powder But howsoeuer it pleaseth master Bellarmine to bragge of the might and maiesty of the church of Rome we see that the hath lost many kingdomes that sometime serued her And where her power is greatest we see that many fall â—ayly from her and that such as doe so haue no cause to repent it but that God aideth them with his wonderfull and mercifull hand and prosecuteth them with many blessings But to returne vnto master Bellarmines argument againe Vpon this rocke I will build my church The foundation of a house hath two respects First it holdeth vp the whole building which being coupled together in it groweth to be an house as before I haue shewed out of saint Paules epistle to the Ephesians and thus Christ onely is the foundation of his church as hee is also the head whereof all the bodie furnished and knit together with ioints and bands increaseth with the increasing of God This foundation or head none can be but Christ Secondly the fonndation is as it were a direction and rule for the building of the rest of the house For it must be made according to the length and breadth of the foundation In which respect the Apostles are called foundations in the reuelation foundations I say in this church of God And so doth the apostle say that the church is built vpon the fonndation of the Apostles and prophets Iesus Christ himselfe beeing the chiefe corner stone And whether they be called foundations in respect of their doctrine as Saint Ambrose thinketh or because they were first layed in the building as Theophilact seemeth to affirme yet are they not such foundations as can hold vp this building but such onely as by their doctrine and fayth must be a patterne and platforme for all other builders to builde by that they goe not out of that rule and square which is most fit for Gods house And thus we confesse that Saint Peter is a foundation as also all the Apostles are And that which Chrysostome writeth vpon this place is in my iudgement a strong argument against this secondarie foundation which they say Peter is because he will haue the building so coupled witâ— tâ—e foundation as that there shalbe nothing between them But most plainely in his commentaries vpon the epistle to the Corinthians he will haue nothing betweene vs and Christ no distance betweene the head and the bodie As he proueth by examples of the head and the bodie the branch and the tree the building and the foundation For if the head be from the body but the thicknesse of a sword it dieth If the branch be cut from the tree neuer so litle it withereth If the house be not ioyned vpon the foundation it falleth Howe then can we haue any secondary foundation in the church of God without the ruine of the whole church The Apostles therefore may well bee foundations as I haue before saide either because that they are as it were the first stones that are layed vpon Christ in this building or because of their doctrine whereupon our faith is grounded but otherwise we can not admitte them all or any one of them whether Peter or any other to be a foundation in this building So that al the paines that master Bellarmine taketh to proue that this rocke must needs signifie Peter himselfe is more than needeth for we wil confesse that he and the rest of the Apostles are foundations in the church But if after some more peculiar sort he wil haue him a foundation neither hath he prooued it by that which he vrgeth out these words vpon this rocke neither yet by that vniuersall consent of the church that he braggeth of For the fathers do in sundry sorts expound these words som by this rocke vnderstand Peter as he was an apostle and teacher of the word of God And so may the fathers be vnderstoode that are in this chapter alleaged by master Bellarmine For he can not reason thus He is called a foundation therefore he is a foundation after some other manner than the other Apostles Some by this rocke vnderstand Christ whom Peter confessed So doth saint Augustine vpon this rocke which thou hast confessed saith he I will build my church now the rocke that hee confessed was Christ There are also sundry that by this rocke vnderstand the confession that Peter made as Hillarie Ambrose Chrysostome and Cyril But none of these interpretations can please our Romish rabbies but that only that makes Peter the foundation in Christs place which can not out of any of these expositions be gathered S. Augustine master Bellarmine saith was deceiued because he knew not the Hebrew tongue but yet saint Augustines words teach vs that in his time this place was not by consent of the godly so expounded as now the Papists expound it but only that there were sundry expositions of sundry men and that saint Augustine liked this of his best How happeneth it then that maister Bellarmine with a great cracke saieth hee hath the consent of the whole church Where is their catholike doctrine euen in this point that which now the church of Rome teacheth was not in saint Augustines dayes catholike But to to proue this doctrine to be catholike he saith The whole Councell of Chalcedon wherein were 630. fathers call Peter the Rocke and Bancke of the church so also saith Melchior Canus But both of them by shamelesse lies do seeke to abuse the simplicity of the ignorant Paschasinus or Paschasius he only said so who was Legat there for Leo bishop of Rome and sought by all meanes possible to aduance that seat aboue all others as may appeare in that place especially in the sixteenth action of that council and yet these men doe not shame to say that the whole council said so As for that other sence of those words receiued by Hillary Ambrose Chrysostome and Ciril which take Peters confession to be that rocke master Bellarmine would shift that off with this answere that they only speak of that faith that Peter as a pastor of the church had not of the faith without respect of Peters person And yet Hillary saith not vpon the rocke of this pastours confession but Vpon this rocke of confession And also not this mans faith but This faith is the foundation of the Church by reason of this faith the gates of hell can do nothing against it this faith hath the keies of the kingdome of heauen Saint Ambrose in the words alleadged by master Bellarmine speaketh also of faith absolutely without hauing respect to Peter as also he doth in sundry other places of that booke Yea he telleth vs there that whosoeuer ouercommeth the flesh is a foundation in the church and speaking of this rocke he would that euerie one should haue within himselfe this rocke which cannot be vnderstood of this confession as it hath respect to Peter The like also may bee said for
ancient writers of their time and that maketh me thinke that they did speake for themselues and were somewhat pricked forward with a purpose to aduance their seat Therefore letting them passe as partiall in this cause let vs come to this next proofe which is out of the greeke fathers And first commeth in Ignatius who writeth to the church that ruleth for I will admit the worst that Maister Bellarmine or any other can alleadge ont of this place in the Romane region But will Maister Bellarmines logicke conclude that therefore the church of Rome hath supremacy ouer the whole church He must first bring the vniuersall church within the place of the Roman region before that can be Out of Ireny he hath these words For vnto this church for the more mighty principality speaking of the church of Rome it is necessary that the whole church doe come that is the faithful from al places in which alwaies of them that are from all places is kept that tradition which is from the Apostles The wordes as you may see are somewhat hard by reason that he who translated Ireny out of greeke did here as in many other places translate him very darkely But I haue englished them word for word His meaning is that they that come from other places of the world be it neuer so farre off yet doe not alter the tradition that the apostles left vnto them and yet many must needes come thither because that in respect that Rome is the Imperiall citty the church also hath the more mighty principality and so in deciding of causes hath the more reuerence and authority And thus doth he proue that to be true that in the beginning of that chapter he said that it is an easie matter for him that will to see the tradition of the apostles manifested through the whole world because that from whence soeuer they do come yet still they keepe one tradition By this argument doth Ireny confute the heretikes because the tradition of the apostles being kept in all places not only in the church of Rome although because it was best known or most famous he bringeth that for example yet no such doctrine as the heretikes speake of is taught among them But nowe maister Bellarmines vnseasonable collection out of this place is very farre from Irenies meaning That it is necessary saith he that all churches should hang of the church of Rome He proueth first by that which goeth before because principality is giuen to this church secondly of that which followeth because hitherto al in that church haue kept the faith that is in being vnited and cleaning to that church as the head and mother These are maister Bellarmines words But first he saith wrong of Ireny that he should indeuour to proue such necessity in comming to the church of Rome especiall taking as here he doth for a bounden duty For it is maister Bellarmines meaning to make the church of Rome the onely church that must heare all great matters decide all doubtfull questions and commande all other churches But Ireny his meaning is that all other men had occasion to seeke rather of that church then of any other for helpe and direction because that in respect of the greatnes of the citty the church there was in some greater accompt as before I haue shewed but he neuer saide that all were bound to submit themselues to that church as maister Bellarmine and his partakers would haue him be thought to speake Secondly he must speake more plainely what he meaneth by this that principality is giuen to the church of Rome For if he meane that men yeeld great reuerence to the church of Rome we yeelde that in the primitiue church they did so that iustly because the true faith was there sincerely kept but this principality will not please maister Bellarmine or proue his intent And if Ireny had meant that this principality had beene giuen by Christ a man of meane vnderstanding will easily thinke that he would haue spoken it in more plaine tearmes But what neede I to vse many words the place it selfe is plaine For the more mighty principality saith Ireny if he had thought of the supremacy of the bishop of Rome he would haue said most mighty principality For more mighty principality doth but make him better then others in some respect not aboue all others which he claimeth to be So that to proue his intent he must haue better proofe For this will not warrant that soueraigne authority of the bishop of Rome Thirdly that which maister Bellarmine would tell vs out of this place that all churches must be vnited and cleaue to this church of Rome as their head mother hath at all no ground of Irenies words And thus we see howe he doth racke and rent the wordes out of their plaine sence to serue for his purpose which being wel weied of make rather against them and their supremacy Epiphanius is his third witnes who reporteth that Vrsarius and Valens two Arrian bishops being conuerted did go to Iulius bishop of Rome to giue an accompt of their errour and fault But if that proue the supremacy of the bishop of Rome then must Athanasius also haue that supremacy as well as he for it followeth immediatly after that they vsed the selfe same proofes that they repented of their errour vnto Athanasius So that the intent and cause of their going to pope Iulius or pope Athanasius for he is there so called was not to acknowledge his supremacy but as it was known that they had erred so woulde they haue it well knowen that they reuoked their heresie Neither did they craue pardon of their offence of Iulius bishop of Rome which out of Athanasius he endeuoured to proue because he had authority ouer all persons but because they knew their offence to haue beene against the whole church they were desirous that the bishop of Rome for his parte as a principall member of the church but not a head aboue all should not impute that fault vnto them And this is the part of euery christian man or woman hauing made a generall fault whereby many godly are offeuded to make also a publike satisfaction for the same And cannot this be done to pope Iulius but we must make him head of the church Athanasius also his letter to pope Felix is alleadged wherein Athanasius being much distressed of the Arrians and wrongfully dealt withall and not hauing any hope that the greeke Church coulde helpe him the Emperour himselfe being an Arrian the rather to mooue the bishoppe of Rome to pity his case saith thus For this cause God hath placed you and your predecessours Apostolicke prelates in the towre of height and hath charged you to haue care of all churches that you should helpe vs. That God by meanes of Constantine and other good Emperours aduanced high the Bishop of Rome we deny not And we also knowe
famous bishop and better knowne to his people then any of the other patriarches and therefore fittest for an example Secondly there had beene a very great schisme or strife about the popedome one Vrsicinus standing for it against Damasus so that many of both sides were slaine in the very church in striuing for it But Damasus in the end obtaining the popedome Saint Ambrose to testifie his owne perswation and to assure others that Damasus and not Vrsicmus was bishop of Rome although he stood for it doth take occasion heere to name him Thirdly Damasus beeing pope was accused of whoredome whereof hauing cleared himselfe it is not vnlikely but that S. Ambrose did the rather take this occasion to pull al suspition out of other mens minds by giuing this testimony of him Another cause also may be added that as it seemeth he was as learned as any bishop of Rome before him For which S. Ambrose himself a being a learned man might then rather delight in naming him The rest of the places out of S. Ambrose haue no waight at all Satyrus did aske the bishop whether he agreed with the Catholicke bishops that is with the Church of Rome He meaneth by catholicke bishops such as held the catholicke faith that then was maintained at Rome If it be a good argument to say Rome is a catholicke church therefore it must gouerne all the churches in the world then will this also be a good argument Hippo was a catholicke church so was Millaine so are also the churches that we haue allowed in England by authority therefore they were and ours are heads ouer all others And that master Bellarmine will not allow But he asketh why the bishops are not catholickes that agree not with the church of Rome if it be not because Rome is the head of the catholike church I maruell much that maister Bellarmine whose wordes go for oracles with many will shew himselfe so ignorant of that he alleadgeth For if hee had read but the wordes that immediatly doe follow the reason is there rendered why he asked that question namely because the church there was in a schisme For one Lucifer had seperated himself from their communion Lo here M. Bellarm. he dreameth not of any headship of that church but asketh this question whether he helde the faith that then was preached at Rome And Athanasius in his creede speaketh in this sence of a catholike faith Yea the name of catholike was also as it were a note of their profession That whereas the Donatists gloried that they onely had the true church the catholikes on the contrary would be known by their name that in any place of the world they might be of the true church Yea there were Emperours that made a lawe that whosoeuer beleeued the one godhead in trinity and equal maiesty of the father the sonne and the holy ghost should be called Christians and Catholikes as their law doth testifie Yea Sozomen reporteth of a lawe made by the Emperour that all should beleeue the lawe deliuered by Peter the head of the apostles but howe he may be called head of the apostles I haue shewed before and that nowe Damasus bishop of Rome and Peter of Alexandria doe holde and that they onely that worship the trinitie with like honoure should be called the catholike church And doeth maister Bellarmine to make his bad proofe seeme better aske howe they may be called catholikes that agree with the church of Rome vnlesse it be in this respect that they take it to be the head of the catholike church heere are catholikes we see and yet not bound to beleeue that head After he alleadgeth two other places of like force The effect of them is that he woulde followe the paterne of the church of Rome So woulde I also if I had liued in those daies when they sincerely held the faith committed to them by Gods worde And he doubtlesse if he sawe the superstition and Idolatry and treasons that vnder coulour of religion are hatched there in our daies he would thinke euen the cotten ruines of Rome to bee ouer good to bee a cage for so badde birdes But to follow their example is not to yeelde vnto them power ouer vs. To go forward out of saint Ierome hee reasoneth thus Saint Ierome for pope Damasus answered the Synodicall consultations of the East and West therefore they that sought for answere from the seate of Rome in their matters acknowledged the superioritie thereof If I should tell Maister Bellarmine againe that Maister Caluine in his time and Maister Beza in his time haue answered more matters and questions that came from sundry of the reformed Churches and some particular men then many of the popes of that time yet I am sure he wil neuer confesse them to be vniuersall Bishoppes for that No more neede wee graunt to him that the Pope is a vniuersall Bishop because many questions were mooued to him Againe Saint Hierome confesseth himselfe to be Damasus his sheepe and that hee is of communion with him Alas what childish proofes are these May not Hierome confesse himselfe to depend vpon Damasus but that hee must thereby tie all others likewise to be subiect vnto him It is a shame for men so to deceiue the world aud to hasten euen their owne damnation by abusing the simple in such sort They crie it out in euery corner that there is no saluation to be hoped for vnlesse they doe acknowledge the Bishoppe of Rome to bee head of their Church and yet are they not able to yeelde so much as one good reason out of the Scriptures or ancient writers of the purer age for proofe of their doctrine It must bee beleeued as an article of faith and yet they coulde shewe no ground no warrant for it Out of saint Augustine is alleadged that in the Church of Rome the principalitie of Peters chaire hath alwayes flourished Augustine and Optatus as they were in one time so were they of one minde And as before out of Optatus I shewed and that by Christes testimony that the Apostles chaire is his doctrine so here doeth it signifie And saint Augustine his meaning is that Rome hath especially kept the Apostles doctrine or faith the which in Saint Augustines dayes might truely bee verified Againe out of Saint Augustine epist 92. he desireth pope Innocent to helpe them against the Pelagians which maruellously troubled Palestine and Affrike Now out of this will he conclude the popes Supremacie But saint Augustine himselfe denyeth that hee had any such meaning in that he was one of that sixt councill of Carthage that so stiffely denied supremacie vnto the pope seeking it so earnestly and by very false practises And the Bishop of Rome was then of great abilitie to doe good as also any other may be and yet not haue iurisdiction ouer them that seeke for that good at his hands I would haue them
hath established in making that sin which he calleth honourable and forbidding that which he hath commanded as appeareth in their forbidding certaine persons to marry And on the contrary wheras Christ reproued Peter for drawing his sword euen in defence of his master yet Peters successor and Christs vicar as he tearmeth himselfe commendeth it as a most acceptable sacrifice to God and meritorius of the remission of sinnes if in the defence of the pope or reuenge of his enemies and they are all his enemies that will not be his slaues they fight againgst christian princes yea and rebell against their naturall and soueraigne magistrates Of the which because I shall God willing haue better occasion to speake after I only would haue you nowe to remember that furious fellow Iulius the second of whom it is written that he gaue forgiuenes of sinnes to any that would kill a Frenchman And it seemeth that some cause of his deadly hatred against the French was this Iulius this iolly pope was sworne when he was chosen pope as many stories testifie that he should call a generall council within two yeares But he not regarding either oath or duety was so farre from calling of a councill that as much as he could he hindered the same And thereupon nine Cardinals leauing him came to Millan and appointed a councill to be kept at Pysa whither the Emperour and French king did send their Ambassadours Now when otherwise hee could not hinder the council hee purposed as a friend of his telleth vs to rule it by warres so that he made the councill to goe to Millaine for feare A great fight beeing vpon Easter day betweene the French and this woorthy warriour the French men gaue his a great ouerthrowe Whereupon he stirred vp against them all that he could the Venetians Heluetians Italians Spaniards So wel did he seeke for peace and insue it as Saint Peter commandeth him whose successour he calleth himselfe So much did he regarde that promise that our Sauiour Christ himselfe whose Vicar he would seeme to be did make Blessed are the peace makers for they shalbe called Gods children And so lightly did he set by that commaundement that Christ hath giuen against our affectionat and vnlawfull reuenges Resist not euill but whosoeuer shall smite thee on the right cheeke turne to him the other also So that this pope doth promise the reward of remission of sinnes for dooing that which Gods law doth flattely forbid and the law of nature doth vtterly condemne Is not this to take vppon him against God himselfe Is not this to commaund when he forbiddeth and to forbid when he commaundeth Againe God hath giuen vs a plaine and flat commandement that we should doe nothing but that which he biddeth Wee must not so much as turne to the left hand of our corrupt affections or superstitious seruices which our selues condemne or to the right hand of our good intentions and deuotions wherein we please our naturall man very well His word only must be our rule and square Doth not then the bishop of Rome controll this and such like commandements of God when he saith in expresse wordes ye shall haue other rules of religion other articles of faith otherwayes to worship God by traditions of the apostles and of the church vnwritten verities decrees decretalles briefes and buls councils and precepts of the church Is not this to transgresse Gods commandement by our owne traditions and to make it of none authoritie Is not this to teach as doctrines mens precepts Yea is not this to say with those lawlesse lordes wee are they that ought to speake who is Lord ouer vs Thirdly in that the pope may as hee and his fauourites falsely affirme allowe of the scriptures whether they shall be authenticall or not Doth he not thereby take vpon him to be aboue God whose word is not authentical vnlesse the pope allow of it If you doubt whether the Bishop of Rome be so shamelesse or not as so to say consider first what Siluester Prierias a frier and maister of the popes pallace writeth in his articles or foundations that he setteth downe against Luther Whosoeuer saith he resteth not vpon the doctrine of the church and bishop of Rome as vpon an iufallible rule of faith from whence euen the holy scripture doeth drawe strength and authoritie is an heretike like vnto which is that also of Eckius without the authority of the church the very scriptures are not authenticall And let not their doctrine only be examined wherein they teach that the pope is virtually the church as doth that frier Prierias in the place before alleadged in his second foundation but also yea and that especially the practise of that church so to refer al things to the pope in such things that he according to that fulnesse of knowledge which is in that sacred casket of his holy brest which pope Paule the second did first boast of must iudge of all things so that as he saith so it must be and there must no reason be asked of his doing Whereby it appeareth that the Pope being the church and as we see hauing the ful authoritie to do what he will in the church of Rome they tell vs that the scripture hath no authoritie or strength but from him And I pray you then who is greater hee that maketh the word authenticall or hee that hath his word approoued Is not he that doth approoue it so God must be vnder the pope that holy God vnder a vile sinfull man Fourthly the pope will take vpon him to dispence with or rather against the word of God and to allow that which God manifestly condemneth and is expresly against gods holy law For proofe whereof I neede not alleadge the false testimony of his flattering lawyers that giue him that power to dispense against the apostle and so against gods word but we may see his practise which doth sufficiently testifie that he thinketh he may dispense with the wicked and vnnaturall vncouering of the shame of them that are neare of kinne And he hath done contrary to this flat commaundement giuen by God against marying with vncle or aunt In which case he did dispense in the marriage of his catholike sonne Philip King of Spaine who as in his vnrighteous ambition hee hath no measure so in his vnnaturall iust he hath as it seemeth no shame but to his Lord he shall stand or fall before whome it shall be tried one day whether the popes bull can stand betweene God and him for breach of Gods lawe Yea pope Martine the fifth as is alleaged in a booke called Brutum fulmen out of Anthony of Florence and others did dispense with one to marry his owne sister whereas God saieth thou shalt not vncouer the shame of thy sister But what can not the pope do He can make wrong right say they And wee knowe that hee can
scarlet they shalbe as wooll But either to thinke or say that any man can giue any pardon is too absurd I cannot therefore but maruel at the church of Rome and the bishops thereof tha they shame not as it were to thrust themselues into Gods place and to take vpon them to doe that which none can doe but God only They appoâ—â—t their Iâ—â—ylies and proclaime pardon of all their sins to suth as come to Rome in the time of that solemne feast In like manner to such as deuoutly say so many praiers before such an image or goe in pilgrimage to such a place They send abroad into all places their pardons and indulgences making of them plaine marchandies So that men or women may for a litle mony buie a pardon for their greatest sinnes as they imagine Is not this an easie way for rich men to get to heauen Is not this the very fountaine of all licentious liuing to teach that men for mony may make their peace with God and satisfie for their sinnes And yet the church of Rome that shamelesse harlot dare charge our doctrine of iustification by fayth taught first by Christ himselfe afterwards by his apostles especially Saint Paul in plaine words to be a doctrine of libertie What shall we then say of this wicked doctine or rather of this blasphemous marchandies whereby leaue to sinne is sold as commonly for mony as old boots and shoes are sold in London streets for beesoms or broome The first I suppose that opened this shop of these popish wares was Boniface the eight who gaue full pardon of all sinnes marke not of some sinnes but of all to them that visited the place where the apostles were And after the world was filled with such trash pardons were promised to them that would fight against the Turke yea pardons for them that would fight against the popes enemies But my meaning is not to stand vpon these points in particular but rather to point vnto them Yet I can not omit how that Clement the sixth pope of that name did perswade himselfe so well of his power and authoritie in this behalfe that he gaue commaundement and charge vnto the Angels that if any died comming to Rome to the Iubilie which he had appointed to be kept euery fifteth yeare whereas Boniface had appointed it to be kept but euery hundred yeare the Angels I say should carry the soules of such straight way to heauen What durst not these men presume to doe that durst like Gods take vpon them to commaund euen the Angels to be at their becke Well against these their blasphemies which haue no warrant no colour in the word I only aske of them who can forgiue sinne but God onely Let them proue it by scripture let them point vnto him out of Gods worde If man could doe it what neede so precious a price so great a ransom as not gold nor siluer but the blood of that vnspotted Lambe Christ Iesus An other great abuse there is in this there wicked doctrine They promise their indulgesnce generall to al that die in the defence of christians against the Turke Yea they often sell their pardons to any that will buie them as Bale out of Crantzius reportes that some did in Saxonie in the time of pope Martine the first What excuse can they make or what pretence can they vse to make this haue any shew of lawfulnesse God in the scripture still criieth turne vnto me and promiseth forgiuenesse to the penitent hee threatneth the vngodly that they shall haue no peace But not one testimonie not one example cannot be alleaged to proue that any man or woman receaue forgiuenesse of sins vnlesse they first be sorie for the same which commonly cannot be in sodaine death in the wars and the pardoners rather require money then amending for the same The sinful woman had pardon for her sins but shee hated them Zache likewise but he was become a new man Peters denying of Christ was forgiuen him but by weeping hee testified his sorow for the same The like may be said of many other whome I for shortnesse omit Wickedly therefore doeth the Pope giue his pardon of sinnes not seeing sorrow for sinnes or purpose of amendment in them that buy or inioy those their pardons So Alexander the fifth did wickedly abuse the words of Christ being at point of death my peace I giue to you my peace I leaue with you as though he could giue that peace But if he haue beeue so sawcie with God how shall he behaue himselfe thinke you towards men For that is another point which is neeessarie to be considered Whereby it will appeare that as by subtilty he entred so with much pride and more then barbarous cruelty he hath raigned I told you before how that when he had first by the emperors means got the bishops vnder him he neuer rested vntil he had not onely thrust the emeperour from hauing any thing to doe in this election but also brought them vnder his yoke that they could not be confirmed in the empire but by him Now what folowed of this must be declared First he did striue earnestly to keepe all that he had gotten and if any emperour hauing indeede in him any noble heart would seeke to recouer his ancient libertie in some part and to free himselfe from that Romish Egypt and slauish seruitude wherein that proud Pharo vnmindfull of Gods graces to him or his duetie to others did seeke to detaine him then would the proud pope viis modis by al meanes that possible he could deuise so persecute and afflict such as if he were set vp of God to be a pledge to all christian princes and as were the Cananits vnto the Israelites pricks in their eies and continuall thornes and whips in their sides And this may euidently appeare out of innumerable examples The church of Rauenna did not vpon Phoeas his decree submit it selfe to the church of Rome or acknowledge it to be her head The patriarch thereof thought himselfe to vne as great at Rauenna as the pope was at Rome But Theodorus although he willingly would haue kept that ancient priuiledge yet for feare submited himselfe to Donus then bishop of Rome about the yeare of the Lord six hundred seuentie and seuen But Felix beeing after patriarch of Rauenna and desirous to stand in his auncient priuiledges mouen the people to the same So that by all meanes they sought to shake off the bishop of Rome his heauie yoke Leo then bishop of Rome stirred vp Iustinian the second Emperour of that name by slaughter siege spoile and such violent meanes to subiect that patriarch to his seate And Felix who sought to recouer his liberties had his eies thrust out with a hot burning Iron as out of Sabelicus and Nauclerus it is reported But the pope is not more earnest to maintaine his
these priuileges Which being so many in number as they were the common welth did not onely find a want of such as should help to beare the burthens that were to be laied vpon the same but also they by their multitude were able to make a great party to attempt any thing that they would take in hand And by the large possessions which many of these had they could draw many folowers to be on their side And this I take to be the reason that Boniface the eight as Marcilius Patiuinus writeth was so desirousto inlarge and increase the number of his clergy that he would haue all such as had married a maide and contented themselues but with one wife should be of his clergie Now their exemptions streching to all the clergie I pray you what subiects should be left vnto the king for him to commaund and rule for his owne safetie and the gard of his common wealth It was therefore a great post and piller of poperie to bring these immunities to the clergie and a meane to maintaine it the better Both because it imboldned themselues to doe much mischiefe and also it drew many to be of their societies And so as it was a double dammage to the ciuil estate So was it a double prop to vphold the kingdome of the pope and therefore dangerous moe wayes then one Well thus far we are nowe come in this proofe of popish practises that wee see their subâ—â— shiftes to bring themselues to this high estate It is not vnknowen to vs how wickedly they haue abused their authoritiÌ„e in pride intollerable couecousnesse insaâ—iable and malice vnmeasurable And lastly their gouernment being so very deuilish and detested almost of al yet how and by what means they haue maintained the same That is to say I haue opened their subtil shifts wherby they became so great and secondly their practises and proceedings in this their greatnesse thirdly their cunning and compasses to keepe themselues great the meanes which for the most part they haue vsed to get into this nest which they haue built so high and to â—eepe themselues in the same My meaning is not so lay open their wickednesse of life so long as it is but their priuate fault let them stand or â—all to their owne Lord he against whom they offend shall call them to account But that onely that belongeth to the question of the popes supremacie which now I haue taken in hand to suruey and to the abuse either in getting or in vsing of it that onelie did I purpose to intreate of And hereunto am I forced by double necessitie First because it is one part of the popiâ—h practises But especially to stoppe the mouthes of them whose sight is so quicke towards others as that they can espie a small mote in their eie In our church they can find no ministerie no succession no sacraments all is wrong they see nothing but faults The great beame that troubleth their owne eye they cannot see But as men sightlesse and sencelesse they imagine all is well with them all is catholike Catholike church catholike faith catholike religion catholike doctrine And yet if the matter be well examined neither their church neither yet their faith haue any shew of catholike in them As I trust it is euident to see in this Suruey of the Popes Supremacie that their doctrine is not catholike their doings are not christian like Let vs examine whether that which they teach vs concerning this point haue bene taught likewise of al the godly learned or at the least of the most of them at all times in all places constantly and of set purpose not by the way as we terme it in handling some other matter often and plainely For these are the properties that Viucentius Lyrinensis an old father requireth in that doctrine that is catholike and true That Peter was otherwise a foundation in the building of the church of Christ then were other of the Apostles it is not a catholike doctrine That Christ gaue to Peter onely the keies of the kingdome of heauen it is not by these rules a catholike faith That the feeding of Christs sheep in the whole world or the gouernment of the whole church was commited to Peter onely or especially is most catholikely taught so that not one of all these points of their religion which are indeede the ground-worke whereupon they raise this their stately building of the popes supremacie can be called catholike as is before shewed But if they could prooue these things to be catholike as they will neuer be able to doe yet haue they not obtained their purpose For how is this conueyed to the bishop of Rome if it were in Peter It is not catholikely beleeued that he was bishop of Rome neither yet that he conueyed his estate or interest ouer the whole church if any such had beene in him to the bishop of Rome Or if all this could be proued yet remaineth one point that were able to ouerthrow all For it is not receiued as a catholike doctrine that the Bishop of Rome cannot erre or that for sinne and errour the priuileges which the church of Rome claimes if they had any such could not be forfeited as well in them as in other churches In all which pointes if I haue nor sufficiently prooued that the church of Rome teacheth false doctrine and repugnant to the Scriptures wherein I submit my selfe to the iudgement of the indifferent Reader yet I trust that the aduersaries them selues must needes confesse that these cannot be prooued to be catholike doctrines But on the contrary a man may easily see if hee marke the storie of times that these things which are the only pillers to vphold this popish kingdom were neuer thought vpon in the Apostles times or the ages next to them that is to say in the purer times of the primitiue church But when heresies began to trouble the church and men began to separat them selues from the vnity of faith more boldly and more openly then at the first they did And it pleased God to continue in some reasonable sort sinceritie and trueth of religion in the church of Rome then beganne that seate to be called Peters chaire not because Peter sate there but because that notable confession that Peter made and the faith that he preached was there established and soundly kept and maintained as before I haue shewed out of Optaâ—us and others that Peters chaire signifieth his doctrine And as after the sunne is once set darkenesse groweth still more and more so that the furder from sunne set vntill it be readie to rise againe the greater is the darknesse euen so the farder men were from those purer times the furder did they wander from the wayes of truth and the grosser was the ignorance that they were in So as that which at the first was not once thought vpon yet was it at the last affirmed of some very constantly and boldly But
keis besides the testimonie of Theophilact we haue most plaine proofe out of Gods word Whatsoeuer is promised Mathew the sixteenth chapter in these words I will giue thee the keis is performed Iohn the twentieth chapter in these words whose sinnes ye remit they are remitted and whose sinnes ye retaine they are retained but in Saint Iohn no chiefe power is giuen but such as is generall and common to all the apostles therefore in Saint Mathew there is not promised any chiefe power but such as is common to them all and so to all pastours in them My minor needeth no proofe for it is confessed by master Bellarmine But master Bellarmine denieth my maior and yet hath no ground of his deniall but this onely that he taketh it not be all one to binde and to retaine sinnes or sinners and to loose or remit Which subtil difference the fathers did not see And therefore Theophilact doth not onely expound this place of Matthew the sixteenth chapter by that place out of Saint Iohn the twentieth chapter making this later to bee a perfourmance of that promise I will giue thee the keies but also hee flattely there opposeth remitting to binding whereas by master Bellarmines doctrine if hee had beene brought vp in his schoole he should haue set remitting against retaining and not against binding For saith hee it is a greater matter to binde then to retaine to loose then to remit Saint Ambrose also maketh to binde and to retaine to remitte and to loose all one For whilest the puritie of doctrine in some measure remayned this subtile Sophistirie was vnknowen in Gods church But nowe for defence of popery such stuffe must serue the turne when they haue no better And heere I cannot but maruell at master Bellarmine his answere vnto this argument out of the centuries For they that wrote those bookes reason thus if in these wordes to thee will I giue the keies c. there were promised any supremacie the Apostlles could not haue doubted which of them should haue beene chiefe but they doubted of this therefore there was not in those wordes any such supremacie promised Maister Bellarmine maketh no question but that they doubted of it for there was among them some contention about that matter but for the maior hee answereth that the apostles did not vnderstande plainelie that there was anie promise made to Peter vntill after that Christ rose againe but then they suspected some such matter and that made them striue Is it not great boldnes in master Bellarmine in so waightie matters to bring no other warrant but his foolish fancie Or to answere such an vnanswerable argument by such silly shiftes They knewe not saith master Bellarmine that Christ made such promise to Peter vntill after Christ was risen againe But if it had beene an article of such importance as now it is made why shoulde they not haue knowne it They heard what Christ said to Peter they heard the promise of the keies and this is asmuch as our Romish Rabbines can nowe bring for their proofe If they vnderstoode it not so as master Bellarmine heere confesseth they did not what newe reuelation haue our newe Romish teachers to assure this to be the meaning of those wordes But they seeme to be whelpes of one haire with those hereticks whome Tertullian reprooueth because they saide the apostles knewe not all thinges that if their doctrine were not agreeable to that which the Apostles taught they might the lesse bee condemned As Bishoppe Fisher not knowing better howe to excuse their additions vnto the auncient doctrine which the church of Rome hath brought in saith that later wits knowe thinges better then before they did Well master Bellarmine you see confesseth that the apostles vnderstoode not then that promise as nowe the papistles doe When did they reforme their iudgement Where in what place doe they shew any signification that they euer vnderstood it otherwise If they neither vnderstood it so before Christs resurrection neither yet gaue anie signification afterwardes by woorde or deede by their writings or examples that their knowledge was in this pointe reformed howe can wee saie that they euer tooke that to bee Christes meaning But the first of these is confessed as before is shewed by Maister Bellarmine the latter they cannot shewe Therefore it maie be gathered that the apostles neuer vnderstood the words of Christ as the papistes doe And howe doeth hee prooue that which hee boldlie affirmeth that then they suspected such a thing Or that after Christes resurrection they did striue It is mentioned in the storie of the gospell that twise they did striue who shoulde be chiefe Of both which times the three Euangelistes doe make report And Saint Iohn also in his gospell seemeth to pointe vnto the latter strife when hauing washed his Apostles feete Christ giueth them good lessons of humilitie But that after Christes resurrection they did consende for this it cannot bee prooued For both these times were before his death And therefore I cannot but maruell that Maister Bellarmine will bring such proofelesse stuffe to open light as though hee imagined that his counterfaite coyne must goe for currant And whereas afterwardes hee alleadgeth out of Origen Chrysostóme and Hierome that the apostles did striue amongst themselues because they suspected this supremacie of Peter himselfe doeth not in this giue credite to these fathers For if it bee true that maister Bellarmine saide before that this suspition was not vntill Christ was risen then howe is this true that they affirme that they suspected thus much when they did striue first of all Which was at the least about a yeare and a halfe before Christ rose againe Neither doe these fathers heerein deserue to bee beleeued For the grounde of this their conceite is that they imagined the paying of the tribute money to haue beene before this contention For they surmise that because Christ said paie for mee and thee therefore the rest of the apostles suspected that Peter shoulde haue some superiority ouer them and grudged at it But this their imagination as it is farre from the thought of the apostles for any thing that may be gathered so is it flatly confuted by the scripture For this contention was before the tribute money was demaunded namely in the way before they came to Capernaum as is most plaine in the euangelist saint Markes gospel the ninth chapter and three and thirtie and foure and thirtie verses And the tribute was not demaunded before they were entred into Capernaum and into a house there Matthew the seuenteenth chapter and xxv verse Therefore that suspition of supremacie was not the cause of their contention which maister Bellarmine woulde prooue out of these fathers But perchance rather that ambitious affection that was in Iames and Iohn the sonnes of Zebedee which afterwardes they shewed more plainely in asking that one might sit at his
haue said I doe not inioyne you these thinges as Peter who was your bishop But the greatest matter that he espieth in Peter and Paule is that they are apostles And writing vnto the Ephesians he moueth them to depende vpon their bishop as the Church hangeth vpon the Lord and the Lord vpon his father How happeneth that in this reckoning of these goodly couples the Ephesians and their bishoppe the church and Christ Christ and God there is not any mention of Peter or his successour Doubtlesse as yet this conceit was not hatched which yet more plainely maie be seene in that exhortation that he maketh to the Saintes in Smirna to honour God as the maker and Lorde of all but their bishoppe for that he speaketh of their owne bishop the whole epistle sheweth as the high priest the Image of God and the most excellent thing in the Church Nowe I pray yon what account is here of Peters chaire or of his succession Not one word This also in his epistle is to be obserued that hee seemeth to make more especiall account of Paul then of Peter As writing to the Philadelphians he saith Be ye folowers of Paul and the other Apostles as they folowed Christ which it is to be thought he would not haue don if Peter had beene in such account then as since he is said to be Nowe for Iustinus Martir who wrote about the yeare 147. doth neuer so much as make mention of Peter being bishop of Rome although in his second Apologie he maketh mention of Simon Magus how hee was honoured at Rome but not of his fierie chariots destroied by Peter as some doe whereof I spake before Seeing therefore Iustinus hauing so good an occaston and writing and dwelling in Rome as by Hierom it appeareth speaketh not one worde of it there neither yet afterwards in the end of the apologie wherein he sheweth the sinne of christianitie it is likely that Rome was not then knowen to be either Peters chaire or the bishop thereof to bee vniuersall bishop Eusebius writeth of Denis of Corinth who florished about the yeare one hundred seuentie and foure howe hee did write vnto the Romans and yet nothing is there of Peter that he was bishop there but onely that Peter and Paul did plant the church there And in the same place Eusebius reporteth of Caius who as he saith was made bishop of Rome after Zephirinus which Zephirinus died the yeare of the Lord two hundred and twentie that he writing vnto Proclus an hereticke put him in minde of the monuments of the Apostles that he could shew Whereas hee might haue made a better bragge to hane serued for his purpose if hee could haue told them of Peters chaire But as yet there was no such matter knowen As for that which master Bellarmine himselfe aleageth out of Irenie it proueth nothing for him For in saying that Peter and Paul together did found a church there he ascribeth nothing to Peter alone And Tertulian that was about 200. yeares after Christ doth seeme rather to make Clement the first bishop of Rome so litle doth he dreame of Peters chaire or bishoprick there Neither yet doth Cyprian plainly affirme that Peter was bishop of Rome He doth somtime indeede call that church Peters chaire in respect of the doctrine that Peter taught and published which at that time was beleeued at Rome which also perchance he in Rome confirmed by his death As also our Sauiour Christ speaketh of Moses chaire and saith that the priests did sit in Moses his chaire so long as they taught the lawe that Moses from God deliuered to them But as for Moses hee neuer came neere the place where Ierusalem was built to establish any chaire there And thus we see that in all these ancient fathers who liued more then two hundred yeares after Christ for Ciprian florished about two hundred and fiftie yeares after Christ there is no plaine proofe of Peters being bishop of Rome And excepting Ciprians words who if he allude vnto the words of our sauiour Christ as he seemeth to do can make no more for the opinion of the church of Rome then any of the rest there is nothing in them all that hath any likelyhood of proofe of the thing in controuersie But if any man answere that it is no good argument thus to reason Such men haue not written that Peter was bishop of Rome therefore hee was not bishop there I reply that if this that out of them hath beene said doe not substantially prooue that Peter was not bishop of Rome as if the allegations be wel considered of they are strong presumptions yet doe they inuincibly prooue that for this space of more then two hundred yeares they cannot shew of any authentike author that hath acknowledged Peter to be bishop of Rome Yea the first that is aleaged by master Bellarmine is Ireny who liued after Christ not much lesse then two hundred yeares And therefore this doctrine doth easily appeare not to be catholike and the godly fathers which slace haue affirmed that he was bishop of Rome either do so call him in respect of the worke of a bishop which if he were there by his care of Gods flocke and constancie in his truth he did shew or else they teach that which had not bin taught in the dayes next vnto the apostles times A second argument that vnanswerably prooueth this to be no catholike doctrine is the dissenting of y ◠most anciēt authors that they alleage from themselues in this point wherin they affirme that Peter was bishop of Rome For Ireny who is first alleaged of master Bellarnine Tertulian whome in the second place he produceth then also Epiphanius and Dionysius bishop of Corinth out of Eusebius do al with one consent ioyne Peter and Paul together I say not Peter onely so that vnto the one as well as vnto the other belongeth that dignitie by their records And Damasus himselfe a pope I maruel if he would erre in this point saith that Peter came to Rome Nero being emperour which must be at the least twelue yeares after the reckoning that is nowe holden for good in the church of Rome And Eusebius doth aleage out of Origen how Peter in the latter end of his life came to Rome and therefore he is not like to be Bishoppe there xxv yeares This doubtfulnesse and vnconstancie of their deliuering this doctrine is an infalible argument that there was not in those times any catholike doctrine taught of this matter but that men might thinke thereof as they saw cause But now it is no lesse then heresie to denie that Peter was Bishoppe of Rome Now if vnto this that hath bin said we adde the vocation or office of Saint Peter recorded in the holy Scripture that he should be the Apostle of the circumcision whereof that euer he was discharged all the Iesuites in Rome and Rheimes
in iudgement Liberius a pope did not only consent to the condemnation of Athanasius that great learned and catholike father as many ancient histories doe report and our aduersaries deny not but also did communicate with two notable Atrian heretikes which was a great offence to the godly and an incouraging of those heretikes But maister Bellarmine answereth that neither he taught any heresy or was an heretike The question is whether the pope may er or not Now our aduersaries draw vs from the questiō not answering whether Liberius did erre or not but they tell vs that he was no heretike and that he taught no heresie And admit he did neither of these two I meane that he neither became an heretike neither yet taught heresie yet he may erre Yea Liberius did fouly erre in that externall action whereby our aduersaries confesse that he consented to the banishment of Athanasius and in communicating with those two Arrians Valence Visacius and by help of Arrians get again to be bishop of Rome deposing Felix For to er is to wander or go out of the right way whether it be for ignorance or feare or through any other affection he that steppeth aside doth erre And because this giueth great light to al that is to be said of this question it shal not be amisse somewhat more throughly to consider of the same First you see that whereas their doctrine is briefly deliuered that the pope cannot erre they wil haue it thus to be vnderstooed the pope cannot be an heretike that is he cannot continue obstinatly in heresie nor he cannot teach heresie when he giueth generall precepts that should belong to the whole church For that is the meaning both of Melchior Canus in his Theological places and of maister Bellarmine in this place before alleadged The intent also of their doctrine is to commend vnto vs that their Italian head as a fit head for to guide the vniuersal church and able to be ahead to the whole body Nowe therefore let vs see how well their doctrine and their meaning agree together For the head of the church should be such as should in nothing no not for a time leade the body of the church awry But the church may be led into many foolish opinions strange conceites and dangerous doctrines euen by such as cannot be called heretikes For an heretike is he as Saint Augustine telleth vs that being of any euill and corrupt opinion in the church and being reproued or monished to amend resisteth stubbornly and will not reforme his contagious and perilous doctrines but defendeth the same and is drawen to deuise or follow such opinions for his own profit especially for his own glory and to aduance himselfe Now who seeth not that a man in place of credite and authoritie as the bishop of Rome hath beene by such bad means as he hath vsed these many yeares may wonderfully indamage and indanger the church of God before any body wil or dare reprooue him for any opinions that he will holde And when he is found fault withall as he must be before they can count him an heretike how many subtile shifts can euil men haue to continue a long time in their wicked opinions without reuoking the same or reforming themselues and yet to auoide the danger of being accounted stubborne or obstinate The Pelagians against whom saint Augustine writeth many bookes did turne many waies their lewd opinions changed often in some shewe of words their positions and did adde as by reason they were forced and by arguments compelled some such wordes vnto their errours as that thereby they might auoide the note of contumacy and deceiue the more vnder a shew of truth as may appeare by saint Augustine who confesseth plainly that if their meaning were not knowen to be euill their wordes could well enough haue beene borne withall Admit then that a bishop of Rome being of such absolute authority as now they are could as cunningly as did the Pelagians couer and cloake an heresie Might not he be an heretike many yeares before he would be driuen to recant And might not he then by such meanes bring irreparable hurt to the church of God Thus we see that as by this doctrine that the pope cannot erre they goe about to assure vs that the head which they haue set ouer the church cānot deceiue vs if we wil be lead by him so their interpretation of that their position argueth in them great doubtfulnes y t they dare not defend their own fayings vnlesse they may expound their words after this manner that the pope cannot erre that is he cannot obstinately or stubbornly teach as a doctrine to be receiued of the whole church any heresie And I pray you what safety can the godly finde in following such a head as when he hath guided them into many errours yet he will not stubbornly stand in defence of them Such may wel be compared to souldiers that by the rash leading of an vnskilfull captaine are brought into the hands of their enemies and when the captaine seeth his folly he would faine mend it if he coulde and is sory for that he hath done But what helpeth this his late repentance the distressed souldiers nothing at all Euen so that the bishop of Rome cannot continue in his errour if it were true that he had some such priuiledge it might be good for himselfe But such a head is for others very dangerous because y ◠not all they who are seduced by such mens instruction or example are also reduced by their recantation or amendment as appeareth by multitudes of examples And so we see that this their interpretation standeth not with either their common receiued doctrine or with their intent and meaning which is to promise safety from errour vnto them that receiue that head Whereas in truth their meaning is to tell vs that the pope may be of a wrong iudgement but if he be much vrged he cannot be obstinate he wil not stand to it And whereas they defend that the pope cannot teach heresie as a doctrine publikely to be receiued in some respect I thinke it to be most true For seldome or neuer are there any popes that can teach either truth or heresie They cannot preach they cannot with wholesome doctrine feede their flocke they cannot deuide the foode of life and breake the bread of the word vnto Gods houshold seruants For want of knowledge they cannot of themselues doe much either in defence of truth or to maintaine errour But this exposition will not please them They haue another meaning For when they tell vs that the pope cannot be an heretike when he teacheth the whole church their meaning is plaine enough that in particular iudgements they may erre but not in their generall decrees or preachings or instructions Which they are forced to say for the auoiding of such inconueniences as might growe by defending the doing of many
answered that the physition said it was not wholsome for him I will haue it saith he in despite of God At another time missing a peacock which he had commaunded to be kept colde against night hee burst into extremitie of choller whereupon a cardinall mouing him to be quiet What said he was God angry for an aple in so much as he cast our first parents out of paradice for that matter and may not I being his vicar be angrie for my peacock The irreligious heart of this prophane pope could neuer haue burst out iuto such blasphemies against God but that in his excesse of pride he esteemed himselfe as God or else in affection euen besotted with atheisme hee said as did the wicked in the prophet Dauid There is no God And so hee proued that to be most true that the same prophet saith in another place man being in honour hath no vnderstanding he is like to the beasts that perish And thus we see howe the bishop of Rome being drunken with too wel liking of himselfe in his authoritie and high estate did not only exalt himselfe by his names aboue al men but made himselfe equall euen with the most high But least the bishop of Rome should seeme to be but God in name and not in deede as a shadow without a bodie and title without authoritie as were Paul the third his archbishops that he sent to the council of Trent whome he was faine to maintaine with his poore almes that he bestowed vpon them he therefore sheweth his prerogatiue and telleth what power and might he hath that he may prooue himselfe to be like to her that said in her heart I will ascend aboue the height of the clouds and I will be like the most Highest If I would indeuour to set downe all that might be said of the pride of the bishop of Rome or at the least of his impudent affection of his claw-backs it were harder to find an outgate then an entrance this field is so large to wander in For what is it that the Pope can not doe Yea what can God himselfe doe more then hee If wee will trust flattering Lawyeares in their approued and allowed bookes he is Christs vitar generall ouer heauen earth and hell ouer angels good and bad yea they tell vs that the pope can doe whatsoeuer God can doe except sinne It seemeth that they meane God can sinne but the pope is so clad with holinesse and compassed about with righteous dealing as with a garment that hee can in no wise sinne such a staine cannot be in his flesh such a clog cannot hang at his backe O proud blasphemie Can that man of sinne for Saint Paul doubtlesse speaketh of him iustly so called because he is a stumbling block to others and a cause of sinne to many thousands and himselfe also often a seruant or rather a sincke of sinne can he I say be without sinne Yea they tell vs that he may and that by the authoritie of pope Symmacus who doth testifie that Saint Peter did bequeath the euerlasting gift of Merites together with the in heritance of innocencie to his posteritie In somuch as if they haue not merits enough yet that sufficeth that Saint Peter hath done He addeth the reason because he I thinke he meaneth Saint Peter either doth aduaunce them that are worthie or doth lighten such as are aduaunced Now if the pope himselfe will say that he in respect of his chaire hath a succession of innocencie it is no great maruel if his flatterers will say he cannot sinne But if all the popes and their parasites would crie it out neuer so loud yet so long as their owne stories are remaining they shal be proued liers Where are now these censurers and seuere forbidders of Gods writings Why vse they not their authoritie to represse such blasphemies The Romish church can take vpon them to prohibit the writings of godly men yea if there be but a note in the margent of the fathers word for word out of the fathers whereby the reader may perchaunce be directed more readily to see the iudgement of that father in some point in controuersie although it change not the meaning of that place yet our seuere censurers still commaund that it be left out But these horrible blasphemies whereof al men may iustly be a shamed are not once misliked of sound not out of time but are melodius musicke in the eares of such holie fathers Can we hope for any good from them that call light darknesse and darknesse light euil good and good euill I feare such bad trees can bring forth no good fruit But to come to some particular points Let vs see what this petty God doth take vpon him and how he plaieth the God indeede For as I haue said the bare name of God although it be far too much that it should be giuen him by others or acknowledged of himselfe wil not please him but he must also doe as God doth And first whereas Christ is our only lawmaker and master as Christ himselfe telleth vs and therfore Saint Iames also exhorteth vs that we be not many masters yet this Romish Rabby will be our master also not contenting himselfe to deliuer that which he receaued from God as did Christ and his apostles whose footsteps he should not be ashamed to follow but he will teach vs his owne lessons and deliuer vs his owne doctrines And although he pretend the direction of Gods spirit yet euen hereby it appeareth that this is but a lying pretence and coulour wherewith they would cloke all their heresies and superstitions For the spirit shal not speake of himselfe but whatsoeuer he shall heare that shall he speake Aud this reason our Sauiour Christ yeeldeth why the spirite shall lead vs into all truth because he shall teach nothing of his own but that which he shall heare Therefore all new doctrines euen whatsoeuer hath beene added in substance of doctrine vnto that which Christ and his apostles left vs sauoureth of another spirit and not of that spirit of God which shall teach or suggest nothing but that which he hath heard What a master then is that great master not in Israell but in Italy that bringeth in huge heapes of doctrine which themselues confesse onely to rest vpon mens traditions which they call traditions of the church and haue no good warrant or sure ground in the word of God Doeth he not take vpon him Gods office Doeth he not make himselfe herein equall with God It is most plaine it cannot be denied But the infatiable ambition of those holy fathers will not suffer them to content themselues with that excesse of pride in that they take vpon them as God to make lawes and giue rules to Gods church vnlesse they also control and correct as seemeth good to them those lawes which God hath set downe and those ordinances which he