A CHRISTIAN DIALOGVE BETWEENE THEOPHILVS A DEFORMED CATHOLIKE IN ROME AND Remigius a reformed Catholike in the Church of England Conteining A plaine and succinct resolution of sundry very intricate and important points of religion which doe mightily assaile the weake consciences of the vulgar sort of people penned for the solace of all true hearted English subiects and for the vtter confusion of all seditious Iesuites and Iesuited Popelings in England or else where so long as they shall persist inordinately in their nouelties heresies errours and most grosse and palpable superstions Ecclesiast Cap. 4. Ver. 28. Striue for the truth vnto death and defend Iustice for thy life and the Lord shall fight for thee against thine enemie Prou. Cap. 12. Ver. 1. He that loueth instruction loueth knowledge but he that hateth correction is a foole LONDON Printed by Nicholas Okes for VVilliam VVelby and are to be sold at his Shop in Paules Church-yard at the signe of the Gray-hound 1609. TO THE RIHGT VVORSHIPFVLL MY APPROVED GOOD FRIENDS SIR STEuen Procter Sir Timothie Whittingham Sir Vincent Skinner and Sir Timothie Hutton Knights and his Maiesties most zealous vpâ—ight painfull Iustices of the Peace HAuing published many bookes in defence of the truth against the aduersaries of the truth the Pope his Cardinals Iesuites and Iesuited Popelings I meane and perceiuing by many arguments that sundry of my deare Country men are not yet fully resolued in certain maine points of religion vpon which all the rest in some sort do depend I haue deemed it a labour very necessary for the common good to dispute those most intricate points pro contra Dialogue-wise that so all difficulties therein may bee cleered all obscurity taken away and the truth plainly laid open before the eyes of euery indifferent reader The Papists most impudently bragge and boast that they maintaine keepe and defend that faith and doctrine which S. Peter and S. Paul deliuered to the Romans that neither their Pope nor their Church can erre that their Church and none but their Church is able to shew and truly to proue a perpetuall vninterrupted succession of their Bishops and Priests that the written word of God containeth not all things necessary to be beleeued vnto saluation for that it sheweth not the holy Bible to be canonical and that originall sinne remaineth only materially in the bodies of the regenerate and not formally in their mindes wils and hearts All these points and euery of them though most difficult and intricate I haue taken in hand to confute relying vpon Gods holy assistance who neuer forsaketh the truth What I haue performed let your wisedomes and others iudge The work such as it is I dedicate to your worships not only to giue as a signe of a gratefull minde for your kinde fauours to me-ward but much more to intimate to the world that inward ioy of mine heart which issueth out of your rare zeale to Gods eternall truth constant loyalty to your most gracious Soueraigne and painefull labours for the good of our Church and Common-weale The almighty giue you many happy yeares vpon earth and vouchsafe to increase his manifold graces in you that you may dayly more and more and others by your Christian example imploy your painefull labours for the aduancement of his glorious Gospell the cutting downe of sinne the extirpation of late start-vp Popery and the rooting out of all traiterous Iesuites and Iesuited Popelings which haue beene and still are too much fauoured and winked at by sundry in authority especially in these North-parts of noble England Dixi. March 21. 1609. Your worships to be commanded THOMAS BELL. A Table of the Chapters contained in this Booke CHAP. 1. Of the old Roman and ancient Church of Rome Pag. 1. CHAP. 2. Of the false and erroneous faith of the late Bishops of Rome Pag. 11. CHAP. 3. Of sundry important obiections which seeme to proue the Popes prerogatiue of faith Pag. 26. CHAP. 4. Of the Succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome Pag. 66. CHAP. 5. Of Popish vnwritten Traditions Pag. 102. CHAP. 6. Of the state of the regenerate with the particular adiuncts of the same Pag. 121. CHAP. 1. Of the old Roman and auncient Church of Rome Theophilus GOD blesse you Father Remigius I hope you will this day yeeld great comfort to my distressed heart for I haue often heard that you are both proâ—undly learned and charitably affected to all your Christian neighbours so as for your great learning you are very able and for your rare charitie euer ready to giue good counsell to such as stand in neede of you I therefore for Christs sake beseech you to shew me the ready way to heauen Remig. To beleeue rightly and liue christianly is your very path-way to Heauen but it is a straight and narrow gate and few do finde the same Theoph. Alas my good father then shall more be damned then saued God forbid it should be so Remig. That which God hath decreed man cannot withstand Many saith Christ are called but few are chosen Striue to enter in at the straight gate for many will séeke to enter in and shall not be able Yet our most mercifull and iust God will condemne none to eternall death but for their notorious sinnes and iust deserts Theoph. We may exclaime with holy Polycarâ—e ô God to what a world hast thou reserued vs c. Now euery one can giue good words both in the Pulpit and else where but badder life and wickeder dealing was neuer more frequent in any towne or City The Catholiques for good life and meritorious actes are the mirror of the Christian world Remig. Whom doe you call Catholikes I am a Catholique my selfe Theoph. The Pope his Cardinals his Monkes his Fryers his holy Nunnes and all such as agree in faith and doctrine with the Church of Rome Remig. If you speake of Pope Formosus Pope Iohn degraded him and brought him to laicall state againe after he had béene the Bishop of Portua Hée further tooke him sworne that hée neither should be Bishop again not euer returne to the Citie of Rome Howbeit Pope Martin absolued him from his oath and after a few yéeres he did notonely come to Rome but there was made the Pope If you speake of Pope Stephanus yâ— sixt he persecuted Pope Formosus euen after his death He called a Councell and disanulled all the decrées of Pope Formosus his predecessour He caused his body to be brought into his CoÌ„sistory the papall induments to be taken away a laicall habite to be put on she dead corps two fingers of his right hand to be cut off and that done forsooth his body to be put againe into the graue Meane you Pope Sergius the third he caused Pope Formosus who now had béen dead almost ten whole yéeres to be taken out of his tombe and to be set in a chaire with pontificall attire vpon his backe that done he commanded his head to be
he that can hinder sinne and doth it not is as much in fault as he that doth it Tullie that heathen Orator knew the same euen by the sole light of nature This being so which the Apostle confirmeth to bée true it followeth by a necessary consequence that Aaron was guilty of the Idolatry committed and albeit the text say not that he taught Idolatry vocally yet doth it plainly insinuate or rather fully expresse that he did it vertually and effectually For first when the people required him to make them Gods he did not reproue them but roundly consented to them where and when hee should haue vocally told them the Law the truth whereof by silence he bewrayed Againe the people sayd openly these be thy Gods O Israel which brought thée out of the land of Egypt and yet Aaron was so farre from preaching against that hereticall assertion that thereupon he built an Altar before the Calfe and proclaimed saying to morrow shall be the holy day of the Lord as if he had sayd your doctrine is my doctrine your faith my faith your opinion mine opinion I practically shew it in building this Altar before the Calfe and in proclaiming to morrow to bée holyday Thirdly the text saith plainely that Aaron made the people naked and consequently that he erred in his doctrine Fourthly because not the high Priest onely but all the Priests of the Consistory at Hierusalem together with the deuill Iudges were assigned to declare the Law vnto the people Lastly and this reason striketh dead because Caiphas the high Priest erred perniciously and taught most execrable blasphemy when he denied Christ to be the sonne of God A true Messias of the world for as soone as Christ had sayd hereafter shall yée sée the sonne of man sitting on the right hand of the power of God and come in the cloudes of heauen The high Priest rent his cloathes saying hée hath blasphemed what haue we any more néed of witnesses behold now yée haue heard his blasphemy Theoph. I am fully satisfied in this point God for whose sake ye haue taken this great labour giue you reward for the same Now if it please you there is another question or two which I thinke vnanswerable I would willingly propound them if it may stand with your fauour Remig. I sée you desirous to know the truth and therefore I am not weary of any paines taken in that behalfe Let vs heare your supposed vnanswerable questions in Gods holy name for whose glory and your good I will answere sincerely as before Theoph. My first question is of the succession of the Popes of Rome for no Church is able truly to shewe their succession as the Pope his Cardinals and Iesuites tell vs saue onely the Church of Rome Remig. I hope in God though indéed it be not a thing easily done to make it as plaine to you as I haue done the other question or rather God in me that our English Church can shew a better succession then can the Church of Rome CHAP. 4. Of the Succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome Theophilus NO Church in the vniuersall world is able to shew a perpetuall succession of her Bishops without interruption saue onely the Church of Rome and therefore seeing God hath appointed placed in his visible Church as the Apostle teacheth vs a cōrinual successiō of Bishops vnto the worlds end the Church of Rome and none but the Church of Rome is or can bee the true Church of God Remig. This indéed is a reason so strong in the iudgement of Papists that none liuing can truly answere the same Howbeit when the difficulty thereof shall bée truly examined to the bottome it will be found of no force at all but as light as a feather Theoph. Will you deny the Apostles doctrine wil you not grant as S. Paul telleth vs that there must be Bishops and Priests in the Church till the worlds end Remig. I am very willing to grant euery truth neither will I deny that there haue béene are and shall bée Bishops and Priests or Pastors and teachers in this visible Church militant on earth vntill Christs second aduent and generall doome of the world Theoph. Well there must be Bishops and Priests or Pastors and Teachers as the Apostle termeth them euen to the consummation of Saints and end of the world Now sir you are not able say our Doctors our Iesuits our Cardinals our Popes to shew or name any Church in the world but the Church of Rome which hath alwaies had in it these Pastors and Doctors from Christs visible departure to this day Remig. I answere that succession is of two sorts to wit materiall and formall Materiall is of the persons and the places formal of the faith and doctrine Touching the succession formal which is the principall and from whence the denomination must bée deriued the Church of Rome cannot chalenge it as it is already proued for if yée remember I haue proued both soundly and plainly that many Bishops of Rome haue taught false doctrine and that not onely as priuate men but euen as publike persons in their iudiciall definitions and decrées and consequently that the true proper and formall succession can no way bée truly verified of the Church of Rome Theoph. That is very true which yee now say it cannot bee denyed but still it seemeth true that the materiall succession perteineth onely to the Church of Rome Remig. Marke well what I shall sincerely deliuer in this behalfe Saint Clement whose epistles the Papists magnifie when they séeme to make for their purpose testifieth for himselfe that Saint Peter appointed him to bée his successor Irenaeus Epiphanius Eusebius and the canon of the Popish Masse do all with vniforme consent place Linus and Cletus before the sayd Clement But for all this Sophronius Metaphrastes and the Popish Pontificall which cannot lye affirme stoutly and peremptorily that Saint Peter was liuing after Lynus This variety so troubled the learned Papist Nauclerus that he was enforced to coine this new and vntimely hatched distinction viz. that Saint Peter did indéed appoint Clement to be his successor but the sayd Clement perceiuing that it would bee a thing pernicious to the Church if one Bishop should choose another to bée his successor yéelded vp his right and so Linus was elected in his roome The bare recitall of this imaginary solution is a sufficient confutation thereof for as you sée hée taketh vpon him to controll S. Peter Theoph This variety among Catholicke Writers is strange and it is more strange that Clement should alter and change S. Peters constitution But it surpasses all the rest that any thing which S. Peter ordeined could bee pernicious to the Church Remig. This is an euident demonstration that Romish succession is as a nose of waxe and as vncertaine as the winde but I will shew you greater wonders and by Gods help so vnfold
doing I must incurre the crime of sacriledge What a thing is this silly Papists are brought into greater thraldome perplexity then euer was Buridanus himselfe or the poore beast his Asse Theoph. I haue bin too long seduced with paltry popery I see it is but flat cozenage and a meere tricke of Legierdemaine Henceforth I renounce it and will only obiect my difficulties to be better confirmed in the truth But sir I do not yet vnderstand the other point of doctrine which you obserued out of Nauclerus Remig. It is cléere out of Nauclerus that the Cardinals popish Bishops Priests and Lay-people of Rome committed flat Idolatry in the time of their Woman-pope Iohn who for the honour of S. Peter as you haue heard already brought forth a child in the altitude of her popedome Thus you shall vnderstand the same Nauclerus telleth vs plainely that their woman-pope could neither make Priests nor yet consecrate their Eucharist To this doctrine let vs adde these points First that all Papists must adore their Bread-god in euery popish Masse Secondly that by popish faith none but popish Priests can turne bread into Christs body Thirdly y◠all Priests made by their woman-pope were méere Lay-men This foundation thus firmely layd we may erect without danger of falling this high and lofty building viz that all y◠Cardinals Bishops Prists and Lay-people who euer heard the Masses of their women-pope or of the Bishops and Priests made by her did commit flat Idolatry at every one of the sayd Masses the reason is euident because such Priests were indéed méere Lay-men and so could not change the bread and make it God almighty and consequently the spectators and adorers that were present adored bakers bread for the euer-liuing God All this is sound Popish faith and doctrine Theoph. It is abhomination in Gods sight but what shall we say to M. Nauclerus he seemeth to purge free the worshippers by reason of inuincible ignorance Remig. Our Iesuite S. R. in his pretensed answere to the downefall of Popery iumpeth in opinion with Nauclerus he fréely granteth in the place quoted in y◠margent that there is no consecration and consequently no God almighty when the Priest wanteth both actuall and vertuall intention or omitteth any essentiall word of their sayd consecration but withall hee excuseth the worshippers of bread for God almighty because of their inuincible ignorance I returne this answere to them both viz. that this distinction of ignorance inuented in Popish Schooles hath no foundation in Gods word neither yet in the pure Cannens of the Popes law For the former the Prophet Ezechiel or rather God by the meuth of Ezechiel telleth vs plainely and in flat termes that though the watch-man giue not y◠people warning but suffer them to liue in ignorance yet shall they be guilty and perish in their sinues Yea Christ himselfe telleth vs that who knoweth the law and doth it not shall not be punished alone but he in like manner shall bée punished for the transgression that knew it not This mitigation onely is alotted to the ignorant that his punishment shall be more tollerable and hee beaten with fewer stripes For the latter the Popes owne Canons teach vs that neither the ignorance of the law of nature nor of the law diuine can excuse vs when we offend against the same Yet true it is that in humane affaires and ciuill iudgements inuincible ignorance will excuse but Gods iudgements and his waies are not like to mans they are farre different from them man can but iudge the externall act but God searcheth the very heart and veines man is subiect to Gods lawes but God is aboue both mans lawes and his owne and hath also full power to dispense with the same There yet remaineth a mortall and vncureable wound in Popish Succession at Rome which I hold very necessary for you to know for your better confirmation in the truth Theoph. For Christs sake take the paines to vnfold it to me for nothing is so deare to my soule as the knowledge of the truth Remig. The incurable wound may be reputed the second wonderment of the world this is it marke it well The general Councell of Basil deposed Pope Eugenius for his contumacie and chose Amadaeus who was named Foelix the first and put him in his roome this notwithstanding Eugenius crept againe into the Popedome without any Canonicall election and continued in the place as Pope Theoph. I do not well conceiue or vnderstand what you would inferre hereupon I therefore humbly craue your larger explication thereof Remig. The Councell of Basil was holden in Anno 1439. and summoned Eugenius to appeare before it then and there to yéeld an account of such matters as the Councell had to obiect against him but he would not appeare and therefore for his contuinacie disobedience contempt of the Councels summons he was by the authority of the sayd Councell deposed and Amadaeus was made the Pope or Bishop of Rome The Schisme betwéene Amadaeus and Eugenius continued about nine yeares vntill Foelix was content to resigne to Nicholas and then it ended Now sir all y◠Cardinals Bishops Priests Deacons who afterward sprong of Eugenius possessing Peters chaire without Canonicall election that is of the Church of Rome are illegitimate irregular schismatikes vsurpers and not lawfull gouerners of the Church by popish faith and doctrine Theoph. One refuge the Papists would seeme to haue herein viz. that the counsell could not depose the Pope which if it once be proued against them their backs are at the wall and their Popish Romish succession Remig. It is without all question that a general Councell was and is aboue the Pope no learned papist euer did or this day doth deny the same the Popes themselues the Iesuits and Iesuited crew onely excepted Cardinalis Cameracensis Abbas Panormitanus Nicholaus Cusanus Adrianus Papa Cardinalis Florentinus Iohannes Gersonus Iacobus Almaynus Abulensis Alphonsus the Deuines of Paris and all others except euer before excepted doe resolutely and constantly defend as an vndoubted truth grounded vpon the holy scriptures that a generall Councell is aboue the Pope the practicall procéedings of papists euery where haue yéelded vs an assured argument thereof for first the Councell of Basil as we haue séene deposed Pope Eugemus and chose Amadaeus in his roome Secondly the generall Councell of Constance which was celebrated about 15. yéeres before the Councell of Basill did publikely depose thrée Popes Iohn 22. Gregory 12. and Benedict 13. and those Martin the fifth and made him Pope which things doubtlesse these Councels hauing many very learned men in them would neuer haue attempted so publikely and so resolutely as they did if it had not béene a resolued and knowen case and truth throughout the Christian world Theoph. The case is cleere and euident to euery indifferent reader but giue me leaue I pray you to tell what the papists say
that hold preach or defend the contrary this excommunication Pope Sixtus the fourth thundred out in his Extrauagant in the yéere 1474. by which practicall procéedings and doctrine we may easily espie the vncertainety of the Popes faith and religion as also his ignorance in the high mysteries of popish doctrine for though he cannot erre iudicially in matters of doctrine as the papists must beléeue yet can he not decide this easie question whether the Virgin Mary was conceiued in originall sinne or not but Aquinas the Popes angelicall doctor and canonized Saint whose doctrine two Popes Vrbanus the fourth and Innocentius the fifth haue confirmeth to be sound and true affirmeth resolutely that she was conceiued in originall sinne tell me now what ye thinke of the Popes succession at Rome Theoph. I see flatly and euidently that by popish doctrine faith and religion we cannot this day tell who are true Bishops of Rome indeed and consequently that the succession deriued from them is of no credit or force at all but yet by your fauour I desire your further resolution to such shewes and colours of succession as they pretend for the Church of Rome Saint Austen saith say they that the succession of Priests euen from Saint Peter to these daies kept him in the bosome of the Church so Optatus Tertullianus others do often alledge stand vpon the succession of Bishops as an argument of the truth Remig. It is true that Saint Austen made a great account of the succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome and my selfe also all learned men I thinke doe iumpe with Saint Austen in that his opinion for the resolution of which obiection sundry obseruations already Proued are to be well remembred First that the Bishops of Rome were in the beginning many of them holy Martyre who gaue their liues for the testimony of our Lord Iesus Secondly that they ioyned formall succession with materiall vntill Saint Austens dayes and long after Thirdly that the Church of Rome by little and little swarued from the truth and declined in many points of doctrine from the auncient receiued faith Fourthly that the latter Bishops of Rome haue decreed publickely against the knowen faith in so much as some of them haue béene condemned with the sound of the Trumpets other some haue béene conuicted of Arrianisme others of Nestorianisme others of flat Atheisme others to haue crept into Peters chaire as they terme it by flat Simony others haue occupied the place by violent intrusion others by homage done to the diuel of hell Fifthly that faith and honest dealing was now decaied in the Church of Rome and long before the daies of Carranza and Platina brought to that miserable estate that euery ambitious fellow might inuade Peters seate Sixthly that by popish doctrine and vniforme assertions of best approued popish writers succession in the Church of Rome is so doubtfull that they cannot proue themselues this day to be true Bishops indeed I say by popish doctrine because my selfe doe hold them true Bishops though very wicked and vngodly men of which point I shall haue occasion to speake of more at large by and by my answere therefore in briefe is this viz that the Bishops of Rome in Saint Austens time ioyned formall succession with materiall which if the Bishops of Rome would this day performe all godly Christians would now ioyne with them as Saint Austen did in his time for as Saint frene say we ought to obey those Priests that with the succession kéepe the word of truth Theoph. Saint Paul saith plainely that there must bee Bishops and Pastors in the church vntill the worlds end whereupon it followeth say the Papists whom now I haue vpon good grounds renounced that you Protestants haue no Church at all for before Luther departed from them all Bishops and Priests for many yeares together embraced their Romish religion This obiection say our Iesuites and Iesuited Popelings doth so gall the Protestants as they cannot tell in the world what answere to frame thereunto Remig. I answere first that we are the true reformed Catholikes as is already proued Secondly that Pastors Doctors as S. Paul saith haue euer béene in the Church are at this present and shall be to the worlds end Thirdly that albeit the visible Church cannot want materiall succession the continuance whereof Christ hath promised yet cannot that succession without formall yéeld any sound argument of true faith and religion For which respect the famous Papist Nicholaus de Lyra after he hath told vs that many Popes haue swarued from the faith and become flat Apostataes concludeth in these expresse words propter quod Ecclesia consistit in illis personis in quibus est notitia vera et confessio fidei veritatis By reason whereof the Church consisteth in those persons in whom there is true knowledge and confession of the faith and verity Thus writeth this learned popish Fryer telling vs resolutely y◠though there must be euermore a visible Church with visible Pastors Doctors in it yet those visible Pastors Doctors both may swarue haue de facto swarued from the true faith religion and that therefore the Church indeed consisteth of the predestinate and elect children of God whose faith shall neuer faile this poynt you haue heard so pithely approued as is able to satisfie euery in different reader Theoph. The Iesuites say that howsoeuer you wrangle about your formal succession yet it is cleere that you haue no material succession at all vnlesse you tearme it material succession when meere Lay-men occupy the roomes of lawful Bishops for none may take vpon them or intrude thēselues into the holy ministery but such as are lawfully called thereunto as Aaron was yet all the world can tell you that all your Ministers Bishops Priests and Deacons in the time of King Edward and Queene Elizabeth and now of King IAMES haue no other orders consecration at all but such as they receiued of our Romish Bishops indeede Remig. Our succession is both materiall and formall Christian and Apostolicall as which is consonant to the holy Scriptures and to the vsuall practise of the primitiue Church For first our Bishops can proue their Doctrine by the scriptures and by the testimonies of best approued popish writers as we haue séene already Secondly our Bishops haue mission and imposition of hands according to the practise Apostolical and of all approued antiquity Thirdly our Bishops are made in such forme and order as they haue euer béene accustomed a few popish superstious and beggerly ceremonies omitted which by little little had of late yeares crept into the Church that is to say by frée election of the Chapiter by consecration of the Arch-bishop and other his associates and by the admission of the Prince Theoph. Saint Epiphanius inueigheth bitterly against one Zachaeus who being but a Lay-man as your Puritaines be presumed impudently to
vs that Constantine the great at his departure from Rome to Constantinople gaue the Bishop of Rome and his successors his crowne and all his royall dignitie both in the Citie of Rome and in Italie and in all the west parts which goodly story inuented for the Popes aduancement we sée by the constant verdit of these foure learned Papists to be nothing else indéede but a lying fable for the the Bishops of Rome were stil subiect to the Emperors receiued their authoritie and iurisdiction by their letters patents aboue 340. yeares euen vntill Benedict the second to which I adde that manie of the popish Cannons are of as good credit as Esops fables Remig. This is a point of great consequence which I should neuer haue espied but by your relation Theoph. I would wish you likewise to obserue that the Emperours Constantinus Iustinianus and others yéelding vp their soueraigne rights to the Bishops of Rome vpon a fond zeale without knowledge opened the window to all antichristian tyrannie for in short time after the Romish Bishops became so arrogant and Lordly that they tooke vpon them to dispose Royall scepters and to translate them to their pleasures Theoph. It is a memorable obseruation I shall keep it in remembrance but let me still reason for the Papists as if I were one of them for when all difficulties are answered I shall be the stronger in the truth The Church of God cannot be without Bishops and Priests as the Apostle recordeth and your selfe graunteth but so it is that when he first reformed the Church as you terme it yee neither had any Bishops nor any Priests of your owne neither could ye finde any in any other place but onely with vs and in our Church when Martin Luther went out from vs our Church therefore and none but ours is the true Church of God as which onely hath the true succession Apostolicall Remig. I answere first that our succession in the Church of England is farre better then theirs of Rome for theirs of Rome as we haue heard and séene is most doubtfull and vncertain but ours of England so constant and so assured as no deniall can be made thereof I proue it because in Anno 596. Gregory the great sent Augustine the Monke with Iustus Melitus and others as our approued Cronicles do relate to preach the Gospell to the Saxons who were kindly receiued of King Ethelbert and he conuerted to the Christian faith gaue to the same Austen the City of Canterbury since which time our Church of England is able to proue her perpetuall succession of Bishops without schisme or interruption at all albeit the Church of Rome as is already proued is not able to performe halâ—e so much Secondly that though the visible Churches were euery where greatly stained and polluted with many grosse errors superstitions and abuses at such time as M. Luther began a Christian reformation yet for all that the Bishops and Priests of the popish Churches were still true Bishops for their calling albeit otherwise very wicked men and consequently that our Bishops and Priests though descended created and made of such deformed popish Prelats are true Bishops and Prists indéede Theoph. If our Bishops and Priests were made of theirs then must either theirs bee good or ours as bad as theirs and so we shall haue no true Bishops at all Remig. Marke well what I say that yée may vnderstand the saint The Philosopher saith that one may bée a good Citizen though a bad man Euen so say I that though the Papists were wicked men and the Popish Bishops that created our Bishops foully polluted both in life and doctrine yet were they still true Christians true Bishops and consequently true members of the visible Church for they still professed held and maintained the chiefe fundamentall points of religion of God of the blessed Trinity of Christ and his two natures of his death passion of his resurrection and assention of the generall doome of all the rest comprised in the summe of religion which we call the Apostles Créede and therefore though they grieuously wounded and in a manner killed themselues by their errours corruptions superstitions and abuses yet in regard of the truth which they kept coÌ„stantly there remained in them some life of Christianity They wanted legges and armes and had their bodies and soules corrupted with many pestilent diseases but they did still draw breath and were not wholy dead We read in the Apostolicall history that there were some that beléeued who being of the heresie of the Pharisées did still hold the ceremonies of the law and vrged others to be circumcised The Prophet Dauid was sore wounded with adultery and murther but yet he still continued the child of God and Peter cursed and sware that hée knew not Christ who for all that still beleeued in Christ to the end Theoph. How can they be both good and bad Bishops at once it seemeth to me a thing impossible Remig. I answere first that the same persons may aswell be both good and bad at once as the same man may be both a father and a sonne at once and yet do all Logicians grant that this latter may be effected with all facility For one and the same man may at one and the same time be both a father in respect of his own child a sonne in respect of his father who is Grandfather to the sayd child Secondly that there is as great disparity betwéene a true Bishop and a good Bishop as there is betwéene a true man and a good man but as he is a true man that hath the nature of a true man how bad soeuer he be in faith life conuersation as Turkes Iewes Traitors Heretickes Apostataes euen so are they true Bishops of the visible Church who haue their calling places iurisdiction allotted them by the same Church how bad soeuer they be in other respects Theoph. Those Popish Bishops that made and created our Bishops and Priests in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths reigne ordeyned and consecrated them after another manner then they are this day and euer haue beene since that time ergo either must their Bishops or else all our Bishops the first onely excepted who were created after the popish manner be false counterfeit and no true Bishops indeed Remig. Neither their Bishops nor ours are false and conterfeit but both true and perfect Bishops in euery essentiall and necessary poynt pertaining to a Bishop Theoph. Theirs were made by the authority of the Pope yours by the authority royall of your gracious Princesse of famous memory Theirs with Oyle and Chrisme and many other ceremonies which yours doe not vse at all Remig. All the things by you named are méere extrinsecall and not of the essence and nature of a Bishop or of a Priest Theoph. Either must they sinne in vsing Oyle Chrisme and other ceremonies or you in reiecting
cut off and to be cast into theirâ—iuer Tyber Meane you Pope Iohn yâ— twelfth his father Albericus being a man of great power and might enforced the Nobles to take an oath that after the death of Pope Agâ—pitus they would promote his sonne Octauianus to the Popedome The oath was accomplished and he was named Iohn He was a great hunter and a man of licencious life he kept women openly to the notorious scandall of the Church insomuch that some of the Cardinals wrote to Oâ—to then King of the Saxons to come and besiege Rome and so to afflict him for his sins Which the Pope perceiuing commanded the Cardinals nose to be cut off that gaue that counsell and his hand that wrote the letters Speake you of Pope Boniface the seuenth he was made Pope by the Romans after they had thrâ—tâ—ed Benedictus the sixt who afterward not able to tarrie in the City robbed S. Peters Church of all the â—â—asure in it and fled to Constantinople Means you Pope Benedict the eight he was seene after his death as it were corporally riding vpon a blacke horse the Diuell he confessed that he was in great torment therefore desired some money to be giuen to the poore because all that he had giuen the poore aforetime was gotten by robbery and extortion Meane you Pope Iohn the woman she belying her sexe and clad in mans attire was with great admiration of her sharpe wit and singular learning chosen to be the Pope of Rome But shortly after by the familiar helpe of her beloued companion she brought forth the homely fruits of her Popedome Meane you Pope Boniface the eight he made a constitution in which he called himselfe both Lord spirituall Lord temporal of the whole world whereupon he required Philip the French King to acknowledg that he held his Kingdom of him which when the King scorned to doe he gaue his Kingdome to him thatcouldget it This Pope entred as a Foxe reigned as a Wolf and died as Dog What shal I say of your Monks or Fryers Pope Siluester the second was first a Monke a FreÌ„chman borne Gilbeâ—â—us by name he promised homage to the Diuell so long as he should accompliâ—h his desires who being very ambitious did so often expresse his desire to the Diuell as he made homage to him He was first made Archbishop of Rhemes then of Rauennes at the last Pope of Rome for the Diuell knowing his ambitious minde brought him to honour by degrées All this to be most true these Popish writers of high estéeme euen in the Church of Rome viz. Geniblacensis Marianus Scotus Baâ—â—holemeus Carranza Martinus Polonus Philippus Bergomensis Bapt. Platina Palmerius haue publishes it in printed books to the view of the whole world which doubtlesse they would neuer haue done if the truth it selfe had not enforced their pennes thereunte For the holy life of your Iesuites and Iesuited brâ—â—d I will say nothing their deare bréethren the secular Priests haâ—â— related that matter sufficiently in many bookes late extant in print against them they charge them with pride ambition couetousnesse cozenage theft cruelty murther treason and what not yea of Frier Parsons they giue this testimony in particular viz. by Parsons platformes secular Priests must depend vpon Blacwel and Blackwel vpon Garnet and Garnet vpon Parsons Parsons the Priests bastard vpon the Diuel Read the Anatomy of Popish tiranny and there then shalt find this truth with great variety of like matter I let passe what Polidorus Virgilius Abbas Panormitanus Pope Pius himselfe before called Aeneas Syluius haue written of the filthy life of Popish Priests Monkes Friers and Nunnes Peruse the suruey of popery and the triall of the new religion and that done the truth will shew it selfe herein For if S. Austin said truly that in his time all was full of humane superstitions with the seruile burdens whereof men were so pressed as the Iewes estate vnder their legall ceremonies was more tollerable then the state of Christians Truely may we say much more of the last and worst daies Theoph. S. Peter S. Paul deliuered the Catholique saith to the Church of Rome and the succession from S. Peter and S. Paul kept S. Augustine in the vnity of the Church So writeth S. Austen of himselfe Remigius True it is first that both S. Peter and S. Paul preached at Rome and for the testimony of Christs Gospell were there put to death both on one day not both in one yeare the one beheaded the other crucified none well studied in the auncient fathers histories of the Church will or can this deny true it is secondly that many Bishops of Rome were holy men who constanly yéelded vp their liues as become holy martyrs for the testification of the truth of Christs Gospell true it is â—â—irdly that S. Austen saith of himselfe that the succession of Priests from S. Peter was one thing amongst many that kept him in the Church true it is fourthly that the maiâ—sty of the Roman Empire together with the great liberality which the Romans exhibited to the Martyrs in exile and otherwise afflicted yéelded no small honour to the City and Church of Rome and hereupon I will it not deny it came to passe that the auncient councels had euer great respect to the dignity and excellency of Cities in the distribution of Episcopall and Patriarchall seates hereupon it likewise came that the West and Occidentall Churches not so the East-churches did greatly reuerence the Church of Rome and many times to appease controuâ—â—sies and dissentions had recourse vnto it as to the mother-Mother-church and auncient nurse of the faith which things S. Augustin beholding together with the succession not barely of place or persons but of Bishops in faith â—â—ctrine and holy conuersation was confirmed in the vnity of the Church for so as then so now nothing doth or can yéeld greater comfort or solace to a Christian heart then to behold the lines of Gods ministers to be agreable to their doctrine and their doctrine to be consonant to the word of God for what man would not rather in any difficulty haue recourse to that Minister and Preacher whose life is agréeable to his doctrine then vnto him who though he preach pleasantly yet liueth not accordingly None doubtlesse For this respect said the holy Apostle to the Romans that through their euill life the word of God was blasphemed among the Gentiles and for this respect likewise are the Bereâ—ms highly commended in holy writ in that they examined the Apostles doctrine by the liue and rule of Gods word yea for this respect doth the holy vessell of our Lord Iesus very grauely admonish the Hebrwes to consider the end of their conuersation who haue preached Gods word vnto them but for all this no auncient councell no holy father no history Ecclesiasticall did euer ascribe this supereminent prerogatiue to the Bishop of
Rome that he could no erre in his iudiciall and definitiue resolutions neither euer was the Bishop of that Sea acknowledged for the sole and onely iudge in controuersies of religion this is to be so one onely testimony of S. Cyprian will or at least may suffice for S. Cyprian a very auncient father a great learned Bishop and amost blessed martyr although he highly reuerenced the Church of Rome for respects now related and consequently the Bishops thereof yet was he so farre from acknowledging the falssy now vsurped prerogatiue of the Bishop of Rome that his faith could not faile that he flatly reiected his opinion contemned his definitiue sentence and decided his iudiciall decrées calling him blind buzzard and arrogaÌ„t Prelat The like I might alledge cut of many famous papists Adrianus Panormit nus Alphonâ—us Gersonus Ockamus and others but this â—onuâ—ceth that neither S. Austin nor any auncieÌ„t father in their time nor the Bishop of Rome did obiect against S. Cyprian that the said Bishop could not erre Theoph. This is a wonderment to me that our Popes Monkes and Iesuites haue beene so licentious and wicked liuers but seeing so many famous Popish writers and the late secular Romish Priests haue in printed bookes published to the whole world testified so much of and against them it maketh me to stagger and to doubt of the Romith religion although informer times I haue high reuerenced the same for if the Bishop of Rome had beene priuiledged not to erre not onely the Bishop of Rome but the holy fathers also of that age would haue obiected the same against S. Cyprian vndoubtedly it cannot be denied Remig. You neither are nor euer were a more earnest zealous papist then my selfe haue béene but I heartily thanke God for it I now behold as clearely as the noone day the absurdities and abhominations of late vpstart popery the case is so cleare as euery child of God may with all facility perceiue the same Theoph. Why doe you call it late vpstart popery it hath continued from S. Peter and euery Pope is his successor Remig. This is one mighty point which hath not onely seduced and be witched you but both many others and myne owne selfe aswell as you I truely cald it late vpstart popery because of ten parts it scarscely retaineth two parts of the old Roman religion which S. Peter and S Paul by their preaching deliuered to the Church of Rome yea since the Iesuites began which was about the yeare 1537. popish religion is ten times more absurd then it was afore Theoph. The Catholikes hold constantly that the true faith and religion which S. Peter and S. Paul preached at Rome hath euer continued at Rome vntill this present day and that no other Church in the Christian world is able to shew a perpetuall and vninterrupted succession of their Bishops and priests saue onely the Church of Rome Remig. This is my answere First that the word Catholike is an holy and auncient name giuen in the beginning to all Christians and faithfull people in the world and therefore is it this day highly reuerenced and continually rehearsed in the publicke prayers of our English Church but there be two sortes of Catholikes the one deformed the other reformed which reformed Catholikes are all the true members of our English Church and all such as consesse and embrace the same faith and doctrine with them Secondly that the faith and doctrine which S. Peter and S. Paul preached to the old Romans remaineth at Rome indéede but how no otherwise doubtlesse then an old beggars cloake remaineth still to the beggar though it haue an hundred clouts of diuerse colours added and fastened one to another Thirdly that our English Church is able to shew a better and sounder perpetuall and vninterrupted succession of her Bishops and Priests then the late vpstact Church of Rome Theoph. What are you English-men Catholikes you are say we at Rome flat heretikes and apostataes as whom many late Popes of Rome haue accursed to the deepe pit of hell Remig. You know there is a sort of Fryers at Rome commonly called the Franciscans which sect was hatched and borne in the yéere 1206. who haue by little and little swarued from their first institution and become so licentious and dissolute that another sect of Fryers commonly called Capuchéenes which thing you béeing a Citizen of Rome knowe aswell as my selfe haue accused them to haue depraued and fowly peruerted the rules of their auncient order sect and profession in so much as they cannot this day with safe consciences embrace the same and therefore haue they reformed their said sect and doe terme themselues the reformed true Franciscans indéede this if it be duely considered is doubtlesse this day our case in our Church of noble England as also of many other reformed Churches within the Christian world for as the Capuchéenes hold fast kéepe still and constantly defend all the auncient rules of the old and true Franciscans and duely reiect and abandon that which by little little crept into their sect supertition abuses neglect of discipline and dissolute life euen so is it this day in our Church of England she holdeth fast kéepeth still and most constantly deserdâ—th all and euery rite of the old Roman religion highly reuerencing the same as Catholike and Apostolike doctrine Shee onely reiecteth and abandoneth heresies errors superstitions and intollerable abuses by little and little brought into the Church the enemy the dinel hauing sowen tares while the carelesse pastors were a sléepe For neither did most noble Quéene Elizabeth in her time neither doth our most pious religious Soueraigne King IAMES who most happily raigneth ouer vs set vp or bringe into the Church any new religion but he as Quéene Elizabeth before onely reformeth purgeth the Church after the holy examples of King Dauid King Salomon King Iosaphat King Ezechias King Iosias and other godly and zealous Kings in their daies and carefully reduceth it to the primitiue order and to the purity of the old Roman religion This to be so none can in conscience deny that will with a single eye this day behold thegodly setled Canons of this Church of England Theoph. If you were able to proue vnto me that the Church of Rome did any time swarne or reuolt from the old Roman religion I would doubtlesse forsake the late romish doctrine as you terme it and ioyfully yeelde vnto the truth Remig. I shall proue it by the power of God and assistance of his holy spirit before the end of this our conference if you like to stay to the end thereof and be not wearied with my discourse Theoph. God reward you for your Christian kindnesse and this paineful trauaile for my sake your talke is so comfortable to myne heart that I shall not be weary thereof though I should stay an whole yeare in your company but I feare me I shall
same so pithily as I must perforce yeelde thereunto I will proceed by your fauour to be resolued in other doubts Remig. Leaue nothing vnsayd which possibly can bée deuised or aduised for the supposed prerogatiues of your Pope Obiection fourth Theoph. The Apostle telleth vs that the Church cannot erre and he proues it because it is the pillar and ground of truth Remig. It is true that the Apostle saith so and my selfe do willingly admit the doctrine and humbly reuerence the same I most willingly grant yâ— Christs church cannot erre in matters of faith we differ not in the nature of the thing markewel my words but in the modification and application of the thing that is to say wèe all grant on all sides that the Church cannot erre but we differ in the application of our grant what Church it is that cannot erre what Church meane you M. Theophilus Theoph. I meane as all Catholikes doe of the Pope and Church of Rome Remig. I told you that you are but bastards and deformed Catholikes as your owne Capuchéenes do tell your deformed Franciscans and withall I tell you that the Pope or Church of Rome which is with Papists all one hath de facto erred egregiously as is already proued Nay it is vnpossible that the Apostle should meane of your Pope or Church of Rome I proue it many wayes First because the famous Popish Doctor Iohannes Gersonus hath fréely told vs as we haue heard already related the the Bishop of Rome hath de facto erred not onely in his priuate opinion but also in his publike and iudiciall definitions that therefore we haue no infallible Iudge vpon earth sauing these two viz. the whole Congregation of the faithfull and a generall Councell sufficiently representing the same where I wish you to marke attentiuely the word Sufficiently because it is very emphatical â— of great moment Secondly because the Popish Doctor Syluester Pryeras a diuine so learned that he is by them so named Absolutus Theologus confirmeth the opinion and doctrine of M. Gerson the famous Chauncelor of Paris in these expresse words Et sic intellige glossam dicentem quod Ecclesia quae errare non potest dicitur non papa sed congregatio fidelium quae scilicet tenet fidem quam Petrus eum alijs populis docuit And thus must the glosse be vnderstood which saith that yâ— Church which cannot erre is not the Pope but the congregation of the faithfull that is such as hold firmely that faith which Peter with other godly people taught Thirdly because Panormitanus that famous Popish Canonist Abbot Arch-bishop Cardinall for he was all foure and therefore of high estéeme with the Pope and Church of Rome iumpeth with the other learned Papists Gerson and Syluester and stoutly coÌ„firmeth their doctrine These are his expresse words Nam in concernentibus sidem c. For concerning matters of faith euen the iudgemeÌ„t of one that is a méere lay-man ought to be preferred before the sentence of the Pope if that lay-man could bring Better reasons out of the old and newe Testament then did the Pope And it skilleth not if one say that a Councell cannot erre because Christ prayed for his Church that it should not faile for I say that although a generall Councell represent the whole vniuersall Church yet in truth there is not truly the vniuersall Church but representatiuely For the vniuersall Church which is it that cannot erre consisteth of the collection of all the faithful Whereupon all the faithful in the world make this Church vniuersal whereof Christ is the head The Pope is the Uicar of Christ but not truly the head of yâ— Church as noteth the glosse vpon the Clementines which glosse saith notably that when the Pope is dead the Church wanteth not an head and this is that Church which cannot erre whereupon it is possible that the true faith of Christ might remaine in one alone and so it may be truely said that the faith faileth not in the Church Christ before his passion prayed for Peter that his faith should not faile therefore the Church is not said to faile neither to erre so long as the true faith abideth in one onely thus writeth this famous and learned papist Fourthly because the Popes owne deare glosse vpon his owne dâ—â—rées doth most liuely describe that Church which cannot erre to be the Congregation of the faithfull for thus is it there written in expresse termes Quaero de qua Ecclesia intelligas quod hic dicitur quod non possit errare si de ipso Papa certum est quod Papa errare potest respondeo ipsa congregatio fidelium hic dicitur Ecclesia talis Ecclesia non potest non esse I aske thee O Pope Leuci of what Church thou vnderstandest that which thou tellest vs in this place to wit that the Church cannot erre for if thou vnderstand it of the Pope himselfe it is certaine that the Pope may erre I therefore answere that the Church is here taken for the congregation of the faithfull and such a Church can neuer erre indéede Fiftly because the popish ceremoniall practise in the holy wéeke while they put out all the candles saue one doth liuely expresse vnto vs that the Church of Rome and Bishop there may erre indéede for thereby the romish Church doth giue vs to vnderstand that the light of faith was extinguished in all generally saue only in the blessed virgin Mary that most holy mother of true God and true man and so their vsuall yéerely practise thrée daies together in the wéeke afore Easter doth vtterly condemne the faith of the Pope and of the Church of Rome Sixthly because S. Austen and S. Anselme doe both of them so expound S. Pauls words the ground of this obiection these are S. Austens expresse words secundum ergo sabbathi c. therefore we may not vnderstaÌ„d the second of the sabbath to be any other then the Church of Christ yet the Church of Christ in the saints the Church of Christ in those which are not ouercome with the tentations of this wicked world for they are worthy the name of Firmament therefore the Church of Christ is called the Firmament in those that are firme which is saith he the Church of the liuing God the piller and Firmament of truth The like saying hath the same holy father in many other places but especially where he writeth against the Donatists Anselmus an auncient father and well approued of the papists doth follow Saint Austens interpretation these are his words Domus in qua Deus habitat c. the house in which God dwelleth is the whole congregation of the faithfull who are to be taught diuersly and the same Church is in the perfect a pillar that is sublime straight inconcussible supporting lifting vp the yonger sort and in the same perfect it is the firmament of truth because in
the truth of Popish mangled materiall succession that you wil loath and detest the same for euer The famous Papist Onuphrius Panuinius reckoneth vp thirty Schismes in the Church of Rome But I for the present content my self with two whereof their owne déere Fryer Bartholomeus Carranza can instruct them sufficiently The former Schisme endured for the space of 64. yeares during which time their godly Popedome was at a vnion in France not one day at Rome albeit as yée know your Pope Cardinals and Iesuited Popelings beare the world in hand that God placed their holy sâ— supposed seate at Rome In the latter Schisme of the twaine thrée of their holy Bishops were Popes at one and the selfe same time to wit Iohn the 24 of that name Bennet the 13. and Gregory the 12. Out of which discourse two things of great moment are to bée obserued First that it is a méere foolery to chalenge any singular prerogatiue by Saint Peters death at Rome Againe that that succession cannot but bée vncertaine which is deriued from thrée Bishops striuing and grinning for the Popedome as dogges do for a bone Theoph. The Popes or Bishops of Rome chalenge S. Peters priuiledges because he died at Rome Remig. What must Bishops liuing 64. yeares in France be priuiledged at Rome because S. Peter dyed there better reason it were to grant the chéekest prerogatiue to the Bishops of Hierusalem because Christ our Lord and maister dyed there Theoph. Although three did striue at once for the Popedome yet could there be but one Pope at one and the same time Remig. Two no small absurdities doe perforce arise from hence The one that the succession of the Popes of Rome whereof they glory somuch is very doubtfull and vncertaine The other that the Church of Rome was many yeares without a head and so by popish doctrine without an infalible iudge in matters of their faith But I will tell you a greater mystery A woman is not capable of holy orders as Christs Apostle assureth vs nor of any Ecclesiasticall function in the Church and consequently the Popish succession which is deriued from our holy mistresse Pope Iohn cannot possibly bée of force Here the Church of Rome hath vtterly forsaken her succession and is not comparable to our Church of England in that behalfe Theoph. If it were possible for a woman to bee inthronized into Peters chaire at Rome then as you say popish succession were ouerthrowne indeede it cannot be gainsaid But such a thing neither hath beene neither is neither euer can be till the worlds end Remig. What doe you thinke it a thing impossible to be done an huge number of famous popish writers doe resolutelie contest it for a constant truth Theoph. If you be able this to proue indeede henceforth popish succession shall neuer come with in my creed Remig. Sigebertus GeniblaseÌ„sis Marianus Scotus Matthaeus Palmerius Martinus Polonus Philippus Bergomensis Baptista Platina Bartholomaeus Carranza IohaÌ„nes Nauclerus are my substantial witnesses in this weighty point of Popery viz that Pope Iohn was a woman who by the familiar help of her beloued companion brought forth publikely the homely fruits of her Popedome Theoph. These writers which you name were indeede Papists of high esteeme in the Church of Rome but they liued long after Pope Iohn and therefore knew nothing of that matter but by report of others Remig. I answere first that these eight Historiographers liued longer one after another then Sigebertus Geniblasensis and Marianus Scotus liued after Pope Iohn Secondly that all Historiographers write for the most part by the report of others Thirdly that so many writers otherwise of good credit with your Pope may well be credited of vs in a matter against your Pope especially since sundry of them be your owne holy popish Fryers Fourthly that this story of Pope Iohn is publikely painted and is this day to bée séene in your Cathedrall Church of Syenna which painting our politike newly hatched Iesuites sought earnestly to haue had it defaced in the late repairing of that Church but the Bishop of the place digitus Dei est hic would not suffer them to preuaile Fifthly that these eight writers who were all the Popes owne vassals and liued long one after another would neuer for shame haue published one and the selfe same story to the world if any one of them could in his life time haue learned the centrary to be the truth Theoph. They say onely and barely vt ferunt as the report and fame goes and other graue writers that liued before them all and neerer the time of Pope Iohn make no mention thereof at all Remig. I answere first that an argument ab authoritate negatiué is not holden good in your Schooles and yourselues do roundly condemne in others that manner of dispute Secondly that if these famous writers had not béene fully perswaded of the truth of the story they would neuer haue published it to the world and hereof this double reason may be yéelded First for that the Popes déere friends were no doubt very loathto reueale the shame and turpitude of their holy fathers saue onely then and so much when and how much the very force of truth compelled them to do Againe because they being very learned could not be ignorant that it was a great damnable sinne to defame so great a man Thirdly that the sayd Authors write of this matter euen as they do of other things Palmerius and Sigibertus both haue these expresse words Fama est hunc Iohannem faeminam fuisâ—e vnisoli familiari tantum cognitam qui eam complexus est grauis facta peperit Papa existens quare eam inter Pontifices non numerant quidam The fame goes that this Iohn was a woman and not knowne but to her familiar friend by whose familiarity she became with child and was deliuered euen whiles she was Pope for which respect some do not reckon her among the Popes Marianus Polonus Bergomensis Platina and Carranza whom I haue already named teach flatly and plainely the selfe same doctrine writing vpon the same woman Pope and here must I put you in minde of this mackeable poynt viz. that Marianus Scotus affirmeth the story constantly flatly and simply without all ands or iffs Yea Martinus Polonus the Popes owne Penitentiary singeth the selfe same song Fourthly that some Historiographers fauouring the Pope more then the truth haue of purpose so to couer the Popes shame concealed the truth of the story To these I may fitly adde that which their famous Abbot saith the beast saith my L. Abbot Bernardus yâ— best Abbot that euer I heard or read of mentioned in the Reuelation to whom was giuen a mouth speaking blasphemies and to make warres with the Saints fitteth in Peters chaire Theoph. This is wonderfull which you say and I hope I may giue credit to your reports your protestation hath assured me thereof
howbeit for my further satisfaction let me tel you that one of your authors Nauclerus by name vtterly denieth the story as I haue heard Remig. I make a conscience I thanke my Lord God humbly for it to deale sincerely in all my writings and with you in this our Christian conference wishing heartly that the papists would doe the like I haue euer dealt so truely and vprightly against the papists in all my writings as I now in my old and decrepite age I am ready to take it vpon my saluation and to seale the truth thereof with my blood Concerning your report of Nauclerus you shall truely heare his owne words and that done yéeld your censure according to the truth after that this Nauclerus had told a long tale in the fauour of our Woman-Pope so to couer and hide the nakednesse of his holinesse at the length he resolueth with himselfe and concludeth the controuersie in these expresse words Sed etsi fuit verum nulli tamen ex hoc salutis emeâ—sit periculum quia nec Ecclesia tunc fuit fine capite quod est Christus ait Antoninus nec enim vltimi effectus Sacramentorum quae illa conferebat deficiebant eis qui debite accipiebant scilicet gratia licet mulier non sit susceptibilis Characteris alicuius ordinis nec conficere Eucharistiam etiam de facto ordinata possit nec absoluere a peccato vnde ab ea ordinati erant iterum ordinandi gratiam tamen Sacramentorum Christus supplebat in recipientibus dignâ— ignorantia facti inuincibili eos excusante But although it were true no man for all that susteined any losse of his saluation because euen then the Church had still an head which is Christ as Antoninus witnesseth neither did they who deuoutly preached the Sacraments which he ministred want the lâ—st effects thereof which is grace albeit a woman be neither capable of any Character of order neither able to celebrate the Eucharist or to absolue from sinne whereupon such as receiued orders of her were to be ordered againe neuerthelesse Christ supplied the grace of the Sacraments in those that receiued them worthily inuincible ignorance of the fast excusing them thus you sée the opinion and verdict of your owne deare Doctor Nauclerus that famous papist who hath said for the credit of your Pope what possibly he could deuise now deliuer your censure in Gods name according to the truth Theoph. I will confesse the truth I obserue out of this testimony of our reuerend and learned histriographer these memorable points of doctrine First that Nauclerus hath emploied his whole industry and all his wits to defend the Pope from shame and dishonour if it possibly could be done Secondly that Antoninus their reuerend Archbishop and canonized Saint is of his opinion Thirdly that Christ is the head of the Church and that therefore the Church wanted not a head in time of the woman Pope if euer there were such a monster in the world Fourthly that popish succession is as vncertaine as the weather-cocke howsoeuer my selfe and others haue hitherto beene seduced therewith and I humbly thank my Lord God that by your most Christian instruction as by an instrument appointed by him for that end I nowe at the last behold the same Remig. Non nobis Domine non nobis sed nomini tuo da gloriam it is no small comfort and solace to mine heart that Gods holy spirit doth so mightily worke in you you haue obserued well the doctrine of Nauclerus though some thing may fitly be added thereunte Two further points of great consequence are implied in the doctrine of Nauclerus the one that it is this day doubtfull which of their romish Cardinals and Bishops be rightly ordered and whether they be meere Lay-men or Priests the other that the Cardinals popish Priests and lay people of Rome did for many yéeres commit flat idolatry Theoph. These points could I neuer haue considered in his doctrine God reward your paines emploied for his sake but what are not the Cardinals and Priests in the Church of Rome truely and lawfully consecrated in their functions Remig. I speake not generally and absolutely of the consecration of the Cardinals Bishops and Priests in the Church of Rome fit occasion will be offered hereafter to speake more precisely of that point of doctrine the question is now of those particular Cardinals Bishops and Priests who were consecrated for such in the time of the Woman-pope Iohn for as the Popes owne deare Doctor Nauclerus telleth vs all such as were ordered by the Woman-pope were to be ordered again as being but méere Lay-men Theoph. I am at my wits end what to say or thinke of the Church or Pope of Rome Remig. What I am sure you remember the old receiued Maxime Vbi Papa ibi Roma vbi Roma ibi Ecclesia Catholica where the Pope is there is Rome and where Rome is there is the Catholike Church So as the Pope is Rome the Catholike Church Christ himselfe and all Theoph. I cannot indeed but remember the same it is so frequent and vsual in euery learned Papists mouth But alas alas the remembraÌ„ce thereof doth this day wound me at the very heart for hitherto I haue beene taught to hold it for a constant truth that the Catholike Church the Church of Rome and the Popes holinesse were all as one that is to say that the Popes faith was the faith of the Church of Rome and the faith of the Church of Rome the faith of the Catholike Church militant heere on earth Remig. It is very true which you say and this approued Romish Maxime confirmeth the same for when the Pope and his Popelings tell vs that the Church cannot erre then do they meane that the Pope cannot erre and when they speake of the Catholike Church then they euer meane of yâ— Church of Rome of such Churches as iump in faith with the Pope So then we must iump with the Collier and say we beléeue as the Church beléeueth and the Church beléeueth as we beléeue for by this learned answere if Cardinall Hosius writ truly we may ouercome the diuell but when all is said done we must beléeue we cannot indéed tell what for when yâ— Pope saith thus and thus you must beléeue if then he speake as a priuate man my faith is wan and no faith indéed for as a priuate man he may erre and so both deceiue himselfe and me as we haue séene already and yet alas for pitty these two articles I must hold for an vndoubted truth which agrée together as Yorke and soule Sutton First that the Pope may erre and become an heretike Secondly that I am an Hereticke vnlesse I beléeue as he teacheth me if he speake as a publike person This notwithstanding I may not to dye for it examine the Popes decrées whether they procéed from him as hée is a priuate man or as a publike person for in so
to God I could soundly answere this reason Remig. Listen well to my discourse and you shall God willing be able to confute it with all facility this is the answere First that our nation first receiued the faith iâ— the time of Vespasian Emperour of Rome about 70â— yeeres after Christs sacred Incarnation by the preaching of Christs holy Apostle Symon Zelotes Secondly that if it be true which Freculphus writeth the Brutans had receiued the faith of Christ about the yéere 6â— by the preaching of those twelue which Philip the Apostle sent into this land whereof Ioseph of Aramathâ—a was the chiefe Thirdly that about the yéere 1â—9 Elutherius then Bishop of Rome at the request of King Lucius the sonne of Coâ—lis sent Faganus and Deruuianus into Britaine to baptise the said King and his people and to instruct them in the faith of Christ. Fourthly that séeing the Brutanes had béene subiects and tributaries to the Romans aboue 600. yéeres it is no rare thing that Gregory the chiefe Bishop of the Romans should send preachers into England with the good liking of Ethelbert then King of Kent for it is euery Christians duty to doe what in him lieth in such a case Fifthly that the name Pope is a Gréeke word which signifieth father and in the auncient Church was common to other Bishops with the Bishops of Rome which you may finde proued at large in a little booke intituled the triall of the new religion Sixthly that in the time of this Gregory and long after the faith and doctrine of the Church of Rome was in good case though in some part steined with some corruptions neither is it blame worthy either in Bishop Gregory that sent it or in King Ethelbert that receiued it that our nation had then the Church seruice in the Latin tongue for as the prouerbe saith necessity hath no law besides that the Roman language was then in the Latin tongue and so to them their vulgar tongue and they altogether ignorant of the language of our nation for of old time as Nicholaus Lyranus that learned popish Frier telleth vs euery Church had diuine seruice in her mother and vulgar tongue of which subiect I haue written at large in the suruey of popery and no maruell if our Church receiuing the Church seruice in the Latin tongue though vpon necessity for that the Romans were ignorant of the Saxons language did a long time reteine the same for though it were a fault comparatiuely a small one would to God our Church had neuer béene steined with greater corruptions one thousand yéere are fully expired since Gregory was the Bishop of Rome since which time most intollerable abuses superstitions errors and flat heresies haue crept into the Church of Rome which is all that our Church hath abolished still constantly reteining as pure and inuiolable the old Roman faith and religion Theoph. You told me that the visible Church both may erre and de facto hath erred and the same as you haue soundly proued by the testimonies of best approued popish writers may fitly and truly be verified in many late Bishops of Rome but how any Church can be inuisible which is the Church say you that cannot erre I doe not yet vnderstand I pray you take some paine for my better instruction in that behalfe Remig. True it is that euery particular Chuch is visible in it selfe for all men women and children euery one in his corporall consistence are visible as experience teacheth vs and for all that this is a true and most constant position that that Church which cannot erre inuisible for the true aâ—d exact knowledge whereof you must distinguish in man two things his externall corporeity or corporall consistence and his internall election in Christ Iesus Man considered the former way is visible indéed euery child can discypher the case but the latter way he is inuisible and knowne onely vnto God or to those to whom he reuealeth it Theoph. I seeme now to haue a glimmering of the question though no perfect insight into the same I pray you vnfold the case distinctly and declare it by some familiar examples if it may be Remig. At such time as the Prophet Elias made his complaint in Santaria that he onely was left alone an Oracle from heauen answered him in this maner I haue reserued to my selfe seuen thousand men which haue not bowed the knée to Baal By which diuine Oracle it is euident yâ— seuen thousand persons were inuisible to Elias and all the same visible in themselues at one and yâ— same time Do yée now vnderstand the case Theoph. I seeme to conceiue it by vertue of your former distinction They were visible as men but inuisible as the children of God for that Elias knew not their faith and election in Iesus Christ. Remig. You conceiue it aright Iudas Iscariot as he was a man was visible both to the rest of the Apostles and to others who for all that as he was a traytor was visible to God alone for which cause the Apostles were astonished when they heard that one of them should betray Christ their Lord and Maister The Apostle confirmeth the same when he saith the foundation of God remaineth sure and hath this seale the Lord knoweth who are his the faith and conscience of the elect to God-ward is vnknowne to men and so to them they are inuisible though visible in their owne persons Theoph. I must needes yeeld to this as to a manifest truth but are not all members of the which Church beleeue in Christ and hold the catholike faith as we do Remig. All that professe externally the Catholike faith are members of the visible Church and must be reputed for such so long as they are not cut off from the Church by the iust censure of excommunication But Gods elect onely are the true Church that is to say that mysticall body whereof Christ Iesus is the mysticall head Gods elect onely are that Church to which Christ promised his inuisible presence to the worlds end Gods elect only are that Church which is the pillar of truth and cannot erre But the reprobates neither are nor can bee that mysticall body whereof Christ is the head for our Lord Iesus is so farre from being their head that he hateth all those that worke wickednesse and wil put them from him with a sharp ve vobis at the generall doome Gods elect onely are the bride betrothed to our Lord Iesus the Bride-grome betwéene whom there is such an inseparable vnion as no power create vpon earth or in heauen is able to dissolue the same Theoph. God reward you for your great paines which you haue taken herein for his names sake and my good you haue so resolued me in these most intricate difficulties of christian religion that I stand at vtter defiance with the late start-vp Romish faith and doctrine highly reuerencing the old Roman
set downe by his Holinesse to the contrary by wrong information giuen appeale euen from the Pope as Clemens vnto his holines as Peter for this cause doth the Iesuite Parsons or S. R. in his pretended answere to the downe â—all of Popery proclaime it lustily to the work that Bishops must not examine the doctrine which the Pope â—â—â—inereth iâ—ditially out of S. Peters chaire as suprethe pastor of Gods Church but onely that wherein he vttereth his owne priuate opinion For this cause doe the Popes decrées roundly tell vs that it is sacriledge to dispute of the Popes power So then on the one side the Pope may be deposed if he speake write or hold hereticall opinions as a priuate man but on the other side whatsoeuer the Pope shall define or decrée as Pope and publike person that we must receiue reuerence and constantly beléeue otherwise we must be adiudged Heretiques and be burnt with fire and saggot at a stake What a religion eat yee this the Pope may decrée things at his owne good pleasure either as a priuate man or as a publique person the one way he cannot erre as Papists doe and must beléeue but the otherway hee both may erre and hath de facto erred in very déede it therefore standeth with all reason piety and good conscience that the Papists shall examine his decrées whether they procéede from the Pope as a publique person or as a priuate man leâ—t they receiue errors for faith falshood for truth poyson for wholesome medicine Howbeit they must beléeue all things resolutely they may doubt or dispute of nothing curiously lest they be accused of sacriledâ—â— or heresie For if the Pope when he spake or wrote sate in S. Peters chaire at Rome an old rotten and worme-eaten thing which the silly people adore reuerence and kisse as my selfe sometimes haue done and Saint Peter perhaps neuer saw or knew the same then the case is cléere the Popes decrée is as sound as the holy Gospel and procéedeth from the holy Ghost Theoph. All this is very true and we are taught to beleeue that Saint Peter sate in that chaire indeede and that it hath beene reuerently kept from Saint Peters death to this day insomuch that they are likewise taught to bring girdles to touch the said chaire which therefore are called Saint Peters girdles for the safe deliuerance of women which are with child and doe vse them neither did I euer heare to this day that any Pope taught false Doctrine or decreed any vntruth out of Saint Peters chaire Remig. Whether Saint Peter euer sate in that chaire or not it is not much materiall this one thing is certaine that it is this day most superstitiously abused and that the real sitting in the material chaire cannot preserue him that sitteth in it from false doctrine or erroneous faith whereof more at large hereafter as your demandes or difficulties shal minister fit occasion that many Popes haue béene Heretiques and flat Apostataes is already proued out of your owne best approued Doctors Now will I likewise proue vnto you God willing euen by the expresse testimonies of most renowned Popish writers that sundry Popes haue taught and decréed false doctrine and that as publique persons sitting in Saint Peters chaire as they call it and that done I will answere to all your obiections against the same M. Gerson sometime Chauncellour of the famous Uniuersity of Paris and a man of high estéeme in the Councel of Constance writeth plainely and auoucheth it for a constant knowne truth that Pope Iohn the 22. of that name taught publiquely that the soules of the iust doe not sée God till the day of generall Doome as also that his false doctrine was publiquely condemned with the sound of trumpets euen before Philip then King of France Yea Adrianus who was Bishop of Rome himselfe doth constantly auouch the same truth as testifieth Alphonsus a zealous and learned Popish Writer in these expresse wordes Nouissime fertur de Iohanne 22. quod c. Last of all it is reported of Pope Iohn the 22. that hee publiquely taught declared and commaunded all to hold the same that the soules of the iust before the day of iudgement generall haue not the stole which is the cleare and faciall vision of God and he is reported to haue induced the vniuersity of Paris to this that none should take degrée of Theology in the same but those that did first sweare to defend this error and to adhere to it for euer Thus writeth Adrian who was himselfe Pope or Bishop of Rome And Alphonsus a man of good credite with the papists after he had rekoned vp fiue heresies setteth downe this for the â—iâ—th heresie viz that the soules of the iust doe not see God till the day of doome ascribing the said heresie to the Armenians as to the authors thereof and to the Greekes together with Pope Iohn as the patrons and defenders of the same So then it is cleare as the noone day that the Bishops of Rome both may erre and de facto haue erred not onely as priuate men but also as Popes and publike persons in their iudiciall sentences and decrées Bellarmine your romish Iesuits and Cardinal séeing the force of this testimony and maâ—king well that it doth ouerthrowe the highest point of their late start vp popery doth bestirâ—e himselfe more then a little in defence of popish faith he would gladly perswade his reader that their Pope Iohn erred onely as a priuate man and not as a Pope or Bishop of Rome which is a subtile distinction but falsly inuented to seduce the silly people therewith lest they should forsake the Pope his new religion I proue it many wayes first because Pope Adrian himselfe saith docuit hee taught Secondly because he saith Publicé publiquely Thirdly because he saith Mandauit hée commanded all to hold it Fourthly because none could bee made Graduates in the Uniuersity which held not this opinion Fiftly because euery Graduate was sworne to desend it and to hold it for euer So then the Pope erred de facto euen in his publike decrée of faith and that euen by the consent of Adrian who sometime was Pope himselfe yea who for learning and knowledge was one of the rarest Popes that euer were at Rome What say you to this testimony M. Theophilus doe ye not sée it euidently proued euen by the testimony of approued Popish writers that the Pope both may erre and de facto hath erred and that not onely as a priuate man but also as a publique person Theoph. Your reasons are so strong so pithy and so plaine indeed that I know not in the world how in truth to answere them they make me to stagger in my old Romish faith and to doubt of that whereof I neuer doubted all my life before for we Catholiques haue euer holden it for an article of our Catholique faith that the Pope as Pope
was the Bishop of Rome yea he both sharply reproued him and scornefully condemned his definitiue sentence and decrée Theoph. I see not how this proceeding of Saint Cyprian can proue that the Pope may erre Iudicially in matters of faith I beseech you take the paines to explicate the same more at large Remig. Saint Cyprian was euer reputed a learned man and an holy Bishop in his life time as also a most glorious Martyr being dead Now in regard of his great learning he could not haue béene ignorant of the Popes rare priuiledge in noterring in matters of faith if either the holy Scriptures had taught it or the learned Fathers of that age had beléeved or receiued it and in regard of his piety and rare vertue he would reuerently haue yéelded to such a singular prerogatiue and haue giuen the glory to the sonne of God the author thereof if any such thing had béene done vnto him Yea if the Bishop of Rome had beene Christs Uicar generall and so priuiledged as our Iesuites and Iesuited crew beare the world in hand he is that is to say that hée could not erre in his iudiciall definitions of faith then doubtlesse S. Cyprian must needes haue béen a flat heretique and so reputed and estéemed in the Church of God For if any Christian shall this day do or affirme as S. Cyprian did or publickly deny yâ— Popes sayd falsly pretéded prerogatiue of faith in any place Country territories or dominions where Popery beareth the sway then without all peraduenture he must be burnt at a stake with fire and faggot for his paines Theoph. God reward you for your trauaile I see it now as cleerely as the noone day For S. Cyprian both knew the Scripture right well and also what was the publike faith of the Church in his time so if either the Scripture had taught it or the Church had beleeued it hee would neuer haue withstood it but reuerently haue yeelded thereunto But sir our Doctors haue much to say for themselues would God it might please you to heare and answere the same at large Remig. I will both willingly heare them and soundly by the power of God confute the same For I know right well before I heare them from your mouth what possibly they are able to say in their owne defence CHAP. 3. Of sundry important Obiections which seeme to proue the Popes prerogatiue of faith Obiection first Theophilus CHrist prayed for Peter that his faith should neuer faile ergo the Bishop of Romes faith cannot faile nor the Pope erre in his iudiciall decrees for seeing Christ constituted a Church which should continue to the worlds end he prayed not onely for S. Peters person but also for all that should succeede him in his Chaire at Rome Remig. I answere first that many learned Writers doubt greatly not onely of his supposed Chaire but euen of his being there Howbeit because all the holy Fathers and learned Writers of the auncient Church doe with vniforme assent affirme Saint Peter to haue béene Bishop of Rome I willingly admit the same as a receiued truth Secondly that albeit Christ prayed for S. Peters faith as also appointed his Church to continue to the worlds end yet doth it not follow thereupon that what priuiledge soeuer he obtained by prayer for S. Peter the same must redound to all those that lineally succéed in his place or chaire for no Scripture no Councell no Father doth so write or so expound Christs prayer Thirdly that Christ prayed for the faith of the whole Church or for Peters faith as he did represent the whole church which is all one in effect This I proue by sundry meanes First because Christ himselfe doth so expound himselfe in these words I pray not for the world but for them which thou hast giuen mee for they are thine I pray not for these alone but for them also which shall beléeue in me through their word Christ prayed aswell for the rest of his Apostles as hée did for Peter and a well for all the elect as for his Apostles and consequently séeing Christ directed not his words to Peter as to one priuate man but as to one representing yâ— whole Church it followeth of necessity yâ— whatsoeuer Christ did or said concerning Peters faith the same perforce must be vnderstood of the faith of yâ— whole Church which faith shall neuer faile indeede Secondly because Iohannes Gersonus a famous Popish writer affirmeth constantly as we haue seene already that there is no infallible Iudge vpon earth in matters of faith sauing the vniuersall Church or a generall Councell lawfully assembled and sufficiently representing the same which doctrine though procéeding from a Popish penne I willingly embrace and reuerence as an vndoubted truth Thirdly because S. Austen applieth Christs prayer generally indifferently to all the whole Church Quid ambigitur c what doubt is there did hée pray for Peter and did he not also pray for â—ames Iohn to say nothing of the rest it is cléere that in Peter all the rest are meant because he saith in another place I pray for these O Father which thou hast giuen me and desire that they may be with me where my selfe am Lo S. Austen vnderstandeth Christs prayer for Peter of the whole Congregation of the faithfull and hée proueth it by Christes owne explication in an other place of the Holy Gospell Fourthly because Origen a very learned and auncient Father affirmeth in a large discourse vpon Saint Matthew that all things spoken of Peter touching the Church and the keies are to be vnderstood of all the rest and the collection or illation of Origen is euident euen by naturall reason for as that learned father profoundly disputeth if Christ prayed not aswell for the rest as he did for Peter of small credite were a great part of the holy scriptures a reason doubtlesse insoluble for all Iesuites and Iesuited popelings in the world for if they could faile in their faith they could also faile in their writing and yet that they could not so faile was by vertue of Christs prayer Fiftly because Panormitanus the Popes skilfull Canonist his religious Abbot his renowned Arche-bishop and his Lordly Cardinall for he was all foure telleth vs plainely and peremptorily that Christs prayer was for the whole congregation of the faithfull these are his expresse words pro hac tantum Chrstus in Euangelio â—ruit ad patrem ego rogaui pro te and for this he speaketh of the whole faithfull congregation Christ onely prayed to his Father in the Gospell when he said I haue prayed for thée Peter that thy faith faile not Behold and marke well and then yéeld your indifferent censure when Christ saith the famous papist Panormitanus prayed that Peters faith should not faile he prayed for the faith of the vniuersall Church whose faith shall neuer faile indéede the same Panormitanus proueth his opinion
your dispute a great deale the better because I see and finde you willing to discouer euery thing truly to conceale nothing that seemeth to make for their profession and religion But I greatly desire a sound answere to this great and mightie reply for our learned Diuines doe thinke it vnanswerable and altogether insoluble Remig. I answere first that the Iesuite S. R. or Robert Parsons if you will citeth this reason or testimony out of S. Cyprian but corruptly and falsly as in the reply to his pretensed answere to the downe-fall of Popery it doth and may appeare Secondly that it is a very childish reply vnworthy to be aleaged of any learned writer for these are S. Cyprians words ad quos perfidia accesâ—â—m habere non potest They know not them to bée Romans to whom falshood or deceiptfull dealing can haue no accesse or with whom falshood and crafty dealing can finde no place or comfort Now this answere is as much to the purpose for prouing that the Popes faith cannot faile as if I should demand of M Fryer Parsons how farre it is to London and it should please his grauity to answere a poke full of plums For first S. Cyprian speaketh of the Romans indefinite whom he commendeth to bée so honest so sincere and so vpright in all their procéedings that the false reports and vniust allegations of disobedient persons can find no help or comfort in their Tribunals or Consistorie-courts Now Robert parsons to make a shew of the Popes falsly pretended prerogatiue in matters of faith doth first of all corruptly set downe these words to S. Peters chaire for these words in the text ad qâ—os Romanos to which Romans then he falsly setteth downe false faith for the word perfidia in S. Cyprian which there signifieth not false faith but â—â—lshood and deceiptfull dealing as if S. Cyprian had sayd it sâ—illeth not for the Romans are so wise so sincere and so vpright in all their procéedings that no false reports or deceitfull allegations can haue any place or finde any refuge in their Courts Now I pray you heartily to censure the case and cause indifferently was this honest dealing of your Iesuite to change the word falshood into false faith as if forsooth Saint Cyprian had meant that the Popes faith cannot faile when indéede S. Cyprian as we haue heard doth vtterly renounce that hereticall and damnable position viz. that the Popes faith cannot faile For if S. Cyprian had beléeued that position and withall had gainesaid and withstood the Popes definitiue and iudiciall sentence hee should both in the iudgement of other holy Fathers and in his owne conscience haue bin a flat Hereticke But neuer did any holy Father or yâ— Church of God so repute him Pope Stephanus with a Councel of al the Bishops and Priests of Italy defined flatly against rebaptization which decrée of Councel with the Popes assent thereto Saint Cyprian scorned and contemned stil defending his former opinion constantly Yea he was so farre from acknewledging yâ— prerogatiue in Popes which they of latter dayes challenge to themselues that he would not take Pope Stephanus for his superior or to haue any iurisdiction ouer him but termed him proud ignorant blinde and naughty as is euident to such as read his Epistle to Pompeius Out of which procéedings I note these memorable points First that he knew what the Pope and his Councel had decreed Secondly that he iudged a Romish Councell to be of no greater force then a Councell African Thirdly that he iudged the councell of Italy to bee of no greater force for the Popes consent then was the councell of Astricke for his owne consent Fourthly that prouinciall Councels are of no greater authority for the Popes confirmation then for the confirmation of another Bishop The third Reply Theoph. Cardinall Bellarmine telleth vs that the Pope defined the controuersie indeede but not as a matter of faith and consequently Saint Cyprian could not bee an Heretique albeit hee withstood the decree of the Pope Remig. What a Religion is Popery what a man is Cardinall Bellarmine shall we make him another Pope shall we admit euery thing hee saith for and as Christs holy Gospell I knew the man right well before he was Cardinall and I thinke no Angell hath spoken to him since I fit so be let him worke myracles for confirmation thereof The Pope vtterly disliking Saint Cyprians opinion and déeming it repugnant to Christs Gospell did for that end conuocate all the cleargie men of Italy that the controuersie might be derided and the truth thereof made manifest to the world And yet saith Bellarmine he defined it not as a matter of faith The controuersie was about rebaptization and consequently either flatly with the Gospell or flatly against the same If it were flatly with the Gospell then erred the Pope and his Councell egregiously if it were flatly against yâ— Gospell and the Pope so decréed it then decréed he against it as against a matter of faith or else opinions and doctrines against the Gospell are not against the Catholike faith but the truth of the matter is this viz. that if the Papists graunt as of necessity they must graunt S. Cyprian to haue withstood and contemned the Popes iudicial and definitiue sentence for all that euer to haue béene reputed an holy man and learned Father it will fallow of necessity that the Pope hath no such authority and prerogatiue as he a long time falsly hath vsurped and still tyrannically pretendeth to haue And therefore the Iesuited Cardinall déemed it the best course for the continuance of his Popes falsly pretended prerogatines to tell vs that though the Pope defined the controuersie yet did he not define it as a matter of faith and so Saint Cyprian could he no hereticke because hee withstood no decrée of faith as if forsooth it rested in the Popes power to make matters of faith and herefie at his good will and pleasure Theoph. This your answer doth yeeld great solace to to my heart for our great masters beare vs in hand that whatsoeuer the Pope decreeth the same must we receiue and beleeue as an vndoubted truth and their dayly practise is correspondent thereto for whosoeuer shall denie or gainesay the Popes decree who is with vs as another God shall vndoubtedly be burnt as a conuicted Heretike Bellarmines answere seemeth indeed to bee nothing else but a plaine tricke of Legerdemaine as is his like conceite and doctrine concerning his Popes double person But good sir doth not the Euangelist tell vs that Christ built his church vpon Saint Peter and that hell gates shall neuer preuaile against it the words seeme very plaine Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I build my church and Hell gates shall not preuaile against it Obiection second Theoph. Christ built his Church vpon Peter ergo his faith caÌ„not faile the antecedeÌ„t is proued by Christs own
words following For if his faith could faile then should hel gates indeede preuaile against him Remig. I answere that Christ did not build his Church vpon Peter I proue it First because the words are changed both in the Greeke which is the fountaine ana originall and also in the romish approued Latin translation which onely must be beleeued and followed by the decree of their Tridentine Councell for the alteration of the word insinuateth significantly an alteration in the sense If Christ had meant to build his Church vpon Peter he would haue said vpon this Peter and not vpon this Rocke And it is not to the purpose to say that Christ spake in the Hebrew of Syâ—â—ack tongue for we haue the originall in Gréek from S. Iohn who being full of the holy Ghost would neuer haue changed the words but to insinuate expresse a different sense and meaning if as Christ had said thou art a Rocke by name and my selfe a Rocke by nature and indéede so strong so permanent so inuincible that hell gates cannot preuaile against it Upon this Rocke therefore of thy consession will I build my Church against the faith of which Church neither hell nor the Diuell shall euer preuaile Secondly because the Apostle affrmeth constantly that no man can lay any other foundation then that which is laid which is Iesus Christ Christ therefore speaking in S Mathew of the Rock of the Church doth by the word Rocke annotate himselfe not S Peter for we see that S Paul doth so expound Christs words whose interpretation may fitly be gathered out of the circumstances of the text in S Mathew either is it to the purpose to cite out of the Reâ—elation of S. Iohn that the wall of the City which he behold had twelue foundations and in them the names of the twelue Apostles of the Lambe for the Apostles were but partiall and mutable foundations but Christ is the totall and permanent foundation of the Church neither can any City wall or other thing haue moâ— total foundatios then one neither yet can the twelue foundations make for Peters prerogatiue â—â—y thing at all for seeing the foundations were 〈◊〉 in number precisely assigned by the vision to the twelue Apostles without distinction oâ— limitation it followeth byâ— necessary 〈…〉 the 〈◊〉 〈…〉 for this â—eâ—peâ—â— doe the holy fathers vsually write that what 〈…〉 Christ spake or did to Peter concerning the Church he spake it 〈…〉 〈…〉 th◠〈…〉 in the name of the â—ho◠〈…〉 conâ—â—â—-â—â—th my expositionâ— Tâ—â—s Petrus c. thou art Peter â—uch Christ and vpon this Rocke which thou hast confessed vpon this Rocke which thou hast acknowledged saying thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God will I â—uil◠〈…〉 Churchâ— that is vpon my selfe the Sonne of the liuing God will I build my Church vpon my selfe will I build thée not my selfe vpon thée Fourthly because S. Chrysostome iumpeth with S. Austens interpretation in these words columnae quidem c the Apostles are the pillers because by their vertue they are the strength of the Church they are the foundation because the Church is built vpon their confession when the Lord saith thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church Fiftly because S. Hylary is consonant to the other holy fathers these are his words this faith is the foundation of the Church by this faith hell gates shal not preuaile against it this faith hath the Keyes of Heauen Sixtly because the receaued Popish glosse vpon this text vnderstandeth by the Rocke Peters faith the confession which he made Seuenthly because Panormitan and Syluester two very famous 〈…〉 are both of the same opinion Out of this discourse I obserue these points for your better instruction First that Christ is the Rocke vpon which Peter is built that Christ is the Rocke vpon which the Church is built that the Sonne of God is the Rocke vpon which the Church is built Secondly that the Apostles are called the foundation because as testifieth S. Chrysostome the Church is built in their confession when the Lord saith thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church Thirdly that the confession pronounced for â—â—der sake by the mouth of one euen Peter by name was the ioynt confession of them all the Church is built in their confession marke well these words of the â—â—lded mouthed doctor S. Chrysostome they are words of great importance they proue the controuersie so sufficiently as no euasion can take place they proue effectually that whatsoeuer was said to Peter touching the Church was meant of the whole Congregation of the faithfull for as Peter spake and answered in the name of the whole Church so Christs demaunds answeres and promises were made and intended for the whole Church for as S. Chrysostome truely saith Peters confession was made in the name of all the Apostles and consequently in the name of the whole Church when he pronounced Christ the Sonne of the liuing God and euen so Christs answere and promise was made to Peter as appeareth by the circumstances of the text in the name of the whole Church and I may not forget to adde hereunto the ioynt-testimonis of all the learned diuines of Paris who as we haue heard already vnderstaÌ„d al things spoken to Peter in Church matters to be meant of the whole Church as when he prayed that Peters faith should not faile he then prayed for the infallibility and perpetuity of the faith of the whole Church all both the holy and auncient fathers and also best approued popish writers our Iesuites and Iesuited popelings only excepted doe willingly subscribe hereunto Obiection 3. Theoph. Christ commanded Peter and onely Peter and that three seuerall times to feede his sheepe Ergo Peter onely Peter had the ordinary charge and gouernement of Christs sheepe and consequently all Priests all Bishops all Arch-bishops all Patriarkes receiue their authority and iurisdiction from the Pope as from Saint Peters successour Remig. I answere that all Christs shéepe were committed to all the Apostles ioyntly and seuerally aswell to Paul the rest as to Peter yea rather to Paul though he were none of the twelue then to Peter for hee saith of himselfe that the Gospel of the vncircumcision was committed to him euen as was the Gospell of Circumcision vnto Peter and consequently since all Christians now were Gentiles then yâ— Pope if he wil néedes haue a superiority ouer all his brethren yâ— Bishops must perforce reduce his succession from S. Paul for this policy perhaps it is that the Pope euer ioyneth Saint Paul and Saint Peter together whether it be in giuing pardons or other faculties whatsoeuer I proue the proposition First because Christ committed the charge of all Nations to all his Apostles alike without any priuiledge or restriction more or lesse to one rather then to another Secondly because Christ for edification sake
required a thrée sold confession of Peter in regard of his thréefold negation left nouises and weaklings should haue béene scandalized vnderstanding that such a notorious sinner without publike confession of his faith should haue any iurisdiction ouer them but not to giue any speciall prerogatiue to Peter thereby The reason hereof is euident because our Sauiour had before this charge of féeding giuen a very large commission to all his Apostles of féeding all Nations and therefore he can now meane and intend no other thing but onely to moue Peter to walke warily to be mindfull of his infirmities to be carefull of his charge Thirdly because Saint Austen that mighty pillar of Christs Church confirmeth defendeth this my present doctrine These are his expresse words Ecclesiae Catholicae personam sustâ—â—â— Petrus cum ei dicitur ad omnes dicitur aâ—â—â— me pasâ—â—â—ues meat Peter represented the person of yâ— Church Catholike when it is said to him it is said to all louest thou me féed my shéep Fourthly because S. Cyprian decideth this controuersie 〈◊〉 plainly as caÌ„not but satisfie 〈…〉 indifferent readerâ— these are his expresse words loquitur Dominus ad PetruÌ„ ego dico tibi quia tu es Petrus c. Paulo post hoc eraÌ„t vtique caeteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus pari consortio prediti honoris potestatis sed exordâ—â— aboâ—niâ—ate proficiscitur vt Ecclesia vna monstretur Our Lord speaketh vnto Peter I say vnto thée that thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church c. the same were the rest of the Apostles doubtlesse that Peter was indued with equall fellowshippe both of honour and of power but the beginning procéedeth from vnity that the Church may be shewed to be one And the same holy Father confirmeth this his doctrine in another place in these memorable words Episcopatus vnus est 〈…〉 a singulis in solidum pars tenetur there is but one Bishoprickâ— a part whereof euery Bishop possesseth and enioyeth wholly S. Austen confirmeth S. Cyprians sentence and iudgement in these words Claues non vnus homo Petrus sed vnitas accepit Ecclesiae not one onely maâ— Peter receiued the Keies but the vnity of the Church Fiftly because two famous popish writers are iump of tho same opinion constantly desend yâ— same doctrine Couarâ—viâ—s a profound Canonist a popish Archbishop of great estéeme in yâ— romish Church hath these expresse words enim iuxta Catholicorum viroruÌ„ auctoritates communem omnium traditionem Apostoli parem ab ipso Domino Iesu eum Petro potestatem ordinis iuridictionis acceperunt ita quidem vt quilibet Apostolorum aequalem cum Petro habuerit potestatem ab ipso Deo intotum orbem in omnes actus quos Petrus agere poterat for according to the authorities of Catholike writers and the common tradition of all the Apostles receiued from our Lord Iesus Christ himselfe equall power with Peter both of order and of iuridiction in somuch doubtlesse as euery Apostle had equall power with Peter from God himselfe and that both ouer the whole world and to all actions that Peter could doe Iosephus Angles a famous Fryer and a very learned popish Bishop in that selfe same booke which he dedicated to the Pope hath by the force of Gods spirit testified the same truth both against the Pope against himself these are his owne words si comparemus B. Petri aliorum Apostolorum potestatem ad gubernationem omniumcredentium tantam alij Apostoli habuerunt potestatam quantam B. Petrus habuit ita quod poterant quemlibet Christianum totius orbis sicut modo Rom. Pont. excommunicare in qualibet Ecclesia Episcopos Sacerdotes creare ratio est quia omnis potestas B. Petro promissa tradita fuit caeteris Apostolis collata hoc sine personarum loci vel fori discrimine if we compare the power of S. Peter and of the others Apostles to the gouernment of all the faithfull other Apostles haue euen asmuch power as S Peter had so that they could then excommunicate euery Christian in the whole world and in euery Church make Bishops and Priests the reason is because all power promised and giuen to S. Peter was also giuen to the rest of the Apostles and that without difference of persons place or consistory Thus we haue a full and resolute iudgement both for answere to the obiection and for the supposed prerogatiues and priuiledges of S. Peter which resolution is not onely deduced out of the holy scripture but plainely contested also by the vniforme consent of the holy fathers S. â—vprian and S. Austen and in like maner of the famous and learned papists Couarruvias and â—osephus Angles for they teach vs many sound points in diuinity First that all the Apostles had as great authority and as full and large euery way as Saint Peter had Secondly that euery Apostle aswell as Peter could make and constitute Bishops and Priests euery where throughout the Christian world Thirdly that what act soeuer S. Peter could doe euery Apostle had power and authority to do the same Fourthly that the iurisdiction of euery Apostle was as great and as large euery way as Saint Peters was And this saith Couarruvias is the common receiued doctrine of all Catholike writers this is a poynt of Catholike doctrine so important and so memorable as it well deserueth to be written in golden letters Fiftly that Christs spéeches vnto Peter in the singular number did not argue any superiority of iurisdiction but only signifie the vnity of the Church Sixtly that the authority and iurisdiction of euery Apostle was equal to Peters and that without all difference of persons place or consistory This is another point of great consequence for séeing first all and euery of the Apostles had equal iurisdiction séeing secondly that their iurisdiction was not limited but ouer the whole world seeing thirdly that the whole iurisdiction of euery Apostle ended and expired with his death and séeing fourthly that S. Iohn liued after all the Apostles it followeth of necessity that the Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction of the whole world remained in Saint Iohn after the death of Peter and the other Apostles So then if the Bishop of Rome will haue indéede any such prerogatiue as he falsly pretendeth to haue he must bring and shew vs his comission from S. Iohn and not from S. Peter for S Iohn being the suruiuer had all iurisdiction in himselfe And if the late Bishops of Rome can shew vs such a commission from Saint Iohn viz that Saint Iohn translated and committed his whole power authority and iurisdiction to the Bishop of Rome and his successors I for my part will willingly yeeld obedience to the same not otherwise For I require the Popes charter from S. Iohn Theoph. This is wonderfull which you say and yet you proue the
obiection wherein the papists glorie more then a little maketh nothing for them for as say those holy fathers these words already recited 〈◊〉 spoken to the whole congregation of the faithfull which are or shall be to the worlds end and Saint Aâ—ston proueth it by two reasons First because not onely the Apostles but others together with them should be his witnesses in Hierusalem and Samaria albeit Christ spake that of them touching the being witnesses of him as he spake this to theÌ„ concerning his spiritual preseÌ„ce therfore as he spake the other to all the faithfull so did he also this yâ— is promised his inuisible presence not onely to the Apostles or Pastors of the Church but euen to all the faithfull in the world Secondly because Christ spake that to his Apostles as pertaining onely to them which for all that did nothing at all concerne them as if he had said it is not a good reason to deny Christs presence to the whole Church because he vttered the words onely to the Apostles for séeing he spake that to the Apostles which pertained nothing to them but onely and solely to others much more might he speake yâ— to them which betongeth to them with others The first reply Theoph. Christ himselfe saith that the holy Ghost shall teach the Apostles all truth euen many things whereof they were not capable then and therefore did he reserue those things till the comming of the holy Ghost who should continue with them for euer for that end Remig. I answere that the holy Ghost after Christs ascension taught the Apostles all truth indéede of such things as he had reserued by reason of their â—udity and imperfection in conceiuing heauenly doctrine but withal I say that those things so reserued and the truth so taught was nothing else but a manifest explication of the selfe same verity which they in briefe before had heard For the holy Ghost did coyne no new doctrine nor reueale any new articles of faith but onely taught the Apostles the true sense of Christs words which afore for their dulnes they were not able to perceiue which sense they being directed by the instinct of the holy Ghost deliuered to the whole world First by word and afterward by writing This mine answere thus explicated I proue by two euident demonstrations First because Christ himselfe doth so expound himselfe in these words following He shall teach you all things and bring all things to your remembrance which I haue told you Which assertion must be well noted because the latter words are a plaine declaration of the former as if Christ had said all things which the holy Ghost shall teach the Apostles after my departure are no new doctrine but the very same things which they heard afore of me This onely difference there is yâ— the Apostles do more plainly vnderstand them by the assistance of the holy Ghost Secondly because the best learned Popish Doctors doe constantly deâ—end the same doctrine and this mine exposition For yâ— famous Schooleman and great learned Popish Bishop Melchior Canus hath these expresse words Nec vllas in fide noâ—as Reuelationes Ecclesia habet For the Church hath no new reuelations in matters of faith Thus teacheth Christ himselfe and thus their â—â—iâ—e learned Bishop affirmeth and yet will the Papists porforâ—e compell vs dayly to admit new doctrines from the Church of Rome The second reply Theoph. Christ promiseth the continuance of the holy Ghost euen after the death of the Apostles ergo he meaneth of their successors aswell as of themselues Remig. I answere that Christ promiseth the presence of the holy Ghost here as he did afore his owne presence to the worlds end and so one and the same answere may fitly serue to both to wit that the holy Ghost is promised to the whole congregation of the faithful the Doctors of Paris are all of the same opinion The third reply Theoph. Christ commanded the people to do whatsoeeuer the Scribes and Pharisees willed them to obserue and this he did for this respect onely because the Scribes and Pharisees sate in Moses chaire But doubtlesse if they sitting in Moses chaire could haue erred Christ would neuer haue commanded his disciples and the people so strictly to obserue their doctrine and none will or can deny that to sit in Peters chaire hath as great prerogatiue euery way as to sit in Moses chaire ergo the Pope that now sittes in Peters chaire at Rome can neuer teach false doctrine Remig. I answere first by the Popes owne decrées in these expresse words Multi Sacerdotes pauci Sacerdotes multi in nomine pauci in opere Videte ergo fratres quomodo sedetis super cathedram quia non cathedra facit Sacerdotem sed Sacerdos cathedram Non locus sanctificat hominem sed homo sanctificat locum Non omnis Sacerdos sanctus sed omnis sanctus est Sacerdos qui bene sederit super cathedraÌ„ honoreÌ„ accipit cathedrae qui malè sederit iniuriam facit cathedrae Many Priests and few Priests many in name few in worke therfore my brethren beware how you sit vpon the chaire for not the chaire makes the Priest but the Priest makes the chaire the place doth not sanctifie the man but the man sanctifies the place euery Priest is not a holy man but euery holy man is a Priest hee that shall sit well in the chaire receiues the honor of the chaire but he that sits euill doth iniury to the chaire Thus saith the Popes own decrée I ad nothing I change nothing I wil deale sincerely vpon my saluation Would to God the Pope and his Iesuited Popelings did this day put this decrée in practise Christianly Let not the Popes henceforth boast of sitting in Peters chaire Let them remember that they be many in name but few in worke they haue not this hundred yeares preached an hundred Sermons What say I an hundred Sermons for so farre as I can learne not one at all therefore as the Popes owne Canons tell vs the Popes did honour Saint Peters chaire Secondly with Saint Austen in these expresse words sedendo Cathedram Moysi legem Dei docent ergo per illos Deus docet sua vero si illi docere velint nolite audire nolite facere sitting in the chaire of Moyses they teach the law of God therefore God teacheth by them but if they will néedes teach their owne inuentions fantasies then heare them not doe not as they bid you do Thirdly with Saint Hilary in these words cum igitur doctrina Pharisaeorum ob id probabiâ—is esse docetur quia ipsi in Moysi Cathedra sederunt doctrina necessatio significatur in Cathedra séeing therefore that the doctrine of the Pharises is for that proued probable because they sate in the chaire of Moyses therefore by the chaire doctrine must of necessity be signified Thus write these two
yâ— words Iudges Officers shalt thou make thée in all thy Cities and they shall iudge the people with righteous iudgement Where I note by the way the falshood of the Latin vulgata editio which the late popish Councell of Trent extolleth aboue the Gréeke and Hebrew for in the Chapter next afore the text saith thus Vt iudicent populum that they may iudge the people but in the Chapter which the papists cite for them it is thus and they shall teach the people and in the Prophet Malachie thus and the Priests lips shall kéepe knowledge and yet in the Hebrew text which is the fountaine and originall the word and is in euery place which the Papists guilefully change into the word that in the 16. Chapter so to make their matter good if it would or could be but let vâ— be made et as it is in the Hebrew and the question is at an end For as it is sayd of the Priests yâ— they shall teach the truth so is it sayd of yâ— ciuill Iudges officers that they shall iudge the people righteously and yet do their aduersaries grant that it is a condition in the ciuill Iudges and no promise at all and that therefore they may fayle in doing iustice and swarâ—e from the truth therein so then this is the truth of the question that where the Scripture sayth the Priests shall teach the Law and the iudges minister iustice it hath no other sense and meaning but yâ— their charge office requireth so much at their hands there is a coÌ„dition implied of doing but no promise made of performing and the Latin vulgata editâ—o doth plainly insinuate this interpretation Though the papists conceiue no such thing these are the expresse words Iudices Magistratus constitues c. vt iudicent populum iusto iudicio nec in alteram partem declinent Thou shalt make Iudges and Magistrates in all thy Cities which the Lord thy God giueth thée throughout thy Tribes and they shall Iudge the people with righteous iudgement saith the Hebrew text that they may iudge the people with righteous iudgement and not decline into the other part saith the popish Latin text where euery child may discerne a condition implied but no promise of performing the same Fiftly because as the Priests are said to teach the law so are the people said to require the law of them and consequently if it be a condition in the one it is so in the other and semblably if a promise in the one a promise also in the other The 6. reply Theoph. The Apostle telleth vs that Christ hath put Pastors Doctors in his Church vnto the end that henceforth we be no more children wauering and carryed about with euery winde of doctrine ergo it seemeth that the Pastors of the Church shall euer teach the truth Remig. This text as the others of Deuteronomie and Malachie insinuateth a condition of doing but no promise at all of performing The 7. reply Theoph. God gaue Pastors and Teachers to his Church for this end that they should not be carryed away with false doctrine But if all persons haue erred as you affirme then in vaine did God giue Pastors to his Church to preserue his people in the truth For they that should haue taught the truth did euen themselues swarue from the truth and so they became vnfit instruments to do the will of God Remig. I answere first that albeit Gods will be one as himselfe is one willing by his owne essence and by one eternall and immutable act whatsoeuer hee willeth yet is his will said to be manifold aswell of the holy Fathers as of the Schoole-doctors and this is done for two speciall considerations The former is by reason of the variety of the things which God willeth The latter for the variety of the manner by which God séemeth to will things Here vpon arise many divisions of Gods will assigned by the learned for explication sake Some deuide Gods will into antecedent and consequent Some others deuide it into the will of signe and will of good pleasure Others into the will reuealed and will secret or not reuealed Others into the will absolute and will conditionate and the like Secondly that though Gods will consequent and will of good pleasure be euer accomplished vndoubtedly yet is his will antecedent and will of signe oftentimes neglected and left vndone Of the former will the Prophet speaketh thus Whatsoeuer pleased the Lord that did he in heauen and in earth in the Sea and in all the depths And the Apostle sayth For who hath resisted his will Of the latter we haue many examples in the holy Scriptures God commanded Pharao to let his people go but Pharao would not obey God would haue gathered the Iewes together euen as the Hen gathereth her Chickens vnder her wings but they would not haue it so God would haue all men saued as the holy Apostle witnesseth and yet we know by the holy Gospell that the greater part shall be damned Thirdly that Gods will now obiected is onely Voluntas signi his will of signe and not voluntas beneplaciti his will of good pleasure and therefore it can neuer bee effectually concluded out of this Scripture that the Pastors of the visible Church doe alwaies teach the truth and neuer swarue from the same for the Apostle speaketh indefinitely and indifferently of all Teachers and of all hearers of all shepheards and of all shéepe neither excepting one nor other and yet both you know and I know that many Preachers preach false doctrine and that many hearers embrace the same whereupon it followeth of necessity that if the Apostle should meane as you would haue him to meane then should Christs intent and purpose bée frustrate in very déed which for all that is it that your selues impugne The Apostle therefore meaneth onely this viz. that Christ sheweth voluntate signi what hee would haue his shepheards and shéepe to do and what is their duty to do although his voluntas beneplaciti doe not euer cause the same to be accomplished The 8. reply Theoph. You haue fully satisfied me and proued very pithyly that the Priests commonly swarue from the truth But I thinke it impossible for you to proue that the high Priest in the law did erre at any time Remig. What impossible say you it is a thing so farre from being impossible that I am able to effect it with all facility Aaron was the high Priest in the law and yet erred he most grosly and egregiously while he taught the people flat Idolatry telling them that the molten Calues brought them out of the Land of Egypt Theoph. Aaron indeed consented to Idolatry and made the molten Calfe but the text saith not that hee taught Idolatry Remig. This is Cosen-german to yâ— of the Popes double person Yée haue heard of a Bishop of Rome that sayd right learnedly that
to this the Councell of Basil say they was not a lawfull Synode because it had neither the presence of the Pope nor of his Legats Remig. This answere is a new inuention of our late strat-vp Iesuits who neuer were heard of or known to yâ— Church of God for the space of a thousand fiue hundred and forty yéeres after Christs sacred Incarnation and whose first author was one Ignatius Loyola a souldier a Spaniard borne hauing neither scripture CouÌ„cel father or good reason whereupon it may be grounded For first the Councel was called by Pope Martin the fifth to be holden at Papias from whence by reason of the pest it was remoued to Senas afterward it was translated by Alphonsus the King of Aragon and continued at Basill where were present both Sigismundus the Emperour and Iulianus the Popes owne Legat and after him Ludouicus the Cardinall of Arles supplied his place Again not onely the Councell of Basil but the Councels also of Constance of Florence and of Lateran did all constantly and vniformely define for an vndoubted truth that a generall Councell is aboue the Pope and hath authority to cite him to controll him and to depose him for due proofe and triall whereof the Councell of Constance deposed de facto thrée Popes viz. Iohn 23. Gregory 12. and Benedict 13. and chose Martin the first and made him Pope in his place Another or two like mortall wounds I could vnfolde vnto you but these séeme to me sufficient Theoph. For Christs sake take the paines to relate them it is a thing well worth the labour Remig. Pope Sergius the third caused the corps of Pope Formosus who now had béene dead almost tenne yéeres to be taken out of his tombe and to bee set in a chaire with yâ— pontificall attire vpon him O braue Gallant and that done his head to be cut off and to bée cast into the riuer Tiber. He disanulled the acts and orders giuen by Pope Formosus insomuch as all were enforced to take orders againe who had béen made Bishops or Priests by Pope Formosus Theoph. Marry sir the Papists may boast indeed of their Romish succession and be derided of all wise men for their paines Remig. Amongst the Popes excommunications the 29. is against the Colledge of Cardinals in the Romish Church who by Symonie or Symoniacall pacts procure themselues to bee aduanced to the Popedome By verture of which excommunication all such as are made Popes by Symony Symoniacall pacts doe ipso facto incurre the sentence of excommunication from which they can neuer be absolued but by one that is Pope indéed and Canonically elected thereunto Upon which excommunication one of the Popes inquisitors Bartholomaeus Fumus a very learned Dominican Fryer hath published this commentary for the true sense meaning of that extrauagant which Pope Iulius the second diuulged in that behalfe these are his expresse words Nota hic bene Papa Simoniacé electus non est veâ—e Papa Note here and that to good purpose that the Pope which is elected by Symonie is not the true Pope indéed Marke well and let me sée what you obserue out of this discourse Theoph. I see euidently by the Popes own constitution and flat decree as by the law of the Medes and Persians which no papist may withstand or gainsay that whosoeuer is chosen Pope by Simony is no Pope indeede Remig. You haue marked the discourse very well let vs now proceede and looke circumspectly into the matter as which is of so great importance as nothing can be more Baptista Platina a man very néere and very deare vnto the Popes as who was by office Abbreuiator Apostolicus and consequently best acquainted with the manners and dealings of Popes telleth vs roundly and constantly that the Popes of latter dayes crept into the Popedome by gifts bribes and Simony these are his expresse words eò enim tum Pontificatus deuenerat vt qui plus largitione ambitione non dico sanctitate vitae doctrinae valereâ— is tantummodo dignitatis gradum bonis oppressis reiectis obtineret quem morem vtinam aliquando non retinuissent nostra tempora For to that passe was the Popedome now brought that whoseeuer was able to preuaile most in giuing bribes in ambition I say not in good life and doctrine that many onely should haue the degrée of honour and good men should be reiected which custome would to God our dâ—yâ—â— had neuer knowne Again that same Platina in another place hath these words Adeo enim inuoluerat hic mos vt iâ—m cuique ambitioso liceret Petri sedem inuadere For this custome did so encrease thâ—t now euery ambitious fellow might inuade Saint Peters chaire Gregory the fifth was by sedition thrust out of his throne and Pope Iohn the 18. by tyrannie occupied the Popedome so write both Platina and Carranza who were the Popes good friends albeit they could not conceale the truth hereof yea Platina procéedeth further and saith qua quidem beatitudine Iohannes carnit fur certè in Pontificatu latro Non enim vt par fuerat per ostium intraut which happy life Pope Iohn wanted as who was a théefe and a robber for hee entred not in by the doore as he ought to haue done To be briefe Pope Bonifacius the eight may sound the Trumpet for all the rest for of him thus writeth his deare Feyer Carranza Intrauit vt Vnlpes regnauit vt Lupus mortuus est vt Canis he entred as a Foxe he reigned as a Woolfe he died as a Dogge By this discourse two things are cleered which are of so great weight and moment as they are able to batter downe popery and to draw it vnder foote For first what Bishop soeuer is made Pope by gifts bribes and Simony that Bishop neither is nor can be the true Pope indéed Secondly the Bishops of Rome haue now â—or a long time béene very wicked men and haue aspired to the Popedome by bribes and Simony To which two maine points of popery this third as a golden corollary is consectary and cannot be denied viz that the Bishops of Rome for many yeeres were not true Bishops or Popes in very déede and consequently by popish doctrine there are no true popish Bishops in the world Theoph. All the Iesuits and Iesuited papists in the world are neuer able truly to answere these reasons for doubtles they are insoluble Remig The 18. excommunication falleth vpon all those which deny the Church of Rome to be the head of all other Churches and the Pope to be the commaunder of all people this excommunication was thundred out for the establishing of the Popes tyranny throughout the Christian world the 21. excoÌ„munication is against all such as shall boldly affirme either that the blessed Virgin Mary was conceiued in originall sinne or not so conceiued and shall thereupon condemne them of heresie or of mortall sinne
religion and so much of late Romish faith and doctrine as is consonant and agreeable to the same But for all this the Papists seeme to haue strong reasons for their vnwritten traditions which indeede are so strong as my selfe know not how to answere them Remig. Doubt nothing in this behalfe God of his mercy will illustrate your vnderstanding in this difficulty as he hath done already in the rest but for this subiect I haue written so largely thereof in two seuerall bookes viz. the downe fall of Popery and the Iesuits Antepast that I am altogether vnwilling to handle the same a fresh Theoph. I haue read both those bookes they doe content me exceedingly howbeit some obiections may yet be made against the doctrine there deliuered which my selfe am not able to confute I therefore would humbly intreate your paines not for a new discourse thereof which I hold needlesse but for a fuller and plainer explication of some especiall doubts wherewith our learned papists troubleme Remig. Propound them in Gods name by whose holy and powerfull assistance I trust to returne them to the Popes vtter shame to the and euerlasting confusion of al Iesuited papists that shall obstinately beléeue or defend the same CHAP. 5. Of Popish vnwritten traditions Theophilus I will still by your fauour argue as a papist on the behalfe of the papists that so I may more cleerely haue a souÌ„d insight into the truth you Protestants for so we vse to terme you beare vs in hand that the scripture or written word of God conteineth all things necessary for mans saluation but our learned and religious Cardinall Bellarminus assureth vs that the truth is farre otherwise and that many things necessary for mens saluation are onely knowen and receiued by tradition and what he writeth is the Popes ownefaith and consequently the faith of the whole Church for he dedicated his bookes to the Popes holynesse who highly commended and approued them that he made him Cardinall though before but a poore Fryer for his paines Remig. I answere first that I know your Cardinall right well and willingly acknowledge him to be learned as also religious and â—ealous after the manner of his sect but in such sort as Paul was before his conuersion Secondly that your Cardinal doth often acknowledge the truth vnawares against himselfe as doe your other Iesuits one onely assertion I will now cite out of the Iesuite S. R. Robert Parsons is the man in his pretensed answere to the downefall of popery these are his expresse words where if by diuina eloquia we vnderstand holy writ as Bell translateth and Saint Austen séemeth to meane me thinkes he plainely auoucheth that God hath procured euery thing to be cléerely written which to know is necessary to euery mans saluation the same teaceth Saint Syril saying not all things which our Lord did are written but what the writers déemed sufficient as well for manners as for doctrine that by right faith and works we may attaine to the Kingdome of Heauen and Saint Chrisostome what things soeuer are necessary are manifest out of scripture this is our Iesuites owne tale in the best manner he can vtter it whiles he bestirreth himselfe more then a little to answere my booke the downefall of popery out of whose confession and frée graunt such is the force of truth I obserue these memorable and golden lessons First that euery thing necessary for euery mans saluation is contained in the holy scriptures Secondly and this is a thing to be admired comming from a papists mouth that euery point necessary for saluation is plainely and cléerely set downe in holy writ Thirdly that God himselfe appointed all necessary things to be cléerely written Fourthly that Saint Augustine Saint Chrisostome and Saint Cyrill are of mine opinion Fiftly that the Iesuite vnawares iustifieth that doctrine which he puposely laboureth to ouerthrow for as our Lord Iesus said to Saul it is hard for him to kicke against prickes Theoph. The Iesuite S. R. when you rightly name Parsons graunteth all things to be written which are necessary for saluation but not which are necessary for faith and doctrine these are his owne and expresse words for surely the Prophets and Euangelists writing their doctrine for our better remembrance would omit no one point which was necessary to be actually knowne of euery one especially seeing they haue written many things which are not so necessary and this conclusion teacheth Saint Austen when he saith that those things are written which seemeth sufficient for the saluation of the faithfull where I note saith S. R. that he said not which seemeth sufficient to Christian faith but which seemed sufficient to saluation because fewer points suffice to saluation then the Christian faith containeth thus writeth the Iesuite in flat termes freely graunting the scripture to containe all things necessary for saluation but not all things necessary for faith and doctrine Remig. I answere first that the Iesuite granteth as much as I desire when he graunteth the holy scripture to containe all things necessary for our saluation for doubtlesse if all things necessary for saluation be written in the scripture it followeth of necessity that no vnwritten tradition is necessary for the same Secondly that noting is or can be necessary for the Christian faith but the same is also necessary for saluation for otherwise it would follow which no Christian may anouch that a man may be saued without the Christian faith but S. Athanasius in that créede or summary of faith which the Church of Rome receiueth and highly reuerenceth affirmeth resolutely that whosoeuer beleeueth not stédfastly euery iote of the Christian faith shall perish euerlastingly Thirdly that whosoeuer hath the holy scripture hath all things necessary for his saluation Fourthly that séeing the Christian faith by popish doctrine contaïneth many points not necessary for saluation it followeth of necessity that many points of popish so supposed Christian faith are néedlesse in very déede and for that respect with some other our Church of noble England hath abolished the same with spéede for we are the true reformed Catholikes who hold constantly the old Roman religion in euery point but the late start-vp Romish faith is fully replenished with curious sophistications friuolous diâ—â—â—â—â—ns vain inuentions counterfeit myracles grosse errors palpables herâ—stes intollerable superstitions méere foolishnesse and flat leasings Theoph. It is nowhere siad in scripture saith the Iesuite S. R. that all the bookes chapters verses and sentences which in the Bible are admitted for Canonicall are truly Canonicall and Gods pure word without the mixture of mans word and yet is this a point of Christian faith yea hereupon depend all the articles which we gather out of the scripture this is that inuincible Bulwarke saith Parsons which no Protestant can euer batter downe while the world shall endure Remig. I answere first that by our Iesuits doctrine as
aduersaries arguments plainely resolutly confesseth the doctrine which I defend In one place hee hath these expresse words me thinkes he plainely auoucheth he speaketh of Saint Austen that God hath procured euery thing to be cléerely written which to know is necessary for euery mans saluation In another place hee hath these words what things soeuer are necessary are manifest out of scripture Now sir what man can thinke our Iesuite to bee in his right wits that thus woundeth himselfe with his owne weapons for he doth not onely grant that euery thing necessary for euery mans saluation is manifest in the scripture but withall that euery necessary thing is cléerely written in the same and consequently he granteth vnaware against himselfe either that to beléeue the holy Bible to be the pure word of God is a trifle a thing of small moment and not at all necessary to saluation which if the Papists doe they must perforce condemne themselues and vtterly ouerthrow their Romish faith or else that the same is plainely and cleerely set downe in the holy Scripture the cause is cléere I hope I haue said enough Theoph. All the world knoweth old and yong rich and poore learned and vnlearned that to know and beleeue the holy Bible to be Gods word is so necessary to saluation as none without it can be saued It now remaineth for my full satisfaction and resolution in all points of Catholike doctrine in controuersie that if I know how to answere the Papists concerning one point of doctrine wherwith they neuer cease to charge you your profession I would think my selfe able to answere and confound all Papists in the world and to perswade all indifferently affected persons to abhorre and detest late start-vp popery world without end Remig. Let me know I pray you heartily what yâ— point of doctrine is wherewith our aduersaries so surcharge vs and our profession conceale nothing from me that any way troubleth your conscience for doubtlesse I am most willing to vndergoe any paines for your instruction in the truth Theoph. They charge you to hold teach that the best liuer among you sinneth in the best act he doth which seemeth a doctrine so strange irksome to all godly eares as my selfe caÌ„not but detest the same for if we can do nothing but sinne we must perforce condemne all good workes all preaching all teaching and all holy conuersation Remig. I wonder that any liuing wilcharge our Church with such vnsauory doctrine Theoph. Your aduersaries affirme with open mouthes so disgracing you and your profession as much as in them lieth that this is a generall receiued axiome with all your Deuines Iustus in omni opere bono peceat The iust man sinneth in euery good worke he doeth and that all euen our best workes are sinne Remig. My selfe though most vnworthy of that sacred name am one among the rest Howbeit I am so farre from beléeuing or defending that doctrine that I vtterly renounce the same in the sense formerly by you auouched For the exact examination of which proposition by them te armed our Maxime or Axiome let vs dispute the question pro contra as we haue done the rest CHAP. 6. Of the state of the regenerate with the particular adiuncts of the same Remigius THis proposition which séemeth to trouble you more then a litle the iust man sinneth in euery good work may admit a double sense and meaning viz a rigorous and a fauourable interpretation Iâ— we interprete it according to the rigour of the words the sense must be this the iust man sinneth euen in the best worke he doth which sense I willingly graunt is not onely straunge but with all very irksonâ—â— to all Christian eares howbeit if it may finde a fauourable interpretation the sense and meaning will be this the iust man sinneth whiles he doth the best worke he can which sense is most Christian sound Catholike Apostolicall and consonant to the holy scriptures But here ye must marke seriously that it is one thing to sinne in doing a good worke an other thing to sâ—me while the same good worke is a doing Iheoph This your distinction as it is very subtile so is it also right iovous comfortable to mine heart it affordeth me a kind of glimmering though no ful insight into the question Remig. He that will exactly know the truth of this question must apâ—ly distinguish the quadruple state of man First his state before sinne vntill his fall Secondly his state after sinne vntill his regeneration Thirdly his state after regeneration vntill his glorification Fourthly his state after glorification world without end In the first state albeit man sinned indéede and thereby made both himselfe and his posterity subiect to eternal torment yet was he so created of God his maker that he might haue liued without sinne for euer and aye In the second state man can doe nothing that good is but sinne continually In the third state man by Gods grace and great mercy is enabled to do good though not wholly to â—schew sinne saue onely according to the measure of his regeneration In the fourth state man is so confirmed in grace that he cannot sinne world without end Which distinction being well marked and remembred we shall easily vnderstand that albeit man can neuer be without sinne in this life but adde sinne to sinne continually yet may he by the grace of regeneration do good workes euen while he sinneth mortally Theoph. It seemeth to mee a thing impossible that man shall be able to do any good worke while he sinneth damnably Remig. It is a generell receiued axiome with all skilfull Logicians that true things must be graunted falsâ— things denied and ambiguous things distingushed which being true as it is most true indéede if we shall distinguish regeneration aright the truth of this intricate question will soone appeare viz. that one may aswell both sinne and do good at one and the same time as he may at the same time be both a father and a sonne Theoph. Our Papists contend with might and maine that howsoeuer we distinguish regeneration yet shall man in his iustification be freed from all sinne and consequently he cannot sinne mortally in the best act he doth Remig. The Papists erre grosly about regeneration whilest they doe not vnderstand the same aright according to the holy scriptures or they beare the world in hand that euery iustified person is fréed from all sinne in his soule and onely subiect to sinne materially in his body which if it were true as it is most false then doubtlesse could not the regenerate man commit mortall sinne while he doth his best workes Theoph. The Apostle seemeth to stand on their side when he telleth vs that the flesh lusteth against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh and it is confirmed by the same Apostle in another place where he affirmeth himselfe to serue the law of God in his
CypriaÌ„ confoundeth the Pope Other Bishops were of Cyprians opinion Luk. 22. v. 32. S. Peter suffred at Rome Ioh. 17. v. 9. 20. Gers. vbi sup cap. 2. â—ug in quaest mixtis q. 5. tâ—m 4. Orig. Homâ—â— in Mat. â—aâ—or apud Sylâ— defido §. 9. de conc §. 5. Panorm de elect cap significati Apâ—d Bel. lib. 4 cap. 3. de rom pontif Gâ—rs 〈…〉 Coram Philip â—â—ge Francâ—â— supra cap. 2. Bellarm. de verb. deâ—on script lib. 4. cap. 12. Ps. 116. v. 11. Iere. 16. v. 19. Rom. 3. v. 4 Mal. 1. v. 8. Esa. 28. v. 7 Eze. 7 v. 〈◊〉 Micach 3. v. 1â— Soph. 3 v. 4 OffeÌ„â—is adu Luth. art 32. Lege Caâ—etaâ— in prefat in libr. Mâ—â—is Aug. ep 11. 19. Eze. 20. 10. Cyprian lib. 1. epist. 3. Cyprian vbi super He speaketh of one Felicissimus his bad companions S. R. pag. 31â— See the â—esuits antepast pag. 13â— The Romans being faithfull men would not giue eare to faithles lyars Bell knoweth Bellarmine right well Marke this point well Mat 16. ver 18. As in all assemblies of gouernment one for order sake and peace must bed ssigned to end and to moderate the actions so was a preminence giuen to Peter among the Apostles that all things might be done in peace order a primacy not of powers as ouer inferioâ—rs but of order as amongst equals 1. Cor. 3. 11. Mat. 16. 18 Apoâ— 21 14. Aug. de verb. Dom. serm 13. Chrys. serm de pent 10. 3. Apoc. 21. v. 14. Hilarius de trinit lib. â— p 103. Panâ—rmit Sâ—luester marke this point well for it is wonderfull and killeth the papists Mat. 16. ver 13. 15. Luke 22. ver 32. Mat. 18. ver 15. 18. 19. 20 The whole vniuersity of Paris teacheth this my doctrine Gal. 2. 7. Marke this poynt againe and againe To auoyde â—sme di Per hathe primacy of order but not of power Mat. 28. v. 19. Mark 16. v. 14. 15. ioh 21. v. 14. 15. Aug. de ogonae Christi cap. 30. Rom. 3. Cypr. de simplicit Prelaetorum p. 113. Cypr. de vnitate Ecclesiae p. 29â— Couarr to 1. part 2 9. p. 242. col 4. prope finem Angl. in 4. q de clau diâ— fic 2. Concl. 1. pag. 6. Lo Peter had the primacy of order as amongst equals not of power as ouer inferious for he was the first both in order and calling Ioh. 1 42. Mat. 10. 2. 〈◊〉 tollendâ— schismata Marke wel that all Writers teach this doctrine Marke this well for it striketh dead Mortuus est Ioannes A. D. 99. Let this be well marked 1 Tim. 3. v. 15. wee differ not in the thing but in the modification thereof Syluest de Eccles. §. 4. Lo not the Pope but the congregation of the faithfull is 3. the church that cannot erre Panorm de elect cap. significasti Cers idem docet p. 1. de exam doctrin Seo the antepast pag. 173. 175 177. Oh that this learned man durst haue spoken out â— Caus. 24. quaest 1. arecta 〈◊〉 glosia â— Vide Dur. in rationâ— â— Tim. 3. v. 15. Aug. in Ps. 47. in pref Vide Aug. lib. 7. de bapt c. 51. tom â— Ansel. in 1. tim 3. v 15. â— Gerson part 1. de examin doctrin Iesuites Antepast pag. 134. Marke this point well See the antepast 172. Marke wel this point The body of Christ which the wicked are not Ephe. 2. v. 22 23. 1. Tim 3. 15 Ps. 118. v. 23 Mat 28. v. 20. Esa. 59. 2â— Iere. 33. v 20. Chrysost. in cap 5. Mâ—â— hom 15. Tom. 1. Aug. in ep 90. 4. 23 8. Maike wel these vnanswerable testimonies Mat. 24. v. 33. Ioh. 16. v. 13. Ioh. 14. v. 16. The holy Ghost taught no new doctrine but onely reucaled the true sense of such things as the Apostles did not vnderstand Ioh. 14. v. 16. It is the selfe same doctrine but more plainely declared Canus de lecâ—s lib. 3. c. 4. pag. 101. 〈◊〉 14. vet 16. Mat. 28. ver â—0 Mat. 23. ver 2. 3. dist 42. cap. multi Sacerdotes The faithful dealing of the Author Aug. tract 46. in Ioh an in mediâ— Rom 9. Hylar in Psal. 118. Pag. 698. Marke this doctrine and forget it not Lyr. in cap. 23. Mat. Carth in cap 23. Mat. Deut. 17. â— 9. 10. 11. Popery is plainely confuted by her owne doctors Lyr. in cap. 17 deuter Lo papistry is confuted by Papists even of the best sort Lyra. in cap. 23. Mat. The Iewish Church erred in matters of faith Lyra vbi super Carthus 23. cap. Mat. Ca lt in cap. 17. deut Canus lib. 3. câ—p vlt. pag. 106. Deut. 17. v. 10. Mal. 2. v. 7. Deut. 17. v. 9. v. 10. Deut. 17. v. 8. 9. 10. Mal. 2. v. 8. Note this well Mal. 2. v. 8. Deut. 17. v. 9. 10. Deut. 10. 12. Exod. 28. 4 Leu. 26. 3. 25. Deut. 28. 1. Deut. 16. v. 18. Deut. chap 16 v 18. Deut. 17. v 10 11. Mal. 2. v 7. Deut. 16. 18 This point must be remembred Deut. 16. 18. Deut 17 9 Mal. 2. 8. Ephes 4. v. 11 13 14. Ephes. 4. v. 14. Gods will is his essence Psa. 46 80. Ps. 155. 6. Rom. 9. 19. Exo. 4. 22. 23 Mat. 23 v. 37. 1 Tim. 2. v. 4. Mat. 20. v. 16. Genuinuâ— loci sensus Exod. 32. v 4. 5. 6 Rom. 132 Vertually though not vocally Exod. 32 v 1 2. 3. 4. 5. 6 â—5 Deut. 17. â— 10. 11. Mat. 26. v 64. 65. The high Priest erred most grosly Ephes. 4. v. â—2 Ephes. 4. v. â—2 The Church of Rome wan teth formal succession Clem ep 1. Iren. lib. 3. cap. 3. Epiâ—h her 27. â—is seb lib 3. c. 13. 14. 15. Naucler paâ—â— 3â— histor S. Peters doing is controlled Carranz in â—pit concil p. 370. p. 373. The cheefest Bishop dyed at Hierusalem 1 Tim. 2. 1◠〈◊〉 Pope Iohn was a woman Exod 8 19. Digitus Dei est hic The truth must preuaile in time Palmer Sigeber in Chron. Obraue succession of women Popes The Popes of Rome 4. can beare children but not preach Bernard aâ— Ganfrid ep 12. 5. Apoc. 13. v. 5. 7. The Authors protestation for his sincere dealing Naucler pag 713. histor Ps. 115 v. 2 Mark this The Church cannot erre that is the Pope cannot erre 1489. Victor de potest Papâ— pâ—oâ—os 16. caus 17. q 4 cap. quiâ— Flat Idolatry euen by Popish â—aâ—h This woman-pope liued A. D. 18. S. â— pag. 142. Ezec. 3. 18. cap. 33. v. 8. Psal. 79. v. 6 Luk. 12. 48. Caus. 17. q. 4 cap. siquis Esa. 55. v. 8. 9. 3. Reg. 8 39 Rom. 8. 17. 1 Par. 28. 9. â— Sam. 16 â— Psa. 7. v. 10. Mar. 2. 27. A. D. 1439. Loe the Councell deposed the Pope for his disobedience A Spaniard being but a Souldier was the author of the sect of the Iesuites A. D. 1540. A generall Councell is aboue the Pope by the verdict of best learned papists Carranzâ— â—ol 354. 355. Barth fumus A. D 1503.