coÌ„mission of God to doe all thesâ— things The Suprem gouernour may practise any thing properly belonging to his gouernmeÌ„t It is not possible for a man 〈◊〉 haue the supreame gouernment in 〈◊〉 Ecclesiastical causes by lawful power aâ—â— right but that he should thereby haâ—â— also power and right to execute any 〈◊〉 those things which belong to such Ecclesiastical causes as are vnder his gâ—uernment Marck the point I say not he is bound to executâ— euery such matter as falleth vnder hâ—â— gouernment or that it is decent for hiâ— to doe it but that he may doe it anâ— hath right and power to doe it if he bâ— rightly the supream gouernour in thâ— behalf An exaÌ„ple in ciuil Matters For example the King who 〈◊〉 supream gouernour in the ciuil and teÌ„poral causes hath vnder him Iudges shriues maiors Capitains and constables If his maiesty will plaie the iudgâ— in Westminster hal or the shriue in any sessions or the Capitain in warre he surelie may doe it concerning the right â—f his Kingdome Yea he lacketh no â—ight nor lawfull power to play the Solâ—iour the Tailour the Mason Carâ—enter or Tanner albeit he perhappes doe lacke the cunning or experience â—o exercise or practise those Artes so as they ought to be practised Likewise an Archbisshoppe or Priuate who hath Bisshoppes An exaÌ„ple in Ecclesiastical matters Archedeacons Officials Priests and Clerks vnder him may by right of his Suâ—eriorie baptize anie childe blesse or geue benediction burie the dead approue their last wils by his own fact helpe a Priest to Masse cary the crosse in procession digge the graue and to be shorte he maie doe anie thing which anie man may doe who is vnder his iurisdiction If then the king haue the right and power of Supreme gouernement in al Ecclesiastical causes The applying of the rule to our purpose seing it belongeth to the right and power of Ecclesiastical causes that a man may preache baptize blesse or geue benedictioÌ„ to the people and administer the sacrament of Christes body and blood and binde or loose synnes it must needes be that the King euen by that his supreamicy should also haue power and right to preache to baptise to geue benediction to administer the sacrament of Christes supper and to binde or loose synnes A farther declaration I say not that he by his supremacie hath cunning either to preache or to baptize or to geue benediction or to administer the sacrament of Christes supper or to play the tailer or the mason but that no law right and power doth or can forbid him to doe these things if in these things he be the supreme gouernour so that if he otherwise had cunning he might with praise no lesse preache and baptise and geue benediction or administer the sacrament of Christes supper then he might build a howse with his own haÌ„ds or cutte a garment yf he were cuÌ„ning â—herein But now if all the world confesse 2. Para. 20 non est tui officij ô Rex sed sacerdotuÌ„ domini â—hat à King by his kinglie office doth â—ot only lack knowlege but also hath no â—ight or power at al to preache to bapâ—â—ze to geue benediction or to conseâ—rate the sacrament of Christes supper 〈◊〉 a although otherwise he be most cunâ—ing and excellently lerned except â—e haue the office of a priest also geuen â—im and be lawfullie sent and authoriâ—d by the imposition of the hand of â—riesthood doutlesse it ought to be conâ—essed 1. Tim. 4. that a King by his kinglie office â—ath no right or supreme power at all in â—cclesiastical causes vnlesse it be comâ—itted to him from the bisshop And â—hat as wel because he of him self can â—ot practise those causes though he wold as euen our aduersaries coÌ„fesse â—s also because his power be it neuer 〈◊〉 roial reacheth not so high as the â—ower of spiritual gouernmeÌ„t appointed by Christ doth And surely no man by the commission which he onely hath to rest or to prison men maie also hang them or burn them For the lesser authority doth not coÌ„prehend the greater Say now M. Horn whether to celebrate our Lords supper and to preache Gods word and to absolue or bind sins it be a lesser or a greater ministery theÌ„ the Kings authoritie If it be lesser you haue reason on your side For then a greater power may comprehend it being the lesser But if it be incomparablie greater to minister vnto men the heauenly Sacraments then to minister iustice in temporal things if that be a higher power which toucheth the soule then that which only toucheth the body then by what meanes extend you the commission of a King which hath to do with lesse maters not only to the commission of a Priest In the booke agâ—inst M. Feenâ—Ì„ but also aboue it You bring many examples euil applied to make an apparance of somewhat But they al concerne matters of fact which are for many circumstances subiect to much wrangling But either it was no good Prince who medled of his own authority with disposing holy matters Or if he were otherwise good that deed was not good Or if he did it wel he did it by coÌ„mission from a Prophet or froÌ„ a high Priest Or he was deceiued by flatterers Or els being forced by necessity which is vnder no law he only sought the publike peace in that his deed and not to set himself ordinarily aboue the spiritual gouernmeÌ„t For howsoeuer the deeds of men be vncertaine deceitful aÌ„d vnknowen in al their particular circuÌ„stances the word of God can not fail which saith to Peter and to other Bishops after him Feed my sheep Ioan. 21. Here I aske whether the King or Emperour who is christened be Peters sheep or no If he be not he is not only not aboue the Church but he is not at all of the Churche If he be his sheepe then I say boldly that as it is against the law of nature which neuer can be wholie changed for a shepe to rule his shepheard in anie manner of such sort wherein he is the shepheard euen so it is vtterly impossible for anie King or Prince to be in anie respect of Ecclesiastical gouernment aboue his own pastour who soeuer he be for the time And yet farther to make this matter more plaine be it that a Christian King doth take vpoÌ„ him the supreame gouernment in Ecclesiastical matters What if a bishop being called before him Epist 32. sequeÌ„t say boldlie as S. Ambrose in a like case did may it please your maiestie to coÌ„maund my goods my laÌ„ds my body my life it shal be at your coÌ„mandemeÌ„t But as for the ordering and gouerning of my bishoprike I will not yeld it to you because Christ and not your maiestie committed the same to me what could that Christian King doe to that bishop more theÌ„ Nero or Traian might haue done Could he excommunicate him by his roial power M.
nations but also in a fâ—â— more excellent kinde then the Christian Kings are For to what Christian King did Christ euer say Ioan. 20. As my father sent me I send thee Math. 16. or vpon this rock I will build miâ— Church Ioan. 21. or doest thow loue me more then these fede my shepe â–ª feede my lambs And yet is a King aboue priests â–ª yea aboue the high pastour of Christes flock he is so in dede with them who make lesse accompt of Christes heaueÌ„ly institution and Officer then of him that was first made either by the necessitie of wordly calamities to kepe away a greater euil from the common weale or els by the wanton and proud affection of earthly men ambitiously affecting tyrannical power Let no man thinck that I despise the authoritie of Kings God forbid but thei are a good thing brought in mercifully sumwhere to staye violent iniuries and robberies and other where permitted of God for our iust punishment 2. Cor. 5. and not any like thing to that diuine order of pastours which Christ ordeined purposely for our reconciliation to God the father and for the auoiding of al iust punishment otherwise deserued It was a King as Saint Gregorie In 1. Reg. lib. 4. c. 1 noteth who deuided the ten tribes from the Churche of God and made those by the iust punishment of God to be idolatours who so greedely preferred his gouernment before the gouerment of the priests And are not we now in the same case who for greedines to reiect the Vicar of Christ are come to preferre the secular and temporall power before the spirituall the body before the sowle and earth before heauen In 1. Reg. lib. 4. c. 1. Nonnulli saith Saint Gregory in tantum dementiae malum proficiunt vt commouere ipsum etiaÌ„ statum Ecclesiastici culminis non vereantur There are some who are come to so great madnes that they are not a feard to moue and trouble euen the state it self of the Ecclesiastical toppe or highest dignitie of the Churche And a little after His autem qui viuebant sub spiritali regimine Ibidem Regem petere quid aliud est quà m eandem spiritalem praelationem in seculaâ—m dominationem transferre geâ—re For those that did liue vnder the spiâ—â—tual gouernment to require a King â—hat other thyng is it then to goe aâ—out to transfer the same spiritual preâ—teship or gouernment into a tempoâ—al dominion Yf any man would deepely weigh with himself that God chose such a â—ecret and extraordinarie way to â—â—ue mankinde that no creature â—ould worck it beside his owne Almightie Sonne and that he comming â—nto the world was so farre from working his purpose by Kings and princes that whereas it was most easie for him to haue made manie Kings and Princes at the beginning to beleue in him 1. Cor. 1. he rather chose the weakest things of the world to confound the strong things and wrought the beginning and increase of his Church by the misbeliefe and persecâ—tion of princes if he would be thinâ— himself how farre the pouerty and hâ—militie of the Kingdome of heauen 〈◊〉 from the pompe and wordly distractiâ—â— of Kings Yea though thei be Christiaâ— and good also he wold much wondâ—â— what sense in holy matters thei haue who dare make that princely state sâ—preme head of the Church which of 〈◊〉 states came last to the faith and the pomp whereof is most contrary of aâ—â— other degrees to the profession of the same And yet what are they who persuade this matter The incoÌ„stancie of the protestants verely those who hauing iustly reproued some lewd and proud bishops for their wordly pompe afterward set vp Kings in the bishops places yea aboue them also as though any King had lesse wordly pompe then the bishops Yea they also doe it who protesting thei will beleue nothing but the expresse word of God yet beleue Kings to be the heads of the Church â—hich they not only can not find in â—ods word but thei rather finde there 1. Reg. â— â—at God was angrie when the â—ouernment of the highe priest â—as reiected and a kingly gouernment â—alled for Moreouer yf by this precept the â—ings of the nations haue domiâ—ion ouer them it shall not be so â—mong you not only all tyrannical or â—ordly power of life and death but also â—l spiritual primacie and superioritie be forbidden to the Apostles ouer the whole militant Church it is forbiddeÌ„â—ikewise that there should be any superiour in any one part of the Church For the parts accordiÌ„g to their degree are of the same nature whereof the whole is Therefore if the whole militant body may haue no one head much lesse any part thereof may haue a head If then no Apostle may be superiour or primate in any parte of the Church much lesse any other Christian maÌ„ wâ—â— is inferiour to an Apostle may be sâ—preme gouernour in any one part of thâ— same Church But euery King in thâ— behalf as he is a Christian is inferioâ—â— to the Apostles for he is both tawgâ—â— his faith of them Matth. 28 and baptized by them and in spiritual matters he must be guided by them therefore seing the King may not be supreame gouernour of any parte of Christes Church in that respect as he is a Christian maÌ„ if yet he shal be supreame head of his own Christian realme by any meane at all it must be by that power which he either had before his Christianity or beside it For by his christianity it is not possible that he shold haue any greater power then the Apostles had Ioan. 20 who were sent into the world with Christes authority If then a King be supreme gouernour of the Church where he is a King besides his christianity he is no otherwise supreame gouernour thereof then any Ethnik prince might haue beÌ„ And so it 〈◊〉 brought to passe by the doctrine of the â—rotestaÌ„ts that an infidel King hah suâ—reme power to visite to reforme to â—orrect and to depose any bishop â—ithin his own realm The which arâ—umeÌ„t wheÌ„ Antichrist or the great Turk shal make vnto the ProtestaÌ„ts â—hey must nedes yeld vnto it and grauÌ„t â—iÌ„ to be supreame head of their Church Be it so of their Church but the Caâ—holikes shal stil keepe them vnder the â—piritual gouernmeÌ„t of the bisshops and â—astours which Christ hath instituted To enter one degree farther in this matter let vs graunt that some King were so ê‘fit so poore in spirit so chast so liberal as euer any bishop or priest was required to be in Gods law VVhat things a King caÌ„ not doe caÌ„ he yet baptize caÌ„ he coÌ„secrate Christes body can he forgeue synnes can he preache can he excommunicate can he blesse the people can he iudge of doctrine by his kingly authority If he can not doe these things how can he be aboue theâ— coÌ„cerning these causes who haue receaued
Apostoke Priesthood or Bisshoplie power is made greater by the chiefe Castell or Fortresse of Religion then by the Throne of Imperiall power In anuiuersa assumpt serm 2. Leo the Greate hauing saied that in Saint Peters Seat his own power liueth his authoritie excelleth in an other place sheweth himselfe to haue bene the successour of S. Peter and therefore to be the president of the Churche For thus he writeth to Iulianus the Bisshop epist 30. Memor sum me sub illius nomine Ecclesiae praesidere cuius à Domino Iesu Christo est glorificata confessio cuius fides omnes haereses destruit I am mindfull that I am Praesident of the Churche vnder his name Matth. 16 whose confession was made gloriouse of our Lorde Iesus Christe in epist 82. 87. and whose faith destroieth al heresies It were infinite to bring all that Leo saith in this behalfe Eulogius the Patriarche of Alexandria wrote to S. Gregorie after this sense Lib. 6. ep 37. as S. Gregory himself doth report it Suauissima mihi sanctitas vestra multa in epistolis suis de sancti Petri Apostolorum principis Cathedra locuta est dicens quòd ipse in ea nunc vsque in suis successoribus sedeat Your most swete Holinesse hath said manie things in his letters concerning the chair of S. Peter the prince of the Apostles saying that S. Peter himself sitteth it it euen til this present tyme in his successours And S. Gregory with great humility acknowlegeth it to be true affirming in an other place that Lib. 11. Ep. 54. the Apostolike See is head of all Churches For the honour of our country I wil not omit the testimony of S. Bede who in a sermon made vpon the Feast of a certain Abbate of England named Benedictus In Natali Benedicti inter homilias hyemales de Sanctis affirmeth him to haue gon to Rome vt ibi potius perfectā viuendi formam sumeret vbi per summos Christi Apostolos totius Ecclesiae caput eminet eximium That he might there rather take the perfit example of liuing where the excellēt head of the whole Churche doth appere aboue the reast through the highest Apostles of Christ Whereas much more may be alleaged yet these few testimonies may suffise to proue that the bishop of Rome is the Successour of S. Peter in his most principal and chiefe pastoral office And surely if we may be deceaued in any point of the faith which is so wel groūded in Gods word so vniformly cōfessed by the holy Fathers and so notoriously practised in the Catholike Churche as the Supremacy of S. Peter and of his successours in the See of Rome is I can not deuise when a man may be sure of any article of his faith But if there be a meane whereby a man may be sure of his belefe surely that meane whatsoeuer it be shall wel appeare to be found in the prouf of the supremacy of S. Peter and of his successours That the good Christian Emperours and Princes did neuer thinke them selues to be the Suprem Heads of the Churh in Spiritual causes but gaue that honour to Bisshops and Priests and most speciallie to the See of Rome for S. Peters sake as wel before as after the time of Phocas The XVI chap. An D. 246 PHilippus who was the first Christian Emperour did so litle think him selfe to haue bene the Heade of the Bisshoppes in Spirituall causes throughout his Dominion that wheras on Easter daie he would haue bene at the Vigils and holy watches and would haue communicated of the holy Mysteries the Bisshope of the place would not lette him doe it Nisi consiteretur peccata sua except he hadde first confessed his sinnes and stood amōg them that did penance and so by penance had washed awaie the faults which were reported of him Ferunt igitur libenter eum saith Eusebius quod à sacerdote imperatum fuerat suscepisse eccles histor lib. 6. c. 25. apud Ruffinum diuinum sibi inesse metum fidem religionis plenissimam rebus atque operibus comprobando They saie therefore that he toke gladly that whiche was inioyned to him of the Priest Imperatū making faith by the things and workes that the feare of God and most full persuasion of Religion was in him Is he chief in al causes who in some must obey the Priest the priest vvas aboue the Emperor in Ecclesiastical causes Or can he that is supreme gouernour in all things and causes Ecclesiastical haue an other aboue him in puttng him back from the mysteries and in enioyning him publik penaunce and in constreining him to confesse his sinnes Or is the comming to the Mysteries no cause Ecclesiastical or Spiritual Or is not the Bisshoppe or Priest who in this cause gouerneth the Emperour the Superiour and gouernour of the Emperour in the same cause Or is it not a kind of gouerning to command him to stand back to threaten him if he repine to punish him if he be stubborne Yea how to punish him to come to him in a rod as S. Paule speaketh that is to say 1. Cor. 4. in power and authoritie to beate or to correct And is not he a gouernour who may iustly beate the child If then in prescribing confessiō satisfaction and abstinence from communion the priest be the gouernour of the king I ask whether al other Ecclesiastical causes be greater or lesse then these are Note an infallible argument against your Antichristian supremacy The one parte of the Dilēma M. Nowel If other Ecclesiasticall causes be greater then these were surely the Emperour or king who is gouerned by a priest in the lesser Ecclesiasticall causes and therefore can not be supreme head in them is much more to be gouerned by a priest in the greater causes of the same kind And therefore he is much lesse supreme head in them For if when one thing standeth aboue an other I am to low to reache the lower much more I am to low to reache a higher then the other was But if other Ecclesiastical causes be lesser then the suspending from communion the other part or the inioyning of publike penance then the bishop or priest who is the gouernour of the Emperour or King in the greatest Ecclesiastical causes is much more his gouernour in the lesser Ecclesiasticall causes Because the lesser are of the same order kind and kinred whereof the greater are As therefore he that is supreme head in the greatest temporall causes as in iudging ouer life and death A similitude is much more supreme head in the lesser temporall causes as in iudging ouer lands or goods and as he that is not of sufficient authority to be supreme ruler in sitting iudge vppon mens lands or goods can much lesse sitte iudge ouer their liues by anie his former authoritie euen so neither the King who can gouern in the lesser causes
praescript It hath ben alwaies the fashion of all heretikes as Tertullian saith to destroye other mens buildings as to vndoe that which other men doe Ipsum opus eorum non de suo proprio aedificio venit sed de veritatis destructione nostra suffodiuÌ„t vt sua aedificent Their very worck riseth not of their own building but from the destroying of the truthe They vndermine our things that they may build vp their owne And Hippolytus thinketh the seale of Antichrist to be nego In Homi. de consum mat sec I deny For as saith he the deuil did exhort the Martyrs to deny their God who was crucified so at the last day the seale of Antichrist and of his members shal be Nego creatorem coeli terrae nego baptisma nego adorationem à me Deo praestarisoliatam I deny the maker of heauen and of earth I denie baptisme I deny the adoration which I was wont to doe vnto God Thus in the old tyme whereas the Apostles preached Christ to be true God and man VVHat the old hereticke deny Arrius denied his true Godhead Marcion and Valentinus and Manicheus denied his true manhood Apollinaris is denied his true sowle the Monothelits denied his doble will the Donatists the Continuance of the vniuersality of his Church the Pelagians the necessity of Gods grace and the like may be said of all other heretiks whose opinions alwaies detracted some perfection from Christ or from his Church Now I will shew that the Protestants doe the like in our tyme. For whereas the vniuersal Church as wel by the preaching of the Apostles as by the witnesse of Gods writen word was in possession of a publike sacrifice of priesthood of seuen Sacramentes as of most vndoubted instrumentes of grace and of diuerse other godly and diuine orders and Canons haue they any other Gospell any other Churche or any other doctrine then that which consisteth in deniyng Hovv many things the Protestants take avvay froÌ„ the Churche Ioan. 1. and in taking away that which was before The holy scriptures and Churche tawght that a man being iustified is both really deliuered from his synnes and really receaueth faith hoape and charity Thei deny our synnes to be taken away by the lamb of God who came for that purpose saying they tary still but onely that they are not imputed They teache also that no iustice is at all made in vs by spreading charity in our harts Rom. 5. whereas S. Paul saith iusti coÌ„stituentur multi many shal be made iust But they only say iustice is imputed to vs. Again they fiue Sacraments of the seuen They deny that baptism remitteth our synnes or that baptisme is necessarie to children which are born of Ghristian parents Augustin epist 106. Which was the heresie of the Pelagians They deny the vse of holy oyle and of chrism They deny the reall presence of Christes body the adoration and reseruation thereof the transubstantiation of the bread into his body the vnblody sacrifice of Christes supper the communion of one kinde to be sufficient and consequently they deny that whole Christ in vnder eche kinde and the mingling of water with the wine And that one may receaue alone that Aultars are lawfull that there are Priestes of the newe Testament that Bishops are of any higher degree then Priestes that there is any one bisshoppe chief of all other that Priests can forgeue synnes but onelie may preache that they are forgeuen that it is lawfull to appoint certaine daies of fasting or the abstinence from certain meates for obedience although God both willed Adam to absteine from a certain frute Genes 2. and the Iewes to absteine from certain meates They deny that it is lawfull to pray to the Saints in heaueÌ„ or to pray for the faithful which died in Christ wherein they deny any communioÌ„ of praier betwene the faithful which are aliue and their brethern who liue out of this worlde with Christ They deny the infallible authority of generall CouÌ„cels the visible succession of bishoppes the place of purgation after this life the remaining of paine after the synne is forgeuen the chaÌ„ging or pardoming of the said paine by the high bisshop the vse and moderate honour of Images the signe of the healthfull crosse the making of a vowe to liue chaste or to renounce all propriety of goods or to liue in obedience the reuerence don the reliques of the blessed Martyrs the vse of praier in the holy tungs the vniuersall tradition of vnwriten verities and to be short theiÌ„ deny the bookes of the old Bible such as are not in the Canon of the Iewes These things and many other like whiles they deny what other thing do thei theÌ„ pul down the religioÌ„ of Christ which hath ben a building these fiften hundred yeeres And therein they prepare a way to Antichrist who in the end must deny all that they as yet leaue vndenied For if they should openly deny euery whit 2 Thes â— then the mystery of iniquity should not be a working and many simple men should not haue bene deceaued by them who now are deceaued because they pretend to refoorme and not to take away Christes religion But when the tyme is ripe then the iniquity which is now begun must be fulfilled and so is the whole religioÌ„ destroied I would this were not true And yet it is possible that euery Protestant knoweth not so much because Satan the great capitaine of their army keepeth his Counsel to himselfe knowing that how much the closer he worketh the more hurt he is like to doe But God through mercy detecteth his snares aÌ„d warneth them Genes 1â— 6. who wil be saued to flee into the hil with Loth and to the ship of the Churche with Noe there to prouide for their eternal saluatioÌ„ which our Lord graunt through his bitter passion Amen Finis Librum istum de primatu Romani Pontificis Petra Ecclesiae vniuersalis legerunt viri sacrae Theologiae Auglici idiomatis peritissimi quibus iudico meritò tutò credendum esse vt fine periculo imo summa cum vtilitate euul gari possit Cunerus Petri P.S. Petri Louanij 25. Februa Anno. 1566. A BRIEF SOME OF THE chief points of this treatise THE preface conteineth the marks of the true Church The difference betwen a dominion and a primacy 17. The Apostles strife coÌ„cerning superiority is declared 25. 26. 27. That there was one greater among the Apostles 20. vsque 37. To be a ruler and as a minister do not repugne 46. 47. The preeminence of priests aboue Kings 51. 52. caet A King can not be supreme gouernor in all ecclesiasticall causes because by right and Law he can not practise al ecclesiastical causes 61. 64. 67. The highe priest is preferred before the King by Gods lawe 72. 74. 76. The euil life of a bishop taketh not away his authority 78. 79. The differences betweÌ„ the bisshop of Rome and temporal princes 80. vsque 88. That Moises was a priest 83. 84. 85. The literal sense of holy scripture 96. The promise to be called Peter was the first cause why the church was built vpon him 110. The Protestants can not tell which is the first literal sense of these words vpon this rock I will build my Churche 135. How Peter beareth the person of the Church 165. The obiections against S. Peters supremacy are answered 219. vsque 230. How Christ loued Peter aboue others 237. The Church neuer lacked a visible rock 270. 271. The whole gouernment of the Church tendeth to vnity 299. Why S. Peter died at Rome 313. 313. S. Augustins minde touching the supremacy of the Pope of Rome 348. vsque 372. A priest aboue the Emperour in Eeclesiasticall causes 378. The oth of the roial supremacy is intolerable 383. CoÌ„staÌ„tine baptized at Rome 391 Phocas did not first make the See of Rome head of al Churches 405. vsque 410. Why Antichrist is permitted to come 423. Hereticks depart from the Catholik Church 469. Hereticks being once departed out of the Churche haue newe names 471. Why amoÌ„g the Catholiks some are called Franciscans Dominicans caet 477. Heretiks can neuer agree 479. The short reigne of heretickes 489 caet Hereticks preache without coÌ„mission 496. Heretiks doe prefer the temporal reign or sword before the spiritual 499. They are the members of Antichrist who withstand the external and publike sacrifice of Christes Church 518. Hereticks depriue Christ of his glorious inheritaunce in many nations together 517. The intolerable pride of heretikes in making themselues onely iudges of the right sense of Gods word 530. The ProtestaÌ„ts teache the same doctrine which the old hereticks did 553. The Protestantes are the right meÌ„bers of Antichrist in that they spoile Gods Church of very many gifts and graces and articles of the faith 560. FINIS Faultes escaped in the printing Page Line Faultes Corrections 10. 10. shephead shepheard 23. 22. them because them but because 98. 22. resurrection by resurrection by 103. 24. confession Being confession being 106. 13. stedfastnes of stedfastnes or of â—16 9. and promised aÌ„d being promised 145. 8. and in that and that 177. 21. the thing the man 186. 6. rocke of rock or 195. 14. sbme some 208. 23. vvhen Augustine vvhen Augustine 209. 11. hy me by me 214. 1. to true to be true 2â—9 17. in omnibus in ouibus 26â— 1. to the the 273. 15. vvas vvere vvas vvhere 281. 6. the pordinary the ordinary 382. 7. can gouern can not gouern 426. 14. CoÌ„essours Confessours 430. 13. teache teache 432. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 408. 1. out the out of the 496. 2. rom from 516. â— hauen heauen 539. 22. S. Saule S. Paul 553. 21. bishops bishop I F RESPâ—â—ITE VOLATILIA COELI ET PVLLOS CORVORVM
that which wee vse 14. Victory in persecution is ours 15. Yea we are persecuted of the ProtestaÌ„ts our childern as of whome they were baptized aÌ„d in whose vniuersities they were brought vp aÌ„d now thei turn the weapoÌ„s which we gaue theÌ„ against vs. 16. Antiquitie aÌ„d the practise of the primatiue Church is agreable to that of our tyme. 17. The name of Catholiks by their confession is ours 18. The continuall succession a bishops we doe shew and they can noâ— so much as pretend it Rom. 3. Generally what haue they which wâ— lack haue they a faith iustifiyng so haue we but not iustifiyng alone Galat. 5. Iacob 2. but iustifying with charity which is as it were â—he life of faith Ergo their iustificatioÌ„â—f faith alone is a deade righteousnes â—urs is it which quickeneth to life eâ—erlasting Haue they two SacrameÌ„ts We haue seuen 1. Pet. 2. Haue they an inwarde â—riesthod whereby Christ is offered in â—heir harts we haue an inward and â—n †Isai 61. 66. 1. Tim. 4. Heb. 10 outward whereby he is offered â—oth in our harts and in our hands Do â—hey beleue that Christ with one Saâ—rifice paid our rauÌ„som for euer Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 10. 11. We beâ—eue it and shew to the eye vnder the foorm of bread the self body sacrificed and by offering and eating it sacramenâ—ally with our mouth we are made partakers of the redeÌ„ption which is in it Is Christ with them the head and â—astour of his Church Ioan. 10. Ephes 1. We do not onely beleue so but we shew it to be so by the real figure of one chief head aÌ„d Pastour of his particular flock in earth Heb. 10. whereby the eternall thinges are liuely represented Doe lay men with them receaue the communion vnder both kinds euen so doe they with vs by dispensation of the See Apostolike in Austria and in diuerse other parts of Germany both without schism and also without iniury of an other truth which must confesse one kind to conteine as much as both and therefore to suffise alone And both kindes were instituted of Christ Math. 26. rather to shew by an vnbloody sacrifice the nature of Christes bloody sacrifice where his sowle and blood was a part from his body and fleshe then that any more is either conteined or distributed by both Ioan. 19. then by one alone Heb. 13. Haue you Mariage in great price Not in so great as we who teache it to be a Sacrament which by the outward and visible signe of mutuall consent in faithfull persons signifieth the gratious vnity of Christ and of his Churche and whiles it signifieth such a singular grace Ephes 5. it partaketh of the grace whereof it is the signe Yea but you allow Mariage in all kind of men what Euen in those Math. 19. who haue gelded them selues for the kingdom of heauen For they onely who make the vow of chastity can iustly be said to geld them selues for the kingdom of heauen Vvho geld theÌ„selues for the Kingdom of heauen For he that absteineth from Mariage without any vowe he is not yet gelded sithens he maie lawfullie marie But whoso hath gelded himself for the kingdom of heauen is meant to be no more hable to marie by the right of Gods law and in very conscience theÌ„ he is able by the course of nature to haue a child who either is borne or by force is made an Eunuche For these three kinds of Eunuches Christ doth compare together Math. 19. expresly geuing vs to vnderstand that it is both praise worthy to vow chastity and when it is once vowed that by Gods owne law there is no more possibilitie to return to the vse of mariage then it is possible for a gelded man to be restored again to that which he lacketh By these few examples it may appere that you haue no maner of thing praise worthy which we lack whereas we haue a great nuÌ„ber of things both good and laudable VVhat thiÌ„gs the protestaÌ„ts lack and many of them very necessary all which you lacke You haue no insufflations no exorcism no holy oyle in baptism no holy Chrism in bishopping no externall priesthood no publik sacrifice no altars no censing no lights at your seruice no Images in your Churches no adoration no reseruation of Christes body no Eremits no MuÌ„kâ— no virgins vealed and consecrated no vnwriten traditions no communion with Saints or with faithfull sowles by praying to the one or for the other no Stations no pilgrimages no confession of synnes to the priest no forgeuenes by the priest no temporall satisfaction inioyned nor the same remitted by pardon no holy water no holy vestments no Reliques of Martyrs no extreme vnction no place of purgatory where their synnes may be released after this life who died in charity but yet not without the det of temporall purgation You say falsely that all these thinges are naught Galat. 1. praeterquaÌ„ quod accepistis but once we receaued theÌ„ of our auncestours and we iustifie theÌ„ by Gods word and by the bookes of the auncient Fathers If we our selues had once had other things and so had cast away those other and taken these as you haue taken Note vppon your own heads naked tables in stede of adorned altars praying toward the south in stede of praying toward the East mariage of priestes in steade of chastity vulgar tungs in stede of holy and learned the sacrifice of praysing God by bare words in stede of Masse which praised him by the consecration of Christes owne body with other like matters then in dede there had ben cause why we might haue feared our owne dedes and inuentions But seing we made no new religioÌ„ but kepe the olde Philip 2. humilitie obedience and the keeping of vnity is our fault if we haue any Of such faults I beleue noman shall geue accompt but rather of pride Rom. 1. 2. Cor 3. Galat. 5. of disobedience of breakiÌ„g vnitie of makiÌ„g schismes and of troubling the Churche Neither can it be iustlie replied of you that you doe toward vs in changing our religion Dissimile as Christ and the Apostles did toward the Iewish synagoge For Christ changed his owne Religion whereof himself was Lorde and not onely theirs But Luther is not that toward Christ which Christ was toward Moyses neither hath Caluin that power to alter the state of Christes Churche which Christ had to alter the Law It must be vnderstanded that in all Religions there is a law which prescriâ—eth in what maner God shal be serued The chief point of Gods seruice coÌ„sisteth â—n publike Sacrifice The Sacrifice deâ—endeth of the Priesthod for of whatâ—oeuer order the priest is there after he maketh his sacrifice whervpon S. Paul said Heb. 7. The priesthod being transferâ—ed or changed it must nedes be â—hat the law be transferred or chaÌ„ged also Now from Adam til Christ â—here
fathers at once Concil Chalced. Act. 3. who in the fourth general Councel teache thus Petrus Apostolus est Petra crepido ecclesiae Catholicae Peter the Apostle is the Rocke and toppe of the Catholik Church What meant you then M. Iewel to say that the olde Catholique Fathers haue writen and pronounced not any mortal man as Peter was but Christ himselfe the Sonne of God to be this Rocke The old Fathers affirm both Christ and Peter to be the Rocke Christ by nature Peter by vocation and election Christ to be both the Rocke absolutelie and also by a consequent to be this Rocke wherupon the militant Church shal be built Peter to be this Rocke but not absolutely the Rocke But what did not M. Iewel know all this that surely is scant likelie sith these things are so riue in the old Fathers and so oft alleaged by the new writers Vnlesse perhaps M. Iewel readeth not the old Fathers and trusteth not the new writers aÌ„d so be ignoraÌ„t of these authorities For in dede id appeareth by his doings that either he neuer saw the originals whence he citeth his testimonies but onlie followeth blind note bookes made and collected by other his auncestours and masters in heresie or els he is one of the most manifest falsifiers that euer was in the Church For willinglie to belie so manie Fathers at once as he now hath done it is a malice not much lesse then Simon Magus or any scholar of his had I rather thinck he saw not the originals Howsoeuer it be he is an horrible instrument of perdition to the childern of perdition O syr Are Tertullian Origenes Cyprian Hilarie Basil Epiphanius Ambrose Hierom Augustine Chrysostome Cyrillus Damascenus Psellus Theodoretus Theophilactus Euthimius Prosper Leo Gregorius no auncient Fathers Al they teache a mortal maÌ„ as Peter was verily euen Peter him self by the gift of Christ to be this Rock whereof it is said vpon this rock I wil build my Church What a lyer now is he who saith they doe not so their bookes be foorth in print let them be sene If M. Iewel be an impudeÌ„t lier let him either openly recant or be auoided as a falsifier of Gods Gospel and of true religion yea as one more worthy of a whetstone then of a bishopricke But now lette vs consider also the reason why the fathers confesse the Church to haue ben built vpon S. Peter For euery thing is made the plainer and surer when the reason of it is knowen The diuerse reasons which the Fathers bring to declare why S. Peter was this rock doe euidently shew that he was most literally this Rocke whereupon Christ would build his Church The VI. Chap. HE that geueth a cause of a thing done or said sheweth himself to be most fully persuaded concerning the truthe of the thinge otherwise he would neuer indeuour to find out the reasons why that should be so doÌ„ or said which he thought not to be don or said at all Seing then the auncient Fathers do shew why and how S. Peter is this Rocke wherevpon the Church is built it is impossible that they should anything dout thereof and much lesse can they denie him to be this rocke wherevpon Christ said he would build his Church And yet M. Iewel hath said most falsely that they doe write and pronounce not any mortal man as Peter was to be this Rocke To beginne with S. Basil he saith Petrus Ecclesiae aedificationem in seipsum suscepit Aduersus EunomiuÌ„ lib. 2. Peter receaued the building of the Church vpon himself But why propter fidei excellentiam for the excellencie of his faith Behold his faith alone was not properlie the Rocke but Peter was the Rocke and that not onlie for his faith for then other faithful meÌ„ might haue ben the like rock but for the excellencie of his faith Two things then are necessarie for being this Rocke that he be Peter and that he haue an excellent faith to wit such as none other had as the which was promised most singularly and for the continuance whereof Christ himself hath praied And because this faith was most excellent Libr. 6. de Tainit Saint Hilarie teacheth farther that Supereminentem gloriam beatae fidei suae confessioâ—e promeruit Peter by the confessing of his blessed faith deserued a passing glorie Peters faith had not excelled yf anie man had ben like to him neither had Peters glorie passed for the confession of his faith yf any man had bene like to him in glorie His glorie was to receaue the building of the Church vppon him for the excellencie of his faith therefore the Churche was more singularlie built vppon him then vpon any other manels S. Cyprian writeth of S. Peter Ecclesia quae vna est super vnum Ad Iubaian qui claues eius accepit Domini voce fundata est The Church which is one is by the voice of our Lord fouÌ„ded vppon one who hath receaued the keies of it This reason can beare but one such Rocke at once as Peter was for els the Church as one is not founded vpon one if there are moe such rocks at once Otherwise what can be saied why if there be many such rocks there should not also be many Churches But the Churche beinge one is built vppon one therefore that one who is Peter hath no fellow in that behalf vntil after him an other doe succede in that one office Homil. de Pastor S. Augustine discoursing vpoÌ„ those wordes of Christ spoken to S. Peter Feed my sheep writeth thus Dominus in ipso Petro vnitatem coÌ„mendauit c. Our Lorde hath coÌ„mended vnitie in S. Peter himself Vni dicitur There were many Apostles aÌ„d it is said to one feed my shepe S. Augustin calleth the other Apostles also good shepherds but S. Peter he calleth the one good shephearde by whose one pastoral office vnitie is commended and set forth verely because it is meant that as many Pastours and particular flocks in this life are vnder Peter one chief pastour and in him â—hey al are one euen so all the states â—nd ages of the Church that euer haue â—en be or shal be are vnder one chief â—astour Iesus Christ and in him they â—al are one But as al the ages of faithful meÌ„ are one Church in Christ the chief pastour because he in deed and in truth conteineth them al vnder his vnitie right so Peter shuld not be the chief one Pastor of al the particular flocks in respect of the other Apostles except in deede he had power geuen him to feede them all within the compasse of his one folde S. Hierome hauing called S. Peter Lib. 1. aduers IouiÌ„ the Apostle of Christ and the Rock afterward confesseth to Iouinian who reioysed to see a maried man so honoured that Super Petrum fundatur Ecclesia The Church is built vpon Peter Adding therevnto Licet id ipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat
man in himselfe so hath euery Bishop for his part the whole nature of a bisshop in hiÌ„self This equalitie of bishoply order and office notwithstanding the Apostles were in their bishoply prelateshippe and Iurisdiction a great way behiÌ„d S. Peter because he had a higher and larger power of gouerning geuen to him ouer Christes shepe then any of the other had in that behalfe Touching then the superiority of S. Peters iurisdiction for asmuch as all the power he had was either Apostolike or bishoply seing he could not easily haue more coÌ„mitted to hiÌ„ ouer the rest of the shepe by his Apostolike office Math. 2â— then the other Apostles had for ech of theÌ„ had charge ouer the whole Church and the gouerment of their owne persons excepted what greater power could S. Peter haue if this notwithstandig I proue euideÌ„tly that Christ committed to S. Peter more Ecclesiastical power eueÌ„ ouer his shepe then to anie other it must needes be rather meant of more bishoply then of more Apostolike power And so albeit the power and iurisdictioÌ„ of the Apostles ouer the rest of the shepe be equal yet the power of bishops euen ouer the same shepe is not equal How proue I theÌ„ that S. Peter had more coÌ„mitted to his charge theÌ„ the other Apostles Verily because Christ in the presence of S. Iohn S. Iames aÌ„d S. Thomas the Apostles aÌ„d of other three disciples said to Peter SimoÌ„ IoaÌ„nis diligis me plê° his Ioan. 21. Simon the son of Iohn doest thou loue me more then these And surely seing S. Iohn was among them who was so tenderly beloued of Christ that he was knowen by the name of the Disciple whom Iesus loued Ibidem when Peter is asked whether he loue more theÌ„ they he is in effect asked whether he loue more then any other Apostle or Disciple Neither doth our Lord demaunde this question as a thing whereof he doubted but to instruct vs that Peter loued him more then the other Wherevpon S. Augustine concludeth In Ioan. Tract 24. Sciebat igitur Dominus noÌ„ soluÌ„ quôd diligeret verumetiam quôd plus illis diligeret eum Petrus Therefore our Lord did know that Peter did not onely loue him but also that he loued him more then they And yet seing Peter could not loue Christ more then the other did except Christ had first loued Peter more then he loued the other for Peters excelleÌ„t loue towards Christ must nedes come of the former exceding loue of Christ toward Peter as the scripture it selfe doth teache vs it is out of all controuersie that Christ first loued S. Peter 1. Ioan. 4. Prior dilexit nos more then he loued any other man in the whole world What The question more then he loued S. Iohn Or more then he loued his own Mother I answere An exaÌ„ple that there are diuerse coÌ„siderations of loue Alexander the great had two frindes who loued him for diuerse respects The one called Craterus loued him as king and loked to his honour in matters belonging therevnto The other called Hephestion loued his ê‘son and diligently ê“cured his health aÌ„d priuate wel doing WhereupoÌ„ King Alexander was wont to saie that Craterus loued the King but Hephestion loued Alexander EueÌ„ so Christ loued his Morther aboue all creatures in the respect of that loue which it pleased him as her Sonne to owe vnto his Mother by the Law of nature Exod. 20. And therein he loued her almost incoÌ„parablie aboue S. Peter Likewise he loued personally S. Iohn the Euangelist August in Ioan. Tractat 124. and S. Iohn loued him more then other in that he was a virgin by Christes gift as who had dedicated his bodie and soule to Christ alone But in respect of Christes flock which was to be fed aÌ„d gouerned in the earth in that respect Christ loued S. Peter and S. Peter him more theÌ„ others The which distinction being kept we maie well say that our Lady loued Christ as the Sonne of God taking flesh of her own bodie more then any other and that S. Iohn loued Christ as the cause of his virginitie and the Athour of his chast loue more then any other and that S. Peter loued Christ as the prince of pastours more then anie other 1. Pet. 5. of which last kind of loue Christ now speaketh as it may wel appeare by his owne words For wheÌ„ S. Peter had answered yea Lord thou knowest that I loue thee Iesus said to hiÌ„ fede my laÌ„bs As who should saie for asmuch as thou in respect of my pastoral power louest me more then these take more power then they to feede my lambs For now sith Peters loue is the cause why Christ geueth him power to feede his lambs according to the measure of the loue the measure of the feeding must be vnderstanded De temp serm 149. Dominus Iesus saith S. Augustine respondenti amoreÌ„ commendat agnos suos dicit pasce oues meas tanquam diceret quid retribues quia diliges me dilectionem ostende in omnibus To Peter answering that he loueth our Lord Iesus commendeth his lambs and saith Feede my shepe as if he should say what wilt thou render to me because thou louest me Shew thy loue toward the shepe The same verie sense S. Chrysostom geueth In Ioan. Hom. 87. Si amas me fratruÌ„ curaÌ„ susci pias If thou louest me or seing thou louest me take the care of thy brethern Yf then the authority of feeding be the reward of Peters loue for asmuch as accordiÌ„g to S. Augustines iudgemeÌ„t grouÌ„ded vpoÌ„ the expresse word of God Peter loued more theÌ„ the other Peter is now bid to shew more loue in taking cure of his brethern then any other Which thing because he can not doe except he receiue more power and authoritie to feed his brethern Iacob 1. then other haue for Peter can doe no more in that behalfe then is from heaueÌ„ committed to him it doth inuinciblie follow that Christ at this time geueth to Peter alone more povver and authority to feede his sheepe then any other had or can haue For the literal meaning of Christes whole discourse is none other thing then to say for as muche as thou louest me more then these feede my sheepe In the cumpasse or meaning of which wordes it is not possible for any other Apostle to be comprehended aequallie with S. Peter Note this reason For if any other may feed aequallie with him by the force of this commission the same cause of feeding must be in him which is named in this commission That is to say More theÌ„ these he must loue more then these But if any other doe so then hath Peter no commission to feed Christes sheepe because he then doth not loue more then they seing they must loue more then he or els no coÌ„missioÌ„ of feeding is geueÌ„ theÌ„ Who so euer hath this commission to feed
can by his Kingly power iudge in the greater nor the priest who is the Kings superiour in the lesser can possibly but much more be his superiour in the greater The remouing of the obiection Or haue we diuerse Kinds of Ecclesiastical and of spiritual causes Be there neuer so manie the Act of parliament geueth the highest and the supreme gouernment of them all In al causes vnto the King And yet the King lacketh not onelie practise experience or cunning but also he lacketh spirituall and Ecclesiasticall power to heare confessions to absolue men from their synnes to inioyne penance to consecrate the Sacrament of the altar to Ordre bishops and priestes by the Imposition of hādes or to excommunicate open synners Here Master Iewel wolde say that he neuer meant the prince should be supreme gouernour either in administring or in frequenting or in directing others to frequent the holy mysteries or in any like sacramental functions Why then doth he and his fellowes sweare men The othe of the supremacy generally to acknowledge the secular Christian prince Supreme gouernour in all things and causes Why doth he not rather declame and speake with all his force against that most impiouse and blasphemouse othe Yea so impiouse that those Protestants who most earnestly pressed the setting foorth therof dare not now iustifie the foorm of it Shall men in a Christian realme be sworen vpon the holy Euangelistes to keepe beleue or acknowledge that which noman at all no not they who procured it dare mainteine See good Countrie men see the discretiō of your parlaments in matters of Religion A men aliue abhorre from that act which the Laity made and enacted as a form so warely drawen wherevnto men might commit their euerlasting saluation or damnation Mark I say that M. Nowel M. Horn M. Iewel dare not warrant the King to be suprem gouernour in al Ecclesiastical causes But rather they confesse that a Bisshop or Priest may and ought to gouerne the King concerning his comming to the Mysteries and in such like matters This much being said cōcerning Philippus the first Christian Emperour who obeyed but gouerned not the Bisshop in Ecclesiastical matters let vs now goe forward An. Dom. 324. Constantinus the Great perceiuing the Bisshops which came to the Synod at Nice to haue many quarels and sutes among them selues appoynted a day wherein euery man should offer his complaint in writing and when he had takē al their libels without disclosing the contents of them Ruffinus lib. 10. Eccles histor cap. 2. he said vnto the bishops Deus vos constituit Sacerdotes potestatē vobis dedit de nobis quoque iudicandi ideo nos a vobis rectè iudicamur vos autē nō potestis ab hominibus iudicari propter quod Dei solius inter vos expectate iudicium God hath made you priests or Sacrificers and hath geuen you power to iudge of vs also And therefore we are rightly iudged of you But yee can not be iudged of men For which cause expect yee or tary for the iudgemēt of God alone among you This discourse of Constantine conteineth three thinges worthie to be noted First he saith the bishoppes are Sacerdotes Priestes or men that haue publik authority to make externall sacrifice vnto God for the whole Heb. 5. peples synnes Secondly he saieth that they haue power to iudge euen of the Emperour himself And this their power of iudging dependeth of their power of priesthod For the highest power may iudge the lower But no power can be higher then the power of a priest because he is the minister of God in that office which most directly toucheth Gods honour and seruice Malac. 1. Wherupon S. Augustin hauing said what was Moyses if he were not a priest In Psal 98 geueth this reason of his words Nūquid maior Sacerdote esse poterat Whether could he be greater then a priest as who should say seing Moyses was the greatest officer amōg the Israelits and yet he could not be greater then a priest it must nedes be that he was a priest The priestes then of God being the greatest officers in earth haue power to iudge euen of an Emperour if any be in their parishes or Dioceses Thirdly of these former points Cōstātine deduceth an other conclusion that priestes can not be iudged of mē How then can they be iudged of the Emperour Neither doth it skill that Constantine seemeth to haue iudged certaine priests or Ecclesiastical causes when the Donatists appealed vnto hī for he did it as S. Augustine saieth à sanctis antistitibus postea veniam petiturus In epistol 162. as one that would afterward aske leaue or pardon of the holy bisshops Who asketh leaue or pardon for that which he may doe by his owne power He did it then through the importunat sute of heretickes for the peace of the Church otherwise detesting them that demaunded his iudgement after that the bishoppes had iudged Optat. li 2 August in epist 162. and finding great fault therewith himself as Optatus and S. Augustine also doe witnesse But take away importunity of heretikes and the commission leaue or pardon of the right bishoppes who may for diuerse respectes either committe certain Ecclesiasticall causes to lay mē or winck for a tyme at such iudgemēts take away I say heresie and permission and ordinarily it is against the law of God that any secular Prince who needeth the office of a priest for his reconciliation vnto God should sitte iudge vpon him in causes of the Churche 2. Cor. 5. at whose handes he must receaue the Sacramentes of the Churche and by whose ministery his soule must be purged Now if one priest doe iudge an other that is Gods iudgement Deut. 17. Num. 3 and not the iudgement of men For God hath sette one priest ouer an other as the high priestes was aboue the Leuites in Moyses lawe and as the Apostles wereof a higher degree then the seuenty Disciples or then the seuen Deacons These woordes then of Constantine vos non potestis ab hominibus iudicari Ruffin li. 1. cap. 2. yee ô priestes of God can not be iudged of men are thus meant the order of priesthood is such as is not subiect to anie secular or earthly iurisdiction And seing all the power of iudgement which euen Christian Emperours or Kinges haue by their own state is earthly and secular it wil follow that no King or Emperour can by his owne power iudge a priest in priestlie causes and in Ecclesiasticall matters That all the power of Emperours though they be Christians is secular Constantine himself pronounceth saying to the Donatists as Optatus recordeth Petitis á me in seculo iudicium De schism Donatist lib. 1. cùm ego ipse Christi iudiciū expectem Yee aske of me iudgement in the world whereas I my self looke for Christes iudgement There are then two iudgements one in the world an other
of Christ That is worldly or secular Secular iudgemēt this is heauenly or spiritual Constantine had none other iudgement but secular because his sentence could binde no farther then in this life But Christes iudgement which he excerciseth as wel presently by his Priestes and Ministers Ioan. 20. as at the later day in his own person is spirituall Spirital iudgemēt Matth. 16. In Coelis and rather apperteineth to heauen and to the life to come then to this world Againe that Constantines iudgement was earthlye S. Augustine in diuers places declareth saing of the very same Donatists In ep 162. Terrenum Regem suae causae iudicem esse voluerunt They would an earthly King to be the iudge of their cause He meaneth there Constantine the Christian Emperour by the name of an earthly King Hitherto I haue shewed that Constantine beleued and professed that Bishops or Priestes are not ordinarilie and where aequitie or conscience maie take place to be iudged by secular Princes Now it onely remaineth to consider specially the great honour which he gaue to the See of S. Peter and to his Successour the Bisshop of Rome First I take it for moste certaine that Constantinus the Great Constātin baptized at Rome was instructed and baptized of Syluester the Pope of Rome as not onely most auncient witnesses but euē the very stones ād pillers of marble doe witnesse which being erected in the Emperors owne house named Constantiniana beare the name of his baptisterie to witte of the verie place wherein Constantinus was baptised 1 in vita Syluestri in Pontificali 2 De sex aetatibus 3 in Chrō 4 lib. 2. Histor Whiche thing also Pope Damasus who liued not long after and consequēt lie 2. S. Bede 3. Ado and Marianus Scotus affirme the same Yea 4 Gregorius Turonensis who liued long before alludeth to the same storie in describing the baptism of King Chlodoueus Neither only the Latines haue thus auouched the truth 5 In vita Cōstant 6. Lib. 7. c. 35. 7 In Anna libus but the Greciās also as 5 Zonaras 6 Nicephorus 7 Cedrenus not esteming what Eusebius and some other moued by him reporte in that behalfe as whom for his affection to the Arrian heresie they had suspected Constantine then being baptized at Rome and thereby instructed that S. Peter had died there to whome he built a faire Church in the hil named Vaticane and that he had left a successour in that See Damasus in Pontif. who beside his Bisshoprike of Rome should haue the chiefe pastoral cure ouer al the faithfull gaue such reuerence to the saied Chaire and See of S. Peter that he thought it not conuenient for him to keep his ordinarie courte and Residence anie more in that Citie where the chiefe causes of all Christendome should be daily examined In so muche that he did not onely protest his faith in Christ and the honour due to S. Peter in expresse words which are before the first Nicene Coūcel some of whiche wordes are likewise alleged at the second general Coūcel kept at Nice but also he in deede went out of the Citie of Rome with this intent in Praefat. Concilij Niceni to keep no more his Imperiall residence in the same Which thīg is farther proued in that he gaue away his owne Palaice dedicating it a Temple vnto our Sauiour which temple standeth till this daie wherein also the Pope had aftetward a dwelling place And who doth not perceiue that he departeth with the mind to returne no more who at his going geueth his own house away Adde herevnto In vitae Constantini that Constantine went to seeke a newe dwelling place as Zonaras reporteth and at the last reasted in Bizance calling it of his owne name Constantinople or new Rome Why should Constantine thus aduisedly deparete from the head Citie of al the world the glorie of his Empire and the chiefe roialtie of his inheritance except he had bene fullie perswaded that S. Peter and his successours the Bisshops of Rome had bene placed at Rome by the wil of God Serm 1. de Natiuit Pet. Pauli thēce to publish the faith of Christ into al Countries as Pope Leo saieth wherevnto he would that his Imperial court should be no hinderance For otherwise if he had yelded to a simple Bisshop there was a Bisshop in Constātinople also as in euery other great Citie But it was not euery Bisshoppe to whome Constantine yealded but the chiefe Bissbop of all and the heade of the whole Militāt Church Which Exāple of his al good Emperours following neuer kept afterward their courte and ordinarie residence in Rome Zonaras in vita Constantis Nepotis Heraclij al be it Constance perceiuing more honour to be geuen to the Mother which was Rome then to the daughter whiche was Constantinople woulde haue returned to Rome but as Zonaras declareth without successe Which thing who so thinketh to haue chanced with out the singular prouidence of God may seme to think that the world is gouerned by chance To this fact of the Emperors in their absteining to keepe their residence in Rome let vs ioyn the expresse wordes also of diuers good successours of Constantine the Greate For if anie euil came betwene it is no marueil if thei did hate so good a thing as the Primacie of the Church was Concerning Constantius the heretike who was the sonne of great Constantine Athanasius complaineth An. D. 360 that he and his adherents the Arrians had no reuerence toward the Bisshop of Rome In Epist ad Solitar vitam agentes not consideringe vel quòd sedes illa apostolica esset vel quôd Roma Metropolis esset ditionis Romanae either that it was the Apostolike See or els that Rome was the Mother citie of the Roman circuit So that we may see euen from the beginning that as the most faithful Emperours did alwaies honour the Apostolike See of Rome euen so the heretikes and worste men did alwaies hate it and despise it For on the other side in the midst of the Arrian heresie the noble and vertuouse Emperors Gratianus Valentinianus and Theodosius doubted not to sette foorth a Lawe in these woordes An. D. 386 leg 1 Cod. de summa Trinitat Cunctos populos quos Clementiae nostrae regit imperium in tali volumus religione versari quam D. Petrum Apostolū tradidisse Romanis religio vsque ad huc ab ipso insinuata declarat quà mque Pontificē Damasū sequi claret Petrū Alexādriae Episcopū virum Apostolicae sanctitatis We wil al nations which are gouerned by our Clemēcy to liue in such a religiō as the religiō which is vsed from S. Peter til this day doth declare him to haue deliuered to the Romans ād which religiō it is euidēt that Pope Damasus ād Peter the Bishop of Alexandria a mā of an Apostolik holines doe follow By this Law it is witnessed first that S. Peter
deliuered a certain religioÌ„ to the Romans as wel concerning the Trinitie as other things Secondly that the said religion coÌ„ming from S. Peter was kept stil in the Church of Rome Thirdly that it was kept speciallie by the perpetual succession of Bishops For which cause Damasus the Bisshop of Rome is named in the Law After Damasus a blessed Bisshop of Alexandria called Peter is also named not with the intent to shewe also that the Bisshops of Alexandria kept alwayes the true faith for at that momeÌ„t Lucius a raging wolf occupied the seat in Alexandria but because this Peter of Alexandria who is now named was in deede the true bishop of Alexandria albeit he was now kept out of his Church by violence Nicep lib. 11. cap. 26 Whereas then there were two bisshops of Alexandria one who agreed with the bishop of Rome an other who disagreed â–ª because the said Peter did agree with Damasus and fled out of prison to him he is named with Damasus and therby the other bishop is insinuated to be an vsurper So that the whole force of the Decree resteth vpon the tradition and succession of S. Peter at Rome and of those who agree with him If Peter of Alexandria had not followed that succession of S. Peter he had no more ben esteemed then Lucius Georgius Gregorius or Dioscorus An. Do. 4â—4 Tom. 1. CoÌ„cil distinct 97. who being bishops of Alexandria wree al heretiks Pope Bonifacius the first wrote to the Christian Emperour Honorius in this wise Mihi Deus noster meuÌ„ Sacerdotium vobis res humanas regentibus deputauit Our God hath appointed mie priesthood to me wheras you doe gouern woordlie matters And in the same epistle he requireth the Emperours help not I warrant you for the disposing of his own priesthod but for the conseruation of the peace of the Churche To whome the Emperour promiseth his help confessing that he receaued the writings of his blessednes with dew gratulation of reuerence Apostolatus tuus desiring his Apostoleshippe to pray for the safegard of his Empire Honorius faith then was that the Emperours were heads of the ciuill gouernment for the defense of Ecclesiastical peace and not supreme heads in all Ecclesiasticall things and causes to defend I say the lawes of the Churche made by bishops and not to make new Ecclesiastical lawes wheruÌ„to to bishoppes should be subiect against their wils An. Dom. 450. Let vs adde hereunto that which an Empresse also writeth of the same matter for we may wel beleue that she wrote according to the faith of Church in her tyme. In epistol Gallae Placidiae ante synodum Chalcedonens Thus then Galla Placidia saith concerning the Churche of Rome In Apostolica sede primus ille ê“ coelestes claues dignus fuit accipere principatum Episcopatus ordinauit He that was worthy to receaue first the heauenly keyes that is S. Peter hath ordeined the primacy of the Bishoply office in the Apostolik See If this be so Peter was not only first and prince himself but he also ordeined the bishop of Rome to be the first and chief of bishops after him Ad synoduÌ„ Chalcedo Domino meo Theodosio c. When I say Peter ordeined it I meane that Christ by Peter ordeined it Valentinian is of the same belefe and iudgement saying Fidem à nostris maioribus traditam debemus cum omni competenti deuotione defendere dignitatem propriae venerationis B. Apostolo Petro intemeratam in nostris temporibus conseruare quatenus beatissimê° Romanae ciuitatis episcopus cui principatum Sacerdotij super omnes antiquitas contulit locum habeat ac facultatem de fide sacerdotibus iudicare We ought to defend with all competent deuotion the faith deliuered from our elders And to conserue and keepe in our tymes to the blessed Apostle S. Peter the dignity of his proper and owne worship vncontrolled so that the most blessed bishop of the City of Rome to whome â—ntiquity hath geuen aboue al me the cheefty of priesthood may haue place and power to iudge of faith and of priests Lo the honour that is geuen to the bishop of Rome is geuen to Saint Peter verily because the bishop of Rome sitteth in his chaire And when the bishop of Rome is despised the worship of S. Peter is stained If the old tyme gaue the primacy of priestod vnto the bishop of Rome for S. Peters sake and that super omnes ouer al men if eleuen hundred yeres agoe it was true to say that Antiquity gaue the chiefty of priestly power to the bishop of Rome are not they new teachers who after fiften hundred yeres goe about to pluck the primacy of priesthod from the bishop of Rome An. Dom. 4.57 Act. 3. In Concil Chalceâ—o Autoritate Ro. Episcopi Martianus likewise with Valentinian confesseth of the General Councel which came togeather at Chalcedon in â—â—â—â—wise Quae Synodus dum fidem diligenter inquirit authoritate beatissimi Leonis Episcopi aeternae vrbis Romae religionis fundamenta constituit sanctae ciuitati Flauiano palmam mortis tribuit gloriosae The which councel whiles it maketh diligent inquisition concerning the faith it both appointed the foundations of religion to the holy city the Church by the authoritie of most blessed Leo bishop of the euerlasting City of Rome By the authority of Pope Leo. and also gaue to Flauianus the crown of a gloriouse death Al this was done by the autority of the bishop of Rome And why by his autority the same Martianus gaue the cause therof before in an oratioÌ„ which he made in the fourth general councel Act. 1. Fol. 740. where he said of Leo the Pope qui ApostolicuÌ„ gubernat thronuÌ„ who gouerneth the See Apostolike And it is well knowen he ment only the Apostolike see of S. Peter An. D. 534 In Codicadâ— summa Trinit For the honour of that See IustiniaÌ„ writeth thus to Iohn the secoÌ„d pope of Rome Nos reddeÌ„tes honoreÌ„ Apostolicae sedi vestrae sanctitati qdsemê‘ nobis in voto fuit est vt decet patreÌ„ honoraÌ„tes vestraÌ„ beati tudineÌ„ oiÌ„a quae ad ecclesiaruÌ„ statuÌ„ pertineÌ„t festinauimus ad notitiam deferre vestrae sanctitatis We rendering honour to the See Apostolike and to your Holines the whiche thing euer was and is our desire and we honouring your blessednes as it becommeth vs to honour our Father haue hastened to bring to the knowledge of your Holines all things which doe appertein to the state of Churches If the Pope be as a Father to the Emperour and be so to be honoured it is vtterly impossible for the Emperour who is as it were a Sonne to be the supreme head or gouernour in spiritual causes of his spiritual Father Againe he saith Nec enim patimur quicquaÌ„ quod ad EcclesiaruÌ„ statuÌ„ pertinet quamuis manifestuÌ„ indubitatum sit quod mouetur vt noÌ„
euÌ„deÌ„ statim verum Christi vicariuÌ„ esse omnes credereÌ„t That froÌ„ thence forward whom the Clergy people and the Roman armie should chose to be bishop all men should straight beleue him to be the true vicare of Christ The true VicareÌ„ of Christ He saith not the Vicare of Phocas or the Lieutenant of the Emperor but the Vicar and LieutenaÌ„t of Christ It was then the publicke faith not onlie in the Latine but also in the Greeke church that who so was duely chosen Bisshop of Rome was Christes own Vicare An. Dom. 749. Yf the whole nobilitie and people of Fraunce had not beleued the Pope of Rome to be of such authorie for what purpose would they haue sent to Rome to know the mind of Pope Zacharias who should be King of Fraunce whether Chilpericus Paenè nullius potestatis who hadde the bare name thereof without exercising any kingly power in maner or the greate Stuard Maior domus who exercised the publik office and power of the King without the name In Chron. The Pope answered as Ado testifieth Regem potius illum debere vocari qui rempublicam regeret That he rather should be called the King who ruled the common weal. VpoÌ„ which answere Pipinus was anointed King autoritate Apostolica FraÌ„ corum electione saith Sigebertus by the Apostolike authoritie In Chron. An. Dom. 750. and by the election of the Frenche men Neither may this so great credite whiche the whole people and Nobilitie of France reposed in the See Apostolike be righly imputed to the sentence of Phocas who before that had declared the See of Rome to be head of al Churches For euen after this election of King Pipinus the first Emperour of the French men or rather of the Germans for the French men came out of Germanie Carolus Magnus protesting his reuerence to the See Apostolike sheweth the cause why he honoureth it to be the Chaire of S. Peter and not the iudgement of Phocas His wordes are these In memoriam beati Petri Apostoli honoremus sanctam Romanam ecclesiaÌ„ ApostolicaÌ„ sedeÌ„ An. Dom. 806. 19. distiÌ„ct vt quae nobis sacerdotalis mater est dignitatis ecclesiasticae esse debeat magistra rationis Quare seruaÌ„da est cuÌ„ mansuetudine humilitas et licet vix fereÌ„duÌ„ ab illa sancta sede imponatur iugum tamen feramê° pia deuotione toleremus Let vs honor the holy Church of Rome and the See Apostolike for the remeÌ„brance of blessed Peter the Apostle The see of Rome is the mother of priestly Vvorship that as the same See is to vs the mother of priestlie dignitie so it may be the teacher of the Ecclesiasticall trade Wherefore humility is to be kept with meekenes And although a yoke be putte vppon vs from the same holy See which is scant to be born yet lette vs beare and suffer it with godly deuotion Thus we see that Carolus honoured the See of Rome not for Phocas but for S. Peters sake Ludouicus who for his singular vertue and godlines was surnamed Pius hauing ben triatorouslie ordered by Adalgisus the Duke of Beneuentum Regino in Chron. An. 872. who went about to kill him in his palaice and being afterward forced to sweare that he wold not reuenge that iniury was so far from taking himselfe to be the supreme head ouer the Bisshop of Rome that rather he was content to take absolution from his oth of Iohn the pope Authoritate Dei Sancti Petri by the authority not of Phocas but of God and of Saint Peter I woulde goe forward to shew at large the obedience of all good Emperours and Kings to the See Apostolik euen till this day but that it shoulde be accompted a superfluouse labour sith as I suppose no man doth doubt of it And verilie concerning our own countrie as aboue fourtene hundred yeres past An. D. 188 Lucius the first Christian King of the Britans did send to Eleutherius the Bisshop of Rome to receaue from thence by his authority the ordinary meane of administring the Sacraments for him and his realm eueÌ„ so Ethelbert the first Christian King of the English Saxons toke his faith and the gouernment of the Church from the See of Rome S. Gregorie being theÌ„ Pope by our Apostle S. Augustine An. D. 630 And the good King Osui of NorthumberluÌ„d Bedae lib. histo Angli 3. c. 29 and Ecbert the King of Kent vnderstaÌ„ding that the RomaÌ„ Church esset catholica Apostolica Ecclesia was the Catholik and the Apostolike Church sent Wichardus with the consent of al the faithfull of England to Rome that hauing ther takeÌ„ the degré of an Archbishop he might ordein bisshops to all the Catholike Churches through Britannie From that day forward it is euident by al our Chronicles which at the least were made before that schism and heresie began that as euery King not only of EnglaÌ„d but of all Christian CouÌ„tries was best aÌ„d most geueÌ„ to godlines and to vertue so was he most obedient and frindful to the bishop of Rome And coÌ„trariewise as euery of them was most licentious most geuen to extorsion to tyrannie or to robling of Churches so was he most disobedient to the See of Rome So that as all the heathen Emperours froÌ„ Nero to the Renegat Iulianus did alwaies persecute the Apostolike See of Rome and as afterward al the heretical Emperours did the same as wel those of CoÌ„stantinople as of the West so contrarywise all the good Constantines the Theodosians the MartiaÌ„s Carolus Ludouicus Otho and their good successours did so little thiÌ„ck themselues the supream heads ouer the bishops of Rome and of the other Christians in spiritual causes that contrarie wise they obeied them as their chiefe pastours and as the Vicars of Christ aÌ„d the successours of S. Peter And that they did not only being a part euery man in his own Realm but also when that most famouse battell against the Turkes and Saracens was by the inspiration of the holy Ghost begun at one tyme by the Spaniards Sigebertus in Chron. Anno Do. 1096. Gascons Britans Normans English Scotish and Frenchmen by the Burgundions Almains Lumbards and Italians when diuerse Dukes as Godfrid of Lorrain and Baiamund of Apulia wheÌ„ diuerse Erles as Baldwin of MoÌ„s one Robert of Flanders and an other of Normandy StepheÌ„ of Blese and Raimund when Hugh the brother of Philip the King of Fraunce toke that most holy warfare in hand when I say they were stirred vppe with one spirit and hart to recouer the holy land did not they shew as wel their own belief as the vniuersal faith of al their countries and nations in that they had Hamarus the bishop of Podium sette ouer them Apostolica authoritate by the Apostolike authoritie And how marueilouse successe of victory had they conquering as well Antioche as Hierusalem It can be vnknowen to no man who readeth
threatenings of the Emperour what neede is there of men who haue the title of bishoppes When hath it bene heard of since the beginning of the world Note when did the iudgement of the church take his autority frō the Emperor or whē at any time was this acknouleged for a iudgemēt There haue ben very many synods hertofore many iudgements of the Church haue ben kept But neither the Fathers went about to persuade these things to the prince nor the Prince did shew himselfe curiouse in the matters of the Churche Paule the Apostle hadde frinds in Cesars howse and did salute the Philippians in their name in his letters yet did he not take them as his fellowes in iudgement By this ye may perceaue that no Emperours at al were they neuer so good no County Palatines or secular Lords be they neuer so much faithful as Constās was ād those of th' Emperors house of whome S. Paule speaketh haue yet any right or power Philip. 4. to sitte presidents in Ecclesiastical matters otherwise then to kepe ciuil order and peace but onlie those to whom God hath committed the cure of sowles In so much that Athanasius douteth not by name to call Constantius the foreruner of Antichrist because he being a secular prīce intermedled with the spiritual gouernment of the Churche Quid igitur Constantius quod Antichristi non sit In epist vbi antè omisit aut quomodo ille in aduentu suo non repererit sibi expeditam viam ad dolos ab isto praeparatam Siquidem in locum ecclesiasticae cognitionis suum palatium tribunal earum caufarum constituit séque earum litium summum principem authorem facit What hath Constantius then omitted that doth not appertain to Antichrist Or how shal not Antichrist when he cometh finde a fitte way for him to all deceits prepared by this mā ▪ For in steede of the Ecclesiasticall iudgement The part of Antichrist he appointeth his palace to be the place of iudgement for their causes and maketh himselfe the chiefest prince and bearer out of those controuersies Ibidē vbi antè And againe Grauia sunt ista plusquam grauia sed tamen istiusmodi quae congruant in eum qui Antichristi imaginem induerit Quis enim videns eum in decernendo principem se facere Episcoporū praesidere iudicijs Ecclesiasticis non meritò dicat illū eam ipsam abominationem desolationis esse quae à Daniele praedicta est nam cùm circumamictus sit Christianismo caet These things are greuous and more then greuous but yet they are such as doe well agree to him who hath put on the the Image of Antichrist For who seing him in making a decree to take vpon him to be prince of the bishops and to be president in Ecclesiastical iudgemēts may not worthely say that he is the abomination of the desolation which was foretold by Daniel The property of antichrist For when he being clothed with Christianitie doth both enter into the holie places and also being there doth spoile Churches abrogate the Canons vsing force to make men obserue and keepe his commaundements who will at anie tyme dare say that this is a quiet tyme to the Christians and not rather a persecution and such a persecution as neither hath ben before nor perchance no man will at any tyme make again but that sonne of iniquity which is Antichrist Thus haue we the determinate sentence of Athanasius of Athanasius I say the most notable bishop that euer was for vertue and lerning since the Apostles time And his sentence is that the Christiā Emperor and the like is of any Christian Prince who taketh vpō him to be prince of the bishops in making a decree and to be president in Ecclesiasticall iudgements is a mēber of that abominable desolatiō wherof Daniel prophecied Can any plainer sentence be wished for to conclude my present purpose Neither was this doctrine only meant of an heretical Emperour for the Catholike Emperour Constans is praised for not medling with Church matters Philip. 4. Yea S. Paule is alleaged not to haue communicated the Church matters with those good Christians of Cesars howse I know with what wranglers I haue to doe They wil bring examples to shew that some Emperours haue sitten in general Coūcels as Constantine the great Martianus ād some others But I answere that they satte to kepe good order and to preserue peace and quietnes among the bishops speciallie because the Archeheretikes were commonly themselues great Prelates as being the patriarches of Antioche or of Alexandria or of Constantinople Who yf the Emperour were not present would vse force in the stede of holy scriptures as Dioscorus did In the schismatical Ephesine Coūcel and Eusebius of Nicomedia in the tyme of the Arrians For the preseruing thē of ciuil and ecclesiastical peace the Emperour was present ād not as supreme iudge in Ecclesiasticall causes S. Ambrose noteth and thincketh that euen an heretical Emperour comming to yeres of discreatiō wil be hable to consider In epi. 32. VVhat maner of bishop M. Horn i◠qualis ille Episcopus sit qui Laicis ius Sacerdotale substernit what manner of bishop he is who layeth the priestly right vnder the laye mens seete And yet by geuing of the most proud and most intolerable title of supreame Head or gouernor in al ecclesiastical causes to lay princes al the religiō vsed now in England wholy standeth What bishoppes then are those of England who making the secular prince their head putte the priestly right vnder his feete S. Augustine being fully persuaded that nothing could be greater then a priest in the house of God therevpon concludeth that Moyses must nedes haue ben a priest for saieth he nunquid maior sacerdote esse poterat August in Psalm 98. Could he be greater then a priest Yea Marie saith M. Horn he might haue ben a King or a secular Prince But S. Augustine knew no such diuinity And yet the worlde toward the comming of Antichrist is growne so wise that these men haue found now that euery Emperor King Prince or Duke who hath any temporall state of his owne is greater euen in Ecclesiasticall causes then the lawfull successour of S. Peter This I say is the diuinity of England For therein our countrie maketh a peculiar Secte of his owne wherein they disagree euen from their fellow Caluinistes But lette them loke to it as well as they will they shal finde it a badge of Antichrist as Athanasius hath plainlie affirmed And when the daie of triall commeth it shall euidentlie appeere that those are most faithfull subiects to the prince who geue him his due place of honour in Gods Churche without derogation to that heauēly power of bishops which Christ himself came down from hauen to plant and whom he hath set euen ouer the Kings themselues Ioan. 21. as being the sheepe of their foldes Theod. lib.