emperour Or thus that Saint Paul who vsed the same speech now Obiected of hauing the care of all Churches must therefore be esteemed to haue had a Gouernement aboue Peter and all the other Apostles From the Thirteenth viz. Liberatus as if thus Although Liberatus who was an Author that had beene deceiued by Heretikes in giuing credit to their false and forged writings doth thus report yet we must not distrust him when he reporteth for the Pope Or else thus We must beleeue that of the Bishop of Patara which he himselfe could not beleeue The last who is Iustinian hath beene already answered by a Parallel of other Bishops and Bishoprickes which haue beene called Heads of all Churches without any colour of a Crowne of Monarchie Our Second discouery of the falshood and Vanity of your former Consequence taken from the Testimonies of some of the Ancient Fathers aboue mentioned SECT 7. THe Fathers that haue beene alleadged were of the Easterne Church and therefore doubtlesse were of the Faith of those Generall Councels in the East which haue beene knowne to oppose themselues to the pretended Papall Iurisdiction as oft as they had iust Cause so to doe Which one Consideration ought to be your full satisfaction in this point Notwithstanding for a clearer conuiction of that falshood which we haue beene constrained so often to complaine of in your Obiectors We proceed to a Second Answer which is by Retorsion in auouching your owne witnesses against you Saint Basil is the Sixth Witnesse which your Cardinall produced one so aduerse to your Cause as that hee you know fell into an extreme distrust of the Church of Rome which be iustly condemned of Pride and Ignorance and also accompted Athanasius Bishop of Antioch to be in his time in respect of his sound and sincere iudgement The Chiefe Head of all others If now Saint Basil cannot be called a Subiect to your Monarch the Pope of Rome then ought you to haue patience with Protestants who haue tenne-fold more iust cause aginst the Church of Rome than he at that time possibly could haue Saint Cyrill Patriarch of Alexandria hath beene cited for the Ninth witnesse whom because his Testimonie requireth a larger discussion we haue reserued to this place The Story concerning him as you may collect out of your Baronius consisteth of Three parts 1. In behalfe of Theophilus Predecessor to Cyrill the 2. Touching Atticus Patriarch of Constantinople an Admonisher of Cyrill the 3. Is acted by Cyrill himselfe Theophilus Patriarch of Alexandria and Predecessor to Cyrill was Excommunicated by Pope Innocentius for not admitting of the name of Chrysostome now dead into the Dyptickes or Tables of publike Commemorations in which Excommunication the same Theophilus continued vntill the last houre of his death And how little support you can haue for that which your Cardinall addeth touching his altering of his opinion at the very point of death will appeare in handling the Second and Third part Secondly therefore Atticus Patriarch of Constantinople who had runne the same course of Opposition with Theophilus against the Restoring of the Name of Chrysostome now after the
of all the Fathers whom your Cardinall in the strength of his learning and iudgement hath produced to guard and defend this your Monarchy of the Church of Rome or Bishop thereof The number of the Greeke Fathers are but Thirteene and of the Latine but Eleuen within the space of the first sixe hundred yeares which we call the extent of Primitiue Antiquitie But he omitteth Origen Tertullian Iustin Martyr Ruffinus and aboue fiftie Fathers more whom he citeth in his Catalogue of Ecclesiasticall writers to haue written Bookes of Apologies Prescriptions and Treatises against the Heretickes and Schismatickes of those former ages Now would we but demand of your ingenuitie whether you can thinke it a matter we say not credible but euen so much as fanciable to thinke that of almost an hundred Witnesses of the Truth of Antiquity so many as haue bene omitted and had as great conflicts with Heretickes and Schismatickes should say iust nothing at all for the dignifying of the Monarchicall Iurisdiction of Rome when the very acknowledgement thereof might if true haue bene in their Time the Decision of the whole Cause and almost of all other Controuersies in Religion yea and a Reparation of all Schismes in the Church of Christ. And that they also that are alleaged for proofe of the same Attributes should say nothing more in effect for Rome and her Bishop than vpon the like occasions they haue said of other Orthodox Churches and Bishops and not thus onely but that furthermore some of the same Fathers haue wrestled and iustled with that your pretended Monarch and oftentimes giuen him the foyle To whom we might adde Tertullian of whom it hath bene confessed that in the time of his Catholicisme he did not giue that respect to Rome as is done at this day but marshalled her with the Church of Corinth Others insomuch that if he had bene now aliue he could not haue escaped vnpunished And after his defection vnto Montanisme he called indeed the then Pope High Pope and Bishop of Bishops but as is also Confessed by way of Ironie and scorne so obseruable euen in his daies which were about the yeare 217. after Christ was the Presumption of the Romane Pope III. The last CHALLENGE concerning the Testimonies of Ancient Fathers IT will be Obiected that the Popes of these daies do still retaine the Places and Titles which were of their Predecessors This we deny not no more than we do that many Noble mens Heires enioy the houses Escucheons and Robes of their Ancestors who haue little inheritance in their Fathers virtues You your selues can giue vs Examples in the former who confesse that the Denomination of your Pope to instile him thus Your Holinesse was first giuen to Pope Leo about the yeare 440. for his Holinesse sake and sanctitie of life Yet is this you know continued if we may belieue euen your most Popish Authors to Popes who haue bene Most wicked yea sometimes Apostaticall rather than Apostolicall and retained onely in respect of their Functions Or if this will not serue yet haue you another Engine whereby to hooke in those Titles whiles you teach that A Pope who in his life defiled his Sea with most leud and beastly actions notwithstanding after his death may not be intitled Pope of bad but of BLESSED MEMORY Why because hereby say you is considered not what he did but what he ought to haue done In which sense we shall as easily yeeld vnto your Romane Church in respect of Faith the Appellation of Catholike as could belong to such Popes the Title of Holinesse Your fourth kind of Obiections are taken from the Testimonies of Ancient Popes as well from their Titles as in their Acts and Deeds First of their Titles and a Discouery of the Vanity of this Defence out of the Testimonies of Popes of the first three hundred yeares after Christ. SECT 11. OVR Inquisition is concerning the iudgement of Antiquity and Antiquity properly so called may be confined within the Circumference of the first sixe hundred yeares In the first three hundred yeares whereof are produced among the Popes by your Cardinall for the proofe of Papal Monarchie ouer the Catholike Church the names of these Popes to wit Clemens Anacletus Euaristus Alexander Pius Anicetus Victor Zepherinus Calixtus Lucius Marcellus Eusebius Miltiades Marcus somewhat more than the full number of an Inquest of men it were well if it might be said Good and true Foâ— although these Popes were iust and holy men in themselues and blessed Professors of Christ most of them sealing their Faith with their bloud Yet seeing that the Epistles which are cited in their names for witnessing your Romane Article were falsely fathered vpon them it must needes be confessed that you haue not all those Popes but onely the Names of so many Popes to patronize your Cause For albeit that Stapleton Turrian and some other of your late Schoolemen propound these Epistles and Testimonies as Most authenticall and no-way to be suspected Yet your Cardinall euen when he iudgeth them to be most Ancient sheweth how little repose he could haue in them when as he is compelled to grant saying I cannot denie but some errors haue crept into these Epistles which I dare not affirme to haue beene vndoubtedly the Epistles namely which were written by those Popes In this point a learned man in our Church one singularly studied in the disquisition of Antiquity for discerning of the proper workes of Fathers from the forged and counterfeit hath giuen you sufficient Reasons in his Censure of Writers to proue the obiected Epistles which your Cardinall himselfe confesseth to be Doubtfull to bee vndoubtedly Bastard and adulterate Partly by the errors that are apparant in them no lesse absurd than to turne Cephas into Caput a Stone in an Head and the like Partly by the Confession of your owne Learned Authors accompting diuers of them Suppositions and bastardly false Thus haue almost all of these by some of your Doctors as namely Cardinall Cusanus Cardinall Turrecremata Cardinall Baronius and by your leaue Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe together with Contius Binius and other learned men selected for the correcting of Gratian beene excepted against Wee might adde heereunto that whereas among infinite multitudes of men each man is distinguished and discernable from another in face and countenance in gesture and voice yet these Epistles now obiected haue all the same style and for Stylus est orationis quasi Nasus as it were the same Nose and that as you cannot but know an horrid barbarous one too whereas the Writings of these Popes were doubtlesse polished and elegant as were the workes of other Authors in those daies And is not this good arguing Did not the Maid finde out Peter to bee a Galilean by his Language when shee said Thy speach betrayeth thee and did not the Gileadites discerne their enemies the Ephraimites by their
dissenting from the Pope and his Apostolicall See in this whole Cause and not thus onely but in condemning him also It must therefore follow that these 165 Bishops of this Generall Councell and the Catholike Church in them not onely in not beleeuing this Article but also in withstanding it were damned or elâ—e that your Article and the defenders thereof are iustly damnable Consider we pray you in what a snare of Heresie and Blasphemie you are intangled seeing that you cannot but see that your owne Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church without subiection whereunto there is no saluation is Contradicted by the truely Catholike Church it selfe in her purer and more primitiue age of the first 500 yeeres by those fiue Generall Councels the first fower whereof Saint Gregory himselfe professed To imbrace as the bookeâ— of the Gospell And the Fift saith he I also reuerence Idle therefore and vaine is your Obiection out of that Synod from one word Obedience which they professed to the Catholike See by not discerning betweene a Logicall and a Morall Obedience For they promised Obedience to that See in all her Orthodoxe and reasonable Perswasions but not to her peremptory Commands and Conclusions For you may Obey Saint Augustine by subscribing to his iudgement without submitting to his Iurisdiction If you know not this then may you learne ìt namely that a Superior may be said to obey his Inferior when he yeeldeth to his reasonable perswasion As a sicke man to the Physitian VI. That the beleefe of the Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church without subiection whereunto there is no saluation doth damne all the Fathers of the Sixt Seuenth and Eighth Councels in your owne estimation Generall SECT 7. THese three Councels which you call Generall and which doe containe aboue the compasse of 300 yeeres more giue vs iust Cause to iudge this your Romane Article to bee Imposterous Wee instance first in the first Two The Sixt and Seuenth Councels in the Cause of Pope Honorìus condemning him for an Heretike THe Sixt vniuersall Synod saith your Cardinall was in the yeere 681 or according to others 685 Celebrated at Constantinople by 289 Bishops The Seuenth Vniuersall Councell was held at Nice in the yeere 781 wherin were 350 Bishops So he Well in both these was Honorius Pope of Rome condemned for an Heretike How will you free your Pope from being a Monothelite Namely The Fathers of both these Generall Councels say you were deceiued as they might easily be in a matter of Fact to iudge whether Honorius were a Monothelite not in a matter of Faith So your Cardinall Is it a matter of Fact then and were these Fathers deceiued therein Who can say so Why Cardinall Bellarmine doth affirme it Good God! The rare modestie of this man who wil haue vs to beleeue that one Bellarmine liuing now a 1000 yeeres since that matter was in agitation should iudge better by his Coniectures of the Circumstances of a matter of Fact than could 639 Bishops for so many there were in all in their publike Synods iam flagrante crimine when-as yet the Cause was fresh and greene their Witnesses liuing and all Circumstances which are the perfect Intelligencers visibly before their eyes This Condemnation of Pope Honorius by two Councels doth vndermine the Fox-hole wherein your great Clerkes commonly lurke by telling vs that Popes may be Heretikes as Priuate Doctors but not in their publike Persons as Popes An Answer most friuolous 1. Because those Bishops condemning Him in their publike Councell did iudge him according to his publike person 2. Because they Condemned Honorius Bishop of Rome in the same tenor wherein vpon the same Heresie they condemned Sergius Bishop of Constantinople Anathematizing them both for their Heresie of Monothelitisme It would much better haue become your Cardinall to haue Confessed in the spirit of Ingenuitie as your Canus hath done that Howsoeuer other Popes may be excused from Heresie yet I see not saith he how Honorius can be vindicated and freed from this guilt whom Psellus Tharasius Epiphanius Beda whom Adrian and Agatho both Popes whom the seauenth he might haue also alleaged the VI. Generall Councell hath branded with the Note of Haeresie So he CHALLENGE CALL this as you do but a matter of Fact if you will which caused those Councels to condemne Pope Honorius for an Heretike after his death yet doth this plainely and ineuitably tell vs that they were of this beliefe that the Pope of Rome may be an Heretike and that They who would excommunicate that Bishop of Rome being dead would not haue Communicated with him if persisting an Heretike he had beene aliue no more than they would with his fellow Heretike Sergius Bishop of Constantinople And if they would denie vnion with him certainly they would not haue acknowledged spirituall Subiection vnto him Which flatly gain-sayeth your Article of beleeuing The Catholike Romane Church and the Bishop thereof without subiection vnto whom there is no saluation Therefore all those 639. Bishops besides two Popes and all their Beleeuers must necessarily be damned or else your Romish Article as a most execrable Paradox must vtterly be abandoned VII That the Beliefe of the Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church without subiection whereunto there is no Saluation damneth the Eighth Councell which you call Generall consisting of 383. Bishops in the yeare 870. SECT 8. WHat was done in this fourth Synod of Constantinople you may vnderstand from your owne Men. These Bishops saith your Binius condemned a Custome of the Sabboth-fast in Lent then vsed in the Church of Rome and thereupon made they a Canon inhibiting the Church of Rome from keeping that Custome any longer Their words are these Wee will that this Canon be constantly obserued in the Church of Rome Would the Church of Rome swallow and disgest such an hot morsell at this day wee trowe not for This Canon saith your Surius is not receiued because it reprehendeth the Church of Rome the MOTHER-CHVRCH of all other Churches So he CHALLENGE YEa rather it condemneth your presumption in calling the Church of Rome the CATHOLIKE MOTHER-CHVRCH aboue all others As though a Generall Councell were not rather to be called the Catholike Church than Shee So then those 383. Bishops prescribe a Canon and impose it vpon her and thereby sufficiently disclaime all Subiection vnto her as Any albeit but halfe-witted may easily discerne Where againe wee are constrained to iudge your fore-said Article Execrable rather than to giue those 383. Bishops ouer for damned soules Our generall CHALLENGES concerning the formerly cited Eight Generall Councels Remember by this your Article The Catholike Romane Church without subiection whereunto there is no Saluation and without the beliefe whereof none can be saued are damned not onely all those that shall oppose themselues against the Church of Rome but also all they that do not beleeue the same as an Article
is not iustifiable in the Conscience of euery sound Christian First hee held it a way to Heresie for any Church to take vpon her to create a new Article of Faith such as hee beleeued the Romish Doctrine of Indulgences to be Secondly he taught it to be a Satonicall lye to constitute that for an Article of Faith which is in it selfe a meere falshood Thirdly hee proclaimed your Doctrine of Indulgences to be a Blasphemous Article because it is not onely a new and false Doctrine but also the very Nurse of all Impietie Each point is worthy to be Discussed Touching the First point your Philiarchus will haue you to Take heede of the Heresies of Luther in teaching that the Church hath no power to create new Articles of Faith So hee If this be true then marke I pray you what fellowes and Companions Luther hath or Patrons rather of his Heresie accordingly as your owne Doctors will teach you who doe not onely openly professe for themselues that The now Church ought to relie vpon the Doctrine anciently taught in the Apostles times but also confesse that The ancient Fathers taught that the Church deliuereth no new Faith but alwaies confirmeth and explicateth the ancient Faith Alleaging for proofe hereof the authoritie of Irenaeus Hierome Vincentius Lirinensis Nor can any produce one Father in all Antiquitie that did not account euery new Article of Faith that is to say euery new Doctrine made necessary to saluation to be no better than a new Heresie So iustifiable is Luther in this point Next Luther in his first Assumption saith that the Doctrine of the Popes Indulgence is a New Doctrine of Faith and that it is imposed vpon the Church of Rome as an Article of Faith Whereof if peraduenture you should be ignorant your owne Popes would instruct you Pope Pius the IV. setteth downe this of Indulgences among his other Articles concluded of in the Councell of Trent as Necessarily to be beleeued vpon danger of Damnation And Pope Leo the X. tooke this as his hint in condemning Luther for denying any power to be resideÌ„t in the Church to establish a new Article of Faith An Articleâ—hen â—hen it is made and that it is also New which Doctrine of IndulgeÌ„ces you beleeue to be an easing or helping of Soules out of the paines of Purgatorie-fier we hope you may be satisfied from your selues who teach first that all Doctrine which is not New is deriued either from Scripture or antient Tradition But concerning your Doctrine of Indulgences some of your owne Doctors haue made bold to proclaime saying It is not found either in Scripture or in other writings of ancient Fathers Whereof also your Romane Champion against Luther euen in this Question concerning Indulgences doth grant that There was no vse of Indulgences in the beginning of the Church Christian. Which must necessarily haue then bene if at that time it had bene a Doctrine of Faith except you will confesse that there was then no Purgatory-fier at all nor any soules of men departing this life in the guilt of veniall sinnes but that all the scores of debts of temporall punishments were then wiped off at the death of euery Christian in those Apostolicall times And accordingly giue vs some reason how afterwards that Fier was kindled and what was the fewell that set it on a flame after the space of 1294. yeares when Boniface the 8. was Pope Who as your selues know after that the world was affrighted with Purgatory-torments was the first that extended and applyed Indulgences vnto Purgatory This made your Frier Castro in his coniecture of greater antiquity in them to excuse their Noueltie saying Indulgences are not therefore to be contemned as being admitted but of late because many things saith he are made knowne to posteritie of which the more ancient times were ignorant Behold now the great reuerence forsooth you haue of the iudgement of Antiquity Besides to pull vp this weede by the roots the ground of Indulgences as you teach is The spirituall Threasury of the Church consisting in the satisfactory and meritorious workes of Supererrogation done by the faithfull Which notwithstanding as you likewise know your Doctors of Louaine and some Schoolemen affirme were anciently wanting in the Church So then your Doctrine of Indulgences is New in Institution New in Practise New in the Extent New in the Roote and foundation and euery way a New Article So iustifiable is Luther in his Assumption calling it New Thirdly Luther called this Doctrine False yea and Impious also and Blasphemous And false it must needs be if it be but New But how naughty also and impious the vent of Indulgences was your noble Historian can best report giuing you an instance in the same Pope Leo Who saith he vnto his sinne of ill dispersing of Indulgences added a farre greater for although he was of himselfe prone enough to all licentiousnesse yet by the instigation of Cardinall Puccius in whom he had great confidence he gathered huge summes of money by sending his Breeues abroad euery where promising expiation of all sinnes and life euerlasting vpon a certaine price which any should giue according to the haynousnesse of his offence Then rose vp Martin Luther a Professor of Diuinity in Wittemberge who first confuting and then condemning the Sermons which were made for Indulgences at length questioned that power which the Pope assumed to Himselfe in the same Breeues So he And what other we pray you can be the Consequence of this piece of Doctrine but that which if you be to seeke you may learne from experienced Authors within your owne Church who say as appeareth in the Margent that When first Indulgences were set on sale with full Pardons men did lesse abstaine from wickednesse and the keyes of the Church became vile That Pope Leo the 10. was Too too indulgent in granting Indulgences That Popes are the most expert Alchemists By Turning their leade into gold through their Negligences otherwise called Indulgences Noting that Papall Indulgences to Sinners worketh Negligence in well doing That They Measuring all things by gaine tyrannize ouer the people sitting in the seate of Simon Magus or else of Caiphas We might easily loade you with multitudes of Inuectiues of your owne Authors against the Impiety of Papall Indulgences so iustifiable is Luther in his Opposition against them insomuch that Erasmus held it An Impiety not to defend him This Luther who in the opinion of the Popular Auditors so farre ouercame his Aduersarie Ecchius in a Disputation held at Lipsia that your Castro doth instance in this Example and thereupon prefixeth a Rule To auoide publike Disputation with as he accounteth and calleth Protestants pertinacious Heretikes The Summe of All may be comprized in a few words The Patrons of Romish Indulgences by making it an Article of Faith do Canonize and Deifie a Nouelty a Falshood and a
very Baud of all Impietie Whence to vse your owne words Adulteries Incests Periuries Homicides and the spawne of all euils did arise THESIS II. LVTHER had necessary Cause to Depart from the Church of Rome SECT 15. IT is not as you haue heard the corruption of a Doctrine which can alwaies driue a man out of the Church except other properties of necessary Remoouing do concurre What these are you may call to your remembrance Which may be obserued in this Case of Luther and iustifie him before God and Man As first the generall Obstinacie of contrary Teachers such as were the Romish of whom Luther complained saying They Alto fastu with high disdaine contemned my Preaching against Indulgences Secondly Luthers hearing if he had stayed the way of Truth often blasphemed Thirdly Luthers complaining of violent forcing of men to subscribe vnto New Articles this is Tyrannie And lastly he further chargeth them with Compelling him to submit to Satanicall Doctrines speaking both of the vilenesse of Indulgences and the Idolatrie of and in the Romish Masse Albeit any One of all these had bene a sufficient cause for him to warrant his Departure out of Romish Babylon THESIS III. LVTHER and his Followers were farre more safe for their Soules state in that Separation from the Church of Rome and lesse Schismatikes than They whom he forsooke SECT 16. ALL sound knowledge is by vnderstanding of the true Causes of things It is the Cause that distinguisheth a Martyr from an Heretike and the same iust Cause also truely and essentially vniteth one with the true Catholike Church discerneth him both from an Excommunicate properly so called and from a Schismatike Attend then to that which your Cardinall would haue you to MARKE Marke saith he that an vniust sentence of Excommunication is of no force at all Accordingly Saint Augustine Iniusta vincula iustitia disrumpit Vniust bonds are more iustly broken then kept Of this somewhat more hath bene said in a former Thesis This knowne it wil be no hard matter to find out the true Schismatike For as it is the vnlawfull Agent and not the Innocent Patient that maketh the Fray so in Excommunication Whosoeuer Excommunicateth another vniustly condemneth not that other but himselfe Accordingly in Separation from any Church the Actiue if vniust and not the partie Passiue is the Schismatike vpon which Suppositition Firmilianus Concluded against Stephen Pope of Rome that the said Stephen was the Schismatike by his Excommunicating and separating S. Cyprian with many Others in the Africane Chuches and else-where from his Communion In like Case well said once your Cardinall Benno that Eusebius did binde Liberius by forsaking his Communion Euen as did also the Africane Bishops in their Synod by Excluding Pope Vigilius out of their Communion in the dayes of Iustinian Now that Luther was vniustly Excommunicate by your Pope the first Thesis hath fully prooued And that Luther was a Passiue in this Separation appeareth not onely by his owne Complaints saying I was Compelled Constrained c. but also by the Proceedings of Pope Leo against him Else why is it that your owne Thuanus speaking of this Separation said that Some in those dayes layd the fault vpon Pope Leo More fully your Cassander an Author selected in those dayes by the King of the Romanes as the chiefest Diuine of his time and one most fit to be Consulted with concerning the same Separation of Protestants I cannot saith he denie many of them in the beginning to haue bene mooued and prouoked with a pious zeale to a sharpe reprehension of manifest Abuses and that the principall cause of this calamity and Disunion is to be imputed to them who superciliously and disdainefully contemned such godly Admonitions Neither yet euer had there bene as I am perswaded any Contention about the externall Vnitie of the Church except the Popes had abused their authority to an ambitious and Domineiring manner of Rule aboue the limits which Christ prescribed to his Church So He. But it will be said Why did not Luther seeke remedie and redresse of his wrong somewhere where we pray you should he haue sought it can you tell By Appealing to a Generall Councell why that meanes was barred by the Popes Extrauagant denouncing him to be Anathema whosoeuer shall so much as consult or deliberate to Appeale from the Pope to a future Generall Councell Albeit this preferring the Popes iudgement before a Councel's is by the sentence of two Romish Councels as namely Constance and Basil held a Doctrine of all others most Schismaticall Oh! but he being but a Sheepe cited to Rome should haue appeared before Leo his Pastor notwithstanding the Popes high indignation against him As though you could be ignorant of the Apologue of the Sheepe and the Lion at their meeting the end whereof could be no other then this Ora Leonis habes for the sheepe to run head-long into the Lions mouth A Fable which of later times the Venetian Fulgentius the French Abbot of Boys and after them the Dalmatian Spalatensis verified seelie Sheepe with the losse of their liues THESIS IV. The Romish Obiections vrged against this Separation of LVTHER are notably friuolous SECT 17. STill we say that an ill Cause oftentimes bewrayeth it selfe as much by the friuolous Obiections of an Opponent as it is discouered by the iust Euidences of a Defendant There are but foure kinde of Obiections besides such as haue bene alreadie answered which you do usually vrge against Luther THESIS V. The I. Obiection in respect of LVTHER'S former Vow to the Pope or Church of Rome is vaine and idle SECT 18. IT is true Luther had bene a Vowed and if you will a sworne Vassall to the Pope and to the Romane Church And so was once your owne Stephen Gardiner sometimes Bishop of Winchester whose answer in like case may satisfie your Curiositie and controlle your scurrilitie in this point Hee in his booke of True Obedience to the King notwithstanding the Popes Breeues to the contrary enlargeth himselfe in his Answer after this manner following Some saith he pull me backward asking why I enterprize so to teach Obedience as that I do disclose my owne Disobedience to the authority and power meaning of the Pope for whose Defence I was bound by my Oath to defend his authority to my possible Power Where is his keeping of Oaths become say they where is his fidelitie He was sworne to defend the Rights of the Church of Rome and now professeth himselfe an open enemie ther-unto But this their talke no more mooueth me than the bumbling sound of an old barrell because where vnlawfull Oathes there also vnlawfull Vowes are not to be kept for none are to sweare to any wickednesse Thus your owne Bishop and after illustrateth this by an elegant Similitude A certaine married man saith he when he thought by iust likely-hoods his first wife was dead