that faith was requisite to make a true member of the church here he saith that without faith a mēber cā not be knowen much lesse therfore made 3 The Rhemistes confesse in these very words that in the raigne of their imagined and supposed Antichrist the externall state of the Romane church and publike entercourse of the faithfull with the same shall cease and that there shal be onely a communion in hart with it and practise in secret Annot. in 2. Thess. 2. Sect. 10. Where then I pray you shal be your tabernaculum in sole ciuitas in monte candela splendens in domo your tabernacle in the sunne your Citie in a mountaine your candle shining in the house that is say you in the world Math. 5. Sect. 3. Ergo out of their owne wordes we conclude that the church shall not alwayes be visible and notoriously knowen in the world Lastly we will conclude with Augustine Aliquando in sola domo Noah Ecclesia erat in solo Abraham Ecclesia erat in solo Loth domo eius Ecclesia erat in solo Henoch Ecclesia erat Sometime the church was onely in Henochs house sometime onely in Noah some time in Abraham alone in Loth his house How then hath the church bene alwayes so visible and notoriously knowē to the world when it hath layen hidden some time in one house yea in one man THE SECOND QVESTION whether the Church may erre THis questiō is deuided into two parts First whether the catholike church may erre at all or not Secondly whether the visible church vpon earth may fall away from God into Idolatrie and apostasie THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE Catholike Church may erre in doctrine The Papistes THey do teach that the catholike church can not possiblie erre not onely in matters absolutely necessarie to saluation but not in any thing which error 16 it imposeth and commaundeth whether it be conteined in the word of God or not yea that it can not erre in these things which beside the word of God are commaunded And by the church here they do meane not onely the Pastors and Bishops but the whole companie of the faithfull so that neither that which all the pastors of the church do teach can be erronious nor what is receiued generally of the whole church Bellarm. de Eccles. lib. 3. cap. 14. Rhemist annot an Iohan. 14. ver 16. 1 The church say they is the pillar of truth 1. Tim. 3. Ergo it can not erre We answere First it is no otherwise the pillar of truth then a virgin without spot and wrincle Ephe. 5.27 As that place doth not priuiledge the church frō all sinne and imperfection of life so neither doth this place exempt her from all error in doctrine Secondly she is called the pillar of truth in respect of vs because the truth is preserued in the true church and is not els where to be found not because the truth dependeth vpon the church for S. Paule sendeth not Timothie in this place to learne of the church as though it could not possiblie be deceiued but saith he these things haue I written that thou mayst know how to behaue thy selfe in the house of God ver 14.15 Ergo the word of God is the rule of truth and the church hath no warrant to be kept from error but as she is lead and gouerned by the word of God Thirdly the argument foloweth not for Peter was a pillar and yet erred Gallat 2.9.11 2 They heape many arguments together The church hath the spirite of God to lead it into all truth the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it Math. 16. God hath geuen it Apostles teachers Euangelistes to keepe it in the truth Ephe. 4. Christ hath prayed for the church that it may be sanctified in the veritie Iohn 17. Christ prayed that Peters faith should not faile Ergo the church can not erre Rhemens annot 1. Timoth. 3.15 We answere euery one of the elect hath the spirite of God neither shall the gates of hell preuaile against the faith of any one of the elect to ouerthrow it Christ prayeth for euery one of his Disciples that they may be sanctified in the truth Iohn 17.20 wherefore it foloweth as well by these arguments that no one faithfull man can fall into error The pastors and teachers so long as they folow the Apostles doctrine may keepe the church from error but it is not gathered out of that place Ephe. 4. that the pastors if they swarue from Gods word can not erre Concerning Peter Christ prayed for him that his faith should not faile in that greeuous tentation which he fell into Secondly he prayed not for him as gouernour of the church but as he prayeth for euery faithfull man Iohn 17.23 Thirdly for all this prayer Peter erred Gallat 2. 3 This argument was vsed in the Councell of Basill the Church is without spot and wrincle Ephe. 5.27 Ergo without error We aunswere First S. Paule speaketh there of a glorious church such as it shal be in the kingdome of heauen not of the church as it is vpon earth so Reuel 7.14 The elders which sat round about the throne which are the Saintes in heauen were seene in long white robes which they had washed white in the bloud of the Lambe 2 It foloweth out of this place that the church is as well without sinne as free from error which the diuines in the Councell did also graunt But seeing by their owne confession euery member of the church being clothed in this mortall flesh sinneth how can the church be without sinne If the church consist of men and all men are sinners how is the church free If all the partes and members be sinnefull how is not the whole also polluted with sinne If all the partes of the body be sicke and diseased how can the whole be sound The church also is not ashamed to confesse her selfe to be blacke Cant. 1.5 she shal be made bewtifull and glorious without all spot blemish in the kingdome of God and euen now also is made righteous and iust before God through Christ not because she hath no sinne but because it is remitted and although some errors and imperfections remaine yet shall they be no hinderaunce to her saluation The Protestantes WE doubt not to say that the church of God may erre in some points not necessarie to saluation but can not fall cleane away from God into any dānable error Fulk annot in Ephe. 5. ver 29. That the church may erre as we say we do shew it thus and by the Church we vnderstand the whole companie and congregation the pastors with the people 1 When our Sauiour Christ suffred the church erred in faith Ergo it may erre the proposition is thus proued The church was either in the Scribes and Pharisies or els in the Apostles but both of them erred they in putting Christ to death the other in their incredulitie not beleeuing rightlie in the
but now they doe light them at noone day 3 These offices haue not been in vse these many yeares among the papists themselues for many times the Sexton or his boy doe execute the charge both of Acolites Ostiaries and Readers yea of Deacons and Subdeacons also when the Priest with his boy can dispatch a Masse Neither are these orders retayned amongst them for any especiall seruice or office but onely as praeparatories and steps and degrees to the priesthood Fulk annot 1. Timoth. 3. sect 7. THE SECOND PART OF THE DIFFErence of Bishops and other Ministers The Papists WE differ from them in two poynts First they say that Bishops are not onely in a higher degree of superioritie to other Ministers but they are as Princes of the Clergie and other Ministers as subiects and in all things to bee commaunded by them Secondly they affirme that Bishops are onely properly Pastors and that to them onely it doth appertaine to preach and that other Ministers haue no authoritie without their license or consent to preach at all and that not principally or chiefely but solie and wholie to them appertayneth the right of consecrating and giuing orders For the first for the princely authoritie of Bishops whom they would haue obeyed in all things they wrast these and such like places of scripture as 2. Cor. 1.9 I write vnto you to know whether you will be obedient in all things Ergo they must be absolutely obeyed Answere the Apostle challengeth only obedience in such things as he should commaund agreeable to Gods word for if I my selfe sayth he preach another Gospell holde me accursed Galat. 1. Fulk annot 1. Cor. 2. sect 3. 2 Against an Elder receiue no accusation vnder two or three witnesses 1. Tim. 5.19 Ergo the authority of Bishops is absolute and princelike Videmus Episcopum iudicem esse presbyterorum proinde verum principem wee see the Bishop is the iudge of the Elders Ergo a prince ouer them Bellarm cap. 14. Answere First it followeth not Bishops haue iurisdiction and authoritie ouer other Ministers Ergo they are princes ouer them Can there be no preeminence and superioritie in the Church but it must needes be princelike Is euery iudge a prince ouer those which are brought before him to be iudged 2. Timothie had no such princelike authority for here it is restrained limited a rule is set down by the Apostle which he must obserue Ergo his authoritie was not absolute Thirdly Saint Paul was so farre off from making Timothie a prince in the Church at Ephesus that he would rather haue him not to rebuke but to exhort the Elders as fathers the younger men as brethren cap. 5.1 Where now is his princely authoritie become whereas he maketh his subiects as our aduersaries call inferior Ministers his fathers and brethren For the second the Apostles properly had the preaching of the word committed vnto them Act. 6. For other were chosen to attend vpon tables the Apostles also onelie had the right of laying on of hands Act. 14.23 Ergo It is proper onely to Bishops to preach and to ordayne who are the Apostles successors Bellarmin Answere First Bellarmine denieth that Bishops doe properly succeed the Apostles de pontifice lib. 4.25 because he would magnifie the Pope his ghostly father aboue all Bishops but now forgetting himselfe hee sayth Episcopi propriè succedunt Apostolis Bishops doe properly succeede the Apostles cap. 14. so by this reason euery Bishop hath as ful authoritie as the Pope Secondly euery godly faithful Bishop is a successor to the Apostles we denie it not so are all faithfull and godly pastors Ministers for Christ prayeth for them all indifferently hauing first praied for his Apostles Iohn 17.20 I pray not for these alone sayth our Sauiour but for al them which shal beleeue in me through their word Thirdly at that time when the Deacons were elected the congregation was at Ierusalem neither were there as yet any other Pastors ordained therefore the Apostles only attēded vpon preaching of the word but afterward when they had ordayned Pastors in other Churches to them also fully was committed the word of reconciliation Ephes. 4.11 Christ hath giuen some to be Apostles some Prophets some Pastors and teachers So that Pastors teachers though ordained first by the Apostles yet had their calling of God and together in their calling authoritie and commission to preach neither being once ordayned needed they to expect anie further license from the Apostles And as for the right of ordayning and imposition of handes though it were chiefly in the Apostles yet the Pastors and Elders together with them layde on their handes Act. 13.4 Yea the Rhemists confesse as much that when a Priest is to be ordered the rest of the Priests together with the Bishop doe lay on their hands Annotat. 1. Timoth. 4.18 What doth this else signifie but that they haue some interest in ordayning together with the Bishop The law also must be changed Heb. 7.12 that is the manner and forme of the priesthood But we easily see your drift you would gladly haue vs like of this argument that in stead of a high Priest in the law you might bring a Pope into the Church The Protestantes FIrst though we doe admitte that for auoyding of schisme the Church hath thought it meete there should be difference in degree and a superioritie among Ministers yet your princely dominion which you doe vrge in no wise must be admitted 1 It is contrary to the rule of Christ. Luk. 22.25 the Kings of the nations are Lords ouer them and they that haue authoritie ouer them are called benefactors Here our Sauiour speaketh not of tyrannical dominion for how could tyrants be benefactors but forbiddeth that there should be any such princelike and pompous preeminence among ecclesiasticall persons as there is among secular and ciuill gouernours A superioritie may be graunted but not as the Prince is ouer his subiects it was so in time of popery that the people were halfe subiects to the Prince and halfe subiects to their spirituall gouernours But though we acknowledge other ecclesiasticall fathers and pastors yet we are subiects onely to our prince 2 Saint Peter also is flat against this princely rule and dominion Feede the flock sayth he not as Lords ouer Gods heritage but that you may bee ensamples 1. Pet. 5.3 But are not they I pray you Lords ouer the flock that challenge to be princes Secondly concerning the power of preaching we affirme that euery pastor once ordayned hath sufficient authoritie to preach in his owne flocke and charge as Iohn Husse notably prooued to their face out of a certayne glose in the fift booke of the decretals that when as the Bishop ordayneth anie Priest he giueth him also therewithall authoritie to preach Wee denie not but when there is iust occasion this authoritie maybe restrayned by the Church gouernours and so also may an euill Minister be suspended
yeare after Christ and that being expelled the citie by Claudius with the rest of the Iewes he returned to Ierusalem and there spake with Paul and after that went to Rome agayne and there ended his life This answere we shewe to bee very insufficient First Act. 15.2 it appeareth that there was as it were a standing and set councel of the Apostles at Ierusalem of the which Peter was one for the Church thought good to send vp to the Apostles and Elders which were at Ierusalem Secondly till the 18. yeare when this Councel was held it seemeth that Peter had laboured onely or especially amongst the Iewes of whom there were then but fewe at Rome for saith the Apostle he that was mightie in Peter in the Apostleship ouer the circumcision was also mightie in me Gal. 2.8 Therfore Peter was not knowne to haue laboured vntill this time in the circumcision Thirdly afterward it is more like he went to Antiochia then to Rome for after this Paul rebuked Peter at Antioch Gal. 2. Fourthly these are but bare coniectures of our aduersaries and craftie euasion without scripture but seeing we appose them out of scripture it is great reason they should likewise answere vs out of scripture 3 We haue diuers other obections also out of the scriptures as first that if Peter were at Rome it is not like that Paul would leaue him out in his salutation in the end of his Epistle Rō 16. sent to the brethren Our aduersaries answere but very simplie that at that time when S. Paul wrote his Epistle either Peter was not at Rome or els Paul might write some especiall letters to him by himselfe and this Epistle enclosed in them such goodly coniectures they haue But I pray you what needed S. Paul to haue written vnto the Romanes if S. Peter so faithfull and vigilant a Pastor were continually amongst them Other places also of scripture we haue as Philipp 2.20 speaking of Timothy he saith I haue none like minded to him that will faithfully care for your matters Coloss. 4.11 These onely are my workfellowes 2. Timoth. 4.11 onely Luke is with me Ergo Peter all this while was not at Rome for Paul would not haue left him out of the number of his fellowe-helpers at the lest he would not haue commended Timothy though he were a worthie yong man before him That which Bellarmine answereth is iust nothing that S. Paul speaketh in those places onely of his domesticall helpers which did minister vnto him When S. Paul speaketh plainly of his fellowe labourers these onely are my workfellowes to the kingdome of God Coloss. 4.11 An other argumēt doth arise out of S. Pauls words 2. Timoth. 4.16 At my first answering no man assisted me Ergo it is like that Peter was not then at Rome for he would not haue forsaken Paul Bellarmine answereth that he speaketh onely of such fauourers as hee had in Caesars court that they would not make sute for him to the Emperour But this is a weake solution First it appeareth by that which followeth that they left him without helpe in his open Apologie or defence they did not assist me sayth he but the Lord assisted me that is gaue me strength to defend my cause so that the word assisting must bee taken in the same sense before that they fayled him in that wherein God assisted him that is in speaking boldly in the defence of the truth Secondly it is proued by the diuers successe that he had at his first and second answering at the first all left him but at the next many were emboldened through his bonds what to doe more frankly to speake the word Philipp 1.14 Ergo at the first they forsooke him because they were afrayd to speake the word THE SECOND PART WHETHER PETER were Bishop of Rome error 39 OVr aduersaries would gladly bring it about that Peter was Bishop of Rome there enthronised and sate in the Bishoplike chayre many yeares and after left it to his successors 1 The Romane faith was first planted by Peter for he first preached to the Gentiles Act. 15.7 Ergo he was the first Bishop Answere First that Peter first preached to the Gentiles it is contrarie to the storie of the Acts for Paul was conuerted before Peter sawe the vision from heauen Act. 10. before which time Peter made a great question whether it were lawfull to preach to the Gentiles But Paul immediatly after his conuersion preached to the Gentiles Galath 2. therefore before Peter Neither is there any thing to the contrarie Act. 15.7 the Gentiles beleeued by S. Peters mouth as he sayth but not first Secondly that Peter first preached not at Rome it is thus gathered because it is not like that the Christian faith being spread farre abroad could be kept from Rome the space of 12. yeares for so long it was by their account before Peter came to Rome Agayne there were diuers that dwelled at Rome which heard the Apostles speake diuers tongues Act. 2. being straungers then and soiourners at Ierusalem and Rom. 16.7 he maketh mention of Andronicus and Iunia which were in Christ before him By these it is most like that the Christian faith was first sowed at Rome Thirdly it is more like that Paul preached at Rome before Peter for when he came to Rome he called the Iewes together who sayd vnto him that they had heard nothing concerning him by letters or from the brethren out of Iudea Act. 28.22 But if Peter had beene there Paul no doubt should haue been knowne at the least by name The Iewes also say vnto him wee will heare of thee what thou thinkest and some of them were perswaded by Paul some beleeued not It seemeth by this place that the Iewes in Rome had not heard of the Gospell before But if Peter had been amongst them who had an especiall charge of the circumcision he would haue had the greatest care of the Iewes to winne them to Christ. Fourthly though Peter had first preached to the Romanes it would not followe that therefore he was Bishop there for Paul first founded the Church of Ephesus yet they say Iohn was first Bishop there wherefore they should gayne nothing by this argument if it were true but that Peter was the first preacher and conuerter of the Romanes to the faith The Protestants IF wee take the name of Bishop generally for that office which hath the publique cure and charge of soules in that sense we denye not but Peter and the rest of the Apostles may be called Episcopi Bishops as Christ is called the shepheard and Bishop of our soules 1. Pet. 2.23 But taking it strictly for a Bishop of this or that place which is called Episcopus intitulatus a Bishop entituled wee denie that either Peter or Paul were Bishops Fox pag. 15. 1 Paul was Apostolus Gentium the Apostle of the Gentiles and Peter of the circumcision therefore it is more like that Paul was chiefe Pastor of the Romanes because
they were of the Gentiles and part of his charge and vnlesse they can proue that Paul resigned ouer his lot vnto Peter that he also should be the chiefe Apostle of the Gentiles as he was of the Iewes Peter should haue intruded himselfe into Paules charge not in preaching to the Gentiles for both Paul might preach to the Iewes and Peter to the Gentiles but in taking vpon him to be the chiefe Apostle of the Gentiles which was giuen before to S. Paul 2 The Rhemists themselues graunt that the Church of Rome was founded both by Peter and Paul annot in 2. Gal. sect 6. B. Tunstal a strong champion of theirs but varying from them in this opinion shewed in a letter of his to Cardinall Poole how in times past both Peter and Paul were counted Patrones of the Church of Rome and principes apostolorum the chiefe of the Apostles Eusebius sayth that Clement was the third Bishop after Peter and Paul Alexander succeeded in the fift place after Peter and Paul If therefore the Bishops of Rome challenge any preeminence of authoritie from Peter they may doe it as well from Paul for they both founded that Church preached there and both there suffered Fox pag. 1066. 3 No Apostles were Bishops for they were diuers offices Eph. 4.11 he gaue some to be Apostles some to be Pastors Doctors Ergo they were diuers offices and the same were not Apostles and Pastors or Bishops for both are all one The offices were much different Apostles were immediatly called of God Bishops and Pastors were ordayned by the Apostles the Apostles calling was general ouer the whole world the Pastors were obliged to their dioces parishes particular Churches the office of the Apostles was extraordinarie but for a time the calling of Pastors was to endure euer in the Church Wherfore it can in no wise be that the Apostles were Bishops of any certaine places Irenaeus saith that Fundata ecclesia beati apostoli Lino officiū episcopatus iniungunt the Church of Rome once founded the holy Apostles layd the charge of the Bishopricke vpon Linus Whereby it appeareth that they onely reteyned their Apostleship inioyned them of Christ Tunstal ex Fox pag. 1066. It had therefore been contrarie to the commaundement of Christ who sayd Ite in vniuersum mundum goe into all the world if they should haue left their calling and bound themselues to any peculiar Church Ergo we conclude that neither Peter nor Paul were Bishops of Rome THE FOVRTH QVESTION WHETHER THE Bishop of Rome be the true successor of S. Peter The Papists error 40 THey doe generally hold that the Bishops of Rome being lineally descended by succession from Peter they haue the same primacie apostolike authoritie iurisdiction ouer the whole Church which Peter had Bellar. lib. 2. de pont c. 12. They are very barren and scant of arguments in this place to maintaine and vphold this succession by and in the end the Iesuite runneth to tradition and at the length he thus concludeth that it is not de iure diuino it is not necessarie by the lawe of God that the Romane Bishop should be Peters successor but it dependeth onely vpon the ordinance of Peter and is proued by tradition not diduced out of scripture That it was necessarie for Peter to haue a successor they say it is proued out of scripture which we also graunt that all faithfull Pastors and Ministers are the Apostles successors though they haue not their plenarie and Apostolike power but that the Pope ought to bee and is his successor it standeth vpon tradition We see then the grounds of their opinion scripture they haue none but blind tradition vnlesse therefore they could bring better stuffe for the Papall succession we will not spend any time in confuting nothing The Protestants THat the Pope or Bishop of Rome neither can is or ought to be S. Peters successor in his high and Apostolike authoritie primacie and iurisdiction ouer the whole Church which Peter himselfe neuer had thus we declare it 1 The Pope though hee were Peters successor yet can hee not receiue that from him which he neuer had but Peter had neuer any such primacie of power as we haue shewed before Quaest. 1.2 Ergo he is not here in his successor 2 That primacie which Peter had could not bee conueyed to any other namely his primacie of confession which he first of all the Apostles did vtter concerning Christ proceeding from faith did adhere so to his person that it could not bee deriued to any successor of his for Peters faith was a proper adiunct to himselfe Argument Tonstalli Fox pag. 1066. Agayne how can he haue the Apostolike authoritie being not an Apostle But an Apostle he is not for Christ onely made Apostles the Apostles did not ordayne other Apostles Argum. Nili 3 He succeedeth not Peter rightly in place for seeing Peter sate at Antioch why may not that Church challenge succession as well as Rome Why might not also other Churches haue Apostolike succession as Alexandria from Peter and Marke Herusalem from Iames Constantinople from Andrew Further they haue no certaine succession from Peter Tertullian maketh Clement the next successor to Peter Optatus first nameth Linus then Clement Irenaeus after Peter placeth Linus and Cletus and Clement in the fourth What certaintie therefore can they haue of so vncertaine succession Fulk annot in Rom. 16. sect 4. 4 It skilleth not who commeth in the place roome of the Apostles They that will be their true successors must followe their example and walke in their steps teaching their doctrine and embracing their holie vertues Wherfore the Pope is not Peters right successor swaruing both from his doctrine example Non sanctorum filij sunt qui tenent loca sanctorum sed qui exercent opera eorū They are not the children of the Saints which occupie the same places but they which doe their workes Lambert So Bernard writing to Eugenius chargeth him that in respect of his pompe and pride he did rather succeede Constantine then Peter Iohann Huss pag. 610. 5 All good Bishops and Pastors are as well the Apostles successors as the Pope nay rather then he being a wicked man Iohn Huss articul 4. Fox pag. 590. Lambert pag. 1120. Nay they haue greater and more excellent titles then to be called the Apostles successors for those that walke in obedience vnto Gods commandements our Sauiour calleth them his sisters kinsfolkes and brethren Math. 12.50 Ergo the Pope is not the right successor of Peter Lastly of this matter Augustine thus writeth Cathedra tibi quid fecit ecclesiae Romanae in qua Petrus sedit in qua hodie Anastasius sedet vel ecclesiae Hyerosolymitanae in qua Iacobus sedit in qua hodie Iohannes sedet What hath the Sea of Rome done vnto thee wherein sometime Peter sate where Anastasius now sitteth or what hath the Church or chaire of Ierusalem committed where
world part 8. Which cannot agree to the Pope Ergo he is not Antichrist Answere To these eight arguments we haue before answered seuerally shewing how fabulous ridiculous and impossible our aduersaries assertions are without ground of scripture shewe of reason or colour of argument Wherefore we will not trouble the reader with needlesse repetitions desiring him to haue recourse to that which hath been alreadie sayd The Protestants THat the Pope of Rome is very Antichrist and that all the qualities and properties which the scripture describeth Antichrist by doe fitly agree vnto his person and that we are not therefore to expect or looke for any other Antichrist Thus by testimonie of scripture and sufficient reasons deduced out of the same we trust it shall appeare to all men 1 The first place of scripture is Daniel 11. where many notes and markes are declared proper to Antichrist yet especiallie set foorth to describe Antiochus Epiphanes who might be very well a type and figure of Antichrist who was then to come 1 vers 36. It is sayd He shall doe what him listeth This is most true of the Pope his will must stande for reason Distinct. 96. cap. satis If the Pope should drawe infinite soules to hell no man is to say vnto him Sir why doe you so Distinct. 40 Heere Bellarmine hath but this poore shift to say that it is meant onely of publike iudgement that no man is by authoritie to call the Pope to account but yet a brotherly admonition may bee vsed But who seeth not that the words are generall Nemo debet ei dicere No man ought to say vnto him neither Iudge nor other 2 Hee shall magnifie himselfe agaynst GOD and speake blasphemous things agaynst GOD hath not the Pope done so Of him it is sayd that GOD and the Pope haue but one Consistorie I am able to doe almost all that GOD can doe Fox pag. 785. articl 192. I am aboue all and in all Hostiens Nay that Dominion and Lordship which Christ had in earth but habitu in habite the Pope hath actu in act and in deede Agayne as we reade the earth is the Lordes and the fulnesse thereof and as Christ sayth all power is giuen mee in heauen and in earth so is it to bee affirmed that the Vicar of Christ hath power on things celestiall terrestriall infernall apud Fox pag. 791. col 1. Now let the discreet reader iudge whether this fellowe doe not magnifie himselfe and speake blasphemously agaynst God 3 Hee shall prosper till the wrath bee accomplished So hath the Pope had but too good successe hee hath subdued Emperours and made them his seruants trode vpon their neckes made them serue at his table crowned them with his feete made them hold his stirrup and leade his horse by the bridle But wee doe hope that his date is out and that hee shall prosper no longer 4 vers 37. He shall not care for the God of his fathers No more doth the Pope for he hath inuented and erected a newe breaden god which he worshippeth hangeth vp in Churches carrieth about in procession being but a peece of bread This breaden god a might his forefathers neuer knew 5 Hee shall not care for the desires of women So hee prohibiteth lawfull marriage permitteth adulteries and the vnnaturall lust of Sodomites Bellarmine first denyeth the text which is faithfully translated according to the Hebrew Secondly he sayth the place is meant literally and properly of Antiochus who was giuen to the pleasures of women Answere First if it be meant literallie of Antiochus then can it not be meant literallie of your Antichrist If Antiochus be but a type of Antichrist then can you not necessarilie conclude out of this place for types prooue not vnlesse they be diuine that is appoynted of God to be types which you can not shewe for this place see then the best arguments that you haue for your Antichrist out of the prophecies of Daniel and Ezechiel are proued nothing worth Secondly as Antiochus was giuen to vnlawfull desires of women so is the Pope yet might he be an enemie to chast and holy marriage and so is the Pope And by the way let it bee noted that the Iesuite picketh quarrels with scripture and maketh it false for the text sayth He that is Antiochus shall not care for the desires of women Yes sayth the Iesuite he shall be giuen to the pleasures of women cleane contrarie to the text Bellarm. cap. 21. 6 vers 38. He shall honor his god Mauzzim that is a god of power and riches with gold siluer precious stones Both of these are most true of the popish religion for their god hath brought them great riches lands treasure possession by their idolatrous Masses they haue greatly enriched themselues wherein their breaden god playeth the chiefe part and therefore they doe worship him agayne with gold siluer precious stones what rich Corporals and Altar-clothes Copes Vestiments of veluet silke wrought with gold are seene in their Churches what gilding of Roodes and Roodlofts garnishing of Idols what rich Crucifixes of siluer of gold beset with pearle and precious stones This description therefore of Daniel as you see doth in euery respect agree with the conditions and properties of Antichrist of Rome Argument Illyrici Secondly Saint Paules description in euery poynt also is verified in the Pope First He shall exalt himselfe aboue God and all that is called God 2. Thess. 2.4 So the Pope challengeth the full authoritie of Christ as wee haue shewed before and exalteth himselfe aboue Emperours which are called gods vpon earth yea they haue taken the iust proportion of inequalitie betweene the Pope and Emperour for the Pope is 47. degrees aboue the Emperour as the Sunne is 47. degrees bigger then the Moone Innocent 3. in decretalib 2 He shall sit in the temple that is in the Church so the Pope nameth himselfe head of the Church and hath the keyes as he braggeth both of heauen and hell Therefore the Turke cannot bee that Antichrist because he is out of the Church and so in truth is the Pope but yet he challengeth to him and his the name of the Church 3 The mysterie wrought in Paules time and afterward encreased so not long after the Apostles time the Bishops of Rome began to lift vp their heads aboue other Churches as Zozimus falsified the Councel of Nice and sent to the 6. Councel of Carthage to haue it there confirmed that it might be lawfull to send vp appeales to Rome 4 Antichrist shall come with lying signes So hath the Pope done as experience proueth and we haue shewed before 5 vers 11. God shall send strong delusions that they shall beleeue lyes And in time of Poperie men indeede were so strongly deluded that the father persecuted the sonne the sonnes set fire to their father yea the husband was made a witnesse agaynst the wife the wife agaynst her husband and seruants accused their masters These things are
saepe tam diu clamatur vt fiat in Psal. 63. What medicine or plaister wilt thou buie to heale thy sinne Behold euen now while I preach vnto thee change thy heart and it is already done which we so often call vpon you to be done See then by the preaching of the word our heart is chaunged our life amended and our sinne remitted THE SECOND PART TO WHOM THE authoritie of the keyes is committed The Papists error 74 THe authoritie and power of excommunication say they is not in the whole Church but onely in the Prelates neither was the power of binding and loosing giuen vnto the whole church but in their own name not in the name or right of the Church doe the pastors and Prelates exercise this power Remist 2. 1. Corinth 5. sect 3. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Clericis cap. 7. The Church is sayd to binde and loose because the Prelates doe binde loose as a man is said to speake and see though he onely speake with the tongue and see with the eyes 1 They seeme to proue it by S. Paules example 1. Corinth 5. I absent in bodie but present in spirit haue decreed S. Paul vseth here his Apostolike power in sending his letters and Mandatum to haue the incestuous person excommunicate Ergo the right was in him and not in the Church and so consequently in the Bishops his successors Ans. First S. Paul sendeth no Mandatum but sheweth his Apostolike power in decreeing the incestuous person worthy of excommunication and requiring the same to be executed by the Church Fulk 1. Corin. 5. sec. 2. Secondly though Paul gaue the sentence yet was it done both in the power of Christ and the name of the whole Church for he had decreed onely that he should be excommunicate it was not actually done but to the due performing thereof there is required the congregating of the Church in Christs name the presence of Paul in spirit by his apostolike power that it should be done in the name of Christ. Al this sheweth that Paul gaue sentence in the name of the whole Church 2 Paul they say by the preeminent power of his Ministerie pardoneth the incestuous person whom he had excommunicate Rhemist argument in 1. ad Corinth Ans. The text is plaine that he consenteth the Church should pardon him 2. Corinth 2.10 To whom you forgiue any thing I forgiue also Heere not Paul onely but the whole Church pardoneth Fulk ibid. 3 The Iesuites simile may bee returned vpon his owne head for as the eye and tongue in the bodie are but instruments of the life and power of the soule which quickneth the whole bodie so the gouernours of the Church do execute the discipline of the Church by the spirit of Christ which is giuen to the whole bodie The Protestants THe authoritie of excōmunication pertaineth to the whole Church although the execution and iudgement thereof to auoyd confusion be committed to the gouernours of the Church which exercise that authoritie as in the name of Christ so in the name of the whole Church Fulk totidem verbis annot 1. Cor. 5. sect 3. 1 Math. 18.17 If he wil not heare thee tell the Church this place proueth that although the exercising of the keyes be referred to the gouernours of the Church yet the authoritie and right is in the whole Church for the keyes were giuen to the whole Church The pastors and gouernours though they be excellent and principall members of the Church yet are they improperly called the Church Argument Illyrici 2 We conclude the same also out of S. Paules words 1. Cor. 2.21 All things are yours whether Paul Apollos or Cephas whether things present or things to come and ye are Christs and Christ Gods Ergo whatsoeuer power is in the Church it is the Churches not onely the common vse and the benefite thereof because it may be answered that although the keyes be onely granted to the Prelates yet they vse them to the good of the Church but the right also and possession thereof euen as the Church is the inheritance and proper possession of Christ. 3 Augustine consenteth Ecclesia quae fundatur in Christo claues ab eo regni coelorum accepit in Petro. Tract in Iohann 124. The Church which is founded vpon Christ receiued in Peter the keyes of the kingdome of heauen But the whole Church and not onely the Pastors is founded and builded vpon Christ Ergo. THE THIRD PART WHETHER THE PASTORS of the Church haue any absolute power to remit sinnes otherwise then as Ministers onely The Papistes error 75 THey spare not to say that Priests haue full right to remit sinnes and are not ministers onely thereof and dispensers but haue full power as Christ had and he that doubteth of their right herein may as well doubt whether Christ had authoritie as man to remit sinnes Rhemist annot Iohn 20. sect 3. And againe they call it an expresse power and commission yea a wonderfull power which is giuen vnto Priests to remit sinnes and therfore it followeth necessarily that men should submit themselues to their iudgement for release of their sinnes Annot. Iohn 20. sect 5. 1 They reason thus out of our Sauiours owne words Iohn 20.21 As my father hath sent me so I send you He sheweth his fathers commission giuen to himselfe and then in plaine termes most amply imparteth the same to his Apostles But Christ had full right to remit sinnes Ergo also the Apostles and their successors for they haue the same power that Christ had Rhemist annot Iohn 20. sect 3. Ans. First it is great presumption and spoken without any ground to say that Christ by sending his Apostles into the world gaue them as full large and ample commission as he himselfe had for neither the Pope in whom remaineth as they say the Apostolike authoritie by their owne confession can doe all that Christ did as to ordaine and institute Sacraments and Christ say they might forgiue sinnes without the Sacraments which the Pope cannot doe and so consequently neither the Apostles whose full iurisdiction he hath in this behalfe Bellarm. de pontif lib. 5. cap. 4. Secondly the power therefore here granted to the Apostles is in the name of Christ to declare and pronounce remission of sinnes according to the wil of God not properly in their owne power to release or absolue sinners 2 He breathed vpon them and gaue them the holy Ghost vers 22. Therefore he that denieth the Priests authoritie to forgiue sinnes he must denye the holy Ghost to be God and not to haue power to remit sinnes Rhem. ibid sect 4. Ans. What a blasphemous consequence is this The holy Ghost hath absolute power to forgiue sinnes Ergo the Apostles also and all other Priests haue the same power First by this meanes they make no difference betweene the fulnes of power in our Sauiour Christ and the communication of that power to other Ministers of Christ it is sayd that the
of euill and euill of good Hee that iustifieth the wicked and condemneth the iust they are both an abomination to GOD Prouer. 17.15 Wherefore a priest binding a penitent man and loosing a wicked man doth flatly transgresse the law and rule of Gods word neither shall his sentence be ratified in heauen 2 In saying that whosoeuers sinnes the priest bindeth or looseth his sentence standeth in effect before God they must needes admit one or both of these absurdities either to grant that a Priest cannot erre in dispensing of the â—eyes which were too shamefull a saying to giue so great a priuiledge to euery ignorant and simple priest such as their Church hath great store of which no mortall man can haue Saint Paul giueth warning to Timothie who was more then a common or ordinarie minister that he lay not his handes sodaynly vpon any ad 1. Timoth. 5. vers 22. But if Timothie so excellent a man had been free from erring in executing his function this exhortation of Saynt Paule had been needlesse and superfluous Or else they must say that the iudgement of mens soules is committed vnto them for if looke how they pronounce vpon men on earth euen so it fareth with them before GOD then the saluation and damnation of men dependeth of their sentence But the scripture sayth Doe not iudge thy brother for we shal al appeare before the iudgement seate of Christ Rom. 14.10 Men therefore are not iudges to pronounce who are saued or damned but the iudgement must be committed to Christ. But who knoweth not that the popish Church doth arrogate vnto themselues this power to define who are Saynts in heauen and whose soules are tormented in hell Thus they dealt with Iohn Husse hauing condemned him they set a crowne of paper vpon his head pictured with diuels saying vnto him Now we commit thy soule to the diuel At the burning of that worthie seruant of God and blessed martyr Iohn Frith one Doctor Cooke a fowle mouthed papist bid the people to pray no more for him then they would for a dogge And thus they take the Lords office out of his hand in taking vpon them to be iudges of men 3 I will conclude with Augustines words he sayth that sinnes are forgiuen or not forgiuen non secundum arbitrium hominum sed secundum arbitrium dei orationes sanctorum not after the will and pleasure of men but according to the will of God and at the prayers of deuout and holie men THE FIFT QVESTION CONCERNING the lawfulnesse of mariage in Ministers THis question hath three partes first whether it bee expedient or requisite that all Ministers should be tied vnto single life Secondly whether men twice maried are to be admitted into the ministerie Thirdly whether Ministers hauing entred into holie orders ought to renounce the societie of their wiues before maried THE FIRST PART WHETHER IT BE lawfull for Ministers to marrie The Papists error 77 BEllarmine confesseth that single life is not imposed vpon Ministers by the lawe of God for there is no precept either in the olde or new testament that forbiddeth Ministers to marrie but it is a positiue law of the Church most ancient and most iust kept and obserued euen since the Apostles time And therefore it is not now lawfull for Ministers to marrie cap. 18. lib. de Clericis 1 1. Timoth. 2.3 the Apostle sayth that no man that warreth entangleth himselfe with the affayres of this life But to bee maried and to haue care of houshold are counted amongst the affayres and busines of this life Ergo a Minister who is the Lords souldier ought not to entangle himselfe therewith Bellarmin Ans. First the Iesuite before confessed that they had no scripture against Ministers mariage how is it then that now he pleadeth scripture Secondly we must put the Iesuite in minde of his owne exposition of this place lib. 5. de pontif cap. 10. where this place being alleadged against the temporall dominion of Ecclesiasticall persons he answereth that this place onely forbiddeth negotiationes and mercimonia merchandise and traffick in the worlde not regimen politicum not politicall regiment If then the politicall care of a citie prouince or common-wealth be no impediment in his iudgement to the spirituall warfare much lesse without all question is the domesticall care of one familie the charge of wife and children Thirdly we vtterly denie that mariage is an hinderance or let to the calling of Ministers nay we say that it is an helpe and comfort to those that haue not the proper gifte of continencie 2 The Iesuite giueth diuers instances wherein mariage is a let and impediment to ministers As it hindreth their prayer their preaching their almes and liberalitie to the poore for they haue wife and children to care for Bellarmin Answere First belike you esteeme of mariage as of an vnholie and vnpure thing that a man can neither pray nor doe the office of a Christian performing the duetie to his wife and indeede one of your companions calleth mariage a prophanation of sacred orders Greg. Martin discouer cap. 15. sect 11. Whereas the Apostle calleth it an honourable state Heb. 13. and it was instituted in Paradise whereas before the fall of man there was no vncleane thing Secondly we denie not but that abuse of mariage both in ministers and other lay-men is an impediment to all holie actions and therefore Saint Paul giueth generall Counsell to all both ministers and others that they which haue wiues should bee as though they had none 1. Cor. 7.29 that is should liue soberly in mariage and not giue themselues to the wantonnes of the flesh Thirdly neither doth mariage hinder hospitalitie for Saint Paul requiring that a minister should be harborous 1. Tim. 3.2 giueth also rules concerning the gouernement of his familie his wife and children vers 4.11 For to whom may he better commit the care of houshold affayres then to his wife And that familie which is guided by a carefull godly huswife we see by experience to yeeld more reliefe to the poore and giue entertainement to strangers then those houses which haue none And where it is obiected that Ministers will care altogether for their children It hath been seene that single priests in time of poperie haue been more couetous and greedie to enrich their kinred then maried Ministers haue cared for the prouision of their children 3 Single life by the Apostle is preferred before the maried estate and therefore fittest for Ministers for he that is maried careth for the things of the world 1. Cor. 7 33. Rhemist Ans. First single life is preferred before mariage in all men not onely in Ministers And therefore as lay-men are not bound to single life though it be in it self more conuenient so neither ought ministers to bee 2. Though a thing in it selfe be best yet is it not vniuersally best for euery man as riches are better then pouertie because they are Gods blessing
better argument can we haue against this Popish decree then the great vncleannes and foule enormities that haue been brought by the meanes thereof into the Church In the time of Gregorie the first who enioyned his Clergie to liue single commaunding on a time his seruants to catch him some fish out of his Motes and Ponds in stead of fish they brought vnto him sixe thousand heads of yong children whereupon he fetching a great sigh with himselfe commended then the saying of the Apostle It is better to marrie then to burne Bellarmine hath no better answere then to denie the storie which notwithstanding is found in the Epistle of Huldericus Bishop of Augusta which he sent to Pope Nicholas Fox pag. 1155. In Anselmes time after the restraint of Ministers marriage great rumors and complaint was brought to him of the execrable vice of Sodomitrie which began to raigne in the Clergie Pope Pius the second saide hee sawe manie waightie causes why wiues should bee taken away from Priests but he saw more why they should be restored to them againe Bishop Iewell Apol. cap. 8. diuis 3. Bernard saith Tolle de Ecclesia honorabile coniugium c. Take from the Church honorable Matrimonie shall you not replenish it with incestuous persons concubinaries Sodomiticall vices Hereupon the popish Catholikes seeing their owne infirmitie began thus to salue vp the matter Si non castè tamen cautè if thou deale not chastly yet deale charily Yea they are not ashamed thus to write If any of the Priests should bee found imbracing of a woman it must bee expounded and presupposed that hee doth it to blesse her I but saith Bellarmine these are the abuses of single life will you condemne a good thing because of the abuse by the same reason saith he coelum terra tollenda sunt Heauen and earth must be taken away because they were abused of the heathen and taken for Gods cap. 21. Answere First wee say not that these bee the fruites of single life which Saint Paul commendeth in all those that haue the gift but of this co-acted and constrained Popish Virginitie which is imposed indifferently vpon all and cannot haue any good vse secondlie when you can proue that restraining of Ministers marriage is of Gods ordinance as it is certaine Heauen and earth are of his making then wee will grant vnto you that it may haue a right vse and for the abuse ought not vtterly to be abolished 4 Lastly Augustine saith Quae nubere volunt ideo non nubunt quia impunè non possunt melius nuberent quà m vrerentur id est quà m occulta flamma concupiscentiae in ipsa conscientia vastarentur Those Virgins which would marrie but cannot because of restraint and reproch might better marrie then burne that is to say then with the secret flame of concupiscence to be wasted and consumed in their conscience Wherefore it followeth that all they both Ministers votaries Virgines that haue not power to absteine should doe better for all their profession and vow to marrie then to burne THE SECOND PART WHETHER any ought to bee admitted to the Ministerie after second marriage The Papists THey denie not but that Bishops and Ministers hauing been once married error 78 are rightly ordeyned so that afterward they doe not companie with their wiues but they which haue been either themselues twice married or haue married a widdow which had a husband before are vtterlie vncapable of holy orders Bellarmine cap. 23. Rhemist Timoth. 3. sect 4. and this they call Bigamie 1 They reason thus out of Saint Pauls words 1. Timoth. 4.2 A Bishop must be the husband of one wife that is say they that no kinde a way was Bigamus or had two wiues either at once or one after another And they proue their interpretation thus First as Saint Paul describeth a widow of the Church 1. Timoth. 5.9 that hath been the wife of one husband so here hee saith of a Bishop that he should be the husband of one wife but that is meant successiuè of one husband after another for it was neuer seene that one woman should haue more husbands then one at once nor neuer suffered either amongst the Iewes or Gentiles therefore it must be so taken here a husband of one wife that is who hath been but once married as it is taken there a wife of one husband that neuer had more not onely simul at once but not successiuè not successiuely one after another Bellarmine cap. 23. Ans. First there were many women both among the Iewes and Gentiles that had forsaken their first husbands and were vnlawfully coupled to others and so had moe husbands at once and likewise many men that had done the like to their wiues but afterward repented and were conuerted to the Christian faith but yet were not admitted to any publike office in the Church because of their former infamous life Of such the Apostle speaketh in both these places and not of those that married one wife or one husband after another It is therefore great boldnes and a greater vntruth to say that there were none such heard of in those dayes for although it were neither lawfull then nor now yet both many such were heard of in those dayes and it were no hard matter to finde out some now among the papists that haue had more then one wife at once Secondly he is not to be counted Bigamus or Digamus that is coupled and ioyned to one wife after another lawfullie but he that vnlawfully at once enioyeth more then one Fulk Annot. Timoth. 5. sect 6. cap. 3. sect 4. 2 Againe say they the high Priest in the lawe was not permitted to marrie a widow Leuit. 21.13 Which lawe being obserued in the high Priest ought much more to be kept now Rhemist Answere That lawe concerning the high Priest did onely appertaine to himselfe who was a figure of Christ neither can it be extended to the Ministers of the Gospell no more then any other partes of his office that were peculiar to that state and calling Fulk Annot. 1. Timoth. 3. sect 4. The Protestants THat it is not by the word of God forbidden that any man should marrie the second yea the third time after the decease of his wife neither that hee is to be counted vnchast or giuen to wantonnes in so doing much lesse hee that in his first marriage taketh a widow neither that to haue been twise married ought to be a barre or a stop from entring into the state and calling of the Ministerie if otherwise the man be qualified and furnished with sufficient graces for that calling thus it is proued 1 They that cut off such as haue been twise married from behauing any calling in the Church doe sauour of the heresie of Montanus into the which also Tertulliane fell who condemned second marriage for if once marriage be no impediment nor preiudice to him that is to bee ordained but
Confirmation And thus they preferre their owne inuentions before the ordinance of God no Sacrament before a Sacrament Augustine sheweth what the Sacrament of Vnction is Vnctionis sacramentum est virtus ipsa inuisibilis vnctio inuisibilis spiritus sanctus The sacrament of vnction is the inuisible vertue the inuisible anointing the holy spirite What is become now of your sacrament of vnction THE FOVRTH PART OF THE RITES and ceremonies of Confirmation The Papistes THe ceremonies which they commonly vse in Confirmation are these First error 47 the Bishop must breathe vpon the pot or cruze of Chrisme Seōcdly he saluteth it in these words Aue sanctum Chrisma Haile holy Chrisme Thirdly he giueth a kisse Fourthly he striketh him that is cōfirmed with his hand to teach him patience Fiftly his forehead is bound about least the Chrisme should run downe which teacheth him not to lose the grace of God Sixtly seuen daies together he must neither wash his head nor face And these with such like ridiculous toyes are practised amongst them Bellarm. cap. 13. lib. de confirmat The Protestants 1. SOme of these ceremonies we condemne as ridiculous as the breathing vpon the oyle the striking of the party confirmed which light gestures become not the grauity of the Ministers of the Gospell all things should be done in the Church in decent and comely order 1. Cor. 14.40 Secondly one of them is meerely Idolatrous to salute the oyle as the Angel saluted Mary to say Aue All haile vnto it making an Idoll of it being a thing without sense or life Thirdly all of them are superstitious hauing mysticall and typicall significations and shadowes which agreeth not with the nature of the Gospel for all shadows are now past the body being come Col. 2.17 Lastly they are superfluous cumbersome and burdenous as Augustine saith Ipsam religionem quam Deus paucissimis sacramentis liberam esse voluit onerib premunt They oppresse religion with the burden of ceremonies which God hath left free in few sacramēts Againe who seeth not how thus by their own traditions they doe euacuate the ordinance of God for in stead of catechizing and instructing of the youth in the principles and foundation of religion as of repentance from dead workes faith toward God of the resurrection and eternall iudgement Hebre. 6.2.3 they haue brought in nothing else but oyling greazing annointing of them breathing vpon them crossing and such like and whereas S. Paul giueth Parents a charge to bring vp their Children in the instruction of God Ephes. 6.4 They bid them bring their Children to be anointed crossed chrismated as they call it and they haue done enough THE SECOND QVESTION of Orders THe seuerall partes of this question are these First whether it be a Sacramēt Secondly of the efficacie and vertue thereof Thirdly of the ceremonies THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE receiuing of orders be a Sacrament The Papists THat holy Orders are a sacrament rightly and properly so called it was decreed in the Tridentine Councell sess 23. canon 3. And that not onely the error 48 three higher degrees of Priesthood Deaconship subdeaconship but the foure inferiour orders of Exorcistae Acoluthi Lectores Ostiarij doe belong vnto the same sacrament of Orders and are sacraments as well as the other Bellarm cap. 8. lib. de sacram ordinis Argum. 1. Timoth. 4.14 Despise not that gift which was giuen thee through prophesie with the laying on of hands Holy orders giue grace by an externall ceremonie and worke Ergo it is a Sacrament Rhemist in hunc locum Ans. 1. It cannot be proued out of this place that imposition of hands giueth grace for this was an extraordinary gift which S. Paul speaketh of and doth not alwaies follow imposition of hands Secondly this gift was not giuen by the very ceremony of imposition of hands but through prophesie and reuelation of the holy Ghost for it was reuealed vnto the Church by the spirite of prophecie that Timothie was a chosen vessell of God therefore S. Paul saith That worthie thing which is committed vnto thee keepe through the holy Ghost 2. Tim. 1.14 The holy ghost was both the conferrer of that grace and the preseruer of it Imposition thē of hands was but an outward signe of the presence of Gods spirit vpon those that were lawfully ordeined for al vpon whom hands were laid receiued not the holy ghost but such only as were appointed of God And therefore the Apostle chargeth Timothie to lay hands sodenly on no man 1. Timoth. 5.22 which caueat was not needfull if vpon whomsoeuer he had laid his hands they should immediately receiue the holy Ghost The Protestants YOur seuen popish orders we do not at all receiue into the church much lesse can we abide that they should be sacraments The lawfull ordeining of Pastors teachers and Deacons we doe acknowledge but no sacrificing Priesthoode nor no ministring Deaconship at the Altar such orders as we haue notwithstanding we doe not take to be Sacraments much lesse yours that are vtterly to be abolished Argum. 1. Sacraments must haue their institution from Christ so haue not your orders for Christ instituted onely Apostles and Disciples Presbyters and Deacons were founded by the Apostles who notwithstāding had no commission to constitute new Sacraments As for the other fiue orders of Subdeacons Readers Acoluthi Exorcistes doore keepers they are neither read in Scripture nor ordeined of the Apostles nor heard of for many yeeres after Secondly your Sacrament hath neither outward element nor word of institution if you say laying on of hands is the externall signe we answere that the visible signe in a Sacrament must not onely be an externall action but a materiall element as water in Baptisme and bread and wine in the Lords Supper The forme you say is in these wordes pronounced by the Bishop Accipite potestatem offerendi sacrificium Receiue ye power to offer sacrifice Bellarm. ca. 9. We answere againe that this sacrificing office hath no foundation in Scripture the Ministers of the Gospell are called dispensers of Gods Mysteries namely of the word and Sacraments 1. Corinth 4.1 Ministers for Christ not sacrificers of Christ wherefore neither haue ye any word of institution and consequently no Sacrament And I pray you tell me if you will make euery one of your orders a Sacrament then must you needes haue as many Sacraments as there are orders and so shall you haue sixe Sacraments more then you thought for you doe distinguish all the orders in office and forme of consecration one from another and therefore they cannot all make one Sacrament Augustine saith Christus Sacramentis numer◠paucissimis societatem populi colligauit Christ hath ioyned together his people with most fewe Sacraments and then he nameth Baptisme and the Communion Et si quid aliud in Scripturis canonicis commendatur and if any other be commended in Scripture Ergo there is no Sacrament of orders because it is not found in
of them hold great scorne to be named Papists yet I see no reason why they should so doe The Rhemists like this name well enough because it is not deriued from any one man but from their Popes and chiefe Bishops to whom say they we are bound to cleaue in Religion and obey in all things So to be a Papist say they is to be a Christian man a child of the Church and a subiect to Christs Vicar Seeing then this name pleaseth their ghostly fathers of Rhemes so well there is no reason why they should mislike it and therefore we will vse it still as best expressing their profession who are pinned vpon the Popes sleeue for their faith and Religion As likewise the name of Protestants we refuse not which name I thinke tooke beginning in England in King Henry the eights daies when there was a generall protestation made in the name of the King the whole Councel and Clergie of England against the Pope In the which protestation thus we finde England hath taken her leaue of popish crafts for euer neuer to be deluded with them hereafter Romane Bishops haue nothing to doe with English people the one doth not traffique with the other at the least though they will haue to deale with vs we will none of their marchandise none of their stuffe Thus we see how a Papist and a Protestant are defined A Papist is he that cleaueth to the Pope in Religion and is obedient to him in all things A Protestant is he that professeth the Gospell of Iesus Christ and hath renounced the iurisdiction of the sea of Rome and the forced and vnnaturall obedience to the Pope These names therefore as best fitting both our professions seeing no cause to the contrary I purpose euery where to vse and retaine throughout this Treatise I would here finish and make an end of this Preface but that first I must make the Reader acquainted with the order and methode which I haue followed in setting downe the controuersies The whole bodie therefore of the controuersies betweene the Papists and vs our worthie and learned countriman D. Whitakers hath digested and disposed into a singular Methode the which I haue propounded to my selfe throughout this discourse to obserue The heresies and errours therefore of Poperie doe either impugne the offices of Christ with his benefites and merites or his person the most of them are of the first kinde some errours they maintaine against his person but not many First the name of Christ sheweth his offices for it signifieth annointed he was annointed to be our Prophet King and Priest Iesus betokeneth a Sauiour and setteth forth the benefites of our redemption and saluation First then of his offices and then of the benefites that do arise and spring thereof The first office of our Sauiour Christ is to be our heauenly teacher and Prophet His heauenly doctrine is conteined no where els but in the Scriptures The first generall controuersie then must be of the Scriptures where there arise many questions as of the Canonicall bookes of the Scripture of the vulgare translation of Scripture of the perspicuitie and plainenesse authoritie interpretation and perfection of Scripture with such other The second office of Christ is to be our King and because his kingdome is his Church here we are to handle the controuersies about the Church Which is either the Church Militant vpon earth or the Church Triumphant in heauen The Church militant is to be considered either in generall where these questions are moued what the Church is whether it be visible or not by what markes it is knowen whether it may erre what authoritie it hath Then the parts of the Church which are either assembled and gathered together as in generall Councels where these doubts must be discussed whether generall Councels be necessary by whom they ought to be summoned whether they can erre whether the Pope be aboue Councels or not and such like Or els the parts of the church are seuerally to be considered and they are of three sortes either the chiefe parts the middle and meane parts the lowest and basest parts of the Church The chiefe member they make to be the Pope where there are many questions and of great waight as whether the regiment of the Church be Monarchicall whether Peter were appointed head of the Church whether the Pope be Peters successour whether he may erre whether the Pope be Antichrist with such other The middle parts are their Clerkes which are either secular as they call them which haue any Ecclesiasticall function where we must enquire of their election degrees of their single life and such like the Regular Clerkes are their Monkes and other of that profession where we must entreat of vowes of their solitarie life their habite their Canonicall houres with other matters The lowest members are the lay men where the questions about the Ciuill Magistrate must be handled as whether he may put heretikes to death whether he haue any power and authoritie in Ecclesiasticall matters and hetherto of the Militant Church The triumphant Church consisteth either of Angels or other Saints departed Concerning the Angels we dissent about the orders and degrees of them about their ministerie and office and whether they are to be prayed vnto Concerning the Saints departed there are many questions in controuersie as of Purgatory Lymbus Patrum whether they are to be praied vnto of their Reliques Images Temples Holie daies and such like The third office of Christ is his Priesthood whereof there are two parts his intercession where we must enquire whether Christ be the onely Mediatour of intercession and his Sacrifice where the maine and great controuersie concerning the Sacraments doth offer it selfe for by the Sacraments the power and efficacie of the death of Christ is deriued vnto vs. Here first we must entreate of the Sacraments in generall as of their number their efficacie the difference betweene the Sacraments of the olde and new Testament then in particular as of Baptisme and the seuerall questions thereto belonging of the Lords Supper where also the great controuersie about their Idolatrous sacrifice of the Masse and other necessary questions must be handled Then follow in order fiue other popish Sacraments to be considered of confirmation penaunce extreme vnction orders matrimony And these are the controuersies concerning the offices of Christ. The controuersies which concerne the benefits of our redemption with other seuerall questions are these as of predestination of sin of the law of free will of faith of good workes the particular questions are set forth at large in other places Lastly there remaine some questions about the person of Christ 〈◊〉 whether he be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is God of himselfe whether he encreased in wisedome whether he suffered in soule whether he merited for himselfe with such other Thus haue we the summe body of Antichristiā doctrine which we purpose by the grace of God to goe
lawfull for any to inuent allegories of scripture as it seemeth good to them selues THE SECOND PART OF THE SIXTH QVEtion to whom the chief authoritie to expound Scripture is committed The Papistes error 9 IT was decreed in the Councell of Trent that scripture should be expoūded as the Church expoundeth it and according to the common and consonant cōsent of the fathers Sect. 4. The Rhemistes say that the sense of the scriptures must be learned of the fathers and pastors of the Church Praefat. Sect. 18. If the fathers agree not the matter is referred to a generall Councell if there it be not determined we must haue recourse to the Pope and his Cardinals The Iesuite dare not referre the matter to the Pope alone to expound scripture but ioyneth the Colledge of Cardinals with him Bellarm. lib. 3. de script cap. 3. 1 They obiect that place Deut. 17.9 where the people are commaunded to resorte vnto the Priest or Iudge in doubtfull matters Ergo there ought to be a chief and supreme iudge in Ecclesiasticall matters Bellarm. We aunswere First here the ciuill Magistrate and the Iudge are ioyned together as ver 12. Wherefore if they will gather hereby that the Pope must be supreme Iudge in all Ecclesiasticall matters then the Emperour ought to be as well in ciuill Secōdly the text saith they shal come to the Priests ver 9. assigning many not to one onely Priest Thirdly they must iudge according to the law v. 11. not as they list thē selues Fourthly here is no mentiō made of doubts in interpreting scripture but of controuersies that may fall out betweene man and man either Ecclesiasticall to be decided by the Priest or ciuill by the Magistrate Fiftly we graunt that in euery country there ought be a supreme and high seate of iudgement for determining of controuersiall matters betweene men but it foloweth not that there should be a supreme iudge ouer the whole Church especially in such matters as this concerning the sense of the scriptures which i◠not commited to the iudgement of men neither is any such controuersie named in that palce ver 8. 2 Ecclesiastes 12.11 The wisemā cōpareth the wordes of the wise to nayles which are fastned geuen by one pastor Ergo the Pope is supreme iudge We aunswere the wise men are here vnderstood to be the Pastors and Ministers of Gods word but this one pastor signifieth neither the high Priest in the old law nor the Pope in the new but Iesus Christ the high shepheard for our soules What great boldnesse is this to attribute that to the Pope which is onely proper to Christ 3 They also picke out some places in the new Testament as Math. 16.19 to thee will I geue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Christ saith so to Peter Ergo the Pope hath authoritie to expound scripture We aunswere First by the keyes here is meant commission to preach the Gospell not onely to expound doubtes Secōdly they were geuen to all the Apostles not to Peter onely Math. 28. v. 18.19 Thirdly the Pope is not successor of Peter no more then any other godly Bishop nor so much vnlesse he folow Peters steps So they abuse that place Math. 18.17 he that will not heare the Church c. Ergo the Bishops and chief pastors must expound the doubt in scriptures Aunswere First our Sauiour speaketh here of the discipline of the Church of correctiōs and admonitions not of interpreting scripture which dependeth not vpō the will fantacie of Pope Cardinals or Popish Councels but must be tryed by the scriptures them selues Secondly we must geue eare to the Church but with a double condition we must be sure it is the Church of God secōdly we must not heare them cōtrary to the scriptures but so long as they do teach the doctrine of Christ. The Protestants WE haue a more compendious way to come to the vnderstanding of the scripture It were to lōg whē we doubt of any place to stay till we haue the generall consent of the pastors of the Church or to expect a generall Councell or go vp to Rome And it were to much to trouble the Popes grauitie with euery questiō The Lord hath shewed vs a more easie and ready way see that we neede not ascend to heauen or cōpasse the earth or passe the Alpes but the word of God is amongest vs the scriptures them selues and the spirite of God opening our harts do teach vs how to vnderstand them the interpretation of Scripture is not assigned to any succession of pastors or tryed to any place or persons Our arguments folow some few of them 1 That onely hath power to geue the sense of Scripture which doth beget vs faith the spirite onely by the Scriptures begetteth faith Rom. 10.17 faith commeth of hearing the word Ergo the spirit of God is the onely interpreter of scripture The proposition also is cleare for seeing the Scripture is the true sense and meaning therof if any should geue the sense of the scripture but that which worketh faith then vpon him should our faith be grounded If the Pope therefore geue the sense of Scripture and our faith ariseth of the Scripture vnderstood then our faith is builded vpon the Popes sense argum Whitach 2. 9. 2 The Scriptures cā not be interpreted but by the same spirit wherewith they were writtē but that spirite is found no where but in the Scriptures Ergo. The first part the Papistes them selues graunt the second is thus proued the spirite of the Apostles is not geuen by secret inspiration that sauoureth of Anabaptisme where is it thē to be found whether is it like that S. Peters spirite should be found in the Popes chaire or in his Epistles or if they haue S. Peters spirite where is S. Paules found but in his writings Yet it is all one spirite appeareth not els where but in the Scriptures where euery man may finde it as wel as the Pope the spirituall man iudgeth all things 1. Cor. 2.15 you haue an oyntment from him that is holy and you haue knowen all things and ver 27. you need not that any mā teach you By these places it is euident that euery faithfull man by the spirite of God may vnderstand the scriptures 3 The doctrine of the Church must be examined by the Scriptures Ergo the scriptures are not to stand to the iudgement of the Church The former part is proued by the example of the Berrheans Act. 17.11 If they did well in examining Paules doctrine much more may the decrees of the Pope Church Coūcels be examined by the scriptures But they knew not whether Paule was an Apostle or not therefore they might examine his doctrine saith the Iesuite Answere it is no matter for the person of Paule they examined his doctrine which dependeth not vpon the person Secondly they could not be ignoraunt of his Apostleship who was famous throughout the Churches Thirdly they doubted onely whether Paul was an
of the question First whether wicked men and infidels be true members of the Church Secondly whether the Catholike Church be inuisible 2 Whether the Catholike Church may erre and whether the visible Church may fayle vpon earth 3 Concerning the true notes and markes of the Church 4 Of the authoritie of the Church two partes First whether the Church haue authoritie in matters of faith beside the Scriptures and whether we ought to beleeue in the Church Secondly concerning the ceremonies of the Church 5 Whether the Church of Rome be the true Church two partes First whether it be the Catholike Church Secondly whether the Church of Rome be a true visible Church of these now in their place and order THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE definition of the Catholike Church The Papistes THe Catholike Church say they is a visible companie of men professing the same faith and Religion and acknowledging the Bishop of Rome to be their chief pastor and the Vicare of Christ vpon earth Bellarmin de Eccles. Lib. 3. cap. 2. Canisius capit de praecept Eccles. articul 9. Lindanus lib. 4. cap. 84. The Protestantes THe Catholike and vniuersall Church is the inuisible cōpanie of the faithfull elected and chosen to eternall life Iohn 10.16 A particular Church is a member of the vniuersall and Catholike Church and it is a visible companie and congregation of men amongest whom the pure word of God is preached and the Sacramentes rightly administred in the which visible congregation there may be and are many hypocrites euill and vnfaithfull men found and shal be to the end of the world Ex Amand. Polano So then betweene the vniuersall and particular Church there is a treble difference First the one is dispersed ouer all the world the other in some one country citie or any certaine place Secondly the vniuersall consisteth onely of the elect the particular both of good and bad Thirdly the Catholike is inuisible the other is visible and to be seene The question betweene vs and our aduersaries is about the vniuersall Catholike Church which they do falsly define in three points First they hold that wicked men are true members of the Catholike Church Secondly they allow not this distinctiō of the Church visible and inuisible but do affirme that the Catholike Church is visible Thirdly they make the Catholike Church to be in subiection to the Bishop of Rome Concerning this last point it belongeth to the controuersie of the Bishop of Rome and therefore we will not touch it in this place The other two are now to be handled in this question as two partes thereof THE FIRST PART OF THIS FIRST question whether wicked men and infidels may be true members of the Church The Papistes THey affirme that not onely the predestinate but euē reprobates also may belong vnto the Church and be true members thereof Bellarmin Lib. 3. de error 14 Eccles. cap. 7. Nay they denie that the elect which are vnborne and not yet called do appertaine to the Church of Christ. Rhemistes annot in 1. Tim. 3. Sect. 10. This then is generally their opinion that there is no internal grace or vertue required in the mēbers of the Church but onely the externall and publike outward profession Bellarmin cap. 2. And therefore they doubt not to say that euen wicked men and reprobates remaining in the publike profession of the Church are true members of the body of Christ. Rhemistes annot in Iohan. 15. Sect. 1. 1 They first alledge certaine places of Scripture as Math. 3. the Church is compared to a barne floore where there is both chaff and corne Math. 13. to a net cast into the sea where all manner of fish are gathered together 2. Tim. 2. to a house wherein there be vessels of honor and dishonor Ergo both good bad are members of the Church Bellarmin cap. 7. lib. 3. We aunswere All these places must be vnderstood of the visible Church which is knowen by the publike preaching of the word and therefore Math. 3. compared to a fanne and Math. 13. to a draw net the Apostles pastors and teachers are the fisher men Wherefore we denie not but that wicked men may be in the Church but not of it yea they may be members of the visible Church for a time but can not be truly ingraffed into the body of Christ. Fulk annot Iohan. 15. Sect. 1. 2 The Church say they is compared to a body 1. Cor. 12. as in the body there are some partes which haue neither sense nor life so in the Church there are some mēbers which haue neither faith nor charitie which is the life of the Church Ergo wicked men may be right members of the Church Bellarm. cap. 10. there may be also some fruitlesse braūches in the vine and so euill men may be members of Christ. Rhemist annot 15. Iohan. 1. euery braunch not bearing fruit in me shal be cast forth Ergo there may be fruitlesse braūches in Christ. We answere to the first who would haue said as the Iesuite doth that there are partes in the body that receiue neither life nor sense of the body doth he meane the nayles and heares as he seemeth to geue instance in the end of the Chapter but they are no partes of the body but excrements he is so deepe in his sophistrie that he hath forgotten Philosophie and yet they receiue some gift from the body for they grow encrease but the wicked receiue no grace at all from the Church The Rhemistes yet are more reasonable that say the wicked in the church are as ill humors and superfluous excrements in the body rather then liuely partes therof 1. Iohan. 2. Sect. 10. To the second is a dead bow or a braunch I pray you any part of the tree I thinke not the tree can not conueniently spare any one of the partes therof but the dead partes are hurtfull and combersome and it doth the tree good to cut them of But that they haue preuented vs we would haue vsed no better argument against them then this drawen from the resemblance of a mans body for as what is in the body receiuing no life nor power from the body is not properly a part of the body howsoeuer it seeme to be ioyned to the body so the wicked although they be in the outward face of the Church yet because they are not partakers of the spirituall life thereof by Christ are not truly to be iudged members of it 3 If wicked men should not be right members of the Church but the faithfull and predestinate we should be vncertaine which is the true Church which is not to be admitted because the whole doctrine and all the principles of Religion do depend of the testimonie of the Church Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 10. We aunswere First although it is necessarie that the true Church should be certainly knowen yet not for that cause which the Iesuite pretendeth for the Religion of Christians is grounded vpon the Scriptures
of Bishops and Pastors is not necessarie for the continuance of the truth neither can it be concluded out of this place 3 Thus they reason there haue bene alwayes some faithfull men which haue outwardly professed their faith for if they dissembled or cloaked their profession then were they not faithfull Ergo the church hath bene alwayes visible as in the time of persecution Bellarmine We aunswere First the Iesuite doth cleane peruert and chaunge the state of the question for he defineth a visible church to be multitudo congregata in qua sint praelati subditi a multitude or companie gathered together where there are both Prelates and Bishops and people obediēt vnto them And now he geueth an instance of persecution wherein some faithfull Christians may geue an outward profession of their faith where is now that multitude congregate together where is that iurisdiction of Prelates where is that visible and glorious succession We denie not but that in time of persecution the faithfull may be knowen to them selues and yet some time they are not for in Israell there were seuen thousand faithfull beside Elias yet he knew none of them But it foloweth not that therefore the church is then visible to the world and notoriously knowen to men for so the Rhemistes say in Math. 5. Sect. 3. Act. 11. Sect. 3. Thus they flye manifestly from the question The Protestantes WE denie not but that the catholike vniuersall church as it hath hitherto continued since the beginning of the world so shall it endure to the end the Lord shall neuer want vpon earth a companie of faithfull men which shall truly serue him though it be not necessarie neither hath alwayes bene seene that they should be in any one place A visible church we define to be a congregation of men amongest whom the word is truly preached and the Sacraments administred such a Church hath not alwayes bene neither can we be assured that it shall alway be found vpon the earth wherein the worship of God publikely and visibly is practised 1 In the raigne of Ahaz king of Iuda there was no visible church where the pure worship of God was practised for both Israell vnder Pekah and Iuda vnder Ahaz fell to Idolatrie and folowed the custome of the Gētiles 2. Kings 16.3 yea Vriah the high Priest consented with the king to set vp Idolatrie Likewise in the dayes of Manasseh who did euill after the abhomination of the heathen 2. Kings 21.2 there was no place where God was publikely worshipped for Iudah was corrupted Israell was carried away captiue Ergo there was a time when there was no visible Church 2 In the Passion of our Sauiour there was no visible church such a church we still meane as where there are Prelati subditi pastores oues Prelates and people pastors and sheepe We proue it thus The visible Church was not amongest the Pharisies and Priests for they shamefully and wickedly erred Bellarmin 17. It was not among the Apostles for they also erred therfore after the Papists opiniō they were not the Church for the Church say they erreth not Secondly he saith they were yet but materiall partes not formall that is not Bishops or Pastors how then could there be a visible Church which was without the formal and principall parts that is Pastors and Bishops Ergo there was then no visible Church 3 When the abhominatiō of desolation shall stand in the temple there shal be a generall defection and apostasie from the faith then shall the visible church fayle vpon earth But the first is true Math. 24.15 2. Thess. 2.3 Ergo. To the first place the Iesuite aunswereth that it must be vnderstood of the destruction of the temple cap. 16. But the Rhemistes more liberall then so affirme that it shal be especially accomplished in Antichristes time when as the sacrifice of the Masse shall vtterly be abolished annot in Math. 24. ver 15. To the next place cōcerning that defectiō apostasie which S. Paul speaketh of first he saith that it shal be a defection from the Romane Empire but the Rhemistes say it shal be a defection frō most points of Christian Religion Secondly the Iesuite aunswereth that though it be a defection from the Romane faith yet it shall not be generall but particular but the Rhemistes better aduised graunt it shal be a reuolt of kingdomes peoples prouinces the publike entercourse of the faithfull with the church of Rome shall cease they shall onely communicate with it in hart annot in 2. Thess. 2. Sect. 6. Now out of their owne wordes we conclude there shal be a time whē as the publike seruice of God shall cease there shal be desolation in the Churches and temples of Christians there shal be then no publike entercourse with the Church but a priuat communicating in hart Ergo there shal be a time when there shal be no outward visible Church notoriously and famously knowen Ergo our aduersaries are in an error are condemned by their owne mouth THE THIRD QVESTION OF THE notes and markes whereby the true Church may be discerned and knowen FIRST OF THE FALSE AND ERROneous notes of the Church OVr aduersaries do deuise many notes whereby their Church is discryed as Bellarmine reckoneth vp 15. in order to many certaine to be found in a good Church but there are six principall which they doe most stand vpon antiquitie vniuersalitie succession vnitie the power of miracles the gift of prophesie We must first touch these in order and then come to the true and infallible notes of the Church Of antiquitie Note 1. THe Papists make great bragges of the long continuance of their Church yea that they can shew the discent of their Church from Adam Rhemistes error 18 annot in Act. 28. Sect. 5. But alacke sillie men they must come short of our Sauiuiour Christs and the Apostles time by fiue or six hundred yeares for the most of the opinions which they now hold Let vs examine their reasons In any great chaunge of Religion say they the authors of the Sect the time when it began the persons that oppugned it may be knowen but no such thing can be shewed of our Church say they as we can shew of yours we can tell them the yeare the places and ringleaders of their reuolt say our English Rhemistes annot in 1. Iohan. 2. Sect. 9. Bellarmin lib. 4. de Eccles. cap. 5. We aunswere First no meruaile if Papistrie herein do much differ from other heresies they as the heresies of the Arrians Pelagians Donatistes because they were not long to continue sodainly brake out and sodainly againe were extinguished But Papistrie being the prop and pillar of Antichrists kingdome by whom the world must be deluded many yeares was at the beginning to worke closely and secretly not breaking out at once into open impietie and blasphemie but vnder pretense of holynesse to set a broach her deadly poyson therefore S. Paule calleth it a
mysterie of antiquitie which began euen to worke in his dayes 2. Thess. 2.7 Secondly we also aunswere that all these things the authors of their sectes the time the persons that withstood them may manifestly be detected first concerning the time we haue a manifest Prophesie Apocal. 20. that Sathan should be bound a thousand yeares and afterward let loose when no doubt Antichrist should begin to shew him selfe to the world Cōcerning this space of a thousand yeares there are two probable opinions some thinke they are to begin immediatly after our Sauiour Christes time and so counting a thousand yeares all which time Sathan must be bound then Antichrist should begin to appeare Thus Iohn Wicliffe expoundeth it Others say the thousand yeares ought to begin after the three hundred yeares expired of persecution for all that while it is most like Sathan was let loose when he raged with opē mouth like a Lion against the Church and Saints of God of this opinion was Walter Brute somewhat after Wicliffes time who by this meanes maketh the Prophesie of Daniell of 1290. dayes and that in the Apocalipse 12. of 1260. dayes to agree with the thousand yeares of Sathans binding for taking euery day for a yeare we shall come to .1290 yeares after Christ when the thousand yeares must be expired beginning from the three hundred yeares of persecution If we count the thousand yeares from Christ we shall come to the time of Hildebrand the seuenth who was Pope of Rome a thousand yeares after Christ and vpward by whom the mariage of Ministers is thought first to haue bene forbidden if we begin after the ceasing of persecution which continued three hundred yeares we shall fall into the yeare .1300 about the time of Iohn Wicliffe whē the great rabble of Monkes and Friers began to swarme and superstition to encrease But we will take a litle payne briefly to touch the authors of many superstitions in Poperie and of their erronious and hereticall opinions Anno. 420. Zosimus Bishop of Rome did chalenge a prerogatiue aboue other Churches that it might be lawfull to make appeales frō other Churches to that sea and to set the better colour vpon it he falsely alledged a decree of the Nicene Coūcell but there was no such thing found there wherefore it was decreed in the Councell of Carthage at that time that none should appeale ouer the seas to Rome Bonifice the third purchased of the wicked Emperour Phocas the title of vniuersall Bishop Transubstantiation was first concluded against Berengarius anno 1062. vnder Leo the ninth but not publikely enacted before anno 1216. vnder Innocentius the third The Dominicke Friers brought in the same time and their Sect established by Innocentius the third Auricular confession also was brought in anno 1215. vnder the same Pope Mariage first prohibited by Nicholas the secōd Alexander the second Gregorie the seuenth about the yeare 1070. The Communion in one kinde forged and inuented and decreed in the Councell of Constance not aboue two hūdred yeares ago By these few examples it may appeare that it is false which the Iesuite saith that the authors of their sectes and heresies cā not be shewed Now we will briefly declare what oppugners and gainsayers they haue had in all ages since their grossest opinions began to be receiued Such were Bertramus and Berēgarius about pope Hildebrands time that mightily impugned the grosse opinion of Trāsubstantiatiō Robertus Gallus 1291. Robert Grosthead Bishop of Lincolne who was called malleus Romanorū the mallet or hammar of the Romanes anno 1250. Franciscus Petrarcha 1350. Iohannes de rupe Scissa who Prophesied against the Pope 1340. with many other which ceased not to crye out against the abhominable vices and erronious opinions of the Church of Rome Wherefore it is a great vntruth which the Iesuite doth so stifly auouch that we can not set down the pedegree discent of their church and faith and how it hath continually bene resisted 3 Now whereas they say that they can name the ringleaders of our sect we haue none other maisters and authors of our faith then our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles by whose holy writings we refuse not to be tryed But you flye from the light you disgrace the Scriptures making them imperfect and insufficient this the true Disciples of Christ would not do you are the Disciples of Christ as the Pharisies bragged that they were the Disciples of Moses And as then the true church was not in those that sat in Moses chaire though they could alledge great antiquitie but in Christ and his Apostles so is not now the true Church to be discerned by custome or number of yeares but by that truth which was taught and preached by our blessed Sauiour and his Apostles Of Vniuersalitie Note 2. OVr Church is vniuersall say they both in respect of time person place error 19 it hath alwayes bene in the world in all countrys and nations it hath florished Ergo it is the true Church That it is vniuersall they first proue by the name of Catholike which is say they by Gods prouidence appropriat to them which name they affirme without ground to haue bene imposed by the Apostles vpon true beleeuers Rhem. in Act. cap. 11. Sect. 4. We aunswere First the name of Christians is a more honorable title then the name of Catholikes for it is manifest Act. 11.26 that this name was vsed in the Apostles time and by the Apostles them selues allowed but it is not certaine that the name Catholike came from the Apostles Againe many heretikes chalenged this name to be called Catholikes who did not so easily obtaine to be called Christians which ancient and honorable name the Papistes do despise for in Italie and at Rome it is vsed as a name of reproch to signifie a dolt or a foole Fulk in Acts. 11.26 2 We say that you doe vsurpe this name as the Donatistes in Augustines time would be called Catholikes for what is the name of Catholike without the Catholike doctrine They are the true Catholikes that professe the auncient and Apostolike faith to vs therefore be it knowen to you this name of better right appertaineth then to you ô ye Papists yet we haue better argumentes to proue our Church by then by sillables and titles Quasi nos saith Augustine huius nominis testimonio nitamur ad demonstrandam Ecclesiam non promissis Dei As though we saith he do leane vpon this name to proue our Church by and not rather vpon the promises of God Secondly they proue their vniuersalitie by the multitude of people that haue receiued the Romish faith and their Church say they hath replenished the greatest part of the world They would proue this by the propagation of the Church in the Apostles time in Tertulian Irenaeus Hierome Augustine yea and afterward in Gregories dayes yea and now also besides many great countryes in Europe they haue of their church in
the Iewish ceremonies this is great presumption to thinke it is lawfull for the Church to doe whatsoeuer Christ and his Apostles did Fulk 1. Tim. 4. sect 18. The Protestants ALthough there be great moderation to bee vsed in the ceremonies of the Church and there is also some limitation for them yet hath the Church greater libertie in the rites and ceremonies which are appoynted for order and comelinesse sake then in the doctrine of fayth and religion The doctrine of saluation is alwayes the same and cannot be changed and toucheth the conscience But rites and ceremonies are externall and commanded for order sake and neither are they vniuersall the same in euery Church nor perpetuall but are changed according to times and as there is occasion Againe the precepts of Christianitie are either directly expressed or necessarilie concluded out of the scriptures but externall rites and ceremonies are not particularlie declared in the word there are onely certaine generall rules set downe according to the which all ceremonies brought into the Church are to bee examined as for the Sacraments of the Church they cannot bee altered hauing a perpetuall commandement from Christ Therefore the Church cannot appoynt what how many ceremonies soeuer she shall thinke good but according to these foure rules and conditions which followe here in order 1 All things ought to bee done to the glorie of God euen in ciuill actions much more in things appertayning to the seruice of God 1. Cor. 10.31 Our aduersaries offend agaynst this rule applying and annexing remission of sinnes to their owne inuentions and superstitious ceremonies as vnto penance and extreame vnction which they also make Sacraments for this is greatly derogatorie to Christs institution who hath only appoynted the hearing of his word and vse of the Sacraments for the begetting and encreasing of faith and by this faith only is the death of Christ applied vnto vs for the remission of sinnes 2 All things ought to be done orderly and decently 1. Cor. 14.40 Wherefore al ridiculous light vnprofitable ceremonies are to be abolished such our aduersaries haue many as knocking kneeling creeping to the Crosse lighting candles at noone day turning ouer of beades and many phantasticall gestures they haue in their idolatrous Masse as turning returning looking to the East to the West crossing lifting quaffing and shewing the emptie cup with many such toyes 3 All things ought to bee done without offence 1. Corinth 10.32 But to whom that hath but a little feeling of religion is not the abhominable sacrifice of the Masse offensiue What good conscience doth it not grieue that the Priest should create his maker as they say should offer vp the bodie of Christ in sacrifice and be an intercessor as it were for his mediatour desiring God to accept the sacrifice of his sonnes bodie As also to make it a propitiatorie sacrifice for the quicke and the dead But of these matters we shall haue fitter occasion to entreate afterward when we come to the seuerall controuersies 4 All things ought to bee done to edifying 1. Corinth 14. vers 12. But the popish ceremonies are so farre from edifying that by reason of their infinite rabble and number they are a clogge vnto Christians and more burdensome then were the obseruations of the Iewes They haue hallowed fire water bread ashes oyle waxe flowers braunches clay spittle salt incense balme chalices paxes pixes altars corporals superaltars altarclothes rings swords and an infinite companie besides doe these tend thinke you to the edification of the minde Nay they doe cleane destroy and extinguish all spirituall and internall motions drawing the heart from the spiritual worship of God to externall beggerlie and ragged reliques and ceremonies Fulk 1. Timoth. 4. sect 1. Beza lib. confess de eccles articul 18.19.20 The fift question whether the Church of Rome be the true Church THis question hath two parts First whether the Romane Church be the Catholike Church or not Secondly whether the Church of Rome be a true visible Church THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE ROMANE Church be the Catholike Church The Papists BEllarmine defining the Church maketh this one part of the definition to be error 27 subiect vnto the Bishop of Romes iurisdiction Lib. 3. de eccles cap. 2. And therefore they conclude that they are out of the Church and no better then heretikes that doe not acknowledge the Pope to be their chiefe Pastor Canis de praecept eccles cap. 9. So they make the Romane faith and Catholike to bee all one Rhemist annot in 1. Rom. sect 5. Their reasons are none other then we haue seene before taken from vniuersalitie antiquitie vnitie vnto the which wee haue alreadie answered quaest 3. of this controuersie Not. 1 2 3. The Protestants WHile the Church of Rome continued in the doctrine of the Apostles it was a notable and famous visible Church and a principall part and member of the vniuersall Catholike but now since it is degenerate and fallen away from the Apostolike faith from being the house of God to be a synagogue for Antichrist we take it not to be so much as a true visible Church But neuer was it to be counted the Catholike Church as though all other Churches were parts and members of it but it selfe onely was a part as others and Catholike too while it continued in the right faith but not Catholike as hauing iurisdiction ouer the rest and all to receiue this name of her 1 The vniuersall Catholike Church is so called because it conteyneth the whole number of the elect and first borne of God Heb. 12.23 Whereof manie are now saints in heauen many liuing in the earth many yet vnborne But all these were not neither are of the Romane faith the holie men departed knewe not of these superstitious and prodigious vsages which now doe raigne in the Church of Rome nay many of them neuer heard in their life so much as of the name of Rome Ergo. 2 It is called Catholike and vniuersall because they that are to be saued must belong vnto this companie and be of this Church for without the Church there is no saluation for Christ onely gaue himselfe for his Church to sanctifie it and cleanse it Ephes. 5.25 But all that dye out of the faith of the Romane Church do not perish Nay verely we doubt not to say but that all which depart this life in the communion thereof without repentance are barred from saluation and dye out of grace We are in the right faith neither will we be our owne iudges the scriptures shall iudge vs Euery spirit that confesseth that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God 1. Iohn 4.2 We beleeue aright in both the natures and all the offices of Christ which you doe not which doe greatly deface his prophetical office in not reuerencing his word but making it imperfect his kingdom in appointing him a Vicar and Vicegerent vpon earth as though he of himselfe were not sufficient to gouerne
commaundement of Christ who inioyned them not to depart from Ierusalem The second Act. 6. congregate by the twelue not Peter onely for the election of Deacons The third which was holden as touching the taking away of circumcision and other ceremonies of the lawe was gathered together by a generall inspiration Act. 15.6 The fourth wherein certaine things contained in the lawe are permitted seemeth to be gathered by Iames. Act. 21.18 Vpon these reasons the Councel thus concludeth that if the Pope would resist and haue no Councel congregate yet if the greater part of the Church doe iudge it necessarie to haue a Councel the Councel may bee congregate whether the Pope will or not Ex Aenea Syluio Fox pag. 676. Col. 2. 5 Augustine saith Catholicos Episcopos partis Donati iussu imperatoris disputando inter se contulisse Breuicul collation lib. 1. cap. 1. That the Catholike Bishops and the Donatists did meete together to dispute at the commaundement of the Emperour There were in that Councel which was at Carthage of the Catholike Bishops 286. and of the Donatists 279. THE THIRD QVESTION OF WHAT PERSONS the Councel ought to consist The Papists WHereas there are foure sorts of men vsually present at Councels the Princes error 31 and Magistrates Bishops and inferiour Ministers and Priests and other lay people of all these Bishops they say onely must haue a deciding or determining voyce Priests and other learned may dispute and haue a consultatiue voyce Princes are there to defend the Councel and see order kept other of the Laitie may be there as officers and ministers as Scribes and Notaries but the suffrages and voyces must onely be giuen by Bishops Eckius loc de concil Bellarm. de concil lib. 1. cap. 15. Let vs see some of their reasons First to teach and to feede is proper for the Pastors only and to establish and decree in Councel is nothing els but to feede and teach Ergo Pastors onely must rule in Councel which none are but Bishops Soli Episcopi pastores sunt sayth the Iesuite neque laici neque ecclesiastici quicunque Onely Bishops are pastors and none other of the Clergie besides and to them onely he sayth that is to bee applyed Act. 20. Take heede to your selues and the flocke ouer the which God hath made you ouerseers I answere First what an absurd saying is this and voyde of sense that the Bishop is the onely pastor of his Diocesse and that euery Minister is not pastor in his owne parish Nay if the Iesuite would speake trueth he shall finde that popish Bishops are neither Pastors nor Doctors for the most of them neither feede nor teach And they be not ashamed to professe it Ann. 1540. or thereabout Thomas Forret Martyr being found fault withall by the Bishop of Dunkelden in Scotland because he preached so oft exhorted the Bishop agayne and wished that he did preach The Bishop answered nay nay let that bee we are not ordayned to preach and in further talke the blind blockish Bishop bewrayed his owne ignorance I thanke God sayth he that I neuer knewe what the olde and newe Testament was Thereupon rose a common prouerbe in Scotland you are like the Bishop of Dunkelden that knewe neither the old nor new lawe Fox Martyrol pag. 1266. With this blind saying of the popish Bishop our countrey men of Rhemes also doe agree which doubt not to say that many which haue no gift to preach yet for their wisedome and gouernment are not vnmeete to be Pastors and Bishops Annot. in 1. Timoth. 5. sect 13. 2 I answere the Iesuite bewrayeth his ignorance in making no difference betweene communis and propria politia ecclesiae the common and speciall policie and office of the Church for there are proper offices and dueties some of Pastors some of gouernours some of other Ministers but this office to be performed in general Councels is not proper to Pastors but common to the whole Church whereupon wee denye that it is Proprium pastorum munus suffragia ferre in concilijs It is not the proper duetie of Pastors to giue voyces and make decrees in Councels 3 By the Iesuites argument the fathers of Basile doe conclude cleane contrarie out of that place 4. Ephes. That because Christ instituted not onely Apostles and Prophets but pastors and teachers for the work of the Ministerie who doubteth say they but that the gouernance also of the Church is committed vnto others together with the Apostles And hence they inferre because the worke of the Ministerie is layd vpon the rest of the Clergie that therefore they ought not to be excluded from Councels Secondly Panormitane in the Councel of Basile thus reasoneth for Bishops that they were the pillars and keyes of heauen and therefore had onely deciding voyces Vnto him answered at that time the wise and couragious Cardinall Arelatensis shewing Augustines iudgement vpon those words I will giue thee the keyes of heauen that the iudiciall power was giuen not onely to Peter but also to the other Apostles to the whole Church the Bishops the Priests Whereupon he inferreth that if the Priests haue a iudicial power in the Church they also ought to haue a determining voyce in Councels Thirdly Lodouicus the Prothonotarie in the same Councel thus argued Albeit sayth hee Christ chose twelue Apostles and 70. Disciples notwithstanding in the setting forth of the Creede onely the Apostles were present thereby giuing example that matters of faith did pertaine onely to the Apostles and so consequently to Bishops To him Arelatensis made this answere First it followed not because the Apostles onely are named that they therefore only were present at the setting forth of the Creede for wee see that Princes beare the name and commendation of many actions which are done notwithstanding by their helpers 2. Lodouicus cannot be ignorant sayth he that there be some articles in the Creede which were not put to by the Apostles but afterward by generall Councels as that part wherein mention is made of the holy Ghost which the Councel of Lions did adde Thus much out of the Councel of Basile The Protestants confession OVr opinion grounded vpon trueth and scripture is this that not onely Bishops but all other pastors admitted to the Councel and the learned and discreete amongst the Lay men ought to haue concluding voyces in Councel and that rather the discussing and consulting of matters pertayneth to the learned Diuines the deciding to all then contrariwise First that inferiour pastors are to bee ioyned with Bishops and Prelates it was amplie proued in the Councel of Basile of the which I haue so often made mention as noble Arelatensis reasoneth thus The dignities of the fathers is not to be respected but the trueth neither will I preferre a lye of any Bishop be he neuer so rich before a veritie or a trueth of a poore Priest this is his first reason that the trueth ought to bee receiued at any mans mouth bee
he neuer so simple and therefore Priests as well as Bishops are to bee admitted to the Councel 2 He declareth the ancient practise of the Church In the Councel of Nice where there were assembled 322. Bishops Athanasius being then onely a Priest withstood the Arrians and infringed their arguments In the Synode of Chalcedon there were present sixe hundred Priests which name is common both to Bishops and Priests When Paul Bishoppe of Antioch preached that Christ was a man of common nature the Councell assembled against him at Antioch where the sayde Paul was condemned neither was there any man which did more confound the sayd Paul then one Malchion Priest of Antioch which taught Rhetorick there Concerning the second part that laye men also with Priests ought to bee admitted first we haue testimonie out of the word of God for it Tit. 3.13 for this cause Zenas the lawyer is ioyned as fellow in commission with Apollos But we haue a more euident place Act. 15.22 It seemed good to the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church here we see that not onely the Elders but the whole multitude were admitted into consultation with the Apostles To this place our aduersaries doe thus aunswere Lodouicus the Prothonotarie first thus rashly and fondly gaue his verdicte in the Councell of Basile that there was no argument to be gathered of the Acts of the Apostles whose examples were more to be maruayled at then to be followed But to this Arelatensis replied that he would stay himself most vpon the Apostles doings for what sayth he is more comely for vs to followe then the doctrine and customes of the primitiue Church And Aeneas Siluius reporteth who writeth of the actes of that Councell that all men impugned this saying of Lodouicus that the Apostles were not to be followed as a blasphemie Wherefore the Iesuite hath found out another aunswere he sayth that none but the Apostles gaue sentence the rest onely gaue consent and inwarde liking and approbation this cauill Arelatensis met withall long before the Iesuite was borne in the forenamed Councell Neither this worde sayth hee It seemed good signifieth in this place consultation but decision and determination And so it doth indeede for seeing there is one worde applyed to them all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 placuit it seemed good to the Apostles Elders and the whole multitude why should it not be taken in the one and selfe same sence and after the same manner vnderstood of them all 2. Seeing the Councel doth represent the whole Church there ought to be present and to giue sentence of all sorts and callings of men and the tather because the matter of fayth and religion is a common cause and as well appertayneth to lay-men as to Bishops it behooueth them also to bee present And further it were more reasonable that princes and temporall Magistrates should binde their subiects to their lawes without their consent then that ecclesiastical persons should lay yokes vpon Christians against their willes for ciuill matters are more indifferent and left to our choyce then spirituall are Yet we see there are no lawes enacted in our Realme but by the high court of Parliament where alwayes some are appoynted for the commons euen the whole neather house without whose consent no acte can passe So it were very reasonable that no law should be layd vpon the Church without the generall consent thereof 3. Lastly Augustines iudgement we heard before alleadged by Arelatensis that seeing the iudicial power of the keies is committed to the whole Church to Bishops to Priests they all ought to bee entertayned in generall Councels THE FOVRTH QVESTION WHO OVGHT to be the president and chiefe moderator in Councels The Papists error 32 WIth one whole consent they all agree and holde that the Pope onelie ought to haue the chiefe place in Councels either himselfe in his owne person or else his Legates and deputies for him they reason thus 1. The Pope is the chiefe pastor of the vniuersall Church for vnto Peter onely it was sayd pasce oues meas feede my sheepe and he is called and saluted in Councels by the name of father and all other both Princes and Bishops are sheepe in respect of him Wee answere first in the Iesuites argument there is petitio principij a foule fault in a good Logician though it bee none in a Sophister still to begge that which is in question for yet he hath not prooued that the Pope is the vniuersall pastor 2. That place feede my sheepe prooueth it not Augustine saith redditur negationi trinae trina confessio ne minus amori lingua seruiat quà m timori in Iohan. tract 123. he recompenceth a threefold deniall with a threefold confession lest that his tongue should be lesse seruiceable to loue then it was to feare so then by this fathers iudgement it was no priuiledge to Peter to bee thrise admonished but he is thereby put in mind of his thrise deniall of Christ. Againe I maruaile the Iesuite can so soone forget himselfe for in the 15. chapter afore he prooued by these words feede my sheepe that Bishops onely were pastors and he can now turne the wordes to serue onely for the Pope 3. What great matter is it for the Pope to be called father seeing he is not ignorant that all Bishops assembled in Councell and other learned are called by that name Nay it is no rare matter for other Bishops to be saluted by the name of Pope as Prosper writing to Augustine twise in one Epistle calleth him beatissimum Papam most blessed Pope Tom. 7.4 Princes and Bishops to the Pope are sheepe sayth the Iesuite 1. For Bishops though he had a iurisdiction ouer all which will stick in his teeth to prooue yet shall they be no more his sheep then Priests are to Bishops and Bishops to their Metropolitanes who cannot be sayd to be their sheepe though they haue some preeminence ouer them for Augustines rule must stand nemo se nostrum episcopum episcoporum constituit De baptism 2.2 No man is a Bishop of Bishops nor shepheard of shepheards Secondly for Princes he hath nothing to doe with any but those in his owne Bishopricke and as they are his sheep one way as they are taught of him so he and his Cardinals are the Magistrates sheepe another way and in respect of the ciuil gouernement he is their shepheard And both he and they prince and priest are sheep-fellows vnder Iesus Christ the chiefe shepheard as Augustine sayth tanquam vobis pastores sumus sed sub illo pastore vobiscum oues sumus in Psal. 126. we are shepheards to you but both you and I are sheep vnder that great shepheard The Protestants WE doe truely affirme that the Soueraigne Maiestie of the Emperour and chiefe Magistrate or his legate if he either be present himselfe or sende ought to be president of the Councel Or else in their absence one to be chosen and elected by the
Prophet in the midst Euen thus with the like spirite of blasphemie doo the Iesuites crie out that the Pope is the chiefe shepheard steward husband and head of the Church vpon earth But we will leaue to charge them so deepely with blasphemie which notwithstanding they cannot auoyde Let vs heare what the fathers of Basile say to this poynt Bellarmine saith the Pope is the husband but they reason cleane contrarie the Church say they is the spouse of Christ the Pope make the best of him you can is but a Vicar but no man dooth so ordaine a Vicar that hee maketh his spouse subiect vnto him but that the spouse is alwaies thought to be of more authoritie then the Vicar forsomuch as she is one body with her husband but the Vicar is not so thus haue they to the full answered the Iesuite ex Aenea Syluio Better arguments they haue none for the Popes prerogatiue then we haue seene The Protestants THat the Pope is by right and ought to be subiect to generall Councels and that they haue authoritie to iudge examine suspend punish depose him if there be iust cause it is proued thus This matter was pithilie disputed vpon by the Fathers of Basile some of whose reasons it shall bee sufficient heere to followe 1 They proue this conclusion out of Scripture First whereas Panormitane had saide that the Pope was Lorde of the Church vnto him Segouius answered that it was the most honourable title of the Bishop of Rome to be called the seruant of the seruants of God and Peter saith hee forbiddeth pastors to behaue themselues as Lords ouer the Clergie 1. Pet. 5. And if Christ the sonne of God came not to be ministred vnto but to minister and serue how then can his Vicar haue any dominion So was Panormitane answered Againe the Diuines thus argued Christ saith to Peter dic Ecclesiae Peter is sent to the Church or Councell Ergo the veritie doth remit the Bishop of Rome to the Councell But to this the Iesuite saith that Peter was not yet entred into his office to bee chiefe Bishop but was as a priuate person So then belike this rule of our Sauiour Christ dic Ecclesiae tell it to the Church did but binde Peter till Christ were ascended and he receiued his Vicar-dome This cauillous answere the Fathers of Basile wisely foresaw and preuented it for they shew how Peter was subiect to Councels euen after the ascension as Act. 11. Peter is rebuked say they by the congregation because he went to Cornelius an heathen man as if it had not been lawfull for him to attempt any great matter without the knowledge of the congregation but that seemeth to make more for the purpose Galath 2. where Paule rebuked Peter to his face because contrarie to the decree of the Councell of the Apostles hee did cogere gentes Iudaizare hee would constraine the Gentiles to doe like the Iewes Ergo Peter was subiect vnto the Councell ex Aenea Syluio Other reasons many were alleaged by the Fathers of Basile First the Bishop of Burgen As in euery well ordered Kingdome the whole realme should be of more authoritie then the King so the Church ought to be of more authoritie then the Pope though he were Prince thereof The Diuines brought these argumēts the Church is the mother of the faithfull and so of the Pope if he be a faithfull man the Pope is then the Churches sonne as both Anacletus and Calixtus Bishops of Rome confessed Ergo how much the sonne is inferiour to his mother so much is the Church superiour to the Pope Secondly the Pope is inferiour to Angels he is not greater then Iohn Baptist of whom it is said that the least in the Kingdome of God is greater then he but the Angels doe reuerentlie accord vnto the doctrine of the Church Ephes. 3.10 Ergo the Pope is bound to doo the same who is lesse then the Angels These Fathers thought none so absurd to denie the Pope to be inferiour to Angels and therefore labour not to proue it Yet Antoninus an olde Papist saith Non minor honor datur Papae quà m Angelis there is no lesse honour due to the Pope then to the Angels Nay another saith I thinke it be Pope Paschalis Datur Episcopis quod ne Angelis vt Christi corpus crearent it is graunted to Bishops which is not giuen to the Angels to create the bodie of Christ. But the Fathers of Basile thought not these men worthie the answere no more doe we and so let thē passe Thirdly the Pope say they being the Vicar of the Church for he is more truely so called then the Vicar of Christ he may be deposed of the Church for a Lord may put out his Vicar at his pleasure Ergo the Pope is vnder Councels 4 If the Councels might not ouerrule the Pope there were no remedie left to resist a wicked Pope Shall we suffer all things say they to run into ruine and decay with him for it is not like that hee would congregate a Councell against himselfe To this the Iesuite answereth that there is no remedie left but to pray to God in such a case who will either confound or conuert such a Pope Here is goodly diuinitie we know that Antichrist shall at length be destroyed at the comming of Christ but if he should be let alone in the meane while and not be bridled he might doe much hurt as he hath done too much alreadie Yet the Iesuite confesseth that a wicked Pope may bee resisted by force and armes and why not I pray you as well by peaceable meanes these sayings are contrarie Bellarm. cap. 19. So then this is Popish diuinitie that be the Pope neuer so wicked doe he neuer so much harme hee is not to bee controuled of any mortall man Such doultish schoole poynts maintained especially by begging friers the fathers of Basile complained of As that they should say that no man ought to iudge the high and principall seate that it cannot be iudged either by Emperour Clergie King or people Other affirme that the Lord hath reserued to himselfe the depositions of the chiefe Bishop Others yet more mad are not ashamed to affirme that the Bishop of Rome though hee carrie soules in neuer so great number to hell yet is he not subiect to any correction or rebuke For all these straunge and blasphemous positions the fathers concluded as yee haue heard that the Pope ought to obey generall Councels 4 Lastly I will adioyne the iudgement of Augustine who writing in his 162. Epistle concerning the Donatists whose cause was heard and determined by the Emperours appoyntment at Rome before Miltiades then Bishop there and other Bishops assistants and yet for all this the Donatists would not bee quiet Thus he saith Putemus illos iudices qui Romae iudicauerunt non bonos iudices fuisse Restabat adhuc plenarium Concilium c. Put case saith hee that the Bishop of Rome
and the rest iudged corruptly there remayned yet another remedie A generall Councell might haue beene called where the iudges and the cause might further haue been tried and examined their iudgement if there were cause reuersed Whereby it appeareth say the fathers of Basile that not onely the sentence of the Pope alone but also the Pope with his Bishops ioyned with him might be made frustrate by a Councell Here the Iesuite paltreth saith that a matter determined by the Pope in a particular Councell may be called againe in question by the Pope in a general Councel First what neede that seeing that a particular Councel hauing the Popes authoritie as the Iesuite confesseth cannot erre Againe Augustine saith vbi cum ipsis iudicibus causa possit agitari In the which generall Councell the cause and the former iudges of the which Miltiades was one may bee tryed and examined so that the Pope himselfe might be adiudged by the Councell and not the cause onely Vpon the Premisses we truely and iustly conclude that the Pope is and of right ought to be subiect to generall Councels THE EIGHT QVESTION OF THE CONditions and qualitie of generall Councels The Papists THeir vnreasonable and vnequall conditions are these and such like as followe 1 That the Pope onely should haue authoritie to summon call proroge dissolue and confirme Councels and he onely to bee the iudge president and moderator in Councels or some at his appoyntment 2 They will haue none to giue voyces but Bishops and such as are bound by oath of alleageance to the Pope 3 That the Councell is not bound to determine according to Scripture but to follow their traditions and former decrees of Councels 4 That no Councell is in force without the Popes assent yea the Pope himselfe say they by his sole authotitie may abrogate and disanull the canons and decrees of Councels These and such other conditions the Papists require in their Councels So they wil be sure that nothing shall be concluded against them The Protestants OVr conditions which we would haue obserued and kept in generall Councells are these most iust and reasonable 1 That the Pope which is a party should be no iudge for it is vnreasonable that the same man should be both a partie and a iudge and therefore he ought not to meddle with calling and appoynting Councels with ruling or moderating them seeing it is like he would worke for his owne aduantage 2 That such a time and place be appointed as when and where the Churches of Christendome may most safely and conueniently meete together not at such a time as Paulus the third called a Councell when all Princes in Christendome were occupied in great affaires nor such a place as he thē appointed at Mantua in Italie whither Princes could not come without perill of iourney and danger of life being penned in by the Popes garrisons Thus Pope or Bishop Leo for then there were no Popes writ to Martianus the Emperour to haue the Councell remoued from Calchis to Italie but hee preuayled not So Pope Eugenius would haue dissolued the Councell at Basile and brought it vnder his owne nose 3 We would haue it a free Councell where euery man might fully vtter his minde and that there should be a safe conduct graunted to al to come and goe which the Pope for all his faire promises is vnwilling to doe as it was flatly denyed to Hierome of Prage in the Councell of Constance to whome it was answered that he should haue safe conduct to come but none to goe Neither if they should giue a safe conduct were they to bee trusted for it cannot bee forgotten to their perpetuall infamie that they brake the Emperour Sigismunds safe conduct graunted to Iohn Husse in the Councell of Constance saying that faith was not to be kept with Hereticks 4 That the matter should not bee left wholie to Bishops and Prelates but that the learned of the Clergie and Laitie besides should giue voices seeing the cause of religion is common and concerneth all But most of all that nothing bee carried with violence or popularitie against the Scriptures but euery matter determined according to the truth thereof Such a Councell wee refuse not nay wee much desire which is the true generall Councell that is not generall where all men cannot speake no freedome nor libertie graunted for men to vtter the trueth where all thinges are partially handled and are swayed by one mans authoritie Wherefore the Rhemists slander vs in saying wee raile vppon general Councels annot in Act. 15.10 and that we refuse them 2. Galath 2. Whether wee or they are enemies to true generall free holy indifferent Councels let all men iudge THE FOVRTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE BISHOP OF ROME COMMONLIE CALLED THE POPE THis great and waightie controuersie conteineth tenne seuerall questions 1 Whether the regiment of the Church be Monarchicall 2 Whether Peter were the Prince of the Apostles and by our Sauiour Christ made head of the Church 3 Whether Peter were at Rome and dyed Bishop there 4 Whether the Bishop of Rome be the true successor of Peter 5 Concerning the primacie of the Bishop of Rome sixe partes of the question First whether hee haue authoritie ouer other Bishops Secondly whether appeales are to be made to Rome Thirdly whether the Pope be subiect to the iudgemēt of any Fourthly whether he may be deposed Fiftly what primacy he hath ouer other Churches Sixtly of his titles and names 6 Whether the Bishop of Rome may erre and likewise whether the Church of Rome be subiect to error 7 Of the spiritual iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome two parts First whether he can make lawes to binde the conscience Secondly whether other Bishops doe receiue their iurisdiction from him 8 Of the Popes temporall iurisdiction two parts First whether hee haue authoritie aboue Kings and princes Secondly whether he be a temporal prince 9 Of the prerogatiues of the Pope 10 Concerning Antichrist nine parts First whether Antichrist shall be some one singular man Secondly of the time of his comming Thirdly of his name Fourthly of his nation and kinred Fiftly where his place and seate shall be Sixtly of his doctrine and manners Seuenthly of his miracles Eightly of his kingdome and warres Ninthly whether the Pope bee the very Antichrist of these in their order THE FIRST QVESTION WHETHER THE Regiment of the Church be Monarchicall error 36 WE are not ignorant that the Philosophers made three formes and states of gouernement in the commonwealth the Monarchical when as the principall and soueraigne power rested in one as in the King Queene or Emperor as Rome sometime was ruled by Kings and many yeares after by Emperors Secondly the Aristocratical when the commonwealth was gouerned by an assembly and Senate of nobles as the Romanes had a long time their Consuls and Senators Thirdly the Democratical which is the popular state when the people and multitude bare the greatest sway as
sometime in Rome also tribuni plebis the officers for the people had the chiefe authoritie Now of all these in common-wealth matters the first kinde is the best and safest the Monarchical or princely gouernement The question now is whether the same forme ought to bee reteyned in Church-gouernement and in this question certaine things are to bee obserued First that wee haue not to deale in this place with that part of Ecclesiasticall regiment wherein the prince hath interest as in ordayning Ecclesiasticall Lawes and seeing to the execution thereof but the question is onely of that regiment Ecclesiasticall which is proper to the gouernors of the Church which consisteth in the ministerie of the word and Sacraments in ordaining and electing of Church-ministers in the dispensing of the keyes of the Church in the Ecclesiasticall censures and discipline and such like whether in the Church there ought to bee one chiefe Bishop from whom all other receiue this power in the premisses Secondly the question is not of the spirituall gouernement of Christ who is the chiefe Monarch and King of his Church but of the outward and externall regiment vpon earth Thirdly wee speake not of the state of any particular Church either nationall prouinciall or oppidall but of the generall state of the Church whether ouer all Churches there ought to be one chiefe Bishop These things premised wee come now to the question The Papists THat there ought to bee one chiefe Monarch and high Bishop ouer all the Church in all Ecclesiasticall matters for the deciding of controuersies preseruing the vnitie of the Church from whom all other Ecclesiasticall Ministers doe receiue their power and authoritie they thus would proue 1 The militant Church is in all things answerable and correspondent to the triumphant companie in Heauen as Heb. 8.5 Moses was bid to make all things according to the paterne shewed in the Mount But in heauen there is beside God himselfe a Monarch and chiefe commaunder of the Angels euen Michael the Archangel Reuel 12.7 Michael and his Angels fought Ergo it ought to be so vpon earth We answer First the Church vpon earth neither is nor can be altogether like to the celestiall congregation for there is no temple Reuel 21.22 There shall enter no vncleane thing and many such like differences there are We are bid to follow them in holines and obedience so farre wee must imitate the Angels as in the Lords prayer 3. Petit. As for imitation and conformitie in other things we haue no such commaundement we are promised hereafter to be like them but that is not yet Neither doth that place proue any such thing Heb. 8. For how followeth it Moses was shewed a paterne to make the Tabernacle by Ergo the Church hath a paterne of her gouernement from Heauen When they can shew any such paterne reuealed in the word for their dreames and phantasies we wil not beleeue for the Church as Moses had for the Tabernacle then they shall say somewhat 2 It is a vaine controuersie so to descant of the Angels as to appoynt them a Captaine and commaunder and to make nine orders or bands of them as our Rhemist annot 1. Ephes. vers 21. These are but their dreames they haue not a worde in Scripture for it And concerning Michael they are much deceiued for in that place Apocal. 12.7 Christ is called Michael Michael and his Angels fought against the Dragon And who I pray you is the chiefe Captaine of the Church against the diuell and his hoast but Christ And so is it expounded verse 10. Now is saluation in Heauen and the strength and Kingdome of our God and the power of his Christ Here hee is called Christ who before is Michael In other places also Michael is vnderstood to be Christ as Dan. 10.21 there is none that holdeth with mee but Michael your Prince here Michael is the prince of the Church and not of the Angels And that Michael is not the prince of the Angels as our aduersaries meane taking Michael for an Angell it is proued out of the 13. verse Michael one of the chiefe princes the Angels are all called princes and not one to bee prince aboue them Likewise the nature and signification of the word Michael agreeth hereunto for it is compounded of three hebrue particles as much as to say one that is equall vnto GOD which name in that sense cannot bee giuen vnto any creature Further Epistle Iud. 9. there is mention made of Michael the Archangell who stroue against the diuell and saide the Lord rebuke thee Sathan where the Apostle alludeth to that place of Zacher 3.2 where the very same words are found but there the prophet calleth him Iehouah that spake those words and here the Apostle calleth him Michael so that in this place it must needes bee vnderstoode for Christ. But to conclude we denie not but that Michael may bee the name of some glorious Angell but out of these places it cannot bee proued And againe we will not stand with them but that there may be degrees of excellencie amongst the Angels as there shall be amongst the Saints but that any one hath any such soueraigne and commaunding authoritie ouer the rest it is a curious and presumptuous surmise 2 The Church of the olde Testament was a figure of the Church vnder the New but they had a high Priest aboue the rest Ergo there ought to be now We answere First we graunt the high Priest was a figure but neither of Peter nor Pope but onely of Christ for in two things did the high Priest resemble Christ in offering of sacrifice so hath Christ offered vp himselfe Heb. 7.27 and in entring into the sanctuarie to make attonement for the people so Christ is entred into the Heauens to appeare in sight for vs before God as the apostle saith Heb. 9.24 I trow in neither of these the high priest could be a type either of Peter or Pope 2 Neither doth it follow because there was an high priest in one countrey therefore there ought to bee one ouer the Churches in al countries as the Iesuite frameth an other argument by a comparison because a bishop is ouer his diocesse a Metropolitane ouer his prouince there may bee as well a Pope ouer the whole Church For by the same reason because a Lorde may bee the chiefe in his seignorie a Duke in his prouince a Prince in his Kingdome therefore there ought to bee an Emperour ouer all the world or as Master Caluine saith because one fielde is committed to one Husbandman to dresse and to till therefore the whole Worlde may which were a thing impossible The Protestants THat there ought not to be any one chiefe Bishop Pope or prelate to exercise iurisdiction ouer the whole Church wee doe thus make it good 1 We acknowledge no head of the Church but Christ neither doth the Scripture attribute this title of Maiestie ouer the whole Church but onely to Christ. If
the Pope or any else bee the head the Church is his bodie which Bellarmine is a shamed to graunt yet Pope Athanasius doubted not to call populos mundi partes corporis sui the people of the Worlde the partes of his bodie Againe if he be the head hee must doe the duetie of an head which is to knit and ioyne the parts together and to giue effectuall power to euery part Ephes. 4.16 Where the Apostle alludeth to the gouernement of mans bodie in the which the parts receiue a double benefite from the head the knitting and ioyning together by sinewes which come from the head and sense and motion also giuen to euery part from the head but it were blasphemie to thinke this of the Pope that he giueth any influence to the Church If they answer he is but a ministeriall head Christ is the principall We say againe that although these things are principallie wrought by the principall head yet they must bee done instrumentally or Ministerially by the Ministeriall head or else it is but a rotten head such an one as the Wolfe found in a caruers shop as you knowe the fable is a goodly head saith hee but without wit or braine If Christ performe all the duetie of the head himselfe then is there no other head if the Pope doe somewhat that belongeth to the head tell vs what is it If hee will bee an head and doe nothing surely hee must needes bee a brainelesse and witlesse head 2 It is a daungerous and impossible thing to haue the charge of all Churches committed to one man GOD alone is sufficient to beare that burthen Saint Paule saith who is sufficient for these things No pastor or minister that is but set ouer one flocke or parish is sufficient to preach the worde much lesse is any one man sufficient to gouerne the whole Church Bellarmine answereth first Saint Paul saith of himselfe that hee had the care of all Churches 2. Corinth 11.28 We replie againe first then belike Saint Paul was vniuersall pastor and not Peter Secondly wee must consider that the Apostles were sent to all the world their calling was not limited when they had planted the Gospell in one place they did take care also for other places but now there is no such Apostolicall calling Thirdly Paul did not beare this burthen alone but the Apostles and Euangelists were his coadiutors and fellow-helpers Secondly sayth he why may not the care of the whole Church bee committed to one man as well as the gouernment almost of the whole world was appointed by God to Nabuchadnezzar Cyrus Augustus seeing the gouernement of the Church is easier then the ciuill and politike regiment We replie First wee neuer reade of any that had dominion ouer the whole world as the Pope chalengeth to haue ouer the whole Church which is dispersed throughout the world Secondly these great and large Monarches are saide to haue been giuen of God Dan. 2.37 Not that this large dominion and vsurpation ouer other countries so much pleased God for the people of God the Israelites in their most flourishing estate neuer had such soueraigntie ouer other countries but by voluntarie subiection as in Solomons dayes 1. King 4.21 the Kings round about brought presents vnto him But because the Lord turned and vsed this their large and mightie dominion to the good of his Church for Cyrus was a defender of the Church against all that bare euill will thereat and the large Empire of the Romans serued very commodiously for the propagation of the Gospell Thirdly the Iesuite sheweth his skill when he saith that the regiment of the Church is easier then the gouernement of the common-wealth Whereas there is no greater and waightier burthen vpon earth then is the charge of soules It seemeth the Pope taketh his ease finding the care of the Church to be so easie and pleasant a thing in deede as he vseth it it is no great matter for hee preacheth not but giueth himselfe to ease and idlenes and all princely pleasures But England hath found by experience and so did that worthie and famous Prince King Henry the eight that there was neuer matter so hardlie compassed as was the reformation of the Church and the suppression of idolatrie and superstition in this lande Augustine saith Nemo nostrum se episcopum episcoporum constituit aut quasi tyrannico terrore ad obsequēdi necessitatem collegas suos adigit de Baptis 2.2 None of vs doth count himselfe a Bishop ouer other Bishops or taketh vpon him after a commaunding manner as tyrants vse to enforce his fellowes to obey Ergo by his iudgement all Bishops are of like and equall authoritie THE SECOND QVESTION WHETHER PETER were the chiefe and Prince of the Apostles and assigned by Christ to bee head of the Church The Papists THis our aduersaries doe stiffelie maintaine that he was not only head of the error 37 Church but of the Apostles also Bellarmi lib. 1. de pontif cap. 11. And the Rhemists doubt not to call him the chiefe and Prince of the Apostles 1. Corinth 9. ver 5. 1 Wee will omitte manie of their waightie arguments as out of these and such like places I haue prayed for thee Peter that thy faith should not fayle cast forth thy net into the deepe I will make thee a Fisher of men Peter payed toll for Christ and himselfe Peter drew the net to the land full of great fish Peter onely drew out his sword in the defence of Christ. Ergo Peter was the Prince of the Apostles and head of the Church ex concil Basilien Fox pag. 673. Such other goodlie arguments our Rhemists doe make Peter did excommunicate Ananias and Sapphira he healed the sicke by his shadow Ergo he was the head of the Church Annot. 5. Acts se. 5.8 Againe Peters person was garded with foure quaternions of Souldiours Act. 12.4 the Church prayed for him Ibid. sect 4. Paul nameth Cephas 1. Cor. 9.5 Ergo hee was chiefe of the Apostles Are not here goodlie arguments thinke you To these reasons I neede make no other answere then that which our learned countrie man dooth in his Annotations You must saith he bring better arguments or else children will laugh you to scorne Fulk Annot. Act. 5. sect 5. Let vs see therefore if they haue any better arguments 2 They take that to be a maine inuincible place for them Matth. 16.18 Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I builde my Church Ergo the Church is built vpon Peter To make this argument the more strong they set vnder it diuerse props First why did Christ giue Peter this name more then to any other of the Apostles to call him Peter of Petra a Rocke but to shew that hee was appointed to be the foundation of the Church Bellarmine cap. 17. Wee answer Christ hereby signified that Peter should bee a principall piller of his Church as the rest of the Apostles Ephes. 2. He chaunged also the
names of some other Apostles as Iames and Iohn were called Boanerges the sonnes of thunder Mark 3. Therefore this was no such preeminence to Peter neither is it true that Peter was almost called by no other name for he is oftē in the Gospel after this called by his old name Simon Mat. 16.17 17 25. Fulk Annot. in Ioh. 1. sec. 7. Secondly againe saith Bellarmine the text is aedificabo I will build my Church but if Christ be here taken for the rocke his Church was built alreadie for many beleeued in him But Peter was not made the foundation of his Church till afterward after his resurrection and therefore hee saith I will build Wee answere First it is a corrupt glosse to say the Church of Christ was not builded till after the resurrection for seeing that many beleeued before in Christ and made a Church either they must graunt that the Church was without a foundation or else that the foundation was changed from Christ to Peter Secondlie it is taken therefore for the enlarging and increasing of the Church of GOD. It followeth not because Christ saith I will build and his Church was begun to bee built alreadie that therefore another kinde of building must bee excogitate no more then because Christ gaue his spirite to the Apostles Matth. 10.1 and againe Iohn 20.22 and yet biddeth them stay at Ierusalem till they should receiue the holie Ghost Acts. 1.7 that therefore they should looke for another holy Ghost or as though they had not receiued the holy Ghost before But as the sending of the holy Ghost is meant for the increase and more plentifull measure thereof so is the building of the Church here taken for the increase of the building Wee yet further answere with Augustine super hanc petram quam confessus es aedificabo ecclesiam vppon this rocke which thou hast confessed will I build my Church so that in this place is meant not Peter to bee the rocke but either Christ whome he confessed or his saith whereby he confessed him which commeth all to one effect There is no great difference whether wee say the Church is builded vppon Christ or faith is the foundation of the Church for faith is an apprehension of Christ but of the person of Peter it can no more bee vnderstoode then of the rest of the Apostles who in some sence are called the foundation of the Church namely in respect of their holy Apostolick doctrine vpon the which the Church is built Ephes. 2.20 Bellarmine and the Iesuites denie not but here is relation also to the faith of Peter but faith considered in his person We answere if they meane Peters particular faith which was a proper adiunct to himselfe the vniuersall Church cannot be built vpon that faith seeing when Peter dyed his faith also as a proper accident to his person ceased if they vnderstand that generall faith whereby Peter in the name of all the rest made this confession then they all are as well made pillars and foundations of the Church as he because it was their generall confession Fulk annot in 16. Matth. sect 8. 3 Another place which our aduersaries mightely vrge are those words which follow verse 19. I will giue vnto thee the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen whatsoeuer thou shalt binde in earth shal be bound in Heauen Ergo Peter had especiall iurisdiction giuen him more then any of the rest Bellarmine cap. 12. Wee answere First as Peter confessed in the name of all the rest so this power is geuen him not onelie for the rest as the Rhemists falslie charge vs that we make Peter a proctor for others but together with the rest Peters person must be excluded for immediately after he deserued for a certaine slip of his person to bee called Sathan it were an vnfit match the same person at the same time to be honoured with the glorious title of the rock of Christ and to sustaine so great a rebuke as to bee called Sathan Secondlie here is no more promised to Peter then vnto all the rest of the Apostles Matth. 18.18 They likewise haue authoritie giuen them to binde and loose and it is performed to them all alike Iohn 20.23 2 By the keyes here cannot be vnderstoode that large iurisdiction which the Papists dreame of as not onely the authoritie and chaire of doctrine iudgement knoweledge discretion betweene true and false doctrine all which we graunt together with Peter to haue been giuen to al the Apostles besides But say they hereby is signified the height of gouernement the power of making lawes of calling Councels and confirming them of ordeyning Bishops and Pastors finally to dispense the goods of the Church spirituall and temporall all this is added without ground neither had either Peter or any of the Apostles this ample authoritie no nor the Bishops of Rome for many hundred yeares after Christ. For this plenarie power of the keyes when they signifie a soueraigne and chiefe and surpassing power are so onely giuen vnto Christ and to no mortall creature He is saide to haue the keye of Dauid who openeth and no man shutteth who shutteth and no man openeth Apocalip 3.7 Fulk Annot. 16. Matth. sect 13. Lastly I will oppose the iudgement of the Fathers of the Church who alleadge out of Augustine that Peter receiued the keyes for the whole Church and out of Ambrose that when Christ said to Peter pasce oues the blessed Apostle toke not charge of them alone saith he but together with vs and we together with him Fax pag. 675. 4 Other arguments they alleadge for the primacie and preeminence of Peter as Matthew 10. Hee is named in the first place Bellarmine cap. 18. Wee answere this mought bee because Peter was the most auncient in yeeres or one of the first that was called But howsoeuer it was it is no great matter for this order is not alwaie kept as Galath 2. Paul nameth Iames first Iames Cephas Iohn saith hee verse 9. the Iesuits best shift is heere to denie the text saying it should bee read Cephas Iames Iohn vnlesse Iames bee named first because he was Bishop of Ierusalem Marke I pray you Ergo at Ierusalem Peter was not before Iames but next vnto him therfore not prince of the Apostles Bellarm. cap. 18. Againe say they Peter standeth vp in the election of Matthias Acts 1. preacheth the first Sermon Acts 2. Acts. 15. Peter speaketh first Wee answere to the first Wee denie not a primacie of order to haue been in Peter but it followeth not that hee which speaketh first or giueth the first voyce should bee the head and commaunder of the rest to the second wee also graunt that Peter in zeale promptnes and forwardnes was not behinde any of the Apostles but euen with the first for in him was that saying of Christ verified vppon the woman Shee loued much because much was forgiuen her Luk 7 So was it with Peter to whome Christ forgaue much
and therefore hee loued much To the third wee answere that by the Iesuites owne confession Iames who was as they say Bishoppe of Ierusalem had the primacie there how then can they now giue it to Peter The Protestants THat Peter had no such iurisdiction ouer the Apostles as to bee called the head and Prince of them but that to them all indifferentlie were the keyes committed and did all faithfullie execute their Apostleship without any subiection of each to other but ioyned the right hands of fellowship together we thus confirme it out of the holy Scripture and necessarie arguments deriued out of the same 1 Ephes. 2.20 Apocalips 21.14 The Church is said to bee built vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Ergo no primacie of power amongst the Apostles they all founded the Church Bellarmine confesseth that in respect of their doctrine there was no difference betweene Peter and the rest for they all were first planters of Churches they all preached the Gospell by reuelation But in respect of gouernement they were not equall they had chiefe authoritie committed to them as Apostles and Embassadors of Christ But Peter as ordinarie pastor Wee answere First by his owne confession the Apostles had chiefe authoritie as Apostles but there was no higher authoritie or power then of the Apostleship but as they were Apostles they were equall saith the Iesuite Ergo there could be no superioritie for the calling of the Apostles was the highest in the Church 2 To preach the Gospell and to haue iurisdiction of gouernement do both belong to the power of the keyes but the keyes were equallie committed to all Ergo they had all equall power both to preach and to gouerne That they all had the power of the keyes equallie graunted vnto them wee haue proued before out of Matth. 18.18 2 Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that Iames was Bishop and ordinarie pastor at Ierusalem and saith with Anselme and Thomas Aquinas that therefore he is named first by Saint Paule Gal. 2. Bellarm. cap. 19. Therefore at Ierusalem Peter was to giue primacie to the ordinarie pastor there If they answere that Rome was then the chiefe citie and therefore Peter being Bishop of Rome was to haue the preeminence To this we replie that Ierusalem was rather to be preferred in respect of place which was chosen by the Lord himselfe to be the chiefe citie of his Church But Rome through the tyrannie and vsurpation of the Romans ouer other countries was aduanced to that dignitie not by the election of God But Bellarmine answereth that Peter was Bishop of the whole Church and so of Ierusalem too We answere he now saith lesse for Peter then if hee called him as he was the Apostle of the whole world for it was more to be an Apostle thā a Bishop Diuers were called in the Apostles times episcopi ouerseers or Bishops that were not Apostles as the pastors of Ephesus Act. 20.28 Wherefore now hee hath saide iust nothing in seeking to aduance Peter hee hath disgraced him in pulling him downe from his high Apostleship to the chaire of a Bishop 3 Peter had no superioritie ouer Paul for they ioyned right handes of fellowship and this allotment was made betweene them that Paule should bee the chiefe of the Gentiles and Peter of the circumcision Galath 2.9 Ergo. Bellarmine answereth First they were ioyned as fellow-laborers in the preaching of the Gospell but Peter might for all this bee greater in the office and power of gouerning Wee answere yea but the text saith that Paule onelie was not appointed to preach to the Gentiles but hee had the chiefe Apostleship Now to the Apostleship belongeth not onely the function of preaching but the whole vse of the keyes and power of iurisdiction Ergo in all respects Saint Paule ouer the Gentiles had the chiefe Apostleship But let any man say that this was a humane compact amongst themselues and Paul had his lotte at Peters assignement the text sheweth that the Lorde himselfe had made this distribution For when they sawe saith Saint Paul that the Gospell ouer the vncircumcision was committed to mee verse 7. So then the Apostles did but confirme by their consent that distribution which they sawe the Lord himselfe had appoynted Further saith the Iesuite the diuision was not so made but that it was lawfull for Peter also to preache to the Gentiles Wee answeare wee graunt it and for Paule to preache to the Iewes yet that distinction remayned still that Peter was chiefe of the circumcision Paule of the vncircumcision Againe saith hee but Peter had the more excellent lotte for Christ himselfe first preached to the Iewes Wee answere wee denie not but that hee had the first lotte in order for to the Iewes was the Gospell first offered but Paul had the larger and more glorious lotte the Church of the Iewes now decaying and the Gentiles beginning to be planted in their roome But howsoeuer it was it cannot bee denied but that Paule was chiefe towards the Gentiles And therefore the Church of Rome might with better right haue deriued their authoritie from S. Paul then from Peter Both of them they cannot make patrons of their See seeing by their owne rules the Pope cannot be successor to them both Further out of the same place Galath 2.11 an other thing commeth to bee obserued that Peter was rebuked of Paule and in such sort that it appeareth there was no great inequality between them for he doth it to his face openlie before all men and at Antioch in Peters owne Bishopricke as they say can it be now thought that Paul was any thing inferior to Peter Bellarmine and the Iesuits answere that the Pope may bee rebuked of an inferior and ought to take it patiently if it be done in zeale and loue Aunswere First wee doe not simplie thus conclude because Paul reprehended Peter therefore he was not his superior but because of the manner as we shewed it was done in such sorte so plainely so openly without any submission or crauing of pardon that there can appeare no inequalitie at all betweene them Secondly although they seeme heere to graunt that the Pope may be rebuked yet is it otherwise in their Canon lawe which saith that though the Pope doe leade innumerable soules to hell no mortall man may presume to reprooue his faultes part 1. distin 4. cap. Si Papa Fulk Annot. in Gala. 2. sect 8. 4 Lastlie what reason was there why Christ should giue the supremacie to Peter ouer the rest Christ was no acceptor of persons if hee had bene Iohn should haue bene preferred whom he loued most If deserts be weighed I think Peter deserued no more then the rest of his fellowes Nay I thinke the wisedome of the Spirit foreseeing the questions that should afterward arise in the Church about Peter hath so disposed that this Apostles infirmities both in number more and weight greater then any of the rest should be euidentlie set forth in
Scripture We will brieflie runne them ouer not to derogate from the blessed memorie of so excellent an Apostle but a litle to stay and bridle the preposterous zeale of our aduersaries who doe ascribe more vnto him then euer he would haue challenged to himselfe To let passe the smaller slippes and scapes of this Apostle as his rashnesse in aduenturing beyond his strength to walke vppon the Sea Matth. 14. Secondlie his vnaduised speech in the Mountaine Math. 17. let vs make three Tabernacles thirdlie his ignorance Matth. 19. In saying to Christ how often shall I forgiue my brother till seuen times Fourthlie his impatiencie as in drawing out his sworde and cutting off Malchus eare Fifthlie his timorousnesse in flying from Christ at his apprehension Sixtlie his curiositie Iohn 21. In asking concerning Iohn what shall this man doe To let passe these as common infirmities There are fower great faultes which Peter fell into much amplified and stoode vppon by the fathers 1 He deâ—orted our Sauiour from his passion with these words Master fauour thy selfe Math. 16. and was therefore called Sathan an aduersarie to the death of Christ and so to the redemption of man Augustine chargeth him with great forgetfulnes hauing made so notable a confession of Christ before and noteth him for some sparkes of distrust and infidelitie Ille Petrus qui iam eum confessus fuerat filium dei timuit ne sicut filius hominis moreretur in Psal. 138. The same Peter sayth he which a little before had confessed him to be the Sonne of God feared lest he should dye and perish as a man 2 In promising rashly not to denye Christ yea vnto death whereas Christ had foretold him of his fall before Augustine noteth great presumption Petrus ex egregio praesumptore creber negator effectus Epist. 120. cap. 14. Peter of a great presumer is become a desperate denyer 3 The third great sinne was committed by Peter in denying of Christ and that thrice yea with an oath at the instance of a mayden and in a very short while before the cocke crewe twise Mark 14.72 The Iesuite answereth that this was no hinderance to Peters primacie but a furtherance and a confirmation of it But whether it were a let to his primacie or not let all men iudge seeing it had been sufficient to haue hindered his saluation and destroyed his faith without the great mercie of God Let vs heare Augustines iudgement of Peters fall Some man may excuse Peter and say that he did nothing but as Christ forewarned him What then sayth he if Peter therefore did not amisse because his fall was foretold by Christ Rectè etiam fecit Iudas qui tradidit dominum quia hoc praedixerat dominus then Iudas did well too sayth he in betraying of Christ for this also Christ shewed afore But some agayne may say he denyed not Christ for hee sayd hee knewe not the man Quasi vero sayth he qui hominem Christum negat non Christum neget as though hee that denyeth the man Christ doth not flatly denye Christ. Christ also taketh away all doubts saith he when he thus said to Peter the cock shall not crowe till thou hast denyed me thrice he sayth not till thou hast denyed the man but me Agayne Ipse potius redarguit defensores suos Peter himselfe doth confute his maintayners and defenders Agnouit planè peccatum suum infirmitas Petri Peters owne conscience gaue him that hee had sinned for he went out and wept bitterly But if by this meanes his primacie was confirmed he had occasion to reioyce and not to weepe Yea he wept bitterly his sinne was very great how then dare one of your sect say with a blasphemous mouth Petrus non fidem Christi sed Christum salua fide negauit Peter denyed not the faith of Christ but his faith remayning safe and sound he denyed Christ The ancient writers durst not so extenuate Peters fall no nor Peter himselfe that wept full sore as these men presume to doe 4 The last fault noted in Peter was that for the which he is reproued of Paul Act. 2. Tush saith Bellarmine it was a very small and light offence Yea was it so smal a fault to constrayne the Gentiles to doe like the Iewes for this was the poynt as S. Paul writeth Galath 2.14 And Augustine saith Petrus non obiurgatus a Paulo fuit quòd seruabat consuetudinem Iudaeorum in qua natus educatus fuit sed quòd eam gentibus imponere volebat Exposit. ad Galat. Peter was not rebuked of Paule because hee kept the custome of the Iewes wherein hee was brought vp but because he would lay it vpon the Gentiles Was this leuissimum peccatum a small transgression S. Paule should greatly haue been to blame for rebuking Peter openly and so plainly for so small an offence and should haue done agaynst his owne rule Galath 6.1 But Peter did it of a good mind sayth Bellarmine Yea did then he was worthie to be excused not worthie of blame as S. Paule writeth He might also doe it ignorantly and vnwittingly saith hee How can that be seeing he was one that made the decree Act. 15 That no yoke should be layd vpon the Gentiles other then there expressed and now contrarie to that decree hee constrayneth the Gentiles Iudaizare to play the Iewes These things doe not hang together I will now conclude out of Augustine as hee alleageth out of Cyprian Nec Petrus cum secum Paulus de circumcisione disceptaret postmodum vindicauit sibi aliquid insolenter vt diceret se primatum tenere De baptis 2.2 Howsoeuer it was Peter when Paule reasoned thus with him did not stand vpon his pantofles chalenge any primacie to himselfe But it is very like if there had been any such primacie in Peter of power and iurisdiction a primacie of order wee graunt as Cyprian in that place calleth Peter primum the first that this sharpe reprehension of Paul should either haue been spared or els not done in that vehement manner THE THIRD QVESTION CONCERNING Peter his being at Rome THis question hath two parts first whether Peter were at all at Rome or not Secondly whether he were Bishop of Rome THE FIRST PART WHETHER PETER were at Rome error 38 OVR aduersaries would seeme to prooue it by these and such like arguments 1 Out of that place of S. Peter 1.5.13 the Church that is at Babylon saluteth you Babylon here say they is taken for Rome from whence Peter wrote his Epistle Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 2. de pontif Rhemens argum in 1. Epist. Petri. We answere First it is a sillie argument for them hereby to proue Peters being at Rome for thus much they haue gayned by it that Rome is Babylon and so the seate of Antichrist Reuel 18. Secondly there were two Babylons one in Syria the other in Aegypt from either of which S. Peter might dare his epistle and it is most like that he
sometime Iames sate and Iohn now sitteth In those words Augustine ascribeth as much to the succession of other Apostolicall Churches as he doth to the succession of the Bishops of Rome And therefore Canisius craftely leaueth out the one half of the sentence cōcerning the Church of Ierusalem Neither is it true which our aduersaries say that Peters Sea remaineth still at Rome when all other Apostolicall Sees are gone for euen to this day the See of Antioch standeth and hath a Patriark likewise the See of Alexandria The See of Constantinople neuer wanted successors to this day nor the Church of Ephesus In India and Aethiopia there hath been alwaies a succession in those Churches planted by the Apostles and is at this day Fulk 2. Thess. 2. sect 7. Wherefore they haue no cause to bragge of their succession which is found in other places as well as at Rome THE FIFT QVESTION CONCERNING THE primacie of the See of Rome THis question hath diuers partes which must be handled in their order First whether the Bishop of Rome haue authority ouer other Bishops Secondly whether appeales ought to be made to Rome from other countries Thirdly whether the Pope be subiect to the iudgemēt of any Fourthly whether he may be deposed Fiftly what primacie he hath ouer other Churches how it began Sixtly of the titles and names giuen to the Bishops of Rome THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE BISHOP of Rome hath authoritie ouer other Bishops The Papists error 41 THey doubt not to say that the Bishop of Rome hath authoritie and ought so to haue to ordaine and constitute Bishops to depriue and depose them to restore them likewise to their former dignities and this power hee exerciseth ouer the vniuersall Church The Iesuites principall only argument is drawen from certain examples how the Bishops of Rome haue in times past constituted deposed and restored some Bishops in the Greeke Church as in the patriarchal Seas of Constantinople Alexandria Antioch Ergo hee hath power ouer all Bishops We answere First It was not done by the absolute authority of the Roman Bishops any such constitution or deposition though perhappes their consent and allowance were required as Leo writeth thus to Martianus the Emperour about the ordayning of Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople Satis sit quod vestrae pietatis auxilio mei fauoris assensu episcopatum tantae vrbis obtinuit It is sufficient that by your godly helpe and my fauourable assent he hath obtained so famous a Bishoprick Whether was greater now the help and furtherance of the Emperor or the base assent of Leo Secondly wee denie not but that the Pope sometimes what by sufferance of others what by his owne intrusion hath vsurped this power ouer other Bishops by this ought not to make a law that which is once or twise done by a false title cannot prooue the iustnes of the title Thirdly that the Bishop of Rome hath no such authoritie it appeareth by this that he doth not neither of many yeares hath constituted or ordayned the patriarks of the Greeke Church they came not vp to Rome nor yet sent thither for their palls as other Archbishops here in the West parts haue done paied full dearely for them being made slaues to the beast of Rome The Protestants THat the Pope neither hath nor yet ought to haue any such authority ouer other Bishops but that euery one in his owne precinct and iurisdiction hath the chiefe charge It is thus proued 1. Peter was not chiefe neither did exercise iurisdiction ouer the twelue Ergo neither the Pope ought to doe ouer other Bishops The antecedent or first part is thus confirmed The heauenly Hierusalem which is the Church of God is described Apocal. 21. not with one foundation onely of Peter but with 12. foundations after the number of the Apostles argument Tunstalli To this purpose also hee alleadgeth in saying out of Hierome contra Iouinian All the Apostles receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and vpon them all indifferently and equally is the strength of the Church grounded and established Fox p. 1066. 2. Till the yeare of the Lord 340. there was no respect had to the Church of Rome but euery Church was ruled by their owne gouernment afterward followed the Councel of Nice wherein was decreed that the whole Church should be deuided into foure circuites or precincts ouer the which there were foure Metropolitanes or patriarkes set first the Bishop of Rome next the Bishop of Alexandria the third was the Bishop of Antioch the fourth the Bishop of Ierusalem and not long after came in the Bishop of Constantinople in the roume of the B. of Antioch All these had equall authoritie in their prouinces and one was not to deale within anothers charge Ergo the Bishop of Rome had not then the iurisdiction ouer the whole Church argument Nili plura Fox p. 9. 3. We will adioyne the testimonie of the fathers of Basile which were all of the Popish sect what haue the Bishops been in our daies say they but only shadowes might they not haue been called shepheards without sheepe what had they more then their Miters and their staffe when they could determine nothing ouer their subiects Verily in the primitiue Church the Bishops had the greatest power and authoritie but now it was come to that poynt that they exceeded the common sort of priests onely in their habite and reuenewes What plainer testimonie can we haue then from the papists themselues Augustine also agreeth to their sentence habet omnis episcopus saith he pro licētia libertatis potestatis suae arbitrium propriū tanquam iudicari ab alio nō possit quomodo nec ipse potest alium iudicare sed expectemus vniuersi iudiciū domini nostri Iesu Christi Euery Bishop is priuiledged by his own authoritie to follow his owne iudgement neither is subiect to the iudgement of other Bishops as he is not to iudge them but they all must be referred to the iudgement of Christ See then in this place Augustine setteth Bishops in the highest roume in the Church and sayth they haue no iudge aboue them but Christ. THE SECOND PART CONCERNING APpeales to bee made to Rome The Papists SVch say they is the preeminēt authority of the Bishop of Rome that appeals error 42 may be made vnto him from all Churches in the world and that all ought to stand to his sentence and determination For the proofe hereof they bring no scripture nor any sound argumēt but stand chiefly vpon certain odde examples of some that haue appealed to Rome which we denie not to haue been done but our answere more at large is this 1. One cause of these appeales was both for that they which were iustly cōdemned of other Churches found greater liberty and fauour at Rome as Apiarius did who being condemned in the 6. Aphricane Councel for his detestable conditions found fauour with Zosimus Bishop of Rome who
wrote for him to the Councel to be receiued agayne No maruayle then if licentious fellowes hoping to finde more fauour at Rome did appeale thither As also the ambition of the Bishops of Rome did somewhat helpe forward this matter who were as ready to receiue such appeales as others were to make them 2. Bishop Tunstal doth answere very fully to this poynt that although appeales were made to Rome yet was it not for any iurisdiction that the See had but this was the cause partly for that there were many deuisions and parts taking in the Oriental Churches as also because many were infected with heresies from the which the West Occidētal Churches were more free they were content to referre the cause many times to the Bishop of Rome as being a more indifferent iudge and not like to be partial being no partie in the cause Neither was their 〈◊〉 to the Bishop of Rome singularly but to the whole congregation of the Bishops of Italie and France or of the whole West as it appeareth by the epistles of Basile Tunstal apud Fox 1067. The Protestants That appeales ought not to be made to Rome but that all matters and controuersies may best be ended and determined at home where they doe arise It is thus confirmed 1. This matter was notably handled anno 420. in the sixt Councel of Carthage where Augustine was present with Prosper and Orosius To this Councel Pope Zozimus sent his Legate with certaine requests of the which this was one that it might be lawful for Bishops and priests to appeale from the sentence of their Metropolitanes and also of the Councel to Rome alleadging for him self a decree of the Nicene Councel The Councel of Carthage sent forthwith to the patriarkes of Cōstantinople Antioch Alexandria for a copie of the Coūcel of Nice wherein no such Canon was found that appeales should bee made to Rome but the contrary for in the sixt Canon of that Councel it was founde how all matters and all persons ecclesiasticall both Bishops and others were committed to their Metropolitanes vpon this decree the Councel of Carthage drew out certain reasons why appeales should not be made to Rome First it is not otherwise to be thought but that the grace of God is as ready at hande in one prouince as in another Secondly there is no neede to seeke any outlandish help for the partie grieued may appeale to a prouinciall or generall Councel Thirdly it were not equall nor right to appeale from the Councel to the Bishop of Rome for it is not like that God will inspire his truth vnto the Bishop and denie it to a multitude congregated in his name Fourthly no forraine or outlandish iudgement can be so vpright or iust because the witnesses cannot be present being hindered by infirmitie of sex age sicknes by whom the truth should be discussed Vpon these reasons the Councel concluded that neither any appeales should be made to Rome neither that Legates should be sent from Rome for deciding of matters And this answere they made to Zozimus first to Bonifacius and Celestinus that in short time one succeeded another And for all the B. of Rome his absolution Apiarius was againe called coram and brought to confesse his fault Fox p. 10. col 2. Now out of the Acts of this Councel and their reasons alleadged wee conclude that it is not fit conuenient nor reasonable that appeals should be made to Rome The Iesuite answereth that appeales were forbidden to be made by priests to Rome not by Bishops This is but a vaine shift for the reasons of the Councel are general against all appeales And Apiarius that appealed to Rome was a priest and no Bishop 2. We can bring the decrees of a latter Councell then this of Carthage for in the Councell of Basile it was decreed that no actions or controuersies should be brought from other countries to be pleaded at Rome which were more then foure daies iourney distant from the said court of Rome a few principall matters onely excepted apud Fox p. 697. 3. This also is flatly contrary to the rule of the Apostle that appellations should be made out of the Church a far off Is it so sayth hee that there is not a wise man amongst you no not one that can iudge amongst his brethren 1. Cor. 6.5 Ergo euery Church hath wise men sufficient in it whereby their controuersies may be ended 4. Augustine also thus writeth concerning this matter Miltiades Episcopus Romanus non sibi vsurpauit iudicium de causa Ceciliani sed rogatus imperator iudices misit Episcopos qui cum eo sederent epist. 162. Miltiades Bishop of Rome did not vsurpe or take vpon himselfe to iudge the cause of Cecilian but the Emperour being requested sent other bishops that should sit and determine the cause together with him Out of these words first we note that it had beene vsurpation and presumption for the Bishop of Rome to haue taken vpon him the iudgement of this matter not belonging vnto him vnlesse the Emperor had committed it Secondly that Miltiades did not suffer other Bishops to sitte with him as Bellarmine imagineth but he could not otherwise choyse for they were ioyned in commission by the Emperour to be iudges as well as he Thus we see what small shew or colour of title the Pope hath to heare or receiue appeales from other countries THE THIRD PART WHETHER THE Pope be subiect to the iudgement of anye The Papists error 43 THe Pope neither can nor ought to bee iudged either of the Emperour or anie other Seculare or ecclesiasticall Magistrate no not of any generall Councel Bellarmin cap. 26. Nay hee should doe iniurie vnto GOD to submit himselfe to the iudgement of any Iacobat ex Tilhemann de pontif rom err 34. Beside certayne blinde canons and constitutions and a fewe examples grounded vpon the insolent practises of Popes they haue no other arguments either out of scripture or drawen from reason to confirme this their hideous and monstrous opinion withal Bellarmine reasoneth thus the Prince is not to bee iudged by the commonwealth but is greater then his kingdome the Pope is the prince of the Church Ergo We answere First concerning the Princes high and Soueraigne authority we will not now dispute we make it not infinite the word of God must bee a rule and square both of ciuill and ecclesiasticall iudgement Secondly It is sufficient for vs here to answere that the Iesuite hath sayd nothing for this which he assumeth for a reason is the greatest matter in question between vs and so great an vntruth he hath vttered that he is constrained to leaue scripture and seeke helpe else-where But he shall neuer by any good reason or sufficient authority prooue that the Pope hath any such Princedome in the Church as he would beare vs in hand The Protestants THat the Pope as well as other ecclesiasticall persons ought to be and is by right subiect to the
iudgement and authoritie of the Emperor King Prince or other supreame magistrate and may also by generall Councels be corrected and censured thus it is proued 1. Peter was iudged of Paul Galat. 2. and of him iustly reproued Ergo the doings of the Pope may be iudged and censured Bellarmine answereth that it was not iudicialis censurae but fraterna correptio it was no iudiciall censure but a brotherly reprehension We replie First publike censure and reprehension is a part of ecclesiasticall iudgement and discipline therefore Peter being publikely rebuked was therby iudged also of Paul Secondly the question is not onely concerning publike open iudgement but whether it be lawfull to call the Popes doings into question whether his decrees are absolutely to be receiued without any scāning or discussing or making any doubt thereof for this we hold that it is the duety of all Christians to examine and trie the trueth of all things which they are to receiue and beleeue though they sit not formally and iudicially as in consistories to iudge their spirituall pastors so the Beraeans iudged of the Apostles doctrine so may the Popes decrees be examined and iudged Thirdly the Iesuite granteth that the Pope may be rebuked and brotherly reproued but the Extrauagant denieth it non est qui audeat dicere domine curfacis sic none dare say vnto him sir why doest thou so 2. Euery soule must be subiect to the higher powers Ergo the Pope Rom. 13.1 Bellarm. answereth that the Apostle here speaketh of all superiours both spirituall and temporall and therefore it cannot bee concluded that the Pope ought to obey but hee must bee obeyed because hee is also a spirituall power We replie Saint Paul in this place speaketh onely of the ciuill Magistrate First he calleth them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Princes which is not meant of ecclesiasticall or Church gouernors nor so taken in any place of scripture Secondly they are sayd to beare the sword Thirdly tribute is payde to them those thinges agree not to ecclesiasticall gouernors so the Iesuite is answered THE FOVRTH PART WHETHER THE Pope may be deposed from his papacie The Papists SOme of them holde that the Pope ought not neither can be deposed for heresie error 44 because it is not possible for the Pope to fall into heresie Pighius the Iesuite confesseth this to be a probable opinion but himselfe defendeth it not he confesseth also the opinion of Caietanus that the Pope may be deposed for manifest and apparant heresie Bellarmines opinion is this that the pope can not be deposed for any cause but heresie and not for all heresie but that which is manifest and apparant Neither is he then deposed by any act of the Church but is of himselfe deposed and ceaseth any more to bee pope so the Church may afterward punish him but he is then no Pope for as soone as he is become an hereticke his popedome in the very Acte is gone from him Bellarmin cap. 30. He reasoneth thus A manifest hereticke is not so much as a member of the Church much lesse can he be pope who they say is the heade of the Church and therefore in such a case the pope is deposed without anie sentence and if afterward the Church proceede against him they doe not iudge the Pope for he had lost his papacie before We answer First if a manifest hereticke be actually deposed it is by the secret iudgement and sentence of God for by no other authority can he be deposed as they hold but before God manifest heresie and close and secret heresie is all one therefore the Pope is also actually deposed for secret heresie and not onely for manifest and so some of the papists think as Iohann de Turre veniata Secondly what call you manifest heresie or how is hee knowen to bee a manifest hereticke Can hee bee an heretick before hee bee conuinced shall iudgement passe against him vncondemned A murtherer is a dead man by lawe yet hee liueth till iudgement passe vpon him so is the Pope beeing an heretick yet Pope till he be iudicially proceeded against as a murtherer dead by right is in act yet liuing till by law he is depriued of his life An heretick sayth Saint Paul after two or three admonitions auoyd that is saith the Iesuite he is now excommunicate before the sentence of the iudge Be it so but hee must first be admonished and if he still continue obstinate then he is a manifest heretike so before the Pope can be knowen to be a manifest heretick he must be found obstinate he cannot be obstinate vnlesse he refuse to be admonished if he be admonished then is he iudged Thirdly an heretick ceaseth not to bee a priest as they speake no not after heresie is knowen for manifest heretickes may baptize The Donatists in Augustines time were manifest hereticks and yet the Church did not baptize againe after them If a manifest heretick cease not to be a priest neither ceaseth he to be Pope there is like reason of both for if an heretick because he is not a member of the Church can not be a Pope neither also can he retayne the priesthood Lastly who seeth not what bare and friuolous shifts those are one saith the Church may iudge the Pope not as he is Pope but in respect of his person an other sayth that they may iudge the man which was Pope but hee is then no Pope because his heresie tooke from him the papacie Why masters what iugling is here is the Pope one thing and the Popes person an other By the same reason you may say that the Pope neither eateth nor drinketh nor sleepeth nor dieth and so make a god of him because it is the popes person that doth all this and not the Pope And by this shift you make no difference betweene an heretick Bishop o◠heretick priest and heretick Pope for by the same reason none of them all shall be subiect to the iudgement of the Church for we may say that a manifest heretick whether Bishop or priest hath lost by that very act of falling into heresie his priesthood and Bishoprick and then is neither Bishop nor priest And so you may conclude altogether that neither Pope Bishop nor piest can bee deposed from heresie The Protestants WE doubt not to say that the Pope both lawfully hath been depriued somtime by the Emperour somtime by generall Councels not onely for hesie but for other notable crimes and may still bee proceeded agaynst by the same right as well as any other Bishop or Prelate 1 Diuers examples wee are able to bring forth how the Pope hath been deposed for other crimes beside heresie Pope Iohn the 13. was deposed in a generall Councel by the consent of Otho the Emperour for other matter beside heresie as that he ordayned Deacons in a stable that he committed incest with two of his sisters that playing at dice he called to the diuell for helpe
that he defloured virgins that he lay with Stephana his fathers concubine likewise with Ramera and Anna and her Neece for these beastlie parts and such like he was deposed there was no heresie obiected agaynst him And thinke you not he was worthily vnpoped yet the Papists thinke no for they admit no cause of depriuation but heresie This deuillish Pope through the harlots of Rome for he was well beloued of them recouered his Popedome agayne but at the length the Lord himselfe displaced him for in the tenth yeere of his Popedome being founde without the citie with an other mans wife hee was so wounded of her husbande that within eight dayes after hee dyed Fox pag. 159. Boniface the 7. tooke Pope Iohn the 15. who was made Pope a little before and hee expelled yet recouering the Papacie by force hee tooke him put out his eyes and threwe him in prison where he was famished Likewise was Iohn the 18. serued by Gregorie the 5. his eyes were thrust out first and he afterward slayne I meruaile how our Catholikes can excuse these furious outrages of their ghostly fathers of Rome In the Councel of Brixia Gregorie the 7. was deposed not for heresie but for other abominable vices as maintayning of periurie and murthers for following Diuinations Dreames Sorcerie Necromancie Fox p. 181. Pope Iohn the 23. deposed in the Councel of Constance Eugenius in the Councel at Basile yet neither of them for heresie And yet our aduersaries would still make vs beleeue that Popes cannot be deposed for any crime but heresie 2 We can haue no better argument then from our aduersaries themselues It is a sport to see what diuers opinions they hold and doe runne as it were in a maze not knowing which way to get out Pighius thinketh that the Pope cannot possiblie fall into heresie and therefore for no cause may bee deposed Some other thinke that the Pope for secret and close heresie is actually deposed of GOD and may also bee deposed and iudged of the Church thus holdeth Iohann de turre cremat Caietanus is of opinion that for manifest and open heresie the Pope is both alreadie by right deposed and may also actually be deposed of the Church But Bellarmine confuteth all these There is a fourth opinion most grosse that the Pope neither for secret nor open heresie is either alreadie of right deposed or may be actually depriued of the Church Lastly commeth in the nice and daintie Iesuite with his quirkes and quiddities who sayth that the Pope in case of manifest heresie ceaseth to bee Pope and is euen now deposed and if after the Church proceede agaynst him they iudge not the Pope for now hee is no Pope Which opinion how absurd it is I haue declared before THE FIFT PART CONCERNING THE ORIGInall and beginning of the primacie of Rome The Papists THey doe boldly affirme without any ground that the primacie of that See error 45 hath his beginning from no other but Christ they are the Iesuites owne words Romani pontificis ecclesiasticum principatum authore Christo principium accepisse that the princely dignitie of the Bishop of Rome acknowledgeth no other author or beginner thereof but Christ Bellarm. cap. 7. lib. 2. 1 They would build the primacie of the Romane Church vpon certaine places of scripture as Math. 16. Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I build my Church Luk. 22. I haue prayed for thee Peter that thy faith should not faile Iohn 21. Christ sayd to Peter feede my sheepe Ergo Peter and Peters successors haue their primacie from Christ Bellarm. To these places Tunstal and Stokeslie two Popish Bishops yet in this poynt holding the truth did properly make answere in their Epistle sent to Cardinall Poole To the first They affirme out of the ancient expositors that it is ment of the faith which was then first confessed by the mouth of Peter and not of Peters person Further confirming out of S. Paul that neither Peter nor no creature beside could bee the foundation of the Church for no other foundation can any man lay sayth the Apostle besides that which is layd Iesus Christ 1. Cor. 3. To the second they answere that Christ speaketh onely of the fall of Peter which hee knewe in his godlie prescience giuing an inkling vnto him that after his fall hee should bee conuerted and strengthen his brethren for if it were ment also of Peters successors they must first faile in faith and after confirme their brethren To the third The whole flock of Christ was not committed to Peter to feede for he himselfe testifieth the contrarie exhorting all Pastors to feede the flocke of Christ which was giuen them in charge by Christ as it followeth in that place when the chiefe shepheard shall appeare ye shall receiue the incorruptible Crowne of eternall glorie He calleth not himselfe the chiefe shepheard but onely Christ. It is euident therefore say they that your 3. scriptures ment nothing lesse then such a primacie ouer all Fox pag. 1067. 2 There can bee no time assigned since Christ say they when this primacie should begin nor no author named that brought it in Ergo it must needes bee attributed to Christ he must of necessitie bee found the author thereof We answere the time may bee assigned the authors named when and by whom this pretensed and vsurped authoritie was brought in as euen now wee will shewe The Protestants THat the vsurped iurisdiction of Rome tooke not the beginning from Christ nor his Apostles neither was heard of for many yeres after we thus are able to proue it 1 Before the Nicene Councel which first deuided the regiment of the Church into foure Patriarchal seates Rome had small or no preeminence So Aeneas Syluius witnesseth who afterward was Pope of Rome and called Pius the 2. Ante Nicenum concilium sibi quisque viuebat ad Romanam ecclesiam paruus habebatur respectus Epist. 301. Before the Nicene Councel euery Bishop liued to himselfe there was no great respect had to the Church of Rome What more euident testimonie can wee haue then of a Pope himselfe Yet the Iesuite sayth that it is false in part which hee writeth He is somewhat mannerly in making him but halfe a lyer yet I wonder that he will confesse any vntruth at all in his ghostly fathers words Bellarm. cap. 17. lib. 2. Secondly in the Councel of Nice there was no primacie of power giuen to Rome ouer the whole Church but the other Patriarkes of Alexandria Antioch Ierusalem were priuiledged in like manner in their confines as the Bishop of Rome was in his They had all equall authoritie giuen them in their owne prouinces Sic Tonstall Stokesli ad Poolum Thirdly afterward there was a certayne primacie of order graunted vnto the Patriarke of Rome aboue other Patriarkes as to haue the first place to sit first to giue his sentence first One cause hereof was for that Rome was then the Emperiall and
chiefe citie in all the world this reason was rendered in the Councel of Chalcedon Can. 28. An other cause thereof was the ample priuiledges and immunities which the Emperours endued it withall as Constantine the great and Gratianus the Emperour made a lawe that all men should reteyne that religion which Damasus of Rome and Peter Bishop of Alexandria did hold A third cause was the vnquiet estate of the Greeke Church who often voluntarily referred their matters to the Bishop of Rome as being lesse partiall and a more indifferent Iudge they themselues being diuided and rent into sects And hereupon and other like causes it came about that the Bishop of Rome a little stepped aboue his fellowe Patriarkes but yet had no such preeminent authoritie as to commaund them Fourthly the Pope of Rome being thus tickled with vayne glorie because they were reuerenced of other Churches many matters were committed vnto them and their consent required vnto the decrees of Councels when they were absent Hereupon they laboured euery day more and more to aduance that See taking euery small occasion that might helpe forward their ambicious desire till Anno. 606. or somewhat after Boniface the 3. obtayned of wicked Phocas the Emperour who murthered his master the Emperour Mauritius and his children to come to the Empire and was after slaine himselfe of Heraclius that succeeded him of him I say Boniface for himselfe and his successors obtayned to bee called vniuersall Bishops ouer the whole Church and the See of Rome to haue the preeminence aboue all other Churches in the world Afterward in Pope Zacharie his time the proude and insolent iurisdiction of Rome was established by Pipinus King of France who aspired to the Crowne and obtayned it by the sayd Popes meanes first deposing Childericus the rightfull King and dispensing with the oath which the French men had made before to Childericus Calum Institut 4. cap. 7. sect 17. Thus then it sufficiently appeareth that the primacie of Rome which it now vniustly challengeth ouer other Churches is not of any such antiquitie as they would beare the world in hand neither that it had the beginning from Christ but both the time when and the authors by whom it began may bee easily assigned 2 Wee neede no better argument to proue that the primacie of Rome hath not his originall from Christ then the Iesuites owne confession First he sayth that it doth not depend of Christs institution but ex Petri facto of Peters fact that the Bishop of Rome should bee rather Peters successor then the Bishop of Antioch or any other It is not iure diuino saith he by Gods lawe neither is it ex prima institutione pontificatus quae in Euangelio legitur of the first institution whereof wee reade in the Gospell And agayne Romanum pontificem succedere Petro non habetur expresse in scripturis It is not expressely set downe in scripture that the Bishop of Rome should succeede Peter but it is grounded onely vpon the tradition of Peter Nay he saith further that Peter needed not to haue chosen any particular place for succession and he might as well haue chosen Antioch as Rome Ergo neither is the succession of Rome grounded vpon scripture neither any commandement of Christ for then Peter could not haue had free choyse to appoynt his successor where he would himselfe as the Iesuite saith if he had had any especiall direction or commaundement from Christ. So then marke I pray you they cannot proue out of scripture that the Bishop of Rome ought to succeede Peter in the chiefe Bishopricke but onely that Peter had the chiefe Bishopricke committed to him and his successors in generall whosoeuer they should appoynt Ergo the Bishops of Rome by their owne confession can alleadge no scripture institution or commandement of Christ for the primacie of the Church to bee annexed to the See of Rome and yet agaynst their knowledge they will alleadge scripture to colour the matter withall Bellarm. lib. 2. de pontif ca. 17. 3 Augustine saith Secundum honorum vocabula quae iam ecclesiae vsus obtinuit episcopatus presbyterio maior est The office of a Bishop is aboue the office of a Priest according to the names of honour which the Church by custome hath obtayned If then the difference of those two offices both named in scripture did arise rather and spring of the custome of the Church which thought it good to distinguish them for auoyding of schisme and is not grounded vpon the authoritie of scripture much lesse can the Pope whose neither name nor office is expressed in scripture fetch from thence any shew of proofe for his vsurped primacie THE SIXT PART OF THIS QVESTION CONCERning the proud names and vayne glorious titles of the Pope The Papists BEllarmine setteth downe to the number of fifteene glorious names which error 46 haue been of old giuen as he saith to the Bishop of Rome whereby his primacie ouer other Bishops is notoriously knowne but the principall are these He is called the Pope and chiefe Father the prince of Priests or high Bishop the Vicar of Christ the head of the Church the Prelate of the Apostolike See vniuersall Bishop These sixe names or titles they doe appropriate to the See of Rome Bellarm. de Roman pontif lib. 2. cap. 31. The Protestants WE will shewe by Gods grace that these sixe seuerall titles and names aforesayd are either such as ought not in their sense to be attributed to any Bishop nor any mortall man or els were common in ancient times as well to other Bishops as to him of Rome 1 For the first name of Pope it is deriued from the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in the Syracusane language is as much as Father which name was indifferently giuen to other Bishops which were famous in the Church for their vertue and learning As Cypriane Epiphanius Athanasius were called Papae Popes Augustine saluteth Aurelius President of the 6. Councel of Carthage by the name of Pope Epistol 77. Likewise those two epithetes of the Pope as to bee called Beatissim sanctissim pater most holy and blessed father were vsed in the stile of other Bisshops Prosper in his Epistle to Augustine twise calleth him Dominum beatissimum papam Lord most blessed Pope Tom. 7. Hierome calleth Epiphanius Beatum papam blessed Pope Ad Eustach Fabiol Augustine writing to Petrus the Presbyter or Priest being no Bishop yet thus saluteth him Ad sanctitatem tuam scripsit he hath written to your holines Nay in his booke dedicated to Renatus a lay man neither Priest nor Bishop thus he writeth Hinc angor quòd sanctitati tuae minus quà m vellem cognitus sum This grieueth me that I am not so well knowne to your holines as I desire If then these titles of holinesse and blessednesse were not onely giuen to Bishops but Priests also yea vnto lay men of vertuous and holy life what colour or
shewe of reason can our aduersaries haue to make them proper to the Bishop of Rome 2 The second name is prince of Priests or high and chiefe Bishop which title if it be taken for a chiefe power dominion and soueraigntie is proper only to Christ the chiefe shepheard 1. Pet. 5.4 and cannot in that sense agree to any man If it bee vsed onely as a title of excellencie and commendation so was it in times past ascribed to other excellent and famous Bishops as Ruffinus lib. 2. cap. 26. calleth Athanasius Pontificem maximum chiefe Bishop yea it was in common giuen to all Bishops as Anacletus Bishop of Rome in his second Epistle writeth thus Summi sacerdotes id est Episcopi a deo iudicandi sunt The high Priests that is Bishops saith he are to bee iudged of God If it be taken further for the excellencie of the ministerie of the Gospell and the worthie calling of Christians in this sense the title of summum sacerdotium of the high Priesthood is attributed to all ministers Ecclesiasticall both Bishops and others so Fabianus Bishop of Rome vseth this name Yea the holy Apostle calleth all the people of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a princely royall or chiefe priesthood Ergo the Bishop of Rome hath no especiall or proper interest in this name 3 The third name is to bee called the Vicar of Christ vpon earth Where we are to vnderstand that in respect of the spirituall regiment and kingdome of Christ he needeth no Vicegerent vpon earth for I am with you saith he to the end of the world he himselfe is alway present in power and needeth not in that respect that any man should supplie his roume Petrus scriba martyr Fox pag. 906. If we doe take it for a word of office and publike administration so the Magistrate may bee called the Vicar of Christ in gouerning the people according to the word of God In which sense Eleutherius Bishop of Rome writing to Lucius King of the Britaines calleth him the Vicar of Christ and therfore in his owne kingdome had power out of the word of God to establish lawes for the gouernment of the people So all Bishops Pastors and Ministers in ancient time were called the Vicars of Christ in preaching praying binding and loosing in the name and power of Christ. So Augustine saith or whose worke els it is that Omnis antistes est Christi vicarius Euery pastor and prelate and not the Pope onely is the Vicar of Christ. And this is confessed by our Rhemists annot in 2. Cor. 5.18 that the Bishops and priests of the Church are for Christ and as his ministers that is his Vicars Nay Augustine maketh yet a more generall vse of this word he saith that Homo imperium Dei habens quasi vicarius eius est That man by creation being made Lord of the creatures doth therein represent God and is as his Vicar vpon earth So then all ministers are the Vicars of Christ the ciuill Magistrate likewise in some good sense may bee so called yea in respect of the creatures man generallie is vpon earth in Gods steade Ergo this name cannot be appropriate to the Pope of Rome 4 It is also too huge a name for the Pope or any mortall man to beare to be called the head of the vniuersall Church this is a name only due vnto Christ neither doe the scriptures acknowledge any other head but him Ephes. 1.22.4.15 But say they wee doe not make the Pope such an head as Christ is but only a ministeriall head ouer the militant Church vpon earth We answere First Ergo the Pope by your owne confession is not head of the vniuersall Church whereof the triumphant Church in heauen is a part Secondly the Rhemists confesse that the Church in no sense can bee called the bodie of the Pope Ergo the Pope cannot be any wayes the head of the vniuersall Church Annot. in 1. Ephes. 22. Thirdly the Fathers of Basile vsed this argument The head of the bodie being dead the whole bodie also dyeth but the whole Church doth not perish with the Pope Ergo he is not properly the head of the Church Fox pag. 675. If it shall bee further obiected that the Bishop of Rome hath been called in times past caput Episcoporum the head of all other Bishops we answere that it was but a title of excellencie and commendation not of dominion and power as London is called the head or chiefe citie of England yet are not other cities of the land subiect vnto it or vnder the iurisdiction thereof But we shall haue occasion more fully to discusse this matter afterward 5 They would haue the Pope called the Prelate of the Apostolike See the Rhemists say further that the Papall dignitie is a continuall Apostleship Annot. 4. Ephes. sect 4. We answere First if they call those Churches Apostolicall whose first founders were the Apostles then the See of Antioch Alexandria Constantinople are as well Apostolicall as Rome and this the Iesuite denyeth not Lib. 2. de pontific cap. 31. Secondly those Churches are Apostolicall which hold the Apostolike faith so is not the See of Rome Apostolicall being departed and gone backe from the ancient Catholike faith but those Churches where the Gospell of Iesus Christ is truely preached are indeede Apostolike Thirdly how can the Pope be an Apostle or haue Apostolike authoritie seeing hee preacheth not at all much lesse to the whole world wherein consisted the office of an Apostle Neither can he shewe his immediate calling from Christ as all the Apostles could for seeing he challengeth the Apostolike office by tradition from S. Peter and not by commandement from Christ he can in no wise be counted an Apostle or his office an Apostleship for the Apostles ordayned onely Euangelists and Pastors they had not authoritie to consecrate and constitute new Apostles Our aduersaries for this their Apostleship can finde nothing in scripture nor for a thousand yeeres after Christ in the ancient writers Fulk annot in Ephes. 4. sect 4. 6 Concerning the title of vniuersall Bishop it was thus decreed in the sixt Councel of Carthage as it is alleadged by Gratian Vniuersalis autem nec Romanus pontifex appelletur No not the Bishop of Rome is to be called vniuersall In Gregorie the first his time Iohn Patriarke of Constantinople obtayned of the Emperour Mauritius to be called vniuersall Patriarke but Gregorie would not agree thereunto calling him the forerunner of Antichrist that would challenge so proude a name Bellarmine and other of that sect doe answere that Gregorie found fault with this title because Iohn of Constantinople would haue been Bishop alone and none other to bee beside him but all other onely to bee his deputies and vicars To this wee replie First Iohn did onely challenge a superioritie ouer other Bishops not to be Bishop alone for this had been a thing impossible Secondly if Iohn had sought any such thing
it is not like that the Chalcedone Councel and the Emperour would haue yeelded to so vnreasonable a matter as they did Thirdly Eulogius Patriarke of Alexandria doth call the sayd Gregorie vniuersall Pope which name he vtterly refuseth and yet Eulogius had no such meaning to make him Bishop or Patriarke alone but onely to giue him a preeminence aboue the rest This modest and humble Bishop of Rome Gregorie in stead of the title Vniuersall brought it into the Popes stile to be called Seruus seruorum dei seruant to Gods seruants Ergo wee conclude with Gregorie that this title Vniuersall is an Antichristian name and that it hath misliked the ancient Bishops of Rome themselues and how other Patriarkes and Bisshops haue challenged that ambitious name and title as well as the Popes of Rome THE SIXT QVESTION WHETHER THE Pope may erre or not The Papists THey denye not but that both the Pope by himselfe and together with a error 47 whole Councel may bee deceiued in matters of fact that is in historicall poynts and the truth of things that are done because it dependeth of the testimonie and information of men But in matters of faith and doctrine the Pope determining with the Councel is not subiect to error yea the Pope by himselfe alone decreeing any thing concerning faith cannot bee deceiued Bellar. lib. 4. de pontific cap. 1â— No nor yet in precepts of manners prescribed to the Church by the Pope is there any feare or daunger of error cap. 5. Yea it is probable sayth he that the Pope not onely as Pope cannot erre but not as a priuate person is it like he should fall into heresie or hold any obstinate opinion contrarie to the faith cap. 6. 1 Luke 22.31 Simon I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not Christ here prayeth for Peter and his successors that they might not at any time erre or be deceiued in matters of faith Bellar. cap. 3. Rhem. annot in Luk. 22. sect 11. We answere First this was a particular prayer for Peter that his fayth should not fayle in that great and dangerous tentation into the which our Sauiour foresaw hee should fall For if it were to be vnderstood of Peters successors they also must first be sifted by Sathan as Peter was and deny Christ and so being conuerted strengthen their brethren if they will vnderstand one parte of Peters successors I pray you why not all Secondly Our Sauiour prayeth likewise for all his Apostles that they might be sanctified in the truth yea for al that should beleeue by their preaching yet is not euery Christian priuiledged from all error of fayth Thirdly after this Peter himselfe erred and was reprehended of Saint Paul Fulk annot in Luk. 22. sect 11. 2. The high Priests that sate in Moses chayre were priuiledged not to erre Ergo much more now are the chiefe pastors of the Church free from error Bellarm cap. 3. Rhemist Luk. 22. sect 11. We answer the high Priests had no such priuiledge for some of them fell into strange errors Vriah the high Priest set vp an idolatrous altar at the Kinges commaundement 2. King 16. Eliashib was ioyned in Affinitie with Tobiah the Ammonite contrary to the law of God Fulk ibid. The Protestantes THat the Popes and Bishops of Rome haue not onely erred in manners but euen in fayth and not onely priuately and personally as men but pulikely and iudicially as Popes that they haue by their publike and open preaching defence allowance and consent approued and established erronious and some hereticall opinions thus we trust to make it playne and euident to all men 1. Peter erred Ergo the Pope may though he were Peters successor First Peter erred in denying of Christ the Iesuite answereth First he began not yet to be the chiefe Bishop which he entred not into till after the resurrection when Christ sayd vnto him Feede my sheepe Iohn 21. therefore all this while he might erre A goodly answere I pray you tell me was not the Church before Christs passion and after built vpon the same rocke I trow they cannot denie it but Peter was not the rock before therefore not after If he were therefore called a rock because of his confession of Christ why should he not then rather straight after his confession take possession of his office then immediately after his deniall of Christ Surely this is but a silly shift Secondly sayth the Iesuite Peter fayled in charitie when he denied Christ not in fayth cap. 3. and if he fayled in fayth he lost the confession of fayth and not fayth it selfe We answere First and can a true fayth then bee separated from loue by your doctrine The Apostles knew no such fayth Saint Iames sayth it is a dead fayth that is without the works of loue and the fayth of diuels that is no faith Iames 2.17.19 If then Peters loue failed his fayth also fayled Secondly we doe not say that Peters fayth was lost and vtterly extinguished for Christ prayed for him but whether it were an error in fayth which Peter fell into for it is not all one to erre in fayth or cleane to lose fayth Thirdly hee lost the confession of fayth he denied Christ in word Ergo he denied the fayth howsoeuer he thought in heart for these two are the principall fruites of fayth to Beleeue with the heart and Confesse with the mouth Rom. 10. and where either of these is wanting there can not be a right fayth for he that putteth away a good conscience maketh shipwrack also of faith 1. Tim. 1.19 But the Iesuite I see hath a queazie stomack let him cough vp lustily and say with one of his fellowes Petrus non fidem Christi sed Christum salua fide negauit Peter denied not the fayth of Christ but his fayth remayning sound and whole hee onely denied Christ. Loe here is newe popish diuinitie that a man may denie Christ and yet not denie the faith Secondly Peter erred in constraining the Gentiles to doe as the Iewes Bellarmine saith it was an error in example conuersation not in fayth or doctrine cap. 7. We answere First in this example of Peter there was also included an error in fayth for how should the Gentiles better know Peters iudgement then by his example by the which they fell into an error of fayth and were constrayned to conforme themselues like to the Iewes thinking that the Iewish ceremonies were necessary to bee retayned Secondly Saint Paul himselfe sayth they went not the right way to the truth of the Gospell Ergo they erred from the trueth of the Gospell and so in fayth Thirdly the diuines of Paris doe attribute to Peter an error in fayth Fulk annot 4. Galat. sect 9. 2. We can produce many examples of the Popes which haue erred iudicially namely openly haue maintayned errors To let passe Marcellinus who sacrificed to Idols as a slippe of his person and he afterward repented him of his fall
episcoporum grauiorem authoritatem per concilia licere reprehendi si in eis à veritate deuiatum sit That the decrees of all Bishops whatsoeuer not excluding Popes may be corrected either by the sentence of wiser men in that poynt wherein they erred or by the better aduised sentence of other Bishops or by Councels may be reuersed where they doe erre Ergo it is possible for Popes by his iudgement to erre A PART OR APPENDIX OF THIS QVEstion whether the Church of Rome may erre or not The Papists THey doe not onely affirme that the Pope cannot erre but that the Church error 48 of Rome also caÌ„not be deceiued in matters of faith so long as the Apostolike See remayneth there which they say is like there to remaine to the ende of the world Bellarm. lib. 3. de pontif cap. 4. Hereupon Panormitane doubteth not to say that he would preferre the iudgement of the Cardinals of Rome before the iudgement of the whole world this he sayd standing vp in the Councel of Basile Fox pag. 669. ex Aenea Syluio 1. The Rhemists vpon those words of Saint Paul Rom. 1.5 your fayth is published through the whole world doe thus inferre See say they the great prouidence of God in the preseruation of the Romane common faith In times past the Romane fayth and Catholike all one Ergo that See cannot erre in faith We answere they must proue their Romish faith and popish religion to be the same which was praysed and commended by the Apostle or els they gayne nothing but that shall they neuer doe 2. So long as the Apostolike See remayneth at Rome it shall be preserued from error but that is like there to remaine till the worlds end for it onely remayneth when all other Apostolique Sees are gone and it is very probable that if this See could haue been ouerthrowen it should haue been done by the incursion and inuasion of the Gothes Vandals Turkes the emulation of Princes diuisions and schismes of Popes themselues yet for all this it standeth still and hath so continued almost 1600. yeres and shall so continue still Ergo the Romane Church can not erre Bellarmin lib. 2. cap. 4. Rhemist annot in Thessal 2. sect 7. We answere First it is a great vntruth that all other Apostolike Sees are gone for there is a succession at Antioch Alexandria Constantinople Ephesus euen at this day Secondly it is false that the See of Rome hath continued in that religion it now professeth which indeed is no religion but superstition and heresie these 1600. yeres for first till Gregories time which was 600. yeeres after Christ none of the popes would be called vniuersall Bishops and it was more then 300. yeeres from Gregorie the 1. to Siluester the 2. when sathan is thought fully to be let loose for he by the diuel was aduanced to the papacie All these yeeres therefore you must strike off in your account Thirdly that the See of Rome which is the seate of Antichrist hath continued many yeeres we graunt for it is the iust iudgement of God vpon the world because they loued not the trueth that they should be deluded a long time and deceiued by Antichrist and beleeue lies so did Saint Paul prophesie 2. Thessalonians 2.10 11. And wee grant also that that Antichristian See shall in some sorte remayne till the comming of Christ whom hee shall destroie with the brightnes of his appearing as Saint Paul sayth You haue gayned therefore nothing by this but that Rome is the seate of Antichrist Fulk annotat in 2. Thessalonians 2. sect 7. The Protâ—â—tants IT is euident and plaine and neede not much proofe that the Romane Church as also any particular visible Church maie not onely erre in faith but fall cleane away into heresie and Idolatrie as we see it come to passe in the Church of Rome 1. The Church of Rome hath no better assurance of their continuance then the Church of the Iewes had before Christ no nor yet so great for they were a peculiar and chosen nation But Iudah fell and transgressed and committed Idolatrie in the raigne of Ahaz and therefore the Prophet Esay complayneth and sayth From the sole of the foote to the head there is nothing sound cap. 1. ver 6. Neither are they better then the Church of Ephesus was in Saint Iohns time who was as able I think to keepe that Church from error as the Pope is to keepe Rome yet the Lord threatneth to remoue his candlestick froÌ„ amongst them vnles they did amend Reue. 2.5 Ergo the Church of Rome may erre 2. The Pope may erre as we haue before shewed Ergo the Church of Rome for the Apostolike See as they say is the cause that no error can approch or come neere them Therefore me thinketh the Iesuite committeth a foule absurditie in saying the Church of Rome cannot so much as erre personally and yet they grant that the Pope may erre personally So by this reason the body shuld haue a greater priuiledge then the head the Church of Rome should bee freer from error then the Pope who should preserue it from error this sure is a great absurditie in Popish diuinitie Bellarmin cap. 4. 3. It is confessed by our aduersaries themselues that the Church of Rome may erre as the Councel at Rome vnder Adriane the second erred sayth the Iesuite in determining Honorius to bee an heretick one of his predecessors cap. 11. The Councel of the Italian Bishops at Brixia erred in condemning Gregory the seuenth who was if you will beleeue Harding a vertuous and an holy man Nay Paulus Iouius a popish Bishop confesseth that Adrianus 6. was made Pope mira pudenda Senatorum factiosorum suffragatione through the strange and shamefull suffrages of factious Cardinals because they preferred a stranger before their owne order But our aduersaries haue a trick to shift off all this that hath been saide They erred in a matter of fact not in any poynt of fayth Yet they cannot so closely conuey the matter away for Panormitane euen in such questions also preferreth the iudgement of the Cardinals before the whole world speaking in the defence of Eugenius who was challenged in the Councel of Basile for the dissolution of the Councel which he did saith Panormitane with the aduice of the Cardinals whose iudgement he so much esteemeth in this matter which concerned not faith namely for the dissoluing of the Councel THE SEVENTH QVESTION OF THE spirituall iurisdiction and power of the Bishop of Rome THis question hath two partes the first whether the Bishop of Rome haue a coactiue and constrayning power to make lawes to binde the conscience and to punish the transgressors Secondly whether other Pastors and Bishops haue their iurisdiction immediatly from God or from the Pope Other questions also there are which belong to this matter as whether the Pope be the chiefe iudge in controuersies of fayth which we haue already handled entreating of
the perfection and authority of the scriptures as also whether it be in the Pope to summone dissolue and confirme Councels which hath been sufficiently declared before in the controuersie concerning Councels Concerning other questions as the canonizing of Saints which they say appertaineth to the Pope the election and confirmation of Bishops pardons and indulgences we shall haue fitter occasion to deale in them in their seuerall places and controuersies At this time wee purpose onely to touch these two poynts aforesaide of the Popes Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE POPE may make lawes to binde the conscience and punish the transgressors thereof iudicially The Papists THat the Pope hath such authorie to make lawes for the whole Church error 49 which shall binde vnder paine of damnation as well as the lawes of God it is the general opinion of the papists Fox 981. articul 13. p. 1101. artic cont Lambert 29. But they put in this clause So they bee not vniust lawes nor contrarie to the diuine law Bellarm. cap. 15. And yet they say that the Pope may make lawes hauing not the authority nor warrant of scripture neither is it necessarie for these lawes to be expressed or diduced out of scripture And these lawes are not onely of externall rites and orders of the Church but euen of things necessary to saluation Bellarm. cap 15. in reprehens Caluini Yea he addeth further that in matters not necessary to saluation he can not be disobeyed without deadly sinne and offence of conscience cap. 16. loc 1. Bulla Leonis 10. aduersus Lutherum Fox p. 1283. col 1. 1. The Apostles prescribed a law concerning the abstaining from blood things strangled and offered to Idols concerning the which Christ gaue them no precept But this law did binde the people in conscience for euery where the Apostles gaue straight charge for the keeping of the decrees Bellarm. Answere First the Apostles commaunded no newe thing but the same which they themselues were taught of Christ that they should take heede of offence the Christians therefore were not bound in conscience any further to keepe the decrees concerning such things then for auoyding of scandal and offence Secondly for afterward the offence being taken away the law also ceased and Saint Paul giueth libertie notwithstanding this law to eate things offered to Idols if it might be done without offence Asking no question sayth he for conscience sake 1. Cor. 10.27 Ergo their consciences were not hereby obliged and bound 3. It is necessary to haue some lawes beside the diuine law for the gouernment of the Church for the word of God is too vniuersal neither is sufficient to direct euery particular action therefore other ecclesiasticall lawes must bee added but euery good and necessary law hath a coactiue and constraining power and bindeth the conscience to obedience Ergo the constitutions of the Popes and Councels which are the only ecclesiastical lawes doe binde the conscience Bellarmin cap. 16. lib. 4. Answere First the word of God contayneth all necessarie rules to saluation wherefore all lawes of the Church concerning matters of faith are but explanations and interpretations of the rules of fayth set forth in scripture if they be godly lawes and so are not the lawes of men but of God and doe bind the conscience to the obseruation thereof as the lawes of the Church which command Christians to resort to the congregation to heare Gods word and reuerently to receiue the sacraments are the very ordinances and commaundements of Christ who enioyned his Apostles to preach and baptize and his faythfull people to heare and to be baptized and therefore in conscience wee are bound to the obedience hereof Secondly there are other ecclesiasticall lawes appoynted for the publique order of the Church concerning externall rites and circumstances of persons and place as the houres of prayer the forme of the leâ—turgie publike seruice the times fittest for the celebration of the sacraments and such like These and such like constitutions do not binde in conscience absolutely in respect of the things themselues which are indifferent but in regarde of that contempt and offence which might followe in the not keeping of them contempt to our superiors whome wee ought in all lawfull things to obey offence in grieuing the conscience of our weake brethren So that euen these constitutions also which are made according to the rules of the Gospell that is vnto edification to the glorie of God and for auoyding of offence doe necessarilie binde vs in conscience not conscience of the thinges themselues which are but externall but conscience of obedience to our Christian Magistrates and conscience in taking heede of all iust offence sic Caluin Institut lib. 4. cap. 10.11 3 But we are not God be thanked driuen to any such straight that if there be neede of any such Ecclesiasticall lawes we should run for succor to the Popes beggerly decretals And yet such Canons as were in force amongst them agreeable to the rules of the Gospell we doe not refuse But if there bee want and penurie of good lawes euery Church hath as full authoritie to make decrees and ordinances for the peace and order and quiet gouernement thereof not as the Pope of Rome hath ouer the vniuersall Church for that by right is none or if it be it is but an vsurped power but as the Bishop of Rome hath in his owne Bishopricke and dioces The Protestants WHat our sentence is of this matter it doth partlie appeare by that which wee haue alreadie saide that the Pope hath no power ouer the whole Church and therefore can make no lawes to binde the conscience or otherwise for the same for it belongeth not to his charge Secondly we say that neither he nor any ecclesiasticall gouernement beside can make lawes of things necessarie to saluation other then those which are in Scripture conteined Thirdly all Ecclesiasticall lawes made concerning externall rites and publike order doe not otherwise binde the conscience then in regarde of our obedience due to Christian Magistrates in lawfull things and for auoyding of scandall and offence But in respect of the things commaunded such lawes doe not binde Caluin loc praedicto 1 Saint Iames saith there is one lawe-giuer which is able to saue and to destroy cap. 4.12 He therefore onely maketh lawes to binde the conscience that is able to saue and to destroy but that cannot the Pope doe Ergo Caluin argum Bellarmine answereth that the lawes of men doe binde vnder paine of damnation in as much as God is offended and displeased with their disobedience and so iudgeth them worthie of punishment cap. 20. All this wee graunt that the lawes of men being good lawes doe binde in conscience in respect of the contempt and disobedience to higher powers but not in respect of the thinges commaunded which in their nature are indiffereÌ„t The Iesuite should haue said that God is offended not onely for their disobedience but simplie
more then was in the fountaine or originall seeing he receiued all from thence 3 What maketh this place I pray you for the power of externall iurisdiction Here it is saide that God gaue of his spirit to seauentie Elders and rulers of the people and enabled them for their office endued them with wisdome and knowledge and dexteritie in iudging of the people this maketh nothing for their purpose vnlesse they will also say that there is a secret influence of knowledge and wisdome deriued from the Pope to all other Bishops whereby they are made able to execute their office but I trow they will not say so for Alphonsus de castro truly saith of the Popes of Rome constat plures eorum adeo esse illiteratos vt grammaticam penitus ignorent it is certaine that many of them were so vnlearned that they hard and scant knew their grammar 4 The argument followeth not from one particular countrie as this was of the Iewes to the vniuersal Church that because the seauentie Elders receiued iurisdiction from Moses yet that cannot be proued out of this place for they were rulers before and commaunders of the people the were now but inwardly furnished and further enabled yet it were no good reason that therefore the Ecclesiasticall Ministers ouer the whole Church should receiue their power from one 5 Neither doth it follow that because the Prince and ciuill Magistrate may bestowe ciuil offices create Dukes Earles Lords constitute Iudges Deputies Lieutenants by his sole authoritie that by the same reason Ecclesiasticall ministers should receiue their power office from their superiors for although the Church from ancient time hath thought it good to make some inequalitie and difference in Ecclesiasticall offices for the peace of the Church yet the superiors haue not such a soueraigntie and commaunding power ouer the rest as the Prince hath ouer his subiects The Protestants THat Bishops haue not their Ecclesiastical iurisdiction from Rome but do as well enioye it by right of their consecration election institution in their owne precinctes circuites prouinces cities townes yea as the Pope doth in his Bishopricke and by much better right if they be good Bishops and louers of the truth thus briefely it is proued 1 The Apostles had not their iurisdiction from Peter but all receiued it indifferently from Christ this the Iesuite doth not barely acknowledge but proueth it by argument against the iudgement of other Papists cap. 23. Ergo neither Bishops are authorised from the Pope though he were Peters successor for if he were to graunt it for disputation sake he is no more to the Bishops of the Church then Peter was to the Apostles If hee gaue not the keyes to the Apostles neither doth the Pope Saint Peters successor to the Bishops the Apostles successors for they may with as great right challenge to bee the Apostles successors as he can to be Saint Peters Nay the Apostles gaue no power or iurisdiction to the Elders and pastors whom they ordained Act. 20.28 Take heede to the flocke ouer the which the holy Ghost hath made you Bishops or ouerseers and Ephes. 4.11 Hee hath giuen some to bee Apostles some Prophets some pastors and teachers so then the pastors and teachers though ordained by the Apostles yet had their calling and office frō God and not from the Apostles much lesse now can they receiue their power from any no not from the Pope for he is no Apostle no nor Apostolike man hauing left the Apostolike faith 2 Augustine saith Solus Christus habet authoritatem praeponendi nos in ecclesiae suae gubernatione de actu nostro iudicandi de baptis 2.2 Onely Christ hath authoritie saith hee to preferre vs to the gouernement of the Church and to iudge of our dooings the pastors then of the Church haue the keyes of the spirituall regiment from Christ himselfe not from the Pope or any other THE EIGHT QVESTION OF THE temporall iurisdiction and power of the Bishop of Rome THis question hath two partes first whether the Pope in respect of any spirituall error 51 iurisdiction haue also the chiefe soueraigntie in temporall and ciuill matters and so to be aboue Kings and Emperors secondly whether the Pope or any Bishop may be the chiefe Lord and prince ouer any Countrie Citie or Prouince THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE Pope directly or indirectly haue authoritie aboue Kinges and Princes The Papists THe Papists of former times were not ashamed to say that the Pope is the Lord of the whole Church as Panormitane in the Councell of Basile Fox page 670. Yea Pope Innocentius the third said writing to the Emperor of Constantinople that as the Moone receiued her light from the Sunne so the imperiall dignitie did spring from the Pope and that the papall dignitie was seuen and fortie times greater then the imperiall yea Kinges and Emperors are more inferior to the Pope then lead is to golde Gelasius distinct 96. But our later papists ashamed of their forefathers arrogancie in wordes seeme to abate somewhat of their proud sentence but in effect say the same thing For they confesse that the Emperor hath his office and calling of God and not from the Pope neither that the Pope directly hath any temporall iurisdiction but indirectly hee may depose Kinges and princes abrogate the lawes of Emperors and establish his owne he may take vnto himselfe the iudgement of temporall causes and cite Kings to appeare before him yet not directlie saith the Iesuite as hee is ordinarie Iudge ouer the Bishops and whole Clergie yet indirectlie as hee is the chiefe spirituall Prince hee may doe all this if hee see it necessarie for the health of mens soules And so in effect by their popish indirect meanes they giue him as great authoritie as euer hee vsurped or challenged Bellarmine lib. 5. cap. 6. 1 The Ecclesiasticall and ciuill power doe make but one bodie and societie as the spirite and the flesh in man Now the Ecclesiastical power which is as the soule and spirite is the chiefe part because it is referred to a more principall end namely the safetie and good of the soule the other is as the flesh to the spirite and respecteth but a temporall end as the outward peace and prosperitie of the common-wealth Ergo the spirituall power is chiefe and may commaund the other Bellarm. cap. 7. Ans. First it is a very vnfit and vnproper similitude to compare these two regiments to the soule and the bodie for by this meanes as the spirite giueth life to the bodie and euery parte thereof so the ciuill and temporall state should receiue their office and calling from the Ecclesiasticall which the Iesuite himselfe denieth and so directly the one should rule the other for the soule directly I trow not indirectly moueth the body and gouerneth it But if wee will speake as the Scripture doth we make all but one bodie and it is the spirit of Christ who is the head that giueth
I pray you whether our merchants be admitted to traffick safely in Spaine if their religion be knowen The seruants of God amongst you can neither enioy houses lands libertie or life which yoke also was layd a long time vpon this land till it pleased God to haue mercie on vs for the which his name be blessed 3. Againe many yeares agoe euen in Augustines and Ambrose his time all Churches were ioyned to Rome before Antichrist was yet reuealed Ergo. This is not the Character of Antichrist Bellarmin ibid. Answere First they were ioyned then in common consent of religion not as subiects by compulsion but voluntarie because at that time Rome in the chiefest poynts of Religion was in the right fayth 2. But of late dayes in the Councel of Constance not yet 2. hundred yeares agoe it was made an article of faith to beleeue that the Pope was the head of the Vniuersal Church yea about the yeare 600. the title of Vniuersal Bishop first began to be appropriate to Rome whereby was insinuated that all Churches in the world should be vnder the obedience thereof Lastly we haue the testimonie of one of their Popes themselues who saith plainly that hee is the forerunner of Antichrist which would bee called Vniuersall Bishop lib. 4. epistol 32. See then by his testimony the title of Vniuersality and exacting of obedience of other Churches is the character marke of Antichrist THE FOVRTH PART CONCERNING the generation and original of Antichrist The Papists error 60 THey doe reiect those olde fancies concerning Antichrist as that hee should be borne of a Virgin by helpe of the diuel that hee should haue the diuell to his father that he should be a diuell incarnate or that hee should bee Nero raysed from the dead Refusing these fables they haue found out one as foolish Our Rhemists holde that Antichrist shal be borne of the tribe of Dan. Bellarm. dare not say so but he thinketh that he shall come of the Iewes stock and be circumcised and be taken of the Iewes for their Messiah cap. 12. 1. That he shall come of the tribe of Dan thus they would prooue it Genes 49.17 Dan shal be a serpent by the way biting the horse heeles Ierem. 8.16 The neying of his horses is heard from Dan. And Apocal. 7. where 12. thousand of euery tribe are reckoned onely Dan is left out because belike Antichrist should come of that tribe Rhemist 2. Thess. 2. sect 8. Answere Bellarmine confuteth all these reasons the first hee saith with Hierome to be vnderstood of Sampson who came of the tribe of Dan the second place is of Nabuchadnezzers comming to destroy Ierusalem as Hierome also expoundeth it to the third he sayth that Ephraim is left out as well as Dan yea and so is Manassâ—h too because the tribe of Ioseph is named for his two sonnes but Dan is left out because Leui is reckoned in his place Wee may see now how well they agree when one Iesuite confuteth another Bellarmin cap. 12. 2. Bellarmine standeth much vpon that place Iohn 5.43 If an other come in his name him will ye receiue But sayth he the Iewes will receiue none but of their owne kinred and whom they looke for to be their Messiah Ergo. Antichrist must come of the Iewes ibd Answere This place we haue shewed before part 1. of this question to be vnderstood of false prophets amongst the Iewes such as mention is made of Act. 5. as Theudas and Iudas and not of any one false prophet so Iohn 10. where Christ compareth himselfe which is the true shepheard with the hireling he vnderstandeth all hirelings though he speake in the singular number The Protestantes THat it is a very fable and cousoning deuice of heretikes to make men beleeue that Antichrist shall come of the tribe of Dan or of the stock of the Iewes thus we shew it 1. It is out of doubt that the nation of the Iewes shall bee conuerted vnto God and mercy shal be shewed againe to the remnant of Israel Rom. 11.25 confessed also by the papists But if one come which shall reedifie the temple and restore the sacrifices and circumcision such an one as the Iewes shall take for their Messiah who seeth not that by this meanes the Iewes will bee more hardned hauing now their owne hearts desire their temple Messiah circumcision and their conuersion would be greatly hindred nay quite and clean ouerthrowen 2. If Antichrist should come of the Iewes it is like that his seate should bee at Ierusalem and that the temple shall be built agayne by him but that cannot be for the temple as Daniel prophesieth shall lie desolate euen vnto the ende Dani. 9.27 Ergo. he shall not come of the Iewes More of this in the next parte THE FIFT PART CONCERNING THE seate and place of Antichrist The Papists BEllarmine holdeth opinion that Antichrist shall haue his imperiall seate at Ierusalem and reedifie and build againe the temple yea for a while commaund error 61 circumcision to be vsed and obserued Bellarm. cap. 13. lib. 3. de pontif Rhemist 2. Thessa. 2. sect 11. 1. Apocal. 11.8 the Citie of Antichrist is called the great Citie where our Lord was crucified But Christ was crucified at Ierusalem Ergo. Answere First it cannot be so vnderstood for ver 2. Ierusalem is called the holy Citie ver 8. This great Citie is called Sodome and Aegypt how can the same Citie be capable of such contrary names How can that be called an holy Citie where the abomination of desolation shall be and the seate of Antichrist Secondly Augustine in Apocal. homil 8. vnderstandeth by the great Citie and the streetes thereof the middest of the Church And by the great citie verie fitly is vnderstood the large iurisdiction of the Pope who sayth hee is head of the great citie and Catholike Church Whose seate we see is at Rome by authoritie of which citie Christ was put to death and by Antichrist the Pope Christ also is persecuted in his members Fulk annotat Apocalyps 11. sect 2. 2. Apocalips 17.16 the tenne hornes that is tenne kings amongst whom the Romane Empire shall bee deuided shall hate the scarlet whore that is Rome and burne it with fire how then shall it bee the seate of Antichrist Bellarm. Answere The text is plaine that the same kingdomes that before had giuen their power to the beast and were subiect to the whore of Babilon shall after make her desolate and eate her flesh which thing we see in part to be accomplished already that many princes haue redeemed their necks from Antichrist his yoke Fulk Apocal. 17. sect 3. It is not necessary therefore to bee done all at one time but one after another 3. 2. Thessal 2. he shall sit in the temple of God but at that time the Iewes onely had a temple the Christians yet had none and the Apostle speaking of the Church of God did of purpose refrayne this name lest the Church of Christians
The Beast in the Apocalypse to the which a mouth was giuen speaking blasphemies doth occupie Peters chayre Ioachim Abbas sayth Antichristus iam pridem natus est Romae Antichrist a good while since was borne at Rome The Bishops in the Councel at Reynspurge say thus Hildebrandus Papa sub specie religionis iecit fundamenta Antichristi Hildebrand vnder colour of holines hath layd a foundation for Antichrist Nay long before any of these Gregorie the 1. first of all the Gregories and the best of all the Popes that haue followed him thus prophecied of his successors Ego fidenter dico quòd quisquis se vniuersalem sacerdotem vocat vel vocari desiderat in elatione sua Antichristum praecurrit I speake it confidently that whosoeuer calleth himselfe vniuersall Priest or desireth so to bee called in the pride of his heart is the forerunner of Antichrist But the Popes of Rome are now called vniuersall Bishops or Priests Ergo they are either Antichrists or the forerunners of Antichrist But it is not like that Antichrist should haue so many forerunners and so many yeeres almost a thousand since Boniface the 3. was first called vniuersall Bishop Ergo Antichrist is alreadie come and hath been a good while and where els should he be but there where his forerunners were namely at Rome Now therefore seeing wee haue so many witnesses the scripture reason experience authorities to prooue the Pope Antichrist who will either bee so simple as seeing so good grounds not to beleeue it or so scrupulous hauing such certayne euidence to doubt thereof And thus at the length by Gods gracious assistance wee haue finished and brought this great question concerning Antichrist to an end as also the whole controuersie as touching the Bishop or Pope of Rome THE FIFT GENERAL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING SPIRITVAL PERSONS COMMONLY CALLED THE CLERGIE HAuing now sufficientlie handled the controuersie of the chiefe member of the militant Church which our aduersaries say is the Pope wee must come in the next place to speake of the middle parts which are those whom they call Clericos Clerkes and they are of two sorts Secular which haue any publique function in the Church or Regular which liue according to some rule and they are called Monachi Monkes First then of their secular Clerkes This controuersie conteyneth sixe questions 1 Of the name and title of Clerkes or Clergie men 2 Concerning the election of Bishops and Ministers first of all in generall secondly of the election of the Bishop of Rome 3 Concerning Ecclesiasticall orders First in generall secondly of the difference of Bishops and other Ministers Thirdly of Cardinals 4 Concerning the keyes of the Church and the power of binding and loosing the question deuided into foure parts 5 Concerning the marriage of Ministers three parts of the question 6 Of the maintenance of the Church by tythes in two parts THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING THE name of Clerkes or Clergie men The Papists error 66 THis name Clergie in Latine Clerus is a name made proper to the Spiritualtie by vse of antiquitie and agreeably to Scriptures they are so called because they are the Lords lot and consecrate to the diuine seruice the rest are called popular or lay men which meddle not with any function of the Church 1 This word say they hath been vsed by all antiquitie and thereby Church Ministers only signified Ergo it is a fit and decent name Bellar. lib. 1. de Clericis cap. 1. Rhemens 1. Pet. 2.3 Ans. First the Fathers vsed this name Clergie but not as it is now vsed of the Papists which doe hereby as it were exclude the people of God from the Lords inheritance counting them as Asses and Dogs in respect of the Clergie they vsed it as a ciuill indifferent name for an outward distinctiō of their callings not as a name of more holines and so we refuse it not 2 What though by custome continuance this name hath been somewhat abused we will learne herein to speake of the scriptures and not of men Secondly we mislike this name say our aduersaries because we would haue no difference betweene the people and Clergie Rhemist ibid. Ans. It is a great slander because we make no such difference as they doe as to make the Clergie onely Gods lot and portion and to count the people as vnholy and to preferre euery ignorant doltish Masse priest before the best and deuoutest of the people therefore they imagine we make no difference at all We doe distinguish the calling of the one and the other none of the lay sort to be so hardie as to meddle with the word or Sacraments which are committed to the Ministers which you notwithstanding permit them to doe and the people euery where to reuerence their Pastors and to yeeld due obedience vnto them But that the calling of the one before God in it selfe is more meritorious then the other that we doe not neither dare affirme 3 The Leuites in the time of the lawe were seuered out from the rest of the Lords people and he was their lot and inheritance and they the Lords lot Deut. 18.2 And as the Leuites were then so are the Ministers of the Gospell now Bellarm. Ans. First the Lord is rather sayd to be their lot because they had the Lords portion and liued of the Altar then they are sayd to be the Lords lot for the whole nation was holie vnto God and a kingdome of Priests Exod. 19.6 Secondly it followeth not that because there was a legall and ceremoniall difference then betweene the Priests and the people that therefore it ought to be so now Nay rather the contrarie followeth because there was such a difference then that therefore the Priesthood of the lawe being ceased there ought to bee none such now for Christ hath made vs all Kings and Priests to God his father Apocal. 1.6 And we are al a royall priesthood and holy nation 1. Pet. 2.9 Now though there be a difference of callings amongst men yet before God we are all Priests alike and there is but one Priest for vs all to Godward euen Christ Iesus our Lord. The Protestants THe name of Clerkes or Clergie men if it be not vsed as a name in it selfe of greater holines and merite and so is in effect a proude excluding of the rest of Christians from the Lords inheritance we refuse it not though there are better names and titles to call the Ministers of the Gospell by yet being taken as it is in Poperie we doe vtterly refuse and reiect it First 1. Pet. 5.3 The Apostle exhorteth the pastors and teachers to feede the flock of Christ non vt dominantes Cleris not as Lords ouer Gods Clergie inheritance Here S. Peter calleth the whole flocke the Clergie wherefore it appeareth that this difference was not knowne in the Apostles time of lay and Clergie men And it is agaynst all sense that Saint Peter should vnderstand here the inferiour Ministers and
so exhorteth the superiour Pastors and Bishops to looke to their Clergie as the Rhemists would haue it for S. Peter speaketh of the whole flocke and congregation which cannot bee vnderstood properly of many Ministers dispersed into seuerall places 2 Neither shall wee finde this word Clerus the Clergie properly applied to the Ministers throughout the newe testament let our aduersaries brag neuer so much of scripture as they doe Galat. 6.6 S. Paul vseth these names of difference 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the teacher and he that is taught and 1. Corinth 14.16 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the speaker and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the priuate or vnlettered man So that all their names are giuen in respect of their outward ministerie and calling not in regard of any difference before God For before the Lord as there is neither Graecian nor Iewe bond nor free male nor female so neither is there Clerke or lay man 3 Augustine thus writeth concerning this name Cleros qui sunt in ecclesiastici ministerij gradibus ordinati sic dictos puto quia Matthias sorte electus est in Psal. 67. Clerkes which serue in the Ministerie I thinke were so called because Matthias was chosen by lot See then they are not called Clerkes because they are the Lords lot but because they are allotted and chosen out of the people for that seruice as the Leuites are called the peoples gift Numbers 18.6 and the Priests office an office of seruice not of more merite or holinesse or an office of Lordly preeminence but of ministerie and seruice Augustine therefore hath a notable saying Non nos digni qui pro vobis oremus vos indigni qui pro nobis oretis Psal. 68. We are not onely worthie to pray for you and you vnworthie to pray for vs Auditoribus suis quibus verbum praedicauit se commendauit Apostolus ibid. The Apostle commendeth himselfe to their deuout praiers to whom he preached By this their error is confuted that thinke the prayer of a Priest to be the rather heard for the merite and dignitie of his calling howsoeuer els he be affected in his prayer So the Rhemists say that a prayer not vnderstood profiteth by the vertue of the worke wrought and the office of the Priesthood Annot. 1. Corinth 14. sect 10. THE SECOND QVESTION CONCERNING the election and institution of Bishops and Pastors THis question hath two parts First of the election generally of Pastors and Ministers Secondly of the election of the Bishop of Rome THE FIRST PART CONCERNING THE ELEction generally of all Bishops and Pastors The Papists error 67 THey say that the election of Bishops neither belongeth to the Clergie nor the people but wholly appertayneth to the Bishop of Rome as for the people they haue they say nothing at all to doe in the election of their pastors or ordayning of them that neither their suffragium consilium or consensus suffrage counsell or consent is to be required Bellarm. de clericis lib. 1. cap. 7. 8. 1 That the people are to be vtterly excluded thus they would proue it Aaron was onely elected of Moses without consent of the people so were the Apostles by our Sauiour Ergo the peoples consent is not required Bellarm. Ans. Who seeth not that there is great difference betweene ordinary and extraordinary callings such as the calling of the Apostles was and Aarons at the first though the office of the high Priest afterward became ordinarie Also it followeth not the Apostles were chosen without consent of the people when there were yet no faithfull and Christian congregations and because they were pastors of the whole world Ergo as well the peoples consent may be wanting in the election of ordinarie Bishops and Pastors which haue their peculiar proper charges and there being now many faithfull and well instructed congregations It is one thing to appoynt Pastors for the Church not yet planted an other thing to constitute them in a Church alreadie reformed and instructed for we reade of nations that haue been conuerted to the faith by those that had no calling of the Church as a great nation of the Indians was by Aedesius and Frumentinus Ruffin lib. 1.9 and the Iberians by a captiue woman Ruffin 1.10 2 The people cannot iudge who are fit to be pastors and their elections are tumultuous as we may reade how in the election of Damasus there were 137. persons slaine and therefore it is not meete nor conuenient that the matter should be committed to the people either to elect or ordayne but whatsoeuer they did in times past it was either by sufferance or negligence of the Bishops Bellarmin cap. 7. Ans. First meere popular elections were neuer allowed in any well ordered Church neither was the allowāce of their pastors wholly referred to the people neither did they beare the chiefe stroke but the election was moderated by the wisedome and grauitie of the Clergie Fulk Tit. 1. sect 2. Secondly the question is not betweene vs concerning the ordayning of pastors for that belonged only to the Eldership and was done by laying on of their hands 1. Timoth. 4.14 but concerning the electing and choosing of them Thirdly neither doe we dispute whether it be conuenient and necessarie at al times but whether it be lawfull for neither doe we affirme that it is of the essence and substance of the calling of ministers to be chosen by the voyces of the people as though they were no ministers but vsurpers and intruders that are not so called but whether it hath been at any time may yet be lawfull to require the consent of the people Fourthly it is false that the people had this right by vsurpation or els sufferance of the Pastors for Cyprian sayth it did De diuina authoritate descendere lib. 1. Epistol 4. That this custome was grounded vpon diuine authoritie yea it was established by the lawes of Kings as there was a lawe made by Lodouicus Pius King of France that Bishops should bee ordayned by the free election of the Clergie and the people ex Ansigis lib. 1. cap. 20. 3 Therefore say they elections of Bishops ought to bee at the Popes assignement for vnto Peter was committed the care of the vniuersall Church when he bad Peter feede his sheepe Hereupon they are bold to affirme that we haue neither true Bishops nor Ministers because they are not lawfully sent that is as they interprete it from the See Apostolike Bellarm. lib. 1. cap. 3.8 Rhemist Rom. 10. sect 5. Answere First the charge giuen to Peter beareth no such sense that because Christ bad him feede his sheepe therefore he and his successors should onely haue authoritie to consecrate Ministers for if Peter had it by this grant other Elders and Pastors had it in like sort to whom it as well appertayned to feede the flocke of Christ 1. Peter 5.2 And agayne not Peter onely but the rest also of the Apostles did ordayne and consecrate Pastors
and Elders as it shall be shewed afterward Secondly neither is it a good reason to condemne our Ministerie because it hath not the Popes allowance for euery Church hath a lawfull calling within it selfe without sending to forrayne Prelates for their approbation And if you aske vs by whom our Ministers were first called seeing there were none but popish Bishops in euery Church wee answere that some had their calling in the Popish Church which afterward being more effectually called of GOD became profitable teachers of the Gospell Neither is it necessarie that the Church should alwayes be bound to an ordinarie calling when as the state of the Church is so corrupted and the gouernment thereof that no good calling can bee obtayned for then the Lord raiseth vp some extraordinarily for the reformation of the Church such as we doubt not but Luther was In which and the like cases the ordinarie imposition of hands by the Pastors of the Church being heretikes and idolaters as it was in time of Poperie is not to be expected or stayed for Plura apud Fulk annot Rom. 10. sect 5. The Protestants COncerning election or choise to be made by the people we are to put three cases First meere popular elections wherein the people by multitude of voyce should carrie all away are in no case nor at any time to be allowed Secondly for the people to giue their voyce in elections which are moderated and gouerned by the graue and wise Pastors and Elders it hath been vsed in times past and may bee agayne and is in some places where the state of the Church the condition and qualitie of the people will beare it Thirdly though the people neither beare sway in the election nor giue their suffrages and voyces yet it is conuenient and requisite that their consent should be had and publike testimonie for the Ministers should bee such as haue a good report of all 1. Timoth. 3.7 Fulk Act. 14. sect 3. But as for the Pope let him keepe himselfe as a Bishop in his owne Dioces he hath nothing to doe with ordayning or electing of Ministers in other Churches 1 Numb 20.27 Eleazar was made Priest in Aarons place in the sight of all the congregation Ergo Ministers ought to be ordayned publikely in the sight of the congregation not in corners or priuate places as they vsed to doe in time of Poperie yea it is recorded of Pope Iohn the 13. that he ordayned Deacons in a stable And herein they offended manifestly agaynst their owne rules for their decree is Nullus inuitis detur Episcopus sed Cleri plebis consensus desideriū requiratur Let no Bishop be thrust vpon any against their wils but let the consent and desire of the people and Clergie be knowne 2 We haue the example of the Apostles Act. 1. 6. 14.23 When Matthias was elected the whole multitude was called together and Act. 6. the Deacons were chosen by the whole multitude Ergo the people had an interest in times past in the election of Church officers and this example of the Apostles may safely and lawfully bee followed of the Church when time and place serueth Bellarmine answereth First the election of Deacons and Pastors is not all one neither is there the like reason Ans. They are both publike officers for the good of the Church and therfore if the people haue any interest in the one why not in the other Secondly this was done by the grant and sufferance of the Apostles Ans. Yea the Apostles called them together but by the direction of the holy Ghost as Act. 15. when the Church was assembled together vpon another occasion it is sayd It seemed good to vs and the holy Ghost Agayne in the election beside imposition of hands prayer was vsed which was a chiefe part of that action but the people had their interest in publike prayers as being part of the congregation and were not admitted thereunto at the pleasure and will of men wherefore it is not true that it was a meere grant of men that the people might be present at elections but it so seemed good to the Apostles thereto directed by the spirit of God 3 But as for the right of elections in the Pope it hath no shewe of reason for bee it that Peter had onely the right of consecration amongst the Apostles you doe but flatter your selues in thinking that whatsoeuer right was in Peter it must needes be in the Pope for he is not Peters successor as we haue shewed before at large But we will hold you rather to this poynt that all the Apostles had as full right to ordayne and consecrate by laying on of hands as Peter had Looke Act. 6.6 Act. 13.3 Act. 14.23 And if the Pope cannot haue all that which Peter had much lesse can he bee capable of that which Peter neuer had 4 We haue had good experience in England of the Popes great discretion and wisedome in collation of spirituall preferments and ordayning of Bishops About anno 1253. the Pope wrote a very imperious and commanding letter to the good Bishop of Lincolne Robert Grostede to bestowe a Canonship in Lincolne vpon his nephewe a boy for so Popes call their bastards but he suffered the repulse for that time In the time of Edward the 3. and Richard the 2. a certificate was sent vp into the Chauncerie of such Ecclesiasticall dignities as were possessed by strangers not inhabiting the land and there were found aboue fourtie Deaneries Archdeaconries and Prebends and those not the worst some worth one hundred some two hundred nay some foure hundred pound by the yeere the Archdeaconrie of Canturburie was valued at seuen hundred Florences by the yeere which a Cardinall of Rome had And there were aboue a dosen Cardinals resiant at Rome that had at once the best and richest dignities in the land beside a great sort of Italian priests and others that were beneficed in England By this it may appeare what good choise the Pope-holy father of Rome was wont to make in bestowing Church dignities and it were pitie but he should haue the ordering of them still he did so well dispose of them when he had them 5 Let Augustine speake who growing now old was desirous to knowe his successor while he liued he went not to Rome for the matter but assembling the Church together at Hippo where he was Bishop in the presence of two Bishops beside and seuen Presbyters or Elders Astante clero frequenti populo the whole Clergie and a great sort of people standing by Augustine himselfe began first and sayd Presbyterum Eradium mihi successorem volo I would haue Eradius presbyter to be my successor Afterward hearing how the people did approue and like of his motion he desired them to subscribe to that which was done Rogo vt dignemini gestis subscribere qui potestis And when they held their peace he vrged them further saying Hic
mihi responsione vestra opus est de hac assensione aliquid acclamate I must needes haue you make some answere and testifie your consent by your acclamation A populo acclamatum est fiat fiat dictum vicies quinquies The people cryed out let it be as thou hast sayd let it be and this was repeated fiue and twentie times Augustin epistol 110. By this example it appeareth though the people made not the choise yet their consent was demanded And thus a Bishop was elected and no word sent vp to Rome at all Neither was it the custome of the Church so to do in those dayes for whereas the Donatists obiected agaynst Cecilianus Bishop of Carthage because he stayed not to be ordayned of the chiefe Bishop of Numidia Vt princeps Episcopus a principe ordinaretur That one chiefe Bishop might bee ordayned of an other Augustine answered that there was another custome of the Catholike Church Vt non Numidiae sed propinquiores Episcopi Episcopum ecclesiae Carthaginis ordinarent That not the Bishop of Numidia but those Bishops that were neerest at hand should ordayne the Bishop of Carthage So we see they were not onely bold to choose an inferiour Bishop as was Eradius of Hippo without the Popes consent but they would aduenture to ordayne a chiefe Metropolitane Bishop euen of Carthage without the Popes leaue THE SECOND PART CONCERNING the election of the Pope THey say that the surest and safest way and simplie the best is that which is error 68 now vsed to choose the Pope by namely by the Colledge of the Cardinals That whosoeuer is by two partes of the sayd Cardinals elected is rightly the successor of Saint Peter and the vndoubted Pope of Rome 1 None can better iudge who is fittest for the papacie then they which are the Popes Counsellers and know the affayres of the Church Ergo the Cardinals the meetest men Answere First you take that for graunted which wee instantly denie that the Cardinals of Rome are alwayes the wisest and most learned as though a Cardinals hat doth bring with it such abundance of vertue and learning nay a title of a Cardinalship is sooner obtayned by fauour than desert by masses of money then weight of learning And good reason seeing that the Cardinals make a gayne of the papacie For an Asse loaden with golde shall sooner enter into the Castle of Saint Angel then any other comming with a cart loade of bookes they that reade Cardinal Wolseyes instructions sent to Stephen Gardiner at Rome what great promises of money and preferment may easily vnderstand the disposition of the Pope-holy Electors of Rome Seeing they make a gayne of the Pope why should not he set Cardinalships to sale for if Iacobus Archbishop of Mentz payd 27000. florences for his pall what thinke you a Cardinals hat is to be valued at which is a higher degree then either Bishop or Archbishop We say then that there may be wiser and more learned men of the Clergie in Rome then the Cardinals and that the whole Clergie may better iudge then a few ambitious Cardinals and are freer from corruption 2 They are not fitter not concerning the affayres of the Church for Bishops are like to know better what appertayneth to the office of a Bishop then priests and Deacons as most of the Cardinals are 2 It appeareth by the continuance to be the best for it hath now endured foure hundred yeeres and by the effect for the See of Rome hath neuer been freer from Schismes then since this order was taken for the Popes election Bellarmin cap. 9. Answere First how can it be of such long continuance seeing by your owne confession it exceedeth not foure hundred yeeres Nay who will not graunt that the ancient order of electing the Bishop of Rome by the whole Clergie and consent of the people of Rome with the confirmation of the Emperour which lasted a thousand yeeres till this new deuice came in place was far more ancient and durable Secondly how well the Cardinals election hath kept the See of Rome from Schisme experience of former times teacheth vs In pope Vrbanus time the 6. there were two popes many yeeres together and one did so deadly pursue the other that Pope Vrbane at once cut off fiue of the Cardinals heads might they not haue great ioy thinke you in choosing such a Pope In the time of Pope Iohn the 23. there were three Popes at once In the Councel of Basile Pope Eugenius was deposed and counted an heretike And yet for all this the Cardinals are the onely preseruers and maintainers of the peace of the Apostolike See The Protestants THough it doe not greatly concerne vs what manner of election is vsed at Rome for vnto vs the electiō of the meanest Bishop in the land is as much yea and more then the glorious enthronizing of the Pope Yet it shall not be amisse briefly to shew how these great antiquaries are become enemies of antiquitie refusing the ancient manner of election which was vsed in Rome for a 1000. yeares together namely that the Bishop there should be elected by the whole Clergy wiht the consent of the people and confirmation of the Emperour 1 It is a playne case that till the yeare 685. in all their elections they wayted for the authoritie of the chiefe Magistrate the Emperour or the deputie of Italie But then came in the constitution of Constantine the 4 that their elections should be firme without the consent of the Emperour Yet for all this constitution anno 810. Pope Adriane gaue vnto Carolus magnus full authoritie to elect the Bishop of Rome and anno 961. Leo the 9. made the same grant to Otho first Germane Emperor This continued in force till Alexander the 2. his time who was elected first without the Emperors consent but afterward repenting of it he protested openly that he would be no longer Pope vnlesse hee had the Emperours consent and thereupon he was deposed by Hildebrand and throwen into prison This was more then a 1000. yeeres after Christ since that time the Emperour hath been excluded and shut out from their elections But all this while notwithstanding though the Emperors consent sometime was not necessary yet the Clergie of Rome and the people retayned their ancient priuiledge still So we see by this new erection of the Colledge of Cardinals there is great iniurie offered to three estates the Emperor the Clergie of Rome the people 2 This new forme of election hath not stood continually in force since it was first founded For in the Councel of Constance sess 40. they proceeded to the election of a new Pope not staying for the rest of the Cardinals but appoynting other electors in their roume In the Councel of Basile the Duke of Sauoy was elected Pope by other electors then Cardinals Nay there was but one Cardinal namely Arolatensis the rest were Bishops Doctors and others And though they
will say perchance that this Pope was chosen in a schisme for they holde the Councel of Basile to be schismaticall yet they can not neither doe deny but that Pope Martin the 5. who was chosen at Constance was rightfully Pope 3 In Augustines time the rest of the Bishops of Italie neere vnto Rome should seeme to haue had some interest in the election of the Bishop Romanae ecclesiae Episcopum non ordinat Episcopus aliquis metropolitanus sed de proximo Ostiensis Episcopus The B. of Rome is not ordained by any Metropolitane but by the Bishop of Ostia that is neere at hand Breuicul collation lib. 2. cap. 5. THE THIRD QVESTION CONCERNING THE degrees and orders of ecclesiasticall ministers THis question hath 3. parts first of the 7. degrees of popish priesthood Secondly of the difference and distinction of Bishops other Ministers Thirdly of the institution of Cardinals a new degree of the popish Clergie THE FIRST PART OF THE SEVEN degrees or orders Ecclesiasticall The Papists THough they haue diuers degrees of dignitie in the Church as Popes Cardinals Patriarkes Primates and such like yet they make but seuen error 69 Ecclesiasticall orders which are conferred solemnlie by certayne rites and ceremonies by their Bishops And they are these Ostiarij doore-keepers Exorcistae Exorcists Lectores Readers Acolythi Attenders Subdiaconi Subdeacons Diaconi Deacons and the highest degree Sacerdotes Priests vnto the which all the other are but rises and steppes All these they maintaine to be Ecclesiasticall orders and to be retayned in the Church Bellarm. cap. 11. Rhemist 1. Tim. 3. sect 7. They haue no proofe nor warrant out of scripture for these friuolous orders but onely a shew of antiquitie as they alleadge certaine Canons out of the 4. Councel of Carthage where such offices are reckoned vp Rhemist ibid. Answere First to let passe this that the Councel may be suspected for the credite thereof seeming wholly to be patched out of the Popes decrees Secondly we denie not but they had such offices as Readers to reade the text of the scriptures exorcists to cast out diuels which was an extraordinary gift for that time Acoluthists young men appoynted to attend vpon the Bishop for their better instruction Doore-keepers that kept the entrie of the Church that no heathen person or excommunicate should enter But these were both diuers offices then are now appoynted for them in the popish Church for they make them now all or the most ministers and seruitors for the idolatrous seruice of the Masse which in those dayes was not heard of neither though there were such offices and seruices in the Church were they made orders and degrees of the ministerie 3 They had other offices beside which now are not in vse no not amongst the papists for they had also singers labourers confessors diggers or Sextons so that if you will make all those offices vsed in time past in the Church so many orders of the ministery you must make ten or eleuen more then you doe acknowledge or vse in your Church Fulk annot 1. Tim. 3. sect 7. The Protestantes THe question is not betweene vs and our aduersaries in this place concerning the titles and dignities annexed to the ministerie as of Bishops Archdeacons Deanes Prouosts but of the seuerall orders of the Ministery For Bishops and other ministers doe not differ in order but in office of gouernment They holde that there are seuen seuerall such orders which haue their seuerall rites of consecration and peculiar offices in the Church allotted them But we content ourselues with those orders onely and degrees as necessary which the holy scripture hath commended Fulk ibid. 1 As for the names and offices of Subdeacons Readers Exorcists Acolythi doore-keepers we haue no such warrant out of the scripture to make them orders of the Church and therefore we condemne them All necessary orders for the edifying building of the Church the scripture hath prescribed vs Eph. 4.11 there are al offices set down needful for the doctrine instruction edifying of the Church Fulk Ephes. 4. sect 4. Wherefore away with these popish orders inuented by men But as for vnable offices and seruices which shall be thought meete for the affayres and busines of the Church they may bee retayned and kept but not as new orders of the ministerie 2 These offices are first Idolatrous as they are nowe vsed among the papists for the Deacons Subdeacons Acolythi were to attend vpon the Priest at Masse Secondly some of their offices were ridiculous as to sweepe the Church to driue out dogs and to holde a fly-flap of Peacoks feathers to keep the flies from falling into the coÌ„munion cup. Thirdly they were distinguished by ridiculous ornaments attire which were proper to euery one of them as it shall appeare now in their description From the Priest when he was disgraded they tooke the Chalice patine and host that he should haue no power any more to offer sacrifice they scraped his nayles with a peece of glasse and so tooke away his annoynting and lastly they tooke away his priestly ornameÌ„ts the Cheâ—ile which signified charitie the Stole that represented the signe of our Lord. FroÌ„ the Deacons in their disgradation they tooke first the booke of the Gospels and so all power to read the Gospels Then they tooke away his Dalmatike a signe of his Leuiticall office and the white Stole behinde his backe that signified innocencie From the Subdeacon they tooke the book of the Epistles that he should haue no more power to reade them also the emptie Chalice and Subdeacons vesture his office was to serue and minister to the Deacons at the Altar The Acolythi did light the candles in the Church and brought wine and water to the altar in pitchers and bottels and in his degradation there was taken from him an emptie flaggon or bottle and a candlestick with a waxe candle put out The order of exorcisme was taken away by depriuing him from power to reade in the booke of exorcismes From the Reader they tooke the booke of Church lectures or lessons Last of all from the doore-keeper was taken the keyes of the Church And so was hee depriued of all power to open or shut the Church doores and to ring the bels Ex Fox pag. 2134. Thus we see how much these offices are degenerate from the ancient vse First they are all but Ministers and attendants for the abominable sacrifice of the masse which in those dayes was not knowen for the Acoluthus or waiter waiteth vpon the Subdeacon the Subdeacon vpon the Deacon and all of them vpon the Priest at Masse Secondly whereas then the Exorcists had a peculiar grace of God to cast out diuels their Exorcists do but reade certaine exorcismes in bookes their Readers onely read the text of scripture now they reade the legends of popish saints Then in time of persecution when Christians assembled in the night the wayters had the charge to light the candles
yet is it not best for euery man to be rich God seeth it good that some men should be poore So single life is the best for those that haue the gift of chastitie that can with a quiet conscience liue single otherwise matrimonie were much better for Saint Paul that wisheth that euery one would liue single as hee did yet afterward sayth It is better to marrie then to burne So that by the Apostles iudgement to marrie is best for him that hath not the gift of continencie Iewel pag. 232. defens Apolog. The Protestants THat it is not onely lawfull but conuenient that all men both Ministers and others that haue not receiued a proper gift of continencie should marrie and that it is agreeable and consonant to the word of God thus wee shew it 1 The scriptures are most playne for the mariage of Ministers 1. Timoth. 3.2 Saynt Paul sayth a Bishop and generally euery Minister may be the husband of one wife and verse 11. their wiues are described howe they ought to behaue themselues Let their wiues be honest Ergo it is lawfull for them to bee maried Bellarmine answereth that Saynt Paul speaketh of the wiues which they had before their calling and ordayning not those which they should marry after But there appeareth no such thing out of the text Nay Saint Paul say wee had libertie as well as others to leade about a sister a wife euen after hee was an Apostle 1. Corinth 9. Wherefore it is as lawfull afterward as afore Bellarmine answereth We must thus read a Sister a woman and it is like they were women that did minister vnto the Apostles and followed them We replie First the word Sister doth implie a woman and therefore it had been an improper and needlesse speech to say a sister a woman therefore we must rather read a sister a wife Secondly if they were other women which ministred of their substance what neede the Apostles to be mayntained of the Churches if they ministred but in their seruice and attendance who were more fit to doe it and to follow them from place to place then their wiues Thirdly the phrase of leading about a sister importeth a superioritie and authority such as the husband hath ouer his wife Another place we haue Hebr. 13.3 Mariage is honourable among all men Ergo amongst Ministers Bellarmin If it were meant of all mariages then to marrie within the degrees of consanguinitie were also honourable Answere This is a very childish cauill First hee might haue read further And the bedde vndefiled Saint Paul therefore speaketh of lawfull mariage and indeede the other ioyning and coupling of men and women together contrarie to GODS lawe is not to bee counted Matrimonie or Wedlocke but Incest rather and Fornication as the brother to marrie his brothers wife and such like Secondly Saint Paul sayth not all mariages are honourable but mariage is honourable for all men the generalitie is not of the thing but the persons Wherefore we doe fittly conclude out of this place that marriage is lawful and commendable euen among ministers argum Caluin Further Saint Paul saith For auoyding of fornication let euery man haue his owne wife 1. Corinth 7.2 Here is no restraint for Ministers Bellarm. this is to be vnderstoode of those that haue not made a vow of continency Answer First our Sauiour Christ commaundeth no such vowes it is a cruell Antichristian yoke laide vpon Ministers to binde them when they receiue orders to vowe single life therefore your Antichristian decree ought not to abridge the generall libertie granted by the Apostle Secondly the end of marriage is generall to auoyde fornication and therefore the remedie also is generall for euerie man hauing not a proper gift of continencie may be in danger of that inconuenience if he be denyed the ordinarie helpe Melancthon Againe 1. Timoth. 4. to forbid marriage is called a doctrine of diuels but the Popish Church forbiddeth marriage Bellarm. Wee doe not forbid marriage to any but we require single life of all that are entred into orders which it is at their owne choyce to receiue or to refuse Ans. First it is necessarie that some should receiue orders and be consecrate to the Church ministerie wherefore requiring this condition of all such to liue single though particularly you prohibite not this man or that to marrie yet generally you prohibite the whole calling which is worse Secondly if you say you doe not forbid marriage simplie to all no more did the Manichees for they suffered their scholars and auditors to marrie And Saint Augustines words are generall Ille prohibet matrimonium qui illud malum esse dicit he forbiddeth marriage that thinketh it is euil you therefore forbidding marriage must needs hold opinion that is wicked and euill 2 This restraint of the marriage of Ministers hath not been of ancient time in the Church but imposed vpon the Church of late 1000. yeere after Christ Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus anno 180. had seuen of his progenitors before him Bishops of the same See In the Nicene Councel Paphnutius stoode vp and stayed the decree that should haue past for restraining of the marriage of Ministers and it is saide Synodus landauit sententiam Paphnutij The Synod commended Paphnutius sentence Sozomen lib. 1. cap. 11. Gregorie the father of Gregorie was Bishop of Nazianzum The Greeke Church neuer yet receiued this popish decree of single life and their Bishops are married at this day Bellarmine saith that the Church of Rome hath dispenced with them cap. 18. Ergo if the Pope would dispence with the Latine Church it might be lawfull enough then for Ministers to marrie wherefore it is but a humane constitution Againe it is false that they haue dispenced with the Greeke Church they care not for their dispensations but vse their owne Christian libertie neither was the Greeke Church euer subiect to the Bishop of Rome Thus we see that in times past marriage was lawfull for all men vntill Pope Nicholas the second Alexander the second and Gregorie the seuenth that notable sorcerer and adulterer for these three comming together one not long after another began by publike decree to restraine Priests marriage not long after them Anselme began to play the Rex here in England anno 1104. who stoutely proceeded in his vngodly purpose and enacted that married Priests should either leaue their wiues or their benefices At which time 200. Priests at once came barefoote to the Kings palace to make complaint And for all Anselmes Popelike and outragious proceedings against married Priests yet they continued married well nie two hundred yeeres after Anselmes time doe what he could and thus it is manifest that the restraint of Ministers marriage is no ancient thing but then began most to be vrged when Antichrist fullie was reuealed to the world when as the orders of Friers came in and were confirmed and priuiledged vnder Boniface 8. about anno 1300. 3 What
so fayne themselues vnlesse it be for fornication then without consent the marriage knot is broken 3 Peter left not the companie of his wife after he was made an Apostle for he had a daughter called Petronilla of whom the popish legends write much holines which must needes be borne after he was called Peter And agayne it is proued by her age for she was so young in the persecutioÌ„ vnder Domitian that Flaccus the Countie desired her in marriage but if she had been borne before Peters Apostleship she must haue been threescore yeere old at that time or hard vpon Fulk Math. 8. sect 3. 4 Augustine thus writeth of this matter Vna sola esse causa posset qua te id quod vouisti non solum non hortaremur verumetiam prohiberemus implere si forte tua coniux hoc tecum suscipere animi seu carnis insâ—rmitate recusaret Epistol 45. There may be one cause and no more which would make me not only to moue you to performe that which you haue vowed but to disswade and forbid you namely if your wife by reason of her weakenes should refuse to beare the yoke with you Therefore by Augustines sentence neither ought a Minister that is married performe the vow of continencie which he made without consent of his wife for he speaketh generally of vowes made by those that are ioyned in Wedlocke THE SIXT QVESTION CONCERNING THE maintenance of the Church by tithes COncerning the maintenance of the Church there are diuers poynts wherein we our aduersaries agree The maintenaÌ„ce of the Ministers of the Church is either by temporal possessions which haue been bestowed vpon the Church by the gift of deuoute and religious men or els they haue inheritance from their friends and a patrimonie of their owne or els they liue of the tithes and oblations of the people 1 We grant and agree vnto them that the Church Ministers beside the portion of tithes may lawfully enioy temporall lands which the Church of ancient time hath been endowed withall But we yeeld vnto them vpon certaine conditions First there must be a moderation vsed in all such gifts which are bequeathed to the Church for Ecclesiasticall persons ought not to be too greedie and hastie in receiuing whatsoeuer in simplicitie and blind deuotion any man shall giue vnto them as if they see that others are empouerished by the gift whereby they are enriched Thus the Priests offended in our Sauiour Christs time who allured the people to bring their offerings to the Altar though their parents wanted in the meane time whom they were bound to relieue by the law of God This also was a common practise in time of Poperie So the priests might be enriched they cared not greatly though all the stock of their patrones and founders were vndone who because they were vnsatiable had no measure in entising simple men to giue ouer their lands and Lordships into their hands the statute of Mortmaine was made not without iust cause to be a rule vnto theÌ„ that otherwise could not rule themselues Augustine doth highly commend Aurelius Bishop of Carthage and worthely for this one act A certaine rich man of Carthage hauing no children gaue all his substance to the Church reseruing onely the vse thereof for his life time afterward the man had children Reddidit Episcopus nec opinanti ea quae donauerat The Bishop restoreth vnto him that which hee gaue not looking for it nor making any account of it In potestate habuit Episcopus non reddere sed iure fori non iure poli It was in the Bishops power not to restore the gift but by the lawe of the court not by the lawe of heauen I pray you how many such examples can ye shewe me in the time of popish superstition This then is the first thing required that although it be lawful for the Church to enioy the bequests of their benefactors yet it should be done with some limitation As the Leuites beside their tithes had cities appoynted them but the number was set downe they should not exceede 48. in all and to euery citie was a quantitie and circuite of ground allotted which should in length and bredth contayne euery way 3000. cubites Numb 35. vers 5.8 2 It must also be prouided that the gifts and legacies bestowed vpon the Church bee for the maintenance of pietie and true religion and to good vses not to nourish idolatrie and superstition or if they be giuen through ignorance of the time to such vnlawfull purposes they ought by the Prince to be conuerted to better and more godly vses As now in England the lands of Colledges which were first giuen to maintaine that abominable Idoll of the Masse are turned to the maintenance of learning and true religion So was the lawe of Moses that the gold and siluer brasse yron tinne lead which the Israelites should receiue of the heathen first should passe through the fire and so bee made cleane and fit for holy vses Euen thus according to this lawe the lands consecrate to superstition hauing now passed through the fire of Gods word and triall of the truth may safely be vsed to the glorie of God in aduancing and setting forward true religion and vertue 3 Another thing must bee required that Church-men ought not to abuse the possessions of the Church to maintayne pride idlenes and ryotous liuing for in case they doe notoriously spend and wast the Church goods the Prince by whose authoritie they were giuen to the Church may iustly take from them their superfluities not leauing the Church destitute of sufficient maintenance This is notably proued by Iohn Husse in the defence of Wickliffes articles And we haue seene the practise thereof in England in the late suppression of Abbeyes wherein though some of those lands might otherwise haue been disposed of yet the prouidence of God notably appeared in bringing desolation vpon those Cels of sinne and vncleane cages of birdes neither hath this been an vnusuall and vnaccustomed practise in the Church for Princes to correct the misdemeanour of Priests by cutting them short of their temporalties for in Augustines time the Christian Emperours dispossessed the Donatists of their Churches and possessions and gaue them to the Catholike Bishops And at that time the Donatists cryed out as the Papists doe now Quid mihi est imperator What hath the Emperour the King to doe with our lands Augustine answereth Secundum ius ipsius possides terram by the lawe of Princes the Church enioyeth her possessions Recitemus leges imperatorum videamus si voluerint aliquid ab haereticis possideri Let vs then rehearse the lawes of Emperours and see whether they suffer heretikes to enioy the Church possessions Secondly concerning the second kind of maintenance which ariseth by the proper and peculiar inheritance which Church ministers haue we also yeeld our consent that a Minister to whom some inheritance is befallen is not bound
to disclaime therefore the maintenance which he hath of the Church for the Leuites beside the allotment of the tythes had their proper houses which they might sell and redeeme agayne Leuitic 25.32 As also that place 1. Timot. 3.2 will beare it where the Apostle would haue a Bishop to be harberous and giuen to hospitalitie which he shall be much better able to performe hauing some helpe beside the Church liuing of his owne inheritance So then it is not to be doubted but that Ecclesiasticall persons may together with spirituall liuings retayne their owne proper inheritance referring them both to one and the selfe same end that is to countenance their Ministerie and to be the better able to performe the externall dueties thereof in releeuing the poore helping the needie and such like Thirdly as touching the proper maintenance and reuenew of the Church which is by tithes diuers poynts are agreed of and accorded betweene vs. First that tithes due onely to the Church and cannot be alienated to any other vse nor be turned to the maintenance of lay men for there must be where tithes are payed a matter of giuing and receiuing Philipp 4.15 We giue spirituall and receiue temporall which because lay men doe not performe they haue nothing to doe with the tithe for not keeping the condition they cannot claime the couenant 2 The people are bound in conscience to giue of their goods vnto their lawfull Pastors according to the determination of the Church and the positiue lawes of Princes made in that behalfe the which they are bound to obey and the tenth being the hire of the labourer and the wages of the Lords workeman Math. 10.10 it shall be as great a sinne to defraude the Minister of his portion as to keepe backe the meate or wages from the hireling and labourer Iam. 5.4 3 We vtterly denie also and herein consent with our aduersaries that tithes are not pure almes as some haue been of opinion in times past but are a plaine debt of the people to their Ministers First the wages or reward of the labourer is no almes but his due and of right belonging to him but tithes are so vnto Ministers who labour in the Lords haruest 1. Timoth. 5.16 Ergo no almes Secondly almes doe alway exceede the desert of the almesman they shewe the beneuolence and free heart of the giuer not any merite or worthines in the receiuer but tithes and all other temporall gifts are farre inferiour to the labours of Ministers for what are temporall things to spirituall 1. Cor. 9.11 Ergo no almes Thirdly the tenth is the Lords part and by him it is assigned to his faithfull Ministers which in Gods stead doe teach vs 2. Cor. 5.20 But almes cannot be giuen vnto God Agayne the tenth is as an inheritance to the Church and to bee counted as the corne of the barne or the abundance of the winepresse Numb 18. vers 26.27 It is vnto them as the fruite of the earth and encrease of the ground to the husbandman Therefore to be counted no almes from men but the blessing of God both vpon the pastor and the people 4 We also agree that it is not meete that the maintenance of Ministers should be voluntarie or left to the peoples choise but that it is conuenient iust equall requisite that both by lawes of Princes and constitutions of the Church prouision should be made as there is for the necessarie certayne and competent maintenance of the Church First the tenths in the lawe were established by a perpetuall ordinance Ergo the maintenance of Ministers ought now also to be confirmed by positiue lawes as then tithes were the argument followeth for if their Ministerie deserued such assurance of their maintenāce which did but serue at the Altar much more now doth the Ministerie of the Gospel deserue it And the Apostle also seemeth so to reason 1. Corint 9.14.15 that as they which wayted on the Altar were partakers of the Altar so God hath ordayned sayth he that they which preach the Gospell should liue of the Gospell That is as then the people did not onely giue tithes voluntarily but were bound by lawe to doe it euen so God hath ordayned that Ministers should liue of the people and by this ordinance of God the people may as well be bound vnto it now as they were then Secondly if Ministers bound in conscience to feed and instruct the people may also be enforced and vrged by the constitutions of the Church and lawes of Princes to do that which in conscience they are bound why may not the people likewise be constrayned by publike lawe to performe that dutie to their pastors which their owne conscience doth vrge them vnto Thirdly experience teacheth that men are hardly euen liuing vnder a law brought to pay their rights to the Church no not in those places where they can take no exception against their pastors how much more vnwilling would they be I speake of those which are not yet wonne to a through liking of the Gospel if they were left to their owne libertie 5 We also acknowledge as Bellarmine seemeth to grant cap. 25. that to pay precisely the tenth is not now commanded by the law of God as though that order could not be changed by any humane law as the Canonists hold but men necessarily were bound to pay tithes But thus farre forth we hold that it is groūded vpon Gods law first in respect of the equitie of the law in paying of tithes which is this that the Ministers ought to liue of the people and to haue sufficient competent maintenance by them which equitie and substance of the law is morall and ought alwaies to continue being grounded vpon the law of nature Thou shalt not musle the mouth of the oxe that treadeth out the corne Secondly in as much as the lawe of the land and of the Church doth confirme this ancient constitution of tithes which is left indifferent of itselfe we are bound to obey such lawes being agreeable to the word of God And in this sense also tithes may be sayd to be due by the lawe of God because Gods word commandeth obedience to our Magistrates in all lawfull ordinances 6 Though the lawe of tenths be not now necessarie as it was a ceremonious duetie but it is lawfull either to keepe that or any other constitution for the sufficient maintenance of the Church whether it bee more or lesse then the tenth part yet we doubt not to say that this prouision for the Church maintenance by paying of tithes is the most safe indifferent and surest way and no better can come in the place thereof First it is the most equall way to haue euery thing in the kinde according to the Apostles rule Let him that is taught make his teacher partaker of al his goods Galath 6.6 But this cannot be so conueniently done any other way as by erecting of a set stipend or such like as by
shepheard Bellarm And the Apostle willeth all men to obey their Bishops and ouerseers Heb. 13.17 and to submit themselues vnto them from which rule neither Kings nor Emperours are exēpted Prelates must be obeyed Ergo not obey Rhemist ibid. Ans. First the obedience here required we acknowledge that it ought to be yeelded by Kings Emperours to those that haue the ouersight of their soules for the Prince is bound to receiue and beleeue all true doctrine which is taught by the Pastors and Bishops of the Church agreeable to the word of God vnder paine of damnation and the Pastors are bound vnder the like paine to obey the Princes lawes made according to the word of God Secondly wherefore the spirituall obedience of the ciuill Magistrate to the word of God taught by the Pastors of the Church is no exemption of them from their ciuill obedience for euery soule is subiect to the higher powers Rom. 13.1 Fulk annot 13. Heb. sect 9 The Protestants THat Ecclesiasticall persons are subiect to temporall gouernours and are to be iudged by their lawes the scriptures speake plainly 1 Rom. 13.1 Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers Ergo Bishops yea the Pope himselfe if he haue a soule The like sayth S. Peter 1.2.13 Submit your selues to all manner ordinance Salomon remoued Abiathar from the Priesthood and put in Sadock Paul appealed and submitted himselfe to Caesar. Againe if Priests offend and commit any grieuous sinne as of murther theft who shall punish them The ciuill Magistrate onely beareth the sword They must either grant that priests are no euill doers which were to too grosse or if they be that they are vnder the ciuill Magistrates power for he is the Minister of God to take vengeance vpon euery euill doer Rom. 13.4 In Augustines time the controuersies betweene the Catholike and Donatist Bishops were committed to the iudgement of the Emperour Ait quidam saith he Non debuit Episcopus proconsulari iudicio purgari Quasi verò ipse sibi hoc comparauerit ac non Imperator ita quaeri iusserat ad cuius curam de qua rationem deo red liturus est res illa maximè pertinebat But saith one a Bishop ought not to haue been purged before the Proconsul or ciuill Magistrate As though sayth Augustine the Proconsul did of himselfe intermeddle in this matter and was not commanded rather of the Emperour so to doe vnto whose charge that matter principally appertained and whereof he shall make account vnto God Ergo by his sentence the cause of the Bishop principally was to be iudged by the Emperour THE SECOND PART WHETHER THE PRINCE haue power ouer Ecclesiasticall goods The Papists THe goods of the Clergie both secular and Ecclesiasticall are and ought to error 99 be exempted from paying tribute to Princes yet they haue not this libertie say they by the Lawe of God but by the grant of Princes themselues Rhemist annot Rom. 13. sect 5. Bellarm. de Clericis cap. 28. Genes 47.22 27. The lands of the Priests were exempted from paying tribute Ergo it seemeth that this custome is grounded vpon the law of nature Bellarm. Ans. First the Hebrew word signifieth rather Presidents such as were the Kings officers not Priests as Tremellius sheweth who were maintained by the Kings prouision being officers of his houshold for Genes 41.45 Ioseph is sayd to marrie the daughter of Potyphar prince not priest of On. The same word Cohen is there vsed for it is not like that Ioseph would match himselfe with an idolatrous priests daughter Secondly but be it granted this was but a politike constitution for that coūtrey other Princes are not bound to Pharao his law Thirdly they gaine nothing by this but that it is an humane constitution The Protestants THat Princes haue authoritie to punish Ecclesiasticall persons offending in their goods either by displacing them or by conuerting the Church possessions by them abused to better vses we haue shewed before Contr. 5. quest 6. part 1. And that their goods ought to pay tribute subsidie taxe vnto the prince thus now it is proued 1 Our Sauiour Christ paied poll money Math. 17.25 Rom. 13. Euery soule ought to be subiect to the higher powers and there vers 5. paying of tribute is made a part of subiection the argument therefore thus followeth Clergie men are subiect to Princes therefore they ought to pay tribute 2 Ex concessis we reason thus from their owne confession That which Princes gaue to the Church vpon good cause they may take away but this immunitie not to pay tribute was first granted as they confesse to the Church by Kings and Princes Ergo they haue the same right hauing iust occasion to take it from them againe What Augustines iudgement is we haue seene in the place before alleadged THE THIRD PART CONCERNING THE PRINCES authoritie in causes Ecclesiasticall The Papists error 100 THe Prince they say hath no authoritie to giue voyce deliberatiue or definitiue in Councels concerning matters of religion nor to make lawes Ecclesiasticall concerning the same Onely they giue them authoritie to execute the Ecclesiasticall lawes made by the Church Rhemist 1. Corinth 14.16 Bellarm. de pontif lib. 1. cap. 7. 1 Kings and Princes may in their owne persons execute if they will whatsoeuer their inferiour officers do as to heare and determine causes as the Iudges and other Magistrates doe but the Prince cannot execute any Ecclesiasticall function as to preach baptize Ergo he hath no authoritie in causes Ecclesiasticall for how can the Prince impart that to others whereof he is himselfe incapable as to giue Bishops and Pastors power to ordaine to preach and such like Bellarm. Rhemist ibid. Ans. First the authoritie of ciuill Magistrates doth not giue any thing to Ecclesiasticall Ministers which appertaineth to their office as to ordaine preach baptize neither is the Prince to deale in these offices yet may the ciuill Magistrates command them to execute their charge and dueties according to the word of God Wherefore it followeth not Princes cannot execute the pastoral dueties themselues Ergo they ought not to see them executed Dauid Salomon Iehosophat Ezechia commanded the Priests to execute their office according to the law of God though it was not lawfull for them neither did they execute any thing proper to the Priests office in their owne persons neither doth any Christian Prince challenge any such right in Ecclesiasticall functions wherefore it is an impudent slander of Bellarmine which he giueth forth of our Queene Iam re ipsa Caluinistis in Anglia mulier quaedam summus pontifex And now sayth he in England the Caluinists haue a certaine woman for their chiefe Bishop De notis eccles lib. 4. cap. 9. 2 It doth not followe that the Prince might as well execute Ecclesiasticall offices as he may ciuill in his owne person if he haue authoritie ouer both No more then it followeth that because Ecclesiasticall persons doe teach both ciuill Magistrates
and Church officers their dueties and may in their owne persons execute the one that is spirituall duties that they may as well intermeddle in the other But these two offices of Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall gouernment are distinguished and must not be confounded The Prince though he haue authoritie to command Ecclesiasticall persons yet being a ciuill Magistrate is not to deale with the execution of spirituall dueties Bishops pastors likewise haue a spiritual charge ouer kings princes to shew thē their duties out of Gods word yet because they are persons Ecclesiastical they ought not to meddle with meer Ciuill dueties The Prince hath the soueraigntie of externall gouernement in all causes ouer all persons yet not alike for Ciuill offices he may both command and execute Ecclesiasticall duties he commandeth onely Bishops and pastors haue also a spirituall charge ouer all prescribing out of Gods word as well the duetie of Magistrates as of Ministers but not alike for the one they may fully execute so may they not the other The head in the naturall bodie resembleth the Prince in the commonwealth in some sense the head giueth mouing to the whole bodie and all the parts thereof but to the principall parts in the head the eyes tongue eares it giueth beside the facultie of mouing the sense also of seeing tasting hearing So in the common-wealth by the Princes authoritie all persons are kept in order and vrged to looke to their charge both ciuill officers and spirituall as al the parts of the bodie receiue mouing from the head But the ciuill officers receiue power and authoritie beside and their very offices of the King as the parts in the head receiue sense from their fountaine but Ecclesiasticall Ministers receiue not their offices from the Prince or any mortall man but they haue their calling according to the order of the Church of God Argum. 2. For the space of 300. yeeres the Church after Christ had no Christian gouernours but all Heathen and Idoll worshippers yet then the Church was established and preuailed Ergo Ciuill Magistrates ought not to deale in Ecclesiasticall affayres Bellarmine Ans. 1. Euen then also the Heathen Emperours had authoritie in Church matters and if they had commanded any thing agreeable to true religion they should haue been obeyed as Cyrus in the law which he made for building the temple Ezra 1. Darius the Median for worshipping the true God Dan. 6. Fulk Rom. 13. sect 3. The heathen Emperours then had the same power but they knewe not how to vse it Christian Princes doe succeede them in the same office but are better taught by the word of God how to exercise the sword Secondly we denie not but that in the time of persecution all things necessarie for the spirituall building thereof may be had without the Magistrate as a Vineyard may bring forth fruite without an hedge but it cannot enioy peace nor be in a perfect estate in respect of the externall gouernement but vnder good Magistrates as the Vineyard may soone be spoyled the wild bore and the beasts of the field may breake in vpon it hauing no hedge The child being in the womb though it haue as yet small vse of the head but is fed by the nauell which is in steed of the mouth hath in it selfe the lineaments and proportion of a humane bodie yet it wanteth the perfect beautie till it be borne and come forth and the head receiue his office So may the Church haue a being in persecution and the want of the ciuill head may be otherwise supplied but it is not beautifull till the head be set vp and the sword put into the Christian Magistrates hand Argum. 3. Princes haue no cure nor charge of soules Ergo they are not to meddle with Ecclesiasticall lawes Rhemist annot 1. Corinth 14. sect 16. Ans. Parents haue charge ouer the soules of their childrē for they are charged to bring them vp in the instruction and information of the Lord Ephes. 6.4 Therefore Princes also haue directly charge of the soules of their subiects according to their place and calling by prouiding and making good Ecclesiasticall lawes and compelling them to the true seruice of God As the Ecclesiasticall Ministers in another kind and more properly are said to haue the cure of soules in feeding and instructing the people Fulk ibid. The Protestants THe ciuill Magistrate by the word of God hath power to make and constitute Ecclesiasticall lawes and to establish true religion and see that all persons vnder their gouernment doe faithfully execute their charge To say therefore that the Church officers are to deuise lawes concerning religion and the Prince onely to execute them is to make the Prince their seruant and doth derogate too much from the princely authoritie Neither doe we giue vnto the Prince absolute power to make Ecclesiasticall lawes for first the Prince is not to prescribe what lawes he listeth to the Church but such as onely may require the true worship of God Secondly that it is expedient and meete according to the commendable custome of this land that the godly learned of the Clergie should be consulted withall in establishing of Ecclesiastical ordinances vnlesse it be in such a corrupt time when the Church gouernours are enemies to religion for then the Prince not staying vpon their iudgement ought to reforme religion according to the word of God as we see it was lawfully and godly practised by King Henrie the 8. Thirdly we doe make exception of all such Ecclesiasticall canons and ordinances the making whereof doth properly belong to the office of Bishops and gouernours of the Church for our meaning is not that it is not lawful for Ecclesiastical Ministers to make Ecclesiastical decrees which do properly concerne their office as concerning the censures of the Church excommunication suspension absoluing binding loosing and such like which things are incident to their pastorall office and yet we grant that the Prince hath euen in these cases an ouerruling hand to see that none abuse their pastoral office But that any lawes ought to be made without the authoritie of the prince which the prince is bound to execute we vtterly denie And so we conclude that the ciuill Magistrate hath power ouer all persons and in all causes both temporall and ecclesiasticall in such manner as we haue sayd 1 S. Paul willeth that praiers should be made for Kings and Princes that vnder them we may leade a peaceable life in all godlines and honestie 1. Tim. 2.2 Ergo it is their duetie as well to procure religion by their authoritie as ciuill honestie Againe He beareth not the sword for nought Rom. 13.4 He hath power to punish al euill doers therfore also to correct euill ministers to make Ecclesiastical lawes for otherwise he should haue no ful power to correct the transgressors thereof 2 We reade that Iosua Dauid Salomon Iosia did deale in ecclesiasticall matters which concerned religion and the worship of God
Bellarm. They did it by an extraordinarie authoritie not as Kings but as Prophets Nay it was an ordinarie power for all the good kings of Iuda beside as Iehosaphat Hezekiah and others did take care of religion this was so properly annexed to the kingly office that idolatrous kings also tooke vpon them to command false religion as Ieroboam set vp two golden calues and Ahaz king of Iudah cōmanded Vriah the high Priest to make an Altar according to the patterne which he sent from Damascus 2. King 16.11 This power also was afterward exercised by Christian Kings and Emperours as Constantinus Theodosius Martianus made lawes for the Church Fulk annot 1. Cor. 14. sect 16. Iustinianus the Emperour decreed many things concerning Church affayres as how excommunication should be vsed how Bishops and Priests should be ordained concerning the order and manner of funerals that the holy mysteries should not be done in priuate houses Carolus magnus decreed that onely the Canonical bookes of scripture should be read in the Church he chargeth all Bishops and priests to preach the word Lodouicus Pius his sonne and Emperour after him ordained that no entrie should bee made into the Church by Simonie that Bishops should bee chosen by the free election of the Clergie and the people All these Emperours did lawfully exercise their princely authoritie in Ecclesiastical matters Ergo other princes may doe the same still 3 Augustine saith Epistol 50. Quis mente sobrius c Who in his right wits would say to the King It pertaineth not to you who in your kingdome is religious or sacrilegious to whom it cannot be said let it not pertaine vnto you who in your kingdome will be chast or vnchast And in another place Ad fratres in erem serm 14. Tunc iustitia dicitur gladius ex vtraque parte acutus quia hominis defendit corpus ab exterioribus iniurijs animam à spiritualibus molestijs Then iustice is rightly called a sword with a double edge because it doth both defend the bodie from externall and corporall wrongs and the soule from spirituall vexation That is the sword of the Magistrate serueth as well to prune the Church and to cut off all errors and heresies in religion as to destroy the vices and corruptions in manners AN APPENDIX OR FOVRTH PART OF THE QVEstion whether the Prince in any good sense may be called the head of his kingdome and consequently of the Church in his kingdome The Papists THey do appropriate this title to be called heads of the vniuersall Church to error 101 the Pope of Rome most blasphemouslie for there can be no head of the vniuersal bodie but Christ But for Princes to be called the head that is chiefe gouernours of the Churches in their kingdomes they do abhorre it Whereupon Bellarmine is so saucie as to checke and controule King Henrie the 8. because he was called the head of the English Church 1 The heathen Emperours were not heads of the Church being not so much as members thereof therefore neither Christian Magistrates which doe succeede them in that authoritie Rhemist annot 1. Pet. 2. sect 6. Ans. 1. The argument followeth not they were no true mēbers of the Church therefore could not be heads that is haue the soueraigntie of the externall gouernment for wicked kings and princes doe keepe their magistracie gouernment still who though they be not true members of the Catholike Church yet ought to be obeied as princes 2. Though the metaphorical name of head agreed not vnto them yet were they by Gods ordinance appointed to be heads gouernours of his people protectors of his Church should haue been if they had not abused their authoritie 3. Christian princes though they haue the same authoritie which they had yet now exercising the sword according to Gods law and being Nurses of the Church may vse and retaine those princely titles in deed to be called Patrones and defenders of the faith head that is chiefe gouernours and protectors of the Church which by right had been due vnto the other if they had vsed their authoritie as they should 2 Christian princes are members of the Church Ergo not heads for if they were heads how could the Church stand without them as it did in the time of persecution Ans. First as though the head is not a member and part of the bodie though a principall one so the Prince is a member of the Church but a principall and chiefe member not of the inuisible Church for so Christ is onely head but of a particular visible Church Secondly we denie not but that the inuisible and spiritual Church may consist without the Magistrate but a visible flourishing and wel-gouerned Church cannot want a head or chiefe gouernour that is as a wall or hedge vnto it The Protestants TO bee head of the vniuersall Church is proper onely to Christ and in that sense is not communicable to any creature for he is to his Church as the head to the naturall bodie giuing vnto it influence of grace spirit and life he is therefore the onely mysticall head of the vniuersal Church But in another sense the Prince may be said to be the head and chiefe gouernour of his kingdome of that particular visible Church where he is king We make him neither the mysticall head which is only Christ farre be that blasphemie from vs nor a ministerial head as they make the Pope to be as Christs Vicegerent in the Church but a politicall head to keepe and preserue the peace of the Church and to see that euery member doe his office and duetie But this name we confesse is vnproperly giuen to the Prince neither were we the first inuentors of it for the papists first gaue it to Henry the 8. And there are other titles which doe sufficiently expresse the office of the Prince and may bee more safely vsed If any man thinke it too high a name for any mortall man and so not to be giuen to any we will not greatly contend about it But if any denye it to the Prince as thereby to abridge her of her power in Ecclesiastical matters we doe stand stiffely for it and are bold to affirme that with much better right is this title attributed to the ciuill Magistrate then it was to the Pope yea and that it hath been of old giuen in a modest and sober sense to Kings and Princes and may with a fauourable exposition be still and Princes also may receiue this honour and title at their subiects hands with protestation of their Christian meaning herein 1 This phrase for the King to be called the head is not vnusuall in scripture 1. Sam. 15.17 Saul is sayd to be the head of the tribes Psal. 18.43 Dauid the head of the nations Isay. 9.15 The Prince or honourable man the head of the people yea Princes are called Gods Psal. 82.2 which is a name of greater Soueraigntie then to be called heads
Bellarmine answereth Princes doe rule ouer their subiects as men not as Christians and Kings are set ouer the people not as they are Christians but politike persons so the Prince is head of the kingdome not of the Church De pontif Rom. lib. 1. cap. 7. Ans. Stephen Gardiner taketh away this cauill very sufficiently we will set one Papist against another It is all one sayth he to call the Prince head of the Church of England and head of the Realme of England for if all Englishmen be his subiects why are they not his subiects as they are Christians If the wife or seruant bee subiect to the master or husband being infidels doth their conuersion or name of Christians make them lesse subiect then they were before Haec ille Againe how farre is this I pray you from Anabaptistrie to say that subiects onely as men not as Christians are in subiection to Princes for doth it not followe hereupon that as Christians they ought to haue no superiour or Magistrate 2 It is sufficient for vs that this title more fitly and properly belongeth to euery Prince in his owne kingdome thē to the Pope for the Pope can in no wise be head of the Church he is not the mysticall head neither dare they say so for Christ onely is the head in that manner neither can he be the Ministeriall head of the vniuersall Church for the Catholike Church is a bodie mysticall must needes haue a mysticall head neither is he the politicall head of any particular Church for no Bishop can be a politicall head because he that is the head and chiefe must haue a coactiue power to binde his subiects to obedience so hath not any Bishop The Prince onely beareth the sword and enforceth obedience Againe in a farre diuers sense is the Prince called the head then the Pope was for first the Pope challenged to be head of the vniuersal Church but the prince is chiefe only in his owne kingdome Secondly the Pope would be an absolute head to doe all vpon earth that Christ did yea and more to to bind and loose at his pleasure to depose Kings to dispense with the word of God to constitute and make lawes at his pleasure in so much that one of his clawback flatterers is not ashamed to say of him Christus Papa vnum faciunt consistorium excepto peccato potest Papa quasi omnia facere quae potest Deus Christ and the Pope make but one Consistorie keepe but one court sinne onely excepted the Pope in a manner can doe all things that God can doe But we doe limit the power of the Prince who is not to impose any lawes vpon the Church but such as are agreeable to the word of God neither doe we make him a spirituall officer as the Pope would be but a ciuill gouernour who by positiue lawes is to prouide for the peace and welfare of the Church Lastly S. Peter sayth Submit your selues to the King as the chiefe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or most excelling what is this els but as to the head what is it to be chiefe but to be head But we will not much contend for the name so they will grant vs the thing namely that the Prince is a commander euen in Ecclesiasticall matters as Augustine saith In hoc reges Deo seruiunt si mala prohibeant nō solum quae pertinent ad humanam societatem verumetiam quae ad diuinam religionem Cont. Crescon lib. 3. cap. 5. In this Kings doe good seruice to God if they forbid euill to be done not onely in matters pertaining to humane societie but in things concerning religion As for the title to bee called head let them cease to call their chiefe Bishop so who hath no right vnto it and we will promise also to lay it downe though in good sense we might vse it though the Pope had neuer layd claime thereunto THE SECOND QVESTION CONCERNING THE authoritie of the Prince in punishing heretikes WE doe willingly grant that obstinate heretikes and peruerters of the faith if they persist in their damnable opinions and remaine incorrigible may and ought to be cut off and punished by death to make others to feare so Seruetus at Geneua and one Valentinus at Berne both monstrous heretikes not amongst the Papists but by the Protestants were worthily put to death In this therfore we and our aduersaries agree that heretikes may be punished by death by the ciuill Magistrate If Luther or any other haue held any priuate opinion to the contrarie let them answere for themselues but although we vary not in the principall yet there are certaine circumstances and accessaries greatly material wherein they both dissent from vs and from the truth 1 They would haue the Magistrate onely to be their executioner the iudgement of heresie they say belongeth to the Church for they cited examined iudged disgraded condemned heretikes and then gaue them ouer to the secular error 102 power this was the common practise of their Church But we hold that the hearing iudgement sentence and condemnation of heretikes belongeth to the ciuill Magistrate as well as the execution because these actions are proper to the ciuill sword which the Magistrate beareth Rom. 13. and Deut. 17.5 The false Prophets and Idolaters were brought to the gates of the citie where the ciuill Magistrate was wont to sit Augustine is of the same mind Cur in veneficos vigorē legū exerceri iuste fatentur in haereticos schismaticos nolunt fateri Cont. epist. Parmen 1.7 Why doe they grant that the vigour of the law may iustly be executed vpon witches and not as well vpon heretikes and schismatikes But the causes of witches are heard iudged and handled before the ciuill Magistrate Ergo also the cause of heretikes Augustines reason is out of the 5. Galath 20. The works of the flesh are manifest which are adulterie fornication idolatrie witchcraft and heresies are also reckoned vp amongst All these are workes of the flesh Ergo the Magistrate being appoynted to punish euill doers hath as full right to deale against them all as some 2 We differ about the way and meanes to try an heretike by They affirme that he is an heretike onely that is so iudged by a generall Councel or the sentence error 103 of the chiefe pastors of the Church they would haue an heretike tryed by the constitutions and Canons of their Church Annot. Tit. 3. sect 2. Rhemist We say that an heretike is to be conuicted by the scriptures and that he that holdeth any opiniō obstinately against the manifest authoritie of scripture may be iudged an heretike without a generall Councel So Augustine writeth answering the Pelagians who obiected that they were condemned without a Synode Ac si congregatione synodi opus erat vt aperta pernicies damnaretur quasi nulla haeresis aliquando nisi synodi congregatione damnata sit As though a Synode neede to be
be adored And thus it is lawfull profitable and expedient for the Church to Canonize Saints Bellarm. cap. 7. Argum. 1. The Patriarkes and Prophets were Canonized for Saints in the old law Heb. 11. So Act. 7. Stephen other were Canonized therfore it is credible that the Lord would haue the same order still continued in his Church Bellarm. cap. 7. Ans. First neither in the old nor the new lawe were any set vp to be Saints with intent to be worshipped called vpon temples to be consecrated in their names but onely the scripture giueth testimonie of them as of holy and faithfull men and so may we also honour the blessed Martyrs whom the cruell Emperours of Rome and since them the Popes of Rome haue sent through fire and other torments to heauen Secondly when they haue as good testimonie for their Saints as we haue for the holy Patriarkes and Prophets they may be bold to pronounce them to be holy blessed Thirdly your argument followeth not vnles you will say that the Church may doe all things now which the Prophets and Apostles did then They may as well make scripture and more Canonicall bookes by the same reason as make and Canonize new Saints The Protestants THat none of the Saints are to be adored or worshipped their images or reliques or praiers to be made vnto them or any such honor to be giuen them it shall afterward appeare more at large And therefore they ought not to be Canonized to any such end or purpose We also grant that the number of Gods Saints and elect is encreased daylie and we are sure in generall as the scripture testifieth that the death of his Saints is precious in the sight of God Psal. 116.15 And that all are blessed that dye in the Lord But particularly we are not able certainly to determine of any the matter is to be left wholly vnto God and we in the meane time to hope the best Argum. 1 If the Church hath authoritie to Canonize Saints determine of the election or saluation of men then may we as well iudge of the condemnation of those that are lost for if it be knowen to the Church who are Saints in heauen they also may as wel define who are damned in hell But this none can doe nay it were great rashnes and want of charity for any so to take vpon them S. Paul saith Why condemnest thou another mans seruant hee standeth or falleth to his owne master Rom. 14.4 No man can iudge whether the seruant stand or fall but his Master Ergo if the Church presume to determine of the election or damnation of those that are departed she is nowe a Mistres and Lady rather of the Saintes then they Lords or patrones to her as the Papistes holde they are Argum. 2 Iudge not saith S. Paul 1. Corinth 4.5 before the time vntill the Lord come The iudgement then of men who are saued and who are condemned is reserued for the comming of Christ Therefore it is great presumption for men to preuent the time and to take vpon them to bee Iudges in Gods place Againe our Sauiour Christ saith that To sit at his right hand or left in his kingdome was not his to giue meaning as he was man but it shal be giuen to them for whome it is prepared of my Father Math. 20.23 How then is it in the power of any sinfull man to giue vnto any a seat either at the right hand or left hand of Christ in the kingdome of God Argument Gualter Bruti Fox page 487. Augustine also consenteth Non separatio iam cuique tuta est illius erit separatio qui non nouit errare Nos in hac vita difficile est vt nos ipsos nouerimus quantò minùs debemus de quoquā praeproperam ferre sententiam It is not safe for men now to make separation of the good and bad it belongeth to him that can not erre We in this life do hardly know our selues howe much lesse ought we to iudge rashly of others exposit in Psalm 139. Here are two reasons giuen why it is not lawfull for men to iudge of the election or reprobation of men first their iudgement is subiect to error and therefore the matter must be referred to God who erreth not Secondly we can not iudge our selues much lesse can we iudge of others Ergo no man liuing ought or is able to define either who are Saints in heauen or who are damned in Hell AN APPENDIX OR THIRD PART of other circumstances which belong to the Canonizing of Saints The Papists THey say that it doth appertaine onely to the Pope to Canonize a Saint for error 24 the whole Church and that none ought to be acknowledged for Saints but they that are so Canonized by him And that herein the Pope is of so infallible a iudgement that he can not erre in Canonizing of Saints because that ordinarily none are Canonized by the Pope for saintes which haue not beene knowne to worke miracles Bellarm. lib. 1. cap. 8.9 10. The Protestants FIrst if saintes were to be registred and Canonized as they say yet it should not belong to the Pope but to the whole Church Argum. 1 The Pope hath no authoritie ouer the whole Church no nor yet in any other Bishoppes dioces no more then they haue in his Let him be content with his owne dioces and it were to be wished that he could rule that well the whole world is too large a prouince for him 2 The whole Church hath power to excommunicate and deliuer vp to sathan 1. Corinth 5. 4. and to cut off the prophane and wicked from the Church of God as heathen and publicanes Math. 18.17 Ergo to iudge who are members of the Church and saintes of God is a matter which appertaineth to the whole Church 3 Before Anno. 800. in the time of Carolus magnus there was no saint publiquely Canonized by the pope as Bellarm. confesseth but the truth is this custome of Canonizing saints beganne not till more then 1000. yeare after Christ til Alexander the 3. his time and Gregorie the 7. I pray you then were there no saints before if there were who canonized them Secondly So much as is to be knowne of saints and holy men euery Christian is to acknowledge without any publike decree or determination of the Pope or any other for the word of God giueth rules whereby we may discern the righteous from the vnrighteous Christ speaking of false prophets sayeth By their fruites ye shall know them Math. 7.16 And againe he fayth thus to his Apostles By this shal men know that you are my disciples if you loue one another Iohn 13.35 By these rules it is easie for euery Christian to iudge who for the present time are the true disciples of Christ who otherwise Thirdly it is a most impudent and shameles saying that the Pope can not erre in canonizing of Saintes 1 Miracles are no sufficient proofe of a saint for
not to enter into that holy place and thus according to the places they deuided the congregation as though one part were more holy then the other The people also were made to beleeue that to be buried in the Chauncell but especially vnder the Altar was more auailable for the dead then to be buried in the Church But where learne they that our Churches ought to haue a sanctuary as the Iewish Temple had that was an euident type and is now accomplished in our Sauiour Christ who is now entred into the heauens as the high Priest then entred into the holy place to make atonement for the people Heb. 9.24 This therefore is very grosse to reuiue and renew again Iewish types and figures And if herein they wil imitate the building of Salomons Temple to haue a Sanctuary why doe they not also build toward the West as the Temple was why bring they not their Altar downe into the body of the Church for in their holy place there was no Altar And indeed Altar we acknowledge none as afterward shal be proued But we see no reason why the communion Table may not be set in the body of the Church as well as in the Chauncell if the place be more conuenient and fit to receiue the Communicants But I pray you why is your Altar rather set in your Sanctuary then the Fonte or Baptistery they are both Sacraments as well Baptisme as the Lords Supper why should one be preferred as holier then the other Secondly all things in the Church ought to be done vnto edifiyng and therefore we allow no such partitions as doe hinder the edifiyng of the people and exclude them from hearing as in popish Churches the Priest is pued or mued vp by himselfe a great way off that his voice can hardly be perceiued of the people The Minister is so to stand and turne himselfe as he may be best heard and vnderstood of the people as Ezra had a pulpit of wood to stand in when he read the Law Nehemiah 8. 4. Augustine thus writeth Cum Episcopus solus intus est populus orat eum illo et quasi subscribens ad eius verba respondet Amen While the Bishop or Pastor praieth within the people both praieth together with him and subscribing to his words answereth Amen By this it appeareth that though in Augustines time the Minister had a place for him selfe as it is meete he should yet he so disposed himselfe that his praier was heard of all the people for otherwise how could they pray with him and subscribe or giue assent to his wordes THE SECOND PART OF THE END and vse of Churches THis part hath 3. seuerall pointes First whether the Churches of Christians are built to offer sacrifice in Secondly whether they be in themselues places more holy then others Thirdly whether they may be dedicate to Saintes THE FIRST POYNT OR ARTICLE whether our Churches are for sacrifice The Papists THe principall end of Churches is for the sacrifice of Christians and in that error 49 respect they are truely called Temples they are not onely for prayer the preaching of the word and administration of the Sacraments but chiefely for the externall sacrifice of the Masse Bellarm. cap. 4. Argu. 1. The Churches of Christians haue altars therefore sacrifices that they haue altars he thus proueth First 1. Corinth 10.21 You can not be partakers of the Lords table and the table of Deuils by the table here is meant the altar for the table of the heathen was their altar wherein they sacrificed to their Idols Ans. 1. A table is one thing an altar an other and very vnproperlye is an altar called a table this place in any wise mans iudgement maketh more against them then with them Secondly S. Paule speaketh not here of the sacrifices of the heathen nor of their altars but of the feastes which they made in their idolatrous temples which was done vpon tables of such sacrifices as had bene offered to idoles vnto the which feastes S. Paul forbiddeth Christians to come as it appeareth in the rest of the Chapter and more plainely cap. 8.10 Argu. 2. Heb. 13.10 Wee haue an altar of which they haue no power to eate that serue at the Tabernacle that is the altar whereon Christs body is offred Bellarm. Rhemist in hunc locum Ans. The Apostle speaketh expressely of participation of the sacrifice of Christs death as it is manifest in the 2. verses next following which is by a Christian faith and not in the Sacrament onely whereof none can be partakers that remayne in the ceremonial obseruations of the Leuitical sacrifices For the Apostle speaketh manifestly verse 12. of the suffering of Christ without the gate Christ therefore is the altar yea our Priest and sacrifice too You abuse this place to proue your materiall popish altars which are many but the Apostle saith we haue an altar speaking of one The Protestants THe Churches of Christians are the houses of praier made to that end that they should come together to heare the word of God read and preached receiue the sacraments and offer vp their spiritual sacrifices of praise and thanksgiuing other externall sacrifices or altars we acknowledge none Argu. 1. The temple of the Iewes was called an house of praier that is principally for praier Marke â—1 17 Moses was read and preached in their synagogues Act. 15.21 Much more are the Churches of Christians appointed for preaching and praier Act. 20.7 The first day of the weeke which is the Lords day they came together to breake bread and Paul preached vnto them Ergo the administration of the word and sacrameÌ„ts with praier is the chiefe and only cause of the holy assemblies of Christians Argu. 2. Altars we haue none in our Churches S. Paul calleth it the Lords table 1. Corinth 10.21 where wee receiue the sacrament of the bodye and bloud of Christ. And he calleth it bread which is broken 1. Corinthians 11.20 But bread is set vpon Tables not sacrificed vpon Altars Augustine also calleth it Mensam Domini the Lords table Epist. 59. epist. 50. He sheweth howe cruelly the Donatistes handled Maximian a catholik Bishop beating him with Clubbes euen in the church lignis altaris effractis immaniter ceciderunt and wounded him with the wood of the Altar which they had broken downe Where though he improperly call it an Altar yet was it a communion table framed of wood and made to bee remoued not fastened to the wall as their popish Altars were THE SECOND ARTICLE WHETHER Churches are more holy places in them selues The Papists GOd they say rather dwelleth and is present in Churches then els where error 50 and therefore it is more auailable for a man euen to make his priuate prayer in the Church Argum. 1. The Temple of Salomon was ordained euen for the prayers of priuate men and Salomon prayeth vnto God that they might be heard 1. King 8.38 So Anna prayed in the Tabernacle 1. Sam. 1.
purpose they do amisse And yet we deny not but that the names of holy men may be safely remembred by thankesgiuing vnto God for such excellent instruments and setting before our eyes their good example And concerning the names which haue bene superstitiously giuen in times past vnto Churches and other places though it were to bee wished that they neuer had beene so giuen yet now we vse them setting apart all superstition as ciuill names of differēce as S. Luke describeth the ship of Alexandria wherein they were carried whose badge saith he was Castor Pollux Act. 28.11 In a ciuil matter of description hee refuseth not to vse the names of the heathen goddes Augustine also giueth a good rule concerning such names He speaketh of the names of dayes which were called after the names of heathenish Idols as the 4. day in the weeke which we call Wednesday was then called and is yet in the Latine toung Dies Mercurij Mercurie his day Sic dicitur a paganis a multis Christianis sed nolumus vt dicant et vtinam corrigātur melius de ore Christiano ritus loquendi ecclesiasticus procedit So it is called of the heathē of many christians but I would not haue them called so and I wish they were amended for a Christian kinde of speaking best becommeth a Christian. Sed si quem forte cōsuetudo traxerit c. sciat illos omnes homines fuisse But if custome preuaile with a man so to speake let him vnderstand that all they were but men whome the heathen take for gods So say wee it were to be wished that we had names void of al shew of superstition but seeing for our speaking we must be ruled by custom let vs know that those saints by whose names places are called are no Gods nor Gods fellowes nor patrons or Mediators for vs nor any way to bee worshipped But they are the fellow seruants of all faithfull Christians to bee reuerenced with a Christian duety of loue not a religious worship of seruice THE THIRD PART OF THE ADORning and beautifiyng of Churches The Papists error 32 THe Temples and Churches of Christians they would haue built in the most sumptuous and costly manner yea in beauty to exceede the palaces of Princes with siluer golde silke Veluet to be decked and adorned Bellarmine cap. 6. Argum. 1. The Tabernacle of the Iewes was of exceeding beauty the Curtaines therof of silke the vessels euen to the snuffers for the Lampes were of golde the Priests garment had a breastplate of golde set about with precious stones Therfore why should not the Temples of Christians be in like sort adorned and set foorth as Isay prophecieth that the Glory of Lebanon shal come the Firre Oliue and Boxe tree to beautifie my sanctuary Isai. 60.13 which is literally to be vnderstood Bellarm. ibid. Ans. First if the Iesuite had turned his argument and reasoned thus the temple of the Iewes was gorgeous and sumptuous and beautifull to the eye therfore Churches of Christians ought not to be so now he had reasoned much better for their seruing of God was externall now God will be worshipped in spirit All things were done vnto them in types and figures the outward glorie of their temple was a liuely figure of the spirituall beautie of the Church of Christ. Secondly where you would haue the prophecie of Isay to be literally vnderstood you haue made a good argument for the Iewes for then they shall haue their sanctuarie restored againe which the Prophet speaketh of by name And if that place of Isay haue a literall sense why not that also 54.10 I will lay thy stones with Carbuncle and thy foundation with the Saphires I wil make thy windowes of Emeraudes and thy gates shining stones Say also that this shal be literally performed and so according to this grosse sense the prophecie of Haggie shal also be fulfilled the glorie of the last house shal be greater then the first Hagg. 2.10 But I thinke you neuer sawe Church built in this goodly manner in beautie surpassing the Iewish temple nor neuer shall The Protestants THat the Churches of Christians and places of praier ought decently to bee kept yea and with conuenient cost and seemely beautie to be built and repaired and Church vessels with other necessarie furniture to be of the best not of the worst sort we doe both commend it and practise it for so we learne by the example of our Sauiour that cast out of the temple sellers of doues and money changers and would not suffer them to carrie vessels through it Mark 11.15 16. that the house of praier ought to be reuerently regarded but yet it followeth not that such immoderate and excessiue cost should be bestowed vpon the walles of the Church and Idols to garnish and beautifie idolatrie and poore people in the meane time to want A Matrone ought to goe comely and decently apparelled though not tricked vp with the iewels and ornaments of an harlot Argum. 1. Our Sauiour Christ reproueth the Scribes and Pharisees because they drewe the people to bee good vnto the altar and bestowe largely vpon them and so leaue their parents helplesse Math. 15.5 And he often doth inculcate that golden saying I will haue mercie not sacrifice it is better to succour the liuing temples of God which are the bodies of his poore children then to bestowe superfluous cost vpon dead temples of stone Argum. 2. Christ also doth rebuke them because like hypocrites they did garnish the sepulchres of the Prophets yet persecuted their doctrine Math. 23.29 so all popish pharisees are worthie of blame that take greater care in garnishing the temples and tombes of the holy Apostles and Martyrs then they doe in setting forth their holy doctrine and preaching the Gospell nay they doe contemne persecute and hate that doctrine for the which those holy men died so that this prouerbe was very well deuised of them In times past we had golden Priests and woodden Cuppes now we haue woodden Priests and golden Cuppes Augustine exhorting the people to be liberall to their Bishops and Pastors thus writeth further Forte ecclesiam fabricat forte vtile aliquid in domo dei molitur expectat vt attendas expectat vt intelligas super egenum Perhaps he is in building a Church and doing some profitable worke in the house of God he looketh that thou shouldest attend and consider of his neede By this it appeareth that Churches were not superfluous costly in Augustines time for nothing was done but what was thought necessarie and profitable and the builders which were then for the most part their Bishops were not of any great abilitie to bestowe superfluous cost nay they were not able to finish the necessarie workes without the beneuolence and contribution of the people THE FOVRTH PART OF THE DEDICAtion of Churches The Papists error 53 THe superstitious dedication of their Churches with the Annuall memories thereof they would warrant
est vt ieiunium Sabbati horribilius haberetur By the which sayth he it came to passe that the fast of the Sabboth was more abhorred Augustin ibid. But this reason now bindeth not vs because the name and heresie of the Manichees is now worne out and therefore there is no feare of any scandale to arise that way Thirdly we grant that the Lords day is not the fittest time for publique fasts first because it is a day of reioycing so we reade that the people in Nehemiah his time were forbidden to mourne and weepe after the lawe was read vnto them by Ezra because it was a day of ioy and mirth Nehem. 8.11 Secondly the day of solemne and publique fasting ought to be set a part from other dayes and to be proclaimed solemnely and to be spent wholly in spirituall exercises euen as the Sabboth with vacation and rest from other bodily labours as we may reade 2. Chronicl 20.3 Nehem. 9.1 And therefore any day is more fit then the Sabboth because that is a holy day alreadie vnto the Lord but when we will humble our selues before the Lord by fasting and prayer some day would onely for that purpose bee consecrate vnto GOD that may be as a voluntarie sacrifice whereas wee are bound of necessitie to keepe the Lords day But concerning priuate and particular fasts when men by themselues haue occasion to giue themselues to prayer whereof S. Paul speaketh 1. Corinth 7.5 Such priuate exercises may be better performed vpon the Sabboth because of the ordinarie exercises of the word which are notable meanes to kindle and stirre vp true deuotion in him which at that time will humble himselfe yea and publike fasts though not ordinarily yet wheÌ„ there is iust occasion may be kept vpon the Sabboth as we reade Act. 20.7 how that Paul continued his preaching till midnight whereof Augustine writeth thus Necessarius sermo resiciendi corporis causa interrumpendus esse non visus est profecturo Apostolo The necessary preaching of the Apostle he thought not good for the refreshing of their bodies to breake off being readie to depart We conclude therefore that it is lawfull to fast vpon the Lords day though it be not alwaies expedient And Augustine very well determineth this matter Ego in Euangelicis Apostolicis literis video praeceptum esse ieiunium quibus autem diebuâ—â—non oporteat ieiunare quibus oporteat praecepto domini vel Apostolorum non inuenâ—o de finitum I finde both in the Euangelicall and Apostolicall writings that fasting is commanded but vpon what dayes we ought to fast vpon what we ought not I doe not finde it defined Epistol 86. Wherefore to fast or not to fast vpon the Lords day or vpon any other being not determined in scripture is left as a thing indifferent to the Church of God The Papists error 67 8. THe name Sunday is an heathenish calling as al other weeke-daies in our language some imposed after the names of Planets as in the Romanes time some by the name of certaine Idols which the Saxons did worship which names the Church vseth not but hath appoynted to call the first day the Dominike after the Apostle Apocal. 1.10 the other by the name Feries vntill the last of the weeke which she calleth by the old name Sabboth because that was of God not by imposition of the heathen Rhemist annot Apocal. 1. sect 6. The Protestants Ans. FIrst as the name of Sunday and the rest is of the heathenish beginning and therefore were better to be otherwise termed as the first second or third from the Lords day as the Iewes called their daies from the Sabboth so your terme of feries is no lesse heathenish deriued from the word feria or feriae which were so called a feriendis victimis of striking the heathenish sacrifices as Sextus Pompeius sayth Fulk ibid. 2. We haue other names also that might bee reformed as of our moneths as March is so called of Mars Iune of Iuno Ianuary of Ianus which were heathen goddes Iuly and August doe beare the names of men yea and if wee might bee inuentors of newe names the termes of Christmas Michaelmas Candlemas should not stand in force nor any more be vsed which are as offensiue as the rest for as for the names of heathen Idols the most part are ignorant of them but the vulgar terme of Masse is to too well known too much loued of many of our countrey men Now for the name Sunday which is so great a mote in your eye if there were no more but that Augustine sheweth how it might be fauourably expounded Dies magni solis celebramus illius solis de quo dicit scriptura orietur vobis sol iustitiae We doe keepe Sunday holy namely of that great Sunne whereof the scripture speaketh the Sunne of righteousnesse shall arise 3. We wish that all these termes might be layd downe as Augustine sayth Nolumus vt dicant vtinam corrigantur vt non dicant We would not haue men so to speake and I wish they were reformed But seeing by continuall custome mens tongues are inured to such termes let them knowe that they are vsed onely as ciuill names to call things by not for any religion or mysterie in them contained or signified THE THIRD PART OF THE FESTIVAL daies of Christ and the holy Ghost The Papists THE feasts of Easter and Whitsontide and other solemnities of Christ were error 68 prescribed they say by the Apostles Rhemist Matth. 15. sect 2. to be kept vpon certaine dayes and that Peter did appoint that Easter should not be kept the 14. day of the first Moone as the Iewes obserued it but the Lordes day after And of the feast of Pentecost mention is made 1. Corinth 16.8 Ergo these feasts were instituted of the Apostles Bellarm. cap. 12.13 The Protestants Ans. FIrst wee graunt that it is expedient for the Church to keepe the memoriall of the Natiuitie Passion Resurrection Ascension of Christ and of the comming of the holy Ghost and the dayes instituted for the remembrance thereof no doubt ought to be had in greater account then any other holy dayes instituted by the Church Secondly it cannot be proued that they were prescribed by the Apostles or if they were but as indifferent ceremonies which are subiect to alteration and in the which the religion or worship of God dooth not consist Certaine it is that before the time of Constantine the great there were not many festiuall dayes kept in so much that the feasts of the Natiuitie of Christ Easter Pentecost were not vniformally obserued for many yeares after as appeareth by diuerse Councels And before Constantines time there was great contention betweene the Bishop of Rome and the Bishops of the East about the celebration of Easter they alleadging the constitution of Saint Iohn the other of Saint Peter wherefore it is like that the Apostles appointed no such certaine dayes for then the Church would
First that they doe not onely signifie but exhibite and represent vnto vs after a liuely manner the spirituall things which are signified Secondly they must haue the institution perpetuall commandement of Christ. Thirdly the sacraments of the new law must succeede in the place of the olde Hereupon we will inferre that there are but two sacraments in the new Testament Baptisme and the Lords Supper Argum. 1. These two alone are not onely signes of heauenly things but seales and pledges vnto vs thereof whereby our fayth is strengthened and our hope confirmed in the promises of God as the remission of sinnes is represented in Baptisme Act. 2.38 the death of Christ shewed foorth in the Eucharist 1. Corinth 11.26 The like commendation is not giuen of any other of their sacraments Argum. 2. Christ onely commaunded these two sacraments to bee vsed for euer in his Church to such spirituall purposes as Baptisme is instituted and commaunded Math. 28.19 the Lords Supper likewise Math. 26. Many other ceremonies Christ vsed himselfe as lifting vp of hands the tempering of clay and spittle his Apostles imposition of hands and anoynting with oyle But he hath not layd his commaundement vpon these ceremonies enioyning vs perpetually to keepe them as he hath charged vs with the other two Argum. 3. The sacraments of the newe Testament succeede in the roume of them of the olde Baptisme standeth in stead of Circumcision the Lordes Supper is come in place of the Paschal Lambe But they cannot shew what old sacraments those fiue other newly inuented confirmation orders penance matrimony extreame vnction doe succeede and supplie Ergo they are none And beside if all these should be sacraments and so seuen in all we should haue more in number then the Iewes had which is not to bee admitted for they had but two ordinary sacraments Circumcision and the Paschall Lambe two extraordinarie as their baptisme in the red sea and the clowde and their eating of the Manna and drinking of the rocke 1. Corin. 10.2.3 So they should haue but foure sacraments for your seuen Other legall rites ceremonies and sacrifices they had and many typical shadowes and significations but no more sacraments then we haue heard Augustine yeeldeth to haue no more sacraments then onely two As Eua was made out of Adams side as hee was asleepe Sic ex latere domini dormientis in cruce manauerunt sacramenta ex quibus formaretur ecclesia So out of the Lordes side sleeping vpon the crosse the sacraments of the Church issued that is water and blood by the which he vnderstandeth the two sacraments THE SECOND PART OF THE order and degree of the sacraments among them selues The Papists error 97 IF any man shall say that these seuen sacraments are of equall dignitie and not one in some respect to be preferred before the other let him be accursed Concil Trident. sess 7. can 3. In diuers respects one sacrament may excell another as Baptisme excelleth the rest because of remission of sinnes thereby effected or as we say represented Orders excell in respect of the minister because they are onely say they conferred by a Bishop Matrimony excelleth in respect of the signification the coniunction of Christ and his Church But simply the Eucharist exceedeth all because of the substance of the sacrament the reall and bodily presence of Christ. Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 28. Answer First that Baptisme and the Eucharist exceede all the other we do easily admit for we holde them to be no sacraments and therefore we stand not vpon their seuerall priuiledges Secondly neither Baptisme is more excellent then the Lords Supper because it representeth the remission of sinnes for that also is insinuated in the other for how can we shew foorth the Lords death which is done in that sacrament vnlesse we call to minde the benefits purchased by his death as remission of sinnes Neither doth the Eucharist goe beyond Baptisme in regard of a more full presence of Christ for he is not otherwise present in one sacrament then in the other presenting himselfe in both spiritually to be apprehended of the worthy receiuer as for that carnal and grosse presence of the body of Christ in the sacrament we acknowledge none as afterward it shall more fully appeare when wee come in order to that question Augustine sheweth that Christ is no otherwise present in the Eucharist then in the preaching of the word for the manner of his presence Eucharistia panis noster quotidianus est quod vobis tracto panis quotidianus est quod in ecclesia lectiones quotidie auditis panis quotidianus est the Eucharist or sacrament of thankesgiuing is our dayly bread that which I handle and preach to you is our daylie bread that which you heare read daylie in the Church is our daylie bread If Christ then be no more really present in the sacrament then in the worde what is become of the preeminence that the one sacrament in that respect should haue aboue the other The Protestants THat the one sacrament should be so much extolled aboue the other namely the Lords Supper to be preferred before Baptisme as the more worthy and excellent sacrament we finde no such thing in the word of God but that both of them are of like dignitie in themselues and to be had equally and indifferently in most high accompt thus it is prooued Argum. 1 They are both commaunded and instituted by the same authoritie of our Lord Iesus Christ neither is one by the first institution aduanced aboue the other Secondly there is the same matter and substance of both sacraments Christ Iesus with all his benefites Thirdly one and the same end of them both which is the increase and strengthening of our fayth in the promises of God Ergo they are both of equall dignitie and worthynes Let them say now which is the more worthy thing Baptisme or the word preached no doubt they will preferre Baptisme for they holde that the sacraments doe giue grace by the worke wrought and so doth not the worde yea they are offended because we say that the sacraments are no otherwaies instruments of our iustification then the word preached is but that the one worketh by the hearing the other by the senses of seeing handling tasting but they all serue to one end namely to beget and increase fayth in vs. This our assertion they vtterly mislike Bellarm. lib. 2. de sacram cap. 2. Whereby it appeareth that they preferre Baptisme before the word We then thus reason out of Augustine He thus writeth Dicite mihi quid plus videtur vobis verbum dei an corpus Christi respondere debetis quod non sit minus verbum dei Tell me which is the chiefer in your opinion the word of God or the body of Christ that is the sacrament of his body ye must answere that the word of God is not inferior Homil. 26. Hence we frame this argument The word of God is equiualent to
9.4 or for the easing of our conscience to man also as to him whom we haue offended Math. 5.24 Or to any other faithfull man the Minister or some other that we may be holpen and comforted by our mutuall prayers Iam. 5.16 There are also two kinds of publique confession either of the whole congregation together Nehem. 9.3 or of some one or more that make publique confession of their sinne for the satisfying of the congregation whom they haue offended which belongeth to Ecclesiasticall discipline 2. Corinth 2.6 But this particular confession of all sinnes yea of them that are secret and to none but the Priest is an Antichristian yoke and too heauie for Christians to beare Arg. 1. It is not necessarie to make confession at all vnto men the Prophet Dauid confessed onely vnto God Against thee O Lord onely haue I sinned Psal. 51.4 Augustine also sayth Quid mihi cum hominibus vt audiant confessiones meas quasi ipsi sanaturi sint languores meos What haue men to doe to heare my confessions as though they were able to heale my sores Confess lib. 10.3 Argum. 2. If a man otherwise cannot finde ease of conscience but will open his sinnes to men it is not alwaies necessarie he should seeke to the Minister though it be most cōueniēt if he be a fit man any other faithful godly man may serue for so the Apostle biddeth vs Acknowledge our faults not to the priest but one to another Iam. 5.16 Whereupon Augustine writeth Peccata nostra debemus non solùm Deo sed etiam sanctis Deum timentibus confiteri We must confesse our sinnes not onely to God but to men also that feare God He sayth not Sacerdotibus onely to the Priests Homil. 12. Argum. 3. Such a particular enumeration of sinnes is not necessarie neither is it possible It sufficeth where our sinnes are kept from our sight to say with the Prophet Cleanse me from my secret sinnes Psal. 19.12 Augustine sayth Quot habes in corde compunctiones facinorum tot habe illic punctiones confessionum Looke how many sinnes doe pricke thy conscience so must thy confession be It is an vncomfortable doctrine to teach men to labour to remember all their sinnes and to make a particular catalogue of them they haue worke enough to be eased of those sinnes that lye heauie on the heart AN APPENDIX OF OTHER CIRCVMSTANCES of Auricular confession The Papists 1. THis order and custome of Confession they hold to be a diuine ordinance error 14 no humane tradition Concil Trid sess 14. can 6.8 The Protestants THey are neuer able to shewe that it had any diuine institution but it was a meere deuise and inuention of men First we reade that Nectarius a good Bishop of Constantinople did abrogate this custome of Confession vpon this occasion which had before time been vsed in that Church for it was found out that a certaine woman of the citie vnder this pretence of confession had vnlawfull companie with the priest to whom she confessed whereupon the good man abolished that custome seeing more harme then good to come by it And this act of his was approued by that famous preacher Chrysostome who succeeded him in that see but if it had been the ordinance of God it ought not for some abuse to haue been abolished Augustine also sayth Si deest sacerdos confiteatur proximo If a priest cannot be had let a man confesse to his neighbour Ergo to confesse to a priest is no certaine ordinance of God for then might it not be changed The Papists 2. IT is necessarie that euery man should confesse to his owne parish priest error 15 Thom. ex Tileman Heshus loc 7. err 46. The Protestants YEa but Augustine sayth Sacerdos vt perfectus medicus primùm sciat curare peccata sua tum detergere aliena The priest as a cunning phisition must first know how to cure his owne sinnes before he can helpe another De salutaribus docum cap. 50. And in another place Quaerat sacerdotem scientem ligare soluere ne ambo cadant in foueam Let him seeke a priest that knoweth how to bind and loose lest both fall into the ditch De poenitent cap. 10. But such an one cannot be had in euery parish for many times the parish priest is worse then he that commeth to be confessed such an one Augustine sayth is not to bee taken and therefore men should not in that case bind themselues to their popish priest The Papists 3. IT is enough for men once a yeere in the time of Lent to confesse themselues error 16 Concil Trid. sess 14. can 8. The Protestants AVgustine sayth contrarie Non tantum laici sed etiam sacerdotes vna die esse non debent sine poenitentia Not onely lay men but not priests ought to be one day without repentance In Apocal. hom 2. His reason is because they can not be one day without sinne THE SEVENTH QVESTION of satisfaction THis question containeth these parts First whether the sinne being forgiuen there remaine any punishment 2. Whether the temporall punishment of this life may be redeemed by good workes 3. Whether the wrath of God may be satisfied for sinne and the punishment due vnto the same 4. Whether one man may satisfie for another of these now in their order THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE PVNISHment remaine the sinne being once pardoned The Papists error 17 THey doe affirme that it may stand with the iustice of God to forgiue the sinne committed yet reserue the punishment Concil Triden sess 14. can 14. Argum. The Lord forgaue vnto Dauid the sinne of adulterie and murder which he had committed yet he punished him in the death of his child 2. Sam. 12.13.14 Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 2. The Protestants Ans. THat crosse was laid vpon Dauid not as a punishment of his sinne but as a fatherly correction or chastisement to exercise him make him more carefull for the time following as Augustine sayth writing vpon the same example Subsecutus est illius comminationis effectus vt pietas hominis in illa humilitate exerceretur atque probaretur The effect of the threatning immediatly followed that Dauids godlines might thereby be tried and proued He saith not that Dauid might thereby be punished Argum. Christ sayd to the sicke of the palsie Mark 2.5 Sonne thy sinnes are forgiuen thee Whereby our Sauiour would haue them to vnderstand that the sinne being once forgiuen the sicknes of the bodie which was the punishment of sinne could not continue for the cause being remoued the effect ceaseth The afflictions of this life are the louing corrections of God to admonish vs not plagues to punish vs as Augustine sayth well Tota miseria generis humani dolor medecinalis non sententia poenalis The miserie of man is but a medicinall griefe not a sentence of punishment In Psalm 138. THE SECOND PART WHETHER THE TEMPOrall punishment of this life may be redeemed
sed ad arbitrium Dei orationes sanctorum Sinnes are not loosed or retained at the pleasure of men but according to the will of God and praiers of his Church The Papists error 24 2. THe satisfactorie and meritorious workes of the Saints which doe abound being communicable and applicable to the faithfull that want are the very ground of the indulgences and pardons of the Church and the very treasure thereof and to be dispensed according to euery mans neede by the pastors of the Church 2. Corinth 2. sec. 5. Coloss. 1. sect 4. The Protestants HEre are many blasphemies and vntruthes couched together 1 That a mans penalties may exceede and bee greater then his sinnes and so his abounding may supplie another mans want for thus the Rhemists say which cannot stand with the iustice of God to punish a man more then he hath deserued And it is contrarie to the Scriptures Enter not into iudgement with thy seruant for in thy sight shall none that liueth be iustified Psalm 143.2 And Iob saith If the Lord should call him to account he should not answere one to a thousand 9.3 2 How can the Church gouernours dispense the merites of one to another Who made them stewards of another mans good Yee say also the contrarie your selues That the abounding passioÌ„s of the Saints are applicable to others by the sufferers intention Rhem. 1. Colo. 2.2 Then not by the Churches dispensation 3 It is a great blasphemie that one may bee holpen by another mans merites and it doth derogate from the death of Christ whose onely merites are the treasure and storehouse of the Church The most righteous man that euer was can but saue his owne soule Ezech. 14.14 And that onely by Christ. Augustine saith Vnusquisque pro se rationem reddet nec alieno testimonio quisquam adiuuatur apud Deum vix sibi quisque sufficit c. Euery man shall giue account for himselfe before God no man is holpen by the testimonie of another the testimonie of his owne conscience doth hardly suffice for himselfe The Papists 3. THe dispensing of pardons and indulgences is onely committed they say error 25 to the chiefe magistrates the Popes and Bishops and as the Bishops in their Diocese haue especiall cases reserued to themselues wherein inferiour Priests are not to deale so the Pope hath also his proper reseruations wherein other Prelates are not to meddle Concil Trident. sess 14. cap. 7. The cases reserued to the Pope are 51. in number Fox pag. 785. The Bishop of Paris ann 1515 reserued these cases to himselfe to dispense in murder witchcraft sacrilege heresie simonie adulterie ex Tileman Heshus loc 9. de poeniten err 63. Likewise the yeares of their pardons are limited Bishops may not exceede 40. dayes pardon the Pope may be lauish in his hundreds and thousands yea and this reseruation of cases standeth not onely with the externall policie of the Church but is of force euen before God Concil Trident. sess 14. cap. 7. The Protestants WE will not much contend with them about reseruation of cases for wee acknowledge no such power to giue pardons or indulgences either in superior or inferior Priests yet wee will shew how this deuise of theirs standeth not with their owne doctrine Argum. 1. It is a greater power to remit the sinne then to release the punishment but euery Priest hath the greater power as they say to remit sinnes yea as fullie as hath the Pope himselfe Allen in his booke of pardons cap. 2. Ergo why haue they not the lesse power which is by indulgence to dispense with the punishment And that of these two the remission of sinnes is the greater it is confessed by the Rhemist 2. Corinth 2. sect 6. Argum. 2. In the point of death the reseruation of cases hath no place but at that time euery Priest may absolue from all manner sinnes and punishment Concil Trident. sess 14 cap. 7. But euery houre is with some and ought to be with all the point of death because we are vncertaine when it commeth and therefore ought alwaies to be in a readines Therefore euen by their owne rule euery Priest hath at all times authoritie to absolue in all cases Againe if those words of Christ be spoken to all ministers and preachers of the Gospell Iohn 20.22 Whose sinnes ye reteine c. which cannot bee denied to them all then is committed equally that power of binding and loosing which is exercised by the preaching of the word THE NINTH QVESTION OF THE ceremonies and circumstances of penance The Papists error 26 1. THey enioyne their penitent Clients to poll their heads and their women to weare a vaile to goe in black to put on sackcloth to looke sowrely and such like presumptions they haue concerning the habite of those that doe penance Bellarm. lib. 1. de poenitent cap. 22. The Protestants OVr Sauiour cleane contrarie biddeth his Disciples not to looke sowrely nor to disfigure themselues when they fast and repent or to shew any other outward token of their sorrow but to doe it secretly betweene themselues and God to wash their face to annoynt themselues with oyle that it appeare not to men that they fast Matth. 6.16.17 Augustine also answering a certaine obiection that young men newly married might make How can I shaue my head or change my habite saith thus Vera conuersio sufficit tibi sine vestimentorum commutatione The true conuersion of the heart may suffice thee without changing of thy vesture The Papists error 27 2. THey enioyned them to fast bread water certaine dayes in the weeke to lie hard to absteine from marriage or to doe some great almes deedes to satisfie for their sinne Bellarm. ibid. to goe a pilgrimage and such like workes of penance were prescribed them The Protestants TRue repentance consisteth not in such outward exercise of the bodie but is a conuersion rather of the heart It was the manner of hypocrites idolatâ—rs and superstitious men to seeke to appease their Gods with afflicting of their flesh as the Gentiles did cut their hayre Deut. 14.1 Baals Priests did launch their flesh 1. King 18.28 Argum. What is to be thought of such punishing of the carkasse Saint Paul sheweth Coloss. 2.23 He calleth it voluntarie religion or superstition in not sparing the bodie when men doe not vse such outward exercises of fasting and abstinence for the chastisement of the flesh to subdue it to the spirit but with an opinion of meriting thereby preferring them before the faith and conuersion of the heart as the papists doe Augustine saith Non sit satis quòd doleat sed ex fide doleat non semper doluisse doleat Let it not suffice to bee sorrowfull but let his sorrowe proceede of faith and let it grieue him that hee is not alwaies grieued for his sinne So then true repentance is especially an inward worke of fayth rather then an exercise of the body and it ought alwayes
the prosecuting whereof if sometime I chance to misse I say with Augustine Nunquam errari tutius existimo quà m cum in amore nimio veritatis reiectione nimia falsitatis erratur I thinke a man can neuer more safely erre then when he erreth in the too much loue of the truth and the reiecting of falsehoode I haue labored in this worke to set downe not onely the chiefe and principall but euen the most and in a manner all the controuersies of religion betweene vs and the Papists maintained this day If any thing bee missing I say againe with Augustine Tale esse arbitratus sum cui mea responsio necessaria non fuisset siue quia ad rem de qua agitur non pertinet siue quod tam leue esset vt à quolibet redargui facillimè posset I thought it to be such as vnto the which mine answere was not needefull either because it was not pertinent to the matter in hand or else of so small moment that euery man might easilie answer vnto it I haue no more to say but this If thou findest thy selfe any thing profited or helped good Christian Reader by these simple labouâ—s of mine giue God the praise and I will praise him with thee but one thing let mee pray thee Quisquis legis nihil reprehendas nisi cum totum perlegeris atque ita forte minus reprehendes Whosoeuer readest in this booke reprehend nothing before thou hast read the whole and so perhaps thou wilt be more sparing in rephending The Lorde giue vs all grace to loue the truth that they which knowe it may liue thereafter and they which as yet knowe it not may seeke for it and wee all may embrace the Counsell of the wise man to Buy the trueth but in no wise to sell it that is by all possible meanes to labour for it and hauing attained thereunto for no earthly respect for feare or fauour to depart from it The Lord God Iesus Christ Iehouah Emmanuel our blessed Sauiour and Redeemer who is the way the truth and the life giue vs of his heauenlie grace that wee may walke obediently in his waies and constantly professe his truth that in the end he may bring vs to eternall life Amen Soli Deo immortali patri Filio cum Spiritu sancto sit omnis honor gloria A PARTICVLAR INDEX OR TABLE OF ALL THE CONTROVERSIES WITH THEIR SEVERAL questions contained in this treatise The contents of the first Booke This Booke containeth seuen Controuersies The first Controuersie of the Scriptures hath seuen questions 1. quest Of the number of the Canonicall bookes of Scripture pag. 2. 2. Of the authenticall edition of Scripture pag. 12. 3. Of the vulgar translation of Scripture and of publique prayers in the vulgar tongue pag. 16. 4. Of the authoritie of Scripture pag. 20. 5. Of the perspicuitie and plainnes of Scripture pag. 23. 6. Of the interpretation of Scripture 3. parts 1. Of the diuers senses of Scripture pag. 26. 2. Who ought to expound Scripture pag. 28. 3. Of the manner of expounding Scripture pag. 30. 7. Of the perfection of Scripture 3. parts 1. Whether the Scripture be absolutely necessarie p. 33. 2. Whether they be sufficient pag. 35. 3. Of vnwritten traditions beside Scripture pag. 38. The second generall Controuersie concerning the Church containeth fiue questions 1. quest Of the definition of the Church 2. parts 1. Whether wicked men be members of the Church pag. 43. 2. Whether the Church be inuisible pag. 46. 2. Whether the Church may erre 2. parts 1. Whether the Catholike Church may erre at all or not pag. 49. 2. Whether the visible Church vpon earth may fall into Idolatrie or Apostasie pag. 52. 3. Of the notes and markes of the Church 1. Antiquitie pag. 55 2. Vniuersalitie pag. 57 3. Succession pag. 59 4. Vnitie pag. 60 5. Miracles pag. 63 6. The gift of prophecying pag. 66 4. Of the authoritie of the Church 2. parts 1. What authoritie it hath in matters of faith and whether wee are to beleeue in the Church pag. 73 2. Of the ceremonies of the Church pag. 76 5. Of the Church of Rome two parts 1. Whether it be the Catholike Church pag. 78 2. Whether it be a true visible Church pag. 79 The third controuersie of generall Councels containeth eight questions 1. quest Whether Councels be absolutely necessarie pag. 81 2. By whom generall Councels ought to be summoned pag. 83 3. Of what persons Councels ought to consist pag. 84 4. Who ought to be the president in Councels pag. 88 5. Whether Councels may erre or not pag. 90 6. Of the authoritie of Councels pag. 93 7. Whether they be aboue the Pope pag. 95 8 Of the conditions requisite in generall Councels pag. 98 The fourth controuersie of the Bishop of Rome called the Pope ten questions 1. Whether the regiment of the Church be Monarchicall pag. 100 2. Whether Peter were Prince of the Apostles and assigned by Christ to be the head of the Church pag. 105 3. Of Peters being at Rome two parts 1. Whether Peter were at Rome pag. 112 2. Whether Peter were Bishop of Rome pag. 116 4. Whether the Bishop of Rome be the true successor of Peter pag. 118 5 Of the primacie of the See of Rome sixe parts 1. Whether the Bishop of Rome be aboue other Bishops pag. 120 2. Concerning appeales made to Rome pag. 122 3. Whether the Pope bee subiect to the iudgement of any pag. 124 4. Whether the Pope may be deposed from his Papacie pag. 125 5. The originall of the primacie of Rome p. 128 6. Of the names and titles of the Bishop of Rome pag. 131 6. quest Whether the Pope of Rome as likewise whether the Church of Rome may erre pag. 134 7. quest Of the spirituall iurisdiction of the Pope two parts 1. Whether hee may make lawes to binde the conscience pag. 141 2. Whether all Bishops do receiue their Ecclesiastical iurisdiction from the Pope p. 145 8 Of the temporal iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome two parts 1 Whether the Pope be aboue Kings and Emperours pag. 148 2 Whether he be a temporall prince pag. 151 9 Of the Popes prerogatiue 3. parts 1 Of his power dispensatiue pag. 154 2 Of his power exemptiue Ibid. 3 Of his power transcendent Ibid. 10. Of Antichrist 9. parts 1 Whether Antichrist shal be one particular man pag. 155 2 Whether Antichrist be yet come and how long he shall raigne pag. 157 3 Concerning the name character of Antichrist p. 162 4 Of the generation of Antichrist pag. 168 5 Of the seate and place of Antichrist pag. 169 6 Of the doctrine of Antichrist pag. 172 7 The miracles of Antichrist pag. 176 8 The warres and kingdome of Antichrist pag. 179 9 Whether the Pope be Antichrist pag. 182 The fift controuersie of the Clergie sixe questions 1. quest Of the name of Clerkes or Clergie men pag. 190 2 Of the election of Bishops and
Pastors and of the election of the Pope pag. 197 3 Of Ecclesiasticall degrees and orders 3. parts 1 Of the seuen degrees of popish priesthood p. 199 2 Of the difference of Bishops and other Ministers pag. 201 3 Of the office of Cardinals pag. 205 4 Of the keyes of the Church 4. parts 1 Wherein the authoritie of the keyes consisteth pag. 206 2 To whom the authoritie of the keyes â—s committed p. 208 3 Whether the Pastors of the Church haue absolute power to remit sinnes pag. 210 4 Of the effect of binding and loosing pag. 212 5 Of the marriage of Ministers three parts 1 The marriage of Ministers lawfull pag. 214 2 Men may be admitted to Orders after second marriage pag. 219 3 Whether perpetuall abstinence be required in married Ministers pag. 221 6 Of the maintenance of Ministers by tithes two parts 1 Whether the paiment of tithes bee necessarie pag. 228 2 By what right tithes are due pag. 229 The sixt controuersie of Monkes and Friers sixe questions 1. quest Of the originall of Monkes and of their diuers sects pag. 232 2 Of the difference betweene Euangelicall Counsels and precepts pag. 236 3 Of vowes in generall three parts 1 Whether it be lawfull for Christians to vow pag. 239 2 Wherein lawfull vowes consist pag. 241 3 Whether voluntarie vowes properly be any part properly of the worship of God pag. 242 4 Of Monasticall vowes 3. parts 1 Of the vow of voluntarie pouertie pag. 244 2 The vow of Monasticall obedience p. 246 3 Of the vow of chastitie pag. 247 5 Of Monasticall persons foure parts 1 Whether the younger sort ought to professe Monkerie pag. 251 2 Whether children may be made Monkes without their parents consent pag. 253 3 Whether married persons may with mutuall consent become votaries pag. 254 4 Whether marriage not consummate may without consent bee broken for the vow of continencie pag. 256 6 Of the rules and discipline of Monasticall life foure parts 1 Of the solitarie austere life of Monks pag. 257 2 Of the habite and shauing of Monkes pag. 259 3 Of their Canonicall houres pag. 261 4 Of the maintenance of Monkes pag. 262 The seuenth generall controuersie of the Ciuill Magistrate foure questions 1 Of the authoritie of the Prince in Ecclesiasticall matters foure parts 1 His authoritie ouer Ecclesiasticall persons pag. 266 2 Ouer Ecclesiasticall goods pag. 267 3 In causes Ecclesiasticall pag. 268 4 Whether the Prince may be sayd to bee the head of the Church in his kingdome pag. 271 2 The authoritie of the Prince in punishing heretikes 1 Whether the iudgement of heresie any way belongeth to the Prince pag. 274 2 How an heretike is to be tried pag. 275 3 How heretikes are to be examined and punished Ibid. 3 Whether the positiue lawes of Princes doe binde in conscience 4 Whether the Prince may be excommunicate of the Pope THE SECOND BOOKE CONTAINETH SIXE CONTROVERSIES The first controuersie which is the eight in the whole is concerning Angels three questions 1. quest Of the hierarchie of Angels 2. parts 1 Of the degrees of Angels p. 291 2 Whether Michael be the Prince of the Angels pag. 292 2 Of the ministerie of Angels three parts 1 Of their externall ministerie in the protection of the Church pag. 293 2 Of their spirituall office about our prayers pag. 295 3 Whether Angels know our hearts pag. 296 3 Of the worship of Angels 2 parts 1 Of their worship in generall pag. 299 2 Of the inuocation of Angels pag. 300 The ninth generall controuersie concerning Saints departed two parts 1. part Of those that suffer punishment being departed two questions 1 Of Limbus Patrum and of the apparition of Samuel pag. 302.305 2 Of Purgatorie foure parts 1 Whether there be any Purgatorie pag. 307 2 Of the circumstances of Purgatorie pag. 310 3 Of prayer for the dead p. 312 4 Of burials funerals p. 315 2. part Of the Saints that are in ioy and blisse after their departure 9. quest 1. quest Of the blessed estate of the Saints and of Canonizing of Saints pag. 320 2 Of the adoration of Saints 3. parts 1 Whether they are to bee adored and of othes vowes made to Saints pag. 325 2 Of the diuers kindes of worship pag. 330 3 Of the kissing of holy mens feete pag. 331 3 Of the inuocation of Saints three parts 1 Whether prayers are to be made vnto them pag. 332 2 Whether they pray for vs pag. 334 3 Whether they vnderstand our praiers p. 335 4 Of the reliques of Martyrs foure parts 1 Of the worshipping of Reliques pag. 338. 2 Translation of Reliques pag. 340. 3 Preseruing of Reliques pag. 342. 4 Miracles of Reliques pag. 343. 5. question 1. Of Images foure parts 1 Of the difference of Idols Images p. 347 2 Whether it bee lawfull to haue Images pag. 348 3 Whether to be worshipped pag. 350 4 What manner of worship it should be p. 353 2. Of the signe of the Crosse 4. parts 1 Of the Crosse whereon Christ suffered p. 355 2 Of the image of the Crosse. pag. 357 3 Of the signe of the Crosse. pag. 359 4 Of the power or efficacie of the Crosse. p. 360 5 An appendix concerning the name of Iesus pag. 361 6. quest Of Temples and Churches fiue parts 1 Of the situation and forme of Churches pag. 3â—2 2 Of the ende and vse of Churches three parts pag. 365 1 Whether they are built for sacrifice pag. 365 2 Whether they be holy places in theÌ„selues pag. 367 3 Whether they may be dedicate to saints pag. 368 3 Of the adorning of Churches pag. 370 4 Of the dedication of Churches pag. 372. 5 Of thinges hallowed for Churches pag. 373 7 Of Pilgrimages and Processions and of the holy land pag. 375 8 Of holy and festiuall daies fiue parts 1 Of holy dayes in generall 378 2 Of the Lords day 379 3 Of the festiuall dayes of Christ and the holy Ghost pag. 386 4 Of the festiuities of Saints 1 The number of them 2 The manner of keeping them pag. 388 3 Of their vigils p. 391 5 Of Lent and Imber daies pag. 392 9 Of the Virgin Mary 1 Whether she were conceiued without sinne pag. 398 2 Whether she vowed virginitie pag. 400 3 Of her assumption into heauen pag. 401 4 Of the worship due vnto her pag. 402 5 Of the merites of the virgine and of the Aue Maria. pag. 404 The tenth controuersie hath but one question concerning the mediation and intercession of Christ. pag. 406. The eleuenth controuersie concerning the Sacraments in generall three questions 1. quest Of the definition and nature of a Sacrament 1 Of the efficient cause or institutor of the sacrament pag. 408 2 Of the forme manner of consecration pag. 409 3 Of the instrumentall cause which is the Minister pag. 413 4 Of the vse whether the Sacraments be seales pag. 414 2. quest Of the efficacie and vertue of the Sacraments 1 Whether the SacrameÌ„ts
scripture 1. Deut. 17.12 He that harkeneth not vnto the priest that man shal die But mark I pray you what goeth before v. 11. according to the law which they shal teach thee according to the iudgement which they shall tell thee shalt thou do see then here is no absolute iudicial power giuen to the priest but according to the law of God 2. The example of the Apostles Act. 15. is as fōdly alleadged where it was decreed saith the Iesuite that the Gētiles shuld not be burthened with ceremonies which saith hee was not determined by the scriptures but by the absolute suffrages of the Apostles Again their decrees were absolutely imposed vpon the Churches without any further examination of the Disciples Ergo we are now also absolutely bound to obey all decrees of Councels Bellar. de concil 1.18 We answere first it is false that this matter was determined without scripture for Iames alleadgeth scripture Peter thus reasoneth we beleeue through the grace of God to be saued as wel as they v. 11. therfore what need this yoke of ceremonies 2. Though there had been no scripture who seeth not that the spirit of God so ruled the Apostles that their writings and holy actions should serue for scripture vnto the ages following Thirdly the Disciples needed not to examine their decrees knowing that they were gouerned by the spirit as they themselues write It seemed good to vs and the holy Ghost yet we see the brethren of Bereae searched the scripture for the trueth of those things which the Apostles preached Act. 17.11 When they can proue such a plenarie power fulnes of the spirit in their pastors and Councels as was in the Apostles we wil also beleeue them The Protestantes WE doe firmly beleeue that neither the Church nor Councels haue any such absolute power to determine without the holy scriptures either beside or agaynst them or to binde other men to obey such decrees Neither that the true Church of God dare or will arrogate such power vnto it self But that Councels are ordayned for the discussing deciding of doubtful matters according to the scriptures and word written 1. If the Apostles preachings might bee examined according to scripture much more the acts of all other Bishops and pastors But that was lawful in the Disciples of Berea Act. 17.11 which are commended for it therefore called noble couragious Christians because of this their promptnes diligence in searching out of the truth Ergo. 2. All things necessarie to saluation to be beleeued are articles of our fayth but al such articles must be grounded vpon the word of God therfore nothing can be imposed as necessary to saluation without the word of God Wherefore it is a blasphemous saying of the papists that the Church may make new articles of fayth Rhemens annot in 1. Tim. 3. sect 9. and Eckius maintained the same poynt agaynst Luther in the disputation at Lipsia and brought forth a new article of faith agreed of in the Councel of Constance that it is de necessitate salutis of the necessitie of saluation to beleeue that the Pope is the head of the Church The fathers of Basile more modest then so concluding that it was an article of fayth to beleeue that Councels were aboue the Pope doe vse this reason those things say they which we alleadge for the superioritie of general Councels are gathered out of the sayings of our Sauiour Christ. Ergo we are al bound to obey them Therefore we conclude that the word of God only written is the rule of fayth and al things necessary to be beleeued Rom. 10.10 Fayth commeth by hearing and hearing by the word Councels are to explane and declare articles of faith not to establish new 3 Lastly we will heare Augustine speake Nec tu debes Ariminense neque ego Nicaenū tanquā praeiudicaturus proferre concilium scripturarum authoritatibus c. Neither must I alleadge the Nicen Councel nor you the Arimine I am neither bound to the one nor you to the other let the matter be tried by Scripture cont Maximu Arrianum lib. 3. cap. 14. By this fathers sentence therefore no man is bound of necessitie to be tyed to Councels but the Scripture onely is absolutely to be beleeued THE SEAVENTH QVESTION WHETHER Councels be aboue the Pope or not The Papists THis is a matter yet not fully determined amongst the Papists Neither are error 35 they all of one opinion In the Councell of Constance and Basile it was fully concluded that the Councell is aboue the Pope Gerson of Paris that was also present in the Councell of Constance and a great dooer against Iohn Hus stifly maintaineth the authoritie of Councels aboue the Pope Other Papists more fauorable to their new God amight say that the Pope is by right aboue the Councell but he may if he wil submit himselfe to the Councell But now commeth in the stoute Iesuite and saith with the rest of the schoolemen that the Pope hath such a soueraigntie aboue the Councell that he cannot be subiect to their sentence though hee would Bellar. de concil lib. 2.14 Yet hee is in a mammering with himselfe for saith he in periculo schismatis when there is a schisme and it is not knowne who is the true Pope in such a case the Councell is aboue the Pope Let vs examine some of his best reasons 1 Now commeth in a great blasphemie All the names saith the Iesuite that are giuen to Christ in the Scriptures as head of the Church are ascribed to the Pope as he is called fidelis dispensator Luc. 12. a faithfull steward in the Lords house pastor gregis Iohn 10. the shepheard of the flocke Caput corporis ecclesiae Ephes. 4. the head of his bodie the Church vir seu sponsus Ephes. 5. the husband or spouse of the Church all these titles saith he are due to the Pope Ergo he is aboue the Church and so consequently aboue generall Councels Bellar. de concil lib. 2.17 O Lord what great blasphemie is here to appropriate the titles of Christ to a mortall man But goe to Bellarmine and the rest of that packe fil vp the measure of iniquitie of your forefathers say with Pope Athanasius that the people of the world are the partes of his bodie with Cornelius the Bishop in the Councell of Trent the Pope being the light came into the world and men loued darkenes rather then light with Pope Calixtus in the Councell of Rhemes who when hee saw the Councell would not consent to excommunicate the Emperour impiously cried out that they had forsaken him as Christ was left of his Disciples with Innocentius the third that all things in Heauen and earth and vnder the earth doe bowe the knee vnto him with Otho no Pope but a Cardinall that sitting amongst his Bishops blasphemously applied to himselfe the vision of Ezechiel cap. 1. resembling the Bishops to the sower faced beasts himselfe vnto God that approched to the
whose merites and praiers namely of the Saints grant we may be defended Thus the merites and praiers of Christ are excluded 4. We beseech thee saith the Priest to receiue this oblation which we beseech thee in all things to make blessed Heere the Priest is made a mediator betweene Christ and his Father desiring God to sanctifie the body blood of his sonne 5. Who the next day afore he suffered But the Scripture saith The same night For this is my body Heere they haue put in enim of their owne and left out quod pro vobis datur Such is their boldenes that they are not ashamed to change the words of our Sauiour Christ. 6. He saith further The holy bread of eternall life which vouchsafe thou with a pleasant countenaunce to beholde The bread of eternall life is Christ himselfe if this be he how dare ye presume to offer him vp to his Father 7. As thou didst vouchsafe to accept the righteous giftes of Abel and the sacrifice of Abraham Heere the sacrifice of Christ is compared to the sacrifice of beastes and the Priest seemeth to attribute as much efficacie to the one as to the other 8. And the holy sacrifice which thy high Priest Melchisedech did offer vnto thee This is a plaine vntruth and a flat lie as we haue shewed alredy that Melchisedech sacrificed bread and wine 9. Command thou these to be brought by the hands of thy holy Angell vnto the high altar in heauen What an absurd thing is this that he should desire that to be carried into heauen which he eateth and deuoureth And if this be the body of Christ what need the help of an Angell to carry it vp to heauen is not Christ able to lift vp his own body or what need that to be conueied to heauen which was neuer from thence 10. As many of vs as shall receiue thy Sonnes body and blood And yet for the most part none receiue but the Priest and when the people doe communicate the wine they haue not how then can he say As many 11. Remember O Lord the soules of thy seruants which rest in the sleepe of peace and graunt them a place of refreshing and rest Heere is an other error contrary to the Scriptures in praying for the dead and the praier also is contrary to it selfe for first he saith they rest in peace and yet afterward praieth for their refreshing 12. Vouchsafe to giue some portion with thy Saints And why doth he not rather pray to be admitted to the fellowship of Christ 13. Deliuer vs by the blessed intercession of the Virgine What then is become of Christs mediation and intercession 14. Let this mingling together of the body and blood of our Lord Iesus Christ be vnto me saluation of minde and body Then is not Christs blood shed vpon the Crosse the full sufficient and perfect saluation of mankinde if there be an other saluation beside 15. Grant me so worthily to take this holy body and blood that I may merite to receiue forgiuenes of sinnes O sinfull man how canst thou merite that which is Christs onely gift 16. Let the priest bow himselfe to the host saying I worship thee I glorifie thee I praise thee What monstrous Idolatry is this thus to worship a piece of bread 17. Let this communion purge vs from sinne If they meane the principall purging of our sinne so doth Christ onely purge vs Heb. 1.3 If they vnderstand the instrumental meanes of our purgation so are we purged and iustified onely by faith Rom. 3.28 18. Respect not my sinnes but the faith of thy Church By this reason one may be profited by an others faith which is contrary to the Scriptures the Iust shal liue by faith his owne and not an others 19. Let vs worship the signe of the Crosse What I pray you wil not these Idolaters worship 20. Let this sacrifice which J haue offered auaile to obtaine remission of sinnes If the Masse be auaileable for this end wherefore then died Christ Thus we see with how many and what great and horrible blasphemies this popish nay rather diuelish canon of the Masse is stuffed indeede it is an epitome and abridgement of Papistrie the marrow sinewes and bones of their idolatrous profession yea the very darling of the popish Church it is the very proper badge and marke of a papist He that hateth the Masse hateth the whore of Babylon he that loueth the Masse cannot loue the truth If then I should be demaunded at once which of all popish blasphemies and heresies I thinke most abominable contrary to the faith and to be abhorred of all good christians though I know that there are many of this kinde yet I would redily answere the Masse the inuention whereof I am wel assured cannot be ascribed but to the deuil himselfe the author of all lies and blasphemies I conclude therefore with that saying of Gregorie as he said concerning the word Antichristus so may I in as good sense of this word Missa as it is now vnderstoode of Papists Si spectes quantitatem vocis duae sunt syllabae si pondus iniquitatis est vniuersa pernicies If you marke the quantitie of the word it standeth but of two syllables but if we respect the waight of iniquitie it containeth all impietie and vngodlines Soli Deo immortali Patri Filio cum Spiritu sancto sit honor et imperium sempiternum THE THIRD BOOKE OR CENTVRIE CONTAINING A THIRD HVNDRED OF POPISH ERRORS AND HERESIES ABOVT the controuersies of the fiue Popish Sacraments and of the benefites of our redemption and concerning the person of Christ CONSISTING OF SEVEN SEVERAL CONTROVERSIES THE 14 15.16 17 18 19 20. in number Jmprinted at London by Thomas Orwin for Thomas Man 1592. To the right honorable Sir Robert Cicil Knight one of her Maiesties most honorable priuie Councell BOth that general loue right honorable which the Church of God doth beare to your worthie and honorable Father for his sincere and sound affection to religion and the dutifull reuerence which our vniuersitie of Cambridge and generally the whole company of Students doth owe vnto him as their singular good Patrone haue moued and caused me at this time to cōmend this last part of this worke to your Honor his sonne of whose loue also vnto the Gospell following your Fathers steppes we are all perswaded and conceiue no lesse hope of your honourable fauour to learning I haue as your Honor seeth vndertaken an hard peece of worke and thrust my shoulders vnder an heauy burthen for in this worke I haue taken vpon me to discouer and lay open all popish Heresies and Errors to portraite and decipher the whole body of papistrie to spread abroad the whore of Babylons skirtes that her filthines may appeare to vncouer her whorish face which masked vnder the visour of the Church and religion for we may say to them as Leo Bishop of Rome did sometime to certaine Heretikes Ecclesiae
nomine armamini sed contra Ecclesiam dâ—micatis You are armed with the name of the Church and yet you fight against the Church This difficult matter being thus by me enterprised I haue exposed my selfe to the obloquie and euill speech of two sortes of men against whom in the defence of this work I must craue your Honors aid and protection The first sort is of our hollow harted Countrimen that haue English faces but Romish harts who will forge cauillations I know against these labours of mine and not cease to accuse me of lying and falshood as not hauing truly and indifferently set down the opinions of the popish Church To meete then with those slanderous accusations let such men know that I haue beene most carefull and circumspect in this behalf throughout this whole work not to charge them with any opinions which I haue not gathered out of their owne writings and alleadged their owne Authors for them so that with a good conscience I can protest before God that one day shall open the secrets of our harts that to my knowledge I haue not any where vsed any forgerie cauilling or deceit in setting downe their assertions and I would to God their writers were as free from this fault and as indifferent in alleadging the sentence of our Church as we doe deale plainely with them But as for them it is a shame to see how without all feare the Rhemists in their annotations vpon the new testament doe bely and slander our Church I will for example sake note a fewe places They charge vs to say that God is the author of sinne annot Math. 13. sect 2. which blasphemie is further off from vs then it is from them though we graunt that nothing is done in the world beside the will of God not by his permission onely That we affirme all things to be easie in Scripture annot Luk. 6. sect 1. whereas we say onely that the doctrine of faith is plainly declared in Scripture and deny not but that many things are therein hard to be vnderstood That we should say that the preaching of the Law and the iudgement to come maketh men hypocrites Act. 24. sect 2. whereas we holde the preaching of the Law to be necessary to bring men to repentance but iustification by keeping the Law which they teach we vtterly condemne That we condemne good workes as sinfull Pharisaicall hypocriticall annot Rom. 2. sect 3. whereas we acknowledge them to be the good gifts of God the fruits of iustification the way wherein all Christians must walke to saluation we onely exclude them from being any cause of our iustification before God That we allow no fasting but morall temperance and spiritual fasting from sinne Act. 13. sect 5. whereas we doe acknowledge a Christian vse of fasting and abstinence from all meates and drinkes for the taming of the flesh and making vs more fit to pray not an abstinence from flesh onely as they do superstitiously practise That we should say man hath no more free will then a peece of clay Rom. 9. sect 7. whereas we onely say that our free will hath no power or strength at all to will or doe the thing that good is without the grace of God That Caluine holdeth Christians children to be so holy that they neede no baptisme annot 1. Cor. 7. sect 11. Whereas Caluine clean contrary reasoneth thus against the Anabaptists That children ought therefore to be baptized because they are holy as S. Paul saith And such slanderous accusations they haue published against vs which would require a seuerall treatise to be set forth at large Let indifferent men now iudge comparing their writings with ours which of vs hath dealt most vntruly and vnfaithfully each with other and whether we haue not more iust occasion to complaine of them then they of vs. But to let accusations goe I would desire them rather to listen to the words of exhortation that they would but indifferently weigh with an equal balance of Christian iudgemeÌ„t what is set downe on both partes in this booke I trust if they be not wilfull and obstinate in their opinions that they may in time conceiue some better liking of the truth Augustine in a certaine place maketh mention of drunken Polio who one a time came from his pots and riotous company to Xenocrates schoole to laugh the graue Philosopher to scorne but it fell out to his good farre otherwise Ad extremum totum se illi ad quem deridendum venerat discipulum tradidit But Polemo being cleane changed by Xenocrates speech became his Scholler whom he went to scorne and whereas he came drunke he returned sober So I wish that our English recusants would but take vp this and such other bookes into their hands if it were but to scorne them God may so worke with them that their scorning shal be turned into a loue and lyking of the truth And I further say vnto them as Augustine to the Pelagians Quod dicimus orent vt aliquando intelligant non litigent vt nunquam intelligant quod dicimus intendant non contendant illuminentur non calumnientur An other sort of men there is beside these Right honorable against whom I must arme my selfe they are such as are giuen to extenuate disgrace and discommend the labours of others Me thinkes I heare them thus to giue out of me He hath taken a matter in hand aboue his strength some of his writings are extant already we know what he can doe he is like to perform no great matter and what doth he he doth but abridge other mens writings he bringeth nothing of his owne To these accusations I thus answere First I confesse my streÌ„gth to be small of it selfe yet God by weake meanes may worke great things Some Pamphlets of mine I coÌ„fesse are abroad vnworthy this learned age though perhaps befitting the person that wrote them his time age and the occasion considered But I say rather with August I count my self in the number of those qui scribendo proficiunt et proficiendo scribunt which profit in writing and by profiting write Secondly coÌ„cerning my labour paines taken in this work I boast not he that thinketh it light let him trie first himselfe before he giue his iudgement the waight of this burthen he onely knoweth that felt it and God that gaue strength to beare it but as for my part I hunt not for the praise of men I desire onely to profit the church of God I had rather men should holde their peace then flatter It is very well said of him Si inter quos viuis te recte viuentem non laudauerint illi in errore sint si autem laudauerint tu in periculo es I had rather other meÌ„ should be in a small error then I in great danger Epictetus wise saying is much commended 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sustine abstine sustaine and abstain I would we might part it betweene