to the true Successor of Peter or otherwise we could not know that this is a true Councell and iustly confirmed by the Pope c. But with what degree of Faith do you beleeue this With that Diuine Faith saith the Other wherewith we beleeue Iesus Christ with the same ought we to beleeue this Paul the IV. to be the true Pope and not with any humane Faith which is subiect to be deceiued Behold a Iesuiticall Faith both grosly false and also wickedly blasphemous because that there cannot be an Infallibilitie in the Election of any Pope is manifest by two confessed and vncontrollable Consequences taken from two possible defects the one in the Popes Ordination the second in his Election First for his Ordination your Councell of Florence defineth That the truth of euery Sacrament dependeth vpon the intention of the Minister But None can be sure by certaintie of Faith saith Bellarmine that any such receiued the Sacrament of Ordination because none infallibly knoweth the intention of him that Ordaineth And Vega more vehemently It is as certaine saith he that we are not infallibly certaine of the receiuing of any Sacrament as it is certaine that we now liue Thus of the Popes Ordination Alphonsus à Castro is as bold with the Pope about his Election Which because it may not be Canonicall we are not to beleeue it saith he with a Catholike Faith Whereof your Cardinall giueth some Examples In which two respects many of your Schoole Doctors haue concluded that In the knowledge of this man to be a true Pope you haue no more but a morall certitude Whereof we shall speake more hereafter CHALLENGE THat Addition the beliefe whereof is onely humane morall and fallible cannot be a Declaration of an Article of Diuine and Infallible faith such as is that of the Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed But the word ROMANE is an Addition the Beliefe whereof is onely humane morall and fallible Ergo the Addition of the word ROMANE to the Catholike Church cannot be a proper Declaration of that Article in the Creed So vaine and vniust is your appropriation of the word Catholike to your Romane Church The eight Argument to proue that the Addition of the word ROMANE can be no Declaration of the Article of The Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed because it makes all periured that do professe it vpon Oath besides the heresie and blasphemie thereof SECT 11. THat in your profession of the Catholike Romane Church the word Romane is an Article of Faith challenging thereby a necessary subiection to the Bishop of Rome we haue heard already both in the Decrees of Popes and also in that Forme of an Oath which euery Ecclesiasticall person in your Church of what condition soeuer he be is enioyned to take swearing that The Romane Church is the Catholike Mother and Mistris Church vowing Obedience to the Bishop thereof and in the same Oath that this Romane Article with others is The Catholike faith without which there is none can be saued which is the proper tenor of an essentiall Article of faith Now in as much as the word CREDO in the Apostles Creed doth import A constant and infallible persuasion of the Christian Beleeuer as your owne Romane Catechisme doth truly instruct you and because to speake in the words of your owne Bozius These things which are propounded in the Creed are the Principles or foundations of all other things that are to be beleeued and ought at all times to be in themselues infallibly true in euery part otherwise they should be no Principles in as much as their truth is but doubtfull We by this your appropriating of the Article The Church without which none can be saued are constrained to pronounce you guiltie of a new Heresie in your faith Periurie in your Oath and Blasphemie in your excluding out of the state of Saluation the most vndoubted members of the mysticall body of Christ which is his Church I. CHALLENGE EVery new Article of Faith that is to say new Doctrine made necessary to saluation is an Heresie as you your selues will confesse But this Article The Catholike Romane Church without which there is no Saluation is a new Article as hath bene amply prooued because it is repugnant to the Article of The Catholike Church professed in the Apostolike Creed as hath bene made manifest in the Premisses by many Arguments Therefore your Article of The Catholike Romane Church without which there is no saluation must needs be esteemed Hereticall II. CHALLENGE EVery one bound to beleeue and to auouch vpon Oath any Doctrine as necessary to Saluation which is not of an infallible truth is thereby made guilty of Periurie But euery Romish Priest by the Bull of Pope Pius 4. is bound to beleeue vpon Oath that the Romane Church is the Catholike Church without which there is no saluation Albeit you yourselues haue confessed at large that this your doctrine standeth not vpon any infallible grounds of truth either in respect of Time past at the founding of the Church of Rome which was not instituted by any Diuine Ordinance or in respect of the Time present wherein you haue no full assurance of your Catholike Head the Pope or yet in respect of the Time to come when as you Confesse a Possibilitie that the Catholike Church may cease to be Romane because it may possibly be translated to another place Therefore are all Romish Priests necessarily inuolued in the crime of Periurie by swearing that to be a necessarie Article of Faith which is in so many respects defectiue and commeth short of all the Essentiall grounds of Faith III. CHALLENGE THat Article which excludeth from Saluation the vndoubtedly essentiall and liuely members of the Mysticall bodie of Christ which is his Church that is a doctrine vndoubtedly Blasphemous But your Article The Romane Church without which there is no saluation doth exclude from Saluation both those which before the Church of Rome was a Catholike Church suffered bonds imprisonment and Martyrdome it selfe for the profession of Christ next all Catechumenists and persons vniustly Excommunicated albeit departing this life in true faith and repentance and lastly all them who in the dayes of Antichrist when the Church as it is Romane as you say may peraduenture but as we thinke will Apostate from the Faith shall persist the constant and glorious Martyrs of Christ Iesus c. Therefore this Article cannot but be manifestly Blasphemous Thus much concerning our Proofes taken from the Consideration of the Article of Christian Faith in the Apostles Creed viz. The Catholike Church By which we haue euicted your Additiō of the word ROMANE to make an Article of Faith to be New False Scandalous Pernitious Hereticall and Blasphemous respectiuely CHAP. III. A Second generall Head of Confutation of the former Article is from the Consideration of the Iudgement of the Church by Examples of seuerall
That which we now contend for in the Popes of Rome may be cleared by an example of him that is called Emperour of Rome who because hee hath neither a foot of possession in Rome nor in the Territories thereof nor yet any professed Subiect inhabiting therein but the whole Princedome is belonging to the Pope your owne Diuines hold it a kinde of Soloecisme to name any at this day The Romane Emperour Therefore to alleadge a few of many that may be produced Lyra The Empire of Rome saith he hath for a long time beene without an Emperour Faber What obedience I pray you saith he doth Rome yeeld to her Monarch meaning the Emperour So to Now saith he is that temporall Dominion of the Citie of Rome ceased and your Iesuite Salmeron The Romane Emperour saith hee was ouerthrowne long agoe II. CHALLENGE THe Romish Babylon then by the Reuelation of Saint Iohn is that Citie of Rome whose place and people must be destroyed No people can be called Romane without they haue relation to Rome nor any people called The Church of Rome except they be Professors of the faith in Rome Therefore Saint Iohn prophecying of these things could not but beleeue that before the end of the world that Church which is now called The Church of Rome shall depart from the faith euen because this Departure must be from the sincere doctrine and worship of God vnto errour and Idolatrie Oh! that this were not at this day a iust Cause to challenge euery one to Come out of Babylon Both which we shall be ready in due time to proue by as true grounds as any haue hitherto beene deliuered That Saint Iohn's faith did not conceiue the now pretended Monarchie of the Pope aboue all other Bishops and Pastors in the Catholike Church SECT 16. WHat that Papall Monarchie is in your faith and how it is deriued we haue heard namely that because Saint Peter was the Vicar of Christ vpon earth as his ordinary Pastor ouer all the other Apostles therefore the Successors of Saint Peter in the same See are of the same authoritie and Iurisdiction ouer the whole Church of Christ and euery member thereof Hence issueth the Article of your now Romane faith that Without obedience and subiection to the Pope as the Catholike Bishop of the Catholike Church None can be saued The meditation vpon this Article begetteth a Probleme viz. whether Saint Iohn the Euangelist who liued 20. yeares after Saint Peter were indeede subordinate and subiect to the Iurisdiction of Linus or Cletus the immediate Successours of Saint Peter Either Saint Iohn was subiect to the Pope or he was not What say you It seemeth vnto mee saith your Iesuite that the Apostles who suruiued Peter were subiect to the Pope because the power of the Pope was alwayes ordinary and to continue in the Church Haue you any ground for this I cannot remember saith hee that I haue read in any Author any thing of this point So he CHALLENGE SAint Paul as hath beene proued reckoned these Three Peter Iames and Iohn equally Columnas that is The Pillars and as it were equally the three Chiefe Worthies among the Disciples who concerning the offices of their Apostleship receiued from Christ as your Cardinall Cusanus hath taught you Euery way an equall charge And without Controuersie the faith of Iohn and Paul was both the same Is it then possible for a Christian man to thinke that Iohn being that Apostle who was immediately chosen by Christ and equall to Peter should thinke himselfe subiect to Linus the Successour of Peter that he who for his sublimitie of knowledge in the mysteries of Christ was called The Diuine who was made the Pen-man of the holy Ghost in writing the Gospell and one for whose infallibility in the truth Christ offered vp praiers to his Father ought hee now to submit his iudgement vnto Linus one of the line of those Popes whereof Some haue beene by Generall Councels and by Popes themselues iudged for Heretikes And againe that Iohn who at the time of the Supper of our Lord leaned vpon the brest of our Sauiour when Peter you know was but next after Iohn should now prostrate himselfe before Linus the Successor of Peter and if this Ceremonie had beene so old to doe him the honour as to Kisse his feet And not this onely but to beleeue this Article of due Subiection to the Pope Without which none can be saued which indeede is more than to Kisse the feet or to licke the dust of the feet of Saint Peter's Successor Sure we are that the Disciples of Saint Iohn to wit the Christians of the Easterne Church were not of your beliefe who to adhere to the orders of Saint Iohn refused to obserue the Easter of the Latine Church which they would not haue done if they had beleeued Saint Iohn to haue beene subiect to those Romane Bishops or yet to Peter himselfe Before we can conclude you are to be exhorted to obserue the Iesuiticall front of Suarez who in a matter of this nature concerning Saluation durst make this Conclusion of the Apostles Subiection and subordination vnder a Pope namely as you haue heard him confesse without any Author besides himselfe Whereby you may discerne with what vntempered morter these men daube vp the Consciences of their Followers CHAP. V. That the Catholike and Apostolike Church of Christ it selfe at or about the Time of the foundation of the Church of Rome had no such Article of faith viz. The Catholike Romane Church without vnion wherewith there is no Saluation SECT 1. THe Churches vnto which Saint Paul writ for we name not the Romanes of whom wee haue intreated before were the Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Thessalonians and the dispersed Hebrewes As for the other Apostles Iames Peter Iohn Iude each one writ to Diuers those their Epistles which are intitled Catholike Epistles And the seauen Churches of Asia were they to whom the booke of the Apoealips or Reuelation was directed Among these the Apostles are instant and vrgent in inueying 1 against the Heresies of Iudaisme Saducisme of worshipping Angels 2 Against Apostasie and Antichristianitie 3 Against Diuisions and Schismes in the Church and abuse of Ecclesiasticall Orders therein And yet in all these there appeareth not any one Syllable or Iota to proue your Article of The Catholike Romane Church without vnion and subiection whereunto and to the Head thereof there is no saluation No nor yet so much as to intimate any one of the particles of this Article as first not to signifie that the Church of Rome was a Catholike much lesse THE Catholike Church as being in right which you say The Mother and Mistris of all others Not to note that in the conuincing of Heretikes Christians ought to looke as to their Cynosura to the Faith of the Romane Church nor that for the discouering
acknowledged that Gregory by impugning the Title of vniuersall Bishop would haue no Bishop so principall as to make all other members subiect vnto him So he Than which what can bee more apposite in this Cause and opposite vnto the now Romane Profession concerning the Title of Vniuersall Romane Bishop the Foundation of the sence of your owne Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church Yet this is not all but we furthermore auerre that Gregory condemned the Title of Vniuersall Bishop then vsed by the Patriarch of Constantinople in no other sence than it was after the daies of Gregory assumed and vsed by your Romane Popes whereunto such of your owne Historians who are very many beare full witnesse For they record that Pope Boniface the next Successour to Gregorie saue one did obtaine of the Emperour Phocas that Rome should haue the same Title of Head-ship ouer all other Churches which the Bishop of Constantinople had challenged to his See The onely difference will be this that the Head of the Popes vniuersall Iurisdiction vnder that Title as it were vnder a poysoned Miter hath growne farre more loathsome by impostumes and swolne with tyrannie than it could possibly be at the first vsurpation thereof being become no lesse intollerable than was that Emperour Phocas of whom Pope Boniface with much importunity receiued that Title Which Emperour your Cardinall Baronius noteth to haue beene A bloudy Tyrant So then we see that this Title of Vniuersall Bishop was abandoned by Gregory as extremely Impious But some peraduenture would bee willing to know his reason heereof Saint Gregory will satisfie any one that shall bee desirous to vnderstand the mischiefe heereof Because the Vniuersall Church saith hee must needs goe to ruine whensoeuer hee that is the Vniuersall Bishop thereof shall chance to fall VVhich Assertion of Saint Gregory doth brand your Church with Two blacke Notes of Apostasie and Antichristianitie CHALLENGE CAtholike or Vniuersall Church and Vniuersall Bishop of the same Church are in your doctrine as truely Relatiues as Master and Seruant the one cannot be denied without the other Goe too now then blazon your Papall Inscription in the highest stile that you can inuent more than Vniuersall it cannot be and animate it with the perfectest spirit that can be infused into it more absolute none can expect than that which you ascribe vnto your Pope of Rome which is that The Popes iudgement is infallible in defining of any doctrine of faith But why Because say you if he as a publike person and Iudge of the Church should erre by concluding any thing against faith then the vniuersall Church which is bound to follow him should likewise erre So hee This is your Romane Profession which may bee vnto vs a perfect Argument of your Apostasie from the ancient Romane faith maintained in the dayes of Saint Gregorie as thus The now Romane Article is to beleeue that the Pope of Rome is the Vniuersall Bishop of the Church Catholike and therefore cannot erre in any doctrine of faith insomuch that the Church subiect to this Romane Bishop must be accounted the Onely Church on earth without which there is no saluation But the faith of Saint Gregorie contrarily standeth thus Whatsoeuer Bishop he be Romane or other that professeth himselfe the Vniuersall Bishop or Head is subiect to Error Therefore none ought to assent to any such Assumption lest that that one erring the whole Church of Christ should erre with him So then you forsooth see an Infallibility in the vsurpation of that Title as proper to the Pope wherein Saint Gregorie did foresee the baine of an Vniuersall Erring and falling from the faith To conclude Saint Gregorie held the title which betokeneth an Vniuersall Dominion ouer the whole Church to be so direfully pernicious that hee consequently condemned the Vniuersall Subiection vnto one Bishop the now Article of the Romane Church as Pernicious and Antichristian To whom also your Iesuites haue taught you to adde two other Popes Pelagius and Leo who in like manner condemned and disclaimed that Title CHAP. VII Our second Argument against the Article of necessitie of Subiection to the Romane Church and Pope is taken from Comparisons made betweene the Bishop and Church of Rome with other Bishops and Churches by the ancient Fathers SECT 1. AGainst an Article of an vsurped Dominion of one Church ouer all other there can be no better Argument than from the Comparison of other Churches with that one which pretendeth her selfe to be the Mother and Mistris of all the rest Vpon this consideration you haue beene vrged by One who for learning and iudgement in Antiquitie was hardly to be seconded by any He posed you from the testimonies of the writings of Dionysius Areopagita and Ignatius the most ancient of Fathers Where supposing That Dionysius to be as truely that great Areopagita and as worthy an Author as you would haue him to be hee spurreth you a necessary question Why Dionysius was so vtterly silent in not mentioning the Vniuersall visible Head of the Church reigning at Rome if at that time there had beene any such Monarchicall Head there especially seeing hee professedly writ of the Ecclesiasticall Hieâ—archie and gouernment or is it credible and not rather monstrous that hee writing of the mysticall rites of the Church should omit all mention of this chiefe mysterie of one supreame Head and Monarch of the Church at Rome being so pertinently inuited thereunto by that matter subiect which hee had there in hand to wit by the Hierarchie of the Church if this doctrine had beene of faith in that age This saith hee remoueth your friuolous Obiection By the same reason hee obiecteth against you the Epistles of Ignatius the most ancient Martyr and Bishop of Antioch that hee being frequent in setting forth the Order Ecclesiastical and dignitie of Bishops vpon diuers occasions should forbeare all mention of the Monarchie of Saint Peter or any Romane Pope But we returne to our owne Obseruations out of Antiquitie by equall Comparisons of other Bishops with the Bishop of Rome beginning at the same Ignatius 1 He writing to the Church of Trallis and exhorting them vnto obedience to Bishops as to the Apostles instanceth equally in Timothie Saint Paul's Scholler as in Anacletus Successor to Saint Peter 2 Irenaeus liued next to the Apostles times who referreth his Reader for direction in the right of Traditions as well to Polycarpus Bishop of Smyrna in the East as to Linus Bishop of Rome in the West 3 Tertullian to secure Christians in the Doctrine of the Apostles prescribeth vnto them that they consult with the Mother-Churches immediately founded by the Apostles naming aswell Ephesus in Asia and Corinth in Achaia as Rome in Italie And againe for the persons mentioning to the same purpose aswell Polycarpus ordained by Saint Iohn as Clemens by Peter Wee shall not neede to make any Notes or Comments vpon the
Rome as it is tearmed Catholike Your answer is that Among the Causes which by Diuine Law are referred vnto the Pope one is to decree what Scriptures are Canonicall Well then let this bee our First Question whether the Church of Rome in the dayes of Saint Hierome decreed the Epistle of Saint Paul to the Hebrewes to be Canonicall And Saint Hierome saith that Although formerly all other Churches in the East did account it Canonicall yet it was not receiued as Canonicall in the Latine or Romane Church In the Second place it is inquirable whether vpon this difference Saint Hierome will yeelde to the iudgement of the East and Greeke Church rather than of the West and Latine Church in a Cause of so great moment And Saint Hierome resolueth saying Although the Latine Church doth not admit of this Epistle as Canonicall wee notwithstanding saith hee doe receiue it Say now was Saint Hierome herein a Catholike or not you must needs grant he was a Catholike seeing that since his dayes your Church hath decreed that Epistle to the Hebrewes to be held Canonicall whence it will irresistibly follow that Saint Hierome who held herein with the rest of the Catholike Church against the Church of Rome in discerning of a part of Canonicall Scripture did thereby iudge the Church of Rome not to bee The Catholike Church Wee may see the same concerning the Canon of Scriptures of the Old Testament whereof your Church of Rome hath decreed in the last Councell of Trent as followeth If any doe not receiue as Canonicall the booke of Hester Daniell Baruch Ecclesiasticus Wisdome Iudith Tobias and the Two Bookes of Maccabees with all their parts as they are in the Vulgar edition let him be Anathema and accursed But say now was Saint Hierome of this Faith did he beleeue all those Bookes and their parts now mentioned to be Canonicall Nay did he not abandon them as Apocrypha and not properly Diuine Scriptures Yes saith your Cardinall Saint Hierome said of these that they were not within the Canon of Scriptures where he speaketh not of the Canon of the Iewes onely So he meaning that hee spake of the Canon of Christians If therefore the Church of Rome at that time were of the opinion of Saint Hierome then doth That ancient Church of Rome in reiecting those Bookes as Apocrypha condemne This now Romane Church which hath Canonized them for true Scriptures And if Saint Hierome in iudging these Apocrypha Bookes worthy to be excluded out of the Canon of Christians did herein dissent from the Church Rome in his dayes then did he againe beleeue that the Church of Rome was not The Catholike and Vniuersall Christian Church CHALLENGE WHereas your Obiectors haue dealt like a sort of Trades-men who shew not their wares but in darke lights whereby their Chapmen are often mistaken in their Trafficke we contrarily haue set before you the best kinde of Illustration namely the Comparison of things ioyntly one with another As for Example 1. Comparing Pope with Pope as Damasus a true Catholike with Liberius in apparance an Heretike Wee inferre Saint Hierome his no-beliefe of Gods perpetuall Assistance by Diuine Direction of the Pope 2. Comparing Pope with Bishop as Damasus with Petrus Bishop of Alexandria in Aegypt vpon whom Saint Hierome ioyntly relied in his Opposition against Heretikes Wee inferre that Saint Hierome beleeued not a Necessity of a singular Communion with the Pope 3. Comparing the Pope with Saint Hierome himselfe who although hee had beene a Scribe to the Pope and therefore so neere to the supposed fountaine of Oracles yet was glad to take long iournies and spend much time to Learne the Interpretation of Scriptures from Gregorie of Nazianzum and Didymus of Antioch and not so onely but did also instruct Pope Damasus in the knowledge of Scriptures Wee inferre that Saint Hierome did not beleeue your now Romane Principle which is to referre the last and safest Resolution for vnderstanding of the Sense of Scriptures to the iudgement of the Pope 4 Comparing the Citie of Rome and his Clergie with Palestine and hirs and Hierome not doubting to call Rome Babylon purple Whore strange Land and her Clergie Factious Ignorants and shewing his great contentment which hee found else-where We inferre that Rome is not alwayes to containe that Schoole of learning that Theatre of Sanctitie that Temple of perfit Worship which you vsually boast off 5 Comparing Bishopricke with Bishopricke Saint Hierome equalling the greatest as Rome with the least as Eugubium In honore Sacerdotij In honour of Priesthood And what Saint Hierome meaneth by Sacerdotium who knoweth not Wee inferre that Saint Hierome neuer beleeued the Prae-potency of the Bishop of Rome ouer other Bishops which you call Popedome to be founded vpon Diuine Ordinance 6 Comparing Church with Church as the Westerne or Latine Church whereof Rome is a chiefest member with the East or Greeke Church and all other Churches besides and Saint Hierome forsaking the Custome and iudgement of the West and Latine Church and yeelding to the East and Greeke Churches in a Doctrine which is the Foundation of all Fundamentall Articles to wit the true Canon of Scriptures both in the New Testament and in the Old We inferre that Saint Hierome did not beleeue either a Necessitie of all Vnion with the Romane Church in Doctrine or yet an absolute Dominion of the Romane Church aboue all others Whatsoeuer your reply be you must either expunge your now Romane Article out of the Canon of Faith or else raze the name of Saint Hierome out of your Calendar of Saints VII Saint Ambrose beleeued not the now Romane Article of Necessitie of Vnion and Subiection to the Romane Church SECT 7. SAint Ambrose Bishop of Milane is honored by your Memoriall of him in your Romane Calendar but much more in his owne Bookes and in the mindes of all Orthodox Christians in all ages since he liued for Confessor and Doctor of the Church of whom Saint Augustine could say I haue had experience of his graue constancie labours and perils for the Catholike Cause which the whole Romane world doth commend and report as well as I. This Saint the more excellent hee is the more forcible his Testimony ought to be whether it be on your side or on ours We are willing first to vnderstand what you can obiect Your Obiection out of Saint Ambrose answered Your Cardinall his Argument is this Ambrose calleth Pope Damasus the Rector of the whole Church and his Brother Satyrus would not admit of a Bishop to heare him before he vnderstood that he consented with Catholike Bishops That is saith he with the Church of Rome Ergo the Church of Rome is the Head of the Church Catholike Wherein your Cardinall laboureth of the same Elench whiles hee mistakes the words respectiuely spoken to one person Pope Damasus and circumstantially for one time as if they were absolutely so ment
but to signifie that hee ment not the Chaire of Iurisdiction in One but of Vnion equally in Many he addeth The other Apostles were the same with Peter indued with equall honour and power Therefore by Chaire hee meant not any particular See of Peter but the Vnion of one Vniuersall Church gouerned by an Aristocraticall Equality of many We leaue the true Peter and come to the counterfeit whom you call your Pope and see if you can take any better hold either at the word Episcopatus Bishoprick or Episcopus Bishop There is one Bishopricke saith Cyprian dispersed throughout the world consisting of the vnanimous multitude of many Bishops If by One Bishopricke were meant onely the See of Rome then should there be so many Bishops of Rome as there are Bishops throughout the world This one Sentence of Cyprian breaketh the necke of your Cardinals conceit that will haue vs to vnderstand by Bishopricke in Cyprian the Indiuiduall Bishopricke of the Pope of Rome and not a generall Complexion and Comprehension of All. But that you may further know that Cyprian himselfe will challenge a part in this Bishopricke as well as the Pope Wee saith he that gouerne in the Church ought to hold Vnity that so we may proue the Bishopricke to be but one The Bishopricke is but one a portion whereof is wholly and fully held of Euery Bishop To signifie that in the Essentiall nature of a Bishop euery Bishop is equall and the Collection of All doth equally make vp this One Vniuersall Bishopricke Which can no more agree as your Cardinall would haue it to the Particular Bishopricke of Rome than if hee would conclude that because there is One Man-hood whereof euery man whatsoeuer in the world hath equally a portion therefore this Man-hood is proper to Clement Pope of Rome If your Plea faile in the word One Bishopricke it will neuer preuaile in the word One Bishop for Bishopricke and Bishop are Relatiues and inferre the same Consequence Cyprian writing to Pope Cornelius saith that There ought to be but One Bishop in the Catholike Church which soundeth in the braines of your Teachers that by Catholike Church is ment the Vniuersall Church of Christ and by One Bishop particularly Cornelius the then Bishop of Rome A Glosse which neither Cyprian nor Cornelius himselfe will admit Not Cornelius who describing the lewd properties of Nouatus who sought to snatch the Bishopricke of Rome from him Nouatus saith he would haue vs to thinke forsooth that hee did forget that there ought to be but One Bishop in the Catholike Church wherein there are six and forty Priests and seauen Deacons where the word Catholike Church is not taken in the proper sense of Vniuersall Church as you would haue it to make him an Vniuersall Bishop but it is taken for a Church professing the Catholike Faith in which signification the word Catholike Church doth agree as well with any Orthodox Church as with the Church of Rome You discerne this as well as we for hee speaketh expresly of a Catholike Church which hath but Fortie and six Priests and but seauen Deacons You are wee thinke already ashamed to heare of such a paucitie of Priests and Deacons within albeit but the Suburbs of the Citie of Rome which to pronounce of the whole and Vniuersall Church Catholike throughout the world seemeth to be as loud a lye almost as can be in the Vniuersall world and as little truth then can there be in your Obiections Wee returne to Cyprian who sometimes speaketh of One Bishop at large and sometimes with Relation to himselfe Nouatian saith hee could not obtaine the Bishopricke meaning of Rome although hee had bin made Bishop namely thereof by his fellow Bishops that is to say Nouatian Bâ—shops Who then should haue the Bishopricke Who but Cornelius who was made Bishop of Rome for this is implied by his Orthodox fellow Bishops If in this place Bishop must signifie One onely Bishop how commeth the Bishop of Rome to haue Fellow-Bishops Doe not Onely and Also make a plaine Solecisme And other Bishops there alwayes were except when you make onely the Pope the One Bishop as the onely Vicar of Christ you make all other Bishops against your owne Conclusions to be but the Vicars of the Pope At the length Cyprian commeth to plead his owne Cause Once writing to Pope Cornelius I cannot but speake with griefe saith hee and I am constrained to say it when a Bishop elected in peace and approued of his people Foure yeares c. Where by Bishop hee could not vnderstand Cornelius Pope of Rome who liued Bishop but Two yeares but ment indeede himselfe Againe writing to his Aduersary Pupianus who sought to ouertop him Hence sprang Schismes and Haeresies saith Cyprian when that one Bishop that gouerneth the Church is insolently contemned as who should say the Fraternitie hath not had a Bishop these sixe yeares nor the Flocke a Shepheard nor God a Priest Which words the iniurie hee receiued of his Aduersary compelled him to speake of himselfe and his owne modestie to speake in the Third person as not of himselfe Lastly when hee calleth the Church One which saith hee possesseth all the grace of Christ the spouse of the Church wherein speaking of himselfe we haue authoritie and rule must the word Church here also Indiuidually point out the Particular Church of Rome So should Cyprian be said to haue gouerned the Particular See of Rome which whether it were alone or with Cornelius it dissolueth his Monarchie What shall wee say to the sayings of Cyprian if hee had beleeued your Article of Papall Monarchie as a Doctrine of Faith hee that laid downe his life for the Profession of our true Monarke and Head Christ the Lord of life was hâ—e either such a Coward that hee durst not plainely professe this Faith or else such an Infant as that hee could not expresse it in the proper style of that Article concerning the Pope of Rome the Bishop of Bishops the Father of Fathers the High-Priest of Christ and Monarch of the Vniuersall Church or at least some one Syllable to that effect of which Attributes your Cardinall hath made a faire Diademe and fitted it onely to your Head the Pope And so indeede Cyprian would haue instiled Pope Cornelius if he had bin of your Faith For Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh Yet what Faith did that holy mouth of Saint Cyprian vtter in his inscribing of Pope Cornelius In all his Epistles to that Pope hee saluteth him with onely Charissime Frater Most deare Brother and taketh his Vale with the same Most deare Brother Farewell And in his Epistles vnto others falling into mention of the same Pope Cornelius whom hee indeede both much loued and honoured yet hee exceedeth not these Epithets Our fellow-Bishop Cornelius our Collegue or fellow in office Cornelius and O Brother Antonianus
our Brother Cornelius c. Behold this in a secular glasse and conceiue what a despight it were vnto a King to heare his Vassall salute him with a Farewell fellow Henrie Fie fie what will you make of the Fathers will you iudge them so witlesse or senselesse as not to haue vnderstood their Morals Yet so you propound them For some where they giue glorious Titles to the Popes of Rome and in euery such one you point out the Pope the Monarch of the Church notwithstanding the same Fathers gaue the like Titles also to others Sometime they ioyne more familiarly with Popes by Tearmes of Fellowship and Brotherhood and yet euen then also you will haue them to beleeue your Pope to be their Monarch What Solecismes must these be The First as if one should put the Diadem vpon the Kings foot the Second as if hee should put the Kings shooe vpon his head This is not spoken by vs to note the holy Fathers of such default farre be it from vs but to condemne your Authors and Disputers of want of sobrietie that thus reason beyond all reason Thus haue you heard Cyprian interpret his Words by his owne Word Will you now heare Cyprian speake by his Acts and Deeds wee shall but be your remembrancers of that which hath bin largely proued already as namely Cyprian his Reprehending and taunting the person of Stephen the Pope of Rome and Successour to Cornelius contradicting his Decrees opposing his Romane Councell disclaiming his claime of Appeales contemning his threats of Excommunication Can you perswade your selues that Cyprian could haue escaped the crueltie of your Romish Inquisition if hee had liued and so behaued himselfe a Bishop among you at this day All this while we haue said nothing of the Corruptions of the writings of Cyprian which your Papalists feede vpon Our like Discouerie of the like Vanitie of your Proofes out of other the Latine Fathers SECT 9. THE Second Father is OPTATVS Concerning whom your Obiection maketh fâ—r vs a good Answere For if Optatus as hee saith followed the iudgement of Cyprian than it followeth that the foresaid Iudgement of Cyprian may resolue vs of the Doctrine of Optatus to wit that by One Chaire or Church hee ment the whole Vniuersall Church professing the same Catholike Faith and that the Particular Church of Rome as it then stood was an excellent Portion thereof built vpon the same Faith of Peter which all Christians professe but onely a Portion because the same Father obiecteth against the Donatists their want of Vnion with the Churches of Asia commended by Saint Iohn in his Reuelation as well as with Rome You haue no fellowship saith hee with the seauen Angels of Asia whatsoeuer is without these Seauen Churches is an alien namely from the Catholike Church and Saluation Which Doctrine of Optatus is sufficient to proue all Appropriators of an Infallible and Perpetuall Church to onely Rome to be little better then Donatists If you require a further Answer you may receiue it from a farre more elegant penne which will tell you that Optatus who required a necessary Vnion with the Romane Chaire yet neuer taught any Necessity of Vniuersall Subiection vnto it Nay so farre was he from acknowledgement of Monarchicall Dominion in the Pope that he calleth him absolutely his Fellow So he As for Necessity of Vnion it is no more than he required to be had as you haue heard vnto the Churches of Asia so that whensoeuer Rome as Asia hath done shall depart from the sincerity of the Apostolicall profession the departure from that must dissolue the Necessity of Vnion The third Latine Father is Ambrose the fourth Hierom the fifth Augustine If we thought it not an iniury vnto you to repeat the former Answers which haue beene made to all these Obiections it were an easie matter for vs to be superfluous When you shall reuiew the places then we doubt not but it will seeme as well to you as vnto vs an hatefull thing to see what violence your Obiections haue offered to these witnesses of Antiquity but much more to their owne consciences in inforcing these witnesses to speake the language of Babell and conspiring together to build the Tower of Papall Monarchy which both their words and Acts as you haue already heard do in a manner confound The sixt is Prosper whose meaning might haue bene better knowne if he had written in prose and not assumed vnto him the liberty of a Poet. Yet he and the seauenth namely Victor Vticensis call the Church of Rome The Head of all Churches But how in power and Iurisdiction you could neuer prooue this out of any ancient Father No but euen as Antioch and Constantinople with other Churches haue bene so called in other respects The eight is Vincentius Lyrinensis in whose Testimonie your Cardinall doth first mistake a mountaine for a man and secondly painting for person For Lyrinensis called not the Popes of Rome namely Felix and Iulius nor the Church of Rome but the Citie of Rome The Head of all the world What is more frequent than Rome to be called the Head of the Church Caput orbis after an Ethnick stile because of the Ciuill Dominion thereof ouer other Nations Hee called also Carthage on the North and Milan on the South the Sides by reason of their situations onely figuratiuely And although he had in like manner called the Bishop of Rome the Head and the other two Bishops his Sides must therefore the Pope of Rome be truly and absolutly iudged to be the Monarchicall Head of the Church in the meaning of Lyrinensis Then must you as absolutely beleeue that Cyprian of Carthage and Ambrose of Milan and their Successors were alwaies to continue the Sides of the Catholike Church Is this good learning thus to snatch at aduantages of naked Metaphors and with Michol to present vnto vs an image for a man But who is there that knoweth not how little the Church of Rome is beholden to Vincentius Lyrinensis who writing a Booke which you your selues call Little in bulke but most great in weight and worth wherein he giueth Resolution to all Catholikes how they should discerne the True Church yet neuer remembred your Romane Article of making the Church of Rome the Mother Mistris and Monarch of all the Churches in the world without Subiection whereunto as you say there is no Saluation But how should a man remember that which hee neuer forgot or forget that which he neuer learnt For if this had bene his Faith his booke of Resolutions which you say was so Little might haue bene comprehended in one leafe and almost in one line to wit There is but one Catholike Church which is the Roman which hath the Promise of perpetuall infallibility stand euer to this and then you cannot but be a good Catholike Nay he matcheth the Easterne Church with the Westerne as
is not iustifiable in the Conscience of euery sound Christian First hee held it a way to Heresie for any Church to take vpon her to create a new Article of Faith such as hee beleeued the Romish Doctrine of Indulgences to be Secondly he taught it to be a Satonicall lye to constitute that for an Article of Faith which is in it selfe a meere falshood Thirdly hee proclaimed your Doctrine of Indulgences to be a Blasphemous Article because it is not onely a new and false Doctrine but also the very Nurse of all Impietie Each point is worthy to be Discussed Touching the First point your Philiarchus will haue you to Take heede of the Heresies of Luther in teaching that the Church hath no power to create new Articles of Faith So hee If this be true then marke I pray you what fellowes and Companions Luther hath or Patrons rather of his Heresie accordingly as your owne Doctors will teach you who doe not onely openly professe for themselues that The now Church ought to relie vpon the Doctrine anciently taught in the Apostles times but also confesse that The ancient Fathers taught that the Church deliuereth no new Faith but alwaies confirmeth and explicateth the ancient Faith Alleaging for proofe hereof the authoritie of Irenaeus Hierome Vincentius Lirinensis Nor can any produce one Father in all Antiquitie that did not account euery new Article of Faith that is to say euery new Doctrine made necessary to saluation to be no better than a new Heresie So iustifiable is Luther in this point Next Luther in his first Assumption saith that the Doctrine of the Popes Indulgence is a New Doctrine of Faith and that it is imposed vpon the Church of Rome as an Article of Faith Whereof if peraduenture you should be ignorant your owne Popes would instruct you Pope Pius the IV. setteth downe this of Indulgences among his other Articles concluded of in the Councell of Trent as Necessarily to be beleeued vpon danger of Damnation And Pope Leo the X. tooke this as his hint in condemning Luther for denying any power to be resideÌ„t in the Church to establish a new Article of Faith An Articleâ—hen â—hen it is made and that it is also New which Doctrine of IndulgeÌ„ces you beleeue to be an easing or helping of Soules out of the paines of Purgatorie-fier we hope you may be satisfied from your selues who teach first that all Doctrine which is not New is deriued either from Scripture or antient Tradition But concerning your Doctrine of Indulgences some of your owne Doctors haue made bold to proclaime saying It is not found either in Scripture or in other writings of ancient Fathers Whereof also your Romane Champion against Luther euen in this Question concerning Indulgences doth grant that There was no vse of Indulgences in the beginning of the Church Christian. Which must necessarily haue then bene if at that time it had bene a Doctrine of Faith except you will confesse that there was then no Purgatory-fier at all nor any soules of men departing this life in the guilt of veniall sinnes but that all the scores of debts of temporall punishments were then wiped off at the death of euery Christian in those Apostolicall times And accordingly giue vs some reason how afterwards that Fier was kindled and what was the fewell that set it on a flame after the space of 1294. yeares when Boniface the 8. was Pope Who as your selues know after that the world was affrighted with Purgatory-torments was the first that extended and applyed Indulgences vnto Purgatory This made your Frier Castro in his coniecture of greater antiquity in them to excuse their Noueltie saying Indulgences are not therefore to be contemned as being admitted but of late because many things saith he are made knowne to posteritie of which the more ancient times were ignorant Behold now the great reuerence forsooth you haue of the iudgement of Antiquity Besides to pull vp this weede by the roots the ground of Indulgences as you teach is The spirituall Threasury of the Church consisting in the satisfactory and meritorious workes of Supererrogation done by the faithfull Which notwithstanding as you likewise know your Doctors of Louaine and some Schoolemen affirme were anciently wanting in the Church So then your Doctrine of Indulgences is New in Institution New in Practise New in the Extent New in the Roote and foundation and euery way a New Article So iustifiable is Luther in his Assumption calling it New Thirdly Luther called this Doctrine False yea and Impious also and Blasphemous And false it must needs be if it be but New But how naughty also and impious the vent of Indulgences was your noble Historian can best report giuing you an instance in the same Pope Leo Who saith he vnto his sinne of ill dispersing of Indulgences added a farre greater for although he was of himselfe prone enough to all licentiousnesse yet by the instigation of Cardinall Puccius in whom he had great confidence he gathered huge summes of money by sending his Breeues abroad euery where promising expiation of all sinnes and life euerlasting vpon a certaine price which any should giue according to the haynousnesse of his offence Then rose vp Martin Luther a Professor of Diuinity in Wittemberge who first confuting and then condemning the Sermons which were made for Indulgences at length questioned that power which the Pope assumed to Himselfe in the same Breeues So he And what other we pray you can be the Consequence of this piece of Doctrine but that which if you be to seeke you may learne from experienced Authors within your owne Church who say as appeareth in the Margent that When first Indulgences were set on sale with full Pardons men did lesse abstaine from wickednesse and the keyes of the Church became vile That Pope Leo the 10. was Too too indulgent in granting Indulgences That Popes are the most expert Alchemists By Turning their leade into gold through their Negligences otherwise called Indulgences Noting that Papall Indulgences to Sinners worketh Negligence in well doing That They Measuring all things by gaine tyrannize ouer the people sitting in the seate of Simon Magus or else of Caiphas We might easily loade you with multitudes of Inuectiues of your owne Authors against the Impiety of Papall Indulgences so iustifiable is Luther in his Opposition against them insomuch that Erasmus held it An Impiety not to defend him This Luther who in the opinion of the Popular Auditors so farre ouercame his Aduersarie Ecchius in a Disputation held at Lipsia that your Castro doth instance in this Example and thereupon prefixeth a Rule To auoide publike Disputation with as he accounteth and calleth Protestants pertinacious Heretikes The Summe of All may be comprized in a few words The Patrons of Romish Indulgences by making it an Article of Faith do Canonize and Deifie a Nouelty a Falshood and a
did as one that had bene freed take another wife by the authority of the Church and consent of her Parents by which wife after some yeares he had children But loe his former wife vnlooked for returneth againe and requireth to haue her husband againe that had done ill in marrying another The man maruailing hereat and being loath to be diuorced from his latter wife maketh long delaies yet at length brought into Law and being cast gaue way to the Truth and taketh his first wife againe by the iudgement of the Church When now the Parents friends of the latter wife made the like wonderment as these men do against me saying vnto him thou hel-hound thou wicked couenāt-breaker c. And if a man would consider this businesse shall he not see as it were in a glasse the very image of that Husband in me For indeed I seeing I beleeued that no such Truth of obedience had bene c. I compelled my selfe in a second Couenant and thereto plighted my troth Wherefore I thought that I had kept lawfull Companie but when the TRVTH came which is euery mans first wife maried to him in publike Baptisme which wil require the first Promise at al mens hands to her I applyed to her I cleaued and from my second knot as of none effect by the iudgement of my Church I departed And shall any man thinke it indifferent that I shall be called a Liar because I obey the Truth c. I am by most graue iudgement of the Truth diuorced from the Church of Rome which it was not lawfull for me to keepe still and am compelled to take my wife TRVTH to me when she cometh againe Thus farre B. Gardiner The right and accurate Sence of this Similitude may as the beames of the Sunne dispell the foggie myst of Romish error concerning the Question we now haue in hand it being taken from the consideration of our Christian Vow made in Baptisme Wherein we are to obserue the Parties betrothed together which are the Soule of a Christian and the Truth of God in Christ and secondly the Parties and if I may so say Parents by whose consent and Authoritie this mariage is made which in the inward is our Father euen GOD in the vnity of Three persons Father Sonne and holy Ghost and in the outward is our spirituall Mother mentioned in our Creed at the rime of our Vow in Baptisme The holy Catholike Church It especially therefore concerneth euery Votarie that hath vowed himselfe in Baptisme to learne to acknowledge his true Father his true Mother and his owne true Wife For Father he is baptized in the name of the Blessed Trinitie in the vnity of one God euerlasting not in the name of any man whatsoeuer as Saint Paul prooueth against the Schismatikes in the Church of Corinth that would seeme Some to hold of Cephas that is Peter Some of Paul as though the Gospell or Truth were Pauls or Peters he answereth them No his Reason is interrogatiuely Were you baptized in the name of Paul As much as to say He onely is essentially your spirituall Father in whose Name you are baptized Secondly the Mother is mentioned in our Vow at Baptisme to be The holy Catholike or Vniuersall Church not any particular Church though by the particular Church I am brought into the Catholike We say not any Particular Church because euery Particular Church as hath beene Confessed may possibly erre and Apostate from Truth But the Catholike is built vpon a Rocke immoueable as the earth yea or the highest heauens Lastly the Wife whereunto euery Soule is betroathed in Baptisme is onely that Truth which was first reuealed by Christ vnto his Apostles as the Apostle teacheth If any preach any other Gospell than that which you haue receiued that is to say already hold him Accursed Now giue vs leaue to trie what kind of Mariage is made by your Votaries in the Church of Rome First by beleeuing the Infallibility of the Pope in whatsoeuer Reuelations which he shall propound to be beleeued of all Christians it is to assume a new Father which is thus prooued If I saith Saint Paul or an Angel from heauen preach otherwise let him be Accursed but who in all the Church of Rome will say Though the Pope teach vs otherwise then was Apostolically and Primitiuely taught from the immediate Doctrine of Christ I shall account him Anathema Next the Partie baptized in your Church is Catechized to beleeue the Church of Rome to be The Catholike and Mother-Church of all other Churches which wee through-out this Treatise haue prooued to be an Imposterous Schismaticall and Blasphemous Article First Imposterous because The Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed was extant in the dayes of the Apostles diuerse yeares before Rome was that we may so say Baptized to haue the name of a Church Secondly Schismaticall because it being as hath bene shewed but a Particular Church and vsurping the Title of The Catholike Church doth thereby peremptorily diuide her selfe from All other Churches of Christ which both for Truth and Extent make a farre more Catholike Church than she is Thirdly Blasphemous in Damning by this Article of the Catholike Romane Church all the most glorious Christian Fathers Martyrs Professors and Churches as well Primitiue as Successiue which are infinite that haue denyed Subiection to the Romane Church All which Particulars haue bene prooued at large In the last place each Christian in Baptisme being espoused to his wife Truth which can be but One euen that whereof Saint Paul spoke saying That which you haue receiued before and accordingly Saint Iude Contend for the Faith which once was deliuered to the Saints therefore euery other New Article of Faith as it were a later Consort and wife that shall bee admitted is no true loyall wife but an vnlawfull Concubine and strumpet So then so many Concubines may the Church of Rome be said to betroath her Children vnto as she hath set downe New Articles in her Romane Creed and imposed vpon all her Ecclesiastikes vnder the bond of an Oath Among which is your Article of Indulgences from which as from a supposititious wife Luther necessarily made his diuorce returning vnto the Primitiue Truth whereunto in holy Baptisme he had formerly plighted his Troth THESIS VI. Your Second and most Popular Obiection against LVTHER in his Opposition to your Romane Church vrging in him to prooue his Doctrine by immediate Succession and by Naming his Teachers Before him is as fond as the other SECT 19. I. FOr the no-Necessitie of Name we reade first that our Sauiour Christ answering a question concerning Diuorce whether it were lawfull for the husband to put away his wife at his pleasure or no an Abuse which by the hardnesse of the Iewes hearts had continued among them many hundred yeares sendeth them to Gods first Institution of Marriage set downe in the beginning of Scripture saying From the beginning it
he the Church to be a Companie of men obedient to the Bishop of Rome for the time being and we affirme the Church of Rome to be alone the Catholike and Apostolike Church The Third and last thus None doth communicate saith he with the Catholike Church except he subiect himselfe vnto the Pope yea although otherwise he professe the Catholike Faith For vnion with the Head is a note of the Church So standeth the now Article of your Romane Faith Foure remarkeable Points more distinctly to be obserued in your former Romane Profession concerning the Article of The Catholike Romane Church SECT 5. FIrst obserue that the word ROMANE is not added only for distinction-sake to discerne it from other Churches which in respect of the Catholike doctrine of Faith professed in them haue equally had that Addition as to bee called the Catholike Corinthian or the Catholike Ephesian the Catholike Thessalonian or as we now the Catholike English Church because so it could be no more Catholike than other particular Churches as your Iesuite confesseth and consequently there could be no matter of controuersie But now the word ROMANE is added to the Article of the Catholike Church by way of Transcendencie and as the same Iesuite resolueth supreamly comprehending all other Churches professing the Catholike faith vnder the obedience of the Pope of Rome as the vniuersall Vicar of Christ. So that this Article is become not onely one point of Controuersie but indeede the chiefe Head of all the Controuersies which are between the said Romane Church and all other Churches at this day Secondly you conceiue this Appropriation to be Diuini Iuris in a strict sence ordained by Christ himselfe and not onely by Ecclesiasticall Institution Thirdly vpon this pretended Ordinance you exact from all other Churches Christian a Necessitie of Vnion with your Church of Rome and the Bishop thereof both in Faith Subiection Fourthly this Necessity of Subiection you beleeue to be Absolute as to exclude from hope of Saluation not onely all them that shall refuse to be subiect to the Romane Primacie but euen all them also that do not beleeue euery soule of man to be vtterly Damned that is not subiect thereunto The GENERALL CHALLENGE against this your former Romane Profession and the Summe of our contrarie Defence SECT 6. IF therefore wee may giue credit vnto your now Romane Church to your later Romane Bishops to your Romane Councels and Creed to your selues and other sworne Professors of the same Romane faith then must wee beleeue all the seuerall points and as it were the Particles of this one Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church without subiection whereunto there is no saluation Which notwithstanding wee hold and beleeue to be respectiuely False Vnconscionable Scandalous Schismaticall Hereticall Blasphemous and euery way Damnable And this we coÌ„fidently hope God assisting vs to proue from such your owne Grounds and from so manifest Demonstrations as that you shall fully perceiue vs to plead not so much our owne Cause as the Cause of the holy Apostles of the renowned Martyrs and Confessors of Christ of the most Orthodoxe Christian Professors of the holy Faith euen in the Primitiue Times of other innumerable Churches of Christendoâ—e still partakers of the Common Saluation yea and of the Catholike and Vniuersall Church of Christ it selfe Our proofes for the maintaining of this Challenge may be reduced vnto two heads The first is the Consideration of the common Article of our Christian faith to wit The holy Catholike Church The second from the state of the Visible Church of Christ it selfe as well Primitiue as Successiue CHAP. II. The first Generall Foundation of our CHALLENGE is taken from the Article in the Apostles Creed viz. The Catholike Church SECT 1. WE lay the first ground of our Challenge vpon the Apostles Creed and Symbol so called you know as being A forme of Faith composed by the Apostles accordingly as the ancient Fathers haue commonly taught Which the Schollers of Christ ought to get by hart as a watch-word in our Christian discipline whereby the faithfull Professors as by a perfect Shibboleth may be distinguished from the Iewish and Hereticall Which Christian Symbol although it be called the Apostles Creed yet it is so termed not because they were Deuisers but onely Collectors thereof by reducing the fundamentall Articles into one Briefe euen as a posie is called his that gathered trimmed it not that he created the flowers but because he composed the bundle and like as the writers of the Gospell were not Inuentors and Dictators but onely Pen-men of the holy Ghost and Scribes of Christ as the Fathers vse to speake Which the Euangelists themselues do sufficiently teach by inscribing their worke The Gospell of Iesus Christ. And accordingly all the Apostles in receiuing the doctrine of saluation are called Disciples not Doctors or Masters in respect of Christ. So then we haue in this posie a briefe Collection of those flowers of sauing truth which spring in the Paradise of God the Gospell of Iesus Christ. That the Church hath no power to ordaine any new Article of faith SECT 2. HE onely can make an Article of faith as necessarily belonging vnto the saluation of soules who can create a soule and after make a Gospell or Testament to saue this soule and then giue vnto that soule the gift of faith to beleeue this Gospell and next institute a Sacrament for confirmation of that faith and in the end bestow saluation vpon the same faithfull beleeuer This we should prooue from Scriptures and from the constant iudgement of the Fathers if it were not a doctrine acknowledged in your owne Schooles and professed by all Christians I proceed to that which followeth That the false Additions to the Creed are new Articles SECT 3. THere are two kinds of additions vnto the Apostolicall Creed the one is of Explication the other is of Deprauation The addition onely of Explication is iustifiable as appeareth by the addition of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Consubstantiall filioque which haue bene set downe in Declaratiue Creeds composed by ancient Councels for the clearer vnderstanding of the great mysterie of the Trinitie In which case those additions may be truly called as Lirinensis saith of the like Non noua sed nouè dicta But the Addition of Deprauation of the sence of the Creed in any essentiall and fundamentall part thereof which is to be beleeued as necessary to saluation must needs be a new Article and euery such new Article in true construction a new Heresie Now what one Professor is there in the Romane Church who whensoeuer he repeateth that one Article of our Christian Creed The Catholike Church doth not vnderstand thereby the Romane onely And againe what one is there among you that hearing mention made of the Romane Catholike Church doth not take the addition of the word ROMANE to be a Declaration and exposition of the
said Article viz. The Catholike Church As if Romane Church and Catholike Church were vniuocall and conuertible tearmes equally betokening one and the same Vniuersall Church That the Addition of the word ROMANE vnto the Article of the Catholike Church is no true Exposition and Declaration but a notorious Alteration and deprauation thereof proued by diuers Arguments The first Argument in respect of the Church Triumphant SECT 4. CHurch Catholike or Vniuersall as it is prescribed in the Apostles Creed is a comprehension of all the members of the mysticall bodie of Christ which is his Church Now in your Romane Catechisme authorized both by the Decree of your Councell of Trent and the Bull of Pius then Pope there are acknowledged Two parts of the Catholike Church the one called Triumphant in heauen the other Militant here on earth Accordingly S. Augustine The whole Church of Christ saith he is here vnderstood to be not onely that part which is in pilgrimage here vpon earth but that part also which is in heauen Which sence of this Article is grounded vpon diuine foundation where it is written Christ loued his Church that he might present it to himselfe a glorious Church without spot or wrinckle Where by the word CHVRCH to vnderstand onely the Church militant was the heresie of the Pelagians who peruerting the meaning of this text concluded that the Church of Christ here vpon earth doth consist of them that are Perfect in this state of mortalitie that is of such who in this mortall life are not tainted with sinne To whom S. Augustine as you know replied As though saith he the Church of Christ throughout the world doth not pray and crie Forgiue vs our sinnes Therefore must this Text be vnderstood of the Triumphant part of the Church whether alone as Saint Augustine you know and Saint Hierom haue expounded it or iointly with the Militant according to the interpretation of the profoundest Doctors in your Romane schooles saying that The Catholike Church is indeed without spot or wrinkle within the Militant part thereof by grace and in the part Triumphant by glorie So vndoubted a truth it is that the Article of Catholike Church as it is prescribed in the Apostles Creed doth comprize as well the Triumphant as the Militant part thereof CHALLENGE THat then which comprehendeth not as well the Triumphant as the Militant part of the Church cannot be a Declaration of the Catholike Church as it is contained in the Apostles Creed because no one part can expresse the whole But in the Romish Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church without subiection whereunto there is no saluation the word ROMANE vtterly excludeth the part Triumphant Therefore it cannot possibly be a Declaration or exposition of the word Catholike as it is vnderstood in the Apostles Creed except some of you shall be so blasphemous as to subiect Saints which are the members Triumphant and Conquerors now in blisse to the members Militant and mortall here below Saint Peter to your Pope and heauen vnto earth Wherefore euery Christian man who doth as seriously studie the Celestiall spheare of the Saints in heauen as others do the Terrestriall globe of this corruptible earth must call in this your Article The Catholike Romane Church the word ROMANE a false deprauation of the Article of our Apostolicall Creed From the Triumphant part of the Catholike Church we descend to the Militant The second Argument to prooue that the Addition of the word ROMANE cannot be any Declaration but rather a Deprauation of the Article in our Creed in respect of the Church Militant SECT 5. A Double consideration is to be had of the Catholike Church Militant one in respect of her essentiall estate as she is said to haue being the other in respect of her accidentall estate as she is said to be outwardly Visible be it in more or lesse degree of Visibilitie In the first respect when Protestants say that the Catholike Church doth essentially consist onely of persons regenerate in this life and predestinate to life euerlasting They do not as they are by Some slandered to do make two Churches but one Church in a different habitude relation and consideration For as Christ when he was on earth although he commonly appeared euidently visible vnto men yet sometimes he is said after a sort to haue vanished inuisibly out of mens sights notwithstanding in that his Inuisibilitie was he still the same Christ because vsuall Visibilitie and Inuisibilitie are but outward accidents so Christ his mysticall bodie which is his Church being considered in her Essentiall estate is Inuisible and the obiect of Faith and not of Sense According to which Consideration we affirme this Article in the Apostles Creed I beleeue the Catholike Church to be more peculiarly vnderstood And this we prooue first by the nature of Faith it selfe which as the Apostle hath defined it Is the demonstration of things not seene Next by the whole tenor of the Apostles Creed wherein the obiect of euery Article of that Symbol from beleefe in God vnto beleefe of life euerlasting is vnto vs inuisible and so farre as it is beleeued is without compasse of Sense as may be obserued in the faith of Thomas the Apostle to whom albeit Christ said Thomas because thou hast seene mee thou hast beleeued yet the sense of Thomas saw onely the Visible humanitie of Christ but his faith which was his soules sight beheld Christs God-head So that Thomas could no more properly be said to haue beleeued that which hee saw than to haue seene that which hee beleeued Lastly diuine Scripture in positiue doctrine doth manifest thus much as namely to omit many others in that speech of Christ to Saint Peter Mat. 16.19 Vpon this Rocke will I build my Church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it Where the word CHVRCH by the iudgement of Saint Augustine and the accordance of your owne Doctors doth signifie Onely the number of Predestinate And good reason because the godlesse and gracelesse are so farre from being the true members of the Church against which the gates of hell shall not preuaile that those Infernall gates stand continually wide open as being desirous and iustly appointed to deuoure them The same may be said of the Church as it is called the flocke of Christ Iohn 10. My sheepe heare my voice where by Sheepe are onely ment The sanctified elect of God as the testimonies of your owne Iesuites the iudgement of Saint Augustine and Saint Chrysostome doe confirme A third Scripture we finde Rom. 8.9 where the Apostle saith Hee that hath not the spirit of Christ the same is not his Which sheweth that none is truely a Christian but as hee is regenerated by â—he Spirit of Christ. And so your Diuines as well Iesuites as others both ancient and moderne haue determined that All that are not sanctified with the holy Spirit of Christ although outwardly neuer
Rome and Bishâ—p thereof without subiection whereunto according to your Faith there is no saluation nor can any be saued that doth not beleeue the truth of this Article If therefore those ancient Popes beliefe had bin of a Subiection due vnto them from Emperours in such Causes wherein they by their practise of Humilitie Reuerence and Obedience denyed all such Right then should their Fact haue betrayed their Faith a faithlesnesse which wee you will pardon vs dare not impute vnto those holy ancient Popes In all these Instances you may obserue that wee haue alleaged onely such Popes who were the FIRST of their owne name because we would not be found superfluous yet these First because they must be so much the more aduantagious to warrant our Conclusion to wit that either must your Article of beleeuing such a Necessitie of Subiection damne so many and in your owne iudgements excellently godly and learned Popes of Ancient times or else must their profession condemne your Article of Noueltie and you consequently of Haeresie in beleeuing a Doctrine so Imposterous Scandalous Schismaticall and so manifoldly Blasphemous against so holy Emperours and Popes CHAP. XII Our Seauenth Argument is because this Article The Catholike Romane Church without beliefe whereof there is no Saluation damneth the most learned Saints and Martyrs that are placed in the Romane Calendar for Saints or Martyrs of Christs Church First from Saint Polycarpus SECT 1. POlycarpus Bishop of Smyrna is Registred a Saint in your Roman Calendar and indeede he was an excellent Saint of whom Ecclesiasticall Historie you know giueth so notable a Testimonie as shewing that hee was the Disciple of Iohn the Euangelist who being now brought to Martyrdome by the Proconsull his persecutor and being moued to sweare Heathenishly By Caesar answered saying I AM A CHRISTIAN being then threatned to be cast into the fire said This fire now flameth and will shortly be extinguished but there is an eternall fire prepared for the torment of the wicked which thou artignorant of being burnt in the fire he yeelded a smell as fragrant as the sweetest spices whom when the Iewes and Gentiles heard professing himselfe a Christian they cried out in their wrath saying This is the Doctor of Asia this is the Father of Christians c. Lastly this Polycarpus is hee by whose authoritie Polycrates in the fury of Pope Victor then Excommunicating all the Bishops of Asia that would not celebrate Easter according to the Romane Custome defended and iustified himselfe saying When Polycarpus came to Rome in the dayes of Anicetus Bishop of that See and fell into dispute about the time of Obseruation of the Feast of Easter yet could not Anicetus perswade Polycarpus to alter his Custome which he had kept with Saint Iohn and with other Apostles with whom he himselfe had beene conuersant and in the end both Anicetus and Polycarpus notwithstanding their dispute about these Rites did mutually communicate with each other Thus farre the Ecclesiasticall Storie CHALLENGE BY this it appeareth that Polycarpus and Polycrates were both of the same spirit to maintaine their old Custome of Easter notwithstanding whatsoeuer Opposition of the Bishop of Rome because they both tooke their Resolution from the same ground to wit an Apostolicall Custome of their Church so that Pope Anicetus could no more preuaile with Polycarpus by perswasion for Alteration thereof than Pope Victor could ouercome Polycrates by his Excommunication The difference then is not betweene the Two Asian Bishops Polycarpus and Palycrates for both had the same Resolution the onely difference is betweene the Two Popes viz. Anicetus notwithstanding this Contrarietie will hold Communion with Polycarpus but Victor will needs breake out into Excommunication against Polycrates and was freely reproued for his presumption by godly Fathers of those times You will say this was but a Question of Rites and a matter of small importance be it so But the meaner the matter is they contended about the mainer and more forcible is our Consequence by good Law of Logicke as for example your whole claime is that the Pope is the Bishop of Bishops and Spirituall Monarch in the whole Christian world and ouer Kings and Monarchs You know that in them Impetrare est Imperare their Couetings and desires are Commands If therefore Saint Polycarpus would not yeeld his consent at the much instancing of Pope Anicetus in as wee may so call it a trifle in respect it plainly argueth that hee ought the same Pope no Canonicall Obedience by Law of Discipline much lesse by Doctrine of Faith if any of the now new Romane Articles had beene imposed vpon him seeing that for all the perswasion which the Pope could vse he kept his owne Conclusion still Nor is it altogether nothing which you may obserue that when both Iewes and Heathen cryed out vpon him calling him in despight The Father of Christians as though there were no Bishop in Christianitie as Monarch aboue him he did not vtter one word in behalfe of the Pope and his Supreme Dignity aboue All other Bishops which doubtlesse hee ought to haue acknowledged if that this kinde of Appellation were as you teach so proper to the Pope as to be an Argument of his Primacie aboue all other Christian Bishops II. Saint Cyprian was Exoommunicated by Stephen Bishop of Rome for not beleeuing the Necessitie of Vnion with him SECT 2. SAint Cyprian is also one of the Saints inrolled in your Romane Calendar vnder the title of Confessor and Martyr This witnesse you doe as vehemently Obiect for defence of your former Romane Article as wee doe to impugne and confute it Your Obiection answered It is an horrour to any man of iudgement to see the violence which is offered by your Doctors vnto Saint Cyprian by racking his sentences and inforcing him to say in defence of Papall Primacy that which he neuer ment nor yet dreamed of For that which hee spake of his owne onely Authority against Schismatikes who troubled his Iurisdiction That soundeth in the preoccupation of your iudgements as though it concerned onely the Pope of Rome and where hee maketh One Vniuersall Bishopricke consisting of All Bishops equally one with another without any respect to Rome more than to any other Church That also ringeth in your eares the onely Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome All which your futilily is exactly confuted by an Author who will surely satisfie any confcionable Reader But Saint Cyprian writing to Pope Cornelius doubtlesse a godly Bishop among other allurements hee inserteth this Perfidiousnesse saith he cannot haue accesse to Rome the chaire of Peter Ergo saith your Cardinall Cyprian affirmed that neither the Pope nor the Church of Rome could possibly erre No Father of the Primitiue times is more vrged by you for proofe of this Conclusion than Saint Cyprian no Epistle more insisted vpon than this now cited no words more inculcated than these which we haue alleaged and
be called Vnio Leonina as when beasts for awe of the Lion goe in troopes and follow at his becke The Second is Vulpina a craftie combination made and maintained by Foxes The Third is Asinina the heard of seely Ignorants Loud and frequent are the boasts of your Catholike Vnion neuer regarding whether it haue the Characters of these kindes of Vnions now spoken of although that none can bee more Tyrannous than that which as you haue beene instructed by Pope Paul the IV. vseth the extent of the Inquisition as the onely Fortresse and support thereof None more craftie than that Church which is fed at home as with naturall sustenance with false Legends and fained Miracles and preserued abroad with Aequiuocations and Mentall Reseruations and specially by Politike Maximes for alterations of States Lastly there can be no greater blockishnesse than to be wholly guided by an Implicit faith of beleeuing you know not what according to your COLIERS FAITH which because it seemeth so commendable vnto your Cardinall Hosius I will deliuer it in his owne words It will be most safe saith he to follow the Example of a certaine Colier of whom when a learned man asked him for his soules behoofe what he beleeued hee repeated the Apostles Creed and being asked what hee beleeued more said that which the Catholike Church beleeueth But what quoth the other doth the Catholike Church beleeue that which I beleeue quoth the Colier The other being still vrgent the Colier vsed the same Circle and made no other Answer than that hee beleeued as the Church beleeued and the Church the same that hee beleeued Some while after it happened that the same learned man was by sickenesse in danger of death at what time Sathan tempted him vrging him what was his beliefe insomuch that he poore wretch was not able sufficiently to expresse himselfe but calling to minde the Coliers Answer hee himselfe made no other Answer to the Diuell than this AS THE COLIER Confessing afterwards that hee had bin dangerously assaulted had not this example of the Colier holpen him Thus farre your Cardinall of your Colier like an Horse in a Milne going all in a round as if he would teach you that this Implicit Faith were the onely safe Circle God blesse you to keepe out the Diuell Wherein you are little inferior to the Iewish Rabbines who taught their Disciples To haue rather regard to the words of the Scribes than to the Law of Moses the word of God Whom also they instructed that in case the Iudge once passed sentence hee must be absolutely beleeued Though he say that the right hand is the left or the lest the right In all this you crye Pax Pax when as indeede it is nothing else but a paction and accordance in Error and Idolatrie The whole Colledge of Priests were against Ieremie All the Priesthood with the Scribes and other Sects conspired against Christ So little cause haue you to glorie in the nature of your Vnion As for Vnion with the Church Catholike there is no other difference than this Protestants as you haue heard stand in Christian Vnion with Graecians Aegyptians Asians Assyrians Aethiopians and all Churches Christian that haue not ouerthrowne the fundamentall Articles of faith Whereas the Romane Church by Excommunicating all other Christian Churches from her hath Excommunicated her selfe and made a Separation from all other Christian Churches And therefore being alone is nothing lesse than Catholike Vae Soli THESIS V. The Protestants granting it possible for Some to be saued within the Church of Rome and the Papists denying that any can be saued in the Churches of the Protestants is but a Sophisticall proofe that there is more Safetie in the Romane Church SECT 27. MAny Protestants grant say you that some may be possibly saued within the Church of Rome whereas the Papists absolutely deny that Any adhering to the Churches of Protestants can be saued This Argument to the Ignorant may be an efficacious inchantment to perswade to Poperie which to the iudicious and Discreete Reader will appeare to bee but Childish and ridiculous whether we consider your Deniall or our Grant The first because your Deniall proceedeth not either from Truth or Conscience Not from Truth because first our Separation from you as hath bene prooued out of your owne Authors was for Truth and equitie-sake And secondly what Conscience can it be in such Obiectors which the more Ingenuous among you will gain-say acknowledging it possible that such as are diuided from the outward Communion of your Church if yet they ruine not the Foundations of Faith May by their inward will otherwise be ioyned vnto her Such as was saith he the case of Cyprian from the Church of Rome Now what Christian is there opposite to the Church of Rome but he hath a desire and will that she were as Orthodoxe in faith and as sincere in worship as euer she was that so he might be vnited vnto her Nay we dare herein appeale to many of your owne Consciences nothing doubting but that many of you conceiue Saluation towards all Protestants that in faith and repentance finish this their earthly pilgrimage accordingly as Some we speake from knowledge euen of the Society of the Iesuites haue done in desiring the prayers of Some Protestant yea and to vse their owne words Ex animo desiring the same And yet did these also as bitterly inueigh against Protestants as did other of their Sect which sheweth that your Authors tongues and pens are not directed by the same spirit Howsoeuer you your selues will condemne your Obiector of follie after that you haue heard some Instances First then in the Donatists They held all men damned that were not of their Church Whereas Saint Augustine their principall Aduersarie did thinke that Some of them were in the state of life Would you suffer your Obiector hereupon if he had liued in those daies to haue perswaded Saint Augustine by reason of this odds of opinion to leaue the Catholike Church and turne Donatist Secondly in the Grecians They you know at this day condemne the Church of Rome for consecrating the Sacrament in vnleauened bread for which cause they call them Azymites and Heretikes as impugners of the Gospell But yet you excuse Them in their Consecrating with leauened bread saying They may lawfully do it Here is then great odds also in these Censures Would you thereupon aduise your Fathers of the Councell of Trent necessarily to confesse that the Church of Rome hath for a long time bene Hereticall in that point and therefore ought to forbeare to Consecrate in Azymes any more A third Instance you may receiue from Pagans The Indian Priests called Bramenes beleeued and taught that to take bread from the hand of a Christian is Sacriledge whereas Christian Doctrine saith to the Christian If an Infidel bid thee to a feast whatsoeuer is set before thee eate c.