against Adimantus as part of his owne confession and former obiection and conclude that either Adimantus mistooke the meaning of the law as in deede hee did or that Dauid perfourming the precept of Christ when hee spared his enimie gaue example that others vnder the Lawe shoulde doe the like and so the Law neither waie repugnant to the Gospell as his conclusion imported And if any thinke it much Sainct Augustine should pitch himselfe on other mens wordes as they were apparant truethes hee must remember hee dealt with the Manichees that receiued no Scriptures but such as they listed and therefore to presse them with their owne position was a neerer waie to confounde them than to loade them with Scriptures which they regarded not and that maketh Sainct Augustine giue sometimes not the soundest solution hee coulde but the readiest to stoppe their mouthes with their owne assertions Otherwise Sainct Augustine was plainely resolued that Dauid so much esteemed in Saul the holinesse of his regall inunction euen vnto his death that hee trembled at heart for cutting the lappe of Sauls garment Quaero si non habebat Saul sacramenti sanctitatem quid in eo Dauid venerabatur nam eum propter sacrosanctam vnctionem honorauit viuum vindicauit occisum Et quia vel panniculum ex eius veste praescidit percusso corde trepidauit Ecce Saul non habebat innocentiam tamen habebat sanctitatem non vitae sed vnctionis If Saul had not the holinesse of the sacrament I demand what it was that Dauid reuerenced in him For the sacred and holy vnction of a king hee honoured Saul liuing and reuenged his death on him that saide hee slue him And because himselfe had cut but the lap of Saules coate hee was strooken and trembled at heart for the fact Behold Saul was not innocent yet had hee the holinesse not of life but of his annointing Phi. If Dauid might not lawfully haue slaine Saul Dauid might not beare armes against Saul for the putting himselfe in armes proueth hee was either lawfull king or a manifest rebel against the king which I thinke you will not affirme Theo. Dauid was neither king as yet when hee did this nor rebell against the king Hee put him-selfe in armes not to seeke the kingdome nor to subdue the vsurper as you vainly suppose hee fledde to saue his life as euery subiect may by your doctrine doinges yea though life be not sought Phi. Howe coulde Dauid bee annointed if Saul were not first deposed Theoph. You misconster Samuels wordes For by them the Scepter was not taken out of Saules handes but his seede reiected from inheriting the kingdome Philand Nay Samuel sayde vnto him God hath cast thee awaie from being king And againe The Lord hath rent the kingdome of Israel from thee this day hath giuen it to thy neighbor What can this import but he was personallie deposed from the gouernment Theophi The present possession of the kingdome was not denyed him but the inheritaunce of it to him and his issue By a king Samuel ment not one that shoulde gouerne during his life for so did the Iudges of Israel before Saul that were no kinges but one that should haue the kingdome to him and his after him by waye of inheritaunce For that was it which the children of Israel respected when they required a King which was not a Gouernour for the time but a setled succession in the regiment as other Nations had This was it that Samuell saide vnto Saul when he first reproued him Thou hast doone foolishly thou hast not kept the commaundement of the Lord for haddest thou kept it the Lord had now established thy kingdom vpon Israell for euer But now thy kingdom shal not continue This was it that Samuel ment the seconde time when he more sharpely rebuked Sauls disobedience Because thou hast cast awaye the worde of the Lord therefore hath he cast away thee from being king And againe The Lord hath rent the kingdome of Israel from thee this daie and hath giuen it to thy neighbour not meaning his person shoulde bee degraded but the kingdom remoued both from his line and from his tribe Phi. This is your priuate sense for the wordes sound that he should not bee king ouer Israell Theo. Sainct Augustine him-selfe expoundeth these verie wordes as I do Iste cui dicitur spernit te Dominus ne sis Rex super Israel dirupit Dominus Regnum ab Israel de manu tua hodie quadraginta annos regnauit super Israell tanto scilicet spacio temporis quanto ipse Dauid audiuit hoc primo tempore regni sui vt intelligamus ideo dictum quia nullus de stirpe eius fuerat regnaturus Saul to whome it was sayde the Lorde will cast thee away that thou shalt not bee king ouer Israell and the Lorde hath rent the kingdome from Israell out of thine hand this daie euen hee raigned fourtie yeares as long as Dauid him-selfe and this hee hearde in the verie beginning of his raigne that wee shoulde vnderstand it therefore to be spoken because none of his stocke should raigne after him And hadde not Sainct Augustine goone cleare with vs the circumstaunces of the Scriptures doe thus lymitte the wordes of Samuel For Dauid was then a verie young boie or as the text sayeth a little one keeping sheepe when hee was annointed hauing neither age experience nor strength fit for the present vndertaking of the kingdome Next Dauid neither claymed nor pretended any right to the Crowne during Saules life but serued and obeyed Saul as his liege Lorde and Master whiles hee lyued and so confessed him to bee Thirdly Saul him-selfe neuer obiected this vnto Dauid that he sought the kingdome from him but from his sonnes for so he said to Ionathan As long as the sonne of Ishai liueth vpon the earth thou shalt not be established nor thy kingdō And the priests that were charged with treason for helping Dauid did not answere as you do that Saul was an vsurper Dauid the right king but Who is so faithful among all thy seruants as Dauid goeth at thy commandement witnessing for Dauid that he behaued himselfe as a faithfull subiect vnto Saul not as a claimer of the crown from Saul Thus al the Tribes of Israel conceiued constred the wordes of Samuel For when they came to make Dauid king after Sauls death they said In time past when Saul was our king thou leddest Israel in out the Lorde saide vnto thee thou shalt feed my people Israel and thou shalt be captaine ouer my people Israel So came all the elders of Israel and annoynted Dauid king ouer Israel according to the word of the Lord by the hand of Samuel The text it self alleadgeth Gods own words Samuels act not for the present possession but for the rightfull succession of the crowne that after Sauls death
must his owne prouince shoulde take stitch against him But howe can you proue that he alone was spoken to Phi. The words be plaine Obsecro vt scribas I beseech you to write in the singular nūber Theo. What if a man should distrust the print or the Copie woulde it not tempt your patience Phi. Haue we not good cause if you beginne to discredite euery thing that maketh against you Theo. Whether I suspect the place vppon iust occasion or no your selfe shall bee Iudge Chrysostome in this Epistle hauing reported at large the violent and enormous rage of his enemies against him and his adherents commeth at last to make his petition not to Ionnocentius alone as you conceiue but generally to the West Bishoppes Igitur Domini maxime venerandi pij cum haec ita se habere didiceritis studium vestrum magnam diligentiam adhibite quo retundatur haec quae in ecclesias irrupit iniquitas Therefore most reuerent and religious Lordes since you see what is done put to your endeuours and diligence that this wickednes which is broken into the Church may be beaten back Quippe si mos hic inualuerit scitote quod breui transibunt omnia Quapropter ne confusio haec omnem quae sub celo est natione minuadat obsecro vt scribatis quod haec tam iniquè facta robur non habeant nobis verò literis vestris charitate vestra frui concedite For if this grow to a custome knowe you that al things wil shortly come to nought therfore least this confusion attempt euery nation vnder heauen I beseeche not one of you but al you to write that these things so vniustly doone may be taken as voide and you all graunt that we may enioy your letters your fauours And so goeth he on to the very end with verbes of the plural number leauing off with these words Haec omnia cum ita se habere intellexeritis a dominis meis pientissimis fratribus nostris Episcopis obsecro vt praestetis id quod petent officij Al these things when you shall perceaue to be true by these my Lordes and most godly brethren the Bishops whom I haue sent I beseeche you giue them that assistance which they shall aske The whole petition from the first word to the last is made to them al without exception the selfe same sentence where hee prayeth them to write hath these woordes nobis verò literis vestris frui concedite you all graunt vs your letters Now whether obsecro vt scribas can stand with these wordes literis vestris frui concedite or rather obsecro vt scribatis I referre it to your selfe this you can not denie but hee requireth ayde of them all and prayeth their common letters which is enough to shew that Chrysostome ment Innocentius shoulde take with him the generall consent of the West Bishops And so he did For this wrongful and vnrighteous dealing against Chrysostome sayth Theodorete the Bishops of Europe did greatly detest and therefore seuered themselues from the communion of those that were the doers thereof Phi. I graunt they did but Innocentius alone did excommunicate the chiefe doers euen Arcadius the Emperour Eudoxia the Empresse Arsacius Theophilus the Patriarkes of Constantinople and Alexandria Theo. Who told you so Phi. The bull is extant to this day Theo. A bull of that antiquitie were newes in deede Phi. You may soone finde him Theo. Where Phi. In the 13. booke and 34. Chapter of Nicephorus ecclesiasticall historie Theo. I was afraide you would haue quoted Socrates or Sozomene Phi. Nicephorus is as good Theo. Not by ten parts of twelue Phi. Why not Theo. Besides that he loadeth the whole historie of the Church with many fables and visions he liued thirteene hundred yeres after Christ as your owne frinds confesse which in comparison of the rest is but yesterday Therefore if Socrates Theodorete and Sozomene which wrote at that very time when these thinges were done report no such matter I would faine know which way Nicephorus that came a thousand yeere after them could light on a true constat of this ecclesiasticall censure Phi. Perhaps he found it in some auncient Librarie Theo. As though the Patriarks and Princes of Greece would suffer such a president against themselues to lie quiet in their Libraries a thousand yeres Phi. That reason of yours is but coniecturall Theo. Then heare that which is effectual and you shal see the framer of this bull proue himselfe a calfe The twentieth day of Iune Honorius and Aristinetus being Consuls Chrysostome was caried from his Church into banishment by the Emperours Edict as Socrates witnesseth The thirtieth of September the same yere a mightie hayle fell in Constantinople and the suburbes thereabout and the fourth day after the hayle Eudoxia the Empresse died The next yere the eleuenth day of Nouember when Stelichon the second time Anthemius were Consuls Arsacius died The next yere after that which was the sixt of Arcadius and the first of Probus a very religious man named Atticus was chosen Bishop of Constantinople The next yeere which was the seuenth of Honorius and the second time of Theodosius Consulship the fourtenth day of Nouember Iohn Chrysostome died in banishment You doubt not of this accompt I trust Phi. As yet I see no cause to doubt it Socrates was then aliue when these things were in action Theo. The same order of their deaths you shall finde in Sozomene a writer of that age also when these troubles were hottest Phi. What then after all this Theo. Your solemne Bull auoucheth Chrysostome to be dead and Eudoxia to be liuing after him which died three whole yeres before him Phi. What It doeth not I hope Theo. Marke the wordes Tamet si enim beatus Iohānis vitam reliquit in eterna tamen secula immortalis vitae haereditatem est consecutus Verùm illa excipiet presentem hic paenam futurum sempiternum supplicium post non multos hosce dies ei adueniens Itaque ego minimus peccator cui thronus magni Apostoli Petri creditus est segrego reijcio te illam a perceptione immaculatorū mysteriorum Christi For although blessed Iohn Chrysostomde parted this life yet hath he gottē the inheritance of an immortal life for euer but Eudoxia shall receaue a present punishment in this world and eternal paines that shall befall her afore many dayes be past Therfore I though the least and a sinner to whom the throne of Peter the great Apostle is committed do segregate and cut off thee O Emperour her from receauing the vndefiled mysteries of Christ c. How think you was the contriuer of this Bull wel in his wits to threaten that the Empresse should shortly die which was dead long before to put her from receauing the Communion after she had beene three yeres buried Phi. Perhaps Innocentius knew not
receaued to their fellowship they keeping still that honor and excellencie which they had in Christ before our comming Abraham is to this day the father of the faythful the Patriarkes Prophets are not depriued of their dignitie Peter no doubt as he was so he is the first Stone that Christ layed in the foundation of his Church which dignity you can not take from him after his death Phi. What then shall his successour haue Theo. The charge that he had to feede the same keyes that were giuen him and the rest to binde lose Which office if the Bishop of Rome will execute he may haue Phi. A fayre promotioÌ„ You meane he shal be a Bishop as others are Theo. God graunt he be so much More if he will haue by warrant from Peter you must proue it better than by such forged autorities manned exaÌ„ples as here you bring Those that are past your self see were to litle purpose Theodoretes example which is yet behind is like the rest Phi. He submitted him self to Leo the great was by him restored to his Bishoprike though he were not of his Prouince Theo. Leo toke his part against Dioscorus the Patriarke of Alexandria that like a tyrant in the second Councell of Ephesus not only was the death of Flauianus by spurning tredding on him but also coÌ„firmed the wicked opinion of Eutiches deposed Theodorete without any iust cause whoÌ„ the Bishop of Rome receaued to the coÌ„munion accepted for a lawfull and Catholike Bishop not regarding the sentence pronounced against him by Dioscorus Phi. Then Leo reuersed the lewd acts of Dioscorus in that Ephesine Councell Theo. Leo withstood theÌ„ as all other good men did throughout the world but the iudgement was reuersed by the great CouÌ„cel of Chalcedon not by the Bishop of Rome where Theodorete was forced with his own mouth in their presence to cleare him selfe from all suspition notwithstanding his restitution by Leo before he could be admitted to make his complaynt against Dioscorus Phi. Still you see the Bishop of Rome resisted other by dissenting from them ouerthrew their interprises Theo. And still you see the Bishop of Rome neuer ended these matters at home in his owne Câ—â—sistorie as supreme Iudge of the whole earth but euer made suite to Christiâ—n Princes that these thinges might be determined in full assemblies of Bisâ—ops by the iudgement opinion of the most part which is cleane contrarie tâ— that absolute power he now claymeth as Uicar generall to Christ the only Ruler of his vniuersall Church And therefore these examples which you haue brought many like which you might bring proue noâ— that power which you defend at this day to belong to the Bishop of Rome but rather euert the same For what needed his predecessors with all ouetie become suppliants to Catholike Emperours for the gathering of Bishops out of all quarters to decide matters in doubt and that sute often refused as when Innocentius messengers came backe from Arcadius with a shamefull repulse and Leo the great whom you last spake of besought Theodosius the yonger with sighes teares to graunt a Councell for the repealing of Dioscorus actes could not obtaine it what needed I say such earnest and humble request to those that neglected their prayers if Christ had appointed them as Peters successors and his deputies without depending on Princes pleasures or other mens voices to say but the word which should stand good in his Church against all persons in all causes both of doctrine discipline And what better conuiction of your falshood can there be than that in all these troubles tempests of the Church which you haue chosen out of many for your best aduantage the Bishop of Rome neuer so much as pretended or mentioned his Lieutenantship to Christ which you now defend but euer keeping his place which by reason of his Citie was the first among the Patriarkes ioyning him selfe to the West Bishops which were then a good part of Christendom by their helpe and the fauour of religious Princes gate those thinges that oppressed the Church and impugned the faith to be debated and determined by common coÌ„sent in generall and lawfull Councels without any reseruation or motion of his absolute power or negatiue voice Phi. Our examples you grant proue this that he resisted others now shewe you that others ouerruled him Theo. If I could not the matter were not great coÌ„sidering your examples conclude nothing against vs but least you should flatter your selues too much in your follies you shal see that others withstood him as well as he withstood others Phi. Were they Catholiks Theo. I trust you dare not account them heretikes Peter as you say the first Bishop of Rome was resisted by Paul the teacher of the Gentiles Anicetus by Policarpus Saint Iohns owne scholer Victor by Polycrates Ireneus and al the brethren of Asia Stephanus by Cyprian Damasus Syricius and Anastasius by Flauianus and all the Churches of the East of Asia Pontus Thracia and Illyricum Innocentius by Cyrill Sozimus and Bonifacius by Augustine and two hundred and sixteene Bishoppes of Africa Caelestinus by Theodorete Leo by the great Councell of Chalcedon Gregorie by the Britanes and many other Bishops of Rome by diuerse godly Princes Prelates Countries and Councels Phi. I like not these generall florishes which serue onely to obscure the truth and beguile the simple Theo. Howe then can you like your Apologie which consisteth of nothing else And what a slender kinde of proofe was that idle rehearsall of names which you made euen now for your running to Rome But our particulars I am well content you shall skan The first Paul himselfe affirmeth When Peter came to Antioch I withstood him to his face for hee was to be blamed Phi. The quarell betwixt them was not great Theo. Not walking the right way to the truth of the Gospell and compelling the Gentiles to liue like the Iewes was no such petite fault as you make it but graunt it were The smaller the fault the stronger our instance If Paul for a light matter resisted Peter to his face what woulde hee haue done in a cause of more weight Phi. Was Peter then Bishop of Rome when Paul reproued him Theo. It forceth not whether hee were or no. Peter as you pretende had his prerogatiue not from Rome but from Christ long before hee sawe Rome and therefore was in as full authoritie when Paul resisted him as when Nero martyred him and yet if their account bee true that were the first authours of his preferment to Rome hee was rebuked at Paules handes euen when hee was Bishoppe of Rome For Peter as Eusebius or some other in his name recordeth went to Rome and was Bishoppe there in the 44. yeare of Christ that is eleuen yeares after his passion Christ being put to death in the 33. yeare of his age
Rome complayning what the Arians had done at Alexandria requesting at his hands the true copie of those seuentie Canons neuer remembring howe fond and foolish a fable this would be when it shoulde come to skanning and howe substantially the Bishoppes of Aphrica went to worke when this title was first pretended Phi. Doth not Iulius in his Epistle to the East Bishops repeate 27. Canons of the Nicene Councell more than our copies haue sixe of them clearer for the Popes authoritie than that which Sozimus alleadged Theo. You come in with your decretals as if they were some worthie monuments But Sirs the more you forge the lesse you gaine All the decretals you haue will not counteruaile the reason which S. Austen and the rest make to Bonifacius Quis dubitet exemplaria esse verissima Nicenae Synodi quae de tam diuersis locis de nobilibus Graecis ecclesijs adlata comparata concordat Who can doubt those copies of the Nicene Councell to be most true which being brought from so many places from the noble Churches of Greece agree when they bee compared The letters of Marcus and Iulius framed in corners and founde at Rome light of credite and full of lies are not able to frustrate the great paynes and good meanes which the Bishops of Africa bestowed and vsed in searching the trueth They had their owne bookes which were many both in Greeke and Latine they had the very copie which Coecilianus Bishoppe of Carthage that was present and subscribed in the Councell of Nice brought with him from thence they had a faithful transcript from the Churches of Alexandria and Constantinople out of their originall recordes These three copies so many thousande miles asunder and euery one of them Authentike when they were brought together and compared did word for worde agree with themselues and with the bookes that were in euery mans priuate keeping If that be not enough Ruffinus that liued in Italie and wrate in the dayes of Theodosius the elder before this matter came in question published in his Latine historie to the eyes of all men the very same number and order of the Nicene Canons which the Councell of Africa followed Yea the Bishops of Rome themselues Bonifacius and Coelestinus to whom this answere was made neuer replied neuer vrged nor offered any mo Canons than these twentie which were sent from other places though the cause required and the time serued to bring forth their seuentie Canons as well for Sozimus discharge as their owne interest authoritie which was then not only doubted but also resisted Besides this your assertion of seuentie Canons what a peeuish and senselesse fable it is Howe coulde all the true copies of the Nicene Councell throughout the worlde bee consumed and destroyed within three score yeeres and no man mislike it no man perceiue it no man report it Or howe coulde fiftie Canons bee suddenly lost and euery where twentie left in faire and Authentike writings Why would the Arians for they must bee the doers of it wreake their malice on those Canons that did not touch them and spare the Nicene creede Epistle written to the Church of Alexandria which directly condemned their impietie Nay why did the church of Rome suffer those 50. Canons to perish that made most for her prerogatiue and kept these twentie safe which rather restraine than enlarge her authoritie Phi. Trust you not Athanasius that was present when the Canons were made Theo. I trust him well but I trust not your shuffeling in what you list vnder his name Your forged Athanasius is soone disproued For if Iulius were Bishop of Rome when the Councell of Nice was called as Sozomene Bede doe witnes how could Athanasius write to Marcus next before Iulius that the Canons of the Councell of Nice were burnt Were the Canons burnt trow you before they were made Againe though al men did not allow the decrees of the Nicene Councel yet whiles Constantine liued no man saith Sozomene durst openly and plainely refuse them much lesse burne them in a furious publike tumult And what if Athanasius were not then néere Aegypt when Marcus wrate this solemne Epistle will you neuer bee weaned from these foolish forgeries Marcus letter beareth date decimo calendas Nouembris Nepotiano Secundo Consulibus the 21. of October Nepotianus and Secundus being Consuls which was the later end of the 30. yere of Constantines raigne Nowe all that yeere was Athanasius kept from Aegypt at the Councel of Tyrus without returning home fled to Constantinople where he stayed till hee was banished into Fraunce Neither was there any such persecution in Aegypt that yere or any time before vnder Constantine as this Epistle doth specifie but a great while after vnder Constantius when Marcus was dead and rotten And to conclude if the copie which Athanasius brought with him from Nice were burnt by the Arians in his time as his letter to Marcus importeth howe coulde Cyril that came long after him find an Authentike copie in the same Church as his words inferre to the Councell of Africa Phi. Marcus Epistle might be suspected if Iulius letter did not affirme the same Theo. Iulius Epistle is a right paterne of your Romish recordes For there besides impudent forgerie you shall find wilfull periurie Phi. Why so Theo. Your counterfayte Iulius is not content to forge Canons but hee byndeth thē also with an othe Verū me dixisse testis est diuinitas god is my witnes that I speake trueth Phi. You should the rather beleeue him Theo. Beleeue him As though the right and true rescript of Iulius to the Synode of Antioche were not set downe by Athanasius himselfe in his seconde Apologie to the manifest detection of your shamelesse forging and forswearing Compare that letter with this and you will blush to see the Church of Rome so fowlely ouershot And yet were there no such thing extant this blind decretall doth conuict it selfe For it beareth date the first of Nouember Felicianus and his fellow being Consuls which was the very yere that Constantine the great died Now the councel of Antioch y◠deposed Athanasius to the which Iulius wrate was gathered by Constantius the fift yere after Constantines death and so this answere to the councel of Antioch was written fiue yeres before there was any such councel assembled Again Iulius himself sayth in his Epistle to those of Antioch that Athanasius stayed at Rome with him one whole yere sixe moneths expecting their presēce after they were cited by his first letters to shew the reason of their proceeding against Athanasius these two decretals of Iulius which you bring vs beare date iust 31. dayes asunder in which tune you can not go from Rome to Antioch returne with an answere except you get you wings And so notwithstanding your shifts deuises to cloke
but by deiecting and disgracing those that vtterly refused him as lewd light persons And this maketh you so falsly without al truth so boldly without al shame so desperately without all feare to belie both England Scotland as if our disorders in twentie yeres were mo than yours in a thousand and the treacheries treasons murders vilanies done in Scotland were the protestants doings which virulent impudent reproches vttered against two Christian Common weales without any maner or colour of truth shew what liquor boyleth in your hearts and what humour raigneth in your heades Phi. And what salt seasoneth your mouth when you raile at Rome so fast as you do Theo. If I report any thing of Rome which your own fellowes doe not witnes let it go for a slander but what proofe bring you that in Scotlande the professors of the Gospell murdered the kinges father or sought to destroy their Prince when he was yet in his mothers wombe Phi. Sure it is the kings father was horribly murdered amongst them Theo. Can you tel by whom Phi. I can not tel but he lost his life Theo. No doubt of that but who did the deed Phi. It was secretly done in the night season we know not by whom of likelyhood by enemies Theo. It could be no friendship to murder him in his bed neuer heard you A mans enemies shal be they of his owne houshold But since you know not the doer is it not mere malice in you to charge your enemies and not his with it especially those that did hazard their liues to reuenge his death Phi. A faire reuenge to displace their Queene for other mens faults Theo. If y◠Nobles of Scotland did any thing against their Queen which the lawes of that land did not warrant wee defend them not you were best obiect it to them they can answere for themselues Yet are you not ignorāt whom they deepely charge with the death of that Earle but I wil not meddle with other mens matters I returne to this land where you say you haue wrought great alteration of mindes throughout the whole Realme wonderfull increase of courage in all sortes not only to thinke well in heart but openly and boldly to prosesse their faith and religion and refuse all actes contrarie to the same Phi. And this haue we done only by the power of priesthood in spiritual silent and peaceable maner not with riots tumults or warlike concourse we haue done it as the Apostles other holy mē did in the primatiue church by trauels watchings fastings perils at the Portes perils in the Sea perils on the Land perils of open enemies perils of false brethrē feares of the laws feares of hurting our frinds feares for scandalising the weake by contumelies disgraces pouerties prisonmēts fetters dungeons racks deaths And this the omnipotent God because it is his owne worke enterprised by order and authoritie of his chiefe Minister in earth hath prospered exceedingly though it seemed at the beginning a thing hard or impossible you hauing so many yeres the lawes the sword the pulpits and al humane helps for you Theo. Neuer vaunt of your victories vnlesse they were greater Papists that before dissembled are now by your meanes encouraged to professe your religion against a day this was no such conquest The priuie report of a forraine power to be landed in this realme was enough to turne them al. For they which twentie yeres together perished their cōsciences to saue their goods would they now rather hazard their lands life which you threatned hinder that action which they long desired than shew themselues The rest of your conuerts be fearefull women hungrie craftesmen idle prentices seelie wenches and peeuish boyes for the most part voyd of all reason sense desirous of nouelties by nature and soone enticed to any thing al the religion you haue taught them is to name the catholik church as parats to pretend their cōsciēces when they lacke al vnderstāding of god godlines Such in some places for want of good order haue bin of late inueigled by you to mislike those with whō they liue to fansie that they neuer saw which was no masterie cōsidering the mildenes of our discipline the maner of your whispering the rudenes of those simple soules whom you peruerted Phi. We did nothing but in spiritual silent peaceable maner as the Apostles other holy men did in the primatiue Church Theo. We know you can cōmend your selues but a man may soone discerne the fierbrands of Rome from the disciples of Christ. Throckmortōs kalēder was the chiefest end of your running ouer which was to soūd whether your pretēded catholiks wold not back any such force as should be sent to inuade the land This no Apostle nor any other holy man in the primatiue Church did they neuer made religion a cloake for rebellion Phi. God is our witnes we knew no such thing when we were sent ouer Theo. But they which sent you knew what they did Phi. That was counsell to vs we are bound to obey our superiour that sent vs. Theo. To rebell against your Prince and to procure others to doe the like if the Pope commaund you Phi. We say not so Theo. But you must doe so Phi. Can you proue that Theo. We neede no plainer proofe than your silence For how say you will you take her maiestie for lawful and rightful Queene of this Realme notwithstanding the Pope depriue her Phi. You still aske mee that question Theo. Wee must still aske it till you answere it One woorde of your mouth woulde suffice vs and discharge you from all suspition which you would neuer refraine if it were not against you Phi. Remoue the daunger of your lawes and I will quickly tell you what I think Theo. That speach is enough to bewray your affection Our Lawes be not dangerous vnlesse you say the Pope may take the crowne from the Princes head licence her subiects to rebell against her which is the treason we charge you with Phi. Is that so trayterous a position that Popes may depose Princes Theo. That point you should either freely defend or flatly deny By that we shall see what the bent and drift was of your late perswading reconciling so many to the Church of Rome For if this be your doctrine that such as wil be Catholikes must obey the Pope deposing the prince then is it euident that you sow religion but intend to reape treason and make your first entrance with preaching that afterward you may prepare the people to rebelling Phi. This is your false surmise not our meaning Theo. Then answere mee What if the Pope publish a Bull to depriue the Queene which part will you teach the people to followe The Popes or the Queenes Phi. We will tell you that when the Pope doth attempt it Theo. Wel sayde Philander you play sure to
of the cause and we bring Tertullian not to commend Montanus error but to shewe what the Bishoppe of Rome did Phi. He beganne to like them but it tooke not effect Theo. Hee wrate letters of peace to the Montanists and sent them away which is enough to conuince that he erred though hee after relented from his former enterprise How Mercellinus Bishoppe of Rome sacrificed vnto Idols and denyed it when it was obiected to him and was after reproued by sufficient witnesse and condemned for it the Synod extant in your first booke of councels doth declare and Damasus writing the liues of his predecessours doth testifie the same Phi. Hee fell in persecution but he repented after and suffered for Christ as Peter did Theo. And therefore the Bishoppe of Rome may fall from the faith for so did Peter and Marcellinus but whether he shal be renewed by repentance as they were that is neither knowne to you nor beleeued of vs. Phi. We care not if they fall so they rise againe Theo. We proue they may fal Proue you they shall not choose but rise againe Phi. They haue all done so that yet are mentioned and so did Liberius whō I knowe you will name next although wee may worthily doubt whether euer hee fell or no. Theo. You and your fellowes make a doubt of it but I see no reason why you should For it is confirmed by many sounde and sufficient witnesses who both for the time when and place where they liued did and might best know the trueth of that matter Phi. Ruffinus doubteth of it Theodoretus denyeth it and Socrates inclineth rather to vs than otherwise Theo. Ruffinus sayth whether it were so or no pro certo compertum non habeo I know not for a certaintie Socrates maketh neither with it nor against it but passeth it ouer with silence And so doth Theodorete onely hee sayth the Emperour at the supplication of the Gentlewomen of Rome Flecti se passus iussit optimum quidem Liberium de exilio reuocari Suffering him self to be intreated commaunded the good bishop Liberius to bee called from banishment But this excludeth not his subscription before hee receiued his place which Sozomene writeth The Emperour at the intercession of the West Bishoppes recalleth Liberius from Beroea whither hee was banished and assembling the Bishoppes that were in his tents compelleth him to confesse the sonne of God not to bee of the same substance with his father Basilius Eustathius and Eleusius induced Liberius to consent by this meanes that some vnder the colour of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did labour secretly to confirme heresie When this was done the Emperour gaue him leaue to go to his Bishopricke Phi. Will you beleeue Sozomene before the rest that report no such thing Theo. Their silence doth not preiudice his Storie And yet Sozomene is not the first author of this report Athanasius who liued in the same age with Liberius and for whose cause Liberius was banished therefore woulde say no more than truth by him witnesseth no lesse Liberius post exactum in exilio biennium inflexus est minisque mortis ad subscriptionem inductus est Liberius after two yeres spent in banishment inclined by feare of death was induced to subscribe Damasus that was Bishoppe of Rome next after Liberius and therfore could not be ignorant of the trueth and woulde not belie his owne See saith of him Ingressus Liberius in vrbem Roman◠4. nonas Augusti consensit Constantio haeretico Non tamen rebaptizatus est sed consensum praebuit Liberius entering the citie of Rome the 4. of the nones of August consented to Constantius the heretike He was not rebaptized but hee gaue his consent Hierom brought vp at Rome in the time of Liberius and after so neere Damasus that hee was his right hand in answering all Synodal consultations and in that respect had often and easie accesse to the Recordes and monuments of the Church of Rome writeth of Fortunatianus Bishoppe of Aquileia In hoc habetur detestabilis quod Liberium Romanae vrbis Episcopum pro fide ad exilium pergentē primus solicitauit ac fregit ad subscriptionem hareseos compulit In this he is coūted detestable that he first attempted Liberius the Bishoppe of Rome going into banishment for the fayth and preuayled with him and gate him to subscribe to the Arrian heresie In his addition to Eusebius Chronicle hee saith as much Liberius taedi◠victus exilij in haereticam prauitatem subscribens Romā quasi victor intrauerat Liberius wearied with his banishment and subscribing to hereticall prauitie had entered Rome as a conquerour We aske not what authoritie you haue to counteruaile these wee knowe you haue none but what reason haue you to resist these Phi. The rest agree not with them Theo. Omission in one writer is no good argument against an other foure affirme it and euery one of thē elder and likelier to come by the trueth than Theodorete yet Theodorete doth not gainsay but only ouerskip the fact If therefore to claw the Bishoppe of Rome you refuse the consent of Athanasius Hierom Damasus and Sozomene you doe but discouer your follie to the wiser sort and hazard your credite with the simple If you receiue their testimonie touching this fact then is there no doubt but the Bishop of Rome subscribed vnto Arianisme and whether hee repented or no wee may worthily doubt since your owne Stories auouch the contrarie Phi. Which of our Stories Theo. Martinus Polonus Vincentius and others Martinus saith Constantius recalled Liberius from banishment because he had agreed to him and to the Arians and placed him againe in his Seate and so vnhappie Liberius held the Church of Peter sixe yeeres by violence then was the persecution great in the citie in so much that the Clergie men which were against Liberius were Martyred then also Eusebius a Priest suffered death for declaring Liberius to be an heretike And Damasus when he came to the Bishoppe of Rome next after Liberius with open voyce condemned Liberius and all his acts Phi. I beleeue neither Vincentius nor Martinus in this case Theo. Your not beleeuing them sheweth your selfe to be partial not their report to be false Phi. Liberius surely continued not an Arrian Theo. That he subscribed to the Arrians we proue that he recanted his subscription you can not proue Phi. No doubt he did it though it bee not written Theo. So you presume though you want all proofe for it Phi. Neuer Bishoppe of Rome died an heretike Theo. What did Honorius whom the sixt generall Councell condemned and accursed after his death for heresie Phi. That Councel is shamefully corrupted by the Grecians Theo. If the Grecians copies did differ from yours you had some reason to charge thē with corruption but since your copies confesse the same howe could the Grecians inuade your libraries without your knowledge and raze
such as be worthie Phi. No. Theo. Then do you giue the same power to the Pope which God claimeth to him-selfe to displace the wicked from their thrones Phi. But vnder God Theo. If your holy father do this without a particular and precise warrant from God hee doth it not vnder God but as well as God that which is in this case done without God is against God But on with your example of Samuel Saul was deposed of his kingdome by Gods appointment and sentence which Samuel pronounced vnto Saul from the mouth of God Ergo what Phi. Ergo king Saul was deposed Theo. Grant he were by whom was it done by God or by Samuel Phi. God prescribed the sentence but Samuel pronounced it Theo. In whose name did Samuel speake in Gods or his own Phi. In Gods Theo. Said he more than God commaunded him Phi. I thinke not Theo. Then God spake the worde and God gaue the iudgement against Saul only Samuel was sent to tell Saul so much that was sore against Samuels will as appeareth by his mourning for Saul which God reproued in him And now to turn your own exāple on your own head I trust God hath as much right to depose Princes as the Pope Phi. What then The. Did all Israel Iudah sinne in obeying Saul so many yeares after hee was deposed by God and an other annointed in his place Phi. They did it for feare because Saul kept the kingdom by tyrannical force notwithstanding his deposition Theo. Did Dauid sinne in seruing Saul long after himselfe was annointed Phi. He durst not doe otherwise Theo. When Dauid had Saul alone in the caue and might haue slain him did he well to spare him Phi. He might lawfully haue killed him as S. Augustine deduceth but he would not Theo. Of that anon in the meane time was it a lie in Dauid to call him his master and the Lords annointed after his deposition Phi. He called him so in respect he had bin so though presently he were not so Theo. Nay Dauid affirmed y◠at that present he was so The Lord saith Dauid keepe me from laying mine hand on him For he is the Lords annointed And after shewing that this was his dutie and not his curtesie when he founde him asleepe one of his Captaines would haue slain him he said Destroy him not for who can lay his hand on the Lords annointed be giltles Where Dauid maketh it no fauor to spare him but a sin to touch him And to the messenger that brought him news of Sauls death How wast thou not afraide saith Dauid to put foorth thine hand to destroy the annointed of the Lord And commaunding the fellow to bee thrust through Thy blood saith hee bee vpon thine owne head for thine own mouth hath witnessed against thee saying I haue slaine the Lords annointed If all Israel obeyed Saul notwithstanding the sentence of God pronounced against him if Dauid himselfe after his annointing serued honored Saul as his master called counted him the Lords annointed to the houre of his death abhorring it as a sinne in himselfe to lay hands on him seuerely punishing it in an other that did it How can you warrant rebellion against Princes or make it a meritorious act to murder them whom the Pope without all authoritie frō God presumeth to displace Phi. Dauid might lawfully haue killed Saul as S. Austen sheweth against Adamātius but he would not The. The words of Dauid are plain to the cōtrary speaking of Saul himselfe Who can lay his hand saith he on the Lordes annointed be guiltles He could not be guilty but of a sinne it had bin therfore no lawful but a sinful deed for any man Dauid himselfe not excepted to haue killed Saul in respect he then was so continued till he died The Lordes annointed Phi. S. Augustine saith Dauid might haue killed Saul without feare His words be Dauid had his enemie persecutour king Saul in his power to do with him what hee woulde and hee chose rather to spare him than to kill him Hee was not commaunded to kill him neither was hee prohibited Imo etiam diuinitus audierat se impunè facere quicquid vellet inimico Yea rather hee had hearde at Gods mouth that hee might freelie handle an enemie how he would and yet so great authoritie hee conuerted to curtesie Theo. Adimantus helde opinion that the olde Testament was contrarie to the newe because the Lawe as hee thought permitted reuenge and allowed men to kill their enimies where the Gospell commaundeth vs to praie for our enimies and to loue them as the wordes of our Sauiour doe witnesse This obiection Sainct Augustine refelleth by shewing that the killing of the Nations which God commaunded proceeded of loue not of hatred and that the iust of the olde Testament loued and fauoured their enimies when it was expedient for them so to do as namely Dauid that spared king Saul his enimie and persecutour though he might easilie haue slaine him Philand Sainct Augustines worde is impunè hee might freely haue doone what hee woulde to him Theoph. Whether that were Sainct Augustines perswasion or an aduauntage taken vppon Adimantus assertion the place it selfe doeth not expresse of the twaine I thinke the later to bee the truer For this was Adimantus erronious position that the Lawe licenced the Iewes to kill their enimies and you may not well charge Sainct Augustine there-with least you bring him againe within the compasse of the Manichees errour Sure it is Sainct Augustine doeth not grounde his speech on this that Saul was deposed and therefore might haue iustly beene destroyed which is our case but on the permission of reuenge which the Lawe of Moses seemed to graunt Dauid towarde his enimie as well as all others towardes their enimies marie that was no right exposition but a misconstruction of the Lawe sufficient to refute Adimantus because it was his owne but not rashly to bee fathered on Sainct Augustine in respect of his learning and credit otherwise in the church of God For the lawe of God gaue no man leaue to kill his enimie but that precept was to bee referred to the Magistrate to whome God gaue the sworde lawfully to kill such as were by his Lawe adiudged to die which our Sauiour doth not prohibite in the new Testament but reproueth the Iewes for hauing this false conceit of Gods lawe that euery priuate person might hate his enimies and loue his neighbours they corruptly expounding neighbours for friendes and acquaintance and assureth them that to loue their enimies and pray for their persecutors which hee then prescribed them was no new addition but the ancient and true intention of Gods law These wordes then Dauid had heard by the Lawe of God for speciall reuelation from God to Dauid Sainct Augustine knewe none that hee might doe freely what hee would to an enimie are assumed
Caluinistes furie phrensie mutinie I know not what You may pursue depose murther Princes when the Bishop of Rome biddeth you that without breach of dutie law or cōscience to God or man as you vaunt though neither life nor limme of yours be touched wee may not so much as beseech Princes that we may be vsed like subiects not like slaues like men not like beasts that we may bee conuented by lawes before iudges not murthered in corners by inquisitours wee may not so much as hide our heades nor pull our neckes out of the greedie iawes of that Romish wolfe but the fome of your vncleane mouth is ready to call vs by al the names you can deuise Howbeit looke well to your selues it is not enough for you to haue lawes of your owne making to licence you to beare armes against your Prince you must haue Gods law for your warrant or else you come within the compasse of heinous and horrible rebellion For you doe not defend your selues but impugne your Prince you seeke not the freedom of your religion but the subuersion of other mens estates you do not take armes that your condition may be tolerable but that her highnes shoulde be no Prince you saue not your own liues but intend her death These shamefull and manifest treasons against the law of God nature and nations you smooth with a few faint colours and publish them to the whole world for iust honorable and godly warres But deceiue not your selues the breath of your mouthes may not ouerbeare the lawes of God states of men You must shew some better warrant than the Popes decrees or else your rising in armes against your Prince though the Bishoppe of Rome back and abet you with all his Buls and Decretals is an vnlawful irreligious and wicked rebellion Phi. Whosoeuer seeketh not after the Lord God of Israell let him bee slaine saide king Asa admonished by Azaria the Prophet from the highest to the lowest without exception And all the people and many that followed him and fled to him out of Israel from the schisme there did sweare and vowe them-selues in the quarrell of the God of their forefathers And they prospered and deposed Queene Maáchah Mother to Asa for Apostasie and for worshipping the venereous God called Priapus Theo. Doth the example of king Asa forcing his Subiectes with an othe and vnder paine of death to seeke after the Lorde God of Israel serue you to proue that Subiectes may assault their king and oppresse him with armes Will this goe for a reason with you The Magistrate may vse the sworde and put offendours to death ergo the Subiect may vse the same and that against his Prince Sure if you make such collections wee shall mistrust rebellion hath so possessed your braynes that reason hath no place in you Phi. This example proueth that heretikes may be deposed and put to death Theo. But by whom By the Prince or the people Phi. The king I grant was the doer Theo. Then seeke farther for your conspiracies against kinges this example will do you no good Phi. The people that fledde to him out of Israel from the schisme there did sweare and vowe themselues in the same quarrell with the king of Iudah Theo. The straungers that fledde out of Israell for their conscience sake tooke an oth to serue the same God but not to beare armes against their owne countrie Phi. They prospered and deposed Queene Maáchah mother to Asa for Apostasie and for worshipping the venereous God Priapus Theo. You inlarge the number where you should not which by your leaue is a plaine corruption of the Scripture The text is And king Asa deposed Maáchah his mother from her regēcie because she had made an idoll And againe not they but he deposed Maáchah his mother from her estate because she had made an idol The Queene mother was remoued from her honor dignitie by the king her sonne for her idolatrie but Asa did not put her to death though that were the summe of the oth which the king and the rest tooke and he that did this deede was the true king of Iudah and in full possession of the crowne many yeares before and suffered his mother not in her owne right but of reuerence curtesie towards her to inioy some part of her former degree and dignitie from the which he lawfully might and worthily did put her when shee fell to erecting and worshipping Idols Phi. The text noteth not howe long hee was king before hee deposed his mother Theo. After the death of Abiah Asa his sonne saieth the Scripture raigned in his steede in whose dayes the Land was quiet tenne yeares Then came the AEthiopians out against him with an huge hie host those hee ouerthrew And at his returne the Prophet Azariah met him and incouraged him to goe forwarde in the reformation of the Lande which hee perfourmed in all the Cities of Iudah and Beniamin and gathered all the people of the Lande togither in the fifteenth yeare of his raigne where this oth was taken and paine appointed before his mother was deposed So that he not shee was rightfull Gouernour of Iudah and that which shee lost was either the honour and dignitie which otherwise did appertaine to so great a State as the kinges mother or else that portion of the Lande which was assigned to her to rule vnder the king in respect of her dowrie Howsoeuer the kingdome shee had not and therefore the crowne she lost not neither finde you here a Prince deposed by his subiectes but a Prince remouing her that in nature was his mother in condition his subiect from that authoritie or dignitie choose you whether which before of fauor not of duety he suffered her to haue Phi. For that case also in Deuteronomie expresse charge was giuen to slea all false Prophetes and whosoeuer should auert the people from the true worship of God induce them to receiue straunge Gods and newe religions and to destroie all their followers were they neuer so neere vs by nature And in the same place that if anie Citie shoulde reuolt from the receiued and prescribed worship of God begin to admit new religions it should be vtterly wasted by fire and sword Theo. The commaundement in Deuteronomie toucheth not heretiks but manifest Apostataes such as cleane forsooke the verie name and outward profession of God and serued straunge and new gods and the rigour of this precept I meane the punishment doeth not binde vs that are vnder the Gospell by the iudgement of the best learned that euer taught in the church of Christ. For by the same law of God blasphemers adulterers witches strikers and cursers of Parentes should die Which penalties your owne church did neuer execute nor any christian Magistrate that euer wee reade of Touching heretikes you heard Sainct Augustines opinion before that it neuer pleased any good man in the
West Empire Phi. Might the people of Rome forsake the Grecians that bare the sworde Theo. Looke you to that You may proue them rebelles if you bee so disposed you can not proue the Bishoppe of Rome to be the deposer of Princes That which was done had the common consent was the publike Act of the Romane state when there was no disagreement in religion between them Irene but a dislike for lacke of conuenient aide in their distresses as some affirme or else a discontentment to see that furious woman vsurpe the imperial dignitie and no lawfull successour left to vindicate the same out of her hand as others seeme to saie What-soeuer the cause was that mooued the Romanes the Empire amongest the Grecians at that time went neither by succession nor election but they were fallen to cutting of throates and hee that was mightiest tooke the sworde Iustinian the yonger was depriued of the Empire and banished and his nose cutte off by Leo the seconde and Leo the seconde thrust from the throne and imprisoned by Tiberius the thirde Against them both when Iustinian had preuailed and recouered his crowne and put them to death Philippicus in open fielde slue Iustinian and gat his place but kept it not long For Arthemius the next yeare after tooke from him the Scepter and both his eyes Theodosius sawe that and hee sette Arthemius besides the stoole and with maine force of armes made him of a Prince a poore Priest and was him-selfe within one yeare serued of the same sauce by Leo the thirde This wretched tumbling for the Empire by rebellion and murder might prouoke the Romanes to giue eare to the Popes priuate whisperings and when they saw Constantine the sixt the last of Leoes line depriued both of his kingdome and eyesight by his owne mother to forsake her as well as the Grecians did after depriue her and close her in an Abbay but that I esteeme not so long as the Pope by the power of his keyes did not diuide the empire for defect in religion as you vainlie auouch Phi. Many writers witnesse with vs that the Bishop of Rome translated the Empire Theo. Wee doe not denie but the Bishop as a principall part of the citie and policie of Rome had a stroke therein and gained well thereby but that he did it by his Priestly power as Peters successour and not rather the people and the Bishop ioyning togither with their common aduise and authoritie as a politike state that you shall neuer proue Phi. What had the people to doe with translating the Empire Theo. Nay what had the Pope to do with disposing the temporall sworde The Romane state and Common-wealth had as good right to dispose the Romane Empire as all other christian heathen kingdoms and countries had to settle the sword and scepter that raigned ouer them And since all other nations once members of the Romane Empire were suffered to plant those seuerall formes of regiment which they best liked and when the right heires failed to elect their own Gouernours I see no cause why the Romanes might not prouide for themselues as well as other Realmes had done before them specially if the purportes of your Stories be true that they were neglected by the Grecians whē they were besieged by the Lombardes and the scepter at Constantinople wēt not by discent or succession but by violent and wicked inuasion and sedition but that the Bishop of Rome by his Priestly keyes or Apostolike power did or might dispose the Empire that we denie And if any of your side to flatter the Pope make report that he did it of his absolute power and iudiciall authoritie wee little esteeme such stragglers as hauing the generall consent of your best authours and chiefest pillours for the contrarie Phi. The chiefest of our side are against the most of your assertions You holde opinion that Leo the thirde was not depriued of all his temporalities within Italie by Gregorie the second and yet Platina and Nauclerus say that Gregorie put him Imperio simul communione fidelium both from his Empire from the communion of the faithful Theo. This they say of Gregorie the thirde not of Gregorie the 2. as you do but it can be true of neither Nauclerus by and by reciteth Epistle of Gregorie the thirde written the same yeare that Leo the Emperor died where he calleth him Dominū pijssimum Augustū Leonē most religious Lord Leo the Emperour Sabellicus leaueth out the word imperio as vnlikely to be true saith that Gregorie the thirde magno Cleri populique consensu piorum communione priuat put the Emperour Leo frō the communion with the consent and liking of the clergie and laitie Blondus holdeth hardly that Gregorie the third was not Bishop of Rome whiles Leo the thirde had the Empire Againe the Empire could not be translated in the time of Leo but Constantine his sonne must likewise lose the same his father taking him into the societie of the crowne the fourth yeare of his empire and writing seuen where Constantine wrote foure as appeareth by the letter of Gregorie the seconde to the Germanes and Bonifacius othe and contestation before the same Gregory Now to Constantine the sonne of Leo did the Bishop of Rome sende both letters and Legates for helpe against Aistulphus when he besieged Rome as to the right owner protectour and Emperour of that citie And therefore it must needs be false that Platina saith the tutele of the church was remoued from the Emperors of Cōstantinople to others by this Gregorie in the raign of Leo for so much as Blondus Sabellicus and Nauclerus witnesse the defence of the citie against the Lombardes was craued at Constantines handes by those whom Platina placeth after Gregorie And the chiefest reason which hee giueth of this transferring the defence of the church is most false Gregorie deriued it to others sayeth hee maximè quod vrbem regiā aegrè Leo à Saracenis tutaretur chiefly because Leo was hardlie able to defende his owne citie of Constantinople from Saracens whereas the Saracens besieged not Constantinople but the first yeare of Leo before his edict against Images came foorth and Luitprandus besieged Rome not Interim as Platina sayeth but a long time after and the Bishoppe of Rome sent first for helpe into Fraunce not when Luitprandus but when Aistulphus besieged him and then hee sent not vnto Charles as Platina woulde haue it but to Pipine the father of Charles with many such errours which conuince Platina to bee a verie indiligent and insufficient writer in this point Nauclerus contented him-selfe with the wordes of Platina searched no farther which Sabellicus perceiued to bee so repugnaunt to the course of other Stories that hee sayeth Neque tempora legentibus neque rerum ordo constare liquid◠potest It is hard for the reader to distinguish either the times
I leaue to the iudgement of the christian Reader Your catalogue of the Germane Emperours that insueth As of Frederike the first Frederike the second Otho the fift Lewes the thirde Lewes the fourth and Henrie the thirde or as some call him the fourth maketh shew to the simple but doth you no good The eldest of these that were offered depriuation by the Pope is Henrie the fourth whom Gregorie the seuenth a thowsand threescore and six yeares after Christ prouoked with that iniurie but to his owne vtter ouerthrow You recken Lewes the thirde and Lewes the fourth for Princes depriued of their Empires by the Bishoppe of Rome but reason were you did first tell vs whom you meane and how you proue it Marianus Scotus and they that follow him make Lewes the third to be Lodouicus Balbus to whom Pope Iohn fled annointed him king of the Romanes when the Nobles of Rome inclined rather to Charles the thirde and gaue him possession of the citie who was after annointed by Pope Iohn at his returne Lodouike the thirde liuing skant two yeares after his coronation Martinus Polonus numbreth him for Lewes the third that was next after Arnulphus but whether it were Lodouike the sonne of Arnulphus or an other of that name the sonne of Boso he doth not determine onely he saith Berengarius caught him at Verona and recouered the Empire which Blondus and Marianus report of Lodouike the sonne of Boso and not of Lodouike the sonne of Arnulphus as Platina doth In this vncertaintie of your Stories you might haue done wel to haue distinguished the person pointed out your author you now driue vs to suspect that you go about to haue them deposed that were neuer crowned Of Lodouike the sonne of Arnulphus Martinus saith Hee succeeded his father sed ad coronam Imperij non peruenit but hee neuer was crowned Emperour And Platina confesseth the same In the place of Arnulphus we read that Lodouike was made Emperour quem tamen nusquam habuisse imperij Coronam accepimus of whom we do not finde that euer hee had the Crowne of the Empire If hee neuer receiued the Crowne how could hee bee deposed from the Crowne Phi. Perhappes the Pope kept him from it Theo. Perhappes you can not tell but thinke you that Princes will loose their Crownes for your perhappes Phi. He neuer had it Theo. But had he any wrong to bee kept from it Phi. Howe thinke you of that Theo. Your proofes bee verie mightie that must depende on my thoughtes Phi. Wee brought in these instances as it were by the way to let you see what stoare of examples wee had Theo. Then take them out of the way for they do but hinder your cause When Charles the thirde otherwise called Carolus Crassus grewe both sicke and lunatike the Nobles of Germanie cleane forsooke him and choose Arnulphus which as some say was the sonne of Charlemaine but as Blondus affirmeth was obscurissimo natus loco a man very basely borne and not of Charles line by reason whereof the kingdomes which before were subiect to Charles now as destitute of a right heire beganne to fall in sunder on euerie side to choose kinges of themselues Then Fraunce tooke Charles the childe cognamed Simple and when his simplicitie displeased them they set Otho the sonne of Robert Duke of Saxonie in his place At the same time the people of Italy meaning to haue a king of their own could not agree on the matter but chose some Berengarius and others Guido and so had two kinges in Italy both calling and bearing them-selues as Emperours Besides these defections Arnulphus had long and sharpe warres with Rodolph that proclaimed him-selfe king of Prouince and with the Nortmanes that ranged in many partes of Fraunce and Germanie So that the Pope did not depose Lewes the thirde as you would insinuate but Italie seeing the line of Charles to bee expired thought to make an Emperour of their owne bowels and to keepe off straungers that before had the rule ouer them and so they did for threescore yeares till barbarous inuasions and domesticall seditions and disorders made them glad to send to Otho the great and to receiue him for their Emperor and to yeelde to a forme of electing to the Empire by certaine Bishops and Princes of Germanie which hath indured vntil this present This your own Stories abundantly confirme saue that some write of Arnulphus that he marched with his armie through the middest of Italy and tooke Rome and caused him-selfe to bee crowned Emperour as Regino sayth who then liued by Formosus the Bishoppe of Rome which Blondus doth skant beleeue Howsoeuer that were they all agree that Berengarius and Guido were chosen kinges of Italie when Arnulphus was first aduaunced to Charles his place Blondus saieth Arnulpho apud Francos in Imperatorem creato Romani caeteri Itali nullum ab imperatore nouo dissidijs Regni Franciae implicito auxilium aduersus rebelles Longobardos affuturum intelligentes Berengarium Foronâ—liensem Ducem Roma oriundum crearunt Imperatorem Arnulphus being chosen Emperour by the Germanes the Romanes and Italians perceiuing they might looke for no helpe against the rebellious Lombards from that new Emperor hauing his hands ful of the dissentioÌ„s of his own kingdom created Berengarius the duke of Frioli a Romane their emperor Neither yet did they so wel agree in that electioÌ„ but that other chose Guido the Duke of Spoletum to be king of Italie Otho Frisingensis maketh the same report Charles the next yeare after hee was deposed died From that time to Otho wee finde the regiment at Rome verie confused For after the death of Charles which raigned sixe yeares and ledde a priuate life the seuenth yeare the Empire was rent in many partes euery Prouince desirous to haue a seuerall king onely Arnolfus had the greatest share Therefore the Italians make themselues two kinges Berengarius Duke of Friault and Guido Duke of Spoletum Of the which Berengarius chased out of his couÌ„try by Guido â—led for succour to Arnolfus You can not proue hence that Arnulphus or Lewes his sonne were depriued by the Pope but only that the Romanes made an other defection from the Empire who after they had once tasted the sweetnesse that came by cutting the empire in peeces for where before they were suppliaÌ„ts subiects now by the larges of Pipine they were Lords of halfe Italie by their willes could neuer haue rested And though the Germanes and Italians differ in their reckonings the Germanes accounting Berengarius and those that succeeded him vntil Otho the great for vsurpers and contrary-wise the Italians accepting them for their naturall and true Emperours Yet that is no cause for you to auouch that the Pope deposed any of them For put the case either way that the Germanes were lawfully excluded as hauing no right or wrongfully debarred of their
writer witnesseth who also bringeth three reportes of his death one that hee fell mad and slue himselfe an other that in hunting he was cast off his horse and torne of dogges the thirde that wandering into a straunge Countrie he became a skullin in a certaine monasterie and there in repentance ended his life Phi. If his ende were so straunge his life coulde not bee good Theo. I commend not his life if it be true that Cromerus writeth of him I rather acknowledge the iust iudgement of God in taking vengeance of his sinnes Phi. Why doe you not acknowledge the like in his deposition Theoph. Because the Pope is not God to whom the punishing of Princes sinnes doeth rightly belong Phi. Would you that Princes should kill Bishops at the verie Altar for doing their duties and yet goe free Theo. As if God were not both as sincere and seuere a iudge as the Pope Phi. Who doubteth of that Theo. Then shall they not goe free that sinne against his lawe bee they Princes or others Phi. I speake of the meane time before that day come wherein hee shall iudge Theo. And in the meane time which you speake of God mightily punisheth all sortes and states though not by the Pope Phi. He punisheth by diseases and straunge kinde of deathes as hee seeth cause but yet good Lawes must be made and maintained by men for the repressing of vice amongst men Theo. Uerie true but those lawes must bee made by Princes and not by Popes Bishops haue not to do with the sworde which God hath giuen vnto Princes for the punishment of euill doers Phi. And what if Princes them-selues be the doers of euill who shall punish them Theo. Euerie soule must bee subiected to them and they to God They beare the sworde ouer others not others ouer them Besides them or aboue them no man beareth the sworde by Gods appointment Phi. The keyes are aboue the sworde Theo. The keyes open and shutte the kingdome of God they touch not the bodies nor inheritances of priuate men much lesse of Princes Onely the sworde is corporally to compell and punish which is not the Priestes but the Princes charge as I haue often shewed Phi. To let Princes doe what they will without feare of punishment is the next way to ouerthrow common-wealthes Theo. What kingdom can you shewe wherein it hath beene otherwise Saul willed Doeg in his presence to â—lea fourescore and fiue of the Lordes Priestes and hee smote their citie with the edge of the sworde both men women children and sucklinges Did Abiathar the high Priestes sonne that fledde and escaped depriue Saul of his kingdome or did Dauid for whose cause they were slain when shortly after hee had Saul in his power to doe with him as hee woulde seeke the kings life or suffer his men to take it that were readie to doe it Dauid when he was king defloured Bethsabe and caused her husbande to be murdered Did therefore any Priest or Prophet in all his Realme offer to depose him or did Absolon well to conspire against him Achab ioyned with Iesabel in putting Naboth to death and killing the Lords Prophets Did Elias depriue him or incite his subiectes to forsake him Herod beheaded Iohn Baptist and likewise Iames and apprehended Peter with a purpose to sende him after but that hee was deliuered by an Angell did Peter therefore take vengeance on Herode which hee might haue done with a worde as well as on Ananias or did he leaue him to the iudgement of God which shortly after insued with an horrible plague The tyrantes of all ages and vices of all princes both before the comming of our Sauiour and since haue they beene punished by Priestes as you woulde haue it or else haue they beene reserued to Gods tribunals as we affirme Phi. Some haue beene punished by Priestes though not all Theoph. Shew but one prince for fiue thowsand yeares since the first foundation of the earth that was iudicially cited examined corrected by a priest til Hildebrand began this new president If any princes were during all that time repressed it was done by their own states realms that for their extreme tyranny priests alwaies refrained those attempts and neuer thought it any part of their vocatioÌ„ to medle with the changing and altering of kingdoms Phi. It is a better readier way to reforme princes to subiect them to the tribunall of one godly Bishop as we do than to leaue them in thraldome to popular tumults and mutinies as you do Theo. We leaue them in thraldom to none but only to God and to serue him is no thraldome but an honorable and princely liberty Yet if princes were to choose their iudges among men they were farre better referre themselues to the generall consent of their Nobles commons at home than hold their scepters at the pleasures of disdainful seditious Popes which seeke to dishonor their persons impouerish their Realmes Phi. You speake this of spite Theo. Your own examples wil proue it a truth How dealt Adrian the fourth and Alexander the third with Frederike the first a wise valiaunt and vertuous prince Did not Adrian receiue a great summe of mony to excommunicate the Emperor the stomack which the pope tooke against the prince grew it not vpon these causes for that the Emperor in his letters put his own name before the Popes and required homage fealty of the Bishops for their temporalities and would not suffer the Cardinals to pray vpon the churches of Germany Did not the Cardinals conspire bind themselues with an oth that they would neuer choose any to be Pope but one that should be an opposite to this Emperor And when AlexaÌ„der the third was shuffled in by that faction against Victor did he not twise refuse to haue the matter discussed by councel and stirred vp the kings of Scicily France and the states of Venice against the Emperour and caused all the cities countries of Italie to rebell against him and hauing taken his thirde sonne prisoner would hee restore him or make peace with the father til in presence of al the people at the dore of S. Marks church in Venice the prince had cast his body flat on the ground the pope setting his foote on the Emperors neck had auanced himself with that part of the Psalme which saith Thou shalt walke vpoÌ„ the aspe the basilisk and shalt tread the lion and dragon vnder thy feete The parts that were plaied by the Bishops of Rome with Frederike the second Lodouik of Bauaria king Iohn of this Lande and Lewes the 12. of that name king of France which are your own examples if I should largely pursue theÌ„ a whole volume would not suffice them I wil therfore rip vp so much only as shal let the reader see with what cunning these princes were wearied with what pride they
purpose Phi. Many you know report for vs that Charles and his councell condemned the breakers of images and a number of your owne side confesse the same Theo. In stories we must not respect the number vehemencie but the antiquitie and sinceritie of the authors Two hundreth that liued long after were not acquainted with the deedes themselues can not counteruaile two that liued in the same age and had the full perusing of their actes Againe your later writers were all addicted to images and therefore they would not acknowlege that euer the councell of Franckford condemned the councell of Nice for adoring images Lastly it is not altogether a lie when they say the councell of Franckford refused the councell of Constantinople For where the councell of Constantinople said it was idolatrie to haue them and the councell of Nice defined it lawfull to worship them the councell of Franckford as Hincmarus confesseth liked neither but held it a thing indifferent to haue them adiudged it a meere impiety to worship them Phi Then hauing of images you graunt was catholike though the worshipping of them in some places were not so taken Theo. The hauing of images was neuer catholike and the worshipping of them was euer wicked by the iudgement of Christes church Phi. At this time the West church did not gainesay the hauing of them Theo. The West church at this time vsed them only as ornamentes and monumentes for the ruder sort to learne the liues and deathes of ancient vndoubted Martyrs but if you forget not your selfe you bee 800. yeres too short of catholik euen then by the churches of EnglaÌ„d France Spaine and Germanie was the worshipping of images detested and refuted as contrary to the christian faith Phi. By worshipping and adoring of images we doe not meane that godly honor should be giuen to them but only a kinde of external dutie reuerence with the gesture of the body as kneeling kissing censing religious holding vp of eyes and handes before them with such like signes of outwarde submission Theo. Neither do I thinke that Adrian the Bishop of Rome or the Grecians were so blasâ—hemous brutish idolaters that they decreed diuine honor to dead sensles stocks though your SchoolemeÌ„ not long before our age came to that grosse â—ilâ—hy doctrine salued it with a vaine translatioÌ„ of the honor that was done to the image as passing from the image to the principall it selfe represented by the image But the Grecians I thinke ment an externall regard reuerence such as is giuen to the sacred vessels bookes elementes that are vsed in baptisme at the Lords Supper For those be their owne comparisons though their words be adoration veneration yet that externall corporall honor giuen to images the West Bishops abhorred as neither catholike nor christiaÌ„ and the church of Christ long before them condemned as hereticall Gregory the first 200. yeares before Charles called the councel of FraÌ„ckford thought it not amisse to haue painted histories suffred in the church but in no wise the pictures to be worshipped Your brotherhood saith he to Serenus Bishop of Massilia seeing certaine worshippers of images brake the said images and cast theÌ„ out of the church The zeale which you had that nothing made with hands should be worshipped we praise but we thinke you should not haue broken those images For painting is therefore vsed in churches that they which are vnlearned may by sight read that in the walles which in bookes they caÌ„not Your brotherhood should therefore haue spared the breaking of theÌ„ yet restrained the people froÌ„ worshipping them that the rude might haue had how to come by the knowledge of the story yet the people not sinne in worshipping the picture Painted stories Gregory thought might be tolerated in the church for the simple to learne the deathes and martyrdoms of many Saints which in bookes they could not but as for worshipping them he confesseth the people should sinne in doing it and the Bishop did well in keeping them from it And treating in an other place of the same matter he saith The children of the church now disperced are to be called togither and taught by the testimonies of the sacred scriptures that nothing made with hands may be worshipped And so concludeth adoration of images by all meanes auoide S. Ambrose speaking of that crosse on which Christ was crucified saith Helena found the title worshipped the king not the wood surely for that is the error of the Gentiles and vanitie of the wicked S. Augustine requiring the Mâ—nichees to shew what one thing they could mislike in the catholik church Bring me not saith he such christians as either knowe not or keepe not the force of their profession Rake not after the rude sort which euen in true religion are intangled with superstition My selfe know many that are worshippers of tombes and pictures I warne you that you cease to speake euill of the catholike church by carping these mens maners whome the church her selfe condemneth and seeketh euery day to correct theÌ„ as vngracious children Marcellina is reckoned and detested as an heretike by Ireneus Epiphanius and Augustine for hauing the images of Christ and Paul in her closet and setting garlandes on their heades and burning incense to them Marcellina sayth Austen was of Carpocrates sect and worshipped the images of Iesu Paul Homere and Pythagoras with bowing her selfe burning incense So sayth Epiphanius Of this sect was Marcillina of Rome Shee made secretly the images of Iesu and Paul and Homere and Pithagoras and burned incense to theÌ„ worshipped theÌ„ And charging the whole sect of Carpocrates with the same fault he saith The heretikes called Gnostici Besides all this haue images painted with colours and some of gold and siluer which they say are the images of Iesu and made in the time of Pontius Pilate when Christ was conuersant amongst men These they keepe closely And so doth Ireneus also witnesse they all restrayning and adiudging it to be heresie and idolatry to cense bow to the image of Christ or Paul as wel as to the image of Homer or Aristotle Phil. Not so neither Theo. Yeas euen so This in manifest wordes is reckoned by these three fathers for a speciall point part of their wickednes as well as the worshipping of other Philosophers images Phi. Put you no distinction betweene the images of Christ other prophane persons Theo. The worshipping of either is heathenisme idolatry Phi. Call you the image of Christ an Idole Theo. Not vnlesse it be worshipped but if it be then is it an Idoll incense burnt vnto it is idolatrie Phi. How proue you that Theo. If the iudgement of christes church in accompting them heretikes for that act do not weigh heauie enough with you the law of God coÌ„firmeth the same Phi. Where The. You be
proper earthly substance when notwithstanding your selues offer thē to God in your masses for the remissiō of your sins redēption of your soules to profit the quick the dead by that oblation You teach the people that nothing is offred by the priest to god the father for remission of sins but Christ his son Your masse where this should be done conuinceth that you sacrifice not Christ but the creatures of bread wine Be you not more thā blind which see not that the praiers which you daily frequent refute the sacrifice which you falsly pretend Phi. As though the ancient fathers did not also say that Christ himself is daily offred in the church Theo. Not in the substance which is your error but in signification which is their doctrine ours Take their interpretation with their words they make nothing for your local external offring of christ Was not Christ saith Austen once sacrificed in himselfe and yet in a sacrament is he offered for the benefite of the people not euery Paschal feast only but euery day Neither doth he lie that whē the questiō is asked him answereth Christ is offred daily For if Sacraments had not a certain similitude of the things wherof they be sacraments they should be no Sacraments at al. And by reason of this similitude they vsually take the names of the things them-selues Christ is offred daily this is true saith Austen but how The communion is a sacrament of the Lords death sacraments haue the names of the things them selues from a certaine resemblance that is betwene them This doctrine differeth much from yours and yet must Austen stand for a christian and Catholike father when you by your patience shall goe for vpstarts Phi. S. Augustine spake this not of the liuely flesh blood of Christ which we sacrifice to god the father by the priests hands for the sins necessities of mē but of his death passiō represented at our masse by the holy mysteries The. In deed S. Augustin spake of that he knew as for your cōceit of sacrificing the liuely flesh blood of Christ in substance vnder the formes of bread wine by the priests hands neither he nor any good author was euer acquainted with it And to say the truth the very spring roote of your error is this that you seek for a sacrifice in the Lords supper besides the Lords death Marke wel the words of Cyprian The passion of the Lord is the sacrifice which we offer Of Ambrose Our high priest is he that offred on the crosse a sacrifice to clense vs the very same we offer now which being then offred cannot be consumed this Sacrifice is a sāplar of that we offer that very sacrifice for euer Of Eusebius Christ after al things ended offred a wōderful oblation most excellent sacrifice on the crosse for the saluation of vs al gaue vs a memorie therof in stead of a sacrifice we therfore offer the remēbrance of that great sacrifice in the mysteries which he deliuered vs. Of Chrysost. Bringing these mysteries we stop the mouthes of those that aske how we proue that Christ was sacrificed on the crosse For if Iesus were not slaine whose signe and token is this sacrifice Of Austen We sacrifice to God in that only manner in which he commanded we should offer to him at the reuealing of the new Testament the flesh and blood of this sacrifice was yeelded in verie trueth when Christ was put to death after his ascention it is now solemnized by a Sacramēt of memorie The verie elements and actions of the Lordes Supper conuince no lesse The bread which we breake what else doth it represent but the Lordes bodie that was broken for vs The cup which we drinke what els doth it resemble saue the Lordes blood that was shed for our sakes When the host is broken and the blood poured out of the cup into the mouthes of the faithfull what other thing saith Prosper is thereby designed than the offering of the Lordes bodie on the crosse and the shedding of his blood from his side As often as you shall eate this bread and drinke of this cup you shewe forth the Lordes death till he come saith Paul There can be no question of this the spirit of god hath spoken it Then if the death of Christ be the sacrifice which the church offreth it is euident that christ is not only sacrificed at this table but also crucified crucified in that selfe same sort sense that he is sacrificed but no man is so mad as to defēd that christ is really put to death in these mysteries ergo neither is he really sacrificed vnder the formes of bread wine which thing your selues haue lately ventered rashly presumed without al antiquity The catholik fathers I can assure you say christ is offered christ is crucified in the Lords supper indifferently So Ierom Christ is euery day crucified to vs. So Chrysostom The death of christ is here performed So Gregory Christ dieth againe in this mysterie his flesh suffreth for the saluation of the people so to conclude Austen The gētiles now through the whole world tast lick the passion of Christ in the sacraments of his body blood If you can expound this you shall not neede to stagger at the rest The church hath no Sacrifice propiciatorie besides the death of her Sauiour and therefore as she doth kill him so she doth offer him in her mysteries If you can not learne by the direction of your own decrees what doctrin was taught in the primatiue church and euen in your own church for 1300. yeres touching this matter The offering of the Lords flesh by the Priests hands is called the passion death and crucifying of Christ Non rei veritate sed significante mysterio Not in precise truth but in a mystical signification or it your gloze delight you rather In this mysterie Christ dieth that is his death is represented his flesh suffereth that is his passion is represented In this very sense Christ is offred daily Chrysostom Do we not offer euery day we do but a memorial of his death We do not offer an other sacrifice but euer the same or rather we continue the remembrance of that sacrifice Ambrose Because we were deliuered by the Lords death we bearing that in mynd do signifie with eating and drinking the flesh and blood that were offred for vs It is a memorial of our redemption Eusebius Christ offered a wonderful sacrifice for the saluatiō of vs al we haue receiued a memorial of that most sacred oblation to be performed at the Lordes table according to the rule of the new testament Augustin Christ is our high priest after the order of Melchisedec which yeelded himself a slain sacrifice for our sinnes and gaue vs a
not supreme ouer them Atha sought to the west Emperour and to al the west Bishops that his cause might be heard in a Councel Socrat. lib. 2. Cap. 15. Athanasius cause intimated to al the west Bishops Iulius had the consent of both parts that a councel should be called Athanas. eadem Apolog. Socrat. lib. 1. Cap. 11. Episto Iulij ad eos qui ex Antiochia scripserunt citatur ab Athanasio Apologia 2. Iulius pretendeth not Peters keyes for his authority This spirit differeth much from the late spirit of Rome Idem in Epist. Iudij Athana Apologia 2. Athana heard and restored by a councel The councel willed Iulius to write in his own name because the Arrians wrate to him and not to them Idem in Epist. Iulij Iulius claimeth an equalitie with the East Bishops no supremacie ouer them Ibidem in Episto Iulij They should haue written to all the west Bishops not to the Bishop of Rome alone Socrat. lib. 2. Cap. 15. Idem lib. 3. Cap. 17. In Epist. Iulij By reason his place was first and after to the rest Sozomen lib. 3. Cap. 10. In weightie matters the consent of al the Patriarks was to be required In Epistola Iulij Socrat. lib. 2. Cap. 17. Sozome lib. 3. Cap. 10. The deposition of Athanasius a matter of great weight Euseb. lib. 7. Cap. 30. Sozome lib. 3. Cap. 7. The Arrians sought by deposing him to posses the East Church Iulius when he coulde doe no good in Athanasius cause besought the west Emperor to put to his helping hand Sozome lib. 3. Cap. 10. Sozome lib. 3. Cap. 11. Athanasius with teares requesteth a councel of the west Emperour Theodoret. lib. 2. Cap. 4. Socra lib. 2. Cap. 20. The Emperours letters for Athanasius restitution Ambros. de incarnatio Domin sacrament Cap. 5. Cyprian sermo 5. de lapsâ— What Chrysostome requested of Innocentius The Bishops of the west Church were to consent before the sentence could be giuen Chrysost. Episto 1. ad Innocent tomo 5. Chrysost. vt supra Eadem episto ad Innocentium Chrysost. maketh this petition to all the west Bishops Ibidem A verbe of the singular number thrust in among verbes of the plural to claw the Bishop of Rome Theodores lib. 5. Cap. 34. A bul absurdly forged to make men beleeue the Pope did excoÌ„municate the Emperour for Chrysost. banishment Nicepho lib. 13. Cap. 34. Cronologia Canisij The Bull proued to be forged Socrat. lib. 6. Cap. 18. The first yere of Chrysost banishment Socrat. lib. 6. Cap. 19. The same yeare the Empresse died Socrat. lib. 6. Cap. 20. The second yeare of his banishment Eodem Capite The third yeare Socrat. lib. 6. Cap. 21. The fourth yeare Chryso himselfe died Sozome lib. 8. cap. 27. 28. The Bull supposeth the Empresse to be liuing after Chrysostoms death Niceph. lib. 13. Cap. 34. A blind Prophet to threaten that shee should shortly die which was dead foure yeares before Sozome lib. 8. Cap. 28. Niceph. lib. 13. Cap. 33. Chrysostom appealed not to the Bishop of Rome but to a Councel Socra lib. 6. Cap. 15. Episto 1. ad Innocentium Sozome lib. 8. Cap. 28. Ibidem The Popes legates sent awaie with reproch They were punished by the Princes law that did communicate with the Bishop of Rome Niceph. lib. 13. Cap. 30. Sozome lib. 8. Cap. 24. Theodoret. lib. 5. Cap. 34. Chrysost. enemies were men of good accompt in the church Socrat. lib. 7. Cap. 2. Theodor. lib. 5. Cap. 35. Epistola 1. ad Innocentium Socrat. li. 6. Cap. 23. â—eo Epist. 64. 69. Niceph. lib. 14. Cap. 27. Socrat. lib. 6. Cap. 21. Chrysost. very passionate Socrat. lib. 6. Cap. 18. What help Saint Austen and others sought of Innocentius Inter August Epist. 90. They requested Innocentius to concur with them in the condemnation of Pelagianisme Idem Epist. 90. Inter August Epist. 93. The Bishops of Rome will quickly take enough vpon them What is ment by referring matters to Peter Censura in Epist 90. 93. Basill wrote to the West Bishops in generall but neuer to the Bishop of Rome The end why the East Bishops sought to the West Basilij epistola 48. ad Athan. Basilij Epist. 61. occidentalibus frasribus Basilij Epist. 69 Italicis ac Galliâ— Basilij epist. 70. Galliae Italiae episc Marke what thinges Basill requested of the West Bishops Basilij epist. 74. occidentalibus episc The greater number and the further off the lesse suspected of the people Ibidem Basilij epist. 52. ad AthanasiuÌ„ The Bishop of Rome might counsell but not coÌ„maund Why Basill required messengers from the West patriarke Basil epist. 52. Ibidem S. Hierom coÌ„sulting Damasus Hiero. Damas. Episto tom 2. Ibidem Epist. sequent ad Damasum Epist. ad Damasum prior S. Hierom preferreth the West Church before the East as more syncere in faith and not Rome before all the world Ibidem S. Hierom sought no resolution in faith at Damasus mouth but letters to keepe him froÌ„ trouble in a strange place Ibidem Ibidem Ibidem Epist. ad Damasum Super illam Petram in HieroÌ„ stand fitter to be referred to Christ than to Peter Hieron ad Marcellum aduersus Montanum tomo epi. 2. Vpon this rocke diuersly expounded of the fathers Aug. de verbis Domini secundum Mat. serm 13. The Church built on none but on Christ. Hilar. de Trin. lib. 2. Ibidem lib. 6. Ambros. in 2. cap. Epist. ad Ephesioâ— Idem de incarnat Dominici sacrament cap. 5. Chrysost. homil 55. in Matth. Bede in cap. 21. Iohannis 1. Cor. 3. Peter laide in the foundation of the Church as a principal meÌ„ber thereof Origen in 16. Mat. tract 1. Hieron lib. 1. aduersus Iâ—uiniaman Ephes. 2. Galat. 2. Neither of these constructions make for the church of Rome Tertul. de praescription Cyprian lib. 1. Epi. 3. Ad Marcellum tomo epistolaruÌ„ 2. Testimonia Hieron Damas. quoniaÌ„ vetusto tomo 2. The house of God is the Church of God and not the Church of Rome What S. Augustine meaneth by Peters seat Aug. in Psalm contra partem Donati From not in Peters seat Why may not ipsa est Petra be referred to Peters person as well as super hanc Petram in the Gospel as the Iesuits would haue it Cyprian de vnitate Reclesiae Catholicae S. Cyprian lately falsified by the papists A Canon of Bruges with his blind CaÌ„bron copie hath inlarged CypriaÌ„s text against all the copies of christendom Either the Cambron copie or all the written copies in the world must be corrupted which of these twaine thinke you do the Iesuits chose Distinct. 39. qui cathedram Gratian lately augmented as well as Cyprian Caus. 24 quaest 1. loquitur Dominus ad Petrium This place was not in the auncient decrees Glos ibidem qui CathedraÌ„ The glosse lately forged as wel as Gratians text And al this to make CypriaÌ„ speake cleane contrarie to himself within the compasse of eight lines Cyprian de