whiche alwayes Gods holy name be praysed therefore hath turned to the confusion of Popery and the further spreading of the light of the Gospell In the demaunde he vrgeth vs to shewe when the Romanes went out of the truth fâ—rsaking any company of Christians then liuing This hath bene often shewed that the Romanes though not all at once yet by litle and litle euen as the mysterie of iniquitie got strength which began to worke in the Apostles tyme haue departed from the communion of other Christians The first storye that maketh notable mention is Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 25. of Victor which did cut him selfe from all the Churches of the East about a ceremonye since which tyme the Romane Bishops by litle and litle haue departed vntill they made a generall apostasie and defection from the vniuersall Churche condemning all the Christians in the world except such as held of their particular schismaticall and hereticall Churche of Rome The 19. motiue is the 4. demaund Risinge afterwarde Saynt Ireneus and Tertullians motiue He spendeth muche labour in vayne to proue that the first religion is the onely true religion and that all sectes that arise after are false which we graunt most willingly with Irenaeus Tertullian and the Scripture it selfe But he hath not one worde to proue that our religion is of a later springe then the Apostles and therefore like an asse he flyeth to their common stable saying that Luther liued but yesterdaye as though Luther were the firste author of our religion Which if it be not as auncient as Christ and the Apostles might easiely be confuted by the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles contayned in the holye Scriptures The 20. motiue is the 5. demaunde Beginninge with wondringe and gaynesaying of Christians then in vnitye vvhich is Saynte Irenaeus motiue Our religion of Christ reuealed in the fleshe began with wondring and gaynesaying of Scribes Pharisees as it is manifest by the historye of the Gospell Marke 1. yet was not the doctrine of Christ newe or straunge but newely begonne to be restored which was by them corrupted so is the same now wondred at and gaynesayde by their successors the Papistes but of true Christians it is nether wondred at nor gaynesayde contrariwise the heresie of Papistes in manye poyntes was wondred at and gaynesayde by true Christians whiche Bristowe saythe we can not proue to be in anye one For example I will name one of the chiefest articles which they holde namely the Popes supremacye vpon which all the rest in Eusebius testifyeth that when Victor Bishoppe of Rome which was the first that challeÌ„ged any supremacie tooke vpon him to excommunicate the Churches and Bishops of Asia about the celebration of Easter His presumption was wondred at and gainesayde not only by those Churches and their Bishops but euen by others neere hand as by Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons in Fraunce which sharpely reproued him therfore more theÌ„ two hundreth yeeres after when Zozimus other Romish Prelates made claime to a kind of supremacy in resisting appeale out of Africa and for that purpose had counterfaited a decree of the Nicâ—ne councel They were wondred at and gainesaid by the whole councell of Carthage The like might I shewe for worshipying of Images the reall presence transubstatiation c. But where hee sayeth that all heresies were wondered at and gainesaide immediatly after they arose it cannot be proued Nor that all was Heresie that was gainesaide by them that were in vnitie For the baptisme of Heretikes was gainesaide by Saincte Cyprian and all the Bishoppes of Africa yet was it none heresie that Infants might be sauedwith out receiuing of the communion was gainesaid by Innocentius Bishop of Rome and by S. Augustine and by all the church that was at vnitie against the Pelagians August contra duas epistolas Pelag. ad Bonifacium lib. 2. Cap 4. Yet was not that opinion then helde by the Pelagians otherwise horrible Heretikes and heresie but that which the Bishop of Roms the rest of the known visible church did holde was an erâ—or whereby you may see how truely the commaundement of Christe vnto Peter to confirme his Brethren after his conuersion doth giue the Byshop of Rome ' power neuer to be deceiued nor to fall into error And that the Church may be the piller and stay of trueth although the chiefe members thereof and generally all that are knowen to be members thereof may be taken in some particular error The 21. Motiue is the 42. demaunde Vnsent Orders Protestants allowe better of our orders theÌ„ of their owne Wheras Bristowe chargeth vs to be vnsent it is nothing else but a popish slaunder and petition of principle for we are called and sent ordinarily by the Church and elders of the same to preach the word of God and to minister the Sacraments Neither are we ordayned by a lay Prince as he like a lewde Papist doth slaunder both our Christian Prince and vs. And although the Prince by letters Patents hath sent some to preach and visite the Churches of her dominions yet shee hath doone it by authoritie of the worde of God and by example of godly Princes Iosaphat and other 2. Chro. 17. not taking vpon het to execute any ecclesiasticall function but according to her kingly authoritie in causes ecclesiasticall And where Bristowe saith we allowe better of their popish orders then of our owne secking as much as we can possible to be consecrated by one of their orders except it be some such proude hypocrite as Bristowe is that so iudgeth and seeketh it is a moste abhominable lye For withall our heart wee abhorre defie detest and spit at your stinking greasie antichristian orders Neither doth our Church receiue any of your execrable ordering to minister in the Church before they haue solemnly by othe renounced your Antichriste and publikely as well professed to imbrace all true religion as Protested that in their conscienses they defy all papistry and other heresies Although many godly men wishe yet a more seuere discipline in examining and receiuing such as come our of your heresie to serue in the Church of God The 22. motiue is the 43. demaund Suceession S. Optatus motiue The Church is euerlasting visible S. Hieroms S. Augustines motiue the Church euerlasting The communion of the B. of Rome to be kept of all Christians Succession in the see Apostolike Tertullians and Augustines motiues That the Church is euerlasting Bristow neede not haue takeÌ„ such paynes to proue that this continuance is preserued by succession is also to be confessed But y t this succession is visible limited to any one sea of bishops it is false For euen as he him selfe sayth it is necessary that all Adams children to be come of Adam by a continuall pedegree of fathers and grandfathers and other progenitors euen vntill his time and yet no one of Adams childreÌ„ can deduce this pedegree by
naming of all his progenitors from Adam vnto his time so there is no doubt but the Church hath had a perpetuall succession in the world from y e beginning thereof vntil this day although she can not name a particular succession of persons in any one place for all ages that are past But euen as by the Scriptures we are taught that Adam is our naturall father although we can not name all our auÌ„cestors that haue bene betwene vs and him right so by the Scriptures we are taught that the Church is our heauenly mother although we can not frame such tables of succession as the Papistes require vs to shew which they can not performe them selues For although they can name a number of Bishops whereof some haue taught at Rome some haue sitten and slept in their chayer at Rome and some at Auynion some haue played the deuill therein an hundreth of the last being no more like to a score of the firste in doctrine and life then God whose children the first were is like the deuill whose derlings the last were yet what is this to shewe a succession of their Church And howe doth this proue them to be the true Churche can not the Churche of Constantinople and other Churches in Greece doe the like vnto this daye Yet doe the Papistes count all them for heretikes and scismatikes Whatsoeuer therefore Optatus Hierom Augustine Tertullian or any other haue written of succession of Bishops in the Apostolike sees they meane so large and so farre forth as they continue in succession of Apostolike doctrine Otherwise woulde not Hierom haue embraced Arrianisme because it was receyued by Liberius who sate in the Apostolike see of Rome and coulde name his predecessors from Peter Nor Optatus haue receyued Eutychianisme because it was defended by Dioscorus which satte in the Euangelisticall see of Alexandria and coulde name his predecessors from S. Marke the disciple of S. Peter Nether woulde Augustine haue consented to Arrianisme because it was mayntayned by Eulalius and Euzoius Bishops of the Apostolike see of Antioche althoughe they were able to shewe their succession by many Bishops euen vnto S. Peter him selfe who planted his chayer at Antioche by all Papistes confession seuen yeares before he came to Rome You see therefore howe farre the motiue of succession may drawe or driue any man to haue regard vnto it euen as long as there is succession of doctrine as well as of place and person and not longer nor further The 23. motiue is the 44. demaund Apostolike Church The Communion of the Bishop of Rome to be kept of all Christians Apostolike Church is the Romane Church Apostolike Church as the Romane is S. Augustines motiue Succession of the Bishops of Rome the motiue of Optatus S. Augustine and S. Irenaeus This motiue in effect is all one with the former and in a maner so confessed by Bristow him selfe But thus he takâ—th his principle of their singing in the Masse our saying in the communion of the creede in which we confesse that we beleue one onely Catholike and Apostolike Church This one Catholike Church sayth Bristow is our Church that is Apostolike because it agreeth with the faith of the Church of Rome which is the sea of an Apostle holding on to this day by succession and to which was written an Epistle by an Apostle I aunswer it is not the popish Romane Church because that Church is departed from the vniuersal Church of Christ planted by the Apostles through out the worlde and holdeth not on in succession of the doctrine of the Apostle which did write that epistle to the Romanes But Bristowes wise reasoning is to be noted S. Peter was an Apostle That is true he was the first Bishop of Rome It is a great doubt whether he euer came at Rome and it is out of doubt by the Scriptures that he taried not there so longe as the histories affirme and last it is false that he was a Bishop of a particular Church which was an Apostle ouer all the world and specially ouer the circumcision There is a citye in the worlde named Rome And that citye by the Scripture is the seat of Antichrist and the whore of Babylon Apoc. 17. vers 18. S. Paules epistle to the Romaines is extant and euen that epistle will proue the Church of Rome at this day to be not apostolicall but apostatical as in many articles so in the article of iustification Rom. 3. vers 28. Are not those causes why a Church is called Apostolike sayth Bristow No verily but onely because it holdeth and mayntayneth the Apostolike doctrine which if it doe in all necessary articles then is it Apostolike hath succession and plantation of the Apostles or els not although it be gathered in such cities in which the Apostles haue preached planted and to whome they haue written But Tertullian doth so define Apostolike Churches sayth Bristow I say it is vntrue for Tertullian against newe heretikes sendeth vs not to the emptye chayres of the Apostles which had written to such cities but vnto the the testimony of their doctrine receyued from the Apostles and continued vntill that time So he sendeth them that are in Achaia to Corinthe such as are in Macedonia to Philippi those that are in Asia to Ephesus them which be neare Italy to Rome from whence they of Africa had their authoritie not by excellency of that Church aboue other Apostolike Churches but by nearenes of place Therfore he saith Proxima est tibi Achaia habes Corinthum Si non longè es à Macedonia habes Philippos Si potes in Asiam tendere habes Ephesum si autem Italiae adieceris habes Romam vnde nobis quaeque auctoritas presto est statuta Is Achaia nearest vnto thee thou hast Corinthe If thou be not farre from Macedonia thou hast Philippi If thou canst goe into Asia thou hast Ephesus If thoulye neare to Italy thou hast the Church of Rome from whence vnto vs also in Africa authoritie is setled nearer at hand Tertul de praeser But Bristow sayth that the auncient fathers when there were many Apostolike Churches standing they did principally and singularly direct men alwayes to the Church of Rome This you see to be false by the place of Tertullian last ciâ—ed But that they did more often direct men to the testimony of the Church of Rome it was for that by meanes of the Imperiall citie it was more notorious and best knowne Otherwise it is a very lye of Bristow where he sayth that when the fathers name the Apostolike church they do meane the Romane church by excellency as the Poet signifieth Vergil and the Philosopher Aristotle A like lye it is that no Church remayneth in the world founded by any of the Apostles but onely Rome For many Churches remayne to this day that were planted by the Apostle Paule who from Hierusalem to Illyricum filled all the contryes with the doctrine of the Gospell of which
Popish church neuer made any chauÌ„ge of religion Which is a shamelesse assertion although he say that none of his aduersaries is able to charge them with any alteration since Augustines time For to omitte the whole scope of doctrine cleane peruerted I will obserue only the practise of the church in Augustines time about the Lords supper In that time the lay people did receaue the communion in both kindes and one thousand yeres almost after which of late the Papistes haue altered In Augustines time the communion was geuen to infantes which the Papistes doe not obserue therefore they can not bragge of perpetuall practise and deny all chaunge in religion made by them But Bristow not content with this vayne bragge will go farther and shewe that whatsoeuer they haue vsed sithe S. Augustines time was obserued euen so in all that time that passed betwene S. Paule and S. Augustine Is not this a master of impudence to promise that which all the worlde of learned men doth know to be impossible to be performed and whereof the promiser himselfe can bring no profe at all but his bare worde For he beginneth with exorcisme and exsufflation which as it was vsed in Augustines time vnnecessarily so it appeareth by Cyprian that was long before him that it was vsed for the casting out of the deuill in them whose bodies he did sensibly possesse lib. 3. cap. 7. ad Magnum Of the sacrifice of the Masse worshipping of the Sacrament and oblation for the deade as Bristow referreth the reader to his fift and seuenth motiues so doe I to mine aunsweres vnto the same Concerning the vse of the altare howe truly he sayth I referre the reader to mine answere of D. Heskins lib. 3. cap. 31. The other fonde reason of the practise of the church that children were taught to beleue the reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament for which he citeth Aug. de Tim. lib. 3. cap. 10. which the poore man borowed out of Allens booke of Purgatory is discussed answered in my confutation of the same treatise lib. 2 cap. 9. Then followeth going on pilgrimage to holy places worshipping of reliques prayer vnto Sainctes vsed as he sayth in Augustines time For worshipping of reliques and praying to Sainctes he citeth Aug de câ—re pro mor. Who concludeth that to be buried at some memorie of the martyrs doth in this poynct only auayle the dead that the affection of supplication commending him also to the patronage of the martyr may be encreased That this was no perpetuall practise of the church to desire the intercession of Sainctes it is manifest by this that Augustine him selfe dare affirme nothing certeinly whether or how the Saincts may heare our prayers Affirming that this question passeth the power of his vnderstanding cap. 16. But by the name of memory Bristow will vnderstande relique because it is somtime so vsed which is no strong argument But admitte it were so how can he proue either that practise to haue bene continued from S. Paule to S. Augustine or the same opinion of reliques to haue ben in Augustines time which is mainteined in the Popish church that there was superstitious peregrinatioÌ„ vnto Ierusalem c. vsed in S. Hieroms time it is as true as that the same was reproued of him Ep. ad Paul If God shewed any miracles at the deade bodyes of the Martyrs to confirme that religion for which they suffred against the Gentiles it foloweth not that the reliques of dead Saints are to be worshiped kissed saught vnto by pilgrimage c but most absurd is it that Bristow would haue Hierome by ofteÌ„ entering into the Cryptos or vaultes of churches at Rome to signifie that he went a Pilgrimage Hierome was not so grose to accounte walking about the Citie to be a Preregrination But what is so leaden or blockishe which these doltish Papists will not auouch for the mainteinaunce of their trompery Last of all he chargeth the Protestantes with an impudent attempt in making such an vniuersall chaunge of the whole face of Religion which none of the olde Heretikes did before theÌ„ That we are like to none of the olde Heretikes we like our selues neuer the worse but as concerning the vniuersall chaunge it was necessary in reformation where there was an vniuersal Apostacie For any alteratioÌ„ that we haue made the Papistes dare not affirme for shame that wee haue brought any thing into the Church which ought not to be vsed by the worde of God neither are they able to proue that we haue omitted anything which by the holy scripture is necessaryly required To coÌ„clude you see that the practise of the church except it be perpetuall euen from the first beginning is no Motiue by Augustines iudgement and that Bristowe though hee hath bragged much thereof for some superstitions vsed of olde yet he hath brought nothing to proue that they haue beene from the beginning The 12. Motiue is the 28. demaunde Sea apostolike The communion of the Bishop of Rome to be kept of all Christians The Romain Church is the Catholike Church Saint Augustine of our religion Such as are condemned by the Sea Apâ—stolike are holden for Heretikes Pelagians aliue againe in Protestants Emperours and other peeres of our Religion as also their first conuersion S. Theodoret Chrisostom and Hierome of our Religion Antichristes side against the Pope Protestants doe decay and shall come to nothing VVhosoeuer sayth Bristow at any time were for their doing or teaching condemned by the definitiue sentence of the Sea Apostolike and stubbernly condemned the same they were Scismatikes or heretikes And contrariwise all Catholike men haue kept them selues in the vnitie of that sea and if for any cause they were out of it labouring to be reconciled againe or if they had beene but suspected neuer ceasing vntill they had made their purgation Moreouer he saith there can none example be alleadged to the contrary but innumerable for it It is not denyed but the Church and Sea of Rome while it continued in true catholike Religion was much reuerenced euery where so farre at least as the Romane empire did extende But when any Bishop of that sea went out of the way either in scisme or herefie they were not followed but resisted condemned For Example When Victor bishop of Rome like a proude scismatike did take vpon him to excommunicate all the Churches of the East for celebration of Easter they did not onely contemne his censure but many Bishops also did sharply rebuke him as Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons other Euse. li. 5. ca. 25. WheÌ„ Liberius bishop of Rome relented vnto the Arrians he was forsaken of the true Christians and accounted an Heretike Hier. in Catal. When Bonifacius Zosimus and Celestinus Bishops of Rome would chalenge appellations out of Africa contrary to the decrees out of the councels of Africa by counterfaiting a Canon of the Nicene councell they were resisted by all the Bishops of Africa and the trechery
many vnto this day continue in profession of Christianitie beside all the Churches of India AEthiopia which were also planted by the Apostles Thomas and other The more beastly is the blundering of this Bristow who dreameth that the councell of Constantinople the 1. which made this confession by the Apostolike Church did not onely meane the Romane Church but also none other but the Romane Church As though that councell could not distinguish the Catholike Apostolike Church dispersed ouer all â—â—â—â— face of the earth from the particular Apostolike Church of Rome which was but a member therereof when the same councel gaue the like priuiledges of honor to the Church of Constantinople which the Church of Rome had reseruing but the senioritie to y e Church of Rome And being called to a councel at Rome by the Princes letters procured by Damasus Bishop of Rome other Bishops of Italy the West they refused to come as hauing already by the Emperour of the East being gathered to Constantinople â—oncluded what they thought good to be decreed Histor. trip lib. 9 cap. 13. And in their epistle written to their fellow ministers Damasus Ambrose c. gathered in councell at Rome wherein they excused their refusall to come they call the Church of Antiochia seniorem vere apostolicam Ecclesiam the elder truly an Apostolike Church The church of Ierusalem they call the mother of all Churches Ep. Concil Constanti Hist. trip lib. 9. cap. 14. Nether was it euer in their mind to make the particular Church of Rome the only Apostolike Church of the world but onely a principall member consenting with the same The succession of bishops of Rome alledged by Irenaeus Tertullian Augustine Optatus doth nothing in the world defend the popish bishops in their successioÌ„ vnto this day for so much as they succeede not in doctrine as well as in place Nether doe we make any leape from Luther vnto the Apostles but prouing our doctrine to be the doctrine of the Apostles we doubt no more of perpetuall succession thereof then knowing our selues to be descended from Adam we doubt whether we haue had a line all discent of progenitors vnto this time that I may vse Bristowes owne example to declare that numbring of Bishops is no more necessary in the one theÌ„ shewing our pedegrie in the other Seing the question is not how many men in what places were professed this doctrine but whether it be the same which â—â—â—â— Apostles taught but that can not better be proued then by the writings of â—â—â—â— Apostles The places cited by Bristow for succession out of Irenaeus Tertullian Optatus Augustine you shall sinde answered in my confutation of Stapletons fortres part 2. cap. 1. of Sanders rocke cap. 15. where also is answered the place of S. Luke cap. 22. of Christ praying that Peters faith might not faile The 24. motiue â—â— the 45. demaund The Romaines neuer chauÌ„ged their religion S. Bede of our religion the Râ—maine church his motiue ProtestaÌ„ts be of many old heresies The Apostles were of our religion Prayer for the dead vsed alwayes If the Romaines had not chauÌ„ged their religion since their faith was coÌ„mended by the Apostle there should be no controuersie betwene vs them And if Bristow caÌ„ proue by the Apostles writing that he is of their religion or that they were of the Popish religioÌ„ the strife is at an ende How farre Bâ—de was of your religion I haue shewed in the answer to Stapletons fortresse But he vrgeth vs to shew what Pope chaunged their religion what tumults rising in the worlde thereon what Doctors withstoode it what couÌ„cels accuâ—sed c. which he saith they can shew in all innouatioÌ„s both great sinal that euer by heretikes were atteÌ„pted What an impudent lyar is this Bristow to brag of that which at this day is impossible to be don by any maÌ„ liuing in the worlde For of so many heretikes as are rehersed by Epiphanius Augustine not the one halfe of theÌ„ can be so shewed as Bristow like a blind bayard boasteth they can doe But if we say the chaunge was not made al at once we must shew wheÌ„ euery pece was altered as they do of our doctrin of old taught by many old heretiks AErius denying praier for the dead c. Whereof many are slauÌ„ders lyes the rest if we can not defend by Scriptures let them be takeÌ„ for heresies To the purpose we haue often shewed and are ready daily to shew the beginning of many of their heresies errors as of the Popes supremacy in Victor of prayer for the dead in the Montanists of their crossing in the Valentinians of images in the Gnosâ—ikes and Carpocratians and so of a great many other errors which are contrary to the holy Scriptures by which we first reproue them of falshood and as stories serue vs we open their beginnings And wheras Bristow without all shame affirmeth that prayer for the dead was vsed alwayes citeth Irenaeus among other for his auctor he sheweth nothing but impudency matched with his heresie for there is no worde in Ireneus to proue that prayer for the dead was vsed of any godly man of his time Tertullian a Montanist is the first that maketh any mention of prayers for the dead only in such bookes as he wrote when he was an heretike Whereas Augustine sayth Ep. 119. That y e church of God nether appâ—oueth nor keepeth secret nor doth such thinges as be against the faith and good maners it is to be vnderstanded of such things as the church knoweth to be against the faith For of some thinges the church may be ignorant as Augustine confesseth in his retractations lib. 2. cap. 18. Vbicunque in his libris commemoraui ecclesiam non habentem maculam aut rugaâ— non sic accipiendum est quasi iam sit sed quae praeparatur vt sit quando apparebit etiam gloriosa nunc enim propter quasdam ignorantias infirmitates meâ—brorum suâ—rum habet vnde quâ—tidie tota dicat Dimitte nobis dâ—bita nostra Wheresoeuer in those bookes I haue made mention of y e church not hauing spot or wrinckle it is not to be takeÌ„ as though she were so now but which is prepared that â—he may be when she shall appeare also glorious For now because of certaine ignorances and infirmities of her members euen the whole church hath cause to say euerie day forgiue vs our trespasses Notwithstanding the watchmen therefore prophecied by Esay continually geuing warning vpon the walles against the inuasion of open enemies and blasphemous heretikes yet many hypocrites haue crept into the church secretly and vnder shew of pietie haue shewed many errors and superstitions while the mysterie of miquity wroughâ— the full manifestation and Apostasie of Antichrist In the demaunde Bristow denyeth that any Pope did erre although I haue shewed both out of stories S. Hierom the Pope Damasus and the generall
Rome to approue her doctrine by auctority of Gods word Which because the Papists dare not atteÌ„pt Bristow requireth I can not tel what approbation priuiledge of the sayd libell to shew a bad shift better then none at all why they wil not answere it For Popish libells that are but cast abroad in writing we require no approbation nor priuiledge dare not the Papists confute a printed libell before it haue approbation priuiledge The 29. motiue Protestantes them selues take thinges vpon our churches credit The churches auctority S. Augustines motiue VVhat Sor. pture the Protestants deny Although we did receaue such things as he reherseth vpon their churches credit it followeth not that theirs is the true church for we receaue nothing from them without dew exammation The Scriptures we receaue not vpon the only credit of the Popish church but vpon the credit of y e vniuersall church of Christ. The creedes articles of doctrine tearmes of person trinitie consubstantiality Sacraments c. we receaue because they be consonant to the Scriptures not because the church of Rome tellâ—th â—s they be true As for the auctoritie of the church which he sayth was S. Augustines motiue to beleue the Gospell was not a single or sole motiue but a commotiue or an argument that with other argumeÌ„ts did moue him for the sayth not moueret but commoueret and so it is with vs. Prouided alwayes that the Popish church be no taken for that Catholike or vniuersall church VVhat then sayth Bristow was it the Protestants church whereof Augustine ment or can you hold laughter when the question is asked No verily for when the Protestants church that it is now so called in this age like as it was called the Homousians church in Augustines time is a member of the Catholike vniuersall church of Christ and so proued by the holy Scriptures it is a ridiculous thing to doubt whether it were the popish church which is but an hereticall assembly departed from the vniuersall church long since Augustines departure out of this life But Bristow will proue that the church at whose commanndement Augustine beleued the Gospell was not the ProtestaÌ„ts church because that church commaunded him to beleue the bookes of Toby Iudith VVisdome Ecclesiasticus the Machabees to be canonicallscripture which the church of Protestantes doth denye But what it Augustine were deceiued to thinke he hearde the voice of the Catholike church when he did not shall the Protestantes churche be condemned S. Hierome who if the church of Rome were the Catholike church was more like to heare her voice because he was a Priest of the church of Rome telleth vs a cleane contrary tale For thus he writeth In praefat in Prouerbia Sicut ergo Iudith Tobiae Machabaeorum libros legit quidem ecclesia sed eos inter Canonicas scripturas non recipit sic haec duo volumina leg at ad aedificationem plebis non ad auctoritatem ecclesiasticorum dogmatum confirmandam Therfore as the Church in deade readeth the bookes of Iudith and Tobias and of the Macchabees but yet she receiueth them not among the Canonicall scriptures so she may reade these two Bookes speaking of the booke of Wisedome and Ecclesiasticus for the edifying of the common people but not for confirming the authoritie of Ecclesiasticall doctrine Doth the Church of Protestants iudge otherwise of these Bookes then that Church which thus instructed Hierome What then I must say as Bristowe doth S. Hierome and the Catholike Church in his time of our Religion The Church of Rome now is of an other iudgement then the Church of Rome was then ergo it is not now that it was then But whereas Bristowe chargeth vs to to deny or at least to leaue indifferent the Canticles of Salomon The Epistle to the Hebrues The Epistles of Saint Iames S Peter S. Iohn Sainct Iude with the Apocalips it is a diuelish slaunder as God knoweth and the woâ—ld can beare vs witnesse The 30. Motiue is the 36. and 37. demaÅd Storehouse of the Scriptures Tht Iewes Religion chaunged into ours by Christ. The Churches learning and wisdome The Church store S. Irenaeus motiue Bristowe demaundeth whether the Popish Church receiuing the Scriptures of the olde and newe Testament from Christ hath not kept them faithfully without adding minishing or corrupting I aunswere no for the Popish church receiueth none of Christ but the catholike church of Christ. Againe the popish Church hath added whole bokes to the canon which the chuch of the Iewes neuer receiued nor the vniuersall Church of Christ. But those Bokes saith Bristow hath the Protestants church robbed vs of w c are allowed by approued Councels You heard in the last motiue Hieromes iudgement of those bookes whervnto agreeth the couÌ„cel of Laodiâ—ea cap. 59. Augustine receiueth the boks of Macchabees but with condition of sobrietie in the reader or hearer Augâ— consec â—pist Gaudent cap. 13. Last of al the popish church either of fraud or negligence hath corrupted an exceeding great number of textes of the scripture in her vulgar latine translation w c she receueth as only authentical The very first promise of the gospel is corrupted and falsyfied For wheras the trueth is Ipsum contret caput â—â—â—â— the same seede shall broose thine head the popish translation hath Ipsa the same woman Gen 3. Wheras he saith the Protestants church for this 100. yeeres as we coÌ„fesse our selues occupyed no bible nor had any thing to do with the scriptures he lieth out of al measure for the church of Christ hath alwaies had the scriptures in euery nation where it was it had theÌ„ in their mother toung How many Bibles are yet extant written in parchmeÌ„t 3 or 4. hundreth yeeres past in the English toung beside other in the Saxon language The like are to be proued to haue ben in al places where the Churches were gathered as in France Italy Bohemia c. Finally whatsoeuer he bableth of their Church to be the store house of the Scriptures trueth the like may be said of the greke Church which they coÌ„demne as schismaticall hereticall therefore this storehouse is no Motiue to proue the Romish Sinagogue to be the church of God In the 37. demaund he asketh whether as wel Protestants as other doe not condemne the old writers errors other heresies of Heretiks which made great shew of scriptures by the rule of y e popish churchs faith I answere the Protestants out of the scriptures do can disproue such shew of scriptures made by maisters of error are no more moued by the popish churches authoritie then the Apostles were moued by authoritie of the Iewish Synagogue to reproue all the grosse Idolatrie and snperstition of the Gentiles Therfore the popish Church is not Depositorium Diues that rich storehouse of trueth which was S. Ireneus motiue The 31. motiue is the 41. demaund Sending and teaching of all diuine
with the crosse more then of touchinge the hemme of anye garment In the 22. demaunde he asketh whether in the most auncient seruice of the primitiue Church there was not alwayes prayer for the deade and to Saynctes the ceremonies vsed by Papistes in baptisme c. I answere no. Cyprian whome he quoteth Ep. 66. speaketh not of prayer for the deade in any place but of oblation for the falling a sleepe that is thankes giuing for the departure of the deade and naming them in the prayers of the Church which dyed in the faith of Christ and in obedience of the Church In the tyme of Eusebius that errour of praying for the deade was in deede receyued in many places of the Churche which beganne first amonge the Montanists The ceremonies of exufâ—lation and exorcisme were not idlely vsed in the primitiue Church as they are of the Papistes but when the persons to be baptised were sensibly possessed with deuills as appeareth in Cyprian lib. 3. Ep. 7. ad Magnum Likewise where he demaund th whether we reade at any tyme when Masse did first come into the Churches I aunswere if by Masse he meaneth that popish forme of sacrificing which they vse and call Masse we reade of euery parte of it when and by what Pope it came in By Masse he meaneth the doctrine of the carnall presence transubstantiation adoration of the sacrament and making it a sacrifice propitiatory for the quicke and the deade I aunswer that we reade all these heresies to haue crept into the Church of Rome since the first six hundreth yeares And as for the substance of the canon being contrary to the doctrine of the Apostles is easie to be proued that it came not from the Apostles beside that some of them ascribe it to Gregory and Gregory him selfe to Scholasticus so that being of some antiquitie it conteyneth in it matter repugnant euen vnto the popish heresies For first it calleth the coÌ„secrated breade and wine the sacrifices and offereth them for the whole Church Secondly after consecration it calleth the Sacrament Panem sanctum vitâ—e aeternae calicem salutis aeternae holye breade of eternall life and cuppe of eternall health of the giftes of God and prayeth God to accept it as the sacrifice of Abell Thirdly the priest prayeth that God will commaund â—â—â—â— same to be caried by an Angellinto his high alter c. Fourthly he prayeth for all them that haue receyued the same sacrament with him which can not stand with a priuate Masse Finally that it came not euidently of the Apostles as Bristow impudently affirmeth it may be euideÌ„tly seene by this that diuerse Sainctes are named in it which liued more then two hundreth yeares after the Apostles as Cosmus Damiaius c. And that we are able to finde more fault with it then with Gloria Patri Te Deum c. it is plentifully declared by many volumes and namely by Bishop of Sarum in his sermon and defence of the same against Harding The 33. motiue is the 21. demaund Ecclesiasticall monuments and liuings Churches the worke of the Catholikes Vniuersities of heretikes and Catholikes Protestants be vsurpers of other mens liuings Although a great number of churches that are now standing were builded by Papistes and for Popery yet not all For the chiefest and most auncient Cathedrall churches were neither builded by Papistes nor for Popery but by Christian Princes and for the vse of Christian religion Of such churches writeth Euseb. in vita Const. lib. 30. Hist. Eccl. lib. 10. cap. 4. where was but one table or altare which was remoueable made of bords placed in the midest of the Church contrary to the popish fashion which hath many Altars and all againste walles or pillers and the chiefest against the farthest wall most commonly It is a fonde reason of Bristowe that they were built for Popery because they are builte in length to the East or in forme of a Crosse. For many are built rounde and those with crosse Iles are moste vnmeete for masse at the high Altar which they that sit in the crosse Yles cannot see Likewise Bede whome Bristowe in the demaunde without shame doth quote for the contrary testifieth that the churches of the Romaines lib. 3. Cap. 4. speaking of Niua one that was brought vp at Rome which at a place called Candida casa now Whiterne Made a Church of stone of an other facion then the Britans were wont to build These are y e words of Bede of Stapletons translation And concerning the founding of Ecclesiasticall liuings and Vniuersities we know that the first dotation of Churches was by Christian Princes what if superstition hath added any thing to them Nether the building of Churches not the founding of liuings and Vniuersities doth proue the builders or founders to be of good religion not yet coÌ„demne the vsers of such Churches liuings and Vniuersities of vsurping or sacriledge The idolatrous Church of Pantheon at Rome was turned into Maria rotunda Gregory councelled Augustine to conuert the Idolatrous Churches of the Saxons to the vse of Christian religion Beda lib. 1. cap. 30. The Vniuersitie of Athens founded by heaâ—hen Philosophers was after frequented by Christian schollers as testifieth Gregory Nazianzene in Monod And if we beleue our English stories y e liuings of the Idolatrous Flamines Arch Flamines was conuerted to the mayntenancs of the Bishops and ArchBishops The 34. motiue is the 23. demaund Heretikes are apes of the Catholikes The Churches learning and wisedom The Communion booke an apish imitation of our Masse booke The maner of Apes is to counterfeit and follow visible actions without any meaning or profit Such imitation haue we none but the apish Church of Rome is ful of such following of the gestures of Christ in their masse and other ceremonies Yea they counterfeit the voice of Pilate Iudas in reading the gospel on Palme Sonday They play the apes of the Primitiue Church in coniuring the deuil in baptisme Yea they be the apes of Aaron the leuitical Priestes in their robes sensing sacrificing The very Pagans they follow in ceremonies festiuities as their owne Durand confesseth In whose Rationale diuinorum you may see the learning wisdom of the popish Church for all their mischieuous mysteries As for vs we imitate nothing that they doe to get commendation by similitude of their doings but rather we abhorre whatsoeuer hath but a shew of popery if we vse any thing rightly which is abused of them we are not therefore apes of them but they apes of the auncient fathers whose doctrine we doe truely follow as they vainely imitate and in imitation falsely peruert their examples That the communion booke is an apish imitation of the masse booke is a most shamelesse lye For what similitude hath our ministration of the communion with their masse any more then our doctrine with theirs If any thinge in ceremonies or discipline haue bene tollerated not
gouernment is such as therein they serue God and the Church in compelling by lawe and authoritie all persons to doe their duties as well in religion as in ciuill affayres Not an antichristian tyranny such as the Pope vsurpeth to be Lords ouer our faith and to make Articles of Religion at their pleasure but to prouide that all thinges may be doone according to the word of God But Bristow replyeth that it was not the Popish church vnto whome Constantine and the rest of the Christian Emperours yeelded vp the imperiall Cittie of Rome with all the countrie of Italie What an impudent lye this is may easely be knowen of all them which haue read the historyes which testifie that the Emperors of Constantinople receiued possession in Rome and Italy vntill the time of Charles the great which was made Emperour by the Pope In the demaunde Bristowe asketh if the first Christian Emperonrs Constantinus Theodosius were not in all pointes of the popishe Religion I answere that although they were infected with a few errors as prayer for the deade c yet in the substance of Christian Religion they beleeued the same that wee beleeue of Iustification by faith onely of the vertue of Christes sacrifice once offred for all of the authoritie of the holy Scriptures and were enemies to the Papistes in their chiefe Principle of the Popes supremacie the carnall presence transubstantiation priuate Masse Communion in one kinde Images Prayers in vnknowen language and many other As for the lycence that Bristowe woulde haue vs procure for them to appeare with vs before the Queenes highnesse to dispute whether the firste Christian Emperors were not altogither Papists is nothing else but a popishe bragge whiche if it were procured they would delude the whole purpose with such Cauillations as they did in the Conference offered vnto them at Westminster in the firste yeere of her Maiesties raigne where after they had hearde our side once reade their Booke they were so discouraged that they durst abide no more tryall but shamefully and obstiantely cleane gaue ouer the conference The 42. motiue is parte of the 47. demaund The Parliament Church and Religion Sainct Peter excluded out of Englande by Parliament Yea Christe Peter and Paule and other Apostles excluded out of Englande by Parliament The Apostles were of our Religion Howe Sainct Augustine should be vsed in England by the Parliament lawe if he were there liuing Of what Religion and authoritie the Fathers are Succession Protestants contrary to them salues Wee must consider sayth Bristowe what Church that is where Lawes be made to charge Peter if hee were liuing to giue vppe his commission receiued of Christ and to take another of the Kinge or Queene and to charge him and his fellowe Apostles to leaue the true seruice which they had receiued and to minister after an other sorte as the Paliament lawe prescribeth To this I aunswere we will bee tryed by the writinges of Peter and his fellow Apostles that the Parliament lawe for Religion and seruice of God concernig the substance thereof vrgeth not Peter to chaunge his commission nor to vse any other seruice then they them selues haue taught vs to vse If Augustine were aliue and in Englande hee was a man of such modestie and loue of the trueth that seeing the same plainly reuealed out of the holy Scriptures hee woulde retracte his errour of Prayer for the deade as when hee lyued hee retracted and sette foorth manye thinges wherein he founde that he hadde erred As for the fine of an hundred Markes he woulde not haue lefte nor beene depriued of his Byshoprike and imprysoned for saying of the popishe Masse for hee neuer sayde any in his life but was an vtter enemye to the chiefe poyntes thereof allowing nothing therof but prayer for the deade at the celebration of the Lords supper And for as our Sauiour Iesus Christ the King of all Kinges and Lorde of all Lordes and the onely ruler of Heauen and earth doe you thinke that hee wyll not complaine that hee onely by Parliament lawe is acknoweledged to bee the heade of his vniuersall Church and so continually present therewith by his holy spirit that he neede no viear generall of a mortall manne which canne occupye but one place although he were neuer so diligent and painfull to discharge his dutie in that behalfe For his diuine and spirituall authoritie is not excluded vnder the name of forraine power as Bristowe not more slaunderously then ridiculously affirmeth Yet hee pleaseth him selfe so much in so greate folly and madnesse that hee sayth Christe coulde not clayme to be heade of his Church excepte he should clayme to be the naturall Kinge of Englande and to haue sayde vnto Pylate My kingdome is of this world and thy maister Caesar doth me wronge As though the King of Englande by title of his royall power clayming to be the chiefe Seruaunte or deputie of Christe in gouerning his Churche according to his worde did exclude the soueraignitie of Christe which he hath ouer his Church and elect wheresoeuer they are vpon the face of the earth But the Protestantes sayth Bristowe are contrary to them selues while they say that our Prince is Kinge of France aswel as of England and Ireland yet say not that he is heâ—de of the Church of Fraunce but onely of the Church of England and Irelande And is Bristowe such a profound Logitian that he cannot distinguishe a Kinge in right onely from a King in actuall gouerment If our Prince had as good possession of the gonernmente of Fraunce as hee hath title of right to haue it hee shall be gouernour of the Church of Fraunce as well as of the Church of Englande and Ireland That hee sayth we haue beene from hence at the Apostles going so long a iorney without any footing in the way it is a foolish cauel for wee haue often shewed succession of doctune euen from the Apostles from whome it is receiued The 43. Motiue is parte of the 47. demaunde Communion of Saintes Christendom shut out of England by Parliament Councels Sainct Paule might not write ad Anglos for the Paâ—lâ—ament The Church of Englande is not so straythened or pinched within the lymites of one Kingdombut that she beleeueth and inioyeth the communion of all the Sainctes of God as a member of the vniuersal church of Christe And therefore I meruail what collour Bristowe hath for those slaunders that one Christian man in Englande in spirituall affayres is a straunger to another that generall Councels haue no authoritie in it that Sainct Paule or all the Apostles if they were lyuing might not write to the Englishmen aswell as to the Romaines Galathians Corinthians c. that Christe without the consente of the Kinge and the Parliament might not dispose his owne Church These vaine and impossible suppositions could not come but from a grosse and foolish inuention of one that lacketh argumentes to proue his cause The lawes
lyneall succession from Christ it is vnpossible for them to shewe But Bristow wil proue that we were neuer before this time For as for AErius he knoweth we are ashamed of him But he will proue that nether Hus nor Wicklefe were Protestants Because they held some opinions that we doe not By the same reason he may proue that the fathers of the councels of Constance and Basil were no Papists because they tooke vpon them to depose Popes and decreed that the councell was aboue the Pope which most Papistes at this day dare not affirme AEneas Syluius doth slaunder Wicklefe and Hus that for euery mortall sinne a Magistrate should lose his office for their Apologies are extant to be seene to the contrary But Luther sayth he denyeth that he was an Hussite affirming that Hus was not of his opiniō Although he had bene in all poyntes of his opinion as he was in the chiefe yet might Luther iustly deny the name of a man which is proper to sectaries as Franciscanes Dominicanes c not to Christians Yet Wicklefe sayth he is condemned by Melanthon How I pray you First that he found many errors in him by which iudgement might be made of his spirite If Wicklefe liuing in a time of so great blindnes and darkenes coulde not see the truth in all matters it was no maruell and that he had errors he sheweth that he was a man euen as the best writers of the Church since the Apostles tyme which might be deceyued But as we condemne not Augustine Hierom Chrysostom Cyprian and other auncient writers because we know rhey erred in some things no more haue we iust cause to cond emne Wicklefe for some errors which it is not vnlike but he did holde yea but Melanthon chargeth Wicklefe sayth he to be altogether ignoraunt of the righteousnes of faith which is the foundation of religion I will rather thinke that Melanthon was ignoraunt of Wicklefes opinion as one which had not seene but fewe of his workes In which as perhaps he might vse the tearmes of merit and deseruing then commonly vsed in his tyme yet that he had not the same meaning in them but did well vnderstand and holde the righteousnes which is of fayth I can playnely proue by his owne writings in diuerse places As vpon the Heb. 10. he sayth Sith Christ is God and man satisfaction for the sinne that he made thus freely is better then any other that man or Angell might make The same man in nowmber that sinned in Adam our first fadir the same man in nowmber made asseeth by the second Adam Christ. And sith he is more of vertue then the first Adam might be and his payne is much more then sinnefull lust of the first Adam who shoulde haue conscience here that ne this sinne is clansid all orst And sith our Iesu is very God that neuer man forfete this mede he is a sufficient medicine for all sinners that bene contrite for Christ is euer and euery where and in all such soules by grace and so he clanseth more cleanely then any bodye or figure may clense and herefore as Poule sayth Christ is mediator of the newe lawe c. Agayne vpon 2. Cor. 3. Seeth mans thinking amonge his werkes seemeth moste in his power and yet his thought mote come of God much more eche other werke of man c. Thus should we put of pride and wholly trusten in Iesu Christ for he that may not thinke of him selfe may doe nought of him selfe but all our sufficiencie is of God by the meane of Iesu Christ. Likewise vpon the 8. to the Romanes Sith God susteyneth man and moueth him and helpeth him for to trauell how had it not come of grace and thus reward of this trauell mote needes all come of grace These places and many other shewe that Wicklefe was not ignorant of the righteousnes of fayth It seemeth therefore that Melancthon had seene only the articles which his aduersaries had gathered against him and not his owne writings and discourses The prophecyes which Bristow boasteth to be for their religion be of Ieremye and Esay for the perpetuall continuance of the true Church of Christ but seing it is proued that the popish Church hath not bene from the beginning those prophecyes appertayne not vnto her How the Church is visible is shewed in the 37. motiue whereunto I adde that while the Papistes glory of a visible Church on earth Ierusalem that is aboue and therefore not subiect to the eyes of earthly men but of such whose conuetsation is in heauen is the mother of vs all Finally if Bristow coulde as truly proue as he doth boldly say that no Scripture is against them but all for them he shoulde haue no Protestants to be his aduersaries who more accept of the authoritie of the holy Scriptures then of all other motiues in the world The 46. motiue is the 39. demaund VVhere grewe the Protestants seede before our time The church hath rehearsed wednesday fast long sithence A Bishop is aboue a Priest The Saincts were of our religion Baptisme necessarie for saluation of children Anabaptists VVhy there be so many Atheistes in England Trinitaries Such seedes of our doctrine sayth Bristowe as haue growne before this time did alwayes growe in euell grounde namely in heretikes as denyall of prayer for the deade in Aerius who beside that errour was an Arrian He chargeth vs also with denying the ordinarie fast of the church but that is false For we hold that the fast which is appointed by the church ought to be obserued although we hold that no man is bounde to the blasphemous superstitious and counterfait fast of the Popish synagogue In that time in which Aerius liued there were other times of fasting appointed then such as the Popishe church obserueth But the wedsnesday fast sayth Bristowe the church hath released In what generall councell good Sir are you able to shewe likewise of other times of fast named in Epiphanius if you be not able to shew this where is either your vniuersalitie antiquitie or succession in doctrine and discipline without interruption More thē this sayth he Aerius did hold that a Bishop a Priest be equall which also the Protestāts do mainteyne In preaching the word and ministring the Sacramentes S. Hierom Euagrio is of the same opinion that they are equall likewise in Epistad Titum cap. 1. shewing that a Bishoppe is preferred before a Priest magis ecclesiae consuetudine quam dispositionis dominicae veritate rather by custome of the church to auoyde schismes then by truth of the Lordes disposition Furthermore one of the Protestantes seedes is that we must not pray to Saints but this was held of certayne heretikes in S. Bernardes time who were called Apostolici were also Anabaptistes denying the baptisme of infantes The conclusion is that these opinions can not be good because they are founde in some heretikes And the contrary opinion must needes be true
your selues to shadowe your heresies cannot proue you to be Christians or your church to be Catholike especially seeing you lacke the truth which Augustine in the same place confesseth to be more worth then either successioÌ„ antiquity the name of Catholike or any other thing else The eyghteenth marke is the succession of Priestes and Bishops euen from the seate of Peter vnto Pius the fifth in whose time this booke of M. Sander was written which marke is approued by Augustine by Irenaeus by Tertullian by Optatus by Hieronym as he sayth being one of the most euident of all other but therein he belyeth all these fathers whom he citeth who neuer alleaged the bare successioÌ„ of place persons but ioyned with the coÌ„tinuance of doctrine receaued from the Apostles against new late sprong vp heresies Augustine shall speake for the rest who after he hath alleaged vnto the Donatistes the successions of Bishops from Peter in the vnity of the Catholike church among which was neuer a Donatist the iudgement of the Bishop of Rome in absoluing of Cecilianus and many such like reasons whereunto he thinketh the Donatistes shoulde yeelde yet in the ende he addeth these words Quamquà m nos non tam de istis documentis presumamus quam de Scripturis sanctis Although we doe not so much presume of this documents as of the holy Scriptures These eighteene markes M. Sander will haue to be more richly seene in them then in the Protestantes but what markes they are and how they are to be found in their church I haue briefely shewed But nowe he commeth to a general challenge to proue that we haue nothing which they lacke and we lacke many thinges which they haue First they haue a iustifying faith as well as we but not iustifying alone but with charity which is the life of faith But charitye is a fruict of a liuinge and vnfayned fayth not the life thereof 1. Tim. 1. 5. the effect not the cause and we holde with Saynct Paule that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe Rom. 3. for charitie is no instrument to apprehend the mercie of God but faith onely therefore faith onely doth iustifie We are iustified gratis steely by his grace Rom. 3. 24. therfore nothing can come in accompt of iustification before God but onely faith which seeing y e Papistes haue not they haue not a iustifying faith We haue two Sacraments and they haue seuen but seeing they haue fiue more then Christ instituted and haue peruerted the one and polluted the other they haue but one Sacrament at the most and that horribly prophaned I meane baptisme VVe haue an inward priesthood he sayth to offer vp Christ in our hartes and they offer him both in hartes and handes But our spirituall priesthood is not to offer vp Christ but spirituall sacrifices acceptable by Christ 1. Pet. 2. 5. Heb. 13. 15. and they are horrible blasphemers that take vpon them to offer vp Christ whome none could offer but him selfe by his eternall spirite Heb. 9. 14. He sayth that the Papistes beleeue as well as we that Christ by one sacrifice payed our raunsom for euer when they shewe it to the eye in the eblation of their Masse then the which nothing can be more contrary to the onely sacrifice of Christ once offred and neuer to be repeated because he founde eternall redemption thereby Heb. 10. 14. 9. 12. 25. c. He addeth that they beleue Christ to be the head of the Church and shewe it by a reall figure of one heade in earth meaning the Pope whome now he maketh a figuratiue heade as though Christ were not present with his Churche or that his Churche were a monster with two heades As laye men receyue the communion in both kindes with vs so they dâ—e with them in Austria by the Popes dispensation as though Christes commaundement and institution were not sufficient without the Popes dispensation Wherein also he affirmeth a monstrous absurditie that the Sacrament was not instituted in two kindes to be so receyued but by an vnbloody sacrifice to shewe the nature of his bloody sacrifice in which his soule and blood was separated from his body and flesh and yet he sayth the body and flesh of Christ is not well conteyned in the cuppe as his blood in the paten with the body and forme of breade and no separation of the one from the other and no more contayned or distributed by both then by one alone Which saying is to be receyued with whoopes and hisses of all men that haue their fiue witts They haue mariage he sayth in greater price then we because they teach it to be a sacrament but we find it not instituted by Christ to be a sacrament of the new testament therfore we receyue it as an holy ordinance contayning also a great mystery but yet no sacrament But if it be an holy sacrament why doe you thinke it vnmeete for ministers of the Church and why doth your Pope Syricius or rather some counterfeating Canonist in his name call holy matrimony a liuing in the flesh such as can not please God But although mariage be honorable in all men you saye it is not so in them that haue gelded them selues for the kingdome of heauen who haue no more possibilitie to marye then a gelded man to â—eget children You were best then to tel the Apostle that his saying was too generall for he shoulde haue excepted them that so gelded themselues But S. Paule sayth notwithstanding your impossibilitie if a virgine doe marye she doth not sinne 1. Cor. 8. 28. You will reply he speaketh of them that haue not vowed how proue you that Christ speaketh of them that haue vowed longer then God would giue them grace to liue chast which he affirmeth to be a peculiar gift not in the power of euery man Mat. 19. 12. But what if your popish geldings by neying at euery mans wife and by tombling in all beddes where they are not kept out by force proue them selues to be stone horses are they still in the number of those that hauing gelded them selues for the kingdom of heauen may not possibly marye and yet nether we will nor can possibly liue chast But omitting these thinges which they haue as well as we now he commeth to those thinges which we lacke and yet many of them are very necessary as insufflations that is blowing vpon exorcismes that is coniuring holy oyle in baptisme chrisme in Bishopping externall priesthood sacrifice altars censing lights and so forth a large rablement of popish errors and superstitious ceremonies And that we saye falsly in saying these are naught he proueth by S. Paules saying to the Galathians praeterquam quod accepistis beside that you haue receyued for once sayth he we haue receyued those thinges of our auncestors as if S. Paule had not spoken of the Gospell but of beggerly ceremonies which because they are an other Gospell and way
that he deserued so to be and therefore had neede especially to bee confirmed by our Sauiour Christ more then the rest as his offence was more shamefull then of any of the other Therefore the seconde reason that hee bringeth of his restitution if he had lost it is superfluous Ioh. 20 For he was none otherwise restored then the rest were but at this time especially confirmed as his speciall case required His last reason is that admit Peter had not beene restored before this time yet nowe he was restored to a greater authority then any other Apostle had receued at any time and whereas we reply that all the Apostles were equall by testimonie of Cyprian and Hieromes he aunsweareth by distinction forsooth that they were equall in Apostleship and yet Peter was chiefe of tâ—e Apostles and an ordinary chiefe shepheard or high â—â—yshop wherein they were all inferiours to him and â—â—ee was their Primate and their heade and this distinction he promiseth to proue exactly heereafter In the meane time it is a monstrous Paradox that all the Apostles should be equall with Peter in Apostleshipp and yet Peter be the chiefe of the Apostles He that can proue inequalitie to be where he graunteth equallitie to be and in the same respecte is a straunge Logition Fynally where as some men graunting Peter to bee the rock deny the honor to his successors he will proue that the Byshop of Rome and none other hath all that authoritie which Peter sometime had and consequently that the Protestants come neerer to the nature condition of Antichrist then any pope of Rome euer did or can doe The seconde Chapter THat there is a certaine primacie of spirituall gouernment in the church of Christ though not properly a Lordlynesse or heathenish dominion And in what sort this Eâ—clesiasticall primacie differeth from the Lordly gouernmeÌ„t ofseculer princes and how it is practised by the Bishop of Rome Also the Apostles strife concerning superioritie is declared That there â—as one greater amonge the Apostles to be a ruler and as a minister doe not repugne The preheminence of Priestes aboue Kings A King can not be supreame gouernour in all Ecclesiasticall causes because by right and law he can not practise all Ecclesiasticall causes The high Priest is preferred before the King by Gods law The euill life of a Bishop taketh not away his authoritie The differences betwene the Bishop of Rome and temporall Princes That Moyses was a Priest THe Ecclesiasticall gouernment of the Church is a ministery or seruice by the authoritie of Christ and his Apostle Peter therefore neither properly nor vnproperly a Godlines or Hethenish dominion but altogether as vnlike to it as our Sauiour Christ the paterne of all true ministers was vnlike to an earthly Lorde or an Heathen Prince But whereas M. Sander in the first sentence of this chapter sayth That no man properly can tâ—e Lord among the Christians where all are seruaunts indifferently vnder the obedience of one true Lord and Maister Iesus Christ. he sheweth him selfe not only to be a Papist â—ut also an Anabaptist For the coÌ„mon seruice that we oâ—â—e vnto Christ hindereth not but that a Christian man â—ay be Lord King ouer his fellow seruaunts and thren in Christ as properly as euer he might be before the incarnation of Christ who saith himselfe that his kingdome is not of this worlde who himselfe was obedient and taught obedience both to God and Caesar to eche in things that belonged to them that dominion which he forbiddeth vnto his Apostles like to the princes of the nations Luc. 22. Matth. 20. and which S. Peter forbiddeth the elders of the church 1. Pet. 5. is not prohibited to all Christians but to the ministers of the Church onely in respect of their ministery And yet that there ought to be a gouernment of the church some kind of primacy also it is cleerer by the scriptures then that it neede any proofe especially such slender proues as M. San. bringeth namely where he citeth this text Feed my sheepe to signifie that Peter should giue euery man his dewe portion iust measure of victuals in coÌ„uenient time which thing neither Peter did nether was he able to doe And much lesse any man in succession to him which is not equal in gifts with him And therefore the example of a stuarde who may prouide for a competent number of one family is fondly applyed to make one Stewarde ouer al the worlde beside him that is almightie For although the Apostles were not lymited to any certaine congregation but were generall Embassadors into all partes of the worlde yet were they not appoynted to giue to euery man his dewe portion but to appoynt Pastors in euery Church and towne for that purpose Tit. 1. Actes 14. verse 23 they them selues to proceed in matters pertayning to their generall Commission And therefore although M. Sander in applying these woordes of Ieronime Cont. Luciferanos which hee calleth Exortem quandam eminentem potestatem A certaine peerelesse and highe power And of Cyprian lib. 1. Ep. 3. Of one priest in the Church for that time c. True Euery seuerall Pastor or as he tearmeth them parrishe priest dealeth more honestly then other Papists that drawe the same testimonyes as proper to the Popes soueraigne auctority yet in that he argueth that the like should be in the whole church militant which is in euery parish it is out of all compasse of reason For that which is possible in the one is altogeather impossible in the other And the argument is no better then if we should say there is one steward in euery Colledge or greate house therefore there is is one steward ouer all the world And wheras he would proue his matter good by that S. Mat. cap. 10. rehearsing the names of the Apostles calleth Peter the first it is to childish friuolous For in euery nomber one or other must be the first it seemeth that Peter was first called to the office of Apostleship therefore his primacy was of order not of auctority Nether is he alwaies first named for Gal. 3. 9. where the question is of the dignity of the Apostles Iames is named before Cephas or Peter as he was indeede elected to be the principall minister at Hierusalem by consent of most auncient writers neither doeth it folow that because the high Priest of the old law was called Princeps populi A prince of the people therefore Peter was made prince of all Christian men For neither was the high Priest alone called the prince of the people as M. S. seemeth to say neither had Peter by those wordes feede my shope any auctority committed vnto him more then to the rest of the Apostles As for the name of Lord or tearme of dominioÌ„ sometime geueÌ„ by ecclesiasticall writers to the Bishop or his gouernment we striue not about it so there be no such dominion by him excercised
The church which is one was founded by our Lordes voyce vpon one which receaued the keyes thereof And againe de simplicitat praelat Quamsis c. Although Christ after his resurrection geueth equall power to all his Apostles and sayth as my father sent me so do I send you receaue the holy Ghost If you remit to any man his sinnes they shal be remitted And if you râ—teine them they shal be reteined yet that he might shew the vnitie he disposed by his auctoritie the originall of that vnitie beginning of one But Cyprian proceedeth Hoc erant c. Vere by the rest of the Apostles were the same thing that Peter was endued with equall fellowshippe both of honor and of power but the beginning proceedeth from vnitie that the church might be shewed to be one These wordes are playne to declare that Cyprian acknowledgeth no inequalitie of the Apostles in respect of any auctoritie they had Also that the building of the church vpon one and the receauing of the keyes of one was not an ordinarie office to discende by succession but a singular priuiledge for that one tyme to shewe the beginning and not the continuaunce of the power to proceede from one but to be helde alwayes of one which is Iesus Christ without any shadowes of one Bishoppe on earth to signifie the same when Christ is reuealed with open face vnto vs nowe sitting in heauen 2. Cor. 3. 18. The like thing teacheth Optatus lib. 2. de schism Vt in â—na c. That in one chaire in which Peter sate vnity might be kept of all men least the rest of the Apostles shoulde euerie one challenge a chaire to him selfe so that he shoulde nowe be a schismatike and a sinner that agaynst a singular chaire should place an other Therfore in that one chaire which is chiefe in giftes Peter sate first His meaning is to defende the vnitie of the churche against the Donatistes but of the auctoritie of Peters chaire ouer all other Bishoppes chaires if he had spoken any thing M. Sander would not haue concealed it which doth vs great wrong to thinke that we can not distinguishe a chaire of vnitie from a chaire of auctoritie The place of Hierom cont Iouin lib. 1. hath bene aunswered once or twise shewing that among the Apostles which were equall Peter was chosen to be primate to auoide contention which was a primacy of order and not of auctority As for the collection of Lco Bishoppe of Rome that Peters primacy was a platforme for other Bishops to vnderstaÌ„d that they must haue a Bishop ouer them if the very Apostles had an head among them sauoreth of the ambition incident to that see which was appoynted to be the seate of Antichrist Although neither Leo him selfe challeÌ„ged so much as the Pope doth nowe neither the Bishops of his time would yeeld vnto him in so muche as he challenged For beside the whole generall councel of Chalcedon that concluded against him about the priuiledges of the Bishop of Constantinople wherein they made him equall with the Bishoppe of Rome the title of seniority onely reserued it appeareth by his Epistles that many Bishops acknowledged not such primacy ouer them as he claimed whereof he complameth in diuerse of his Epistles The place of Cyprian lib. 1. Epist. 3. that heresies haue sprong because one Iudge is not acknowledged in steâ—de of Christ for the time to whom the whole brotherhood might obey He can not deny but it is ment of Cyprian of one Iudge in euery diocesse But he reasoneth a fortiori that there ought to be much rather one Iudge ouer all the world Howbeit I haue shewed the in consequence of this argument by example of one Phisitian one Schoolemaister one Iudge in temporall matters ouer the whole worlde to whom it is as impossible to discharge suche an office ouer all as it is profitable for one suche to be in euerie towne He sayth that particular flockes are voluntarie and likewise particular pastors but one flocke and one pastor is of absolute necessitie on earth In deede the limites of particular flockes and the persons of particular pastors are left to the appoyntment and choise of the church But that there should be particular flockes and pastors it is of Gods ordination though God by his Apostles appoynted it to be so yet is it of as absolute necessity while the church is dispersed in diuerse places of the world as that there is one flocke and one shepheard ouer all Iesus Christ and yet he is not ashamed to challenge vs pag. 298. Let the text be named where Christ did institute many parishes Whereas he him selfe pag. 294. quoteth Tit. 1. Act. 14. which places proue that Christ did institute many parishes except he will say the Apostles did it without the institution of Christ which he confesseth they did not without the speciall inspiration of the holy Ghost or else will say that the inspiration of the holy Ghost in the ordinaunce of many parishes differeth from the institution of Christ. But he that wrangleth thus impudently and vnreasonably agaâ—nst the playne institution of many parishes by Christ bringeth a playne text where it is sayd Feede me sheepe to one pastor Hath this man any foreheade thinke you that calleth this a playne text to proue that there shoulde be one sheepehearde vpon earth ouer all the flocke because Christ vpon speciall occasion exhorted one man to feede his flocke Are all thinges that were spoken to him singular vnto him Christ sayd to him and to none other of the Apostles come after me Satan thou art an offense to me for thou sauerest not the thinges that are of God but of men Christ sayed to Peter and to none other put vp thy sworde into thy scaberd Christ sayed to Peter and to none other thou wilt denye me thrise O paynted rocke of the Popishe Churche that hathe no better grounde then this saying feede my sheepe when he that challengeth auctoritie hereby of all other feedeth least and poysoneth most But let vs returne and see what auctoritie of olde fathers he hath to proue one pastorall preheminence ouer all the churche Cyprian lib. 1. Ep. 8. Deus vnus est Christus vnus vna ecclesia Cathedra vna super petram Domini voce fundata There is one God and one Christ and one churche and one chaire founded vpon Peter by our Lordes voyce Heare I say first of all that he doth falsifie Sainct Cyprians wordes turning peâ—ram into petrum so that his saying is There is one chaire by our Lordes voyce founded on the rocke An other altar or a new Priesthoode can not be appointed beside one altar and one Priesthoode Whosoeuer gathereth elsewhere scattereth abroad c. But if the worde were petrum and not petram yet the whole discourse of that Epistle sheweth that Cyptian meaneth by these wordes to set forth not the past orall preheminence of one man ouer the whole church but one
Bishop in euery diocese For he writeth against fiue Elders or Priestes which had chosen one Felicissimus a schismatike to be Bishop in Carthage against him But what other malicious ignorance or shameles impudence is this that he peruerteth the saying of Christ of him selfe to the Pope There shall be one sheepefold one shepheard Ioan. 10 Yet see his reason A flocke of shepe is one by force of one pastor therefore if the Pastor on earth be not one the flocke is not one on earth If this argument be good howe is the flocke one vpon earth when there is no Pope For the see hath bene voyde diuerse times many dayes many monethes somtime many yeares Howe was the flocke one when there were two or three Popes at once and that so often and so long together Therefore the flocke on earth is one by that one onely shepheard Iesus Christ whose diuine voice all the shepe heare though in his humanity he be ascended into heauen and not by any one mortal man to whom they can not be gathered nether being so farre abroad dispersed can heare his voyce And the whole order of the church on earth tendeth to an vnitie in Christ not in one man whatsoeuer as one generall pastor For if that one shoulde be an heretike and all the church tend to vnity in him the whole church should be wrapped in heresie with him That diuerse Popes haue bene heretiks as Libeâ—ius Anastasiâ—s Vigilâ—us Honorius Ihon the 23. in knowne condemned heresies it is too manifest by recordes of antiquitie that it shoulde be denyed wherefore Christ instituted no such ordinary auctoritie to be limited in one successioÌ„ that it should haue prehemineÌ„ce imisdiction ouer all the churche Seeing vnity is best mainteyned in doctrine by his word in gouernment by the discipline by him appoynted And vnity in truth can not be had at the handes of a man which is a lyer experience sheweth that the iurisdiction which the Bishoppe of Rome hath claimed hath bene occasion of most and greatest schismes and dissentions that haue bene in particular churches wheÌ„ no man would obey his ordinary pastors and Bishops without the appealing to the see of Rome beside so many schismes as haue bene in the same see which haue set all the Christian world together by the cares while they were deuided in factioÌ„s some holding with one Pope and some with an other and some with the third and some with none of them all The 15. Chapter THat the Bishop of Rome is that one ordinarie pastor who succeedeth in S. Peters chaire and is aboue all Bishoppes according to the meaning of Gods worde VVhy S. Peter dyed at Rome S. Augustines minde touching the supremacy of the Pope of Rome THe first reason is that although Peter at the first was rather high Bishoppe of the circumcision theÌ„ of the Gentiles yet because he did at length settle him selfe at Rome by Gods appointment and left a successor there he sayeth he may well affirme that the Bishop of Romes primacy is warranted by Gods word A strauÌ„ge kind of warantise for to omit that the primacy ouer the Gentils by Gods worde is giuen to another namely to Paule from whom he can neuer proue that it was taken afterward Where hath he any worde of God to proue that by his appointment Peter setled him self at Rome and appoynted there a successor He quoteth Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 3. who reporteth that Linus the first Bishop of Rome was ordayned not by Peter onely but by Peter Paule the Apostles who founded the Church there euen as Polycarpus by the Apostles in Asia was made bishop in Smyrna which Church with the Church of Ephesus founded by Paule and continued by Iohn the Apostles he citeth as witnesses alike with the Church of Rome of the tradition of the Apostles against Valentinus and Marcion which being voyd of Scriptures bragged of the tradition of the Apostles But of Peters primacie or his successors ouer all Bishops Irenaeus sayth not a word No more doth Tertullian whom likewise he quoteth de praescrip but euen as Ireneus would haue the tradition of the Apostles against those heretikes that boasted of it to be tryed by the coÌ„fession of those Churches that were founded by the Apostles His second reason is vpon a false supposition that he hath already proued Peter alone to be the rocke to haue chiefe authoritie in feeding c. all which thinges are vntrue That Peter came to Rome he is not content that it be testified by all auncient Ecclesiasticall writers But he sayth it is witnessed by the expresse word of God 1. Pet. 5. The Church which is gathered together in Babylon saluteth you Although the history of Peters comming to Rome and sitting there 25. yeares testified by so many writers is proued false in many circumstances by the playne worde of God yet I am content to admitte that he came thither towarde the later ende of Ne roes raigne But that in his Epistle he sent salutations from Rome I can not admitte seeing that in such manner of salutations men vse not to write allegorically albeit that in the reuelation of Saint Iohn Rome the sea of Antichrist is mystically called BabyloÌ„ But Babylon from whence S. Peter did write is more probably to be taken for a citye of that name in Egypt where Marke was with him whoÌ„ the consent of antiquitie affirmeth to haue bene Bishop of Alexandria a citie of Egypt also who coulde not haue bene with him at Rome Seeing it is manifest by the first and seconde of the Epistle to the Galathians and by diuerse of Saint Paules Epistles that if euer Peter was at Rome it was but a short tyme in the later ende of Nero his Empire Whereas Marke dyed in the eyght yeare of his raigne before Peter coulde be at Rome For in the tenth yeare Paule was brought prisoner to Rome Saint Luke accompanying him who would not haue omitted to shewe that Peter was there to haue mette him as the rest of the brethren did if he had then bene at Rome Agayne Paule in so many Epistles as he writeth from Rome sending salutations from meane personages would not haue omitted mention of Peter if he had bene there Saint Luke then affirming that he taryed two yeares in prison at Rome which must be vntil the twelfe yeare of Nero it followeth that if Peter came he came very late to Rome within two yeare before his death at which tyme it was not possible that Marke which was dead foure yeares before could be at Rome with him wherefore Babylon in that text can not be taken for Rome Another reason of the Popes supremacy he maketh that Peter not onely came thither but also dyed there A simple reason why the city of Rome should haue that prerogatiue because she murthered y e Apostles Rather might IerusaleÌ„ clayme it in which Christ the head of all dyed After this he telleth the fable
persons as went ouer sea caried false tales Vt Ecclesiae Catholicae matriceÌ„ radiâ—em agnoscerent tenerent that they woulde acknowledg holde the mother and roote of the Catholike Church by which wordes they disswaded them from ioygninge with schismatikes who being condemned in one Church would gad vp and downe for absolution in an other The 7. did not S. Cyp. confesse Cornelius to haue receiued the appellation of Rasilides lawfully out of Spaineâ— li. 1 Ep. 4 There is no word of any such confession or appellation in that epistle But rather if you suppose an appellation a restitution by the Byshop of Rome Cyprian 36. bishops with him determine the same restitution to be voide of none effect Neque rescindere ordinationem iâ—re perfectam potest quod Basilides post crimina sua detecta conscientiam propria confessione nudatam Romam pergens Stephanum collegam nostrum longe positum gestae rei ac veritatis ignarum fefellit vt ambiret reponi se miustè in episcopatum de quo fucrat iustè depositus Haec eò pertinent vt Basilidis non tam abolita sint quam cumulata delicta vt ad superiora peccata eius etiam fallaciae circumuentionis crimen accesseris Neque enim tam culpandus est ille cui negligenter obreptuÌ„ quam hic execraÌ„dus qui fraudulenter obrepsit Obrepere auteÌ„ hominibus Basilides potuit Deo noÌ„ potest cuÌ„ scriptâ— sit Deus non irridetur Neither can it make frustrate the ordination lawfully made y Basilides after his crimes were detected his coÌ„scieÌ„ce opened by his owne confession going to Rome hath deceiued our fellow bishop Stephan being farre of ignoraÌ„t of â— matter of â— truth â— he might aÌ„bitiously seeke to be vniustlye restored into his bishoprick froÌ„ wÌ„ he was iustly deposed These things tend to this ende that the offences of Basilides are not so much abolished as increased so that to his former sinnes the cryme of deceifulnesse and circumuention is added For neither is he so much to be blamed who was negligently deceiued as he is to bee abhorred which did craftely deceiue him But if Basilides could deceiue men he coulde not deceiue God seeing it is written God is not mocked Heere is no lawefull appellation spoken of but the Bishope of Romes sentence pronounced voyde and he blamed for his negligence and rashnesse to medle with matters whereof he coulde haue no knowledge by meanes of distance of place But if M. San. reply that he is not reproued for taking such appellations he must heare what Cyprian sayth of such appellations which began to be vsed in his daies vnto Cornelius B. of Rome immediatly after the woordes cyted by him lib. 1 epi. 3. of those schismatikes that were so bolde as to sayle to Rome and carry letters as aboue Quae autem causa veniendi pseudoepiscopum contra episcopos factum nunciandi Aut enim placet illis quod fecerunt in suo scelere perseuerant aut si displicet recedunt sciunt quo reuertantur Nam cum statutuÌ„ sit omnibus nobis aequum sit pariter iustuÌ„ vt vniusâ—uiusque causa illic audiatur vbi est crimen admissum singulis pastoribus portio gregis sit ascripta quam regat vnusquisque gubernet rationem sui actus Domino redditurus oportet vtique eos quibus presumus non circumcâ—rsare nec episcoporum concordiam coherentem sua subdola fallaci â—emeritate collidere Sed agere illic causam suam vbi accusatores habere testes sui criminis possint nisi paucit desperatis perditis minor videtur esse auctoritas episcoporum in Africa constitutorum qui iam de illis iudicauerunt eorum conscientiam multis delictorum laqueis vinctaÌ„ iudicij sui nuper grauitate damnaruÌ„t But what cause had they to come and to report that a false Byshop was made against the Byshops For either that which they haue done pleaseth them they continew in their wickednesse or if it displease theÌ„ and they goe back from it they knowe whether they shoulde returne For wheras it is decreed of vs all is also meete and right that euery mans cause should be hard there where the crime was committed and a portion of the flocke is committo euery Pastor which euery one ought to rule and gouerne as he that shall yeelde an account of his doings to the Lord verily it behoueth them ouer whome wee haue rule not to runne about neither by their craftie deceitful rashnes to crase the concord of Byshops agreing togither but there to plead their matter wher they may haue both accusers and witnesses of their crime except the authoryty of the Byshops ordeined in Africa seemeth to a few desperate and wicked fellowes to bee lesse which haue already iudged of them and condemned their consciences bounde with the waight of their iudgement in many cordes of their offences This place of Cyprian declareth not onely that the Byshopps of Africa had decreede against such appellations but also that they thought theyr authoritie nothing inferior to the Byshops of Italy nor to the byshop of Rome him self The 8. note out of Cyprian is That he required Stephanus the Pope to depose Marcianus the Byshop of Arles in Fraunce which to dee in an other prouince is a signe that the Pope of Rome is aboue other Bishops If it were true that M. Sander sheweth it might proue the Bishop of Rome to be a Primate or Metropolitane it coulde not proue him to be a Byshop ouer all the world But it is vtterly false that he saith Cyprian required the Pope Stephan to depose him for he was deposed by the iudgement of all the Byshops of the Weste Churche Ab vâ—iuersis sacerdotibus iudicatus condemned of all the Priestes onely hee exhorteth Stephan of Rome which was negligeÌ„t in this behalfe to ioyne with the reste of the Byshoppes of Fraunce in ordering of another Byshopp in his steade who long since hath beene excommunicated and deposed from his place for taking parte with Nouatiane the Heretike And lest you should think the whole mâ—tter to be referred to the Byshop of Rome these are is words in the same Epistle li 3. Ep. 13. Id circo enim frater charissime copiosum corpus est sacerdotum concordiae mutuae glutine atque vnitatis vinculo copulatum vt si quis ex collegio nostro haeresâ—m facere gregem Christi lacerare vastare tentauerit subueniant caeteri quasi pastores vtiles misericordes oues dominicas in gregem colâ—igant For therfore most welbeloued brother the bodie or fellowshippe of priestes is plentifull beeing coupled togither by the Glewe of mutuall concorde and the bande of Amitie so that if any of our company shall assay to make an heresie or to rente or waste the flocke of Christ the reste should giue ayde and as profitable and mercifull shepheards
his time of whom he saith Qui noster est socius which is our fellow In this sentence Optatus laboreth to proue against the Donatists which were scismatikes that ther is but one Catholike church froÌ„ which they were departed He vseth the argumeÌ„t of vnitie commended in Peters chaire whom he calleth head of the Apostles in respecte of vnitie not of authority which appeareth by this that in the end he accounteth Syricius bishop of Rome and Peters successor not head of all Churches nor vniuersall Bishop of al Bishops but Socius noster our fellowe or companion as one consenting with him in the vnitie of that Church which was first planted by the Apostles and not as a generall gouernor of the vniuersall Church of Christe Wherefore although Optatus doe more theÌ„ was necessary vrge this argument of the vnitie of Peters Chaire yet his meanining was not to set foorth an vnrepr ouable authoritie thereof such as the Pope nowe challengeth but onely to make it tbe beginning of vnitie At length he commeth to S. Hierome in an Epistle to Damasus out of whiche he gathereth diuers sentences Mâ—hi cathedram c. I thought it beste to aske councel of the Chaire of Peter of the saith praysed by the mouth of the Apostle I speake with the successor of a fisher and with a difciple of the crosse I following none first but Christe am ioyned in communion with thy blessednesse that is with the Chaire of Peter Vpon that Rocke I knowe the Church to be builded VVhosoeuer shall eate the Lambe out of this house he is vnholy If any man lâ—e out of the Arke of Noe during the time of the Floude hee shall perishe I knowe not Vâ—atis I despise Melitius I haue no acquaintance with Paulinus whosoeuer doth not gather with thee he doth scatter abrode that is he that is not of Christe is of Antichriste The conclusion openeth all the matter as longe as Damasus Byshop of Rome gathereth with Christe that is mayntameth true doctrine Hierome will gather with him who professed before that he woulde followe none as first but Christe For he woulde not haue gathered with Liberius Byshoppe of Rome whome hee confesseth to haue subscrybed to the Arians that were Hereukes in Catal. Script ecclesi What mockery is it then to drawe the commendations of a good Catholike Byshop maintaining true Doctrine to euery Byshoppe sitting in that seate agreeing neither in doctrine nor manners with that Christian predecessor Augustine must succeede Hierome who in his 166. Epistle giueth vs this rule Caelestis magister c. The Heauenly maister maketh the people secure concerning euil ouerseers lest for their sakes the Chaire of healthfuâ—l doctrine shoulde be sorsaken in whiche Chaire euill men are euer constrayned to say good thinges for the thinges whiche they speake are not their owne But they are the thinges of God Heere sayeth Maister Sander wee haue a Chaire of healthfull doctrine and that is afterwarde called the Chaire of vnitie therefore it is not the Chayre of euery Byshop which are many and of which many haue beene Heretikes but the only chayre of the bishop of Rome in which Chaire the Pope be he neuer so euill is constrayned to say good thinges and cannot erre But seeing I haue often proued that many Byshops sitting in that Chayre of Rome haue spoken euill thinges and were fylthy Heretikes it followeth that this is not a wodden Chayre that Augustine speaketh of but the Chayre of true doctrine such as the Chayre of Moses was in which not onely Aaron and his successors but euen the Scrybes and Pharisees did sit hauing the authoritie of Moses while they vttered nothing but that which God deliuered by Moses But when they preached false doctrine they did not sit in the chaire of Moses but in the chayre of pestilence as the Pope all other heretikes doe He talketh much of vnitie in S Peter in his chaire seaâ—e and succession as though any of these were worth a straw without vnitie in S. Peters doctrine which was the doctrine of Christ. But Sainct Augustine Contr epist fundament confesseth that the successioÌ„ of priestes from Saint Peter vnto this present time stayed him in the Catholike Church It is true he confesseth that this succession amonge many thinges was one that stayed him And yet he acknowledgeth that the manifest trueth Praeponenda est omnibus illis rebus quibus in Catholica teneâ—r is to be preferred before all thinges by which I am stayed in the Catholike Church namely before antiquitie consent of nations miracles succession of Byshops and the name of Catholikes Likewise rehearsing the same things in a manner against the Donatistes which Maister Sander hath not omitted Epist. 165. Hee sayeth Quamuis non tam de istis documentis presumanus quam de Scripturis sanctis Although we presume not so much of these documents as of the holy spriptures Wherefore as the argument of sucessioÌ„ was wel vsed against heretikes so long as there was succession of doctrine with succession of persons so now to alleadge the onely succession of persons where the doctrin is cleane changed is as folish ridiculous as by shewing of emptie dishes to proue abundance of victuals or showing vessels ful of filthy waters to proue that they are full of good wine because meate of olde time hath beene serued in such dishes and wine preserued in such vessels But if the authoritie of one man as Saint Augustine was seeme little M. San. bringeth the two councels gatheredin Africa Numidia against the PelagiaÌ„s which sent their decrees to the Sea of Rome That the authori-of the Apostolâ—ke Sea might be giuen to them Epi. 19. if they required the B. of Rome to agree with theÌ„ in the truth what pretogâ—tiue of supremacie do they grauÌ„t vnto him Nay rather they do pâ—iuâ—ly reprehend him that he had so long suffred the Pelagian poyson to be spread vnder his nose in Europe and the doctriue neither called to examination nor confuted yea rather seemed to coÌ„sent to the den of the bishops of the East that Pelagius was iustly absolued But Pope Innocentius himselfe praiseth them Ep 91. that they had kept the customs of the olde tradition in referring the matter to his Sea and sayth That the sathers not by humaine but by diuine sentence haue decreed that what soeuer was done in the prouinces a farre of they should not account it before to be ended except it came to the knhwledge of this sea where whatsoeuer had beene iustly pronounced should be coufirmed by the authoritie of this sea and those other churches should take it as it were waters which should flow from their owne natiue fountain We know the ambitious Ep. of Innocentius if it be not counterfeted because many patches therof are found in other decretal epistles but we deny that y e authoritie which he pretended was acknowledged by these two councels yes saith M. S. the fathers of the Mileuitan councel say
tyme as many thousands aliue could disproue him for any affection to that heresie whereto the baptisme of Constantine pertayned nothinge in the worlde As for the stones and pillers of marble in which any such matter is grauen bearing the name of his baptistry except Maister Sander could proue that they were sette vppe in his tyme are simple witnesses against the historye of Eusebius which lyued in his tyme. Nether the forged pontificall of Damasus nor the writings of Beda Ado Marianus Gregorius TureneÌ„sis Zonarus Nicephorus late writers following the fable of the Romish Church are of any credit in respect of Eusebius and the eldest writers of the Ecclesiasticall story that agree with Eusebius that he was not baptised many yeares after Syluester was deade And concerning the donation of Constantine it is too absurd for any wise man to defend which hath bene so long before disproued by Laurentius Valla no enemy of the Romish religion although a discouerer of that fable Agayne his forsaking of the citie of Rome and building of Constantinople is as great a fable for although he bewtified Byzantium and made it an imperiall citye as placed conueniently to keepe the Orientall Empire yet he forsooke not Rome but still retayned it as the chiefe see of his Empire so did the Emperours that followed him vntill after it was wasted by the barbarous nations they made lesse accompt of it And therefore although Constans the Nephew of Heraclius could not conueniently remoue thether yet he remoued froÌ„ thence what he thought good by which it appeared he had authoritie in the citie by the prouidence of God and not by chaunce as M. Sander dreameth that he was prohibited by Gods prouidence in respect of the Popes supremacie or els the world should be gouerned by chaunce But leauing Constantinus the father we must come to Constantius his sonne which was an Arrian of whom Athanasius complayneth that he had no reuerence of the Bishop of Rome Ep. ad Solit. vit agen nether considering that it was an Apostolike see nor that Rome was the mother citie of the Romane Empire There were other Apostolikes sees beside Rome and the Christian worlde was larger then the Romane Empire therefore this maketh nothing for the singular prerogatiue of that see But the noble Emperours Gratianus Valentinianus Theodosius made a law lege 1. Cod. de summ trinit That all their people should continue in that religion as the religion which is vsed from S. Peter vnto this day doth declare him to haue deliuered to the Romanes and which it is euident that Bishop Damasus doth follow and Peter Bishop of Alexandria a man of Apostolike holines This law proueth that the Emperours had authoritie in Ecclesiasticall causes And that they ioyned the Patriarch of Rome with the Patriarch of Alexandria not because he of Alexandria agreed with him of Rome but because they both agreed with Peter and Peter with Christ. From these Emperours he commeth to Bonifacius who writing to the Emperour Honorius and humbly desiring his ayde to appease the tumults of his Church vseth these wordes Ecclesiae meae cui Deus noster meum sacerdotiuÌ„ vobisres humanas regentibus deputauit cura constringit ne causis eius quamuis adhuc corporis incommoditate detinear propter conuâ—ntus qui à sacerdotibus vniuersis clâ—ricis Christianae plebis perturbationibus agitantur apud aures Christianissimi principis desim The care of my church to which our God hath deputed my priesthood while you gouerne the affayres of men doth bind me that although I am yet withholden by infirmitie of bodye I should not be wanting to the causes thereof in the hearing of a most Christian Prince by reason of the meetings that are held of all the Priestes and the Clergie with the perturbations of the Christian people These words shewe that the Emperour was supreame gouernour in causes Ecclefiastiâ—â—ll for he writeth concerning the election of the Bishop To whom the Emperour answereth making a lawe against the ambitious labouring for succession that if two Bishops should be chosen they should be both banished out of the citie Con. To. 1. dist 97. I haue set downe the wordes at large to shewe the shamefull salsification of M. Sander who setteth them downe absolutely thus Mihi Deus noster mewn sacerdotium vobis res humanas regeÌ„tibus deputauit Our God hath appoynted my priesthood to me whereas you doe gouerne worldly matters As though he had denied to the Emperour all gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes wheÌ„ he flyeth to his authoritie in a cause Ecclesiasticall and doth not onely acknowledge him to be a conseruer of ciuill peace as M. Sander would haue it To Honorius he ioyneth Galla Placidia the Emperesse in her epistle to Theodosius set before the councell of Chalcedon Assirming that Peter ordayned the primacy of the Bishoply office in the see Apostolike Thus wrote the Emperesse or her Secretary and so it was taken in that time The like sayth Valentinianus in his Epistle to Theodosius his father that antiquitie gaue the chiefâ—y of priestly power to the Bishop of the citie of Rome And Martianus with Valentinian confesse that the Synode of Chalcedon inquired of the faith by the authoritie of Leo Bishop of the euerlasting citie of Rome Adde hereunto that the councell it selfe confesseth Act. â— that Leo was ouer them as the head ouer the members All these proue in deede a primacy of the Bishop of Rome acknowledged in those dayes but not such a primacye as is now claymed For the same councell and Emperours decreed that the see of Constantinople in the East should haue the same authoritie that the see of Rome had in the West the title of senioritie onely reserued to the Bishop of Rome Although the Bishop of Rome Leo by letters and his legats in the councell cryed out against it as lowd as they could Cont. Chal act 16. namely Lucentius cryed Sedes Apostolica c The Apostolike sea ought not to be abased in our presence c. but all the synode and the Iudges continued in their decree The saying of Iustinian in cod de summ trinit is examined and aunswered in the 69. article of M. Sanders treatise which is the true Church before his booke of Images as also the sayings of the Bishop of Patara of Eugenius Bishop of Carthage and Gregory Bishop of Rome The report of the councell of Sinuessa is too full of corruption and confusion to be credited for authenticall authoritie And yet it is playne that Marcellinus the Bishop of Rome was conuicted by witnesses to haue committed Idolatry before he confessed the sinne and receiued sentence of condemnation and accursing of the Synode howsoeuer that patche is thrust in after the Actes of the councell prima sedes c. the first see is not iudged of any which in euery counterfait decretall epistle almost must haue a place To proue that Phocas did not first make the see of Rome heade of
32. that r. the. 260. 3. petram r. PetruÌ„ 276. 6. den r. doome 279. 3. deforme r. defame 280. 14. vncertainly r. vnreuereÌ„tly l. 38. vvith r. vvhich 281. 4. challeng r. calling 297. 17. Barbarita r. Borberitae 314. 13. Cyrians r. Collyridianes A RETENTIVE TO STAY GOOD CHRISTIANS IN THE TRVETH OF THE GOSPELL WRITTEN BY W Fulke against the Motiues of R. Bristow and by him directed to his friends of the Popish Church AMong such English papistes as haue written within these twentie yeares against the religion of God nowe mainteyned by publike authoritie in this Realme some haue shewed greate witte some muche readinge some flowing eloquence some all these indifferently but among them all none hath shewed lesse witte learning or good vtterance then this Richard Bristow So much the more doe I meruell when I heare that many Papistes make so great accompt of his witlesse and senselesse writinges But it fareth with them as with litle children to whome newe trifles seeme alwayes most worthy to be played with al. And verily I had thought of all other least to haue delt against this peuish prater both because he bringeth no newe matter but such as in other of his cote was with more coullor of trueth set foorth before and also for that I had alreadie made aunswere to Ryshtons challenge which as I take it is that table of the Church which Bristowe confesseth to conteine all his demaundes whiche demaundes are almost all conteined in his motiues But my friendes requiring mee not onely to aunswere this but all other writinges also of the papistes what soeuer they haue set foorth in the englishe tongue since the happie raigne of our soueraigne Ladie I haue condescended to confute euen that which deserueth no confutation and somewhat the rather because Bristow would haue this alone to bee a sufficient motiue vnto poperie that wee hauing nothing to gainesay most of their popish bookes haue not dared I vse his owne wordes once to goe about the aunswering of most of the saide Catholikes bookes But are faine to get them forbidden by proclamation althoughe ourselues haue prouoked confidently the Catholikes to write them Whervppon also he noteth that Iewels challenge is turned into proclamations how rightly or truly he that hath but halfe an eye may see His preface to the reader conteining neuer an argument or motiue which is not repeated either in the treatise it self of motiues or in the demaundes I will passe ouer and come to the firste motiue gathering the principall contentes out of his owne table as I haue done with the rest Name of Catholikes The verie name of Catholikes a certaine marke of right Catholikes Iewel vnwars testifieth the Romane religion to be Catholik Laâ—rence HuÌ„frâ—is Troian horse his pseudocatholicâ— Luthers consciens the Catholike Church to be against him Pontaâ—us erred not whose historie Humfrey himselfe vnawars confirmeth For Catholikes saith he were present as lookers on and earnest defenders What then â— but none such were moderators saue onely lay Lordes and vnlearned heretikes ergo The first motiue is the 6. demaunde In whiche he woulde proue the verie name of Catholikes to whoÌ„ soeuer it is giuen to be a certain marke of right Catholikes to be knowen as readely easely and certainely by that name as such a citie is knowne by the name of London and such a countrie by the name of England If euer he learned any logike at Oxforde he left it behinde him or else lost it by the way when hee ranne ouer the sea For if all thinges may bee knowen by the name whereby they are coÌ„monly called nothing beareth a false name all Idoles are true gods and saintes al deade carcales be liuing men Yea all heretikes which are commonly called Christians in respecte of Iewes Turkes be true Christians But we must bring him a companie of men commonly knowne by the name of Catholikes which proued heretikes Forsooth the Arrians among themselues were commonly called bv the name of Catholikes and so reputed and taken when the true Catholikes were called homousians and heretikes yea all heretikes among the Pagans were coÌ„monly knowen by the name of Christians whiche â— thinke is as glorious a name as the name of Catholikes Yet Augustine saith â—ee maketh much of the name of Catholikes Cont. â—â— Fund c. 4. Tâ—net me postremò c. Last of all the verie name of the Catholike Church doeth holde me which not without cause amongest so many heresies this Church alone hath so obteined that whereas all heretikes would haue themselues to be called Catholikes yet to a straunger which asketh where men meete at the Catholike Church none of the heretikes dare shewe either their minster or house But let vs see howe Augustine and Bristow agree Augustine maketh this name the last motiue Bristowe the first Augustine ioyneth it with many thinges Bristowe maketh it alone to be a sufficient motiue Augustine in the nexte sentence after confesseth the playne demonstration of the trueth wheresoeuer it may be shewed to bee preferred before al those motiues of Vniuersalitie miracles consente succession and name of Catholikes by which he saith that he might be helde in the Catholke Churche although he grounded no argument vppon that wisedome which the Maniches would not acknowledge to be in the catholike church his words are these Apud vos autem vbi nihil horum est quod me inuitet ac teneat sola personat veritatiae pollicitatio quâ—e quidens sutam manifesta monstratur vt in dubium venire non possit praeponenda est omnibus illis rebus quibus in Catholica tenâ—or Among you Maniches saith he where there is none of these thinges whiche might allure and hold me the onely promisle of trueth doth sounde whith trueth if it be shewed so manifeste that it caÌ„not come in doubt it is to be preferred before al those things by which I am helde in the Catholike Church This is Augustines iudgement of such simple motiues which with the trueth may helpe to confirme it but are not worth a straw when they are alledged against the truth Wherfore seing we make so plaine demonstration of the trueth out of Gods word that no maÌ„ can doubt of it but such as will followe the bare name of Catholike contrarie to the Catholike doctrine of the scriptures against all such vaine motiues wee may be bolde to oppose the trueth it selfe What a mockerie is this that hee saith that anâ—eretike in Germanie being asked where the Catholike Church is will point to â—â—â—â— popish Church Admit this to be so doth this proue the Massing Church to bee the Catholike Church In France if you aske a Papist which is y e reformed Church he will point you to the place where the congregation of true Christians vse to assemble Doth the Papist therfore acknowledge the Church of protestantes to bee in deede the reformed Churche Iâ— hee doe not the name of Catholikes proueth no more on the one syde theÌ„ the
name of reformed Christians on the other side that either is such in deede as of the vulgare and ignorant people they are called But why are Protestantes all hereâ—ikes desirous to be called Catholikes but that they which in deede haue the name are also in deede euermore true Catholikes and so the name alone sufficient to moue any man Who euer heard such an asse bâ—aye as though there were no difference whether they haue the name rightfully or wrongfully truely or falsely In all the Easte Church who are called Catholikes but the Grecians Which for many hundreth yeares haue bene separated from the Communion of the Latines and of them are compted for heretikes and Schimatikes But Augustine de vera rel Cap. 7. writeth more plainly for the name of Catholike Tenenda est nobis Christiana c. Wee muste holde the Christian religion and the companie of that Church which is Catholike and called Catholike not onely of her owne but also of her enemies For will they nill they the heretikes also and Schismatikes them selues when they talke not with their own but with strangers they call the Catholike Church nothing but the Catholike Church For they can not else bee vnderstanded excepte they discerne her by that name by which shee is called of the whole world This therefore quoth Bristow is proued they to be Catholikes that Catholikes are called When as Augustine saith we must hold y t church which both is catholike is so called Bristowe the Papist is called by the name of a Cittie in England theresore Bristowe the Papist is in deede a citie in England This therefore is proued that to bee Bristow that Bristow is called But how proueth he that they be called Catholikes The worlde forsooth beareth them witnesse For beside some ignorant fellowe in Germanie that calleth them so or rather not meaning to brable in the streat yealdeth to that tearme not because hee thinketh them to bee so but because he knoweth the Papist which asketh for the Catholike Church seeketh not the Catholike Church in deed but the Popish Church falsely called Catholike beside I say some tankarde bearer boye or gyrle that hath mâ—de such a unswere to Bristowe as he trauelled in Germanie he asketh when in printed bookes they bee called Catholikes whether the reader knoweth not who is meaned Yes verily if the bookes bee written by papistes oâ— such as take neither part But he would â—now further why we mâ—ke name theÌ„ call them Cacolikes or Cartholikes I suppose whosoeuer mocketh them it is because they falsely â—surpe that name which they are not woâ—thie to beare and not because they bee such and the name euill yet againe he asketh why Luther iâ— Germanie did cause the Creede to be turned I beleeue the Christian Church and not I beleeue the Catholike Church Mine answere is I beleeue that Bristowe belyeth Luther for any such change of the creede although he might well expouÌ„d the true Catholike Church by the name of the true Christian Church But Iewel confirmeth the name of Catholike to be theirs or els what meaneth he to entitle his replie Against the Romane religion which of late hath ben accompted Catholike Alas poore Bristow hast thou no better reason to proue the Popish Church to be Catholike but that Iewel saith it hath bene accompted Catholike and proueth that it hath ben falsely accompted so Yes sir not he only but also Pope Humfrey in his Legend of sains Iewel confesseth vs to be Catholikes where he saith that Pontacus erred when he wrot that onely lay men neither learned nor Catholikes were moderators in the disputation at Westminster Why Bristow are you not ashamed to take the name of the lorde your god the Pope in vaine And because Pontacus complaineth that catholikes were not moderators doth Humfrey therefore acknowledge papistes to be Catholikes yea forsooth he doth so and also coÌ„firmeth the storie of Pontacus when he saith Catholikes were present but in the next worde he expoundeth what catholikes namely papistes And som of theÌ„ were also moderators at the least wise one namely D. Heath then occupying the place of the Bishop of Yorke therefore not onely lay Lords vnlearned heretiks as this lewd losel and vnlearned dogbolt trayterous papist I am bold with him because he is so malepert with the learned godly nobilitie of England most slaunderously and maliciously affirmeth were only moderators of that disputation but some of y e Popish faction were not only present but presidents of that action beside all the rest of the popish prelates which then were of the Parliament for information whereof that conference was appointed But Humfrey saith moreouer that the chiefe cause of all euils and as it were the Troian horse within the walles of the Church hath beene hitherto a Catholike defection from the holy scripture and especially your papistrie Therefore saith Bristow hee acknowledgeth vs to be Catholikes In deed you be catholike that is to say vniuersal reuolters froÌ„ y e holy scriptures if that title please you reioyce of it spare not You be Catholike heretiks that is heretikes not in one or two articles of religion but in all in as much as you denie the office of Christe vpon which is grounded all Christiaâ—itie The name of Catholike of it selfe is indifferent to good and euil euen as the name of vniuersall is therefore in our Creede we say not simplie I beleeue the Catholike Church but the holy Catholike Church And therefore D Humfrey in calling you pseudocatholici false Catholikes sheweth what Catholikes he meaneth you to be not members of the holy Catholike Church of godly Christiss but pillers of the false and counterfeit Church of malignant herenkes And whereas you say you haue hearde Humfrey in his fond and vnlearned lectures at Oxford call them pseudocatholiâ—i â—home Faustus the Maniche did entwite for honouring the memorie of Martyrs first you take vpon you like the sowe to entwite Minerua as it is in y e latine prouerb which might better be borne withall in a man of such learning and arte as you shew if you did not also slander belie him as the diuell doth all the saintes of God For although I neuer heard any of his lecturs yet I dare affirme he neuer accompted Augustine and â—â—â—â— godly Catholiks of his time for false Catholikes although hee coulde not allowe of all that Augustine hath written and mainteyned Wherefore it is cleare hee calleth not Augustine and the Catholikes of his time but you Papistes of our time false Catholikes and shewed that to you did truly agree that which Faustus did falsely charge y e true Catholikes with all y t is the turning of Idols into Martirs For Faustus did slander not as you traÌ„slateit onely entwite the true Catholikes for worshipping the Martirs as â—â—â—â— pagans worshipped their Idols Calumniatâ—â—nobis Faustus c. Faustus doth slander vs saith Augustine Againe Non taÌ„ me mouetut hic Calumniae
Caecilianistes as the Papistes call vs. Heretiques Protestants Lutherans c. but these were but dilatorie deuises of Heretiques to auoyd the true trial which as the Catholikes in the forenamed conference confessed was onely by y e Scriptures The 4. motiue is the 38. demaund Olde heresies Arrians againe aliue in Protestantes Protistants be Pelagians in denying Baptisme to be necessarie for the saluation of Infants Her etiques are not Christians Whatsoeuer was heresie in times past saith Bristow is heresie now also some opinions holden by the Protestants were heresie in times past Ergo they be heresies now also so Protestants be Heretiques and no Christian but almost Apostataes But I deny that any opinion holden by vs was euer Heresie Yes saith Bristow the denying of prayer and oblation for the dead was accounted heresie in Aâ—rius both by Epiphanius and Augustinus True it is they both following the errour of their times account it for an errour in Aâ—rius but it doth not followe that bicause they accounted it so that it was so in deed seing neither of them both doth proue it to be an errour by the authoritie of the holy Scriptures but by the corrupt vsage of their Churches which had turned thankesgiuing for the dead into prayers and oblation for the dead And yet the same Epiphanius denyeth fasting and almes to bee profitable to the dead wherefore the Papistes do now hold the contrarie Contra Melchisedec sumus Haer. 53. Hee accounteth the hauing of the images of Christ and the Apostles one of the heresies of the Gnostikes Haer. 27. many such like things which the Papistes defend for Catholike The like doth Augustine wherefore let Bristow aduise him selfe whether it be a good argument Epiphanius and Augustine accounted prayer for the dead to be an errour Ergo it was an heresie in deede For an other example of old heresies by vs recyted he bringeth in That cruell heresie of theirs against the necessitie of childrens baptisme wherin they agree with the Pelagians through which they suffer many thousand poore soules to perish which can not helpe them selues while they promise them both life euerlasting and the kingdome of heauen without baptisme whereas the Pelagians promised life euerlasting only Who would thinke that this slaunderous heretique had liued so long in England as hee did before he became fugitiue which lyeth so impudeÌ„tly without all colour or shewe of trueth Was there euer any of vs heard to preach of baptisme as not necessarie for infaÌ„ts if they might obteine it according to the institution of Christ. But contrariwise that it is a cruell errour of the Papists which condeÌ„neth infants who being preuented by death can not obteyne the outward Sacrament yet hath this error Augustine and Cypriane to vpholde it But if Augustine and Cypriane neuer erred no not about the doctrine of the Sacramentes then let their authoritie defend the Papists But when Cypriane denyed the Baptisme of Heretikes to be any thing auayleable how many thousand soules both of yong and olde dyd he condemne And wheÌ„ Augustine with Pope Innocent holdeth the communion to be as necessarie for the saluation of Infants as Baptisme how many huÌ„dred thousand soules doth he condemne or the Papistes destroy which denye the communioÌ„ vnto them Cyprian lib. 1. Epi. 6. Magno Augustin Contra duas Epist. Pelagi lib. 2. Cap. 4. where he accuseth the Pelagians as well for affirming the Communion not to be necessarie for Infants as for houlding that Baptisme was not needefull for them In the 38. Demaunde he chargeth vs with denying prescript fasting dayes which is falle when they be prescribed by the Churche of God and not vsurped of superstition and opinion of merite He chargeth vs further with denying of Free Will and quoteth in the margent August Tom. 6. De fide coÌ„tra Manichaeus Cap. 9 10. where in deede Augustine against the Manichees affirmeth the Free Will of man but in his retractations he sheweth that euen then hee vnderstoode it of the state of Man before his fall and therefore the Pelagians whiche were maynteyners of Free Will to remayne in man since the fall of Adam did slaunderouslie vsurp those his sayings against him and the truth euen as the Papists do now Cùm autem de libera voluntate rectè faciendi loquimur de illa scilicet in quae homo factus est loquimur Ecce tam longè antequam Pelagiana haeresis extitisseâ—â—sic disputanimus velut iam contra illos disputaremus Whensoeuer we speake of the Free Will of man to do well we speake of that Will in whiche man was made Behold so long before the Pelagian heresie arose we haue disputed eueÌ„ so as though we had disputed against them Retract lib. 1. cap. 9. Now iudge whether if Papistes or we be more like to the Pelagians He chargeth vs moreouer to hold against the merite of single life quoting Aug. haer 82. with Iouiaian which is false for as Augustine vnderstandeth by merite worthines or excellency we acknowledge that the state of virginitie is more excellent then of matrimony in such respects as the Apostle preferreth it 1. Cor. 7. Last of all he chargeth vs with holding against the vowe of single life quoting Aug. Retract lib. 2. c. 22. where there is no word of any vowe and much lesse of vowing a single life in them that can not liue an honest chast life without mariage There is mention of certaine sanctimoniales holy and deuout women of whose chastity was no suspition which leauing their purpose of virginitie were perswaded by Iouinian to marie Not we therefore haue reuiued any old heresie but the Papists haue continued many old errors reuiued many old heresies of the Pharises Pâ—â—â—gians Anthropomorphites added many new of their owne such as were neuer heâ—â—d of in the primitiue Church for six hundred yeares after Christ as hath often bene shewed at large The 4. and 5. motiues are included in the 10. demaund Miracles dogmaticaâ—â— a marke of true doctrine for the sacrifice of the Masse for purgatory Deuills expelled with a Masse by a Priest of S. Augustines who was of our religion S. Bede of our religion Masse sayd for the dead oftentimes to redemption both of body and soule The saerament of the altare sticked by the Iewes bleedeth Mâ—rkes and mâ—nasteries Visions for our religion An Englishe woman miraculously cured of late by the blessed sacrament Holy water Masse confirmed by miracles in Afrike Englande and Brabant Bristow diuideth miracles into dogmaticall and personall Of the first sort he setteth this conclusion VVhosoeuer haue at any time set them selues against any doctrine confirmed by miracle they haue bene against the truth There can to this no instans be giuen our doctrine which they resist hath bene confirmed by miracles therefore plaine it is that they are enemies of the truth Doe you heare this shameles beast say there can be no instans giuen against his proposition When y e Lord
denyed a testimony of the booke of wisedom de praedest Non debuit They should not reiect the saying of the booke of wisedom which in the church of Christ hath deserued so long a rew of yeares to be recited in the steppe of the readers of the church of Christ and with worship of diuine auctoritie to be heard of all Christians from the Bishops to the lowest sorte of lay men c. And againe Et Etiam temporibus c. Euen the notable interpreters that were next to the Apostles times when they brought forth that booke for witnes beleued that they brought nothing but a diuine testimonie Touching this defense first I aske of Bristow how he can proue that the booke of Machabees hath had such continuaunce of credit Secondly howe this saying of Augustine coÌ„cerning the booke of wisedom can be true when Hierome plainly reiecteth it as not Canonicall praefat in Prouerb Thirdly I demaunde how Bristow can defend his maior if we admitte this saying of Augustine to be true for not Pelagius as Allen sayth expressely nor any Pelagians as Bristow seemeth to meane but such as defended the Catholike faith against Pelagius reiected this saying of the booke of Wisedome which booke also we refuse although not for that saying and what one article of our doctrine doth that booke impugne nay rather there is testimonies therein manifest agaâ—â—st Images against Purgatory and merites yet can not we therefore allow the writings of Phâ—lo a â—ew since Christes time for the canonicall Scripture of Salomon whose title it salâ—ly beareth But to proceede Luther denyeth the Epistic of S. Iames because it is against his heresie of instfication by faith onely We allowe not Luther neither did he allow him self therein for he retracteth it afterward Yet is not Eusebius counted an heretike which vtterly reiecteth that Epistle Lib. 2. cap. 23. But to goe on Beza doth say that S. Lukes Gospell is falsified because it mainteyneth the reall presence of Christ in the sacramet where he sayth Hic est calix this is the chalice which is shed for you This is an impudent slaunder which I haue aunswered against SauÌ„ders rocke of the church in his ninthe marke of an AntichristiaÌ„ where it is handled at large and thether I referre the Reader To conclude Bristow saith no Scriptures is against the Catholikes but all for them because they must obediently receiue and beleue all Scriptures canonicall But what obedience and beliefe they attribute to the canonicall Scriptures it is plaine by this that they dare not abide the triall by them but flie from them to traditions as Bristow doth euen in the next motiue as though the Scriptures inspired of God were not sufficient both to teache all truth and to confute all errors In the demaund this motiâ—e is handled somewhat otherwise for there we are examined whether in the coÌ„ference of Carthage Augustine and his fellowes did not proue by Scripture that a visible Church should beginne at Hierusalem which shoulde continue visibly to the ende of the world I aunswer they proued sufficiently that the preaching of the gospell beginning at Hierusalem should gather the Church out of all partes of the world and therefore the faction of Donatus which begonne in Africa was not to be found but in a corner of Africa could not be the Church of Christ. But of a visible Church to continue visibly in manner as Bristow demaundeth there was no controuersie in that conference and therefore no proofe thereof brought out of the Scriptures The 9. motiue is the 29 demaund Traditions most certaine The Apostles were of our religion S. Augustine S. Chrysostome S. Hierome S. Cypriane fasting daies lent masse for the dead prayer for the dead confirmed by the Apostles traditions water mingling mith the wine in the chalice The Masse made by S. Paule S. Paule of our religioÌ„ The true Church sayth Bristow hath alwayes had traditions beside the Scripture and what company soeuer was faine to crye for only Scriptures to deny most certeyne traditions of the Apostles their doctrine was heresie and they heretikes To proue that the church had alwayes traditions beside Scripture he bringeth in the sayings of S. Paule 1. Cor. 11. 2. Thess. 3. before the Scripture was all written when it was necessary for the Church to haue much of the doctrine deliuered onely by preaching yet had they no doctrine of faith but such as was coÌ„firmed by scriptures of the olde testament as is manifest 2. Pet. â— But for the certaintye of popishe traditions what proofe hath he First Basil de sp sancto cap. 27. sayth Dogmata c. Matters of doctrine which are kept and preached in the church we haue partly by doctrine committed to writing partly by tradition of the Apostles which are of like force vnto godlines c. But the same Basil writeth contrary to him selfe and agreeable to the truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whatsoeuer is beside the holy Scripture in that it is not of faith is sinne And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he requireth euen newe planted Christians to be instructed in the holy Scriptures both for their full perswasioÌ„ in godlines also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they be not acquainted with mens traditions Furthermore sayth Bristow Augustine Epiphanius the Protestants them selues condemne Heluidius for an heretike for denying the perpetuall virginitie of Marye the mother of Christ contrary to the Churches tradition Nay rather for troubling y e church with contention about that in which he hath no grouÌ„d out of the Scriptures Now let vs see how they are proued to be heretikes that refuse traditions of the Apostles are fayne to cry for onely Scriptures First that Maximinus the Arrian did so ergo whosoeuer doth so is an heretike according to Bristowes logike And yet he belyeth Maximinus for he refused not traditions of the Apostles but such wordes as were beside the Scripture meaning Homousion such like termes which were theÌ„ newly vsed but yet conteyned no newe doctrine but euen that which alwayes was approued according to the Scriptures The same thing did the decree of the heretical Emperour Constantius forbid not traditions of the Apostles of which was no controuersie betwene the true Christians the Arrians But that the Scriptures onely are of sufficient authoritie to confute heresies Augustine declareth euen against the same Maximinus lib. 3. cap. 14. Sed nunâ— nec ego Niccnum c. But now must not I bring forth the councel of Nice nor thou the couÌ„cel of Ariminum to make any preiudice but by the authoritie of Scriptures not being proper to ether but coÌ„mon witnesses to vs both let matter contend with matter cause with cause reason with reason Likewise he and his fellow Bishops sayd vnto the Donatists in the conference of Carthage Si tantummodo id qu. crerctur quâ— vel rbi esset Ecclesia nihil se acturos publicis gestis sed scripturarum diuinarum tantummodo
testimonijs If this onely were the question which or where the Church were that they woulde pleade nothing at all by publike actes of men but only by the testimonies of the holy Scriptures Yet sayth Bristow the Apostles were of our religion because Chrysostom sayth Ad pop Antioch that it was decreed by the Apostles that in the dreadfull mysteries a remeÌ„brance should be made of the dead This sayth Bristow was masse for the dead How prayers for the dead came in how at leÌ„gth sacrifice of the masse was applied vnto the dead I haue shewed sufficiently against Allen lib. 2. ca. 5. If we should admit all thinges to be ordeyned of the Apostles which some of the olde writers doe ascribe to their traditions wee should receiue many thinges that euen the Papistes them selues doe not obserue As that it is a wicked thing to fast on SoÌ„day or to pray kneling that oblations are to be made for mens birth dayes c. which with diuerse other superstitions Tertullian fathereth vpon the tradition of the Apostles as wel as oblation for the dead De coron nul hearing therefore such manifest vntruths are fathered vpon the Apostles tradition by most auÌ„cient writers what certainty can we haue of their tradition without their owne writing Againe S. Hierom saith it was a tradition of the Apostles to fast 40 daies in the yeare If this be true then is the popish story false that maketh Telesphorus Bishop of Rome author of that lenten fast Eusebius sheweth the great diuersitie of fasting before Easter li. 5 cap. 26. saying that some fasted but 1 day some 2 daies some more some 40 howres of day night this diuersitie proueth â—â—â—â— Hierom vntruly ascribeth y t tradition to the Apostles which should haue bene kept vniformely if it had any institution of the Apostles Cyprian sayth it was our Lordes tradition that the wine in the communion should be mingled w t water But the Scripture saith not so S. Paule w c deliuered that w c he receiued of Christ saith not so And yet CypriaÌ„ coÌ„teÌ„deth principally for the vse of wine in the cup against the watry heretikes that vsed onely water It is a coÌ„mon thinge with the auncient writers to defend euery ceremony mhich was vsed in their time by tradition of the Apostles But the chiefe matter is the masse which sayth Bristow S. Paule one of our religion made I maruell whether Bristow writeth this for fooles to beleue or for wise men to laughe at When they them selues make Gregory or Scholasticus or I can not tell whom auctor of the canon and when they write howe euery peece was added by what Pope what impudence is it to say that S. Paule made the Masse and to call Augustine to witnesse that which he good man did neuer thinke of and much lesse write Whose wordes Bristow hath mangled and falsified for thus he citeth them Ep. 118. cap 6. Totum illum agendi ordinem quem uniuersum per orbem seruat Ecclesia ab ipso ordinatum esse That by him was ordeyned this order of doing which through the whole world the Church doth keepe in doing of Masse The wordes of Augustine speaking of receiuing the communion fasting or before all other meates are these vpon the wordes of S. Paule Caetera cum venero ordinabo Vnde intelligi datur quia multum erat vt in epistola totum illum agendi ordinem insinuaret quem universa per orbem seruat Ecclesia ab ipso ordinatum esse quod nulla morum diuersitate variatur Other thinges will I set in order when I come Whereby it is giuen vs to be vnderstood because it was much that in an epistle he should set forth that whole order of doing which the whole Church throughout the world doth obserue that this thinge was ordeyned by him which is varied by no diuersitie of maners vnderstanding the custome of receyuing the communion fasting which he sayd before was generally obserued in all places But of ordeyning the masse there is no title You see now howe â—â—â—â— Apostles especially S. Paule is of Bristowes religion beside ChrysostoÌ„ Hierom Cypâ—iaÌ„ The 10 and 11 motiues are confusely conteâ—ned in the 34 demaund The Courches iudgement is alwayes infallible VVhen by Iewell the Church of God dyed Donatistes and Luciferians aliue againe in Protestants S. Augustine and S. Hierome were of our religion Protestants in their owne conscience be against the Church which is euerlasting and visible No scripture against the Catholiks but all for them Christ to be loued for the authoritie of his Church for which there be playner prophecyes then for Christ him selfe Although we should graunt the Churches iudgemeÌ„t to be alwaies infallible yet would we neuer graunt the popish churches authoritye which falleth so manifestly from the word of God thereby sheweth her self to be the malignant Church Synagogue of Satan That the Church of Christ hath alwaies ben from y e beginning shal continue vnto the end of the world we all confesse and defende Wherefore it is an impudent slaunder of Bristow to saye that by Iewell the Church dyed within six hundreth yeares after Christ. And that the Donatistes and Luciferians are reuiued in Protestants For we nether say that the Church is perished out of all places except Africa as the Donatistes nor that it is become a stewes with the Luciferians But the Papistes are more like to the Donatistes which say the Church is perished out of all partes of the world except Europe and in steede of the Church they defende a stewes and sincke of all dolatrie superstition vngodlines Therefore Augustine and Hierom be not of Bristowes religion for condemning those heretikes to whome Bristow and his Papistes are more like then the Protestants Nether doe Protestants in their conscience thinke the Church of Christ to be against them because Castalio an Anabaptist translateth Ecclesiae the Churche into reipublicae the common wealth or because many vse the name of congregation which is the true signification of this word Ecclesia as no man will deny that is not past all shame That the Churche is euerlasting and visible to them that haue suche eyes as the Churche is that is spirituall we neuer deny But that it is visible to the world alwayes that shall neuer be proued That no Scripture is against the Catholikes we graunt but that many Scriptures are against the Papists it hath bene more then a thousand times proued That the church geueth testimonie to Christ that the prophecies of the churches euerlasting continuance are plaine euident It is no question betwene vs. But that the synagoge of Romish Papists is the church of Christ to whoÌ„ such credit or reuerence is to be geuen that I say if Bristow woulde burst for anger against the Protestantes he shall neuer be able to proue The 11. motiue The practise or custome of the church of God S. Paule and S. Augustine of our
religion Exorcisme exufflation in baptisme Pelagians aliue againe in Protestants Baptisme necessary for saluation of children ChauÌ„ge of religion neuer made by us Altares prayer for the dead used alwayes Reall presence of Christ in the SacrameÌ„t Pilgrimage reliques of Saints S. Hierom of our religioÌ„ Miracles for reliques Churches coÌ„firmed by miracles VVhat an impudeÌ„t atteÌ„pt is chauÌ„ge of religioÌ„ Of the churches practise custome I say euen as of the churches iudgement that how much soeuer it be to be esteemed yet is not the Popish church the Catholike church of Christ but an apostasie schisme from it Neither is it sufficieÌ„t for Bristow to say y e Popish church practiseth many things that the auÌ„cieÌ„t church of Christ practised therfore it is the true church of Christ except he can proue that the Popish churchteacheth practiseth all nothing els but that which the ancieÌ„t church of Christ did teach practise In stede whereof Bristow can allege nothing but certeine spots wrinkles of the elder church which the Popish church doth embrace hauing almost nothing els like vnto it But let vs see how substantially he proueth out of S. Paule S. Augustine that the churches custome and practise is an infallible rule of truth First S. Paule saith he 1. Cor. 11. after many reasons for the vncomelines of womeÌ„s going bareheaded recoyleth to this inuincible forte Si quis c. But if any man seeme to be contentious we haue no such custome for women to pray vncouered nor the church of God See how this impudent asse to stablish his ground of custome is not ashamed to falsifie the wordes of holy Scripture S. Paul saith if any man seme to be desirous of contention we haue no such custome nor the churches of God whereby he meaneth plainly that it is not the custome of the Apostles nor of the church of God to be contentious about such small matters of external behauiour May we herof inferre that whatsoeuer the church at any time hath vsed is allowable to be vsed alwaies S. Aug. Ep. 118. Ian. is cited by Bristow but corruptly Si quid tota per orbeÌ„ frequentat ecclesia hoc quia it a â—acienduÌ„ sit disputare insoleÌ„tissimae insaniae est If y e whole church do vse any thing only to call it in question whether that thing should be so don is a poinct of most prowd or most straÌ„ge madnes But Augustine is not so generall for his words are siquid horuÌ„ if any of these things speaking of ceremonial obseruations as of receiuing the coÌ„munion fasting c. be vniuersally vsed of all the church when it is not coÌ„trary to the word of God it were madnes to striue about it For in the first place Augustine setteth the auctority of Gods word secoÌ„dly the custome of the vniuersal church being not contrary to Gods word last of all the customs of particular churches which are varied according to the diuersities of coÌ„tries natioÌ„s Now for these matters in coÌ„trouersy betwene vs I answer as Augustine doth to the questioÌ„ of Ianuarius immediatly after the words cited by Bristow Sed neque hoc neque illud est in eo quod tu queris But neither is this nor that in the question that thou propoundest that is neither the practise of the vniuersall church nor the auctority of the Scriptures serueth to decide this question but it is the third kind So say I to Bristow nether the auctority of the holy Scriptures nor the practise of the vniuersall church can be shewed for these things which thou defeÌ„dest but they are of a third kind that is contrary to the word of God and the practise of the most auncient Primitiue church But Augustine sayth Bristow proueth that infants are borne in sinne against the Pelagians which are reuiued in ProtestaÌ„ts by the customes practise of the church which was to baptise theÌ„ for remission of sinnes And this practise he called the waight of truth a most plaine bignes of truth The slauÌ„der that PelagiaÌ„s are aliue in ProtestaÌ„ts by denying children to be borne in sinne I wil no more esteme then the barking of a dogge against the moone But where he sayth that Augustine by the only practise of the church coÌ„uinceth the Pelagians calling the practise poÌ„dus veritatis c it is a shameles lye for his words are in the same Epist. 105. Circunstiâ—antur enim diâ—inarum auctoritate lectionuÌ„ antiquitus tradito retcÌ„to firmo Ecclesiae ritu in baptismate paruulorum For they are compassed about both by the auctoritie of the diuine readings also by the stedfast practise of the church deliuered of old reteined in the baptisme of infants But he vrgeth them with exorcisme and exsufflation which were there vsed in the church I confesse but their meaning by exufflatioÌ„ exorcisme he defendeth out of the Scriptures And who can blame Augustine if after he haue mightely confuted the Pelagians out of the Scriptures to shew the nouelty of their heresie he alleaged the perpetuall practise of the church which she alwaies had alwaies shall haue in praying for the conuersion of infidels for the perseueraÌ„ce of the faithful in goodnes This is all one saith Bristow as if we should reason against these heretikes out of priuate mens beades out of the publike prayers which are in the portuse or Breuiary or in the missall and such like bokes The deuill it is except Bristow can proue that such beades and prayers were euer vsed in the church For Augustine sayth de bono perseuer ca. 22 Atque vtinam tardi corde infirmi qui non possunt velnon dum possunt Scriptur as vel earum expositiones intelligere sic audrient vel non audirent in hac quaestione disputationes nostras vt magis intuer entur orationes suas quas semper habuit habebit ecclesia ab exordijs suis donec finiatur hoc seculum And I would they that are dull of hart weake which can not or as yet can not vnderstand the Scriptures or the expositions of them would so heare or not heare our disputations in this question that they would rather consider their owne prayers which the church alwaies hath had shall haue from her beginning vntil this world be ended You see plainly that Augustine ioyneth to the auctority of the holy Scriptures the perpetuall practise of the church which hath continued from the beginning and shall remayne vnto the ende Which seeing it can not be shewed for Poperie the argument of the practise of the church serueth not for Popery Bristowe proceedeth and passeth ouer the example of Christian women which killed them selues rather then they would haue their bodies abused yet notwithstanding by the churches iudgement were honored as martyrs To which I aunswere the church considered their minde which was good not the fact which was euell At last he commeth to affirme that the
This thing sayth D. Humfrey he did not with his wil but yet he did it not without a cause that he might strike you through with the testimonie of your fathers as it were with your owne sworde For it had beene manlie for a Christian man to say Thus sayth the Lorde It had bene sufficient to haue layed agaynst you Your doctrine is contrarie to the Scripture For it is the question of men possessed with deuills to say What haue we to doe with thee Iesus thou sonne of Dauid But it is an interrogation of the Saynctes What haue we to doe with our fathers with fleshe and bloode You heare by these wordes what a daungerous opinion he holdeth of the fathers and of the Saynctes in the calender namelie that the fathers are no farther to be followed then they followed the holie Scriptures and that the Sainctes either liuing or deade whether they be in the calender or no deny their fathers as fleshe and bloode if they be in any respect an hinderance for them to obey the will of their father in heauen These are the perillous opinioÌ„s that Bristow brableth against falsifying his words by ommission depâ—auing his meaning by false surmising But Bristow hath yet an other reason to proue the fathers to be in all poinctes of their side If in all poinctes sayth he they be not with the Protestants then vndoubtedly in all poynctes they be with vs. And what is the reason of this monstruous conclusion There was neuer but one true religion As though none can be of true religion but such as erreth in nothing But who would spend incke and paper to confute such vaine reasonings The 15. motiue conteineth the 15. 16. and 20. demaundes Martyrs S. Stephen of our religion Pilgrimage Churches confirmed by vision Mâ—racles for reliques and for necessitie of childrens baptisâ—ne Confirming of children the custome and practise of Gods church Foxes martyrs Miracâ—es for our martyrs Al martyrs that euer suffred fot the testimony of true religion since Abel were numbred of one true church euen of the same that we are But Bristow would binde vs to the Saincts in the calender termed by L. Humfrey SaÌ„ctâ—li which terme yea a worse might serue a number of theÌ„ Notwithstanding so many of those caleÌ„ddred canonized Sainctes as be Saincts in heauen and not firebrands in hell were of that church which is builded vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Iesus Christ being the head corner stone And therefore it is a foolish request that we should name any one of theÌ„ which was of our faith But it is a pleasant pastime to heare howe Bristow proueth S. Stephen to be of his religion It is manifest sayth he that he is of the religion of the rest of the martyrs meaning Papistes because it is proued that he as well as they had heard helped theÌ„ which prayed to them which worshipped their reliques went a pilgrimage to their churches he specially reuealing by vision the place where his reliques were hidden with the reliques of S. Gamaliel S. Nicodemus vnto one Lucian a Priest of â—erusalem which wrote in Greeke the history of his inuention To this inuention I answere that it is an inuention of the deuill either by meanes of him that counterfaited the vision or by sending a stronge illusion so â— say generally of all such miracles and visions as are alleaged to proue any doctrine contrarie to the holy Scriptures As for the vanitie of this epistell of Lucian it be wrayeth it selfe in that he maketh Gamaliel the Pharizee so great a Sainct who for any thing that we can read in the holy Scripture was neuer a Christian. S. Paule in the 22. of the Actes appealeth to the knowledge of the Iewes that he was brought vp in Iudaisme vnder Gamaliel which if after he had bene conuerted to Christianity it shoulde haue bene greatly suspected that S. Paule had bene noselled vp by him and not conuerted by a vision from heauen as his intent was to shew From this counterfait stuffe of Lucians epistell he sendeth vs to the new founde sermons of Augustine to whom he would get credit by Augustines owne report De ciuit 22. ca. 8. but in vaine for Augustine speaketh not of any such sermons but only when report of a miracle was brought vnto him that he went vnto the church spake a few things of the matter And touching all such miracles as he reporteth of Stephen his conclusion is this God was glorified by them and the faith for which Stephen died was magnified But of worshipping of reliques pilgrimage c. there is no mention and yet that chapter of miracles as Ludouicus Viues doth confesse is notably corrupted as appeared to him by ancient copies The conclusion was Quid erat in cordibus exultantium nisi fides Christi pro qua Stephani sanguis fusus est What was in the hartes of them that reioysed but the faith of Christ for which the blood of Stephen was shed The miracle which Bristow reporteth out of the 38. Serm. in diuus 96. in noua editione to proue the necessitie of baptisme for infants the practise of the church for confirmation of children praying to S. Stephen is an impudeÌ„t fiction as appeareth manifestly by this that he calleth a sucking babe Catechumenu one that was instructed in Christian religion which could not possibly be before he was of yeares of capacity Secondly the infants ofChristian parents in Augustins time were baptised as sone as they were borne taried not vntil they were Catechumeni that is enstructed Thirdly the woman in this fable praying to S. Stephen perswadeth him to know the purpose of her hart which the word of God affirmeth to be known only to God As impudent as the deuiser of that fable was is Bristow who citeth out of Augustine De â—nitat eccles cap. 16. a few words rent a sunder from the rest coÌ„cerning miracles which the whole discourse sheweth to be plainly against him as you may read in this aunswere in the 8. motiue of visions After this followeth a comparison of Foxes martyrs with the Popish martyrs Videlicet the good Earle of Northumberlande Storie Feltons Nortons VVodhouse Plomtree and so many hundrethes of the Northerne men all rebells and traytors yet saith he approued by miracles vndoubted but what miracles he sheweth not To these he addeth Fisher More the Charterhouse monkes c. whose cause being sufficiently discussed by M. Foxe I referre to the iudgemeÌ„t of indifferent readers But this I can not omit that the traiterous Papist flauÌ„dereth our state not only for publike execution of open rebelles and errant traytors but also with priuie murthering by poysoning whipping and famishing From all suspition of which wicked practises God be praised the states that are professors of the Goâ—pell haue alwayes bene as free as the Papists both by storie liuing testimonie may be proued giltie of theÌ„ And where hee
specially chargeth that learned and reuerend Father M. Elmer now Byshop of London with this deuilishe practise notinge these woordes in the margent Let Elmer remember his Tragedie of the Scottishfriere at Lincolne As I knowe not what coulour he hath for so great and haynous a slauÌ„der so I nothing doubt but that the same is vtterly false and vntrue as a thousand more slaunders and lyes Wherein the Papists as Children of the Father of lyes haue so great delight To conclude seeing not the paine but the cause maketh a martyr whosoeuer haue suffred for treason and rebellion may well be accounted Martirs of the Popisn Church but the church of Christe condemneth such for enemies of Christes kingdome and inheritours of eternal destructiâ— except they repent and obtaine mercie for their horrible wickednes And seeing patient suffring is by Bristows owne confession a gift of God vnto all true Martirs such as were manifestly voide of patience can be no true Martirs as were most of these rebels traitors Story by name Who for all his glorious tale in the time of his most deserued execution by quartering was so impatieÌ„t that he did not only rore and cry like a helhounde but also strake the executioner doing his office and resisted as long as strength did serue him beeing kept downe by three or foure men vntil he was deade O patient martir of the popish church In the 15. 16. demaund he asketh vs whether we haue not read in Chrysostome Augustine others that they vsed this argument to proue the diuinitie of Christ that he hath aduanced his seruants to such honor that they are prayed vnto their graues honored of kings Emperors that miracles are wrought by the reliqus of their Saints I answere we read soÌ„e such thing although not altogither as Bristow reporteth nor to y t end But what if amoÌ„g a great nuÌ„ber of forcible aguments they vsed also some such persuasions shuld their reasoning be a preiudice to the truth of God reueled out of the Scriptures whervnto if those holy man had had as great regarde as they wishe other men to haue in their writing and not suffred them selues to be carried away with common plausible errors they should easely haue espyed that they gayned not so much in resoning so against the Painims as they gaue occasion of superstition among the Christians And to aunswere the xx demaunde we are content to bee tryed by that doctrine for which the auncient Martyrs Irenaeus Cyprian Laurens c. suffred persecution and Martyrdom which was for no pointe of Popery but true christianitie yet wil we not be tryed by all poyntes of doctrine which they did holde for that it is certaine some of them had their errors which the Papists them selues doe not holde as Irenaeus is charged by Eusebius l. b. 3. cap 39 to be a follower of the Chiliastes Cyprian did openly in a councel maintaine rebaptising of them which were baptised by Heretikes Againe wee resuse not the tryall of that docttine for which the Christians were persecuted by the Arrians in Africa notwithstanding the terme of Missa vsed by Victor that writeth that Story by which tearme in that time not the popish Masse which then was not made either in matter or forme but the celebration of the Communion and memory of the sacrifice of Christ commonly called in deede but vnproperly a sacrifice yet will we not be tryed by all that they holde for diuerse errors of prayer for the deade and to the dead were then receiued neithet will the Papistes be tryed by that Religion they helde in all pointes For then were Byshops married Lib. 2. 3. Then the Praiers were in the vulgar tounge and all the people sunge Himnes togither lib. 2. There is no reason therefore that the Papists shoulde call vs to such a tryall as they dare not abide them selues The 16. motiue is the 30. Demaunde Their owne Doctors The disâ—orde of Protestants Luther â—ondemneth our Pretestantes Carolstadians Zwinglians and Caluinists Luther corrupteth the Scripture to helpe his heresie of the breade to be Christes body The head of the church to be a Layman is against the Magdeburgenses and Caluine The prophecie fulfilled in the accorde of the Protestants and Puritants Parliament religion The inconstancy of Protestants VVhat an impudent attempt is chaunge of religion True Christianitie by Luther is vnder the Popedome The discorde of our owne Doctors Bristowe would haue to be a Motiue against vs. As though it were not as great a motiue against them whose Doctors dissent as much as ours To omit all other controuersies when will they bee agreed whether the Pope bee aboue the Councell or the Councell aboue the Pope In which discention they haue not onely Doctor against Doctor but also Councell against Councell and Pope against Pope and Cardinall against Cardinall as Constance and Basill against Ferraria Florence Nicolaus Felix with thâ—ir Cardinals against Eugenius and and his Cardinals But now let vs see what discorde he findeth in our Doctors Luther condemneth the Protestants Carâ—â—stadians Zwâ—nglians Caluinistes in the cause of the Sacrameâ—t The more was his immoderate heate and bitter zeale to be blamed and their Christian modestie to be commended which notwitstanding his ouermuch vehemency in maintayning his error yet accepted hâ—m alwayes as a brother The corruption of the Scripture wherwith he chargeth Luther is a slaunder of his owne for Luther altred no wordes of Scripture but declared his vnderstanding of them when he said Take bread and eate â—his is my body And this is the only discorde that he can proue betweene the professors of the truth For it is a meere sophistry of the ambiguitie of the worde head of the Church that maketh that shewe of contrarietie betweene the Magdeburgenses Caluine and vs who in sence and meaning therof doe perfectly agree as I haue often shewed And Bristowe cannot altogether deny where he derideth the Parliament Religion and inconstancie of Protestants for chaunging the title of head into gouernour and then expounding the gouernment by iniunction Whereas in neither of bothe titles was any other meaning of the godly sorte in the time of King Henry Kinge Edwarde or her Maiestie then is contayned in that exposition In deede Stephen Gardiner as Caluine reporteth at Ratisbone abused the title of supreme head not more wickedly theÌ„ absurdly to defend all Papistrie which theÌ„ was not abolished by king Henry And against that grosse errour of Gardiner writeth Caluine and not against our vnderstanding of that tytle But the Apologie prophecieth that shortely the Lutherans and Zwinglians should bee accorded which is fulfilled in the accorde of the Protestantes and Puritanes who in the demaunde he sayth doe abhorre the tytle of supremacie If I knewe whome he did meane by Puritanes I might aunsweare him the better but seeing hee maketh Protestantes and Puritanes members of a diuision If hee recken the Puritanes for such as bee
The like I say of the storie of the bodie of Babycas the martyr in presence wherof the oracle of Apollo could not speake But Chrysostom to draw mâ—n from all kind of idolatrie sent them from reliques In Gen. Hom. 15 Nay he sent them to the churches and houses of prayer to the graues of the martyrs not to worship them as Papistes doe but by such things to receaue blessing and to kepe them selues from being entaÌ„gled with the snares of the deuill while they be put in mind of the vertue of the martyrs to follow their godly coÌ„uersation And albeit there were some superstitioÌ„ in that regard of martyrs troubles memories as in that age there was yet doth it not follow there was all Popery nor such grosse idolatry as Papistes doe commit with their counterfait rehques Finally the miracles wroght by God at the dead bodies of the Saincts might wel be vsed by Augustin Chrysostom Theodoret against the GeÌ„tills asan argument to ouerthrow their idolatrie euen as the example of the miracles wrought by God at the dead body of Elizeus against the idolatrous Israelits Reg. but it followeth not therof that idols should be made of their lawes by worshipping them as the Papists do For y e bones of Elizeus were not for that miracle takeÌ„ out of his graue shined in gold deuided into many churches worshiped licked and kissed as the Popish guise is The same aunswere I make concerning miracles wrought by God with the signe of the crosse which was the motiue of Lactantius I say they proue not that the signe of the crosse should be worshipped no more then the miracles wrought by God with the brasen serpeÌ„t were any cause why the Israelits should worship the brasen serpent Reg. And as touching the blessed Sacrament which Bristow blasphemously calleth his Lord and God although the reall presence and transsubstantiation were graunted forasmuch as the Papists theÌ„ selues affirme the Sacrament to consist of accidents as the signe but no accideÌ„ts are God or in God If any miracles were wrought by God at the celebration therof as Augustine and Cyprian seeme to auouch yet neither is the reall presence proued by those miracles nor they tryed to be Papists for writing of such miracles of which if any man will see more let him resorte to mine aunswere vnto Heskins lib. 1. cap. 24. lib. 3. cap. 42. Vnto the storie of S. Bernards life we geue no credit as to a counterfait fable and as litle to the reporte of M. Poynts iâ— his booke of the reall presence testifying the casting out of many deuils by vertue of the same sacrament Finally it is alltogeather false that he sayeth the Iewes religion was chaynged by Christ into Popery For the sacrifice of Christes death against which the sacrifice of the Popish masse is blasphemous hath taken away all sacrifices ceremonies of the law Heb. 9. Concerning the Altar which Christians haue whereof they haue no power to caâ—e which serue the Tabernacle Heb. 13. mine aunswere is against Heskins lib. 3. cap. 60. where that text argument is handeled of purpose The 27. motiue is the 35. demaund Vnity of the church a motiue to beleue in Christ. The discord of Protestantes the inconstancy of Protestantes Our Sauiour Christ praieth that his disciples may be one in God him theyr redeemer And this vnitye all Protestantes retaine notwithstanding diuersity of opinion in one article any contention about ceremonies Euen as the Apostles were one in one God and Christ although there was variaunce about Circumcision ceremonies Ciprian Cornelius the Romayne church the church of Carthage were at vnitye in Christ although the one of them erred in the sacrameÌ„t of baptisme So were Hierome Augustine allthough they mayneteyned contrary opinions about Peters dissembling translation of the Scripture From this verily I except such schiâ—inaties as delight in contencion which haue allwayes bene against the true church As for the vnity of the Papistes seeing it is not in the doctrine of Christ it proueth no more that they are those for whom Christ prayed then the vnity of the Mahometistes which for these thousand yeares haue kept greater vnity then the Papists whose church hath bene rent a sunder into so many heades as there haue bene Popes at once and that very often and for many yeares together there haue bene Pope against Pope couÌ„cel against couÌ„cell Doctors against Doctors orders against orders Canonists against Diuines disseÌ„ting in articles of faith as of the Popes supremacy of original sinne of transubstantiation c. Wherefore Christian vnity is as vntruly denyed vnto vs as falsely challenged vnto them whatsoeuer he prateth of Lutherans Zwinglians Caluinists Protestants and Puritans The 28. and 29. motiues are conteined in the 34. demaund Iudges infallible in cases of controuersie The churches iudgemeÌ„t is alwayes infallible Obedience of Catholiks to their superiors both ecclesiasticall and temperall Trinitaries Bristrow braggeth that their church hath iudges infallible in cases of controuersie and ours hath not But who be their iudges The Pope or the generall councell Whether soeuer of these be nether is irrefragable For both haue bene controlled and found fault withall as I haue shewed before and they them selues are together by the eares whether of these is irrefragable because the councell hath deposed the Pope the Pope hath not obeyed the councell as it is manifest betwene Eugenius the 4. and the councell of Basil. How infallible the churches iudgement is and alwayes hath bene it serueth not the Romish synagogue vntill she proue her doctrine to be agreable to the Scriptures which seeing she neither can doe nor dare abyde the triall of them she sheweth plainly that she is not the church of Christ. As for the auctoritie of synodes such as that of the Apostles was which determined the controuersy by auctority of the holy Scriptures ProtestaÌ„ts do gladly acknowledge how necessary it is for the church to decide controuersies and do willingly submit them selues thereto The subiection of Papists to their indges doth no more proue their religion to be true then the obedience of the Mahometistes to their superiors both in cases of religion and of the common wealth doth iustifie their sect to be the religion of God What Trinitaries other sectaries be in Polonia or elswhere that wil not submit themselues to any auctority as they are no parte of our church so we haue no cause to excuse or defende them In the demaunde Bristow complaineth of an vnlearned Christian which hath bene suffered to write a vaine libell against the auctority of the church of God which is a vaine lye for there is no true Christian learned or vnlearned which will hold against the church of God so loÌ„g as she is directed by the word of God as the true church is in all matters necessarie vnto saluation But perhaps the vnlearned Christian hath challenged the church of
continence so renounced the world that they possessed nothing in proper As testifieth Epiphanius and Augustine And Philaster affirmeth that they absteyned also from cating of flesh So that all thinges considered Aerius mainteyned the doctrine of the Papistes as much as of the Protestantes That our preachers in pulpits praise God for the founders of colledges and schooles of learning by name what maketh this for allowance of their religion God is to be praised for such benefits as he hath bestowed vpon his church or any members thereof euen by Turks and Heathen men Wherfore this is a very slow motiue vnto Popery For whether the founders were good or euill men and what intent soeuer they had their benefits are now vsed to the glory of God therefore God for them and their benefits is greatly to be praised The 37. motiue hath neuer a demaund that I can aptly referre vnto it The only knowne vndoubted mother of Christs children for a thousand yeares together The church is euerlasting and visible The Popish church hath not only bene y e only known church and vndoubted mother of Christes children for these thousand yeares First because it is not of so many yeares continuaunce the mysterie of iniquitie hauing not bene in highest degree of wickednesse before the councell of Constance where notwithstanding the institution of Christ and the practise of the primitiue church the communion of the Lordes bloud was taken from the people Secondly the Popish church was neuer acknowledged by all the true children of Christes church for their mother which was a steppemother and a persecuter of them Thirdly the Popish church was neuer y e only reputed church or mother of Christs children of all them that professe Christianitie for the churches of the East as great and as large as she was in the West woulde neuer so accompt the Popish steppedame of Rome but did separate them selues from her communion Fourthly the Catholike church of Christes members dispersed ouer all the world vnder the tyranny both of the Turke the Pope haue in all times protested that y e Romish Apostolical synagoge is the whore of Babylon and see of Antichrist The places of Mich. 4. and Esa 61. which he citeth to proue that the church must be alwayes visible you shall finde aunswered with many other in mine ouerthrow of Stapletons fortres lib. 1. cap. 13. And wheras Bristow confesseth that a mist may hide an hil that is neuer so high from some wicked sighted men that are without it but neuer from them that are within it no meruaâ—le if the spirituall church of Christ being lifted vp aboue the top of all hills not in worldly glory but euen vnto heauenly dignitie hath long remained hid from them that haue no spirituall eyes at all But Bristow thinketh it strauÌ„ge that a mist should continue a thousand yeres together Then I aske him what hath hindered the greatest parte of all the worlde seduced by Mahometistrie and Gentilitie that for these thousand yeres they haue not seene the height of the Popish church If he say not a mist about their church but a blindnesse in the others eyes to be the cause the same I aunswere for the Catholike dispersed church of Christ which the Papistes pretend that this thousand yeares they could not see Although as I haue often sayd Papistry is not halfe so olde in the greatest heresies and absurdities which now she maynteyneth The 38. motiue is the 24. demaund also the 48. and the 17. Celebration operation of Christes death The sacrifice of Bristow the masse Priestâ—oode VVhere Christ worketh Only faytâ— Exorcising of deuills In the Popish churchis no celebration but a derogation of the merite of Christs death by the blasphemous sacrifice of the masse But Bristow in the 24. demaunde asketh vs whether we be content to trie religion by the Priesthood that hath bene froÌ„ the beginning of Christs church I answere that we must first consent of the name of Priest and Priesthoode whereof also in the same demaunde he cauilleth that we haue chaunged the name therefore haue chaunged the order The name I say of Priesthood Priest must be coÌ„sidered either according to the Etymologie deriuation or els according to the present vse thereof And according to the deriuation we coÌ„fesse y t this word Priest coÌ„ming of the greeke word Presbyteros signifieth the same oâ—der which is instituted by God like as the word Bishop câ—mming of Episcopus for which if any man vse the name of Elder superintendent he varieth nothing in the worlde from the signification of Presbyter and Episcopus and much lesse setteth vp a new order as Bristow most vainly doth cauill For in that sence we abhorre not the name of Priest Bishop But when according to the present vse this word Priest is takeÌ„ for him which in greke is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in Latine Sacerdos that is one appointed to offer a special sacrifice for which our English tongue hath none other worde but Priest as Bristow doth well confesse In this sence we deny that we haue any speciall Priesthoode or Priestes among vs but the only Priesthoode and high Priest our Lorde and Sauiour Iesus Christ and the generall Priesthoode that is common to all the Saynctes of God Apoc. 16. But in the former sence we haue the same office of Bishoppe Elder or Priest which being ordeyned by the holy Ghost hath continewed in the church vntill this time But this will Bristowe disproue by two reasons First that auncient Bishoppes and Priestes were made by Bishoppès and Priestes and not by Kinges and Queenes secondly they were made to offer sacrifice and euen for the deade Concerning the first it is true that the auncient Priestes were so ordeyned but it is a most impudent slaunder that we are made Bishoppes or Priests by Kinges or Queenes For the worlde knoweth we are ordeyned by the Bishoppes and Elders of the church and not by the Prince But that the auncient Bishoppes and Elders of the church since Christ were ordeyned to offer sacrifice for the quicke and the dead it is vtterly false For albeit the auncient writers vnproperly vsed the names of Priest and sacrifice yet did they neuer meane to set vp a newe Priesthoode or sacrifice to ouerthrowe the only true Priesthode and sacrifice of Christes death as in many places of their writinges most manifestly doth appeare but only they did continew a memory of the sacrifice of Christes death in the celebration of the Lordes supper Chris. ad Heb. cap. 10. Hom. 17. and a sacrifice of prayse and thankesgeuing August De ciuit Dei lib. 10. cap 6. Hoc est sacrificium Christianorum multi vnum corpus sumus in Christo quod etiam Sacramento altaris fidelibus noto frequentat ecclesia vbi ei demonstratur quod in ea oblatione quam offâ—rt ipsa offeratur This sayth Augustine speaking of the sacrifice of thankesgeuing is the
are made according to that which is namely the trueth set foorth in the holy Scriptures not according to that which euery foole will fondly suppose or imagine The 44. Motiue is the 49. demaund The Church that all Chrsstes enemies fight against Englande ioyneth with Christes enemyes againste Christendome VVhat Religion the Iowes impunge as the Religion of Christ. Christ is to bee beleeued for conuerting of Emperours and powers from their Idols to serue his seruauntes The Church is euerlasting and visible Saincte Augustines motiue Emperors turned from their Idols and praying at Peeters sepulchre and the Christianitie of humane lawes Sainct Augustine of our Religion Protestants bee of many olde heresies The popish Church was not persecuted by the heathen Emperous but the Catholike church of Christ The popish Church is not of so great antiquitie that shee had then any shewe in the worlde although the misterie of iniquitie did then woorke and euen in the Apostles time The Heathens Turks and Iewes doe no more hate the popish church then they doe the church of God which is in England The warres against the Turke be at this day maintained by the states of Germany which are of our religioÌ„ aswel as by the Papists That there is no publike ayde sent against the Turk out of England it is not in any allowaunce of Turkish religion but because the state seeth it not necessary neither was there any publike ayde sente an hundreth yeeres be ore the reuolte from Papistrie And yet euen in the Queenes maiesties raigne there hath gone ayde out of England against Soliman which died at the siege of Segesto where diuers noble Gentlemen of Englande goinge on their owne charges as Bizia testifieth wan more true glory then they that 2. or 3. hundred yeeres before vpon a superstitious vowe were signed with the crosse to fight against the Saracens for the possession of the earthly Ierusalem How often shall I aunswer that the first christian Emperours were not conuerted from Idolatry to Christianitie by the popish Church but the later Christian Emperours by her haue bene peruerted from the true worship of God vnto Idolatry That the Emperours being conuerted from Idolatry did pray at Peter the fishermans sepulchre as Augustine sayth it sheweth the vertue of y e Gospel of Christ that had made so great alteration in them but nothing at all proueth the authoritie or any error of the popish Church for Augustine sayth not that they prayed vnto Peter but at the sepulcher of Peter meaning in the Church that was builded vpon the place that was supposed to be the buriall of Peter The lawes that those Emperours made against Idolaters may well serue against the Papistes w c are as grosse in all kindes of Idolatry as the Gentills for the most part were Finally it was not y e popish Church but the Church of Christ that suppressed the heresies of the Arrians Sabellians Nestorians c. But Iouinian did let out of hell Priestes and Nunnes mariage which gate not the Church of Protestantes but our Church sayth Bristow hath stopped The Church that striued against Iouinian was nether for mariage of Priestes of whom many thowsands were maryed in that tyme yea and a thowsande yeares after nor yet for mariage of such as had vowed virginitie and could not contayne when both Epiphanius the hatchet of heresies and Hierome that greatest aduersary of Iouinian agree that they ought to marye Epiph. cont Apostolicoshaer 61. Hierom ad Demetriadem Nether were Epiphanius Philaster and Augustine which disalow the opinion of Aerius concerning prayers for the dead members of the popish church for this one error which they held seeing they hold the principall substance of religion against the Papists and agreeable to the word of God That Bristow sayth in the demaund VVe count Turkes Iewes and very Atheistes for our frendes and all that be not Papistes it is a most detestable slaunder The Anabaptistes burned in Smithfield were no Papistes the blasphemer of Christ lately burned at Norwiche was no Papist whose sharpe execution sheweth that heretikes blasphemers and Atheistes when they are discouered finde no friendship at the handes of Christes Church but such as they deserue Finally the Easterne Church which of long tyme hath bene separated from the Romish communion hath as great enemies of the Turkes heathen and Iewes as the Popish Church hath yet will not the Papistes allow it for the Catholike Church The 45. motiue conteyneth the 31. 32. 33. 40. demaundes Euer visible and Catholike Vniuersalitic Antiquitie Consent Protestants were neuer before this tyme. They are ashamed of their fathers Hus was not a Protestant VVicklefe was not a Protestant VVicklefe condemned by Melancthon Prophecy for our religion No Scripture against the Catholikes but all for them Here is nothing but the old popish bragge of vniuersalitie antiquitie and consent which is as easily denied as it is allwayes alleaged without proofe Sauing that in the demaundes they are sundered as though euery one of them without the other two were a sufficient triall of truth which nether Vincentius nor Optatus nor Augustine nor any that vsed this argument did euer meane But that is truth which being most auncient hath at all tymes of all true Christians by general consent bene receyued But this can not be proued of any one error of poperye For if any of these three be omitted the argument is of no force to proue truth All nations by generall consent embraced Idolatrie yet was the true worship of God which was knowen onely in Iurye the more auncient The worship of Iupiter was more auncient then the honor of Christ shewed in the flesh and more vniuersally receyued but not of the true worshippers of God As for generall councells which in the demaund of consent he sayth to be all against the Protestants he is not able to shewe one approued generall councel that was held within six hundreth yeares after Christ that decreed any thing contrary to that which we beleue in any poynt But confessing that in many ages some there haue bene in some poyntes of our opinion yet he sayth we can shewe no lyneall succession but leape from Luther to Christ without any recorde of our religion in all the meane tyme hauing no monument of such Church nether in leafe or lyne of seruice booke As one that loueth antiquities well I would fayne see what leaues the Papistes can shewe of their seruice bookes to proue a lyneall descâ—nt from Christ to Pope Gregory the 13 when Bristow sweareth perdie to agree in all poyntes with Pope Leo the tenth which was in Luthers tyme some of their seruice being made by Thomas Aquinas some by Fulbertus some taken out of Beda some out of Gregory some out of Augustine some out of Hieronyme some out of Iohn Chrysostom and of Ambrose and the eldest I thinke not of Origen which argueth nether antiquitie nor vniuersalitie to stand with the popish seruice as for
because they are found in some holy men as in S. Athanasius Epiphanius Augustine c. Although these opinions are but fewe in comparison of so many articles of religion in whiche we dissent from the Papistes which if they coulde be founde in heretikes we should soone heare of them yet what Logike is in this conclusion of Bristow you shall see by examples of the like and euen of the same heretikes Aerius as Augustine reporteth out of Philastre did also receiue into his felowship none but suche as wete continent and had so renounced the worlde that they possessed nothing in common likewise they abstayned from fleshe The very same doth Bernarde report of the heretikes called Apostolike that they rereuerenced mariage and abstayned from all flesh and whitemeates In canti ser. 66. This diuelishe seede prophecied before to be the note of Antichristian hypocrites grew in many heretikes before the time of the Papistes and not these only but many other also Worshipping of Images in Carpocratians Ep. 1. lib. 1. T. 2. prefat contr Gnostic 27. 29. The superstitious estimacion of the crosse in the Valentinians Epiph. Ho. 31. Transubstantiation of the wine into blood in Marcus and the Marcosians Ireâ—aeus lib. 1 cap. 9. Prayer for the deade in the Montanistes Tert. de Monon de Anima c. Inuocation of Angells in the Caianites and many other Popishe plantes were first sowne by the deuill in elder heretikes And yet were this no good argument to confute these opinions or errors because they are founde in heretikes except they were found to be contrarie to the word of God All is no heresie whatsoeuer an heretike hath affirmed for there was neuer heretike but affirmed much truth neither is all truth that is affirmed by euery Sainct and holy man for not one of the ancient writers but is acknowledged to haue affirmed some vntruth Only the holy Scripture ought to haue this preheminence as Augustine sayth that it may iudge of all sayings and writings it selfe being iudged of none because it is the word of God which can not erre or be deceaued Cont. Crescon gram lib. 2. cap. â—â— But Bristowe hath Scripture to proue that he which denyeth prayer for the dead being found among the Arrians Anabaptists can not choose but be bouÌ„d in bundells with them and cast into the fire Mat. 13. In deede he that is an Arrian or Anabaptist shal not escape for denying prayer for the deade But the Angells that are the reapers are not so vnskilfull but that they can discerne true Christians denying the abuse of prayers for the dead which the Scripture doth not admit from blasphemous heretikes among a great number of falsehoodes affirming some truth But it is a sore matter that he sayth The verie worst sorte of heretikes of this time as the Anabaptistes Trinitaries yea the verie Epicures and Atheistes were first Protestantes ye such they be and will seeme to be still He had spoken more truly if he had sayd they were first Papistes But what heretikes and Atheistes woulde seeme to be it is no dishonor to our cause seeing all hypocrits would seeme to be true Christians That only Papistes are troubled in our countrie and all other sectes tollerated and mainteyned the publike execution and punishment of Anabaptistes and other blasphemous sectes as the Familie of Loue c. doth playnly proue to be false and Bristow to be a shamelesse slaunderer The 47. motiue is the 50. demaund Sure to continue The church is euerlasting and visible Protestants do decay and shall come to nothing The churches continuaunce S. Augustines motiue England beware destruction Luther was a false Prophet I neede not to shewe how often and how vainly Bristowe repeateth one thing to make a great number of motiues The euerlasting continuaunce of the true church hath bene seuen times at least before alleaged But neither is it proued that the Popish church is that true church nor yet that any sect or companie which shall continewe to the ende of the worlde is the Catholike church of Christ. For although Antichrist is and shall be more and more consumed with the breath of the Lordes mouth which is his holie worde yet shall he not be altogether abolished vntill the ende of the worlde Yea at the ende of the worlde as our Sauiour Christ sayeth fayth shall be verie scant and hard to be founde and iniquitie shall haue the vpper hande Therefore there shall be a great church of malignant hypocrytes euen to the ende of the worlde It is true therefore that Christes church is sure to continewe but not whatsoeuer sect shall continew is thereby proued to be Christes true church How vayne his bragge is that Protestantes doe decaye and shall come to nothing by their dayly increase in all partes of the world God be thanked may be seene to all men Likewise how true it is which he affirmeth that Papistes doe increase and to such numbers euen in Englande that there are more Papistes nowe then when the Gospell was first preached notwithstandinge so many yeares preaching of vs and large silence of them who liuing in Englande can be ignoraunt I confesse there are too many obstinate Papistes in Englande whome none of Bristowes motiues hath either moued vnto Poperie or confirmed therein but onely great tolleration and lenitie which is vsed in these times But if such seueritie were vsed nowe as in times past the Pope shoulde not haue many confessors in Englande to glorie of And to say the truth what one of these Papistes dare professe what he thinketh of the Popes auctoritie because the lawe is somewhat sharpe in that poynt If the like lawe were of hearing masse we should haue as fewe suffer for masse as for the supremacie But to returne to our motiue S. Augustine doth well to send Honoratus the Manichee to followe that way of Catholike doctrine which from Christ him selfe by the Apopostles is descended vnto vs and from hence to posteritie shall descende De vtilit cred cap. 8. But that it is not the way of all Popish doctrine which neuer came from Christ nor his Apostles nor the most auncient church And if the tradition be vncerteyne how shall we know what came from Christ and his Apostles but that which we finde in the Gospell of Christ and the Epistles of his Apostles But the same Augustine sayeth Bristow biddeth the simple Donatistes to Number the Priestes euen from the verie seate of Peter and in that order of fathers see who to whom succeeded That same is the rocke which the prowde gates of Hell doe not ouercome P. S. contra Donatistas Augustine speaketh of the Catholike church which was the vine whereof the Church of Rome at that tyme was but a growing braunch For a litle before he sayth Scitis Catholica quid sit quid sit precisum a vite You knowe what the Catholike church is and what is that which is cut of from the vine But if
particularly to euerie one of them sheweing whether it be a true and proper note of the church and if it be that it belongeth to vs and not to them Although Bristow say that this way we know full well that they shall haue the victorie flying therefore euermore to our weake false castle of only Scripture That the scripture onely is our castle we do gladly admitte but that the same is a most strong true impugnable castle none but a blasphemous heretike will deny But you must saith Bristow still labour to get them if you can with their consent out of the castle into the plaine fieldes aforesayde to make them graunt expressely that there in your handes they can not stande Nay Bristow you must beate vs from our castell if you can for we will neuer consent to goe out of it for defense except it be to offer you the aduauntage not in the playne fieldes as you cal it but among your pettie piles and small holdes And so we haue done often So did that reuerende father the Bishoppe of Salisburie in that noble challenge wherein you were shamefullie foyled in your owne grounde and many of your fortes beaten about your eares But you doe not well to teach your schollers to seeke a gentle aduersarie to fight withall which must first of all be willing to laye downe his sworde and shielde and then you are good enough for him with your manlie motiues with which when you haue treandled him about like a tenis ball you sende him backe agayne to his castell of onely Scripture to see whether they will beare him out in his opinions For example is not this Scripture manifest inough on your side and agaynst vs This is my body This is my blood Mat. 26. Verily euen as plaine as this They did all eate the same spirituall meate They all dronke of the rocke that followed theÌ„ y e rocke was Christ. 1. Cor. 10. They are both one maner of speaking and both of one matter Therefore they haue both one meaning The second exaÌ„ple is By works a man is iustified not by faith only Iac. 2. And this is also Scripture knowing that a man is not iustified by the workes of the Lawe but by faith of Iesus Christ Gâ—lat 2. And agayne by grace you are saued through faith and that not of your selues it is the gift of God not of workes least any man shoulde boast The later being in maner of speaking contrarie to the former text doe playnly shewe that these two Apostles speake not both of one kinde of faith or iustification But that Iames speaketh of a dead faith as his wordes are playne Vers. 17. and of iustification before men Paule of a liuing faith and of iustification in the sight of God The third example is out of Iames 5. Where I must first note that Bristow in translation doth manifestly corrupt falsefie the Scripture The Latine is Infirmatur quis in vobis If any amongest you be daungerously sicke let him send for the Priests of the church and they to pray ouer him anealing him with oyle in the name of our Lord c. First Bristow addeth this word daungerously of his owne heade which is neither in the Greeke nor vulgare Latine text to draw the text of Iames violently to their popish greasing which they vse only when a man is desperatly sicke and past hope of recouerie in theiâ— iudgement Whereas Iames speaketh generally of any kinde of sickenes wherewith any of the faithfull were molested Secondly Bristowe leaueth out the wordes following which are these and the prayer of faith shall saue the sicke person and the Lord shall restore him or raise him vp the Latine is alleâ—iabit shall ease him which wordes declare that the Apostle speaketh not of a perpeâ—uall Sacrament of the church but of a ceremonie vsed by them that had a speciall gift of healing the sicke in the primitiue Churche whiche ceremonie must needes cease with the gift except it be among apes that practise outward gesture and actions without effect The other two examples out of the 2. of Machabees the one of praying for the deade the other of Ieremie praying for the people are no partes of the castell of Canonicall Scripture and therefore with other errours in the same bookes I omit them The last exaÌ„ple is out of Genesis 48. The saying of Iacob the Patriarke of Iosephs two childreÌ„ God who hath fed me from my youth euen to this day The Angell who hath deliuered me out of all aduersities blesse these children which is sayth Bristow as if one would say God and our Ladie blesse them Nay rather God by Iesus Christ blesse them for what other Angell but Christ the Angell of the great councell was the deliuerer of Iacob which when he wrestled with him in a vision and mystery Gen. 32. he doubted not to call God Euen the same Angell which led the children of Israel through the wildernes whoÌ„ S. Paul 1. Cor. 10. calleth Christ who was not an Angel by nature but by office in that as the Mediator he was sent to deliuer the people before he came in the flesh But if we should vnderstand the Angell of whom Iacob speaketh for soÌ„e priuate Angel appointed of God to protect him yet is it not as if one would say now God our Lady blesse theÌ„ For that God vseth the ministery of Angels to defend prosper his seruaunts but not the ministery of Saincts in heaueÌ„ for any such purpose that we can learne by the holy Scriptures Iacob might therfore pray y t God would send his Angell to protect those children euen as he had done for him As for that vaine brag that all Scripture from the beginning of Genesis to the end of the Apocalipse is for theÌ„ against vs is nothing els but a false alarme as though he woulde on all sides assalt our castel of only Scriptures wheras he purposeth nothing lesse But this can not be borne that he sayeth some places of Scripture be so playne against vs that we can not aunswere them but by plucking the pen of the holy Ghost out of his hand that wrote theÌ„ meaning that we deny the auctority of such books as be not Canonicall the Machabees especially But this he sayth can not be For either they are proued muâ—ncibly to be of the holy Ghostes indighting or no Scripture at all is proued to be suche as you may remember the common saying of S. Augustine Ego Euangelio non crederem c. I shoulde not beleue the Gospell it selfe vnlesse the Catholike Churches auctoritie did compell What shall I say to this impudent blasphemer that alloweth none other tryall of holy Scripture but the authoritie of the Church because Augustine supposing that hee were an Heathen Againe sayth he would not beleeue the Gospell except the authoritie of the Church with other thinges did moue him his woorde is Commoueret whiche Bristowe not so ignorauntly as
be seene in England yet they that had spirituall eyes and by Gods grâ—ce drewe neare vnto his Church did in the most obscure tymes as the worlde esteemeth them see the cleare bewtie of her light and the glorye of the Lordes hill lifted vp aboue all the hills in the world Esa. 2. The heathen tyrants thought by their cruell persecution that they had vtterly rooted out the name and nation of Christians from the face of the earth Nero gloried that he had purged the world of the superstition of Christ as appeareth in an olde inscription in a picture of stone Neroni â—l Caes. Aug. Pontif. Max. ob prouin latromb hijs qui nouam generi hum superstitionem inculcar purgatam To Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus the greatest Prelate for that he hath purged the prouince of theeues and them that brought in a newe superstition to mankind Likewise another like piller there is of Diocletian and Maximian in these wordes Diocletian Iouius Maximi Herculeus Caes. Augu. Amplificato per Orientem Occident nup. Rom. nomme Christianorum deleto quiremp euertebant Diocletianus Iouius and Maximianus Herculeus Caesaris Augusti hauing amplified the Empire of Rome both in the East and West and vtterly destroyed the name of Christians which did ouerthrow the common wealth Another like there is of Diocletian alone Diocletian Caes. Aug. Galerio in Oriente adoptat superstitione Christi vbique deleta cultu Deorum propagato Diocletianus Caesar Augustus hauing adopted Galerius in the East and in all places vtterly destroyed the superstition of Christ and set forth the worship of the Gods By these inscriptions and glorious titles you see that the heathenish tyrants perswaded them selues that they had vtterly defaced the religion of Christ destroyed his Church out of the worlde what maruell then if Antichrist and his adherents which to the cruelty of the former tyrants haue added most detestable hypocrisy haue thought that they had so wholy subuerted the true religion of Christ and his true Church that the name ether of Church or religion might not seeme to haue remayned in the world but that of the Romish Antichrist But as Nero the Pontif. Maximus of Rome with Diocletiane and the reste were deceyued in their time so their successors in place office and wickednes the Popes of Rome are likewise disapoynted of their cruell purpose But M. Sander glorieth that in all markes and signes of the true Church the popish Church doth excel ours But first of all that which is the onely true marke and triall of the Church namely the word of God he denyeth to be a sufficient marke of the true Church yet had he before confessed the Church to be the piller and stay of truth 1. Tim. 3. but the rule of truth if we beleue our Sauiour Christ is the word of God Iohn 17. 17. therefore the word of God is the onely true tryall and marke of the Church But let vs consider his reasons by which he woulde perswade vs that y e word of God is not the chiefe marke whereby the true Church of God may be knowen First he sayth the marke whereby an other thing is knowne ought it selfe to be most exactly knowne wheras we are not agreed what Gods word is Note this reason of his by which he taketh away all authoritie and vse from the worde of God not onely thereby to discerne the true Church but also to teache vs any other thinge that is needefull for vs to know But why I pray you are we not agreed what is Gods word Forsooth because some cal onely the written letter and the meaning thereof Gods word other thinke many thinges are Gods word which are not expressely written but deliuered by tradition from the Apostles and by the holy Ghost which hath written his lawes in our hartes of this later sort be the Papists but they are easily confuted For this principle must needes stand vnmoueable that Gods spirite is neuer contrary to him selfe Therefore seeing the spirite of God hath pronounced of the Scriptures that they are able to make the man of God perfect prepared to all good workes 2. Tim. 3. 16. it is certayne that God hath reuealed nothing by tradition for our instructioÌ„ which is not conteyned in his worde written much lesse any thing that is contrary to his doctrine deliuered in the holy Scriptures His second reason is that we are not agreed vpon the written word of God because the Protestants doe not admitte so many bookes of the olde testament as the Catholikes doe I aunswer the Protestants doe admit as many as the Catholike Church euer did or doth at this day His third reasoÌ„ is that the meaning of those bookes which we are agreed vpon is altogether in question betwene vs therfore that can be no marke of the church which it self is not knowne I answer although heretikes which are ouerthrowen in their owne conscience will acknowledge no meaning to be true but their owne yet are there many principles in the Scriptures so playne as they are graunted by both partes or els can not without shame be denyed of our aduersaries out of which playne certeyne and immutable principles all matters in controuersie may be proued and the same church also discerned which is the verie cause why the Papistes dare not abide the triall by the Scriptues but flye to traditions euen as their forefathers the auncient Valentinian heretikes of whome Irenaeus writeth lib. 3. cap. 2. Cum ex Scripturis arguuntur in accusationem conuertuntur ipsaruÌ„ Scripturam quasi non rectè habeant neque fuit ex auctoritate quia variè sunt dictae quia non possit ab his inueniriveritas qui nesciant traditionem non enim per literas traditam sed per viuam vocem When they are conuinced out of the Scriptures then fall they to accusing of the Scriptures them selues as though they were not right nor of sufficient authoritie because they are spoken doubtfully and that the trueth cannot be found of them which knowe not the tradition for that was not deliuered by letters but by word of mouth Thus much Ireneus of the olde Heretikes and what his iudgement was of the meaning of the Scripture which M. Sand. maketh so ambiguous he declareth lib. 2. cap. 35. Vniuersae scripturae Propheticae Euangelicae in aperto sine ambiguitat similiter ab omnibus audiri possunt c. The whole Scriptures both of the Prophets and of the Gospells are open and without ambiguitie may be heard of all meÌ„ alike This speaketh Irenaeus not of euery text of Scripture but of the whole doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles which is so playne and easie to be founde in the Scriptures that no man can misse thereof that seeketh not of purpose to be deceyued as he sayth cap. 67. of the same booke But M. Sander is content for disputation sake to admit Gods word for a marke of the true Church and
will proue that it is first with the Papistes For if by Gods word we meane the written letter of the Bible they are before vs because we haue none assured copies thereof which we receyued not of them for since that day in which S. Peter and S. Paule deliuered Gods word to the Romaines the Church of Rome hath alwayes kept it without leesing or corrupting I aunswer we meane not by Gods worde the written letter onely but receyuing and obeying the true and playne sense thereof to be the marke of the Church Againe I deny that we had any assured copies of the olde and new testament of the popish Church but the one of the Iewes in Hebrue the other of the Greeke Church in Greeke And whereas he talketh of a certayne daye in which S. Peter and S. Paule deliuered the Scripture to the Romains it sauoreth altogether of a popish fable finally how the Romish Church in these last dayes hath kept the Scripture from corruption although I coulde shew by an hundreth examples yet this one shall suffice for all the very first promise of the Gospell that is in the Scripture Gen. 3. that the seede of the woman shoulde breake the serpents heade the popish Church hath ether willfully corrupted or negligently suffered to be depraued thus ipsa conteret caput iuum she shall breake thyne heade referring that to the woman which God speaketh expressely to the seede of the woman The second marke is that the Papistes acknowledge more of the Bible then we doe by the bookes of Toby Iudeth Wisedom Ecclesiasticus and of the Machabees I aunswer in that you adde vnto the word of God it is a certayne argument that you are not the true Church of Christ for the true Church of Christ hath euer accompted those bookes for apocryphall witnesse hereof Hieronym praef in prouerb Sicut ergo Iudith Tobiae Machabaeorum libros legit quidem Ecclesia sed eos inter Canonicas Scripturas non recipit sic haec duo volumina legat ad aedificationem plebis non ad auctoritateÌ„ EcclesiasticoruÌ„ dogmatum confirmandam Therefore as the Church doth in deede reade the bookes of Iudith Tobias and of the Machabees but she receyueth them not among the canonicall Scriptures so she may reade these two bookes meaning the booke of Wisedom and Ecclesiasticus for the edifying of the people but not to confirme the authoritie of Ecclesiasticall opinions Nether is Augustine de doct Christ. lib. 2. cap. 8. whoÌ„ M. Sander quoteth of any other iudgement but prescribeth rules how the canonicall Scriptures are to be knowne And cont Gaudent epist. lib. 2. cap. 23. he confesseâ—h plainely that the booke of Machabees is not accompted of the Iewes as the law the Prophets and the Psalmes which our Sauiour Christ admitteth as his witnesses yet it is receyued of the Church if it be read or heard soberly Whereby it is manifest that the Church in his tyme receyued it not absolutely as part of the Canonicall Scripture but vnder condition of a sober reader or hearer As for the decree ascribed to Gelasius it hath no sufficient credit of antiquitie and much lesse the late councels of Florence and Trent which he quoteth Beside that the same decree of Gelasius admitting but one booke of Esdras excludeth the Canonicall booke of Nehemias and receyueth but one booke of the Machabees which will doe the Papistes but small pleasure The third marke the popish Church receyueth not only the hebrue text of the old testament the greeke of the new but also the greeke translation of the septuaginta and the common Latine translation to be of full authoritie whereas we giue small credit to those translations except they agree with the first Hebrue and Greeke copies Therefore the Papists haue Gods word in more authenticke tongues and copies then we haue I aunswer The Tridentine councell alloweth none for authenticall but the common Latine translation that is the worst of all but in that the popish Church admitteth differing translations from the originall truth of the Hebrue and Greeke text to be of full authoritie with the truth it appeareth plainely that she is not the Church of Christ which ether willfully confoundeth error with truth or els lacketh the spirite of discretion to know the one from the other And for more authentike copies it is impudently sayd that the Papistes doe receiue for we receiue not onely all these which he nameth but also the most auncieÌ„t Chaldee Paraphrastes the Syrian text of the new testament yea the Arabicall text of the whole Bible beside all vulgare translations of English French Dutch Italian Spanish which the Papistes can not abide All those I saye we receyue as authenticall copies for Christian men to vse but so that the tryall of all translations be made by the originall truthe of the Hebâ—ue and Greeke texts in which tongue the olde and newe Testament were first written Fourthly the Papistes doe translate and expounde Gods worde in all maner of tongues better then we because they haue not onely internall vocation but also externall vocation and commission from the Apostles by lyneall succession of Bishops and Preestes whereas we haue no commission but â—rom the common wealth which hath none authoritie to make Preestes c and yet how shall they preache if they be not sent Rom. 10. I aunswer concerning translations of the word of God into all tongues I neuer saw any nether is there any translation to be shewed of any Papist into any vulgare tongue And as for the externall calling of the Papistes I say it is not from any lawfull succession of the Apostles and auncient Church whose faith and doctrine they do not follow in their interpretations for if lyneall succession of Priestes and Bishops coulde make interpretations good the doctrine of Arius Nestorius Macedonius and many other heretikes whose externall calling was according to the lyneall and ordinary succession of Bishops and Priestes might be auctorised for Catholike Yea the Papistes might not refuse whatsoeuer Luther Bucer Cranmer and other haue taught which had the same lyneall succession that M. Sander doth nowe bragge of And as for our externall calling he sayth falsly it is of the common weale c whereas it is of the Church and therefore ordinarye and lawfull and the saying of S. Paule whom he citeth Rom. the tenth is of the inward calling and sending by God whereof our doctrine agreeable with the Scripture and our whole intent to set forth the glory of God is a sufficient profe the one to satisfie men the other to aunswer our owne conscience Fiftly he sayth it is no perfection at all on our side that we reade Gods word to the people in our Church seruice in the vulgare tongue for thereby we lacke the vse of the better tongues as of the Greeke and Latine O maister of impudencie what vse is there of the Greeke and Latine tongues to be read to the people
the Sacraments haue not fayth 2. Thess. 3. 2. The 8. marke of the Church if not onely the playne vnderstanding of any one sentence but also the circumstance of the place and the conference of Gods worde be necessary the Papists haue vsed it in euery question For proofe herof M. Sanders referreth vs to his treatise of the supper of the Lord lib. 4. and to his booke of Images cap. 2. 11. in this booke to the ca. 2. 4. I answer you make a light shew for a fashion but you nether coÌ„sider the circumstances rightly nor make any true collation of one place with another as is proued by the answers of these bookes Therefore your Academical conclusion is false hereticall blasphemous that the onely word of God being neuer so well handled is no sufficient marke to shew the truth When Christ sayth Sanctifie them in thy truth Thy word is the truth Ioan. 17. 17. The 9. M. Sander sayth the heads of the Church the councels the Bishops and the auncient fathers must be Iudges whether we do well apply the Scriptures or no as whether S. Peter be the rock which M. Iewel denieth he proueth by 16 doctors afterward cap. 4. of w c proofe we shall consider God willing in due place But whereas M. Sander quoteth Aug. cont Iulian. lib. 2. for his rule of Iudges I say he hath no such rule in that booke onely Augustine doth coÌ„uince the argumeÌ„ts of the Pelagians of nouelty by the iudgemeÌ„t of Iren. Cyprianus Rheuanus Ambrosius c. and other which liued before their time and therefore were no partial iudges so do we conuince the Popish heresies and their argumentes of noueltie not only by the manifest worde of God but also by the testimonie of the most auncient fathers although we may not admit all that they did write to be true euen as the same Augustine being pressed with the auctoritie of Ambrose Chrysostome and Cyprian by the Donatists Pelagians prouoketh from them onely to the Scriptures de nat graâ—cap 61. de vnit eccl cap. 16. cont Crescon lib. 2. cap. 31. de gratia Christ. cap. 43. That the allegation of the fathers suffiseth not of it selfe we agree with Maister Sander but that there is any other triall of the truth theÌ„ Scripture we wil neuer graunt seeing God hath therein deliuered his whole doctrine whatsoeuer is necessarie for vs to beleue that we may be saued Ioh. 20. 31. But the Papistes for the tenth marke ioyne tradition and practise of Gods church which can neuer deceaue amaÌ„ VVe thinke sayth Chrysostom the tradition of the church to be worthie of beleefe Is it a tradition aske no further But howe shall we proue it to be a tradition of the church The Valentinians as I shewed before out of Irenaeus denyed the Scriptures to be sufficient without knowledge of the tradition Therfore to discerne the tradition of â—â—â—â— church from the tradition of the heretikes we haue none other triall but by the Scriptures Therefore Chrysostom saith in 2. Cor. Ho. 3. that S. Paule did write the same thinges which he told them before in preaching As for the vniuersall practise either of the Popes supremacy or of the sacrifice of the masse which he braggeth of shall neuer be proued but the contrarie The eleuenth marke is the auctority of generall couÌ„cells confirming the truth condemning heretikes such he maketh the late councell of Trent to be But we deny that Conciliabulum of a few Popish hypocrits to be a generall councell in which no man should haue a definitiue voyce but they that were accused of heresie and whereof he that is most of all charged with heresie that is the Pope is made the supreme iudge wherefore the Papists haue no lawfull generall councell on their side although generall councells as he confesseth are no sufficient triall of the true church both because they may be hindered many wayes and also because they may erre as did the conncells of Arimine and Ephesus In respect of these considerations he maketh the twelfth marke to be the supremacy of the Pope whichis wholly theirs for triall whereof this booke following was written But for proofe that Christ hath appoynted such a iudge ouer all he citeth Ioan. 21. that Christ coÌ„maunded Peter to feede his sheepe as though that perteyned not to euerie one of the Apostles as much as to Peter Also Lu. 22. that Christ hauing praied that Peters faith might not fayle commaunded him when he was conuerted from his fall to confirme his brethren which perteineth only to the person of Peter and can not with any cable ropes be draweÌ„ to the Bishop of Rome or any successor of Peter for it concerneth his singular full comfort duty in respect of his fall Gods mercy except that according to analogy it may be applied to any man that is so raised after his fall and so that precept confirme thy brethren geueth no speciall commaundemeÌ„t to the Pope but to euery man whom God hath mercifully conuerted as he did Peter With the twelfth marke M. Sander would haue ended but that the Protestantes affirme the lawfull preaching of Gods word and the lawfull administration of the Sacramentes to be a marke whereby they wilbe tried But seeing lawfull preaching ministring must be tried by Gods worde M. Sander first asketh what we call Gods word secondly he asketh if he haue not proued it to be more with theÌ„ theÌ„ with vs whatsoeuer it be It is like this Popishe academicall Atheist hath proued Gods word to be on his side â—â—â—â— wil not haue it certeinly known what Gods word is After this he will proue the Papists to be most lawfull preachers because they are likest to the Apostles in conuerting many nations within these 900. yeres wheÌ„ he sayth no man aliue could once heare vs peepe As though controuersie of nations would argue a true church By which reasons not only the Protestants may nowe proue them selues to be most like the Apostles in conuerting so many nations of Europe but also the Arians and most of all the Mahumetists might proue them selues the true church It is not therfore coÌ„uersion of nations but conuersion of theÌ„ to the true doctrine of the Apostles which maketh vs like the Apopostles the Papistes Arians Mahometists most vnlike vnto them And where he saith that no souÌ„d of ours was heard in 900. yeares space by any man aliue to see how impudeÌ„tly he lyeth read Flaccius Illyricus in catalogo testium veritatis you shal see in all ages what monumeÌ„ts are extant of some few whom God reserued from that generall Apostasie of Antichrist Read also the acts monumentes set forth by M. Foxe you shall see the same most plentifâ—lly He wil proue their administration of the Sacraments to be more lawful then ours because they haue fiue more then we But I answer because they haue fiue more then the
worde of God alloweth or the primitiue church acknowledgeth in the administration of the other they haue either altogether peruerted the institution as in the Lordes supper or shamefully corrupted it with superstition as in baptisme they are not the church of Christ but the church of Antichrist When we alledge the persecution of the Romish Antichrist to be the cause that our church hath not florished in outward peace to be a marke also of the truth of our congregation what maisters sayth D. Sanders Antichrists persecution shall dure but three yeres an halfe and is the Pope Antichrist who hath dured these 900. yeres But good M. Doctor determiner how proue you that Antichrists persecution shall dure but three an halfe of such yeares as the Pope hath dured 900. you quote Dan. 7. Apoc. 13. you might by as good reason say it shal dure but three dayes an halfe Apoc. 11. 9. will you take vpon you so precisely to determine of the mysticall nuÌ„ber which is somtime called 3. yeares an halfe somtime 42. moneths somtime 1260. daies somtime 3. daies an halfe somtime a time times halfe a time al which make halfe a Prophetical weeke signifie a time determined of God but not plainly reuealed to many SecoÌ„dly you aske how it could be the true church against w c Antichrist so loÌ„g preuailed that no man could tel whether any such were in y e earth wheÌ„ hel gates shal not preuaile against y e true church I answere if you can not put a difference betwene impugning preuailing you wil haue much to do to defend your Romish church to be the true church against the Turkes theÌ„ selues who haue possessed a great part of â—â—â—â— grouÌ„d w c you say perteined once to your church But herin appeareth the mark of the true church against w c the gates of hell haue not preuailed that although SataÌ„ was let loose the whore of Babylon dronken with the blood of her meÌ„bers her two witnesses slaine she her selfe driuen into the wildernes her seede persecuted wheresoeuer they were dispersed yet she is restored in the sight of the world her witnesses raised froÌ„ death to life the deuill is vanquished y e purple whore of Babylon is fallen Antechrist shall at length be throwne into the lake with the deuil and his Angels This is the Lordes worke it is maruelous in our eyes If either persecution or not failing in persecutioÌ„ be a marke of the church it is more in the Papists theÌ„ in the ProtestaÌ„ts for persecutioÌ„ he will proue that they be persecuted by vs as the mother by y e child which departeth from her obedience as Agar Ismael froÌ„ Sara But I answer we are departed froÌ„ Agar vnder whom we were in bondage to Sara by whom we are made children of the heaueÌ„ly Ierusalem euen as Agar departed froÌ„ Sara so did the synagoge of Rome froÌ„ the Catholike church of Christ. For not failing in persecutioÌ„ experieÌ„ce teacheth in all countries w c haue receaued the Gospell how small punishmeÌ„ty greatest nuÌ„ber of Papists wil abide for their Popish profession whereas so many thousands Goâ—s Saincts being most cruelly murdred by y e popish church the church of Christ is not diminished but encreased thereby euen as Cyprian saith the blood of the martyrs is the seede of church If antiquitie be a marke it is proued to be on the Papists side by this reason The church is all one the later part of the church for 900. yeares last past is on the Papistes side therefore the former parte also But this reason standing vpon a shamefull begging of that which is questioned is soone turned vpon your owneÌ„ necke The church is in all but one but the beginning of the church maketh not for you therefore that which you say is the later part of the church being contrary to that former is no part of the church so that by this reason you shal neither haue antiquitie or any parte of the church But if you appeale to particular examples sayth M. Sander I say the Christians in the primitiue church did communicate vnder one kinde at Emaus and at Ierusalem And I say M. Sander if he would burst him self with study shall neuer proue it He quoteth Aug. de consen Euang lib. 3. cap. 25. whose opinion was that Christ gaue the sacrameÌ„t at Emaus but of communion in one kind he neuer once dreamed He sayth the Christians did set vp images in the honor of Christ quoting Eus. lib. 7. cap. 14. whereas Eusebius speaketh of heathen men that of heathenish custome did set vp images and not of Christians Dionysius although he be auncient yet he wrote not in the tyme of Eusebius Hieronymus or Gennadius so was knowne for no writer in y e Church for 500. yeares after Christ Wherefore I wil not stand about his errors and ceremonyes which yet for the moste parte are as vnlike the popish ceremonyes as they are to ours Although wee haue no certaintie of the writinges of Ignatius which are extant yet is there nothing in them that fauoreth the Papists religion Hee nameth a a sacrifice which could not be offered without the Byshop that cannot be the Masse whiche euery hed geprieste may say ad Symrn. He would haue the Emperor obey the Byshop sayth M. Sand. ad Phil. But this proueth the Epistle to bee counterfaite for there was no Christian Emperour when Ignatius liued Although in deuine matters the Christian Emperour ought to obey the Bishop or rather Gods word which y e Bishop preacheth Also he speaketh of Virgins that had consecrated them selues to God who speaketh against them which hauing the gifte of continency doe keepe virginity In the same Epistle He affirmeth both Peter and Paule to haue bene maried and will not condemne the mariage of church ministers He commendeth the lent fast ad Antioch Choose M. Sander whether your decretals lye of Thelesphorus that inuented the lent fast or that this is a counterfait Epistle of Ignatius In the Epistle ad Phil. Where he commendeth the 40. daies fast the Wednesday the Friday fast he saith farther Quicunque dominicum aut sabbathum non ieiunauerit praetâ—r vnum sabbathum pasâ—ae ipse est Christi interfector Whosoeuer shall not fast the Lordes day or sabbat beside one sabbat of Easter he is a murtherer of Christ. If this be true antiquity why doth the church of Rome omit fast on Sunday if it be counterfait why is not M. Sander ashamed to alleage it Iustinus witnesseth that water was mingled with the wine Yea but it was to alay the strength of the wine not that it was necessary for the Sacrament though afterward it grew to a superstitious obseruation He saith further the Deacons caried the consecrated mysieries to them that were absent which Caluine reputeth for an abuse If they caried the bread the wine as the Sacrament it was an abuse not to
t the straungens thereof so long as the trueth of the little flock the falshod of the reuolted multitude are manifestly tryed by the authoritie of the scriptures The conclusion of all his Preface is that which was the cause of this treatise that there neuer lacked a chief Byshop in Saincte Peeters chaire whose supremacy beeing graunted all other controuersies bee superfluous Yea verely all Scriptures Doctors and Councelles be needlesse where there is such a person alwaies at hand who cannot erre in any thing that he commandeth men to beleeue or doe And contrariswise if ther be any necessary vse of scriptures doctors couÌ„cels Learning Tounges c. there is no such chiefe Byshop on Earth But what saye you M. Sander did there neuer lack a Pope to sit in Peters Chayre Was that See neuer voyde many dayes many monethes and many yeeres togither And when there was two Popes or three Popes at once and that oftentimes who sat in Peters Chaire You will say one of them but which you cannot tell Whose voyce shoulde the people obey as Christes vicar The one cursed the other absolued the one commannded the other forbadde Is not all your bragging of Peters chaire and vnitie thereby proued to be nothing else but a meere mockerie The Lorde Iesus confounde Antichrist with the breath of his mouth and with his glorious appearance and defend his Church in trueth and holinesse for euer and euer Amen The first Chapter THE state of the Question concerning the supremacie of Sainct Peter and of the Byshoppes of Rome after him VPon our denyall of the supremacie of the Pope and of S. Peter he sayth we deny all primacie and chiefe gouernment in the Church Wherevpon he rayseth three questions to intreate of Whether it be against the worde of God that there should be in his Churche any primacie or chiefe authoritie Whether S. Peter had the same primacie or no Whether the Byshop of Rome had it after S. Peter To which we aunswere with distinction of the words primacie and Church that we affirme there is a spirituall and eternall primacy of the vniuersall Churche which is proper onely to our Sauiour Christ which neuer was giuen to Peter nor to any mortall man Likewise we arffime that in particular Churches there is must be a primacie of order which is temporall according to the disposition of the Church And such primacie in the Colledge of the Apostles might Peter haue for sometime but that he had it not alwayes it appeareth in the councell of the Apostlesin the 15. of the Actes of which Iames in a manner by all writers consent was President and Primate and vpon the controuersie beeing throughly debated pronounced the definitiue sentence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c according to which the synodall Epistle to the Churches of Antiochia Syria and Cilicia was written in the name of the Apostles Elders and brethren But concerning S. Peter M. Sander moueth newe questions First whereas Christ promised that Simon should be called Cephas or Peter whiche is a stone or Rock Ioh. I. and afterward performed his promise wheÌ„ he chose him to be an Apostle Mar. 3. Luk. 6. And thirdly when Simon confessed his godhead the reason of the promise was declared that he would builde his Church vpon that Rocke the question is whether Peter himselfe be that Rock vpon which Christ woulde builde his Church or Christ himselfe or the fayth and confession of peter M. Sander the spokesman for the Papists passing ouer the second question that is whether Christe himselfe whom Peter confessed by this rock denyeth the fayth or confession of Peeter to be the perfect sence of that promise affirming the Rock on which the Church is builded to be S. Peter not barely confirmed but in respect of the promise past the present confession and the authoritie of feeding Christes Sheepe giuen him after his resurrection of which foure conditions the Protestantes hee sayth doe lack no lesse then three But what doe the Papists lack when in there sence they exclude the rock Christ the only foundation then the which none other can be layde 1. Cor. 10. 4. 1. Cor. 3. 11. by any wise builder of the Church Yet seeing M. Sand. is so desirous to haue Peter to bee the stone whereof Christ speaketh laying first Iesus Christ to be the head corner stone I wil franckly yeelde vnto him that which he coulde neuer win by force that Christ saying to Peter thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke or stone will I builde my Church meaneth euen Peter him selfe vpon whome he would build his Church but so that he maketh not Peter a singular Rocke or stone to beare the whole building for then hee should put him selfe out of place but one of the prâ—ncipall stones of the foundation euen as all the Apostles and Prophetes were for so the holy Ghost speaketh Ephe. 2. vers 20. beeing builded vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Iesus Christe beeing the head corner stone in whome all the building beeing compacted groweth vnto an holy temple vnto the Lord. Nowe let vs consider whether any singular authority was committed to peter when hee was willed to feede the sheepe of Christ. M. Sand. saith yea because it was sayd to him alone feede my sheepe and no particular flock named it must needes be ment the whole flocke Marke these maine pillers of the popishe Rock Christ saide onely to Peter come after me Satan for thou art an offence to me c. Therefore Peter onely was an enemie of Christe If the Pope must needes haue the one texte as peculiar to him let him take the other also Againe Peter himself sayth to the elders feede as much as in you lyeth the flocke of Christe 1. Peter 5. Heere is no particular slocke named therefore he meaneth the whole vniuersall flocke But he vrgeth farther that as Peter loued Christe more then the rest so he did feede the flock of Christ aboue all other pastors But if labouring in preaching the gospel be the feeding of Christes flock not Peter but Paule laboured more then he and all the rest of the Apostles 1. Cor. 15. The answere of the Protestants to his demande Why Peter alone in presence of other Apostles was commaunded thrise to feede the sheepe that by thrise confession and iniunction to feede he might abolishe the shame of his thrise denying and knowe that hee was restored to his Apostleship from which he deserued to be depriued M. Sand. liketh not for three causes First he sayth hee had not lost his Apostleship because his fault was not externally proued nor confessed in iudgment nor stubbernly defended c. as though Christ which knew and foretolde his infirmitie before he fell had neede of externall proues or a Commissaries court to depriue Peter of his office O blockish reason Although neither Caluine nor Beza doe affirme that hee was altogither excluded from his office by his fault but
me dicitis Statim loci non immemor sui Primatum egit Primatum confessionis vtique non honoris primatum fidei non ordinis This Peter I say when he hearde but what doe you say that I am immediatly not forgetting his place executed his primacie Verely the primacie of confession not of honor the primacie of faith not of degree By these places of Ambrose it appeareth what gouernment and primacie was graunted to Peter and how he exercised the same The fift differeÌ„ce is that the other Euangelists say absolutely let him be a minister a seruauâ—â—t in S. Luke it is said with a great moderation let him be made as the younger and as he that ministreth If this be a good argument to proue that the ministery is more truly a greatnesse then a ministerie the Arrians may deny by the like that Christ is more truely a man then the sonne of God because Sainct Iohn sayeth we sawe his glorie as the glorie of the onely begotten sonne of God O beastly absurdity and yet he sayeth if any man say that there was not one certeyne man greater amonge the Apostles who might be as the younger it is playne contradiction to Christ and he is Antechrist But where on Gods name sayeth Christ that there is one certeyne man greater among the Apostles The last the least difference is that the greater man is euidently named a litle after when Christ saâ—th to S. Peter Simon Simon beholde Satan hath desired to sift you as it were wheate but I haue prayed for thee that thy faith shall not faile And thou being once conuerted confirme thy brethren Maister Sander asketh what other thing it is for Peter to confirme his brethren but to practise and exercise his greatnesse ouer them for euerie one that confirmeth is greater then they which are confirmed Who euer did reade such impudent assertions Peters faith was confirmed by Marie Magdalen therefore she was greater then Peter Paule was confirmed by Ananias therefore he was greater then Paule Aquila Priscilla confirmed Apollo therfore they were greater then he To conclude if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in S. Luk. 22. do necessarily proue that there was one certeine man among them greatest theÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the 9. of Luk. 48. doth proue that there was one least among them He that is least among you al saith our Sauiour Christ euen he shalbe the greatest And least M. Sander should renue his differeÌ„ce of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it may please him to vnderstand that the contention was among the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which should be the greater or greatest of them Which question our Sauiour Christ doth not decide if M. Sanders difference of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place may stande Wherefore hitherto Peter hath found no supremacie and muche lesse the Pope by prerogatiue of his chaire who can not be sayd to sit in Peters chaire except he taught Peters doctrine which if he did teach as he doth y e contrarie yet Peters auctority could no more be deriued to him then the auctority of Moses to euery one of y e Scribes Pharizees w c did sit in Moses chaire He citeth Ambrose to proue that there is a prelacie or preferrement in the church because he forbiddeth contention thereabout as though there could not be a prelacy or preferremeÌ„t of euery Bishop ouer his church but there must be one Bishop ouer all the church The like he alleageth out of Bede which speaketh expressely of al the teachers of the church not of one Pope ouer all The conclusion of his disputation is that the ecclesiastical primacy doth in al points resemble as much as it possible may the primacy of Christ therefore he that denyeth the primacie among the Apostles to be a true primacy in his kinde is blasphemous against Christ him selfe Nay rather he that communicateth with any man that which is peculiar to our Sauiour Christ that he only shoulde be as S. Paule speaketh of him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 himselfe the primate in al things Col. 1. 18. which is y e head of his body which is the church is fouÌ„d a manifest blasphemer of our Sauiour Christ. But that they w c excel among y e Apostles their successors the Bishops may be humble and yet great after the example of our Sauiour Christ is no question at all But that any hath suche greatnes in auctoritie as our Sauiour Christ hath cuer his whole Churche is the thinge we denye If Gregorie affirme that Peter by Gods commission had the primacie of the holy church and was growne in power aboue the rest it is no maruel seeing he was so nere to the open manifestation of Antechrist which succeeded him the next saue one whose tyranny beganne to encrease longe before Gregories time yet was he in his pretended primacie more modest then any that followed him to this day Vtterly refusing and condemning as prophane proude blasphemous against Christ the title of vniuersall Bishoppe which Ihon of Constantinople did vsurpe and other Bishoppes would haue geuen to him And whereas M. Sander frameth an obiection of our part that no man can be both a minister a gouernour therfore no ecclesiasticall minister can be a gouernour he playeth with his owne shadow For we deny not but a minister of the church which is a seruaunt is also a gouernour But we affirme that his gouernmeÌ„t is spiritual not worldly vnlike to the earthly gouernment of this worlde euen as the kingdome of Christ is not of this worlde But it followeth not because that euery Bishop shepherd is a gouernour therefore there must be one Bishop and shepherd gouernour of them all other then our Sauiour Christ the arch or head shepherd Bishop of our soules 1. Pet. 5. 4. 1. Pet. 2. 25 M. Sander coÌ„mendeth y e saying of Leo B. of Rome to Anastasius B. of Thessalonica Qui se c. He that knoweth him seife to be set ouer some men let him not disdaine to haue some man preferred before him But he proceedeth sed obedientiam quam exigit etiam ipse dependat But such obedience as he requireth of other let him yeeld himselfe By this saying it appeareth that although Leo take much vpoÌ„ him as to heare the coÌ„trouersies y e can not be determined by the Metropolitans yet he acknowledgeth that in equitie he was bâ—â—â—â—d to yeelde that obedience to others which he required of others if he him selfe were in fault But M. Sander maketh an other obiection for vs on this maner The Princes of the Gentiles doe also serue their subiectes in conseruing peace keeping out their enemies c. but the clergie must be altogether vnlike to temporal gouernours therfore there must be no primacie or gouernment among them although it be ioyned with seruice Once againe I say we make no such obiection but we answere the Anabaptists that
made such a monstrous iumbling of three opinions in one he is not ashamed to charge Maister Iewell for leauing the moste literall sense and mingling three opinions of these foure in one as though his sense which is farthest of from the meaning of Christ were the onely or moste literall sense But seeing hee wisheth Maister Iewell or any of vs to discusse the meaning of Christe particulerly with all circumstaunces for my parte considering all circumstaunces I think the most simple and plaine meaning of Christe is that Peter it a Rocke or stone vppon which the Church is buylded but none otherwise then euery one of the Apostles is Ephe 2. and 20. verse and in the Apocalips the 21. chapter and 14. verse Of which M. Sander also confesseth euery one to be a Rock in his kinde But nowe let vs see the fiue circumstaunces by which Maister Saunder will proue Peter for to bee such a Rocke as none of all the reste of the Apostles is but he The firste Christe promised Symon before he confessed that he shoulde be called Peter whiche was the firste cause of beeing the Rocke Iohn I. Admit this to bee a promise not an imposition of a name in respect of the giftes of fortitude constancie where with he woulde endue him this proueth him not to be a singular rocke The second he was named Peter before he coÌ„fessed which was the performaunce of the promise Mark 3. I dout not but that he had coÌ„fessed Christ before he was made an Apostle although he had not made that solemne confession expressed in Matthew 16. Wherefore this circumstaunce is a friuolous argument And his brother Andrewe which first brought him to Christ confessed Iesus to be the Messias before Peter was come to Christ. The thirde when he had confessed the Godheade of Christ which was the fruâ—ct of the gift of the promise Christ pronounced him to be such a rocke whereupon he would build his church which was the reward of his confession But all the Apostles made the same confession therefore the same reward was geuen to all that they should euerie one be a rocke or stone on which the church should be builded The fourth Christ prayed that Peters faith might not fayle which was the warrant of the perpetuitie of his strong confession Luc. 22. Christ prayed for all his Apostles Ioan. 17. the speciall prayer for Peter was in respect of his greater weakenes when he was left to him selfe The last to shew what strength Peter should geue to his brethren after his conuersion Christ bad him feede his lambes wherby he was made such a rock wherby he should stay vp his church by teaching ruling y e faithful as whose voyce the sheepe should be bound to heare in payne of damnation First I answere that the strength or confirmation which he should geue to his brethren was not all one with his feeding of the lambes but was vsed to the strengthening of his weake brethren the rest of the Apostles whom after his maruelous conuersion he did mightely confirme though in his fall he was shewed to be the weakest of all Then I say the feeding of the sheepe of Christ was committed to him with the rest of the Apostles in which he had no prerogatiue of auctoritie geuen but an earnest charge to shewe his greater loue by greater diligence in his office So that hitherto Peter is none otherwise a rock then euery one of the Apostles is The fourth Chapter DIuerse reasons are alleaged to proue chiefely by the circumstance and conference of holy Scripture that these wordes thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will builde my church haue this literall meaning vpon thee ô Peter being first made a rocke to thend thou shouldest stoutely confesse the faith and so confessing it I will build my church the promise to be caelled Peter was the first cause VVhy the church was built vpon him the Protestants can not tel which is the first literall sense of these wordes vpon this rocke will I build my church FIrst it is to be remembred that M. SaÌ„der in the chapter before reiecting the interpretatioÌ„ of three of the greatest Doctors of the church Origen Augustine and Chrysostom not only is bound in equity to geue vs the same liberty which he taketh him selfe but also to confesse that these three principal doctors following other senses then his were ignoraunt of that which he all other Papists make to be the chiefe article of Christian faith namely of the supremacie of Peter when they acknowledged not Peter to be the rocke wherupon Christ would build his church and therfore would neuer haue subscribed to his booke which he instituteth the rock of the church But nowe to the argument of this chapter Chrysostomis cited to proue that where Christ sayth to Peter thou art Simon the sonne of Iona thou shalt be called Cepha which is by intepretation Peter a newe name is promised to Simon in Ioan. Hom. 18. Honorifice c. Christ doth forespeake honorably of him For the certeine foretelling of things to come is the worke only of the immortal God It is to be noted that Christ did not foretell at this first meeting all thinges which shoulde come to passe afterwarde to him For he did not call him Peter neither did he say vpon this rocke will I builde my church But he sayd thou shalt be called Cephas For that was both of more power and also of more auctoritie There is nothing in this sentence but that we may willingly admit Peter was not yet instructed that he might be one of the twelue foundations of the church as he was afterward And that Chrysostom iudged no singular thing to be graunted by that saying of Christ Mat. 16. to Peter appeareth by his wordes in Euang. Ioann Praef. Where he applieth the same to Ihon. Tonitrui enim filius est Christo dilectissimus columna omniuÌ„ quae in orbe sunt ceclesiarum qui caeli claues habet For the sonne of thunder is most beloued of Christ being a piller of all the churches which are in the worlde which hath the keyes of heauen Neither doth Cyrillus whom he citeth make any thing for his purpose In Ioan. lib. 2. cap. 12. Nec Simon c. And he telleth afore hande that his name shalbe Peter and not nowe Simon by the very word signifying that he would build his church on him as on a rocke and most sure stone These are the wordes of Cyrillus but that he meaneth not his person but his faith he sheweth manifestly in his booke de Trinit lib. 4. speaking vpon the text of Math. 16. the grounde of M. Sanders booke Peiram opinor per agnominationem nihil aliud quam inconcussam firmissimam discipuli fidem vocauit in qua ecclesia Christi it a firmata fundata esset vt non laberetur I thinke he called a rocke by denomination nothing els but the most vnmoueable and stedfast
faith of that disciple on which the church of Christ should be so established and founded that it should not fall Here is an other principall Doctor ioyning with Chrysostom against M. Sander who affirmeth that the rocke is nothing els but Peters faith After these he nameth Theophylact and Euthymius two late writers but he citeth nothing out of them presently But after shewing the force of Gods promise to be effectual to work al meanes necessarie for the performaunce of it he citeth out of Euthymius in Luc 6. that it was like that in Ioh. 1. Christ promised that Simon should be called Peter in Luk. 6 called him Peter All this needed not we doubt not but Simon was called Peter Yea but Cyrillus sayth in Ioan. lib. 12. cap. 64. that he being Prince and heade first cried out saying thou art Christ the sonne c. Therfore he was head before his confession by promise and name I will not here say how contrary M. Sander is to him selfe which in the cap. 3. sayd that his supremacie was graunted to him as a rewarde of his confession But I will aunswere Cyrillus by him selfe in Ioan. lib. 4. cap. 28 that Peter was Ordine maior superior in order to auoyde confusion not in degee dignitie or auctoritie And whereas M. Sander vrgeth so vehemently that the name of Peter was not geuen for his confession but was singular to him by promise so that it belonged literally to no Prophet Apostle nor disciple but only to him his successors it is a most fond friuolus matter for the name of Bonarges was specially geuen to the sonnes of Zebedee in respect of their excellent giftes and at the same time that the name of Peter was geuen to Simon which secing it perteineth not to their successors which haue not the same giftes no more doth the name dignity of Peter perteine to any that sit in his chaire if euer he had any fixed chaire among the Gentiles which by Gods ordinaunce was appoynted to be the principall Apostle of the Iewes Moreouer where he laboreth tooth nailc to proue that these wordes vpon this rocke I will build my church are to be referred to Peter as I sayd before I will graunt euen as muche But that Peter by these wordes was made a singular rocke more then all the Apostles vpon which the whole church is builded I vtterly deny neither shall he be euer able to proue it For it is an impudent lye that onely Peter at this time had this high reuelation to acknowledge Christ to be the sonne of God For he aunswered in the name of all the rest who beleued the same which he in their name confessed Did not Andrewe before Peter acknowledge him to be the Messias Did not Nathaniel which was none of the Apostles acknowledge him to be the sonne of God and the King of Israel Ioan. 1. 49. But he reasoneth substantially when he saith thou only art the rocke because thou alone hadst this name c. promised thou alone hadst it geuen thou alone didst confesse me to thee alone I say thou art Peter As though a man may not haue a name whose signification is common to many Salomon alone was promised to be called and was called Iedidiah that is the beloued of God shall we therefore reason that Salomon onely was beloued of God as for that he onely confessed I haue shewed before that it is false for Christ saying thou art Peter meaneth not to say thou onely art a rocke but thou well aunswerest thy name which signifieth a rocke or stone and I wil in deede vse thee as a rocke or stone to builde my church vpon yet not meaning the person but the office and doctrine of his Apostleship But nowe hath M. Sander no lesse then 21. reasons to proue that Peter is the rocke here spoken of w c althogh they may for the most parte be easily auoided yet I will graunt that Peter is one of the twelue stones whereupon the church is builded but not the only stone Therfore his first foure arguments I deny 1. Simon is alone promised to be called Peter 2. he alone is called Peter 3. Christ speaketh to him alone saying And I say to thee c. 4. Christ sayth of him alone thou art Peter therefore Simon alone is the rocke of the church let him proue the cōsequence if he can The next 5. which proue that these wordes are to be referred to Peter although that they be not verie strong yet I graunt the wordes may be aptly referred to Peter the reasons are 1. vpon the pronoune The 2 the worde rocke of which Peter is named 3. the conference of thē together 4. the word I will build 5. the word my church The 10 Argument I denye that Christ. by saying to Peter Feede my Lambes feede my sheepe made him the heade stone of Gods militant Church nexte vnto Christe The eleuenth that Peter is shewed to be the Rocke spoken of by geuing of the Keyes I confesse ebut seeing the keyes are giuen to all the Apostles this proueth Peter to be none otherwise a Rocke then euery one of them That Iohn receued the Keyes I shewed euen now out of Chysostome The twelfth that the propertie of a Rock in constant withstanding of tempests agreeth with Peter I graunt and so it doth to the rest of the Apostles for whome Christ prayed as he did for Peter who also strengthened and confirmed their brethren as Peter did The 13. I confesse that hell gates shall not preuayle against the Church nor against any member thereof which is a small reason to make Peter supreame heade thereof The 14. which is the authorities of those doctors that teach Peter to be the rocke whom he nameth when he citeth their sayings or quoteth their places I will seuerally consider The 15. their reason also when I see them to deriue Peters authoritie to his successors I will waighe likewise The 16. the practise of 1500. yeares I deny The 17. I deny that all generall councells or any generall councell for 600. yeares after Christ acknowledged Peter to be the rocke in that sence the Papistes do now The 18. if the confession of Peter be the rocke yet it is none inconuenience that the church shoulde be builded theron which began to be builded on the same confession offered by Iohn Baptist. The 19. though you confound the diuerse senses geuen by the fathers in your fourth sense yet that proueth not your sense to be true The 20. seeing the Apostles are certeyne foundatiōs and rockes vpon which the church is builded I confesse that Peter must needes be one but that he was the most principall rocke in respect of his name Peter which is a stone I say it followeth no more then that Salomon was best of al men beloued of God because of that name Iedidiah which signifieth beloued of God The 21. that all the Protestantes doe not agree in the interpretation of
these wordes vpon this rocke I will builde my church it proueth not your exposition to be true for neither do all the old Doctors nor yet the new Papistes agree in one the same interpretation of this text And oftentimes it may inuincibly be proued that an heresie hath no grounde out of suche a text of Scripture although the true and naturall sense thereof can not be found at all The fift Chapter IT is proued out of the auncient fathers that S. Peter is this rocke whereupon the church was promised to be builded otherwise then M. Iewell affirmeth THat Peter was a rocke or stone vpon which the church was builded is graunted of vs but that he alone was a rock for the whole church to be builded vpoÌ„ we deny and M. Iewell rightly affirmeth that the olde Catholike fathers haue written and pronounced not any mortall man as Peter was but Christ him selfe the sonne of God to be this rocke whereon y t whole church is builded But M. Sander will proue if he can out of the old writers that not onely Christ is the chiefe rocke but Peter also is an other rocke so that the church by his doctrine is builded vpon two rockes and this he will shew 1. by their words 2. their reasons 3. by the same places which M. Iewell alleageth for the coÌ„trary opinioÌ„ The decretal epistles of Anacletus Pius Fabianus c. which in his owne conscience he knoweth to be forged he omitteth and beginneth with Tertullian De praescrip aduers. haeres Latuit aliquid Petrum aedisicaÌ„dae ecclesiae Petram dictum Was any thing hid from Peter which was called a rocke of the church which was to be builded This is graunted that he was a rocke or stone whereon the churche is builded and the same Tertullian in his booke de pudicitia sayth of this whole text that this was conferred to Peter Personally and perteineth to none other but such as he was namely an Apostle or Prophet Secundum enim Petri personam spiritualibus potestas ista conueniet aut Apostolo aut Prophetae For according to the person of Peter this power shall belong to spiritual men either to an Apostle or to a Prophet Where is then the succession of the B. of Bome But Hippolytus saith Princeps Petrus fideipetra Peter is chiefe a rocke of faith He meaneth a strong preacher of faith not a rocke whereon faith is builded Origenes in Exod. Ho. 5. calleth S. Peter Magnum illud c. That great foundation and most sound rocke whereupon Christ hath builded his church But let Origenes expound him selfe in Math. cap. 16. Si autem super vnum illum Petrum arbitraris vniuersam ecclesiam aedisicari à deo quid dicis de Iacobo Ioanne filus tonitrui velde singulis Apostolis Verè ergo ad Petrum quidem dictum est Tues Petrus super hanepetram edifiâ—abo ecclesiam meam pertae inferorum non praeualebâ—nt ei tamen omnibus Apostolis omnibus quibus q perfectis fidelibus dictum videtur quoniam omnes sunt Petrus petrae in omnibus aedificata est ecclesia Christi aduersus nullum ecrum qui tales sunt portae preualent inferorum But if thou thinke the whole church is builded by God vpon that one man Peter what sayst thou of Iames and Iohn the sonnes of thunder or of euerie one of the Apostles Therefore it was in deede truly sayd vnto Peter Thou art Peter vpon this rocke I will builde my church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile agaynst it yet it seemeth that it was spoken also to all the Apostles and to all the perfect faithfull because they are all Peter and stones and on them all the church of Christ is builded and agaynst none of them which are suche the gates of hell shall preuayle By this you see howe Origen is none of his howe so euer he abuse his name Next he citeth Cyprian lib. 1. Ep. 3. lib. 4. Ep. 9 which sayeth that the church was builded vpon Peter Which we confesse as vpon one of the foundation stones but the same Cyprian De simplicitate praelatorum sayth Hoc erant vtique caeters Apostoli quod fuit Petrus pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis sed exordium ab vnitate proficiscinur vt ecclesia vna monstretur The rest of the Apostles were euen the same thing that Peter was endued with equall fellowship both of honor and auctoritie but the beginning procedeth from one that the church might be shewed to be one This speaketh Cyprian vpon the very text now in discussing Consequently he citeth Hilarie lib 6. de trinit Petrus c. Peter lieth vnder the building of the church and in ca. Math. 16. O in nuncupatione c. O happy foundation of the church in hauing the new name pronounced and ô rocke worthie of the building of that church which should dissolue the lawes of hell But the same Hilarie sayeth of Christ de trinit lib. 2. Vna haec est foelix fidei petra Petri ore confessa tu es filius Dei viui This is that onely happie rocke of fayth confessed by the mouth of Peter thou art the sonne of the liuing God And agayne lib. 6. Super hanc igitur confessionis petram ecclesiae aedificatio est Vpon this rocke of confession is the building of the church And againe Haec fides ecelesiae fundamentum est per hanc fidem infirmae aduersus eam sunt portae inferorum Haec fides regni caelestis habet claues c. This fayth is the foundation of the churche by this fayth the gates of hell are of no force agaynst it This fayth hath the keyes of the kingdome of heauen c. Therefore not the person of Peter is the rocke for all the church to be built vpon S. Ambrose hath the next place whome he citeth Scr. 66. Si ergo c. If Peter then be a rocke vpon which the church is builded he doth well to heale first the feete that euen as he doth conteyne the foundation of faith in the church so in the man he may confirme the foundation of his members Of the auctoritie of this Sermon I will not dispute it shall sufâ—ice that Ambrose in Ps. 38. sayth Quod Petro dicitur Apostâ—lis diâ—itur non pâ—testatem vsurpamus sed seruiâ—â—s â—mperio That which is sayd to Peter is said to the Apostles we vsurpe not power but we serue vnder commaundâ—ment By this saying of Ambrose Peter is so a rocke and foundation as the other Apostles are not a rocke to beare all the building him selfe S. Basil is alleaged in Concâ—de paenit Petrus petra est c. Peter is a rocke through Christ the rocke For Iesus geueth his owne dignities he is a rocke and maketh a rocke This proueth not Peter to be the onely rocke of the militant church as M. Sander would make him After him he citeth Hierom in 16. Math.
AEdificabo ecclesiam mean super te I wil build my church vpon thee Behold sayth M. Sander the church promised to be built vpon a mortall man If he say true Christ sayth in vaine that flesh and blood made him not Peter But the same Hieronyme interpreteth that power there geuen to Peter to perteyne to euerie Bishop and Priest as much as to Peter And contra Ioninian lib. 1. he writeth At dicis super Petrum fundatur ecclesia licet id ipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolâ—s fiat cuncti â—laues regni caelâ—rum accipiant ex aequo super eos ecclesiae fortitudo sâ—lidetur tamen propterea inter duâ—decim vnus eligitur vt capite coÌ„stituto seisinatis tollatur occasio But thou sayest the church is founded vpon Peter although in an other place the same is done vpon al â—â—â—â— Apostles they al receaued the keyes of the kingdom of heauen the strength of the church is grounded equally vpon theÌ„ yet for this cause one is chosen among the twelue that the heade being appoynted occasion of diuision might be taken away You see now that Peter is no more a rock or fundation then the rest neither hath any more auctoritie of the keyes then the rest alâ—hough by his iudgement he was chosen to be the chiefe or first in order to auoyde strife not in dignitie or auctority Chrysostom is cited ex Var. in Math. Hom 27. Princeps c. Peter Prince of the Apostles vpon whome Christ sounded the church a verie immoueable rocke and a strong confession M. Sander woulde haue vs note that Peter is called confession that when he sayth the church is builded vpon faith confession we might vnderstand no mans saith and confession but Peters As though all the Apostles had not the same faith made not the same coÌ„fession But notwithstaÌ„ding that Chrysostom doth ofteÌ„ acknowledge Peter to be the Prince of the Apostles yet he willeth vs to coÌ„sider that his principallity was not of auctority but of order Iam illâ—d considera quà m Petrus agit omma excommuni disâ—ipulorum sententiâ— nihil auctoritate sua nihil cum imperio Now also coÌ„sider this how euen Peter doth all things by the coÌ„mon decree of the disciples nothing by his owne auctority nothing by commaundement Ex. Act. Ho. 3. Also in 2. ad Gal. he doth not only asfirme that Paule was equall in honor with Peter but also that all the rest were of equall dignitie Iamque se caeteris honore parem ostendit nec se reliquis illis sed ipsi summo comparat declarans quod herum vnusquis q parem sortitus sit dignitateÌ„ And now Paule sheweth him selfe equall in honor with the rest neither doth he coÌ„pare him selfe with the rest but euen with the highest himselfe declaring that euery one of theÌ„ hath obteined equal dignity Now followeth Epiphanius in Anchor Ipse dominus c. The Lord himselfe did constitute him chiefe of the Apostles a sure rocke vpon which the church of God is built and the gates of hell shall not preuayle agaâ—nst it now the gates of hell are heresies and auctors of heresies for by all meanes faith in him was established which receaued the keye of heauen That Peter was chiefe of y e Apostles in order we striue not that he was a sure rocke we graunt but that he alone was the rocke of the church we deny The same Epiphanius acknowledgeth the Bishop of Rome to be fellow minister with euery Bishop and no better and therefore setting forth the epistle of Marcellus to Iulius Bishop of Rome he giueth this superscriptioÌ„ Beatissimo coÌ„ministro Iulio Marcellus in Domino gaudium To his most blessed fellow minister Iulius Marcellus wisheth ioy in the Lord. The place of Cyrillus which followeth I haue sette downe and aunswered iu the chapter before After him Theodoretus alleageth Psellus In Petro c. In Peter the prince of the Apostles our Lord in the Gospells hath promised that he will build his Church Damascâ—n and Euthymius later writers are alledged to the like effect all which proue nothing but that Peter is a rocke which we confesse as euery one of the Apostles is TheÌ„ followeth Augustine in his retractations which leaueth it to the choyce of the reader whether he will vnderstand Peter figuring the person of the Church to be the rocke spoken of by Christ or Christ whoÌ„ he coÌ„fessed But that Peter as Bishop of Rome should be the rocke he sayth nothing Againe leauing it to the readers choyse he sheweth he had no such perswasion of the rocke of the Church as M. Sander teacheth After him Prosper Aquitanicus Leo with Gregory two Bishops of Rome say nothing but that Peter was a rocke which we graunt without controuersie Last of all the councell of Chalcedon is cited Act. 3. Petrus Apostolus est petra crepido Ecclesiae Peter the Apostle is a rocke and a shoare of the Churche which M. Sander translateth the toppe of the Church In deede the legats of the Bishop of Rome vttered such words which may be well vnderstoode as all the rest of the fathers that Peter was one of the twelue foundations of the Churche But that the councell acknowledged not the Bishop of Rome to haue such authoritie as is pretended appeareth by the 16. action of the Chalcedon councell where notwithstanding the B. of Romes Legats reclaymed Leo him selfe refused to consent yet by the whole councell it was determined that the Archbishop of Constantinople should haue equall authoritie with the Archbishop of Rome in the East onely the title of prioritie or senioritie reserued to the Bishop of Rome To conclude M Iewell sayd truly for all M. Sanders vaine childishinsulting impudent rayling y t no mor tall maÌ„ but Christ only is the rocke foundation of the Church albeit that Peter all the Apostles in respect of their office doctrine were fouÌ„dation stones wheron the Church was builded Iesus Christ being the corner stone and onely one generall foundation The sixt chapter THe diuerse reasoÌ„s which the fathers bring to declare why S. Peter was this rocke do euidently shew that he was most literally this rocke whereupon Christ would build his Church How Peter beareth the person of the Church THat he was a stone or rocke wheron the Church is builded hath bene often graunted but that he onely was such a stone is stil denyed First Basil aduersus Euno lib. 2. is cited with his reason Petrus c. Peter receyued the building of the Church vpon him selfe for the excellencye of his faith I aunswer so did the other Apostles for the excellencye of their fayth for continuance whereof Christ prayed as well as for Peters faith Iohn 17. The 2. Hilarie de trinit lib. 6. sayth Supereminentem c. Peter by confession of his blessed faith deserued an exceding glory And so did the rest of the Apostles by their confession of their
blessed faith obtaine an exceding or passing glory vltra humanae infirmitatis moduÌ„ beyond y e measure of mans infirmitie w c wordes also Hilary hath left you should thinke he preferreth Peter in auctoritie before y e other Apostles For Peters fayth confession he did before interprete to be the rocke of the Church w c because it was common to all the Apostles he maketh their authoritie equall Vos ô sancti beati viri ob sidei vestrae merituns claues regni caelorum sortiti ligandi aique soluendi in caelo in terra ius adepti O you holy and blessed men which for the worthines of your faith haue obtayned the keyes of the kingdom of heauen and haue attayned to auctoritie to bind and loose in heauen and in earth And if you vrge that Peter spake when all the rest helde their peace yet is that primacye but of order not of authoritie for they all beleued as Peter confessed and Peter confessed in the name of all the rest The 3. Cyprian ad Iubaianum Ecclesia quae est vna c. The Churche which is one is founded by our Lordes voyce vpon one which hath receyued the keyes of it This reason sayth he can beare but one such rocke for if there were more rocks at once there should be more churches But it is reason that Cyprian should expound him selfe which by founding meaneth the beginning of the foundation as he sayth de simplicitate pr elat Loquitur Dominus ad Petrum c. The Lorde speaketh to Peter I say to thee sayth he that thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not preuayle against it To thee will I giue the keyes of the kingdom of heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt bind vpon earth shall be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heauen And to the same after his resurrection he sayth Feede my sheepe And although he giueth to all his Apostles after his resurrection equall power and sayth as my father hath sent me so also doe I sende you receyue the holy Ghost Whose sinnes you forgiue they shall be forgiuen and whose sinnes you retayne they shall be retayned yet that he might shewe the vnitie by his authoritie he disposed the beginning of the same vnitie beginning at one For verely the rest of the Apostles were euen the same thing that Peter was endued with equall fellowship both of honour and of power but the beginning procedeth from vnitie that the Church might be shewed to be one Thus farre Cyprian By which we see that there is but one beginning yet all the Apostles are equall This vnitie of beginning of building Tertullian also lib. de pudic sheweth to haue bene in Peter when he was the first that preached after the ascention of Christ. The 4. Augustine Hom. de pastoribus Dominus c. Our Lord hath commended vnitie in Peter him selfe there were many Apostles and it is say dâ— to one feede my sheepe Here he will haue Peter to represent Christ the onely good shepeheard although the wordes importe no such thing but onely a mystery of vnitie which is but friuolously gathered by the author of that booke or homely vntruly ascubed to S. Augustine where yet he will not haue Peter to be the head but to beare a figure of the body of Christ which is the Church Whereupon his wordes follow soone after Na n ipsum Petrum cui commendauit oues suas quasi alter alteri vnum seâ—um facere volebat vt sic ei oues commendaret vt esset ille caput ille figuram corporis portaret id est Ecclesiae tanquam sâ—onsus sponsa essent duo in carne vna For he would make euen Peter to whome he commended his sheepe as one to another one with him selfe that he might so commend his sheepe to him that he him selfe might be the heade and Peter might beare the figure of his body that is of his Church and so they might be as the bridegrome his spouse two in one flesh These words shew how vaine M. Sanders collection is for Peters headship beside that he citeth the wordes otherwise then they are in the author euen as his note booke serued him The 5. reason is vttered by Hierome aduersus Iouinianum lib. 1. aunswering the obiection of Iouinian and intending to proue that Iohn the virgine was as excellent as Peter the maried man At dicis c. But thou sayst the Church is built vpon Peter Albeit the selfe same thing in another place be done vpon all the Aposiles all doe receiue the keyes of the kingdom of heauen and the strength of the Church be grounded equally vpon them yet therefore one is chosen among twelue that a head being made the occasion of schisme may be taken away Here he woulde haue three thinges to be noted First that the Church is so built vpon Peter the rocke that in the same place where it is built vpon Peter the like is not done vpon the other Apostles But seeing he him selfe before vrged the future tence I will build this collection is false Christ promiseth that he will builde his Church vpon Peter but when he buildeth he vseth all the Apostles as well as Peter Secondly that the church is equally built vpon all the Apostles therefore not more on Peter then on the rest Thirdly that one is chosen head to auoyde schisme But if all be equall he as keth how one may be head I aunswer euen as the foreman of the Iury in some respectes is chiefe and yet they are all equall But he aunswereth they are equall in authoritie as Apostles but not as Bishops But seeing the office of euery Apostle is aboue the office of euery Bishop it will followe that euery Apostle as Apostle is aboue Peter as Bishop of Rome which were a perilous matter for Maister Sander to admitte Howbeit concerning this distinction of his more is to be sayd in a more proper place In the meane tyme he vrgeth that Peter was chosen of Christ to be heade to auoyde strife and schisme which reason seeing it holdeth alwayes there ought alwayes one heade to be chosen to be a heade and perpetuall rocke by succession I aunswer the reason of auoyding schismes may gayne so much that in euery Church such as the first of the Apostles was such an head for such purpose may be chosen but it will not inforce one heade being a mortall man ouer all the Churche which no one man can keepe in vnitie and how conuenient the headship of the Romish Church is to auoyde schismes let so many schismes as haue bene made euen for the attayning of the same headship beare witnes Whereof one continued 39 yeares As for Leo Bishop of Rome it is well knowen hee was too much addicte to maintaine the dignitie of his Sea and yet he was farre from the tyranny which
the later byshops vsurped and practised vnder pretence of Peters supremacie His words ate cited in Ann. ass ser. 3. Super hoc Saxum c. Vppon this stone this soundnes and strength I will builde an euerlasting temple and the hight of my Church which is to reach to Heauen shall rise in the strength of this Rocke A great extolling of Peter vsuall to the Byshops of Rome but yet no more is saide of him then may be truely faide vpon euery one of the Apostles The 6. reason is vttered by Augustine Ep. 165. Petro totins ecclesiae figuram c. Our Lorde saide to Peter bearing the figure of the whole Church vppon this rocke I will builde my church And againe in Ioan Tr. 124. Ecclesiae c. Peter the Apostle by a generalitie that was figured did beare the person of the Church by reason of the primacie of his Apostleship Heere he maketh much adoe aboute his primacie by reason whereof he beareth the figure of all the Church willing to inferre that because hee was primate of the Apostles and in respect of his primacy represented the whole Church therefore he was soueraigne ruler and generall officer of the whole militant Church But it followeth not that euery one which is made an atturney or Proxei to receiue a thing for a whole comminaltie is thereby made generall ruler of al that comminaltie The Papistes them selues in the Councell of Basill discharge vs of this conclusion where they agree to the sentence of Iohn Patriarch of Antiochia which citeth Augustine to witnesse that Peter receiued the Keyes as minister of the Church And Augustine writeth De Agone Christ. cap. 30 Non enim siae causa inter omnes Apostolos huius ecclesiae Catholicae personam sustinet Petrus Huic enim ecclesie clauis regni caelorum datae sunt Et cum ei dicitur ad omnes diâ—itur Aâ—nas me Pasce oues meas For not without cause amonge all the Apostles Peeter sustaineth the person of this Catholike Churche For to this Churche the Keyes of the kindome of Heauen are giuen And when it is saide vnto him it is saide to all Doest thou loue me feede my sheepe By this sentence it is playne that Christe after Augustines minde preferred not Peter in power before all the rest but to receiue equall power with the reste hee made him as it were the Attornye of the rest So that all these reasons duely considered the sayinges of the Doctors which affirme Peter to be a rocke or stone on which the Church is builded doe not prooue that hee was an onely foundation of the whole Church but with the rest of the apostles he was one and the firste of the twelue stones whereon the Church was founded and that in respect of his office and doctrine not of his person as he wasa mortal man The seuenth Chapter THE authorities alleadged by M. Iâ—well to proue that Peter was not this Rock proue against him self that Peter was this Rocke although they proue that there was an other kinde of Rock also beside him which thinge wee denye not THE first authoritie is Gregorius Nyssenus in loc vet test Thou art Peter and vpon this rock I will build my church He meaneth the confession of Christ. For he had sayd before Thou art Christe the sonne of the liuing God M. S. replieth that it is neither said that Peter was not this Rock nor that Christ was this rock But that the confession of Peter was the Rock whiche he graunteth and therefore Peter much rather muste be the rock For his confession which commeth from his soule and heart as from a fountaine or springe is greater then the acte of confession Firste I deny his Argument because Peters confession came neither from his soule nor hart but from God which reuealed the trueth vnto him as Christ saith Flesh and bloode c. Secondly I say Gregory meaneth by Peters confession him which Peter confessed namely Christe which is the onely Rocke of the Church whereon the whole Church is builded as his wordes doe sounde for he had sayde before Thou art Christ c. But M. Sander reasoning like a learned Clarke findeth faulte with M. Iewels argumente comparing it to this There commeth eloquence from a man but he is not eloquent Peters confession is the Rocke therefore Peter is not the Rocke Would a man thinke that a Doctor in Diuitie should either be so ignoraunt in the Arte of reasoning or so impudent in peruerting a good reason that a very Childe might reproue either the one or the other I appeale to Logicians whether this reason of M. Iewels The Rock commeth from Peter by confession Ergo Peter is not the Rock be like this argument Eloquence commeth from Cicero therefore Cicero is not Eloquence and not as M. Sand. inferreth Ergo Cicero is not Eloquent But he hath another Example A mans Oration is eloquent therefore the man him selfe is eloquent So Peters confâ—ssion is the Rocke therefore Peter hâ—â—selfe is the Rocke I deny the resemblance for there is resembled the Adiectiue in the one and the substantiue in the other But thus he shoulde compare them Tuilyes defence of Mylo is an eloquent oration therefore Tully is an eloquent Oration which reasoning is no more absurde then this of M. Sand. Peters confession is the Rocke therefore Peter is the Rocke Contrarywise you may reason Peters confession was the Rock therefore Peter was Rockey or stony The seconde authoritie is Hilarie Haec vna est c. This is that onely blessed rock of Faith that Peter confessed with his mouth M. Sander caueleth that this is not spoken vpon the wordes said to Peter but vpâ—on the wordes spoken by Peter But beside that the whole context of the place is against him both in that lib. 2. De trinit and also lib. 6. Super hanc confessionis Petram ecclesiae edifiâ—ato est vpon this Rock of confession is the building of the Church which M. Sand. would auoyde by bringing in of two rocks Christ Peter the particle exclusiue shutteth him cleane out of the dores for Hillarie sayth not that Christe is a Rocke but that he is the onely Rocke Therefore this is but one Rocke and one building and not as M. Sand. sayth two Rocks and two buildings for aswell hee might say two Churches Now where Hilarie vpon Mathew acknowledgeth Peter to be a rock and foundation of the Church it is answeared before that he was one of the xii foundations spoken of Apoc. 21. in a farre other meaning then Christ is the onely Rock The 3. authoritie is Cyrillus Dial 4. de trini The rock is nothing else but the strong assured faith of the disciple This saith M. S. is that I would haue for this disciple was S. Peter and the rock here spoken of is nothing else but S. Peters faith therfore it is not Christ. Nay rather the rock is nothing but S. Peters faith therfore it is not his
person so no mortall man For those woordes nothing but Peters faith do not exclude Christ because faith cannot be without necessary relation vnto Christ but they exclude the person of Peter as a mortall man because flesh blood reuealed not this confession vnto him but the Heauenly father The 4. authorite is Chrysostome Vpon this Rocke that is vpon this faith and this confession I will builde my church M. San. saith he that beleeued confessed was Peter and not Christ ergo the rock is Peter not Christ. Although this argument haue no consequence in the world yet to admitte that it doth followe I will reply thus but he that beleeued and confessed was not Peter onely therefore Peter onely was not this rock The 5. is Aug. de verbis dom Christe was the rocke vpon which foundation Peter him selfe was also builte M. San. asketh if one Rock may not be built vpon anonother as Peter vpon Christ yes verily but Peter none otherwise then the reste of the Apostles who were all foundation stones laid vpon the great corner stone or onely foundation Rock Iesus Christ. S. Augustine againe addeth in Christes person I wil not builde my selfe vpon thee but I wil build thee vpon me M San. following the allegory of building coÌ„fesseth that Christ is the first greatest stone vpon which by all proportion the seconde stone that should be laide must be greatest that can be gotten next the first If this be so it is meruaile the Angel which shewed vnto Iohn the building of the heauenly Ierusalem shewed him not this second stone by it selfe but the xij stones lying equally one by an other vppon the maine foundation Apo. 21. whereby we see that M. Sand. vttereth nothing but the visions of his owne head The 6. is Origines in 4. sentence in 16. Mat. He is â—â—â—â— rock whosoeuer is the disciple of Christ. M. S. reciteththis seÌ„se as not literal seing Peter is a disciple the first he wil proue Peter next to christ to be y e chief rock In deed according to this sense it must needes be that Peter is one principall rock among so many thousand rocks but because he is named first in the Catalogue of the Apostles it is a sory reason to make him so to excel that he is one rock that beareth al the rest But M. Iewel is frantike in M. San opinion that denying any mortall man to be this rock nowe proueth euery mortall man that is Christs disciple to be this Rock Nay rather M. Sand. is brainsick that cannot vnderstand this reason euery Christian is such a rock as Peter was therefore Peter in being a rock was not made Pope or hed of the vniuersal church Origines procedeth vpon such a rock all ecclesiasticall learning is built But S. Peter is such a Rock saith Maister Sander ergo vppon him all ecclesiasticall learning is built VVho would wish such an aduersary as M. Iewel is who proueth altogither against him selfe Nay who can beare such an impudent caueler that findeth a knot in a rush For your conclusion is graunted M. Sand. that all ecclesiasticall learning is builte vppon S. Peter but so it is builte vpon euery true Disciple of Christe by Origens iudgement Againe Origine sayth If thou thinke that the whole Church is built onely vpon Peter what then wilte thou say of Iohn the sonne of thonder and of euery of the Apostles First M. Sand. chargeth the Bishop for leauing out in English this worde Illum so that he shoulde haue saide vpon that Peter whereby he accuseth him to deny that Peter is a Rock whiche is an impudente lye Secondly when this authoritie doth vtterly ouerthrowe his whole building of the popish rocke he can say nothing but that Iohn was a mortall man and so were all the Apostles aswel as Peter therfore M. Iewel saide not truely that the olde sathers haue written not any mortall man but Christe himselfe to be this Rock when Iohn and all the Apostles be rockes As though there were no difference betwene the onely foundation and rocke of the whole Church which is Christ all the other stones that are built vpon it Last of all Origen sayth Shall we dare to say that the gates of hell shall not preuayle onely against Peter or are the keyes of the kingdom of heauen giuen onely to Peter M. Sander aunswereth It is enough that the gates of hell shall least of all preuayle against Peter he hath chiefly the keyes of heauen But what reason hath he for this impudent assertion Peter of all the Apostles first confessed in the name of the whole Church Admit this were true as it can neuer be proued that this was the first time that any of the Apostles confessed Christ yet no primacy of superiority is hereby gayned if the sentence as Origen expounded it perteyneth to euery faithfull disciple What aduauntage M. Sander hath taken of the Bishops allegations let the readers iudge The eight chapter THe conclusion of the former discourse and the order of the other which followeth THe conclusion consisteth of 7. poynctes In the first he repeateth what he woulde haue men thinke he hath gained in his former discourse concerning Peter to be the Rock of the Church where on it is builte In the second for continuaunce of the building promised there must be alwayes some mortall man which beeing made the same Rocke by election and afterwarde by reuelation shoulde make the same confession whensoeuer hee is demaunded or consulted in matters of Religion If this were true there were no necessitie of the holy Scriptures neither yet of Synodes and Councelles if one Pope were abe to resolue all the demaundes mooued by all menne of the worlde In the thirde he sayeth if there muste be some such one Rocke it is not possible it shoulde be any other but the Bishop of Rome First because he alone hath beene the firste and chiefe in all assemblyes Secondly he only sitteth in Peters Chaire Thirdly and the consent of the world hath taken him so euer indeede but by the aduersaryes confession aboue a thousande yeeres But God be thanked the Churche hath no neede of any such Rock neither is any such taught Ephe. the fourth where the order of the building thereof and of all necessary builders of Fayth and doctrine are fully sette foorth And the three reasons are all false in manner and forme as they are vniuersally set downe as in their proper places shalbe shewed In the the fourth he gloryeth that he hath chosen to proue that poynte which of all other is moste hard That all the Apostles were not the same thinge that Peter was And firste he will aske in what Gpspell or holye Scripture it is written that euery other Apostle was the same Rocke which Sainct Mathewe testifyeth Sainct Peter to haue beene I answeare not onely by necessary collection out of many places of Scripture whiche he him selfe acknowledgeth to be the literall
sense as well as that which followeth the sounde of wordes it is proued but also in plaine wordes of Sainct Paul Ephe. the second verse 20. Where the Churche is builded vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophetes Iesus Christ beeing the head corner stone And Apo. 21 verse 14. Where the twelue precious stones the foundations of the wall of the Cittie had on them the names of the xij Apostles of the Lambe The 5. is either thus or nothing at all for it is not noted in him as the other bee If Cyprian or Hierome were alleadged for this equallitie it were sufficient for him to say they were no Euangelists For he sheweth it written thou shalt be called Cephas and thou art Peter You see these men that bragge of the Doctors will be holden by them as long as they liste The 6. whereas all holy Scriptures is on the popish Catholicks side he lamenteth the vnhappines of these dayes in w c men altogither vnlearned in them by the bare naming of Gods word haue among Pedlers won their spurres and amonge the ignoraunt haue gotten the opinion of knowledge As truely as none but Pedles and ignoraunt men imbrace this doctrine which we teach so truely all Scriptures be on M. Sand. side Among so many Princes noble men and excellent learned men as at this day acknowledge this doctrine to be the trueth M. Sanders head was very sleepy when he could see none but Pedlers and ignoraunt persons The seuenth he will take vpon him to shew by what meanes Sainct Peter excelled the other Apostles and sheweth in what order he will proceede which seeing it is contained worde for worde in the titles of the seuen Chapters next following I though it needelesse heere to rehearse The ninthe Chapter THat Saincte Peter passeth farre the other Aposlles in some kinde of ecclesiasticall dignitie THat S. Peter had some excellent gieftes peraduenture more then some of the Apostles that he had greate dignity among the Apostles may easely be graūted but that he had auctority ouer them such as the Pope claymeth ouer all Bishops is of vs vtterly denyed Neitherd oeth any one nor all together of M. Sāders 34. argumentes proue that he had one iote of auctority ouer his brethren 1 He was first in order of nombring of the twelue Apostles 2 He was promised to be called Cephas before the twelue were chosen 3. He was named Peter at the time of the choise ergo he hadde the Popes auctoritie ouer them Who would graunt the consequence of these arguments Let vs see what the other be 4 It was sayd to him alone thou art Peter vppon this rocke I will build my Church I deny that it was said to him alone for all the Apostles were likewise rockes vppon which he would build his Church The like I say of the 5. that the keyes of the kingdome of heauen were promised to him alone for euery one of the Apostles receiued thē aswel as he being or dained with equal power of binding losing of remit ing retayning sinnes Mat. 18. 18 Ioan. 20. 23. Notwithstanding the wordes at one time were spoken to Peter alone yet did they giue him no singular auctority The 6 Christ payed tribute for Peter as vnder head of his family ergo he was greater then the rest A fond argument This Didrachma was payd for euery man in the City where he dwelt because Peter had a house and a family in the Cytie Christ payed for him with whom he lodged and him selse But if you drawe it into an allegorie These absurdities will follow First that Christ maketh his Church and splrituall kingedome subiect to tribute yea to Moses lawe by which that kind of tribute was due Secondly you deuide Christes church into two householdes Didrachma was to be payde for the heade or firste borne of euery house And you shewe your ignoraunce in referring this payment to Num. 3. which was only for the firste borne wheras this was for all men And for the firste borne was dewe fiue siccles whereof euery one was halfe an Vnee of Siluer at the leaste whereas Didrachma contayning but two Drachmaes whereof euery one was equall with the Romane pennie coulde be but xvj pence at the moste of our monie It is a strong argument that the payment of trybute which argueth subiection should make Peter so greate a Lorde that he should be out of all subiection which if Chrysostome had considered hee woulde not haue grounded Peters primacie vppon so friuolus an Argument The seuenth Christe preached out of Saincte Peters Bote to shew that in his Chaire his doctrine should alwayes be stedfastly professed An Argument to be answeared either with laughing or hissing The 8. Though all the Apostles were to be sifted yet Peters Fayth alone is prayed for This is vtterly false for Christe prayed for all his Apostles fayth Ioh. 17. if specially for Peter it was in respecte of his greater daunger and not in respect of his greater dignitie The 9. Peter firste entred into the Sepulchre ergo he was made pope He entred for farther confirmation of his Fayth concerning Christes resurrection this maye be imputed to diligence but not to dignitie 10 The Angell sayth Tel his Disciples and Peter naming him seuerally because of his shamefull fall he had more neede of comforte The 11. Ambrese thinketh Peter was the first man that saw him Nay rather the Souldiors which kept the graue saw him before Peter the women also which would geue them dignity aboue Peter if firste seeing were a matter to argue dignity or auctority of the seer The 12. onely S. Peter walked on the Sea that signifieth the worlde to be his iurisdiction As he walked by Fayth so by weakenesse of fayth he beganne to sinke And the Sea that he walked on was but a lake or meere therfore cannot well signifie the whole worlde beside the argument is as sure as if it were bound with a strawe 13 S. Peter is shewed to haue loued Christe more then the reste and is alone commaunded to feede his sheepe He had good cause to loue him more because greater sinnes were forgiuen him but it is false that he onely was commaunded to feed Christes sheepe for all the Apostles were likewise commaunded 14 It is saido to Peter thou shalte stretch foorth thy hands and followe thou mee by which a particular kinde of death on the crosse is prophecied A violent death but no particular kinde of death is shewed by these wordes And although it were yet Peter in beeing Crucifyed was made no greater then Andrewe who was crucifyed also if the storyes of both be true 15 Peter aunsweared alwayes for the Apostles ergo hee was chiefe No more then the foreman of the Iewrye although it is not true that he alwayes aunsweared for the rest for sometime Thomas sometime Philip sometime Iudas aunsweared Iohn 14. 16 Peter pronounced Iudas Iscariot deposed That was by speciall instinct
of the holy Ghoste and by no ordinary authoritie 17 After the sending of the holy Ghost Peter aboue all the rest firste taught the fayth Chrysostome and Cyrill sayth he did it by the consent of all the rest who all stoode vp togither with him although one spake to auoyde confusion when the Apologie was made to answere the slaunderous scoffers But before that they taught euery one a like 18 The multitude conuerted said to Peter and to the other Apostles but to Peter by name VVhat shall we doe If this proue any thing it proueth the equallitie of the Apostles that hauing heard one man preach they demand not of him alone but of all the rest with him what they shall doe 19 Peter made aunswere for all that they should repent be baptised It was good reason seeing he made the apologie for all 20 Peter did the first miracle after the comming of the holy Ghost and by healing the lames feete shewed mystically that he was the rocke to establishe the feete of other I aunswere Iohn healed him as muche as Peter by Peters owne confession Act. 3. 12. and the lame mans acknowledging the benefit to be receiued equally from both in holding Peter and Iohn 21 Peter cōfessed Christ first not only before priuate mē but at the seate of iudgement Act. 4. It is false that Peter cōfessed Christ first before priuate men and at the seate of iudgement he confesseth equally with Ihon. 22 Peter alone gaue sentence with fullnesse of power vpon Ananias and Saphyra Not by ordinarie power but by speciall reuelation and direction of the holie Ghost whatsoeuer Gregorie a partiall iudge in this case doth gather 23 Peter was so famous aboue the rest that his shadow was sought to heale the diseased This was a singular and personall gift which the Pope hath not therefore it perteineth nothing to him 24 Peter did excommunicate enioyne penance to Symon Magus the first heretike Peter denounced Gods iudgement against him but not by way of excōmunication yet the argumēt is naught as all the rest are though the antecedents were graunted 25 Peter was the first that raised a deade body to life namely Tabitha after Christs ascētiō This is neither proued to be true neither if it were should Peter thereby haue greater auctoritie then his fellow Apostles which likewise raised the dead and peraduenture before Peter although S. Luke make no mention of them 26 Peter had first by vision that the Gentiles were called to beleue in Christ. This is false for Paule had that in vision before him Act. 9. 26. 17. 27 God chose that the Gentiles shoulde first of all heare the worde of the Gospell by Peters mouth and shoulde belecue Actes 15. This is false for Peter sayeth not first of all but of olde tyme. And the Eunuche of AEthiopia was baptised by Philippe before Cornclius of Peter 28 Prayer was made for Peter by the churche which was not so earnestly made for any other Apostle that we read of Their earnest prayer for Peter is set forth to shewe that God at their prayer deliuered Peter not that Peter was thereby shewed to be greater in auctoritie 29 Paule and Barnabas came to Ierusalem to the Apostles to fitch a solution from Peter Act. 15. as Theodoret noteth But S. Luke noteth that they came to all the Apostes and Elders at Ierusalem and not to Peter onely nor for his solution but for the solution of the councell 30 In the councell Act. 15. Peter did not onely speake first but also gaue the determinate sentence Both the partes of this proposition are false for Sainct Luke testifieth there was greate disputation before Saincte Peter spake also Sayncte Iames as President of the councell gaue the definitiue sentence accordinge to whose wordes the synodicall Epistle was written in the name of all the Apostles and Elders at Ierusalem 31 Sainct Paule came to Ierusalem to see Peter as Chrysostome sayeth because he was primus first or chiefe But Sainct Paule him selfe affirmeth in the same place and diuerse other that he was equall with Peter and the highest Apostles Galathians 2. 8. 2. Corinthians 12. 11. 32 Peter was either alone or first chiefest in the greatest affaires of the church The greatest affaire of the church was the preaching vnto the Gentils in which Peter was neither alone nor first nor chiefest But Paule chiefest Gal. 2. 33 Peter was sent to Rome to occupie with his chaire the mother church of the Romane prouince and chiefe citie of the worlde and there vanquished Symon Magus the head of heretikes c. All this is vncerteyne being not founde in the Scriptures but those stories which reporte it conuinced by Scriptures to be false in diuerse circumstaunces 34 Peters chaire and succession hath bene acknowledged of all auncient fathers c. Although the see of Rome appoynted for the scate of Antechrist hath of olde bene verie ambitious yet it is a fable that hath bene acknowledged by all auncient fathers to haue the auctoritie which the Bishoppes thereof haue claymed For Irenaeus rebuked Victor for vsurping All the Bishops of Africa in councel withstoode Innocentius Zozimus Bonifacius and Caebastinus alleaging for their auctoritie a counterfaite decree of the councell of Nic◠as we haue shewed before in the first treatise the like may be sayed of the councells of Chalcedon of Constantinople the 5. c. which withstoode the Bishoppe of Romes auctoritie in such cases as he pretended prerogatiue To cōclude neither any one nor altogether of these 34. reasons proue Peter to be greater in auctority then the rest of the Apostles and much lesse the Bishoppe of Rome to be greater then Bishops of other seates The tenth Chapter THat the Apostles beside the prerogatiue of their Apostleshippe had also the auctoritie to be particular Bishoppes which thing their name also did signifie in the olde time ALthough the Apostles had all such auctoritie as euerie particular Bishop hath yet had they not two offices but one Apostleship No more then a King although he haue all auctoritie that euerie Constable hath is thereby both a King and a Constable but a King onely Neither doth their staying or as he calleth it residence in some particular citie proue that the Apostles either were or might be Bishops that is geue ouer their generally charge and take vpon them a particular or still reteyning their generall charge to exercise the office of a Bishoppe any longer then vntill the churche was perfectly gathered where they remayned For although the holy Ghost distinguished their vniuersall charge into seuerall partes to auoyde confusion as in making Peter chiefe Apostle of the circumcision and Paule of the Gentiles yet were they not thereby made Bishoppes And although the consent of writers is that Iames was Bishoppe of Ierusalem yet following the course of the Scriptures we must hold that Iamesby decree of the holy Ghost was appoynted to stay there not as a
Bishoppe but as an Apostle for the conuersion of the Iewes which not onely out of all Iurie but out of all partes of the world came thither ordinarily to worshippe Of S. Peters sitting at Antioch as Bishoppe we finde nothing in the Scriptures and lesse of his remouing to Rome But we finde that when Peter came to Antioche Paule withstoode him to his face and reproued him openly which he might not well haue done if Peter had bene supreame heade of the church in his owne see as M. Sander doth fantasie Where he alleageth the text Episcopatum eius accipiat alter and let an other take his Bishoprike to proue that Iudas and so the Apostles were Bishoppes it is too childish fonde an argument seeing the Greeke word which S. Luke vseth the Hebrue word which the Prophet vseth signifieth generally a charge or office and not suche a particular office of a Bishoppe as nowe we speake of He citeth farther Theodorete in 3. cap. 1. ad Tim. to proue y t the name of an Apostle in the primitiue church did signifie such a Bishoppe But howe greatly Theodoret was deceaued appeareth by this that he citeth for proofe Philip. 2. Epaphroditus to be the Apostle of the Philippensians because S. Paule sayth of him Epaphroditus your Apostle and my helper whereas he meaneth that he was their messenger vsing the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the generall signification for a messenger and not for the name of suche an officer as an Apostle or Bishoppe He nameth also Titus and Timotheus which in the Scripture are neuer called Apostles likewise the Apostles and Elders at Ierusalem which were in deede the true Apostles of Christs immediat sending and not Bishoppes ordeyned by men And whereas Hierome sayeth that all Bishoppes be successors of the Apostles he meaneth manifestly in auctoritie within their seuerall charges and not that the Apostles were Bishops Likewise where Augustine sayth that the Bishoppes were made in steede of the Apostles it rather proueth that the Apostles were no Bishoppes for then if the Apostles were Bishoppes he should say Bishoppes were made in steede of Bishoppes The last reason is that if the office of Bishoppes had not bene distinct in the Apostles froÌ„ their Apostleship that office woulde haue ceased with the Apostleshippe for the whole being taken away no parte can remayne except it had an other grounde to stande in beside the Apostleshippe as the Bishoppely power had In deede if the Apostleshippe had ceased before Bishoppes had bene ordeyned Bishoplike power woulde haue ceased with it but seeing the Apostles ordeyned Bishops and Elders in euery congregation to continue to the worlds ende the Bishoppes office hath not ceased though the office of the Apostles is expired Wherefore seeing neither by Scripture reason nor Doctors this distinction of offices in the Apostles can be proued when Peter is called heade Prince chiefe first Capteyne of the Apostles by Cyrill or any auncient writer we must vnderstande as Ambrose teacheth a primacie of confession or fayth not of honor or degree de incar dom cap. 4. The 11. chapter HOw farre S. Peter did ether excell or was equall with the Apostles in their Apostolike office VVhere in diuerse obiections are aunswered which seeme to make against S. Peters supremacie BVt that necessity enforceth him M. Sander thinketh it sinne of curiositie to inquire of that equality or inequalitie of the Apostles where as it should suffice vs to follow the present state of the vniuersall Church practised in our time As though the vniuersall Church of any time did euer acknowledge the Pope to be supreame heade although a great part of the world hath of long time so taken him He thinketh it out of contronersie that S. Peter was the first of the Apostles as S. Mathew sayth primus the first Simon which is called Peter And he is not coÌ„tent that he was first in the order of numbring but he will haue him first in dignitie because he is alwayes named first But that is nether true nor a good reason if it were true because he is named first therefore he is of greatest dignitie But Gal. 2. 9 Iames and Cephas Iohn are sayde to haue bene pillers of the Churche and yet Paule equall with them Although if we graunted greatest dignity to Peter yet thereupon did not follow greatest authority For these three Apostles last named were of greatest dignity among the Apostles yet not of greater authoritie then the rest And although the auncient fathers of the worde primus haue deriued the name of primatus or primacy yet haue they also expressed wherin this primacie doth consist namely not in authoritie but in order nether doth those names Prince chiefe heade toppe guide mouth greatest of the Apostles vsed by some of them signifie his authoritie ouer them but his dignitie amongest them But if you aske him wherin Peter was chiefe He answereth â—â—â—â— question is curious For in y e nature order of the apostleship euery Apostle was equall with all his fellowes so is euery Bishop Priest King Duke Knight with euery one of his degree If this be as he sayth then was Peter chiefe nether as Apostle nor Bishoppe But there may be another thinge sayth he coincident to some degree of men not necessary for the being but for their well being One therefore was set ouer the Apostles for vnities sake and to auoyd schismes as Cyprian Hierom write in places before cited This must nedes be a primacy of order and not of authoritie for amonge men of equall authoritie as he confesseth the Apostles were one may be chosen as the President or Primate to auoyd confusion the austeritie remayning equall to euery one but one can not be preferred in authoritie to remayne still equall with his fellowes in auctoritie But wheras Optatus lib. 2. de schism Don. Leo ad Aâ—astas Ep. 82. are cited to proue that the same primacie which Peter some time but yet not alwaies had among the Apostles should be reteyned in succession of his chayre to mayntayne vnitie amonge all men it hath no ground in the holy Scriptures and yet those good men were farre from imagining suche an absolute power of Peters successor as M. Sander defendeth in the Pope although some times he doe handle it so nicely as it might seeme to be a thing of nothing wherein the Pope is aboue his fellow Bishops where I sayd that Peter had not alwayes the primacie of order among the Apostles it is proued both by the 15. of the Actes where Iames was President of the councell Gal. 2. not onely where Iames is named before Peter but also where Peter abstayned and separated him selfe after certayne came from Iames fearing them of the circumcifion left he should haue bene euill thought of as he was before for keeping company with Cornelius and in diuerse other places of the Actes of the Apostles But M. Sander will adde another truth
to the former doctrine of Peters primacie namely that seeing the Apostles needed no heade because they were not in dauÌ„ger of error the head was appoynted ouer them for an example of the Church afterward when that personall priuiledge of the Apostles ceased to be in their successors But how wil he proue that the priuiledge of not erring hath continued in Peters successors more then in the successors of all the Apostles Forsooth because Christ prayed that Peters faith might not fayle that he might confirme his brethren I haue often shewed that he prayed for the perseuerance of all his Apostles and the cause of his speciall prayer for Peter was proper to Peters person therefore can not be drawne to his successors And what madnes is it to defend that the Pope can not erre when Pope Honorius was condemned for an heretike both by the 6. Councell of Constantinople and by the decree of Leo 2. Bishop of Rome confirming the same councell Act. 18. Ep. Leon. 2. ad Constant. But M. Sander concludeth to aunswer the argument of the equalitie of the Apostles that Paule was equall with Peter in Apostleship but by the appoyntment and will of Christ Peter was heade to shew that his Church hauing one Pastor in it aboue the rest is one as a kingdom one by hauing one king in it Howbeit we sinde the will of God for the supremacie and headship of Christ ouer all his Church to make it one in the holy Scriptures when of Peters headship or supremacie there is neuer a word And Paule sayth that he was nothing inferiour to the highest Apostles 2. Cor. 2. if nothing absolutely then was not Peter his superiour in any respect That Paule reprehended Peter M. Sander sayth he might doe it by equalitie of his Apostleship If that be so why may not euery Bishop reprehende the Pope by equality of Bishoprike If you graunt they may then haue you so many Canones against you as you can neuer saue their authoritie and abide by your confession But this fault you say with Tertullian was of conuersation not of preaching that Peter might not seeme to haue erred in doctrine Neuertheles it can not be excused but Peter also erred in doctrine Not in the generall doctrine of the abolishing of the lawe or of Christian libertie but of bearing too much with the Iewes in preiudice of the Gentils whom he compelled to Iudaisme in derogation of the truth of Paules doctrine which dissimulation he entred not into for any worldely respect but because he was dâ—ceyued in opinion thinking that in that case he ought so to haue done before he being reprehended by Paule sawe the inconuenience and then myldely yelded to the correction But in this humble submission sayth Maister Sanders Peter proued him selfe to be the head of all the Apostles seeing Christ had sayde he that is greater among you let him be as the lesser In deedâ— he shewed herein such greatnes as Christ commendeth but no headeship or authoritie ouer his brethren Cyprian ad Quintum sayth he did not iudge this reprouing of Peter to be an argument against his supremacie but a witnes of his humilitie but he giueth vs this much to vnderstande that if he had chalenged primacie he had taken vpon him arrogantly his wordes are these Nannec Petrus quem primum Dominus elegit c. For nether did Peter whome our Lorde chose the first and vpon whome he builded his Church when Paule did striue with him about circumcision afterward chalenge any thinge insolently or take vpon him arrogantly to say that he had the primacie and that he ought rather to haue bene obeyed of Nouices and aftercommers nether did he despise Paule for that he was before a persecutor of the Churche but he did admitte the counsell of truth The like sayth Augustine for his humilitie but as a later writer more pregnant for his primacye De bap cont Don. lib. 2. cap. 1. In Scripturis c. VVe haue learned in the holy Scriptures that Peter the Apostle in whome the primacie of the Apostles in so excellent grace hath the preheminence when he vsed to dâ—e otherwise then the truth required about circumâ—sion was corrected of Paule who was admitted after him to be an Apostle In this saying the primacye is of tyme and order not of dignitie and authoritie But Gregory much later then Augustiue graunteth to Peter not onely a primacie bâ—t also a maioritie in Ezech. Hâ—m 18. Quatenus c. That he who was chiefe in the toppe of the Apostleship should be chiefe also in humilitie And agayne Eâ—ce à minore c. Beholde Peter is reproued of his lesser and he disdayneth not to be reproued Nether doth he call to minde that he first was called to the Apostleship These wordes make Peter greater none otherwise then that he was first called to the Apostleship which argueth small authoritie ouer his iuniours Hereupon he taketh occasion to inueye against the pride of Luther Zwinglius Caluine c. and their bitter dissentions shewing how farre they are vnlike to the Apostles It is not to be doubted that they were many degrees inferior to the vertue and holmes of the Apostles but yet as well in humilitie as all other vertues if they come not nearer to them then the Pope and his pompous Clergye let God and all indifferent men bee Iudges Moreouer where as it is obiected against the supremacie of Peter that the Apostles sent him to lay hands vpon those whom Philip the Deacon had baptized he aunswereth that proueth no more their equalitie then when the Canones of a Cathedrall Church doe chose their Deane or Bishop to go about busines of the chapter it proueth the Deane and Bishop to be inferior to the CanoÌ„s But by his fauor where the Deane or Bishop are sent about busines it argueth the Bishop and Deane in respect of those busines to be inferior to the whole chapiter as Peter Iohn were to the whole Colledge of the Apostles though the Bishop or Deane in other respects be superior to the Canons and Peter and Iohn were equall to euery one of the Apostles Wherefore M. Sanders conclusion is vpon a false supposition that Peter had authoritie to depose the Apostles if they had fallen as Iudas did therefore the Pope hath the like ouer Bishops For nether had Peter any singular auctoritie to depose any of his fellow Apostles no more then he had to chose one in place of Mathias nor the Bishop of Rome ouer other Bishops euer had of right but by concession election or vsurpation The 12. chapter THat S. Peters prerogatiue aboue the other Apostles is most manifestly seenâ— by his chiefe Bishoply power Howe Christ loued Peter aboue others M. Sander fantasying that he hath proued Peter superior to the Apostles not in their Apostleship but in his Byshoply degree doth yet againe distinguish the order and office of a Byshop from the authoritie and iurisdiction of the
onely Petrum Christus auctoritate praeditum esse voluit c. whereas Chrysostom speaking to euery Priest shewing how careful he ought to be in his office in respect of his high calling the excellent dignitie thereof sayth Etiam ne nune nobisium contendes fraudemistam tibi non bene ac foeliciter cessisse quiper eam vniuersis Dei optimi maximi bonis administrandis sis praeficiendus quuÌ„praesertim ea agas quecuÌ„ Petrus ageret illuÌ„ Christus auctoritate predituÌ„ esse voluit ac reliquos item Apostolos longeÌ„ praecellere Wilt thou then stil contend with vs that this fraude hath not happened well luckely to thee which by it art to be made ouerseer of all the goods of God almightye especially when thou doest those thinges which when Peter did Christ would haue him to be endued with authoritie also farre to excel the other Apostles Here M. Sander wil haue vs note 3. things 1 Peters authoritie 2. passing the Apostles 3. farre passing We marke them all that they are directly ouerthrowing M. Sanders rocke of the popish Churche For they declare that Peter in doing those things was endued with authoritie farre passed the other Apostles euen as euery Priest to whoÌ„ Chrysostom speaketh when he doth the same thinges is endued with the same authoritie farre passeth all other men So that here is none other authority nor excelleÌ„ce of Peter then such as is common to all ministers in executing their charge and was common to all the Apostles when they did the same things that Peter did For Chrysostom proueth to Basil that he did him no hurt when by pollicie he caused him to be called to the ministery against his will seeing that thereby he was made partaker of the reward of the faithfull wise seruaunt and equall in authoritie with Peter if of loue towardes Christ he would diligently feede his flocke So that Leo had no iust cause to saye that in respect of any greater authoritie Peter had a speciall care of feeding the sheepe committed to him but rather in respect that he had greater cause to loue Christ which had so mercifully forgiuen him so shamefull a fall But Arnobius is a lesse partiall witnes then Leo a Bishop of Rome he vpon the Psal. 138. writeth thus Nullus Apostolorum nomen c. None of the Apostles receiued the name of a Pastor For our Lord Iesus Christ alone saide I am the good pastor againe my sheepe follow me Therefore this holy name the power of this name after his resurrection he graunted to Peter repenting And he that was thryse denyed gaue to his denyer that power which he had alone Arnobius saith he noteth none of the Apostles euer to haue had the name of a pastor giuen to him by Christ beside S. Peter alone But I demaund of M. S. where he hath in Arnobius this word euer For he sayth y t Peter had this name after y e resurrection w c none of y e Apostles had before He writeth against the Nouatians w c denied helpe to such as repented after baptisme prouing by exaÌ„ple of Peter that they are to be receyued seeing Christ gaue him greater dignitie after his repentance then he had before his fal But that Peter had greater authoritie theÌ„ the rest of the Apostles he neuer thought or sayde M. Sander cutteth of both the head and the tayle In this discourse lest the meaning of Arnobius might appeare for thus he writeth Dicis certâ— baptizatis non debere poenitentibus subueniri Ecce Apostolo poenitenti succurritur qui est Episcoporum Episcopus maiâ—r gradus additur ploranti quam sublatus est deneganti Quod vt doceam illud est endo quod nullus ApostoloruÌ„ nomen Pasioris accepit c. In deede thou sayst that such as repent being baptised ought not to be helped Beholde the Apostle repenting is helped which is a Bishop of Bishops and a greater degree is restored to him weeping then was taken from him denying Which that I may teach this I shew that none of the Apostles receyued the name of a sheepeheard c. Againe in the ende following the wordes before cited by M. Sander he sayth vt non sâ—lum recuperasse quod amiserat probaretur verum etiam multo amplius poenitendo quam negandâ— perdiderat acquisisse He gaue his denyer that power which before his resurrection he alone had That he might be proued not onely to haue recouered that which he lost but also to haue gotten much more by repenting then he lost by denying This speaketh Arnobius of the general authoritie which Peter had ouer all the Church as euery Apostle had likewise was a Bishop and ouerseer of Bishops as well as Peter and a Pastor of the vniuersal Church which thing Arnobius neuer did deny These therfore be M. Sanders arguments none of the Apostles had the name of a Pastor before Christes resurrection ergo they neuer had it Peter was called to greater dignitie after his fall then he had before ergo he was greater then his fellow Apostles Again Peter was a Bishop or an ouerseer of Bishops ergo he was Bishop ouer the Apostles Next Arnobius is cited Ambrose in 24. Luc. Who first ayd that Peter was euery where ether alone or first And theÌ„ vpon these words Peter doost thou loue me sayth Dominus interrogat c. Our Lord asked net to learne but to teach whoÌ„ he beeing to be lâ—fted vpp into heauen did leaue to vs as the Vicare of his loue For so thou hast â—â— Simon thou sonne of Iohn doest thou lâ—ue me Yea Lord thou knowest that I loue thee Iesus sayth to him feede my lambes Peter being priuy of a good conscience doth testifie his owne affection not taken for the time but already well knowen to God For who else were able to professe this thing of him selfe Aâ—d because he alone amongst all professeth he is preferred before all M. Sander omitteth the conclusion Maior enim omnibus charitas For the greatest of all is Chariâ—ie So Peter is heereby declared to haue the greateste loue but not to haue the greatest authoritie M. Sander vrgeth that he is the Vicar of Christes loue and pastorall office The one indeede Ambrose sayth the other Sander sayeth but is not able to proue no not by that which followeth in the same place of Ambrose that Peter had committed to him to feede not onely the Lambes with milke as at the first nor yet the little sheepe as at the seconde time but the sheepe to the end that he beeing more perfect might gouerne the more perfecte For euery one of the Apostles hadde the same charge to feede the sheepe of Christe and not the Lambes or little sheepe onely Neither doth the woorde of gouernment helpe him For euery Apostle had the like gouernment ouer the whole flock w c Peter hath and there is an ordinary gouernment in euery particular church 1. Co. 12. w c
vacant vniting of two Bishoprikes in one or diuiding one into two may better be done by the auctoritie of those churches with consent of their Princes who seeth and knoweth what is needefull in those cases then by one which sittinge in his chaire at Rome requireth halfe a yeares trauell from some parte of the worlde to him before he can be aduertised of the case and yet must vnderstande it by heare saye and therefore not able to see what is expedient so well as they that are present and see the state of the matter Finally it is against all likelyhoode that Christ woulde make suche a generall sheepehearde ouer all his flocke as many thousande sheepe which liue vnder the Sophi the Cham the Turke can haue none accesse vnto for suche thinges as are supposed necessarie to be had and to be obteyned from him onely Wherefore if the Pope were heade of the churche suche as by crueltie of tyrauntes are cut from him shoulde be cut from the bodie of the church Yea if Hethenish tyrauntes coulde so much preuayle as they do in hindring this gouernment of the Pope pretended to be so nâ—cessarie the gates of hell might preuayle against the churche contrarie to the promise of Christ. The fourteenth Chapter THat the ordinarie auctoritie of S. Peters primacie belongeth to one Bishop alone The whole gouernmeÌ„t of the church tendeth to vnitie COncerning Peters primacie as there is litle in the Scriptures wherupon it may be gathered so I haue shewed that it was not in him perpetuall For there are greater arguments to proue the primacie of Iames. Agayne the greatest shewe of Peters primacy that we reade of in the Scriptures is the primacie or heade Apostleshippe of the circumcision So that if one Bishoppe should succeede him in that primacie he must be chiefe Bishoppe ouer the Iewes and not ouer the Gentiles For the chiefe Apostleshippe ouer the Gentiles was by God committed to Paule Galat. 2. 7. 8. But if M. Sander say as he doth in an other place that the Pope succeedeth both these Apostles and therefore hath both their auctoritie First he ouerthroweth his owne rocke of the church which he will haue to be Peter alone Secondlie his argument of vnitie which he vrgeth in this chapter he subuerteth if the Popes auctoritie be deriued from two heades Thirdly he destroyeth his owne distinction of Bishoplike and Apostolike auctoritie if the Apostolike auctority of Paul should descend to the Pope by succession Nowe let vs consider what weighty reasons he hath to proue the title of this chapter S. Peters auctority was specified before the auctoritie was geuen to the rest of binding loosing Mat. 18. Therfore seeing it was first in him alone it ought to descend to one Bishop alone But let M. Sander shew where it was geuen to him alone or promised to him alone ether For the promise thou shalt be called Peter gaue him no auctoritie nor yet the performance thereof Thou art Peter But still the auctority is promised I will build I will geue I reason as M. Sander doth of the Future tense which promise being made Math. 16. is performed Math. 18. not to Peter onely but to all the rest and so all auctoritie is geuen in common Ioâ—an 20. But S. Cyprian ad Iubaianum sayth that Christ gaue the auctority first to Peter Petro primus Dominus super quem aedificauit ecclesiam vnitatis originem instituit ostendit potestatem istam dedit vt id solueretur in terris quod ille soluisset This doth M. Sander translate Our Lorde did first geue vnto Peter c. Wheras he should say Our Lord was the first that gaue to Peter vpon whom he builded his churche and instituted and shewed the beginninge of vnity this power that whatsoeuer he loosed it should be loosed in earth This proueth that the auctoritie came first from Christ but not that it was geuen first to Peter And if we should vnderstand it so that it was first geuen to Peter yet he meaneth not that it was geuen to reside in his person but that in him as the attorney of the rest it was geuen to them also as he saith lib. 1. Ep. 3. Petrus tamen super quem aedificata ab eodem Domino fuerat ecclesia vnus pro omnibus loquens Ecclesiae voce respondens ait Domine ad quem ibimus c. Yet Peter vpon whome the churche had beene builded by the same our Lorde as one speaking for all and aunswering in the voyce of the church sayeth Lorde whether shall we goe c. as he spake for all so he receaued for all Which thing if it had bene so as we sinde not in the Scripture yet could it haue beene no ordinary matter to discend to one by succession For the power beeing once receiued by one in the name of the reste and by him deliuered to the rest it should be continued in succession of euery one that hath receiued it and not euery day to be fetched a new from a seuerall heade For that beginning came from vnitie which Cyprian speaketh of when Peter beeing one was the voice mouth of the rest and so receiued power for the rest which being once receiued the church holdeth of Christe and not of Peter or his successors no more then a corporation holdeth of him that was their atturney to receiue either lands or authoritie from the Prince but holdeth immediatly of the Prince Wherfore this argument followeth not although the authoritie had begon in one that it should continue in one The second reason is that the most perfect gouernment is meete for the Church but most perfection is in vnitie therefore there ought to be one chiefe gouernor of all This one chiefe gouernour is our Sauiour Christ ruler both in heauen in earth Who ascending into heauen did not appoynt one Pope ouer all his church but Apostles Euangelistes Prophets Pastors and teachers that we might all meete in the vnitie of faith and grow into a perfect man Eph. 4. 11. 12. The third reason is that the state of the newe Testament must be more perfect then the law but in the law there was one high pastor the high Priest on earth therefore there must be one now also and much rather I aunswere we haue him in deede our chiefe Bishop high Priest of whome the Aaronicall Priest was but a shadow namely Iesus Christ whose gouernment is nothing lesse perfect and beneficiall to his church in that he sitteth in heauen and hath as before is cited lefte an ordinarie ministerie on earth in many Pastors and teachers ouer euerie seuerall congregation and not in one Pope ouer al which could not possibly either know or attend to decide the one thousande parte of controuersies which are determined by y e auctoritie of Christs law and such ministers as he hath ordeyned The fourth reason is of auctority Cyprian ad Iubaianum Ecclesia quae vna est c.
all Churches when the history is plaine he did M. Sander bringeth in these and such like alledgged before which acknowledged a certaine primacie of the see of Rome And certaine it is the Bishops of Rome before Phocas tyme affected a great primacie which of many was acknowledged but yet neuer absolutely neuer without coÌ„trouersie vntil Phocas for a great summe of money receyued of Boniface the thirde strake the stroke and made the decree for which in all popish writers he is highly praised although in the Greeke church his decree was not long obserued Touching the examples of Emperours and Princes of later times although I could shewe they haue often resisted the Pope yet I know many may be alledged that haue submitted them selues to his Antichristian tyranny which I will not staÌ„d to examine because they can be no preiudice to the truth approued by examples of the eldest age As for the history of Lucius king of Britayne that sent to Eleutherius for preachers if it were true it maketh nothinge for the supremacy of the romish Bishop I will therefore conclude this chapter with a saying of Socrates in proe lib. 5. to shew what authoritie he iudged them perours to haue in Ecclesiasticall matters Etipsos quidem Imperatores hac historia continua complectimur prâ—pterea quod ab illis postquam Christiani esse coeperunt res Ecclesiasticae pendent maximae Synodi ex illorum sententia congregatae sunt congregantur And in this continuall history we comprehend the Emperours them selues because that vpon them since they began to be Christians the matters of the Church depend and the greatest synods haue bene gathered are gathered by their authoritie The punishment he threatâ—eth to them that forsake the Church of Rome shal one day fall vpon them that take part with â— Church of Rome as in part it doth already The 17. chapter THeir doctâ—ine who teach the Bishop of Rome to be Aâ—â—ichrist him selfe is confuted by the auctoritie of Gods worde and by the consent of auncient fathers VVhy Antichrist is permitted to come AFter he hath shewed his opinion what maner a one Antechrist shalbe alleaged â—â—â—â— cause of his coÌ„ming out of S. Paul 2. Thes. 2. because men haue not receaued the loue of the truth that they might be saued God shal sende theÌ„ the working of error y t they may beleue lying c. he stormeth out of measure against the Protestants for that they can find no place to setle Antichrist in but in the see of Rome so beautified dignified by Christ and all the primitiue Church But seeing Antichrist is appoynted to sit in the temple of God which is a higher place then S. Peters chayer it is no meruayle if Satan haue thrust him into that see which of olde tyme was accompted the toppe and castell of all religion But let vs see his reasons taken out of Gods word by which it is proued that the Pope can not be Antichrist him selfe The first is because in S. Paule he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. the man of sinne which signifieth one singular man and not a number of men in succession and this is affirmed to be the Greeke article in this worde man by Cyrillus in Ioan. lib. 1. cap. 4. But how frendly Cyrillus was deceaued you shall see by some examples euen out of the new Testament In S. Mathew cap. 12. 35. you haue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart and an euill man out of the euil treasure of his heart bringeth c. where no one singular man is ment In S. Mark cap. 2. verse 27. The Sabboth was made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for man not man for the Sabboth In S. Luke cap. 4. verse 4. Not with breade onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a man shall liue but by euery woorde of God S. Paule 2. Tim. 3. ver 17. That the man of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be perfect and prepared to euery good woorke These places and an hundreth more which might bee brought doe proue howe vaine the argument is thatis taken of the nature of the Greke article Nether is Hierom or any of the auncient writers to be heard without authoritie of the Scripture which supposed that Antichrist should be one man Although none of them directly affirmeth that he should be one man as Christ was Hierom in Dani. cap. 7. sayth we must not thinke that Antichrist should be a Deuill but one of the kind of men in whom Satan should dwell This proueth not that he should be a singular man no more then the fourth beast which signifieth the RomaÌ„e Empire out of which he should rise should be one singular Emperour No more doth it proue that because Antiochus was a figure of him he must be but one man And as litle that Ambrose in 2. The. 2 sayth Satan shall appeare in homine in a man which may signify the kind of men and not one singular person Likewise Augustine calling Antichrist the Prince and last Antichrist meaneth no one person for the words Prince and last may agree to a whole succession of men in one state as well as the wordes king and beaste to a whole succession of Emperours in Daniel To conclude there is not one whome he nameth that denyeth Antichrist to be a whole succession of meÌ„ in one state of deuilish gouernment And Irenaeus thinketh it probable of the Romane kingdom lib. 5. The second argument is that Antichrist is called the aduersary therefore is the greatest enemy of Christ denying Iesus Christ to be God and man or to be our Mediatour I aunswer the Pope doth so denying the office of Christ although with the deuills he confesse in wordes Iesus to be the holy one of God and to be Christ the sonne of God Marke 1. 24. Luke 4. 41. his diuinitie the Pope denieth by denying his onely power in sauing his wisedom in his word to be onely sufficient his goodnes in the vertue of his death to take away both payne and guylt of sinne which he arrogateth to him selfe by his blasphemous pardons Christes humanitie he denyeth by his transsubstantiation his mediation in which he is principally Christ he denyeth by so many meanes of saluation as he maketh beside Christ videlicet mans merits ceremonies inuented by man pardons a newe sacrifice of the Masse c. The third argumeÌ„t is that Antichrist shall not come before the Romane Empire be cleane taken away For that which Saint Paule sayth ye knowe what withholdeth c. Although it be not necessary to expound this of the Romane Empire yet following the olde writers that so vnderstood it I say the Romane Empire was remoued before Antichrist the Pope was throughly enstalled For beside that the see of the Empire was remoued from Rome the gouernment it selfe was in a manner cleane remoued the title of the Romane Emperour onely remayning at last an
cap. 16. But whereas Rome is the citie builded vpon seuen hills spoken of in the Apocalypse cap 17. M. Sander couÌ„teth it a childiâ—he argument to proue the see of Antichrist to be there for that the citie is nowe gone from the hills and standeth in the playne of Campus Martius and the Pope sitteth on the other side of the riuer vpon the hill Vatican harde by Saint Peters Churche by whome he holdeth his chayre not at all deriuing his power from the seuen hills c. But if the Pope sitte now in an other Rome then Peter the Apostle satte howe will Maister Sander perswade vs that he fitteth in the chayre of Peter For that Rome where Peter satte was buylded vpon seuen Hilles and not gone downe into the plaine of Campus Martins nor ouer the Riuer Beside this it is plaine that although the people haue remoued their habitations from the hilles yet the Pope hath not for on them be still to this day his Churches Monasteryes courtes For on the Mounte Caelius be the monastery of Sainte Gregory the church of Iohn and Paule the Hospitall of our Sauiour the rounde Church the great Minster of Laterane in which are sayde to be the heades of the Aposiles Peter and Paule and the goodlyest buildings in the worlde where the Byshops of Rome dwelled vntill the time of Nicolas the seconde which was almost eleuen hundreth yeeres after Christe The Mount Auentinus hath three Monastetyes of Sabina Bonifacius and Alexius The Mount Exquilinus hath the Church of Saincte Peter himselfe surnamed Ad vincula The Mounte Viminalis hath the Church of S. Laurence in Palisperna and S. Potentiana The Mount Tarpeius or Capitoline hath an house of Fryers Minors called Ara Coeli And there did Boniface the ninth builde a fayre house of Bricke for keeping of Courtes The Mount Palatinus is a place called the great Pallace and hath an olde Church of S. Nicolas and of S. Andrewe The Mounte Quirinalis is not altogither voide of habitation to which appertaineth the Churche of S. Maria de populo The citie with 7. hils is stil the see of Antichrist described by S. Iohn at such time as those 7 hills were most of alinhabited garnished with sumptuous buildings But M. S. to darken the prophesie saith Those 7. hilles be the fulnes of pride in secular princes to whome the Protestantes commit the supreme gouernment of the church I will not speake of this contumely that hee bloweth out against christian Princes neither wil I' staÌ„d to proue that 7. hills in that place are taken literally which is an easy matter because 7. hilles are the exposition of 7. heads of y e beast but how wil M. S or all the Papists in the world deny the citie of Rome to be that Babylon and see of Antichrist When the Angel in the last verse of the chapter sayth And the woman which thou sawest is that great citie which hath dominioÌ„ ouer the Kings of the earth which if any man say was any other Citie then Rome all learning and learned men wil cry out against him The see beeing found it is easy to finde the person by S. Paules description and this note especially that excludeth the heathen tyrants he shal sit in the temple of God which when when we see to be fulfilled in the Pope although none of the eldest fathers could see it because it was performed after their death we nothing doubt to say affirme stil that the Pope is that man of sinne Sonne of perdttion the aduersary that lifteth vp himselfe aboue all that is called God and shalbe destroyed by the spirit of the Lords mouth by the glory of his coÌ„ming The 18. Chapter NOT the Pope of Rome but the Protestants them selues are the members of Antichriste by forsaking the Catholike Church by setting vppe a newe Church and by teaching salse doctrine against the Gospell of Iesus Christe Heretikes departe from the Catholike Churche Heretikes beeing once departed out of the Church haue newe names VVhy among the Catholikes some are called Franciscanes Dominicanes c. Heretikes can neuer agree The short raigne of Heretikes Heretikes preach without commission Heretikes do preferre the temporall raigne or swoorde before the spirituall They are the members of Antichrist who withstande the externall and publke sacrifice of Christes Church Heretikes depriue Christe of his glorious inheritaunce in many nations togither The intollerable pride of Heretikes in making them selues onely Iudges of the righte sence of Gods word The Protestants teach the same doctrine which the olde Heretikes did The Protestants are the right members of Antichriste in that they spoâ—le Godes Church of very many giftes graces articles of the faith HE maketh 11. markes of an Antichristian The 1. is They departe from the church as all herâ—tiâ—s doe I aunswere the Protestantes haue not departâ—d from the Church of Christ but are gone out oâ— the Church of Antechrist according as they are commâ—unded by the holy Ghost â—poc 18. 4. are returned to thâ—â—hâ—â—ch of Christ which by the Pope the dâ—uill was driuen into the wildernes Apoc. 22. 6. But M Sand would haue the place named where they dwelt from whom the Pope departed as though the place were mateâ—iall when his depaâ—ture from the doctrine of Christ is manifest And Saint Paule prophesâ—ed of the greate Apostasie and departing from Christ which Antechrist shoulde make 2 â—hess 2. to him selfe his owne doctrine as Irenaeus doeth expound it â—â—b 5. Basi. Ep. 71. which all nations peoples tongues should embrace Apâ—â— 18. 3. therefore it were no maruaile if no place could be named altogeather voide of the insection of Antâ—christ especially seeing the Church her selfe was driuen into the desert that is out of the sight of men yet there is no donbt but God preserued his Church though in small numbers both in the East in the West And namely one parte of the Church of God was in Britaine both in Wales and Scotland not subiect to the Pope nor acknowledging his auctority at such time as Augustine the monke came from Pope Gregory so conâ—nued longe after the reuelation of Antechrist Bed Hist. lib. 2. cap. 2. lib. 3. cap. 25. And no doubt but the like was in many corners of the world The 2. marke of an Antechristian he maketh to haue newe names after they be gone out of the Church as Lutherans Zwinglians c. whereas they haue none but Catholikes yes verely the name of the Popish Church Papistes is as auncient as the name of Luther Lutheâ—ans more aunciente to M. Sand. sayth we geue them these names of spight eyght or nyne hundreth yeâ—res since the papacy Began The lyke I say of them who call vs Lutherans c. of mere malice when we are nothing but Christians wherefore the tryall must be in the doctrine which either sorte professe and not in names The Christians of the Arians were called
translate the Scriptures both into Latine and into the Dalmatian tongue And the Papistes haue played the part of Antichristian heretikes to confirme the vulgare Latine traÌ„slation which is so manifestly corrupt and false contrary to the truth of the Hebrue and Greeke textes vpon pretence of auoyding vncertaynty of translatioÌ„s wheras there is none so bad as that I might heere runne through a great number of the olde heresies in which the Papists consent with the ancient Heretikes The Valentinians in their crosse Montanistes in their purgatory and prescript fastings Carpocratians in their images The Hemerobaptists in their holy water The Offenes and Marcosianes in their reliques and straunge tounge in prayers The Heracleanites in annoynting them that are redy to dye The Caians in praying to angels The Archonticks in their couÌ„terfaite moÌ„kery The Marcionists in extolling virginitie fasting in permitting women to Baptize The Enctatits in abstaining from flesh The Apostoliks in their vowe of continence The Cyrians in worshipping the virgine Mary The Pelagians in their opinion of merites and freewill The Eutychians in denyinge the truethe of Christe his bodye The Anthromorphites in making Images of God and many other but that I haue doone it elsewhere more at large But of these Epiphanius Augustine and others are witnesses The 11. and last marke is that Antichristians shoulde goe about to make voyde and deny the supernaturall graces which God hath giuen to his Church so that the seale of Antichrist by Hippolitns iudgement should be Nego I deny So doe the Protestants which deny fiue sacraments of the church the sacrifice of the Masse c. And so maketh rehearsall of a greatnumber of popish errors which indeed we deny because they be contrary to the trueth of Gods worde Among which he rehearseth some false and shamelesse slaunders as that we denye our sinnes to be taken away by the Lambe of God saying they tary still but that they are not imputed In deed if we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues and the trueth is not in vs. But we say all the sinnes that we haue are taken away when they are not laid to our charge Secondly he chargeth vs to teach That no iustice is at all made in vs by spreading charitie in our heartes VVhereas S. Paule saith Rom. 5. many shalbe made iust but they say onely that Iustice shall be imputed We say with Saincte Paule Rom. 5. that beeing iustifyed by faith we haue peace with God reioycing in hope which doth not confound vs in the middest of afflictions because the loue of God is powred foorth in our heartes I meane the loue of God towarde vs and not our loue towarde him Wee say likewise with Sainct Paule that by the obedience of one which is Christe many shalbe made righteous But howe can we be made righteous by obedience of Christe but that his obedience is imputed and made perfecte vnto vs O putide and absurde slaunders He chargeth vs thirdly that wee deny Baptisme to remit our sinnes which is false excepte as Sainct Peter denyeth the woorke wroughte to saue vs. 1. Pet. 3. verse 21. not the washing of the filth of the body but the aunsweare of a good conscience vnto Almightie God Fourthly he chargeth vs to deny that Baptisme is necessary to Children which are borne of christian Parentes wherein he lyeth moste impudently although wee agree not with the Papistes that the Infantes of Christians excluded by necessitie from Baptisme are damned In which errour although Augustine was yet he is no more to be followed then in an other errour about the same infantes to whome bothe he and Pope Innocentius thought the Sacrament of the Lordes Supper as necessarye as the Sacrament of Baptisme affirming that Infantes whiche haue not receiued the Lordes Supper were damned Contra duas Episto Pelag ad Bonifac. lib. 2. cap. 4. Ecce beatae memoriae Innocentius Papa sine Baptisino Christi sine participatione corporis sanguinis Christi vitam non hobere paruulos dicit Beholde Pope Innocente of blessed memory sayeth that without the Baptisme of Christe and the participation of the body and bloode of Christe little Children haue no lyfe To conclude we deny nothing that they can proue to be true but such matters as we proue by the onely rule of trueth to be false But the Pope sheweth himself to be Antichrist which denyeth al the soueraignitie of the office and prerogatiue of Christ. He denyeth that Christe is the onely heade of his vniuersall Church in Heauen and in earth He denyeth that Christ onely is a Prieste according to the order of Melchizedech He denyeth that Christ onely is our Mediatour aswell of intercession as of redemption He denyeth that Christs woorde is sufficient for our saluation He denyeth that the sacrifice of Christe his death is the onely purgation of our sinnes He denyeth that the merites of Christ are our onely justification He denyeth that God onely is to be prayed vnto He denyeth the veritie of Christes bodye by his transubstantiation Finally he denyeth all honor and glory to be dewe onely to God by Iesus Christ and therefore he is none other but euen that detestable monster Antichriste whome I beseech the Lord speadely to confound and abolish by the spirit of his mouth which is his holy woorde and by the brightnesse of his comming Amen God be praysed Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristowe Fulk e Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow â—ulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Brâ—sâ—ow Fulke Bristowe Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristowe Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Fulke Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristowe Fulke Pristow Fulke Bristowe Fulke Bristowe Fulke Bristow Fulke Bristow Bristow Fulke Saunder Fulke 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 8 9 10 11 12 13 13 15 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 17 Sander Fulke 1. 2. 3. Sander Fulke 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Sander Fulke Sander Fulke Sander Fulke Sander Fulke Sander Fulke Sander Fulke Sander Sander Fulke Sander Fulke Sander Fulke Sander Fulke Sander Fulke Sander Fulke Sander Fulke Sander Fulke Sander Fulke