heavenly building 1. Cor. 3. though our saviour Christ Iesus bee the chief fundation and corner stone yet next to himself hee hath placed Saint Peter and hath vpon him as vpon a firme rock builded his church which is as much to say as that hee gave him firme and infallible authoritie vpon which all the faithfull should rely for finall resolution in all doubts of faith religion and manners which do necessarily appartayne to the edifying of Christs church this may serue for a cursory exposition of the first fountaine of holy scripture out of which I derived that our Saviour bestowed vpon S. Peter the supreme place of government in his church a fuller confirmation of it shall follow by and by 6 I might add for further proof of the same position out of Saint Iohns Gospell how our blessed Lord severing Saint Peter from the rest of the Apostles and intimating how S. Peter loved him more then anie of them gave to him as head pastor the charge of both his sheepe and lambes that is of all Christians aswell the cleargy as the laity to bee by him instructed ruled and governed as the flock of sheepe is fed and ruled by the shepheard which according to the ancient doctors testimonie doth verie plainly confirme Saint Peters supremacie as you shall heare presently out of their own wordes yet this though it bee most pregnant among the rest I then omitted because the question of the supremacy was not to bee handled there at the full I touched also a third text to prove that the Bishop of Rome as Saint Peters successor should never faile in confirming of his brethren in the true faith taken out of Saint Luke where our Lord saith Simon Simon behold Luca 22. sataÌ„ hath required to haue you for to sifte as wheate but I haue praied for thee that thy faith faile not and thou once converted confirme thy brethreÌ„ wher vpon it followeth that all others ought to repaire to him and his successors for resolution of all controversies in faith to bee confirmed by him and are bound therby to obey him as the person to whom Christ gaue power to confirme his brethren Of the first text of scripture shal bee treated more at large in this section for the others I will onlie note some places of the holy fathers where the reader maie see the very same explication of Christes words and deduction that I make here by their auctoritie approved bicause M. Abbot doth here verie hotly call for such testimonies and seemeth so earnestly sett vpon the sight of them that I must needes giue him out of hand at least the quotations of them in the margent and then small doubt but hee will presently bee satisfied if there bee such honestie in him as hee makes shew of well if it bee no more then for the good readers content I will giue him more then hee demauÌ„deth that is not only the quotations in the margent but their words also in the text a Origenes in cap. 6. ad Rom. Petro cum summa rerum de pascendis ovibus traderetur super ipsum velut super terram fundaretur ecclesia nullius confessio virtutis alterius ab eo nisi charitas cuigitur To begin Origen saith when the church was founded vpon S. Peter and supreme power of feeding Christs sheepe was comÌ„itted to him the profession of no other vertue then of charitie was demaunded of him b Cipri de vnitate eccles Petro post resurrectionem dominus dicit pasce oves meas super illum vnum aedificat ecclesiam suam illi pascendas mandat oves suas S. Ciprian Christ after his resurrection said to Peter feede my sheepe and vpon him alone doth build his church In both these sentences are linked two texts of the Euangelists that concerne Saint Peters supremacy c Ambros 10. in Lucam cap. 24. Contristatur quia tertio interrogatur Amas me iâ— enim interrogatur de quo dubitatur sed dominus non dubitabat qui interrogabat non vt disceret sed vt doceret quem elevandus in caelum amoris sui nobis velut vicarium relinquebat paulo post ideo quia solus profitetur ex omnibus omnibus antefertur ibidem tertio dominus non iam diligis meâ— sed amas me interrogauit iam non agnos vt primo quodam lacte pascendos nec oviculas vt secundo sed oues pascere iubetur perfectiores vt perfectior gubernaret Saint Ambrose Our lord not to learne himself but to teach vs did aske him whom hee being to ascend into heaven would leave vs as it were the vicar of his loue for so thou hast Simon sonne of Iohn dost thou loue mee c. Peter testified his affection and therfore bicause hee alone made that profesâ—ion hee is preferred before the rest and a little after he is commaunded to feede the sheepe as well as the lambes that the perfecter sort might be governed by him that was more perfect behold sheepe and lambes to bee governed by Saint Peter d Chrisost homil 1. de penitentia Poenitentia post tantum malum iterum cum ad priorem honorem reuehit ecclesiae primatum gubernationém que ipsi per vniuersum orbem tradidic Chrisost homil 80. in Ioannem Cum magna Christus Petro coÌ„municasset ei orbis terrarum curam demandasset c. S. Chrisostome the primacie of the church and the government throughout the whole world is by Christ coÌ„mitted to S. Peter see him also in his last homily vpoÌ„ S. Iohns Gospell and in his second booke of priesthood whom e Theophil cap. 21. Ioannis Totius orbis onium praefecturam Petro committit non autem alij sed huic tradit Theophi lact vpon the same place doth follow saying Christ granteth to S. Peter and to none els the government of the church through the whole world f Leo sermo 3. de assump De toto mundo vnus Petrus eligitur qui vniuersarum gentium vocationi omnibus Apostolis â—unctisque Ecclesiae patribuâ— praeponatur vt quamuis in populo dei mulâ—â— sacerdotes sint multiquâ— pastores omnes tamen proprie regat Petrus quos principaliter regit Christus S. Leo amonge all the meÌ„ of the woâ—ld onely Peter is chosen who is placed over the Apostles and fathers of the church and over the vocation of the Gentils And albeit among the peoplâ— of God there be manie priests and manie Pastors yet Peter doth rule all them properly over whom our Saviour Christ doth rule principally observe the rule over all that appertaine to Christ to be given by Christ to S. Peter g Eucherius Lug in vigilia S. Petri. Dicit ei pasce oves meas prius agnos deinde oues coÌ„misit ei quia non solum pastorem sed pastorum pastorem eum constituit pascit igitur Petrus agnos pascit oues pascit filios pascit matres regit
collatam in qua sederit omnium Apostolorum caput Petrus in qua vna cathedra vnitas ab omnibus seruaretur ne caeteri Apostoli singulas sibi quisque defenderent vtiam schismaticus peccator esset qui contra singularem cathedram alteram collocaret ergo cathedra vnica quae est prima de dotibus sedit prior Petrus cui successit linus c. damaso Siricius hodie qui noster est socius Cum quo nobis totus orbis commercio formatarum in vna communionis societate concordat vestrae cathedrae vos originem reddite qui vobis vultis sanctam Ecclesiam vindicare wherin Peter the head of all the Apostles sate first in which one chaire vnity is preserued amoÌ„gst all c. That he is now to be taken for a sinner a schismatike that would against that singuler or only chaire oppose another Therfore in that one chaire which is the first in dowry sate Peter vnto whom succeeded Linus and so in â—ew downe vnto Siricius that then liued who is saith Optatus our companion with whom the whole world by entercourse of formed letters doth concord with vs in the same society of coÌ„munion Hitherto Optatus where you see by the iudgment of so great a Prelate who liued in the time of pure antiquity that the chaire of Rome is the only chaire of vnity with which if you ioyne you are in the vnitie of Christs church against which if you oppose your self you become a sinner and a schismatike further that by communicating in faith with it you do enter into the society of all Catholikes dispersed ouer the whole world I do now staÌ„d more particulerly vpon those holy fathers words bicause M. Abbot was so shamles as to write that I did before of set purpose omitt their words bicause if I had set them downe euerie one might haue seene as he saith that they said nothing for our purpose when as for breuities sake I was then content only to point at these testimonies not thinking that any man would haue been so careles of his credit as to haue denied them to be most effectuall to our purpose Now that Optatus did prove the Donatists to be a particuler stragling congregation like the Protestants not only for that they did not comunicate with the church of Rome but also for want of comunication with the churches of Asia that makes nothing against the singuler esteeme hee had of the church of Rome for learned writers do vse diuers sorts of arguments to make their partie the more strong and probable One argument not destroying but fortifying the other The Donatists were schismatikes saith that noble Author bicause they opposed themselues against the church of Rome They were also astraying company for that they held no communion with the churches of Asia or any other part of the world besides Africa From Optatus M. Abbot coms to answer that place I quoted out of S. Austin which I haue before set downe at large and confesseth August epist 165. That Austin setteth downe the succession of the Bishops of Rome and vpbraideth the Donatists that no Donatist euersate in that chaire But M. Abbot doth add that as well doth he obiect to them that wheras they read the Epistles of the Apostles they deuided themselues from the peace and fellowship of those churches to which the Apostles wrote the same Epistles Is not this a worthy answer trow you bicause S. Austin vsed as a second argument to confute the Donatists their seperation from the knowne fellowship of the world Therfore his former argument taken from the coÌ„munion of the sea of Rome was nothing worth wheras contrary wise acute disputantes like to wise warriours do coÌ„monly range the strongest arguments in the forefront Or is there nothing to our purpose in the former place of S. Austin as here M. Abbot having put on a brasen forhead doth avouch Turne to it good Reader and see First that profound Doctor teacheth that among all the successions of Bishops that of Rome is most to be regarded bicause the gats of hell shall never preuaile against it Secondly that there had sitten from Peter vnto Anastasius then pope about fortie popes and that not so much as one of them had been a Donatist wherfore the Donatists were to be reiected of all men Hee thirdly teacheth in the same place that if any traitor should by chance creepe into that chaire of Rome yet the wickednes of that man should not be preiudiciall vnto the innocent faithfull that do rely vpon Christs promise made to that chaire bicause our Saviours singuler care therof is and wil be alwaies such that they who put their trust therin shall neuer be confounded Is all this nothing to our purpose that the gats of hell cannot prevaile against the chaire of Rome That they who rely vpoÌ„ it cannot faile no not if there should be a naughty Bishop sitting in that chaire besides as S. Austin did then argue because not one of the Bishops of Rome had been a Donatist therfore the Donatists religion was to be reiected why may not we in like manner make a stronger argument against the Protestants and conclude that seing among all the Bishops of Rome that haue been froÌ„ Saint Peter vnto Paule the fift which are in number not 40. only but more then 200 yet not one of them hath been a protestant therfore the protestants religion must needs be starke naught and of all men to te vtterly reiected This I hope will serve to discouer M. Abbots over hardy audacitie who noteth here that the cause why I did set downe my authors names without their words was for that their names might get some credit to my cause but their words would haue shewed that they had said nothing for mee when as now every man may see that their words truly set downe do make much more for mee then a verie good frind would haue imagined vnlesse he had seen them himself M. Abbot proceedeth to another great priuiledg which I related in honor of the church of Rome to witt that there hath not been any generall councell of vndoubted and sound authority vnlesse it were by the same sea confirmed which is a point of such importance that whosoeuer doth maturely ponder it it is alone sufficient to perswade him in all controversies of religion to make his recourse vnto the church of Rome and to follow that full and wholy which he shall find to be resolued by it For if the wisest and most learned heads of the world assembled together in a generall councell after all their owne advises vpon long examination of all particulers given do yet hold it expedient to send to the pope of Rome to haue his approbation and confirmation therof how much more ought any particuler person be he of never so exquisite gifts for iudgment and literature to referr himself vnto the determination of the same seat whervnto what doth M. Abbot answere first as
to beleeve let him but proue that any one of the afore rehersed heresies were condemned in generall councell or that those popes of Rome by me named did not condemne them 32 It is to small purpose which M. Abbot saith that notwithstanding the opposition of the legates of the Bishop of Rome and the popes owne reclayming also yet it was decreed in the councell of Chalcedon that the Bishop of Constantinople should haue equall priuiledges with the Bishop of Rome saue only that the Bishop of Rome had the precedence bicause the opposition of the popes Legats with some others in that councell and the popes disclayming from that point when the councell was sent to him to be confirmed as most opposit vnto the first generall councell of Nice was sufficient to reverse and annihilate that decree which needs no other proofe then one argument which the same Legats vsed then and there to suppresse that ambition of the Bishops of Constantinople For the like decree had been made once before in the second generall councell holden at Constantinople and yet the pope not condescending thervnto it tooke no effect whervpon the presidents made this witty dilemma If the Bishops of Constantinople having the like Canon made in their favour fowrscore yeres before that time had euer sithence enioyed that prerogatiue and preeminence why did they nowe againe seeke after it And if notwithstanding that decree made in their fauour they could then not obtaine it why did they now seeke to haue the like Canon againe made for them which would no more prevaile for them then the other given before by the same authority For that this would be as well withstood by Leo the great as the other was reiected by Pope Damasus 33 M. Abbot following his accustomed humor of excepting against whatsoever I write doth say that an nother note of mine is fond and a vaine presumption I would haue it to be noted that all heresies lightly which sprung vp ever since the Apostles daies even to our time haue opposed themselues against the church of Rome and haue been by the same sea ouercome which argueth most cleerly that the church of Rome is the seat of Christ and fortresse of verity against which all of the band of Antichrist do continually and daily wage battell but all in vaine and with verie ill successe for they all vanishing away like smoke it continueth still and shall do for euer because it is an invincible rock which the gates of hell shall neuer over come M. Abbot crieth out against this as a fond presumption but doth not bring any one instance to the contrary so that his exception being without reason may well be passed ouer without answere wheras I countenanced my assertion with the authority S. Austin who writeth Aug. de vtili credendi ca. 17. Dubitabimus nos eius Ecclesiae condere gremio quae vsque ad confâ—ssionem generis humani ab Apostolica sede per successiones Episcoporum frustra haereticis circum latrantibus culmen auctoritatis obtiuuit that the sea Apostolike obtained the top of authority heretiks barking round about in vaine which did prove that all heretikes how soeuer they snarle one at another yet do commonly ioyne all in one to barke against the church of Rome And which is most to be noted all in vaine M. Abbot to shew the profundity of his skill doth saie that I take there sedes Apostolica wrong for the sea Apostolike of Rome when as it signifieth saith hee the Apostles time And albeit the natiue signification of the words be plaine for mee yet he avoucheth S. Austin to vse these words to signifie the time of the Apostles And for proofe therof he citeth two places out of S. Austin Aug. coÌ„t saustum mam li. 11. ca. 2. in neither of which Apostolica sedes is vsed at all in the singular number nor in the plurall neither to signifie any other thing then the seats and chaires of the Apostles Take one of those places of his owne alleaging for example Ibidem l 29. ca. 2. Vniuersa Ecclesia ab Apostolicis sedibus vsque ad presentes Episcopos certa successione perducta The vniuersall church deriued from the Apostolicall seats by certain succession vnto the Bishops that now are where mention being made of lineall descent of Bishops from the Apostles seats Great iniury should be done to those Bishops by him that would say they descended indeed from the Apostles times but not from the chaires of the Apostles For if they had descended from Simon Magus or some other Archheretike of the Apostles time they might bee said to haue descended ab Apostolicis sedibus from the Apostles times according to M. Abbots interpretation because their descent was from the time of the Apostles yet could not be said to haue descended from the Apostles chaires as their lawfull Successors according vnto S. Austins or any other approved auncient Authors true meaning therfore M. Abbots deprauation rather then interpretation of those words is too too absurd That S. Austin did commonly take sedes Apostolica for the Bishop or church of Rome is most evident to all that haue read his works let them that are not so conversant in him take these few places for a tast therof in his 106. Epistle Missae sunt literae ad Apostolicam sedem Letters were sent to the sea Apostolike that is to the Bishop of Rome And in the 157. Epistle Zozimus Apostolicae sedis Episcopus Zozimus Bishop of the Apostolike sea and Pope Innocent Bishop of the Apostolike sea And in his booke De peccato originali the sixt chapter to make profession before the sea Apostolike and the seaventh the letters of the sea Apostolike And that you may be well assured that in Africa at those daies sedes Apostolica was the common title of the church of Rome both that African councell cited by M. Abbot in the 35. Canon and the fore alleaged epistles of the councels of Carthage and Milevitan vnto Pope Innocentius do by it ordinarily designe the Bishop of Rome which maie suffice for a proof that sedes Apostolica in that place of saint Austin is to be taken for the sea of Rome And wheras M. Abbot saies that in all that booke of S. Austin there is no mention made of any particular church and therfore vnlike that those words should beare any speciall appliâ—ation to the church of Rome I in answer do say that sides Apostolica vsed there by S. Austin in the singular number is sufficient to giue vs biâ—h to vnderstand that hee spake of a particuler church also to lead vs to applie these his words vnto the church of Rome which he commonly through all his workes doth describe by those verie words which may also be much confirmed by the like sentence vsed by S. Austin to the same purpose in another place where hee saith Aug. co Epist fundam ca. 4. In Ecclesia gremio me
that I will do that for him which hee blinded with self loue imagined impossible for any man to do to wit I will put downe his argument more cleerly and formerly then he hath done himself as every scholler that can Iudge of the forme of an argument may easily perceaue in this manner No part can be the whole but the church of Rome is but a part to wit the head of the church Ergo it cannot be the whole This his so often repeated argument without any new fortificatiō needs no other refutatiō than that which hath been once or twice giuen before Thus at length we come to the end of M. Abbots first chapter which was diuided into fower sections or parts and haue by the helpe of Gods good grace both defended and proued that supreme commanding power of Iurisdiction which consisteth in the chief government of Christs church vpon earth to haue been by our blessed Saviour first established and placed vpon the person of S. Peter Prince of the Apostles that there should be perfect vnity in his Ecclesiasticall kingdome then that the same might endure not for tearme of S. Peters life only but alwaies continue vnto the worlds end He ordained that S. Peters successors the Bishops of Rome should enioy the same soveraigne authority ouer the whole Catholike church vntill the worlds end which I made good specially by the confession and acknowledgment of the greatest Patriarks most learned and best approued Prelats of the East churches because the better learned Protestants do after a manner grant vnto the Bishop and pope of Rome Of this read more in the note at the end of this chapter as patriarch of the west supreme authoritie and Iurisdiction ouer all the west churches Moreouer because the protestants do all and some obiect that fact of the African Bishops wherin they seemed to deny appeales of all vnder the degree of Bishops vnto the court of Rome as an argument of great moment against the said supreme commanding power of the sea of Rome I haue produced testimonies of the most ancient and best learned Bishops and Doctors of the African church averring the Iurisdiction of the church of Rome ouer themselues and their countrie So that there can remaine no scruple in the vpright and iudicious Readers vnderstanding but that the Bishop of Romes supremacy hath been acknowledged witnessed and obeyed all the world ouer even in the pure times of most florishing Christianity And consequently that all they who desire to bee sound and perfect Catholiks must imbrace and professe the faith and religion of the same Roman church or els be content to bee reckened in the rew of hereticall or schismaticall Congregations And as in this life they willingly take part with them in their schisme and errors so they may assure themselues vnles God giue them grace to repent to bee against their wils sorted with them in the finall separation at the last day and to haue their vnlucky lott with them in the lake euer burning with fire and brimstone from which our most mercifull Lord and sweet Saviour Christ Iesus deliuer all them that professe his truth and holy name Amen M. Richard field Doctour of diuinity in his fift book of the church printed at london 1610. of the bishop and church of Rome hath these positions FIrst in the 32. chapter that the Bishop of Rome doth succeed S. Peter in the Bishoprique of the City and in the honour of being one of the prime Bishops of the world Secondly in the 34. chapter that the church of Rome was head of all churches that is first in order and honour among them but not in absolute supreme commaunding power 3 That the same church was in more speciall sort head of such churches as were within the Patriarchship of Rome as was all the west church To which effect his maiesty of England our soueraigne lord writeth to all Christian Monarches Pag 46. If there were yet question among the Patriarches for the first place I would with all my hart giue my consent that the Bishop of Rome should haue the first seat I being a westerne king would go for the patriarch of the west 4 That the Bishop of Rome had the care of all churches not as absolute supreme commaunder but as most honorable among the Bishops who were first to be sought vnto in matters requiring a common deliberation and from whom all things generally concerning the state of the whole church were either to take beginning or at the least to seek confirmation before they were generally imposed and prescribed The same Doctour in his preface to the reader teacheth that to compose variances rising between Patriarches and their Bishops or among themselues he that was in order and honour before the rest might lawfully interpose himself and in his synode iudg of such differences And in such cases as could not be so ended or that concerned the faith and the state of the whole vniuersall church there remained the iudgment and resolution of a generall councell wherin the Bishop of the first sea that is the Bishop of Rome was to sitt as President and moderatour Obserue how easily that which we teach of popes the supremacy may be gathered out of these principles for if it appertaine vnto the Bishop of Rome as prime Patriarch to compose the differences rising betwixt other Patriarches and their Bishops if he must be principally sought vnto for finall resolutions in matter of faith if care of all churches belong to him and from him all thinges generally concerning the state of the whole church were either to take beginning or els to seek confirmation let any vnderstanding man exercised in gouernment tell me how Patriarches and Bishops may be conuented to appeare without commaunding authority and how without compelling power the popes finall determinations would be of all parties obeied THE SECOND CHAPTER M. ABBOT The comparisons betweene the Donatists and Papists iustified and enlarged page 51. R. AB IT is a meere vsurpation wherby the Papists call the Roman church the Catholike church and the same that the Donatists of old did They held the Catholike church to be art Cartenna in Africk and the Papists hold it to be at Rome in Italy W. B. THis cōparison is a fond new deuise of M. Abbot wherin there is skarce one spark either of wit or learning wherfore it deserued rather to be abridged or wholy cāceld then to haue been enlarged Iustified it can never bee because it hath not many true words in it Take a tast of this first branch which is false on both sides for neither was Cartenna in Africa but in Mauritania nor did the Donatists hold their pretended Catholike church to bee at Cartenna but esteemed the Rogatists who so much magnified Cartenna to be wicked Schismatiks altogether vnworthy the name or communion of their supposed Catholik church as S. Austin M. Abbots owne author doth testifie Aug. Epist 48. in the place
anie good order yet to make the matter as seÌ„sible and perspicuous as his perplexed proceeding will give mee leave I will gather into the first place what hee hath scatteringly disputed against the supremacy of the church of Rome and giue answere to that SecoÌ„dly I will confirme our part Lastly I will examine how sufficientlie hee hath answered my former argumeÌ„ts made to prove the same M. Abbots first argumeÌ„t against the primacye of the sea of Rome is taken ab authoritate negative as schollers do vse to speake from authoritie negatiuelie which kind of reasoning though among the protestants it bee holden for currant in matter of faith yet hee can not be ignoraÌ„t that wee allow not of it who hold some points of faith to bee deliuered by vnwritten tradition wherfore if hee had not wanted iudgment hee should not so confidentlie haue vsed such kind of arguments against vs. But let vs heare them such as they be S. Peter and S. Paul do make no mention of this superioritie of the churh of Rome in their Epistles therfore there is none such this is a verie vaine and insufficient argument even in the waie of protestants for albeit they would grant that if there were no warrant for it in all the old or new testament that then it were not to bee creditted yet they would not denie but that it might bee a matter of faith though there were no mention made of it in S. Peter or S. Pauls Epistles so that it bee recorded in anie other part of the scriptures for all parts of the holy scriptures are alike true wherfore anie thing written in anie parcell therof is as well to bee beleeved as if it were written in S. Peters or S. Pauls Epistles But M. Abbot vrgeth in this manner S. Paul writ an Epistle to the Romanes and therfore hee would not haue omitted that their priviledge if any such had been I answere that S. Paul writt to the Romans not of all matters but to instruct them in some importaÌ„t poiÌ„ts of doctrine and to coÌ„fort them in their tribulatioÌ„s which hee might well do without makiÌ„g any mentioÌ„ of the priviledges of their church besides neither M. Abbot not anie man els I thinke is able to shewe that S. Paul in all that Epistle doth so much as once treat of Bishops or church government wherfore he had no occasioÌ„ ministred to talke of the Roman churches supremacy Let it for this time suffice that S. Paul doth els where acknowledg S. Peter for a person of excellency and his superiour as the holie learned Doctors do gather out of these his words Then after three yeeres I came to Hierusalem to see Peter Gallat 1.18 and tarried with him fifteene daies That going vp of S. Paul to Hierusalem to visit S. Peter was not of curiosity but of dutie and by the law of faith as a Tertul. de praescrip cap. 23. Paulus sicut ipse narrat ascendit Hierosolymam cognoscendi Petri causa ex officio turc scilicet eiusdem fidei praedicationis Tertullian taketh it S. Chrysostome b Chrysostomus superillum locum Vi les quemad â—odum illis tribuit congruentem honorem neque solum non ducit scipsum illis meliorem verum ne parem quidem esse putat id quod ex ipsa profectione liquet non dixit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quomodo loqui solent quiinvisunt magnas vrbes vel viros sanctos out of the Energie of the greeke word collecteth that it was to see and to visit Peter as a person of excellency and maiestie And vpon S. Iohns c Chrysost hom 87. in Ioannem Petrus os erat Apostolorum Princeps vertex ipsius coetus propterea Paulus eum preter alios visùrus ascendit simul vt ei ostenderet tam ei fiduciam habendam Gospell addeth another cause of that visit to have been to certifie Saint Peter of his extraordinary coÌ„mission to preach the Gospell that he might bee creditted of the Christians which Saint Ambrose confirmeth in these words It was meete d Ambros in 1 cap. ad Galatas Dignum fuit vt cuperet videre Petrum qui primus erat inter Apostolos cui delegauerat Saluator curam ecclesiarum non vtique vt aliquid ab eo disceret quia iam ab auctore didicerit à quo et ipse Petrus fuerat instructus sed propter affectum Apostolatus vt sciret Petrus illi datam licentiam quam ipse acceperat meete that Saint Paul should covett to see S. Peter who was the chief amonge the Apostles to whom our Saviour had comÌ„itted the charge of the churches Not that hee should learne any thing of him who had before been instructed of the same maister that S. Peter was but for the qualitie of his Apostleshipp and that S. Peter might know the same comission to bee giuen to S. Paul of preaching which hee had before receiued e Hieronimi Epla 89. Denique tantae authoritatis Petrus fuit vt Paulus in Epistola sua scripserit deinde post annos tres veni Hierosoliman videre Petrum c. S. Hierome saith to the same effect S. Peter was of so great authoritie that S. Paul writeth hee went to Ierusalem to visit him f Theodoret in 1. ad Galatas Et hoc rursus Pauli virtutem ostendit etenim cum humana doctrina non indigeret vt qui ab vniuersorum deo eam ante accepisset Apostolorum principi quem par est honorem tribuit Theodoret thus when S. Paul needed no instruction of men having been taught by the Lord of all hee nevertheles deferred that honor to the ptince of the Apostles which was due g Theophilactus ibidem Paulus ad Petrum abijt non vtilitatis gratia sed solo visendi studio honoranseum maiorem se notat ibidem verbum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 significare cum obseruatione intueri Theophilact S. Paul desired to see S. Peter as a personage greater then himself and went vp with reuerence to behold him By the record of all these ancient fathers S. Paul went vp to Ierusalem to visit S. Peter as the prince of the Apostles and as the chief governor of the church to acquaint him with his extraordinarie vocation that having gotten his approbation hee might without contradiction bee receiued of all others Now to M. Abbots second argument which is yet worse then the former S. Iohn did honour to the seaven churches of Asia Apoc. 2. 3. writing to them and yet hee would never speake of the seaven hills of Rome but as of the seate of the whore of Babylon Ergo what you please a messe of plumme pottage if you will for this pleasant Iester rather then disputer hath this sophisme so much as the shadow of a sorie argument S. Iohn in the 2. and 3. chapters of the reuelations makes no mention of the church of
Romes supremacy Ergo there is no such matter in all the scripture M. Abbot blushing at the vglie shape of this ilfavoured argument to botch it out doth adde that by those seaven churches are figured the whole church of Christ and yet there is not a word in thē of the supremacie of the church of Rome I thinke well nor of thundreth matters moe that belonge to the christian religiō for these seaven short letters which S. Iohn writes to the seaven churches are contained within the compasse of three pages of one little leafe in octauo in their owne bible and can anie man bee so simple as to dreame that all the points of our faith are comprehended within them S. Iohn com̄ends the vertues reprehends the vices of those churches but doth treat of verie few points of doctrine and therfore no strange case if hee spake not of the supremacie of the church of Rome M. Abbots third argument the church of Rome hath a speciall caution given her not to presume vpon her stabilitie in the faith lest she fall Rom. 11.20 S. Paul saying to her Be not high minded but feare for if God spared not the naturall branches take heed also lest hee spare not thee Behold the bountifulnes of God towards thee if thou continue in his boūtifulnes or els also thou shalt bee cut of Ergo what hee had neede to bee a cūning fletcher that could make either a bolt or a shaft of this fit for the purpose First here is nothing at all against the church of Romes supremacie nor yet anie certaine assertion against her stability in the received faith For here is aswell a promise of Gods bountifulnes towards them if they will do well as a threat against them if they do evill Againe all this is besides the cushion for though that Epistle bee to the Romanes yet S. Paul there doth expresly direct that discourse not to the Romanes in particuler but in generall to all the Gentiles beginning it thus for to you Gentils I say c. Ibid. v. 13 and goes on with a comparison betweene the Iewes and the Gentils so that nothing is more perspicuous then that the warning there given is not speciall to the Romans but generall to all Gentiles These loe bee the foregallāts shal I saie or rather the forlorne hope of M. Abbots terrible argumēts marshalled by himself in the forefrōt of his batlle to daūt the Enemy are wee not like thinke you to haue a hott skirmish of it where such drosse and refuse of arguments are thought worthie the first and best place but it were pittie that such a bad cause should bee burnished sett out with anie better M. Abbot having given such a mighty pushe at our position cometh to confute that I said to witt that it is deduced out of Gods word rightly vnderstood according to the interpretation of the ancient fathers that the church of Rome is that rock vpon which Christ built his church against which the gates of hell shall never prevaile To which M. Abbot as though he went about to choke dawes saies that I giue him chalke for cheese bicause I promised a deduction out of the word of God and in steed therof bring an exposition of the ancient fathers Marke gentle reader my words and then thou canst not but find M. Abbot to be an egregious wrangler for I performed that deduction which I promised out of Gods word naming the verie place out of which it is deduced but because I ioyned with it according vnto the exposition of ancient fathers hee like a man scarse well in his wits cries out that in steed of scriptures I bring in an exposition of the fathers when I do make mention of the fathers exposition not as the ground of my deduction but onlie for the true sense of those words of holy scripture out of which I do make the said collection The deduction in my former booke was verie briefe bicause I did there point onlie at the places of holie scriptures out of which it might bee gathered the question of the supremacy being there but touched by the way wherof M. Abbot takes advantage and saies that I am dumbe and can say no more because I will not bee like to him and out of season thrust forth long discourses of by questions I hauing also before written a whole chapter of the supremacy in my second part against M. Perkins where M. Abbot saw well enough that I could haue said here much more of the same matter if need had so required but such is his impudencie that he cares not what hee saie so hee maie make a shewe to his simple reader that hee hath canvased his aduersarie seeing that M. Abbot hath here hudled together verie much of that matter I will more at large sett downe these deductions and orderlie confirme each member therof The first fountaine out of which all the rest do flow as riuers is this The chief superiority in governmēt and authoritie of power over all the church was by our blessed Saviour given to S. Peter and to his successors vnto the end of the world but the Bishops of Rome are S. Peters successors therfore the Bishops of Rome have from our saviours grant and gift authority of power and superiority of goverment over all the church The maior of this argument is to bee deduced out of the word of God the minor being a matter of fact and that which hapned after S. Peters death to wit who was his successor shall haue sound proofe out of the most approved testimony of the best witnesses since that age All which being performed the conclusion that the Bishop of Rome hath supreme commaunding power over all the church must needs stand most assured That our blessed saviour gaue superiority of government to S. Peter vnder the metaphore of a rocke or foundation in building when he said Thou art Peter Math. 16 and vpon this rocke I will build my church Thus I proue Christ made Peter the rock or foundation of his church therfore he gaue to him the chiefest place of government in it for as the foundation is first placed and doth vphold all the rest of the building so he that is the foundation in the spirituall building of Christes church hath the chiefest place therin is to com̄and over all the rest To make this more perspicuous we must call to mind that amongest other titles and names of the church of God one is a house as the Apostle sheweth that thou maist knowe how to converse in the house of God 2. Tim. 3.15 which is the church and the faithfull are called by the same Apostle 1. Cor. 3.9 Ephes 4.12 the building of God Dei aedificatio estis Againe God gaue some Apostles some Doctors c. to the building vp of the bodie of Christ S. Paul as a wise Architect laid the foundation and others builded thervpon Now in that supernaturall and
aduersus illam Epiphanius Our lord made Peter the chiefe of the Apostles a firme rock vpon which hee built his church 5 Basilius super 2. cap. Esaiae Apostâ—loram vnus erat Petrus super quam petram pollicitus fuerat sâ—am se aedificaturum ecclesiam statim anima autem beati Petri nominata merito est petra sublimis quod inâ— de radices solide infixerat aduersus plagas stabiliter segesserit S. Basil One of these Apostlâ—s or mountaines was Peter vpon which rock our saviour promised to build his church for the soule of Blessed peter was worthely called a rocke for the fastnes of his faith and fortitude against tribulations c. 6 Gregor Nazianz oratione 26 de moderatione in disputatione seruanda Vide quemadmodum ex Christi discipulus magnis vtique omnibus excelsis atque electione dignâ— hic Petrus petra vocetur atque ecclesiae fundamenta in fidem suam accipiat S. Gregorie Nazianzene thousâ—est how among Chrâ—sts disciples who were all surelie great worthie pâ—rsons Peter was called a rocke and the foundation of the church coÌ„mitted to his fidelitie 7 Chrisost de laudibus Petri Pauli De Petro quid dicemus qui dulce spectaculum est ecclesiae splendortotius mudi Apostolorum doctor Angelus homo firma fidei petra semlu ecclesiae sapientia c Idem homil 1. de penit Petrum cum dico petram omnino infragilem crepidinem immobilem Apostolum magnum primum discipulum c. S. Chrysostome Peter the brâ—ghtnes of all the world an Angel and a man the Doctor of the Apostles the firme rocke of faith the grace and sage wisedome of the church c. and in an other place when I say Peter I name a rocke that cannot bee battered an vnmoveable turrett Cirill 8 Cirill Alexand. l. 2. c. 12. in Ioannem Respicit vt deum decet qui corda renes scrutatur videtque qui nihil ignorat ad quantam fidem virtutem discipulus peruenturus sit c. nec Simon fore tam nomen sibi sed Petrus pradicit vocabulo ipso commode significans quod in eo tanquam in l'etra lapideque firmissimo suam esset adificaturus ecclesiam Alex. Christ did heerby teach Peter that hee knoweth all things before they be done did tell him before hand that his name should not bee Simon but Peter whiâ—h is interpreted a rocke by the name it self fitly signifying that vpon him as vpon a rocke and most firme stone he would build his church Theodoretus libro 3. 9 Psellus apud Theodoretum lib 3 in Cantica Per hutus crura Petrum intellige Apostolorum principem in hoc enim dominus in Euangelio se Ecclesiam adificaturum promisit in Cantica doth out of ancient Psellus teach that our lord promised to build his church vpon S. Peter Prince of the Apostles 10 Evagtius in lib 2. histor ca 4. Petrus qui est petra et basis Catholicae Ecclesiae et fides Orthodoxae fundamentum resert ex Concilio Chalcedonensi Evagrius the most blessed Apostle Peter with all praise to bee extolled who is the rocke the base and foundation of the Catholike Orthodox faith 11 Damascen historia barlam cap. 10. Princeps Apostolorum Petrus fidei petra magister orbis ordinatus fuit Damascenus the Prince of the Apostles Peter the rocke of faith who as hee was made maister of the whole world so was hee a patterne of penance 12 Theophilactus in 22. Lucae ad cap 16. Math. Remunerat Petrum Dominus mercedem illi dans magnaÌ„ quod super eum aedificauit Ecclesiam Theophilact before cited Peter after Christ is the rock and fondatâ—on of the church and vpon Saint Mathew saying our lord rewarded peter bestowing on him a great recompense in that he built his church vpon him Let these twelve renowmed Grecians serve for the testimony of the Greeke church now to the Latin I will begin with a Teâ—tul de praescriptione c. 22. Latuit aliquid Petrum adificandae Eâ—clesia Petram dictum claves regni coelorum consecutum Tertullian for his antiquitie Peter was called the rocke vpon which the church was to bee builded b Cyprianus Deus vnuâ—ed Christus vnus et vna ecclesia et Cathedra vna super Petrum Domini voce fundata epist 40. Petrus supra quem aedificata ab eodem domino fuerat ecclesia epistola 55. Loquitur hic Petrus super quem aedificata fuit ecclesia epist 69. Petrus quem primum dominus elegit et super quem aedificavit ecclesiam suam etc epist 71. S. Ciprian Our lord chose Peter to bee the chief vpon whom hee built his church which hee repeateth verie often c Ambrosius serm 2. de sanctis Petrus pro soliditate devotionis ecclesiarum petra dicitur sicut ait dominus Tu 〈◊〉 Petrus super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam petra enim dicitur eo quod primus in nationibus fidei fundamenta posuerit tanquam saxum immobile operis totius Christiani compagem molemque contineat recte confortium meretur nominis qui consortium meretur et operis S. Ambrose Peter for the soundnes of his deuotion is called a rocke as our lord doth saie Thou art Peter and vpon this rock I will build my church he is called a rocke for that he first laid the foundation of faith amonge the Gentiles and like vnto an vnmoveable stone doth vphold and conteine the frame and waight of the whole christian worke d Hilar. in Psal 131. Petrus super quem Ecclesiam aedificaturus erat adversus quam portae inferorum nihil praualerent Idem in can 16. in Mathaeum O in nuncupatione novi nominis faelix ecclesiae fundamentum Hieronim in 2. Esaiae Vnde super vnum montium Christus fundavit ecclesiam suam loquitur ad eum Tuâ—es Petrus super hanc petram aedificâ—ho ecclesiam meam Idem in 16. Matthaei Simoni qui credebat in petram Christum Petri largitus est nomen ac secundum Metaphoâ—â—m petrae recte deitur ei aedificabo ecclesiam meam superto S. Hilary vpon peter our lord was to build his church and in another place o happie foundation of the church iâ— the imposition of a new name a rock worthie that building that should dissolue the lawes of hell Hierome in 2. Esaiae Christ built his church vpon one of the mountaines saying to him Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I build my church Agaiâ— according to the Metaphore of a rocke it was rightly said to Peter vpon thee will I build my church which hee doth confirme expresly in diuers other places August in Psal 69. Petrus qui paulo ante eum confessus erat filium dei in â—lla confessione appellatus est petra super quam labricaretur ecclesia Paulinus epistola 4. ad seuerum Christus est petra
sed etiam discipulo suo buius vocabuli gratiam non negauit dicens illi super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam portae inferi non praeualebunt aduersus eam S. Augustin Peter did confessâ— Christ to bee the sonne of God and in that confession was called a rocke vpon the which Christ was to build his church Paulinus Christ is the rock and yet he denied not the grace of this name to his disciple peter saying to him vpoÌ„ this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it Petrus Chrisologus Peter is the keeper of the faith Petrus Chrysolog serm 107. Petrus est custos fidei petra ecclesiae â—anitorque coelorum Leo hom de transfigurat Tantum in hac fidei sublimitate comâ—laâ—rit vt beatitudinis faelicitate donatus saâ—rae â—nviolabilis Petrae acciperet firmitatem supra quam fundata Ecclesia portis inferi â—â—ortis legibus praâ— aleret the rock of the church the porter of the heauens Leo the great Peter did so much please â—n the sublimity of this faith that hee being rewarded with the felicitie of blessednes receiued the holie â—ouÌ„dnes of an inuiolable rocke vpon which the church being founded doth preuaile against hell the lawes of death Gregor lib 6. regiâ— epist 37. Quis enim nescit sanctam ecclesâ—am â—n Apostolorum principu solidâ—tate firmatam qui firmitatem mentu traxit in nomine vt Petrus à â—â—tra 〈◊〉 â—retur Gregory the great who knoweth not the holy church to be setled in the soundnes of the prince of the Apostles because hee in his name hath drawen firmeness of mynd that of a roâ—ke was named Peter S. Isidore Simon Peter the sonne of Iohn Isidor de vita sanctorum cap. 69. Simon Petrus filius Ioannis frater Andreae Apostolorum princeps est pastor humani gregu petra ecclesiae Clavicularius regni c. Idem de officijs eccles lib. 2. cap. 5. In novo testamento post Christum sacerdotalis ordo à Petro Apostolo caepit ipsi enim primus pontificatus datus est in ecclesia Christi Sic enim loquitur ad eum dominus Tu es Petrus super hanc petram adificabo ecclesiam meam c. Prosper de vocatione gentium l. 2. cap. 28. Quis ergo ambigat quis ignorat hanc fortissimam petram Petrum qui ab illa principali petra communionem virtutis sumpsit nominis hoc desiderium habuisse c. the brother of Andrew is priÌ„ce of the Apostles pastor of the flocke of meÌ„ the rocke of the church Againe in the newe testament priestly order after Christ began of S. Peter for to him was giuen the chiefest byshoprick in the church of Christ for thus doth our lord speak vnto him Thou art Peter and vpon this rock I will build my church Prosper who can doubt that this most valiant rocke Peter who received of that principall rocke Christ participation both of name and vertue had alwaies a burning desire to die constantly for Christ Maximus this is Peter Maximus sermone 51. de Petro Paulo Hic est Petrus cui dominus communionem sui nominis libenter indulsit vt enim sicut Apostolus Paulus edocuit Petra erat Christus ita per Christum Petrus factus est petra dicente ei domino tu es Petrus supra hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam to whom our lord fauorably gaue the felowship of his own name for as the Apostle S. Paul teacheth Christ was the rock euen so by Christ Peter was made the rock our lord saying vnto him thou art Peter and vpon this rock will I build my church Lower I will not descend for these Latin fathers doe suffice to certifie any reasonable reader that this was the common opinion of the most approved writers in the west church which being linkt vnto the other dozen of most renowmed Grecians all famous Authors and for the greater part the most godly and best learned prelates of most Christian nations of the world These I say such excellent qualified personages the masters and mirrours of Christian Religion with one consent agreeing that our Saviour Christ Iesus did coÌ„municate his owne name of Rocke vnto S. Peter and vpon him as vpon a most sound rocke built his church by which as they vnderstood it he gave vnto him the Charge over the whole church to governe and rule it as chief pastor therof to containe and vphold the whole frame of that heavenly building and holy howse of God next vnto Christ the principall foundation and head cornerstone All this and much more they whom both Catholikes and Protestants hold for the best learned and most worthy prelates of Christes church teaching so plainly what Christian hart that hath anie sparke of godlines or any care of embracing the trueth when it is shewed him had not rather believe and follow their Iudgment therin then the new opinions of late writers partially pleading for their owne fancies specially if they please to consider what weake reasons they alleage to delude that comon exposition of the ancient faâ—hers Amonge which these as principall M. Abbot hath heere made choice of The first is that Christ is the rocke vpon which hee built his church vpon this that thou hast confessed saith saint Austin and acknowledged that is vpon my self I will build my church I Answer out of the fathers before rehearsed that both be true Christ is the rock and yet he gaue the same name and title to S. Peter as both S Hierome Paulinus Prosper and Maximus abouecited do testify with whom a Ambrosi l. 6. in Lucam cap. 9. Tertul. l. 4. Co. Marcio c. 13. Christus chariss discipulo nomen communicauit suum S. Ambrose doth agree affirming our Saviour to haue communicated most of his titles to his disciples b S. Basil homil 29. ex varijs ad populum de poenitentia Licet Petrus sit petra non tamen sicut Christus nam Christus vere est immobilis petra Petrus vero propter petram axiomata namque sua Iesus largitur alijs non evacuatus sed nihilominus habens luâ—e est vos estis lux mundi inquit Sacerdos est facit Sacerdotes petra est petram facit qua sua sunt largitur seruis suis argumentum hoc est opulenti and in particuler to S. Peter that of a Rock and so doth Tertullian to whom S. Basil addeth Christ is the rock and Peter is the rock Christ an vnmoveable rocke of himself But Peter through Christ Christ saith this great doctour imparts his dignities vnto others without depriving himself of them hee is the light of the world yet saies to his Apostles yee are the light of the world hee is the priest and hee maketh priests hee is the rocke and hee maketh a rocke with whom accordeth S. Leo saying I am saith our Saviour a rocke S. Leo 3.
church vpon him when he said to him Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I build my church these wordes would haue marred M. Abbots market therefore he did wisely to ouerskip them now that which followeth may serve rather to confirme our opinion then make anie whit for theirs for thus it may bee vnderstood Saint Peter for that his confession of faith received power and vertue from Christ to confirme others in the faith thereby to establish them to life And so by that confession of faith made by Saint Peter the faithfull are established to life Againe Saint Ambrose who elswhere often and in that verie place teacheth S. Peter to bee that rocke vpon which the church was built might make a secondarie good morall construction of those wordes teaching every man to believe as Saint Peter did and to make the like confession of their faith that they might be setled in the right way to life everlasting which moralization of Christs words doth not crosse but suppose the true litterall sence to bee as before you haue heard out of Saint Ambrose with the vniforme consent of other fathers To that which followeth in the same Author these words of the Apostle in him all the building is coopled together c. are the sense and meaning of that which our lord said vpon this rocke I will build my church I answer there is a cunning tricke vsed in cutting of the Apostles wordes in the middest with an c and making that to be the exposition of the first part of the sentence which Sainct Ambrose makes the interpretation of the last as may appeare vnto him that will see the place for his reason is fideles enim sunt superficies templi dei c. for the faithfull of holy conversation bee the walls or over parts of that temple of God which suteth well with the latter end of Saint Pauls sentence which is in whom you also are built togither into an habitation of God in the holy Ghost in brief S. Ambrose meaning in that place is no other then that the Apostle vsed the same Metaphore of building which our Saviour did when he said Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will build my Church Of which spirituall building the faithfull are the over partes the Apostles the foundations amoÌ„g whom S. Peter is the rocke and Christ the head corner stone that closeth all togeather and beareth vp both peoples aswell those that went afore as those that came after his incarnation M. Abbots fourth obiection Epla Iuuenalis â—t Epist pal in Apendice Concil Cholced the whole number of the Bishops of Palaestina in the councell of Chalcedon vnderstood Christs words so vpon this confession the church of God is confirmed and strengthened ANSWERE THat whole number I find to bee but two or three and they not in the councell neither nor during the time of that councell but after they came home from the councel and their meaning is plaine for vs. They having been att the councell of Chalcedon and there heard and saw how Discorus patriarch of Alexandria was for his heresie and obstinacie censured and condemned by the sentence of Leo the great Bishop of Rome did certifie all them that were vnder their charge that the church of God was confirmed and strengthned by the confession and declaration of the Bishop of Rome S. Peters successor and how in him was verified that sentence of our Saviour vpon this rocke I will build my church and that other also Thou being conuerted confirme and strengthen thy brethren which is all as direct for vs as can bee besides what other pregnant proofe there is in that generall councell for S. Peters supremacy and that the Bishop of Rome is his successor in the same supreme authoritie shal bee heerafter declared more at large Out of these former arguments M. Abbot maketh this inference that by the exposition of the ancient fathers it maie appeare that Christ eueÌ„ the true faith of Christ for Christ is nothing to vâ— but by faith is the true rocke whervpon the church is builded to which S. Iohn accordeth This is the victorie that over cometh the world even our faith for who is hee that overcometh the world but hee that believeth that Iesus is the sonne of God what is this good Sir to the preseÌ„t purpose of the popes supremacie though faith in some good sense may bee called a rocke bicause it is the foundation and ground worke of all other Christian vertues yet how doth it follow therof that S. Peter is not that rocke vpon which it pleased Christ to build his church what because ther is an order in the frame of a vertuous life must it needes ther vpon ensue that there is no order in the government of Christs Church is not this a very strange inference For the clearer explication of this doubt â—â—t this distinction bee observed the building of Christs church as it is like to a kingdome differeth much from the building of a spirituall temple vnto the holie Ghost in our soules to the first kind of building beloÌ„g subiects and magistrates Bishops Archbishops and so forth the highest wherof vnder Christ was S. Peter To the other inward building concurre all such divine graces and qualities that serue for the reformation of our soule as faith hope Charitie humilitie and such like among which vertues faith in Christ Iesus is at it were the fundamentall stone to the argument then this is the answere that albeit faith in Christ be as it were the rocke and foundation of all Christian vertues yet that is no let but that in the order of Christian magistrates S. Peter may be the rock and haue the chief commaunding power giuen to him and to his successors the Bishops of Rome purity of faith boldnes of confession fervour of Charitie rare gifts of God bestowed on S. Peter were the principall dispositions in him to that other high dignitie and authoritie but the authoritie it self of government was not bestowed on those vertues but vpon the person of Saint Peter though in regard of the same divine qualities After these arguments M. Abbot inferreth that if Christ bee the rocke properly and truly Saint Peter cannot bee the rocke but accidently and vnproperly in respect of his doctrine and example of saith vttered in his confession As Abraham is the rocke from whâ—nce wee are hewed so is Peter the rock wheron wee are built not that either of them conferreth any thing to vs but only for that they staÌ„d before vs for patterns of imitation I answer that he should rather haue made this inference bicause Christ is the rocke of the Church most properly therfore S. Peter is the rocke therof also properly both for that Christ made him the rocke who maketh all things well and properly and also because the properties of a rocke do fitlie agree to S. Peter that is to bee constant and firme in the faith to strengthen and vphold
others as hath been before declared To imagine Saint Peter to bee called a rocke because hee is a patterne of imitation is as dull and blockish as to call a duske darke stone a cleere looking glasse Abraham was more properly by the prophet called though in another sense a rocke out of which the Iewes were hewen and a pitt out of which they were digged bicause all the Israëlites descended out of his loynes as stones are hewen or digged out of a rock 10 M. Abbot not being able to disprove S. Peter to bee the rocke bicause our Saviour Christ alone is the rocke turnes himself on the other side and will needes prove that all the Apostles were rockes and Peter therin not to haue beeÌ„ alone but that as hee spake in the person of all the Apostles so Christes wordes returned in answere to Peter should appertaine to them all for saies hee Saint Austin affirmeth that Peter answeâ—ed for all a Aug. in psal 8â— one for vnitie And Hierome by the words here spoken to Peter concludeth b Hieron in Amos l 3 c. 6. that Chrâ—st the rocke gave not to one only Apostle but to his Apostles that they also should bee called rockes And in like sort Origen conceiueth when he saith c Orig in Math. c. 16. If thou thinke that the church was built vpon Peter only what wilt thou saie to Iohâ— the sonne of thunder and to every of the Apostles c. wee must rather say that in all and evâ—rie one of thâ—m is verified vpon this rocke I will build my church and in a word hee reasoneth thus bicause that which followeth after I will giue to thâ—e the Keies of the knigdome of hâ—aven is coâ—â—on to them all therfore that going before is also coÌ„mon to them all and this the scripture confirmeth in that it saith d Ephes 2.20 the houshold of God are builded not vpon the foundatioÌ„ of Peter only but vpon the foundations of the Apostles and Prophets e Reuelâ—t 21.14 And not Peter onlie but the lambes twelve Apostles haue their names written in the twelue foundations of the Citie of God hitherto M. Abbot Doth not this great inconstancie in answering argue plainly that there is no setled soundnesse in the protestants doctrine but that they are caried about with the wind Before you heard that no other bodie saving Christ alone could bee that rock and to make that good M. Abbot was verie earnest there now the wind blowing in an other dore not only Peter is the rocke but all the Apostles aswell as hee yea and euerie Christian man too is a rock as you shall heare heereafter And all this to make men beleeve that it is but an ordinary matter to bee that rocke vpon which Christ built his Church wee that hold it to bee one of the greatest priviledges that could bee graÌ„ted to a mortall man do notwithstanding graunt that the Apostles may be called rockes as they are called foundations after a certaine proportion that is as S. Peter was the fundamentall rock placed next vnto our Saviour over the whole Church So the Apostles were constituted principall pillers or rockes of certaine countries laying the foundation of Christian religion in them by preaching the Gospell and by ruling the severall flockes coÌ„mitted to their charges As Metropolitans primates may bee said to bee the rockes and foundations of Christian religion in their provinces bicause they do principally commaund over all Ecclesiasticall persons therin and do keepe all vnder them in vnitie of faith In like manner to preserve all Christian countries in the said vnitie of faith and vniformitie of religion there ought to bee one supreme pastor over all the world who first was S. Peter and ever since have been his lawfull Successors the Bishops of Rome All this is good doctrine but to saie that these words in S. Mathew were spoken aswell to the rest of the Apostles as to S. Peter which M. Abbot would faine haue his reader believe is flatt against the evidence of the verie text For S. Peter is there severed from the rest by all circumstances that can bee devised in so few words first by his owne proper name for our Saviour said to him happie art thou Simon then by the name of his father the sonne of Ionas thirdly by mention of a speciall revelation made to him for flesh and blood hath not revealed this to thee fourthly by expresse direction of this speech to him I say to thee not to all the Apostles thou art Peter none of the rest were so called Out of which it doth ensue most cleerly that the words immediatly following and vpon this rocke I will build my church were particulerly spoken to S. Peter and not to any other of the Apostles To the others afterward was given the power of binding and loosing remitting of sins and retayning yet with out any mention made of the keies of the kingdome of heaven which albeit they do signify there a supreme coÌ„maunding power yet they maie in a certaine sence bee said to bee given vnto the other Apostles as is the title of a rock though they bee not that principall rocke vpon which Christ built his church so they had not the prime vse of the keies which was appropriated to S. Peter I do also further grantâ— that the name of a rock maie bee in a good morall sence applied vnto everie constant Christian that doth confesse the true faith with S. Peter and is constant and vnmoveable in the same confession like vnto a rocke And this is all which Origen and S. Ambrose cited by M. Abbot do saie as may bee seene by him that pleaseth to read the circumstances of those places for Origen discourseth how all may bee called rockes that have this effect of a rocke And that the gates of hell cannot prevaile against them that is all that do perseuere constantly to the end in the true faith S. Ambrose exhorteth all men to endevour to bee roâ—kes that is to haue soundnes in constancie and stedfastnes of faith Origen addeth that which I before said that the Apostles and Prophets maie bee called rockes in a higher degree bicause they are the foundations of others that are builded vpon them but these expositions as M. Abbot saith bee Allegoricall or rather morall explications of these our Saviours wordes that do not destroie the prime litterall sence therof which according vnto the generall consent of the ancient fathers is that Christ built his church vpon S. Peter as the supreme governor therof as hath been alreadie proved Now to M. Abbots last evasion that the fathers in all this matter make Peter to beare the figure of the whole church and therfore that to bee applied to all and everie one in the church which was there spoken to Peter for these fathers hee alleageth only S. a August Epist 165 Idem de verb Domini ser 13. Austin and S. b Gregor expos in
finding these Bishops conformable to the faith of the Nicene councell of which Athanasius had been a principall piller hee admitted them into communion of all spirituall matters And wheras by the dignitie of his sea the charge of all persons did apperteine vnto him hee restored them backe to their Bishoprickes And did write vnto the Bishops of the east blaming them for that they had vnaduisedly iudged of those personages and sent them a mandate that some of them should appeare at a certaine day in the name of the rest who also threatned that he would not afterward let them passe vnpunished if they gaue not ouer to molest others Is not heere plaine proofe of the Bishop of Rome his power and commaunding authoritie ouer the greatest Bishops in the east They appealed vnto him for iudgment hee heard their causes hee reversed the sentences given against them by the Bishops of the east hee finallie restored againe their Bishopricks vnto them cited the others to appeare before him and theatned to punish them if they continued in their ill doeing Hosius ad Imperator Constantium Citatus ab Athanas epist ad solit vitam agentes Ne te misceas Ecclesiasticis neque nobis in hoc genere praecipe sed potius ea à nobis disce tibi Deus imperium coÌ„misit nobis quae sunt Ecclesiae concredidit quemadmodum qui tuum imperium malignis oâ—ulis carpit contradicit ordinationi divinae Ita tu cave ne quae sunt ecclesiae ad te trahens magno crimini obnoxius fiaâ— The same is also witnessed by Athanasius himself in his epistle to them that lead a solitarie life and in his second Apologie where hee doth relate the whole busines and teacheth expresly that it did not belonge to CoÌ„stantius then Emperour to determine ecclesiasticall causes but that he ought to learne them of Bishops To Athanasius I will ioyne Cirillus bicause hee was patriarch of the same sea of Alexandria Cirillus epist 18 ad CelestinuÌ„ and as learned and valiant a maintayner of the third generall councell held at Ephesus as Athanasius had been of the first kept at Nice Extat Tomo 1. Concil Ephes cap 29. This most learned Archbishop confesseth the like commanding power to haue been in Celestinus then pope of Rome that thother did before in Iulius Quoniam vero deus hiscâ— in rebus prudentiam à nobis exigit long aque ecclesiarum consuetudo suadet vt istiusmodi sanctitati tuae communiceÌ„tur non possum equidem quod apertum est ad pietatem non perscribere post malefacta exposita subiungit Et quamvis res ita se habeat non prius tamen illius communionem confidenter deserere ausi fuimus quam haec ipsa pâ—etati tuae indicaremus Digneris proinde quid hic sentias declâ—rare quo liquido nobis constet communicare ne nos cum illo oporteat an vero libere eidem denunciare neminem cum eo communicarâ— qui eiusmodi Erroneam doctrinam fovet praedicat Porro tâ—a integritatis mens ac super hac re sententia non modo pijssimis Macedoniae Epistopis sed totius quoque Orientis Antistibus perspicue per literas exponi debet Thus hee writeth to him Bicause in busines of this nature God requireth of vs wisdome and the long continued custome of the church doth admonish vs to communicate them with your holines I cannot but giue your pietie to vnderstand what is here discouered of Nestorius Bishop then of Constantinople whose foule crimes and pestilent errours when hee had laid open and certified how hee had done his endevour to move him to repentance but all in vaine hee afterward addeth Albeit these things bee soe yet wee durst not forbeare communicating with him before wee had related these things to your pietie Vouchsafe therfore to declare what you deeme to bee done therin that wee may assuredly know whether wee ought to communicate with Nestorius or els boldlâ—e denounce that no man ought to communicate with him that doth dâ—fend such erronious doctrine your holines good pleasure and sentence in this matter is to bee notified not onlie to the Bishops of Macedonia but vnto all the prelates of the east Behold the maÌ„ner of proceeding in these pure times of the church S. Cirill who for learning was perhaps better able then Celestinus to iudge of the errour of Nestorius and being patriarch of Alexandria by his place held the highest court of Iudgment in the east church Celestin Papa Cyrillo Archiepiscopo habetureodem Tomo 1. Concil Ephes cap. 16. yet would hee not take vpon himself to determine of Nestorius heresies or to excommunicate him but referred both vnto the Bishop of Rome whose sentence therin both hee and all the Bishops of the east did require and embrace In this manner did the same pope Celestinus returne answere vnto S. Cirill Most Reverend brother do you take vnto you our authoritie Quamobrem nostra autoritate ascita nostráque vice loco cum potestate vsus eiusmodi non absque exquisita severitate sententiam exequeru nempe vt nisi à decem dierum intervallo ab huius nostrae admonâ—tionis die numerandorum nefariam doctrinam suam conceptis verbis anathematizeâ— eamque de Christi dei nostri â—eneratione fidem in posterum confessurum se spondeat quam Romana tuae sanctitatu ecclesia vniuersa denique religio Christiana praedicat illico sanctitas tua illi ecclesiae prospiciat and vsing our power and place do you execute against Nestorius the sentence of excommunication with exquisite severitie vnles within ten daies after hee hath been admonished from vs hee do recant and recall his errours and let your holines provide a more worthy person for that Bishoprike which mandate of his Cirillus with the whole couÌ„cell following proceeded to the deposition of Nestorius in this maÌ„ner No man doth doubt Tomo secundo eiusdem Concil Ephes cap. 16. Nulli dubium imo seculis omnibus nâ—tum est sanctum beatissimumque Petrum Apostolorum principem caput fideâ—que columnam ecclesiae Catholicae fundamentum à Domino nostro Iesu Christo caelestis regni claues accepisse solvendique atque ligandi potestate quam acceperat vsum fuisse necnon per successores suos huc vsque semper vivere causas decernere semperque victurum esse Huius itaque ordinarius successor vicarius sanctus beatissimusque papa Episcopus noster Celestinus nos suos pro se quasi vicarios misit c. Et hac est praefatio sententia Nos canonum vi sanctissimi que patris comministri nostri Celestini ecclesia Romanae Antistitis epistola compulsi hanc tristem in illam sententiaÌ„ tulimus naie it hath been in all ages notorious that the most blessed S. Peter priÌ„ce head of the Apostles the pillar of faith and foundation of the Catholike church did receive of our Saviour Iesus Christ
the redeemer of mankind the keies of the kingdome of heaven and the power of loosing and binding And that also even vnto these daies hee doth in his successors liue and determine causes and shall alwaies liue To him doth Celestinus now Bishop of Rome in right order succede finally by vertue of power receiued from the said Celestinus they proceede to pronounce senteÌ„ce against Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople All which set togither standing of record in the third generall councell doth demonstrate that the Easterne church did acknowledge both the Bishop of Rome to bee S. Peters lawfull successor And that it also did appertaine to him to excommunicate and depose principall Bishops of the Greeke and Easterne church which no man can doubt to bee principall and most proper actes of supreme power in government with this I will linke another like example practised and recorded in the fourth generall councell held at Chalcedon Dioscorus patriarch of Alexandria being for his erronious opinions and enormious actions called in question was convented to answere in that generall councell first all the actions that are entered against Dioscorus are stiled thus Concil Chalced. actio 3. Libellus Theodoridiaconi ad Leonem PapaÌ„ ad Chalced coÌ„cilium Libellus Iscyronis ad Leonem nem PapaÌ„ Chalcedon conciliuÌ„ Vnto the most holy and most happie Archbishop of the great and old Rome Leo and to the generall councell assembled at Chalcedon Setting the Bishop of Rome as head before the generall couÌ„cell as his bodie which in expresse tearmes the whole couÌ„cel acknowledgeth writing vnto the said pope Leo the great That hee was President over them Quibus tu quidem sicut membris caput praeâ—ras quam velut auro textam seriem ex veste Christi praecepto legislatoris venientem vsque ad nos ipse servasti vocis beati Petri omnibus constitutus interpres eius si lei beatificationem super omnes adducâ—ns even as the head is to the rest of the members that the custodie of our lords vineyard was coÌ„mitted to him that hee was the interpreter of Saint Peters sentence Observe secondlie the forme of their definitiue sentence which is thus set downe The most holie and most blessed Archbishop of great and old Rome Leo Ibidem in exemplari epist Paschacini Vnde sanctissimus ac beatissimus Papa caput vniuersalis ecclesiae Leo per nos vt lâ—gatos suos sancta synodo consentiente Petri Apostoli praeditus dignitate qui ecclesiae fundamentum et petra fidei calestis regni lanitor nuncupatur Episcopali eum Dioscorum dignitate nudavit ab omni sacerdotali opere facit exortem by vs and this present holy councell together with the most happie most worthy Apostle S. Peter who is the rock and topp of the Catholike church hee who is the foundation of the Orthodox and true faith hath deposed Dioscorus from all Episcopall dignitie and deprived him of all priestlie function and ministery First let it bee well obserued and borne in mind that all the parts of this my discourse be verified in the sentences of these two generall councells First that S. Peter was that rocke vpon which Christ built his church Secondlie that the Bishop of Rome succeeded him therin Thirdlie that in the vertue therof is comprehended power and authoritie to vphold the Orthodox saith and to punish and depose the highest patriarches in the church aswell of the east as of the west if they do obstinatlie trouble the peace of Christs church This having been by the verdict and practise of the pure Church in ancieÌ„t time so cleerly testified in two of those prime generall councells which the Protestants themselues do confesse to bee Orthodox and authenticall what reasonable Christian can take anie exception against it yet for more full confirmation of this most important point of our faith I will passe through all the patriarchall seas and out of each of them choose some sufficient proofe for the popes supremacie in gouernment Athanasius patriarch of Alexandria was absolued and restored by Iulius pope of Rome Dioscorus of the same sea was excomunicated and deposed by Leo the great Nestorius patriarch of Constantinople was in like manner censured and depriued by Celestinus pope of Rome of whom wee haue alreadie treated Now to S. Iohn Chrysostom Bishop of the same city of Constantinople who was absolued and restored to his Bishopricke by Innocentius the first pope of Rome This verie learned zealous and godly prelate and most eloquent preacher was through the malice of the Empresse Eudoxia assisted by her husbaÌ„d the emperour Archadius deposed hoised out of his seate euen by the verdict of many Easterne Bishops assembled in a councell wherof Theophilus patriarch of Alexandria was the head wher vpon hee treading in the noble stepps of Athanasius and diuerse other good Bishops made his appeale to InnoceÌ„tius pope of Rome craving of him to reuerse that vniust sentence which had been given against him Innocentio Papae Ioannes Chrisost ex palladio in vita eius Quapropter ne confusio haec omnem quae sub coelo est nationem enuadat obsecro vt scribatis quod baec tam inique facta absentibus nobis non declinantibus iudicium non habeant robur sicut nec sua natura habent Illi autem qui inique egerunt poena â—cclesiasticarum legum subâ—aceant nobis vero qui nec conuicti nec redarguti nec habiti vt rei literis vestris charitate vestra aliorumque omnium quorum scilicet anâ—ea societate fruâ—bamur fâ—ui concâ—dite these bee his words I beseech thee holie father that their sentence so vniustly giuen in my absence I not refusing iudgement maie bee of no validity furthermore that they who haue done mee that wrong may according to the lawes of the church bee punished And commaund that I being innocent and not to bee convicted of any crime may bee restored to my church againe See most evident acknowledgment of the Bishop of Romes power to repeale the sentence of a councell holden in the greeke church by the greatest patriarch of those coasts yea and to inflict punishment vpon them Item to restore Saint Iohn Chrisostome to his Bishopricke againe which Innocentius effected Ex epist 30. Innocent ad Archadium ex Nicepho 10 l. 13. c. 34. Itaque ego minimus peccator cui thronus magni Apostoli Petri creditus est segrego to illam a perceptione immaculatorum mysterioruÌ„ Christi dei nostri Episcopum etiam omnem aut clericum ordinis sancta dei ecclesiae qui administrare aut exhibere â—a vobis ausuâ— fuerit ab ea hora qua presenteâ— vinculi meilegeritis literas dignitate sua excidisse decerne thundering out a most terrible sentence of excomunication against the Emperour Archadius in these tearmes I the least of Gods seruaÌ„ts and a sinner vnto whom the throne of the great Apostle S. Peter
giue mee leaue to imploy one probable presumption that in my poore opinion doth much fortifie the same It is collected out of those letters which in ancient time were called literae formatae and granted either vnto Bishops at their first creation or vnto priests that were dismissed by licence from their ordinary This kind of letters was in great vse in the primitiue church for no stranger was admitted into communion among the Catholiks without them The invention of these leters is referred to the first generall councell holden at Nice and the forme of them is recorded authentically in the end of the Chalcedon councell immediatlie before the letters of the Illustrious persons that wrote in or about that councell vnder this title Atticus Episcopus qualiter formata Epistola fiat In this epistle fower letters principally were set for an assured token that hee in whose favour they were granted was a sound Catholike The three former letters were the first letters of the father of the sonne and of the holy Ghost to testifie that hee believed aright in the blessed Trinitie and therfore was no Arrian Sabellian Macedonian or such like heretike the fourth letter in that formall Epistle was a the first letter of S. Peters name therby to signifie that the bearer was receiued into the vnitie of that church of which S. Peter as chief governor kept the keies the other letters of his name that graÌ„ted that Epistle Distinct 73. ca. 1. to whom it was granted I omitt as not necessary to this purpose hee that will may see a copiâ— of such an Epistle sett downe at large in Gratian where the misterie also of these letters is deciphered to bee such as I haue declared namely that the fourth letter was put for S. Peters name to make knowen that the bearer therof was a true member of that church in qua Petro datum est ius ligandi atque absoluendi in which to S. Peter was giuen the right of binding and loosing Out of which notable monument of antiquitie I draw this argument so well assured it was and a thing so notoriously knowne and approved in those purer daies of the primitiue church that S. Peter and the popes of Rome his successors were the chief governors of Christs church and the insoluble band of the vnitie therof that the first letter of S. Peters name was chosen for an vndoubted badge and token of being a sound member receiued into the vnity of the said Catholike church for why should the first letter of S. Peters name rather then any other of the Apostles bee taken for such an infallible marke of society with the catholike church had it not been a cleere overuled case that hee who like an even squared stone lay vpon that rocke and did adhere vnto the head of the church was vndoubtedly a true member therof This argument as it shall serue for a coÌ„clusion of that which goeth before so it will make a conuenient passage to that which followeth in M. Abbots text 15 There was saith hee a church when there was no Roman church at all how then could that church bee builded vpon the Roman church This is a verie poore obiection for speaking as wee now do of the church which was since our Saviours time if hee take that season next to Christs ascension S. Peter was head of that church during his owne life and after him the Bishops of Rome his lawfull successors No man ever said that the church or Bishop of Rome was head of the church before S. Peter had placed his seate there If M. Abbot will accord vs that ever since that time the church of Rome hath been head of the rest as in truth it hath been wee will easily grant him that before it had no such priviledg Another like slugg M. Abbot thrusteth forth thus If the church of Rome bee that rock and other churches bee builded thervpon then it would follow that the gates of hell should never haue prevailed against any other of those churches but it hath prevayled against them Ergo. True good Sir if those other churches had stuck close to the said rocke the gates of hell had never prevailed against them but they foolishly flitting from that firme rocke were sowsed in the surging seas and swallowed vp by the gulfe of hell M. Abbot saw this to bee so full an answere that hee could not tell what to saie to it but that wee haue no assurance that the church of Rome shall continue alwaies builded vpon Christ Iesus this is M. Abbots last refuge and to it as to a safe anchor he doth twenty times fly in this book wherfore it shall haue a full answer in its due place but let vs first see whether the Bishops of Rome be S. Peters lawfull successors because that comes next M. Abbot doth either graunt it to bee true or at least hee supposeth it for true for hee disproues it not wherfore I need not staÌ„d loÌ„g about it so much the rather because it is recorded by S. Iraeneus Iren. l. 3. v. 3. Tertull. de prescr 36. Euseb l. 2. hist c. 2. Epiphar heres 27. Optat. mi leuit l. 2. perm Hieron de viris ill 1. August Epistola 1â—5 Tertullian Eusebius Optatus mileuitanus S. Hierom S. Austin and briefly by the full consent of all that haue made anie Catalogue of S. Peters successors It is evident and confessed by both sides that our Saviour established such a forme of government in his church that hee would haue to continew as long as the same church continued that is alwaies to the worlds end which was according to our doctrine that one should bee head and supreme gouernor over all the rest to preserue vnity in faith and conformity in rites of religion And by name that one was S. Peter for his life time All which I haue before proved out of holy scriptures and the ancient fathers S. Peter finally making choise of Rome for the seat of his Bishoprick liued there many yeres and in the end died Bishop of Rome wherfore they that were choseÌ„ Bishops of Rome were to succede him as in that seate so in that supreme governmeÌ„t of Christs church which daily experience teacheth vs. for wee see that whosoever is chosen bishop of any place for example of Canterburie hee presentlie vpon his installing entreth vpon all the priuiledges of honour and government which the former Bishops his predecessors died possessed of so that no sooner any man is created Archbishop of Canterbury but that imÌ„ediatly hee is therby Metropolitane of England and hath comanding authority ouer all the Bishops of that prouince with law full Iurisdiction to heare and determyne all such causes that by appeale do come to his courts In like maÌ„ner Linus being chosen Bishop of Rome after the death of S. Peter entred into possession of full power authoritie not onlie ouer the Diocese of Rome but also over all the Bishops of Christs church
vniforme in holie rites and māners should establish some one at the least to resolue infallibly all the rest in all doubtfull questions that should arise amōg them which he forsaw would be almost innumerable And to endow him with sufficient power and authority to kepe all the rest in order and due obedience This is that which wee maintaine he did for S. Peter and his successors the Bishops of Rome having his owne expresse word for our warrant being vnderstood according vnto the learned exposition and prudent practise of the most ancient holy pastors and prelates of Christs church as hath been before declared Thus much to shew how vnsoundly M. Abbot interpreteth that text of holy scripture and how vnproperly and feebly hee seeketh to shift from the most literall and vniforme exposition of the ancient Doctors Now I come to examine the exceptions that hee taketh against some sentēces that I alleaged out of the said holy fathers to the same purpose My first and principall author was the most learned and holie Archbishop of Lions S. Ireneus who with his blood sealed his doctrine 1400 yeares agoe Hee teacheth plainly that the Roman church is the greatest and most autentike and that hee and others by alleaging the traditions which the Apostles had lest to that church and their faith by succession of Bishops descending downe to his daies did confound and put to shame all wranglers who either of ignorance vaine glorie or envy did teach otherwise then they should haue done And for an vpshott addeth this reason which I did before cite to prove that wee must all ioyne in matter of faith with the church of Rome to witt For it is necessarie that everie church that is all the faith full everie where do agree with the church of Rome Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 3. Sed quoniam valde longum est in hoc tali volumine omnium ecclesiarum enumerare successiones maximae antiquissima omnibus cognitae à gloriosissimis duobus Apostolis Petro Paulo Roma fundata constituta ecclesiae eam quam habet ab Apostolis traditionem annunciatam hominibus fidem per successiones Episcoporum pervenientem vsque ad nos indicantes confundimus omnes eos qui quoqu◠modo vel per sui placentiam malam vel vanam gloriam vel per caecitatem malam sententiam praeter quam oportet colligunt Ad hanc enim ecclesiam propter potentiorem principalitatem necesse est omnem convenire ecclesiam hoc est eos qui sunt vndique fideles in qua semper ab his qui sunt vndique conservata est ea quae est ab Apostolis traditio for her more mightie principalitie Bicause in it the traditions which descended from the Apostles hath been alwaies preserved round about Note first a most cleere proofe of that for which I cited it to witt that everie church yea everie faithfull man must not of curtesie but of necessitie accord with the church of Rome in matter of faith and religion Bicause in it as in a rich treasurie that doctrine which the Apostles taught is kept whole and sound to which M. Abbot saith that if wee take the reason added by Irenaeus but concealed by mee it will plainly appeare why it was necessarie for the other churshes to accord with the church of Rome for this church saith he for the renowme of the place being then the seat of the Empire was the most eminent church of the world I answere that I concealed nothing And this reason added by M. Abbot is wholie mistaken for there is no mention in Irenaeus of either the Emperors power or seate for that mighty principality is proper to the church of Rome for her spirituall dignitie And it is most absurd to thinke that the church of Rome in those ancient daies of S. Irenaeus when the Emperours were most deadly ennemies of the Christian name gott any reputation with other churches by the worldly renowme of those persecuting Emperors who raigned there for that their wicked glorie was rather a whetstone to hatred and contempt then anie allurement to loue and estimation This great respect then being borne vnto the church of Rome before the Emperors of Rome were converted to be Christians is a most manifest argument that the principality of the church of Rome was not gotten by the renowme of that city nor by the glorie of these heathen peesecuting Emperors but for that the best learned and most holie prelats of all countries were taught by the Apostles and their schollers that it was our blessed Saviours pleasure and ordinance that such regard and obediēce should bee yeelded vnto the church of Rome were the Emperors therof heathens or Christians good or bad It was in deed verie convenient that the prince of the Apostles and head of Christs church should be there seated where the Monarch of the temporall estate held his court to the intent that impietie being there crushed as it were in the head might the sooner decaie all the bodie over And true godlines being happely planted in the cheif place might with more facility and speed bee spred in all other nations and also that mē might bee more easily induced to yeeld religious obedience to the Bishop of that place vnto whose tēporall magistrates the whole world before had obeied in temporall affaires But this is to bee attibuted to our Saviours devine wisdome order institution Not vnto the greatnes or worldlie pollicie of anie earthly Emperors M. Abbot seing little hold to bee taken vpon the renowme of that place as the state of things went then doth acknowledg that in those daies the church of Rome was pure sound therfore fitt to be propounded as a patterne for other churches to imitate But now the case is altered as he saith bicause the church of Rome it self is now questioned for swarving from the tradition of the Apostles which being soe that cannot be said to bee necessarie now which was necessarie then This answer hath as litle solidity in it as the other For the church of Rome it self was as well chalenged in those daies for swarving from the Apostles tradition by the Mōtanists Marcionists and such like Heretikes as now by the Lutherans Calvinists and Anabaptists And neuertheles the renowmed prelates of Christs church and most firme pillers of our Christian religion did then teach all Christians to make their recourse vnto the same church for resolution of the true faith wishing them to conforme themselues therto and by avouching boldlie that doctrine which they found there maintained to confound all them that taught the contrary as yee haue heard out of Irenaeus Let vs therfore as kind children treading in the right steps of those our most laudable forfathers seeke with them vnto that same church of Rome for the veritie of that doctrine which descended from the Apostles imbrace it most willingly and professe it as constantlie though we heare our holie mother to be
called into question by vntowardlie and degenerous Children that either wilfullie run out of her house to follow their owne pleasure and fancies or are for pure feare falne away from her and forsaken her ordinances M. Abbot admitting as it were that other churches should according to S. Irenaeus rule conforme themselues in matter of doctrine to the church of Rome yet to giue vs a tast of the subtility of his shifting witt addeth that ther is in that place of Irenaeus nothing for her superiority in goverment well that being once granted that all other churches should for matter of doctrine accord with the church of Rome it would theron necessarily follow that the church of England and consequently his maiestie ought to do the same which was all that I sued for yet over and besides Irenaeus words being well weighed do import also a superiority in goverment to be resident in that church which I proue bicause he saies that other churches must of necessity accord with the church of Rome for her more poteÌ„t principality Now if the church of Rome haue power and principality over other churches And do impose a necessitie vpon them of according vnto it it must needes haue superiority in goverment over them or els the other could not be bound of necessitie to follow it M. Abbot doth grammatically descant first vpon this word principalitie and saies that it may signâ—fie eminencie in estimation though not superioritie in goverment And that it maie bee potent also to move by example and perswasion only not by commaundement Be it so that these words maie be wrested into some such signification as what words be there that may not be diuerslie construed yet everie reasonable man will soone see that power and principalitie do properly import a commaunding superiority And will as easily graunt that the fathers words are rather to be fairly taken according to the more vsuall signification then in anie such forced sense and construction Againe seing that power and superioritie did even as S. Irenaeus expresseth impose a necessitie vpon others of conforming themselues to the church of Rome it could not bee that imagined superioritie of M. Abbots which imposeth no such necessitie wherfore it remaines evident that M. Abbot is driuen to flie from the vsuall signification true meaning of S. Irenaeus words In like manner M. Abbot to cast some better colour vpon his new devised principalitie or rather to shift over into another matter that seemes more plausible writeth thus 20 That M. Bishop may vnderstand I do not answere him by a deuise of mine Cypr. l. 1. Epist 3. but according to the truth hee shall find that Ciprian calleth the chuâ—ch of Rome the princ pall church and yet in the same place he denieth the authority of the Bishops in Africa to be inferiour vnto the Bishops of Rome M. Abbot and other Protestants cannot choose but stand in bodily feare so often as they appeale vnto the ancient fathers for support of their novelties for you shall scarse find any one of them that doth not in the verie place alledged by the Protestants giue them such a bob that everie beholder maie plainly see they do not favour their cause nor are content to be called in for their witnesses Let S. Cyprian now cited by M. Abbot serve for an example This is the sentence out of which M. Abbot picked the former words Cypr. l. 1. Epist 3. iuxta pamel Epist 55. Post ista adhuc insuper pseudo-Episcopo sibi ab haereticis constituto nauigare audent ad Petri cathedram atque ad EcclesiaÌ„ principalem vnde vnitas sacerdotalis â—rta est a schismaticis profanis litteras ferre nec cogitare eos esse Romanos quorum fides Apostolo praedicante laudata est ad quos perfidia habere non posset accessum After those things and more also after a false Bishop appointed them by Heretiks they dare saile to the chaire of Peter and vnto the principall church whence priestlie vnity hath its beginning and carrie letters from schismatikes and prophane fellowes not remembring that such are the Romanes whose faith is praised by the Apostles voice vnto whom perfidie can haue no accesse I set downe the whole passage because by and by we must treate of the later part therof as well as now of the former where is sufficientlie declared that S. Ciprian tooke the church of Rome to be principall not onlie in estimation but in order of goverment which I proue First because hee affirmes the church of Rome to be S. Peters chaire and consequently to be endued with like authoritie that S. Peter enioyed vpon whom as S. Ciprian in twentie places avoucheth the church of Christ was builded Secondly he describes it to be that principall church which is the fountaine of priestly and ecclesiasticall vnitie which could not be vnles it had power and authoritie to compell all other churches to stand to her order and therby to hold all in vnitie of faith and vniformity of religioÌ„ For as all the world now seeth there neither is nor can bee in mans iudgment any vnitie in faith or religious rites among Protestants bicause there is no one soveraigne coÌ„mauÌ„der over them all indued with authoritie to coÌ„pell the rest to agree in one And in the self same Epistle S. Cip. coÌ„firmeth this verie poiÌ„t in these memorable words Heresies haue not risen Cyprian ibidem Neque enim aliunde haereses orta sunt aut nata sunt schismata quam inde quod sacerdoti dei non obtemperatur nec vnus in ecclesia ad tempus sacerdos ad tempus iudex vico Christi cogitatur nor schismes sprong from any other roote then for that obedience is not yeelded to one priest and for that one priest for the time and one Iugde is not accepted of in Christs steed Do you see by S. Cyprians sentence that the only way to root out heresies and to accord schismes is to acknowledg one priest for soveraigne Iudge in ecclesiasticall cases and to obey him as Christs vicegerent on earth Such a soveraigne Iudge is hee that sits in S. Peters chaire and that principall church of Rome by S. Ciprians owne assertion in the former period or els Ecclesiasticall Discipline could not draw its originall vnitie thence Thus much here to prove that the principall church in that place of S. Ciprian is to be taken for the principall in authoritie and goverment Now to the other part S. CipriaÌ„ denieth not the Bishops in Africa to be inferior vnto the Bishop of Rome but blameth such troublesome fellowes that would not rest quiet and content with their owne Bishops iudgment but flie abroad to molest others with their brawles as though their owne Bishops had not sufficient authority or witt to compose and end their quarrells at home S. Ciprian supposeth that their churches in Afrike had no less authority then others churches to order such matters but neither names the
for imitation the knowen and confessed faults and blemishes of men otherwise good How much more sincerly deale wee who desire all men to follow S. Ciprian in all other matters saving in that one wherin hee failed and not to lay hold of words then spoken in passion by him to make good his errour specially when they be coÌ„trary even vnto himself when he was his owne man and out of that distemper whence also we do gather this Christian observation worthie to be deepely printed in everie Christian mans hart If such great learned personages as were S. Ciprian and Policrates when they would not harken vnto the sentence of the Popes of Rome did fall into errour what a warning is that vnto men of meaner wits and much lesser learning to take heed that they swarne not one haires bredth from the popes definitions in matter of doctrine lest withall they decline from the truth as their betters by many degrees haue done before them when they would not be ruled 25 Out of Africke M. Abbot sailes into Asia taking over great paines to search out some poore relief for his bad cause and saies they did not imagine any such principality to appertain vnto the church of Rome And for proofe therof brings in that which rather proveth the contrarie to witt that Leo the great for the loue of peace yeelded to them in a faultie definitioÌ„ of theirs about the observation of Easter If that worthy pope should haue condescended vnto those Asians rather then to haue contended with them doth not that rather argue that he was their superior and might haue dealt more severly with them if he had taken it for the better course Leo Epistola 93. n. 4. But I reading over all that Epistle cited by M. Abbot do not find it so as he reportes but that these Asians were rather Priscilian heretikes whom that holy pope much blameth and condemneth for their evill observation of Easter without anie yeelding vnto them wherfore I cannot see to what other purpose that can serue than to shew that the bishope of Rome had commanding power in Asia M. Abbot recuils back to Hierome affirming him not to haue believed any such matter of the popes principality who of purpose as hee faineth did write in the derogation of the church of Rome saying Hieron Epist ad EvagriuÌ„ that if authority be required the whole world is greater then one City why dost thou bring mee the custome of one Citty why dost thou vphold a few who being proud vsurpe vpon the lawes of the church Saint Hierom was alwaies a most valiant Champion of the church of Romes authority Epist 57. and of her infallible definitions in matter of faith as every one may plainly see in his epistle to Pope Damasus and elswhere Epist 57. yet for matter of fact neither he nor any other I thinke will go about to excuse the church or rather the court of Rome wholy In the place that M. Abbot doth alleage Hieron Epist 77. he findâ— fault with some Deacons of the court of Rome that did take place before priests which seemed in that humble Doctors eie a great moate growing out of the presumption of some few vsurping against â—he lawes and coÌ„mon custome of the church And in such a case as that the custome of all the world besids was no doubt to bee preferred before the custome of that citie onely or rather as Saint Hierom himself interpreteth it of some few proud deacons of that citie But heerhence to inferr that S. Hierom did not acknowledg the primacy of that sea is too too simple and rather to be laughed at theÌ„ otherwise answered That which followeth out of S. Ambrose is of the same soary sute for that most grave holy father saith I desire in all things to follow the church of Rome Ambros de Sacramentis lib. 3. ca. 10. Cupio inâ— omnibus sequi Romanamâ— Ecclesiamâ— sed tamen nos homines sensum habemus ideò quod alibi rectius seruatur nos recte custodimus but we also are men that haue vnderstanding and therfore what is more rightly obserued elswhere we iustly observe the same S. Ambrose speakes there of rites and ceremonies vsed in the administration of the sacraments in which it was lawfull then for so excellent a prelate as saint Ambrose was to make his choise of the best Yea S. Gregorie the great would not so strictly tie S. Austin our English Apostle brought vp at Rome vnto the ceremonies of the church of Rome but willed him if he saw any ceremonies in the church of France Ex Bedae Histo l. 10. c. 27. Mihi placet vt siue in Romana siue in Galliarum siue in qu ilibet ecclesia aliquid inuenisti quod plus omnipotenti Deo possit placere solicite eligas c. that might better please God or more moue those new converted Christians vnto greater devotioÌ„ to make his choice of them rather then to retaine the rites of Rome whervpon if any man should be so simple as to collect that S. Gregory did not aknowledg the pope or church of Romes principality were he not to be begged for an innocent In the like tearmes stands M. Abbot that would out of Saint Ambrose choise of some ceremonies different from the church of Rome Inferr that S. Ambrose did not acknowledg the pope of Romes supremacy Let it be noted by the way that S. Ambroâ—e who was so graue and iudicious a Doctour and S. Austins father in Christ desired in all things to follow the church of Rome That their spirit and disposition who desire in all things to depart from the same church may be discovered and taken to bee quite contrarie to the holy spirit of the most approved ancient fathers 26 M. Abbot like vnto a man that is shooting at Rovers observing no certain method returnes back to the councell of Chalcedon avouching that it did not acknowledg that principality of the church of Rome Concil Chalced. Act. 15. can 28. These be his words drawen out of that councell The priviledges of the church of Rome were gâ—ven to it by the fathers before because that citie was the seat of the Empire and vpon the same consideration doth give the church of Constantinople equall priviledg with the church of Rome it being then the seat of the Empire W. B. HEre are two or three grosse faults First wheras this councell is cited as not acknowledging the principality of the church of Rome It doth cleane contrarie in the first words cited by M. Abbot acknowledg that priviledg to belong vnto the same church of Rome whether it had that by the institution of Christ or for that it was the seat of the Empire is not now materiall of it I haue said somthing before and haue much more to say when occasion shall serue But to M. Abbots condemnation his owne witnes doth depose that the church of Rome had
together and whose faith was neuer spred one quarter of the world ouer But such Catholikes as ioyne with the church of Rome whose faith and religion was first coÌ„mended in the Apostles daies and hath continued ever since vnmoveable and besids hath florishedd in all christian nations of the world and therfore is indeed truly Catholike Our coniunction therfore with the Roman church associateth vs with the faithfull not only of all Europe Afrike and Asia but also with the faithfull of the East and west Indies and of all the world besides wherfore M. Abbot was fowly deceiued when he said that the word Roman was a tearme of diminution or that it abridgeth the whole vnto a part wheras the Roman is fully as large and ample and hath the very same and no narrower limits and borders then the Catholike faith and religion excluding none of any nation of the world out of that communion but heretiks only and schismatiks and such like counterfeit Catholikes And let him and his companions that blush not to lay that imputation of sect and schisme vpon the Roman church declare if they can from what church the Roman deuided it self in what popes daies it became schismatike And in what countrie was the vnity of the true church then preserued None of all which if they bee able to declare we must needs take their words for wind if not for passionat and womanish scolding without any colour of reason I maruell where M. Abbot hath read that it is the peculiar badg of Antichrist to chalenge to him his alone to be the whole church of Christ May not Christs lieutenant on earth chalenge that truly which Antichrist by intrusion will presume to do vniustly Or is there no whole church of Christ in the world out of Antichrists tents And may he not rather be thought to rove at random then to speake in his right senses that averreth Antichrist to bee willing to stand for Christ and to professe to fight vnder Christs banner against whom as the holy scripture and ancient fathers most manifestly teach hee will proclayme open warr and do the vttermost of his most wicked endeauor to coÌ„pell all Christians openly to forsake and forsweare Christ too and that not covertly and by consequencies but in plaine and formall tearmes and to acknowledg no other soueraigne lord besids himself wherfore to conclude this section let the indifferent reader duly consider whether I haue deliuered in sufficient premises to proue that the church of Rome may be vsed to signifie any church of the world that in faith and religion doth agree with it My promises are not the practise only of Catholiks but also of Protestants who in all countries giue vs a name taken from the church of Rome as Romanists or Papists to signifie that we all be members of the same church in what countrie soever we dwell And not only men of our dâ—â—es do so commonly speake but in ancient tymes also it is as well recorded of the Orthodox fathers as by heretiks that men of all countries who imbraced the true faith were called Romans as I haue once before proued at large wherfore it is no novelty to avouch the church of Rome to comprehend all the true Christians of the world Against which it maketh nothing that heretiks and schismatiks be no members of the church of Rome for they be no better then rotten boughes cutt of from the vine like scattered sheepe out of Christs fold wherfore no part nor parcell of Christs church THE FOVRTH Paragraffe w. B. NOw to M. Abbots second sophistication The Roman church by your rule is the head and all other churches are members to it but the Catholike comprehendeth all Ergo to say the Roman is the Catholike church is to say the head is the whole body To which I saye first as I said to the former argument that it is missshapen and by the like it maie bee proued that their English church is not the Catholike church which M. Abbot is content to grant Seâ—ondly I say that it is a fault in arguing when a word is vsed Metaphorically to take hold vpon anie other property of the Metaphore besides that wherin the resemblance lieth I gaue for example that our blessed Saviour is called a Lion for his invincible fortitude Now if anie man would out of that metaphore argue that our Saviour had foure feete bicause a Lion hath so he should be not only ridiculous but also blasphemous In like manner though the church of Rome be by vs called the head church bicause of her superiority Yet doth it not follow that anie other properties belonging to a head be of necessity attributed to the same church And to our present purpose though a head cannot be called by the name of the whole it being but one part of the whole called dissimilare that consisteth of diuers parts one vnlike to the other yet might the church of Rome not withstanding that it is the head be called by the name of the whole Catholike church For that the Catholike church is totum similare a whole consisting of parts that bee all a like as the aire is every part wherof is called by the name of the whole as euery part of the aire is called the aire euery part of water is called water so every particular church that is part of the Catholike church may truly be called the Catholike church though it be not the whole Catholike church To which M. Abbot after much idle speech mingled with scornfull scoffing answereth nothing els in effect but that hee had said before these be his wordes R. AB TAke a head in what sence you will it must needs bee a distinct part from the rest of the body and then repeats his goodly argument in these tearmes The church of Rome is by their learning the head of all other churches and all other churches are as the members and body of this head But the Catholike church comprehendeth all both head and body To say then that the Roman church is the Catholike church is all one as if a man should say the head is the whole bodie After which he addeth who can speake more cleerly then I haue done where if you wil be his favorable and fast frind you must applaud him and say that no man is able to do better nor to set it out more cleerly then hee hath done A high conceit of his owne writing vttered with vanity enough Now of mee his poore Antagonist hee saith who can answere more absurdly then he hath done I haue put him to his trumps I warrant him c to omit much such trumpery which followeth without any fortification of reason or temper of modestie W. B. I am so farr of from being troubled with his trumpes which are nothing els indeed then very frumpes besids that one old halting spurgald Iade of an argument so confusedly set downe by him even there where hee crakes most of cleernes
three patriarchall seas Alexandria Antioch and Ierusalem as is recorded in the same councell In which faith continued the said three patriarchall seas till the yeare of our lord 1517 when Luther began his tragedy as stands of record in the generall councell of LateraÌ„ held vnder Leo the tenth where the obedience also of Peter Patriarch of the Armenians vnto the church of Rome was presented by his orators since which tyme as somtimes also before albeit those churches for the greater part fell often away into schisme and heresie yet there remained alwaies and do to this time continue still among them many good soules that do constantly retayne and keepe the true doctrine of the church of Rome in all points And the Greeke church hath in Rome it self a Seminary as many other nations haue at this daie to breed and trayne vp their young students as in all other vertues and pietie so principally in the true faith of the church of Rome wherfore albeit the publike face of religion be now in those churches as it is in our countrie yet there want not true Roman Catholikes in those parts no more then there do God be thanked in our country to baptise reconcile and to perfome all other christian duties appertayning to the rites of the Roman church whence it followeth that there are two vntruthes in the former part of M. Abbots new resemblance for we are so farr of from saying the Catholike church to be perished ouer all the world that wee affirme it rather to be at this present day much increased and multiplied which doth controwle the former part of M. Abbots position we say more ouer that in those verie patriarchall seas though the outward face of religion be disfigured and corrupted yet doth the Roman religion remayne there entire and sound though not openly countenanced by the state yet by the godly practised in secret Let vs now proceed to the second particularity to wit that the Donatists laide the foundation of their church in Africa and from thence would haue had all other churches to haue bene restored to their former integrity when did they begin to laie that foundation about 300 yeares after Christ in constantine the great his raigne who was he that laid that foundation One Maiorinus or Donatus of whom the rest tooke their name doth it not herehence that I go no further presently appeare a great difference between the church of Rome and the church of the Donatists The church of Rome began in the Apostles dayes and had for her chief Architects the princes of the Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul wheras the Donatists began their revolt from the said church of Rome 300 yeares after vnder the afore said blind guides wherfore there is no comparison to be made betweene either the foundation or founders of the one with the other But saith M. Abbot The Donatists gaue their church as gallant and braue a title as the church of Rome had for they called it the Catholike church and desired as earnestly as the Romanistes do to haue had it spred all the world ouer True for the title of Catholike true also that they had a feruent desire to haue had it spred farr and neare But their doctrine being the vaine leasings of feeble mortall men had too small force and vertue in it to disperse it self so farr abrode and not being planted by the heavenly father it did not take any deepe root so that albeit those busy fellowes laboured tooth and naile to in large the limits of their doctrine into the out most coasts of the earth that it might haue wonn the name of Catholike yet they could neuer obtaine it nor come within tenthousand mile of it wheras the doctrine and religioÌ„ of the church of Rome as a fruitfull tree plaÌ„ited by the watet side did spread her branches nto all nations and hath even since the Apostles daies even to our time continued a true part of the Catholike church by M. Abbots owne confession as you shall see heerafter in this chapter so that in fine there is left no resemblance at all in this reformed part of the comparison saving that the Donatists had a vaine desire to haue their sect dilated as amply as was the Catholike Roman faith But it began 300. years after the Roman and hath not by 1300 continued so long nor yet could for any short space of time dilate it self so largely wherfore it could not come neere vnto a shadow of the title of Catholike Touching the coÌ„uersion of the Indies it must needs grieve any good christian hart to heare how conteÌ„ptuously and prophaneliet his vnsanctified Abbot doth speake of it first he writes that we may say of their conversion what wee list because those countries are so farr of that they are not like to trauaile so farr to search whether we say true or no. They are peradventure more like to make some iournay thitherward to search out some of the IndiaÌ„ gold then to seeke after the conuersion of the poore Indian soules yet if they will not of themselues take the paynes nor vndergo the hazard to win soules let theÌ„at least afford others their good word that will refuse no paines nor perill in so blessed an enterprise If there were any sparke of Christian Charity in theÌ„ would they not rather reioyce then repine that the faith of Christ is so vniuersally embraced so religiously obserued in those most ample and rich dominions If M. Abbot hath not as hee here pretendeth inquired after the manner of their conuersion how knowes he that there bee so few and they so bad Christians should not an even mind out of commoÌ„ christian charity in cases vnknowne iudge the best and giue his sentence rather in fauour of the Christian Religion then against it but M. Abbot making out of his owne mind that bad construction may not that of the poet be iustlie cast vpoÌ„ him mala meÌ„s malus animus for vnles hee did cary a wicked affectioÌ„ towards the enlargemeÌ„t of Christs kiÌ„gdome not knowing how the case there standeth hee would neuer haue chosen to make the worst report therof that can bee imagined well he that doth not desire to remayne wilfully blind and altogither ignoraÌ„t in those happy tidings of the reducing of so many millions of soules from Idolatry to the knowledg of the true liuing God and vnto the participation of the merits of our most blessed Saviour Iesus Christ may read the histories of their coÌ„versioÌ„ coÌ„posed by men almost of all nations of whom many were eye witnesses of that they writ There shall they find manie notable monuments aswell of the holines of their preachers testifyed by miracles as of the devotion of the people newly converted and of their great sincerity If among the souldiers and marchants which went with the religious priests and preachers thâ—re were more covetousnes cruelty and disagrement then was convenient let not the disorders of those worldly and
churches saue the Roman do err as they say they maie how shall a man then in communicating with the Roman communicate with all other churches then must you needs saie that by communicating with that particular church of Rome you do become Catholike finally M. Bishop doth overthrow himself For if a man become a Catholike by communicating with the church of the whole world and by coÌ„municating with the church of Rome he doth communicate with the church of the whole world then communicating with the particular church of Rome the name of Catholike doth belong to him To be short if the Donatists could haue had their way they would not haue doubted to say asmuch of their church as M. Bishop doth hereof his to wit that men should bee called Catholiks by communicating with the African church not as it was contained within the bounds of Africa but for that in communicating with that church you did enter into communion with all other churches spred over all the world w. B. IN the forefront of this chapter M. Abbot ingraued this title The comparison betwixt the Donatists and Papists iustified And yet we see in the beginning of euery section an open confessioÌ„ of some fault made by himself in the same comparison I said the Donatists I should haue said the Rogatists c well though it cannot be denied but that this is a very simple kind of Iustification yet I am content it passe for some kind of satisfaction be it permitted to M. Abbot for a sory shift to flit vp and downe before from the Rogatists in Mauritania to the Donatists in Africa now back againe from the Donatists to the Rogatists who saith hee did expound the word Catholike of perfection of faith which to haue been otherwise I haue shewed in the second section of this chapter well those honest Rogatists affirmed themselues only to bee true Catholiks and by consequence held none to be Catholikes but such as ioyned with them So did the Donatists in Africa The Papists do the like for their church therfore they resemble the Donatists And do not the protestants put in the same plea for their church therfore they be also Donatists And did not the old Arrians affirme and say asmuch in favour of their church were they also Donatists Is not this then a proper resemblance betwixt the Donatists and Papists that will agree vnto all kind of sects yea vnto the true Catholike church it self to which alone in deed it doth rightfully apperteine yet it is vsuall to all sectaries that take their errors for truth to qualify and grace their sect with the title of the true reformed church This resemblance then is so triviall that a man of any sharpnes of wit would haue been ashamed to haue framed it But if M. Abbots inventioÌ„ were dry and dull when he proposed that we shall now find it fluent and acute in reproving what I answered of the church of Rome to wit If the communion of the church of Rome passed not out of the wals of Rome then by communicating with the church of Rome wee should not become Catholiks But bicause it is farr otherwise with the church of Rome then it was with the church of Cartenna and that in communicating with the church of Rome we enter into the communion of the church dilated all the world ouer therfore wee become Catholiks in communicating with the church of Rome about which M. Abbot makes a foule fumbling but in fine cannot impeach it hee saith first it is contrary to that which I had before taught viz to communicate with the church of Rome was to become Catholike But this hee saw to be so simple that hee corrected it himself presently for I never said otherwise but by communicating with the Roman church wee became Catholiks And my reason alwaies was bicause the communion of the church of Rome did reach into all the coasts of the earth He giueth the second assaut against it by averring that therof it would ensue that one became Catholike now a dayes otherwise then of old bicause then it was sufficient to communicate wâ—â—h the church dispersed ouer all and now wee must communicate with the church of Rome to communicate with the church spred ouer all Is not this a high point and a very great subtiltie when one doth communicate with the church spred ouer all doth hee not euen then communicate with the church of Rome also that is the chief of them all Or was there any time since the Apostles dayes when there was no church of Rome that one might haue communicated with the church spred ouer all and yet not haue communicated with the church of Rome Yea did not they that wrote against the Donatists I meane S. Austin and Optatus make speciall instance in the communion of the church of Rome aswell as I do now to proue their societie with the whole Catholike church S. Austin saith of Cecilianus Archbishop of Carthage who was principally oppugned by the Donatists that hee holding communion with the church of Rome as with the chiefest Apostolicall chaire needed not care for the conspiracy of the Donatists agâ—â—nst him And Optatus speaketh iust to the same sence that I do In the Bishop of Rome the whole world doth accord together with vs in one society of communion Note how in those old daies by coÌ„munion with the pope church of Rome the prelatâ— in Africa esteemed themselues to hold communion with the whole world M. Abbot puts forth a new case what if the church of the whole world do not hold communion with the church of Rome as it was when Arrianisme did ouerflowe the whole world Then at least by holding communion with Rome one held not communion with the church of the world M. Abbot is content to leaue the Donatists to dreame awhile and flieth for aduantage to the Arrians but they will helpe him no more then did the Donatistes For though their heresies infected many cities countries and drew many Bishops to their party yet M. Abbot I thinke can hardly name mee any one city of the world so wholy possessed with that Arrianisme that it had not at the same time many true beleeuers in it that would not ioyne in faith and religion with the said ArriaÌ„s but stuck close to the church of Rome and to all other true beleeuers The like we say of the Easterne churches when they fell into schisme and heresie that albeit the outward face of their congregations were schismaticall yet there remained alwaies in those countries as there do now in England very manie that did coÌ„stantly defend and embrace the Roman religion The Indians for the most part of late time were converted yet many millions of soules were wonne vnto Christian religion in the west and East Indies by good priests Franciscan Fryers and other religious men before any mission of Iesuits were sent into that heavenly haruest as the Indian storie doth testifie yea before their
not condeÌ„ne anie man for not beleeuing that which hee neuer heard of wherfore if in any coast of the world the Doctrine of Christ bee not sufficientlie published no man there shal bee condeÌ„ned for not beleeuing in him but for other mortall grieuous offeÌ„ces which they haue in their life time comitted against the light of reason law of nature If any amogst those infidels haue beeÌ„ so happie as not to haue committed any such mortall sinne Act. 10. which caÌ„not bee without the speciall aide of Gods grace if there bee any such I saie like the good Italian Captaine Cornelius meÌ„tioned in the acts of the Apostles hee shall find the like extraordinarie succour froÌ„ heaueÌ„ as to haue an Angell to teach him or at least to direct him to some Peter that maie throughly instruct him in the Christian faith Among Christians there can hardly bee found anie one I think so vngratiously bred that neuer heard of Christ because that is contained in the Creede that all Christians are taught even from their infancie and are bound to know so farr fourth as their capacitie and wit will giue them leaue which if they should neglect to learne after they come to yeares of discretion they are worthie to bee depriued of all benefits issuing and growing by Christ because they contemned somuch as to know him To that text of S. Paul that hee who cometh to God must know that hee is and that hee is a rewarder c. I answere first that the Apostle saith verie well that hee must know those two points but hee doth noth saie there that hee needs to know no more And elswhere in all his Epistles doth teach that ouer and besides that the faith in Iesus Christ is necessarie for all men wherfore this point must bee added to the rest I answere secondly that one cannot know particulary how God is a rewarder vnles hee know the incarnation of Iesus Christ because God will reward no man with life euerlasting but through the merits of Iesus Christ and for that hee is a member of Christ and for such good works which a man without faith in Christ and without aide of his grace caÌ„not performe Thus much of the first point Now to the second which is the principall question whether holding the right faith in Christ Iesus and beleeuing the other fundamentall articles which are conteyned in the Apostles creed one may bee condemned for not beleeuing any other article of the Christian faith For the plainer explication of the state of this question it is to bee vnderstood that many of the vnlearned and simpler sort maie bee ignorant of many matters appertaining to faith without daunger of damnation because by reason of their lacke of capacitie or for other necessarie occupatioÌ„s about getting of their poore livings they are not bound to know expresly much more then is deliuered in the Apostles Creed and what doth concerne the right vse of the sacraments which they themselues are obliged to receiue Nevertheles euerie Christian man and woman may verie well bee bound not to defend the misbeliefe of anie one article of faith after hee shal bee given to vnderstand that the Catholike church hath declared the same to be so There is a great difference betweene the dispositions of two such parties for it is one thing to bee ignorant what the church teacheth in such a case and another not to bee willing to beleeue it abeit hee knew well enough that the church commaundeth him so to beleeue In the former there is a ready good will to obey the truth assoone as due information shal bee given him and meere ignorance in the meane season hindreth his consent But in the other partie there is a loose libertie of believing what him listeth and an obstinate resolution not to beleeue and obey the church any further then they themselues shall thinke good These men I say albeit they beleeue aright in Iesus Christ touching his owne person and mediation and do not deny anie article of the Apostles Creede at least as they vnderstand it yet do they dwell in the state of damnation and shall not bee saued vnles they repent This proposition I know will seeme ouer rigorous and terrible vnto many but being a matter of eternall saluation or damnation at least as I take it they must giue mee leaue that preferre the honour of Gods truth before the phansies of men and the care of their salvation before currying of false favour with them to aduertise them of it whiles they haue time to take heed to it requesting them to consider well of the reasons that I shall now deliuer vnto them in proofe of the same and then I trust in God they will also come to bee of my opinion therin The first may bee thus propounded If it were sufficient to saluation to beleeue in Christ and in the other articles of the Creede as they take them this great absurdity would ensue therof that all heretikes anciently condemned were vniustlie condemned might well notwithstanding their heresies and condemnation haue liued and died in the state of saluation which to imagine were to condemne all the Orthodox churches and ancient fathers of great impiety and extreame want of Christian Charity I will proue that absurd sequele by the enumeration of the most notorious Heretikes The Arrians for example did professe to beleeue in Christ so farre forth as is deliuered in the said Creede To wit that hee was the only sonne of his father borne of the virgin Mary and our Lord. They did indeed denie him to bee consubstantiall that is of the same substance with his father and coeternall but thervpon discoursed much like as some Protestants do now about Transubstantiation who professe Christs bodie to bee really present in the blessed SacrameÌ„t because Christs words do teach that plainly but they will not admitt of Transubstantiation in any case for that they find not that word set downe in the scriptures So thes Arrians did professe to beleeue Christ to bee the Saviour of the world to bee also the sonne of God trulie and really yet because there was no meÌ„tioÌ„ of Consubstantiall in the scriptures therfore they were content to beleeue so much as was in the scriptures but their tender coÌ„sciences forsooth would not suffer theÌ„ to adueÌ„ture one pace beyoÌ„d the express word of God Notwithstanding their faire pretence they were roundly condemned by the church in the first generall councell for most damnable Heretikes if vnder that pretext they refused to bâ—leeue that Christ Iesus was consubstantiall vnto his father and coeternall The Nestorians beleeued all that the Orthodox church taught of our saviour Christ Iesus and of all the other articles of faith saving that they held him to haue two distinct persoÌ„s aswell as hee had two differeÌ„t natures To wit the nature of man to haue had his owne person of man euen as the nature of God had the person of God The
Apollinarists did not swarue from the Catholiks in any other point of faith except that they maintained our saviour Christ to haue had no soule of man but that his Godhead did supplie the place of the soule Eutiches and his fellowes agreeing in the rest auouched the flesh of Christ to bee turned into the divine nature All these did professe to beleeue in Christ and to hold all the articles of the Creede So did the MacedoniaÌ„s that imagined the holy Ghost to be lesse then the sonne And the latter Grecians also that deny the same holie Ghost to proceed aswell from the sonne as from the father The Pelagians did not denie Christ or anie article of the Creed no more did the Novatians nor the Donatists at lest as they vnderstood the creed For albeit the Nouatians denied priests to haue power to forgiue some certen of the most grieuous sort of sins as the Protestants do now denie them to haue power to forgive any at all yet they denied no more then the protestants do that article of the creed I beleeue remission of sinnes For they beleeued that God could at all times forgiue all sort of sinnes though they denied priests to haue power to remit some of the most enormious So the Donatists though they taught the church to haue been decayed all the world ouer saving in Africa yet did they professe to beleeue the Catholike church But they expounded it to bee Catholike not for that it was spred ouer all but for that it reteyned all the seven sacraments or for that it professed to keepe all Gods commaundements as you haue heard before Out of these examples I frame this argument If it were sufficient to saluation to beleeue in God our Creator and in Iesus Christ our Redeemer withall other articles set downe expresly in the Apostles Creed Then were the Arrians Macedonians Pelagians and all those other aboue rehearsed heretiks notwithstanding their obstinate cleaving to their condemned heresies in the state of saluation because they refused not to beleeve any of the foresaid points But to hold that anie of the aboue named heretikes dying in their said heresies died in the state of saluation is to gainsay and reproue all pure antiquity it is to condemne the holy prelats and most learned Doctors of the primitiue church of want of learning want of Iudgment and want of charity who cast those erring men as heretikes out of their churches condemned them to the pit of hell as the profest enemies of Christ and the Devils champions Besids the best informed Christians of those times chose rather to suffer all kind of torments then to professe any one point of their condemned opinions which had been great folly if with the profession of them they might holding the other fundamentall points haue enioyed Christ his fauour and been inheritors of the kingdome of heauen Moreouer what necessity had there been for the most learned and renowmed ancient prelats to haue taken such paines either in writing so many learned volumes or in disputing or preaching against those heretikes if they might haue been all saued euery one in his owne religion Might not also the huge charges and exceeding great paines of assembling of generall councels haue been well spared if those men for whose right information they were called might haue obtâ—ined saluation though they had been let alone in their owne errours It must needs therfore bee graunted that the best Clerks and holiest personages in the purest times of Antiquity thought it enough to damnation to deny anie one article of the Catholike faith Matth. 7.15 after it was in anie generall councell declared for such Doth not our blessed Saviour when hee stileth heretikes by the name of false prophets and resembleth them to rauening wolues that devoure Christian soules cleerlie demonstrate that they haue no part in his good grace and favour but bee in his sight odious and hatefull creatures Againe when hee doth in another place compare theÌ„ to theeues and robbers Ioan. 10.1 that do breake into his fold of their owne authority and take vpon them to bee his ministers when hee sent them not scattering killing his flocke Doth hee not I say plainly intimate them to bee guiltie of death and eternall Damnation Tit. 3 11. S. Paul chargeth vs to auoide the companie of an hereticall man knowing that such bee subuerted do sinne and bee even by their owne iudgment condemned And elswhere amoÌ„g the workes of the flesh rangeth heresies sects diuisions forewarninge vs expresly that whosoeuer doth committ anie of them shall never enter into the kingdome of heauen what hope then can there bee of their saluation wherfore heretiks being by our Saviour likened vnto wolues Gallat 5.15 theeues and robbers and by his Apostles declared damnable creatures vncapable to enter into the kingdome of heauen who were also in all ancient councels held for accursed can any bodie bee either so ill aduised or so foolish hardie as to perswade them that there is any hope of saluation for them vnles they forsake their errors in season But because worldlings neuer waÌ„t false prophets to lay pillowes vnder their elbowes to vphold them in their errors some such may heere step forth and in their excuse saie for theÌ„ that seing they beleeue in Christ hold all the articles of the Apostles Creede though they erre in other points they caÌ„not bee heretiks therfore whatsoeuer is said against heretikes doth not touch theÌ„ that be not of that nuÌ„ber This excuse will not serue the turne for as I haue before shewed neither Arrians NestoriaÌ„s PelagiaÌ„s nor any other most notorious heretikes did plainly denie either Christ to bee Saviour of the world nor anie other expresse point of any article of the creed neuerthelesse they were by the true verdict of the ancient Catholike church denounced and declared for heretikes In a word if to beleeue in Christ and to hold the rest of the Apostles Creede were sufficient to preserue any Christian from the Canker of heresie then hee that would denie both the old and new Testament to bee Canonicall scriptures and the true word of God might bee no heretike because the Canon of holy scripture is not expressed in the creed So hee that would ouerthrow the whole Hierarchie of the church and send all the sacraments into banishment might escape the brand of heresie because of those points there is no particular mention in the said Creed wherfore it is most certaine that men may bee most wicked and damnable heretikes albeit they professe to beleeue in Christ and do not deny anie one substantiall point expressed in the Apostles Creed if they shall wilfully defend any other erronious doctrine contrary vnto the truth reuealed by God and so declared vnto vs by the pastors and doctors of the Catholike church For witnes wherof I will now cite only two leaving the rest for the vpshot of this question Aug l. q. in Math. q. 11.
without exception against any one of them for if I do beleeue her in one and not in another I am become such a chooser as the Latines following the Grecians call hereticus an heretike and do indeed shew that I do not assuredlie beleeue the church as Gods interpreter that cānot erre but onlie so farre forth as I thinke good And then it may bee asked mee why I do beleeue her at all if she do but now and then tell the truth for it may bee that then shee doth not say true when I do beleeue her To put vs out of all these doubts and difficulties the selected gouernours of the church the maisters of the world Christes hoy Apostles before they did depart to preach the Gospell to all nations set downe this for a most assured principle of the Christian faith I beleeue the holie Catholike church to teach all Christians that in those supernaturall misteries of the kingdome of heauen wee must not leane to the light of nature or trust to our owne Iudgments or follow the advise of everie one that will take vpon him to bee a maister but hold our selues preciselie to that which the holie Catholike church doth teach vs obeie her fullie and wholie in all things Out of the premises this argument may bee framed directly to our purpose No man can bee saued vnles hee follow the direction of the one holie Catholike church in all matters of faith but they that bee of opinion that euerie man may bee saued in his religion do not follow the direction of the Catholike church which doth teach all men to imbrace and follow one only faith and religion wherfore they that will not imbrace the said one only faith which the Catholike church teacheth cannot bee saued To make this more plaine and probable let vs in a word or two examine the speciall meanes that the protestants vse to attaine vnto the true vnderstanding of Gods word and therby vnto saluation where wee must obserue by the way that wee all agree in this that there is nothing to bee beleeued which is not by God reuealed vnto vs. The Protestants do hold all that to bee written either in the old or new Testament wherin wee dissent from them teaching all revealed verities not to bee written in the Bible but some of them to passe from father to sonne by word of mouth and by tradition Of which difference here I doe not dispute but wee all taking for our ground Gods owne and onely word revealed written or vnwritten do inquire how wee come to the true vnderstanding of it wee say by the explication and declaration of the Catholike church The Protestants approue not that meanes but vnder the colour of mans inuentions reiecting of it do either leane to their owne iudgment learning or follow the authoritie of their chiefe preachers or els runne to the revelation of the Spirit speaking inwardlie to their spirits Now if none of all these bee assured meanes to attaine vnto the true vnderstanding of Gods word then their faith that relieth principally theron cannot bee assured Some of them in great zeale simplicitie will say that they relie only on the word of God but good poore soules they know not well what they saie for the question being about the vnderstanding of the same word of God wee affirming the word to bee for vs they denying that and chalenging it to bee for them who shall iudge whether of our pretentions to the same word bee true they will conferre one texte with another so will wee and consider all circūstances too wee will repaire also to the originals haue respect vnto the Analogie of faith briefly wee will vse all humane diligēce pray also to God to assist vs supernaturally yet whē wee haue all done wee come to no agreemēt who shall thē agree vs If they would come with vs to the Catholike churches determination in some generall councell wee should quickly haue an end but they vpon one vaine pretext or other fly of and will finally follow no other then one of those three guids before named wherof the first which is their owne learning and Iudgment bee it neuer so great yet they maie mistake and fall into error Omnis enim homo mendax Rom. 3. For every man is subiect to bee deceiued specially when they bee in passion and striue to vphold and make good their owne conceites against others for then they do oftentimes run astray verie strangelie Secondly the Protestants that relie vpon the reputation and credit of their preachers how can they set vp their rest vpon them assuredlie for that first their masters being men may bee deceiued aswell as other men maie be and that they are in deed deceiued not only the Catholiks who are the farre greater and founder part of Christians do affirme but those also that they themselues hold for men of God do testify the same For example Martin Luther with his disciples repute Zuinglius Calvin and all the troupe of Sacramentaries to bee deceiuing masters and to erre damnablie in the matter of the blessed Sacrament On thother side the Sacramentarie protestants do all teach that Luther with all his followers erred as in many other points so principally in that matter of the reall presence which of these two to omit diuerse other their contradictions shall a poore protestant beleeue and follow both hee cannot because what the one affirmeth thother denieth and each of them saith that the other is deceiued Hee thē taking them both for true of their words must needs beleeue neither of them for that the one avoucheth the other to bee in error Hee maie leaning to his owne Iudgment and liking rather follow one of them then the other yet hee cannot do that without some feare of being deceiued himself because hee hath so many euen of his owne side to bee against him wherfore he can haue no faith at all in these points For faith is an assured perswasion of that to bee true which you do beleeue without anie doubt or feare of the contrarie Let vs now come to their last refuge and surest hold as some take it of the spirit which is indeed the most wauering and vncertaine guide of all the rest For doth not the Lutherans grosser spirit buzze into their braines that they haue found out the light of the Gospell yes I warrant you saies euery good Lutheran Not so saith the purer and nimblet spirit of the Calvinists it was but the dawning of the daie that appeared to M. Luther the light of the Gospell began then only to peepe vp but the bright beames therof brake not out till M Caluins doctrine glittered The more brisk spirite of the Brownists doth assure thē that the nooneday light of the same Gospell shineth onlie in their Horizon And what shall wee say to the Anabaptists who as they bee the most frantike of all other so they brag most of all of verie familiar