any others Reade the olde Fathers in suche sorte that you may vnderstande them without mistaking their right and purposed meaning then maie you cite them both to your owne honestie and to the commoditie of others The errour of one Falcidius One Falcidius a foolishe man vtterly deceiued went aboute to preferre as S. Hierome of him to Euagrius seemeth to reporte or to matche in one equalitie as S. Augustine saith the order of Deacons with the order of Priesthood For suppression of whiche errour the rather to abbase the Deacons vanitie August in Quaest veter no. Testam Quest 101 S. Hierome disputeth that in diuers places of the Scripture in certaine respectes Priestes are taken for Bishoppes and Bishoppes for Priestes so that if the Deacons be aboute the Priestes sith the Scripture doth cal Priestes by the name of Bishoppes it wil folowe that Deacons should also be aboue Bishoppes Which absurditie is so euident as no man maie graunt it Therefore for the auoiding of this absurditie whiche would followe vpon Falcidius false assertion it behoued him and suche as helde with him vtterly to reuoke that errour that Deacons are either aboue Priestes That a Priest is aboue a Deacon or equal with them A Priest maie doo al that a Bishop doth saue that he can not geue Orders A Deacon can not doo al thinges that a Bishop doth saue onely the geuing of Orders for he can not consecrate the body and bloude of Christ in the blessed Sacrament Ergo the Priest that hath more power then the Deacon must be aboue the Deacon This is S. Hieromes very drifte in that Epistle to Euagrius with the whiche meaning of S. Hieromes your authour Erasmus doth wel agree Erasmus in Antidoto post Scholiam in epist ad Euagriū where he writeth thus vpon the same Epistle Itaque quòd hic aequat humilium vrbium Episcopos cum alijs ad Diaconos est referendum qui nonnullis locis praeferebantur presbyteris quos propemodum aquat Episcopis Where as he doth here equally matche the Bisshoppes of the meaner Cities with other that are Bisshopps of great Cities it is spoken for the Deacons sake who in certaine places were preferred before the priestes whom almost he maketh Bisshoppes felowes And againe In hoc igitur aequales sunt Episcopi presbyteri quòd vbicunquesunt Diaconis sunt praeferendi Touching this pointe Bishoppes and Priestes are equal for that they are to be preferred before Deacons where so euer they be But that there is greate difference in authoritie of gouernement betwixte Bishoppes ' Priestes and Deacons S. Hierome is plaine in the laste sentence of that Epistle where he writeth thus Et vt sciamus traditiones Apostolicas sumptas de veteri Testamento quod Aaron filij eius atque Leuitae in Templo fuerunt hoc sibi Episcopi Presbyteri Diaconi vendicent in Ecclesia And that we maie knowe the Apostles Traditions were taken out of the olde Testament what Aaron and his Sonnes and the Leuites were in the Temple Bisshoppes Priestes and Deacons maie chalenge to them selfe the same in the Churche But Aaron being the high Priest and Bisshop was in auctoritie farre aboue al the rest Ergo if Priestes be named in Scripture Bisshoppes as S. Hierome reasoneth against their folie that preferred Deacons aboue Priestes There is one Bisshoppe founde out that ought to haue special rule ouer al the reste and that by a consequent of the very Scripture Whereas S. Hierome condemned the lewde disorder of the Citie of Rome not of the Churche of Rome as M. Iewel vntruly interpreteth which he saith is one with the Churche of the whole worlde keeping one rule of truth with the rest for hauing Deacons in more honour then Priestes and putteth the mater to be tried by authoritie saying that the authoritie of the vniuersal Church of the whole worlde with the which the Church of Rome is one is rather to be folowed then the corrupte manner and custome of that one Citie there is no reason why he should seeme in that place to haue vsed the word Merite Merite for Preeminence after M. Ievvelles iudgement for this worde Preeminence as M. Iewel ful vainely iangleth and can not prooue His seely argumentes stande thus The authoritie of the worlde that is to saie of the vniuersal Churche of the whole worlde and therefore of the Churche of Rome also being One Churche with the reste is greater then the authoritie of the Citie of Rome Ergo the worde Merite in the nexte sentence folowing must signifie Preeminence Againe the power of riches and the basenesse of pouertie maketh not a Bishop either higher or lower Ergo the worde Merite in the sentence before muste signifie Preeminence This is strange Logique by vse whereof euery foole maie seeme to reason wisely if it were once allowed in open schooles The vvorld is more thē the Citie expounded Whereas S. Hierome to Euagrius speaking against the euil custome of Rome where a Deacon was preferred before a Prieste saieth Si authoritas quaeritur Orbis maior est vrbe If wee seeke for Authoritie the worlde is more then the Citie he meaneth not as the circumstance of that Epistle geueth that authoritie there should signifie authoritie in gouernement as M. Iewel hath interpreted making S. Hierome to saie that in Authoritie of gouernement the whole worlde is greater then the Citie of Roome whereby he thinketh to displace the Pope and to depriue him of his authoritie in gouernement and to bestowe it confusely abroade in al the worlde whereof in deede the Confusion whiche they may beste holde and stande by might be procured The truthe is S. Hierome there is not to be vnderstanded to speake of the Churches authoritie in gouernement but of common and publique authoritie to be folowed for auoiding of that errour that made a Deacon better then a Prieste or at least equal with a Priest In Controuersies we folowe authoritie Now saith S. Hierome If we seeke for authoritie the worlde is greater then the Citie As who should saie let no man defende the errour by the authoritie of the Citie of Rome bicause there a Deacon is preferred before a Prieste for what shal we esteme the custome of one Citie the whole world holding the contrarie And the authoritie of no one Citie can be cōparable to the authoritie of the whole worlde Therefore pretending one to obiecte vnto him that the manner was at Rome for a Priest to be ordered at the testimonie of a Deacon he saieth Quid mihi profers vnius vrbis consuetudinem what bringest me foorth the custom of one Citie As who should say Neither at Rome vvas more honour geuen to Deacons then to Priestes it were not to be regarded in cōparison of the custom of the whole world Nowe that the Churche of Rome gaue not greater honour to Deacons then to Priestes by S. Hierome him selfe it seemeth to be euident for so
saie Bonifacius obteined verely not that the See of Rome should be made Vniuersal or be made Head of al Churches for so it was euer but that it might be so taken and called of al men lest the Grecians should thinke that the chiefe Pastour of Gods sheepe sate in Constantinople Whereof it would folow that if the chiefe Postour once taught Heresie as now the Bishop of Constantinople doth concerning the proceding of the holy Ghost then the whole Church should perish sith al the flocke dependeth vpon the chiefe shepeheard Now M. Iewel as he is woont to doo hath most guilefully endeuoured to persuade the Reader that the Popes cal them them selues Vniuersal Bishoppes and bringeth Platina forth in suche sorte that he wil not let him speake his whole minde His wordes are these Platina in vita Bonifacij 3. Bonifacius tertius à Phoca Imperatore obtinuit magna tamen contentione vt sedes beati Petri Apostoli quae caput est omnium Ecclesiarum ita diceretur haberetur ab omnibus quem quidem locum Ecclesia Constantinopolitana sibi vendicare conabatur fauentibus interdum malis Principibus affirmantibúsque eò loci primam sedem esse debere vbi Imperij Caput esset Affirmabant Romani Pontifices vrbem Romam vnde Constantinpolis Colonia deducta est Caput Imperij meritò habendam esse cùm etiam Graeci ipsi literis suis principem suum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est Romanorum Imperatorem vocent ipsique Constantinopolitani etiam aetate nostra 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non Graeci vocentur Omitto quòd Petrus Apostolorum Princep◠Successoribus suis Pontificibus Romanis regni coelorum claues dederit potestatémque à Deo sibi concessam reliquerit non Constantinopoli sed Romae Illud tamen dico multos Principes maximè verò Constantinum comparandae Synodi ac dissoluendae confutandi vel confirmandi ea quae in Synodis decreta erant Romanae sedi tantummodo concessisse Meritò igitur sedes Romana caeteris antefertur cuius integritate constantia cunctae haereses confutatae sunt explosae Boniface the third obteined of Phocas the Emperour although not without great difficultie that the See of the blessed Apostle Peter whiche is the Head of al Churches should both so be called and also taken of al men the which place or preferment the Churche of Constantinople went about to chalenge wicked princes sometimes helping foreward the matter affirming that the chiefe See ought to be in that place where the Head of the Empire was The bishops of Rome auouched that the citie of Rome was for good cause to be taken for the Head of the Empire as from whence the citie of Constantinople had benne translated Whereas also the Grecians them selues cal their Prince the Emperour of the Romains and they of Constantinople euen in our daies are called Romaines and not Grecians I let passe how Peter the prince of the Apostles gaue vnto his Successours the Bishops of Rome the Keies of the Kingdom of Heauen and leafte the power that was geuen him of God not to Constantinople but to Rome Onely this I saie that many Princes but specially Constātine graunted to the See of Rome only power and authoritie to gather and dissolue Councels to reiecte and allow those things that were decreed in Synodes Therefore the See of Rome is worthily preferred before the rest as by whose integritie and constancie al Heresies haue ben confuted and quite put awaie This was the Platina M. Iewel whom you alleged and durst not let him to tel out his tale But he saith not that the Popes laboured to be called Vniuersal Bishops but onely to staie the Grecians from a false and erroneous opinion and to kepe them in the vnitie of the Romaine Churche from whence that vsurped name did by litle and litle withdraw them Thus haue we seene two errours of yours the one Three errours of M. Ievv touching this point of vniuersal Bishop whereas you reproue me for saying that the name of Vniuersal taken in a right sense is no prowd name in respect of the Bishop of Rome the other bicause you impute to the Bishops of Rome that they laboured for that ambitious name The third errour foloweth Pag. 118. which is worse then the other two For you saie these be the wordes of the Coūcel of Carthage as Gratian allegeth them Dist 99. Prima Vniuersalis Episcopus nec ipse Romanus Pontifex appelletur The Bishop of Rome him selfe may not be called the vniuersal Bishop And this thing you prosecute Pag. 121. 122. and repeate againe and againe But you belie the Councel and Gratian and the Glose too al at once And yet you are so highly auaunced in your owne conceite that ye seeme to make a glorious triumphe for it Thus you saie Iewel Pag. 121. Novv M. Harding compare our vvordes and the Councelles vvordes together VVe saie none othervvise but as the Councel saith The Bishop of Rome himselfe ought not to be called the Vniuersal Bishop Herein vve do neither adde nor minish but reporte the vvordes plainely as vve finde them If you had lookte better on your booke and vvould haue tried this mater as you saie by your learning ye might vvel haue reserued these vnciuil reproches of falshed to your selfe and haue spared your crying of shame vpon this defender Harding I neuer cried so ofte shame vpon the Defender as he deserued and that he is a shamelesse man it shal now be here as cleerly tried as euer it was before I laie three maine Lies to your charge in this mater Three main lyes laid to M. Ievvels charge Pag. 118. Pag. 121. Let the worlde vnderstande how wel ye are hable to discharge them One for that you say the Coūcel of Carthage forbiddeth the Pope to be called Vniuersal Bishop An other for that you saie that Gratian saith so The third for that you saie that so muche is noted in the Glose First the Councel of Carthage is extant bothe in Greke and in Latin but those wordes be founde in neither of bothe Copies In Greeke the Decree is thus vttered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In whiche wordes there is no mention made of the Vniuersal Bishop Now the Latin wordes are these in the first booke of the Councels Carthag Conc. 3. c. 26. Vt primae sedis Episcopus non appelletur Princeps Sacerdotum aut summus Sacerdos aut aliquid huiusmodi sed tantùm primae sedis Episcopus It is by vs decreed that the Bishop of a first See be not called the Prince of Priestes or the highest Priest M. Iev falsifieth the Coūcel of Carthage In Nomocanon or any the like but onely the Bishop of a first See Where also no mention is made of the Vniuersal Bishop Balsamon also making a Comment vpon the same Canon yet speaketh no worde of the Vniuersal Bishop We see then plainely that M. Iewel hath falsified the said Canon by
the Chaier of Vnitie hath placed the doctrine of Veritie And immediatly S. Augustine bringeth forth this texte of Christe whereupon we now dispute S. Chrysostom saith Chrysost in Matth. Hom. 74. Benefite graunted vnto Succession Iohannes Sarisburiensis in Polycratico de CurialiuÌ„ nugis li. 6 cap. 24. Platina in Vitis Pontificum whereas Christ could not make the Scribes and Pharisees worthy of faith for their manners he doth it à sede Moysi doctrina for that they sate in the seate of Moyses and taught his doctrine So that albeit Scribes and Pharisees did sit in S. Peters chaier at Rome as M. Iewel affirmeth one Ihon of Sarisburie to saie who in deede saith it not of him selfe but in familiar talke reported vnto Adrianus quartus the Pope what was bruted abroad by the common people yet for their Chaier and Successions sake they must be obeied For in the Chaier of Vnitie God hath put the doctrine of Veritie and in that Chaier euil menne haue benne constrained to saie the Truth as I could shew at large by the example of Pope Vigilius who a thowsand yeres past before he came to be Pope promised the Emperesse to confirme the Patriarke of Constantinople being an Heretique but being once in the Chaier of Peter he chose rather through Gods grace to suffer death then that he would so defile the See Apostolike as by open bishoply facte to establish an heretike in a bishoply seate Iewel pag. 127. Annas and Caiphas touching Succession vvere as vvel Bishops as Aaron and Eleazar Harding Not fully so wel bicause perhaps they came to it by Simonie and yet bicause they were Bishops and sate in that Chaier God honoured them I wisse not for any vertue of theirs but only for theire Chaiers sake The honour which God gaue them was the gift of Prophecie as it appeareth by that which he gaue euidently to Caiphas who was the Bishop of that yere August tract in Iohan. 11. Which thing S. Iohn witnesseth in these wordes Vnus ex Pontificibus Caiphas nomine cùm esset Pontifex anni illius prophetauit quia Iesus moriturus erat pro gente One of the chief Priestes Caiphas by name whereas he was Bishop of that yere prophecied that Iesus should die for the people Vpon which place S. Chrysostom saith Chrysost In Iohan. homil 64 Vides quanta sit pontificalis potestatis virtus Cum enim pontifex esset licet indignus prophetauit nescius tamen quid diceret ostantùm Gratia non autem foelestum cor attigit Doest thou see how great the vertue of bishopply power is For whereas he was a Bishop albeit vnworthy he prophecied yet not knowing what he said And the Grace touched his mouth only but not his wicked hart And afterward againe Quid signat â–ª quum esset pontifex anni illius What meane thesâ— wordes whereas he was Bishoppe of that yere Among other this custom was corrupted For now the hye priesthood was not during life but made a yerely dignitie and was geuen yere by yere from the time that the chieftie was to be solde for monie Veruntamen etiam sic aderat spiritus Yet that notwithstanding the holie Ghost or gift of God was yet present Postquà m autem in Christum manus extenderunt tunc eos dereliquit abijt ad Apostolos But after they extended their handes vpon Christe then the holy Ghost forsooke them and went from them to the Apostles S. Augustine likewise writeth thus August in IohanneÌ„ tract 49. Hîc docemur etiaÌ„ homines malos prophetiae spiritu futura praedicere quod tamen Euangelista diuino tribuit sacramento quia Pontifex fuit id est summus sacerdos Here we are taught that euen euil men foretel thinges to comme by the spirite of prophecie the which thing yet the Euangelist ascribeth to the diuine Sacrament bicause he was the Bisshop that is to saie the high Priest If then Caiphas being one of the vilest menne that euer was and committing the most horrible sinne that can be deuised in murdering Christ yet for his successions sake had the gift of prophecie shal we now geue eare to M. Iewels itching humour wherein he so reioyseth to recken vp the faultes of the Popes of Rome Be it some of them were proude and some coniurers The Popes teach truth not vvithstaÌ„ding their euil life or neuer se great sinners besides yet so long as they sit in Peters chaier which doubtlesse hath no lesse priuilege theÌ„ Moyses chaier had we saie they haue the holy ghost to this effect that they keeping them selues in the faith of their Predecessours shal not be suffered to teach vs false doctrine out of the Chaier of Vnitie whiche Chaier of Vnitie Optatus more then eleuen hundred yeres past affirmed Peters Chaier to be Optat. lib. 2. contra Parmen and reckened vp the Bishops thereof in order til his owne time Therefore as from Moyses time til Christes Comming God of his mercie prouided that a Bishop and high Prieste with other Priestes and Leuites about him should not faile in Moyses Chaier whom al men vnder paine of death as it is said in the booke of Deuteronomie Deut. 17. were bounde to heare and obeye so muche more in the time of Grace God hath prouided that in the Chaier of S. Peter to whom louing Christe more then the other Apostles Iohan. 21. he consequently gaue Authoritie to feede his sheepe in suche superioritie aboue the other Apostles as he loued aboue them muche more I saie now God hath prouided that there shal not lacke til Christes second comming a Bishop or high Prieste in Peters Chaier with other Bisshops and Priestes not onely about him in that one Citie of Rome but also ioyned with him in the same faith and doctrine in manie Countries and Nations together whose final sentence in matters of faith and of good manners who so euer heareth and obeieth heareth and obeieth Christe but who so euer despiseth the same he despiseth Christe him selfe Now I saie to you M. Iewel what Bishop had your faith with preachers Ministers or Deacons about him from age to age who mighte wittnesse in al generations the Doctrine of Christe and the ordinarie Succession of the Churche Iewel Pag. 127. Of Succession S. Paule saith to the faithful at Ephesus I know that after my departure hence rauening wolues shal enter Act. 20. and succede me And out of your selues there shal by succession spring vp men speaking peruersly Harding I thought so you haue a succession to but it is of rauening Wolues They are your Predecessours and yee are their Successours For this saying M. Ievvel falsifieth the Scripture as you haue handled it is yours and noâ—â— Paules He saith not that rauening Wolues should succeede him as your blasphemous penne hath vttered but he saith onely that after his departure rauening Wolues shal enter in Scriptures falsified by M. Ievvel But he addeth not that they
Returne Article 4. fol. 30. sequētib I think it not good to stād about it here bicause the matter is wel handled already by M. Dorman M. Cope and M. Stapletō But you dissembling what they say go on to mainteine the Successiō of lies in your own generatiō Iewel Pope Liberius vvas an Arian Heretike Harding Or els you are an errant sclaūderous lier The truth witnessed by al sortes of writers is that he suffered bannishment by Constantius the Arian Emperour for the true Catholik faith Hieron in Chronicis in Catalogo and as S. Hierome reporteth being ouercome with the tediousnesse of his bannishmēt subscribed to the Heresie after a sort to wit by setting his hand to the bannishment of Athanasius For the Popes power was then knowen to be so great that the Emperour knew the Patriarke Athanasius could not seeme iustly to be deposed onlesse both other Bishoppes and specially the Bishop of Rome had agreed vnto it But when Liberius would not agree to the Emperours vniust request he was bannished Theodorit lib. 5 hist Tripart cap. 18. and as Theodoritus witnesseth he returned home to his See at the request of the vertuous Matrones of Rome who knew him to be farre frō the Arians heresie and iudged so wel of him for it that they would not cōmunicate with Felix whom the Emperour had placed in Liberius roume For somuch as no man knew the cause and state of Liberius better then Athanasius of al otherlie is chiefly to be heard His wordes are these Athanasius in Epist ad Solitariā vitam agentes VVhat Athanasius iudged of Liberius Liberius deinde post exactum in exilio biennium inflexus est minisque mortis ad subscriptionem inductus est Verùm illud ipsum quoque eorum violentiam Liberij in haeresim odium suum pro Athanasio suffragium cùm liberos affectus habebat satis coarguit Afterward Liberius hauing passed ouer two yeres in bānishement stooped and by threates of death was brought to subscribe But that very selfe same facte of his is a sufficient argument both of their Violence and of the hatred that Liberius bore to the heresie of the Arians and what his consent and opinion was concerning Athanasius at what time he had his desires free that is when he might both speake and do freely what semed to him most mete and expediēt in that cause How plaine are these wordes against you M. Iewel Athanasius who liued together with Liberius and knew his whole state sawe right wel that the Subscription which he made proued him not an Arian Heretik but rather a Catholike bicause he subscribed not voluntarily but violently cōstrained and that not with a vaine feare only but also with the present bannishment of two yeres and farther with the threatninges of death Therefore although Liberius sinned greuously in yelding for feare yet he neither was an Arian nor preached he their heresie in his Churche at Rome after his returne but rather repented his deede of subscription and amended it by preaching and doing al that he was hable against the Arians and therfore after his death Epiphanius calleth him beatum Epiphan Haeres 75 Tripart lib. 7. c. 23 In Apolog 2. blessed and Theodoritus calleth him sanctissimum most holy In an other place Athanasius writeth of him thus Eximiarum vrbium Episcopi capita tantarum Ecclesiarum et verbis mihi patrocinati sunt exilia sustinuerunt in quorum numero est Liberius Romanus praesul qui quanquam non vsque ad finem exilij maela perpessus est biennium tamen in ea transmigratione perdurauit non ignarus sycophantiarum quas patiebamur The Bishops of famous cities and the heades of great Churches fauoured me bothe in wordes and for my sake also susteined bannishement Emong whom was Liberius the Bishop of Rome who although he suffered not the miseries of bannishement vntil the ende yet he continued in that place whiche he was carried vnto two yeres not vnwitting what were the sclaunders that we suffered This Liberius then although perhaps he subscribed at the length yet was there neuer good or honest man that euer would cal him an Arian who in dede neuer loued the Arians but abhorred their opinion But perhaps perhaps I say he was wearye of his long bannishement and after terrible threates of death being otherwise weake subscribed Wel maie such a forced subscriptiō argue the lacke of fortitude certainely it proueth not heresie For an Heretike doth stubbornely defende his opinion But Liberius was so farre from defending the Arian heresie that he could hardly with terrour of death after two yeres banishmēt be forced to put his hand vnto the booke against Athanasius which was in deede a derogation to the faith by a cōsequēt but directly it was not Arianisme How seemeth not this wicked generation to spring of the Deuil sithence it maketh the worst of euery thing speaking euil of that which may wel and ought charitably to be defended And yet if he had benne an Arian with al his harte so long as he neuer decreed any thing according to the Arian heresie nor did set it foorth by publike authoritie of the See of Rome that should not hurt our matter of Succession Iewel Pag. 131. Pope Leo as appeareth by the Legende vvas likevvise an Arian Harding Here are al thinges stoutely spoken and nothing proued There haue benne ten Popes euery of whiche was called Leo but none of them al for ought that can be prooued was an Arian But it appeareth by the Legende say you What an obscure proufe is this yet how cleare is the sclaunder What Legende meane you M. Iewel Is it so notable that it was ynough to say the Legende whiche manner of speache we vse when we speake of knowen thinges Or were you a shamed to name the authour Verely onlesse you meane Leo the first I dare boldly say you can shewe vs no Legende written of any other Pope of that name And doth it appeare by his Legende that he was an Arian Certainely the contrarie appeareth That holy and learned Pope bothe by his owne learned workes Leo the first farre from al suspicion of Arianisme wherein he speaketh much against the Arians and by the witnesse of the fourth General Councel and of al the worlde besides is so purged from the suspiciō of that infamous name that your sclaunder in such a case must needes be most damnable vnto your selfe Truly me thinketh I lacke wordes to set foorth in due colours the lewd licentious tongue of this Sclaunderer and yet he alleageth nothing at al for al those hainous crimes which he imputeth vnto so many innocent and worthy menne The vvorthy Legende by vvhich it appeareth to M. Ievvel that pope Leo vvas an Arian Iacobus de Voragine But wilt thou know learned Reader what a worthy peece of worke it is that M. Iewel here calleth the Legende whereby he would proue that Pope
muche as Priestes there sate in the Church where Deacons vsed to stande and the Deacons neuer durste to sitte emonge the Priestes Hiero. in eadeÌ„ epistol ad eÌ„uagriuÌ„ whiles the Bisshop was present Although he confesseth that once in the Bishoppes absence he sawe a Deacon when disorder tooke place sitting emong the Priestes and at priuate Feastes in priuate houses geuing the benediction to Priestes Whereby it is manifest that the preferring of Deacons aboue Priestes rose not of any ordinarie custome of the Churche of Rome where al states best keept due order in the Bisshoppes presence but of the priuate pride of some Deacons and of the simplicitie of the people of that Citie Therefore S. Hierome saith not Quid mihi profers Romanae Ecclesiae consuetudinem why bringest me forth the custome of the Romaine Churche but Quid mihi profers vnius vrbis consuetudinem Why bringest me the custome of one Citie The ignorant people made more of the Deacons Euseb lib. 6. Eccles histor ca. 33. bicause they were but fewe in number to wit but only seuen at one time as Eusebius maketh mention whereas at that time there were six and fortie Priestes in that Churche whom the people as S. Hierome saith for the number had in contempte Vbicunque fuerit Episcopus siue Romae siue Eugubij siue CoÌ„stantinopoli siue Rhegij siue Alexandriae siue Tanis eiusdem meriti eiusdem est sacerdotij Beholde Reader how M. Iewel hath translated this sentence Where so euer there be a Bisshop be it at Eugubium be it at Rome be it at Constantinople be it at Rhegium be it at Alexandria be it at Tanis they are al of one worthinesse they are al of one Bisshoprike Where the nominatiue case Episcopus Bishop being of the singulare number so placed by S. Hierome with the verbe Est also of the singular number bicause it serued not M. Iewels turne guilfully in translation a change is made into the plural and thereby the meaning of the sentence cleane altered to thintent the sentence might so the rather sounde to his purpose whiche is to make al Bishoppes equal in authoritie of rule and gouernment Now S. Hieromes wordes doo signifie that a Bishop is of the same Merite and of the same Priesthood whether he be Bishop of a great Citie or of a litle And here is to be noted that M. Iewel can not yet brooke this worde Merite and whereas before he vsed the worde Preeminence being by me admonished of it now he translateth eiusdem est meriti they are al of one worthinesse Likewise he termeth eiusdem sacerdotij of one Bishoprike for of one Priesthood How so euer you bring in S. Hierome for the equalitie of Priestes with Bishoppes it forceth not It is wel knowen S. Hierome neuer dreamed of suche an equalitie as you would haue when he wrote this sentence Ecclesiae salus in summi sacerdotis dignitate pendet Hieron aduersus Luciferainos cui si non exors quaedam ab omnibus eminens detur potestas tot in Eccesia efficientur schismata quot sacerdotes The sauegarde of the Churche dependeth vpon the dignitie of the highest Bishop vnto whom if a peerelesse and supreme power be not yelded there shal arise so many Schismes in the Churche as there be Priestes If God haue a special regarde to the safetie of the Churche and if the Churche can not be safe without there be a peerelesse and a supreme power yeelded vnto the highest Priest whiche is a Bishop as S. Hierome saith what so euer M. Iewel saie to the contrarie God must needes allowe the hauing of suche Bishoppes as shal haue power peerelesse to rule their flockes not onely their lambes but also their sheepe to witte the Clergie the Priestes and the Deacons vnder them Hieron Lib. 1. aduersus IouinianuÌ„ He saith also Propterea inter duodecim vnus eligitur vt capite constituto schismatis tollatur occasio Therefore is there one chosen emong the twelue saith S. Hierome who should be made Head that the occasion of Schisme might be taken away And that we should be put out of doubte who chose that one to be Head aboue al the reste and why Peter was rather chosen then Iohn that was so deerely beloued S. Hierome saith delatum est aetati partly in consideration of his age and partly bicause he would deliuer Iohn from the enuie that he should haue incurred if he had benne placed in that roome being so yong a man M. Iewel had neede to looke better vpon his booke and to learne by these places better to tempre the other sayinges of S. Hierome S. Hierome saith vnitie can not be kepte the Churche can not be in sauegarde Schismes can not be suppressed by equalitie of Priestes with Bishoppes Ergo there must be Bishoppes that shal haue power to rule the Priestes and the reste Thus M. Iewels equalitie wil not stande with the doctrine of S. Hierome Although saith S. Augustine after the names of honours now vsed in the Church the state of a Bishop be greater August Epist 19. then the state of a Prieste yet in many thinges Augustine is lesse then Hierome Notwithstanding we ought not to refuse and disdaine to be corrected of any man though he be our inferiour Vpon these wordes of S. Augustine M. Iewel reasoneth that the difference of power and authoritie betwixte Bishoppes and Priestes had no allowance from Scripture but by the custome of the Churche As though one thing could not be allowed both in Scripture and also by the common custome of the Churche The common custome of the Churche teacheth vs to feare God daily doth not the Scripture allowe the same To honour our Father and mother And doth not the Scripture commaunde the same But M. Iewel would faine make debate betwixt the custome of the Churche and the holy Scripture and therefore ful prouidently he hath interlaced a Parenthesis of his owne politike deuise in this manner The office of a Bisshop is aboue the office of a Prieste not by authoritie of the Scriptures but after the names of honour whiche the custome of the Churche hath now obteined I haue here before declared that there was a secte of Heretiques calles Aerians as S. Augustine reporteth who denied that there was any difference at al betwen the state of a Bisshop and the state of a Prieste August de Haresib ad Quoduult deuÌ„ Haeres 53. whiche opinion being accompted for heresie by S. Augustine ought to stop any reasonable mans mouth and to persuade him that S. Augustines opinion is quite contrarie to that which M. Iewel holdeth Iewel Pag. 1â—1 As for Pope Leo his ovvne authoritie in his ovvne cause can not be great The Emperour saithe Nemo debet sibi ius dicere ff Li. 2. de Iurisdict omniuÌ„ Iudicum 16. q. 6. Consuetudo in margine No man maie minister lavve vnto him selfe And it is noted thus in the Decrees Papa non
example caÌ„not be fitly applied to M. Ievels purpose S. Augu. speaketh of doctrine M. Ievv of a particular facte bicause no Bishop of Rome taught that doctrine which they taught And you turne al the mater of doctrine to a manner of doing It were surely hard to proue that euer any one Pope not only of those 38. whom S. Augustine nameth but also of al the rest til this hower did say priuate Masse For if M. Iewel should put me to the proufe that Paulus tertius or Pius quartus Federicus Fregosius that noble and learned Bishop of Salerno or Bellaius that worthy Bishop of Paris or any the like who liued in our time had said Priuate Masse and that in such wise as if I were not hable to shew him when they said it where they said it and who were witnesses thereof I should not be credited for want of due proufe I were not hable to proue it either for that I liued not at Rome and in the places where they made their abode or elles bicause though I liued in those places I was not so curious nor careful to know what they did therin And so it would followe by this fond collection of M. Iewels Logique that euen yet to this daie no Pope nor other Bishop faith priuate Masse bicause I can not proue it and shew the circumstance where when and how it was donne Thinke you M. Iewel that the Religion of Christe dependeth vpon any particular facte of menne Is that your Diuinitie Al the Popes and al the Apostles agree with vs in Doctrine bicause wee can shewe diuerse Churches whiche haue benne planted of them and haue kepte from time to time the Religion whiche they receiued from hande to hande of them This is our demonstration of the Truthe This is that whiche Christe allowed when he commaunded his disciples to doo and keepe that which the Scribes and Pharisees who sate in Moyses chaire bad them to keepe and doo Euen so doo we M. Iewel we say priuate Masse so ye wil needes cal it bicause the Popes and other bishops who sit in Peters and in the other Apostles chaire doo tel vs that it is lawful to say priuate Masse And we doubte not also but that it hath benne vsed for euer to be said though the people either were not present or being present would not receiue with the priest as it is plaine in S. Chrysostome Chrysost homil 61. ad Pop. AntiocheÌ„ who stode at the Altare and did that which belonged to priestly duetie that is to say he said Masse and looked for some communicantes to come to receiue the communion but he stode in vaine for any that would come to him Yet did he stil come to the altare when so either the feaste or his deuotion required Iewel Pag. 129. But vvherefore telleth vs M. Harding this long tale of Succession Harding Bicause it is a special marke of the true Churche as a Lib. 3. cap. 3. Ireneus b De Praescript Tertullian c Lib. 2. contra Parmen Optatus and S. d Ep. 165. Augustine doo teach and your Church hath no Succession that is thirty yeres olde nor any Bishop at al lawfully planted But ours hath a Succession of a thowsand fiue hundred threescore and eight yeres with a great number of Bishops in al countries and times Ievvel Haue these men their ovvne Succession in so safe recorde VVho vvas then the bishop of Rome next by succession vnto Peter VVho vvas the second vvho the third vvho the fourth Irenaeus reckeneth them together in this order Petrus Linus Anacletus Clemens Epiphanius thus Petrus Linus Cletus Clemens Optatus thus Petrus Linus Clemens Anacletus Clemens saith that he him selfe vvas next vnto Peter and then must the reckening go thus Petrus Clemens Linus Anacletus Hereby it is cleare that of the first foure bishops of Rome M. Harding can not certainely tel vs vvho in order succeded other And thus talking so much of Succession they are not vvel hable to blase their ovvne Succession Harding Here is a deepe consideration I promise you What if al writers being sure of these foure Bishops of Rome yet be not sure who was before other Is therefore our Succession vncertaine We are wel assured that Peter was the first and after him there was a Second a Third and a Fourth We are also assured that the same were Linus Cletus Clemens Anacletus And what skilleth it vnto vs The true order of the first Popes succeding one another Damasus in pontificalt Clemens epist. 1. TertulliaÌ„ De praescr who was Second who Third who Fourth But now al this busines is ended if we make a distinction And that is this S. Peter being yet aliue made two Suffraganes Linus and Cletus who might doo the outward busines of his office whiles him selfe did attende to praier and preaching So saith Damasus in the life of S. Peter Againe when S. Peter saw his death to be at hand he chose Clement to be his successour as we reade in S. Clementes epistle and in Damasus Yea Tertullian also confesseth that the Church of Rome sheweth Clement to haue benne ordeined of Peter Thus were there three Bishops in Rome but not three Bishops of Rome when S. Peter died of the whiche S. Clement had most right to succede But he hauing seene before the good experience of Linus and Cletus did yelde the administration to them one after the other first to Linus and then to Cletus after whose death Clement him selfe gouerned the Apostolike See And after him came Anacletus whom some Greeke Writers tooke to be one with Cletus Thus are al matters reconciled DiscussioÌ„ of al doubte touching thorder of the first Popes in Rome Ruffin in Praefat. ad lib. Recognit And that not by me onely but by Ruffinus eleuen hundred yeres past who also receiued it of his Forefathers He saith Quidam requirunt quomodo cùm Linus Cletus in vrbe Roma ante Clementem hunc fuerint episcopi ipse Clemens ad Iacobam scribens sibi dicat a Petro docendi Cathedram traditâ—m â—cuius rei hanc accepimus esse rationem Quòd Linus Cletus fuerunt quidem ante Clementem episcopi in vrbe Roma sed superstite Petro vt illi episcopatus curam gererent ipse vero Apostolatus impleret officium Sicut inuenitur etiam apud Caesaream fuisse vbi cùm ipse esset presens Zachaeum tamen à se ordinatum habebat Episcopum Et hoc modo vtrumque verum videbitur vt illi ante Clementem numerentur Episcopi Clemens tamen post obitum Petri docendi susceperit sedem Some aske this question howe Clement him selfe writing to Iames saith that Peter leafte to him the Chaire of teaching whereas Linus and Cletus were Bishops in the Citie of Rome before this Clement Of whiche thing we haue learned this to be the reason That Linus and Cletus were bishops in the Citie of Rome but in the life
Pope Ihon 22. vvas reproued by Gerson and by the schoole of Paris for an Heretike Harding Of Pope Iohn 22. his errour see my Ansvvere to M. Iewels Vievv of his vntruthes before fol. 64. He was reproued for an opinion M. Iewel which he helde before he was Pope many yeres what the opinion was I haue declared before at large to whiche place I referre the reader for a ful answer But when being Pope he would haue confirmed that his wrong opinion that the soules of the iuste lacked the sight of God face to face vntil the daye of Iudgement God tooke him out of this life that al the world might know come who shal to sit in Peters chaier he shal neuer decree any Heresie to be mainteined as the Faith How be it it was not to be accoumpted heresie at that time as yet not being determined by the Church and semed to haue ben holden of certaine olde doctours of the Church as is before said The miracle of God in staying that man from confirming that errour by authentike decree in open Synode ought more to moue you if you were a man whom Gods workes could moue then his priuate erroneous opinion which hurteth no man but him selfe Iewel 132. Petrarcha saith Rome is a sanctuarie of al heresies Harding I neither beleue you nor him I am sure that men of greater authoritie then euer that ryming Poet was of hath said the contrarie But it may be right wel that your sclaunderous penne belieth Petrarcha Ambrosius in Epist ad papam Siricium Cyprian Lib. 1. Epist 3. In Math. cap. 16. Once you name not where he saith it But what so euer Petracha saie S. Ambrose whom we more regarde said that the Church of Rome kepeth alwaies the Apostolike beleefe whole and vndiminished And S. Cyprian saith that infidelitie can not haue accesse vnto the Romaines Iewel Lyra saith that many Popes haue fallen into heresies Harding He saith many as wel princes as chiefe priestes haue falleÌ„ from the faith but not that many haue decreed heresies as to be followed and embraced of others But how truly he saith that many haue fallen from the faith let him answer to it For I find not those many nor yet M. Iew. him selfe as diligeÌ„t as he is about it Wherin Lyra maie helpe vs for opening the text of holy Scriptures we gladly vse him as for his auctoritie specially touching antiquitie being so late a writer you know how litle weight his worde beareth in the iudgement of the learned And how is it come to passe that Nicolaus de Lyra is now so good an author with you M. Iewel who being a professed Frier in his life time followed the faith of the Romaine Church and beleued the Bishoppe of Rome to be the chiefe Bishop of Christendom and the Romaine Churche to be the head of al Churches Iewel 132. You knovv that Pope Hildebrand as he vvas charged by the Councel of Brixta vvas an aduouterer a Chuâ—che robber a periuâ—ed man a mankiller a Sorcerer and a renegate of the faith Harding I know that you lye I may saie it sauing my charitie rather then your worship For Pope Gregorie the seueÌ„th otherwise before he was Pope called Hildebrandus was a very holy man as Marianus Scotus doth witnesse who liued in the same time Marianus Srotus in Chronicis Pope HildebraÌ„dus persecuted and accused by HeÌ„rie the Emperour Marianus Scotus of Pohe Hildebrand and knew that Henrie the Emperour being enemie to Pope Hildebrand bicause the good Pope warned him of his faultes did procure a false conuenticle at Brixia and caused false accusations there to be laid in against him as he did the like also in Rome it selfe whence the Pope was constrained to flee Videns autem saith Marianus Scotus Henricus papam aufugisse congregatis 30. Episcopis fautoribuss suis in ipsa Romanae vrbis obsidione iussit haberisynoduÌ„ in qua Gregorius papafalsis inauditis criminationibus à fautoribus Henrici fictè compositis absens accusatur Denique dicebant cum prophanum scelestum amatorem discordiae virum sanguinuÌ„ sedem Apostolicam vsurpare per necromantiam Conspirantes ergo qui coÌ„uenerunt in vnum aduersus DominuÌ„ aduersus Vicarium eius Papam Gregorium daÌ„nauerunt eum But Henrie seing that the Pope was fled assembling together 30. Bishops who fauoured his part commaunded a synode to be kept euen as he was at the fiege of the citie of Rome in which Synode Gregorie the Pope being absent is accused of false crimes and such as were neuer heard of the which Henries fautours had purposely forged To be shorte they said he was a prophane man a wicked man a louer of discorde a bloudy man and that he had vsurped the See Apostolike by Necromancie They therefore who had thus assembled them selues together conspiring against our Lorde and against his Vicare Pope Gregorie condemned him If you were but a ciuil honest man M. Iewel you would not take that for a Truth which one enemie saith of an other Hildebrand acquitted by true and indiffereÌ„t historiographers It maie please you to read those Historiographers which wrote without partialitie as Marianus Scotus Platina Lambertus SchafnaburgeÌ„sis and Nauclerus with such like By perusing them you shal finde yourselfe a Lyer and Pope Hildebrand a vertuouse man and one that was zelously bent to correcte such faultes as were in the clergie at that time specially Simonie But though he had ben otherwise it hindereth not oure cause as long as he kepte the same Faith whiche he receiued of his forefathers Iewel Pag. 132. Platina calleth the Popes sometimes in scorne Pontificulos Platina in Romano 2 litle petite Popes sometimes monstra portenta monsters and vnnatural and ilshapen creatures Harding If Platina speake so of some Popes it is the more signe that he either hated the Popes or els that he spake as he thought and that he wrote not for flatterie as sometimes you saye of him I praye you what cause had Platina to flatter with them as with Hildebrand who were so long dead before he was borne And as for those with whom he liued he flattered them neuer a whit as maye appeare by the life of Pope Paulus the second Platina caÌ„not seme to haue flattered the Popes in vvritiÌ„g their liues Wel were then some Popes monsters Verely I thinke so with Platina concerning some few of their liues But euen those that were worste made no breache in the rule of the faith God so prouided alwaies that although Hel gates to wit al vices and al the power of the Deuil were bent against the Popes and the Churche of Rome yet al should not preuaile against the Rocke and true Confession of the Faith which euer hath ben and shal be in the Succession of Peters Chaire Whereupon S. Hierome doubted not to saye Hieron epist ad DamasuÌ„ Cathedrae Petri Communione consocior super illam petram aedificatam Ecclesiamscio I
others whiche he thought best to conceele and dissemble One thing good Reader it behoueth thee much to be warned of in case thou desire to stande an vpright vmpeere betwen M. Iewel and me Vpon what places so euer thou shalt happen to light in which he shal seeme to haue any good aduantage against me or against the Doctrine of the Catholique Churche passe not them ouer lightly weigh wel both our groundes examine both our allegations truste not to ought that is laid forth by either of vs presently but resort to the Bookes whence euery thing is taken Doing so thou shalt most certainely perceiue whether of vs both vseth more truth Doubtlesse in such places thou shalt seldō it were much so saie neuer find him to allege the wordes whereby he pretēdeth any colour of aduantage without some false sleight or other If thou desire to vnderstand this by some examples consider I praie thee what great a doo he maketh about the name of Vniuersal Bishop Vniuersal Bishop As he handleth that matter if a man wil beleeue him al thinges seeme to be plaine on his side Defence 120. The Coūcel of Carthage saith he decreed by expresse wordes that the Bishop of Rome should not be called the Vniuersal Bishop And behold Reader the confidēce that he hath in this cause which he sheweth with these wordes speaking vnto me This you saie is forged and falsified and is no part of that Conucel For indifferēt trial both of the truth ād of the falshed herein I besech you behold the very wordes of the Councel euen as they are alleged by your owne Doctour Gratian. These they are Prima Sedi◠Episcopus c. Let not the Bishoppe of any of the first Sees be called the Prince of Priestes Dist 99. Primae or the highest Priest or by any like name but onely the Bishoppe of the first See But let not the Bishoppe of Rome him selfe be called the Vniuersal Bishoppe c. Now M. Harding compare our wordes and the Councelles wordes together We saie none otherwise but as the Councel saith The Bishop of Rome him selfe ought not to be called the vniuersal Bishop Herein we doo neither adde nor minis he but reporte the wordes plainely as we finde them If you had lookte better on your booke and would haue tried this matter as you saie by your learning ye might wel haue reserued these vnciuile reproches of falshed to your selfe and haue spared your crying of shame vpō this Defender Here is muche a doo as thou feest Reader and al standeth vpon falshed as I said at the first in my Confutation We striue not for the name of Vniuersal Bishop neither hath the Pope Challenged that title Yet these menne haue neuer donne with Vniuersal Bishop The whole matter is soone answered These wordes vniuersalis autem nec etiam Romanus Pontifex appelletur Concil Carthag 3 Cap. 26. The Bishop of Rome ought not to be called the vniuersal Bishop these wordes I saie be not the wordes of the thirde Councel of Carthage nor in the Greeke nor in the Latine but the wordes of Gratian and they stande for the Summe of that parte of the distinction whiche there foloweth And thereof M. Iewel was not ignorant as it appeareth by his owne wordes in the same place Howbeit were it true that Gratian had ignorantly added them to the Councel as wordes of the Coūcel what learned man trusteth Gratian a man not greatly trusted in respect of sundrie his allegations when it is easy to see the Original For this I referre the Reader to the 39. Chapter of the third Booke of this Treatie fol. 184. b. Perusing that I haue answered to this point there thou shalt fully vnderstand how falsly M. Iewel hath dealte therein and how litle cause he had so to triumphe For neither hath the Councel any suche woordes at al nor speaketh it there so much as one worde of the Bishop of Rome nor hath Gratian put those wordes as a testimonie of the Councel but as the Summe of that parte of the 99. Distinction which immediatly foloweth As wel might M. Iewel haue said that those other wordes there placed vnde Pelagius secundus omnibus Episcopis had ben the wordes of that Councel He that knoweth Gratians manner of writing can not but either laugh at M. Iewelles ignorance or maruaile at his impudencie To proue that it is lawful for a man to marrie a wife being in holy Orders The example of Eupsychius he allegeth the example of one Eupsychius who was a Laie Gentleman of Caesaria the chiefe Citie in Cappadocia and in a time of persecution suffred Martyrdom soone after that he had benne married Now most falsly he corrupteth the reporter of the Storie and maketh this Eupsychius a Bishop that it might appeare to the ignorant that one had married a wife after he had benne made a Bishop which would haue serued our married Superintendentes purpose gaily For yet after so many yeres searche they can not bring vs forth so much as one cleare example of the ancient Churche that euer there was any Bishop or Priest married after that degree and holy Order taken With such vncleane conueiance their vncleane treacherie is defended Defence 176. Cassio li. 6. cap. 14. His wordes be these Cassiodorus writeth thus In illo tempore ferunt Martyrio vitam finisse Eupsychium Caesariensem Episcopum ducta nuper vxore dum adhuc quasi sponsus esse videretur At that time they saie Eupsychius the Bishoppe of Caesaria died in Martyrdome hauing married a wife a litle before being yet in manner a newe married man Beholde Reader the falshod of this man First contrarie to his custome elswhere he leaueth the Greeke fonteine where this Storie was First written and goeth to the riuer of the olde translation in many places not most exactly answering the Greeke And why did he so Forsooth bicause if he had alleged Sozomenus the Greeke writer his falshod had benne fowly bewraied For he nameth this Eupsychius expressely Eupsychius a laie-man by M. Iewels forgerie made a Bishop to proue the Mariages of Priestes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as much to saie Eupsychius one of the Lordes or one of the Nobilitie of the Citie of Caesaria in Cappadocia Then bicause the Tripartite Storie of Cassiodorus setting foorth hath not so expressely that he was a nobleman of Caesaria M. Iewel was so bolde as to falsifie the place and to putte in of his owne this woorde Episcopum to helpe his matter and so corrupting his authour maketh him to cal him Eupsychium Caesariensem Episcopum Eupsychius the Bishoppe of Caesaria Thus he taketh vpon him to make him a Bishoppe who was a Laie man as wel a Bishoppe as he him selfe is that it might appeare to the vnlearned that a Bisshoppe married a wife after he was Bisshoppe Fol. 302. 318. See what I haue said hereto in this Treatie where I answer his false stuffe touching
greeue the harte not onely of his Aduersarie but also of any other godly man with scorneful flowtes in thinges of greatest holinesse But Christian Reader we striue not for the Garland of that game we go not about to trie maisteries of suche witte or of humaine learning Our strife is about the Truthe The waie to shewe it and proue it whiche he him selfe by open Chalenge hath offred his Doctrine to be tried by is by laying forth the plaine Scriptures the examples of the Primitiue Church the testimonies of the General Councelles and ancient Fathers Of these who hath so great stoare saith a frende of his as M. Iewel Who euer sawe the margent of any Booke so beset with cotations as his Bookes are This were a great euidence of the Truthe on his side if the matter were alwaies tried by what so euer multitude of writers sayinges But what if the number of his testimonies be quite beside the purpose Seemeth he not then very shamelesse Is he not then farre to blame so to abuse the plaine and wel meaning Readers It shal be said perhappes in his excuse He seeth the negligence of menne he coÌ„sidered that fewe or none examine our writinges And therefore he thinketh he shal seeme to saie muche though in deede nothing be said that perteineth to the pointes presently handled And where a thing is to be done and the same for want of habilitie can not be done there it seemeth good policie to geue the assaie and to make shewe as if it could be donne or were donne It is knowen how flatterers make resemblance of frendship how Hypocrites geue forthe tokens of holinesse the intended Bankroute of good truste and credite the craking Coward of stoute courage Beggers oftentimes of welth Queanes of womanly honestie and chast demeanour Right so M. Iewel feeling him selfe destitute of the Truthe and impugning the Truthe and professing to deliuer vnto the worlde a new Truthe that is to saie a heape of olde Vntruthes busily set forth of late yeres by Luther Zuinglius Caluine Beza and the reste and by Wiklefe Hus Waldenses and others their predecessours in former times laboureth with al his witte and cunning to iustifie it calling it by the name of Goddes pure worde the Gospel and the sincere Truthe that whereas he is not hable to perfourme his intent in deed yet he might seeme to make it good with wordes Touching the life of the Clergie wel maie I confesse that M. Iewel hath somewhat to saie out of certaine writers how true I knowe not whereto I shal hardly be hable to make answer in ful defence of certaine personnes But as touching the Doctrine that the Catholike Churche holdeth at this daie and hath alwaies holden I auouche boldly as by sundrie our bookes it hath now ben clearely proued and they vnderstand so much that doo thoroughly examine the reasons authorities and proufes of both partes that he is not hable to bring so muche as one sentence out of any allowed writer that may not easily be refelled And bicause he knoweth that in pointes of Doctrine the force of Truth is clearely on our side he would faine traine me from matters of Doctrine wherein he hath smal hope of victorie or of acquitting him selfe with euen hande vnto matters of life and other bye thinges whereof what so euer be beleeued therein is no great danger touching our Saluation As for example what cracke is there made in the Doctrine of the Catholique Churche if the Nominales and the Reales if the Thomistes and Scotistes dissent about pointes Logical or Metaphysical or perhappes also about the paringes of some Scholastical pointes of Diuinitie What if some light beleeuing writers haue sadly and in ernest made mention of one Ioane a woman Pope deceiued by Martinus Polonus Martinus Polonus a man of smal credite who moued with olde wiues tales first committed that fable to writing What if some later writers haue vttered their phantasies whiche they dreamed thereof vpon occasion of an olde Marble Stone hauing in it a woman with a ladde standing by her engraued What if a fewe menne that helde with certaine euil Emperours whiche could not abide to be reuoked from their vnlawful lustes by the Pope for the time being haue written and reported il of a fewe Popes What if Iohannes Casa wrote some vnchaste Italian Sonettes and Rymes in his yewth though for filthinesse not comparable to suche as be extant of Bezaes making the Apostle of the Frenche Huguenotes What if Petrus Aloisius whom Paulus Tertius the Pope loued so tenderly were a vicious man What if Iohn Diazius the Spaniard were vnnaturally murdered by Alphonsus Diazius his brother that liued at Rome What if Luther wrote against the furious vproares of the Boures in Germanie when he sawe they were sure to be ouerthrowen by the Nobilitie there whom notwithstanding he had before by Thomas Muncer his scholer stirred to take weapons against their Lordes that he might laie some good colour vpon that he had il begonne What if some haue written though not without contradiction of others that Poison was ministred in the blessed Sacrament What if a Pope shewed him selfe cruel and without pitie in suffering Frances Dandulus the Venetians Ambassadour to lie vnder his table like a dogge whiles he was at diner What if Popes haue suffered great Princes and Monarkes to kisse their feete to holde their Stiroppes to leade their horses by the Bridle Wâ—at if Gregorie the seuenth otherwise called Hildebrande whom many graue Writers reporte to haue benne a man of great vertue and an excellent good gouernour of the Church be of some Writers of that age who flattered the Emperour then being that Popes mortal enemie accompted an il man What if Pope Alexander vsed Frederike the Emperour more proudly then became a man of his calling What if Constantines Donation can not be most sufficiently proued by record of antiquitie What if certaine Emperours and other Princes for great causes haue ben remoued froÌ„ their estates by the Popes authoritie What if the Gloser vpon Gratian and certaine other Canonistes haue immoderately magnified the Pope and to extol his power haue vsed some termes vndiscretely which neuerthelesse by fauorable interpretation maie be iustified What if the Popes at certaine times either for negligence cared not or for the wrechednesse of mannes il inclination could not or for great considerations would not vtterly purge the Citie of Rome of Courtesanes and Brodel houses What if the life of many Priestes Bishoppes Cardinals yea of some Popes also hath iustly deserued to be reproued Once to conclude what if al sortes of olde Bookes being raked out of dusty corners Schoolemen Summistes Glosers vaine Chroniclers Legendes writers of Dreames and Visions and suche Riffe raffe and menne for the purpose being set a worke to peruse them in the same be founde a fewe fonde pointes of Doctrine certaine loose Conclusions many seely Tales not worth the telling and some lewd faultes of
should chalenge that name vnto him These thinges are at large proued and set forth bothe by me in my Answer Ansvver to your Chalenge Artic. 4. fol. 90. b. Returne Artic. 4. and by M. Stapleton in his Returne of Vntruthes against you M. Iewel where you shal finde that S. Gregorie did exercise his iurisdiction ouer al the Bishops in the worlde in case they failed in any thing and tooke him selfe to haue cure and charge of them al not as a King and Tyrant but as a brother yea rather a seruant to al. Gregor Lib. 7. Epist 64. For he confesseth euery Bishop to be his equal so long as he sinneth not or as longe as his Church suffereth not some defecte And in that case he supplieth al negligences and al defectes and prouideth for al Churches in Asia in Europa and in Aphrica as his Epistles doo fully declare The whiche if I were disposed here ambitiously to blase as M. Iewelles custome is I might write out the effecte of twelue great bookes of S. Gregories epistles whiche doo fully proue these my sayinges But for so muche as that is already donne sufficiently let this one sentence serue for al. S. Gregorie saith of his owne Church of Rome The Apostolike See Head of al churches Gregor li. 11. epist 54. Apostolica Sedes omnium Ecclesiarum Caput est The Apostolike See is the Head of al Churches This being so let vs now consider that M. Iewel doth not only mislike with the name of Vniuersal Bishop as not becoÌ„ming the Bishop of Constantinople because he was of lower degree then the Bishop of Rome nor only as vnseemely also for the Bishop of Rome bicause it conteineth a proude and ambitious brag and a meaning that may be taken in euil sense for which cause no Bishop of Rome euer vsed that name Defence pag. 118. but also he misliketh with me for saying that the name of Vniuersal Bishop in a right sense is no proude name in respect of him to whom it belongeth By a right sense I meane that sense which S. Gregorie allowed and that whiche the fourth general Councel allowed Yea farther M. Iewel saith that some Popes would haue had Ibidem and ambitiously laboured for the title of Vniuersal Bisshop and againe that the Councel of Carthage forbad the Pope of Rome to be called the Vniuersal Bisshop Al these thinges are false and fond as now it shal be proued Gregor li. 4. epist 32 ad Mauricium IteÌ„ eodeÌ„ lib. epist 36. ad Eulogium Anastasium Item codem lib. epist 38. ad Iohannem CoÌ„stantinop Gregor li. 4. epist 36 Tâ—e name of Vniuersal Bishop offered to Popâ— Leo by the Councel of Chalcedon The name of Vniuersal 8. in vvhat sense agreable to the â—ope Firste S. Gregorie witnesseth that the fourthe Councel offered the name of Vniuersal Bishop to Pope Leo â–ª Therefore saie I there is a good meaning in that name whiche the See of Rome maie laufully vse For it is not to be thought that the fourth Vniuersal Councel assembled out of the whole worlde wherein were six hundred thirty and six Bishops would haue offered that name vnto the Pope whiche by no meanes could be verified of him S. Gregories wordes are these written to Eulogius and Anastasius the two patriarches of Alexandria and of Antioche Sicut veneranda vestra sanctitas nouit vni per sanctam Chalcedonensem synodum Pontifici sedis Apostolicae cui Deo disponente deseruio hoc Vniuersitatis nomen oblatum est As your Reuerend holines knoweth this name of Vniuersalitie or of Vniuersal Bishop was offered by the holy Councel of Chalcedon to the only Bishop of the Apostolike See wherein I serue by the disposition of God If then that name of Vniuersalitie was offered to the Pope and onely to him how can it be iustified that the said name may in no sense be agreeable vnto the Pope of Rome If it may be agreeable vnto the Pope in any sense it is in this bicause he is the chiefe of al Bishops who by office hath care of the whole Churche For the name of Vniuersal must needes haue respecte to the Whole Churche And in that only sense did the Fathers of that Councel of Chalcedon offer that name to the Pope bicause they knew that thing dignitie and office to be in the Pope for that he is S. Peters Successour whiche cause also is expressed in S. Gregorie Gregor lib 4. epist 32. Certè nomen Vniuersalis Episcopi pro beati Petri Apostolorum Principis honore per venerandam Chalcedonensem SynoduÌ„ Romano Pontifici oblatum est Soothly the name of Vniuersal Bishop was offered by the reuerend Councel of Chalcedon to the Bishop of Rome for the honour of S. Peter the Prince of the Apostles Marke M. Iewel he saith not that it was offered bicause Rome was the Emperial Citie That had ben a heathnish respecte but it was offered for the honour of S. Peter If it may then be vsed in a good sense only of that Bishop who is the Successour of S. Peter M. Iewel hath vniustly reproued me That no Pope vsed the title of Vniuersal Bishop Gregor li. 4. epis 32 Now to the second point that no Pope vsed the same title So saith S. Gregorie in the same place Nullus corum vnquam hoc singularitatis vocabulum assumpsit nec vti consensit ne dum priuatum aliquid daretur vni honore debito Sacerdotes priuarentur vniuersi None of the Bishops of Rome hath taken this name of Singularitie vpon him nor did consent to vse it lest whiles some peculiar thing should be geuen to one al Priestes or Bishops together should be depriued of their due honour This modestie was then in Popes for six hundred yeres together But this man here saith Iewel Pag. 118. VVherfore then did their Successours that folovved aftervvard so ambitiously labour to geate the same Harding They laboured not for it nor vsed it any time afterward as their style in al ages til this day doth witnesse For the Bishoppes of Rome doth not write them selues Vniuersal Bishops The Popes stile Seruus seruoruÌ„ Dei but eche one Seruum Seruorum Dei the Seruant of Goddes Seruantes And that style was of purpose taken and reteined of them to checke thereby the pride of the Bishop of Constantinople who neuer leaft his proude name of Vniuersal til the Turcke was sent ouer him to chasten bothe him for his Shisme and al that defended or obeied him in despite of the Bishop of Rome And that you bring out of Platina proueth not that any Pope euer called him selfe Vniuersal Bishop but when the Bishops of Rome sawe that the Bishops of Constantinople would needes by force keepe and vse that arrogant name Bonifacius 3. then Bonifacius the third intending to stay that together with that name the right of the See Apostolike should not be lost and passe away to the See of Constantinople then I
Peter til Christes second comming the Pope S. Peters successour ought to yelde his Chaire to no creature Then be ye assured 3. Reg. 12. that as Ieroboam setting vp a Succession against the Succession of Aaron before Christ was a wicked Schismatike and an Idolatour so what soeuer King Queene or Priest setteth vp a Succession against S. Peters Chaire before Christes seconde comming is a Schismatike and shal without he or she repent be damned in hel fire with Idolatours for euer For S. Peters Chaire to the new Lawe is that which Moyses Chaire was to the olde Lawe Iewel The Pharisees said vnto Christ then euen as M. Harding saith novv vnto vs VVho euer taught vs these thinges before thee VVhat ordinarie Succession and vacation hast thou VVhat Bishop admitted thee VVho confirmed thee VVho allovved thee Harding What meaneth this man wil he take vpon him to be Christ him selfe I thought he would haue put Luther Zuinglius M. Ievvel shevveth vs in him selfe an Image of Antichrist Caluine or Beza in Christes place But he wil now haue it himselfe Marke his wordes good Reader thou shalt see a very Image of Antichriste We must be like the Pharisees and he must be like Christe And therefore as Christe did put the Pharisees from their former Temple Chaire and Lawe so we must yelde to M. Iewel For it was prophecied before for soothe that as Christe was the ende of the Lawe so M. Iewel should be the ende of the Gospel And as al the former Successions of high Priestes and of Leuites gaue place to Christe and to the new Order which he appointed so must now al the former Successions of the Apostles and the new lawe yeld vnto M. Iewel and vnto the order that he shal take hereafter in Religion For he seemeth as it were to say I am Christe and M Harding is a Pharisey And as the Pharisees asked Christe who euer taught vs these thinges before thee so M. Harding the Pharisey asketh M. Iewel who now is become Christ what ordinarie succession or vocation hast thou What Bishop admitted thee who confirmed thee who allowed thee Marke I praie thee good Reader how it commeth to passe whiche Christe said before that many should come in his name and should seduce many There shal arise saith he false Christes and false Prophetes Math. 24 that is to say men shal come who excepte they attributed to them selues mine owne glorie authoritie and power should not deceiue you Suche a one is M. Iewel For I say vnto him in good earnest that beside Christe him selfe who was aboue al Succession and might alter and change the same he can haue none other man possibly from Adam the first man til this hower No man euer was or shal be of auctoritie to take avvay or change the lavvful Succession of Bishops but that lawful Succession of Bishops and Priestes ought to be heard and followed against that man what soeuer he were Cain ought to haue obeied Adam to haue remayned with Seth and not to haue constituted a newe companie in suche sort that there should be one Citie of the children of menne and an other of the Children of God Nemrod ought to haue kepte him selfe in the Succession of Seth continewed by Noe and not to haue made him selfe a Prince by force by which occasion the faith beganne to be abandoned Ismaël and Esau should haue taried in the Succession and not haue suffered their ofspring the Agarenes and Edomites to leaue the olde Religion of Abraham Isaac and Iacob Core Dathan and Abyron should not haue forsaken the Succession of Leui and of Aaron Ioseph lib. 11. Antiquit ca. 8. Ieroboam should not haue forsaken the Succession of Moyses Chaire Manasses the brother of Iaddus should not haue forsaken the same Succession and haue gon to builde a new Temple in the mount Garizim Iosephus de bello Iudaic. lib. 7. ca. 30. Onias should not haue forsaken the knowen Succession at Ierusalem and haue built a Temple in Egypte The Samaritanes should not haue sacrificed but only in Ierusalem Onely Christe onely Christe I say might lawfully according to the prophecies forsake the former ordinarie Succession Ioan. 21. and electe a newe as he did saying to Peter feede my sheepe From which howre til the ende of the world no man what so euer he be may forsake the Ordinarie Succession of Peter but must keepe him selfe in the same house of God with him and his Successours vntil Christ come againe From that Succession departed Marcion Arius Eunomius Nestorius Pelagius Eutyches and briefly al other Heretiques whiche al haue benne condemned of Peters See and of al other Bishoppes that were ioyned and lincked in vnitie of faith and Doctrine with that See Nowe for M. Iewel to take vppon him Christes owne peculiar office such as no Patriarke no Prophete no Apostle euer had and to require that he maie abolishe the Masse and change the order of the Communion diminish the number of Sacramentes and transferre the Order of Succession from the Apostolike See they can not tel whither and al this none otherwise then Christ him selfe did is not this the proper spirite of Antichrist Remember your selfe M. Iewel whiles you haue time to repent And consider that either you thinke your selfe to be in very deede the Messias of the worlde who was annointed only of God and needed no vocation of man or els be you assured that you are bound to holde of the ordinarie Succession of them I meane who sit in S. Peters chaire and are of the same faith and communion with S. Peters successour Iewel Pag. 128. Therefore good Christian Reader let not these M. Hardings great vvordes much abashe thee The Scribes and Pharisees in the like cases vsed the like language long agoe Harding Wherefore shal not the Christian Reader be abasshed at my wordes demaunding of M. Iewel where his ordinarie succession is Wherefore I say shal not the Christian Reader be abashed Forsoth bicause by like M. Iewel is Christ or rather better then Christ who putteth away Christes former Church and the succession of his Apostle S. Peter as Christ did put away Moyses former Law and the Succession of Aaron Therefore as Christ passed Moyses in so many degrees must M. Iewel passe Christ if his doings shal be iustified Therefore good reader be not abasshed if M. Iewel be Christe But if thou thinke not so and yet doest thinke in religion as he doth then be thou worthily abasshed For surely he is either Christ who maketh a new Succession of Priesthod and of Bishops or Antichrist who goeth aboute to vndoo the olde former Succession whiche Christe had established Iewel Touching the Church of Rome I vvil say no more at this present but only that vvas spoken openly by Cornelius the Bisshop of Bitont◠in the late Councel of Trident. Vtinam non à religione ad superstitionem à fide ad infidelitatem à Christo
time of Peter to thintent they should take vpon them the charge of the bishops duetie and he him selfe fulfil the office of an Apostle We finde that he did the like also at Caesarea where though he were present him selfe yet he had Zachaeus whom he ordered him selfe to be the bishop And thus both may seeme true to wit that they were taken for bishops before Clement and yet that Clement after the death of Peter tooke the place of teaching Ruffinus inuented not this solution of him selfe but he tooke it of others For he saith accepimus asmuche to saie we haue receiued we haue heard we haue learned this so that it was a thing knowen and taught from the beginning which yet M. Iewel either knew not or willily dissembled As though it were a great hinderance or preiudice to the Emperours Maiestie if it were vnknowen now whether Vitellius had ben Emperour before Galba or Galba before Vitellius with such toyes he stuffeth his booke Iewel Pag. 129. I might farther say that Peters See Apostolike vvas ouer the Ievves and not at Rome ouer the Heathens Gal. 2. For so S. Paule saith The Gospel of the Vncircuncision was committed vnto me as the Gospel of the Circuncision vnto Peter God that was mightie in Peter in the Apostleship of the Circuncision was mightie in me emong the Heathens Therefore if the Pope this day vvil claime only by Peters title and require no more then Peter had then must he seeke his Primacie emongest the Ievves vvhere Peter had his iurisdiction limited and not at Rome emong the heathen Christians emong vvhom as S. Paule saith he had not much to doe Harding The lewdnes of this licencious Minister passeth al reason He excludeth not only the Pope from the gouernement of the whole Churche but also from his owne Chaire at Rome neither only the Pope but euen the blessed Apostle S. Peter And he thinketh him selfe to haue the Scripture agreable vnto his malicious and fonde conceite VVhy S. Peter had to doo at Rome vvith the Gentile Christiās Mar. 16. S. Peter had to doo with those Christians at Rome which before had ben Heathens or Gentiles for foure special causes First bicause he was one of the twelue Apostles al which had to doo with any Christiā whether he had ben Iewe or heathen before For Christ said to them al Go ye into the whole world and preach the Gospel to euery creature that is to say to men of al nations were they Iewes or Gentiles So that who so euer denieth that S. Matthew S. Thomas or who soeuer els of the Apostles had to doo with the Christians being conuerted from their heathenish Idolatrie he denieth plainly Gods word If then euery Apostle had right to exercise any Apostolike duetie at Rome in case he had come thither what ignorance is it to say that S. Peter could not doo that in Rome which any one of the twelue might lawfully haue donne Secondly Christ him selfe hauing said before Ioan. 10. that he had other sheepe beside the Iewes whiche he would bring into his Folde said afterward to S. Peter Feede my lambes Ioan. 21. Feede my sheepe Seing then the Heathens or Gentiles that became faithful were Christes sheepe they were commended also vnto S. Peter And therefore he had to doo with them aboue al other men Thirdly God chose that is to say purposely prouided that the Gentiles should heare the worde of the Gospel by S. Peters mouth Actor 10. 15. and beleue Therefore it was the special wil and choise of God that S. Peter should haue to doo with the Heathens that should be conuerted which is directly against your saying M. Iewel VVhen S. Peter came vnto Rome Euseb Histor eccles lib 2. c. 14. Hierom. in Catalo VVhen came S. Paule vnto Rome Euseb Ecclesiast Hist lib. 2. cap. 22. Fourthly S. Peter came to Rome before S. Paule For S. Peter came thither in the dayes of Claudius the Emperour as Eusebius and S. Hierome with diuers others doo witnesse And there he preached the Gospel salutaris praedicationis verbo primus in vrbe Romae Euāgelij sui clauibus ianuam regni coelestis aperuit and first opened the gate of the heauēly Kingdom in the Citie of Rome with the keies of his Gospel by the word of heathful preaching But S. Paule came to Rome long after in the daies of Nero the Emperour as Eusebius also recordeth S. Peter therefore must nedes haue to doo with those Christians who were conuerted at Rome no lesse then S. Paule And thence also S. Peter wrote his first epistle as Papias one of the Apostles scholars doth witnesse Euseb Histor lib. 2. cap. 15. Did not you know al this M. Iewel as wel as I How chaunceth it then you are so impudent as to bring into doubte whether S. Peters See Apostolike was ouer the Heathens at Rome or no You answer for so saith S. Paule What doth he say that S. Peter was not ouer the faithful Heathens at Rome He neither saith it nor meaneth any such thing His meaning is to shew that he was made an Apostle not by Peter or Iohn or Iames or by any other man but only by Iesus Christe And therefore although three yeres after his conuersion he went to Ierusalem Gal. 1. Gal. 2. to see Peter and fourteen yeres afterward he cōferred with him concerning the Faith which he preached yet neither Peter nor Ihon nor Iames did geue him any thing or make him either the better learned or endewed him with more power and authoritie But rather they ioined handes with S. Paule and tooke him into their fellowship Why so In consideration that they saw God had no lesse committed to him the preaching of the Gospel vnto the Gentiles then he had before cōmitted to Peter the preaching of the gospel vnto the Iewes And how saw they either this or that Bicause the effect shewed it so For as God had wrought mightily emong the Iewes in conuerting them by S. Peters preaching so they saw that he wrought mightily emong the Gentiles by cōuerting them at the preaching of S. Paule So that by the very euente of the matter they saw that S. Paule was called in deed of God to the Apostleship S. Paule then meant not in these wordes that S. Peter by Christes cōmission had to doo only with the Iewes and him selfe only with the Gentiles Act. ca. 13. For S. Paule had also to do with the Iewes and he preached to them in their Synagogs through diuers partes of Asia and otherwhere Yea at Rome it selfe he preached to the Iewes Act. 28. Shame it is to you M. Iewel the shame of ignorance I meane or which is more likely the shame of impudencie if you see not that both S. Peter had to doo with the Gentiles and S. Paule with the Iewes and eche of them with both But what saying of holy scripture or of holy doctour did you
from his Prince the child from his father and the wife from her husband What is it then wherein your Predecessours if they had now liued and had seene it would not haue benne so wilful as we are They should haue seene in you Diuisions sectes factions pride wantonesse fleshly libertie crueltie murders treasons rebellions Churche robbinges and to be short al impietie and contempte of God Pride accompained with malice couetise and lecherie was the foundation A foule mouthed Frier as euer liued on the earth and a Nūne incestuously coupled together was the building that rose vp of your doctrine which to this daie goeth forward with like increase And yet if your Predecessours had seene that which we see they would forsooth haue ben astonned to see the heauenly fruites which these men bring foorth Iewel To be short vve succede the bisshops that haue ben before our dayes vve are elected consecrated confirmed and admitted as they vvere Harding Here is no lye at al. That I may speake of no other difference the Bishops whom you succeede were al confirmed by the bishop of Rome and so is none of you Iewel .. If they vvere deceiued in any thing vve succede them in the place but not in errour Harding By their place is meant specially their doctrine and beleefe which seing you haue not you are not their successour no more then Paulus Samosatenus the heretique was the Successour in S. Peters chaire in Antioche no more then Gregorius the Arian was S. Markes successour in Alexandria no more then al the Bisshops of Christendome are to be accompted the successours of the Heathnish Priestes which in the same Cities before worshipped Idols It is the Doctrine and place together which maketh the Succession and not the walles of the towne Churche or house alone Iewel They vvere our Predecessours but not the rules and standardes of our faith Harding As long as they remained in that vnitie of Doctrine which they receiued of the Apostles or of the Apostolike Churches as Tertullian doth wel shew so long they are presidentes and their continual Succession is a good rule and standard of our faith For they are pillers of the Church the Successours of the Apostles Luc. 10. whom he that heareth heareth Christ Now when those that breake the Vnitie which was in the Church before come to sit in any bishops Chaire they in deede are no presidentes no rules nor standardes of our Faith bicause the Apostle biddeth vs obserue and beware of them 2. Thess 3. that walke inordinatly and make dissensions For the Church of God hath no suche custome to striue 1. Cor. 11. and to resiste at once al the Bishops of the whole Church as Martin Luther did Iewel 131. Or rather to set apart al comparison of persons the doctrine of Christ this day M. Harding succedeth your doctrine as the daye succedeth the night as the light succedeth darknesse and as the truth succedeth errour Harding VVhat is the daie vvhat is the night in M. Ievvelles iudgement That is to say your doinges and proceedinges are the daye the light and the truth but the Catholique faith whiche we teache and al our predecessours in al the worlde haue euer taught is the night the darkenesse and errour But sir if your doctrine be daye or light and ours night or darkenesse how chaunceth it that our doctrine was euer openly seene in the whole worlde from the Apostles time vnto these daies in so many Bishoppes throughout al nations teaching al one thing and yours was not sene by your owne confession for nine hundred yeres together This was a long night pardy M. Iewel Is it the nature of the light not to be seene Who sawe not our Altars our external Priestes and our Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ in the whole world from East to Weast Malac. 1. as Malachias prophecied and the euent shewed But your no Aulters your no external Priestes and your no sacrificing of Christes body briefly the Imaginatiue face of your Negatiue Religion or rather of your no Religion who could see before that now of late ye pulled downe our Aulters to shewe howe ye had no Aulters and before violently ye bannished our Priestes and draue them out of their Churches to shewe howe ye had no Priestes and denied Christes Real Presence to shew how ye had no Sacrifice Our Munkes and Friers from S. Ihon Baptistes dayes and from the tyme of those that liued a very holy life in Egypte frō the time of S. Marke the Euangeliste vnto the time of S. Basil in the East of S. Augustine S. Benedicte S. Frauncis and S. Dominike in the Weast had replenished Christendom with Cloisters and Monasteries to those our Monkes I say al the worlde beareth witnesse But your no monkes Renegates and Apostates liued in Turkie or in Hel for in the landes of Christendom no such doctrine shined none suche was heard of whiche should auouche that it is not lawful by Gods grace to make a vowe that a man wil renounce the riches and pleasures of the worlde and liue continently vnder the obedience of a spiritual Father If your doctrine be the light and the daye howe commeth it to passe that not so muche as one Churche or chappel in the whole earth can be named where before these fiftie yeres it was vnlawful to occupie holy Chrisme in bishopping of childerne or to saye Masse or to teache the seuen Sacramentes to praie for the dead to celebrate the Churche Seruice in the Latine tongue to desire the Apostles Martyrs and the other Saintes to praie for vs al which thinges now you accompt for vnlawful Can the light be so darkened that it should be vnknowen vnto you whether ye had any auncestours at al or no We can if neede were set forth a rolle of our Pastours and Bishops from this daye vpward vnto S. Peters time in such sort as you shal name no one time of whiche we are not hable to saye vnto you these many prelates and Pastours were knowen to preache Christes gospel at once in diuers nations Marcke M. Iewel what I saye to you and consider of it wel For herein your vtter Confusion appeareth that ye are not hable to bring the continuance of your doctrine vp vnto S. Peters time without interruption albeit you should be bounde to name for euery fiftie yeres in Order but one man in the whole worlde at once Thinke of it with al your witte and geue me an instance There are since Christes time fifteen hūdred yeres passed Geue me for euery hundred yeres two Catholike men one liuing after the other whom you may iustifie to haue ben of your faith holding that doctrine whiche you holde and so geue me in al but thirtye menne liuing and knowen to haue lyued eche of them about fiftie yeres one after the other and for my part I wil release you of your bond of subscription Such a lightsome Churche ye haue that
Fathers accompted euil in vvedlok vvorke Matrimonie it selfe were an euil thing God forbid any should so speake of Goddes holy ordinance But he meaneth the coniunction of the Husband with his wife in the acte of generation Neither yet vnderstandeth he the coniunction or acte it selfe in wedlocke to be an euil thing so it be not to the end to saciate luste and pleasure but to the ende to begete a childe that being againe begotten and regenerate may serue to fil the Citie of God as S. Augustine speaketh but the immoderate concupiscence and luste without the whiche that wedlocke acte is not done Whereof S. Augustine saith August de Nuptijs et concupiscent lib. 1. cap. 24. Cùm ventum fuerit ad opus generandi ipse ille licitus honestus concubitus non poterit esse sine ardore libidinis vt peragi possit quod rationis est non libidinis This immoderate concupiscence this inordination this rebellion of the fleshe and preuenting and ouerbearing of reason this filthy motion swaruing from reason whereof shame is taken without whiche the acte of Wedlocke is not donne is the thing whiche the authour of that vnperfite worke vppon S. Matthew and sundry holy Fathers haue called Malum asmuche to say an euil thing The euil thing of wedlock vvorke of married persons vvel vsed The three good thinges of marriage à cap. 10. vsque ad cap. 16. Whiche euil thing notwithstanding married personnes doo vse wel bicause of the three good thinges that Matrimonie hath by which it is excused Those three thinges are these Fides Proles Sacramentum Faith or Fidelitie Issue and the Sacrament whereof S. Augustine teacheth learnedly in his firste booke De Nuptijs concupiscentia ad Valerium By these three good thinges as S. Augustine and the Churche teacheth the vse of Matrimonie is excused not as an acte that of it selfe is euil is excused thorough ignorance or infirmitie whiche is rather an excuse of the partie that worketh but it is excused for that otherwise it should be a sinne excepte it had these three good thinges ioyned together Whiche when it hath the Circumstances to euery good acte behooful presupposed it is an acte lawful honest good and laudable Now this being considered whereas you M. Iewel iudge the holy Fathers to speake otherwise of Matrimonie then the honor and holinesse of that state deserueth you shew your selfe to be of the nūber of those deceiued men August de Nuptus et Concupis lib. 1. ca. 5. of whom S. Augustin saith thus Profectò errāt qui cū vituperatur libido carnalis damnari nuptias opinantur quasi morbus iste de connubio sit non de peccato Verely they are deceiued which when fleshly luste is rebuked thinke that marriage is condemned as though this disease were of wedlocke August de peccato originali contra Pelag. Coelestiū lib. 2. c. 37 and not of sinne Likewise he saith againe Quia iam ista conditione mortalium nunc simul aguntur concubitus libido eò fit vt cùm libido reprehendatur etiam nuptialis concubitus licitus honestus reprehendi putetur ab eis qui nolunt discernere ista vel nesciunt Bicause as the condition of men is now after Sinne the acte of generation and lust are done both atonce thereof it commeth to passe that when luste is reprooued the lawful and honest dealing of them together that be coupled in wedlocke is thought also to be reprooued of them whiche wil not discerne betwene these thinges he meaneth the acte and the lust or els know not how to discerne them To cōclude what so euer certaine Fathers say and how so euer they seeme to speake of Matrimonie this perteined nothing to the purpose Al your great number of allegations might haue ben leafte out for asmuche as thereby your Vowbreakers marriage is nothing iustified nor defended M. Iewels second Principle for defence of Vow-breakers marriages answered which is that Bisshoppes and Priestes were married in olde time Your second Principle for so you cal it wherein you put the chiefe confidence of this cause is that many Bishops and Priestes in olde time were married for so you dispose your wordes I tel you M. Iewel you haue not so much as one example for you that a bishop was married I meane that any was euer married in the olde Church and allowed in it after that he was Bishop That diuers and sundry married menne were for their vertue and holy life made Bishops I denie not ne neuer yet denied You allege al the examples of antiquitie that you can yet not so much as one to the purpose That Tertullian was a married man Tettulliā of a married man made Priest Spiridion made Bisshop frō being a married laie man S. Hilarie married by M. Ievvel In the Reioinder against the Sacrifice of the Masse fol. 172. b. and afterwarde made a Priest I graunte You say Spiridion the Bisshop of Cyprus was married and had children I denie that Spiridion being a Bishop was married but I confesse that being a married laye man before he was chosen afterwarde to be a Bishoppe and had one daughter named Irene Whether he had mo children I knowe not of mo children of his I haue not read You make S. Hilarie the bishop of Poitiers a married man Your proufe is the Epistle to Abra his daughter If I denie that he was euer married how can ye prooue it The Epistle to Abra is a peeuish Apocryphal and forged write as I tolde you in my last Reioindre where you vtter this same very stuffe in great sooth whereby the worlde may vnderstand what simple ragges ye haue wherwith to coouer your brethern the Apostates filthy lecherie That Prosper the Bishop of Rhegium was a married man you say it but you prooue it not And were it so yet it serueth not your turne bicause if he were maried it was before he was priest Neither haue you good authoritie for proufe that Chaeremon Chaeremō the Bishop of a Citie called Nilus whom you recken among married Bishops Euseb Hist Eccles lib. 6. cap 42. was married Eusebius saith that in time of persecution he fled vnto a Hil in Arabia with her that liued with him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and was neuer founde againe That she was his wife it appeareth not She might be some woman of his kinne or some other old womā that kept him and dressed his meate and attended him as a nourse of whom he had neede being a man of extreme age as Eusebius reporteth of him saying that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say passing olde Polycrates Polycrates you say being a Bisshop sometimes said that seuen of his Fathers or Ancestours had ben Bishoppes What healpeth this your cause at al Marry say you the Greeke word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Ruffinus translateth it Patres Wherunto sticke you vnto the Greeke word
to marrie a wife or no here I dispute not I confesse the Single state of the Clergie not to be Iuris Diuini expressely but Iuris Ecclesiastici positiui And to say that the Pope may in no case at al dispense with a Priest of the West Churche or with a religious person to marrie it is against the Diuines against the Canonistes and against the authoritie Raymeriâ— made kiÌ„g of AragoÌ„ of a MoÌ„ke and married by dispensation See the historie of Franciscus Tarapha which the Churche of Rome hath in some cases vsed de facto as they speake as it is knoweÌ„ by the example of Raymeris the king of Aragon in Spaine with whom about the yere of our Lorde 1160. the Pope dispensed yea he compelled him as we reade to geue ouer the Profession of his Religion and to marrie whiche is more then to dispense with a secular Priest for sauing of Christian bloud and for the necessary disposition of that kingdom The like example happened in the kingdome of Pole Casimirus the onely that remained a liue of the kinges bloud Munster Cosmographiae lib. 3. in Schlesia lib. 4. in Polonia Mart. Cromerus being a Moonke and a Deacon by sute of the Nobles of that realme Dispensation of the Pope obteined was taken out of his monasterie of the Order of Cisterce made Kinge of Pole and married But suche a singular case maketh no common rule Againe where a thing is not done but by special dispensation the dispensation it selfe argueth the same of it selfe that is to say considered without dispensation to be vnlawful Therefore my Assertion that no man may marrie after holy Orders receiued and that such Marriage was neuer accompted lawful in the Catholique Churche standeth true as before Iewel Athanasius saith Athanas ad Dracontium Multi quoque ex Episcopis matrimonia non inierunt Monachi contrà Parentes liberorum facti sunt Many of the Bisshoppes he saith not al but many haue not married By vvhiche vvoordes he geueth vs to vnderstande that some haue married contrarievvise Monkes haue becomme fathers of Children Harding This testimonie is bodged with your forged Parentheses Whereby you signifie that of it selfe and without addition of your owne wordes it helpeth you litle Al standeth vpon trial of the translation If you could haue alleged S. Athanasius owne wordes as he wrote in Greeke a right answere might soone be made The translatour litle thinking of their sleightes that be Proctours for the Marriages of Votaries had rather hauing respect to the finenesse of the Latine so to turne it then otherwise If the place were thus latined Multi ex Episcopis matrimonia non inierant or non habuerunt Monachi contrà parentes liberoruÌ„ extiterunt whereby is signified that many Bishops had neuer contracted Marriages and that some Monkes had ben fathers of children if the place had thus benne turned as I suppose the Greeke hath it would haue serued you to no purpose For I graunt you that some bishops haue had wiues but before they were made Bishops as Spiridion S. Gregorie Nazianzenes father and Gregorie of Nyssa S. Basils brother and that some Monkes were fathers of children whiche they begote in lawful wedlocke before they entred into that profession and order of life Albeit if we allowed you this translation for good and true according to the Greeke yet of these woordes you can not conclude that by iudgement of S. Athanasius the Marriages of bishops are accompted lawful by the circuÌ„stance of the place in that Epistle to Dracontius S. Athanasius may seeme to speake those wordes in dispraise of certaine Bishops and Monkes and not at al in their commendation and so you ought not to allege it for an allowed example But hereof we shal be more assured if they of Basile wil sette foorth that Fathers workes in Greeke Iewel Pag. 176. Cassiodorus vvriteth thus Cassio li. 6. cap. 14 In illo tempore ferunt Martyrio vitam finisse Eupsychium Caesariensem Episcopum ducta nuper vxore dum adhuc quasi sponsus esse videretur At that time they say Eupsychius the Bishop of Caesaria died in Martyrdom hauing married a vvise a litle before being as yet in manner a nevv married man Harding A man would thinke if this wil not serue the turne that nothing wil serue A blessed man Eupsychius bishop of Caesaria a holy Martyr married to a wise but a litle before his Martyrdome The writer of the Storie Cassiodorus a noble man and graue Senator of Rome a man of good credite What can a man desire more But phy vpoÌ„ such shamelesse falsifiers O lamentable state A falshod in excusable and in tollerable of M. Ievv where the people of God be coÌ„pelled to heare such false Prophetes What wil he feare to speake in pulpite where he is sure no man shal control him that is not ashamed thus to write in bookes openly published vnto the world which he knewe should not escape the examination of his Aduersaries The truth is good Reader Neither Cassiodorus wrote thus nor Eupsychius was euer Bishop of Caesaria nor of any other place nor so much as a Priest Deacon or Subdeacon The writer of the Storie which we haue of this blessed Martyr Eupsychius is Sozomenus the Greeke Who with the Ecclesiastical Storie of Socrates and Theodoritus was translated into Latine by one Epiphanius Scholasticus out of whiche three Cassiodorus gathered the AbridgemeÌ„t that we haue vnder the name of the Tripartite historie Histor Tripartit lib. 6. c. 14 The place truly reported hath these wordes In illo tempore ferunt vitam finisse Martyrio Basilium Ecclesiae Ancyranae Presbyterum Eupsychium Caesariensem Cappadociae ducta nuper vxore cùm adhuc quasi Sponsus esse videretur They say that at that time Basiliê° a Priest of the Church of Ancyra ended his life in Martyrdom Also Eupsychius the Caesarian of Cappadocia hauing married a wife a litle before and when as yet he seemed to be but a new married man Here is no mencion made that Eupsychius was the bishop of Caesaria The storie as we haue it in Latine of Epiphanius turning calleth him only Eupsychium Caesariensem Cappadociae that is to say Eupsychius a maÌ„ of Caesaria that is in Cappadocia whiche is added to signifie of whiche Caesaria he was for that there was an other famous Citie of that name in Palestina an other likewise in Mauritania and others moe in other countries Sozomenus him selfe who is the authour of the Storie addeth a worde more signifying of what estate and condition he was whereby the opinion of his being the Bishoppe of Caesaria is quite taken awaye For thus he reporteth of him in the Greeke Sozomen lib. 5. c. 11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. EupsychiuÌ„ Caesariensem Cappadociae PatriciuÌ„ asmuch to say Eupsychius of Caesaria in Cappadocia a nobleman or one of the Lordes of the Citie Thus is Eupsychius whom M. Iewel hath made a Bishop as much as
he is him selfe founde to be a Laie gentleman or noble man of the Citie of Caesaria And whereas he married a wife but a litle before his Martyrdome what is that to the purpose for proufe that it was in olde time lawful for Priestes to marrie Bicause M. Iewel knew this muche rightwel contrary to the custome he vseth at other times he dissembled the greeke Original and thought he might better father this shameful lye vpon Cassiodorus meaning the latine Translation of Epiphanius And to helpe the matter An impudent falsifying he stickte not to put in this word Episcopum Bishop of his owne and so calleth him boldely Eupsychius the Bishop of Caesaria Let these menne haue leaue thus to corrupte and falsifie the Fathers and by them they shal be hable to proue what they liste M. Iewel standeth so muche in his owne conceit for the example of this Eupsychius Nicephorus belyed by M. Ievv Defence pag. 514. that for proufe of this very matter he bringeth it in againe in an other place in his pretensed Defence of his Apologie But there he allegeth it out of Nicephorus His wordes be these Nicephorus saith that Eupsychius being a Priest at Caesaria in Cappadocia married a wife a litle before that he was martyred Now let vs heare Nicephorus tel his owne tale Nicephorus lib. 1â— cap. 20. Thus he saith in like sorte as Sozomenus said before him Hoc ipso tempore Basilius Ancyranae Ecclesiae Praesbyter martyrio est defunctus atque item Caesariensis Eupsychius Cappadox veteri familia locoque claro natus At the very same time Basilius a Priest of the Church of Ancyra died a martyr Euen so likewise did Eupsychius the Caesarian of Cappadocia borne of an auncieÌ„t howse and of noble pareÌ„tage Thus hath M. Iewel belied and falsified both Sozomenus and his translator and also Nicephorus Let vs see what substantial witnesse he bringeth for legitimation of his Priestes Marriage in the last place Dist 84. Cum in praeteritâ— in Glossa Iewel Likevvise M. Harding might haue founde it noted in his ovvne Glose 〈…〉 M. Ieâ—el saith of my 〈…〉 seemeth â–ª that than he 〈…〉 Nicepherus spâ—…king of the two Apollinarâ—s Father and Sonne both heretiques Apollinaris the elder not married after he was made Priest saith Pâ—ter Presbyters filius Lectâ—ris ordineâ—â—…tiâ—ebat the Father obteined the Order of a Priest the sonne of a Pâ—â—â—der Of this it seemeth not that the father was married after thâ—â— he obteined to be a Priest but rather contrariwise that he was married before he was Priest For Niâ—â—phâ—râ—â— saith the father obteined to be a Priest whereby he seemeth to signifie if we may say what seemeth to vs that he was a father before he was made Priest and not first a Priest and afterward married and so made a father But perhaps M. Iewel gâ—â—herâ—th his seeming of these wordes following in Nicephorus Senex Alexandriaeâ—riâ—â— Beryti dâ—câ—it â—ucta Laodicia coniâ—gâ— Apollinariâ— filiâ—… progeâ—â—it â—smuche to say The olde mâ—â— was borne at Alâ—xandria â—â—ught aâ— Berytuâ— married a wife at Laodiceâ— and begâ—â—â— Apollinaris his sonne Of this order of wordes he can concludâ— no more that the older Apollinaris was married after that he was Priest then that he was borne at Alexandria after that he was an old man If he could proue that he was an old man bâ—â—ore he begote the yonger Apollinaris and that he was Priest before he came to Laodicea when he married then should he seeme to proue that an Heretique was married after he was Priest as many be now adaies Vntil he proue so much which sâ—â—l a 〈◊〉 this his seeming 〈◊〉 seeme litle worth Chrysost in Epist. 1 ad Timo. Homil. 1â— Iewel Chrysostome speaking of the Marriâ—ge of Bishops saith thus Quamuis nuptie pluâ—imum diâ—â—â—uâ—tatis in sâ— habâ—â—â—â— ita tamen assumi possunt 〈◊〉 perfectiori vitae impedimento non sint Notwithâ—â—â—â—â—ing marriage haue in it much trâ—â—ble yet so it may be taken that â—…shalbe no hinderance to perfite life He saith marriage may be takâ—â— or chosen and he speaketh namely of the marriage of Priestes and Bishoppes Harding Why nipte you of the ende of the sentence M. Iewel M. Ievvel nippeth of vvordes of his doctor Though you nor your good brethren the married Apostates like not wel of them yet for true dealinges sake you should not so haue gelded your Doctor of the wordes that so iointly hang to the sentence by you alleged They be these It is a hard thiÌ„g that marriage should not be a lette vnto the perfites life by iudgemeÌ„t of S. Chrysostom Verum id planè perquam rarò atque difficile Marriage may be so taken that it shal not be a lette vnto the perfiter life so much goeth before but certainly that is a thing very seldome and of great difficultie Doo ye heare syr what your owne Doctor saith That marriage be not an impediment vnto perfiter life which Priestes doo professe it is very seldome seene and a thing of very great difficultie saith your Chrysostome Here good Reader that thou be not begyled I must tel thee this muche Whereas M. Iewel beareth thee in hand that S. Chrysostome saith Marriage may be taken or chosen and that of Priestes and Bishops for of their Marriage he speaketh saith this manne al this is false M. Ievvel buildeth his prouf vpoÌ„ a forged sentence added vnto S. Chrysostome For first vnderstand thou this sentence is not in S. Chrysostome at al not in the Greeke I saie in which tongue only he wrote For I haue seene the Greeke and diligently conferred it my selfe But it is added vnto his texte either by the translation or by falshod vsed at the printing as in these corrupte times false printers haue corrupted many bookes of the olde Fathers Yet this muche wil I say of this sentence that it may right wel stand without any euil mâ—â—ning gathered of it though 〈…〉 be not S. Chrysostomâ—â— the Greeke examples supposed to be true For the Circumstance of the place beareth it to be spoken not specially of the Marriage of Priestes and Bishoppes as M. Iewel taketh it in this place but of Marriage indefinitely and generally as it maie be proued if there were nothing elles to proue it by the same M. Iewel in an other place namely in the page 179. before where he saith thus in the first line of that page S. Chrysostome saith generally of al menne Quamuis nâ—ptia plurimum difficultatis habeant c. Thus M. Iewel in the 514. page is confuted by M. Iewel in the 179. page Of such Contradictions he hath good stoare That it may appeare the plainer thus is it that we reade in S. Chrysostome Iâ— prim cap Titi. hom 2. Si igitur qui vxorem duxit c. Then if it be so that he which hath married a wife be careful for the thinges of the worlde and of conuenience a Bishop should not be touched