who can with any reason deny that the Popes supremacy the confession whereof is now made treason in England was in King Lucius dayes acknowledged generally of all men for what moued him being so farre from Rome to seeke to receiue the faith of Christ from thence but that he desyred to haue it from the fountayne head were there not Christians at the same tyme in England as there had ben from the tyme of Ioseph of Arimathia by some of whome it is lyke he was conuerted and might haue ben Baptysed or yf there were no Christians there that might satisfy his deuotion and desyre in that behalfe was there not at the same tyme very learned Bishops in France by whome he might haue receiued satisfaction without sending so farre as to Rome what then moued him therto but that he vnderstood that the admission of all Christs sheep into his fold the Church belonged principally to the successor of S. Peter to whome our sauiour particularly commended the feeding of his flock which saynt Bede insinuateth sufficiently saying that King Lucius beseeched Eleutherius by his letters that he might be made a Christian per eius mandatum by his commandement Neither can there any other probable reason be geuen why a few yeres after Donaldus King of Scots sent to Pope victor the next successor of Eleutherius to receiue of him the Christian fayth which at the same tyme florished not only in France as before I haue sayd but also in England from whence he might haue had Bishops and Priests to instruct and baptise him and his people But for the more manifest proof of this poynt let vs heare what S. Ireneus who florished at the same tyme in France teacheth concerning the autority of the sea Apostolike gouerned then by Eleutherius from whome K. Lucius receiued the fayth VVhen we shew sayth he the tradition of the greatest and most AuncieÌ„t Church knowen to all men founded constitute at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles Peter Paule that the same tradition receiued from the sayd Apostles is deriued euen to this our tyme by the succession of Bishops we confound all those that any way eyther by an ouerweening of their owne wits or by vayne glory or by blyndnesse and euil opinion are led away with fals conceyts for euery Churche that is to say the saythful which are euery where must needs haue recours to this Church agree therewith propter potentioreÌ„ principalitatem for the greater or more mighty principality of the same wherein the tradition of the Apostles hath ben alwayes conserued by them which are euery where abroad and a litle after hauing declared the succession of the Bishops of Rome from saynt Peter to Eleutherius who he sayth was the twelfth he addeth by this ordination and succession the tradition which is in the Church from the Apostles and the preaching of the truth is come euen to vs hec est plenissima osteÌ„sio this is a most ful euident demonstration that the fayth which hath ben conserued in the Churche from the Apostles vntil now is that one true fayth which geueth lyfe Thus farre S. Ireneus out of whose words may be gathered three things very imporrant and manifest against our aduersaries The first the force of tradition in the Churche of God that the same alone being duly proued is sufficient to conuince all heretykes that teach any thing contrary therto The second that the continual succession of the Bishops of Rome in one seat and doctrin is an infalible argument of the truth The which also Tertulian in the same tyme not only obserued but also prescrybed for a rule against all heretykes in his book of Prescriptions To which purpose S. Augustin sayth the succession of Priests from the seat of Peter the Apostle to whome our Lord recoÌ„mended his sheep to be fed holdeth me in the Catholyke Church and in another place number the Priests euen from the very seat of Peter and in that order of fathers see who succeded one an other that is the rock which the proud gaâ—â— of hel do not ouercome Optatus Mileuitanus in lyke sort vrgeth this succession of the Roman Bishops against the Donatists reckoning vp all the Bishops from S. Peter to Siricius with whome he sayth all the world did communicat and there-vpon concludeth therfore yow sayth he that challeÌ„ge to your selues a holy Churche tel vs the beginning of your chayre Thus reasoned these fathers against heretykes aboue 1200. yeres ago as also did S. Ireneus before in K. Lucius tyme and the same say wee now with no lesse reason against the heretykes of our tyme we shew them our doctrin conserued in a perpetual succession of Bishops from the Apostles vntil this day we demaund the lyke of them and seing they cannot shew it we conclude with S. Irenaeus that they remayne confounded and that they are to be registred in the number of those that eyther by an ouerweening of their owne wits or by vayne glory or by blyndnes and passion are led away with fals conceits The third poynt that I wish to be noted in the words of S. Irenaeus is the supreme dignity of the Roman Churche aboue all other seing that he cauleth it the greatest most ancient not in respect of tyme for the Churches of Hierusalem and Antioch were before it but for autority and therfor vrgeth it as a matter of necessity duty that all other Churches whatsoeuer and all faythful people throughout the world ought to haue recours therto and agree therwith propter potentioreÌ„ principalitateÌ„ for the greater and more powreful principality and autority therof which autority is founded vpon no other ground then vpon the institution of our Sauiour himselfe who gaue the gouerment of his Church to S. Peter the Apostle not only for him selfe but also for his successors which I wil prooue heare with as conuenient breuity as the importance of the matter wil permit THAT OVR SAVIOVR made S. Peter supreme head of his Churche CHAP. VIII THE supreme autority of S. Peter ouer the Churche of God is to be proued directly out of the holy scriptures by many places and arguments but 3. shal suffice for breuityes sake The first place is in S. Mathew where our sauiour promised to S. Peter to buyld his Church vpon him saying Tu es Petrus super hanc Petram adificabo Ecclesiam meam that is to say thou art Peter or a rock and vpon this rock I wil buyld my Churche signifying by this allegory that he made him the foundation or head of his Church for the head is to the body the gouernour to the common welth as the foundation is to the buylding that is to say the principal part the stay strength and assurance therof and this appeareth more playnly in the Siriac tongue in which saynt Mathew wrote his gospel where
poynts which I haue handled what hath alwayes bin the doctrin of the Churche of God concernâ—ng the same and that therfore King Lucius could receiue no other froÌ„ the Catholyke RomaÌ„ Churche by the which he was conuerted to the Christian fayth and yf I thought it needful to rip vp euery other particuler point controuersed betwyxt our aduersaries and vs I could easely shew the same in euery one But what needeth it seing they cannot proue that any Pope I wil not say from S. Eleutherius to S. Gregory but from S. Peter to Clement the eight that now gouerneth the Churche hath taught and decreed any different doctrin from his predecessors whereas on the other syde wee shew euidently that in a perpetual succession of our Roman Bishops there hath ben also a continual succession of one the selfe same doctrin where vpon it followeth infalibly that King Ethelbert and the English could not receiue from S. Gregory the Pope any other fayth then King Lucius and the britans receiued from saynt Eleutherius and that wee which now hold communion with the Roman Churche teache no other doctrin then that which was taught by them to our ancestors and hath successiuely come from S. Peter consequently from our Sauiour Christ. Therefore thou mayst wel wonder good reader at the impudency of our English ministers that are not a shamed to preache teache the contrary wherby thow mayst also see how lamentable is the case of our poor country wherein such haue the charge and cure of soules as haue not so much as common honesty to say the truth in matters as cleare as the Sunne and teach such a religion as for lack of better reasons and arguments they are forst to mayntayne it with manifest lyes slanders yea and murders of innocent men whome they execute for fayned crymes vnder colour of matter of state acknowledging therby sufficiently the truth of our Catholyk fayth seing they are ashamed to aâ—ow that they trooble any man for it whyles they confesse that they punish and put to death heretykes namely the Anabaptists directly for their religion and their impudency is so much the more notorious for that their publyk proceedings in the dayly execution of penal and capital lawes touching only matter of religion doth contradict and conuince their sayings and writings wherein they affirme that they put none to death for religion But for as much as I haue treated this matter at large in diuers partes of my Apology besydes that I vnderstand that some others also entend to treate thereof in the answere of a ridiculous challenge made by O. E. fraught with most absurd paradoxes as wel concerning this poynt as others touching our Catholyke fayth I remit thee good reader therto and so conclude this treatys beseeching almighty God to geue our aduersaries the light of his grace and vs in the meane tyme pacience and constancy and to thee indifferency to iudge of maters so much importing the eternal good and saluation of thy soule which I hartely wish no lesse then my owne FINIS A TABLE OF THE CHAPTERS OF THIS TREATISE THE preface wherein are declared the causes of the long delay of printing the Apology and withall is noted the impudency of a late wryter in England disguysing his name with the letters O. E. who auoweth the fiction of Squyres employment for a truth and affirmeth that none are put to death in England for religion An Answere to two malitious slanders auowched in the foresayd libels concerning the conquest of England falsly supposed to be pretended sollicited by the Catholyks touching the late enterprise of the King of Spayne in Ireland Also concerning sir VVilliam Stanley and the Iesuits calumniated by the lybellers CHAP. 1. Concerning father Parsons in particular and that the extreame malice that the heretyks beare him is an euident argument of his great vertue CHAP. 2. That the Catholykes are persecuted martyred now in England for the same causes that the martyrs dyed in the primatiue Churche and of the great iniustice donne to two Priests condemned at Lincolne by Iudge Glanduile CHAP. 3. Of the impudeÌ„cy of a minister who being present at the death of the two martyrs aforesaid affirmed publykly that our country was conuerted by saynt Augustin the monk to the protestants religion by occasion where-of the truth of that poynt is euidently declared CHAP. 4. Of the first conuersion of our country whyles it was called Britany in the tyme of King Lucius with euideÌ„t proofes that our Catholyk fayth was then preached and planted there CHAP. 5. The same is coÌ„firmed proued out of Gildas the sage Ca. 6. Certayne poynts of controuersy are discussed whereby it is proued that King Lucius receiued our Catholyke fayth and first of the Popes supremacy in Ecclesiasticall causes CHAP. 7. That our Sauiour made S. Peter supreme head of the churche CHAP. 8. That the successors of saynt Peter to wit the Bishops of Rome succeed him in the supremacy of the Churche CHAP. 9. That the Bishops of Rome exercised supreme autority in the tyme of King Lucius CHAP. 10. The matter of holy Images is debated and the vse thereof proued to haue ben in the Churche of God euer since our Sauiours tyme. Chap. 11. The commandment of God touching Images is explicated the practise of the Churche declared Chap. 12. Concerning the relicks of saynts and the reuerend vse thereof Chap. 13. That our doctrin concerning the sacrifice of the Masse was generaly receiued and beleeued in the tyme of King Lucius and first that it was foretold and prophecyed by Malachias Chap. 14. That not only the sacrifice of Melchisedech but also all the sacrifices of the old law were figures of the sacrifice of the masse and are changed into the same and by the way is declared the necessity of sacrifice as wel for common welth as for religion Chap. 15. That our Sauiour Christ instituted and offred at his last supper the sacrifice of his blessed body and blood proued by his owne woords by the expositions of the Fathers with a declaration how he is sacrificed in the masse and lastly that he gaue commission and power to his Disciples to offer his body and blood in sacrifice that is to say to say the Masse Chap. 16. That the Apostles practised the commission geuen them by our Sauiour sacrificing or saying Masse them-selues and leauing the vse and practise thereof vnto the Churche that the ancient Fathers not only in King Lucius tyme but also for all the first 500. yeares afeer Christ taught it to bee a true sacrifice and propitiatory for the liuing for the dead Chap. 17 An answere to the obiections of our aduersaries out of S. Paules epistle to the Hebrewes with a declaration that the heretyks of this tyme that abolish the sacrifice of the Masse haue not the new testameÌ„t of Christ and that they shew themselues to be most pernicious enemies of humain kynd Chap. 18.
might haue continually a visible head no lesse now in the new law theÌ„ heretofore in the old which was a figure of the new and had a continual succession of Bishops from Aaron therfore I say all the ancient fathers worthely acknowledged this our sauiours institution and this autority of an vniuersal Pastor not only in S. Peter but also in his successors where vpon S. Chrisostome saith that Christ committed the care of his sheep tum Peâ—ro tum Petri successorebus both to Peeter and to Peeters successors and Petrus Bishop of Rauena in his epistle to Eutyches blessed Peeter sayth he liues gouerns stil in his owne seat and Leo magnus affirmeth that Peeter continueth and liueth in his successors and therfore the great councel of Chalcedon abouesayd hauing heard the epistle of the sayd Leo condemning the heresy of Eutyches sayd Petrus per Leonem locutus est Peter hath spoken by the mouth of Leo. In this respect also the blessed martyr S. Cyprian who as I sayd before wrote soone after the conuersion of K. Lucius cauleth the Roman Church CathedraÌ„ Petri ecclesiam principaleÌ„ vnde vnuas sacerdotaelis exorta est the chayre of Peeter the principal or cheef Churche from whence springeth all Priestly vnity signifieng therby that as the vnity of the natural body consisteth in that dyuers members being combyned vnder one head do all receiue from the same the influence of one lyfe so also the vnity of the mistical body of Christ consisteth in that diuers Churches being conioyned vnder one head which is the Roman Churche or chayre of Peter do all receiue from the same the influence of one spirit and doctrin which he declareth playnly in his book of the vnity of the Churche where he sayth eueÌ„ as there are many beames of the Sunne and one light many bowes of one tree and yet one strength founded in one root many brookes flowing from one fountayne a vnity therof conserued in the spring euen so the Churche of our Lord casting foorth her light euery where stretcheth her beames through out the world yet the light is one shee extends her bowes ouer the whole earth spreads her flowing riuers farre neare and yet there is one head one beginning and one fruitful and plentiful mother Thus far this famous martyr who speaking also other where of Peters chayre declareth the miserable state of those that are deuided seperated from the same which I wish our aduersaryes diligently to note there is sayth he one God one Christ one Churche one chayre founded vpon Peeter by our Lords woords an other Altar caÌ„not be erected nor a new priesthood ordayned whosoeuer gathereth any where els scattreth it is counterfeyt wicked and sacrilegious whatsoeuer humain fury doth institute ordayne to violate the ordenance of God and agayne to the same purpose he which holdeth not sayth he this vnity of the Churche doth he beleeue that he holds the fayth of the churche he which forsakes the chayre of Peeter where vpon the churche was fouÌ„ded can he hope to be in the churche Finally this blessed martyr writting to S. Cornelius the Pope calleth the Roman Church Marricem radicem catholicae Ecclesiae the mother root of the Catholyke Churche which he wisheth all men to acknowledge and hold most firmly and transferring the same presently after to the person of Cornelius he sayth that he would haue all his collegues retayne hold stedfastly his communion that is as much to say sayth he as to hold the vnity charity of the Catholyke church geuing to vnderstand that he which doth not communicate with the bishop of Rome the chayre of Peter the fountayne of vnity the root and mother of the Catholyke Churche he is not a member of the same nor gathereth with Christ but scattreth The very same in substaÌ„ce the famous Doctor S. Hierom teacheth as wel of S. Peeter as of his chayre and successors of S. Peeter he sayth that he was therfore chosen of our sauiour one only amongst twelue that a head being appoynted all occasions of schisme diuision might be taken away and of his chayre and successors he sayth to S. Damasus the Pope qui cathedrae Petri iungitur meus est he which is ioyned to the chayre of Peter he is myne and agayne to him in an other Epistle I sayth he following no cheef but Christ am lincked in communioÌ„ with thy beatitude that is to say with the chayre of Peter vpon that rock the Churche was buylt whosoeuer eateth the lambe out of this house is profane if any man be not in the arke of Noe he shal perish in the flud and a litle after I know not Vitalis I refuse Meletius I know not Paulinus whosoeuer doth not gather with thee scattreth he which is not of Christ is of Antichrist thus far S. Hierome of the supremacy of Peeters chayre and particularly of Pope Damasus of whome S. Ambrose in the same tyme acknowledged no lesse saying Ecclesia domus Deâ— dicitur cuius rector hodâ—e est Damasus the Churche is cauled the house of God the gouernour whereof at this day is Damasus with these all other Doctors of the Churche Greekes and Latins agree concerning the supremacy of the bishops of Rome as Epiphanius Athanasius Basilius Gregorius Nazianzenus Chrysostomus Cyrillus Theodoretus Sozomenus Optatus Ambrosius Augustinus Prosper Victor Vticensis Vincentius Lirinensis and Cassiodorus all which did wryte aboue 1000. yeres ago and playnly acknowledged the supremacy of the bishop of Rome as appeareth in the places aleaged in the margent wherto I remit our aduersaries to auoyd prolixitie concluding with the great councel of Chalcedon abouesayd wherein Pope Leo was cauled vniuersal Bishop dyuers tymes besyds that in an epistle written to him by the whole councel it is playnly signified that the Vineyard of our Lord that is to say the Churche was committed to his charge and custody To returne therfore to S. Ireneus in the tyme of King Lucius thou seest good reader how true is that which he sayth of the necessitie and obligation that all faythful people haue to agree with the Roman Churche propter potentioreÌ„ principalitatem for the mightier or more powerful principalitie therof that is to say for the supreme dignity it hath ouer all other churches as the mother ouer her children the head ouer the body and the spring and root of vnity THAT THE BISHOPS OF Rome exercysed supreme authoritie and iurisdiction in the tyme of king Lucius CHAP. X. NOW then let vs consider how the byshops of Rome did exercyse this theyr authority before and in the tyme of K. Lucius and neare vnto the same the which may appeare partly by the appellatioÌ„s out of all parts to the sea Apostolyke and the restitution or deposition of bishops by the
Catholykes were alienated froÌ„ him his frieÌ„ds in which respect he was fayne to wryte an Apology in defence of his book And at another tyme being him-self in Rome and writing against some vices of the clergy though in general tearmes he receiued such a violent impugnation and persecution of all the bad priests in the cittie that he was forced to depart thence which neuerthelesse how little it impayred his credit in the end he signified 30. yeres after in an epistle to Demetrias wherin he maketh mention of the said treatise that caused all that broyle against him and addeth further quid profuit armasse exercitum reclamantium vulnus conscientiae dâ—lore monstrasse liber mauet homines perierunt that is to say what did it auayle them to arme an army of clamarous men against me and to bewray the wound of their owne conscience by their greef the book is yet extant but the men ar dead and gon thus farre saint Hierome wherby he signifieth that although good men for good workes suffer somtymes great persecutions yet the good woorkes remayne and not only the persecution passeth away but also the persecutors themselues perish and come to nought which by the way I wish the heretyks Fa. Parsons aduersaries to note for let them rayle vpon him slander him and cry our against him neuer so much the memory and monuments that he shal leaue behynd him of his great seruice to God his Churche wil remayne honorable to all posterity when their clamours and slanders shal vanish away lyke smoke and they themselues shal be eyther cleane forgot or els remayne ignominious for their heresy and the persecution of him and other good men S. Chrisostome Bishop of Constantinople the ornament of the east Churche who made coÌ„tinual warre against paganisme heresy vyce as wel by the example of his saintly lyfe as by the force of his eloquence and deuyne preaching was so exagitat by the calumnious and contumelious tongues of heretykes and all sorts of wicked men that he was expelled twyse from his bishopryk by Catholyke Bishops being falsly accused of treasons and many heynous matters and dyed at length in banishment which shortly after God did punish notoriously in all his aduersaryes and calumniatours and in some of them as Palladius noteth by losse of their speech horrible paynes in their tongues in regard no dout of their contumelious speches and slanders geuen out against him and within a few yeres after his death his innocency was made so manifest to all men that his memory was celebrated in the Churche he serued for a great saint of God as he hath ben euer since I omit to speak particularly of S. Hilary S. Ambrose S. Augustin S. Gregory Nazianzen and dyuers other notable antagonists of the heretykes of their tymes all of theÌ„ notably caluÌ„niated by their aduersaries whome I say I wil omit for breuityes sake conclude with S. Ciril Bishop of Alexandria the hammer of the NestoriaÌ„ heresy who in his epistle to the clergy of CoÌ„stantinople signifieth that Nestorius the heretyke did send abroad certeyn wicked aud lost companions to defame him euery where as now the heretykes of England deale with father Parsons whom they seek to disgrace and defame by their spyes that they send throughout Christendome whereof the experience hath ben seen these yeares past not only in other places but also in the very Seminaries of his owne erectioÌ„ in Spayne where haue ben discouered within these 2. or 3. yeres dyuers spyes sent from England who counterfeiting great holynes and zeale in religion endeuored nothing els but to alienate the students from the Iesuits their superiours and particulerly from Fa. Parsons filling their eares with such monstrous lyes that if God of his goodnes had not sooner discouered it one of those Seminaries had ben put in as great combustion as was the English colledge at Rome some yeres agoe But S. Ciril who receiued lyke measure at heretikes haÌ„ds as Fa. Parsons now doth shal answere for both who in certeyn letters of his to Nestorius him self saith thus They cast a brode against me reportes no lesse mad then malitious some say I haue iniuriously oprest the poort and blynd others say I drew a sword vpon my owne mother and others that I stole gold with the healp of a mayd seruant and some agayne say that I haue ben always suspected of such wickednes as a maÌ„ would be loth should be fouÌ„d in his greatest enemy But of these fellowes and such lyke I make smalle account least I may seeme to extend the measure of my weaknes aboue my maister and lord yea aboue all my predecessors for whatsoeuer cours of lyfe a man holdeth it is skant possible for him to escape the sharp teeth of malitious wicked backbyters But they hauing their mouths ful of slander malediction shal one day answere for it before the Iudge of all and I in the meane tyme wil discharge my part and do that which becommeth mee to wit admonish thee Nestorius of thy duty as my brother in our lord c. Thus sayd S. Ciril to the heretyk Nestorius and so wil I say in father Parsons behalf to the heretykes his aduersaries to wit that hee litle regardeth their rayling considering he cannot look to be more free from that kynd of persecution then his maister Christ and other seruants of God that haue laboured in the Churche before him and that therfore leauing them to answere for it before the iust and rigorous Iudge he wil in the meane whyle proceed to do his duty towards God and them as heatherto he hath donne repaying their malice with charity their fury with patience their rayling with prayers to God for them their slanderous pamphlets and libels with learned and godly bookes and their employing of spyes abroad to defame him with sending in priests from his Seminaries to conuert them and to saue their soules which is all the hurt he wisheth them for all the rancour and malice they beare him and the iniury they do him for the which he thinketh they rather deserue pitty then hatred for that as saynt Hierome sayth apud Christianos non qui patitur sed qui facit iniuriam miser est that is to say not he which suffreth the iniury but he which doth it is miserable And now to say somewhat particularly though very breefly of his labours in Gods Churche which makes him hateful to the diuel and all heretyks yf wee consider the same and the fruits therof as the soules he gayned to God whyles he was in England the notable bookes he hath written the foure notable Seminaries which he hath erected wherof 3. do stil florish in Spayne and Flanders besydes two residences for priests in S. Lucar and Bishon the important releef of two thowsand crownes rent
to make others of the â—emples of the Idols which saint Gregory ordayned shuld â—e donne with casting holy water therin buylding altars â—nd placing relikes of saynts commaunding further that â—easts should be celebrated in the dayes of the dedication of â—he sayd Churches in the natiuity of the martyrs whose â—elykes should be kept there besyds that he appoynted saynt Augustin to be Metropolitan of England and sent him holy vessels and vestiments for altars and Priests and relyckes of the Apostels and martyrs and granted him the vse of the pal ad sola missarum solemnia agenda only for the celebration of solemne masses and further gaue him order to ordayne 12. Bishops vnder himself and to make another Metropolitan at Yorke who when those parts should be coÌ„uerted should haue as many vnder him and be himself after saynt Augustins dayes dependant only vpon the sea Apostolyk and receiue the Pal from the same furthermore saynt Augustin caused King Edelbert to buyld a Church from the ground in honour of the blessed Apostles S. Peter S. Paule and a monastery not farre from Canturbury whereof the first Abbot called Peter was of so holy a lyfe that after his death it was testified from heauen by a continual light that appeared ouer his tombe Also King Edelbert caused S. Paules Church to be buylt in London and another in Rochester dedicated to S. Andrew the Apostle Hereto may be added the exercise of the Popes autority not only in the dayes of King Edelbert but also after in the raygne of other Christian Kings vntil the tyme that saynt Bede ended his history Pope Boniface sent the Pal to Iustus fourth Archbishop of Canturbury after saynt Augustin Honorius the Pope sent also the Pal to Honorius that succeded Iustus and to Paulinus Archbishop of York ordayning at the request of King Edwin and his wyfe that the longer liuer of them should consecrate a successor to the orher that should dy first to excuse so long a Iourney as to Rome The two Kings Oswy and Egbert the one of Northumberland and the other of kent sent Wigard to Rome to be made Primat when both the seas of Canturbury and Yorke were vacant and Wigard dying there Pope Vitalianus made Theodore a grecian primat in his steede Wilfrid Byshop of Yorke being twys vniustly expelled from his Bishoprik appealed both tymes to Rome first to Pope Agatho and after to Pope Iohn and being cleared by their sentences was restored to his Bishoprik and heer I wil ad a woord or two concerning the exceeding great zeale and deuotion of the Saxon Kinges to the sea Apostolyke in those dayes King Oswy determined to goe to Rome in Pilgrimage and had donne it yf death had not preuented him King Ceadwald weÌ„t thether to be baptysed dyed there King Hun his successor after he had raygned 37. yeares weÌ„t thether also in Pilgrimage as many sayth saynt Bede in those dayes both of the layty and clergy as wel women as men were wont to doe King Coenred did the lyke had in his company the sonne of Sigher King of the east Saxons and both of them entred into religion in Rome about the yeare of our Lord 709. not past 22. yeares before S. Bede ended his history which was almost 900. yeres a goe wherto may be added out of later historiographers the lyke examples of the extraordinary deuotion and obedience of our English Kings vnto the sea Apostolyke in â—uery age vntil after the conquest King Inas shortly after S. Bedes tyme about the yeare of our Lord 740. went to Rome and made his Kingdome tributary to the Pope ordayning the Peter pence the lyke did also afterwards Offa the King of the Mercians in the yeare of our Lord .775 Etheluolph King of England went to Rome in Pilgrimage about the yeare of our Lord 847. and made that part of England which his father Egbert had conquered tributary also to the Bishop of Rome King Edward being threatned with excommunication by Pope Iohn the teÌ„th for that he was carelesse to prouide the English Church of Bishops caused Pleimund the Bishop of Canterbury to make many and after to goe to Rome to purge him selfe of his negligence about the yeare of our Lord 920. King Edgar obtayned of Pope Iohn the 13. with licence to giue certayne liuings of secular Priests to Monkes about the yeare of our Lord .965 Canutus King of England went to Rome in Pilgrimage about the yeare of our Lord 1024. S. Edward King of England hauing made a vow to goe to Rome procured the same to be commuted by Pope Leo the nynth into the buylding of a monastery of S. Peter he also confirmed the payment of the yearly tribute to the sea Apostolyke about the yeare of our Lord 1060. which was not past 5. yeares before the conquest after the which there were no lesse notable examples of this matter King Henry the second who by Pope Adrian was first intituled Lord of Ireland sent legats to Rome to craue pardon of Pope Alexander for the murder committed by his occasion vpon saint Thomas of Canterbury where vpon two Cardinals were sent into England before whome the King lyke a publike penitent a priuat person submitted himselfe to the Ecclesiastical discipline in a publik assembly of the cleargy and nobility When King Richard the first was kept prisoner by Frederick the Emperour his mother wrote to Celestinus the Pope calling him the successor of Peter and the Vicar of Christ quem Dominus constituit super gentes regno in omni plenitudius potestatis whome our Lord had placed ouer nations and Kingdomes in all fulnesse of power and willed him to vse the spiritual sword against the Emperour as Alexander his predecessor had donne against Frederick his Father whome he did excommunicate King Iohn being excommunicated by the Pope was not absolued before he tooke his crowne of froÌ„ his owne head and deliuered it to Pandulfus the Popes legat promising for himselfe and his heyres that they should neuer receiue it afterwards but from the Bishop of Rome I omit others of later tyme seing no maÌ„ I think doubteth but that all the successors of King Iohn liued in the communion and obedience of the Roman Church paying the old yearely tribute called the Peter peÌ„ce vntil the tyme of King Henry the 8. her maiestyes father who being maried to his brother Arthurs widdow by dispeÌ„sation of the sea Apostolyke continued many yeares after in the obedience therof and in defence of the autority of the sayd sea wrote a learned book agaynst Luther for the which the honorable title of defender of the fayth was giuen him by Pope Leo which tytle her maiesty also vseth at this day so that no man can deny that our country was conuerted by S. Gregory to the Roman fayth or that it hath continued therin vntil K.
doing other workes of deuotion as I declared before he addeth mansit haec Christi capitis membrorum consonantia suauis donec Arriana perfidia c. this sweet consonance or agreement of the members of Christ the head remayned vntil the Arrian heresy spread her poyson there and although he insinuat as saynt Bede also doth that afterwards the people became new fangled and embraced other heresyes meaning no dout the Pelagian heresy which as I haue shewed before out of S. Bede was quickly extinguished there yet afterwards he signifieth playnly that neither the Arrian nor Pelagian nor any other heresy took root in Britany and that the Churche was cleare therof after the coÌ„ming in of the Saxons about the tyme of his byrth which was in the yere of our Lord 594. for speaking of the tyme and of the ouerthrow geuen by Ambrosius Aurelianus to the Saxons and Picts and of the great slaughter of them shortly after at blackamore in York-shire which as Polidore supposeth is called in Gildas mons Badonicus he sayth that the people hauing noted the punishment of God vpon them for their sinnes and his mercy in giuing them afterwards so greate victories ob hoc reges publici priuati sacerdotes ecclesiastics suum quique ordinem seruauerunt for this cause saith hee the Kings and others as wel publik as priuat personâ—â— Priests and ecclesiastical men did euery one their dutyes and although he declare presently after that by the extreame negligence of their Kings and gouernours ecclesiastical and temporal which immediatly succeded greate corruption was entred at the same tyme that he wrote yet it is euident ynough in him that it was not corruption of fayth but of manners as pryd ambition dissolutioÌ„ of lyfe droÌ„kenesse lying periury tyranny in the Kings simony couetousnesse in the clergy sildome sacrifices breach of vowes of chastity and of monastical lyfe profaning of altars and such lyke for the which he threatneth and as it were prophesyeth the vtter destruction of Britany which shortly after followed so that amongst other things which he was persuaded brought the plague of God vpon our country we see he taxed certayne customes peculiar to our aduersaries and the proper fruits of their religion tending only to the ouerthrow of ours therfore it playnly appeareth that ours was then in vre and receiued detriment by those who though they were not protestants in profession yet were protestants in humour and condition I meane profaners of Altars and holy things breakers of vowes of chastity and Apostatats from religious and monastical lyfe such as Luther and many of his followers haue ben since And now to come to later tymes after Gildas yf we consider the relicks of Christian religion which saynt Augustine found in Britany amongst other things the great monastery of Bangor wherein were aboue two thowsand monks it wil be manifest that the ancient religion of the Britains was our Catholike fayth for although in the space of a hundreth seuenty and three yeres that passed from the comming in of the Saxons vntil their conuersion the Britain Church was not only much decayed but also had receiued some aspersion of erronious and euil customes yet in fayth and opinion they diffred not from S. Augustine insomuch that he offred to hold communion with them if they would concurre with him in three things only the first in the tyme of celebrating the feast of easter the second in the manner of administring the sacrament of Baptisme and the third in preaching the faith to the Saxons all which the monkes of Bangor refused vpon no better reason then for that S. Augustine did not ryse to them when they came to the synod condemning him therefore to be a proud man notwithstanding that he had restored a blynd man to sight by his prayers in the presence of all the Bishops and clergy of Britany who vndertooke to do the lyke in confirmation of their customes but could not performe it Therfore as saynt Bede reporteth S. Augustine did foretel to the sayd Monkes of Bangor that seing they would not haue peace with their brethren they should haue warre with their enemies and yf they would not preach vnto the English nation the way of lyfe they should by their hands receiue reuenge of death which after was truly fulfilled for Edelfrid a pagan King of NorthumberlaÌ„d killed a thousand two hundred Monkes of that monastery at one tyme by the iust iudgement of God as saynt Bede sayth for their obstinacy Thus much for this matter wherby thou mayst see good reader that saynt Augustine found in wales amongst the Britains the same religion faith in substance that he then preached to the English or Saxons and which we Catholykes stil professe which being considered with that which I haue proued before concerning the continual practise therof in the primatiue Church of Britany whyles the same was in purity and integrity no man that hath common sence can dout that the same fayth was deliuered by Pope Eleutherius to King Lucius and generally professed throughout Christendom at those dayes in which respect we fynd honorable mention and testimony of the faith of the Britains in the Fathers both Greekes and Latins from the tyme of their conuersion as in Tertulian in K. Lucius tyme and in Origen presently after in S. Athanasius and S. Hilarius in the tyme of the Arrians of which two the first testifieth that the Bishops of Britany came to the councel of Sardica and the other commendeth the Britan Church for reiecting the Arrian heresy as I haue noted before also in S. Chrisostome and saynt Hierom who commendeth the deuotion of the Britans that came to Bethlem in pilgrimage in his dayes about the same tyme that the Saxons entred into Britany CERTAINE POINTS OF CONTROUERSY are discussed wherby it is prooued that King Lucius receiued our Catholyke fayth and first of the Popes supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes CHAP. VII BVT to the end that this vndouted truth may be cleared of all dout I wil ioyne Issue with our aduersaries vpon some two or three poynts now in controuersy betwyxt vs and them and breefly proue that the doctrin that we teach concerning the same was publykly held for truth throughout Christendome in King Lucius dayes and that therfore he could receiue no other then the same from the Church of Rome and this I vndertake the more willingly for that albeit all matters of controuersy haue ben very learnedly and sufficiently handled yea and whole volumes written of them by our English Catholykes in the beginning of her maiestyes raygne yet by reason of the strayt prohibition of the sayd bookes there are an infinit number in England especially of the younger sort that neuer saw the same to whome I desyre to giue in this treatyse at least some litle tast of the truth of our Catholyke religion so farre as my determined breuity wil permit First
there is no difference betwyxt Petrus Petra Peter and a rook For in steede of thou art Peter c. the Siriac hath thow art a rock and vpon this rock I wil buyld my Churche For this cause as S. Ciril S. Chrisostome S. Hilary and others do note the name of S. Peter being first Simon was changed by our Sauiour who sayd vnto him tu vocaberis cephaâ— thou shalt bee called Cephas which the Euangelist expoundeth saying quod interpretatur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is interpreted a rock or stone for so signifieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the greeke and therfore Cirillus Bishop of Alexandria saith vpon those words now our sauiour Christ fortelleth that his name shal be no more Simon but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say a rock signifieng aptly by the very word it selfe that he would buyld his Churche vpon him as vpon a most sure rock and stone whereto S. Hilary agreeth expounding the same woords and speaking to S. Peter thus O happy foundation of the Churche by imposition of thy new name in this respect S. Peter is called in the greeke text sometymes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by making a greek word of the Siriac and sometymes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because they are synonima and do both of them signify a rock Therfore I cannot omit to discouer vnto thee here good reader a suttle shift of our aduersaries in translating those words of our sauiour Tu es Petrus super banc Petram for although they censure and controle all the translations that the Catholyke Church vseth and professe to translate the scriptures immediatly out of the hebrew yet in translating this place they follow the latin because the hebrew is far more cleare against them in this controuersy for the better vnderstanding whereof it is to be considered that all the ambiguity dout therin ryseth of the difference that may be noted in the greeke Latin and English translations not only of them all from the Siriac or Hebrew but also of one from another for that euery translator obseruing the dialect or propriety of his owne tongue hath some variety from the rest and the English most of all for although in the greeke Latin all other languages deriued of them the name of Peter and a rock or stone is eyther all one as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the greeke or els haue great affinity and a manifest allusion the one to the other as in Latin Petrus and Petra in Italian Pietro Pietra in the Spanish Pedro and Piedra in the portugues Pedro Pedra and in the french Pierre for both though ther be difference in the gender yet in our English tongue Peter neither signifieth a rock nor a stone neyther yet hath any alusion nor affinity therwith in which respect our English translation much lesse expresseth the force and true sence of our sauiours words in the hebrew then eyther the greeke or the Latin of both which I will treate a litle for the better explication of this question and first of the greeke Albeit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in greek is more commonly vsed for a rock then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is of the masculine gender hath also the same signification yt seemed more fit to be applyed to the name of a man then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whervpon yt followed that when not only saynt Peter was commonly cauled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the greekes to expresse therby in their language the Syriac woord Cephas but also many others had takeÌ„ vnto them that name for the honour they bore to S. Peter the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 came to haue two significations the one a rock or stone and the other the name of a man which wee cal Peter and therfore he that translated S. Mathewes gospel into the greeke out of the Siriac or hebrew vsed both the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in translating thow art a rock and vpon this rok I wil buyld my Church for in the first place he hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to denote in the first as wel the trew significatioÌ„ of Cephas that is to say a rock as also the name by the which S. Peter was best knowen to the greekes and to expresse in the later the allegory of a rock according to the very words of our sauiour lest perhaps otherwyse the readers attending more to the name thâ—n to the signification therof should not perceiue the force of our sauiours allegory who to signify the strength and stabilitie of his Churche gaue the name of a rock to saynt Peter vpon whome he meant to buyld the same and therfore I say the greeke translator elegantly vseth both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explicating the first by the later and expressing the allegory in both And as for the Latin translation it is manifest that it followeth the greek and not the hebrew nor Siriac and that therfore for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it hath Petrus partly for the allusion that Petrus hath both to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in greeke also to Petra in Latin both which signify a rock and partly for that from the tyme that saynt Peter was knowne by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Romans Petrus which is deriued of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by turning os into vs to make it a Latin word was no lesse vsed for his name and other mens amoÌ„gst them then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amongst the greekes And although now in common vse Petrus doth signify nothing els but Peter in which respect it may seeme that the Latyn translator rather expresseth the bare name of a maÌ„ then the true sence or signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Cephas neuerthelesse the circumstances being considered yt is euident that Petrus or Peter in the scripture doth not only signify the name of a man but also a rock To which purpose there is to be noted a great difference in Petrus when it is spoken of the Apostle S. Peter when it is spoken of any other man as for example Cook is a name now common to many of good cauling though perhaps at first it grew to be a name from some one that by reason of his office was commonly cauled Cook and therfore though now in such as haue no such office yt signifieth nothing but a bare name yet in him that was first cauled so it signified rather his office then his name and in lyke maÌ„ner though Petrus now haue no other signification but the proper name of a man as Thomas or Iohn and the lyke yet in S. Peter the Apostle who was the first that was cauled so it signified the office and quality which Christ gaue him when he made him a rock to buyld his Church vpon
wil geue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and Origen addeth further that there was no smalle differēce betwyxt the Apostles commission to bynd and loose and the commission of S. Peter which he affirmeth to be more ample because sayth he non erant in tanta perfectione sicut Petrus they were not in such perfection as Peter and therfore S. Leo sayth that the authority or power to bynd and loose was geuen Petro prae caeteris to Peter aboue the rest of the Apostles and the reason is for that he being their head and they subordinat to him he receiued the same for him selfe and them and they held it as from him vnder him though they had it also by Christs commissiō as wel as hee which S. Augustin teacheth clearly when he sayth that the keyes of the kingdome of heauen were geuen to S. Peter because he represented the whole church of which representatiō he yeildeth the reason adding immediatly Propter apostolatus sui primatum or as he sayth in an other place propter primatum quem in discipulis habuit by reason of the supremacy he had ouer the rest of the Apostles geuing to vnderstand therby that the keyes being geuen to S. Peter as head of the Apostles and consequently as head of the Church they were geuen also to the Apostles and to the whole Church for what is geuen to the king as king the same is geuen to the common wealth and from him or by him as head therof is communicated imparted to the whole body For this cause S. Chrisostome treating of the promis that our sauiour made to S. Peter to buyld his Churche vpō him and to geue him the keyes of the kingdome of heauen affirmeth that he made him head or gouuernour of the whole world Thus much for the second proof The third and last shal be the commission and charge that our sauiour gaue particularly to S. Peter to feed his sheep wherby he made him general Pastor ouer his whole flock whereof Eusebius Emissenus sayth thus first Christ comitted vnto him his lambs then his sheepe because he made him not only a pastor or shepherd but also the pastor of Pastors Therefore Peter feedeth the lambes he feedeth the sheepe he feedeth the young ones their dammes he gouerneth the subiects their prelats so that he is Pastor of all for besydes lambes sheepe there is nothing in the Church This is more euident in the Greeke wherein the gospel of S. Ihon was written then in our latin translation for where as we haue 3. tymes pasce that is to say feed the greeke hath in the second place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which doth not only signify to feed but also to gouerne and rule wherby the Euangelist signifyed that Christ gaue to S. Peter commission not only to feed his flock with preaching and teaching but also to exercyse all pastoral authority ouer them that is to say to rule and gouern them in which sence the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is often vsed in the holy Scriptures as in S. Mathew and Micheas the Prophet where it is sayd of Bethlem there shal come foorth of thee a caeptayne that shal gouern my people Israel and in the Apocalipse he shal rule them in an yron rod and againe in the Psalm thow shalt gouerne or rule theym in a rod of yron in which places as also in dyuers others of the scripture to lyke purpose the greeke hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the same sence our lord saith in the Prophet that the great Monark Cirus should be his Pastor because he should gouern and rule his people and Homer oftentymes cauleth king Agamemnon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the king or Pastor of this people for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth both and therfore S. Augustin expounding those words feede my sheep sayth that Christ recommended his sheepe to S. Peter pascendas id est docendas regendasque to be fed that is to say to be taught and gouerned Theophilactus also vpō the same place witnesseth that Christ gaue to S. Peter praesecturam ouium totius mundi the gouernment of the sheepe of the whole world and S. Chrisostome treating of those words of our sauiour sayth that he would haue S. Peter to be endewed with authority and farre to excel the other Apostles and agayne expounding the same words otherwhere he sayth that Christ spake vnto him only because he was the mouth head of the Apostles and committed vnto him curam fratrum suorum the charge of his brethren and a litle after that Christ gaue him the charge of the whole world which he also affirmeth in an other place of the vniuersal Churche saying that the supremacy and gouernment of the Churche throughout the whole world was geuen him by Christ. I wil conclude with S. Leo whereas saith he the power of bynding and loosing was geuen to Peter aboue the rest of the Apostles the care charge of feeding the sheepe of Christ was more specially committed to him to whome whosoeuer shal thinck the principality or supremacy is to be denied he cannot by any meanes diminish his dignity but being puft vp with the spirit of his owne pryde he casts him selfe head-long to hel Thus thow seest good reader that our doctrin of the supremacy of S. Peter is no nouelty of our inuention but the vniform and constant opinion of the most learned and anciēt Fathers of the Churche grounded vpon the scriptures in which respect we fynd in all the sayd auncient Docctors most eminent and excellent tytles of superioritie and praerogatiue attributed to S. Peter who in S. Hilary is cauled the blessed porter of heauen in S. Augustin the first or cheef of the Apostles in Eusebius the greatest of the Apostles and maister of the warfare of God in Epiphanius the captayn of the Disciples in S. Ciril Prince and head of the Apostles in S. Ambrose the Vicar that Christ left vs of his loue and to omit others for breuityes sake in S. Chrysostome the toppe or head of the congregation of the Apostles an vnconsumable rock the vnmoueable top of the buylding and lastly the pastor and head of the Churche THAT THE SVCCESSORS OF S. Peeter to wit the Bishops of Rome succeed him in the supremacy of the Churche CHAP. IX AND for as much as it is euident that our sauiour Christ gaue not this authority to S. Peeter for his owne particular benefit but for the general good of his Churche nor for his owne dayes only but during the tyme of the Churche militāt to the end that so long as their should be any sheep in his fold so long ther should be an vniuersal Pastor to feed and gouerne them and that his Churche which is a visible body
sayd sea and partly by the decrees made by the same for the whole Churche and the censures layd vpon such as would not receiue and obey them Wee read in Tertulian who liued in king Lucius tyme that Montanus Prisca and Maximilla fals prophets in Phrigia being excomunicat and expelled by their bishops came to Rome to be restored by Pope Victor whome they had almost circumuented hauing obtayned of him letters to the churches of Asia for their restitution which letters neuerthelesse Pope Victor reuoked by the aduise of Praxeas who discouered to him their trechery wherof Tertulian complayneth bitterly being then become an obstinate Montanist saying that otherwyse Pope Victor had restored MoÌ„tanus and geuen peace to the churches of Asia lo then how great was the authoritie of the bishops of Rome in forayn remote parts by the testimony of Tertulian who was then an heretyke and a great enemy to the Roman Churche S. Cyprian about 250. yeares after Christ testifyeth that Fortunatus and Felix being deposed in Afrike by him appealed to Pope Cornelius and that Basilides in lyke manner being deposed in Spayne appealed to Pope Steuen who suceeded Cornelius and although S. Cyprian shew that Basilides being iustly condemned did vniustly appeale and deceiue the Pope by fals suggestion that therfore his appellation could not auayle him yet he confesseth that the Pope receiued the appellation wherein he sayth he was not to be blamed but Basilides for deceauing him so that wee see the custome of appealing to the bishop of Rome out of al partes is most ancient whereof I wil also alleadge some other examples of later tymes though aboue 1000. yeres agoe Athanasius being deposed by the Arrians in Greece appealed vnto Iulius the first bishop of Rome and by him was restored 1300. yeres agoe and the ecclesiastical histories do witnesse that not only he but also Paulus byshop of Constantinople Marcellus byshop of Ancira and Asâ—lepa byshop of Gaza and Lucianus of Hadrianopolis were all at Rome at one tyme iniustly expelled from their bishoprikes and that Pope Iulius discussing the crymes obiected to euery one of them tanquam omnium curam gerens propter propriae sedis dignitatem as one that had care of them all for the dignity of his owne sea restored euery one of them to their Churches wrote to the Byshops of the east blaming them for the wrong they had donne them and threatning them that he would not suffer it if they proceeded to do the lyke hereafter S. Chrysostome byshop of Constantinople appealed to Pope Innocentius the first and Flauianus byshop of the same citty and Theodoretus byshop of Cyrus appealed in the same age to Pope Leo who restored Theodoretus as testifieth the great general councel of Calcedon saying restituit ei Episcopatum S inus Archiepiscopus Leo. The most holy Archbishop Leo restored to him his bishoprik And S. Gregory the great byshop of Rome did excomunicate a byshop of Greece called Iohn for that he had presumed to Iudge an other byshop that had appealed to the sea Apostolyke Lastly this custome of appealing to the Bishop of Rome was confirmed by two seueral cannons in the second great general councel held at Sardica in the tyme of Athanasius the great whereat were present some byshops of Britany and this shal suffise for the appellatioÌ„ of byshops to Rome and their restitution Now to speak a word or two of the deposition of Byshops wee fynd an euident example therof within 40. or 50. yeares after the coÌ„uersion of K. Lucius for S. Cyprian wrote to Steuen the Pope to desyre him to excomunicat depose Marcian the Bishop of Arles in France and to substitute an other in his place by vertue of his letters to the people there further desyred him to aduertyse him who should succede him that he the Bishops of Africk might know to whome to direct their letters so that wee see the authority and custome in the Church of Rome to depose forraine Bishops is no new thing nor a iurisdiction vsurped in later tymes by fauour of Christian Emperours seing in the great persecutions in the primitiue Churche when none were more persecuted by the Emperours then the Popes them selues who vntil this tyme were almost all martired they exercysed this authority as their successors haue done euer since indiffereÌ„tly without exception vpon all Bishops whosoeuer yea vpon the 4. principal patriarkes of Constantinople Alexandria Antioch and Hierusalem in so much that Nicolaus the first Pope of that name writing to Michael Emperour of Constantinople about a 1000. yeres ago reckoneth 8. Patriarchs of that Churche deposed by Bishops of Rome before his tyme and Flauianus Patriarch of Antioch was deposed by Pope Damasus 1200. yeares ago and although the Emperour Theodosius labored to restore him yet he commaunded him to go to Rome to answere for him selfe and both S. Chrysostome Bishop of Constantinople and also Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria were intercessors for him to the Pope to conclude he could not hold his Bishoprik in peace vntil the Pope being pacified was conteÌ„t therwith and promised to receaue his legats therfore Flauianus presently sent him many Byshops and some of the cheef of the Clergy of Antioch Also Pope Sixtus the 3. deposed Polichronius Bishop of Hierusalem I omit later examples wherof there are many to say somewhat of the general decrees of Popes made before or in the dayes of K. Lucius Wee read in Tertullian who as I sayd before florished in King Lucius tyme that the Bishops of Rome made decrees agaynst the heresyes of Montanus and his followers and although Tertulian was then an egregious Montanist himselfe an enemy to the Roman Churche which had condemned his heresyes neuerthelesse in that which he wryteth agaynst one of the sayd edicts he sufficiently sheweth what was the authority of the Byshops of Rome in those dayes recyting the edict in this manner Pontifex Maximus Episcopus Episcoporum dicit c. that is to say the cheef or greatest Bishop the Bishop of Bishops doth say c. wherby it appeareth what was the title of the Bishop of Rome at those dayes for although it should be true that Tertulian being then an heretyk and condemned by the Bishop of Rome vsed those words of Pontifex Maximus Episcopus Episcoporum ironice yet is it manifest that he did it eyther for that such were the tytles of the edict which was most probable or els because he was generally so called at that tyme by all those that held communion with him But before this tyme Pius the first Pope of that name about 160. yeres after Christ made an edict about the keeping of Easter which was after confirmed by Pope Victor the Churches of Asia were excomunicated by him for not receiuing the same But to the end good reader thou mayst the better vnderstand how this
matter passed and euidently see the supreme autoritie of the Bishops of Rome in those dayes it is to be considered that there hauing been from the tyme of the Apostles a different manner of keeping Easter in the Churche of Rome and the Churches of the lesser Asia the Romans keeping it alwayes vpon the sunday according to the tradition of the Apostles S. Peter and saynt Paule they of Asia obseruing the tyme and custome of the Iewes pretending the example and tradition of S. Iohn the Euangelist Pius the first of that name Bishop of Rome desyring to reduce all the Churche to vniformity made a decree that the feast of Easter should be celebrated only vpō sunday but for that the Churches of Asia made great dificulty to leaue their tradition as wel Pius as Anicetus Soter and Eleutherius forbore for peace and quietnesse sake to compel them by Ecclesiastical censures to the obseruation therof but afterwards Victor who succeeded Eleutherius noting that not only those which inclyned to keep the ceremonies of the old law were much confirmed therby in their opinion but also some in Rome namely one Blastus sought to introduce that custome there and Iudaysme withall cauled a councel of the Bishops of Italy neere adioyning and not only caused other councels to be assembled in France but also directed his commaundements to the Bishops of the east to do the lyke namely to Theophilus Bishop of Caesarea as that S. Bede reporteth in these words victor the Pope Bishop of the citty of Rome dixerit authoritatem that is to say directed a commaundement to Theophilus Byshop of Caesarea and Palaestina that it should be determined how the easter should be celebrated there where our Lord the sauiour of the world conuersed Therfore perceptae qutoritate the authority or commaundement being receiued Theophilus assembled Bishops not only out of his owne prouince but also out of diuers other cuntryes and when they were come togeather in great numbers Theophilus protulit autoritatem ad se missam Papae Victoris Theophilus shewed the autority or commaundment that Pope Victor had sent him declared quid sibi operis fuisset iniunctum what was enioyned him to do c. herein by the way I wish to be noted how the Bishop of Rome in those dayes that is to say in the tyme of Lucius exercised his autority in calling of councels both of the Byshops of the Latin or west Church also of the east seing Theophilus Byshop of Palaestina assembled the prelats not only of his owne prouince but also of diuers other by vertue of the commission geuen him by Pope Victor But to proceed yt being determined by all those coūcels that the feast of Easter should be kept on the sunday according to the custome of the Romā Churche Victor the Pope renewed the decree of Pius his predecessor and denounced excomunication against all the Churches of Asia that would not cōforme them-selues therto which though some holy and learned Bishops amongst other Irenaeus thought to bee rigorously done and not with such consideratiō as it seemed to them the peace of the Church required yet none of them nor any of the schismatykes themselues took any exception to his autority as though he had donne more then he might do which no dout they would haue done yf he had exceeded the limits of his power therfore Eusebius sayth that Irenaeus did admonish him that he would not cut of from the body of the whole Church so many Churches for obseruing a tradition vsed amongst them according to an old custome and Nicephorus testifieth that they aduised him vt benignius statueret that should determine therof with more benignity and myldnes wherin wee see Pope Victors authoritie and power to excommunicat all other Bishops sufficiently acknowledged though there was question of the iustnesse of the cause and conueniency of the fact neuerthelesse yt appeared afterwards by the determination of the whole Churche of God yea of the greatest part of the Asian Churches themselues that Victor had reason in that which he did for as Nicephorus testifieth not only Asia did at lēgth yeild therin but also vbique terrarum in orbe decretum est it was decreed through out the world that the feast of Easter should be celebrated vpō the sunday in so much that those which would not yeild therto were held for heretykes cauled quarta decimani for so they are accounted and termed by Nicephorus saynt Augustin Epiphanius Philastrius and the councels of Antioch and Laodicea and to conclude this poynt yt shal not be impertinent to the matter in hād to consider how this controuersy about the keeping of easter ended many yeares after in England betwyxt the English Byshops mayntayning the custome of Rome and the Scottish that were Schismatykes and obserued the custome of Asia which venerable Bede recounteth saying that Bishop Colman with his Scotish elergy being assembled in Northumberland with Agilbert Bishop of the east Saxons his Priests Wilfred and Agathon in the presence of King Oswy after long debating the matter on both sydes Wilfred answered to Colman who relyed vpon the autority of Anatholius and Columba his predecessors although quoth he Columba was a holy man yet could he not be perferred before Peter the most blessed Prince of the Apostles to whome our Lord sayd thou art Peter and vpon this rock I wil buyld my Churche hel gates shal not preuayle against it and to thee I wil geue the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen when Wilfrid had sayd this King Oswy who had ben brought vp by the Scots and infected with their schisme asked Colman wheather he could proue that so great autority was geuen to Columba and Colman answered no and do you on both syds sayth the King grant without controuersy that this was sayd principally to Peter and that the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen were geuen him by our Lord and both parts answered yea nay then quoth the King merily I assure yow I wil not in any thing contradict that porter but as farre as my knowledge and power shal extend I wil obey his commaundments least perhaps when I shal come to heauen and haue him my enemy that keepeth the keyes no man wil open me the gates The King hauing sayd thus all that were present both litle and great sayth saynt Bede allowed therof and yeilded to receiue the Catholyke custome of keeping Easter on the sunday Thus wee see this great controuersy ended also in England neere a thousand yeres agoe by the autority of the sea Apostolyke so that to returne to Pope Victor wee may truly say he had the victory or rather that saynt Peeter by him and his successors vanquished all such as opposed themselues to this traditiō of the Roman Churche Seing then in the tyme of K. Lucius the Bishops of Rome both claymed and exercised supreme authority ouer all
other Bishops making general edicts condemning heretykes deposing and restoring Bishops cauling counsels and excommunicating whole prouinces and countryes I appeale to thee gentle reader whether he was not then generally held for supreme head of the Church whether it is lykly that when Eleutherius the Pope made King Lucius a Christian he made him a protestaÌ„t that is to say an enemy to the sea Apostolyk a persecuter of Priests and of all such as defend the dignity and autoritie of saynt Peeter his predecessor from whome he claymed and held the supremacy of the Churche which now all protestants deny to his successors And agayne seeing I haue proued that the authority of the sea Apostolyke is not grounded vpon any humain tradition but vpon the institution of our sauiour himselfe who left his flock and sheep to saynt Peeter to be fed and buylt his Churche vpon him as vpon a sure rock promising that hel gates should not preuayle against it ordayning for the auoyding of Schisme diuision one head from the which the dyuers and manyfold members of his Churche might receiue the influence of one doctrin and spirit what shal wee say of them that are not of this fold that do not communicat with this head that are not planted vpoÌ„ this root of vnity nor buylt vpon this rock that agaynst the chayre of Peeter set vp a chayre of pestileÌ„ce can they be the sheep of Christ or members of his mistical body or receiue the influence of his spirit it is no maruel yf they be caryed away with euery blast of new doctrin torne and rent with euery schisme and cast at length vpon the rockes of heresy or atheisme haue wee not then sufficient reason to giue lands lyues or what honour pleasure or comodity soeuer the world yeildeth rather then to be driuen from this safe harbor of truth and ancor of vnity into the seas of schisme and heresy to the assured shipwrack of our soules and when wee spend our blood for this cause do we not dy for religion yea for a most important point of religion though it be made treason wherof wee may truly saye with the blessed martyr Sir Thomas More thet it is a treason without sinne for the which a maÌ„ may be hanged and haue no harme dy and liue for euer seeme to some a traytor and be a glorious martyr THE MATTER OF HOLY Images is debated and the vse therof proued to haue ben in the Churche of God euer since our Sauiours tyme. CHAP. XI BVT let vs examine a poynt or two more of religion wherein our aduersaries dissent from vs that wee may see wheather K. Lucius were more lyke to learne their doctrin concerning the same or ours and for that they think they haue a maruelous aduaÌ„tage of vs in the matter of Images and relykes of saints wherein they charge vs with flat Idolatrie and breach of the commaundment of God I wil say somwhat therof And fyrst I cannot but maruel at their grosnesse that cannot distinguish betwiyt an Idol and an Image whereof they may learne the difference in Origen and Theodoretus expouÌ„ding these words of the coÌ„maundmeÌ„t non facies tibi IdoluÌ„ thou shalt not make to thy self any â—dol for the septuaginta whose translation they follow for sculptile haue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say an Idol wherevpon they say that an Idol is a fals similitude representing a thing which is not that a similitude or Image is a representation of ae thing which truly is to which purpose also S. Paule sayth Idolum nihil est in mundo an Idol is nothing in the world for that Idols represent no truth but mere fictions vanityes and lyes and therfore ar cauled in the Hebrew text of the holy scriptures Elilun and Auâ—nim wheron it followeth that all Images or other creatures held or adored for Gods whâ—ch they neither are nor yet possibly can bee are truly and properly Idols wheras other Images that represent a truth can not so bee cauled and this difference is euident in the holy scriptures which neuer atribute the name of Idol to the true Image of any thing but to the fals gods of the gentils and vseth the name of Image for the similitud of that which is truly the thing that it is thought to be or hath the true proprietyes that by the Image are represented so Christ is cauled the Image of his father and Salomon is sayd to haue made in the temple Images of Lions Oxen Flowers yea and of the Cherubins who though they were Angels and Spirits were neuerthelesse pourtrayed lyke men to expresse the forme wherein they appeared to Moyses on the mountayne and with wings to shew the celerity of their motion so that the representation made therby was true as of a true apparition and a true propriety in the Angelical nature Herevpon it foloweth that Images which are not honored for Gods but ordayned for the honor of Christ and his saynts who are truly that which they are represented to be are no Idols and therfore our aduersaries are eyther very ignorant or malicious when they confound these woords in such sort as to cal Images Idols and to translate Idolum in the scripture an Image as they commonly do very absurdly and sometymes ridiculously as in S. Paule where he speaketh of couetousnes saying it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say Idolatry or the seruice of Idols and in an other place that the couetous man is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Idolater or a woorshipper of Idols meaning therby that couetous men make theyr money and their riches their Gods they translate it couetousnes is the seruice of Images and the couetous man is a woorshipper of Images as though there were no other Idolatry but that which may be doÌ„ne to Images or that Image and Idole were all one or that it could be sayd with any propriety or reason that a couetous man makes his money an Image as it may be properly sayd that he makes it an Idol because he makes yt his God which yt neither is nor can be in which respect it may wel be cauled an Idol Furdermore they bewray in themselues either great simplicity or peruers malice in that they permit no honour nor reuerence to be donne to the Image of Christ his saynts for doth not reason and common experience teach vs that the honour or reuerence donne to the Image passeth from thence to the Prototipon that is to say to the thing or person it representeth he which crowneth sayth S. Ambrose the image of the emperour crowneth the Emperour and he which contemnes his image seemeth to do iniury to his person when the people of Antiochia cast downe the image of the Empresle wyfe to Theodosius the Emperour he took it for so great an affront to her and him selfe that he had lyke to haue destroyed the whole citty in
reuenge thereof and S. Chrysostome complayneth greeuously of the indignity donne to the Emperour therin The lyke was iudged in England of the violeÌ„ce doÌ„ne by Hacket to the Queenes picture which was iustly held for a disloyal act agaynst her Magestyes person And who knoweth not that he which standeth bare headed in the presence chaÌ„ber before the Queenes chayre and cloth of state doth honour the Queene therein Also it was the custome in tymes past to adore the images of the Roman Emperours which the Christians refused not to do in which respect Iulian the Apostata thinking either to draw them to adore his fals Gods or els to haue some pretence to punish them for contempt of his person placed his owne image amongst the images of false Gods as I haue noted in my Apology vpon an other occasion whervpon S. Gregory Nazianzen sayth that the simple Christians who did not fal into account of the deceat were to be excused of ignorance for that they thought they adored no more but the Emperours image if therfore it be lawful to adore the image of an Emperour or earthly king for that he is the image of almighty God I meane if it bee lawful to adore the image of Gods image how much more is it lawful to do reuerence to the image of God him selfe I meane of Christ God and man And sure I am that many in England which wil not haue nor reuerence the image of our sauiour for feare of committing idolatry wil make no bones at all to keep some picture or remembrance of their Maistres to kisse it and to vse other tokens of affection and respect towards it to shew therby their good wil to her And how many are there in England that condemne catholykes for keeping images and pictures to moue them to deuotion and yet make no scruple to keep lasciuious pictures to prouoke themselues to lust wherby they might see by their owne experience if they were not wilfully blynd what is the effect of good and deuout pictures in wel disposed mynds and what it would bee in themselues if they were as spiritual and feruerous in the loue of God as they are carnal and fyry in sensual appetyt for who douteth that deuout representatioÌ„s do as easely moue pious and godly minds to holy cogitations and affections as lasciuious obiects do kindle carnal mynds to concupiscence and lust and therfore S. Gregory Nissen sayth that he neuer beheld the picture of Abraham sacrifising his sonne Isaac but hee was moued to teares and yet it is likely that he had often read the story therof without any such effect as Basilius byshop of Ancyra noted very wel in the 7. general councel of Nice when the same was aleaged there out of S. Gregory aboue 800. yeres agoe wherevpoÌ„ Theodorus byshop of Catane also inferred in the same councel that much more may the story of our sauiours passion represented by picture woorke the lyke effect in deuout persons that behold the same Wherof I think good to declare here a manifest example of my owne knowledge It chaÌ„ced in the house of a Catholyke where I was that a young mayd of 15. or 16. yeres of age who had ben alwayes brought vp amongsts protestaÌ„tes comming thether and seeing a picture of Christ crusified demaunded whose picture it was and being told that it was the picture of our sauiour Christ wherby she might see what he suffred for vs she was moued with such compassion that after she had stedfastly beheld it a whyle she burst out first into sighes after into teares saying that shee had often heard of it but neuer seene it before adding further our Lord helpe vs if he suffred all this for vs. Wherby it may appeare how true is that which saynt Gregory the greate sayth of Images to wit that they are the bookes of the ignorant who are many tymes more moued with pictures then with preaching and vnderstand that which is taught theÌ„ much better when it is by Images or pictures represented to their eyes for as the Poet sayth Segnius irritant animos immissa per auros Quam quae sunt oculis commissa fidelibus That is to say those things that are conceaued by hearing do lesse moue the mynds of men then such thinges as are committed to the sight This the deuil knoweth so wel as to hinder the same all other good effects of holy Images and deuour pictures yea and to exterminat as much as in him lyeth all external monuments and memories of the lyfe and passion of our sauiour and his saynts and so by degrees to root out all Christian religion he hath stirred vp in all ages his instruments and seruants to make warre against holy Images vnder colour of zeale to Gods honour and glory To this purpose it may be noted that the first and cheef impugners of the lawful vse of Images for some hundreth yeares togeather were eyther Iewes or magicians or manifest heretikes or otherwyse know in for most wicked men The first wherof was a perâ—â—◠〈…〉 about 500. yeres after Christ whome 〈…〉 cauleth the seruant of Satan saying that he made himselfe a Bishop before he was baptised and that he was the first that taught that the Image of Christ and of his saynts ought not to be woorshiped and almost 200. yeres after in the yere of our Lord 676. the Iewes impugned the vse of Images in their Talmud and about the yere of our Lord 700. a Iew persuaded a Mahometan King in Arabia to burne all the Images in the Churches of the Christians and shortly after Leo Isaurus the Emperour did the lyke by persuasion of a Iew whose example his sonne Leo Copronimus followed being a magician and a nestorian heretyk and about the yere 800. Leo Armenius the Emperour and his successors Michael Balbus and Theophilus all three most wicked men the last addicted both to iudaisme and necromancy made a new warre against Images which the wyclefists also did 500. yeares after and now of late the Lutherans and Caluinists whereas all those that defended the vse of Images against Leo and those other Emperours were most holy and learned men as Gregorius and Hadrianus Bishops of Rome in those dayes and Germanus and Tharasius Bishops of Constantinople S. Iohn Damascen Methodius Leontius Ionas Aurelianensis Paulus Diaconus and diuers others all of them men of singuler learning and vertue by the testimony of all autors both Greeks Latins THE COMMANDEMENT OF God touching images explicated and the practise of the Churche declared CHAP. XII BVT our aduersaries obiect against vs the commaÌ„dement of God to wit thou shalt not make to thy selfe any grauen Image nor any similitude of any thing c. wherto I answere yf they take the bare letter without the true sence and circumstances no man may make any Image whatsoeuer nor so much as any lyknesse of any thing
that the sonne of one Irenaus was restored to lyfe being anoynted only with the oyle of a lamp that did hang before the tomb of a martyr in lyke manner Theodoret Venantius Fortunatus Paulus Diaconus recount wonderful miracles donne by the oyle of lamps that burned by martyrs tombs yea S. Gregory Nazianzen sayth of his owne knowledge that not only a litle dust or bone of the martyrs but also the very remembrance of them supplyeth sometymes the want of their whole bodyes and concludeth with this exclamation O rem predigiosam salutem assort sola recordatio o prodigious thing the only remembrance of them giueth health and in his oration in prayse of S. Ciprian he calleth to witnesse many that knew by their owne tryal and experience what great vertue power was in this very dust ashes to expel diuels to cure diseases and for the foreknowing of things to come S. Ambrose asketh why faythful men should not honour relickes of saynts which the very diuels reuerence and feare who also signifieth that he had a reuelation from almighty God of the place where the bodyes of S. Ceruas and Protase were buryed in Millan wher-vpon he took them vp with great solemnity as S. Augstin also witnesseth who was present and reporteth a great miracle of a blynd man that recouered his sight at the same tyme and diuels expeld by the merits of those blessed martyrs S. Chrisostome proueth against the Painims by the honour donne to saynts relicks that Christ is God to whose power and omnipotency he sayth it is to be ascrybed that his disciples and seruants who whyles they were liuing did seeme most contemtible became after they were dead more venerable then Kings in so much that at Rome and Constantinople Kings and praesidents sayth he runne to the tombe of a fisher and take it for a great fauour that their bodyes may be buried not hard by the Apostles bodyes but without the circuit of their tombs and be made as it were porters of Fishermen Furthermore in his book against the gentils where he discourseth at large of the lyfe death of S. Babilas the martyr he signifieth that his body being placed in the suburbs of Antioch neare to a temple where there was an Oracle of Apollo it put the diuel to silence and when Iulian the Apostata thought by the remoue of it to remedy the same the Temple and Idole were presently after destroyed with fire from heauen wherwith as saynt Chrisostome testifieth Iulian and all the gentils were wounderfully confounded and so may our heretykes be in lyke manner seing that they not only impugne with them this euident argument of the diuinity of Christ but also hold that for Idolatry which maistreth the diuel ouerthroweth Idols and confoundeth Idolaters I omit infinit others for breuities sake conclude with saynt Hierome who declareth the custome of the whole Churche of God both in his tyme and longe before therby to confute Vigilantius the heretyke that taught the same doctrine in this behalfe that our heretykes teach at this day whosoeuer sayth he adored martyrs who euer taught men to be God yt greueth vigilantius to see the relickes of martyrs couered with costly and precious veyles belyke Constantin the Emperour committed sacrilege when he translated to Constantinople the holly relyckes of saynt Andrew S. Luke S. Timothe wheraâ— the diuels roare and now also Arcadius the Emperour belyke committeth sacriledge who after so long tyme hath translated the bones of Samuel the Prophet into Thratia and all the Bishops that caryed the ashes laye in silk and in a vessel of gold are to be condemned for fooles and sacrilegious persons yea then the faythful people of all Churches are fooles also for going to receiue the same with no lesse Ioy then if they had serue the Prophet aliue in so much that froÌ„ Palestina to Calcedon ther was all the way 〈◊〉 of people that with one voyce sounded forth the praise of Christ lastly so shal wee say that the Bishop of Rome doth il when he offreth sacrifice to our Lord ouer S. Peter and saynt Paules venerable bones as wee tearme them though thou caulest them vâ—le dust and when he taketh their tombs for the altars of Christ lo here good reader the vse of Images and relykes and the honor due to them approued by the Fathers of all ages confirmed by the custome of all Christian nations ratyfied by miracles acknowledged by infidels and Paynims confessed by diuels and yet denied and deryded by the heretyks of this tyme are they not then more obstinat and malicious then heathens yea then diuels themselues THAT OVR DOCTRIN concerning the sacrifice of the Masse was generally receiued and beleued in the tyme of king Lucius first that it was foretold prophecyed by Malachias CHAP. XIIII BVT I wil passe to an other importaÌ„t poynt I mean the sacrifice of the Masse to see whether our doctrin concerning the same or theirs was deliuered by our sauiour to the Apostles and taught in king Lucius tyme or no. The sacrifice of the Masse consisting in the oblation of the blessed body and blood of our sauiour Iesus Christ was prophesyed by Malachias praefigured by the sacrifice of Melchifedeth instituted and offred by our sauiour at his last supper deliuered by him to his Apostles practysed by them and by the Churche of God euer since Malachias the Prophet foretelling the reiection of the Iewes and the election of the gentils signifieth withall the translation of the Iewes law and priesthood into a new law and a new priesthood and compareth or rather opposeth the priests of the one to the priests of the other sacrifice to sacrifice place to place altar to altar and a poluted bread which they were woÌ„t to offer only in Hierusalem to a cleane oblatioÌ„ which should be offred to God amongst the Gentils euery where throughout the whole world saying to the priests of the Iewes in the person of God that seing they dispysed his name and offred vpon his altars a polluted bread and blynd and lame sacrifices non est mihi voluntas in vobis c. sayth hee my wil is no longer to be serued of you neyther wil I accept any more sacrifice at your hands for my name is great amongst the Gentils euen from the east to the west there is a cleane oblation offred to my name in euery place c. Thus farre the Prophet who cannot be vnderstood to speake of any other sacrifice then of the Masse which being nothing els but the oblation of the blessed body and blood of our sauiour Iesus Christ in forme of bread and wyne is a most pure and cleane oblation and cannot be polluted by the wickednes of the priests as the bread offred in the old law was wont to be to which purpose it may be noted that the Prophet speaking of dyuers kinds of sacrifices some consisting
of their primacy in causes ecclesiastical Seing then your religion so far as it is distinct from others hath no other ground then reason of state I doubt not but yf the matter were wel examined what God they beleeued in that persuaded her Ma tie therto or yow and your fellowes that manitayne it vpon the same reason and by such vnchristian practises as yow do yow would be found to be coÌ„preheÌ„ded in the third diuisioÌ„ of varro who said that 3. kynds of men had three different kynds of Gods the Poëts one the Philosophers an other and statists or Polityks a third that euery one of them had a different religion according to the difference of their Gods as that the religion of the Poets was fabulous the other of the Philosophers natural the third of the Statists polityke and accomodated to gouernment And this is that which yow professe For the God yow beleeue in is the Prince your scriptures are the actes of Parliament your religion is to conserue the state persas uefas and therfore as all good Christians do measure the reason of state by religion which is the true rule and the end therof and from the which it cannot in reason dissent or disagre so yow on the other syde reduce and frame religion to your fals reason of state and by that meanes peruert all the order both of nature and grace preferring the body before the soule temporal things before spiritual humayn before deuine earth before heauen the world before God and which is more yow subiect both earth heauen body soule the world yea God and all to the priuate pleasure and profit of the Prince as though he were the end the Lord and God of all the world and of nature it self whervpon ensew those monstrous pollicies which wee fee fraught with all frand hipocrisy periuries slauÌ„ders murders and all kynd of cruelty oppression and impiety which haue ruined infinite Kinges with their countries Kingdomes and what they wil bring our poore country vnto in the end tyme wil tel wherto I remit me for as the Italian prouerb sayth La vita il sine â—l di lâ—da La sera the end prayseth the lyfe and the euening the day OF THE TRVE CAVSES OF more moderation vsed in the beginning then afterwards of the difference made by the Lawes betwixt Seminarie and I Mary priests CHAP. XXIII BVt to proceed in your obseruations you go forward to geue example that there is moderation vsed in ecclesiastical causes where matter of state is not mixt with religion saying for els I would gladly learne what should make the difference the temper of the lawes in the first yeare of the Queene and in the 23. and 27. but that at the one tyme they were papists in conscience and at the other they were growne papists in faction or what should make the difference at this day in law betwixt a Queene Marie priest a Seminary priest saue that the one is a priest of suspition and the other a priest of sedition Hereto I answere that because you say you would gladly learne and that I take yow to be of a good wit and docile I wil take paynes to teach you this poynt that you say you would so fayne learne Know you therfore that there were diuers causes of more moderation and lenity vsed for some yeares in the beginning then afterwards yet not those which you speak of and so you shew your self eyther ignorant or malitious in both The first an ordinary rule of state which those great statists that procured this change could not neglect I meane in case of innouation to vse no suddayne violence but to proceed by degrees especially in matter of religion which is seldome changed without tumult and trouble wherof they had seene the experience in the tymes of both the kings Henry and Edward therfore they had great reason to water their wyne at the beginning and to vse moderation at least for some yeares vntil the state and gouernment were setled The second cause was the doctrine of your owne gospellers in Q. Maryes tyme who because some of their folowers were burnt for heresy according to the Canons and lawes of the Churche cryed out that they were persecuted and published in their bookes and sermons that faith ought to be free and not forced that therfore it was against all conscience to punish or trouble men for their religion in which respect the authors of the change that serued themselues of them in the ecclesiastical and pastoral dignityes could not for shame at the very first vse the bloody proceeding which afterwards they did though neuerthelesse they forbore not in the very beginning to imprison and otherwise to afflict all Bishops and cheif pastours and such others as would not subscribe come to their Churches for the which cause I remember that besydes a great number of ecclesiastical and temporal persons some of my owne kindred and familie were called to London and imprisoned in the second yeare of her Maiesties raigne and so remayned prisoners many yeares after The third cause was the vayne hope that those polityks had that a religion so sensual and ful of liberty as theirs authorized with the power of the Prince vpholden with lawes promulgate with all artifice of writers preachers and perswaders would easely within a fewe yeares infinuate it self into the hartes of all men especially of the youth wherby they made accompte that the elder sort being worne out there would be within a fewe yeares litle memorie or none at all left of Catholike religion but when they saw after some yeares experience how much they were deceiued of their expectation and that through the zealous endeauours of the learned English Catholikes abroad learned bookes written Colledges Seminaryes erected priests made and sent in therby infinite numbers reduced to the vnity of the Catholike Churche not only of the schismatiks that fel at the first eyther by ignorance or for feare but also of the ProtestaÌ„ts themselues and amongst them euen many ministers and principal preachers and none sooner conuerted or more zealously affected to Catholike religion then the yongest and fynest wits wherwith our new Seminaryes beganne to be peopled when those statists I say saw this they thought it then tyme to bestyrre themselues and to persecute in good earnest and yet to do it in such sort as they might if it were possible auoyd the name suspition of persecutors both at home and abroad and therfore they vsed the same pollicy that Iulian the Apostata did of whom S. Gregory Nazianzenus writeth that he professed not externally his impiety with the courage that other persecutors his predecessours were wont to do neyther did he oppose himself against our faith lyke an Emperour that would gayne honour in shewing his might and power by open oppression of the Catholyks but made warre vpon them in a cowardly and base maÌ„ner couering